How to Allocate to Digital Assets: The Menu of Options Available to Institutional LPs

What happens when you add just 1% of cryptocurrency to a traditional 60/40 investment portfolio? The math might surprise even the most skeptical institutional investors. At Breakpoint 2025, Pierre Henry, partner at EXPAAM, delivered a comprehensive roadmap for institutional allocators looking to enter the digital asset space, revealing that we're only 3% of the way through crypto's adoption journey—and the opportunity ahead is staggering.

Summary

Top Projects

Lulo

Score: 7,586.13

Bonk

Score: 4,806.12

Sphere

Score: 2,544.42

Moonwalk

Score: 2,026.11

Pierre Henry's presentation at Breakpoint 2025 tackled one of the most pressing questions facing institutional investors today: how exactly should sophisticated capital allocate to digital assets? With approximately 1 billion crypto users globally and projections reaching 3-4 billion by 2030, the asset class is growing at roughly double the rate of early internet adoption—137% annually during bull markets and 43% even during bear markets.

The core revelation driving institutional interest is portfolio efficiency. Henry presented data showing that adding 3-5% Bitcoin, 1-2% Ethereum, or 3-4% Solana to a traditional portfolio improves returns without meaningfully increasing volatility. The volatility increase is measured in tens of basis points—well within institutional tolerances—while the return improvement is substantial. Perhaps more compelling, crypto exhibits persistently low correlation with bonds and commodities, the two categories where traditional portfolios lack diversification most.

Henry outlined six primary strategy categories for institutional allocators: directional exposure (spot and ETFs), active liquid investing (hedge funds), staking and treasury strategies, structured products, private markets (venture and growth), and market-neutral strategies. Each category offers different liquidity profiles, return expectations, and risk characteristics, allowing institutions to construct crypto allocations that match their specific mandates and risk tolerances.

The presentation addressed head-on the historical concerns that have kept institutions on the sidelines—regulatory uncertainty, platform safety, volatility, and fundamental value. Henry argued each has been substantially resolved: comprehensive regulatory frameworks now exist globally, institutional-grade custody with SOC audits and insurance is standard, risk-adjusted returns compensate for volatility, and real economic activity (46 trillion in annual stablecoin volume, 70 million monthly active users) validates fundamental utility.

Key Points:

The Adoption Trajectory Mirrors Early Internet—But Faster

When EXPAAM normalized crypto user growth against internet adoption starting from a 5-million-user base, they found crypto is expanding at roughly double the internet's pace. From 2016 to 2021, crypto users grew at 137% annually, compared to the internet's growth rate during its main adoption phase of approximately 43%. The acceleration comes from crypto building atop existing infrastructure—social media, digital virality, global mobile networks, and broadband access that the early internet never had.

This trajectory positions the industry at approximately 1 billion users today, with projections reaching 3-4 billion by 2030. Henry characterized this as an "unstoppable train" and noted that over the next decade, more wealth will be created in this space than internet, cloud, and mobile combined. For institutions, this represents the classic early-stage adoption opportunity that has generated outsized returns across asset class histories.

Portfolio Math Favors Crypto Allocation

The empirical case for crypto allocation centers on low correlation with traditional assets and asymmetric risk-adjusted returns. Over a five-year lookback period, crypto demonstrated near-zero correlation with bonds and commodities—precisely the categories where 60/40 portfolios lack diversification. When EXPAAM modeled adding crypto to traditional portfolios, they found optimal allocation ranges of 3-5% for Bitcoin, 1-2% for Ethereum, and 3-4% for Solana, each improving returns without proportional volatility increases.

Critically, Henry emphasized looking beyond Sharpe ratios, which penalize upside volatility. Using Sortino ratios (downside-focused) and Calmar ratios (drawdown-based), crypto assets provide superior risk-adjusted returns compared to even equities. Bonds—which dominate institutional portfolios—score worst on these metrics. The message is clear: institutions are being compensated for taking crypto volatility, particularly when comparing downside pain to return generation.

The Full Menu of Institutional Strategies

Henry presented a taxonomy of six strategy categories, each serving different institutional mandates. Spot holdings offer the purest expression of crypto conviction with full upside and downside exposure—the growth category. ETFs provide familiar wrappers tradeable in standard brokerage accounts, now increasingly with staking yields built in. Staking itself generates 2-12% yields across networks, particularly attractive in falling-rate environments.

Hedge funds span from directional strategies (potential for 1,000%+ returns in bull markets, 80% drawdowns in bears) to market-neutral approaches using statistical arbitrage, liquidity provision, and DeFi activity for consistent 20%+ returns regardless of market direction. Multi-strategy funds dynamically shift exposure based on macro regimes. Credit and lending strategies capture premium yields from the immature prime brokerage ecosystem. Private markets include traditional venture (equity-based), liquid token venture, and growth-stage investments with clearer unit economics.

