1. What exactly happened today?

On December 2, 2025, Beijing time, the world's second-largest asset management firm Vanguard announced:

Its U.S. brokerage platform will allow trading of third-party cryptocurrency-related ETFs and mutual funds, including products that mainly hold Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), XRP, Solana (SOL), etc.

How many key points are there:

Only third-party products (such as BlackRock's IBIT, etc.) are open for trading; they are not currently launching any cryptocurrency products themselves;

These cryptocurrency ETFs/funds are treated as "non-core assets" similar to gold, rather than the main focus of the portfolio;

Over 50 million brokerage clients managing about 11 trillion dollars in assets can now directly buy crypto ETFs in their Vanguard accounts;

Explicitly excluding Meme coin related funds, only supporting 'investment grade' mainstream assets (BTC/ETH/XRP/SOL, etc.), and must meet US regulatory standards.

The symbolic significance of this step is very strong:

Wall Street's most steadfast 'anti-crypto bastion' has been 'broken through' by reality and clients together.

2. Who is Vanguard? Why is its shift so important?

Simply give a portrait:

Vanguard currently manages about 11 trillion dollars in assets, making it the second largest asset manager in the world, next to BlackRock;

It is synonymous with passive index investment and low-fee funds; a significant part of the global passive index wave was driven by it;

It has over 50 million clients, many of whom are American middle-class, pension accounts, and 401(k) long-term funds.

More crucially — before this shift, Vanguard had always been a 'dead opponent' to crypto ETFs:

When the US spot BTC ETF was just approved in January 2024, Vanguard publicly stated: they will not open any spot Bitcoin ETF on the platform nor issue their own crypto products.

It not only doesn't sell spot ETFs, but also delisted the previously available Bitcoin futures ETFs, reasoning that 'crypto assets are overly speculative and do not align with the long-term investment philosophy emphasized by the company';

At that time, other US brokerages (like Fidelity and Schwab) allowed users to freely buy BTC ETFs.

Only Vanguard firmly said: 'No.'

Thus, this company that was once ridiculed on social media as 'Have fun staying poor's traditional stubborn faction' suddenly said:

"Okay, I've opened up crypto ETFs," this is not an ordinary business adjustment but a 'signal of a shift' in the entire traditional financial attitude.

3. What exactly changed in this policy? Where are the boundaries?

From a detail perspective, this adjustment is somewhat like:

"I still think your risk is high, but since clients insist on playing, at least I'll give you a relatively safe and compliant entry."

Mainly includes a few points:

1. What can you buy?

The tradable assets are: ETFs/mutual funds primarily holding mainstream assets like Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP, Solana, etc.;

Products must be compliant and registered, meeting regulatory standards as 'regular troops'.

2. What can't you buy?

Clearly prohibiting Meme coin related funds;

Not supporting 'highly speculative, regulatory ambiguity' varieties.

3. Will Vanguard itself create crypto products?

Unified statement: There are no plans to issue their own crypto ETFs/funds, only to open trading of others' products;

In other words, it is more like a 'channel' and 'supermarket shelf', rather than actively entering the 'crypto brand' space.

4. Positioning in asset allocation

The official statement is: these crypto ETFs/funds will be treated as 'non-core assets' similar to gold;

That is to say: the core assets remain stocks + bonds + cash;

Crypto is more like 'small positions, diversification, risk assets'.

Overall, Vanguard's approach this time is not suddenly 'falling in love with crypto', but rather:

"The bottom line remains the same, but I can't resist customers wanting to buy, so I'll give you a relatively controllable way."

4. Why exactly at this moment is there a 'turnaround'?

On the surface, it seems like an 'attitude change', but essentially it's a realistic choice after weighing multiple pros and cons.

1. Client and market pressure: If they don't open up, they will really be 'rolled under.'

In the past year, the US spot BTC ETF has become one of the fastest-growing ETF categories in history, with net inflows of hundreds of billions of dollars.

