Shark Tank Investor Explains Why He Cut 27 Crypto Bets

• O’Leary exited 27 tokens, holding only Bitcoin and Ethereum for core allocation.
• Regulation delays and the CLARITY Act progress influence institutional crypto participation.
• Energy, permits, and infrastructure now shape crypto investment returns beyond tokens.

Shark Tank Investor Kevin O’Leary explained his crypto portfolio reset this week in a CoinDesk interview. The Shark Tank investor detailed why he exited 27 crypto positions. He said he consolidated into Bitcoin and Ethereum after internal analysis showed most tokens failed to add measurable returns, while regulation delays influenced timing.

O’Leary said the decision followed analyst reviews in early October, before a broader market dip on October 20. He explained that BTC and ETH recovered faster than smaller tokens after the decline. As a result, he kept his crypto allocation near 19 percent, while reducing exposure breadth.

Why O’Leary Now Holds Only Bitcoin and Ethereum

O’Leary said index-style analysis drove the consolidation, not narratives or community support. He said two assets captured more than 97 percent of crypto market volatility and returns. Therefore, he said, additional tokens added compliance burden without improving performance.

He added that institutional allocators prioritize liquidity and operational simplicity. Sovereign funds and pensions, he said, avoid managing dozens of positions under regulatory scrutiny. Consequently, O’Leary described Bitcoin and Ethereum as the only assets large allocators consistently evaluate.

O’Leary also addressed Ethereum’s role in payments infrastructure. He noted that more than 70 percent of stablecoin transactions run on Ethereum, based on industry data. However, he said even that advantage does not guarantee long-term dominance beyond current usage.

Solana, Software, and the Limits of Token Narratives

Turning to competing blockchains, O’Leary addressed claims that Solana could overtake Ethereum. He said Solana faces a “Sisyphean task” because it lacks comparable narrative reach and institutional focus. He added that many chains offer similar technical features, yet fail to gain sustained allocation interest.

O’Leary repeatedly framed blockchains as software products rather than scarce assets. He said allocators rarely reward technical differences without proven liquidity advantages. As a result, he argued that most alternative tokens remain highly correlated with Bitcoin, limiting diversification benefits.

He also discussed private blockchains developed by large institutions. According to O’Leary, some financial firms prefer systems they fully control for security reasons. That approach, he said, could bypass public chains entirely for certain payment and settlement uses.

Power, Permits, and the Push Beyond Tokens

After reducing token exposure, O’Leary said he redirected capital toward energy and infrastructure. He described power access as more valuable than Bitcoin itself, given rising demand from miners and data centers. Notably, he cited projects in Norway, Finland, Alberta, and the United States with sub-six-cent power costs.

O’Leary said land, water, permits, and grid access now define competitive advantage. He explained that permitting delays in jurisdictions like New York forced earlier projects abroad. However, he added that some regions now offer faster approvals, attracting large-scale investment.

He also discussed public and private exposure choices. While he holds equities like Coinbase and Robinhood, he said most infrastructure investments remain private. According to O’Leary, those projects target returns between 11 and 17 percent, driven by energy contracts rather than token prices.

Related: Bitcoin and Ethereum Lead $1.17 Billion Crypto Fund Outflows

Regulation, Stablecoins, and the Clarity Act Timeline

Regulation was important to O’Leary’s outlook for Bitcoin and Ethereum. He said meaningful price appreciation depends on passing U.S. market structure legislation, often called the CLARITY Act. Without it, he argued, major institutions remain sidelined by compliance limits.

O’Leary highlighted stablecoin yield as the primary obstacle. He criticized rules that allow banks to earn interest spreads while restricting similar returns for stablecoin holders. Consequently, he said Coinbase withdrew support until lawmakers address the imbalance.

Despite delays, O’Leary predicted progress soon. He said bipartisan staff negotiations continue, with stablecoin yield dominating discussions. Based on those talks, he estimated the bill could pass by May 15.

O’Leary said disciplined analysis drove his exit from 27 crypto positions, leaving Bitcoin and Ethereum as core holdings. He emphasized software limits, institutional behavior, and regulatory barriers throughout the discussion. He also tied crypto’s future returns to power infrastructure, permits and pending U.S. legislation.