Page 13

‍

• Utility and Use Cases:
  
  
  
  • PAXG: Highly versatile. You can use it in DeFi as collateral, earn yield, subdivide it as needed (0.01 oz increments). You can transfer globally quickly, which is useful for remittance or collateralizing loans internationally. It basically brings gold into the digital economy, enabling use cases like instant loans against gold, or integrating gold into crypto trading strategies.
    
    
  • Gold ETFs: Good for investment exposure in portfolios, easily integrated into brokerage accounts, eligible for margin or lending in traditional finance context (you can margin GLD or write options on it). However, it’s confined to the securities ecosystem; you can’t use GLD in a smart contract or move it outside brokerage infrastructure. It’s not redeemable for jewelry or bars that you might want to gift or use.
    
    
  • Physical: Use cases include jewelry or personal satisfaction of holding wealth tangibly. Physical can be used in barter in extremis (some see gold coins as doomsday money). You can’t directly integrate physical gold into digital financial systems (without first tokenizing it like via PAXG). But physical has cultural and emotional utility for some; for instance, gifting gold coins or using gold in religious/traditional contexts.
    
    
• Transparency:
  
  
  
  • PAXG: Paxos provides transparency through on-chain data (you can see token supply, transactions) and monthly reports (). Also, Paxos’s lookup tool gives specific bar details for tokens (Paxos | Pax Gold (PAXG)), which is a level of transparency unique to PAXG. However, this transparency is only as good as Paxos’s honesty (which is verified by audits).
    
    
  • Gold ETFs: They publish bar lists usually (GLD publishes a list of all bars and serials daily, often running thousands of pages). Authorized participants and auditors ensure the gold count matches shares. But retail investors don’t easily verify holdings beyond trusting the reports.
    
    
  • Physical: The asset is in your hand, so full transparency to you about its existence and quality (assuming you trust the assay mark on the bar/coin or get it verified). There’s no question about it being backed – it is the gold itself. Though ironically, if you have lots of physical stored remotely, you rely on vault inventory statements for transparency, similar to trusting a Paxos or ETF statement.
    
    
• Tax Considerations: (This can vary by jurisdiction.)
  
  
  
  • In the US, both PAXG and gold ETFs are considered collectibles for tax, meaning long-term gains are taxed up to 28% (higher than the 20% for stocks). So they’re equivalent. One nuance: some ETFs (like GLD) form a PFIC for non-US investors which can complicate taxes; holding PAXG might be simpler for some.
    
    
  • Physical gold sales are also taxed as collectibles. But physical coins in some countries have VAT or GST applied on purchase (e.g., some countries exempt bullion from VAT, others don’t for certain forms). PAXG being digital avoids VAT because it’s effectively a financial asset trade, not a purchase of a good.
    
    
  • PAXG trades could trigger taxable events each time one sells tokens for another asset. Same as ETF trades causing gains/losses.
    
    
• Regulatory and Accessibility:
  
  
  
  • PAXG: Accessible globally to anyone with an internet connection (unless Paxos geoblocks certain regions on their platform due to regulation, but tokens themselves can circulate). This can democratize gold access in places where buying physical or ETFs is hard. However, regulatory grey areas exist: some countries might not recognize or might restrict crypto tokens of commodities. PAXG being regulated by NYDFS gives it legitimacy, but not all jurisdictions have frameworks for it.
    
    
  • Gold ETFs: Very accessible in developed markets via stock exchanges; less accessible in countries without capital market access or where brokers don’t offer international trading. Some ETFs are cross-listed internationally, but many emerging market investors can’t easily buy them. ETFs are regulated securities; that can be a pro (investor protections) or con (less flexibility).
    
    
  • Physical: Universally recognized, though carrying gold across borders can face customs duties or limits. But in-country, anyone can typically buy from a dealer for cash. Accessibility is high in local context (buying a gold coin from a shop is simple in many countries), but low in terms of global mobility (transport and cross-border issues).
    
    

Summing Up:

• PAXG shines in flexibility and digital integration: It's like an ETF with added benefit of redeemability and usage in crypto finance. It has lower holding costs than ETFs and solves the redeemability drawback of ETFs, though with a bit more counterparty trust than holding the metal yourself. It's an ideal choice if you want both the stability of gold and the functionality of a crypto asset.
  
  
• Gold ETFs excel in simplicity for traditional investors: They slot into portfolios, are highly liquid on stock markets, and require no new infrastructure (no crypto wallets). They're best for those who don't need physical redemption and are okay with the annual fee drag in exchange for ease of trade on traditional platforms. Large institutions often prefer ETFs for convenience and because their mandates allow securities, not necessarily tokens.
  
  
• Physical Gold is about tangible ownership and independence: It's the go-to for people who distrust financial intermediaries or want to hold wealth outside the system. It's also preferred for cultural reasons (many in Asia prefer physical gold jewelry or coins). However, its downsides are liquidity friction, storage/insurance costs, and lack of income or easy divisibility for transactions.
  
