Dmitry Tokarev, CEO of Copper, breaks down the current state of crypto custody and the cryptocurrency industry as a whole.
The crypto industry has experienced major progress in its own evolution over the last year: Libra brought the arrival of "Big Tech" into the space, the launch of ICE's Bakkt and Fidelity's custody services brought more "legitimate" opportunities for institutional investors to enter into crypto, and the resurgence of crypto markets after the doldrums of 2018 filled the industry with a more mature and savvier investor base.
However, there are still a number of loose ends that have yet to be tied up: one of the most important ones, notably, seems to be custody.
Indeed, while many crypto “traditionalists” continue to preach the gospel of personal responsibility and “not your keys, not your coins,” other members of the community seem to be pushing for more centralization and more regulation--an insured world of crypto investing in which money is protected if a hacker should hack or if something else falls through the cracks.
Interestingly, the two sides of the argument seem to fall somewhere close to the lines between retail and institutional traders--folks on the spectrum of users and providers on the retail side of things seem to be the strongest advocates for decentralized exchanges and self-sufficient custody measures.
On the institutional side of things, however, there is a push toward building out third-party custody solutions.
In fact, a lack of adequate custody solutions has often been pointed to as one of the major factors that institutional investors have stayed out of crypto, both from a practical and regulatory standpoint.
However, a recent study conducted by Binance Research found that in spite of calls for better custody solutions for institutional investors, the institutional investors that have made their way into the crypto space don’t seem to be using third-party custody solutions in the ways that many thought that they would.
Indeed, of the 72 institutional respondents to Binance’s custody survey, 92 percent said that they stored their funds on an exchange, while only 2.6 percent said that they made use of third-party custody solutions. And here’s the kicker--because of hacks and other vulnerabilities, exchanges are widely considered to be the least secure place for cryptocurrency hodlers of any size or stripe to store their funds.
Source: Binance Research
So, what gives? Does the current paradigm of third-party custody providers fail to provide the right kinds of services for institutional investors? Are third-party custody solutions really necessary? Or, are institutional investors uneducated, uninterested, or something else?
Recently, Finance Magnates spoke with Dmitry Tokarev, CEO and Founder of Copper, a London-based institutional cryptocurrency custodian. Dmitry broke down Binance’s findings and spoke about the current state of crypto custody and the cryptocurrency industry as a whole.
Different kinds of institutional investors have different kinds of custody needs
Dmitry explained that first of all, he believes that the vagueness of the term “institutional investors” has led to some confusion within the space. “Some people think it [means] pension funds, some people think family offices--but in reality, there are several layers within that space.”
“We call it ‘buy-side’, basically,” he continued. “So, who’s buying the products? Who’s buying the products on the sell side? Custodians, prime brokers, exchanges, et cetera...all of them are slightly different, and all of them need to address those problems in a different manner.”
“So, for example--you have venture capital (VC) funds and you have hedge funds. In a traditional space, VC funds are the ones investing for five to seven years,” after which point “they sell the company, and that’s how they make money.”
”Lots of VCs have built something in-house”, but hedge funds tend to rely on exchanges as their primary custodians
“Hedge funds are slightly different because they can go full-cash or zero-cash in a matter of days,” Tokarev said. “They’re traders--they run market-neutral strategies, they run statistical arbitrage strategies,” and other, similar practices.
Therefore, while both of these kinds of institutional investors need “safe and secure custody”, the kinds of custody solutions that they use will most likely look different from one another.
Historically, Tokarev continued, “lots of VCs have built something in-house because there is no one out there that would provide [appropriate custody] for them, and that works for them.’
When it comes to hedge funds, however, “custody is obviously an essential part of the puzzle. But in reality, when you need to trade, you still need to move the funds to the exchange.”
It’s disappointing to see how far institutional custody has come and see so many exchanges that could be better safeguarding their users https://t.co/3Pgq84aoNO
Dmitry Tokarev, CEO and Founder of Copper (Source: Copper.co)
This is the particular predicament of institutional traders, and the reason that so many institutional investors told Binance that they store their funds primarily on cryptocurrency exchanges--in spite of the associated risks, they need to stay as liquid as possible.
If institutional investors store their balances on exchanges, are crypto custodians really necessary?
So, what to do? “If [institutional investors] have to permanently store their balances on exchanges, do [they] really need custodians?
Tokarev believes that the answer is “yes”--even if the reason is simply to reassure limited partners and possibly provide an extra layer of insurance. ”Outside of the security bit, it’s also to tell your investors that you’re not in self-custody mode. And that’s the crucial difference,” he said.
Why is this? “You can’t have an asset-manager in self custody mode,” Tokarev continued. “You can’t be at risk of an asset manager misappropriating funds and basically disappearing.”
