Competition will bring down bank spreads on cryptocurrency in Russia: analysts' forecast
With the start of banking operations with cryptocurrency in Russia, market spreads will inevitably be higher than on classic crypto exchanges. However, it will not be possible to maintain a markup of 5–7% or more in a competitive market. This is my conclusion, based on an analysis of transaction banking and payment systems: the price for the client will be determined not so much by the bank's desire to earn, but by the real cost of liquidity, the client's willingness to pay for a regulated framework, and the difference from familiar fiat transfer channels.
Why spreads will be high at first and then decline
At the start, banks will be forced to factor significant costs into the price: the cost of liquidity, compliance, hedging, and building new infrastructure. On individual products, the markup could easily reach several basis points. This is an inevitable stage of "testing" a new service.
However, I do not see sustainable prerequisites for maintaining spreads of 5–7% or higher. As soon as several banks and other regulated players enter the market, margins will begin to compress fairly quickly. The spread will be shaped by the market, not the regulator. It will consist of the global price of the crypto asset plus the cost of liquidity, hedging, infrastructure, and the margin of a specific bank.
The Bank of Russia, as I believe, will regulate primarily the rules of access, the composition of participants, and the market infrastructure, rather than set specific buy and sell quotes. Therefore, markups may vary significantly among different banks.
Within an individual bank, the spread will depend on the number of active product users, the volume of real user liquidity in the "order book," and the cost of liquidity for the bank itself, which will be required on its balance sheet in significant amounts. I would classify infrastructure and legal costs as secondary factors.
Who will win the competition for the user
Victory will go to those with a larger marketing budget and a greater willingness to take risks for a dominant position in the new economy. This is not only about qualified investors. The more liquidity providers and competition among banks, the closer prices will be to market levels. The mechanism here will resemble the currency market more than a product with an administratively set tariff.
The mass client is currently not willing to pay for the mere word "bank." This is linked to the level of stress among the retail audience since 2022: the Russian user is willing to accept many scenarios to meet their needs, except one—an unjustifiably high cost of service. The picture is different for wealthy clients. Large capital continues to move between countries, and with an average transaction of 3–5 million rubles, a person is willing to pay for speed, transparency, and the absence of problems. Which such a client will prefer—their own accountant or a Russian bank—is a rhetorical question.
My conclusion: the banking cryptocurrency market in Russia faces a rapid cooling of margins. The first players will be able to profit from the audience's inexperience, but within a year or two, spreads will approach exchange levels. The key factor will not be regulation, but the battle for liquidity and client trust.