A few weeks ago, speaking on stage at the Digital Asset Summit, Kraken CEO Arjun Sethi confirmed the company had confidentially filed for a US initial public offering.

In a stronger market, the announcement might have been read as the next chapter in crypto’s migration into public markets. As of 2Q26, it arrives as issuance has sharply contracted and new listings have vanished.

Crypto-related issuance on US exchanges in the first quarter fell to roughly USD 470m from more than USD 2.7bn in each of the first quarters of the prior two years, according to Dealogic data. No crypto IPOs have priced in 2026. What capital that has come through has clustered around repeat convertible issuers such as Strategy and MARA, rather than companies attempting fresh valuation discovery.

It’s a sharp reversal from the sector’s 4Q25 surge, when more than USD 8bn was raised and convertibles from issuers including Coinbase, Strategy, and Bitcoin miners helped swell volumes. And it shows how current activity depends on incumbent borrowers rather than new issuance.

Digital asset trading remains relatively weak across Bitcoin, Ethereum, and XRP, as macroeconomic instability and energy-related complications cast a long shadow.

“Demand for crypto? It’s tough,” one ECM advisor said. The challenge, the advisor suggested, is whether investors can look through Bitcoin volatility and underwrite an equity story on different terms. In risk-off conditions, that conviction becomes harder to secure.

Even where interest exists, the advisor said, investors are asking more pointed questions. “Is this a Coinbase? Is this a Robinhood?” they ask. The comparison is an attempt to determine whether an issuer belongs in a familiar platform framework or remains principally a bet on trading activity.

The ECM advisor described investor appetite as “a mixed bag,” arguing the stronger conversations center on whether a company can be evaluated less as a proxy for Bitcoin and more on standalone fundamentals. Where investors can make that distinction, they suggested, a path to market can still exist.

Another ECM consultant was skeptical many exchange-led candidates remain. “Good solid IPO-able assets have, for the most part, gone out,” the consultant said, arguing businesses tied heavily to fees and transaction activity remain exposed when digital asset prices fall and trading slows.

Some names still discussed in the pipeline attract attention precisely because they sit outside traditional exchange models.

Fireblocks is often framed as an infrastructure business rather than simply an expression of crypto trading activity. The company has long been building toward an IPO and could list as soon as 2026 if market conditions align, CFO Michael Levine told this news service last year.

ConsenSys, which develops software and infrastructure for the Ethereum ecosystem, is often viewed through a similar lens. One consultant grouped such businesses among “some picks and shovels” opportunities in custody, compliance, and blockchain software.

Uphold, a trading platform, is another company often mentioned in terms of IPO readiness, even though an M&A route is viewed by some market observers as the likelier path.

A similar debate surrounds Kraken, which now offers trading of traditional financial assets as well as crypto. Supporters argue Kraken’s attraction lies in presenting something broader than a pure crypto listing. One investor close to the company pointed to its roughly USD 20bn last private valuation and acquisitions beyond digital assets as part of that positioning.

Others question whether the market is ready to reward that argument.

One ECM banker said a Kraken IPO “seems impossible in this current crypto environment,” reflecting concern not simply about the issuer but about whether traditional listing routes are the right lens at all. Indeed, some advisors point to distressed listed digital asset vehicles as potential reverse-merger targets, suggesting some issuers may look at public shells as readily as conventional IPO windows.

Alpaca CEO Yoshi Yokokawa approached the question from another direction, arguing the boundary between crypto platforms and traditional financial firms is beginning to dissolve as both move toward multi-asset models. Digital asset exchanges are adding equities and ETFs while incumbent brokerages build crypto capability. “Anyone who doesn’t combine both will struggle to compete,” he said.

Investors, advisers say, are increasingly focused on which business models can be understood as durable financial platforms rather than on crypto exposure alone.

That may also help explain why activity continues to surface through routes beyond traditional IPOs. Shari Mager, national capital markets readiness leader at KPMG, said digital assets remain a target of special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs), with sponsor specialization and issuer interest driving demand.

In this respect, Blockchain.com previously explored a US public listing via a SPAC, according to an October 2025 report. In a sign of IPO readiness, the crypto platform appointed Justin Evans (ex-Goldman Sachs) as CFO and Mike Wilcox (ex-Velocity Global) as COO in February 2025, the report added. Evans said then that the firm was preparing to go public “if and when markets allow.”

Different as these routes may be, whether through infrastructure-led candidates, reverse-merger ideas, or SPAC combinations, they are part of a common search for structures and equity stories still capable of attracting capital.