Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

TL;DRThe fastest practical way to move USDC to Polygon is a route that settles in native USDC through Circle's CCTP, so what lands is the real Circle-issued token, not a wrapped placeholder.

Across routes USDC through CCTP automatically when that's the optimal path. No extra steps from you.

CCTP burns USDC on the source chain and mints native USDC on Polygon after Circle's attestation. No pooled liquidity to drain, and free at the protocol level.

Polygon (chain ID 137) is a supported destination on Across, and you can send USDC to Polygon from any supported chain.

Across has run billions in volume with a clean security record since 2021.

Bridge USDC to Polygon

Moving USDC to Polygon has a fast answer and a slow answer. The difference is what token shows up at the other end. Send it through a route that settles in native USDC and the Circle-issued token lands on Polygon ready to use in Aave, QuickSwap, or a Polymarket position. Send it through a route that wraps and you receive an IOU. Some chains and apps treat that as a second-class asset you then have to unwrap or swap.

Across takes the first path. When you bridge USDC to Polygon, Across routes the transfer through Circle's Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol whenever that's the optimal path, and native USDC is what arrives.

Native USDC Settles Through CCTP, Not a Wrapped IOUCCTP works by burning and minting. Your USDC is burned on the source chain, Circle issues an attestation that the burn happened, and an equivalent amount of native USDC is minted on Polygon. What you receive is canonical USDC issued by Circle, the same contract every major Polygon app already trusts. No pooled balance sits in a bridge contract waiting to be exploited, and the mechanism is free at the protocol level.

That matters more than it sounds. A wrapped bridge token is a claim against a pool. Drain the pool and the claim is worth nothing, and you find out at the worst possible moment. Native USDC carries no such dependency. It is the asset itself, minted fresh on the destination.

You don't pick the rail. The Swap API selects the optimal settlement pathway for the size and route you're moving, and for USDC into Polygon that's frequently CCTP. CCTP V2 Fast Transfer can mint ahead of source-chain finality for a small fee, which is how a large USDC transfer lands without the usual finality wait.

Bridging USDC to Polygon Takes Three StepsThe route is short because the protocol does the routing for you.

Open the Across bridge and connect your wallet on the chain your USDC is on today, whether that's Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, Optimism, or another supported origin.

Select USDC as the token, set Polygon (chain ID 137) as the destination, and enter the amount. Across quotes the fee and the expected settlement path before you sign.

Approve and confirm. Across handles the rest, fronting funds on Polygon and reconciling in the background, so native USDC arrives in seconds rather than minutes.

You'll want a small amount of POL, the native gas token of Polygon, to transact once your USDC arrives. Bridging the USDC itself doesn't require holding POL first.

The USDC Lands in Seconds Because Across Runs on IntentsYou declare the outcome you want, native USDC on Polygon. A relayer advances the funds on the destination almost immediately, then gets reimbursed through a background settlement secured by UMA's Optimistic Oracle. On mainnet that produces fills in about two seconds. The CCTP burn-and-mint and the relayer fill work together. You get destination liquidity fast, and the canonical-USDC accounting settles underneath.

Across is built by Risk Labs, the foundation behind UMA, and is deployed across 20+ chains. It has processed billions in volume since 2021 with no protocol-level exploit.

USDC Is the Asset Polygon Runs OnUSDC is the dominant stablecoin on Polygon, and that's the practical reason native settlement matters here. The apps you're bridging into are denominated in and quote against native USDC: Aave, QuickSwap, Uniswap, Polymarket. Land wrapped and you add a conversion step before you can do anything. Land native and you're already in the asset the destination expects.

Polygon also connects to AggLayer, its cross-chain settlement layer, so native USDC on Polygon isn't a dead end. It's a starting position.

Move USDC to Polygon through Across and the token that shows up isn't a placeholder you have to translate. It's the same USDC the chain already runs on, minted on arrival, usable the second it lands.

In brief Nano Banana 2 Lite (gemini-3.1-flash-lite-image) generates images in four seconds at roughly $0.034 per image. This means it produces results at about half the cost of Nano Banana 2 at the same resolution and 2.7× faster. In head-to-head testing, the Lite model matched or beat Nano Banana 2 on many fields, but when details are important, the more expensive version may be the better option. Google last week launched Nano Banana 2 Lite—officially gemini-3.1-flash-lite-image—as the entry point in its image generation stack, sitting below Nano Banana 2 and well below Nano Banana Pro. It delivers text-to-image outputs in roughly four seconds, 2.7 times faster than Nano Banana 2, and is positioned as the direct replacement for the original Nano Banana (gemini-2.5-flash-image). The explicit pitch: same Google ecosystem, less money, less waiting.

The model is available through Google AI Studio, the Gemini API, and the Enterprise Agent Platform—and it's baked into consumer products including Search, the Gemini app, NotebookLM, and Google Photos. It works alongside Gemini Omni Flash, Google's new video generation model, through the Interactions API, which lets users stack up to three sequential edits within a single session. The Nano Banana family now reads as a clean three-tier structure: Lite for speed and cost, Nano Banana 2 for the quality-speed balance, Nano Banana Pro for complex professional work.

At roughly $0.034 per image at 1K resolution, Nano Banana 2 Lite is about half the price of Nano Banana 2, which runs $0.067 per image at the same resolution. That puts the Lite model in direct competition with Seedream 5.0 Lite, which comes in at $0.031–0.035 per image. Reve 2.0 undercuts both at around $0.0067 per image via API—though it lacks the deployment breadth that comes with Google's infrastructure. Qwen Image Edit is a good, free, open-source option for standard use cases.

So, is the quality drop from Nano Banana 2 concentrated enough to matter for your specific workflow? Is it distributed enough that most people won't notice?

We ran the same prompts through both models across five categories to find out. The answer is less predictable than you'd expect.

Realism

The realism test is where the gap between Nano Banana 2 and its Lite sibling is most visible. Both models received the same technically demanding portrait prompt: a cinematic image of a 32-year-old female architect on a rooftop at sunset, wearing a beige trench coat and round glasses, holding rolled blueprints specifically in her left hand, with a defocused city skyline behind her, golden hour lighting with a soft rim light, shallow depth of field simulating a 50mm lens, a vertical 4:5 aspect ratio, realistic skin texture, and subtle film grain.

The prompt explicitly frames each element as an independent constraint that can fail.

Nano Banana 2 Lite passed the basic test. The subject is correctly dressed and positioned, wears round glasses, holds blueprints, and stands on a rooftop with a blurred city behind her. But it is slightly, just slightly, less realistic in terms of details: The subject only has one hand, which is oversized in comparison to the rest of the body. The rim light is barely perceptible. Skin texture holds up at thumbnail scale but doesn't survive close inspection. The image, in the end, looks like a competent stock photo, not a cinematic portrait.

Nano Banana 2 produced something photographically different in kind. The subject stands against a fully realized New York City skyline at magic hour, bokeh city lights blooming across the background, a hint of a river visible in the distance. The depth of field is dramatic. The warm rim light clearly separates the subject from the background. The blueprints are in her left hand, not her right hand, as requested.

Both models struggle with symmetry. For example the holes for the buttons and some straps are not consistent, but again, those are details that are spotted upon closer inspection.

For social media content or rapid visual mockups, the Lite version is workable—it communicates the concept. For anything where the image is the final product—a hero image, a client deliverable, a portfolio piece—it will show its seams at any resolution above a thumbnail. Photographic quality is where the Lite model's architecture makes its largest single concession, and it makes it consistently.

Prompt Adherence

Prompt adherence testing used a different strategy: a dense, multi-element scene where each labeled detail functions as an independent failure point. The prompt described a steampunk cityscape viewed from a gargoyle's perch—complete with a hot air balloon labeled "Atlas & Sons Cartographers, Est. 1842," a cable car with a specific named route, a gear-driven clock tower, a gargoyle holding a document labeled "Sector 7 – Condemned," a foreground newspaper with a specific headline, and a detailed Victorian street scene below.

