Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

Key Highlights Table of Contents

Key HighlightsEntering a Competitive LandscapeBridging Institutional Bitcoin to DeFiGet 3 Free Stock Ebooks Circle unveils cirBTC, a Bitcoin-backed wrapped token with 1:1 BTC reserves for institutional markets The token will debut on Ethereum, Circle’s Arc blockchain, and the Circle Mint platform Primary target audience includes OTC trading desks, market makers, and DeFi lending platforms BitGo’s WBTC dominates with approximately $8B market cap; Coinbase’s cbBTC holds $5.9B Circle joins an increasingly competitive field featuring Kraken, Binance, OKX, and additional players The stablecoin powerhouse Circle, known for issuing USDC, is expanding its product lineup with a wrapped Bitcoin offering. The firm revealed Thursday its intention to introduce cirBTC — a digital asset with 1:1 Bitcoin backing — on Ethereum’s blockchain infrastructure.

🗞️📲 Circle is launching cirBTC, a 1:1 backed wrapped #Bitcoin designed for institutions.

It will launch on Ethereum & Arc and integrate with Circle's infrastructure, offering institutional-grade security. pic.twitter.com/kwn20o9qUt

— Bitcoin.com News (@BitcoinNews) April 2, 2026

The initiative specifically targets institutional market participants: over-the-counter trading desks, liquidity providers, and DeFi lending platforms. Circle positions the product as a “highly secure and neutral version of wrapped BTC.”

Wrapped Bitcoin tokens enable BTC to operate across alternative blockchain networks such as Ethereum, providing asset holders entry into decentralized finance ecosystems that remain inaccessible with standard Bitcoin.

Beyond Ethereum, cirBTC deployment will extend to Circle’s proprietary layer-1 blockchain called Arc, along with integration across the Circle Mint infrastructure.

This development represents Circle’s inaugural venture into wrapped digital assets — a sector the company has avoided until now, despite its position as a leading cryptocurrency infrastructure provider.

Entering a Competitive Landscape The wrapped Bitcoin sector currently features two dominant players. BitGo’s WBTC commands the leading position with approximately $8 billion in market capitalization and roughly 119,000 tokens currently circulating — representing about 50% of its November 2021 all-time high.

Coinbase launched cbBTC in September 2024, achieving rapid expansion to a $5.9 billion market cap with approximately 88,800 tokens in circulation.

Together, WBTC and cbBTC represent approximately 208,000 BTC in aggregate supply, based on CoinGecko data.

Numerous cryptocurrency exchanges have introduced competing products — including Kraken’s kBTC, Binance’s BBTC, OKX’s okBTC, and Bitget’s BGBTC — though their market capitalizations remain significantly smaller than the top two contenders.

Circle faces the challenge of penetrating a market with established competitors and a defined hierarchy. The critical question remains whether cirBTC can attract meaningful institutional adoption.

Bridging Institutional Bitcoin to DeFi Financial institutions have accumulated Bitcoin positions at significant scale. Many now seek methods to deploy this capital within DeFi ecosystems — creating demand for wrapped asset solutions.

By enabling BTC functionality on Ethereum’s infrastructure, wrapped tokens allow institutions to access lending protocols, liquidity mechanisms, and additional DeFi services without liquidating their Bitcoin holdings.

Circle markets cirBTC as the neutral, institutional-quality solution for this use case.

The company has not yet disclosed custody frameworks or proof-of-reserve verification systems. Cointelegraph contacted Circle for additional details but has not received a response.

Circle clearly identifies an opportunity to become the trusted issuer for institutional clients — mirroring the strategy that elevated USDC to stablecoin market leadership.

No specific launch date has been announced. Circle confirmed plans to release cirBTC across Ethereum, Arc, and Circle Mint platforms without providing a definitive timeline.

TLDR: Kraken DeFi Earn has surpassed $300M in total deposits, with the Bitcoin Vault alone crossing $70M shortly after launch. The vault uses a single-cycle supervised borrow strategy, eliminating recursive leverage and maintaining full market neutrality at all times. Sentora’s three-layer risk framework has recorded zero liquidations across more than three years of live vault operation since January 2021. kBTC, Kraken’s wrapped Bitcoin token, enables BTC collateral deployment across Ethereum’s DeFi infrastructure with a one-to-one redemption guarantee. Kraken DeFi Earn has crossed $300 million in total deposits, with its Bitcoin Vault contributing over $70 million. The vault converts idle BTC into structured yield positions through vetted DeFi protocols.

It operates using a supervised loan strategy, avoiding directional speculation entirely. Yield comes from the spread between borrowing costs and returns on deployed stablecoins.

The vault requires no active management from depositors at any stage.

How the Bitcoin Vault Generates Yield Without Directional Risk The vault supplies BTC as collateral to lending protocols, then borrows stablecoins against it. Those stablecoins are deployed into pre-approved yield strategies across onchain markets.

Target venues include Aave, Euler, and Morpho for stablecoin lending. Real-world assets and market-neutral AMM pairs on platforms like Curve also receive allocations. Each strategy is chosen because expected returns exceed borrowing costs.

Sentora Research flagged the vault’s milestone on X recently. SentoraHQ noted that the Bitcoin Vault alone surpassed $70 million shortly after launch.

That growth reflects strong depositor interest in BTC-based yield strategies. The vault’s design focuses on productivity without requiring price speculation. Idle BTC holdings are put to work through a constrained, structured process.

Leverage is used in this vault, but its application differs from typical margin trading. CEX margin trading often involves 5x to 100x leverage on directional bets.

The Bitcoin Vault uses a single supervised borrow with a 10–20% buffer below maximum collateral ratios. The strategy maintains market neutrality throughout its operation. If BTC falls in value, automated systems deleverage before liquidation thresholds are approached.

The vault does not use recursive leverage or looping strategies. BTC collateral is deposited once, stablecoins are borrowed once, and capital is deployed into approved venues.

There is no re-deposit cycle that compounds BTC price exposure across multiple loops. This single-cycle structure limits overall risk significantly. It keeps leverage defined, traceable, and governed by automated rebalancing at all times.

The vault uses kBTC, Kraken’s wrapped Bitcoin token on Ethereum, as its collateral format. Native BTC cannot operate directly on Ethereum’s lending and liquidity infrastructure. kBTC is redeemable one-to-one for Bitcoin with no fees attached.

For existing Kraken users, this wrapper does not introduce new custodial risk. It simply extends an existing trust relationship into the onchain environment.

Three-Layer Risk Framework Supports Vault’s Clean Liquidation Record Sentora applies a three-layer risk management model across all vault operations. The first layer involves formal research and due diligence before any capital is deployed.

Over 60 protocols across 17 networks have undergone technical and economic review. Audit history, oracle dependencies, and liquidation mechanics are all examined. No protocol enters the approved list without completing this review process.

The second layer is an automated on-chain system that acts as a 24/7 circuit breaker. It continuously tracks collateral ratios, borrow costs, and liquidation thresholds in real time.

If safety thresholds are breached, the vault autonomously recalls capital and repays debt. This process can occur within the same block when market conditions require it. Since January 2021, the vault has recorded zero liquidations across all deployments.

The third layer consists of quantitative off-chain monitoring across six risk categories. These include concentration, liquidity, interest rate, duration, leverage, and correlation. Metrics like Val01 and Exit Maturity help stress-test positions against worst-case market scenarios.

Available liquidity is evaluated to confirm clean exit conditions for each position. Large-holder movements that could shift market conditions are also tracked continuously.

Withdrawals from the vault are available through a standard five-day window. This period allows the system to exit multiple strategies while minimizing slippage costs.

The withdrawal timeline is expected to shorten as deposits scale and flows deepen. Independent audits by Spearbit and 0xMacro have reviewed the vault’s infrastructure. Sentora’s stated philosophy remains return of capital before return on capital.

In This Article cirBTC Explained: What 'Wrapped Bitcoin' Actually MeansCircle's Institutional Play: Why cirBTC Is Different From WBTCRotation, Not Revolution: How cirBTC Fits Into the Wrapped Bitcoin Market Circle, the regulated financial infrastructure company behind USDC, launched cirBTC on Ethereum on June 8, 2026, adding a new 1:1 BTC-backed wrapped Bitcoin token to a market already anchored by WBTC at roughly $8Bn in market capitalization and Coinbase’s cbBTC at approximately $5.9Bn.

Each cirBTC token is backed by native Bitcoin held in segregated, regulated custody and verified in real time through Chainlink Proof of Reserve. That is a meaningful structural claim in a category where custody transparency has not always been the default.

Here is the central tension this article unpacks: wrapped Bitcoin has existed since 2019, yet most crypto holders have never had to think about it. So why does Circle’s entry into this market matter, and does its regulated approach actually change anything for the people who would use it?

cirBTC is live on @ethereum.

Circle helped establish the institutional standard for dollar collateral with USDC.

Now cirBTC brings that same approach to Bitcoin, bringing 1:1 BTC-backed collateral to institutional DeFi markets with neutrality, transparency, and Circle…

— Circle (@circle) June 8, 2026

cirBTC Explained: What ‘Wrapped Bitcoin’ Actually Means Think of wrapped Bitcoin like a coat-check counter at an exclusive club. You hand over your actual coat – your real Bitcoin – and the attendant gives you a numbered ticket.

That ticket represents your coat inside the venue. You can trade the ticket, use it to get a drink tab, or hand it to someone else. But the coat itself stays safely in the back room, and you can always redeem the ticket to get it back.

That is exactly how tokenized Bitcoin works. Real BTC goes into custody with a regulated entity, in cirBTC’s case, a Circle group company with assets kept explicitly separate from Circle’s corporate holdings. In exchange, an ERC-20 token is issued on Ethereum that represents the BTC at a 1:1 ratio.

The token can then move freely through Ethereum DeFi apps, smart contracts, and lending protocols. When you want your BTC back, you burn the token, and the custodian releases the underlying Bitcoin.

Why does any of this matter? Bitcoin cannot natively run smart contracts or act as collateral inside Ethereum-based lending protocols. Wrapping solves that. It is the bridge that allows Bitcoin’s roughly $1.7 trillion in value to participate in decentralized finance without the underlying asset ever leaving the Bitcoin blockchain.