Among them, BlackRock's IBIT is the star:

Net inflows exceeded 52 billion dollars in the first year of launching;

Management scale surpassed 70 billion dollars, setting a record for the fastest in history;

Holding over 3% of the total Bitcoin supply, with annual management fee income of about 240 million dollars.

What does this mean?

On one side are competitors like BlackRock making management fees + creating crypto 'entrances';

On the other hand, Vanguard tells clients: you can't buy from me, if you want to buy, go to other places.

The result is:

When the spot ETF just went online in 2024, many Vanguard clients publicly expressed on social media their intention to move assets to more 'friendly' platforms;

For an institution known for 'client scale + low fees', to hand over the crypto ETF market long-term is actually hard to maintain coherence.

2. Leadership changes: from 'absolutely not touching' to 'limited opening'

In 2024, former BlackRock executive Salim Ramji took over as Vanguard CEO; he was previously in charge of BlackRock iShares ETF business and is not unfamiliar with blockchain and crypto;

At the beginning of his tenure, he still maintained the stance of 'not issuing their own crypto products', but gradually promoted internally: at least allow clients to buy compliant crypto ETFs in Vanguard accounts instead of being forced to leave.

Can be understood as:

Today's compromise is a middle ground made by a 'CEO who understands ETFs' between traditional culture and the reality of the market.

3. The product itself has also 'gone through several rounds of storm testing'

Vanguard also mentioned a reason:

Crypto ETFs/mutual funds have performed 'as expected' in terms of overall liquidity and operational mechanisms during the past few major fluctuations, and back-end operations have matured.

Simply put:

In the two years of 2024–2025, BTC went through various market conditions including surges, waterfalls, and sideways movements;

ETF products have generally passed the tests in terms of subscription and redemption, liquidity, and price tracking;

For an institution emphasizing 'long-term, predictable', this is more persuasive than any slogan.

5. The medium to long-term impact on BTC/ETH: channels + structure + volatility logic

1. Channel dimension: 50M accounts + 11 trillion AUM's 'options opened'

To be realistic:

Vanguard has opened the door, but it doesn't mean these 50 million accounts will rush in to buy crazily;

But what was originally 'completely unavailable' has now become 'can be allocated in small amounts', which is the essential change.

Let's make a very rough, intuitive arithmetic:

Assuming that even 0.1% of the 11 trillion ultimately flows into crypto ETFs, that would still be a potential incremental funding level of 11 billion dollars;

The circulating supply of BTC is not large, and against the backdrop of rapidly expanding ETF holdings, every new long-term funding entry amplifies the supply-demand effect.

Of course, this does not guarantee an 'immediate surge', but rather:

"When the next round of market sentiment recovers, this door of Vanguard will no longer be locked but will be an open channel."

2. Holding structure: from 'geeks + exchanges' to 'ETF managers + pensions'

The spot ETFs of these past two years have already put a trend in plain sight:

BlackRock's IBIT has already held over 3% of the total Bitcoin;

If in the future many Vanguard clients also indirectly hold coins through ETFs, then: BTC's 'surface holders' are becoming increasingly concentrated among a few giant ETF issuers & custodians;

The proportion of retail/tech enthusiasts directly holding coins on-chain is relatively decreasing.

This has dual aspects:

On the positive side: more long-term funds are entering (pensions, retirement funds, etc.);

The overall narrative is gradually shifting from 'speculative coins' to 'alternative assets/digital gold'.

The downside: the proportion of 'paper Bitcoin' is increasing;

The risks, regulation, and policy changes of individual ETF issuers may have a greater impact on prices.

You have already seen this in previous market conditions:

IBIT's massive outflows in a single day can lead to significant corrections in BTC.

After Vanguard entered the market, this trend of 'ETFization + centralization' will only become more pronounced.

