QuFi Network says it has launched a post-quantum verification platform aimed at protecting digital assets from future quantum-computing threats—without forcing existing blockchain settlement layers to undergo immediate upgrades. The core idea is to add a separate verification step that can use post-quantum cryptography while leaving the underlying networks to continue settling transactions in their current forms.

Alongside the platform, QuFi introduced uBTC, a proof-of-concept applying the verification approach to Bitcoin. In the implementation described by QuFi, uBTC runs on Bitcoin Testnet, verifies BTC collateral, and produces cryptographic proofs that govern how value moves between settlement environments, with final redemptions settling as standard Bitcoin transactions.

Key takeaways

• QuFi’s platform separates transaction verification from on-chain settlement, using a dedicated network of nodes for post-quantum checks.
• The uBTC proof-of-concept applies the verification layer to Bitcoin Testnet while keeping ultimate redemptions compatible with normal Bitcoin transaction settlement.
• QuFi reports using three post-quantum cryptographic standards—ML-DSA-65, SLH-DSA, and ML-KEM-1024—for signatures and key exchange.
• The announcement adds to a broader push across the ecosystem to prepare for quantum risks through methods that avoid immediate hard forks or chain-wide rewrites.

A verification layer built to avoid chain migrations

According to QuFi, the platform is designed to reduce some of the practical friction that can come with adopting post-quantum cryptography directly at the blockchain protocol level. QuFi’s stated motivation is that larger post-quantum signatures and related cryptographic operations can increase storage, bandwidth, and computation requirements when deployed inside individual blockchains.

Instead of changing how settlement networks validate transactions at the base layer, QuFi says it “separates verification from settlement.” The company describes a decentralized set of verification nodes that validates transactions using post-quantum cryptography before those transactions are settled on existing blockchain networks. For users and integrators, the practical implication is that post-quantum protections could be introduced as an additional infrastructure component rather than as a sudden protocol overhaul.

QuFi also positioned the platform around a concrete cryptographic toolbox: ML-DSA-65 and SLH-DSA for digital signatures, and ML-KEM-1024 for secure key exchange. The use of multiple standards suggests QuFi is aiming for flexibility in how verification and key establishment work across different flows, though the performance and operational trade-offs of each element are not detailed in the announcement.

uBTC: post-quantum checks for Bitcoin collateral (test environment)

QuFi’s uBTC system is a proof-of-concept that takes the verification approach and tests it against Bitcoin’s asset layer. The described design is relatively specific: uBTC verifies BTC collateral and generates cryptographic proofs that define how value can move between settlement environments. Redemptions, QuFi says, ultimately settle as standard Bitcoin transactions.

Operating on Bitcoin Testnet4 means the work is currently in a test stage rather than live production settlement. For investors and builders, the key reason to watch this kind of design is that it targets compatibility—by generating proofs for movement rules, rather than requiring Bitcoin itself to immediately adopt a new post-quantum signature scheme. However, the real-world effectiveness will depend on how the proof system behaves under realistic load, how verification nodes are governed and secured, and whether the proof workflow can be made robust for everyday wallet and custody operations.

Quantum defenses are spreading—sometimes with clear trade-offs

QuFi’s announcement lands in the middle of a wider industry campaign to harden blockchains against quantum-era threats. Recent efforts show a pattern: many teams are trying to prepare without forcing disruptive upgrades, but each approach comes with costs.

Earlier in August, StarkWare tested a quantum-resistant Bitcoin transaction on mainnet without requiring a fork. According to reporting from Cointelegraph, the experiment ran for hours, cost roughly $150 to $200, and produced a nonstandard transaction format that required direct submission to a miner. That experience illustrates one of the practical barriers to immediate post-quantum adoption at the settlement-layer level: even when a scheme works, it can be expensive and operationally awkward.

The same month, a pilot involving banks and regulators across Europe, the Middle East, and Asia tested post-quantum wallets and onchain transfers using ML-DSA-65, a standard that QuFi also lists among its cryptographic choices. In parallel, the Ethereum Foundation reportedly removed the Poseidon hash function from its planned post-quantum architecture in favor of established alternatives such as SHA or BLAKE. Together, those moves underline how the search for “quantum readiness” is not just about adding new cryptography, but also about selecting components that are mature, implementable, and safe under realistic engineering constraints.

