Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

Tether just pushed $500 million in freshly minted USDT onto the Solana blockchain in less than 60 minutes.

The massive mint adds to Solana’s existing USDT supply, which currently sits at approximately $3.8 billion to $4 billion in native SPL-standard tokens. While that’s a meaningful chunk of stablecoin liquidity, it still trails far behind the Tron network, which remains the dominant highway for USDT circulation globally.

Why Solana, and why now Tether first deployed USDT on Solana back in September 2020, betting early on the network’s high throughput and low transaction costs.

The timing of this particular mint is worth noting. Circle, the issuer of rival stablecoin USDC, minted $250 million on Solana around the same period. When two of the largest stablecoin issuers are simultaneously flooding the same chain with fresh supply, it usually means one thing: someone needs liquidity, and they need it fast.

Advertisement

Tether has also been active on other chains during this period, executing significant transfers including a $500 million USDT movement to Binance via Solana. The company continues to operate across multiple blockchains simultaneously, with Tron and Ethereum remaining its largest venues by total supply, but Solana is clearly gaining ground as a preferred rail for high-volume operations.

Solana’s stablecoin infrastructure play The $3.8 billion to $4 billion in native USDT on Solana represents a substantial but still secondary presence compared to the tens of billions circulating on Tron.

For Solana’s broader ecosystem, stablecoin liquidity acts as a foundational layer. DeFi protocols need stablecoins for lending, borrowing, and providing liquidity pairs. Trading platforms need them for settlement.

The competitive dynamic between Solana, Tron, and Ethereum for stablecoin market share has become one of the quieter but more consequential races in crypto infrastructure. Tron still dominates USDT volume largely because of its entrenched position in peer-to-peer transfers across Asia and emerging markets. Ethereum commands the largest DeFi ecosystem. Solana is carving out its niche by offering speed and cost advantages that appeal to both retail and institutional users.

What the liquidity surge signals Market observers generally read large stablecoin mints as leading indicators rather than lagging ones. The logic is straightforward: new USDT doesn’t get minted for fun. Someone deposits dollars (or dollar-equivalent collateral) with Tether, and Tether issues tokens in return. A $500 million mint means $500 million in demand showed up at the door.

That demand could come from several sources. Institutional trading desks preparing for large positions often pre-stage stablecoin liquidity. DeFi protocols experiencing growth need deeper stablecoin pools to function efficiently. And exchanges frequently request new mints when their reserves run low relative to trading volume.

The fact that both Tether and Circle are simultaneously expanding supply on Solana specifically suggests the network is becoming a preferred venue for whatever activity is driving this demand.

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

TL;DR

U.S. Ethereum ETFs recorded $29.4 million in net inflows on September 18. Fidelity’s FETH brought in $26.2 million. The move followed three consecutive sessions of net outflows. Ethereum ETF flows finally turned positive on Friday, although the rebound was considerably smaller than the one seen in Bitcoin funds.

U.S. spot Ethereum ETFs recorded $29.4 million in combined net inflows on September 18, according to Farside Investors. Fidelity’s FETH was responsible for $26.2 million of that figure.

Bitwise’s ETHW added $1.3 million and VanEck’s ETHV brought in $1.9 million. The remaining funds reported no net movement for the session.

It wasn’t a huge day, but after the previous few sessions, green was probably welcome.

Three Difficult Sessions Came First Ethereum funds had been under steady pressure heading into Friday.

September 15 produced a $142 million net outflow, followed by another $224.1 million leaving the funds on September 16. September 17 added a further $39.3 million in redemptions.

That means Friday’s $29.4 million inflow only recovers a small portion of the money that left earlier in the week.

Still, the composition is interesting.

Fidelity was the clear buyer, while BlackRock’s ETHA recorded no net flow after being one of the major sources of outflows earlier in the week.

ETF capital can move very differently from crypto’s spot market. Sometimes that reflects portfolio rebalancing, sometimes a large allocator moving through a particular issuer, and sometimes it is simply the timing of creations and redemptions.

A Rebound, Not A Reset That’s probably the right way to read Friday’s number.

It is a rebound, but not enough to say the week’s outflows have suddenly been reversed.

What it does tell us is that demand for Ethereum exposure through regulated funds hasn’t disappeared. Even after several difficult sessions, buyers were still willing to put fresh capital into the products.

The next few sessions will tell us more.

If inflows broaden beyond Fidelity and begin showing up across multiple issuers, that would look more like a genuine change in the short-term flow pattern. If not, Friday may simply prove to have been a pause in a choppier stretch.

Either way, the ETF market gave Ethereum investors their first positive session after several days of redemptions.

Source: Farside Investors — https://farside.co.uk/eth/

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

Ethereum climbed roughly 5.8% to 6.5% on September 18, 2026, pushing past the $2,580 mark after the SEC unveiled a regulatory framework that could funnel trillions of dollars worth of stock trading onto public blockchains. The token moved from a starting range of $2,445 to $2,451 up to between $2,580 and $2,603, its sharpest single-day gain in weeks.

The catalyst: the SEC’s freshly minted “Innovation Exemption,” a five-year pilot program announced on September 17 that formally permits tokenized trading of National Market System stocks through what the agency calls Tokenized Securities Venues, or TSVs.

What the SEC actually greenlit The exemption allows on-chain trading of tokenized equities using permissioned automated market makers and liquidity pools on public blockchains. Every token must represent an actual underlying share, preserving full shareholder rights like voting and dividend collection. Synthetic assets are explicitly prohibited.

Advertisement

Issuers wanting to tokenize their stock must notify the SEC, which then has a 30-day objection window. There are also volume and symbol caps, plus mandatory sanctions compliance.

The timing is notable. The exemption landed just two days after the Senate rejected the CLARITY Act, a broader legislative attempt to define crypto asset classifications. SEC Chair Paul Atkins framed the exemption as consistent with the agency’s existing regulatory authority, essentially bypassing Congress to get something done.

Why Ethereum stands to benefit most Tokenized US Treasury funds on Ethereum reached an average market cap near $7.5 billion during Q2 2026. Across all chains, tokenized Treasuries surpassed $15 billion in value during the same quarter, with Ethereum holding the majority share.

The broader tokenized stocks market has already been on a tear even before this regulatory green light. Tokenized stocks reached a market cap of roughly $3.2 billion, representing a climb of over 1,200% year-over-year. BNB Chain currently leads in the tokenized stocks sector specifically, which means Ethereum’s dominance in Treasuries doesn’t automatically translate to equities.

It wasn’t just ETH that moved on the news. Coinbase and Robinhood both saw stock price increases of approximately 5% following the SEC announcement.

The institutional calculus shifts The requirement that tokens represent actual shares rather than synthetic derivatives means tokenized stocks under this framework carry the same legal weight as their conventional counterparts. An investor holding a tokenized share through a TSV has the same voting rights and dividend claims as someone holding it through a traditional brokerage account.

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

Key Takeaways The Glamsterdam upgrade will launch on Ethereum’s Sepolia testnet October 6, 2026 Security concerns emerged around malicious actors exploiting free testnet tokens to disrupt block building Bad actors could create numerous fake builder accounts, win auction bids, then refuse to deliver transaction payloads Development teams face a September 29 deadline for Sepolia-compatible releases, allowing just seven days for testing The mainnet deployment timeline hasn’t been finalized, though Q4 2026 remains the target window Ethereum’s development team has officially designated October 6 as the activation date for testing the Glamsterdam upgrade on Sepolia. This announcement was accompanied by security warnings regarding a vulnerability that could compromise the testing process.

ETHEREUM’S NEXT MAJOR UPGRADE IS MOVING FORWARD.

Glamsterdam is scheduled to hit the Sepolia testnet on October 6, followed by a tentative Hoodi test on October 27.

Developers have identified a potential weakness where attackers could create fake builder identities, submit huge… pic.twitter.com/79L6vjSf4I

— MANDO CT 🇮🇪 🇦🇪 🇬🇧 (@MandoCT) September 18, 2026

The security issue revolves around the block construction mechanism within Glamsterdam. This upgrade implements Enshrined Proposer-Builder Separation (ePBS), a framework where dedicated builders engage in competitive bidding to provide transaction blocks to network validators.

While mainnet participation requires actual capital investment, Sepolia operates differently since test tokens carry no monetary value. This fundamental difference creates a unique vulnerability scenario.

The Potential Exploitation Method Consensus developer Potuz outlined the vulnerability during a September 17 development meeting. A malicious actor could generate numerous counterfeit builder profiles, place winning bids in block auctions, then withhold the required transaction information.

“I can just spin up a thousand builders, rotate them, offer very high bids, and not produce payloads,” Potuz explained. “Any teenager can do this.”

While this attack wouldn’t threaten actual assets, it could paralyze testnet operations and prevent developers from accurately assessing the upgrade’s functionality under authentic circumstances.

Current protective measures appear insufficient. Some client safeguards activate only after multiple payload failures occur. Development teams noted that clients require mechanisms to permanently block specific builders, preventing attackers from repeatedly returning with fresh identities.

Glamsterdam’s Core Objectives Glamsterdam represents Ethereum’s upcoming significant protocol enhancement. The upgrade aims to dramatically expand network capacity per block, with a target gas ceiling approaching 200 million—a substantial increase from the 60 million achieved in previous testing phases.

