Bitwise’s first Institutional Crypto Adoption Report found that none of 15 large institutions reduced their crypto exposure during a market drawdown of roughly 50% between October 2025 and April 2026. Several increased their allocations, while most maintained crypto exposure between 1% and 2% of investable assets.

The institutions surveyed included endowments, foundations, pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, multi-family offices and public companies. Their portfolios ranged from hundreds of millions of dollars to tens of billions of dollars. Crypto allocations varied from 0.5% to 13% of investable assets.

Bitwise said institutions are generally reluctant to disclose their cryptocurrency positions. The firm therefore asked 15 of the world’s largest investment firms how they were allocating to crypto. The report is available through Bitwise’s Institutional Crypto Adoption Report.

Institutions are generally reluctant to announce their crypto positions. So we asked 15 of the world’s largest investment firms how they’re allocating to crypto today. Introducing the first-ever Bitwise Institutional Crypto Adoption Report. — Bitwise (@Bitwise) September 23, 2026

Several surveyed institutions increased their allocations during the period. The finding contrasts with public data showing substantial Bitcoin exchange-traded fund outflows and complicates the interpretation that ETF selling represented broad institutional withdrawal from crypto markets. Daily ETF flow tallies are among the most closely watched public indicators of institutional crypto demand, and the report suggests that indicator can diverge from what longer-term allocators are actually doing.

Bitcoin was the common institutional holding

Every surveyed institution that was already invested in crypto held Bitcoin. It was typically the first, largest and longest-held digital asset in those portfolios. Some allocators paired Bitcoin with gold as part of broader store-of-value strategies.

US-listed spot Bitcoin ETFs, which began trading in January 2024, gave allocators a regulated, securities-based route into the market. Exposure was not limited to ETF products, however. Institutions also used directly held crypto, venture investments and hedge funds, giving them multiple ways to maintain market exposure.

Ethereum and Solana received less consistent support. The report said those assets were generally treated as smaller, shorter-duration technology investments. Continued ownership depended on network adoption translating into token value.

Bitwise said falling prices alone were not cited as a reason to exit. Respondents instead pointed to a failed investment thesis, regulatory reversals or an industry credibility crisis as potential triggers for reducing exposure.

ETF outflows and 13F filings offered a partial picture

Market data showed heavy ETF withdrawals during the downturn. Bitwise described the second quarter as the worst quarter for spot Bitcoin ETF outflows. Farside Investors recorded $691.7 million in ETF outflows on June 25 and another $444.5 million on June 26.

Bloomberg ETF analyst James Seyffart said ETF flow data and Form 13F filings broadly supported Bitwise’s findings. He said hedge funds and retail traders and investors accounted for much of the selling, while longer-term allocators generally remained invested.

ETF Flow data and 13F reporting data back up this Bitwise survey that says long term allocators to Bitcoin ETFs held through the ~50% drawdown and many even bought more. By far, the biggest sellers of the ETFs over the last ~year were hedge funds and retail traders/investors — James Seyffart (@JSeyff) September 23, 2026

Form 13F data nevertheless provides only a partial view. Qualifying managers report covered securities to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission quarterly, generally within 45 days, a schedule that can leave the public record months behind current positioning. The filings do not capture every investment vehicle or retail position. Bitwise also found that some institutions intentionally used structures that avoided 13F visibility.

The firm said reported institutional crypto ownership should therefore be treated as a floor rather than a complete measure. The sample was small and anonymized, covering only 15 institutions. Even so, the findings distinguish ETF outflows from institutional exits: during the roughly 50% drawdown, surveyed allocators largely held their positions, and some increased their exposure. Future editions of the survey and upcoming quarters of 13F filings are the natural checkpoints for whether that pattern extended beyond the study window.