In the early history of cryptocurrency, the largest holders were often individual investors.

Compiled & Edited by: Deep Tide TechFlow

Guest: Leah Wald, CEO of SOL Strategies

Host: Jack Kubine

Podcast Source: Lightspeed

Original Title: The Solana Playbook With Leah Wald

Broadcast Date: March 27, 2025

Key Points Summary

In this week's special episode, we invite Leah Wald, who brings us an exciting share from the DAS NY 2025 event. This episode will focus on the launch of the Solana futures ETF in 2025, deeply analyzing the strategy guide from SOL Strategies, and exploring Leah's unique insights on the current cryptocurrency market. Additionally, we will discuss Solana's long-term vision and its latest industry dynamics.

Highlights of Insights

• In the early history of cryptocurrency, the largest holders were often individual investors.

• The institutionalization of Solana is still in its early stages, and more discussions are just beginning.

• One of Solana's successes is its ability to engage in dialogue with various institutions, attracting them to consider running blockchain projects on its platform.

• Comparing SOL Strategies to Solana's Microstrategy is actually an incomplete analogy.

• A fairer approach would be to establish a real technology company.

• One thing I love about the Solana community is that there are various types of startups exploring innovation.

• Like Bitcoin, it took a long time to establish itself as a "store of value." Solana and SOL itself are more speculative, so it also needs time to find its direction.

Launch of Solana Futures ETF

Jack: We just saw the first Solana ETF in the U.S. start trading. You are an expert in this area, so I want to ask you, what do you think about the performance of the futures ETF on its first day? How was the trading volume? What key points should people pay attention to during this release?

Leah Wald:

This is very important. I think we all didn't expect things to develop so quickly. This launch comes right after the release of the CME futures products, and the approval process was very fast, while also introducing the A2X leverage mechanism.

I think it was a very wise strategy for Volatility Shares to choose to launch a futures product. The market performed very strongly on Monday; in any case, this was a successful showcase, demonstrating the existence of the market and the success of trading. Especially for products with 2x leverage, this is undoubtedly a huge victory. From the perspective of institutional adoption and market effectiveness, it is significant for the entire ecosystem.

As for trading volume, I think there is still a lot of room for growth, but after all, this is just the first day. Many market participants typically do not enter on the first day, so it is more important to observe the performance three months later, including trading volume, market participation, and overall interest.

Jack:

If I remember correctly, when you were at Valkyrie, you launched a Bitcoin futures ETF. Can you share your experience from that time? For example, how was the trading volume on the first day? When did you start to see significant capital inflows? Additionally, what lessons from the Bitcoin futures ETF experience can be applied to the Solana futures ETF?

Leah Wald:

We launched the Valkyrie and ProShares Bitcoin futures ETFs in October 2021. ProShares went live two days before us; they chose to list on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), while we chose Nasdaq (NASDAQ). ProShares' product exceeded $1 billion in trading volume on the first day, while our first-day trading volume was about $50 million. Nevertheless, this was already a very good achievement, as it was the first Bitcoin ETF in the U.S.

The process of launching a futures ETF is very complex, especially in terms of communication with market makers and ensuring the normal operation of the entire futures trading ecosystem. Compared to spot ETFs, futures ETFs involve more participants, and since they are based on CME's paper trading, there is a certain separation from spot assets, which requires additional considerations regarding tracking errors.

Although Bitcoin's AUM and trading volume are larger, the market conditions are indeed different. People had more preparation time. It seems that the SEC approved it two days after the futures launch. So Volatility Shares still has the opportunity to start marketing.

Jack:

How long do you think it will take to make a meaningful assessment of the trading volume of CME futures and Volatility Shares ETFs? After all, first-day trading volumes are usually low; does it require a longer observation period?

Leah Wald:

Many companies cannot directly purchase futures products due to internal portfolio restrictions. Additionally, the range of participants in futures trading is relatively limited. Therefore, the performance on the first day usually does not fully reflect the product's potential.

I think it takes at least three months to observe the market performance of these ETFs, including changes in trading volume and participation. Generally speaking, trading firms in Chicago are the main participants, and their behavior will have a significant impact on market performance. Therefore, a three to nine-month timeframe is a reasonable period to assess the success of these products.

Jack:

What do you think about the prospects for spot ETFs in 2025?

Leah Wald:

I think this is a key moment worth looking forward to. Historically, futures ETFs tend to launch before spot ETFs. Although we cannot predict accurately, the launch of this futures ETF is undoubtedly a positive signal. Many companies have already submitted applications for spot ETFs, and their product operations are performing well. So, I am optimistic about the prospects for spot ETFs in 2025.

Are institutions optimistic?

Jack:

Let's talk more broadly about futures ETFs. We are currently at the DAS conference, which feels more like a gathering of institutional investors. However, you and I have talked before about how many people often view "institutions" as a unified whole when discussing cryptocurrency.

