The institutional adoption of cryptocurrency represents one of the most dramatic shifts in financial services in decades. What began as skepticism toward a fringe asset class has evolved into active engagement from the world's largest financial institutions. Few professionals have witnessed this transformation as closely as Eugene Ng, whose career spans both traditional Wall Street institutions and pioneering cryptocurrency ventures, providing him with a unique vantage point on how institutional attitudes have fundamentally changed.
"When I first spoke with institutions six months ago, the response was very lukewarm. It was 'we'll take a look when we have some time.' Fast forward today, they're actually sending us a lot of inquiries. It's all in-bound. So that's really a 180-degrees change," said Ng, describing the dramatic shift he's observed in institutional engagement with digital assets.
This transformation—from dismissive skepticism to active pursuit—reflects broader changes in how traditional finance views cryptocurrency's role in portfolio construction, risk management, and client service. Ng's firsthand observations offer valuable insights into the drivers, challenges, and implications of this institutional evolution.
The initial institutional response to cryptocurrency was characterized by deep skepticism rooted in legitimate concerns about regulatory uncertainty, custody challenges, and market volatility. Ng's experience working with institutions across Asia-Pacific markets provided him with front-row access to these early conversations, where cryptocurrency was often dismissed as speculative or inappropriate for institutional portfolios.
"I think when I first spoke with institutions six months ago, the response was very lukewarm," Ng recalled, highlighting how recently institutional attitudes remained resistant to digital asset engagement.
This lukewarm reception reflected institutional risk management cultures that prioritize capital preservation and regulatory compliance above potential returns. For institutions managing fiduciary responsibilities to pension funds, endowments, and sovereign wealth funds, the early cryptocurrency landscape presented more risks than opportunities.
However, Ng observed that even skeptical institutions were beginning to monitor cryptocurrency developments, recognizing that dismissing the asset class entirely could become a strategic disadvantage as markets evolved.
According to Ng, the transformation in institutional attitudes reached a clear inflection point where passive monitoring shifted to active engagement. This change coincided with several external factors: major corporations adding Bitcoin to their balance sheets, regulatory clarity emerging in key jurisdictions, and the development of institutional-grade infrastructure for custody and trading.
"I think that's a testimony that we have come to the inflection point where it's not just a penny sort of asset class. It's more than just like a token right at this moment," Ng explained, describing how institutional perceptions evolved beyond viewing cryptocurrency as merely speculative instruments.
The shift became apparent through changing conversation patterns. Where institutions previously offered polite but disinterested responses to cryptocurrency discussions, Ng began receiving direct inquiries from institutional clients seeking guidance on digital asset strategies.
"Fast forward today, they're actually sending us a lot of inquiries. It's all in-bound," Ng noted, emphasizing how the relationship dynamic completely reversed as institutions moved from passive recipients to active seekers of cryptocurrency expertise.
A crucial accelerator in changing institutional attitudes was the entry of recognizable corporate names into the cryptocurrency space. When established companies like Square and PayPal announced cryptocurrency initiatives, it provided institutional decision-makers with precedent and cover for their own exploration.
"With news like Square, PayPal, all these big giant fintech companies talking about crypto, and banks, I'm confident that a lot of the CEOs at C-level suite management are asking what's a digital asset strategy," Ng observed.
This validation effect extended beyond individual companies to entire sectors. As payment processors, banks, and technology companies announced cryptocurrency initiatives, institutional clients began viewing digital assets as inevitable rather than optional components of modern financial services.
The corporate adoption trend also addressed institutional concerns about reputational risk. By following established companies rather than leading the charge, institutions could engage with cryptocurrency while minimizing potential criticism from stakeholders or regulators.
Perhaps most revealing in Ng's observations is how institutional adoption often depends on individual champions within organizations—employees willing to advocate for cryptocurrency engagement despite internal resistance. He shared a particularly illustrative anecdote about one such institutional champion whose experience encapsulates the broader transformation.
"So one client of mine, that I know before joining Gemini, he was obviously in a very big and large organization and they were looking to cryptocurrency, but there were a lot of resistance," Ng recalled.
Initially, this individual faced significant pushback when promoting cryptocurrency initiatives within his institution. "The poor guy, there [are] a lot of career risks especially during Covid times. You don't want to be the guy who tries to push an initiative that may sound pretty crazy in times like this," Ng explained.
The internal resistance was severe and sustained. "He got so much [pushback] from his colleagues and coworkers and his bosses. He's literally getting so many requests to speak to him,"Eugene noted, describing how the same individual who was previously ignored became the most sought-after person in his organization as institutional attitudes shifted.
This transformation illustrates how institutional adoption often requires internal advocates willing to endure initial skepticism while building the case for engagement. As market conditions and external validation evolved, these early advocates became valuable resources within their organizations.
Through his extensive work with traditional financial institutions, Ng identified the specific concerns and requirements that institutions prioritize when evaluating cryptocurrency engagement. Understanding these institutional needs has proven crucial for businesses attempting to serve this market segment.
"I think one of the things that they really want to figure out is the custody of the assets—who exactly hold [these] assets," Ng explained, highlighting custody as the primary institutional concern when considering cryptocurrency investments.
This custody focus reflects fundamental differences between traditional securities and digital assets. "It is a departure from our traditional securities where we buy a stock and it gets sent into one of our CDPs (central depository) in Singapore. But in crypto, it is slightly different. The exchange is also the carrier, it's also the broker, it's also the custody," Ng noted.
