How Goldman Sachs is betting on crypto with its billion-dollar strategy

ambcryptoОпубліковано о 2026-02-11Востаннє оновлено о 2026-02-11

Анотація

Goldman Sachs has significantly shifted its stance on cryptocurrency, investing over $2.36 billion in a diversified portfolio that includes $1.1 billion in Bitcoin, $1 billion in Ethereum, $153 million in XRP, and $108 million in Solana. This marks a major departure from its previous position, where it viewed crypto as a risky asset with no long-term value. The change began around 2020 as institutional interest grew. While building its crypto holdings, Goldman is also involved in regulatory debates, particularly opposing crypto platforms offering interest on stablecoins, which it could threaten traditional banking. Despite recent price declines in major cryptocurrencies, Goldman’s strategy shows confidence in the broader crypto market, contrasting with JPMorgan’s focus on building digital finance infrastructure.

In a surprising turn of events, new regulatory filings from Goldman Sachs show that the famous investment bank is changing how it views the crypto market.

The bank now holds about $1.1 billion in Bitcoin [BTC] and almost the same amount, $1 billion, in Ethereum [ETH].

Additionally, the bank has invested $153 million in XRP and $108 million in Solana [SOL] – A sign that it is no longer just testing crypto. Instead, it is building a well-balanced portfolio of major digital assets.

Goldman Sachs’s previous position on cryptos

To understand how important Goldman’s current crypto portfolio is, its worth looking at its previous position.

For many years, Goldman Sachs was strongly against crypto. Before 2020, its research teams often called Bitcoin a risky asset with no real value. The bank believed crypto did not belong in serious, long-term investment plans. At that time, it saw digital assets as something to avoid, not invest in.

This started to change after big institutions began entering the crypto market around 2020. Goldman slowly softened its position.

It reopened its crypto trading desk and began saying that Bitcoin could help protect against inflation. Thus, what began as small steps has now grown into careful but active participation.

An interesting plot twist

Goldman Sachs’s growing investment in crypto is not happening on its own. It is taking place while lawmakers and regulators are still arguing about how digital assets should be controlled.

While the bank is quietly building its $2.36 billion crypto portfolio, its leaders are also involved in tense discussions with government officials in Washington.

One major issue in these talks is stablecoin interest. Some crypto companies want to pay users interest on stablecoins, just like banks do with savings accounts. Traditional banks strongly oppose this though.

Banks, including Goldman, say that if crypto platforms are allowed to offer interest, people may move their money out of banks. This could weaken the banking system.

Crypto market tests hard waters

This debate comes at a time when the digital asset landscape is weathering a significant storm that has wiped billions in market cap over the past few weeks.

At press time, Bitcoin was fighting to hold the $66,900-mark following a 2.81% slide in 24 hours. Over the same time period, Ethereum dipped to $1,946, down 3.03% too.

The newer additions to Goldman’s portfolio are feeling the heat even more acutely. XRP was trading at $1.36 after a 3.84% drop and Solana, the network Goldman recently bet $108 million on, was reeling from a 4.53% fall.

At the same time, JPMorgan Chase is taking a different path from Goldman Sachs. While both are involved in regulatory talks and see crypto as important, their strategies differ.

Goldman is acting like a confident investor, buying and holding major assets. JPMorgan, meanwhile, is focused on building digital finance infrastructure through payment tokens and blockchain services.

In simple terms, Goldman is betting on prices, while JPMorgan is building the system.

Final Thoughts

Bank’s investments suggest confidence that blockchain will become part of everyday financial systems.
By holding large amounts of Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP, and Solana, the bank is betting on the entire crypto ecosystem, not just one asset.

Пов'язані питання

QWhat is the total value of Goldman Sachs' crypto portfolio as mentioned in the article?

AGoldman Sachs' crypto portfolio is valued at approximately $2.36 billion.

QWhich two major cryptocurrencies make up the largest portion of Goldman Sachs' holdings?

ABitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) make up the largest portion, with holdings of about $1.1 billion and $1 billion, respectively.

QHow did Goldman Sachs' view on cryptocurrencies change around 2020?

AAround 2020, Goldman Sachs softened its position, reopened its crypto trading desk, and began to view Bitcoin as a potential hedge against inflation, moving from strong opposition to cautious participation.

QWhat is a major regulatory issue that traditional banks like Goldman Sachs are concerned about regarding crypto platforms?

ATraditional banks are concerned that if crypto platforms are allowed to pay interest on stablecoins, it could lead to people moving their money out of banks, potentially weakening the traditional banking system.

