Hong Kong — On Thursday, developers focused on Bitcoin’s layer-2 solutions emphasized that the future of cryptocurrency will not revolve around supplanting Bitcoin as “digital gold,” but rather transforming it into a functional asset.
During Consensus Hong Kong 2026, representatives from Citrea, Rootstock Labs, and the investment firm BlockSpaceForce highlighted that Bitcoin’s scaling layers prioritize enabling programmability over merely increasing transaction throughput. Their goal is to evolve Bitcoin into a programmable financial infrastructure.
Gabe Parker, head of business development at Citrea—a zk-rollup platform built atop Bitcoin—explained that the primary objective is to make Bitcoin a productive asset. He noted that the original design of Bitcoin’s base layer did not support complex smart contracts. “The focus lies in integrating existing financial concepts such as decentralized finance (DeFi), lending, and borrowing onto the Bitcoin network,” Parker said. “This approach emphasizes programmability more than scaling.”
Diego Gutierrez Zaldivar, CEO of Rootstock Labs, argued that fixating on the term “layer two” overlooks its broader implications.
“Layer one serves as a store of value; layer two functions as an economic coordination layer; and layer three acts as a scaling solution facilitating payments,” he explained. “We should shift our conversation towards networks designed for economic coordination.”
The panelists also pointed out rising institutional interest in bitcoin-backed lending and yield-generating strategies. Charles Chong from BlockSpaceForce remarked: “Bitcoin has matured into a macro-level financial asset desired by many investors. The next step involves constructing an entire financial ecosystem around it.”
However, trust models remain at the heart of ongoing discussions. Parker criticized Ethereum-based wrapped bitcoin products for their dependence on centralized custodianship mechanisms: “Wrapped bitcoin security typically relies on three-to-five multisignature wallets,” he said. “Such frameworks lack scalability; managing assets worth hundreds of billions or even trillions demands protocol-level trust assumptions instead of counterparty reliance.”
Despite this challenge, institutions tend to proceed cautiously. Chong noted: “Institutions can either engage with regulated counterparties offering legal protections through centralized systems or participate permissionlessly in BTCFi protocols—accepting governance risks inherent in smart contracts.” He added that currently many institutions prefer working with regulated entities due to these considerations.
Gutierrez Zaldivar suggested hybrid compliance approaches might serve as transitional solutions bridging traditional finance with decentralized models but stressed long-term ambitions extend beyond this phase.
“For global relevance beyond being just a store of value,” he stated regarding Bitcoin’s future role within worldwide markets.
The advocates supporting enhanced scalability for Bitcoin believe even modest adoption within decentralized finance could significantly impact both its network dynamics and international financial landscapes over time.
Read more: As DATs Face Pressure, Institutions Could Soon Look to BTCFi for Their Next Strategic Shift
</html