Enterprise
What does a tokenization or custody engagement cost for a financial institution?
The scoping question a regulated institution should ask before the RFP, not during it.
The answer
The estimate turns almost entirely on one question, asked before scoping starts: does your institution already hold the authoritative record for the balance in question, and would every counterparty accept it? If yes, the engagement is core-system integration — weeks, not quarters. If no, budget for a full custody and reconciliation build, where the signing boundary and daily reconciliation close are the lines that dominate the cost, not the ledger itself.
Why the estimate splits in two, immediately
A regulated institution that already holds the authoritative record for a balance is buying integration: adapters into core banking, idempotent write paths, and a documented break procedure. A regulated institution issuing a new instrument or accepting custody on behalf of a third party is buying something larger — a signing boundary with a rehearsed key ceremony, transfer-restriction logic versioned against a rule set, and a daily reconciliation close with a named owner for breaks.
Most cost surprises in this sector come from budgeting the first case and discovering, midway through discovery, that the engagement is actually the second.
What to ask a vendor before the estimate
Who signs off the custody design, and has it been reviewed by someone who has answered to a regulator for a similar system before — not just built one.
What the daily reconciliation tolerance is, and who is named to resolve a break above it.
Whether key ceremony and rotation have been rehearsed on a non-production environment, with the runbook available to read, not just described.
Talk to the practice
Tell us what you are trying to build and what has to be true for it to work.
Contact