Crypto Funds in the Cayman Islands

Published: 1 Jul 2025
Type: Insight

As one of the leading offshore financial centres, home to approximately 70% of the world’s offshore investment funds and with an absence of any direct taxation on companies or individuals, the Cayman Islands has become an attractive destination for technology entrepreneurs. The introduction of framework legislation regulating virtual asset service providers (the VASP Act) in 2020 attracted a number of new entrants to the Cayman market.


Cayman’s flexible business-orientated legislation enabled the Islands to pivot away from retail crowdfunded models towards security tokens and stablecoins, which provided greater value stability and more predictable investment returns. This same flexibility means that Cayman is already taking advantage of the latest shift towards securitising common assets and decentralised finance (DeFi) products.

Importantly, there are no restrictions on the types of assets in which a Cayman Islands fund may invest, including virtual assets. The usual considerations should be addressed including the need for regulation of the fund with the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority as a mutual fund (open ended) or private fund (closed ended) unless an exemption applies (see our overview for further details). A virtual asset fund should consider the need for compliance with the VASP Act which may require the fund to register or obtain a license if it provides virtual asset services which fall outside traditional fund activities, such as the issuance of virtual assets, custody of virtual assets or the transfer/exchange of virtual assets, for or on behalf of others.

What kind of asset is a virtual asset?

The VASP Act defines virtual assets as “a digital representation of value that can be digitally traded or transferred and can be used for payment or investment purposes but does not include a digital representation of fiat currencies”. This wide definition captures all cryptocurrencies, security tokens, utility tokens or other digital assets that are tradeable or transferable, with the exception of digital fiat currencies.

Whether virtual assets are considered “property” may be relevant to a Cayman Islands fund in circumstances where the fund may want to grant security over its virtual assets or where the fund needs to pursue claims against its custodians for the recovery of its assets.  Where security is to be taken over virtual assets appropriate measures, such as taking custody of private keys, would be advisable to secure these charges effectively.

Where the equity interests of a Cayman fund are tokenised and the fund’s investors want to grant security over those tokens security should also be taken over the underlying equity interests by way of equitable share mortgages or charges.

Subscribing and redeeming in kind using virtual assets

This is permissible in Cayman but any subscription made to a Cayman fund is required to be subject to detailed customer due diligence (CDD) processes. The Cayman Islands has long been committed to implementing best international practices and is compliant with the anti-money laundering and anti-terrorist financing requirements of the OECD and FATF. As a member of the Caribbean FATF, the Cayman Islands implements recommendations promulgated by the FATF. All Cayman Islands-incorporated entities are subject to the Proceeds of Crime Act which sets out the principal money laundering offences. Certain “relevant” businesses (which would include registered mutual funds, registered private funds, VASPs, entities registered or licensed for investment management or advisory services and other entities thought to be at a higher risk of money laundering) are further subject to the Anti-Money Laundering Regulations which prescribe certain identification, record keeping and internal control procedures for such businesses.

Businesses in the Cayman Islands need to adopt a risk-based approach to the collection of CDD information. Under the risk-based approach, the latest guidelines from the FATF permit the digital verification of identities and receipt of electronic copies of documents instead of traditional “wet ink” paper-based processes. Given Cayman’s stringent CDD requirements, a number of service providers have adopted technologies to enable the onboarding of clients and the collection of CDD information digitally.

Trades on virtual asset exchanges generally require each participant to have completed KYC checks although certain exchanges are more stringent on these requirements than others and Cayman funds may want to limit the receipt of subscription funds from exchanges to only those with strong anti-money laundering policies.

Whether subscriptions in specie are transferred via virtual asset exchanges or from digital asset wallets additional information may be sought by a Cayman virtual asset fund to evidence the source of investor funds including tracing transactions back to fiat currencies and evidence of sources of investor wealth.

The redemption of an equity interest in a Cayman fund will require the same considerations relating to CDD as a subscription in kind. Full investor CDD should be obtained before redemption payments are made whether in cash or in kind by the transfer of virtual assets and payments should be made only to accounts or wallets in the investor’s name.

Tokenised funds

Tokenised funds have proved increasingly popular in recent years. In a tokenised fund, an investor’s interest is represented by a cryptographic token, as opposed to shares or other interests or units offered to investors in a more traditional fund structure. Cayman’s company legislation and the wide choice of corporate vehicles available allows for a great deal of commercial flexibility and lends itself well to tokenised equity issuances.

Cayman’s Companies Act and Exempted Limited Partnership Act each provide flexibility for Cayman funds to determine the manner for passing investor resolutions and the process for transferring their equity securities, both of which can be conducted electronically, with the instruments of transfer completed digitally. Under Cayman law, legal title to a share or exempted limited partnership interest is transferred when the name of the transferee is entered into the fund’s register of members or partners. For a Cayman-exempted company or exempted limited partnership that register may be held electronically, provided the company can produce legible evidence of its contents and, consequently, could be held encrypted on a private blockchain and accessed when required. Smart contracts built into the tokens can govern those transfers once any pre-set conditions have been satisfied and also ensure that the register of members or partners is updated simultaneously with any transfer. Regulatory concerns over AML, CDD and jurisdictional restrictions can be alleviated in the same way and a tokenised fund is likely to appoint a smart contract auditor and/or a third party CDD service provider to assist with the CDD process for subscribers.

