A Visual Guide to the Howey Test

  •   Comments

Disclaimer: I am  not a lawyer, and I am not your lawyer. 

I have been in an uncountable number of conversations over the past few years discussing the question of what defines a “security” in the context of cryptocurrencies, cryptonetworks, and token offerings. 

Here is my current understanding, including a number of key questions I am still working on.  I invite any and all corrections to this visual framework.  And I should note that this is a high-level framework: the nuanced details are the subject of many enforcements, settlements, and litigations and will be worked out over a long-period of time to come.

First: the what constitutes a “security” has been defined by the courts more specifically as an “investment contract”, which is a transaction with the following properties:

  1. An investment of money
  2. With the expectation of profits
  3. In a so-called “common enterprise” (roughly meaning: investors and the company rise and fall together)
  4. From the efforts of a promoter or third party (some dispute over whether this means “solely” from a promoter, but clear that it entails “significant managerial efforts” of a single promoter)

This four-part test was established as part of SEC vs. Howey, a 1946 supreme court case involving the sale of tracts in an orange grove, with an associated lease-back arrangement where buyers of the land leased the land back to the Howey corporation in exchange for profits generated from cultivation of orange crops.  This so-called “Howey Test” is now the basis for determining whether such a transaction constitutes an “investment contract” and would therefore fall under securities laws (with all associated registration and disclosure requirements).

The way the test works is that, if the contract satisfies all 4 “prongs”, it “passes” the Howey Test and is therefore a securities transaction. If the contract does not satisfy any one of the prongs, it fails the Howey Test and is therefore is not a securities transaction. 

The 4 prongs of the Howey Test

Ok, with all of that as background, here is how I see the Howey Test — 4 prongs that all need to be satisfied:

So, if you were to start to think about how to “knock out” prongs of the test, thereby removing a transaction from securities status, you’d start one-by-one.

1) Remove the “investment of money” and what you have looks more like a Gift (think: receiving airline miles, or ride credits on Uber, or “airdrops” of tokens in a crypto network)

2) Remove the “expectation of profit” and what you have looks more like a product  (think: pre-buying a backpack or movie on Kickstarter, purchasing laundry or arcade tokens, or buying Stacks Tokens to insert records in the Blockstack blockchain):

3) Remove the “common enterprise” and what you get looks more like a collectible (think unique items like stamps, baseball cards, or CryptoKitties):

4) Finally, remove the “efforts of a promoter or third party” and what you get looks more like a commodity (think gold, wheat, or Bitcoin or Ethereum):

All together, it looks like this:

Is a “security” an asset or a transaction?

A key question throughout all of this is whether the “security” is the digital asset itself, or instead the transaction involving the digital asset.

In a key speech by the head of SEC’s Corporate Finance Division, Bill Hinman, earlier this year, he addressed this question head on:

To start, we should frame the question differently and focus not on the digital asset itself, but on the circumstances surrounding the digital asset and the manner in which it is sold. To that end, a better line of inquiry is: “Can a digital asset that was originally offered in a securities offering ever be later sold in a manner that does not constitute an offering of a security?” In cases where the digital asset represents a set of rights that gives the holder a financial interest in an enterprise, the answer is likely “no.” In these cases, calling the transaction an initial coin offering, or “ICO,” or a sale of a “token,” will not take it out of the purview of the U.S. securities laws.

But what about cases where there is no longer any central enterprise being invested in or where the digital asset is sold only to be used to purchase a good or service available through the network on which it was created? I believe in these cases the answer is a qualified “yes.”

The Hinman speech clarified two things: 1) that by knocking out the “efforts of others” prong of the Howey Test (#4 above) a crypto asset transaction can be viewed through the lens of commodities vs securities and 2) that an early transaction of that asset (in this case the pre-sale of ETH) can be analyzed under Howey distinctly from a later sale, given different facts and circumstances at the time.

This last part is really important, and I still have a hard time pinning down (really smart, expensive) lawyers on the subject.  There is an idea that a “security” is a thing rather than a transaction, which does seem at odds with both Howey and the Hinman speech.    In the case of Howey, the oranges produced under the contract are not the same as the contract itself (similar to contracts for future tokens), and in the case of the Hinman speech, it’s the transaction rather than the underlying token (BTC or ETH).

Finally taking all of this together, it’s important to remember that 1) there are many kinds of cryptoassets, and 2) they are offered/sold/traded/transferred under different circumstances over time. I think about it like this:

I hope that is helpful.  This is complicated stuff, and new territory.

