By Julia Galina,
Chief Growth Officer at ATME

A year ago, I didn’t know much about blockchain. In fact, I thought tokenization was something for crypto enthusiasts and techies. Definitely not something I expected to get excited about.

Fast forward to today, and I’m knee-deep in the tokenization of aircraft, ships, art, and other high-end assets, basically helping make the kinds of investments that used to be totally out of reach more accessible to more people.

In this piece, I reflect on what changed for me, and why I’m greatly enthusiastic about the work we’re doing at ATME .

It’s Not Really About Tech

When I joined ATME, I assumed tokenization was mostly a technical thing. But what I’ve come to realize is that tokenization is more about access than about technology.

It’s about opening up asset classes that were once reserved for the ultra-wealthy (think aircrafts, luxury real estate, rare collectibles), and allowing more people to tap into them, even with smaller investments.

Democratized access to such exclusive assets? That’s the part that hooked me, because I’ve always believed finance should be more inclusive. And tokenization is one real, practical way to make that happen.

Real Progress, Not Just Hype

Tokenization has been a buzzword for a while, but we’re finally seeing real movement. Case in point: the value of real-world assets (RWAs) on-chain has grown from about $5 billion in 2022 to over $25 billion now.

What that means in practice: people can now own a slice of a real asset like a plane or a building by buying a digital token that represents economic rights to it. That opens up new opportunities for investors and adds liquidity to markets that used to be locked up.

A Few Cool Examples

Here are some areas where tokenization is really making waves. I might be biased, but we’re working on some of this at ATME too:

• Real Estate & Luxury Assets In the GCC, platforms like SmartCrowd and Aqarchain are letting people invest in real estate fractionally. At ATME, we’re going beyond real estate to tokenize aircraft, ships, and other high-end assets that used to be the domain of the 1% of investors.
• Art & Collectibles This one’s close to my heart. I love art, and I’ve collected a few pieces myself. Companies like Masterworks and Maecenas let people invest in art fractionally, and ATME is moving in that direction too. I genuinely believe more enthusiasts should have access to collecting, not just those with deep pockets.
• Funds & Private Markets Platforms like Securitize and Tokeny are making it easier to invest in venture capital and private equity funds, with lower minimums. This space has always felt very closed-off, so it’s great to see it opening up.

Why This Work Feels Meaningful

Many might still consider tokenization to be a fintech trend, but it is part of a bigger shift toward financial systems that are more flexible, transparent, and inclusive.

How ATME fits into the bigger picture is this: we’re not trying to reinvent investing; we’re trying to make it fairer. More people should be able to invest in meaningful, high-value assets, not just those with millions in the bank.

And for me, being part of that shift feels genuinely exciting.

By Hiba Adnan
Chief of Compliance and MLRO, ATME

In today’s fast-moving financial landscape, innovation often leads the way, particularly in fintech and blockchain-based assets. For businesses and investors, this can feel like navigating uncharted territory, full of opportunity, but not without risk.
Naturally, regulation follows. That’s not a flaw, it’s the nature of regulatory systems to be reactive, adapting to new technologies and market behaviors as they emerge.

That said, regulators who recognize early signals and move decisively can close the gap faster. A prime example is the Central Bank of Bahrain (CBB), which has established a comprehensive regulatory framework for crypto assets, providing both regulatory clarity and essential safeguards for market participants. This was followed by a framework from CBB specifically governing digital token offerings.

Through its adaptive and balanced approach, the CBB has set a regional benchmark: enabling innovation while maintaining market stability and investor protection. For investors, this translates into greater confidence, stronger oversight, and access to a market that is evolving responsibly.

Most importantly, regulation isn’t just about detailed rulebooks, it’s about building trust. And in the digital asset space, trust is what ultimately drives sustainable growth. Understanding these protections is key, whether you’re an investor, fintech innovator, or business leader.

The Investor’s Shield: Key Protections Under Modern Financial Regulations

The move by regulators like the CBB to bring the digital asset industry under their purview provides several layers of protection that are fundamental in traditional finance and are now being applied to the digital frontier.

