Fidentity: Ethereum follows Bitcoin

Ethereum trading and Fidelity depository services are one of the most important steps in the adoption of cryptocurrencies.

Having already done this with Bitcoin, Fidelity is now entering the world of cryptocurrencies for Ethereum as well. Fidelity Group, which, among other things, manages cryptocurrency ETFs in several jurisdictions, has actually activated trading and custodial services on Ethereum. This is very important as part of the expansion of the group, which will also include 110 employees to manage crypto investments.

Another sensation, after the opening of access to Bitcoin in pension funds, which caused an unusual hype in the United States, even at the political level. The group, without hesitation, expands its horizons towards Ethereum, following the rating of the best cryptocurrencies by market capitalization. And, perhaps, in the near future it will extend these services to other cryptocurrencies.

Institutions don’t back down

Another sign (perhaps a good one) that we can take from this news is that institutional investors have not actually retreated from the market despite the strong correction. Bitcoin and Ethereum are less than halfway to historical highs, and there is no certainty yet that they have found a bottom. Despite the fact that some encouraging rises are being recorded, they are still too sluggish to speak with confidence about a trend reversal.

This situation makes the crisis of 2022 very different from the crisis of 2018, when institutional investors, who had already tasted the benefits of profit in the world of cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin, fled.

It will be a year of change for Ethereum

Switching to PoS will also be an important turning point for Ethereum as an asset, and we will see if it can recover price levels close to historical highs. At this stage, its cost is 1,935 US dollars.

A transition that, needless to say, divides experts and enthusiasts into two opposite camps.

On the one hand, there are those who want to switch to PoS at any cost in order to compete with those chains that can offer faster and, above all, cheaper exchange, and others who see this step as a dangerous slide towards centralization.

Let’s see: the fact remains that the institutionals seem to have already made their choice.