Conversation with CEO of SOL Strategies: Institutionalization has just begun, we are not just "SOL version of micro-strategy"

Organize & compile: Shenchao 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

Summary of key points

This week’s special show, we invite Leah Wald, who brings you wonderful sharing from DAS NY 2025. This episode will focus on the launch of the 2025 Solana Futures ETF, in-depth analysis of SOL Strategies’ strategy guides, and explore Leah’s unique insights into the current cryptocurrency market. Apart from that, we will also discuss Solana’s long-term vision and its latest industry trends.

Wonderful view summary

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

• Solana’s institutionalization 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 agencies to entice them to consider whether to run blockchain projects on its platform.

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

• A fairer approach is to build a real tech company.

• What I really like 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 themselves are more speculative, so it also takes time to find their direction.

The launch of Solana futures ETF

Jack: We just saw the first Solana ETF in the United States start trading. You are an expert in this field. I would like to ask you, what do you think of the performance of the first day of the futures ETF of volatility shares ? What is the trading volume? What key points should people pay attention to during this release process?

Leah Wald:

This is very important. I don't think we expected things to go so quickly. This launch happened to follow the release of CME futures products, with very fast approval speeds, and an A2X leverage mechanism was introduced.

I think it is a very wise strategy for volatility shares to choose to launch futures products. The market performed very strongly on Monday, and it was a successful show, showing the existence of the market and the success of the transaction. Especially for products with 2x leverage, this is undoubtedly a huge win. From the perspective of institutional adoption and market effectiveness, it is of great significance to the entire ecosystem.

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

Jack:

If I remember correctly, you have launched Bitcoin Futures ETFs while you were working at Valkyrie . Can you share your experience at that time? For example, what is the trading volume on the first day? When did you start to see large-scale inflows of funds? In addition, what do you think are the experiences of Bitcoin Futures ETFs that can be learned from Solana Futures ETFs?

Leah Wald:

We launched Valkyrie and ProShares’ Bitcoin Futures ETFs in October 2021. ProShares went online two days before us, and they chose to go public on the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE), while we chose NASDAQ. ProShares' products exceeded $1 billion in the first day, while our first day trading volume was about $50 million. Despite this, this is already a very good result because it is the first Bitcoin ETF in the United States.

The process of launching futures ETFs is very complicated, especially in communication with market makers and ensuring the normal operation of the entire futures trading ecosystem. Compared with spot ETFs, futures ETFs involve more participants. At the same time, because it is based on paper trading on CME, there is a certain separation between it and spot assets, so additional considerations are needed in terms of tracking errors.

Although Bitcoin has greater AUM and transaction volume, the market situation is indeed different. People have more time to prepare. It looks like the SEC approved it two days after the futures were launched. So volatility shares still have 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 volatile stock ETFs ? After all, the first-day trading volume is usually low, does it take longer to observe?

Leah Wald:

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

I think it will take at least three months to observe the market performance of these ETFs, including changes in trading volume and participation. Generally speaking, trading institutions like Chicago are the main players, and their behaviors will have an important impact on market performance. Therefore, a three to nine-month time frame is a reasonable cycle to evaluate the success of these products.

Jack:

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

Leah Wald:

I think this is a critical moment to look forward to. From historical experience, futures ETFs are usually launched before spot ETFs. Although we cannot predict accurately, the launch of futures ETFs is undoubtedly a positive signal. Several companies have submitted applications for spot ETFs and their product operations are performing well. So, I am optimistic about the prospects for spot ETFs in 2025.

Is the institution optimistic?

Jack:

Let’s talk more broadly about futures ETFs. Now that we are in the DAS conference, the overall atmosphere here is more like a gathering of institutional investors. However, you and I have talked about before that many people tend to regard "institution" as a unified whole when talking about cryptocurrencies.

I have two questions to ask: First, has the institution started to enter Solana? Second, what does this mean for the market? Furthermore, how should we define “institutions”? Which institutions are considered, and which ones are not considered? Judging from your current observation, which areas or segments of institutional capital are most likely to enter Solana in the short term?

Leah Wald:

This is a very worthy question. We usually divide ordinary users and institutional investors into two categories, and distinguish them by the size of the capital. But in the history of cryptocurrencies, the situation has not been so simple. If we regard ordinary investors as people who manage their own wealth, and institutions are organizations that manage other people's capital, then these two represent flows of funds of different natures, not necessarily differences in the size of funds. In fact, in the early history of cryptocurrencies, the largest holders were often individual investors.

