Tokenized stocks vs. traditional IPOs: A comparative analysis of investor protection strategies
https://doi.org/10.26907/2541-7738.2026.3.220-236
Abstract
This article presents the findings of a comparative study of tokenized stocks and traditional initial public offerings (IPOs) from the perspective of the legal protection of investor rights. The analysis is based on the functional classification of tokenization models in business (registry-based, custodial, and synthetic), which provides the foundation for comparing the scope of corporate and legally binding investor rights with applicable regulatory regimes. Using the international standards (BIS, FSB, IOSCO), EU regulations (ESMA, DLT Pilot Regime, MiCA/MiCAR), and Russian legislation on digital financial assets (DFA), the mechanisms of prospectus control, listing, custodial protection, secondary trading, and dispute resolution governing both systems were systemically assessed. The results show the configurations in which tokenization reproduces or strengthens traditional guarantees, as well as those that give rise to “regulatory gaps” and opportunities for regulatory arbitrage. Targeted proposals for reforming the current EU and Russian regulatory frameworks based on the principle of regulatory equivalence were outlined.
About the Authors
F. I. Khamidullinа
Kazan Federal University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Farida I. Khamidullina, Dr. Sci. (Law), Full Professor, Department of Civil Law
Kazan
L. Z. Gazizullina
Kazan Federal University
Russian Federation
Russian Federation
Liliya Z. Gazizullina, Cand. Sci. (Law), Associate Professor, Department of Economic Security and Taxation
Kazan
References
1. Grechka S.S., Kruzhevnikova A.A. The legal status of cryptocurrencies: Problems of regulation and protection of investor rights. Humanities. Higher School, 2025, no. 3. pp. 33–41. https://doi.org/10.24412/cl-37382-2025-3-33-41. (In Russian)
2. Adhami S., Giudici G., Martinazzi S. Why do businesses go crypto? An empirical analysis of Initial Coin Offerings. Journal of Economics and Business, 2018, vol. 100, spec. issue: FinTech: The impact on consumers and regulatory responses, pp. 64–75. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconbus.2018.04.001.
3. Fisch C. Initial coin offerings (ICOs) to finance new ventures. Journal of Business Venturing, 2019, vol. 34, no. 1, pp. 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jbusvent.2018.09.007.
4. Fisch C., Momtaz P.P. Institutional investors and post-ICO performance: An empirical analysis of investor returns in initial coin offerings (ICOs). Journal of Corporate Finance, 2020, vol. 64, art. 101679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2020.101679.
5. Howell S.T., Niessner M., Yermack D. Initial coin offerings: Financing growth with cryptocurrency token sales. Review of Financial Studies, 2020, vol. 33, no. 9, pp. 3925–3974. https://doi.org/10.1093/rfs/hhz131.
6. Kher R., Terjesen S., Liu C. Blockchain, Bitcoin, and ICOs: A review and research agenda. Small Business Economics, 2021, vol. 56, no. 4, pp. 1699–1720. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-019-00286-y.
7. Momtaz P.P. Initial coin offerings. PLoS One, 2020, vol. 15, no. 5, art. e0233018. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0233018.
8. Benedetti H., Kostovetsky L. Digital Tulips? Returns to investors in initial coin offerings. Journal of Corporate Finance, 2021, vol. 66, art. 101786. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcorpfin.2020.101786.
9. Lee J., Li T., Shin D. The wisdom of crowds in FinTech: Evidence from initial coin offerings. Review of Corporate Finance Studies, 2022, vol. 11, no. 1, pp. 1–46. https://doi.org/10.1093/rcfs/cfab014.
10. Lambert T., Liebau D., Roosenboom P. Security token offerings. Small Business Economics, 2022, vol. 59, no. 1, pp. 299–325. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11187-021-00539-9.
11. Ante L., Fiedler I. Cheap signals in security token offerings. Quantitative Finance and Economics, 2020, vol. 4, no. 4, pp. 608–639. https://doi.org/10.3934/QFE.2020028.
12. Cappai M. The regulation of crypto-assets between public and private law. Computer Law & Security Review, 2023, vol. 49, art. 105831. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.clsr.2023.105831.
13. Cohney S., Hoffman D.A., Sklaroff J., Wishnick D. Coin-operated capitalism. Columbia Law Review, 2019, vol. 119, no. 3, pp. 591–676. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3215345.
14. Chuvakhin P.I. Investment contracts: balancing investor rights and state sovereignty in the era of sustainable development. Theory and Practice of Social Development, 2025, no. 8 (208), pp. 152–160. https://doi.org/10.24158/tipor.2025.8.18.
15. Zetzsche D.A., Arner D.W., Buckley R.P. Decentralized finance. Journal of Financial Regulation, 2020, vol. 6, pp. 172–203. http://dx.doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.3539194.
16. Zetzsche D.A., Woxholth J. The DLT sandbox under the Pilot Regulation. Capital Markets Law Journal, 2022, vol. 17, no. 2, pp. 212–236. https://doi.org/10.1093/cmlj/kmac003.
17. Barczentewicz M., de Gândara Gomes A. Crypto-asset market abuse under EU MiCA. European Journal of Risk Regulation, 2024, FirstView art., pp. 1–18. https://doi.org/10.1017/err.2024.80.
18. Konashevych O. General concept of real estate tokenization on blockchain: The right to choose. European Property Law Journal, 2020, vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 21–66. https://doi.org/10.1515/eplj-2020-0003.
Review
For citations:
Khamidullinа F.I., Gazizullina L.Z. Tokenized stocks vs. traditional IPOs: A comparative analysis of investor protection strategies. Kazan Journal of Historical, Linguistic, and Legal Research. 2026;168(3):220-236. (In Russ.) https://doi.org/10.26907/2541-7738.2026.3.220-236
Views:
63
JATS XML
Email this article 