Bitcoin developers have also been exploring protocol-level mechanisms. Cointelegraph previously covered work from Blockstream researchers around a Bitcoin Improvement Proposal for SHRINCS, an experimental post-quantum signature scheme intended to reduce the size and performance costs of quantum-resistant signatures. The same coverage highlighted important trade-offs: SHRINCS uses stateful signatures to keep signatures smaller, which requires wallets to track previously used signing keys. It also remains in an early stage without a completed security proof and introduces complexity that could create user failure modes.

Why QuFi’s approach matters—and what to watch next

The main difference in QuFi’s pitch is architectural. By placing post-quantum verification in an external layer and keeping settlement tied to existing blockchain networks, QuFi is aiming to avoid the immediate overheads and interoperability friction that can arise when chains are forced to adopt larger post-quantum primitives all at once.

That said, a verification layer introduces its own questions that the market will likely evaluate over time: how decentralized and credible the verification network is, how proofs are generated and validated end-to-end, and whether operational requirements for key management and custody remain manageable. For Bitcoin-related use cases, particular attention will be on how uBTC’s testnet results translate to real wallet and exchange integration patterns—especially if the goal is to support production redemptions without requiring nonstandard transaction formats or special miner submission paths.

Readers should watch for updates that move beyond testnet demonstrations—particularly performance metrics, security assumptions for the verification network, and any clarity on how this approach could interoperate with broader custody, compliance, and wallet tooling as quantum transition planning accelerates across the ecosystem.

The United States and United Kingdom have formed a joint law enforcement alliance to investigate and dismantle scam centers behind cryptocurrency investment fraud and other cyber-enabled schemes.

The U.S. Department of Justice announced on Sept. 3 that the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the District of Columbia, the Crown Prosecution Service of England and Wales and the UK National Crime Agency had signed a memorandum of understanding focused on cross-border enforcement against the operations.

The DOJ called the pact the first international cooperation agreement of its kind specifically designed to disable scam centers carrying out cryptocurrency and cyber-enabled investment fraud. U.S. authorities estimate such schemes are costing Americans approximately $10 billion a year.

US and UK crypto scam alliance targets common cases

Investigators from both countries will pursue parallel investigations into common targets, exchange information on organized crime syndicates and determine which jurisdiction should handle specific cases where their investigations overlap.

Authorities have already identified several cases of common interest, according to the DOJ. The agencies plan to meet with private-sector companies in London in early October for an in-person disruption operation hosted by the National Crime Agency.

U.S. Attorney Jeanine Ferris Pirro signed the agreement alongside Crown Prosecutor for England and Wales Stephen Parkinson and NCA Director General Graeme Biggar at the residence of UK Ambassador to the United States Sir Christian Turner.

Pirro said the agencies would work together to disable transnational organized crime networks operating scam compounds and targeting victims while using trafficked workers to carry out fraudulent schemes.

The alliance builds on existing cooperation between U.S. and UK authorities. During a May enforcement initiative organized by the Scam Center Strike Force, the NCA joined agencies from Australia, Canada, New Zealand and Thailand, along with private companies, to exchange information on scam infrastructure.

That operation resulted in the disruption of more than 1.4 million social media and email accounts, while private companies froze more than $3.8 million in cryptocurrency linked to laundering funds stolen from Americans. Seven suspected scammers were arrested in Thailand, and authorities disrupted servers, network connections and other infrastructure.

Crypto.news previously reported that Coinbase froze over $3 million in cryptocurrency linked to Southeast Asian scam networks during the enforcement effort. Meta, Microsoft and Starlink took action against accounts and infrastructure linked to suspected fraud operations.

Crypto investment fraud losses reached $8.65 billion

The new agreement follows a sharp rise in reported losses from cyber-enabled investment fraud in the United States.

FBI Internet Crime Complaint Center data cited by the DOJ showed reported losses from such scams climbed 89% from $4.57 billion in 2023 to $8.65 billion in 2025. Cyber-enabled fraud accounted for almost 85% of all losses reported to the center last year.

