Deployments · UBS Tokenize · platform by UBS

UBS Tokenize notes and warrants (Asia Pacific)New

UBS's in-house tokenisation service has issued its own securities for Asia Pacific clients: USD 50 million of six-month fixed-rate notes in December 2022, constituted on a permissioned Ethereum-based blockchain and placed with wealth and institutional clients in Hong Kong and Singapore, and in February 2024 Hong Kong's first tokenised warrant, a call on Xiaomi issued natively on public Ethereum and bought by OSL Digital Securities, which simulated its lifecycle including secondary trades.

AnnouncedProof of conceptPilotLive (limited)Live (scaled)

Pilot since Dec 2022[1] — Two one-off issues; the warrant was a lifecycle simulation with one buyer. The 2022 notes matured in 2023. · Reviewed 13d ago

Assets
Debt securityDerivative[1]
Six-month fixed-rate notes of UBS AG London Branch
[2]
Call warrant on Xiaomi shares
Networks
Unknown ledger Not disclosed[1]
2022 notes; described only as a permissioned Ethereum-based blockchain.
Ethereum Public, permissionless[2]
2024 warrant, issued on public Ethereum in a permissioned environment.
Use cases
Primary issuance[1][2]
Jurisdictions
Hong Kong, Singapore

Participants

Likely relevant regulation

Assets

Metrics

  • $50mTokenised notes issued (2022) · as of Dec 2022[1][2]

Timeline

  1. Happened 7 Feb 2024 · Scope expansion · recorded 17 Oct 2026
    UBS issues Hong Kong's first tokenised warrant, a Xiaomi call on public Ethereum, bought by OSL Digital Securities.[2]
  2. Happened Dec 2022 (month only) · Launch · recorded 17 Oct 2026
    UBS AG London Branch issues USD 50 million of six-month tokenised fixed-rate notes to clients in Hong Kong and Singapore, under English and Swiss law.[1][2]

Sources

  1. [1]UBS Breaks Fresh Tokenization Ground — WealthBriefing, 20 Dec 2022. Accessed 17 Oct 2026.C
  2. [2]UBS expands its digital asset capabilities by launching Hong Kong's first-ever tokenized warrant on the Ethereum network — UBS, 7 Feb 2024. Accessed 17 Oct 2026.B

Spotted something out of date or missing? Suggest a correction, ideally with a source.