Key Highlights
- Bitwise interviewed investment professionals from 15 large institutions about their crypto holdings and allocation decisions.
- Reported crypto allocations ranged from 0.5% to 13%, with most between 1% and 2% of investable assets.
- Bitcoin was held by every surveyed institution with crypto exposure, while Ethereum and Solana appeared in smaller, thesis-dependent positions.
Bitwise’s latest institutional survey offers a look at how large investors are approaching crypto, with the findings showing relatively small allocations, a strong preference for Bitcoin and significant differences in how institutions gain and manage exposure.
The report, published September 23, is based on interviews with investment professionals responsible for crypto decisions at 15 institutions, including endowments, foundations, public pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, multi-family offices, investment consultants and public companies.
Rather than following a single allocation model, the institutions reported different approaches depending on their investment mandates, governance structures and operational requirements.
Bitcoin remains the common entry point
Among the institutions surveyed that held crypto, Bitcoin was the only asset consistently held, according to Bitwise.
For nearly all of those investors, Bitcoin represented their first, largest and longest-held crypto position. The report said some institutions viewed it as a store of value and compared its role in portfolios with gold.
That does not mean institutions universally hold Bitcoin directly. Some investment mandates restrict direct ownership, leading investors to use products such as exchange-traded funds or other investment vehicles instead.
Ethereum and Solana depend on the investment thesis
The survey found a different approach toward Ethereum and Solana.
Institutions that held either asset generally maintained smaller positions and evaluated them over shorter time horizons than Bitcoin.
For these assets, the central question was whether network activity would translate into value for the underlying token.
That puts factors such as application growth, network usage and token economics closer to the center of the investment decision.
Bitwise said some investors had explicit conditions for exiting Ethereum or Solana positions if expected adoption or value accrual failed to develop.
Most crypto allocations remain small
The institutions reported crypto allocations ranging from 0.5% to 13% of investable assets, although most were between 1% and 2%.
Allocation size varied depending on the type of institution and the number of people involved in approving investments.
Bitwise said family offices generally reported higher allocations, while sovereign wealth funds tended to report lower exposure.
The survey also found that allocation size was inversely related to the number of people involved in the approval process, with more complex governance structures generally associated with smaller allocations.
Spot ETFs have simplified access
Spot crypto ETFs have become an important route for institutions that want exposure without building the infrastructure required for direct custody.
Nearly every institution interviewed either uses spot ETFs or is considering them, Bitwise said.
The investors cited lower operational requirements, easier reporting and compatibility with existing portfolio systems as factors behind the preference.
Direct ownership remains an option for institutions with the necessary custody infrastructure. Bitwise cited one sovereign wealth fund that was developing its own custody capabilities because it wanted direct control of the underlying assets.
The findings therefore point to different access methods rather than a single institutional preference.
Governance can shape investment decisions
For large institutions, the decision to allocate to crypto can involve several layers of approval.
Public pensions, endowments and sovereign wealth funds may need approval from investment committees, boards, beneficiaries, regulators or government officials.
Family offices can generally make decisions with fewer internal layers, which Bitwise said helps explain why they reported larger allocations than some other institutional categories.
The report also identified career and reputational considerations for investment professionals. An allocation may require additional internal justification when investment decisions can carry professional consequences if the position performs poorly.
Institutions held through the 2026 drawdown
One of the survey’s notable findings concerns how institutions responded to the crypto market decline.
Bitwise said crypto markets fell roughly 50% between Q4 2025 and Q2 2026, but none of the 15 institutions interviewed reduced its crypto allocation during that period. Several increased their exposure.
None of the investors cited a price decline as a reason they would sell.
Instead, the potential reasons identified for reducing exposure included failure of the original investment thesis, a significant regulatory reversal or a broader credibility crisis affecting the crypto industry.
That suggests the surveyed investors were assessing their positions primarily through longer-term investment criteria rather than short-term price movements, although the survey covers only 15 institutions.
Sovereign Wealth Funds take longer to move
Sovereign wealth funds were among the more cautious participants in the survey.
Some were still conducting due diligence, while others had already established crypto positions. Their decision-making processes generally involve more layers of institutional or government approval.
Bitwise also identified motivations beyond portfolio returns among some sovereign investors, including interest in national digital-asset strategies and financial technology development.
The findings illustrate how institutional mandates can influence both the pace and size of crypto allocations.
Institutional managers remain limited
The survey also points to a potential infrastructure constraint as institutional participation expands.
One sovereign wealth fund told Bitwise it had identified roughly 10 crypto asset managers that met its requirements around factors such as size, track record and operational infrastructure.
A relatively small pool of managers could become more significant if institutional allocations increase and large investors continue relying on external managers rather than direct custody.
Bitwise’s earlier research provides broader context
The September survey follows a separate Bitwise report published in July examining crypto adoption during the first half of 2026.
That research looked more broadly at institutional adoption, tokenization, crypto-related equities and blockchain application revenue during a period of weaker crypto prices.
The latest report instead focuses on the decision-making process inside individual institutions.
Together, the two reports provide different views of institutional participation: the earlier research examined broader market trends, while the September study looked directly at how a small group of large investors approaches allocation decisions.
What institutions are watching
The survey suggests that institutional crypto decisions are influenced by factors beyond the assets themselves, including regulation, custody, investment vehicles, governance and token economics.
Bitcoin had the broadest presence among the institutions interviewed, while Ethereum and Solana were assessed more closely based on network adoption and how value accrues to their respective tokens.
Most participants reported relatively modest crypto allocations, with internal approval processes and operational requirements shaping how those investments are structured.
Overall, the responses point to a fragmented institutional approach rather than a single investment strategy. Institutions are weighing crypto exposure through considerations familiar to other asset classes, including allocation size, access, custody and the underlying investment case.
Also Read: Crypto Economy Holds at $9.4T Even as Market Value Drops 50%: Chainalysis