The DOJ cautioned that the figures were largely based on reports submitted by victims and could substantially understate actual losses because many fraud cases are never reported.

Created by Pirro in November 2025, the Scam Center Strike Force has concentrated on Chinese organized crime groups accused of running compounds primarily across Southeast Asia.

Its investigations cover cryptocurrency investment scams, cyber-enabled fraud, human trafficking and money laundering. Participating agencies include the FBI, U.S. Secret Service, Justice Department Criminal Division, U.S. Postal Inspection Service, IRS Criminal Investigation and Homeland Security Investigations, while the Treasury and State departments work with the task force on related actions.

Federal prosecutors have increasingly pursued the cryptocurrency and online infrastructure used by the networks. In July, the DOJ sought forfeiture of $25 million recovered through five investigations involving suspected victims in the United States and Canada.

Those cases involved fake cryptocurrency investment platforms and laundering networks linked to China, Malaysia and Cambodia. Prosecutors said at the time that the Scam Center Strike Force had seized more than $800 million since its November 2025 launch.

Authorities have targeted Southeast Asian scam compounds

A major enforcement action announced in April demonstrated the scale of the networks under investigation. U.S. authorities charged two Chinese nationals accused of managing a cryptocurrency investment fraud compound in Burma and attempting to establish another operation in Cambodia.

The DOJ said more than $700 million in cryptocurrency linked to suspected scam-related money laundering had been restrained through coordinated enforcement actions. Authorities seized 503 fake investment websites and a Telegram channel with more than 6,000 followers that prosecutors said was used to recruit people to a scam compound in Cambodia.

Workers were allegedly attracted with promises of high-paying employment before being held against their will and forced to participate in fraud schemes. Some job advertisements specifically sought workers who could speak with American accents and work during U.S. daytime hours.

Fraudulent cryptocurrency platforms used by such networks commonly displayed fake account balances and investment returns to persuade victims to send more funds. Investigators have tied similar methods to relationship-based schemes in which scammers spend extended periods building trust before introducing fake investment opportunities.

An international crackdown announced in April led to 276 arrests and the disruption of at least nine scam centers connected to investment fraud. Dubai police detained 275 people, while another suspect was arrested in Thailand as investigators pursued networks accused of using fake cryptocurrency platforms.

Chinese, U.S. and UAE authorities later described the Dubai action as their first joint crackdown on telecom and online fraud. Investigators said suspects used social media to establish fake romantic relationships before directing victims toward purported high-return cryptocurrency investments.

Regional governments step up action against scam centers

Countries where scam compounds operate have pursued their own enforcement and legislative measures as international investigations continue.

Myanmar’s Parliament approved an anti-online scam bill on July 28 after lawmakers reconciled versions adopted by its two chambers.

A draft published in May proposed prison sentences ranging from 10 years to life for operating an online scam center or committing digital currency fraud. It covered recruitment, financial facilitation, telecommunications support and other activities connected with online fraud networks.

The draft permitted capital punishment where violence, torture, unlawful detention or cruel treatment was used to force people to work in scam operations, with the death penalty required when such conduct caused a person’s death.

Final amended legislation, a presidential assent notice and a commencement date had not been publicly confirmed when the parliamentary approval was reported on July 29.

International enforcement has continued outside Southeast Asia as investigators follow the financial infrastructure used by organized fraud groups. An INTERPOL operation running from November 2025 through June 2026 resulted in 58 arrests and involved authorities from 22 countries, including the United States and United Kingdom.

Investigators examined romance scams, fake cryptocurrency investments, business email fraud and the shell companies, bank accounts and digital wallets used to move proceeds. Separately, an INTERPOL-led operation announced in July resulted in 5,811 arrests across 97 countries and territories, with authorities blocking more than 31,000 bank accounts and intercepting $293 million in illicit assets.

The U.S.-UK agreement now provides a formal framework for investigators and prosecutors in both countries to share information, pursue overlapping scam-center cases and decide where suspects should face prosecution. Their first planned joint disruption event under the pact is scheduled to take place with private-sector partners in London in early October.

