Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

US-listed spot Bitcoin ETFs experienced significant outflows on Wednesday, recording a net withdrawal of $120.2 million, according to data from Farside Investors. This brings the two-day total for the holiday-shortened week to $166.8 million in outflows.

Key ETF withdrawals and inflowsAmong the funds, the ARK 21Shares Bitcoin ETF (ARKB) saw the largest single-day withdrawal, losing $78 million. Grayscale’s Bitcoin Trust ETF (GBTC) followed with $27.2 million in outflows, while BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT) registered $19.5 million in net redemptions.

Morgan Stanley’s Bitcoin Trust (MSBT) stood out as the only spot Bitcoin ETF reporting inflows on Wednesday, adding $4.5 million.

Mini dictionary: Farside Investors, a financial analytics firm, tracks and reports on the net flows of cryptocurrency exchange-traded funds across major markets, providing data for institutional and retail investors.

The midweek outflows followed $46.6 million in net redemptions from Tuesday, marking the first consecutive days of outflows for US spot Bitcoin ETFs since a three-day streak ended on August 14. Over the two sessions, GBTC lost a total of $92.7 million, while ARKB posted $69.9 million in redemptions and IBIT reported $8.8 million in net withdrawals.

ETFNet Flow (Wednesday)2-Day Net FlowARK 21Shares Bitcoin ETF (ARKB)-$78 million-$69.9 millionGrayscale Bitcoin Trust ETF (GBTC)-$27.2 million-$92.7 millionBlackRock iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT)-$19.5 million-$8.8 millionMorgan Stanley Bitcoin Trust (MSBT)+$4.5 millionN/AImpact on cumulative fund flowsThe two-day decline erased around 4.4% of the $3.8 billion net inflow accumulated during the ETFs’ strongest three-week period of 2026. While total cumulative net inflows for Bitcoin ETFs now stand at approximately $55 billion since launch, aggregate net flows for 2026 show an outflow of about $1.07 billion.

Ether and Solana ETF activityIn contrast to the Bitcoin ETF pullback, US spot Ether ETFs rebounded with $34.7 million in net inflows on Wednesday, offsetting Tuesday’s $24.3 million in outflows and resulting in $10.4 million in weekly net inflows. BlackRock’s ETHB led the pack, attracting $22.9 million, with its ETHA fund following at $9.7 million. The 21Shares TETH fund added $2.1 million, and other Ether ETFs recorded no notable flows.

Spot Solana ETFs also reversed course, bouncing back from a $700,000 outflow on Tuesday to post $11.2 million in inflows on Wednesday. This pushed their two-day net inflow to $10.5 million, entirely led by Bitwise’s BSOL fund.

Meanwhile, Hyperliquid ETFs logged their second consecutive day of withdrawals, losing $5.3 million Wednesday after a $13 million outflow on Tuesday, for a total net outflow of $18.3 million for the week.

Cryptocurrency price trendsAs ETF flow trends fluctuated, Bitcoin traded near $78,000 on Thursday, down from about $79,700 when the previous three-week net inflow data was reported. Ether was priced around $2,470, while Solana traded close to $101, according to CoinGecko figures.

US spot Bitcoin ETFs saw $120.2 million in outflows on Wednesday, with ARK 21Shares, Grayscale, and BlackRock funds all experiencing significant withdrawals. Morgan Stanley’s Bitcoin Trust remained the only ETF to attract new investments during the session.

Ripple’s stablecoin has grown 1,278% this year while XRP shed more than a quarter of its value. The network is busier than ever, but the token capturing that activity has a dollar sign and a peg.

Summary

RLUSD market cap hit $2.32 billion with cumulative volume surpassing $9 billion, a 1,278% increase year to date, while XRP dropped 27% over the same period to trade near $1.39. The XRP Ledger processes 2.4 million daily transactions, up 21% year over year, and DEX volume surged 79%, yet active accounts fell 40%, pointing to fewer but larger participants. Seven spot XRP ETFs approved in March 2026 have pulled in $1.68 billion in cumulative inflows, with August alone contributing $153 million to $159 million, the best month since launch. RLUSD supply on the XRP Ledger jumped from 18.4% of total issuance at the start of 2026 to 58.9% today, with $963 million now sitting on XRPL and $1.1 billion on Ethereum. Institutional integrations, including JPMorgan, Mastercard, Convera, and Interactive Brokers, have overwhelmingly adopted RLUSD for settlement, not XRP, raising the question of whether the token is becoming a sidecar to its own ecosystem. The numbers tell two contradictory stories about the same network. XRP started 2026 near $1.90, slid to a July low of $1.06, bounced to $1.55 in August, and then drifted back to $1.36. Down 27% on the year. That is the kind of chart that makes retail traders close their apps and check back in six months.

But the infrastructure underneath that falling price is having its best year. The XRP Ledger is settling more transactions than at any point since the 2021 bull run. RLUSD, barely seven months old, already ranks among the ten largest stablecoins by market capitalization. Ripple signed deals with payment processors that move $190 billion per year. The Bank for International Settlements published a working paper using the XRP Ledger for cryptographic proof of integrity.

None of this lifted the token price. And that contradiction is the story worth unpacking, because it reveals something about XRP that the community has been reluctant to confront: the network’s success and the token’s performance may no longer be the same story.

The stablecoin that ate the narrative RLUSD launched in late 2025 as a compliance-first stablecoin designed to slot into existing banking infrastructure. Ripple positioned it as the settlement layer for cross-border payments, the exact use case that XRP was supposed to own. The company argued the two assets were complementary. Seven months of market data suggest otherwise.

The growth curve speaks for itself. RLUSD crossed $1 billion in market cap in the spring, then $2 billion on August 25, and sits at $2.32 billion today. Cumulative trading volume has passed $9 billion. The growth rate, 1,278% year to date, is the kind of number that would dominate crypto headlines if it belonged to a token people could speculate on. But a stablecoin pegged to one dollar does not generate the same excitement, even when it is quietly absorbing the utility that once justified XRP’s existence.

The listing trajectory tells its own story. Binance added RLUSD in January 2026. OKX followed on April 29. Gate.io on June 15. All four Korean Big 4 exchanges, Upbit, Bithumb, Coinone, and Korbit, now carry it. That is not a niche product limited to Ripple’s partner network. That is distribution at scale, across every major trading region, in under a year.

More revealing is where the supply lives. At the start of 2026, only 18.4% of RLUSD existed on the XRP Ledger, with the rest on Ethereum. Today that figure has flipped to 58.9%, with $963 million on XRPL and $1.1 billion on Ethereum. The stablecoin is migrating to XRP’s home chain at an accelerating pace, which means the ledger’s growing transaction volume is increasingly denominated in dollars, not in XRP. Every mint on the XRPL is a vote of confidence in the chain and a vote of indifference toward the token.

The institutional playbook that skipped XRP When JPMorgan ran its treasury settlement using Ripple infrastructure, it chose RLUSD for the cash leg. Not XRP. That single decision captures the entire institutional logic in one sentence.

The pattern repeated across every major deal Ripple closed in 2026. Convera, the payment company processing $190 billion per year in cross-border volume, integrated RLUSD for its corridor settlements. LMAX Digital signed a $150 million deal to bring RLUSD into its institutional trading infrastructure. Mastercard connected through Ripple’s payment APIs. BlackRock’s BUIDL fund interacted with the Ripple ecosystem through RLUSD rails. Flutterwave, fresh off a $3.2 billion Series E, partnered for African payment corridors where dollar-denominated settlement reduces friction for remittance senders. Interactive Brokers and B2C2 added RLUSD support for their institutional client bases.

Count the names. JPMorgan. Mastercard. BlackRock. Convera. These are not speculative crypto plays. These are the largest financial institutions on earth, and every single one chose the stablecoin over the token. The reasoning is not complicated. A bank treasury desk managing overnight positions in multiple currencies does not want to hold an asset that dropped 27% in eight months. A dollar-pegged token eliminates the volatility risk entirely. The parade of institutional names signing with Ripple is real, but the parade is marching toward RLUSD, and XRP is watching from the sidewalk.

This is not a conspiracy or a failure of strategy. It is the predictable result of building a stablecoin that does the same job as XRP but without the price risk. Ripple created a better product for the exact customer it spent a decade courting. The irony is thick enough to cut.

Consider the pitch Ripple made to banks from 2015 to 2023: use XRP as a bridge asset, settle in three seconds, save 40% to 70% on corridor costs compared to SWIFT. Banks listened politely and mostly declined. The volatility objection was consistent across every boardroom. Now Ripple walks into the same boardrooms with RLUSD, which offers the same three-second settlement on the same ledger with the same cost savings, minus the volatility. Banks are signing. The product-market fit that eluded XRP for a decade arrived the moment Ripple removed the token from the equation.

Fewer, larger hands Here is the number that nobody is talking about. Active accounts on the XRP Ledger dropped 40% year over year. At the same time, daily transactions rose 21% to 2.4 million, and DEX volume surged 79%.

Read those three data points together. Fewer wallets. More transactions. Much higher volume per wallet. The network is concentrating into a smaller number of participants who each move significantly more money.

This is the “fewer, larger hands” paradox, and it reframes the entire XRP story. Retail traders, the ones who drove the 2017 rally and the 2021 echo, are leaving. The 40% drop in active accounts is not a rounding error or a seasonal blip. It is a structural shift that has persisted across multiple months. The people who bought XRP hoping it would hit $10 are gone, or at least dormant, their wallets sitting idle while the network they once championed rewires itself around institutional flows.

Who replaced them? Institutional players routing payments through RLUSD on high-throughput corridors. Market makers filling order books with larger individual trades that generate the same volume from a fraction of the accounts. Treasury operations that do not need thousands of wallets because they consolidate flows into a handful of accounts with API-driven execution and batch settlement. The ledger did not get quieter. It got more efficient, which is the polite way of saying it got more institutional and less retail.

This matters because XRP’s price has always been a retail phenomenon. Institutions did not buy XRP to hold. They used it as a bridge asset, in and out in seconds, which created transaction volume but not sustained buy pressure. The token’s market cap was built on the belief that retail holders and institutional utility would eventually converge, that the network effect would grow large enough to lift the price floor permanently.

Instead, institutions found a way to use the network without the token, and retail left when the price stopped cooperating. The convergence thesis collapsed not because it was theoretically wrong, but because RLUSD offered institutions a better path that did not require XRP exposure at all. The bridge asset became optional the moment the bridge itself could carry dollars natively.

No competitor has published this analysis. The bullish XRP content focuses on ETF inflows and partnership announcements. The bearish content points to price decline and escrow dilution. Neither side has connected the account data to the RLUSD migration to explain what is actually happening on the ledger at a structural level.

The ETF paradox Against all of this, spot XRP ETFs are having a quietly strong year. Seven funds launched after SEC approval in March 2026, and they have pulled in $1.68 billion in cumulative inflows. August was the best month yet, with $153 million to $159 million in net new capital.

That is real money entering real custody wallets, managed by real fund managers with real fiduciary obligations. It validates XRP as an investable asset class in the eyes of traditional finance. It is also a fraction of what Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs attracted in their first six months, which suggests the institutional appetite for XRP exposure has a ceiling that the community has not fully acknowledged. More critically, it creates its own paradox. ETF buyers are accumulating XRP in a wrapper that removes it from active circulation. They are not sending XRP across borders. They are not providing liquidity on the DEX. They are not participating in the network’s growing transaction volume. They are buying exposure to a price chart that has moved against them all year, warehousing tokens in cold storage vaults while the chain underneath operates on a different asset.

The ETF inflows have not translated into sustained price appreciation because the buy pressure from funds is offset by the sell pressure from escrow unlocks and the broader market’s indifference to XRP’s fundamental story. On September 1, Ripple unlocked three escrow tranches totaling 1 billion XRP: 100 million, 400 million, and 500 million tokens. The remaining escrow holds 32.6 billion XRP, with 1 billion tokens released every month. That is a monthly supply expansion that institutional ETF buyers cannot absorb at current flow rates, especially when the use case those institutions care about now runs on RLUSD.

The structural imbalance between inflows and outflows is the ETF story that the headline numbers obscure. One billion XRP at $1.39 equals roughly $1.39 billion in potential monthly sell pressure. August ETF inflows of $159 million represent 11.4% of that figure. Even assuming Ripple relocks most of each monthly unlock, the escrow mechanism creates a persistent overhang that works against price appreciation.

The ETFs prove that financial products can exist around XRP. They do not prove that XRP needs to appreciate for the Ripple ecosystem to succeed. That distinction is the quiet earthquake at the center of this story.

Regulatory clarity arrived and the price did not care The SEC case is resolved. Japan’s FSA approved RLUSD on June 25. The EU granted MiCA preliminary authorization in Luxembourg on June 23. The BIS published a working paper using the XRP Ledger for cryptographic proof of integrity.

Two years ago, any one of these headlines would have sent XRP up 30% in a day. All four happened in 2026, and XRP is down 27% on the year.

The obvious explanation is that regulatory clarity was already priced in. Markets anticipated the SEC resolution for over a year. The less obvious explanation is more important: regulatory clarity benefited RLUSD more than XRP. A stablecoin needs regulatory approval to function as a payment instrument in a given jurisdiction. A speculative token needs regulatory approval to avoid being delisted. The same event has different implications for different assets, and the market figured that out faster than the community did.

Japan’s FSA approval opened RLUSD to the third-largest economy by GDP, a market where dollar-denominated stablecoin settlement can replace costly yen conversion in cross-border flows. MiCA authorization covers the entire European Economic Area, granting RLUSD legal standing as an electronic money token across 30 countries. These are not theoretical markets. They are jurisdictions where RLUSD can now legally serve as a settlement currency for banks and payment processors.

