Tokenized Funds Exposed: Structural Differences Uncovered

Centrifuge is set to release a report that compares tokenized money market funds and highlights their structural differences. Despite holding similar assets, such as short-term US government securities and repos, tokenized treasury funds have varying fee structures, redemption timelines, onchain liquidity, and composability with DeFi protocols.

The report's findings show that while some funds offer daily liquidity, others impose redemption constraints that can lock capital for days. The fees charged by these funds can also significantly eat into their already low returns. Additionally, the report notes that only a small percentage of tokenized assets are composible with DeFi platforms.

Centrifuge's own flagship offerings illustrate the higher end of what is possible in tokenized fund design. Their Janus Henderson Anemoy Treasury Fund has crossed $1B in AUM at various points in 2026, and features onchain NAV reporting. However, even Centrifuge faces challenges in scaling distribution, with its Tokenization Outlook 2026 survey finding that 86% of operators cited this as their primary challenge.

The regulatory classification of tokenized MMFs as securities creates a ceiling for these products, imposing transfer restrictions and making seamless circulation more difficult than stablecoins. This tension arises from the fact that tokenized treasury funds are increasingly positioned as yield-bearing cash equivalents, but the regulatory framework treats them as investment products rather than payment instruments.