Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

ARK Invest and Glassnode published a joint study on Sept. 1 that found three entities could cross the measured block-production thresholds for both Bitcoin and Ethereum, while Solana required 19.

Summary

Bitcoin reaches its 51% hash-rate threshold through three mining pools, according to the joint report. Ethereum requires three staking entities to exceed 33%, although pooled delegation complicates direct control assumptions. Solana’s Nakamoto coefficient is 19, but nearly all measured infrastructure operates inside commercial data centers. Bitcoin’s infrastructure is comparatively dispersed, with 63% of measured nodes operating anonymously through Tor networks. Ethereum hosts roughly 49% of execution-layer nodes in clouds, including 20% through Amazon Web Services. The 32-page report, titled The Decentralization Spectrum: Design Tradeoffs in Digital Assets, compares the networks across ownership, exit fluidity, verification costs, critical resilience, reconstruction costs and infrastructure distribution.

The findings do not mean three companies control Bitcoin or Ethereum. The metric counts mining pools and staking platforms as entities, even when the underlying hardware, stake or node operators belong to separate participants who may withdraw or redirect their resources.

Bitcoin’s three-pool threshold does not equal ownership The report applied a 51% hash-rate threshold to Bitcoin. Foundry USA represented 27.27% of the measured hash rate, followed by AntPool at 17.06% and F2Pool at 16.96%. Together, the three pools exceeded 61%.

This produced a Nakamoto coefficient of three, defined as the minimum number of measured entities needed to cross a network’s critical production threshold. ViaBTC controlled another 9.50%, while SpiderPool represented 5.82%.

Mining pools coordinate block construction and distribute rewards, but they do not necessarily own the machines producing their hash rate. Independent miners connect to pools to receive steadier income and can redirect their computing power elsewhere.

That mobility limits how closely pool concentration can be equated with permanent control. The report estimated a Bitcoin miner could switch a 1% hash-rate position in approximately 29 seconds. A coordinated attack or censorship attempt could prompt participants to leave the responsible pools.

Pools still influence transaction inclusion and ordering because they usually provide the block templates miners use. Pool concentration therefore represents an operational risk, even if it overstates the concentration of underlying mining ownership.

The issue is not new. Earlier crypto.news reporting found that two mining pools produced a majority of sampled Bitcoin blocks in late 2022. Pool shares have changed since then, but production continues to be concentrated among several large coordinators.

Ethereum crosses a lower threshold through pooled stake ARK and Glassnode applied a 33% stake threshold to Ethereum because participants controlling one-third of staked ETH can disrupt finality. This differs from Bitcoin’s 51% majority threshold, so the two coefficients do not describe identical powers.

Lido represented 23.04% of staked ETH in the report’s July data. Binance controlled 8.88%, and Kraken held 6.91%. Those three entities collectively represented approximately 38.8%, taking Ethereum above the selected threshold.

Lido is not a single validator. It distributes stake among multiple node operators, although those operators participate through a common protocol and governance framework. The report therefore treats Lido as shared infrastructure that aggregates economic weight rather than one machine or company directly controlling every validator.

Ethereum’s exit mechanics also restrict validator mobility. The report estimated that exiting a 1% position would take around 14.6 days under current conditions and as long as 55.6 days under heavy congestion. That is much slower than redirecting Bitcoin hash rate.

Client diversity provides another layer of resilience. The study placed Geth’s execution-client share at 34.88%, followed by Nethermind at 26.96% and Reth at 18.98%. Lighthouse represented 54.16% of consensus clients.

Different clients independently implement Ethereum’s rules, reducing the portion of the network exposed to one software defect. The relationship between Ethereum nodes and their software clients means validator concentration alone cannot describe the network’s full failure risk.

Solana’s 19-validator result comes with infrastructure costs Solana recorded the highest Nakamoto coefficient for the selected block-production threshold. The report found that 19 validators were needed to control more than 33% of delegated stake.

Figment was the largest individual validator at 3.78%, followed by Helius at 3.69%, Jupiter at 2.91%, Binance Staking at 2.81% and Ledger by Figment at 2.16%. The remaining 84.65% was spread across other validators.

One passage in the report says Solana requires 20 entities, but its chart, comparison table and published Glassnode summary all report a coefficient of 19. The table also says the figure increased from 18 in March 2026.

Solana’s validator distribution performed well on this particular measure, but its physical infrastructure was more concentrated. Approximately 100% of the infrastructure measured by the researchers operated in commercial data centers. About 68% was in Europe, while 21% was in North America.

TeraSwitch hosted 30.23% of measured stake, and the top two hosting companies served around 35.7%. Common infrastructure can create correlated failures even when the validator set contains many separate operators.

That risk became visible in August when 102 of 699 Solana validators stopped voting during a TeraSwitch routing problem. Solana continued processing transactions, but the episode showed how one infrastructure failure can affect multiple otherwise independent validators.

The report used Solana geographic data from November 2024, while most Bitcoin and Ethereum infrastructure data came from July 2026. That timing difference limits direct comparisons and leaves room for Solana’s distribution to have changed.

Bitcoin leads infrastructure resilience and auditability Bitcoin had the least expensive verification requirements in the study. The researchers estimated hardware for a full node at $289, compared with $730 for Ethereum and $21,478 for a Solana RPC node or validator-class configuration.

Its measured full-chain storage requirement was 753 gigabytes. Ethereum required approximately two terabytes for a full archive setup, while reconstructing Solana’s history was estimated at 480 terabytes because historical data is commonly offloaded to external providers.

Bitcoin also had the most distributed hosting profile. Only 16% of measured infrastructure operated in data centers, while 63% of nodes used Tor. Another 15% was residential or self-hosted.

Ethereum placed approximately 49% of execution-layer nodes in cloud environments and 45% in self-hosted settings. AWS alone hosted around 20%, while the top two providers accounted for approximately 27%.

Solana’s higher hardware and bandwidth demands reflect its focus on throughput. The tradeoff is that fewer ordinary users can independently recreate or verify the full network history using consumer equipment.

No single score settles blockchain decentralization The report ultimately ranked Bitcoin as the most decentralized of the three networks overall, followed by Ethereum and Solana. Bitcoin led in ownership distribution, auditability and geographic resilience.

Ethereum generally occupied the middle across the six dimensions. Solana scored strongly for its critical resilience threshold and validator participation but ranked lower for ownership distribution, verification accessibility and infrastructure diversity.

The methodology remains sensitive to how entities are grouped. Exchanges can hold tokens for many customers, mining pools aggregate independent miners, and staking protocols coordinate multiple operators. Wallet-size bands can likewise combine custodial assets belonging to thousands of users.

The comparison is therefore more useful as a map of separate concentration risks than as a definitive ranking. A network may distribute block production broadly while relying heavily on several hosting companies, software clients or governance organizations.

Future editions could improve comparability by using synchronized data dates, separating pools from underlying resource owners and distinguishing censorship thresholds from thresholds capable of rewriting finalized history.

FAQs Do three entities control Bitcoin? No. Three measured mining pools exceeded 51% of hash rate, but independent miners supply much of that computing power and can change pools.

Can three Ethereum platforms rewrite the blockchain? The report’s three-entity figure concerns the 33% stake threshold associated with disrupting finality. It does not represent the stronger two-thirds threshold needed for other consensus actions.

Why does Solana score 19? The 19 figure is the minimum number of validators whose combined delegated stake exceeds the report’s 33% threshold.

Which blockchain did the report rank as most decentralized? Bitcoin ranked highest overall due to its accessible verification, dispersed ownership and comparatively resilient geographic infrastructure.

Robinhood Chain has gone from newcomer to one of the more talked-about DEX venues in DeFi, and the numbers are starting to back that up. Trading volume on the Ethereum layer 2 climbed 61% over a matter of days, with 24-hour DEX volume crossing $1.58 billion and weekly figures up nearly 90% according to DefiLlama data.

For a chain that only launched its mainnet on July 1, 2026, that is a remarkably short runway to relevance.

What is actually driving volume Tokenized equities have emerged as a genuine pull factor. Representations of stocks like Nvidia and Apple are being used as collateral in DeFi transactions. Over a 30-day window, tokenized stocks generated $4.3 billion in DEX volume on the chain, with daily real-world asset trading peaking at $85 million on August 25.

Advertisement

The primary trading venue is Uniswap, which handles the bulk of swap activity on the chain. Morpho Blue leads on the lending side, holding roughly $481 million in total value locked, which represents the majority of the chain’s overall TVL figure of approximately $735 million. Stablecoin supply sits at around $797 million, with USDG accounting for a significant share of that figure and serving as the main fuel for Morpho’s lending markets.

The Arbitrum connection and what it means for Ethereum Robinhood Chain is built on the Arbitrum stack, which means it shares infrastructure DNA with one of Ethereum’s most established layer 2 networks. Part of that arrangement includes a 10% fee share with Arbitrum, giving the underlying network a direct financial stake in Robinhood Chain’s continued growth.

Analysts at Bernstein flagged the chain’s early momentum as a signal worth watching for Ethereum more broadly. The logic is straightforward: more DEX activity means more bridging, more gas consumption, and more demand for block space on Ethereum’s base layer.

Daily transaction counts have exceeded five million on peak days. Cumulative DEX trading volume has already crossed into the tens of billions since the July launch.

Real-world assets as a DeFi wedge Equities are different from tokenized Treasuries or credit products. Nvidia and Apple are household names with massive retail followings. Using tokenized versions of those stocks as DeFi collateral creates a bridge between the investing behaviors that Robinhood’s core user base already has and the on-chain functionality that DeFi protocols have spent years building.

A 10% fee share arrangement with Arbitrum means that as revenue scales, the economics benefit multiple layers of the stack simultaneously, which is a different model from chains that capture all fees internally.

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

Owners must stake, post and attest to a permitted country to earn Robinhood Stock Tokens. Anyone can buy the NFT, and the portfolio inside it, with no KYC.

Posted September 1, 2026 at 6:30 pm EST.

On Robinhood Chain, an NFT collection whose floor price has risen 77% in a month is testing the line between securities and collectibles, mixing regulated financial products with pixelated, suit-wearing avatars.

Called StonkBrokers, the colorful 4,444-piece collection enables its owners to accrue Stock Tokens as rewards on Robinhood’s Ethereum layer-2 network, providing them with a novel way to gain exposure to Wall Street names like Tesla, Amazon, and Nvidia.

Robinhood has made the tokens available to investors in more than 120 countries, though not in the U.S., U.K., Canada or Switzerland. The rules that would govern them in the U.S. remain unwritten: The SEC’s proposed exemption for tokenized securities was pulled from its agenda in August and has never been published. And the team seems to have taken into account past NFT projects’ brushes with U.S. securities law, such as Ashton Kutcher’s Stoner Cats 2.

In order to earn those Stock Tokens, those holding StonkBrokers must pass what the project’s terms call “geographic and network screening” and complete a “Program attestation” declaring that they live in a “permitted jurisdiction.” At the same time, the NFTs can be bought by anyone on a secondary market outside the same Know Your Customer (KYC) procedures that Robinhood customers must satisfy.

By offering NFTs that can accrue Stock Tokens as rewards, StonkBrokers is charting new ground at the intersection of collectibles and securities, according to Givner Law founder and principal attorney Ariel Givner.

“Nobody’s done it before,” she said. “It’s a gray area, and it’s bringing together a lot of new things that we don’t have precedent on.” 

A Fast Run, a Retrace, and Another Run Clutch Markets, the Grand Cayman company behind StonkBrokers, said on X on Aug. 25 that the project had distributed more than $1.57 million in what it calls marketing rewards.

The collection’s floor passed Bored Ape Yacht Club’s in early August, gave back roughly 60% of that run, and has now passed it again, trading at 8.50 ETH, or about $20,500, against Bored Ape’s 7.65 ETH on Tuesday afternoon. That floor is not set by open bidding. The project’s own automated market maker prices every broker at a flat 666,666 $STONKBROKER plus a 10% fee, so the floor tracks the token, which fell 14% on Tuesday even as the floor reading climbed. 

The collection stood out in a slow market for profile picture NFTs, or PFPs. The collection carried no mint price, though allocation required burning an earlier Clutch NFT before a July 16 deadline. Pseudonymous crypto analyst Diamond estimated the mint cost at around $37. 

The SEC and CFTC interpreted in March that a “digital collectible” is not itself a security, while leaving intact that one can still be sold subject to an investment contract. StonkBrokers has squarely tied itself to financial products that operate within tight regulatory boundaries, Givner told Unchained. 

Freely Tradeable — While Still Blocking U.S. Users StonkBrokers are capable of holding Stock Tokens thanks to ERC-6551, an Ethereum standard giving each NFT its own unique smart contract wallet, known as a token-bound account. 

According to the project’s documentation, each StonkBrokers NFT comes equipped with a wallet that’s “seeded with tokenized stock at mint and, once activated, can receive stock-token reward drops through the StonkBrokers rewards program.”