The logic: If a model can hold 10 specific simultaneous constraints, you can trust it on complex creative briefs.

Both models produced visually compelling steampunk scenes. Both correctly place the gargoyle in the foreground, the clock tower at center, the balloon in the sky, and a cable car crossing the frame. At a glance, the differences feel cosmetic—the Lite version is darker and moodier, the full model cleaner and brighter. But the specifics tell a different story. In the Lite version, the balloon reads "Est. 1942" instead of 1842—mostly due to AI grappling to properly render text. The cable car route label is partially garbled. The foreground newspaper headline blurs at the edges, losing legibility on the details that were specifically requested.

Overall, it focused more on visuals than text, which is ok for most use cases.

Nano Banana 2 gets almost everything right. The balloon clearly reads "Atlas & Sons Cartographers Est. 1842." The cable car sign says "Upper Vantis – 4 Stops." The gargoyle holds a document, but the text is illegible. The foreground newspaper reads "Clocktower Falls Silent – City Mourns" in clean, readable type. Every named element appears where it should, with the correct label, in legible form. The compositional decision to use brighter, more editorial lighting also pays off here—it keeps the labeled details readable rather than swallowed by atmosphere.

Casual prompt users won't catch a one-digit transposition on a fictional establishment date. But concept artists, worldbuilders, and narrative illustrators—the people using these models to communicate specific creative logic to clients or collaborators—will notice immediately.

The Lite model's tendency to blur or transpose specific in-image text labels isn't a catastrophic failure, but it introduces a manual correction step that compounds badly at scale.

Spatial Awareness

Spatial awareness testing evaluated how each model handles multi-depth scene composition: multiple objects at close range, a human subject in the middle distance, and atmospheric elements receding into background darkness.

The scene—a medieval alchemist at a cluttered wooden desk, surrounded by an armillary sphere, a lit candle, an hourglass, a skull, star charts, and a glowing green jar, with a black cat silhouetted in an arched window behind him—requires convincing three-dimensional layering to read as coherent rather than assembled.

Both models understood the basic spatial grammar of the scene. Foreground objects are rendered at appropriate scale and shadow detail, the scholar occupies the mid-ground with correct occlusion relationships to the objects around him, and the arched window with the moonlit night sky creates a convincing sense of recession behind the scene. Neither model misplaces objects, collapses depth planes, or introduces spatial contradictions. The scene architecture—front, middle, back—is correctly established in both outputs.

The differences are subtle and real. Nano Banana 2's version has a richer atmospheric depth gradient: The candlelight fades naturally as it reaches the stone walls, the background haziness reads as genuine atmospheric depth rather than digital softening, and the overall scene has a painterly warmth that suggests volumetric space. The Lite version's depth is structurally correct but slightly compressed—the background reads marginally more like a stage flat than a receding room with actual air in it.

At least in this text, the Nano Banana 2 image feels like the same Nano Banana 2 Lite image with a detailed LoRA (a sort of specialized fine tuning layer) applied during sampling.

This is the smallest gap across all five tests. For storyboards, game asset concepts, and most editorial illustration contexts, both models demonstrate adequate spatial reasoning. The Lite model's slightly flatter depth rendering becomes meaningful only in high-resolution output or detailed compositional analysis—and even then, the gap is arguable.

For this category, the Lite model is a viable substitute in the vast majority of practical workflows.

Text Generation

Text generation is where this review produces its most counterintuitive result.

The test prompt described a gritty nighttime hardware store with dozens of simultaneous text elements at different scales and styles: a hand-painted main sign with the store name, founding date, and product categories; a graffiti tag on the façade; window decals with hours and services; a concert poster with band name, venue, date, doors time, and specific ticket prices; a city council meeting notice; a lost cat notice with a phone number; political stickers on a phone booth; and a street parking restriction on the curb.

Text generation at this complexity is difficult because each element has to be correctly rendered while the overall image still reads as a coherent photograph.

Nano Banana 2 Lite actually delivered something genuinely impressive for how fast it is. "KELLERMAN'S HARDWARE & SUPPLY CO. – SINCE 1931 – TOOLS, ROPE, PAINT," graffiti reading "STILL HERE," window signs for "OPEN 7 DAYS / WE BUY SCRAP – ASK FOR RAY / CLOSED," a concert poster for "THE DREDGE PALE MOUTH / SUNDAY JUNE 4 / DOORS 9PM / THE ANCHOR CLUB / $12 ADV – $15 DOOR," stickers reading "THIS MACHINE KILLS FASCISTS" and "JESUS SAVES," a lost cat notice with a specific and legible phone number—every single text element in the prompt is correctly rendered and readable simultaneously in one image.

If there’s something to note, it’s that the image is less realistic. Some posters seem rendered by an editor with poor photoshop skills rather than genuine elements of the scene. One example could be the posters pasted on the phone booth. To be more realistic they should have some natural imperfections, and even deterioration signs. That said, this is a legitimately strong result for any image model, let alone the cheaper, faster one.

Nano Banana 2's version is also strong. Most text is correctly placed and legible, and the overall image reads as a convincing nighttime scene. But the full model's darker, moodier atmospheric rendering—generally one of its assets—works against it here. Several smaller sticker texts fall into shadow and lose legibility. The Lite model's brighter, more neutral lighting, a quality that reads as a weakness in portrait work, becomes a clear advantage when the evaluation criterion is whether all the text in the scene is actually readable.

For text-heavy generation—signage mockups, editorial graphics, product concepts with labeled elements, infographic-style composed images—Nano Banana 2 Lite performs below Nano Banana 2. The model seems to either focus too much on visuals that text becomes garble, or focus so much on text that its placement in scene becomes unrealistic.

ConclusionsNano Banana 2 Lite is not a straight downgrade from Nano Banana 2. It's a focused tool with a specific ceiling, and that ceiling drops hardest in exactly the scenarios where photographic quality is the deliverable, and holds surprisingly steady everywhere else.

Cinematic portrait work, sophisticated lighting physics, fine material texture, close-inspection-quality skin rendering—all of these expose a clear difference between the two models. Style transfer also takes a meaningful hit, not in rendering quality but in contextual comprehension: the Lite model can execute a subject, but it struggles to capture the visual environment in which that subject lives. Prompt adherence degrades specifically on in-image labeled text accuracy—a narrow failure mode, but one that matters badly in worldbuilding, concept art, and any pipeline where specific in-image language carries meaning.

What holds up well—and in some cases holds up better—is specificity: if you require a lot of focus on something, it will make sure everything is there.

Spatial scene architecture, and basic compositional competence are also good. The text generation result warrants specific emphasis: If your workflow involves signage mockups, branded graphics, editorial composites with text-heavy elements, or any pipeline where multiple readable text strings need to coexist in a single image, the Lite model is worth reaching for first. Its brighter rendering defaults, a liability in portrait work, are an advantage when legibility is the metric. Spatially, it handles multi-depth scenes adequately for the vast majority of professional contexts.

On the cost math: at $0.034 per image, Nano Banana 2 Lite runs at roughly half the cost of Nano Banana 2 at 1K resolution ($0.067) and trades almost blow-for-blow with Seedream 5.0 Lite ($0.031–0.035). Reve 2.0 undercuts both dramatically at approximately $0.0067 per image via API, but doesn’t offer the deployment footprint that comes with the Nano Banana ecosystem: Search, NotebookLM, Google Photos, and the Gemini app running off the same model simultaneously.

For teams already inside Google's infrastructure, that integration removes a platform-switching cost that pure-API alternatives can't account for. If you know which use cases you're in—and you're not in the photographic quality bucket—Nano Banana 2 Lite earns its spot in the lineup, and might even be a better option than its more powerful brother.