Crypto Fundamentals

  •   Comments

Our good friend Chris Burniske was on Squawk Box this morning. I got up and watched it.  You can see the video here. Of course there is interest in the crypto market right now, as it is falling hard. I suspect there are many out there who are enjoying the drop, waiting for the bubble… Read more »

Getting Hands-On

  •   Comments

One of my favorite things to do is get my hands into something and figure out how it works, whether that’s an app, or a gadget, or a house. For example, over the past few months I have been renovating our basement, turning an unfinished, dank storage area into a playroom for the kids.  Here… Read more »

The Dangers of Unstoppable Code

  •   Comments

With real-time, interconnected, self-executing systems, sometimes when things wrong, they go really wrong.  I wrote about this general idea previously here. Yesterday, while I was writing my post on Trusted Brands, I was doing a little searching through my blog archives, so as to link back to all the posts categorized under “Trust”.  In the… Read more »

Trusted Brands

  •   Comments

Today is election day.  I’m on a plane today, so I voted early, a few days ago.  I cast my vote and it felt good. I marked my paper ballot with a marker (for optical scanning) glued it shut into a sealed envelope, and handed it to a volunteer who placed it in a secure… Read more »

Suffering, Self, and Service

  •   Comments

The massacre in Pittsburgh is heartbreaking and awful, and another example of the extent to which society seems to be fraying. The Pittsburgh attacker spent a lot of time on social media sites that stoked his fear, isolation and anger.  I think about the internet a lot, and while the internet has the ability to… Read more »

Building a meditation routine

  •   Comments

I wrote recently about the challenge of turning plans into routines.  One of the activities that is the most impactful for me is meditation.  I cannot say that I have a perfect meditation routine, but I can absolutely say that when I do do it, it makes me feel great, immediately. There are a bunch… Read more »


  •   Comments

Just about two years ago, my wife’s parents were hit by a truck while crossing the street. The past two years have been both difficult and wonderful.  Wonderful in that two people who were on the brink of death following the accident are still with us (her mother in particular has had a miraculous if… Read more »

Plans vs. Routines

  •   Comments

Sunday night over dinner, my son, parents and I were discussing the saving / investing system we set up for our kids in the spring. The idea was/is: set a monthly budget for purchases (in their case, mostly online movies, tv shows and games), and include a really healthy interest rate (20% monthly) to encourage… Read more »

The Adjacent Possible

  •   Comments

Dani and I have been spending a bunch of time recently thinking about the relationship between applications and infrastructure.  It’s a little bit of a chicken and egg situation.  You need infrastructure to build apps, but often times you don’t really know what kind of infrastructure is needed until you build some apps. For example, we… Read more »

Getting the Chills

  •   Comments

One of the greatest things Frannie and I have in common is that we get the chills from music — typically at the exact same time, triggered by the same musical… something. For me it starts  at the back of my neck, and if it’s really good, it spreads all over my back, head, and… Read more »

The Utility Infielder

  •   Comments

My favorite baseball player is Brock Holt, and has been since his first season with the Red Sox back in 2013.  Here is me last month wearing my Holt jersey that I wear to every game (note the #26 that he started out with, before it was retired for Wade Boggs a few years ago… Read more »


  •   Comments

I have been helping my son, who is in 4th grade, with his math — specifically, multiplication.  He feels like he is a little bit behind, so we are working on it so he can get more comfortable.  It is going well now — we have gotten into a routine of spending 15 minutes per… Read more »

Form factor

  •   Comments

Over the past few weeks, I have varied up my computing habits a bit.  For a laptop, I have been using a Pixelbook, and I have also been spending more timing using an iPad Pro for work (vs my default of using a Mac laptop for everything). What I have discovered is that the form… Read more »

A little, and then a little more

  •   Comments

Back in May, I had what ended up being a major hand surgery — repairing a torn tendon and in the process reconstructing the end of my pinkie by grafting tendons borrowed from my ring finger.  As a result, I am now recovering from two injuries — the pinkie itself and the ring finger that… Read more »


  •   Comments

A central concept on the internet is Layering.  Each of the protocols in the internet stack talks to the layer directly above and below it — new protocols can be added as long as they speak the language of their layer.  Protocols at one layer can be upgraded so long as they don’t break compatibility… Read more »

Minimum Viable Economy

  •   Comments

One of my favorite things about the cryptocurrency / blockchain space is that our conception of “what it all means” is still very much in flux. Nic Carter just published a nice analysis of how the functional narrative around bitcoin has changed over time – (roughly) from e-cash, to e-gold, to private currency, to a… Read more »

The path to decentralization: self-destructing companies

  •   Comments

In June, the SEC gave some of its most concrete guidance to date that cryptoassets can start out as centralized projects, possibly initially sold under securities laws, and eventually become “decentralized” and thus no longer sponsor-controlled, and no longer sold or transferred under securities laws. It makes sense that a decentralized protocol does not fit… Read more »

Trust and fairness

  •   Comments

I was at an event last night, where the moderator, Preeti Varathan from QZ observed that there seemed to be a lot of cynicism in the blockchain / crypto space — in other words, that the whole thing was essentially premised on a distrust of existing systems (fiat currencies, large internet companies, etc). It’s an… Read more »

Compound interest goes in both directions

  •   Comments

There is no shortage of writing and punditry about the power of compound interest. As usual Naval has a pithy tweet about it: Play iterated games. All the returns in life, whether in wealth, relationships, or knowledge, come from compound interest. — Naval (@naval) May 31, 2018 I have been thinking about this a lot… Read more »