JPMorgan explores crypto trading for institutional clients: Report

cointelegraphPublished on 2025-12-22Last updated on 2025-12-22

Abstract

JPMorgan Chase is reportedly exploring the launch of cryptocurrency trading services for its institutional clients, marking a significant expansion into digital assets. According to Bloomberg, the bank is assessing potential offerings, including spot and derivatives trading, in response to growing client interest and a shifting regulatory landscape in the U.S. This move represents a notable shift from CEO Jamie Dimon’s previous criticism of Bitcoin, though he has expressed support for stablecoins and blockchain technology. The development follows similar initiatives by other financial institutions, such as France’s BPCE and BNY Mellon, which are also expanding their crypto services.

Banking giant JPMorgan Chase is considering offering cryptocurrency trading to its institutional clients, marking a significant expansion for a traditional financial institution expanding its digital asset services.

According to a Monday Bloomberg report citing a person familiar with the plans, JPMorgan Chase is assessing products and services in its markets division as part of a potential expansion into cryptocurrencies. The company’s plans were not public at the time of publication, but could include digital asset spot and derivatives trading.

The crypto trading services are in the early stages of development, in response to interest from the company’s clients amid the changing regulatory environment in the United States. The government under US President Donald Trump has enacted several policies favoring the crypto industry since January, including signing a stablecoin payments bill, the GENIUS Act, into law.

Despite the reported move deepening its ties to the digital asset industry, JPMorgan faced criticism from Strike CEO Jack Mallers, who in November claimed the company closed his accounts without explanation. JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon said in a December interview that the company does not debank customers based on religious or political affiliations.

Related: Strike CEO debanked by JPMorgan, Lummis sounds ‘Chokepoint 2.0’ alarm

If confirmed, the institutional client offering would represent a significant about-face on Dimon’s view on cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin (BTC), which he said was only for “criminals, drug traffickers, money laundering, tax avoidance” in a 2023 hearing. He said in a July interview that he was a “believer in stablecoins” and saw the benefits of blockchain technology.

US bank not the only game in town on crypto offerings

French bank BPCE is also preparing to launch crypto trading for its retail customers. The move would make the financial institution one of the few banks based in the European Union to offer digital asset services.

BNY Mellon, another global banking giant, said in November that it had launched a money market fund to hold reserves for US stablecoin issuers. The move was in response to regulations under the GENIUS Act, requiring reserves for stablecoin issuers.

Magazine: When privacy and AML laws conflict: Crypto projects’ impossible choice

Related Questions

QWhat is JPMorgan Chase considering offering to its institutional clients according to the Bloomberg report?

AJPMorgan Chase is considering offering cryptocurrency trading services, including potential digital asset spot and derivatives trading, to its institutional clients.

QWhy is JPMorgan developing crypto trading services, as mentioned in the article?

AThe development is in response to client interest and the changing regulatory environment in the United States, including policies enacted under President Trump administration such as the stablecoin payments bill (GENIUS Act).

QWhat criticism did JPMorgan face from Strike CEO Jack Mallers?

AStrike CEO Jack Mallers claimed that JPMorgan closed his accounts without explanation, which led to criticism of the bank's practices.

QHow has JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon's public stance on cryptocurrencies evolved?

AJamie Dimon previously called Bitcoin only for 'criminals, drug traffickers, money laundering, tax avoidance' in 2023, but later in a July interview expressed belief in stablecoins and acknowledged the benefits of blockchain technology.

QWhich other banks are mentioned as expanding into digital asset services besides JPMorgan?

AFrench bank BPCE is preparing to launch crypto trading for retail customers, and BNY Mellon launched a money market fund to hold reserves for US stablecoin issuers in response to the GENIUS Act regulations.

Related Reads

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

In mid-June, three seemingly independent industry events—the compliance-driven throttling of Fable 5, the open-sourcing of GLM-5.2, and the leaked release timeline for GPT-5.6—are pushing the global AI industry toward a watershed moment. These shifts signal a fundamental restructuring of the industry's underlying logic. First, **"usability" has substantially overtaken "advanced capabilities"** as the primary weight, pushing the global large language model (LLM) supply chain into a "dual-track" phase of controlled closed-source and local open-source coexistence. Second, **the competitive moats of closed-source giants are shifting**. Their technical focus is moving from "language intelligence" toward "spatial intelligence (world models)"—a domain heavily reliant on computing power. Third, faced with常态化 transnational compliance risks, **a "model-agnostic" decoupled design has become a survival necessity for application-layer developers to maintain business continuity.** The article details how Anthropic's Fable 5, despite its advanced engineering feats, was restricted for non-U.S. citizens within 72 hours of launch, highlighting how geopolitical compliance can instantly limit even the most advanced models. In response, the open-source camp, exemplified by Zhipu AI's MIT-licensed GLM-5.2, is gaining market share by offering stable performance improvements and significant cost advantages (up to 70% savings for enterprises), while achieving full adaptation with domestic semiconductor platforms. Meanwhile, closed-source leaders like OpenAI are pivoting. The anticipated GPT-5.6 reportedly shifts focus from language to spatial intelligence and world models, aiming to rebuild a generational gap in areas like 3D understanding, simulation, and industrial design that demand immense compute. The core conclusion is that the LLM supply chain's logic has changed. Enterprises must now evaluate infrastructure based on a composite of technical performance and policy compliance. For developers, complete reliance on a single closed-source API poses unacceptable risk. Implementing a truly model-agnostic architecture—enabling swift switches to compliant, locally deployable open-source alternatives—is no longer just good practice but a fundamental baseline for business continuity.