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

HomeDividends AnalysisDividend Quick Picks

SummaryI define dividend growth stocks as those with dividend increases of 5 or more consecutive years.In this monthly series, I rank a selection of dividend growth stocks and present the top 10 stocks for consideration.This month, I'm presenting the top 10 dividend growth stocks with a 5-year yield-on-cost of 2.5% or higher and a consensus upside of at least 5%.July’s top 10 is led by MLI (a stock I own), which offers the highest quality score and trades about 16% below my fair value estimate.I plan to expand my ROL position while maintaining overweight allocations in INTU and ACN, emphasizing disciplined portfolio sizing and quality screening. gustavofrazao/iStock via Getty Images

My database of dividend growth [DG] stocks contains more than 720 stocks with dividend increase streaks of 5 or more years. I use different screens every month to find interesting candidates.

I assess the quality

27.78K Followers

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of ACN, INTU, MLI, ROL either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

July's GVAS Dogs list highlights ten fair-priced, high-yield large-cap stocks, including IRSA Inversiones, Weibo, Verizon, and AT&T, as ideal buys. Analyst targets project average net gains of 40.39% for the top ten GVAS stocks by July 2027, with risk profiles generally below market volatility. The dividend dogcatcher strategy favors stocks whose $1K dividend income exceeds share price, with 36 of 54 GVAS stocks meeting this ideal condition.

Retirement income requires more than just high yield. REIT funds may not be the best solution. A balanced REIT portfolio can offer income and growth.

The probability that Bitcoin will rise to $70,000 this year has climbed to 79%.

Prediction market platform Polymarket now puts the probability of Bitcoin rising to $70,000 this year at 79%, up from 54% as of June 26. Additionally, the odds of Bitcoin hitting $80,000 stand at 32%, while the probability of it reaching $90,000 is 19%.

1 minutes ago

An alleged insider address of LAB has transferred $9.15 million worth of tokens to Aster again.

According to on-chain analyst Ai Yi (@ai_9684xtpa), a suspected insider address of LAB has transferred 10.5 million LAB tokens to Aster again. Calculated at the $0.872 price at the time of transfer, the move is worth roughly $9.15 million. This marks the address’s second transfer of LAB in the same fashion in about 22 hours. Over the past 24 hours, the address has moved a total of LAB worth approximately $18.69 million to Aster. Earlier, after the address completed the transfer last night, LAB’s price once plummeted sharply.

1 minutes ago

US-listed ETFs' assets under management climbed to $15.6 trillion, notching a new all-time high.

The Kobeissi Letter noted that the assets under management (AUM) of U.S.-listed ETFs have climbed to a record $15.6 trillion, doubling over the past 30 months. Year-to-date, investors have allocated more than $1 trillion to U.S.-listed ETFs, nearly double the year-to-date record set in 2025. At the current pace, full-year inflows are on track to top $2 trillion for the first time, roughly 33% higher than last year’s all-time high. In June alone, U.S. ETFs pulled in around $193 billion in inflows, marking the second-highest monthly inflow on record. Demand has been concentrated in U.S. large-cap, semiconductor, AI, and South Korea-focused ETFs, with the U.S. ETF market’s growth accelerating.

1 minutes ago

Hyperliquid’s perpetual contracts open interest market share hits 9%, a new all-time high.

According to hypeflows data, Hyperliquid holds a 9% share of the global perpetual contract market (covering all centralized exchanges including Binance, Bybit, OKX) by open interest, marking the highest level since the platform’s inception. Per HTX market data, HYPE is currently priced at $66.69, down 2.83% over the past 24 hours.

1 minutes ago

Smart money nets $97.2 million in total profit from a 3x short position on 1.85 million CASHCAT tokens

According to Onchain Lens monitoring, a top-performing whale on Hyperliquid has just opened a 3x short position on 1.85 million CASHCAT tokens. The wallet has accumulated a total profit of $97.2 million to date, and its latest CASHCAT position currently boasts an unrealized profit of $17,900.

1 minutes ago

Ethereum Foundation leverages AI to mine vulnerabilities: Successfully identifies security flaws, notes that manual review remains irreplaceable.

The Ethereum Foundation has disclosed that its Protocol Security team is using AI agents to conduct vulnerability hunting of Ethereum client software to boost network security. During testing, the AI successfully identified a vulnerability in the Gossipsub message propagation protocol that allows remote attackers to trigger node crashes, leading to validator nodes going offline. The flaw has since been patched and assigned CVE ID CVE-2026-34219. However, the foundation notes that AI’s biggest challenge is not discovering vulnerabilities, but distinguishing actual flaws from false positives. AI can generate vulnerability descriptions, impact analyses, and exploit code, but may also produce seemingly plausible yet non-existent issues—requiring security researchers to conduct thorough verification. The foundation outlined three common types of false positives: crashes occurring only in test environments, exploit paths that cannot be leveraged in real-world scenarios, and invalid proofs in formal verification. Additionally, the Ethereum Foundation believes AI is currently better at analyzing individual code issues, but has limited ability to identify complex attack chains formed by multiple legitimate operations—an attack vector that has been the primary cause of breaches for multiple crypto protocols this year. Going forward, the foundation plans to have AI assist in generating potential attack paths, which will then be verified via manual and automated testing to further improve the efficiency and accuracy of vulnerability discovery.

1 minutes ago

More than $5 million has been stolen from the Hedera Network after hackers exploited the DeFi lending platform Sauce Protocol. The attack caused the HBAR coin price to fall by nearly 3% as the stolen crypto was quickly moved to Ethereum. 

So far, the attacker has not been identified, and the Hedera Network team has not released an official statement.

Sauce Protocol Exploit Drains Over $5 MillionAccording to PeckShield, the attacker exploited the Sauce Protocol by manipulating its price oracle after depositing collateral into the lending platform.

By changing asset prices, the hacker borrowed nearly 6.6 million USDC and 35 million HBAR before swapping the stolen tokens on SaucerSwap.

The attacker then used LayerZero to bridge the stolen funds from the Hedera Network to Ethereum, making it more difficult to recover the assets.

The total loss is estimated at more than $5.25 million, with the funds already transferred off the Hedera Network.

Stolen Funds Moved to EthereumOn-chain investigator Specter said the hacker first stole the funds from Sauce Protocol on the Hedera network. After that, the attacker used LayerZero to transfer the stolen crypto from Hedera to Ethereum, where it is easier to swap and move the funds.

The hacker’s Ethereum wallet now holds around 2,068 ETH, worth nearly $3.7 million, along with 15.58 WBTC, bringing the total stolen assets to more than $5 million.

Blockchain records also show the attacker making several transactions, repeatedly moving Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) to another wallet, likely an attempt to hide the money trail.

More than $5 million has been stolen from Hedera’s DeFi ecosystem after hackers exploited Sauce Protocol in an oracle manipulation

Before carrying out the exploit, the hacker funded the wallet 0x9A4…6a494 with just 1 ETH from Tornado Cash. Attackers often use Tornado Cash to cover their tracks before launching an exploit.

HBAR Coin Price Falls After AttackFollowing the news, HBAR dropped around 3.5%, falling to nearly $0.0670 as investors feared a more serious breach.

Although the exploit targeted Sauce Protocol rather than the Hedera network itself, the incident has raised concerns across decentralized finance (DeFi) applications built on the blockchain.

The investigation is still ongoing, yet there is no official announcement or post from the Hedera network team.

Story Ends Here

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

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

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

Read the Next News

Hedera-based lending protocol Bonzo Lend lost about $9 million after an attacker manipulated the price of SAUCE used as collateral, allowing the account to borrow assets far beyond the value deposited.

In a preliminary incident report published Saturday, Bonzo said the attacker deposited 250 SAUCE, worth only a few dollars, before submitting a price update that inflated the token’s value by roughly 12 orders of magnitude. The wallet then borrowed 6.63 million USDC and 34.5 million wrapped HBAR from the lending pool.

The case illustrates how oracle failures can turn low-value collateral into a tool for draining large amounts of liquidity from lending protocols, even when the application and underlying network continue operating as designed. 

