Tokenized Equities: On-Chain Stocks with “Peep a Token” Holder Verification
Tokenized equities are one of the few crypto narratives that can survive hype cycles because the demand is structural.
Users want 24/7 markets, faster settlement, fractional access, programmable ownership, and global distribution.
Institutions want shorter settlement cycles, cleaner reconciliation, and fewer intermediaries.
But there is a catch that never goes away:
tokenized equities are still securities, and the rails that move them must respect custody, investor protections, and compliance.
This guide explains tokenized equities in plain English, why “on-chain stocks” can mean very different things, how DTCC-style settlement and tokenization pilots fit into the bigger picture,
and how holder verification changes what you can safely build on top of tokenized equities.
We also introduce a practical, topic-native framework for this space:
a Rights Mapping + Holder Verification Playbook that helps you spot “looks like a stock” tokens that do not behave like real ownership.
Disclaimer: Educational content only. Not financial, legal, or tax advice. Securities laws vary by jurisdiction. Always verify current legal guidance, issuer disclosures, and platform terms.
- Tokenized equities can mean (1) a regulated on-chain entitlement to a real share, (2) a fully-backed wrapper held in custody by a provider, or (3) a synthetic price token that has no shareholder rights. These are not the same product.
- The core risk is not “gas fees” or “which chain.” It is whether the token actually maps to enforceable rights: ownership, dividends, voting, transfers, and redemptions.
- DTCC-style tokenization pilots matter because settlement and custody are the real bottlenecks. Faster settlement is valuable, but only if investor protection and operational integrity remain intact.
- Holder verification is the bridge between capital markets rules and on-chain composability: if you can verify eligible holders without exposing all identities, you can build safer access, distributions, and corporate actions.
- “Peep a Token” concept: treat holder verification like an infrastructure primitive. Verify who holds what (or who qualifies), then build actions on top: allowlists, dividends, voting, access, and risk controls.
- Safety workflow: verify issuer model, scan contract addresses, understand custody and redemption terms, avoid clone UIs, and never assume a token is “a share” because the ticker looks familiar.
- TokenToolHub workflow: scan addresses with Token Safety Checker, research platforms and market structure with AI Crypto Tools, learn infrastructure basics via Blockchain Technology Guides, and stay current through Subscribe and Community.
Tokenized equities combine securities rules with crypto attack surfaces. Treat wallet security and domain verification as non-negotiable.
Tokenized equities bring stocks on-chain using blockchain rails for ownership records, settlement, and programmable transfers. This guide explains on-chain stocks, custody and DTCC-style settlement, and how to design holder verification with a “Peep a Token” approach that helps prevent scams, misrepresented ownership, and exploit patterns.
1) What tokenized equities are, and why the market keeps returning to them
Tokenized equities are blockchain-based representations of equity exposure, with the big caveat that “representation” can mean very different things. Some tokenized equities are designed to map directly to ownership records and legal entitlements. Others are fully-backed wrappers where a provider holds shares in custody and issues tokens that mirror those holdings. Others are synthetics that track a price but do not grant the rights you normally associate with share ownership.
The reason this narrative keeps returning is simple: the problems tokenized equities target are real. Traditional markets still rely on a network of intermediaries that provide important protections, but add operational complexity. Settlement, reconciliation, corporate actions, and cross-border access are costly. The promise of tokenization is not “stocks on a meme chain.” The promise is modernization: improved settlement, tighter auditability, and programmable ownership that can support new distribution models.
1.1 The two audiences driving demand
There are two primary audiences, and they often talk past each other. The first is institutional infrastructure: custodians, clearing networks, broker-dealers, transfer agents, and issuers who want operational efficiency and more modern recordkeeping. The second is the crypto-native market: users who want 24/7 access, composability, collateral reuse, and global distribution without the friction of legacy rails.
Tokenized equities succeed when they satisfy both sides: they preserve investor protections and enforceable rights while making the system more programmable and efficient. Tokenized equities fail when they satisfy only one side: they either become a compliance nightmare, or they become “price tokens” marketed as shares. Your job, as a user or builder, is to understand which world you are interacting with.
1.2 Why regulators keep repeating the same line
The “same line” is boring but critical: tokenized securities are still securities. Tokenization changes the rail, not the legal nature of the instrument. This matters because the strongest tokenized equities products will be the ones that respect this reality instead of trying to route around it. If a project is building around compliance boundaries, they can last. If they are building around loopholes, they are building on sand.