Because the underlying Stock Tokens live inside the NFT’s sub-account rather than a user’s personal wallet, trading the NFTs on secondary markets effectively transfers that portfolio.

That gap appears significant, Ryón Nixon, founding partner of crypto-native law firm Horizons Law, told Unchained. Robinhood’s Stock Tokens are debt instruments issued by an offshore affiliate that can’t be directly purchased or redeemed by U.S. persons, but can be freely transferred like any other ERC-20 token, such as a stablecoin, he noted.

“In simple terms, StonkBrokers engineered the protocol in a way where they don’t let people in certain jurisdictions, like the U.S., interact with the touchpoints that might trigger compliance requirements like a customer identification program,” he said.

Nixon noted that the offshore separation provides a unique legal buffer: “Even if a Stock Token ends up in a U.S. person’s wallet, Robinhood’s offshore affiliate does not let U.S. persons directly purchase or redeem the Stock Tokens, so from their perspective, the transactions are intended to remain completely offshore.”

Robinhood’s own base prospectus complicates that picture somewhat. It reserves the issuer’s right to declare a transfer “null and void” and to “freeze, block, seize, transfer, redeem and/or recreate” a token, and says the contracts will be programmed to block addresses identified as sanctioned.

Lessons From Stoner Cats 2 Before the Securities and Exchange Commission struck a more collaborative stance under its current leadership, the regulator brought several enforcement actions against NFT issuers.

For example, the SEC famously argued that Stoner Cats 2, LLC, the firm behind an animated web series backed by actors Mila Kunis and Ashton Kutcher, offered unregistered securities because buyers had “a reasonable expectation of obtaining a profit based on SC2’s managerial and entrepreneurial efforts,” pointing to its marketing campaign and a 2.5% cut of secondary sales. The company paid a $1 million penalty. Commissioners Hester Peirce and Mark Uyeda dissented, writing that the analysis “lacks any meaningful limiting principle.”

The position was rooted in the SEC’s Howey test, under which a transaction is an “investment contract,” and therefore a security, if it involves an investment of money in a common enterprise with an expectation of profits derived from the efforts of others. 

StonkBrokers explicitly strips away any notion of passive income, requiring holders to stake $STONKBROKER to activate a broker and then work for their payouts. Any wallet can trigger the “Clock In” that releases a round of rewards, but only activated brokers collect them. According to the project’s terms of service, participants receive rewards for “the creation and publication of qualifying social media posts promoting the StonkBrokers game, collection, art, or Clock In.”

The document strictly bans users from utilizing words like “royalty,” “dividend,” “yield,” or “passive income,” asserting instead that the compensation is “payment for services rendered” to those who are classified technically as independent contractors.

An Untested Defense Whether that structure works has not been tested. The March interpretation’s safe harbor for token distributions covers only those where recipients provide “no money, goods, services, or other consideration,” and it names social media promotion among the activities that count as services. In a 2018 case against Tomahawk Exploration, the SEC found that tokens paid out for promotional posts were an offer and sale of securities.

The project’s documentation says rewards are funded mechanically: 70% of the trading fees from its own automated market maker, plus fees from lending, its Safety Deposit Box and a slot-machine game. Its terms of service describe something looser, saying the project funds the pool “in its sole discretion.” The funding story buyers are relying on is not the one the project has committed to in writing. 

The project has not slowed down while those questions sit open. On Aug. 29 it launched Stonk Exchange, a venue built on Uniswap v4 pools where liquidity providers collect premiums from leveraged traders, with covered-call vaults slated for September. Robinhood’s own crypto account retweeted the team on Aug. 28, amplifying a Robinhood Chain block explorer it had built, though it has said nothing publicly about the stock-token rewards program itself.

While StonkBrokers is taking a fresh approach to NFTs, Robinhood Chain’s mainnet only launched on July 1, following a public testnet in February.

Interest in tokenization has climbed sharply this year. dYdX Labs brought leveraged stock and crypto tokens to the same chain last week, and on Tuesday the SEC proposed its first overhaul of transfer-agent rules since the 1970s, asking for comment on how a blockchain should interact with the official record of who owns a security. Nixon noted that while the structure is unconventional, it showcases a broader appetite for experimentation.

“It’s a very interesting approach that opens the market up to new design spaces, which is refreshing to see in the current market conditions,” he said.

Unchained has reached out to Clutch Markets and Robinhood for comment.

Related Listen: How Tokenized Stocks Could Undercut Interactive Brokers’ 77% Profit Margin

Solana-based automated market maker Aquifer has lost roughly $2.5 million in an exploit involving wallets on Solana and Ethereum, with the protocol offering the attacker a 20% bounty for returning most of the funds.

Summary

Solana based AMM Aquifer lost roughly $2.5 million in an exploit involving attacker addresses on Solana and Ethereum. Aquifer offered the attacker a 20% whitehat bounty if at least 80% of the assets are returned by Sept. 3. The exact point of compromise remains unclear, with no technical post mortem yet establishing how access to the affected wallets was obtained. Available information has not established that Aquifer’s smart contracts were exploited, leaving compromised wallet access as the main focus of the incident so far. Blockchain security monitoring service Defimon reported the attack on Aug. 31, identifying separate Solana and Ethereum addresses controlled by the suspected exploiter. Aquifer later sent an on-chain whitehat offer seeking the return of at least 80% of the assets linked to the incident.

The offer gives the attacker until Sept. 3 at 14:00 UTC to transfer the assets, or their equivalent value, to recovery addresses provided by Aquifer. The person controlling the wallets may retain up to 20% of the funds as a whitehat bounty if the conditions are met.

Aquifer said it would not pursue civil claims arising from the exploit if the attacker complies with the terms, subject to applicable law. The agreement would not bind law enforcement agencies, regulators, sanctions authorities or other government bodies.

Aquifer exploit involves wallets on two chains Aquifer operates as a proprietary automated market maker on Solana, where its liquidity is used to facilitate token swaps. DefiLlama describes the protocol as a prop AMM and currently lists its total value locked at around $2.8 million.

The addresses identified after the exploit show activity spanning Solana and Ethereum. Defimon linked the Solana address 7fTe9pvrwXJRBHq9MaSyVPR4PgEuhqLiA93Dxf4gRk7J and Ethereum address 0x2Dfe9e969796e2797278b02761dd9Ad6aE922746 to the attacker.

Aquifer’s whitehat message was authorized through the protocol’s Solana upgrade authority and published on-chain. The project supplied separate recovery addresses for Solana and Ethereum, allowing assets associated with the attack to be returned on either network.

Public information has not yet established exactly how the wallets were compromised. No technical post-mortem has been released explaining whether private keys, administrator credentials or another part of Aquifer’s operational infrastructure was exposed.

Available information similarly does not establish that Aquifer’s smart contract code was exploited. The use of addresses across Ethereum and Solana provides a trail for investigators tracking the assets, but does not by itself identify how access to the affected funds was obtained.

The incident follows several Solana-related attacks this year where the point of compromise was outside the underlying blockchain.

Solana protocols have faced different attack methods In June, crypto.news previously reported that five legacy liquidity pools belonging to Raydium lost roughly $1.3 million after an attacker targeted retired AMM infrastructure.

On-chain investigator Specter said the Raydium attacker used a fake mint address to bypass validation checks in an older AMM program. The stolen assets included roughly 150,177 RAY, 5,603 SOL and 893,700 USDC.

Raydium said its active pools and current users were unaffected because the vulnerable infrastructure had already been phased out. The protocol committed to reimbursing the affected assets from its treasury.

A separate July incident involving Across Protocol produced losses of less than $4 million after an attacker fabricated Solana deposit events. The attacker created 1,627 fake deposits with a combined stated value of $41.7 million and requested payouts across 18 destination chains.

Risk Labs’ relayer processed 581 of the fraudulent requests before Solana operations were suspended, advancing approximately $4.5 million of its own capital. Around $500,000 belonging to the attacker remained trapped, bringing the net loss below $4 million.

Across later said the Solana attack stemmed from a flaw in Risk Labs’ off-chain event-reading software and not a vulnerability in its smart contracts or the Solana network. Legitimate user transfers were completed or refunded.

Operational security failures have produced losses elsewhere without attackers needing to exploit smart contract logic.

Wallet access has become a major attack route Stablecoin payments company Triple-A confirmed in July that unauthorized access to its treasury wallets resulted in the theft of company-owned digital assets. On-chain researchers initially tracked suspicious withdrawals across Ethereum, Solana, TRON and TON, with some reports identifying activity on Polygon and Arbitrum.

Triple-A later said client funds remained unaffected because customer assets were segregated from the compromised treasury infrastructure. Researchers had estimated the loss at roughly $11.8 million before the company confirmed the breach.

The company did not disclose whether the attacker obtained private keys, credentials or another form of access. Triple-A said cybersecurity specialists and Singapore police were working on the investigation and asset tracing.

Private key and wallet compromises have accounted for a substantial portion of crypto thefts in 2026. CertiK reported in July that digital asset losses reached $1.32 billion during the first half of the year, down 46.8% from the same period in 2025.

Despite the lower total, the security firm said wallet compromises became the largest attack method during the second quarter, replacing phishing as the main source of losses.

Another Solana project, Step Finance, ultimately shut down its operations after an attack earlier this year targeted devices used by members of its executive team. Attackers gained access to treasury and fee wallets and moved approximately 261,854 SOL, while later estimates placed total losses across affected assets near $40 million.

Investigators determined that Step Finance’s smart contracts were not the point of entry. Compromised endpoints allowed the attackers to access wallets used by the project, and the financial damage later contributed to the decision to wind down the platform.

A similar distinction will depend on Aquifer publishing more details about its own breach. The protocol has not released a post-mortem identifying the initial point of access, the specific credentials involved or whether one compromised account provided control over multiple wallets.

For now, Aquifer’s recovery process centers on its whitehat proposal. The attacker has been offered the right to retain up to 20% of the assets associated with the exploit if at least 80% is returned to the designated recovery addresses by Sept. 3 at 14:00 UTC.

In brief Bitmine bought 53,501 ETH (~$131 million), its largest weekly purchase since June, raising its holdings to 5,901,112 ETH—4.9% of supply and 98% of the way to its "Alchemy of 5%" goal. The buy extends a 65-week streak since the treasury strategy launched in June 2025; total holdings, including cash and other assets, hit $15.6 billion. Bitmine remains the largest ETH treasury and No. 2 crypto treasury behind Strategy, with 86% of its ETH staked via MAVAN for ~$335 million in projected annual revenue. Bitmine Immersion Technologies picked up the pace of its Ethereum buying last week, acquiring 53,501 ETH worth roughly $131 million as chairman Tom Lee touts crypto's strong third quarter.

The NYSE-listed company said Monday its Ethereum stash now stands at 5,901,112 ETH, valued at about $14.8 billion using a reference price of $2,511 per coin. That represents 4.9% of Ethereum's total supply of 120.7 million tokens, leaving Bitmine, in its words, 98% of the way toward its goal of controlling 5% of the network, a target it calls the "Alchemy of 5%."

Myriad: Ethereum next price move? Click to make your prediction.The purchase extends an unbroken run of accumulation. Bitmine has bought Ethereum every week since launching its treasury strategy on June 30, 2025, a streak that now spans 65 weeks even as some recent buys had slowed to smaller sums.

Lee said the top three performing assets since June 30 were Ethereum, Bitcoin and Solana, with Ethereum outpacing the S&P 500 by 5,430 basis points so far this quarter, and he argued that outperformance sets the stage for institutions to add crypto exposure. (Disclosure: Tom Lee is one of several investors in Decrypt’s parent company Dastan.)

Counting cash, other tokens and what it calls "moonshot" investments, Bitmine's total holdings reached $15.6 billion as of Saturday. That includes 211 Bitcoin, $541 million in cash and marketable securities, a $180 million stake in Beast Industries and an $81 million position in Eightco Holdings.

Bitmine remains the world's largest Ethereum treasury and the second-largest crypto treasury overall, trailing only Michael Saylor's Strategy.

Ethereum ETF Net Flows. Image: DecryptThe Bitcoin giant broke its own two-month buying pause this week, snapping up about $370 million in Bitcoin in its first purchase since June. The move followed a rally that flipped Strategy's 840,447 BTC to a roughly $2.8 billion paper profit, after the position had spent much of the summer underwater. Saylor's firm holds around $66 billion in Bitcoin, dwarfing Bitmine's crypto stack.

Bitmine also continues to generate staking income, with 5,067,309 ETH, about 86% of its holdings, staked through its MAVAN platform for projected annualized revenue of roughly $335 million.

Lee pointed to the mid-September Clarity Act vote as one of several potential catalysts heading into year-end.

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

Ethereum’s institutional moment is no longer a theory. US spot Ethereum ETFs recorded net inflows of $60.86 million on August 5, 2026, adding another data point to what has become one of the more compelling demand stories in digital assets this year.

