Stablecoins, tokenisation and decentralised finance (DeFi) have woken traditional financial institutions to the potential of digital assets. This is no longer a fringe idea; there are clear signs that digital assets are rapidly becoming a fixture of the financial system – as 86% of institutional investors already have exposure to digital assets and nine major banks announced plans to launch a euro-dominated stablecoin in September 2025. Consumer demand is also growing, with 820 million crypto wallets live in 2025.

The scale of demand is undeniable, and the opportunity is clear. However, the question now becomes: can financial institutions offer digital assets with the same standards of security, continuity and recoverability that customers and regulators expect?

The Institutional Opportunity

Consumer demand for digital assets is growing, and financial institutions are alert to the commercial opportunities. But the real engine of adoption is broader than retail investment alone. Stablecoins, in particular, are shifting digital assets from a speculative use case into payments infrastructure, with clear relevance for cross-border transfers, settlement and treasury operations. The total value of issued stablecoins is forecast to reach more than $2 trillion by 2028, a surefire sign of their growing role in mainstream financial infrastructure.

The opportunity for banks and financial institutions is enormous, but it’s also the responsibility of these institutions and regulatory bodies to ensure that digital assets can be accessed in a secure and resilient way. There is clear cause for concern, with an estimated one in five bitcoin – $350 billion worth – now permanently inaccessible due to loss of access. Consumer trust and confidence, therefore, remains one of the main barriers to the widespread adoption of digital assets, and for the sector to mature and scale, and for traditional financial institutions to take full advantage of this opportunity, customers will need assurance that innovation will not come at the expense of their financial security.

Balancing Regulation and Innovation

The UK’s digital asset ecosystem is growing rapidly, and regulatory requirements and expectations are developing alongside it. This represents a significant shift in how the UK manages digital assets, and it puts pressure on institutions around compliance, accountability and transparency.

The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has made it clear that the UK is moving towards a comprehensive set of digital asset regulations. The Cryptoasset Regulations 2026, which fully come into force in October 2027, signals a point of maturation for the market, but it also leads to increased pressures for institutions to demonstrate compliance and accountability. Equally, the Bank of England is also pushing forward with plans for stablecoin regulation in association with the FCA under the UK European Market Infrastructure Regulation. This clearly demonstrates that for the UK Government and regulators, consumer protections and preventing loss of access to assets are high on the agenda.

Institutions are also more likely to scale activity where rules and responsibilities are clear. Done right, regulation doesn’t slow innovation, it gives institutions the structure they need, and as demand is moving in the right direction, there is only one more missing piece.

Embedding the Right Infrastructure

Regulation creates the right foundations, but customer trust is earned in the “what if?” moments: what if a customer loses access? What if a key-holder leaves the firm? What if a critical wallet becomes inaccessible during a market stress event?

Scaling adoption isn’t just about building the right products, it’s about whether customers, counterparties and regulators believe the system will protect them when something goes wrong. That’s where the trust gap appears.

The expectation across traditional financial assets is that access can be fully recovered if a mistake is made – the ‘forgotten password’ principle – and customers demand the same for digital assets. If you lose your login, misplace your device or make an operational mistake, there is a governed process to restore access and keep critical assets safe. Crypto’s design often flips that expectation; when private keys or seed phrases are lost, access is permanently lost, even if the assets remain visible on-chain. This creates an institutional issue – key loss and process failure are predictable failure modes of any human system, and you cannot build institutional trust on that fragility.

Self-Custody

The problem isn’t self-custody itself, it is that self-custody at scale becomes an operational risk transfer. Self-backup remains the number one method by which self-custodied consumers protect their digital assets, but it is not sustainable at institutional scale, and it is unlikely to satisfy regulatory expectations as oversight tightens.

Institutions need robust recovery technologies and the infrastructure to build confidence and scale effectively – for their own assets and that of their customers. This needs to be incorporated from the start, not added on when something goes wrong, at which point it is already too late. This is particularly relevant as digital assets move towards mainstream adoption, where consumers cannot be expected to be cognisant of the risks of self-custody – principally, the risk of digital assets in a wallet being permanently lost due to a lost seed phrase. Having a viable recovery method as part of an institution’s core infrastructure helps to offset these concerns and puts institutional and consumer security first. Without it, institutions face risk of high-profile losses, inconsistent outcomes and a persistent perception that digital asset innovation comes at the cost of safety.

In practice, this means layered protection against lost access, matched to the risk profile of each use case, and for consumers, it means a governed path back to access when a seed phrase or device is lost without opening the door to fraud. Institutions need wallet disaster recovery that quickly restores operations and has clear controls over who can trigger recovery is vital. This is a business continuity issue, not a ‘nice-to-have’. A firm that cannot access its own wallets is operationally frozen.

The Path Ahead

The institutional opportunity in digital assets is real and growing. But adoption will ultimately be defined by whether traditional finance can deliver trust at scale. Regulation is heading in the right direction, and the UK is establishing a clear framework, but regulation needs to be accompanied by progress in infrastructure. Firms need recovery capabilities that protect assets and maintain access when errors, failures or disruptions occur – the ‘forgotten password’ feature that we are used to in in traditional finance. 

Pair comprehensive regulation with resilient recovery frameworks, and institutions can finally offer digital assets with the assurance customers expect – that innovation won’t come at the cost of security.

Learn more at coincover.com