Zou chuanwei: the economic logic of security token and the block chain mechanism of financial transaction post-processing
Zou chuan-wei, chief economist of PlatON: the logic and mechanism of the application of blockchain in the post-processing of financial transactions
Source: PlatON
Author: zou chuanwei, who studied in Peking University, tsinghua university and Harvard University, worked for a long time in central huijin company, China investment corporation and nanhu financial services company. Before joining wanxiang blockchain, he was the chief economist of bitmainland. Representative studies on blockchain include bubbles and opportunities: nine economic questions about digital cryptocurrency and blockchain finance and what blockchain can and cannot do. He was awarded the first "sun yefang financial innovation award" and the fifth China soft science award (frontier exploration award).
preface
In order to understand the application of blockchain in the mainstream financial field, the post-processing of financial transactions is a problem that must be studied clearly. This question is also key to understanding the scenarios in which central Banks' digital currencies and global stability currencies are used in financial transactions. This paper was written by Dr. Zou chuanwei, chief economist of wanxiang blockchain and PlatON. Based on a brief introduction of financial infrastructure such as central securities depository and management, securities settlement system and payment system, this paper first discusses the economic logic of Token of capital and securities, and then analyzes the mechanism of post-processing of financial transactions by blockchain.
The digital currency of central bank and the global stable currency represented by Libra reflect the application of blockchain in currency and payment field, which has become a concerned frontier issue. Global stability currency and central bank digital currency are used in financial transaction scenarios as well as payment scenarios. Compared with the previous scenario, the latter scenario, though less focused, is no less important, and the key to understanding the latter scenario is the application of blockchain in post-trade Processing of financial transactions.
Post-processing of financial transactions involves the process from Trade Completion to Final Settlement, and the core is the clearing and Settlement of securities and capital.
In this context, securities refer to tradable financial assets in which securities are issued to raise funds from investors; Funds refer to electronic payment instruments such as central bank currency (excluding cash) and commercial bank deposits; Final settlement is the point at which securities and funds are irrevocably and unconditionally transferred.
Post-processing of financial transactions deals with both securities and capital. If money is also processed in blockchain, the post-processing of financial transactions involves central bank digital currency and global stability currency. The bank of Japan's Stella project in cooperation with the ECB, the Singapore monetary authority's Ubin project and the bank of Canada's Jasper project all include experiments on the application of blockchain in post-processing of financial transactions. Moreover, the Token paradigm of blockchain is used to replace the account paradigm (zou chuanwei, 2019a).
Therefore, in order to understand the application of blockchain in the mainstream financial field, the post-processing of financial transactions is a problem that must be clearly studied. Much valuable work has been done in this area.
· in 2015, nasdaq stock exchange launched Linq, a private equity trading platform based on block chain technology, which mainly issued pre-ipo stock services based on block chain.
, in 2016, Shanghai institute of clearinghouse to constitute, the people's bank of digital currency, some commercial Banks constitute joint digital paper trading platform prototype system development, realize the whole life cycle of digital instrument based on block chain registration flow trading and based on the digital currency notes against (Delivery versus Payment, DvP) settlement function.
· in 2018, the world bank issued the world's first Bond created and managed using blockchain, called bond-i.
· Depository Trust & amp; The Clearing Corporation (DTCC) proposes the post-transaction processing principle of Token securities (DTCC, 2019).
The work has attracted media attention, but it has also been accompanied by a lot of specious arguments. For example, some media articles think that issuing and trading securities through blockchain is an obvious thing to do, and seldom delve into the complex mechanism behind it.
The application of blockchain in post-processing of financial transactions involves not only the understanding of blockchain, but also the understanding of financial infrastructure.Without relevant work experience, this problem is not easy to be studied clearly. However, with the attention of front-line experts in financial infrastructure, a batch of high-quality professional literature has emerged.
· in 2017, the BIS Committee on Payments and Market Infrastructures (CPMI) proposed an analytical framework for the application of distributed ledger in payment, clearing and settlement (CPMI, 2017).
· yao qian (2019) discussed the new forms of financial infrastructure based on distributed ledgers, especially the Central Securities Depository (CSD), Securities Settlement System (SSS), Payment System (PS) and Central Counterparty (CCP) under distributed ledgers. But due to space constraints, he did not discuss some of the key issues in the application of blockchain to the post-processing of financial transactions.