For context, that single-day figure is not the headline number. The headline is what’s underneath it: cumulative net inflows into US spot Ethereum ETFs have now reached somewhere between $12 billion and $13 billion since the products launched in July 2024, with total assets under management estimated between $12 billion and $15 billion.

BlackRock is running away with this market If you want to understand who is winning the Ethereum ETF race, look at BlackRock’s iShares Ethereum Trust, ticker ETHA.

The fund accounts for an estimated 47% to 72% of recent category inflows, with assets under management between $6.5 billion and $8 billion. Fidelity’s FETH, Grayscale’s ETHE and ETH mini trust, Bitwise’s ETHW, and VanEck’s ETHV have all contributed to the overall picture, but the gap between BlackRock and the rest of the field remains wide.

August 2026 turned into something of a breakout month The $60.86 million day on August 5 was actually a relatively quiet moment compared to what followed later in the month.

From August 17 onwards, Ethereum ETFs went on a nine-to-ten day streak of consecutive net buying that totaled over $1.42 billion. Single-day inflow peaks exceeded $225 million during that run, making August 2026 the strongest month for Ethereum ETF inflows since August 2025.

On several trading sessions during August’s inflow streak, the gap between Ethereum ETF inflows and Bitcoin ETF inflows narrowed meaningfully.

What this means for Ethereum’s market structure Crossing $12 billion in cumulative net inflows in roughly 13 months is a milestone worth pausing on. These are not paper numbers or theoretical demand. Net inflows represent actual capital entering the wrapper after accounting for redemptions, meaning real money from real institutional accounts is sitting in these products right now.

There is also a product development dimension here. BlackRock has already filed for a second Ethereum product, ETHB, alongside its existing ETHA. Grayscale, which converted its existing Ethereum trust into a spot ETF, continues to offer both a higher-fee flagship product and a lower-cost mini trust variant.

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

Monero ($XMR) has posted its strongest monthly performance in more than four years, gaining over 45% in August 2026 and rising roughly 10% in a single 24-hour window. The last time the privacy-focused cryptocurrency delivered a comparable monthly gain was April 2021.

THORChain 3.20 Brings Native XMR Swaps The rally coincides with a significant protocol upgrade from THORChain. The timing matters:

That is a notable shift for Monero holders in particular.

Derivatives Market Signals Strong Demand The price action has been accompanied by a sharp move in derivatives markets. during the move, a dynamic that can amplify upward price momentum as bearish bets are forcibly closed.

The THORChain upgrade offers a structural reason for renewed interest beyond short-term speculation. A decentralized, non-custodial alternative for XMR swaps could help sustain demand if that trend continues.

Sources:
THORChain 3.20 Unlocks Native Monero and Zcash Swaps (TradingView / Chainwire)
THORChain Upgrade Enables Native Monero Swaps, Boosting XMR (Crypto Briefing)
Monero Price Pushes Above $500 as Privacy-Driven Focus Intensifies (The Coin Republic)

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

Ethereum developers have issued an alert for L1 contract users on the ETH mainnet as the Glamsterdam upgrade progresses.

In a recent post, the Ethereum Foundation gave a heads-up for anyone maintaining L1 contracts ahead of the Glamsterdam upgrade scheduled for Q4 2026.

Heads-up for anyone maintaining L1 contracts:
→ The Glamsterdam upgrade will include gas repricings (EIP-8037, EIP-8038) that shift state creation and access costs.
→ Most contracts are unaffected, but a small set may break or degrade without updates. Affected contracts rely on…

HOT Stories

— Ethereum Foundation (@ethereumfndn) August 25, 2026 The Glamsterdam upgrade will include gas repricings (EIP-8037, EIP-8038), which will shift state creation and access costs.

While most contracts are unaffected, Ethereum developers warn that a small set may break or degrade without updates. Affected contracts rely on assumptions that the new schedule changes, such as hardcoded gas values.

EIP-8037 and EIP-8038, both anticipated for inclusion in the Glamsterdam upgrade, will modify the cost of creating and accessing state, allowing gas costs to better reflect the actual work required for each operation.

Replaying historical mainnet transactions under the new schedule reveals that a tiny set of smart contracts rely on assumptions the new schedule shifts, potentially causing these contracts to break or degrade without preventative upgrades.

The bulk of highlighted concerns are resolved with an increase in the gas limit, and the large majority of smart contracts remain unaffected, while direct outreach to the most-affected builders is already underway.

You Might Also Like

Gas prices for state operations were last adjusted in the Berlin fork in 2021, following which Ethereum's state has grown significantly.

Repricing state operations to reflect their actual cost is a prerequisite for increasing the gas limit further. The new schedule is derived from a performance target that supports roughly a 3x increase in base throughput.

About GlamsterdamEthereum's upcoming Glamsterdam upgrade aims to pave the way for the next generation of scaling. Glamsterdam is named from the combination of "Amsterdam" (execution layer upgrade) and "Gloas" (consensus layer upgrade).

You Might Also Like

Following the Fusaka upgrade, Glamsterdam focuses on scaling the L1 by reorganizing how the network handles transactions and manages its huge database, substantially changing how Ethereum generates and verifies blocks.

Less than two months after its public mainnet launch, Robinhood Chain generated $2.66 million in app revenue over a single 24-hour period on August 30, placing it second only to Solana among decentralized finance platforms. That figure topped both Hyperliquid L1, which brought in $1.7 million, and Ethereum, which managed roughly $1.27 to $1.28 million in the same window.

Where the money came from Three applications accounted for approximately 88% of Robinhood Chain’s daily revenue haul. GMGN led the pack at $1.11 million, followed by Pons at $930,587 and Uniswap at $306,877.

GMGN and Pons are memecoin-focused trading tools. Uniswap’s presence at a distant third suggests that while established DeFi protocols are active on the chain, the real revenue engine right now is meme-driven trading volume. Analysts note the trajectory for RWA engagement is still developing, with current revenue largely driven by memecentric trading activities rather than substantive RWA use cases.

The economics of keeping fees in-house Robinhood Chain retains roughly 89% of the fees generated within its network. About 10% flows to the Arbitrum ecosystem, and less than 2% trickles down to Ethereum for settlement and data availability.

Two months in, early metrics look aggressive Robinhood Chain launched its public mainnet on July 1, 2026, built as an Ethereum Layer 2 using Arbitrum Orbit technology. In the weeks since, the chain has racked up over $3 billion in DEX volume and attracted a rapid inflow of bridged assets.

Robinhood has positioned the network as a home for tokenized stocks, stablecoin products, and onchain lending integrations. Real-world asset engagement remains in its early stages, with current revenue overwhelmingly driven by speculative trading activity rather than those RWA use cases.

What this means for the Layer 2 landscape Ethereum’s daily revenue landing below $1.3 million while one of its own Layer 2s pulled in more than double that amount illustrates one of the most debated dynamics in modular blockchain design. Robinhood Chain retaining nearly 90% of generated fees within 60 days of launch raises direct questions about Ethereum’s economic model, given the base layer captures less than 2% of the value flowing through its ecosystem.

Having a high-profile chain like Robinhood’s built on Orbit technology and sending 10% of fees back to the Arbitrum ecosystem validates the Orbit framework as a viable path for institutions looking to launch their own chains without building from scratch.

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

An attacker exploited a vulnerability in the Cosmos EVM to move $50 million of Nesa (NES) off the project’s chain. However, the payout came to $60,000.

Blockchain analytics firm Bubblemaps traced the wallets involved. Liquidity vanished from the pools before the selling finished, and extreme slippage swallowed almost the entire position.

How the Nesa Exploit UnraveledThe main wallet, 0x9AE7, bought $250,000 of NES and bridged the tokens to Nesa Chain. Bubblemaps said the address was funded through Monero (XMR).

The attacker exploited the bug, inflating that balance by 200 times. He then bridged roughly $50 million of NES back to Ethereum (ETH).

From there, the tokens moved through eight addresses. Those wallets swapped NES for ETH on decentralized exchanges before routing proceeds to centralized platforms.

However, liquidity disappeared from the pools before most of the selling happened. The swaps hit extreme slippage, and the attacker recovered $315,000 against $255,000 spent.

Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens

Cosmos Labs Told Chains to HaltCosmos Labs disclosed the incident on August 24 and advised chains in contact with it to have validators halt.

“Many affected chains have now patched. We continue to provide mitigation information to affected chains. Chains that use a Cosmos EVM version less than v0.6.2 or v0.7.2 are recommended to immediately halt the blockchain and upgrade it to include the patches in those releases,” the team said in an update.

It has not yet named the vulnerability, the affected chains, or the total loss figure. The team has promised an incident report once the response ends.

Four networks running the shared module have reported problems. KiiChain said an attacker repeated the same technique 18 times, draining 148,326,583.15 KII.

Nesa also notified users that it had identified malicious activity exploiting the Cosmos EVM vulnerability on its layer-1. The team said they will bring the services online after a software fix. Other impacted networks include MANTRA and TAC.

Whether other chains running the module took quieter losses will not be clear until Cosmos Labs publishes its report.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights

TLDR: RWA.xyz tracked $38.35B in distributed assets on-chain, up 1.54% in 30 days as holders neared 3 million. Ethereum led distributed RWAs with $17.3B, ahead of BNB Chain at $5.8B and Solana at roughly $4.1B on-chain. Tokenized stock transfer volume jumped over 415% to $29.5B in 30 days, while distributed value hit $2.54B. Ondo Finance offers 440+ tokenized stocks and ETFs, showing how RWAs are expanding beyond Treasury products. Binance co-founder Changpeng Zhao has acknowledged that he underestimated real-world asset tokenization as on-chain assets approach a $39 billion market value. Speaking during a Binance Clubhouse Bali 2026 community Q&A published August 23, Zhao said he paid little attention to RWAs 18 months earlier.

CZ: I Definitely Underestimated the Growth of RWA

Binance founder Changpeng Zhao (CZ) @cz_binance said during the Binance Clubhouse Bali 2026 Community Q&A on August 23 that until about a year and a half ago, he did not expect RWA to grow to such a large scale, but now he is… pic.twitter.com/jPnJ9tV3ms

— Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) August 30, 2026

That view has changed as traditional financial instruments increasingly move onto blockchain networks. Zhao said 24/7 trading, transparency, lower fees, and global access now give tokenization clear advantages over traditional market structures. He also noted that earlier crypto trends, including NFTs and memecoins, grew far beyond his initial expectations.

CZ Reassesses RWA Growth as On-chain Value Nears $39B The market data now helps explain CZ’s shift in perspective. RWA.xyz recorded $38.35 billion in distributed real-world assets on-chain as of August 28, excluding stablecoins. That total increased 1.54% over 30 days, while the number of asset holders more than doubled during the same period.

Nearly 3 million wallets now hold distributed RWAs, reflecting a 104% monthly increase. Separately, RWA.xyz tracked $380.88 billion in represented asset value across the broader tokenization market.

Source: RWA.xyz

Ethereum remained the largest blockchain for distributed RWAs, holding about $17.2 billion. BNB Chain followed with $5.7 billion, while Solana accounted for approximately $4.1 billion. Within that market, tokenized Treasury products remain among the sector’s largest individual assets.

Circle’s USYC stood near $2.88 billion, while BlackRock’s BUIDL reached roughly $2.76 billion. Ondo Finance’s USDY followed at about $2.19 billion. However, tokenized equities are becoming a faster-growing segment.

Monthly transfer volume for tokenized stocks surged more than 415% to $29.5 billion during the latest 30-day period. Their distributed value reached $2.54 billion, representing growth of about 637% from one year earlier.

Ondo Finance has also expanded the practical reach of tokenized equities. The platform now offers more than 440 tokenized stocks and exchange-traded funds to eligible non-U.S. investors across several blockchains.

Tokenized Stocks Surge as Regulation Moves Closer The expansion of Tokenized Assets is also unfolding alongside clearer regulatory discussion in the United States. The Securities and Exchange Commission issued January guidance explaining how federal securities laws apply to tokenized securities.

The guidance distinguished issuer-sponsored tokens from third-party tokenized products, giving the market a clearer framework for understanding different token structures. SEC Chair Paul Atkins later said the agency’s 2026 agenda includes clearer rules covering custody and trading of tokenized securities on-chain .

Meanwhile, CZ did not describe RWA growth as crypto’s next guaranteed dominant trend. Instead, he grouped RWAs with perpetual decentralized exchanges and AI agents as emerging sectors that could shape the industry’s next phase.

His reassessment nevertheless reflects a measurable shift in the market. Tokenized Assets now span government debt, equities, commodities, credit, and other traditional instruments, while distributed value has moved close to $39 billion.

For CZ, the change is less about predicting the next crypto narrative and more about recognizing an existing market transformation. RWAs have moved from a niche concept toward financial infrastructure with rapidly growing users, assets, and transaction activity.

