Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

Tando at the Nairobi Bitcoin++ conf from @Murugi___ on X (Formerly Twitter)

Tando

Last month, Tando, the Kenya-based Bitcoin payments company, announced it had created a service that allows 40 million Kenyans to send and receive Bitcoin using the existing M-Pesa infrastructure. To pull this off, they strung together numerous pieces of technology, including in-house solutions, to make bitcoin’s Lightning Network act as a translation layer for millions.

TandoLaunched in 2024, Tando, the Kenyan payments company founded by Jason and Sabina Waithira Gitau, began as an attempt to solve a very specific problem: how do Kenyans spend Bitcoin like they do Kenyan Shillings (KES)? They quickly realized the best way to do that was to leverage the ubiquitous M-Pesa mobile money payment rail to provide a seamless experience.

They built an app that allows anyone with bitcoin to pay an M-Pesa invoice without needing local currency. Once a user enters their M-Pesa phone number and amount, they receive a lightning invoice to pay, and the recipient receives Kenyan shillings (KES). The app soon grew in virality and reach among the growing base of Kenyan bitcoin users.

As Gitau underscored in her panel at this year’s Oslo Freedom Forum, people can test out Tando using less than a dollar, without paying fees, or KYC, making it quick to validate and easy to adopt.

Giving Millions Access To Bitcoin However, as Jason put it in an interview for this article, though the app resonated with many, “they still need a separate bitcoin wallet to use Tando.” To curb that, they again went back to the tried-and-true formula: combining and building on existing infrastructure. In this case, M-Pesa phone numbers and what are known as lightning addresses—a payment spec that lets users to receive bitcoin payments via email addresses.

MORE FOR YOU

Slide from the Tando presentation at the Bitcoin++ Nairobi Open Source Edition from tando_me on X (Formerly Twitter)

Tando

They unveiled their novel approach last May, in which any bitcoin wallet that supports lightning addresses can instantly send bitcoin to a Kenyan phone number via M-Pesa. To achieve this, users claim their phone-number-prepended lightning addresses. This new service also gives the recipient, once they claim their address and pay a fee, a way to set up a non-custodial bitcoin wallet, enabling them to send and receive bitcoin.

Tando’s technique is reminiscent of a cousin project in South Africa called Machankura, which enables users to send and receive bitcoin offline over the Lightning network using Unstructured Supplementary Service Data (USSD) codes.

While there are privacy implications to linking phone numbers to payment infrastructure, the Tando team plans to continue iterating to strike a better trade-off and provide a more balanced experience.

The Spend Not Sell Bitcoin Movement Over the last few years, Africa has become home to projects looking to cement Bitcoin’s use as money, from circular economies and solutions like Machankura and Tando to infrastructure-led companies like MavaPay. The focus is not on price action but on utility and freedom money. This has fueled the ‘spend not sell’ movement, in which builders seek to familiarize users with earning and spending their bitcoin rather than trading and falling for get-rich-quick schemes.

Living On Bitcoin In KenyaMore importantly for the Tando team, bitcoin is for everyone, so there should be no gatekeeping; from the president and office workers to the farmers, the bitcoin network treats them all equally.

Tando makes it possible to live entirely on Bitcoin in Kenya, an idea now promoted as the African way to use bitcoin. In the past few weeks, as bitcoin builders and leaders from Africa and beyond met for the first Bitcoin++ Nairobi conference, many on social media expressed surprise at seeing this in action, how easy the experience was, and how groundbreaking the idea of living on Bitcoin really is.

Bitcoin is Money In AfricaAs Tando has shown, the combination of mobile money and freedom money is growing evidence that where there is a need, Africans will build, and where there is technology, they will pioneer and adopt.

African bitcoin builders continue to demonstrate that you do not need mass adoption or permission to live in the future.

Galaxy Digital’s research arm has cut its estimate of the CLARITY Act becoming law in 2026 to 50-50, down from 60% just three weeks ago, citing a Senate floor calendar that grows shorter each week and a bill that still lacks a merged text, a scheduled vote, or public commitment from leadership.

The downgrade, published by Galaxy researcher Alex Thorn, is a calendar story more than a substance story. The bill itself — the CLARITY Act, short for the Digital Asset Market Structure and Investor Protection Act — cleared the Senate Banking Committee 15-9 on May 14 and has sat on the Senate Legislative Calendar as item No. 423 ever since. No floor date has been set. No motion to proceed has been scheduled.

The CLARITY Act represents the most significant attempt yet by Congress to build a comprehensive regulatory framework for digital assets. It draws jurisdictional lines between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, establishes standards for when a digital asset is a commodity versus a security, and includes the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act (BRCA), which provides protections for certain blockchain developers and node operators. 

The bill passed out of the Senate Banking Committee with bipartisan support, a notable threshold in a political environment where crypto legislation has often stalled on party-line divisions.

The House passed a version of market structure legislation in 2024, but Senate action has been the harder lift. Banking and Agriculture committees both have jurisdiction, and staff-level reconciliation of the two committee texts is still underway. No unified legislative text has been made public.

The calendar problem with the CLARITY Act For a 60-vote bill — one that needs to clear the filibuster — the math is tight. The Senate is scheduled to begin its August recess at the end of July. Between now and then, a merged Banking-Agriculture text still needs to be finalized, a motion to proceed must be filed, floor debate must occur, and an amendment process must run. 

After all that, the House would need to act on whatever the Senate produces.

Thorn wrote that Senate Majority Leader John Thune needs to announce floor time by early July “at the latest” for a July vote to be realistic. 

Without a scheduling announcement on that timeline, the path shifts to September — and September runs into midterm-election dynamics that make scheduling controversial votes difficult.

The competition for floor time has intensified. Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act lapsed on June 12 after Congress failed to pass a reauthorization, and a Grassley-Cotton-Warner product still needs floor time. 

The FY2027 National Defense Authorization Act, a must-pass annual defense bill, also remains unfinished.

And on June 24, President Trump canceled the scheduled signing of a bipartisan housing bill that passed 358-32 in the House and 85-5 in the Senate, conditioning his signature on Congress first passing the SAVE Act, a proof-of-citizenship elections bill that Thune has said lacks the votes to pass the chamber. That condition injects another leadership-consuming fight into an already packed queue.

The calendar is the headline, but the bill’s substance has not been fully resolved. The ethics question remains the central open issue: a Van Hollen conflict-of-interest amendment failed 11-13 in committee, and Senators Ruben Gallego and Cory Booker continue to make enforceable ethics standards a condition of their support.

Thorn wrote that at least two Republican no votes — Josh Hawley and Rand Paul — are expected, which means Democratic crossover support is not optional. Law enforcement-aligned senators are also pressing for further changes to the developer-protection language inside the BRCA.

Galaxy’s note identified conditions that would push the odds back up: a public agreement on a combined Banking-Agriculture text, credible resolution of the ethics or BRCA disputes in a way that locks in a durable Democratic bloc, and a floor commitment from leadership for July. A scheduling announcement in the next two weeks, Thorn wrote, would push the firm back toward 60% or higher. Continued silence into mid-July would push it lower.

For now, the bill waits at No. 423 on the Senate calendar — real, but unscheduled, in a chamber that keeps finding other things to do.

Micah Zimmerman

Micah first discovered Bitcoin in 2018 but remained a skeptic on the sidelines for too long. Since 2021, he has covered crypto and business and now works as a news reporter for Bitcoin Magazine, based in North Carolina.

Macro FUD is easing, markets are deleveraging, and Fed policy is shifting.

According to CoinGlass data, roughly $1.8 billion in liquidations have hit the broader crypto market over the past 72 hours, with more than 75% of the total wipeout coming from long positions, in line with Bitcoin’s 5%+ weekly drawdown.

The flush wasn’t entirely unexpected. BTC had been consolidating around $60k for nearly two weeks, allowing leveraged long exposure to accumulate. 

Once the price lost that range, the move naturally triggered long liquidations, clearing traders positioned for a bullish continuation. Against this backdrop, Ansem’s Q3 BTC thesis starts to make more sense. 

Source: X According to the analyst, the flush has done what it needed to do, resetting excessive leverage and shaking out weak hands. With positioning now much cleaner, Bitcoin could be in a better spot to reclaim momentum, provided spot demand steps back in. 

On the macro side, the analyst argues the backdrop is still supportive. After a four-week run in the U.S. dollar, the rotation into gold has started to fade, while inflows into AI have left many sitting on large unrealized gains.

With macro FUD easing, the market is increasingly leaning toward a rotation back into risk assets. 

Against this backdrop, Ansem has flipped his Bitcoin [BTC] stance from bearish to bullish, viewing the start of Q3 as a clean long setup. However, unrealized losses among BTC long-term holders continue to build, raising the question whether the market is underestimating downside risk.

Bitcoin setup: Macro tailwinds vs. LTH stress signals  Is it still too early to call Bitcoin’s current dip a buying opportunity?

Even as macro FUD around the Strait of Hormuz cool, Fed rate hike expectations have jumped to over 27%, up from 11% last month, heading into the upcoming FOMC meeting on the 29th of July. This shift adds another layer of uncertainty to BTC’s setup, even as liquidity conditions show early signs of easing.

In this context, the growing number of holders sitting in unrealized losses starts to matter more. As the chart below shows, nearly 11 million BTC now sit in loss, marking the highest level on record.

Bitcoin’s drop to $59.1k has pushed 10.83 million BTC underwater, according to Glassnode data. LTHs now hold 14.8 million BTC, roughly 75% of circulating supply, with about 37% currently in the red.

Source: Glassnode Against this backdrop, Ansem’s call may be a bit early.

With no strong catalysts coming through, Bitcoin’s spot demand still looks weak. In that context, framing the recent pullback as just a short-term deleveraging flush might be premature. Meanwhile, macro FUD continues to weigh on sentiment among long-term holders.

That naturally increases the risk of LTH capitulation. Overall, this makes a strong Q3 Bitcoin setup less convincing for now, with the market potentially underpricing downside risk.

Final Summary Leverage is resetting and macro conditions are improving, so Bitcoin could recover if spot demand returns. Weak demand, Fed uncertainty, and rising LTH losses increase risk of further downside.

Strategy’s enterprise mNAV fell below 1 on Friday afternoon as its common stock extended its decline and its Stretch preferred stock hit a record low.

MSTR shares fell 3.5% on Friday and reached a yearly low near $82, adding further pressure to the company’s valuation.

