A banking industry expert delivered an eye-opening talk on the obstacles that must be overcome to drive innovation in digital assets: regulation and real-world operational infrastructure.
Token Americas Miami 2026
Igor Istranov built and managed digital asset products within top-tier institutions such as JP Morgan and SoFi. He is currently Head of Digital Assets at Fifth Third Bank, an institution that will process close to $18 trillion in new portfolios and generate over $1 billion in commercial payments revenue.
His presentation at Token Americas Miami offered valuable insights into the future of the financial industry.
1
In banking, if it’s not explicitly allowed, it’s restricted
The starting point wasn’t a whitepaper—it was the regulatory framework. In the United States, banks operate under a permission-based model: if an activity isn’t explicitly authorized, it is restricted until it can be verified that it can be conducted under existing controls. The OCC has expanded this framework in recent years, allowing digital asset custody, payments and settlement, activities tied to stablecoins, and the use of distributed ledger technology for settlement. But none of these permissions removes banking obligations around security, consumer protection, and operational resilience. Those remain intact.
2
A bank doesn’t ask if a product is innovative. It asks if it can survive an audit
The difference between a bank and a fintech isn’t just the balance sheet—it’s the question asked before launching a product. Startups ask: can we build it fast? Banks ask: can we withstand supervision, stress, and audit? This isn’t meaningless bureaucracy. It’s the result of operating with the money of millions of people under constant regulatory scrutiny. In that context, compliance isn’t a post-launch step—it’s a foundational layer that defines product architecture from day one.
3
Five filters every digital asset product must pass
Before any digital asset product reaches production in a bank, it must clearly answer five questions:
- Is the activity within the bank’s charter?
- Will the product sit on balance sheet or off, and is it an asset or a liability?
- Can operational controls support a 24/7 product when most banking systems still run on business hours?
- Can the product comply with the Travel Rule, KYC, and AML from the start—not as a patch?
- Does the product generate auditable evidence for every transaction?
If any of these questions lack a clear answer, the product doesn’t launch.
4
Tokenized deposits are the most structured way to bring digital assets into banking
Among the instruments discussed—third-party stablecoins, direct crypto, and asset tokenization—tokenized deposits best fit within the existing banking structure. The reason is simple: they are bank liabilities, issued by the bank, and operate within existing controls. At the same time, they deliver what clients want: instant settlement and 24/7 availability. They don’t require relinquishing control to an external issuer, don’t create dependency on third-party infrastructure, and preserve regulatory oversight. As the speaker put it, they bring the benefits of digital liquidity without breaking what already works.
5
Stablecoins solved a real weekend liquidity problem that no traditional rail had addressed
This was one of the most concrete moments of the panel. The speaker described firsthand what it means to run a crypto trading business when two liquidity providers fail within a month. The issue wasn’t asset volatility—it was that operations don’t stop at 5 PM on Friday, while traditional banking rails do.
The solution being implemented in commercial banking combines tokenized deposits and stablecoins to move liquidity after cutoff hours and over weekends, reducing exposure risk that today forces prefunding positions. In practical terms: capital no longer needs to be locked at both ends simultaneously.
6
The build vs. buy dilemma isn’t about cost—it’s about which risk you choose to manage
A regional bank launching a digital asset product for the first time faces a seemingly binary decision: build in-house or outsource. The panel made it clear there’s no universally correct answer—but there is a correct way to frame the question.
Outsourcing doesn’t eliminate risk; it transforms it into counterparty risk—the bank depends on the provider’s reliability and compliance. Building in-house doesn’t eliminate risk either; it turns it into operational and liquidity risk.
What has changed is that today there are platforms—like ZeroHash—that allow banks to outsource everything from trade execution to custody and tax reporting, something that simply didn’t exist a decade ago. Back then, banks had to adapt retail solutions to institutional needs and build controls themselves.
7
Innovation in banking isn’t replacement—it’s enablement of what already works
The panel closed by challenging the narrative of blockchain as a total disruption of the banking system. The thesis was the opposite: banks already provide what the system needs—trust, liquidity, settlement finality, and regulatory certainty.
What digital assets can do is extend that capacity to areas where current systems fall short: cutoff times, weekends, and jurisdictions not connected by efficient rails. The right model isn’t to replace banking infrastructure—it’s to enable it to operate where it currently can’t.
In that model, fintech licenses and new digital capabilities aren’t a threat to banks—they’re how banks participate in change, safely, compliantly, and sustainably.