Hi Marco. SIX has received FINMA approval to merge its digital CSD into SIX SIS and to provide crypto custody through the consolidated CSD. Why is this approval such a defining milestone for SIX and for the Swiss financial market infrastructure as a whole?
What makes this approval so significant is that it changes the structure of the market, not just the product landscape. We are bringing digital and traditional asset services into a single regulated entity and extending the CSD framework to include crypto custody. That is a fundamental shift because digital assets become part of core market infrastructure rather than something operating alongside it.
At the same time, institutions can now access digital assets within the same regulated environment they already trust for traditional securities. That means the same standards around asset safety, governance, and operational resilience. This is what enables institutions to move forward with confidence and at scale.
How does this step fit into SIX’s long-term ambition to become a pan European provider of integrated and digital post trade solutions by 2030, and why is now the right moment to make this move?
This step fits directly into our long-term ambition to provide an integrated post trade infrastructure across asset classes and across markets. It is essential because it removes the separation between traditional and digital assets at the infrastructure level. If you want to scale across Europe, you cannot run parallel systems. You need one consistent operating model.
The timing is equally important. Institutions are increasingly interested in digital assets, but adoption depends on having the right infrastructure in place. With the regulatory foundation now in place, we can offer access in a way that aligns with institutional requirements, which makes this the right moment to move from strategy to execution.
By bringing traditional and digital assets together under one regulated CSD, SIX is introducing the concept of “one plug to two worlds.” What does this mean in practice for institutional clients, and how does it change the way they can think about using digital assets?
In practical terms, it means that clients can access digital asset services through the same connection and framework they already use for traditional securities. They do not need to build and maintain a separate setup for crypto or digital assets.
More importantly, it shifts the mindset. Digital assets are no longer something you approach as a standalone initiative. They become part of the existing operating model. That allows institutions to adopt them in a more controlled, incremental way, which ultimately makes them easier to scale.
At the same time, we want to give clients the flexibility to transition towards digital models at the pace they prefer and apply digital capabilities where they create the most value for their business. Ultimately, the goal is to enable seamless interaction between traditional and digital rails. For example, clients should be able to transact seamlessly across both environments, such as delivering an asset held on a traditional ledger against payment made in the form of digital money on a digital ledger.
From your perspective, what is the biggest mindset shift institutions need to make when approaching digital assets today?
The biggest mindset shift is moving away from treating digital assets as something separate that requires a completely new way of thinking. For a long time, institutions approached this space as though it existed outside the rest of their business.
What we are seeing now is a transition towards a much more relevant question: how do we incorporate new asset classes into existing operating models in a controlled and scalable way? Once you make that shift, digital assets stop being a special case and start becoming a natural extension of what institutions already do.
What demand signals are you seeing from institutions when it comes to crypto and digital assets, and how are those expectations evolving?
One thing that is very clear is that institutional interest is real and sustained, but expectations have matured significantly. A few years ago, there was more curiosity and experimentation. Today, institutions are much more focused on how they can engage in a way that aligns with their core business.
They are looking for solutions that provide regulated access, operational consistency, and scalability. What they do not want is additional complexity. So, the demand is not just for access to digital assets, but for access that fits seamlessly into existing governance structures and operational environments.
Beyond custody, what kinds of business opportunities and client propositions does this integrated infrastructure unlock for banks and financial institutions engaging with digital assets?
Custody is really the foundation, but once that foundation is in place, the conversation quickly broadens. Institutions start looking at how they can build services around those assets, whether through collateral usage, tokenized offerings, or broader digital asset propositions for clients.
What is important is that these opportunities only become meaningful when they can be delivered within a trusted and scalable environment. Without that, they remain largely theoretical. With it, digital assets become something that can be embedded into real client propositions and long-term business models.
At the same time, there is a broader dynamic in the market that is worth highlighting. A lot of current traction is in the digital money space, with developments around stablecoins, deposit tokens and central bank digital currencies. However, digital money is typically used in conjunction with securities. This means that tokenization on the securities side is equally critical, as it is what allows institutions to fully unlock the benefits of digital money in a post trade context.
How can institutions use digital assets not only to expand product offerings, but also to improve efficiency, scalability, or client experience across their broader business?
The opportunity goes beyond launching new products. It is also about how digital assets can simplify and streamline existing processes. However, that only works if institutions avoid creating fragmented setups.
If digital assets require separate systems, separate controls, and separate processes, most of the potential benefits disappear. If, on the other hand, they can be integrated into existing infrastructure, institutions can start to improve scalability, operational efficiency, and consistency in client experience.
So, the focus should not be on adding complexity, but on integrating capabilities in a way that reduces it.
Many institutions are interested in digital assets but hesitate to move from observation to action. What do you see as the main barriers today, and how does a regulated setup help overcome them?
The barriers to adoption are relatively well understood. Institutions remain cautious because of regulatory and operational uncertainty, as well as the lack of proven infrastructure.
A regulated setup addresses those concerns directly. It provides a clear structure within which institutions can operate and aligns digital assets with the same standards they apply across the rest of their business. That makes it much easier internally to move from observation to execution because the risks become more manageable and better understood.
What role does trust play in accelerating institutional adoption, and how does established market infrastructure help build that trust?
Trust is absolutely central. Without trust, adoption will always remain limited and cautious, regardless of how strong the underlying technology may be.
Trust comes from a combination of regulation, proven infrastructure, and familiarity. When institutions can access digital assets through environments that operate in ways they already recognize, with clear rules, controls, and accountability, the barrier to entry is significantly reduced. That is when adoption can begin to accelerate in a meaningful way.
Looking ahead, how do you see the role of digital assets evolving within SIX’s core post-trade infrastructure over the next few years?
What we are ultimately working towards is a model where digital assets are no longer viewed as an add-on, but as a core part of the infrastructure offering.
This will not happen overnight, and it should not. It requires a phased approach to ensure that integration happens in a controlled and resilient way. But the direction is clear: a more unified setup where clients can access different asset types through a consistent framework that supports institutional scale.
If we look five years ahead, what do you expect will feel “normal” about digital assets in post-trade that still feels unfamiliar to many institutions today?
What will feel normal is not necessarily the assets themselves, but what institutions are able to do with them. Today, digital assets still feel unfamiliar because they are often managed in separate environments and require dedicated attention.
In five years, I expect digital assets will be integrated into the same processes, controls, and infrastructure that institutions already use. At that point, the infrastructure will become less of a focus, and more attention will shift to the valuable services and use cases that institutions can leverage on top of it, with digital asset capabilities running in the background as a natural part of the overall post-trade environment.
What should institutions already be thinking about today if they want to engage with digital assets in a way that is scalable, compliant, and future-proof?
The key for institutions is to think beyond individual use cases and focus on building the right foundation. That means asking how digital assets can fit into the broader operating model, rather than solving isolated opportunities.
Institutions should be thinking about governance, infrastructure, and scalability from the beginning. If those elements are in place, expanding into digital assets becomes a gradual and manageable evolution rather than a disruptive transformation.
Thank you, Marco!