Enterprise mNAV stood near 0.99, with Strategy’s enterprise value estimated at $50.3 billion against Bitcoin holdings worth roughly $50.6 billion. The company holds 847,363 BTC.

STRC, Strategy’s Variable Rate Series A Perpetual Stretch Preferred Stock, fell to about $71 before recovering to $74 at press time. The preferred stock remains well below its $100 stated amount.

Bitcoin was trading near $60,000 after repeatedly slipping below that level on Thursday and Friday, adding further pressure to Strategy’s valuation.

Advertisement

Strategy defines enterprise mNAV as its enterprise value divided by the market value of its Bitcoin holdings. Enterprise value includes the market value of MSTR common shares, debt, and preferred stock, minus cash.

This differs from basic mNAV, which compares Strategy’s common market capitalization with the value of its Bitcoin holdings. Diluted mNAV also accounts for potential dilution from securities that may convert into common shares.

Enterprise mNAV provides a broader view because it includes Strategy’s full capital structure. A reading below 1 means the company’s enterprise value is lower than the market value of its Bitcoin holdings.

That does not mean common shareholders have a direct claim on Bitcoin at a discount, since debt and preferred stockholders rank ahead of common equity.

The decline comes as pressure builds on STRC, one of Strategy’s main funding vehicles for Bitcoin purchases.

STRC was designed to trade near $100, with Strategy able to adjust its monthly dividend rate to support the price. The annualized dividend has already risen from 9% at launch to 11.5%.

At a price near $74, the current dividend implies an effective yield of more than 15%.

Strategy has relied heavily on STRC to raise billions of dollars for Bitcoin purchases. Trading far below par makes future issuance less efficient, while another dividend increase would raise the company’s annual payment obligations.

The simultaneous decline in MSTR, STRC, and Bitcoin is now pressuring both sides of Strategy’s funding model. A lower MSTR valuation reduces enterprise mNAV, while a deeply discounted STRC weakens one of the company’s main sources of capital.

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

Bitcoin’s [BTC] Q2 recovery was cut short at around $83K. What followed was a 25% pullback to sub-$60K, effectively erasing this quarter’s entire recovery gains.  

Short sellers made a killing thanks to Fed rate hike fears, Strategy’s overhang, and geopolitical tensions. Now, the crypto asset has retested the 200-weekly MA (Moving Average, white), a key level that marked previous market cycle bottoms. 

While this could help kick off the next Bitcoin bull market cycle, analysts expect another sharp drawdown.

Bitcoin market bottom: Close, but not there yet Renowned analyst Benjamin Cowen recently cautioned that there will likely be a scary dump below the 200WMA in late 2026. 

A decisive move down later this year, while initially scary, would likely just set up the market cycle bottom for Bitcoin in Q4 2026.

His projection was based on the 2022 market pattern. Bitcoin broke below the bull market cycle bottom support of the 200WMA for the first time in 2022. 

At the time of writing, Bitcoin’s price was trading just below $62K. And, this marked the fourth week that BTC has been flirting with the 200WMA. 

Back in 2022, it stayed below the level for months before the bull market kicked off in September 2023. This happened after BTC decisively reclaimed the 200-day MA (200DMA, blue), a level that typically acts as the bull market cycle support.  

Source: BTC/USDT, TradingView The 2020 rally also began in September and accelerated in Q4. So, if the current trend mirrors the past two cycle patterns, Cowen’s projection for a sharp drop below 200WMA and subsequent recovery in late 2026 could be validated. 

In fact, beyond the price charts, there has been a worryingly high leverage and weak demand. This was a perfect combination for a liquidation event that could push BTC lower, according to Binance Research analysts. 

Taken together, another slip below the bear market support or an extended dip below $60K couldn’t be overruled as we enter Q3. In such a scenario, the next potential floor price would be around $53K, the realized price for most BTC holders. 

But it’s not all gloomy for bulls who are tired of timing the market bottom. From an on-chain perspective, BTC may be close to marking the final market bottom based on past patterns. 

Currently, long-term holders (those who’ve held BTC for more than 6 months) control about 78% of BTC’s invested capital (realized cap). According to on-chain analyst James Check, these levels marked the past market bottom. 

Historically, this metric tends to peak late in bear markets, as supply gradually migrates from weaker hands to investors with longer time horizons.

Source: Checkonchain  Check added that BTC may be approaching the “pointy end” of this bear market. In other words, going by the behavior of long-term investors, the sub-$65K level could be a great buying opportunity. 

In fact, Bitfinex analysts reinforced Check’s outlook and added, 

Long-term $BTC holders sold into the 2024 ETF rally. Now they are doing the opposite. The cohort that took profit at the top is accumulating the decline.

Is consolidation likely ahead of Q2-end? The short-term headwinds for BTC bulls are OG whales (those who’ve held BTC for +5 years) and macro pressures. 

According to Galaxy Research, this cohort’s selling pressure (blue bar) overwhelmed the U.S. ETF absorption rate (purple) in the past few weeks. On average, the net BTC demand, factoring in ET, Strategy bids, and OG distribution, has been negative at 120K BTC. 

Source: Galaxy Research Simply put, the thin demand and the previously highlighted leverage risk could derail BTC in the near term. 

For its part, Singapore-based QCP Capital believes the May PCE inflation data, scheduled for Thursday, the 25th of June, could be the catalyst for the end of Q2 positioning. The firm noted, 

Following recent hawkish rhetoric from policymakers, an upside surprise could reinforce expectations for further policy tightening, while a softer-than-expected reading would likely support crypto and other risk assets.

As of writing, consensus forecasts suggest a headline PCE rising 0.4% on a MoM (month-on-month) basis, with core PCE expected to jump by 0.3-0.4%. 

Still, institutional and professional traders held a bullish outlook for the asset in the near and mid-term. 

This was reinforced by positively rising Skew across 1-week, 1-month, and 3-month tenors. It meant there was more demand for calls (bullish bets) than puts (hedging, bearish bets) for upcoming options expiries at the end of Q2 and in Q3. 

Source: Laevitas  Will Q3 offer the last BTC buying chance? Overall, the market bottom phase is a process and not a one-off event. As such, a dip towards $54K could still be on the cards.  

Even so, if the 2022 and 2018 market patterns play out, Q3 2026 could be the last discounted buying opportunity for long-term holders. 

But for a confirmed start of the next bull market cycle, BTC should decisively reclaim the 200DMA, currently at $76K. 

Final Summary BTC could still slip below $60K again before marking a final market cycle bottom.  Still, the drop could be the best buying opportunity if the next bull market phase starts in Q4 2026. 

Bitcoin’s latest pullback was not driven by a single headline. Instead, traders were hit by a cluster of pressure points at the same time: weakness in global technology stocks, another heavy day of spot Bitcoin ETF redemptions, a sharp leverage flush, and a large monthly options expiry that kept the market focused on downside strike levels.

TL;DR Bitcoin fell toward the $58,000 area as risk appetite weakened across crypto and technology stocks. U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs saw roughly $691.7 million to $696 million in net outflows on June 25, extending a six-day redemption streak. A large Deribit monthly options expiry, valued around $10 billion, added another layer of uncertainty for traders. Liquidations across the crypto market topped $1 billion over a 24-hour window as leverage was forced out of the system. ETF Outflows Add To The Pressure The institutional flow picture turned sharply negative before the move. Spot Bitcoin ETFs in the United States recorded net redemptions of roughly $691.7 million to $696 million on June 25, according to the validated figures in the writing pack. Fidelity’s FBTC and BlackRock’s IBIT were among the largest contributors to the daily outflow, with FBTC cited at about $274.5 million and IBIT at about $265.7 million.

That matters because spot ETFs have become one of the clearest gauges of institutional demand for Bitcoin. One weak day does not define a full trend, but a six-day redemption streak changes the market’s tone. When price is already under pressure and ETF flows continue to move out, traders tend to question whether dip-buying demand is deep enough to absorb forced selling and hedging activity.

Derivatives Traders Focus On The $55,000 To $60,000 Zone The timing of the decline was also awkward for derivatives traders. Bitcoin moved into the $58,000 region around the same time as a major monthly options expiry on Deribit, with notional value cited at roughly $10 billion. Options expiries do not mechanically determine price direction, but they can concentrate hedging flows around key strike levels and make already-volatile markets more difficult to read.

The validated source pack also pointed to stronger put skew around the $55,000 to $60,000 area. In plain English, traders were paying more attention to downside protection as Bitcoin tested lower levels. That does not guarantee a deeper drop, but it shows where anxiety had built up across the options market.

Leverage Gets Washed Out Liquidation data added to the bearish picture. Across the broader crypto market, more than $1 billion in leveraged positions were reportedly liquidated within a 24-hour window. Forced liquidations can accelerate intraday moves because losing positions are closed automatically, often into already-thin liquidity.

The broader backdrop was not helping either. Crypto’s sell-off came alongside pressure in global technology shares, including weakness in Nasdaq futures and heavy selling in parts of Asia’s equity market. That link matters because Bitcoin and major altcoins have increasingly traded like high-beta risk assets during periods when investors reduce exposure to expensive growth and technology themes.

What Traders Are Watching Now The immediate question is whether ETF outflows cool, whether options-related pressure fades after expiry, and whether Bitcoin can hold the lower end of the recent trading range. A reclaim of higher levels would help stabilize sentiment, but a failure to absorb redemptions and leverage unwinds could keep downside protection in focus.

For now, the sell-off looks less like a crypto-specific breakdown and more like a broad risk-off move amplified by ETF flows and derivatives positioning. That distinction matters: if macro pressure eases, the market may stabilize quickly. If institutional redemptions continue, however, the path back above key levels could remain choppy.

This report is based on information from CoinDesk Markets and Tokenpost and CoinDesk Derivatives.

This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.

Bitcoin sits near $60,000, down more than half from its October peak, with traders in extreme fear and institutions pulling money out for six straight weeks. The single question that decides where it goes next is whether the famous four-year cycle still governs Bitcoin, or whether institutions have broken it for good.