· since the end of 2019, CPMI has produced three research reports that discuss the impact of distributed ledgers on payment and securities settlement from different perspectives. CPMI (2019) discusses the wholesale Settlement Token, but the economic logic is applicable to the processing of funds and securities with blockchain.
· in the March 2020 BIS quarterly, Bench and Hancock (2020) discussed the future payment system, and Bench et al. (2020) discussed the future securities settlement system.
Combined with these research reports, we can already see the general picture and core problems of the application of blockchain in the post-processing of financial transactions. This is the goal of this article.
This paper is divided into three parts. The first part briefly introduces the core components of financial transaction post-processing, the second part discusses the economic logic of Token of capital and securities, and the third part discusses the key mechanism of block chain applied to financial transaction post-processing.
I. the core component of financial transaction post-processing
This part prepares for the following, because only by understanding the core components of post-processing of financial transactions, can we analyze the necessity and rationality of the application of block chain in post-processing of financial transactions.
Early stock take physical form, is Paper documents (Paper Certificate), can be divided into unregistered Securities (Bearer Securities) and registered Securities (Inscribed Securities).
Bearer securities do not have to be registered with the issuer. The holder is the beneficiary and has the same anonymity as cash. No person or institution records the holder of bearer securities, but once the bearer securities are lost, stolen or destroyed, the holder generally suffers a total loss. Bearer transfers do not require endorsement, and transactions are like cash. Once both parties confirm the authenticity of the bearer securities, they can complete the transaction and deliver the securities without the assistance of a third party trusted institution. After the completion of the liquidation and settlement, the bearer securities trading process is concluded.
America's Treasury issued long-dated paper bearer bonds before 1986 (see chart 1). China's economic construction bonds issued from the 1950s and Treasury bonds issued since 1981 are bearer (in kind). But the regulation of bearer securities is difficult, including counterfeiting, money laundering and tax evasion.
On November 14, 1986, deng xiaoping gave John fallin, chairman of the New York stock exchange, the shares of Shanghai feile audio co., ltd. as registered securities (figure 2). At present, there are no physical stocks in China, Australia and the European Union (after 2025), while there are still physical stocks in the United States, Hong Kong, Singapore, South Korea and India, which must be dematerialized before trading (see below).
Because the storage and delivery of physical securities means high costs and risks for investors, investors usually hand over physical securities to custodian institutions to hold them, which gives rise to the indirect holding mode.
CSD has three main functions: one is to certify, fairly and reliably maintain the records of securities issued; Second, the settlement, the ownership of the securities from the seller to the buyer; Third, account maintenance, establishment and update of ownership records of securities.
In the indirect holding model, investors hold securities through an agent (including CSD and market intermediaries such as brokers and custodians) whose name is shown on the securities register rather than the name of the investor.
According to the Hong Kong stock exchange (2020), the indirect holding mode can be subdivided into single-tier holding mode and multi-tier holding mode (figure 3). In a single-tier hold model, the investor is a direct participant in CSD, and CSD manages the agent account for its participant. In a multi-tier holding model, the top tier is usually CSD, with various financial service providers (such as brokers and custodians) acting as investors' agents at each layer below.
Our country basically is direct hold mode. Investors need to open a real name securities account in China clearing (CSD in China's stock market). The opening procedure can be handled through an authorized securities company.The investor's securities account is composed of the total account (i.e., the "one code pass" account) and the associated sub-accounts. Real-name account system with unique identification number. China clearing is responsible for maintaining the investor's securities account information and the share register of the securities issuer. The shares held by the investors are entrusted by the securities company, and the shares held by the securities company itself and on behalf of the clients are deposited in China for settlement. Agent accounts in China are limited to foreign investors who hold shares under the shanghai-shenzhen stock connect through Hong Kong agents.
And the United States and India are indirect holding mode, Hong Kong, Singapore and Korea and other characteristics of both direct and indirect holding mode, there are agent accounts.The existence of the agent's account reduces the information requirements for CSD, but the securities ownership information is fragmented, which makes reconciliation difficult.
The whole process of securities trading can be divided into two parts.
The first is trading, or buying and selling securities, which requires a central intermediary or multiple intermediaries to match orders.In the case of stocks, billing and matching are done on the exchange.
