
Crazino
@crazino
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
1 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
1 reply
1 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
1 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
The S-1 filing is crystal clear, this is about the PENGU ETF, not Pudgy Penguins NFTs. Yet, there’s still confusion. Many assume an ETF linked to Pudgy Penguins must involve NFTs, but that’s not what’s happening here
Why $PENGU, the token, and not the NFTs?
1. The ETF is for PENGU, Not NFTs
If the focus was on NFTs, the filing would mention NFT backed assets or tokenized index funds. It doesn’t.
This is a fungible asset, structured in a way that aligns with traditional financial markets.
2. Why an ETF Needs a Fungible Token, Not NFTs
ETFs work best with liquid, easily tradable assets.
NFTs are non fungible, meaning each one is unique and lacks the volume necessary for efficient ETF trading.
A fungible token like PENGU is more suitable because it can be traded like any other digital asset.
3. What This Means for the Future of Web3 Finance
A shift in strategy: Pudgy Penguins might be a brand first ecosystem, but PENGU is the financial asset being positioned. 1 reply
0 recast
0 reaction
0 reply
0 recast
0 reaction