Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

TL;DR BlackRock’s BUIDL fund exceeded $900 million in assets on Avalanche after growing by approximately 105% in just one week. The tokenized U.S. Treasury fund now manages around $2.87 billion in total assets, making it one of the world’s largest on-chain Treasury products. Ethereum remains the largest BUIDL deployment, while Solana ranks third, reflecting growing multi-chain adoption of tokenized assets. The milestone highlights accelerating institutional interest in tokenized Treasuries as real-world asset adoption continues to reshape blockchain-based finance. BlackRock’s tokenized U.S. Treasury fund BUIDL has crossed another milestone, with assets on the Avalanche blockchain surpassing $900 million, underscoring the growing institutional appetite for real-world assets (RWAs) on public blockchains. 

Fresh data from RWA.xyz shows the Avalanche allocation more than doubled in just one week, helping lift the fund’s total assets under management (AUM) to approximately $2.87 billion.

The rapid expansion adds to evidence that tokenized Treasuries are becoming one of crypto’s fastest-growing sectors as traditional financial institutions increasingly adopt blockchain infrastructure for cash management and settlement.

Launched in March 2024 by BlackRock in partnership with Securitize, BUIDL invests primarily in short-term U.S. Treasury bills, cash and repurchase agreements while allowing qualified investors to hold fund shares on-chain. Since its debut, the product has expanded beyond Ethereum to several networks, including Avalanche, Solana, Aptos, Arbitrum, Optimism, Polygon and BNB Chain.

According to the latest RWA.xyz figures, Avalanche now hosts roughly $902.7 million of BUIDL assets, representing an increase of about $436 million, or 105%, over the past week. Ethereum remains the largest deployment with just over $1.02 billion, while Solana ranks third with more than $616 million. 

Treasury Product Metrics Data | Source: RWA.XYZ Avalanche strengthens its position in institutional tokenization The sharp rise in BUIDL assets has reinforced Avalanche’s role as one of the leading destinations for tokenized financial products.

Earlier this year, analysts noted that a major allocation into BUIDL pushed Avalanche’s total tokenized asset market above $1 billion, making it the second-largest blockchain for institutional RWAs behind Ethereum. The latest growth suggests that momentum has continued as asset managers seek networks capable of supporting compliant, high-value financial products with lower transaction costs and faster settlement.

Unlike stablecoins, tokenized Treasury funds generate yield from underlying government securities while offering investors the operational benefits of blockchain-based ownership, including near-instant transfers and continuous settlement.

The broader tokenized Treasury market has also expanded rapidly. Industry data indicates that the sector now manages well over $15 billion in on-chain Treasury assets, with BlackRock’s BUIDL remaining among the largest products globally by assets under management, having been recently made available on OKX. 

Institutional adoption continues to reshape crypto markets The latest milestone reflects a broader shift as traditional finance firms increasingly view blockchain networks as infrastructure rather than speculative ecosystems.

Major financial institutions including Franklin Templeton, Janus Henderson, Apollo, and others have introduced tokenized investment products over the past two years, while regulators in several jurisdictions have shown growing support for real-world asset tokenization through clearer digital asset frameworks.

Market observers increasingly see tokenized Treasuries as one of the strongest use cases for blockchain technology because they combine regulated fixed-income products with programmable settlement and improved capital efficiency.

With BUIDL approaching the $3 billion mark and Avalanche emerging as one of its fastest-growing deployment networks, the data suggests institutional capital continues flowing toward tokenized government securities even as broader crypto markets experience periods of volatility. For many analysts, that trend signals that tokenization is evolving from an experimental concept into a core component of modern financial infrastructure.

Widespread Disruption Hits Phantom Users@phantom, one of the most widely used self-custody wallets in the crypto space, suffered a significant service outage on July 11, 2026, leaving thousands of users unable to access their portfolios during peak trading hours. The wallet, which first gained traction through the @Solana $SOL ecosystem before expanding to Ethereum and other networks, acknowledged the problem publicly, confirming that some users were experiencing degraded performance.

The service interruption began during peak trading hours across multiple time zones, affecting users primarily on the Solana and Ethereum networks. Many users reported seeing zero balances or frozen price data across various decentralized applications connected to their Phantom wallets.

According to analysts, the fault originated in Phantom's data-aggregation layer rather than its key storage infrastructure, leaving user funds secure on-chain while exposing weaknesses in functional reliability. In practical terms, that layer sits between the blockchain and the user interface, fetching balances, token prices, and related state to help the wallet display information and draft transactions.

Service Restored, But Questions RemainThe outage began around 13:00 UTC and appeared fixed by 16:40 UTC, hitting Phantom during peak trading hours across Solana and Ethereum. Within hours of the initial incident, Phantom confirmed that its mobile app had returned to normal operation and apologised to affected users.

Over 161 user-submitted outage reports were logged within 24 hours, with confirmed issues spanning the mobile app, Phantom backend, and browser extension.

Repeated outages risk eroding Phantom's market position as users prioritise wallets with consistent access during critical trading windows. While the swift resolution and transparent communication helped contain the fallout, the incident underlines how dependent DeFi activity has become on wallet infrastructure that can falter under pressure. Users wanting to monitor Phantom's service health going forward can check its official status page at status.phantom.com.

Sources:
Phantom Official Status Page - Incident History
StatusGator - Phantom Mobile App Outage Tracker
CryptoRank - Phantom Wallet Outage Report

APX and HASH have rocketed the most in the past day, while BEAT has dumped by over 20%.

Bitcoin’s price experienced minor volatility over the past 24 hours as the US and Iran exchanged a new wave of attacks, and the asset now struggles to remain above $64,000.

Most larger-cap alts have remained sideways over the past day, aside from ZEC and DEXE. The latter has posted a massive double-digit surge to well over $40.

More Volatility to Come Soon? The previous weekend was quite similar in terms of price action, as BTC remained sideways between $62,400 and $63,400. Its more impressive leg up followed on Monday when it jumped to $64,000 before it was violently rejected and driven south to $61,200 after Michael Saylor’s Strategy announced its biggest BTC sale to date.

Unlike the developments that took place after the previous Strategy sale, bitcoin actually rebounded almost immediately this time and rocketed to $64,600. However, it was rejected there again and dipped to $61,600 as the US and Iran broke the ceasefire with new attacks against each other in the middle of the week.

The bulls intervened once again and helped the cryptocurrency recover a lot of ground. The culmination came yesterday, when it pumped to $64,700. However, it couldn’t keep climbing and dipped to $63,600 after the latest attacks in the Middle East. It now trades close to $64,000 again, but more volatility is likely to take place later tonight or tomorrow when the legacy financial markets open for trading.

For now, bitcoin’s market cap remains at $1.280 trillion, while its dominance over the alts on CG is up to 56.8%.

BTCUSD July 12. Source: TradingView ZEC, RAIN, UNI, DEXE Up Ethereum continues its fight with the $1,800 resistance, which has been described as critical by many analysts. XRP, SOL, DOGE, XLM, ADA, and BNB are slightly in the red daily, while TRX, HYPE, and XMR have posted insignificant increases.

ZEC has added 5% of value to trade at $525, RAIN is up by 3% and sits close to $0.015, UNI has tapped $3.65 after a similar increase, while DEXE has stolen the show from the larger cap alts. It has risen by over 17% to $43. APX and HASH are the other double-digit gainers, while BEAT has plummeted by 20% after yesterday’s rise.

The total crypto market cap remains close to $2.260 trillion on CG after a minor daily retreat.

Cryptocurrency Market Overview July 12. Source: QuantifyCrypto

WSJ Survey: U.S. Recession Probability Drops to 25%, Down From 33% in April

According to survey data from The Wall Street Journal, the probability of a U.S. economic recession has dropped to 25%, down from 33% in April.

6 minutes ago

Commercial shipping traffic through the Hormuz Strait has dropped significantly.

According to reports from China Central Television (CCTV), commercial shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has dropped sharply following Iran’s announcement of the reclosure of the strait. Citing commercial shipping tracking data, Iran stated that only 11 commercial vessels passed through the Strait of Hormuz in the past 24 hours, including 8 oil tankers and 3 cargo ships.

6 minutes ago

Two hackers today spent a total of 11.71 million DAI to buy ETH.

According to Yu Jian Monitoring, two hackers purchased Ethereum today. The first hacker, who stole funds from Coinbase users, spent 7.378 million DAI to acquire 4,049.7 ETH in the early hours of today, at an average price of $1,822. The second is an address that received ETH from Tornado Cash last November; it spent 4.34 million DAI to repurchase 2,405 ETH two hours ago, at an average price of $1,804.

6 minutes ago

Polymarket's weekly revenue topped $11 million this week, hitting an all-time high.

According to Defillama data, Polymarket's weekly revenue exceeded $11 million this week, hitting an all-time high, while the protocol's cumulative revenue has surpassed $97 million.

