MiCA Lookback: Regulation, Adoption, and Europe’s Crypto Crossroads

Transcript

Hey everyone, good morning. My name is Ambrose and the country manager of Bybit in in France. I've been working in a crypto industry since 2022. Uh only in regulated businesses overall. And so now today we are going to talk a little bit more about MiCA and how MiCA is basically reframing, reshaping everything that we've been doing in Europe since crypto came in place and that the biggest uh crypto players uh targeted the country. So, I would say that a lot have been said about MiCA since the launch.

Whether it is too slow, too narrow, or not even profitable because basically it's only spot crypto spot um regulation. Um I think it's kind of unfair to just frame it that way and it's a bit too easy. The truth is that currently we are trying to give MiCA too much power without considering the European market as it is.

So, in terms of um Europe, basically, where MiCA applies, Europe is basically not a simple extension of the global market of of crypto. Uh crypto is really big in Asia, crypto is really big in the US, and in Europe been growing uh ever since uh the birth of Bitcoin. But one thing that we should take a look at is basically the adoption of crypto in Europe. And since I have joined crypto 2022, um following the Adam surveys that in France provides you kind of the uh yeah, a pulse of how crypto is uh owned uh adult by

uh our citizen. And what we see is like 8% of the population had crypto in the portfolio in 2022. In 2025, I think it was like between 10 12%. And in the meantime, you had all the biggest exchanges in the world coming in Europe. I'm talking Binance, I'm talking OKX, Bybit, a lot of different exchanges who got their license locally and then tried to expand um around that.

So, I got a question that we should ask ourselves as crypto exchange leaders and managers is why. Basically, what we've been trying to do and what we've been trying to sell altogether is basically um marketplace where you see green and red candles with a different logo on it. And we've been fighting altogether to try to educate users into becoming traders.

And thinking that the most difficult parts uh is what into getting into the European market was to find crypto interests instead of trying to focus on trying to find traders. And that's actually where most of us uh I would say didn't manage just quite yet to to like to succeed and to make it that we're not stuck at these 20 to 10 to uh 10 to 15% of of adoption, but like take over the entire market.

And basically it comes down to find a needle in a haystack in the reason that for user to be profitable for any crypto exchange, he needs to be a good trader first because we need tons of volume and you will never get tons of volume from a user who doesn't know how to trade. Because basically we it will put 100, lose it, another 100, lose it, and then you lose the user. So, we're the our interest here is really to get that type of very good quality traders first and then an interest in crypto. So, it's basically trying to find this intersection of two different um

uh categories of population which makes the total addressable market, let's say, for traders right now. And basically we tried and we pushed a lot for education. Why? Because we needed to educate and thought that we needed to educate people to learn about crypto, to know about it, understand what is Bitcoin, why it's so cool, why it's relevant in uh in in in the world compare it to fiat and everything, the whole theory.

Everything is right. But is it relevant to the user? Yes, if they are traders. But basically what we need to figure out is that there is only 7% of households' assets that are uh invested into single stocks across Europe. Those eyes those are numbers from uh the European Commission. So, what we learn about it is that European, they don't take their financial decision themselves. Only 7% of their assets overall are investing into single stocks.

And so us altogether are coming and saying "Hey instead of investing in stocks, you should invest in in crypto." And so we should think about yeah, basically, does it make sense really when 55% of the assets of the same household stays in the bank with no interest? And 40% of their assets are invested through intermediaries, regulated guys that we're going to take decision for you because you don't know how to deal with your money.

Um and so basically this is where there is a mismatch between the product that we've been trying to sell for some time now and the product that we are uh we need to build, basically. Um and this is why I believe MiCA critics are unfair because one, we pushed for it. The entire industry said, "Yes, we should get a European-wide uh regulation." And we got it. Was it exactly what we wanted? Maybe not. But then we had this core belief that thanks to the regulation, traders would come.

But we don't build traders out of regulation. And this is where there is a big shift that us need to do in order to to offer a better product, basically, something that fits perfectly what user needs in Europe. And what do they need? They need deposit remuneration. They need yield on their crypto assets. And they need ETF, stocks, as well as crypto. But basically what they are telling us is that they need everything in once and not one separate things with with different user experience, different KYC processes, different everything.

They basically want a finance super app. And so the bad news is uh for this specific product, we as exchange, we need to basically reinvent everything. We need to combine in one single experience all of these things. And all of these things require different licenses, which make it way better uh way way harder. Deposit remuneration, we need EMI license for it. Yields, we need depending on what product you're going to choose, EMI or MiFID. ETFs, MiFID.

