Jeff Zylstra Of UpTrade On The 5 Things You Need To Understand In Order To Successfully Invest In Cryptocurrency
Finance looks numerical from the outside, but in practice it is deeply human. Fear, confidence, impatience, and uncertainty all affect what people do with their money.
As a part of this series, we had the pleasure to interview Jeff Zylstra.
Jeff Zylstra is the Founder and CEO of UpTrade, a dedicated crypto brokerage built around a relationship-led model. A qualified stockbroker with over a decade of experience in digital assets, Jeff previously built the brokerage desk for one of the world’s largest cryptocurrency brokers. He founded UpTrade to give investors clearer research, disciplined risk management, secure execution, and direct access to experienced human brokers.
Thank you so much for joining us in this interview series! Before we dig in, our readers would like to get to know you a bit. Can you tell us a little about your backstory and how you grew up?
I tend to keep my family and early personal life fairly private, but the part of my backstory that shaped my career is that I was always more interested in how decisions are made than in simply watching prices move. Finance looks numerical from the outside, but in practice it is deeply human. Fear, confidence, impatience, and uncertainty all affect what people do with their money.
I came into cryptocurrency through markets and brokerage rather than through the purely technical side. Becoming a qualified stockbroker gave me a strong grounding in research, execution, risk, and client responsibility. When I moved deeper into digital assets, I saw enormous potential, but I also saw a market where many investors were expected to navigate complex products, security decisions, and extreme volatility alone.
I later built the brokerage desk for one of the world’s largest cryptocurrency brokers. That experience showed me both what professional crypto investing could look like and where the client experience was falling short. In 2023, I founded UpTrade to build the model I believed investors needed: clear information, direct human support, disciplined execution, and a relationship with someone who understands their portfolio rather than a support ticket with an anonymous platform.
Is there a particular book, film, or podcast that made a significant impact on you? Can you share a story or explain why it resonated with you so much?
Rather than name a title for the sake of having one, the body of work that has influenced me most is the work around investor psychology and market cycles. The recurring lesson is that intelligence and information are not enough. People can understand an asset and still make a poor decision because they are reacting to fear, greed, or social pressure.
That idea resonated with me because I have watched it play out repeatedly in cryptocurrency. During a strong market, people often convince themselves that risk has disappeared. During a downturn, the same people may feel that the entire asset class has no future. Neither conclusion is usually based on a calm review of the facts. It is the emotional environment speaking.
That is why I spend so much time thinking about process. A written investment thesis, a sensible position size, secure custody, and a clear review or exit plan may sound less exciting than predicting the next market move, but those are the things that help an investor remain rational when the market is not.
Is there a particular story that inspired you to pursue your particular career path? We’d love to hear it.
The turning point was not one dramatic event. It was the repeated experience of watching capable people struggle with a market that was built for self-service.
On a crypto brokerage desk, I saw investors moving meaningful amounts of money while dealing with fragmented exchanges, banking friction, unclear pricing, custody questions, and very limited human support. Many were not looking for someone to make every decision for them. They simply wanted a knowledgeable person who could explain what was happening, execute properly, and be accountable when something went wrong.
That gap stayed with me. Traditional stockbroking had long understood the value of a relationship between an investor and a broker, but much of crypto had moved in the opposite direction. It had powerful technology, yet the client was often left alone at the exact moment the decision became complicated.
I founded UpTrade because I believed the industry did not need another anonymous trading interface. It needed a more mature service model around the technology. That idea still guides how we work today.
Can you share a story about the funniest mistake you made when you were first starting? Can you tell us what lesson you learned from that?
One of my early mistakes was assuming that the more detail I gave someone, the more helpful I was being. I could take a fairly simple question and answer it with a full explanation of market structure, liquidity, execution, and risk. Technically, the answer was correct. Practically, I had made the person work far too hard to find the point.
I remember finishing one of those explanations and realizing from the other person’s expression that I had answered every question except the one they had actually asked. It was a useful lesson in humility.
Since then, I have tried to lead with the clearest answer first. The detail can follow when it is useful. In finance, expertise is not demonstrated by making a subject sound complicated. It is demonstrated by helping someone understand what matters, what does not, and what decision they are actually making.
