Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

Hyperscale Data (NYSE American: GPUS) sold roughly 685 Bitcoin for approximately $43 million, using the proceeds to slash about $30 million in debt and funnel remaining capital into its Michigan AI data center campus. The company now holds around 275 Bitcoin, down from over 1,000 just weeks ago.

The numbers behind the sell-off As of July 19, Hyperscale Data’s Bitcoin stash sat at 1,087.4527 BTC, valued at roughly $70.3 million at the time. Then came a sale of approximately 100 Bitcoin in late July, earmarked for the Michigan data center project. The 685-coin sale announced around August 14 was considerably larger, generating around $43 million in gross proceeds.

Advertisement

Of that $43 million, an estimated $30 million went directly toward paying down corporate debt. The remainder is being directed toward expanding the company’s AI data center operations through its subsidiary Sentinum.

Executive Chairman Milton “Todd” Ault III affirmed that Bitcoin will remain central to the company’s strategy, positioning the sale as a capital allocation decision rather than a philosophical shift away from crypto.

Why Michigan, why now Hyperscale Data operates at the intersection of two capital-hungry industries: Bitcoin mining and AI data centers. The dual-track approach, running Bitcoin mining alongside AI data center operations via Sentinum, lets the company play both sides.

Selling 685 BTC for $43 million implies an average sale price of roughly $62,700 per coin. The debt reduction cuts $30 million in liabilities, improves interest coverage, frees up future cash flow, and leaves 275 Bitcoin still on the balance sheet as residual crypto exposure.

The company also plans to divest Ault Capital Group in 2027 to concentrate efforts more squarely on data centers and digital asset management.

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

Israel’s largest commercial bank is finally ready to put crypto on the same screen as your savings account. Bank Leumi has announced a partnership with Galaxy Digital and its custody subsidiary GK8 to offer trading in Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana directly through its Leumi Trade platform and Pepper mobile app, with a planned rollout in early 2027.

The bank’s roughly 2.5 million retail clients would be able to buy, hold, and sell digital assets alongside stocks and bonds, all in one place. Leumi will handle custody through GK8’s infrastructure and take responsibility for tax compliance on behalf of customers.

The second act
This is not Leumi’s first attempt at getting into crypto. In 2022, the bank tried to launch Bitcoin and Ethereum trading through a partnership with Paxos, only to shelve the whole project when the Bank of Israel declined to grant regulatory approval.

What’s changed since then is the regulatory environment. Israel has made meaningful progress on its framework for virtual asset service providers, creating a clearer path for banks that want to offer digital asset services. That updated landscape is what makes this 2026 announcement feel more durable than its predecessor, though final sign-off from the Bank of Israel is still pending.

Advertisement

Galaxy Digital’s announcement of the partnership came in mid-August 2026. The involvement of GK8, a custody-focused subsidiary, addresses one of the thorniest problems banks face when integrating crypto: keeping clients’ assets safe without taking on operational risk the bank can’t manage.

Why 2.5 million clients is a meaningful number
Bank Leumi is not a niche fintech running a pilot for early adopters. It is the largest commercial bank in Israel, with a retail customer base that spans essentially every demographic. Dropping a crypto trading feature into an app that 2.5 million people already use for mortgages, payroll, and bill payments is a very different distribution strategy than launching a standalone exchange.

The specific mechanics of the service, including fees, withdrawal options, and the granular details of how custody works in practice, have not been publicly disclosed yet. The structural architecture is clear: Leumi owns the client relationship, GK8 owns the security infrastructure, and Galaxy Digital provides the broader digital asset expertise tying it together.

What this means for the Israeli market and beyond
More than 25% of Israel’s population has engaged with cryptocurrencies, according to available reports. A green light from the Bank of Israel for Leumi’s new service would carry symbolic weight that goes beyond the bank itself, given that Galaxy Digital oversees approximately $9 billion in client assets and holds the necessary financial licenses.

Israel’s regulatory environment has also seen relaxed deposit requirements for funds originating from digital assets, showcasing a more accommodating environment for banks to integrate crypto services. The Leumi model, combining an established custody partner with an existing retail app, offers a blueprint that competitors could replicate without building from zero.

There is still a meaningful caveat sitting over all of this: regulatory approval. Leumi’s 2022 effort is a reminder that bank announcements and bank launches are not the same thing. The Bank of Israel will need to formally bless the arrangement before a single client can execute a trade.

What to watch between now and early 2027: the Bank of Israel’s formal response, the fee structure Leumi chooses to publish, and whether any competing Israeli banks announce similar partnerships in the months that follow.

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

Gemini, the crypto exchange founded by Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss, has built up a corporate Bitcoin treasury totaling 5,528 BTC. At current market prices, that stash is worth roughly $324M, placing Gemini among a growing cohort of crypto-native firms treating Bitcoin as a balance sheet asset rather than just a product to sell.

Approximately 80% of that Bitcoin position was financed through borrowing from the Winklevoss twins themselves. In other words, the founders are lending Bitcoin to their own company to beef up its treasury.

How the numbers stack up
Activity from Winklevoss Capital, the twins’ personal investment vehicle, appears to support this buildup. In April 2026, roughly 572 BTC worth approximately $43M was transferred to Gemini custody addresses. That suggests the treasury expansion isn’t a one-time event but an ongoing, actively managed process.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, Gemini Space Station, a publicly associated entity tied to the exchange, holds between 3,839 and 4,827 BTC with valuations ranging from $240M to $306M. Together, the Gemini-affiliated ecosystem’s total Bitcoin exposure could be substantially north of $500M depending on how these entities overlap.

The gap between the Space Station’s reported range and the 5,528 figure attributed to Gemini’s broader treasury raises questions about which entity holds what, and whether these positions are additive or partially overlapping.

The founder-lending dynamic
Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss are simultaneously Gemini’s controlling shareholders, its most visible public advocates, and now its largest creditors on the Bitcoin side. The arrangement means that if the twins ever called those loans back, or if market conditions forced a restructuring, the exchange’s treasury position could change dramatically overnight.

Why exchanges are hoarding Bitcoin
Gemini has had its share of turbulence in recent years. The exchange navigated the fallout from its Gemini Earn program and regulatory scrutiny from multiple agencies.

Precise details regarding the reported 5,528 BTC figure and the specifics of the Winklevoss lending arrangement have not been extensively covered in prominent financial media outlets, raising questions about transparency and market communication.

Traders watching this space should pay attention to future on-chain transfers between Winklevoss Capital and Gemini custody addresses. The April transfers suggest more accumulation could be coming.

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

Tether, the issuer of the world’s largest stablecoin USDT, has announced the completion of its first independent audit of reserves, conducted by KPMG U.S. The El Salvador-based company described the review as the most extensive inaugural financial audit in history.

KPMG signs off on Tether’s reservesFor years, Tether faced criticism for a lack of transparency regarding its reserve holdings. Industry observers regularly questioned the absence of an independent, thorough audit conducted by one of the Big Four accounting firms.

According to Tether, KPMG performed a detailed review, including the physical verification of each gold bar held in its reserves. The audit included independent substantive testing and verification of all assets and statements, rather than relying solely on reports from external custodians or counterparties.

Tether stated that this process involved KPMG physically counting and inspecting each gold bar to confirm its existence and identifying features.

CEO Paolo Ardoino addressed the doubts surrounding the review, stating that detractors have long claimed an audit of Tether could not be completed and accused the company of avoiding rigorous scrutiny. “We have once again proven them wrong. Completing our financial statement audit sets a new standard for the industry and reflects the leadership we’ve brought to this market from the start,” Ardoino said.

“They said the Company refused to subject itself to the most rigorous scrutiny. We have once again proven them wrong. Completing our financial statement audit sets a new standard for the industry and reflects the leadership we’ve brought to this market from the start.”

Tether did not refer specifically to its sizeable Bitcoin reserves within the audit statement and did not immediately respond to external inquiries on this point.

Mini dictionary: KPMG, one of the “Big Four” accounting firms, provides audit, tax, and advisory services for major corporations and financial institutions worldwide, and an independent reserve audit by such a firm is considered a significant benchmark of transparency in the financial sector.

Breakdown of Tether’s reservesTether, established as a leading stablecoin issuer, holds a diversified reserve portfolio that includes gold, U.S. Treasuries, and substantial holdings of Bitcoin. Recent years have seen the company increase its gold acquisitions and amass nearly $60 billion in Bitcoin, according to Arkham Intelligence.

With its USDT stablecoin, Tether has reached a market capitalization of over $183 billion, making it the world’s third largest cryptocurrency by market value.

AssetDetailsGoldPhysically inspected and verified by KPMGBitcoinNearly $60 billion held in reserves (Arkham Intelligence)US TreasuriesHoldings exceed reserves of some countriesArdoino further highlighted Tether’s evolution, emphasizing that the firm has grown from a disruptive stablecoin issuer into one of the most significant private financial companies globally. He commented, “This audit demonstrates that our financial infrastructure and governance have evolved alongside that responsibility.”

“This audit demonstrates that our financial infrastructure and governance have evolved alongside that responsibility.”

The completion of the audit marks a milestone for Tether and the broader stablecoin sector, addressing longstanding calls for transparency and independent validation of reserves.

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.

The @bitcoinpolicy and a coalition of more than 40 digital asset organizations have published an open letter calling on leading artificial intelligence laboratories to grant vetted open-source security researchers controlled access to their most capable models. The letter, titled "Defenders Need the Frontier" and released on August 10, 2026, has drawn 78 signatories including Franklin Templeton (@FTDA_US), @ARKInvest, @coinbase, and @Strategy.

What the coalition is asking for The letter does not call for unrestricted public access to advanced AI tools. Instead, the signatories proposed a controlled program covering early access to frontier cybersecurity models, sufficient computing capacity, secure research environments, and direct channels with AI laboratory security teams. The goal is to allow researchers to examine $BTC wallets, payment infrastructure, and other open-source software before attackers can exploit newly discovered weaknesses.

The letter said many digital asset defenders, including Bitcoin Core developers, lack access to lab cyber programs and can be blocked by guardrails on publicly available frontier systems, leaving them to rely on less capable open-weight models. AnchorWatch CEO Rob Hamilton (@Rob1Ham) has spoken directly to this problem, saying that safety guardrails blocked his defensive research and forced him to turn to Chinese open models instead.

Bitcoin secures more than $1 trillion in value, which the coalition says raises the stakes of any unpatched vulnerability. Sophisticated adversaries, including potential foreign actors, are reportedly already leveraging advanced AI to sustain offensive campaigns at a pace that small open-source teams struggle to absorb.

The Coldcard exploit that sharpened the urgency The letter follows a serious hardware wallet compromise that began on July 30. An attacker exploited a five-year-old firmware flaw in Coinkite's Coldcard hardware wallet, traced to a March 2021 firmware release and a build configuration error that caused seed generation to fall back on a weak software random number generator rather than the device's hardware-based source of entropy. Galaxy Research's running tally of losses stands near 1,816 $BTC, worth close to USD 116 million, drained from more than 5,200 addresses.

The push also follows an early-August volunteer project called the Bitcoin Red Team, which used AI-assisted tools to audit Bitcoin-related code. Participants included Cashu developer Calle and AnchorWatch CEO Rob Hamilton. In one early snapshot, the group reviewed 390 projects in about 27.5 hours and filed roughly 4,962 findings, including dozens classified as critical and hundreds considered high severity.

BTCPay Server, one of the letter's signatories, wrote afterward that AI is changing the balance between attackers and defenders, and that models make it faster and cheaper to search large codebases for weaknesses. Whether AI labs will accept the coalition's proposal remains to be seen, as any response will require them to verify researchers, supervise sensitive work, and prevent advanced cybersecurity models from being redirected toward offensive use.