2) Three product types: entitlement tokens, fully-backed wrappers, and synthetics
Most confusion in tokenized equities comes from collapsing three different product types into one label. People say “tokenized stock” and assume it automatically means real ownership. That assumption is the root of many losses and misunderstandings. Let’s define the three types clearly and describe how each one behaves.
| Type | What it actually is | What it implies |
|---|---|---|
| Entitlement token (ownership-grade) | A token that represents a legal security entitlement, recorded in regulated infrastructure or through a compliant transfer agent model, with enforceable rights tied to an underlying share record. | Strongest alignment with shareholder rights, but highest compliance and operational complexity. Usually permissioned or restricted by jurisdiction and eligibility. |
| Fully-backed wrapper | A provider holds shares in custody and issues tokens to mirror those holdings. Redemption depends on the provider’s terms and the custody structure. | Useful exposure and potentially efficient settlement inside the provider’s system, but the token’s rights depend on issuer terms. It may not grant voting rights or direct shareholder status. |
| Synthetic / derivative token | A token that tracks a stock price via an oracle, a derivative contract, or a perpetual futures mechanism. No shares are necessarily held. | High liquidity potential and 24/7 markets, but it is not ownership. You are trading exposure with counterparty and oracle risk. |
2.1 The “ownership-grade” test
If you want to evaluate whether a tokenized equity is ownership-grade, you do not start with the chain or the token standard. You start with rights and enforceability. Ask: what legal instrument is being tokenized, who is the transfer agent or recordkeeper, and what happens during corporate actions? If you cannot answer those questions, treat the token as exposure, not ownership.
2.2 Why builders care about type distinctions
Builders care because composability is different for each type. If the token is ownership-grade, you can build corporate action automation, voting mechanisms, and compliant distributions. If the token is a fully-backed wrapper, you might build collateral integrations and settlement workflows inside a defined ecosystem. If the token is synthetic, you build trading and hedging tools, but you should not build workflows that assume shareholder status.
3) Rights mapping: the one table that prevents confusion
Rights mapping is the simplest, most powerful tool in tokenized equities. You list the rights a normal share implies and check whether your tokenized product provides them in an enforceable way. This turns hype into a concrete decision. It also turns “tokenized equities” into a spectrum rather than a binary.
| Right | Real share (baseline) | Fully-backed wrapper | Synthetic exposure |
|---|---|---|---|
| Ownership record | Registered in market infrastructure and issuer records | Usually held by provider or nominee, not necessarily by token holder | No ownership record |
| Voting rights | Yes (subject to share class) | Often no, or indirect, or limited | No |
| Dividends | Yes (when declared) | May be passed through under terms | No dividends, only price exposure |
| Corporate actions | Yes (splits, mergers, spin-offs) | Handled by provider processes | Handled by oracle adjustments or contract terms |
| Redemption | Sale on exchange or transfer per rules | Depends on provider redemption policy | No redemption into shares |
| Jurisdiction controls | Strict, enforced by brokers and venues | Strict if provider is compliant, unclear if not | Often offshore, varies widely |
| Disclosure / reporting | Issuer disclosures, regulated venues | Provider disclosures plus issuer baseline | Often minimal, depends on platform |
3.1 Why rights mapping helps retail users the most
Retail losses usually happen because of assumption gaps. The ticker looks right, the UI feels like a brokerage, and the product is labeled “tokenized stock.” So users assume they are buying a share. Rights mapping forces you to slow down and answer: what do I actually own? If the answer is “a token that tracks a price,” then the risk is closer to crypto derivatives than to long-term equity investing.
4) How settlement really works: brokers, custodians, transfer agents, and DTCC context
Tokenized equities become easier to understand when you stop thinking about “blockchain vs legacy” and start thinking about records and obligations. Traditional markets work because there is a chain of responsibilities: brokers keep books, custodians hold assets, transfer agents maintain issuer records, clearing networks coordinate settlement, and regulators enforce standards. That sounds slow, but it exists for reasons that matter: fraud prevention, investor protection, and market integrity.