Additionally, the upgrade extends the timeframe for broadcasting transaction payload information from approximately two seconds to nearly nine seconds, providing nodes with enhanced processing capabilities for larger block sizes.

Devnet-11, a private testing environment, successfully executed a Glamsterdam transition on September 16. The network operated 84,000 validators distributed across various clients and pushed gas limits toward 200 million while maintaining network finality.

Schedule and Future Milestones Client development teams face a September 29 cutoff for delivering Sepolia-compatible software releases. This compressed timeframe provides only seven days preceding the October 6 implementation—considerably shorter than Ethereum’s standard 14-day period allocated for security audits and vulnerability identification.

The development community accepted this accelerated schedule because Sepolia maintains a managed validator configuration that simplifies recovery procedures should complications arise.

Following the Sepolia deployment, testing on the Hoodi testnet is provisionally scheduled for October 27. This timeline remains contingent upon Sepolia’s performance outcomes.

A mainnet launch date remains unannounced. Ethereum’s development roadmap indicates Q4 2026 for Glamsterdam deployment, though specific block numbers or epoch designations haven’t been established. Production-grade builder infrastructure from Titan and Ultrasound teams has yet to successfully complete Glamsterdam fork transitions.

Ethereum’s average transaction fees have fallen sharply in recent months, sliding from $0.72 per transfer in April to just $0.095 today. This dramatic decline arrived as Ethereum’s market price remains near yearly highs, highlighting the impact of recent technical upgrades and changing user demand on network costs.

Network activity cools as upgrades take holdAnalytics provider Santiment attributed much of the fee reduction to subdued mainnet activity during the summer’s quieter trading environment. With fewer active users competing for Ethereum’s blockspace, congestion eased and processing costs dropped.

Santiment noted transaction costs have decreased considerably since reaching their yearly peak. The firm highlighted that despite Ethereum’s higher price, users now pay significantly less per transaction, with current fees measured at $0.095 compared to $0.72 in April.

While seasonal demand is down, Ethereum’s increased network capacity has also played an important role in reducing fees. The Fusaka upgrade brought higher blob throughput, enabling the blockchain to handle more data with every block and easing congestion further.

In addition, Ethereum’s gas limit was raised to 60 million, increasing the number of transactions processed in each block and further diluting competition for blockspace.

Layer 2 networks, such as Optimism and Arbitrum, have absorbed a significant share of network activity that previously occurred directly on Ethereum’s mainnet. These secondary protocols help reduce demand for mainnet blockspace and thereby ease upward pressure on fees.

Mini dictionary: Fusaka upgrade, a network improvement on Ethereum that increases “blob” data throughput, allowing for greater transaction capacity and helping decrease congestion.

These combined factors have given users a more affordable experience for activities such as token transfers and decentralized finance transactions. Lower transaction costs address one of the platform’s long-standing hurdles to broader adoption, though fee reductions alone do not necessarily signal renewed network growth.

ETH price tests key support and resistance zonesETH most recently traded near $2,441, marking a 2.2% rise over the previous 24 hours and showing sturdy trading volumes of $12.2 billion. Despite this bounce, weekly performance has cooled, with the token declining 0.6% over the past seven days.

Market analyst Cryptorphic identified $2,365 to $2,380 as an important support zone, stating that ETH has rebounded from this range after a recent dip.

According to the analysis, price is currently testing a broken rising trendline around $2,460. If ETH reclaims this level, a further advance toward the $2,520 to $2,530 resistance area could follow, while failure may result in a return to support.

This technical area remains a focal point for traders anticipating a potential shift in short-term sentiment. The asset’s ability to sustain movements beyond its immediate support and resistance levels may influence near-term outlooks.

Meanwhile, the improved fee environment could help stimulate activity if market participants regain confidence and push for higher transaction volumes in the months ahead.

MetricApril 2026September 2026Average transaction fee$0.72$0.095Gas limitPreviously lower60 millionETH priceLower than $2,441$2,441Key support zone$2,365–$2,380$2,365–$2,380Key resistance$2,520–$2,530$2,520–$2,530

Abu Dhabi, Dubai, UAE, 17th September 2026, ChainwireBy Chainwire

4 min read

Create an account to save your articles.

Add on Google

Add Decrypt as your preferred source to see more of our stories on Google.

Abu Dhabi, Dubai, UAE, September 17th, 2026, Chainwire

Motoswap announces the launch of its decentralized exchange on Ethereum, introducing a trading model built on Uniswap v2's constant-product mathematics with fees distributed among liquidity providers, traders, MOTO stakers, the treasury and MOTO buy-and-burn.

Robinhood Chain went live in July with Circle's Arc following in September. This reflects the growing role of EVM networks in onchain activity and raises a question over why the DEX layer sitting on top of them has changed little in years.

According to the company, onchain volume is driven by memecoins and trench traders, by speed and attention rather than by settlement. They claim Uniswap became the default venue for that activity not because it was built for it, but because there was nowhere else to go. V3's concentrated liquidity was engineered for capital efficiency, which rewards professional market makers who can actively manage ranges and disadvantages participants who cannot. V4 opened the door to customization but changed little about what an ordinary participant receives for providing liquidity or trading, and that same architecture is now being shipped to every new chain that launches. The gap is not liquidity or throughput. It is that major venues treat the trader as the source of fees rather than as a participant, taking fees from the people generating the volume and returning nothing. Motoswap was built on a different assumption.

The launch mechanics follow the same logic. A token deployed through Motoswap opens two pools, TOKEN/ETH and TOKEN/MOTO, with the LP burned inside the launch transaction, nobody holds the claim ticket, so nobody can pull the liquidity, not the creator and not the protocol. Half of that MOTO pool is locked under the token permanently, which means demand for new tokens is demand for MOTO as a matter of mechanics rather than narrative. Creators get the thing Solana solved and the EVM never did: a 0.2% cash cut of their own token's trades, claimable without ever selling into their own chart. On Uniswap v2 the deployer earns nothing and has exactly one way to get paid, which is to sell. That single plumbing difference is most of why launches went to Solana and stayed there.

The framing is deliberate. Most DEXes were built like an on-chain NYSE, waiting for institutions that never showed up while retail paid every fee and got nothing back. Motoswap is built as a casino on purpose, with the rake wired into the contracts and pointed at the players. Rakeback is a casino word, used knowingly.

Few projects have challenged Uniswap as significantly since SushiSwap's 2020 campaign, which moved more than a billion dollars in liquidity within a week. Everything since has been forks, aggregators and interfaces, all competing on price or routing while accepting Uniswap's incentive model as settled law, none of them touching the thing that actually decides where volume lives, which is who gets paid. Motoswap does not ask traders to accept worse execution, bridge somewhere unfamiliar, or trust a new curve. It runs the same constant-product math that carried every major EVM player. The traders get paid for simply executing. A deployer gets paid in cash instead of selling their own chart. An LP keeps the largest slice and farms on top of it. Every seat at the table is better than the seat it replaces. The Motoswap primitive solves the gap, sees the opportunity and revolutionizes the EVM landscape. 

About Motoswap

Motoswap is a decentralized exchange built on Ethereum that routes the majority of every swap fee back to the people who generate it. Traders receive Rakeback in cash on every trade, MOTO stakers share protocol revenue, and tokens launched on Motoswap open with liquidity permanently locked. Motoswap is expanding to all major EVM blockchains. 

motoswap.org · @motoswap

ContactMotoswap cofounder
Chad Master
Motoswap
[email protected]

Disclaimer: Press release sponsored by our commercial partners.

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

BlackRock’s latest wallet activity points to a sizable repositioning across its Bitcoin [BTC] and Ethereum [ETH] holdings, with $62 million moving through Coinbase Prime.

The transfers involved 656.71 BTC worth about $49.79 million and 5.15K ETH worth roughly $12.28 million. Most Bitcoin moved in two 300 BTC transfers, valued at $22.87 million and $22.64 million, while another 56.71 BTC added $4.28 million.

Source: Arkham Meanwhile, its tracked portfolio holds 787.349 K BTC with a total value of $60.15 billion and 3.556 million ETH worth $8.68 billion. As such, the recent Bitcoin transaction represents a very minor percentage of BlackRock’s overall stated holdings of Bitcoin.

Source: Arkham Similarly, the recent ETH transaction represents a relatively minor increase to BlackRock’s previously stated holdings.

While the aforementioned transactions do not demonstrate whether the assets are supporting ETF operations or longer-term custodial services. Subsequent wallet transactions will better indicate how BlackRock intends to utilize the funds.

BlackRock’s ETF holdings hold firm BlackRock’s overall ETF holdings show the broader position BlackRock had behind the transfers it made with IBIT and ETHA. IBIT holds about 795K BTC, while ETHA holds roughly 3.6 million ETH. Both funds have retained substantial holdings despite major price declines.

Source: CryptoQuant IBIT’s holdings fell only 9% from nearly 800K BTC in 2025 to the July 2026 low, while Bitcoin lost more than 50%. Since then, the holdings in IBIT have increased to be near the highest level previously seen.

Similarly, ETHA’s holdings decreased by 30% from their peak of 4 million ETH to 2.8 million ETH when Ether decreased by over 60%. However, those holdings have now increased back to 3.6 million ETH.

Source: CryptoQuant These results demonstrate that BlackRock’s overall ETF exposure has remained resilient through the downturn.