I have two questions: First, have institutions started to enter Solana? Second, what does this mean for the market? Additionally, how should we define "institutions"? Which ones count as institutions, and which do not? From your current observations, which areas or segments of institutional capital are most likely to enter Solana in the short term?

Leah Wald:

This is a very thought-provoking question. We usually categorize ordinary users and institutional investors into two groups based on the size of their capital. But in the history of cryptocurrency, it is not that simple. If we view ordinary investors as those managing their own wealth, while institutions are organizations managing others' capital, then these two represent different types of capital flows, not necessarily differences in capital size. In fact, in the early history of cryptocurrency, the largest holders were often individual investors.

As Bitcoin gradually comes to be seen as a new store of value asset, the trend of institutionalization has begun to emerge. For example, financial giants like Blackrock and Fidelity are actively launching Bitcoin ETFs, marking a significant shift in the market. However, for other altcoins (like Solana), the current major holders are still individual investors. Although legally these individuals are referred to as ordinary investors, their capital size and market influence can actually rival that of institutional investors.

As for your second question, what does institutional entry mean for the market? Are they already participating? For Solana, the current discussions are more focused on how institutions can participate in its ecosystem. We can see some signs, such as Franklin Templeton launching blockchain-based funds and trying to operate on the Solana platform. Additionally, the launch of the futures ETF provides institutional investors with new tools, which may attract more capital into the Solana ecosystem. In the Bitcoin market, we have already seen institutions making significant asset allocations through donation funds, pension plans, and sovereign wealth funds. As Solana also has similar investment tools, we may see more institutional participation.

However, overall, the institutionalization of Solana is still in its early stages, and more discussions are just beginning.

The Ultimate Vision of Solana

Jack:

One potentially overlooked issue is the distinction between institutions purchasing SOL assets and institutions operating money market funds on the Solana platform. Compared to the on-chain NASDAQ that may be realized in the future, I think the possibility of pension funds purchasing SOL assets is clearly more practical.

Leah Wald:

Your point is very valid. It is indeed interesting to observe the development paths of different projects. I believe one of Solana's successes is its ability to engage in dialogue with various institutions, attracting them to consider whether to run blockchain projects on its platform. Solana has shown strong persuasion in this regard, as it has many significant advantages. However, how the funds entering the Solana ecosystem are allocated and which areas they flow into are important questions that need to be explored further. Fortunately, as we discussed two days ago, these topics have already begun to receive attention.

Jack:

You previously mentioned the distinction between institutions and ordinary investors, but in reality, capital size is not the main dividing line between the two, as there are also so-called "ordinary whales" (referring to individual investors holding large amounts of assets). Does your SOL Strategies often interact with individuals like Joe, who hold a large amount of Solana for the long term? After all, he may control a considerable amount of assets.

Leah Wald:

Indeed, this is a very interesting phenomenon. One of my jobs is to communicate with investors and share our ideas and stories with them. For investors like Joe, he may be very satisfied with holding SOL for the long term, just like many Bitcoin investors who are happy to hold their Bitcoin and may discuss the importance of ETFs with us. This choice itself is good because investors should have diverse investment options.

Currently, we are the only option providing stock investment exposure to ordinary investors through IRA or similar accounts. This is also a topic worth noting in the development of Bitcoin ETFs. However, I think investors like Joe may prefer to hold and stake his Solana assets directly rather than immediately purchasing our stock. Unless our stock becomes more attractive to them, or they start to engage more actively in stock trading, this transition may take time.

Laine's Acquisition Strategy

Jack:

Speaking of your validators, I recently saw an interesting piece of news about SOL Strategies. You acquired the Laine Solana validator, and I remember his name is Michael, who also operates stakewiz.com. This acquisition is quite special. I wonder how you initiated the conversation with him? Why did you choose to acquire this specific validator and have Michael serve as the Chief Operating Officer? Can you share the story behind this?

Leah Wald:

To be frank, this acquisition was largely due to Michael's personal capabilities. He is an outstanding and intelligent businessman with an excellent engineering background, and talents like him are indeed very rare. Therefore, discussing the acquisition of the Laine validator, stakewiz.com, and other related assets with him completely aligns with our strategic logic for achieving external expansion in the next phase. This acquisition increased our shares to about 3.3 million.

Jack:

This is almost equivalent to doubling your shares, and it seems to have been completed in a short time.

Leah Wald:

That's right, indeed. The effect of Michael's joining has been very significant; he is widely respected in the Solana community, not only for his abilities and intelligence but also for his genuine commitment to the community. You can also see this focus on the community from the work of our Chief Technology Officer. For example, we recently supported the SIMD02,2,8 proposal, even though it doesn't fully align with our economic interests as validators, we still chose to support it because it is more beneficial for the overall development of the Solana network.

Our goal is to build a company that is deeply integrated with the Solana ecosystem and contribute to the long-term development of the Solana network in this way. This is also one of the original intentions behind our acquisition of the Laine validator.

