Japanese Banking Giant Cuts Crypto Bets After Q3 Profit Slump

bitcoinistPublished on 2026-02-03Last updated on 2026-02-03

Abstract

Japan's largest brokerage firm Nomura announced it will temporarily reduce its cryptocurrency trading positions following a 10% decline in net income for the third quarter ending December 31. The profit slump, partly attributed to trading losses at its European crypto subsidiary Laser Digital, prompted tighter risk controls and position limits to manage earnings volatility. Despite this short-term pullback, Nomura remains committed to its long-term digital asset strategy, with Laser Digital actively seeking to expand services internationally, including applying for a U.S. trust bank charter. The firm aims to balance immediate risk management with continued development of crypto infrastructure and institutional services.

Nomura, Japan’s biggest brokerage and banking giant, said it will temporarily trim its cryptocurrency positions after a weak quarter that dented profits and tightened its short-term risk tolerance. The pullback looks aimed at smoothing swings to earnings while the firm keeps its longer-term plans for digital assets alive.

Bank Cuts Crypto Exposure After Profit Decline

According to earnings disclosures and company remarks, Nomura’s net income fell nearly 10 percent in the third quarter that ended December 31, leaving group profit lower than a year earlier and prompting management to curb some crypto trading positions to limit further hits.

Nomura’s European crypto arm, Laser Digital, had posted trading losses during the period, which management singled out as a key factor behind the move to tighten position limits.

Reports note that executives described the steps as temporary and targeted — not an exit from the market but a way to manage volatility while other parts of the business keep growing.

Short-Term Pullback, Long-Term Play

There is a split in the timeline. On one hand, Laser Digital has recently filed paperwork to expand its services abroad, including applying for a US national trust bank charter as it seeks to offer custody and trading to institutional clients.

On the other hand, trading desks that took losses are being put on a tighter leash so quarterly results don’t swing wildly. That two-track approach is what analysts say explains the seeming contradiction.

BTCUSD currently trading at $77,858. Chart: TradingView

Investors reacted quickly. Nomura’s shares slipped after the earnings update, reflecting market concern about the hit to European operations and the extra costs tied to a large acquisition completed in the period.

Management has flagged that one-off charges played a role in the weaker profit line, alongside the trading losses.

Risk Controls Tightened, Growth Goals Kept

Reports say Nomura has tightened risk controls around digital-asset positions and is conducting stricter oversight of exposures that can swing with crypto price moves.

At the same time, executives stressed the firm’s broader commitment to building crypto infrastructure and services over the medium to long term, rather than abandoning the sector outright.

The immediate effect is clear: fewer large directional bets in the trading book and more cautious position sizing. That reduces profit volatility but can limit upside if crypto prices rebound sharply.

Featured image from The Exchange Asia, chart from TradingView

Related Questions

QWhy did Nomura decide to temporarily reduce its cryptocurrency positions?

ANomura decided to temporarily trim its crypto positions after a weak third quarter that saw a nearly 10% decline in net income, which tightened its short-term risk tolerance. Trading losses at its European crypto arm, Laser Digital, were a key factor behind this move.

QWhat was the performance of Nomura's net income in the third quarter ending December 31?

ANomura's net income fell nearly 10 percent in the third quarter that ended December 31, leaving group profit lower than it was a year earlier.

QWhat long-term plans does Nomura have for its digital assets business despite the short-term pullback?

ADespite the short-term reduction in crypto trading, Nomura remains committed to building crypto infrastructure and services over the medium to long term. Its European arm, Laser Digital, has filed to expand services abroad, including applying for a US national trust bank charter.

QHow did investors react to Nomura's earnings update and what were their concerns?

AInvestors reacted by pushing Nomura's shares lower. Their concerns were primarily about the hit to the firm's European operations and the extra costs associated with a large acquisition that was completed during the period.

QWhat specific measures has Nomura implemented to manage risk in its digital asset exposures?

ANomura has tightened risk controls around digital-asset positions and is conducting stricter oversight of exposures that are sensitive to cryptocurrency price movements. This includes reducing large directional bets and implementing more cautious position sizing.