XRP already traded in these markets before any of these approvals landed. Japanese retail investors have been among the largest XRP holders since 2017. European exchanges listed XRP years ago. The approvals changed nothing about XRP’s accessibility but changed everything about RLUSD’s commercial viability as a regulated payment instrument. Every regulatory win expanded the addressable market for the stablecoin while doing little more than confirming the status quo for the token. The community celebrated each headline as an XRP catalyst. The market priced each one as an RLUSD catalyst. The price chart settled the argument.

The cannibalization thesis Put it plainly. RLUSD is cannibalizing XRP’s primary use case, and Ripple is the one doing it.

This is not accidental. Ripple spent years arguing that XRP’s volatility was a feature, that a three-second settlement window meant the price swing during transit was negligible. That argument worked when the competition was SWIFT, which took days and charged 3% to 7% in corridor fees. It does not work when the competition is RLUSD, which settles on the same ledger in the same three seconds with zero price risk and lower integration complexity.

A payment processor choosing between a bridge asset that lost 27% this year and a stablecoin pegged to one dollar will choose the stablecoin every time. Not because XRP is broken, but because the stablecoin removes a category of risk that no amount of speed can compensate for. The conditions for XRP recovery exist, but they require something beyond Ripple’s core payment business to drive demand.

The bull case for XRP now rests on three pillars that have nothing to do with cross-border payments. First, speculative demand driven by ETF flows and retail re-entry during the next broad market rally. Second, DEX activity on the XRP Ledger creating organic demand for XRP as a base trading pair, a function that grows with on-chain DeFi development. Third, burn mechanics and escrow reductions gradually tightening supply over a multi-year horizon, eventually making the monthly unlocks negligible relative to circulating supply.

None of those pillars requires RLUSD to fail. They coexist. But they also mean that XRP’s investment thesis has quietly shifted from “utility token for global payments” to “speculative asset on a chain that settles stablecoin payments.” That is a meaningful downgrade in narrative, even if the price eventually recovers. It is the difference between owning a toll bridge and owning a house near a toll bridge. The traffic still passes by. The economics are entirely different.

What Ripple gains and what XRP holders lose Ripple the company is having an exceptional year by every metric that matters to a private enterprise. RLUSD generates revenue through minting and redemption fees. Institutional partnerships create recurring payment volume that compounds over time. Regulatory approvals open new markets with each jurisdiction. The Ripple ecosystem, measured by transaction throughput, partner count, and stablecoin adoption, has never been stronger.

XRP holders do not automatically benefit from any of that. Ripple holds billions of XRP in escrow, and the company’s success does not create a direct mechanism for that XRP to appreciate. There is no revenue share. There is no buyback program. There is no on-chain fee distribution. The link between Ripple’s business performance and XRP’s market price was always assumed by the community and never formally codified. In 2026, the data suggests that link is weaker than the community believed.

This is the uncomfortable truth that the “fewer, larger hands” data illuminates. The XRP Ledger is becoming an institutional payment rail denominated in RLUSD. The token that gave the ledger its name is becoming less relevant to the ledger’s primary function with each integration that chooses the stablecoin over the token. The network can thrive while the token stagnates, and 2026 is the first year where both of those things are happening simultaneously and measurably.

That does not mean XRP goes to zero. Plenty of tokens trade on narratives decoupled from their network’s primary utility, and some of them do very well over multi-year cycles. But it means the token needs a catalyst that is independent of Ripple’s payment business. Smart contract functionality expanding on the ledger could attract DeFi protocols that require XRP for gas fees and collateral. A DeFi ecosystem built on XRPL could generate organic trading demand that puts sustained buy pressure on the token through AMM pools and lending markets. Or a supply shock driven by sustained ETF accumulation combined with escrow reduction could tighten the float enough to move the price even without a fundamental use case shift.

Something has to create demand for XRP specifically, not for the XRP Ledger generally. Until that distinction narrows, the great disconnect will persist. And every month that RLUSD grows while XRP stagnates makes the distinction harder to close, because it proves to the next institutional prospect that the ledger works perfectly well without the token.

What to watch RLUSD monthly mint rate versus XRP escrow unlocks. If new RLUSD issuance consistently outpaces the dollar value of monthly escrow releases, the stablecoin is growing faster than the token supply. That ratio tells you which asset the market is choosing in real time. Active account trend reversal. The 40% drop in active accounts is the clearest signal of retail departure. A sustained increase over two consecutive months would indicate fresh participants entering the network, not just existing institutions adding wallets. XRP ETF flow acceleration. August’s $153 million to $159 million was strong but not sufficient to offset escrow sell pressure at current prices. Monthly inflows above $250 million would begin to matter for price. DEX volume composition. The 79% surge in DEX volume is bullish for network activity, but tracking how much of that volume is XRP-denominated versus RLUSD-denominated will reveal whether the token or the stablecoin is driving on-chain trading growth. Institutional settlement currency disclosure. When the next major bank or payment processor announces a Ripple integration, watch whether the press release names RLUSD, XRP, or both. That language is the clearest forward indicator of which asset institutions are choosing to build on. What is the current price of XRP? XRP trades near $1.39 as of early September 2026, down approximately 27% from its January high near $1.90. The token hit a year-to-date low of $1.06 in July before rallying to $1.55 in August, then pulling back again.

What is RLUSD and how big has it gotten? RLUSD is Ripple’s dollar-pegged stablecoin launched in late 2025. It has grown to a $2.32 billion market cap with cumulative trading volume exceeding $9 billion, representing 1,278% growth year to date. It is listed on Binance, OKX, Gate.io, and all four major Korean exchanges.

Why is XRP falling while the network grows? The XRP Ledger’s growing activity is increasingly driven by RLUSD settlement and institutional payment flows that use the stablecoin instead of XRP as the value transfer layer. Network utility and token price have decoupled because the utility does not require the token.

How many spot XRP ETFs exist? Seven spot XRP ETFs launched following SEC approval in March 2026. They have attracted $1.68 billion in cumulative inflows, with August generating $153 million to $159 million, the strongest single month since launch.

Is RLUSD replacing XRP for payments? Institutional integrations in 2026, including JPMorgan, Convera, Mastercard, and Interactive Brokers, have adopted RLUSD for settlement. Banks and payment processors prefer a dollar-pegged asset over a token carrying a 27% annual drawdown for the same three-second settlement speed.

How much XRP remains in escrow? Ripple holds 32.6 billion XRP in escrow with monthly unlocks of 1 billion tokens. On September 1, three tranches of 100 million, 400 million, and 500 million XRP were released. The escrow creates persistent monthly sell pressure.

Why did regulatory wins not boost XRP price? The SEC resolution, Japan FSA approval of RLUSD, and EU MiCA authorization were largely priced into XRP before they occurred. More significantly, these events disproportionately benefited RLUSD by opening new jurisdictions for regulated stablecoin use while changing little for XRP’s existing market access.

Should I buy XRP based on this analysis? This article examines the structural relationship between XRP price action and RLUSD adoption. Individual investment decisions depend on personal risk tolerance, time horizon, and financial situation. This is educational analysis, not investment advice.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational and educational purposes only. It does not constitute financial, investment, or trading advice. Cryptocurrency markets carry significant risk. Always conduct your own research before making investment decisions. Published September 9, 2026.

Cover image via depositphotos.com Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.

Among the biggest cryptocurrency assets, XRP has had the best daily ETF flow result. It is now the only significant spot cryptocurrency ETF category to draw in new investment, while Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and Hyperliquid products all saw withdrawals.

XRP reaches breakthrough thresholdAccording to the most recent spot ETF data from September 8, the net inflows for XRP products were about $1.55 million. Although the amount is modest in absolute terms, it is noteworthy when compared to rival assets.

Source: Sosovalue HOT Stories

Bitcoin ETFs ended a three-day inflow streak with net outflows of $46.65 million. Ethereum followed with $24.29 million in outflows from spot products, while Hyperliquid ETFs experienced withdrawals of $12.96 million. A smaller $667,720 outflow was reported by Solana. As a result, XRP was the only asset among these five that had positive daily flows.

Additionally, the overall view is still positive. Five U.S. spot XRP ETFs have net assets of about $1.51 billion and cumulative net inflows of about $1.69 billion. In just the past 30 days, XRP products have brought in about $173 million.

Is XRP in pre-breakout territory?When compared to the underlying market, the divergence becomes especially intriguing. Following its significant August breakout, XRP is currently trading between $1.39 and $1.40 and is still above the long-term moving average at $1.35. Buyers have so far avoided a total reversal toward pre-breakout territory, even though the initial rally has cooled.

You Might Also Like

Though its ETF flows have gone negative for the day, Bitcoin is likewise consolidating around $79,000 following its swift recovery. Despite its ETF outflow, HYPE is still near its recent highs of $86, while SOL is holding around $104 following its surge toward $110.

However, a single successful session should not be taken as proof that institutional capital is firmly shifting to XRP. At about $55.59 billion, Bitcoin's total ETF inflows are still much higher.  

The current divergence may be a sign of relatively higher institutional demand if inflows continue while BTC, SOL, and HYPE products find it difficult to draw in capital. As of right now, XRP has emerged victorious in the daily ETF flow comparison; however, confirming a significant trend will require a few more positive sessions.

Fintech veteran Wojciech Kaszycki has identified three tests for real bank adoption of Bitcoin: client custody balances, credit-funded spot trades and its use as loan collateral, following Standard Chartered’s launch of deliverable BTC and ETH trading for eligible UAE institutions.

Summary

Standard Chartered now offers institutional BTC/USD and ETH/USD trading through its existing electronic channels. Kaszycki said bank credit lines, custody, and back-office integration matter more than a familiar trading screen. Bitcoin-backed loans with published collateral haircuts would show that banks can price and manage the asset’s risk. Crypto-native venues may retain their advantage in weekend liquidity, derivatives, and trading outside banking hours. Standard Chartered has put Bitcoin trading on existing bank rails Standard Chartered said on Sept. 3 that eligible institutions can trade deliverable Bitcoin and Ether through its Dubai International Financial Centre branch, making it the first global systemically important bank to offer institutional digital asset spot trading in the UAE.

The service supports BTC/USD and ETH/USD trades through the bank’s existing electronic channels, including interfaces already used for foreign exchange. Clients can choose where their assets settle, either using Standard Chartered’s UAE custody platform or another custodian.

As crypto.news previously reported, the bank introduced the UAE service more than a year after launching the same trading model through its UK branch in July 2025. Standard Chartered had already begun offering regulated digital asset custody in the UAE in September 2024, initially supporting Bitcoin and Ether with Brevan Howard Digital as its first client.

Wojciech Kaszycki, founder and chairman of Mobilum and a strategy advisor to Warsaw-listed BTCS S.A., told crypto.news that placing digital assets on a bank’s foreign exchange interface only removes one small obstacle for institutions.

According to Kaszycki, treasury teams care more about the identity of their counterparty, internal risk approval, custody standards, auditor acceptance, and the way each trade enters the company’s accounting system.

“Nobody on a treasury team ever says: ‘I’d buy bitcoin if only it looked like my EUR/USD ticket.”

A meaningful system, in his view, would connect Bitcoin trades to the credit lines, limits, confirmations, and back-office processes that institutions already use for currencies. Such integration would let a treasury department treat crypto as a regular balance-sheet item instead of running it as a separate project.

“If it’s just a new ticker in the GUI and everything behind it is manual, it’s a demo,” Kaszycki said.

Drawing on his work with a listed Bitcoin treasury company and a Dubai family office, he added that trading against a bank credit line without sending funds to a venue in advance would make it easier to secure board approval.

Bitcoin collateral would offer a clearer adoption test Spot volume provides a poor measure of institutional adoption because trading activity can rise without showing whether companies or funds intend to hold digital assets, according to Kaszycki.

He instead pointed to custody balances held at banks for clients outside the crypto industry. Such balances would show that conventional companies, funds, and other institutions have chosen to hold Bitcoin through regulated banking relationships rather than merely trade it.

His second indicator is bank credit for spot purchases. Removing the need to prefund a trade would indicate that a bank’s risk department has assessed the asset, set exposure limits, and approved it within the institution’s credit framework.

Bitcoin entering bank lending books would provide the strongest signal, he said, especially if lenders disclose the haircuts applied to the collateral. A haircut reduces the value that a bank assigns to pledged property when calculating how much it will lend.

“When a bank has to price it, custody it, and liquidate it if needed, that’s adoption. Everything else is marketing,” Kaszycki said.

Banks in the United States have already started moving in this direction. An August report on JPMorgan collateral cited Bitcoin haircuts of 30% to 50%, meaning $1 million in pledged BTC could support between $500,000 and $700,000 in loan proceeds, depending on the borrower and loan terms.

According to the report, accepting Bitcoin as collateral also creates liquidation risk because a steep price decline could trigger margin calls and forced sales. Lenders therefore need rules for valuation, custody, collateral monitoring and liquidation before placing BTC alongside assets such as bonds, equities or gold.

Kaszycki also pointed to listed companies whose auditors approve Bitcoin holdings on their balance sheets. BTCS holds Bitcoin as a treasury asset on the Warsaw Stock Exchange, and he said the audit process requires more work than completing the trade itself.

Separate custody leaves a settlement problem Allowing clients to use their preferred custodian offers flexibility, but Kaszycki said splitting execution and custody creates a familiar settlement risk. One party may need to transfer first, prefund the transaction, or use an escrow provider trusted by both sides.

Deliverable spot trading requires the buyer to receive the underlying Bitcoin or Ether rather than a cash-settled contract linked to its price. When the digital asset and cash travel through separate systems, completion of one leg can occur before the other.

Kaszycki compared the setup with foreign exchange settlement in 2005. In his assessment, Bitcoin can reach final settlement in under an hour at any time, while the dollar transfer may remain tied to SWIFT processing, bank opening hours, and payment cutoffs.

“The slow leg is fiat,” he said.

