As institutional investors pushed Bitcoin to new heights earlier this year, many predicted a corresponding explosion in the decentralized finance (DeFi) industry. The timing was right for institutions to join DeFi, as its total value locked (TVL) had already exceeded $100 billion. However, the anticipated surge in institutional funding for DeFi has not materialized as planned. The article focuses on the main obstacles institutions face when implementing DeFi.
Regulatory Challenges and Institutional Barriers in DeFi
One major obstacle that institutions face is regulatory ambiguity. The hazy categorization of cryptocurrency assets, particularly stablecoins, makes compliance more difficult in large markets like the United States and the European Union. This ambiguity increases costs and discourages institutional involvement. Certain jurisdictions with more transparent regulatory frameworks, such as Switzerland, Singapore, and the UAE, have drawn early adopters. Institutions are wary of confidently entering the DeFi area because of the absence of worldwide regulatory uniformity, which hinders cross-border capital allocation.
Further discouraging direct involvement are regulatory frameworks such as Basel III, which impose strict capital requirements on financial institutions holding Crypto assets. As a result of these regulatory limitations, numerous institutions are choosing to avoid direct involvement by forming subsidiaries or specialized investment vehicles. However, U.S. DeFi regulations may transform since the Trump administration is anticipated to place a greater emphasis on innovation than on prohibitions. Clearer standards could reduce compliance hurdles, attract institutional money, and position the US as a leader in the field.
DeFi Integration and Institutional Wallet Infrastructure Issues
The absence of adequate wallet infrastructure is a significant concern. While MetaMask and similar wallets are excellent for retail customers, institutions need solutions like Fireblocks that are secure and compliant to provide proper governance and custody. To reduce capital flow friction, it is necessary to have seamless on-and-off ramps between traditional finance and DeFi. Institutions struggle to navigate the two financial ecosystems efficiently without a strong infrastructure.
Developers needing to work on DeFi infrastructure have a unique set of abilities. The necessary set of skills can change from one blockchain to another and from conventional financial software development practices. Deploying numerous blockchains can add complexity and overhead for institutions only interested in the most liquid solutions.
Liquidity Fragmentation
One of DeFi’s ongoing problems is liquidity. Decentralized exchanges (DEXs) and borrowing platforms have fragmented liquidity, which can lead to problems like unsafe debt and slippage. Institutions face the challenge of shallow liquidity because of the difficulty in conducting large transactions with minimal impact on market prices. Institutions may find themselves in scenarios where they must conduct transactions across numerous blockchains to complete a single trade. This can complicate the process and introduce more risk vectors into their strategy. For DeFi protocols to entice institutional investors, they must establish concentrated liquidity pools that can handle enormous trades.
The development of the L2 blockchain environment is a prime illustration of liquidity fragmentation. Liquidity has moved away from the Ethereum main net as L2 blockchains have become more affordable for establishing and conducting transactions. Consequently, the lack of liquidity on the Ethereum main net for specific assets and deals prevents institutions from deploying as much. This has been a major obstacle for institutional deployment, even if improvements to infrastructure and technology are underway to address many liquidity fragmentation issues. This is particularly the case when deploying to L2s, as liquidity and infrastructure difficulties are more noticeable there than in the mainnet.
Risk Management Challenges for Institutions in DeFi
Institutions must prioritize risk management when dealing with emerging industries like DeFi. There are monetary dangers associated with DeFi protocols that institutions must be aware of, in addition to the technological security that prevents hacks and exploitation. Institutions are under threat because of protocol flaws in tokenomics and governance.
DeFi’s limited access to assets with a high return on investment (R/R) further complicates matters. This is because institutions don’t have any insurance plans that can cover significant losses like a protocol exploit. This indicates that funds with a lesser risk profile, which could be vulnerable to Bitcoin exposure, are not investing in DeFi. It is difficult for institutions to efficiently manage exposure due to liquidity constraints, which include issues such as not being able to exit positions without causing enormous market consequences.
Financial institutions also require advanced methods like modelling and stress testing to evaluate liquidity concerns. Institutional portfolios greatly depend on stability and the ability to invest or withdraw large amounts of capital with minimal risk. DeFi will remain too risky for these portfolios without them.
Adapting DeFi for Institutional Investment
If DeFi wants to entice investors with institutional money, it must change to fit their criteria. Some of these tasks are making good wallets for institutions, putting in place thorough risk management systems, setting up structured incentive programs, and ensuring that capital can flow smoothly on and off ramps. If these issues are resolved, DeFi can develop into a parallel financial system that can handle the volume and complexity demanded by major financial institutions.
With the correct framework in place and sync with institutional requirements, DeFi can revolutionize conventional banking. By implementing these changes, DeFi can attract more institutional funding, strengthen its position as a crucial component of the international financial system, and usher in a new era of financial innovation.
[sp_easyaccordion id=”2867″]