• Mandatory Licensing and Capital Requirements: Before any digital asset service provider or exchange can even begin operations in Bahrain, it must obtain a license from the CBB. This is not a simple rubber-stamping process. Applicants undergo rigorous scrutiny of their business plans, security systems, and corporate governance. Furthermore, licensees are required to meet minimum capital requirements, ensuring they have a financial buffer to protect their operations and their clients’ interests.
• Robust Security and Custody Standards: A major concern for any digital asset investor is the security of their assets. The CBB mandates that licensed platforms implement robust cybersecurity measures in place to prevent hacks and unauthorized access. They also have strict rules regarding the custody of client assets, requiring them to be segregated from the company’s own funds. This is a critical protection measure in the event of insolvency. These requirements are complemented by the systems and controls that licensees must maintain when holding custody of digital assets.
• Transparency and Fair Treatment: Licensed entities are obligated to be transparent in their dealings with clients. This includes clear communication on fees, risks associated with digital assets, and the terms and conditions of their services. The CBB’s regulations are designed to ensure fair treatment of all customers and prohibit deceptive or unfair practices.
• Ongoing Oversight: To maintain ongoing oversight, licensees are subject to both periodic reporting and immediate reporting in the event of significant incidents, such as security breaches or operational failures. This ensures the regulator remains fully informed and able to take timely action to protect market integrity and investor interests.

When Things Go Wrong: A Clear Path to Resolution

Perhaps the most significant aspect of the CBB’s consumer protection framework is the robust complaint handling mechanism. In the often-impersonal world of online platforms, having a clear and effective process for resolving disputes is invaluable.
The process is structured to ensure that your voice is heard:

• Formal Complaint to the Provider: Your first step is always to file a formal complaint with the licensee. They are required to have internal complaint handling procedures and to respond to your complaint within a specific timeframe.
• Escalation to the Central Bank: If you are not satisfied with the resolution offered by the licensee, or if they fail to respond, you have the right to escalate your complaint to the CBB’s Consumer Protection Unit.
• Regulatory Intervention: The CBB will then investigate the matter. They have the authority to mediate a resolution and to take action against non-compliant firms, which can include substantial fines and other penalties. This power of the central bank provides a significant incentive for licensed platforms to resolve customer issues fairly and promptly.

Why This Matters for the Future of Finance

The progressive regulatory stance taken by the CBB serves as a blueprint for other jurisdictions. It demonstrates that innovation and consumer protection are not mutually exclusive. In fact, a strong regulatory framework is a catalyst for sustainable growth in the fintech and digital asset sectors.

For investors, it provides the confidence to participate in new and exciting markets. For financial institutions, it creates a level playing field and fosters a culture of trust and transparency. For companies seeking business-critical capital, it opens a compliant new channel to engage with modern funding channels like tokenization. And for the broader economy, it paves the way for the responsible adoption of new financial technologies.

As the digital transformation of finance accelerates, the role of regulators in protecting consumers will become even more vital. Their commitment to creating a safe and transparent environment should not be considered a barrier to progress, but as the very foundation upon which modern finance is being built.

By Alex Lola
Chief Executive Officer

People are talking a lot about tokenization these days. Some of the information is helpful, but a lot of it is misleading or unclear. The term gets thrown around as if it’s either the magic solution to every financial inefficiency or an overhyped trend destined to fade. Neither is quite right.

In this piece, I’ll first examine and then either debunk or confirm some of the most common myths to help bring greater clarity to the topic of tokenization.

Myth #1: Tokenization is a New Concept

It might feel new, but tokenization isn’t fresh out of the lab.

In fact, the foundational ideas have been around for a while. Back in the mid-2010s, Security Token Offerings (STOs) were already exploring how to represent ownership of real-world assets (RWAs) on a blockchain. It wasn’t mainstream then, and the infrastructure wasn’t exactly user-friendly, but the seeds were planted.

What’s changed more recently is the regulatory environment. Jurisdictions like Bahrain in MENA, Switzerland and Luxembourg in the EU, along with Singapore and Hong Kong in Asia, have begun to clarify how tokenized assets can fit into traditional financial frameworks.

