The quality of returns: Crypto risk-adjusted performance

The quality of returns: Crypto risk-adjusted performance

December 16, 2025

Share on

The quality of returns: Crypto risk-adjusted performance | AI generated image by XBTO

The quality of returns: Why risk-adjusted performance matters more than headline gains in crypto

Two crypto funds. Fund A returned 70% last year with 80% drawdowns. Fund B returned 30% with 15% drawdowns. Which is better?

For institutional investors, the answer isn't as obvious as it seems. The question is no longer how high returns can go, but how steady the path can be on the way there.

Because investors do not compound returns they cannot stay invested in.

This is the essence of crypto risk-adjusted returns: understanding not just how much was earned, but how much uncertainty, volatility, and potential loss were endured to earn it. As institutional capital enters crypto-pension funds, endowments, family offices-performance must be judged not just by what was earned, but by what was risked to earn it. Traditional finance has long prioritized risk-adjusted returns. Pension funds, endowments, and sovereign wealth investors all allocate capital through frameworks that weigh returns against risk budgets, volatility limits, and drawdown tolerances.

In 2025, as Bitcoin's volatility compresses (declining from 200% in 2012 to 50% today) and institutional infrastructure matures, crypto is finally ready for this framework. Bitcoin's 2025 Bitcoin Sharpe ratio reached 2.42, placing it among the top 100 global assets by risk-adjusted returns.

This article explores why risk-adjusted returns matter, introduces the key metrics institutional allocators use (Sharpe, Sortino, Calmar ratios), and demonstrates how active management can improve survivability and compounding in institutional crypto allocation.

The path matters as much as the destination

In investing, it's tempting to focus on the finish line: the headline return, the percentage gain, the chart that slopes up and to the right. Yet too often, that singular focus blinds investors to the most important question of all: what did it take to get there?

A strategy that doubles capital in a year but suffers 80% drawdowns along the way may look impressive on paper, but few investors will survive the emotional and fiduciary turbulence required to fully capture it. This is the true cost of carry: the emotional burden of enduring risk. For many, it becomes too heavy to bear, forcing them to leave the party early, never to return, or worse, to rejoin just as the next correction begins.

Whether institutional or retail, investors share one universal temptation: to focus on the outcome, not the process.

Consider the arithmetic of losses. Lose 50%, and you need 100% to recover. Lose 80%, and you need 400%. Every large drawdown doesn't just reduce wealth: it resets the compounding base. A strategy that avoids deep losses, even at the cost of slightly lower returns, often ends up ahead over time.

For institutional allocators, this isn't just theory. Risk budgets, volatility limits, and drawdown tolerances are hard constraints. A pension fund with a 25% volatility limit cannot hold an asset with 65% volatility, regardless of returns. A family office with a -30% drawdown threshold cannot endure -73% losses, regardless of eventual recovery. This is why institutional investors prioritize crypto risk-adjusted returns: they describe not only how much a portfolio moves, but how it feels to hold it. So how do we measure this? How do we quantify the difference between a smooth path and a chaotic one? That's where risk-adjusted metrics come in.

Download the report

Why traditional investors measure risk-adjusted returns

In traditional finance, risk-adjusted performance crypto evaluation is second nature. Pension funds, endowments, and sovereign wealth investors all allocate capital through frameworks that weigh returns against risk budgets, volatility limits, and drawdown tolerances. These aren't arbitrary constraints. They reflect fiduciary duty, governance processes, and the reality that large institutions cannot exit positions quickly during stress.

A risk budget is the total amount of risk an institution is willing to take across its entire portfolio. If a pension fund allocates 5% to crypto, that 5% might consume 20-30% of the total portfolio risk budget due to crypto's high volatility. This forces a trade-off: higher crypto allocation means lower allocation to other risk assets.

But institutions aren't the only ones constrained. Retail investors face an even less predictable constraint: emotion. Behavioral biases-fear, overconfidence, loss aversion-often turn volatility into poor decision-making. This is the true cost of carry: the emotional burden of enduring risk.

Studies show that most retail investors who bought Bitcoin at the 2021 peak ($69,000) sold during the 2022 trough ($15,000), locking in 78% losses. They missed the 2023-2024 recovery not because the asset failed, but because they couldn't endure the journey.