Summary

Bitcoin trades near $60,000, roughly 52% below its $126,000 October 2025 peak, sitting on its 200-week moving average with the Fear and Greed Index in extreme fear. The central debate is whether the four-year halving cycle is still in control, which would make this a textbook post-peak correction, or whether institutional demand has broken that cycle. The cycle-alive case fits the timing almost perfectly: Bitcoin peaked about 18 months after the 2024 halving and is now in the correction phase, the pattern predicts. The cycle-dead case argues that exchange-traded funds, corporate treasuries, and structural institutional demand have overridden the old retail-driven rhythm, pointing to a slow grind rather than a deep bear market. The crash is the test: a new low below the prior cycle bottom would vindicate the cycle, while holding here and grinding higher would suggest the pattern is broken. The outcome hinges on flows and the macro environment, not on any single price target. Bitcoin is trading near $60,000, and depending on which framework you believe, that number is either the early stage of a painful but normal correction that ends with a familiar recovery, or the beginning of something the old playbook cannot explain.

The price is down roughly 52% from the all-time high near $126,000 set in October 2025. It is resting on a long-term technical line that traders watch closely. The sentiment gauge known as the Fear and Greed Index is buried in extreme fear, and institutions have pulled money out of Bitcoin exchange-traded funds for six consecutive weeks.

Bitcoin daily price chart | Source: crypto.news Every one of those facts can be read two ways, and the reading you choose depends almost entirely on a single question that now hangs over the entire market: is Bitcoin still governed by its famous four-year cycle, in which case this is the correction the cycle always brings, or have institutions broken that cycle, in which case the old rules no longer tell you what comes next. 

This piece is built around that question, because it is the one that actually decides Bitcoin’s path through the rest of 2026, far more than any individual price level does.

The reason to frame a price prediction this way, rather than as a list of targets, is that the targets themselves flow from which thesis turns out to be right.

If the four-year cycle is alive, history points toward a deeper drawdown and a multi-quarter trough before the next halving-driven recovery. If the cycle is dead, the structural demand from funds and corporate treasuries could put a floor under the price well above where the old pattern would take it, turning a crash into a correction.

The honest work of a prediction, then, is not to pretend to know the number, but to lay out both frameworks clearly, weigh what the current evidence says about each, identify the levels and catalysts that would tip the balance, and translate all of it into concrete bull, bear, and base scenarios.

That is what follows: the cycle explained, the case for each side, what the crash is really signaling, the levels that matter, the scenarios, and the specific developments that would settle the debate.

Bitcoin at a crossroads Start with where things actually stand, because the current picture is genuinely tense. Bitcoin fell hard through June, breaking down toward the $60,000 area in one of its worst stretches in months, with a single brutal session wiping out around $700 million in leveraged positions, the great majority of them bullish bets that were forced to close.

The drop brought Bitcoin to its 200-week moving average, a long-term trend line near $62,000 that has historically marked deep-cycle support, the kind of level that in past bear markets has roughly coincided with major bottoms.

Just below it, analysts flag the $59,000 area as the next test, and below that, the psychological $60,000 line gives way to genuine uncertainty about how far a breakdown could run.

The mood matches the chart. The Fear and Greed Index, which measures market sentiment on a scale from extreme fear to extreme greed, sits near the bottom of its range in extreme fear, a reading that reflects how thoroughly the recent decline has shaken confidence.

Institutional behavior tells a similarly cautious story, with spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds posting six straight weeks of net outflows totaling close to $6 billion, described by analysts as the largest sustained institutional redemption wave since these funds launched.

Futures positioning has contracted sharply as traders cut leverage, a sign of de-risking rather than fresh conviction. And yet, woven through the gloom, are countervailing signals: a single day of positive fund flows late in the month, continued buying by corporate treasuries that view these levels as attractive, and the historical tendency of extreme fear to precede rebounds. 

Bitcoin, in other words, is at a genuine crossroads, with the bearish evidence and the contrarian signals roughly balanced, and the cycle question is what tips the interpretation one way or the other.

The four-year cycle, explained To weigh whether the cycle is alive or dead, you have to understand what the four-year cycle actually is, because it has been the dominant framework for understanding Bitcoin’s price for over a decade.

At the center of it sits the halving, a programmed event that occurs roughly every four years and cuts in half the rate at which new Bitcoin is created. Because Bitcoin’s supply growth slows abruptly at each halving while demand continues or grows, the halving has historically acted as a supply shock that, with a lag, drives the price upward.

The pattern that emerged across the first three cycles was remarkably consistent: in the 12-18 months following each halving, Bitcoin entered a powerful bull market and reached a new all-time high, after which it suffered a severe bear market, often falling seventy to 80% from the peak, before grinding through a recovery into the next halving and repeating the sequence.

This rhythm became almost a law in the minds of many investors. The halvings of 2012, 2016, and 2020 were each followed by a major price peak roughly a year to a year and a half later, and each peak was followed by a brutal drawdown and a multi-year trough.

The framework gave Bitcoin holders a kind of map: accumulate in the bear market, hold through the halving, ride the bull market to a new high, and brace for the crash that follows. The most recent halving occurred in April 2024, which places the present moment about 26 months into the current cycle, in what the framework would call the late-cycle or post-peak phase.

If the four-year cycle still governs Bitcoin, then the timing of the recent peak and the subsequent decline should look familiar, and the path ahead should rhyme with what happened after the previous three halvings. Whether it does is exactly what is now in dispute.

The case that the cycle is playing out exactly as it should The argument that the four-year cycle is alive and well is, on the timing alone, strikingly persuasive. Bitcoin reached its all-time high near $126,000 in October 2025, which is roughly 18 months after the April 2024 halving, landing squarely inside the 12-18-month window in which the previous three cycles each topped out.

From the cycle’s perspective, that peak was the natural climax of the post-halving bull market, right on schedule. What has followed, a sharp decline that has now erased more than half the price, is precisely the kind of post-peak correction the pattern predicts, the opening phase of the bear market that historically arrives after each cycle high.

Seen this way, nothing about the current crash is surprising or anomalous; it is the cycle doing exactly what it has always done.

Respected voices in traditional finance hold this view. Some analysts have described 2026 as a likely correction year, the down phase of the cycle, pointing to support zones in the $60,000-$75,000 range as the kind of levels a cycle correction might test or breach.

LATEST: Bitcoin hit a new cycle low near 60 thousand dollars with onchain metrics showing it is undervalued yet not at the levels of prior cycle lows. Identifying the bottom depends on the Clarity Act and how levered BTC holders perform, per Grayscale Research pic.twitter.com/DGwxb8Cvz0

— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) June 10, 2026 Prominent cycle analysts have argued that the cycle bottom still lies ahead, with base cases placing a potential new low later in 2026, consistent with the historical pattern in which the trough comes well after the peak.

Under this framework, the extreme fear, the institutional outflows, and the technical breakdown are all expected features of the post-peak phase, not signs that something unprecedented is happening.

The cycle-alive case, therefore, implies real further downside: if Bitcoin follows the template of prior cycles, the current decline could deepen toward a trough materially below current levels before the next halving-driven recovery begins. It is a sobering view, but it has history and timing firmly on its side, which is what makes it so hard to dismiss.

The case that the cycle is dead The opposing argument is that the four-year cycle was a feature of a Bitcoin market that no longer exists, and that the forces which created the cycle have been overwhelmed by something new.

The cycle, in this view, was largely a product of retail-driven speculation amplified by the halving narrative, a self-fulfilling rhythm that worked when Bitcoin was a small, speculative asset, moved mainly by individual traders and the four-year supply story.

LATEST: Matt Hougan argues Bitcoin bottom is not the key focus. He advises long-term investors to target potential cycle tops pic.twitter.com/Rhxq6FoX8B

— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) June 17, 2026 What has changed is the arrival of institutions at scale. Spot exchange-traded funds have brought enormous, structural pools of capital into Bitcoin, corporate treasuries have adopted it as a reserve asset and accumulate it continuously, and large financial institutions now treat it as a portfolio allocation instead of a speculative flyer.

These holders do not buy and sell on the halving narrative; they respond to macro conditions, portfolio strategy, and long-term conviction, and their presence changes the market’s fundamental behavior.

Proponents of this view, including some prominent research shops, argue that Bitcoin has entered a slow bull phase more akin to a mature asset like gold than to its old boom-and-bust cycles, in which persistent institutional demand smooths out the violent four-year swings and replaces them with a steadier, longer grind higher.

In this framework, the halving still matters as a supply event, but it no longer dictates the price the way it once did, because the marginal buyer is now an institution instead of a retail speculator chasing the cycle.

The implication is that the deep, 70-80% bear markets of the past may not repeat, because structural demand provides a floor that did not exist before, turning what would once have been a cycle-ending crash into a more contained correction.

If this thesis is right, then the current decline, however painful, is a drawdown within an ongoing structural bull market instead of the start of a multi-year winter, and the $60,000 area could prove closer to a bottom than to a way station on the road down. The cycle-dead case, in short, says the old map no longer describes the territory.

What the crash is actually telling us The natural question is whether the current crash settles the debate, and the honest answer is that it does not, because the evidence cuts both ways, which is itself revealing.

On the bearish side, the six straight weeks of exchange-traded fund outflows, totaling close to $6 billion, complicate the cycle-dead thesis, because they show that institutional demand, far from providing an unshakable floor, can reverse hard and become a source of selling pressure.

The slow-bull argument rests on institutions being steady, structural buyers, and a sustained redemption wave of this size shows that institutional money can flee risk just as retail money does, dragging the price down instead of cushioning it.

The extreme fear, the forced liquidations, and the breakdown to long-term support all fit comfortably within the cycle-alive interpretation of a post-peak correction gathering momentum.

On the other side, several signals support the cycle-dead reading. Even amid the outflows, corporate treasuries kept buying through the decline, with major holders adding to their positions at current levels and explicitly framing them as attractive entry points, behavior that reflects exactly the structural, conviction-driven demand the slow-bull thesis describes.

Late in the month, fund flows turned positive for a day, a tentative hint that the institutional selling may be exhausting itself. And the very depth of the extreme-fear reading, historically, has often preceded rebounds instead of further collapse, because it tends to mark the point of maximum pessimism where selling pressure runs out.

The takeaway is that the crash is genuinely ambiguous: it has features that fit both frameworks, and it has not yet produced the one piece of evidence that would be decisive, which is whether Bitcoin makes a new cycle low or holds here and recovers. Until that resolves, the data refuses to declare a winner, which is precisely why the cycle question remains open and why the next few months matter so much.

The levels that matter While the big-picture debate plays out, the technical levels provide the concrete map traders are watching, and they are worth knowing because they will mark, in real time, which thesis is gaining the upper hand.

The most important support is the 200-week moving average near $62,000, the long-term trend line that has historically tracked deep-cycle bottoms; a decisive, sustained break below it would be a meaningful signal that the bearish, cycle-alive scenario is taking hold, because losing that level has in the past preceded extended declines.

