Bitwise’s first institutional crypto adoption report found that most of the 15 institutions it interviewed had between 1% and 2% of their investable assets in crypto. None of them reduced their crypto exposure during the roughly 50% market decline between October 2025 and April 2026. In fact, several increased their positions while prices were falling.
Bitwise conducted the interviews between late March and April with investment professionals from endowments, foundations, public pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, multi-family offices, investment consultants and public companies.
The institutions reported crypto allocations ranging from 0.5% to 13%, although most were between 1% and 2%.
Endowments and foundations had allocations ranging from 0.5% to 10%, with most staying between 0.5% and 2%. Sovereign wealth funds reported around 1% to 1.5%, while public pensions ranged from 1.5% to 4.5%.
Multi-family offices had some of the largest allocations, reaching as high as 13%, while family offices commonly targeted around 5%. Public companies reported putting between 1% and 10% of excess cash into crypto.
One of the biggest findings was how these institutions reacted during the market downturn. None of the 15 respondents said they cut their crypto allocation during the roughly 50% decline.
Some actually increased their exposure as prices fell.
The institutions also said that a drop in crypto prices by itself was not a reason to sell. Instead, they would consider exiting if their investment thesis broke down, regulations moved in the opposite direction, the industry faced a major credibility problem, or networks such as Ethereum and Solana failed to create enough value for their tokens.
Several institutions had already experienced earlier crypto crashes, including the major downturn in 2022. Some continued working toward their target allocations during the latest decline, while others moved money from private investments into direct holdings or spot ETFs.
Bitcoin was the common asset across all of the crypto-owning institutions in the study.
For almost every respondent, Bitcoin was the first, largest and longest-held digital asset. Some institutions held Bitcoin separately, while others used broader crypto portfolios where Bitcoin made up around 80% of their digital asset exposure.
Many institutions viewed Bitcoin as a store of value and compared it with gold. Some endowments even held both assets as part of the same portfolio strategy.
Ethereum and Solana were less widely held. Institutions that owned ETH or SOL generally kept smaller positions and watched network growth and performance more closely.
Some investors said they were not comfortable holding Ethereum or Solana because they could not clearly determine how network activity would translate into value for the tokens.
Institutions that did hold ETH or SOL generally viewed them more like technology investments connected to network adoption. Some said they could sell those positions in the future if growth in areas such as stablecoins, DeFi and tokenization failed to create enough value for the tokens.
Spot crypto ETFs are also becoming an important way for institutions to gain exposure.
Almost every institution interviewed by Bitwise either already used spot crypto ETFs or planned to use them. Investors pointed to lower costs, easier operations and simpler reporting as major reasons for using ETFs instead of managing crypto directly.
ETFs can also fit more easily into existing systems for custody, reporting and portfolio management.
However, some institutions still prefer direct ownership. One sovereign wealth fund was building its own custody infrastructure because it was required to control the underlying assets directly.
Bitwise also said that publicly reported 13F filings may not show the full amount of institutional crypto exposure. These filings do not capture direct token ownership, many private funds or other investment structures that are not required to be reported.
The report also found that governance remains a major factor limiting how much institutions allocate to crypto.
Custody, portfolio classification, committee approvals and reputational concerns were often bigger issues than questions about potential returns.
Family offices generally had fewer approval requirements, which helped some of them reach larger allocations. Public pension funds faced more oversight from boards, beneficiaries, elected officials and the media.
Sovereign wealth funds often had even longer approval processes involving government officials and committees.
For many public institutions, professional and reputational risk also played a role in deciding whether to invest.
Bitwise expects more institutional investors to hold crypto over the next five years, but that is the company’s own outlook and not a conclusion proven by the 15 interviews.
The firm believes regulatory progress and growing adoption by other institutions could support further investment. At the same time, a major failure in the crypto industry or weak real-world adoption could slow that growth.
Several sovereign wealth funds interviewed by Bitwise are still researching crypto investments. Some are already invested, while others are working through legal, regulatory and operational requirements before committing capital.
