Read the full report here

Why Sovereign Wealth Funds Are Taking a Second Look at Bitcoin

The macroeconomic backdrop that defined institutional investing for the past four decades has fundamentally shifted. Post-2008 disinflation and near-zero rates suppressed volatility and delivered reliable bonds-as-ballast. Post-2020, that compact broke. Inflation ran at multi-decade highs, rates rose sharply, and stocks and bonds fell together, undermining the classic 60/40 hedge at precisely the moment it was needed most.

For sovereign wealth funds (SWFs), this creates a pressing question: what serves as the portfolio anchor when traditional safe assets carry policy risk? A new category of reserve asset is entering the conversation, one that is nobody's liability, governed by transparent rules rather than central bank discretion, and verifiable by anyone with an internet connection. That asset is Bitcoin, and this piece outlines the rationale, the policy design, and the implementation path for sovereign funds considering a small, disciplined allocation.

The Changing Landscape for Sovereign Funds

Two types of sovereign funds face this environment differently, but both confront the same fundamental challenge.

Stabilization funds, designed to provide short-term fiscal support during downturns, have historically relied on G7 bonds for their ballast role. That assumption is now in doubt. If equities and bonds fall together during a crisis driven by inflation or policy stress, the fund's capacity to cover near-term obligations could be compromised. Every assumption about "safe" must now be stress-tested.

Savings and future-generation funds face a structural problem with long-run returns. Equity valuations can no longer count on ever-falling real rates for support, and bonds may struggle to keep pace with inflation if financial repression takes hold. The purchasing-power mandate that defines these funds requires a genuine hedge against monetary dilution over decades, not just nominal value preservation.

"SWFs need a hedge against the risks of the current financial system (inflation, financial repression, foreign asset freezes) that does not rely on that same system."

The geopolitical dimension adds urgency. The 2022 freezing of a major nation's foreign exchange reserves demonstrated that even assets held at major financial institutions carry jurisdictional risk. Central banks responded by buying gold at record rates. For SWFs, this episode crystallized a question that had previously been theoretical: can we rely on assets whose usability depends on another sovereign's cooperation?

What Makes Bitcoin "Outside Money"

The inside-money versus outside-money framework clarifies where Bitcoin fits. Inside money refers to assets that are someone else's liability: Treasury bonds, bank deposits, stablecoins backed by T-bills. These instruments are useful and liquid, but their value ultimately depends on the issuer's policies, solvency, and jurisdiction. Outside money has no issuer and no counterparty liability. Physical gold is the classic example. Bitcoin extends that concept into digital form.

Finite Supply Discipline

Gold's above-ground stock grows roughly 1.5 to 2 percent per year from mining, and higher prices can incentivize more production. Bitcoin's supply, by contrast, is programmatically inelastic. After the April 2024 halving, new issuance runs below 0.9 percent of existing supply annually. The stock-to-flow ratio, already approximately double that of gold, will continue rising as issuance declines toward the 21 million cap. No amount of demand can increase Bitcoin's production rate. Excess demand only drives price higher, creating the occasional right-tail revaluations that a small, rebalanced allocation can harvest.

Verifiable Ownership

Sovereign-scale gold custody requires assays, storage agreements, and reliance on vaults that may sit in another country's jurisdiction. Bitcoin is verifiably owned through the public blockchain. A sovereign fund can hold Bitcoin in a dedicated on-chain address that anyone can inspect. There is no need to trust a custodian's attestation for the existence of the asset. Full-reserve holding is simple to verify, and rehypothecation does not occur unless the owner explicitly chooses it.

Borderless Settlement

In an extreme event that shuts down banking systems or closes borders, physical gold is difficult to mobilize. Bitcoin's network operates 24 hours a day, 365 days a year. Value can be transferred globally in minutes with final settlement in under an hour. No bank holiday, airspace closure, or sanctions regime can halt a Bitcoin transaction between two parties with internet access. This option value matters most precisely when other reserve instruments would be least usable.

Portfolio Behavior: What the Data Shows

Bitcoin is undeniably volatile, but volatility per se is not the relevant risk metric for a strategic sleeve. What matters is how that volatility interacts with the rest of the portfolio. Bitcoin's average correlation with global equities is in the low single digits, and its correlation with bonds is similarly modest. It also exhibits positive skew, meaning its return distribution features more large upside periods than large downside periods over rolling windows.

Historical backtests spanning different macro regimes bear this out. Two proxy portfolios were constructed to approximate stabilization and savings fund mandates respectively, and their performance was measured with and without small Bitcoin allocations across quarterly rebalancing.

Savings Fund Results (March 2018 to July 2025)

• No Bitcoin: CAGR 7.30%, Sharpe 0.48, max drawdown -20.46%

• 1% Bitcoin: CAGR 8.00%, Sharpe 0.54, max drawdown -20.71%

• 3% Bitcoin: CAGR 9.36%, Sharpe 0.64, max drawdown -21.22%

• 5% Bitcoin: CAGR 10.69%, Sharpe 0.72, max drawdown -22.09%

The improvement in compound returns at the 5% level was over 3 percentage points, while maximum drawdown deepened by only 1.6 percentage points. Sharpe ratios improved consistently at every allocation level because Bitcoin's return uplift exceeded its volatility contribution at these small weights.

