Built for different tokenized markets

Tokenized assets do not share one liquidity profile. Range design, fees, reference inputs, settlement, and inventory risk need to reflect how each underlying market behaves.

The differences between those markets are not differences of degree. A tokenized equity has a continuously updating reference for roughly a third of each weekday and none for the rest. A Treasury product tracks a value that moves slowly and predictably. A private-credit token carries a valuation published monthly and a redemption process measured in days. Each implies a different answer to how tightly liquidity should be placed, how quickly fees should respond, and how much divergence should be tolerated before something intervenes.

Parameters follow the asset class

Bin step, range width, and fee level are not general-purpose settings. Each asset class implies a different starting point, and a market configured for one behaves badly for another.

The common error is copying a configuration from a liquid equity market into an asset whose price is published monthly. A small bin step implies a precision that a stale reference cannot support.

The reverse error is subtler and just as costly. Configuring an equity market with the wide steps appropriate to private credit produces a market whose minimum spread is larger than the asset's typical daily move, so ordinary trading never crosses a bin boundary and price discovery stops working. A step is not a safety setting that can be widened without cost.

RWA liquidity premiums

A private-credit token may have a NAV of $1.00 but require seven days to redeem. An LP might offer immediate USDG liquidity at $0.98. The discount represents the market price of immediacy, while the LP accepts redemption, issuer, and liquidity risk.

Underlying yield and trading fees

Some Treasuries, credit products, and funds produce yield independently of Silo. Where an asset passes that yield through to holders, an LP earns it alongside trading fees, and the two are reported separately because they are earned differently and carry different risks. Returns are never guaranteed.

Tokenized equity language

Silo does not issue Stock Tokens. Compatible tokens are created by their respective issuers and deposited into Silo markets by LPs. Documentation should say “tokenized stock exposure,” “Stock Tokens,” or “tokenized equities.” It should not claim that using Silo means owning the underlying share directly.

Market hours and settlement

Onchain markets trade continuously. Most underlying markets do not. That mismatch is the defining property of tokenized real-world assets, and range design has to account for it rather than ignore it.

The gap this creates is not a risk that careful positioning avoids. While an underlying market is closed, information about the asset keeps arriving, and the onchain market is the only place it can be expressed. Price moves onchain on whatever depth is available, which is usually thinner than during the session. When the underlying reopens it does so at the price the closed period implied, and any difference between the two is settled against whoever was providing liquidity in between.

Corporate actions and token economics

Underlying assets change in ways that have no equivalent in a purely onchain market. A split, a distribution, a merger, or a contract migration alters what a token represents, and a market built on that token has to handle the change explicitly.

• Splits and reverse splitsThe reference price changes discontinuously, and every existing range is suddenly positioned against a different scale.
• Dividends and distributionsValue leaves the underlying on a known date. Whether the token reflects that, and how, is the issuer's design rather than the market's.
• Mergers and delistingsThe underlying market can stop existing, leaving a token with no reference and no redemption path.
• Contract migrationA new canonical contract makes the old market's asset stale even though it continues to trade.