Why This Approach
Legacy vs. tokenised — the honest trade-off
What tokenised settlement actually buys you versus today's rails, what it costs to build, and where it isn't worth it yet.
New to the wording on this page? 7 terms explainedShow
Correspondent banking
The traditional way cross-border payments work: banks hold accounts with each other, and a payment hops through a chain of these relationships to reach its destination. Each hop adds time, cost and a place it can stall.
For example: Paying a supplier in Brazil from Hong Kong might route through a US bank, then a regional bank, then the supplier's bank — three hops, three sets of fees, and three places where a compliance check can hold it for days.
RTGSReal-Time Gross Settlement
Central-bank systems that settle large payments one at a time, immediately and irreversibly, using central-bank money. 'Gross' means each payment settles individually rather than being bundled and netted off.
For example: CHAPS in the United Kingdom is how the money moves when you buy a house — a single large payment settled on its own, same day, and impossible to reverse once done.
Netting
Adding up everything two parties owe each other and moving only the difference, instead of settling every transaction separately.
For example: Over a day, Bank A owes Bank B US$100m across many trades, and Bank B owes Bank A US$97m. Rather than moving US$197m in total, they move US$3m once. Far less cash is needed.
ISO 20022
The modern international standard for the messages banks send each other about payments. It carries far more structured detail than the older format it replaces — including what a payment is actually for.
For example: The old format might carry a cramped free-text line like 'INV 4471 PYMT'. The new one carries separate, properly labelled fields for invoice number, purpose code and full party addresses — so a computer can read it rather than a human guessing.
Cut-off time
The daily deadline after which a payment will not be processed until the next business day.
For example: A treasurer realises at 6pm Hong Kong time that the Singapore office needs cash. The payment window closed at 5pm, so the money cannot arrive until Monday — leaving Singapore short all weekend while the cash sits unused in Hong Kong.
Nostro account
An account one bank holds at another bank, usually abroad and in that country's currency, so it can make payments there. Latin for 'ours' — our money, held at your bank.
For example: For HSBC to pay someone in Brazilian reais, it keeps a pot of reais in an account at a Brazilian bank. That cash sits there earning little, purely so payments can be made — money that is parked rather than working.
Settlement
The moment value actually changes hands and the deal is genuinely done — not just agreed, promised, or sitting as pending. Before settlement, someone is still owed something.
For example: You tap your card at 9am and the shop says 'approved'. That is authorisation, not settlement. The money may only actually leave your account two days later — that later moment is settlement.
Side-by-side comparison
Advantages
Removes principal and settlement risk
Atomic DvP/PvP makes the classic 'I paid and they didn't deliver' failure mode structurally impossible, not just less likely.
Collapses reconciliation effort
A shared, continuously-reconciled ledger removes most of the manual matching work that legacy multi-party settlement requires.
Removes the cut-off constraint entirely
Not 'faster within business hours' — genuinely always-on, which changes what's possible for corporate treasury, not just how fast today's process runs.
Programmable settlement
Conditional logic (release funds only when X is true) becomes a platform capability instead of a manual workaround or a bespoke integration project.
Disadvantages
Legal finality isn't settled yet
Every corridor needs its own legal opinion before production use — this isn't a technology problem, and it can't be engineered away.
Real integration cost
Core banking, treasury systems, screening and reconciliation all need new integration points — this isn't a drop-in replacement for existing rails.
Requires counterparty readiness
The value compounds with adoption — a single bank's tokenised ledger is far less useful until clients and counterparties are actually on it too.
New operational risk surface
Key management, smart-contract logic and network resilience are new failure modes without decades of institutional playbook behind them yet.
Genuinely new skills required
Engineering, risk, legal and operations teams all need capability they may not have today — this is a change-management cost, not just a build cost.
Cost
What it actually takes to build
Using this case study's own delivery backlog as a real effort proxy, in story points — not a made-up number.
Effort by area
137 points total across 7 epics — see the full backlog for story-level detail
Client onboarding & entitlements
New KYC-to-entitlement workflow, role-based approval limits
Token issuance, transfer, redemption
Core ledger lifecycle, 24/7 availability engineering
Ledger integration & reconciliation
Real-time core-banking posting, continuous reconciliation
Financial-crime & wallet controls
Pre-settlement screening, wallet risk scoring, AML monitoring tuned for tokenised movement
Operations, exceptions & reporting
New exception-handling and incident playbooks for a system with no institutional history
Pilot rollout & client support
New commercial and support model — nothing to reuse from the legacy playbook
Commercialisation & go-to-market
Pricing, RM enablement, client segmentation for a genuinely new proposition
See the full delivery backlog for every story and acceptance criterion behind these totals.
The real question
Is it worth it?
Not a yes/no answer — it depends on the client, the corridor and the counterparty. That's exactly why the roadmap is phased rather than a single big-bang launch.
High-volume, multi-entity corporate treasury clients with real cut-off pain
Worth it — this is exactly where 24/7 movement and reconciliation savings show up fastest and most visibly.
A single, occasional cross-border payment need
Probably not worth it yet — legacy rails already handle this adequately, and the integration cost isn't justified by the volume.
A trade that requires DvP/PvP with an external counterparty on incompatible infrastructure
Not worth it until the counterparty is reachable — the value of atomic settlement depends on both sides actually being on compatible rails.
A corridor where legal finality hasn't been established yet
Not worth it for production — this is a hard blocker, not a trade-off to weigh, regardless of how compelling the technology case is.