  

An investor could even use a combination: PAXG for active trading or DeFi, physical for ultimate insurance or gifting, ETFs in retirement accounts (where crypto might not be allowed, but ETFs are). It depends on use-case priorities:

• If one values immediacy and global transfer, PAXG wins.
  
  
• If one values zero reliance on any company or technology, physical wins.
  
  
• If one needs integration in a traditional brokerage account or large-scale exposure with robust regulation, ETFs win (for now, until perhaps tokens become mainstream and regulated similarly).
  
  

In terms of performance, all three track gold price; differences come in net return after costs. Over a long period, PAXG could outperform an ETF by the amount of the ETF’s expense ratio, since PAXG doesn’t eat away value yearly (assuming one doesn’t frequently pay creation fees repeatedly; just buy once and hold). That could be significant: over 10 years, a 0.4% annual fee compounding means ~4% of value lost relative to spot. PAXG would preserve that if one held that long and only paid, say, 0.1-0.2% upfront.

In conclusion, PAXG offers a compelling middle ground between gold ETFs and physical gold (Paxos | Pax Gold (PAXG)) (Paxos | Pax Gold (PAXG)). It combines much of the liquidity and convenience of an ETF with some of the redeemability of physical, plus unique digital advantages. For sophisticated investors, PAXG can actually enhance gold's utility by enabling yield and easy rebalancing in a digital portfolio. Thus, when choosing among these, one should weigh factors like fee structure, need for physical access, regulatory environment, and intended use of the gold exposure. Many institutional reports now consider tokenized gold like PAXG as a viable alternative or complement to ETFs (ARC: Add PAX Gold (PAXG) Collateral & Borrow Support - New Asset - Aave), particularly for those active in both crypto and traditional markets.

‍

‍

5. Competitor Tokens and Market Position

PAX Gold operates in a niche market of tokenized gold, where its primary competitors include other gold-backed crypto tokens and digital gold offerings. The most notable among these are Tether Gold (XAU₮) and some smaller projects like DigixGlobal’s DGX (now defunct), Perth Mint Gold Token (PMGT), Aurus Gold (AWG), and others. There are also emerging platforms tokenizing gold via NFTs or private blockchains. Let’s compare PAXG’s position relative to these:

• Tether Gold (XAUt): Launched by Tether in early 2020, XAUt is the biggest competitor to PAXG by market cap and adoption. Each XAUt represents 1 troy ounce of gold (held supposedly in Swiss vaults by TG Commodities). As of 2025, XAUt’s market cap is roughly similar to PAXG’s (around $800M) (Tether Gold XAUT - COIN360), making these two the dominant players with a combined >90% of tokenized gold market (PAX Gold Token Price, PAXG to USD, Research, News & Fundraising | Messari). Key differences:
  
  
  
  • Issuer & Regulation: Tether is less regulated than Paxos. XAUt is issued by a Tether-affiliate registered in the British Virgin Islands. It doesn’t have the NYDFS oversight Paxos does. This makes some institutions less comfortable with XAUt’s transparency and governance. On the other hand, Tether has a large existing user base from USDT that may trust XAUt by extension.
    
    
  • Redeemability: XAUt allows redemption of physical gold bars as well, with a minimum of ~50 XAUt required (around 50 oz, which is smaller threshold than PAXG’s 430 oz) (Tether Gold | XAUt token | Digital Token Backed by Physical Gold). However, redemption has to be in specific locations (Switzerland) and involves a 25 bps fee (Tether Gold - The World's Leading Gold Token). In practice, not many retail users redeem XAUt; it’s mostly traded.
    
    
  • Fees: XAUt charges a flat 0.25% for creation or redemption (Tether Gold - The World's Leading Gold Token), and no ongoing storage fee (similar to PAXG’s model). They say no custody fees as well. XAUt does not (as far as known) have a transfer fee either. So cost-wise, for mid-sized transactions, XAUt is a bit pricier than what a large PAXG user would pay (0.25% vs 0.125%), but cheaper than what a small PAXG user might pay (1%). But practically, most get these tokens via exchanges, so direct fee differences aren't big factors for many.
    
    
  • Technology: XAUt is issued on Ethereum as an ERC-20 and also available on Tron as a TRC-20 token. Tron’s inclusion made it accessible with lower fees for certain markets (Tron is popular in Asia for USDT). PAXG by contrast stuck to Ethereum mainnet (so far). So Tether took a multi-chain approach which may have slightly extended XAUt’s reach in retail channels that use Tron (like some exchanges or wallets).
    
    
  • Transparency: Tether provides less granular transparency. They publish a gold bar list occasionally, but they don’t offer a per-address bar lookup like Paxos (CF Benchmarks launches PAX Gold-USD benchmark price index). Tether’s reputation for transparency is mixed (they’ve been less forthcoming in the past about their reserves with USDT, though XAUt is simpler). Paxos’s monthly attestations by a reputable auditor might be seen as more trustworthy than Tether’s attestations or lack thereof.
    