The goal of tokenization is not to delete these responsibilities. The goal is to modernize how records are kept and how obligations are reconciled. That is why infrastructure-level experimentation matters. If the post-trade stack can record entitlements on distributed ledger technology under defined guardrails, settlement can be faster and reconciliation can be cleaner. But the core responsibilities still exist. Someone is accountable for custody. Someone is accountable for accurate books. Someone is accountable for corporate actions and disclosure handling.
4.1 What people mean when they say “DTCC approvals”
In casual crypto discussions, “DTCC approvals” is often used as shorthand for “mainstream post-trade infrastructure is taking tokenization seriously.” A more precise way to think about it: large market utilities exploring tokenization, sometimes under regulatory guardrails, signals that tokenization is shifting from experiments to structured pilots. That does not mean “everything is approved.” It means the road is becoming legible.
4.2 The core components of a compliant on-chain equity rail
If you want to build “secure fiat-crypto rails” for equities, the architecture needs clear modules: identity and eligibility, custody, ownership record, transfer restrictions, compliance reporting, and corporate action execution. In an on-chain system, you represent these modules as smart contracts plus off-chain processes that are audited and accountable. The system is only as strong as its weakest module. A perfect smart contract does not help if custody is opaque.
| Module | What it enforces | Failure mode |
|---|---|---|
| Eligibility | KYC/AML, jurisdiction restrictions, accredited status where required | Unlawful distribution, platform shutdown risk |
| Custody | Who holds the underlying shares and how they are safeguarded | Counterparty failure, rehypothecation, unclear bankruptcy treatment |
| Ownership record | Who is the holder-of-record and what the token represents legally | Token holders have no enforceable rights |
| Transfer controls | Rules that constrain transfers (whitelists, lockups, compliance checks) | Illicit transfers, forced rollbacks, freezes |
| Corporate actions | Dividends, splits, votes, and event-driven updates | Mismatch between share reality and token state |
| Reporting | Audit trails, regulator reporting, operational monitoring | Compliance gaps, fraud risk, operational drift |
4.3 Why “faster settlement” is not just a buzzword
Faster settlement can reduce counterparty risk and operational costs. But it also changes how markets function. If settlement becomes near-instant, you reduce a class of failures tied to delayed reconciliation. You also change liquidity management, margin practices, and operational workflows. This is one reason institutions move carefully: “fast” is attractive, but “fast and wrong” is catastrophic. Tokenization succeeds when it makes systems faster and more auditable.
5) “Peep a Token” holder verification: why it matters and how to do it safely
Tokenized equities introduce a paradox. Traditional equity rails are designed around identity and eligibility. On-chain systems are designed around open transfers and composability. To bridge these worlds safely, you need a way to verify that a holder is eligible or that a holder is part of a defined set, without turning the chain into a public identity database.
That is where the idea behind “Peep a Token” fits. In this context, “Peep a Token” is not just “look at holders.” It is a practical approach to holder verification: verify the holder set and the rights mapping before you build distributions, access, or collateralization on top. In plain terms: before you treat a token like a share, you “peep” what it really is, who can hold it, and how ownership is enforced.
5.1 What holder verification enables
Holder verification is the missing infrastructure for many “institutional-ready” on-chain equity features. If you can verify holders safely, you can:
- Run compliant transfers with allowlists and restricted flows without manual reconciliation.
- Distribute dividends to verified holders using snapshot logic and event-driven schedules.
- Execute voting with proofs of ownership while protecting identity where appropriate.
- Provide gated access to disclosures, investor communications, or issuer programs.
- Prevent spoofed claims where a user pretends to be a holder to access benefits.
5.2 Two verification modes: open audit vs privacy-preserving proofs
Not all verification needs are the same. Sometimes you want open auditability: the holder list is public and the system is transparent. Other times you want privacy: you only need to know that a holder qualifies, not who they are. That is where privacy-preserving systems become important. You can build systems that prove “eligible” without exposing full identity data on-chain.
| Mode | Best for | Tradeoff |
|---|---|---|
| Open holder audit | Transparency, community trusts, simple snapshot distributions | Privacy loss and doxxing risk, holder targeting, compliance sensitivity |
| Privacy-preserving proof | Regulated transfers, sensitive holder sets, gated disclosures | More complex engineering, proof systems, and audit requirements |
5.3 Practical “Peep a Token” checks for tokenized equities
If you are a user, “peeping” a token is not about scanning thousands of wallets manually. It is about verifying key facts that protect you from misrepresentation and platform risk. Here are the checks that matter most:
- Issuer model: entitlement token vs fully-backed wrapper vs synthetic.
