If you're reading this and still haven't signed up, click the subscribe button below!
Introduction
Welcome to the Tokenized newsletter, brought to you by the creators of the Tokenized Podcast. Written by Simon Taylor of Fintech Brainfood and Shwetabh Sameer of Molten Ventures.
We are the newsletter for institutions that need help preparing for a Tokenized future.
We run through the headlines every week, what it means for you and a market readout. Always with an institutional, business-focused perspective.
Join us every week as we meet your Tokenization needs.
In This Week's Edition:
💬Simon's Market Readout – DoorDash goes live with stablecoin payouts in 40+ countries on Tempo — and Coastal Community Bank quietly builds cross-border settlement rails on the same network that might matter more
📰 Stories You Can't Miss: Qivalis picks Fireblocks and adds BBVA and DZ BANK to its consortium; UK pivots toward a unified payments rulebook after BoE cap backlash; Senator Tillis delays CLARITY Act markup to May as bank lobbying escalates; and a $292 million KelpDAO bridge exploit triggers $6.6 billion in Aave outflows and exposes DeFi's hidden trust assumptions
This newsletter is sponsored by M0!
Make your own money. m0.org.
Stablecoins are becoming global financial infrastructure.
Brands partner to issue their own stablecoins with regulated issuers.
Stablecoin issuers want to issue for the most valuable brands.
Both need robust tech.
M0 is the only platform where issuers and brands get together to build stablecoins.
Make your own money. m0.org.
Simon’s Market Readout 💬
A pixelated Simon gives you his market readout for the week.
Editor's Note: Simon Taylor, co-creator of Tokenized, works at Tempo. The analysis below represents Simon's perspective on these developments.
DoorDash is bringing stablecoin-powered payments to 40+ countries on Tempo. This is the canonical stablecoin use case.
The DoorDash co-founder Andy Fang said, "there's real promise with stablecoins transforming financial infrastructure, not just in America, but globally," and they want to be a proactive participant in making that happen.
If you're going to operate in 40 markets and pay out to merchants and Dashers, each market has different payment rails, different FX dynamics, different settlement timelines, different regulatory requirements. A payout flow that works in the United States doesn't necessarily apply in Helsinki. The logistics of actually getting a Dasher paid in more than one country looks completely different and incredibly complex.
The ability to get paid and to pay without waiting days is solving a real problem for people right now at scale. DoorDash is building stablecoin payment infrastructure as part of its global marketplace to make payouts faster, reduce cross-border costs, and make transactions more flexible. This is a business that has been around since 2013, is publicly traded, and has now chosen Tempo to move things forward.
This is a real sign of stablecoin maturity coming into the marketplace. If you zoom out, this is a signal: no matter how much it seems like the crypto market can have hacks and scams and issues, the stablecoin market is continuing to deliver large enterprises that see a commercial business case in dealing with stablecoins. I suspect we'll see many more.
The story I think everybody missed: Coastal Community Bank is using Tempo to make cross-border settlement happen in minutes.
Coastal Community Bank, as many of you will know, is the bank that powers lots of fintech companies like Robinhood. Those fintech clients need faster, cheaper ways to move money across borders, and traditional correspondent banking infrastructure isn't built to deliver that—especially when you're dealing with the US to Latin America.
So Coastal and Tempo are building a cross-border corridor that keeps all of the existing compliance infrastructure of a bank in place, just replacing the settlement layer underneath with stablecoins on Tempo. This is a highly regulated bank choosing to move a major product onto the Tempo blockchain, onto digital assets, onto stablecoins.
Far from being a problem for community banks, the stablecoin opportunity is about new revenue. And that's been a learning process in both directions. Features required for institutional cross-border settlement—like privacy zones or compatibility with ISO 20022—have been built into Tempo as part of that feedback. These seemingly small details make a massive difference to being able to deliver.
Put these two stories together: You've got an enterprise operating in multiple markets—I think that story was understood and we'll see more of it. But banks choosing to do cross-border on-chain because it's better for them and their fintech companies? That's the story everybody missed here.
Stories You Can't Miss 📰
🚀Qivalis Picks Fireblocks as Infrastructure Partner, Expands to 12 Banks
The European banking consortium building a euro stablecoin just moved from press releases to procurement. Qivalis - which we've covered twice since it was announced in October 2025 - has selected Fireblocks as its core infrastructure partner. It has also added BBVA and DZ BANK as its eleventh and twelfth members, and maintained its H2 2026 launch timeline pending DNB authorization. I
In December, we flagged three open questions: blockchain infrastructure, interoperability, and distribution commitments. One of those three is now answered.
