Key TakeawaysUnderground Reserves Near 15-Year BottomRegional Instability Constraining International SupplyMonetary Policy Expectations Under PressureGet 3 Free Stock Ebooks Natural gas prices across Europe reached four-month peaks Friday, with TTF benchmark rising 0.4% Markets are experiencing their fourth consecutive weekly rally — the longest upward trend since May 2025 Equinor cautioned that Europe will likely miss its 80% storage target ahead of winter Current storage capacity stands at approximately 54%, marking the second-weakest level in a decade and a half Military operations in Iran and Houthi disruptions are constraining LNG deliveries via the Strait of Hormuz Wholesale natural gas prices in Europe remained elevated near four-month peaks on Friday, extending their rally into a fourth successive week.
The TTF front-month contract traded on the Dutch exchange, serving as Europe’s primary benchmark, advanced 0.4%, while Britain’s comparable futures contract climbed 0.3%. This week alone has witnessed an approximately 8% increase in gas values, with July’s cumulative surge exceeding 42%.
This represents the longest sustained upward momentum European gas markets have experienced since May of the previous year.
Underground Reserves Near 15-Year Bottom Earlier this week, Equinor, the continent’s leading domestic natural gas provider, announced that storage facilities throughout Europe are currently filled to just 54% of total capacity. This figure falls short of the five-year seasonal norm and represents the second-weakest position recorded over the past fifteen years.
The energy giant’s chief executive stated that the continent is improbable to achieve its objective of replenishing underground reserves to 80% capacity prior to the commencement of the winter heating period. This benchmark exists as a buffer against potential supply disruptions during colder months.
Entering winter with depleted reserves increases market vulnerability to significant price volatility should weather conditions deteriorate.
Regional Instability Constraining International Supply This week marked the thirteenth straight evening of American military operations targeting Iran. President Donald Trump issued warnings to Tehran and its Houthi proxies in Yemen regarding additional military responses should assaults on Red Sea maritime traffic persist.
🇾🇪 Insurance costs for shipping through the southern Red Sea doubled in a single day.
The jump came after Houthi forces hit at least one tanker overnight, with some companies now paying twice what they paid yesterday.
War risk premiums are the fastest signal in this whole… pic.twitter.com/w7OG07YfWT
— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) July 23, 2026
The ongoing hostilities have disrupted shipping lanes through the Strait of Hormuz, severing a segment of international LNG transportation from Persian Gulf facilities.
With reduced availability from Persian Gulf sources, Asian purchasers have been successfully outcompeting European utilities in securing available LNG shipments. This competitive dynamic is redirecting cargoes away from European regasification facilities during a critically vulnerable period.
Elevated temperatures throughout Europe have simultaneously increased electricity consumption for air conditioning, compounding the strain on natural gas availability.
Monetary Policy Expectations Under Pressure Escalating energy expenses are contributing to intensifying inflationary pressures throughout the European region.
Financial markets are progressively incorporating scenarios where elevated utility costs could postpone anticipated interest rate reductions. Central banking authorities may need to maintain restrictive monetary policies for extended periods if energy-influenced inflation remains persistent.
The convergence of supply interruptions, insufficient storage capacity, and robust demand provides market participants with minimal indication that prices will moderate in the near term.
The TTF futures contract continues trading close to its strongest position since March, and without an imminent resolution to Middle Eastern tensions, the prospect facing European consumers approaching autumn remains precarious.
Marathon Digital has launched a small Bitcoin mining pilot in Utah powered by landfill methane gas, and while the project is not huge, it is a useful example of where mining infrastructure may be heading.
The project, built with Nodal Power, uses off-grid landfill methane to generate electricity for Bitcoin mining. Marathon’s announcement describes the facility as a 280 kW pilot, or 0.28 MW, with reported uptime of 92% and power costs around $0.03 per kWh.
That is not a massive hashrate deployment.
But scale is not really the point here. The point is that Marathon is testing whether waste methane, which would otherwise be an environmental liability, can be turned into a low-cost power source for mining.
That is the kind of energy story Bitcoin miners need more of, especially as political and environmental scrutiny around mining continues.
TL;DR Marathon Digital and Nodal Power launched a 280 kW landfill methane Bitcoin mining pilot in Utah. The project uses off-grid landfill gas to generate electricity. The facility is small, so the environmental impact should not be overstated, but the model is strategically interesting. Bitcoin Mining Needs Better Energy Narratives Bitcoin mining has always been tied to electricity.
That makes it easy to criticize and sometimes hard to explain. Critics focus on energy consumption, grid pressure, and emissions. Miners respond by pointing to stranded power, renewables, demand response, and the ability to monetize energy that would otherwise be wasted.
Both sides can be selective.
The reality is that mining’s environmental profile depends heavily on where the power comes from, how the facility interacts with the grid, and whether the project solves a real energy problem or simply consumes cheap electricity.
That is why landfill methane projects are interesting.
Methane is a potent greenhouse gas. If it escapes into the atmosphere, it creates environmental harm. Capturing it and using it for electricity can turn a waste problem into an energy source. If that electricity is off-grid and would not otherwise be used efficiently, Bitcoin mining can act as a flexible buyer.
That is the theory Marathon is testing.
Small Pilot, Bigger Implications A 280 kW project is tiny compared with large industrial mining sites.
Some major facilities run at tens or hundreds of megawatts. So this Utah deployment should not be presented as a major shift in Marathon’s overall energy footprint. It is a pilot, and a small one.
But pilots matter because they test operational viability.
Can the gas supply be reliable? Can the generators run efficiently? Can mining equipment operate with enough uptime? Are maintenance costs manageable? Does the power price stay competitive? Can the model be repeated at other landfill sites?
Those are practical questions, not marketing questions.
The reported 92% uptime and roughly $0.03 per kWh power cost suggest the pilot has enough promise to watch. If those economics can be repeated, landfill gas mining could become a useful niche for miners looking for cheap energy and stronger environmental positioning.
Why Off-Grid Power Is Attractive Off-grid power matters because it reduces the argument that miners are competing directly with households or businesses for electricity.
If a mining facility uses power that is stranded, wasted, or difficult to deliver to the grid, the economics look different. Mining becomes a buyer of last resort, or a way to monetize energy at the source.
That flexibility has always been one of Bitcoin mining’s stronger arguments.
Miners can locate near energy rather than near customers. They can shut down quickly if needed. They can operate in remote areas. They can turn irregular or stranded energy into revenue.
Landfill methane fits that model because the fuel source is location-specific and often underused.
If Bitcoin mining helps capture and consume methane that would otherwise be vented or flared, the environmental conversation becomes more complicated than “mining uses electricity.”
The Industry Still Needs Proof At Scale The challenge is scale.
One pilot does not transform Bitcoin mining’s environmental record. It does not prove every landfill gas project will work. It does not erase concerns about mining facilities that rely on fossil-heavy grids.
Marathon and other miners need to show that these models can scale, remain profitable, and produce measurable environmental benefits.
That last part is important. If miners want credit for emissions reduction, they need credible measurement. How much methane was captured? What would have happened without the project? How much electricity was produced? What emissions were avoided?
Without those numbers, the story can become vague.
Mining Is Becoming An Energy Infrastructure Business The bigger shift is that Bitcoin miners increasingly look like energy infrastructure operators, not just data-center companies.
They negotiate power contracts, work with stranded energy, participate in grid programs, evaluate generation sources, and compete with AI data centers for access to electricity. The winners may not simply be the miners with the newest machines. They may be the miners that understand energy markets best.
Marathon’s landfill gas pilot fits that direction.
It is small, but it shows the kind of practical experimentation that could shape the next mining cycle. Instead of only chasing cheap grid power, miners are looking for energy problems they can help monetize.
That may be the strongest long-term argument for Bitcoin mining.
Not that every mining operation is clean. Not that energy concerns do not matter. But that mining can sometimes turn wasted or stranded energy into economic value.
The Utah pilot will not settle the debate. It does, however, give the industry a better kind of example to point to.
This article is based on Marathon Digital’s announcement of its Utah landfill methane gas Bitcoin mining pilot.
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
Gas on AztecGas on Aztec is known as Fee Juice and is used to pay for transaction costs. This is the same as $ETH on Ethereum. Some apps will handle transaction costs for you under the hood, but if you are using a browser extension wallet, you will not be able to send transactions without it. Fee Juice can be obtained by bridging the $AZTEC token on Ethereum to the Aztec Network L2. This means that under the hood, all activity that happens on Aztec is underpinned by the $AZTEC token bridged into the network. Some bridges like Shield (by human.tech) handle this for you, allowing you to allocate a portion of your bridged transaction to convert into Fee Juice and land in your wallet automatically.
Public vs Private AssetsAssets and transactions on the Aztec Network can be either public or private. If you bridge publicly, your tokens will arrive as public, traceable tokens visible to all. Privately bridging, on the other hand, will give you private assets that are visible only to you. These assets can then be sent privately to another user or wallet without ever revealing who you are, what tokens were sent, how many, or who the recipient is.
Public vs Private GasLike tokens on the Aztec Network, Fee Juice (gas) can also be public or private. The reason for this is that even if what you are sending is private, the gas you spend to execute that transaction could still be visible if you are using public Fee Juice, potentially revealing transaction patterns and activity. Private Fee Juice keeps your entire transaction footprint hidden. When you send a private transaction, you can use private Fee Juice, and when you send a public transaction, you can use public Fee Juice, which means your transaction costs are always aligned with the type of transaction you're making.
Fee Juice in AppsAztec has native fee abstraction, which means apps could let you pay for transactions in any token you want, or cover your fees entirely. Apps like Nyx may choose to cover part or all of a user's transaction costs, or allow you to pay in tokens that are convenient for you. This means you will most likely never see Fee Juice in an app; instead, you'll pay in whatever makes sense for what you're doing, on your terms. Similarly, you might never even see an Aztec wallet at all, because the app itself becomes your interface that you connect to using your MetaMask wallet.
Fee Juice in Browser WalletsIf you're using a browser extension like Azguard, you'll manage Fee Juice directly in your wallet alongside your private and public balances, converting between tokens as needed to cover transaction costs.
When you bridge tokens in, you'll need enough Fee Juice to cover the cost of your first transaction, then you'll need to monitor how much Fee Juice you have available to make transactions. Browser wallets will allow you to send either publicly or privately to other users and will default to using either public or private Fee Juice depending on the type of transaction. Both private Fee Juice and public Fee Juice will appear by default in your token list.
Wrapping upHow you handle Fee Juice depends on where you're transacting: apps can abstract it away entirely and let you pay in any token, while a browser wallet like Azguard puts it in your hands to manage across public and private balances. Match your gas to your transaction, keep private activity private down to the fee, and you move on your terms.
Read more
Aztec Network
Aztec Network
21 Jul
•
xx min read
Introducing Alpha V5The Aztec Network today activated Alpha V5, a major protocol upgrade passed by token-holder governance and executed onchain. Alpha V5 reduces private-transaction proving times by more than 2x compared to the previous version, lowers the cost of a fully private transaction by roughly 50%, resolves the critical issues found in V4, and sees the first wave of apps go live. Users can now send private transactions and earn yield on Aave simply by connecting their Ethereum wallets on Nyx, bridge from Ethereum to Aztec using Shield or TRAIN, privately collect NFTs on RavenHouse, or play Dark Forest Aztec, a hidden-information strategy game in a universe that lives entirely onchain.
"Alpha V5 continues Aztec's work at the frontier of client-side proving, with cryptographic breakthroughs that cut proving times by more than half this release," said Zac Williamson, Co-founder, Aztec Foundation. "We believe Aztec is now the fastest system in the world for proving a fully private transaction entirely on a user's own device, and every release moves the industry closer to private transactions at public transaction speeds."
As the only decentralized privacy L2, Aztec is the credibly neutral privacy layer for Ethereum. Aztec allows anyone to write smart contracts that include both private and public aspects – every private transaction is proven on the user's own device, so no operator, sequencer, or intermediary can see the data. The Alpha V5 proving improvements come from cryptographic advances that make this client-side proving faster than any prior release. The network remains in alpha, but with V5 it is ready for teams to begin building and deploying applications.
Performance - 2.5 second fully private transactions Making private transactions practical comes down to how quickly a proof can be generated on a user's own device, without offloading that work to a server that would learn what the user is doing. On Alpha V5, proving a private token transfer natively now takes approximately 2.5 seconds on a consumer laptop, down from 5.2 seconds on V4, and about 6.8 seconds in a browser, down from 12.5 seconds. Across every measured transaction flow, client-side proving times improved by approximately 2x compared with V4.
Bench machine: an M2 MacBook (12 cores, throttled to 8). "Native" runs Aztec's C++ proving binary; "WASM" runs the same prover in a browser engine (Node on V8).
Alpha V5 lowers ECDSA signature-verification cost by approximately 2x, speeds up Poseidon2 hashing by approximately 3x, and reduces the protocol circuit gate count by approximately 50% (gate count is the number of individual operations a proving circuit must perform, and it is the main driver of how long a proof takes to generate). Each of these lowers the amount of work a device performs to prove a transaction, and the reduction in gate count in particular compounds across every proof the network generates.
Apps - send, receive, and earn privately on EthereumAlpha V5 launches the first wave of apps on a network where privacy is built into the protocol rather than managed by an operator. On other networks that claim privacy, transactions still pass through an operator or node that reads them in plaintext, or depend on a viewing key that a third party holds, so users rely on someone else to protect their data and to decide when it gets disclosed. On Aztec, every private transaction is proven on the user's own device, so the app, the sequencer, and any operator never need to see the underlying data. Nyx is one of these apps, allowing users to privately send transactions and privately earn yield on Aave.
"On Ethereum, everything you do is public. That's why we built Nyx: a private account governed by your Ethereum wallet", said Nikhil, Co-founder of Nyx. "Now you can send, receive and earn in private. Nyx was the first app live on the Aztec Alpha, and we're excited to expand participation to more users with the added stability of Alpha V5."
Other apps on Alpha V5 include Azguard and Nethermind (wallets), Shield, TRAIN, and RavenHouse (bridges), and the Aztecscan block explorers. Also launching is Dark Forest Aztec, a game where users explore a universe, control planets, manage planetary energy, expand territory, and launch attacks through strategic play with private state and hidden actions.
Dark Forest Aztec private universe-building gameplayLower costs, higher security Transaction fees on Aztec come from two main sources: the cost of proving a transaction and the cost of verifying the rollup proof on Ethereum. Alpha V5 reduces both. It lowers the network's proving-cost parameter by 50%, and it reduces the L1 gas required to verify a rollup proof by approximately 40%. Because rollup proofs are verified on Ethereum and that cost is shared across all transactions in a batch, the L1 reduction lowers fees for every user, while the lower proving-cost parameter reduces the per-transaction proving fee directly. Together, these bring the average cost of a fully private token transfer to under a $0.05 transaction cost.
Alpha V5 also hardens the network on several fronts. It resolves critical vulnerabilities found in Alpha V4 along with additional bugs discovered since launch. Aztec's bug bounty program on Cantina also drew more than 234 security researchers to participate. The network remains in alpha, and further bugs may surface as usage grows, but each release has closed the issues found in the last and strengthened the protocol against new ones. With the critical V4 issues resolved and these safeguards in place, Alpha V5 is stable enough for teams to begin building and deploying applications.
AvailabilityAlpha V5 is live now, view the Alpha V5 landing page for a full list of features, performance updates, and live apps to explore.
About AztecAztec is the only decentralized, privacy-first Layer 2 on Ethereum. Developers write private and public logic in the same smart contract, and private functions are executed and proven on the user's own device, so no operator sees the underlying data. The protocol is upgraded through onchain governance, and the network settles to Ethereum. For more information, visit aztec.network.
Aztec Network
Aztec Network
30 Jun
•
xx min read
Inside an Aztec TransactionOn Ethereum today, each transaction reveals everything publicly. The token you moved, the size, the timing, the wallet it came from, every action you take. Given the limitations of this type of transparent network, the industry is now focusing on bringing privacy onchain as a top priority. The response to this has mostly been to enable private transactions that shield transfers in various ways. But when we look at how privacy works on Web2, it’s clear that users and developers need granular privacy controls: the ability to decide what is public or private and who is able to see different types of data.
Aztec was built so that one transaction can carry two halves. A private half that runs on your own device and never leaves it, and a public half that the network runs in the open. Apps can choose which aspects are private or public, and users can choose what they want to reveal and when.
This article will follow an example transaction on Aztec: a vote in an onchain election built on Aztec, where who you are and which candidate you chose stay private, while the running tally for each candidate stays public for anyone to verify.
Public and private in one movePicture the vote you cast in our example as two aspects that seamlessly weave together. In the first step, you act in private: an app records your vote on your device and hands the network a proof that the vote is valid without revealing it. In the second, the network acts in public: it checks that proof, then adds one to the chosen candidate's public tally. It is one transaction: one part stays with you, one part goes to the network. Both parts end up recorded onchain, in two separate state trees, one private and one public. The walkthrough below follows how these two aspects work together and what this means for how your transaction lands onchain.
It starts on your deviceYou open the voting app and connect an Aztec wallet. That first step looks like any onchain app. The difference is inside the wallet. An Aztec wallet carries a private execution environment, the PXE, pronounced "pixie", which runs on your phone or in your browser. The PXE is where the private half of your transaction executes, and where the proof of that work gets made, on your hardware, under your exclusive control.
Every account on Aztec is a smart contract rather than a bare key. That design, account abstraction, allows a wallet to authorize a transaction however its owner chooses without writing an identity onto the network for everyone to read. The wallet is the front door, and on Aztec you can decide if the door is open or closed, who you share your information with.
The private half runs on your deviceThe voting app is a smart contract with two kinds of functions. The private functions run first, and they run inside your PXE. Your identity and the candidate you picked are the private inputs, and they stay on your device.
The only thing to leave your device is a proof confirming the legitimacy of your vote. Aztec's client-side proving system, Chonk, takes the private execution and produces a zero-knowledge proof: a compact cryptographic receipt that your vote followed the rules, that you are eligible, and have not voted before, while revealing nothing about who you are or who you voted for. Think of it as a sealed ballot the network can confirm is valid without opening it. The network learns only that a legitimate vote happened. It does not learn how you voted, or even which account voted.
This is the part that used to be too slow to be practical. Generating a proof on a phone was the bottleneck every privacy app hit. Aztec’s Chonk is purpose-built for fast proving on low-memory devices, both natively and in the browser, so the private half runs on the device in your hand instead of on someone else's server.
The public half runs in the openSome elements of a vote should be public. The tally is shared infrastructure, the number everyone relies on to trust the result. Thanks to programmable privacy on Aztec, the app marks that part public. Public functions live on the network and run in the open, the way functions do on Ethereum.
On Aztec, private and public logic live in the same contract, and the developer decides which is which, function by function and variable by variable. Programmable privacy is a dimmer, not a switch. The voting app turns it up on the individual ballot and turns it down on the running tally. That boundary is a design decision written into the contract, and it is the thing no transparent chain and no fixed-privacy chain can offer.
The network checks the proof and runs the public partYour vote leaves your device as a bundle: the zero-knowledge proof of the private half, plus the call to the public function that updates the count. It goes to Aztec's sequencers, a decentralized set of thousands of independent operators, with more than 3,500 of them running the network today.
The sequencers do two jobs at once. They verify the proof of your private vote, confirming it is valid and eligible without seeing the choice behind it, and they run the public function that adds one to the chosen candidate and updates the public tally. Your ballot stays sealed. The count goes up by one for everyone to see. The same proof guarantees you cannot vote twice, even though no one learns which ballot is yours.
Two state trees, both onchainAztec has two main state trees, and both live onchain. One holds private state, the other holds public state, so the full record of what happened sits on the network rather than on any one person's laptop. The two trees store each record in two different ways depending on if it needs to be private or public.
The private tree uses a UTXO model, the same note-based design used by Zcash. In this model, state is written as commitments: each entry is a sealed record that a valid vote was cast, with the voter and the choice kept private. Just like with Zcash or Bitcoin, you do not edit a private entry in place. You write a new one, and the design stops the same vote from being cast twice (old state is nullified). The vote stays private, and the record of a legitimate vote happening is onchain for the network to check.
The public tree uses an account-based model, the same shape Ethereum uses: values that update in place, readable by anyone. This is where each candidate's tally lives.
One transaction wrote information to both trees. The private tree recorded that you voted, sealed. The public tree recorded the new totals, in the open. Everything is onchain. The difference between the two trees is how much each one reveals.
Every private app on Aztec writes into that same private tree. A vote, a payment, and a payroll run all land in one shared record of activity, so each user's privacy grows stronger as the network grows, instead of splitting into a separate pool for every app.
