Technology is constantly evolving in its application across market sectors. Long-established standards and structures within each sector are being challenged in parallel, slowly at first, then snowballing as institutional thought leaders gain comfort with each new paradigm. We see this in financial services not only through fintech, but in asset classes, investment vehicles, and the exchanges that facilitate markets. In each instance, institutional adoption is not a moment, but rather a process.
This process begins when innovators produce an edge that early adopters follow. Progress is met with resistance from incumbents who mislabel innovation as risk. Hurdles are subsequently overcome and professionals separate from opportunists. Advisors establish frameworks to educate their clients. Lobbyists lobby, then regulators regulate or legislators legislate. Risks become quantifiable, incentives align, and premier LPs amend their investment policy statements.
Then, more often than not, adversaries and the aforementioned incumbents become target markets for new product development.
Equities traded in 1/16 fractions before ECNs matched bids and offers, and gold traded at $450/oz before commodity ETFs improved investor access. The hedge fund industry was measured in the billions, not trillions of dollars, before public pensions began funding the alternative asset class.
Digital assets and cryptographic infrastructure are now moving through this progression. The useful question is not whether the technology is interesting or where the asset is priced. It is whether the economics are durable, the incentives align, and the risks can be both quantified and justified.
Thought leaders in digital assets must guide institutional LPs down this predictable path. While cryptographic infrastructure is a sell-side game, nothing moves the sell side like the buy side.