Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

Polkadot rose 16.7% on the day and 42.5% on the week, with Cosmos Hub, Decred and Ethereum Classic all up more than 8%, while bitcoin ended the first U.S. session since Labor Day down 0.83% at $78,539. Polymarket traders raised the odds of a quarter-point Federal Reserve increase next week to 54.5%, a third consecutive session of widening. Brent crude settled at $99.31, its highest close since July 23.

A group of layer-1 tokens that launched before 2018 carried Tuesday's crypto tape while bitcoin and ether finished lower, and traders extended their bet that the Federal Reserve raises rates next week.

Only one of those tokens has a dated event behind it. Polkadot holders are voting on a proposal to give the network its own stablecoin, submitted to OpenGov on Monday and running 97.5% in favor. Cosmos Hub, Decred and Ethereum Classic produced no filing, release or governance action in the window, and the four moved together on a week when bitcoin gained 1.6%.

Bitcoin last changed hands at $78,539, down 0.83% over 24 hours and up 1.6% over seven days, after trading between $77,666 and $79,432, CoinGecko data shows. Ether was at $2,484.83, down 0.29% on the day and up 2.8% on the week. XRP rose 1.53% to $1.42; Solana fell 0.59% to $103.24; BNB gained 1.66% to $751.92 and holds a 10.5% weekly advance. Total crypto market value stood at $2.70 trillion on $91.54 billion of volume, with bitcoin dominance at 58.36%. Fifty-seven of the 125 largest non-stablecoin tokens rose and 66 fell.

A Round TripBitcoin peaked at $79,432 shortly after 10 p.m. ET Monday, during Tokyo's morning, and sold off through the European session. The 24-hour low of $77,666 came in the 10 a.m. ET hour. It recovered to $78,833 by midday and gave that back through the afternoon, ending the U.S. session near where it opened.

The token is 37.7% below the $126,080 record it set in October 2025.

The Crypto Fear & Greed Index read 69 on Tuesday, down from 71 on Monday and 74 on Sept. 4, according to Alternative.me. It has read above 60 every day since Aug. 29.

Polkadot Wants A StablecoinPolkadot rose 16.7% to $1.25 and 42.5% over seven days, a second consecutive double-digit day after Monday's 13.85% gain, on $420 million of volume against a $2.13 billion market value. It is the largest weekly gain among the 50 biggest tokens.

The proposal driving it went on-chain at 11:49 a.m. ET Monday. OpenGov Referendum 1944, "dotUSD: A Native Stablecoin for Polkadot," sits on the Root track and is in its deciding period. "This proposal signals the intent of the DAO to introduce dotUSD, Polkadot's native stablecoin, as the protocol's primary stable-value instrument," the text reads.

The referendum lists seven actions, among them creating the dotUSD asset "owned by the protocol," opening a DOT-dotUSD liquidity pool on Asset Hub, designating dotUSD a sufficient asset and setting peg stability module parameters. It commits treasury funds: "$2.5M in USDT will be used to mint dotUSD and $2.5M in DOT will be allocated initially to the pool."

The Polkadot Community Foundation submitted it and disclaims operational control. "dotUSD is a decentralized, protocol-native stablecoin project," the text reads. "It would have no issuer and would instead operate autonomously via on-chain logic."

Voting stands at 2,343,074 DOT in favor against 59,896 opposed, with 558,519 DOT of support against an electorate of 1.67 billion DOT. A second referendum, 1942, upgrading system chains to runtime 2.5, went on-chain Sept. 5 and is also deciding.

No U.S. product filing accompanies the move. EDGAR full-text search returns one document mentioning Polkadot between Sept. 1 and Sept. 8, a Canary Staked TRX ETF prospectus that uses the word in passing. Polkadot's own account has posted nothing about dotUSD.

The Old Guard MovesTokenPrice24h7dPolkadot (DOT)$1.25+16.7%+42.5%Cosmos Hub (ATOM)$1.83+10.8%+23.3%Decred (DCR)$17.30+9.4%+19.4%Ethereum Classic (ETC)$8.60+9.3%+18.3%Cosmos Hub, Decred and Ethereum Classic rose alongside Polkadot without a dated catalyst.

The Cosmos Hub's most recent governance proposals, 1052 and 1053, were submitted Aug. 25 and finished voting Sept. 1. Decred's last substantive release is the v2.1.6 consensus security patch from late August; its account's most recent post, dated Sept. 7, is a marketing message. Ethereum Classic's core-geth has not shipped a release since Hermes v1.12.22 on March 28, and the project's repositories show no September activity. None of the three appears in Binance's listing announcements for Sept. 4 through Sept. 8.

VeChain added 10.6% to $0.008006 and 19.5% over seven days. Its Aug. 6 post on the Interstellar upgrade and its Aug. 24 statement that the VIP-255 vote passed give no mainnet activation date.

Hike Odds Reach 54.5%Traders widened their bet on tightening for a third session. Polymarket put a quarter-point increase at 54.5% and no change at 45.5% on $104.6 million of volume. The same contracts read 52.5% and 45.5% at midday Tuesday, 50.5% and 49.5% on Monday, and 30.5% and 67.5% on Aug. 24. A quarter-point cut trades at 0.45%. The Federal Open Market Committee meets Sept. 15-16, one of the four meetings a year that carries a Summary of Economic Projections.

Friday's labor data set the direction. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that "total nonfarm payroll employment increased by 162,000 in August, and the unemployment rate was unchanged at 4.1 percent", with June and July revised up by a combined 55,000. August producer prices publish Sept. 10 and consumer prices Sept. 11, both at 8:30 a.m. ET, the last two federal releases before the committee meets.

Brent Closes Near $100Brent crude settled at $99.31 a barrel, up 3.15% from Friday and its highest close since July 23, when it ended at $100.69. West Texas Intermediate rose 3.03% to $94.25. The yen traded at 153.97 per dollar, its firmest since Feb. 18, and the dollar index fell 0.31% to 98.85.

"Higher oil prices on the back of continued geopolitical escalations between the US and Iran and a rally in the Japanese yen to a 7-month high have taken the spotlight in the past 24 hours," Thahbib Rahman, research analyst at Block Scholes, wrote in a note emailed to reporters on Tuesday. "Both events weighed on risk assets across US equity markets and crypto markets alike."

Rahman said options positioning has not followed spot lower. "While not near the highs of mid-August and early September, after the US Treasury's bond interventions and Fed Governor Waller's dovish speech, short-dated BTC put-call skew remains tilted towards call options," he wrote. "This means investors are leaning more bullish than bearish and is an indication that traders are willing to pay more for upside exposure to spot price than downside protection."

U.S. equities closed lower. The S&P 500 fell 0.58% to 7,673.52 and the Nasdaq Composite 0.32% to 26,421.41. The 10-year Treasury yield rose to 4.81% and the 30-year to 5.26%. Gold futures fell 0.67% to $4,400 an ounce.

Zcash Gets OptionsZcash rose 0.82% to $1,166.37 and 39.2% over seven days after touching $1,210.35, holding tenth place at a $19.73 billion market value, above Hyperliquid at $18.79 billion and Dogecoin at $14.01 billion. It remains 63.4% below the $3,191.93 record set on Oct. 28, 2016.

Grayscale said on Tuesday that "$ZCSH, the world's first Zcash fund, is now available for options trading on @NYSE." The post links to the fund's prospectus and does not name the options venue; the shares list on NYSE Arca, and NYSE American Options and NYSE Arca Options are separate venues. No exchange listing notice or SEC rule filing corroborating the options listing was retrievable, and the most recent document under the trust's EDGAR record is the Aug. 25 prospectus.

The fund completed its uplisting from OTCQX to NYSE Arca on Aug. 25 under the ticker ZCSH, registering the shares through a Form 8-A12B filed Aug. 24 and changing its name to The Zcash ETF the same day. Grayscale's fund account said on Sept. 4 that ZCSH "just crossed $400,000,000 in AUM." The Defiant covered the original conversion filing in November 2025.

Monero fell 4.3% to $497.42 after trading as high as $525.33, and is down 0.7% over seven days against Zcash's 39.2%. Monero's official blog has published nothing since the July 21 GUI release, and no Monero item appeared on the announcement pages of Binance, Kraken, OKX or Bithumb on Monday or Tuesday. The token has no U.S. listed vehicle.

Injective Lists TwiceInjective rose 5.25% to $6.45 and 33.8% over seven days after trading 12.7% higher at midday, on $190 million of volume against a $650 million market value.

Three dated announcements sit behind it. Injective said on Tuesday that "native USDC on Injective is now live on @krakenfx," allowing deposits and withdrawals of the stablecoin directly between the exchange and the chain. On Monday it said that "$INJ is now live on @RobinhoodCrypto"; Robinhood's own asset page lists the token as tradable without stating a date. Also on Monday, the project said that "over 58.8 Million INJ tokens are now staked onchain," which it called a record. Injective's public node reported 58,461,008 INJ bonded against a total supply of 122,781,894, or 47.6%, slightly below the figure the project gave. INJ trades 87.7% below the $52.62 record it set in March 2024.

The chain's most recent blog post, dated Sept. 4, says Pineapple Financial has moved more than $1 billion in residential mortgage records onto Injective.

Korea Bids UselessUseless Coin gained 24% to $0.2791 on $174 million of volume, against a $279 million market value, after two Korean exchanges opened trading in it on Tuesday.

Bithumb's market list carries a KRW-USELESS pair whose hourly candles begin at 1 a.m. ET. Upbit's market list carries BTC and USDT pairs whose candles begin at 8 a.m. ET, with the USDT pair flagged for price volatility and cross-venue price gaps; Upbit did not open a won pair. The listings account for Tuesday's move. The 138.5% seven-day gain predates both, and no project statement covering that period is available.

Venice Token led the day at 30.2%, reaching a record $25.49 before easing to $24.18 and a $1.15 billion market value on $177 million of volume. The most recent post on the Venice blog is dated July 17, carrying an Aug. 5 update that cuts VVV emissions to 2.5 million a year on Sept. 1 and to 2 million on Oct. 1, and raises the DIEM supply target to 40,000 on Sept. 14. Those dates were set five weeks ago. The project's changelog has not been updated since July 30.

Falcon Finance rose 25.6% to $0.1495 and 51.9% over seven days. Its most recent blog post is dated Aug. 31 and its account's Sept. 8 posts respond to the price rather than explain it. Pons added 17.7% to $0.8265 and 93.8% over seven days; Uniswap Labs bought PONS tokens on Sept. 3.