A block is proposed, and Ethereum records itAztec is an L2 on Ethereum, so everything settles to Ethereum L1. A sequencer on Aztec gathers transactions into a proposed block. Other sequencers validate it before it goes to Ethereum's pending chain. At that point the block sits on Ethereum, ordered and recorded, waiting for its proof. The network has agreed on what happened and the proposed block is just waiting a final proof.
Anyone can prove itProving a block is its own job, and on Aztec, it belongs to no one in particular. A decentralized, permissionless set of provers competes to take a full epoch, a 32-block stretch of the chain, and compresses it into a single zero-knowledge proof of the entire epoch. Anyone with the hardware can run a prover and bid for the work. There is no privileged operator, no committee you have to trust, no outside network holding a key.
That openness is the whole point of a privacy layer. A system that protects your data but routes it through one trusted server has only moved the exposure rather than removed it. Aztec keeps proving permissionless and your private inputs on your device, thereby avoiding any exposure.
The economics land in the voter's favor too. As an L2 network, Aztec spreads the cost of that one L1 proof across thousands of transactions in the rollup, so a vote costs pennies, not the millions of gas a private proof would cost verified alone on Ethereum.
Settled on Ethereum, verifiable by anyoneA prover then posts the epoch proof to Ethereum's proven chain, and the Aztec state is final. Ethereum verifies one proof and inherits the correctness of everything inside it. Aztec extends Ethereum and settles to Ethereum, so your hybrid transaction carries Ethereum's security without carrying Ethereum's enforced transparency.
Anyone can now verify that the result is valid and that every counted vote was legitimate. No one can see how any individual voted. The tally is on the shared ledger where it belongs, and your ballot stayed yours the whole way through.
What this unlocksFor the voter, their ballot was never a broadcast. The candidate you chose stayed yours, with no record tying your wallet to a name for anyone to read later, and you can still check that your vote was counted and the result is honest. You took part without your choice becoming data for systems built to act on it.
For a founder, the election app in this walkthrough is easy to implement without needing to build extensive custom code. Secret ballots with a public, verifiable count, in one contract, is a product category that opens up only because the boundary is programmable. You can build governance, elections, and polls where people vote without fear and the result still proves itself. And of course you can build anything that requires both public and private state to work seamlessly together.
For an infrastructure provider, the same machinery serves clients who need a result they can stand behind without exposing the people who produced it. Selective disclosure lets a client prove exactly what a counterparty needs to see, the count and the integrity of the process, and protect everything else, on their own terms. That is a guarantee a transparent chain cannot make.
A real vote needs two things at once: a secret ballot and a count anyone can check. A transparent chain makes you give up the first to get the second. On Aztec, you get both. The tally settled on Ethereum for anyone to verify, and how you voted stayed yours. The infrastructure is in place, what will you create with it?
->Review the Aztec Basics ->Head to the docs and start building today
Aztec Network
Aztec Network
23 Jun
•
xx min read
The Devil's Bargain - Privacy Without Credible Neutrality Crypto is in a long night. It is no secret that the industry is facing challenging circumstances and there has been a clear consolidation of the industry. Right now we are seeing a focus on real traction, demonstrable value projects shipping practical solutions that will meaningfully reach users.
Some of that discipline is overdue. However, in times like these the properties that made crypto structurally different begin to look expendable. Decentralization slows you down. It makes upgrades harder. It makes institutional sales harder. It removes the control surfaces that the existing financial world knows how to buy.
We used to accept those costs as the price of building something durable. But, in a famine, they look like unaffordable affectations. Discarding them wholesale, however, is like selling the land out from under our feet.
Permissionless, uncensorable transaction networks with rich composability - this is the clay from which our industry was grown. The long term commercial health of our industry depends on preserving these properties in an age of privacy and institutional adoption.
These trade-offs become more challenging and pernicious when privacy is involved. Privacy is the narrative for crypto in 2026, and for good reason. It’s the missing piece that will deliver the traction and real use-cases that the industry so desperately needs.
The challenges of decentralization multiply under the constraints of privacy and what we are seeing in the industry is not a pivot, but a complete capitulation of all of the differentiable value that made crypto valuable.
I have spent nearly a decade building a network that marries programmable privacy with decentralization. A network where users keep their data, where applications are composable with one another, where transactions can settle without a privileged party learning everyone’s business or deciding which products are allowed to exist. That required new cryptography, new programming models, new state architecture, new wallets, and a fairly insane number of tradeoffs that are invisible until you try to build the thing yourself. There are easier products to ship.
A centralized privacy service can give institutions something legible quickly, replicating how the existing financial sector works: a responsible operator, a viewing key, a way to block transactions, a way to explain the whole thing to a risk committee. Some of these products will be useful. Some will be good businesses. But they are not the thing we came here to build.
The Devil’s BargainInstitutional and enterprise adoption is one of the core growth areas in this crypto-winter and the playbook is simple: use the language of crypto as a skin-suit to sell products and services that pattern match onto existing financial rails, with their need for complete visibility, censorship, centralized network operators and all of the liabilities this incurs.
This is a tempting bargain because it shortens the path to adoption. It gives buyers and regulators a shape they understand. A company. A contract. A switch. But the moment you accept that bargain, the system changes character. It may still be encrypted. It may still contain proofs. It may still call itself private. But, it now behaves like and is an operated service.
There is a party with privileged knowledge and privileged control. Builders must shape themselves around it. Institutions negotiate with it. Regulators may pressure it. Attackers target it. Users ultimately depend on it. By a backdoor I mean something specific: a network or protocol-level viewing key where the product developer does not control who can see their users’ data, especially when paired with network-level controls that can block transactions or ban smart contracts entirely. I do not mean application-level controls. I do not mean user-authorised disclosure. I do not mean a dapp deciding that users must prove something before using it. Regulated applications will need rules. The issue is that the disclosure boundary of your application belongs to somebody else, and the same layer that sees can also decide whether your users are allowed to transact. In short, users lack a platform that has credible neutrality.
The Platform RiskPrivacy on top of centralized rails is fatal. If one party can see everything and stop anything, that party may be treated as responsible for seeing and stopping.
This compounds into substantial platform risk. If an entity builds on top of such a system they must surrender visibility and control to the network operator to satisfy their liabilities without consideration for yours. Decentralization and ultimately credible neutrality is the difference between whether you own durable infrastructure or are renting a service whose rules can change on a whim. Worse, you cannot “just build things”. For novel transaction flows approval must be sought and granted. Tell me, would Ethereum have grown if every smart contract deployment required approval from the Ethereum Foundation?
Privacy needs the same freedom. A private credit market, for example, touches identity, collateral, repayment history, payment flows, liquidation logic, lender disclosures, auditor access and borrower privacy. If every component lives inside a different permissioned service, each with its own operator and viewing assumptions, that is a bureaucratic friction that negates blockchain’s core value proposition; composability.
A decentralized and credibly neutral privacy network prevents the settlement layer from becoming the single place where all surveillance and censorship obligations naturally accumulate. It allows product developers to scope their code to satisfy their own narrow requirements without consideration for the obligations of a centralized operator.
Building for credible neutralityA lot of today’s privacy narrative treats architecture as if it were a detail. It is not. You cannot take a transparent ledger, staple confidentiality onto the edge, add a viewing key for comfort, and expect to get programmable private infrastructure.
If the state model is not private from the ground up you get wrappers, third party tools, data custodians, ad hoc disclosure paths and a pile of assumptions that every application drags into the next. Developers do not get a normal programming model where private contracts can call private contracts and users keep state on their own devices. They do not get composability.
The difference matters. In a real private execution environment, users generate transactions locally. They do not outsource their intent to a third party who learns what they are doing. Private contracts interact through a state model designed for privacy. The network settles proofs without becoming the party that knows everyone’s business. Privacy is part of the architecture.
This is why Aztec has taken so long. We built something that makes programmable private state and decentralised settlement live inside the same system. That means proving systems that run on consumer hardware, a transaction architecture built around local private execution, and a programming model where privacy is idiomatic and just works out of the box.
A centralized service can skip much of this. It can hold the key, run the prover, approve the flow and call the result privacy. It gets to market faster because it is not trying to arrive at the same place.
The edgeAdding decentralization does not make obligations disappear. Applications, issuers, frontends, custodians and regulated businesses will continue to exist in a web of obligations and responsibilities. Anyone pretending otherwise is unserious.
The question is where those obligations live. If they are pushed into the settlement layer, the settlement layer is no longer credibly neutral. It needs visibility into everyone and controls over everyone.
The better answer is selective disclosure. Users and applications should prove specific facts to specific parties for specific purposes. A regulated application may need to know that a user passed a check, that a transaction satisfies a policy, or that an auditor can inspect a particular flow. None of that requires the base network to hold a permanent key into everyone’s activity.
This will be harder to explain to the existing world. New infrastructure always fails to fit the categories built for the old infrastructure. Bitcoin did not arrive as a neatly regulated bank product. Ethereum did not wait for every lawyer to understand smart contracts. Stablecoins and DeFi forced institutions, regulators and users to develop new language around rails that kept existing.
If the standard for privacy infrastructure is to plug into the old world without changing anything, the answer will always be a service with a backdoor. And the result will be to catch crumbs falling from the tables of the old world.
The market worth buildingThe market we should be building is, well, a market. A private financial system that compounds: assets, liquidity, identity, credentials, credit and applications interacting through a shared settlement layer without forcing users to surrender their data to whoever sits in the middle.
Traditional finance is built out of vertically integrated information silos. Those silos are its moat. Banks, exchanges, custodians, payment processors and data brokers all benefit from controlling the information that flows through them. A global private settlement layer attacks that advantage directly. It lets liquidity and credentials move while outsourcing information custody to neutral cryptographic infrastructure.
A company wants a moat. A settlement layer wants surface area. A permissioned privacy provider can ration access, raise fees, exclude applications, shape disclosure rules and define acceptable use around its own risk tolerance. These are products pretending to be networks, and not durable financial infrastructure. What bothers me is this compounding category confusion. Networks adding protocol-level viewing keys and transaction controls are using the same language as decentralised programmable privacy, and commentators are treating them as variations of the same thing. They are not.
We have spent nine years walking the hard road. Now, just as we are close, the market has lost faith. Everyone is reaching for whatever lifeline looks immediate. Some of those lifelines will be real. Some will make money. But if crypto responds to its long night by rebuilding financial privacy as permissioned services, then we will have survived by surrendering the property that made the industry worth building.
Markets can grow when the platform is removed from the position where it can dictate the rules. It would be perverse to forget that lesson while building privacy, the domain where control over information matters most.
The land we tillCrypto is in a famine. The land is struggling. We could sell our land for a pittance and survive the season. But the famine will pass, and when it does the land will blossom again. Without the land we are nothing.
We have struggled immensely to create a permissionless network that can marry privacy with decentralisation: an indestructible network whose users cannot be surveilled and whose transactions cannot be censored. This is the soil we have to grow our crops. To surrender a backdoor or a centralized operator for temporary relief is to sell our land for the price of a stablecoin. And we cannot sell the land.
Follow Zac on X to get more insights
Follow Aztec on X for updates & breaking news
Aztec Network
Aztec Network
2 Jun
•
xx min read
Who controls your privacy off-switch?Privacy has become a baseline requirement for L1s and L2s who care about bringing real-world users onchain. Users don't want their activity broadcast to competitors or the general public, but applications operating at scale also need some form of auditability, whether for regulators, compliance requirements, or tax reporting. Selective disclosure resolves that tension: privacy by default, with the ability to prove specific facts when required. What separates these networks is not whether they offer that switch, but who gets to hold it.
Aztec, Canton, Starknet, Tempo, and zkSync all offer some form of privacy with selective disclosure, but under the hood they make fundamentally different architectural decisions about who can see your data and who can turn your privacy off. Those decisions determine whether your privacy stays under your own control or sits behind a switch that someone else operates.
Three questions reveal where these networks actually diverge:
Who sees your data?Who can prove the network followed its own rules?Who controls when something gets disclosed?The answers determine whether your privacy off-switch is held by a policy, by an operator's good behavior, or by you alone through a cryptographic proof. As you'll see in this post, there are legitimate reasons to use each one with different tradeoffs. Aztec is the only network, however, where that switch stays in the user's hands, answering all three questions without putting a permissioned set of operators or a standing viewing key in control of your privacy. That gives developers the flexibility to build apps that comply with applicable laws while still keeping full privacy under the user's control.
This article will compare the privacy approaches of Aztec, Canton, Starknet, Tempo, and zkSync to give developers insight into the privacy tradeoffs of each network.
TL;DRHere’s how each network handles the selective disclosure privacy off-switch, and who has control over your privacy:
Aztec: Only you can see your data, client-side proofs settled to Ethereum let anyone verify every transaction without trusting an operator, and the off-switch stays in your hands, allowing you selectively share information.Canton: Participant nodes read your data in plaintext, no outside party can verify the global ledger, and your off-switch sits with those nodes rather than with you, since disclosure depends on them staying honest.Starknet: No operator ever sees your plaintext because proofs are generated client-side, and those proofs verify the rules, but your off-switch is a standing viewing key that a designated auditor can use to decrypt and trace your entire history on request.Tempo: The zone operator sees every transaction in plaintext, mainnet validity proofs let anyone verify the zone ran correctly, and the operator holds the off-switch, so you are private from the public but not from the operator. zkSync: The operator reads every transaction in plaintext while a validity proof on Ethereum proves it cannot forge state, and the operator holds the off-switch over who sees what, giving you privacy from the outside world but not from the operator.The Comparison In One View
Comparing your privacy off-switch Each of these networks offers privacy with selective disclosure, but each rests on a different network design with its own tradeoffs. We have ordered them by who holds your privacy off-switch, starting with designs where a third party controls access to your data and ending with designs where that control stays with you. At the top, the switch sits behind a policy promise and an honest operator, and further down it is replaced by proofs that the user generates and controls.
CantonCanton keeps data private by controlling viewing permissions for the various actors on its network. A transaction splits into per-participant views, so each party receives only the sub-transactions that name it, and the parts it is not entitled to never reach it. The sequencer and mediator move those views without reading them, which is real privacy against those roles.
However, the data is still read in plaintext by the participant nodes that host the relevant parties, and in the common regulated-asset pattern where the issuer is a signatory on its own token, the issuer's node sees every transfer. The harder gap is verification, because no third party can reconstruct the global ledger, so correctness rests on the confirming nodes staying honest and their keys staying safe. In practice the off-switch sits with those nodes rather than with you, since you cannot see when your data is read and cannot stop it.
TempoTempo is designed for payments and uses validity proofs to verify that each zone is executing correctly, while still giving the zone operator full plaintext visibility into every transaction within that zone. Privacy comes from Tempo Zones, which are parallel execution environments connected to the Tempo mainnet.
By design, the zone operator has visibility into all transactions within the zone, while users see only their own and the public sees only a proof that the zone is valid. Token issuers set compliance controls, allowlists, blocklists, and freezes, enforced across zones. The mainnet checks each zone's validity, so execution is verified, while the operator still reads every transaction in plaintext and holds the off-switch over what is revealed. Your privacy is from the public, not from the operator.
zkSync PrividiumzkSync Prividium adds the verifiability piece that Canton lacks. Every batch produces a validity proof settled to Ethereum, so a compromised operator cannot forge state or mint tokens from nothing without also forging a proof, which it cannot do. The tradeoff is that the operator processes every transaction in plaintext and decides who sees what, which means the off-switch stays with the operator and your privacy is from the outside world rather than from the operator itself.
This tradeoff has legitimate uses in high-trust institutional environments. If Bank of America, JPMorgan, and Wells Fargo are transacting on a shared network, a zone where BofA's infrastructure processes BofA-originated transactions satisfies internal control requirements while still delivering genuine ZK privacy from the other banks and the rest of the world. Where this model breaks down is in lower-trust environments where giving an operator full plaintext access and the switch that comes with it holds back product design possibilities.
Starknet STRK20Starknet's STRK20 breaks from relying on an operator for privacy. It shields ERC-20 balances and transfers in a privacy pool, and every private transaction carries a zero-knowledge proof generated client-side, so no operator sees your plaintext in order to build it.
Disclosure is where STRK20 diverges from Aztec. To join the Starknet Privacy Pool, you register an encrypted viewing key onchain, and it sits there for the life of your participation. On a regulatory request, a designated auditing entity can decrypt that key and trace your complete transaction history, forwards and backwards. StarkWare calls this ‘not a backdoor’ but a carefully scoped access mechanism, and the safeguard is a policy promise that the auditor decrypts only when required. The privacy is cryptographic, but the off-switch is a standing key that someone else holds and can flip whether or not you are watching.
AztecOn Aztec your private state lives as encrypted private data that only you can decrypt. The contract developer can choose what state is public and what is private, and whether your encrypted private data is emitted onchain as a private log or shared off-chain instead.
Your transactions get proven client-side on your own device, so no sequencer or operator sees your unencrypted private data. Those proofs settle to Ethereum, which gives the same integrity anchor marketed by Prividium, with every transaction verified and no forged state, but without a single operator who reads your data. The base protocol decentralizes sequencing, proving, and governance, so there is no operator to choose and trust in the first place.
Disclosure is your choice too: you decide who learns your private data, and whether they learn it in encrypted or decrypted form. To grant discovery without readability, you share an app-specific tagging secret that lets an auditor find your data in encrypted form without being able to decrypt and read it. This is enough to prove things calculated from that data, such as a tax basis or a profit and loss figure. Granting permission to actually read the data works differently. There's no per-contract read key you can hand out, because decryption uses your master viewing key, which would unlock all your data across every contract. So instead of sharing a key, you share the data itself, plus a proof that your plaintext is what encrypts to the on-chain ciphertext.
Aztec has true selective disclosure in that you can selectively share it, and nothing else you don’t need to. This is app specific, meaning that private data discoverability access on one app does not grant access on another. Most importantly, the off-switch stays in your hands, and you never need to trust the network to handle access to any of your private data and activity.
This is not just conceptual: here is a working proof-of-concept of this model on Aztec. PrivPNL takes you from private DEX trades through a tagging-key disclosure to a browser-generated ZK proof of your PnL. The auditor verifies a proof while the prover only has to reveal the amount they owe, and your portfolio stays private.
Users need to hold their own off-switch, not a promise to look awayCanton keeps the switch with the participant nodes that read your data in plaintext, so disclosure rests on those nodes staying honest rather than on anything you control. Tempo similarly gives the off-switch to a zone-based node operator, but allows you to verify the correctness of transactions using validity proofs. Prividium hardens that promise with a proof settled to Ethereum, a real improvement, but the operator still reads every transaction and still decides who sees what. This can work well for large institutions, but small to medium sized enterprises are left with the same privacy as their current banks unless they run their own Prividium nodes. STRK20 moves the switch into a standing viewing key and asks you to trust that a designated auditor reaches for it only when needed. In each of these models the real question is not whether your privacy can be switched off, but who gets to do the switching, and whether you would even know it happened.
Aztec takes the operator and the standing key out of the question entirely. You keep the data, you generate the proof, and you disclose the result, one fact at a time and only when you choose to. The off-switch never leaves your hands, and no operator, auditor, or node can reach it on your behalf. This is one of the benefits of a network that offers fully programmable, privacy-preserving smart contracts that put you in control.
Selective disclosure is how privacy survives contact with a regulator, and the model you pick decides who can open your history when you are not looking. On Aztec, that answer is no one but you.
Let's BuildDive into the technical details: Try a live demo of selective disclosure on Aztec and read the technical article on how it was built.
Integrate with Aztec: Reach out if you are interested in integrating privacy into your project.
Fifteen West African nations just put their names behind a $25 billion gas pipeline stretching from Nigeria to Morocco. The project, formally endorsed at an ECOWAS summit in Freetown, Sierra Leone on July 20, represents one of the largest cross-border energy infrastructure bets Africa has ever made.
The African Atlantic Gas Pipeline, or AAGP, is designed to move up to 30 billion cubic meters of natural gas per year across an estimated 5,660 to 7,000 kilometers of pipeline.
What the deal actually involves The pipeline is a joint venture between Nigeria’s NNPC Limited and Morocco’s ONHYM, the two national energy entities tasked with making this thing real. The agreement calls for the establishment of a dedicated project company.
Advertisement
First gas flows are targeted for 2029. Full development is expected to span more than 20 years.
The project didn’t materialize overnight. A feasibility study kicked off back in 2017, followed by a memorandum of understanding in 2022. The Freetown signing reportedly came ahead of a Q4 2026 target that Nigeria and Morocco had set for themselves.
