Cross-chain RWA isn’t a “bridge integration” problem; it’s an issuance, compliance, and settlement problem that happens to be multichain. Here’s exactly how to move tokenized assets between networks in 2026 without breaking your risk controls—or your roadmap.

Title: Cross-Chain RWA: How to Move Tokenized Assets Between Networks

Hook: the technical headache you’re probably wrestling with

• You issued on Ethereum because custody, auditors, and fund ops tooling exist there—but your liquidity, market venues, or end-users live on Solana, Base, or an app-chain. Now you need to move regulated fund shares and cash legs cross-chain with identity-gated transfers, chain-specific finality, and atomic DvP—all while procurement is asking for regulatory references and uptime SLAs.
• Meanwhile, “wrapped” assets fragment liquidity and break compliance registries; a wrong choice here means non-transferable shares, orphaned allowlists, or a stuck cash leg. Add live migrations—like Circle’s CCTP V1 deprecation by July 31, 2026 and non-EVM chain transitions (e.g., Sei’s EVM-only pivot)—and you’ve got potential asset inaccessibility if you miss the window. (circle.com)

Agitate: the risks of getting this wrong

• Missed regulatory dates: Basel’s cryptoasset disclosure framework and targeted amendments are effective January 1, 2026. If your cross-chain design obfuscates exposures or stablecoin criteria, your bank counterparties will push back—or walk. (bis.org)
• Liquidity stranded on the wrong rail: tokenized U.S. Treasuries grew roughly 125% in 2025 to early 2026; funds like BlackRock’s BUIDL crossed $1B AUM in March 2025 and became collateral inputs elsewhere. If your architecture can’t follow the liquidity to the chain where it’s used, your product underperforms. (cryptoslate.com)
• Interop security incidents: if you ship with single-attestor bridging and no rate limits, your RWA can become the next headline. Use stacks that let you configure attestation thresholds, independent verifiers, and per-chain velocity caps. (wormhole.com)

Who this is for (target audience + their required keywords)

• Head of Digital Assets at global asset managers and banks seeking “ISO 20022 instruction flows,” “atomic DvP,” “Basel disclosure tables,” and “NAV-sourced oracles.”
• Fund Operations and Transfer Agents who care about “share-class aware cross-chain transfers,” “identity-gated registries (ERC‑3643),” and “audit-ready event logs.”
• Treasury and Liquidity leads looking for “CCTP Fast Transfer,” “cash leg burn-and-mint,” and “chain finality alignment.”
• Procurement/InfoSec requiring “configurable verification (DVN),” “rate-limited bridges,” and “SOX-aligned change control with rollbacks.”

The 2026 cross-chain RWA toolbox (what actually works now)

1. Cash leg (USDC) that’s native—not wrapped

• Use Circle’s CCTP (canonical V2) for burn-and-mint USDC between supported chains. V2 adds Standard and Fast Transfer modes, transfer hooks, and a growing chain set; V1 begins manual phase-out July 31, 2026. Build for V2 now. (circle.com)
• For Cosmos, USDC native to Noble routes across IBC; CCTP on Noble provides the canonical burn-and-mint path from EVM to Cosmos app-chains. This unifies the USDC cash leg for RWA subscriptions and redemptions entering/exiting Cosmos venues. (usdc.com)

1. Regulated share units that preserve compliance across chains

• For permissioned securities, implement ERC‑3643 (T‑REX): identity-based transfer controls at the contract layer, now moving toward ISO standardization with accelerating institutional adoption and integrations (e.g., Hedera’s Asset Tokenization Studio). This keeps your allowlist portable and auditable across chains. (erc3643.org)
• When you must be multichain, avoid ad-hoc wrappers. Use frameworks that make your token “native” on each destination with unified supply accounting and governance.

1. Interoperability rails to move the asset safely

• Wormhole Native Token Transfers (NTT) for native, share-class-aware movement (burn-and-mint or hub-and-spoke), with a global accountant, per-chain rate limits, and support for custom verifiers alongside the Guardian set. This gives you M-of-N attestation and operational circuit breakers. (wormhole.com)
• Chainlink CCIP with the Cross-Chain Token (CCT) standard to make tokens available across 50+ chains, programmable token transfers for cross-chain DvP, and private transactions for bank-grade data handling. Adoption accelerated in 2025 (e.g., Solana integration, Ronin canonical bridge, Lido/Aave upgrades). (blog.chain.link)
• LayerZero v2 with Decentralized Verifier Networks (DVNs) to “compose your security”: combine oracles/bridges/enterprise signers (e.g., Google Cloud, Blockdaemon) per application and change later via governance—useful for procurement and risk committees that demand vendor redundancy. (medium.com)

