Insurance coverage for losses related to nontraditional forms of property, such as cryptocurrency, is a developing area. Courts are determining how to apply existing caselaw to losses involving cryptocurrency.

While there is no conceptual distinction between cryptocurrency and other forms of insured property—such as gold coins or computer systems—courts have struggled to interpret standard form language in the relatively new context of nonphysical property. As detailed below, courts have reached conclusions that defy logic, as well the policyholder’s reasonable expectations, when rigidly applying case law to newer forms of property.