#dusk $DUSK
I used to think settlement was instant everywhere already. You buy a stock, its yours, done. Then i learned most traditional trades actually settle two days later T+2, and it reframed how i read what Dusk Trade is claiming.
Heres the odd part. When you buy shares through a normal broker the trade happens now but the actual settlement ownership and cash changing hands for real, lands about two business days later. For those two days, a lot is quietly in limbo. The other side could fail. Your capital is committed but the asset isnt fully yours yet. Clearing intermediaries exist mostly to manage that gap.
Dusk Trades pitch runs the other way, instant atomic settlement. The asset leg and the payment leg settle together immediately or not at all.
So the comparison isnt faster app. Its does the two day risk window exist at all
For a retail buy, T+2 is invisible, you dont feel it. But at institutional size two days of counterparty risk and locked-up capital across huge volumes is a real cost, its part of why clearing houses and collateral exist. Removing the window isnt a speed feature, its a risk-and-capital feature.
To be fair instant settlement also removes the buffer that T+2 sometimes gives, time to catch errors, fund accounts, unwind mistakes. Atomic is cleaner but less forgiving.
is T+2 actually a problem worth removing, or is that two-day buffer quietly doing more useful work than it looks? would love a take from anyone whos worked around settlement. @Dusk _Foundation
#dusk $HEMI $COW
I used to think settlement was instant everywhere already. You buy a stock, its yours, done. Then i learned most traditional trades actually settle two days later T+2, and it reframed how i read what Dusk Trade is claiming.
Heres the odd part. When you buy shares through a normal broker the trade happens now but the actual settlement ownership and cash changing hands for real, lands about two business days later. For those two days, a lot is quietly in limbo. The other side could fail. Your capital is committed but the asset isnt fully yours yet. Clearing intermediaries exist mostly to manage that gap.
Dusk Trades pitch runs the other way, instant atomic settlement. The asset leg and the payment leg settle together immediately or not at all.
So the comparison isnt faster app. Its does the two day risk window exist at all
For a retail buy, T+2 is invisible, you dont feel it. But at institutional size two days of counterparty risk and locked-up capital across huge volumes is a real cost, its part of why clearing houses and collateral exist. Removing the window isnt a speed feature, its a risk-and-capital feature.
To be fair instant settlement also removes the buffer that T+2 sometimes gives, time to catch errors, fund accounts, unwind mistakes. Atomic is cleaner but less forgiving.
is T+2 actually a problem worth removing, or is that two-day buffer quietly doing more useful work than it looks? would love a take from anyone whos worked around settlement. @Dusk _Foundation
#dusk $HEMI $COW
