Evaluating Interest-Bearing Crypto Accounts
By Zev Shimko, Jenny Shaver and Blake Cohen
The latest offering in crypto custody is an interest-bearing crypto account. Although marketed similar to cash deposit savings accounts offered by traditional banks, the structure of this type of interest-bearing crypto product is more closely analogous to securities lending and should be viewed as such when assessing the risks associated with placing crypto in an interest-bearing account.
There are certainly benefits to interest-bearing crypto accounts — namely the ability to earn a return on a custodied asset beyond its possible appreciation value. However, those interest benefits aren’t without their own risks. Here are some important considerations when assessing if an interest-bearing crypto account might be suitable for your risk appetite*:
Commingling and Rehypothecation
When opting for an interest-bearing product, your crypto assets may be commingled (where funds belonging to one party are mixed with those of a second party), and rehypothecated (practice whereby a broker or lending agent uses assets in their possession, but owned by their customer, to invest with or lend to a third party). In this structure, your funds may be taken by your custodian (acting as a lending agent), pooled with other assets owned by other customers of your custodian, and lent to a third-party. As a result, and in return for interest payments, you may forfeit several rights associated with your crypto assets. For example, you may be unable to quickly withdraw your crypto in whole or in part and you may lose, due to the commingling of your assets with assets owned by other customers, the ability to independently verify the security of your assets on-chain. Instead you may be supplied with a percentage statement or value statement regarding your interest in the crypto collateral you deposited into your account.
Enabling of Short Selling
With a traditional bank savings account, your cash deposits may be lent to other financial institutions and vetted borrowers who have a multitude of options for generating wealth with the borrowed funds. In many cases, these traditional bank accounts are also insured and operate within strict regulatory guidelines and limitations on the collateral percentage, number of parties, among other restrictions for and to which the deposited assets can be lent, distributed, and relevered. These regulatory guidelines and restrictions prevent traditional financial intermediaries of this type from participating in some high-risk lending behaviors when it comes to their customer assets, but do not, generally, prohibit the rehypothecation of deposited assets under certain conditions. These intermediaries then cover their costs, not by the fees charged on the interest-bearing customer accounts, but through the income generated by lending and investing those assets during the rehypothecation process. While this process seems straight forward and analogous to what might happen with the crypto you deposit in an interest-bearing account, some additional crypto market specific comparison will help to highlight the difference in rehypothecated use between cash denominated and crypto denominated accounts.
While there are certainly financial institutions which take short and long positions on various currencies, the typical use case for rehypothecation in cash accounts is the lending or investment of the cash deposited directly to a third-party and not for direct speculative purposes in that asset. However, for many institutional crypto holders, the primary use case for generating returns with crypto assets is often to take a speculative position on the asset itself. An institution with a bearish view on the market, for example, may look to short sale opportunities — borrowing crypto and immediately selling it in hopes of a future purchase at a lower price to close the position. The institution will only net a profit if the value of the crypto falls below their initial sale price, which means you and the counterparty borrower are betting on opposing outcomes. As a HODLer of crypto assets, it’s important to understand the motives of each party involved aside from what traditional rehypothecation in cash accounts might suggest. This comparison highlights the operational difference in the rehypothecated use of cash deposits and crypto deposits in interest-bearing accounts and should motivate anyone seeking to deposit their crypto into such an account to carefully inspect the intended and permitted uses of the assets they plan to deposit.
Lender Operational Risk
Any custodian or intermediary entrusted with your crypto may be required to act in a responsible capacity either by their position as a custodian or fiduciary or by some applicable regulatory regime. However, there are still strategic and operational choices which may put your assets at risk. For companies offering interest-bearing crypto accounts, how might they be regulated? Traditionally chartered banks, for example, are regulated by the FDIC and must carry insurance and maintain fractional reserves to address withdrawal, and other requests without becoming overextended. Lending intermediaries are also often required to maintain capital reserves to cover risk exposure of defaults in capitalized accounts and through bonds or other insurance policies.
Given that crypto regulation is scant, the savvy crypto account holder may want to make a detailed investigation of how and through what methods companies offering interest-bearing crypto accounts have structured their risk mitigation. For example: Does the company carry insurance for your assets? What is the claims process in the event of an incident? In a relatively nascent industry, transparency of risk mitigation protocols should be table stakes for any interest-bearing products. In addition to the primary lender or custodian involved, downstream market participants face similar responsibilities as any loss throughout the ecosystem may lead to direct counterparty effects.
As an extension of assessing operating risk, a savvy account holder should also understand how counterparty risk is being mitigated and which or what counterparties may be involved. When it comes to borrowers of your crypto assets, who are they and how have they been vetted for their own operational risk? Should a third-party default on their obligation, what are the implications for your account? For loan agreements, it’s important to know how they are being structured to mitigate default risk. For example, in securities lending, borrowers are often required to post collateral. In this case, it’s important to understand what the lender is doing with the collateral and how the collateral account is being managed. Is the collateral itself being rehypothecated to earn additional returns? If so, what are those direct or indirect investments and how risky might they be? Transparency and accountability are key and so is a keen eye for the fine print.
Lock-Up Period Risk
Since all-time highs, the price of Bitcoin has dropped roughly 80%, with the largest recent weekly drop of 22% and one-day drop of 12%, both in November 2018. Heightened volatility is no stranger in the cryptocurrency world as the market can turn meaningfully in a period of days, or even hours. It is important to take note of an extended lock-up period (or simply a delay in withdrawal) associated with any interest-bearing deposit account as any delay in or restriction on your ability to liquidate or transact your assets may subject you to additional market risk. Alongside normal course market volatility, an increase in borrowing crypto for the purpose of a taking a short position, especially if undertaken by a large subset of holders in a particular asset, may potentially exacerbate any downward pressure on price, heightening lock-up risk through increased intensity in negative peak volatility.
Sustainability of Returns
Before depositing crypto into an interest-bearing account, take a look at the fine print. Returns initially quoted may carry restrictions on the period of time they are available, may require additional deposits or transfers, and may have additional caveats regarding market conditions and other impediments. It is important to understand the process and any notice requirements or promises made by your lender or custodian for any changes to the quoted interest rate. Depending on the size of the custodian or lender, interest bearing accounts which carry guaranteed interest rates may require significant cash outlays by the custodian or lender as a cushion for the quoted returns. Understanding the custodian’s cash and balance sheet position may also be important depending on the amount of crypto being deposited.
There is a place for interest-bearing accounts in the crypto ecosystem and as the market matures so will the terms and safeguards associated with these accounts. In the meantime, you must seek transparency for how your funds may be distributed and how risks are being mitigated. It’s important that you request adequate information, and that you handle your crypto assets with a full understanding of the risks and tradeoffs. Happy HODLing.
None of the information contained in this post should be taken as investment advice or any suggestion for or against the suitability of any interest-bearing, custody, or other crypto currency product for any investment, diversification, or market strategy. Salt does not offer investment advice. Please speak to your advisor, tax accountant, and/or legal counsel regarding the suitability, risks, and legality of any crypto market position or strategy. Salt is not a bank and is not FDIC insured. Please see www.saltlending.com for additional information, references, and disclosures.