SEC Tokenized Stock Framework Faces Pushback From Broadcom, Verizon and Nasdaq

What to Know

• Broadcom, Verizon and UnitedHealth are among nine companies objecting to having their shares traded on OKXICE’s planned tokenized stock platform.
• Eight newly disclosed objections appeared in an October 15 public notice from OKXICE, the joint venture between crypto exchange OKX and Intercontinental Exchange, the parent of the New York Stock Exchange.
• The objecting issuers named in the notice include Broadcom, Verizon, UnitedHealth, AppLovin, Applied Digital, Rocket Lab, CoreWeave, Applied Optoelectronics and Cerebras Systems.
• Nasdaq has separately said it would opt out of having its own shares tokenized under the SEC framework.
• OKXICE announced on October 5 that it had notified the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission of plans to launch a venue initially targeting shares of 63 U.S. listed companies.
• The planned venue would operate under the SEC’s five year Innovation Exemption, issued September 17.
• The venue is designed to support around the clock trading of blockchain based shares backed one for one by underlying stock.
• OKXICE plans to use Uniswap v4 liquidity pools on OKX’s XLayer blockchain, with trades settled in stablecoins.
• Issuer resistance and uncertainty around temporary regulatory relief could limit the selection of available stocks and slow institutional adoption of tokenized trading infrastructure.

Major Issuers Push Back on Tokenized Stock Listing

The SEC’s emerging framework for tokenized stock trading is running into resistance from some of the public companies whose shares could be included in the new market structure. Broadcom, Verizon and UnitedHealth are among the latest issuers objecting to the inclusion of their shares on OKXICE’s planned tokenized stock platform, raising fresh questions about how quickly blockchain based equity trading can move from concept to active market infrastructure.

The objections were disclosed in an October 15 public notice from OKXICE, a joint venture between crypto exchange OKX and Intercontinental Exchange, the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange. The update named eight newly disclosed objecting issuers: Broadcom, Verizon, UnitedHealth, AppLovin, Applied Digital, Rocket Lab, CoreWeave and Applied Optoelectronics. The notice listed nine objecting issuers in total, including AI chipmaker Cerebras Systems, which had already formally opted out of being listed.

The notice did not disclose why the companies objected or when the notices were submitted. Even without detailed explanations from each issuer, the development is significant because it shows that tokenized stock trading is not only a regulatory and technology question. It is also a question of issuer consent, market quality, investor protections and confidence in how equity trading data is handled.

Nasdaq Raises Separate Concerns

Nasdaq has separately said it would opt out of having its own shares tokenized under the SEC framework. That position is not part of the nine issuer objections named in OKXICE’s notice, but it adds another influential voice to the debate over whether tokenized equities should trade on venues that differ from the traditional national market system.

A Nasdaq spokesperson told the Wall Street Journal that the company does not want its shares trading on a venue that does not display best prices in real time or report to the consolidated tape. The consolidated tape aggregates stock market trading data and is a key reference point for visibility across equity markets. For traditional market operators, the question is not simply whether blockchain rails can support trading. It is whether those rails can operate in a way that preserves the transparency and price discovery standards investors expect from public equity markets.

Nasdaq’s stance illustrates one of the central tensions around tokenized stocks. Supporters see blockchain based shares as a way to modernize settlement, expand trading hours and create new forms of liquidity. Critics and cautious issuers may worry that parallel trading systems could fragment liquidity, reduce transparency or create uncertainty about investor rights if the infrastructure does not align with familiar equity market safeguards.

How the OKXICE Venue Would Work

OKXICE announced on October 5 that it had notified the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission of plans to launch the venue, initially targeting shares of 63 U.S. listed companies. Former New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo, the venture’s co chair, announced the move on X.

The planned venue would operate under the SEC’s five year Innovation Exemption, issued September 17. The exemption allows qualifying platforms to trade tokenized U.S. stocks using automated market makers and liquidity pools. In practice, that means the system could look very different from the order book model used by conventional equity exchanges, where buyers and sellers interact through bids and offers during regulated trading sessions.

Tokenized stocks are blockchain based representations of shares. Under the model described in the OKXICE notice, underlying shares would be held one for one against outstanding tokens through a registered broker dealer. Token holders must receive equivalent rights, including dividends and voting rights. That structure is intended to distinguish the proposed tokens from purely synthetic products, because the tokens would be backed by actual underlying shares rather than only referencing a share price.

OKXICE plans to operate around the clock using Uniswap v4 liquidity pools on OKX’s XLayer blockchain, with trades settled in stablecoins. Around the clock trading is one of the most frequently cited benefits of tokenized markets, especially for global investors accustomed to crypto markets that do not close overnight or on weekends. However, round the clock access can also raise questions about liquidity depth, volatility outside traditional market hours and how corporate actions would be administered across tokenized rails.

Why Issuer Resistance Matters

Issuer objections could become a practical constraint on the development of tokenized stock markets. If major companies opt out, platforms may have fewer high profile stocks available for trading. That could reduce investor interest, limit liquidity and make it harder for new venues to demonstrate that tokenized equities can compete with or complement established market infrastructure.

The objections also matter because public companies have a direct interest in where and how their shares trade. Issuers are sensitive to market quality, shareholder communication, voting rights, dividend processing and the accuracy of trading information. A tokenized market that promises equivalent shareholder rights still needs to convince companies that those rights can be administered reliably, especially when automated market makers, liquidity pools, blockchain settlement and stablecoin payments are part of the architecture.

