Nearly 80% of crypto holders say they would consider using a loan against their crypto.

But only 14% actually do.

That is the core finding from new research by Ledn, conducted by Protocol Theory, based on a survey of 1,244 crypto holders across the U.S. and Australia in February 2026. The top reasons holders avoid crypto-backed loans are concerns about managing price volatility, liquidation risk, and regulatory uncertainty, not confusion about how the product works.

The trade itself is simple: borrow against Bitcoin at a fixed annual rate, and bet that BTC gains more than the interest costs. Over the last five years, that bet has worked in four out of five years.

How a Bitcoin-backed loan works

You deposit Bitcoin as collateral and borrow cash or a stablecoin against it at a fixed rate. There is no credit check and no monthly payments, interest accrues and is repaid at maturity.

This differs from exchange margin accounts on platforms like Kraken or Binance, where rates often compound daily and can spike above 30% annualized during volatile periods. A fixed-rate loan gives a known cost upfront.

Loan-to-value, or LTV, matters here too. At a standard 50% LTV, Bitcoin would need to fall by roughly half before triggering liquidation. Tools like automatic collateral top-ups, real-time LTV alerts, and partial repayments help manage that risk, they don’t eliminate it, but they make it survivable.

The five-year track record

To test the trade, take a $50,000 loan at a fixed 11.5% annual rate. The interest cost is $5,750, a year, regardless of Bitcoin’s performance. Against that fixed hurdle, here is how Bitcoin performed, using year-open and year-close prices.

Year	Bitcoin return	Interest cost (11.5%)	Result
2020	+303%	$5,750	Strongly positive
2021	+60%	$5,750	Positive
2022	-64%	$5,750	Negative, collateral stress
2023	+155%	$5,750	Strongly positive
2024	+121%	$5,750	Strongly positive

Four profitable years, one brutal one. In every up year, Bitcoin’s gain dwarfed the fixed 11.5% cost of carry. The problem is 2022, when Bitcoin fell 64%. A borrower at 50% LTV would have watched their position pushed toward liquidation as the collateral collapsed. That is the exact scenario automatic top-up tools are designed for, adding collateral before liquidation triggers, without the borrower having to watch the market around the clock.

Past performance guarantees nothing, and a five-year window that happens to contain two of the strongest bull years in Bitcoin’s history flatters any long-biased strategy.

Popular on TheStreet Roundtable:

What 2022 reveals about risk

Traditional exchange margin tends to force liquidation at a set price with little warning, while interest keeps compounding daily throughout a crash. A fixed-rate loan with tools like auto top-up avoids that compounding risk and gives borrowers room to react.

Leverage still amplifies both gains and the temptation to hold too long. The honest verdict: this works best for holders with surplus Bitcoin beyond their collateral, who can absorb a drawdown without being forced sellers, and who treat it as a long-hold strategy rather than short-term speculation.

Who actually borrows this way

The typical borrower is often in their late 30s to 60s, an early Bitcoin adopter with meaningful net worth, who treats Bitcoin as long-term capital rather than a trading asset. Seventy-two percent of crypto holders already agree these loans offer convenient access to funds without needing to sell, reinforcing that the barrier is confidence, not comprehension.

A common use case, known as B2X, involves borrowing against Bitcoin specifically to buy more of it, avoiding a sale that gives up future upside. Loan availability may vary based on jurisdiction; B2X, for instance, is not currently permitted in the US and Canada. There is also a tax angle: in most jurisdictions, borrowing against Bitcoin is not a taxable event, while selling it is.

Is it rational?

A rational strategy needs positive expected value, known risk parameters, and a survivable downside. The five-year win rate, fixed cost of carry, risk management tools, and tax efficiency all support the case.

The counterpoint is real too, 2022 was genuinely brutal, and the strategy demands surplus capital beyond what is posted as collateral. Leverage on Bitcoin is not inherently reckless. Reckless leverage is reckless. Based on the five-year record, the outcome comes down to two things: the structure of the loan, and the discipline of the person using it.

Source