Chainlink Proof of Reserve is the accountability layer; it continuously verifies on-chain that the number of circulating cirBTC tokens matches the BTC held in custody, so anyone can check the math without relying on a periodic third-party audit.

DISCOVER: Best Meme Coin ICOs to Invest in 2026

Circle’s Institutional Play: Why cirBTC Is Different From WBTC

(SOURCE: CoinGecko)

Circle is not just a crypto startup; it has established USDC as a key player in institutional digital finance and is now applying that compliance to Bitcoin collateral with cirBTC. This new offering aims to set an institutional standard for Bitcoin similar to what USDC achieved for dollar liquidity, emphasizing transparency and regulated custody.

While BitGo’s WBTC, the market leader, has around $8Bn in wrapped Bitcoin, its custodial model has faced scrutiny. Coinbase’s cbBTC, launched in September 2024, reached $5.9Bn in market cap but benefits significantly from Coinbase’s distribution.

cirBTC, however, positions itself with a compliance-focused approach while avoiding competition, appealing to institutions like OTC desks and corporate treasuries that want to leverage Bitcoin as collateral.

Despite its strengths, cirBTC faces challenges, including WBTC’s established liquidity and integrations, as well as cbBTC’s distribution advantages. While Circle’s compliance reputation is strong, it may not be enough to drive DeFi liquidity on its own.

EXCLUSIVE: Earn $10 USDC Via Binance Sign-Up

Rotation, Not Revolution: How cirBTC Fits Into the Wrapped Bitcoin Market $BTC short-term momentum is still bearish.

If we want a potential trend reversal, the first step is to have a clean break of $64k and $66k.

If $BTC doesn't manage to do that within a few days, the bearish momentum is probably going to continue.

I think in that case we… pic.twitter.com/qRIGnNPRLf

— Quinten | 048.eth (@QuintenFrancois) June 9, 2026

The wrapped Bitcoin market is poised for growth rather than disruption. The rise of corporate Bitcoin treasuries has created demand for efficient collateral deployment in institutional DeFi, a need cirBTC aims to meet.

Bull case: Circle’s compliance and USDC distribution position cirBTC well for institutional adoption, especially with integrations into major lending platforms like Aave and Morpho, creating significant liquidity and a unique cross-collateral workflow. This could lead to a substantial market share within 12 to 18 months.

Base case: cirBTC becomes the go-to wrapped Bitcoin product for compliance-focused institutions, while WBTC maintains dominance due to liquidity; cirBTC may serve as a solid third option as overall institutional demand for Bitcoin collateral rises.

Bear case: Slow integration with DeFi protocols and regulatory challenges could hamper cirBTC’s expansion, leaving it a niche product without the network effects needed to compete with established providers.

The competition is heating up as traditional finance explores tokenized products alongside crypto options, making Circle’s reputation as a regulated issuer increasingly important.

#Bitcoin News Today

Why you can trust 99Bitcoins

10+ Years

Established in 2013, 99Bitcoin’s team members have been crypto experts since Bitcoin’s Early days.

90hr+

Weekly Research

100k+

Monthly readers

50+

Expert contributors

2000+

Crypto Projects Reviewed

Follow 99Bitcoins on your Google News Feed

Get the latest updates, trends, and insights delivered straight to your fingertips. Subscribe now!

Subscribe now

Alex Ioannou

On-Chain Journalist

Alex is a seasoned cryptocurrency trader and market analyst with over seven years of active experience in the digital asset space. Since entering the markets in 2017, Alex has specialized in identifying emerging "meta" trends and high-volatility narratives. Notably, Alex... Read More

Free Bitcoin Crash Course Enjoyed by over 100,000 students. One email a day, 7 days in a row. Short and educational, guaranteed!

US-listed AI chip stocks saw mixed pre-market performance, with Qualcomm surging 13%.

According to Bitget market data, U.S. AI chip stocks posted mixed pre-market performance: Qualcomm (QCOM.O) surged 13%, Intel (INTC.O) rose nearly 6%, AMD (AMD.O) gained nearly 4%, and Google (GOOG.O) declined 1.4%.

4 minutes ago

Micron Technology surges 18% in pre-market trading on US stocks

According to Bitget market data, the US stock storage sector is seeing broad pre-market gains. Micron Technology (MU.O) jumps 18% in pre-market trading, as its strong earnings significantly exceeded expectations, with multiple major banks raising the stock’s target price. SanDisk (SNDK) rises 12.25%, Western Digital (WDC) gains 12.05%, and Seagate Technology (STX) climbs 8.63%.

4 minutes ago

SBI announced it will acquire cryptocurrency trading platform Bitbank for 46.7 billion yen.

According to Nikkei News, Japanese financial group SBI Holdings announced on the 25th that it will acquire cryptocurrency exchange platform bitbank for 46.7 billion yen (approximately $288 million). Upon completion of the transaction, SBI Group’s crypto asset custody scale is expected to exceed 1 trillion yen, making it one of the largest operators in Japan’s crypto industry. Per the plan, a subsidiary under SBI Holdings will acquire Bitbank shares from individual shareholders including its founders as early as August this year. Bitbank will then repurchase shares held by existing shareholders MIXI and Ceres by the end of October. If combining data from SBI’s own crypto exchange SBI VC Trade and Bitbank, as of April this year, the two firms had a total of around 2.92 million accounts and total custody assets of approximately 1.1 trillion yen. While different crypto exchanges disclose custody assets at varying time points, among Japan’s major industry competitors, bitFlyer held about 960 billion yen in custody assets as of the end of December 2025, and Coincheck had around 800 billion yen as of the end of March 2025.

4 minutes ago

Bithumb was fined for sharing user data overseas without consent.

South Korean regulatory authorities have ordered cryptocurrency exchange Bithumb to pay a 210 million won (approximately $136,000) fine for sharing user personal information with overseas platforms without user consent. According to an announcement released Thursday by South Korea’s Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC), the relevant user data exposure occurred between September and November 2025. At that time, Bithumb transferred user information to overseas platforms while sharing its USDT market order book data. The PIPC also noted that when assisting users with asset transfers to 13 overseas exchanges, Bithumb failed to obtain full and sufficient user consent before sharing personal details including names, wallet addresses, and dates of birth. For the two violations, the PIPC not only imposed the fine but also ordered Bithumb to rectify its processes and management systems related to cross-border transmission of user information.

4 minutes ago

US-listed AI chip stocks saw mixed pre-market performance, with Qualcomm surging 13%.

According to Bitget market data, U.S. AI chip stocks posted mixed pre-market performance: Qualcomm (QCOM.O) surged 13%, Intel (INTC.O) rose nearly 6%, AMD (AMD.O) gained nearly 4%, and Google (GOOG.O) declined 1.4%.

4 minutes ago

Micron Technology surges 18% in pre-market trading on US stocks

According to Bitget market data, the US stock storage sector is seeing broad pre-market gains. Micron Technology (MU.O) jumps 18% in pre-market trading, as its strong earnings significantly exceeded expectations, with multiple major banks raising the stock’s target price. SanDisk (SNDK) rises 12.25%, Western Digital (WDC) gains 12.05%, and Seagate Technology (STX) climbs 8.63%.

4 minutes ago

SBI announced it will acquire cryptocurrency trading platform Bitbank for 46.7 billion yen.

According to Nikkei News, Japanese financial group SBI Holdings announced on the 25th that it will acquire cryptocurrency exchange platform bitbank for 46.7 billion yen (approximately $288 million). Upon completion of the transaction, SBI Group’s crypto asset custody scale is expected to exceed 1 trillion yen, making it one of the largest operators in Japan’s crypto industry. Per the plan, a subsidiary under SBI Holdings will acquire Bitbank shares from individual shareholders including its founders as early as August this year. Bitbank will then repurchase shares held by existing shareholders MIXI and Ceres by the end of October. If combining data from SBI’s own crypto exchange SBI VC Trade and Bitbank, as of April this year, the two firms had a total of around 2.92 million accounts and total custody assets of approximately 1.1 trillion yen. While different crypto exchanges disclose custody assets at varying time points, among Japan’s major industry competitors, bitFlyer held about 960 billion yen in custody assets as of the end of December 2025, and Coincheck had around 800 billion yen as of the end of March 2025.

4 minutes ago

Bithumb was fined for sharing user data overseas without consent.

South Korean regulatory authorities have ordered cryptocurrency exchange Bithumb to pay a 210 million won (approximately $136,000) fine for sharing user personal information with overseas platforms without user consent. According to an announcement released Thursday by South Korea’s Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC), the relevant user data exposure occurred between September and November 2025. At that time, Bithumb transferred user information to overseas platforms while sharing its USDT market order book data. The PIPC also noted that when assisting users with asset transfers to 13 overseas exchanges, Bithumb failed to obtain full and sufficient user consent before sharing personal details including names, wallet addresses, and dates of birth. For the two violations, the PIPC not only imposed the fine but also ordered Bithumb to rectify its processes and management systems related to cross-border transmission of user information.

4 minutes ago

Posted: March 3, 2020

Behind the rollercoaster-like price fluctuations of cryptocurrencies, there exists another class of coins that promises to offer price stability. Stablecoins attempt to bring in the best of both fiat, as well crypto, and over the past few years, they have gained massive traction, primarily because it is a major source of liquidity in the cryptocurrency market.

Unlike cryptocurrencies, the value of a stablecoin is pegged to a stable real-world asset that can range from commodities to fiat, held in reserve by the stablecoin issuer, bringing in centralization factor to the game. Meaning, there has to be a central authority holding and monitoring the backing of such crypto-assets.

This goes against the very ethos of cryptocurrencies. Along the same lines, Wiess Crypto Ratings’ latest tweet read,

“There’s a big problem with the 1st generation of #stablecoins: Users have to trust a central authority to hold sufficient dollar balances to back the coins they issued.”

Tether is unarguably the biggest stablecoin in the realm. Tether, with a market cap of $4.46 billion, holds a dominance of 11.7% over the entire cryptocurrency market. But in less than four years of its inception, USDT has garnered significant bad press. with numerous scandals and issues under its name.

Speculations alleging Tether manipulated Bitcoin’s price were the most damaging for the space. To top that, last years’ Bitfinex-Tether fiasco has only added to the woes.