In parallel, some emerging markets like Brazil and Russia are carving their own paths in the digital asset space. Russia particularly has seen a significant surge with a recent Central Bank report highlighting that the total volume of tokenized assets has reached 800 billion rubles (over $10 billion USD) in Q1 2025.

This shift is what has pushed tokenization back into the spotlight. It’s more about opening doors rather than inventing something brand new.

Verdict: Debunked.

Myth #2: A Token Is Volatile Like Cryptocurrencies

This myth is surprisingly persistent. Say “token,” and people immediately think of Bitcoin or Ethereum: assets that swing wildly in value. But tokenization does not inherently mean volatility. In fact, when we’re talking about RWAs, the token is just the form. A container, basically.  It’s what’s inside (real estate, art, carbon credits, shares in a private company, and so on) that determines value and stability.

So, if you’re evaluating a tokenized asset, you shouldn’t be asking, “Is this token safe?” You should be asking, “Is the asset behind it solid?” The token just makes it more transferable, perhaps more transparent. But it doesn’t magically erase risk, or on the flip side, introduce it.

Verdict: Debunked.

Myth #3: Tokenization Will Solve All Liquidity Problems

There’s a common belief that once you tokenize an asset, it becomes instantly tradable like a public stock. Reality is more nuanced.

Take a $30M aircraft leased to an airline. Through tokenization, it is split into 1,000 tokens at $30,000 each. Fractionalization lowers the entry barrier, but does it make the asset liquid? Not necessarily.

True liquidity depends on three things:

1. A low enough minimum investment
2. A live, functioning secondary market
3. Enough buyers and sellers actually trading

Tokenization builds the rails of fractional ownership and a marketplace. But without active participation, trades don’t flow. It improves access. It increases the potential for liquidity. But it doesn’t make an asset as liquid as public equities by default. It’s a step forward, not magic.

Verdict: Debunked.

Myth #4: Tokenization Is Only for Crypto-Native Users

This was probably true a few years ago, but not today.

Early platforms were built by and for crypto enthusiasts, often with complex interfaces and little regard for traditional investors. But that’s changing fast.

Today, companies like ATME are working to remove the technical complexity behind tokenized assets, making them feel more like regular investments. You don’t need to know what gas fees are just to buy a piece of tokenized real estate. And now, you don’t have to.

While the driving technology is still evolving and the learning curve remains, it is no longer accurate to suggest that tokenization is limited to crypto-native users. That assumption is increasingly outdated, much like claiming the internet is only suitable for programmers. While technically proficient communities drove early adoption, today’s platforms are becoming more accessible, with interfaces and user experiences designed for a broader audience.

Verdict: Debunked.

Myth #5: Tokenization is a Fancy Technology That May Reduce Timeframes

There’s some truth here as tokenization can streamline certain processes.

Settlements can be faster, audits simpler, and ownership transfers more transparent. But again, it’s not a silver bullet. Bureaucracy doesn’t disappear just because you’re using blockchain technology.

Say you tokenize a bond. Sure, the transfer might happen faster on-chain, but if you still need regulatory approval or a wet signature somewhere along the way (and in many cases, you do), then the overall time savings might be modest. Helpful, yes. Game-changing? Not always.

It’s worth appreciating the efficiency gains without overestimating them. Switching from paper to email is faster, but you still have to write the message.

Verdict: Confirmed (Partially).

Moving Forward: The Real Potential of Tokenization

Tokenization is a practical tool. One that, when implemented thoughtfully, can increase access, transparency, and efficiency in the investment world. But it also needs infrastructure, regulation, and perhaps most critically, patience.

The real potential isn’t in turning everything into tokens just because we can. It lies in identifying where the current system falls short with illiquid markets, opaque ownership, high friction, and then seeing where tokenization offers genuine improvement to the broader ecosystem.

By Ashwaq Shukralla
Chief Legal Officer

When businesses approach us at ATME, they often arrive with a straightforward objective of raising capital. But what they often don’t know is how to structure their assets in a way that makes them compliant with regulations and attractive to investors.