1. Messaging and bank rails for offchain instruction flows

• Swift + Chainlink CRE and the Digital Transfer Agent (DTA) standard let you drive tokenized fund subscription/redemption via ISO 20022 messages from existing systems, while Swift’s interoperability experiments showed multi-network tokenized transfers at scale. This is how you align with existing TA ops without replatforming. (blog.chain.link)

Why this matters for GTM now

• Tokenized treasuries and MMFs are the liquidity spine for RWA settlement. BUIDL’s ascent and the category’s expansion create “programmable cash” loops as collateral and treasury instruments; your product must plug into these flows to win mandates. (coindesk.com)
• Interop leaders are standardizing. Securitize selected Wormhole as primary interop, enabling multi-share-class funds to move across networks—exactly the share-class nuance TAs need. (wormhole.com)
• Compliance is converging. Basel’s 2026 disclosure framework and targeted amendments, plus ERC‑3643’s push toward ISO, give procurement the regulatory hooks they want to see in your architecture docs. (bis.org)

7Block Labs methodology: de-risked cross-chain RWA in four sprints Sprint 0 — Regulatory and system-of-record alignment

• Map the legal instrument and registrar of record, then decide “canonical chain of issuance” and “accounting truth” for total supply.
• Choose identity and compliance stack: ERC‑3643 identity registry, off-chain KYC provider, and optional zero-knowledge proofs for selective disclosure.
• Define cash leg routing (CCTP V2 pathing, chain support, attestation flow) and redemption windows to meet fund docs.

Sprint 1 — Interop and compliance architecture

• We design an Interop Decision Matrix:
  • Cash: CCTP V2 Standard vs Fast Transfer; Cosmos routing via Noble CCTP + IBC.
  • Shares: Wormhole NTT (hub-and-spoke vs burn-and-mint) vs CCIP CCT; both support programmable compliance hooks and rate limits. LayerZero v2 as a secondary transport with DVNs for configurable verification. (circle.com)
• Compliance portability:
  • ERC‑3643 allowlists synchronized across chains; transfer validation integrates chain-specific KYC signals.
  • NAV and market data oracles for RWA pricing; for equities or fund-of-fund exposures, integrate Chainlink 24/5 U.S. Equities Streams to avoid after-hours blind spots. (chainlinktoday.com)

Sprint 2 — Reference implementation (Solidity + operational controls)

• Token contracts:
  • ERC‑3643-compliant share token with upgradeable access manager.
  • NTT Manager or CCIP Token Manager configured for supply sync; “global accountant” on Wormhole or CCT ledger on CCIP.
• Controls that matter to auditors:
  • Per-chain rate limits (daily notional, per-address velocity caps).
  • Emergency pause with batched “drain-to-issuer” function under multisig for containment.
  • Finality alignment built into cross-chain calls (e.g., wait for source chain finality block N or use CCTP Fast Transfer with insurance buffer for reconciliation). (wormhole.com)
• Messaging:
  • ISO 20022 subscription/redemption intake translating via CRE/DTA to onchain calls; reconciliation reports exported nightly to the TA’s system. (blog.chain.link)
• We ship this with our smart contract hardening and incident playbooks via our security practice. See our security audit services and smart contract development.

Sprint 3 — Rollout and GTM enablement

• Venue integrations and chain coverage prioritized by your liquidity plan; we pre-wire adapters for Base, Solana, and Cosmos venues where your users actually trade.
• Migrations:
  • CCTP V1→V2 cutover calendar, including attestations drain and forwarding service readiness (when available).
  • Cosmos-specific migrations for chains changing architecture (e.g., EVM-only pivots) so assets don’t strand. (circle.com)
• We pair this with ops runbooks, transfer-agent data exports, and audit trails that slot into your existing controls.