Even policymakers are not a big fan of stablecoins, with numerous papers published on how this sector can threaten the monetary systems. Grant Baker, Chief Innovation Officer at STAE and author of the 2019 Blockchain Compliance Paper, was quoted as saying,

“While stablecoins provide shelter for cryptocurrency investors during times of turbulence, they haven’t seen much usage elsewhere. We anticipate this will change when Singapore begins issuing licenses and regulating stablecoin issuers this year. Decentralized stablecoins will likely be a very practical application of blockchain and that’s what we’re focusing on.”

However, even as the crypto-space continues to evolve, dethroning the largest stablecoin by market cap is be a tough job. Nevertheless, there is a growing breed of stablecoins that has made its presence known over the last couple of months.

The rise of crypto-collateralized stablecoins

The most appealing factor is the decentralized notion of this breed. While most popular stablecoins like USDT, USDC, PAX, Gemini Dollar are all fiat collateralized stablecoins, ie., backed by legal tender, crypto-collateralized stablecoins are trustless in nature. They are linked to the reserves of other cryptocurrencies.

Without a central authority, the most prominent decentralized stablecoin is DAI. This stablecoin uses smart contracts on the Ethereum blockchain to manage the collateral and maintain order. Another token that has gained traction is Synthetix [$sUSD] and it allows the creation of on-chain synthetic assets on the Ethereum blockchain.

Its advantages include transparency, accountability, and efficiency [in using due to the quick process of liquidation into other cryptos],

But, everything has its own pros and cons. A recent blog by DeFi Rate explained the drawback of this emerging class of stablecoins,

“Where fiat-backed stablecoins only need to hold 1:1 reserves in legal tender, this subset of stablecoins often require over-collateralization to account for price volatility. Most commonly, this ratio is set at 150%, meaning that in order to issue $100 worth of $DAI, you will need to post AT LEAST $150 worth of $ETH as collateral.”

There is also a high volatility factor. Additionally, there also may be chances of instant liquidation, meaning, the underlying crypto can be instantaneously liquidated if its price falls below a certain threshold, which is a risky affair for investors.

That being said, the growing trend depicts a more mature crypto-space, despite mounting regulatory threats from agencies across the world.

New Cryptocurrency Act In Congress Classifies Assets Into Three Distinct Groups

Crypto Lending Firm BlockFi Raising Interest Rates on BTC and ETH

So far, the past month had seen some of the worst days in Bitcoin’s price history. Following the emerging coronavirus crisis, Bitcoin plunged from a high of over $10K in mid-February, to a current low of $3,600 reached March 12. Since then, the price had recovered to the $6,000 area, but March is not yet over.

The drop affected almost all of the cryptocurrencies and stablecoins were the only ones that saw their market cap increased.

Stablecoins’ Growth Amid The Sell-Offs As the name suggests, stablecoins find a valuable place among all cryptocurrencies because of their “stability”. In a market with generally high levels of volatility, traders can quickly exit their positions from a violently swinging coin and store their funds in a more stable digital asset, pegged to the USD in most cases.

A perfect example of their usage came last week when the market crashed over 50% in one single day. A recent report indicated that during the most significant stages of the sell-off, short term traders turned to stablecoins.

Therefore, even though the total market cap saw its value slashed in half from over $300m a month ago, most stablecoin are on the rise in that manner.

According to data from CoinGecko, USDC, the stable coin backed by Circle, had seen an increase of 55% in its market cap. Until February 27, all USDC was equivalent to $430 million. As of writing these lines, the market cap grew to almost $670 million. Paxos Standard (PAX) saw a minor increase of 9% to a current market cap of $230 million.

The biggest gainer has been BUSD (Binance USD), with an increase of over 100%. It seems rather logical since the coin is available on the leading cryptocurrency exchange by trading volume – Binance.

You may also like: UK Central Bank Eases Stablecoin Rules Following Market Response Coinbase Urges Congress to Treat Stablecoins Like Cash and Ease Crypto Tax Burdens Peter Schiff Blasts Jamie Dimon’s Push for Bank-Style Rules on Stablecoins Despite the above, True USD, Paxos and Gemini Dollar didn’t notice a significant change in their market cap, and MakerDAO saw a decrease of 30% in its market cap due to the recent instability of the promising project.

Still Far From Tether (USDT) Despite the new additions in the stablecoin market, Tether (USDT) is still well in the lead in this race. It’s the most widely used, and naturally, it has the largest market capitalization of over $4.5 billion. After the latest price crash, Tether is now the 4th biggest cryptocurrency by market cap.

As the majority generally prefer using it, USDT ERC-20 transactions noted an all-time high last year. Ultimately, they utilized almost 25% of the whole Ethereum network.

More recently, USDT ERC-20 balance on cryptocurrency exchanges has more than doubled in the past month, and it’s close to $1 billion.

USDT ERC 20 Balance On Exchanges. Source: glassnode.com However, the emergence of new stablecoins may soon threaten Tether’s dominance over the market. According to a recent report, USDC, PAX, TUSD, and DAI had surpassed USDT in terms of transfer counts at the start of the year.

Tags:

DeFi lending TVL is outpacing DEXs due to more sustainable yield — VC

Maple Finance, FalconX secure Bitcoin-backed loans from Cantor Fitzgerald — Report

Celsius Network just got the green light to take Tether to court over one of the biggest disputes in recent crypto history – a $4 billion lawsuit centered around the liquidation of Bitcoin during Celsius’s collapse in 2022.

A U.S. bankruptcy judge has allowed the case to move forward, rejecting major parts of Tether’s attempt to shut it down. The ruling could have lasting consequences for how global crypto firms are held accountable in U.S. courts, especially when billions are on the line.

Here are the deets.

Tether’s “Fire Sale” of Bitcoin Under ScrutinyThe case goes back to June 2022, when Celsius was already under pressure as crypto markets crashed. Tether, which had lent money to Celsius, allegedly sold over 39,500 BTC at an average price of $20,656, well below market value at the time. Celsius says this was done without proper notice AND in violation of a 10-hour waiting period that was part of their agreement.

Celsius claims this move not only broke their contract, but also amounted to fraudulent and preferential transfers under U.S. bankruptcy law. At today’s prices, Celsius says the early liquidation cost them over $4 billion worth of Bitcoin.

The BTC, according to court documents, was later moved to Bitfinex, Tether’s sister company.

Tether’s Jurisdiction Argument FailsTether tried to get the case dismissed, arguing that a U.S. court has no authority since the company is based in the British Virgin Islands and Hong Kong. But the judge disagreed.

The court found that Tether used U.S.-based personnel, bank accounts, and communications in its dealings with Celsius enough to consider the activity “domestic.” That ruling now opens the door for Celsius’s lawsuit to proceed in the U.S., even though Tether operates offshore.

Some lesser claims were dismissed, but the judge is allowing Celsius to pursue key charges – including breach of contract, fraudulent transfer, and preferential transfer.

Big Implications for Crypto Lending and StablecoinsThis isn’t just a courtroom fight between two crypto companies. The ruling could influence how similar cases are handled in the future especially when it comes to stablecoin issuers, asset custody, and cross-border lending practices.

If Celsius proves its claims, it could raise serious questions about how major players like Tether manage client assets during times of market stress.

Also Read : Tether Keeps Expanding Despite Legal PressureWhile the legal battle continues, Tether isn’t slowing down. The company recently bought a majority stake in Twenty One Capital, a firm linked to Strike CEO Jack Mallers. With that move, Tether is now connected to the third-largest corporate Bitcoin holder in the world.

Tether also transferred nearly 37,230 BTC, worth about $3.9 billion, to addresses tied to the platform further strengthening its position in the Bitcoin market.

In the middle of all this, CEO Paolo Ardoino has dismissed talk of a Tether IPO. Even as speculation swirls over a possible $500 billion valuation, Ardoino said the company has “no plans” to go public.

What’s Next?The case now heads to the next phase, with Celsius aiming to hold Tether accountable for what it sees as a massive breach of trust. 

Never Miss a Beat in the Crypto World!Stay ahead with breaking news, expert analysis, and real-time updates on the latest trends in Bitcoin, altcoins, DeFi, NFTs, and more.

We’ll keep you updated on how this plays out – right here on Coinpedia. 

FAQsWhat exactly did Tether do wrong in the Bitcoin liquidation, and how did it violate the agreement with Celsius?

Celsius alleges Tether conducted a “fire sale” of over 39,500 BTC without proper notice and below market value, violating a 10-hour waiting period specified in their agreement. Celsius claims this breached their contract and constituted fraudulent and preferential transfers under U.S. bankruptcy law, costing them over $4 billion.

How does the court’s ruling on U.S. jurisdiction affect other offshore crypto companies?

The court’s ruling, which found U.S. jurisdiction over Tether despite its offshore base due to “domestic” activities (U.S.-based personnel, bank accounts, communications), sets a significant precedent. It suggests that offshore crypto companies with substantial operational or transactional links to the U.S. may be subject to U.S. legal scrutiny and accountability, regardless of their official incorporation location.

Story Ends Here

Trust with CoinPedia:CoinPedia has been delivering accurate and timely cryptocurrency and blockchain updates since 2017. All content is created by our expert panel of analysts and journalists, following strict Editorial Guidelines based on E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness). Every article is fact-checked against reputable sources to ensure accuracy, transparency, and reliability. Our review policy guarantees unbiased evaluations when recommending exchanges, platforms, or tools. We strive to provide timely updates about everything crypto & blockchain, right from startups to industry majors.

Investment Disclaimer:All opinions and insights shared represent the author's own views on current market conditions. Please do your own research before making investment decisions. Neither the writer nor the publication assumes responsibility for your financial choices.

Sponsored and Advertisements:Sponsored content and affiliate links may appear on our site. Advertisements are marked clearly, and our editorial content remains entirely independent from our ad partners.

Read the Next News

A U.S. judge allowed Celsius’ $4 billion lawsuit against Tether to proceed, finding enough domestic ties despite offshore operations.

(Photo of Jen Titus on Unsplash)

Posted July 3, 2025 at 10:11 am EST.

U.S. bankruptcy judge Martin Glenn has ruled that Celsius Network’s $4 billion lawsuit against stablecoin giant Tether can proceed, rejecting major portions of Tether’s motion to dismiss the case.

The lawsuit centers on allegations that Tether improperly liquidated over 39,500 BTC held as collateral for Celsius loans during the crypto market crash in June 2022.