The AAGP also aligns strategically with other continental energy ambitions, including the Trans-Saharan pipeline project, which would connect Nigeria’s gas reserves to Algeria.
Why Europe is paying attention The AAGP is positioned as an alternative source, offering West African gas a direct route to European buyers. Morocco provides geographic proximity to European markets.
But pipelines of this scale are notoriously difficult to deliver on time and on budget. The $25 billion price tag is an estimate, and mega-infrastructure projects have a well-documented tendency to blow past initial budgets.
What this means for investors The movement toward a final investment decision will be the next major milestone to watch. The ECOWAS endorsement removes a significant political hurdle, and the involvement of national oil companies on both ends suggests this isn’t just aspirational.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Key Highlights Monday saw the national average gasoline price reach $4.0030 per gallon, marking the first breach of the $4 barrier since June Fuel costs have surged over 30% following late February military strikes by the U.S. and Israel on Iranian targets A temporary peace agreement in June temporarily reduced prices below $4, though hostilities reignited in early July On Monday, Brent crude jumped 3.2% to reach $90.95 per barrel while U.S. crude increased 2.8% to $84.04 Current U.S. fuel reserves are approximately 1.5 million barrels beneath the five-year average, intensifying upward price pressure American motorists are once again confronting $4-per-gallon fuel costs, primarily driven by escalating military tensions between the United States and Iran.
According to data from the American Automobile Association, Monday’s national average for regular unleaded gasoline climbed to $4.0030. This represents a significant increase from $3.14 per gallon recorded during the same period last year.
The initial breach of the $4 threshold occurred in late March when Iran began blocking commercial traffic through the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz. This critical maritime passage facilitates the transport of approximately 20% of the world’s oil supply.
A temporary respite came in June when Washington and Tehran reached a memorandum of understanding aimed at de-escalation. However, this fragile agreement disintegrated in early July, with military operations resuming shortly thereafter.
Following the breakdown of peace talks, crude oil prices spiked approximately 16% over the past week. The correlation between retail gasoline and crude oil prices remains strong, as crude represents the primary input cost for refined fuel products.
Crude Markets Respond to Conflict Escalation Monday trading saw Brent crude, the global pricing benchmark, advance 3.2% to settle at $90.95 per barrel. Meanwhile, West Texas Intermediate, the U.S. standard, gained 2.8% to close at $84.04 per barrel.
The Strait of Hormuz continues to be the epicenter of market anxiety. Any impediment to shipping through this narrow channel creates immediate ripple effects across worldwide energy markets.
🇺🇸NOW: PRESIDENT TRUMP ADDRESSES ESCALATING IRAN CONFLICT
"We are now doing a FAR bigger job, we were on a little job stopping them from having a certain capability"
"But now, we're just ENDING it"
"Ending any chance where they can have a nuclear missile.
"If you look at it,… pic.twitter.com/QE4lEMEwz5
— Coin Bureau (@coinbureau) July 20, 2026
Additional upward pressure on energy costs stems from intensified Ukrainian military operations targeting Russian petroleum processing facilities, which have substantially diminished Russia’s refining capabilities.
Supply Shortages Compound Price Increases Last week’s figures show U.S. gasoline inventories at 210.5 million barrels, falling roughly 1.5 million barrels short of the five-year seasonal average. These diminished reserves leave the market more vulnerable to supply disruptions.
Regional variations in fuel pricing persist due to differing state taxation policies, local supply dynamics, and transportation expenses. Several states have maintained prices above $4 for extended periods.
The $4-per-gallon threshold represents a critical psychological and economic benchmark for American households. Elevated fuel costs create cascading effects throughout the economy, increasing transportation expenses for consumer goods and groceries.
Rising pump prices have emerged as a significant political challenge for President Donald Trump and congressional Republicans. With November midterm elections approaching, Republicans must defend narrow legislative majorities while addressing voter concerns over inflation.
During the June ceasefire period, Trump publicly voiced dissatisfaction that retail gas prices weren’t declining proportionally to crude oil reductions.
It’s important to note that the $4 figure represents a nationwide average. Consumers in traditionally high-cost regions such as California have been confronting prices significantly above this level for several months.
Without prospects for renewed diplomatic engagement, industry analysts anticipate sustained elevated prices at filling stations. Monday’s sharp escalation in Middle East hostilities propelled crude prices upward, immediately translating into higher costs for American drivers.
Strait of Hormuz Tanker Attack Sends European Gas Prices Soaring to Highest Point in MonthsKey TakeawaysVessel Incident Sparks Immediate Market ResponseRising Insurance Premiums Compound Market PressureGet 3 Free Stock Ebooks Key Takeaways Natural gas benchmarks in Europe jumped more than 3.4% on Monday, reaching peaks not seen since late March An attack on a commercial vessel in the Strait of Hormuz sparked a fire, triggering market concerns Approximately 20% of worldwide LNG shipments travel through this strategic waterway Crude oil markets advanced 2.2%, pushing oil-indexed gas contracts upward War-risk insurance costs surged dramatically, directly impacting European wholesale gas valuations A vessel fire in the strategically vital Strait of Hormuz has propelled European natural gas valuations significantly higher, sparking renewed anxiety over the security of global LNG supply chains.
The front-month Dutch gas futures contract, serving as Europe’s primary benchmark, advanced 3.45% during Monday’s trading session. Britain’s wholesale gas contract climbed 3.52% in parallel. Both indices touched their strongest points since March 23.
Dutch TTF Natural Gas Calendar (TTF=F) Vessel Incident Sparks Immediate Market Response The upward price movement followed news that a commercial tanker was engulfed in flames after being struck in the Strait of Hormuz. This narrow waterway represents one of the planet’s most critical corridors for energy transportation.
Roughly 20% of the world’s liquefied natural gas shipments transit through the Strait of Hormuz. The majority of these deliveries originate from prominent Gulf region producers. Any potential disruption to this passage immediately heightens concerns across European energy trading floors.
European nations have grown increasingly dependent on seaborne LNG deliveries in recent times. This shift occurred as Russian pipeline gas volumes plummeted dramatically in the aftermath of the Ukraine conflict. The region now relies substantially on imported LNG to maintain residential heating and industrial operations.
Crude oil prices similarly advanced during the session, gaining 2.2%. This upward movement elevated oil-linked gas contracts in tandem, compounding the overall price momentum.
Rising Insurance Premiums Compound Market Pressure Market participants indicated that LNG shipments continue to navigate through the strait, though under enhanced security protocols. The risk environment has fundamentally shifted, despite cargo movements remaining intact for now.
War-risk insurance premiums have escalated substantially. Insurance providers are incorporating the elevated risk associated with active security threats in the region. These additional expenses translate directly into higher European wholesale gas prices.
The timing presents challenges for European energy companies. They are entering a phase when supply interruptions could produce disproportionate effects on continental pricing structures.
Energy markets are now monitoring intensely whether conditions in the Strait of Hormuz deteriorate further. Any prolonged interruption to LNG transit through the waterway could elevate prices substantially beyond current levels.
The Dutch front-month futures contract serves as the principal pricing benchmark for European gas commerce. Monday’s rally represented a multi-month peak and demonstrated how rapidly geopolitical developments can transform energy market dynamics.
At present, LNG deliveries remain operational, but the market has already incorporated risk premiums. Energy traders and utility companies will maintain close surveillance of developments in coming days.
Monday’s market movement underscored how vulnerable European energy systems remain to Middle Eastern events, especially along strategic shipping passages such as the Strait of Hormuz.
Sui has launched gas-free stablecoin transfers, a move that goes directly at one of the most annoying pieces of crypto payments: needing the network’s native token just to move dollars.
For experienced crypto users, gas is normal. For everyone else, it is friction. A user may have USDC or another stablecoin in a wallet, but if they do not also hold the chain’s native token, they can get stuck. They cannot send funds, make a payment, or move assets without first acquiring gas.
That is a terrible experience for payments.
Sui’s new stablecoin transfer feature is designed to remove that issue by allowing users to send supported stablecoins without holding SUI for transaction fees. The available source material points to implementation through Sui’s Move API, with gas set at zero and the fee burden handled away from the end user.
That sounds technical, but the user-facing idea is simple: stablecoins should move more like money and less like a puzzle.
Reference: Sui
TL;DR Sui has launched gas-free transfers for supported stablecoins. Users can move assets such as USDC without first holding SUI for fees. The change could make Sui more competitive in stablecoin payments and consumer crypto apps. Why Gas Still Breaks Crypto UX Stablecoins are one of crypto’s clearest product-market fits.
They are used for trading, settlement, payments, remittances, DeFi collateral, and dollar access in markets where banking rails are slow or unreliable. But even stablecoins can feel awkward when the user has to understand gas.
The problem is especially obvious for new users. Someone may receive stablecoins and assume they can send them immediately. Then the wallet tells them they need the native asset to pay fees. Now they have to find SUI, ETH, SOL, TRX, or another gas token before they can do anything.
That is not how normal payments work.
Nobody expects to hold a separate “fee token” to send pounds from a banking app or dollars from a payment wallet. Crypto users have learned to tolerate that because they understand blockchains. Mainstream users have not, and probably should not have to.
Gas-free stablecoin transfers are an attempt to hide that complexity.
If Sui can make stablecoin movement feel more like a normal payment action, the network becomes easier to use for wallets, apps, merchants, and everyday transfers.
Stablecoin Competition Is About Convenience Now Sui is not the first network to chase stablecoin payments, and it will not be the last.
Ethereum has the deepest liquidity and most established DeFi ecosystem. TRON has become a major stablecoin transfer network because of its low fees and wide USDT usage. Solana has pushed hard into fast, low-cost consumer payments. Base is trying to combine Ethereum alignment with cheaper transactions and app distribution.
That means Sui needs a real reason for users and developers to care.
Gas-free stablecoin movement is a practical answer. It does not rely on abstract network claims. It solves a visible user problem.
The supported stablecoin list is important as well. According to the cleaned pack, supported assets include USDC, USDsui, suiUSDe, AUSD, FDUSD, USDB, and USDY. That gives the feature a wider stablecoin base than a single-asset implementation.
For developers, the more interesting part may be the infrastructure model. If apps can build payment flows where the user never has to think about gas, Sui becomes easier to integrate into consumer-facing products.
That could matter for wallets, games, DeFi front ends, subscription tools, and cross-border payments.
The Real Test Is Usage The launch is promising, but the market will judge it by adoption.
Gas-free transfers sound useful, but the feature needs real volume. Users have to adopt it. Wallets and apps have to integrate it cleanly. Stablecoin liquidity has to remain deep enough that the experience feels reliable.
The competitive bar is high. Users already move stablecoins across other networks, and many do not care which chain wins as long as the transfer is cheap, fast, and easy. Sui has to prove that removing gas friction is enough to pull activity into its ecosystem.
There is also a sustainability question. If end users are not paying gas directly, someone else is absorbing or sponsoring those costs. That can work well, but the economics need to make sense over time, especially if volume scales.
Still, the direction is right.
Crypto payments will not become mainstream if every transaction requires users to understand the mechanics underneath. The winning experience probably looks boring: open app, send dollars, done.
Sui’s gas-free stablecoin feature moves in that direction. It is not a guarantee that Sui becomes a dominant payments chain, but it gives the network a cleaner user-experience argument at a time when stablecoin competition is becoming more serious.
This article is based on information from Sui Network.
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
Dana Gas has announced the shutdown of its main production facilities at the Khor Mor field in Iraq due to credible security threats amid rising regional tensions. This facility is a critical source of natural gas for the Kurdistan Region’s electricity grid. The suspension comes as tensions related to the U.S.-Israel-Iran conflict continue to disrupt Iraq’s oil sector, already impacted by previous closures and attacks. The current halt in operations threatens to significantly affect the region’s electricity supply, which depends heavily on output from Khor Mor.
Market participants appear to interpret this development as a potential catalyst for increased crude oil prices, particularly in the context of ongoing disruptions in Iraq’s oil production. The WTI Crude Oil market has seen active movements, with the likelihood of prices hitting higher targets in July showing varied shifts in percentage probabilities. The ongoing geopolitical tensions are a key factor driving these market reactions, as they could lead to further supply disruptions.
Advertisement
The pricing of WTI Crude Oil futures suggests a cautious outlook, with a 22.4% chance that prices will hit $90 by the end of July, reflecting a notable increase from previous estimates. This is consistent with concerns about sustained regional instability and its impact on global oil supply. However, the probability of reaching higher targets, such as $130, remains low at 1%.
Key Takeaways Markets suggest that the shutdown at Dana Gas’s Khor Mor field could lead to increased oil prices, reflecting concerns about supply disruptions. The probability of WTI Crude Oil hitting $90 in July has increased to 22.4%, indicating heightened market sensitivity to regional tensions. Ongoing geopolitical developments, particularly involving U.S.-Iran tensions, are critical drivers of current market expectations. What to Watch Market participants will closely monitor any announcements from key geopolitical actors, such as the U.S. and Iran, which could influence oil supply dynamics. Reports of further disruptions or resolutions in the conflict could significantly impact WTI Crude Oil pricing. OPEC+ decisions regarding production levels and updates on the Strait of Hormuz’s openness will also be pivotal in shaping market expectations.
Get live prediction-market analysis, powered by Vera. Sign up for Vera.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Estefano Gomez. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.
Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.
NEAR Governance Vote To Scrap Gas Rebates Puts Developer Incentives Under Review is a useful reminder that crypto coverage is not only about token prices. Sometimes the more important story is the infrastructure, regulation, security, or product layer sitting underneath the market noise.
The immediate point is straightforward: nEAR governance voted to scrap developer gas rebates. That gives readers something concrete to work with, rather than another vague sentiment update.
TL;DR NEAR governance voted to scrap developer gas rebates. The change affects developers who relied on protocol gas distributions. It raises a broader question about how chains should reward app builders. Why This Matters Now The timing matters because NEAR is already part of a wider conversation across the market. Traders want to know whether the development changes liquidity or risk. Builders want to know whether it changes what can be deployed. Compliance teams want to know whether it changes how platforms operate.
In that sense, the story is bigger than one headline. It sits inside the ongoing shift from speculative crypto cycles toward more practical questions: who can use these systems, how safe are they, and whether the underlying incentives actually work.
The best way to read it is with discipline. It is not a guarantee of immediate upside, and it should not be treated as one. But it does add a fresh data point to the way the market is thinking about NEAR.
The NEAR Angle For NEAR, the important part is the specific mechanism. If this is a security issue, the risk sits in dependencies and user protection. If it is a listing or product launch, the question is access and liquidity. If it is a governance or research proposal, the question is whether the idea can survive implementation.
That is where this update becomes useful. It is not just a label attached to a trend. It gives readers a way to understand what might actually change if the development gains traction.
Crypto has a habit of turning every announcement into a broad market claim. This one deserves a narrower read. The value is in seeing how it affects the users, developers, institutions, or traders closest to the issue.
The Risk Side There is also a caution attached. Source material can confirm that a development exists, but it cannot prove that adoption will follow. A proposal still needs support. A product still needs users. A chart still needs confirmation. A compliance tool still needs integration.
That is why the responsible reading is not to oversell the story. The stronger takeaway is that this adds to a pattern. The crypto market is steadily becoming more professional, more technical, and more sensitive to real operational details.
Readers should also watch for follow-up signals. That could mean developer feedback, exchange support, regulatory response, wallet adoption, liquidity data, or simply whether market participants continue reacting after the first headline fades.
What Comes Next The next stage will decide whether this remains a narrow update or becomes part of a larger market theme. In crypto, that difference matters. Plenty of stories look important for a few hours and then disappear. The ones that last usually show up again through usage, liquidity, enforcement, governance, or developer adoption.
For now, this gives the market another piece of information to weigh. It is specific enough to be useful, but still early enough that readers should keep the caveats in view.
That makes it worth covering without pretending it settles anything. The story is a signal, not a final verdict.
The key is not to confuse coverage with certainty. NEAR stories can move quickly, especially when they touch security, regulation, listings, infrastructure, or price levels. The useful approach is to track the next confirming detail rather than assume the first update carries the whole market story. That is how traders avoid chasing noise and how readers separate a genuine development from another passing headline.
This report is based on information from thedefiant.io.
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
Gasoline prices in New York have reportedly surged by 40% since former President Trump initiated actions against Iran, according to Senator Kirsten Gillibrand. This increase allegedly amounts to an additional $2.2 billion in expenses for New Yorkers. However, verified data suggests a 21% rise in prices, with the average cost per gallon now at $4.075. The national average has seen a 54% increase, partly driven by recent geopolitical tensions following Trump’s announcement ending the Iran ceasefire. Gasoline futures and crude oil prices have responded by climbing significantly in the past week.
Advertisement
The prediction market for crude oil reaching a new all-time high by September 30 currently shows low probability, with a 5.8% chance. This figure reflects a slight reduction from 7% just 24 hours ago, despite the recent geopolitical developments. By December 31, the market suggests a higher probability of 12.5%, indicating expectations that current tensions could have more significant impacts on oil prices later in the year.
Key Takeaways The claim suggests New Yorkers’ gas costs have increased by 40%, though verified data indicates a 21% rise. Market pricing suggests a modest likelihood of crude oil reaching new highs by September, with higher expectations for later in the year. Recent geopolitical actions involving Iran appear consistent with potential upward pressure on oil prices. What to Watch Observers will monitor whether ongoing geopolitical tensions between the U.S. and Iran result in significant oil supply disruptions, which could push prices higher. Key developments from OPEC regarding production cuts or increases will also be crucial indicators. Any major announcements or policy changes by prominent figures such as OPEC’s Mohammad Sanusi Barkindo or Saudi Arabia’s Abdulaziz bin Salman Al Saud could shift market expectations further. Markets appear to be particularly sensitive to these geopolitical and supply-side factors through the end of the year.
Get live prediction-market analysis, powered by Vera. Sign up for Vera.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Estefano Gomez. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Key Takeaways Tehran announced an indefinite closure of the Strait of Hormuz amid escalating tensions with U.S. military forces Brent crude oil prices jumped 4.4% in immediate market reaction European natural gas prices climbed 3.5–4%, reaching their highest point in a month Bond yields across the Eurozone remained elevated near multi-week peaks on inflation worries Current European gas storage stands at 47%, down from 56% recorded at the same time in the previous year Tehran’s announcement to seal off the Strait of Hormuz has sent tremors through global energy markets, driving significant increases in both oil and natural gas prices while intensifying inflation anxieties throughout the European continent.
The blockade was announced as indefinite following renewed military confrontations between Tehran and American forces during the weekend. Despite U.S. Central Command’s statements that commercial vessels can still navigate the area, the mere declaration triggered substantial market volatility.
BREAKING: The US has struck Kharg Island's western jetty pumping station and multiple pipelines supplying Kharg's pumping stations, with fires visible on NASA FIRMS satellite imagery.
This is the first US strike specifically targeting oil infrastructure at Kharg, Iran's primary… pic.twitter.com/lhO9DqGa2Q
— The Hormuz Letter (@HormuzLetter) July 13, 2026
Brent crude experienced a 4.4% surge following the initial reports. As one of the planet’s most strategically important petroleum shipping corridors, any disruption to the Strait of Hormuz creates instant pressure on energy costs globally.
Natural Gas Markets Reach Monthly Peak Wholesale natural gas prices throughout Europe experienced significant upward movement on Monday. The Dutch benchmark front-month contract increased 3.5% to settle at 50.37 euros per megawatt-hour. Meanwhile, the British equivalent climbed 4%, tracking closely with European prices.
Dutch TTF Natural Gas Calendar (TTF=F) Approximately one-fifth of global liquefied natural gas trade passes through the Strait of Hormuz, including the majority of Qatar’s LNG shipments. An extended blockade would sever a critical supply artery for European energy consumers.
European nations are presently working to replenish their natural gas reserves in preparation for the 2026/2027 winter heating season. Current storage levels hover around 47% of total capacity, notably lower than the 56% recorded during the corresponding period last year. This shortfall makes Europe considerably more vulnerable to supply disruptions than it was a year ago.
Should Gulf LNG shipments face prolonged interruption, European importers would encounter intensified competition from Asian markets, driving costs even higher across the board.
Government Bond Markets Signal Inflation Concerns Yields on European government bonds maintained positions near their highest levels in more than a month throughout Monday’s trading. Germany’s benchmark 10-year Bund yield stood at 3.05%, with the 2-year yield positioned at 2.68%.
These elevated figures persisted because surging energy costs typically fuel inflationary pressures, which diminish the attractiveness of fixed-income securities. Last week witnessed the most substantial weekly increase in German bond yields observed in five weeks.