Tokarev also said that “the fact that there is so much counterparty risk--or credit risk, however you want to call it,” is a problem that he says hasn’t been solved yet but will be solved within the new year.
For example, “if an investor is thinking of investing into a fund that trades on ten exchanges, if one of them goes down, you’ve lost your funds,” Tokarev said. “It’s very hard to do the operational risk due-diligence on all ten exchanges, especially given the fact that most of them are based god-knows-where and regulated by god-knows-who.”
Therefore, Tokarev believes that “in reality, if [an exchange] disappears tomorrow, people are not going to be that surprised,” he said. “They’re going to be like, ‘yeah, well, it’s a crypto exchange, so what did you expect?’”
This kind of risk does not go well with institutional money, Tokarev said. “So, the solution to that is to remove that credit risk from exchanges--that’s why we think that the settlement and clearing solutions that will become available [in 2020]” will bring about “a rise of prime brokerage in this sector.”
In turn, Tokarev said, this “will allow investors to get comfortable with infrastructure that asset managers will have.”
“We need to build this infrastructure first,” he said, “because they’re not coming unless it’s there.”
”Every kind of new technology runs [according to a] cycle.”
And indeed, many industry participants who have been waiting for an injection of institutional capital into crypto are hoping that 2020 may be the year for it after 2019 failed to meet certain expectations.
But will 2020 be “the year”?
“Every kind of new technology runs [according to a] cycle,” Tokarev said. “One year, everyone gets uber-excited about it and finances the idea, and two years later, you need to raise another round [of capital], because the world has moved onto something else already, and you need to basically prove that what you’ve built is actually useful in the world.”
For crypto, the end of “that two-year [cycle] is approaching right about now, because the hype of 2017 was about this time of year,” he said.
One way that Tokarev thinks that this will manifest itself is a need for further fundraising among young companies: “we would expect a lot of startups right about now that raised traditional financing through VCs or equity financing [will] need to go into Series A fundraising rounds and continue to grow,” Tokarev said.
Alternatively, “we’ll see consolidation--for example, if you haven’t quite made it, and you need to merge with someone because you find that together, you have a better chance of getting the market--that’s something that could happen as well.”
This was an excerpt. To hear the rest of Finance Magnates’ interview with Dmitry Tokarev, visit us on SoundCloud or Youtube.
The crypto industry has experienced major progress in its own evolution over the last year: Libra brought the arrival of "Big Tech" into the space, the launch of ICE's Bakkt and Fidelity's custody services brought more "legitimate" opportunities for institutional investors to enter into crypto, and the resurgence of crypto markets after the doldrums of 2018 filled the industry with a more mature and savvier investor base.
However, there are still a number of loose ends that have yet to be tied up: one of the most important ones, notably, seems to be custody.
Indeed, while many crypto “traditionalists” continue to preach the gospel of personal responsibility and “not your keys, not your coins,” other members of the community seem to be pushing for more centralization and more regulation--an insured world of crypto investing in which money is protected if a hacker should hack or if something else falls through the cracks.
Interestingly, the two sides of the argument seem to fall somewhere close to the lines between retail and institutional traders--folks on the spectrum of users and providers on the retail side of things seem to be the strongest advocates for decentralized exchanges and self-sufficient custody measures.
On the institutional side of things, however, there is a push toward building out third-party custody solutions.
In fact, a lack of adequate custody solutions has often been pointed to as one of the major factors that institutional investors have stayed out of crypto, both from a practical and regulatory standpoint.
However, a recent study conducted by Binance Research found that in spite of calls for better custody solutions for institutional investors, the institutional investors that have made their way into the crypto space don’t seem to be using third-party custody solutions in the ways that many thought that they would.
Indeed, of the 72 institutional respondents to Binance’s custody survey, 92 percent said that they stored their funds on an exchange, while only 2.6 percent said that they made use of third-party custody solutions. And here’s the kicker--because of hacks and other vulnerabilities, exchanges are widely considered to be the least secure place for cryptocurrency hodlers of any size or stripe to store their funds.
Source: Binance Research
So, what gives? Does the current paradigm of third-party custody providers fail to provide the right kinds of services for institutional investors? Are third-party custody solutions really necessary? Or, are institutional investors uneducated, uninterested, or something else?
Recently, Finance Magnates spoke with Dmitry Tokarev, CEO and Founder of Copper, a London-based institutional cryptocurrency custodian. Dmitry broke down Binance’s findings and spoke about the current state of crypto custody and the cryptocurrency industry as a whole.
Different kinds of institutional investors have different kinds of custody needs
Dmitry explained that first of all, he believes that the vagueness of the term “institutional investors” has led to some confusion within the space. “Some people think it [means] pension funds, some people think family offices--but in reality, there are several layers within that space.”