Beyond custody, institutions consistently inquire about diversification opportunities beyond Bitcoin. "A second one would be, 'What else besides bitcoin? What else can I invest besides bitcoin?' So that's also another very commonly asked question that we get," Ng observed.
Regulatory compliance and security protocols represent additional institutional priorities. "Do you guys actually have compliance policies in place? How do you look at security, how do you look at KYC/AML? So these guys are actually looking at these things and we answer those questions for them," Ng explained.
As institutions moved beyond initial curiosity toward actual implementation, they encountered practical challenges in integrating cryptocurrency into existing portfolio management frameworks. Ng observed how institutions grappled with allocation decisions, risk assessment, and performance measurement for digital assets.
"The tradition of popular 60-40 is not going to play out. It's not going to work, especially with three-quarters of the bonds yielding a negative yield," Ng noted, describing how traditional portfolio construction models struggle in current market conditions.
This challenge created opportunities for cryptocurrency to serve institutional portfolio needs. "Having a small allocation whether there is 0.1% to 5%, it all makes sense. And we are starting to hear and have that sort of conversations with a lot of different persons," Ng explained.
The portfolio integration discussion reflects institutional recognition that cryptocurrency can serve legitimate diversification and return enhancement purposes rather than purely speculative positions.
Through his work across diverse institutional clients, Ng observed significant variation in cryptocurrency sophistication and adoption readiness. Rather than treating institutions as a monolithic group, he developed nuanced approaches based on organizational characteristics and constraints.
"I don't think it's a one-size-fits-all, when it comes to answering that question. It really depends on who you're talking to," Ng explained when asked about institutional readiness levels.
Organizational size often correlates with adoption speed, but not always in expected ways. "Generally speaking, the larger the institution, there is going to be a lot more of a formal processing. And they're probably going to move a lot slower," Ng noted.
Conversely, smaller institutions often demonstrate greater agility. "With respect to a family office or an office where there is more discretion and they can be more nimble. So it really depends on the type of organization that we speak to," Ng observed.
Despite these differences, Ng identified universal baseline knowledge. "I think one commonality is that all of these guys are aware of crypto and they do have that basic understanding of bitcoin," he noted, suggesting that institutional education has progressed significantly from early skepticism.
The Regulatory Comfort Factor
A crucial factor enabling institutional adoption has been the gradual emergence of regulatory clarity in key jurisdictions. Ng's experience working across multiple regulatory environments provided him with insights into how regulatory development influences institutional comfort levels.
"We like regulations. We welcome that," Ng emphasized, describing how clear regulatory frameworks enable rather than hinder institutional engagement.
This perspective contrasts sharply with early cryptocurrency culture, which often viewed regulation as antithetical to digital assets' innovative potential. Ng's institutional experience taught him that regulatory clarity creates the confidence necessary for large-scale adoption.
His work obtaining various licenses across different jurisdictions demonstrates how regulatory compliance can serve as a competitive advantage when serving institutional clients who require such assurance before engaging with cryptocurrency businesses.
Looking ahead, Ng anticipates continued institutional adoption driven by fundamental portfolio needs rather than speculative interest. This evolution represents a maturation of both institutional understanding and cryptocurrency infrastructure.
"And with the innovation that we're seeing in crypto space today, you don't just buy bitcoin and hold it, there are so many other use cases, you can invest in interest-bearing product—it's more than just diversifying and it's becoming more of an investment," Ng explained.
This perspective suggests that institutional adoption will accelerate as cryptocurrency products become more sophisticated and aligned with traditional institutional investment processes.
The trend toward institutional adoption also reflects broader recognition that cryptocurrency represents fundamental technological innovation rather than temporary market speculation. As institutions develop internal expertise and regulatory frameworks continue evolving, Ng expects engagement to deepen rather than remain superficial.
The transformation in institutional attitudes toward digital assets represents one of the most significant developments in cryptocurrency's evolution from fringe curiosity to mainstream financial instrument. Eugene Ng's observations from the front lines of this transition offer valuable insights into both the challenges and opportunities that define institutional adoption.
"I think that's really a testimony that we have come to the inflection point," Ng reflected, describing how institutional engagement has fundamentally shifted the cryptocurrency landscape.
For institutions still evaluating digital asset strategies, Ng's experience suggests that engagement is becoming a competitive necessity rather than an optional exploration. As regulatory frameworks continue developing and institutional infrastructure matures, the question may shift from whether institutions should engage with cryptocurrency to how quickly they can develop effective strategies.
The institutional transformation Ng has witnessed represents more than portfolio diversification—it signals cryptocurrency's transition from alternative asset to core financial infrastructure, with implications extending far beyond individual investment decisions.
Join our WhatsApp Channel to get the latest news, exclusives and videos on WhatsApp
_____________
Disclaimer: Analytics Insight does not provide financial advice or guidance on cryptocurrencies and stocks. Also note that the cryptocurrencies mentioned/listed on the website could potentially be scams, i.e. designed to induce you to invest financial resources that may be lost forever and not be recoverable once investments are made. This article is provided for informational purposes and does not constitute investment advice. You are responsible for conducting your own research (DYOR) before making any investments. Read more about the financial risks involved here.