2026-01-04
Looking back at 2025, if one were to identify a single theme that ran consistently through the development of Web3, it would undoubtedly be “compliance.” During this year, regulators around the world were no longer merely observers, but active shapers of the market. This was particularly evident in Hong Kong, a city long committed to consolidating its position as an international financial center, where regulatory actions were both swift and profound. After several years of preparation and transitional arrangements, the Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission (SFC) fully implemented the licensing regime for Virtual Asset Trading Platforms (VASP) in 2025. This was not merely the enforcement of a new regulation, but rather an industry coming-of-age ceremony. It marked the end of the so-called “Wild West” era, characterized by speculation and uncertainty, and the formal beginning of a new paradigm centered on transparency, robustness, and investor protection. This fundamental transformation provides the first key perspective for understanding 2025 Web3 Industry Review: The Evolution of Compliance and Institutional Participation.
Let us imagine the cryptocurrency market a few years ago. For many participants, it was an unfamiliar frontier filled with opportunity but also hidden risks. Concerns around exchange security, custody of funds, and potential market manipulation were ever-present, discouraging many prospective participants, particularly cautious institutional investors. The full implementation of Hong Kong’s VASP licensing regime was designed precisely to address these foundational trust issues.
Under the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorist Financing Ordinance (AMLO) and the Securities and Futures Ordinance (SFO), any platform operating a virtual asset trading business in Hong Kong, or actively marketing its services to Hong Kong investors, must obtain authorization from the SFC (Securities and Futures Commission, n.d.-c). What does this imply? It means that an exchange can no longer function merely as a website matching buyers and sellers. It must operate in a manner comparable to a traditional financial institution.
The SFC’s requirements are stringent, covering financial soundness, segregation of client assets, cybersecurity, anti-money laundering (AML) and know-your-customer (KYC) procedures, as well as internal controls to prevent market misconduct. For example, platforms are required to store 98% of client assets in offline cold wallets and to purchase sufficient insurance coverage for those assets. Each of these requirements directly targets long-standing pain points in the industry. In 2025, with the end of the transitional period, all platforms that failed to obtain a license or were not deemed to be licensed were required to cease operations in Hong Kong. The market underwent a clear and decisive cleansing process, leaving behind only those leading players with sufficient capability and a genuine willingness to embrace regulation.
This shift from “self-regulation” to “external regulation” carries profound significance. For retail investors, it provides an unprecedented layer of protection. When trading on a licensed platform, they can be confident that regulatory oversight and rule-based safeguards are in place. For institutional investors, this framework serves as a critical entry ticket. Without a compliant regulatory structure, it would be extremely difficult for any large fund, family office, or listed company to justify to its board and stakeholders the decision to allocate capital to this emerging sector.
| Feature | Licensed Virtual Asset Trading Platform (VATP) | Unlicensed or Offshore Exchange |
|---|---|---|
| Regulator | Directly regulated by the Hong Kong SFC | No local regulator or inconsistent regulatory standards |
| Investor Protection | Strict client asset segregation (98% cold storage) and insurance coverage | Opaque asset protection measures, with risks of misappropriation |
| AML | Bank-grade KYC/AML standards | Looser AML policies, potentially a channel for illicit funds |
| Approved Assets | Subject to SFC review, limited to highly liquid and reputable major tokens | Inconsistent listing standards, often including high-risk, low-liquidity assets |
| Transparency | Regular SFC audits and transparent financial and operational disclosures | Corporate structure, financial condition, and operating location often unclear |
| Legal Recourse | Clear legal entity in Hong Kong with local legal recourse | Often headquartered in lightly regulated jurisdictions, making recourse difficult |
In the evolution of Hong Kong’s VASP regime, licensed exchanges have not merely acted as rule followers, but as builders of industry standards. Taking HashKey Exchange, one of the first licensed retail virtual asset exchanges in Hong Kong, as an example, its operating model clearly demonstrates how compliance can be transformed into a core competitive advantage.