“We call it ‘buy-side’, basically,” he continued. “So, who’s buying the products? Who’s buying the products on the sell side? Custodians, prime brokers, exchanges, et cetera...all of them are slightly different, and all of them need to address those problems in a different manner.”
“So, for example--you have venture capital (VC) funds and you have hedge funds. In a traditional space, VC funds are the ones investing for five to seven years,” after which point “they sell the company, and that’s how they make money.”
”Lots of VCs have built something in-house”, but hedge funds tend to rely on exchanges as their primary custodians
“Hedge funds are slightly different because they can go full-cash or zero-cash in a matter of days,” Tokarev said. “They’re traders--they run market-neutral strategies, they run statistical arbitrage strategies,” and other, similar practices.
Therefore, while both of these kinds of institutional investors need “safe and secure custody”, the kinds of custody solutions that they use will most likely look different from one another.
Historically, Tokarev continued, “lots of VCs have built something in-house because there is no one out there that would provide [appropriate custody] for them, and that works for them.’
When it comes to hedge funds, however, “custody is obviously an essential part of the puzzle. But in reality, when you need to trade, you still need to move the funds to the exchange.”
It’s disappointing to see how far institutional custody has come and see so many exchanges that could be better safeguarding their users https://t.co/3Pgq84aoNO
Dmitry Tokarev, CEO and Founder of Copper (Source: Copper.co)
This is the particular predicament of institutional traders, and the reason that so many institutional investors told Binance that they store their funds primarily on cryptocurrency exchanges--in spite of the associated risks, they need to stay as liquid as possible.
If institutional investors store their balances on exchanges, are crypto custodians really necessary?
So, what to do? “If [institutional investors] have to permanently store their balances on exchanges, do [they] really need custodians?
Tokarev believes that the answer is “yes”--even if the reason is simply to reassure limited partners and possibly provide an extra layer of insurance. ”Outside of the security bit, it’s also to tell your investors that you’re not in self-custody mode. And that’s the crucial difference,” he said.
Why is this? “You can’t have an asset-manager in self custody mode,” Tokarev continued. “You can’t be at risk of an asset manager misappropriating funds and basically disappearing.”
Tokarev also said that “the fact that there is so much counterparty risk--or credit risk, however you want to call it,” is a problem that he says hasn’t been solved yet but will be solved within the new year.
For example, “if an investor is thinking of investing into a fund that trades on ten exchanges, if one of them goes down, you’ve lost your funds,” Tokarev said. “It’s very hard to do the operational risk due-diligence on all ten exchanges, especially given the fact that most of them are based god-knows-where and regulated by god-knows-who.”
Therefore, Tokarev believes that “in reality, if [an exchange] disappears tomorrow, people are not going to be that surprised,” he said. “They’re going to be like, ‘yeah, well, it’s a crypto exchange, so what did you expect?’”
This kind of risk does not go well with institutional money, Tokarev said. “So, the solution to that is to remove that credit risk from exchanges--that’s why we think that the settlement and clearing solutions that will become available [in 2020]” will bring about “a rise of prime brokerage in this sector.”
In turn, Tokarev said, this “will allow investors to get comfortable with infrastructure that asset managers will have.”
“We need to build this infrastructure first,” he said, “because they’re not coming unless it’s there.”
”Every kind of new technology runs [according to a] cycle.”
And indeed, many industry participants who have been waiting for an injection of institutional capital into crypto are hoping that 2020 may be the year for it after 2019 failed to meet certain expectations.
But will 2020 be “the year”?
“Every kind of new technology runs [according to a] cycle,” Tokarev said. “One year, everyone gets uber-excited about it and finances the idea, and two years later, you need to raise another round [of capital], because the world has moved onto something else already, and you need to basically prove that what you’ve built is actually useful in the world.”
For crypto, the end of “that two-year [cycle] is approaching right about now, because the hype of 2017 was about this time of year,” he said.
One way that Tokarev thinks that this will manifest itself is a need for further fundraising among young companies: “we would expect a lot of startups right about now that raised traditional financing through VCs or equity financing [will] need to go into Series A fundraising rounds and continue to grow,” Tokarev said.
Alternatively, “we’ll see consolidation--for example, if you haven’t quite made it, and you need to merge with someone because you find that together, you have a better chance of getting the market--that’s something that could happen as well.”
This was an excerpt. To hear the rest of Finance Magnates’ interview with Dmitry Tokarev, visit us on SoundCloud or Youtube.
Rachel is a self-taught crypto geek and a passionate writer. She believes in the power that the written word has to educate, connect and empower individuals to make positive and powerful financial choices. She is the Podcast Host and a Cryptocurrency Editor at Finance Magnates.
