Figure’s ‘Second IPO’ Brings Real Shares Onto Solana — Why markets should care

What happened and why markets will watch

Figure Technology has filed what it calls a “second IPO”: a plan to issue native equity directly on the Solana blockchain. In plain terms, the company is trying to create onchain shares that live as tokens, carry ownership rights, and can be traded where crypto markets live. For investors, this is more than a novelty. It tests whether traditional corporate claims — ownership, dividends, voting — will ever look and behave like crypto tokens. If it works, issuers and traders could gain faster settlement, 24/7 markets, and new liquidity channels. If it fails, regulators or practical frictions could leave a live trading token with little legal backing and big settlement risk.

How Figure’s onchain equity would be built and how it differs from a normal IPO

The filing proposes minting a token on Solana that represents equity in the company. That means the company, rather than a custodian or exchange, would create a digital instrument that sits on a public ledger. Traditional IPOs issue shares through an underwriter, register those shares with a securities regulator, and rely on central depositories and broker networks to record and settle trades. Figure’s plan shifts that core record-keeping to a blockchain.

There are a few practical differences to note. First, the token is native to the blockchain: ownership is recorded by whoever controls the private keys tied to a token wallet. Second, issuance and secondary trading can happen without the usual intermediaries — no clearinghouse instruction is needed to transfer ownership. Third, the company can program rules into the token itself: transfer restrictions, voting logic, or automated corporate actions. That looks similar to a token sale, but it’s framed as corporate equity rather than a utility or speculative token.

Crucially, this is not the same as a simple crypto fundraising. In a classic token sale, buyers are often buying a digital product or access. Here, buyers would assert ownership rights in a legal entity. That creates a direct link between onchain mechanics and traditional corporate law — a knot that has rarely been tied cleanly in practice.

How this fits into the tokenization trend and which precedents matter

Tokenized assets have been discussed for years: bonds, real estate shares, and funds have been moved onto blockchains in pilot projects. What’s different now is an operating company trying to place its equity on a high-speed public chain. That moves the conversation from privately managed token projects to a mainstream corporate action.

Precedents include private firms issuing tokenized shares in controlled environments and a handful of Exchange Act-registered depositary receipts that map to crypto assets. But a true onchain share issued by the company itself — and claimed to carry corporate rights — is rarer. If regulators tolerate it, we should expect more issuers, especially those with existing crypto-friendly investor bases, to experiment.

Market players likely to get involved include crypto custodians, market makers used to providing liquidity on Solana, specialized broker-dealers willing to connect onchain trading to offchain record systems, and institutional custody vendors exploring token custody as part of their product roadmap.

How native equity might trade on Solana: custody, liquidity providers and settlement

On Solana, trades clear almost instantly by blockchain standards. A token transfer happens in seconds, with settlement finality once the transaction is included in the ledger. That speed solves a lot of day-to-day settlement headaches that plague traditional markets, where trade settlement can take days and relies on central counterparties.

Custody will be the immediate operational issue. For large investors and institutions, custody means a secure way to hold keys and a legal relationship that recognizes ownership. Crypto custodians will offer key management and insured services, but traditional custodians and broker-dealers must decide whether they will accept onchain tokens as eligible assets. If they don’t, big pools of capital may be locked out.

Market makers and liquidity providers will likely be the first to drive trading depth. Automated market makers and centralized order-book desks can bring liquidity, but the two ecosystems prize different risk models. Crypto market-making is used to high intraday volatility and fast settlement; traditional market makers price based on regulatory restrictions, margining, and overnight risk. Bridging these requires new pricing tools and possibly wrapped liquidity products that map onchain tokens to offchain shares.

Finally, settlement risk changes: instead of counterparty risk between brokers, the key risk is custody and legal recognition of token ownership. If a token is stolen or legally contested, the blockchain will still show a transfer — but enforcing corrective action may be slow and messy.

Who wins, who loses, and what it means for listed markets

Retail and crypto-native investors win at least in the short run: they get easier access to buy and sell equity without going through a broker’s onboarding. Active traders will enjoy faster execution and 24/7 markets. Crypto-native market makers and DeFi platforms could profit from new fee pools and trading volume.

Traditional custodians, broker-dealers and some institutional investors could lose optionality if tokens don’t fit their compliance models. Exchanges that rely on centralized clearing may see flows move to crypto venues, pressuring fees and liquidity pools in established venues.

For investors assessing the idea as an opportunity, this is a mixed setup. On one hand, faster markets and potential new liquidity channels can improve price discovery and reduce short-term trading friction. On the other hand, legal uncertainty, custody gaps, and tax accounting ambiguity raise the risk profile. Where the token trades relative to any offchain share will create arbitrage chances — but exploiting them could be complex and risky.

Regulatory and operational risks — what to watch next

The top risks are legal recognition of the token as equity, enforcement of shareholders’ rights, custody and theft, and how tax and accounting rules will treat tokenized shares. Watch for responses from securities regulators, clarifications in the company’s prospectus language about legal recourse, and which custodians and broker-dealers sign up. Also monitor whether exchanges list a tokenized class and whether there’s an equivalent offchain share; mismatches there will be a flashpoint for arbitrage and litigation.

Disclosure: This analysis examines structural and market impacts and does not give personal investment instructions. The setup is innovative but legally and operationally risky for investors and intermediaries.

Sources

• cointelegraph.com