Binance warned cryptocurrency users on Sept. 3 about an increase in phishing attacks involving text messages disguised as account security alerts.

The exchange said scammers were sending messages claiming that account settings had changed or that suspicious login activity had occurred. The messages include shortened links and direct recipients to “verify” or “secure” their accounts.

Binance did not disclose how many users received the messages. It also provided no figure for losses connected specifically to the latest campaign.

Binance phishing texts create false urgency

The fraudulent messages are designed to resemble official Binance notifications. They commonly warn about an unexpected login, changed account settings or another supposed security issue requiring immediate action.

The links may direct recipients to websites created to imitate Binance’s login or account verification pages. Scammers can then attempt to collect passwords, authentication codes or other information needed to access the victim’s account.

“We’ve recently observed an increase in phishing attacks targeting crypto users,” Binance said, without quantifying the increase.

The warning follows earlier campaigns using the exchange’s name. In 2025, the Australian Federal Police said scammers sent spoofed messages that appeared within existing Binance message threads. As previously reported, those messages falsely claimed that customer accounts had been compromised.

Binance says text links should not be trusted

Binance said it will never ask customers to click a link in a text message to verify or secure an account. Users who receive unexpected messages should instead open the official Binance application or enter the exchange’s address directly.

Customers can also use Binance Verify to check whether a website address, email address, phone number, social media account or other contact belongs to the exchange. Verification should take place before users enter account information or contact anyone presented as customer support.

Anyone who has already followed a suspicious link should contact Binance customer support through the official application. Users should avoid communicating further with the sender or providing passwords, recovery phrases and authentication codes.

Three account controls can limit phishing losses

Binance advised users to enable its withdrawal address whitelist. The feature limits withdrawals to wallet addresses approved by the account holder, creating another barrier if an attacker obtains login credentials.

The exchange published a separate guide explaining how customers can activate and manage the whitelist. Users should secure access to the email account and authentication method used to approve changes because attackers may target those services as well.

Binance also recommended activating its anti-phishing code. Once configured, legitimate Binance emails include a personalized code selected by the user. An email without the correct code may be fraudulent, although customers should still check its sender and destination links.

The protection applies to email rather than ordinary text messages. Binance’s instructions explain how users can create and update the code through their account security settings.

Binance also uses automated systems to detect suspicious behavior during logins, trading and withdrawals. The exchange previously said more than 100 artificial intelligence models support its fraud controls. According to related crypto.news reporting, Binance attributed an eightfold reduction in phishing success rates to those systems.

Platform controls cannot prevent every loss when customers voluntarily provide credentials or approve transfers after receiving deceptive instructions. Withdrawal whitelists, passkeys and application-based authentication can add barriers, but users still need to verify unexpected communications independently. Binance recommends contacting support only through its official application or website, particularly after opening a suspicious link.

Earlier scams show how impersonation causes losses

Binance impersonation through text messages is not new. Hong Kong police said 11 users lost approximately $446,000 in a 2023 campaign after receiving messages that threatened to deactivate their accounts unless they completed verification. The victims followed links contained in fraudulent messages.

In July 2026, Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission ordered licensed crypto platforms and brokers to replace authentication based on SMS, email or app-generated one-time codes. The new standards require phishing-resistant authentication methods within 12 months.

Binance’s latest warning does not identify a deadline, investigation or regulatory action. The campaign remains an account-security matter, with users advised to verify communications and contact official support if they disclosed information or followed a suspicious link.

“Saint Seiya” creator Masami Kurumada has sued his former manager and other defendants for roughly 2.89 billion yen ($19.6 million) after alleging that billions of yen were diverted from his companies over six years, with some of the money believed to have been invested in cryptocurrency.

According to the lawsuit filed with the Tokyo District Court on Sept. 2, Kurumada Production and two other companies headed by the 72-year-old manga artist claim they suffered approximately 4.68 billion yen in losses between 2018 and 2024 through unauthorized transfers and diverted licensing payments.

The former manager, who served as a director of the three companies, had been entrusted with accounting, editorial work and other administrative duties for years. Kurumada’s lawyers said the manager has acknowledged taking the funds and told them he had acted with Kurumada’s interests in mind and had no malicious intent.