So, basically, now we are all in this uh run uh fight to get to the to this triple crown. Sorry, triple crown. Uh which is uh MiCA first, EMI, MiFID. Without that, you cannot really offer the right product that the Europeans needs. So, another good news is that it makes it the entry barrier very very high. It needs a lot of resources, a lot of uh legal fees and representation, um and big companies who come from outside of Europe

will have much more power in terms of ability to invest to get all of those licenses in order to make it work. The bad news is that not all will survive. And we are already seeing some of our competitors or some local alternatives not being able to be on par with the regulation before the end of the grandfathering. Um and data from AMF in France told themselves like only 1/3 of all the PSAN registered will be able to get their MiCA license.

Um Yeah. So, basically what I mean here is that overall, MiCA MiCA is bigger than just a regulation because it's a trigger for an reshuffle of the industry, which is good because we're going to as big platform offer a product that is closer and closer to what the user in Europe needs. And yes, we're going to be regulated. It's going to attract a new type of users that you we don't really know. People who are not afraid of regulation, but are attracted by it, reassured.

And but it's also a bigger, I would say, geopolitical reshuffle. The reason is simple, like it's a new a new type of fight for managing the money. And there is two types of fights going on at the same time. The first type of fight is between the big European economies. Every different country can right now deliver MiCA licenses. And what we are seeing is a shift between who are the main delivery or managers of license

of, let's say, banking license in Europe, and who are the main regulators for crypto. And what we see is, for example, France very big TradFi regulator had four out of 10 regulates four of the 10 biggest European banks right now. How many of the biggest crypto exchanges currently will be regulated by France? We don't really know, but right now I do believe that we we haven't seen one.

In the other side, we have I would say we have new, I would say how to put it? Not new because they exist for a long time, but basically other regulators, like Austria, who are currently getting a lot of candidacy for MiCA. Bybit is currently regulated by the FMA in Austria, as well as KuCoin and other exchanges. And what we are seeing is that there is a shift in power in terms of who will control the 450 million user who going to use crypto in

the future. It's not going to be from the traditional regulators. Right now, it's it's shifting a little bit to other types of regulators, which is one fight that there is inside Europe. And then there is a second type of fight, like we are unfortunately not having a lot of European-based and born region-wide competitors. I think of one who is doing very, very well. But then, the shift, the split is between basically basically Asian-based versus US-based. And this is the second fight that we have following right now, which is like who is going to manage the

money? Which regulator for one, and which geopolitical sphere? So I guess that's this is where we we are. This is a status where it's a big opportunity for a lot of companies to do better because MiCA as itself is not a limitation. It's just the evolution of the market that makes it harder now for us to compete without additional licenses, but we we still need them. Ideally, we would be in a world where with the MiCA license, we could offer all the services that the user wants. It's not like that.

It doesn't work like that. So So to conclude, yeah, to conclude, I would say that one year after MiCA comes in place, I think everything is still up for debate. And we are in a situation where the winner will be the one who is able to really answer the needs of the European user. And do the efforts of adapting their products and getting all the right licenses for it to to succeed.

For example, at Bybit, we are announcing our new financial platform, which will basically gather all of those needs in one place on crypto rails so that people can access their money 24/7. And we believe that for Europe, this is the way forward, and we are happy now to take some questions, if you have any. Thank you for the for the talk. The one one question is you you mentioned

dynamic. So there is two I would say that there is two context in which it makes sense for consolidating European European players. My personal belief is that it should be a matter of European companies across Europe coming together and building build the Airbus of crypto, for example. I believe in I believe that we should push for that as a industry or at least as European.

Now, when it comes to Bybit, I think that there is a question of does it make sense from a license standpoint? And from our ability, do we believe that we going to go faster with an acquisition, let's say, or a consolidation versus without? Right now, I would say that we are getting the license. We are applying and soon receiving license that we are needing. So yeah, for Bybit, I'm not sure, but overall, I believe that from a industry standpoint, we should Europe should should push for that.

Hi. You mentioned licensing and regulation. All your supervisory authority is helping you to reach the compliance standard of the MiCA regulation. Is it supportive with your entity not? So Bybit in Europe is regulated by the FMA in Austria, as I said. From the start, they have been really welcoming in the way that they demonstrated strong understanding of the crypto mechanics. And yeah, they demonstrated a strong knowledge about crypto. They have good reputation overall in their in the

way that they regulate banks and TradFi businesses. Overall, how they support us is that they are they are like the way they support is by understanding very well how it works and how and and the very fine lines sometimes between crypto concepts and TradFi concepts. And I think that is yeah, one key advantages that the FMA have right now. Good. Thank you very much.

[applause]