That lesson has shaped the way I speak with clients and the way we build products at UpTrade. Clarity is part of risk management. When people do not understand a decision, they are more likely to make it for the wrong reason.
None of us are able to achieve success without some help along the way. Is there a particular person who you are grateful towards who helped get you to where you are? Can you share a story about that?
I cannot honestly reduce it to one person. I am grateful to the experienced brokers, traders, compliance professionals, and clients who trusted me with responsibility early in my career.
The people who helped me most were often the ones who challenged my thinking rather than simply agreeing with it. On a brokerage desk, you learn quickly that a confident opinion is not the same as a well-supported decision. Senior people would ask simple questions: What is the downside? What would prove your view wrong? How liquid is the position when everyone wants to leave at once? Those questions became part of the way I think.
I am also grateful to clients who were candid about what they found difficult. Some of the best ideas behind UpTrade came from listening to people describe the frustration of moving money, understanding custody, getting support, or trying to separate useful research from market noise.
The lesson for me is that good businesses are rarely built from one person’s insight. They are built by paying close attention to the people doing the work and the people experiencing the problem.
Are you working on any exciting new projects now? How do you think that will help people?
A major focus for us is continuing to develop UpTrade Alpha, our research platform. Crypto investors have access to an extraordinary amount of information, but volume is not the same as clarity. The market moves around the clock, narratives change quickly, and social media often rewards certainty rather than accuracy.
We are building Alpha to help investors filter that noise and make research more practical. That means combining market data, structured analysis, and technology with the judgment of people who have traded through different market cycles. The aim is not to give people a magic signal. It is to help them understand why an asset is moving, what risks may be present, and how a development fits into a broader investment thesis.
The platform was recently recognised at Paris Blockchain Week, which was encouraging, but the more important measure is whether it improves the quality of decisions. Good research should slow people down at the right moment. It should help them ask better questions before they commit capital, rather than explain a mistake after it has happened.
The cryptocurrency industry seems extremely dynamic right now. What are the 3 things in particular that most excite you about the industry? If you can, please share a story or example for each.
The first is the maturity of the market infrastructure. Crypto used to require investors to accept weak custody, fragmented liquidity, and limited professional support as the price of participating. That is changing. Better custody technology, institutional trading infrastructure, and stronger compliance systems are making it possible to manage digital assets with more of the discipline expected in traditional finance.
The second is the quality of research now becoming available. For years, retail investors were often working with public headlines while larger market participants had better data, better execution, and more context. Tools that organize on-chain information, market structure, and macroeconomic signals can narrow that gap. Our work on UpTrade Alpha comes from that belief.
The third is the movement from speculation toward practical use. Tokenization, cross-border settlement, programmable ownership, and digital identity are examples of blockchain technology being used to solve real operational problems. I am cautious whenever a technology is presented as a solution to everything, but I am excited when it removes friction in a specific process.
What connects all three is accountability. The industry is becoming less tolerant of vague promises and more focused on whether a product is secure, useful, transparent, and able to survive a difficult market.
What are the 3 things that concern you about the industry? Can you explain? What can be done to address those concerns?
The first concern is the persistence of hype-led investing. Too many people still enter the market because a price is rising or because an online personality sounds certain. Education needs to focus less on naming assets and more on teaching people how to assess risk, liquidity, concentration, and incentives.
The second is security and custody. Investors can make a correct market decision and still lose money through poor operational security, a compromised platform, or a mistake with private keys. The industry needs clearer disclosure, stronger custody standards, better account protections, and more honest conversations about which custody model suits which investor.
The third is uneven accountability. Regulation and consumer protection differ sharply between jurisdictions, while crypto operates globally. That creates opportunities for weak operators to present themselves as legitimate. Better licensing, enforceable standards, transparent reserves and segregation practices, and cooperation between regulators would help.
I do not think the solution is to remove all risk. That is neither possible nor desirable in an investment market. The goal should be to make risks visible, understandable, and properly priced, while making fraud and misconduct harder to hide.
What are the “myths” that you would like to dispel about cryptocurrency? Can you explain what you mean?