The difference between a trader and a professional manager lies not in making money when prices rise, but in preserving it when they fall." Professional managers use risk-adjusted metrics not to eliminate risk, but to measure, manage, and harness it as a source of opportunity. That discipline-knowing when and why a strategy performs-is what separates skill from luck.

The key metrics institutional allocators use

Risk-adjusted metrics translate uncertainty into understanding. They reveal not just how much was earned, but how well it was earned along the way. Here are the three core efficiency metrics institutional allocators use to evaluate crypto investments.

Sharpe ratio: return per unit of total risk

The Bitcoin Sharpe ratio measures return per unit of volatility. It's calculated as (Return - risk-free rate) ÷ volatility. Think of it like miles per gallon: how efficiently does a strategy convert risk into return? A Sharpe ratio above 1.0 is considered good; above 2.0 is very good; above 3.0 is excellent. Bitcoin's Sharpe ratio has improved dramatically as volatility compresses. In 2025, Bitcoin's 12-month Sharpe ratio reached 2.42, placing it among the top 100 global assets by risk-adjusted returns. This outperforms large-cap tech stocks (which cluster around 1.0) and rivals gold's historical Sharpe ratio. For context, the S&P 500's long-term Sharpe ratio is approximately 0.5-0.7. However, the Sharpe ratio has a flaw: it penalizes upward volatility just as much as downward volatility. For investors, only downside volatility matters. That's where the Sortino ratio comes in.

Sortino ratio: return per unit of downside risk

The Sortino ratio improves on the Sharpe ratio by measuring return per unit of downside volatility only. It's calculated as (Return - target) ÷ downside volatility, where downside volatility measures only negative returns. For institutional investors, this is a more meaningful metric because upward volatility is desirable, not risky. A strategy with high Sortino ratio delivers returns while minimizing painful losses-exactly what risk-averse allocators want.

In the XBTO Trend vs. passive Bitcoin comparison, XBTO Trend achieved a Sortino ratio of 3.83 compared to Bitcoin's 1.93-representing a 2x improvement in downside risk efficiency. This means Trend's returns more than compensate for downside risk when upward volatility is excluded from the calculation.

Calmar ratio: return per unit of maximum drawdown

The Calmar ratio measures annualized return divided by maximum drawdown. It answers the question: how much return did I earn for every percentage point of peak-to-trough loss I endured?

Maximum drawdown is the single most important risk metric for many institutional investors because it represents the worst-case pain. A high Calmar ratio means strong returns without catastrophic losses-the holy grail of institutional investing. Passive Bitcoin's Calmar ratio over 2020-2025 was approximately 0.84, reflecting 61.7% annualized returns against a 73% maximum drawdown. By contrast, actively managed strategies can achieve Calmar ratios above 2.0 by reducing drawdowns while maintaining solid returns. This brings us to the critical question: can active management improve these metrics?

The quality of returns: Crypto risk-adjusted performance Table

On paper, Fund A’s returns look spectacular (i.e., 70% p.a.), but they came with 100% volatility and drawdowns of 80%. Few investors would endure that ride. Fund B’s 30% annualized return looks modest in comparison, yet it was delivered with steady control: low volatility, shallow drawdowns, and a far smoother path. In digital assets, that principle is amplified. A 50% drawdown requires a 100% recovery to break even. An 80% loss demands a 400% rebound. The math of recovery is unforgiving, and it is why allocators focus less on the highest peaks and more on the stability of the climb.

Case study: active management vs. passive Bitcoin exposure

To illustrate how risk-adjusted metrics work in practice, let's compare passive Bitcoin exposure with active management. We'll use data from XBTO's Trend strategy-a long/short trend-following approach-versus passive Bitcoin over the period January 2020 to September 2025. This timeframe spans multiple market regimes: the 2020-2021 bull run, the 2022 bear market, and the 2023-2025 recovery.

| Metric | Passive Bitcoin | XBTO Trend | Winner | | :--- | :--- | :--- | :--- | | Annualized return | 61.7% | 34.8% | Bitcoin | | Volatility | 65.2% | 21.5% | Trend (3x lower) | | Maximum drawdown | -73% | -15.5% | Trend (5x lower) | | Downside volatility | ~40% | 9.1% | Trend (4x lower) | | Sharpe ratio | ~0.95 | 1.62| Trend (1.7x higher) | | Sortino ratio | 1.93 | 3.83 | Trend (2x higher) | | Calmar ratio | 0.84 | 2.25 | Trend (2.7x higher) | | Expected shortfall | -4.7% | -1.35% | Trend (3.5x lower) | | Win ratio | 59.4% | 63.8% | Trend |

Max. drawdown: Active vs. Passive

Download the report

At first glance, passive Bitcoin's 61.7% annualized return looks superior. But the crypto risk-adjusted returns metrics tell a different story. Bitcoin's path to those returns required enduring 65.2% volatility and a 73% maximum drawdown. In practical terms: an investor who put $100,000 in Bitcoin at the 2021 peak saw it drop to $27,000 by late 2022.

