Robinhood Faces Backlash Over Tokenized Stocks Tied to OpenAI, SpaceX

OpenAI has firmly denied any involvement in Robinhood’s recent launch of tokenized stock offerings tied to its name and that of SpaceX. The tokens, which are based on Ethereum’s blockchain, do not represent actual equity or confer any ownership rights, voting rights, or dividends. Instead, they offer price-linked exposure to the estimated valuations of these private companies through blockchain contracts hosted on Arbitrum, an Ethereum layer-2 network.

OpenAI’s denial came swiftly after Robinhood’s announcement, with the company posting a public warning on X (formerly Twitter) stating that no equity transfer had been approved and that it had not partnered with Robinhood in any way. This statement was echoed by Elon Musk, who emphasized the unease around what exactly Robinhood is selling, describing the “equity” as fake. This backlash has sparked debates about the limits of tokenization, investor protections in crypto, and the extent to which platforms can mimic exposure to high-profile companies without formal partnerships.

Robinhood claims that its new tokens provide retail investors with indirect access to private markets through a Special Purpose Vehicle (SPV) structure. These tokens track the estimated valuation of companies like OpenAI or SpaceX, with prices displayed in USD. However, U.S. residents are barred from trading these assets due to regulatory restrictions. Critics argue that these digital certificates lack transparency, real asset backing, and legal clarity, especially under U.S. securities law.

Legal experts have raised concerns about the regulatory implications of Robinhood’s offering. Kurt Watkins, founder of a U.S.-based legal firm, warned that the tokens could face serious scrutiny from the SEC if launched in the U.S. He noted that the opaque structure of the SPV behind the tokenized equity could trigger Howey Test implications, potentially classifying the product as an unregistered security. This would require a formal registration process with more robust disclosures than what Robinhood currently provides.

Watkins’ concerns highlight a broader regulatory theme: when platforms tokenize assets without consent, clear rights, or legal structure, it undermines investor protections that securities laws are built to uphold. The DeFi community has also pushed back against Robinhood’s centralized approach to tokenization, arguing that it does not align with core crypto principles of openness, decentralization, and composability. DeFi developers have noted that Robinhood’s tokenized assets cannot interact with DeFi protocols due to tight restrictions and centralized controls, potentially giving centralized platforms an unfair advantage.