As Bitcoin is gradually regarded 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 huge shift in the market. However, for other altcoins (such as Solana), the current main holders are still individual investors. Although these people are legally called ordinary investors, their capital scale and market influence are actually comparable to institutional investors.

As for your second question, what does the entry of institutions mean to the market? Have they been involved? For Solana, the current discussion focuses more on how institutions “how” participate in their ecosystems. We can see some signs, such as Franklin Templeton launching a blockchain-based fund and trying to operate on the Solana platform. In addition, the launch of futures ETFs provides institutional investors with new tools that may attract more capital into the Solana ecosystem. In the Bitcoin market, we have seen how institutions can make major asset allocations through endowment funds, pension plans and sovereign wealth funds. As Solana has similar investment tools, we may see more institutions involved.

Overall, however, the institutionalization of Solana is still in its early stages and more discussions have just begun.

Solana's ultimate vision

Jack:

One issue that may be overlooked is the difference between institution buying SOL assets and institution 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 obviously more realistic.

Leah Wald:

Your point of view makes sense. It is really interesting to observe the development paths of different projects. I think one of Solana’s success is that it’s able to talk to various agencies and entice them to consider whether to run blockchain projects on their platform. Solana shows great persuasion in this regard, because it has many significant advantages. However, how funds are allocated and which areas to flow after entering the Solana ecosystem are important issues that need to be discussed in depth next. Fortunately, as we discussed two days ago, these topics have begun to gain gradual attention.

Jack:

You mentioned the difference between institutions and ordinary investors before, but in fact, the scale of funds is not the main dividing line between the two, because there are also some so-called "ordinary whales" (referring to individual investors holding a large amount of assets). Do your SOL Strategies often interact with individual investors like Joe who have long-term holdings of Solana? After all, he may have a considerable scale of assets.

Leah Wald:

That's true, this is a very interesting phenomenon. One of my jobs is to communicate with investors and share our philosophy and stories with them. For investors like Joe, he might be very satisfied with holding SOLs for a long time, like many Bitcoin investors, who are happy to hold their own Bitcoins and may discuss with us the importance of ETFs. This choice itself is good because investors should have a diverse investment choice.

Currently, we are the only option to provide stock investment exposure to average investors through an IRA or similar account. This is also a topic worthy of attention in the development of Bitcoin ETFs. However, I think investors like Joe may be more inclined to hold and pledge his Solana assets directly rather than buying our stock right away. Unless our stocks become more attractive to them, or they start to engage in stock trading more actively, this transition may take time.

Laine's acquisition strategy

Jack:

Speaking of your validators, I recently saw an interesting news about SOL Strategies. You bought Laine Solana verifier, I remember his name is Michael, and he also runs stakewiz.com. This acquisition is very special. I wonder, how did you talk to him? Why choose to acquire this particular validator and also let Michael be the chief operating officer ? Can you share this story?

Leah Wald:

Frankly speaking, the acquisition is largely due to Michael's personal abilities. He is a very outstanding and smart businessman, and also has an excellent background in engineers. Talents like him are indeed very scarce. Therefore, discussing the acquisition of Laine Verifiers, stakewiz.com and other related assets with him is fully in line with our strategic logic for achieving external expansion in the next stage. This acquisition increased our stake to approximately 3.3 million.

Jack:

This is almost the equivalent of doubling your shares, and it looks like it 's done in a short time.

Leah Wald:

That's right, it's true. Michael’s effect after joining was very significant, and he was widely respected in the Solana community, not only because of his ability and ingenuity, but also because of his sincere dedication to the community. You can also see this focus on the community in the work of our CTO. For example, we recently supported the SIMD02,2,8 proposal, and although this is not entirely in our financial interests as validators, we still choose to support it because it is more beneficial to the development of the entire 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 of our acquisition of Laine verifiers.

Is SOL Strategies a Microstrategy from Solana?