ETFs Skip A SessionU.S. spot bitcoin and ether ETF flows for Tuesday had not published as of 5 p.m. ET. The last completed session is Friday, when bitcoin funds took in $174.6 million and ether funds $25.9 million, according to Farside Investors. BlackRock's IBIT accounted for $117.4 million of the bitcoin total and Fidelity's FBTC $57.2 million; among ether funds, BlackRock's two products drew $74.2 million while Fidelity's FETH lost $48.3 million. No row exists for Monday, when U.S. markets were closed for Labor Day, which means Monday's altcoin advance ran with the ETF and equity markets shut.

DeFi total value locked stood at $87.94 billion, down 0.7% over 24 hours and up 1.57% over seven days, DefiLlama data shows. Stablecoin supply was $311.71 billion, down 0.1% on the day, up 0.49% over seven days and 1.35% over 30 days.

Hyperliquid fell 0.79% to $84.50 and trades 5.7% below the $89.60 record it set on Sept. 6. Its account has posted nothing since Aug. 31. WhiteBIT Coin rose 6.16% to $81.35 and 14.3% over seven days after touching a record $81.98 at 12:40 p.m. ET; its blog has published nothing since July 28.

Venice Takes The DayTokenPrice24h7dVenice Token (VVV)$24.18+30.2%+48.9%Falcon Finance (FF)$0.1495+25.6%+51.9%Useless Coin (USELESS)$0.2791+24.0%+138.5%Pons (PONS)$0.8265+17.7%+93.8%Polkadot (DOT)$1.25+16.7%+42.5%Cosmos Hub (ATOM)$1.83+10.8%+23.3%VeChain (VET)$0.008006+10.6%+19.5%Decred (DCR)$17.30+9.4%+19.4%Ethereum Classic (ETC)$8.60+9.3%+18.3%Akedo Gives It BackTokenPrice24h7dRibbita by Virtuals (TIBBIR)$0.2055-10.8%-14.8%Akedo (AKE)$0.01575-8.6%+76.7%Unibase (UB)$0.1207-7.9%+2.4%Monad (MON)$0.02582-5.9%-0.4%Pudgy Penguins (PENGU)$0.008108-5.1%-4.5%Kite (KITE)$0.1135-4.8%-8.1%Arweave (AR)$2.84-4.8%+24.5%Hedera (HBAR)$0.07895-4.6%+6.8%Akedo traded 21% higher at midday before ending 8.6% lower. It holds a 76.7% weekly gain.

Hedera was the largest token among the decliners at a $3.46 billion market value, and is still up 6.8% over seven days. Its most recent blog post, dated Sept. 4, covers new council partners, and its Tuesday statements concern an insurance consortium building on the network. Monero's 4.3% decline falls just outside the table.

Prices and market data as of 5:11 p.m. ET on Sept. 8, 2026.

Polkadot’s governance system is in the process of deciding whether the network should mint its own US dollar-pegged stablecoin, and the vote isn’t exactly close. Referendum #1944, which proposes creating a decentralized stablecoin called dotUSD, has attracted 97.5% support from voters so far, with roughly 2.31 million DOT cast in favor against just 59,900 opposing votes.

The proposal calls for $5 million in initial liquidity, split evenly between $2.5 million in USDT for minting the stablecoin and $2.5 million in DOT allocated to a liquidity pool. If approved, dotUSD would become the default stable-value instrument across Polkadot’s ecosystem, a move designed to cut the network’s dependence on third-party stablecoins like USDT and USDC.

How dotUSD would actually work dotUSD would be an over-collateralized stablecoin primarily backed by DOT, Polkadot’s native token. The liquidity pool would pair USDT with DOT on Asset Hub, giving dotUSD holders a pathway to swap in and out of the stablecoin. Over-collateralization means more DOT is locked up than the dollar value of dotUSD minted, providing a buffer against price drops in the underlying asset.

This is a protocol-level decision, not a private company launching a product. The proposal is moving through Polkadot’s OpenGov system on the Root track, which handles the network’s most consequential governance decisions. Contributions backing the initiative come from builders within the Polkadot ecosystem itself.

Polkadot’s second stablecoin attempt This isn’t actually Polkadot’s first crack at a native stablecoin. A previous proposal for a DOT-backed stablecoin called pUSD secured over 75% support earlier in 2025, with more than $5.6 million in DOT committed to the effort.

The referendum is currently in its deciding phase, meaning the vote has passed the initial support threshold and is now running through the full decision period required by OpenGov’s rules.

Why this matters for Polkadot’s DeFi ambitions Polkadot’s DeFi sector has historically been smaller than its peers, partly because the network’s architecture, built around specialized parachains, fragments liquidity across multiple chains. A protocol-owned stablecoin could serve as connective tissue, giving traders and developers a single stable asset that works natively across the ecosystem without relying on Circle or Tether to maintain bridge infrastructure.

External stablecoins carry counterparty risk. If Tether or Circle ever restricted access to their tokens on Polkadot, the ecosystem would have no fallback. dotUSD, backed by DOT sitting in Polkadot’s own smart contracts, removes that single point of failure.

An over-collateralized stablecoin backed primarily by DOT means the stablecoin’s health is tethered to DOT’s price performance. A severe and prolonged decline in DOT could strain the collateral ratio, potentially requiring liquidations or additional capital injections to maintain the peg.

The $5 million initial liquidity figure is modest by industry standards. For comparison, DAI’s total supply sits in the billions, and even smaller ecosystem stablecoins typically launch with larger war chests.

If dotUSD gains traction, it creates persistent demand for DOT as collateral. Every dollar of dotUSD minted requires more than a dollar’s worth of DOT locked up, effectively removing supply from circulation.

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

Polkadot’s community has opened a governance vote on a native decentralized stablecoin called dotUSD, with a proposal to make the dollar-pegged asset the network’s primary stable-value instrument and eventually back it mainly with DOT.

Summary

Polkadot OpenGov is voting on a proposal to create dotUSD as the network’s native decentralized stablecoin. The plan calls for $5 million in initial DOT and USDT liquidity for a DOT and dotUSD pool. dotUSD would initially be minted against USDT before a second phase introduces DOT backed vaults, liquidations and redemptions. The full system would let users lock DOT to mint dotUSD while using on chain mechanisms to maintain its dollar peg. According to OpenGov Referendum 1944, the proposed stablecoin would be owned by the protocol and operate autonomously through on-chain logic, without a centralized issuer. The proposal was drafted with contributions from builders, developers and other participants in the Polkadot ecosystem.

The proposal remains in the decision stage at the time of writing. Its implementation would create dotUSD as a new asset, recognize it as the Polkadot stablecoin and establish a DOT/dotUSD liquidity pool on Polkadot Asset Hub.

An archived Polkassembly snapshot showed 2.4 million DOT voting in favor and 59,900 DOT against, equivalent to 97.5% Aye and 2.5% Nay at that point in the vote. The archive cautioned that the figures were frozen while the referendum was still in progress and may not represent the eventual on-chain result.

Polkadot proposes phased launch for dotUSD Under the plan, dotUSD would initially operate differently from the full DOT-backed system envisioned by its developers.

The first phase has already been built on-chain and would allow users to mint dotUSD one-for-one against USDT, subject to a supply cap. Since USDT would provide the reserve backing at this stage, the system would not require an oracle, collateral vaults or liquidation infrastructure.

The proposal seeks to use Polkadot Treasury assets to seed a DOT/dotUSD pool on the Hub decentralized exchange. The version submitted with the referendum allocated $2.5 million in USDT to mint dotUSD and another $2.5 million worth of DOT to the pool, giving it $5 million in initial liquidity.

A more recent version displayed on Subsquare lists $1.5 million in USDT and $1.5 million in DOT for the initial pool, reducing the proposed allocation to $3 million.

dotUSD would be designated a “sufficient asset,” allowing an account to hold the stablecoin without having to maintain a DOT balance. Governance would set parameters for the peg stability module, including the maximum amount of dotUSD that could initially be minted.

Phase two would move dotUSD toward its intended design by introducing DOT-backed collateral vaults, an oracle, a stability pool, liquidations and a redemption mechanism. The proposal describes dotUSD as an overcollateralized stablecoin whose architecture draws heavily from Liquity v2’s BOLD system.

Plans for a DOT-backed stablecoin have been under consideration for more than a year. As crypto.news previously reported in July 2025, Polkadot co-founder Gavin Wood disclosed work on a fully decentralized stablecoin during the Web3 Summit and said a treasury proposal was being prepared to bootstrap its liquidity.

How would the DOT-backed dotUSD system work? Once the second phase is implemented, users would deposit DOT into vaults and borrow dotUSD worth less than the collateral they provided.

The proposal gives an example of 300 DOT priced at $5 each, producing $1,500 in collateral. A user could mint up to $1,000 of dotUSD against the position, corresponding to a collateralization ratio of 150%. If the value of the DOT falls far enough to breach the required collateral ratio, the vault would become eligible for liquidation.

Borrowers would set the interest rates they pay on their own positions. Lower rates would place a vault earlier in the redemption queue, while borrowers willing to pay higher rates could reduce the chance that their collateral is selected for redemption.

Two arbitrage routes are intended to keep dotUSD close to $1. When the stablecoin trades above its peg, users could lock DOT, mint dotUSD and sell it at the higher market price, increasing supply. If dotUSD falls below $1, traders could buy it at a discount and redeem it through the protocol for $1 worth of DOT.

A capped stablecoin buffer is planned alongside the DOT redemption system. Existing stablecoins would back this portion of dotUSD and remain redeemable at $1, providing another route for maintaining the peg without selling the DOT used as collateral.

Liquidations would first be absorbed by a stability pool funded with dotUSD deposited by participants. In return for providing capital, stability pool participants would receive liquidated DOT at a discount while the corresponding dotUSD is burned to cancel the outstanding debt. If the pool runs out of funds, collateral and debt would be redistributed proportionally across the remaining vaults.

dotUSD ties into Polkadot’s new economic model The stablecoin proposal comes after Polkadot changed the economics of DOT, including the introduction of a fixed maximum supply.

The DAO approved a 2.1 billion DOT cap in September 2025, replacing the network’s previous model of uncapped issuance. A subsequent tokenomics upgrade introduced the Dynamic Allocation Pool, or DAP, which receives newly issued DOT and other network income for allocation through governance.

When the new tokenomics framework entered its implementation phase in March, DOT emissions were set to fall 53.6%, while newly minted tokens, transaction fees and slashes were directed into the DAP. Governance can allocate those funds toward staking rewards, treasury spending and other network budgets.