These two funds represent approximately 4% of Bitcoin’s total circulating supply and approximately 3% of Ethereum’s total circulating supply. Therefore, these positions give BlackRock a sizable presence in both markets.

Institutional demand loses momentum The trend of flow-shifting was made clear as ETFs for Bitcoin and Ethereum had enjoyed August demand in the month of August. In the weeks ending 4 September, Bitcoin-based ETFs brought in $986.85 million, while Ethereum-based ETFs brought in $218.41 million.

Source: SoSoValue Bitcoin then recorded $462.73 million in weekly outflows by the 11th of September, while Ethereum still attracted $197.11 million. The divergence narrowed after the 15th of September, when Bitcoin lost $450.33 million and Ethereum shed $141.47 million.

Source: SoSoValue On the 16th of September, both assets suffered greater losses than they did previously, with Bitcoin losing $295.90 million and Ethereum losing $224.11 million. The timing of these losses occurred as investor sentiment worsened due to a Senate setback regarding the CLARITY Act.

Together, the flows show institutional demand weakening across both assets, limiting ETF-driven support for prices.

Final Summary BlackRock’s Bitcoin and Ethereum holdings remain resilient despite market volatility. Rising BTC and ETH ETF outflows now weaken institutional demand and buying support.

Ethereum researchers have reported sub-one-second median propagation for a simulated 1 MiB execution payload using EIP-8411’s segmented broadcasting design, compared with roughly five seconds when sending the payload as one message.

Summary

Tests cut median propagation for a 1 MiB payload from five seconds below one second. EIP-8411 splits execution payloads into chunks that nodes can verify and forward before full completion. A Merkle root in the execution bid lets nodes validate each received payload segment independently. Prototype tests used 500 simulated nodes, home-builder bandwidth, geographic latency, and ten randomized network seeds. Ethereum developers will discuss EIP-8411 for Hegotá inclusion at ACDC on September 17, 2026 today. Ethereum Research published the latest test results on Sept. 17, detailing a prototype that breaks execution payloads into smaller pieces so nodes can verify and forward each segment before receiving the full payload. The findings come from simulations and prototype client code, not Ethereum mainnet measurements.

The proposal remains a Draft networking EIP in the Ethereum EIPs repository. Its current design replaces the single execution_payload gossip topic introduced through EIP-7732 with an execution_payload_chunks topic and commits the pieces through a Merkle root included in the builder’s execution bid.

Ethereum EIP-8411 removes whole-payload waiting Ethereum’s existing gossip model can require a node to receive and validate a large message before forwarding it to peers. Researchers behind EIP-8411 describe the resulting delay as a store-and-forward problem because the complete payload must cross one network hop before beginning the next.

With segmented propagation, a builder divides the payload into fixed pieces. Each segment carries a Merkle inclusion proof tied to the root committed in the execution bid. A receiving node can check one segment and begin sending it onward while the remaining pieces are still arriving.

Moreso,the EIP discussion on Ethereum Magicians describes the planned change as replacing EIP-7732’s single payload message with independently verifiable chunks. The draft currently proposes 64 chunks and a Merkle proof structure that binds every piece to the original payload commitment. Researchers said the Merkle commitment represents the main consensus-level addition required for basic segmentation. The latest research prototype keeps the existing gossipsub wire format, network mesh construction, peer degree and scoring system intact while changing how payload pieces are published and forwarded.

Ethereum’s documentation currently describes execution payloads as transaction and state-related data generated by the execution client and carried through the consensus process. Validators receive proposed blocks through the consensus gossip network before sending execution data to their execution clients for validation.

Simulation cuts 1 MiB median from five seconds The strongest performance figures in the Sept. 17 report come from a controlled simulation. Researchers modeled 500 nodes using geographic network latency, 50 Mbps upload capacity and 100 Mbps download capacity, with a 1 MiB payload originating from a home builder and no high-bandwidth data-center nodes.

Under that setup, sending the payload as one complete gossipsub message took approximately five seconds to reach half the receiving nodes and close to six seconds at the tail. A tuned segmented version reached a median near 0.75 seconds and a tail close to one second.

The researchers stress that the measurements come from a simulation harness running real Prysm and go-libp2p-pubsub code against a simulated network and virtual clock. Each measurement used ten randomized network configurations. Mainnet conditions could differ from the modeled topology, bandwidth and traffic assumptions.

Their basic Tier 1 design combines segmentation with batch publishing. Using 16 KiB segments, the report says median propagation for a 1 MiB payload fell from five seconds to under one second, while tail latency dropped from roughly six seconds to just over one second.

Batch publishing changes how the source sends pieces. Instead of sending every copy of one segment before beginning the next, the builder distributes different pieces to different peers early, allowing several sections of the payload to start moving through the network at once. Researchers said Tier 1 required roughly one-third more received bytes than today’s whole-message approach. The tradeoff comes from sending many independently identified pieces and the extra control messages required to announce them.

More advanced tiers cut duplicate network traffic A second proposed tier tackles duplicate data. Instead of pushing every segment to all eligible mesh peers, nodes can push pieces to a limited group while announcing availability to others. Peers request missing segments only when required.

The prototype combines that system with what its authors call disciplined pulls. A node initially requests a segment from one peer, waits for a defined timeout and moves to another source if the first peer fails to deliver.

At a 1 MiB payload size, the research says disciplined pulls reduced received traffic to around 1.5 payload copies per node, compared with considerably more duplicate traffic in less controlled variants. Researchers found that reducing duplicates became increasingly useful when available upload bandwidth was limited.

The approach creates another tradeoff. A malicious or overloaded peer could announce a segment and then refuse to provide it. Researchers tested a withholding scenario in which some nodes advertised segments but failed to answer requests. At higher withholding levels, the tuned pull-based design showed rising tail latency. The authors tested shorter timeouts and multiple possible request sources as methods for limiting that exposure.

Their third tier adds Reed-Solomon erasure coding. A payload is compressed, encoded with extra parity pieces and divided into segments. Nodes can reconstruct the payload after collecting enough pieces without waiting for every original segment.

Researchers said the coded model had the lowest tail latency in their tests and remained functional when some segments were withheld. The cost was higher bandwidth at the publishing source because the parity data increases the amount sent.

EIP-8411 now faces a Hegotá inclusion discussion EIP-8411 is not currently an activated Ethereum feature. The GitHub proposal was opened on Sept. 4 and remains labeled as a Draft networking EIP awaiting review. The proposal requires EIP-7732, Ethereum’s enshrined proposer-builder separation design.

Ethereum developers have requested that EIP-8411 receive PFI, or Proposed for Inclusion, status for Hegotá, the network upgrade expected after Glamsterdam. During the Sept. 10 All Core Developers Execution discussion, developers said the proposal should be considered by the consensus-layer developer call because the change primarily affects consensus networking.

The request came after the normal Hegotá PFI deadline. Its proponents proposed EIP-8411 as a replacement for EIP-8142, which had explored placing blocks into blobs but raised concerns over builder-side KZG proving and reuse of data-availability subnets.

The ACDC #187 agenda schedules an EIP-8411 PFI discussion for Sept. 17 at 14:00 UTC. At the time of this report, the call had not yet taken place, so no decision to include EIP-8411 in Hegotá had been recorded.

Developers have been narrowing Hegotá’s feature set across account abstraction, scaling, censorship resistance and other protocol work. EIP-8411 entered that process later than many proposals and still needs a core-developer inclusion decision.

The networking proposal is tied to Ethereum’s work on raising Layer 1 capacity. Larger gas limits can lead to larger execution payloads, increasing the amount of data validators must receive within fixed consensus deadlines. Ethereum’s gas limit reached 60 million in late 2025 after validators signaled support for the increase.

Vitalik Buterin has described higher Layer 1 capacity, PeerDAS and future ZK-EVM work as parts of Ethereum’s scaling plan. Faster payload delivery is being researched alongside those changes because larger network messages place more pressure on node bandwidth and propagation deadlines.

Prototype code is available but remains experimental The researchers have published prototype implementations for Prysm and go-libp2p-pubsub. The recommended variant-a Prysm branch contains a series of changes behind an –enable-segmented-payload-gossip flag, while the accompanying libp2p branch implements forwarding and request policies used in the study.

The authors explicitly describe their research branch as “a harness, not a proposal.” Some features measured in the paper, including advanced erasure-coding configurations, remain experimental components of the test environment and are not necessarily part of the minimum EIP-8411 specification.

Open questions identified by the researchers include increased control-message traffic, CPU costs from processing many smaller messages, alternative segment mappings, queue management, timer tuning and whether a newer QUIC-focused networking stack could produce different results.

The authors plan further comparisons between the single-topic design used by variant A, partial-message approaches and models that assign separate gossip topics to individual segments. The current prototype keeps 16 KiB pieces as its recommended baseline after simulations showed smaller 8 KiB pieces did not produce further latency gains while increasing control traffic.

Ethereum blocks have traditionally been a one-builder affair. One entity assembles the transactions, one entity wins the auction, one entity gets the slot. As of September 16, that changed. Multi-party block construction, or MPBC, is now running on the Ethereum mainnet, allowing multiple builders to contribute transactions to a single block without requiring any changes to the underlying protocol.