- Redemption: is redemption into shares possible, and under what terms?
- Custody clarity: who holds underlying shares, and what disclosures exist?
- Transfer controls: are transfers permissioned, and what happens if you send to an ineligible address?
- Corporate actions plan: how are dividends, splits, and mergers handled?
- Contract safety: verified contracts and clean allowances, scanned before approvals.
Use Token Safety Checker to sanity-check addresses and permissions before you approve or interact. For broader tooling research, use AI Crypto Tools.
6) Market structure: 24/7 trading, fragmentation, and why equity perps show up
Tokenized equities often meet the market through derivatives first. This is not an accident. Derivatives are easier to launch because they do not require the full rights mapping and custody infrastructure of ownership-grade tokenization. If your product is “exposure,” you can price it via an index or oracle and trade it 24/7. That is why equity perps often appear as the “first wave” of on-chain equity products.
6.1 Spot ownership is hard, derivatives are fast
Spot ownership-grade tokenized equities require coordination across regulated entities, custody, eligibility checks, and corporate action handling. Derivatives can be deployed as contracts with pricing logic and risk controls. This creates a split: markets get the trading experience quickly, but not the ownership rights. Users must understand which one they are using.
6.2 Fragmentation: multiple venues, multiple representations
Tokenized equities also fragment quickly. A single equity can have: (1) a synthetic perp market, (2) a fully-backed wrapper token, (3) a permissioned entitlement token, and (4) an off-chain CFD or broker product. These can trade at different prices because they carry different rights and redemption assumptions. The existence of multiple representations is not “inefficiency” by default. It is a sign that the market is still discovering which representation people trust.
6.3 Funding rates and “equity perp drift” risk
Perpetual futures rely on funding rates to keep the perp price close to a reference. In crypto, this system is mature and liquid. In tokenized equities, liquidity can be thinner and price references can be noisy, especially outside traditional market hours. This creates drift risk: the perp price can deviate, funding can flip sharply, and liquidation cascades can happen based on thin conditions. If you use equity perps, treat them as high-risk instruments.
7) Risk model: custody, redemption, compliance, oracle drift, and smart contract exploits
Tokenized equities combine two different risk cultures. Securities markets focus on compliance, custody, and investor protection. Crypto markets focus on smart contracts, keys, phishing, and adversarial execution. The overlap creates new risk layers. A good system can manage both. A sloppy system will fail in one domain and take users down with it.
7.1 Custody and counterparty risk
Fully-backed wrappers are only as strong as custody. The underlying shares might be held by a custodian, a nominee structure, or a broker. Your exposure depends on: whether the custody is segregated, how bankruptcy is handled, and what legal claim you have. If those questions are not answered clearly, your risk is not “crypto volatility.” Your risk is counterparty failure.
7.2 Redemption risk: the exit that matters
Redemption is where a token proves itself. Many “tokenized equity” offerings allow buying and selling inside a platform, but redemption into shares may be limited, expensive, or impossible. Redemption policies define whether the token behaves like a settlement instrument or like a closed-loop product. A token can be valuable without redemption, but it must be marketed honestly. Misrepresentation is where danger starts.
7.3 Compliance boundary risk
Securities restrictions are not optional. If an offering is not permitted in your jurisdiction, you may lose access, face forced liquidation, or see accounts frozen. In crypto, users often assume “code is law.” In securities, law is law. Tokenized equities sit in that second world. Plan accordingly.
7.4 Oracle and reference risk (especially for synthetics and perps)
Synthetics and perps require a price reference. If the reference is wrong, manipulated, or stale, liquidations can cascade. The risk is amplified when: markets are closed, liquidity is thin, or the oracle uses a small set of sources. An equity might not move much, but a bad oracle can still destroy a leveraged position.
7.5 Smart contract risk and permission risk
Tokenized equities introduce smart contract risk in places that traditional equity investors never think about. Users can lose funds due to: malicious approvals, upgradeable contract abuse, compromised admin keys, or phishing dashboards. Permission hygiene matters here more than in most narratives because users may treat “stock-like” products as low risk and let their guard down. That mismatch is exactly what attackers exploit.