Key Points:
Fireblocks will provide the full infrastructure stack: tokenization engine using its ERC-20F standard (a permissioned ERC-20 variant with built-in compliance controls), wallet infrastructure, custody, and integrated AML/KYC and sanctions screening. This confirms an EVM-compatible architecture with permissioned access layers - not a proprietary chain
The two new members aren't filler. BBVA is one of Europe's crypto-forward major banks. DZ BANK is the central institution for Germany's ~700 cooperative banks - collectively one of the country's largest private-sector financial groups by assets - with ~7,500 branches. That's distribution into the German Mittelstand that no non-bank stablecoin issuer can replicate
The market cap comparison is misleading. Euro-pegged stablecoins represent roughly $650 million against a $305 billion total market. But Qivalis isn't competing for stablecoin market cap — it's targeting interbank settlement flows. T2, the Eurosystem's real-time gross settlement system, processes hundreds of trillions of euros annually. At those volumes, even a fractional shift onto new rails dwarfs the entire stablecoin market. The $33 trillion in stablecoin transaction volume last year - up 75% - was almost entirely dollar-denominated retail and DeFi flows. Qivalis is operating in a different lane.
Political tailwind is strengthening. Bank of France first deputy governor Denis Beau called a few weeks ago for the EU to limit non-euro stablecoins in everyday payments. Qivalis is no longer just a commercial initiative - it's becoming part of the European digital sovereignty argument
The Tokenized Take:
In December, we wrote that "signing up isn't the same as showing up." Selecting Fireblocks is the step between the two. You don't integrate a tokenization engine, build compliance workflows, and connect wallet infrastructure across twelve banks without real engineering budget and institutional commitment. Consortiums that don’t work usually stall before the procurement phase, not after. The fact that Qivalis has a named infrastructure partner, a specific token standard (ERC-20F), and a compliance architecture tells us this is no longer a concept paper.
But infrastructure is the easy part. The hard part is the twelve separate adoption decisions that come next.
Each member bank needs to independently allocate IT budget, secure risk committee sign-off, integrate Qivalis into treasury workflows, and route actual settlement flows through the stablecoin. That's twelve different technology roadmaps, twelve compliance interpretations, twelve internal change management processes - at banks that are often competing for the same corporate clients. ING and BNP Paribas don't stop being rivals because they share a stablecoin.
DZ BANK's addition is the most strategically interesting of the new members. Germany's cooperative banking network - ~700 institutions, ~7,500+ branches - gives Qivalis potential reach into the small and mid-sized businesses that actually drive European cross-border trade. But "potential reach" requires DZ BANK to build the integration, train the relationship managers, and convince the cooperative banks to offer something they've never offered before. That's a multi-year programme, not a launch-day feature.
The competitive landscape looks different when you frame it correctly. Checkout.com, Circle's EURC, and SocGen's EURCV aren't targeting the same flows - they serve merchants, DeFi, and retail cross-border payments respectively. Qivalis's actual competitors are JPMorgan's Kinexys, Fnality's wholesale settlement network, and the ECB's own wholesale CBDC experiments. Those are the projects racing to become default infrastructure for institutional euro settlement. And unlike the retail stablecoin market, that race has no clear leader yet - which is exactly why twelve banks think a consortium still has a window.
The catch: Kinexys moves at JPMorgan speed. Qivalis moves at the speed of twelve risk committees reaching consensus. In wholesale infrastructure, execution tempo matters as much as design.
Two of our three December questions remain unanswered. Interoperability with existing euro stablecoins: unaddressed. Distribution commitments beyond wholesale pilots: unspecified. The infrastructure question is closed. The adoption question is not.
H2 2026 is now six months away. We'll find out soon enough whether Qivalis crosses the line from construction site to production - or whether twelve banks discovered, as consortiums often do, that building together is harder than building alone.
🏛️ UK Plans Payments Rule Changes for Stablecoins, Tokenized Deposits
The UK is attempting something no other major jurisdiction has tried: a single regulatory framework covering stablecoins, tokenized deposits, and traditional payment services. At UK Fintech Week, HM Treasury unveiled a package that moves toward a unified payments rulebook - a direct pivot from the BoE's proposed holding caps last September, which drew sharp industry backlash and risked making the UK the least competitive major jurisdiction for digital payments.
