Are Digital Assets RFPs Doomed to Miss the Point?

Credit unions are doing what they’re supposed to do right now. They’re asking good questions, sitting through demos, and trying to make sense of a digital asset market that seems to change every quarter. On the surface, it looks like thoughtful vendor evaluation.

But there’s a problem hiding underneath all of it.

Most institutions think they’re choosing a product. They’re not. They’re choosing an architecture.

What I keep hearing is some version of this: “We know it's important to offer digital asset services to stay relevant and attract younger members, but aren't all of the solutions more or less the same?” It’s a fair question, after all, most digital asset 'solutions' are third-party bolt-ons, dependent on fourth-party, centralized custody models. And, while the regulators are still trying to catch up it could be tempting to go with one of these models.

But this is where things start to go sideways. Not all digital asset solutions live in the same layer of the stack, and the layer you choose determines who actually owns the relationship, the data, and the future. That part rarely shows up in the demo (huge surprise).

Most of what’s being sold today aren't build on layer 0 (your core), and don't live in layer 1 (direct integration), but instead get stuck in the third-party vendor layer, connected to a fourth-party exchange or custodian. It’s the fastest way to get something live, and the easiest way to completely misunderstand what’s actually happening.

Because from the member’s perspective, it looks like your credit union just added a set of shiny new services. From an accounting perspective, you just installed an exit door. Member funds move out, data fragments, and control shifts. The experience may still carry your brand, and attract younger members, but the underlying relationship is no longer fully yours. You built a feature that quietly moves deposits somewhere else.

Layer 1 is a different decision. This is where the credit union connects directly to the underlying networks, where identity, compliance, and controls stay anchored inside the institution. Wallets, hybrid-custody, payments, and whatever comes next are built on top of your infrastructure, not rented from someone else’s.

It’s not just a different solution. It’s a different strategy. Instead of reacting to what vendors make available, you’re deciding how your members interact with an entirely new set of money rails. And that's something most institutions haven't even started thinking about yet: optionality. Not just for today’s use case, but for the next ten that haven’t even yet been conceptualized!

There’s also a line of thinking that sounds reasonable on the surface: “We’ll do something lightweight now and come back to the real solution later.” In theory, that’s disciplined. In practice, it rarely works. Architectural shortcuts cause major long-term problems. Every bolt-on adds integration debt, complicates your data model, and introduces dependencies you don’t control. By the time you decide to “do it right,” you’re not starting fresh – you’re unwinding everything you've already outsourced. What looked reasonable and inexpensive in year one exposes itself via rising transaction fees and irrecoverable deposit bleed in year three.

Even regulators are starting to catch on. There’s an assumption that pushing institutions toward third-party solutions reduces risk. In reality, it often just moves it further away from where it can be managed. When data, assets, and control are spread across multiple vendors, the institution doesn’t become safer – it becomes more dependent and fragile.

Layer 1 solutions, like DaLand's Coin2Core®, do the opposite. It keeps the credit union at the center of the relationship, even as the technology evolves around it. That’s no longer just a technical preference. It’s starting to look like a foundational risk-mitigation decision.

This isn’t really about wallets, or custody models, or even digital assets. It’s about whether you’re maximizing your core's native functionality … or simply installing an exit door and hoping your members don’t use it.

Credit unions don’t need to rush into this space. But they do need to be honest about what they’re choosing. Because the real question isn’t, “What’s the fastest way to say we’re in?” It’s, “Which layer of the stack keeps us in control of our members, our data, and our future?”

Once you see it that way, the answer tends to get a lot clearer. Let's talk.