Banking spreads on cryptocurrency in Russia: why high fees are doomed to fall
The Russian banking sector is preparing to integrate operations with digital assets, and the first steps along this path will be accompanied by inflated service costs for clients. However, as my analysis of market dynamics shows, inflated spreads on cryptocurrency buying and selling are a temporary phenomenon that will be leveled out by growing competition and the demands of users themselves.
Why starting spreads will be high
At the initial stage, banks will have to compensate for significant costs: factoring into the price the cost of liquidity, hedging, implementation of new infrastructure, and compliance procedures. In certain products, the markup could reach several basis points, which will inevitably be reflected in the final price for the consumer. However, maintaining a spread at the level of 5–7% or higher in a competitive market is not feasible.
The key factor that will determine the price is not the bank's desire to earn, but the real cost of liquidity and the client's willingness to overpay for a regulated framework and convenience. Against the backdrop of classic fiat transfer channels, the difference will be significant, but it is precisely this that will become the driver for finding more efficient solutions.
The market, not the regulator, will shape the final spread. It will be formed from the global price of the crypto asset, the cost of liquidity and hedging, as well as the margin of a specific bank. At the same time, the Bank of Russia, judging by all appearances, will regulate access rules, the composition of participants, and infrastructure, but will not set fixed quotes. This leaves room for maneuver and differentiation among players.
Competition — the main catalyst for price reduction
As several banks and other regulated participants enter the market, margins will begin to compress. The mechanism will resemble the currency market, where the price is determined by supply and demand, rather than an administratively set tariff. The more liquidity providers there are, the closer prices will be to market levels.
The mass client, in turn, is not ready to overpay just for the word "bank." Since 2022, the level of stress among the retail audience has been high, and the user agrees to many scenarios except one — an unjustifiably high cost of the service. The picture is different for affluent clients: with an average transaction of 3–5 million rubles, they are willing to pay for speed, transparency, and the absence of problems. The question is only whom such a client will prefer — their own accountant or a Russian bank. The answer is obvious.
My conclusion: banks that are the first to offer competitive tariffs and high-quality service will capture a dominant share of the new market. Inflated spreads at the start are merely the price of entry, which will inevitably be reduced by market pressure and client demandingness.