Key Points:
HM Treasury and Economic Secretary Lucy Rigby announced a consultation to reform payment services and electronic money rules. The goal is to create a single regulatory framework for traditional and tokenized payments - covering both stablecoins and tokenized deposits
The government plans to bring forward legislation to reduce administrative burdens for companies seeking to offer stablecoin payment services, with broader crypto legislation expected to take effect in 2027
Former FCA interim CEO Chris Woolard CBE (now a partner at EY) has been appointed as digital markets champion for the Wholesale Financial Markets Digital Strategy, tasked with driving tokenized asset adoption through public-private collaboration
The consultation doesn't explicitly address whether the BoE's proposed holding caps - the single most criticized element of the September 2025 framework - survive as a prudential overlay
The Tokenized Take:
This reads like a course correction dressed as a strategy launch. The UK is attempting something no other major jurisdiction has done — unifying stablecoins and tokenized deposits under one rulebook. The US regulates them separately (GENIUS Act for stablecoins, existing FDIC rules for tokenized deposits).The EU has MiCA for stablecoins but treats tokenized deposits under existing e-money and banking frameworks rather than a unified digital payments rulebook. The UK is betting it can avoid that fragmentation before it hardens.
The execution is where it gets tricky. Tokenized deposits carry FSCS protection and sit inside bank prudential rules. Stablecoins backed by T-bills are a fundamentally different risk instrument. A single framework either waters down deposit protections, burdens stablecoin issuers with bank-grade requirements they can't meet, or - the sophisticated version - introduces activity-based tiering where the rulebook is unified but requirements scale with risk profile. We don't yet know which path the Treasury is walking.
There's also the question of what happens to the BoE's existing proposals. In November 2025, we covered their offer of RTGS access to systemic stablecoin issuers with a proposed 60/40 gilt/BoE reserve split. This unified rulebook potentially reorganizes that entire framework. Whether the systemic/non-systemic tiering survives - and crucially, whether the holding caps that drew so much criticism last September are dead or just dormant - is what our readers will want to know. The consultation is silent on both.
Then there's Bybit. Bybit left the UK in 2023 after tighter FCA rules, relocated to Dubai, and only re-entered in late 2025 through a partnership with Archax. Government officials courting the exchange's leadership in London is an implicit admission that the previous regulatory posture cost the UK real business. You don't invite companies back unless you've acknowledged they left because of you.
If the consultation produces rules that genuinely reduce compliance overhead, the UK could leapfrog the EU and compete directly with the US for stablecoin issuer headquarters. But "consultation" is not "legislation”. And until it is, this remains ambition, not policy.
🏛️ Banks Escalate Lobbying Campaign as Tillis Pushes CLARITY Act Markup to May
Two weeks ago, we covered the White House CEA report that dismantled the banking lobby's core objection to stablecoin yield - a ~0.02% lending gain at an $800 million consumer welfare cost.
The data should have settled it. The banks decided to escalate instead.
Key Points:
April markup is dead. Senator Thom Tillis (R-NC) told Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott directly that the committee should not plan to advance the CLARITY Act this month. May is the new target - contingent on banks and crypto reaching an agreement on stablecoin yield that both sides can accept.
The lobbying has gone state-level and multi-front. The North Carolina Bankers Association launched a targeted pressure campaign urging member banks to call Tillis's office. Separately, banking trade groups have begun taking their concerns to other Banking Committee senators beyond the two lead negotiators (Tillis and Alsobrooks), trying to erode the committee vote count, not just the timeline.
The Tillis-Alsobrooks yield compromise text, expected to go public last week, has been delayed. A small group of bank and crypto representatives were shown the draft privately. The crypto side appears largely satisfied. The banks ramped up lobbying after seeing it - which tells you the language doesn't give them what they wanted.
The White House is now openly antagonistic. Crypto Council Executive Director Patrick Witt publicly called continued bank lobbying "greed or ignorance." The administration has moved from publishing data to naming and shaming.
Tillis floated a "crypto palooza" (his term) - an in-person session with senators, bank experts, and crypto leaders. If pursued, it adds more time to a process that's already running out of it.
The Tokenized Take:
The banks want two things at once: 1) a yield definition broad enough to shut down the Coinbase/Kraken distribution channel, and 2) enough calendar delay to force CLARITY into a larger package where prudential regulators have more leverage.
