Digital-asset custody is moving beyond the business of holding private keys as tokenized funds and stablecoins create demand for firms that can also settle transactions, manage collateral and operate under trust-based legal structures. The change is visible in Europe, where the number of authorized custodians under the Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation, or MiCA, has risen to 230 from 50 in one year, according to figures provided in the source material.
The expansion comes alongside a sharp increase in blockchain-based versions of traditional financial assets. RWA.xyz, a platform tracking tokenized real-world assets, reported that the sector grew 85% this year to about $39.8 billion. Stablecoins also crossed $300 billion in market value during 2025 after rising more than 50%, before remaining around that level.
Those assets need more than secure storage. Tokenized Treasury funds, money-market products and stablecoin reserves raise questions over asset segregation, redemption, collateral eligibility, transfer controls and the handling of assets when a client enters insolvency. Custody providers that can address those requirements are seeking a larger role in the financial infrastructure surrounding on-chain assets.
Custody fees put pressure on firms to add services
Traditional crypto custody has a relatively simple commercial model: a provider holds assets on behalf of a client and charges a fee based on the value held. Revenue rises when client balances increase, but the model offers limited scope to expand income if asset prices and deposits remain flat.
That constraint is encouraging custody firms to turn client relationships into platforms for additional regulated services. Trust structures are central to that effort because they can give an institution broader administrative responsibilities than a standard custody arrangement.
In a conventional custody relationship, the client retains legal ownership of the assets. The custodian provides safekeeping and executes transfers when instructed by the client. A trust arrangement changes the legal framework: assets are transferred to a trustee, which administers, invests or distributes them according to the trust's terms and owes fiduciary duties to beneficiaries.
For digital-asset firms, that framework could support services including collateral administration, managed distribution of tokenized assets, settlement arrangements and certain forms of asset management. It also brings greater legal responsibility, since a trustee's authority and obligations go beyond processing a customer's instruction to move funds.
The model has precedents in traditional finance
The shift resembles the evolution of financial custodians in earlier eras of capital markets. Safe-deposit businesses began as providers of physical storage but developed into institutions handling bond collateral, estate administration and trust services as clients needed more complex forms of financial oversight.
A documented example dates to 1883, when a Boston safe-deposit business acted as trustee for bond collateral connected to American Rapid Telegraph. The arrangement placed the institution between issuers, creditors and pledged assets, a role much closer to modern trust administration than physical safekeeping.
State Street followed a comparable route decades later. The company built from fund custody and asset servicing into investment-related operations that drew on its valuation, accounting and recordkeeping capabilities. State Street formed an index management unit for institutional clients in 1978. In 1993, it worked with the American Stock Exchange on the launch of SPY, the first exchange-traded fund designed to track the S&P 500, while serving as trustee.
The comparison has limits: blockchain assets settle and move differently from securities held through traditional intermediaries. Yet the commercial logic is similar. A firm trusted to maintain accurate ownership records and safeguard assets is positioned to offer settlement, reporting, collateral and administrative functions around those assets.
U.S. trust bank charters become strategic assets
Several digital-asset firms are pursuing national trust bank status in the United States, where an Office of the Comptroller of the Currency charter can provide a federal legal basis for trust activities.
Anchorage Digital reorganized as a national trust bank in January 2021. The company has presented the charter as a foundation for institutional digital-asset custody and related financial services. BitGo reached a national trust bank licensing milestone in December 2025, according to the source material, placing it among the firms seeking to build regulated settlement and stablecoin-related operations from a trust-bank base.
Stablecoin issuance, clearing and settlement are especially attractive areas because they generate recurring transactional activity rather than relying solely on assets sitting in storage. Providers with custody capabilities can verify wallet controls, monitor transfers, administer reserve-related processes and support institutional settlement workflows, subject to the scope of their approvals.
Agora and Catena are pursuing a different version of the model. On Sept. 18, 2026, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency granted both firms conditional preliminary approval to establish national trust banks, according to the material provided.
Their stated operating plans point toward advisory and asset-management services. Agora's proposed structure would keep final trading decisions with clients, limiting its role to advice and execution support. Catena's model would extend to direct management of on-chain digital assets, including assets allocated by autonomous AI agents. Both companies are preparing operations while awaiting final authorization to begin full activities.
Collateral management is becoming a central test
The growing use of tokenized funds as on-chain collateral could determine which custody providers gain the largest role. A holder of tokenized U.S. Treasury fund shares, for example, may seek to pledge those tokens to borrow stablecoins and deploy the borrowed capital elsewhere on-chain.
That transaction requires more than a wallet with strong security. The parties need reliable confirmation that collateral is locked, rules for valuing it, processes for margin calls and liquidation, and settlement procedures if a borrower defaults. Smart contracts can automate parts of those steps, but regulated institutions are seeking to provide the legal controls and operational oversight around them.
This is where custody begins to merge with clearing, settlement and collateral administration. Firms able to hold tokenized assets compliantly while supporting their controlled use in lending and trading strategies could gain business that basic cold-storage providers cannot easily capture.
Europe's rising number of MiCA-authorized custodians suggests that regulated capacity is growing quickly. The next competitive divide will depend less on which firms can safeguard tokens and more on which can administer tokenized assets through settlement, collateral and trust structures without losing the legal protections that institutional clients expect.
Explore how real-world-asset tokenization is reshaping yields and on-chain credit in this in-depth RWA migration analysis today.
Disclaimer: The content on this page is provided for general informational purposes only and does not represent the views or financial advice of Toobit. We make no guarantees regarding the accuracy or completeness of this information and shall not be held liable for any errors, omissions, or outcomes resulting from its use. Investing in digital assets involves risk; users should independently evaluate their financial situation and the risks involved. For further details, please consult our Terms of Service and Risk Disclosure.