Bonzo attributed the incident to a flaw in Supra’s on-chain oracle verifier, which accepted a manipulated SAUCE price carrying a zeroed signature. The protocol said Supra acknowledged the issue and deployed a fix, while stressing that the incident was not a vulnerability in Bonzo Lend’s contracts or Hedera’s core network.

Estimated economic impact of the incident. Source: Bonzo Finance

DeFi hacks continue to pressure the sector The incident adds to a growing number of exploits targeting decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols in 2026. 

The second quarter had become the most-hacked quarter on record by incident count, with 83 exploits and about $755 million stolen. Cross-chain bridge exploits accounted for $351 million, while compromised administrator attacks and fake token price manipulation represented 37% of quarterly losses. 

In 2026, DeFi’s total value locked (TVL) had fallen 39% to over $70 billion in June from about $115 billion in January. CryptoRank recorded 121 hacks and roughly $942 million in losses over the period, saying repeated security incidents likely weighed on user confidence and reinforced capital outflows.

The Bonzo incident also follows a similar collateral-pricing exploit on Stellar. In February, attackers drained roughly $10 million from a YieldBlox DAO-managed lending pool after manipulating the price path used to value USTRY collateral, allowing them to borrow assets beyond the token’s real worth. 

Magazine: Will the crypto lobby's $189M campaign get CLARITY over the line?

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

Bonzo Finance Labs, the team behind Bonzo Finance, Hedera’s flagship DeFi lending and borrowing protocol, announced today that Bonzo Lend was exploited on July 11 after an attacker manipulated a third-party oracle price feed, allowing the protocol to vastly overvalue a small SAUCE deposit and enable excessive borrowing.

The team stressed that the issue originated in Supra’s oracle verification process rather than Bonzo Lend’s smart contracts, which it said functioned as designed by using the incorrect on-chain price supplied by the oracle.

Bonzo Lend and Bonzo Points have been paused, while Bonzo Vaults, Bonzo Bridge, and BONZO/XBONZO staking remain unaffected, according to the project.

Advertisement

According to the preliminary incident report, Wallet A submitted a forged price update that inflated SAUCE’s value by roughly 12 orders of magnitude above its actual market price. Bonzo said the manipulated update was accepted because a flaw in Supra’s verifier incorrectly treated a zeroed BLS signature as valid, allowing the false price to be written on-chain.

Once the manipulated price was live, the attacker deposited 250 SAUCE as collateral and borrowed millions of dollars worth of assets. Bonzo said its lending contracts simply read the oracle’s on-chain price and calculated borrowing limits as designed, adding that Supra has since acknowledged the vulnerability and deployed a fix for the affected verifier.

The report further stated that the exploit did not involve vulnerabilities in Bonzo Lend, abnormal market activity, or flash loans, noting SAUCE’s real trading price remained stable throughout the incident.

The report also highlighted the involvement of Wallet B, which borrowed roughly another $1 million while the inflated price remained active before identifying itself as a white-hat participant and offering to return the funds.

Bonzo said it is coordinating the recovery with Wallet B separately and will provide further updates on reimbursements, withdrawals, and remediation once investigations are complete.

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

PANews reported on July 11, citing Cointelegraph, that the Hedera-based lending protocol Bonzo Finance suffered an oracle attack, losing approximately $9 million. The attacker used collateral after the SAUCE token price was abnormally inflated to borrow assets far exceeding their actual value from the protocol.

Bonzo’s preliminary incident report shows that the attacker deposited only 250 SAUCE (worth just a few dollars), then submitted a price update that artificially inflated the token’s price by about 12 orders of magnitude. Subsequently, the address borrowed $6.63 million in USDC and 34.5 million wrapped HBAR (wHBAR) from the lending pool. It is reported that the incident originated from a vulnerability in the on-chain oracle validator of the oracle service provider Supra, which erroneously accepted a SAUCE price data with a zeroed-out signature. Supra has confirmed the issue and completed a fix. Bonzo emphasized that this attack did not stem from any vulnerability in Bonzo’s smart contracts or the underlying Hedera network.

Data shows that the second quarter of 2026 has become the quarter with the most attacks in crypto history, with a total of 83 security incidents resulting in cumulative losses of about $755 million. Among them, cross-chain bridge attacks caused approximately $351 million in losses, while admin key leaks and fake token price manipulation accounted for 37% of the quarterly losses.

Affected by ongoing security incidents, the DeFi sector’s total value locked (TVL) has fallen from around $115 billion in January this year to over $70 billion in June, a cumulative decline of 39%. CryptoRank data shows that the industry has experienced 121 security incidents so far this year, with cumulative losses of about $942 million. Persistent security issues may further weaken user confidence and accelerate capital outflows.

It is worth noting that in February this year, the Stellar-based lending protocol YieldBlox also experienced a similar incident. The attacker stole around $10 million in assets from its lending pool by manipulating the USTRY collateral price path.

A new platform called Solana Music is preparing to launch with an ambitious goal: take on Spotify’s dominance in music distribution and monetization. The project plans to leverage the Solana blockchain to let artists distribute and earn from their work, bypassing the traditional intermediaries that have defined, and frustrated, the music industry for decades.

The Nina Protocol cautionary tale Anyone evaluating Solana Music’s chances should study Nina Protocol carefully. Launched in 2021 on Solana, Nina was built on nearly identical principles: artist-first distribution, zero commission on sales, full revenue retention for creators. Co-founded by Jack Callahan, Mike Pollard, and Eric Farber, all from DIY music backgrounds, the platform earned the nickname “Bandcamp for the Discord generation.”

Advertisement

Nina did a lot of things right. It evolved meaningfully over time, adding fiat and USDC payment support in its version 2 update in late 2023. A mobile app followed in 2024. By late 2025, the platform had attracted roughly 40,000 monthly users and hosted over 20,000 music releases.

And yet, on May 28, 2026, the Nina team announced a phased shutdown beginning in mid-July 2026. Despite meaningful growth, the project couldn’t overcome the fundamental challenges of building a sustainable business at the intersection of blockchain and consumer music.

What Solana Music needs to get right Third, and this is the one that ultimately sank Nina, there’s the sustainability question. Platforms that take zero commission need alternative revenue models. Nina notably never launched a dedicated token, which may have limited both its fundraising options and its ability to bootstrap network effects through token incentives.

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

TLDR: CASHCAT price moved toward $0.20 after an early trader sold 15.04 million tokens for 580 ETH, converting an initial $838 purchase into about $1.04 million. The completed sale produced an estimated 1,183x return, although the same holdings could have reached about $2.9 million at a later market valuation. CASHCAT has expanded from Robinhood Chain to Solana through Sunrise, giving the token access to new wallets, exchanges, and liquidity pools. Hyperliquid has introduced CASHCAT perpetual futures with up to 3x leverage, adding short exposure and greater liquidation risk during volatile sessions. The CASHCAT price climbed toward $0.20 on July 11 after an early trader recorded one of the token’s largest documented exits. The wallet turned a 0.49 ETH purchase, worth about $838, into 580 ETH valued near $1.04 million. The completed sale delivered an estimated 1,183x return.

Bitcoin held near $64,000, while Ethereum traded close to $1,800. The CASHCAT price gained about 15% over 24 hours, strongly outperforming the wider market. 

The rally also comes as CASHCAT expands beyond Robinhood Chain. Solana access through Sunrise and a new Hyperliquid perpetual market have widened its trading routes.

Lookonchain reported that the wallet bought 15.04 million CASHCAT with 0.49 ETH. It later sold the full position for 580 ETH, securing more than $1 million in realized profit. The tracker estimated that holding longer could have lifted the position’s value near $2.9 million.

The full exit matters since many meme coin success stories rely on unsold balances. This wallet converted the entire position back into ETH. That move provides a clearer measure of realized gains during the CASHCAT price rally.

Lookonchain also suggested the wallet could belong to crypto creator Brian Jung. No public on-chain evidence confirms that link. Jung separately posted that he cashed out more than $1 million from CASHCAT and missed an additional seven-figure upside.