Sources:
CoinDesk: Bitcoin firms ask AI labs for same tools attackers already have
TRM Labs: Inside the $116 Million Coldcard Hack
Cointelegraph: Crypto Companies Urge AI Firms to Give Bitcoin Devs Early Access

Bitcoin company leaders and open-source developers are publicly stating that Chinese AI models are currently outperforming restricted American frontier systems in defensive cybersecurity work, forcing researchers to rely on them to secure critical Bitcoin infrastructure.

Rob Hamilton, CEO of AnchorWatch, a Bitcoin self-custody insurance company, reported cripling American AI restrictions. After integrating OpenAI’s trusted cyber program (having already completed KYC months earlier), he was blocked from further analysis on a codebase he had already responsibly disclosed. “It absolutely guts me as a patriotic American to have to do this, but I will be going back to using Chinese open source models to conduct my research to protect Bitcoin infrastructure,” Hamilton wrote. “Black hats will not hit these issues. The white hats will.” Days later, he gained access to OpenAI’s “Daybreak Blue” cyber model and was blocked again within 19 minutes while red-teaming Bitcoin infrastructure.

Francis Pouliot, founder of Bull Bitcoin, a Bitcoin-only exchange focused on self-custody infrastructure, described the situation bluntly. “I have never seen OpenAI this cucked. It’s cucked beyond belief now. Not even for security, for anything related to Bitcoin,” he posted. “USA AI industry is completely cooked if they don’t change this path,” he concluded, adding “Open-source Chinese LLMs. [orange heart emoji],” meaning that open Chinese models like Kimi K3 are actually helpful to Bitcoin. In a follow-up, Pouliot detailed how a Chinese open-source model identified a money-stealing exploit in a project he was auditing, demonstrated it on regtest, and helped patch it. When he asked the American models he pays for to review the same patch, they refused.

PortlandHODL, a Bitcoin Core contributor who builds for AnchorWatch, publicly highlighted the performance gap. “US-based Frontier AI Model – ‘You’re absolutely right!’ Chinese Open Model – ‘78 critical vulnerabilities found.’ The implications of this are unfathomable,” he posted. In a follow-up, he added that he felt he was “basically asking Xi to not get my software hacked at this point,” calling for OpenAI and Anthropic to create proper access programs for U.S. citizens doing defensive security work.

Alex Thorn, Head of Firmwide Research at Galaxy, signed a recent Bitcoin Policy Institute open letter demanding trusted access to frontier models for open-source defenders. “Americans should not have to rely on Chinese AI to defend themselves, their projects, companies, or clients from cyber-attacks,” he wrote. “RED TEAM NEEDS THE MODELS.”

On August 10, the Bitcoin Policy Institute — a Bitcoin and, of late, AI-focused policy think tank — published an open letter signed by more than 70 organizations across the digital-asset ecosystem, including major custodians, exchanges, mining firms, and open-source development groups. The letter calls on frontier AI labs to establish clear trusted-access programs for qualified open-source and digital-asset defenders. It argues that current restrictions and safety guardrails leave legitimate security researchers without access to the strongest models, forcing them to rely on less capable open-weight alternatives while sophisticated attackers face no such limits. The signatories request early access to cyber-capable models, sufficient compute, secure environments for reviewing code, and direct channels with lab security teams, stating that frontier AI could become one of the most powerful defensive technologies available if defenders are given fair access.

These statements reflect a broad pattern among Bitcoin security researchers: American models from OpenAI and Anthropic frequently refuse or restrict legitimate defensive work, even to users who are supposed to have been granted explicit access, while Chinese models such as Kimi K3 operate without the same guardrails and are delivering confirmed results. Concerns about hosting infrastructure of Chinese models being an attack vector can also be mitigated, since they are open source and can be run on American-hosted data centers, a trend that is likely to threaten the U.S. AI market if it continues.

Coldcard Exploit Triggers Ecosystem-Wide Response The cybersecurity pressure became acute in the Bitcoin industry after a firmware flaw in Coldcard hardware wallets was exploited beginning July 30, resulting in the theft of well over $100 million in bitcoin from seeds generated with insufficient entropy. Bitcoin Magazine published an urgent advisory urging affected users to migrate funds: COLDCARD SECURITY RISK: IMMEDIATE ACTION REQUIRED.

In response, a volunteer effort known as the Bitcoin Red Team formed, led by open-source developer Calle (creator of Cashu and the Android version of Bitchat) and Rob Hamilton. The group has conducted large-scale AI-assisted audits of Bitcoin open-source repositories, using models including Kimi K3 as the primary workhorse alongside limited access to Western systems. Early results, covered by Bitcoin Magazine, showed thousands of findings across hundreds of projects, including dozens of critical issues, with spending covered largely by OpenSats.

By August 8, after more than 100 hours of work involving dozens of contributors, the team reported scanning 501 projects and producing 7,958 findings, of which 1,280 were rated high or critical severity. The majority of compute spend continued to go to Chinese open-weight models.

Lessons from the Red Team Campaign Most recently, Calle shared lessons from the intensive red-team period. The effort has essentially completed a basic scan of virtually the entire Bitcoin open-source landscape; low-hanging fruit is largely exhausted, the developer wrote on this X account. Maintainers across projects have validated many of the critical and high-severity reports, while response times from projects vary widely and serve as a signal of overall health.

Key takeaways include the need for every project to maintain its own permanent AI audit pipeline going forward. Projects that began such reviews months earlier are in a markedly stronger position. Unmaintained repositories should be treated as likely broken and unreliable. 

Calle also warned that the human-only era of open-source security review is over; verification is now effectively free, and information overload must be handled with AI rather than complaints about PR slop. Multiple concurrent and diverse human approaches remain the strongest method for finding vulnerabilities, and external red-teaming will likely be required indefinitely. 

Calle also repeatedly emphasized that developers should stop writing security-critical code in C. In a follow-up post he explained: “we’re finding memory-safety vulnerabilities in c projects that are prevented by default in many other languages. In the past, finding a simple buffer overflow wasn’t enough. You’d need a highly skilled hacker to turn the vulnerability into a working end-to-end exploit. Today, that’s a single prompt.”

Bitcoin was the first major open-source ecosystem to confront this collision between accumulated human code and frontier AI capability. The rest of the software world is expected to follow.

UBS Group AG, Switzerland’s largest bank, has significantly increased its stake in spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs), raising its holdings by 230% to a total value of $90 million in BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust. The bank now owns approximately 2.5 million shares, marking a substantial expansion since its initial investment of just 3,600 shares valued below $150,000 at the start of 2024.

Growing institutional embrace of BitcoinUBS’s latest move signals growing momentum among major banks to increase exposure to digital asset products, even as the broader crypto market endures a period of volatility. The bank has allowed its wealth management clients broader access to BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) and comparable ETFs, which has resulted in parallel growth between the firm’s own positions and its facilitation for clients.

A UBS spokesperson emphasized the bank’s forward-looking approach to blockchain innovation, stating:

UBS recognizes the importance of distributed ledger technology like blockchain, which underpins digital assets.

According to individuals familiar with the matter, UBS is also evaluating the introduction of cryptocurrency trading services for select private banking clients in Switzerland. If implemented, initial offerings would include direct trading access to Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH), with possible future expansion to Asia-Pacific and US markets. The sources noted that a final decision on launching these services has not yet been made.

Institutional flows and market recovery hopesDespite a sharp market decline during the past year, institutional interest in digital assets remains strong. In the first quarter of 2026, 1,560 institutional entities held collective IBIT shares valued at over $27 billion. Since approval in January 2024, US-listed cryptocurrency ETFs have surged, now overseeing nearly $140 billion in assets, led predominantly by BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust.

At the same time, some hedge funds scaled back on their Bitcoin ETF allocations in Q1 2026, while banks increased exposure, suggesting a divergence in institutional appetite for risk and long-term positioning. Currently, Bitcoin is trading at $63,433, reflecting a decline of more than 40% over the year.

Tools for navigating volatile marketsAs shifting regulatory landscapes and legislative developments take shape globally, market observers suggest institutional investment—such as UBS’s aggressive accumulation—could help steady Bitcoin’s recovery trajectory through the rest of the year. In highly volatile conditions where Federal Reserve decisions or sudden altcoin listings can shift sentiment instantly, traders and institutions alike are seeking efficient ways to manage multiple market data streams.

Smart traders have started consolidating analytics by using privacy-first platforms like CryptoAppsy. This app brings together real-time charts, customized price alerts, coin-specific news feeds, and macroeconomic indicators—all accessible on a single screen, and without the need for account registration, reducing the friction and costs of switching between separate tools.

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.

HIVE Digital Technologies is doubling down on Paraguay as the centerpiece of its Bitcoin mining expansion, with the company’s newly appointed country site president outlining a vision built on clean energy, disciplined growth, and operational leadership in one of South America’s most energy-rich nations.

Gabriel Lamas, who took over as HIVE’s Country Site President in March 2025, has been vocal about what he sees as the recipe for sustainable Bitcoin mining: cheap hydroelectric power, careful scaling, and strong on-the-ground management.

Paraguay’s power advantage
The country sits downstream from the Itaipú Dam, one of the largest hydroelectric power plants on the planet. HIVE operates two major facilities in the country: a 200 MW site at Yguazú, acquired in early 2025, and a 100 MW facility at Valenzuela, completed the same year. Combined, that’s 300 MW of hydroelectric-powered mining capacity.

Advertisement

Paraguay generates far more hydroelectric power than its domestic economy can absorb. That surplus energy, sometimes called “stranded” power, sits there doing nothing unless someone finds a use for it. Bitcoin mining fits that gap almost perfectly.

Lamas brings over 20 years of experience in the industry to the role, including prior work with Bitfarms, another publicly traded mining company. According to HIVE, his leadership has exceeded operational expectations during the phased scaling of the Paraguayan sites.

The hashrate targets
HIVE is targeting a global hashrate of 25 EH/s (exahashes per second) in 2025 and 35 EH/s in 2026. The jump from 25 to 35 EH/s in a single year would represent a 40% increase. That’s aggressive, particularly in a post-halving environment where Bitcoin mining rewards were cut in half in April 2024. After a halving, miners earn fewer Bitcoin per block, which means only the most efficient operators survive and thrive.

Beyond Bitcoin: the AI infrastructure play
HIVE has been developing its BUZZ platform, which is designed to support AI and high-performance computing (HPC) workloads alongside traditional mining operations. The idea is that the same infrastructure, power supply, and cooling systems that serve Bitcoin miners can also serve the rapidly growing demand for AI compute.

The company trades on both Nasdaq and the TSX under the ticker HIVE, giving it access to both US and Canadian capital markets.

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

Charles Schwab has opened direct trading of Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) to its approximately 40 million brokerage account holders, expanding its crypto offerings on August 13. The move gives one of the largest US financial institutions’ clients access to leading cryptocurrencies through the same platforms they use for stocks and bonds.

Schwab’s crypto platform detailsThe Schwab Crypto platform allows eligible clients to buy and sell Bitcoin and Ethereum using their existing brokerage interface. The service is currently available in 48 US states, with New York and Louisiana excluded for now. Schwab charges a 0.75% fee on crypto trades, which aligns with rates found across the industry.

Charles Schwab Premier Bank handles custody of client assets for the new crypto service, providing oversight and recordkeeping. Paxos, a blockchain infrastructure company regulated by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), is responsible for sub-custody and trade execution.

Mini dictionary: Paxos is a blockchain infrastructure company that provides crypto brokerage, custody, and settlement services, operating under regulatory oversight from the US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC).

Jonathan Craig, Head of Retail Investing at Schwab, highlighted new service and research features available to clients trading digital assets alongside traditional investments. He stated that broader financial management and educational resources are intended to make the platform appealing for cryptocurrency investors.

Clients now have access to Bitcoin and Ethereum trading on the same interface as stocks and bonds, with added support, research, and education.

Expansion and future plansSchwab, with over $12 trillion in client assets, initially entered the crypto sector using indirect exposure instruments such as spot Bitcoin and Ether exchange-traded products (ETPs), futures, and related funds. As of May, 39.1 million Schwab retail clients were offered access to crypto trading. The figure has now reached 40 million accounts with the broader rollout.

