- Bitwise conducted 15 interviews with crypto investment professionals.
- Every surveyed organization that holds crypto assets holds bitcoin — there is no single consensus on Ethereum and Solana.
- During the 50% crypto market drawdown from October 2025 to April 2026, no institution reduced its allocation — some increased their positions.
According to a Bitwise study conducted among 15 wealth managers (overseeing from hundreds of millions to tens of billions of dollars), none of the surveyed organizations reduced their crypto allocations during the market’s 50% decline from October 2025 to April 2026, and some even increased their positions.
Bitwise called bitcoin the only crypto asset with a durable consensus among respondents. Every organization that owns crypto holds the first cryptocurrency. For nearly all participants, it was the first crypto asset they bought, their largest position, and the asset with the longest holding period.
In addition, most respondents view bitcoin as a store of value with upside potential and compare it to gold, particularly in the context of the risk of fiat currency debasement.
In some cases, institutions build a crypto portfolio based on assets’ market capitalization. In such portfolios, bitcoin accounts for about 80%. At the same time, most participants hold the first cryptocurrency as a standalone position.
Institutions Did Not Sell Crypto Assets During the Market Downturn
From October 2025 to April 2026, the crypto market fell by roughly 50%. Even so, none of the organizations surveyed by Bitwise reduced its crypto allocation. Some, on the contrary, increased their positions.
Participants noted that during periods of volatility, they either maintained their allocations or continued moving toward pre-defined target levels. Some also shifted capital from illiquid private structures into direct asset ownership or spot ETFs.
Bitwise notes that some participants have already lived through several market drawdowns of more than 50%, including the 2022 crash.
Ethereum and Solana Do Not Have the Same Level of Consensus
Unlike bitcoin, Ethereum and Solana are used selectively by institutions. Organizations that hold these assets typically have smaller positions, shorter investment horizons, and pre-defined exit conditions.
Some of the respondents do not own Ethereum or Solana at all. Some participants also could not fit these assets into their own classification framework — for example, as a store of value, an equity, or a commodity.
At the same time, there are different investment theses among holders of these cryptoassets. Some preferred Solana due to high throughput, low latency, and no reliance on rollups. Another participant owns Ethereum, but not Solana, citing the network’s use in DeFi, tokenization, and stablecoins.
Overall, the surveyed institutions mostly view Ethereum and Solana as assets whose value should depend on real network usage, transaction activity, and fees.
Crypto Allocations Mostly Stand at 1–2%
The total size of participants’ crypto allocations ranged from 0.5% to 13% of investable assets. In most cases, this figure was in the 1–2% range.
To gain exposure, institutions use spot ETFs, direct ownership, venture funds, and hedge funds. Position sizing is typically set so it can materially impact portfolio results if the investment thesis plays out, but does not create critical risk for the overall portfolio.
Nearly every surveyed organization already uses or plans to use spot crypto ETFs. Among the reasons for shifting from direct custody of assets to ETFs, participants cited lower costs, less operational burden, simplified back-office workflows, liquidity, and easier rebalancing.
At the same time, some institutions deliberately opt out of ETFs. For example, one sovereign fund is building its own infrastructure due to a government mandate for direct control of assets.
Governance Remains One of the Main Barriers
Among the main obstacles to increasing crypto allocations, participants cited secure custody, the need to publicly explain the investment thesis, the role of cryptoassets in the portfolio structure, internal procedures, reputational risks, and asset classification.
Some organizations had issues classifying Ethereum and Solana. Two endowments addressed this in different ways: one created a “liquid venture” category, while the other classified all cryptoassets as a venture bet.
Bitwise also points to career risk — the professional consequences of an unsuccessful investment allocation. It was mentioned by funds, public pensions, and sovereign funds.
According to Bitwise, institutions often begin investing in groups. When a sufficient number of similar organizations publicly disclose their allocations, the risk for an individual manager shifts from “I invested and was wrong” to “others invested, and I missed it.”
What Could Accelerate Further Institutional Adoption?
Bitwise highlights two key positive factors for further growth in institutional allocations: regulatory clarity and an increase in public investments by other organizations.
The report’s authors attribute regulatory clarity to new product approvals, legislative changes, regulatory policy, and sovereign adoption of crypto assets in other countries.
At the same time, public allocations by other institutions can lower the reputational barrier for new entrants.
Among the negative scenarios, Bitwise cites a major crisis within the crypto industry, technical failures, the collapse of a major market participant, insufficient real-world use of Ethereum and Solana, or a situation in which growing blockchain adoption does not create additional value for the relevant tokens.
As a reminder, Bitwise previously stated that bitcoin is increasingly behaving like digital gold.