Other early traders show the timing risk around the Robinhood Chain token. One wallet reportedly turned an $86 purchase into about $1.6 million after selling part of its holdings. Another trader sold 20 million tokens for only $711 before the same balance later reached a multimillion-dollar estimated value.

Solana Expansion Adds New Liquidity and Trading Routes CASHCAT began as a community token linked to Robinhood’s earlier Cash Cat name. Its story gained traction after Robinhood Chain launched and attracted trading across new ecosystem assets. The Solana meme coin now trades across more than one venue and network.

Solana confirmed that CASHCAT went live through Sunrise. The platform brings external assets onto Solana through issuer-designated canonical tokens. The listing gives users access through Solana wallets, aggregators, and decentralized exchanges.

Hyperliquid added CASHCAT perpetual futures with leverage capped at 3x. Traders can now take long or short exposure without holding the spot token. Derivatives may lift turnover, although they also create faster liquidation risk during sharp price moves.

CASHCAT price traded near $0.199 during the latest DEX Screener check. The Robinhood Chain pair held about $11.5 million in liquidity and a market capitalization near $197.8 million. Its 24-hour volume reached roughly $31.9 million, split between $16.3 million in buys and $15.6 million in sells.

Source: Coingecko That liquidity remains small compared with the token’s market value. Large exits can therefore move the CASHCAT price quickly, especially after leveraged markets attract short-term traders. Copycat contracts on Solana also raise verification risks for buyers searching the ticker across different pools.

Quick Summary Bitcoin receives the largest allocation at 40% thanks to institutional adoption and proven market stability Ethereum captures 25% of the portfolio for its dominance in decentralized finance and smart contracts Solana claims 15% based on superior transaction throughput and expanding ecosystem Chainlink secures 10% for providing critical oracle services across blockchain networks Near Protocol takes 5% offering exposure to AI integration and Layer 1 innovation A cryptocurrency expert has detailed a strategic approach for distributing $1,000 across five digital assets plus a stablecoin buffer, designed to optimize both security and upside potential in today’s market environment.

Core Holdings: Bitcoin and Ethereum Anchor the Strategy [[LINK_START_1]]Bitcoin[[LINK_END_1]] commands the dominant position with a 40% allocation, representing $400 of the total investment. As the cryptocurrency sector’s flagship asset by market capitalization, it benefits from continuous institutional capital inflows via spot exchange-traded funds and corporate balance sheet acquisitions. Its established history and deep liquidity position it as the portfolio’s most reliable component.

Bitcoin (BTC) Price [[LINK_START_3]]Ethereum[[LINK_END_3]] claims the second-largest position at 25%, equating to $250. As the fundamental infrastructure supporting decentralized finance and the primary platform for asset tokenization, it remains the preferred choice for financial institutions experimenting with distributed ledger technology.

Combined, these two market leaders comprise 65% of the entire allocation. This substantial weighting acknowledges their relatively reduced volatility when measured against smaller market cap alternatives.

Solana captures 15% of the portfolio at $150. The network challenges Ethereum through superior processing speed and minimal transaction costs while establishing significant traction in decentralized finance, payment systems, and user-facing applications. Though it introduces elevated risk, it simultaneously offers greater appreciation potential should mainstream adoption accelerate.

Chainlink occupies 10% of the allocation at $100. Its decentralized oracle infrastructure serves as the critical bridge connecting blockchain networks with external data sources, proving indispensable for smart contract functionality and enterprise blockchain implementations. As the tokenization of tangible assets gains momentum, dependency on this data infrastructure layer may intensify.

Near Protocol completes the active holdings at 5%, representing $50. The project emphasizes artificial intelligence infrastructure alongside its Layer 1 blockchain capabilities. While it represents the portfolio’s most speculative and smallest position, it provides valuable exposure to the convergence of AI and cryptocurrency sectors.

Strategic Stablecoin Buffer Explained The remaining 5%, totaling $50, stays allocated in stablecoins. This isn’t merely a defensive position—it equips investors with immediate purchasing power during market corrections without requiring the liquidation of current holdings.

Cryptocurrency valuations can experience dramatic swings within compressed timeframes. Maintaining a modest cash-equivalent reserve delivers tactical flexibility when valuations decline.

Rationale Behind Multi-Asset Diversification No individual cryptocurrency can be certain to deliver superior returns. Distributing capital across five distinct assets with varying utilities and risk profiles helps contain potential losses if any single position underperforms.

[[LINK_START_4]]Bitcoin[[LINK_END_4]] and Ethereum establish the portfolio’s stable foundation. [[LINK_START_5]]Solana[[LINK_END_5]], Chainlink, and Near Protocol introduce enhanced appreciation opportunities accompanied by proportionally increased risk.

The allocation strategy mirrors present market dynamics. Institutional participation continues expanding, artificial intelligence is intersecting with blockchain technology, and infrastructure protocols are becoming increasingly fundamental to network operations.

This approach doesn’t pursue rapid speculation. Instead, it presents a methodical entry framework for investors with $1,000 seeking diversified cryptocurrency exposure while avoiding concentration in any single digital asset.

469 Followers

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of CRCL, COIN either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

This New Spinoff Is a Nuclear and AI Chip Beneficiary Worth WatchingSolstice Advanced Mat NASDAQ: SOLS announced an agreement to acquire Element Solutions in a cash-and-stock transaction valued at approximately $14.5 billion, including the assumption of net debt, executives said on a conference call discussing the deal.

Under the terms outlined by Solstice President and CEO David Sewell, Element Solutions shareholders will receive $10 in cash and 0.5 shares of Solstice common stock for each Element Solutions share. Sewell said the consideration represents a 15% premium to Element Solutions’ closing price on Friday. Upon closing, Element Solutions shareholders are expected to own approximately 44% of the combined company.

Get Solstice Advanced Mat alerts:

The combined company will operate as Solstice, with Sewell serving as chief executive officer. The board will include 11 directors, including Element Solutions CEO Ben Gliklich and two other designees from the Element Solutions board, subject to standard governance procedures. Solstice said it has fully committed financing in place and expects the transaction to close in the first half of 2027, pending shareholder approvals from both companies, regulatory approvals and other customary closing conditions.

Companies Point to Electronics and Data Center Demand Sewell said the transaction would create “a global advanced materials leader” with combined 2025 net sales of approximately $6.8 billion and adjusted EBITDA of $1.7 billion. He said the combined business would hold leading positions across end markets and be backed by more than 8,300 patents and pending applications.

Solstice framed the deal as an acceleration of its strategy following its separation as an independent company last October. Sewell said the acquisition would strengthen Solstice’s position in electronic materials, particularly across semiconductor fabrication, packaging, assembly and thermal management.

“Together, we will be able to deliver broader solutions, greater performance, and deeper co-innovation with customers,” Sewell said.

Executives emphasized secular demand tied to artificial intelligence, advanced computing and data center construction. Sewell said denser and higher-powered chips are driving demand for advanced packaging and new thermal management materials, while also increasing demand for data center cooling and power solutions. He said Solstice’s existing refrigerants and uranium conversion services are relevant to the broader data center build-out.

Element Solutions CEO Says Deal Is ‘Better Together’ Gliklich said Element Solutions did not put itself up for sale and was approached by Solstice. He described the deal as a strong strategic fit, citing complementary portfolios and customer relationships.

Element Solutions generates just over 70% of its revenue from electronics, Gliklich said, with the remainder from specialty businesses. Within electronics, he said about 75% of sales come from business-to-business enterprise markets, and more than 20% of total sales come from the data center market.

Gliklich said Element Solutions’ consumable products, qualification status and high switching costs help insulate the business from capital cycle volatility. He also highlighted recent portfolio actions, including the divestiture of its graphics business and the acquisitions of Micromax and EFC, as well as the addition of Kuprion technology.

“This is very much a better together story, one that comes at the right time to meaningfully accelerate all facets of our business,” Gliklich said.

