The launch of cryptocurrency banking operations in Russia will inevitably begin with elevated spreads, but players are unlikely to sustain a markup of 5–7% or higher amid competitive pressure. This is confirmed by an analysis of market dynamics that I conducted, drawing on expert assessments in the field of transactional banking.
The key factor determining the price for the client is not the bank's desire to profit, but the fundamental cost of liquidity, the client's willingness to pay for a regulated framework, and the difference compared to familiar fiat transfer channels. At the outset, banks will have to factor in costs for compliance, hedging, and building new infrastructure, which could easily add several basis points to the spread.
Why spreads will be high at first, then decline
In the first months of operation, the markup will be elevated—this is an objective reality. Banks need to recoup costs for liquidity, legal support, and technological solutions. However, I do not consider a scenario sustainable in which spreads of 5–7% persist for long. As soon as several banks and other regulated participants enter the market, margins will begin to compress rapidly.
The spread will be shaped by the market itself, not the regulator. The Central Bank will focus on access rules, participant composition, and infrastructure, but will not set specific buy and sell quotes. This means that markups may vary significantly across different banks, and within a single bank, they will depend on the number of active users, the volume of real client liquidity, and its own costs for position balancing.
Who will win the race for clients
In this competition, the winner will be the one with a larger marketing budget and a greater willingness to take risks to dominate the new economy. This is not just about qualified investors—the mass client is currently unwilling to pay for the word "bank." The stress level of the retail audience has remained high since 2022: users accept many scenarios, but not an unjustifiably expensive service.
The situation is entirely different for affluent clients. Large capital continues to migrate 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. The question of whether such a client will prefer their own accountant or a Russian bank becomes rhetorical.
My assessment: the pricing mechanism will resemble the currency market rather than a product with an administratively set tariff. The more liquidity providers and competition among banks, the closer prices will be to market levels. This is an inevitable path, and banks that recognize this first will take leading positions in the new segment.