BlackRock and Coinbase Leaders Discuss: In 2025, Crypto Assets Are Fully Entering the Financial Mainstream

At the New York Times DealBook Summit, Larry Fink, CEO of BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, and Brian Armstrong, CEO of Coinbase, the largest publicly listed crypto exchange, made a rare joint appearance, both asserting that cryptocurrency is increasingly integrating into the mainstream financial system. Armstrong defined 2025 as a pivotal year when crypto regulation will shift from the “gray area” to full legitimacy, revealing that key market structure legislation has already made bipartisan progress in Congress. Fink shared his journey from skeptic to believer and reiterated his “asset of fear” theory. The consensus between these two titans indicates that, driven by both institutional demand and legislative momentum, the crypto industry is approaching an unprecedented inflection point for institutionalization.

Regulatory Watershed Has Arrived: Armstrong Defines “2025 as the Turning Year”

When discussing the US regulatory landscape, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong gave a clear and powerful assessment: “2025 is actually the year that crypto regulation moves from a gray market to a well-lit, mature system.” His confidence stems from substantial progress made by US lawmakers over the past year. Notably, the Payment Stablecoin Clarity Act, which provides a clear federal regulatory framework for stablecoins, has been signed into law, seen as the first step to breaking the deadlock.

Even more significant is a comprehensive crypto market structure bill that has passed the US House of Representatives with bipartisan support and is now awaiting Senate review. Armstrong is optimistic that this will become the first such bill to pass the Senate as well. This legislative wave delivers unprecedented legal clarity to the entire industry, enabling traditional financial institutions to participate with lower compliance risks. Armstrong characterized the previous administration’s policies as “illegally trying to choke the industry,” resulting in massive business and talent outflows, ultimately harming US consumers and the nation’s competitive edge.

To foster a more favorable regulatory environment, the crypto industry has also demonstrated strong political mobilization. Armstrong specifically mentioned the industry-backed super PAC Fairshake, which raised over $78 million during the 2024 election cycle to support pro-crypto candidates, with eyes already set on the 2026 midterms. This “voting with their feet” type of political engagement is converting the will of more than 52 million US crypto users into tangible policy influence, marking a shift from defensive to proactive rule-making in industry lobbying.

Fink’s Evolution of Thought: From “Money Laundering Index” to “Asset of Fear”

Unlike Armstrong, who speaks from within the industry, BlackRock CEO Larry Fink’s transformation represents a profound evolution in the mindset of top traditional finance decision-makers. In the interview, Fink candidly recalled once calling Bitcoin the “money laundering index” and explained the reasons behind his change in perspective. He stated that in his position, he meets with thousands of clients and government leaders annually, and these conversations have continually shaped his thinking. His changing stance on Bitcoin is “a very public example” of how his thinking has evolved with the times.

Now, Fink not only sees the immense use cases for Bitcoin but also places it within a rigorous macro analysis framework. He reiterated his famous “asset of fear” theory, noting that people hold Bitcoin out of deep concerns for their physical and financial security. From a longer-term viewpoint, the driving factor is the need to hedge against the ongoing depreciation of fiat assets caused by fiscal deficits. While this theory may seem to diminish Bitcoin’s “tech utopian” aura, it actually provides a solid, quantifiable role for it in traditional asset allocation theory—a potential hedge against extreme uncertainties like geopolitical risk and currency debasement.

Fink’s transformation is closely aligned with BlackRock’s actions. The company is not only a spot Bitcoin ETF issuer, but its IBIT fund has also rapidly become one of the largest products of its kind. This alignment of “words” and “actions” sends the clearest possible signal to the entire traditional asset management industry: the era of ignoring crypto assets is over. Understanding, pricing, and allocating these emerging assets has become a core competency for future competitiveness. Fink’s public statements are providing a “comprehensible” narrative framework for more on-the-fence peers.

Key Takeaways and Data Summary

Regulatory Progress:

• Core Legislation: The Payment Stablecoin Clarity Act is now in effect; a comprehensive market structure bill has passed the House on a bipartisan basis and awaits a Senate vote.
• Industry Assessment: Armstrong calls 2025 the pivotal year for crypto regulation moving from “gray” to “clarity.”

Industry Political Influence:

• Political Action Committee: Fairshake raised over $78 million in 2024 to support pro-crypto candidates.
• User Base: The US has about 52 million crypto users, forming a significant voter and consumer group.

Titans’ Views:

• Larry Fink: Has made a public transition from critic to supporter, proposing Bitcoin as an “asset of fear” used to hedge against security concerns and currency debasement.
• Brian Armstrong: Criticized prior administration policies for causing industry outflows; predicts banks will actively embrace stablecoins and offer yields within 1-2 years.

Response to Traditional Skepticism: Armstrong believes Buffett and Munger’s generational context makes it difficult for them to understand the concept of decentralized “digital gold” based on the internet.