Joe Vietri, Head of Digital Assets, said Schwab aims to become the primary destination for individual investors looking to include digital assets in their portfolios. The company plans to expand its product range beyond BTC and ETH and eventually enable token transfers from outside wallets and exchanges.

FeatureMay 2026August 2026Accounts eligible for crypto trading39.1 million40 millionTokens supportedBTC, ETHBTC, ETHSupported states48 (excludes NY, LA)48 (excludes NY, LA)Trade fee0.75%0.75%Currently, Schwab clients account for about 20% of all spot crypto ETP holdings, highlighting the firm’s position in the retail crypto market.

Risk messaging and industry contextDespite launching direct crypto trading, Schwab continues to caution investors about the risks of digital assets. A company research report from April found that even a modest 1% to 3% allocation to Bitcoin or Ether can significantly increase a portfolio’s total risk. The firm noted that volatility remains a concern, as both tokens have previously dropped over 70% in some market cycles, and described cryptocurrencies as speculative, high-risk holdings.

Any cryptocurrency allocation is likely to raise portfolio volatility, and there is no single correct level of exposure for every investor.

Schwab’s move matches a broader trend on Wall Street, with institutions such as Morgan Stanley introducing crypto trading on its E-Trade platform and Goldman Sachs seeking regulatory approval to launch a Bitcoin Premium Income ETF. These developments are happening as US lawmakers consider the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, which would divide oversight of crypto between the SEC and CFTC and establish ground rules for tokens, stablecoins, and decentralized finance (DeFi).

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.

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

Strategy chairman Michael Saylor, who had championed uncompromising Bitcoin maximalism for years, has made an unexpected compromise with the fiat world. The entrepreneur unveiled the concept of a multi-layered Digital Finance Stack, in which the USDT stablecoin has, for the first time, been officially designated as the ecosystem's primary transactional gateway.

The new architecture clearly distributes assets across the monetary spectrum: from volatile Bitcoin on the left flank to stable fiat payment instruments on the right.

How Saylor plans to supercharge Bitcoin with USDTWithin this framework, Bitcoin is assigned exclusively the role of "heavy" digital capital and the ultimate defensive asset. To directly address Bitcoin's limited transactional utility, the largest corporate holder of the cryptocurrency has unexpectedly integrated Tether's USDT into the model.

HOT Stories

This zero-volatility instrument is intended to fully meet the market's need for fast, everyday payments.

Michael Saylor's Bitcoin-centered Digital Capital framework, Source: Michael Saylor via X.comServing as a bridge between them are new structured financial-engineering products developed by Strategy itself. These include STRC, a semi-stable, fixed-income credit instrument represented by the company's Bitcoin-backed preferred stock, and SR-strcUSX, a hybrid token created for the sole purpose of combining the stability of fiat currency with debt-market yields.

The top layer of this system is Digital Equity, which connects all levels of the framework into a single business. 

You can live on Bitcoin. You can also build on it. Crude oil is valuable, but civilization gets more utility by refining it into gasoline, jet fuel, plastics, lubricants, and asphalt. Bitcoin is Digital Capital. Innovation turns capital into credit, money, and currency.

— Michael Saylor (@saylor) August 13, 2026 Under Saylor's vision, fintech companies will be able to earn revenue by managing these payment and credit instruments, while investors will receive a share of their earnings by purchasing equity.

You Might Also Like

Saylor's theoretical framework has emerged at a moment of severe stress testing for Strategy's actual balance sheet. The company's latest reports showed that it had broken its "never sell" rule, liquidating 6,948 BTC worth $432.5 million this summer to pay dividends and maintain liquidity. The sale came as the STRC preferred stock was trading below its $100 par value.

Although CEO Phong Le said this week that Strategy expects to return to net Bitcoin purchases by the end of 2026, Saylor's new concept clearly shows that the company is attempting to transform its massive reserve of 840,447 BTC from a passive and volatile burden into an active commercial fintech instrument.

Goldman Sachs has agreed to acquire Neos Investments for up to $2.25 billion, a deal that will add three Bitcoin and Ethereum options-income ETFs managing more than $1.1 billion combined to its asset management business.

Summary

Goldman Sachs will acquire Neos Investments for up to $2.25 billion. The deal will add three Bitcoin and Ethereum income ETFs to Goldman’s asset management business. Neos manages more than $30 billion across 19 options based income ETFs. The transaction is expected to close in the first quarter of 2027, subject to regulatory approval. According to Goldman Sachs, the cash-and-equity transaction will bring Neos and its more than $30 billion in assets under management into Goldman Sachs Asset Management, subject to performance and service commitments tied to the agreement. The acquisition is expected to close in the first quarter of 2027 after regulatory approval and other customary closing conditions.

Among the 19 Neos funds included in the transaction are the Neos Bitcoin High Income ETF (BTCI), Boosted Bitcoin High Income ETF (XBCI) and Ethereum High Income ETF (NEHI), giving Goldman an existing lineup of crypto-linked income products while its own proposed Bitcoin income fund remains on file with U.S. regulators.

Goldman Sachs will inherit three crypto income ETFs Neos launched BTCI in October 2024 as an actively managed ETF designed to combine Bitcoin-linked exposure with monthly income generated through options. The fund had accumulated more than $1 billion in net assets as of Wednesday, making it the largest of Neos’ three crypto-focused products.

Rather than buying Bitcoin directly, BTCI obtains exposure through exchange-traded products linked to the cryptocurrency and uses an options strategy to generate distributions. A Neos shareholder report for the period ending November 2025 showed the portfolio using Bitcoin ETFs alongside options linked to the Cboe Bitcoin U.S. ETF Index.

XBCI, launched in February 2026, applies a more aggressive version of the strategy. The fund had about $111 million in net assets as of Wednesday and seeks roughly 150% exposure to BTCI’s underlying strategy, according to its prospectus, meaning declines in Bitcoin-linked investments can also be magnified.

Ethereum High Income ETF NEHI, meanwhile, was launched in December 2025 and had accumulated more than $77 million in net assets. Like the Bitcoin products, NEHI does not directly hold Ether and instead combines exposure through exchange-traded products with an options-based income strategy.

Neos has built the three crypto ETFs as part of a larger range of income funds covering U.S. equity indexes, fixed income, Bitcoin, Ether and gold. Founded in 2022, the investment manager now oversees more than $30 billion across 19 options-based ETFs.

“As investor demand for active ETFs grows, NEOS’ disciplined investment approach is highly complementary to our capabilities across buffer, managed outcome and income strategies,” Goldman Sachs Chairman and CEO David Solomon said.

Neos deal could affect Goldman’s filed Bitcoin ETF plans The acquisition also puts an existing Bitcoin income fund inside Goldman months after the bank filed to launch a competing product of its own.

In April, crypto.news reported that Goldman had filed a registration statement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for the Goldman Sachs Bitcoin Premium Income ETF. The proposed fund would invest at least 80% of its net assets in instruments providing Bitcoin exposure, primarily through spot Bitcoin exchange-traded products, before selling call options against part of the position.

Goldman’s filing proposed an options overwrite covering between 40% and 100% of its Bitcoin exposure depending on market conditions. Selling the calls would generate premiums for monthly income, although the structure would also limit some of the fund’s participation when Bitcoin rises sharply.

Bloomberg senior ETF analyst Eric Balchunas said following the Neos announcement that the acquisition could explain why the Goldman product filed in April has not launched.

Goldman will get $BTCI in the Neos deal, which is a $1b bitcoin premium income ETF, yields 27% and captures most but not all of bitcoins run-ups. Nowww I get why GS never launched the btc covered call product they filed months ago. Better to leap frog BlackRock’s $BITA vs me too pic.twitter.com/kCeuAAqiQo

— Eric Balchunas (@EricBalchunas) August 12, 2026 With BTCI already holding more than $1 billion in assets, Balchunas said the Neos acquisition could allow Goldman to “leapfrog” BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Premium Income ETF, or BITA, rather than building a competing fund from the beginning.

Goldman has not said whether it intends to withdraw, modify, or proceed with its Bitcoin Premium Income ETF following the Neos transaction.

BlackRock has already entered the Bitcoin income ETF market Competition for Bitcoin options-income products intensified in June when BlackRock brought BITA to market.

A June filing update showed that BlackRock planned to generate income by writing covered calls primarily against its iShares Bitcoin Trust, or IBIT, and Bitcoin ETF-linked indexes. The filing also set BITA’s sponsor fee at 0.65%.

BlackRock subsequently launched the fund on June 16. Unlike a conventional spot Bitcoin ETF, BITA combines Bitcoin exposure, mainly through IBIT shares, with call options written against part of the portfolio.

An analysis of BITA published after the launch found that BlackRock planned to write calls against roughly 25% to 35% of the fund’s net asset value each month while targeting annual income of between 15% and 25%. The trade-off comes from surrendering some potential gains above the strike prices of the calls when Bitcoin rises sharply.

BITA had accumulated about $59 million in net assets as of Wednesday, compared with more than $1 billion for Neos’ BTCI.

Neos’ longer operating history in the category gives Goldman an established Bitcoin income product if the acquisition closes, while XBCI adds leveraged Bitcoin-linked exposure and NEHI extends the same general income approach to Ether.

Goldman expands its options ETF business through acquisitions Neos is Goldman’s second multibillion-dollar ETF acquisition in 2026.

The firm completed its roughly $2 billion purchase of Innovator Capital Management in April, adding an investment manager focused on defined-outcome and options-based ETFs. Innovator’s products use options structures to establish predetermined ranges for potential gains and losses over specified periods.

Adding Neos would increase the scale of the same part of Goldman’s asset management operation. Goldman said derivative-income ETFs across the industry now manage about $180 billion, citing Morningstar data, after recording a compound annual growth rate of more than 70% since 2021.

Goldman Sachs Asset Management, Innovator and Neos together managed more than $130 billion across their global ETF platforms as of June 30. Goldman said the combined operation would include roughly $80 billion in active ETFs and make the firm the eighth-largest active ETF provider based on Morningstar data.

Neos co-founders Troy Cates and Garrett Paolella are expected to become partners at Goldman Sachs Asset Management once the transaction closes. Neos’ investment professionals and client-service employees are also expected to join the firm under the agreement.

U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs absorbed about 13,300 BTC last week, more than four times the roughly 3,150 BTC newly created by the network.

Bitcoin moved toward the top of its range last week as institutional demand through U.S. spot ETFs strengthened. Cooler employment data reduced expectations for an immediate Federal Reserve rate hike, but persistent selling pressure kept the move contained.

The stronger ETF demand was reflected in $865.3 million of net inflows across five straight sessions, the funds’ strongest weekly showing since April. According to a recent Bitfinex Alpha report, the funds absorbed about 13,300 BTC during the period. That was more than four times the roughly 3,150 BTC newly created by the network.

ETF Inflows Return, But Sellers Push Back BlackRock’s IBIT and Fidelity’s FBTC accounted for much of the ETF activity. Ether-focused ETFs also recorded $243.7 million in inflows, extending their weekly streak and showing that demand was not limited to Bitcoin.

The renewed demand came as broader risk assets also moved higher amid easing tensions and falling oil prices. The S&P 500 rose 3.58% for the week, while Bitcoin gained slightly more than 2%, indicating that other sources of supply continued to weigh on its price.

One notable source of that supply came from Strategy, which disclosed the sale of 1,638 BTC for approximately $104.7 million. The company sold the coins at an average price of about $63,957 and said it would use the proceeds for preferred dividends and a discounted share repurchase.

Strategy’s sale adds to a broader supply overhang visible on-chain around Bitcoin’s current trading range. An estimated 1.79 million BTC have cost bases between $62,000 and $65,000, creating potential selling pressure as the price moves through the band.

