Page 31

‍

3. Institutional Bitcoin Exposure Through Public Investment Vehicles

‍

Venture capital found another avenue to interact with Bitcoin: investing in products that offer institutional exposure to BTC without owning the asset directly.

‍

These include:

‍

Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) – Backed by Digital Currency Group

‍

Exchange-Traded Funds (ETFs) – e.g., BlackRock’s IBIT, Fidelity’s FBTC

‍

Custodial Platforms and Trading Infrastructure

‍

These vehicles enabled indirect participation in Bitcoin’s price action and liquidity flows, allowing VCs, hedge funds, and family offices to allocate without touching the underlying asset.

‍

As of 2023, GBTC alone managed over $20 billion in AUM, with VCs holding fund shares.

‍

The approval of spot Bitcoin ETFs in 2024 accelerated institutional capital inflows without compromising decentralization.

‍

Sources:

"Grayscale Bitcoin Trust Factsheet" – Grayscale

"BlackRock Launches Bitcoin ETF" – BlackRock

‍

4. VCs as Ecosystem Builders, Not Token Governors

‍

Unlike in newer blockchains, VCs in Bitcoin’s ecosystem have no governance privileges. They cannot:

‍

Vote on protocol upgrades

‍

Propose network changes

‍

Influence issuance schedules

‍

Reallocate treasury funds (since none exist)

‍

Their role is purely in ecosystem development, not in protocol control. This makes Bitcoin resilient to VC overreach, a growing concern in Layer-1 governance debates elsewhere.

‍

Bitcoin’s lack of programmable governance tokens is both a risk (slower innovation) and a strength (minimized central capture).

‍

See

"Decentralization and Governance in Blockchains" – Stanford Journal of Blockchain Law

‍

5. Institutional Capital as Passive Liquidity Force

‍

While VCs can’t shape protocol mechanics, their capital flows do influence:

‍

Price volatility: Especially during early rounds of ETF accumulation

‍

Custody dynamics: More BTC in institutional wallets increases concentration risks

‍

Market structure: Fund redemption policies, lock-ups, and derivatives can affect liquidity

‍

But these are market-level influences, not protocol-level governance.

‍

As such, Bitcoin offers a model where institutional capital can scale exposure without corrupting decentralized ethos—a key differentiator for conservative allocators.

‍

Source:

"Bitcoin Liquidity Risk and Institutional Flow Impact" – CFA Institute

‍

6. VC Risk vs. Protocol Neutrality: Why Bitcoin Avoided The Trap

‍

Many Layer-1 chains face challenges from VC-dominated governance, leading to:

‍

Token inflation favoring insiders

‍

Vote-buying in DAOs

‍

Perceived manipulation or centralization

‍

Bitcoin’s absence of VC entanglement in core protocol decisions protects it from such conflicts of interest.

‍

Institutional investors benefit from:

‍

Clear incentive alignment

‍

Neutral monetary policy

‍

Predictable roadmap (or deliberate lack thereof)

‍

Bitcoin’s immutability is its moat, and it is possible precisely because no capital entity ever bought a seat at the protocol’s table.

‍

7. Final Take: Capital Without Control

‍

Bitcoin demonstrates a unique economic model: a permissionless, decentralized system that grew into a trillion-dollar asset class without selling governance rights or compromising monetary integrity for capital.

‍

For institutional investors, this offers:

‍

Risk: Slower innovation, no directed funding

‍

Reward: Unmatched protocol neutrality and resilience

‍

Bitcoin is not an investable startup, but a monetary substrate—one that welcomes capital but resists capture.

‍

References:

‍

1. "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" – Satoshi Nakamoto

https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

‍

2. "Coinbase Raises Seed Round" – TechCrunch

https://techcrunch.com/2012/09/11/coinbase-bitcoin/

‍

3. "BitGo Raises $12M" – CoinDesk

https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2014/06/05/bitgo-raises-12-million-to-bring-bitcoin-security-to-businesses/

‍

4. "Grayscale Bitcoin Trust Factsheet" – Grayscale

https://grayscale.com/products/grayscale-bitcoin-trust/

‍

5. "BlackRock Launches Bitcoin ETF" – BlackRock

https://www.blackrock.com/us/individual/products/316337/ishares-bitcoin-trust

‍

6. "Decentralization and Governance in Blockchains" – Stanford Journal of Blockchain Law

https://stanford-jbl.org/blockchain-governance-decentralization/

‍

7. "Bitcoin Liquidity Risk and Institutional Flow Impact" – CFA Institute

https://www.cfainstitute.org/en/research/cfa-digest/2022/05/bitcoin-market-liquidity

‍

8. "VC Influence on Blockchain Governance" – CoinDesk Research

https://www.coindesk.com/research/vc-influence-on-crypto-governance/

‍

Financials & Funding 

G. Revenue vs. Expenses

‍

“The Balance Sheet That Doesn’t Exist: Understanding Bitcoin’s Revenue-Expense Dynamics Through a Decentralized Lens”

‍

In any traditional investment analysis, comparing a project’s revenue streams against its expenses forms the foundation for calculating sustainability, profitability, and growth potential. Income statements, balance sheets, and cash flow projections enable institutional investors to quantify the financial health of an enterprise.