The second link is post-transaction processing, divided into clearing and settlement.Clearing is primarily a calculation of the securities and capital repayment obligations of the parties involved in the transaction, some of which are offset or offset. Clearing also involves sending transaction information to a third party to check accounts and identify whom to settle. Settlement refers to the transfer of ownership of securities and funds in accordance with the agreement, which is divided into "Delivery Leg" and "Payment Leg". Among them, the promissory side refers to the securities from the securities seller to the securities buyer, the payment side refers to the funds from the securities buyer to the securities seller.
The payment side involves PS. PS refers to a set of tools, processes, and rules for transferring money between two or more traders.
Payment is divided into wholesale payment and retail payment.Wholesale payments occur between financial institutions, securities and foreign exchange transactions between financial institutions, transactions between financial institutions and CCPS, and financing between financial institutions. Retail payments relate to consumer and commercial bank purchases of goods and services, including peer-to-peer (P2P), peer-to-peer commercial bank (P2B), business-to-business (B2P) and business-to-business (B2B).
Whether it's wholesale or retail, there's a gap between the front end and the back end. The front end includes: one is the source of funds, such as bank accounts; Second, the service channels that initiate payment, such as retail payment App; Third, payment instruments. The back-end includes: clearing, which refers to the transfer of payment instructions and reconciliation process, and sometimes also includes the transaction confirmation before settlement; Second, settlement, refers to the transfer of funds to release two or more parties from the repayment obligations.
There are three main methods of settlement in PS.
The first is real-time full settlementRTGS is an order to settle a payment in full. RTGS is efficient and reduces the credit risk of all parties involved in the payment, but requires higher liquidity.
The second is delayed nettingDeferred Net Settlement (DNS) refers to the Net Settlement after the offset of payment instructions. DNS can save liquidity, but it takes time to roll and settle. DNS has settlement risk, which is reflected in two dimensions: one is credit risk, which refers to the risk caused by the default of Payment Service Provider (PSP) or payee before the settlement is completed; Second, liquidity risk, refers to the risk that the recipient may delay the receipt of funds.
The third is a hybrid model of RTGS and DNS.For example, if the payer's PSP does not have enough money to perform RTGS, PS provides a Liquidity Saving Mechanism (LSM) that compares payment orders with other payment orders before settling.
In almost all countries, RTGS is used for wholesale payments, and RTGS systems are usually owned and managed by central Banks.In the RTGS system, Intraday Credit is provided by the central bank to financial institutions for payment orders that may be blocked if the financial institution's account balance is insufficient. DNS is usually used before retail payment.
A major Risk in settlement is Principal Risk, which is the Risk that a seller will not be able to obtain funds after delivering the security, or a buyer will not be able to obtain the security after paying for it, because the payments do not synchronize with the delivery of the security.
Therefore, post-processing of financial transactions emphasizes the DvP principle: the delivery of securities is only and only the payment of funds.There are three DvP modes: one is DvP mode 1, which refers to the full settlement of securities and funds; The second is DvP mode 2, which refers to the full settlement of securities, and the net settlement of funds after misalignment; Third, DvP mode 3, which refers to the net settlement of securities and funds after misalignment.
Figure 4 is a typical financial transaction post-processing process.
(I) the general logic of Token
It is necessary to clarify three concepts before formal discussion: account, Token, and ledger.
In this article, the Account corresponds to the Account. For example, securities are recorded in CSD accounts, while electronic central bank currency is recorded in the central bank reserve account and commercial bank deposits are recorded in the commercial bank deposit account. These are value representations under the account paradigm, where ownership and transaction records of assets are maintained and updated by a centralized account manager. Token, as a digital certificate, is another way to express value. The comparison between account paradigm and Token paradigm shows that zou chuanwei (2019a). Ledger corresponds to Ledger. Ledgers, which record asset ownership and transactions, can either take the account paradigm or the Token paradigm.
Zou chuanwei (2019a) discusses the rules that should be followed for the Token of capital and securities. Token is a piece of computer code in its existing form and has no intrinsic value.
The Token's value comes from the assets (money and securities) it carries, and it follows three rules.
One is the 1:1 rule.Token issuer issues tokens in a 1:1 relationship based on the underlying asset. The user gives the Token issuer 1 unit of the underlying asset, and the Token issuer issues 1 unit of Token to the user.
The second is the 1:1 redemption rule.The user returns 1 unit of Token to the Token issuer, and the Token issuer returns 1 unit of the underlying asset to the user. Under the first two rules, the Token issuer ensures a two-way 1:1 exchange between the Token and the underlying asset.