Schwab Aims Crypto Custody at Its $5 Trillion Advisor Channel by 2027
Featured Videos
Buy, Build or Both? Trading Tech for Brokers, Banks & Beyond
Buy, Build or Both? Trading Tech for Brokers, Banks & Beyond
Buy, Build or Both? Trading Tech for Brokers, Banks & Beyond
Buy, Build or Both? Trading Tech for Brokers, Banks & Beyond
For every feature and product, someone has to decide: build it in-house or buy from a vendor. In Singapore and across APAC, local banks and global players face the same question with very different constraints.
This session gathers heads of technology and e-trading to compare how client demand and cost structures shape their choices, and how long it actually takes to ship in each.
Attendees will walk away with:
First-hand view of how client feedback informs decision-making across different market participants.
Understanding pain points and benefits of working with 3rd party integrations at scale.
Insight into products and innovation banks’ retail and trading heads will look for in 2026.
For every feature and product, someone has to decide: build it in-house or buy from a vendor. In Singapore and across APAC, local banks and global players face the same question with very different constraints.
This session gathers heads of technology and e-trading to compare how client demand and cost structures shape their choices, and how long it actually takes to ship in each.
Attendees will walk away with:
First-hand view of how client feedback informs decision-making across different market participants.
Understanding pain points and benefits of working with 3rd party integrations at scale.
Insight into products and innovation banks’ retail and trading heads will look for in 2026.
For every feature and product, someone has to decide: build it in-house or buy from a vendor. In Singapore and across APAC, local banks and global players face the same question with very different constraints.
This session gathers heads of technology and e-trading to compare how client demand and cost structures shape their choices, and how long it actually takes to ship in each.
Attendees will walk away with:
First-hand view of how client feedback informs decision-making across different market participants.
Understanding pain points and benefits of working with 3rd party integrations at scale.
Insight into products and innovation banks’ retail and trading heads will look for in 2026.
For every feature and product, someone has to decide: build it in-house or buy from a vendor. In Singapore and across APAC, local banks and global players face the same question with very different constraints.
This session gathers heads of technology and e-trading to compare how client demand and cost structures shape their choices, and how long it actually takes to ship in each.
Attendees will walk away with:
First-hand view of how client feedback informs decision-making across different market participants.
Understanding pain points and benefits of working with 3rd party integrations at scale.
Insight into products and innovation banks’ retail and trading heads will look for in 2026.
Regulation Roundup: Setup, Compliance, and Hidden Costs of Entry
Regulation Roundup: Setup, Compliance, and Hidden Costs of Entry
Regulation Roundup: Setup, Compliance, and Hidden Costs of Entry
Regulation Roundup: Setup, Compliance, and Hidden Costs of Entry
Regulation Roundup: Setup, Compliance, and Hidden Costs of Entry
Regulation Roundup: Setup, Compliance, and Hidden Costs of Entry
As Singapore's capital-intensive requirements leave only a few retail brokers active in the city-state, there are many opportunities to be made in and around.
This session gathers regulators, advisors, and operators who have set up across multiple APAC jurisdictions to break down figures, what's working, what's breaking, and what's next.
Attendees will walk away with:
Survey of capital thresholds and other requirements across regions in APAC
Nuanced understanding of Singapore's role in the retail trading space
Glimpse into parallel developments in digital assets and RWA
As Singapore's capital-intensive requirements leave only a few retail brokers active in the city-state, there are many opportunities to be made in and around.
This session gathers regulators, advisors, and operators who have set up across multiple APAC jurisdictions to break down figures, what's working, what's breaking, and what's next.
Attendees will walk away with:
Survey of capital thresholds and other requirements across regions in APAC
Nuanced understanding of Singapore's role in the retail trading space
Glimpse into parallel developments in digital assets and RWA
As Singapore's capital-intensive requirements leave only a few retail brokers active in the city-state, there are many opportunities to be made in and around.
This session gathers regulators, advisors, and operators who have set up across multiple APAC jurisdictions to break down figures, what's working, what's breaking, and what's next.
Attendees will walk away with:
Survey of capital thresholds and other requirements across regions in APAC
Nuanced understanding of Singapore's role in the retail trading space
Glimpse into parallel developments in digital assets and RWA
As Singapore's capital-intensive requirements leave only a few retail brokers active in the city-state, there are many opportunities to be made in and around.
This session gathers regulators, advisors, and operators who have set up across multiple APAC jurisdictions to break down figures, what's working, what's breaking, and what's next.
Attendees will walk away with:
Survey of capital thresholds and other requirements across regions in APAC
Nuanced understanding of Singapore's role in the retail trading space
Glimpse into parallel developments in digital assets and RWA
As Singapore's capital-intensive requirements leave only a few retail brokers active in the city-state, there are many opportunities to be made in and around.