The initiative was coordinated by the Blockspace Forum, which spent much of 2026 herding an impressive coalition of block builders toward this moment. The early numbers are modest but meaningful: roughly 3% of Ethereum blocks in the first 24 hours were constructed using the multi-party approach, and more than 20,000 transactions have been included faster since testing began in late August.

What MPBC actually does To understand why this matters, you need to understand how Ethereum blocks get built today. After the Merge in 2022, Ethereum adopted a system called proposer-builder separation, or PBS. Validators propose blocks, but specialized builders actually assemble them. Builders compete in an auction, and the winner’s block gets included.

MPBC changes the model so that multiple builders can each contribute transactions to a single block, creating multiple inclusion paths rather than funneling everything through one entity. The result is blocks that are fuller, more diverse, and faster at confirming pending transactions.

Advertisement

The gains in the early data are striking. Some multi-party blocks have included up to 810 additional transactions compared to what a single builder would have produced. In certain cases, gas usage jumped nearly 14-fold.

How we got here This didn’t happen overnight. The Blockspace Forum ran a series of workshops throughout 2026, culminating in a meeting in Cannes that brought together 32 teams. Those teams collectively account for over 95% of out-of-protocol block contributions on Ethereum.

Foundational research published in May 2026 laid out the design principles. The key constraint was that MPBC had to be strictly additive. No protocol changes, no hard forks, no consensus-level modifications. The system works entirely at the builder and operator layer.

Notably, the design doesn’t depend on relays for its core function. By sidestepping that dependency, MPBC introduces a parallel path that reduces the chokepoint risk.

Alongside the mainnet launch, the team released comprehensive public documentation and a live dashboard tracking multi-party block metrics. Performance indicators, participation rates, and transaction inclusion data are all visible in real time.

Why block construction centralization matters The current PBS model has structural issues that compound over time. When one builder wins each auction, they effectively control transaction ordering within that block. Builders can prioritize transactions that generate profit for themselves, sandwich trades, front-run orders, or simply exclude transactions they don’t find economically interesting.

MPBC doesn’t eliminate these dynamics entirely, but it dilutes them. When multiple builders contribute to the same block, no single entity has full control over transaction ordering or inclusion. Service transactions get additional pathways into blocks rather than competing for space in a single builder’s priority queue.

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

As cryptocurrency adoption continues to grow worldwide, Deutsche Bank, Germany’s largest bank, has announced it is preparing to launch a cryptocurrency custody service for its corporate and business clients later this year.

Deutsche Bank Offers Cryptocurrency Custody Service to Corporate Clients! Deutsche Bank announced in an official statement that it is preparing to offer digital asset custody services to its corporate clients in Europe.

According to the statement, the service will be available to initial customers after the necessary regulatory processes are completed. The bank, however, emphasized that the exact launch date has not yet been determined and that the launch depends on the relevant regulatory requirements.

Bitcoin and Ethereum Included! According to Deutsche Bank, the service will initially support Bitcoin and Ethereum, as well as select stablecoins. These include USDC, EURC, and EURAU. However, the bank states that the scope of supported digital assets may be expanded in the future.

Under the new system, Deutsche Bank will manage wallets and private keys on behalf of clients. This will eliminate the need for institutional clients to establish and operate their own in-house cryptocurrency custody infrastructure. Clients will also be able to transfer their stored digital assets to third parties.

Who Can Benefit? The service’s initial target audience will not be individual investors, but rather Deutsche Bank’s corporate and business clients. The bank is targeting diverse client groups within the scope of the service, including corporations, asset managers, hedge funds, custodians, brokerage firms, and government agencies.

Customer acceptance will be carried out in accordance with the bank’s criteria, due diligence requirements, and risk assessments.

*This is not investment advice.

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

The CLARITY Act failed to advance in the US Senate on Tuesday, September 15, dealing a major setback to the crypto industry’s biggest regulatory push in years.

Senators voted 49-50 on a procedural motion to move forward with the bill. It needed 60 votes. The vote was on whether the Senate should begin considering the legislation, rather than final passage.

So why did it fail?

1. Democrats Wanted Trump to Sell Large Crypto Holdings
This became the biggest disagreement in the final hours.

Republicans made a major concession before the vote. Their final bill required senior officials with a “significant financial interest” in certain crypto companies to either sell that interest or place it in a qualified blind trust.

Democrats wanted to go further.

Their final counteroffer would have required officials with a “very large interest” in a crypto company to sell it, removing the blind-trust option for those holdings. Democratic negotiator Angela Alsobrooks said divestment was the major unresolved issue before the vote.

The difference is simple. Under the Republican proposal, an official could remain financially invested through a blind trust. Democrats wanted very large interests sold completely.

Crypto billionaires have spent nearly $300M on the midterm elections.

Meanwhile, Trump and his family have pocketed more than $1.4B from crypto deals.

Now the crypto industry wants Congress to do its bidding by passing the corrupt CLARITY Act.

The Senate must say NO.

— Bernie Sanders (@BernieSanders) September 15, 2026

2. Democrats Wanted the Rules to Cover Trump’s Children
The Republican bill covered senior elected officials, federal judges and their spouses. Democrats wanted the ethics restrictions expanded further, including to children of covered officials. 

That was particularly relevant because Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump and Barron Trump have links to World Liberty Financial.

The Democratic counteroffer also sought tighter restrictions around paid crypto promotions.

Republicans rejected those additional changes on Tuesday morning. Sen. Cynthia Lummis’ office argued Democrats were repeating demands Republicans had already considered during months of negotiations.

Today, I voted no on the Clarity Act, legislation meant to regulate cryptocurrency in America.

The ethics provisions in this bill are simply too thin. President Trump, his children, and his Cabinet are making billions of dollars in the crypto space, in part from bilking everyday…

— Sen. Elissa Slotkin (@SenatorSlotkin) September 15, 2026

3. Democrats Still Had Concerns About Who Would Enforce the Rules
Republicans had already moved considerably on enforcement.

Earlier versions gave the US attorney general the main enforcement role. Democrats argued that created an obvious problem: a Justice Department controlled by the president could be responsible for enforcing ethics rules against that same president.

The final Republican bill gave state attorneys general a role in enforcement, one of the concessions President Trump accepted before the vote.

Democrats still argued that the mechanism left too much authority inside the federal administration and could make enforcement difficult in practice.

Hot take: Trump coin, World Liberty, USD1, and Melania coin are why CLARITY failed.

An unprecedented $1.3 billion pocketed. More than all past U.S. presidents made during their terms combined.

— Dennis Porter (@Dennis_Porter_) September 15, 2026

4. Banks and Crypto Companies Were Still Fighting Over Stablecoin Rewards
Ethics was the final major obstacle, but another fight remained unresolved.

Banks have warned that stablecoins paying rewards could pull deposits out of traditional banks. That could particularly hurt smaller community banks that rely on deposits to fund loans.

The final CLARITY draft gave the Treasury secretary temporary authority to restrict stablecoin rewards if they caused damaging deposit outflows.

Some lawmakers still wanted stronger protection for banks. Sen. Josh Hawley, one of the Republicans who opposed advancing the bill, raised concerns about community banks.

The CLARITY Act didn't advance in the Senate today, which was a disappointment. While it's possible bi-partisan conversations continue and it lives to fight another day, we can't wait on Congress anymore.

The SEC and CFTC have the tools they need to create clear rules under…

— Brian Armstrong (@brian_armstrong) September 15, 2026

5. Illicit Finance and DeFi Rules Were Still an Issue
Democrats also wanted stronger protections around money laundering, national security and illicit finance.

The latest Republican draft made changes to DeFi regulation and anti-money laundering requirements. However, lawmakers including Elizabeth Warren argued that more work was still needed.

These issues contributed to the wider disagreement, although divestment and presidential ethics were the clearest final sticking points.

Crypto Prices Fell Before the Vote Was Even Over
The reaction has been clearly negative, especially in assets most exposed to U.S. crypto regulation. Bitcoin fell more than 5% during Tuesday’s sell-off, while Coinbase and Circle shares fell as much as 10%. Ethereum dropped more than 6%, while XRP lost roughly 12% at one point.

Part of the decline began before the Senate vote.

Markets could see negotiations breaking down during the morning. That meant traders were already reducing risk before senators officially voted.

CLARITY was also only one source of pressure.

US Treasury yields climbed above 5%, oil prices surged above $100 and markets were preparing for a Federal Reserve interest-rate decision on September 16. Higher interest rates generally make risk assets such as crypto less attractive.

Will Crypto Prices Keep Falling?
Further losses are possible, although CLARITY alone may have already caused most of its immediate damage.

Dennis Porter, co-founder of Satoshi Action Fund, made this argument to BeInCrypto more than a month before the vote.

“I think failure is priced in right now,” Porter told BeInCrypto.

At the time, Polymarket gave CLARITY only around a 16% chance of becoming law in 2026. Porter argued that a failed vote could therefore have less impact on crypto prices than many investors expected.

He also said clear rules could encourage larger institutions to make longer-term crypto investments. He expected that benefit to appear gradually rather than produce an immediate Bitcoin rally.

So far, that argument has partly held up.

Bitcoin suffered a meaningful decline after negotiations collapsed, but there has been no CLARITY-driven market crash on the scale that might occur after a completely unexpected regulatory shock.

Assets more directly exposed to US crypto regulation were hit harder. XRP fell much more sharply than Bitcoin, while Coinbase suffered a double-digit decline.

