Takeaway
- This article focuses on two new architectures that have taken shape, but neither has yet entered publicly verifiable market use. Route 1 brings tokenized stocks into the existing Nasdaq order book and DTC settlement system; the change occurs only in the post-trade delivery link. Route 2 builds a separate trading venue on-chain, where tokenized stocks and stablecoins are paired in liquidity pools, and both trading and settlement are completed on-chain. As of October 14, 2026, the regulatory frameworks for both architectures have been formed, but the corresponding exchanges or venues have not yet entered actual trading.
- The two routes face different constraints. Route 1 has broad coverage—the Russell 1000 accounts for about 95% of the investable market capitalization of U.S. equities—and price discovery continues to use the existing market, but tokens can only be transferred between wallets registered with DTC, are not counted for collateral and settlement value in the DTC risk control calculations specified by the pilot, and launch depends on whether DTC settlement services are in place. Route 2 must re-accumulate liquidity in new liquidity pools, has trading caps for individual stocks, and third-party tokenization may also be opposed stock-by-stock by listed companies.
- The constraints of Route 2 may first appear in the quotas for individual stocks rather than in the total quota. Based on September 2026 trading volume, the combined daily cap for the first batch of 63 stocks on OKXICE is about $710 million; using 19 days of offshore tokenized trading volume as a demand reference, the combined daily average for 49 stocks is about $430 million, using only 60% of the total quota, but 6 stocks already have offshore trading volume higher than the single-venue cap. The top 10 by quota account for 55%, and the top 10 by demand account for 81%; demand is more concentrated than quota.
Introduction
Putting stocks on-chain is no longer a new topic. In the past few years, different tokenized U.S. stock products have emerged outside the United States: Robinhood launched stock tokens in 2025 for EU users[1], and other offshore platforms have similar products. But these tokens have not had direct connections with U.S. domestic exchanges or the settlement system, and are mainly aimed at users outside the United States. There are also institutions in the United States that have launched on-chain stock trading under the existing broker-dealer / ATS framework, such as Securitize[2, 3]. This article focuses on two other new market architectures.
These two new architectures took shape almost one after another within a year. In December 2025, the SEC agreed to DTC piloting tokenization services[4]. DTC is the central depository for the U.S. securities market, where a large number of stocks complete back-office position records and settlement; in March 2026, Nasdaq was approved to trade tokenized stocks[5]; in September of the same year, the SEC issued an innovation exemption allowing new trading venues to be added on-chain[6]; on October 4, OKX and ICE's joint venture OKXICE issued its first opening announcement under the new rules[7].
Figure 1 | Four nodes, two routes: one connects to the existing trading and settlement system, the other builds a separate venue on-chain
These four events belong to these two architectures, referred to below as Route 1 and Route 2. The first two bring tokenized stocks into the existing exchange and settlement system: investors gain an additional on-chain holding method, the stock remains the same stock, trading still occurs on Nasdaq, and after execution DTC still handles settlement as before; the latter two open new trading venues on-chain: tokenized stocks are directly paired and traded with on-chain assets such as stablecoins, and settlement is also completed on-chain. The core difference between the two paths lies in whether trading and settlement remain within the existing system.
The regulatory frameworks for both architectures have been formed, but the corresponding exchanges or venues have not yet entered actual trading. As of October 14, 2026, according to RWA.xyz, tokenized stocks and ETFs in circulation on-chain are about $3.28 billion, and tokenized U.S. Treasuries are about $14.9 billion; the former is only about one-fifth of the latter[8]. It should be noted that this figure mainly comes from offshore products such as xStocks, Ondo, and Robinhood, and is not the same as the equal-rights tokenized stocks required by the two U.S. routes. At present, it is difficult to judge the development of subsequent paths from the perspective of scale; what is more informative is to see who is paving the way. But whichever path it is, the following links are unavoidable: setting rules, custody and settlement, providing trading venues, providing tokenized stocks, and providing on-chain money. Behind each link there are only a few institutions. This article selects 8 representative institutions and observes their relevant progress to judge where each of the two paths has reached and what each is constrained by.
Figure 2 | The two routes change different market layers: Route 1 only changes delivery, Route 2 rebuilds trading and pricing
1 Key roles: who determines whether the two routes can operate
1.1 Screening criteria for the eight roles
There are only two core criteria for selecting the targets: 1. There have been verifiable actual actions in the past year, such as approval, launch, or announcement; 2. The target is at a necessary link in one of the two paths.