But the fallback undermines their own position. If banks stall long enough to kill the bill, they get the status quo - which means no yield restrictions at all. The GENIUS Act bans direct issuer yield, but platform distribution channels remain wide open. Every week of delay is another week Coinbase keeps those channels running - no restrictions, no guardrails.
May looks tight but not dead. Senate recesses May 4-8 and May 25-29, then Juneteenth. That leaves roughly three working weeks before summer break - and the bill still needs House reconciliation after committee
Early May markup with strong bipartisan support? Survivable. Late May? Probably not.
The insider quote from Crypto in America captures the equilibrium: banks can accept the Tillis-Alsobrooks compromise and limit deposit flight exposure, or they can hold out and be left with no protections at all.
The question is whether they're rational enough to take the win.
💸The 1-of-1 Validator: How a $292M Hack Exposed DeFi's Hidden Trust Assumptions
Three weeks ago, we covered Aave V4's launch and called its Spoke architecture "the upgrade that could turn it into institutional infrastructure." On Friday, a single misconfigured bridge validator proved exactly why that architecture was needed - and exposed how much of DeFi still hasn't caught up.
On April 18, an attacker forged a single cross-chain message on KelpDAO's bridge - a message that only needed one validator to approve - and drained 116,500 rsETH worth ~$292 million. The stolen tokens were immediately deposited as collateral on Aave V3, where the attacker borrowed ~$193 million in real WETH against them.
Then the bank run started: Aave's WETH pool hit 100% utilisation, legitimate depositors couldn't withdraw, and $6.6 billion in net outflows dropped Aave's TVL by ~25% in 48 hours. AAVE dropped ~16%.
The contagion didn't stop at protocols with direct exposure. Lido paused deposits into its earnETH product, which held rsETH exposure. Even Ethena - which confirmed zero exposure to the exploit - saw its token reprice as the market sold first and asked questions later. This is correlation contagion: one protocol's failure repricing an entire asset class.
Key Points:
The root cause was a configuration problem, not a code exploit. KelpDAO's bridge ran a 1-of-1 DVN (decentralised verifier network) setup on its Unichain-to-Ethereum route - meaning a single validator attestation was enough to approve a cross-chain transfer. The attacker forged one inbound message and drained 18% of rsETH's circulating supply in a single block.
LayerZero and KelpDAO are pointing fingers at each other - and both have a point. LayerZero says it recommended multi-verifier setups and Kelp chose the minimal configuration. Kelp counters that the 1-of-1 setup was LayerZero's onboarding default and alleges the compromised verifier was LayerZero's own infrastructure - a claim LayerZero disputes. Dune data shows 47% of LayerZero OApps still run this same minimal configuration - which makes this a systemic default problem, not an isolated misconfiguration.
Aave's bad debt ranges from $124 million to $230 million, and the answer depends entirely on KelpDAO. If losses are spread across all rsETH holders (a ~15% haircut per token), Aave absorbs ~$124 million. If losses are isolated to L2 holders only, bad debt jumps to ~$230 million - with Mantle's WETH reserve facing a 71% shortfall. Whichever path Kelp chooses will set a precedent for every cross-chain token built on the OFT standard.
Aave's Umbrella insurance system - its automated backstop against bad debt - is facing its first real stress test. The majority of staked capital in the backstop vault has already entered the unstaking queue. The governance choice is lose-lose: activate Umbrella and slash remaining stakers to cover losses, or pause withdrawals to preserve coverage at the cost of credibility. Either way, the insurance layer that was supposed to reassure institutional depositors just became a source of uncertainty.
Emergency responses came from centralised actors at every level. Kelp froze a recipient address and blocked a second attack that would have drained another 40,000 rsETH (~$100M). Aave's Guardian froze rsETH reserves across 11 markets within 85 minutes. Arbitrum's Security Council froze $71 million in ETH on its chain. Every successful defensive action relied on trusted actors with kill switches.
The Tokenized Take:
The institutional story here isn't the hack itself - bridge exploits happen. It's what happened next. A $292 million exploit in one protocol created a $6.6 billion liquidity event across a supposedly isolated lending market. Tokens with zero direct exposure got repriced anyway. Trapped depositors borrowed $300 million against their own locked collateral just to exit their positions. That is systemic risk - the exact contagion mechanism that institutional risk committees model when they evaluate DeFi exposure.