By contrast, XBTO Trend delivered 34.8% annualized returns-still exceptional by traditional finance standards-with 21.5% volatility and only a 15.5% maximum drawdown. The trade-off: concede ~27% annualized return, gain 3x lower volatility and 5x lower drawdowns.

More importantly, Trend's risk-adjusted metrics (Sharpe 1.62, Sortino 3.83, Calmar 2.25) are all markedly superior, indicating more efficient use of risk.

The survival math matters. As XBTO's research emphasizes, "A 73% loss needs +270% to break even; 15% needs only ~18%." This is why all of Trend's risk-adjusted metrics dominate even while conceding some headline return. Lower peak-to-trough losses reduce the recovery hurdle, allowing compounding to work more consistently.

How does active management achieve this? Trend is doing what active management is supposed to do in a fat-tailed market: participate in uptrends while de-risking quickly when the regime turns. By adapting to market regimes and managing exposure dynamically, Trend achieves shallower and shorter drawdowns. It shifts the shape of returns: lower downside volatility, improved Calmar ratio, higher win rate, and fewer "give-back" months.

For institutional allocators with risk budgets and drawdown limits, this trade-off is often worth it. A 34.8% return with 15.5% drawdown fits within most institutional risk frameworks. A 61.7% return with 73% drawdown does not. This is the essence of crypto risk-adjusted returns: not maximizing returns at all costs, but optimizing the return-to-risk ratio.

Why Bitcoin's declining volatility makes risk-adjusted returns even more compelling

Bitcoin's volatility has declined dramatically as the asset matures. From over 200% annualized volatility in 2012, Bitcoin's volatility compressed to approximately 80% by 2020, and further to 50% by 2025. In Q3 2025, Bitcoin's 30-day historical volatility oscillated between 16.32% and 21.15%-still elevated compared to equities (~15%), but dramatically lower than its early years. Bitcoin's implied volatility hit a 2-year low of 37% in 2025, signaling market expectations of continued stability.

This compression is structural, not cyclical. It's driven by deeper liquidity, institutional participation, and market maturation. Bitcoin ETFs (BlackRock IBIT, Fidelity FBTC) have brought $82.5 billion in institutional capital, creating more stable demand. Institutional-grade infrastructure-regulated custody, prime brokerage, derivatives markets-has reduced speculative trading and improved price discovery. As Bitcoin's market cap grows (currently ~$1.8 trillion), it becomes harder to move the price, naturally reducing volatility.

Lower volatility directly improves Bitcoin Sharpe ratio values, assuming returns remain positive. This is why Bitcoin's 2025 Sharpe ratio (2.42) is significantly higher than historical averages. As volatility continues to compress, Bitcoin's crypto risk-adjusted returns become increasingly competitive with traditional assets.

For institutional crypto allocation decisions, this makes Bitcoin more palatable: the return potential remains high, but the risk is becoming more manageable. If Bitcoin's volatility continues declining toward 30-40% (comparable to high-growth equities), its Sharpe ratio could exceed 3.0-placing it among the best risk-adjusted assets globally. This is the maturation thesis: as Bitcoin evolves from speculative asset to institutional reserve, its risk profile normalizes while return potential remains elevated.

Practical implications for institutional allocators

So what does this mean for portfolio construction? How much Bitcoin should institutional investors allocate? Research from leading asset managers converges on a similar answer: 3-6% of portfolio assets for institutional crypto allocation.

Grayscale Research found that approximately 5% Bitcoin allocation optimizes Sharpe ratio for a traditional 60/40 portfolio. VanEck Research suggests 6% total crypto allocation (70% Bitcoin, 30% Ethereum) delivers improved risk-adjusted returns with only modest drawdown increases. Bitwise Research shows that Bitcoin contributed positively to portfolio returns in 74% of 1-year periods, 93% of 2-year periods, and 100% of 3-year periods since 2014.