marsbit2h ago

GPT-5.6 Countdown: Abandon the Illusion of a Single API, Computational Iteration Can't Outpace a Single Page of Compliance

marsbit2h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

The article discusses the ongoing "token subsidy war" among AI giants like OpenAI and Anthropic, questioning whether it's nearing its end. It reveals that current AI subscription prices are heavily subsidized, with some plans offering tokens at up to 70 times the actual cost to attract and retain heavy users, especially developers and enterprises. This strategy mirrors past internet-era subsidy battles, but with a key difference: AI tokens lack "lock-in" effects. Unlike ride-hailing or food delivery apps, users can easily switch between AI providers as APIs become standardized, making it difficult for companies to raise prices post-subsidy. The piece highlights a structural asymmetry in the competition. Giants like Google, with massive advertising revenue, can afford to subsidize tokens indefinitely, akin to using "tokens as a weapon." In contrast, venture-backed companies like OpenAI and Anthropic face pressure to become profitable, especially as they approach IPO. The article cites Google Ventures founder Bill Maris, who suggests Google could slash token prices by 80%, putting immense pressure on competitors. Two potential endgames are presented: the "internet service" model (subsidize, monopolize, then raise prices) and the "utility" model (tokens become a standardized, low-margin commodity like electricity). Given the low switching costs, the latter seems more likely. The competition may not have a single winner but could instead accelerate AI's evolution into a foundational, infrastructure-level technology, akin to a public utility. For now, users continue to benefit from heavily subsidized token costs.

marsbit2h ago

Is the 'Token Subsidy War' Among AI Giants Almost Over?

marsbit2h ago

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

"Beyond the Pitch: The Profit Game Around the World Cup" The FIFA World Cup transcends being a sporting spectacle, evolving into a massive global arena for speculation and profit-seeking. The 2026 tournament has amplified this dynamic, creating a multi-layered ecosystem of financial opportunism alongside the football. **Prediction markets** have surged into the mainstream. Platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi saw trading volumes for World Cup contracts soar, attracting new users with their financial trading model and high-profile, chain-based wealth stories that overshadow traditional sports betting in terms of growth and narrative. However, **traditional sportsbooks** remain the dominant force, leveraging established user habits, legal markets, and comprehensive product offerings to handle the vast majority of speculative wagers, with projections suggesting record-breaking betting volumes. Capital markets also react. **"Concept stocks"** in countries like South Korea and Japan experience volatile price swings based on team performance and anticipated fan spending on items like chicken, beer, and viewing parties, effectively becoming a stock market reflecting fan sentiment. The **ticket resale market** has become a sophisticated arena for arbitrage. Prices fluctuate wildly based on team draws and star power, with sellers sometimes listing tickets they don't yet own in a practice akin to short-selling, while FIFA's own "Right to Buy" tokens add another layer of speculative trading. **Collectibles and merchandise** offer another avenue. Panini sticker albums, with their inherent scarcity and nostalgic value, can become high-value collectibles. Limited-edition or locally themed jerseys command significant premiums on secondary markets, and even counterfeit vendors profit from fans' desire for affordable match-day identity. The **cryptocurrency** space has seen a frenzy of speculative, unauthorized World Cup-themed meme coins on chains like Solana. These tokens, often exploiting team names and player imagery, experience extreme pump-and-dump cycles, creating stories of massive gains for a few early entrants and steep losses for many others. Finally, an entire industry thrives on **providing information and tools** to other speculators. Developers create platforms like SeatSidekick to track ticket inventory and prices, while paid Telegram groups and subscriptions sell betting tips and predictions, monetizing the widespread desire for an informational edge. In essence, the World Cup has become a compressed, global laboratory for speculation. While the games determine champions on the field, a parallel, complex network of financial transactions—spanning prediction contracts, bets, stocks, tickets, collectibles, crypto, and information services—settles its own scores in the global market.

marsbit3h ago

Beyond the Stadium: The Profitable Games Surrounding the World Cup

marsbit3h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片