The primary concern among investors is that the European Central Bank might need to halt its interest rate reduction trajectory if energy prices continue fueling inflation. Financial markets have already adjusted expectations, pricing in fewer ECB rate cuts than anticipated just weeks earlier.
ECB Executive Board member Isabel Schnabel is scheduled to deliver remarks later Monday. Schnabel has consistently maintained a more hawkish stance within the ECB’s Governing Council. Any commentary she provides regarding inflation risks stemming from the Gulf crisis could generate additional market movement.
Diplomatic initiatives aimed at de-escalating regional tensions had demonstrated some positive momentum in recent weeks. However, those efforts now appear to have stalled following the latest military confrontations, leaving energy markets in a state of uncertainty with no immediate path toward resolution.
NextDecade Corporation (NEXT) has quietly recovered toward $8 while the market fixates on the Strait of Hormuz. The reason is a building gas supply shock, and this overlooked LNG stock sits directly in its path.
NEXT Share Price: Google FinanceMost investors are trading the crisis through oil tankers. That trade, however, is already crowded. The longer prize, by contrast, sits with American gas exporters.
What the Tanker Trade MissesThe tanker trade is simple. Investors buy the companies that own the ships hauling crude oil. When Hormuz turns dangerous, rerouting and war insurance push tanker rents higher, so those shares climb.
Want more insights like this? Sign up for Editor Harsh Notariya’s Daily Newsletter here.
That move, however, is late. Analysts at Evercore previously cut Frontline and DHT Holdings to hold, citing reversion risk. The easy money has likely gone. Even as the US-Iran standoff flares again, tanker rate spikes tend to fade fast.
The trade also misses the deeper wound. Iran’s strikes damaged close to 20% of Qatar’s liquefaction supply at Ras Laffan during early 2026. Unlike shipping delays, broken plants do not recover when a ceasefire holds.
A Qatari LNG tanker was struck while exiting the Strait of Hormuz 🇶🇦🚨
🚢 The laden ship (Al Rekayyat) was traversing the Omani route when it was hit by a projectile. The tanker was dark at the time
⚠️ This threatens Qatar's plans to rapidly revive LNG exports from Ras Laffan pic.twitter.com/sMMJEJoWGU
— Stephen Stapczynski (@SStapczynski) July 7, 2026 Indeed, Iran’s navy closed the strait again on July 12. Tanker crossings have plunged to near 33 a day, versus about 130 before the war.
Why LNG Is the Real PrizeLiquefied Natural Gas (LNG) is gas chilled into liquid form. That cooling shrinks its volume about 600 times, which lets tankers carry it across oceans.
Qatar is a top supplier, and about one fifth of the world’s LNG passes through Hormuz. As a result, buyers now scramble for supply from safer regions.
An armada of US LNG shipments are heading to Asia
🇺🇸🇺🇸🇺🇸
The near-closure of Hormuz has forced Asian LNG importers to scramble for alternatives. US supply has largely filled the gap
West>East LNG flows via Cape of Good Hope is at a seasonal high (+80% from last year) pic.twitter.com/4JbdIDMYwS
— Stephen Stapczynski (@SStapczynski) July 6, 2026 The United States fits that need. It is the biggest LNG exporter and sits an ocean away from Iran. Meanwhile, Shell expects global LNG demand to rise about 65% by 2050.
NextDecade is building the Rio Grande LNG plant in Brownsville, Texas. The site holds about 48 million tonnes of yearly capacity under development, with first cargoes due in early 2027.
That timing lands just as the shortage bites. The firm could become a top-four US exporter early next decade. In July, XRG, the investment arm of Abu Dhabi’s state oil producer ADNOC, boosted its stake.
Wall Street, however, has barely moved. Citi set a Buy rating and an $11 target on May 13 and has not changed it since, showing how overlooked a stock NEXT is. That stale call predates the latest closure, so the case has strengthened while the number sat still.
Citi Called A Buy: TipRanksToday, the stock trades near $7.99, roughly 40% below that target.
What the Money Flow and Options SignalMoney flow is turning. The Chaikin Money Flow fell from a mid-May peak to a June 18 low, then recovered to near minus 0.03.
The last time it crossed above zero, on April 30, the stock rose about 7% into mid-May. Another cross would repeat that signal, and price has already recovered while flow lags.
NextDecade Chaikin Money Flow Near Zero: BeInCryptoOptions traders lean bullish too. Last week the put-call volume ratio sat near 0.27, with open interest near 0.21. Both low readings mean far more bets on gains than on losses.
Still, that can shift fast. NextDecade reports second-quarter results on July 30, which may confirm construction progress and new contracts.
NEXT Options Positioning: BarchartUltimately, the tanker trade priced the crisis in days, because shipping rates spike then fade. The LNG trade works on a longer clock. Qatar’s plants take years to rebuild, so buyers need new supply well into the decade.
That is why NextDecade matters. Its Texas plant starts shipping in 2027, just as that gap widens. Yet the market still values it like a pre-revenue project, which keeps this hidden LNG stock overlooked.
Robinhood Chain is gaining ground fast. Just 11 days after its July 1 mainnet launch, the Arbitrum-based Ethereum Layer 2 processed 7.6 million transactions in a single day. That puts it within striking distance of Coinbase’s Base, which logged 9.2 million transactions the same day. The pace of that climb has caught the attention of on-chain analysts and HOOD stock investors alike, as Robinhood’s blockchain ambitions move from launch hype to live metrics.
Gas Subsidy Drives Explosive Growth on Robinhood Chain The driver behind the numbers is deliberate. Robinhood is covering all network fees for users through the first 90 days of mainnet. That brings the cost of transacting to near zero, drawing in retail traders, DeFi participants, and memecoin activity that would otherwise stay on competing chains.
According to on-chain data made by MSBIntel and verified by Token Terminal, Robinhood Chain has 7.6M transactions per day, and its daily protocol fees were approximately $4,000. Base is still ahead with 9.2M. However, there is a convergence of the gap.
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
BREAKING: Robinhood Chain has nearly matched Base's daily transaction count in just 1.5 weeks.
Yesterday, Robinhood Chain processed 7.6 million daily transactions, compared with 9.2 million on Base.@vladtenev vs. @brian_armstrong game is on! pic.twitter.com/m4GqyMXzwD
— Token Terminal 📊 (@tokenterminal) July 10, 2026
Additionally, Robinhood Chain’s Base single-day volume exceeded $500 million as it took over the number 2 position among Uniswap deployments. Ethereum mainnet was the only one higher. Robinhood earlier flipped Base to No. 2 Spot on Uniswap, Trails Only Ethereum, a milestone that signals real liquidity activity, not just speculative churn.
The growth curve is similar to that of Base, which had been subsidizing fees, built on an established user base, and integrated with DeFi apps on day one, like Uniswap and Chainlink. Robinhood Chain adds one variable that Base was missing in its launch: direct access of 23 million brokerage users and tokenized equities that are live in more than 120 countries.
HOOD Stock Watchers Track L2 Metrics as Tokenized Finance Race Heats Up Every meaningful step taken on the chain by Robinhood has had a bearing on HOOD stock prices. The first Layer 2 announcement has caused the stock price to rise 10%.
The Robinhood agentic trading launch drove a slight 7% spike in the HOOD stock price after transactions on Robinhood Chain surged, continuing the same point as the launch that Robinhood is shifting from a brokerage to an on-chain financial infrastructure company.
Chainlink’s 95 tokenized stocks, which currently include NVDA, AAPL, and GOOG, were powered by Uniswap’s liquidity, Morpho’s lending, and Chainlink’s oracle pricing. Earlier this week, Robinhood announced a Layer 2 blockchain on Arbitrum.
The price of HOOD stock surged ~10% after the initial Robinhood Chain L2 announcement, which brought significant early investor excitement and provides context for the market’s pricing of the buildout. As of the July 10, 2026 close, HOOD traded at $111.97, down 2.73% on the day.
Google Finance HOOD Price Sustainability questions remain. This 90-day gas subsidy will expire at the end of September 2026. In April 2026, FalconX estimated its Robinhood Chain would collect approximately $1.1 million in fees in six months, but the subsidy is stopping this.
Once free gas runs out, volume will reset again, and the long-term traction will depend on real-world asset flows being greater than the memecoin spike during the launch week.
Next is early August with its Q2 2026 earnings, which will be the first to include live mainnet activity. That report will be pivotal for investors in determining whether Robinhood Chain’s early buzz is reflective of the infrastructure revenue narrative of the market.
Track active ICOs and upcoming token sales in one place.
Stablecoins are useful, but crypto still has a simple payment problem: users do not want to think about gas. BNB Chain’s push toward gas-free stablecoin transfers is aimed directly at that friction point, especially for wallet users who are not interested in managing network fees every time they send money.
That makes this more than a small feature update. It touches one of the reasons crypto payments still feel awkward for normal users.
For more details, visit the official Binance platform.
TL;DR BNB Chain is pushing gas-free stablecoin transfer rails through a wallet partnership.The goal is to reduce friction for everyday payments and onboarding.Fee delegation could make stablecoin transfers feel less intimidating for retail users. Why Gas-Free Transfers Matter For experienced users, gas fees are just part of crypto. For everyone else, they are confusing, annoying, and easy to get wrong. If a wallet can hide or delegate that cost in a safe way, stablecoin payments become much easier to understand.
BNB Chain’s approach sits inside a broader industry trend toward account abstraction, fee sponsorship, and smoother wallet UX. The goal is to make the chain feel less like infrastructure and more like a usable payment network.
The Retail Adoption Angle Stablecoins already have product-market fit in many parts of the world. The challenge is making them accessible without forcing users to learn every detail of blockchain mechanics.
Gas-free transfers can help with that. They lower the psychological barrier and reduce failed transactions caused by users not holding the right gas token.
The Caveat Behind The Convenience The important question is how fee delegation is managed and funded. Someone still pays for blockspace. The user experience may be simplified, but the economics have to be sustainable.
If BNB Chain and its partners can solve that balance, gas-free stablecoin transfers could become a meaningful step toward everyday crypto payments. If not, it risks being a temporary subsidy. Either way, the direction of travel is clear: crypto wallets are trying to remove friction wherever they can.
A Useful Way To Frame It The useful way to read this story is not as a standalone headline about BNB Chain, but as part of the wider pressure building around Binance coverage this week. Markets have been jumping quickly from one catalyst to the next, so the cleaner value for readers is in separating the actual development from the instant reaction around it. In this case, the source material gives us a concrete event to work from, rather than a loose rumour or a recycled social-media talking point.
That distinction matters because crypto readers are being asked to process a lot at once: ETF flows, regulatory actions, exchange listings, protocol upgrades, wallet movements, and political signals. A story like this is most useful when it helps them understand where Trust Wallet fits into that broader map. It does not need to be inflated into a guaranteed price call to be worth covering. It simply needs to explain what changed, who is affected, and why the market is paying attention today.
The caveat is also important. Even clean source-backed developments can be overinterpreted when traders are hunting for a fast narrative. A listing does not automatically create lasting demand, a regulatory update does not immediately settle every legal question, and an on-chain movement does not always translate into a finished sale. The better read is to treat the development as a fresh data point and then watch whether follow-up activity confirms the direction of travel.
For NewsBTC readers, that means keeping the focus on what can actually be verified from the source and avoiding the temptation to turn every update into a sweeping market verdict. The story is strong enough on its own terms: it gives investors and traders another piece of context around Binance, while leaving room for the next filing, dashboard update, wallet movement, governance vote, or exchange notice to decide whether the angle grows into something bigger.
This report is based on information from Binance.
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
Aave’s V4 discussion is a useful reminder that DeFi’s next cycle will not be won only by bigger yields or louder token narratives. Cost still matters. If users have to think twice before every transaction, the product is not ready for the next wave of adoption.
That is why the gas optimization side of Aave’s roadmap deserves attention. It speaks to the everyday friction that can make even good DeFi products feel too expensive or clunky.
For more details, visit the official Governance platform.
TL;DR Aave Labs has outlined gas optimization work tied to its V4 roadmap.The proposal focuses on making liquidity movement and user interactions cheaper.For DeFi, cost reduction remains one of the clearest ways to improve real usage. Why Gas Costs Still Shape DeFi Aave is one of DeFi’s most established lending protocols, but scale does not remove the need for efficiency. Users still care about how much it costs to borrow, repay, move collateral, or interact across chains.
The V4 roadmap points toward technical changes designed to make those interactions smoother. That includes better handling of liquidity and a more modern architecture for a multi-chain environment.
The Cross-Chain Reality DeFi is no longer confined to one chain or one liquidity venue. Capital moves across Ethereum, layer-2 networks, and alternative ecosystems. That creates opportunities, but it also creates fragmentation and cost overhead.
Aave’s challenge is to make that environment feel less fragmented for users. Gas optimization is part of that, because even small cost savings can matter when activity scales.
Why This Is A Blue-Chip DeFi Signal The market often treats mature protocols as if they have stopped innovating. Aave’s V4 planning pushes back against that. It shows one of DeFi’s largest names still trying to improve the rails underneath the product.
That is not an instant price catalyst, but it is the kind of infrastructure work that keeps a protocol relevant after the hype fades.
Why Readers Should Care The useful way to read this story is not as a standalone headline about Aave, but as part of the wider pressure building around DeFi coverage this week. Markets have been jumping quickly from one catalyst to the next, so the cleaner value for readers is in separating the actual development from the instant reaction around it. In this case, the source material gives us a concrete event to work from, rather than a loose rumour or a recycled social-media talking point.
That distinction matters because crypto readers are being asked to process a lot at once: ETF flows, regulatory actions, exchange listings, protocol upgrades, wallet movements, and political signals. A story like this is most useful when it helps them understand where Aave v4 fits into that broader map. It does not need to be inflated into a guaranteed price call to be worth covering. It simply needs to explain what changed, who is affected, and why the market is paying attention today.
The caveat is also important. Even clean source-backed developments can be overinterpreted when traders are hunting for a fast narrative. A listing does not automatically create lasting demand, a regulatory update does not immediately settle every legal question, and an on-chain movement does not always translate into a finished sale. The better read is to treat the development as a fresh data point and then watch whether follow-up activity confirms the direction of travel.
For NewsBTC readers, that means keeping the focus on what can actually be verified from the source and avoiding the temptation to turn every update into a sweeping market verdict. The story is strong enough on its own terms: it gives investors and traders another piece of context around DeFi, while leaving room for the next filing, dashboard update, wallet movement, governance vote, or exchange notice to decide whether the angle grows into something bigger.
This article is based on Aave governance materials.
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
Ethereum mainnet is rarely described as cheap, but 1 gwei gas changes the tone. For users who have spent years avoiding mainnet transactions because of cost, this kind of fee environment creates a very different experience.
The useful way to read this is not as a guaranteed price signal, but as a fresh piece of information in a market that is trying to sort real developments from noise. The trade-off is that low fees also reduce the amount of ETH burned through the fee mechanism. For investors who care about Ethereum’s monetary narrative, that matters. Cheap usage is positive for adoption, but it can soften the burn story if network demand remains low.
For more details, visit the official Etherscan platform.
TL;DR Ethereum gas fees have fallen toward 1 gwei.Lower fees make mainnet DeFi and wallet activity more accessible.The downside is that reduced base fees also mean less ETH is burned through transaction activity. Cheap fees cut both ways Lower gas fees are good for users. Swaps, transfers, NFT interactions, and DeFi management become easier to justify when the cost of pressing a button is no longer painful. That can bring some activity back to mainnet, especially for smaller wallets.
The trade-off is that low fees also reduce the amount of ETH burned through the fee mechanism. For investors who care about Ethereum’s monetary narrative, that matters. Cheap usage is positive for adoption, but it can soften the burn story if network demand remains low.
The Market Read Use Etherscan as the data anchor and explain the burn trade-off clearly.
That is the balance readers need to keep in mind. Crypto markets are quick to turn every update into a single-direction trade, but most durable stories are more layered than that. They matter because they change positioning, incentives, infrastructure, or regulation over time.
What Comes Into Focus Now From here, the important thing is follow-through. If the source data, company update, filing, or on-chain record continues to move in the same direction, this can become part of a larger trend. If it stalls, it is still useful as a snapshot of where attention is sitting today.
For traders and readers, the cleaner takeaway is to separate the confirmed development from the speculation around it. The confirmed part is what deserves coverage. The speculation is what needs caution.
For Ethereum readers specifically, the story is useful because it gives a clearer frame for the next few sessions. It tells them what to watch, which part of the market is reacting, and where the first obvious risk sits. That is more valuable than simply saying a token, company, or regulator has made a move. The useful work is in connecting the update to liquidity, positioning, adoption, enforcement, or user behaviour without pretending that any single headline controls the whole market.
The practical question now is whether this remains an isolated update or becomes part of a chain of follow-through. A second filing, another wallet move, fresh dashboard data, a new governance vote, or a stronger market reaction can all turn a clean single-day story into a broader narrative. Without that follow-through, it still matters, but more as a marker of where attention was concentrated on July 8 than as a complete trend on its own.
That distinction is especially important in a market where headlines can travel faster than context. A source-backed update gives readers something firmer to work with, but it does not remove liquidity risk, execution risk, or the chance that traders fade the initial reaction once the first wave of attention passes.
In that sense, the headline is only the starting point. The better read is to watch how builders, exchanges, funds, wallets, regulators, or large holders respond after the first announcement has moved through the feed.
This report is based on information from etherscan.io.
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
Ethereum mainnet is rarely described as cheap, but 1 gwei gas changes the tone. For users who have spent years avoiding mainnet transactions because of cost, this kind of fee environment creates a very different experience.
The useful way to read this is not as a guaranteed price signal, but as a fresh piece of information in a market that is trying to sort real developments from noise. The trade-off is that low fees also reduce the amount of ETH burned through the fee mechanism. For investors who care about Ethereum’s monetary narrative, that matters. Cheap usage is positive for adoption, but it can soften the burn story if network demand remains low.
For more details, visit the official Etherscan platform.
TL;DR Ethereum gas fees have fallen toward 1 gwei.Lower fees make mainnet DeFi and wallet activity more accessible.The downside is that reduced base fees also mean less ETH is burned through transaction activity. Cheap fees cut both ways Lower gas fees are good for users. Swaps, transfers, NFT interactions, and DeFi management become easier to justify when the cost of pressing a button is no longer painful. That can bring some activity back to mainnet, especially for smaller wallets.
The trade-off is that low fees also reduce the amount of ETH burned through the fee mechanism. For investors who care about Ethereum’s monetary narrative, that matters. Cheap usage is positive for adoption, but it can soften the burn story if network demand remains low.
The Market Read Use Etherscan as the data anchor and explain the burn trade-off clearly.
That is the balance readers need to keep in mind. Crypto markets are quick to turn every update into a single-direction trade, but most durable stories are more layered than that. They matter because they change positioning, incentives, infrastructure, or regulation over time.
What Comes Into Focus Now From here, the important thing is follow-through. If the source data, company update, filing, or on-chain record continues to move in the same direction, this can become part of a larger trend. If it stalls, it is still useful as a snapshot of where attention is sitting today.
For traders and readers, the cleaner takeaway is to separate the confirmed development from the speculation around it. The confirmed part is what deserves coverage. The speculation is what needs caution.
For Ethereum readers specifically, the story is useful because it gives a clearer frame for the next few sessions. It tells them what to watch, which part of the market is reacting, and where the first obvious risk sits. That is more valuable than simply saying a token, company, or regulator has made a move. The useful work is in connecting the update to liquidity, positioning, adoption, enforcement, or user behaviour without pretending that any single headline controls the whole market.
The practical question now is whether this remains an isolated update or becomes part of a chain of follow-through. A second filing, another wallet move, fresh dashboard data, a new governance vote, or a stronger market reaction can all turn a clean single-day story into a broader narrative. Without that follow-through, it still matters, but more as a marker of where attention was concentrated on July 8 than as a complete trend on its own.
That distinction is especially important in a market where headlines can travel faster than context. A source-backed update gives readers something firmer to work with, but it does not remove liquidity risk, execution risk, or the chance that traders fade the initial reaction once the first wave of attention passes.
In that sense, the headline is only the starting point. The better read is to watch how builders, exchanges, funds, wallets, regulators, or large holders respond after the first announcement has moved through the feed.
This report is based on information from etherscan.io.
