I’ve been looking at Dusk from a slightly different angle: the harder part may not be putting regulated assets onchain, but making the market around them actually useful.
NPEX gives an interesting reference point. It operates under AFM supervision, has passed €217M in funding and has more than 20,000 active investors.
That makes the question for Dusk more specific.
What happens when a regulated security moves from an existing venue into an onchain market?
If settlement becomes easier, transfers can stay controlled, and investors can interact without exposing unnecessary transaction details, there is a real reason to care.
But I think liquidity is the tougher test.
A regulated asset can be technically compliant and still struggle if there aren't enough buyers, sellers, or repeat transactions.
This is where Dusk Trade gets interesting to me.
The value isn't simply that an asset can exist onchain. It's whether someone can actually enter a market, trade, settle, and come back later because the experience is better than the old process.
That changes the benchmark.
Not "Can Dusk tokenize regulated assets?"
More like:
Can Dusk make regulated assets easier to actually trade?
Because issuance is a milestone.
A functioning market is the harder part.
#dusk $DUSK @Dusk