A widely followed crypto strategist believes that altcoins are gearing up for a rally with a magnitude never seen before in the current market cycle.
Pseudonymous analyst Altcoin Psycho tells his 493,700 followers on the social media platform X that altcoins historically witness big bursts to the upside during a bull market’s second inning.
[adinserter block="1"]
According to the analyst, traders who made gains on Bitcoin (BTC) and meme tokens will likely rotate their capital and trigger another round of rallies for the altcoin market.
“If you think this market is fun, just wait until memecoins and BTC liquidity rotate back into quality altcoins. The best gains of a cycle tend to happen in the 2nd leg up.
Don’t get me wrong, I think memecoins go higher and I’ve been enjoying finally not losing money on them but as someone who’s been in crypto since 2014, I can tell you from past experience the 2nd leg up is by far the craziest (in a good way).”
Specifically, Altcoin Psycho is keeping a close watch on altcoins with no more tokens to unlock, suggesting that heavy selling pressure is not in sight for these coins as total supply is out in circulation.
“Look for previous cycle tokens that are fully unlocked and haven’t run yet. The ones with strong weekly candle closes today are next up to run.”
One fully vested altcoin on trader’s radar is the native asset of the non-fungible token (NFT) marketplace LooksRare (LOOKS).
“–> NFTs picking up steam again
–> former 2nd largest NFT marketplace
–> 100% unlocked
——–>bottom?”
Source: Altcoin Psycho/X At time of writing, LOOKS is trading at $0.124.
Strict editorial policy that focuses on accuracy, relevance, and impartiality
Created by industry experts and meticulously reviewed
The highest standards in reporting and publishing
Strict editorial policy that focuses on accuracy, relevance, and impartiality
Morbi pretium leo et nisl aliquam mollis. Quisque arcu lorem, ultricies quis pellentesque nec, ullamcorper eu odio.
Crypto trading sensation Ansem, known on X (formerly Twitter) as @blknoiz06, has directed the market’s gaze towards the Bitcoin Runes ecosystem, labeling it as the nascent grounds for the next 100x crypto opportunity, as NewsBTC reported yesterday. Ansem, whose prowess is well-documented through his previous astronomical gains of 170x on Solana (SOL), 520x on dogwifhat (WIF), and 80x on Bonk (BONK), stirred the crypto community with his recent Dogecoin comparison.
On the cusp of Bitcoin’s highly anticipated halving today, Ansem doubled down on his initial assessment, particularly highlighting two tokens within the Bitcoin Runes ecosystem: Bitcoin Wizards (WZRD) and PUPS. He equates WZRD with Dogecoin, suggesting it has the potential to mirror Dogecoin’s viral success. In contrast, he compares PUPS to the lesser-known but highly profitable dogwifhat (WIF).
Related Reading: Elon Musk Latest Tweet: How Much Did Dogecoin Gain From It Today?
Dogecoin needs to overcome the 0.236 Fib, 1-week chart | Source: DOGEUSD on TradingView.com In a tweet that caught the eye of both investors and enthusiasts, Ansem elaborated on his reasoning behind the picks, stating:
Great thread, been saying, I believe Runes are next asymmetric 100x opp in crypto. The meme that got DOGE founder interested in Bitcoin & the phrase magic internet money is still used today – representative of bitcoin culture. DOGE equivalent = WZRD, WIF equivalent = PUPS.
Ansem references a thread on X by Immutable Edge (@ImmutableSOL), who delved into the historical and cultural significance of the “Magic Internet Money” meme, originally sparked by mavensbot’s viral Reddit ad.
The “Magic Internet Money” meme dates back to February 18, 2013, when mavensbot, a digital artist, submitted a hand-drawn depiction of a blue wizard to promote Bitcoin on Reddit. This ad, created during Bitcoin’s early adoption phase, was crucial in cultivating a cultural ethos around Bitcoin.
It resonated deeply within the community, encapsulating the whimsical yet revolutionary nature of Bitcoin’s rise. The ad’s simplicity and authenticity resonated with the Reddit community, propelling Bitcoin from a niche internet experiment to a major financial phenomenon. Within weeks of the ad’s debut, Bitcoin’s value surged from $27 to a record high of $1,132 by November 2013.
Bitcoin Wizards, one of the highlighted tokens, aims to rekindle this original spirit. The token leverages the iconic imagery and cultural narrative of the “Magic Internet Money” meme to foster a new wave of interest and adoption. The creators of WZRD are not only paying homage to Bitcoin’s roots but are also embedding this storied meme within the mechanics of a modern cryptocurrency, aiming to capture both nostalgia and innovation.
The Bitcoin Wizards project is part of the broader Bitcoin Runes ecosystem, which reached a lot of hype prior to its launch. According to Ansem, WZRD’s history and deep roots in memes give it the perfect ingredients to become the next Dogecoin, just on Bitcoin Runes.
Moreover, the analyst assessment comes at a critical time for the crypto market, which is often influenced by the narratives that capture the community’s imagination. As the Bitcoin halving event unfolds, many eyes will be on the Bitcoin Runes ecosystem to see if it can indeed replicate the meteoric rises seen in BRC-20 tokens and Ordinals.
At press time, WZRD traded at $12.15, up 70% in the last 24 hours.
WZRD/USD price | Source: Coingecko Featured image created with DALL·E, chart from TradingView.com
Strict editorial policy that focuses on accuracy, relevance, and impartiality
Created by industry experts and meticulously reviewed
The highest standards in reporting and publishing
Strict editorial policy that focuses on accuracy, relevance, and impartiality
Morbi pretium leo et nisl aliquam mollis. Quisque arcu lorem, ultricies quis pellentesque nec, ullamcorper eu odio.
After momentarily sliding below important support levels, Ethereum (ETH) is once again on the climb. After a significant change in market mood, the second-largest digital asset by market capitalization passed $2,900.
Interestingly, Eric Trump, the son of US President Donald Trump, weighed in on the situation, remarking that it is a strategic opportunity to acquire ETH.
Tariff Pause Sparks Market Rebound Concerns over possible tariffs on Canada and Mexico rattled the crypto market earlier this week. Both Bitcoin and Ethereum fell significantly; Ethereum dropped momentarily to around $2,360. Still, the temporary suspension of the tariffs by Trump offered a breather, which raised investor confidence in risk assets including cryptocurrency.
In the wake of the announcement, Ethereum experienced a robust recovery, with a nearly 20% increase. Traders interpreted this as an invitation to re-enter the market, and ETH promptly reclaimed the $2,900 mark.
In my opinion, it’s a great time to add $ETH.
— Eric Trump (@EricTrump) February 3, 2025
Eric Trump’s Crypto Endorsement Raises Eyebrows Eric Trump posted his optimistic view on Ethereum on social media. He first said, “In my opinion, it’s a great time to add $ETH. You can thank me later.” Although the subsequent section of his remarks was deleted, crypto investors saw resonance in his endorsement of Ethereum’s future development.
The Trump family has been progressively involved in the digital asset sector, particularly through their World Liberty Financial platform. This most recent statement serves to emphasize their involvement and potential long-term dedication to blockchain technology.
ETHUSD trading at $2,722 on the daily chart: TradingView.com World Liberty Financial’s Significant Ethereum Transaction World Liberty Financial recently made a substantial move in the crypto space, which has served to further fuel speculation. The firm transferred over $300 million in assets to Coinbase’s custody platform, according to blockchain analytics firm Spot On Chain. Furthermore, they acquired an additional 1,826 ETH for approximately $5 million and converted nearly 20,000 Lido Staked Ether (stETH) into ETH.
World Liberty Financial (@worldlibertyfi) moved $307.41M in 8 assets to #CoinbasePrime 6 hours ago—as part of treasury management and business operations.
Shortly after, the project unstaked 19,423 $stETH to $ETH and further spent 5M $USDC to buy 1,826 $ETH at $2,738.… https://t.co/Rp9NAFUs5N pic.twitter.com/5bfIvJma7U
— Spot On Chain (@spotonchain) February 4, 2025
These transactions indicate that the company is making preparations for the introduction of its “Earn and Borrow” lending protocol. Although the protocol is still in the process of being developed, the substantial transfers suggest that the platform could soon play a significant role in decentralized finance (DeFi).
Ethereum’s Prospects Still Remain Positive As institutional interest is rising and the price of the top altcoin has recaptured higher levels, Ether remains a central focus in the crypto market. Macroeconomic changes, strategic investments, and political influence taken together provide an interesting dynamic for ETH’s future course.
Featured image from Gemini Imagen, chart from TradingView
The crypto market has experienced a modest correction, with several major coins witnessing small declines amid a broader bull run.
This dip comes amid significant whale activity, revealing divergent strategies among the crypto market’s largest players.
Crypto Whales Play Both Sides: Accumulating and SellingBeInCrypto Markets data revealed that over the past 24 hours, the broader crypto market has dropped 3.83%. Furthermore, 7 of the top 10 cryptocurrencies are in the red.
Bitcoin (BTC), the flagship crypto, dipped 0.48% over the past day. Ethereum (ETH), Lido Staked Ether (STETH), and TRON (TRX) bucked the trend, with the latter posting the highest gains of 3.19%.
Crypto Market Performance. Source: BeInCrypto MarketsMeanwhile, (Micro) Strategy has bought the dip. The firm announced the acquisition of 21,021 BTC, valued at approximately $2.46 billion. The average purchase price was $117,256 per coin.
This purchase, funded through a $2.5 billion initial public offering of Variable Rate Series A Perpetual Preferred Stock (STRC), increases the company’s total holdings to 628,791 BTC. The firm is now sitting at an unrealized profit of $28.18 billion.
“With approximately $2.521 billion of gross proceeds, this is the largest US IPO completed in 2025 to date based on gross proceeds and the largest U.S. exchange-listed perpetual preferred stock offering in the U.S. since 2009,” the firm added.
Furthermore, its year-to-date BTC yield stands at 25%. This acquisition aligns with the company’s pattern of leveraging equity and debt to bolster its BTC reserves, a strategy that has positioned it as a leading institutional holder.
Besides Strategy, Lookonchain highlighted that Anchorage Digital, a digital asset platform and infrastructure provider, has also increased its Bitcoin exposure.
“Anchorage Digital has accumulated 10,141 BTC($1.19 billion) from multiple wallets over the past 9 hours,” Lookonchain posted.
In contrast, a previously dormant investor’s activities indicated a more profit-oriented approach. Lookonchain reported that after 12 years of dormancy, a Bitcoin holder transferred out 343 BTC, worth $40.52 million. Of this, the ‘Bitcoin OG’ deposited 130.77 BTC, valued at $15.45 million, to Kraken.
“This OG received 343 BTC (around $29,600 at the time) 12 years ago, when the BTC price was $86. That’s a 1,368x return!,” the blockchain analytics firm revealed.
This small transfer follows one of the largest Bitcoin transactions ever executed in the cryptocurrency’s history. BeInCrypto reported that Galaxy Digital sold over 80,000 Bitcoin, worth more than $9 billion, on behalf of a long-term investor.
Ethereum’s market has similarly seen contrasting whale behaviors. A new wallet (0x3dF3) accumulated 12,000 ETH worth over $45 million through Galaxy Digital.
“Since July 9, a total of 9 fresh wallets have accumulated 640,646 ETH ($2.43 billion),” Lookonchain wrote.
However, this accumulation is offset by sell-offs. An on-chain analyst noted that Galaxy Digital deposited 5,000 ETH worth $19.28 million into Coinbase, and Cumberland also transferred 10,592 ETH worth approximately $40.79 million to the same exchange.
Moreover, Fidelity also followed the same path and sent 12,981 ETH valued at around $49.7 million to Coinbase.
“The institutional address suspected to be HashKey Capital transferred 12,000 ETH to OKX the day before yesterday, and then withdrew 46.16 million USDT from OKX yesterday. In other words, those 12,000 ETH have been sold at a price of $3,847,” analyst EmberCN added.
Thus, the crypto whales’ divergent strategies—accumulation versus liquidation—illustrate varying risk appetites and outlooks in the market.
The crypto market capitalization has moved higher over the past day, with broad gains across major coins reflecting improving investor sentiment.
At the same time, the rebound has squeezed bearish positions, with over $468.5 million in short liquidations recorded during the 24-hour window.
Crypto Liquidation Wave Hits Short SellersAccording to BeInCrypto Markets data, total market capitalization has increased by 4.29%. The majority of the top 10 cryptocurrencies have posted gains over the past 24 hours.
Dogecoin (DOGE) jumped 9.10%, marking the strongest performance among the 10 largest cryptocurrencies. Lido Staked Ether (STETH) followed, advancing 8.83%. Ethereum (ETH) ranked third among the top performers, jumping 8.75% and reclaiming the $2,000 level.
Bitcoin (BTC) also posted notable gains, climbing 4.76% over the past day. The flagship cryptocurrency briefly touched $70,027 on Binance yesterday before retracing slightly to trade at $68,647 at press time.
Crypto Market Recovery On February 26. Source: BeInCrypto MarketsBeInCrypto reported that the rally benefited some long traders who recorded profits amid ETH’s latest rise. However, traders betting on further downside saw losses.
According to Coinglass, 128,348 traders were liquidated over the past 24 hours, with total liquidations reaching $575.59 million. Short traders bore the brunt of the losses, accounting for $468.53 million in liquidations, compared to $107.06 million in long positions.
Crypto Market Liquidations. Source: CoinglassBitcoin alone accounted for roughly 40% of total liquidations, with approximately $194.95 million in short positions liquidated. ETH recorded $203.8 million in total liquidations during the same period, with $175.16 million stemming from short positions.
The largest single liquidation order occurred on Hyperliquid for the BTC-USD pair, valued at $10.41 million.
Leveraged positions over the past 7 days have just turned positive.
With today’s short liquidations in BTC, what remains now are longs.
The market works like this — it moves toward where weak hands are most heavily exposed.
That’s easy money for exchanges and the liquidity… pic.twitter.com/UtZ7px3KVr
— Joao Wedson (@joao_wedson) February 25, 2026 Analysts Warn Crypto Relief Rally May Not Signal Full Trend ReversalThe recent rally has sparked optimism, but analysts warn it may not mark a full trend reversal. According to XWIN Research Japan, Open Interest has fallen sharply from prior highs, signaling a broad deleveraging phase.
“The recent drop in price was accompanied by falling OI, suggesting that liquidations and derivatives-driven unwinds — rather than aggressive spot selling — played a major role in the decline. This type of reset can stabilize the market, but it does not automatically signal renewed structural demand,” XWIN Research Japan wrote.
At the same time, Binance’s Fund Flow Ratio remains low at around 0.012. Since this metric tracks BTC inflows relative to total exchange holdings, a low reading suggests limited immediate sell pressure.
The analysis added that during the drop toward the mid-$60,000 range, the ratio did not spike. This suggested there was no panic-driven spot selling.
However, XWIN Research Japan noted that weak inflows do not imply strong accumulation. The medium-term trend of the Fund Flow Ratio’s moving averages is trending downward. It indicates that structural demand has not yet shifted upward.