Just beneath sit the $59,000 area and the round $60,000 psychological level, the latter being the line that prediction-market traders have heavily wagered Bitcoin will break to set a new yearly low, with a smaller but real probability assigned to a fall under $50,000.

On the upside, the levels that would suggest the decline is stabilizing run through the $64,000-$65,000 zone as immediate resistance, with the broader trading range capped near $66,000-$67,000. Reclaiming those levels with conviction would weaken the bearish case and lend support to the idea that structural demand is putting in a floor, while repeated rejection there would keep sellers in control.

The key point is that these levels are not just numbers but markers in the larger argument: holding the 200-week moving average and pushing back above resistance would be evidence for the cycle-dead, floor-is-holding thesis, whereas breaking down through support toward the fifties would be evidence for the cycle-alive, correction-deepening thesis.

The chart, in this sense, is where the abstract debate becomes concrete, and the next decisive move through one of these levels will tell observers a great deal about which framework is winning.

The bull, base, and bear cases for 2026 Translating all of this into scenarios means tying each outcome to the cycle question and to the levels and flows that would drive it. These are conditional ranges, not predictions, and each depends on which forces win out.

Bull case: Bitcoin holds the 200-week moving average, the extreme fear marks a local bottom, institutional fund flows turn decisively positive, and a friendlier macro backdrop, such as signals of easier monetary policy, restores risk appetite. In this scenario, the cycle-dead, structural-demand thesis is vindicated, the $60,000 area proves to be a correction low, and Bitcoin recovers back toward and through its prior resistance, with more optimistic institutional targets pointing well into six figures over the following year as the slow bull resumes. Base case: the tension persists and Bitcoin chops within a wide range for an extended period, neither breaking down to a new cycle low nor mounting a clean recovery, as steady treasury buying offsets continued fund outflows and the market waits for macro clarity. In this scenario, the cycle question stays unresolved, Bitcoin grinds sideways to modestly lower around current levels, and direction depends on which flow trend wins out over the second half of the year. Bear case: Bitcoin loses the 200-week moving average decisively, the institutional outflows continue, and the four-year cycle reasserts itself in textbook fashion, driving a deeper correction toward the $50,000 area or below as the post-peak bear market plays out. In this scenario, the cycle-alive thesis wins, prediction-market bets on a sub-$50,000 print are realized, and Bitcoin works toward a cycle trough later in the year before any halving-driven recovery can begin. What would settle the debate For anyone trying to read Bitcoin’s direction over the coming months, the analysis points to a short list of developments that would actually settle the cycle question, and watching them is more useful than fixating on any single price. The first and most decisive is simply whether Bitcoin makes a new cycle low. If it breaks down through the 200-week moving average and the $60,000 area toward a materially lower trough, the four-year cycle will have shown that it still governs the market, and the bearish framework will have won.

If, instead, Bitcoin holds these levels and begins to recover, the case that structural demand has broken the cycle gains powerful support. That single binary, new low, or held floor, is the cleanest test available.

The second thing to watch is the institutional flow trend. The six-week outflow streak is the strongest evidence against the slow-bull thesis, so a durable reversal back to sustained net inflows would suggest the structural demand is reasserting itself, while a continuation or acceleration of outflows would reinforce the bearish, cycle-alive reading.

The behavior of corporate treasuries matters here too: continued accumulation through weakness supports the floor thesis, while any sign of treasuries slowing or reversing would be a serious warning.

The third factor is the macro environment, since Bitcoin now trades heavily as a risk asset, and a shift toward easier monetary policy or renewed risk appetite would support the bullish case, while tighter conditions and risk aversion would deepen the decline. 

The honest conclusion is that Bitcoin’s path through 2026 is not yet written, because it depends on a genuine, unresolved question about whether the oldest pattern in crypto still holds. The cycle is either running late or it is dead, and the market is about to find out which, with the 200-week moving average, the flow data, and the macro backdrop serving as the scoreboard. Until those resolve, humility about any specific target is not weakness but accuracy.

Frequently Asked Questions What is the four-year Bitcoin cycle? It is the dominant framework for understanding Bitcoin’s price, built around the halving, a programmed event roughly every four years that cuts the rate of new Bitcoin creation in half. Historically, in the 12-18 months after each halving, Bitcoin entered a bull market and reached a new all-time high, then suffered a severe bear market, often falling 70-80%, before recovering into the next halving. The pattern held across the 2012, 2016, and 2020 halvings, giving investors a map of accumulation, bull run, peak, and crash that has shaped how the market thinks about Bitcoin for over a decade.

Where is Bitcoin in the cycle right now? The most recent halving was in April 2024, which places the present moment about 26 months into the current cycle, in what the framework calls the late-cycle or post-peak phase. Bitcoin reached its all-time high near $126,000 in October 2025, roughly 18 months after the halving, squarely within the historical window for a cycle peak. The decline since then, now more than 50%, would be the post-peak correction the cycle predicts. If the cycle still governs, the trough would typically come well after the peak, potentially later in 2026.

Why do some analysts think the cycle is dead? Because the market that created the cycle has changed. The four-year rhythm was largely driven by retail speculation amplified by the halving narrative, when Bitcoin was a small asset moved by individual traders. Now spot exchange-traded funds, corporate treasuries, and large institutions have brought structural capital that responds to macro conditions and portfolio strategy instead of the halving story. Proponents argue this has turned Bitcoin into a slow-bull asset more like gold, with steadier demand smoothing the violent four-year swings and providing a floor that could prevent the deep bear markets of the past from repeating.

What does the current crash tell us about the debate? It does not resolve it, because the evidence cuts both ways. The six straight weeks of fund outflows show institutional demand can reverse and become selling pressure, undercutting the steady-floor thesis and fitting the cycle-alive correction view. But corporate treasuries kept buying through the decline, fund flows turned positive for a day, and extreme fear has historically preceded rebounds, all of which support the cycle-dead reading. The decisive evidence, whether Bitcoin makes a new cycle low or holds and recovers, has not yet arrived, which is why the debate remains open and the coming months are pivotal.

What price levels matter most? The key support is the two-hundred-week moving average near $62,000, a long-term line historically tied to deep-cycle bottoms; a decisive break below it would signal the bearish scenario is taking hold. Beneath sit the $59,000 area and the $60,000 psychological level, with prediction markets heavily wagering on a break to new yearly lows and a smaller chance of a fall under $50,000. On the upside, 64,000-$65,000 is immediate resistance, with the range capped near $66,000-$67,000. Holding support and reclaiming resistance favors the bulls; breaking down favors the bears.

Could Bitcoin fall below $50,000? It is possible, and prediction-market traders assign a real probability to it. In the bearish, cycle-alive scenario, Bitcoin loses its 200-week moving average, institutional outflows continue, and the post-peak bear market drives a deeper correction toward 50,000 or below as the cycle works toward a trough later in the year. This is not a certainty, and the bullish scenario, in which structural demand puts in a floor near current levels, is equally coherent. Which path unfolds depends on the cycle question, the flow data, and the macro environment, none of which has yet been settled, so a fall below $50,000 is a genuine risk instead of a forecast.

This article is information, not investment advice. The scenarios described are conditional ranges that depend on unresolved questions, not predictions, and Bitcoin is highly volatile. Prices, flows, and sentiment reflect reporting available as of June 26, 2026, and can change quickly. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy or sell. Verify current data from primary sources and consider your own circumstances before making any decision.

Bitcoin and altcoins continue to experience sharp declines due to ongoing ETF outflows, a more hawkish Fed, and a stronger dollar.

As Bitcoin fell to levels as low as $58,000 in the recent decline, expectations for June on the forecasting market Polymarket were also reshaped.

At this point, investors are expecting a decline, especially for Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum, and XRP.

According to Polymarket data, the price expectations for BTC, ETH, and XRP in June were as follows.

1. Bitcoin (BTC): Predictions titled “What Price Will Bitcoin Reach in June?” indicate that a decline in BTC prices is the dominant expectation.

A drop below $57,500 is the most likely scenario, with a 49% probability. This is followed by a 37% probability of Bitcoin rising above $62,500. This is followed by a 19% probability of Bitcoin falling below $55,000. Finally, the possibility of Bitcoin rising above $65,000 only covers about 10% of the target. 2. Ethereum (ETH): In predictions titled “What Will Ethereum’s Price Be in June?”, bearish forecasts for Ethereum are also prominent.

The most dominant scenario is a drop below $1,500, with a 66% probability priced in. A drop below $1,400 is priced in with a 22% probability. The probability of Ethereum surpassing $2,000 is priced at only 1%. 3.XRP: In predictions titled “What will the price of XRP be in June?”, bearish forecasts for XRP are prominent.

The most likely scenario is a drop below $1, with a 70% probability of the price being priced in. Secondly, a drop below $0.8 is priced in with a 2% probability. In contrast, a move above $1.4 is priced in with only a 1% probability. *This is not investment advice.

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

Ripple CTO Emeritus David Schwartz has clarified a long-running point of confusion in the XRP community: XRP did not exist before Bitcoin. The debate often resurfaces because RipplePay, an early trust-based payment concept created by Ryan Fugger, dates back to 2004. But Schwartz drew a clear line between that earlier idea and the XRP Ledger, which launched years after Bitcoin.

TL;DR David Schwartz clarified that XRP was not created before Bitcoin. Bitcoin launched in 2009, while the XRP Ledger and XRP token were developed from 2011 and launched in 2012. The confusion comes from RipplePay, a 2004 credit-trust network concept that did not use blockchain technology or a native asset. Schwartz also pushed back on claims linking an old distributed computing patent to XRP or blockchain design. RipplePay Versus XRP Ledger The heart of the confusion is the word “Ripple.” Ryan Fugger’s RipplePay was conceived in 2004 as a way to think about payments through trust relationships and credit lines. It was not a blockchain, and it did not include XRP as a native digital asset. That distinction matters because some social media narratives have blurred the early RipplePay idea with the later XRP Ledger.

According to the validated writing pack, Schwartz clarified that development of the XRP Ledger and XRP token began in 2011, with the ledger launching in 2012. Bitcoin, by comparison, launched in 2009. On that timeline, XRP clearly does not predate Bitcoin.

Why The Claim Keeps Returning The claim is sticky because the XRP ecosystem has a complicated history. RipplePay predates Bitcoin, the company that became Ripple later became associated with XRP, and several early crypto builders explored payment-network ideas before blockchains became mainstream. That creates enough overlap for misleading claims to spread quickly online.