Cronos stopped its entire blockchain on Sunday after an attacker drained Tectonic, the biggest lending protocol on the network. Crypto.com said its own app and exchange were never touched.

Most of the money never left the chain before validators pulled the plug, likely explaining why the CRO token price remained unaffected, surging nearly 5%.

Cronos (CRO) Price Performance. Source: BeInCryptoThese are names, representing three different things. Crypto.com built Cronos, an Ethereum-style chain, and issues the CRO token securing it.

Tectonic is not Crypto.com’s code. It launched in December 2021 out of the Cronos Labs incubator and runs independently.

That makes the Crypto.com reassurance true but narrow. The exchange was never exposed. Tectonic depositors are another matter.

Tectonic was still almost the whole lending market on Cronos. It held about $121.6 million, or 46% of all DeFi value on the chain, DefiLlama data shows. The next biggest lender holds about $30,000.

What the Companies ConfirmedCronos Network said it found the exploit and halted block production. Tectonic warned depositors to stay away.

Crypto.com CEO Kris Marszalek said the app and exchange ran normally, with a postmortem to follow.

There has been a security breach on a Cronos lending protocol Tectonic. Cronos team is investigating, with assistance from https://t.co/JNeHyErmqH security team. https://t.co/JNeHyErmqH app and exchange were not affected and are operating as usual. All funds are safe.

I will…

— Kris (@kris) August 30, 2026
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens

Nobody has said whether Tectonic depositors will be repaid.

Why This Tectonic Exploit Could End DifferentlyResearcher Weilin Li put the drain at roughly $75 million. Only about $6 million reached Ethereum before the freeze, Li said. Some $60 million sits stranded on Cronos. That is about 91% of the haul, going nowhere.

Treat those numbers as provisional, as nothing is confirmed until the postmortem lands.

Compare the $8.7 million Moonwell exploit three days earlier. Base kept producing blocks. The money walked.

Cronos could stop because of how it is built. It runs on Tendermint with a cap of 100 validators, making a coordinated pause realistic.

We identified an exploit in Tectonic.

The Cronos Network has been halted and we'll provide updates here

— Cronos Network (@CronosNetwork) August 30, 2026
There is also precedent. A bridge exploit minted $570 million on BNB Chain in October 2022. Within five hours, 26 validators paused the network and recovered close to $470 million.

The trade-off is the one raised by the Linea chain halt debate. A chain somebody can switch off is also a chain that can claw money back. Same property, judged twice.

Validators now pick. Roll back, blacklist the attacker, or restart untouched. That decides whether the tentative $60 million comes home.

WhiteBIT’s native token WBT has reached a new all-time high. The milestone lands during a period of genuine activity across the WhiteBIT ecosystem, including the fourth anniversary of WhiteBIT Coin and the relaunch of Whitechain as a distribution-focused Ethereum Layer 2. The combination of a token record and infrastructure development happening at the same time is worth paying attention to.

WBT’s Record Arrives as Whitechain Enters Its Next Phase Whitechain’s relaunch isn’t a minor update. Moving to an Ethereum Layer 2 model means the network is being rebuilt around scalability and broader blockchain adoption rather than staying in its original form.

Layer 2 networks have become an important part of the Ethereum ecosystem. They allow applications to process activity more efficiently while staying connected to Ethereum’s underlying infrastructure. For WhiteBIT, this transition means Whitechain can support a wider range of future applications and developers while maintaining a real connection to the broader blockchain environment.

WBT sits at the center of this. The token connects exchange activity, blockchain development, and future platform initiatives across WhiteBIT’s expanding infrastructure. As Whitechain evolves, WBT’s role within the ecosystem grows alongside it.

What WBT’s Utility Actually Covers WBT’s utility goes well beyond a simple exchange token. Holders get trading-fee discounts, which reduce the cost of active trading on the platform. Staking opportunities let users earn rewards on held tokens. The referral reward system gives users a way to generate income through network growth. Launchpad access gives WBT holders early entry into new projects listed on the platform.

WBT also functions as the native asset within Whitechain, which means its role expands directly as the Layer 2 network grows. That native asset function is the connection between the token’s exchange utility and the broader blockchain infrastructure WhiteBIT is building.

WhiteBIT Has Been Building Beyond Exchange Services WhiteBIT started as a cryptocurrency exchange. That’s still a core part of what the company does, but it’s no longer the whole picture. The company has expanded into additional areas including blockchain infrastructure, financial products, and technology initiatives.

The Whitechain development is the clearest example of that shift. By building its own blockchain infrastructure, WhiteBIT is creating a foundation for future applications rather than depending entirely on existing networks. That kind of infrastructure investment tends to have a longer payoff horizon, but it also builds something that’s genuinely harder to replicate.

The Ethereum Layer 2 direction also reflects broader industry demand. Blockchain networks that combine scalability with established security foundations are attracting developer attention. WhiteBIT is positioning Whitechain to compete in that environment.

What the All-Time High Means in Context WBT reaching a new record during a period of infrastructure expansion reflects more than just market sentiment. The token has been accumulating utility across a growing ecosystem, and Whitechain’s relaunch adds another layer to that structure.

The fourth anniversary of WhiteBIT Coin also matters here. Four years of ecosystem development don’t happen overnight. The token’s evolution from a straightforward exchange utility asset to a core component of a broader blockchain ecosystem reflects consistent work rather than a single product launch.

WhiteBIT continues building blockchain capabilities and developing products around digital asset adoption. The WBT all-time high marks where that work stands right now.

What’s Ahead for WBT Token WBT is trading near $72.5 after gaining approximately 30.88% over the week. The token broke above the $55 to $60 resistance zone with strong volume, reaching an ATH of $72.21. Current resistance sits at $72 to $75, followed by the psychological $80 level. Key support levels are located around $60 to $62, with stronger support near $54 to $56. The $401.76M 24-hour volume suggests strong market participation behind the breakout.

An artificial intelligence (AI) security firm went public with a Ledger Ethereum app bug. Ledger says it had already fixed the flaw quietly, two weeks earlier.

Chief technology officer Charles Guillemet called the disclosure fear-mongering. The patch shipped on August 12 with a one-line note and no security bulletin.

What the Ledger Ethereum App Bug Actually DidLedger sells one core promise. The screen shows you what you are signing. That promise has a name. Ledger calls it clear signing, and it turns raw transaction code into plain words on the device screen.

TestMachine says it found a way around that. The firm builds an AI agent called Azimuth that hunts exploits in smart contracts. On its own EVMBench benchmark, Azimuth catches 86.3% of known bugs with roughly 2.7% false positives.

Found by Azimuth during an autonomous scan of the Ledger Ethereum app. Validated on Flex. Shared and verified with the team. Declining any bounty. Same shared APDU/UI code across Nano X, Nano S Plus, Stax, Apex.

The power of always on securityhttps://t.co/fH5mO97Kkp

— TestMachine (@testmachine_ai) August 22, 2026
Here is the flaw in plain terms. A malicious website could send the device a second command while you were still reading the first one.

The channel between browser and device is called the Application Protocol Data Unit, or APDU. It kept listening during the review. So it accepted the swap.

You would read a small transfer on screen. Then you would tap approve. And you would actually sign an unlimited token approval to a stranger.

That last part is why this matters. Chainalysis has traced roughly $1 billion in crypto stolen through approval phishing since May 2021. Those victims signed the approvals themselves.

TestMachine says it confirmed the bug on a Ledger Flex. Ledger has sold more than 7 million devices across 180 countries.

Ledger’s Donjon Team Says It Got There FirstGuillemet flips the timeline. Donjon is Ledger’s in-house hacking team. He says it caught the bug with its own AI tools and shipped the fix first.

The public changelog backs the date. Version 1.22.2 landed on Aug. 12. Its entire security note says “Security issues.”

Donjon has published 22 numbered security bulletins. None of them covers this bug. The latest, dated June 4, deals with a Monero key-recovery issue instead.

That silence is the gap TestMachine walked into. Ledger closed the hole, then never told owners what it had closed.

Guillemet’s sharper complaint is about manners. He says TestMachine contacted the bounty program only after the patch shipped. It never spoke with the bounty team.

“…Then they published a thread implying the problem is unsolved. It is not. That’s not security research. That’s manufacturing fear for attention,” Charles Guillemet, Ledger CTO remarked.

Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens

TestMachine praised the speed of the fix and turned down the reward. Ledger pays bounties in Bitcoin, at an amount it sets case by case.

AI Found the Bug Twice, But Humans Still FoughtBoth sides used machine learning to reach the same defect. That is the part worth watching.

Ledger has made this argument before. Its executives have said for months that AI attackers threaten wallets more than weak hardware does.

Guillemet drew his line at discipline.

“AI-speed research only makes the ecosystem safer if the people doing it still follow basic security principles. Disclose responsibly. Verify before you publish. Don’t confuse noise with a finding.”

The fight itself is familiar. Security firms have gone loud after hacking a Trezor device, and CertiK researchers fought Kraken over disclosure terms in 2024.

So is the flaw. Back in January 2021, Donjon disclosed that this same Ethereum app failed to show transaction data for unsupported assets. Same app, same lesson. What you saw was not what you signed.

AI now surfaces these bugs in hours. Vendors and researchers still coordinate at human speed. That gap is where this argument lives.

For owners, the fix is dull. Open Ledger Live, update the Ethereum app, and check that it reads 1.22.2.

DeFi lending protocol Term Labs lost roughly $8.5 million on Sunday after a governance exploit impacted its Term vaults, blockchain security firm PeckShield reported.

The attacker pulled 2,843 Ethereum (ETH) and 1.68 million USDC (USDC) out of the protocol. Term Labs confirmed the incident and said a fuller account would follow its investigation.

How the Term Labs Attacker Moved the FundsPeckShield valued the ETH portion at $6.87 million and the stablecoin portion at $1.68 million. The attacker then swapped the USDC into roughly 1.68 million Dai (DAI).

The post highlighted that the wallet behind the attack was originally seeded with 2 ETH withdrawn from Tornado Cash. Mixer funding is a common precursor to onchain theft, since it breaks the link to an exchange deposit.

Term Labs runs fixed-rate lending through onchain auctions. According to DefiLlama, the vaults’ total value locked stands at $12.2 million, with $8.6 million of that on Ethereum.

The team has not yet named the specific governance function the attacker abused.

We are aware of a governance exploit impacting Term vaults.

We will share more details once it has been further investigated.

— Term Labs (@term_labs) August 23, 2026
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens

August Losses Keep Stacking UpThe exploit lands in an already heavy month. DefiLlama had logged 17 security incidents worth about $18.8 million in August before the Term Labs drain. The $8.5 million loss alone would push the month past $27 million.

August still trails July, when 38 incidents cost roughly $254 million. The Coldcard wallet firmware flaw accounted for $116 million of that total.

Other August victims include Harmony, where an attacker minted roughly 4 billion tokens without authorization. Payment processor Coinsbuy was also drained of $7.9 million. Sandbox contained a SAND bridge vulnerability on Saturday.

Governance failures stay rare but expensive. DefiLlama has classified five 2026 incidents as governance attacks worth $25.1 million combined, led by a $20 million malicious proposal against BonkDAO in July.

Term is also a repeat target. DefiLlama recorded a $1.65 million hit at Term Finance in April 2025, attributed to an oracle misconfiguration.

Across the wider market, SlowMist counted 182 incidents worth about $956 million in the first half of 2026, per its mid-year report.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights

Altcoins

22 August 2026 | 16:02 Ethereum’s flash push above $2,500 ran out of steam, dragging the asset back below the crucial $2,465 handle, though it still retains a 30% weekly gain, according to CoinMarketCap data.

With spot demand wrestling against heavy derivatives exposure, the next directional cue depends entirely on whether bulls can recapture that old ceiling.

Make no mistake, this price action goes far deeper than a simple technical rejection. U.S. spot ETF absorption and surging on-chain velocity are clashing with bloated futures leverage, setting up an explosive environment if $2,465 fails to hold.

Ethereum price chart – Source: TradingView What sits behind ETH at $2,430 $692.6M: Net inflows into U.S. spot Ether ETFs over five consecutive trading sessions. +61.25%: Weekly expansion in Ethereum DEX volume. $80.22B: Total ETH futures turnover recorded over a 24-hour window. $6.32B: Corresponding ETH spot market turnover over the same period. $2,465: The former resistance ceiling ETH must now flip back into support. The breakout demands a reclaim On the Coinbase daily chart, ETH stretched as high as $2,530, cleanly clearing the $2,465 Fibonacci level (1.0). The failure to stick the landing left ETH slipping back to $2,430 by the time of writing.

That swift rejection puts a spotlight on $2,465. Closing a daily candle back above that threshold would signal genuine market acceptance at higher valuations; failing here locks it in as firm overhead resistance.

If sellers stay in control, downside tests wait at the 0.786 Fibonacci retracement near $2,270. A deeper flush exposes $2,100, followed by a heavier confluence zone around $2,000 and $1,986, where the 200-day moving average intersects the 0.5 Fibonacci marker.