Why the Macro Picture Remains Mixed U.S. labor data added to the macro backdrop, with July payrolls falling by 23,000 and earlier figures revised lower. The three-month average job gain dropped to about 20,000, while unemployment reached 4.1% as participation declined.

You may also like: Bitcoin Rebound Faces Risk as Futures Demand Outpaces Spot Buying: Analysts Only 90 Bitcoin Wallets Hold 10K+ BTC: And That Number Just Hit a 6-Month High BTC Price Drops Below $64K as Peter Schiff Urges Investors to Sell Bitcoin Initial jobless claims remained low, indicating that the labor market was cooling rather than collapsing. Futures markets lowered the probability of a September rate hike to 43.9%, while Treasury yields and the dollar eased.

However, long-term borrowing costs stayed high, with the 30-year Treasury yield above 5.2% amid inflation concerns and heavy government borrowing. Bitfinex said Bitcoin could break above $65,000 if ETF demand remains strong while inflation and long-term yields ease.

Tags:

Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) miners are increasingly looking beyond crypto mining toward AI infrastructure, as access to massive amounts of power becomes potentially more valuable than the BTC mining machines plugged into it.

Are Mining Economics Less Attractive?In a podcast on Aug. 12, prominent crypto investor and "Wolf of All Streets" host Scott Melker argued on what may have been miners’ most valuable resource all along.

His commentary comes after Riot Platforms (NASDAQ:RIOT) reportedly signed a $9.1 billion, 20-year data center agreement with Anthropic. The agreement could rise to $16.1 billion if extension options are exercised.

The deal represents one of the clearest examples yet of Bitcoin miners repurposing their power-rich infrastructure for the booming AI computing market.

Melker said miners’ biggest asset may not be mining equipment but access to electricity and infrastructure capable of supporting energy-intensive computing.

Riot’s own numbers help explain the attraction. The company reported an average cost to mine Bitcoin of $49,912 during Q2, excluding depreciation, up from $48,992 a year earlier. Riot produced 1,587 BTC during the quarter.

Melker noted that once depreciation and other expenses are considered, the economics of mining become substantially less attractive, particularly with Bitcoin trading well below its October 2025 all-time high.

Other BTC miners have also been exploring AI and high-performance computing opportunities, turning what was once primarily a Bitcoin-mining infrastructure story into a broader race to monetize scarce power capacity.

What Does It Mean For Bitcoin?Melker argued the shift could create an unexpected positive for Bitcoin despite reducing the incentive for large U.S. miners to dedicate their infrastructure exclusively to BTC.

If major publicly traded mining companies redirect capacity toward AI, Bitcoin’s hash rate could become distributed across a broader set of operators.

That could potentially reduce concerns about mining concentration among a relatively small number of large corporate players, though lower mining participation would not automatically guarantee greater decentralization.

For investors, however, Riot’s deal illustrates a more immediate change. The valuation case for some Bitcoin miners is increasingly becoming an AI infrastructure thesis rather than simply a leveraged bet on Bitcoin.

Riot still generated most of its latest quarterly revenue from Bitcoin mining, but the Anthropic agreement represents its largest step yet toward becoming a high-performance computing and data center operator.

The transition suggests the next major competition among Bitcoin miners may not simply be over who can mine BTC most efficiently.

It may be over who controls the electricity, land and grid connections needed to power the AI boom.

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.

Kostas Chalkias, co-founder and chief cryptographer at Mysten Labs, has revealed he is building affordable quantum-safe two-factor authentication cards for the Sui blockchain. The project puts a fresh spotlight on hardware wallet security at a moment when the sector is dealing with one of its worst-ever exploits.

Sub-$10 Cards, NFC Signatures and a Dedicated Factory Chalkias has set a target of under $10 per quantum card key and one to two seconds per NFC quantum signature. To reach that at scale, he quietly leased a factory to mass-produce quantum-resistant hardware wallet cards for Sui. The work has been carried out on personal time outside his day job, and Chalkias has said he may go as far as sponsoring cards for users who cannot afford them.

The push fits a broader pattern of quantum preparedness at Mysten Labs. Sui can adopt new authentication methods, including post-quantum cryptography, at the flip of a switch, and Chalkias has said the network was "designed to be quantum-ready from day one." Existing Sui accounts would be able to rotate into a quantum-safe key derived from their existing recovery phrase rather than requiring a full migration to a new wallet. Chalkias holds a PhD in identity-based cryptography and plays a key role in the development of the Sui blockchain and the Walrus decentralised storage layer.

Coldcard Exploit Sharpens the Focus on Wallet Security Chalkias has cited recent hardware wallet failures as part of his motivation, and the timing is pointed. Beginning July 30, 2026, an attacker exploited a five-year-old firmware flaw in Coinkite's Coldcard hardware wallet to systematically drain bitcoin from affected devices, with the root cause traced to a March 2021 firmware release that caused seed generation to fall back on a weak software random number generator rather than the device's hardware-based source of entropy.

Galaxy Research confirmed 1,596 $BTC stolen across three attack waves, with a suspected fourth wave that could bring the total to approximately 2,055 BTC, worth close to $130 million. At least four waves of theft followed, draining funds from more than 5,200 addresses. The root cause was weak random-number generation dating to a March 2021 firmware build, not a flaw in the Bitcoin protocol itself.

Coinkite shipped emergency firmware for every affected model on July 31, but installing it does not repair an existing seed. Anyone who generated a seed on a Coldcard between March 2021 and the patch should treat it as compromised and migrate to a new seed. The incident has reinforced the case for rethinking how cryptographic keys are generated and secured at the hardware level, the precise problem Chalkias says he is working to address.

Sources:
Bitcoin.com News: Sui Co-Founder Is Building Quantum-Safe Hardware Wallets For $10
TRM Labs: The Largest Hardware Wallet Exploit of 2026, Inside the $116 Million Coldcard Hack
The Hacker News: Coldcard Hardware Wallet Flaw Linked to $70 Million Bitcoin Theft in 41 Minutes

Strategy, a leading institutional Bitcoin holder, plans to resume its Bitcoin acquisition efforts later this year after shifting aspects of its business focus and drawing attention for recent sales of its holdings. CEO Phong Le outlined the company’s current and future approach to Bitcoin investment during an interview with FOX Business.

Significant net buying despite salesPhong Le revealed that Strategy acquired approximately 175,000 Bitcoin so far in 2024, while also selling about 7,000 BTC. These figures place the company firmly in net buyer territory and reinforce its status as a dominant player in the corporate Bitcoin holdings landscape.

According to Le, this pace means the company has purchased about 25 times more Bitcoin than it has sold over the period. The executive said that this activity moved Strategy from the second to the first position among institutional Bitcoin holders worldwide.

Strategy CEO Phong Le indicated, “We’ll get back to buying more Bitcoin throughout the course of the year,” reaffirming commitment to the firm’s core digital asset strategy.

Since May, Strategy has sold Bitcoin on four occasions, including a recent sale of 1,690 BTC. The firm has used proceeds from these transactions to fund preferred stock dividends, undertake share repurchases, and boost its US dollar reserve.

Departure from ‘never sell’ policy faces scrutinyWhile the scale of Strategy’s sales remains modest in comparison with its total holdings, the company has encountered increased scrutiny in the market for shifting away from its traditional “never sell” approach. This adjustment highlights the challenges that public companies face as they attempt to balance long-term digital asset strategies with near-term financial responsibilities to both common and preferred shareholders.

Strategy is known for accumulating over 840,000 BTC, making it a central figure in institutional Bitcoin investment.

Shares of the company have often been viewed by market participants as an indirect way to gain exposure to Bitcoin, with company decisions frequently subject to market analysis.

BTC treasury model faces broader market challengesThe broader corporate Bitcoin treasury model is confronting pressures in the current market environment. According to BitcoinTreasuries.NET, public companies collectively hold more than 1.26 million BTC. However, they trail exchange-traded funds and other investment funds, which now command over 1.6 million BTC.

Novaque Research has detailed that the Bitcoin treasury model benefited in the past from a favorable financing cycle, as market premiums above net BTC holdings enabled companies to raise funds and accumulate more Bitcoin through equity or debt offerings.

Maintaining this cycle becomes difficult when companies trade below the net asset value of their Bitcoin, making new capital raises more dilutive for existing shareholders.

Mini dictionary: Novaque Research, an independent research firm specializing in digital assets and financial markets, is known for its analysis of Bitcoin treasury models and institutional investment trends.

EntityBTC Holdings (approximate)Public Companies1.26 millionETFs and Other Funds1.6 millionStrategy840,000Observers continue to examine how the corporate accumulation strategies and financial priorities of leading institutional holders like Strategy shape both their own performance and broader trends in the digital asset market.

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.

Table of contents

Investors pulled $145 million from U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs on Aug. 10, the largest single-day redemption in over a week, according to data tracked by SoSoValue and highlighted in the original report. Spot Ether ETFs also bled $14.59 million, extending a pattern of tepid demand for Ethereum-based fund products. But the headline numbers masked a telling fissure: Grayscale’s mini trusts, which offer the same underlying exposure at a sharply lower fee, registered notable inflows, with the Bitcoin Mini Trust pulling in $37.06 million and the Ethereum Mini Trust attracting $8.59 million.

The divergence points to a market increasingly discriminating about cost. The Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) and its larger Ethereum counterpart have long struggled with outflows as early investors exit and competitors undercut them on management fees. The mini versions, introduced this year, are designed to recapture those dollars by matching fee structures of leading rivals like BlackRock’s IBIT and Fidelity’s FBTC. Monday’s data suggests that strategy is working, at least in relative terms, even as the broader ETF complex faces headwinds.

The Mini Trust Divergence Grayscale’s mini trusts, which trade under tickers BTC and ETH, are physically backed and carry expense ratios of just 0.15%—a fraction of GBTC’s 1.5% fee. When spot Bitcoin ETFs launched in January 2024, GBTC hemorrhaged billions as traders arbitraged the discount to NAV and rotated into cheaper products. That exodus has slowed, but last week’s net outflows show that the product still leaks capital. By contrast, the Bitcoin Mini Trust has steadily grown, and Monday’s $37 million intake was its best day since early July. The gap between the two vehicles reflects the fee sensitivity of both retail and institutional allocators.

Cost is not the only variable. Liquidity, spread, and custody considerations matter, but the fee line is the first filter many investors apply. As the mini trusts gain scale, they could cannibalize GBTC further, forcing a deeper restructuring of Grayscale’s product suite. The question is whether the mini trust inflows represent new money or simply a migration from the older, pricier wrapper.

Ether ETF Demand Remains Soft Ether ETFs fared worse, with the entire category posting $14.59 million in net redemptions. Unlike Bitcoin funds, which have attracted net positive flows over the past month, Ether ETFs have yet to demonstrate durable demand. Since their July launch, spot Ether funds have struggled to convert curiosity into committed capital. Part of the problem is the lack of staking yield: holding ETH through an ETF means forgoing the staking rewards that native holders earn, a drag that becomes more pronounced as on-chain staking rates rise.

The Ethereum Mini Trust’s $8.59 million inflow, though small, suggests that cost-conscious investors are the ones testing the waters, not large-scale institutional whales. Without a staking component, the value proposition for Ether ETFs remains incomplete. Until issuers find a way to incorporate staking returns within a regulated vehicle—something the SEC has so far blocked—these funds will likely trail their Bitcoin counterparts in asset gathering.

Fee Wars Reshape the ETF Landscape The crypto ETF market has evolved into a race to the bottom on cost. With 11 spot Bitcoin ETFs now trading in the U.S., issuers have slashed fees to near zero to differentiate. BlackRock’s IBIT and Fidelity’s FBTC, both waiving fees for initial periods, have dominated flows. Grayscale’s mini products are its defensive response, and the numbers indicate they are clawing back share. Still, Monday’s outflows from the broader group highlight that cost alone cannot shield funds from sentiment-driven redemptions. When Bitcoin’s price wavers or risk appetite contracts, even the cheapest wrapper will see money leave.