But the technical distinction is straightforward. A credit-trust payment network is not the same as a blockchain ledger with a native token. RipplePay was an early payments concept. The XRP Ledger was a later cryptographic network built in the post-Bitcoin era.

Schwartz Also Addresses Patent Rumors The validation notes also state that Schwartz pushed back on rumors connecting his 1988 distributed computing patent to blockchain or XRP. That type of claim has circulated in parts of the XRP community for years, often as part of broader theories about XRP’s origins or supposed pre-Bitcoin design.

Schwartz’s clarification narrows the historical record. His earlier work in distributed computing may be part of his broader technical background, but it should not be treated as proof that XRP existed before Bitcoin or that the XRP Ledger was secretly developed before 2009.

A Cleaner Timeline The clean version is simple: RipplePay was an early 2004 payment-network concept without blockchain technology or a native digital asset. Bitcoin launched in 2009. The XRP Ledger and XRP token were developed beginning in 2011 and launched in 2012. Those dates do not diminish XRP’s role in crypto history, but they do correct the idea that XRP came first.

For traders and long-term XRP holders, the clarification is less about price and more about narrative discipline. Crypto communities often build identity around origin stories, but when those stories become inaccurate, they can create unnecessary confusion. Schwartz’s comments help separate genuine XRP history from social media mythology.

This report is based on information from Crypto.news Schwartz Response.

This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.

Bitcoin trades around $60,000 as analysts remain divided on whether a durable market bottom has formed.

Notable Statistics:

Coinglass data shows 90,825 traders were liquidated in the past 24 hours for $484.09 million.        SoSoValue data shows net outflows of $696.3 million from spot Bitcoin ETFs on Thursday. Spot Ethereum ETFs saw net outflows of $81.9 million. In the past 24 hours, top gainers include Jito, SKYAI and Aave. Notable Developments:

Trader Notes:

Scott Melker noted Bitcoin is at a critical technical juncture. If BTC closes the day at current levels or higher, it would confirm a strong bullish RSI divergence on the daily chart after reaching oversold conditions.

The analyst said Bitcoin has already printed a bullish divergence on the weekly RSI, only the second such occurrence ever.

Walter Bloomberg explained Bitcoin may not have reached its cycle low yet. Despite more than $1.3 trillion being wiped from the market, many expect the final bottom to form in the $50,000–$53,000 range, with the bear market potentially extending into September.

He predicts that the strongest buying opportunities typically emerge after forced selling and panic-driven liquidations subside, rather than during the height of market fear.

Ted Pillows argues Bitcoin has not yet seen the type of capitulation that marked previous cycle bottoms. The analyst notes BTC fell 87% in 2015, 84% in 2018 and 78% in 2022, suggesting the current expectation of a bottom after only a roughly 50% decline may be premature.

Based on those historical drawdowns, Ted expects Bitcoin to decline at least 60%–65% from its cycle peak before establishing a final market bottom.

Image: Shutterstock

Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs

© 2026 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

To add Benzinga News as your preferred source on Google, click here.

Mike McGlone, senior macro strategist at Bloomberg Intelligence, has argued that the US dollar-pegged stablecoin Tether is on track to overtake Bitcoin at the top of the global cryptocurrency rankings. According to McGlone, the growing dominance of dollar-backed stablecoins is reshaping the balance of power in the crypto market.

Tether’s path to the topMcGlone suggested that if Tether’s total assets under management continue to rise at their current pace, the possibility of Tether surpassing Bitcoin in market value could become a reality. The key question, he said, is whether the long-standing expansion trend centered around Tether in the crypto market will reverse.

Emphasizing the strength of blockchain technology, McGlone pointed out that, at its core, this structure still relies on the US dollar, which he described as contradicting the frequent calls for dedollarization.

Tether is distinguished as one of the most widely used stablecoins in the crypto ecosystem, aiming to maintain a 1:1 peg with the US dollar. Its extensive use in trading pairs, exchange transfers, and on-chain liquidity has made it a central player in shaping market structure.

The analyst further remarked that the growing popularity of tokens backed by income-generating physical assets could make the long-term outlook for millions of more speculative cryptocurrencies increasingly challenging. This perspective signals a broader questioning of the sustainability of speculative tokens in the industry.

Tether edges past Ethereum, Bitcoin warningRecently, Tether briefly overtook Ethereum to become the second-largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization. McGlone believes this shift could be more permanent in favor of Tether this time around.

While noting Tether’s increasing lead over Ethereum may become lasting, McGlone also maintained a bearish scenario for Bitcoin.

Reaffirming his bearish outlook, McGlone forecast that Bitcoin’s price could drop as low as $10,000. He observed that Bitcoin experienced rapid growth during a period dominated by zero-interest-rate policies and unparalleled liquidity expansion. For this reason, he warned that Bitcoin could face a steeper correction associated with the broader unwinding of risk assets.

The table below summarizes the key highlights from McGlone’s analysis.

Asset or marketMain insightLevelTetherPotential to surpass BitcoinScenario for market leadTether and EthereumBrief reshuffling of rankingsSecond placeBitcoinBearish expectation$10,000WTI crude oilProjection of decline$40 per barrelWeakness expected beyond cryptoMcGlone’s cautious stance is not limited to digital assets. He also anticipates a broader correction in global commodity and equity markets. In this context, he predicted WTI crude oil could drop to $40 per barrel in the coming period.

According to McGlone, one of the main factors that could lead to a decline in commodities is potential weakness in the US stock market during the second half of the year. He argued that the classic cycle—where lower prices trigger self-correcting effects—could once again come into play in the current environment.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

Legendary investor Jeremy Grantham — co-founder of asset management firm GMO and one of Wall Street’s most prominent bubble-spotters — came at Bitcoin again on Friday, calling the asset a “useless, speculative mechanism” destined for slow decline into irrelevance.

Speaking on CNBC’s Squawk Box, Grantham predicted that Bitcoin will “dwindle away, I suspect — not with a bang, but a whimper.” He said he has never owned Bitcoin and believes it will fall to zero, not through a sudden crash but through a gradual erosion of interest over years and decades.

“All Bitcoin does is allow fraudsters to move money around,” he said.

Grantham pointed to Bitcoin’s instability as evidence against its status as a store of value. The coin “halved for no particular reason in a strong economy,” he noted — a critique with fresh teeth given where Bitcoin stands today. 

Gold, he added, has delivered solid gains over the same period.

Perhaps Grantham is right, the selloff has been severe. BTC hit an all-time high near $126,000 in October 2025. Since then, the digital asset has shed more than 50% of its value. As of Friday, BTC traded in the $60,000 range, testing what analysts consider a critical support zone that, if broken, could open a path to the $40,000s.

Bitcoin fell toward $62,000 in mid-June as hawkish signals from the Federal Reserve spooked risk markets. Rising U.S.–Iran geopolitical tensions sent oil prices higher and reignited inflation fears, pushing Fed officials to abandon any talk of rate cuts — with some floating the possibility of rate hikes. U.S. spot BTC ETFs posted four consecutive days of net outflows totaling around $113.8 million.

Bitcoin’s attempt to reclaim higher ground ran straight into its 200-day moving average, which served as hard resistance and triggered a roughly 30% decline from that ceiling. The current drawdown is among the 5th worst in Bitcoin’s history — territory that tests the resolve of long-term holders. Some institutional buyers, however, are treating the dip as an entry point, with Coinbase reporting that major institutions have stepped in to buy the crash.

Another billionaire bets big on bitcoin On the flip side, Mexican billionaire Ricardo Salinas Pliego has placed 70% of his investment portfolio into BTC — up from just 10% in 2020 — and has even convinced his wife to mortgage their home to buy more. 

The founder of Grupo Salinas traces his skepticism of fiat currency to family dinner table conversations about Nixon ending the gold standard, and views Bitcoin as superior to both cash and gold because it is unseizable and borderless. 

His conviction has survived a $150 million loan scam, regulatory pushback on his plans to make Banco Azteca Mexico’s first Bitcoin-accepting bank, and multiple market cycles. 

He recently pointed to a decade of London property prices as proof of his thesis — a home that cost 4,000 BTC in 2016 now costs fewer than 30 — and urges ordinary investors to convert their home equity into BTC exposure, calling it “an asymmetrical bet to the upside.” 

Micah Zimmerman

Micah first discovered Bitcoin in 2018 but remained a skeptic on the sidelines for too long. Since 2021, he has covered crypto and business and now works as a news reporter for Bitcoin Magazine, based in North Carolina.

However, the artificial intelligence-linked assets look increasingly stretched.

“Layer-1s Are Still The Place To Be“In a "Drinks With Raoul Pal" episode on June 26, Pal acknowledged that crypto markets have been painful for investors, saying the asset class has not been "the gift that keeps on giving" over the past year.

Still, Pal said he remains heavily allocated to crypto and continues to believe that major layer-1 networks are the core opportunity.

"I strongly believe in my thesis that the layer ones are still the place to be," Pal said, naming ETH, SOL and SUI among the assets he continues to watch closely.

Pal argued that blockchain infrastructure remains central to the next phase of the internet, particularly as AI agents require payment rails, identity, privacy and coordination layers.

Liquidity Is Turning Positive Pal contrasted crypto’s weakness with the sharp rally in semiconductor and AI-related stocks, saying parts of the AI trade now look heavily overextended.

He said semiconductors are trading nearly four standard deviations above their long-term trend, making it difficult for them to remain the market’s next leadership group.

By comparison, Pal said Ethereum and Sui appear far more attractive on a relative basis, with ETH near the bottom of a long consolidation range and SUI trading well below its trend channel.

Pal also pointed to global liquidity as the underlying driver of financial assets, arguing that liquidity remains in an uptrend even though the crypto market has not yet fully responded.

He said excess liquidity is beginning to turn positive again, which could eventually support risk assets beyond the current AI winners.

“Great Rotation” To ComePal said he expects a “great rotation” across markets, with leadership potentially shifting away from the most crowded AI trades and toward assets that have lagged, including crypto layer-1s.

He warned investors not to confuse short-term pain with a broken thesis, arguing that the most important investing gains usually come from compounding through long-term secular trends rather than trading every market swing.

Pal added that investors need a framework, a thesis and the discipline not to panic during drawdowns.