QHow does JPMorgan Chase's strategy with crypto differ from Goldman Sachs' according to the article?

AWhile Goldman Sachs is investing heavily in holding major crypto assets, JPMorgan Chase is focused on building digital finance infrastructure through payment tokens and blockchain services.

Пов'язані матеріали

Fed's Internal Doves Flock to Hawkish Stance, Warsh's Debut "Between a Rock and a Hard Place"

U.S. Federal Reserve officials who previously advocated for rate cuts, including Governor Christopher Waller, have recently shifted their stance, with many now not ruling out the possibility of future rate hikes. This sets a challenging stage for new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh's first policy meeting. Appointed by President Trump based on his dovish views, Warsh now faces a committee where the debate has pivoted from "when to cut" to "whether to hike," driven by persistent inflation above 3%, a strong labor market, and supply-side pressures from AI infrastructure demands and geopolitical tensions. Key figures illustrate the shift. Governor Waller, once concerned about employment, now says data has pushed him toward considering rate increases. Even moderate voices like Governor Lisa Cook, while expecting inflation to ease, have indicated readiness to hike if it fails to do so. Long-time hawks such as regional Fed presidents Beth Hammack, Lorie Logan, and Neel Kashkari have grown more vocal, arguing that the real policy rate is effectively falling and that action may soon be needed. The upcoming Fed meeting is expected to keep rates steady but will likely remove the "easing bias" from its statement, signaling a neutral stance between cuts and hikes. The quarterly "dot plot" is anticipated to show most officials projecting no cuts this year, with some potentially indicating hikes. Chair Warsh, a critic of the Fed's reliance on forward guidance like the dot plot, must navigate communicating this pivot using tools he has questioned, all while steering policy in a direction counter to the preferences of the president who appointed him. The consensus suggests the Fed's next move could well be a rate increase.

marsbit3 хв тому

Fed's Internal Doves Flock to Hawkish Stance, Warsh's Debut "Between a Rock and a Hard Place"

marsbit3 хв тому

The Trillion-Yuan Market Cap 'Yi Zhong Tian': Who is the True Value King?

The article analyzes the three leading Chinese optical module companies, collectively nicknamed "Yi Zhong Tian": Xinyisheng, Zhongji Innolight, and TFC Optical Communication. It evaluates their "cost-performance" not by current stock price, but through three lenses: PEG ratio (growth vs. valuation), earnings quality, and premium/discount for certainty. Xinyisheng shows the most attractive PEG ratio and high profitability, but its valuation reflects discounts for risks like high customer concentration and reliance on overseas markets. Zhongji Innolight, the most expensive, commands a premium for its market leadership, dominant share in key products like 800G/1.6T modules, and higher earnings certainty, though it faces geopolitical risks. TFC Optical, as an upstream component supplier ("water seller"), has the highest gross margin and bets on the long-term CPO/NPO architecture trend, but trades at a high valuation with more stable, less explosive growth. The core argument is that while these companies dominate module assembly, the true profit pool and technological moat lie upstream in laser and switch chips, currently controlled by U.S. firms like Lumentum and Coherent. The long-term "cost-performance" for these Chinese leaders hinges on whether the domestic industry, exemplified by companies like Yuanjie Technology, can successfully move up the value chain into high-power laser chips. Otherwise, their high growth may remain confined to the lower-margin assembly segment.

marsbit13 хв тому

The Trillion-Yuan Market Cap 'Yi Zhong Tian': Who is the True Value King?

marsbit13 хв тому

Has the Crypto Market Bottomed? Here's What Institutions Think

The crypto market is in a period of significant debate, with leading institutions offering differing views on whether a bottom has been reached. Three prominent firms have published detailed analyses: * **Galaxy Digital** argues Bitcoin has **not yet bottomed**. Their analysis of 13 historical indicators across six dimensions (valuation, profit-taking, miner pressure, etc.) shows only four are fully met. They project a potential bottom range between $30k and $54k. * **NYDIG** states a bottom is **possible but not likely**. While metrics are close to historic bear market extremes, they note the absence of a classic panic-selling event. They also suggest increased institutional adoption may have structurally altered the market cycle, potentially leading to a shallower downturn. * **Standard Chartered Bank** asserts the **bottom has already occurred** at around $59k. They cite two key factors: potential US-Iran diplomatic progress and the anticipated SpaceX IPO, which they believe absorbed capital and caused ETF selling pressure that is now subsiding. They forecast a year-end price target of $100k. Despite the surface-level disagreement, the reports share critical common ground more valuable for long-term investors: 1. All three believe the market bottom will form **within this year**. 2. All agree the current price is **closer to the bottom than to previous highs**. 3. All maintain a **bullish long-term outlook** for Bitcoin and a new cycle. The core takeaway is that while the exact bottom price ($40k, $50k, or $60k) is debated, the consensus is that a bottom is imminent. For long-term holders, the primary focus should not be pinpointing the absolute low, but on the future potential for prices to reach $100k, $200k, or higher. The fundamental thesis for Bitcoin—sovereign debt accumulation, inflation, declining trust in centralized institutions, global digitization, and improved accessibility—remains intact and is arguably strengthening. The overall landscape is viewed as more favorable than in previous crypto winters.