Third, credible rules.Token issuer must regularly accept third-party audit and fully disclose information to ensure the authenticity and adequacy of the underlying assets as Token issuance reserves. Under the constraints of these three rules, 1 unit Token represents the value of 1 unit of the underlying asset, the number of tokens at each address in the ledger records the asset ownership information, and the Token transfer between addresses records the asset transaction information. When there is secondary market transaction in Token, the Token market price may deviate from the value of the underlying asset, but the market arbitrage mechanism will drive the price to return to the value. Once the three rules are not strictly followed, the effect of the market arbitrage mechanism will be weakened and the Token price will be decoupled from the value of the underlying asset, but not completely.
(ii) tokenization of funds
CPMI (2019) illustrates the mechanism design of wholesale settlement Token with the following steps:
1. Bank A transfers funds to the Token Arrangement Account in order to purchase the Token;
2.Token arrangement increases the account balance, which triggers the Token issuer to issue new tokens of equal amount;
3. Transfer the newly issued Token to bank A;
4. Bank A transfers Token to bank B, and the transfer is point-to-point;
5. When bank B redeems the Token, it transfers a certain number of tokens back to the Token issuer;
6.Token redemption triggers Token arrangement to transfer the same amount of money from the account;
7. These funds are transferred to bank B's account.
Figure 5 shows the issuance, transfer and redemption mechanism of wholesale settlement Token, which embodies the two rules of 1:1 issuance and 1:1 redemption. Figure 5 shows the operation under the account paradigm on the left and the operation under the Token paradigm on the right, indicating that there should be Interoperability between the two paradigms, i.e. technical and legal compatibility between different systems or mechanisms.
In addition, if the Token arrangement account in figure 5 is understood as the Libra legal currency reserve pool, bank A and B are understood as the Libra authorized dealers, and the Token issuer as the Libra alliance, figure 5 also conforms to the design scheme of Libra (Libra Association, 2019), except that the transaction unit between the authorized dealers and the legal currency reserve pool is A basket of currencies.
(3) Token of securities
The above discussion discussed the economic logic of Token capital, which also applies to Token security. When a Token is used to represent a security, a Token can be used to represent an existing security or a new security in Token form can be issued. The best way to understand Token securities is to compare them with Depositary receipts (DR).
Depository receipts are negotiable certificates issued and circulated in the securities market of a country, representing securities of foreign companies (called "basic securities"). Each depository receipt represents a certain number of basic securities.
There are two core institutions in the depository receipt business:One is depository institutionsDepositary Institution serves as the nominal issuer of Depositary receipts and the Depositary receipt market intermediary for Depositary receipt investors, including issuance, registration, transfer and cancellation of Depositary receipts;The second is the custodian institution(Custodian Institution), depository institutions in the underlying securities issuers to arrange bank, responsible for hosting the underlying securities depositary receipts represent. Depository receipts are classified into financing type and non-financing type according to whether the underlying securities are newly issued or existing stock.
Depository receipts can be traded across borders with underlying securities. In domestic investors to domestic brokers buy depository receipts command, the domestic brokers can choose to buy depository receipts in the domestic market, but can be by overseas securities brokers in the overseas market to buy basis, by the depository institutions into a depositary receipts after sold to domestic investors (corresponding to the above 1:1 issued rules). After the domestic investor issues the order to sell the depository receipt to the domestic broker, the domestic broker may choose to sell the depository receipt in the domestic market, or sell the underlying securities in the overseas market through the overseas broker, and the depository institution shall cancel the equivalent depository receipt (corresponding to the 1:1 redemption rule above). Because of the arbitrage mechanism formed by cross-border transactions, there is generally no significant price difference between depository receipts and underlying securities.
The above discussion discusses the economic logic of Token of capital and security. The logic is not complicated, I should say, but the legal issues are more complicated than the economic ones.
CPMI (2019) proposes to study the legal rights of Token holders and the relationship between Token holders, Token issuers and reserve assets issued by Token. For example, does the Token holder have a claim on the Token issuer or on the reserve asset issued by the Token? If the latter, does the Token holder have a claim on the reserve asset as an individual or as a whole? This will cause compliance risks and operational risks that cannot be ignored.
The post-processing of financial transactions under the account paradigm has been explored and studied for a long time, and a series of risk mitigation and management mechanisms have been established, while the legal basis of Token securities remains to be studied.