EXPAAM's Cycle Management Approach

The presentation revealed EXPAAM's methodology for optimizing allocations across market cycles. Using macroeconomic frameworks—particularly global liquidity analysis—they shift exposure along the risk curve. During high-liquidity environments, allocations favor directional hedge fund managers who can capture maximum upside. As liquidity contracts, positions rotate toward market-neutral strategies that generate consistent returns independent of direction.

This approach aims to capture the full secular technology trend while minimizing drawdowns. Henry described it as a "barbell approach": capital preservation through blue-chip holdings (Bitcoin, Ethereum) on one side, and convexity through specialized managers accessing smaller-cap projects on the other. A 50/50 to 70/30 split between these components optimizes portfolio efficiency within the crypto allocation itself.

Due Diligence Differs Fundamentally from Traditional Finance

Henry outlined nine critical due diligence areas where crypto diverges from traditional asset analysis. Custody tops the list—unlike commoditized tradfi custody, crypto requires evaluating private key management, signing processes, and operational security. Counterparty risk compounds because custodians, exchanges, and fund administrators often blend together in crypto, requiring scrutiny of rehypothecation practices and venue quality.

Tokenomics replaces traditional capital structure analysis—understanding token distribution, vesting schedules, and economic design is as important as evaluating leverage ratios or cash flows in tradfi. Technology risk rivals financial due diligence in importance; protocol quality, smart contract security, and vulnerability to hacks must be thoroughly assessed. In an industry lacking long track records, team evaluation becomes paramount—understanding whether management grasps distributed systems, cryptography, and maintains clear investment processes can differentiate successful from failed investments.

Regulatory Landscape Has Fundamentally Shifted

The presentation documented key regulatory milestones resolving historical institutional concerns. The EU's MiCA framework provides comprehensive rules for stablecoins, custodians, exchanges, and disclosures. The Ripple case established judicial guardrails distinguishing when tokens constitute securities. The Trump administration's bipartisan innovation agenda enabled policy advancement in the US, culminating in the Genius Act providing clear stablecoin frameworks and safe harbor rules.

Perhaps most significant, the SEC's transition from adversarial to collaborative stance has enabled ETF approvals and transparent filing rules. Henry noted that 70% of institutional survey respondents now recognize crypto as an opportunity with significant convexity—more upside than downside. The gap between this interest level and actual allocation mirrors historical patterns in private credit, hedge funds, and emerging markets before they matured.

Facts + Figures

• Crypto is approximately 3% of the way through its adoption journey with more wealth expected to be created over the next decade than internet, cloud, and mobile combined

• Crypto user growth averaged 137% annually from 2016-2021, roughly double the internet's adoption rate; during bear markets, growth maintained at 43%, matching internet's main adoption phase

• Current crypto user base: approximately 1 billion, projected to reach 3-4 billion by 2030

• Bitcoin has returned 36.5 million percent since 2011; Ethereum over 400,000%; Solana over 10,000%

• Total crypto market cap: $3-3.5 trillion—small compared to other major asset classes

• Annual stablecoin transaction volume: $46 trillion

• Monthly active crypto users: 70 million unique individuals engaging in borrowing, lending, swapping, and trading

• Global ETPs and institutional wrappers: $175 billion in assets

• Optimal portfolio allocations: 3-5% Bitcoin, 1-2% Ethereum, or 3-4% Solana improve 60/40 portfolio returns

• Adding crypto increases portfolio volatility by only tens of basis points—within institutional tolerances

• Ethereum's merge reduced energy usage by 99%

• Staking yields range from 2-12% across networks

• Directional hedge funds can return 1,000%+ in bull markets but experience 80% drawdowns in bears

• Market-neutral strategies consistently produce 20%+ annual returns

• 70% of surveyed institutional respondents recognize crypto opportunity with significant convexity

Top Quotes

"We're about 3% of the way through this journey. And actually, there will be over the next 10 years more wealth than the internet cloud and mobile combined."

"From 2016 to 2021, crypto is growing at about 137% every year. And it's about double the rate of the internet."

"If you add up to 5% of Bitcoin, you are improving the returns without an offset increase in volatility."

"Despite these big moves up and down on a risk-adjusted basis, you're well compensated."

"Allocation lacks interest. And basically, nobody does anything until the operational risks and the regulation are taken care of. And what we've seen is crypto is in exactly that spot today."

"On a risk-adjusted basis, you are paid for your volatility. And in fact, by sizing appropriately, you can deal with the volatility very easily."

"If you only are owning Bitcoin and Ethereum, you're not getting the full picture."

