Blockstream Enterprise Custody

Enterprise buying personas

6 refined buyer personas across the institutional custody decision committee. Mapped to a 4-tier ABM account model with buying journey stages, objection handlers, and persona-specific messaging.

March 2026  ·  Strategy research + competitive analysis  ·  6 personas  ·  200 target accounts
Chief Information Security Officer
“Security-First Sarah”
Decision maker
Who they are
  • Owns security architecture and key management policy
  • Reports to CTO or CEO; board-level visibility on custody risk
  • Background in enterprise security, often from TradFi or cloud infrastructure
  • Evaluates vendors on audit trail depth, HSM integration, and incident response
Pain points
  • Single points of failure — most custody solutions rely on one vendor’s proprietary HSM
  • Closed-source risk — can’t audit the code that protects billions in assets
  • Incident response gaps — no proven playbook for crypto-specific breach scenarios
  • Key ceremony complexity — multi-sig ceremonies are error-prone without proper tooling
What they care about
  • Open-source, auditable signing infrastructure
  • Multi-sig architecture with geographically distributed keys
  • SOC 2 Type II and penetration test reports
  • Air-gapped signing options for cold storage
Content that converts
  • Security architecture whitepapers
  • Penetration test summaries and audit reports
  • Comparison: open-source vs. closed-source custody
  • Incident response framework documentation
CFO / Corporate Treasurer
“Bottom-Line Brian”
Budget holder
Who they are
  • Controls the budget for custody infrastructure
  • Increasingly responsible for Bitcoin treasury strategy (MicroStrategy effect)
  • Needs to justify custody spend to the board in terms of risk reduction
  • Evaluates total cost of custody including insurance, operations, and compliance
Pain points
  • Hidden costs — custody fees, transaction fees, insurance premiums, and integration costs add up
  • Insurance gaps — most custody insurance covers only a fraction of AUM
  • Vendor lock-in — proprietary systems make switching costly and risky
  • Board education — explaining Bitcoin custody risk to non-technical board members
What they care about
  • Total cost of ownership vs. competitors
  • Insurance coverage and proof of reserves
  • No per-transaction fees that scale with AUM
  • Clear ROI framework for custody spend
Content that converts
  • Total cost of custody calculator / comparison
  • Board presentation template for Bitcoin custody
  • Insurance coverage analysis across providers
  • Case study: custody cost reduction via multi-sig
Head of Digital Assets
“Champion Charlie”
Internal champion
Who they are
  • Hired to build the crypto/digital assets practice at a TradFi institution
  • Often a former crypto-native who moved to institutional side
  • Must navigate internal politics and skepticism about Bitcoin
  • Your primary point of contact; drives the evaluation process internally
Pain points
  • Internal resistance — legacy teams skeptical of Bitcoin; needs ammunition to sell internally
  • Vendor sprawl — evaluating 5–10 custody providers with different architectures
  • Speed vs. process — crypto moves fast, institutional procurement does not
  • Credibility gap — needs a vendor with both crypto-native depth and institutional polish
What they care about
  • Vendor credibility (Blockstream’s Bitcoin pedigree)
  • Easy-to-share materials for internal stakeholders
  • Fast proof-of-concept to show internal momentum
  • Roadmap alignment with their 12–24 month plan
Content that converts
  • Internal business case template
  • Vendor comparison matrix (Blockstream vs. competitors)
  • Quick-start POC documentation
  • Executive briefing deck they can present internally
CTO / VP Engineering
“Architect Anika”
Technical evaluator
Who they are
  • Owns the technical architecture and integration decisions
  • Evaluates API design, SDK quality, and developer experience
  • Cares deeply about reliability, uptime SLAs, and disaster recovery
  • Will block the deal if the technology doesn’t meet engineering standards
Pain points
  • Integration complexity — custody APIs that don’t fit existing infrastructure
  • Uptime anxiety — custody downtime during market volatility is catastrophic
  • Black-box signing — can’t verify what happens inside proprietary HSMs
  • Testing limitations — no sandbox or testnet environment for custody integrations
What they care about
  • Clean API design, comprehensive SDKs, good documentation
  • 99.99% uptime SLA with transparent status page
  • Open-source components they can audit and extend
  • Testnet/sandbox for risk-free integration testing
Content that converts
  • API documentation and SDK quickstart guides
  • Architecture diagrams and integration patterns
  • Uptime and incident history transparency reports
  • GitHub repos and open-source contribution activity
Chief Compliance Officer
“Regulatory Rita”
Gatekeeper
Who they are
  • Responsible for regulatory compliance across all jurisdictions
  • Must sign off on any custody solution before procurement can proceed
  • Tracks evolving regulations: MiCA (EU), SEC guidance (US), MAS (Singapore)
  • Focuses on audit trails, reporting, and jurisdiction-specific requirements
Pain points
  • Regulatory fragmentation — EU, US, and Asian frameworks all differ and keep changing
  • Audit trail gaps — custody providers don’t generate compliance-ready reports
  • Proof of reserves — no standardized way to prove holdings to regulators
  • Liability ambiguity — unclear who is liable when multi-party custody fails
What they care about
  • Immutable audit logs for every signing event
  • Automated compliance reporting by jurisdiction
  • Clear custody liability framework
  • Proof of reserves that regulators will accept
Content that converts
  • Regulatory compliance guide by jurisdiction
  • Audit log sample exports and reporting templates
  • Legal opinion letters on custody liability
  • MiCA / SEC / MAS readiness checklist
Board Member / Investment Committee
“Fiduciary Frank”
Final approver
Who they are
  • Has fiduciary responsibility; ultimate sign-off on custody decisions
  • Limited technical knowledge of Bitcoin; relies on internal team’s recommendation
  • Cares about reputation risk, regulatory exposure, and asset protection
  • Reads executive summaries, not whitepapers
Pain points
  • Reputation risk — a custody failure or breach would be career-ending
  • Knowledge gap — doesn’t fully understand the technology but must approve it
  • Precedent anxiety — few institutional peers to benchmark against
  • Headline risk — “Company loses $X in crypto” is their nightmare scenario
What they care about
  • Brand credibility and track record of the vendor
  • Insurance coverage and risk mitigation framework
  • Peer adoption (which other institutions use this?)
  • Executive summary they can digest in 5 minutes
Content that converts
  • One-page executive brief on Blockstream custody
  • Peer adoption case studies (anonymized if needed)
  • Risk mitigation framework and insurance summary
  • Adam Back / leadership credibility materials

