Institutional digital asset transactions settle in one of three broad architectures. On a single shared ledger, the asset and the payment live in one place and settle together. With linked ledgers, each asset stays on its own network and a messaging layer coordinates the transfer between them. In a hybrid setup, the asset moves onchain while cash settles on traditional payment rails. Each one trades the ease of settling both sides at once against independence, reach, and change to existing systems.
Last updated: October 27, 2026.
What does a settlement architecture decide?
Every transaction has at least two parts: the asset being delivered and the payment for it. The architecture decides where each part is recorded, what money the payment is made in, and how the two parts depend on each other. Linking them so that delivery happens only if payment happens is called delivery versus payment, and it removes the risk that one side delivers while the other does not.
The payment side can use different settlement assets: central bank money, tokenized bank deposits, or stablecoins. The choice of asset and the choice of architecture are linked, since not every settlement asset is available on every network.
What are the main architectures?
| Architecture | Where the asset and cash live | Main strength | Main trade-off |
|---|---|---|---|
| Single shared ledger | Both on one network | Both sides can settle atomically | Participants have to agree on one network and its rules |
| Linked ledgers | On separate networks, coordinated by messages | Each network keeps its own rules and users | Settlement depends on verified cross-ledger messages |
| Hybrid | Asset onchain, cash on existing payment systems | Uses payment rails institutions already run | Both sides settle separately unless the two systems are linked |
These categories describe designs, not products. A real system can combine them, for example a shared ledger for one market that also links to outside networks.
Why not put everything on one ledger?
A single ledger makes delivery versus payment simple, because one transaction can move both sides. The difficulty is getting every participant, asset, and settlement asset onto the same network under the same governance. Assets are already issued on many public and permissioned networks, and moving them all is slow.
Linked ledgers accept that assets live in different places. A messaging layer carries verified instructions between networks so a transfer on one can trigger an action on another. Conditional designs can make each leg depend on the other, which brings cross-chain settlement closer to the guarantees of a single ledger.
How does the hybrid model fit in?
Many early tokenized asset transactions use a hybrid model. The asset is recorded onchain, and cash moves through the payment systems the institution already uses. This needs little new infrastructure for payments, but unless the two systems are linked, the two sides settle separately and have to be coordinated. The post-trade guide covers how clearing and custody fit around this.
FAQ
What is atomic settlement?
Atomic settlement means both sides of a transaction complete together or neither does. There is no state in which one party has delivered and the other has not.
Can linked ledgers support delivery versus payment?
Yes, when each leg is made conditional on the other through verified messages between the networks. The design has to define what happens if one leg cannot complete.
Which settlement asset is used?
It depends on what is available on the networks involved and on the rules that apply to the participants. Central bank money, tokenized deposits, and stablecoins are all used in different settings.
Map settlement for your asset
To discuss settlement across the networks your asset uses, request a custom briefing.