8) Contextual playbook: Rights Mapping + Holder Verification + Redemption Stress Test
Instead of a generic due diligence checklist, tokenized equities need a more contextual playbook. The right questions are about rights, recordkeeping, eligibility, and redemption. The smart contract questions still matter, but they are not the starting point. This section gives you a structured playbook you can reuse across any on-chain stock product.
Tokenized Equities Playbook
A) Identify the product type (do not skip)
[ ] Ownership-grade entitlement token
[ ] Fully-backed wrapper (custody-issued)
[ ] Synthetic / derivative exposure (oracle or perps)
B) Rights Mapping (what do you actually get?)
[ ] Ownership record is enforceable (who is holder-of-record?)
[ ] Voting rights: yes/no/limited (document it)
[ ] Dividends: pass-through rules (document it)
[ ] Corporate actions: splits/mergers/spin-offs handling (document it)
[ ] Transfer restrictions: allowlist / KYC gating / freeze logic understood
C) Holder Verification ("Peep a Token")
[ ] Can the platform verify eligible holders for transfers and actions?
[ ] Is verification privacy-preserving where needed?
[ ] Are snapshots and distributions auditable?
[ ] Are holders protected from doxxing and targeted attacks?
D) Custody + Redemption Stress Test (the exit that matters)
[ ] Who holds underlying shares, and under what legal structure?
[ ] Is custody segregated, and what is bankruptcy treatment?
[ ] Redemption into shares: possible? how? fees? timelines?
[ ] Worst-case scenario: platform failure path documented
E) Smart contract + permission safety
[ ] Contracts verified and reviewed before approvals
[ ] Upgradeability and admin controls understood
[ ] Exact approvals used (no unlimited allowances)
[ ] Wallet separation: hot wallet for interactions, cold wallet for storage
F) Monitoring plan
[ ] Legal / compliance updates tracked
[ ] Contract upgrades and admin events tracked
[ ] Liquidity + spreads tracked
[ ] Corporate action announcements tracked
8.1 How to “score” an on-chain stock product in 5 minutes
If you need a fast scoring method, use a simple 3-part test: Rights, Redemption, Verification. If rights are unclear, redemption is impossible, and verification is absent, then you are in synthetic territory, even if the UI pretends otherwise. If rights are clear, redemption is defined, and verification exists under compliant constraints, then the product is closer to ownership-grade. Most products today will sit between these extremes.
9) Scams and misrepresentation: the tokenized equities drain and deception playbook
Tokenized equities attract two kinds of attackers. The first kind attacks wallets: phishing dashboards, approval drains, and fake support. The second kind attacks beliefs: they sell products as “shares” that are not shares, leaning on the credibility of traditional markets to lower skepticism. Both are dangerous. The second kind is especially corrosive because it damages trust in the entire category.
9.1 Common deception patterns
| Pattern | What you see | Defense |
|---|---|---|
| Ticker hijack | A token uses a famous ticker and branding to imply legitimacy. | Run rights mapping. Check issuer model and redemption terms. |
| “Shareholder rights” bait | Marketing implies voting/dividends with no enforceable mechanism. | Demand documentation: who is holder-of-record and how actions occur. |
| Clone brokerage UI | Fake platform looks like a broker, asks you to connect wallet and approve. | Bookmark official sites, avoid social reply links, scan contracts before approvals. |
| Unlimited allowance trap | “Approve to trade” prompts unlimited spend “to reduce friction.” | Use exact approvals and revoke after. Separate wallet for interactions. |
| Fake compliance language | Terms mention compliance but no entity, license, or disclosures are real. | Verify legal entity and disclosures; if vague, treat as high risk. |
9.2 The modern drain path: approvals + social engineering
Most crypto drains still happen through approvals and signatures. Tokenized equities users are vulnerable because “equities” feels safe. Attackers exploit that comfort. They create fake announcements and “exclusive access” links, then prompt a wallet connection. The signature is framed as “verify eligibility” or “unlock trading.” Then the spender approval happens, often unlimited. The drain follows.
9.3 Privacy risks: holder targeting
Tokenized equities can create a new kind of targeting risk. If holders are easily discoverable, high-value holders can be targeted by phishing, extortion, or social engineering. This is why privacy-preserving holder verification matters: it allows compliance and actions without turning holders into public targets. If a product relies on open holder lists, consider whether that exposure is acceptable.