Tokenized bank deposits or regulated stablecoins could place the cash and asset legs on compatible systems, allowing payment-versus-payment settlement in which both transfers complete together, according to Kaszycki. Custodians would also need conditional release functions instead of waiting to confirm receipt of a wire before releasing the crypto.

For transactions between several banks, he said a netting network modeled on CLS could reduce the gross amounts that counterparties exchange bilaterally. Without such a system, banks must rely on credit lines, approved wallet lists, settlement windows, and staff monitoring blockchain explorers.

Standard Chartered has already tested ways to separate exchange activity from asset storage. Under a collateral-mirroring arrangement introduced by OKX in April 2025, institutions can keep eligible assets with the bank while their value appears in an exchange trading account. The framework later added BlackRock’s BUIDL tokenized U.S. Treasury fund as eligible collateral in April 2026.

Banks could win regulated flows while exchanges retain liquidity Large banks can capture more institutional crypto trading because corporate treasuries, investment funds, insurers and Gulf sovereign institutions often prefer counterparties that already support their compliance and credit requirements, Kaszycki said.

Clients may accept a higher spread in return for access to a bank’s balance sheet, documentation, and established relationship. Kaszycki expects banks to source prices from crypto-native markets before adding a spread for institutional customers.

Crypto exchanges would retain several advantages under such a structure. Their markets operate continuously, including weekends, while banks remain organized around business hours and existing staffing models. Native venues also offer more assets and deeper derivatives markets, where much of crypto price discovery still occurs.

“At BTCS, we already do most of our size OTC with market makers rather than on order books, exactly for settlement flexibility,” he said. “Banks are just the next step in that same logic.”

U.S. rules now give national banks room to participate in several parts of the process. A December 2025 report on OCC guidance explained that national banks may conduct matched crypto transactions as riskless principals, provided they offset the exposure and comply with trading, anti-money laundering and third-party risk controls.

Earlier OCC guidance also confirmed that national banks can provide crypto custody and execution or outsource those functions to qualified providers. Banks remain responsible for managing the risks created by sub-custodians and other outside firms.

An August review of the U.S. custody market found that BNY, State Street, Standard Chartered, U.S. Bank, and Citi had launched or were preparing direct digital asset custody services. The report linked increased bank participation to the SEC’s January 2025 withdrawal of Staff Accounting Bulletin 121 and OCC letters confirming banks’ custody authority.

Kaszycki said banks extending spot credit would show that their risk teams had built formal models for Bitcoin, while disclosed collateral haircuts would reveal how lenders value its volatility. On the corporate side, he would count listed companies whose auditors approve Bitcoin holdings, a process BTCS has already completed for its Warsaw-listed treasury.

As countries around the world continue to regulate cryptocurrencies, taxation stands out as one of the most important issues.

The latest notable regulatory effort on this issue comes from Germany.

A New Era in Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Earnings! Germany, one of Europe’s largest countries, is preparing comprehensive regulations to tax gains from cryptocurrencies, particularly Bitcoin and Ethereum.

According to BlockBeats, a draft prepared by the German Ministry of Finance plans to subject cryptocurrency gains to a flat tax of 25 percent, similar to stocks and other capital investments.

The draft legislation is not yet enacted and will be submitted to parliament for approval after a review process within the government.

One Year of Tax Exemption is Ending! Under the current system, gains made by individual investors from selling cryptocurrencies held for more than a year are exempt from tax. However, the ministry wants to abolish this exemption, and the new regulation proposes removing this exemption and classifying cryptocurrencies as capital gains.

At this point, the new system is planned to be applied to cryptocurrencies acquired on or after January 1, 2027.

The draft also envisages preserving some important advantages for investors. The current annual tax exemption limit of €1,000 ($1,170) is expected to remain in effect. Furthermore, according to the report, the draft text also includes a provision allowing crypto investment gains and losses to be offset against gains and losses from other securities such as stocks.

*This is not investment advice.

Follow our Telegram and Twitter account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!

Iran has reportedly changed its foreign-exchange framework to give companies more options for bringing export income back into the country, with the new arrangements permitting digital assets in international payments amid tighter US sanctions.

According to a Wednesday report from the Financial Times, Iranian businesses can now use Bitcoin (BTC) and Tether’s USDt (USDT) to pay overseas counterparties, with transactions processed through domestic crypto exchanges.

Exporters have also gained more control over money they earn outside Iran. Rather than sending those proceeds through the state-run exchange system and converting them at government-set rates, companies can put the funds directly toward their own import costs.

US Targets Iranian Crypto Assets and Exchanges Washington has meanwhile targeted Iranian activity in the crypto sector through measures covering both trading platforms and digital assets. In early June, the Treasury sanctioned four Iranian crypto exchanges under its “Economic Fury” campaign.

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said shortly before those sanctions were unveiled that the United States had gained control of Iranian digital assets valued at approximately $1 billion.

Bessent announced another action on July 14, saying US authorities had directed the freezing of crypto worth more than $130 million in wallets connected to Iran’s central bank.

Separate blockchain research has also revealed the extent of crypto activity involving sanctioned Iranian parties. TRM Labs said in June that transactions linking CoinEx to sanctioned Iranian entities totaled more than $3.8 billion over more than seven years.

CoinEx disputed suggestions that it maintained business ties with the Iranian state or crypto trading platforms based in the country. The exchange also said it had not helped sanctioned entities obtain financing.

DisClamier: This content is informational and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author's personal opinions and do not reflect The Crypto Basic opinion. Readers are encouraged to do thorough research before making any investment decisions. The Crypto Basic is not responsible for any financial losses.

CoinCorner has launched a Bitcoin custody service for UK customers that charges a 1.5% annual fee and uses keys held separately by CoinCorner and AnchorWatch.

Summary

CoinCorner and AnchorWatch each control a key, preventing either company from moving customers’ Bitcoin alone. Lloyd’s of London underwriters cover key loss and unauthorized access involving Bitcoin held in Vault. Customers can add or remove funds without a long-term commitment and set custom identity checks. CoinCorner’s crypto services remain outside FCA regulation and are not protected by the UK’s FSCS. CoinCorner said its new Vault uses multi-signature technology to divide control of customers’ Bitcoin between two companies operating in different jurisdictions. CoinCorner holds one key, while insurance and custody provider AnchorWatch holds the other.

Neither company can independently approve a transfer from the Vault, according to CoinCorner’s support documents. Requiring multiple keys removes the single point of control found in a conventional custodial wallet, where one company can authorize transactions on its own.

Bitcoin held through the service is insured under a policy underwritten through the Lloyd’s of London market. CoinCorner said the cover applies to losses caused by lost keys and unauthorized access, although specific policy conditions and exclusions have not been published on the product page.

Customers can also set their own identity checks, which must be completed before a transaction can proceed. The available controls allow account holders to add verification steps that match their security needs, with CoinCorner’s support team handling the setup.

CoinCorner Vault charges a 1.5% annual fee Vault costs 1.5% per year, with CoinCorner calculating and billing the fee monthly. The company charges customers on the first day of each month based on the amount of Bitcoin recorded in their Vault at that time.

No long-term commitment is required, and users can move Bitcoin into or out of the product. Withdrawals return funds to a customer’s standard CoinCorner Bitcoin balance, which the company describes as an instant process.

Deposits follow a different monthly schedule. According to CoinCorner’s Vault guidance, Bitcoin added after the first day of a calendar month does not enter the recorded Vault balance until the following month. The company says any Bitcoin remaining within Vault after a withdrawal continues to be insured.

CoinCorner also says it does not lend out or otherwise use Bitcoin placed in the service. The product therefore differs from interest-bearing crypto accounts, where a platform may deploy customer assets through loans or other transactions in return for yield.

Vault does not advertise a return on deposited Bitcoin. Customers instead pay for the custody structure, transaction controls, and insurance attached to assets held within the product.

Multi-signature custody splits control between two firms Multi-signature wallets require more than one private key to approve a Bitcoin transaction. Under CoinCorner’s setup, the relevant keys are held by independent entities rather than stored by a single platform.

AnchorWatch provides the second part of that arrangement through Trident, its Bitcoin custody infrastructure. The AnchorWatch platform uses Bitcoin scripts and time locks to apply security, recovery, and governance rules at the protocol level.

Time locks can make an alternative method of moving funds available after a specified period when a key is lost or a participant becomes unavailable. AnchorWatch says the design allows recovery conditions to be built into a vault without giving one party immediate control over the Bitcoin.

The US company is also a Lloyd’s coverholder, which allows it to arrange policies backed by underwriting capacity in the Lloyd’s market. AnchorWatch says its other custody products can obtain as much as $100 million of cover per vault, while institutional customers may seek limits of up to $500 million. CoinCorner has not disclosed the limit attached to its UK Vault product, so figures advertised for AnchorWatch’s other services should not be treated as the coverage available to every CoinCorner customer.

AnchorWatch separately offers a three-institution custody configuration involving AnchorWatch, BitGo, and CoinCorner. Its website describes that product as a two-of-three wallet, meaning two institutions must sign a transaction. CoinCorner’s UK-facing documents describe Vault as a two-entity service in which CoinCorner holds one key and AnchorWatch holds the other.

Insurance does not provide FSCS protection The private insurance attached to Vault is separate from the protection provided through the UK’s Financial Services Compensation Scheme.

CoinCorner states in its legal notice that investments in cryptoassets through its platform are not regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority. Customers also cannot take complaints about the crypto service to the Financial Ombudsman Service, while their Bitcoin is not eligible for FSCS protection.

The distinction matters because private policies cover named events under agreed terms and exclusions. CoinCorner identifies lost keys and unauthorized access as covered events, but its public Vault material does not say that the policy protects customers from a fall in Bitcoin’s price, insolvency, or every possible operational loss.

CoinCorner Ltd is based in the Isle of Man and is registered with the Isle of Man Financial Services Authority under the Designated Business Act 2015. The company is also registered with the Isle of Man Office of Fair Trading as a moneylender.

Its electronic money and payment services have a separate structure. CoinCorner acts as a distributor for Mercury Foreign Exchange Limited, an FCA-authorized electronic money company, but the authorization attached to those payment services does not extend FCA protection to CoinCorner’s cryptoasset products.

Founded in 2014, CoinCorner says it serves more than 350,000 users across 15 markets. The company previously entered the UAE market through a 2022 partnership with Dubai-based Seed Group covering Bitcoin trading, storage and payment services.

UK crypto custody faces new FCA rules in 2027 CoinCorner has introduced Vault as the UK prepares to place crypto custody under a full authorization system.

As crypto.news reported in June, the FCA’s new cryptoasset regime is scheduled to take effect on Oct. 25, 2027. The rules will cover custodians, trading platforms, stablecoin issuers, staking providers and other intermediaries.

Firms seeking to conduct regulated crypto activities will have an application window running from Sept. 30, 2026, through Feb. 28, 2027. Existing registrations under the UK’s anti-money laundering rules will not automatically become authorizations under the new Financial Services and Markets Act framework.

The regulator plans to apply requirements covering custody, capital, operational resilience, disclosures, market conduct and consumer protection. Companies may also need to show that they can withstand market stress and maintain financial resources against risks carried on their balance sheets.

In August, US trading platform Robinhood secured FCA registration under the existing anti-money laundering system before the new framework takes effect. More than 50 companies were listed on the FCA’s cryptoasset register at the time, including Kraken, Ripple, BlackRock and BNY.

For American customers, AnchorWatch advertises a separate multi-institution service using a two-of-three arrangement with CoinCorner and US custodian BitGo. Its website says insurance for that configuration is optional for US users, with indicative pricing beginning at $4,000 for every $1 million of coverage and final premiums subject to underwriting review.

HashKey Cloud said on Sept. 7 that it had joined Stacks as a launch partner for self-custodial Bitcoin staking.

Summary

HashKey Cloud joined Stacks as a Genesis Bond participant and an sBTC signer operator officially. The institutional Genesis Bond is scheduled to launch around September 10, according to Stacks developers. Bonded Bitcoin remains timelocked on Bitcoin while participants pair it with locked STX tokens separately. HashKey Cloud says its staking infrastructure spans more than 40 different blockchain networks globally today. sBTC signers coordinate Bitcoin deposits and withdrawals using a threshold-based approval system collectively onchain today. The agreement gives the infrastructure provider two roles: participating in the inaugural Genesis Bond and joining the signer network securing sBTC.

HashKey Cloud operates under HashKey Holding Limited. Stacks founder Muneeb Ali presented the collaboration during the HashKey Cloud and Cactus Custody “Yield on Trust” event in Hong Kong.

The company says its node and staking infrastructure covers more than 40 blockchain networks. Stacks reported that HashKey Cloud manages about HK$29 billion in staked assets. These figures come from the companies and were not independently audited for the partnership announcement.

HashKey Cloud will participate in the first Genesis Bond HashKey Cloud will join the first institutional cohort using Stacks’ new Protocol Bond system. Stacks said in an official announcement that the Genesis Bond was expected to begin around Sept. 10.

The launch date remains an estimate. Stacks has not announced an exact activation time, final capacity or participant allocations. Technical or operational conditions could also alter the schedule.

The first cohort includes institutional participants such as digital asset manager 21Shares and UTXO Management, a subsidiary of Bitcoin treasury company Nakamoto Inc. The Genesis Bond is intended to demonstrate how institutions can earn BTC-denominated rewards without transferring their Bitcoin to a centralized custodian.

Bitcoin committed to the product remains visible on its base blockchain. The arrangement should allow observers to inspect the relevant timelock transactions without relying exclusively on reports from Stacks or participating institutions.

The phrase “Bitcoin staking” requires context. Bitcoin uses proof-of-work and does not support staking through its native consensus system. The Genesis Bond does not change Bitcoin’s consensus rules.

Stacks instead uses Proof of Transfer, commonly called PoX. Stacks miners commit BTC while competing to produce blocks. The protocol distributes part of that Bitcoin to qualifying participants as rewards.

