FINMA is the Swiss Financial Market Supervisory Authority. In 2018 it introduced a systematic distinction that still anchors the field today, classifying tokens into three categories:
- Payment tokens — digital means of payment (classical “cryptocurrencies” such as Bitcoin), backed only by supply and demand.
- Utility tokens — access to a platform or application; digital admission tickets rather than investments.
- Asset tokens — the digital form of a classical security, representing a real economic claim.
This taxonomy is why, in Switzerland, “crypto” and “a tokenised security” are not treated as the same thing — a distinction that matters enormously for investors and regulators alike.
What FINMA does and does not do. FINMA licenses and supervises financial intermediaries: banks, securities firms, fund managers, insurers and, since the DLT Act, DLT trading facilities. It does not approve individual tokens or vouch for issuers. Its 2018 guidelines on initial coin offerings, with the 2019 supplement, set out how it classifies tokens as payment, utility or asset tokens, and an asset token is treated as a security. Prospectuses for public offers are reviewed not by FINMA but by reviewing bodies licensed under FinSA.
Why it matters for robot ownership. The phrase “FINMA-regulated” is used loosely in marketing. For a robot pool, the relevant questions are whether the issuer or its partners hold a licence for what they do (custody, trading, asset management), whether the token has been classified correctly as a security, and whether the offer follows the prospectus and information rules. A project can be fully compliant without FINMA ever having looked at its token, and a project can name FINMA without holding any licence.
What to check. Ask which entity holds which licence, or which exemption is relied on; whether client onboarding includes identity checks under anti-money-laundering rules; and whether the issuer states plainly that FINMA has not approved the token. Precise answers are a good sign; vague ones are not.