“When leverage remains suppressed, upward price moves can easily trigger short squeezes. In that case, the rally is driven more by position unwinding than by expanding structural demand,” the post read.
Analyst Darkfost also stressed that an increase in spot trading volume will be necessary for any bullish recovery or solid market bottom to develop.
The Frax community has approved a proposal to use BlackRock’s Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund (BUIDL) as collateral for its upcoming frxUSD stablecoin.
The proposal, identified as FIP-418, received unanimous support after a six-day voting period.
The Increasing Demand for BlackRock’s BUIDL FundBlackRock’s BUIDL fund manages over $648 million in assets and provides yield-generating opportunities for frxUSD holders. Achieving this approval is a significant step for the Frax Protocol.
BlackRock is the largest asset manager in the world, with over $10.4 trillion in global assets. So, being backed by its tokenized fund can potentially minimize counterparty risk for the stablecoin’s collateral.
Frax Portocol’s Proposal Receives 100% Votes to Use the BUIDL Fund. Source: SnapshotAlso, this move reflects a growing trend among stablecoin projects to introduce yield-bearing options that reward holders financially while maintaining stability.
Securitize, the brokerage firm managing the BUIDL fund, initially proposed the idea on December 22. The frxUSD stablecoin will be pegged to the US dollar at a 1:1 ratio and backed by US government securities through BUIDL.
Meanwhile, other projects have also adopted BUIDL as collateral for stablecoins. Ethena Labs launched the USDtb (USDTB) stablecoin on December 16, backed by the BUIDL fund. The asset’s current market capitalization is $70 million.
In November, Curve Finance enabled users to mint Elixir’s deUSD (DEUSD) yield-bearing stablecoin using BUIDL as collateral.
Distribution of BlackRock’s BUIDL Fund. Source: DeFilLamaThe Rise of Real-World Asset TokenizationIn late 2024, BlackRock expanded BUIDL to five major blockchains. This included Aptos, Arbitrum, Avalanche, Optimism, and Polygon.
These developments align with BlackRock’s broader digital asset strategy, which includes initiatives like the IBIT Bitcoin ETF and tokenized funds.
Overall, the adoption of tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) continues to grow. In 2024, several major players achieved milestones in this area, setting the stage for further developments in 2025.
For example, Tether plans to roll out its Hadron RWA tokenization platform by February. This will offer institutional investors direct access via APIs.
Also, Hedera has integrated Chainlink Data Feeds and Proof of Reserve mechanisms to enhance its DeFi and RWA capabilities.
RWA Tokenization Global Market Overview. Source: RWA.XYZIn short, the Frax community’s decision to integrate BlackRock’s BUIDL fund into its stablecoin highlights the increasing overlap between traditional finance and blockchain-based innovations.
This shift reflects the potential for real-world asset tokenization to transform the stablecoin industry.
Bitcoin, Raydium, and Frax dominate crypto discussions as volatility, governance changes, and major BTC acquisitions drive market sentiment.
According to Santiment, Bitcoin (BTC), Raydium (RAY), and Frax (FRAX) are currently at the center of social media discussions.
Much of the growing discourse is focused on market volatility and governance changes within the crypto ecosystem.
The Top 3 Trending Tokens Santiment’s February 25 report reveals that BTC is getting attention due to a recent acquisition from Michael Saylor’s Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy).
The firm purchased 20,356 BTC for approximately $1.99 billion, increasing its total holdings to 499,096 BTC bought for around $33.1 billion. This investment, alongside a yield of 6.9% YTD 2025, has been widely discussed within the crypto market, particularly regarding its impact on the asset’s price fluctuations.
RAY is trending following a recent 29% decline in a day and a 50% slump since Friday that was caused by rumors of a competing platform launching its own automated market maker (AMM). This speculation has raised concerns over liquidity shifts within the Solana ecosystem, leading to increased investor attention toward the token.
Pump.fun is reportedly testing an AMM that, if implemented, could reduce the platform’s reliance on Raydium. The decentralized exchange currently facilitates trading for tokens launched on the Solana meme coin maker.
FRAX has also been a focal point in conversations, with debates surrounding tokenomics, governance, and inflation. Various proposals have been introduced regarding changes to the coin’s emissions, branding, and incentive mechanisms.
You may also like: Brutal Bitcoin Liquidation Cascade Imminent Below $59K, Warns Analyst Mining Profits Dry Up Across Bitcoin, DOGE, LTC, and BCH Saylor Should Stop Buying Bitcoin, Says CryptoQuant Ongoing discussions are centered on the token’s inflationary nature and relationship with FXTL and the potential impact these changes could have on its value and utility within the market.
Other Trending Cryptocurrencies on Santiment’s List The blockchain analytic firm also highlights Ethereum (ETH), Frax Shares (FXS), and Kendu Inu (KENDU) as trending digital assets. ETH has seen increased discussions following its association with GrokAI3.0, a new project focused on advancements in AI technology and its potential financial implications.
FXS, which is linked to FRAX, has also been widely mentioned, with many raising concerns about its potential dilution and implications for liquidity and value.
On its part, KENDU has gained attention as part of a growing community-driven approach to digital assets. According to Santiment, talks around it largely highlight the importance of strong group bonds and collective effort over speculative trading.
The token has been compared to cryptocurrencies like Shiba Inu (SHIB) and Dogecoin (DOGE), with enthusiasts emphasizing its long-term potential as the market evolves. Some believe it represents a shift toward community-focused investments rather than gambling and pump-and-dump schemes.
Update: Following the publication of this article, Huobi has updated its transparency page to include new addresses that contain the collateral for all of the wrapped tokens mentioned. These show that all of the tokens are fully collateralized.
"To enhance HBTC holders’ confidence, we have been gradually migrating HBTC assets to Huobi Trust Company Limited for digital asset custody," said a spokesperson for Huobi via email.
Huobi’s version of wrapped bitcoin isn’t living up to the transparency that it promised. The $800 million of assets that are backing the crypto exchange’s token are supposed to be sitting in clearly market wallets; except they’re not.
Instead, the money appears to have been spread among other exchange wallets, also owned by Huobi. The problem here is not that the money is necessarily gone; it’s plausible that Huobi is using its exchange hot wallets to make it easier to process transactions. The issue is that market observers cannot see for themselves whether the token is still backed.
For all we know — from checking Huobi’s official transparency page — the $800 million of outstanding Huobi Bitcoin (HBTC) is backed by less than $30,000.
The Block reached out to Huobi for comment but — after an initial response — the exchange stopped replying to follow up emails. The exchange did not provide any explanation for why the bitcoin was moved, nor would answer whether HBTC was still fully backed.
'Transparent and verifiable’ Huobi created HBTC in February 2020 as its proprietary form of wrapped bitcoin. Wrapping bitcoin is a process where you take bitcoin on the Bitcoin blockchain, lock it up in a wallet and issue a tokenized version of it on another chain, in this case on Ethereum.
At the time, Huobi said HBTC would be “transparent and verifiable,” enabling anyone to authenticate the assets on both the Bitcoin and Ethereum blockchains.
For a while, it seemed that this was the case. In early August 2021, the supply of HBTC was around 31,000 and Huobi’s two official wallets contained around 39,700 bitcoin.
Yet between August 20 and August 26 of last year, practically all of this collateral was moved out of both wallets. The funds were split into three sums and all were sent to this wallet. Each was then repeatedly shifted to new wallets, with small amounts siphoned off at each turn.
Huobi also created wrapped assets for six other cryptocurrencies: bitcoin cash (BCH), polkadot (DOT), tezos (XTZ), bitcoin satoshi’s vision (BSV), filecoin (FIL) and litecoin (LTC). Out of these, only Huobi’s version of BSV (HBSV) is fully backed by collateral in the official wallets. The transparency page shows no data for its version of filecoin at time of writing.
All the assets have a combined total supply worth $865 million but yet just $5.5 million in collateral in the official transparency wallets.
How this compares to others HBTC is failing to offer the transparency provided by Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC), the most common form of wrapped bitcoin.
WBTC is run by a conglomerate of crypto businesses, including Compound and BitGo. The project’s website provides a list of 268 bitcoin wallets that contain its $4.8 billion of bitcoin — and these wallets do indeed contain that amount of the cryptocurrency. This enables those using the wrapped token to know that it’s fully backed.
Still, not all wrapped bitcoin projects offer this level of transparency. RenBTC, another version of wrapped bitcoin with a market cap of $100 million, initially used the crypto data service Chainlink to show its proof of reserves. But it now just has a statement on its dashboard that says how much it has in reserve — a sum equal to the amount issued on its network — and doesn't provide any links to where the money is kept.
What's complicated about the way renBTC looks after its collateral is that every time some of the collateral is redeemed, it sends that person those funds and sends the remaining assets to a new wallet. As a result, it can’t simply provide a list of wallets where the funds are stored, since it would have to be constantly updating the list.
This may shed some light on Huobi’s processes, as it also constantly spreads the funds to new addresses while siphoning off a little each time. Perhaps the exchange adopted this system but failed to implement a way to track the collateral, since it requires either using Chainlink or setting up an automated system.
Either way, Huobi is — for now at least — failing to offer the transparency it originally promised.
Convex Finance (CVX) has seen a continuous downtrend since the crash at the end of July, with its price steadily declining each day. This prolonged drawdown has resulted in CVX reaching a new all-time low.
The persistent losses have left investors wary, leading to further pessimism about the token’s recovery prospects.
Convex Finance Investors Give UpInvestor sentiment around CVX has been overwhelmingly negative in recent months. As losses continued to mount over the last two months, confidence among holders began to erode. Many investors who initially believed in the token’s potential recovery are now skeptical about its ability to bounce back, especially in light of the consistent price declines.
This growing pessimism has worsened as CVX fails to establish a stable support level. The lack of bullish momentum and the token’s inability to reverse its downtrend has compounded concerns, leaving many holders uncertain about the future of their investments.
Read More: What Is Convex Finance (CVX)?
CVX Realized Losses. Source: SantimentCVX’s overall macro momentum is also troubling. Historically, Convex Finance has maintained a correlation with Bitcoin, a trend that typically benefits altcoins. However, this correlation has proven to be a bearish signal for CVX.
Whenever the correlation between CVX and Bitcoin improves, the altcoin has experienced further price drops. The current situation is no different, with the increased correlation contributing to CVX’s decline to a new all-time low.
This bearish macro environment, coupled with the strong correlation to Bitcoin’s price movements, has placed additional downward pressure on CVX. As the cryptocurrency struggles to recover, it remains vulnerable to further losses unless significant bullish sentiment returns to the market.
CVX Correlation to Bitcoin. Source: TradingViewCVX Price Prediction: What After a New LowOver the last four days, CVX has experienced a 16% drop, creating intense bearish pressure. This resulted in the token hitting a new all-time low, with an intra-day decline of 6%, bringing CVX down to $1.72. At the time of writing, CVX is trading slightly higher at $1.86, just above the critical support level of $1.81.
CVX would need to reclaim the local support level of $1.97 to regain momentum. However, given the current bearish sentiment and ongoing selling pressure, this may prove not easy in the near term. Without a significant change in the market conditions, CVX could struggle to break above key resistance levels and face consolidation above $1.81.
Read More: What are Crypto Airdrops?
CVX Price Analysis. Source: TradingViewOn a more optimistic note, if CVX manages to bounce off the $1.97 level, it could push back above $2.00. A successful breach of $2.12 would invalidate the bearish-neutral outlook and potentially trigger a recovery, although this remains a challenging scenario given the token’s recent performance.
PANews reported on April 25th that Bitcoin developer Paul Sztorc announced on April 24th plans to implement a hard fork of the Bitcoin network in August, launching a new chain, eCash. This fork will use a replica of the BTC Core client and the SHA-256 algorithm, reducing initial mining difficulty. Bitcoin holders can exchange their Bitcoin for eCash at a 1:1 ratio. It will also add seven Layer 2 scaling networks, known as "drivechains," to increase transaction throughput and support optional on-chain privacy features.
Sztorc emphasized that eCash differs from Bitcoin Cash (BCH) in 2017 by "manually" redistributing approximately 1.1 million BTC from Satoshi Nakamoto to early investors, calling it a "permanent solution to the Bitcoin problem." This proposal sparked strong opposition from the community, with Bitcoin advocates criticizing it as "stealing Satoshi's tokens" and questioning the limited existing applications of eCash, predicting the project's complete failure within two to three years. Currently, the Bitcoin community is engaged in heated discussions surrounding protocol upgrades, privacy protection, and post-quantum resistance.
Paul Sztorc, a Bitcoin developer, will develop eCash, a BTC clone, as a solution to the problems in Bitcoin.
25.04.2026 - 19:30
Update: 25.04.2026 - 19:30
Bitcoin developer Paul Sztorc has announced a new hard fork plan that could create a fundamental change to the network.
This upgrade, called “eCash,” is scheduled to launch in August, and the project aims to create a Layer 1 network as an alternative to Bitcoin, along with seven Layer 2 scaling solutions (Drivechains).
According to information shared by Sztorc, after the hard fork, existing Bitcoin (BTC) holders will be able to exchange their assets for eCash at a 1:1 ratio. It was stated that the new chain’s Layer 1 node software will be largely a copy of the Bitcoin Core client, while continuing to use the SHA-256 algorithm. However, it was also announced that the initial difficulty will be reduced to increase mining participation.
Another notable aspect of the project is the integration of seven Layer 2 solutions aimed at increasing transaction capacity. This structure is planned to support both higher transaction throughput and optional on-chain privacy features.
Sztorc argued that eCash differed from forks like Bitcoin Cash, which emerged in 2017, stating that the project aimed to “solve Bitcoin’s long-standing problems.” However, this approach sparked disagreements within the community.
One particularly controversial proposal was to “manually redistribute” a portion of the approximately 1.1 million BTC believed to belong to Satoshi Nakamoto to early participants. Some Bitcoin supporters strongly opposed this plan, arguing that it would constitute interference with the assets on the original chain.
*This is not investment advice.
Follow our Telegram and Twitter account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!
Long-time Bitcoin developer proposes a Bitcoin hard fork. (geraldfriedrich2/Pixabay)Summary
Paul Sztorc proposes a 2026 hard fork of Bitcoin called eCash, giving BTC holders equivalent tokens and adding Drivechains. A hard fork splits a blockchain into a new network with shared history but different rules, like Bitcoin Cash in 2017. The plan is controversial for reallocating coins tied to Satoshi Nakamoto, which critics call unethical and risky.Long-time Bitcoin developer Paul Sztorc has been trying to overhaul Bitcoin's architecture since 2015, but the broader community hasn’t budged.
So now he has proposed a dramatic step, called eCash hardfork, that involves copying Bitcoin's code to launch a separate version in August, while giving existing bitcoin holders equivalent tokens in the new network for free.
The community, however, is criticizing the funding part, which involves reassigning coins linked to Bitcoin’s missing founder, Satoshi Nakamoto.
Think of a hard fork like a railway line splitting into two. Trains start from the same station, but at some point the line splits, helping trains reach completely different destinations.