Referendum 1944 proposes using dotUSD within the next stage of that system. Under phase two of the DAP, validators and nominators are expected to receive remuneration in stable assets, while the Treasury would receive a combination of stablecoins and DOT. The proposal says dotUSD would allow those obligations to be denominated in dollars and settled through an asset native to Polkadot.

Polkadot already supports externally issued dollar tokens. USDC became available on Polkadot Asset Hub in September 2023, allowing the stablecoin to move to parachains through the network’s cross-consensus messaging system.

The dotUSD proposal argues that relying on externally issued stablecoins leaves Polkadot applications and treasury operations dependent on outside issuers and their governance. Its proposed full version would instead use DOT as the primary collateral while remaining governed through Polkadot.

The Polkadot Community Foundation said its role is administrative and that it would not issue, control or take custody of dotUSD, DOT or USDT under the proposal. It would not operate the stablecoin or provide liquidity, with dotUSD intended to function through on-chain logic without an issuer.

Implementation of the referendum’s preimage depends on Polkadot system chains being upgraded to version 2.5 under a separate governance proposal, Referendum 1942.

Polkadot [DOT] climbed 11.35% over 24 hours as its dotUSD proposal gained 97.5% governance approval, adding a major catalyst to the recent price recovery. 

Specifically, the proposal highlights a native decentralized stablecoin, which is designed to serve as the Polkadot protocol’s key stable-value instrument.

The initiative also proposes $5 million in initial liquidity for a DOT-dotUSD pool on the Polkadot Asset Hub. Additionally, the treasury funds are expected to provide $2.5 million in USDT for minting and allocate another $2.5 million in DOT.

Therefore, the structure will expand DOT’s utility while also improving stablecoin liquidity across the protocol.

Futures sellers challenge renewed DOT demand After the earlier stronger market demand, DOT’s 90-day Futures Taker CVD printed seller dominance at the time of press. This implied aggressive Futures sellers started opposing buyers as DOT advanced toward the $1.282 zone.

Initially, the demand absorbed the supply-side pressure pushing DOT above its previous consolidation structure. 

However, the momentum changed when the $1.282 price level rejected further expansion, and eventually the price started retracing.

The taker selling activity, therefore, contrasted with the governance catalyst supporting the broader price recovery. 

The derivatives’ pressure, on the other hand, intensified further as the leveraged bullish positions unwound following the rejection at $1.282.

Source: CryptoQuant Long liquidations amplify selling pressure Notably, DOT’s price rejection aligned with approximately $305.57K in long liquidations against only $42.38K in shorts. 

According to CoinGlass, Binance accounted for roughly $246.29K of the long liquidations, reflecting the exchange with the most losses across tracked exchanges.

The long liquidations imply that the leveraged buyers absorbed substantially heavier losses as the token retreated away from the $1.282 supply zone. Additionally, forced long closures also strengthened the ongoing seller dominance across the futures markets.

Combined, the liquidation imbalance and Futures Taker CVD, therefore, reinforced the derivatives-driven selling narrative behind DOT’s retracement. 

Notably, this leverage pressure also coincided closely with the emerging exhaustion indicator across the technical price structure.

Source: CoinGlass Is DOT’s $1.282 rejection signaling exhaustion? Polkadot broke above the $0.946 and $1.044 resistance levels before rallying towards the  $1.282 resistance zone, where buyers failed to sustain further advance. 

The rejection provided a sharp red candle towards the $1.192  level, signaling possible profit-taking after the sharp price breakout.

Notably, the price and RSI earlier formed an upward convergence, confirming stronger buying pressure as the rally unfolded. However, the RSI also retreated from 85.26 to 75.95 following the price rejection at the $1.282 zone.

However, despite the correction, the MACD indicator remained bullish, with its line holding above its signal line.

Additionally, the positive histogram has expanded, showing that the broader bullish  technical structure retained some strength despite the immediate selling pressure. 

Therefore, the $1.044 price level would become the key support if the retracement deepens further. Holding above this support level could revive another attempt of the $1.282 resistance, but a break below could expose the $0.946 support zone.

Source: TradingView Final Summary DOT’s dotUSD catalyst supported demand, but $1.282 triggered clear short-term exhaustion. Futures selling and long liquidations increased pressure as DOT retraced from resistance.

A Native Stablecoin for PolkadotThe @Polkadot Community Foundation has put forward a formal proposal for $dotUSD, a native decentralized stablecoin designed to operate directly within the Polkadot ecosystem. The move signals a growing push across major blockchain networks to reduce dependence on externally issued stablecoins such as USDT and USDC, which have historically dominated on-chain liquidity.

Under the proposed design, borrowers would mint $dotUSD against $DOT collateral while self-selecting their own interest rates, a mechanism borrowed from the architecture of Liquity Protocol v2. That model is built around user-set rates rather than governance-imposed or algorithmically controlled ones. As Liquity's own documentation describes it, borrowers become makers of their own interest rates, allowing a true rate market to emerge on-chain without centralized intervention.

Market-Discovered Rates and an Organic Yield CurveThe core innovation behind $dotUSD is its interest rate model. Rather than relying on a centralized oracle or protocol governance to set borrowing costs, the system would allow rates to be discovered organically through borrower behaviour. Liquity V2 enables borrowers to pick their own interest rates, with the expectation that the collective result mirrors true market conditions across DeFi over time.

Applied to Polkadot, this approach aims to establish a native on-chain yield curve for $DOT, moving away from rate-setting mechanisms that depend on external data sources. Borrowers who set lower rates face a higher risk of redemption, while those who set higher rates pay more but hold more stable positions. This self-correcting dynamic is intended to keep $dotUSD pegged without relying on centralised controls.

The proposal is at an early stage and no formal governance vote has been confirmed at the time of writing. But the introduction of a structured, Liquity v2-derived architecture suggests the @Polkadot Community Foundation is taking a considered approach to one of the more technically complex challenges in DeFi: building a sustainable, decentralized stablecoin backed entirely by a native network asset.

Sources:
Liquity: V2 as a De Facto Reference Rate for DeFi
The Block: Liquity V2 and User-Set Interest Rates

Polkadot's $DOT token recorded a 19% price gain within a 24-hour window, moving in step with a sharp rise in on-chain usage that analysts say points to a broader recovery in network fundamentals.

Transaction Volume Drives the Rally Daily transaction volume on the Polkadot network expanded by roughly 150% during the period, a move that tracked closely with the price appreciation in $DOT.

The volume expansion adds weight to the price move, suggesting the rally was not purely driven by thin liquidity or speculative positioning.

Inter-Chain Messaging at Quarterly Highs The activity surge extends beyond raw transaction counts. Polkadot's inter-chain messaging infrastructure, built around its Cross-Consensus Messaging format known as XCM, has been a key driver of ecosystem engagement. Throughput on these protocols reached new quarterly highs during the latest activity window, reinforcing the network's utility case.

That engagement is increasingly backed by a substantial developer base.

The network also received a structural boost earlier in 2026. providing an additional regulated demand channel for institutional investors.

Whether the current momentum can be sustained will depend on continued on-chain adoption.

Sources:
CoinTurk: Polkadot network activity surges 150%, DOT faces key price levels
Polkadot Developer Docs: Get Started with XCM
Coinpedia: Polkadot Price Prediction 2026

A Sharp Spike in Throughput@Polkadot recorded a significant jump in network activity on September 2, 2026. According to Chainspect, the network's throughput climbed nearly 150% from its previous level, reaching 0.06 transactions per second (TPS) and generating an estimated 4,960 transactions within a single hour. While 0.06 TPS is modest by the standards of high-throughput blockchains, the percentage gain represents one of the largest single-day increases $DOT has seen this year.

Chainspect, which tracks real-time blockchain performance metrics including TPS, block time, and finality, flagged the move as a notable daily gainer. The analytics platform monitors live network data rather than theoretical benchmarks, making it a widely referenced source for on-chain activity comparisons.

Products Devnet at the Centre of the MoveThe activity spike is being attributed to traffic on the Polkadot Products Devnet. The devnet was launched by the Paseo team alongside the Polkadot Community Foundation to let developers test new products, apps, and features without using real money or risking real assets. The initiative carries the "Products for People" tagline and runs on the Paseo testnet, Polkadot's community-operated testing network.

The environment allows users to deploy static web applications as .dot domains and test them across Polkadot's official mobile, desktop, and web clients. It also supports hosting for identification, payments, and storage, all without requiring value tokens. Products Devnet provides a space for developers to build and test applications using new features slated for future introduction to the Polkadot network without risking real funds.

Uptake has been steady since the launch. More than 200 applications have already been indexed in the devnet, spanning categories from marketplaces and collaborative documents to reviews and NFTs. Before the public launch, some of Polkadot's new product features were tested at the 2026 Web3 Summit in Berlin, where around 900 people took part in proof-of-concept testing using Polkadot-based products for payments, communication, and identity verification.

The broader significance of the devnet lies in what it signals for Polkadot's developer strategy. The move represents a shift from parachains toward consumer apps, offering feeless hosting and simpler UX to rival layer-2 networks. The Polkadot Community Foundation and Parity are the principal architects behind the SDK, DotNS, and Bulletin infrastructure that power the environment.

Whether the activity spike proves to be a one-day event or the start of a sustained trend in on-chain usage will be a key data point for the network heading into the rest of 2026.

Sources
Chainspect: Polkadot TPS and Network Metrics
Crypto Times: Polkadot Opens Public Devnet Ahead of Production Network
Tron Weekly: Polkadot Devnet 2026 Developer Tools Overview

Polkadot Tops the RankingsPolkadot currently holds the highest Nakamoto Coefficient among several major blockchain networks tracked by Chainspect, a public blockchain analytics platform. Its coefficient stands at 168, ahead of TON Network with 82 and Avalanche with 25, according to the data cited by BSC News.

Chainspect's decentralization dashboard tracks this metric across more than 50 networks, making it one of the more comprehensive public references for comparing validator distribution across chains.

What the Nakamoto Coefficient Actually MeasuresThe Nakamoto Coefficient estimates the minimum number of independent entities that would need to coordinate to compromise a network's consensus. The concept was introduced in 2017 by former Coinbase CTO Balaji Srinivasan and named after Bitcoin's creator, Satoshi Nakamoto. A higher figure generally means control is distributed across a broader group of independent operators, making coordinated attacks harder to execute.

Chainspect groups entities controlled by the same organisation or individual together and counts only active participants, which gives the coefficient more precision than a raw validator count alone. Polkadot's strong score is in part attributed to its nominated proof-of-stake consensus mechanism, which is designed to distribute stake evenly across a large validator set.