ETF buyers showed up ahead of the test Farside Investors’ ETF tracking data reveals a healthy institutional appetite, logging five straight days of net inflows into U.S. spot Ether products from August 17 to August 21. Total absorption hit $692.6 million, capped by a massive $184 million single-day injection on August 21.

BlackRock’s ETHA drove the lions share, pulling in $536.8 million across the window. This steady cash accumulation separates the move from a transient retail squeeze, proving real capital is entering regulated investment vehicles.

To be clear, spot inflows don’t dictate every intraday price swing or guarantee $2,465 will hold. But they confirm the breakout attempt was backed by authentic capital rather than pure perpetual swap leverage.

Derivatives are still out-muscling spot The derivatives complex remains the primary source of market friction. CoinGlass figures show ETH futures turnover reached a staggering $80.22 billion over 24 hours, dwarfing the $6.32 billion spot volume by a factor of roughly 12.7.

With open interest hovering at $31.80 billion alongside $286.75 million in daily liquidations, the market is primed for violent moves in either direction. Ideally, ETH will reclaim $2,465 while open interest stabilizes rather than compounding. Traders tracking risk exposure can monitor CoinGlass’s ETH funding-rate metrics for signs of overheating.

On-chain activity climbs, but stablecoin liquidity flatlines Fundamental network activity paints a constructive picture. According to DefiLlama, weekly Ethereum DEX volume surged 61.25% to $8.28 billion, while on-chain perpetual volume climbed 53.51% to $10.38 billion.

Yet a closer look at the data reveals a notable divergence: Ethereum’s stablecoin market capitalization barely budged over the same period, sitting flat at $147.05 billion (down 0.05%).

Higher token prices naturally inflate dollar-denominated DeFi TVL, but flat stablecoin supply signals that a massive wave of fresh fiat liquidity hasn’t actually washed onto the chain yet. Trading velocity is up; the underlying cash pool is staying steady.

The verdict rests below $2,500 Ethereum proved it has the firepower to breach $2,500, but sustainable rallies require more than a fleeting spike. The healthier path forward involves reclaiming $2,465, establishing a calm retest base, and letting derivatives leverage cool off while ETF bids continue.

If price breaks below $2,270 while open interest stays bloated, that $2,530 wick will look less like a breakout and more like a classic liquidity sweep that ran too far, too fast.

The underlying cash bid is real, underscored by strong ETF inflows and surging decentralized exchange volume. Now, the chart has to prove whether that momentum can turn $2,465 into a permanent floor.

Methodology: Price structure, Fibonacci levels, moving averages, volume and RSI are taken from the Coinbase ETH/USD daily chart created on August 22, 2026, at 12:46 UTC. ETF-flow, derivatives and on-chain metrics were reviewed on August 22, 2026 and change continuously. The article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice.

Author

Kosta has reported on cryptocurrency markets and blockchain infrastructure since 2020, bringing over six years of hands-on experience in the crypto industry built through daily tracking of markets, trends, and emerging blockchain developments. Specializing in Bitcoin on-chain analysis, institutional ETF flows, and digital asset price action, his work at Coindoo has been cited by other news agencies and consistently covers market developments with a focus on data-driven reporting across Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and XRP. Over the years, Kosta has contributed to multiple crypto media outlets in different regions, authoring over 6,000 articles across the sector. His reporting spans cryptocurrency markets and the broader fintech industry, tracking not only price action but also the technological and regulatory forces shaping the ecosystem. To support his analysis, Kosta actively leverages on-chain data and metrics from leading platforms such as Santiment, Glassnode, and CryptoQuant, enabling deeper, evidence-based market insights. He believes in the power of transparency and the data that underpins the blockchain ecosystem. His academic background in Marketing Management from Denmark further complements his analytical approach, adding a strong understanding of communication strategy and content positioning to his work.

Key Highlights Spot Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs in the U.S. recorded $2.61 billion in combined inflows during a five-day trading period Bitcoin-focused funds captured $1.92 billion, representing approximately 73% of the total Ethereum ETFs brought in $697 million with positive flows across all five trading days BlackRock’s products dominated both markets, securing roughly 79% of Friday’s aggregate inflows Bitcoin’s price surged approximately 18% over two days, pushing past the $76,000 mark Exchange-traded funds tracking spot Bitcoin and Ethereum in the United States achieved their most robust combined weekly performance since October 2025, attracting $2.61 billion in capital throughout the five trading days that concluded on August 21.

This remarkable influx represented a complete reversal from the preceding week’s combined outflow of $391.96 million, marking a differential of approximately $3 billion.

Bitcoin Products Dominate Weekly Inflows Bitcoin-focused exchange-traded funds accumulated $1.92 billion throughout the week, with momentum accelerating daily. The sequence initiated with $297 million entering on August 17, advanced to $517 million by August 19, reached a weekly high of $606 million on August 20, before moderating to $307 million during the final session.

BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust emerged as the leading product throughout every session. During the August 21 trading day specifically, it absorbed $239 million, accounting for approximately 78% of that day’s aggregate inflows.

The iShares Bitcoin Trust has accumulated $62.43 billion in cumulative net inflows since its inception. Fidelity’s competing product added $30 million during the same session, elevating its cumulative total to $10.18 billion.

Collectively, all U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs maintain $96.07 billion in net assets, representing 6.17% of Bitcoin’s aggregate market capitalization.

The $1.92 billion weekly figure marks the strongest performance since October 2025, when these investment vehicles attracted $2.71 billion during one week and $3.24 billion in another.

Ethereum Products Show Impressive Momentum Ethereum-tracking ETFs accumulated $697 million throughout the identical five-day period, representing their strongest weekly showing in recent months. Daily capital inflows expanded from $30 million on August 17 to $221 million by August 20, concluding with $185 million on August 21.

🚨BULLISH: Ethereum crosses $2,500 for the first time since March after surging 30% in five days.$ETH is up another 9% today.

It spent most of August stuck below $2,000.

The Aug 19 move was a 20% single-day surge, its largest since May 2025.

Spot ETH ETFs pulled in over $500… pic.twitter.com/Jh5sI21vTQ

— Coin Bureau (@coinbureau) August 21, 2026

BlackRock’s iShares Ethereum Trust commanded Friday’s trading session with $151 million in net inflows. Grayscale’s Ethereum Mini Trust secured second position with $11.5 million.

Aggregate net assets held within Ether ETFs reached $14.30 billion by session close, equivalent to 4.85% of Ethereum’s total market capitalization.

The weekly aggregate exceeded the entire July month’s performance, when Ether ETFs collectively gathered $365 million.

Bitcoin’s market price advanced approximately 18% across two trading days, penetrating key resistance levels at $65,000, $70,000, and $75,000 before ultimately exceeding $76,000 on August 21. Ethereum similarly gained around 18% within a single 24-hour period, climbing above the $2,400 threshold.

Nick Ruck, Director of Research at LVRG, observed that consistent inflows would necessitate additional confirmation before establishing a definitive long-term trend.

Certain market participants are currently reallocating capital toward alternative cryptocurrencies. Bitcoin Cash appreciated 31% on August 21, while Ethena recorded a 27% increase. Bitcoin dominance maintained a position near 59.8%, with the Altcoin Season Index registering 33 out of 100.

BlackRock accumulated a combined $390 million across both Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs on Friday, representing approximately 79% of the day’s aggregate inflows spanning both asset categories.

The SEC has opened a public comment period on Cboe BZX Exchange’s proposal to list six daily 3x leveraged Bitcoin and Ethereum futures ETFs.

The proposal, filed under SR-CboeBZX-2026-065, would cover commodity-pool products sponsored by Volatility Shares. The funds would seek three times the daily performance of front-month and next-month CME Bitcoin and Ethereum futures contracts, using daily reset mechanics.

That is a very different product from a spot ETF.

A 3x leveraged futures ETF is built for short-term tactical exposure. It is not a simple buy-and-hold wrapper for Bitcoin or Ethereum, and its daily reset structure can create performance drift over time.

The SEC’s move opens the proposal for public comments. It does not mean the products have been approved.

TL;DR The SEC opened comments on Cboe’s proposal for 3x leveraged BTC and ETH futures ETFs. The proposed products would be sponsored by Volatility Shares. The filing is under review and has not been approved. Why Leveraged Crypto ETFs Matter Leveraged ETFs are popular because they give traders amplified exposure without directly using margin or futures accounts.

In crypto, that can be especially attractive because Bitcoin and Ethereum already move sharply. A 3x daily product would magnify those moves, creating potential for larger gains and larger losses in a traditional brokerage format.

That is exactly why regulators pay attention.

Leveraged products can be misunderstood by retail investors. They are designed to track daily performance, not long-term cumulative returns. Over multiple sessions, compounding and volatility can cause results to diverge from what investors might expect.

That risk becomes more important when the underlying asset is already volatile.

Futures, Not Spot The proposal concerns futures-based products, not spot Bitcoin or spot Ethereum ETFs.

That distinction matters because the funds would use CME futures exposure rather than directly holding BTC or ETH. Futures-based exposure can behave differently from spot assets because of roll costs, margin, contract structure, and futures-market dynamics.

Investors may see “Bitcoin ETF” or “Ethereum ETF” and assume direct asset exposure.

That would be inaccurate.

These would be leveraged futures products tied to daily movements in futures contracts.

The Comment Period Is Only One Step A public comment period gives market participants, investors, issuers, competitors, and other stakeholders a chance to respond to the SEC.

Comments may address investor protection, market manipulation, disclosure, suitability, volatility, liquidity, and exchange-listing standards.

The SEC can approve, reject, delay, or request changes.

So the current development is procedural but important. It shows the proposal is formally in the review pipeline, but it does not indicate the regulator has accepted the structure.

Crypto ETF Market Keeps Expanding The proposal also shows how quickly the crypto ETF market is moving beyond plain spot products.

Bitcoin spot ETFs opened the door. Ethereum followed. Now issuers are testing leveraged, inverse, staked, altcoin, and multi-asset structures.

That expansion is natural in traditional ETF markets.

Once a base asset category becomes accepted, issuers compete by offering more specialized exposures. Crypto is now entering that phase, and regulators are being asked to decide how much complexity is appropriate.

What Traders Need To Understand If products like these eventually launch, they will not be suitable for every investor.

Daily 3x leveraged funds are typically tools for active traders. Holding them over longer periods can produce unexpected results because the fund resets exposure each day.

For Bitcoin and Ethereum, that risk may be magnified by extreme volatility.

The SEC’s review will likely center on whether disclosures, exchange rules, and product design are sufficient to protect investors.

For now, Cboe’s proposal is another sign that crypto ETF experimentation is accelerating. Approval, however, is still an open question.

This article is based on the SEC’s self-regulatory organization filing notice for Cboe BZX Exchange.

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

BitMine Chairman Tom Lee has identified BMNR as the US-listed stock most closely tied to Ethereum, citing an 80% correlation while predicting that ETH will outperform Bitcoin during the current cycle.

Summary

BitMine showed an 80% correlation with ETH in Fundstrat’s comparison of 17 large-cap stocks. Lee expects tokenization and AI applications to support Ethereum’s performance against Bitcoin. BitMine held 5.82 million ETH, or 4.8% of the token’s supply, as of Aug. 16. US spot Ethereum ETFs attracted $365 million in July, compared with $205 million for Bitcoin funds. Fundstrat said in a Friday post on X that its study covered 17 companies with market values above $2 billion, giving stock investors a list of publicly traded businesses that have moved closely with Bitcoin or Ethereum.

For equity investors seeking exposure to crypto, particularly the sizable moves made by @ethereum and Bitcoin

The 17 large cap (>$2b) stocks with correlation to crypto shown below:

– $BMNR highest correlation to $ETH (80%)
– next closest is $COIN (74%)

– $MSTR highest… pic.twitter.com/p7CM92Uk6m

— Thomas (Tom) Lee (not drummer) FundstratDirect.com (@fundstrat) August 21, 2026 BitMine Immersion Technologies led the Ethereum group with a correlation of 80%, while Coinbase ranked second at 74%. Among stocks linked to Bitcoin, Strategy recorded the highest reading at 78%, followed by Coinbase at 74%.

Lee said he expects Ethereum to beat Bitcoin during the present cycle because tokenization and AI applications could create demand for Ethereum’s network. In his view, the two uses matter more than the themes that supported ETH during earlier market cycles.

The post did not disclose the period used to calculate the correlations or explain whether Fundstrat measured daily, weekly, or monthly returns. Correlations also change as prices and market conditions change, meaning the figures describe the relationship found in Fundstrat’s dataset rather than a fixed link between each stock and the corresponding cryptocurrency.

BitMine stock gives investors an indirect route to Ethereum BitMine’s position at the top of the list follows its decision to build the world’s largest corporate Ethereum treasury. As of Aug. 16, the company held 5,815,164 ETH, 210 Bitcoin, $78 million in cash and marketable securities, and investments in Beast Industries and Eightco Holdings.