When a group of developers cannot reach consensus on a proposed change to Bitcoin’s code, they copy the existing blockchain and launch it as a separate chain, which shares Bitcoin’s entire history up to the point of the split, but diverges after the split, moving forward with its own rules, features, token and direction.
That's precisely what happened in 2017 when the debate over Bitcoin's block size reached a tipping point, culminating in a chain split and the creation of the Bitcoin Cash blockchain with its native token, BCH.
The technical dispute centered on Bitcoin's 1MB block size limit, which caps the number of transactions that can be processed every 10 minutes when new blocks are added to the blockchain. Hence, some favoured increasing the block size, but the community remained divided, eventually leading to a chain split.
Sztorc's eCash hard forkThe proposed hard fork will create a new chain called eCash with native eCash tokens. “Hold 4.19 BTC at the time of the fork, get 4.19 eCash. You can sell it, keep it, or ignore it entirely,” he said on X.
The fork is scheduled for Bitcoin block height 964,000 in August 2026. A coin-splitter tool will be released to help holders cleanly separate their BTC from their new eCash.
The new chain will be a near-copy of Bitcoin's existing blockchain, with one critical addition called Drivechains, a scaling architecture Sztorc first proposed in 2015 and formally submitted to Bitcoin developers as BIP300 and BIP301 in 2017 and 2019, respectively.
Drivechains are sidechains tethered to the Bitcoin blockchain, allowing seamless movement of BTC between the main chain and sidechains without changing Bitcoin's base layer. Each sidechain can operate under its own rules and features, essentially allowing developers to build new capabilities on top of Bitcoin without requiring the entire network to adopt those changes.
Think of Drivechains as service roads attached to the main highway. When the highway is congested, drivers can exit the highway and travel on the service road at different speed limits, then re-enter the highway when it's clear. This way, the highway never changes, yet more traffic is handled more efficiently, and the journey becomes more flexible for everyone.
Seven Drivechains are already in development, Sztorc said on X, including a privacy chain modelled on Zcash, a prediction market called Truthcoin, a decentralised exchange called CoinShift, and a quantum-resistant chain called Photon.
The controversial part linked to Satoshi coinsSztorc wants to use coins that would have gone to Satoshi Nakamoto's equivalent addresses on the new eCash chain to bring investors on board before the fork goes live, a decision he calls necessary but which has riled the community, with some calling it outright theft.
A potential hard fork would bring Bitcoin’s entire transaction history to the new chain. So every bitcoin balance, including Satoshi’s 1.1 million bitcoin, sitting untouched in wallets that have noved moved these coins, would show up as an equivalent eCash balance on the new chain.
As per the plan, fewer than half of the Satoshi-equivalent eCash coins will be assigned to investors today. The precise mechanism of how it's being done remains unclear. But since eCash doesn't yet exist, the pre-hard fork assign seems to be a promised credit following a successful hard fork.
The plan, he argues, will ensure collaborators have a tangible incentive to get involved early, building momentum and completing work ahead of launch. Without this mechanism, the project can turn into a "zombie project" that ships unfinished. Worse, it could become a centralized project, where a small group of developers gains outsized control over the chain's direction.
The industry response, however, has been negative.
“Taking Satoshi coins is theft and disrespectful, and eCash is already used for Lightning payments with Cashu and Fedi. Those are poor choices,” Bitcoin advocate Peter McCormack said.
Josh Ellithorpe, chief technology officer at Pixelated Ink, expressed concerns about the precedent it sets and how it could eventually be a risk to everyone’s BTC holdings.
“eCash, setting the precedent that they can and will steal coins. Now it's Satoshi, but it could be anyone later. Also misrepresenting the BCH fork, stealing another project's name, and not having replay protection,” Ellithorpe said.
AI Disclaimer: Parts of this article were generated with the assistance from AI tools and reviewed by our editorial team to ensure accuracy and adherence to our standards. For more information, see CoinDesk's full AI Policy.
Veteran Bitcoin developer Paul Sztorc, known for his long-standing proposals to innovate Bitcoin’s infrastructure since 2015, is once again making waves in the crypto community. After years of discussion with little traction, Sztorc is now pushing forward with a plan he calls the “eCash hard fork.” Under this initiative, a new blockchain based on Bitcoin’s code would be created, and existing Bitcoin holders would receive an identical amount of eCash tokens on this new network, free of charge.
The most controversial element of Sztorc’s proposal is the intended use of coins held in the wallets of Bitcoin’s anonymous founder, Satoshi Nakamoto. Sztorc suggests distributing these dormant coins to incentivize and attract new users to the eCash network. This plan, however, has sparked heated debate among Bitcoin enthusiasts, with many arguing that reallocating Satoshi’s funds violates property rights and undermines the principles of decentralization.
In defense of the controversial proposal, Sztorc has stated that utilizing a portion of these coins is necessary to properly incentivize early collaborators and participants in the project. According to details provided so far, more than half of Satoshi’s coins would remain unassigned to investors until after the fork. The process by which these funds would eventually be distributed has not yet been clarified, leaving technical specifics unresolved.
Peter McCormack, a prominent Bitcoin advocate, voiced his disapproval: “Taking Satoshi’s coins would be both wrong and disrespectful. Plus, the eCash name is already used for Lightning payments. These are poor choices.”
Integrating Drivechains for scalabilityThe new eCash chain is essentially a direct copy of Bitcoin’s current blockchain, but with a key difference: it will include the “Drivechains” upgrade, first introduced by Sztorc in 2015 and formally proposed in 2017 and 2019. Drivechains enable the addition of sidechains to the Bitcoin network, allowing users to experiment with new features and conduct transactions under alternate rules, while maintaining core blockchain security. This technology has the potential to boost innovation, scalability, and flexibility within the wider Bitcoin ecosystem.
This design allows new features to be tested and deployed without altering the main Bitcoin chain. As a result, developers can innovate more freely, while the original Bitcoin remains stable and secure for users who prefer minimal change.
Hard fork history and eCash launch timelineHard forks are not new to the cryptocurrency landscape. One of the most notable examples occurred in 2017, when debates over Bitcoin block size culminated in the launch of Bitcoin Cash. That split arose from differing opinions on whether to raise the 1MB block size limit, ultimately resulting in two separate blockchains. The planned eCash hard fork differs in that it not only introduces a new token, but also targets more ambitious structural changes through the inclusion of Drivechains.
According to Sztorc’s roadmap, the eCash fork is slated to occur at block 964,000 on the Bitcoin chain in August 2026. Bitcoin holders with balances, for example, of 4.19 BTC would automatically be eligible to claim an identical amount of eCash on the new network. A dedicated tool will be made available for users to securely separate their BTC and eCash tokens post-fork.
Developer Josh Ellithorpe highlighted the risks: “eCash paves the way for potential seizure of anyone’s coins in the future—not just Satoshi’s. It also misrepresents the BCH split and raises trademark disputes.”
With community opinion divided and both legal and ethical concerns surfacing, the fate of the new chain remains uncertain. The coming months will determine whether Sztorc’s vision gains traction, or if opposition within the Bitcoin community will prevail.
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.
A proposed Bitcoin fork called “eCash” would redistribute Satoshi Nakamoto’s dormant ~1.1 million BTC. The market for Bitcoin staying above $68,000 by April 26 sits at 99.9% YES.
The fork, scheduled for August 2026, includes a 1:1 airdrop of eCash tokens to BTC holders and would reassign Satoshi’s unspent BTC to early investors. The Bitcoin dip to $60,000 in April 2026 market is priced at 99.9% YES, unchanged from 24 hours ago. The proposal raises questions about supply expansion and breaks from Bitcoin Core’s consensus model.
Advertisement
The 99.9% YES pricing reflects deep skepticism about the fork’s near-term effect on Bitcoin’s price. A 15% expected move suggests traders are pricing in potential volatility if the proposal gains traction, but the April 26 market itself hasn’t budged.
Trading volume on the April 26 market is $13,175 in daily USDC, and it takes $67,380 to shift prices by 5 percentage points. That depth means any meaningful repricing would require a major catalyst. At 99.9¢, a YES share pays $1 if Bitcoin stays above $68,000 by April 26.
The proposal matters because it directly challenges Bitcoin’s established ownership norms. Redistributing coins attributed to Satoshi introduces a concrete governance dispute: whether any fork can legitimately reassign coins that have never moved. The real question is whether the fork attracts enough mining and node support to be taken seriously. Watch for updates from Paul Sztorc and public positions from major Bitcoin holders. Shifts in Federal Reserve monetary policy could also affect broader price action around the fork timeline.
Get prediction market intelligence as a structured API feed. Early access waitlist.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Estefano Gomez. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Paul Sztorc wants to fork Bitcoin into a new chain called eCash and reassign part of Satoshi Nakamoto’s 1.1 million dormant BTC to early investors — the Bitcoin community is calling it theft.
Posted April 27, 2026 at 6:31 am EST.
Long-time Bitcoin developer Paul Sztorc has announced plans to hard fork Bitcoin into a new chain called eCash, set to launch in August at block height 964,000.
Every BTC holder at the time of the fork would automatically receive an equal amount of eCash on the new chain. A coin-splitter tool will be released to help users cleanly separate their holdings. The new chain will run on a near-copy of Bitcoin Core software using the same SHA-256 hashing algorithm, but with a reduced initial mining difficulty and seven layer-2 scaling networks called Drivechains, a technology Sztorc first proposed in 2015 and has been trying to merge into Bitcoin Core ever since.
This story is an excerpt from the Unchained Daily newsletter.
Subscribe here to get these updates in your email for free
The funding mechanism for eCash, however, has the Bitcoin community up in arms. Sztorc intends to manually reassign “fewer than half” of Satoshi Nakamoto’s estimated 1.1 million BTC, worth nearly $40 billion at current prices, to investors in the new chain before the fork goes live. The goal is to give early contributors a tangible incentive and build momentum before launch, he said.
“This will no doubt be a controversial decision,” Sztorc wrote on X, “but I think it is necessary, and in fact, ideal.”
Podcaster and Bitcoin advocate Peter McCormack called the proposal “theft and disrespectful,” adding that eCash is already a name used in the Lightning‐adjacent payments space. Critic “PakoVM” predicted the project would collapse within two or three years.
Others warned that touching Satoshi’s coins, even on a forked chain, sets a precedent that could be applied to any dormant address in the future. Josh Ellithorpe, chief technology officer at Pixelated Ink, wrote that the move shows the team “can and will steal coins,” adding that “now it’s Satoshi, but it could be anyone later.”
Sztorc has since posted a second version of the proposal that does not involve Satoshi’s coins, though the final structure has not been confirmed. No miners, exchanges, or major ecosystem participants have yet signaled they will support the chain.
In brief LayerTwo Labs CEO Paul Sztorc has proposed a Bitcoin hard fork called eCash. The fork would clone and "reassign" coins linked to Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto and give them to eCash investors. Previous Bitcoin and Ethereum hard forks have been far less successful than the originals long-term. Bitcoin developer Paul Sztorc has proposed a hard fork that would reassign some of the earliest coins on the original crypto network—widely believed to belong to pseudonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto—to investors in a new project.
The co-founder and CEO of LayerTwo Labs, Sztorc announced the project, called eCash, on Friday. The plan would “manually reassign” about 500,000 of the roughly 1.1 million Bitcoin associated with the so-called “Patoshi pattern,” a mining pattern some researchers believe is linked to Nakamoto.
“This will no doubt be a controversial decision,” Sztorc wrote on X. “But I think it is necessary, and in fact, ideal.”
Sztorc would not (and could not) move the Satoshi-linked coins on Bitcoin itself. Instead, eCash would create a separate blockchain that copies Bitcoin’s history and changes the ledger to assign all but 600K of those coins to new owners. Current on-chain Bitcoin (BTC) holders would also receive coins on the eCash network equivalent to their holdings at the time of the fork.
Important: I've also devised a way that some can *invest* in this hardfork, now, before the fork-date, in August:
- Satoshi has 1.1M coins in the so called "patoshi" pattern.
- We will be manually reassigning some of these coins (fewer than half) to investors today.
This will…
— Paul Sztorc (@Truthcoin) April 24, 2026
“Your coins will split. For example, if you have 4.19 BTC, then you will get 4.19 eCash,” he wrote on X. “You may sell your eCash—or keep it. Or ignore it!”
Named after the original eCash, cryptographer David Chaum’s early digital money project, the new fork is a callback to one of crypto’s earliest ideas. The original eCash used cryptographic “blind signatures” to let people make private electronic payments, but DigiCash, Chaum’s company developing the project, filed for bankruptcy in 1998 after the project failed to gain widespread adoption.
“It’s not Satoshi’s Bitcoin, it’s just [unspent transaction outputs] that are presumed to belong to Satoshi that are being cloned and modified onto a completely different network,” Bitcoin developer and Casa Chief Security Officer Jameson Lopp told Decrypt.
Lopp dismissed the move as a publicity stunt, calling it “clever outrage marketing.”
According to Loop, such a reassignment could only happen on Bitcoin itself if the broader network of developers agreed to adopt the fork.
“If the entire Bitcoin ecosystem decided to migrate to a hard fork that reassigned Satoshi’s coins to keys that other people controlled, then sure, it’s theoretically possible,” Lopp said.
Sztorc has said the reassignment would allow early supporters to invest in the project before its planned August launch. He has argued the move is needed to keep the chain from becoming a “zombie” project without enough capital or contributors.
Bitcoin has split before. Bitcoin Cash launched in 2017 after a dispute over scaling, splitting off and creating a new network. Ethereum split in 2016 after the DAO hack, with most network backers choosing to reverse the transactions with stolen funds while Ethereum Classic kept the original chain. Both Bitcoin Cash (BCH) and Ethereum Classic (ETC) have been far less valuable and popular than their respective original coins and networks.
The eCash website says the chain is expected to launch in about 119 days and will include “Drivechain” scaling network support, with seven sidechains in development.
“The upside is enormous: global scalability, privacy, competition, rapid improvement, and adoption,” Sztorc wrote on the eCash website. “In fact, it may be a matter of life or death for Bitcoin. The downside is small: some drama, plus every Bitcoiner gets some free money.”
Sztorc did not immediately respond to a request for comment by Decrypt.
Daily Debrief NewsletterStart every day with the top news stories right now, plus original features, a podcast, videos and more.
Peter Sztorc, a long-time developer, has defended his Bitcoin hardfork plans via eCash, dismissing recent claims of plans to steal Satoshi’s 1.1 million BTC.
In a statement on the 28th of April, Sztorc clarified,
We do not take any of Satoshi’s BTC. We **gift** Satoshi 600,000 eCash, instead of gifting 1.1 million. That is **600k more** than Satoshi got from Litecoin, Ethereum, Solana, Tether, etc (ie, 0).
Source: X A hard fork happens when a blockchain splits into two separate entities, each operating independently. Sztorc’s eCash Bitcoin hard fork proposal was floated last week, and it’s scheduled to go live in August at block height 964,000.
Per his plan, the split allows BTC holders to have eCash on a 1:1 basis. That means, after the hard fork, users holding 2 BTC will also receive 2 eCash. The new chain will feature Ethereum‑style Layer 2 ‘drivechains,’ making it programmable for smart contracts.