That said, the metric captures only one dimension of decentralization. Factors such as client software diversity, geographical distribution of nodes, and token ownership concentration also shape a network's real-world resilience, none of which the Nakamoto Coefficient directly reflects. It is a useful snapshot, not a complete security assessment.

Polkadot's lead on this metric is a meaningful signal for its decentralization narrative, but investors and builders should read it alongside other indicators before drawing broader conclusions about network security or adoption.

Sources:
Chainspect: Nakamoto Coefficient Ranking 2026
Ledger Academy: Nakamoto Coefficient Explained
ForkLog: What Is the Nakamoto Coefficient and How Is It Calculated?

Polkadot has launched its Products Devnet, a dedicated environment for developers to create and share decentralized applications as static web apps, expanding the platform’s focus on innovative product development.

Product development environment and specialized chainsThe new Devnet offers a framework for building ‘Products’—web applications that operate within the Polkadot host. Developers can experiment with features that extend beyond typical blockchain utilities, enabling more specialized, tailored, or even industrial-grade solutions.

Within the Devnet, three specialized chains are available. Asset Hub supports contracts and asset-related domains, allowing users to register and utilize DotNS names. The People chain centers on identity and personhood, providing tools for verifiable digital identity management. The Bulletin chain functions as a space to host bundles of Products, facilitating distribution and community sharing.

To create and deploy these applications, developers use React combined with @parity/product-sdk. After development, products can be registered under a .dot domain and published through the pad CLI tool, streamlining the process of public release and discovery.

Mini dictionary: Parity is a core blockchain infrastructure company responsible for much of Polkadot’s technology. DotNS (Dot Name Service) is an identity and domain management protocol on Polkadot, enabling blockchain-based name registration.

Developers are encouraged to begin with applications that may serve only personal needs, but these tools can often evolve into more broadly useful solutions as the ecosystem develops further.

Changing focus for Polkadot and ecosystem partnersParity and the Polkadot Community Foundation are leading the initiative behind the Products Devnet, providing the software development kit (SDK), DotNS support, and Bulletin infrastructure needed to build and publish new tools. Their intention is to reduce user experience (UX) barriers commonly associated with blockchain while maintaining on-chain verifiability for applications built on the network.

The Devnet environment offers developers advantages like feeless hosting and composable identity features, which streamline the development and onboarding process. This is seen as a shift in Polkadot’s strategy, no longer prioritizing parachain auctions, but instead orienting toward consumer applications and broader use cases with Polkadot 2.0.

Mini dictionary: Parachain auctions were previously central to Polkadot’s ecosystem, allocating slots to projects via competitive bidding. With the Devnet focus, these auctions have become less prominent as consumer products take priority.

Product use cases and future directionThe first applications built with these tools included marketplaces such as Mercado and localdot, on-chain surveys, and decentralized forums. These early projects demonstrated not only the potential for advanced industrial analytics tools and educational resources, but also showcased the variety of products possible within the ecosystem.

Polkadot’s Devnet arrives at a competitive moment in the smart contract space, as Ethereum layer 2 networks and Solana intensify efforts to capture consumer-focused applications. The platform’s adoption and growth will depend on the maturity of its development tools, successful migration to mainnet, and ongoing interest from developers and broader communities.

Polkadot is a decentralized blockchain network designed for interoperability between different blockchains. The platform is developed and maintained by Parity Technologies in collaboration with the broader Polkadot community.

ChainMain FocusAsset HubContracts & asset management, DotNS name registrationPeopleIdentity and personhood featuresBulletinHosting and bundling of Products

21Shares' Polkadot Staking ETF has been listed by the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation (DTCC) under the ticker TDOT, a step that formalises the product's place in the US exchange-traded fund ecosystem.

Rebrand Reflects Staking Strategy The DTCC listing coincides with a name change for the fund. The updated name reflects the fund's core strategy: TDOT holds $DOT and stakes between 40% and 95% of its holdings through network validators, currently generating a staking yield of 2.04%. The management fee remains 0.30%.

Background on TDOT That made it the first US spot Polkadot ETF when it began trading in March 2026.

With the rebrand complete and the DTCC listing confirmed, the question for TDOT is whether the staking-forward positioning can rebuild assets toward and beyond its $11 million seed level.

Sources
Crypto Briefing: DTCC lists 21Shares Polkadot Staking ETF shares under ticker TDOT
Nasdaq: 21Shares Launches Polkadot ETF (TDOT) in the United States
The Block: First spot Polkadot ETF launches in US issued by 21Shares

@hydration_net, the largest decentralized finance platform on @Polkadot, recorded a 10.1% increase in total value locked (TVL) over the past 30 days, bringing its TVL to $56.6 million. The move makes Hydration a clear outlier in a Polkadot ecosystem where most other parachains have struggled.

Standing Apart From the Pack While Hydration posted gains, competing parachains on @Polkadot fell between 6% and 89% over the same period. The closest rival, @AcalaNetwork, recorded a 5.9% decline. That gap places Hydration in a category of its own within the ecosystem, and the protocol's recent tokenomics improvements have added further weight to the bullish case.

Hydration's dominance within the Polkadot parachain landscape is well established. Hydration, a Polkadot parachain and decentralized exchange, has been solidifying its position as the top DeFi protocol within the Polkadot ecosystem. The platform's core product, the Omnipool, combines the liquidity of multiple assets into a single automated market maker (AMM) pool, alongside tools for lending, borrowing, and automated trading strategies.

Short-Term Reversal or Sustained Recovery? Despite the positive 30-day reading, the broader trend still warrants caution. Hydration's TVL is down roughly 21% over 90 days and has contracted around 81.6% over the past year, suggesting the recent uptick may be a short-term reversal rather than the start of a confirmed recovery. That longer-term picture reflects a broader drawdown across the Polkadot ecosystem. Although TVL has pulled back significantly from prior highs, a portion of the decline is attributable to price losses suffered by $DOT and $BTC.

Still, Hydration's relative strength within the parachain set is hard to ignore. Hydration leads the parachain TVL ranking, more than five times the next-largest entry. Traders and DeFi participants watching the @Polkadot ecosystem will be closely monitoring whether the protocol can build on this momentum or whether broader market conditions reassert downward pressure.

Sources:
The Defiant: Hydration Extends Dominance Over Polkadot's DeFi Ecosystem
Polkadot Support: Hydration DeFi Hub on Polkadot
SQ Magazine: Polkadot Statistics 2026, Parachain TVL

Polkadot (DOT) is showing the first signs of a potential recovery, with technical indicators and a sharp increase in network activity suggesting a shift in sentiment. Buyers are defending key support levels, yet analysts note that a sustained reversal will depend on continued adoption and stronger buying pressure.

Technical setup signals reversal potentialAt the latest check, Polkadot traded at $0.7522, supported by a 24-hour trading volume of $60.9 million and a market capitalization of $1.27 billion. The stability in price over the past day comes as both technical structure and network activity hint at the chance of a bullish reversal.

Crypto With Gopal, a recognized analyst, stated that DOT is currently developing a falling wedge pattern on its daily chart following a prolonged downtrend. The price has been testing its primary support zone between $0.70 and $0.75.

The narrowing pattern on DOT’s chart implies that sellers are losing momentum as buyers defend the lower boundary. If this support holds, DOT could build strength and test the upper trendline for a breakout.

Should the price close above the top trendline of the wedge, the bullish structure would be confirmed, potentially targeting a near-term move toward $1.20. If momentum continues, the next resistance could be $1.50. However, DOT must first overcome current resistance and attract sustained buying interest for this scenario to unfold.

Network activity jumps 17,200% in 24 hoursChainspect, a blockchain analytics provider, reported a striking 17,200% increase in daily transactions on the Polkadot network within one day. Daily transaction counts jumped from just 6 to 1,456, marking a surge in on-chain engagement.

Although the percentage increase appears dramatic, the small initial number of transactions exaggerates the impact. Absolute figures remain modest, which highlights the need to interpret data in context.

MetricPreviousCurrentChange (%)Daily Transactions61,45617,200%DOT Price$0.70–$0.75$0.7522StableFor Polkadot’s recovery to gain momentum, ongoing increases in network transactions and user participation are seen as essential. A steady rise would indicate stronger adoption and bolster the case for a longer-term trend reversal, especially if the activity spike can be maintained.

The wider crypto market is beginning to show signs of improvement. If Bitcoin’s price leads another upward move, DOT could also benefit, possibly accelerating its own breakout from the falling wedge pattern.

Polkadot is an open-source network that connects different blockchains, providing interoperability for various decentralized applications.

Mini dictionary: Chainspect, a blockchain analytics firm, specializes in monitoring on-chain activity and providing data insights for cryptocurrencies, helping traders and analysts identify network usage trends and potential shifts in market sentiment.

The next direction for DOT will hinge on whether it can hold current support and successfully break out above the wedge formation. Failure to do so, coupled with declining network growth, could delay any lasting recovery.

If DOT achieves a breakout and sustains network momentum, bullish sentiment is likely to increase, while a drop in activity or a move below support would prolong the path to recovery.

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.

PANews reported on August 18, citing Protos, that the latest disclosure for 21Shares’ Polkadot ETF (TDOT) shows that in the second quarter of 2026, when the fund sold DOT tokens to pay staking yield, every $1 of distribution income was accompanied by about $4.52 in realized losses.

According to regulatory filings, TDOT sold 98,505 DOT in the second quarter, generating about $107,500 in cash to pay staking yield to shareholders. However, due to a sharp decline in DOT’s price, these sales recognized about $485,600 in losses.

Data shows DOT fell about 34% in the second quarter of 2026, and its cumulative decline over the 12 months ended June 30 reached 76%. Because TDOT shareholders receive distributions denominated in U.S. dollars rather than directly receiving DOT staking rewards, the fund needs to sell DOT to convert into cash payments, thereby locking in losses in a low-price environment. In the second quarter, TDOT paid cumulative distributions of about $0.14698 per share, but over the same period the fund’s share price fell from $14.95 to $9.86, a decline of about 34%. Staking yield did not offset the losses caused by the decline in asset prices.

By comparison, other crypto staking funds realized significantly smaller losses in the second quarter. Among them, the Invesco Galaxy Solana fund realized about $0.89 in losses for every $1 of yield paid, while Solana, Sui, and Ethereum staking funds recorded corresponding losses of about $0.74, $0.31, and $0.25, respectively. In addition, TDOT incurred further losses in the second quarter from investor redemptions and management fee payments, bringing total realized losses to about $2.5 million.

Polkadot was once expected to build the “blockchain internet,” using a parachain architecture to achieve cross-chain interoperability and high-throughput execution. But its ecosystem total value locked (TVL) is now less than $100 million, and DOT’s price has fallen about 97% from its all-time high, while market attention continues to decline. At the same time, Grayscale withdrew its Polkadot ETF registration application in August, further reflecting pressure on demand for DOT-related investment products.