Using an ETH price of $1,893, BitMine valued its combined crypto, cash, securities and other investments at $11.4 billion. The company said its Ethereum position represented 4.8% of the token’s stated 120.7 million supply, placing it 96% of the way toward its target of owning 5%.

During the week ending Aug. 16, BitMine purchased another 9,926 ETH. The company has bought Ether every week since adopting its Ethereum treasury strategy on June 30, 2025, according to its latest update.

An Aug. 10 treasury update previously covered by crypto.news showed BitMine holding approximately 5.81 million ETH after another 7,391-token purchase. At that time, the company had also repurchased three million BMNR shares under a $4 billion authorization.

BitMine added another 1.7 million shares to its repurchases during the following week, taking the total since July to more than 20.8 million. Lee said management considered the common shares undervalued, although that assessment represents the company’s view rather than an independent valuation.

BMNR closed at about $22.72 on Aug. 21, gaining roughly 5.3% during the session. Coinbase rose around 7.5%, while Strategy added about 5.9%, as Bitcoin and several large altcoins advanced during the same trading period.

Ethereum staking has become central to BitMine’s model Of BitMine’s 5.82 million ETH, 5,067,309 tokens were staked as of Aug. 16. The amount represented about 87% of the company’s Ethereum holdings and was valued at $9.6 billion using the price cited in its announcement.

Based on a seven-day annualized yield of 2.61%, BitMine projected around $250 million in annual staking revenue from the position. The company said potential annual rewards could reach $287 million after its remaining ETH is staked through its MAVAN platform and external partners.

Staking gives BitMine a source of revenue that Strategy cannot generate from its Bitcoin holdings because Bitcoin does not use a proof-of-stake system. BitMine’s estimates, however, depend on Ethereum’s staking yield, ETH’s market price, validator performance and the amount of company-owned Ether placed into staking.

The company also joined the Russell 1000 large-cap index on June 26, giving US fund managers and benchmark-tracking products another route to obtain indirect Ethereum exposure. BMNR trades on the New York Stock Exchange, while its 9.5% Series A perpetual preferred stock trades under the ticker BMNP.

Compared with a spot Ethereum ETF, BMNR carries risks tied to its operating costs, capital decisions, share issuance, staking activity, and other investments. Its market value can also trade above or below the value of the ETH and other assets held on its balance sheet.

Tokenization supports Lee’s Ethereum thesis Lee has described tokenization as one of the main reasons Ethereum could gain against Bitcoin. In BitMine’s Aug. 17 update, he said the ETH/BTC ratio had risen to 0.02994 and moved above a long-running downward trend.

Earlier ETH/BTC analysis showed the ratio testing resistance near 0.0286 in July after recovering from an early June low around 0.026. The ratio measures how much Bitcoin one Ether can buy, so a rising reading indicates that ETH is gaining value against BTC.

According to Lee, Ethereum’s relative gains during earlier cycles were supported by initial coin offerings in 2017 and 2018, NFTs in 2020 and 2021, and stablecoin adoption in 2025. He expects Wall Street tokenization and blockchain-based AI agents to support the next period of ETH outperformance.

RWA.xyz data offered additional context for the tokenization argument. As of Aug. 21, the analytics platform tracked 2,267 real-world assets on Ethereum and $13.99 billion in RWA transfer volume over 30 days, an increase of 20.45%.

The same database placed the stablecoin market value on Ethereum at $157.11 billion, with 26.6 million holders and $1.55 trillion in 30-day transfer volume. Tokenized-asset platforms listed on the network included Ondo, Securitize, Circle, Tether, and Sky.

Wall Street involvement has also extended beyond companies holding ETH. BlackRock, JPMorgan, and several asset managers have developed or tested tokenized funds, collateral products, and settlement services that use Ethereum or networks compatible with its software.

US Ethereum ETFs show signs of institutional demand US-listed exchange-traded funds have provided another measure of demand from investors who prefer regulated brokerage products. Spot Ethereum ETFs attracted $365 million in net inflows during July, while spot Bitcoin ETFs received $205 million.

The July result was Ethereum funds’ strongest month on record and the first time their monthly inflows exceeded Bitcoin ETF inflows by more than two to one, according to a recent ETF flow review. On July 23, Ethereum products received $72.64 million, compared with $68.99 million for Bitcoin funds.

Ethereum ETFs added another $53.75 million on Aug. 4, followed by $202 million over the next three trading days. During July, the ETH/BTC ratio rose by about 11%, moving from roughly 0.027 to 0.030.

AI applications form the second part of Lee’s forecast. Ethereum.org says blockchain-based agents can control wallets, execute transactions, interact with smart contracts and use stablecoins to pay for computing resources, data and application access.

Ethereum.org also describes the technology as experimental and warns users to exercise caution. Agent activity does not guarantee demand for ETH because applications can use other blockchains, layer-2 networks, or off-chain payment systems.

Lee has pointed to Robinhood Chain as one example of financial and blockchain services coming together. The Ethereum layer-2 network uses ETH for transaction fees and sends its final transaction records to Ethereum, while Robinhood reported 27.4 million funded customers at the end of the first quarter.

Within weeks of its July launch, the network had recorded almost $9 billion in cumulative decentralized-exchange volume, $431 million in locked assets and more than 250,000 daily active users, according to Robinhood Chain data. More than 80% of its early exchange volume came from memecoins, while temporary fee waivers reduced trading costs during the network’s first 90 days.

BTCS Inc. reduced its DeFi leverage in the second quarter, repaying $8.2 million in debt to the Aave protocol as the company shifted its balance sheet away from more aggressive borrowing.

In its Q2 2026 Form 10-Q filing, BTCS reported ending the quarter with $317,113 in cash and stablecoins. The company also reported $36.0 million in outstanding loans payable to DeFi protocols, showing that its digital-asset balance sheet remained heavily tied to crypto, staking, and DeFi activity.

The numbers are striking, but they need careful framing.

This is not proof that BTCS is insolvent. It is not evidence of an Aave failure. It is a corporate treasury and risk-management story involving Ethereum, DeFi borrowing, and balance-sheet leverage.

TL;DR BTCS repaid $8.2 million in debt to Aave during Q2 2026. The company ended the quarter with $317,113 in cash and stablecoins. BTCS still reported $36.0 million in outstanding loans payable to DeFi protocols. Corporate Treasuries Are Getting More Complex Public companies involved in crypto no longer just hold Bitcoin or Ethereum on the balance sheet.

Some stake assets. Some borrow against assets. Some use DeFi protocols. Some run validator infrastructure. Some hold a mix of tokens, cash, stablecoins, loans, and operating assets.

BTCS fits into that more complex category.

Its filing shows a company using crypto-native financial infrastructure while still reporting through traditional public-company disclosures. That combination gives investors a rare view into how DeFi leverage can appear inside a listed company’s financial statements.

The result is more transparent, but also more complicated.

Why The Aave Repayment Matters Aave is one of the largest DeFi lending protocols.

Repaying $8.2 million in Aave debt suggests BTCS was actively reducing leverage rather than simply carrying the same borrowing profile forward. That can be read as a risk-management move, especially during a period when Ethereum and DeFi markets remain volatile.

Reducing debt can lower liquidation risk and simplify the balance sheet.

But it also shows how closely some crypto companies are tied to on-chain lending conditions. When a company borrows through DeFi, its financial position can depend on collateral values, interest rates, liquidity, and liquidation thresholds.

That is very different from a plain cash-and-equity treasury.

The Cash Figure Needs Context The $317,113 cash and stablecoin figure may look low at first glance.

But it should be read alongside the rest of the balance sheet, including digital assets, staking exposure, and outstanding DeFi loans. Crypto-native companies may hold value in assets that do not resemble traditional cash reserves.

That does not remove risk.

Low cash balances can limit flexibility, especially if operating expenses rise or market liquidity weakens. But it also does not automatically mean a company is insolvent.

The cleaner read is that BTCS was managing a balance sheet where most value remained tied to digital assets and DeFi positions.

DeFi Leverage Is Now A Public-Market Issue This is the broader point.

DeFi borrowing used to be mostly a wallet-level or protocol-level story. Now it can appear inside public-company filings. That means traditional investors need to understand terms like collateral, liquidation, protocol debt, staking, and on-chain credit exposure.

As more companies use Ethereum and DeFi infrastructure, these disclosures will matter more.

Investors will not only ask how many coins a company holds. They will ask whether those assets are borrowed against, staked, locked, lent, or exposed to smart-contract risk.

BTCS offers an early example of that shift.

What Comes Next The next filings will show whether BTCS continues reducing leverage or rebuilds DeFi exposure as market conditions improve.

If the company keeps lowering debt, investors may view the strategy as more conservative. If it increases borrowing again, the balance sheet may become more sensitive to Ethereum price swings and protocol conditions.

Either way, BTCS highlights an important trend.

Corporate crypto strategies are no longer simple reserve stories. Some companies are operating inside DeFi as active balance-sheet participants.

That creates opportunity, but it also creates risk that investors need to understand.

This article is based on BTCS Inc.’s Q2 2026 Form 10-Q filing and related company financial disclosures.

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

Montevideo, Uruguay, August 20th, 2026, Chainwire

Aligned allows fintechs and institutions to build financial products on Ethereum, with one-click solutions for wallets, rollups, interoperability, and zero-knowledge services.

Today, Aligned, a full-stack Ethereum infrastructure project, has launched $ALIGN*, the native token of its ecosystem, with listings on major exchanges. Aligned is working to turn Ethereum into the world’s financial backend, and its ecosystem is the single integration fintechs, institutions, and enterprises use to build financial products on Ethereum.

Less than one percent of the world’s assets are onchain, and most of what has moved sits on Ethereum as stablecoins, tokenized treasuries, and wrapped assets. Building on top of them is still harder than it should be. A fintech going onchain usually signs with multiple vendors, one for wallets, another for scalability solutions (including rollups and proving systems), then spends months wiring them together and keeping them in sync. There is no standard way to ship a financial product on Ethereum yet.

Aligned was built to fix that. It’s built in close collaboration with LambdaClass, a company behind key contributions across the Ethereum ecosystem, including work on Starknet, zkSync, Polygon Miden, and EigenCloud (formerly EigenLayer), as well as Ethrex (the execution client which powers Aligned’s Rollup-as-a-Service) and lambdaworks, a cryptography library written in Rust. By integrating with Aligned, users can access wallets, rollups, interoperability, and zero-knowledge services through a single stack.

Aligned ships the stack one piece at a time:

Proof Aggregation Service: live on mainnet alpha. Batching the proofs a rollup generates so verification stays cheap as Ethereum scales. Wallet-as-a-Service: MVP already launched. Users sign in with Google or Face ID and get a real Ethereum wallet, with no seed phrases, extensions, or gas fees. Rollup-as-a-Service, the LambdaVM, and the interoperability protocol: in development. The LambdaVM is Aligned’s RISC-V zkVM (zero-knowledge virtual machine), built in collaboration with LambdaClass and 3MI Labs. Each ships as it’s ready. The world’s assets are moving onto Ethereum, and Aligned is creating the stack that makes it easy to build on. In the future, $ALIGN will be available as an option to pay for the services across that stack, from Proof Aggregation to Wallet-as-a-Service. As more teams build on Aligned, it will be the asset they use to pay for that usage. It is a utility token. It is not equity, a share, or a claim on revenue or dividends, and it does not promise a yield or a price.

$ALIGN has a fixed supply of 10 billion tokens, with about 16% circulating at launch. The full allocation and the Genesis airdrop are laid out in the ALIGN tokenomics. The airdrop was distributed across several waves spanning developers and researchers, the Discord and Galxe communities, distinguished contributors to Ethereum and ZK such as Protocol Guild, L2BEAT, ZachXBT, and ZK Podcast, and holders of ecosystem tokens including Starknet, Mina, zkSync, Polygon, Scroll, Taiko, and EigenCloud.

Aligned is committed to Ethereum by choice, focusing all of its efforts on it. Through the rest of the year, the team plans to ship the remaining pieces of the stack and grow the number of products built on it. The longer-term goal is to make building a financial product on Ethereum a single decision, not a systems-integration project.

Check eligibility and follow the launch at community.alignedlayer.com. To hear more, read the ALIGN tokenomics at blog.alignedlayer.com and follow @alignedlayer.

About Aligned

Aligned builds the tools that turn Ethereum into the world’s financial backend. It gives fintechs, institutions, and enterprises one integration for wallets, rollups, interoperability, and zero-knowledge services, so they can build real financial products on Ethereum instead of assembling a stack from separate vendors. Users can learn more at alignedlayer.com.

*$ALIGN is the native asset of the Aligned ecosystem, built on Ethereum as an ERC-20 token and also available on Base, with a fixed total supply of 10 billion and an initial circulating supply equal to approximately 16% of the total token supply. It will be used across the Aligned stack. $ALIGN is not equity, a share, or a claim on revenue or dividends. This announcement is informational only and is not financial advice. Do your own research.