Bitcoin remains under the holder’s keys Stacks’ PoX-5 design introduces a Protocol Bond that connects two separate commitments. The participant timelocks BTC on Bitcoin’s base layer and locks a corresponding amount of STX on Stacks.

According to the project’s technical documentation, a bond lasts 12 Stacks reward cycles, or approximately six months. The Bitcoin remains in a wallet controlled by the holder’s keys rather than moving to a centralized custodian or wrapped asset.

The participant must also lock STX through a signer-manager contract. The two positions are cryptographically associated and operate together for the bond term.

PoX-5 permits only one active staking position for each Stacks principal. A participant cannot use the same principal for an STX-only position and a Protocol Bond simultaneously. The protocol also prevents one principal from holding two concurrent bonds.

The documentation allows early withdrawal. However, participants leaving before the scheduled end of a term forfeit their remaining rewards for that cycle. Recovering the BTC principal still requires the holder’s signature.

Rewards initially accrue as sBTC. A participant may request native BTC by supplying a Bitcoin payout address, provided the selected signer manager supports base-layer withdrawals.

Native BTC settlement is not available under every configuration. If the withdrawal cannot be processed within the participant’s maximum transaction-fee setting, the payment falls back to sBTC.

As crypto.news reported, Stacks is targeting an annualized Bitcoin yield near 3% during the initial phase. The rate is a protocol target, not a guaranteed return. Actual rewards may vary with miner commitments, available capacity and network conditions.

HashKey Cloud will help secure sBTC transfers HashKey Cloud will also operate as a signer for sBTC, the Bitcoin-backed asset used within the Stacks ecosystem. Stacks previously confirmed that HashKey Cloud, Ankr and The Tie had joined the signer set.

sBTC is designed to represent BTC on Stacks at a one-to-one ratio. Users can deploy it within Stacks applications while the underlying Bitcoin remains governed by the network’s signer system.

Signers collectively authorize deposits and withdrawals between Bitcoin and Stacks. No individual signer can independently move the BTC backing sBTC.

Stacks said the system maintained a 70% approval threshold throughout the latest signer rotation. Operations such as withdrawals require approval representing at least 70% of participating signer weight.

Adding HashKey Cloud brings an Asia-based infrastructure provider into the signer group. Stacks described the expansion as improving institutional access and distributing operating responsibility across additional companies and regions.

Those benefits remain Stacks’ assessment. A larger signer set does not remove every technical or governance risk associated with sBTC.

Users still depend on enough signers remaining available and following the protocol correctly. Software failures, signer outages or coordination problems could delay deposits and withdrawals. Smart-contract faults could also affect services built around sBTC.

Self-custody reduces exposure to a single custodian, but it does not eliminate risks arising from Stacks contracts, wallet software, signer managers or the sBTC system.

Genesis Bond access will remain limited initially Stacks plans to introduce Protocol Bonds in stages. Initial Genesis Bond access focuses on institutions and professional market participants rather than unrestricted retail participation.

The project’s staking guidance says bond capacity will be allocated to approved partners during the bootstrap phase. Some capacity may become available through selected pooling providers.

Wallet compatibility is another requirement. Leather and Xverse support PoX-5 functions, while Ledger users need Stacks application version 0.26.15 or later for transactions carrying the new spending conditions.

Participants must also consider the prepare phase at the end of each reward cycle. During the final 100 Bitcoin blocks, the protocol rejects new staking transactions, position updates and withdrawal requests.

HashKey Cloud has not disclosed how much BTC or STX it plans to commit. The company also has not published participation fees, customer eligibility requirements or a list of supported jurisdictions.

Its announcement cautioned that Bitcoin staking services may be unavailable in some regions because of local laws. HashKey Cloud did not guarantee any investment return.

The Genesis Bond’s expected launch is the next event to watch. Confirmation of the activation time, committed Bitcoin, participating institutions and available capacity would provide the first measurable evidence of demand for the product.

Bitcoin has become one of the world’s largest pools of digital capital, yet only a small fraction participates in onchain financial activity.

Summary

Stacks plans to use self-custodial Bitcoin Staking as an entry point for BTC holders, targeting roughly 3% annualized rewards paid in Bitcoin. Its roadmap moves from attracting Bitcoin capital to scaling network infrastructure and expanding into lending, trading, perpetual markets and programmable BTC. StackingDAO, Bitflow, Zest Protocol and Hermetica are developing liquid staking, trading, credit and yield products that could give staked and Bitcoin-linked capital more uses across the ecosystem. Other crypto ecosystems built large economies around staking, lending and decentralized trading. Bitcoin, by comparison, still lacks a universally accepted home where holders can put BTC to work without taking on custody, bridge or foreign-chain risks.

That is the problem Bitcoin-native finance is trying to solve.

The term describes a financial system built around Bitcoin as the productive asset, with services such as staking, lending, borrowing and trading anchored to Bitcoin rather than requiring holders to move their wealth into another blockchain economy. Stacks is pursuing that model through a 2026 roadmap built around three connected stages: attract Bitcoin capital with self-custodial yield, scale the infrastructure needed to support greater activity, then expand the financial applications available to that capital.

The official roadmap is currently presented as a 2026 plan rather than a formal roadmap extending through 2030. Its direction, however, describes a longer-term effort to build lending, trading, programmable capital and other financial services around Bitcoin. The central question for the coming years is whether Stacks can turn that roadmap into the ecosystem where BTC holders move from passive ownership to active financial use.

Bitcoin Staking could become the entry point for idle BTC Many Bitcoin projects have tried to make BTC productive, but each approach introduces different trade-offs.

Core already offers self-custodial Bitcoin staking using Bitcoin’s CheckLockTimeVerify timelocks, but rewards are paid in CORE. Babylon also keeps staked BTC native to Bitcoin, but its security model includes slashing, meaning delegated BTC can face penalties if protocol security conditions are violated.

Stacks is proposing a different combination. Under its Bitcoin Staking design, participants create a protocol bond by locking BTC on Bitcoin Layer 1 and pairing it with STX worth approximately 5% of the BTC position. The BTC remains under the participant’s keys, while the paired STX secures access to staking capacity. The current target yield is approximately 3% annualized and paid in Bitcoin.

The source of that yield is Proof of Transfer, or PoX, the consensus mechanism Stacks has operated since January 2021. Stacks miners commit BTC as they compete to produce blocks and receive STX rewards. The BTC committed by miners then flows to eligible participants. Stacks says the mechanism has distributed more than 4,200 BTC since launch.

That gives the planned product an economic structure different from staking systems funded entirely through new token issuance. The reward pool comes from BTC spent by miners as part of Stacks block production rather than from creating a new reward token or lending participants’ Bitcoin to borrowers.

The product is not yet established at scale. As of July 16, 2026, PoX-5 was operating on a private testnet with integration partners testing bonding, reward distribution and exits ahead of a public testnet and potential mainnet activation. Mainnet still depends on the Stacks governance process and successful testing.

That distinction matters. Bitcoin Staking could become the top of the Stacks capital funnel, but the thesis remains dependent on execution.

The roadmap moves from capital to infrastructure and finance Attracting BTC is only the first step. A Bitcoin-native financial system also needs enough performance, liquidity and application depth to give holders reasons to keep using their capital after earning an initial yield.

The Stacks roadmap organizes that process into three phases. Bitcoin Staking anchors capital. Infrastructure improvements prepare the network for greater DeFi and automated activity. The final phase expands Bitcoin-native finance across lending, trading and programmable capital. The workstreams are progressing concurrently rather than waiting for each previous phase to finish.

On performance, Stacks core developers are targeting a 100-fold improvement in throughput through efforts including Clarity Wasm. The roadmap also calls for continued core improvements and optimization of the sBTC bridge. Stacks has separately set a goal of supporting up to 10,000 active AI agents as programmable financial activity grows.

The longer-term financial layer includes self-custodial Bitcoin lending, trading, perpetual markets and programmable BTC that software agents can use. The roadmap also explores allowing sBTC to pay transaction fees, which could reduce the need for users or automated agents to acquire a separate gas asset before interacting with applications.

For institutions and large Bitcoin holders, that combination matters because yield alone may not justify moving substantial capital into a new financial environment.

StackingDAO, Bitflow, Zest and Hermetica build the next layer The wider Stacks ecosystem is already assembling several of the financial primitives needed to move BTC beyond a single staking product.

StackingDAO provides the liquid staking layer. It currently operates liquid Stacking products for STX and has outlined plans for a Bitcoin liquid staking token as Bitcoin Staking develops. A BTC liquid staking token, or BTC LST, would represent an underlying yield-producing Bitcoin position while remaining usable elsewhere in DeFi.

The role is comparable in structure to the function liquid staking tokens serve in Ethereum’s DeFi economy. Without a liquid representation, staked capital remains harder to use elsewhere. With one, the same economic position can potentially provide liquidity, serve as collateral or participate in additional financial strategies.

Bitflow supplies another necessary piece: markets where Bitcoin-linked assets can trade and find liquidity.

The protocol operates a decentralized exchange and aggregator on Stacks and has introduced HODLMM, a concentrated-liquidity engine designed for more capital-efficient markets. A future BTC LST would need liquid trading venues to maintain an effective market and provide holders with practical entry and exit routes.

Zest Protocol adds credit markets. Its existing Stacks market allows users to lend Bitcoin-linked assets and borrow against collateral, while its planned Bitcoin Collateral Vaults aim to let users borrow stablecoins against BTC without moving their Bitcoin off Layer 1. Zest says those vaults are scheduled to launch in 2026 and are designed around self-custodial Bitcoin collateral rather than a conventional wrapped-BTC structure.

Hermetica provides yield products and a Bitcoin-linked monetary layer through hBTC and USDh. The hBTC vault deploys BTC exposure into onchain strategies including lending, staking and basis strategies, with realized profits accounted for in Bitcoin terms. Hermetica describes the product as redeemable for native BTC, while its current documentation shows that withdrawals remain subject to protocol cooldowns and Bitcoin settlement times.

Its USDh product provides a Bitcoin-backed synthetic dollar that can serve as a stable asset within the same financial environment. Hermetica’s hBTC documentation describes a strategy that can use BTC-linked collateral in lending markets and deploy borrowed stablecoins into additional yield opportunities, connecting Bitcoin collateral, credit and stable liquidity within one system.

Together, these protocols illustrate what comes after Bitcoin Staking.

From Bitcoin yield to a Bitcoin-native financial economy Ethereum and Solana showed how staking can become more than a standalone yield product. Once users begin earning on an asset, demand can develop for liquid staking, collateral markets, decentralized exchanges and structured strategies that make the staked capital more useful.

Stacks is attempting to build a similar progression around Bitcoin without simply copying another chain’s security and custody model.

Its strategy starts with a product designed to keep BTC on Bitcoin L1 while generating BTC-denominated rewards. The roadmap then connects that capital to faster infrastructure and an ecosystem spanning liquid staking, trading, credit and yield products.

Bitcoin-native finance will not be defined by one staking product. It will be defined by whether Bitcoin can function as productive capital across staking, lending, liquidity and programmable applications without forcing holders to abandon the properties that made them choose Bitcoin in the first place.

Stacks is building toward that outcome. Bitcoin Staking is intended to open the door. The ecosystem developing behind it will determine how far the capital travels once it enters.

FAQ How is Stacks Bitcoin Staking different from other self-custodial options? Stacks’ proposed design combines three features: rewards denominated in BTC, no protocol-level slashing of Bitcoin principal and an early exit mechanism that returns BTC while forfeiting remaining rewards. Core also offers self-custodial staking but pays rewards in CORE, while Babylon’s security model includes BTC slashing. Stacks Bitcoin Staking remains in testing and has not yet established a mainnet operating record.

What is Bitcoin-native finance? Bitcoin-native finance is a financial ecosystem where Bitcoin serves as the productive asset across activities such as staking, lending, borrowing, trading and structured strategies, with infrastructure anchored to Bitcoin rather than requiring holders to move entirely into another blockchain economy.

How does Bitcoin Staking on Stacks work? The current design requires participants to lock BTC on Bitcoin L1 and pair it with STX worth approximately 5% of the BTC position. The two assets form a protocol bond. BTC committed by Stacks miners through Proof of Transfer funds Bitcoin-denominated rewards, with a current target of approximately 3% annualized yield during the planned bootstrap phase.

What is a Bitcoin liquid staking token? A Bitcoin liquid staking token represents an underlying staked or yield-producing BTC position while remaining transferable and potentially usable in DeFi. It can allow holders to maintain exposure to staking rewards while using the liquid token for trading, liquidity or collateral. StackingDAO has outlined plans to develop a BTC LST as Bitcoin Staking on Stacks develops.

Tether isn’t just printing digital dollars anymore. CEO Paolo Ardoino has laid out a vision that positions the stablecoin giant as something closer to a sovereign wealth fund, one that distributes dollars globally while quietly amassing enormous reserves of Bitcoin and physical gold.

Tether has been buying between 1 and 2 tons of gold every single week. Let that accumulate over months, and you get approximately 140 tons of gold valued at roughly $23-24B.

Ardoino has indicated the company targets gold at approximately 10-15% of its investment portfolio. The purchases are funded not by minting more USDT, but by profits from Tether’s core operations. Tether earned an estimated $10-13.7B across 2024 and 2025, with expectations for 2026 running even higher. When your stablecoin has $186B in market circulation and you’re earning yield on the reserves backing it, the cash flow becomes almost absurdly large.

The company has also reportedly been hiring ex-HSBC traders and expanding into gold trading operations.

Advertisement

Tether has been allocating up to 15% of its realized operating profits to Bitcoin since May 2023, building a position that now sits somewhere in the range of 83,000 to 100,000 BTC. At current prices, that Bitcoin treasury is worth north of $8B. Ardoino has described Bitcoin as a “digital inflation hedge” and, in more colorful terms, a crucial defense against what he called an “apocalyptic future.”