Some market participants view issuer caution as expected in an early stage framework. Tokenization of real world assets has gained attention across finance, but public equities sit at the center of a heavily regulated and deeply interconnected market. Any shift in trading infrastructure must address not only technological efficiency, but also compliance, transparency, surveillance, custody, corporate governance and operational resilience.

Temporary Framework Creates Investment Questions

The issuer pushback aligns with concerns flagged by TD Securities analysts led by Reid Noch, vice president of U.S. equity market structure. Conversations with dozens of issuers showed little interest in tokenizing their shares outside a small group of crypto adjacent companies, the analysts wrote in a report shared with CoinDesk. Several issuers also approached the firm with significant concerns after discovering the framework, having been unaware of it when it was announced, the report said.

TD Securities identified the framework’s reliance on temporary exemptive relief, rather than permanent rules, as its largest hurdle. A future commission could reverse the approach, which could complicate the case for investing in infrastructure and discourage institutions from integrating with venues even after they launch, the analysts said.

That regulatory uncertainty is a major issue for institutions because market infrastructure requires long planning cycles, legal review, risk controls and operational integration. Banks, brokers, custodians and asset managers may be reluctant to devote resources to tokenized stock systems if the rules could change before the market achieves scale. For issuers, a temporary framework may also make it harder to assess long term consequences for shareholder access and market quality.

Competition From Overseas Synthetic Products

TD Securities analysts also pointed to a competitive challenge from overseas platforms that can continue offering synthetic stock products without assuming the operational requirements attached to the U.S. relief. That distinction matters because synthetic products may be easier to list and scale, but they do not necessarily provide the same direct link to underlying shares or the same rights structure described in the OKXICE model.

For U.S. regulated tokenized stock venues, the challenge is therefore two sided. They must satisfy regulators and issuers while also competing with offshore alternatives that may operate under different standards. If compliance costs and issuer objections limit the available stock universe, U.S. venues could struggle to attract the liquidity needed to make tokenized equities viable at scale.

At the same time, a regulated model could appeal to investors who want blockchain enabled access without relying on products that only track share prices synthetically. The question for the market is whether regulatory clarity, issuer participation and institutional demand can develop quickly enough to offset early friction.

What Comes Next for Tokenized Equities

The OKXICE plan remains an important test of how traditional equity markets and crypto native infrastructure might converge. The involvement of OKX and Intercontinental Exchange gives the project significance across both digital asset markets and established exchange infrastructure. Yet the growing list of issuer objections shows that technical capability alone will not determine whether tokenized stocks gain traction.

For the SEC’s five year Innovation Exemption to support a durable market, participants will likely need clearer answers on transparency, data reporting, market surveillance, shareholder rights and the role of issuers in approving or rejecting tokenization. Market participants will also watch whether more companies object, whether the initial list of targeted shares changes and whether institutional firms decide to connect to the venue once it is operational.

For now, the debate underscores a broader reality in financial innovation: tokenization can reduce some frictions, but it can also create new questions when applied to assets that already trade in mature regulated markets. The next phase for tokenized equities will depend on whether platforms can prove that blockchain based trading improves access and efficiency without weakening the market protections that issuers and investors expect.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs)

Which companies objected to the OKXICE tokenized stock plan?

The October 15 notice named Broadcom, Verizon, UnitedHealth, AppLovin, Applied Digital, Rocket Lab, CoreWeave, Applied Optoelectronics and Cerebras Systems as objecting issuers.

What is OKXICE planning to launch?

OKXICE is planning a tokenized stock trading venue that would offer blockchain based representations of U.S. listed shares, backed one for one by underlying stock and settled using stablecoins.

What SEC framework would the venue use?

The venue would operate under the SEC’s five year Innovation Exemption, which was issued September 17 and allows qualifying platforms to trade tokenized U.S. stocks using automated market makers and liquidity pools.

How many companies did OKXICE initially target?

OKXICE said on October 5 that it had notified the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission of plans to launch the venue, initially targeting shares of 63 U.S. listed companies.

Why is Nasdaq opting out?

Nasdaq has said it would opt out of having its own shares tokenized. A spokesperson told the Wall Street Journal that Nasdaq does not want its shares trading on a venue that does not display best prices in real time or report to the consolidated tape.

What rights would token holders receive under the OKXICE model?

Under the model described in the notice, token holders must receive equivalent rights, including dividends and voting rights, while underlying shares would be held one for one through a registered broker dealer.

Why are issuers concerned about tokenized shares?

Issuer concerns may involve market transparency, trading data, shareholder rights, regulatory durability and the operational complexity of supporting tokenized equity infrastructure. The OKXICE notice did not disclose the specific reasons each company objected.

Why does temporary regulatory relief matter?

Temporary exemptive relief may make long term infrastructure investment more difficult because a future commission could reverse the approach. That uncertainty can discourage institutions from integrating with new venues even after launch.

Does this mean tokenized stock trading will not happen?

No. The objections show resistance and uncertainty, but they do not eliminate the possibility of tokenized stock trading. The market’s development will depend on issuer participation, regulatory clarity, institutional adoption and the ability of platforms to demonstrate reliable market structure.