And attractive to investors doesn’t just mean offering high returns or showing financial growth on paper. It’s about knowing what they are buying into. Product structuring transforms an investment idea into a proposition that investors can understand, assess, and act on. With sound legal support, the product clearly defines what investors own and outlines the rights attached to that ownership, such as dividends, redemption or priority claims.

A properly structured token issued under a regulatory framework gives investors access to the relevant disclosures and provides a foundation from which to pursue legal remedies. The investment terms are set out in formally binding agreements that guide the behavior of issuers, allocate risks, and clarify what happens in the event of a default or dispute. Such frameworks also establish how tokens can be traded or transferred, what laws apply, and how income is taxed. In doing so, it gives investors the informed confidence they need to evaluate and participate in an investment opportunity.

Providing these essential safeguards begins with how the token is structured. Let’s explore what actually makes a token offering sound, compliant, and investable.

What Makes a Sound Token Structure?

Every tokenized asset must answer these fundamental questions: what exactly does this token represent? Is it a share of equity in the business? A promise to repay with interest (i.e., debt)? A revenue-sharing instrument? Or something else entirely?

This classification defines how the token will be treated under applicable laws and regulations, and what rights and risks investors are taking on. While the responsibility for structuring the product sits with our dedicated Product Structuring team, as legal professionals, we work with them to ensure that each decision made during this process is underpinned by a defensible and compliant legal foundation. This collaboration ascertains that:

• The token structure is compatible with applicable laws.
• Investor rights (such as entitlement to returns, or claims on underlying assets) are clearly and legally defined.
• Issuer obligations are reasonable and realistic to prevent defaults or operational strain.

Turning Structure into Legal Certainty

Once the structure is defined, we move to formalize the terms governing the tokenization project. While these may take on different forms, the legal documents governing the token issuance and investment would address matters such as:

• The purpose and structure of the token
• The role of the token issuer
• The tokenomics (distribution, pricing, payout logic, and limitations)
• The rights and obligations of investors
• Key risks, legal disclaimers, and compliance statements
• Subscription terms
• Terms governing exiting the token investments
• Terms governing token maturity
• Dispute management

One such example is the adaptation of a Whitepaper. In all cases, drafting with meticulous legal rigor is essential, as inconsistency between what is promised in a Whitepaper and what is enforceable in the law can potentially lead to disputes, regulatory penalties, and reputational loss.

A Case in Point: Tokenizing the Aspen St. Regis Resort

A clear example of how structuring directly influences the outcome of a token offering is in the case of the Aspen St. Regis Resort. In 2018, Elevated Returns initiated a project to tokenize ownership in the Aspen St. Regis Resort, a luxury hotel in Colorado. They created Aspen Digital Inc., a single-asset trust, and issued digital tokens representing shares in this entity. Each token was valued at $1, collectively representing an 18.9% ownership stake in the resort. This initiative was among the first major digital tokenizations of a commercial real estate asset.

While the project eventually succeeded in raising the planned capital, it took detailed financial and legal consideration to structure the product. Initially, there were plans to list the tokenized asset as a Real Estate Investment Trust (REIT), but these plans did not materialize. Subsequently, Elevated Returns pivoted to securities regulations and structured the token as digital securities offered to accredited investors. They partnered with Securitize to facilitate the token issuance and aimed to digitize their entire portfolio of real estate assets using blockchain technology.

This case illustrates how even promising and well-capitalized projects require careful legal designing to take the project from an idea to the market.

Enabling Trust, Scale, and Sustainability

A robust legal foundation ensures offerings can survive legal scrutiny. It requires close coordination of the legal function with their product structuring, compliance, and risk management counterparts to deliver token offerings that are market-ready and protect the interests of both issuers and investors. This integrated approach is what allows us at ATME to:

• Navigate regulatory complexities and adapt to evolving standards
• Establish investment terms that are clearly written and commercially balanced
• Build investor protections within binding agreements and smart contract logic
• Clarify issuer obligations so businesses can manage expectations and avoid legal friction down the line

These protections transcend theory to become practical mechanisms that determine how ownership is defined, what regulatory framework is applicable, what the contractual obligations of an issuer are, how investors’ rights are enforced, and disputes are resolved. These questions determine the level of trust investors place in a token offering.