At 5% portfolio weight, Bitcoin typically contributes 20-30% of total portfolio risk due to its higher volatility. This forces a trade-off: higher crypto allocation means lower allocation to other risk assets (equities, high-yield bonds). For most institutional allocators, 5% represents the "sweet spot": meaningful exposure to Bitcoin's return potential without dominating portfolio risk.

Institutions can choose between passive exposure (ETFs, direct holdings) or active management (funds, managed accounts). Passive makes sense for long-term holders (5+ years) with high risk tolerance and no drawdown constraints. Active management makes sense for institutions with risk budgets, shorter time horizons (1-3 years), or fiduciary requirements to demonstrate prudent crypto volatility management. As the data shows, active management can improve Sortino ratios by 2x and Calmar ratios by 2.7x, making it worth the management fee for risk-constrained allocators.

When evaluating crypto investments-whether passive or active-institutional allocators should ask these questions: Can the manager explain negative months? If a strategy loses money, does the manager understand why, and does it align with the strategy's design? A fund that posts a negative month but can clearly explain why demonstrates control. A fund that surprises itself with a positive result reveals ignorance of cause.

What are the risk-adjusted metrics? Don't just look at returns. Demand Sharpe, Sortino, and Calmar ratios. Compare them to benchmarks. What are the risk controls? How does the manager size positions, set stop-losses, manage leverage, and de-risk during volatility spikes?

Conclusion: survival is the precondition for success

In investing, returns are the outcome, but risk is the story. The path to those returns-their volatility, drawdowns, and emotional toll-determines not just how much investors make, but whether they can stay invested long enough to realize it. This is why crypto risk-adjusted returns matter: they measure not just efficiency, but survivability.

As digital assets mature and institutional capital grows, this understanding becomes indispensable. The industry's future will not be built on tales of 10x trades, but on frameworks that transform volatility into opportunity and uncertainty into process. Bitcoin's declining volatility (from 200% to 50%), improving Bitcoin Sharpe ratio values (now 2.42), and institutional infrastructure (ETFs, custody, regulation) signal this maturation. For the first time, crypto is ready for institutional frameworks-and institutional frameworks are ready for crypto.

Professional managers use risk-adjusted metrics not to eliminate risk, but to measure, manage, and harness it as a source of opportunity. That discipline-knowing when and why a strategy performs-is what separates skill from luck.

For institutional allocators evaluating crypto, the question is no longer "if" but "how": passive or active, 3% or 5%, direct or managed. The data is clear: crypto risk-adjusted returns matter, active management can improve them, and Bitcoin's maturation makes this the right time to allocate.

Download XBTO's full report: "The Quality of Returns: A Practical Guide to Understanding Risk Metrics in Investing" for a comprehensive framework on evaluating crypto performance. Because in the end, the true test of any investment is not how fast it rises, but how well it travels. And in crypto, the smoother the journey, the further you can go.

‍

Expand

Collapse

The full breakdown

In our first article, "Navigating Crypto Volatility: The Advantages of Active Management," we explored how the high volatility and low correlation of digital assets with traditional asset classes create unique opportunities for active managers. We discussed how these characteristics enable active managers to execute tactical trading strategies, capitalizing on short-term price movements and market inefficiencies. Building on that foundation, we now turn our attention to the unique market microstructure of digital assets.

Conducive market microstructure of digital assets

The market microstructure of digital assets - a framework that defines how crypto trades are conducted, including order execution, price formation, and market interactions - sets the stage for active management to thrive. This unique ecosystem, characterized by its continuous trading hours, diverse trading venues, and substantial market liquidity, offers several advantages for active management, providing a fertile ground for sophisticated investment strategies.

24/7/365 market access

One of the defining characteristics of digital asset markets is their continuous, round-the-clock operation.

Unlike traditional financial markets that operate within specific hours, cryptocurrency markets are open 24 hours a day, seven days a week, all year round. This continuous trading capability is particularly advantageous for active managers for several reasons:

Immediate response to market events: Unlike traditional markets that close after regular trading hours, digital asset markets allow managers to react immediately to breaking news or events that could impact asset prices. For instance, if a significant economic policy change occurs over the weekend, managers can adjust their positions in real-time without waiting for markets to open.
Managing volatility: Continuous trading provides more opportunities to capitalize on price movements and volatility. Active managers can take advantage of this by implementing strategies such as short-term trading or hedging to mitigate risks and lock in gains whenever market conditions change. For instance, if there’s a sudden drop in the price of Bitcoin, managers can quickly sell their holdings to minimize losses or buy in to capitalize on the lower prices.