3. Volatility logic: becoming more 'like traditional assets'

As more institutions and more pensions allocate BTC/ETH through ETFs, the future price drivers will increasingly include:

Interest rate expectations, inflation expectations, macro liquidity;

ETF subscription and redemption rhythm, institutional asset rebalancing;

Regulatory statements from various countries, changes in tax policies.

Crypto assets will resemble less and less a 'completely independent risk asset',

Rather, it resembles a comprehensive asset with attributes of 'tech stocks + commodities' —

Is this a good thing or a bad thing? It depends on which angle you view it from:

For those who hope to 'integrate into a serious asset allocation framework,' this is a good thing;

For those who like 'extreme decentralization, anti-traditional finance' fundamentalists, this is a bad thing.

6. For ordinary investors/audience, a few practical thoughts and suggestions

The following content is for information sharing and personal opinions only and does not constitute any investment advice.

1. If you are a US investor and use Vanguard for long-term financial planning

You now have one more option:

No need to handle private keys, cold wallets, or open exchange accounts yourself,

You can make a small allocation to BTC/ETH through ETFs.

But the trade-off is also very clear:

What you get is price exposure, not on-chain usage rights: you cannot transfer, cannot participate in DeFi, cannot self-custody;

To pay management fees, accept ETF trading time limits, and tracking errors;

It is important to recognize: Vanguard views it as a 'non-core asset', and you should not treat it as an 'all-in tool'.

2. If you are outside the US (like domestic investors)

Vanguard's own decision will not greatly help you in the short term,

But the signals it releases can serve as a reference dimension for medium to long-term judgments:

Traditional finance has moved from 'collective resistance' → 'differentiation' → 'now almost fully accepting crypto ETFs',

The position of BTC/ETH on the global asset allocation map has become difficult to simply categorize as 'junk speculative coins.'

This does not mean:

BTC/ETH will not be halved again, nor will it crash again;

What it means is:

After each significant correction, the potential 'compliant funding pools' and 'institutional entries' are increasing.

This is a slow but continuous positive variable for the long-term supply-demand structure.

3. Indirect insights on altcoins/Meme track

Vanguard has drawn its boundaries very clearly:

Only accepting top assets like BTC/ETH/XRP/SOL,

Clearly rejecting Meme coin products.

This explains from another perspective:

In the eyes of traditional finance, the crypto assets that 'can enter pension and retirement money systems' are very limited;

Only a small handful of assets may truly benefit from this wave of institutionalization.

For altcoins/Meme, it is still more about narrative + liquidity games,

And not the path of 'integrating into retirement portfolios'.

7. Summary: Is the opposition being pulled to the table a bull market signal or the beginning of 'being taken over'?

We can understand Vanguard's shift this time as a node in the history of crypto:

1. From a timeline perspective

2024: Spot BTC ETF approved, BlackRock/Fidelity loudly entering the market;

2024–2025: Rapid expansion of ETFs, institutions become the new generation of 'whales' through ETFs;

By the end of 2025: the last big stubborn faction, Vanguard, will be forced to make concessions to clients,

≥ 50 million accounts, 11 trillion AUM gaining access to crypto ETFs.

2. From a symbolic perspective

For the crypto circle, this is a large-scale confirmation of 'legalization + mainstreaming';

For traditional finance, this is 'I may not agree with your value, but I can no longer pretend you don't exist.'

3. From a risk perspective

The ETF trend has accelerated centralized custody, regulatory constraints, and policy risks,

"Decentralized currency" is being increasingly packed into "highly centralized financial containers."

It is not simply 'good news / bad news',

Rather, it is a long-term theme that can be repeatedly dissected from multiple dimensions: macro, institutional, product, retail, decentralized ideals, etc.

"Vanguard's compromise is not because it fell in love with Bitcoin, but because it realized — not accepting Bitcoin means losing its future clients."

When even the most conservative institutions have to leave a place for crypto in the world,

Is this truly the beginning of a bull market, or the start of 'being taken over by traditional finance'?