Image: Shutterstock

Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs

© 2026 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

To add Benzinga News as your preferred source on Google, click here.

Institutional demand for cryptocurrency ETFs weakened sharply this week as investors pulled billions of dollars from products tied to Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and XRP. The latest wave of redemptions coincided with Bitcoin falling below $60,000, marking one of the most challenging periods for crypto investment products since the launch of spot ETFs in the United States.

US-listed spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded their largest daily net outflow in June on Thursday, while Solana ETFs are headed toward their first monthly net outflows on record. Across the broader market, crypto ETFs have collectively lost approximately $5 billion over the past 30 days, highlighting a widespread shift in investor sentiment.

Bitcoin ETFs post June's biggest outflow According to SoSoValue data, US spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded net outflows of $696.29 million on Thursday, surpassing the previous monthly high of $519.2 million recorded on June 2. The latest withdrawals extended Bitcoin ETF outflows to 6 consecutive trading days.

June has now recorded total net Bitcoin ETF outflows of $3.61 billion, while year-to-date net outflows have reached $4.56 billion. Since the beginning of May, investors have withdrawn approximately $6.04 billion from spot Bitcoin ETFs.

The selling pressure also appeared concentrated among the industry's largest funds. Fidelity's FBTC recorded $274 million in net outflows on Thursday, while BlackRock's IBIT lost another $265 million. The previous trading session on June 24 had already seen another $469.08 million leave US spot Bitcoin ETFs. The outflows have significantly reduced the size of the US Bitcoin ETF market.

SoSoValue data shows that total net assets across US-listed spot Bitcoin ETFs have fallen below $73 billion for the first time since late 2024. Combined assets now stand at approximately $72.57 billion. The decline represents a substantial drop from the sector's peak of $169.5 billion reached in October 2025, leaving total assets approximately 57% below their record highs.

More recently, total Bitcoin ETF assets have fallen from $104.29 billion on May 15 to $72.57 billion, extending a 7-week decline. Bitcoin ETF assets now represent 6.09% of Bitcoin's circulating market capitalization, down from more than 7% during the May peak.

Solana ETFs Record Their Worst-Performing Month Solana investment products also experienced notable weakness. June is on track to become the worst month on record for US spot Solana ETFs, with the category posting its first monthly net outflows. Net redemptions currently total $5.80 million for the month. On Thursday alone, Solana ETFs lost $3.94 million, with all of the outflows coming from Bitwise's $BSOL fund.

Ethereum products also joined the broader selling trend. Spot Ether ETFs recorded combined net outflows of $81.87 million, with BlackRock's $ETHA accounting for $62.99 million of the withdrawals. XRP ETFs remained flat during Thursday's session, recording neither net inflows nor net outflows.

While other Hyperliquid-related investment products experienced withdrawals, Grayscale's $HYPG fund stood out as the sole major crypto ETF to record net inflows, drawing in $112.73 million. This positive momentum was primarily the result of Hyper Holdings providing the fund with seed capital in the form of 2 million $HYPE tokens.

Bitcoin falls below $60,000 The ETF selling coincided with another sharp decline in cryptocurrency prices. Yesterday, Bitcoin briefly fell to $58,050, its lowest level since October 2024, before recovering to around $60,000. The recent market weakness has been linked to concerns surrounding Strategy and its $STRC preferred shares, which declined further to a new all-time low of $72 earlier today.

Solana also came under heavy pressure during the broader market sell-off, briefly dropping to $64 before leading the recovery among majors with an over 10 % rise in the last 24 hours.

Will The Sentiment Remained Subdued? Market observers continue to view ETF flows as an important measure of institutional demand. Citi has previously described Bitcoin ETF flows as one of the best indicators of investor adoption and expects sentiment to remain subdued while ETF flows stay negative.

In a recent report, CoinShares noted that Bitcoin's recovery from approximately $58,000 indicates continued buying interest during market declines, although resistance around $60,000 remains significant. The firm also observed that whale selling, which contributed heavily to the October market decline, has slowed considerably. However, the firm cautioned that whales historically do not return as consistent buyers until the next Bitcoin halving cycle, which is expected in 2028.

Looking ahead, CoinShares expects market conditions to remain challenging as inflation concerns, elevated oil prices, and a hawkish Federal Reserve continue to weigh on risk assets. The firm also believes delays in passing the CLARITY Act could extend uncertainty about the US regulatory environment, with the legislation now more likely to advance toward the August congressional recess than in early July.

For now, persistent ETF outflows across nearly every major cryptocurrency suggest institutional investors remain cautious as falling prices, macroeconomic uncertainty, and concerns surrounding Strategy continue to pressure digital asset markets.

Read More on SolanaFloor Solmate Board Under Scrutiny Over Alleged $18M Dilution of Shareholder Value
26 Solana Frontier Winners Revealed After Crypto’s Biggest Hackathon Ever

Has This Been Solana’s Biggest Mistake?

Roughly $10.63 billion in Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) options expire on Deribit Friday. The settlement drops into a market that keeps sliding lower while traders hunt for a floor.

Bitcoin trades near $60,200 after a 2% daily drop, while ether sits around $1,580 after a steeper 4.43% fall. Both rest far below their options max pain levels.

Puts Command a Premium as Traders Brace for DownsideFriday’s settlement ranks as the quarter’s largest options event on Deribit. The bulk of expiring value sits in Bitcoin, with notional contracts worth about $9.06 billion against ether’s $1.57 billion. Max pain marks the price where the most options expire worthless. Bitcoin’s level sits at $70,000, while ether’s sits at $2,000.

Bitcoin Expiring Options. Source: DeribitOpen interest leans toward calls in raw terms, yet positioning tells a cautious story. Bitcoin’s put-to-call ratio sits at 0.63, with 92,154 calls against 57,652 puts. Ether’s ratio runs lower at 0.50. The heavier call count reflects bullish bets now stranded well above the current price. Bitcoin’s recent options expiry events have followed a similar defensive pattern.

Ethereum Expiring Options. Source: DeribitAccording to Greeks.live, Bitcoin’s 25-delta skew has turned sharply negative on short-dated contracts. The skew reads -10.7% at one day, -11.3% at seven days, and -9.6% at one month. By contrast, longer tenors stay calmer near -6% and -5%.

“Puts continue to command a meaningful premium over calls across all major tenors,” analysts at Greeks.live stated.

That premium reflects steady demand for near-term downside protection. Traders are paying up to hedge a further slide rather than chase upside. Bitcoin’s recent price action has kept that hedging active through the week.

The Bottom Question Hangs Over SettlementGreeks.live places negative gamma between $60,000 and $64,000, the band where Bitcoin trades now. Positive gamma spreads across $67,000 to $82,000, with clusters near $67,000, $71,000, $75,000, and $80,000. The June, July, and September contracts drive most of that dealer exposure. The firm notes these readings exclude IBIT data.

That structure can keep price action choppy near current levels through expiry. Meanwhile, ether’s steeper price drop has pushed it well below its $2,000 max pain mark.

The expiry also lands during a broad crypto downturn. Both assets have slid to multi-month lows this week, deepening the case for caution into settlement.

Some forecasters expect deeper losses first. Jiang Zhuoer, founder of mining pool BTC.TOP, sees a late-2026 bottom forecast near $42,000 to $44,000. He points to Strategy’s mNAV slipping to 0.72, close to its 2022 low. BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes has floated a $40,000 Bitcoin bottom within six months. Even so, his year-end target still runs above $200,000.

Jiang’s broader four-year cycle model points to a bottom around late October. He has mined through several halvings and plans to buy back near the low.

Deribit, however, cautions against reading too much into the max pain pull.

“While max pain remains a widely followed metric, recent quarterly expiries have shown limited evidence of a consistent pinning effect ahead of settlement,” Deribit analysts indicated.

Both assets remain stuck below max pain heading into settlement. The next sessions may show whether sellers extend the search for a bottom or buyers finally step in.

Decentralized AI Exposure To Get Easier?Silbert promoted the launch of the Total Market Fund by Yuma, a DCG subsidiary, that provides a single allocation for exposure to TAO and tokens tied to AI projects built on Bittensor. The fund is marketed as an institutional gateway to decentralized AI infrastructure, offering exposure beyond traditional equities and venture capital.

“AI is becoming a core portfolio allocation. But for most investors, it’s limited to a few, big players,” Silbert noted. “Bittensor offers access to a decentralized network of AI projects.”

What’s Bittensor Moat?Bittensor is an open-source network that allows AI models to be shared, trained, and ranked by value. Participation and contribution are incentivized by handing out rewards in the form of the native cryptocurrency called TAO.

Silbert himself has picked Bittensor as one of the top projects where the majority of cryptocurrency capital is expected to rotate into eventually.

Silbert Bullish On Privacy NarrativeSilbert has also championed financial privacy, positioning privacy-focused coins as the cryptocurrency industry’s next major investment opportunity.

His thesis is that 5-10% of Bitcoin market cap would eventually rotate into privacy coins, including Zcash (CRYPTO: ZEC).

Price Action: At the time of writing, TAO was exchanging hands at $213.40, down 3.48% over the last 24 hours, according to data from Benzinga Pro, valued at over $2.35 billion.

Photo courtesy: Shutterstock

Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs

© 2026 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

To add Benzinga News as your preferred source on Google, click here.

21Shares’ latest State of Crypto Mid-Year Check-In report states that cryptocurrency market has shifted from a speculative phase to an institutionally driven asset class.

Stablecoins and tokenization are emerging as the sector’s strongest long-term themes.

Crypto, Stablecoins and TokenizationIn the report published on June 24, 21Shares wrote the first half of 2026 has been defined by macroeconomic uncertainty, tighter liquidity conditions and a broad correction in digital assets.

Despite the volatility, the form argues the industry’s underlying fundamentals continue to strengthen.

Institutional adoption remains the dominant structural trend, supported by expanding ETF and ETP participation, improving regulatory clarity and growing corporate and sovereign interest in digital assets.

While stablecoins are crypto’s fastest-growing real-world use case, tokenization of traditional assets also remains a major long-term opportunity.

21Shares also points to the growing intersection between artificial intelligence and blockchain, arguing that decentralized networks could provide the infrastructure for autonomous AI agents, digital identity and machine-to-machine payments.

The firm believes these applications could become an important driver of blockchain adoption over the coming years.

BTC Price Correction Is A Major HurdleBitcoin’s (CRYPTO: BTC) price correction has prevented the industry from reaching 21Shares’ projected $400 billion target for assets under management by ETFs this year.

