The board

Six stocks, chosen by depth

Every one of these is a tokenised share trading in its own pool on Robinhood Chain. The price you see is that pool's price, read live — not a feed, not a quote we fetched from somewhere and retyped.

Reading prices from chain…

Pool depth is the number that matters most on this page. It is what an attacker has to fight to move a settlement, and it is why the list looks like this rather than like a list of famous tickers.

Why these six and not the obvious ones

Two names people ask for are deliberately missing, and the reasons are worth stating rather than hiding.

TSLA — not readable
Tesla's main pool on this chain is a Uniswap v4 pool. v4 keeps every pool inside one contract, so there is no pool address to read a price from the way there is for v3. Until that changes it cannot be settled the way the others are.
AAPL — too thin
About $300k of liquidity. Deep enough to trade, shallow enough that someone with real money could hold the price away from the market through a settlement window and decide the day. Listing it would be handing them a cheque.

Depth is not a promise. The shallowest market listed here is around $460k, and a determined attacker with enough capital could still lean on it. What the design buys is that leaning on it is expensive and public — they have to hold the price off-market across a thirty-minute average, twice, paying arbitrage the whole time. How the averages work ›

Where the price comes from

These tokens are redeemable for the real share, so arbitrage keeps them close to it. That is the entire reason an on-chain pool price is usable here: if the token drifts from the share, somebody profits by closing the gap.

It also means the price is only as good as that link. If redemption ever broke, the pools would drift and this game would be settling on something other than the stock. Nothing in the contract can detect that, and it would show up as prices that stop matching the ones on your broker's screen.