marsbit23 хв тому

Has the Crypto Market Bottomed? Here's What Institutions Think

marsbit23 хв тому

The 'Chip' Challenge and Breakthroughs in China's Optical Industry Chain

China's Photonics Industry: Bottlenecks and Breakthroughs In the global AI race, computing chips dominate the narrative, but the underlying bottleneck increasingly defining the scale of AI clusters is light—or more specifically, optical connectivity. Optical modules, which translate electrical signals to light and vice versa, are crucial for connecting thousands of GPUs in AI data centers, preventing data congestion and ensuring efficient model training. High-speed modules (800G, 1.6T) are now standard, with performance hinging on advanced DSP (Digital Signal Processor) chips. This is where a critical dependency lies. Two US giants—Marvell and Broadcom—collectively dominate over 90% of the high-end DSP chip market. Chinese optical module leaders like Zhongji Innolight and Eoptolink rely on these chips to manufacture modules for overseas AI customers, primarily in North America. While this creates a supply chain vulnerability, complete decoupling is difficult. Marvell derives over half its revenue from Greater China, and the US firms depend on Chinese partners for chip packaging and optical components. The risk from laser chips (e.g., from Lumentum), another key component, is considered more manageable due to multiple global suppliers and faster progress in domestic alternatives from companies like YOFC and Accelink. To mitigate risks, China's industry is pursuing a multi-pronged strategy: diversifying supply chains and locking in long-term orders; fostering a domestic market ecosystem to adopt homegrown DSPs from firms like Huawei HiSilicon and CETC; accelerating R&D in high-speed DSPs and advanced packaging; and investing in next-gen technologies like silicon photonics and Co-Packaged Optics (CPO) to reduce reliance on discrete DSPs. The ultimate solution lies not in short-term博弈 but in persistent advancement of domestic high-end chip R&D and manufacturing. While challenges remain in performance, certification, and ecosystem building, China's vast domestic market and manufacturing base provide a crucial buffer, buying time for the industry to achieve greater technological independence.

marsbit37 хв тому

The 'Chip' Challenge and Breakthroughs in China's Optical Industry Chain

marsbit37 хв тому

Behind SpaceX's $2 Trillion Market Cap: Why Does Musk Always Have the Next Move Planned?

On June 12th, SpaceX debuted on the Nasdaq, reaching a valuation that briefly touched $2 trillion. This marked the culmination of a 24-year journey from its founding in 2002, driven by Elon Musk's frustration at the high cost of buying rockets. The company's path was defined by early failures, with its first three Falcon 1 launches ending in explosions before a successful 2008 flight opened the era of commercial spaceflight. Key to its model was a fixed-price NASA contract, incentivizing cost reduction. SpaceX mastered rocket reusability, first achieving a Falcon 9 landing in 2015, which drastically cut launch costs. This enabled its profitable Starlink satellite internet constellation, envisioned years before reusability was proven, to create an internal market for frequent launches. Similarly, the next-generation Starship rocket was in development long before its first flight, with its business case evolving from Mars colonization to supporting the emerging concept of in-orbit data centers for AI—a story now central to its valuation. The company's recent IPO, a reversal of its long-standing "no IPO" stance, is funding this ambitious "space-based compute" vision. While major tech players like Google, Blue Origin, and others are investing heavily, significant technical and cost hurdles remain. Ultimately, SpaceX's history is one of creating its own demand: first with Starlink and now with space-based AI compute, betting that its next rocket will enable its next giant market.

marsbit40 хв тому

Behind SpaceX's $2 Trillion Market Cap: Why Does Musk Always Have the Next Move Planned?

marsbit40 хв тому

Торгівля

Спот

Ф'ючерси

Обговорення

Ласкаво просимо до спільноти HTX. Тут ви можете бути в курсі останніх подій розвитку платформи та отримати доступ до професійної ринкової інформації. Нижче представлені думки користувачів щодо ціни T (T).