Bitcoin is increasingly behaving like a macro asset rather than a purely speculative investment, while Ethereum (CRYPTO: ETH) continues to strengthen its role as the infrastructure layer for tokenized finance and decentralized applications.

As number of wallets holding BTC continue to grow, 21Shares’ year-end base case is a recovery toward $100,000 rather than a breakout to new all-time highs.

Bitcoin’s current cycle is unfolding differently from previous bull markets, with institutional adoption replacing retail speculation as the primary driver.

Corporate Treasury AdoptionCorporate crypto treasury adoption has slowed amid weaker market conditions and higher financing costs, leading many companies to pause expansion plans.

21Shares expects the sector to consolidate, with well-capitalized firms continuing to accumulate digital assets while weaker players struggle to raise capital or sustain their treasury strategies.

By May 2026, total global crypto ETF assets undermanagement stood around $140 billion, down around 15% year-to-date, with Bitcoin ETFs accounting for almost $110 billion.

Prediction Markets21Shares says blockchain-based prediction markets have emerged as one of crypto’s fastest-growing applications, fueled by increasing user participation, improved liquidity and expanding real-world use cases.

The firm now expects cumulative trading volumes to comfortably exceed its earlier $100 billion forecast as the sector gains mainstream traction.

Through May 2026, the prediction markets have recorded $57.5 billion marking it over 10 times the volume of same period in prior year.

Image: Shutterstock

Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs

© 2026 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

To add Benzinga News as your preferred source on Google, click here.

The US goods trade deficit ballooned to $105.8 billion in May, a $22.7 billion jump from the prior month and the widest gap the country has posted since at least mid-2025.

According to the US Census Bureau’s Advance Economic Indicators report, goods exports dropped $11.8 billion to $207.7 billion while imports climbed $10.9 billion to $313.4 billion.

What happened to the improving trend Just a month earlier, the merchandise trade deficit had shrunk to roughly $82.4 billion to $83.7 billion, helped by stronger petroleum-related exports and relatively muted import growth.

Advertisement

May’s data reversed that trend. The export decline wasn’t concentrated in one sector. Industrial supplies and automobiles both saw notable pullbacks, suggesting the weakness was broad-based rather than driven by a single commodity or category.

On the import side, elevated capital goods purchases helped push the total higher.

The net result is a monthly deficit that’s roughly 28% wider than April’s figure.

Why a trade number matters for crypto investors A widening trade deficit means more dollars flowing out of the country to pay for imports, which can put downward pressure on the greenback. A weaker dollar has historically been a tailwind for Bitcoin and other risk assets priced in USD.

Trade deficits subtract from gross domestic product calculations. A deficit this large could shave a meaningful amount off Q2 GDP growth estimates when they’re published.

What investors should watch next The May deficit is an advance estimate, meaning the final services trade data hasn’t been folded in yet. Services trade, where the US typically runs a surplus, could offset some of the goods deficit when the full picture emerges.

Currency traders are likely already pricing in some dollar weakness on the back of this data. A single month of widening is noise. Two or three consecutive months of $100B-plus deficits would be a trend, and trends are what move monetary policy.

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

Trading of the DRAM memory ETF is now available on the Solana blockchain, with its holdings covering Samsung, SK Hynix, Micron, and SanDisk.

Jupiter official announcement: Trading of Roundhill Memory ETF (ticker: DRAM) is now supported on the Solana blockchain, with its holdings covering Samsung, SK Hynix, Micron, and SanDisk.

2 minutes ago

At the opening of US stock markets, AI application software stocks rose against the trend, with ServiceNow and Figma climbing more than 5%.

According to Bitget market data, AI software stocks in the US market rose against the trend at opening. ServiceNow (NOW.US) and Figma Inc (FIG.US) jumped more than 5%, while Palantir (PLTR.US), Adobe (ADBE.US), Workday (WDAY.US), Salesforce (CRM.US), and Datadog (DDOG.US) gained over 3%, and Microsoft (MSFT.US) rose by more than 2%. Microsoft has hiked Xbox prices three times in 13 months, and stated that storage component costs will double next year.

2 minutes ago

At the opening of the U.S. stock market, most space-themed concept stocks rose, while SpaceX declined 0.75%.

According to Bitget market data, most US space concept stocks advanced at the opening of US stock trading. Specifically: SpaceX (SPCX) slipped 0.75% to $151.8; Virgin Galactic (SPCE) gained 8%; AST SpaceMobile (ASTS) rose 3.45%; Rocket Lab (RKLB) added 4%; Redwire (RDW) gained 1.9%.

2 minutes ago

At the opening of US stock markets, optical communication concept stocks fell broadly, with MRVL, AAOI, and LITE down more than 6%.

According to Bitget market data, US stocks opened with broad declines in optical communication concept stocks, including: Pure Photonics ETF (FOTO) fell 5.7%; Marvell Technology (MRVL) — a stock NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang previously touted as the next trillion-dollar market cap company — dropped 6.1%; AAOI (Applied Optoelectronics) fell 7.1%; LITE (Lumentum Holdings) dropped 8.86%; COHR (Coherent Corp.) declined 8.4%; and CIEN (Ciena Corporation) fell 4.75%.

2 minutes ago

US stocks opened with all three major indices in the red, with semiconductor and storage sectors plunging; Micron and SanDisk fell more than 5%.

According to Bitget market data, the three major US stock indexes all fell at opening: the Dow Jones Industrial Average dropped 0.44%, the S&P 500 declined 0.67%, and the Nasdaq Composite fell 1.1%. The semiconductor and storage sectors saw broad declines, with individual stocks performing as follows: NVIDIA (NVDA) dropped 1.56%; Intel (INTC) fell 3.5%; Broadcom (AVGO) declined 2.5%; Qualcomm (QCOM) fell 0.4%; Seagate Technology (STX) dropped 5.78%; Western Digital (WDC) fell 7%; SanDisk (SNDK) declined 7.5%; Micron Technology (MU) dropped 5.4%.

2 minutes ago

Under the leadership of Michael Saylor, Strategy has reaffirmed its commitment to Bitcoin, even as the cryptocurrency experiences a sharp pullback. On Thursday, the price of Bitcoin fell to as low as $58,000—its lowest level since October 2024. This decline means Bitcoin has now dropped about 52% from its all-time high above $126,000 reached last year.

Strategy stands firm as Bitcoin downturn continuesAccording to recent data, Bitcoin repeatedly found support around the $60,000 mark throughout the year. After rebounding from this level in February and again in the first half of June—reaching as high as $67,000—the latest wave of selloffs has once again put this threshold under pressure. As of publication time, Bitcoin was down 3.95% over the past 24 hours to $59,729, and had dropped 4.16% for the week.

Michael Saylor emphasized that volatility tests every capital structure, and he underscored that Strategy remains steadfast in its Bitcoin focus, disciplined capital allocation, credit integrity, and commitment to long-term value creation.

Strategy has emerged as one of the most prominent companies regularly adding Bitcoin to its balance sheet since 2020. Originally a software firm, Strategy has become well-known in recent years for its institutional approach to acquiring Bitcoin. Saylor has made this strategy central to the company’s corporate identity.

Balance sheet pressure and growing criticismAs cryptocurrency market losses deepened, Strategy has faced more than $13 billion in unrealized losses on paper. Nonetheless, the company’s management remains convinced that the current volatility is not reason enough to alter its core investment strategy. The company’s statements have consistently highlighted its focus on transparency and unwavering execution.

However, this approach is not without its critics. Crypto analytics firm CryptoQuant argued that Strategy should temporarily pause its Bitcoin purchases and focus on strengthening its reserves. According to CryptoQuant, adopting a more systematic purchasing schedule—rather than buying only when new capital is raised—would represent a more cautious strategy.

CryptoQuant believes that it would be more prudent for Strategy to first rebuild its reserves and then adopt a more structured timing model for its future Bitcoin acquisitions.

Strategy boosts reserves and maintains Bitcoin buying policyMost recently, Strategy increased its dollar reserves by $300 million, bringing the total to $1.4 billion. The company reported that these additional funds would continue to back the credit quality of its digital debt securities.

During the same period, Strategy acquired an additional 520 BTC for $35 million, raising its total Bitcoin holdings to 847,363 coins. This demonstrates that, even amid significant price declines, Strategy has not abandoned its accumulation policy.

Supporters argue that the losses currently remain unrealized and that the outlook could improve dramatically if Bitcoin finds a bottom and begins to climb again. Nonetheless, as market pressure persists, attention remains fixed on Strategy’s debt structure, reserve management, and the timing of its new acquisitions.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

ToplineBillionaire Michael Saylor on Friday defended his Strategy’s approach to bitcoin even as shares of the cryptocurrency’s largest institutional holder fell to multi-year lows, and as analysts warned against the company buying more amid a broader decline in the crypto market.

Shares of bitcoin’s largest institutional holder have plummeted 80% from their all-time high.

Getty Images

Key FactsSaylor, in a post on X, wrote that “volatility tests capital structure” and reaffirmed that Strategy “remains focused on bitcoin, disciplined capital allocation, credit quality and long-term value creation.”

Shares of Strategy plunged by more than 9% on Thursday to their lowest level since February 2024, and shares are down more than 8% from their record intraday high ($543) in November 2024, while its preferred stock has dropped nearly 25% since Jan. 13 to a new record low.

The price of bitcoin briefly stumbled to a 21-month low on Thursday, hitting an intraday low of $58,131, and the world’s leading cryptocurrency has shed more than half of its value since peaking above $126,000 in October 2025.

Crypto analytics firm CryptoQuant wrote in a report Thursday that Strategy should halt its bitcoin purchases and instead rebuild its cash reserves, arguing the company’s strategy of buying during bitcoin price dips has resulted in “rapid unrealized loss growth.”

