a16z: Two Recommendations for Crypto Builders by 2026

Author: a16z crypto

Translation: TechFlow

1. Trading Can Be a Stepping Stone, Not the Endgame for Crypto Businesses

Today, aside from stablecoins and a few core infrastructure projects, nearly every successful crypto company is pivoting to—or has already become—a trading platform. But if "every crypto company becomes an exchange," who then remains to build the rest? When so many players converge on the same model, attention fragments across the market, ultimately leaving only a few dominant winners. This also means companies that pivot too early to trading may miss the opportunity to build more competitive and enduring businesses.

I fully understand the pressure entrepreneurs face in keeping their operations financially viable. Yet chasing short-term product-market fit comes at a cost—especially in crypto, where the unique dynamics of tokens and speculation can lure founders down a path of instant gratification in their search for product-market fit. You could say this is a "marshmallow test" (a psychological experiment measuring patience and self-control).

There's nothing wrong with trading—it's an essential function in market operations—but it doesn't have to be the end goal. Founders who focus on the "product" rather than just short-term product-market fit may ultimately emerge as the bigger winners.

—Arianna Simpson (@AriannaSimpson), Partner at a16z Crypto

2. This Year, Regulation Will Help Correct Industry Distortions

Over the past decade, one of the biggest obstacles to building blockchain networks in the U.S. has been legal uncertainty. Securities laws have been stretched and selectively enforced, forcing founders into a regulatory framework designed for corporations—not networks. For years, minimizing legal risk replaced product strategy; engineers were supplanted by lawyers.

This dynamic led to numerous distortions: founders were advised to avoid transparency; token distributions became legally arbitrary; governance turned into theater; organizational structures were optimized for legal cover; and tokens were designed to lack economic value or sustainable business models. Worse still, crypto projects that circumvented the rules often grew faster than well-intentioned builders who played by them.

However, this year the government is closer than ever to passing regulatory frameworks for crypto market structure—frameworks that could eliminate these distortions. If enacted, such legislation would incentivize transparency, establish clear standards, and replace the "enforcement roulette" (random enforcement) with clearer, structured pathways for fundraising, token issuance, and decentralization. After GENIUS (note: likely referring to a policy or event), we've already seen explosive growth in stablecoins; upcoming legislation on crypto market structure will bring even greater transformation—but this time, for networks.

In other words, such regulation would allow blockchain networks to truly operate as networks—open, autonomous, composable, credibly neutral, and decentralized.

—Miles Jennings (@milesjennings), Head of Policy and General Counsel at a16z Crypto