6 minutes ago

Robinhood Chain’s DEX trading volume exceeded $877 million over the past 24 hours, ranking second among all blockchains.

According to DefiLlama data, Robinhood Chain’s 24-hour DEX trading volume hit $877.6 million, ranking second among all blockchains—only trailing Solana’s $1.133 billion, while Ethereum’s mainnet came in third with $778 million in trading volume.

6 minutes ago

The volume of ETH bridged from Ethereum Mainnet to Robinhood Chain has surged roughly tenfold in a week, surpassing $100 million.

According to Token Terminal data, over the past week, the volume of ETH bridged from Ethereum mainnet (L1) to Robinhood Chain (L2) has surged roughly 10-fold, surpassing $100 million. Robinhood Chain uses ETH as its native gas token, as noted. Token Terminal stated that if adoption of the chain continues to grow, it could become a new, significant source of demand for ETH.

6 minutes ago

A growing disparity between institutional and retail investors could set the tone for Ethereum [ETH] heading into the new week. At press time, the asset climbed just 1.1% over the past day and posted impressive double-digit gains across the past thirty days.

That sentiment may be turning, though, as rising tension in the perpetual futures market hints that retail investors are shifting bearish and selling into the weekend.

Institutional flows turn bullish Ethereum has held fairly steady around $1,800 over the past day, with institutional investor flows serving as one major contributor.

At the close of Friday’s trading session, SoSoValue reported that these investors recorded a weekly netflow of $84.4 million in net buying. That marked the first weekly net buy across the past nine weeks of trading.

Source: SosoValue During the week, only one day saw net sales, the 9th of July, when investors offloaded $52.08 million as Ethereum fell to $1,748.

Therefore, a turnaround of this kind, after such a long stretch of selling, often signals that institutional investors are recalibrating their outlook and may look to add capital to spot U.S. Ethereum ETFs. That fresh demand could help push the asset’s price higher in the near term.

Retail investors shift the other way Retail investors, meanwhile, have continued to move in the opposite direction, opposing the bullish outlook that institutions have leaned into.

Over the past 24 hours, selling volume has risen across the Ethereum perpetual market. At the time of writing, the Long/Short Ratio that tracks this had fallen to 0.946.

Source: CoinGlass Whenever the ratio drops below 1, as it has here, it points to a growing base of sellers in the market. The bigger concern, though, remains the mounting pressure building on key venues OKX and Bybit.

According to CoinGlass, whales, the high-liquidity players across these exchanges, carried an “extremely bearish” tag. For context, the two exchanges control $4.10 billion and $1.19 billion in total perpetual trading volume, respectively.

Moreover, a bearish stance from these players adds further weight to ETH and could drag the asset lower on the chart.

Short sellers step into ETH Some retail investors are already positioning bearishly, and data shows one trader has opened a massive short worth $12.43 million on ETH ahead of further losses.

For now, though, overall liquidation data suggests those short sellers could still be at risk. The market’s total liquidations continue to work against short traders, who lost $11.49 million over the period compared with $8.30 million on the long side.

If anything, the data shows the market still leans more bearish than bullish. And while retail traders are attempting to set the tone for a decline, they could just as easily bear the brunt of it.

Final Summary Institutional investors bought Ethereum for the first time in nine weeks, a sign that big money may be warming back up to the asset. Retail traders moved the opposite way, selling into the weekend and setting up a tug-of-war that could decide ETH’s next move.

The Ethereum Foundation said it used AI agents to uncover a real vulnerability, which could be the new way of improving blockchain security.

The organization behind the second-largest blockchain network revealed it had employed a coordinated army of AI agents to identify vulnerabilities in Ethereum’s critical infrastructure.

The team said one major bug was successfully discovered and patched before it could become a larger problem. But that could be just the start of this major story.

AI and Ethereum The blog post published by the Ethereum Foundation reveals that the Protocol Security team disclosed that AI-powered agents found a remotely triggerable vulnerability in libp2p’s Gossipsub networking layer. This is a core component used by the blockchain’s consensus clients to communicate with each other.

The AI agents were deployed against the protocol code, cryptographic software, and smart contracts that underpin the network. The most significant issue the team faced was not finding the bug itself, but filtering genuine issues from the overwhelming number of false positives generated by the agents.

The team published its findings only after fixing the issue, but researchers said the bigger breakthrough lies in the process of finding it rather than the bug itself. AI has become highly effective at identifying potential weaknesses, but without a human touch, the process is still far from being good enough for such major tasks.

The Foundation compared AI agents to modern fuzzing tools. They won’t replace human auditors, but can dramatically expand the search process by generating proof-of-concept exploits, tracing attack paths, and testing assumptions at a scale that would be challenging to achieve manually.

Is This the Future? The cryptocurrency community has wondered for a few years how and why the cryptocurrency industry can be linked to artificial intelligence. The EF said that one of the most important connections between the two is now through AI-assisted auditing, which can fundamentally change how blockchain security operates.

You may also like: Analyst Sees Upside for ETH Ahead of Glamsterdam Upgrade ‘Summer of Ethereum Love’ Gaining Steam, Says Lubin, But When Will ETH Price Follow?  Charles Hoskinson Says Ethereum Is Adopting Cardano Ideas Without Credit Development teams may deploy more and more AI agents to continuously probe protocol code for vulnerabilities before malicious actors discover them. This could be the opposite of numerous examples in which bad actors employed such agents to hack different blockchains.

Nevertheless, the Foundation cautioned that today’s systems remain far from autonomous as they still generate reports that are duplicates, contain false alarms, or describe attack paths that cannot actually be exploited. The team doubled down that every serious finding still requires careful human review before developers can act on it.

Tags:

WSJ Survey: U.S. Recession Probability Drops to 25%, Down From 33% in April

According to survey data from The Wall Street Journal, the probability of a U.S. economic recession has dropped to 25%, down from 33% in April.

6 minutes ago

Commercial shipping traffic through the Hormuz Strait has dropped significantly.

According to reports from China Central Television (CCTV), commercial shipping traffic through the Strait of Hormuz has dropped sharply following Iran’s announcement of the reclosure of the strait. Citing commercial shipping tracking data, Iran stated that only 11 commercial vessels passed through the Strait of Hormuz in the past 24 hours, including 8 oil tankers and 3 cargo ships.

6 minutes ago

Polymarket's weekly revenue topped $11 million this week, hitting an all-time high.

According to Defillama data, Polymarket's weekly revenue exceeded $11 million this week, hitting an all-time high, while the protocol's cumulative revenue has surpassed $97 million.

6 minutes ago

Robinhood Chain’s DEX trading volume exceeded $877 million over the past 24 hours, ranking second among all blockchains.

According to DefiLlama data, Robinhood Chain’s 24-hour DEX trading volume hit $877.6 million, ranking second among all blockchains—only trailing Solana’s $1.133 billion, while Ethereum’s mainnet came in third with $778 million in trading volume.

6 minutes ago

The volume of ETH bridged from Ethereum Mainnet to Robinhood Chain has surged roughly tenfold in a week, surpassing $100 million.

According to Token Terminal data, over the past week, the volume of ETH bridged from Ethereum mainnet (L1) to Robinhood Chain (L2) has surged roughly 10-fold, surpassing $100 million. Robinhood Chain uses ETH as its native gas token, as noted. Token Terminal stated that if adoption of the chain continues to grow, it could become a new, significant source of demand for ETH.

6 minutes ago

Binance Wallet has integrated Robinhood Chain.

According to official announcements, Binance Wallet has integrated Robinhood Chain. Users can directly access and trade tokens on Robinhood Chain via the Binance Wallet App and browser extension, delivering a more convenient multi-chain operation experience.

6 minutes ago

A new Cambridge study placed Ethereum near the lower end of energy intensity among major proof-of-stake (PoS) blockchains, although the network still used more electricity overall than most of the PoS networks studied.

The Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance estimated that Ethereum consumes about 7.87 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of electricity annually. When adjusted for market value, the network used roughly 33 kilowatt-hours (kWh) per $1 million, the second-lowest figure among the proof-of-stake networks assessed, behind BNB Chain.

Solana used the most electricity among the PoS networks studied, at about 13.48 GWh per year. Its energy intensity was roughly 283 kWh per $1 million of market value, around 8.5 times Ethereum’s, while the networks in the comparison consumed about 38 GWh combined.

The report provides one of the most detailed assessments yet of Ethereum’s post-Merge footprint, giving policymakers and investors a more current basis for comparing blockchain sustainability.

Illustration of post-Merge Ethereum consumption. Source: Cambridge

New estimates map Ethereum’s energy useCambridge measured how much electricity Ethereum nodes used at the wall across 20 combinations of the network’s main software clients. It found that a typical home setup used about 18 watts, while a more powerful workstation used roughly 153 watts.