The next major market driver is now likely to be the Federal Reserve.

If rates rise and the Fed signals further tightening, crypto could face more pressure. A softer message could instead help risk assets recover.

What Happens to the CLARITY Act Now?
The bill is stalled, but there is still a route to revive it.

September 15: The Senate failed to invoke cloture, with the vote ending 49-50.
Before October 5: Senators could reopen negotiations and attempt another procedural vote if Republicans and Democrats reach a new compromise.
October 5-November 6: The Senate is scheduled for a state work period covering the November 3 midterm elections.
After November 6: Congress could try again during the post-election session.
December 18: The Senate’s current schedule lists this as its target adjournment date.
January 2027: If Congress does not pass the legislation before the current Congress ends, lawmakers would have to introduce legislation again in the next Congress.

There is one important procedural detail.

Republican Sen. Thom Tillis switched his vote to “no” at the end of Tuesday’s vote, preserving a route to seek reconsideration later. That means another attempt remains possible if negotiators can find enough votes.

For now, the biggest question is whether Republicans and Democrats are willing to reopen the ethics negotiations.

Without a compromise on divestment and enforcement, CLARITY still does not have the 60 Senate votes it needs to move forward.

Disclaimer

BeInCrypto is committed to unbiased, transparent reporting. This news article aims to provide accurate, timely information. However, readers are advised to verify facts independently and consult with a professional before making any decisions based on this content. Please note that our Terms and Conditions, Privacy Policy, and Disclaimers have been updated.

TheDAO Security Fund is back with a second round of ETHSecurity Initiatives. Round Two is live and accepting community proposals for onchain security projects, with funding decisions expected by mid-November 2026 and the submission window staying open through late January 2027.

The headline numbers tell the story of ambition: a $600K grant earmarked for a formally verified Vyper compiler and a $300K allocation for a decentralized privacy-preserving detection system built by Auditware. Up to 100 proposals could receive community input and funding this cycle.

From broad strokes to precision cuts Round One distributed over $1.6 million across 135 projects, fueled by 13,805 individual donations from 3,934 donors.

Two proposals already illustrate the shift. The $600K Vyper Foundation grant would fund a formally verified compiler for Vyper, the smart contract language that underpins major protocols including Curve, Yearn, and Lido. Formal verification is the process of mathematically proving that code does what it claims to do.

The second marquee proposal, a $300K grant for Auditware, targets a decentralized endpoint detection and response system with privacy-preserving features.

The 200-person filter One of the more interesting structural changes in Round Two is the role of ETHSecurity Badge holders. These are 200 verified security experts selected through a specific rubric and assisted by AI-driven processes to evaluate and influence which proposals get funded.

The fund’s curators include Vitalik Buterin and Taylor Monahan.

Where the money comes from The fund was established using approximately 69,420 unclaimed ETH from the 2016 DAO hack recovery. Those tokens were repurposed into a staking endowment that now generates an estimated $8 million annually in yield, creating a self-sustaining funding mechanism for Ethereum security work.

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

An Ethereum wallet holding leveraged rsETH has lost around $7.8 million after an attacker exploited a custom Safe module linked to a Uniswap v4 liquidity pool. The incident happened on September 15, 2026, but security researchers said the attack did not come from a flaw in Kelp DAO’s core rsETH contracts.

Here’s how the exploit actually happen.

Custom Safe Module Exposed Wallet to AttackBlockchain security firm Blockaid identified the attack and traced it to a custom Uniswap v4 LP Safe module used by the affected Gnosis Safe wallet.

The wallet at 0x40E93…7AbA8 held about $7.73 million worth of rsETH before the attack.

🚨Blockaid exploit detection system detected an exploit on an unidentified user's Safe on Ethereum.
~$7.73M confirmed rsETH loss so far.
An attacker used a public keeper multicall to drive a custom Uni V4 LP Safe module into an attacker-created hooked pool; the hook unwrapped…

— Blockaid (@blockaid_) September 15, 2026 According to the security analysis, the module had a public entry point that accepted caller-controlled data and used DELEGATECALL without proper access checks. 

Because the module was already authorized by the Safe, an outside attacker could use that entrypoint to execute code inside the wallet’s own context.

This gave the attacker control over the wallet’s assets.

How rsETH Exploit Happen?The attacker first used a public keeper multicall function to redirect the wallet’s custom Uniswap v4 Safe module toward a malicious Hook pool.

The module then unpacked the wallet’s aEthrsETH, an Aave-wrapped version of restaked ETH, into raw rsETH. The attacker attempted to extract those tokens through the malicious pool.

Perhaps, the original attacker did not get the stolen funds.

Why!

Because the attacker’s transaction entered Ethereum’s mempool, where an MEV bot known as “yoink” detected and front-ran the transaction and captured the entire roughly $7.8 million worth of rsETH for itself.

Can Kelp just withdraw the $7.8M from rsETH?Not necessarily. As rsETH is a liquid restaking token. The fact that the wallet held $7.8M worth of rsETH does not mean Kelp DAO has a $7.8M pile of the same tokens that it can simply take back.

If the stolen rsETH remains in an address controlled by Yoink, recovery would generally require freezing, blacklisting, recovering, or otherwise restricting those assets, if the token’s design and applicable controls allow it.

Kelp DAO Says Core rsETH Contracts Are SafeMeanwhile Kelp DAO team has responded by temporarily pausing rsETH transfers for 24 hours to isolate the affected funds.

We've detected potential suspicious activity on an the address (0xc70f00cd7e461686b04b0e912e309beca8b80ea0) that received rsETH a few hours ago.

Out of an abundance of caution, we've placed that address under a temporary 24-hour pause. During this window, rsETH cannot move in…

— Kelp (@KelpDAO) September 15, 2026 The team said its core smart contracts remained secure and that the rsETH pool was fully collateralized. Normal minting, redemptions, and other DeFi integrations continued to operate.

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

Ripple USD (RLUSD) has grown into one of the larger regulated dollar stablecoins, with net circulating supply recently topping an all-time high of about $2.44 billion before settling near $2.42 billion. That expansion looks like a success story for Ripple’s dual-chain product.

A closer look at where the new tokens actually landed tells a more complicated story.

Most of the growth since July has accumulated on Ethereum, not on the XRP Ledger that Ripple has long promoted as its flagship settlement network.

RLUSD launched in December 2024 on both chains under a New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) trust-company charter.

The design was straightforward: XRPL would handle fast, low-cost enterprise payments, while Ethereum would connect the token to deep DeFi liquidity. For much of 2025,

Ethereum dominated.

At one point it held close to 88 percent of supply. XRPL then staged a notable catch-up. By late June 2026 the two networks were roughly even.

In early July the XRP Ledger briefly pulled ahead, holding roughly $863 million against Ethereum’s $676 million out of a total near $1.54 billion.

That lead did not last through the subsequent surge.

Total supply rose more than 50 percent in a little over a month as Ripple minted and redeemed tokens to meet demand, rebalance liquidity, and support exchange and lending markets.

Live trackers now show Ethereum with about $1.37 billion, or 56.5 percent of circulating RLUSD, versus $1.05 billion, or 43.5 percent, on XRPL.

The gap is not just a rounding error.

The bulk of the hundreds of millions of dollars added since midsummer has been issued or moved onto Ethereum.

The reasons are structural.

Ethereum still hosts the largest concentration of DeFi venues that can put a dollar stablecoin to work.

Aave’s lending contracts alone hold on the order of $330 million in RLUSD.

Curve pools and other automated market makers add further depth. Average balances on Ethereum run far higher than on XRPL, pointing to institutional and protocol-level holdings rather than a wide retail base.

XRPL, by contrast, shows more individual holders and trust lines, cheaper fees, and faster settlement—advantages that matter for payments but have not absorbed most of the newest issuance.

Ripple itself treats the two chains as complementary rather than competing.

The company mints and burns on both ledgers, parks inventory for market-making, and periodically rebalances.

Those treasury operations explain some of the visible transfers.

They do not change the destination of net new capital.

When demand spiked in August and early September, Ethereum received the larger share.

The result is an awkward split for a product often framed as proof of XRPL’s enterprise readiness.

RLUSD is growing quickly, is fully reserved, and is expanding toward corporate treasury use and additional networks.

Yet the chain that captured most of the post-July inflow is the one Ripple did not build. It now remains to be seen if XRPL can reclaim a majority as payment volume scales remains an open question. For now the numbers are clear: the stablecoin is larger than ever, and most of that extra size lives on Ethereum.

Key Takeaways The company acquired 27,180 ETH in the past week, representing approximately $68 million in value, increasing its total position to 5.96 million ETH. Bitmine currently holds 4.9% of the entire Ethereum supply and requires about 144,000 additional ETH to achieve its 5% objective. According to Chairman Tom Lee, the ETH-BTC price relationship reached its strongest point since January 30, ending a multi-year downward pattern that began in 2022. The company has staked more than 5 million ETH via its MAVAN infrastructure, anticipating several hundred million dollars in yearly staking returns. Combined assets including digital currencies, cash reserves, and investment positions now reach $15.8 billion, with BMNR listed in the Russell 1000 index. Bitmine expanded its Ethereum position by 27,180 tokens over the previous week, representing a market value of approximately $68 million based on Monday’s ETH trading price just north of $2,500.