Variety of trading venues

The proliferation and variety of trading venues is another crucial element of the digital asset market structure. The extensive landscape of over 200 centralized exchanges (CEX) and more than 500 decentralized exchanges (DEX) offers a wide array of platforms for cryptocurrency trading. This diversity is beneficial for active managers in several ways:

Risk management and diversification: By spreading trades across various exchanges, active managers can mitigate counterparty risk associated with any single platform. Additionally, the ability to trade on both CEX and DEX platforms allows managers to diversify their strategies, incorporating different levels of decentralization, regulatory environments, and security features.
Arbitrage opportunities: Different venues often exhibit price discrepancies, presenting arbitrage opportunities. For example, managers can buy an asset on one exchange at a lower price and sell it on another where the price is higher, thus generating risk-free profits.
Access to diverse liquidity pools: Multiple trading venues provide access to diverse liquidity pools, ensuring that managers can execute large trades without significantly impacting the market price.

Spot and derivatives markets (Variety of instruments)

The seamless integration of spot and derivatives markets within the digital asset space presents a considerable advantage for active managers. With substantial liquidity in both markets, they can implement sophisticated trading strategies and manage risk more effectively.

For instance, as of August 8 2024, Bitcoin (BTC) boasts a daily spot trading volume of $40.44 billion and an open interest in futures of $27.75 billion. Additionally, derivatives such as futures, options, and perpetual contracts enable managers to hedge positions, leverage trades, and employ complex strategies that can amplify returns.

Spot and derivatives markets graph — Source: Coinglass, Aug 16, 2024

Overall, the benefits for active managers include:

Hedging and risk management: Derivatives offer a powerful tool for hedging against unfavorable price movements, enabling more efficient risk management. For instance, a manager holding a substantial amount of Bitcoin in the spot market can use Bitcoin futures contracts to safeguard against potential price drops, thereby enhancing risk control.
Access to leverage: Managers can use derivatives to leverage their positions, amplifying potential returns while maintaining control over risk exposure. For instance, by employing options, a manager can gain exposure to an underlying asset with only a fraction of the capital needed for a direct spot purchase, thereby enabling more capital-efficient investment strategies.
Strategic flexibility: By integrating spot and derivatives markets, managers can implement sophisticated strategies designed to capitalize on diverse market conditions. For instance, they may engage in volatility selling, where options are sold to generate income from market volatility, regardless of price direction. Additionally, managers can leverage favorable funding rates in perpetual futures markets to enhance yield generation. Basis trading, another strategy, involves taking offsetting positions in spot and futures markets to profit from price differentials, enabling returns that are independent of market movements.

Exploiting market inefficiencies

Digital asset markets, being relatively nascent, are less efficient compared to traditional financial markets. These inefficiencies arise from various factors, including regulatory differences, market segmentation, and varying levels of market maturity. For example:

Pricing anomalies: Phenomena like the "Kimchi premium," where cryptocurrency prices in South Korea trade at a premium compared to other markets, create arbitrage opportunities. Managers can exploit these by buying assets in one market and selling them in another at a higher price.
Exploiting mispricings: Active managers can identify and capitalize on mispricings caused by market inefficiencies, using strategies such as statistical arbitrage and mean reversion.

The unique aspects of the digital asset market structure create an exceptionally conducive environment for active management. Continuous trading hours and diverse venues provide the flexibility to react quickly to market changes, ensuring timely execution of trades. The availability of both spot and derivatives markets supports a wide range of sophisticated trading strategies, from hedging to leveraging positions. Market inefficiencies and pricing anomalies offer numerous opportunities for generating alpha, making active management particularly effective in the digital asset space. Furthermore, the ability to hedge and manage risk through derivatives, along with exploiting uncorrelated performance, enhances portfolio resilience and stability.

In our next article, we'll delve into the various techniques active managers employ in the digital asset markets, showcasing real-world use cases.

Read full disclaimer

Read the full article

More from Knowledge

Applying tokenization: From real estate to treasuries

Knowledge

November 3, 2025

Tokenization platforms explained – Technology, custody & compliance.

Knowledge

October 21, 2025