According to Sztorc, the drivechains will enable various applications, including privacy, quantum resistance, prediction markets, and more. But some community members strongly slammed the hard fork plans.
Bitcoin hard fork plan elicits criticism According to Peter McCormack, a BTC investor and chairman of Real Bedford FC, Sztorc’s plans were ‘poor choices.’ He claimed that the hard fork’s planned 1:1 redemption for Satoshi Bitcoin for eCash was ‘theft and disrespectful.’
Besides, the Lightning Network already uses a privacy feature called ecash, which could likely confuse the community.
Source: X In response, however, Sztorc claimed that Satoshi Nakamoto’s BTC coins will remain intact. However, about 600K of his 1.1 million ‘gifted’ eCash tokens will be sold to fund the project.
Will eCash escape past Bitcoin hard fork failures? But this is not the first attempt to improve the Bitcoin network via hard forks. In 2017, Bitcoin Cash (BCH) and Bitcoin Gold (BTG) were proposed to ensure cheap transfers and decentralized mining, respectively.
BCH succeeded in enabling faster, cheaper transactions. However, it didn’t build enough trust, leading to a decline in price and hash rate relative to the original Bitcoin network. On the other hand, Bitcoin Gold has become irrelevant after suffering multiple 51% security attacks amid low hashrate.
In 2018, another hard fork, Bitcoin SV (BSV), also failed to gain traction to achieve its larger blocks (up to 2 GB) to enable massive data and millions of transactions. Top exchanges like Coinbase delisted the token.
In fact, other proposals, like Mt. Gox’s hard fork, didn’t even see the light of day. It remains to be seen whether eCash will escape pitfalls suffered by past hard forks.
Final Summary Peter Sztorc clarified that the eCash Bitcoin hard fork is a 1:1 ‘gift’ of tokens and not a theft of Satoshi’s BTC. However, the community has raised ethics and viability concerns ahead of the August implementation.
A longstanding debate in the Bitcoin community has resurfaced, centering on the ownership of early-era coins and their uncertain future. Paul Sztorc, co-founder and CEO of LayerTwo Labs, has proposed a dramatic new hard fork aimed at reallocating nearly 500,000 BTC linked to the controversial “Patoshi” pattern in Bitcoin’s blockchain history. These coins, widely believed to be controlled by Bitcoin’s pseudonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto, but with no definitive proof to date, would be reassigned under the plan.
The new chain: eCash projectAccording to Sztorc’s proposal, the existing Bitcoin network would remain entirely intact, while a completely separate blockchain named “eCash” would be launched. This new chain would copy Bitcoin’s full transaction history but change the ownership of coins from certain early blocks, specifically redirecting the roughly half a million BTC associated with the Patoshi pattern to a new set of investors. While most analysts believe the Patoshi mining pattern points to Satoshi Nakamoto, no conclusive evidence confirms this theory.
Under the plan, anyone holding BTC at the time of the fork would receive an equivalent amount of eCash coins. Importantly, the distribution and ownership structure of coins on the main Bitcoin chain would remain untouched.
Paul Sztorc explained that the goal of this redistribution is to support early investors in the eCash project and drive early momentum for the chain. He emphasized, “This is simply a copy of Bitcoin, and a totally new chain. Existing Bitcoin balances will be mirrored exactly at the moment of the eCash fork.”
Jameson Lopp, a prominent Bitcoin expert, disagreed with characterizing the fork as a direct Bitcoin transfer, considering the eCash chain a separate blockchain event altogether. Pointing to similar precedents, he noted that previous forks—such as Bitcoin Cash in 2017 and the Ethereum–DAO split in 2016—introduced new assets without altering the main chain.
As a result, BTC ownership on the primary chain wouldn’t change. Instead, at the forking snapshot, Bitcoin holders would receive identical amounts of the new eCash coin. The eventual market value of the new asset would depend entirely on uptake and trading volume.
Long-dormant coins and quantum computing risksSztorc’s proposal enters the debate amid ongoing concern over nearly 5.6 million BTC that have remained untouched in wallets for over a decade. Developers and market analysts are discussing whether these coins should be frozen to shield the ecosystem from potential “quantum computing threats,” with some warning that advances could someday crack old wallets’ cryptographic secrets and enable unauthorized access.
Opponents counter that Bitcoin’s founding principle is the inviolability of coin ownership: assets should never be altered due to centralized or collective decisions. They warn that revising ownership structures—even on a separate fork—could undermine user trust and erode the institutional credibility that Bitcoin has built.
Thus, while altering ownership on an entirely different chain like eCash may not impact the main Bitcoin network directly, experts caution it could further inflame debates over the value and legitimacy of dormant coins and forked networks attributed to Satoshi.
On the technical side, it is only possible to change the Bitcoin main chain through broad ecosystem backing and full community consensus. With forks like eCash, value depends entirely on whether investors, exchanges, and miners are willing to support the new asset, which is never guaranteed.
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 Bitcoin community is abuzz with debate following the announcement of a new blockchain fork called eCash, raising questions about the fate of Satoshi Nakamoto’s substantial coin holdings. Scheduled to occur in August at block height 964,000, the fork will create a complete copy of the Bitcoin blockchain’s history, granting current BTC holders an equivalent amount of eCash. As with previous forks in Bitcoin’s history, users will automatically receive assets on the new chain proportional to their existing BTC.
Satoshi’s coins at the heart of a new controversyWhat sets the eCash fork apart from earlier splits is the handling of approximately 1.1 million BTC attributed to Satoshi Nakamoto, which have remained untouched since 2009 and are viewed as a symbol of fairness and transparency in the community. Under normal circumstances, these coins would also be duplicated as eCash. However, LayerTwo Labs CEO Paul Sztorc has proposed allocating only 600,000 eCash to Satoshi’s presumed addresses, diverting the remaining 500,000 eCash to early project investors instead.
This proposal has triggered an intense ethical dispute regarding property rights. In response to accusations of “theft” circulating on X (formerly Twitter), Sztorc emphasized that there is, from a technical perspective, no misappropriation involved.
Satoshi’s untouched holdings are considered the most important collateral at the core of Bitcoin. The fact that even the network’s creator has never accessed their coins is evidence that the same rules apply to everyone. While selling the rights to these coins to finance a new project might not be technically an abuse, it is widely seen as morally questionable.
Beau Turner, CEO of Abundant Mines, told CoinDesk that Bitcoin was built upon universal property rights, emphasizing that any interference targeting Satoshi’s coins constitutes a major ethical error.
“Bitcoin was created to safeguard everyone’s inviolable property rights. Any suggestion that seizes the creator’s coins represents such a grave mistake that it’s difficult to comprehend how this idea even surfaced,” he remarked.
As the community discusses the fork, concerns have also emerged about restricting or freezing unspent coins in old, often insecure addresses, particularly those linked to Satoshi. These debates are regarded as especially sensitive issues for Bitcoin’s immutability and the broader social contract underpinning the network.
Ethics debated across platformsIn Bitcoin culture, the inviolability of Satoshi’s holdings carries deep significance. Vijay Selvam, author of “Principles of Bitcoin,” has argued that freezing these assets in any way fundamentally undermines Bitcoin’s monetary principles.
“Freezing Satoshi’s coins would irreversibly harm Bitcoin’s monetary attributes. Once such a precedent is set, users will never again feel fully assured that their assets are safe, always fearing potential future infringements.”
Selvam further warned that the fork’s approach threatens Bitcoin’s status as “digital gold,” as the stability and reliability expected by future generations are put at risk by such measures.
Paul Sztorc’s prior proposals for adding sidechains via BIP300 and BIP301 also failed to gain broad community backing. The eCash fork is now seen as both an alternative path and a means to press the community, should his earlier projects continue to be sidelined.
Sztorc has stated he might abandon the eCash plan if these sidechain proposals are approved by the Bitcoin network. To date, however, Bitcoin’s developer community has taken no steps in this direction.
While it remains uncertain whether the fork will have lasting value, the accompanying social pressure and ethical debates have become the dominant issues. Previous Bitcoin forks have failed to maintain parity with the original chain; the eCash project, by focusing on Satoshi’s coins, once again challenges the ethical legacy embedded within Bitcoin’s design.
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 Bitcoin community is facing heated debate following the announcement of a new fork called eCash, which is set to launch in August at block height 964,000. With this fork, the entire Bitcoin blockchain will be duplicated, meaning existing BTC holders will receive the equivalent amount in eCash. As seen in previous forks, users will automatically get new coins on the new chain in proportion to their BTC holdings.
Satoshi’s unspent coins raise concernsWhat makes the eCash fork different from earlier splits is the fate of around 1.1 million BTC long believed to belong to Satoshi Nakamoto. These untouched holdings, resting since 2009, have become symbols of fairness and transparency within the Bitcoin community. Under normal circumstances, the same amount would be credited as eCash on the new chain. However, LayerTwo Labs CEO Paul Sztorc has proposed crediting only 600,000 eCash to addresses associated with Satoshi, distributing the remaining 500,000 eCash to early project backers instead.
This proposal has ignited intense ethical debate regarding property rights. On X, Sztorc rejected accusations of “theft,” emphasizing that, from a technical standpoint, no theft is actually occurring.
Sztorc argued that Satoshi’s untouched coins serve as crucial guarantees at the core of Bitcoin, suggesting that even the creator’s decision not to move these coins proves equal application of rules. While reallocating these coins to fund a new project is not technically exploitative, he acknowledged it remains ethically controversial.
Concerns over property rights and fairnessAbundant Mines CEO Beau Turner told CoinDesk that Bitcoin’s foundation lies in the principle of universal property rights, and any intrusion on Satoshi’s coins would represent a significant ethical misstep.
Turner explained: “Bitcoin was created to protect the inalienable property rights of everyone globally. Any suggestion to seize the founder’s coins is such a grave error that it’s hard to understand how an idea like this even comes up.”
As the potential fork draws closer, discussion has also arisen about whether to freeze or restrict older and less secure addresses, particularly those associated with Satoshi. These subjects are highly sensitive, as they drive core debates on Bitcoin’s immutability and the community’s social contract.
Cross-platform ethics go under the microscopeThe inviolability of Satoshi’s coins occupies a central position in Bitcoin’s ethos. Vijay Selvam, author of “Principles of Bitcoin,” contends that any attempt to freeze these coins would inflict irreparable harm on Bitcoin’s monetary fundamentals.
Selvam said that freezing Satoshi’s coins would deeply undermine Bitcoin’s monetary properties, cautioning that, if such a precedent were set, users could never be certain their holdings would remain secure, leading to constant anxiety about future rights violations.
Selvam further emphasized that Bitcoin is expected to serve as a reliable, time-resistant store of value for future generations, like digital gold, and that manipulative practices arising from forks like eCash jeopardize this narrative.
Paul Sztorc’s earlier proposals to implement sidechains in Bitcoin, known as BIP300 and BIP301, received little support from the broader community. Now, the eCash fork is being positioned as both a contingency and a tactic to generate community pressure should these proposals continue to face rejection.
Sztorc has stated he may withdraw the eCash plan if his proposed sidechain upgrades are adopted, but so far, there has been no indication of developer consensus in that direction.
While it remains uncertain whether this fork will achieve lasting economic significance, the social and ethical debate it has sparked is already the main story. Most earlier forks failed to retain substantial value in the long run; eCash, however, puts Bitcoin’s ethical legacy under renewed scrutiny through its handling of Satoshi’s coins.
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 Bitcoin community is gripped by heated debate after news broke of an upcoming fork called eCash. Scheduled for August at block height 964,000, the fork will duplicate the entire Bitcoin blockchain. Every BTC holder at the time of the split will receive an equal amount of the new asset, eCash, reflecting their Bitcoin balance. Like previous Bitcoin forks, this means users will automatically own new coins on the new chain, matching their original holdings.
Satoshi’s coins under scrutinyWhat sets the eCash fork apart from past forks lies in its treatment of nearly 1.1 million BTC believed to be owned by Bitcoin’s pseudonymous creator, Satoshi Nakamoto. These untouched assets have stood as a symbol of fairness and transparency in the Bitcoin community since they have not moved since 2009. Traditionally, these coins would be mirrored as eCash in the new chain. However, LayerTwo Labs CEO Paul Sztorc has proposed that only 600,000 eCash should be credited to Satoshi’s addresses, with the remaining 500,000 distributed to early contributors funding the eCash project.
This proposal has sparked an intense ethical debate over ownership rights. Responding to accusations of “theft” on X, Sztorc firmly denied any wrongdoing, stating the move would not amount to technical theft.
The untouched coins belonging to Satoshi are the bedrock collateral of Bitcoin’s foundation. Even the network’s founder never moved his coins, proving the rules applied equally to everyone. Selling rights to these coins to fund new projects, even if not a technical violation, is ethically contentious.
Community concerns about rights and ethicsBeau Turner, CEO of Abundant Mines, told CoinDesk that Bitcoin’s core principle is universal property rights, arguing that any intervention targeting Satoshi’s coins would be a grave ethical misstep.
“Bitcoin was created to uphold inviolable property rights for everyone worldwide. Any proposal that seizes the founder’s rightful coins is such a major error, it’s difficult to understand how it’s even up for discussion.”
At the same time, the community is also wrestling with related issues about freezing or restricting old, less-secure addresses—especially those thought to belong to Satoshi. These conversations are pivotal in view of Bitcoin’s unchangeability and social contract.
Ethical lines drawn across platformsWithin the Bitcoin ethos, the untouchability of Satoshi’s coins holds special significance. Vijay Selvam, author of Principles of Bitcoin, insists that freezing these coins, no matter the justification, would fundamentally damage the monetary principles of Bitcoin.
“Freezing Satoshi’s coins inflicts irreparable harm on Bitcoin’s monetary attributes. Once this happens, users can never truly trust that their assets are safe, always fearing the next violation of rights.”
Selvam emphasized hopes that Bitcoin would serve as a lasting and reliable store of value across generations, akin to digital gold, but warned that such forks threaten this vision and undermine Bitcoin’s claim as the digital equivalent of gold.
Paul Sztorc’s previous attempts to integrate sidechains to Bitcoin via BIP300 and BIP301 failed to gain widespread community support. Now, the eCash fork is perceived both as an alternative plan and as leverage, should those proposals remain sidelined.
Sztorc remarked he might abandon the eCash plan if BIP300 and BIP301 become active in the network. However, the developer community has yet to respond to this call.
Uncertainty persists over whether the fork will create lasting economic value. For now, social pressure and ethical frictions seem to outweigh technical or financial factors. Unlike previous forks, which struggled to retain value, eCash places renewed focus on the ethical legacy of Bitcoin by targeting Satoshi’s coins.
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.
Updated Jun 9, 2026, 11:46 a.m. Published May 2, 2026, 4:00 p.m.
3 min read
(CoinDesk)Summary
Critics say eCash is less a Bitcoin fork and more a complex airdrop that could expose users to security risks.Concerns focus on replay protection, custody complications and the redistribution of Satoshi-linked coins.Support exists but is limited, largely framing eCash as an optional experiment tied to long-standing scaling proposals.Paul Sztorc’s proposed eCash fork has been framed as a battle over Bitcoin’s principles. But among developers and infrastructure builders, a different interpretation is taking hold.
