From Bank to Broker to Crypto: Infrastructure Playbooks for Regulated Companies Entering Digital Assets

The EU’s MiCA framework is creating a predictable environment for crypto services. Stablecoins are being used for payments, settlements, and cross-border operations. Tokenized assets are being tested by banks and asset managers.

As a result, banks, brokers, and fintech platforms are planning to launch crypto services. This can include custody, trading, or stablecoin rails.

But these companies work under strict rules. They need infrastructure that meets high standards for uptime, access control, compliance, and reporting. A simple API or SDK is not enough. What they need is a full infrastructure strategy.

This article outlines how regulated companies can add crypto services without increasing their risk.

Why regulated companies are moving into crypto

There are several reasons why traditional financial companies are building crypto services now:

• MiCA gives legal clarity in the EU
• Stablecoins like USDC are becoming tools for fast payments
• Clients are asking for access to crypto products
• Tokenized assets are gaining interest from institutions

The goals are different from startups. Regulated firms need long-term infrastructure that can handle audits, reporting, and operations at scale.

Common entry points for crypto integration

Regulated companies usually begin their crypto journey by focusing on one or two specific services, depending on their market and compliance readiness. One common starting point is custody. Firms that offer custody focus on secure wallet infrastructure, enabling users to deposit and withdraw assets safely. This creates a foundation for other services, such as staking or tokenized investments.

Some companies prioritize trading access. These platforms allow users to buy and sell cryptocurrencies but avoid handling custody by keeping the assets off-chain or locked within internal systems. This limits their exposure to custody-related risks while still meeting customer demand.

Another growing use case is stablecoin integration. Payment firms and cross-border platforms are using assets like USDC or EURC to provide faster and more cost-effective alternatives to traditional rails like SWIFT or SEPA. Others are entering crypto through tokenized asset offerings, where banks and brokers begin experimenting with digital versions of bonds or private equity instruments.

Each approach requires a tailored infrastructure stack and a different level of compliance maturity. But all of them depend on having reliable custody, transaction logic, and audit controls from the beginning.

Core infrastructure requirements

When a regulated company adds crypto to its platform, the infrastructure must meet the same operational and legal standards as any other financial system. Custody systems should be built on secure methods like MPC or HSM, and must include fine-grained control over who can initiate and approve transactions. Access needs to be managed by role, with multi-level approvals and detailed permissions.

Logging and audit trails must be available in real time. Every transaction, user action, or system change needs to be tracked and stored securely, with full export capabilities for regulators or internal teams. Uptime is also critical. Crypto services should match the reliability of traditional trading or banking infrastructure, which means deploying redundancy, health checks, and fallback systems to minimize service interruptions.

Beyond the backend, companies also need tools for real-time monitoring. Dashboards that track delays, performance, or anomalies help operations teams respond quickly. And when working with infrastructure vendors, transparency is essential. Regulated companies need visibility into how the platform works, what its performance history looks like, and how it supports ongoing compliance.

Compliance is a technical requirement

Many crypto compliance rules are enforced through software. Regulated companies must understand the infrastructure requirements behind these rules.

Travel Rule

When users send crypto to external wallets, the system needs to detect when to apply the Travel Rule. This means adding metadata, identifying the receiving service, and preventing non-compliant transfers.

MiCA enforcement

MiCA asks for clear control over custody, user asset management, and risk policies. These controls must be built into the infrastructure. Manual policies are not enough.

Regional requirements

Some regions require local data storage or restrict where wallets can be accessed from. This must be supported in system design and deployment.

At Scalable Solutions, we build compliance into the platform. Features like transaction screening, withdrawal checks, and audit logs are not optional add-ons. They are part of the standard architecture.

What to build in-house and what to use from vendors

Companies that want to offer crypto services need to decide which parts of the infrastructure they will build themselves and which parts they will source from vendors. In most cases, it makes sense to keep control over the user interface, onboarding experience, internal dashboards, and risk or compliance rules that are specific to their business

At the same time, core infrastructure such as key custody, blockchain node access, transaction screening, and monitoring tools can be more efficient and secure when provided by specialized vendors. The key is to work with providers who offer transparency, regulatory readiness, and clear service-level commitments. Systems that don’t provide access to logs, lack proper client separation, or operate as black boxes can create serious operational and compliance risks.

When choosing a vendor, companies should avoid platforms that:

• Don’t share logs or audit data
• Use shared infrastructure without strong isolation
• Have no proof of regulatory readiness
• Can’t meet SLA and uptime requirements

Lessons from the field

What didn’t work

A European broker launched a crypto service using a basic white-label backend. The system gave internal staff access to wallets without proper role separation. When regulators asked for logs, the company couldn’t provide them. The service was shut down after a few months.

What worked

A payment platform added USDC payouts using vendor-based custody and compliance modules. They kept control over AML policy logic and used modular infrastructure. The service launched quickly and passed a regulatory audit within six months.

Conclusion

For regulated companies, crypto is no longer out of reach. But it must be added with the same care as any other financial service.

The infrastructure must support controlled key management, transaction screening, role-based access, logging and audit tools and regional deployment strategies - all in one, simply manageable source.

• #Cryptocurrencies
• #Banks
• #Europe
• #Fintech
• #Integration
• #Stablecoin
• #Scalability
• #MiCA
• #Regulation
• #Tokenization