The first myth is that cryptocurrency is a shortcut to wealth. Crypto has created significant returns, but that does not mean returns are easy, predictable, or evenly distributed. A volatile asset can rise dramatically and still be unsuitable for a particular investor.
The second myth is that all cryptocurrencies are essentially the same. They differ in purpose, security, governance, liquidity, token supply, and the people or institutions that control them. Owning several tokens does not automatically create diversification if they share the same underlying risks.
The third myth is that long-term holding removes risk. A long time horizon can reduce the pressure to react to short-term volatility, but it does not turn a weak asset into a strong one. Investors still need to review whether the original thesis remains valid.
Another myth is that self-custody is always safer, or that leaving assets with a platform is always safer. Both approaches involve trade-offs. The right answer depends on the investor’s technical ability, the size and purpose of the holding, recovery planning, and the quality of the provider.
The final myth is that confidence is expertise. In this market, the most credible people are often the ones willing to say what they do not know.
How do you think cryptocurrency has the potential to help society in the future?
The greatest potential is not simply that cryptocurrency may increase in value. It is that blockchain-based systems can change how value and ownership move.
Cross-border payments are one example. Traditional international transfers can be slow, expensive, and difficult to track. Digital assets and stable-value settlement systems can reduce friction, particularly for businesses or individuals operating across several countries.
Tokenization is another area with real potential. Assets, rights, or financial products can be represented digitally and transferred with clearer records and more flexible settlement. That could eventually make parts of private markets more accessible and operationally efficient.
There is also value in giving people greater control over digital ownership. Today, much of our online activity depends on centralized platforms maintaining the record. Blockchain systems can allow ownership and transactions to be verified across a shared network.
None of this means every blockchain project will succeed. Technology only helps society when it solves a genuine problem more safely or efficiently than the alternative. The industry will create the most value when it stops asking, “Where can we add a token?” and starts asking, “What problem are people currently unable to solve well?”
Recently, more people have been scrutinizing the ecological impact of crypto mining. From your perspective, can you explain to our readers why the cryptocurrency industry is creating an environmental challenge?
The environmental concern is mainly associated with proof-of-work networks, where miners use computing power to compete for the right to validate transactions and secure the network. That process consumes electricity, and the impact depends heavily on how that electricity is generated.
It is important to separate cryptocurrency as a whole from one particular consensus model. Not every blockchain is mined, and different networks have very different energy profiles. At the same time, it would be wrong to dismiss the concern. A large proof-of-work network can create significant demand for power, hardware, and data-centre capacity.
The debate also becomes unhelpful when it is reduced to one of two extremes: either mining is inherently wasteful, or energy use does not matter because the network has value. Both the benefit and the cost need to be examined. The relevant questions are what the network provides, what type of energy it uses, whether it adds stress to a grid, and whether the operator is transparent about those factors.
Investors should treat environmental impact as part of asset research, not as a separate public-relations issue.
From your perspective, what can be done to address or correct these concerns?
The first step is better measurement. Mining operators and networks should be more transparent about energy consumption, energy sources, hardware efficiency, and the effect they have on local grids. It is difficult to improve what is not measured consistently.
The second is to connect mining with cleaner or otherwise underused energy where that can be done responsibly. Some mining operations can use surplus renewable generation or energy that would otherwise be curtailed, but those claims should be independently verifiable rather than used as a blanket defence.
The third is continued improvement in hardware and network efficiency. In networks where proof-of-work is not essential to the security model, other consensus mechanisms may be appropriate. Where proof-of-work remains central, operators should compete not only on computing power but on efficiency and responsible energy sourcing.
Policymakers also need a more precise approach. A rule that treats every blockchain or every mining operation identically may miss the actual sources of harm. Standards should focus on emissions, grid impact, disclosure, and local environmental consequences.
The industry should not be afraid of this scrutiny. A credible asset class must be able to account for its costs as clearly as it promotes its benefits.
Recently, more people have been scrutinizing cryptocurrency’s impact on illegal activity. From your perspective, can you explain to our readers why cryptocurrency, more than fiat currency, is seen as an attractive choice for criminals?
Cryptocurrency can be attractive to criminals because it can move quickly across borders, transactions may be irreversible, and wallet addresses can initially appear separate from a person’s real identity. The market also operates continuously and across jurisdictions with different levels of oversight.