This isn’t really a Bitcoin fork, they argue. It’s an airdrop — and a potentially hazardous one.
“I’m firmly against Paul’s fork, but not because it represents a ‘hostile Bitcoin hard fork,’ as some claim,” said Sergio Lerner, co-founder of Rootstock Labs, told CoinDesk in an email. “eCash is a new blockchain…It is not directly taking anything away from bitcoin holders.”
That distinction cuts through much of the early backlash. Unlike past splits that attempted to carry the Bitcoin name or compete for hashpower, eCash is structurally closer to a new token being airdropped to existing bitcoin holders.
But for Lerner and others, that framing shifts the concern rather than resolves it.
Airdrops are common across crypto. In Bitcoin, they are rare — and often messy.
Lerner argues that distributing eCash based on Bitcoin’s UTXO set — the collection of “unspent transaction outputs,” essentially the chunks of bitcoin that make up user balances — exposes users to avoidable operational risk, particularly if they try to claim the tokens.
“Airdropping to UTXO owners does not help bitcoiners and instead exposes them to significant risk,” he said, pointing to the need for users to move funds out of cold storage and interact with unfamiliar software.
That risk is compounded by the lack of full replay protection between the two chains. Without a clean separation, transactions intended for Bitcoin could inadvertently affect funds on the eCash network, or vice versa.
Dan Held, a Bitcoin entrepreneur, framed it more bluntly: “Reallocating Satoshi’s coins is shock value marketing, and the no-replay protection makes it quite hazardous to redeem.”
No-replay protection could allow a valid, signed transaction from the hard fork to be maliciously broadcast and accepted on another chain. This causes identical, unwanted transactions on both networks, leading to accidental loss of funds. It occurs when two chains share the same transaction format.
Distribution questionsBeyond security concerns, the distribution itself is being questioned.
Because Bitcoin ownership is often intermediated by exchanges, custodians and institutional platforms, the entity controlling private keys is not always the economic owner of the coins.
“The custodians controlling UTXO keys are often not the rightful economic owners,” Lerner said. “This places users who hold bitcoin through custodians at a disadvantage.”
In practice, that means some users may never receive eCash at all, while others may take on new risks to access it. For systems built on top of Bitcoin — including sidechains, like Rootstock, and federated custody networks — the situation becomes even more complex, potentially requiring coordination or upgrades to safely split coins across chains.
Lerner also criticized the project’s funding model, which allocates a portion of Satoshi-linked coins on the new chain to early investors, calling it “morally objectionable and unnecessary.”
Philosophical fault lineFor others, the objection goes beyond mechanics.
Jay Pollak, head of strategy at Bitcoin sidechain VerifiedX, sees the proposal as part of a broader category of attempts to reinterpret Bitcoin’s core properties through derivative systems.
“It’s mind boggling to think that anybody would think that’s a really good idea,” Pollak said, referring to the combination of forking and reassigning dormant coins.
Pollak argues that even indirect changes to how Bitcoin ownership is represented risk undermining the system’s core guarantee.
“You can’t break the native ownership of Bitcoin. It’s totally contradictory to what Bitcoin is,” he said.
In that framing, eCash is less about whether Bitcoin itself changes — it doesn’t — and more about whether the ecosystem should tolerate structures that reinterpret its ledger.
Most Bitcoin forks fail to gain meaningful traction. eCash may follow the same path.
But the reaction to it is already clarifying something else: Bitcoin’s resistance to change is not just about code or consensus rules. It extends to how users are expected to behave, how risk is introduced, and what kinds of experiments are considered acceptable at the edges.
Framed as an airdrop, eCash looks less like a challenge to Bitcoin — and more like a test of how far its social boundaries actually reach.
AI Disclaimer: Parts of this article were generated with the assistance from AI tools and reviewed by our editorial team to ensure accuracy and adherence to our standards. For more information, see CoinDesk's full AI Policy.
Recently, the eCash project has sparked heated debate within the Bitcoin ecosystem. Unlike a typical Bitcoin fork, eCash is being called a new airdrop. The proposal, brought forward by Paul Sztorc, has split the community, with developers and major infrastructure providers warning of potentially dangerous consequences.
eCash launches as separate blockchainSergio Lerner, co-founder of Rootstock Labs, emphasizes that eCash does not take any assets directly from Bitcoin, but rather is launched as an entirely new blockchain asset. While Lerner opposes typical Bitcoin forks, he states his main concern with eCash is its attempt to target Bitcoin’s existing user base through an airdrop instead of creating a true chain split.
“An airdrop to UTXO holders doesn’t benefit Bitcoin users. Instead, it exposes them to substantial risks, since they have to move their cold storage funds and interact with unfamiliar applications,” explains Lerner.
Airdrops of this kind are very rare in Bitcoin and have caused confusion in the past. Because the distribution relies on the set of “unspent transaction outputs” (UTXO), it creates significant operational risks, especially for those Bitcoin holders who do not wish to move their old holdings. Additionally, if users choose to claim the tokens, the risk of encountering illicit transactions rises.
Replay protection missing raises concernsThe biggest concern within the community is eCash’s lack of robust replay protection on the Bitcoin network. Since both blockchains have similar transaction formats, any valid transaction on one could be accepted on the other. This could result in users unintentionally executing the same transaction on both networks, putting their assets at risk.
Dan Held views the project’s proposal to reallocate coins thought to belong to Satoshi as “a marketing move designed for impact” and argues the absence of replay protection makes it extremely dangerous for users to claim their tokens.
Technical security is not the only criticism. The distribution method itself is under scrutiny, as many users hold assets through exchanges or custodians. Determining key ownership becomes complex, and there is a risk that new tokens may never reach some rightful owners, or may be claimed by unintended parties. This creates challenges for sidechains and institutional platforms operating on Bitcoin, potentially requiring new coordination efforts or major software updates to safely split coins between the two networks.
Community boundaries and ethical debateIn eCash’s funding mechanism, a portion of the coins expected to belong to Satoshi on the new chain is allocated to early investors. Lerner labels this practice unethical and unnecessary. Jay Polack, from the strategy team at VerifiedX, a Bitcoin sidechain project, notes that this move is part of a broader trend questioning the basic ownership structure of Bitcoin itself.
“Bitcoin’s true ownership cannot be altered. This kind of initiative is fundamentally opposed to Bitcoin’s core principles,” Polack says.
Ultimately, the incident shows Bitcoin is as influenced by social norms as it is by software or consensus mechanisms. While eCash does not represent a major technical change for Bitcoin, it has ignited debate about the types of experiments that should be permitted within the ecosystem. The Bitcoin community’s response to new projects is shaped not only by code, but also by user behavior and the culture that has evolved around the network.
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.
A new Bitcoin fork project reignites tensions within the ecosystem. Led by developer Paul Sztorc. The initiative named “eCash” does not just propose a basic parallel chain: it introduces technical and economic choices that directly affect fundamental principles of the network, notably the management of UTXOs and the controversial use of Satoshi Nakamoto’s historical holdings. Between promises of innovation and fears of misuse, the debate intensifies around the project.
In brief Paul Sztorc’s eCash project plans a Bitcoin hard fork with token distribution equivalent to BTC holders. Drivechains integration aims to extend uses (DeFi, privacy, prediction markets) but raises technical debates. Potential use of funds linked to Satoshi Nakamoto to finance the project crystallizes criticism. Several experts warn about major risks, including violations of property rights, dangerous precedents, and increased user exposure. Bitcoin faces a new parallel chain project The project announced by Paul Sztorc, founder and CEO of LayerTwo Labs, plans a hard fork at block height 964,000. This step should create a new chain called eCash, with its own native tokens. Holders would thus receive an equivalent balance on this separate network.
To limit confusion, a coin separation tool should accompany the launch. It would help users distinguish their BTC from the new eCash asset. Primarily, this measure aims to reduce errors during fund transfers.
The future chain would adopt almost the entire existing Bitcoin structure. However, it would integrate a major evolution: drivechains. Sztorc proposed this extension architecture in 2015 and then presented it to developers via BIP300 and BIP301.
According to him, eCash would not follow BCH’s logic in 2017. The project does not just seek to increase block size. It wants to offer a more sustainable solution without using the Bitcoin name in its branding. Moreover, a four-month notice should give the community time to prepare.
eCash fork: Drivechains at the center of the debate The fork would also carry several technical projects already in development. Sztorc cited seven Drivechains, including a privacy chain inspired by Zcash. He also mentioned Truthcoin, CoinShift, and Photon.
These extensions would cover varied uses. Truthcoin would target prediction markets. CoinShift would operate as a decentralized exchange. Photon, on the other hand, would seek quantum computer resistance.
However, the most discussed point concerns launch funding. Sztorc wishes to use coins sent to equivalent Satoshi Nakamoto addresses on eCash. He believes this mechanism can attract investors before the fork.
The developer defends this approach with an operational argument. According to him, it would provide contributors a concrete incentive to act early. Without that, the project could become a “zombie project” delivered incomplete. It could also become more centralized, with excessive influence from a small circle of developers.
This proposal remains very sensitive as it touches on historical balances. By adopting the complete Bitcoin history, eCash would display the 1.1 million coins of Satoshi as an equivalent balance on the new chain.
A community divided over ownership and risks The eCash hard fork project quickly triggered a wave of reactions within the Bitcoin ecosystem, revealing deep fault lines between supporters of experimentation and defenders of a strict interpretation of protocol rules.
This is notably the case regarding distributions based on UTXOs, which some consider risky for users. Sergio Lerner, co-founder of Rootstock Labs, adopts a particularly critical stance on this point. In a statement attributed to CoinDesk, he emphasizes:
I am firmly opposed to Paul’s fork, but not because it represents a ‘hostile Bitcoin fork’… eCash is a new blockchain… It does not directly take anything from Bitcoin holders. Distributing airdrops to UTXO owners does not help Bitcoiners and instead exposes them to significant risks.
Sergio Lerner, co-founder of Rootstock Labs. Source: CoinDesk According to him, these mechanisms force holders to adopt potentially dangerous behaviors, such as moving funds from cold storage or interacting with unfamiliar software. An approach that, far from strengthening security or usefulness for Bitcoin users, instead rekindles tensions around fork models and management of historical assets.
At the same time, Jay Pollak, Head of Strategy at Sidechain Bitcoin VerifiedX, voices a more fundamental critique of attempts to reinterpret Bitcoin’s network properties.
It’s stunning to think someone could truly believe this is an excellent idea; you cannot break Bitcoin’s native ownership—that is completely contrary to what Bitcoin is.
Jay Pollak, Head of Strategy at Sidechain Bitcoin VerifiedX. Source: Coindesk However, he warns that even indirect changes, notably via forks or derived mechanisms, could compromise the system’s essential guarantee.
Furthermore, other ecosystem players have adopted a harsher line of criticism, even raising accusations of theft. Bitcoin lawyer Peter McCormack denounced the project logic by stating, “Taking Satoshi’s coins is theft and disrespect, and eCash is already used for Lightning payments with Cashu and Fedi. These are bad choices.”
Josh Ellithorpe, CTO at Pixelated Ink, warns of the precedent such actions could create. In a post on X, he states, “eCash created a dangerous precedent, proving they can steal cryptocurrencies, and they will. Today it’s Satoshi’s, but it could be anyone’s. They also distorted reality regarding the BCH fork, hijacked another project’s name, and implemented no replay protection,” he warns, highlighting potential risks for all BTC holders.
Beyond technical considerations, the eCash project highlights a deeper rift within the Bitcoin community: how far can one innovate without betraying the network’s founding principles? This potential BTC fork exposes the ongoing tensions between experimentation and conservatism within the ecosystem, highlighting the conflict between ambitions for expansion through drivechains and concerns about ownership, security, and legal precedents.
Maximize your Cointribune experience with our "Read to Earn" program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.
Join the program
A
A
Lien copié
Ghiles A.
Journaliste et rédacteur web passionné par l’univers des cryptomonnaies et des technologies Web3. J’y traite les dernières tendances et actualités afin de proposer un contenu de haute qualité à un large public du secteur.
DISCLAIMER
The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this article belong solely to the author, and should not be taken as investment advice. Do your own research before taking any investment decisions.
The idea of Bitcoin sidechains, first introduced by researchers at Blockstream and later materialized by Rootstock in 2018, represents one of the most promising paths to extend Bitcoin’s functionality without altering its ethos or base-layer properties.
Drivechains, more precisely described as hashrate escrows or hashrate locks, are one of the approaches proposed to enable more decentralized sidechains. Paul Sztorc invented the idea of drivechains in 2015 and in 2016, I introduced an early drivechain proposal based on the COUNT_ACKS opcode. Later that same year, Paul presented his own drivechain design. Since then, the concept of hashrate escrow has been widely discussed and debated across Bitcoin forums and conferences. Ultimately, no consensus emerged to incorporate it into Bitcoin, and the community continued exploring alternative approaches to sidechains. More recently, the emergence of BitVM and platforms such as BitVMX has renewed interest in trust-minimized sidechain constructions.
However, Paul Sztorc did not accept the lack of consensus around his proposal. He founded a company to pursue drivechains and continued development using investor funding. From a startup perspective, this path predictably creates a competitive dynamic between the proposed system and Bitcoin itself. Instead of deploying sidechains using alternative bridging mechanisms to attract real users and demonstrate product–market fit—potentially strengthening his position within the Bitcoin ecosystem, he prioritized the technology over adoption. As a result, the success of his company has become tightly coupled to the deployment of drivechains, making that outcome effectively irreversible, regardless of whether it is the best direction.
Before proceeding, it is important to clarify that the eCash project is not a Bitcoin hard fork as some have claimed. eCash is a new blockchain. It is not a Bitcoin hard fork because
it does not attempt to appropriate the Bitcoin brand, and it distributes a new token to bitcoiners rather than directly extracting value from them. However, there are three critical design choices that makes eCash hostile and harmful to bitcoiners:
eCash cannot be merge-mined with Bitcoin (even if eCash sidechains can be merge-mined with eCash!) so it competes with Bitcoin hashrate. eCash transaction replay protection is only partially implemented (it does not clearly separate the domains of transaction signatures). eCash initial coin distribution is not an airdrop, as claimed, but a forkdrop. An airdrop typically distributes new tokens based on a snapshot of an existing ledger—account balances in EVM systems or the UTXO set in Bitcoin, while ensuring that transactions on one chain cannot be replayed on another. This is not the mechanism being used here: bitcoin transactions are valid on both chains until an eCash transaction breaks this entanglement. I refer to this approach as a forkdrop.
From the three design decisions mentioned follow several serious consequences, many of which are highly controversial and, in my view, detrimental to the broader ecosystem:
eCash mining decreases Bitcoin’s security budget and can destabilize both chains.