Using Ethereum’s mix of residential and professionally hosted nodes, the researchers estimated an average power draw of about 105 watts per node. Cambridge counted around 8,522 discoverable full nodes, with 64% running in cloud or enterprise facilities and 36% on residential connections.

Cambridge said Ethereum’s remaining emissions are now driven mainly by the electricity grids supplying its nodes. The study estimated that about 56.4% of the network’s electricity mix came from renewable and nuclear sources, compared with 43.6% from fossil fuels.

Ethereum moved from proof-of-work mining to proof-of-stake validation through the Merge in September 2022. The Merge replaced miners competing with one another using energy-intensive computing equipment with validators who secure the network by staking Ether.

After the Merge, energy estimates showed that the upgrade had reduced the network’s electricity use by more than 99.9%, as the mining process used to secure the blockchain was removed. 

Magazine: Bitcoin nearing late stages of bear market: Jamie Coutts, Real Vision

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.

BNB Chain has maintained its dominant position in the stablecoin sector, recording approximately 15 million active stablecoin addresses per month. Data compiled by Binance Research and Dune indicate that this network consistently outpaces all other blockchains in terms of active stablecoin users.

BNB Chain’s expanding user baseThe percentage of active stablecoin users on BNB Chain was significantly lower in 2021. Since then, the network has experienced robust growth in its user base, reinforcing its standing as the primary blockchain for stablecoin transactions. Competing networks, including Ethereum and Solana, have also seen their user numbers climb, but none currently match the address activity registered on BNB Chain.

Stablecoins are widely used on blockchain platforms for trading, payments, transfers, and decentralized finance (DeFi) applications, serving as a critical foundation for on-chain activity. Analysts generally interpret a growing stablecoin user base as a sign of higher liquidity and stronger ecosystem participation. However, user activity tells only part of the story.

Address activity vs. capital flowsHigh address activity does not always translate into greater capital concentration. While BNB Chain leads in active users, it does not hold the largest stablecoin market capitalization or transaction value, nor does it attract the same level of institutional adoption observed on other networks.

The chain’s accessibility and low transaction costs have encouraged many users to conduct smaller-value transfers. In contrast, blockchains like Ethereum attract fewer active addresses but record substantially higher capital flows and more institutional-grade transactions.

From a market perspective, this distinction is significant. Although strong address activity points to heightened retail involvement and network utility, it should not be assumed that every user contributes equally to total economic value.

BNB price action under pressureRecent movements in the price of BNB reflect this complex situation. Data show that BNB, the native cryptocurrency of BNB Chain, is currently trading near $573 after a prolonged period of declining highs and lows. The price remains below its 50-day, 100-day, and 200-day moving averages, signaling that the broader downward trend is still in effect.

Although the Relative Strength Index (RSI) has rebounded toward the neutral 50 mark—suggesting that selling pressure is easing—buyers have not yet provided sufficient momentum for a meaningful breakout. Immediate resistance for BNB hovers at the 50-day EMA, close to $579, with stronger barriers marked by the 100-day and 200-day averages.

Despite these technical headwinds, BNB Chain’s network continues to demonstrate leadership in user activity within the stablecoin market.

Mini dictionary: BNB Chain is a decentralized, public blockchain platform developed by Binance, one of the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchanges. The network supports high-throughput applications and is widely used for trading, DeFi, and digital asset transfers, with a focus on low fees and scalability.

BlockchainMonthly Active Stablecoin AddressesMain AdvantagesBNB Chain15 millionLow fees, high retail activityEthereumLower than BNB ChainHigh capital flows, institutional adoptionSolanaLower than BNB ChainFast transactions, growing user baseWhile BNB Chain maintains its lead in user activity, transaction values and institutional involvement often favor other networks like Ethereum. This nuanced dynamic influences both ecosystem participation and cryptocurrency price behavior.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

Two hackers today spent a total of 11.71 million DAI to buy ETH.

According to Yu Jian Monitoring, two hackers purchased Ethereum today. The first hacker, who stole funds from Coinbase users, spent 7.378 million DAI to acquire 4,049.7 ETH in the early hours of today, at an average price of $1,822. The second is an address that received ETH from Tornado Cash last November; it spent 4.34 million DAI to repurchase 2,405 ETH two hours ago, at an average price of $1,804.

1 minutes ago

Polymarket's weekly revenue topped $11 million this week, hitting an all-time high.

According to Defillama data, Polymarket's weekly revenue exceeded $11 million this week, hitting an all-time high, while the protocol's cumulative revenue has surpassed $97 million.

1 minutes ago

The volume of ETH bridged from Ethereum Mainnet to Robinhood Chain has surged roughly tenfold in a week, surpassing $100 million.

According to Token Terminal data, over the past week, the volume of ETH bridged from Ethereum mainnet (L1) to Robinhood Chain (L2) has surged roughly 10-fold, surpassing $100 million. Robinhood Chain uses ETH as its native gas token, as noted. Token Terminal stated that if adoption of the chain continues to grow, it could become a new, significant source of demand for ETH.

1 minutes ago

Binance Wallet has integrated Robinhood Chain.

According to official announcements, Binance Wallet has integrated Robinhood Chain. Users can directly access and trade tokens on Robinhood Chain via the Binance Wallet App and browser extension, delivering a more convenient multi-chain operation experience.

1 minutes ago

Institutions: HBM4 prices could rise to $4–5 per thousand bits in the second half of this year.

DigiTimes reports that fueled by surging AI demand and structural production capacity bottlenecks, the price of next-generation HBM4 may jump from $2 per kilobit to $4–5 or higher in the second half of 2026. This is partly due to the extreme complexity of HBM4 manufacturing: its production cycle lasts four to six months, and initial yields are notably low. Additionally, HBM production consumes approximately three times the wafer capacity of standard DDR5 DRAM, severely restricting the total memory volume manufacturers can output at existing facilities. (Jinshi)

1 minutes ago

The deadline for Bitcoin data limit proposal BIP-110 is approaching, with miner support for the proposal remaining near zero.

Bitcoin’s BIP-110 proposal is approaching its early August deadline, yet miner support for the measure remains below 1%, signaling significant resistance to the initiative. Officially titled “Temporary Soft Fork for Reducing Data”, BIP-110’s core controversy centers on restricting non-financial data on the Bitcoin blockchain. The proposal aims to cap OP_RETURN data capacity within a year, ban most arbitrary data exceeding 256 bytes from being written to the chain, and limit certain script formats primarily used for data storage. Supporters argue the plan would refocus the Bitcoin network on its payment function and reduce node operational burdens; opponents counter that it would escalate policy disputes over block space usage into consensus rule changes, effectively determining which transactions qualify as “acceptable”. Strategy founder Michael Saylor and Blockstream co-founder Adam Back have both publicly opposed BIP-110. Saylor remarked, “There are 110 things more dangerous than junk data”, adding that the proposal would “turn the junk data debate into a consensus change, invalidating some currently valid transactions that pay fees”. Back stated that if supporters cannot accept the status quo, they may choose to fork, but “Bitcoin will not join”. Data shows BIP-110 uses a user-activated soft fork mechanism with a 55% miner signaling threshold, though miner signaling rates have never topped roughly 1% to date, with the current cycle sitting at 0 and no major mining pools backing the measure. The share of nodes running BIP-110 software also remains in the single digits, primarily from Bitcoin Knots users. The proposal’s current signaling cycle will end around block height 959,615, with a voluntary lock-in period expected in early August and activation targeted for around September. If broad support is still absent by then, the initiative could result in a minority of nodes forming a separate chain.

1 minutes ago

Where Is Ethereum Node Activity Concentrated? Nearly a third of Ethereum node activity is hosted in the United States, while roughly 39% sits across the European Union excluding the UK, according to new research from the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance.

The findings show that Ethereum’s infrastructure remains heavily Western-centric, even if it is not dominated by one country. That distinction matters for a network built around geographic and operational resilience. A broad spread across several advanced markets reduces the risk of single-country dependence, but it does not remove exposure to common legal systems, cloud providers, and hosting policies.

Alexander Neumuller, research lead at the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance, described the distribution as healthy as a personal view rather than a formal finding, while also saying it is an area the Ethereum community should continue to monitor.

“Geographical distribution is something desirable for a network,” Neumuller said.

The issue is not only where nodes are located. Ethereum also depends on the diversity of the infrastructure running those nodes. If too much activity clusters around the same providers, the network can face correlated outages, policy shocks, or operational failures that affect many participants at the same time.

Why Does The One-Third Validator Threshold Matter? Ethereum does not need half of its validators to fail for the network to face a live disruption. If more than a third of validators go offline at once, checkpoints stop finalizing. That makes the one-third threshold a key operational risk level for Ethereum’s proof-of-stake design.

The research flagged concentration around 3 hosting providers: Hetzner, AWS, and OVH. That clustering matters because hosting providers can become points of shared vulnerability. An outage, terms-of-service dispute, regulatory order, or enforcement action affecting a major provider could have wider consequences than an isolated node failure.