Some of the diverted money is believed to have been used for cryptocurrency investments, according to Kurumada’s legal representatives.

Kurumada seeks 2.89 billion yen after partial repayment

The three companies are seeking approximately 2.89 billion yen in damages from the former manager, his relatives, acquaintances and other parties after roughly 1.8 billion yen of the alleged losses was repaid.

Court filings allege that the former manager transferred money without authorization from bank accounts belonging to Kurumada’s companies into accounts held by separate companies he had established or controlled.

Another method involved licensing revenue. Business partners that would normally have paid licensing fees to Kurumada’s companies were allegedly directed to send the money elsewhere, allowing funds generated from Kurumada’s intellectual property to be diverted.

The alleged transactions continued for around six years before irregularities were uncovered during a Tokyo Regional Taxation Bureau audit in 2024.

Kurumada said he had left the movement of money entirely in the former manager’s hands and was unaware of the scale of the funds passing through the companies.

Speaking at a press conference in Tokyo after the lawsuit was filed, Kurumada said he initially found the allegations difficult to believe after spending decades working in the manga and anime business.

“I really couldn’t believe it,” Kurumada said, describing his feelings after learning about the alleged losses.

He said the situation eventually left him feeling empty and frustrated after a person he trusted with his finances was accused of diverting company money for years.

Crypto investments reportedly involved diverted funds

Kurumada’s lawyers said interviews conducted with the former manager indicated that at least part of the money had been directed into cryptocurrency investments.

The available court reports have not identified which cryptocurrencies were purchased, the platforms used to make the investments or how much of the alleged 4.68 billion yen was ultimately placed into digital assets.

No information has been disclosed on whether the cryptocurrency investments produced gains or losses, or whether any digital assets remain among the funds that Kurumada’s companies are seeking to recover.

The case comes as Japanese authorities have increased scrutiny of cryptocurrency transactions linked to fraud and other financial crimes. In August, crypto.news previously reported that Japan’s Financial Services Agency and National Police Agency had requested stronger withdrawal controls from domestic crypto exchanges, including waiting periods for newly registered withdrawal addresses and faster restrictions on suspicious accounts.

Official figures cited at the time showed Japan recorded 18,067 special fraud cases through May 2026, with losses reaching 151.47 billion yen. Social media investment scams accounted for 5,099 cases and 70.04 billion yen of those losses.

Japanese authorities have dealt with crypto-linked cases extending beyond investment scams. Tokyo police in June arrested Hu Xiaowei, an alleged senior figure connected to Cambodia’s Prince Group, which U.S. authorities have accused of involvement in cryptocurrency investment fraud and money laundering.

A separate Nikkei investigation published that month linked a crypto fraud operating through Japan to a Chinese network suspected of exporting fentanyl precursor chemicals. The reported scheme used Japanese internet domains and a fake token called Zksync.jp to target cryptocurrency users.

Japan has tightened its crypto framework

Japan has been changing the rules governing legitimate digital asset activity at the same time authorities are strengthening controls against fraud.

The country’s parliament in July passed financial law amendments that classify cryptocurrencies as financial products under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.

The legislation creates a framework for stricter market oversight and insider trading restrictions while opening a route toward domestic crypto exchange-traded funds and a proposed 20% tax treatment for cryptocurrency gains.

Major financial groups have been preparing products under the changing framework. SBI, Rakuten, Nomura and other Japanese financial institutions have been exploring crypto investment trusts as regulators work toward allowing investment funds to hold digital assets.

The cryptocurrency component of Kurumada’s lawsuit, however, concerns the alleged use of company funds after they had been diverted, based on statements from his legal team, rather than an allegation against a cryptocurrency platform or digital asset issuer.

Saint Seiya licensing revenue was allegedly redirected

Kurumada’s works have generated substantial licensing income, particularly as “Saint Seiya” developed an international audience through manga, animation, merchandise and other products.

At the Tokyo press conference, Kurumada said revenue had increased substantially over the past decade as Chinese companies, including Tencent and Alibaba, became involved with products connected to his work.