This is a direct consequence of eCash not being merge-mined with Bitcoin. While eCash internal drivechains can be merge-mined with the eCash base layer, the base chain itself operates as an independent proof-of-work network competing for SHA-256 hashpower. This design choice directly undermines Bitcoin’s security model: instead of extending Bitcoin’s security budget, it diverts it into a parallel chain.This creates structural risks. Competing for the same hashpower can lead to oscillations in mining allocation—similar to what has historically occurred between Dogecoin and Litecoin before stable merge-mining equilibria emerged. Such oscillations can destabilize both networks in the short term and weaken their security assumptions. More broadly, the approach is divisive: rather than aligning incentives to reinforce Bitcoin as a single security anchor, it fragments them across competing systems. Forkdropping does not help bitcoiners and instead exposes them to significant risk.
Claiming the forkdrop generally requires moving bitcoins from cold storage to hot storage and executing scripts created by unknown eCash developers rather than trusted Bitcoin developers, often on less secure hardware. There are many ways this process can fail, and users may end up losing both their bitcoins and their eCash tokens. Forkdropping is not a fair distribution mechanism.
The custodians controlling UTXO keys are often not the rightful economic owners, but intermediaries. Because institutional bitcoin custody typically involves strict security procedures, those intermediaries may be unable or unwilling to split funds and recover the associated eCash coins. This places users who hold bitcoin through custodians at a disadvantage. If users attempt to withdraw funds to self-custody in order to claim the forkdrop, they may lose the security protections the custodian provides. The entire splitting event creates disruption. Even if intermediaries can perform the split, the procedures may be risky and largely untested, since such events occur only rarely. The splitting problem is especially severe for highly secure sidechains such as Rootstock.
Coins in these systems may be protected by HSM-based custody systems that do not expose private keys by design. In that case, splitting funds may require a hard fork of Rootstock itself to introduce a one-time migration or splitting procedure. That would require months of planning, and testing such procedures is inherently difficult. If the Rootstock community does not permit this, then some users may attempt to capture the sidechain’s share of eCash by pegging in bitcoin-only UTXOs and pegging out coins valid on both chains. Another possibility is that users rush to peg out before the UTXO snapshot date, depleting the vault UTXOs because change outputs must confirm before reuse. This could create an unnecessary run to exit before the deadline. Similar issues could affect other systems such as Citrea and Liquid Network. eCash is a premined coin.
Early investors may receive coins instantaneously and without any vesting mechanism. That exposes all other participants to greater volatility and uncertainty, while creating pressure to act quickly. Rushed decisions in these contexts often lead to mistakes and loss of funds. Paul chose to use Satoshi’s coins (those in the Patoshi pattern I identified).
In my view, this is morally objectionable and unnecessary. New coins could have been created to compensate early investors instead of allocating value taken from an existing party. Even if one argues that the owner may be deceased or permanently absent, nobody truly knows. Replay protection was not fully implemented.
Paul did not provide replay protection for Bitcoin transactions, but only for eCash transactions. This means bitcoin users may accidentally lose their eCash forkdrop simply by transacting normally on Bitcoin. That places pressure on users to take defensive action, increasing the likelihood of mistakes and losses. The eCash transaction format should have been changed so that signatures could never be valid on both chains. The proposed drivechain design is not the best possible implementation.
I am not particularly satisfied with the BIP he proposed. Back in 2016, I proposed an alternative drivechain BIP that I believe is more flexible and better aligned with the stateless nature of Bitcoin Script [1]. In my view, the Bitcoin community’s rejection of BIP300 was not only about opposition to the concept of drivechains itself, but also about the fact that the proposed implementation was far from the best possible design. To summarize, I strongly disagree with the eCash fork on technical, moral, and user-fund security grounds.
Update 12/05/26: An early version of this article did not make it wholly clear that it was indeed Paul Sztorc who invented the concept of drivechains. To clear up any ambiguity on the subject, Paul Sztorc did invent drivechains and an edit was made to clarify this. Ps. Paul Sztorc invented drivechains.
PANews reported on May 11th that, according to SoSoValue data, the cryptocurrency market is generally trending upward, with the PayFi sector performing particularly well, rising 3.26% in the last 24 hours. Specifically, XRP rose 3.29%, Trust Wallet (TWT) rose 6.55%, and eCash (XEC) rose 12.85%. Meanwhile, Bitcoin (BTC) rose 1.17%, returning above $81,000; Ethereum (ETH) rose 1.75%, approaching $2,400.
In other sectors, Layer 2 rose 2.76% in the last 24 hours, with Mantle (MNT) up 4.12%; DeFi rose 2.56%, with Uniswap (UNI) up 7.72%; Meme rose 2.25%, with TROLL (TROLL) surging 50.14%; Layer 1 rose 2.08%, with Sui (SUI) up 24.00%; AI rose 1.85%, with Unibase (UB) up 13.24%; and CeFi rose 1.57%, with Cronos (CRO) up 6.53%.
Bitcoin’s on‑chain data is flashing a strange mix of softer retail‑style activity and still‑robust throughput, fees and capital flows that look more like consolidation than exhaustion.
Summary
Active Bitcoin addresses have dropped to roughly 660,000 on a seven‑day basis, a 12‑month low that coincides with more batching, consolidation and custodial use. The network still processes around 400,000–450,000 transactions per day, with average fees in a $2.50–$4.00 band that signals steady economic activity rather than a ghost chain. Research on Ordinals finds inscriptions contributed about 22% of fees between 2023 and early 2024, with each 1‑point blockspace share increase driving roughly 3.2% higher regular‑tx fees. Bitcoin’s (BTC) on‑chain data is flashing a strange combination: softer retail‑style activity, but still‑elevated throughput, fees and capital flows that look more like consolidation than exhaustion.
Activity and addresses: weak surface, noisy signal Metrics that usually stand in for “user activity” have rolled over. By December 2025, the seven‑day average number of active Bitcoin addresses had fallen to roughly 660,000, a one‑year low and well below the levels seen during the Ordinals craze at the end of 2024. On‑chain analysts at BecauseBitcoin and MEXC note that this drop coincides with more wallet batching, UTXO consolidation and the growth of custodial solutions, all of which can depress address counts without necessarily reflecting a collapse in real economic usage.
Transactions, volume and fees: consolidation, not coma Under the hood, the network is still busy. A February 2026 review of on‑chain data finds Bitcoin processing around 400,000–450,000 transactions per day, with relatively stable throughput even as prices chop. That same analysis highlights “robust institutional‑scale flows” visible in large transactions and cluster behaviour, describing current traffic as “genuine economic activity rather than speculative trading alone.”
Fees are sitting in an awkward middle zone that suits miners better than traders. Average transaction costs have hovered in roughly the $2.50–$4.00 range in early 2026 – far above the sub‑$1 lull of mid‑2025 but well below the $50‑plus spikes logged during prior bouts of memecoin and inscription congestion. A separate snapshot from early March puts 24‑hour BTC trading volume near $73 billion, roughly 5% of market cap, a ratio that MEXC flags as historically preceding “significant directional moves” as positioning builds.
Ordinals, inscriptions and blockspace demand Part of the fee story is structural. Academic and industry research on Ordinals and inscriptions estimates that between mid‑2022 and early 2024, inscription transactions accounted for about 22% of total Bitcoin fees and that a 1‑percentage‑point rise in their share of blockspace corresponded to roughly a 3.2% increase in fees paid by ordinary transactions. Galaxy Research and other desks have documented multiple periods where inscriptions generated more than 20% of daily fee revenue, effectively subsidizing miners while competing with payments and exchange transfers for blockspace.
Mixed but constructive into 2026 Taken together, the picture into 2026 is mixed but not obviously bearish. A composite view of “crypto on‑chain signals” described by Blockchain.News shows fundamental activity measures softening even as realized profit/loss and capital‑flow indicators stabilize, consistent with a market that is digesting past gains rather than falling apart. With Bitcoin trading in the low‑$70,000s and on‑chain volumes still punchy, the network looks less like a ghost chain and more like a maturing settlement layer where speculative froth has drained faster than institutional usage.
The dollar index fell below 100 as traders sold the greenback after the Fed meeting, with USD/JPY sliding on rising BOJ hike and intervention risks and mixed signals for emerging markets and Bitcoin.
Summary
DXY slid 0.5% to 99.79 and USD/JPY dropped 1% to 158.22 as traders unwound crowded dollar longs after the Fed flagged sticky inflation but acknowledged rising macro uncertainty. Markets now eye a possible BOJ move toward 1% and FX intervention if USD/JPY threatens 160, shifting rate divergence away from a one-way dollar trade. A weaker dollar gives only limited relief to crypto, with Bitcoin still down over 4% around $71,313 as the Fed’s higher-for-longer stance and oil shock overshadow FX tailwinds. The U.S. Dollar Index (DXY) fell below the psychologically significant 100 level on Thursday, sliding 0.5% to 99.79 as markets digested the aftermath of Wednesday’s Federal Reserve meeting and recalibrated positions across currency markets. USD/JPY dropped 1% to 158.22, one of its sharpest single-session declines in weeks, as a combination of post-FOMC profit-taking, rising rate divergence expectations, and the looming prospect of Bank of Japan intervention weighed on the dollar against the yen.
The move is notable precisely because of its direction. As recently as last week, the DXY had broken back above 100 for the first time since late 2025, driven higher by safe-haven demand from the Iran conflict and inflation fears stemming from the Strait of Hormuz disruption. That rally had pushed USD/JPY as high as 159.40 during Tuesday’s Asian session. Thursday’s reversal therefore represents a meaningful technical breakdown, with the 100 level now flipping from support to resistance.
The Post-FOMC Paradox The dollar’s weakness in the wake of a hawkish Fed statement appears counterintuitive on its surface — Powell raised the 2026 inflation forecast to 2.7%, signalled only one rate cut for the year, and explicitly cited the oil shock as a persistent inflationary risk. In a traditional macro framework, that combination should support the dollar. But currency markets have responded differently, focusing instead on three complicating factors.
First, much of the hawkish repricing had already occurred in the days leading up to the FOMC meeting, with market expectations for Fed easing having compressed from two-to-three cuts earlier in the year to just one. With that narrative largely priced, the announcement became a sell-the-news event for dollar bulls who had positioned for upside. Second, Powell’s acknowledgement of heightened economic uncertainty — including the risk that the oil shock could simultaneously depress growth while keeping inflation elevated — raised fresh concerns about the dollar’s medium-term trajectory if the U.S. economy weakens while the Fed’s hands remain tied by inflation. Third, and critically, the divergence between the Fed and other major central banks is shifting.
The Bank of Japan held its policy rate unchanged at 0.75% on Thursday — its highest since September 1995 — but markets are pricing a rate increase to 1.00% by end-June. Mizuho Financial’s markets co-chief Kenya Koshimizu told Reuters in February that up to three BOJ hikes in 2026 are entirely possible. Japan’s Finance Minister has also stated explicitly that authorities stand ready to intervene in FX markets if yen weakness persists, with USD/JPY above 160 viewed as a potential trigger for BOJ action. Thursday’s 1% drop in USD/JPY, pulling the pair to 158.22, suggests markets are pre-empting that intervention risk.
The dollar’s stumble below 100 is also a signal to emerging markets and commodity-linked currencies. The Philippine peso breached the 60-per-dollar level on Thursday as oil costs weighed on the country’s import bill, while gold stabilised following a sharp 4% decline in the prior session. For crypto markets, a weaker dollar historically provides modest tailwind support — but with Bitcoin already down 4.62% to $71,313 on the day, macro headwinds from the Fed’s inflation posture are currently overwhelming any currency-driven relief.
Robert Kiyosaki says an imminent “biggest financial bubble in history” will end in a crash that sends Bitcoin to $750k and Ethereum to $95k within a year, even as critics doubt his methods.
Summary
Kiyosaki argues a financial bubble inflated since 2008 will soon burst and forecasts Bitcoin at $750,000 and Ethereum at $95,000 within one year of that crash, alongside gold at $35,000 and silver at $200. He frames BTC, ETH, gold, and silver as scarce “escape hatches” from fiat, noting he recently bought another 1 BTC around $67,000 and claims he would still buy more even if price fell to $6,000. Critics highlight his decade-long record of missed crash calls and say his numbers lack rigorous modeling, but his alarm now lands amid tighter Fed policy and rising geopolitical risk. Robert Kiyosaki, the author of Rich Dad Poor Dad and one of the crypto space’s most vocal mainstream advocates, has issued his most dramatic price predictions yet — forecasting Bitcoin (BTC) at $750,000 and Ethereum at $95,000 within one year of what he describes as an imminent and catastrophic global financial crash.
Speaking on X, Kiyosaki framed his outlook around the thesis that the world is approaching the “biggest financial bubble in history” — one he argues has been inflating since the root causes of the 2008 financial crisis were papered over with stimulus and monetary expansion rather than resolved structurally. His message was unambiguous: the question is no longer whether a crash will happen, but when.
The post-crash price targets Kiyosaki outlined are striking in their scale. For Bitcoin, he projects a rise to $750,000 per coin within a year of the collapse — a roughly 10x move from current levels near $69,900. For Ethereum, his target of $95,000 implies an approximately 45x gain from where ETH trades today at around $2,130. He also projected gold reaching $35,000 per ounce and silver hitting $200 in the same post-crash window — suggesting a broad revaluation of scarce, non-sovereign assets as confidence in fiat currencies erodes.
The underlying logic Kiyosaki applies is consistent with his long-held worldview: when the traditional financial system fractures, assets with capped supply or physical scarcity — Bitcoin, gold, silver — will be the primary beneficiaries of the capital flight that follows. He has continued to put his money where his mouth is, most recently disclosing the purchase of an additional 1 BTC at approximately $67,000, and stating he would consider buying more if prices fell to $6,000.
Critics, however, are quick to note the limitations of Kiyosaki’s track record. His crash predictions span more than a decade, with calls for collapses in 2016 and 2020 that did not materialize as forecast. One response to his latest post on X summarized the skeptical view plainly: his forecasts are “big numbers to grab attention,” lacking the methodological grounding of rigorous financial analysis. Others pointed out that major crashes rarely stem from a single trigger, but rather from compounding pressures — tighter monetary policy, credit contraction, and forced asset repricing — a dynamic already partly visible in current market conditions.
That said, Kiyosaki’s warnings land at a moment when macro conditions are unusually fraught. The Federal Reserve held rates steady this week while signaling fewer cuts ahead. Geopolitical tensions in the Middle East are escalating. Bitcoin’s 30-day correlation with equities is at its highest of 2026. Whatever one thinks of his methodology, the macro backdrop he has been warning about for years looks more plausible today than at any point in recent memory.
Anthony Scaramucci is openly backing Michael Saylor’s high‑yield Bitcoin strategy at the same time he jolts markets with a tongue‑in‑cheek X video announcing a 2028 presidential run, sharpening the line between his crypto advocacy and broader economic message.
