Institutions Held Crypto Through 50% Drawdown, Bitwise Finds

A group of 15 institutional investors maintained their crypto allocations through a market drawdown of roughly 50%, according to a Bitwise report cited by Cointelegraph. Several investors increased their positions, suggesting that long-term conviction—not short-term price action—was the primary factor guiding their decisions.

Bitcoin Anchors Institutional Portfolios

Bitwise’s Institutional Crypto Adoption Report is based on interviews conducted in late March and April, during a decline that began in October 2025. Participants included investment professionals from endowments, foundations, public pensions, sovereign wealth funds, multi-family offices, investment consultants and public companies.

Every institution in the group with crypto exposure held Bitcoin (BTC). Bitcoin was typically the largest and longest-held digital asset in their portfolios, making it the clearest institutional consensus in the survey.

Crypto allocations among institutions with exposure ranged from 0.5% to 13% of investable assets, although most fell between 1% and 2%. Nearly all respondents either used or planned to use spot crypto exchange-traded funds, with some moving away from private placements or direct custody in favor of ETF structures.

The findings do not necessarily indicate that institutional demand was uniformly rising. A CoinShares 13F data report published in June found that professional investors’ reported exposure to US spot Bitcoin ETFs declined 17% in the first quarter. Hedge funds and brokerages accounted for about 96% of that reduction, while banks increased their exposure.

Ether and Solana Face a “Prove It” Test

Institutional conviction was less consistent for Ether (ETH) and Solana (SOL). Both assets appeared as smaller positions with shorter investment horizons, and some investors established conditions under which they would sell.

Several institutions said they could exit Ether or Solana over the next few years if growth in areas such as stablecoins, decentralized finance and tokenization failed to create meaningful value for the underlying tokens. One institution held neither asset despite extensive use of DeFi applications, saying it saw no clear mechanism through which that activity would benefit the tokens themselves.

The distinction puts Solana under a more demanding institutional evaluation framework than Bitcoin. Network activity and ecosystem growth may support investment theses, but institutions increasingly appear focused on whether that usage translates into durable token value accrual.

What This Means

The survey suggests institutional investors may be more resilient during volatility than short-term fund-flow data implies. None of the interviewed institutions identified falling prices alone as a reason to sell. Instead, potential exit triggers included a regulatory reversal, an industry-wide credibility crisis or a failure of the original investment thesis.

For Solana, the result is constructive but qualified. Continued institutional interest is possible, particularly through regulated ETF access and measurable network growth, but adoption alone may not be enough. Investors are likely to scrutinize whether activity across DeFi, stablecoins and tokenization strengthens SOL’s long-term economic role.