Bitwise's latest institutional research finds that large investors increasingly view bitcoin through a dual lens — framing it like gold while allocating capital to it the way they would a technology venture.

The survey covered endowments, foundations, public pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, multi-family offices, investment consultants, and public companies managing assets ranging from hundreds of millions to tens of billions of dollars. Interviews were conducted between late March and April 2026, a period when bitcoin ($BTC) traded near $75,000. The findings come from Bitwise, a crypto asset manager whose research arm regularly surveys professional investors on digital-asset allocations.

According to the report, "most" respondents who own crypto assets describe bitcoin as "a store of value with asymmetric upside, often paired with gold as a fiat debasement hedge." The report does not specify how many respondents "most" represents, nor how frequently they "often" pair the two assets.

Bitcoin as a 'Central Part of the Equation'

"For most institutions we interviewed, bitcoin and gold now travel together. Especially for those concerned about fiat debasement, bitcoin is a central part of the equation," the report stated. It was co-authored by Bitwise Chief Investment Officer Matt Hougan and Head of Research Ryan Rasmussen.

One unidentified institution said it keeps bitcoin within its portfolio's "gold bucket." Yet other findings show crypto assets are mostly held in venture, innovation, and technology investment buckets. That placement matters, since it shapes what each position is measured against and over what time horizon it is judged.

One foundation, an outlier whose crypto position has at times exceeded 10%, treats "crypto as a growth and disruption bet." A pension fund positioned "crypto as part of a broader innovation allocation including AI, life sciences, space, and other innovative tech," while a sovereign wealth fund described its crypto allocation, in Bitwise's words, as a multi-year bet on achieving global recognition rather than near-term return.

"One foundation rejected the 'digital gold' framing entirely, categorizing all crypto as disruptive technology rather than a store of value," the report noted. Meanwhile, per Coinglass data, the correlation between $BTC and gold has been volatile this year.

Both Digital Gold and a 'Venture-Style Bet'

The mixed view was echoed by one endowment that simultaneously calls $BTC an "emerging-to-established store-of-value" play and "a venture-style bet."

The report therefore reflects bitcoin's still-fluid identity as both a multipurpose asset and a multipurpose technology, with constantly shifting narratives. This evolving perception, combined with longer-term price performance, has helped bitcoin become "the universal conviction asset" — a status ether and solana have yet to attain among surveyed institutions.

"Every institution we interviewed that owns crypto owns bitcoin," the report said, adding that "most" hold $BTC as a standalone position. Crypto allocations among respondents range from 0.5% to 13% of investable assets, with most between 1% and 2%.

The Barrier of Committees

These mixed messages may also reflect how institutions make decisions about crypto allocations. "Where one person can decide, crypto gets allocated. Where a committee must agree, it often stalls," Bitwise wrote — a dynamic that may also shape how these assets are positioned within.

Despite such ambiguity, bitcoin and the broader crypto sector continue moving deeper into the portfolios of even the most conservative institutions. As reported by Bitcoin.com News in March 2026, the central bank of Kazakhstan announced plans to use gold and foreign exchange reserves to invest up to $350 million in a portfolio of crypto asset proxies for diversification purposes.

Exit Criteria Beyond Price

Another finding shows that interviewed institutions did not reduce their crypto allocations during the broader market sell-off between October 2025 and April 2026, and several bought more. However, multiple large institutional investors did cut their bitcoin exposure during that period, including Harvard University, while some investors — banks, governments, private equity firms, family offices, and insurers — increased their allocations, according to CoinShares data.

When asked by Bitwise what would prompt them to exit, none of the institutions named price. Bitcoin-only holders said they would reconsider their positioning if ether or solana demonstrated clear value accrual, while investors holding ETH and SOL positions would consider exiting if those tokens failed to show real utility. Sovereigns also cited a regulatory reversal or an industry-wide credibility crisis as potential exit triggers. Those exit criteria give observers concrete markers to track going forward — the pace at which ether and solana demonstrate real utility and value accrual, and the direction of regulation across the sector.