First, HashKey Exchange holds both the SFC Type 1 license (dealing in securities) and Type 7 license (providing automated trading services). This enables it not only to trade mainstream non-security tokens such as Bitcoin and Ethereum, but also to lay the groundwork for the future trading of SFC-recognized security tokens (Security Tokens) (HashKey Exchange, n.d.). This dual-license strategy reflects a forward-looking understanding of regulatory trends, namely that the future of virtual assets will involve the parallel development of both security and non-security tokens.
Second, from an operational perspective, HashKey Exchange strictly adheres to SFC guidance. It has established an institutional-grade digital asset wallet system to ensure secure segregation of client assets. Its robust AML and on-chain transaction monitoring (KYT) framework not only satisfies regulatory requirements but also earns the trust of banking partners, enabling the platform to provide stable HKD and USD fiat on- and off-ramps for users. This is particularly important, as smooth fiat channels are the lifeline connecting the virtual asset ecosystem with the traditional financial system. In the past, many investors struggled with inefficient or unreliable fiat access.
More importantly, HashKey Exchange provides the market with a clear “compliance anchor.” When investors, whether retail or institutional, seek entry into the crypto market, they no longer need to conduct risky due diligence across hundreds or thousands of platforms with unclear backgrounds. Instead, they can directly choose an SFC-regulated platform such as HashKey, significantly reducing counterparty risk. This demonstration effect also compels other market participants wishing to establish themselves in Hong Kong to align with the highest compliance standards, thereby improving the overall health of the industry. In this sense, licensed exchanges represent one of the most concrete manifestations of 2025 Web3 Industry Review: The Evolution of Compliance and Institutional Participation.
The compliance push of 2025 did not stop at exchange licensing. By the end of the year, the Hong Kong Monetary Authority (HKMA) and the SFC had launched a new round of public consultations on issues such as stablecoin issuers and virtual asset over-the-counter (OTC) trading (Securities and Futures Commission, 2025). This signals that the regulatory framework is expanding beyond trading venues into broader areas of the ecosystem.
Stablecoins, as the unit of account and medium of exchange in the Web3 world, are undeniably important. However, past experience has shown that poorly designed stablecoins or inadequate reserves can pose systemic risks. Hong Kong regulators have begun establishing a dedicated licensing regime for stablecoin issuers, requiring full backing by high-quality liquid assets and subjecting issuers to rigorous audits. The objective is to bring HKD- or USD-denominated stablecoins under a regulatory framework similar to that applied to stored value facilities (SVF), ensuring their stability and reliability. For the broader ecosystem, a compliant and transparent stablecoin can significantly enhance transaction efficiency and provide a solid foundation for more sophisticated DeFi applications.
Similarly, the exploration of regulatory oversight for OTC services reflects regulators’ nuanced understanding of market maturity. Large institutional transactions are often executed through OTC channels to avoid impacting public market prices. Bringing OTC service providers into the regulatory perimeter and ensuring adherence to the same stringent AML and compliance standards is a critical step in strengthening the infrastructure required for institutional participation.
Taken together, these regulatory initiatives paint a clear picture: Hong Kong aims to establish a comprehensive, multi-layered virtual asset regulatory system. This system is designed not only to mitigate risks, but also to create a predictable and trustworthy environment that attracts top-tier global capital, technology, and talent, thereby reinforcing Hong Kong’s position as a leading global virtual asset hub.
This material is for general information purposes only. It does not constitute, nor should be interpreted as, any form of solicitation, offer or recommendation of any product or service. It does not constitute investment, tax or legal advice. In no event should any news release be considered as recommendation of a particular type of digital asset.This material may include market data prepared by HashKey Exchange or data from third party sources. While HashKey Exchange makes reasonable efforts to ensure the reliability of such third-party information, such information may have not been verified. Graphics are for reference only. We make no representation or warranty, express or implied, to the timeliness, accuracy or completeness of the information in this material. Information may become outdated, including as a result of new plans, regulations or changes in the market. In making investment decisions, investors should not solely rely on the information contained in this material. The risk of loss in trading digital assets can be substantial and is not suitable for all investors.Any forward-looking statements in this material is subject to several conditions, uncertainties and assumptions. We undertake no obligation to update or revise any forward-looking statements.The Chinese version shall prevail if there is any inconsistency between the English and Chinese versions.