Tokenization holds tremendous potential to reshape capital markets, but only if its legal fundamentals are addressed. Clarity of rights, enforceability of commitments, and alignment of structure with regulations and laws are what turn potential into performance. And at ATME, our legal approach is built to make that performance possible.

By Alexey Tartyshev
Head of Tokenization and Product Structuring, ATME

In this short article, I will look ahead and offer a vision of how private equity markets might evolve with the help of tokenization. To illustrate how tokenization could reach its full potential, let’s draw a parallel from another industry by examining how the grain market in the United States evolved in the 19th century.

The Old Market Reality

Imagine you’re a baker in need of grain. A few times each year, on designated market days, you travel to a nearby town. There, you find farmers who have arrived in horse-drawn carts, each carrying a modest supply of grain. You inspect the grain directly—running it through your hands, examining its color and texture—and then negotiate face-to-face with the farmer. Reputation and trust were crucial, because these transactions relied heavily on firsthand knowledge.

A Technological Breakthrough

Over time, however, one significant technological breakthrough reshaped the market: the railway. Tracks stretched across the countryside, enabling steam locomotives to connect once-remote farms with grain markets. Instead of arriving in small sacks, grain began pouring in by the wagonload, surpassing anything horse-drawn carts could carry. The marketplace, once defined by personal relationships and familiar faces, became a hub for buyers and sellers from various regions.

The Implications

As the railways reshaped the grain trade, the rules of the marketplace changed. Buyers who once relied on personal relationships to assess quality now found themselves navigating an entirely new reality. Grain arrived in overwhelming quantities from distant farms, often from suppliers they had never met. Checking the grain quality in a wagon was not feasible technically and one wagon could have a mix of grain from various farms.

A Market Transformed

Faced with these challenges, the Chicago market devised a groundbreaking solution: standardization. To address the issue of quality uncertainty, a system of grain quality grades was introduced. Large storage elevators were designated for each grade, ensuring that every deposit met a predefined standard. Sellers would bring their grain to the appropriate elevator, where market-appointed inspectors—working for a commission—would assess its quality and certify it accordingly.

This innovation revolutionized the trade. Buyers no longer needed to be experts in grain or personally inspect every purchase. Trust, which had once depended on face-to-face relationships, was now established through uniform standards and third-party verification.

The Explosion of Growth

With this newfound confidence, the market passed its physical limitations. Buyers could place orders remotely via telegraph, purchasing grain from thousands of miles away without ever seeing it. The identity of the seller became irrelevant—what mattered now was the certified grade and the market’s guarantee of quality.

The impact was profound. The grain trade, once constrained by geography and personal trust, expanded at an unprecedented pace. Standardization created transparency, enabling even those without deep industry knowledge to participate. What had once been a localized exchange between farmers and bakers evolved into one of the largest commodity markets.

With trust secured, financial innovation followed, boosting the implementation of future contracts and derivatives allowing traders to hedge risks and speculate on future prices, pushing the market into a new phase of maturity. As liquidity surged, the sector attracted increased investment, fuelling further advancements in agriculture, transportation, and storage infrastructure.

What had begun as a simple marketplace bound by face-to-face relationships had now transformed into a sophisticated, globalized system—one where technology, regulation, and financial instruments worked in tandem to drive progress.

How does this relate to RWA tokenization?

The tokenization ecosystem of today feels a lot like those early grain markets: non-standardized and fragmented.

• Regulatory inconsistency: Regulations of tokens representing real-world assets (RWAs) vary across jurisdictions—some are at an advanced stage, others remain in a legal grey zone, and many have yet to establish any framework. Just as in the early grain markets, the rules of the game are non-standardized or non-existent.
• Lack of market integration: Digital asset exchanges trading RWA tokens are rare and operate independently, with little connectivity between them. Similarly, a variety of private blockchains exist in isolation, lacking integration with one another or with public blockchains.
• Diverse underlying assets: Just as different farmers produced different types of grain, the assets represented by tokens vary widely in terms of asset class, risk profile, and return characteristics.
• Investor knowledge gap: Much like early grain traders who required specialized expertise, today’s RWA token investors are primarily tokenization enthusiasts with deep knowledge of the space. Meanwhile, the majority of investors struggle to differentiate between RWA tokens, utility tokens, and cryptocurrencies.