That said, the idea that cryptocurrency is completely anonymous is misleading. Many public blockchains maintain a permanent, visible record of transactions. Once an address is linked to a person, platform, or criminal group, investigators can often trace the movement of funds in a way that would be difficult with physical cash.
The real vulnerability tends to appear at the points where people enter, leave, or interact with the system. Weakly regulated platforms, compromised accounts, social-engineering scams, and cross-border enforcement gaps create opportunities.
Criminals use whatever system offers speed, access, and a perceived chance of avoiding detection. Crypto can provide some of those features, but it also creates evidence. The right response is not to pretend the problem does not exist, nor to suggest that every crypto user is suspicious. It is to improve the controls around the places where illicit activity can be identified and interrupted.
From your perspective, what can be done to address or correct these concerns?
Regulated on-ramps and off-ramps need strong identity verification, anti-money-laundering controls, transaction monitoring, and clear escalation processes. Those controls should be proportionate, but they must be real rather than box-ticking exercises.
Blockchain analytics can also play an important role. Because transactions on many networks are public, specialist tools can identify links between wallets, known illicit services, hacks, and laundering patterns. Platforms should use that information proactively instead of waiting for law enforcement to contact them after funds have moved.
International cooperation is essential. A criminal network can operate across several countries in minutes, while legal requests may take months. Regulators, financial-intelligence units, platforms, and law-enforcement agencies need faster ways to share verified information while protecting legitimate users’ rights.
Consumer education matters as well. A significant amount of crypto-related crime begins with impersonation, fake investment platforms, false urgency, or promises of guaranteed returns. Teaching people to pause before transferring an irreversible asset can prevent harm before compliance teams or investigators are involved.
The standard should be simple: innovation does not excuse weak controls. A credible crypto business should be able to explain how it protects clients and how it responds when suspicious activity occurs.
What are “The 5 Things You Need To Understand In Order To Successfully Invest In Cryptocurrency?” (Please share a story or example for each.)
1. Understand what you actually own.
A low token price does not mean an asset is cheap, and a compelling story does not mean the token captures the value of the network. Investors should examine the purpose of the asset, its supply, liquidity, governance, security, and who controls a meaningful percentage of it.
For example, two assets may both trade at one dollar, but one may have a modest circulating supply while the other has billions of tokens and substantial future issuance. The price per token tells you very little without the wider structure.
2. Decide the risk before imagining the return.
The first portfolio question should not be, “How high can this go?” It should be, “What happens to my financial plan if this falls sharply?” Crypto positions should be sized around the investor’s actual capacity to absorb loss, not around confidence in a prediction.
A simple example is an investor who can tolerate a ten percent portfolio position emotionally but would be unable to meet an upcoming financial obligation if that position fell by half. That is not true risk capacity, regardless of how strongly the investor believes in the asset.
3. Treat custody and security as part of the investment.
An investment thesis is irrelevant if the asset is lost, stolen, frozen, or inaccessible. Investors need to understand where assets are held, who controls the keys, what protections exist, how withdrawals work, and what happens if they lose access.
For example, self-custody can remove reliance on a platform, but it also makes the investor responsible for secure backups and recovery. A reputable custodian can provide stronger operational controls, but it introduces counterparty risk. The choice should be deliberate.
4. Have an entry, review, and exit plan.
Buying is only one part of an investment. Before entering, investors should decide what would make them add, reduce, rebalance, or leave the position. That plan should include both price-related and thesis-related triggers.
Imagine a crypto position grows from five percent to twenty percent of a portfolio during a rally. The investor may feel successful, but the portfolio has also become far more concentrated. Rebalancing is not a declaration that the asset has failed. It is a way of keeping one successful position from determining the investor’s entire financial outcome.
5. Manage your behaviour more carefully than you manage your predictions.
No one consistently predicts every market turn. What investors can control is how they respond. FOMO, panic selling, overtrading, and changing strategy after every headline can do more damage than an imperfect market forecast.