Based on these two rules, the list includes both regulators and back-office settlement institutions, as well as exchanges, issuers, and stablecoin companies. They belong to different industries and are rarely discussed together. In the matter of putting stocks on-chain, no link is dispensable, but the weight of specific institutions is not the same.
1.2 Divided into three layers by substitutability: architecture, venue, and asset services
Measured by "whether the route can continue if this institution is absent," the eight roles can be divided into three layers. The SEC and DTC determine the architecture itself: the former sets rules for the two routes, and the latter is the only launch node for Route 1; currently neither has a substitute. Nasdaq and OKXICE are the first venues to land on the two routes, but the five exchanges under NYSE already have similar rules[9], and other institutions on Route 2 can also set up venues separately under the exemption[6], so they can all be replaced. The third layer is asset and service providers such as Circle, BlackRock, and Ondo, which are currently not prerequisites for the routes to operate: OKXICE accepts three stablecoins at the same time, USDC is only one of them, and it has not adopted tokenized money market funds[7]. Securitize's position is more complex: on the one hand, it provides tokenized issuance and transfer services for listed companies; on the other hand, it has launched on-chain stock trading through its own registered broker-dealer[2, 3]. Therefore, it is not a control node of these two architectures, but it is also not just an asset supplier. Outside the list, listed companies hold a stock-by-stock veto, and Cerebras has already exercised it once[7], but this currently affects whether individual stocks can be listed, and cannot yet be said to limit overall supply.
Figure 3 | Among the eight roles, currently only the SEC and DTC have no substitutes
Note: The three-tier grouping is CoinFound’s analytical classification, not a regulatory designation. Securitize also operates a separate regulated broker-dealer trading route outside the two new architectures compared in this report.
2 Route 1: Tokenization only changes delivery, not price formation
2.1 DTC brings securities entitlements on-chain, but official records remain at DTC
The starting point of Route 1 is DTC's tokenization service. Based on the SEC's no-action letter, DTC participants can convert securities held at DTC into on-chain tokens, and can also have DTC convert them back into the original book-entry form at any time. The scope includes Russell 1000 constituent stocks at the time the service launches, stocks newly added to the index thereafter (and later removed from the index will not lose eligibility solely for that reason), ETFs tracking major indices, and U.S. Treasuries, for a term of 3 years after the service launches. Conversion does not change the legal framework applicable to the holdings: stocks are still registered in the name of DTC's nominee Cede & Co., DTC recognizes only participants as entitlement holders, and the official record remains DTC's books; shareholder rights remain unchanged[4].
2.2 Nasdaq uses the same order book; the only difference is post-trade delivery
In March 2026, the SEC approved Nasdaq's rule change, allowing stocks included in DTC's tokenization service to be traded in tokenized form on Nasdaq. On the exchange, tokenized shares and traditional shares sit in the same order book, are matched in the same sequence, and have the same ticker and CUSIP, so the same stock will not have two prices. Tokenization is merely a settlement flag attached when placing an order: after a DTC-eligible participant checks it, the order's execution priority remains unchanged, and the exchange does not verify eligibility; ineligible orders settle in the traditional form; at T+1 settlement, DTC then, according to the choice, records the shares in a traditional account or delivers them to a registered wallet. Market data also does not distinguish between the two types of shares [5].
Route One therefore does not establish an independent tokenized stock market: tokenized orders enter the stock's existing quoting, matching, and price formation, and the change occurs only at the layer of how securities are delivered after the trade, without needing to build separate liquidity in a new pool as Route Two does, and without relying on stablecoins or tokenized money market funds.
Figure 4｜Route One does not create a new pricing market; the difference occurs only in the post-trade delivery stage
Native RWA platform Ondo states that tokenized entitlements generated by DTC can serve as "digital twins" of the underlying securities corresponding to CRCLon and SPYon, with the underlying securities always remaining within the DTC custody system, while user-facing products are still provided by Ondo itself [10]. This is an access method that has already occurred; there is currently no public data indicating its scale.