These gaps highlight the need for a system where token standards are globally unified, underlying asset types are categorized into risk buckets, regulations are harmonized across borders, and exchanges operate seamlessly together.
This may seem like a mere infrastructure upgrade, but—just as railways transformed the grain market—the tokenization of real-world assets has the potential to redefine the way financial systems operate.

With such a system in place, investors could trade tokens globally, selecting the best assets for their portfolios without being hindered by regulatory or legal complexities. By establishing standardization, RWA tokens could serve as the foundation for financial instruments such as futures, derivatives, and beyond.

A preview of what’s possible if tokenization is commoditizedAssume a scenario where you hold Bitcoin but need fiat to invest in a private equity deal in another jurisdiction. You don’t want to sell your Bitcoin. Instead, you could use Bitcoin as collateral through a regulated and trusted digital asset exchange to secure a fiat loan instantly allowing you to invest in an RWA token backed by a private equity fund.

This could happen seamlessly because you would only need to complete KYC verification once and onboard to the digital assets exchange just once. From there, you could select investment products that have already undergone due diligence and received approvals from reputable regulators.

Now, picture being able to do this with as little as $1,000, without needing a multimillion-dollar check or incurring the legal costs of reviewing a Limited Partnership Agreement prepared by the fund.
Imagine having instant access to tokens representing alternative investments, categorized into standardized risk buckets, which could be traded freely in a relatively liquid secondary market.

And all of this would be managed by immutable, blockchain-based smart contracts, which automate key processes—verifying your collateral’s value, ensuring asset ownership, and distributing returns directly to your wallet.

The entire process would unfold within a user-friendly digital interface, offering an experience as seamless as making mobile banking transactions.
Ultimately, having real-world assets represented as tokens, moving along the same rails as fiat and cryptocurrencies, could revolutionize the financial system as we know it today—driving standardization, broadening market participation, enhancing liquidity, and eliminating inefficiencies in capital flow.

This may sound like a distant future. But it’s not. In my estimation, it is merely one strategic planning cycle—3 to 5 years—away from becoming reality in jurisdictions with advanced regulatory frameworks. Singapore, Luxembourg, and Bahrain are prime examples of markets where these types of transactions could soon take off.

By Alaa Al-Shuwaikh
Chief Risk Officer, ATME

Blockchain has emerged as an impactful innovation rethinking how assets are owned and traded. By enabling real-world asset (RWA) tokenization, the technology has brought a new level of accessibility and liquidity to capital markets.

For those unfamiliar with the concept, tokenization of RWAs involves representing them as digitally tradable tokens on a blockchain. This approach decreases the check size of assets like private equity and commodities, making them more accessible to investors and allowing the issuers to gain more liquidity. Blockchain also makes the processes of exchange faster, delivering better transparency and reducing operational costs.

For organizations, choosing between public and private blockchain-based platforms is not just a technical decision, but a strategic one that is underpinned by their long-term security and compliance considerations.

In this write-up, I will provide strategic risk insights to help decision-makers like business leaders and investors understand the key differences and make informed choices between public and private blockchains. Let’s begin by first understanding how these two systems differ.

Public vs Private Blockchains: What’s the Difference?

Public Blockchains

Think of public blockchains as vast oceans: open, expansive, teeming with activity, and full of uncharted depths. Like oceans, they are globally interconnected systems that run on decentralized networks like Ethereum where everyone can observe the flow of transactions. They offer transparency but require careful navigation due to their unpredictable nature. This transparency builds trust, but the openness comes with challenges: scalability and privacy can be complex to manage, especially for institutions handling sensitive data.

Despite these hurdles, public blockchains continue to evolve with innovations aimed at improving performance, security, and energy efficiency.