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
NEAR's on-chain governance body, House of Stake, passed proposal HSP-027 to eliminate the protocol's developer gas rebate, a change that will send all network gas fees to be burned rather than partly rebated to smart-contract owners. NEAR co-founder Illia Polosukhin confirmed the outcome Monday,…
NEAR's on-chain governance body, House of Stake, passed proposal HSP-027 to eliminate the protocol's developer gas rebate, a change that will send all network gas fees to be burned rather than partly rebated to smart-contract owners. NEAR co-founder Illia Polosukhin confirmed the outcome Monday, calling it a step "to keep NAER Protocol simpler and cleaner going forward."
Under the current design, 30% of gas fees generated by calls to a smart contract go to that contract's owner, with the remaining 70% burned. Once implemented, expected around August 2026 with the nearcore v2.14 release, the rebate drops to 0%, so all gas fees are burned, according to a delegate who voted on the proposal. The same account put the final tally at 46 votes representing 4.66 million veNEAR in favor versus two votes representing 1,819 veNEAR against.
NEAR's developer-relations account had flagged the vote in early July, warning builders "don't factor this gas bonus into your dApp's budget anymore." NEAR's governance account had described the measure as aimed at reducing "protocol complexity and misaligned incentives for builders."
Polosukhin, who designed the original rebate to incentivize developers to build reusable components, said the mechanism no longer reflects how most NEAR applications monetize, since projects typically sponsor gas costs and recoup revenue through spreads, subscriptions or ads instead. He also cited an accounting problem: the rebate was hard to distinguish from ordinary user deposits of funds.
Polosukhin framed the vote as a trial run for House of Stake's authority over NEAR's core economic parameters, saying it is "a great test" ahead of future proposals and that he was "excited to have explicit governance for economics of $NEAR." The change makes NEAR's token issuance more deflationary by removing a carve-out from fee burning, though it does not alter the network's broader value-capture model.
PANews reported on July 3, according to Cailian Press, the market rose and then fell back, with the gains of the three major indexes narrowing near the close. The total turnover on the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges was 3.18 trillion yuan, shrinking by 268.1 billion yuan from the previous trading day. On the market, hot spots rotated rapidly, with over 3,800 stocks rising across the board. By sector, the robotics concept exploded, with over 40 constituent stocks hitting their daily limit. Estun Automation achieved 3 boards in 4 days, Rian Electronics locked in 2 consecutive boards, and Changsheng Bearing, Wolong Electric Drive, and Shoukai Shares hit the daily limit. The gold concept continued its strong momentum, with Zhaojin Gold and Chifeng Gold both achieving 2 consecutive boards, while Sichuan Gold, Western Gold, and Shanjin International hit the daily limit. The grid equipment sector strengthened, with Huaming Equipment and Jinzhi Technology hitting the daily limit. The pharmaceutical sector was repeatedly active, and CSPC Jingfeng locked in 2 consecutive boards. On the downside, the semiconductor materials sector fluctuated lower, with electronic specialty gases and photoresist sub-sectors leading the decline. Do-Fluoride touched the downside limit, and Rongda Photosensitive, Nanda Optoelectronics, and Huate Gas fell sharply. As of the close, the Shanghai Composite Index rose 0.37%, the Shenzhen Component Index rose 0.64%, and the ChiNext Index rose 0.07%.
While Ethereum adoption keeps growing, Layer-2 networks are becoming more important for reducing costs and scaling transaction capacity. These networks are efficient in processing transactions while still gaining from Ethereum’s security.
However, gas costs and execution overhead can still affect Layer-2 performance. One aspect of optimization involves improving how the network accesses and processes state data during block execution.
Block-Level Access Lists (BAL) offer a way to organize and predefine state access patterns for a whole block instead of individual transactions. This can improve execution efficiency, reduce unnecessary operations, and lower overall gas consumption.
In this article, we will explain how Block-Level Access Lists work, why it is vital, and the steps involved in incorporating them on Ethereum Layer-2 networks.
Key Takeaways Block-Level Access Lists (BAL) help optimize how state data is accessed during block execution. BAL differs from transaction-level access lists by operating at the block level rather than the individual transaction level. Improved state access can reduce execution overhead and contribute to better gas efficiency. Layer-2 networks can benefit from lower transaction costs, higher throughput, and improved scalability. Successful BAL implementation requires proper planning, testing, and performance monitoring. Understanding Block-Level Access Lists (BAL) These are structures that identify the accounts, state data, or storage slots likely to be accessed during the execution of a block.
Instead of preparing access information for each transaction separately, BAL applies these optimizations at the block level.
This approach can help execution environments prepare state data in advance. It also reduces the number of expensive state lookups needed during processing. Hence, transactions may execute more efficiently and consume fewer resources.
For Layer-2 networks, where massive numbers of transactions are processed together, BAL can enhance performance by streamlining state access and reducing execution overhead. This can contribute to better throughput, lower costs, and improved scalability.
Why Gas Efficiency Matters on Layer-2 Networks Here’s how it plays an important role in scaling.
1. Lower transaction costs Reducing gas consumption lowers the cost of executing transactions on Layer-2 networks. This makes decentralized applications affordable and encourages greater user participation.
2. Improved network throughput Efficient transaction execution enables more transactions to be processed within the same resources. This enhances network throughput and helps support growing levels of activity.
3. Better user experience Faster processing times and lower fees create a smoother experience for users. This can boost adoption and encourage more frequent use of blockchain applications.
4. Increased scalability Gas-efficient systems can manage larger transaction volumes without significantly increasing operational demands. This enables Layer-2 networks to scale more effectively as usage grows.
5. More efficient resource usage Optimizing execution processes reduces unnecessary computations and storage operations. This helps networks use available resources more efficiently and enhance overall performance.
6. Stronger ecosystem growth Affordable transactions and enhanced performance can attract businesses, developers, and users. This supports ecosystem growth and encourages the development of new applications.
Prerequisites for Implementing Block-Level Access Lists Here are some essential features to note, which can simplify the implementation process:
1. Understanding of Ethereum state access Developers should understand how Ethereum stores contract and account data. It also stores how state information is retrieved during transaction execution across Layer-2 environments.
2. Familiarity with Layer-2 architecture A solid understanding of Layer-2 network design helps developers identify where Block-Level Access Lists can boost performance and reduce execution overhead.
3. Access to development tools The required testing frameworks, software tools, and development environments should be available to support debugging, implementation, and performance evaluation activities.
4. Knowledge of smart contract execution Developers should learn how smart contracts consume gas, access storage, and interact with blockchain state during execution and validation processes.
5. Testing environment setup A dependable testing environment is important for measuring BAL performance, identifying issues, and validating improvements before deployment to production systems.
6. Monitoring and analytics tools These solutions help monitor execution metrics, resource usage, and gas consumption. This makes it seamless to evaluate the effectiveness of BAL implementations.
Step-by-Step Guide to Implementing Block-Level Access Lists (BAL) Follow these steps to incorporate BAL effectively:
1. Analyze current state access patterns Review transaction execution data to know how contracts and accounts access state information. This helps identify opportunities for reducing repeated storage lookups.
2. Identify frequently accessed storage slots Determine which storage locations are accessed most often during block execution. These locations are likely to gain the most from BAL optimization.
3. Design the BAL structure Create a structured access list that includes frequently used accounts and storage slots expected to be accessed during block processing activities.
4. Integrate BAL into the execution pipeline Modify the execution workflow so that predefined access lists can be utilized and referenced throughout the block processing lifecycle.
5. Configure state prefetching mechanisms Design systems that load commonly accessed state data before execution commences. This reduces delays associated with repeated state retrieval requests.
6. Test access list performance Run simulations and benchmarks to evaluate the impact of BAL on execution speed, gas consumption, and overall network efficiency.
7. Measure gas savings and throughput improvements Compare performance metrics before and after implementation to determine if BAL delivers meaningful improvements in efficiency and scalability.
8. Optimize and refine the implementation Review test results and adjust access list configurations as needed to maximize performance while maintaining system reliability and stability.
9. Deploy to production After successful optimization and testing, deploy the BAL solution to the production environment and keep monitoring performance over time.
Conclusion: Improving Layer-2 Efficiency with Block-Level Access Lists Block-Level Access Lists offer a practical way to improve gas efficiency on Ethereum Layer-2 networks. By optimizing how state data is accessed during block execution, developers can reduce unnecessary overhead and improve overall network performance.
When implemented correctly, BAL can contribute to lower transaction costs, faster execution, and better scalability. As Layer-2 ecosystems continue to grow, techniques such as Block-Level Access Lists may play an increasingly important role in building more efficient and cost-effective blockchain infrastructure.
By combining careful planning, thorough testing, and continuous monitoring, developers can maximize the benefits of BAL and support the long-term growth of their Layer-2 solutions.
Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.
Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.
Key Highlights Shares of Siemens Energy advanced approximately 5% in Frankfurt on Tuesday following optimistic commentary about gas turbine market conditions. Company executives conducted a pre-close investor call Monday evening, confirming fiscal year targets and emphasizing robust order pipeline. Long-term annual gas turbine demand outlook increased to 110-120 gigawatts, representing an upgrade from the previous 100 gigawatt projection. Bank of America analysts project third-quarter total orders reaching €17.6 billion, exceeding Street estimates by roughly 4%. Complete third-quarter financial disclosure scheduled for August 5; updated 2030 strategic targets set for November 11 announcement. Shares of Siemens Energy (ENR) jumped approximately 5% during early Frankfurt session trading Tuesday, reaching 165.46 euros. The advance followed an investor conference call Monday evening where the German energy technology firm expressed strong confidence regarding gas turbine order momentum.
Siemens Energy AG, SMEGF
The Tuesday surge extends the stock’s year-to-date performance to almost 40%. This represents significant appreciation for a company that many market participants believed had already reached its cyclical peak.
During Monday’s discussion, executives directly addressed investor anxiety: the concern that 2026 could mark the apex of gas turbine demand. Leadership countered this narrative, emphasizing that market indicators show continued strength with substantial order visibility extending forward.
Wall Street Reactions Citigroup equity research suggested third-quarter gas turbine bookings might approximate the €9 billion levels recorded in earlier quarters this fiscal year. The firm highlighted that encouraging statements regarding near-term commitments and the 2027 order book should provide reassurance to concerned equity holders.
Morgan Stanley characterized the investor call as “modestly constructive versus market positioning.” The investment bank observed that Siemens Energy’s head of investor relations conveyed an optimistic message consistent with what long-positioned investors have maintained throughout recent months.
A particularly notable update: leadership elevated their structural gas turbine demand assessment to 110-120 gigawatts per year. This marks an increase from the 100 gigawatt framework presented during the November 2025 investor day presentation.
Some caution persists among analysts. Morgan Stanley noted that while near-term visibility appears solid, Siemens Energy’s own order intake will likely moderate during 2027 following this year’s exceptional performance.
Order Projections and Divisional Performance Bank of America forecasts aggregate third-quarter orders of €17.6 billion, approximately 4% above consensus expectations. The gas services segment appears especially robust, with projected orders of €9.0 billion—roughly 23% higher than Visible Alpha consensus figures.
The grid technology division presents a more measured outlook this quarter. Bank of America anticipates no mega-deals in that segment, with management guidance indicating a normalized €5 billion to €5.5 billion range following an outsized contract that boosted the previous quarter.
Grid technologies continue capturing substantial long-cycle opportunities. Approximately 2 billion euros in data-center-linked orders were secured during the first half alone, nearly equaling the total amount recorded throughout all of fiscal 2025.
Infrastructure electrification and artificial intelligence data center expansion remain central themes in management’s strategic narrative. Leadership emphasized that equipment demand for both power generation and transmission infrastructure continues rising as nations enhance and upgrade electrical grid capacity.
The Gamesa wind turbine division is progressing through its recovery phase. Siemens Energy maintains expectations that this business segment will achieve breakeven performance for the current fiscal year.
During May, the company reported a record order backlog and upgraded full-year financial guidance after delivering robust second-quarter performance. Current guidance targets comparable revenue expansion of 14% to 16% for the fiscal period ending September 30.
The profit margin before special items is projected in the 10% to 12% range, while net income for the year is forecast at approximately 4 billion euros. Siemens Energy will release comprehensive third-quarter financials on August 5.
Wall Street views that earnings release as an interim milestone rather than the primary catalyst. Analysts indicate the more significant market-moving event will be the company’s refreshed 2030 financial objectives, scheduled for presentation on November 11.
Key Takeaways Natural gas prices in Europe increased on Tuesday but remain set for their first quarterly decline since late 2023. The TTF benchmark in the Netherlands climbed 2% to reach 43.44 euros per megawatt-hour while maintaining a downward quarterly trend. Recent diplomatic agreements between the US and Iran have restored regular shipping operations through the Strait of Hormuz, alleviating supply concerns. Gas storage facilities across Europe are operating at approximately 48% capacity, significantly lower than previous years and historical benchmarks. EU officials maintain that current reserve levels are adequate to ensure energy security throughout the upcoming winter season. Wholesale natural gas markets in Europe experienced upward movement on Tuesday. However, the market continues to trend toward its first quarterly decrease in more than twelve months.
The Dutch TTF front-month contract, which serves as Europe’s primary natural gas benchmark, increased by 2% to settle at 43.44 euros per megawatt-hour. This positions the market for its first quarterly retreat in six consecutive quarters.
Dutch TTF Natural Gas Calendar (TTF=F) The United Kingdom’s wholesale gas futures also experienced a 2% uptick, closing at 104.57 pence per therm. British gas markets are poised for their first quarterly reduction in five quarters.
Factors Behind Recent Market Movements Earlier this year, prices surged dramatically amid military tensions involving Iran. The escalating situation generated significant anxiety regarding critical energy transportation corridors throughout the Middle East region.
Recent attacks on commercial vessels temporarily disrupted shipping lanes through the Strait of Hormuz last week. American and Iranian representatives are expected to convene in Doha today to continue diplomatic discussions.
Approximately twenty percent of global liquefied natural gas supplies transit through the Strait of Hormuz. Any interruption to this vital waterway typically creates upward pressure on international gas valuations.
A diplomatic ceasefire agreement reached earlier this month has enabled shipping operations to return to normal patterns. LNG shipments from Qatar and the United Arab Emirates that had been delayed are now reaching their intended destinations in global markets.
International oil prices have also stabilized to pre-conflict ranges. This normalization has eliminated some of the factors that had been propping up European natural gas and power prices.
Storage Capacity Issues Persist Despite the overall downward price trajectory, market analysts warn that insufficient storage volumes could prevent further price declines. Storage facilities throughout Europe currently hold just under 48% of their total capacity.
This represents a substantial decrease from the 56.2% storage level recorded during the corresponding period last year. The figure also trails the five-year historical injection average of 61%.
According to a Financial Times analysis referencing Wood Mackenzie data, European Union storage installations may conclude the refill period at approximately 76% capacity. This would represent the lowest peak storage capacity since at least 2011.
The storage deficit can be attributed to the Iranian military conflict, which prevented LNG deliveries through the Strait of Hormuz. Diminished output from production facilities in Qatar and the United Arab Emirates contributed additional pressure.
European storage infrastructure entered the injection season with only 28% capacity utilized. Current average levels throughout the continent hover near 48%.
The European Commission stated on Sunday that existing storage volumes do not represent an immediate threat to energy security. Officials emphasized that achieving 80% storage capacity is adequate to satisfy winter consumption requirements.
A commission representative indicated that storage levels are approximately 10% beneath pre-crisis historical averages. He further noted that natural gas consumption throughout the EU has declined by roughly 17%.
The commission has advised member nations to target storage levels of at least 75% to 80%. In previous years, the non-mandatory benchmark had been established at 90%.
PANews June 29 news, according to Cailian Press, all three major indices closed higher, the ChiNext Index rebounded after dipping, and the STAR 50 Index surged 4.61%. Total trading volume across the Shanghai and Shenzhen markets was 3.52 trillion yuan, shrinking by 34.7 billion yuan from the previous trading day. On the market, hot spots rotated rapidly, and more than 2,900 stocks fell across the board. By sector, the semiconductor equipment sector strengthened, with Jinhaitong, Huaya Intelligence, Baicheng Co., Ltd., and Huahai Qingke hitting limit up. The electronic specialty gas concept was active in the afternoon, with Haohua Technology, Kaimeite Gases, and Guanggang Gas hitting limit up. The pharmaceutical sector exploded, with more than twenty constituent stocks hitting limit up; Hainan Haiyao achieved 3 boards in 5 days, and Wanbang Pharmaceutical, Tailong Pharmaceutical, and Teyi Pharmaceutical hit limit up. The controllable nuclear fusion concept was active, with Baili Electric, Lianchuang Optoelectronics, CNNC Science & Technology, and China Nuclear Engineering hitting limit up. The retail concept oscillated and pushed higher, with Ningbo Zhongbai achieving 2 boards in 3 days and Zhongbai Group hitting limit up. On the downside, the fiber optics concept fell intraday, and Changyingtong hit a 20% daily limit down. The glass fiber concept fluctuated and adjusted, with Honghe Technology and Shandong Fiberglass falling by the daily limit. At the close, the Shanghai Composite Index rose 1.16%, the Shenzhen Component Index rose 0.19%, and the ChiNext Index rose 0.54%.
TLDR Trump ordered a federal investigation into major oil producers for insufficient pump price reductions despite falling crude costs Chevron and Exxon Mobil were specifically identified in the investigation Crude oil prices down 36% since May peak, while retail gasoline prices declined only 14% Wednesday’s national average gas price stood at $3.93 per gallon, significantly above January’s $2.76 level Investigation introduces new regulatory uncertainty for energy sector stocks ahead of midterm elections President Donald Trump has ordered the Department of Justice to open an investigation into leading oil producers, claiming they have failed to reduce gasoline prices proportionally to the significant decline in crude oil costs.
🚨 JUST IN: President Trump just CONFIRMED he's ordered a MAJOR DOJ investigation into oil companies for price gouging Americans at the pump
ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP, and more.
"The oil companies are possibly gouging. I hope they're not. Otherwise they're going to be in… pic.twitter.com/Cv1jgPpWNE
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) June 24, 2026
Trump took to Truth Social to publicly criticize the industry. “The big Oil Companies are not dropping their price at the pump commensurate with the sharply lower prices they are paying for Oil,” his post stated. He characterized the situation as consumer “gouging” and announced an immediate DOJ review.
In a video released through his administration’s official X account, Trump specifically identified Exxon Mobil and Chevron, making these two energy giants the focal point of the federal inquiry.
The Growing Gap Between Crude and Retail Prices Since reaching a peak in May, U.S. crude oil prices have tumbled 36%. This dramatic reduction followed a temporary peace agreement between the United States and Iran, which led to the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz. Prior to the conflict, approximately 20% of the world’s oil supply moved through this critical waterway.
While gasoline prices have declined for six consecutive weeks, the rate of decrease has been considerably slower than crude’s fall. AAA data shows the national average gas price reached $3.93 per gallon on Wednesday—a roughly 14% decrease from May’s high point, yet substantially above the $2.76 per gallon recorded in January before tensions with Iran escalated.
Trump characterized this pricing disparity as unacceptable.
The American Petroleum Institute countered the allegations. Spokesperson Bethany Williams explained that gasoline prices don’t mirror crude oil movements precisely, particularly following major global disruptions that continue to impact supply chains, refining capacity, and inventory levels.
Neither Exxon nor Chevron provided statements in response to media inquiries.
Impact on Energy Sector Equities Exxon Mobil stock declined 2.03% while Chevron shares dropped 2.57% after the announcement.
Exxon Mobil Corporation, XOM
Both corporations operate as integrated energy conglomerates. Retail gasoline represents just one segment of their business portfolios, which encompass exploration and production, refining operations, petrochemicals, and international commodity trading.
However, the political dimension cannot be ignored. With November midterm elections approaching and gasoline prices remaining a prominent voter concern, Trump and Republican candidates face strong incentives to maintain pressure on the energy sector.
From an investment perspective, the immediate legal implications may be limited, but the investigation elevates regulatory risk across the industry. Should the probe gain momentum, scrutiny could expand to include refining profit margins and pricing methodologies throughout the energy value chain.
The investigation’s scope could eventually extend beyond Exxon and Chevron to include independent refiners and fuel retailers, given that pump prices reflect multiple factors beyond crude oil costs alone.
TLDR Chevron’s CFO Eimear Bonner confirms gas prices are set to decline but cautions about timing delays between crude price reductions and retail pump pricing Donald Trump alleges major oil companies are engaging in price “gouging” and directs DOJ to launch immediate investigation President specifically called out Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Shell, and BP, insisting pump prices should reach $2.25 per gallon Brent crude declined 1.3% to reach $72.75 while WTI decreased 1.1% to $69.60 during Thursday trading Current national gas price average stands at $3.92 per gallon, representing a 13% decline from the previous month but still elevated compared to last year’s $3.22 During a Thursday interview with CNBC, Chevron’s Chief Financial Officer Eimear Bonner projected that gasoline prices across the United States would decline in the coming period. Nevertheless, she cautioned motorists against anticipating instantaneous relief when filling up their tanks.