Implementation patterns we recommend in 2026

• Canonical issuance + burn-and-mint distribution
  • Keep issuance on Ethereum or your chosen “system of record” chain.
  • Use NTT (burn-and-mint) for share units; use CCTP (burn-and-mint) for USDC. This eliminates legacy wrappers, aligns supplies, and simplifies reconciliations. (wormhole.com)
• Configurable security stacks
  • Choose interop where you control the verification quorum. Example: Wormhole NTT with a 2-of-3 model (Guardians + Custom DVN), or LayerZero v2 with DVNs (e.g., Google Cloud + Axelar + CCIP adapter). Procurement can document the stack and swap components later without reissuing the asset. (wormhole.com)
• Identity-gated transfers at the token layer
  • Use ERC‑3643 so your KYC/AML posture travels cross-chain; coordinate with your TA so primary/secondary transfers remain compliant under prospectus rules. (erc3643.org)
• Bank-friendly instruction flows
  • For institutions with ISO 20022 back office, integrate Swift + CRE/DTA to trigger onchain subscriptions/redemptions from existing systems—no new consoles, fewer training cycles. (blog.chain.link)
• Data you can defend
  • Use Chainlink’s 24/5 Equities Streams and tokenized NAV oracles (e.g., NAVLink) for funds referencing offchain assets. This materially reduces liquidation or pricing anomalies outside RTH. (chainlinktoday.com)

Practical example 1: USDC cash leg from Base to dYdX Chain (Cosmos)

• Flow: Burn USDC on Base via CCTP V2 → Circle attests → Mint on Noble → IBC hop to dYdX.
• Why it’s right: You’re not wrapping; you’re receiving native USDC on Cosmos via Noble, maintaining canonical supply and minimizing operational risk. Note the V1 deprecation timeline; plan your cutover and monitoring now. (noble.xyz)
• Ops tip: Pre-fund destination gas and implement a “forwarding/relayer” service to remove end-user friction as Circle rolls this out. (circle.com)

Practical example 2: Multi-share-class tokenized MMF moving between Ethereum and Solana

• Setup: Issue ERC‑3643 share classes on Ethereum; adopt Wormhole NTT for native representation on Solana with a global accountant and rate limits; TA registry remains master on Ethereum with mirrored checks on Solana.
• Why it’s right: Securitize already uses Wormhole for multi-network funds, giving you a path with proven ops. (wormhole.com)
• Controls: Require 2-of-3 attestation (Guardian + Custom verifier + enterprise signer) for large notional transfers; queue excess notional over daily caps. (wormhole.com)

Practical example 3: Cross-chain DvP for RWA trade (bank-client workflow)

• Buyer on Solana; seller on Ethereum. Use CCIP Programmable Token Transfers to escrow the share token and USDC legs with atomic settlement across chains; if either leg fails, both revert.
• Why it’s right: Banks have already piloted CCIP for cross-chain tokenized asset settlement (e.g., ANZ), and Swift/CRE/DTA lets your TA kick off these flows from ISO 20022 rails. (chain.link)

Practical example 4: Surviving chain migrations (Sei EVM-only)

• Problem: Cosmos-native assets (including USDC.n) can become inaccessible after an EVM-only pivot.
• Fix: Monitor chain governance timelines; pre-plan swap/migration paths; add “chain exit” runbooks that unwind to native USDC and re-enter via CCTP to the EVM destination. This is a program risk, not a code bug. (blog.sei.io)

Security and auditability checklists you can hand to Procurement

• Architectural controls
  • “Global accountant” to reconcile burns/mints across chains; immutable event logs; per-chain rate limits; emergency pause; multisig + timelocks. (wormhole.com)
• Verification and redundancy
  • M-of-N attestation across independent verifiers; DVN composition with enterprise signers; documented ability to rotate or add verifiers without reissuing securities. (medium.com)
• Compliance posture
  • ERC‑3643 identity registry evidence; on-chain enforcement of transfer restrictions; mapping to prospectus rules and Basel disclosure tables. (erc3643.org)
• Data integrity
  • 24/5 equities and NAV oracles; stale-price guards; market-status flags for after-hours trading states. (chainlinktoday.com)

Emerging practices we endorse for 2026

• Prefer native over wrapped: use CCTP for USDC and NTT/CCT for shares; eliminate liquidity splits and simplify audits. (circle.com)
• Program compliance, not just transfers: integrate ERC‑3643 and, where applicable, Chainlink ACE for automated approvals, blacklist checks, and regional constraints. (blog.chain.link)
• Make bank rails first-class: treat Swift+ISO 20022 as a primary initiation channel, not an afterthought UI. (blog.chain.link)
• Test finality and failure modes: simulate chain reorgs, relayer outages, and rate-limit breaches; verify idempotence and replay locks.