Jack:

Has SOL Strategies' development plans been achieved through acquisitions? When I first heard about SOL Strategies, it was described as "Solana's Microstrategy." I thought you would buy a lot of SOL by issuing debt, like Microstrategy, and maybe use staking to get additional benefits, such as pledging SOL to platforms like Jito or Helius. This is what I heard on the Lightspeed podcast. However, it seems that you have penetrated into the realm of validators, not only in acquiring validators, but Max also often posts opinions on SIMD proposals on Twitter. Michael, as a well-known figure in the Solana validator community, has also joined your team. So, have you planned this development direction from the beginning? Or is this a strategy that has gradually formed over time?

Leah Wald:

Comparing SOL Strategies to Solana 's Microstrategy is actually an incomplete analogy. In my opinion, the limitation of this model is that it simply plays the "Net Asset Value (NAV) game", that is, to increase the company's value by accumulating assets, but this alone is not enough. I need to think about how to run a real business while creating long-term value for the shareholders of the company. If the market thinks we are just waiting for SOL to appreciate, it will be unfair to shareholders. I think a fairer approach is to build a real tech company.

Our strategy is to achieve growth in a slower but steady way. In the early stages, we mainly rely on external acquisitions (inorganic growth) to expand our business, such as acquisition of validators and related assets. Over time, we will gradually turn to natural growth (organic growth) that relies on our own abilities. Our ultimate goal is to become a Solana infrastructure company.

In the process, we are really accumulating as much SOL as possible and staking it to our validator node. But this is only part of the overall strategy, similar to Bitcoin miners operating mining business while increasing Bitcoin on their balance sheet through financing. I believe this model is stronger and more meaningful because we are not just “buying SOL” but playing a practical role in Solana’s infrastructure ecosystem. Through the help of Max and Michael, we are also actively talking to institutional investors to drive the realization of this vision.

Jack:

In addition to operational validators, are you considering expanding to other infrastructure businesses? Are your goals limited to validators, or are there a wider technical direction to explore?

Leah Wald:

We are indeed considering more opportunities outside of the validator business, especially in the field of assistive technologies that support the Solana ecosystem. At present, we are negotiating with multiple parties to explore more possibilities.

Solana's investment philosophy

Jack:

What is Solana 's current investment philosophy? You guys seem to have some connection with Microstrategy. Michael Saylor plays an important role in the Bitcoin field and can be said to be the "spokesperson" of Bitcoin. I think you are trying to do something similar. Now it seems to be a turning point, and recently we have seen some heat about meme coin fading, such as the once very popular Fire Dancer, which now seems to have dropped attention. So, what are your investment philosophy for the rest of 2025? How do you think of the Solana network and how do you promote Solana now?

Leah Wald:

This is a very in-depth question, divided into three parts to answer. I think Solana is currently looking for her position. As a blockchain that is still in its early stages, it is also working to clarify its role and value proposition. Solana has its own strengths and core pillars, which prove that it is better than some other blockchains in efficiency. But the key question is, who are these advantages attractive to it? Who would choose to build it on it? Who will become its user?

In Solana's ecosystem, discussions around products are very active, such as the concept of "structured products". So, will Solana become a platform to support on-chain mutual funds? Or, will it evolve into a payment system? These are the possible directions. What I really like about the Solana community is that there are various types of startups exploring innovation. This year, I hope to see Solana further clarify its segment. Although it has established its core strengths, it has not yet found a unique positioning that suits it.

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

The final thought

Jack:

Regarding other ecosystems, such as Sui, other first-tier blockchains (L1), and Ethereum. Honestly, I think there are investment opportunities similar to SOL Strategies in these ecosystems. Why haven't we seen more holding companies adopt similar investment strategies? Do you think this kind of company will appear in the next year and a half?

Leah Wald:

I think such companies will indeed appear, and I have already communicated with some interested companies. Overall, I expect we will see a lot of companies going public in the US through IPOs, which may be in the form of a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC). In Canada, I think some companies may try to utilize real-time operating systems (RTOS).

However , with the increase of such companies, I think the key issue is how to define success. Going public just does not mean success. True success depends on multiple factors such as market participation, investor interest, and volume support in the stock ecosystem. These support may come from both the token community and the ecosystem of the capital market. So, I believe we will see more companies going public, but they need to have a more comprehensive strategic thinking, not just for the purpose of going public.

I hope to see companies that think more comprehensively, not just thinking about going public, but thinking for a long time. I welcome competition. I think we will see this and look forward to seeing these companies actively participate in ecosystem construction. Only in this way can we truly promote the healthy development of the industry.