Celsius alleged that Tether breached their lending agreement by selling the BTC collateral before a contractually required 10-hour waiting period had elapsed, and at an average price of $20,656, below prevailing market rates. 

This story is an excerpt from the Unchained Daily newsletter.

Subscribe here to get these updates in your email for free

Meanwhile, Tether’s case for dismissal was built on the fact that both companies are based offshore and the transactions were international. But the judge found sufficient ties to the U.S., including U.S.-based accounts and systems, to allow the case to proceed. 

Last August, Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino labelled the lawsuit “baseless” and claimed that Tether was acting on Celsius’ instructions to liquidate the BTC and return it to Celsius. 

In the first half of 2024, Tether’s profits surged to around $5.2 billion, largely from interest income on its reserve assets, mainly U.S. government debt, which had grown to nearly $98 billion by mid-2024 and approached $120 billion by early 2025.

Stablecoin issuer Tether has agreed to pay $299.5 million to the Celsius Network bankruptcy estate, settling years of litigation tied to the crypto lender’s 2022 collapse. 

The payment is far below the nearly $4.5 billion Celsius originally sought in bitcoin.

The Blockchain Recovery Investment Consortium (BRIC) — a partnership between VanEck and GXD Labs — announced the settlement Tuesday, saying it settles “all issues” between Tether and the Celsius estate. 

“We are pleased to have resolved Celsius’s adversary proceeding and related claims against Tether,” said David Proman, managing partner at GXD Labs.

Tether and the Celsius collapse The settlement ends one of the most contentious cases in crypto bankruptcy history. Celsius sued Tether in August 2024, claiming the stablecoin issuer improperly liquidated roughly 39,500 Bitcoin used as collateral before Celsius filed for bankruptcy in July 2022. 

Celsius said Tether violated an agreement requiring a 10-hour notice before selling the assets, costing the lender any remaining equity in the position.

Tether pushed back, calling the suit a “baseless shakedown.” The company said it acted within the terms of a 2022 agreement requiring Celsius to post more collateral as Bitcoin prices fell.

When Celsius failed to meet the margin call, Tether said it liquidated the bitcoin at Celsius’s direction to cover an $815 million debt.

A U.S. bankruptcy judge in New York allowed Celsius’s case to move forward earlier this year, though Tether denied wrongdoing.

The $299.5 million payment was arranged through BRIC, a joint recovery vehicle set up in early 2023 to pursue claims and recover assets from collapsed crypto firms. 

BRIC was appointed by the Celsius debtors and creditors’ committee in January 2024 to oversee asset recovery and litigation management, according to the BRIC release on the matter.

While the payment represents a win for Celsius creditors, it’s a modest one compared to the scale of losses from the company’s collapse.

Celsius, once one of the largest crypto lenders, froze withdrawals in mid-2022 amid plunging token prices and failed investments. Its bankruptcy exposed billions in customer losses and alleged mismanagement by top executives.

Former Celsius CEO Alex Mashinsky was sentenced in May to 12 years in prison for fraud and market manipulation. Prosecutors said he misused customer funds and inflated the price of the platform’s CEL token. In June, Mashinsky agreed to forfeit any claims to assets from the bankruptcy estate.

The Celsius collapse became one of the defining moments of crypto’s 2022 credit crisis, alongside failures at Voyager, BlockFi, and FTX.

The fallout triggered a wave of litigation and recovery efforts that continue to reshape how courts treat crypto lending and collateral agreements.

Micah Zimmerman

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

Crypto Lender BlockFills Faces $75 Million Black Hole, Clients Reportedly Locked Out

The crypto market’s volatility in April resulted in Bitcoin and many altcoins witnessing considerable growth.

However, some altcoins missed this opportunity but are preparing to do so in May. BeInCrypto has prepared this analysis to put the spotlight on lesser-known coins that are poised for gains in the coming month.

Eyes on Theta Network (THETA)Theta Fuel (THETA) price has witnessed nothing but a drawdown throughout April and the second half of March. The altcoin fell from $3.4 to $1.9, marking a 42% correction. Consequently, the altcoin fell into a descending broadening pattern known to be bearish.

However, the Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) indicator suggests differently. MACD is a trend-following momentum indicator that shows the relationship between two moving averages of a security’s price. It helps identify potential buy and sell signals based on crossovers and divergences between these moving averages.

Read More: What Is Theta Network (THETA)? A Complete Guide

The indicator has only observed bearishness for the past month, which flipped this week as the MACD witnessed a bullish crossover. This will likely initiate the uptrend on the daily chart, which could help THETA break out of the descending broadening pattern to flip $3 into support.

THETA/USDT 1-day chart. Source: TradingViewHowever, if the breach of the upper trend line fails, the altcoin could see a fall back to the lower trend line. As the pattern suggests, this would result in a potential downtrend, effectively invalidating the bullish outlook.

Ravencoin (RVN) Is at the Cusp of a BreakoutRavencoin (RVN) price is attempting recovery from the lows of $0.028 and is now aiming at flipping the 23.6% Fibonacci Retracement of $0.058 to $0.028 into support. Marked at $0.035, doing so would enable the altcoin to bounce off the price level and breach the 38.2% and 50% Fib lines. 

Read More: Ravencoin (RVN) Price Prediction 2024/2025/2030

Marked at $0.039 and $0.043, respectively, breaching them would sustain the rise and push RVN further upwards. The MACD is also at the cusp of noting a bullish crossover with green bars on the histogram. Once this crossover takes place, a potential bullish outcome could be confirmed.

RVN/USDT 1-day chart. Source: TradingViewHowever, if the 38.2% or 50% Fib levels remain unbreached, RVN could return to the 23.6% Fibonacci line, invalidating the bullish outcome. This might result in a decline to $0.028.

Akash Network (AKT) Is set to Flip Critical Resistance Into SupportAkash Network (AKT) price has been making headlines lately for its Upbit listing and the upcoming summit, which will be the first for the network. This has resulted in AKT posting an almost 74% growth in a single day before retracing the rally down to 25%.

The altcoin is now trading at $4.80, just under the 50% Fibonacci Retracement of $6.25 to $3.44. Closing above this line would enable AKT to breach the 61.8% Fib marked at $5.17. This level is also known as the bull run support floor, as rallies find strength upon branching this line.

AKT/USDT 1-day chart. Source: TradingViewThis could help AKT run up to $5.50 and beyond. However, if the breach fails or the 50% Fib level is not secured as a support floor, it could cause a decline to $4.10, effectively invalidating the bullish outcome.

Key takeaways:

Strategy faces tighter short-term liquidity, but its conservative 11% net leverage protects it from forced BTC liquidations.A Bitcoin rally above $70,000 remains unlikely as long as STRC trades under $100 and spot ETFs show net selling pressure.Bitcoin (BTC) faced a 21% price correction in 10 days, retesting the $61,000 level for the first time in four months. This movement coincided with Strategy (MSTR US) company's decision to buy back some corporate debt, temporarily pausing its Bitcoin accumulation. Traders now fear that Strategy could be forced to liquidate some of its Bitcoin holdings.

Strategy (MSTR US) Bitcoin reserve changes and average price. Source: Strategy

Strategy had been the largest known Bitcoin buyer, accumulating 126,016 BTC for $9.31 billion since March. However, the company used $1.38 billion of cash raised by recent equity issuances to buy back some of its convertible debt. The decision, announced on May 15, coincided with the Stretch preferred stock (STRC US) distancing itself from $100.

Strategy Series A Perpetual Stretch preferred stock (STRC US). Source: TradingView

The STRC preferred stock allows Strategy to issue new shares whenever its price reaches $100 and offers holders a variable dividend, currently set at 11.5% annually, paid monthly in cash. If traders decide it is no longer worth $100, new buyers step in at lower levels, which is equivalent to demanding a higher dividend. So, at first sight, this should be a non-event for Strategy’s risk perception.

Strategy raised $7.5 billion through preferred stock issuances in the first five months of 2026, which was highly supportive of Bitcoin’s price. Now, the company faces a rough path, given its cash position has been reduced to $900 million, which is enough to cover dividends for six months.

Strategy (MSTR US) financial highlights. Source: Strategy

Strategy’s 11% net leverage is the key financial metric to monitor, as it represents the amount of debt the company holds relative to its assets. By any standard, the coverage provided by its Bitcoin holdings — even at a $30,000 price — should be considered conservative.

Will Strategy be forced to liquidate some of its Bitcoin holdings?While short-term liquidity conditions have certainly deteriorated, there is no contractual floor set in Strategy’s convertible debt that would force a Bitcoin reserve liquidation. Moreover, there is no prohibition on selling MSTR stock at a discount to its market-adjusted net asset value.

If debt markets are not available, the company could opt to dilute current MSTR holders. Whether this move would be interpreted as a weakness and further pressure MSTR and STRC prices is irrelevant to Strategy’s leverage ratio, as the company would remain financially solid.

Source: X/zeroxkyle

According to X user zeroxkyle, author of the Grand Line newsletter, an eventual Bitcoin sale from Strategy would only bring its price down faster, worsening liquidity conditions. The analysis refers to a “doom loop” causing buyers to withhold from adding positions due to a constant fear of a large seller entering the market.

It is impossible to predict what would ease investors' tension, as Strategy is in no danger of an imminent forced sale. The preferred stock dividends can be paused at will, although they merely accumulate for later on. Still, as long as STRC continues to trade below $100 and spot exchange-traded funds (ETFs) remain a net seller, odds for a Bitcoin rally above $70,000 are slim.

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

The world’s largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization, Bitcoin, experienced a steep selloff on the final trading day of the week, plunging to its lowest point since October 2024. As of Friday, the price retraced as far as $59,073, sliding beneath the previous low reached in February, when it tested the $60,062 mark.

Rising US labor data intensifies pressureThe main catalyst behind the sharp decline was robust US employment data released on Friday. Afterward, markets factored in the likelihood that interest rates would remain elevated for a longer period. This sentiment drove US Treasury yields and the dollar index higher, exerting pressure across risk assets, including equities and the cryptocurrency market.

In the aftermath of Friday’s sharp correction, Bitcoin stabilized around the $61,000 level in Saturday’s Asian trading session. The flagship crypto remained roughly 1.3 percent in the red on the day and booked a significant weekly loss of 16 percent. Ongoing outflows from Bitcoin ETFs throughout the week added to the bearish mood and exacerbated downward price movement.

