Bitcoin’s Role in the Modern Portfolio – Key Insights from Galaxy Funds

Galaxy Funds’ May 2025 report explores Bitcoin’s evolving role as a digital store of value, its fixed supply, portfolio diversification benefits, and potential as a hedge against global uncertainty.

Bitcoin’s Role in the Modern Portfolio – Why Institutional Capital Can No Longer Ignore It

By 223 Advisory

Sixteen years after its launch, Bitcoin has completed a metamorphosis few financial instruments achieve in such a short lifespan: from a fringe experiment in cryptographic money to a globally recognised, $1.6 trillion asset class. For much of its history, Bitcoin’s most ardent advocates came from outside the established financial order — coders, libertarians, early adopters, and digital asset entrepreneurs. Today, it is the subject of allocation discussions inside sovereign wealth funds, blue-chip asset managers, and multi-generational family offices. The question is no longer whether Bitcoin belongs in a portfolio, but what size, structure, and risk framework it should occupy. And for allocators facing a decade defined by deglobalisation, fiscal overreach, and technological disruption, the answer is not a simple binary. It is strategic, nuanced, and increasingly urgent.

Scarcity as a Strategic Hedge

In an era of monetary expansion and fiscal debt accumulation, assets with verifiable scarcity are rare. Bitcoin is programmed to produce no more than 21 million coins — a limit enforced by open-source code and cryptographic consensus, not by the decision of a central bank. This hard-coded issuance schedule stands in stark contrast to fiat currencies, which can be expanded at will to finance deficits or respond to crises. For investors seeking to insulate part of their portfolio from inflationary policy, Bitcoin represents a form of digital scarcity that is transparent, predictable, and immune to discretionary supply changes. From an advisory standpoint, this makes Bitcoin structurally different from commodities or equities, whose supply can respond to price signals. It is not a “hard-to-produce” asset — it is an “impossible-to-inflate” asset.

The Gold Parallel — and Its Digital Advantage

For centuries, gold has been the archetype of a non-sovereign store of value. It has survived wars, regime changes, and currency collapses. Bitcoin shares many of these qualities: it is borderless, decentralised, and no government can unilaterally alter its supply. But Bitcoin also removes gold’s logistical burdens. It is weightless, infinitely divisible, and transferable across borders in minutes, without vaults, shipping, or security guards. In practice, this makes it more flexible than gold for institutional portfolios operating in a digitised global economy. From a 223 Group perspective, the analogy to gold is helpful but incomplete. Bitcoin is not simply “digital gold” — it is a programmable, financial-grade settlement asset for the internet age.

Portfolio Modelling — What the Numbers Suggest

Modern Portfolio Theory (MPT) remains a useful lens for assessing how new assets interact with traditional allocations. Analysis of historical Bitcoin price data shows that a 1–2% allocation often delivers the greatest marginal improvement in a portfolio’s Sharpe ratio. An allocation up to ~16% historically maximises risk-adjusted returns in backtests, though volatility makes such sizing impractical for many investors. Even small allocations have historically improved both absolute and risk-adjusted returns, largely due to Bitcoin’s asymmetric upside potential. For advisory clients, this creates a tactical opportunity: position sizing can start conservatively, then increase as institutional-grade custody, compliance, and market infrastructure deepen. The benefit is not simply performance enhancement — it is portfolio resilience against scenarios traditional assets fail to hedge.

Low Correlation — and Why It Matters in 2025

Over its 16-year history, Bitcoin has maintained low or even negative correlation with major equity, bond, and commodity indices, averaging around zero against benchmarks like the S&P 500, US Aggregate Bond Index, and gold. That correlation has occasionally spiked during liquidity crises — as in March 2020 — but tends to revert to low levels as macro conditions normalise. This profile makes Bitcoin one of the few assets capable of providing genuine diversification in a world where many “uncorrelated” assets have converged under global liquidity cycles. From an institutional perspective, this is not about chasing speculative gains; it is about creating optionality in portfolios that are otherwise vulnerable to synchronous drawdowns.

Market Size — Why the Growth Curve Is Still Intact

With a $1.6 trillion market capitalisation, Bitcoin remains far smaller than the gold market ($21.8 trillion) or US equities ($60 trillion). Even a partial reallocation of gold reserves or sovereign wealth assets into Bitcoin would represent a structural re-rating of its value. Institutional adoption is already accelerating. Major custodians such as BNY Mellon and Deutsche Bank have launched digital asset services. Asset managers like BlackRock and Fidelity have brought Bitcoin products to market. Sovereign entities — from Abu Dhabi’s wealth funds to state treasuries in the US — are testing exposure. This institutional shift is not speculative hype. It is a build-out of the rails and governance structures needed for large-scale capital to participate without operational or compliance risk.

The 223 Advisory View — Integration, Not Speculation

At 223 Advisory, we counsel clients to approach Bitcoin neither as a trading token nor as a maximalist bet. Instead, it should be treated as a strategic, non-sovereign reserve asset integrated into portfolio architecture with clear governance. That integration process involves:

1. Infrastructure First – Secure, regulated custody; counterparty risk assessment; operational due diligence.
2. Sizing Discipline – Begin with an allocation that meaningfully impacts diversification metrics without introducing excessive volatility.
3. Policy Alignment – Ensure internal investment policy statements explicitly address digital assets, rebalancing triggers, and compliance requirements.
4. Long-Term Thesis – View the position through a five-to-ten-year horizon, where compounding adoption and network effects matter more than short-term price swings.
5. This is not about timing a cycle; it is about positioning ahead of a structural shift in how value is stored, transferred, and verified globally.

Final Thought — The Cost of Delay

In the early 2000s, institutional investors debated whether to integrate emerging markets into their core portfolios. Many waited for “more data” and missed a decade of outsized returns. Bitcoin is at a similar inflection point today. For allocators willing to take a disciplined, infrastructure-led approach, Bitcoin offers an asymmetric proposition: capped downside via sizing and risk controls, with potentially exponential upside as adoption broadens. The greater risk, in our view, is inertia. In an environment where traditional hedges are under pressure and macro stability is far from assured, ignoring a globally liquid, non-sovereign, fixed-supply asset is no longer a neutral position — it is an active choice.

‍