Ownership after Bitcoin gains: Fed experiment explained

by

Bitcoin price gains can draw new buyers into crypto by lifting expectations for future returns, a Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland experiment found.

According to the report, participants shown Bitcoin’s previous 12-month performance became more bullish on crypto. They were about 2.5 percentage points more likely to own it in a later survey, researchers found. With roughly 11% of respondents owning crypto before the experiment, that change amounted to about a 23% increase in the likelihood of ownership.

The results offer rare experimental evidence for a dynamic long associated with speculative markets: past gains can influence what investors expect next and, in turn, where they put their money.

Researchers also found that the response was strongest among people with limited knowledge of crypto. That suggests rallies may have the greatest pull on potential investors who have yet to form strong views about the asset class.

The findings come from Do You Even Crypto, Bro? Cryptocurrencies in Household Finance, a July 2026 working paper by Michael Weber, Bernardo Candia, Olivier Coibion and Yuriy Gorodnichenko.

The Cleveland Fed classifies the study as a working paper, meaning the research is preliminary. The views expressed are those of the authors and do not represent the Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland or the Federal Reserve System.

Recent gains changed what investors expected next

The experiment found that Bitcoin’s past performance altered expectations before it changed actual ownership.

During the second quarter of 2025, researchers divided participants into groups and provided them with different pieces of financial information.

One group was told Bitcoin had returned 14.3% over the previous 12 months. Another was shown a Bitcoin price chart covering the same period.

Separate groups received information about the S&P 500, GameStop, or the Federal Open Market Committee’s inflation outlook, while a control group received no additional information.

Participants told Bitcoin’s exact return raised their expected crypto return for the following year by 3.2 percentage points relative to the control group. Those shown the Bitcoin chart increased their expected return by about 1.2 percentage points.

Higher expectations changed desired portfolios

That shift fed directly into desired portfolios.

The Bitcoin treatments increased the amount respondents wanted to allocate to crypto by about 2 percentage points from a control-group average of 4.3%, almost half the starting allocation.

Most of the additional exposure came from money respondents would otherwise have kept in checking, savings, or cash accounts.

The researchers later surveyed the participants again to see whether the shift in expectations translated into actual investment decisions.

Participants who received Bitcoin’s return information were 2.41 percentage points more likely to report owning crypto. Participants who saw the Bitcoin price chart were 2.48 percentage points more likely to own it.

Because relatively few respondents changed their ownership status between surveys, the researchers combined the two Bitcoin treatment groups. The pooled result was statistically significant, with a p-value of 0.017.

The result gives the experiment more weight than a simple survey showing that crypto investors tend to be bullish. Researchers randomly assigned participants to information groups. This allowed them to trace changes in expectations and subsequent ownership back to what participants had been shown.

Still, the experiment does not establish that every Bitcoin rally will generate the same level of new demand or quantify how much those purchases could move prices.

Other assets showed weaker spillover

There was also some evidence that rising enthusiasm for one risk asset can spill into others.

Participants who saw S&P 500 information were also more likely to own crypto later. Those who received the GameStop chart increased their desired crypto allocation, but the change did not produce a statistically significant difference in subsequent ownership.