This cycle witnesses steepest demand contractionJulio Moreno, head of research at on-chain analytics provider CryptoQuant, characterized the latest correction as “a new cycle low that signals a bear market for Bitcoin.” In his analysis, Moreno argued that the current pullback marks the most severe contraction of this market cycle.

Julio Moreno, at the helm of CryptoQuant’s research division, commented that the recent price action corresponds to the steepest contraction seen in this cycle and has established a new bear market low.

CryptoQuant’s data revealed that global Bitcoin demand has dipped to its weakest point since this cycle began after the previous bear market. Aggregate demand fell by 501,000 BTC, the deepest contraction observed so far in this period. The data also pointed out that the speed of this demand drop mirrors the rapid retreat seen in the aftermath of the Terra and Luna crash.

Glossary: On-chain data refers to indicators derived from activity and balances on the blockchain. Spot demand reflects direct buying interest, whereas futures demand measures position-taking in derivatives markets.

According to the same dataset, total Bitcoin demand, which includes both speculative and spot transactions, shrank by 501,000 BTC over the past month. This marks the fastest monthly drop since May 22, 2022. Spot demand alone fell by 272,000 BTC on a rolling 30-day basis, while futures-driven demand dropped by 229,000 BTC during the same timeframe.

Analysts draw parallels with previous bear cyclesAnalysts observed that similar patterns emerged in November 2023 and again in April 2025, with market participants now focusing intently on this latest period of waning interest. Historically, such phases of low demand and muted investor engagement have sometimes preceded shifts in market direction.

CryptoQuant’s data shows simultaneous weakness in both spot and futures demand, with an overall contraction reaching a cycle low of minus 501,000 BTC.

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 broader cryptocurrency market remains under pressure, with Bitcoin (BTC) trading around $62,000 on Tuesday, while market-wide Open Interest stabilizes after hitting a two-month low. Reduced leverage exposure reflects a risk-off phase, as supported by the Fear and Greed Index, which indicates extreme fear in the market. Although downside pressure lingers, Zcash (ZEC) and Terra Classic (LUNC) emerge as top performers over the last 24 hours, defying market trends.

Crypto is under pressureBitcoin’s rebound following a brief slip below $60,000 on Friday, as stronger-than-expected US jobs report data fueled hawkish Fed expectations, is losing momentum. The intraday pullback below $63,000 on Tuesday is consistent with the broader market risk-off sentiment.

CoinMarketCap data shows the Fear and Greed Index down to 15 on Tuesday, from 25 last week, reflecting a sharp decline in investors' risk appetite. Corroborating the de-risking phase, the broader market Open Interest (OI) dropped to a two-month low of $100 billion on Sunday, down from the May 12 peak of $135 billion, driven largely by over $1 billion in daily liquidations last week. As of Tuesday, the OI stands at $103 billion, stabilizing in the near-term as liquidations cool off.

Though the data suggests easing of near-term volatility, persistent downside pressure could extend the decline in Bitcoin and major altcoins.

Fear and Greed Index. Source: CoinMarketCap

Crypto Open Interest data. Source: CoinGlassZcash and Terra Classic attempt to scale the market tideZcash hovers slightly below $450 at press time on Tuesday, holding after a 4% gain above the 100-day Exponential Moving Average (EMA) at $430 on Monday. The privacy coin keeps the near-term tone neutral to slightly bullish with a near-term V-shaped recovery from the 200-day EMA at $369. The upward trend in EMAs suggests the broader uptrend remains intact, but it is capped by the 50-day EMA at $485.

That said, the momentum is subdued on the daily chart, with the Relative Strength Index (RSI) hovering around 44 and the Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) still below its signal line, which hints that recovery attempts could struggle while price trades beneath the 50-day EMA.

Looking up, the 50-day EMA at $485 could serve as the final dynamic resistance, capping the upside toward the $500 psychological threshold.

ZEC/USDT daily price chart.On the downside, initial support is seen at the 100-day EMA at $430, ahead of a structural band around the 200-day EMA at $369.

Terra Classis mirrors a similar near-term V-shaped rebound from its 200-day EMA at $0.000057 on Saturday. At the time of writing, LUNC is down over 3% on Tuesday as the 50-day EMA at $0.000072 caps the three-day recovery, keeping the near-term bias neutral.

With the MACD and signal line trending in the negative zone and the RSI rising to 45, momentum remains subdued.

A daily close above the 50-day EMA at $0.000072 could extend the LUNC recovery toward $0.000091 resistance, which capped a minor bullish attempt in late May.

LUNC/USDT daily price chart.Looking down, the 100-day and 200-day EMA at $0.000064 and $0.000057, respectively, serve as crucial support zone for buyers to regain control.

(The technical analysis of this story was written with the help of an AI tool.)

Ali Martinez has cautioned that Strategy’s STRC structure may amplify financial stress in a prolonged Bitcoin bear market, citing similarities to the feedback loop seen in Terra-Luna’s collapse in 2022.

Summary

Ali Martinez warned that Strategy’s STRC structure could increase financial pressure during a prolonged Bitcoin decline. STRC fell as much as 17% below its $100 par value, raising concerns about investor demand. Martinez said the stock’s feedback mechanism shares conceptual similarities with Terra-Luna’s collapse dynamics. In a June 19 X post, Martinez argued that STRC differs from traditional corporate bonds because its dividend rate can be adjusted to help keep the security trading near its $100 par value.

Same-Same, But Different

Most traditional corporate bonds have fixed interest rates. If a company struggles, the market price of the bond drops, but the company's actual monthly interest payments stay the same. The investors take the hit, not the company.

Strategy’s STRC debt… pic.twitter.com/DcN50g2emI

— Ali Charts (@alicharts) June 19, 2026 While conventional bond issuers continue paying fixed interest regardless of market fluctuations, he said Strategy may face pressure to raise dividend payouts if demand for STRC weakens during a Bitcoin downturn.

The concern comes as scrutiny of Strategy’s financing model continues to grow following a sharp decline in its latest preferred stock offering.

As reported by crypto.news earlier, STRC fell as much as 17% below par value on June 18, reaching a record low of $82.53 before recovering to close at $88.59.

Source: Yahoo Finance Rising payouts could increase pressure during a Bitcoin decline Martinez said the structure creates a situation in which Strategy’s financing costs could rise at the same time that the value of its primary treasury asset falls. If Bitcoin remains under pressure and investor demand for STRC declines, the company may need to offer higher dividends to attract buyers and support the stock’s market price.

According to Martinez, additional cash commitments tied to higher payouts could become increasingly burdensome during a prolonged market downturn.

His assessment arrives as investors debate how Strategy should respond to the weakness in STRC. Arca Chief Investment Officer Jeff Dorman recently noted that selling between $3 billion and $4 billion worth of Bitcoin could be one way to relieve pressure on the company’s capital structure.

As reported by crypto.news, Dorman assigned a 25% probability to a large Bitcoin sale and said such a move could provide flexibility while helping restore confidence in STRC. He nevertheless viewed continued sales of MSTR shares as the more likely outcome, assigning that scenario a 70% probability.

Terra comparison focuses on incentives rather than mechanics While drawing comparisons to Terra-Luna, Martinez emphasized that Strategy is fundamentally different from the failed stablecoin ecosystem. He noted that Strategy does not rely on algorithmic tokens or token minting mechanisms, which played a central role in Terra’s collapse.

Instead, his warning focused on what he described as a similar economic dynamic. Martinez argued that both systems place additional financial burdens on the issuer as conditions deteriorate, rather than reducing pressure during periods of stress.

“It is conceptually similar to the Terra/Luna collapse,” Martinez wrote.

Expanding on that view, he said a sustained Bitcoin decline could force more capital toward supporting STRC around its $100 par value. According to Martinez, this could create a “dangerous loop” where falling asset values coincide with increasing financial obligations.

Additional concerns surrounding Strategy’s liquidity position have also emerged in recent weeks. Earlier, market maker QCP estimated that the company’s available liquidity could cover preferred dividend payments for roughly seven and a half months.

At the same time, longtime Bitcoin critic Peter Schiff has questioned how STRC was marketed to investors, arguing that the stock’s decline could eventually raise Strategy’s future fundraising costs if buyers begin demanding higher yields to hold similar securities.

In brief Strategy’s Stretch (STRC) may be volatile, but it’s far from the stablecoin that underpinned Terra’s ecosystem, according Benchmark-StoneX’s Mark Palmer. The Bitcoin-buying firm’s flagship preferred stock is designed to trade at a certain level, but it’s incapable of “depegging” in a technical sense, he wrote. STRC fell as low as $82.53 last week, and on Monday, it recovered some losses to close around $88.65. Strategy’s Stretch (STRC) is facing notable pressure, but it doesn’t resemble the stablecoin that brought crypto to its knees in 2022, according to Benchmark-StoneX’s Mark Palmer.

Although the Bitcoin-buying firm’s flagship preferred stock evoked painful memories as it drifted to record lows last week, comparisons between it and Terra’s collapsed ecosystem remain “fundamentally misguided,” the investment bank’s analyst shared in a Monday note.

Palmer argued that STRC’s weakness has “fueled alarmist commentary across social media,” overlooking core differences between the dividend-paying product and two tokens, TerraUSD and LUNA, which erased $40 billion in market cap as they plummeted years ago.

“STRC is not a stablecoin,” Palmer underscored. “It is not backed by an algorithmic arbitrage mechanism, and it is not dependent on confidence in a reflexive token structure.”

Most stablecoins are backed by a combination of cash and U.S. Treasuries, but TerraUSD attempted to break that mold without any hard reserves, relying instead on a novel “mint-and-burn” framework with its sister token, LUNA, to artificially maintain its peg.

STRC, conversely, is indirectly backed by Strategy’s Bitcoin holdings. The Tysons Corner, Virginia-based firm signaled on Monday that it now owns 847,363 Bitcoin, a sum valued at $54.5 billion with the digital asset changing hands around $64,400.

As Terra’s ecosystem unwound, TerraUSD “depegged,” losing parity with the U.S. dollar as investors swiftly lost confidence in the protocol’s ability to remain stable. The project’s Anchor Protocol was famously known for offering a 20% annual percentage yield on deposits.