Depending on the redemption rights relating to the equity interests, token holders may redeem their tokens for cash and/or payments in-kind (or a combination thereof) or transfer their tokens with the consent of the fund’s operators. The attraction for holders of these tokens is that they also have the potential to offer liquidity through an exchange.

Alternatively a Cayman tokenised fund may facilitate tokenisation through depository receipts rather than the equity securities themselves. In such cases, the Cayman fund would issue the equity securities to a licensed depository which in turn would issue tokenised depository receipts, representing those equity securities, to investors. The depository will hold the underlying equity securities on trust for token holders on the terms set out in the depository agreements.

The recently published Virtual Asset (Service Providers) (Amendment) Bill confirms that virtual assets as defined under the VASP Act does not include the equity interests of Cayman registered funds and anticipates that the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority will issue a statement of guidance or rule in relation to Cayman registered funds that issue tokenized equity interests.

Custody of virtual assets

Cryptocurrency exchanges remain among the most popular digital asset custodians in the industry offering sophisticated custody solutions across multiple digital asset classes. Many of these exchanges operate under comprehensive regulatory frameworks across global jurisdictions. In additional traditional financial players such as established banks are also beginning to offer virtual asset custody services bringing substantial resources and custody expertise.  Some institutions outsource to sub-custodians for virtual assets whilst others maintain direct control.

Security of digital assets held in custody on exchanges or through custody wallets are at risk from malware, hacking, scams and phishing attacks and robust cybersecurity should be an essential pre-requisite in the selection by a Cayman fund of custody service providers.

Valuation of virtual assets

Managers of Cayman funds may trade across multiple exchanges and counterparties in private transactions and also directly on chain through decentralised finance protocols. In these circumstances virtual assets trading and pricing information for the fund will need to be collated from multiple sources and analysed through traditional accounting principles that are capable of audit. Order management systems might be used to access and transact across multiple exchanges and protocols via established accounts at multiple trading venues providing managers trading access without the need to open their own individual accounts.

Due to the potential for extreme volatility in the value of virtual assets, Cayman funds should provide for their operators and/or managers to adopt methods of valuation other than pricing obtained through the above sources if they consider that it would better reflect the fair value of those assets.

Appleby

With technological innovation transforming businesses and markets and with a number of offshore jurisdictions vying to become technology hubs, Appleby led the way amongst the offshore firms by establishing a dedicated, multi-disciplinary Global Technology and Innovation Group in 2017 to support leading technology companies and start-ups across a broad range of emerging technologies.

Working closely with the Technology Group, our Cayman Investment Funds team has carved out a true niche in the digital assets space making Appleby the go-to firm for the establishment of funds investing in cryptographic assets, and the creation of tokenised funds and other bespoke pooled structures in this fast-moving space.

Share
More publications
Appleby-Website-Insolvency-and-Restructuring
13 Aug 2026

Restructurings Frustrating Creditors And The Enforcement Of Arbitral Awards: The English Court's Decision In State Oil Company Of Azerbaijan V Mansimov Abstract

The English High Court has issued a significant judgment on the enforcement of arbitral awards, the reach of section 423 of the Insolvency Act 1986 and the limits of the Marex tort, with potential relevance to the Cayman Islands' Fraudulent Dispositions Act.

Appleby-Website-Regulatory-Practice
7 Aug 2026

New CIMA Rules on AML/CFT/CPF Compliance and Financial Sanctions Issued in the Cayman Islands

On 20 July 2026, further to an industry consultation, the Cayman Islands Monetary Authority (CIMA) published the following two new Rules set to introduce binding risk management, governance, sanctions screening and other compliance requirements for regulated financial service providers in the Cayman Islands: (i) Rule on Effective Compliance Programmes for the Prevention and Detection of Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Proliferation Financing for Financial Services Providers (AML Rule); and (ii) Rule on Compliance with Financial Sanctions and Targeted Financial Sanctions (Sanctions Rule and, together with the AML Rule, the Rules). All CIMA-regulated financial services providers, including investment funds, insurers and reinsurers that are conducting ‘relevant financial business’ as defined under the Proceeds of Crime Act (Revised) (POCA) (FSP), are encouraged to review and update their documented framework of AML/CFT/CPF and sanctions compliance policies, procedures, controls, oversight and reporting mechanisms (Compliance Programmes) to ensure compliance with the Rules by the time they come into force on 18 September 2026.

