Crypto Market 2026: Nation-States as New Players – Europe Struggles for Attention

USA Dominates the Crypto Narrative

The decisive developments in the crypto sector continue to come from the United States. Last week, investment giant Morgan Stanley announced its entry into the crypto ETF business ^[1]. The company has also filed for a Solana ETF with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) ^[2]. These moves signal that major investment banks no longer want to act merely as distributors, but wish to issue products themselves ^[2].

At the same time, US monetary policy has once again moved to the center of market activity. The public power struggle between President Donald Trump and Fed Chair Jerome Powell raises fundamental questions about the independence of the US Federal Reserve ^[1].

Nation-States as Strategic Investors

A recent Binance report from January 9 paints an ambivalent picture for the crypto market ^[2]. While the overarching trend remains positive, there is a short-term lack of structural demand ^[2]. However, there are increasing signs that 2026 could become a strategic turning point ^[2].

The report argues that demand in 2026 could expand – away from purely industrial use toward national and institutional reserve functions ^[2]. In the US, discussions are underway at both federal and state levels regarding a strategic crypto reserve. In parallel, several emerging markets, including Brazil, are examining Bitcoin as a component of national currency reserves ^[2].

Binance Research expects a new "ETF race" on Wall Street that could provide continuous, passive capital inflows into Bitcoin over the medium to long term ^[2]. Should state and institutional actors begin to accumulate Bitcoin, BTC could finally evolve from a primarily speculative asset to a strategic reserve – with far-reaching consequences for supply, demand, and market structure ^[2].

Europe's Regulatory Dilemma

While the US generates attention with catchy narratives like "Big Beautiful Bill" or national Bitcoin reserves, Europe remains largely invisible despite progressive regulation ^[1]. With the Market Integration and Supervision Package (MISP), the EU is currently deliberating on the future market architecture of digital financial instruments ^[1]. The trading of digital securities, the DLT pilot regime, and the possible consolidation of crypto supervision at the EU level, presumably under ESMA, are under debate ^[1].

The Markets in Crypto Assets Regulation (MiCA), which came into force at the beginning of 2025, also received scant attention outside specialist circles ^[1]. A political narrative for crypto adoption in the EU has not emerged from this ^[1].

According to observers, the problem is not the content, but the method of communication. Outside a small circle of regulators, specialized lawyers, and market infrastructure providers, hardly anyone takes notice of European regulatory initiatives ^[1]. Regulation is conveyed as a technical administrative act, not as an economic policy project with tangible consequences for investors, companies, and capital markets ^[1].

Long-Term Structural Issues Are Decisive

Yet it is precisely these ostensibly dry structural issues that have the greatest leverage in the long term: market integration determines liquidity, supervisory architecture determines scalability, and uniform rules determine whether capital markets grow together or remain fragmented ^[1].

For the Bitcoin price, however, European regulation is of secondary importance in the short term. The market is focused on US interest rates, liquidity trends, and the development of crypto ETFs ^[1]. What matters is whether US asset managers expand their allocations and institutional demand becomes sustained – not how far Brussels has progressed with market integration ^[1].