The Bitcoin allocation targets roughly 10% of the overall investment portfolio, mirroring the gold strategy. Together, these two hard-asset positions represent about 20-25% of Tether’s total reserves, with US Treasuries and cash equivalents making up the bulk of the company’s backing.

With approximately $186B in circulation, Tether’s stablecoin dwarfs every competitor and serves as the de facto digital dollar for emerging markets worldwide. In parts of Latin America, Africa, and Southeast Asia, USDT functions as a savings vehicle and payments rail in ways that traditional banking simply doesn’t reach.

Tether earns yield on the Treasury bonds and other instruments backing USDT, while users get the dollar exposure they want. USDT holders don’t earn interest, making the spread between what Tether earns on reserves and what it pays out the core business model.

The company has also launched Tether Gold (XAUT), a tokenized gold product that has been gaining traction. If Tether’s physical gold holdings continue to grow at the current pace, XAUT could allow the company to monetize its gold reserves twice: once through appreciation and once through tokenization fees.

Tether’s Bitcoin purchases represent a steady, programmatic source of buying pressure. A company allocating 15% of multi-billion-dollar annual profits to BTC on an ongoing basis creates a persistent bid in the market. Hiring traders from major banks and building physical commodity positions gives Tether credibility with institutional players who might otherwise dismiss a stablecoin company as a purely crypto phenomenon.

A company holding $186B in stablecoin liabilities, 140 tons of gold, and nearly 100,000 Bitcoin has become systemically relevant. Any shock to Tether’s operations, whether regulatory, operational, or reputational, would now send ripples through multiple asset classes simultaneously.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

The oldest trick in the con artist’s handbook, updated for the crypto age: call someone pretending to be from a trusted institution, create enough panic, and walk away with their life savings. In this case, the life savings happened to be more than 4,100 Bitcoin, worth over $240 million at the time of the theft.

Malone Lam, a 22-year-old Singaporean national, is scheduled to appear in a U.S. federal court on September 9, 2026, to enter a guilty plea linked to one of the largest Bitcoin thefts ever prosecuted on American soil.

How the scheme worked Lam and his associates allegedly impersonated representatives from both Google and the Gemini crypto exchange, contacting a wealthy investor based in Washington, D.C.

The goal was straightforward, even if the execution was elaborate: convince the target that his accounts were compromised, then talk him into handing over security codes and access credentials. Once inside, the group transferred his Bitcoin holdings out of his control entirely.

The theft occurred in August 2024, though the broader criminal operation had been running since approximately October 2023. By the time authorities dismantled it, the group had been linked to thefts totaling more than $263 million across multiple incidents stretching through March 2025.

The FBI arrested Lam in September 2024 at a mansion in Miami, a detail that says everything about how the stolen funds were being spent. Prosecutors allege the group converted Bitcoin into cash and then burned through it: dozens of sports cars, private jets, and a single nightclub visit in Los Angeles that reportedly ran to over $569,000.

A landmark prosecution This case carries legal significance that extends well beyond the dollar amount. It marks the first time a Bitcoin-related prosecution has been brought under the Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act, better known as RICO, a statute historically associated with organized crime syndicates rather than crypto theft rings.

Eighteen people have been indicted in connection with the scheme. Ten have already pleaded guilty ahead of Lam’s scheduled hearing, suggesting prosecutors have built a durable case from the inside out. Lam himself faces a minimum sentencing guideline of 14 years in prison if the plea proceeds as expected.

The operation also had a physical dimension that investigators found notable. The group reportedly conducted home burglaries specifically to steal hardware wallets, the small USB-like devices that store crypto private keys offline.

What this means for crypto security Exchanges invest heavily in technical infrastructure, multi-factor authentication, and blockchain-level security. None of that matters if an attacker can simply call your customer and impersonate your support team.

Gemini’s brand was used as a prop in this scheme, though the exchange itself was not compromised at the infrastructure level.

For individual holders of significant crypto assets, the case reinforces several uncomfortable realities. Legitimate exchanges and platforms do not initiate unsolicited calls asking for security codes. Any unexpected contact claiming to be from a financial institution or exchange, requesting credentials or urgent account action, should be treated as a red flag regardless of how official it sounds.

Ten guilty pleas already secured, a lead defendant scheduled to follow, and a case that federal prosecutors are framing as organized crime rather than opportunistic fraud.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

@PancakeSwap has crossed the 200 million user mark, a milestone that underscores its standing as the dominant decentralized liquidity venue heading into the second half of 2026.

A Platform Built on Sustained Growth The milestone did not arrive suddenly. That foundation has since expanded:

While the multi-chain footprint has broadened its reach, BNB Chain remains the engine of the platform, accounting for the deepest liquidity and the highest transaction counts.

On the tokenomics side,

Expanding Into Tokenized Assets Beyond spot trading in $BTC and memecoins, PancakeSwap has moved aggressively into tokenized real-world assets (RWAs).

The tokenized asset push was largely triggered by a partnership with Ondo Finance. The appeal is practical:

With 200 million users now on board and a growing suite of products spanning crypto-native tokens, memecoins, and tokenized equities, @PancakeSwap appears well-positioned to remain the primary decentralized exchange for retail participants through the current market cycle.

Sources:
PancakeSwap: 5 Years of PancakeSwap (Official Blog)
Crypto Briefing: PancakeSwap hits $1B in tokenized asset volume
Crypto Briefing: PancakeSwap v3 hosts $3B in spot DEX volume for tokenized stocks

Altcoins

7 September 2026 | 11:13 U.S. inflation is the main market-wide risk this week, while policy decisions, security updates, network upgrades and migration deadlines could move several individual tokens.

Date Catalyst Main exposure September 10–11 U.S. PPI and CPI Bitcoin, altcoins, yields and the dollar September 10 ECB policy decision European markets and global risk appetite No fixed date Liquid incident resolution L-BTC, Liquid services and bridge confidence September 10–11 MultiversX and XRPL upgrades EGLD, XRP and network applications September 10 Harmony migration deadline ONE holders, applications and liquidity providers 1. U.S. inflation could move the entire crypto market The Bureau of Labor Statistics calendar places the August Producer Price Index release on September 10 and the Consumer Price Index on September 11. Both reports are scheduled for 8:30 a.m. ET.

PPI measures prices received by domestic producers, while CPI tracks prices paid by consumers. CPI normally has the stronger immediate influence on Federal Reserve expectations, but an unexpected PPI result could begin changing market positioning one day earlier.

The releases arrive shortly before the Federal Reserve’s September 15-16 meeting. Because the figures could alter expectations for that decision, Bitcoin’s historical reactions to Federal Reserve rate increases provide useful context for the connection between monetary policy and crypto prices.

Hotter inflation could push Treasury yields and the dollar higher if traders reduce expectations for monetary easing. Higher yields increase the return available from lower-risk assets, while a stronger dollar can tighten financial conditions for assets priced in the U.S. currency. Both developments can pressure Bitcoin and altcoins.

Softer inflation could lower yields and weaken the dollar, creating a more favorable environment for risk assets. The initial move may still prove temporary if the data do not materially change the expected path of interest rates.

That happened after the May 2024 CPI report was released on June 12. Bitcoin initially surged above $69,000 after inflation came in below expectations, but part of the advance faded as traders considered the Federal Reserve’s cautious outlook.

After this week’s releases, traders can distinguish a broader macro move by checking whether Bitcoin, two-year Treasury yields and the dollar move in consistent directions. Softer inflation accompanied by falling yields, a weaker dollar and gains across altcoins would provide stronger confirmation than an isolated Bitcoin spike.

2. The ECB decision could send conflicting signals The European Central Bank’s monetary-policy meeting concludes on September 10. The decision is due at 12:15 UTC, or 2:15 p.m. in Frankfurt, followed by a press conference.

The ECB does not usually influence crypto as directly as the Federal Reserve, but its decisions can move European bond yields, the euro and expectations for global liquidity.

A restrictive decision or unexpectedly hawkish guidance could lift regional yields and weigh on risk appetite. A dovish decision could support European assets through lower borrowing costs, but it could also weaken the euro and strengthen the dollar. Those opposing effects make the market’s response more informative than the rate decision alone.

The ECB raised its three key rates by 25 basis points in June, confirming that renewed inflation pressure can still produce a restrictive policy surprise. That decision provides policy context rather than proof that Bitcoin will respond in a particular direction this week.

Traders should compare the ECB statement with movements in EUR/USD, European yields and the dollar index. A Bitcoin move that occurs without corresponding changes in those markets would be more likely to have a crypto-specific cause.

3. Liquid’s repayment now requires on-chain proof The Liquid Network incident has no scheduled resolution, but a return of funds, publication of a technical postmortem or restoration of normal network activity could become a significant development during the week.

Liquid said approximately 4,000 BTC, valued near $320 million at the time, left its federation wallet. It also said the SideSwap Peg-Out Authorization Key and the federation’s other keys had not been compromised.

SideSwap said the L-BTC submitted through its service had been created through an Elements software vulnerability before the related peg-outs were processed. No complete public postmortem had independently established the full mechanism at the time of writing.

The unidentified parties controlling the Bitcoin claimed in on-chain messages to be white hats. They said they would return most of the funds after the vulnerability was patched, but that promise had not been completed or independently verified.

The distinction between a stolen key and a software failure matters. A compromised private key would mean an attacker obtained direct control over protected funds. A validation failure could allow an unauthorized state change even when the relevant keys continue functioning as designed.

A detailed examination of how 4,000 BTC left Liquid without a reported key compromise explains the known transaction sequence and the questions that remain unanswered.

The broader Bitcoin market would face greater risk if the funds began moving toward exchanges or services commonly used for liquidation. Without such movement, the immediate consequences remain more concentrated in L-BTC, Liquid-based services and confidence in federated bridges.

The 2022 Ronin bridge exploit provides a relevant comparison. RON fell about 20% after the breach was disclosed, while the most direct disruption remained within Ronin and its connected applications. Security incidents generally become market-wide risks only when losses, forced selling or technical concerns spread beyond the affected system.

For Liquid, the useful evidence would be confirmed repayment transactions, a reconciled reserve balance, publication of the vulnerability fix and the restoration of network and exchange services.

4. MultiversX and XRP Ledger face execution tests Two protocol changes are expected during the week, placing the immediate focus on whether both networks complete their upgrades without disruption.

MultiversX has scheduled its Supernova mainnet activation for September 10 at epoch 2233. The upgrade is designed to reduce block times from approximately six seconds to 600 milliseconds by separating consensus from execution.

If the activation succeeds, faster confirmation could make the network more suitable for applications requiring frequent or time-sensitive transactions. Its longer-term value to EGLD will depend on whether developers and users take advantage of that additional capacity.

The XRP Ledger could activate its fixCleanup3_3_0 amendment around September 11. The projected date remains conditional on validator support staying above the required threshold.

Under the XRPL amendment process, a proposal must retain supermajority support for two weeks before activation. The current voting position and projected date can be followed through the XRPScan amendment tracker.

The bundled fixes affect features including vaults, lending, automated market makers, permissioned trading infrastructure, checks and pseudo-accounts. It is primarily a maintenance amendment rather than a new source of XRP demand.

Ethereum’s 2022 Merge shows why technical execution and price performance must be judged separately. The network completed its transition to proof of stake, but ETH initially rose by around 2% before falling about 6% below its price at the time of the upgrade, according to Coinbase Institutional. Wider market conditions and existing trader positioning outweighed the successful deployment.

For both MultiversX and XRPL, activation is the first test. A lasting token-price effect would require the technical changes to produce greater usage, liquidity, transaction activity or fee generation.

5. Harmony users face an asset-access deadline Harmony has proposed retiring its mainnet and migrating ONE to Ethereum while redirecting the project toward AI-powered video infrastructure.

The proposals are nonbinding and may be revised. Their immediate importance comes from Harmony’s instruction for users to exit smart contracts before September 10 because multisignature wallets, liquidity pools and on-chain applications cannot be transferred automatically.

The proposal says its final-state calculation would cover wallet balances, staking delegations, validator rewards and ONE reported by centralized exchanges. Users should nevertheless verify how their wallet, exchange or application plans to handle the migration rather than assume every balance will receive identical treatment.

Liquidity providers may need to unwind positions, while application teams must determine whether balances and services can be moved safely. These actions could reduce on-chain liquidity or produce selling pressure even before the proposal reaches its final form.

Validators may stop operating from 7 a.m. Pacific Time on September 10 under the published plan. Declining validator participation could therefore become relevant before the network’s final block is established.

BNB Beacon Chain’s retirement shows why migration deadlines can matter long after a blockchain stops operating normally. BNB Chain provided a formal migration process, but users who missed the primary window later needed a dedicated recovery tool to move eligible assets.

For Harmony, the most useful indicators are validator participation, bridge availability, decentralized-exchange liquidity and updated instructions for assets remaining in smart contracts after September 10. ONE’s market price will show only part of the migration’s impact.

Inflation has the widest market reach U.S. inflation has the greatest potential reach because it can reprice interest-rate expectations across crypto, bonds, currencies and equities. The ECB decision is the secondary macro event, while Liquid carries the largest unresolved security risk.

Liquid, the two network upgrades and Harmony’s migration proposal have narrower exposure. Their effects should be assessed through fund movements, network performance and user access – not automatically treated as signals for the wider crypto market.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice.