Institutional capital is, however, finding other on-chain products. A recent weekly tokenization roundup noted that real-world asset (RWA) markets crossed $20 billion on-chain, with institutions opting for tokenized Treasuries and private credit over volatile crypto funds. This suggests that the same allocators who pulled from Bitcoin ETFs on Monday may be parking capital in yield-generating instruments that feel less speculative. The ETF flows, in that light, look less like a rejection of crypto and more like a rotation within digital asset strategies.

What remains unclear is whether the Grayscale mini trusts can maintain their momentum once the initial fee advantage narrows. As more issuers introduce similar low-cost products, the mini trusts’ edge will erode. Additionally, regulatory uncertainty—something that continues to hang over the sector following a last-minute push by banks to derail a landmark crypto bill—keeps institutional investors cautious. The Senate vote on that bill, covered in a separate report on bank lobbying, could reset the risk calculus for digital asset funds. Until then, flows may remain erratic.

For now, the takeaway is one of fragmentation. The days when one Bitcoin ETF product could dominate are over. Investors are parsing fees, liquidity, and redemption mechanics like never before, and capital flows are reflecting those calculations. The mini trusts may not reverse the overall trend, but they are carving out a growing niche—proof that in an increasingly crowded field, even single-digit basis points can redirect millions.

AUTHOR

With over five years of experience in crypto, blockchain, and tech content, Ishtiyaq makes complex topics easy to understand. He simplifies blockchain and digital currency concepts for a wide audience, ensuring that beginners and experts alike can grasp key ideas. His clear and engaging writing helps readers stay informed about the latest trends, developments, and innovations in the crypto space. Whether explaining blockchain technology, digital assets, or DeFi, Ishtiyaq breaks down complicated ideas into simple, digestible content. His goal is to help people navigate the fast-changing world of cryptocurrency with confidence, clarity, and a deeper understanding.

Tether-backed Bitcoin-focused company Twenty One Capital has reported a $413.5 million net loss for the second quarter of 2026 after Bitcoin’s decline reduced the value of its holdings.

Summary

Twenty One Capital lost $413.5 million during the second quarter of 2026. A $401.5 million Bitcoin valuation loss accounted for most of the quarterly deficit. CEO Raphael Zagury plans to add acquisitions, capital markets services, and Bitcoin-backed loans. The NYSE-listed company gives U.S. investors stock-based exposure to a large corporate Bitcoin reserve. Bitcoin losses have dominated Twenty One Capital’s results According to Twenty One Capital’s second-quarter financial report, a $401.5 million decline in the value of its Bitcoin holdings accounted for most of the company’s quarterly loss.

Twenty One Capital’s latest loss has shown how strongly its financial statements depend on Bitcoin’s price at the end of each reporting period. Because the company holds the cryptocurrency as its main asset, changes in Bitcoin’s fair value pass through its reported earnings even when it does not sell the coins.

The $401.5 million reduction tied to Bitcoin represented about 97% of the total second-quarter loss. Remaining expenses accounted for roughly $12 million, based on the two figures in the report, although the source did not provide a complete breakdown of those costs.

A similar effect appeared in the company’s first-quarter accounts. Twenty One Capital reported an $859.7 million net loss for the three months ended March 31, according to its SEC quarterly filing. An $847.8 million decline in the fair value of its Bitcoin holdings caused most of that loss.

As of March 31, Twenty One held 43,514 BTC with a reported fair value of $2.95 billion, down from $3.80 billion at the end of 2025. Its cost basis for the holdings stood at about $3.69 billion, while the price used to value each coin fell from $87,316 on Dec. 31 to $67,832 on March 31.

Combined, the first two quarters have produced reported net losses of about $1.27 billion. Nearly $1.25 billion of that amount came from the lower accounting value of the company’s Bitcoin, based on the first-quarter filing and the second-quarter figures.

Such fair-value losses do not necessarily represent cash leaving the business. The first-quarter filing shows that Twenty One sold one Bitcoin and recorded a $3,180 gain on that disposal, while the much larger loss came from revaluing the coins it continued to own. Bitcoin’s closing price in later reporting periods can reverse part of a previous loss or create another expense under the same accounting treatment.

Twenty One Capital plans businesses beyond its treasury New CEO Raphael Zagury has said Twenty One cannot rely only on holding Bitcoin and must develop businesses capable of producing cash flow. His plan centers on buying operating companies, using debt and equity markets to raise capital, and offering loans secured by Bitcoin.

Zagury took over from Strike founder Jack Mallers on July 20, according to the company’s leadership announcement. Mallers stepped down to concentrate on Strike but remained involved in the leadership handover.

“Twenty One holds one of the largest Bitcoin balance sheets in the public markets,” Zagury said in the announcement.

“My job is to build the operating company around it, with the discipline, governance, and executional rigor of an institution.”

The company identified five strategic priorities when Zagury became CEO. In addition to acquisitions and Bitcoin financial services, management plans to develop its capital markets operation, manage its Bitcoin reserves through debt and equity transactions, and keep a holding-company structure for acquired businesses.

Zagury has experience across both traditional finance and Bitcoin infrastructure. Before taking the top job, he served as a Twenty One director and interim audit committee chair. His earlier roles included positions at Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank, and Merrill Lynch, while he also helped lead Bitcoin mining and infrastructure company Elektron Energy.

In May, Twenty One said it was considering a combination with Strike and Elektron that would have joined payments, mining, treasury management, and financial services. The company later removed Strike from consideration after Mallers left the CEO position, leaving the payments business as an independent company.

Tether has tightened control of the Bitcoin company Twenty One began with support from Tether, Bitfinex, SoftBank, and Cantor Equity Partners. Its 2025 launch plan valued the business at $3.6 billion and called for more than 42,000 BTC, alongside capital raised through convertible notes and a private investment in public equity.

Tether later acquired SoftBank’s full interest in the company, crypto.news reported in May. The transaction removed a large outside shareholder and increased Tether’s influence over the listed company.

The original structure had included Bitcoin contributions from Tether, Bitfinex and SoftBank. A separate financing package consisted of convertible senior secured notes and common equity, with the proceeds allocated mainly to additional Bitcoin purchases and corporate expenses.

By the time Twenty One entered the public market in December 2025, its treasury had grown to more than 43,500 BTC. Earlier coverage of its debut noted that falling Bitcoin prices were already putting pressure on the stock and other digital-asset treasury companies.

Investors were also questioning whether Twenty One could develop enough operating revenue to distinguish its shares from direct Bitcoin holdings or spot exchange-traded funds. At the time, the company employed four full-time workers and had not provided a product-launch schedule.

Under Zagury, management has placed more attention on acquiring businesses and generating income rather than measuring performance only by the size of the Bitcoin reserve. Twenty One still uses Bitcoin per share, expressed in satoshis, as one of its internal performance measures.

The company’s first-quarter filing showed 12,557 satoshis per Class A share at both Dec. 31 and March 31. Twenty One had 346.5 million Class A shares outstanding at the end of the quarter, while its Bitcoin balance fell by one coin.

U.S. investors face Bitcoin and company-specific risks Twenty One trades on the New York Stock Exchange under the ticker XXI, giving U.S. investors access to its Bitcoin holdings through a regulated public stock. That exposure also includes corporate expenses, debt, management decisions, and share issuance, which do not apply when an investor holds Bitcoin directly.

The shares were trading near $4.59 on Aug. 11, while Bitcoin changed hands around $63,802. Because XXI represents an operating company rather than a spot Bitcoin ETF, its stock price can trade above or below the value of the Bitcoin attributable to each share.

Twenty One has also used Bitcoin to support its financing. Its first-quarter SEC report listed about $484.4 million of convertible notes and said 16,116 BTC served as collateral for them. Management stated that the pledged coins could not be treated as an available source of liquidity while they remained tied to the notes.

At the end of March, the company held $114.1 million in cash and $117.9 million in net working capital. Management said those resources were sufficient to fund operations for at least one year from the filing date and did not expect to sell Bitcoin during that period to meet ordinary liquidity needs.

A governance issue emerged after SoftBank’s representatives left the board following Tether’s purchase. As crypto.news covered in June, the NYSE warned Twenty One that its audit committee no longer met the exchange’s independence rules.

The exchange gave the company until June 5 to appoint a qualified independent audit committee member before attaching a below-compliance indicator to its listing. Twenty One appointed an independent director on June 8, according to its investor-relations records.

Bitcoin 65 bin doların üzerinde kalıcı olamazken, büyük cüzdanların sayısı dikkat çekici biçimde artıyor. En az 10 bin BTC tutan Bitcoin cüzdanlarının sayısı altı ayın en yüksek seviyesine çıkarken, küçük yatırımcıların elindeki Bitcoin miktarı ağustos ayında gerilemeye devam ediyor. Santiment verilerine göre en az 10 bin BTC tutan cüzdanların sayısı 90’a çıktı.

Bu gelişme, Bitcoin arzının daha büyük cüzdanlarda yoğunlaştığı bir döneme işaret ediyor. Ancak spot Bitcoin ETF’lerindeki çıkışlar ve Strategy’nin yeni BTC satışı, piyasanın tamamında aynı yönde bir hareket olmadığını gösteriyor.

Bitcoin Balinalarının Sayısı Neden Artıyor? Santiment verilerine göre en az 10 bin BTC tutan cüzdanların sayısı son sekiz haftada net 6 artarak 90’a çıktı. Böylece bu kategori, son altı ayın en yüksek seviyesine ulaştı.

Söz konusu cüzdan sayısındaki artış %7,1 olarak hesaplandı. Buna karşılık mikro cüzdanların Bitcoin varlıkları ağustos ayında gerilemeye devam etti.

Küçük yatırımcıların elindeki Bitcoin miktarı azalırken, en büyük cüzdanların ağırlığı yeniden artıyor. Santiment’e göre arzın daha güçlü ellere doğru kayması, bir sonraki büyük piyasa hareketinin yukarı yönlü olma ihtimalini artıran bir sinyal olabilir.

Santiment, mikro cüzdanlardaki düşüşü bireysel yatırımcıların artan korkusuyla ilişkilendiriyor. Şirket, özellikle Coldcard saldırılarının yarattığı endişe ve CLARITY Act sürecindeki gecikmelerin bireysel yatırımcı davranışını etkilediğini belirtiyor.

Bitcoin Arzı Büyük Yatırımcılara mı Kayıyor? Asıl dikkat çeken nokta yalnızca büyük cüzdanların sayısındaki artış değil.

Santiment, Bitcoin arzının daha güçlü ellerde yoğunlaşmasının büyük bir piyasa hareketi öncesinde görülebilen bir yapı olduğunu belirtiyor. Analiz şirketine göre bu tür bir dağılım, sonraki büyük hareketin yukarı yönlü olma ihtimalini artırabilir.

Ancak bu veri tek başına BTC fiyatının yükseleceğini doğrulamıyor.

Büyük cüzdanların sayısındaki artış, piyasadaki arz dağılımının değiştiğini gösterirken fiyatın yönü için ETF akışları ve teknik seviyeler de önemini koruyor.

Bitcoin İçin Kritik Seviye 65.400 Dolar Bitcoin’in önündeki en önemli kısa vadeli eşiklerden biri 65.400 dolar seviyesi olarak öne çıkıyor.

BTC salı günü bu seviyenin üzerine çıkmayı denese de hareket kalıcı olmadı. Fiyat daha sonra 64 bin doların altına geriledi.

Analist Doctor Profit, Bitcoin’in güçlü bir yükseliş trendine geçtiğini söylemek için yalnızca 65.400 doların aşılmasının yeterli olmadığını belirtiyor. Analiste göre bu seviyenin üzerinde birden fazla haftalık kapanış görülmesi gerekiyor.

Bu senaryoda sonraki önemli direnç bölgeleri 77-78 bin dolar ve 83 bin dolar olarak öne çıkıyor.

Buna karşılık 65.400 doların yeniden aşılamaması hâlinde aşağı yönde 61.500 dolar ve ardından 54 bin dolar seviyeleri gündeme gelebilir.