That same language was used in relation to STRC’s weakness on Thursday, as the product, which currently offers an 11.5% annual dividend, fell as low as $82.53. On Monday, the preferred stock closed flat at $88.65, or around 11.3% below its $100 par value, according to Yahoo Finance.

STRC, Palmer noted, is engineered to trade around the $100 mark, but its price has been cyclical since it debuted less than a year ago. When STRC trades at or above that threshold, Strategy issues more shares and uses the proceeds to purchase more Bitcoin.

The product has lingered below its $100 par value for several weeks, and some analysts now anticipate that the company will seek to increase the product’s dividend rate in an attempt to support its recovery back toward that level.

There are other levers that Strategy can pull as well. For example, the Bitcoin-buying firm has accumulated cash for three straight weeks, topping off its USD reserve as a way to communicate to preferred stockholders that dividend payments will continue flowing.

When STRC trades below the $100 mark, its ability to purchase Bitcoin may be constrained, but that doesn’t mean there’s a fundamental problem, Palmer wrote.

“There is a meaningful difference between stating that Strategy's preferred stock funding engine has become less efficient,” he said, “and asserting that the company's overall model is broken, as some of its detractors have suggested.”

The investment bank reaffirmed its $570 price target for Strategy. The forecast is far above the multi-year high of $457 that the company’s shares soared to in October.

On Monday, Strategy shares fell 2.8% to $109. The performance added to a negative streak, with the company’s stock price falling for a fifth straight trading day.

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

While there are plenty of blockchain projects focused on dApps and the conversion of tokens, one that stands out is the Bancor Network and its BNT token.

Indeed, this project is one of the most well known in the cryptocurrency space. It has also had its fair share of ups and downs. From a blockbuster ICO to legal challenges. From widespread partnerships to a widely publicized hack.

However, is it something you should consider?

In this Bancor Network Token review, I will give you everything that you need to know. I will also take a look at the long term prospects and adoption potential of BNT.

The Bancor Network has created an elegant solution in its decentralized network which allows traders to swap a wide selection of tokens seamlessly across nearly 10,000 token pairs, and all with a single click.

Image via Bancor Website

Bancor allows users to instantly convert between two tokens without needing a counterparty to the trade. This is all done right within the Bancor wallet, and this model has allowed Bancor to provide traders with automatic liquidity for trades.

More importantly, it allows the network to remain completely decentralized, and much of the functionality of the network is thanks to the innovative use of the BNT token to facilitate trades.

So, this all sounds really intriguing but in order to understand the real heft behind Bancor, we have to go over its relatively eventful history.

Bancor Network BackgroundThe Bancor Network is overseen by the Bancor Foundation, which is based in Zug, Switzerland. The company also operates a Research & Development center in Tel Aviv, Israel, which gives the company a foothold in the rising blockchain hub in Zug as well as the rising Middle Eastern technology center of Tel Aviv.

The company was founded in 2016 by a group is Israelis with a background in Silicon Valley start-ups, as well as experience in scaling startups and blockchain technologies. It was named after the international trade balancing currency initially envisioned by John Maynard Keynes.

Token Sale Page for the Bancor Network Token

The Bancor Network is perhaps most well-known for holding one of the most successful ICOs ever. In 2017 it set a world record by raising over $153 million in Ethereum tokens in less than 3 hours. The world-record has since been topped by several projects (including SIRIN Labs and Tezos), but remains an impressive beginning for the project.

Since the ICO the Bancor Network has seen over $1.5 billion in token conversions take place on its platform, all facilitated by the BNT token. In addition, there are over 100 liquidity providers serving as Bancor nodes, and these nodes provide over $13 million in liquidity by staking BNT tokens to power token conversions.

More recently, on January 1, 2020 Bancor has added dramatically to its liquidity pool by airdropping all of its Ethereum Reserve, which totaled 10% of the BNT marketcap at the time, in the form of ETHBNT Bancor Pool Tokens.

In effect this added 60,000 liquidity providers, although it’s understood that many of the airdrop recipients simply turned around and sold the tokens. Still, the Bancor network has gone from liquidity of just under $4 million on January 1, 2020 to over $17 million as of mid-June 2020.

Cross-chain ConversionBancor has made the user experience of exchanging tokens quite easily. The intuitive wallet app is slick and allows for the quick and easy conversion of tokens similar to what users get when using Coinbase or other custodial wallets.

While the user interface makes it look simple, behind the scenes the Bancor wallet is transacting directly with BNT smart contracts on the blockchain, all while allowing users to retain full control of their private keys and funds at all times.

Cross Chain Token Swap on Bancor

The obvious advantage of Bancor’s wallet is that it not only allows for the exchange of tokens, but it does so without the need for a counterparty. This makes it the first network to allow cross-chain conversions without requiring users to give up their private keys in the process of the exchange.

Bancor began their cross-chain integration efforts with EOS and Ethereum, however, they have plans to add other bridges over time, eventually enabling them to function as a multi-chain liquidity solution that can provide instant token conversions for many of the popular blockchains such as Bitcoin, Tron, and Ripple.

Range of ConversionsAlready Bancor gives traders and investors an amazing range of conversion options, with fee-less, instant trades available for tokens across more than 8,700 token pairs right through the Bancor wallet.

To make a comparison, one of the most popular exchanges Binance has roughly 196 tokens available, but just 586 trading pairs.

Automatic LiquidityOne of the greatest benefits of Bancor and the BNT token is that they bring liquidity to cryptocurrency markets, and without liquidity, currencies are apt to wither and die. After all, who wants to own a currency that can’t be easily bought and sold.

Of course, the top cryptocurrencies like Ethereum, Ripple, Litecoin, and others in the top 20 have enough trading volume on their own, but the Bancor Protocol brings a unique solution that delivers automatic decentralized liquidity to any token.

Instant & Affordable Liquidity on Bancor. Image via Bancor Blog

Through the Bancor Protocol any token at all, even those privately created, can get instant liquidity, no matter what size trade volume the token enjoys. This is incredibly important functionality when it comes to facilitating the adoption of decentralized applications.

Since many dApps have their own tokens, and now those tokens are able to be converted with other cryptocurrencies instantly and with a single click right within a user’s wallet.

How Bancor Protocol WorksAt this point, you might be wondering if it’s really necessary to have another decentralized exchange. After all, the centralized exchanges seem far more popular at this point, and there are dozens of active exchanges already providing a trading platform and liquidity for cryptocurrencies.

In short, yes the world does need another exchange, or at least it needs an exchange like Bancor. That’s because the Bancor platform provides a much-needed service of increasing liquidity for any token, and of creating a platform where any token can be exchanged without the need for a counterparty.

This is something that can’t be accomplished with any other asset. Take fiat currencies as an example. If you want to exchange U.S. dollars for Yen you need to find someone willing to sell Yen to complete the transaction. Every asset is like this. There must be a buyer and a seller for a transaction to work.

Overview of the Bancor Protocol for external developers

Bancor only requires one person to complete a trade, with the liquidity provided by the native BNT token and its smart contracts. The BNT token’s smart contracts ensure that there is a balance between tokens at all times. Once any trade is concluded there will also be a total remaining that represents the BNT balance coded into the smart contract.

This structure removes the need for the exchange to act as a third-party to transactions. With Bancor and its BNT token, you are able to continually perform exchanges for Ethereum and EOS compatible tokens right through the Bancor wallet.

You can think of the system as an hourglass. It’s a closed system and it doesn’t matter how you turn the hourglass, it always holds the same quantity of sand. In this analogy, the hourglass represents the BNT smart contract, and the grains of sand are the tokens being traded.

And next up from the team will be a development marketplace for dApps that will also make use of the cross-chain compatibility and balanced smart contracts. Also in the pipeline for the future is staking rewards to incentivize liquidity, and a BancorDAO to add self-governance to the blockchain and fully decentralize.

Bancor Staking RewardsBNT staking rewards are a future enhancement that is planned to incentivize users to provide liquidity for the network. The basis for adding staking is that Bancor needs liquidity to lower fees for traders, while also increasing trading volume and overall network fees. By providing users with an incentive to add liquidity to the network Bancor is expecting to see its network grow and flourish.

Simulated Staking APRs. Image via Bancor Blog

While plans for adding staking rewards are in the early stages the basics are that users will receive rewards of BNT for holding their BNT in an existing liquidity pool such as MKR/BNT or ETH/BNT. The amount of new BNT that will be created as staking rewards and the distribution of staking rewards to different pools on the network will be decided by users voting in the BancorDAO.

This type of reward system is expected to pull new users into the ecosystem thanks to the APR generated by fees and staking rewards. Bancor is carefully designing their staking rewards system to avoid concentrating the rewards in a small number of pools, choosing instead to provide an even distribution across dozens of network pools.

Bancor VortexVortex is the solution implemented in February 2021 which allows users to provide liquidity in BNT to borrow funds while continuing to obtain yield from swap fees.

Vortex reworked the existing vBNT mechanism, which gave the token more uitility aside from providing governance. As you’ll see later this turned out to be very good when Bancor moved to gasless voting, otherwise the vBNT token would have lost all utility.

vBNT is received when staking BNT into a liquidity pool making it the pool token for the Bancor network. Vortex adds additional functionality to vBNT such that user are able to sell vBNT for actual BNT tokens. That means once vBNT is converted the resulting BNT can be exchanged for any other token.

The addition of this functionality makes Vortex a no-liquidation lending platform, which is pretty cool since it allows a liquidity provider the ability to receive future rewards immediately. And because the principal will continue accruing swap fees the loan eventually repays itself.

The no-liquidation aspect of Vortex arises because vBNT and BNT are essentially the same token. Thus any change in the price of BNT is closely mirrored by vBNT. And while vBNT is created in a 1:1 ratio when staking, the price relationship between the two is not that simple.

vBNT Burner ContractOriginally Bancor Vortex was envisioned with a token supply management solution that would capture a portion of trade revenue and use it to buy and burn vBNT. That original model was dynamic and complex, however in March 2021 the DAO voted to replace the dynamic model with a flat-fee model.

Under that flat-fee model 5% of the total protocol swap revenue is shifted to the vBNT Burner Smart Contract, and the addition of this will turn vBNT into a scarcer asset. That is long-term deflationary and positive for the Bancor ecosystem.

