MiCA Insurance for CASPs: Who Offers It, What It Costs, and How to Choose
Published by Mintara Labs | February 25, 2026
So you've decided that insurance is the right way to meet your Article 67 prudential safeguard requirements. Great. Now what? Who do you actually call?
The honest answer: your options are more limited than you'd think. The market for MiCA-compliant insurance is real but still young. Here's a practical guide to navigating it.
The Carrier Landscape
The number of insurance carriers willing to underwrite crypto-specific risks is small. Globally, roughly seven carriers have meaningful capacity in this space. Most operate through Lloyd's of London or the London specialty market.
It's not that insurers don't see the opportunity. It's that crypto-asset risks are genuinely hard to underwrite. The loss data is thin, the technology keeps changing, the regulatory framework is brand new, and the potential for correlated losses makes traditional actuarial models less reliable.
That said, MiCA itself is changing the dynamic. As Elmore Insurance Brokers pointed out, MiCA has made crypto-asset risk more appealing to insurers by creating a framework for conducting crypto business in a regulated environment. Several major European insurers have already announced new products built specifically for MiCA requirements [1].
What's Available Right Now
The most prominent product out there is Marsh's MiCAssure, which launched in May 2024 in partnership with Lloyd's and London market insurers. MiCAssure covers third-party claims from misrepresentations or misleading statements, obligations of confidentiality, business interruption, legal and regulatory obligations, and gross negligence in safeguarding clients' crypto-assets and funds [2].
Marsh is the world's largest insurance broker. They've got global reach and deep carrier relationships. For large CASPs with significant AUM and complex risk profiles, they're a natural fit.
But here's what smaller CASPs discover pretty quickly: the big brokers' minimum thresholds and service models are built for mid-to-large enterprises. If you're a Class 1 CASP with EUR 50,000 in safeguard requirements, or a small exchange doing EUR 30 million in annual transactions, you might find that the large brokers just aren't set up to serve you efficiently.
The Gap for Smaller CASPs
This is where a lot of smaller CASPs get stuck. They need a MiCA-compliant policy. Their existing corporate broker doesn't have carrier relationships for crypto coverage. The big specialty brokers are focused on larger accounts. And July 1 keeps getting closer.
The practical solution: work with specialist brokers who have established relationships with the carriers that actually write crypto insurance. These brokers operate at Lloyd's and in the London market, and they're increasingly focused on MiCA as a growth area [1].
What Affects Your Premium
If you're budgeting for MiCA insurance, here are the main things that will affect your price:
Your service class. A Class 1 CASP doing advisory work only (EUR 50,000 minimum capital) has a simpler risk profile than a Class 2 or 3 provider running custody and exchange operations (EUR 125,000-150,000 minimum) [3].
Whether you custody assets. This is the big one. MiCA puts strict liability on crypto-custodians for the loss of crypto-assets or the means of access to them as a result of an incident attributable to the CASP. This liability goes even further than what a depositary faces under AIFMD [4]. Insurers price this carefully.
Your AUM and transaction volume. More assets and higher volumes mean more exposure. Premiums scale with that.
Your security infrastructure. Carriers will want to know about your key management, your hot/cold wallet setup, multi-sig arrangements, and incident response procedures.
Your jurisdiction. Some NCAs are more prescriptive about what they expect from insurance policies than others [5].
The deductible you're willing to take. Higher deductibles lower your premium but mean you need more own funds to cover the retention.
How to Evaluate a Policy
Not every policy marketed as "MiCA-compliant" actually meets Article 67's requirements. Before you sign anything, check these things:
Does the policy explicitly cover all the risk categories in Article 67(5) and (6)? That includes breach of legal obligations, failure to act honestly and fairly, confidentiality breaches, conflict-of-interest failures, business disruption, system failures, gross negligence in safeguarding assets, and custody liability under Article 75(8) where applicable [6].
Does it cover all EU territories where you offer services? Is the term at least one year with a 90-day cancellation notice? Is the insurer authorised under EU or national law? Can the policy be disclosed on your website? These are all requirements written right into the regulation [6].
And most importantly: will your NCA accept it? Before you finalise anything, check with your national competent authority that they're happy with the policy structure and the insurer.
The Timeline You Should Plan For
From first conversation with a broker to signed policy in hand, expect four to eight weeks for a straightforward placement. More complex situations involving custody, multiple jurisdictions, or larger AUM may take longer.
That means if you want insurance as part of your MiCA application and you're targeting July 1 authorisation, you should be talking to a broker now.
Mintara Labs connects European CASPs with specialist Lloyd's and London market brokers for Article 67 insurance placement. Get in touch at sree@mintaralabs.xyz.
Sources
-
Elmore Insurance Brokers, "MiCA in 2025 and Insurance: What You Need to Know" (April 2025)
-
Marsh, "Marsh Creates Unique Insurance Solution for Crypto-Asset Service Providers to Comply with Forthcoming EU Regulation" (May 2024)
-
New Balkans Law Office, "MiCA: CASP Authorisation, Governance & Liability Explained" (May 2025)
-
Freshfields, "Digital Asset Protection: A First Look at Client Asset Rules under MiCA"
-
Hogan Lovells, "MiCA CASP Authorisations: ESMA Recommendations in Peer Review Report"
-
Regulation (EU) 2023/1114, Article 67 - Full text via mica.wtf