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

According to the Ripple stablecoin tracker website, Ethereum has now overtaken the XRP Ledger in RLUSD supply.

Based on current data supplied by the page, RLUSD circulating supply on the XRP Ledger is now $941.36 million, which has been surpassed by that of Ethereum, which is $989.34 million.

The change comes as Ripple continues to adjust RLUSD liquidity across its supported blockchain networks. Specifically, the last 24 hours have seen more RLUSD minted on Ethereum than on the XRP ledger, with larger activity in favor of the former (Ethereum). 

HOT Stories

On August 20, $73.8 million RLUSD was minted on ethereum with $23.5 million burned. On August 21 so far, $53.2 million RLUSD was minted on Ethereum with $15 million burned. 

You Might Also Like

This surpasses XRP Ledger, which saw $36.1 million RLUSD minted on August 20 and $15.4 million RLUSD burned in this timeframe. So far on August 21, $12.5 million RLUSD was minted on the XRPL and $6.5 million burned. 

Ripple stablecoin tracker X account details some of these transactions over the last 24 hours.

In recent hours, two transactions of 25,000,000 RLUSD and 20,000,000 RLUSD minted on Ethereum were reported, while 10,000,000 RLUSD was burned on the blockchain. One transaction of 10,000,000 RLUSD minted on XRP Ledger was reported. Another three transactions of 20,000,000 RLUSD, 14,000,000 RLUSD and 16,000,000 RLUSD minted on Ethereum were reported within the last 24 hours. 

RLUSD nears $2 billion in circulating supplyWith the ongoing activity, the RLUSD total circulating supply is fast approaching the $2 billion milestone, currently at $1.93 billion according to the Ripple stablecoin tracker page.  The current figure of $1.939 billion in total circulating supply marks an all-time high for the Ripple USD (RLUSD) stablecoin, which launched in December 2024. 

You Might Also Like

RLUSD was launched with support for both the XRP Ledger and Ethereum, allowing its access across two major networks.

In June, the XRP Ledger surpassed the Ethereum blockchain in RLUSD circulating supply for the first time. Now, a recent supply shift has flipped this tide, and the XRP community is watching what comes next. 

The biggest single day ETH move in two years did not trigger the liquidation cascade. But the concentrated staking correlation trade on Aave is one bad day from unwinding.

Summary

Ethereum surged approximately 18% on Aug. 20, 2026, its strongest single day move since March 2024, climbing from roughly $1,920 to above $2,270 as trading volume jumped 402%. More than $1 billion in Ethereum short positions were liquidated across derivatives markets during the rally, contributing to a broader $3 billion crypto liquidation event. On Aave, the largest decentralized lending protocol with roughly $12.2 billion in total value locked, just 9% of positions carry approximately half of the platform’s total debt. These concentrated positions are built around a leveraged Ethereum staking correlation trade, using WETH debt against liquid staking collateral like weETH (42% of collateral), rsETH, and wstETH, with average health factors near 1.06 and debt to equity ratios near 10.7 times. An 8% to 9% discount in liquid staking wrapper prices relative to ETH could trigger on chain liquidations across hundreds of accounts, creating a cascade risk that the Aug. 20 rally obscured but did not eliminate. The number that matters from Aug. 20 is not 18%. It is 1.06.

Ethereum’s single day gain of roughly 18% dominated the headlines. Trading volume surged 402%. More than $1 billion in short positions were liquidated. The altcoin market cap crossed $1 trillion. By every surface metric, it was one of the strongest days for Ethereum in two years.

But underneath the rally, a structural vulnerability in decentralized lending sat untouched. On Aave, 9% of positions carry roughly half the protocol’s total debt. Those positions run at an average health factor of 1.06, a margin of safety so thin that an 8% to 9% move in the wrong direction could trigger a liquidation cascade on chain.

The rally did not test that vulnerability because ETH moved higher, not lower. The concentrated positions survived. But surviving is not the same as being safe.

The anatomy of the correlation trade To understand the risk, start with the trade itself.

Ethereum’s transition to proof of stake created a new asset class: liquid staking tokens. When a user stakes ETH through a protocol like Lido, Rocket Pool, or EtherFi, they receive a derivative token (wstETH, rETH, or weETH) that represents their staked position. These tokens are designed to trade at or near a 1:1 ratio with ETH, accruing staking rewards over time.

The correlation trade exploits the tight relationship between these wrapper tokens and ETH itself. A trader deposits liquid staking tokens as collateral on Aave, borrows WETH against them, stakes the borrowed WETH to create more liquid staking tokens, and repeats. Each loop adds leverage. The profit comes from the staking yield, which compounds with each layer of recursion.

On paper, the trade appears low risk. The collateral (liquid staking tokens) is correlated with the debt (WETH). As long as the wrapper tokens maintain their peg to ETH, the health factor remains stable. The borrower earns staking yield on every layer of collateral while paying borrowing costs on the WETH debt.

In practice, the risk is concentrated in the peg itself.

Where the leverage sits The data on Aave’s concentrated positions is specific enough to be alarming.

Just 9% of Aave positions hold approximately half the protocol’s total debt. The debt weighted loan to value across this cohort runs near 90%. Their average health factor sits at 1.06. Their debt to equity ratio is approximately 10.7 times.

The collateral backing these loans tells the story. Ethereum staking and restaking wrappers, including weETH, rsETH, and wstETH, make up about 66.2% of the collateral. weETH alone accounts for roughly 42%. WETH makes up about 73% of the group’s total debt.

Total stablecoins supplied on Aave stand at $8.98 billion, with $7.40 billion borrowed, producing a utilization rate of 82.46%. The protocol’s total value locked is approximately $12.2 billion.

The concentration is remarkable. A small number of highly leveraged positions, all running the same fundamental trade, hold enough debt to create systemic consequences if they unwind simultaneously.

What a depeg would look like A health factor of 1.06 means the collateral is worth 6% more than the minimum required to avoid liquidation. For these positions, that translates to a buffer of roughly 8% to 9% in wrapper discount before liquidations begin.

A wrapper discount occurs when a liquid staking token trades below its expected value relative to ETH. This can happen for several reasons: a rush to exit staking positions, a smart contract vulnerability in the staking protocol, a governance failure, or simply a market wide liquidity crunch that drives sellers to accept below peg prices.

Aave learned this lesson in March 2026. A stale risk oracle parameter led to approximately $26 to $27 million in wstETH liquidations. The incident was contained because it affected a single collateral type and the parameter was corrected quickly. But it revealed how oracle latency could interact with concentrated positions to produce outsized losses.

A broader depeg scenario would unfold differently. If weETH, which backs 42% of the concentrated cohort’s collateral, were to trade at a 10% discount to ETH, the health factors on hundreds of accounts would drop below 1.0 simultaneously. Aave’s liquidation mechanism would activate, selling wrapper tokens into a market that is already discounting them. The selling pressure from liquidations would widen the discount, triggering more liquidations.

This is the same feedback loop that operates in centralized derivatives markets during a short squeeze, but in reverse and on chain. Instead of forced buying pushing prices higher, forced selling pushes prices lower. And because the liquidated collateral is the same asset that is being discounted, the cascade feeds on itself.

JUST IN: Aave founder Stani Kulechov announces he is personally contributing 5,000 ETH to DeFi United as the team works nonstop to deliver the best outcome for users pic.twitter.com/CHhe0GlLFu

— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) April 24, 2026 Why the rally masked the risk Ethereum’s 18% surge on Aug. 20 had the opposite effect on the concentrated Aave positions. Higher ETH prices improved health factors across the board. Wrapper tokens rallied in line with ETH, maintaining their pegs. The positions that sit at 1.06 health factor at current prices were temporarily safer.

But the rally also encouraged behavior that makes the eventual risk worse. When ETH prices rise, staking yields become more attractive in dollar terms. Traders have an incentive to add more layers of recursion to the correlation trade, increasing leverage. If the concentrated cohort added positions during or after the rally, the health factors may have returned to the same 1.06 level at higher absolute prices, meaning the dollar value at risk has increased even though the percentage buffer remains the same.

DeFi lending protocols do not have circuit breakers. There is no exchange operator to halt trading during extreme volatility. There is no margin call that gives a borrower time to add collateral. When the health factor drops below 1.0, liquidation is automatic and immediate. The speed of the cascade is limited only by block time and gas availability.

The rally was driven by macro catalysts including Treasury buybacks and a White House summit. If those catalysts fade and ETH retraces, the concentrated positions will be the first to feel the pressure.

The staking yield illusion The correlation trade is popular because the math looks compelling in normal conditions. Staking yields on Ethereum currently range from 3% to 5% annualized, depending on the protocol. At 10 times leverage, the effective yield on equity approaches 30% to 50% annualized, minus borrowing costs.

But this calculation assumes the wrapper peg holds perfectly. It assumes liquidity in the wrapper market remains sufficient to absorb large sales without price impact. And it assumes that no exogenous shock, whether a smart contract exploit, a regulatory action against a staking provider, or a sudden spike in ETH volatility, disrupts the correlation.

Each of these assumptions has been violated at least once in the history of liquid staking tokens. Lido’s stETH traded at a 7% discount to ETH during the Terra/Luna collapse in June 2022. Rocket Pool’s rETH briefly dipped below peg during the FTX contagion in November 2022. These dislocations were temporary, but they occurred during conditions when leveraged positions on the same tokens would have been liquidated.

The August 2026 rally created an opportunity for traders to take on more of this risk at what feel like higher prices and wider margins. Whether those margins are real or illusory depends entirely on what happens next.

Aave’s risk management response Aave is not unaware of the concentration risk. The protocol’s governance forum has discussed parameter adjustments to address the wstETH/weETH correlation trade, including reducing the loan to value ratio in E mode (the enhanced efficiency mode that allows higher leverage for correlated assets) and increasing liquidation incentives to attract faster liquidator participation during stress events.

The March 2026 incident, in which a stale oracle parameter caused $26 to $27 million in unintended liquidations, prompted a review of oracle update frequencies and fallback mechanisms. The protocol now runs multiple oracle sources for major collateral types.

But governance adjustments move slowly in DeFi. Proposals must pass through community discussion, snapshot votes, and on chain execution. The concentrated positions exist now. A parameter change that takes two weeks to implement offers no protection against a depeg event that unfolds in two hours.

The broader DeFi ecosystem faces the same challenge. Compound, Morpho, and other lending protocols have varying degrees of exposure to the same liquid staking correlation trade. If a depeg event triggers liquidations on Aave, the selling pressure would affect wrapper prices across all platforms simultaneously. Institutional custodians watching from the sidelines would have reason to reconsider their DeFi exposure calculations.

What to watch Wrapper discount thresholds. Track the price of weETH, wstETH, and rsETH relative to ETH on DEX aggregators. Any sustained discount above 3% is a warning sign. A discount above 8% would begin triggering liquidations on the concentrated Aave positions. Aave E mode parameter proposals. Governance proposals to reduce the loan to value ceiling in E mode for liquid staking collateral would force the concentrated cohort to reduce leverage. Track the Aave governance forum and snapshot voting page. ETH volatility after the rally. The 18% move was driven by macro catalysts. If those catalysts fade and ETH retraces, the concentrated positions will be tested. A 15% decline from current levels would bring ETH back to the pre rally range near $1,920, which could stress wrapper pegs. Liquidation bot capacity. On chain liquidation depends on bots that monitor health factors and submit liquidation transactions. If gas prices spike during a cascade, slower bots may fail to participate, reducing liquidation efficiency and increasing bad debt risk. Aave’s total stablecoin utilization rate. At 82.46%, utilization is already high. If it climbs above 90%, withdrawal liquidity shrinks and the protocol’s ability to absorb a cascade deteriorates. How much of Aave’s debt is concentrated in a small number of positions? Approximately 9% of Aave positions carry roughly half of the protocol’s total debt. These positions run at an average health factor of 1.06 with debt to equity ratios near 10.7 times.

What is the Ethereum staking correlation trade? Traders deposit liquid staking tokens (weETH, wstETH, rsETH) as collateral on Aave, borrow WETH against them, stake the borrowed WETH to create more liquid staking tokens, and repeat. Each loop increases leverage and staking yield exposure.

What would trigger liquidations on these positions? An 8% to 9% discount in liquid staking wrapper prices relative to ETH would push health factors below 1.0, triggering automatic on chain liquidations. A 10% depeg could flip hundreds of accounts below the danger threshold simultaneously.

Has a liquid staking depeg happened before? Yes. Lido’s stETH traded at a 7% discount during the Terra/Luna collapse in June 2022. Rocket Pool’s rETH briefly dipped below peg during the FTX contagion in November 2022. Both dislocations were temporary but would have triggered liquidations on leveraged positions.