Author

Kosta has reported on cryptocurrency markets and blockchain infrastructure since 2020, bringing over six years of hands-on experience in the crypto industry built through daily tracking of markets, trends, and emerging blockchain developments. Specializing in Bitcoin on-chain analysis, institutional ETF flows, and digital asset price action, his work at Coindoo has been cited by other news agencies and consistently covers market developments with a focus on data-driven reporting across Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and XRP. Over the years, Kosta has contributed to multiple crypto media outlets in different regions, authoring over 6,000 articles across the sector. His reporting spans cryptocurrency markets and the broader fintech industry, tracking not only price action but also the technological and regulatory forces shaping the ecosystem. To support his analysis, Kosta actively leverages on-chain data and metrics from leading platforms such as Santiment, Glassnode, and CryptoQuant, enabling deeper, evidence-based market insights. He believes in the power of transparency and the data that underpins the blockchain ecosystem. His academic background in Marketing Management from Denmark further complements his analytical approach, adding a strong understanding of communication strategy and content positioning to his work.

Someone pulled $319 million in Bitcoin (BTC) out of Blockstream’s Liquid network on Sunday. It cost 21 cents in fees. Then they left a note on the blockchain saying they were the good guys.

While the internet calls it a heist, the chain says something stranger. Liquid’s remaining coins are still fully covered, down to the fourth decimal place.

We are aware of a security incident on @Liquid_BTC. Purported white-hat hackers have withdrawn ~4,000 BTC (~$320 million) from the Liquid Federation wallet. The @Blockstream team is working on contacting them on-chain with a signed message.

What we know so far is that the funds…

— Liquid Network 🌊 (@Liquid_BTC) September 6, 2026
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens 

$320M Crypto Reserve Moves, But the Wallet Left a Strange MessageThe first move cleared at 14:06 UTC, releasing 3,996 coins to an address nobody had ever used before. That was 95% of everything the network held.

Four hours later the money moved again. The sender paid 269 satoshis, about 21 cents, and attached a message anyone can read.

Actors left a message “we are whitehats. contact us on chain”. Source: memepoolThen they sent 0.00001 back to Liquid’s own address. The other 3,998.49 coins have not moved since.

“It looks like ~4,000 BTC just moved from the Liquid Network bridge all at once with an OP Return saying, “we are whitehats. contact us on chain”,” one user noted.

The Part Everyone MissedLiquid runs on one rule: To take coins out, you destroy the matching tokens inside the network first. So when the reserve shrank, the tokens it backs shrank with it. Both landed in nearly the same spot.

Liquid got got?

Liquid Pegout tx 4000/4200 BTC
8db751a650ae2f12006b7e8c69a75e4df360e8afd6b9e05ae0b9fa6458a7b140

Hacker message: "we are whitehats. contact us on chain"
c103de95817b43f2df635ec6f35ff126ca26a7c6d20570c4b01866b2b3e69a19

— ∴FreeSamourai∴ (@ErgoBTC) September 6, 2026
The peg holds, with 0.22 coins to spare. Nobody still holding L-BTC is short a satoshi. That kills the insolvency story. However, it leaves a worse one. Add what left to what remains, and the network held about 4,193 coins on Saturday. Nearly all of them were burned to make this move work.

Blockstream is clear about who can do that. Only a federation member can burn the tokens. Fifteen companies hold the keys, and 11 must sign before coins leave.

Its documentation calls the destination list a safeguard.

Whitelisted addresses are used as a failsafe to ensure that the federation always remains in full control of the BTC held by the Liquid Network,” the team said in its documentation.

The coins went to a brand new address. Blockstream has not explained that, or said anything at all.

Traders have seen this before, particularly with Ronin bridge attackers who gave back $10 million and took a bounty in 2024.

The money sits still, in daylight. Whoever holds it asked to be contacted. Nobody has answered.

The IMF stated that the recent Bitcoin accumulation came from private donations, not public funds

El Salvador has significantly reduced public participation in its Chivo e-wallet as part of changes to the government’s involvement in Bitcoin, according to the International Monetary Fund.

The IMF said efforts are also underway to improve transparency around the country’s BTC holdings across its different wallets.

No Public Funds Bought Bitcoin Majority ownership and operational control of Chivo have been transferred to a private operator, while the government has kept a minority stake and responsibility for holding customer assets. On Bitcoin accumulation, El Salvador provided documentation showing that the BTC acquired since the first review of its IMF program came from private donations, and no public funds were used for the purchases.

The IMF staff and the Salvadoran authorities have reached a staff-level agreement that also includes measures to strengthen the governance and risk management of crypto assets held by the public sector, along with plans to update the country’s digital-asset legal, regulatory and supervisory framework.

The IMF said no additional Bitcoin accumulation beyond the documented donations is expected. The developments come as El Salvador continues implementing reforms under its Extended Fund Facility arrangement with the international financial organization.

Zooming out, the IMF Mission Chief for El Salvador, Mr. Torres, stated that the country’s economy grew more than expected in 2025, and real GDP growth is expected to reach 4.5% this year. The outlook is being supported by investment and consumer spending, as well as remittances, tourism, and capital inflows. The IMF also pointed to improved security and higher investor confidence as factors supporting the economy. It said the government’s economic policies have helped strengthen fiscal and external buffers.

El Salvador Bitcoin’s Stash El Salvador became the first country to make Bitcoin legal tender, but its use and accumulation have faced continued opposition from the International Monetary Fund. As part of negotiations for its $1.4 billion IMF program, the country agreed to limit public-sector involvement in BTC, make private-sector acceptance voluntary, and scale back parts of its crypto framework.

You may also like: Bitcoin’s 4-Year Cycle Could Be Changing: Willy Woo Reveals What Could Replace It Crypto Holders Turn to Loans as Markets Cool in 2026: CQ Bitcoin Holders Just Cashed Out 110,000 BTC in Profits: Is a Bigger Price Drop Coming? The National Bitcoin Office’s reserve tracker currently lists around 7,764 BTC. At the current price of $81,150, the holdings are worth roughly $630 million.

Tags:

8h05 ▪ 6 min read ▪ by Eddy S.

Summarize this article with:

Kalshi has just reached a milestone. The predictive markets platform recorded 15.4 million visits from the United States in July 2026, compared to barely 1 million a year earlier. That’s an increase of 1,520%, according to Similarweb data consulted by Cointelegraph on Friday. Trading volume is rising at an even faster pace. Approximately 40 billion dollars in notional monthly volume in August, compared to 874 million a year before. But the information that really changes the game is elsewhere. Kalshi has just launched crypto perpetual contracts, including BTC, ETH, BNB and 14 other assets, with up to 6x leverage. A pivot that complicates an already heavy regulatory file.

In brief Kalshi now captures most of the growth in the predictive markets sector, driven by sports contracts. The platform is playing its regulatory survival before the Supreme Court on the exact nature of its contracts. In the midst of a legal battle, Kalshi chooses to open a second front by launching leveraged crypto perpetuals. Kalshi: Vertigo-Inducing Traffic and Volumes The numbers speak for themselves. US traffic represented nearly 80% of Kalshi’s total in July, compared to 72.8% a year earlier. Growth remains massively concentrated on the American market. Sports contracts, meanwhile, account for 83% of July’s trading volume, reported Barron’s on Thursday. In terms of volume, the entire predictive markets industry has grown from 2 to 50.7 billion dollars monthly over the period, with Kalshi capturing nearly 79% of the total alone. So Kalshi hasn’t just grown, it has absorbed the entire market.

The notable fact here is that traffic is also increasing from jurisdictions where Kalshi is not allowed to operate directly:

Canada increased from 50,000 to 450,000 visits; The United Kingdom from 31,000 to 296,000, while the platform’s user agreement still prohibits direct access from these two countries.  Kalshi circumvented the issue in June through a partnership with Wealthsimple, which gives access to about 4,000 eligible contracts via a separate app. Clever, but it doesn’t erase the fundamental question. Who accesses what, and under what authorization?

A Court Case that Has Reached the Supreme Court While traffic explodes, the courts are active. New Jersey has brought before the US Supreme Court the question of whether Kalshi’s sports contracts fall under federal supervision (thus the CFTC) or state gambling laws specific to each state. Michigan is pursuing its own efforts to block the platform. The issue is not cosmetic because if sports contracts are reclassified as bets under state jurisdiction, a significant part of Kalshi’s model, 83% of the volume, becomes fragile in its main markets.

Kalshi is playing a double-edged sword here. On the one hand, it claims federal status as an event contract market, regulated by the CFTC for years. On the other hand, the bigger the platform grows, the more it attracts state regulators’ attention, who see in this success proof that Kalshi is effectively disguised sports betting.

The Crypto Shift that Incorporates a Regulator And now Kalshi adds another layer. On September 4, the Kalshi Crypto account announced on X the launch of perpetuals on BNB, complementing an offering that already covers BTC, ETH, LINK and 14 other cryptos, with leverage up to 6x for eligible American traders. An extension confirmed the same day by a post relaying the announcement on the network. The platform is also pushing, according to the same publications, towards tokenized stocks and gold.

To say it frankly, the timing is bold because Kalshi is already fighting before the Supreme Court to prove that it is not a disguised bookmaker. And it chooses this precise moment to launch 6x leverage on cryptos, a territory that clearly falls under the CFTC’s eye for classical derivatives. Instead of simplifying its regulatory file, Kalshi has opened a second front. This time on leveraged crypto derivatives, while the first, sports contracts vs. gambling, is not even resolved yet.

Three Things About Kalshi to Keep in Mind US traffic up +1,520% in one year, 15.4 million visits in July, compared to less than 1 million in August 2025 Kalshi is about 40 billion dollars, driven to 83% by sports contracts, while litigation over their status rises to the Supreme Court New regulatory front opened at the beginning of September: launch of crypto perpetuals (BTC, ETH, BNB, LINK + 14 assets) up to 6x leverage Kalshi is therefore growing faster than its regulatory base can keep up. Between the Supreme Court and the CFTC, two fronts are opening at the same time: sports and crypto. The question is no longer whether a regulator will decide, but which one will tackle it first.

Maximize your Cointribune experience with our "Read to Earn" program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.

Join the program

A

A

Lien copié

Eddy S.

The world is evolving and adaptation is the best weapon to survive in this undulating universe. Originally a crypto community manager, I am interested in anything that is directly or indirectly related to blockchain and its derivatives. To share my experience and promote a field that I am passionate about, nothing is better than writing informative and relaxed articles.

DISCLAIMER

The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this article belong solely to the author, and should not be taken as investment advice. Do your own research before taking any investment decisions.

The service operates through its DFSA-regulated DIFC arm and complements the bank’s existing digital asset custody and stablecoin services.

Standard Chartered extended its deliverable Bitcoin (BTC) and Ether (ETH) spot trading to institutional clients in the United Arab Emirates on September 3, becoming the first Global Systemically Important Bank (G-SIB) to offer the service in the country.

The offering runs through Standard Chartered DIFC, the bank’s arm in the Dubai International Financial Center (DIFC), which said it is the only global bank currently providing institutional digital asset spot trading in the region.

Built on the UK Launch The launch adds trade execution to a custody service the bank already runs in the UAE. The trades are deliverable, so clients take possession of the underlying Bitcoin and Ether at settlement, and they can settle through a custodian of their choice, including Standard Chartered’s own digital asset custody solution that went live in September 2024.

Trades run through the bank’s electronic channels and sit inside its existing platforms, letting clients access the two assets through the same FX interfaces they already use. Standard Chartered DIFC is regulated by the Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA).

“The UAE has developed a clear digital assets regulatory framework that supports institutional participation and innovation,” said Rola Abu Manneh, Chief Executive Officer for the UAE, Middle East and Pakistan at Standard Chartered. She said pairing execution with custody, governance, and the bank’s global connectivity gives clients a more integrated way to participate in digital asset markets.

Standard Chartered first introduced institutional Bitcoin and Ether spot trading through its UK branch in July 2025, the first G-SIB to offer deliverable spot crypto trading to institutional clients.

“DIFC provides an established platform for international financial institutions to deploy global capabilities across markets,” said Christopher Parsons, Senior Executive Officer at Standard Chartered DIFC. He said the arrangement combines the bank’s global markets network with a regulated base for serving clients across the region.

You may also like: Bitcoin Holders Just Cashed Out 110,000 BTC in Profits: Is a Bigger Price Drop Coming? Ripple CTO Emeritus: BIP-110 Vote Loss Doesn’t Justify New Chain Bitcoin, Ethereum, Tron, and Cardano Tell Four Very Different Stories Through Active Addresses A Wider UAE Digital Asset Push The trading service sits inside a broader digital asset strategy that spans custody, trading and tokenization through Standard Chartered’s Corporate and Investment Bank, with its ventures ecosystem reaching into Zodia Markets and Libeara.

The bank already lets institutional clients mint and redeem USDC directly through its DIFC platform, a service it built with Circle. SC Ventures, its innovation arm, has backed a $100 million digital asset joint venture in the UAE with Japan’s SBI Holdings that targets market infrastructure, compliance tools, DeFi and tokenization.

Tags:

13h05 ▪ 5 min read ▪ by Luc Jose A.

Summarize this article with:

Over the past three weeks, Bitcoin ETFs have captured approximately 3.8 billion dollars. This is their best performance since the beginning of this year. In the last week, they attracted an additional 986.9 million dollars despite a withdrawal. This recovery thus confirms the return of institutional demand, although it has not yet offset all the outflows recorded since January.

In Brief Bitcoin ETFs attract nearly 3.8 billion dollars in three weeks. BlackRock and Fidelity concentrate the inflows recorded on Friday. Flows remain positive despite Bitcoin falling below 80,000 dollars. Funds are redirected towards Bitcoin, while Ethereum and XRP ETFs slow down. Three Weeks Erase a Large Part of 2026 Outflows In the week that ended on September 4, Bitcoin ETFs recorded inflows of 986.9 million dollars. This result exceeds the inflows of the previous week by nearly 7%.

The total thus amounts to approximately 3.8 billion dollars over three weeks. However, ETFs still display nearly one billion dollars of outflows since the start of the year. The current recovery has therefore significantly reduced the deficit without completely erasing it according to SoSoValue data.