Synergies and Financial Targets Solstice said it has identified more than $180 million in expected annualized run-rate cost synergies, net of costs, within three years of closing. Sewell said those synergies include:

Approximately $100 million from operational initiatives and operating model integration, including efficiencies across G&A, sales and marketing, and R&D; About $25 million from supply chain improvements, including raw material and procurement scale and copper recovery from deposition processes; About $20 million from footprint optimization; About $35 million from other initiatives. Solstice CFO Tina Pierce said the combined company, including expected run-rate synergies, is projected to have an adjusted EBITDA margin of approximately 26%. She said the company expects medium-term revenue growth at a mid- to high-single-digit rate, with adjusted EBITDA growing faster than revenue as synergies are realized. Pierce also said the transaction is expected to be accretive to adjusted earnings per share in the first year.

Pierce said Solstice expects net leverage of about 3.5 times at closing and plans to reduce leverage below 3 times within 18 months after closing. The company’s longer-term net leverage target is 2 times to 3 times.

Executives Address Integration and Portfolio Questions During the question-and-answer session, Sewell said the timing of the deal reflected customer demand for solutions in advanced electronics and the complementary nature of the two portfolios. He said the integration would be focused on growth, innovation and customers, while Gliklich said the integration appears “reasonably straightforward” based on preliminary work.

Asked about Solstice’s broader portfolio, Sewell said the company does not intend to become a pure-play electronics company. He said refrigerants and nuclear are connected to the data center opportunity through cooling and power needs, and he described Solstice as a “complete solutions provider” across attractive growth markets.

On revenue synergies, Sewell said there may be near-term cross-selling opportunities through each company’s customer relationships, while longer-term opportunities could require customer qualification processes that may take around two years. Pierce said only a relatively small amount of revenue synergy is built into the company’s financial model, which is more heavily underpinned by cost synergies.

Executives also said planned investments remain included in their model, including Element Solutions’ Kuprion facilities, Solstice’s nuclear expansion, the doubling of Solstice’s sputtering targets facility in Spokane and investments in next-generation lightweight body armor.

Sewell said Solstice does not anticipate regulatory issues, describing the transaction as “highly complementary.” Details such as the break fee are expected to be included in forthcoming disclosures.

About Solstice Advanced Mat NASDAQ: SOLSSolstice Advanced Materials is a leading global specialty materials company that advances science for smarter outcomes. Solstice offers high-performance solutions that enable critical industries and applications, including refrigerants, semiconductor manufacturing, data center cooling, nuclear power, protective fibers, healthcare packaging and more.

This instant news alert was generated by narrative science technology and financial data from MarketBeat in order to provide readers with the fastest reporting and unbiased coverage. Please send any questions or comments about this story to [email protected].

Should You Invest $1,000 in Solstice Advanced Mat Right Now?Before you consider Solstice Advanced Mat, you'll want to hear this.

MarketBeat keeps track of Wall Street's top-rated and best performing research analysts and the stocks they recommend to their clients on a daily basis. MarketBeat has identified the five stocks that top analysts are quietly whispering to their clients to buy now before the broader market catches on... and Solstice Advanced Mat wasn't on the list.

While Solstice Advanced Mat currently has a Hold rating among analysts, top-rated analysts believe these five stocks are better buys.

View The Five Stocks Here

Tesla, Nvidia, and Google helped shape the last era of market growth, but the next wave could come from a new group of companies. Inside this report, you’ll find 7 stocks that could play a major role in the next tech-driven market boom.

Get This Free Report

Trading activity on Shibarium-based decentralized exchanges (DEXs) is showing signs of recovery after daily volume surged by more than 1,500% within 24 hours.

According to data from DeFiLlama, Shibarium’s DEX trading volume jumped 1,517%, rising from just $17 on July 9 to $275 on July 10. Notably, Shiba Inu’s native decentralized exchange, ShibaSwap, accounted for the entire $275 in trading volume.

Although the figure remains insignificant compared to rival blockchain ecosystems that process tens of millions of dollars in daily DEX volume, the increase represents a notable improvement from Shibarium’s recent performance.

Trading Volume Recovers After Weeks of Inactivity The latest spike follows an extended period of minimal trading activity on the network.

Notably, Shibarium recorded no DEX trading volume from June 23 through the end of the month. Activity resumed at the beginning of July, but only $3 worth of trades were executed. Trading volume then climbed to $17 on July 9 before surging to $275 the following day, representing a 1,517% day-over-day increase.

While trading activity remains modest in absolute terms, the latest figures suggest that liquidity is gradually returning to the Shibarium ecosystem. 

Shibarium DEX Volume Shibarium TVL and Transactions Soar Meanwhile, Shibarium’s decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem has also expanded in recent weeks. At press time, the network’s total value locked (TVL) stood at $24,014, representing an 11.71% increase from its June 27 level. 

Additionally, TVL has risen by 1.50% over the past 24 hours, indicating continued growth in assets deposited across Shibarium-based protocols. Beyond decentralized exchange activity, overall network usage has also strengthened.

Data from Shibariumscan shows that daily transactions, which had remained below 2,000 since July 5, surged to 5,170 on July 10. This represents a 361% increase from the 1,120 transactions recorded on July 9.

Despite the recent slowdown, Shibarium has continued to process substantial on-chain activity throughout its lifetime. The network has now recorded more than 1.56 billion total transactions across approximately 18.06 million blocks.

The simultaneous rise in DEX trading volume, TVL, and daily transactions suggests that activity across the Shibarium ecosystem is gradually recovering after a prolonged period of weak on-chain engagement. 

DisClamier: This content is informational and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author's personal opinions and do not reflect The Crypto Basic opinion. Readers are encouraged to do thorough research before making any investment decisions. The Crypto Basic is not responsible for any financial losses.

This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.

The AI data center buildout is minting a second tier of winners that most retail investors still haven’t priced in. While the crowd fights over GPU tickers, the money is quietly flowing into the plumbing: RF, optical, custom silicon, PCIe retimers, wafer-scale compute. Consider that Arm Holdings (NASDAQ:ARM | ARM Price Prediction) alone now sees over $2 billion in customer demand for its AGI CPU across FY27-FY28, with the data center CPU market pegged at more than $100B by 2030. That is one company, one product line. The following five names sit directly on the fuse.

1. MACOM Technology Solutions Start with the name almost nobody puts on their AI list. MACOM Technology Solutions (NASDAQ:MTSI) builds the RF, microwave, analog and optical semiconductors that increasingly show up in hyperscaler switch cages and pluggable optics. As 800G migrates to 1.6T and copper interconnects hit their reach limits inside AI racks, MACOM’s analog and light-wave content per rack goes up, not down. This is the shovel play behind the shovel play.

Fiscal Q2 2026, reported May 7 was the tell. Revenue hit $288.95 million, up 22.5% year over year, adjusted gross margin expanded to 58.5%, and management guided fiscal Q3 to $331M to $339M in revenue with adjusted EPS of $1.31 to $1.37. The Street is catching up: analysts carry a consensus target of $403 with three strong buys and nine buys against zero sells.

The chart tells the rest. Shares are up 76.32% year to date through July 10, yet the stock trades at a forward multiple of 45x, well below the pure-play AI silicon cohort. The heavyweight comes next, and it has already tripled.

2. Marvell Technology Marvell Technology (NASDAQ:MRVL) is the custom silicon partner every hyperscaler wants on speed dial. Its portfolio spans 800G and 1.6T scale-out optics, 51.2T Ethernet switches, NPO and CPO optical solutions, and custom XPU designs, which puts Marvell directly inside the AI cluster. The February acquisitions of Celestial AI (photonic fabric) and XConn Technologies bolted on the exact optical interconnect IP that determines who wins the next generation of scale-up fabrics.

