Ethereum staking is moving beyond its retail roots and into institutional portfolio construction, according to the latest edition of CoinDesk’s Crypto for Advisors column, which featured Lido’s Will Shannon. The column outlined three changes it expects to define ETH staking in 2026: institutions becoming a real force in holdings, Ethereum’s roadmap leaning more heavily toward post-quantum security and scalability, and advisors needing to sharpen how they assess staking products.
Bitmine ties most of its revenue to Ethereum staking
Bitmine Immersion Technologies (NASDAQ: BMNR) said in its latest quarterly report that 98% of its revenue came from Ethereum staking rewards. In the article, that figure is presented as evidence that ETH staking has moved past the edge of the market and become a core revenue source for a listed company.
The comparison with Bitcoin treasury strategies is central to the argument. A Bitcoin treasury company, such as MicroStrategy as cited in the piece, cannot earn native yield from simply holding BTC. The value of that position depends on price appreciation. An ETH treasury company, by contrast, can stake its holdings and collect on-chain rewards, and that income can be large enough to shape how the company’s financials look.
That gives Ethereum treasury exposure a different profile: not only price exposure, but also an income-producing component. For institutions that care about steadier cash flow, the article describes this as a structural difference.
Ethereum roadmap items aimed at larger allocators
The piece says Ethereum developers have made two priorities on the roadmap especially relevant for institutional investors.
- Post-quantum resilience: As quantum computing is seen as a growing threat to existing cryptography, Ethereum is pushing post-quantum upgrades across both the consensus layer and the contract layer. Glamsterdam, expected in the second half of 2026, is described as one step in that process, with more upgrades to follow.
- Enshrined PBS (EIP-7732): Proposer-builder separation would be written into the protocol layer, reducing reliance on off-chain intermediaries such as MEV-Boost relays. For large-scale allocators, that would mean a more standardized and transparent block production process, while making validator cluster management easier for institutional staking providers.
Shannon said, “Decentralization remains an explicit goal of the roadmap. A more distributed validator set makes the network more resistant to censorship and single points of failure, and that is what institutions are buying into when they hold.”
Native staking versus liquid staking
For institutions that already hold ETH, the article argues that not staking can amount to leaving the asset idle. The choice of staking format depends largely on liquidity needs.
- Native staking: ETH is locked while staked and cannot be traded or deployed. That structure fits institutions with long time horizons and little need for short-term liquidity.
- Liquid staking: After staking, the holder receives a token representing the staked position, such as stETH. That allows the client to trade or use the represented value while still earning staking rewards, which suits institutions that need more flexible capital management.
Lido is described as the leading liquid staking provider, and its stETH as one of the main tools institutions use for Ethereum staking exposure. The article also flags the risks tied to liquid staking, including centralization concerns and smart contract vulnerabilities, saying advisors need to match product structure with a client’s risk tolerance.
Three questions advisors should ask
Shannon listed three issues that investment advisors should settle before recommending a staking product.
- Who bears slashing risk? If a validator breaks protocol rules, including double-signing, part of the staked ETH can be slashed. Product terms need to state clearly whether the loss falls on the client, the staking provider, or an insurance arrangement.
- How is yield built? Staking returns come from two main sources: protocol rewards and MEV, or maximal extractable value. Protocol rewards are more predictable and tied directly to network issuance, while MEV changes with market conditions. The mix between the two affects both stability and predictability of returns.
- What are the custody and compliance trade-offs? The column says custody needs often come more from regulation than from security upgrades alone. Advisors need to understand what clients give up or gain when choosing a custody route instead of direct DeFi integration.
The article adds that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has recently proposed revisions to crypto custody rules that would set clearer standards for registered investment advisors, or RIAs, holding client digital assets. That could push institutional staking products toward more standardized compliance practices.
Staking as a kind of fixed-income substitute
Placed in a broader asset-allocation context, ETH staking is described as taking on an unusual role. For institutions with a higher risk appetite, it offers both price exposure and yield, making it resemble a higher-risk substitute for fixed income.
The comparison has limits. The article notes that ETH is far more volatile than traditional fixed-income assets, and staking rewards are not guaranteed. Slashing, failed protocol upgrades, and liquidity risks can all reduce realized returns.
Shannon closed with a warning: “Staking products vary widely. A few key questions can separate products worth recommending from products with hidden risks.” For advisors, the message is that ETH staking is not a buy-and-ignore allocation. It is a product set that requires ongoing review of structure, protocol risk, and the regulatory setting.
The institutional phase may only be starting
With Ethereum’s roadmap advancing post-quantum and decentralization-related upgrades, and with institutional holdings accelerating, the article argues that the institutionalization of ETH staking is still in its early stages. It points to 2026 as a year when that shift could take firmer shape.