2.3 Broad coverage, but asset movement and risk-control valuation are limited
In terms of asset coverage, Route One already covers the main part of the U.S. stock market: the Russell 1000 accounts for about 95% of U.S. equity investable market capitalization [11]. The real limitation lies in where these entitlements can go: wallets can only be registered by DTC participants, and participants can open wallets for clients or even hand over private keys, but tokens can only be transferred into DTC-registered wallets; DTC recognizes only participants as entitlement holders and retains the technical ability, under specific reversal scenarios (such as handling corporate actions or correcting erroneous transfers), to force conversion, transfer, minting, or burning of tokens [4]. This is more like an on-chain extension of existing market infrastructure than an open on-chain trading market.
Reusing existing liquidity does not mean tokenization is costless. The no-action letter states that during the pilot, when calculating participants' net debit caps and collateral monitoring, DTC does not assign any collateral value or settlement value to tokenized entitlements [4]. Positions converted into tokens cannot contribute value in this part of risk control the way ordinary book-entry positions do. Whether this will create significant costs for certain types of institutions, there is currently no participant-level public data to quantify.
Figure 5｜Route One covers about 95% of investable market capitalization, with constraints falling on asset movement and risk-control valuation
2.4 Rules approved, but exchanges are still waiting for DTC to be in place
As of October 13, 2026, Route One has completed rule approval but has not yet entered the formal exchange trading stage. On July 15, DTCC completed its first production-environment transactions using actually custodied stocks and Treasury bonds, with more than 30 institutions participating [12]; the formal service is still planned for launch in October, and no launch announcement has yet been seen. Nasdaq's rules have been approved, and the five exchanges under the NYSE group have also adopted essentially the same rules [5, 9], but tokenized trading on these exchanges must wait for DTC to establish the corresponding infrastructure and post-trade settlement services [5]: the front end can be handled by multiple exchanges, while the back office remains concentrated in the same DTC settlement layer.
However, the above two milestones cannot be conflated. The July test proved that the DTC side can already complete the conversion, transfer, and settlement processes for multiple types of tokenized securities in a production environment [12], but public materials do not clearly state whether these tests covered the complete tokenized settlement process after exchange execution; the October service launch also only indicates that underlying securities can be tokenized and transferred between registered wallets. It is not yet possible to determine whether the service DTCC launches in October already includes all the settlement functions Nasdaq needs to start.
The most direct way to judge whether Route One has truly launched is to see whether Nasdaq issues an Equity Trader Alert. Under the rules, Nasdaq must notify members at least 30 days before starting tokenized stock trading [5]. After trading begins, ordinary market data itself cannot distinguish which trades chose tokenized settlement; DTC must report data such as tokenization scale, transfer volume, and wallet numbers to SEC staff quarterly, but existing documents do not require public disclosure [4]. The actual usage of Route One will depend on whether DTC, exchanges, or regulators disclose it separately.
3 Route Two: Rebuilding the trading and pricing layer on-chain
3.1 On-chain trading venues under the innovation exemption
The rule basis for Route Two is the innovation exemption issued by the SEC on September 17, 2026. It allows new "tokenized securities trading venues" to trade already-issued U.S. stocks on-chain without registering in the manner of traditional stock exchanges. Trades can be completed through automatically priced liquidity pools, but only secondary market trading is allowed; new shares cannot be issued here; participants must also first pass venue review. The entire exemption is currently valid for five years [6].
The biggest difference in Route Two is that both trading and settlement occur directly on-chain. Tokenized stocks need to be placed into liquidity pools together with another on-chain asset, with pricing and exchange completed by algorithms. There are only three types of assets that can be used for pairing: another tokenized stock, non-security crypto assets such as stablecoins, and tokenized money market funds [6]. Therefore, in addition to stocks, Route Two must also have funds that can complete trading on-chain.
3.2 Stock supply and listed companies' right of objection
Tokenized stocks usually have two sources: issued by the listed company itself, or tokenized by a third party. Either way, the tokens must correspond to real stock entitlements and cannot merely be synthetic products that track the stock price. If the stock is tokenized by a third party, prior consent from the listed company is not required, but advance notice must be given. The listed company has 30 days to raise an objection; once it objects, the stock cannot be traded on that venue [6]. Securitize, meanwhile, is positioning itself on another supply path: it cooperates with transfer agents such as Computershare and Continental to provide services for listed companies issuing on-chain shares themselves [13, 14].