Q1 FY2027, reported May 27 put numbers behind the thesis. Revenue reached $2.418 billion, up 27.6% year over year, with the data center segment contributing $1.83 billion, or 76% of revenue, up 27% year over year. Management guided Q2 to $2.70 billion. On the call, CEO Matt Murphy told investors, “We are seeing exceptional AI-related bookings, and as a result, we are significantly raising Marvell’s revenue outlook for both fiscal 2027 and fiscal 2028”.

The stock is up 163.80% year to date and 221.44% over the past year. Yet with 31 Buy ratings and seven Strong Buy ratings against a consensus target of $252.26, sell-side conviction remains intact. The next name doesn’t build chips at all. It taxes them.

3. Arm Holdings Every custom AI CPU shipping in volume in 2026 runs on Arm Holdings IP. NVIDIA Vera, Google Axion, Microsoft Cobalt: all Arm-based. Arm collects a license upfront, then a royalty on every unit shipped, forever. That is the toll-booth model, and the toll booth is now sitting on the fastest-growing road in tech.

Q4 FY2026, reported May 6 delivered revenue of $1.49 billion, up 20.1% year over year, with licensing revenue of $819 million, up 29% and data center royalty more than doubling year over year. CEO Rene Haas framed the setup bluntly: “As AI becomes more agentic, demand for Arm AGI CPU, Arm’s first data center chip, has exceeded expectations, reinforcing Arm as the compute platform for the AI era.” Meta is the lead partner.

July 16 is the Final Day to Tap Into the Lithium Boom (sponsor)
General Motors, POSCO, and 50,000+ everyday investors have already backed lithium producer EnergyX.

Here's why you should do the same before their July 16 investment deadline: lithium prices are up 75% this year, with demand projected to grow a staggering 5X by 2040.

With tech that can recover up to 3X more lithium than traditional methods, EnergyX is preparing to unlock up to 15M+ tons. Become a private-stage EnergyX investor before the July 16 deadline.

Shares are up 181.87% year to date. Valuation is stretched at 137x forward earnings, but the analyst pool holds seven Strong Buy ratings and 20 Buy ratings. Retail is here too: Reddit sentiment on r/wallstreetbets rebounded to a bullish 74 by June 27 after a brief regret-post-driven dip. The next stock is the one connecting all of these chips inside the rack.

4. Astera Labs Astera Labs (NASDAQ:ALAB) makes the retimers, smart cable modules, and fabric switches that keep PCIe 6 and CXL links alive inside AI servers. When rack density climbs and every XPU wants to talk to every other XPU at line rate, Astera’s silicon is what makes it possible. In May, the company launched the Scorpio X-Series 320-lane Smart Fabric Switch targeting a $20B merchant scale-up market by 2030. That is not a niche.

Q1 2026 was a statement quarter. Revenue reached $308.36 million, up 93.4% year over year and 14% sequentially, non-GAAP EPS came in at $0.61 versus $0.54 expected, and operating income jumped to $61.8M, up 447.9% year over year. Management guided Q2 to $355 million to $365 million. Astera has beaten consensus in every one of its ten reported quarters, with surprise percentages that show sell-side models can’t keep up.

Shares are up 129.99% year to date and 325.65% over the past year, with a 24.82% pop in the last month alone. The last name on this list builds the entire AI system itself.

5. Cerebras Systems And here it is: the payoff. Cerebras Systems (NASDAQ:CBRS) went public in Q2 2026, raising $6.4 billion, backed into the AWS ecosystem with a partnership pairing Trainium 3 with the Cerebras CS-3, and then locked in a multi-year OpenAI deal for 750MW of inference compute valued at more than $20B. OpenAI also extended Cerebras a $1B working capital loan in January 2026. Wafer-scale has graduated into the AI inference backbone OpenAI chose. Q1 2026 revenue printed at $193.4M, up 94% year over year, with Cloud and Other Services up 178% to $82.8M. The full-year 2026 guide sits at $855M to $865M, roughly 69% growth at the midpoint. CEO Andrew Feldman put it plainly: “Cerebras’ wafer-scale technology delivers the fastest AI in the world… This is the Cerebras mission.”

The setup is asymmetric. Shares have already pulled back 30.86% since the May 14 IPO peak as retail digested guidance that forecast shrinking margins, with the Reddit sentiment score cratering to 35 on IPO day. Analysts see a target of $291.09, well above the current price. When the largest AI lab in the world writes you a $20 billion contract and a $1 billion loan, gross margin compression in year one is a footnote, not a thesis.

The Bottom Line The AI datacenter trade has moved past the GPU. It now runs through RF and optical content, custom XPU silicon, licensed CPU cores, PCIe fabrics and wafer-scale inference clusters. Every one of these five names is already accelerating revenue, and four of the five have outperformed the market year to date. The window on the “under the radar” framing is closing quickly as sell-side targets catch up to shipment reality. Keep an eye on the group into the next earnings cycle.

Meet America's Newest $1b Unicorn (Sponsor) A US startup just passed a $1 billion private valuation, joining billion-dollar private companies like OpenAI and ByteDance. Unlike those other unicorns, you can invest in EnergyX right now; but only until July 16.

Over 50,000 people already have, along with global giants like General Motors and POSCO.

Here's why there's so much interest: EnergyX's patented tech can recover up to 3X more lithium than traditional methods. That's a big deal, as demand for lithium is expected to 5X current production levels by 2040. Become an early-stage EnergyX shareholder before the 7/16 investment deadline.

Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.

On July 1, several media outlets reported that Meta Platforms (META +6.16%) was forming a new business unit, internally dubbed "Meta Compute", to sell its excess AI cloud capacity to third-party customers. Meta will reportedly sell both its raw GPU computing capacity and remote access to its infrastructure to companies so they can run their own AI models.

Shares of CoreWeave (CRWV 0.87%), a leading neocloud provider that provides many of the same services, have dropped nearly 11% since that news broke. Does that pullback represent a buying opportunity or a dire warning for the company's future?

Image source: Getty Images.

Why did Meta's strategic shift crush CoreWeave's stock? Meta's strategic shift surprised CoreWeave's investors, since Meta had just agreed to pay CoreWeave $21 billion through 2032 for its neocloud services this April. Meta also struck a similar multi-billion dollar deal with another neocloud company, Nebius (NBIS +1.60%).

Therefore, it might initially seem odd for Meta to sell its own cloud computing power when it clearly needs it. Meta's agreements with CoreWeave and Nebius also prohibit it from reselling any of that cloud computing power, so it can only sell the excess AI cloud capacity at its own first-party data centers.

Today's Change

(

-0.87

%) $

-0.78

Current Price

$

88.92

However, Meta plans to invest up to $145 billion this year in expanding its own AI infrastructure. As it builds more data centers, some of those servers will remain idle until they're fully utilized by its social networking platforms and AI services.

To avoid wasting too much cash and energy on underutilized servers, Meta wants to rent them out to third parties -- a move that could transform it into a formidable competitor to companies like CoreWeave and Nebius. CoreWeave's other major customers, such as Jane Street and IBM (NYSE: IBM), could also eventually follow the same playbook if they decide to expand their cloud infrastructure.

On the bright side, CoreWeave's largest customer -- Microsoft (MSFT +0.15%) -- probably won't do the same thing because it's already one of the world's biggest cloud infrastructure companies. Instead, CoreWeave will continue to serve as an "overflow tank" for its cloud services.

Does the pullback represent a buying opportunity? From 2025 to 2028, analysts expect CoreWeave's revenue to surge from $5.1 billion to $40.3 billion as its adjusted earnings before interest, taxes, depreciation, and amortization (EBITDA) soars from $3.1 billion to $25.7 billion. With an enterprise value of $91.2 billion, it still looks like a bargain at 7 times and 13 times this year's revenue and adjusted EBITDA, respectively.

Meta's move is alarming, but it doesn't break the bullish thesis for CoreWeave. Even if Meta sells its idle computing power to cut costs, it doesn't indicate that other companies will eagerly tether themselves to the social media giant's infrastructure. Instead, independent neocloud players like CoreWeave and Nebius should remain appealing choices as the AI market expands -- so this pullback could be a great buying opportunity.