"Most of the hedge funds we analyze don't make the cut because they fail in this category [operational controls]."

"Tokenomics is completely replacing capital structure analysis, leverage ratios, cash flow analysis."

"We're on a one-way train to billions of users. And the growth of the internet is a really useful early model for that."

Questions Answered

How much crypto should institutions add to their portfolios?

EXPAAM's analysis shows optimal allocation ranges of 3-5% for Bitcoin, 1-2% for Ethereum, and 3-4% for Solana. These percentages improve portfolio returns without meaningfully increasing overall volatility—the volatility increase is measured in tens of basis points rather than percentage points. Even adding just 1% makes a measurable difference to portfolio efficiency. This finding has led major private banks like Bank of America to begin advising crypto allocations within these ranges.

Why does adding volatile crypto actually improve portfolio efficiency?

The key lies in correlation. Over a five-year period, crypto shows persistently low correlation with traditional asset classes—near zero with bonds and commodities. Since these are precisely the categories where traditional 60/40 portfolios lack diversification, adding crypto provides genuine diversification benefits. Additionally, when measuring returns against downside risk specifically (using Sortino and Calmar ratios rather than Sharpe ratios), crypto compensates investors well for the volatility they experience. The upside volatility that crypto exhibits shouldn't be penalized the same way as downside volatility.

What investment options exist for institutions that cannot hold crypto directly?

Institutions unable to hold spot crypto have multiple alternatives. ETFs provide familiar wrapper structures tradeable in standard brokerage accounts, increasingly with staking yields embedded. Digital asset treasuries like MicroStrategy offer amplified exposure through public equity. Tokenized securities package fund structures with blockchain benefits like instant settlement and programmable compliance. Separately managed accounts provide weekly liquidity with professional custody. Hedge funds—both directional and market-neutral—offer exposure with varying risk profiles and lockup periods.

How do institutional crypto hedge funds compare to traditional finance strategies?

Crypto hedge funds span a wide performance spectrum. Directional fundamental managers can achieve 1,000%+ returns in bull markets but may experience 80% drawdowns in bears—extreme convexity profiles. Market-neutral strategies produce more consistent 20%+ annual returns using statistical arbitrage, DeFi activity, and liquidity provision regardless of market direction. Multi-strategy funds dynamically adjust exposure based on macro conditions. The dispersion in performance across managers is enormous, making manager selection critical. EXPAAM notes most hedge funds they analyze fail due to operational control weaknesses rather than investment strategy issues.

What makes crypto due diligence different from traditional finance?

Nine key areas diverge from tradfi analysis. Custody requires evaluating private key management and signing security rather than assuming commoditized service. Counterparty risk is elevated because custodians, exchanges, and administrators blend together. Tokenomics replaces traditional capital structure analysis—understanding token distribution and economic design matters more than leverage ratios. Technology risk equals financial due diligence in importance; protocol security and smart contract quality must be assessed. Liquidity fragmentation across venues affects execution. Team evaluation becomes paramount given limited track records—management must demonstrate understanding of distributed systems and cryptography.

What regulatory changes have made institutional crypto investment viable?

Multiple frameworks now exist globally. MiCA provides EU-wide rules for stablecoins, custodians, and exchanges. The Ripple case established when tokens are securities under US law. The Genius Act creates clear stablecoin frameworks and safe harbor provisions. The SEC has shifted from adversarial to collaborative, enabling ETF approvals and transparent filing rules. These developments address the historical pattern where allocation lags interest until operational and regulatory risks are resolved. Henry noted this pattern matched previous institutional asset classes like private credit, hedge funds, and emerging markets during their early phases.

How should investors think about crypto market cycles?

EXPAAM manages cycle risk using macroeconomic frameworks, particularly global liquidity analysis. During high-liquidity environments, they favor directional hedge fund managers capturing maximum upside. As liquidity contracts, allocations rotate toward market-neutral strategies generating returns regardless of direction. This approach captures the secular technology trend while minimizing drawdowns. Within a crypto allocation, a barbell approach works well: blue-chip holdings (Bitcoin, Ethereum) for capital preservation combined with specialized managers accessing smaller-cap projects for convexity. A 50/50 to 70/30 split between these components optimizes portfolio efficiency.

What Solana-specific investment strategies exist?

Funds have emerged specifically exploiting Solana's high throughput and low latency characteristics. These strategies capture alpha through mechanisms unique to high-performance blockchains—atomic settlement enabling independent asset exchange without settlement risk, on-chain order book strategies, and other approaches impossible on slower networks. These Solana-specific funds exhibit volatility similar to directional strategies but combine growth and return-seeking characteristics. They represent strategies that simply don't exist in traditional finance, highlighting crypto's unique alpha sources.