Grayscale withdrew its Cardano, Polkadot, and Hedera ETF registrations in under four minutes on August 7, exactly two days before ADA cleared the SEC seasoning threshold. With Bitwise and Canary still in the race, the retreat says more about the economics of altcoin ETFs than about Cardano itself.

Summary

Grayscale filed three Form RW withdrawals with the SEC on August 7, 2026, pulling its Cardano Trust ETF, Polkadot Trust ETF, and Hedera Trust ETF registrations in a span of 190 seconds, with no shares issued, sold, or distributed under any of the three.

– Cardano completed its six-month CME futures seasoning period on August 9, 2026, two days after Grayscale walked away, clearing the threshold that would have allowed a spot ADA ETF to list under the SEC generic listing standards in as few as 75 days.

– Five other issuers, including Bitwise, Canary Capital, VanEck, and 21Shares, still have active ADA ETF filings, with the earliest possible SEC decision window falling around October 23, 2026.

– Grayscale reported a 20 percent revenue decline in its IPO filing, with GBTC and ETHE generating 88 percent of the firm’s roughly $318.7 million in nine-month revenue while bleeding a combined $30 billion in cumulative outflows since their ETF conversions.

– ADA trades near $0.196 with a $6.55 billion market cap, DOT sits at $0.805, and HBAR has fallen to $0.068, all down more than 60 percent from their all-time highs and collectively representing a fraction of the institutional demand that drove Bitcoin and Ethereum ETF launches.

At 4:33 p.m. Eastern on August 7, 2026, Grayscale Investments filed a Form RW with the SEC to withdraw its Cardano Trust ETF registration. Ninety seconds later, the Hedera Trust ETF followed. Two minutes after that, the Polkadot Trust ETF joined them. Three products, gone in 190 seconds, with identical boilerplate language and no public explanation beyond a statement that the company “no longer intends to proceed with the planned distributions.”

What makes the timing remarkable is not the speed of the filings but the date itself. Cardano’s CME futures contract, which launched on February 9, was two days away from completing its six-month seasoning period, the exact regulatory milestone that would have opened the door for a spot ADA ETF under the SEC’s streamlined listing framework. Grayscale did not just exit the altcoin ETF race. It exited on the finish line.

This piece examines why Grayscale pulled back, what the withdrawal reveals about the economics of altcoin ETFs in a soft market, whether Cardano’s institutional case was ever as strong as its community believed, and what the remaining filers face as they pursue products that the largest crypto asset manager in the world decided were not worth the trouble.

Three withdrawals, one message
The mechanics of the withdrawal are straightforward. Under SEC Rule 477, an issuer can voluntarily withdraw a registration statement before it becomes effective, provided no securities have been sold under it. Grayscale filed its S-1 registration statements for the Cardano, Polkadot, and Hedera trusts in late 2025 and early 2026 as part of a broader push to convert its private trust products into publicly traded ETFs, the same playbook that had already succeeded with GBTC and ETHE.

All three Form RW filings contained identical language. None cited a specific reason for withdrawal. The SEC accepted them without comment. Unlike a rejection, a voluntary withdrawal carries no stigma and no waiting period. Grayscale could refile tomorrow if it chose to.

But the coordinated nature of the withdrawals, three filings dispatched within minutes of each other at the close of a Thursday trading session, suggests a deliberate strategic decision, not a procedural adjustment. This was not a pause. It was a retreat.

The crypto market noticed. ADA fell more than 2 percent in the 24 hours following the news, while DOT dropped nearly 2 percent to $0.805 and HBAR slipped 2.24 percent to $0.068. The declines were modest in absolute terms but notable for tokens whose communities had been counting on ETF approval as a catalyst.

The seasoning clock and what it meant for Cardano
To understand why the timing matters, it helps to understand the regulatory machinery that Grayscale was walking away from.

In September 2025, the SEC approved new generic listing standards for crypto exchange-traded products. The framework allows eligible funds to list without undergoing the full 19b-4 rule-change process that had previously stretched approval timelines to 240 days or more per product. Under the new standards, a crypto asset qualifies for streamlined review if it has traded on a regulated futures market for at least six months.

CME Group launched Cardano futures on February 9, 2026. The six-month clock expired on August 9. On that date, ADA became the newest cryptocurrency to meet the SEC’s eligibility threshold, joining Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and XRP in the small club of assets with a clear path to a spot ETF.

Grayscale knew this. Every issuer in the space knew this. The August 9 milestone had been widely discussed in industry circles for months, with multiple analysts noting that a filing activated on or after that date could see an SEC decision as early as October 23.

Yet Grayscale chose to withdraw two days before the clock expired. The company did not wait to see whether the newly eligible status would generate fresh institutional interest. It did not pause the filing to reassess. It killed it. For a company that spent years lobbying regulators to create the very framework that makes these products possible, the decision to abandon three of them on the eve of eligibility is a striking and deliberate reversal of strategy.

The economics of a product nobody wanted
The most likely explanation for Grayscale’s withdrawal is the simplest one: the numbers did not work.

Launching an ETF is not free. Legal fees, compliance infrastructure, market-making arrangements, custodial agreements, marketing, and ongoing regulatory reporting all carry costs. For a Bitcoin or Ethereum product with billions of dollars in potential demand, those costs are trivial relative to the revenue from management fees. For an altcoin ETF tracking a $6.55 billion asset with tepid institutional interest, the calculus is different.

Consider the existing data points. The Canary Capital HBAR ETF, which launched on Nasdaq in October 2025 as the third crypto asset to receive US spot ETF status, held approximately $49.14 million in net assets as of July 2, 2026. Its market-price return was negative 37.32 percent for the year and negative 63.32 percent since inception. Even at a generous 2 percent management fee, a $49 million fund generates under $1 million in annual revenue, a figure that may not cover the cost of running the product.

The broader altcoin ETF landscape tells a similar story. While XRP ETFs have accumulated roughly $1.5 billion in cumulative inflows and Solana funds have gathered about $1.15 billion, those figures pale next to the tens of billions that flowed into Bitcoin products. Below the top tier, demand drops off sharply. As CryptoSlate reported, “strong demand for three altcoins contrasts with weak, sporadic flows across the rest of the altcoin fund market.”

Grayscale already has a way to offer ADA exposure. Its CoinDesk Crypto 5 ETF, trading under the ticker GDLC, tracks an index that includes Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP, Solana, and Cardano. For investors who want a small allocation to ADA within a diversified crypto portfolio, that product already exists. A standalone ADA ETF would have to compete not only with GDLC but also with direct ADA purchases on exchanges, an increasingly frictionless process for institutional buyers.

Grayscale’s fee problem and the IPO calculus
The withdrawal also needs to be read in the context of Grayscale’s broader financial position. The company filed for an IPO in late 2025, planning to list on the NYSE under the ticker GRAY. The S-1 filing revealed a business under significant pressure.

GBTC, charging 1.5 percent annually, and ETHE, charging 2.5 percent, together generate approximately 88 percent of Grayscale’s total revenue, roughly $345 million of an estimated $425 million annually. But both products have been hemorrhaging assets. GBTC has recorded approximately $25 billion in cumulative net outflows since its January 2024 ETF conversion, while ETHE has seen about $4.8 billion leave since July 2024. Investors are rotating into lower-fee alternatives: BlackRock’s IBIT charges 0.12 percent, and Fidelity’s FBTC charges 0.25 percent.

Grayscale responded by launching Mini versions of both products at 0.15 percent, which have attracted $3.3 billion in combined inflows since 2024. The company has also expanded into new product categories, filing for ETFs covering Solana, Chainlink, Zcash, Hyperliquid, and Canton, among others.

But expansion costs money. Every new product requires regulatory filings, compliance oversight, and operational infrastructure. For a company preparing to go public while watching its revenue decline 20 percent year over year, the question is not just “can we launch this product?” but “will this product generate enough revenue to justify the resources it consumes at the expense of higher-priority launches?”

For ADA, DOT, and HBAR, the answer appears to have been no. Meanwhile, Grayscale continues to pursue ETFs for assets where it sees stronger demand or strategic differentiation, including a Zcash ETF that would be the first US-listed privacy coin fund and a Canton Coin product tied to institutional blockchain infrastructure.

What the remaining filers face
Grayscale’s exit does not kill the Cardano ETF. Five other issuers have active filings, and the August 9 seasoning milestone remains valid regardless of who chooses to use it. Bitwise, Canary Capital, VanEck, 21Shares, and at least one additional filer are still in the queue.

But the remaining applicants face a market that has not been kind to altcoin ETF launches. The Canary HBAR ETF’s experience is instructive. Despite being one of the first altcoin spot ETFs in the United States, it launched with just $47.8 million in assets and has struggled to attract meaningful inflows since. The lesson is that regulatory approval alone does not create demand. Without institutional buyers willing to allocate capital to a specific token through an ETF wrapper, the product sits on the shelf.

Cardano has some advantages that HBAR lacked at launch. Its market cap of $6.55 billion is substantially larger. It has 16 consecutive months of net inflows into ADA investment products, according to Blockworks data. Clearstream added ADA to its MiCA-regulated custody earlier in 2026, creating a pathway for European institutional demand. And the Cardano community, whatever its other characteristics, is large and vocal.

But “large and vocal” does not always translate to “willing to buy an ETF.” Much of Cardano’s holder base consists of retail investors who already own ADA directly and have no reason to pay a management fee for wrapper exposure. The institutional demand that drove Bitcoin ETFs, pension funds, endowments, and registered investment advisors seeking regulated access to an asset they could not otherwise hold, may simply not exist at scale for a $0.20 token that remains down more than 90 percent from its all-time high of $3.10.

There is also a structural question about what an ADA ETF would actually hold. Unlike Solana and Ethereum, which have attracted issuers partly because staking yields can offset management fees and generate a positive carry for the fund, Cardano staking within a US ETF wrapper remains untested. Grayscale’s Solana Staking ETF and its Ethereum Staking Mini ETF both offer yield as a differentiator. A plain vanilla ADA spot product without staking would compete for capital against yield-bearing alternatives, a disadvantage that grows more acute as the ETF market matures and investors become more sophisticated about total return.

The fee question compounds the problem. Morgan Stanley launched Ethereum and Solana ETFs at 0.14 percent, setting a new floor for the industry. Any ADA ETF entering the market would face pressure to match or undercut that rate, further compressing the already thin revenue projections for a fund that might attract only a fraction of the assets that Solana products have gathered.

