Kenya VASP Licensing & Compliance Resource Centre
The central hub for licence categories, CBK/CMA jurisdiction, costs, AML and the transition deadline.
Read insight →Intermediary businesses in the virtual asset space often blend elements of brokerage, advice and discretionary management. The VASP framework treats these as distinct activities.
Founders building an intermediary business, one that helps clients buy, sell, evaluate or manage virtual assets, often assume a single "crypto adviser" licence covers the whole model. Under the VASP framework, three related but distinct categories generally apply, each with its own regulatory expectations.
A broker executes transactions on behalf of clients, typically without exercising independent discretion over what to buy or sell. The core regulatory concerns are best execution, conflicts of interest (particularly where the broker also trades on its own account), and clear disclosure of fees and commissions.
| Category | Core function | Discretion over client assets |
|---|---|---|
| Broker | Executes client-instructed transactions | None |
| Investment Adviser | Recommends virtual asset investments | None (client decides) |
| Virtual Asset Manager | Manages a portfolio on the client's behalf | Full or partial discretion |
An adviser recommends virtual asset investments to clients but leaves the actual investment decision, and typically the execution, to the client. Core obligations centre on the suitability of advice given a client's circumstances, disclosure of any compensation the adviser receives from third parties (such as listing or referral fees from a platform), and managing conflicts between the adviser's own interests and the client's.
A manager exercises discretion over a client's virtual asset portfolio, making buy and sell decisions on the client's behalf within agreed parameters. This is the most heavily supervised of the three categories given the direct control over client assets involved, and managers should expect governance, reporting and asset-segregation expectations closer to those applied to custodial businesses.
A platform offering "robo-advisory" portfolio management, for example, may combine advisory and discretionary management functions depending on how much client control is retained. Map your actual client relationship and decision-making flow against these three categories rather than assuming a single generic licence applies.
We map your actual client relationship and discretion level against the three categories.
Request a Licence Classification ReviewIt depends on how much discretion the platform retains once a client selects a strategy. Platforms that execute trades automatically on a client's behalf without further client instruction are closer to a manager function than a pure advisory one, and should be assessed on that basis.
A broker that holds client assets, even temporarily during settlement, takes on custody-related obligations in addition to its brokerage function, and should address both sets of requirements rather than treating the custody element as incidental.
Yes. Compensation received from third parties in connection with recommendations made to clients is a core conflicts-of-interest disclosure point across the broker, adviser and manager categories.
The central hub for licence categories, CBK/CMA jurisdiction, costs, AML and the transition deadline.
Read insight →How trading venue functions are licensed and supervised under the VASP framework.
Read insight →The information on this website is general in nature, is not legal advice, and does not create an advocate-client relationship. Figures, fees, capital thresholds and procedural requirements under the Virtual Asset Service Providers Act, 2025 and the Virtual Asset Service Providers Regulations, 2026 should be confirmed against the current Gazette text and regulator guidance before action is taken. Please contact Njau & Associates Advocates for advice on your specific circumstances.