Tokenisation Offers Common Ledger for Real-World Assets, Says Edul Patel

A Shared Ledger Could Reshape Access to Bonds and Other Assets

Tokenisation’s promise rests on bringing fragmented markets onto common infrastructure—but regulation and investor trust remain central to its reach.

A common ledger aims to address fragmented bond trading

Patel describes tokenisation as recording, offering and transacting in financial assets on decentralised digital infrastructure. The proposed change is not simply a new digital wrapper for an asset: it could also alter how buyers and sellers find one another and how transactions are coordinated.

He points to the bond market as an example. Investors often encounter secondary offerings, while primary issuance is limited and secondary-market liquidity is weak. Newer platforms can end up reselling the same bonds, creating separate venues for the same security. Patel argues that this fragmentation can make pricing less transparent and trading less liquid, while limiting access to a given bond.

A shared ledger could bring those transactions onto common infrastructure, an arrangement Patel compares with equities being traded through a common exchange ledger. The potential benefit is coordination: if participants can view and transact against one shared record, the market may be less divided across platforms. That is a design objective, however, not a guarantee that tokenised bonds will automatically become liquid or trade at transparent prices.

Availability will depend on the asset and its rules

There is no single launch timetable for tokenised assets. Patel says the time frames vary by asset class and that some formats are already available. But tokenised real estate and tokenised Indian equities are not currently available, he says, as the regulatory pathway for those categories continues to evolve.

That distinction matters for investors. The broad idea of putting real-world assets on a ledger does not mean every asset can be bought, sold or transferred in the same way today. Rules governing the underlying asset and the way it is offered remain relevant. Investors should therefore assess a specific product and its legal and regulatory footing rather than treating tokenisation itself as proof of legitimacy or ease of exit.

Diversification is part of the appeal, not a substitute for due diligence

Patel links the interest in tokenisation to the possibility of spreading wealth across asset classes that may not move in tandem. A broader mix can help reduce concentration in a portfolio, and access to assets beyond an investor’s existing holdings could support that goal. But diversification depends on what the asset is and how it behaves; a digital record alone does not make an investment a hedge or reduce its underlying risks.

For retail investors, the practical test is whether a tokenised product offers meaningful access and clear information about ownership, pricing and trading. If multiple platforms continue to operate as disconnected venues, the hoped-for improvements in liquidity and transparency may be limited. Investors will also need to understand how they can sell or transfer an asset, rather than focusing only on how easily it can be purchased.

Regulatory confidence will shape whether investors participate

Patel says trust in India is closely tied to regulatory oversight and enforcement. He compares the scrutiny involved in establishing a land purchase’s ownership history with the need for investors to have confidence in tokenised assets. The technology may make records and transactions easier to coordinate, but it does not by itself resolve questions about ownership, investor protection or how disputes are handled.

He sees regulators as balancing wider access to new infrastructure against the need to protect the public, and says builders have a role in advancing that discussion. For the market, the pace of adoption may hinge not only on technical capability but also on whether rules provide clarity for each asset category. Until then, claims about lower costs, broader access or improved liquidity should be assessed as potential benefits, not assured outcomes.

Key Highlights

• Tokenisation records real-world assets on digital infrastructure and could change how they are offered and traded.
• Patel identifies fragmented secondary bond trading as a problem a common ledger may help address.
• Tokenised real estate and Indian equities are not currently available, with their regulatory pathways still evolving.
• Asset-specific timelines mean tokenisation is unlikely to develop uniformly across markets.
• Regulatory oversight, clear ownership and practical exit options remain important to investor trust.

Investor Note: Tokenisation could improve access and coordination, but investors should evaluate each offering on its underlying asset, regulatory status, pricing transparency and ability to exit. The technology’s promise should not be confused with guaranteed liquidity or lower risk.