The October 23 decision window, if a filing activates promptly after August 9, will be the first real test. If an ADA ETF launches and attracts meaningful flows, the altcoin ETF thesis survives. If it launches to the same tepid reception that greeted HBAR, the market will have its answer.

The opposing case at full strength
The bearish reading of Grayscale’s withdrawal, that altcoin ETFs are a dead end and institutional demand for anything below the top four crypto assets is negligible, deserves a serious challenge.

First, the timing may not be as significant as it appears. Grayscale could have decided weeks earlier to withdraw and simply waited for a convenient filing window. The proximity to August 9 may be coincidental rather than calculated.

Second, Grayscale’s withdrawal is a single data point from a company with specific financial pressures that do not apply to every issuer. Bitwise, for example, operates a leaner business model and has built its brand around altcoin exposure. A product that does not pencil out for Grayscale, with its overhead and IPO-related cost scrutiny, might be perfectly viable for a smaller issuer willing to accept thinner margins in exchange for market positioning.

Third, the altcoin ETF market is young. Bitcoin ETFs attracted modest flows in their first weeks before institutional allocators gradually built positions over quarters. The same pattern could repeat with ADA, particularly as the October decision date coincides with a period when institutional investors typically make fourth-quarter allocation decisions.

Fourth, Cardano’s fundamentals have continued to develop. The network processed its highest transaction volumes in early 2026, governance mechanisms are active, and the Ouroboros consensus protocol remains one of the few proof-of-stake systems with formal academic verification. An ETF issuer could reasonably argue that the market has not yet priced in these fundamentals.

Fifth, and most important, the thesis would be invalidated if an ADA ETF launches in October and attracts more than $200 million in its first 90 days. That would suggest institutional demand exists and that Grayscale simply miscalculated. It would also likely prompt Grayscale to refile, as the company has shown no reluctance to reverse course when market conditions shift.

The 190-second signal the market missed
There is a detail in the withdrawal filings that has received less attention than it deserves, and that a competitor publication is unlikely to have noticed.

The three Form RW filings were submitted in a specific order: Cardano at 4:33:37 p.m. ET, Hedera at 4:34:55 p.m., and Polkadot at 4:36:47 p.m. The gaps between them, 78 seconds and then 112 seconds, suggest a single operator submitting sequential EDGAR filings, not three independent decisions happening to arrive at the same conclusion.

This matters because the order tracks roughly with market capitalization at the time of filing. ADA, the largest of the three at $6.55 billion, went first. HBAR, at roughly $3.1 billion, went second. DOT, at approximately $1.5 billion, went last. If Grayscale had withdrawn in alphabetical order or reverse chronological order by filing date, the sequence would have been different.

The implication is that even the largest of the three, Cardano, was not considered worth salvaging. Grayscale did not withdraw DOT and HBAR while keeping ADA alive for another few days to see how the seasoning milestone played out. It treated all three as a single portfolio decision, suggesting that the threshold for “worth pursuing” sits somewhere above ADA’s $6.55 billion market cap and below the market capitalization of the assets for which Grayscale is still filing, such as Solana at roughly $80 billion.

That threshold has implications far beyond Cardano. If the cutoff for a viable standalone crypto ETF sits at tens of billions in market capitalization, then the long tail of altcoin ETF filings currently working through the SEC, covering everything from Chainlink to Worldcoin, may face the same economic headwinds. The broader question of whether altcoin ETF demand can sustain product expansion is one the industry has been reluctant to confront.

What to watch
October 23 decision window: If an issuer activates a spot ADA ETF filing promptly after August 9, the SEC’s 75-day review period points to late October. The size of first-week inflows will reveal whether institutional demand for Cardano exists at scale or remains a community aspiration.

Canary and Bitwise filing amendments: Watch for S-1/A amendments from the remaining ADA ETF applicants. Active amendments signal continued commitment. Silence or withdrawal notices would confirm Grayscale’s assessment that the market is not ready.

HBAR ETF flow trajectory: The Canary HBAR ETF’s performance over the next 60 days serves as a leading indicator for ADA. If HBAR flows stabilize or reverse, it suggests growing comfort with altcoin ETF exposure. Continued outflows would validate the bearish thesis.

Grayscale IPO pricing and product roadmap: When Grayscale sets its IPO price and releases an updated product strategy, look for whether altcoin ETFs feature in the forward plan or are quietly dropped from the narrative. The company’s selective approach to new filings, prioritizing niche products with differentiation over large-cap altcoin duplicates, may become the template for the industry.

ADA price action relative to ETF catalysts: If ADA fails to rally on actual ETF approval after failing to rally on eligibility, the disconnect between community expectations and market reality will be impossible to ignore. A sustained move above $0.30 on ETF-related news would challenge the thesis that the token lacks institutional appeal.

The information presented in this article is for educational and informational purposes only. It does not constitute financial, investment, legal, or tax advice. Cryptocurrency investments carry significant risk, including the potential loss of all invested capital. Readers should conduct their own research and consult qualified financial advisors before making any investment decisions. Crypto.news does not endorse the purchase, sale, or holding of any cryptocurrency or financial instrument. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Published August 14, 2026.

Is the ADA ETF still happening without Grayscale?
Yes. Five other issuers, including Bitwise, Canary Capital, VanEck, and 21Shares, have active spot ADA ETF filings. Grayscale’s withdrawal is a business decision by one company, not a regulatory barrier. The August 9 seasoning milestone remains valid for any issuer that chooses to proceed, and the earliest SEC decision window falls around October 23, 2026.

Why did Grayscale withdraw all three at once instead of keeping the Cardano filing?
The coordinated withdrawal, completed in 190 seconds, suggests Grayscale treated ADA, DOT, and HBAR as a single portfolio decision rather than evaluating each asset independently. The most likely explanation is that none of the three met an internal threshold for projected demand, and the company chose to reallocate resources toward products with stronger revenue potential.

What is the CME futures seasoning period and why does it matter?
The SEC’s generic listing standards require a crypto asset to trade on a regulated futures market for at least six months before it can qualify for streamlined spot ETF review. CME launched Cardano futures on February 9, 2026, and the six-month period ended on August 9. Meeting this threshold allows an ETF to list in approximately 75 days rather than the 240 days required under the old per-product approval process.

How much would a Cardano ETF need to attract in assets to be commercially viable?
Based on the Canary HBAR ETF’s experience, a fund with under $50 million in assets generates less than $1 million in annual fee revenue, even at a 2 percent management fee. A standalone ADA ETF would likely need at least $200 million to $300 million in assets under management to cover operating costs and generate meaningful returns for the issuer. By comparison, XRP ETFs have attracted roughly $1.5 billion and Solana funds about $1.15 billion.

Could Grayscale refile for a Cardano ETF later?
A voluntary withdrawal under SEC Rule 477 carries no penalties, waiting periods, or stigma. Grayscale could refile an S-1 registration statement for a Cardano Trust ETF at any time. The company has previously shown willingness to adjust its product strategy based on market conditions, and a surge in ADA institutional demand could prompt a reversal.

What does Grayscale’s withdrawal mean for DOT and HBAR prices?
The immediate price impact was modest: ADA fell about 2 percent, DOT dropped nearly 2 percent to $0.805, and HBAR slipped 2.24 percent to $0.068. The withdrawals removed a potential catalyst for these tokens but did not change their underlying fundamentals. For HBAR, the Canary ETF already exists, so the loss of a Grayscale competitor may actually reduce selling pressure from fee competition.

Are altcoin ETFs still worth pursuing for issuers?
The market is splitting into tiers. Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs have attracted tens of billions. Solana and XRP funds have crossed the $1 billion mark. Below that level, flows are sporadic and concentrated among a handful of products. The question is whether assets like Cardano can reach the second tier or whether the viable ETF universe stops at four or five cryptocurrencies.

Should investors buy ADA ahead of a potential ETF approval?
Every previous crypto ETF approval in the United States has followed a pattern where the token price rallied on anticipation and was flat or lower on actual approval day. ADA has already failed to rally meaningfully on its eligibility milestone, suggesting the market may have priced in the possibility. Any investment decision should account for the significant gap between ETF eligibility and actual investor demand for an ETF product. This is educational analysis, not investment advice.

A Sharp Jump in On-Chain Activity@Polkadot is turning heads with a dramatic uptick in transactional activity. According to data from @chainspect_app, the network's daily throughput climbed from just 5 transactions per day to 442 transactions within a 24-hour window, a rise of roughly 5,000%.

The move places Polkadot among the more active layer-1 networks by this measure. , a figure that underscores the network's capacity headroom relative to where daily volume had been sitting.

Context: Polkadot's Network Architecture

That modular design has been undergoing meaningful upgrades. These changes lower the barriers for smaller projects and could help explain renewed activity on the network.

Whether the spike in daily transactions reflects a sustained shift in usage or a short-term anomaly remains to be seen. Analysts and developers are likely to watch the next few days of Chainspect data closely for confirmation of any trend.

Sources:
Chainspect: Polkadot TPS and Scalability Metrics
Polkadot Ecosystem: Chainspect Overview
CoinCub: Polkadot 2.0 and Agile Coretime Explained

Grayscale Investments has withdrawn its SEC registrations for Cardano (ADA), Hedera (HBAR) and Polkadot (DOT) crypto ETFs. The crypto asset manager claimed it does not intend to proceed with the planned distribution. The prices of HBAR, ADA and DOT all fell in the last 24 hours following Grayscale’s ETF application withdrawals.

JUST IN: 🇺🇸 Grayscale withdraws proposed Cardano, Polkadot and Hedera ETF registrations from SEC review.

— Watcher.Guru (@WatcherGuru) August 10, 2026Grayscale filed three Form RWs with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The crypto asset management firm requested the regulator to remove S-1 submissions for the Grayscale Cardano Trust ETF, then the Grayscale Hedera Trust ETF, and the Grayscale Polkadot Trust ETF. The investment manager company cited Rule 477 under the Securities Act of 1933 to withdraw the respective Form S-1 registration statements, amendments, and exhibits. The S-1s were initially filed in late August and early September last year amid a massive push for crypto ETFs.

In addition, Grayscale also confirmed that none of the registration statements were declared effective. “No securities have been or will be issued or sold pursuant to the Registration Statement or the prospectus contained therein, and no preliminary prospectus contained in the Registration Statement has been distributed,” it added in a statement.

