“Bitwise has found that most crypto allocations among 15 institutional investors sat between 1% and 2% of investable assets, while none of the interviewed institutions cut exposure during the roughly 50% market decline from October 2025 through April 2026. Summary 15 institutional allocators were interviewed between late March and April across seven major investor categories.”, — write on: www.crypto.news
Bitwise has found that most crypto allocations among 15 institutional investors sat between 1% and 2% of investable assets, while none of the interviewed institutions cut exposure during the roughly 50% market decline from October 2025 through April 2026.
Summary
- 15 institutional allocators were interviewed between late March and April across seven major investor categories.
- Most surveyed crypto allocations ranged between 1% and 2%, while the full range reached 13%.
- Every crypto-owning institution interviewed held Bitcoin, usually as its first and largest digital asset position.
- None reduced crypto exposure during the 50% drawdown, while several institutions increased their positions instead.
- Almost every respondent uses or plans spot crypto ETFs, citing lower costs and operational burden.
Bitwise published its inaugural Institutional Crypto Adoption report on Sept. 23 after conducting 15 interviews between late March and April with senior investment professionals responsible for crypto allocation decisions. Participants came from endowments, foundations, public pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, multi-family offices, investment consultants and public companies.
The interviews lasted 30 to 60 minutes and covered sizing, governance, investment vehicles, rebalancing and exit conditions, with Bitcoin, Ethereum and Solana receiving particular attention. Bitwise did not identify the institutions, and its report says market figures were measured as of April 30 unless stated otherwise. The findings therefore describe the 15 interviewed allocators and should not be treated as a representative survey of the entire institutional market.
INSIGHT: Bitwise released its first Institutional Crypto Adoption Report, and the findings are bullish. 🤯
✅ 0 institutions cut crypto exposure during the ~50% drawdown
✅ Every crypto-holding institution owns Bitcoin
✅ Most allocations are around 1%-2%
✅ Several bought more… pic.twitter.com/wFljhY8XqR— CryptosRus (@CryptosR_Us) September 24, 2026
Bitwise survey puts most crypto allocations at 1%-2%
Across the full group, reported crypto exposure ranged from 0.5% to 13% of investable assets. Most allocations clustered between 1% and 2%, using combinations of spot ETFs, direct holdings, venture investments and hedge funds.
The numbers varied considerably by institution type. Endowments and foundations reported allocations from 0.5% to 10%, with most between 0.5% and 2%. Sovereign wealth funds in the sample reported 1% to 1.5%, while public pensions ranged from 1.5% to 4.5%. Multi-family offices reached as high as 13%, and Bitwise said family offices commonly targeted around 5%. Public companies reported allocating between 1% and 10% of excess cash.
During the roughly 50% crypto-market decline between October 2025 and April 2026, none of the 15 interviewed institutions reduced their allocation, according to Bitwise. Several increased exposure while prices fell. The finding applies only to the unnamed respondents and cannot establish how institutions outside the survey behaved during the same period.
Price declines were not listed as an exit trigger by any interviewee. Respondents instead cited reasons such as a breakdown in their underlying investment thesis, regulatory reversal, an industry credibility crisis or a failure of Ethereum and Solana activity to create value for their underlying tokens.
Some participants had already held crypto through earlier drops exceeding 50%, including the 2022 downturn. Bitwise said several continued working toward existing target allocations during the 2025-2026 decline, while others moved exposure from private placements toward direct holdings or ETFs.
Bitcoin remains the common institutional holding
Bitcoin was the only crypto asset held by every crypto-owning institution in the study.
For almost all respondents with crypto exposure, Bitcoin was their first, largest and longest-held digital asset. Several institutions held it independently, while market-cap-weighted crypto portfolios left some respondents with roughly 80% of their digital-asset allocation in Bitcoin.
