The European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) has produced a striking statistic: out of 174 registered Crypto-Asset Service Providers (CASPs) as of March 2026, only 14 are authorized to operate a centralized crypto exchange (CEX). This contrast underscores the uneven distribution of business models under the new regulatory framework.
10 Service Codes: Custody and Transfers Dominate
MiCA defines 10 categories of crypto-asset services. Across all 174 authorized entities, custody and administration is the most common (114 CASPs), followed by transfer services (105), crypto-to-fiat exchange (90), and order execution (90). The rarest categories are operating a trading platform (14), providing investment advice (21), and portfolio management (30).
The dominance of custody and transfer services stems from traditional financial institutions—such as Commerzbank and DZ BANK in Germany—adding these services via a notification process, leveraging existing payment infrastructure. In contrast, operating a trading platform requires a multilateral matching engine, a more complex regulatory hurdle.
Geographic Clustering: Germany Leads, But for Different Business Models
Germany tops the list with 51 CASPs (29% of all), but these are predominantly retail banks and broker-dealers, not exchange operators. The Netherlands follows with 23 (13%), France and Malta each have 13 and 12 (7%), while Ireland and Cyprus have 11 and 10 (6%).
However, Malta and Cyprus tell a different story: they host global exchange brands like OKX, Crypto.com, Gemini, eToro, and Revolut. These platforms applied for broad service codes including trading platform operation. In Germany, regulator BaFin is more familiar with traditional banking applications, meaning exchange-related filings may face longer queues.
Where Major Exchanges Registered
Kraken chose Ireland due to pre-existing VASP and EMI licenses; Coinbase and Bitstamp settled in Luxembourg leveraging CSSF's advanced blockchain legislation; Bybit and KuCoin registered in Austria because the FMA implemented MiCA early and Bitpanda had already educated the regulator; eToro and Revolut expanded their existing CySEC relationships in Cyprus; Bitvavo and MoonPay picked the Netherlands as the AFM issued first-wave approvals in December 2024.
The pattern shows exchanges did not choose regulators abstractly—they went where their business model was already understood or where implementation was furthest ahead.
Passporting and the Inactive Jurisdictions
One MiCA license covers the entire EU/EEA via passporting. Kraken, Bitvavo, Bitstamp, and others have passported to 29-30 countries. However, 10 jurisdictions (including Poland, Romania, Italy, and Greece) have yet to produce any CASP authorization records. Poland, once a popular pre-MiCA licensing hub, has still not passed domestic MiCA implementation as of March 2026, creating urgency as the July 1, 2026 deadline approaches. Romania has not even designated its National Competent Authority (NCA).
For founders evaluating where to apply, the CASP register reveals that not all MiCA jurisdictions are equal. The 14 exchange operators and the countries that host them provide the most reliable blueprint for those seeking to follow.