Iii. The key mechanism of block chain application in post-processing of financial transactions
(1) analysis of necessity and rationality
The application of blockchain in post-processing of financial transactions is a paradigm shift, from account paradigm to Token paradigm. However, paradigm shift alone is not enough to support the necessity and rationality of introducing blockchain into the post-processing of financial transactions. The key is to prove that blockchain can improve efficiency, reduce risks and retain the advantages of the current model.
In the indirect holding model of securities, a transaction involves multiple intermediaries, such as CSD, custodians (which can have multiple layers), exchanges and brokers. Each intermediary USES its own system to process, send and receive orders, check data, manage errors, and maintain its own trading records. The data standards used by each intermediary are also not uniform. All this adds up to a lot of costs and makes reconciliation between intermediaries more difficult. This problem is evident when holding multiple layers of securities.
If the settlement and account maintenance functions of CSD are realized through the block chain, then the integration of CSD and SSS and the sharing of one ledger by all market participants will bring the following benefits:
One is to simplify and automate post-transaction processing through distributed, simultaneous and Shared securities ownership records, and reduce the workload of checking accounts and confirming transaction details between CSD and various intermediaries in the background.
Second, shorten the settlement time, reduce the settlement risk exposure;
Third, because the information related to the transaction is Shared by both sides of the transaction, it can promote automatic clearing;
Fourth, shorten the custody chain, so that investors can directly hold securities, reduce the legal, operational risks and intermediary costs borne by investors;
Fifth, good traceability, high transparency;
Sixth, decentralization and multi-backup can improve system security and compression resistance (CPMI, 2017).
Another benefit is that Token holders can automate the management of securities through smart contract programming to achieve flexible risk transfer, hedging and resource allocation. The account system can also automate the management of securities, but it is implemented by a centralized account manager, while Token securities delegate the automation to the security holder. Readers interested in the programmability of Token can refer to zou chuanwei (2020). However, Bech et al. (2020) believes that self-executing contracts may cause risk contagion and amplify procyclicality.
To achieve the above benefits, Token securities need to meet the following premise:
One is that CSD performs the authentication function well to ensure the authenticity of information of issued securities.
Second, the records on the block chain have legal effect. The third part has pointed out this problem.
Third, the block chain can guarantee Settlement Finality. This problem is not difficult for alliance chain, but some public chain because of the possibility of bifurcation, can only guarantee the final settlement in the sense of probability.
Fourth, DvP can be realized.
Fifth, it can effectively handle errors and exceptions. The feature of block chain that cannot be tampered with objectively increases the difficulty of this problem.
Sixth, in the case that there may be many parties involved in the verification, to ensure the confidentiality of the transaction information.
Seven are operational issues, including identity management, system scalability, and interoperability with existing processes and infrastructure.
Next, we will discuss the fifth to seventh points (account management) and then the fourth point (DvP feasibility).
(2) accounting management
Bench et al. (2020) proposed to understand the accounting management problem from the following dimensions.
The first dimension is who has the authority to validate the ledger.Under the account paradigm, only centralized account managers have the right to verify, and their credibility and authority are very important. For example, in payment, the commercial bank verifies the identity of the deposit account owner; In a securities transaction, CSD verifies the identity of the securities account owner. Under the Token paradigm, anyone can theoretically verify whether Token transaction conforms to the pre-defined algorithm rules. We can call the former trust based on mechanism design and the latter trust based on technology.
The second dimension is who has the authority to update the ledger,There are two scenarios.
One is that no permission is required. In theory, any node can verify the transaction and update the ledger, and a consensus algorithm can be used to determine which node will exercise this right at a certain point.
Second, permission is required. Only trusted institutions can verify transactions and update accounts. If only one node can update the ledger, it is the same as the account normal. But even in this case, the Token paradigm has value. For example, the people's bank of China's DC/EP prototype system may use a centralized ledger based on the UTXO (Unspent Transaction Output) pattern. This centralized ledger is embodied in a digital currency issuance registration system maintained by the central bank. Since the credit of central Banks is significantly higher than that of commercial Banks and other private institutions, it is not necessary to introduce distributed trust mechanism in DC/EP, so it makes sense for DC/EP to use centralized ledger (zou chuanwei, 2019b).