‍

But Bitcoin once again challenges these norms.

‍

Bitcoin, as a protocol, does not have a balance sheet. It generates no revenue in the traditional sense and incurs no protocol-level expenses. Yet, paradoxically, Bitcoin is a thriving trillion-dollar economic system that supports a massive infrastructure, multi-billion-dollar capital flows, and thousands of stakeholders—without central spending or revenue.

‍

This section explores how Bitcoin’s unique economic model manifests an asymmetric revenue-expense dynamic, functioning more like a decentralized ecosystem than a traditional enterprise. We’ll also explore how indirect revenue and externalized expenses play a role in investment assessments.

‍

1. Protocol-Level Revenue: Block Rewards and Transaction Fees

‍

As discussed earlier in the Revenue Model section, Bitcoin’s two core economic outputs—block subsidies and transaction fees—form the functional equivalent of “protocol revenue.” These incentives are paid directly to miners as compensation for securing the network.

‍

Block subsidy (March 2024): 6.25 BTC per block

‍

Transaction fees: Dynamic, market-based

‍

At current price levels (~$68,000 per BTC), Bitcoin produces approximately:

‍

~$38 million/day in new BTC issuance (subsidy)

‍

~$2–5 million/day in fees during normal traffic

Combined, this brings total miner revenue to ~$40M+ per day, or $14–15 billion/year.

‍

These numbers rival the top-line revenue of Fortune 500 companies and represent Bitcoin’s primary economic output—despite being decentralized.

‍

Source:

"Miner Revenue Charts" – Blockchain.com

https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/charts/miners-revenue

‍

2. Protocol-Level Expenses: Zero by Design

‍

Bitcoin’s most radical economic feature is that it incurs zero expenses at the protocol level. There are:

‍

No salaried employees

‍

No office leases

‍

No R&D budgets

‍

No treasury disbursements

‍

No marketing or community outreach costs

‍

In essence, Bitcoin is a zero-overhead monetary network, which has profound implications for capital efficiency. All network functions—mining, validation, wallet operation, development—are voluntarily or independently financed by participants.

‍

This structure ensures capital flow without capital dependence—a rare phenomenon in modern asset classes.

‍

Source:

"Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" – Satoshi Nakamoto

‍

3. Ecosystem-Level Revenue: Indirect Monetization

‍

Although the protocol has no ledger of receivables, the ecosystem around Bitcoin generates substantial revenue, including:

‍

Mining Firms: Monetize block rewards and retained BTC appreciation

‍

Custody Providers: Earn fees on storage and transaction services (e.g., BitGo, Coinbase Custody)

‍

ETFs and Trusts: Charge AUM management fees (e.g., 0.25% for BlackRock’s IBIT, 2% for Grayscale’s GBTC)

‍

Layer-2 Service Providers: Lightning routing and liquidity provisioning fees

‍

Hardware Wallet Companies: Ledger and Trezor earn revenue from device sales and subscription services

‍

These revenue streams, while not protocol-native, form the economic outer layer of Bitcoin’s sustainability engine.

‍

Sources:

"iShares Bitcoin ETF Factsheet" – BlackRock

https://www.blackrock.com/us/individual/products/316337/ishares-bitcoin-trust

‍

"Grayscale GBTC Financial Statements" – SEC

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1588489/000119312521193314/d139694d10k.htm

‍

4. Ecosystem-Level Expenses: Distributed but Real

‍

Just as revenue is externalized, so are Bitcoin’s economic expenses. These are borne voluntarily by ecosystem actors rather than the protocol itself:

‍

a) Miners:

‍

Hardware CapEx (ASICs, infrastructure buildout)

‍

Energy OpEx (Electricity, cooling, maintenance)

‍

Financing costs (loans, equipment leasing)

Estimated annual industry expenses exceed $10 billion globally, especially in countries with high energy costs (Bloomberg, 2024).

‍

b) Developer Teams:

‍

Funded by foundations (Brink, HRF, OpenSats)

‍

Paid through grants and fellowships, not protocol revenue

‍

Estimated funding needs per contributor: $50,000–$150,000/year

‍

c) Infrastructure Companies:

‍

Costs for product development, customer support, compliance

‍

Salaries, offices, regulatory filings

These are traditional expenses—carried by the company, not the protocol.

