Skip to main content


Managing risk in digital asset custody partnerships

In January 2024, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved the listing and trading of several spot bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs), which could signal a significant shift in the regulatory landscape for digital assets in the US, and potentially other geographies.
Creative forex data chart

In January 2024, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved the listing and trading of several spot bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs), which could signal a significant shift in the regulatory landscape for digital assets in the US, and potentially other geographies. Following the first two months of trading in the US, the UK Financial Conduct Authority softened its stance on digital assets, saying it would “not object” to the creation of bitcoin and Ethereum-backed exchange traded notes for professional investors.

Many believe this creates positive momentum and adds legitimacy to bitcoin, particularly given that the SEC rejected multiple ETF applications for nearly a decade on the grounds that they were susceptible to fraud and manipulation. The SEC approval statement, however, reminds investors to remain cautious.

What are bitcoin ETFs?

The new ETFs will make investing in bitcoin more accessible. Investors will be able to gain exposure to bitcoin without holding it directly. Instead, ETF investments are backed by bitcoin purchased by the fund; in most cases, the bitcoin is held by a third-party custodian on behalf of the fund. A spot bitcoin ETF invests directly in bitcoin rather than derivatives contracts that are based on the prices of bitcoin.

Four considerations for bitcoin ETFs

The respective roles of funds and custodians are worth exploring, particularly the risk and insurance-related considerations for each.

Consider insurance requirements and contractual risk transfer

As with other critical vendors, insurance requirements and contractual indemnities are key to the custodian due diligence process. While a variety of insurance solutions exist for digital asset custody, not all firms approach risk management or transfer uniformly, and not all insurance coverage is equal. Funds should understand the scope and type of the prospective custodian’s insurance, focusing on how it aligns with the custody architecture and technology rather than simply determining whether and how much insurance is in place.

Understand contingent risk

Even with robust technical controls and custodian insurance, some risks remain the responsibility of the fund sponsor. The fund may be responsible for certain aspects of securing digital assets, for example, through maintaining a key shard, multiparty computation node, signing devices, or determining allowable “whitelisted” addresses for withdrawals. Funds may seek to purchase coverage to protect them in the case of internal fraud, account take over, computer fraud, and other liabilities.

Generally, traditional forms of insurance can cover digital asset exposures, but policies may need to be tailored to address specific risks. Furthermore, some insurers are reluctant to cover digital asset risk, even on a contingent basis. This means that presentation of robust underwriting information can be critical to securing the insurance coverage desired. Engage with your broker or insurance advisor to align insurance policies with the specific risks that are prevalent and to determine potential limitations.

Determine the extent of uninsured or underinsured risk

Some risks remain uninsured or underinsured for various reasons, including limitations on insurance market appetite and capacity, and perceived aggregation risk. In addition to mapping risks to insurance, fund may wish to qualitatively and quantitatively examine select non-transferrable risks, enabling a broader enterprise view of risk tolerance and impact measurement.

Evaluate the benefits of multiple custodians

Less than a month after the new spot bitcoin ETFs started trading, it was reported that one provider added a second custodian in order to mitigate risk. Should others follow suit, financial and operational trade-offs can be evaluated by measuring how the magnitude and volatility of risk changes in different scenarios (for example, using one or more custodians and comparing different types of custody). This framework can be used for other strategic decisions and aligned to the fund’s growth over time to evaluate future risk, thereby connecting risk to strategy. 

Notably, this approach is not specific to ETF sponsors and may extend to any firm providing custody or partnering with a digital asset custodian, and this decision is not US specific. As highlighted the UK Financial Conduct Authority has already softened its stance on digital assets. Understanding risk through financial stress testing can help firms identify and quantify material risks in financial terms. Financial stress testing can also enable strategic decisions at the executive and board levels and help provide a measure of present and future risk scenarios, ultimately supporting growth opportunities for firms in the interconnected digital asset ecosystem.

As the regulatory landscape for digital assets continues to evolve, funds and other institutions partnering with digital asset custodians should carefully consider the potential risks and assess whether their existing insurance programs, risk management strategies, and approach to managing counterparty risk are designed to provide the desired protection.

Our people

Luke Costello

Luke Costello

Senior Account Executive, FINPRO – Corporate

Placeholder Image

Hannah Morgans

Growth Leader, Cyber

  • Australia

This publication is not intended to be taken as advice regarding any individual situation and should not be relied upon as such. The information contained herein is based on sources we believe reliable, but we make no representation or warranty as to its accuracy. Marsh shall have no obligation to update this publication and shall have no liability to you or any other party arising out of this publication or any matter contained herein. Any statements concerning actuarial, tax, accounting, or legal matters are based solely on our experience as insurance brokers and risk consultants and are not to be relied upon as actuarial, accounting, tax, or legal advice, for which you should consult your own professional advisors. Any modelling, analytics, or projections are subject to inherent uncertainty, and any analysis could be materially affected if any underlying assumptions, conditions, information, or factors are inaccurate or incomplete or should change.

LCPA 24/173

Marsh Pty Ltd (ABN 86 004 651 512, AFSL 238983) (“Marsh”) arrange this insurance and is not the insurer. The Discretionary Trust Arrangement is issued by the Trustee, JLT Group Services Pty Ltd (ABN 26 004 485 214, AFSL 417964) (“JGS”). JGS is part of the Marsh group of companies. Any advice in relation to the Discretionary Trust Arrangement is provided by JLT Risk Solutions Pty Ltd (ABN 69 009 098 864, AFSL 226827) which is a related entity of Marsh. The cover provided by the Discretionary Trust Arrangement is subject to the Trustee’s discretion and/or the relevant policy terms, conditions and exclusions. This website contains general information, does not take into account your individual objectives, financial situation or needs and may not suit your personal circumstances. For full details of the terms, conditions and limitations of the covers and before making any decision about whether to acquire a product, refer to the specific policy wordings and/or Product Disclosure Statements available from JLT Risk Solutions on request. Full information can be found in the JLT Risk Solutions Financial Services Guide.”