10) TokenToolHub workflow: verify, peep, scan, size, monitor
Tokenized equities are safest when you follow the same workflow every time. You do not want to improvise in a space that mixes securities restrictions, smart contracts, and social engineering. Here is a practical loop you can reuse, whether you are a retail user or a builder evaluating integrations.
- Verify the product type: entitlement vs fully-backed wrapper vs synthetic. Do not proceed until you know.
- Rights mapping: write down what rights you actually get (dividends, votes, redemption).
- Peep holder verification: confirm how eligibility and holder sets are verified for transfers and corporate actions.
- Scan before approvals: use Token Safety Checker to sanity-check token and spender addresses before you approve or deposit.
- Use a dedicated wallet: hot wallet for interactions, cold wallet for storage. Keep balances small in the hot wallet.
- Exact approvals only: no unlimited allowances. Revoke after completion.
- Monitor policy changes: securities access can change quickly based on jurisdiction and platform terms.
- Stay updated: use Subscribe and Community for security alerts and market structure updates.
10.1 Hardware wallet strategy for stock-like positions
A hardware wallet is the best defense against routine compromise. Equity-like positions are the ones you want to protect with the strongest custody posture. Use cold storage for long-term holdings and transfers, and a separate hot wallet for dashboard interactions and trading. From your affiliate list, these are directly relevant:
OneKey referral: onekey.so/r/EC1SL1 • NGRAVE: link • SecuX discount: link
10.2 Privacy and browsing hygiene for finance-grade products
Tokenized equities platforms attract phishing, ad impersonation, and fake “KYC portals.” Reduce your risk by hardening your browsing and communications. From your list, these tools are relevant for privacy and security posture:
11) Diagrams: issuance rails, compliance boundaries, verification gates
These diagrams show where the real complexity lives: recordkeeping, custody, transfer controls, and verification. Use them to map a product you are evaluating. If you cannot place the product on the diagram, you do not understand the product yet. That is a sign to pause.
12) Ops stack: tracking, automation, and reporting
Tokenized equities and equity-like exposures create many transactions, especially if you trade perps, rebalance collateral, or interact with multiple venues. Without tracking, you cannot measure performance, manage taxes, or catch suspicious activity early. This section covers practical tooling that fits a real workflow.
12.1 Tracking and tax tools
If you trade tokenized equities products, you will likely generate taxable events. Tracking tools help you consolidate transactions across wallets and exchanges. From your affiliate list, these are directly relevant:
12.2 Automated strategies and research (optional)
If you trade around equity-perp narratives or hedge exposure, automation and research can help. These are relevant from your list: Coinrule for rules-based automation, QuantConnect for systematic research, and Tickeron for market intelligence. These are optional, but can be useful if you manage risk actively.
12.3 Exchange links (use as execution tools, not custody)
Some users route exposure through centralized venues. Treat exchanges as execution tools, not long-term custody. From your list: Bybit, Bitget, Poloniex, and CEX.IO. Use these only where relevant to your workflow.
12.4 Fast swaps and bridges (use cautiously)
Moving funds between ecosystems can be useful, but adds routing risk. Your list includes ChangeNOW. If you use such services, avoid doing so from a high-value wallet and verify routes carefully.
FAQ
Are tokenized equities the same as owning shares?
Why do equity perps show up so quickly in crypto?
What is holder verification and why does it matter?
Does “Peep a Token” mean doxxing holders?
What is the biggest risk for retail users?
What are the safest first steps if I want to explore tokenized equities?
References and further learning
Use official sources for securities and market-structure details. For broader tokenization context, market integrity, and technical foundations, these links are useful:
- DTCC: tokenized DTC-custodied assets overview
- SEC: DTC no-action letter document (PDF)
- World Economic Forum: Asset Tokenization in Financial Markets (PDF)
- IOSCO: Tokenization of Financial Assets (PDF)
- Ethereum developer docs (accounts, signatures, approvals)
- Ethereum Improvement Proposals (token and signature standards)
- OWASP (phishing and web security fundamentals)
- TokenToolHub Token Safety Checker
- TokenToolHub AI Crypto Tools
- TokenToolHub Blockchain Technology Guides
- TokenToolHub Advanced Guides
- TokenToolHub Subscribe
- TokenToolHub Community