Related Reads

Anthropic Apologized, But the Business of 'Safety' Hasn't Stopped

On June 11, Anthropic apologized not for a model failure, but for a lack of transparency. Its new Claude Fable 5 model was found to be secretly rerouting requests from users engaged in advanced AI model development to a weaker version, Opus 4.8, without any notification. The company's response—promising future notifications for such "downgrades"—was met with user skepticism. The article argues the core issue isn't technical but commercial: Anthropic's "safety" measures are primarily a business strategy. A key feature, the "intelligent safety classifier," marketed as user protection, is described as a tool for "competitive defense" to protect Anthropic's market lead by limiting rivals' research capabilities. This covert mechanism was designed for low "false positives," precisely targeting AI researchers. Anthropic's model involves a calculated three-step process: publishing alarming security research to amplify public anxiety, offering its Fable 5 model with a "safety classifier" as a premium-priced solution, and cashing in through a planned high-value IPO. This contrasts with OpenAI's more direct "tool-and-traffic" approach. The apology, merely changing a secret downgrade to a visible one, is seen as a business "patch" rather than a principled shift. The incident risks damaging Anthropic's "safest AI" reputation among the developer community, which underpins its valuation and appeal to government and corporate clients. Ultimately, the article concludes that for Anthropic, safety is a business, and the apology is merely customer service for that business.

marsbit48m ago

Anthropic Apologized, But the Business of 'Safety' Hasn't Stopped

marsbit48m ago

The Niche Consensus Among Elites: Has College Become an Expensive Waste?

**Summary:** A growing "anti-college" movement is gaining traction among elite circles in Silicon Valley, challenging the traditional value of a four-year university degree. Proponents argue that college has become an expensive, slow, and increasingly irrelevant waste of time, especially in the fast-paced tech world where opportunities pass by quickly. The movement is led by figures like billionaire Peter Thiel, who criticizes universities for high costs, ideological indoctrination, and stifling true innovation. His "Thiel Fellowship" pays young people to drop out and pursue ventures. Companies like Palantir Technologies (co-founded by Thiel) fuel this trend with programs like the "Meritocracy Fellowship," which offers high school graduates paid internships as an alternative to immediate college enrollment, promising a practical "Palantir Degree." Key drivers include: 1. **Economics:** Skyrocketing student debt versus the allure of immediate, high-paying tech jobs or startup funding. 2. **Technology:** AI and online tools lowering barriers to self-education and product development, making formal instruction seem inefficient. 3. **Culture:** A backlash against perceived "woke" ideology and DEI policies in universities, coupled with a belief that these institutions suppress meritocracy and masculine drive. The movement is notably male-dominated. Critics, like economist David Deming, warn against overgeneralizing from dropout success stories (survivorship bias). He emphasizes that genuine autodidacts are rare, corporate training is narrowly focused, and the "college wage premium" remains high for most people. University liberal arts education, he argues, builds adaptable problem-solving skills and broad perspectives. The debate highlights a deeper crisis in education. The core model of the modern university appears increasingly mismatched with the speed of the information age. The movement signals a shift in the locus of learning from institutional "education" to personal, active "learning" powered by the internet and AI. Ultimately, this may not mean the end of university, but rather a painful evolution. The future likely holds more hybrid, personalized, and lifelong learning pathways. The central question becomes: in a world changing faster than any curriculum, how do we best learn?

marsbit1h ago

The Niche Consensus Among Elites: Has College Become an Expensive Waste?

marsbit1h ago

From Subsidies to Token-Based Pricing to Price Cuts: Is OpenAI Sparking a Price War? Is the Inflection Point for Token Economics Nearing?

The commercialization of generative AI is facing a critical inflection point as a potential price war looms. According to The Wall Street Journal, OpenAI is considering a significant cut to its token fees to compete with rival Anthropic, signaling a shift from a growth-at-all-costs model focused on token consumption. This move comes as both companies, reportedly losing billions on compute, prepare for IPOs, and as enterprise customers face "bill shock" from switching to usage-based token billing. Reports indicate poor ROI, with one analysis finding only 18 cents of every dollar spent on AI tokens generates user-facing value. The industry's initial phases—from flat-rate subscriptions to aggressive subsidies—have given way to a reckoning with real costs. Analysts debate the future: some predict a bifurcation between premium, high-cost models for complex tasks and cheaper alternatives for routine work, while others believe overall spending will still rise as agentic AI increases tokens per task. Notably, Chinese model DeepSeek's low-cost API is gaining traction with U.S. enterprises, adding competitive pressure. The core challenge is redefining value beyond token volume ("tokenmaxxing") toward measurable productivity ("valuemaxxing"), as the entire AI value chain, from cloud providers to chipmakers, feels the ripple effects of unsustainable pricing.

marsbit1h ago

From Subsidies to Token-Based Pricing to Price Cuts: Is OpenAI Sparking a Price War? Is the Inflection Point for Token Economics Nearing?

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片