CHEVRON CFO SAYS GAS PRICES WILL NORMALIZE AFTER TRUMP PRESSES BIG OIL – CNBC
— First Squawk (@FirstSquawk) June 25, 2026
Bonner’s statements followed closely on the heels of President Donald Trump’s accusations that major petroleum corporations were engaging in consumer “gouging” practices. The President contended that oil industry giants were failing to translate reduced crude oil expenses into savings for American drivers.
In a Truth Social post, Trump stated that “the big Oil Companies are not dropping their price at the pump commensurate with the sharply lower prices they are paying for Oil.” His message specifically identified Chevron, Exxon Mobil, Shell, and BP by name.
🚨 JUST IN: President Trump just CONFIRMED he's ordered a MAJOR DOJ investigation into oil companies for price gouging Americans at the pump
ExxonMobil, Chevron, Shell, BP, and more.
"The oil companies are possibly gouging. I hope they're not. Otherwise they're going to be in… pic.twitter.com/Cv1jgPpWNE
— Nick Sortor (@nicksortor) June 24, 2026
During her appearance on CNBC’s Squawk Box Europe, Bonner recognized the frustration experienced by consumers. She expressed understanding for drivers “whether it’s in the U.S. or here in the U.K. or in Europe.”
“It’s going to take time,” Bonner explained. “There is a lag between oil prices and reductions in oil prices and when that shows up at the pump.”
She further noted that Chevron was expanding its production capacity by 7% to 10% throughout the current year. According to Bonner, major oil companies were “doing everything that we can” to address the pricing situation.
Trump Directs DOJ to Investigate Major Oil Corporations The previous day, Trump announced he had instructed the Department of Justice to examine the matter without delay. A DOJ representative verified the order, characterizing fuel pricing as “not only a national security issue” but one that impacts “the wallet of every American.”
According to Trump, retail gas prices should currently sit at $2.25 per gallon. Data from AAA indicates the present national average remains at $3.92 per gallon.
This represents approximately a 13% decrease from the $4.52 average recorded one month earlier. However, it remains significantly higher than the $3.22 motorists paid during the corresponding period last year.
The previous week represented the first occasion since March that the national average fell below the $4 per gallon threshold.
Crude Oil Prices Retreat Following U.S.-Iran Agreement Crude oil valuations have experienced downward pressure since the United States and Iran formalized an interim peace agreement the previous week. The two nations continue negotiating various aspects of the 14-point framework.
During Thursday’s trading session, Brent crude decreased 1.3% to settle at $72.75 per barrel. West Texas Intermediate declined 1.1% to close at $69.60 per barrel.
The American Petroleum Institute challenged Trump’s characterization of the situation. API spokesperson Bethany Williams noted that retail fuel prices and crude oil costs don’t operate in lockstep with one another, particularly when international supply networks face continued pressure.
Representatives from Exxon Mobil, Shell, and BP had not issued responses to media inquiries by Thursday afternoon.
Bonner’s remarks underscore the industry position that marketplace dynamics, rather than intentional pricing strategies, account for the disconnect between crude oil costs and pump prices. The Department of Justice’s investigation remains active.
PANews, June 11th - According to Cailian Press, the market experienced volatile adjustments, with all three major indices closing in the red, and the ChiNext index falling by over 1%. The combined turnover of the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges was 2.55 trillion yuan, a decrease of 67.2 billion yuan compared to the previous trading day. Market hotspots were scattered, with over 4,000 stocks declining. In terms of sectors, the semiconductor materials sector bucked the trend, with target materials, photoresist, and electronic specialty gases all performing strongly. Heyuan Gas achieved four limit-up days in six trading days, Kangqiang Electronics and Haohua Technology achieved two consecutive limit-up days, and Xingfu Electronics and Huatai Gas both hit the 20cm limit-up. The semiconductor equipment sector also rose against the trend, with cleanroom and packaging/testing equipment leading the gains. Helin Micro-Nano hit the 20cm limit-up, and Shengjian Technology also hit the limit-up. The non-ferrous metals sector was active, with Xianglu Tungsten, Guizhou Platinum, and Zhangyuan Tungsten all hitting the limit-up. The chemical sector rose during the session, with Liuguo Chemical and Jinniu Chemical hitting the limit-up. On the downside, the physics AI concept stocks fluctuated and declined, with Tianyu Digital Technology, Nengke Technology, and Dashen Intelligent hitting the limit-down. Film and cinema chain stocks collectively declined, with Hengdian Film & Television and Beijing Culture both hitting their daily limit down. At the close, the Shanghai Composite Index fell 0.16%, the Shenzhen Component Index fell 0.68%, and the ChiNext Index fell 1.13%.
PANews, June 10th - According to Cailian Press, the market experienced volatile adjustments throughout the day, with the Shenzhen Component Index and the ChiNext Index both falling by more than 2%, and the Shanghai Composite Index falling below 4000 points. The combined turnover of the Shanghai and Shenzhen stock exchanges was 2.62 trillion yuan, a decrease of 21.1 billion yuan compared to the previous trading day. On the market, hot sectors rotated weakly, with over 3800 stocks declining. In terms of sectors, semiconductor materials stocks rallied across the board, with electronic specialty gases and packaging materials leading the gains. Stocks such as Heyuan Gas, Haohua Technology, and Yake Technology hit their daily limit, while China Shipbuilding Special Gas and Zhongjuxin reached new historical highs. AI application concepts bucked the trend, with stocks such as Nanxing Shares, City Media, and Tianyu Digital Technology hitting their daily limit. The consumer sector saw some activity, with sports and food and beverage sectors leading the gains, and stocks such as Huiquan Beer, Tianfu Cultural Tourism, and Yuanzu Shares hitting their daily limit. The photovoltaic concept saw afternoon fluctuations, with Aiko Solar and JA Solar hitting their daily limit. On the downside, liquid-cooled server and data center power supply sectors experienced deep corrections, with stocks such as Dayuan Pumps, Tenglong Shares, and Megmeet hitting their daily limit. At the close, the Shanghai Composite Index fell 0.42%, the Shenzhen Component Index fell 2.06%, and the ChiNext Index fell 2.70%.
GMX has launched 24/7 perpetual markets for WTI Crude Oil (WTIOIL/USD), Brent Crude (BRENTOIL/USD), and Natural Gas (NATGAS/USD). All three are backed by and tradable using WETH and USDC on Arbitrum; there is no underlying spot asset. Market pricing for the energy commodities is powered by high-speed data from Chainlink Data Streams.
GMX removes three major constraints of traditional energy futures: the 49-hour weekend blackout, a daily one-hour gap, and a timezone problem that puts the most liquid sessions in the middle of the night for anyone outside the US or UK. Add a broker requirement, margin accounts, and a ~$90K minimum notional per WTI contract, and retail access effectively doesn’t exist.
Additional Market Specs:
Availability: 24/7, continuous
Trading fees: Starting at just 1 or 2 bps during CME market hours, and based on the Open Interest balance
Maximum leverage: OIL: 100x during on-hours / 25x during off-hours; NATGAS: 40x during on-hours / 20x during off-hours
Dynamic liquidity: The GM pools underlying these energy perps were added to the GLV [ETH-USDC] vault, so liquidity can dynamically meet demand
Primary blockchain deployment: Arbitrum One
Multichain access: Users on Base, BNB Chain, and Ethereum Mainnet can also seamlessly trade these energy markets via their GMX Account
Trade the energy markets at: app.gmx.io
Akin to the low-fee Gold and Silver markets launched last week, energy commodities have clear active trading sessions that affect liquidity depth and price stability. The parameters for these 24/7 GMX markets reflect that reality, with conditions adapting to on-hours and off-hours trading:
Energy commodity markets are technically open around the clock, but their liquidity profile is not uniform. WTI and Brent crude have benchmark pricing windows tied to major trading centers. Natural gas pricing is similarly concentrated during peak session hours.
Outside those windows, bid/ask spreads widen, order book depth thins, and price moves can be more abrupt. GMX’s on/off-hours parameters for fees, leverage, and open interest caps account for this directly.
GMX has adopted these primary markets while removing their traditional constraints, enabling traders to open, close, reduce, or adjust their positions even during the Friday-to-Sunday blackout or the daily one-hour maintenance gap.
WTI and Brent crude are the two primary global oil benchmarks and underpin the largest commodity derivatives markets. Natural gas is also one of the most actively traded energy instruments, with pricing that responds to supply dynamics, weather, and macro conditions.
Trading these instruments on leverage through traditional channels requires a futures account or a brokerage with commodities access; routes that introduce counterparty risk and other friction. GMX’s synthetic perps remove the custodian from the equation, and democratize access.
The launch of WTIOIL/USD, BRENTOIL/USD, and NATGAS/USD follows last week’s introduction of low-fee XAU/USD (Gold) and XAG/USD (Silver) markets, GMX’s first perps for real-world assets.
The expansion logic is consistent: we focus on globally traded instruments with the liquidity depth and pricing infrastructure needed to support synthetic perp markets without weakening risk parameters.
GMX’s objective is to be a leading permissionless trading platform for a broad range of globally traded instruments, including Forex and stock indices. The current RWA market lineup is the first phase of that ongoing expansion. Sign up to be notified when new markets go live:
All three markets are powered by the Chainlink data standard via Data Streams, which actively secures all of GMX’s existing 100+ perp markets.
For perpetuals, oracle quality has a direct bearing on execution integrity. The low-latency delivery window closes the gap between oracle price and market price, and the aggregated pricing is designed to make price manipulation significantly more difficult. These properties matter to all users, and are even more relevant during the off-hours when underlying liquidity is thinner.
GMX is the go-to permissionless exchange for trading Perps on a growing range of global financial instruments. Trade 100+ transparently fair markets across multiple asset classes, with up to 100x leverage, fast execution, and sub-second Chainlink oracle pricing—all from your wallet.
Over 45,000 liquidity providers on GMX earn from billions in weekly volume. Trusted by thousands of traders daily and integrated across 70+ DeFi protocols, GMX is a foundational layer for DeFi on public blockchains.
[PRESS RELEASE – Boston, Mass, December 5th, 2024]
No Wallet, No Gas – Evrloot Brings Seamless Blockchain Gameplay to All Players
Evrloot, the anticipated blockchain-based RPG, is set to exit its closed beta and officially launch with a Free-to-Play campaign at the end of November 2024. Developed by a global team of 13 passionate builders, Evrloot offers a rogue-like, light-MMO experience in a medieval fantasy world, combining deep gameplay with innovative on-chain mechanics.
Evrloot distinguishes itself from most Web3 games with a unique approach: Build a fun on-chain game first, talk later. The game empowers players by treating NFTs as save games, making progress and achievements tangible and tradeable on-chain. Players’ in-game experiences—whether mastering fishing or crafting a powerful weapon—are captured as soulbound or equipable ERC-6220, essentially NFTs 2.0 that can be seamlessly accessed across ecosystems, ensuring every victory stays with the players.
Players will have the opportunity to explore idle missions, tactical auto-battler dungeons, and on-chain crafting systems. Key features include:
Idle Missions: Players can deploy special bait to send their character on a six-hour fishing expedition, offering the chance to discover rare items. Crafting: Resources such as fish and herbs can be combined to mint health potions. Tactical Dungeons: Players equip their loot to navigate dangerous dungeons. Only those who exit safely keep their spoils, which are minted on-chain. NFT Trading Marketplace: Valuable items, such as a ‘Damaged Battle Axe,’ can be exchanged for health potions and other resources through the game’s native marketplace. Evrloot began as a passion project from Polkadot fans who believed NFTs could do more than just exist as collectibles. The game has grown steadily during its beta phase, recording over 1.5 million on-chain transactions on Kusama and Polkadot and fostering a community of around 400 NFT owners. It peaked at 1,000 Monthly Active Users (MAU) during the successful “Pink Event.” For the full release, the game will launch on Moonbeam, with a seamless onboarding experience featuring wallet and gas abstraction.
Evrloot’s launch prioritizes accessibility. Players can dive into the full gameplay experience without barriers—no crypto wallet or upfront payment required. As they progress, players have the option to upgrade their free-to-play characters to NFTs for enhanced features. However, the game ensures that free players enjoy the complete experience without any pressure to upgrade.
Tobi “Deckard” Amann, CEO of Chainfood Studio, the developers of Evrloot shared, “Our goal with Evrloot is to create an immersive and thrilling Dark Fantasy Web3 world that prioritizes fun and player enjoyment, transforming the world into a canvas for its players. Through their in-game actions, players shape the story and forge the lore of this world. As RPG enthusiasts, creating a canvas like this has always been our dream—and with Evrloot, we’ve found an exciting and ethical opportunity to bring our vision fully on-chain.”“I am very excited to see Evrloot enter its next growth phase. Chainfood studio has a very special game in Evrloot with a fiercely loyal community – moving to a Free-To-Play model will give them a lot more exposure and will allow a lot more players discover what makes this game so special.” said Sicco Naets, Head of Ecosystem Development at Moonbeam.
Evrloot’s player onboarding uses a gamified affiliate campaign. Players join in-game clans that link back to the affiliates that brought them to the game. Being part of an active in-game clan not only shows player alliance with existing communities, it boosts the points they can potentially earn that are important for Phase II of the campaign. Players join for free and can optionally upgrade to one of 1299 exclusive NFT 2.0 Characters.
With freemium upgrades, cosmetics, and marketplace fees driving the business model, Evrloot offers a sustainable economy without compromising the player experience. While Evrloot operates without a token at launch, players are able to gather Points by completing tasks and referring friends.
Evrloot will also run a giveaway campaign to coincide with the game’s launch. Players who participate in specific in-game activities will have the chance to win 1 of 3 exclusive merch packs featuring original hand-drawn concept art on hand-made medieval paper, an Evrloot T-shirt, and stickers. Players can enter by joining the “⭕️” clan for at least one day between the release date and December 21st. Winners will be drawn on December 21st and contacted via X (if linked in-game).
For more information, users can follow Evrloot on social media for the most current updates.
About Evrloot
Evrloot is a blockchain-based RPG with a medieval fantasy setting, developed by a global team passionate about ethical Web3 gaming. Combining engaging gameplay with NFT-based mechanics, Evrloot allows players to keep their progress on-chain and trade assets in a dynamic marketplace. Built on Moonbeam, Evrloot aims to redefine blockchain gaming with fun, accessibility, and sustainability at its core.
About Polkadot
Polkadot is the powerful, secure core of Web3, providing a shared foundation that unites some of the world’s most transformative apps and blockchains. Polkadot offers advanced modular architecture that allows devs to design and build their own specialized blockchain projects easily, pooled security that ensures the same high standard for secure block production across all connected chains and apps connected to it, and robust governance that ensures a transparent system where everyone has say in shaping the blockchain ecosystem for growth and sustainability. With Polkadot, users are not just participants, they’re co-creators with the power to shape its future.
Along with other supported chains, important assets and networks including BTC, ETH, and SOL are now covered by the subsidy. It is noteworthy that transactions made inside Mixin’s Privacy Wallet are promptly settled via Mixin’s decentralized network and remain natively fee-free. By expanding its gas fee subsidy program, Mixin, the privacy-first digital asset transactional platform, will allow users to move assets across many blockchains with effectively zero net transaction fees.
The program, which was first introduced in 2025, removes one of the most enduring obstacles to regular cryptocurrency use by enabling users to import external Web3 wallets into the Mixin ecosystem and carry out on-chain transactions while paying gas fees up front. These fees are then fully reimbursed to their wallets at the start of the following month.
Small and frequent transactions have long been unfeasible due to gas fees, especially during times of network congestion. This problem is addressed by Mixin’s subsidy approach, which greatly enhances the user experience and makes regular transfers between supported networks more affordable and accessible.
“Our goal has always been to make cryptocurrency as simple and private as sending a text message,” said Cedric Fung, Co-Founder of Mixin. “Gas fees have been one of the biggest barriers to everyday crypto usage. By subsidizing those costs across supported networks, we’re removing friction from how people move value online.”
Users may move funds between Mixin Privacy Wallets and the imported Web3 wallets, as well as transfer assets between imported wallets, after a Web3 wallet has been imported into Mixin. Along with other supported chains, important assets and networks including BTC, ETH, and SOL are now covered by the subsidy. There are currently no restrictions on the program’s transaction volume or transfer amounts.
It is noteworthy that transactions made inside Mixin’s Privacy Wallet are promptly settled via Mixin’s decentralized network and remain natively fee-free. These transactions work independently of the subsidy method used for on-chain transfers utilizing imported Web3 wallets.
This upgrade is a component of Mixin’s larger initiative to combine financial infrastructure that prioritizes privacy with encrypted messaging. The platform, which uses the Signal Protocol for end-to-end encrypted communication, allows users to manage assets using a chat-based interface and negotiate payments in private.
“The future of finance is social, private, and multi-chain,” Fung added. “Mixin is building a messaging layer where people can communicate, coordinate, and move value without friction.”
An open-source decentralized transaction network Mixin was created to link many blockchains with robust privacy guarantees and fast throughput. The platform, which was established in 2017, combines an encrypted messenger driven by the Signal Protocol with a self-custodial multi-chain wallet. Mixin, which has over a million members and over $1 billion in user-managed assets, continues to build infrastructure to make using digital assets easier on a daily basis.
For detailed rules, eligibility, supported transfers, and updates on the Gas Fee Rebate Program, visit:
https://support.mixin.one/en/article/campaign-free-transactions-between-mixin-wallets-kozded/
Content writer by profession. A crypto lover and has passion for writing. Follows the developments of digital currency right from its launch, years ago.
Hong Kong, Hong Kong, 26th March 2026, ChainwireBy Chainwire
Mar 26, 2026
3 min read
Create an account to save your articles.
Add on Google
Add Decrypt as your preferred source to see more of our stories on Google.
Hong Kong, Hong Kong, March 26th, 2026, Chainwire
Mixin, the privacy-first transactional platform for digital assets, is expanding its gas fee subsidy program, enabling users to transfer assets across multiple blockchains with effectively zero net transaction costs.
Originally launched in 2025, the program allows users to import external Web3 wallets into the Mixin ecosystem and execute on-chain transactions while paying gas fees upfront, which are then fully reimbursed to their wallets at the beginning of the following month, effectively removing one of the most persistent barriers to everyday crypto usage.
Gas fees have long made small and frequent transactions impractical, particularly during periods of network congestion. Mixin’s subsidy model addresses this challenge by significantly improving the user experience, making everyday transfers across supported networks more accessible and cost-efficient.
"Our goal has always been to make cryptocurrency as simple and private as sending a text message," said Cedric Fung, Co-Founder of Mixin. "Gas fees have been one of the biggest barriers to everyday crypto usage. By subsidizing those costs across supported networks, we’re removing friction from how people move value online."
Once a Web3 wallet is imported into Mixin, users can transfer assets between imported wallets, move funds between Mixin Privacy Wallets and the imported Web3 wallets,. The subsidy currently applies to major assets and networks including BTC, ETH, and SOL, alongside other supported chains. At present, there are no limits on the number of transactions or transfer amounts under the program.
It is important to note that transfers conducted within Mixin’s Privacy Wallet remain natively fee-free and are settled instantly via Mixin’s decentralized network. These transactions operate independently from the subsidy mechanism applied to on-chain transfers involving imported Web3 wallets.
This upgrade is part of Mixin’s broader effort to integrate encrypted messaging with privacy-focused financial infrastructure. Built using the Signal Protocol for end-to-end encrypted communication, the platform enables users to coordinate payments privately while managing assets within a chat-based interface.
"The future of finance is social, private, and multi-chain," Fung added. "Mixin is building a messaging layer where people can communicate, coordinate, and move value without friction."
About MixinMixin is an open-source decentralized transaction network designed to connect multiple blockchains with high throughput and strong privacy guarantees. Founded in 2017, the platform combines a self-custodial multi-chain wallet with an encrypted messenger powered by the Signal Protocol. With more than 1 million users and over $1 billion in user-managed assets, Mixin continues to develop infrastructure aimed at simplifying the everyday use of digital assets.
Learn MoreFor detailed rules, eligibility, supported transfers, and updates on the Gas Fee Rebate Program, visit:
Mixin, the privacy-first transactional platform for digital assets, is expanding its gas fee subsidy program, enabling users to transfer assets across multiple blockchains with effectively zero net transaction costs.