Also Read: UK Regulators Pushing Digital Finance, Readying Tokenized Gold

The crypto market in 2026 has been very difficult to navigate. New reports show that cryptocurrencies are the worst-performing assets so far this year. Bitcoin (BTC) has dipped by 34.6%, while Ethereum (ETH) has fallen by 47%. The larger cryptocurrency market, meanwhile, has fallen by 57.5%. Traditional stocks and precious metals, on the other hand, have rebounded despite geopolitical issues worldwide.

Grayscale withdrew 3 ETF filings after filing Form RW with the SEC on August 7. The S-1 registrations for the ADA, HBAR, and DOT ETFs were withdrawn. On August 7, 2026, Grayscale Investments filed three Form RW submissions with the SEC. It withdrew the S-1 registration statements for the Grayscale Cardano Trust ETF, Grayscale Hedera Trust ETF, and Grayscale Polkadot Trust ETF, all within minutes of each other.

The Cardano and Polkadot registrations dated back to August 29, 2025. The Hedera filing dated back to September 9, 2025. All three were pulled with identical language across each Form RW. 

Moreover, ADA, HBAR, and DOT sit a tier below Bitcoin and Ethereum in the ETF race, and a tier below the next wave of assets drawing serious filing activity, including Solana, XRP, and Litecoin. 

Spot BTC and ETH funds already trade with billions in assets. These tokens mentioned above were further back in that queue, representing bets on demand that has not clearly materialised. Also, pulling all three at once reads as a portfolio decision rather than a reaction to any single token or regulatory development. 

Withdrawing preserves the option to refile later without burning resources on a product that is not ready for the market. Earlier removal of related exchange-listing proposals for these same assets preceded the withdrawals, suggesting this was a deliberate and staged pruning rather than a sudden decision.

What Remains Untouched? Grayscale’s flagship Bitcoin and Ethereum vehicles are completely unaffected. The company continues to develop other altcoin ETFs; Bittensor, Aave, BNB, NEAR, Zcash, and others remain in preliminary registration stages. Some staking-related products have already received approval. This was a narrow cut of three specific altcoin lines. 

The reaction across ADA, HBAR, and DOT was essentially flat following the announcement. No significant price movement in any of the three tokens, a clear signal that the market read this correctly as a calculated housekeeping move rather than a bearish statement on the assets themselves.

For Grayscale, the lower-priority products with uncertain demand get cut when the registration cost does not justify the wait. The option to refile remains open. For now, the shelf got narrower, and the remaining products got more attention.

Crypto Market Highlights

Pudgy Penguins (PENGU) Teeters Above Key Support: Can $0.0050 Be Avoided?

Content Writer | Crypto Enthusiast | Bridging Literature and Blockchain

16h05 ▪ 5 min read ▪ by Ariela R.

Summarize this article with:

Shock on the crypto ETF market! On August 7, Grayscale withdraws three ETF files within 190 seconds. No official reason has been communicated by the institutional investment giant. Nevertheless, this massive withdrawal already raises questions about the future of altcoin ETFs in the United States.

In brief Grayscale withdrew its three crypto ETF applications for Cardano, Hedera and Polkadot in only 190 seconds, on August 7. The documents filed with the SEC give no commercial or regulatory explanation. Other Grayscale crypto ETF projects like Bittensor and Zcash remain active and at an early stage. A lightning withdrawal that leaves the SEC speechless The documents filed with the SEC are formal. At 4:33:37 PM, Grayscale files the first RW Form to withdraw the Grayscale Cardano Trust ETF. 78 seconds later, it’s the turn of the Grayscale Hedera Trust ETF. At 4:36:47 PM, the Grayscale Polkadot Trust ETF meets the same fate. In all: three crypto ETFs massacred in less than four minutes.

Each document moreover uses the same phrase:

Grayscale does not intend to continue the proposed distribution of shares.

These are thus voluntary withdrawals under Rule 477, not a SEC rejection.

For now, Grayscale Investments has provided no official explanation. That said, various hypotheses are already circulating within the crypto community:

The first concerns potentially weak investor demand for single-asset spot ETFs on ADA, HBAR, and DOT. The second suggests a strategic decision to focus resources on priority projects, such as the Worldcoin ETF filed in July or the already launched Hyperliquid Staking ETF. A third, more structural hypothesis points to the current regulatory complexity in the United States. Two days before these withdrawals, Grayscale analysts had indeed warned of the risk of a “crypto exodus” if the CLARITY Act was not adopted by the Senate.

A reversal for Grayscale’s crypto ETFs The recent decision by Grayscale contrasts with the momentum gained earlier this year. The company had in fact filed its crypto ETF applications for Cardano and Polkadot, alongside a broader wave of filings from other asset managers.

The associated listing proposals had in fact already been withdrawn by the exchanges themselves. NYSE Arca abandoned the Cardano one in September last year and Nasdaq those of Hedera and Polkadot in November.

Despite these withdrawals, Grayscale also does not seem to be totally disengaging from the crypto ETF market. Proof of this: it continues to push other projects, notably on Bittensor, Aave, BNB, NEAR Protocol and Zcash. Their Registration Statements are still under review.

That’s not all! Two staking products have also reached an advanced stage. We are referring to the Avalanche Staking ETF and the Hyperliquid Staking ETF, whose filings were declared effective respectively in March and June 2026.

For holders of ADA, HBAR, and DOT, the door is also not definitively closed. The fact is that a RW form withdrawal does not prevent Grayscale (nor any other issuer) from refiling a crypto ETF application if demand or the regulatory context evolves.

Excerpt from the RW Form filed by Grayscale (Source: SEC) Crypto ETF withdrawal by Grayscale: consequences were immediate! In the cryptocurrency market, the news struck like a thunderclap in an already stormy sky.

The price of the altcoin Cardano (ADA) dropped more than 2% in twenty-four hours. Hedera (HBAR) and Polkadot (DOT) followed the same trajectory. Coinglass data also shows mixed sentiment on derivatives. Open interest in ADA futures contracts rose by nearly 1%. This means some crypto traders are betting on a rebound. Whale activity remains weak though. Decoding: without massive crypto liquidity, a rise back to $0.47 seems compromised.

Chart showing the evolution of ADA futures contract open interest (Source: CoinGlass) In any case, this massive withdrawal by Grayscale of three major altcoin ETFs raises questions about the future of crypto ETFs in the United States. If regulation remains unclear and institutional demand uncertain, other issuers might follow the same path. The adoption of the CLARITY Act could well be the key to reassuring the market and enabling the emergence of new spot ETFs on altcoins. Story to follow…

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

Ariela R.

My name is Ariela, and I am 31 years old. I have been working in the field of web writing for 7 years now. I only discovered trading and cryptocurrency a few years ago, but it is a universe that greatly interests me. The topics covered on the platform allow me to learn more. A singer in my spare time, I also cultivate a great passion for music and reading (and animals!)

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.

Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.

Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA.

Grayscale withdrew registration statements for three planned U.S. altcoin exchange traded products on Aug. 7, ending the current registration process for its Cardano, Hedera and Polkadot funds. 

Summary

Grayscale withdrew Cardano, Hedera and Polkadot ETF registrations through three Form RW filings on Friday. All three filings state registrations never became effective and no securities were issued or sold. NYSE Arca and Nasdaq had already withdrawn corresponding listing proposals during September and November 2025. SEC generic listing standards now let qualifying crypto products bypass separate exchange rule change filings. Bittensor, Aave, BNB, NEAR and Zcash registrations remained preliminary in recent SEC filings reviewed. SEC records show the three Form RW submissions were accepted between 4:33:37 p.m. and 4:36:47 p.m. ET, a span of exactly 190 seconds.

The filings are withdrawal requests, not SEC rejections. Grayscale said it no longer intends to proceed with the planned distribution of shares under those registration statements. It also confirmed that none had become effective and that no securities had been issued or sold.

Grayscale withdraws three S-1 registrations The Cardano filing sought withdrawal of registration statement No. 333-289948, originally filed in August 2025. The Hedera request covered No. 333-290129, first filed in September 2025, while the Polkadot filing covered No. 333-289949, also first filed in August 2025.

Grayscale Withdraws Registration Applications for ADA, HBAR and DOT ETFs

According to SEC filings, Grayscale filed three Form RW submissions on August 7, withdrawing the S-1 registration statements for the Grayscale Cardano Trust ETF, Grayscale Hedera Trust ETF and Grayscale… pic.twitter.com/haXOpqcOuE

— Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) August 10, 2026 Each request gives the same core explanation: the sponsor does not intend to proceed with the planned share distribution. The documents provide no separate commercial, demand related or regulatory reason. They also state that no preliminary prospectus had been distributed.

Meanwhile, the latest withdrawals follow earlier exits on the exchange listing side. SEC records show NYSE Arca withdrew its proposed rule change for the Grayscale Cardano Trust on Sept. 29, 2025. Nasdaq’s proposed rule changes for the Grayscale Polkadot Trust and Grayscale Hedera Trust were both withdrawn on Nov. 3, 2025.

Those exchange proposals were separate from the S-1 registrations withdrawn on Aug. 7. The Cardano review was covered as previously reported, while Nasdaq’s Polkadot proposal appeared in earlier related coverage. The Hedera review also entered the SEC process in March 2025, as crypto.news reported in its earlier coverage.

New SEC rules changed the crypto ETF approval route The regulatory backdrop changed after those original exchange proposals were filed. In September 2025, the SEC approved generic listing standards allowing qualifying commodity based trust shares, including digital asset products, to list without a separate Section 19(b) rule change for each fund.

The faster exchange route does not replace Securities Act registration. A sponsor still needs an effective registration statement before selling shares. That distinction matters here because Grayscale withdrew the S-1 layer itself. A current overview of the U.S. ETF process explains how exchange listing and registration now operate separately.

What happens next for Grayscale’s altcoin ETF slate Under Rule 477(b), an application to withdraw an entire registration statement before effectiveness is deemed granted when filed unless the SEC objects within 15 calendar days. The three requests therefore take effect without a separate approval order unless the Commission intervenes during that window.

The withdrawals do not establish that the SEC rejected ADA, HBAR or DOT products, and they do not prevent Grayscale from filing again later. For now, SEC records reviewed Aug. 10 show preliminary registrations for Bittensor, Aave, BNB, NEAR and Zcash at different stages. The Zcash registration received its third amendment on July 31.

Grayscale also has altcoin products further along. The SEC declared the Grayscale Avalanche Staking ETF registration effective on March 11 and the Grayscale Hyperliquid Staking ETF registration effective on June 2. Those differing statuses show the Aug. 7 filings are not evidence of a companywide retreat from altcoin exchange traded products.

What remains unknown is why Grayscale ended these three registrations together. The filings give no explanation beyond the decision not to proceed, leaving claims about investor demand, economics or regulatory resistance unconfirmed.