The third dimension is who has access to the ledger,There are two scenarios. One is public, anyone or institution can initiate a transaction. The other is private, where only trusted people or institutions can initiate transactions. This situation is similar to the authority management in the account system.
The fourth dimension is who has access to the books. There are two scenarios. One is non-hierarchical, in which any person or institution has a full backup of the ledger and is informed of all information contained therein. The second is hierarchical, only some people or institutions have a full backup of the ledger.
(iii) feasibility of DvP
Some projects have tested whether the application of blockchain in post-processing of financial transactions can realize DvP. The complexity of this problem lies in the fact that there are four different combinations of the voucher and payment ends of financial transaction post-processing, which can be either Token paradigm or account paradigm. Table 1 shows that the corresponding items can be found for each combination.
One is off-chain liquidation,Namely, RTGS is adopted for clearing (corresponding to the Token paradigm at the coupon end vs the account paradigm at the payment end in table 1);
Second, the liquidation on the chain,That is, through the central bank digital currency settlement. The results show that the introduction of digital currency by the central bank has greatly simplified the bill transaction process, enabling automatic real-time DvP and monitoring of fund flows. If out-of-chain clearing is adopted, the advantages of digital bills based on block chain technology will be greatly reduced, which is not different from the traditional electronic bill system. This shows that, after Token security, must cooperate with capital Token, in order to play the potential of block chain in post-processing of financial transactions.
There are two situations in which both the coupon end and the payment end are Token patterns (figure 7) :
One is the use of the same Token system (that is, the same blockchain) between the voucher side and the payment side, known as a single-ledger DvP. For single - ledger DvP, funds and securities are recorded in the same ledger. After each counterparty confirms the order, Atomic Settlement smart contracts can coordinate clearing and Settlement, allowing simultaneous transfers of securities and funds. The Jasper and Stella projects argue that DvP mode 1, in which securities and funds are liquidated in full, is feasible in this case. Therefore, we need to see the difficulty of net settlement in a decentralized environment.
Second, the voucher end and the payment end use two different Token systems (namely, two different blockchains), known as cross-ledger DvP. For cross-ledger DvP, funds and securities are recorded in two different books, requiring some mechanism between the books to link the transactions between the two assets. There are two possible approaches. The first is for a central agency to coordinate the transfer of securities and funds on two blockchains. The second is Hashed Time Lock Contract (HTLC).
However, whether DvP can be implemented in all scenarios is still an open question. The Jasper project argues that there may be principal risk in cross - chain clearing. Stella project test found that the cross-ledger DvP using HTLC may have settlement failure and lead to two different results. The first result is that funds and securities are returned to their original holders, with neither counterparty taking on much Risk but facing Replacement Cost Risk (the Risk that a settlement failure forces it to retrade but current market conditions deteriorate) and liquidity Risk. The second result is that both the money and the securities will go to one counterparty and the other party will take on the greater principal risk.
First, the economic logic of Token of funds and securities is not complicated, but there is still no clear answer to the legal problem, which is mainly reflected in the legal rights of Token holder and the relationship between Token holder, Token issuer and the reserve assets issued by Token.
Second, the necessity and rationality of the application of block chain in the post-processing of financial transactions.At present, the preliminary analysis shows that the introduction of block chain in the indirect holding mode of securities can help shorten the custody chain, reduce the dependence on intermediaries, simplify the reconciliation work, and thus shorten the settlement flow and improve the settlement efficiency. These improvements are more apparent when there are multiple layers of securities held. However, in China's capital market (including the stock market and the bond market) such as the direct hold model, the improvement of the role of blockchain remains to be seen and tested.
Third, China's experiment on digital bill trading platform shows that, after Token of securities, it must cooperate with capital Token, so as to give full play to the potential of block chain in post-processing of financial transactions. This shows that the block chain is applied to the post-processing of financial transactions, and the digital currency of the central bank is an unavoidable problem.
Fourth, blockchain will bring new problems for post-processing of financial transactions.Including but not limited to: 1. Final issues of settlement; 2. Effective handling of errors and exceptions; 3. Feasibility of net settlement after rolling under decentralized environment; 4. Feasibility of cross-ledger DvP.
Source link:weixin.qq.com
Welcome to join the official BlockBeats community:
Telegram Subscription Group: https://t.me/theblockbeats
Telegram Discussion Group: https://t.me/BlockBeats_App
Official Twitter Account: https://twitter.com/BlockBeatsAsia
Related Articles