Bitcoin ETF’lerinden 144 Milyon Dolarlık Çıkış Büyük BTC cüzdanlarındaki artışa rağmen kurumsal yatırımcı tarafında aynı güç görülmüyor.

ABD spot Bitcoin ETF’leri pazartesi günü 144,67 milyon dolarlık net çıkış kaydetti. Böylece ağustos ayındaki ilk negatif işlem günü yaşandı ve beş günlük giriş serisi sona erdi.

En büyük çıkış BlackRock’ın IBIT fonunda gerçekleşti. IBIT’ten 53,5 milyon dolar çıkarken, Grayscale’in GBTC fonunda 52 milyon doların üzerinde, Fidelity’nin ETF’sinde ise 40 milyon doların üzerinde net çıkış görüldü.

Bu tablo, büyük cüzdanlardaki hareketliliğe rağmen spot ETF kanalındaki kurumsal talebin kısa vadede zayıfladığını gösteriyor.

Strategy Bitcoin Satışına Devam Ediyor Kurumsal taraftaki satış baskısının bir diğer göstergesi ise Strategy‘nin yeni Bitcoin satışı oldu.

Şirket 1.690 BTC’yi 108,6 milyon dolar karşılığında sattı. Elde edilen kaynakla 1,15 milyon adet STRC imtiyazlı hisse geri alındı.

Strategy ayrıca 6,59 milyon MSTR hissesi satarak 653 milyon doların üzerinde kaynak sağladı. Şirketin nakit rezervi böylece 4,6 milyar doların üzerine çıktı.

Satışın ardından Strategy’nin Bitcoin varlığı 840.447 BTC’ye geriledi. Şirket bu varlıkları toplam 63,36 milyar dolar maliyetle ve ortalama 75.385 dolar fiyattan satın almış durumda.

Bitcoin’de Sıradaki Büyük Hareket Hangisi Olacak? Bitcoin’de büyük cüzdanların artışı dikkat çekici bir sinyal verirken, ETF çıkışları ve Strategy’nin satışı kurumsal tarafta aynı gücün görülmediğini ortaya koyuyor.

Fiyat açısından ilk kritik eşik ise 65.400 dolar olmaya devam ediyor. Bu seviyenin üzerinde birden fazla haftalık kapanış gelmesi hâlinde 77-78 bin dolar ve 83 bin dolar bölgeleri gündeme gelebilir. Aşağıda ise 61.500 ve 54 bin dolar seviyeleri izlenecek.

Dolayısıyla piyasanın önündeki kritik soru yalnızca büyük cüzdanların Bitcoin toplamaya devam edip etmeyeceği değil, bu hareketin fiyat üzerinde gerçek bir talebe dönüşüp dönüşmeyeceği.

Bu içerik genel piyasa verilerine dayanır ve yatırım tavsiyesi değildir. Kendi araştırmanızı yapmanızı öneririz.

Son Dakika kripto para haberleri için hemen tıkla.

Konu ile ilgili yorumlarınızı bize yazabilirsiniz. Ayrıca, bu tarz bilgilendirici içeriklerin devamının gelmesini isterseniz, bizleri Telegram, Youtube ve Twitter kanallarımızdan takip edebilirsiniz.

Coinbase on Tuesday said it is expanding derivatives access to professional investors in the UK. This represents another milestone for the crypto exchange amid its Everything Exchange strategy, following the rollout of 24/5 US stock trading to all users in the UK. COIN stock rebounds in premarket hours in Tuesday.

Coinbase Rolls Out Crypto Derivatives Trading in the UK Crypto exchange Coinbase is launching futures, perpetuals and options in the UK, rolling out access to professional investors over the coming months.

Eligible investors can trade over 170 contracts across crypto, stocks, commodities and forex. Among these, perpetual contracts support 24/7 trading with up to 50x leverage, while dated futures offer up to 20x leverage.

Also, crypto options support calls, puts, and multi-leg strategies. These services are exclusively available to qualified investors classified as professional clients.

The derivatives launch in the UK comes after Coinbase secured MiFID license from the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) last month. The license enabled the crypto exchange to offer derivative contract trading to UK investors.

“This launch is part of our global commitment to build a unified, borderless, and fully transparent derivatives ecosystem. It gives professional traders the tools to navigate any market,” said Coinbase UK arm CEO Keith Grose.

As CoinGape reported recently, Coinbase launched 24/5 stock trading to all users in the UK. It enabled eligible UK investors to buy, sell, and hold US stocks alongside crypto and fiat in the same app.

COIN Stock Price Sees Slight Rebound Coinbase stock (COIN) is up 0.40% during the premarket trading hours on Tuesday. COIN stock closed 3.20% lower at $148.68 on Monday, as the broader US stock market fell on Iran’s refusal to reopen the Strait of Hormuz.

Coinbase stock outlook revealed the price remains below the 20-day EMA and the 50-day EMA at $162. Also, the short-term momentum is favoring bears, with potential drop continuing unless buying pressure rises.

The derivatives trading expansion in the UK continues Coinbase’s push to diversify beyond pure crypto trading volume into a multi-asset platform.

Meanwhile, Bitcoin has also recorded a slight rebound after dropping more than 2% over the past 24 hours. The price is currently trading at $64,134, with a massive 45% bounce in trading volume.

Prediction markets show 26% odds for Bitcoin to dip below $60,000 in August, with Wednesday’s CPI inflation data as the major event to watch this week.

3 hrs ago

2 min read

President Donald Trump at the White House (Jesse Hamilton/CoinDesk)Summary

Trump Media held 9,477 bitcoin at the end of June, down from 9,542 at the end of 2025, while the position's fair value fell to $557 million from $836 million.The company recorded $360.6 million in losses on digital assets and digital assets pledged during the first half of 2026, much of it unrealized.The results come days after Trump Media and Crypto.com scrapped plans for a publicly traded CRO treasury company and abandoned a separate ETF servicing partnership.Trump Media and Technology Group's (DJT) bitcoin holdings shrank during the second quarter of the year as falling crypto prices saddled the Truth Social parent with $360.6 million in losses in the first half of the year.

The company held 9,477.16 bitcoin BTC$63,940.84 with a fair value of $557.1 million as of June 30, according to its quarterly filing Monday. That's down from 9,542.16 BTC at the end of March, translating to a 65 BTC decline in holdings through the quarter.

Trump Media's Crypto.com-linked cronos CRO$0.04685 holdings remained unchanged at roughly 756.1 million tokens, but their fair value fell to $40.6 million from $68 million at the end of 2025.

A significant chunk of the company's bitcoin was also tied up as collateral. Trump Media, which is majority owned by the Donald J. Trump Revocable Trust, had 4,260.73 BTC pledged against convertible notes and another 2,077.34 BTC pledged for its bitcoin options strategy as of June 30.

U.S. President Donald Trump owns a significant stake in the trust, which is controlled by Donald Trump, Jr., one of the president’s children.

The results landed only days after Trump Media pared back parts of its crypto ambitions.

On Friday, Trump Media, crypto exchange Crypto.com and Yorkville Acquisition said they mutually terminated their proposed business combination to establish Trump Media Group CRO Strategy, a publicly traded company designed to build a large CRO treasury.

The companies cited "prevailing market conditions, and shifting business and stakeholder priorities." They also abandoned a separate partnership under which Crypto.com would have serviced certain planned Yorkville America exchange-traded funds, though Yorkville America said its existing and future ETF plans otherwise remain unchanged.

Related Assets

12345678910

Building the Zcash Machine: Tachyon and Quantum Readiness

Building the Zcash Machine: Tachyon and Quantum Readiness

Zcash’s Tachyon upgrade aims to scale shielded payments, improve quantum readiness, and test whether its funding, security, and governance can hold.

Jun 30, 2026

Zcash’s Tachyon upgrade aims to scale shielded payments, improve quantum readiness, and test whether its funding, security, and governance can hold.

Why it matters:

Zcash’s Tachyon upgrade aims to scale shielded payments, improve quantum readiness, and test whether its funding, security, and governance can hold.

A Brazilian company that barely existed two years ago now holds roughly $255 million worth of Bitcoin, making it the largest corporate Bitcoin treasury in Latin America and one of the top 25 among public companies globally.

OranjeBTC, trading on Brazil’s B3 exchange under the ticker OBTC3.SA, has accumulated 3,950 BTC as of early August 2026. The company went public less than a year ago with around 3,650 BTC. It has been buying steadily ever since.

The company behind the stack OranjeBTC was founded by Guilherme Gomes, a former partner at Bridgewater Associates. The company went public in October 2025 through a reverse IPO, acquiring the educational platform Intergraus to gain its B3 listing.

Advertisement

Its average cost basis sits at approximately $105,000 per BTC, which means the company has been acquiring through what has been a sustained high-price environment rather than buying at cycle lows.

The investor list includes Adam Back, the cryptographer whose work Bitcoin’s proof-of-work mechanism is directly based on. So are the Winklevoss twins, who have been institutional Bitcoin advocates since 2013. Ricardo Salinas Pliego, the Mexican billionaire who has publicly called Bitcoin his second-largest personal asset, is also involved.

The STRC move and what it signals In March 2026, OranjeBTC became the first public company to hold STRC, Strategy’s variable-rate perpetual preferred equity, on its balance sheet.

Strategy, formerly MicroStrategy, pioneered the corporate Bitcoin treasury playbook under Michael Saylor. Perpetual preferred equity with a variable rate pays ongoing dividends and never matures. The company still holds Bitcoin as its primary reserve, and STRC represents a secondary position rather than a pivot.

Why LatAm matters for this story OranjeBTC also has ADR availability under the ticker ORNJY, meaning US investors can access the stock through American depositary receipts without touching Brazilian markets directly.

What to watch from here OranjeBTC currently ranks around 23rd among public companies by Bitcoin holdings worldwide.

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

Strategy just sold Bitcoin—again. The world’s foremost digital asset hoarder announced on Monday that it unloaded 1,690 Bitcoin, or nearly $109 million, using the proceeds to buy back one of its preferred-stock products rather than expanding its treasury. The sale comes seven weeks after Strategy made its last purchase, according to the company’s catalog of crypto transactions. After the announcement, Strategy’s shares fell 1.5% at market open but quickly rebounded to $100. Bitcoin’s price briefly dropped 1% before climbing back to $64,700, according to CoinGecko. 

Monday’s sale marks the second time this month that Strategy has sold Bitcoin. On Aug. 3, the company sold roughly $105 million worth of the cryptocurrency. Since announcing in late June that it could sell up to $1.25 billion in Bitcoin to build its cash reserves, Strategy has now sold the asset on four separate occasions. 

The sales mark a sharp shift for a company whose strategy has long centered on accumulating—not selling—Bitcoin. Michael Saylor, Strategy’s executive chairman, began adding the cryptocurrency to the balance sheet of his cybersecurity firm, then known as MicroStrategy, in 2020. The company’s holdings have since grown to roughly $54 billion, which represents about 4% of the total Bitcoin supply, according to the company’s own data.

Strategy has reversed course in recent months as Bitcoin’s price and the company’s own shares have declined. Since the Oct. 10 crash, which wiped out more than $19 billion in leveraged crypto positions, Bitcoin has fallen nearly 43% and MSTR shares have dropped almost 70%. Because Strategy traditionally funds its Bitcoin purchases by selling common and preferred stock and issuing convertible debt, it has moved to build up its dollar reserves to show investors it can meet its cash obligations even if markets remain volatile. Against that backdrop, CEO Phong Le praised the company’s latest Bitcoin sale.

“Our USD Reserve and Duration are now at all-time highs. In 2.5 months, we added nearly $3.8 billion and grew both more than 5X,” he said in a social media post. 

