The State of Institutional Crypto – Watchlists, Workflows, and Whitespaces

Institutional crypto has entered a different phase of its development. Nearly three-quarters (73%) of institutional investors plan to increase their digital asset allocations in 2026, and the share allocating more than 5% of AUM is expected to rise from 18% to 29%, according to a January 2026 survey of 351 institutions by EY-Parthenon and Coinbase.

Digital assets now sit within the investable universe of hedge funds, asset managers, family offices, banks, and other sophisticated investors. The conversations taking place across the market reflect that progression. For many institutions, the question is no longer whether digital assets warrant participation. It is how that participation should be structured, executed, and scaled. 

Access was an important problem for the industry to solve. The next set of questions is more demanding: Where is liquidity actually available? How reliably can it be accessed? How much capital needs to sit across venues? What does execution cost after slippage and market impact? How efficiently can positions, collateral, and treasury operations be managed across the trading lifecycle? 

Where institutions choose to trade is already shifting. Institutional spot OTC volumes grew 109% year on year, against 9% growth on the top 20 centralised exchanges, roughly twelve times the pace, according to Finery Markets' Crypto OTC Trading Report 2026. Forty percent of institutions surveyed named OTC as their first-choice execution venue, routing more than half of their trades off-screen. 
These answers will shape the next stage of institutional crypto. 

What institutions are watching now

The institutional crypto stack has expanded considerably. Liquidity now spans centralised exchanges, OTC desks, market makers and decentralised protocols, supported by a growing ecosystem of execution, custody and settlement providers.

The priorities around that infrastructure are becoming clearer. The same research by EY-Parthenon and Coinbase showed that nearly half (49%) of institutional investors have strengthened their focus on risk management, liquidity, and position sizing following recent market volatility. Trading infrastructure is also moving up the agenda, with 69% identifying digital-asset trading capabilities as a priority over the next two years. Among firms with more than $500bn in AUM, that figure rises to 78%.

The economics explain why. Capital distributed inefficiently across venues carries an opportunity cost. Poor execution erodes returns. Manual processes introduce operational risk. Limited execution visibility makes transaction-cost analysis harder, while fragmented reporting adds reconciliation work to portfolios spanning multiple venues, counterparties and products. In the same survey, 61% of respondents invested in digital assets already use more than one custodian.

At institutional scale, these costs accumulate and can prove detrimental to the bottom line. Infrastructure is now part of the investment equation.

Crypto has plenty of liquidity. The challenge is orchestrating it. 

Crypto liquidity today is distributed across a remarkably broad market. There are global exchanges, regional exchanges, OTC desks, principal liquidity providers, market makers, aggregators, on-chain pools, and specialised DeFi venues. Each can offer different pricing, depth, products, and counterparty arrangements at any given moment. 

Venue count is therefore a poor proxy for executable liquidity. 

Kaiko's Q1 2026 Exchange Ranking assessed 44 spot exchanges, yet depth has historically clustered on a small number of them: Kaiko's 2023 liquidity concentration study found the top eight exchanges held 91.7% of global market depth. 

Executing a sizable order requires an institution to determine where sufficient depth exists, how that depth changes as an order moves through the market and how routing decisions affect market impact. Every additional venue also introduces onboarding requirements, API integrations, collateral arrangements, counterparty limits and reconciliation processes.

This shifts the infrastructure challenge from liquidity access towards liquidity orchestration: identifying and coordinating liquidity across multiple sources while managing the capital and operational requirements surrounding each trade.

The ability to connect to more venues has value. The ability to use those connections efficiently has considerably more.

Execution quality is becoming part of the investment strategy

Headline price tells only part of the story of a trade. Institutional execution also needs to account for slippage, market impact, information leakage, fill rates, and consistency. A price that looks attractive at the beginning of an order can become expensive once the full size has moved through the market. 

These effects compound for systematic investors. A few basis points of unnecessary execution cost repeated across thousands of trades becomes a meaningful drag on portfolio returns. The same principle applies to capital sitting idle across venues or collateral that cannot be redeployed efficiently. More than just a trading outcome, this makes best execution an operational capability. 

The strongest execution infrastructure should help investors understand where liquidity sits, route orders intelligently, minimise market impact, and provide sufficient transparency to evaluate the outcome afterwards. 

Institutional scale requires simpler workflows

Operational complexity creates another layer of cost.

Trading across multiple exchanges can mean maintaining separate onboarding processes, APIs, collateral pools, credit arrangements, settlement procedures and reporting systems. Treasury teams need to position capital across venues, trading teams need access to liquidity at the right moment, and operations teams must reconcile the activity afterwards.

The burden grows as institutions expand across assets, strategies and geographies.

This creates a strong case for consolidated infrastructure that brings execution, liquidity access, settlement and reporting into a more coherent workflow. Institutions can still reach a fragmented underlying market without reproducing that fragmentation across their own operations.

Where the infrastructure whitespace remains 

There is still considerable room to improve the infrastructure underpinning institutional participation.

Cross-venue execution needs to become more sophisticated as liquidity spreads across different market structures. Settlement needs better coordination across venues and counterparties. 

Treasury infrastructure needs to give institutions greater control over assets and collateral, while capital efficiency must improve to reduce excessive prefunding and idle balances.

Workflow automation is another important frontier. Trading, settlement, reconciliation, and reporting still contain processes that can become cumbersome when replicated across multiple venues.

These challenges are closely linked. Finding the best liquidity has limited value if accessing it requires capital to remain idle across numerous venues. Sophisticated routing delivers an incomplete solution if institutions cannot accurately assess execution afterwards.

Where the next institutional advantage will be built

Institutional crypto has spent years expanding its investable universe. The focus now moves towards making that universe more efficient to navigate at scale, and the infrastructure that connects execution, capital, and operations will determine how efficiently that navigation happens.

This is the market need Auros seeks to address: providing institutions with a unified execution layer for navigating fragmented liquidity while reducing the operational complexity that comes with trading across multiple venues.

As institutional participation deepens, the quality of the infrastructure around that capital will carry as much weight as access itself. 

‍Disclaimer

The material provided in this document is for informational purposes only and is intended only for institutional or professional counterparties. This document does not constitute, or is intended to, or shall be construed as or deemed to, constitute (i) any legal, financial, investment, tax or trading advice to, or an offer or commitment or a solicitation to, enter into or conclude any transactions, including any sale or purchase of any digital assets, or any form of financial instruments referencing digital assets, or (ii) an offer or commitment to provide any services or products by Auros in any jurisdiction, in each case, where such an advice, offer, commitment, solicitation or provision would be illegal. This document is not directed at, nor intended for distribution to or use by, any person residing or located in any country or jurisdiction where such distribution or use would be illegal or contrary to local laws and regulations.

The contents of this document are provided "as is" and without representations and warranties of any kind either express or implied. Auros and its affiliates (and each of their respective employees, shareholders, directors, officers and representatives) is not liable whatsoever for any indirect, special, consequential or punitive damages, or for any costs, expenses, losses, damages or liability (direct or consequential) arising from the use or reliance of any content in this document, or the applicability of this document for the specific purposes and objectives of the recipient of this document. You are advised to conduct your own research and seek independent legal, financial, investment or other professional advice.

Neither this document or any copy thereof may be taken, reproduced, redistributed, directly or indirectly, without the prior written consent of Auros.