Which brings us back to Aave V4. Three weeks ago we wrote that V4's Spoke architecture lets institutions participate in dedicated risk pools without exposure to leveraged positions in adjacent markets. Under that design, rsETH would sit in its own Spoke with dedicated collateral caps - and a depeg event wouldn't drain the main WETH pool that every other borrower depends on. The early evidence is encouraging: the LlamaRisk incident report scoped its bad debt analysis entirely to V3, suggesting the Spoke architecture may have contained the contagion as designed. But both versions still had to be frozen. Architectural containment and operational resilience are different things - and right now, DeFi governance moves slower than DeFi exploits.
Morpho proved that under live fire. Paul Frambot (Co-Founder and CEO of Morpho Labs) confirmed ~$1million in exposure across two isolated markets - every other vault was untouched. Same exploit, same asset class, radically different outcome. Morpho's architecture isolates each lending pair, so bad debt in one market cannot propagate to another. That's what V4's Spokes are supposed to do. The institutional question isn't whether DeFi lending can be made safe. It's whether protocols will adopt the architectures that already exist.
The governance gap is what should worry institutions most. In January, Aave's DAO passed Proposal 434, raising rsETH's maximum loan-to-value ratio to 93% in E-Mode - for a liquid restaking token backed by a bridge running single-validator verification. No traditional risk committee would have approved that parameter set. And LayerZero's defaults made the same mistake at the infrastructure layer: if 47% of applications on your messaging protocol are running minimum-security configurations because that's what ships out of the box, you bear responsibility for the default - regardless of what the documentation recommends. Ship insecure defaults, blame your users when things break, and see how far that gets you in an institutional due diligence process.
The Arbitrum freeze deserves honest framing. A 12-member council unilaterally freezing $71 million in user funds is, for institutions, arguably a feature - it looks like a circuit breaker, and it saved real money. But it also means the trust assumptions on L2s are fundamentally different from what the marketing suggests. If a chain can freeze assets by committee decision, that's a governance risk that needs to be priced, disclosed, and stress-tested - not treated as an emergency exception that proves the system works.
LayerZero's official post-mortem attributes the exploit to North Korea's Lazarus Group (TraderTraitor unit). If that attribution holds, DeFi is now facing sustained state-sponsored infrastructure attacks - $577M stolen across Drift and Kelp in 18 days - not occasional freelance exploits. That changes insurance underwriting, custody risk models, and the regulatory case for mandatory bridge security standards.
It also raises a question no protocol has answered yet: what are your OFAC compliance obligations when a state-sanctioned entity is using your bridge as an attack vector?
📰 Some More News:
🏦 Tokenization, Stablecoins & Finance
SEC 'on the cusp' of onchain tokenized securities exemption: Atkins — Atkins signals an imminent "innovation exemption" for compliant onchain securities trading. (Read more here)
WalletConnect Integrates with TradFi-Focused Chain Canton Network — Canton's institutional infrastructure now connects to WalletConnect's 55.5M users and 70,000 dApps. (Read more here)
Nium and Coinbase partner on global stablecoin settlement — USDC-powered just-in-time settlement across 190 countries, no prefunded accounts required. (Read more here)
Inside the MAS Sandbox: How Ripple is testing RLUSD for real trade settlements — Ripple and Unloq pilot automated trade settlement via RLUSD inside Singapore's Project BLOOM. (Read more here)
Peter Thiel-backed unicorn Ramp rolls out $0 conversions between USDT and dollars across product suite — Zero-fee USDT↔USD conversion across Ethereum, Solana, and Plasma, embedded into Ramp's corporate spend platform. (Read more here)
Tether Asserts Stablecoin Dominance Over Circle's USDC Amid Major Crypto Hacks — USDT hits an all-time high market cap as DeFi users rotate out of USDC following the Drift and KelpDAO exploits. (Read more here)
Crypto's massive exploit may force big banks to rethink their blockchain plans, Jefferies warns — Jefferies flags that Wall Street may slow tokenization timelines to prioritise security architecture reviews post-KelpDAO. (Read more here)
Singapore's OCBC launches tokenized gold fund on Ethereum and Solana — GOLDX, purchasable with stablecoins or fiat, targets institutional investors and hedge funds across both chains. (Read more here)
Circle tops crypto stocks with 30% gain as stablecoin growth outpaces Coinbase slump — Stablecoin infrastructure and exchange revenue now respond to entirely different market drivers. (Read more here)
Almost 80% of Japan's institutional investors plan to buy crypto within 3 years, survey finds — Nomura survey puts target allocations at 2–5%, with interest spanning staking, tokenized assets, and stablecoin use cases. (Read more here)