Originally launched in 2025, the program allows users to import external Web3 wallets into the Mixin ecosystem and execute on-chain transactions while paying gas fees upfront, which are then fully reimbursed to their wallets at the beginning of the following month, effectively removing one of the most persistent barriers to everyday crypto usage.
Gas fees have long made small and frequent transactions impractical, particularly during periods of network congestion. Mixin’s subsidy model addresses this challenge by significantly improving the user experience, making everyday transfers across supported networks more accessible and cost-efficient.
“Our goal has always been to make cryptocurrency as simple and private as sending a text message,” said Cedric Fung, Co-Founder of Mixin. “Gas fees have been one of the biggest barriers to everyday crypto usage. By subsidizing those costs across supported networks, we’re removing friction from how people move value online.”
Once a Web3 wallet is imported into Mixin, users can transfer assets between imported wallets, move funds between Mixin Privacy Wallets and the imported Web3 wallets,. The subsidy currently applies to major assets and networks including BTC, ETH, and SOL, alongside other supported chains. At present, there are no limits on the number of transactions or transfer amounts under the program.
It is important to note that transfers conducted within Mixin’s Privacy Wallet remain natively fee-free and are settled instantly via Mixin’s decentralized network. These transactions operate independently from the subsidy mechanism applied to on-chain transfers involving imported Web3 wallets.
This upgrade is part of Mixin’s broader effort to integrate encrypted messaging with privacy-focused financial infrastructure. Built using the Signal Protocol for end-to-end encrypted communication, the platform enables users to coordinate payments privately while managing assets within a chat-based interface.
“The future of finance is social, private, and multi-chain,” Fung added. “Mixin is building a messaging layer where people can communicate, coordinate, and move value without friction.”
About Mixin Mixin is an open-source decentralized transaction network designed to connect multiple blockchains with high throughput and strong privacy guarantees. Founded in 2017, the platform combines a self-custodial multi-chain wallet with an encrypted messenger powered by the Signal Protocol. With more than 1 million users and over $1 billion in user-managed assets, Mixin continues to develop infrastructure aimed at simplifying the everyday use of digital assets.
Learn More For detailed rules, eligibility, supported transfers, and updates on the Gas Fee Rebate Program, visit:
Stablecoins are blockchain tokens pegged 1:1 to a fiat currency, usually the U.S. dollar. They give you the programmability and speed of crypto without the price swings. That simple combination has turned them into plumbing for DeFi, cross-border payments, remittances, treasury management, and on-chain settlement.
The market crossed $250 billion in total supply by mid-2025 and has continued growing. As of early 2026, total stablecoin market capitalization is above $310 billion according to DefiLlama data. Tether’s USDT sits around $183-187B (roughly 60% of the market), Circle’s USDC around $74-76B. Growth has been driven by regulatory clarity in the U.S. and EU and a wave of institutional adoption.
This article is for anyone considering issuing a stablecoin, evaluating the infrastructure to do so, or trying to map the competitive field. It covers issuance models, regulatory frameworks, technical architecture, service providers, the new “stablechains,” step-by-step launch guidance, and the risks worth planning for.
How stablecoin issuance works Issuing a stablecoin means designing, launching, and operating a token where new units are minted only when equivalent reserves or collateral are locked up. Tokens can be burned (destroyed) when someone redeems. The issuer’s job is keeping that mint-burn cycle trustworthy, transparent, and compliant.
You can either build it yourself with custom smart contracts, banking partnerships, and compliance infrastructure, or use a turnkey platform (often called “Stablecoin-as-a-Service”). Most organizations in 2026 choose the turnkey route, at least to start. But understanding both matters. Even turnkey solutions force architectural decisions that stick with you for years.
Which issuance model fits? Every stablecoin starts with a model decision. Your choice determines capital requirements, regulatory burden, revenue mechanics, and risk profile.
Fiat-backed (custodial / off-chain reserves) The dominant model, accounting for over 90% of the market. Also the one regulators prefer.
Users or institutions deposit fiat (USD cash, Treasuries, repos, money market funds, or insured bank deposits) with the issuer or a qualified custodian. The issuer mints an equivalent number of tokens on-chain. When someone redeems, the tokens get burned and the reserves are released. Reserves sit in segregated, audited accounts.
The economics: issuers earn yield on reserves, primarily from short-term Treasuries. That’s how Circle, Tether, and Paxos make money.
The trade-off is centralization. You depend on banks and custodians, you need licenses, and you’re subject to ongoing audits. But for most businesses, this is the right starting point. USDC, USDT, PayPal’s PYUSD, and newer entrants like KlarnaUSD (issued via Bridge) all use this model.
Crypto-collateralized (on-chain, over-collateralized) Users deposit volatile crypto (typically ETH) into smart contracts at 120-200% collateralization ratios. Price oracles are central to this model. They’re external data feeds (Chainlink is the most widely used) that supply real-time asset prices to on-chain contracts. If oracle data is stale, manipulated, or delayed, liquidations can misfire or fail entirely, potentially threatening the peg. Oracle risk is one of the less-discussed but more dangerous failure modes in crypto-collateralized stablecoins. If the collateral ratio drops below a threshold, automatic liquidation kicks in. Minting and burning happen entirely through smart contracts.
This model is fully transparent and doesn’t need traditional banking relationships. The downside is capital inefficiency: you lock up significantly more value than you mint. Liquidation risk during volatile markets is real. MakerDAO’s DAI is the best-known example. Ethena’s USDe is a newer hybrid.
Revenue comes from stability fees and liquidation penalties rather than reserve yield.
Algorithmic / hybrid Pure algorithmic stablecoins use smart contracts to expand and contract supply through incentive mechanisms, with little or no collateral backing. After the TerraUSD collapse in 2022, this model is largely discredited. Most regulators have banned or restricted it. The EU’s MiCA framework prohibits purely algorithmic stablecoins outright.
Hybrids like FRAX combine partial reserves with algorithmic mechanisms, but adoption remains niche. Unless you have a very specific reason, avoid this model in 2026.
Tokenized deposits / bank-integrated Tokens represent direct claims on insured bank deposits or tokenized reserves on permissioned or public chains. JPMorgan’s JPM Coin (now JPMD) is the primary example. These stablecoins integrate directly with traditional banking rails.
The advantage is deposit insurance and the trust infrastructure of established banks. The downside is ecosystem lock-in and limited multichain reach. This model works best for large financial institutions that already have a banking charter and want to extend their rails onto blockchain.
Regulatory frameworks in 2026 Regulation is simultaneously the biggest barrier and biggest enabler of stablecoin issuance. If you don’t understand the regulatory environment, the rest of this article won’t matter much.
The global picture has converged around a few core requirements: 1:1 reserves in high-quality liquid assets, licensing, redemption rights at par, regular audits, and AML/KYC compliance. Most frameworks also restrict or prohibit yield payments directly to stablecoin holders, keeping the instrument classified as a payment tool rather than a security. But the specifics vary by jurisdiction, and the debate around yield-bearing stablecoins is active (the White House held closed-door meetings on this topic as recently as February 2026).
United States: the GENIUS Act and federal/state oversight The GENIUS Act, passed in 2025, created the first comprehensive federal framework for stablecoin issuance. Only “permitted” issuers can operate: FDIC-insured banks and their subsidiaries, or federally/state-qualified non-bank issuers.
An important structural detail: oversight is split between federal and state regulators depending on issuer type and size. Non-bank issuers with under $10B in circulation can be regulated at the state level under existing money transmitter frameworks. Larger issuers and bank-affiliated issuers fall under federal oversight via banking regulators, with the OCC playing a role for non-bank issuers at the federal level. It’s not a single-regulator model.
Requirements: 1:1 reserves in cash, Treasuries, repos, and insured deposits. Monthly attestations and annual audits for large issuers. Redeemable at par. No interest payments to holders under the current framework. Foreign issuers face restrictions unless their home jurisdiction has equivalence arrangements.
European Union: MiCA The Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation took effect across 2024-2025 and creates two categories: e-money tokens (EMTs, pegged to a single currency) and asset-referenced tokens (ARTs). Issuers must be EU credit institutions or authorized electronic money institutions. Reserves must be held in high-quality liquid assets at EU banks.
Pure algorithmic stablecoins are banned. Redemption at par is mandatory, often without fees. The ECB has oversight authority for systemically important stablecoins. Full authorization is required by July 1, 2026 for all issuers operating in the EU.
Other jurisdictions The UK is building its framework through FCA and Bank of England e-money rules, with caps for systemic stablecoins. Singapore requires a MAS license and full backing. Japan restricts issuance to banks and trust companies. Hong Kong has introduced HKMA licensing for HKD-pegged stablecoins.
The pattern across all of these: convergence on reserves, redemption rights, and licensing. Differences mainly come down to issuer eligibility and acceptable reserve assets. The U.S. favors Treasuries, the EU favors bank deposits.
Technical architecture: what a modern stablecoin stack looks like Whether you build or buy, you need to understand the components.
Core smart contracts Deployed on one or more blockchains (Ethereum, Solana, Algorand, others), these handle minting, burning, and transfer logic. For 2026 compliance, your contracts need role-based access control (minter, burner, pauser, blacklister, clawback roles), pause and freeze functionality for AML and sanctions enforcement, and blacklisting and clawback for court orders.
Most teams start with audited frameworks like OpenZeppelin’s ERC-20Upgradeable combined with Pausable, AccessControl, and UUPS proxy patterns for upgradeability. Some blockchains offer built-in compliance controls at the protocol level. Algorand, for instance, has native freeze and clawback functions that make it attractive for institutional issuers without requiring custom contract logic.
Advanced standards like Tempo’s TIP-20 (on their payments-first L1) add native protocol-level features: built-in mint/burn/transfer restrictions, RBAC, transfer memos for reconciliation, and native yield distribution, all without extra contract complexity.
Issuer backend system A secure, centralized system (typically API-driven) that authorizes minting and burning events. It verifies that fiat deposits arrived before instructing the smart contract to mint, and confirms burn events before releasing fiat for redemption. This is the operational core that ties on-chain activity to off-chain banking.
Custody and reserve layer Fiat and other reserve assets sit in custody accounts at regulated banks or trust companies. Qualified custodians provide regular attestations. Typical reserve composition includes cash, short-term U.S. Treasuries, repos, money market funds, and insured bank deposits. Increasingly, reserves also include tokenized Treasuries from providers like BlackRock, WisdomTree, and Superstate, which generate yield while maintaining liquidity. As a point of reference, Tether’s Q4 2025 attestation reported $141 billion in total U.S. Treasury exposure (direct holdings plus overnight reverse repos), making it one of the largest holders of U.S. sovereign debt globally.
Compliance and identity layer KYC/AML checks and transaction monitoring tools integrate with the issuance and redemption flow. Only verified users can mint or redeem. All on-chain activity gets screened for illicit finance. Blockchain analytics providers like Chainalysis and Blockaid are standard parts of the stack.
Fiat on/off-ramps The bridges between blockchain and traditional finance. Licensed money services businesses like Coinme provide the infrastructure to move funds between bank accounts, cards, and on-chain stablecoins.
Multichain deployment Most stablecoins in 2026 operate across multiple chains. You can deploy natively on each chain, use cross-chain bridges or interoperability protocols (Axelar, LayerZero, Circle’s CCTP), or issue on specialized payment-focused L1s. The choice depends on your target users and use cases.
Security Multiple independent audits are table stakes. Beyond that: timelocks on critical contract functions, multi-sig governance, invariant checks, and HSM or MPC-based key custody. Daily reconciliation between on-chain supply and off-chain reserves is standard practice, along with monthly attestations.
Stablecoin-as-a-Service providers Most businesses in 2026 use a turnkey provider rather than building from scratch.
Paxos The most established player, operating since 2018. Paxos is the issuer behind PayPal’s PYUSD and has partnerships with Interactive Brokers and other large enterprises. They handle regulatory compliance, reserve custody, and minting/redeeming technology across multiple blockchains.
They’ve processed over $180B in activity and focus on enterprise partnerships. Expect enterprise-level pricing to match.
Circle Circle is first and foremost the issuer of USDC, the second-largest stablecoin. They don’t offer white-label issuance of fully custom-branded stablecoins the way Brale or Bridge do. What they do offer is programmable wallets, Circle Mint for institutional USDC access, and the Circle Payments Network (CPN) for connecting financial institutions. If you want to build payment products on top of an existing, highly regulated stablecoin rather than issuing your own, Circle’s stack is the natural choice.
Circle supports 20+ blockchains, offers API-based integration, and charges transaction-based fees. Their cross-chain transfer protocol (CCTP) is a real differentiator for multichain deployments. Circle also went public on the NYSE in 2025, adding another layer of transparency.
Brale A U.S.-regulated issuance platform that lets businesses create and manage their own fiat-backed stablecoins. Brale acts as the legal issuer under its money transmitter licenses, handling custody, reserve management, and compliance while providing APIs for minting and burning across 20+ blockchains.
Good option for organizations that want a custom-branded stablecoin without building the regulatory infrastructure themselves. Revenue-share pricing model.
Bridge (Stripe-acquired) Bridge offers an Open Issuance API to launch and manage a branded stablecoin with minimal code. They handle reserves, liquidity, compliance, and fiat on/off-ramps. Stripe’s acquisition gives Bridge access to an enormous merchant network.
Bridge has received preliminary approval to establish a national trust bank, which would let them offer regulated custody and reserve management under a federal framework.
Coinbase Custom Stablecoins Launched December 18, 2025, this is Coinbase’s “stablecoin-as-a-service” offering. It lets businesses create custom-branded stablecoins backed 1:1 by USDC and other USD-stablecoins, with Coinbase handling issuance, smart contracts, compliance, and custody. First partners include Flipcash, Solflare, and R2. Separately, Coinbase is also powering stablecoin-denominated institutional funding for Klarna via USDC.
Important nuance: at launch, Custom Stablecoins use USDC as the underlying collateral rather than direct fiat reserves. That means Coinbase is acting as an issuance layer on top of Circle’s stablecoin, not as a direct fiat-to-stablecoin issuer like Paxos or Brale. Coinbase has applied for an OCC national trust charter, which could eventually allow it to custody reserves directly.
Frax Finance Known for its hybrid stablecoin model, Frax now offers “GENIUS-compatible” white-label infrastructure. Per project announcements, Sonic Labs used Frax’s framework to launch a USSD stablecoin backed by tokenized Treasuries. Frax provides modular smart contract infrastructure with built-in composability through LayerZero.
The DeFi-native option, designed for teams comfortable with on-chain tooling.
Stably A primary partner for blockchain platforms like Algorand and Stacks. Stably provides a Stablecoin-as-a-Service suite including fiat on/off-ramps, multi-chain issuance, and compliance. They specialize in stablecoins pegged to various fiat currencies beyond the dollar.
M0 M0 is a programmable stablecoin issuance protocol that separates token logic from reserve custody. It lets businesses build “stablecoin extensions,” which are custom-branded tokens with their own compliance rules, yield mechanics, and access controls, all built on a shared liquidity and interoperability layer. M0 raised a $40M Series B and has over $779M in on-chain supply minted. Bridge (Stripe) uses M0’s protocol under the hood for stablecoin issuance, as confirmed when MetaMask launched mUSD. MoonPay’s PYUSDx framework also runs on M0 infrastructure.
Worth watching closely. M0’s approach of decoupling reserve management from token issuance could become the default pattern for application-specific stablecoins.
Other providers worth noting Agora offers regulated stablecoin issuance with a trust-based approach. Bastion takes a similar regulated trust posture. Anchorage Digital is primarily a federally chartered crypto bank providing qualified custody and regulated banking services. It’s not a full stablecoin issuance platform, but it plays a role in the custody and compliance layer that issuers need. Fireblocks provides infrastructure and custody tooling (MPC wallets, workflow automation, settlement) across 100+ chains. It processes roughly 15% of global stablecoin volume and is used by 300+ banks and payment providers, but it’s infrastructure plumbing, not a legal issuer of stablecoins. BitGo offers qualified custody infrastructure. Cobo provides full-suite payment operations, combining MPC custody, payment APIs, and Wallet-as-a-Service across 80+ chains. Tassat focuses on tokenized deposits and real-time settlement for institutional digital asset operations, including its Link platform for real-time collateral and settlement workflows.
The stablechains: purpose-built L1s for stablecoin payments This is probably the most interesting development in stablecoin infrastructure right now. Starting in 2025, a new category of “stablechains” appeared: Layer-1 blockchains built specifically for stablecoin payments and issuance. Instead of deploying on general-purpose chains like Ethereum or Solana, issuers can use infrastructure where stablecoins are first-class citizens rather than an afterthought.
Three projects lead this category: Tempo, Circle Arc, and Tether Plasma. All three are EVM-compatible, target sub-second finality, and aim to make stablecoin transactions competitive with Visa, ACH, and SWIFT. They differ in philosophy, ecosystem, and who they’re designed for.
A word of caution: this category is very early. As of March 2026, only Plasma has a live mainnet with real production volume. Tempo and Arc are on public testnet with mainnet launches expected later in 2026. Performance claims (TPS targets, finality times) are based on testnet data or design targets, not proven production metrics at scale. Partnership announcements reflect stated intentions and early pilots, not necessarily live integrations processing real money. That said, the backers (Stripe, Circle, Tether) have the resources and distribution to make these projects matter, which is why they’re worth tracking closely.
Tempo Incubated by Stripe and Paradigm with over $500M raised. Tempo is a payments-first L1 that takes a deliberately neutral approach. No native token. Gas fees can be paid in any stablecoin through an enshrined AMM that auto-swaps to validators. Issuers aren’t forced into any single stablecoin ecosystem.
Tempo’s native TIP-20 token standard includes built-in mint/burn restrictions, protocol-level compliance (TIP-403 Policies), delegatable RBAC with on-chain audit logs, transfer memos for off-chain reconciliation, and native yield distribution. Design targets include 100,000+ TPS and roughly 0.6-second deterministic finality (no re-orgs), though these are pre-mainnet projections, not production-verified metrics.
Other protocol primitives: a Fee AMM (pay gas in any stablecoin, creating structural demand), a native stablecoin DEX for on-chain liquidity and FX (on roadmap), dedicated payment lanes with guaranteed blockspace, and account abstraction with passkey support.
Per Tempo’s announcement materials, the ecosystem roster includes Stripe, Shopify, Nubank, Klarna, DoorDash, Deel, Revolut, Visa, Anthropic, and Deutsche Bank. These are announced partnerships, not necessarily confirmed live integrations. Klarna’s involvement is separately confirmed through its Coinbase stablecoin funding announcement.
Status: public testnet live, mainnet expected H1 2026.
Best for issuers who want maximum flexibility, multi-stablecoin support, and deep payments integration with minimal vendor lock-in. Contact: [email protected].
Circle Arc Circle’s own L1, announced August 2025. Arc makes USDC the native gas token, creating a fully dollar-denominated chain. It uses Malachite BFT consensus for sub-second finality (around 780ms) and targets over 50,000 TPS.
The defining feature is a built-in FX engine with on-chain RFQ and PvP settlement, which makes it attractive for cross-currency treasury operations. Arc deeply integrates Circle’s stack: CCTP, native mint/burn, Gateway, and on/off-ramps. It also offers opt-in privacy designed for compliance-ready institutional use.
Partners include BlackRock, Visa, Goldman Sachs, Mastercard, HSBC, AWS, Coinbase, and OpenAI.
Status: public testnet with 100+ institutional participants, strong activity since October 2025. Mainnet expected 2026.
Best for institutions already in the USDC ecosystem, or those needing on-chain FX and capital markets infrastructure.
Tether Plasma The only stablechain with a fully live mainnet as of March 2026. Plasma is Tether’s chain, built around USDT with a zero-fee transfer model using a Paymaster contract. Sub-second finality at 1,000+ TPS. Over $373M raised.
Plasma supports 25+ stablecoins but is clearly USDT-centric. Per Tether’s communications, it has attracted significant deposits and become one of the larger USDT networks by balance. It includes a native Bitcoin bridge and optional confidential transactions. The ecosystem spans 100+ DeFi partners (including Aave) per project announcements.
Best for USDT-focused use cases, retail and emerging-market payments, and anyone who wants live production volume today.
How to choose between them The decision comes down to a few questions.
What’s your primary stablecoin? USDT points to Plasma. USDC points to Arc. Multi-stablecoin or custom-branded points to Tempo.
Who are your target users? Retail and emerging-market payments: Plasma. Enterprise and institutional capital markets: Arc. Fintechs, merchants, embedded finance: Tempo.
How much execution risk can you tolerate? Plasma is live but carries heavier regulatory scrutiny as a Tether-affiliated project. Tempo and Arc have strong backers but are pre-mainnet.
