The market value of distributed tokenized stocks climbed from $951 million in March 2026 to $1.89 billion in July, according to data cited in a new insights4vc report. The firm says that headline growth masks a deeper split in the market, describing the sector as a fragmented “Layer 2.5” system where liquidity, legal ownership, and onchain market structure still do not line up cleanly.
In the report, insights4vc says products with the strongest legal footing often have the weakest liquidity, while the wrappers that trade most actively tend to offer the thinnest ownership rights. Its core argument is that equities have not truly moved onchain in a full sense. What has emerged instead is a more credible infrastructure stack for issuing securities, recording ownership claims, and using blockchain rails for trade settlement.
The paper updates the firm’s March 2026 study, The State of Real World Assets Onchain, and focuses on what has materially changed since then.
Transferability alone no longer defines product maturity
In its earlier framework, insights4vc separated onchain assets into those merely recorded on blockchain systems and those that could be moved into external wallets. Under the RWA.xyz taxonomy referenced in the report, “represented assets” remain inside an issuer or platform environment, while “distributed assets” can move externally, even if transfers are still limited to approved or whitelisted wallets.
That distinction still matters, the report says, but transferability by itself is no longer enough to judge whether a tokenized equity product is mature.
Since March, offshore products have become easier to use across chains and inside decentralized markets. Ondo expanded to Ethereum, BNB Chain, and Solana, introduced decentralized routing, and added continuous mint-and-redeem functionality for some products. xStocks also widened distribution and collateral integrations.
Regulated U.S. market infrastructure moved in a different direction. There, the emphasis has not been unrestricted portability. It has been legal certainty, controlled wallets, compliant custody, transfer-agent records, and integration with the Depository Trust Company, or DTC.
The two tracks solve different problems. Offshore wrappers improve access and composability. Regulated infrastructure strengthens the link between a token and a legally recognized ownership claim.
The report also highlights the idea of a “canonical share,” meaning the issuer-authorized form of a security whose transfer is recognized in the official ownership system. That is fundamentally different from a third-party instrument that only tracks a stock’s price or performance.
According to insights4vc, no product has yet achieved all four attributes at scale: canonical ownership, broad wallet distribution, institutional liquidity, and independent onchain price discovery.
RWA totals grew, but the figures should not be read as direct fund flows
The report argues that broader RWA market totals also need careful handling. RWA.xyz reported $36.81 billion in distributed value and $218.27 billion in represented value on July 29. Represented value appeared to decline by $124.33 billion from an earlier observation point, but insights4vc says that should not be read as capital flight or a redemption wave.
Between the two observation dates, large parts of the underlying datasets were added, removed, reclassified, or revalued. In other words, the numbers reflect the value of claims covered by the platform’s methodology at specific points in time, not a direct measure of investor money moving in or out.
Tokenized equities are somewhat more comparable because the same “bridged token value” method was used across periods. Even there, the reported 98.5% increase cannot be cleanly broken into new issuance, price appreciation, and classification adjustments.
The report points to FGRS as an example. Figure completed a blockchain stock offering of 4.375 million shares at $32 per share, yet the reported value later moved with market pricing. Without daily mint, burn, and net asset value data for each product, the market’s net issuance cannot be reconstructed reliably.
“Bridged token value” is not the same thing as free float
RWA.xyz measures tokenized stocks using “bridged token value,” calculated as bridged circulating supply multiplied by net asset value.
That circulating supply excludes balances identified as treasury holdings or pre-minted inventory. The bridged figure also removes tokens locked in known bridge contracts so the same asset is not counted twice when it is locked on one network and issued on another.
insights4vc says this is a useful measure of distributed value, but it is not equivalent to free float. Free float refers to the portion of a security that is actually available for public trading after restricted, strategic, and concentrated holdings are excluded.
Timing matters as well. Asset-level export data showed distributed value of $1.8879 billion on July 27, in line with the dashboard reading of about $1.888 billion. Platform and network snapshots taken on July 29 summed to about $1.872 billion.
The gap between the two figures was $15.8 million, or 0.84%, which the report says is consistent with changes in prices and token supply between those dates. For that reason, the study uses July 27 data for growth calculations at the instrument level and July 29 snapshots for platform and network market share, without mixing the datasets inside a single calculation.
Three products drove nearly half of the increase
Three named instruments accounted for roughly half of the increase in distributed value. SECZ added $169 million after listing, FGRS added $162.9 million, and STRCx added $126.6 million. Together they contributed $458.6 million, or 49% of the total increase of $936.8 million. Long-tail products contributed another $150.5 million, equal to 16.1% of the increase.
The report stresses that these figures show changes in distributed value, not subscription amounts from investors.
SECZ was affected by both the number of represented shares and the New York Stock Exchange price tied to Securitize. FGRS reflected issuance, conversion activity, and market price moves. STRCx depended on the circulating supply and value of certificates linked to Strategy floating-rate preferred stock.
Bundling all three categories together as “tokenized stock inflows,” the report says, would collapse economically different events into one number and could mislead readers.
Market share is concentrated even as chain distribution broadens
Concentration is sharper at the platform level. In the July 29 snapshot, Ondo and xStocks together accounted for 72.7% of distributed value. Adding Securitize lifted the top-three share to 85.1%. Broken out individually, Ondo held 45.21%, xStocks 27.51%, and Securitize 12.40%.
Across blockchains, the distribution looked more spread out, but the report says that does not remove shared dependencies underneath. Ethereum led with 36.24% of value, followed by Solana at 19.63% and BNB Chain at 15.82%. Provenance was driven mainly by Figure, while Avalanche was driven mainly by Securitize.
Products issued on different networks may still depend on the same wrapper issuer, broker, custodian, transfer agent, or reference price provider.
That leaves the market broader in appearance, but still legally fragmented. Several tokens can reference Apple shares or the SPDR S&P 500 ETF at the same time, yet each token may represent a separate legal liability governed by a different jurisdiction and a different set of intermediaries.
Bridge adjustments can stop the same token from being counted twice across networks. They cannot, and should not, merge products that reference similar assets but provide materially different legal rights.