🤑 Funding and M&A
Payments infrastructure startup Latitude raises $8 million — Cross-border payments startup launches from stealth with NEA leading, Coinbase Ventures, Paxos, and Solana Foundation participating. (Read more here)
Revolut targets a $200 billion IPO just months after its $75 billion share sale — Europe's most valuable startup eyes a $150–200B IPO valuation, with a 2026 secondary sale potentially lifting it to $100B first. (Read more here)
B2B stablecoin tech provider Infinite rolls out banking services powered by Thiel-backed Erebor Bank — ACH, wire, and stablecoin transfers in a single account, built on Peter Thiel's new-charter bank. (Read more here)
BitMEX taps Zodia Custody for off-exchange collateral trading — Segregated custody for derivatives collateral via Zodia's Interchange solution, drawing explicit lessons from FTX and Bybit. (Read more here)
Onchain vault provider Upshift taps Securitize Fund Services for third-party reporting — Independent auditing and performance transparency for onchain vaults, as tokenized yield products attract institutional scrutiny. (Read more here)
💼 Government & Policy
Cut the red tape: 39 financial giants demand an emergency fast-track for Europe's blockchain pilot — Nasdaq, Boerse Stuttgart, and 37 others urge the EU to carve the DLT Pilot Regime out of its 18-law legislative bundle. (Read more here)
The Payments Association calls for revised stablecoin regulation — UK industry body publishes a competitive analysis of stablecoin use cases ahead of HM Treasury's unified payments framework consultation. (Read more here)
UK invites crypto giant Bybit to London to win over some of UAE's innovation shine — FCA and House of Lords meetings signal London's push to recapture firms migrating to Abu Dhabi and Dubai. (Read more here)
Bank of Korea's new governor signals CBDC and bank token push, skips stablecoins in key address — BOK Governor Shin centres Korea's digital money strategy on Project Hangang Phase 2, pointedly omitting stablecoins. (Read more here)
Fed pick Warsh backs crypto's place in finance as Warren raises 'sock puppet' concerns in hearing — Warsh tells the Senate digital assets are already embedded in financial markets — a signal of the likely Fed posture if confirmed. (Read more here)
Bipartisan PACE Act looks to open Fed payment rails to nonbanks, draws crypto support — New legislation would grant qualifying non-banks access to Federal Reserve payment infrastructure, with direct implications for stablecoin issuers. (Read more here)
New York Attorney General Sues Coinbase, Gemini Over Unlicensed Prediction Markets — NY AG alleges both platforms ran unlicensed gambling operations; Coinbase has already moved the case to federal court. (Read more here)
Russia passes crypto bill in first reading; permits use in foreign trade settlements — Draft law permits crypto in foreign economic activity while banning unlicensed domestic platforms from mid-2027. (Read more here)
Thanks so much for reading the Tokenized Newsletter!
Please share this edition or share it with your colleagues if you enjoyed it!
Disclaimers
This newsletter is for informational purposes only and is not financial, business or legal advice. These thoughts & opinions and do not represent the opinions of any other person, business, entity or sponsor. Any companies or projects mentioned are for illustrative purposes unless specified.
The contents of this newsletter should not be used in any public or private domain without the express permission of the author.
The contents of this newsletter should not be used for any commercial activity, for example - research report, consultancy activity, or paywalled article without the express permission of the author.
Please note, the services and products advertised by our sponsors (by use of terminology such as but not limited to; supported by, sponsored by, Made Possible by or brought to you by) in this newsletter could carry inherent risks and should not be regarded as completely safe or risk-free. Third-party entities provide these services and products, and we do not control, endorse, or guarantee the accuracy, efficacy, or safety of their offerings.
It's crucial to provide our readers with clear information regarding the inherent nature of services and products that might be covered in this newsletter, including those advertised by our sponsors from time to time. When you buy cryptoassets (including NFTs) your capital is at risk. Risks associated with cryptoassets include price volatility, loss of capital (the value of your cryptoassets could drop to zero), complexity, lack of regulation and lack of protection. Most service providers operating in the cryptoasset industry do not currently operate in a regulated industry. Therefore, please be aware that when you buy cryptoassets, you are not protected under financial compensation schemes and protections typically afforded to investors when dealing with regulated and authorised entities to operate as financial services firm.