3.3 Stablecoin pairing, liquidity pools, and trading caps
Once the stock source is resolved, Route Two still needs the other half: on-chain trading funds. All 63 stocks on OKXICE are paired with USDC, USDG, or USDT; among the three types of pairing assets, only stablecoins are used, and tokenized money market funds have not yet entered. The asset types are already in place, but how much money will actually be in the liquidity pools is still not visible: the announcement does not mention initial liquidity arrangements, OKXICE's affiliates do not serve as liquidity providers, and other liquidity providers generally have no obligation to remain in the pools continuously [7].
Even if both stocks and on-chain funds are ready, Route Two cannot be scaled up immediately, because the rules themselves set caps on trading scale. The SEC, based on existing U.S. stock classifications, categorizes large, highly liquid stocks as Tier 1 and most other stocks as Tier 2. A venue can trade at most 75 Tier 1 stocks and 250 Tier 2 stocks; the tokenized trading volume of a single stock also cannot exceed 0.25% and 2.5% of the corresponding traditional stock's average daily trading volume last month, respectively. If the same group operates multiple venues, these quotas must also be calculated on a combined basis [6]. Therefore, Route Two in its early stage is more like a controlled experiment than a market that can be rapidly scaled up.
Converting this cap into actual amounts makes the initial scale of Route Two more intuitive. Taking OKXICE's first batch of 63 stocks as an example, based on average daily trading volume in September 2026, in October they could collectively trade at most about $710 million per day [7, 15]. Moreover, the quota is highly concentrated in a few large-cap stocks: the 10 stocks with the highest caps account for 55% of the total quota, and the median cap for a single stock is only about $5.4 million. Even Nvidia, the most actively traded, could trade only about 280,000 shares, or $64 million, per day. These figures are still theoretical upper limits; actual trading volume will only be lower.
Figure 6｜The combined daily cap for 63 stocks is about $710 million, with the quota concentrated in a few large-cap stocks
Note: Caps are based on September 2026 average daily volume; theoretical maximum, not expected turnover.
Even with limited scale, Route Two still has its own appeal: it supports round-the-clock trading and instant on-chain settlement, and it also gives crypto exchanges a path to trade tokenized U.S. stocks in a U.S.-compliant way. However, round-the-clock trading currently looks more like a feature than a proven source of demand: over the past three weeks, weekends accounted for only about 15% of offshore tokenized-stock turnover[16], and weekend daily averages were only one-third to four-tenths of weekday levels; looking stock by stock, the weekend daily average for all 49 stocks was lower than on weekdays.
3.4 On-chain prices form independently, while inventory and trading halts remain anchored to traditional markets
OKXICE's announcement also provides a more specific implementation approach for Route Two: the venue is deployed on X Layer and uses permissioned Uniswap v4 pools[7]. The announcement did not give an official launch date; under the 30-day advance notice requirement, it could not operate until early November at the earliest[6].
According to OKXICE's announcement, prices in the pool are determined solely by the ratio of the quantities of the two assets, without using oracles or any external market data, and apart from trading halts, there are no circuit breakers or reference price bands; the announcement also acknowledges that token prices may deviate from the underlying stock, especially outside regular trading hours. What links on-chain prices to the stock is the traditional-market side: the tokenizer holds the stock one-to-one through a broker, buying the stock and confirming custody when minting, and selling or delivering the stock upon redemption; once the underlying stock is halted, all related pools are paused in sync until trading resumes[7]. What Route Two builds is a new on-chain trading and pricing layer, while inventory and trading halts still follow traditional markets.
Figure 7｜Route Two builds a new on-chain trading and pricing layer, while inventory and trading halts still follow traditional markets
4 From rule capacity to real demand: the constraints on the two routes begin to diverge
Rules coming into effect is only the starting point. Reaching actual market use still requires passing through five stages in sequence: approval or qualification, system integration, official launch, the emergence of real trading or funds, and finally the formation of meaningful scale. The earlier steps mainly depend on whether regulation and infrastructure are in place, while the later ones depend on whether the market actually uses it. As of now, all eight key players remain in the first three stages, and no one in public information can yet prove they have entered "real use."
Figure 8｜The rules are all in place, but neither route yet has verifiable real trading
Note: The five-stage ladder is an analytical framework; positions reflect public information as of 2026-10-14.