The key statistics reveal the importance of capital inflows :

Inflows reached 986.9 million dollars in the last week ; The total for the past three weeks is nearly 3.8 billion ; Net inflows since launch are around 55.6 billion ; Net assets held by funds amount to 101.3 billion ; The 2026 balance remains negative by about one billion dollars. About 1.92 billion was collected in the first week of this streak. Nearly 924 million dollars were added in the following weekly period, and then 986.9 million during the last. This consistency distinguishes the current sequence from a simple exceptional day.

BlackRock Captures Two Thirds of Friday’s Inflows On September 4, ETFs captured 174.6 million dollars. This amount remains significantly lower than the 730.8 million attracted the previous day, yet it allows the category to close the week with a second consecutive positive session.

BlackRock’s IBIT ETF received 117.4 million dollars, or nearly 67% of the daily total. Fidelity’s FBTC reported 57.2 million dollars. As for other funds, they recorded no net inflows or outflows during the session, according to the Farside Investors table.

This dominance by BlackRock is also visible in cumulative data. IBIT has totaled over 64 billion dollars in inflows since its launch. Fidelity is just behind with nearly 10.3 billion dollars.

This concentration means that a significant share of demand still depends on two large funds. On Friday, IBIT and FBTC provided all the category’s positive flows.

Inflows Increase Despite Bitcoin Falling Below 80,000 Dollars Bitcoin dropped from nearly 81,200 dollars to less than 79,000 dollars during Friday’s session. Afterwards, it moved around 79,700 dollars. However, it maintained a weekly gain close to 2.6%.

ETFs therefore continued to attract capital despite the price drop. This divergence may indicate that some investors use the decline to consolidate their exposure. However, it does not guarantee an immediate price recovery.

This distinction is illustrated by the total valuation of assets held by ETFs. From Thursday to Friday, it fell from 103.3 billion to 101.3 billion dollars, even as funds collected 174.6 million dollars. Bitcoin’s drop reduced asset valuations faster than new capital increased them.

Thus, net flows measure subscriptions and redemptions of shares. Assets also account for Bitcoin price changes. An increase in inflows does not immediately trigger a corresponding rise in assets under management.

Funds Move Away from Ethereum and XRP ETFs For Bitcoin ETFs, demand has consolidated, however it has fundamentally slowed down for other crypto products. Ethereum ETFs recorded only 218.4 million dollars in the week, compared to 824.4 million the previous week. This drop is close to 74%.

Inflows in XRP ETFs fell from 110.5 to 19 million dollars, or a drop of nearly 83%. Despite this slowdown, both categories remain positive since January. Ethereum products have accumulated nearly 863 million dollars of inflows this year, compared to 515 million for those dedicated to XRP.

The current movement thus signals a rotation of capital towards Bitcoin. For confirmation of a durable trend, Bitcoin ETFs need to maintain positive inflows and erase the one billion dollar outflow still accumulated since the start of this year.

Maximize your Cointribune experience with our "Read to Earn" program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.

Join the program

A

A

Lien copié

Luc Jose A.

Diplômé de Sciences Po Toulouse et titulaire d'une certification consultant blockchain délivrée par Alyra, j'ai rejoint l'aventure Cointribune en 2019. Convaincu du potentiel de la blockchain pour transformer de nombreux secteurs de l'économie, j'ai pris l'engagement de sensibiliser et d'informer le grand public sur cet écosystème en constante évolution. Mon objectif est de permettre à chacun de mieux comprendre la blockchain et de saisir les opportunités qu'elle offre. Je m'efforce chaque jour de fournir une analyse objective de l'actualité, de décrypter les tendances du marché, de relayer les dernières innovations technologiques et de mettre en perspective les enjeux économiques et sociétaux de cette révolution en marche.

DISCLAIMER

The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this article belong solely to the author, and should not be taken as investment advice. Do your own research before taking any investment decisions.

Strategy Inc. is sitting on roughly $52.5 billion in net Bitcoin reserves after subtracting what it owes to preferred shareholders and convertible debt holders.

The gross number is substantially larger. Strategy holds approximately 845,050 BTC valued at around $74 billion, which represents about 4.02% of Bitcoin’s entire circulating supply. But after accounting for roughly $14.8 to $15.5 billion in preferred stock obligations and $6.7 to $6.8 billion in out-of-the-money convertible debt, the net figure lands at $52.5 billion.

A new way of counting The shift in reporting methodology traces back to July 2026, when Strategy introduced a revised metrics framework that prioritizes net exposure for common shareholders. Previously, the company simply trumpeted its total Bitcoin stack. Now it’s voluntarily showing its work, deducting the claims that sit above common equity in the capital structure.

Executive Chairman Michael Saylor has been the loudest champion of this approach. The framework is designed to give shareholders a clearer picture of what actually belongs to them after everyone else in line gets paid first.

The company has also introduced a market net asset value metric, referred to as mNAV, which has consistently registered above the 1.0x threshold since the revised framework went into effect. Strategy has permanently anchored its equity issuance threshold at that level, meaning it won’t dilute shareholders by selling stock below the net asset value of its Bitcoin holdings.

Cash reserves and strategic positioning Beyond the Bitcoin pile, Strategy’s liquidity position is substantial. The company reports a USD reserve of $5.1 billion alongside an additional cash pool of approximately $1.6 billion. Combined, that’s enough to cover preferred dividends and interest obligations for several years without touching the Bitcoin stash.

During recent weeks, the company has refrained from purchasing or selling any Bitcoin. Instead, it has raised capital through MSTR share sales and conducted limited preferred stock buybacks. The decision to pause Bitcoin acquisitions while repurchasing preferred stock serves a dual purpose: it reduces the senior claims sitting ahead of common shareholders while maintaining the existing Bitcoin position intact.

What the net reserve framework means for markets The distinction between $74 billion gross and $52.5 billion net is roughly $21.5 billion. It represents the total value of claims that would need to be satisfied before common shareholders see a penny in a theoretical liquidation scenario.

For investors evaluating MSTR stock, the mNAV metric hovering above 1.0x suggests the market is assigning at least full value to Strategy’s net Bitcoin position.

The approximately $6.7 billion in convertible debt is described as out-of-the-money, meaning the conversion prices sit above where MSTR shares currently trade. If those converts were to swing into the money, the dilution math would change, potentially shifting the net reserve calculation in ways that affect common shareholder value.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

Late August’s crypto market rebound has driven enterprises to increase their crypto asset allocations. As Bitcoin’s price rose, Bitcoin mining firms that had previously pivoted aggressively to AI businesses have reemerged as high-beta plays in BTC’s market, while corporate balance sheet strategies involving direct Bitcoin holdings have once again drawn market attention. Data shows Bitcoin climbed around 23% in late August, with some mining stocks surging 41% to 67%—outperforming multiple AI infrastructure companies. The market attributes the rally to three key factors: the U.S. Treasury expanding Treasury repurchase operations, the White House issuing positive signals on crypto regulation, and over $1.6 billion in short positions being liquidated. In terms of corporate buying activity, Strive purchased 1,800 BTC in the final week of August for roughly $143 million, lifting its total holdings to 23,156 BTC and making it the fifth-largest public company holder of Bitcoin. Strategy added 4,603 BTC over the same period, bringing its total holdings to more than 845,000 BTC. Separately, 21 major financial institutions including Bank of America, Goldman Sachs, and Citigroup plan to set up a new entity and launch a U.S. dollar stablecoin in the first half of 2027, with plans to expand to other G7 currencies for cross-border payments and digital asset settlements. For Ethereum, Bitmine has been accumulating ETH for 65 consecutive weeks, with its latest position exceeding 5.9 million ETH—accounting for 4.9% of Ethereum’s roughly 120.7 million circulating supply, just short of its 5% holding target. Despite the ongoing accumulation, the company’s current ETH holdings still carry approximately $5.1 billion in unrealized losses.

Relevant content

Trump says Iran conflict 'not a major issue for the US': Current situation is not a state of war.

US President Donald Trump said on local time September 4 that the more than six-month US-Iran conflict is "small potatoes" for the US, adding that it is more appropriate to define it as a "military conflict" rather than a war. Trump noted that the US is currently only conducting "intermittent strikes" with no sustained fighting between the two sides, and he expressed understanding for Vice President JD Vance’s earlier remark that "it should not be called a war". Trump also stated that the conflict has killed 18 US service members, but its scale is "not large" compared to conflicts like the Vietnam War that claimed tens of thousands of US troops, while emphasizing that "losing even one person is too many". Trump further claimed that the US has achieved "significant results" on the Iran issue, with its core goal being to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons. According to reports, the conflict has driven up energy prices and brought domestic political pressure to the Trump administration. US public approval of Trump’s handling of the Iran conflict is low, and the Republican Party faces pressure to retain its congressional majority in the November midterm elections.

8 minutes ago

A $70 million Bitcoin movie has entered post-production, with its plot suspected to portray Craig Wright as Satoshi Nakamoto.

The film *Bitcoin*, directed by Doug Liman and starring Gal Gadot, Casey Affleck, Pete Davidson, Isla Fisher, and others, has a budget of approximately $70 million and is currently in post-production. Reportedly centered on Bitcoin’s origins and the identity of Satoshi Nakamoto, the movie leans toward portraying Craig Wright—who claims to be Bitcoin’s inventor—as Satoshi Nakamoto, a premise that has sparked controversy in the crypto community. Content creator Terence Michael noted that the film may push the narrative that "Craig Wright is Satoshi Nakamoto" to mainstream audiences, further intensifying the debate over Satoshi Nakamoto’s true identity. Earlier, a UK court ruled that Craig Wright is not Satoshi Nakamoto, and the related controversy had cooled down for a time. The film is written by Nick Schenk, produced by Ryan Kavanaugh and Lawrence Grey, with Wright supporter Calvin Ayre also involved; no major US distributor has been confirmed for the project yet.

8 minutes ago

Over the past 24 hours, the Ethereum network recorded a net inflow of $46.47 million, while Robinhood Chain saw a net outflow of $21.07 million.

According to Defillama data, on-chain funds over the past day have clearly concentrated on the Ethereum mainnet and a small number of legacy Layer 1s. Ethereum saw a net inflow of $46.47 million, roughly 4.5 times that of second-place Solana. On the flip side, Robinhood Chain, Arbitrum, Hyperliquid and other platforms combined for a net outflow of over $100 million, reflecting a rebalancing trend of "flowing back to Ethereum, exiting Layer 2s". Robinhood Chain, the day’s largest net outflow source, is a broker-led Layer 2 launched in July 2026 based on Arbitrum Orbit. In the past two months, it has ranked among the top in Meme and tokenized stock trading volume, with its on-chain fees once even surpassing those of Ethereum, Solana and Base; however, its daily bridged funds have turned net outflow. Arbitrum, Base and Polygon also saw net outflows, bringing the total net outflow of the four major Layer 2s (including Robinhood) to around $69.55 million. Perpetual contract public chain Hyperliquid recorded a net outflow of $18.34 million, nearly on par with Arbitrum. New stablecoin settlement chains are also experiencing capital outflows: Tether’s Plasma saw an outflow of $13.27 million, Stripe-incubated Tempo and Tether ecosystem’s Stable registered outflows of $3.45 million and $2.99 million respectively.

8 minutes ago

A mysterious crypto whale has bought another 343,000 HYPE tokens, bringing its total holdings to 3.24 million HYPE, all of which are staked.

According to Lookonchain’s monitoring, the mysterious whale address 0x6436 has purchased an additional 343,000 HYPE tokens, valued at approximately $29.09 million. As of now, the address has accumulated a total of around 3.24 million HYPE tokens, with a total value of roughly $252 million, and has staked all of its HYPE holdings.

8 minutes ago

The "stock market version of Pokémon GO" meme coin GRASS briefly surged past $13.6 million in market capitalization this morning, hitting a new all-time high.

According to GMGN market data, the Robinhood ecosystem meme coin GRASS briefly surged past $13.6 million in market cap early this morning, hitting an all-time high, and has since pulled back to $8.3 million. It has recorded a 111% 24-hour price increase and a $8.7 million 24-hour trading volume. GRASS combines the internet meme "Touch Grass" with the gameplay of a stock-themed Pokémon GO. The project is officially positioned as a game, where tokenized fractional shares of real stocks (including AAPL, NVDA, TSLA, GME, etc., on Robinhood Chain) "spawn" at the physical locations of their respective companies—such as Apple Stores, GameStop outlets, Tesla showrooms, etc. Users can claim these tokenized stock fractions to their wallets by tapping on them when nearby. BlockBeats reminds users that most meme coins lack practical use cases and are highly volatile; please protect your assets and avoid FOMO.

8 minutes ago

Bitcoin is once again exhibiting characteristics of an "amplified version of gold", though the four-year cycle theory warns that the market still faces downside risks ahead.

Bitcoin has recently re-emerged as a safe-haven asset, hitting a four-month high of $82,262 this week before pulling back to around $79,800. André Dragosch, head of European research at Bitwise, said that amid rising macroeconomic uncertainty and currency devaluation risks, investors are increasingly viewing Bitcoin less as a high-risk tech asset and more as a store of value. Dragosch noted that Bitcoin’s 90-day price correlation with gold is near its highest level in six years. He argued that as macro forces strengthen and currency devaluation risks rise, investors are blurring the lines between Bitcoin and gold, with the cryptocurrency recently acting as an “amplified version of gold”. However, the four-year cycle theory remains a headwind for Bitcoin’s outlook. The theory links Bitcoin’s bull-bear cycles to its halving events. Fidelity projects that if historical cycle patterns hold, Bitcoin’s next bear market bottom could land around November 2026. Alex Thorn, head of research at Galaxy, previously estimated that the baseline scenario for this correction would bottom in the $40,000 to $46,000 range. Chris Kuiper, vice president of research at Fidelity Digital Assets, argued that the four-year cycle is not an exact timing rule, meaning it does not guarantee Bitcoin will decline later this year, and a long-term perspective and holding period have historically been more beneficial for investors.