This session gathers regulators, advisors, and operators who have set up across multiple APAC jurisdictions to break down figures, what's working, what's breaking, and what's next.
Attendees will walk away with:
Survey of capital thresholds and other requirements across regions in APAC
Nuanced understanding of Singapore's role in the retail trading space
Glimpse into parallel developments in digital assets and RWA
As Singapore's capital-intensive requirements leave only a few retail brokers active in the city-state, there are many opportunities to be made in and around.
This session gathers regulators, advisors, and operators who have set up across multiple APAC jurisdictions to break down figures, what's working, what's breaking, and what's next.
Attendees will walk away with:
Survey of capital thresholds and other requirements across regions in APAC
Nuanced understanding of Singapore's role in the retail trading space
Glimpse into parallel developments in digital assets and RWA
Rails for Growth: 'Payments as Infrastructure' for Financial Superapps
Rails for Growth: 'Payments as Infrastructure' for Financial Superapps
Rails for Growth: 'Payments as Infrastructure' for Financial Superapps
Rails for Growth: 'Payments as Infrastructure' for Financial Superapps
Rails for Growth: 'Payments as Infrastructure' for Financial Superapps
Rails for Growth: 'Payments as Infrastructure' for Financial Superapps
For fintechs who try to capture the retail investment crowd, payments can be a game-changer from user experience to back-office plumbing.
This session brings together builders from across the payment ecosystem to examine how new rails are altering the way capital moves in APAC and beyond.
Attendees will walk away with:
A clear view of how stablecoins, on-chain settlement, and tokenised money are being used in live institutional workflows today
Understanding of what MAS initiatives like Project Orchid and Project Bloom signal for the future of digital money in Singapore's capital markets
Insight into how mobile-first fund platforms and digital distribution channels are pulling payment infrastructure closer to the point of investment
Perspective on the compliance and custody challenges firms face when payments, trading, and settlement converge on the same rails
For fintechs who try to capture the retail investment crowd, payments can be a game-changer from user experience to back-office plumbing.
This session brings together builders from across the payment ecosystem to examine how new rails are altering the way capital moves in APAC and beyond.
Attendees will walk away with:
A clear view of how stablecoins, on-chain settlement, and tokenised money are being used in live institutional workflows today
Understanding of what MAS initiatives like Project Orchid and Project Bloom signal for the future of digital money in Singapore's capital markets
Insight into how mobile-first fund platforms and digital distribution channels are pulling payment infrastructure closer to the point of investment
Perspective on the compliance and custody challenges firms face when payments, trading, and settlement converge on the same rails
For fintechs who try to capture the retail investment crowd, payments can be a game-changer from user experience to back-office plumbing.
This session brings together builders from across the payment ecosystem to examine how new rails are altering the way capital moves in APAC and beyond.
Attendees will walk away with:
A clear view of how stablecoins, on-chain settlement, and tokenised money are being used in live institutional workflows today
Understanding of what MAS initiatives like Project Orchid and Project Bloom signal for the future of digital money in Singapore's capital markets
Insight into how mobile-first fund platforms and digital distribution channels are pulling payment infrastructure closer to the point of investment
Perspective on the compliance and custody challenges firms face when payments, trading, and settlement converge on the same rails
For fintechs who try to capture the retail investment crowd, payments can be a game-changer from user experience to back-office plumbing.
This session brings together builders from across the payment ecosystem to examine how new rails are altering the way capital moves in APAC and beyond.
Attendees will walk away with:
A clear view of how stablecoins, on-chain settlement, and tokenised money are being used in live institutional workflows today
Understanding of what MAS initiatives like Project Orchid and Project Bloom signal for the future of digital money in Singapore's capital markets
Insight into how mobile-first fund platforms and digital distribution channels are pulling payment infrastructure closer to the point of investment
Perspective on the compliance and custody challenges firms face when payments, trading, and settlement converge on the same rails
For fintechs who try to capture the retail investment crowd, payments can be a game-changer from user experience to back-office plumbing.
This session brings together builders from across the payment ecosystem to examine how new rails are altering the way capital moves in APAC and beyond.
Attendees will walk away with:
A clear view of how stablecoins, on-chain settlement, and tokenised money are being used in live institutional workflows today
Understanding of what MAS initiatives like Project Orchid and Project Bloom signal for the future of digital money in Singapore's capital markets
Insight into how mobile-first fund platforms and digital distribution channels are pulling payment infrastructure closer to the point of investment
Perspective on the compliance and custody challenges firms face when payments, trading, and settlement converge on the same rails
For fintechs who try to capture the retail investment crowd, payments can be a game-changer from user experience to back-office plumbing.
