Security Token or Utility Token?

[kryptqnick]

If I have to choose, I prefer utility tokens because they have less problems for KYC and taxation generally. Security tokens have more regulation problems in many countries.

I think another reason to support utility tokens is that they have actual use cases and can be a part of financial operations on the platform, just as I think it was meant to be. Security tokens, on the other hands, are more like valuable assets rather than coins for payments. I believe they generally contribute to wrong impression about cryptocurrencies and treating them not as was supposed to. KYC is important, though, whether we are talking about utility or security tokens, because something has to be done with the variety of options to do money laundering on the crypto market. In general, these types of tokens are just too different and IMO should be regulated and considered separately, since nothing but blockchain technology unites them.

[Thinkable999]

Both security token and utility token has merits and demerits. But it seems that security token is currently the one that has more potential to move forward.

[Antinomist]

I would go with security tokens due to structured offerings. It stretches a promising wide variety of actions. Security token has been manifest as the future dominant power of ICOs by many experts.

[1MORLAP]

They both come with their own sets of pros and cons. Which one do you support?

Depends what you mean by support? To invest in, Security should be the way to go, as most utility tokens will be engineered to hold a stable value. IMHO, no more Ethereum like runs, more like Sia that will stay around $0.01 forever.

I created a SECURITY token that is backed by profits from mining, and my early investors (from June!) are looking at 10x today. take a look at what I am doing, interesting idea how to reward investors. Buy back and burn.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=4627045.0.

Tomasz

[jjeeppeerrxx]

I know security tokens require more regulation and taxation etc but if you ask me im in favor of security tokens, it is not just for me, to move forward and adoption and also for competing the stocks, we need to get uniform regulation for security tokens globally and then even traditional businesses can tokenize their business for funding and everyone can become share holder.

I agree with you bro, but why are most people don't like securities token? Why most startup companies don't want their token to be a security token? I find this SEC regulation an advantage for investors because it is secure to invest but, does it affect the concept of decentralization?

[Kofiy]

I prefer Security token to utility token. Security token receive more scrutiny than utility token and this mean the project must adhere strictly to security law, especially Sec. This give more confidence about the project and also make the project to be less riskier than utility token based projects.

[Micronometer]

Comparing to utility token,security token has a much better future.It has the force to move forward and also become stronger in the future.

[kimjenglot]

Both tokens come with their pros and cons taking that into consideration a person with their specific needs can go for either a ultility token or a security one as both have their own seperate advantages.

I think more for the first time, after becoming, we can use the coin comfortably and don't need to worry. If prioritizing its use without security, of course it is very scary, so of course both are equally important

[squanhin]

Security tokens have many problems. Security tokens require more regulations in many countries. So isn't the answer very clear?

What problems?

[wayaneka]

In my opinion security token much better, because with full regulation can be avoid fraud in this crypto market, there are some ICO fraud because they not really comply with regulation, and security token also give more safe investment for investor.

[squanhin]

Comparing to utility token,security token has a much better future.It has the force to move forward and also become stronger in the future.

Very true. It's a good compromise to the world of traditional investing and the decentralized form we saw with ICO's. Security tokens are a good balance between the two, and also drive further innovation in tech.

[AgentZero23]

They both come with their own sets of pros and cons. Which one do you support?

I would definitely go with security tokens, because they comply with regulators and it validates the project is legit. Although security tokens can have a very tough process unlike utility tokens which don't have a very strict regulation. But it makes utility token much riskier to invest.

[christofyler]

I will prefer utility token thou security token is more at a safer sides but utility token is less stressful and cost less unlike security token, security token is very risky because during kyc personal information are released but as time goes on it may be use to steal or commit crimes.

[jouns]

They both come with their own sets of pros and cons. Which one do you support?

Utility tokens strongly discredit ICO as an investment tool, because these tokens immediately fall in price after listing, they are very rarely used in the future, and it makes no sense to keep them for a long time. My Choice - Security Tokens.

[victory.lil]

I would choose utility tokens, I cannot say exactly for what reason, there is probably more an intuitive choice, because there is simply nothing else, and of course security is important, but the work seems more important to me.

[avonka]

I prefer both. Having only utility tokens but  the next big trend will be security tokens. Polymath is doing for securities tokens what ETH did for utility tokens.

[Razick]

I would have to choose a security token, now in our present world, security is a big issue and it seems like everything that we are doing is being tracked and monitored so now we have to make sure that we protect ourselves. This is why I believe that security tokens are going to be the next big thing in the cryptocurrency world