200 target accounts segmented into 4 tiers. Each tier gets a different level of marketing investment and personalization.

Tier Segment Accounts Primary persona Approach
TIER 1 Crypto-Native Institutions 25 CTO, CISO 1:1 hyper-personalized. Dedicated campaigns, custom content, direct exec engagement.
TIER 2 TradFi Crypto Adopters 75 Head of Digital Assets, CIO 1:Few cluster campaigns. Segment by institution type (banks, asset managers, funds).
TIER 3 Financial Infrastructure 50 Head of Product, COO 1:Many scaled. LinkedIn ABM, content syndication, webinar invites.
TIER 4 Corporate Treasury 50 CFO, Treasurer 1:Many scaled. Treasury-specific content, cost comparison tools, CFO peer events.

Enterprise custody is a committee decision. Each persona plays a different role depending on the account tier.

Persona Tier 1 (Crypto-Native) Tier 2 (TradFi) Tier 3–4 (Infra / Treasury)
CISO Primary decision maker Key evaluator Consulted late-stage
CFO / Treasurer Budget sign-off Budget sign-off Primary decision maker
Head of Digital Assets Already exists; champion Newly hired; building case Often doesn’t exist yet
CTO / VP Eng Technical veto power Technical veto power Leads evaluation
CCO Gatekeeper Gatekeeper (strongest) Gatekeeper
Board / IC Rubber stamp (trusts team) Active approval required Active approval required
Stage 1
Problem recognition
Triggers
  • Board asks “how are our Bitcoin holdings secured?”
  • Competitor announces Bitcoin custody offering
  • Regulatory body issues new custody guidance
  • Client demands Bitcoin exposure
Active persona
  • Head of Digital Assets recognizes the gap
  • CFO gets questions from the board
  • CCO flags regulatory changes
Content needed
  • Industry reports and market sizing
  • Thought leadership on institutional custody
  • Regulatory landscape overviews
Stage 2
Solution exploration
Activities
  • Google searches for “institutional Bitcoin custody”
  • Peer conversations at conferences
  • RFI sent to 5–10 vendors
  • Internal working group formed
Active persona
  • Head of Digital Assets leads vendor search
  • CTO evaluates architecture options
  • CISO defines security requirements
Content needed
  • Vendor comparison matrices
  • Architecture overview documentation
  • Security model whitepapers
Stage 3
Requirements & evaluation
Activities
  • Shortlist reduced to 2–3 vendors
  • Technical POC / sandbox testing
  • Security audit and compliance review
  • Reference calls with existing customers
Active persona
  • CTO runs technical evaluation
  • CISO conducts security review
  • CCO validates regulatory compliance
Content needed
  • POC environment and sandbox access
  • SOC 2 reports and pen test summaries
  • Customer reference stories
Stage 4
Business case & approval
Activities
  • Internal business case presentation
  • Board / investment committee review
  • Legal and procurement negotiation
  • Insurance and liability assessment
Active persona
  • CFO presents cost justification
  • Head of Digital Assets presents strategic case
  • Board gives final approval
Content needed
  • Executive one-pager and ROI framework
  • Board presentation template
  • Total cost of custody comparison
Stage 5
Implementation & expansion
Activities
  • Onboarding and key ceremony setup
  • Integration with existing systems
  • Phased migration of assets
  • Expand to additional business units
Active persona
  • CTO leads integration
  • CISO oversees key ceremonies
  • Head of Digital Assets drives expansion
Content needed
  • Implementation guides and runbooks
  • Key ceremony documentation
  • Success metrics and QBR templates
“How do we know Blockstream won’t disappear in 5 years?”
Persona: Board / CFO  ·  Response: Blockstream has been building Bitcoin infrastructure since 2014. Led by Adam Back (inventor of Hashcash, cited in the Bitcoin whitepaper). Profitable, well-funded, and building the core infrastructure the Bitcoin network runs on — satellite network, Liquid sidechain, mining operations. If Bitcoin exists, Blockstream exists.