Hetzner’s terms of service had at one point barred running blockchain nodes, though Neumuller said that may have changed. The broader point remains: Ethereum’s decentralization is not only about validator counts. It also depends on where those validators connect, what infrastructure supports them, and how exposed that infrastructure is to common failure modes.

Neumuller also cautioned that nodes and validators do not map one-to-one. No one knows precisely how many validators operate behind any single node. That uncertainty makes infrastructure concentration harder to measure and harder to manage.

Investor Takeaway Ethereum’s geographic spread looks healthier than a single-country concentration problem, but hosting-provider clustering remains a live operational risk. The key threshold is not 50% of validators going offline; it is more than one-third failing at once, which would stop checkpoints from finalizing.

Why Is Node Location Also A Legal Question? Ethereum’s node geography carries legal and regulatory weight. In 2022, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission argued that it had jurisdiction over Ethereum because most nodes were hosted in the United States, meaning transactions would fall under U.S. securities law.

That argument shows why node distribution can become more than a technical metric. If a regulator can point to infrastructure concentration inside its borders, it may try to claim stronger authority over activity on a supposedly global network. For Ethereum, a wider distribution across regions can help reduce the force of that argument, but it does not eliminate jurisdictional risk.

The same concern applies to client software concentration. A network can appear geographically distributed while still depending heavily on a small number of dominant software clients. If one dominant client contains a serious bug, the problem can propagate across the network quickly. The Cambridge report includes distribution data for both consensus and execution clients, highlighting that decentralization needs to be measured across several layers at once.

For exchanges, custodians, staking providers, and institutional users, these infrastructure questions are becoming part of operational due diligence. Ethereum’s technical performance is only one side of the risk profile. Legal exposure, hosting concentration, client diversity, and validator resilience all affect how institutions assess the network.

How Did Ethereum’s Energy Profile Change After The Merge? The report, titled “Ethereum After the Merge,” also revisits Ethereum’s energy consumption using updated methodology. The new estimate incorporates empirical data on how nodes are split between residential and commercial hosting, rather than relying only on theoretical assumptions.

Ethereum now consumes about 7.9 gigawatt-hours annually, equal to roughly 1 megawatt of continuous power or about 2,000 UK households. That marks a drop of about 99.98% compared with pre-merge levels, reflecting the shift from proof-of-work mining to proof-of-stake validation.

The research also estimated that sustainable power use across the network now exceeds 56%, compared with a global average of 43%. That makes Ethereum’s post-merge energy profile materially different from its former proof-of-work model and from networks that still rely on energy-intensive mining.

Neumuller said offsetting Ethereum’s total annual emissions with high-quality nature-based removal credits would cost between £25,000 and £55,000, or about $33,500 to $73,800. He described that figure as the finding that surprised him most.

Investor Takeaway Ethereum’s energy risk has fallen sharply since the merge, but decentralization risk has not disappeared. Investors should separate the network’s improved environmental profile from its remaining infrastructure questions around hosting, validators, clients, and jurisdiction.

What Does This Mean For Ethereum’s Institutional Case? The findings strengthen part of Ethereum’s institutional narrative while keeping pressure on its decentralization claims. The energy data gives asset managers, custodians, and corporate users a cleaner environmental argument than Ethereum had before the merge. The node and hosting data, however, show that operational resilience remains an area requiring continued attention.

That split is important. Ethereum can be far less energy intensive while still facing concentration risks. Its long-term institutional adoption will depend not only on lower emissions, but also on whether the network can maintain credible geographic, software, and infrastructure diversity as more value moves onto the chain.

For now, the research presents Ethereum as a network with a significantly improved energy footprint and a decentralization profile that is broad but not risk-free. The next test is whether node operators, staking providers, and infrastructure firms can reduce correlated exposure before a provider-level outage, legal challenge, or software failure turns a theoretical risk into a live network event.

Ethereum has undergone significant change over time, particularly since The Merge.The upgrade replaced the energy-intensive Proof-of-Work (PoW) system with Proof-of-Stake (PoS).

With this change, Ethereum currently uses about 8,522 physical nodes, many of which house multiple validators, and nearly 894,000 validators.

Source: CCAF Report As a result, Ethereum now consumes only 7.87 GWh of electricity annually, or about 0.90 MW of continuous power. That is less than half the British Museum’s annual electricity consumption.

Before The Merge, the network required roughly 2.4 GW of continuous power.

Since then, Ethereum’s electricity consumption has fallen by more than 99.9%, marking one of the largest energy reductions by a major blockchain.

Is Ethereum truly decentralized? Additionally, the Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance (CCAF) report highlighted that Ethereum’s infrastructure is decentralized despite being geographically concentrated. Of all nodes, roughly 62% are hosted by the United States (31%), Germany (16%), Finland (8%), and France (6%). 

Source: CCAF Report Another significant discovery is that 56.4% of the electricity used to power Ethereum originates from sustainable sources, such as 17% nuclear energy and 39.4% renewable energy.

Given the electricity mix of the main host nations, natural gas continues to be the largest fossil fuel source at 27.7%. The fact that Ethereum’s sustainable energy share is higher overall than the global average of about 43% shows how much the network depends on cleaner electrical grids.

What does Ethereum’s carbon footprint mean for the network?  At the same time, Ethereum’s carbon footprint has dramatically decreased in tandem with its dramatic decrease in electricity consumption. As per the report, the network has reduced its emissions by 99.98% from its final Proof-of-Work era to an estimated 2.37 kilotonnes of CO₂ equivalent (ktCO₂e) per year. 

Source: CCAF Report To put this into perspective, Ethereum’s yearly emissions are equivalent to the carbon footprint of roughly 900 households in the UK. 

Interestingly, future developments, like stateless verification, may further minimize the need for energy and hardware, reducing Ethereum’s carbon footprint while maintaining its decentralization and security.

What’s ahead?  This further coincided with Ethereum’s development that has entered a new phase as researchers unveiled “Lean Ethereum,” a multi-year overhaul aimed at the network’s long-term evolution. The plan intends to replace the Ethereum protocol’s cores over a period of roughly three to four years, as opposed to a single upgrade.

While these developments were happening, Ethereum’s price surged by 1.42% in the previous day and was now trading at $1,798.71 at press time. The MACD and RSI indicators also showed that bulls are more aggressive than they were previously. However, ETH needs to surpass the $1.8k mark in order for the bulls to continue. 

Source: Trading View Final Summary Ethereum roughly has 62% of all nodes hosted by the United States, followed by Germany, Finland, and France. The network has reduced its emissions to an estimated 2.37 kilotonnes of CO₂ equivalent (ktCO₂e) per year.

Every blockchain transaction begins its life in the mempool, a public waiting area where unconfirmed transactions sit until a block builder decides to include them. Many users assume the network processes transactions on a first-come, first-served basis, yet modern block builders apply far more sophisticated methods that weigh economic value above arrival time.

Specialized block builders on networks like Ethereum compete to assemble the most valuable block possible by selecting and ordering transactions that maximize revenue while staying within protocol rules. Understanding how this competition works explains why some transactions confirm within seconds while others linger, and why transaction fees fluctuate during busy periods on the network.

Key Takeaways Block builders pull transactions from the mempool and private order flow to assemble candidate blocks that fit within each block’s gas limit. Higher priority fees generally improve a transaction’s chance of quick inclusion because they increase the reward the proposing validator collects. Transaction ordering shapes block value as heavily as transaction selection, since execution sequence changes on-chain outcomes. MEV opportunities such as arbitrage and liquidations strongly influence how builders arrange transactions within a block. Proposer-Builder Separation lets specialized builders compete on bids while validators propose the highest-value valid block. How the Mempool Feeds a Block Builder’s Selection Process When a user broadcasts a transaction, it enters the mempool and joins thousands of other pending transactions waiting for a chance at inclusion. Block builders monitor this pool continuously, scanning for valid transactions they can package into a profitable block.

Builders cannot include everything they see because each block carries a fixed gas limit that caps how much computational work it can hold. They evaluate incoming transactions against factors such as offered fees, execution requirements, and overall profitability before assembling a candidate block that fits within that ceiling.

Public mempools supply most of the transactions builders work with, though a growing share now arrives through private order flow routed directly from wallets, decentralized applications, and searchers who want to shield their activity from front-running. This private flow gives builders access to opportunities that never surface on the open network, which shapes both the composition and the value of the blocks they produce.

Fee Prioritization Drives Most of a Builder’s Selection Decisions A block builder works toward one central objective, extracting the maximum economic value from every block it constructs. Transactions that attach higher priority fees usually win inclusion ahead of cheaper ones because they hand the proposing validator a larger reward. Under Ethereum’s fee market, the protocol burns the base fee and lets builders capture the priority fees along with any additional value they generate through ordering, which explains why the tip attached to a transaction carries so much weight in the selection process.

