The purpose of this research is to develop a framework for digital asset accounting and to evaluate the axes identified based on mutual matrices. The methodology of this study is exploratory and developmental, combining qualitative and quantitative data collection. First, it seeks to provide a theoretical framework based on Glaser's (1992) ground theory approach. Second, to determine the most effective central component of digital assets accounting implementation, the interpretive ranking process is applied. The tools used in the qualitative part are interviews with experts selected through theoretical and snowball sampling, and the tools used in the quantitative part are paired comparison checklists of row "i" and column "j". The results of the qualitative part of the study, conducted through 12 interviews, indicate the identification of 4 categories, 5 components, and 25 conceptual themes. These formed the theoretical framework of the investigated phenomenon, with reliability of the main axes confirmed through Delphi analysis. The results of the quantitative part also showed that the central component of compliance with the internal controls of digital assets ("J4") is the most important mechanism for implementing digital asset accounting in the context of capital market companies, which can strengthen the information capacities of users.
Introduction
The changing world of global trade has led to the emergence of new forms of commercial exchange in which assets are traded virtually without the need for physical presence in a contract. In other words, with the reduction of barriers to international trade due to technological developments and the shift in the nature of assets toward virtualization, digital assets have become one of the easiest means of commercial exchange between companies and investors. These assets, which are intangible in nature, not only have high potential to increase the value of companies but also generate higher profit margins because they bring lower costs to companies compared to tangible assets.
 

2. Literature Review

Digital assets were initially classified as “Cryptocurrencies” in the category of intangible assets, valued by connecting to a “Blockchain” as the basis for maintaining and sharing these virtual assets among investors. The ecosystem of this type of asset, beyond the initial idea of ​transactions based on digital currencies, has now become part of the capital functions of companies, as increasing demand from investors has enhanced its value and nature as an intangible asset. As a result, although digital assets were initially similar to cryptocurrencies at the time of their emergence in 2008, today digital assets have a different definition from cryptocurrencies, despite a gray boundary in terms of the nature of their shares. In fact, this change was introduced by the World Bank with the aim of shaping the nature of digital assets in transparent financial reporting. In a specific definition, digital assets are considered to include content based on images, photos, videos, or any intangible content feature that can create value for its holder. By contrast, cryptocurrencies are a type of digital money in which currency production and verification of transaction authenticity are controlled using encryption algorithms.
 

Methodologhy

The methodology of this study is considered to be of a mixed data type. In the qualitative part of the study, due to the lack of a measurable theoretical basis to describe the concept of digital asset accounting, the grounded theory analysis process is used. This provides a theoretical framework as the basic objective of the study, while the quantitative part explores the main axes identified in the theoretical framework in the context of the capital market through reciprocal and diagonal matrix processes. Philosophically, the nature of this study can be considered basic according to the matrix of methodological strategies, with this philosophical basis justified in the methodology through an inductive/deductive combination. In other words, the philosophy of research based on induction helps identify emerging aspects of digital accounting in a cognitive framework, and the deductive philosophy allows the research to examine the identified factors.
 

Result

In this study, due to the dispersion of digital asset disclosure standards and the indirect nature of institutional oversight, an attempt was made to identify the effective factors in the implementation of digital asset accounting based on Glaser's approach in the grounded theory analysis process. Based on 12 interviews conducted with academic experts and through three coding stages, a total of 4 main categories, 5 central components, and 25 initial conceptual themes were identified. These dimensions were an attempt to answer the first research question, which sought to identify the axes of implementing digital asset accounting in capital market companies. The study aimed to determine the central components needed to create a strategic approach to preventing structural opportunism in the emergence of digital assets in the context of capital market companies. To explain the central components, the fuzzy Delphi process was used to assess whether the axes of implementing digital accounting are feasible at the level of capital market companies. The results of this process confirmed that all 5 identified main axes can be useful in the functional evaluation of implementing digital accounting procedures. Furthermore, during the paired comparison process based on reciprocal matrices, and in response to the second research question, it was determined that compliance with internal controls of digital assets ("J4") is the most effective axis component to be considered in the implementation of accounting for these assets.

Discussion

In analyzing the results, it should be stated that internal controls in the disclosure of digital assets, due to the continuous internal monitoring of companies from a structural perspective, enable companies to, first, improve the quality of financial reporting on these assets by facilitating the process of independent auditors' reviews. Second, dynamic monitoring through internal controls provides a level of assurance in calculating the fair value of digital assets in accordance with Standard No. 17 of Intangible Assets and helps strengthen the operational efficiency of companies in using these assets. Adherence to fair value through internal control, by preventing the flow of profit or loss resulting from fluctuations in fair value in the income statement, improves the accuracy of digital asset figures from a disclosure perspective. At the same time, it enables the connection of these values ​​with other aspects of operating profit and helps create a better balance in financial statements.

Conclusion

Given the results, it is recommended that policymakers in the field of accounting standards develop a new standard under the title of digital assets, based on the separation of digital assets into intangible asset items and relying on the existing accounting standards 8, 10, 15, 17, and 21. Integrating digital assets into the intangible asset subset can contribute to the consistency and overall philosophy of the standards for these assets.