BitMine Buys 27,180 ETH, Bringing Holdings to 5.96M ETH

BitMine said it acquired 27,180 ETH over the past week, bringing its total holdings to 5.96 million ETH as of September 13. The position represents about 4.9% of Ethereum’s 122 million ETH supply, putting the company 98%… pic.twitter.com/r5oLTgiA9T

— Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) September 14, 2026

This latest acquisition elevates Bitmine’s complete ETH holdings to 5,956,378 tokens, moving the company closer to its stated 5% supply objective.

Given Ethereum’s current circulating supply of approximately 122 million tokens, the organization requires roughly 144,000 additional ETH to surpass the 6.1 million token benchmark it has established.

The firm has executed ETH acquisitions consistently on a weekly basis since initiating its Ethereum treasury approach in June 2025, with last week’s acquisition volume mirroring the previous week’s activity.

Bitmine Immersion Technologies, Inc., BMNR

According to a September 14 announcement, the organization’s aggregate cryptocurrency holdings, cash reserves, marketable securities, and speculative “moonshot” investments have reached $15.8 billion.

This valuation is primarily driven by its 5.96 million ETH stake, priced at $2,513 per token as of September 13, alongside 212 BTC, equity positions in Beast Industries and Eightco, plus $549 million held in cash and marketable securities.

Ethereum-Bitcoin Price Relationship Shifts Upward Tom Lee, Bitmine’s chairman and Fundstrat’s founder, identified several positive indicators for ETH as 2026 approaches its final quarter.

He emphasized that the ETH-BTC valuation ratio reached its peak level since January 30 and successfully breached a declining trend line established in 2022.

“The valuation ratio between ETH and BTC advanced to its strongest position since January 30th this year and confirmed a fresh upward trajectory,” Lee stated.

He attributed this movement to Ethereum’s expanding function as foundational infrastructure for Wall Street’s tokenization initiatives and its prospective application in governing autonomous AI systems.

Staking Operations Generate Significant Revenue The company has committed over 5.07 million ETH to staking through its MAVAN infrastructure, which functions as an enterprise-level staking and validator platform.

Management is forecasting annual staking income in the hundreds of millions of dollars from this substantial position.

The company also maintains membership in the Russell 1000 index, which it references as evidence of its expanding institutional credibility.

Lee identified two additional immediate catalysts: an anticipated Senate vote on Tuesday regarding U.S. cryptocurrency market-structure legislation called the Clarity Act, and resurgent cryptocurrency purchasing from Korean market participants.

The latest analyst assessment for BMNR is a Buy recommendation, with a $63.60 price objective.

BMNR shares declined 0.64% during Monday’s trading session, closing at $25.04.

MEXC has completed a migration of its $RIO token reserves from the Algorand blockchain to Ethereum, swapping holdings at a 1:1 ratio. The move, confirmed through Realio Network’s official channels on September 14, 2026, is part of a broader recovery process the project has been managing following an unspecified incident affecting its reserves.

The new token now lives at Ethereum contract address 0x94a8b4EE5CD64C79D0Ee816f467EA73009f51aA0, verifiable on Etherscan. For anyone wondering whether their holdings survived the crossing, that address is the definitive reference point.

What actually happened here Realio Network is a real-world asset tokenization platform, meaning it helps bring traditionally illiquid assets like private equity and real estate onto public blockchains.

$RIO functions as the network’s utility and gas token. Since its initial launch in March 2023, $RIO has operated across multiple chains simultaneously, including Ethereum, Algorand, and Stellar, giving users flexibility in where they hold and transact the token.

The migration MEXC executed is not the exchange acting unilaterally. Realio Network directed the move, and MEXC followed through on its end by converting the Algorand-based holdings to the new ERC-20 version at a ratio that leaves holders with exactly what they started with, numerically speaking.

This is not the first time MEXC has navigated a $RIO chain transition. In late 2024, the exchange handled a similar contract swap for $RIO on Binance Smart Chain, also at 1:1, without disrupting trading.

As of the latest communications from Realio Network, no broader disruption to $RIO trading on MEXC has been reported. The project has indicated that further recovery steps will be announced through official channels.

Why Ethereum, and why it matters Moving from Algorand to Ethereum is not a lateral shuffle. Ethereum is, by most measures, the dominant chain for tokenized real-world assets, with more mature infrastructure, more extensive developer tooling, and a larger user base than almost every competing network.

The shift also simplifies the asset management picture for an exchange like MEXC. Maintaining reserve balances across multiple chains introduces operational complexity, and consolidating toward Ethereum reduces the number of moving parts to monitor during a recovery period.

Realio Network’s multi-chain architecture has always been a feature rather than an afterthought. The project launched in March 2023 with explicit support for several blockchains, recognizing that different user bases gravitate toward different ecosystems.

What to watch from here The immediate practical implication for $RIO holders on MEXC is straightforward: holdings are preserved at the same numeric value, just on a different underlying chain.

The more interesting question is what “additional recovery steps” from Realio Network actually entail. The project has been deliberate about not over-communicating on the nature of the original incident, and has stated it will keep users updated through official communications.

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

Ripple has facilitated significant transfers of its stablecoin RLUSD across both the XRP Ledger and Ethereum networks as the asset’s market capitalization approaches $2.4 billion.

RLUSD Mint and Burn Activity IncreasesThe Ripple Stablecoin Tracker recently identified a mint of precisely 14,394,224 RLUSD at the RLUSD Treasury on the XRP Ledger. This mint followed the burning of 10 million RLUSD on the same ledger. Shortly after, another 15 million RLUSD was removed from the RLUSD supply on Ethereum.

Combined, these three transactions accounted for $39.4 million in RLUSD-related activity in just a few days. Such mint-and-burn cycles reflect Ripple’s management of its stablecoin issuance and treasury liquidity, rather than a direct increase in circulating supply. The company does not publicly disclose details about the origin or specific purpose of each transaction supporting RLUSD movement.

The series of RLUSD mint and burn transactions on both XRP Ledger and Ethereum represented approximately $39.4 million within a short period, highlighting Ripple’s dynamic treasury management approach.

As of the latest figures, Ethereum held about $1.38 billion worth of RLUSD, while the XRP Ledger carried approximately $1.03 billion. This created a difference of roughly $350 million between the two networks, with recent activity showing RLUSD increasingly shifting toward Ethereum.

NetworkRLUSD SupplyEthereum$1.38 billionXRP Ledger$1.03 billionAlthough the new RLUSD mint on the XRP Ledger narrowed this gap slightly, Ethereum continues to hold the majority of RLUSD’s supply. Ongoing treasury transactions on both blockchains indicate active liquidity management from Ripple as market conditions evolve.

The market capitalization of RLUSD stood close to $2.40 billion as of September 11, up from roughly $2.26 billion at the beginning of the month. Daily trading volume registered approximately $114 million, demonstrating RLUSD’s growing presence in stablecoin markets.

Ripple Advances Regulatory Compliance and Institutional UseThis period of treasury activity followed Ripple’s release of a new guide for institutional clients, spotlighting RLUSD’s regulatory framework. Ripple, a technology company specializing in enterprise blockchain solutions and digital payments, highlighted in its materials that RLUSD is fully backed 1:1 by cash and approved cash equivalents, with assets held in segregated reserves. The company says institutions can directly mint and redeem RLUSD through Ripple Mint and benefit from redemption rights and oversight under established regulations.

Ripple’s recent messaging underscores its ambitions for RLUSD as a central component in payments, tokenization, lending, and custody services aimed at financial institutions. These compliance-focused efforts reflect the broader push among major stablecoin issuers to differentiate themselves as regulatory scrutiny intensifies worldwide.

Still, Ripple’s team has clarified that treasury minting reflects internal liquidity needs rather than direct retail or institutional demand. Data from August showed that roughly $449.3 million of RLUSD was minted on the XRP Ledger over a 30-day period, while about $448.9 million was burned within the same timeframe, resulting in an almost exact turnover of supply.

The company’s approach to stablecoin management involves frequent adjustments to ensure sufficient market liquidity and a balance between XRPL and Ethereum-based reserves, as RLUSD continues being adopted for institutional applications.

Mini dictionary: RLUSD is Ripple’s US dollar-backed stablecoin, managed across the XRP Ledger and Ethereum networks. It aims to provide high liquidity and regulatory compliance for institutional finance, allowing minting and redemption on multiple chains.

Ethereum [ETH] saw sharp volatility after reclaiming $2,500 and climbing to $2,600 before falling toward $2,400. At press time, it traded near $2,524, up 2.26% daily and 2% weekly.

The pullback coincided with large-holder selling, yet Exchange Supply presented a more complicated picture.

Is Wintermute selling Ethereum? Lookonchain reported that Wintermute deposited 61,847 ETH worth $160.3 million into Binance and Coinbase. The transfer raised selling concerns, but an exchange deposit does not confirm a sale.

Market makers regularly move inventory between venues for liquidity provision and operational purposes.

Source: Arkham If intended for liquidity provision, the transfer may not represent directional selling.

However, market sales from that inventory could increase short-term supply and create downside volatility. The transfer matters, but its purpose determines whether it becomes selling pressure.

Why is Ethereum Exchange Supply falling? Despite Wintermute’s deposit, Ethereum’s broader Exchange Supply continued falling.

