Seven stages from origination to redemption, the stakeholder that captures value at each one, the role of oracles, the bottlenecks that still exist in 2026, and an honest comparison against a conventional private placement.
Left, what happens. Right, who captures value there and roughly how much. Figures are indicative and vary by asset class.
Feasibility, SPV or fund wrapper, offer documents, investor eligibility
Cheaper capital, retained control through the SPV, a wider investor base; pays 2 to 5% all-in at set-up
Independent valuation, custody agreement, legal opinions on title and enforceability
Fixed engagement fees and recurring revaluation; custodian 10 to 50 bps a year on assets held
Standard selection, identity registry, transfer rules, freeze and forced-transfer powers
Set-up fee, per-issuance fee, service fee (Kubermint's plans replace the license-plus-advisers stack)
Whitelisted subscription, funds verified, delivery versus payment, mint
1 to 3% of the primary raise
NAV, proof of reserve, metered output, corporate action triggers written on-chain
Per-feed data fees; the value is trust in the number, and the fee is small
Transfers between approved holders, bulletin board or venue, collateral use
Bid-ask spread, trading and listing fees; only earned if liquidity materializes
Distributions, revaluation, reporting, buyback or maturity, burn
Servicer 5 to 25 bps a year; investor keeps yield plus principal and bears platform and venue fees
Net effect: roughly 3 to 6% of value goes to intermediaries at issuance and 30 to 80 basis points a year in servicing. That is below a conventional placement plus fund administration stack only if secondary liquidity materializes; without it, the comparison is close to even.
Indicative ranges for a mid-sized private issuance. Two of the five lines are compressible. Any thesis built on fee arbitrage alone will not fund, which is why Kubermint leads with access, verification and redemption.
| Cost line | Conventional route | Tokenized equivalent | Compressible |
|---|---|---|---|
| Distribution and arranger | 0.5 to 2.0% of raise (up to 5% on small deals) | 1 to 3% platform or placement fee | No |
| Legal, valuation, structuring | 1 to 2% of raise | Same or higher while counsel prices novelty | No |
| Custody and trustee | 5 to 20 bps a year | 10 to 50 bps a year | No |
| Administration, transfer agent, registrar | 20 to 45 bps a year | 5 to 25 bps a year; the register runs in the contract | Partly |
| Verification and reconciliation | Embedded in the spread | Automated against the on-chain register | Yes |
The chain cannot see the SPV, the bank account, the property register or the inverter. Oracles are how the legal and physical asset reach the token. They do four jobs.
Daily NAV for funds and treasuries, mark-to-model for real estate and private credit. Drives redemption pricing and collateral haircuts.
Attests that the custodian holds what the tokens claim: bank balances, vault audits, receivables ledgers. Minting is gated on this attestation.
Coupon and rent triggers, defaults, maturity, corporate actions, metered output. The contract pays out and burns against these events.
KYC, accreditation and sanctions status written to the on-chain registry, and the messaging that lets those claims travel with the token across chains.
The weak point: an oracle can attest to a number, not to enforceability. If the SPV is drained or the title is disputed, the token still reads "backed". The legal opinion and the custodian are the trust anchors; the oracle is only as good as its data source. This is why assets that meter themselves (solar generation, compute utilization, collection accounts) make the strongest tokenization candidates.
These are the reasons deals stall. None of them is token technology.
Most tokenized assets still show thin volume, long holding periods and weak secondary markets, with liquidity spread across issuers, chains and venues rather than concentrated.
Deals stall on the canonical record: reconciled ownership, valuation, cap table and agreements that survive diligence. With licensing now available, the question has shifted from whether it is allowed to whether the company is ready.
Most tokenized value sits behind institutional or offshore channels; retail access remains limited by structure and jurisdiction.
Misaligned rules across jurisdictions, integration with legacy processes, and thin buy-side and sell-side participation.
Moving a regulated token between chains while preserving its compliance state is unsolved; identity claims on one chain do not exist on another.
The feasibility memo tests readiness and liquidity honestly before anything is built. The service plans include the register, reporting and investor support that readiness requires. Distribution is built into the offer, not bolted on afterwards.
Indicative, and it varies by asset class. This is the table we walk through with every sponsor before quoting.
| Stakeholder | What they keep |
|---|---|
| Issuer or sponsor | Lower cost of capital, retained control through the SPV, global distribution; pays 2 to 5% all-in at set-up |
| Valuer and counsel | Fixed engagement fees; recurring revaluation |
| Custodian or trustee | 10 to 50 bps a year on assets under custody |
| Tokenization platform | Set-up fee, per-issuance fee, annual service fee |
| Placement agent | 1 to 3% of the primary raise |
| Oracle network or attesting party | Per-feed data fees; staking yield on decentralized networks |
| Venue and market maker | Bid-ask spread, trading and listing fees |
| Transfer agent or servicer | 5 to 25 bps a year servicing |
| Investor | Yield plus principal, fractional access, transferability outside market hours; bears platform and venue fees |
The intake form asks the twenty-six questions behind this analysis and tells you which lane the project falls into.