Crypto makes assets easier to move. However, I’m not sure it’s making ownership any easier to understand.

Tokens can be traded 24/7, settled in seconds, and stored in your own wallet.

But that still doesn’t tell me what happens when something goes wrong.

Consider a tokenised stock, fund or real-world asset.

If the secondary market disappeared tomorrow, would I be able to redeem the token directly?

If so, who actually owes me the money?

If the issuer freezes redemptions, can I make a claim against the issuer, the SPV or the underlying asset?

To me, those questions seem more important than whether the token itself can move between wallets instantly.

Crypto has become very good at proving that I control the token.

The harder question is whether the token gives me an enforceable claim when the normal market stops working.

When evaluating a tokenised asset, do you consider the legal/redemption structure, or do you mostly treat the token and the underlying asset as equivalent?