Strategy is not alone in feeling the fallout from the broader crypto downturn. Over the past year, a wave of imitators loaded public-company balance sheets with cryptocurrencies in hopes of sparking stock rallies, but that trade has since soured. Solana-focused Solmate has lost nearly all of its value, saddling investors with steep paper losses, while Cantor Fitzgerald’s BSTR Bitcoin vehicle has struggled to keep its SPAC deal afloat amid waning investor appetite.

Fortune Daily breaks the traditional barrier between audience and newsroom. The show transforms Fortune’s trusted reporting into actionable, conversational, and entertaining insights for an emerging class of business leaders. Watch here.

BlackRock Canada launched two exchange-traded funds Monday, including a portfolio that combines globally diversified equities with a 3% allocation to Bitcoin.

The two funds, which began trading on the Toronto Stock Exchange, are the iShares Equity + Bitcoin ETF Portfolio (IBQT) and the iShares Core MSCI All-International Equity Index ETF (XINT).

IBQT allocates 97% of its portfolio to Canadian, US, international and emerging-market equities and 3% to Bitcoin (BTC) exposure through BlackRock’s Canadian iShares Bitcoin ETF (IBIT), which trades on Cboe Canada. Rather than investing in individual stocks, IBQT primarily holds other iShares ETFs to provide its equity and Bitcoin exposure.

XINT tracks the MSCI ACWI ex North America IMI Index, providing exposure to more than 5,000 companies across over 40 developed and emerging markets outside Canada and the US.

Both funds are managed by BlackRock Asset Management Canada through the RBC iShares alliance. BlackRock said its iShares business managed approximately $6.2 trillion in assets across more than 1,700 ETFs as of June 30.

The asset management giant’s US-listed iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) is the largest US spot Bitcoin ETF by assets under management, with about $47.9 billion in AUM, according to CoinMarketCap data.

Top five US spot Bitcoin ETFs by AUM. Source: CoinMarketCap

Magazine: BIP-110 ends with a whimper, CLARITY vote punted: Hodler’s Digest, Aug. 9

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.

Italy’s largest banking group, Intesa Sanpaolo (BIT: ISP), has executed a notable shift in its cryptocurrency-related exchange-traded fund portfolio during the second quarter of 2026. According to its latest quarterly disclosure submitted to US regulators, the institution substantially reduced its position in a major Bitcoin ETF while expanding its allocation to a staked Ethereum product.

The bank’s Form 13F filing, covering holdings as of June 30, 2026, reveals that its common-share stake in BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) declined by approximately 93.7 percent.

The position fell from 646,809 shares at the end of the prior quarter to just 40,723 shares.

The remaining IBIT holding was valued at roughly $1.36 million.

In parallel, the bank sharply curtailed its call options linked to the same ETF, reducing the underlying share equivalent by more than 99 percent to only 18,000 shares.

A new put option position covering 500,000 underlying IBIT shares also appeared in the filing, suggesting a more defensive posture toward Bitcoin.

In contrast, Intesa Sanpaolo significantly increased its exposure to BlackRock’s iShares Staked Ethereum Trust ETF (often referred to as ETHB). Holdings in this product roughly tripled, rising from 116,200 shares to 349,600 shares.

The position’s reported value grew to about $7.1 million from $3.15 million three months earlier.

This staked Ethereum ETF provides investors with price exposure to ether while also passing through staking rewards generated by the underlying network.

The bank did not abandon Bitcoin entirely.

It continued to maintain a substantial position in the ARK 21Shares Bitcoin ETF (ARKB), holding approximately 3.47 million shares valued at $67.6 million at quarter-end.

That stake experienced only a modest reduction of around 4 percent from the previous period and remained the institution’s largest reported crypto-linked holding by value.

Its position in the Grayscale XRP Trust stayed unchanged at 712,319 shares.

Meanwhile, exposure to the Bitwise Solana Staking ETF was nearly eliminated, dropping from 2,817 shares to just seven.

These portfolio adjustments occurred against a backdrop of declining cryptocurrency prices during the second quarter.

Bitcoin and ether both recorded notable losses over the period, and U.S. spot crypto ETFs experienced net outflows.

The selective reduction in one Bitcoin product alongside growth in a yield-bearing Ethereum vehicle may reflect institutional interest in assets that can generate ongoing returns through staking, rather than a complete retreat from digital assets.

Form 13F disclosures provide only a snapshot of long positions and certain options at quarter-end.

They do not detail trading activity throughout the period, net exposures after accounting for short options, strike prices, or expiration dates.

As a result, the precise overall strategy remains partially opaque.

Nevertheless, the reported changes offer a clear view of how one of Europe’s major banks adjusted its regulated crypto ETF allocations amid market volatility.The filing was submitted to the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on July 31, 2026.

Researchers found 821 accounts that made $8.2 million by manipulating bitcoin prices in the final seconds before Polymarket settled its short dated contracts. Polymarket has now replaced instant snapshots with time weighted averages, but the structural vulnerability they exposed is not unique to one platform.

Summary

Polymarket replaced its instant price snapshot settlement mechanism with time weighted average prices on August 7, 2026, after a study identified 821 accounts that collectively made $8.2 million in settlement windows classified as likely manipulated across roughly two months of five minute bitcoin contracts. The manipulation worked by accumulating a large position on Polymarket, then placing unusually large orders on Binance in the final seconds before settlement to move the bitcoin price across the contract’s strike threshold, causing the contract to resolve in the manipulator’s favor before the price reverted. Excluding market makers, 93 percent of the losses in windows classified as manipulated fell on retail traders, and the researchers found that a bet the market treated as near certain was overturned one time in three during manipulated windows. Under the new system, five minute markets will use a 30 second average and 15 minute and four hour markets will use a 60 second average, with price data delivered through Chainlink Data Streams, and Polymarket committed $1 million in liquidity rewards across affected markets through August to cushion the transition. Rival platform Kalshi already uses a regulated CF Benchmarks price index with a 60 second moving average and reported conducting 150 to 250 material investigations per quarter with 40 to 50 CFTC referrals so far in 2026, highlighting the surveillance gap between DeFi native and regulated prediction market venues. On August 7, 2026, Polymarket announced it would replace the single price snapshot it had used to settle short dated crypto contracts with a time weighted average price, known as a TWAP. The change followed months of trader complaints, public warnings from onchain analysts, and a peer reviewed study from researchers at Stanford University and Singapore Management University that documented how a small number of accounts systematically profited by moving bitcoin prices on Binance in the final seconds before Polymarket’s settlement windows closed.

The exploit was not a hack. No smart contract was compromised. No private key was stolen. The vulnerability was a design choice: Polymarket settled its short dated crypto markets using a single price at a single moment. Anyone who could move that price for a few seconds could change the outcome of the contract. The researchers called the vulnerability “structural,” and their language was precise. “An asset price contract settles on a financial price,” they wrote, “and that price can be moved by trading the underlying market itself.”

The finding raises questions that extend well beyond one platform. Prediction markets handled $50.6 billion in volume in July 2026 alone. As these markets grow, the intersection between prediction contract settlement and spot market manipulation becomes a systemic concern, not a niche complaint from retail traders who lost money on five minute bets.

The timing of the fix also coincides with Polymarket’s reported effort to raise $1 billion at a $20 billion valuation. For a platform seeking institutional capital, the public documentation of a manipulation vulnerability that went unaddressed for months creates a due diligence problem. Institutional investors do not merely evaluate growth metrics. They evaluate integrity infrastructure. The TWAP transition can be read as both a genuine security improvement and a necessary precondition for closing a fundraising round with investors who take market structure risk seriously.

How the manipulation worked The mechanics were straightforward. A trader would accumulate a position on Polymarket’s five minute bitcoin up or down contract. These contracts pay out based on whether bitcoin’s price is above or below a specific threshold at the moment of settlement. The trader would then wait until the final seconds before settlement and place a large order on Binance, the world’s largest spot exchange by volume, to push bitcoin’s price across the strike threshold.

The order did not need to be large enough to sustain a price move. It only needed to last long enough for the settlement snapshot. Once the contract resolved, the manipulator would close the Binance position, often at a small loss, and collect the Polymarket payout. The Binance loss was the cost of doing business. The Polymarket profit was the payoff.

The strategy worked because five minute contracts have thin time horizons. Moving bitcoin’s price by a fraction of a percent for five seconds is expensive but achievable for a well capitalized trader with access to Binance’s spot order book. The study found that the manipulation was concentrated in the final seconds, with unusually large orders appearing just before settlement and rapid price reversals immediately after.

The cost structure made the trade attractive. A trader might lose $5,000 to $20,000 pushing bitcoin’s price on Binance, but collect $50,000 or more from the Polymarket payout. The spot market loss was predictable and bounded. The prediction market gain depended only on whether the price crossed the threshold at the exact moment of settlement. As long as the Polymarket position was large enough relative to the Binance cost, the combined trade was profitable regardless of where bitcoin’s price ended up minutes later.

The researchers noted that the manipulators showed increasing sophistication over the study period. Early instances involved crude large orders that were visible in the order book for several seconds. Later instances used more fragmented order placement, splitting the price push across multiple smaller orders that arrived in rapid succession during the final two to three seconds. This fragmentation made the activity harder to detect in real time, though the statistical signature in the settlement data remained clear.

The paper did not prove that the Binance orders and the Polymarket positions were placed by the same individuals. It could not, because Polymarket operates as a DeFi native platform where traders use pseudonymous wallets. But the statistical patterns were consistent with coordinated activity, and the timing correlations were tight enough for the researchers to classify specific settlement windows as “likely manipulated.”

What the research actually found The study, published on arXiv by researchers from Stanford and Singapore Management University, analyzed roughly two months of five minute bitcoin contracts on Polymarket. The researchers identified 821 accounts whose trading activity was concentrated in windows where the statistical signatures of manipulation were present.

Those accounts collectively made $8.2 million during the study period. The losses came almost entirely from retail traders. After excluding market makers, who are structurally neutral and profit from spreads rather than directional bets, the researchers found that 93 percent of the losses in likely manipulated windows were borne by retail participants.

One finding stood out. In manipulated windows, “a bet the market treated as near certain was overturned one time in three.” This means that contracts priced at 90 percent or higher probability of resolving one way were flipped by last second price movements. For retail traders relying on market pricing as a signal of likelihood, this created a situation where the odds they saw on screen bore little relationship to the odds they actually faced.

The scale of the losses was asymmetric. A retail trader placing a $100 bet on a five minute bitcoin contract that was priced at 90 percent certainty expected to win $10 in profit nine times out of ten. When manipulation flipped the outcome, that trader lost $100. Across hundreds of settlement windows and thousands of participants, these small individual losses aggregated into the $8.2 million figure the researchers documented. No single retail trader lost a fortune. The damage was distributed across a large number of small participants, each of whom had no way to know that the odds they saw on screen had been distorted.

The researchers described the vulnerability as inherent to any event contract that settles on a real time financial price. The specific platform, the specific asset, and the specific contract duration all affect how easy the manipulation is. But the underlying dynamic, that the settlement price can be influenced by trading the referenced asset, applies to any platform using instant price snapshots.

The manipulators exploited a timing asymmetry that exists whenever a financial contract settles on a single price observation. In traditional futures markets, settlement prices are typically calculated from a volume weighted average of trades over a defined window, precisely to prevent the kind of end of period manipulation that Polymarket experienced. The fact that Polymarket launched with a single snapshot mechanism suggests either that the platform’s designers did not anticipate this attack vector or that they accepted the risk as a tradeoff for simpler oracle design. Either way, the result was a settlement system that rewarded traders who could move prices by small amounts for brief periods, a capability that requires modest capital relative to the profits available from correctly positioned prediction market contracts.

