There are other advantages too. Tokenization enables different forms of digital money, such as tokenized bank deposits, fiat-pegged stablecoins, and tokenized central bank reserves to function seamlessly as settlement assets on the same ledger.
It also allows high-quality assets to be quickly deployed across platforms as collateral.
But all this is not without risk.
The hidden danger
The delays that tokenization eliminates aren’t just inefficiencies, Adrian wrote. They also give banks, regulators and risk managers time to catch problems before they spread.
Remove this buffer, and a market shock, a coding error, or a sudden wave of automated selling could ripple through the system before anyone can intervene.
“Liquidity demands materialize in real time, collateral calls can be automated, and failures can propagate faster than institutions or supervisors can respond,” he wrote. “Risk [sic] that once were borne by the balance sheet of individual institutions behind a transaction become increasingly concentrated in the platforms and code that govern these transactions.”
Adrian also flagged concentration risk. Tokenization tends to funnel activity onto fewer, larger platforms. “When infrastructure becomes the central hub,” he warned, “governance failures become systemic events.”
On cybersecurity, he warned that consolidation onto shared ledgers “amplifies the importance of operational resilience, cybersecurity, and crisis management.”
