Some NFTs own a wallet of their own, and the collection tells you there are real assets in it: shares, cash, other tokens. That claim is checkable. Touchstone opens each wallet, prices whatever is inside at live rates, and compares it to what the NFT costs to buy.
Worked example
Here is the largest collection of this kind on Robinhood Chain, StonkBrokers, measured when this page last regenerated. The same three questions apply to any collection whose tokens own wallets.
So the assets account for a small part of the price, and the rest is what the collection says about itself.
That is not an accusation, it is a ratio, and it can be worked out for any collection in about five seconds.
A high number means the price is backed by things you can value. A low one means you are paying for the story.
Measured 2026-08-31 over 60 of 4444 tokens, recomputed every time this page regenerates.
Prices and the cheapest listing both move, so the ratio moves with them.
Live from the chain's own explorer, refreshed every minute
AAPL
Apple
$315.81
AMZN
Amazon
$258.80
NVDA
NVIDIA
$218.48
These are the only three assets StonkBrokers declares on chain, read from its own stockTokenAt() registry.
Press coverage listing TSLA, PLTR, NFLX and AMD is wrong.
A collection can ship its own ERC-6551 registry. StonkBrokers does. Derive against the canonical one and you get valid, empty addresses, which reads as a collection holding nothing. Touchstone asks the contract and says whether the two agree.
custom registry 0x28c1…4161
Balances come from the chain, unit prices from the chain's own explorer. An asset with no listed rate shows its balance and leaves book value blank rather than borrowing a number from somewhere else.
AAPL · AMZN · NVDA
One number decides whether asset backing is real or decorative: what the richest token holds against what the cheapest token costs. Under 100% there is nothing to arbitrage, and the tool says so plainly.
richest ÷ floor = 1.5%