In a post on Friday, Vlad Tenev said securities issuers should control shareholder rights, but not separate products that track their publicly traded shares.
- Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev said public companies should not be able to block stock tokens that provide exposure to their shares without changing shareholder rights.
- The argument pushes back on AMC CEO Adam Aron, who has demanded Robinhood stop offering AMC-linked tokens and threatened to raise the issue with the SEC.
- The clash highlights a wider debate over whether stock tokens are actual shares or separate financial products and what rights investors get when they buy them.
Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev sharpened his defense of stock tokens late Friday, arguing that public companies should not be able to block third parties from creating blockchain-based products tied to their shares.
The comments, posted on X, add another chapter to Tenev’s feud with AMC Entertainment CEO Adam Aron, who has demanded Robinhood stop offering tokens linked to AMC shares. Aron threatened to take the dispute to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission when he made the demand last week.
Tenev said the key question is not whether a product uses a blockchain but what rights it creates.
“A company should control the rights attached to its shares — not every lawful use of those shares once they’re in investors’ hands,” he wrote. “Going onchain shouldn’t give the issuer a veto it never had offchain.”
Robinhood launched its stock tokens outside the U.S. this year, offering exposure to hundreds of American stocks and exchange-traded funds (ETFs). Tenev said Friday that the products are separate financial instruments backed 1:1 by underlying shares that give investors economic exposure without putting token holders on a company’s shareholder register or changing the rights attached to its stock.
“If it creates a separate financial instrument that holds or references freely transferable shares without changing the issuer’s rights, obligations, or authoritative shareholder record, issuer consent should not be required,” Tenev wrote.
That distinction is where AMC’s Aron and Tenev disagree.
Aron has called Robinhood’s product a “fictitious synthetic equity market” and argued that it could weaken AMC’s ability to raise capital, confuse investors about their rights and create a market bearing AMC’s name without the company’s consent.
Tenev, on the other hand, argued existing markets already allow similar arrangements. Options, unsponsored American depositary receipts and structured products can reference public shares without giving the underlying company control over the product.
He drew a line at products that alter the shares themselves. If a token changes shareholder rights, replaces a company’s official stock ledger or creates new obligations for the issuer or its transfer agent, Tenev said the company should have a say.
“If a product purports to change the rights attached to the underlying shares, replaces the company’s official stock ledger, or imposes new obligations on the company or its transfer agent, the issuer should be involved,” he wrote.
The disagreement matters beyond AMC and Robinhood. Firms are testing several ways to put stock exposure on blockchains, from synthetic products to conventional shares held by custodians and issuer-backed shares recorded directly onchain.
Those structures can give buyers very different rights. Tenev said Robinhood chose its model so it could offer tokens across countries and thousands of assets without asking each company to participate. He also left room for changes as regulators develop rules for the market.
“Investors should know what they own, what rights it carries, and whether the issuer is involved,” Tenev wrote.
AI Disclaimer: Parts of this article were generated with the assistance from AI tools and reviewed by our editorial team to ensure accuracy and adherence to our standards. For more information, see CoinDesk’s full AI Policy.