‍

Sources:

"Bitcoin Mining Industry Report" – Galaxy Digital Research

https://www.galaxy.com/research/insights/state-of-bitcoin-mining/

"Brink Developer Fellowship" – Brink.dev

https://brink.dev/fellowship

‍

5. Asymmetry: Revenue Is Automated, Expenses Are Voluntary

‍

This is the key takeaway for institutional allocators: Bitcoin has built an ecosystem where revenue is algorithmically distributed (via mining), and expenses are assumed voluntarily by participants. This asymmetry makes Bitcoin resilient to economic shocks.

‍

If development funding dries up, protocol function continues

‍

If miners drop off, hash rate adjusts via difficulty retargeting

‍

If ecosystem companies fail, protocol remains untouched

‍

There are no expenses to pay, no budget holes to fill, no central treasury to bail out. It is the most antifragile financial model in blockchain history.

‍

Source:

"Bitcoin Mining Difficulty Adjustment" – Bitcoin Wiki

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty

‍

6. Comparative Analysis: Bitcoin vs VC-Backed Chains

‍

While other chains may appear more agile or capital-rich, they also face centralization risks, treasury mismanagement, or short financial runways—none of which exist in Bitcoin’s operating model.

‍

Sources:

"Solana Foundation Grants Overview" – Solana

https://solana.org/ecosystem/grants

‍

7. Bitcoin’s Economic Flywheel: Neutrality Attracts Capital

‍

Bitcoin’s lack of discretionary spending makes it more attractive to conservative allocators:

‍

No risk of treasury misuse

‍

No dilution from protocol token issuance

‍

No dependency on leadership roadmaps

‍

Capital flows in because of belief in the system’s neutrality, not because of top-down capital deployment. This unique balance between automated revenue and zero protocol expenses underpins Bitcoin’s long-term sustainability.

‍

8. Final Take: A Minimalist Engine With Maximum Economic Output

‍

Bitcoin challenges every conventional financial model. It:

‍

Distributes revenue without collecting it

‍

Relies on external actors to bear all costs

‍

Avoids the vulnerabilities of centralized treasuries and discretionary burn rates

‍

For investors, this means a system with high capital output but minimal systemic overhead, offering better sustainability than most centralized crypto networks or even some early-stage traditional startups.

‍

References:

‍

1. "Miner Revenue Charts" – Blockchain.com

https://www.blockchain.com/explorer/charts/miners-revenue

‍

2. "Bitcoin: A Peer-to-Peer Electronic Cash System" – Satoshi Nakamoto

https://bitcoin.org/bitcoin.pdf

‍

3. "iShares Bitcoin ETF Factsheet" – BlackRock

https://www.blackrock.com/us/individual/products/316337/ishares-bitcoin-trust

‍

4. "Grayscale GBTC Financial Statements" – SEC

https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/1588489/000119312521193314/d139694d10k.htm

‍

5. "Bitcoin Mining Industry Report" – Galaxy Digital Research

https://www.galaxy.com/research/insights/state-of-bitcoin-mining/

‍

6. "Brink Developer Fellowship" – Brink.dev

https://brink.dev/fellowship

‍

7. "Bitcoin Mining Difficulty Adjustment" – Bitcoin Wiki

https://en.bitcoin.it/wiki/Difficulty

‍

8. "Solana Foundation Grants Overview" – Solana

https://solana.org/ecosystem/grants

‍

Financials & Funding (continued)

H. Investor ROI Considerations 

‍

“Beyond the Bull Run: What Institutional Investors Must Consider About Bitcoin’s ROI Dynamics”

‍

Return on investment (ROI) is a central metric for any investment thesis—especially for venture capital firms, hedge funds, and family offices assessing entry into a digital asset. However, Bitcoin’s ROI framework is fundamentally different from traditional asset classes and even most crypto protocols.

‍

There is no equity, no dividend, no staking reward, no yield farming, and no token rebasing. ROI in Bitcoin is driven entirely by a combination of capital appreciation, macroeconomic positioning, market narratives, network effects, and liquidity flows.

‍

This section explores how ROI considerations must be reframed when evaluating Bitcoin as a long-term asset, what historical data reveals about performance, and which forward-looking projections are relevant for allocators targeting asymmetric upside.

‍

1. Historical ROI Performance: Bitcoin’s Unmatched Track Record

‍

Since its inception in 2009, Bitcoin has delivered the highest cumulative ROI of any asset class in recorded financial history.

