Most people don't appreciate the differences yet, even many institutional traders.
I can understand that most, "people," don't but it's shocking that institutional investors do not. Isn't it their job to do due-diligence on such things? (that sentence mostly exists so I could write due-do.) It's like if Gold and Lithium were both traded as a commodity and tracked together, simply as a store of value and institutional investors failed to recognize that lithium was also being used for battery production and had actual growing utility.
"Institutional investors" are generally business majors who have a working, practical knowledge of money. They are diesel mechanics. Cryptocurrency is a fundamentally new store of value - institutional investors regard it much the same as diesel guys would regard fusion. It is, nonetheless, a commodity and a very thinly traded one at that. The total market cap of all cryptocurrency has yet to eclipse Apple's cash-on-hand, for example. Most people will form models in their heads to allow them to operate. As George Box said, "All models are wrong, some are useful." Modeling crypto as "goldbugging for nerds and criminals" works up to a point and many funds are diversifying into crypto because at this point if they do they're following the crowd but if they don't they're missing a gold rush. Better to be wrong together than right all alone. Especially since a more refined model of cryptocurrency requires you to start from "what is money anyway" and nearly zero investors have the interest or expertise to entertain such navel-staring.