The RIAs are not extreme risk takers with regard to the confidence they have established in their relationships with customers. An advisory company takes years to build and is not as sure as the confidence that customers place there.
If there is one thing that can quickly undermine this confidence, it is an unnecessary risk.
For the RIAs, the cryptographic (or “digital active”) industry has traditionally known exactly that: useless operational, legal and regulatory risks. At the same time, customers are asking for better access to digital assets. Surveys – including those of well -established institutions as America Bank And Charles Schwab– Indicate an increasing percentage of investors want exposure to digital assets.
These requirements place the RIAs in a precarious position where the very thing they need to develop their business – offering access to digital assets – does not mention at the same time.
In search of solutions, the same surveys invariably cite “regulatory concerns” as the number one barrier at the entrance. Take it 2025 Bitwise and Vettafi Survey on digital assets, for example:
Despite the regulatory concerns at the top of the list each year, what is lacking in these surveys is a tangible discussion on these concerns or on the way companies could sail in this environment. Instead, the investigation into the same bit and Vettafi 2025 offers an analysis of 1 to 2 sentences citing “clearer regulations” as the antidote:
This survey is only an example of a broader lack of real information on this issue. How can a management team use this for decision-making? The unfortunate elephant in the room is that the answer to the question of “regulatory concerns” pushes the majority of RIAs to invest in this asset class.
In practice, “regulatory concerns” are not a vague tote; It is a direct commercial obstacle to offer certain asset classes.
Based on my experience and my discussions with RIA management teams, here are three critical road roadblocks that explain why many RIAs remain on the sidelines.
What am I really exchanged?
The RIAs need legal clarity on what is exchanged because their operational framework is built around traditional asset classes. An ambiguous “almost-security” token does not cut it. Until there is a final classification – something that can be treated, reported and stored in the same protocols used for titles – most advisers will simply not touch it.
Big Crypto likes to discuss and give legal opinions on the status and classifications of his tokens. However, the RIAs do not put their relations with customers in danger on the basis of legal opinions, and the management teams of RIA do not create companies according to these opinions. They will gladly wait for these legal frameworks to be written and codified in law.
Risk of compensation for financial intermediaries
These are the best practices of the industry – the effective CYAs for a RIA – to associate themselves with properly approved guards, the brokers and the other financial intermediaries. Under the federal laws on securities, these entities must comply with the customer protection rule (rule 15C3-3), which guarantees customer assets by requiring that brokers separate funds and customer securities and to return them quickly on request. Although this does not eliminate all the risks associated with corruption or insolvency, the partnership with the entities subject to these rules helps to alleviate potential RIA concerns when managing customer assets and the promotion of customer confidence.
Unfortunately, there is a lack of intermediaries recorded on the SEC on the American market, because most of the inherited cryptography platforms have opted for state licenses or monetary issuer licenses, which has risked too much for most RIAs and their customers.
Internal compliance policies and procedures
In any consulting company regulated by the SEC, robust internal compliance checks are essential. Advisers must demonstrate that they are not leading customers, that all transactions align with fiduciary obligations and that the recordings are easily verifiable. But the crypto is negotiated 24 hours a day, 7 days a week, 365 days a year, creating a non -stop cycle that traditional compliance systems are poorly equipped to manage. The construction and staffing of a 24 -hour surveillance framework, the integration of new tools for holding files and guarantee solid surveillance of emerging markets is a massive company. Until digital assets are a need to serve, not a good house, the RIA will hesitate to invest in the revision of their process and internal compliance policies.
Sources of trust
To really understand what “regulatory concerns” mean, investigation practitioners should go directly to professionals where it most matters – CIOs, compliance officers and operations managers who are the guards of any new class of investing assets. If an investigation does not capture its perspective, the results – as we have seen – have made an incomplete (and often too optimistic) image of the feeling of the advisers.
The next time a Crypto survey highlights “regulatory concerns” as an obstacle to entry, to dig more deeply. What are the concerns? Has the sponsor mapped potential solutions? Advisers need clarifications on the classification of assets, counterparts on which they can rely and internal compliance procedures in force as a contribution to the request of the cross.
