Webinar
Digital Assets: What Financial Institutions Are Building Now… and Next
Webinar
FEBRUARY 4 – MARCH 11, 2026
Spurred by a rapidly evolving regulatory environment and increased commercial demand, financial institutions are accelerating their implementation of blockchain technology and digital assets into their legacy platforms or partnering with digital assets firms to provide their clients with access to crypto markets.
Winston hosted a series of webinars addressing the key areas in which banks, broker-dealers, and other financial institutions are entering the digital assets space—and the regulatory conditions making it possible.
Why Now? The Convergence of the Legal Financial Services Sector with the Digital Assets Ecosystem
This session outlined the regulatory, supervisory, and market developments prompting U.S. and multinational banks to position themselves to deliver digital asset products and services for their customers. Additionally, the session provided a brief overview of our subsequent webinars, which will take a closer look at stablecoins, tokenization, custody and lending, and recent developments in the UK and EU.
Bringing Traditional Bank Products On-Chain
In this session, we discussed how banks and financial institutions are approaching tokenization of deposits, securities, and other financial products, and the legal and regulatory considerations shaping these early-stage implementations.
Key Takeaways
- Tokenization is best approached as an extension of existing, regulated products. Financial institutions can bring deposits, treasuries, and securities on‑chain by representing them digitally while keeping the underlying assets governed by established banking and securities law. Early efforts should focus on closed‑loop pilots with onboarded clients to capture efficiency gains without introducing new regulatory risk.
-
Legal structure—not technology—will determine what scales. Regulators are increasingly receptive to tokenization, but durable models rely on traditional contracts and property law, with tokens used to facilitate settlement and record‑keeping rather than embody legal rights themselves. Institutions should prioritize “instruction‑based” structures that align with existing books‑and‑records and transfer‑agent frameworks.
- Banks can lead by building tokenization infrastructure and services. Beyond issuing products, financial institutions are well positioned to provide custody, compliance, reporting, and tokenization‑as‑a‑service for clients. Investing now in these capabilities allows banks to anchor trust and control in on‑chain markets as activity continues to migrate to blockchain rails.
How Financial Institutions Are Piloting Stablecoins For Payments and Settlement
This session examined how evolving regulatory clarity around stablecoins is enabling banks to explore issuance, payment rails, and settlement use cases while managing prudential, compliance, and operational risk.
Key Takeaways
- Stablecoins are emerging as a regulated institutional settlement tool, not just a crypto product. With the GENIUS Act establishing a U.S. framework for payment stablecoins, financial institutions are increasingly viewing them as a way to enable faster, 24/7 settlement and reduce operational friction. Banks can now assess whether to pursue payment stablecoins or tokenized deposits, which can deliver similar functionality within existing banking models.
- Early stablecoin adoption is focused on targeted, institutional pilots rather than retail use. Most banks are piloting stablecoins in controlled, behind‑the‑scenes workflows, such as card network settlement; interbank treasury movements; cross‑border payments; and delivery‑versus‑payment for tokenized assets, where efficiency gains are immediate and customer exposure is limited. These pilots allow institutions to test compliance, economics, and interoperability while regulatory rulemaking continues.
- Banks can participate without issuing stablecoins themselves. Stablecoin‑as‑a‑service models enable financial institutions to partner with regulated issuers, allowing them to integrate stablecoin settlement into their operations without building full issuance and compliance infrastructure. This approach offers a pragmatic path to market, letting banks gain experience and optionality while deferring more complex balance‑sheet and licensing decisions.
Digital Asset Custody: Structuring Bank-Grade Solutions
This session addressed how banks are structuring compliant digital asset custody offerings, including partnerships with technology providers, risk allocation, and supervisory expectations.
Key Takeaways
- Regulators have cleared a path for bank‑led digital asset custody. The OCC confirmed that digital asset custody and safekeeping are permissible banking activities under existing law, whether conducted on a fiduciary or non‑fiduciary basis. Recent guidance materially lowers regulatory friction for traditional banks seeking to enter the digital asset space.
- Digital asset custody should be customer‑driven and risk‑limited. Banks can provide custody, safekeeping, settlement, reporting, and transaction execution so long as services are offered in an agency or fiduciary capacity. Regulators continue to draw a clear line against proprietary trading or speculative exposure.
- Bank‑grade custody requires controls comparable to traditional trust services. Successful digital asset custody programs hinge on strong governance, cybersecurity, AML and sanctions compliance, and strict segregation of customer assets. Regulators expect custody platforms to integrate with core banking systems and meet established safety and soundness standards.
Crypto-Backed Lending: Structuring Bitcoin-Based Loans With Custodial Partners
This session explored the reemerging market for bitcoin-backed lending, focusing on how banks are evaluating credit, collateral, and custody structures, sometimes in partnership with regulated crypto custodians.
Key Takeaways
- Bitcoin is like any other asset. The risk tools banks already use (e.g., LTVs, margin calls, required hedging, auto-liquidation) map directly onto BTC-backed loans. Banks have managed 10%+ daily swings in oil, gas, and agricultural commodities for decades. This is the same playbook with a different ticker.
- Bitcoin collateral is easier to liquidate. Unlike real estate, equipment, or oil reserves, Bitcoin is liquid and can be sold in seconds. There's no appraisal, no auction, no buyer search. It's 24/7 collateral in a 24/7 market.
- Demand for compliant, low‑cost Bitcoin‑backed loans exceeds supply. The first institutions to build compliant programs will own the space before competitors enter the space.
How UK and EU Frameworks Are Influencing Bank Adoption
In this session, we provided a comparative overview of UK and EU digital asset regimes, including MiCA and proposed UK legislation, and explain how regulatory certainty abroad is influencing bank strategy, product design, and cross-border coordination.
Key Takeaways
- UK and EU regulation is enabling banks to move from observation to execution. The EU’s MiCA regime is already operational, and the UK is progressing toward a comprehensive cryptoasset framework that brings digital assets squarely within the financial regulatory perimeter. This regulatory certainty allows banks to plan and deploy digital asset strategies with greater confidence and reduced legal risk.
- Stablecoins are the most practical starting point for UK and EU bank adoption of digital assets. Banks in the UK and EU are increasingly evaluating stablecoins for payments, settlement, and liquidity management due to faster settlement times, reduced friction, and improved transparency. Adoption requires meeting heightened regulatory expectations around reserves, custody, disclosures, and governance, positioning stablecoins as a regulated financial product rather than a technology experiment.
- Early regulatory preparation will differentiate market leaders from followers. EU regimes and, once in force, the UK regime, require banks—even those already authorized—to obtain specific cryptoasset permissions and comply with new operational and disclosure standards. Institutions that begin regulatory assessments now and align digital asset initiatives with existing risk and compliance frameworks will be best positioned to participate in emerging digital financial infrastructure.