Summary
Scaramucci calls himself a “big fan” of Michael Saylor while dissecting Strategy Inc.’s roughly 11.5% perpetual yield tied to Bitcoin, warning that leverage and drawdowns remain real risks. In a previous crypto.news story, he linked that same wealth‑gap narrative to stalled CLARITY legislation in Washington and his long‑term Bitcoin thesis. His April 1 “Mooch 2028” video on X, framed as an April Fools’ gag, doubles as a campaign‑style address on inequality, debt and digital assets. In a recent episode of the All Things Markets podcast, SkyBridge Capital founder Anthony Scaramucci and Galaxy Digital CEO Mike Novogratz pulled apart Strategy Inc.’s (NASDAQ: MSTR) use of high‑yield perpetual securities, which Scaramucci said can deliver “four quarterly dividend payments equivalent to a yield of approximately 11.5%” for Bitcoin believers. He was explicit about his own position: “I’m a big fan of Saylor, and obviously SkyBridge owns a lot of Bitcoin. We don’t hold any of those assets, but I just wanted to disclose that to people.”
After years of telling everybody else how to run the country and months of deliberation, I have a special announcement:
I’m running for President of the United States in 2028.
I am aware of what happened the last time I worked in the White House.
But I do believe I can help… pic.twitter.com/O2wPkq4Ob8
— Anthony Scaramucci (@Scaramucci) April 1, 2026 Saylor’s 11.5% Bitcoin‑backed yield under scrutiny Novogratz stressed the structure’s dependence on leverage: “It’s leverage on the strategy,” he said, arguing Saylor currently enjoys a “big margin of safety” because of his large Bitcoin corpus but that a sharp drop in BTC would “inevitably” eat into that cushion. He warned that if Bitcoin crashed to around $30,000, perpetual investors “naturally” fear losing principal, because they “don’t have the right to get their money back” and Saylor can theoretically halt dividends, which would likely push the instrument to a steep discount.
From “Mooch 2028” to CLARITY gridlock That nuanced pitch to yield‑hungry Bitcoin holders landed just hours before Scaramucci’s latest viral video on X, where he stood in his office wearing a “Mooch 2028” cap and declared, “I’m running for President of the United States in 2028… Join me and help me heal America.” The clip, posted on April Fools’ Day, was quickly framed by outlets like Benzinga and Breitbart as a prank, but it reads like a test balloon: he references his ill‑fated 11‑day stint in Donald Trump’s first White House and insists, “I do believe I can help guide this country in the right direction.”
In a separate BeInCrypto interview covered by BloomingBit, Scaramucci said that passing the CLARITY Act, Washington’s flagship crypto market‑structure bill, is “not an easy situation,” adding that “in the current political environment, securing 60 votes in the Senate is almost impossible.” Earlier comments to Coinness underscored how partisan rancor over Trump’s launch of a memecoin, which he said earned between $600 million and $700 million, has further poisoned the well for bipartisan crypto rules.
Price‑wise, Scaramucci has hardly turned cautious: in February he told Benzinga that Bitcoin “doesn’t reward being early, but being patient,” even as BTC traded near $70,981, down about 7.2% on the day, and more recently has floated scenarios of $2 million to $3 million per coin over the next decade. For a would‑be “Mooch 2028” candidate, the message is clear enough — leverage can juice returns, but the real bet is that Bitcoin outlasts U.S. political dysfunction.
On-chain data shows whale-sized Chainlink wallets have reached a new all-time high (ATH), a sign that big-money interest has been flowing into the network.
Chainlink Wallets With At Least 100,000 LINK Have Set A New Record According to data from on-chain analytics firm Santiment, Chainlink has seen large wallets reach a new record. The indicator of relevance here is the “Supply Distribution,” which tells us about the total number of addresses that belong to a particular address group.
Wallets or investors are divided into these cohorts based on the number of tokens that they are carrying in their balance. For example, the 1 to 10 coins group includes all addresses holding between 1 and 10 LINK. In the context of the current topic, the range of interest is the one with a lower bound at 100,000 LINK and no upper limit.
At the current exchange rate, the cutoff for the range converts to $957,000, which is a significant amount. Thus, the only investors who would qualify for the group will be the big-money entities like the sharks and whales. Such holders can carry some degree of influence on the network so their behavior can be worth keeping an eye on.
Below is the chart shared by Santiment that shows how the Supply Distribution has changed for these Chainlink investors over the past few months.
The value of the metric seems to have been rising in recent weeks | Source: Santiment on X As is visible in the graph, the Chainlink wallets with 100,000 LINK or more have witnessed a rise in the indicator during the last couple of months. This suggests that the population of big-money investors on the network has grown.
More specifically, the Supply Distribution of the LINK whales has increased by 8.2% over the last seven weeks, a notable figure. Interestingly, this inflow of large investors into the network has arrived while the cryptocurrency has followed an overall trend of sideways movement.
Currently, there are 805 wallets holding at least 100,000 LINK, which is a new ATH. “Key stakeholders are showing bullishness toward the #16 market cap in crypto,” noted Santiment. It now remains to be seen whether the optimism from the LINK whales will end up reflecting on the cryptocurrency’s price.
While Chainlink has witnessed a trend of accumulation, Bitcoin has observed distribution from its large hands instead. As analyst Ali Martinez has highlighted in another X post, the supply of the BTC whales registered a decline recently.
Looks like the whales have been participating in net selling | Source: @alicharts on X From the chart, it’s apparent that the Bitcoin whales sold 18,447 BTC between the 18th and 21st of this month, worth approximately $1.41 billion.
LINK Price At the time of writing, Chainlink is trading around $9.57, unchanged from one week ago.
The trend in the price of the coin over the last five days | Source: LINKUSDT on TradingView Featured image from Dall-E, chart from TradingView.com
The market is in a dull phase right now, with Bitcoin rising while altcoins are dropping. On the other hand, Livepeer crypto recently experienced its highest daily candle in months, surging more than 100% in a single day.
$LPT on the weekly chart. pic.twitter.com/R552R6VsaW
— WiseCharts (@WiseCharts) May 30, 2025
DISCOVER: Top 20 Crypto to Buy in May 2025
Livepeer is a platform for decentralized live video broadcasting on the Ethereum network. It’s building the open video infrastructure for the AI era. Founded in 2017, it comprises a P2P infrastructure that runs on the Ethereum blockchain. Users can stream video content like coding, gaming, education, and entertainment through apps built on Livepeer. Content creators, such as streamers, can also use Livepeer to stream and cut infrastructure costs.
Recently, expanding the token accessibility and branding, LPT got listed on Upbit. It’s a Korean exchange that specializes and is very popular in the Asian market. The exchange does over 4B daily volume. This resulted in Livepeer surging to a four-month high of $14.16, representing over 130% growth. Upbit also listed other coins, like POKT, FORT, FLOCK, and SOPH, all within a period of 3 days.
On another note, earlier this week, asset manager Grayscale unveiled its Artificial Intelligence Crypto Sector, with Livepeer featured as one of the 20 cryptocurrencies included. This rise in value, while other AI coins are performing poorly, has caught the attention of many investors.
An unknown whale began accumulating $LPT from Binance on May 13, and many others followed along before the token pumped in price. If you’re interested in following the whales’ buys, check out this presale that also attracted the whales’ attention.
DISCOVER: Top Solana Meme Coins to Buy in May 2025
Solaxy: The L2 Revolutionizing Solana Raises $42 Million — Limited Time Left To Buy You'll find a way to get to Solaxy any way you can. 🪐🛸
We don't blame you! 🔥https://t.co/mdaTX9aVVx pic.twitter.com/xXzhbXJG9z
— SOLAXY (@SOLAXYTOKEN) May 30, 2025
As the crypto bull run approaches, analysts see the market soaring, and transaction volume will keep hitting new highs. This increases the traffic on most blockchains, especially with Solana, which has created a lot of need for L2 networks on blockchains.
Solana has been facing a lot of transaction congestion from time to time over the last few months. Here is where Solaxy comes into play. The first-ever Solana Layer-2 blockchain directly addresses main Solana pain points: congestion, a lot of failed transactions, and huge scalability limitations.
It’s a multi use L2 that developers can build dApps on and engage with users. Furthermore, Solaxy aims to offload the huge limit on Solana and unlock the chain full potential for many users, developers, and investors alike, just like the Arbitrum network did for the Ethereum chain.
Solaxy’s presale has successfully raised $42.5 million, closing its initial goal of $43 million. Currently, $SOLX is priced at $0.00175 in the presale, and staking rewards offer up to 95% APY
Those presales that raise funds quickly and get many investors’ attention often experience gains of 5x to 10x after launch and usually get listed on many tier 1 centralized exchanges.
Savvy and experienced whales often quietly accumulate these projects to optimize their profits. Recently, one of these whales purchased over $400k worth of $SOLX on the Ethereum chain; click here for the transaction ID.
Connect with the huge SOLX Online community on X and Telegram.
DISCOVER: Best New Cryptocurrencies to Invest in 2025
Join The 99Bitcoins News Discord Here For The Latest Market Insights
Key Takeaways Livepeer’s token LPT surged 130% after being listed on Upbit, a major Asian exchange. Grayscale’s AI Crypto Sector features Livepeer, boosting investor interest amid rising whale activity. #Presales #DeFi
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
Ahmed Balaha
Crypto Journalist
Ahmed Balaha is a journalist and copywriter based in Georgia with a growing focus on blockchain technology, DeFi, AI, privacy, digital assets, and fintech innovation. He has a strong interest in financial literacy and sustainable investing, and he combines these... 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!
Livepeer has surged by over 14% and is now trading at $8. LPT’s daily trading volume has skyrocketed by more than 498%. Bearish momentum continues to weigh on crypto assets with the largest assets, Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH), tumbling toward $104.7K and $2.6K, respectively. All the major assets are trading within the red territory. In the meantime, Livepeer (LPT) has stood out from the crowd with a 14.25% surge in the last 24 hours.
Livepeer has kicked off the day trading at the bottom range at $7.57. The sudden bullish encounter in the market has triggered the price to ascend to its daily high of $10.71. Crucial resistance between the $8.75 and $9.50 zones was tested and confirmed the bullish wave.
Livepeer, with its market cap at $366.26 million, is trading at the level of $8.88. Moreover, the daily trading volume has exploded upward by over 498%, reaching $1.06 billion, as per CMC data. Notably, the market has experienced a $4.08 million liquidation of Livepeer, according to Coinglass.
LPT has registered an increase of over 58.80% in the last seven days. The asset began the week trading in the $5.60 range. The bullish pressure has pushed the price to mount to a high of around the $13 mark.
Is Livepeer’s Uptrend Here to Stay? Livepeer has reported a positive trading sentiment in the market with its solid gain in the recent session. The asset might climb above the $9 range to strengthen the momentum. Gradually, a golden cross could likely unfold and trigger the asset to move up toward the $10 threshold.
Assuming the ongoing trend reversal of the asset, the price could slip to its recent low at around the $8.70 mark. Should Livepeer lose this support, the bears gain enough power to invite the death cross to take place, pulling the price back to its established low at the $8 level.
In addition, the asset’s Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) line is positioned above the signal line. This suggests a bullish signal in the market, and the buying pressure may increase. More upside could be underway. Livepeer’s Chaikin Money Flow (CMF) indicator is resting at -0.06, indicating a slight bearish sentiment, with the money flowing out of the asset. There has been more selling pressure than buying.
Furthermore, the daily Relative Strength Index (RSI) value of 52.12 hints at a neutral momentum with a slight bullish bias; the asset is neither overbought nor oversold. Livepeer’s Bull Bear Power (BBP) reading is found at 0.219, signalling that the bulls are moderately dominant over bears, supporting the short-term bullish outlook.
Highlighted Crypto News
Circle’s IPO Surges Past Expectations, Raising $1.1 Billion
Content Writer | Crypto Enthusiast | Bridging Literature and Blockchain
Livepeer is up 4%, holding steady near the $5 mark. LPT’s daily trading volume has exploded by 462%. The crypto market is riding the mixed signal wave with the neutral sentiment lingering across the assets. The largest assets like Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) trade at $107.4K and $2.4K. With the red and green painted altcoins, Livepeer (LPT) is trying to bounce back, jumping by over 4.89% in the last 24 hours.
Notably, LPT kicked off the day trading on the downside, visiting its daily low of $5.51. A sudden shift in momentum triggered the bulls to push the price to a high of around the $6.57 range. Moreover, a steady correction on the upside can help the price movement stay up.
Meanwhile, as per CoinMarketCap data, Livepeer is currently trading at the $5.80 zone, with its market cap at $242 million. In addition, the daily trading volume of LPT has exploded by over 462%, reaching $158 million.
Where is Livepeer Headed? Assuming the bull entry, the asset could rise and test the nearby resistance at the $5.90 mark. With the sturdy bullish momentum, Livepeer might invite the golden cross to take place and likely initiate a rally, with the price heading toward its high range crossing $6 threshold.
On the downside, if the bullish sentiment fades and bears take command, the price might slip to its initial support at the $5.74 zone. A failure in holding this level could trigger the Livepeer bears to the emergence of a death cross, driving the price to the former lows below $5.67.
Livepeer’s Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) line is above the zero line, indicating upward momentum. However, if the signal line is below the zero line, the uptrend is still developing, potentially at an early stage. Besides, the Chaikin Money Flow (CMF) evaluates the capital flow into the asset; currently, the value is found at -0.15, suggesting a moderate selling pressure in the market, with the money flowing out of the asset.
Furthermore, the asset’s daily Relative Strength Index (RSI) is positioned at 49.50, which implies that the asset is in a neutral zone, neither overbought nor oversold. LPT’s Bull Bear Power (BBP) value of 0.034 signals a mild bullish pressure in the market, with fluctuating momentum.
Highlighted Crypto News
Will a 20% Pump and 226% Volume Boost Send PENGU to $0.020?
Content Writer | Crypto Enthusiast | Bridging Literature and Blockchain
Livepeer jumps over 36%, holding around the $8 mark. LPT’s daily trading volume has skyrocketed by 942%. The crypto assets are displaying mixed waves, with neutral sentiment across the market. Most of the assets are dipped in green, and a few struggle in red. Notably, Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) are hovering at $110.6K and $4.5K. Following suit, Livepeer (LPT) has jumped by over 36.15% in the last 24 hours.
LPT kicked off the day trading on the downside, at a low of $5.96. A sudden and steady shift in momentum pushed the bulls, and the price moved to a high range at around the $8.67 range, breaking the resistance between $5.96 and $8.67 zones.
As per CoinMarketCap data, at the time of writing, Livepeer traded at the $8.13 mark, with its market cap reaching $354.78 million. In addition, the daily trading volume of LPT has exploded by over 942%, likely touching $367.2 million.
What is the Next Price Move for Livepeer? If the Livepeer bulls enter, the price could climb and test the immediate resistance at $8.19. With the sustained upside correction, the asset might trigger the emergence of the golden cross and initiate a rally. The price is heading toward the $8.25 threshold.
Assuming the fading of the bullish sentiment and the bears gain momentum, the price might plummet to find its nearby support at the $8.07 zone. Upon a failure in holding this price level, a death cross of Livepeer could form, sending the price below $8.01.
Livepeer’s Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) line is above the zero line, but the signal line is below zero, likely showing mixed momentum. This hints at the trend trying to shift upward, but it has not been fully confirmed yet.