Many issuers are hedging by testing or launching on multiple chains simultaneously.
End-to-end launch stacks Several providers bundle token issuance, reserve management, compliance, and payment rails into a single integrated offering.
Polygon’s Open Money Stack bundles blockchain settlement, enterprise-grade wallets, and regulated fiat on/off-ramps (via Coinme) into one API. Transactions settle in under 2 seconds at roughly $0.002 each. Institutions can move money from a bank account into a stablecoin, settle on-chain, and convert back to fiat without juggling multiple vendors.
Cobo combines MPC custody, payment APIs, and Wallet-as-a-Service for high-volume stablecoin operations. It supports 80+ chains and plugs into existing treasury systems.
Brale’s unified platform lets an enterprise launch a stablecoin and have it instantly provisioned with on/off-ramps, pricing, APIs, and reporting, all under Brale’s regulatory umbrella.
Step-by-step: how to issue a stablecoin in 2026 The practical sequence, from concept to production.
1. Define purpose and structure. What is the stablecoin for? Payments, treasury management, loyalty programs, embedded finance? Your answer determines which issuance model, platform, and chain make sense. Fiat-backed is the right choice for most use cases. Pick your platform early since switching later is expensive.
2. Secure banking and reserves. Partner with qualified custodians or banks. Set up segregated 1:1 reserve accounts holding cash, short-term Treasuries, repos, money market funds, or insured deposits. Diversify across custodians where possible. Stress-test your liquidity for redemption spikes. Turnkey providers like Brale or Paxos handle much of this, but you still need visibility into the reserve structure.
3. Develop or integrate the technology. If building custom: write and audit your smart contracts (start with OpenZeppelin frameworks), implement compliance controls (RBAC, pause, freeze, clawback), choose your target chains, and get multiple independent security audits. If using a platform: integrate via API (Bridge, Brale) or deploy using native token standards (TIP-20 on Tempo).
4. Set up issuance and redemption flows. Mint tokens when verified fiat deposits arrive. Burn tokens on redemption and release corresponding reserves. Build continuous reconciliation between on-chain supply and off-chain reserves. Publish monthly attestations.
5. Ensure compliance and transparency. Obtain the necessary licenses (or confirm your turnkey provider holds them). Implement KYC/AML for all mint and redeem operations. Set up transaction monitoring. Publish reserve reports and audit results. Under the GENIUS Act, large issuers need monthly attestations and annual audits. MiCA requires full authorization by mid-2026.
6. Launch and distribute. Deploy on your target chain(s). Get listed on exchanges and DEXs. Provide initial liquidity. Monitor the peg continuously. Integrate into real payment flows: payroll via Deel on Tempo, merchant checkout through Stripe, remittance corridors.
7. Ongoing operations. This is where most of the work lives. Regular audits, risk monitoring, smart contract upgrades, regulatory reporting, and responding to compliance events (sanctions, court orders, suspicious activity). It never stops.
Provider comparison Provider Core capability Target customers Supported chains Complexity / cost Paxos Regulated issuance, custody, proven at scale Large enterprises, fintechs Ethereum, others Medium. High cost (enterprise contracts) Circle USDC issuer, programmable wallets, CPN, high liquidity Startups to enterprises 20+ chains Low. Transaction-based fees Brale Full-stack issuance, acts as legal issuer, multi-chain Startups to enterprises 20+ chains Low. Revenue-share pricing Bridge (Stripe) Open Issuance API, fiat on/off-ramps, Stripe distribution Enterprises, fintechs Multiple chains + Tempo Low. Transaction-based fees M0 Programmable issuance protocol, shared liquidity layer Developers, fintechs, wallets Ethereum, multi-chain Low-medium. Protocol-based Coinbase Custom Stablecoins Stablecoin-as-a-service, USDC-collateralized branded tokens Enterprises, fintechs Base, Ethereum (expanding) Low. Revenue-share Frax White-label modular infrastructure, RWA backing Blockchain networks, protocols EVM-compatible via LayerZero Medium. Variable cost Polygon End-to-end “Open Money Stack” Institutions, payment companies Polygon, multi-chain via Agglayer Low. Volume-based pricing Cobo Enterprise payments, MPC custody, treasury automation High-volume institutions 80+ chains Medium. Institutional pricing Fireblocks Infrastructure/custody tooling, MPC wallets, settlement (not an issuer) Large institutions 100+ chains Medium. Institutional licensing Stablechains comparison Aspect Tempo Circle Arc Tether Plasma Backing Stripe + Paradigm ($500M+) Circle Tether/Bitfinex ($373M+) Status (March 2026) Public testnet, mainnet H1 2026 Public testnet, mainnet 2026 Mainnet live Performance 100k+ TPS target (unverified), ~0.6s finality (design) 50k+ TPS target, ~780ms finality (testnet) 1k+ TPS, sub-second finality (production) Gas model Any stablecoin (no native token) Native USDC USDT-native + Paymaster (zero-fee USDT) Stablecoin focus Issuer-agnostic, multi-stablecoin USDC-centric USDT-centric (25+ supported) Key primitives Stable DEX, payment memos, dedicated lanes, TIP-20 FX engine, opt-in privacy, CCTP integration Zero-fee USDT, Bitcoin bridge, confidential txs Target users Fintechs, merchants, embedded finance Institutions, capital markets Retail, emerging markets, DeFi Real-world examples A few cases that show how this infrastructure comes together in practice. Note: some of these are announced projects or early-stage deployments, not fully scaled production systems. Where possible, I’ve verified against public announcements and press coverage.
MetaMask USD (mUSD) on M0/Bridge. Announced August 2025 by Consensys, MetaMask’s native stablecoin is the first issued by a self-custodial wallet. It uses Bridge for issuance and reserve management with M0’s protocol for the on-chain infrastructure. Planned to launch on Ethereum and Linea, with spending via MetaMask Card at Mastercard merchants.
Klarna’s stablecoin initiatives. Klarna partnered with Coinbase in December 2025 for USDC-denominated institutional funding. Separately, Tempo’s announcement materials list Klarna as an ecosystem partner launching “KlarnaUSD” via Bridge on Tempo, but public documentation of that specific deployment is limited beyond Tempo’s own communications. Worth monitoring but not yet a confirmed live product.
Sonic Labs’ USSD via Frax. Per Frax and Sonic project communications, Sonic used Frax’s white-label infrastructure and backed USSD with tokenized Treasuries. Independent documentation is thin, but it illustrates the modular approach: a blockchain network launching a native stablecoin by composing existing infrastructure rather than building from scratch.
Stablecorp’s QCAD. A Canadian dollar stablecoin that uses VersaBank as federally regulated custodian for reserves through VersaBank’s VersaVault platform. Stablecorp manages issuance and compliance while leaning on established banking infrastructure for credibility.
Stable Sea with BitGo. A B2B infrastructure platform that partners with BitGo for regulated custody and trading. Newer platforms can assemble best-in-class services from existing providers rather than building everything internally.
Risks worth planning for Good infrastructure reduces risk. It doesn’t eliminate it. Here’s what actually goes wrong.
Depegging. Market shocks, collateral liquidation cascades, or loss of confidence can push a stablecoin off its peg. Even fiat-backed stablecoins aren’t immune. USDC briefly lost its peg in March 2023 when Silicon Valley Bank failed with a portion of Circle’s reserves held there.
Custody and banking failures. Your stablecoin is only as safe as your custodian. Diversify where possible and understand the insolvency protections (or lack thereof) for your reserve accounts.
Smart contract bugs. A vulnerability in your minting or burning logic can be catastrophic. Multiple independent audits are the minimum. Timelocks, multi-sig controls, and bug bounty programs add layers of defense.
Regulatory changes. The GENIUS Act and MiCA are still relatively new. Rules will evolve. Non-compliance carries real consequences: fines, loss of license, blocked market access. Build compliance into the product from day one, not as an afterthought.
Sanctions and illicit finance exposure. Stablecoins are tools, and bad actors use them. You need transaction monitoring and the ability to freeze or clawback assets when legally required.
Operational risk. Stablecoin operations run around the clock. Reconciliation errors, oracle failures (for crypto-collateralized models), and infrastructure outages compound quickly.
Algorithmic model risk. If you’re considering an algorithmic or lightly collateralized design, this carries the highest systemic risk. The TerraUSD collapse proved that incentive mechanisms alone can’t maintain a peg under stress.
Best practices for 2026 issuers Automate reconciliation between on-chain supply and off-chain reserves. Manual processes break at scale.
Use bankruptcy-remote structures for reserve accounts. If your company has financial trouble, the reserves should be legally protected for token holders.
Build compliance into the product. Freeze, clawback, and blacklisting capabilities aren’t just regulatory checkboxes. They’re what institutional customers and regulators look for before working with you.
Partner with blockchain analytics providers from day one. Chainalysis, Blockaid, and similar firms provide transaction monitoring that regulators expect.
Publish clear redemption policies. Specify timelines, fees (if any), minimum amounts, and the process for large redemptions. Ambiguity erodes trust.
Start with a USD peg for maximum liquidity and market access. Non-USD pegs have their place, but infrastructure, liquidity, and regulatory clarity are all strongest for dollar stablecoins.
Plan for multichain or dedicated-chain deployment from the start. Retrofitting cross-chain support later is painful.
Consider starting on a turnkey platform or specialized L1 for speed, then evaluate custom infrastructure as you scale.
Where this is heading The infrastructure to launch a compliant stablecoin in 2026 exists. You can go from concept to live product in weeks through turnkey providers and purpose-built L1s. That speed would have been absurd even two years ago.
The decisions you face: which issuance model fits (fiat-backed for almost everyone), which platform or chain to deploy on (determined by your target users and stablecoin preference), and how much infrastructure to own versus rent.
White-label platforms like Bridge, Paxos, Brale, and Coinbase, issuance protocols like M0, or payments-optimized L1s like Tempo, offer the lowest barrier for most businesses. Custom builds still make sense for large institutions that need complete control and have the engineering team to maintain it.
One thing I’d flag: the temptation to over-engineer early is strong, especially for technical teams. The businesses actually getting stablecoins into production in 2026 are the ones that started with a turnkey provider, shipped, and iterated from there. The fundamentals, robust reserves, transparent operations, and clear redemption policies, matter more than the specific technology stack underneath.
Neurochain.AI has recently collaborated with Bitgert. Bitgert is known for its gas-fee-free blockchain and centralized exchange (CEX). The joint partnership between these innovative platforms aims to create a unique blockchain-developed AI ecosystem to unlock new possibilities in scalability, speed, and smart innovation.
Bitgert x NeurochainAI 🤝@bitgertbrise is a rapidly expanding crypto project that boasts a gas fee-free blockchain, CEX, and a lot more!
Through this strategic partnership, we're combining cutting-edge blockchain infrastructure with next-gen decentralized AI – unlocking new… pic.twitter.com/hyByg1rwcZ
— Neurochain.AI (@NeurochainAI) April 30, 2025 Neurochain.AI: Pioneering Decentralized AI Neurochain.AI functions as a revolutionary system that provides developers with decentralized AI capabilities. The platform maintains a large user base of 156,000 members whose combined GPUs, totaling 14,000 GPUs, provide the platform with 200TB of GPU memory and support its advanced AI applications. It operates through a three-layer structure composed of a data layer and an AI model marketplace, together with a dApp store, and it uses its $NCN native cryptocurrency.
Bitgert: Redefining Blockchain Efficiency The Bitgert gained rapid popularity as its gas-fee-free system provides superior speed, having the ability to process more than 100,000 transactions per second. The platform presents developers and end-users with a cost-effective and scalable blockchain solution because it removes fees commonly associated with blockchains. The combination of efficiency with affordability positions Bitgert as an optimal choice for ambitious technological collaboration.
What This Partnership Offers Neurochain.AI teams up with Bitgert to develop revolutionary innovative solutions through AI. The joint initiative engages their respective gas-fee-free blockchain and decentralized AI system to provide reduced expenses and enhanced user access for decentralized applications (dApps) created with artificial intelligence. The reduction of gas fees becomes essential because resource-intensive AI projects require it to maximize their user base.
The partnership establishes fresh application potential on Bitgert’s blockchain, which should attract new developers to strengthen its ecosystem.
Looking Ahead Both Neurochain.AI and Bitgert have taken an ambitious move by forming this partnership, which creates innovative opportunities within the AI and blockchain space. Through their collaborative effort to push boundaries, both communities can anticipate future enhancements of efficiency and scalability alongside increased creativity.
AUTHOR
With over five years of experience in crypto, blockchain, and tech content, Ishtiyaq makes complex topics easy to understand. He simplifies blockchain and digital currency concepts for a wide audience, ensuring that beginners and experts alike can grasp key ideas. His clear and engaging writing helps readers stay informed about the latest trends, developments, and innovations in the crypto space. Whether explaining blockchain technology, digital assets, or DeFi, Ishtiyaq breaks down complicated ideas into simple, digestible content. His goal is to help people navigate the fast-changing world of cryptocurrency with confidence, clarity, and a deeper understanding.
Poloniex plans to shift the majority of its crypto trading operations offshore, according to parent company Circle. The move comes amidst regulatory uncertainty and pressure in the US, which lacks a clear legal framework or guidance for cryptocurrency-related businesses or crypto investors.
Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire says that 70% of Poloniex users are not based in the US, prompting the move to another jurisdiction. Allaire says Poloniex has already secured its Digital Assets Business Act license to operate in Bermuda, reports Coindesk.
Says Allaire,
“The lack of regulatory frameworks significantly limits what can be offered to individuals and businesses in the US.”
In May, the Delaware-based exchange stopped offering nine coins for its customers in the US due to regulatory uncertainty: Ardor (ARDR), Bytecoin (BCN), Decred (DCR), GameCredits (GAME), Gas (GAS), Lisk (LSK), Nxt (NXT), Omni Layer (OMNI) and Augur (REP).
The CEO also confirmed that the company’s recent downsizing, eliminating roughly 30 employees, was partly due to the lack of clarity from US lawmakers. The company’s current focus is global and getting beyond the US bottleneck.
“It took a long time working with the Bermuda government and the Bermuda Monetary Authority.”
“The project to establish a new international operations hub for our market, exchange and wallet services, was a major project.”
The move will also allow Poloniex to explore being able to offer financial services, adding that users could expect to see more “yield-generating crypto accounts.”
Poloniex ranks in the top 100 crypto exchanges in the world with a 24-hour trading volume of roughly $16 million, according to data compiled by CoinMarketCap. It is also listed among Messari’s Real 10 Volume index reflecting legitimate trading volumes from leading industry players.
In the wake of last week’s two congressional hearings on Facebook’s upcoming digital asset Libra, crypto insiders are assessing the highly critical response from US lawmakers who are determined to halt the project in its tracks. The hearings sparked an intense debate about Bitcoin, cryptocurrencies and new corporate digital assets that are all vying for a place in the digital economy.
Politicians have not yet figured out a way to deal with emerging blockchain technology and the many products and services currently in development to bring more financial inclusion for people all around the world. The threat of digital assets lowering costs, rivaling existing infrastructure and challenging the traditional banking and monetary systems has prompted many prominent politicians, including Maxine Waters and Brad Sherman, to demand a moratorium on Libra.
As for Bitcoin, the decentralized system cannot be halted or stopped by any central authority or government.
Find Satoshi Lab is a Web3 developer that has gained attention in the gaming industry with their successful video game called Gas Hero. Since its release earlier this month, the game has generated a remarkable $90 million in trading volume by trading non-fungible tokens (NFTs).
According to a report by The Block, Gas Hero has become popular among more than 10,000 active players who enjoy its engaging gameplay. One of the reasons why the game is liked by many is that it can be played on both mobile devices and computers without needing to download anything, making it easy for a wide range of people to access and enjoy.
Through the game, players can trade different collections of NFTs. There are six collections in total, and they include various in-game items such as unique characters, powerful weapons, and virtual assets. These items have been transformed into NFTs using the Polygon PoS network. The collections have become quite popular and are among the most traded sets of items. For example, the game’s Common Heroes collection was the fifth most traded within the past 24 hours at some point yesterday.
To encourage more players to join Gas Hero, Find Satoshi Lab had previously announced that they would reward players with more than 2 million GMT tokens, which were worth about $400,000 at that time. Currently, there are an additional 14 million GMT tokens available for players who actively take part in Gas Hero’s Gas Wars PvP battles. This is an exciting incentive for players to get involved and have fun playing the game.
Gas Hero’s Fast Success Shows New Generation of Gamers Are Eager to Explore Web3 The early success of Gas Hero has garnered positive attention from key figures in the Web3 ecosystem. Sandeep Nailwal, co-founder of Polygon Labs, has expressed satisfaction with the game’s popularity, viewing it as a reflection of the growing interest in web3 gaming. He believes that its launch serves as a promising indicator of the direction the ecosystem is heading, attracting a new generation of gamers who are eager to explore the possibilities offered by the Web3 sphere. He said:
“The popularity of Gas Hero is indicative of the present appetite for web3 gaming. The game’s wide appeal, as illustrated by such early success, is a positive sign of the trajectory our ecosystem is heading in, as we witness a new type of gamer enter into the Web3 sphere.”
Gas Hero has had a big effect on the gaming industry, and many people find the game appealing because it works on different devices and there are rewards to encourage players to get involved. These factors have helped it become popular. As more players get interested and excited about the project, it will likely have a lasting impact on the future of web3 gaming.
Disclaimer: Coinspeaker is committed to providing unbiased and transparent reporting. This article aims to deliver accurate and timely information but should not be taken as financial or investment advice. Since market conditions can change rapidly, we encourage you to verify information on your own and consult with a professional before making any decisions based on this content.
Temitope is a writer with more than four years of experience writing across various niches. He has a special interest in the fintech and blockchain spaces and enjoy writing articles in those areas. He holds bachelor's and master's degrees in linguistics. When not writing, he trades forex and plays video games.
AscendEX has formally partnered with Bitgert to improve the user experience and fuel the adoption of blockchain technology. This is great news for the blockchain and cryptocurrency ecosystem.
Bitgert: Introducing the First Ever Feeless Blockchain Solutions Having garnered much attention thanks to its status as one of the fastest-growing crypto projects, Bitgert’s primary claim to fame is its innovative gas feeless blockchain. Indeed, this approach not only solves one of the most significant problems in the modern blockchain industry, namely, the high cost of transactions (when using certain platforms) but also presents a wide range of innovations, from the unique Platform CEX to various other features.
To sum up, thanks to innovative technology and zero-fee transactions, Bitgert keeps attracting more and more enthusiasts and crypto developers, solidifying its position as one of the leaders in the blockchain market.
AscendEX: Empowering the Crypto Journey Notably, AscendEX is a reputable cryptocurrency exchange that has not been reluctant to drive innovation in the market. As a global cryptocurrency trading platform that focuses on making investing, earning, and trading many hundreds of crypto assets easy to do, AscendEX is unrelenting in its efforts to improve the blockchain space. Since it champions easy-to-use solutions that put the power into the hands of the users, the partnership with Bitgert resonates well with its vision of making blockchain accessible to everyone.
What the Partnership Brings The collaboration plans to interconnect AscendEX’s strong infrastructure with Bitgert’s disruptive solution to provide better services to users. Combined, they aim to organize blockchain technologies to solve problems such as transaction fees and provide crypto solutions to their consumers.
The announcement statement states, “Together, we’ll enhance user experiences and accelerate blockchain adoption.” The partnership not only sets clear aims and expectations for developing new technologies but also guarantees that a friendly and productive environment for the blockchain will be established.
Looking Ahead They also announced that they’re preparing for ‘amazing updates ahead,’ which means this partnership is the first of many to revolutionize the sector.
The cooperation between AscendEX and Bitgert shows that innovation, openness, and expansion objectives unite both companies. The two-chain entities will go a long way in transforming how current and prospective users engage with the blockchain, thus making the crypto environment affordable and less cumbersome to use.
As expected, these leading players in the industry will roll out further enhancements and bring about a new shift in direction to the blockchain and cryptocurrency landscape.
AUTHOR
With over five years of experience in crypto, blockchain, and tech content, Ishtiyaq makes complex topics easy to understand. He simplifies blockchain and digital currency concepts for a wide audience, ensuring that beginners and experts alike can grasp key ideas. His clear and engaging writing helps readers stay informed about the latest trends, developments, and innovations in the crypto space. Whether explaining blockchain technology, digital assets, or DeFi, Ishtiyaq breaks down complicated ideas into simple, digestible content. His goal is to help people navigate the fast-changing world of cryptocurrency with confidence, clarity, and a deeper understanding.
