By Pavel Menshikov
Chief Technology Officer, ATME
When we started the ATME project in 2023, our technical conviction was clear.
For real world asset tokenization, a private permissioned blockchain felt like the most rational choice.
At the time, the reasoning was straightforward and widely shared across enterprise FinTech.
First, private permissioned networks provide deterministic governance. You know exactly who operates nodes, who validates transactions, and how changes are introduced. For regulated RWA use cases, this level of operational control significantly simplifies compliance and auditability.
Second, data confidentiality is structurally embedded. Asset registers, investor data, cap tables, and transaction histories can be selectively disclosed, which is critical when working with banks, issuers, and regulators who are not ready for full on-chain transparency.
Third, performance and predictability matter. Private networks offer stable fees, predictable throughput, and no exposure to public network congestion or fee spikes, which makes them easier to integrate into enterprise-grade transactional systems.
At that stage, private permissioned blockchain felt not just safer, but simply more mature.
Two years later, working with real clients and their real needs challenged our assumptions.
What We Learned from the Market
Despite all the undeniable advantages of private blockchains in security and confidentiality, we saw a clear and growing demand for RWA tokenization on public blockchains.
And this demand was not driven by ideology. It was driven by business.
- Public blockchains offer native liquidity and composability. Tokens issued on public networks can integrate with wallets, custodians, DeFi protocols, and secondary markets without bespoke infrastructure. This dramatically reduces time to market for issuers looking beyond closed ecosystems.
- They enable global distribution by default. Investors already operate on public chains. For many issuers, especially those targeting cross-border capital, meeting investors where they already are is simply more efficient than onboarding them into a closed network.
- And finally, public chains provide transparent trust. In certain asset classes, radical transparency becomes an advantage rather than a liability. Immutable transaction histories and open verification reduce reliance on intermediaries and increase confidence among digitally native investors.
In short, public blockchains trade control for reach, and in many cases, that trade makes sense.
The Pivot
In Q4 of 2025, we made a strategic decision.
Instead of debating which model is “right”, we started transforming ATME into a blockchain agnostic platform.
Today, our platform already supports the issuance and trading of RWA tokens on Polygon, a network that combines EVM compatibility, scalability, and a mature institutional ecosystem.
Next, we are extending support to other EVM-compatible blockchains and to Solana, acknowledging its growing relevance in high-performance financial use cases.
This shift was not about chasing trends, but about aligning technology with real client needs. And the question we normally get when we explain this shift is: how do you maintain regulatory compliance on a public blockchain?
It’s a fair question, and the answer is architectural.
Compliance is not a property of the blockchain itself, but a property of the access layer built on top of it. Our platform enforces identity verification during the onboarding process, ensures token transfers to only whitelisted wallets through smart contracts, monitors all on-chain activity through blockchain analytics, and requires AML checks before any token leaves the platform.
The result is a system where tokens live on a public blockchain but operate within a controlled, auditable perimeter. The openness of the network provides the liquidity and composability benefits, while the access layer ensures compliance.
One Market, Multiple Architectures
The past two years reinforced a simple truth: There is no universally superior blockchain model.
Private or public. Permissioned or permissionless.
Each has unique properties that can be optimal for a specific issuer, asset class, regulatory context, or investor base.
Some clients prioritize confidentiality and regulatory control. Others prioritize liquidity and global accessibility. Many want the option to evolve from one model to another over time.
Going blockchain-agnostic is our strategic commitment to meet different clients where they are, with the compliance and operational agility they expect from a regulated exchange.
If the future of capital markets is heterogeneous, then the platforms operating within them must be flexible by design.
That is the infrastructure we’re building toward.