This session brings together builders from across the payment ecosystem to examine how new rails are altering the way capital moves in APAC and beyond.
Attendees will walk away with:
A clear view of how stablecoins, on-chain settlement, and tokenised money are being used in live institutional workflows today
Understanding of what MAS initiatives like Project Orchid and Project Bloom signal for the future of digital money in Singapore's capital markets
Insight into how mobile-first fund platforms and digital distribution channels are pulling payment infrastructure closer to the point of investment
Perspective on the compliance and custody challenges firms face when payments, trading, and settlement converge on the same rails
From Rewards to Retention: The 5 Loyalty Program Mistakes Brokers Need To Avoid (Case Study)
From Rewards to Retention: The 5 Loyalty Program Mistakes Brokers Need To Avoid (Case Study)
From Rewards to Retention: The 5 Loyalty Program Mistakes Brokers Need To Avoid (Case Study)
From Rewards to Retention: The 5 Loyalty Program Mistakes Brokers Need To Avoid (Case Study)
From Rewards to Retention: The 5 Loyalty Program Mistakes Brokers Need To Avoid (Case Study)
From Rewards to Retention: The 5 Loyalty Program Mistakes Brokers Need To Avoid (Case Study)
Acquisition is getting more expensive. Most brokers already know that. The harder question is what happens after the client funds the account.
This session looks at how broker loyalty programmes are moving from “nice-to-have rewards” into a serious retention layer inside the client portal.
In this session, Desmond Leong, CEO of Returning.AI, will break down the practical mechanics behind high-performing broker loyalty programmes: what to reward, what not to reward, how onshore and offshore entities need different incentive structures, what belongs in the rewards store, and how brokers can recycle reward budgets back into trading value instead of letting them disappear as pure cost.
The talk will cover common mistakes brokers make when launching loyalty programmes, including copying retail-style rewards, ignoring jurisdictional constraints, over-relying on bonuses, failing to connect rewards to lifecycle stages, and measuring vanity engagement instead of retention, LTV, CAC payback, deposits, and active trading behaviour.
Attendees will leave with a clear do-and-don’t framework they can use to pressure-test their own loyalty strategy.
Why loyalty is no longer a “nice-to-have” marketing feature for brokers
The building blocks of any loyalty program and what they mean: points, tiers, missions, stores, leaderboards, boosters, and cashback-style mechanics
Understanding of how key regulators read loyalty incentives and where the compliance lines are
What should go in the rewards store, and what quietly destroys ROI
How trading credits, rebates, VIP perks, education, and service benefits can recycle value back into the brokerage
The 5 mistakes brokers should avoid when building or buying a loyalty programme
Real figures from a live deployment: what moved in daily activity, tier progression, and trader spend
Acquisition is getting more expensive. Most brokers already know that. The harder question is what happens after the client funds the account.
This session looks at how broker loyalty programmes are moving from “nice-to-have rewards” into a serious retention layer inside the client portal.
In this session, Desmond Leong, CEO of Returning.AI, will break down the practical mechanics behind high-performing broker loyalty programmes: what to reward, what not to reward, how onshore and offshore entities need different incentive structures, what belongs in the rewards store, and how brokers can recycle reward budgets back into trading value instead of letting them disappear as pure cost.
The talk will cover common mistakes brokers make when launching loyalty programmes, including copying retail-style rewards, ignoring jurisdictional constraints, over-relying on bonuses, failing to connect rewards to lifecycle stages, and measuring vanity engagement instead of retention, LTV, CAC payback, deposits, and active trading behaviour.
Attendees will leave with a clear do-and-don’t framework they can use to pressure-test their own loyalty strategy.
Why loyalty is no longer a “nice-to-have” marketing feature for brokers
The building blocks of any loyalty program and what they mean: points, tiers, missions, stores, leaderboards, boosters, and cashback-style mechanics
Understanding of how key regulators read loyalty incentives and where the compliance lines are
What should go in the rewards store, and what quietly destroys ROI
How trading credits, rebates, VIP perks, education, and service benefits can recycle value back into the brokerage
The 5 mistakes brokers should avoid when building or buying a loyalty programme
Real figures from a live deployment: what moved in daily activity, tier progression, and trader spend
Acquisition is getting more expensive. Most brokers already know that. The harder question is what happens after the client funds the account.
This session looks at how broker loyalty programmes are moving from “nice-to-have rewards” into a serious retention layer inside the client portal.
In this session, Desmond Leong, CEO of Returning.AI, will break down the practical mechanics behind high-performing broker loyalty programmes: what to reward, what not to reward, how onshore and offshore entities need different incentive structures, what belongs in the rewards store, and how brokers can recycle reward budgets back into trading value instead of letting them disappear as pure cost.