How we prove it (GTM metrics and references)

• Market proof points:
  • CCTP has processed $110B+ cumulative volume and 5.3M+ transfers as of Nov 2025; V2 is canonical going forward. (circle.com)
  • Tokenized Treasuries climbed from about $3.95B (Jan 2025) to $8.86B (Jan 2026); BUIDL crossed $1B AUM in March 2025 and became collateral in other systems. (cryptoslate.com)
  • CCIP expanded to 50+ chains with institutional and DeFi integrations (e.g., Solana integration; Ronin canonical bridge; Lido/Aave adoptions), demonstrating production-grade interop. (blog.chain.link)
  • Securitize’s Wormhole deployment explicitly enables tokenized funds with multiple share classes to move across networks—an operational requirement for TAs. (wormhole.com)
  • Swift + Chainlink CRE/DTA provide ISO 20022-driven onchain subscription/redemption—exactly the pattern Ops teams will adopt first. (blog.chain.link)
• What “good” looks like post-implementation:
  • Cut cross-chain RWA settlement to T+minutes with atomic DvP and reconciled cash/share legs.
  • Zero wrapped-share SKUs in inventory; a single security master across chains.
  • Transfer failures <0.05% with automated retries and replay locks; audit log parity across all chains.
  • Procurement-ready dossier: verification stack, rate-limit policy, ISO 20022 message maps, Basel disclosure traceability.

How we work with you (and where to learn more)

• Architecture and delivery
  • We own the interoperability decisioning, permissioned-token design, and integration with your TA and custodians; we ship tested contracts and runbooks across chains you actually need.
  • Explore our cross-chain solutions development, blockchain bridge development, and blockchain integration.
• Tokenization and app layers
  • From ERC‑3643 issuance to investor portals and venue adapters, we deliver the full RWA stack with compliance-first flows. See our asset tokenization, dApp development, and broader blockchain development services.
• Security and audits
  • We enforce “money phrases” operationally: configurable verification, global accountant, per-chain rate limits, atomic DvP, and ISO 20022-aligned ops—and we validate them through our security audit services.

Brief in-depth details (for your technical lead)

• ERC‑3643 integration
  • IdentityRegistry + ClaimIssuer + Token contracts; on transfer, check investor status and jurisdictional rules; expose hooks for cross-chain managers to call pre/post-transfer checks. (erc3643.org)
• NTT/CCIP manager wiring
  • NTT: Deploy NttManager on source/destination; set “global accountant” address; configure burn-and-mint for new tokens (or hub-and-spoke for legacy); enable per-chain quotas. CCIP: Register Token Manager, choose CCT, and configure risk tier (Standard vs Fast). (wormhole.com)
• Verification stacks
  • Wormhole: Guardian signatures + optional custom transceivers; set threshold M-of-N at the NttManager. LayerZero v2: select DVNs (Axelar/CCIP/enterprise signers) per message class; rotate via governance. (wormhole.com)
• Bank ops alignment
  • Accept ISO 20022 camt/pacs messages via CRE; map to subscription/redemption; persist a reconciliation state that links Swift MT/MX IDs to onchain tx hashes; export nightly CSVs to the TA’s system. (blog.chain.link)

Summary outcomes you can take to your steering committee

• A share token that moves natively across chains with identity-gated transfers and unified cap table.
• A cash leg that’s canonical USDC—not a wrapped derivative—on every destination chain.
• An interop stack with configurable verification, rate limits, and auditor-ready logs.
• Instruction flows your Ops team already knows (ISO 20022) driving onchain settlement.

Ready to make this real? If you’re the Head of Digital Assets or TA Ops lead at a $5B–$50B manager who needs ERC‑3643 share classes tradable on Solana and Base with USDC cash legs into dYdX by June 30, 2026 (Basel reporting included), book a 45‑minute architecture workshop. We’ll whiteboard your exact flows and return a one‑page diagram, risk controls matrix, and a fixed‑bid implementation plan using our cross-chain solutions development and asset tokenization teams—so you hit the date with confidence.

References for claims in this post:

• CCTP V2 canonical + deprecation schedule; features and chain rollout. (circle.com)
• Native USDC on Noble; CCTP live for Cosmos routing. (usdc.com)
• Basel cryptoasset disclosure framework effective Jan 1, 2026. (bis.org)
• Tokenized Treasuries growth; BUIDL AUM milestones. (cryptoslate.com)
• Wormhole NTT design; custom verifiers; rate limits; global accountant. (wormhole.com)
• CCIP expansion, CCT standard, and institutional integrations. (blog.chain.link)
• Securitize selecting Wormhole for multi-network tokenized funds. (wormhole.com)
• Swift + Chainlink CRE/DTA ISO 20022 flows; Swift interop experiments. (blog.chain.link)
• Chain migrations risk example (Sei EVM-only). (blog.sei.io)

Related 7Block Labs capabilities:

• cross-chain solutions development
• blockchain bridge development
• blockchain integration
• asset tokenization
• smart contract development
• security audit services