4.1 A product already existing does not mean it is already used by the market
Looking at these five stages, most players are currently still between "approved" and "system integration." DTCC and BlackRock are relatively further ahead, but the progress they represent is not the same. DTCC has completed small-scale production-environment trading, but official service has not yet launched[12]; although BlackRock's tokenized money market fund has been launched[17], it has not yet been selected by any venue as a paired asset, nor is there public evidence that it has been adopted by stablecoin issuers. Here it is necessary to distinguish between "the product already exists" and "the product is already used by the market": the former has happened, while the latter cannot yet be confirmed.
4.2 The common premise is the same, but the sources of constraint differ
The two routes also share a common premise: tokens must correspond to real stock rights, and holders enjoy the same rights as ordinary shareholders[6]. The stock tokens Robinhood offers to EU users essentially provide exposure to stock prices rather than actual shareholder rights[1], so they cannot be directly applied to these two U.S. routes.
Under this common premise, the constraints faced by the two routes are not the same. Route One has broad coverage, but asset movement is constrained by the DTC registration system; under the pilot's prescribed net debit cap and collateral monitoring calculations, tokenized interests are not counted for collateral and settlement value, and whether it can launch also depends on whether DTC's settlement service is in place. Route Two's constraints come from scale and stock supply: quotas are set stock by stock, and third-party tokenization may also be opposed stock by stock by listed companies.
4.3 The total quota still has room, while offshore demand references suggest per-stock quotas may bind first
Whether the cap constitutes an actual constraint varies by stock. Using offshore tokenized-stock turnover as a demand reference, over the 19 days from September 24 to October 12, complete offshore token trading data could be found for 49 stocks on the list, totaling an average daily volume of about $430 million, equivalent to only 60% of the combined daily cap for 63 stocks[15, 16]. The total quota is not tight, but per-stock quotas may run out first: the offshore daily average turnover of 6 stocks exceeded the daily cap for a single venue, with Circle at about 14 times the cap, Strategy at about 2.7 times, SpaceX and Coinbase at about 2 times, and Nvidia and Google at about 1.35 times[15, 16]. These 6 stocks accounted for 60% of offshore demand; if this group of offshore turnover were truncated daily according to a single venue's cap, about one-third could not be absorbed by one venue. By contrast, most stocks such as Tesla and Micron had offshore turnover below the cap; what limits them is demand, not rules.
Figure 9｜Using offshore demand as a reference: only 60% of the total quota is used, but 6 stocks already exceed the theoretical cap for a single venue
Note: Offshore tokenized-stock turnover over 2026-09-24 to 2026-10-12 (19 days) is used as a demand reference, not a forecast.
The mismatch between the two sides arises because the distribution of quotas and demand is not aligned. Quotas are allocated according to traditional trading volume, and the 10 stocks with the highest caps account for 55% of the total quota; offshore demand is more concentrated, with the top 10 accounting for 81%. Offshore demand still largely follows traditional trading volume, but is notably higher for a few stocks: dividing offshore token turnover by traditional-market turnover over the same period, the median for the 49 stocks was less than 0.1%, while Circle, Strategy, and Coinbase—whose core businesses are crypto assets—ranked exactly in the top three, at about 6.4%, 1.1%, and 0.7%, respectively[15, 16].
Figure 10｜Offshore demand largely follows traditional trading volume, but the demand intensity of the three crypto-focused companies ranks in the top three
Note: Demand intensity = offshore tokenized turnover ÷ traditional-market turnover over the same window.
4.4 Both routes are within a time-limited regulatory window
These restrictions are also not finalized rules. The DTC's no-action letter is only valid for three years after the service launch, and the SEC's innovation exemption for Route Two has a five-year term [4, 6]. Both routes are currently in a pilot phase, and market participants now face a regulatory window with a clear expiration date. Whether the rules will continue to be applied, be expanded, or be readjusted after expiration remains unanswered for now.
5 The next six months: which signals will change the current judgment
Over the next six months, both routes will for the first time be tested on whether they can truly enter trading. The earliest signals will mostly come from infrastructure and regulators, because they usually have clear announcement and notification requirements. These milestones are easier to observe, but that does not mean they are more important than actual trading itself.
Figure 11 | What will change the judgment next is not new announcements, but whether the two routes can produce real trades
Note: Observation framework, not a forecast.
