Spiko Raises $90M to Scale Tokenized Cash Funds Across Europe
Tokenized cash management just got a significant vote of institutional confidence. On 6 October 2026, Spiko announced a $90 million Series B funding round, pushing its total capital raised to $120 million and its assets under management to $2.7 billion. For accounting firms, CFOs, and finance directors across Europe, the announcement is more than a funding story: it raises immediate questions about how these instruments sit inside a balance sheet, how they are audited, and whether existing stablecoin accounting policies are fit for purpose as on-chain cash management goes mainstream.
What Spiko Does and Why the Round Matters
Spiko designs and distributes regulated cash funds directly, giving businesses access through a web and mobile interface as well as an API that financial companies can embed into their own products. The funds are tokenized on multiple public blockchains, which means the underlying units of the fund are represented as tokens and can interact with smart contracts on the same infrastructure used by decentralised protocols.
That architecture is the commercial hook: because the cash is programmable, a treasurer can set rules to sweep excess operating cash automatically into a fund at the end of each day while keeping a defined liquidity buffer available for payroll and supplier payments. The company describes this as making cash "programmable," a feature that goes well beyond what a traditional money-market fund accessible via a bank portal typically offers.
The Investors Behind the Round
The Series B was led by New Enterprise Associates, with participation from Index Ventures, Bpifrance, Speedinvest, and Wintermute Ventures. Angel investors in the round include former Bundesbank president Axel Weber, a name that carries weight in European central banking and regulatory circles. The involvement of Bpifrance, the French public investment bank, adds a semi-sovereign dimension to the cap table that is notable for a firm seeking to expand across EU member states.
Scale Relative to Established Players
Spiko stated, citing data from RWA.xyz, that its tokenized cash-fund range is now larger than those of BlackRock and Franklin Templeton when measured specifically within the tokenized cash-fund category. The company was careful to clarify that this comparison is limited to that category and does not reflect the overall assets under management of those institutions. Still, for a firm that has reached $2.7 billion in AUM across euro, dollar, sterling, and Swiss franc-denominated funds, the claim illustrates how rapidly the tokenized fund sector is consolidating around a handful of issuers.
Expansion into Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, and the Nordics
Spiko will use the new capital to open local operations across Germany, Italy, Spain, the Netherlands, and the Nordic countries, while also launching new funds and growing its team. The geographic focus is significant: all four named EU member states are subject to the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA), which came into full effect in late 2024, and each has its own nuances in how financial regulators are interpreting tokenized fund structures.
Regulatory Context for EU Operations
Tokenized money-market or cash funds do not automatically fall within MiCA's scope, which primarily addresses crypto-assets and stablecoins rather than tokenized units of traditional regulated funds. Instead, they typically remain under the UCITS or AIFMD frameworks, with the tokenization layer governed by the EU's DLT Pilot Regime or national sandbox arrangements. Firms onboarding Spiko's product in Germany will still need to satisfy BaFin's expectations around digital-asset custody and client disclosure. In the Netherlands, the AFM's ongoing review of tokenized fund structures adds another layer of due diligence. For a full picture of how MiCA interacts with regulated digital-asset products in the EU, see our coverage of what MiCA means for regulated digital-asset products in the EU.
The involvement of more than 10,000 businesses and individuals across 25-plus jurisdictions suggests Spiko's compliance infrastructure is already operating at scale, but local operations in new markets will require country-specific AML onboarding, beneficial ownership documentation, and potentially local depositary arrangements depending on the fund structure used in each jurisdiction.
Accounting Implications for Finance Teams and Their Auditors
The growth of tokenized cash funds as a treasury tool creates a set of accounting questions that are not yet fully resolved under IFRS or local GAAP. Getting these right matters whether you are a CFO deciding where to park operating cash or an auditor signing off on a client's digital-asset holdings.
Classification Under IFRS 9
The first question is classification. A tokenized cash fund unit is not cash or a cash equivalent in the traditional sense, even if its economic purpose is to hold highly liquid, low-risk assets. Under IFRS 9, the instrument needs to be assessed on its contractual cash flow characteristics and the business model under which it is held. If the token represents a redeemable unit in a regulated fund, it is likely to be classified as a financial asset measured at fair value through profit or loss, unless a specific FVOCI designation applies. That means mark-to-market movements flow through the income statement, which has implications for earnings volatility reporting, particularly for entities with significant treasury balances.
The "Programmable Cash" Accounting Challenge
The programmable sweep feature Spiko describes adds a further layer of complexity. If an entity's treasury system is automatically moving cash between a current account and a tokenized fund based on pre-set rules, the frequency and volume of those movements could affect how the position is presented in the statement of cash flows. Movements between cash and near-cash instruments must be carefully documented to ensure they are not inadvertently netted or misclassified. Auditors will want to see a clear audit trail of every on-chain transaction, matched to the entity's general ledger, and reconciled at each reporting date.
USDC Accounting and Multi-Currency Fund Considerations
Spiko's dollar-denominated fund raises USDC accounting adjacencies for firms already holding stablecoins. If an entity accesses the dollar fund via a stablecoin on-ramp, or if the tokenized fund units are denominated and settled in a dollar stablecoin, the entity needs a clear policy distinguishing the stablecoin leg from the fund unit itself. IAS 21 foreign currency translation rules will apply to non-functional-currency fund positions, adding an FX layer on top of the fair-value movements. For Swiss franc-denominated holdings in particular, where the CHF often functions as a safe-haven currency with low yield, the accounting treatment and disclosure requirements around foreign currency risk should be explicit in the notes to the financial statements. For a deeper look at the broader landscape of how stablecoin accounting works under current standards, our earlier analysis covers the key policy gaps firms need to address now.