The flat burn rate will be incrementally adjusted over the course of 18 months, with the final target being 15%. The theory is that as trade volumes increase the burning of vBNT will also accelerate. In the coming years this vBNT burn mechanism is expected to be a critical part of the flexible monetary policy employed by the DAO.

In the vBNT burn mechanism the burning of tokens is not automatic. Tokens are moved to the burned smart contract and users are then offered the chance to interact with that contract, also paying the necessary gas fees associated with the burn.

Each vBNT token burned represents a BNT token that is locked into the network forever. That increases the scarcity of BNT and supports the growth in total locked value over time.

The Bancor team also envisions new gamified DeFi strategies coming from this model. In addition to direct incentives to activate the burn mechanism, a new type of transparent and equal-opportunity game becomes available for vBNT.

Speculators will have ample capacity to observe each other’s activities on-chain, and may choose to simultaneously create and seize arbitrage opportunities on the vBNT pool at their leisure.

Bancor TeamThe Bancor Network was founded in 2016 by Israeli siblings Guy and Galia Benartzi. Both remain active with the project, with Guy on the Foundation Council, while Galia is in charge of business development. She is also a strong proponent of women in blockchain and crypto.

Other board members include Olivier Nathan Cohen, who is also the founder and COO of Altcoinomy, a crypto KYC operator- facilitating cash out in Swiss private banks, AML screening of ICO investors, and institutional crypto/fiat transactions.

The CTO of Bancor is Yudi Levi, and he’s held that position since the start of Bancor in 2016. Prior to that, he was co-founder and CTO of AppCoin. He also spent over a decade as a chief architect of several mobile projects, including Real Dice, Mytopia, and Particle Code.

The team also has an impressive list of advisors, including Brock Pierce, the Chairman of the Board at the Bitcoin Foundation, and venture capitalist Tim Draper.

The BNT TokenAs was mentioned earlier, Bancor held an ICO on June 12, 2017 that raised $153 million in just three hours. That ICO sold roughly 40 million BNT tokens at an average price of $3.92 each. Currently, there’s a circulating supply of BNT of nearly 70 million tokens.

The BNT token hit its all-time high of $10.00 on January 10, 2018 and its all-time low of $0.117415 on March 13, 2020. As of mid-June 2020 it recovered remarkably from its March all-time low and traded at $1.17 just three months after for an amazing gain of 1,500%! That gain was primarily powered by news of the July 2020 release of Bancor V2.

Bancor’s BNT did not experience quite the same rally as many other altcoins in 2021, although it did see some upside as it reached $9.15 on March 7, 2021. Since then it has cooled significantly and as of May 22, 2021 it is trading at $4.36.

BNT price movements over time. Image via Coinmarketcap.com

The circulating supply can change however since BNT is created as needed to initiate exchanges. The Bancor protocol will create as much BNT as needed to match the value of currencies held within the smart contract. Once staking rewards are added the circulating supply will necessarily increase more rapidly and regularly.

Trading & Storing BNTYou’ll find that most of the trading volume in the BNT token is at Bancor, naturally. It is also offered at a number of other platforms, including Binance and Coinbase, although trade volumes are pretty low.

Moreover, if we were to take a look at the order books on an individual exchange such as Binance it is clear that there is a lack of liquidity there. You will need to be very careful when placing an order there as if reasonable sized orders are likely to lead to slippage.

Once you have your BNT tokens you are going to want to store them in a secure offline wallet. Given that these are ERC20 tokens it means that you can store it any Ethereum compatible wallet.

If you’re trading or staking then storing BNT in the native Bancor Wallet will make sense.

Bancor V2Late in April 2020, with the BNT token languishing around the $0.20 level the team announced that they would soon be releasing Bancor V2. The token didn’t immediately respond, but by mid-May it had began a serious rally, and a month later is trading at $1.17. That’s especially amazing given that the token was at its all-time low just a short time before in mid-March 2020.

Bancor V2 Announcement. Image via Bancor Blog

The Bancor Protocol V2 is expected to add several important features that will put Bancor at the front of the pack of decentralized finance projects. The changes are meant to address four key issues commonly cited as obstacles to the widespread adoption of Automated Market Makers (AMMs):

Exposure to “impermanent loss”Exposure to multiple assetsCapital inefficiency (i.e., high slippage)Opportunity cost of providing liquidityIt’s interesting to see that the new features were created as opt-in and users are able to create and fund new AMMs with some, all, or none of the new features.

Bancor V2 features:

A new automated market maker (AMM) liquidity pool integrated with Chainlink price oracles that mitigates the risk of impermanent loss for both stable and volatile tokens.Provide liquidity with 100% exposure to a single tokenA more efficient bonding curve that reduces slippageSupport for lending protocolsBancor V2.1Even before Bancor V2 was fully launched the Bancor team was already discussing the necessary changes for Bancor V2.1. This next level update was designed to take the AMM model to the next level and it differs from Bancor V2 by finally offering solutions to two problems that have plagued AMMs ever since they were created. Those problems are:

Involuntary Token ExposureImpermanent LossUnlike other AMM protocols, Bancor uses its native BNT protocol token as the counterpart asset in every Bancor pool. Through the use of an elastic BNT supply, the v2.1 protocol co-invests in pools alongside LPs to support single-sided AMM exposure and to cover the cost of impermanent loss with swap fees earned from its co-investments.

Single-Sided ExposureIn the majority of 1st generation AMMs it’s necessary for liquidity providers to contribute equal amounts of each asset represented in the pool.

Obviously this is not only inconvenient, but it can also be a liability when an LP is only interested in providing liquidity for one asset, or possibly even holds just one asset. Bancor v2.1 breaks this by allowing LPs to provide a single token rather than and even or determinate pair.

Using Bancor v2.1 LPs are able to provide single-sided liquidity exposure using either ERC-20 tokens, or the Bancor BNT token.

Impermanent Loss InsuranceIt’s well known that AMMs which are subject to arbitrage opportunities also suffer impermanent loss as a side effect. Any time there are two assets paired in a constant product AMM the product of those two assets must remain constant.

That means any price variations in either asset leads to changes in the amount of each asset held. So, assets that rise in value are liquidated, while assets that fall in value are purchased to maintain the constant product.

In some cases swap fees are used to offset impermanent losses, however these losses can easily exceed any swap fees earned by the LPs. In this case the LP experiences a negative return when they eventually withdraw their assets.

Bancor v2.1 was designed to avoid this situation and ensure that every LP gets back the same value deposited plus trading fees. This is accomplished through a unique concept called Impermanent Loss Insurance.

Impermanent Loss Insurance isn’t automatic, however. It accrues by 1% each day over time, and after 100% it achieves 100% protection on funds in the pool.

There is also a 30-day cliff used, which means any LP who withdraws their capital before it’s been in the pool for 30 days will incur the same impermanent loss as if there was no insurance protection. Once 100 days has passed the insurance protection is full and the LP can receive 100% compensation for any loss incurred within the first 100 days or any time thereafter.

When the pool does not contain enough tokens to cover the losses fully with the staked tokens the insurance can be paid out in an equivalent value of BNT tokens.

LimitationsBancor v2.1 has some very special features, but to allow for the positive features there are also three notable limitations in the platform:‌

Bancor v2.1 will only work with two-asset pools. For pools with more than two assets and custom weights. Developers need to deploy legacy v1 pools.Bancor v2.1 does not support dynamically adjusting supply tokens ("rebase" tokens) that can control and adjust token balances in users' wallets.When withdrawn from the system, BNTs are locked for a pre-set time (default 24 hr) to prevent panic liquidation.RoadmapBancor does not have a formal roadmap, but they do have a focus and continue improving the platform and adding new features. As of May 2021 Bancor has announced three pillars of development that they are working on:

Token Onboarding: Open Bancor’s doors to as many assets as possible by lowering the barrier to whitelisting, and making bootstrapping and incentivizing liquidity easier and cheaper for token projects.Financial Access & Control: Design powerful financial tools for LPs to earn high yield on their idle assets and manage returns in a stress-free, user-friendly environment.World-Class Trading Venue: Capture a growing share of total crypto trading volume by offering the best prices on a broad range of assets, a world-class trading experience including advanced charting & analytics, and novel tools for professional and retail traders.Gasless VotingGasless voting via the Snapshot governance platform was added in April 2021. The popularity of the proposal to move to Snapshot was apparent as the Bancor community not only passed the proposal with a 98.4% majority, it was also the largest voter turnout for any DAO decision thus far, with 84 unique address participating.

The implementation of Snapshot makes it far easier for community members to participate in governance, and this has been borne out in the real world, with over two dozen proposals added to Snapshot in the month following the addition of gasless voting.

If there is ever a problem found with Snapshot there is a quick-release mechanism that will revert governance back to the Ethereum blockchain. This will serve to protect the DAO in the case of emergency.

ConclusionOne of the major roadblocks in mass adoption is the lack of liquidity, and difficulty in exchanging various tokens for each other. The Bancor Protocol has done away with this problem through the automation of liquidity.

It’s true that complete beginners will face a small learning curve, but the UI of the wallet is as simple as they come. Anyone new to cryptocurrencies should have no problem learning how to make exchanges using the Bancor wallet.

And the newest update to the online platform is making things even easier for users as the team is now focusing its efforts more on creating a powerful and easy to use platform rather than building liquidity.

Moreover, the Bancor Protocol is making it easier for developers to build a seamless exchange application between a plethora of tokens. There are also a host of updates that have been planned for the next 6 to 12 months. This is part of the ongoing upgrades to the protocol and applications involved in the Bancor ecosystem.

Of course, there are still questions linger around the project including the issues of regulations in the U.S. and beyond. Potential centralisation of control in the three year transition period may deter some who fear the potential for arbitrary frozen accounts.

You also have the really paltry token performance of BNT especially over the past year. While the majority of tokens were soaring 500% or more in early 2021 the gains for BNT were relatively tame. It was one of the few tokens that did not reach a new all-time high in 2021.

Either way, Bancor does have some great technology, use cases and a strong team powering it forward.

SBI announced it will acquire cryptocurrency trading platform Bitbank for 46.7 billion yen.