‍

From $0.003 (2009 OTC pricing) to ~$68,000 in 2024

‍

A cumulative return exceeding +2,266,567,000%

‍

Even for more recent institutional timelines:

‍

5-year CAGR (2019–2024): ~78%

‍

10-year CAGR (2014–2024): ~65%

‍

These returns surpass equities, real estate, commodities, and venture capital averages by a wide margin. A 1% BTC allocation in a traditional 60/40 portfolio historically improved:

‍

Sharpe ratio

‍

Volatility-adjusted returns

‍

Tail-risk-adjusted downside protection

‍

Source:

"Bitcoin Historical Price Data" – CoinMarketCap

https://coinmarketcap.com/currencies/bitcoin/historical-data/

‍

2. Bitcoin ROI vs. Traditional Assets

‍

Bitcoin’s volatility-adjusted performance (Sharpe ratio > 1.5 in multiple cycles) rivals high-performing hedge fund strategies and early-stage VC portfolios, with liquidity advantages that most private markets lack.

‍

3. Asymmetric Upside Potential

‍

One of Bitcoin’s greatest investor advantages is its asymmetric return profile:

‍

Downside floor: ~80–85% during extreme bear cycles (observed historically)

‍

Upside ceiling: Exponential, due to global adoption potential, monetary positioning, and finite supply

‍

For institutional portfolios, this creates a rare opportunity:

‍

Small allocation (~1–5%) can significantly shift overall portfolio performance

‍

Drawdown risk can be absorbed, but upside is disproportionately large

‍

This “call option on the future of money” narrative has driven macro fund managers like Paul Tudor Jones and Stan Druckenmiller to allocate capital as early as 2020–2021.

‍

Source:

"Paul Tudor Jones Bitcoin Hedge Strategy" – CNBC

https://www.cnbc.com/2020/05/07/paul-tudor-jones-says-he-has-almost-2percent-of-his-assets-in-bitcoin.html

‍

4. Bitcoin Halving Cycles and ROI Correlation

‍

Bitcoin’s price cycles are historically correlated with halving events, which reduce new issuance by 50% every four years. Historically, each halving has preceded a major bull cycle:

‍

2012 Halving → 2013 Bull Run (~10,000% ROI)

‍

2016 Halving → 2017 Bull Run (~2,000% ROI)

‍

2020 Halving → 2021 Bull Run (~600% ROI)

‍

2024 Halving → Next cycle expected (2025–2026)

‍

Halving-induced scarcity drives market dislocation, catalyzing new capital inflows and speculation. This structural asymmetry provides a time-based ROI framework few other assets offer.

‍

Source:

"Bitcoin Halving Impact on Price" – CoinDesk

https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2023/12/10/how-bitcoin-halvings-have-impacted-price-history/

‍

5. Emerging ROI Vectors: Institutional Channels and Derivatives

‍

New institutional-grade vehicles provide enhanced ROI exposure mechanisms:

‍

ETFs: Allow direct exposure in retirement accounts and institutional portfolios

‍

Futures/Options: Enable delta-neutral strategies, volatility arbitrage, and structured ROI optimization

‍

Yield Products: BTC-collateralized structured notes or staking products (non-native) by platforms like BlockFi or Ledn

‍

These tools enhance ROI strategies beyond pure buy-and-hold, enabling capital efficiency at scale.

‍

Source:

"Bitcoin Derivatives Market Report" – CME Group

https://www.cmegroup.com/markets/cryptocurrencies/bitcoin.html

‍

6. Risk-Adjusted ROI: Volatility and Drawdown Awareness

‍

Bitcoin ROI must be considered with its high-risk profile:

‍

Average intra-year drawdowns: 35–60%

‍

Historical corrections exceed 80% in bear cycles

‍

Price swings triggered by macro liquidity, regulation, and social sentiment

‍

However, over longer time horizons, ROI asymmetry outweighs volatility drag, particularly when allocation size is optimized and rebalanced quarterly.

‍

Sophisticated investors employ:

‍

Risk-parity portfolio design

‍

Volatility-adjusted position sizing

‍

Derivative overlays for protection

‍

Source:

"Bitcoin Drawdown Cycles and Volatility Metrics" – Glassnode

https://insights.glassnode.com/

‍

Thank you for taking the time to read this article. We invite you to explore more content on our blog for additional insights and information.

https://www.thestandard.io/blog  

‍

"If you have any comments, questions, or suggestions, please do not hesitate to reach out to us at [ https://discord.gg/K72hed6FRE ]. We appreciate your feedback and look forward to hearing from you."

‍

CLICK HERE TO CONTINUE

PAGE 32: www.thestandard.io/blog/bitcoin-btc-the-rise-of-cryptocurrency-in-2025-32