AMBCrypto previously reported that Ethereum reserves on Binance had reached a three-month low. Binance covered one venue. However, the Exchange Supply Ratio [ESR] showed that the decline extended across exchanges.

Source: CryptoQuant ESR declined for ten consecutive days and reached 0.125 at press time. The metric had not visited this level since 2016. Its decline showed that exchanges held a smaller share of Ethereum’s circulating supply.

This suggested that the market absorbed individual deposits without creating a broad buildup of immediately sellable ETH.

Historically, lower Exchange Supply can reduce selling pressure. The harder question was why ETH remained weak as its liquid supply contracted.

Source: SwissIntelligence SwissIntelligence data showed that 196 whales were distributing ETH, compared with 125 accumulating.

Source: TradingView This imbalance suggested that large-holder selling continued weighing on ETH as whales secured modest gains.

The True Strength Index had declined since forming a bearish crossover several days earlier.

At the same time, the Balance of Power remained negative. Together, both indicators showed that sellers retained a short-term advantage despite declining exchange balances.

ETH was caught between fewer immediately sellable coins and more whales willing to sell.

If whale distribution continues, ETH could revisit $2,300 if Wintermute’s transfer becomes market sales. By contrast, shrinking Exchange Supply could help ETH reclaim $2,600 and target $2,800 if demand returns.

The next move may reveal whether buyers can absorb whale sales without losing the emerging supply squeeze.

Final Summary Wintermute deposited 61,847 ETH worth $160.3 million into Binance and Coinbase. Ethereum’s Exchange Supply Ratio reached 2016 levels, yet whale distribution continued weakening price momentum.

19h05 ▪ 5 min read ▪ by Evans S.

Summarize this article with:

Ethereum still aims for October 6 at 13:53 UTC to activate Glamsterdam on the Sepolia testnet. The date now appears as the next milestone on Ethereum’s official roadmap. But it remains fragile: Glamsterdam has not yet completed any full run on a stable private devnet, and several bugs must be fixed before exposing the update to Sepolia. The mainnet is still planned for the fourth quarter of 2026, with no confirmed date.

In Brief Glamsterdam targets Sepolia on October 6, but the date remains conditional. Devnet-9 has 1,000 validators and still fails to finalize properly. A bug related to EIP-8037 forces execution layer clients to modify their code. Devnet-9 Still Blocks Before Transition to Sepolia Glamsterdam was supposed to use devnets to eliminate these kinds of problems before reaching public networks. Cointribune was already following the entry of Glamsterdam into its advanced testing phase in the spring.

Five months later, tests are much heavier. Glamsterdam-Devnet-9 was launched on September 1 with 1,000 validator nodes, making it the largest Glamsterdam devnet so far by node count. The result is not yet as expected: the network does not finalize properly. Too few validators propose and attest the same chain head to reach finality.

Stefan Starflinger, DevOps engineer at the Ethereum Foundation, believes that this size mainly highlighted edge cases that were less likely to appear in smaller configurations.

Devnet-8 had already encountered a more serious problem. A bug could freeze the network when a validator proposed a block sharing the same parent hash as the one expected in a specific situation. Client teams have since worked on fixes. So Sepolia is not malfunctioning. Glamsterdam just hasn’t succeeded there yet.

EIP-8037 Adds a New Problem to Solve Another bug directly affects EIP-8037, one of the major proposals of Glamsterdam. This EIP changes the pricing for creating new permanent data on Ethereum. The network wants to increase capacity without letting its database grow at the same pace. EIP-8037 notably introduces separate accounting for certain costs related to state creation.

Cointribune had already explained why this adjustment matters in the project aiming to greatly boost Ethereum’s execution capacity.

Maria Silva, researcher at the Ethereum Foundation, identified during testing a problem related to this EIP. The fix requires updating all affected execution layer clients.

Ethereum will therefore take another round. Developers are now preparing a new devnet before Sepolia. CryptoPotato indicates that Devnet-11 has become the test to watch, with Devnet-10 no longer the main step retained in this week’s reported schedule.

Parithosh Jayanti, who chaired the developers’ meeting, did not guarantee October 6. If the next devnet still encounters significant problems, teams will have to reassess the date “on a case-by-case basis.” So October 6 is definitely a target. Not yet a promise.

Ethereum: Mainnet Still Targeted End 2026, No Confirmed Date Ethereum.org continues to display Q4 2026 for the deployment of Glamsterdam on the mainnet. No specific day is indicated. Sepolia, meanwhile, officially appears as the next milestone with the date of October 6.

After Sepolia, Hoodi must still come, the second public testnet planned in the deployment. Here too, developers preferred to wait before setting a date.

Enrico del Fante, from Consensys, notably advocated for a few additional weeks before committing on Hoodi. The problems encountered on Devnet-9 make a precise timeline difficult to keep.

The challenge goes beyond a simple crypto hard fork. Glamsterdam must deeply modify how Ethereum builds and verifies its blocks. Its program notably includes ePBS, or built-in separation between block proposers and builders, as well as Block-Level Access Lists, designed to prepare for more parallel processing.

The network is already preparing the next steps. Cointribune recently detailed the planned work after Glamsterdam around Hegotá and privacy. For now, December remains possible. But Ethereum must first achieve something much simpler on paper: a Glamsterdam devnet that finalizes cleanly. If Devnet-11 succeeds, October 6 will remain within reach. Otherwise, Sepolia may still have to wait.

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

Evans S.

Fascinated by Bitcoin since 2017, Evariste has continuously researched the subject. While his initial interest was in trading, he now actively seeks to understand all advances centered on cryptocurrencies. As an editor, he strives to consistently deliver high-quality work that reflects the state of the sector as a whole.

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.

Renowned asset management firm BlackRock has continued to dominate both the Bitcoin and Ethereum ETF market, attracting large amounts of capital in the ecosystem. 

While Ethereum has been trading sideways, showing mixed price action over the past weeks, onchain data from Arkham Intelligence shows that BlackRock has managed to attract decent capital into the market over the past month.

BlackRock buys Ethereum's dipAccording to the data, BlackRock's Ethereum ETF (ETHA) bought about $13.9 million worth of ETH during its latest trading session, bringing the fund's total Ethereum purchases over the past 20 trading days to $251.4 million.

HOT Stories

While momentum across the broader Ethereum ETF market has been relatively weak amid persisting market uncertainty, BlackRock has managed to sustain institutional demand for the leading crypto asset.

You Might Also Like

Following this strong performance from the BlackRock Ethereum ETF, ETHA has recorded no outflows during the 20-day period. This means that the fund has maintained a 20-day inflow streak despite unstable price movements.

BlackRock maintains dominance Unlike BlackRock, the downside pressure seen across the crypto market has affected the performance of other Ethereum funds, as they recorded multiple withdrawals during the period.

With BlackRock outperforming its peers in the Ethereum ETF ecosystem, data shows that other major Ethereum ETFs, including BlackRock's sister fund ETHA and Fidelity's FETH, recorded notable outflows during the period.

It appears that institutions are showing more confidence in the BlackRock investment product than in other funds, as ETHA continued to attract capital while some funds experienced withdrawals amid the market correction.

Aerie Capital, curator of Plume Vaults, is launching a lending market on Ethereum mainnet, allowing holders of Plume Vaults or Nest to use their RWA yield positions as collateral to borrow stablecoins and unlock liquidity without leaving Ethereum.

Aerie is a newly launched curator built to address a growing need in decentralized lending: a specialized curator with product-specific expertise for new asset types.Its mandate is simple: set the standard for Open Finance by bringing institutional investment strategies into transparent, composable onchain markets.

The Ethereum mainnet launch is the next step in that vision.

Expanding Onchain Yield OpportunitiesPlume Vaults are designed to make institutional assets accessible and usable across the broader onchain economy. With Plume Vaults now available on Ethereum through a dedicated Morpho market, users can borrow against these assets and execute looping strategies for the first time directly on mainnet, through one of DeFi’s most established lending environments.

Move Your Assets to EthereumFor existing Plume Vault or Nest users, the Ethereum mainnet vaults provide a new home for capital and collateral. Incentives will also be migrating over from the Plume chain.

Liquidity providers in the current Morpho vaults on Plume mainnet can move their liquidity to the corresponding Ethereum mainnet vaults, while borrowers using nALPHA and nOPAL can migrate their collateral to Ethereum mainnet and continue accessing DeFi opportunities there. 

Move your liquidity or collateral from Plume to Ethereum here. Start putting your nALPHA, nOPAL, nBASIS, and nFALCON assets to work across Ethereum’s DeFi ecosystem.

‍

XRP Ledger (XRPL) developers have announced a plan to achieve full quantum resistance for the network by 2028, placing XRP Ledger ahead of several major blockchain rivals pursuing the same milestone. The move was confirmed by Vet, a contributor at the XRPL Foundation and validator on the decentralized Unique Node List (dUNL). Vet outlined that significant advancements are expected by 2027, including the initial deployment of new security protocols through a hybrid system.

XRPL’s technological strategy and key featuresThis newly revealed timeline positions XRPL as a front-runner in the race to secure blockchains against the potential threat of quantum computing, with its projected transition set for one year before Ethereum‘s scheduled 2029 upgrade.