Grayscale Investment, with $45 billion in AUM, has withdrawn registration filings for its proposed Cardano (ADA), Hedera (HBAR), and Polkadot (DOT) ETFs, ending the latest stage of plans that had been in place since 2025. 

The announcement comes just before CME’s regulated ADA futures complete six months of trading on August 9.

Grayscale Withdraws Three Altcoin ETFs Back to BackAccording to SEC filings, Grayscale submitted three Form RW requests on Aug. 7, withdrawing the S-1 registration statements for its Cardano Trust ETF, Hedera Trust ETF and Polkadot Trust ETF.

The Cardano and Polkadot S-1 filings were first submitted on Aug. 29, 2025, while the Hedera filing followed on Sept. 9, 2025.

However, the ETF plans had already lost an important part of their path to launch. The related exchange filings were withdrawn months earlier. NYSE Arca withdrew the Cardano listing proposal on Sept. 29, 2025. Nasdaq later withdrew the Polkadot and Hedera proposals on Nov. 3, 2025.

This left Grayscale with registration filings that could not move forward without an active exchange listing process.

Why Did Grayscale Withdraw ADA, HBAR and DOT ETFs?The decision appears to be more of a strategic withdrawal than an SEC rejection. A crypto ETF generally needs two key SEC filings. The S-1 provides details about the fund, while the 19b-4 filing allows the exchange to seek approval to list the product.

With the exchange proposals already gone, keeping the S-1 filings active offered little benefit.

Grayscale instead chose to withdraw the applications before the process reached a formal SEC decision. The company used standard Form RW language, saying it did not plan to continue with the planned share distribution.

The filings also stated that the registrations had not become effective and that no shares had been issued or sold.

No Formal SEC Rejection for Cardano, HBAR or DOTGrayscale did not receive a formal SEC rejection for these ETF registrations. Instead, the company voluntarily ended the filings. That leaves room for Grayscale to potentially return with new applications if market conditions or U.S. crypto rules become more favorable.

Meanwhile, other early-stage filings linked to Bittensor (TAO), Aave (AAVE), BNB, Near Protocol (NEAR) and Zcash (ZEC) remain in place. This makes Grayscale’s move more selective.

Story Ends Here

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

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

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

Read the Next News

Near-Zero DeFi Activity on Polkadot@Polkadot logged just 4 transactions on August 3, according to DefiLlama data. To be clear, that figure reflects DeFi app-level activity tracked by DefiLlama for the chain, not the full count of native network transactions. Even so, the number is striking for a protocol that was once one of the most hyped names in crypto.

The broader picture is not much more encouraging. Polkadot parachains collectively hold around $81 million in DeFi TVL, per DefiLlama, with the bulk of that sitting on the Hydration protocol. Hydration's TVL reached as high as $376.5 million in September 2025 but has since fallen more than 80%. For context, DeFi TVL on Ethereum currently sits at $48 billion, followed by Solana with $6.8 billion.

$DOT Price Holds Up Despite Thin On-Chain ActivityThe disconnect between on-chain usage and token price performance is hard to ignore. According to @BSCNews, $DOT has risen by nearly 10% over the past week, even as DeFi engagement on the chain remains at historically low levels.

Polkadot's longer-term structural narrative has not gone away entirely. In March 2026, Polkadot set a hard supply cap of 2.1 billion DOT and halved annual token issuance, ending years of running an uncapped inflationary model that had dampened investor sentiment. The Join-Accumulate Machine (JAM) remains the primary long-term institutional catalyst, designed as a decentralized global supercomputer with mainnet targeted for 2026, with 43 independent teams competing for a 10 million DOT prize pool.

Still, the gap between Polkadot's on-chain activity figures and its token valuation raises questions about what is actually driving short-term price moves. Whether the protocol can convert any renewed market interest into genuine user activity remains the key test ahead.

Sources:
DefiLlama: Polkadot Chain Overview
The Defiant: Polkadot Ecosystem Update, May 2026

The decentralized finance (DeFi) protocol Moonwell has thrown a curveball at its WELL token holders. It’s urging them to transfer their holdings from the Moonbeam network before the deadline of July 31, 2026. Why the rush? The Moonbeam parachain on Polkadot is winding down, and after that, WELL holders might find themselves locked out.

This isn’t just about packing bags and leaving quietly. Let’s put it in perspective: we’re talking about a migration of 26.2 million tokens that hold the weight of governance within the Moonwell protocol. That’s like trying to move an entire neighborhood before a new developer comes in—there’s a lot at stake.

The mechanics of the migration Moonwell’s migration plan aligns with the end of Moonbeam operations on Polkadot, driven by a governance decision framed as MIP-M45. This proposal paused new lending and borrowing activities on Moonbeam and triggered the withdrawal of reserves from selected markets. Essentially, Moonwell is rolling up the carpet and shifting to platforms where their community still holds the keys.

Advertisement

For now, token holders have an in-app transfer tool at their disposal, designed to simplify this migration. It’s like a moving company providing full-service relocation—everything is 1:1 swapped to supported networks, minus the hassle of managing external bridges. Moreover, KuCoin is jumping in to streamline this further by handling automatic swaps for its users, potentially making life easier for WELL token holders exercising the move.

The migration period from the Moonbeam network to the Ethereum mainnet marked a significant change. Moonwell officially made this switch on May 21, 2026, embracing Ethereum’s broader user base and reliability. This shift is also backed by the WELL token’s upgrade to xERC20 standards, ensuring it can glide seamlessly across multiple chains like an Olympic skater transitioning between icy surfaces.

Understanding the implications So why should you care? The approaching shutdown of Moonbeam’s parachain and the transition of GLMR tokens to the Base network could shake the DeFi space. Investors, stakers, and traders alike are staring down a crucial deadline. If WELL tokens aren’t transferred by the cut-off date, holders might lose access to governance rights—arguably the crown jewel of owning these tokens.

This mass exodus of tokens isn’t just a blip on the radar—it could influence DeFi markets substantially. With KuCoin’s support, WELL holders benefit from additional liquidity, helping cushion potential volatility and stabilizing their market value. Furthermore, such strategic movements could signal broader trends, with other projects perhaps taking notes on how to adapt when their current ecosystems shift beneath their feet.

What lies ahead for investors? For current and prospective WELL holders, the key takeaway here is speed and strategy. Completing this migration promptly ensures that your governance rights and access are preserved. The deadline is a hard line, not a suggestion. Act swiftly, and the seamless future across robust platforms like Ethereum might just be what you need.

The broader lesson? Evolving blockchain landscapes necessitate flexibility. Projects like Moonwell adapting to these changes are not merely reacting—they’re setting precedents. This agile mindset could draw new ventures and investments into their network, further stabilizing the ecosystem.

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

In March 2000, Michael Saylor, now executive chairman of Strategy, saw his fortune drop by more than $6 billion in a single day after MicroStrategy’s shares plunged more than 60%. This event left him at the center of the dot-com crash and became a notable moment in corporate history.

Saylor’s Transformation and Strategy’s Bitcoin BetStrategy, formerly MicroStrategy, is a US-based software and business intelligence firm known for holding the largest Bitcoin reserve among publicly traded companies, with 843,775 BTC. The company became an industry model when it adopted Bitcoin as its main treasury asset in 2020, inspiring similar moves by other listed firms.

Saylor described fiat cash reserves as a “melting ice cube” and initiated Strategy’s first $250 million Bitcoin purchase on August 11, 2020. At that time, public companies rarely held Bitcoin, and Saylor’s approach was widely regarded as a significant risk rather than conventional financial strategy.

Despite doubts, Bitcoin’s rising price fueled Strategy’s market value, positioning the company as a de facto proxy for Bitcoin exposure on Wall Street. As a result, its Bitcoin holdings today are valued at more than $54 billion.

Shift in Strategy and Market ReactionsOn June 29, Strategy revealed a new capital structure allowing it to sell Bitcoin to fund dividends on preferred stock, increase its cash reserves, and repurchase securities. This marked a notable departure from its previous stance of exclusively accumulating BTC. Days later, the company sold 3,588 BTC—the largest sale since designating Bitcoin as its principal reserve asset.

This move drew concern among investors who for years had believed that Strategy would not sell its holdings. Supporters characterize the change as the natural evolution of a multinational enterprise with a sizable digital treasury, while critics highlight growing risks due to mounting obligations and reliance on external financing.

Strategy’s willingness to sell Bitcoin is less a departure from accumulation than a practical reality of managing a complex corporate balance sheet, according to Drew Forman, senior vice president and head of strategy at Talos. He sees it as “a pragmatic evolution of a more complex treasury strategy.”

After the dot-com era, Saylor spent nearly two decades out of the limelight until reemerging with Strategy’s Bitcoin-focused approach. The company’s financial reporting standards are seen as stricter now compared to the accounting scandal that led to a settlement with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in 2000.

Currently, Saylor leads Strategy as it manages convertible debt and perpetual preferred stock balances. As of late May 2026, Strategy held $6.7 billion in convertible notes and $15.5 billion in preferred stock, much of it raised to buy additional Bitcoin.

Mini dictionary: Preferred stock – A class of ownership in a corporation with a fixed dividend that has priority over common stock dividends but usually does not confer voting rights.

AssetAmount heldOutstanding (May 2026)Bitcoin843,775 BTC$54 billion (approximate)Convertible notesN/A$6.7 billionPreferred stockN/A$15.5 billionCritics and Contrasting ViewsSome analysts argue that Strategy’s model only remains stable if Bitcoin continues to appreciate and investors keep supplying new capital. They caution that, under prolonged market downturns, reliance on debt and equity issuance could create a “death spiral.”

Aswath Damodaran, a finance professor at NYU Stern, questioned Saylor’s aggressive approach to risk and highlighted the lack of fundamental earnings supporting Strategy’s valuation. David Trainer, CEO of investment research firm New Constructs, believes that although the company’s mechanics differ from its dot-com-era collapse, the underlying risk persists due to Strategy’s structure as a highly leveraged proxy for a volatile asset.

Trainer warned that if the investor premium for holding exposure through Strategy disappears, the company’s advantages could vanish, forcing it to sell Bitcoin, seek costlier financing, or halt expansion.

While doubts linger about the sustainability of this financial model, Strategy’s impact on corporate treasury management is evident. Many companies have followed its lead, treating Bitcoin as an institutional asset that requires active governance and risk management.

The future of Strategy hinges on whether its capital structure can withstand future market turbulence, rather than the outcome of the next bullish run in digital assets.

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.

Bitwise Updates Top 10 Crypto ETF: HYPE Joins While DOT and AVAX Exit