The scale of those payments formed part of the alleged mechanism described in the lawsuit, with licensing fees from business partners among the funds that Kurumada’s side says were redirected.

Kurumada made his debut with “Sukeban Arashi” before creating titles including “Ring ni Kakero.” “Saint Seiya,” one of his best-known works, later became an animated series and developed a large audience outside Japan.

The alleged embezzlement affected plans connected to his work as well. Kurumada said a planned exhibition of original artwork at Roppongi Hills in Tokyo in 2024 had to be canceled after the financial irregularities were discovered.

He apologized to fans who had expected to attend the exhibition and said he now intends to hold it in Tokyo’s Ikebukuro district in spring 2027.

Despite saying the episode had temporarily left him distrustful of people, Kurumada told reporters that he intends to continue drawing for readers and fans of “Saint Seiya” and his other manga around the world.

AMC Entertainment CEO Adam Aron has rejected Robinhood’s tokenized product linked to AMC shares and said the theater chain will seek legal advice over an offering created without the company’s involvement.

According to Aron, AMC has no connection to Robinhood’s effort involving tokenized real-world assets and Stock Tokens, despite a product carrying the company’s name and tracking its publicly traded shares.

“Robinhood apparently is behind an effort related to ‘tokenized real-world assets including Stock Tokens’ for AMC Entertainment,” Aron wrote on X on Thursday. “We have no connection to this at all, and do not condone it in any way.”

The AMC chief described the practice as “contemptible” and “outrageous,” adding that the company plans to ask outside securities counsel to examine the matter.

AMC rejects Robinhood tokenized stock product

Aron’s objection centers on a distinction between AMC’s publicly traded shares and a blockchain-based financial product designed to provide exposure to their price.

Robinhood’s stock tokens do not make investors shareholders of the companies they track. Its Classic Stock Tokens are derivative contracts that provide economic exposure to U.S. stocks and exchange-traded products, while holders do not own the underlying shares or receive shareholder rights such as voting rights.

Robinhood owns the assets supporting its Classic Stock Tokens and holds them through a U.S.-licensed institution. The contracts are offered under MiFID II in Europe, according to the brokerage.

A separate generation of transferable Robinhood Stock Tokens uses a different structure. The ERC-20 assets are tokenized debt securities issued by Robinhood Assets (Jersey) Limited and provide economic exposure to underlying securities without granting legal or beneficial rights against the companies that issued those shares.

The distinction has become more visible as financial firms experiment with different structures for putting stock exposure on blockchains. Some products are derivatives that follow a security’s price, while other models hold shares through custodians and issue tokens backed by the underlying equity.

Issuer-sponsored tokenization goes further by placing registered shares onchain with the participation of the company whose equity is being represented.

Robinhood has made the first model a major part of its international expansion. Its European platform currently advertises more than 2,000 Classic Stock Tokens linked to U.S. stocks and exchange-traded products, with trading available around the clock from Monday through Friday.

Robinhood has expanded tokenized stocks onchain

Robinhood’s tokenization plans moved further onchain in July when the company launched Robinhood Chain, an Ethereum Layer 2 network built using Arbitrum technology.

As crypto.news previously reported, the July 1 rollout opened Stock Token trading through Robinhood Wallet to eligible users across more than 120 countries, subject to local restrictions. The network was built to support tokenized real-world assets alongside decentralized finance applications.

Robinhood Chain launched with 95 tokenized equities and infrastructure that allowed the assets to interact with decentralized exchanges and lending applications. Stock Tokens on the network can be transferred as ERC-20 assets and integrated into onchain applications.

Usage has since increased. Combined tokenized-stock trading volume through Uniswap on Robinhood Chain reached $1 billion in August, according to Uniswap founder Hayden Adams.

The products remain unavailable to U.S. investors. Robinhood says the Stock Tokens issued by its Jersey entity are not registered under U.S. securities laws and cannot be offered, sold or delivered directly or indirectly in the United States or to U.S. persons.

Robinhood’s tokenization strategy has expanded beyond simply recreating the trading experience of a brokerage account. Stock Tokens on its blockchain can be transferred between supported wallets and applications, traded through decentralized exchanges and integrated into DeFi products.

