Will traditional asset managers join the party?
These days in having conversations with institutional investors the subject often turns to crypto currencies. The question of whether there is an appetite from traditional asset managers to participate in the space and if so when will this happen is top of mind. It’s an interesting question from several different perspectives with the most pressing question being is there a genuine interest for this type of investment. I believe a majority of managers would welcome some exposure from a uncorrelated asset to the traditional ones. It also worth noting that sophisticated investors realize the changing dynamics proposed by ICOs and it's potential impact on capital markets.
A different asset class with a host of their own distinct issues
So what is the biggest hurdle when it comes to investing in crypto assets for these institutions? High on this list is the custodial ownership of the asset, a technological hurdle that remains as a key piece in the development of this asset class. When we speak of traditional assets, for example when you buy a stock or bond, there is a third party that holds the bearer bond or certificate in safe holding place and therefore assumes the risk of holding the asset. In fact, it is not only problematic but in many cases it's illegal for a investment advisor to have custodian responsibilities of the assets. Cryptos have a different level of security because they are digital keys and therefore have a vulnerability to online bad actors. What is needed to secure the asset is cold storage or a cold wallet, which is a secured , safe place like a hard drive or laptop that has never seen the light of day of the internet . The other pressing issue for institutions is hard forks, which is essentially a patch to the protocol which creates a new coin and perhaps a change in valuation. A clumsy example might be a company spinning of a new public division and leaving the equity holder with two separate traded equities with new valuations. Of course there is always the 800 lb gorilla in the room, the mighty SEC who have subpoenaed around 80 companies and have not come out with any definitive regulatory regime or guidance. There most definitive statements have said that ICOs look like securities per the Howey test leaving the onus on the issuer. (for more :https://www.coinist.io/the-howey-test-the-sec-and-ico/) Meanwhile the other regulatory arm, the CFTC, has claimed cryptos to be commodities, which only adds to the uncertainty. There will need to be regulatory clarity before many firms can even by participate according to their mandates or bylaws.
A community solving problems
While these hurdles seem challenging, the crypto community has already started to address this situation. The Swiss Financial Market Regulatory Authority (FINMA) in February announced a balanced approach to Crypto and ICO regulation where risk is mitigated while not hampering innovative potential. What really garnered the attention of investors and issuers was the willingness of FINMA to distinguish crypto assets into three categories of asset (security) coins, currency coins and utility coins. On the custody side Coinbase is planning on rolling out custodial services while crypto wallet firm Bitgo is merging with qualified custodian Kingdom Trust. Mike Belshe , CEO of Bitgo has said there is 20 bln pipeline that is committed to crypto assets as these custodial issues resolve. By the third quarter of this year the market could see a roll out of custodial services, expanded future contracts and clarification from regulators. Could this bring a funnel of new participants entering the asset class and while simultaneously ending the Crypto Haze of 2018?