According to Nikkei News, Japanese financial group SBI Holdings announced on the 25th that it will acquire cryptocurrency exchange platform bitbank for 46.7 billion yen (approximately $288 million). Upon completion of the transaction, SBI Group’s crypto asset custody scale is expected to exceed 1 trillion yen, making it one of the largest operators in Japan’s crypto industry. Per the plan, a subsidiary under SBI Holdings will acquire Bitbank shares from individual shareholders including its founders as early as August this year. Bitbank will then repurchase shares held by existing shareholders MIXI and Ceres by the end of October. If combining data from SBI’s own crypto exchange SBI VC Trade and Bitbank, as of April this year, the two firms had a total of around 2.92 million accounts and total custody assets of approximately 1.1 trillion yen. While different crypto exchanges disclose custody assets at varying time points, among Japan’s major industry competitors, bitFlyer held about 960 billion yen in custody assets as of the end of December 2025, and Coincheck had around 800 billion yen as of the end of March 2025.

6 minutes ago

Bithumb was fined for sharing user data overseas without consent.

South Korean regulatory authorities have ordered cryptocurrency exchange Bithumb to pay a 210 million won (approximately $136,000) fine for sharing user personal information with overseas platforms without user consent. According to an announcement released Thursday by South Korea’s Personal Information Protection Commission (PIPC), the relevant user data exposure occurred between September and November 2025. At that time, Bithumb transferred user information to overseas platforms while sharing its USDT market order book data. The PIPC also noted that when assisting users with asset transfers to 13 overseas exchanges, Bithumb failed to obtain full and sufficient user consent before sharing personal details including names, wallet addresses, and dates of birth. For the two violations, the PIPC not only imposed the fine but also ordered Bithumb to rectify its processes and management systems related to cross-border transmission of user information.

6 minutes ago

Analyst: SK Hynix’s US listing and fund-raising could trigger a valuation re-rating.

According to Bloomberg, SK Hynix is set to issue American Depositary Receipts (ADRs) on the Nasdaq on July 10. The listing aims to raise nearly $30 billion, making it one of the largest ADR issuances in history. Market participants widely believe the move will significantly expand its global investor base and may drive a valuation re-rating. Multiple asset management firms project that if its valuation converges with Micron Technology’s, its share price could rise by 30% over the next year. One fund manager noted that SK Hynix should trade at a valuation at least on par with Micron, as demand for memory chips is likely to outpace supply for years to come. The listing comes amid an unusually strong boom in the memory chip sector. Shares of Micron, SK Hynix, and Samsung Electronics have all surged over 200% this year, marking their best annual performance in decades. Demand for High Bandwidth Memory (HBM) from AI servers is widely seen as the driver of a structural "memory supercycle".

6 minutes ago

Jefferies: Samsung is likely to follow SK Hynix’s example to list in the US via ADRs.

Jeff Kim, Head of Research at Jefferies, said Samsung is likely to follow SK Hynix in listing on the U.S. market via American Depositary Receipts (ADRs), which will boost the share price of the South Korean chipmaker whose valuation lags behind Micron. "Chip stocks are at a turning point. ADRs will serve as an important catalyst to drive their valuations," he added.

6 minutes ago

A multi-million-dollar Polymarket contract on whether Strategy sold any bitcoin by May 31 has been disputed twice and is now in front of UMA tokenholders, reigniting an analyst argument that prediction-market oracles built on token voting are structurally unfit for high-stakes settlement.

A Polymarket contract that drew more than $60 million in trading volume is sitting in UMA's optimistic-oracle queue after two proposed "No" resolutions on the question "MicroStrategy sells any Bitcoin by May 31, 2026?" were challenged, sending the dispute to a token-weighted vote.

The trigger is a Strategy 8-K filed Monday that disclosed 32 BTC sold between May 26 and May 31 at an average net price of $77,135, the first disposal since 2022. The sale closed before the contract's 11:59 PM ET cutoff. The 8-K hit the wire on June 1. The contract is now reading 12c Yes / 89c No.

The dispute is being framed across Crypto Twitter not as an edge case but as a structural verdict on Polymarket's resolution stack. "UMA's token-voting model is structurally broken," analyst Eric Conner (@econoar) posted Monday. "Whales weaponize ambiguous rules to resolve Polymarket markets incorrectly and save their own positions. Zero legitimacy remains until deterministic settlement replaces it. This is exactly what Hyperliquid fixes with HIP-4."

UMA's VotePolymarket outsources contested settlements to UMA's optimistic oracle, where a proposed resolution can be challenged twice before the question escalates to a token-holder vote. The native token's voting power, not a court of facts, decides the payout.

A Wall Street Journal investigation in May found that in most disputed Polymarket markets more than half the UMA votes came from the ten largest wallets, at least 60% of active UMA voters could be linked to live Polymarket accounts, and roughly one in five disputes had at least one voter with a financial stake in the contract they were ruling on. Polymarket has logged more than 1,150 disputed markets in 2026, already past its full-year 2025 total.

The Strategy market is the highest-dollar live test since the $237 million Zelenskyy-suit market last year. Polymarket itself can't override the vote; it posted a bulletin telling voters that "no information from MSTR, on-chain data, or consensus of credible reporting confirmed that MicroStrategy sold Bitcoin within the market's timeframe. Confirmation achieved outside of the market's timeframe does not qualify."

Yes-side traders, including a holder pseudonymous as "Surprised-Legacy" whose $19,610 wager at roughly 11c would pay about $200,000 if Yes resolves, argue the 8-K's stated sale window, not the filing's date, is what the rules ask about.

Deterministic-Settlement Hyperliquid's HIP-4 outcome markets, live on mainnet since May 2, replace the optimistic-oracle layer entirely. Settlement is determined by the chain's own validator set running automated newsfeed software; there is no token-vote backstop, no two-round dispute window, and no path for a holder of the settlement-layer token to also be a participant in the market being settled. Each binary contract resolves to 1 or 0 against a pre-specified data source.

Kalshi reaches the same end-state through opposite infrastructure: an exchange-cleared central-counterparty book run through Kalshi Klear LLC, CFTC-registered as a derivatives clearing organization in August 2024. Disputes are handled by the exchange under rules filed with a federal regulator, not by anonymous tokenholders.

Polymarket's U.S. arm is itself now a CFTC-registered designated contract market, but the international book where the Strategy market sits still settles in USDC on Polygon under UMA.

Where the $60M Sits NowUMA's voting window runs roughly two days. The June 30 and December 31 children of the same market have already resolved Yes without dispute, meaning the $60 million in question turns entirely on whether "selling in May" requires public disclosure inside the month or only on-chain execution inside the month.

Polymarket has finalized a disputed prediction market with a “No” outcome after 98.6% of voting power backed the decision in a final UMA review, despite Strategy disclosing that it sold 32 Bitcoin before the market’s May 31 deadline.

Summary

Polymarket finalized the disputed Strategy Bitcoin sale market with a “No” outcome after 98.6% of UMA voting power backed the decision. Traders challenged the ruling because Strategy disclosed that it sold 32 Bitcoin between May 26 and May 31, before the contract deadline. The dispute has fueled debate over whether prediction markets should be resolved based on when an event occurred or when it was publicly confirmed. According to Polymarket’s market data, the contract asking whether Strategy would sell any Bitcoin by May 31 completed its final review on Wednesday, ending a dispute that had already triggered two previous “No” resolutions and subsequent challenges.

At the center of the disagreement is Strategy’s June 1 regulatory filing, which revealed that the company sold 32 BTC for roughly $2.5 million between May 26 and May 31. 

Traders who supported a “Yes” outcome argued that the sale itself occurred before the deadline stated in the market question. Others maintained that the transaction was not publicly confirmed until after the deadline had passed.

Days before the final review concluded, Polymarket added a note to the market page stating that “confirmation achieved outside of the market’s time frame does not qualify.” The clarification became a key point in the debate over how the contract should be resolved.

Traders challenge resolution standards Across social media, several traders criticized the decision and questioned whether the outcome matched the original wording of the contract.

Among the most vocal participants was trader 0xDinosaur, who previously disclosed that he had purchased 49,695.76 “Yes” shares for about 35,000 USDC. 

In a public statement issued before the final ruling, he argued that the contract referred to whether Strategy sold Bitcoin by May 31 and did not explicitly require the sale to be publicly disclosed before that date.

“My position was aggressive, and maybe I was greedy,” 0xDinosaur wrote on X. “But risk-taking does not change the facts, and it does not allow a platform to apply an unclear or unwritten rule after real money has already been placed.”

Earlier reporting on the dispute noted that Strategy’s filing showed the company sold 32 Bitcoin during the final week of May, while still holding 843,706 BTC as of May 31. The filing stated that proceeds from the sale were expected to support preferred stock distributions.

Elsewhere on X, trader willo2 argued that UMA voters were obligated to follow Polymarket’s published rules rather than their personal interpretation of the outcome.

“Even if UMA voters think that this outcome is ridiculous… they are forced to ratify it,” willo2 wrote. “This is because UMA is forced to respect the rules as written by Polymarket. Polymarket changed the rules, and now the outcome is literally in the rules.”

Here's my honest opinion on the MSTR market resolution.

It will close NO.

This is because UMA is forced to respect the rules as written by Polymarket. Polymarket changed the rules, and now the outcome is literally in the rules.

Even if UMA voters think that this outcome is… pic.twitter.com/nOGMibeaBh

— willo2 (@willo2_Poly) June 3, 2026 The trader claimed to have lost $500,000 after placing large “Yes” positions on June 1, alleging that the market remained open for betting after information about the sale had emerged.

Debate expands beyond a single market Beyond the financial losses reported by traders, the dispute has drawn attention to how prediction markets handle events that occur before a deadline but become public afterward.

Galaxy Research said the controversy was less about the outcome itself and more about which set of rules should govern the contract’s resolution.

“The core issue is whether the original rules (event-based) or the post-trade clarification (confirmation-based) governs,” Galaxy Research wrote on X. “Traders correctly predicted the future. The platform is about to tell them they were wrong anyway.”

It argued that prediction markets should prioritize the occurrence of an event rather than reinterpretations introduced after trading has taken place.

“Prediction markets should price what happens, not how the oracle will reinterpret rules after the fact,” the firm said, adding that clearer listing criteria, deterministic resolution methods for verifiable events, and structural changes ahead of potential regulatory oversight could help prevent similar disputes.