5.1 Route One: DTC launch and exchange startup signals
The most important things for Route One going forward remain the official launch of DTC and the startup pace of exchanges. DTCC plans to launch its tokenization service in October, and the focus then will be on the first batch of participating institutions, the scope of tokenizable securities, and the supported blockchains [12]. As for whether exchanges truly launch, the direct signal is whether Nasdaq issues an Equity Trader Alert [5]; if the NYSE advances similar trading, there will also be corresponding advance notices. After trading begins, watch whether separate usage data is disclosed.
5.2 Route Two: OKXICE operations, stock supply, and a second venue
The most direct observation point for Route Two going forward is the actual operation of OKXICE after it opens. After launch, the main things to watch are three: whether the first batch of stocks can trade smoothly, whether trading volume quickly hits the cap, and which of USDC, USDG, or USDT becomes the main pairing asset. Overseas trading demand for individual stocks such as Circle, Strategy, and SpaceX has already approached or exceeded single-venue limits, so actual trading after launch will directly test whether these caps constitute a real constraint.
In addition to trading itself, stock supply also needs continued observation. Currently, the only listed company that has publicly opposed it is Cerebras [7]. If more companies raise objections later, the range of stocks that third-party tokenization can cover will narrow, and Route Two will rely more on listed companies actively participating. Conversely, if listed companies begin issuing their own tokenized stocks and trading them on these venues, that would show that the stock supply for this route is beginning to become more stable.
Another thing worth watching is whether a second venue appears for Route Two. So far, no other venue has issued a public announcement. Robinhood has said that trading volume for its stock tokens may reach some limits and is also studying the specific rules of this exemption, but it has not yet announced a clear plan [18]. If a second or third venue appears later, that would show Route Two is beginning to expand from a single project into a broader market experiment; which pairing assets these new venues choose will also show whether tokenized money market funds truly enter this path.
The next timing point on the funding side is the GENIUS Act taking effect on January 18, 2027 [19], with the OCC planning to issue final rules around November [20]. The rules will determine what conditions money market funds and their tokenized forms must meet as stablecoin reserves, which in turn will affect whether products such as BlackRock's can enter the reserve system. It does not affect OKXICE's opening; what it affects is the asset composition behind the stablecoins used by such venues.
5.3 Which outcomes would show that the market has entered the usage phase
Whichever route first produces real trades only shows that it entered the usage phase earlier; it cannot be used to judge who will dominate later. The demand the two seek overlaps, but Route One cannot provide the openness of Route Two; each venue under Route Two (calculated on a consolidated basis within the same group) is limited by quotas, making it difficult in the short term to absorb the mainstream liquidity of the traditional stock market. If after a period there are still only service launches and venue announcements, with no real trading or funding data, that would show the market has not yet moved out of the preparation phase, but it cannot be further inferred that there is no market demand.
Conclusion
Over the past year, the biggest change in U.S. stocks going on-chain is not the appearance of more tokenized products, but that two new market architectures have been built. Route One trades broad asset coverage and ready-made price discovery for asset movement constrained by the DTC registration system; Route Two offers a more open on-chain trading method, but must rebuild liquidity and is constrained by per-stock trading caps. The two have different design goals and different progress: Route Two has already seen the OKXICE venue announcement, while Route One is still waiting for exchanges to launch; but neither side has yet reached the real trading phase.
There are mainly three things that cannot yet be confirmed. First, whether the two routes have already produced real usage; there is currently no public trading or funding data to prove it. Second, the actual depth of Route Two's funding pool. Stablecoins already meet the asset types required for launch, and tokenized money market funds are not a prerequisite, but OKXICE has not committed any initial liquidity, so how much funding will actually be in the pool will only be visible after operations begin. Third, whether the trading demand already formed for overseas stock tokens can be converted into demand under these two U.S. routes; there is currently not enough evidence, because the product rights structures on the two sides are not the same.
What will truly change the judgment next is not the number of new announcements, but whether the two routes can show verifiable actual progress. For Route One, watch whether exchanges truly launch; for Route Two, watch whether OKXICE can operate and further expand to more stocks, more issuers, and more venues. Only when these changes actually occur can it be judged whether U.S. stocks going on-chain have moved from institutional preparation into market usage.
The two new architectures discussed in this article have taken shape. The demand they serve overlaps, but at least at this stage they look more like two parallel architectures than a simple substitute relationship.
