CoinDesk Says BlackRock, Franklin Templeton, and Fidelity Launch On-Chain Treasury Funds And Private Credit

Tokenized assets are moving “from concept to allocation,” and CoinDesk frames the shift as a change in how advisors think about risk and opportunity rather than a breakthrough in the basic ability to create tokens.

“Crypto for Advisors: Tokenization’s evolution Tokenized assets are moving from concept to portfolio allocation”

@coindesk

In the last 18 months, CoinDesk says companies like BlackRock, Franklin Templeton, and Fidelity Investments have launched “real products on the blockchain,” including “Treasury funds and private credit strategies.”

@coindesk

The same CoinDesk piece argues that “bonds, private credit, and money market funds are now available on-chain,” and it adds that “settlement becomes orders of magnitude faster.”

It also emphasizes that the “technology to create tokens has never been the main challenge,” because the “real test comes later” in decisions about “compliance, identity, transfer rules, sanctions, and lifecycle management.”

CoinDesk’s newsletter format explicitly ties this evolution to a “Tokenization & RWA Standards Report 2026” released by RedStone’s research team “last month,” describing it as examining “how these systems are actually being built.”

The thrust is that clients are already asking about tokenized assets, and CoinDesk says “that trend will only accelerate,” with the practical question becoming “how these assets fit into portfolios and what they actually enable.”

CoinDesk presents compliance as the central architectural decision for issuers, arguing that “the most important choice is not which blockchain to use, but where to place the compliance rules.”

It lays out three approaches: putting compliance “right into the token and enforced by smart contracts with every transfer,” managing it “outside the token using tools such as whitelisting,” or enforcing it “at the network level, where the blockchain itself decides which transactions are allowed.”

CoinDesk

The article says each method “fixes one issue but creates another,” and it connects those tradeoffs directly to how assets behave for advisors and investors.

When compliance is inside the token, CoinDesk says issuers get “exact control,” but “it makes the system less flexible,” including the example that “updating a sanctions list or rule might require upgrading the contract.”

When compliance is managed outside the token, CoinDesk says it is “more flexible,” but it “means relying on middlemen and can expose assets if they leave their original environment.”

For network-level enforcement, CoinDesk argues it “makes token design easier,” while “it limits how easily the asset can move to other chains and systems.”

The piece then links these design choices to real portfolio outcomes, stating that “this is not an abstract design choice” because it “determines whether it can move across chains, integrate with blue-chip decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols, like Morpho or Aave, and serve as collateral in a lending strategy.”

CoinDesk argues that institutional capital is already moving on-chain, describing how the transition from theory to practice shows up “in how tokenized assets are used in lending markets.”

“For a long time viewed as the central pillar of the crypto ecosystem, Bitcoin today finds its role questioned”

Gestion de Fortune

It states that “Deposits of tokenized real-world assets in DeFi lending protocols have surpassed $840 million,” and it describes a common structure where “an investor posts a tokenized asset as collateral, borrows against it, and redeploys the borrowed capital.”

CoinDesk says this often happens “often back into the same asset,” and it characterizes the logic as “a programmatic version of the same capital efficiency strategies long used in traditional finance.”

The article adds that this execution is “without a prime broker — faster, cheaper, and with less friction,” tying the on-chain mechanics to a familiar finance goal.

It also reports that on “one major protocol,” “tokenized Treasury exposure declined sharply,” while “tokenized gold allocations expanded severalfold over the same period,” and it says the shift tracked “changes in rate expectations with notable precision.”

CoinDesk then reframes what tokenized assets are for advisors, stating they are “not simply wrappers around existing products” and that “In the right structure, they become productive collateral.”

It further says credit risk is becoming explicit as tokenized assets move into lending and “structured strategies,” including “specific DeFi strategies, such as looping.”

CoinDesk says emerging DeFi risk ratings frameworks are changing how advisors evaluate these assets, describing “Credora” as introducing “continuous, on-chain risk assessment.”

It argues that this brings “a level of transparency that traditional markets rarely offer,” and it shifts the advisor’s question from “what the asset represents” to “how it behaves under stress, and what risks it entails.”

CoinDesk

The article says “Simple-to-understand ratings on a familiar A+ to D scale” can facilitate “the creation of a risk-adjusted portfolio,” and it adds that this is “attracting more and more interested parties.”

CoinDesk also ties this to the broader movement of tokenized assets into lending and structured strategies, where “credit risk is evolving alongside specific DeFi strategies, such as looping.”

The CoinDesk piece also includes a forward-looking note that “What remains unresolved” includes structural gaps, stating “Corporate actions still rely heavily on off-chain.”

That unresolved issue is presented as part of the transition from concept to allocation, where on-chain mechanics and institutional workflows still do not fully align.

The overall message is that tokenized assets are being evaluated through both compliance design and risk measurement, with Credora’s on-chain approach positioned as a key tool for stress-oriented portfolio construction.

A separate op-ed in Gestion de Fortune argues that Bitcoin’s role is being questioned as crypto’s “actual use” could shift toward specialized protocols for “payments, smart contracts, and asset tokenization.”

“Crypto for Advisors: Tokenization’s evolution Tokenized assets are moving from concept to portfolio allocation”

CoinDesk

It describes Bitcoin as “the barometer of the crypto ecosystem” and says its “recent volatility both unsettles and fascinates,” but the op-ed says “a deeper phenomenon deserves attention” beyond volatility.

@coindesk

The piece states that Bitcoin “was not designed for frequent low-value payments,” and it claims that “there have been instances where a transaction took several hours to be fully validated on the network” and that “required significant transfer fees” that make micro-payments impractical.

It also says “the Bitcoin blockchain was not designed for smart contracts,” which it calls “unsuitable for certain uses, notably the tokenization of shares, bonds, or complex financial instruments.”

The op-ed contrasts Bitcoin’s proof-of-work “substantial energy expenditure” with other protocols that use proof-of-stake, saying PoS “drastically reduce energy consumption per transaction” by selecting validators based on staked assets.

It then argues that “the core crypto innovation now takes place on smart-contract blockchains,” naming Ethereum as having “opened the way” and citing networks such as Solana, Binance Smart Chain, or Base for “lower fees and rapid execution.”

It concludes by describing a “multipolar ecosystem” where “Fast-payment blockchains, networks of smart contracts dedicated to tokenization, and stablecoin infrastructures could capture a significant share of economic flows,” leaving Bitcoin with a “more limited role as a reserve asset.”