JPLs, Directors and Arbitration: Grand Court Clarifies the Scope of Provisional Liquidators' Powers
5 Aug 2026

Good faith in action, not just belief: the UK Supreme Court’s decision in Saxon Woods Investments Limited v Costa and its significance in the Cayman Islands

May a company director depart from a strategy his board has agreed, in the sincere belief that he knows a better route to the company’s success? In Saxon Woods Investments Limited v Costa [2026] UKSC 21, the Supreme Court held that, whatever the answer, a director cannot pursue his own strategy by concealing it from, and misleading, his fellow directors. The Court confirmed that the good faith duty is not confined to a director’s sincerely held view of the company’s best interests; it also governs the means by which the director acts. The decision is an authoritative statement of the content of the fiduciary duty of loyalty, and is likely to be influential in the Cayman Islands. The decision will interest directors, those who advise or appoint them, and stakeholders affected by directors’ conduct.

Website-Code-Cayman-2
30 Jul 2026

Contingent Creditors, Standing And The Winding Up Jurisdiction: Analysing Re Petrosaudi International

The Cayman Islands Court of Appeal has delivered a highly significant judgment in Re PetroSaudi International.[1] The Court clarified the circumstances in which an alleged contingent creditor will have standing to petition to wind up a company under section 94(1)(b) of the Companies Act, and confirmed that there is no jurisdiction to make a winding up order on an ex parte without notice basis.[2] Our article analyses the Court of Appeal’s decision, and considers its implications for insolvency practitioners.

Website-Code-Cayman-1
30 Jul 2026

Final Means Final: Wei v Wang and the Common Law Enforcement of Foreign Judgments in the Cayman Islands

English Court Reaffirms Pro-Enforcement Approach to Foreign Judgments In Wei v Wang [2026] EWHC 1892 (Comm), the Court confirmed that exceptional avenues of review do not undermine the finality of a judgment and reiterated the limited scope of the natural justice defence.

JPLs, Directors and Arbitration: Grand Court Clarifies the Scope of Provisional Liquidators' Powers
28 Jul 2026

Drelle Overturned in Latest UK Supreme Court Decision

The United Kingdom Supreme Court in its recent decision in Drelle v Servis-Terminal LLC [2026] UKSC 29 (Drelle SC) has overturned the controversial decision of the English Court of Appeal in Servis-Terminal LLC v Drelle [2025] EWCA Civ 62 (Drelle CA), and in doing so has provided welcome clarity on the effect of unrecognised foreign judgments in cross-border bankruptcy and insolvency contexts. This is likely to have a wide-reaching impact – not only in the UK but also offshore – and particularly in the British Virgin Islands following the recent decision in JJW Hotels & Resorts Holding Inc v Rhodes (BVIHCM2025/0296) (JJW Hotels) (which relied heavily on Drelle CA), and in the Cayman Islands where previous authorities had recognised the ability, in the corporate context, for petitioners to present winding up petitions on the basis of an unrecognised foreign judgment.

JPLs, Directors and Arbitration: Grand Court Clarifies the Scope of Provisional Liquidators' Powers
24 Jul 2026

Thalassa Investments LP: Section 22 and Specific Discovery - Strategic Considerations for Limited Partners Seeking Information and Documents

In Thalassa Investments LP [2026] CIGC (FSD) 32, the Grand Court refused an application by limited partner petitioners for specific discovery from the general partner in just and equitable proceedings to wind up a Cayman Islands ELP. The ruling was against the backdrop of serious lack of probity allegations made against the general partner by the petitioners. Notwithstanding those allegations, the Grand Court declined to make orders requiring discovery of various categories of documents to be used at trial.   The ruling brings into focus the multiple routes potentially open to limited partners seeking information and/or documents from an ELP where there are allegations of mismanagement by the general partner. The limited partner may issue substantive proceedings (or, as in this case, present a just and equitable winding up petition) against the general partner and partnership, and then obtain documents through the usual discovery process. Alternatively, the limited partner may pursue its substantive right to true and full information under section 22 of the Exempted Limited Partnership Act first in order to help inform the bringing of a substantive claim, as was the approach in the Neoma (Abraaj) and the Port Fund litigation. Thalassa illustrates that the nature of the information sought, who holds it, and the legal basis on which disclosure is sought are all highly relevant to the outcome. The decision also highlights that section 22 and discovery serve different purposes, are governed by different legal tests and can produce different outcomes. The strategic question is not whether section 22 or the discovery process may be preferable in the abstract, but which legal framework best aligns with the limited partner’s objectives and the nature of the information sought.

Appleby-Website-Banking-and-Asset-Finance
13 Jul 2026

Guide to Loans & Secured Financing in the Cayman Islands 2026

This guide provides local insights into the legal and regulatory framework governing bank lending and finance. It covers key topics including bank loans versus debt securities, common forms of bank loan facilities, bridge financing, the roles of agents, trustees and lenders, and governing laws. It also examines the regulatory landscape, including capital, liquidity and disclosure requirements, the use of loan proceeds, cross-border lending, and interest rate and currency restrictions. In addition, the guide explores security interests and guarantees, the impact of fraudulent conveyance and similar doctrines on bank loan financing structures, intercreditor arrangements, loan terms and structures, and recent market developments.

Appleby-Website-Insolvency-and-Restructuring
9 Jul 2026

A Warning to Litigants Seeking Funding: English High Court Clarifies the Limits of Litigation Privilege

Important for Cayman litigants, funders and attorneys given the growing use of third-party funding in disputes.