Bitwise surveyed 15 wealth managers about their crypto investments during the roughly 50% market decline from October 2025 to April 2026. None of the surveyed organizations reduced its crypto allocation during that period, and some increased their positions, according to the firm’s study.

The respondents oversee portfolios ranging from hundreds of millions to tens of billions of dollars. Their total crypto allocations ranged from 0.5% to 13% of investable assets, although most allocated between 1% and 2%.

Bitcoin Draws the Broadest Consensus

Bitwise described bitcoin as the only crypto asset with durable consensus among respondents. Every surveyed organization that owned crypto held bitcoin. For nearly all participants, it was the first crypto asset purchased, the largest crypto position and the asset held for the longest period.

Most respondents viewed bitcoin as a store of value with potential upside and compared it with gold, particularly as protection against the risk of fiat-currency debasement.

Some institutions constructed crypto portfolios based on market capitalization, with bitcoin accounting for about 80% of those portfolios. Most participants, however, held bitcoin as a standalone position.

Respondents Maintained Allocations During the Downturn

Participants said they maintained their allocations during periods of volatility or continued moving toward previously defined target levels. Some also shifted capital from illiquid private structures into direct asset ownership or spot exchange-traded funds.

Bitwise said some respondents had already experienced several market declines exceeding 50%, including the 2022 crash.

Institutions set position sizes so a successful investment thesis could materially affect portfolio performance without creating a critical risk for the overall portfolio, according to the study.

Views on Ethereum and Solana Vary

Unlike bitcoin, Ethereum and Solana were held selectively. Institutions that owned them generally had smaller positions, shorter investment horizons and predetermined exit conditions. Some respondents held neither asset.

Some participants also struggled to classify Ethereum and Solana as a store of value, equity or commodity. Two endowments took different approaches: one created a “liquid venture” category, while the other classified all crypto assets as a venture bet.

Investment rationales also differed among holders. Some preferred Solana because of its high throughput, low latency and lack of reliance on rollups. Another participant held Ethereum but not Solana, citing Ethereum’s use in decentralized finance, tokenization and stablecoins.

Overall, respondents generally viewed the value of Ethereum and Solana as dependent on real network use, transaction activity and fees.

Spot ETFs Gain Institutional Use

Institutions obtained crypto exposure through spot ETFs, direct ownership, venture funds and hedge funds. Nearly every surveyed organization already used or planned to use spot crypto ETFs.

Respondents cited lower costs, reduced operational burdens, simpler back-office processes, liquidity and easier rebalancing as reasons for moving from direct custody to ETFs.

Some institutions deliberately avoided ETFs. One sovereign fund was developing its own infrastructure because a government mandate required direct control of assets.

Governance and Career Risk Remain Barriers

Participants identified secure custody, public explanation of the investment thesis, crypto’s role in portfolio construction, internal procedures, reputational concerns and asset classification as barriers to increasing allocations.

Funds, public pensions and sovereign funds also cited career risk, referring to the professional consequences of an unsuccessful allocation. Bitwise said institutions often begin investing in groups: once enough comparable organizations publicly disclose investments, the perceived risk for an individual manager can shift from making a wrong investment to missing an allocation adopted by peers.

Bitwise identified regulatory clarity and more publicly disclosed investments by other organizations as the two main factors that could support further institutional adoption. The firm linked regulatory clarity to new product approvals, legislative changes, regulatory policy and sovereign adoption of crypto assets in other countries. Public allocations by other institutions could also reduce reputational barriers for new entrants.

Negative scenarios cited by Bitwise included a major crypto-industry crisis, technical failures, the collapse of a major market participant, insufficient real-world use of Ethereum and Solana, or growing blockchain adoption that fails to create additional value for the associated tokens.

Bitwise has previously said bitcoin is increasingly behaving like digital gold.

Source: Incrypted