Competition will bring down bank spreads on cryptocurrency in Russia
The launch of banking operations with digital assets in Russia will be marked by inflated spreads, but credit institutions will not be able to maintain margins at 5–7% or higher under real competition. I arrive at this conclusion by analyzing market mechanisms and the behavior of players during the formative stage of this segment.
At the initial stage, banks will be forced to factor significant costs into the price for the client: the cost of liquidity, compliance procedures, risk hedging, and the creation of new infrastructure. In certain products, the markup could reach several basis points, which is quite understandable from the perspective of return on investment in a new business.
Why high spreads are a temporary phenomenon
However, I do not see a sustainable trend toward 5–7% margins. As soon as several large banks and other regulated participants enter the market, natural pressure on prices will begin. Competition for the client will quickly erode the initial appetites of players, and spreads will move downward.
It is important to understand: the final price is determined not by the bank's desire to earn, but by a combination of market factors. The spread is formed from the global price of the crypto asset, the cost of liquidity, hedging, and the infrastructure costs of a specific bank. This is a market mechanism, not an administrative surcharge.
The regulator, in turn, will focus on access rules, the composition of participants, and infrastructure, but will not set specific buy or sell quotes. Therefore, markups may vary significantly among different banks depending on their internal efficiency and client base.
Who will win the fight for the client
In the new economy, the winner is the one with the larger marketing budget and a greater willingness to take risks for a dominant position. This applies not only to qualified investors but also to the mass-market client.
The more liquidity providers there are and the higher the competition among banks, the closer prices will be to market levels. This mechanism resembles the currency market rather than a product with an administratively set tariff.
Today, the mass-market client is not willing to overpay simply for the word "bank." The stress level of the retail audience has remained high since 2022, and the user is willing to accept many scenarios except one—an unjustifiably high cost of service. The picture is different for affluent clients. With an average transaction of 3–5 million rubles, a person is willing to pay for speed, transparency, and the absence of problems. Such a client will choose a bank rather than "gray" schemes—the only question is who will offer the best service.
My conclusion: the banking cryptocurrency market in Russia will see a rapid compression of spreads. Pioneers will gain temporary excess profits, but those who bet on a long-term strategy and competitive rates will take dominant positions. Investors and clients should wait for market stabilization before establishing long-term relationships with a specific bank.