Responding to Buffett and Munger: Generational Divide and the Rise of “Digital Gold”

When asked how he responds to Warren Buffett and the late Charlie Munger’s sharp criticisms of Bitcoin (such as calling it “rat poison” or “worthless”), Brian Armstrong displayed both confidence and understanding. He stated bluntly that, in the current context, Bitcoin has “no chance” of going to zero. Armstrong further analyzed that Buffett and Munger grew up during a time when America was absolutely dominant and the dollar was unquestioned, with their investment philosophy rooted in that specific historical environment.

Armstrong pointed out that Bitcoin, as a new form of “digital gold,” serves as a safe haven in a world filled with uncertainty. Thus, it is extremely difficult for those raised in the old paradigm to understand and accept a new, decentralized, internet-based world. His response avoids getting bogged down in technical debates, instead explaining the fundamental differences between traditional value investing icons and the crypto-native worldview from the perspective of generational cognition and macro narrative. This is not just an argument about an asset, but a deeper clash over the paradigm of value storage and transfer for the future.

In fact, such ideological clashes are common throughout financial history. Every significant financial innovation—from stocks and bonds to derivatives and ETFs—has faced skepticism and ridicule from defenders of the old order. Bitcoin and crypto are simply the latest chapter in this long story. Armstrong’s response acknowledges the achievements and limitations of previous generations while firmly expressing that new innovations will inevitably break through entrenched perceptions and ultimately be embraced by history.

Banks and Stablecoins: “Innovator’s Dilemma” in Play

Another highlight of the interview centered on the potential impact of stablecoins on the traditional banking system. When asked if banks are worried about deposit outflows to tokenized systems, Armstrong candidly stated that this is essentially banks trying to protect their profit margins. He argued that banks should be offering their clients more competitive interest and rewards, but instead try to block crypto from doing so by influencing regulatory rules (“regulatory capture”).

Armstrong then made a bold prediction: not only will banks not resist forever, but they will soon begin to embrace stablecoins. He said he has already seen the early signs of this trend and speculated that within the next year or two, banks will turn around and announce their desire to offer interest and yields on stablecoins within their own systems. He used the classic business theory of “the innovator’s dilemma” to explain this phenomenon: the best banks will see this as an opportunity and actively invest, while those resisting change will be left behind.

This assessment reveals the internal logic of financial evolution. The efficiency gains and cost reductions brought by technology are an irreversible trend. The advantages of stablecoins as payment and settlement tools are obvious; banks are better off integrating than fighting. In fact, some forward-looking financial institutions have already begun exploring issuing their own stablecoins or integrating with existing ones. Armstrong’s prediction points to a future of convergence and symbiosis: traditional banks leverage their credit and compliance advantages, combine them with the technical efficiency of stablecoins, and jointly build next-generation financial infrastructure. The outcome of this game will shape the global financial landscape for the next decade.

Overview of US Core Crypto Regulatory Bills and the “Asset of Fear” Historical Analogy

Current US Crypto Regulatory Legislative Progress

1. Payment Stablecoin Clarity Act: Signed into law by the President. This act establishes a federal registration and regulatory framework for compliant stablecoin issuers and clarifies reserve asset requirements, serving as the cornerstone of stablecoin regulation.
2. Comprehensive Market Structure Bill (pending): Passed the House. The bill aims to clearly define whether crypto assets are securities or commodities, delineate the roles of the SEC and CFTC, and provide operating licensing pathways for key service providers like exchanges and custodians. Its progress in the Senate is a current market focus.
3. Future Outlook: After these two pillars are established, guidelines for more specialized areas such as DeFi and NFTs may be introduced step by step, forming a multi-layered regulatory system covering major activities.

“Asset of Fear” in Financial History: From Gold to Bitcoin

The concept of an “asset of fear” is not new. Historically, gold has been the classic asset of fear, performing well during wars, economic crises, and high inflation. The Swiss franc, due to the country’s neutrality and stability, is also seen as a safe haven currency. Fink’s classification of Bitcoin as such essentially likens it to traditional safe-haven assets, even though its volatility is much higher. The deeper meaning of this analogy is the acknowledgment that, in an era of heightened global uncertainty and persistent sovereign credit doubts, there is a real and urgent demand for a non-sovereign, censorship-resistant, and absolutely scarce store of value. Bitcoin is attempting to fill this role for the digital age.

When the CEO of BlackRock, steward of $10 trillion in assets, sits down with the CEO of Coinbase, representing 52 million users, to jointly outline the future of crypto assets, the contours of a new era become clear. This is no longer a confrontation between rebels and the establishment, but a profound dialogue between an evolving mainstream financial system and powerful new forces. Fink’s “asset of fear” theory and Armstrong’s “regulatory turning point” thesis together describe the same trajectory from two perspectives: crypto is being systematically deconstructed, analyzed, and defined, then carefully woven into the fabric of the global financial network. Regulatory beacons are lighting up, institutional ships are entering the harbor, and the next chapter is no longer about “whether to accept,” but “how to dance together.” For every market participant, understanding the logic behind this dialogue may be more important than predicting tomorrow’s price swings.