Private Blockchains

Private blockchains, by contrast, are more like ponds: contained ecosystems designed for specific inhabitants. They are controlled, tailored environments that limit access to only authorized participants, making them perfect for use cases needing strict governance and confidentiality. Such systems are ideal for entities with stringent regulatory and data protection requirements, often integrating rigorous KYC/AML protocols to meet these demands efficiently and securely.

Breaking Down the Risks

Both public and private blockchains present distinct opportunities. By diving deeper into these aspects, we can see how they align with specific security and compliance needs. Let’s take a closer look at the key considerations.

Security

• Public Blockchains: Leading platforms like Ethereum are robustly secure because they rely on decentralized validator pools. This isn’t the case with smaller networks as they are vulnerable to 51% attacks. Still, innovations like zk-SNARKs and off-chain computations are enhancing confidentiality and reducing risks.
• Private Blockchains: These systems bring enhanced security through permissioned access and centralized oversight. However, this level of control requires careful management, as centralized governance can introduce risks of misuse if not driven by clear policies and robust oversight.

Regulatory Compliance

• Public Blockchains: Compliance can get tricky on public networks due to their pseudonymous nature. But tools like Chainalysis (a blockchain-based data platform that helps government and private sectors detect and prevent illicit use of cryptocurrency) and permissioned layers are improving transaction traceability and accountability – with full regulatory alignment still a work in progress.
• Private Blockchains: Here, compliance is built into the system. KYC/AML protocols make it easier to comply with regulations, which is a win for a lot of market players. ATME platform, for instance, adheres to the Central Bank of Bahrain’s (CBB) regulations to ensure that businesses and investors interact within a safe and compliant environment.

Data Privacy

• Public Blockchains: Transparency can act like an open window. It allows everyone to observe and verify, which builds trust but also exposes sensitive details that require careful handling. Solutions like zero-knowledge proofs address these privacy concerns, but they have yet to achieve widespread implementation.
• Private Blockchains: Privacy is a top priority for these systems, making them perfect for use cases that demand secure information handling.

Scalability and Performance

• Public Blockchains: While improving, they still face slowdowns during peak demand. Ethereum’s Proof of Stake and Layer 2 solutions are improving scalability, but they are not a silver bullet.
• Private Blockchains: Private systems tend to offer consistently high performance by enabling faster transactions and scalability for large-scale projects. Their downside, however, is that they may lack the global reach of public networks.

Governance and Resilience

• Public Blockchains: Typically use decentralized governance, which fosters resilience and long-term stability but can be slow to adapt to changing needs.
• Private Blockchains: Predominantly use centralized governance that enables swift decision-making and robust resilience through advanced failover mechanisms, which is great for ensuring operational continuity and staying ahead of market demands. Though there are centrally distributed private blockchain platforms like ATME that blend the concepts of centralization and distribution.

In our case, we may have our blockchain nodes hosted for example at Bahrain Clear, which is licensed by the CBB as a Clearing House and Central Depository. This approach decentralizes transaction validation across trusted entities, thereby enhancing transparency and security while maintaining centralized oversight to ensure regulatory compliance and streamlined operational management.

Choosing the Right Platform

The future, I believe, lies where both systems will stand with their unique value propositions. The key is to understand the risks, weigh the benefits, and choose the right tool for the job.

Choosing the right platform, hence, would really depend on what helps you achieve your long-term objectives, regulatory obligations, your internal code of conduct, and many more requirements. Public blockchains shine in transparency while their private counterparts enable innovation by offering tailored solutions that excel in compliance, confidentiality, and control.

With regards to the ATME platform, we have opted to develop it on a private blockchain based on the enterprise-grade Hyperledger Fabric (HLF) framework. While Ethereum excels in open networks and public use cases, HLF is ideal for sectors (e.g. finance, healthcare and supply chain) that require privacy, performance, scalability, and regulatory compliance. Users of HLF-based platforms gain greater control, security, cost efficiency, and alignment with enterprise needs, making it, in my opinion, the superior choice for business-focused blockchain applications.