8 minutes ago

AIxCrypto Holdings (AIXC), a US-based technology microcap, has decided to fully liquidate its digital asset portfolio and end its cryptocurrency treasury strategy.

Asset liquidation and SEC filingThe company submitted an amended Form S-1 to the Securities and Exchange Commission on September 4, 2026, revealing plans to sell its remaining cryptocurrency holdings. This decision follows sustained financial losses, including approximately a 50% unrealized decline in the value of its digital asset portfolio.

As of August 31, AIXC reported that it had liquidated 33.49 Bitcoin (BTC), 497.56 Ethereum (ETH), and 6,325.92 Solana (SOL). The firm also sold smaller allocations of Chainlink (LINK), Binance Coin (BNB), and Cardano (ADA).

In a notable detail from its regulatory disclosures, the company classified its XRP position as “immaterial.” By emphasizing this, AIXC’s management appeared to direct shareholders’ attention toward losses centered on major assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum, rather than on XRP.

After disposing of its depreciated assets, the company intends to relaunch and pivot fully to the robotics sector by developing its RoboShare platform, ending its previous focus as a pharmaceutical business.

AIxCrypto Holdings, once primarily focused on pharmaceuticals, is now shifting its strategy to concentrate on robotics, facilitated by the RoboShare platform, after closing out its digital asset exposure.

Mini dictionary: RoboShare, a platform being developed by AIxCrypto Holdings to enter the robotics industry, represents the company’s new direction after exiting its pharmaceutical and crypto treasury activities.

Changing approaches across companiesThis move by AIXC follows similar trends among small-cap companies reevaluating digital asset strategies. Tokyo-based Remixpoint previously cleared its altcoin holdings — including Ethereum, Solana, Dogecoin, and 1.19 million XRP — to fund investment in energy storage systems, yet retained Bitcoin as a treasury asset.

These developments suggest a shift in the approach of small corporates, prioritizing operational stability over speculative crypto investments. Rather than widespread panic, the selloffs point toward a transfer from accidental or opportunistic investors to more pragmatic market participants.

XRP ecosystem sees institutional investment despite small-cap retreatsWhile some companies downplay their exposure to XRP by labeling holdings as immaterial, institutional interest in the XRP ecosystem is evolving. Kinetics funds, a well-known asset management group, disclosed recent direct investments in Ripple Labs’ Class A preferred shares, according to SEC records. This strategy demonstrates that some institutional capital is gaining exposure to XRP through equity positions in Ripple, rather than solely holding tokens traded on exchanges.

Evernorth (XRPN), a leading XRP-focused treasury holding company, currently maintains about 473 million XRP in its reserves and is preparing for a public offering via a special purpose acquisition company (SPAC) structure on Nasdaq.

Mini dictionary: Evernorth (XRPN) is a treasury holding company specializing in XRP, notable for its large balance of XRP and its ongoing preparations for a Nasdaq listing through a SPAC arrangement.

Despite a number of smaller firms exiting the crypto market and labelling certain positions as negligible, other entities are taking calculated steps to strengthen their presence in the sector.

The current pattern reflects not a loss of confidence among corporate players in digital assets, but rather a more selective and strategic approach to managing risk and focusing on core operations.

CompanyCrypto assets soldAssets retainedNew focusRemarksAIxCrypto Holdings (AIXC)BTC, ETH, SOL, LINK, BNB, ADANoneRobotics (RoboShare)50% loss on portfolioRemixpointETH, SOL, DOGE, XRPBTCEnergy storage systemsCleared all but BitcoinEvernorth (XRPN)None~473 million XRPPreparing for Nasdaq via SPACMaintains large XRP holding

A significant amount of Bitcoin linked to the 2026 Coldcard hardware wallet theft has surfaced after being dormant, as blockchain analytics provider Bitquery tracked the movement of 20.5 BTC through THORChain into Ethereum. This marks a notable development in the ongoing investigation into the high-profile crypto theft.

Coldcard theft funds make active cross-chain moveThe transfer began on September 2, when 20.49703196 BTC left a previously identified address associated with what Bitquery describes as “Wave 3” of the Coldcard incident. After passing through two fresh intermediary Bitcoin addresses—both emptied during the process—the funds started a complex journey involving cross-chain swaps.

Bitquery classified the source address as “reported,” indicating it is tied to the known case but falls short of their most-verified category. The identities of those controlling the funds remain unknown, leaving investigators without clear suspects.

The activity shifted the investigation from long-inactive stolen Bitcoin to an active cross-chain trail, as Bitquery tracked the coins moving from Bitcoin to Ethereum networks for the first time since the theft occurred.

Researchers have stated that, until this movement, most of the stolen Bitcoin had remained untouched for an extended period, further obscuring the origins and intentions of the individuals involved.

Traced Bitcoin funneled through THORChain swapsTHORChain, a decentralized cross-chain protocol enabling the swap of crypto assets between various blockchain networks, processed a series of 34 swaps on September 2 and 3. These operations transferred 20.45 BTC into the Ethereum network.

Bitquery’s full tracking registers a total of 20.69 BTC swapped across 36 operations, including two earlier swaps on August 2 worth 0.24 BTC in total. The bulk of the assets—20.15 BTC—found their way to a single Ethereum address via 26 swaps, while another 0.3 BTC ended up at a second address through eight additional swaps. Two further swaps from August directed funds to a third Ethereum address.

Records show THORChain swap memos specified the primary destination address for the September flows. When checked at 16:15 UTC on September 3, the main recipient Ethereum address contained approximately 649.5 ETH and had not shown any outgoing transactions. By 17:25 UTC, new activity reduced the balance by around 5 ETH, marking the first outbound transaction since receiving the funds.

Mini dictionary: THORChain is a decentralized liquidity protocol that allows users to swap assets across different blockchains without relying on centralized exchanges, providing cross-chain interoperability.

Swap DateTotal BTC SwappedNumber of SwapsMain Ethereum Address ETH ChangeSeptember 2-320.45 BTC34649.5 ETH to 644.5 ETHAugust 20.24 BTC2Separate addressMajority of stolen Bitcoin remains untouchedDespite the recent activity, most of the Bitcoin stolen in the Coldcard breach remains unmoved. At block 965,339, investigators reported that 1,402.59 BTC were still sitting in addresses identified as connected to the theft. Of these, 1,396.33 BTC had never left their original theft addresses, reinforcing the opacity around the ultimate disposition of the majority of stolen assets.

Blockchain datasets partition the Coldcard heist into several “waves” by block data. Waves 1 through 3 are tracked separately from a fourth wave involving 64.90373764 BTC. Bitquery and researchers at Galaxy Research caution that blockchain evidence alone cannot determine whether the thefts share a single perpetrator or group.

Galaxy Research, a digital asset and blockchain analytics firm, estimates the total loss from the Coldcard hardware wallet theft at over 1,700 BTC. The status of the main Ethereum address tied to September’s swaps remains under surveillance, with a balance of about 644.5 ETH, while the vast majority of the stolen Bitcoin remains classified as dormant.

Researchers including Galaxy Research maintain they cannot confirm whether individual or collective responsibility lies behind every wave of the Coldcard wallet theft, underscoring continued uncertainty for investigators.

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) says private donations, rather than public resources, have driven El Salvador’s Bitcoin (BTC) reserve growth since the first review.

The finding came alongside a staff-level agreement on El Salvador’s combined second and third program reviews. Approval by the Executive Board would release around $140 million.

IMF Expects No Further Bitcoin Accumulation Beyond Documented DonationsEl Salvador entered the 40-month Extended Fund Facility (EFF) in February 2025. The arrangement carries total access of roughly $1.4 billion, equal to 360% of the country’s quota at the fund.

Bitcoin has shadowed the program ever since. Earlier this year, falling prices cut the value of El Salvador’s Bitcoin holdings. The country’s credit default swaps climbed to a five-month high.

At the first review, completed on June 27, 2025, the Fund said public-sector Bitcoin holdings had not moved since the program began. Coins appearing in the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Fund had been gathered from other state-held addresses.

The IMF said that it has now verified the source of coins added since the first review.

“Documentation has been provided verifying that Bitcoin accumulation since the first review reflects private donations and that no public resources were used,” the statement read.

No further accumulation beyond the documented donations is expected going forward. 

Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens

New Rules for Digital Assets and a Handover at ChivoMeanwhile, both sides also settled on plans to modernize the legal, regulatory, and supervisory framework for digital assets. They agreed to tighten oversight and risk controls on the crypto that the public sector holds.

Public involvement in the Chivo e-wallet has been substantially unwound. A private operator took majority ownership and day-to-day control. 

The state retained a small stake and continues to safeguard customer assets. Staff added that Work is also underway to improve the transparency of Bitcoin held across its various wallets.

Mr. Torres, Mission Chief for El Salvador, projected real gross domestic product (GDP) growth of 4.5% in 2026, helped by investment, consumption, remittances, and tourism. The non-financial public sector primary surplus should widen from 2.9% of GDP this year to 3.7% in 2027.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights

US-listed spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) notched their biggest inflows in nearly eight months as BTC reclaimed $80,000.

Bitcoin ETFs recorded $730.9 million in net inflows on Thursday, the largest daily haul since Jan. 14, when the funds attracted $843.6 million, according to SoSoValue data.

The surge followed $101.2 million inflows on Wednesday and came as Bitcoin reclaimed the $80,000 level after trading in a range between roughly $76,000 and $81,000 this week, according to CoinGecko.

Despite the spike in ETF inflows, CryptoQuant remained cautious about Bitcoin’s rally, citing weaker spot demand and heavy short covering as $83,000 emerges as a key bull market threshold.

BlackRock’s IBIT draws $454 million in a dayBlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT), the largest US spot Bitcoin ETF by net assets, led Thursday’s buying with $454 million in inflows, accounting for about 62% of the total, according to Farside Investors data.

While total spot Bitcoin ETF inflows reached their highest level since January, IBIT alone drew a larger $503 million inflow as recently as Aug. 20.

Daily US spot Bitcoin ETF flows since Tuesday. Source: Farside Investors

ARK Invest and 21Shares’ ARK 21Shares Bitcoin ETF (ARKB) followed with $137.7 million, while Fidelity’s Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC) drew $74.4 million.

VanEck’s Bitcoin ETF (HODL) and WisdomTree’s Bitcoin Fund (BTCW) were the only funds to record outflows on Thursday, at $19.6 million and $5.2 million, respectively.

Bitcoin rally still needs fresh buyersBitcoin’s recent rally was driven largely by traders closing short positions rather than opening new long positions, pointing to limited fresh buying demand, CryptoQuant said in a Thursday report shared with Cointelegraph.

The report mentioned that Bitcoin holders realized 23,000 BTC in net profits on Aug. 21, the highest daily amount this year, and about 110,000 BTC in total since Aug. 19, reflecting substantial profit-taking during the rally.

According to CryptoQuant, Bitcoin’s next major test sits around its 365-day moving average, which CryptoQuant placed at roughly $82,300.

Source: CryptoQuant

The company said the moving average has historically marked the divide between Bitcoin bull and bear markets, with Bitcoin reaching $81,400 on Aug. 28 before retreating below the threshold.

“A decisive close above $83K would confirm the new bull market,” CryptoQuant said, while a rejection could trigger a pullback toward the 200-day moving average near $69,000.

Magazine: Bitget CEO isn’t buying the Bitcoin rally — She’s waiting for $50K

This article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph's Editorial Policy and is intended for informational purposes only. It does not constitute investment advice or recommendations. All investments and trades carry risk; readers are encouraged to conduct independent research.

Kalshi prediction market has expanded its perpetual futures (perps) offerings to include BNB, Cardano (ADA), and AAVE. The platform shows perpetual contracts for AI altcoins such as Worldcoin (WLD) and Venice Token (VVV) are also live for trading after approval from the US CFTC.

BNB, ADA, WLD, AAVE & Venice Token Perps Trading Goes Live on Kalshi Kalshi has added BNB, ADA, AAVE, WLD, and VVV to its line of US CFTC-regulated perpetual contracts. The products debuted under the trademark “American Perpetuals,” which aims to offer CFTC-regulated perpetual futures contracts for trading in the United States.

Notably, the prediction market platform filed for these perpetual futures with the CFTC last week. The max leverage varies by crypto asset, such as 4.5x for BNB and 1.9x for Venice Token.

Kalshi now offers perpetuals trading for Bitcoin and 17 altcoins such as ETH, XRP, SOL, HYPE, and Zcash. Notably, the perpetuals are CFTC-regulated, don’t have an expiration date, and settle in USD.

As CoinGape reported earlier, Kalshi last launched Zcash (ZEC), Near Protocol (NEAR), Dogecoin (DOGE), and Shiba Inu (SHIB) perps. However, approvals for XLM, DOT, and HBAR are still pending with the US CFTC.

The approvals came despite CME Group’s lawsuit against the US CFTC and Chairman Mike Selig, alleging these contracts are swaps. This week, the CFTC filed a motion to dismiss the CME lawsuit, arguing the exchange lacks standing on its competitive-injury claims.

BNB, ADA, WLD, AAVE and Venice Token Perps. Source: Kalshi

Prices Rebound amid More Perpetual Futures Approval by CFTC BNB price jumped more than 5% to $729 amid broader crypto market recovery. The price is currently trading around $723, with a massive 83% rise in trading volume in the last 24 hours.

ADA price has skyrocketed almost 10% to $0.222 as RealFi sets October 1 mainnet launch. Cardano price outlook shows further upside to $0.28.

Meanwhile, AAVE, WLD, and VVV prices also jumped higher as the US Treasury bought back $12.5 billion of debt in its latest Treasury buyback operation.

If you’re looking to explore prediction markets amid the dip in the crypto market, check out these best crypto prediction markets of 2026.