Developers have highlighted three critical architectural innovations underpinning the XRPL quantum security transition. First, the native key rotation feature will enable cryptographic keys to be updated without changing users’ existing r-addresses. This secure and seamless transition is expected to minimize confusion and operational risks for asset custodians. In contrast, most competing blockchains require users to manually transfer assets to new wallets when adopting post-quantum standards.

Second, XRPL and RippleX developers have established a “Quantum-Day” emergency response protocol. In the event of rapid advances in quantum computing threatening current cryptographic schemes, this protocol allows vulnerable accounts to be instantly isolated and secured without interrupting the overall functioning of the ledger.

Third, the network has already begun actively testing quantum-resistant cryptographic algorithms. Developers intend to roll out new security measures gradually, using a hybrid deployment that runs alongside existing protocols. This approach aims to ensure robust protection while maintaining the stability of the network during the transition phase.

Mini dictionary: Unique Node List (dUNL): A decentralized list of trusted validators used in XRP Ledger to ensure agreement on the true state of the network and maintain consensus securely.

Significant enhancements in quantum-resistant security are anticipated by 2027, which will see the launch of a hybrid deployment model operating alongside the network’s existing security structure. This aims to allow a smoother transition and scalability for users and custodians alike.

Competition with Algorand, and comprehensive XRPL auditThe race for quantum resistance has brought renewed focus on comparisons between XRPL and Algorand. Algorand recently announced the development of quantum-secured accounts utilizing Falcon-1024 signatures, a cryptographic scheme resistant to attacks by quantum computers. However, Vet cautioned the community against overestimating this achievement, pointing out that Algorand still primarily depends on the Ed25519 standard for most routine operations. Full integration of quantum-resistant technologies, including the consensus protocol, is not scheduled for completion until 2027.

Mini dictionary: Falcon-1024: A post-quantum digital signature algorithm designed to remain secure against quantum computer attacks.

NetworkQuantum Protection StartFull Quantum Protection TargetCurrent Key StandardXRP Ledger2027 (Hybrid Phase)2028Native key rotationEthereum–2029To be upgradedAlgorandIn progress2027Falcon-1024 (partial), Ed25519Meanwhile, the scope of Ripple’s Project Eleven includes a thorough security audit of XRP Ledger, covering components from validator nodes to the underlying network infrastructure. The audit is part of a broader initiative to validate and update every layer of security before the mainnet’s transition to quantum resistance.

Ripple’s rollout plan features a staged approach, beginning with comprehensive testing. A hybrid deployment of legacy and post-quantum signatures is planned for 2027, leading to a full upgrade in 2028 for the mainnet environment.

As part of its industry-leading strategy, XRP Ledger’s transition roadmap incorporates hybrid cryptographic solutions, system-wide audits, and responsive emergency protocols designed to protect user assets in the face of rapidly evolving quantum technology threats.

As countries around the world continue to regulate cryptocurrencies, taxation stands out as one of the most important issues.

The latest notable regulatory effort on this issue comes from Germany.

A New Era in Bitcoin and Cryptocurrency Earnings! Germany, one of Europe’s largest countries, is preparing comprehensive regulations to tax gains from cryptocurrencies, particularly Bitcoin and Ethereum.

According to BlockBeats, a draft prepared by the German Ministry of Finance plans to subject cryptocurrency gains to a flat tax of 25 percent, similar to stocks and other capital investments.

The draft legislation is not yet enacted and will be submitted to parliament for approval after a review process within the government.

One Year of Tax Exemption is Ending! Under the current system, gains made by individual investors from selling cryptocurrencies held for more than a year are exempt from tax. However, the ministry wants to abolish this exemption, and the new regulation proposes removing this exemption and classifying cryptocurrencies as capital gains.

At this point, the new system is planned to be applied to cryptocurrencies acquired on or after January 1, 2027.

The draft also envisages preserving some important advantages for investors. The current annual tax exemption limit of €1,000 ($1,170) is expected to remain in effect. Furthermore, according to the report, the draft text also includes a provision allowing crypto investment gains and losses to be offset against gains and losses from other securities such as stocks.

*This is not investment advice.

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

Ethereum just got its clearest blueprint yet for surviving a quantum computing future without bankrupting its users on gas fees. EIP-8288, authored by Vitalik Buterin and merged into the Ethereum EIP repository on September 9, 2026, introduces a framework for recursive STARK aggregation that could fundamentally reshape how the network handles cryptographic proofs.

The proposal, first put forward on June 5, 2026, tackles a problem that’s been lurking in Ethereum’s roadmap for years: post-quantum signatures are large and expensive to verify on-chain. EIP-8288’s solution is elegant in its simplicity. Instead of every transaction carrying its own hefty proof, transactions declare their quantum-resistant signatures and STARK proofs as dependencies, and mempool nodes batch them together into a single, compact aggregate proof.

How recursive STARK aggregation actually works Technically, the proposal introduces what it calls a “frame type” for post-quantum signatures and STARK aggregation. Transactions include a minimal base frame, keeping the on-chain footprint small. The heavy lifting, the actual aggregation logic, happens at the mempool and block builder layer rather than at consensus.

By keeping aggregation off the consensus layer, Ethereum avoids the kind of protocol-level changes that require every node to upgrade simultaneously. Block builders and mempool operators handle the recursive proof combination, then submit a single aggregated proof that validators can verify cheaply.

The I-star fork and Lean Ethereum EIP-8288 is part of Ethereum’s broader strategic planning around what’s been called the I-star fork and the “Lean Ethereum” concept, both of which emphasize STARK verification as a core primitive for the network’s future.

Forum discussions around the proposal in June 2026 focused on two key concerns: recursion soundness and omission accountability. Recursion soundness asks whether nested STARK proofs maintain their security guarantees as they get aggregated. Omission accountability addresses the question of what happens when a block builder drops a transaction’s proof from the aggregate batch, either accidentally or maliciously. Notably, the community worked through these issues without proposing any changes to Ethereum’s consensus architecture. The merged pull request, PR #11772, went through comprehensive peer review before acceptance.

What this means for Ethereum’s ecosystem On cost, quantum-resistant signature schemes produce signatures that are orders of magnitude larger than the elliptic curve signatures Ethereum uses today. Without aggregation, migrating to post-quantum signatures would dramatically increase gas costs per transaction. EIP-8288 neutralizes that problem by amortizing verification costs across an entire block’s worth of transactions.

On privacy, the framework opens doors for protocols that rely on zero-knowledge proofs. Aggregating these proofs at the mempool level makes privacy features more economically viable for everyday users.

For Layer 2 solutions, rollups already rely heavily on STARK and SNARK proofs for their security model. A base layer optimized for aggregating these proofs makes L2 settlement cheaper and more efficient.

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

BitMine Immersion Technologies has made another large Ethereum buy, acquiring a total of 28,086 ETH in the past week. Meanwhile, Chairman Tom Lee remains bullish on the future of ETH price after the recent rally.

BitMine Expands Ethereum Treasury With $70 Million Buy The latest acquisition would be valued at around $70 million at the average price of ETH around $2,495. The acquisition is expected to add 5,929,198 ETH to the company’s current holdings, bringing its total ETH stake to 5% of the network’s supply, as it continues to work towards reaching this target.

The company claimed that its Ethereum treasury now accounts for 4.9% of the estimated total ETH supply of 122 million as of Sept. 7. In addition to its crypto holdings, cash, and marketable securities, BitMine’s total assets are approximately $15.7 billion, which also includes strategic investments.

🧵
1/
BitMine provided its latest holdings update for September 8, 2026

$15.7 billion in total crypto + "moonshots":
– 5,929,198 ETH at $2,495 per ETH per ETH per ETH (per @coinbase)
– 211 Bitcoin (BTC)
– $180 million stake in Beast Industries @MrBeast
– $91 million stake in…

— Bitmine (NYSE-BMNR) $ETH $BMNP (@BitMNR) September 8, 2026

Whilst, Lee said that the company has been buying for a long time since it announced the Ethereum treasury plan in June 2025. He noted, “Over the past week, we acquired 28,086 ETH.”

Lee further noted that BitMine has been buying Ethereum since the strategy was initiated, once a week. He said the firm’s build-up is unmatched in terms of its record among publicly listed companies.

The company also revealed that over 5.06 million ETH is currently staked on its Made in America VAlidator Network (MAVAN). Those staked holdings are worth approximately $12.6 billion based on current prices. When it comes to staking revenue, BitMine estimates that it will generate approximately $330 million in annualized revenue based on the current yield.

Tom Lee On The Future of Ethereum, Crypto Market Lee highlighted the strong results in digital assets this quarter. He said Ethereum has been the top-performing macro asset in Q3 2026, beating the S&P 500 by 5,430 basis points. He also pointed out that Bitcoin and Solana are two of the top-performing assets over the past quarter.

Lee further added, “We believe there are multiple positive catalysts as we head into the final months of 2026.”

In addition, Lee underscored upcoming voting on the CLARITY Act in mid-September, rising investor enthusiasm for cryptocurrencies in South Korea and ongoing interest in blockchain tokenization and agentic AI as factors that could fuel the market.

Additionally, BitMine stated that its common stock is up 99% this quarter, the fourth-best performing stock in the Russell 1000, and noted that its common stock has a 14.98% yield. In June, the company joined the Russell 1000 large-cap index, and the crypto segment holds four of the index’s top 21 performers this quarter, the company said.