What is Aave’s total value locked? Aave holds approximately $12.2 billion in total value locked as of August 2026, with $8.98 billion in stablecoins supplied and $7.40 billion borrowed, producing a utilization rate of 82.46%.

Why did the March 2026 Aave incident happen? A stale risk oracle parameter led to approximately $26 to $27 million in wstETH liquidations. The incident highlighted how oracle latency can interact with concentrated positions to produce unintended losses.

Does Aave have circuit breakers? No. DeFi lending protocols do not have the ability to halt trading or pause liquidations during extreme volatility. When a health factor drops below 1.0, liquidation is automatic and limited only by block time and gas availability.

How does Ethereum’s 18% rally affect the concentration risk? The rally temporarily improved health factors by pushing collateral values higher. However, it may also have encouraged traders to add leverage, potentially returning health factors to the same tight 1.06 level at higher dollar values, increasing the absolute amount at risk. This is educational analysis, not investment advice.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or trading advice. Cryptocurrency markets and DeFi protocols carry substantial risk, including the risk of total loss. Always conduct your own research before making any investment decisions. Published Aug. 21, 2026.

Ethereum price traded near $2,300 on Thursday after a derivatives-driven breakout pushed ETH above its three-month range, though overbought signals now raise the risk of a pullback.

Summary

Ethereum price jumped about 20% from below $1,950, reaching an intraday high near $2,300. Daily RSI rose above 83, placing ETH deep inside overbought territory. The $2,300–$2,500 region remains the next major resistance zone. CoinGlass data shows liquidation clusters near $2,300 and below $2,200. Ethereum price action today According to data from crypto.news, Ethereum (ETH) price traded at about $2,285 at press time on Aug. 20, up 1.4% on the daily candle after briefly reaching $2,298.

The latest advance extended a breakout that began Wednesday, when ETH surged from below $1,950 and cleared several resistance levels in a matter of hours. At its highest point, the move represented a gain of roughly 20%.

Before the rally, Ethereum had spent most of August between $1,850 and $1,950. Repeated attempts to break above the upper end of that range failed, allowing short positions to build around the psychological $2,000 level.

A sudden increase in spot and derivatives buying changed that structure. ETH moved through $2,000, $2,100, and $2,200 with few sustained pauses, forcing traders with bearish leveraged positions to buy back the asset as prices rose.

The initial rally produced a long upper wick near $2,330, showing that some holders took profits above $2,300. Buyers nevertheless kept ETH above $2,250 through Thursday, preventing a deeper reversal during the first consolidation period.

What is driving the Ethereum rally? The breakout coincided with a wider cryptocurrency rally after the U.S. Treasury announced an increase in its long-dated bond buyback operations.

On Aug. 19, the Treasury said it would raise the maximum size of liquidity-support buybacks for 10-to-30-year nominal coupon securities from $2 billion to at least $4 billion per operation. The change will take effect on Sept. 9 and remain in place through Nov. 4, according to the official announcement.

The program is intended to support liquidity in older Treasury securities rather than provide direct stimulus to cryptocurrency markets. However, some market participants interpreted the larger purchases as supportive of financial liquidity and risk assets.

MarketWatch linked the crypto rally to the announcement as longer-term Treasury yields declined. Ethereum reached its highest price since May while Bitcoin moved above $70,000 during the same risk-on move.

Derivatives positioning then added momentum. Notably, Ethereum saw $2.55 billion in taker buy volume during one hour, while a wave of short liquidations forced additional buying into a rapidly rising market.

Reported liquidations included a roughly $49 million position held by one highly ranked trader. Forced closures can accelerate a rally because exchanges automatically buy the underlying asset or close bearish contracts when collateral falls below required levels.

U.S. spot Ethereum ETFs also recorded $189.1 million in daily net inflows on Aug. 19, according to SoSoValue data. Positive ETF flows offered evidence of demand through regulated U.S. products alongside the faster derivatives move.

Political developments added to the broader improvement in crypto sentiment. President Donald Trump called on Congress to advance federal digital asset market structure legislation following an Aug. 19 White House event attended by executives from several crypto companies.

The Securities and Exchange Commission has also proposed a framework covering certain registered crypto asset offerings. Both developments may affect the long-term regulatory outlook, although neither represents a completed change to federal law.

Ethereum faces resistance between $2,300 and $2,500 Ethereum’s daily chart shows a clear break above the Ichimoku cloud and its main trend lines. ETH traded about 9% above the Tenkan-sen at $2,098 and 10% above the Kijun-sen near $2,078, reflecting the speed of the move.

Ethereum price daily chart — Aug. 20 | Source: crypto.news The cloud’s upper boundary sits around $2,088, making the $2,075–$2,100 area an important support region if ETH gives back part of its rally. Holding that zone would preserve the broader breakout even if the price retreats from $2,300.

The nearest support on shorter time frames sits between $2,220 and $2,250, where buyers repeatedly entered after the initial spike. A break below that area could expose $2,100, followed by the former range ceiling around $1,950–$2,000.

Momentum has become stretched, however. The daily relative strength index reached 83.25, well above the conventional overbought threshold of 70 and its moving average near 57.

An overbought RSI does not guarantee an immediate decline, particularly during a strong breakout. It does show that ETH has risen much faster than its recent average and may require consolidation before making another sustained move.

The 4-hour Bollinger Bands tell a similar story. Ethereum traded near $2,288, slightly above the upper band at about $2,283, while the middle band remained near $1,998. The wide distance between the price and the middle band shows how far ETH has moved from its recent mean.

Ethereum price 4-hour chart — Aug. 20 | Source: crypto.news A daily close above $2,300 would open the path toward $2,400 and then $2,500. The latter level carries added importance because it sits near longer-term moving averages and a previous supply region visible on the weekly chart.

Liquidation map raises volatility risk near $2,300 The three-day CoinGlass liquidation heatmap shows ETH approaching a series of leveraged positions between $2,300 and $2,350. A move into that zone could trigger further short closures, providing fuel for another brief extension.

Ethereum liquidation chart | Source: CoinGlass Liquidity is also building below the market. Visible clusters sit around $2,220, $2,180, and $2,100, while the largest concentration remains near $1,900.

Liquidation levels do not act as guaranteed price targets. They identify areas where leveraged positions may be forced to close, which can attract price during periods of high volatility.

Because much of the liquidity below $2,000 accumulated before the breakout, a complete return to that region would require ETH to lose several newly reclaimed supports. The more immediate risk is a retest of $2,220 or $2,100 as traders reduce leverage and take profits.

Analysts see $2,500 as Ethereum’s next test Crypto analyst Michaël van de Poppe said Ethereum’s move confirmed that the market was in a bullish phase, but he did not expect the asset to continue rising in a straight line.

Van de Poppe said ETH had reached approximately 0.033 BTC against Bitcoin and described pullbacks from the level as potential buying opportunities. His ETH/BTC chart showed nearby support around 0.032 and a lower zone close to 0.0305.

An absolutely amazing move of $ETH.

I don't think it will continue to run in one go, but it's quite clear that we're currently in a bull market.

Swept all the way towards 0.033 BTC and very likely retraces are for buying. pic.twitter.com/Fw7ZeM10UW

— Michaël van de Poppe (@CryptoMichNL) August 20, 2026 Market commentator Ted Pillows identified $2,500 as Ethereum’s next resistance. He argued that reclaiming the level would reduce the likelihood of ETH returning to a new cycle low, while a rejection would keep the lower part of the range relevant.

The two views align with the visible price structure: Ethereum has shifted from consolidation into an uptrend, but the asset is now approaching resistance with unusually extended momentum.

For U.S. investors, Treasury yields, the dollar, and spot ETF flows may determine whether the breakout develops into sustained demand. A pause near $2,300 would allow technical indicators to cool, while a high-volume close above $2,500 would provide stronger confirmation that buyers can absorb profit-taking after the short squeeze.

Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.

An Ethereum user reportedly lost 1,010 ETH after following an old Tornado Cash bookmark that allegedly redirected to a malicious frontend controlled by phishing attackers.

Summary

An Ethereum address received 810 ETH through nine transfers on August 18, onchain records confirm. Community reports claimed 1,010 ETH was stolen after a user visited a suspected phishing frontend. The cited wallet retained approximately 810 ETH, worth about $1.86 million when records were checked. Claims that attackers stole nearly 4,000 ETH over twelve months remain independently unverified by researchers. Tornado Cash’s website was accessible when checked, leaving the alleged domain takeover without official confirmation. Community accounts said the incident unfolded over approximately 12 hours. They alleged that attackers obtained the victim’s Tornado Cash deposit credentials and withdrew the funds before transferring them to several addresses.

Onchain records provide partial confirmation. The cited wallet received 810 ETH through nine transactions on Aug. 18. Eight transfers carried 100 ETH each, while the final transfer carried 10 ETH.

The transactions occurred between 5:56 a.m. and 6:05 a.m. UTC. The address retained approximately 810 ETH, valued by Etherscan at about $1.86 million when checked on Aug. 20.

Ethereum records confirm 810 ETH, not the full claim The verified transactions leave a 200 ETH gap between the 1,010 ETH loss reported by community users and the 810 ETH held by the cited wallet. The remaining amount may have reached another address, but no additional destination was included in the supplied evidence.

User Loses Over 1,000 ETH in Phishing Attack After Using Tornado Cash’s Expired Official Domain

According to community users, a user clicked an old link left in a related bookmark and was redirected to a phishing site through the expired official domain tornado. cash, which had… pic.twitter.com/8j7eQl3qX2

— Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) August 20, 2026 No public statement from Tornado Cash, an established blockchain security firm or the reported victim had independently confirmed the full amount when this article was prepared.

Community accounts claimed the victim tracked a total loss of 1,010 Ethereum, but the provided address independently confirms only 810 Ethereum.

The cited wallet had recorded nine transactions and no outgoing transfer at the time of review. Its balance therefore supports the claim that most of the reported funds remained under the suspected attacker’s control.

At Ether’s price of approximately $2,295, the confirmed 810 Ethereum was worth about $1.86 million. The reported 1,010 Ethereum loss would be worth roughly $2.32 million at the same price.

Tornado Cash domain takeover remains unconfirmed Reports blamed the theft on the tornado.cash domain, claiming it expired after the project’s team failed to renew it during the disruption caused by U.S. sanctions. According to the accounts, an attacker subsequently registered the address and installed a fake user interface.

That account could not be fully verified. The domain was accessible and displayed a Tornado Cash interface when checked. No authoritative domain record, official Tornado Cash warning or named security researcher was found confirming that the address had expired and changed ownership.

Claims that the official domain was captured by an attacker therefore remain unconfirmed and should not be presented as an established cause.

A website loading correctly at the time of checking does not prove it was safe at an earlier time. Attackers can remove malicious code, redirect only selected visitors or restore a legitimate interface after collecting credentials.

Tornado Cash has faced previous frontend security problems. In 2024, researcher Gas404 found that malicious JavaScript had been inserted into an open source interface and could expose private deposit notes. Checkmarx later documented the supply chain compromise, although no evidence currently connects that episode with the latest transactions.

Deposit notes can give attackers control of funds Tornado Cash uses private deposit notes to let users withdraw assets from its pools. Anyone who obtains a valid note can generally initiate the corresponding withdrawal, making the note comparable to a private credential.

A fake frontend can capture this information when a user attempts to make a deposit or withdrawal. The attacker can then use the stolen note before the legitimate owner does.

The attack differs from approval phishing, where a victim signs a malicious transaction that authorizes a drainer contract. In related coverage, crypto.news explained how wallet drainers exploit deceptive signatures to gain access to tokens and nonfungible assets.

Old bookmarks present another risk because users often assume previously trusted links remain safe. Expired or transferred domains preserve their familiar names, search rankings and backlinks, making malicious replacements harder to identify.

As crypto.news recently reported, fake websites continue draining Ethereum wallets after users approve transactions or enter sensitive information. The safest approach is to verify domains through several current project channels before connecting a wallet.

Nearly 4,000 ETH claim needs more evidence Community reports also alleged that the same attackers stole almost 4,000 ETH through similar methods over the previous 12 months. No list of related addresses or attribution analysis accompanied that figure.

Without linked wallets, transaction hashes or a report from a security firm, the 4,000 ETH estimate cannot be independently verified. Blockchain transfers show where funds moved, but they do not automatically establish who controlled each address or which phishing campaign generated them.

The immediate priority is monitoring the confirmed 810 ETH. Transfers to exchanges could create an opportunity for platforms to identify or freeze assets, subject to their procedures and applicable law.

The victim should preserve browser history, bookmarked URLs, wallet logs and transaction records before reporting the incident to wallet providers, exchanges and law enforcement. Users who interacted with the same frontend should stop using it, move unaffected assets and revoke suspicious token approvals.

The available evidence supports a large Ethereum transfer into a newly active wallet. It does not yet prove the full 1,010 ETH loss, the alleged takeover of the official domain or the claimed 4,000 ETH campaign.