Stabilization Fund Results (March 2018 to July 2025)

• No Bitcoin: CAGR 3.31%, Sharpe 0.35

• 0.5% Bitcoin: CAGR 3.69%, Sharpe 0.49

• 1% Bitcoin: CAGR 4.07%, Sharpe 0.62

• 2% Bitcoin: CAGR 4.82%, Sharpe 0.79

Even at the conservative 2% allocation, the Stabilization Fund Sharpe ratio more than doubled, from 0.35 to 0.79. The mechanism is simple: Bitcoin's independent return cycle means that when it rallies strongly, the rebalancing rule forces the portfolio to trim gains and redeploy into other assets that may be undervalued. When Bitcoin falls, the portfolio buys more at lower prices. This systematic capture of volatility works best when allocations are small and rules are enforced.

Policy Design by Fund Mandate

Any allocation must be sized and governed to match the fund's primary mandate. Borrowing against the reserve or treating it as a yield vehicle defeats the purpose.

Stabilization Funds: Protect Liquidity First

The recommended starting point is a 2% target allocation with a plus or minus 1% tolerance band. The allocation should be funded from risk assets, not from the cash buffer earmarked for near-term fiscal obligations. Rebalancing occurs at quarter-end or whenever the weight drifts outside the band.

A Coverage Ratio stress test provides the key safeguard. The test applies a combined shock (Bitcoin down 50%, equities down 15 to 20%, yields up 1 percentage point) and checks that liquid assets, haircut for those shocks, still cover the next 12 to 18 months of obligations without assuming any Bitcoin liquidation. At the 2% target, this test passes comfortably. If it did not, the protocol calls for reducing the allocation until it does.

Savings and Future Generation Funds: Long-Term Purchasing Power

The recommended target is 5% with a 4 to 6% tolerance band and an 8% absolute hard cap requiring explicit board approval to exceed. Funding comes proportionally from public growth asset classes. Rebalancing logic mirrors the stabilization fund, with quarterly review and intra-period action if the band is breached.

At 5%, even a 50% crash in Bitcoin would dent the total portfolio by only 2.5 percentage points. That is within normal annual volatility for a diversified growth portfolio. Meanwhile, the disciplined trim-and-replenish rebalancing structure means the sleeve actively contributes to portfolio efficiency through the cycle rather than merely sitting as a passive bet on price appreciation.

Real-World Precedents

Sovereign funds are not acting in isolation. In 2025, Luxembourg's intergenerational fund became the first in the Eurozone to allocate approximately 1% of its portfolio to Bitcoin, using regulated ETF instruments. Abu Dhabi's Mubadala sovereign wealth fund disclosed a $408.5 million stake in BlackRock's iShares Bitcoin Trust in its 2025 filings. Norway's Government Pension Fund Global holds MicroStrategy shares and other instruments representing an estimated 11,400 Bitcoin-equivalent exposure according to Standard Chartered's Q2 2025 analysis.

"These are not speculative bets. They are balance-sheet decisions made by conservative stewards who have concluded that a small, governed Bitcoin allocation improves portfolio resilience."

These early movers share a common profile: large, conservative institutions with long-horizon mandates, sophisticated governance structures, and strong reasons to care about purchasing-power preservation across political cycles.

Implementation: Making It Work at Sovereign Scale

Operational feasibility is no longer the constraint it was even three years ago. Institutional infrastructure has matured to support sovereign-scale Bitcoin custody.

Multi-Jurisdictional Custody

The recommended structure uses a multi-signature scheme with independent custodians in different countries. A 2-of-3 multisig arrangement requires any two of three custodians to authorize a movement of funds. This eliminates single points of failure: no individual custodian, internal actor, or foreign government can freeze or transfer the assets unilaterally. Holdings are verifiable on the public blockchain at any time, providing an audit trail that no traditional asset can match.

Trade Execution

Buying or selling hundreds of millions of dollars in Bitcoin requires professional execution to achieve best pricing without moving markets. Agency desks aggregate liquidity across multiple exchanges and OTC venues, using algorithmic strategies such as TWAP (time-weighted average price) or VWAP (volume-weighted average price) to spread large orders over days or weeks. This mirrors how sovereign funds already execute large currency and equity positions.

Governance and Reporting

The Investment Policy Statement should be updated to authorize the allocation, define the target and band, specify the funding source, and establish the Coverage Ratio test. Dual approval should govern all Bitcoin transactions. A quarterly dashboard report for the investment committee covers current weight versus target, contribution to risk and return, rebalancing actions taken, and an on-chain verification of holdings. This level of transparency gives oversight bodies the confidence that the sleeve is managed with the same rigor as any other asset class.

Why Onramp

For sovereign funds evaluating the implementation path, Onramp provides the custody architecture and operational infrastructure designed specifically for this use case. The Onramp platform operates on Multi-Institution Custody rails with independent keyholders, maker/checker controls, four-eyes withdrawal approval, and quarterly proof-of-movement drills. Reporting distinguishes exposure from title, and on-chain verification is available at any time. For sovereign-scale allocations where the monetary essence of the reserve must be preserved, those controls are not optional features. They are the foundation.

Integrating a small Bitcoin allocation into a sovereign wealth portfolio is not a departure from fiduciary responsibility. It is an evolution of it, one that takes seriously the risks of the current regime and reaches for the tools best suited to address them.

Read the full report here