The talk will cover common mistakes brokers make when launching loyalty programmes, including copying retail-style rewards, ignoring jurisdictional constraints, over-relying on bonuses, failing to connect rewards to lifecycle stages, and measuring vanity engagement instead of retention, LTV, CAC payback, deposits, and active trading behaviour.
Attendees will leave with a clear do-and-don’t framework they can use to pressure-test their own loyalty strategy.
Why loyalty is no longer a “nice-to-have” marketing feature for brokers
The building blocks of any loyalty program and what they mean: points, tiers, missions, stores, leaderboards, boosters, and cashback-style mechanics
Understanding of how key regulators read loyalty incentives and where the compliance lines are
What should go in the rewards store, and what quietly destroys ROI
How trading credits, rebates, VIP perks, education, and service benefits can recycle value back into the brokerage
The 5 mistakes brokers should avoid when building or buying a loyalty programme
Real figures from a live deployment: what moved in daily activity, tier progression, and trader spend
Acquisition is getting more expensive. Most brokers already know that. The harder question is what happens after the client funds the account.
This session looks at how broker loyalty programmes are moving from “nice-to-have rewards” into a serious retention layer inside the client portal.
In this session, Desmond Leong, CEO of Returning.AI, will break down the practical mechanics behind high-performing broker loyalty programmes: what to reward, what not to reward, how onshore and offshore entities need different incentive structures, what belongs in the rewards store, and how brokers can recycle reward budgets back into trading value instead of letting them disappear as pure cost.
The talk will cover common mistakes brokers make when launching loyalty programmes, including copying retail-style rewards, ignoring jurisdictional constraints, over-relying on bonuses, failing to connect rewards to lifecycle stages, and measuring vanity engagement instead of retention, LTV, CAC payback, deposits, and active trading behaviour.
Attendees will leave with a clear do-and-don’t framework they can use to pressure-test their own loyalty strategy.
Why loyalty is no longer a “nice-to-have” marketing feature for brokers
The building blocks of any loyalty program and what they mean: points, tiers, missions, stores, leaderboards, boosters, and cashback-style mechanics
Understanding of how key regulators read loyalty incentives and where the compliance lines are
What should go in the rewards store, and what quietly destroys ROI
How trading credits, rebates, VIP perks, education, and service benefits can recycle value back into the brokerage
The 5 mistakes brokers should avoid when building or buying a loyalty programme
Real figures from a live deployment: what moved in daily activity, tier progression, and trader spend
Acquisition is getting more expensive. Most brokers already know that. The harder question is what happens after the client funds the account.
This session looks at how broker loyalty programmes are moving from “nice-to-have rewards” into a serious retention layer inside the client portal.
In this session, Desmond Leong, CEO of Returning.AI, will break down the practical mechanics behind high-performing broker loyalty programmes: what to reward, what not to reward, how onshore and offshore entities need different incentive structures, what belongs in the rewards store, and how brokers can recycle reward budgets back into trading value instead of letting them disappear as pure cost.
The talk will cover common mistakes brokers make when launching loyalty programmes, including copying retail-style rewards, ignoring jurisdictional constraints, over-relying on bonuses, failing to connect rewards to lifecycle stages, and measuring vanity engagement instead of retention, LTV, CAC payback, deposits, and active trading behaviour.
Attendees will leave with a clear do-and-don’t framework they can use to pressure-test their own loyalty strategy.
Why loyalty is no longer a “nice-to-have” marketing feature for brokers
The building blocks of any loyalty program and what they mean: points, tiers, missions, stores, leaderboards, boosters, and cashback-style mechanics
Understanding of how key regulators read loyalty incentives and where the compliance lines are
What should go in the rewards store, and what quietly destroys ROI
How trading credits, rebates, VIP perks, education, and service benefits can recycle value back into the brokerage
The 5 mistakes brokers should avoid when building or buying a loyalty programme
Real figures from a live deployment: what moved in daily activity, tier progression, and trader spend
Acquisition is getting more expensive. Most brokers already know that. The harder question is what happens after the client funds the account.
This session looks at how broker loyalty programmes are moving from “nice-to-have rewards” into a serious retention layer inside the client portal.
In this session, Desmond Leong, CEO of Returning.AI, will break down the practical mechanics behind high-performing broker loyalty programmes: what to reward, what not to reward, how onshore and offshore entities need different incentive structures, what belongs in the rewards store, and how brokers can recycle reward budgets back into trading value instead of letting them disappear as pure cost.
The talk will cover common mistakes brokers make when launching loyalty programmes, including copying retail-style rewards, ignoring jurisdictional constraints, over-relying on bonuses, failing to connect rewards to lifecycle stages, and measuring vanity engagement instead of retention, LTV, CAC payback, deposits, and active trading behaviour.
