A tokenized share is a chain of named parties, and the token is only as good as the weakest
link in it. This graph draws that chain: each issuer programme sits in the centre, the entities that issue,
wrap, tokenize, keep the register, custody the underlying and verify the reserves sit around it, and the
venues, regulators and permitted audiences sit on the rim. Every party edge comes from a cited dossier field,
never from a press release; every traded on edge is a sum of the programme's own pools and
tickers, and its width is the log of that sum. Shared nodes are the point — when one custodian or one exchange
turns up in the middle of four programmes, that is concentration you cannot see in a table.
Showing the bundled sample fixture
(stocks/fixtures/graph.sample.json), not live data. Five programmes with hand-written party and
venue nodes, for layout work only — do not cite any number on this page while this banner is visible.
Loading…
Relations
Drag to pan, scroll or pinch to zoom, click a node for its connections.
What each colour is
How to read it
Node size is degree, not size of business: a node is bigger because more programmes
name it, which is exactly the concentration question.
Edge width is the log of the edge weight, and the two weight families are scaled
separately. A traded on edge weighs the summed pool liquidity of that programme's mints on
that venue, falling back to summed 24-hour volume where the venue reports no pool — a CEX ticker never
reports liquidity, so its width is a volume width and the side panel says so. Every other edge weighs
the number of programmes that relation was read from, which is normally one, so those lines all draw
at the base width: an identical weight is not a measurement and must not look like one. How many
programmes name a party is its node size instead.
Issues and references are not the same claim, and the difference is the whole
point of the graph. A register-mirrored programme — one whose legal form is a
registered share — tokenizes the listed company's own share, so the company issues it and the
arrow runs company → programme. Every other programme merely borrows that company's price: the
arrow is reversed, drawn as a dashed references line, and the company is not
a participant in anything. SpaceX is named by a Backpack dossier and its own prospectus never mentions
the token.
A lends on edge carries no weight. The dossiers name the lending market in a
sentence, and a number parsed out of a sentence is not a measurement, so the line is a hairline and
the quote is in the panel.
Focusing a programme dims everything more than two hops away — it never deletes it, so
the shape of the graph stays comparable while you read one programme's chain.
An arrow reads as a sentence.Backed Assets (JE) Limited → wraps →
xStocks; xStocks → regulated by → FMA Liechtenstein. The side panel spells
out both directions.
Absence is not evidence. A programme with no custodian edge is a programme whose
dossier does not name one, which is a finding about the disclosure, not proof there is no custodian.