“We need SOC 2. Do you have it?”
Persona: CCO / CISO  ·  Response: Position compliance readiness and the open-source advantage — closed-source competitors ask you to trust their SOC 2 report. Blockstream lets you audit the actual code. Provide available audit reports, pen test summaries, and compliance documentation. Map to specific regulatory frameworks (MiCA, SEC, MAS).
“Coinbase Custody / BitGo already has 80% of the market. Why switch?”
Persona: Head of Digital Assets / CTO  ·  Response: Market share ≠ best architecture. Coinbase and BitGo use proprietary, closed-source signing infrastructure you cannot audit. Blockstream’s multi-sig architecture eliminates the single-vendor risk that concentrated custody creates. You’re not switching — you’re adding a security layer.
“What happens if a key holder is compromised?”
Persona: CISO / CTO  ·  Response: Multi-sig by design means no single key holder can move funds. Geographically distributed keys with configurable quorum thresholds (e.g., 3-of-5). Key rotation and recovery procedures are built into the ceremony process. Compare to single-HSM solutions where one compromise means total loss.
“This is too complex for our team. We don’t have crypto expertise.”
Persona: CTO / CFO  ·  Response: Offer white-glove onboarding: dedicated solutions engineer, guided key ceremonies, integration support. Provide sandbox environment for risk-free testing. Highlight that multi-sig is conceptually simpler than it sounds — it’s just “two keys to open the vault” applied to Bitcoin.
“Our board will never approve a Bitcoin-only vendor. What about Ethereum?”
Persona: Board / Head of Digital Assets  ·  Response: Bitcoin represents 60%+ of institutional crypto AUM and is the only digital asset with ETF approval at scale. Getting Bitcoin custody right is the highest-leverage first step. Blockstream’s Liquid Network also supports tokenized assets. Position as “Bitcoin-first” not “Bitcoin-only.”
Lead messages by persona
CISO → “The only institutional custody solution where you can audit every line of signing code. Open-source multi-sig, air-gapped options, no single points of failure.”
CFO → “Institutional-grade Bitcoin custody without per-transaction fees that scale with your AUM. Transparent pricing, no vendor lock-in, built by the team behind Bitcoin’s core infrastructure.”
Head of Digital Assets → “Built by the people who build Bitcoin. Give your internal stakeholders the credibility story they need — from the company founded by Adam Back, cited in the Bitcoin whitepaper.”
CTO → “Clean APIs, open-source signing, testnet sandbox, and 99.99% uptime SLA. Custody infrastructure that meets the same engineering standards as your core platform.”
CCO → “Immutable audit trails for every signing event. Compliance reporting mapped to MiCA, SEC, and MAS frameworks. Proof of reserves your regulators will accept.”
Board → “Trusted by institutions since 2014. Led by the cryptographer cited in Bitcoin’s founding document. Your fiduciary duty, met.”
Open-source signing infrastructure
Multi-sig with no single point of failure
Adam Back / Bitcoin whitepaper credibility
Liquid Network for tokenized assets
Air-gapped signing options
No per-transaction AUM fees
10+ years of Bitcoin infrastructure
Geographically distributed key storage
Funnel stage Format Topics Primary persona
Awareness Industry report, thought leadership State of Institutional Custody 2026, regulatory landscape Head of Digital Assets, CFO
Consideration Whitepapers, webinars, comparison guides Open-source vs. closed-source custody, multi-sig architecture CISO, CTO
Evaluation POC sandbox, security docs, case studies SOC 2 reports, pen test summaries, reference calls CTO, CISO, CCO
Decision Executive briefs, ROI calculators, proposals Total cost comparison, board presentation template CFO, Board
Expansion QBR templates, success metrics, roadmap Usage reports, new feature rollouts, case study co-creation Head of Digital Assets, CTO