$114T.
That's the number going around with DTCC and Canton.
It's DTCC's custody total, not the amount tokenized.
What's actually planned is a commercial tokenized-asset service, starting with US Treasuries, due in October 2026. The exact date isn't confirmed. On Jul 15, DTCC ran trades with 30+ firms across Canton and Besu, its own private network. So Canton isn't the only rail.
That changes the question. It's not "will DTCC use Canton?" It's "will DTCC's activity burn CC?"
Fees on Canton are paid by burning CC. The network did about $1.88M in fees in 24 hours, the most of any chain. The weekly burn/mint ratio went from 0.16 in January to 0.72 by early September. That's real progress.
But 0.72 still means more CC is minted than burned. Digital Asset's whitepaper also lets featured app providers mint up to 100x the CC they burn as fees. And fees are priced in USD, so burn totals alone don't prove usage or price impact.
I found no source saying DTCC's flows pay CC fees. That's the missing number.
My read: the DTCC launch is already public news (the "October" timing has been out since May). What isn't public is the fee model. Until that's clear, "institutions on Canton" and "demand for CC" are two separate claims.
What I'm watching: the burn/mint ratio crossing 1 with DTCC activity visible, the launch date, and first-month volume. If DTCC's fees turn out to be negligible, I drop this.
If burn/mint crosses 1 and DTCC isn't the reason, is that still the DTCC story?
#Canton #DTCC #RWA #Tokenization
$CC $CFG $PLUME
That's the number going around with DTCC and Canton.
It's DTCC's custody total, not the amount tokenized.
What's actually planned is a commercial tokenized-asset service, starting with US Treasuries, due in October 2026. The exact date isn't confirmed. On Jul 15, DTCC ran trades with 30+ firms across Canton and Besu, its own private network. So Canton isn't the only rail.
That changes the question. It's not "will DTCC use Canton?" It's "will DTCC's activity burn CC?"
Fees on Canton are paid by burning CC. The network did about $1.88M in fees in 24 hours, the most of any chain. The weekly burn/mint ratio went from 0.16 in January to 0.72 by early September. That's real progress.
But 0.72 still means more CC is minted than burned. Digital Asset's whitepaper also lets featured app providers mint up to 100x the CC they burn as fees. And fees are priced in USD, so burn totals alone don't prove usage or price impact.
I found no source saying DTCC's flows pay CC fees. That's the missing number.
My read: the DTCC launch is already public news (the "October" timing has been out since May). What isn't public is the fee model. Until that's clear, "institutions on Canton" and "demand for CC" are two separate claims.
What I'm watching: the burn/mint ratio crossing 1 with DTCC activity visible, the launch date, and first-month volume. If DTCC's fees turn out to be negligible, I drop this.
If burn/mint crosses 1 and DTCC isn't the reason, is that still the DTCC story?
#Canton #DTCC #RWA #Tokenization
$CC $CFG $PLUME
