Why infrastructure is the key driver behind institutional adoption of digital assets

It is no secret that institutional players have historically been very cautious when dealing with digital assets. General volatility and a lack of clear regulation made many firms hesitant to move into this market in earnest.But by now, that dynamic has changed a lot. In early 2026, spot crypto ETF trading volume had crossed a $2 trillion mark, highlighting the growing institutional appetite for crypto. At the same time, a late-2025 Digital Assets Outlook found that most investors expect to double their exposure to this asset class in the next three years.

Cryptocurrencies are being increasingly viewed as a valid part of modern finance. So the key question on everyone’s minds now is how they can be integrated efficiently into existing frameworks.

Europe offers perhaps the clearest example of this shift. Between the implementation of MiCA and the adherence to DORA requirements, this market is taking great steps towards a standardised environment for financial institutions that seek to work with crypto.

Importantly, 2026 is going to be the watershed period, as European regulation moves toward active enforcement. The MiCA transition period officially concludes in July, meaning that firms operating in the EU are expected to be fully compliant with the new rules. In practice, there is now a more unified rulebook for digital asset operations, clarifying both how businesses are now meant to operate and how regulators will supervise them.

At the same time, DORA has already raised standards expected from financial institutions and their partners. The regulation focuses heavily on ICT resilience, third-party risk oversight, incident reporting, operational testing, and business planning.

It essentially means that firms must continuously show to regulators that they understand the risks associated with their infrastructure and that they can continue operating during periods of stress. That their systems remain secure and functional even when faced with cyber threats and technical failures.

All in all, this is good for institutions, as these measures help cut down on a lot of the ambiguity that previously made them wary of dealing with digital assets. Large-scale financial organizations can’t afford to scale their infrastructure around uncertain regulatory conditions. Compliance and risk management requirements they have to adhere to are simply too strict for that.

Because the rules remained unclear for a long time, crypto adoption by these parties had been notably delayed over the years. But now we’re seeing a marked improvement to that situation. Europe’s ongoing standardisation efforts allow institutions to access digital assets with greater confidence.

With that said, though, regulation alone is not enough to support institutional-scale participation.

One of the longstanding issues of the digital asset markets has been fragmentation. Different exchanges and liquidity providers often worked according to their own rules, margin models, and settlement processes. So firms that entered this field had to deal with a degree of operational complexity that TradFi institutions are unused to.

Managing all these disconnected systems — for spot trading, CFDs, derivatives, custody, etc. — would build up costs, not to mention the increased complexity of compliance and reporting processes. If all products and venues have different reporting standards and operational procedures, then it’s only natural that institutional players would see them as difficult to work with, no matter how real the interest.

Even now, the friction caused by this fragmentation still makes it difficult to justify scaling exposure to digital assets. As such, consolidation of infrastructure is becoming a priority. Institutional firms show a growing desire for unified account structures and systems that allow them to access multiple asset classes and products from one place.

As digital asset markets continue to mature, consistency of operations comes to the forefront of what institutions demand.

To put it differently, crypto services are expected to function by the same operational standards they already apply to traditional markets. Because those are the rules that large-scale organizations are already familiar and comfortable with. And the more these companies reassess how digital assets can fit into their strategies, the stricter their standards and expectations will become.

Moving forward, there are several factors that are likely to accelerate this trend of systematic integration.

The first is practicality. Maintaining separate infrastructures for traditional and crypto assets creates complications for firms when they have to do twice the amount of work across compliance, reporting, and risk management. Since the demand for multi-asset accessibility only grows, consolidation is simply becoming the most sensible option.

The second factor is competitive pressure. Digital asset infrastructure today is no longer a completely separate market — instead, it would be accurate to call it a part of the broader financial modernisation cycle.

Global financial firms that understand this are actively investing in the foundations they need for long-term participation. And the ones that don’t risk being at a disadvantage later as they fall behind their competitors. Matching the pace of client demand and regulatory changes requires operational readiness from these firms.

In many ways, this is a healthy development for the industry. Institutional participation has always historically scaled through standardisation and trust, so the shifts currently taking place are only to be expected.

Challenges still remain, of course, but the broader direction in which global finance now travels is becoming clearer.

Eugenia Mykuliak, Founder & Executive Director of B2PRIME Group, a global financial services provider for institutional and professional clients

"Why infrastructure is the key driver behind institutional adoption of digital assets" was originally created and published by Private Banker International, a GlobalData owned brand.

The information on this site has been included in good faith for general informational purposes only. It is not intended to amount to advice on which you should rely, and we give no representation, warranty or guarantee, whether express or implied as to its accuracy or completeness. You must obtain professional or specialist advice before taking, or refraining from, any action on the basis of the content on our site.