A disciplined investor may still be wrong about an asset, but a defined process limits the consequences. A reactive investor can be right about the long-term trend and still lose money by entering too aggressively, using leverage, or selling during a temporary decline. In crypto, survival through different market conditions matters more than winning one dramatic trade.
What are the most common mistakes you have seen people make when they enter the industry? What can be done to avoid that?
The most common mistake is starting with the asset instead of the financial plan. People hear about a token, decide they do not want to miss the opportunity, and only later consider how much risk they have taken.
Another mistake is confusing activity with progress. Because crypto trades around the clock, investors can feel they should always be buying, selling, or reacting. Frequent decisions create more opportunities for emotion and poor execution.
I also see people spread money across many assets and assume they are diversified. If those assets depend on the same market sentiment, ecosystem, or source of liquidity, the portfolio may still be highly concentrated.
Security is often treated as something to address later. It should be considered before the first transfer. Investors need strong authentication, verified platforms, tested withdrawal procedures, and a recovery plan.
The way to avoid these mistakes is to slow the process down. Write down the purpose of the investment, the maximum position size, the research supporting it, where it will be held, and what would cause you to sell. If those questions cannot be answered clearly, the investor is not ready to place the trade.
Do you have a particular type of cryptocurrency that you are excited about? We’d love to hear why.
I am most interested in digital assets that have survived difficult market cycles, have deep liquidity, clear security assumptions, and a purpose that can be explained without relying on price appreciation alone.
Bitcoin remains the clearest example to study. It has a transparent monetary policy, a large and resilient network, substantial liquidity, and a long operating history relative to the rest of the sector. That does not make it risk-free, and it does not mean it belongs in every portfolio at any price. It means investors can evaluate it against a more established body of market behaviour and infrastructure.
I am also interested in the infrastructure supporting tokenization and more efficient settlement. The important distinction is between being excited by a technology and being willing to invest in every token associated with it. A sector can have a strong future while many individual assets fail.
My preference is to focus on assets where the investment case can be challenged with evidence. The more a thesis depends on online enthusiasm, guaranteed adoption, or an unnamed future partnership, the less interested I become.
You are a person of great influence. If you could inspire a movement that would bring the most good to the greatest number of people, what would that be? You never know what your idea can trigger. 🙂
I would like to see a risk-first financial-literacy movement.
Most financial education begins with products: which stock, fund, property, or cryptocurrency should someone buy? I think it should begin with the person. What are they trying to achieve? What obligations do they have? How much loss can they absorb without damaging their life? What do they understand well enough to own through a difficult period?
A simple movement could encourage every investor to write a one-page investment plan before buying a speculative asset. It would include the purpose of the investment, the maximum amount at risk, the evidence supporting the decision, how the asset will be protected, and the conditions under which it will be reviewed or sold.
That would not remove mistakes, but it would make impulsive decisions less common. It would also help people recognize the difference between taking a calculated risk and simply hoping.
Financial freedom is not created by finding one perfect investment. It is built through a series of informed decisions that a person can live with in both good and bad markets.
We are very blessed that very prominent leaders read this column. Is there a person in the world, or in the US, with whom you would like to have a private breakfast or lunch, and why? He or she might just see this if we tag them 🙂
I would choose Howard Marks.
His writing on risk, market cycles, and investor psychology has remained useful across very different asset classes. What I appreciate most is the distinction he makes between predicting what will happen and preparing for a range of possible outcomes. That is especially relevant in cryptocurrency, where confidence often receives more attention than probability.
I would be interested in discussing how he would evaluate digital assets within the broader history of speculative markets and financial innovation. Crypto has characteristics that are genuinely new, but the behaviour around it is often familiar. Investors still chase performance, underestimate risk during good periods, and become excessively pessimistic during bad ones.
I would also ask how he thinks about building an investment organization that remains disciplined when the market rewards the opposite behaviour. Technology changes quickly, but sound judgment, humility, and risk management remain remarkably consistent.
Thank you so much for these excellent stories and insights. We wish you continued success and good health!
Thank you for the thoughtful questions and for the opportunity to contribute.
Jeff Zylstra Of UpTrade On The 5 Things You Need To Understand In Order To Successfully Invest In… was originally published in Authority Magazine on Medium, where people are continuing the conversation by highlighting and responding to this story.