Attendees will leave with a clear do-and-don’t framework they can use to pressure-test their own loyalty strategy.
Why loyalty is no longer a “nice-to-have” marketing feature for brokers
The building blocks of any loyalty program and what they mean: points, tiers, missions, stores, leaderboards, boosters, and cashback-style mechanics
Understanding of how key regulators read loyalty incentives and where the compliance lines are
What should go in the rewards store, and what quietly destroys ROI
How trading credits, rebates, VIP perks, education, and service benefits can recycle value back into the brokerage
The 5 mistakes brokers should avoid when building or buying a loyalty programme
Real figures from a live deployment: what moved in daily activity, tier progression, and trader spend
Stablecoins from Experimentation to Implementation
Stablecoins from Experimentation to Implementation
Stablecoins from Experimentation to Implementation
Stablecoins from Experimentation to Implementation
Stablecoins from Experimentation to Implementation
Stablecoins from Experimentation to Implementation
With over $300 billion in stablecoins now in circulation and APAC regulators moving from frameworks to enforcement, the conversation has shifted.
Held in partnership with 8Circle, this session brings together the builders of new payment rails and the institutions putting them to work.
Attendees will walk away with:
A clear view of which stablecoin use cases have cleared proof of concept and are now operating at scale in APAC
Understanding of what the MAS Payment Services Act and Hong Kong's fiat stablecoin licensing regime mean for brokers and payment providers in practice
Insight into the infrastructure gaps firms most commonly underestimate before going live
Perspective on where the next wave of adoption is heading and what existing systems need to accommodate
With over $300 billion in stablecoins now in circulation and APAC regulators moving from frameworks to enforcement, the conversation has shifted.
Held in partnership with 8Circle, this session brings together the builders of new payment rails and the institutions putting them to work.
Attendees will walk away with:
A clear view of which stablecoin use cases have cleared proof of concept and are now operating at scale in APAC
Understanding of what the MAS Payment Services Act and Hong Kong's fiat stablecoin licensing regime mean for brokers and payment providers in practice
Insight into the infrastructure gaps firms most commonly underestimate before going live
Perspective on where the next wave of adoption is heading and what existing systems need to accommodate
With over $300 billion in stablecoins now in circulation and APAC regulators moving from frameworks to enforcement, the conversation has shifted.
Held in partnership with 8Circle, this session brings together the builders of new payment rails and the institutions putting them to work.
Attendees will walk away with:
A clear view of which stablecoin use cases have cleared proof of concept and are now operating at scale in APAC
Understanding of what the MAS Payment Services Act and Hong Kong's fiat stablecoin licensing regime mean for brokers and payment providers in practice
Insight into the infrastructure gaps firms most commonly underestimate before going live
Perspective on where the next wave of adoption is heading and what existing systems need to accommodate
With over $300 billion in stablecoins now in circulation and APAC regulators moving from frameworks to enforcement, the conversation has shifted.
Held in partnership with 8Circle, this session brings together the builders of new payment rails and the institutions putting them to work.
Attendees will walk away with:
A clear view of which stablecoin use cases have cleared proof of concept and are now operating at scale in APAC
Understanding of what the MAS Payment Services Act and Hong Kong's fiat stablecoin licensing regime mean for brokers and payment providers in practice
Insight into the infrastructure gaps firms most commonly underestimate before going live
Perspective on where the next wave of adoption is heading and what existing systems need to accommodate
With over $300 billion in stablecoins now in circulation and APAC regulators moving from frameworks to enforcement, the conversation has shifted.
Held in partnership with 8Circle, this session brings together the builders of new payment rails and the institutions putting them to work.
Attendees will walk away with:
A clear view of which stablecoin use cases have cleared proof of concept and are now operating at scale in APAC
Understanding of what the MAS Payment Services Act and Hong Kong's fiat stablecoin licensing regime mean for brokers and payment providers in practice
Insight into the infrastructure gaps firms most commonly underestimate before going live
Perspective on where the next wave of adoption is heading and what existing systems need to accommodate
With over $300 billion in stablecoins now in circulation and APAC regulators moving from frameworks to enforcement, the conversation has shifted.
Held in partnership with 8Circle, this session brings together the builders of new payment rails and the institutions putting them to work.
Attendees will walk away with:
A clear view of which stablecoin use cases have cleared proof of concept and are now operating at scale in APAC
Understanding of what the MAS Payment Services Act and Hong Kong's fiat stablecoin licensing regime mean for brokers and payment providers in practice
Insight into the infrastructure gaps firms most commonly underestimate before going live
Perspective on where the next wave of adoption is heading and what existing systems need to accommodate