Tax Considerations Across Key EU Jurisdictions
Tokenized fund units are a relatively new instrument, and tax authorities in Germany, Italy, Spain, and the Netherlands have not all issued specific guidance on how they should be treated. What follows reflects the general principles that are most likely to apply based on existing rules, but firms should seek local advice before relying on any particular position.
Germany
In Germany, the Investmentsteuergesetz (InvStG) governs the taxation of fund income for both corporate and individual investors. Whether a tokenized fund unit qualifies as an "investment fund" under InvStG, or whether it falls outside that regime and is taxed under general rules, depends on the fund's structure and authorisation. If the fund is a regulated UCITS or AIF, the InvStG partial exemption system may apply, reducing the effective tax rate on distributions for corporate holders. If it falls outside the regime, income and gains are taxed in full at the standard corporate rate. German corporate treasurers deploying capital into Spiko's euro or dollar fund should confirm the classification with their tax adviser before booking the first trade.
Italy and Spain
Both Italy and Spain apply withholding taxes on fund distributions to non-resident investors, with rates varying depending on the applicable double tax treaty. For corporate entities resident in either country investing in a Luxembourg or Irish-domiciled fund, the domestic fund tax regime rather than a crypto-specific framework will generally apply. Neither jurisdiction has issued specific guidance on tokenized fund units as a distinct category, so the starting position is that existing fund tax rules govern, with the tokenization being treated as a delivery mechanism rather than a change in the nature of the instrument.
The Netherlands
Dutch corporate taxpayers are subject to vennootschapsbelasting on income and gains from fund holdings. The Netherlands has a participation exemption that can shelter gains on qualifying holdings, but cash fund units held as treasury instruments are unlikely to meet the qualifying threshold. Dutch entities should also consider whether the programmable sweep feature creates any issues under the Dutch tax classification rules for hybrid instruments, particularly where the fund unit and the underlying blockchain token are treated as separate assets for legal versus tax purposes.
What Firms Should Do Now
The growth of tokenized cash funds from a niche product into a $2.7 billion category with backing from institutional investors and a former central bank president is a signal that these instruments will appear on client balance sheets with increasing frequency. Accounting firms and in-house finance teams should treat this as a prompt to act, not to observe.
Practical Steps for Accounting and Finance Professionals
First, update your digital asset accounting policy to explicitly address tokenized fund units as a separate instrument class, distinct from stablecoins, utility tokens, and direct cryptocurrency holdings. The classification, measurement, and disclosure requirements differ and should not be handled by analogy with a policy written for Bitcoin or Ether.
Second, confirm that your crypto accounting software or digital asset accounting software can ingest on-chain transaction data from the blockchains Spiko uses, match those transactions to fund subscriptions and redemptions in the general ledger, and produce a reconciliation that an auditor can rely on. Manual processes are a significant audit risk when the volume and frequency of programmable sweeps is high.
Third, brief your tax team on the multi-currency dimension. Funds denominated in euros, dollars, sterling, and Swiss francs each carry their own FX exposure under IAS 21, and the tax treatment of realised FX gains may differ by jurisdiction. A single treasury policy that ignores the currency layer will produce errors at year-end.
Finally, consider the due diligence your firm or your clients need to perform before onboarding any tokenized fund product. Regulated or not, the on-chain settlement layer introduces counterparty, smart contract, and custody risks that a traditional fund investment does not carry. Your AML and compliance function should review the product documentation, the blockchain infrastructure, and the custody arrangements as part of standard new-product onboarding.
Frequently Asked Questions
Is a tokenized cash fund unit the same as a stablecoin for accounting purposes?
No. A stablecoin is a crypto-asset whose value is pegged to a reference asset, typically held by an issuer. A tokenized fund unit represents a redeemable share in a regulated investment fund; its value reflects the net asset value of the fund's underlying holdings. They are legally and economically distinct instruments, and your accounting policy should treat them separately, typically as financial assets at FVTPL for the fund unit, while stablecoin classification remains an open standards question under IFRS.
How should programmable cash sweeps appear in the statement of cash flows?
Each automated movement between a current account and a tokenized fund should be recorded as a cash outflow on subscription and a cash inflow on redemption. They cannot be netted unless the entity meets the specific netting criteria in IAS 7. Frequent, high-volume sweeps can create presentation complexity, so a clear treasury policy and robust crypto bookkeeping software that captures every on-chain event is essential before go-live.
Does MiCA cover tokenized fund units?
Generally, no. Tokenized units of regulated investment funds are excluded from MiCA's scope and remain governed by existing fund regulation frameworks such as UCITS or AIFMD, together with the EU's DLT Pilot Regime where applicable. However, if the product also involves a stablecoin in the subscription or redemption process, that stablecoin leg may be subject to MiCA's e-money token or asset-referenced token rules depending on its structure.
Which blockchains does Spiko use, and does the choice affect accounting?
Spiko stated that its funds are issued on multiple public blockchains but did not specify which ones in the announcement reviewed for this article. The blockchain choice can affect accounting indirectly: different chains carry different gas-fee structures, settlement finality periods, and smart-contract audit histories. Gas fees paid by the entity to interact with the fund should be expensed as transaction costs unless they are directly attributable to acquiring the fund unit, in which case they may be capitalised as part of the cost of the financial asset under IAS 39 legacy policies or IFRS 9.
What audit evidence should firms gather for tokenized fund holdings?
Auditors should obtain a fund administrator confirmation or NAV statement from the fund's administrator or depositary, cross-referenced against on-chain holdings verified via a blockchain explorer or a custody attestation. The on-chain balance, the fund register entry, and the general ledger balance must all reconcile at the reporting date. Smart-contract interaction logs should be retained as part of the entity's transaction documentation, and any automated sweep events should be supported by system-generated logs from the treasury management system.
Source: The Block