Builders also confirm that every selected transaction satisfies protocol requirements, including valid signatures, sufficient account balances, correct nonces, and appropriate gas limits. Any transaction that fails these checks gets excluded regardless of the fee attached to it, since an invalid entry would waste block space and forfeit the reward it promised.

As congestion builds across the network, competition for limited block space intensifies and pushes users to raise their priority fees in pursuit of faster confirmation. This bidding dynamic accounts for much of the fee volatility traders encounter during market surges, NFT mints, and other moments of concentrated demand.

Transaction Ordering and MEV Shape How Builders Construct Blocks Selecting transactions represents only half of a builder’s job, since the sequence in which those transactions execute carries just as much weight as the decision to include them. Blockchain transactions alter the network’s state as they run, so a different ordering can produce a different set of outcomes and a different total value. Builders arrange their chosen transactions deliberately to draw the highest possible return from each block they assemble.

Maximal Extractable Value stands out as one of the strongest forces shaping this arrangement. Searchers scan the network for profitable openings such as decentralized exchange arbitrage, lending-protocol liquidations, and other market inefficiencies, then submit bundled transactions to builders who weave those bundles into the wider block. MEV introduces a hidden layer of cost and opportunity that affects both traders and protocols, and it has become a defining feature of how Ethereum blocks come together.

MEV improves market efficiency in some situations, yet it has also drawn scrutiny over front-running, sandwich attacks, and transaction censorship. These concerns have pushed researchers toward fairer ordering mechanisms that aim to protect ordinary users without stripping builders of the incentives that keep them competing.

Proposer-Builder Separation Improves Efficiency Across Ethereum Ethereum’s ecosystem leans increasingly on Proposer-Builder Separation, a design that hands block construction and block proposal to different participants. Validators often receive finished block proposals from competing builders instead of assembling blocks themselves. Each builder submits a bid that reflects the value of its proposed block, and the validator selects the highest-paying valid block before proposing it to the network, which lets builders pour resources into sophisticated optimization while validators earn stronger rewards without shouldering the complexity of construction.

This separation has sharpened competition and lifted efficiency, though it has also concentrated influence among a small set of dominant builders. Researchers and core developers continue to explore ways to curb that centralization, and upgrades tied to Proposer-Builder Separation aim to push more of this process into the protocol itself over the coming years.

Conclusion Block builders occupy a central position in the process that determines which transactions join the blockchain and in what order they execute. They monitor mempool activity continuously, prioritize transactions according to economic incentives, optimize ordering to raise block value, and assemble blocks that comply with protocol rules. Proposer-Builder Separation, private order flow, and MEV extraction have each reshaped how this process works, and ongoing research into fairer ordering and reduced builder centralization continues to influence its direction.

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) 1. What is a block builder?

A block builder is a specialized participant that selects, orders, and packages transactions into a candidate block for a validator to propose to the network.

2. Why don’t builders process transactions in the order they arrive?

Builders prioritize the transactions that maximize a block’s total value, which makes fee levels and ordering more decisive than arrival time.

3. What is the mempool?

The mempool is a temporary holding area where valid but unconfirmed transactions wait before a builder includes them in a block.

4. How does MEV affect transaction selection?

MEV encourages builders to reorder and combine transactions so they can capture extra profit from arbitrage, liquidations, and similar opportunities.

5. Does paying a higher fee guarantee inclusion?

Paying more improves the odds of inclusion, though builders still need every transaction to satisfy protocol rules and still optimize the block’s overall value, so a high fee on its own offers no guarantee.

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has sparked renewed debate within the technology community after suggesting that a universal kill switch should be implemented for all artificial intelligence applications. His proposal arrives amid ongoing disagreements about the anticipated pace and implications of AI development, particularly concerning its impact on society and the workforce.

Growing divisions among AI expertsButerin’s recent statements on X outlined a divide between those who expect the emergence of “superintelligence” by 2040—often referred to as the “AI 2040” scenario—and skeptics who question the urgency of such concerns. Supporters of the AI 2040 outlook argue that exceptional AI capabilities could develop within the next two decades unless decisive action is taken. Meanwhile, critics contend that this view underestimates humanity’s ability to coordinate and manage risks, while also warning that certain regulatory proposals could restrict freedom without addressing the real dangers.

Acknowledging both perspectives, Buterin admitted uncertainty about which scenario is likely. He wrote that if current-day AI remains similar to existing technologies, he would agree with the skeptics, but that faster-than-expected advances would bring him closer to the AI 2040 camp.

Buterin indicated, “If I was confident that superintelligence is coming in 2030 by default, I would be closer to the AI 2040 camp … But I am open to slowing or pausing AI development if the risks become significant.”

His remarks attracted responses from notable figures, including Meta’s chief AI scientist Yann LeCun, author Daniel Jeffries, and policy analyst Adam Thierer.

The debate over AI safety and governanceLeCun argued that AI safety represents an engineering problem that can be addressed through iterative design, much like how aviation safety progressed over decades. He expressed skepticism toward fears of near-term superintelligence and pointed out that current large language models function as limited “autocomplete machines.”

AI commentator Harry Hawk sided with LeCun, suggesting that, just as aircraft have become safer, future AI systems will be designed for reliability. He pushed back against the belief that advanced AI will eliminate all human jobs.

Buterin countered by highlighting the possibility of Artificial Superintelligence (ASI)—an AI so powerful it could accomplish virtually any task without human intervention. The discussion also engaged AI researcher Yann LeCun, policy analyst Adam Thierer, and others who criticized or supported various ideas on AI regulation and openness.

Part of the debate was prompted by Daniel Kokotajlo’s AI Futures Project, which released the “AI 2040: Plan A” report. The report advocates for collaboration between the United States and China to slow development toward superintelligence, including provisions for open sharing of research and “mutually assured compute destruction.”

Richard Ngo, an AI researcher, claimed the report exaggerates the speed with which powerful AI systems could emerge and does not address the political challenges such technology may create within countries.

Mini dictionary: Artificial Superintelligence (ASI), a hypothetical form of AI that surpasses human intelligence across all domains and could autonomously perform any conceivable task.

ViewpointKey ArgumentMain ProponentAI 2040 ScenarioSuperintelligent AI may emerge by 2040. Strong regulation needed.Daniel Kokotajlo (AI Futures Project), Supported by Buterin (cautiously)Skeptics/CriticsHumanity can control AI risks; focus on freedom and coordination.LeCun, Thierer, JeffriesOpen source as a safeguard?Open source models have become central to the debate. LeCun argued that the true danger lies in the concentration of AI development within a handful of powerful companies, and stated that open source foundation models are crucial for “AI sovereignty.”

LeCun noted, “The only solution to AI sovereignty is open source foundation models,” emphasizing the importance of broad accessibility in AI technology.

Author Daniel Jeffries agreed, warning that efforts by what he called “safetyists and hawks” to restrict open source could stifle innovation. Adam Thierer, a senior fellow at the R Street Institute and key contributor to the US House AI Task Force, labeled the current US legislative process on AI review as disorganized and secretive. He cautioned that increased regulation could harm open source AI, instead supporting “permissionless innovation.”

Thierer recommends using existing laws against harmful applications, creating test zones, mandating openness for certain models, and increasing funding for research, instead of imposing heavy new restrictions.

Mini dictionary: The R Street Institute is a Washington, DC-based think tank that focuses on free markets and limited, effective government, often contributing research and analysis on technology policy issues including AI governance.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

The Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance (CCAF) reports that Ethereum’s annual energy consumption and carbon emissions have declined by over 99.9% following The Merge in 2022, marking a significant shift in the network’s environmental profile.

Ethereum’s energy demand falls after moving to Proof-of-StakeAccording to the latest CCAF research, Ethereum now consumes around 7.87 gigawatt-hours (GWh) of electricity per year. This represents a dramatic drop from the estimated 8.88 terawatt-hours (TWh) annually prior to The Merge, when Ethereum operated on a Proof-of-Work (PoW) validation system.

The Merge was Ethereum’s transition from the energy-intensive PoW framework, where miners competed using computational power, to Proof-of-Stake (PoS), which relies on validators securing the network by staking ETH. With PoS, energy-hungry mining rigs were eliminated in favor of more sustainable and efficient mechanisms for maintaining network integrity. The report estimates Ethereum’s current continuous power draw at 0.90 megawatts, compared to 2.4 gigawatts immediately before the switch.

CCAF also says Ethereum’s annual greenhouse gas emissions have dropped to about 2.37 kilotonnes of CO₂ equivalent (ktCO₂e), reflecting a near-total decline from previous levels.

To provide further context, CCAF compared Ethereum’s electricity usage to that of the British Museum, which consumes about 16.18 GWh per year. Ethereum’s current figure is less than half of that, illustrating how significantly the network’s power consumption has fallen.

The Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance assessed Ethereum’s new energy profile, noting its “electricity consumption and carbon emissions have fallen by more than 99% since it migrated to Proof-of-Stake, transforming its environmental footprint to a level well below that of small public institutions.”

MetricBefore The Merge (PoW)After The Merge (PoS)Annual electricity use8.88 TWh7.87 GWhContinuous power demand2.4 GW0.90 MWCO₂ emissionsApprox. 10,000 ktCO₂e2.37 ktCO₂eInfrastructure and node distribution dataThe CCAF report is based on a comprehensive audit of about 8,522 Ethereum nodes distributed globally. This analysis focuses on actual hardware and internet hosting, rather than theoretical assumptions.

Ethereum nodes act as data processors, maintaining the ledger’s integrity and sharing updates. These differ from the network’s roughly 894,000 validators, who secure Ethereum by locking up staked ETH and confirming transactions.

The study determined that the average energy use per node is approximately 105 watts. For residential setups, the median is 18 watts. Energy requirements increase with larger and enterprise-level deployments.

Mini dictionary: Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance (CCAF), an academic research institute at Cambridge Judge Business School focusing on global financial technology, digital assets, and alternative finance trends.

Carbon intensity depends on grid and hostingThe United States currently hosts 31% of Ethereum’s full nodes, followed by Germany with 16%, Finland with 8%, and France with 6%. Together, these four countries account for about 62% of the network’s full nodes.

CCAF estimates that 36% of nodes run on residential hardware, while the remaining 64% are hosted in cloud or enterprise data centers. In particular, Hetzner, Amazon Web Services, and OVH collectively account for approximately 40% of all node hosting.

The study shows that 56.4% of Ethereum’s electricity is sourced from sustainable energy, with 39.4% coming from renewables and 17.0% from nuclear power. The largest single contributor remains natural gas at 27.7%.

According to the report, the main factor influencing Ethereum’s carbon footprint now is the carbon intensity of local power grids serving the nodes. This means network location has become more important than the underlying consensus protocol for determining environmental impact.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

U.S. spot Ethereum exchange-traded funds (ETFs) recorded a net inflow of $18.4 million on July 10, as institutional appetite for the asset appears to be gaining momentum after weeks of varied activity.

BlackRock leads inflowsThe majority of the day’s inflows came from BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager. BlackRock clients contributed $16.2 million out of the total, accounting for more than 90% of the Ethereum purchased through these ETF products. Other issuers saw relatively minor activity by comparison.

Recent data covers only primary market creations, which means it tracks funds moving in and out of ETFs rather than secondary market trading volumes on exchanges.

Mini dictionary: BlackRock, based in New York, is a global asset management company recognized for its influence in traditional and alternative asset classes, including cryptocurrency ETFs.

ETF IssuerNet Inflow (July 10)BlackRock$16.2 millionOther Issuers$2.2 millionTotal$18.4 millionInstitutional exposure to EthereumSpot Ethereum ETFs offer institutional investors direct exposure to the underlying asset rather than derivatives. This structure links traditional capital markets to the Ethereum blockchain and may affect the wider financial ecosystem, especially asset management firms, exchanges, and custodians.

Continued inflows into spot Ethereum ETFs signal ongoing validation from institutional investors, which could drive issuers to expand product offerings and further integrate crypto assets into mainstream portfolios.

Over the past months, the pattern of flows has fluctuated. While the recent surge may build confidence for new product launches, inconsistent demand could return flow trends to a neutral position.

Market implications and upcoming developmentsFor developers and participants in the crypto ecosystem, sustained inflows from institutions can help deepen market liquidity and potentially reduce volatility. However, analysts caution that these effects are expected to play out gradually over time rather than deliver immediate change.

The months ahead may bring further shifts as upcoming Ethereum network upgrades, growth in Layer-2 solutions, and quarterly ETF portfolio rebalancing shape investor strategies. Should the upward demand persist, issuers are likely to explore education initiatives and product wrappers tailored to registered investment advisors (RIAs).

Institutional inflows to spot Ethereum ETFs could indirectly support long-term market stability, although their full impact may not be felt immediately.

If investor interest wanes, ETF flows could become neutral again, interrupting the recent positive trend.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

Table of contents

The numbers were positive but offered no fireworks. On July 10, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs pulled in $90.44 million in net new capital while their Ethereum counterparts added a modest $18.43 million, according to the original report citing SoSoValue data. The flows arrived during a stretch when crypto markets have drifted sideways, and institutional allocators appear to be favoring incremental exposure over bold positioning.

The subdued pace is less about disinterest and more about the regulatory fog hanging over Washington. With a landmark crypto bill facing last‑minute resistance from traditional banking interests, some fund managers are reluctant to increase digital asset weightings until the Senate votes. The fight over the biggest crypto bill in US history has turned into a wire‑to‑wire drama, and even a single large ETF order can be influenced by the perceived odds of tighter or looser rules.

Ethereum’s $18.43 million inflow, while small in absolute terms, is still a signal. It shows that accredited investors and fund managers are not pulling back from ETH exposure entirely, even as fee competition among ETF issuers intensifies. The network itself continues to attract builders: recent metrics on developer engagement highlight that Ethereum, BNB Chain, and Polygon dominate the rankings, with Solana and Arbitrum close behind. Ethereum’s developer ecosystem remains robust, which adds a layer of conviction for longer‑term ETF holders who track fundamentals rather than daily price action.

A snapshot, not a trend Single‑day flow data can be noisy. July 10’s Bitcoin ETF inflow was decent but well below the hundreds of millions that characterized earlier buying waves. That could be a mid‑summer lull, or it could be a reflection of positioning ahead of second‑quarter corporate earnings and central bank commentary. What’s clearer is that the ETF complex has matured: volume is no longer driven by a handful of early‑mover whales but by a broader distribution of institutional and quasi‑institutional participants. The steady drip of inflows contrasts with the boom‑and‑bust cycles that defined crypto’s previous ETF attempts in other jurisdictions.

Where institutional interest is deepening Separately, the institutional pipeline is not limited to ETFs. Tokenization of real‑world assets has crossed $20 billion on‑chain, and deals like Bullish’s $4.2 billion acquisition of Equiniti signal that large financial players are embedding blockchain into their core infrastructure. The tokenization of real-world assets is no longer a proof‑of‑concept; it is a parallel track of adoption that will eventually pull ETF demand along with it, especially as more familiar assets like Treasuries settle on‑chain.

What remains uncertain The direction of net flows over the next two weeks will depend heavily on whether the Senate passes the crypto bill and what the Fed signals about rate cuts. A rejection or a delay could push daily flows back toward breakeven or negative territory, simply because compliance desks will stay in neutral. The Ethereum ETF category is particularly sensitive: its lower baseline means that even a $20 million swing can look dramatic, but the structural story is about whether issuers can convince RIAs and pension consultants that ether is a distinct asset class rather than an appendage to bitcoin.

For now, the market is in a holding pattern. The inflows are real but restrained, and that is entirely consistent with an institutional crowd that wants more clarity before committing larger slices of a portfolio. The next couple of data points, set against the legislative calendar, will reveal whether this is a temporary pause or the new steady state.

AUTHOR

Kester is an experienced freelance content writer. His focus is primarily on blockchain technology and cryptocurrency. One might even refer to him as a "blockchain enthusiast." He has been following advancements in the crypto and blockchain area for several years, researching and writing his insights in the media. In addition to being a skilled content writer, Mushumir is also knowledgeable in SEO and digital marketing. He aspires to succeed as a content creator in the digital realm, dealing with customers in the finance and tech industries to generate traffic through engaging taglines and content. Mushumir enjoys traveling, reading, and playing cricket when he is not writing. He now works as a news and article writer for BlockchainReporter.

Ethereum’s Market Value to Realized Value (MVRV) Ratio fell below the critical 0.8 threshold, placing the altcoin in a historically rare accumulation zone. 

The on-chain metric suggested ETH traded below its realized value, a condition that previously appeared during major market bottoms. 

According to the data, similar readings emerged in December 2018, March 2020, and June 2022 before Ethereum established cycle lows. That historical context renewed attention among long-term investors despite the absence of an immediate bullish catalyst. 

However, the metric reflected valuation rather than future price direction. Instead, it suggested seller exhaustion had intensified after months of weakness.

As a result, Ethereum entered another period where long-term value investors historically became active, while broader market participants continued weighing macroeconomic uncertainty against improving blockchain fundamentals.

Inflows outweighed withdrawals despite recovery Spot flow data showed Ethereum recorded Exchange Netflows of approximately $62.64 million during the latest session. That reading indicated more ETH entered exchanges than left them, even as price stabilized above recent lows. 

Such activity often reflected investors preparing assets for trading rather than demonstrating outright accumulation through exchange withdrawals. 

However, the inflow remained relatively modest compared with larger historical spikes visible on the chart, suggesting exchange activity had not reached panic levels. 

Meanwhile, Ethereum maintained its recovery without triggering aggressive selling pressure across spot markets. 