JPMorgan analysts issued a similar warning in a note earlier this month, concluding Strategy’s dollar reserves should be rebuilt to “restore confidence and reduce investor concerns that the company would sell more bitcoins to cover dividend payments.”

forbes valuationSaylor founded Strategy, then known as MicroStrategy, in 1989, and his net worth has swelled to $3 billion as of market close on Thursday. He emerged as a top executive during the dot-com bubble, after which Saylor’s fortune plummeted, but Strategy’s bitcoin investments made him a billionaire once again, as Saylor has directed the firm to shift its corporate coffers into bitcoin.

big number845,256. That’s Strategy’s total bitcoin holdings, which the company priced at an aggregated market value of $63.9 billion, or roughly $75,680 per token, according to a regulatory disclosure earlier this month. Strategy most recently purchased 1,550 bitcoin for $101.3 million on June 8 at an average price of $65,332 per coin.

key backgroundStrategy’s cash reserves totaled $1.4 billion as of Friday, representing just a fraction of its bitcoin holdings. The company’s bitcoin transactions have shifted broader views of the crypto market, including its first bitcoin sale in years late last month, sparking a selloff that erased the cryptocurrency’s record-setting surge. Billionaire hedge fund executive Philippe Laffont said earlier this week he was a “little bit more worried” about bitcoin, arguing there were more attractive investment opportunities, like SpaceX, that he would “rather bet” on. Bitcoin’s latest slide also comes as $10 billion in options is set to expire Friday on Deribit, the world’s largest crypto options venue.

further readingForbesBillionaire Saylor’s Strategy Buys Bitcoin Worth $101 Million—After Earlier Sale Sparked Sell-OffBy Ty Roush

An "Indestructible" Balance Sheet@Strategy executive @CJ_Bitcoin has moved to reassure investors that neither a drop in $BTC's price nor a slide in the company's equity can threaten its Bitcoin reserves. In comments shared on June 26, he described the balance sheet as an "indestructible" digital fortress, capable of absorbing significant market drawdowns without triggering forced liquidations or margin calls.

The confidence is rooted in how Strategy structures its debt. Unlike retail traders or hedge funds that use margin loans, Strategy does not rely on high-leverage facilities with automatic liquidation thresholds. Most of its debt consists of long-dated convertible notes, with maturities extending to 2032 and beyond, typically carrying low interest rates between 0% and 1%, with no margin maintenance covenants tied directly to Bitcoin's price. That means a falling $BTC price does not automatically force the company's hand. If Bitcoin appreciates, the value of the company's holdings rises, strengthening its balance sheet. If Bitcoin declines, the debt does not automatically trigger asset sales.

Analysts have broadly echoed that view. No margin calls can be triggered by a price decline in the coin, and forced liquidation probably would not even become a realistic possibility until Bitcoin fell to around $8,000. Absent a "Black Swan" event, involuntary Bitcoin sales remain highly unlikely before debt maturities arrive in 2028, leaving insolvency rather than margin calls as the only plausible risk scenario.

Scale and ContextStrategy's conviction has been tested before. During the 2022 crypto winter, pressure was intense. Critics questioned whether the company could survive its leveraged Bitcoin bet, and calls for forced liquidation circulated widely. Strategy did not sell a single coin. Instead, it held its position and began planning the capital raises that would define the next three years.

As of May 25, 2026, Strategy holds 843,738 Bitcoin, giving it 220,900 Bitcoin per share (in sats), alongside $6.7 billion in aggregate principal of convertible notes and $15.5 billion in aggregate notional preferred stock outstanding. According to data from BitcoinTreasuries.net, Strategy now controls approximately 4% of Bitcoin's fixed 21 million supply.

The picture is not without complications. In early June, Strategy disclosed in an SEC filing that it sold 32 Bitcoin at an average price of $77,135 per coin to help meet obligations tied to its preferred stock. The transaction was tiny relative to its overall holdings, but the symbolism was enormous, as a line that investors once assumed would never be crossed just got crossed. Critics, including gold advocate Peter Schiff, continue to argue that the firm's leverage structure creates latent risks, though Strategy has not indicated any intention to sell its Bitcoin holdings, and Saylor has repeatedly stated his commitment to holding the asset long-term.

For now, @CJ_Bitcoin's message is clear: short-term price volatility in either $BTC or $MSTR is not a strategic threat to the reserve itself.

Sources:
CCN: Strategy Has No Liquidation Risk Until Bitcoin Falls to $8,000
Strategy Inc: Q1 2026 Financial Results (Official Press Release)
Strategy Form 8-K, May 2026 (SEC Filing)

In brief Bitcoin slipped below $60,000 to an intraday low of $58,189, down 6.4% over the week and near its lowest level since September 2024. U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs shed just under $692 million on Thursday, their biggest one-day outflow since late May. A $10.6 billion options expiry hits Friday, while more than $1.1 billion in leveraged crypto bets were liquidated over the past 24 hours. Bitcoin dipped below $59,000 Friday morning, dragged down by a fresh wave of ETF selling just as one of the year's biggest options expiries comes due.

The largest cryptocurrency was trading around $59,100 on Friday, down 6.4% over the past week and roughly 53% below the record $126,080 it set in October. It changed hands in a 24-hour range of $58,189 to $60,724, leaving its market cap near $1.18 trillion.

On prediction market Myriad, owned by Decrypt's parent company Dastan, traders expect Bitcoin's next move to take it to $55,000, placing a 77% chance on that outcome, up from 72% at the start of the week.

The slide came as U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs bled some $691 million on Thursday, their largest single-day outflow since May 27, according to Farside Investors data. The weakness runs deeper than one session. Annual growth in U.S. ETF Bitcoin holdings has slumped to "basically zero" for the first time since the funds launched in 2024, with the ETFs now adding to Bitcoin's supply rather than soaking it up, CryptoQuant head of research Julio Moreno told Milk Road Wednesday. For a bottom to form, he said, that buying needs to stop shrinking and start accelerating again.

The selling sets an uneasy stage for Friday, when about $10.6 billion in Bitcoin options expire on Deribit, the year's largest quarterly settlement. With Bitcoin trading far below the roughly $72,000 "max pain" level, some 80% of those contracts are on track to expire worthless. The $60,000 mark "remains the definitive line in the sand," said Mike McCluskey, co-founder of tokenization platform tx. Given heavy put positioning at that strike, he said, a successful defense "would confirm that dip buyers maintain control," while a breach would “likely accelerate the downside in this thin liquidity environment.”

The pressure has already torched leveraged traders. Over $1.1 billion in leveraged crypto positions were liquidated over the past 24 hours as the drop caught bullish bets offside, $875 million of which were longs, according to CoinGlass.

Behind the slide is a tighter macro backdrop. Bitcoin has weakened since new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh's hawkish debut, with traders bracing for higher-for-longer rates. The drop briefly took BTC to its lowest level since September 2024 this week, dipping below its 200-week moving average—a level that has “historically served as a critical psychological and technical floor,” according to McCluskey.

In a Thursday AMA, Galaxy Digital CEO Mike Novogratz said Bitcoin's bull case "revolves on two things,” the passage of the Clarity Act, and a Fed rate cut. The war in Iran "has slowed the cutting cycle down," he said, adding that “When we see the war end and oil prices go back to $60 then you'll start to see this idea of, maybe that opens the door for a late fourth quarter rate cut, or even early first quarter rate cut the next year.” Until a fresh spark arrives, he sees Bitcoin range-bound, waiting on "some new story" to climb higher.

Daily Debrief NewsletterStart every day with the top news stories right now, plus original features, a podcast, videos and more.

Ripple CTO emeritus David Schwartz has pushed back on a fresh social media debate over whether XRP existed before Bitcoin. 

Summary

Schwartz said Fugger’s 2004 idea was a payment network, not XRP or decentralized assets. XRPL history places XRP’s creation in 2012, years after Bitcoin launched in 2009 officially. The debate shows how older RipplePay ideas still drive confusion around XRP’s real origin. The exchange began after Crypto Dyl News claimed on X that “Bitcoin was NOT the 1st” and that XRP was created in 1988.

That claim drew a question from XRP community user MitchRob, who asked Schwartz whether Ryan Fugger had conceptualized XRP and the XRP Ledger before or after Bitcoin. Schwartz replied that Fugger had conceptualized a decentralized payment and settlement network around 2004, well before Bitcoin.

Schwartz added one key limit to that answer. He said Fugger’s idea did not include decentralized assets. That distinction separates RipplePay, Fugger’s early payment concept, from XRP and the XRP Ledger, which arrived later.

Ryan Fugger built RipplePay, not XRP Fugger’s RipplePay concept dates back to 2004. It focused on payments, IOUs and trust lines between users. It did not operate as a blockchain in the modern crypto sense, and it did not include XRP as a native asset.

Ryan Fugger conceptualized a decentralized payment/settlement network (but without decentralized assets) around 2004, well before bitcoin.

— David 'JoelKatz' Schwartz (@JoelKatz) June 26, 2026 Schwartz’s answer makes that point clear. He wrote that Fugger conceptualized a decentralized payment and settlement network “but without decentralized assets” around 2004. That means the idea came before Bitcoin, but XRP itself did not.

The official XRP Ledger history page places XRP’s launch in 2012. It says Schwartz, Jed McCaleb and Arthur Britto built a distributed ledger that aimed to improve on Bitcoin’s limits. The ledger included a native asset that became XRP.

The XRPL learning portal also says the three developers joined forces in 2011 to create a faster and more scalable digital asset. That timeline puts XRP after Bitcoin, not before it.

XRP origin debate continues online MitchRob later asked whether Satoshi Nakamoto may have drawn any inspiration from Fugger’s earlier concepts. He also asked which network was built with a better framework for payments and settlement.

Schwartz had not answered that follow-up in the provided thread at the time of writing. The question remains speculative because no public evidence in the thread shows that Satoshi used Fugger’s work when designing Bitcoin.

The confusion comes from the Ripple name. Fugger’s RipplePay project came before Bitcoin, while the XRP Ledger came after Bitcoin. Ripple Labs later used the Ripple name, but the technical system behind XRP was built separately.

As previously reported, David Schwartz recently explained his XRP Ledger role after stepping back from daily leadership. The report noted that he remains CTO emeritus and one of XRPL’s co-creators.

XRPL history still matters The debate comes as XRP Ledger development continues. In a previous article, crypto.news discussed Schwartz backing the XRP Ledger 3.2.0 upgrade, which renamed the core server software from rippled to xrpld.

That update moved XRPL further away from older Ripple-branded software names. It also added cleanup fixes for features tied to DeFi tools, vaults, lending, permissioned domains and token functions.

Previously, crypto.news explored XRPL’s growing tokenized finance use cases. Schwartz said XRPL use is expanding from payments into tokenized assets, stablecoins and other financial tools.

The latest exchange does not change XRP’s history. Fugger helped shape an early payment idea before Bitcoin. XRP and XRPL, however, began later as separate code written by Schwartz, McCaleb and Britto.

XRP Sinks Deeper as the Psychological $1 Mark Comes Into Play