The network had already attracted $431 million in total value locked and nearly $400 million in stablecoin market capitalization within three weeks of launch, according to a FalconX report covered in July. Robinhood’s tokenized stocks stood at approximately $14 million at the time, compared with roughly $851 million for Ondo and around $481 million for xStocks.

OpenAI previously rejected Robinhood tokens

AMC is not the first company to object to a Robinhood product carrying its name without its participation.

OpenAI rejected Robinhood tokens linked to the privately held artificial intelligence company in July 2025 after the brokerage announced a promotion giving eligible European customers exposure to OpenAI and SpaceX.

“These ‘OpenAI tokens’ are not OpenAI equity,” the company said at the time, adding that it had not partnered with Robinhood or endorsed the offering.

Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev defended the product after OpenAI’s response, explaining that the tokens were intended to provide retail investors with indirect exposure to private assets. The structure used a special-purpose vehicle holding an economic interest linked to OpenAI rather than shares issued directly to token holders by the company.

The disagreement exposed the same ownership distinction now involved in AMC’s objection: a financial product can track or provide economic exposure to a company without being equity issued or endorsed by that company.

Robinhood’s publicly traded Stock Tokens use similar terminology while carrying specific disclosures about what investors receive. The company states that holders gain economic exposure to the underlying security but do not obtain legal or beneficial rights against its issuer.

Tokenized stock models are taking different forms

Other financial and crypto companies are pursuing structures that more directly connect tokens with the underlying shares.

Base founder Jesse Pollak said in July that the Ethereum Layer 2 network and Coinbase were working on 1:1-backed tokenized stocks designed to be supported by actual underlying shares.

Pollak contrasted the planned structure with Robinhood’s derivatives, saying Coinbase and Base were preparing a model backed one-for-one by equity. He acknowledged at the time that Robinhood had moved faster in bringing tokenized equities into an Ethereum Virtual Machine-compatible environment.

Robinhood itself has continued to build infrastructure around its version of the market. Its July mainnet rollout brought tokenized stocks together with decentralized lending, perpetual futures and other blockchain-based financial products.

Stock Tokens can use Chainlink price feeds on Robinhood Chain, allowing applications to read prices directly onchain. The ERC-20 format means developers can integrate the assets into compatible wallets, trading venues and DeFi protocols without requiring a separate token standard.

AMC has not announced legal action against Robinhood. Aron said the company will first ask outside securities counsel to review the tokenized AMC product and the circumstances surrounding its use of the company’s name.

SoFi Technologies and Kraken parent Payward announced a partnership on Sept. 3 connecting SoFi’s banking and dollar-settlement services with Kraken’s digital asset trading infrastructure.

Payward will join the SoFi Exchange Network, known as SEN, while Kraken will list the SoFiUSD stablecoin. SoFi will use Kraken Prime as an additional liquidity and execution provider for cryptocurrency trades placed through its application.

SoFi gives Kraken access to 24/7 dollar settlement

SEN allows institutional clients to transfer and settle U.S. dollars outside traditional banking hours. Payward’s participation will give eligible Kraken institutional customers access to those settlement rails for round-the-clock liquidity management.

The companies said the connection removes delays that can arise when cryptocurrency markets remain open but banking services are unavailable. Digital asset platforms operate continuously, while many conventional bank transfers remain tied to business days and scheduled processing periods.

Payward will also use SoFi’s Big Business Banking services. SoFi introduced that division in April to combine enterprise banking, payments and digital asset capabilities within one offering.

As previously reported, SoFi’s enterprise platform brought fiat and crypto services together while allowing institutional customers to manage U.S. dollars, SoFiUSD and selected digital assets.

Kraken Prime will execute SoFi crypto orders

SoFi will route cryptocurrency order flow through Kraken Prime, which uses smart routing to compare prices and available market depth across supported trading venues. The system selects where an order should be executed rather than relying on one order book.

Kraken said the arrangement could provide SoFi with deeper liquidity and improved execution pricing. The final price available to a customer will still depend on market conditions, order size, available liquidity and applicable fees.