The combination revealed a market that continued supplying exchanges with liquidity while buyers absorbed available inventory. 

That balance prevented excessive downside pressure, although it also suggested traders remained willing to reposition holdings instead of committing entirely to long-term storage.

Source: CoinGlass Leveraged traders increased their exposure despite softer funding Derivatives activity strengthened as market participation expanded across perpetual futures. 

Open Interest climbed 3.25% to $11.1092 billion, showing traders increased outstanding positions while Ethereum stabilized near current levels. 

Funding Rates remained positive at 0.00699, although the metric declined 25.41% over the previous 24 hours. The combination indicated long traders still paid a premium to maintain positions, but bullish conviction eased compared with the prior session.

Instead of unwinding exposure, participants continued adding contracts while accepting a lower funding environment. 

The derivatives market, therefore, reflected measured optimism rather than aggressive speculation. 

Source: CryptoQuant Can Ethereum hold above reclaimed support? Ethereum [ETH] reclaimed the $1,800 region after recovering sharply from its early June low near $1,560. 

Buyers repeatedly defended higher lows throughout July, allowing the price to consolidate just beneath the next resistance around $2,000. 

The Relative Strength Index also recovered to 57.16, while its moving average stood at 49.84, confirming that buying strength improved after emerging from deeply oversold territory. 

Even so, RSI remained below overbought conditions, leaving room for either continued stabilization or renewed consolidation. 

Price also continued trading below the major $2,000 resistance that previously acted as support before June’s decline. 

If buyers maintain control above $1,800, Ethereum would continue preserving its improving technical structure. 

However, failure to defend that level would likely return focus to the lower support around $1,564, where buyers previously regained control.

Source: TradingView What does it all mean? To sum up, Ethereum presented conflicting signals rather than a one-sided narrative.

The historically low MVRV ratio strengthened the long-term valuation case, while rising Open Interest reflected sustained trader participation.

However, exchange inflows showed more ETH returned to trading venues instead of leaving them for long-term holding. 

The combination suggests confidence improved, yet caution still shaped market positioning as investors balanced attractive valuation against lingering uncertainty.

Final Summary Ethereum looked historically undervalued, but Exchange Netflows suggested investors still preferred flexibility over long-term conviction. ETH’s setup improved, but holding above $1,800 could decide whether buyers keep control.

The Ethereum Foundation’s Protocol Security team just made something clear: AI isn’t just a research toy anymore. In experiments published July 9, 2026, the team confirmed that coordinated AI agents identified genuine vulnerabilities in Ethereum’s core protocol code, including a bug serious enough to earn its own CVE designation.

The bug that could have taken validators offline The confirmed vulnerability lived inside libp2p’s gossipsub implementation, which is part of the networking layer Ethereum nodes use to communicate with each other. The specific issue was a remotely triggerable panic, meaning an attacker could send a specially crafted message that caused a validator node to crash outright. The bug was assigned CVE-2026-34219 and was fixed before it could be exploited in the wild.

Advertisement

What the AI actually did, and where it fell short The experiment used coordinated AI agents to scan critical components of the Ethereum protocol, including systems software and cryptographic code. The agents were capable of surfacing potential vulnerabilities at a pace that would be difficult for human auditors to match on their own.

A significant portion of the AI’s outputs turned out to be false positives, things like non-reproducible crashes and issues that only appeared in debug builds and would never surface in production. Each of those still required a human auditor to examine, test, and discard. The actual time spent confirming genuine vulnerabilities was far smaller than the time spent sorting through junk.

The Foundation concluded that reproducible proof-of-concept artifacts are essential for any AI-assisted audit to be useful. Without a working demonstration that a bug actually does what the AI claims, the finding is just a hypothesis. The broader takeaway from the experiments is that structured validation pipelines matter as much as the AI models themselves.

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

An attacker has stolen over $5 million from the Hedera network in a significant exploit on July 11, with the majority of the stolen assets already transferred to the Ethereum blockchain, according to multiple blockchain analysts.

Exploit details and fund movementsOnchain analyst Specter was among the first to report the ongoing attack, promptly flagging suspicious activity involving large sums moved from Hedera. Initial tallies from Specter estimated losses at $3.7 million, which soon increased to over $5 million as further transactions were tracked over several hours.

Specter indicated that the attacker bridged the funds to Ethereum via LayerZero, a protocol that enables interoperability between blockchain networks. The perpetrator then converted Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) into Ether (ETH) after the funds arrived on Ethereum.

Blockchain security firm PeckShieldAlert later confirmed the incident, revealing that $5.25 million had already been moved from Hedera to Ethereum. Investigators traced the initial capital to 1 ETH withdrawn from Tornado Cash, a crypto mixing protocol. At the time of reporting, the attacker’s Ethereum wallet held approximately 2,360 ETH, valued at roughly $4.25 million, alongside 15.58 WBTC, worth about $1 million.

Onchain observer @0xNox also noted more than $4 million was bridged to Ethereum through LayerZero, with funds being cycled through WBTC-to-ETH swaps.

Mini dictionary: LayerZero is an interoperability protocol designed to allow seamless transfers of assets and data across multiple blockchain networks, linking ecosystems such as Ethereum and non-EVM chains.

AssetAmountValue (approximate)ETH2,360$4.25 millionWBTC15.58$1 millionPeckShieldAlert confirmed that $5.25 million was transferred from Hedera Mainnet to Ethereum, with the attacker’s wallet containing both ETH and WBTC after the swap process.

Transparency concerns on HederaHedera, founded by Dr. Leemon Baird and Mance Harmon, operates on a unique hashgraph consensus system rather than a traditional blockchain. Its native token, HBAR, is used for transaction fees and securing the network through staking. However, auditing incidents on the platform has proven challenging.

Blockchain investigator ZachXBT commented on social media that Hedera’s lack of a reliable block explorer effectively turns it into a “privacy chain,” since tracking and tracing suspicious transactions is particularly difficult for third parties.

ZachXBT remarked that limited block explorer functionality on Hedera poses challenges for transparency, especially during active security incidents.

Mini dictionary: Hashgraph is a consensus algorithm distinct from traditional blockchains, enabling faster and fairer transaction ordering and increased throughput, but often making third-party transaction tracing more complex.

Potential impact and market reactionHedera is governed by a council consisting of major global enterprises. In 2026, the platform attracted members such as McLaren Racing and Accenture, both citing the network’s enterprise-focused governance and infrastructure as key benefits. Hedera markets itself as the chosen trust layer for large organizations worldwide.

Despite these endorsements, the exploit has raised questions about network security and transparency. As of now, Hedera has not released any official statement regarding the exploit, but users and industry participants are awaiting further clarification and a detailed investigation.

HBAR, Hedera’s native cryptocurrency, is currently priced near $0.068, marking a 4% drop in the past 24 hours. The token’s market capitalization has fallen to around $2.98 billion, down just under 4% over the same period, according to CoinMarketCap data.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

XRP Demand Cools Across 3 Metrics, but Funding Hints at Rebound

Robinhood Chain has processed 7.6 million daily transactions just 11 days after its mainnet launch, narrowing the gap with Coinbase’s Base and accelerating competition among Ethereum Layer 2 networks.

Summary

Robinhood Chain processed 7.6 million daily transactions just 11 days after its mainnet launch. Free gas subsidies and tokenized stocks have helped narrow the activity gap with Coinbase’s Base. Investors are watching whether network usage remains strong after fee subsidies end in September. According to on-chain data shared by MSBIntel and verified by Token Terminal, Robinhood Chain recorded 7.6 million transactions in a single day on July 11, while Base processed 9.2 million over the same period. The figures place Robinhood’s Arbitrum-powered Layer 2 much closer to the leading Ethereum scaling network than many expected so soon after its July 1 launch.

BREAKING: Robinhood Chain processed 7.6 million transactions yesterday, nearing Base’s 9.2 million, eleven days after mainnet, per Token Terminal.

Base users pay for every transaction; Robinhood covers gas on its chain through a 90-day subsidy, with daily fees near $4,000. pic.twitter.com/sWLM0yRV0z

— MSB Intel (@MSBIntel) July 10, 2026 Launched alongside Robinhood’s tokenized equities platform, the network has quickly become one of the busiest Layer 2 ecosystems by activity. The rapid increase has drawn attention from blockchain analysts and investors tracking Robinhood Markets’ stock, as the company expands beyond its brokerage business into blockchain infrastructure.

Free gas incentives have accelerated early network activity One factor behind the increase is Robinhood’s decision to pay users’ gas fees during the first 90 days of mainnet operations. By removing transaction costs through the end of September 2026, the company has lowered the barrier for retail traders, decentralized finance users, and memecoin participants to move assets on the network.

Data cited by MSBIntel and Token Terminal also showed Robinhood Chain generated roughly $4,000 in daily protocol fees despite the temporary subsidy. While Base remains ahead in transaction count, the difference between the two networks has narrowed considerably since Robinhood’s launch.