Is SOL Strategies the Microstrategy of Solana?

Jack:

Has the development plan of SOL Strategies always been to achieve growth through acquisitions? When I first heard about SOL Strategies, it was described as "the Microstrategy of Solana." I initially thought you would follow a similar path to Microstrategy by issuing debt to purchase a large amount of SOL, possibly also utilizing staking to gain additional returns, such as staking SOL on platforms like Jito or Helius. This is what I heard on the Lightspeed podcast. However, it seems that you have now delved into the validator space, not only acquiring validators but also Max frequently expressing opinions on SIMD proposals on Twitter. And Michael, as a well-known figure in the Solana validator community, has joined your team. So, did you plan this development direction from the beginning, or did this strategy gradually form over time?

Leah Wald:

Comparing SOL Strategies to Solana's Microstrategy is actually an incomplete analogy. In my view, the limitation of this model is that it simply plays the "net asset value (NAV) game," which is to enhance company value by accumulating assets, but that alone is not enough. I need to consider how to operate a real business while creating long-term value for the company's shareholders. If the market thinks we are just waiting for SOL to appreciate, that would be unfair to the shareholders. I believe a fairer approach is to build a real technology company.

Our strategy is to achieve growth in a slower but steadier manner. Initially, we mainly relied on external acquisitions (inorganic growth) to expand our business, such as acquiring validators and related assets. Over time, we will gradually shift towards relying on our own capabilities for natural growth (organic growth). Our ultimate goal is to become an infrastructure company for Solana.

In this process, we are indeed accumulating as much SOL as possible and staking it to our validator nodes. But this is just part of the overall strategy, similar to Bitcoin miners increasing the Bitcoin on their balance sheets through financing while operating their mining business. I believe this model is more powerful and meaningful because we are not just "buying SOL," but playing a practical role in the Solana infrastructure ecosystem. With the help of Max and Michael, we are also actively engaging in dialogue with institutional investors to promote the realization of this vision.

Jack:

Besides operating validators, are you considering expanding into other infrastructure businesses? Is your goal limited to validators, or are there broader technological directions to explore?

Leah Wald:

We are indeed considering more opportunities beyond the validator business, especially in the auxiliary technology field that supports the Solana ecosystem. Currently, we are in discussions with multiple parties to explore more possibilities.

Solana's Investment Philosophy

Jack:

What is Solana's current investment philosophy? You seem to maintain some connection with Microstrategy. Michael Saylor has played an important role in the Bitcoin space and can be seen as a "spokesperson" for Bitcoin. I feel you are also trying to do something similar. It seems like a turning point now; recently, we have seen some fading interest in meme coins, such as the once very popular Fire Dancer, which now seems to be losing attention. So, what is your investment philosophy for the remainder of 2025? How do you view the Solana network, and how are you currently promoting Solana?

Leah Wald:

This is a deep question, and I will answer it in three parts. I believe Solana is currently searching for its positioning. As a blockchain still in its early stages, it is striving to clarify its role and value proposition. Solana has its advantages and core pillars, which prove that it is more efficient than some other blockchains. But the key question is, who finds these advantages attractive? Who will choose to build on it? Who will become its users?

In the Solana ecosystem, discussions around products are very active, such as the concept of "structured products." So, will Solana become a platform that supports on-chain mutual funds? Or will it evolve into a payment system? These are all possible directions. One thing I love about the Solana community is that there are various types of startups exploring innovation. This year, I hope to see Solana further clarify its niche market. Although it has established core advantages, it has not yet fully found its unique positioning.

This process takes time. Just like Bitcoin, it took a long time to establish itself as a "store of value." Solana and SOL itself are more speculative, so it also needs time to find its direction. In 2025, I will closely monitor Solana's development and hope to see it find its unique niche market.

Final Thoughts

Jack:

Regarding other ecosystems, such as Sui, other Layer 1 blockchains, and Ethereum. To be honest, I think there are also similar investment opportunities like SOL Strategies in these ecosystems. Why haven't we seen more holding companies adopting similar investment strategies? Do you think such companies will emerge in the next year and a half?

Leah Wald:

I believe such companies will indeed emerge, and I have already communicated with some interested enterprises. Overall, I expect to see many companies in the U.S. going public through IPOs, possibly in the form of special purpose acquisition companies (SPACs). In Canada, I think some companies may try to leverage real-time operating systems (RTOS).

However, as the number of such companies increases, I think the key question is how to define success; merely going public does not mean success. True success depends on multiple factors, such as market participation, investor interest, and trading volume support within the stock ecosystem. This support may come from the token community or the capital market ecosystem. Therefore, I believe we will see more companies going public, but they need to have more comprehensive strategic thinking, not just going public for the sake of going public.

I hope to see companies that think more comprehensively, not just focused on going public, but with long-term thinking. I welcome competition. I believe we will see such situations and look forward to seeing these companies actively participate in ecosystem building. Only in this way can we truly promote the healthy development of the industry.

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。