Bitwise found that many institutions framed Bitcoin as a store-of-value position and compared it with gold. Some endowments had built positions in both assets as part of the same portfolio strategy, although one foundation rejected the digital-gold comparison and classified crypto as disruptive technology.
Ethereum and Solana received less consistent support. Institutions holding them generally used smaller allocations, shorter investment periods and explicit performance conditions. Several institutions owned neither asset because they said they could not clearly determine how network usage would translate into token value or how the assets should fit within existing portfolio classifications.
Respondents with ETH or SOL exposure tended to treat the assets as technology investments tied to network adoption. Some said they could sell within several years if growth in areas such as stablecoins, DeFi and tokenization failed to produce value for the tokens themselves.
Bitwise’s finding on Bitcoin is consistent with some public institutional filings, although those filings cover different investors. Harvard kept its 3.04 million-share BlackRock Bitcoin ETF position unchanged during the second quarter after reducing that publicly disclosed stake during earlier quarters.
Spot ETFs are becoming a common institutional route
Almost every institution Bitwise interviewed either used spot crypto ETFs or planned to use them. Respondents that moved from direct custody into ETFs cited lower total costs, fewer operational requirements and easier back-office handling. ETFs can fit into existing systems for custody, reporting and portfolio rebalancing without requiring institutions to build their own digital-asset infrastructure.
Not every institution preferred that structure. One sovereign wealth fund was developing domestic custody infrastructure because of a government mandate to control the underlying assets directly. A public endowment cited a policy prohibiting ownership of spot commodities, including through ETFs, while another investor preferred structures that avoided public Form 13F disclosure.
Bitwise therefore argued that institutional crypto exposure visible in 13F filings should be treated as a floor because the filings do not capture direct token ownership, many private funds or other non-reportable vehicles. Form 13F itself covers qualifying securities held by institutional investment managers and does not provide a complete view of every portfolio asset.
Recent public filings show how ETFs are appearing in endowment portfolios. The SEC received Dartmouth College’s second-quarter 13F on Aug. 13, covering holdings as of June 30. In related coverage, Dartmouth retained its Bitcoin, Ethereum and Solana ETF share counts during the second quarter even though their combined reported value fell with market prices.
Public data outside Bitwise’s anonymous group show that institutional behavior has not been uniform. Harvard exited its Ether ETF and reduced its Bitcoin ETF stake during the first quarter before holding its remaining IBIT shares steady in Q2. Because Bitwise did not disclose the identities of its respondents, there is no basis to assume Harvard was included in its 15 interviews.
Governance still limits larger crypto allocations
Bitwise found that operational structure and internal governance remained major constraints on allocation size.
Respondents raised custody, portfolio classification, committee approvals and reputational concerns more often than questions about whether crypto could produce investment returns. One multi-family office summarized its approach as “Just have a process.”
Approval structures differed sharply. Some investment teams could make an allocation internally, while one sovereign wealth fund reported scrutiny from central-bank leadership involving security reviews, executive background checks, public perception and comparisons with peer institutions.
Family offices generally faced fewer approval layers, helping explain why allocations in that group reached the highest level in Bitwise’s sample. Public pensions faced boards, beneficiaries, elected officials and media scrutiny, while sovereign funds described longer decision processes involving committees and public-sector oversight.
Career risk appeared repeatedly among public-facing institutions. Foundations, pensions and sovereign wealth funds told Bitwise that professional and reputational consequences could influence whether an allocation received approval, even when the investment team supported the underlying thesis.
Bitwise expects a majority of institutional investors to hold crypto within five years, but the firm presents that statement as its own outlook, not a result established by the 15 interviews. Its report lists regulatory development and peer adoption as possible drivers while warning that a major crypto failure or weak real-world adoption could delay further allocations.
Several sovereign wealth funds interviewed by Bitwise remained in active due diligence on potential crypto positions, with some already invested and others still conducting research. One respondent said building the legal and regulatory infrastructure required to deploy sovereign capital could take more than a year.