Network usage has extended beyond simple transfers. Robinhood Chain surpassed $500 million in single-day volume on Uniswap deployments, taking the second position behind Ethereum mainnet, according to the report. The milestone followed Robinhood overtaking Base as the second-largest Uniswap deployment by spot activity, indicating liquidity growth alongside transaction volume.

Unlike Base, which launched with Coinbase’s exchange ecosystem and early integrations with decentralized applications such as Uniswap and Chainlink, Robinhood entered the market with access to roughly 23 million brokerage users. The company also introduced tokenized equities that are available in more than 120 countries, giving the network an additional source of potential activity.

Investors are watching whether activity survives after subsidies end Robinhood’s blockchain expansion has also influenced sentiment around its publicly traded shares. The company’s initial Layer 2 announcement lifted HOOD stock by about 10%, while its later rollout of AI-powered agentic trading coincided with another gain of roughly 7%, according to the data from Yahoo Finance.

Robinhood has connected its tokenized stock offering with infrastructure from several blockchain projects. Chainlink provides oracle pricing for 95 tokenized equities, including Nvidia, Apple, and Alphabet, while Uniswap supplies trading liquidity and Morpho supports lending functionality. Earlier this week, Robinhood also confirmed that the Layer 2 network is built using Arbitrum technology.

Despite the early momentum, analysts continue to watch whether activity remains strong after the promotional period ends. The current gas subsidy expires at the end of September 2026, removing the cost advantage that has encouraged heavy network usage during launch.

FalconX estimated in an April 2026 report that Robinhood Chain could generate about $1.1 million in fees over six months, although the temporary fee subsidy is expected to reduce revenue during its initial rollout. Once users begin paying transaction fees, on-chain activity will provide a clearer picture of whether tokenized assets and decentralized finance usage can sustain current volumes beyond launch-driven trading.

Attention is now turning to Robinhood’s early August earnings release for the second quarter of 2026. Because it will be the company’s first financial report to include data from the live mainnet, investors are expected to watch for evidence that blockchain infrastructure is beginning to contribute to Robinhood’s long-term revenue strategy.

Jul 11, 2026, 12:00 p.m.

3 min read

Summary

Ethereum Foundation developers used AI agents to hunt for bugs in the network’s gossipsub messaging system, uncovering a crash vulnerability that could take validator nodes offline and has since been fixed as CVE-2026-34219.The experiment showed that most of the work involved sifting real bugs from convincing false positives, as AI agents generated detailed but often misleading narratives about test-only crashes, infeasible attacks and trivial formal proofs.Because AI tools struggle with exploits that unfold over valid steps, like recent Edel Finance and BONK attacks, the Foundation now uses agents to propose suspicious sequences while still relying on traditional testing and human review to validate them.Developers at the Ethereum Foundation recently set AI agents loose on the software Ethereum runs on, hoping to discover bugs in an ongoing effort to keep strengthening the largest blockchain by value locked.

And while bugs were found, meticulous human judgment was still required to differentiate between what was real and what were false positives - with the Protocol Security team publishing field notes on tips the broader ecosystem should follow in their own AI workflows.

Ethereum runs on thousands of nodes, or ordinary computers running the network's software, each keeping a copy of the chain and passing messages to its neighbors.

Validators, the nodes that stake ether and vote on which blocks are valid, sit on top of that layer. They only work if messages reach them.

The bug these engineers found sat in gossipsub. The flaw let a remote system trigger a crash — wherein the node's software hits an impossible calculation, gives up and shuts itself down, taking a validator offline until an operator restarts it.

This was quickly fixed and disclosed as 'CVE-2026-34219' with credit to the team. The broader concern, however, was separating the agents' real bugs from the ones that were confidently masquerading as such.

"The surprise was how little of the work went into finding them, and how much went into telling the real bugs from the ones that just looked real," wrote Nikos Baxevanis, who authored the post.

The difficulty started with what an agent produces. A fuzzer, the standard tool that hurls malformed data at software until something breaks, returned a crash and a record of where it happened, which an engineer can confirm in minutes.

An agent, however, returns a created narrative. It traces how the flaw could be reached, argues why it matters, proposes a severity rating and supplies working code that demonstrates the attack. All of it arrives in fluent prose, reading the same whether the bug is real or invented.

Three kinds of false positive kept recurring, according to the Foundation.

The first was a crash that only occurs in a test build, where the compiler switches on safety checks that the shipped software does not carry, so nothing breaks for real users.

The second was an attack that only works if the dangerous value is planted inside the program by hand, because every route an outsider could take to deliver it rejects the value first. The third came from formal verification, the practice of proving mathematically that code behaves correctly, where a proof passed by demonstrating something trivially true and told the reviewers nothing about the software.

Each is a test that never actually tests anything, and an agent writes that empty version as quickly and as convincingly as the genuine one.

Another concern was that agents are strong at reasoning about a single moment and weak at bugs that span a sequence of individually valid steps, where nothing is wrong except the order.

That describes most of the exploits that have drained crypto protocols this year, where attack methods use technical tools that are individually fine, but mask the theft that lives in the sequence of carrying out several usual steps that lead to a malicious outcome.

Recent attacks fit the pattern. The Edel Finance exploit earlier this month sidestepped an accurate Chainlink price feed through the wrapping layer above it, and in the BONK governance attack, buying tokens, voting and executing a passed proposal were each ordinary transactions.

The Foundation's answer is to let the agent suggest which sequences are worth testing, and to run the tests anyway.

12345678910

Digital Assets: Quarterly Review and Outlook Q2

Digital Assets: Quarterly Review and Outlook Q2

Digital assets posted a third consecutive quarter of losses in Q2 2026, the longest losing streak since the 2022 bear market, as institutional capital rotated into AI equities and Bitcoin ETFs recorded their largest quarterly outflow since launch. Our report examines what drove the divergence, where structural adoption continued regardless, and what Q3 signals to watch.

Jul 10, 2026

Digital assets posted a third consecutive quarter of losses in Q2 2026, the longest losing streak since the 2022 bear market, as institutional capital rotated into AI equities and Bitcoin ETFs recorded their largest quarterly outflow since launch. Our report examines what drove the divergence, where structural adoption continued regardless, and what Q3 signals to watch.

Why it matters:

Digital assets posted a third consecutive quarter of losses in Q2 2026, the longest losing streak since the 2022 bear market, as institutional capital rotated into AI equities and Bitcoin ETFs recorded their largest quarterly outflow since launch. Our report examines what drove the divergence, where structural adoption continued regardless, and what Q3 signals to watch.

COINTELEGRAPH: Ethereum climbs 3% on tokenization boom: Can bulls push ETH price past $1,800?

PANews reported on July 11, citing CoinDesk, that the Ethereum Foundation recently disclosed that its security team used AI agents to test the software running on Ethereum validator nodes and successfully discovered a vulnerability that could be triggered remotely, causing the node to crash. However, researchers stressed that among the large number of security reports generated by AI, human review remains the crucial step in distinguishing real vulnerabilities from false positives.

The vulnerability discovered this time exists in the Ethereum network’s message propagation protocol gossipsub. An attacker could remotely trigger the node software to enter an abnormal computing state, causing the program to crash and shut down, taking the validator node offline until the operator manually restarts it. The vulnerability was later fixed and registered as security vulnerability number “CVE-2026-34219”.

Nikos Baxevanis, a member of the Ethereum Foundation’s protocol security team, said that the truly surprising thing was not AI’s ability to discover vulnerabilities, but that the team spent a lot of time distinguishing which vulnerabilities were real and which were merely plausible “hallucinations.” Unlike traditional fuzzing tools (Fuzzer) that directly output the crash location, AI agents automatically generate a complete narrative, including the cause of the vulnerability, impact analysis, severity assessment, and attack demonstration code. However, whether the vulnerability actually exists or is purely fictitious, these reports are usually presented in a fluent and convincing manner.

The Ethereum Foundation summarized three most common types of false positives: first, crashes that can only be triggered in a test environment; second, attack paths that can only be realized by manually modifying program data; and third, during formal verification processes, proving only mathematically meaningless conclusions without verifying the security of the code itself.

Additionally, the researchers pointed out that AI is currently better at analyzing single events, but struggles to identify complex attack chains composed of multiple seemingly normal steps, which is a typical characteristic of many DeFi attacks this year. For example, this month’s Edel Finance attack exploited the wrapper layer to bypass the accurate Chainlink price oracle, and in the BONK governance attack, individual actions such as buying tokens, initiating votes, and executing proposals were all normal behaviors in themselves, but their combination ultimately led to a malicious result.

The Ethereum Foundation stated that it will continue to use AI agents to assist in discovering potential risks in the future, but for scenarios involving complex attack paths, it will still be necessary to manually design and execute tests to verify the hypotheses proposed by AI.