Besides, the Chaikin Money Flow (CMF) indicator, which evaluates the capital flow into the asset, is currently found at 0.10, pointing to mild buying pressure in the market. Also, the money is flowing into the asset, but not very strongly.
Moreover, the asset’s daily Relative Strength Index (RSI) at 80.15 signals a strong overbought condition in the market. There is also a high risk of a pullback or correction. Livepeer’s Bull Bear Power (BBP) value of 2.605 implies that the bulls are currently dominant. The higher the value, the stronger the buying momentum compared to selling.
Highlighted Crypto News
Berachain (BERA) on the Move: Will This 8% Pop Turn Into a Full-On Moonshot?
Content Writer | Crypto Enthusiast | Bridging Literature and Blockchain
Crypto cycles have increasingly tracked macro data, with strong jobs and PMI figures tightening liquidity, while weaker prints often revive risk-on demand. Investors now closely watch unemployment and PMI thresholds, using them as signals to determine when to rotate between high-beta altcoins and more defensive, utility-heavy allocations. AI-driven creator platforms are emerging as a structural theme, transforming fragmented content tools and opaque revenue-sharing models into on-chain, programmable economies. SUBBD targets excessive creator‑platform fees, arbitrary bans, and fragmented AI stacks by merging Web3 payments, governance, and advanced AI tools into a single tokenized ecosystem. Macroeconomic data has quietly turned into one of crypto’s biggest mood swings. One minute, Bitcoin is surging higher on a soft US jobs report, the next it’s plummeting on a hotter-than-expected inflation print, as traders constantly adjust their expectations for rates, liquidity, and risk appetite.
Back in 2023, when unemployment flirted with 3.4% and PMI readings hovered near the 50 expansion line, markets reacted like everything was finally calming down.
Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics Bitcoin and Ethereum surged, while higher-beta sectors took off, and even AI and creator-economy tokens experienced outsized flows as investors chased momentum.
Then you have the other side of the coin. A stronger payrolls report or a surprise rebound in manufacturing can send bond yields flying, push the dollar higher, and suck liquidity out of speculative assets.
You have probably seen it play out a hundred times, with majors swinging 10 percent around Non-Farm Payrolls or PMI data. Altcoins without real utility usually get hit twice as hard.
That’s why more traders are starting to migrate toward projects with tangible use cases and real user demand. SUBBD fits neatly into that shift.
The token powers an AI content creation platform aimed at the $85B creator economy and continues attracting buyers even during choppy macro conditions.
The presale has already raised $1.3M; each SUBBD is currently priced at $0.057, and staking offers a 20% APY, which helps support long-term participation, regardless of whether the next data print sends markets into a risk-on or risk-off phase.
For a deeper dive into market drivers and long-term growth potential, you can explore our full SUBBD token price outlook.
How Jobs And PMI Data Steer Crypto Liquidity Cycles If you zoom out and look at major crypto tops and bottoms since 2020, they line up neatly with shifts in global liquidity. Ultra-loose policy, near-zero rates, and trillions in stimulus helped fuel the 2020 to 2021 bull run.
Once central banks began hiking aggressively in 2022 to fight sticky inflation, Bitcoin slid more than 70 percent from its all-time high, and speculative capital dried up across the board.
US employment and PMI data sit right at the center of that macro picture. Strong payroll growth and PMI readings comfortably above 50 usually signal a healthy economy. That gives central banks cover to keep policy tighter for longer, which pushes real yields higher and makes risk assets less appealing.
Softer data has the opposite effect; it revives rate cut bets, eases financial conditions, and often pulls fresh liquidity back into crypto.
In this kind of stop-start environment, investors have been rotating toward AI and creator economy plays that actually solve problems, from Render and Livepeer in compute and streaming, to Web3 social projects that are rebuilding the social graph.
SUBBD AI Creator Feature: Coming Soon SUBBD is trying to sit in that same lane, a content-focused AI and Web3 stack that aims to attract real creators and viewers, not just short-term speculation. That positioning can matter when the next payroll or PMI print flips sentiment from risk on to risk off in a single session.
Why SUBBD’s Utility Story Matters When Macro Turns Risk Off When liquidity tightens after a hot payroll report or a stronger PMI reading, tokens with weak foundations and no real revenue paths are usually the first to bleed. SUBBD is built on a different thesis.
The project combines Web3 rails with AI creator tooling to challenge platform fees that can reach 70 percent on legacy creator apps, while giving both creators and fans protection from arbitrary bans and geography-based restrictions.
At the center of the ecosystem is the SUBBD AI Personal Assistant, a toolkit that automates fan interactions, manages chats, handles basic support, and powers AI voice cloning and full AI influencer creation. All of these features are directly connected to crypto payments, token-gated content, and on-chain governance.
As the platform grows, transactional demand for the SUBBD token grows with it, regardless of whether the next PMI print lands at 48 or 55.
While many AI creator projects stop at simple chatbot functionality, SUBBD stacks multiple monetization routes on top. Creators can earn from subscriptions, pay-per-view content, NFT drops, and tipping, while users gain XP multipliers and additional rewards through the token.
The presale has already raised over $1.3M with each SUBBD priced at $0.057, which suggests that investors are willing to back a utility-driven model long before the full platform goes live.
On the reward side, staking starts with a 20% APY in the first year, then shifts into a model where stakers unlock platform benefits that include exclusive livestreams, in-house content, and daily behind-the-scenes drops.
In a macro climate where yields on traditional assets can shift after every jobs report, this blend of predictable on-chain rewards and real product utility is an appealing setup for investors who are comfortable taking measured risk.
A simple move, not a gamble, is often the smarter play, and the SUBBD presale gives early participants a chance to position before the platform reaches scale.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice.
Authored by Aaron Walker, NewsBTC – https://www.newsbtc.com/news/will-pmi-and-jobs-data-move-crypto-subbd-token
Livepeer has jumped by over 20%, trading at $3.45. LPT’s daily trading volume has exploded by 1,378%. The current market momentum is bearish, with the major assets struggling to break free from the red zone. All the recent gains are fading, and the largest assets, like Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH), are attempting to escape the bear market. Among the altcoin pack, Livepeer (LPT) has registered a 20.64% jump in value over the last 24 hours.
In the early hours, the asset traded at a bottom of $2.80. A sudden bullish encounter has triggered the LPT price to mount toward a high range of $3.57. It has tested and broken the crucial resistance zones to confirm the building uptrend. Livepeer is currently trading at around $3.45, with its daily trading volume having exploded by 1378% to $144.97 million.
Livepeer’s four-hour trading chart exhibits the growing bullish zone. If the bulls gained more power, they could climb to the $3.66 resistance. Further upside likely initiates the golden cross formation and sends the asset’s price toward the $3.87 zone or even higher.
Conversely, upon the asset’s bullish tone fades, the Livepeer price could slip to its immediate support at the $3.24 mark. Assuming it fails to hold this level, the bearish correction strengthens and triggers the emergence of the death cross, pushing the price below $3.03.
Livepeer Gains Bullish Traction as Indicators Show Uptrend Potential Zooming in on the technical chart of Livepeer, the Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) line is above the zero line while the signal line remains below zero. This points to a transition phase in momentum, and the bullish momentum is starting to build, but it has not been fully confirmed yet.
Besides, the Chaikin Money Flow (CMF) is a technical indicator that evaluates the capital flow into the asset. The value sits at 0.14, showing moderate buying pressure, and the capital is flowing into the asset. The momentum of LPT is not very strong, but more upside would strengthen the bullish trend.
Livepeer’s daily Relative Strength Index (RSI) of 62.10 indicates moderate bullish sentiment. It is leaning toward the overbought zone, and the buyers are in control. Notably, a pullback could occur if the value continues to climb toward 70. In addition, LPT’s Bull Bear Power (BBP) reading resting at 0.355 suggests bullish dominance. Significantly, the upward pressure is outweighing the selling pressure, but it is still moderate.
Top Updated Crypto News
Bearish Winds Hit Pudgy Penguins (PENGU): Is Further Downside Still on the Table?
Content Writer | Crypto Enthusiast | Bridging Literature and Blockchain
On July 24, 2025, Taiwan-based trading platform WOO X became the latest victim in a bruising summer of crypto breaches when attackers made off with roughly $14 million in unauthorized withdrawals from nine user accounts, forcing the exchange to pause withdrawals while it investigated and promised to reimburse affected users.
New chain-analysis shared by Yehor Rudytsia, Head of Forensics and Incident Response at Hacken, paints the post-heist picture as far more organized than a one-off theft. According to Rudytsia, the exploit, which Hacken dates to July, resulted in total losses of about $14 million and was carried out by a DPRK-linked actor tracked in law-enforcement circles as “TraderTraitor.”
Hacken says it is actively monitoring the on-chain movements and is supporting recovery efforts by flagging malicious addresses to the wider security community. The laundering choreography, as mapped by Hacken, left half the stolen funds on EVM networks and the rest on Tron and Bitcoin.
In the last 24 hours, on-chain traces show that the bulk of the EVM-side proceeds, more than $7 million, were routed through THORChain and swapped into Bitcoin, a technique observers have increasingly flagged as a common laundering path after major exchange thefts earlier this year. Rudytsia noted that THORChain’s native cross-chain swap functionality has repeatedly been used to convert large sums of ETH and ERC-20 tokens into BTC, making it attractive to sophisticated operators moving stolen assets across ecosystems.
On-chain Evidence Hacken’s report also documents the handling of the Tron-denominated portion (about $2.5 million in TRX). Those funds, the team found, were converted into USDT, bridged to Ethereum via LayerZero infrastructure, and from there, some of the bridged USDT was again pushed to Bitcoin through THORChain.
On-chain evidence of a nine-figure USDT transfer arriving on Ethereum from a LayerZero executor appears in public transaction records from October 1, 2025, which match the pattern Hacken described.
Complicating the trail, part of the funds that surfaced on Ethereum were sent to a wallet previously tied to the BingX hot-wallet exploit in 2024, itself attributed by investigators to North Korean-linked groups, suggesting either reuse of laundering infrastructure or coordination across multiple thefts.
The address that received those transfers is publicly visible on Ethereum explorer records, and investigators say the link deepens the picture of an organized laundering chain connecting multiple high-profile incidents.
Taken together, the movements indicate that roughly $8–9 million from the WOO X breach was bridged on the same day from Ethereum to Bitcoin, almost entirely via THORChain, leaving an estimated 90% of the stolen value now sitting on Bitcoin addresses as perpetrators accelerate conversion into the oldest and most liquid on-chain asset.
Security teams monitoring the flows warn that once funds consolidate on Bitcoin, conventional tracing and intervention become harder and the risk of eventual cash-out increases. Rudytsia told Blockchain Reporter that Hacken is continuing to monitor the accounts and will push flagged addresses to exchanges and compliance partners in the hope of freezing or otherwise freezing flow paths where possible.
For now, the case is a fresh reminder that as cross-chain tooling gets more powerful, it also gives sophisticated attackers faster, lower-friction routes to turn stolen tokens into harder-to-trace assets, and that forensic work on multiple chains, together with cooperation from on- and off-ramp services, remains the only immediate line of defence in today’s time.
AUTHOR
Mushumir Butt is a seasoned crypto journalist with over three years of experience reporting on the world of blockchain and cryptocurrency. At Blockchain Reporter, he delivers insightful news, in‐depth project reviews, and precise price analysis and predictions. With a strong background in SEO and digital marketing, Mushumir excels at breaking down complex trends into clear, accessible content, ensuring readers stay ahead in the fast‐paced crypto space.
What Happened: The installation, located in Parco Ciani and crafted to symbolize Bitcoin's decentralization ethos, had been torn from its base and discarded into the water over the weekend.
City officials confirmed the recovery of the fragmented artwork on Monday.
Designed by Italian artist and long-time Bitcoin supporter Valentina Picozzi, the piece stood as a faceless optical illusion, a visual metaphor for Satoshi's mystery and the cryptographic roots of Bitcoin.
The structure, made from stainless steel and corten blocks, took nearly two years to complete and was unveiled during the 2024 Plan B Forum hosted by Lugano and stablecoin issuer Tether (CRYPTO: USDT).
The destruction, first noticed by park visitors and flagged on social media, triggered swift response from Picozzi's initiative, Satoshigallery.
The collective, which uses art to advance Bitcoin awareness, has offered a reward of 0.1 BTC for credible information on the perpetrators.
Also Read: Trump Demands Fed Board Remove Chair Jerome Powell, But Polymarket Traders Aren’t Buying It
"You can steal our symbol, but you will never be able to steal our souls," they posted, doubling down on plans to erect 21 similar statues across the globe.
The motive remains unclear, though speculation points to potential acts by intoxicated individuals during Swiss National Day celebrations.
Meanwhile, supporters have launched a petition urging city officials to restore the monument, with private donors pledging to fund the replacement.
Why It Matters: The Lugano piece is part of a broader international trend celebrating Bitcoin through physical art.
Other tributes include a reflective bust in Budapest, an inflatable protest rat in New York, and recent installations in Slovenia and Tokyo.
Together, they represent a cultural shift anchoring Bitcoin's presence beyond the digital sphere, even as Satoshi Nakamoto, the network's founder, remains an enigma, with over 1 million BTC untouched to this day.
Read Next:
The $100 Billion Bitcoin Bet: How Treasury Companies Are Fueling The Crypto Run Image: Shutterstock
Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs
On March 28, MicroStrategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor updated his X profile with laser eyes and a simple message: “It’s time to put the laser eyes back on. $BTC.”
The post surpassed one million views within hours, reigniting bullish sentiment across crypto social media. But every time Saylor used this symbol, it held an important meaning.
Michael Saylor and the Symbol With WeightThe laser eyes symbol carries significant weight in Bitcoin culture. The trend originated in 2021, when believers, including Saylor, Anthony Pompliano, and dozens of public figures, added glowing red eyes to their profile pictures as a declaration that Bitcoin would hit $100,000.
Saylor has since used the symbol selectively, reserving it for moments of strong conviction.
Michael Saylor. Source: XMicroStrategy Doubles Down Despite Unrealized LossesThe timing is deliberate. MicroStrategy currently holds 761,068 BTC, approximately 3.6% of Bitcoin’s entire fixed supply, with an average purchase price of around $75,696 per coin.
Despite the company sitting on significant unrealized losses at current market levels, Saylor’s laser eyes suggest he views the situation as an opportunity, not a threat.
Strategy has publicly set a target of accumulating 1 million BTC by the end of 2026.
Cardone Follows: 100 Bitcoin This WeekReal estate billionaire Grant Cardone wasted no time. One day after Saylor’s post, Cardone asked his 1.5 million X followers, “Do you still believe?” before announcing he would add 100 Bitcoin to his holdings this week.
The back-to-back moves from two of Bitcoin’s most visible advocates send a clear message: major players are potentially treating the dip as an accumulation window.
Adding 100 BTC this week
— Grant Cardone (@GrantCardone) March 30, 2026 Whether the laser eyes mark the beginning of a new rally or simply renewed resolve, the conviction among Bitcoin’s biggest names appears unshaken.