JUST IN: Polymarket adopts Chainlink TWAP for short-term crypto markets

Five-minute contracts now settle on a 30-second average price pic.twitter.com/EmC268lyeh

— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) August 8, 2026 Why it took months to fix The capital efficiency of the attack is what made it particularly difficult to detect through conventional surveillance. Each individual trade was small enough to look like normal market activity. The manipulators did not need to sustain the price movement for more than a few seconds, and the prediction market positions they held to profit from the manipulation were on a separate platform from the spot exchange where they moved prices. This cross platform structure meant that no single exchange could see both sides of the trade. Binance saw small orders that briefly moved bitcoin’s price. Polymarket saw contracts settling at prices that happened to favor certain accounts. Only by correlating the timing of trades across both platforms could the researchers identify the pattern, and that correlation required access to data from both systems and the statistical tools to analyze it. The attack surface existed not in any single platform’s code but in the gap between two platforms that each operated correctly in isolation but whose interaction created an exploitable seam.

Polymarket knew about the problem before the study was published. Onchain analysts raised concerns publicly as early as May 2026. Variance Lover, a pseudonymous analyst, posted an extensive breakdown on May 21 documenting the manipulation mechanism and identifying specific settlement windows where the patterns were visible.

“By now, most people are aware that market manipulation has become a major problem on Polymarket’s five minute crypto markets,” Variance Lover wrote. “The mechanism is simple: accumulate a large position on Polymarket, then move the price on Binance during the settlement window to force the market to resolve in your favor.”

A contributor who goes by the handle Christine on X noted on May 11 that the manipulation was becoming more severe, citing “precise reversals in the last few seconds.” Josh Stevens, a Polymarket developer, responded publicly: “We are looking into this a bit deeper. Do not worry.”

The gap between acknowledgment and action spanned nearly three months. During that time, the manipulation continued. The delay is notable because the fix Polymarket ultimately deployed, replacing a snapshot with a TWAP, is not a novel solution. Time weighted averages have been standard in DeFi oracle design for years. Uniswap V2 introduced TWAP oracles in 2020 specifically to prevent single block price manipulation. The concept was available off the shelf.

Polymarket has not publicly explained why the fix took as long as it did. One possibility is that switching the settlement mechanism required changes to the smart contracts that resolve bets, which need auditing and testing. Another is that the platform was reluctant to change rules midstream for live markets with open positions. A third, less charitable interpretation is that the manipulation generated volume and fees that the platform was not in a hurry to curtail.

The delay had real costs. Variance Lover estimated that manipulation continued throughout June and into July, with increasingly aggressive activity as manipulators learned they could operate without consequences. Several retail traders posted screenshots showing positions that should have been winners based on prevailing market prices but resolved as losers because of last second price spikes. The trust damage was compounding. Each manipulated settlement that went unaddressed made the next complaint louder and the platform’s credibility thinner.

JUST IN: Study finds signs of manipulation in Polymarket Bitcoin prediction markets

Stanford and Singapore Management University researchers identified 821 suspected manipulators who earned 8.2 million dollars pic.twitter.com/CQuLUeX9YO

— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) July 16, 2026 How Polymarket’s fix compares to Kalshi The fix Polymarket deployed mirrors safeguards that Kalshi, its regulated rival, already had in place. Kalshi resolves its short dated crypto markets using a CF Benchmarks price index, which aggregates prices from multiple regulated exchanges. It then applies a 60 second moving average, making it significantly harder to move the settlement price with a brief burst of trading on a single venue.

Kalshi also operates under CFTC oversight, which gives it enforcement tools that Polymarket lacks. A Kalshi spokesperson told CoinDesk that the platform has conducted 150 to 250 material investigations per quarter and made 40 to 50 referrals to the CFTC so far in 2026. Those figures cover all Kalshi markets, not just short dated crypto contracts, but they illustrate the surveillance infrastructure that comes with operating within a regulatory framework.

The structural difference between the two platforms matters. Kalshi requires identity verification for all traders. Polymarket’s DeFi version does not. When manipulation is detected on Kalshi, the platform can identify the trader, freeze the account, and refer the case to a regulator. When manipulation is detected on Polymarket, the platform can identify a wallet address but cannot easily connect it to a person.

Polymarket does operate a US regulated version under CFTC oversight, but its integrity and surveillance infrastructure has been developed largely in response to external pressure rather than as a foundational design choice. The company is reportedly seeking a $1 billion raise at a $20 billion valuation, and the manipulation episode highlights the tension between growing rapidly as a DeFi protocol and building the compliance infrastructure that institutional capital typically requires.

Polymarket faces manipulation allegations as $58M Zelenskyy suit bet nears resolution

Polymarket’s $58M Zelenskyy suit bet nears resolution as $UMA voters dispute media consensus, sparking manipulation claims and credibility concerns.

— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) July 4, 2025 What the exploit reveals about prediction market design The comparison between Polymarket and Kalshi illuminates a broader tension in prediction market design between decentralization and market integrity. Kalshi operates as a CFTC regulated exchange with centralized order matching, surveillance systems, and the ability to cancel trades that result from manipulation. Polymarket operates on Polygon with smart contract settlement that is transparent but largely automated. The transparency means that manipulation is visible to anyone who examines the blockchain, which is how the Stanford researchers identified the 821 accounts. But visibility is not the same as prevention. A centralized exchange can intervene in real time when it detects suspicious activity. A decentralized protocol must design its settlement rules to be manipulation resistant from the start, because retroactive intervention contradicts the trustless execution model that gives blockchain based markets their appeal.

The Polymarket manipulation exposed a broader design tension in prediction markets that settle on financial prices. These markets sit at the intersection of two trading systems: the prediction platform where bets are placed and the spot market where the referenced price is determined. When the two systems are connected but not coordinated, the cheaper market becomes a tool for profiting from the more expensive one.

In this case, moving bitcoin’s price on Binance for a few seconds cost less than the Polymarket payout it generated. The arbitrage was negative in the spot market and positive in the prediction market, creating a combined trade that was profitable as long as the settlement mechanism allowed it.

This is not a problem unique to Polymarket or even to prediction markets. It is a variant of the same cross venue manipulation that regulators have spent decades combating in traditional finance. The SEC’s Regulation SHO, the CFTC’s anti manipulation rules, and the EU’s Market Abuse Regulation all address scenarios where trading in one market is used to influence outcomes in another. The difference is that those frameworks assume centralized, identity verified markets with shared surveillance feeds. The prediction market version plays out across pseudonymous DeFi platforms and centralized exchanges in different jurisdictions.

The TWAP fix addresses the most obvious attack vector by making brief price spikes less effective. But it does not eliminate the underlying vulnerability. A well capitalized manipulator who can sustain a price move for 30 or 60 seconds rather than five can still influence settlement under a TWAP system. The cost is higher, but the attack is not impossible. The question is whether the increased cost makes the manipulation unprofitable, and that depends on the depth of the liquidity in the referenced market and the size of the positions available on the prediction platform.

The economics of the manipulation also raise questions about market depth. The reason five second price pushes were possible on Binance is that bitcoin’s order book, despite being the deepest in crypto, still has moments of relative thinness. During periods of lower activity, particularly around the clock during Asian or European off hours, the cost of moving bitcoin’s price by a fraction of a percent drops significantly. The manipulators timed their activity to coincide with these low liquidity windows, compounding the settlement vulnerability with a liquidity vulnerability. A TWAP reduces one problem but does not address the other.

As regulatory frameworks for prediction markets continue to develop, the settlement mechanism question will become more prominent. Platforms that want to offer contracts on financial prices will need to either use regulated price feeds, implement robust TWAP mechanisms, or accept that their markets will remain vulnerable to the same class of manipulation that Polymarket just addressed.

What to watch Manipulation patterns after the TWAP transition. The 30 second and 60 second TWAP windows raise the cost of manipulation but do not eliminate it. Watch for evidence of sustained price pushes that last longer than the averaging window, which would indicate that manipulators are adapting to the new settlement rules.

Polymarket volume changes on short dated crypto markets. If volume declines significantly after the transition, it may indicate that a portion of the trading activity was driven by manipulators rather than genuine prediction market demand. A volume drop would validate the concern that the platform’s growth was partly artificial.

Regulatory response from the CFTC. The study provides a public, peer reviewed record of manipulation on a platform that overlaps with CFTC jurisdiction. Watch for formal inquiries, enforcement actions, or rulemaking proposals that address cross venue manipulation between prediction markets and spot exchanges.

Chainlink Data Streams performance. The TWAP mechanism depends on Chainlink for price data delivery. Any latency issues, outages, or oracle manipulation attempts would expose a new attack surface. The reliability of the data feed is now a critical dependency for Polymarket’s market integrity.

Kalshi and Polymarket competition for institutional capital. The manipulation episode and subsequent fix narrow the structural gap between the two platforms. Watch for whether Polymarket’s $1 billion fundraising effort is affected by the integrity concerns or whether the fix is treated as sufficient by prospective investors.

Copycat manipulation on other DeFi prediction platforms. The settlement vulnerability that Polymarket’s TWAP fix addresses exists on any platform that uses instant price snapshots. Smaller prediction market protocols with less liquidity and less sophisticated monitoring are potentially even more vulnerable. Watch for reports of similar manipulation patterns on competing platforms that have not yet adopted TWAP settlement.

Academic follow up research on TWAP effectiveness. The Stanford and Singapore Management University researchers documented the pre-fix manipulation in detail. A follow up study measuring whether manipulation persists or adapts under the TWAP regime would provide the first empirical test of whether the fix works in practice, not just in theory. The research community’s engagement with this question will shape regulatory confidence in TWAP as a sufficient safeguard.

Frequently asked questions What happened on Polymarket with the five second exploit? Traders accumulated positions on Polymarket’s five minute bitcoin contracts and then placed large orders on Binance in the final seconds before settlement to move bitcoin’s price across the contract’s strike threshold. The contract would resolve in the manipulator’s favor, and the price would revert immediately after settlement. Researchers identified 821 accounts that made $8.2 million using this pattern.

How did researchers discover the manipulation? Researchers from Stanford University and Singapore Management University analyzed roughly two months of five minute bitcoin contracts on Polymarket. They found statistically significant correlations between unusually large Binance orders in the seconds before settlement and rapid price reversals after settlement. The study was published on arXiv.

Who lost money from the Polymarket exploit? Excluding market makers, 93 percent of the losses in settlement windows classified as likely manipulated fell on retail traders. These were users who placed bets on five minute bitcoin contracts and lost when last second price movements changed the contract outcome.

What is a TWAP and how does it prevent manipulation? A time weighted average price, or TWAP, averages the price over a window of time rather than using a single instant snapshot. Polymarket now uses a 30 second average for five minute markets and a 60 second average for 15 minute and four hour markets. This makes it more expensive to manipulate settlement because the attacker must sustain the price distortion for the entire averaging window rather than just a single moment.

Does Kalshi have the same problem? Kalshi uses a regulated CF Benchmarks price index with a 60 second moving average and requires identity verification for all traders. A Kalshi spokesperson told CoinDesk that these safeguards make brief price manipulation u0022significantly harder and more expensive.u0022 However, a Kalshi user disputed this, claiming to have witnessed similar issues on the platform.

Is the TWAP fix enough to prevent future manipulation? The TWAP raises the cost of manipulation but does not eliminate the underlying vulnerability. A well capitalized trader who can sustain a price movement for the full averaging window can still influence settlement. The fix is a significant improvement over instant snapshots but not a complete solution.

Why did Polymarket take three months to fix the problem? Polymarket has not publicly explained the delay. Possible factors include the need to audit and test smart contract changes, reluctance to change rules on live markets with open positions, and the complexity of integrating Chainlink Data Streams as a price oracle. Onchain analysts raised concerns publicly starting in May 2026.

Can this type of manipulation happen on other prediction market platforms? Yes. The vulnerability is structural to any event contract that settles on a real time financial price using an instant snapshot. Any platform, whether DeFi native or regulated, that uses single point price resolution is theoretically vulnerable. The difference is the cost of the attack and the surveillance infrastructure available to detect it. This is educational analysis, not investment advice.u003cemu003eDisclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Cryptocurrency markets carry significant risk. Always conduct independent research before making investment decisions. Information is current as of August 8, 2026.u003c/emu003e