    
  • Liquidity & Adoption: Both PAXG and XAUt are widely listed. XAUt is on Bitfinex (Tether’s affiliated exchange), OKX, others; PAXG is on Binance, Coinbase, etc. Combined, Coindesk noted they exceeded $1.5B in TVL by 2025 (US SEC approved options trading for multiple spot Ether ETFs). They often trade at similar prices; sometimes XAUt can have a slightly lower liquidity on some platforms. Market cap wise, XAUt was slightly higher than PAXG in 2023 (XAUt ~$820M, PAXG ~$770M (Tether Gold XAUT - COIN360)), but PAXG caught up in 2024-25. It's a tight race. Many consider PAXG and XAUt as the two main options: PAXG favored by those who value regulation and trust Paxos/NY, XAUt favored by those already in the Tether ecosystem or who want a slightly lower redemption threshold.
    
    
• Digix (DGX): Digix was an early pioneer (2016 ICO) issuing 1g gold tokens on Ethereum. It had some initial uptake in Asia but faced problems (low liquidity, high fees, governance issues). By 2020-21, Digix usage dwindled and the project effectively wound down active operations. Many early DGX holders migrated to PAXG for better liquidity and 1 oz unit size. Digix’s struggles highlighted that trust and liquidity are crucial – Paxos and Tether, with more capital and clearer regulatory stance, overtook DGX.
  
  
• Perth Mint Gold Token (PMGT): Launched 2019, backed by the government-guaranteed Perth Mint in Australia. PMGT represents a share of gold stored at Perth Mint (1 PMGT = 1 oz). Strength: government guarantee of the gold (Perth Mint is state-owned). However, uptake was extremely limited – possibly due to restrictive access (it wasn’t widely listed on major exchanges, mostly on an Australian platform) and maybe KYC friction. As of 2025, PMGT’s market cap is tiny (a few million at best). PAXG’s superior exchange presence and marketing overshadowed it. It remains a credible token technically, but not a significant competitor in market share or liquidity.
  
  
• AurusGOLD (AWG): A smaller project by Aurus where gold providers create tokens. It's not as centralized – a more decentralized consortia model. AWG hasn’t gained major traction or listings. It's an example of smaller tokenized gold attempts that have niche usage. PAXG still dwarfs them.
  
  
• Digital Gold via Banks: Some banks or fintechs offer digital gold accounts (not on blockchain, just ledger entries). For example, UK’s Royal Mint had digital gold products, Turkey’s banks let customers hold gold in accounts. These are competitors in a broader sense for people who just want price exposure. But they lack transferability or DeFi use, so they’re not global like PAXG. However, if a large bank (say JPMorgan) launched its own gold token for clients, that could become a competitor down the line, especially for institutional trust. None such widely available as of 2025, though UBS and others have done pilot tokenizations.
  
  
• Central Bank digital currency or official sector: If central banks or institutions created a token (like a “digital gold reserve asset”), that could compete. But more likely they’d integrate with existing (for instance, there’s talk of using blockchain for LBMA settlements). That could actually bolster PAXG’s use if it plugs into that ecosystem.
  
  

Market Position of PAXG: PAXG is generally regarded as the most trusted and transparent gold token due to Paxos’s brand and regulation. In analyses by crypto research firms, PAXG is often cited as the gold standard (pun intended) for tokenized commodities (ARC: Add PAX Gold (PAXG) Collateral & Borrow Support - New Asset - Aave). XAUt is its only equal in market share, but Tether’s controversies (with USDT and lack of full audits historically) make risk-aware investors lean towards PAXG. For example, a family office might choose PAXG because they know Paxos is a regulated trust company and KPMG attests reserves, whereas Tether’s reputation might give pause.

PAXG also has an edge in integration with US-based platforms (Coinbase, for instance, only listed PAXG, not XAUt). Meanwhile, XAUt had an edge on some Asia platforms (Bitfinex obviously, some others). But Binance listed both at different points (Binance had PAXG; FTX before collapse listed PAXG; Bitfinex favored XAUt; Coinbase only PAXG). So PAXG may slightly edge out in Western markets; XAUt in some Eastern markets. Combined, they dominate.

‍

Thank you for taking the time to read this article. We invite you to explore more content on our blog for additional insights and information.

https://www.thestandard.io/blog  

‍

"If you have any comments, questions, or suggestions, please do not hesitate to reach out to us at [ https://discord.gg/K72hed6FRE ]. We appreciate your feedback and look forward to hearing from you."

‍

CLICK HERE TO CONTINUE

PAGE 14: www.thestandard.io/blog/pax-gold-paxg-digital-golds-safe-haven-in-the-2025-crypto-storm-14