Leo Sun has positions in Meta Platforms. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends International Business Machines, Meta Platforms, and Microsoft. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - July 11, 2026) - WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds purchasers of common stock of Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ: MSFT) between May 1, 2025 and January 28, 2026, inclusive (the "Class Period"), of the important August 11, 2026 lead plaintiff deadline.

SO WHAT: If you purchased Microsoft common stock during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement.

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Microsoft class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/cases/microsoft-corporation/join or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than August 11, 2026. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation.

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually handle securities class actions, but are merely middlemen that refer clients or partner with law firms that actually litigate the cases. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered billions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Microsoft's Copilot family of products had experienced significant brand positioning, user experience, usage, data siloing, computational capacity, organizational, and interoperability problems; (2) Microsoft's flagship proprietary AI model ranked well below competitors on a number of benchmark tests; (3) Microsoft needed to increase by billions of dollars its capital expenditures and divert graphics processing unit ("GPU") and central processing unit ("CPU") capacity away from fulfilling demand for its profitable Azure services in order to improve the competitive positioning of its critical Copilot family of products and increase its AI-related research and development ("R&D"); and (4) as a result, Microsoft had failed to convert a significant percentage of its commercial Microsoft 365 users to paid Copilot subscriptions and Microsoft's Copilot offerings had lost market share to rival products, a trend that was increasing. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the Microsoft class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/cases/microsoft-corporation/join or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action.

No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-rosen-law-firm, on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rosen_firm or on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rosenlawfirm/.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

-------------------------------

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/304772

Source: The Rosen Law Firm PA

Ready to Announce with Confidence? Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.

Contact Us

HomeStock IdeasLong IdeasTech 

SummaryKyber delay concerns remain unconfirmed, while Nvidia maintains its roadmap and $91 billion quarterly revenue outlook.Nvidia's second AI wave expands beyond hyperscalers into enterprise, sovereign AI, and agentic applications globally.AI Cloud, Industrial, and Enterprise revenue grew 31% sequentially, while AI Cloud revenue tripled year-over-year.Nvidia's ecosystem, software moat, and AI factory strategy support growth beyond traditional GPU demand cycles. PonyWang/iStock via Getty Images

Introduction The industry is still thinking about Nvidia (NVDA) in the context of the first wave of AI, where demand was largely limited to a select group of hyperscalers looking to train ever-more complex foundation

687 Followers

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of NVDA either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

It was only this past February that Walmart (WMT +1.48%) surged to a market capitalization of more than $1 trillion. That milestone is rarefied air: Just a handful of companies have ever reached that mark. Walmart was shining bright on Wall Street as its e-commerce and digital advertising businesses boomed, and shareholders were thrilled.

Now, just five months later, Walmart has shed more than $100 billion in market cap, and its market cap recently dipped below $900 billion. The main reason for that slide was that Wall Street had unreasonably high expectations for the retail giant.

So, should investors be concerned or see this as an opportunity to buy Walmart at a better price?

Today's Change

(

1.48

%) $

1.66

Current Price

$

113.87

In Walmart's fiscal 2027 first quarter, which ended May 1, it beat analysts' consensus revenue estimates. Still, because the company only met profit expectations and reaffirmed its full-year guidance rather than raising it, the stock pulled back following its May 29 report.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

The sell-off that followed feels more like an overreaction than a necessary correction. Walmart's e-commerce and advertising businesses are growing at double-digit percentage rates, and its fundamentals are incredibly strong.

This doesn't mean the company isn't facing real headwinds, though. Tariffs and higher inflation are applying pressure. The stock is also still trading at a premium, particularly compared to some retail peers such as Target. Walmart announced earlier this week that it is reducing prices to entice cash-strapped shoppers. This move should help boost sales in the upcoming quarter and appease a hard-to-please Wall Street.

Ultimately, Walmart remains a strong buy for long-term investors. The stock offers solid growth and an annual dividend of $0.99 per share that, at current share prices, yields about 0.9%. Even with its market cap sitting below $900 billion again, it's still one of the best companies in the world to own.

Catie Hogan has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Target and Walmart. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Eric S. Yuan, Chief Executive Officer, reported a disposition of 58,655 shares of Zoom Communications, Inc. (ZM 0.13%) for approximately $5.1 million, according to an SEC Form 4 filing.

Transaction summaryMetricValueShares sold (indirectly held)58,655Transaction value$5.1 millionPost-transaction shares (indirectly held)56,622Post-transaction value$5.1 millionTransaction value based on SEC Form 4 weighted average sale price ($86.38); post-transaction value based on July 9, 2026 market close ($89.88).

Key questionsWhat was the motivation for this disposition?
The sale was non-discretionary and was executed specifically to cover tax withholding obligations associated with the vesting of restricted stock units (RSUs). This technical transaction does not represent a discretionary exit or a change in the CEO's fundamental outlook on the company.What is the extent of the insider's remaining equity exposure?
Eric Yuan maintains substantial economic interest in the company through 56,622 shares held indirectly in the 2018 Yuan and Zhang Revocable Trust and over 21.2 million derivative securities across direct and indirect holdings. This includes approximately 20.7 million indirect derivative securities held through the same family trust.How does the transaction timing align with recent stock performance?
The shares were withheld at a weighted average price of $86.38 during a period where the stock closed at $89.88 as of July 9, 2026. This occurred against a backdrop of a 16% share price appreciation over the preceding 12 months.What are the terms of the underlying equity awards?
The shares originated from several restricted stock unit grants dating back to July 2022, July 2023, and April 2026. These awards follow structured quarterly vesting schedules spanning three to four years, suggesting a regular cadence of similar tax-related dispositions may occur as future tranches vest.Company OverviewMetricValueShare Price (as of market close 2026-07-09)$89.88Market Capitalization$26.4 billionRevenue (TTM)$4.9 billionNet Income (TTM)$2.1 billionCompany SnapshotZoom Communications provides a comprehensive unified communications platform that enables video conferencing, messaging, and collaboration capabilities, generating revenue primarily through subscription-based licensing models and usage-based services across enterprise and consumer segments.The company operates a Software-as-a-Service (SaaS) business model, monetizing its platform through tiered subscription plans, premium features, and add-on services that serve organizations of varying sizes and complexity requirements.Zoom's customer base encompasses enterprises, small and medium-sized businesses, educational institutions, and individual users globally, with particular strength in the enterprise segment where organizations require scalable, secure communication infrastructure.Zoom Communications operates at significant scale with a market capitalization of $26.4 billion and TTM revenues of $4.9 billion, reflecting its position as a leading provider of unified communications solutions. The company maintains a global operational footprint organized across three primary regions — the Americas, Asia Pacific, and EMEA — enabling it to serve diverse markets with localized support and compliance capabilities.

Founded in 2011 by Eric Yuan and headquartered in San Jose, California, Zoom has established a competitive advantage through its intuitive user interface, reliable platform performance, and comprehensive feature set that addresses the evolving demands of hybrid and remote work environments.

What this transaction means for investorsGiven that the July 8 and July 9 sale of Zoom shares by CEO Eric Yuan were executed to fulfill tax withholding obligations from the vesting of RSUs, these dispositions are not a cause for investor concern. He also has 20.7 million Class B shares in his family trust that can be converted into common stock, illustrating the sizable equity stake he maintains in the company.

Zoom shares are up this year thanks in part to solid business performance, but more likely due to the company’s stake in Anthropic, a prominent artificial intelligence business that is expected to have a highly-anticipated IPO in 2026.

Zoom’s revenue hit $1.2 billion, a 5.5% year-over-year increase, in its fiscal first quarter ended April 30. Of that, $755.7 million came from enterprise customers, representing a jump up of 7.2% year over year. It’s encouraging to see the company achieve stronger sales growth among its business customers, which bodes well for Zoom’s future now that its impressive pandemic-related growth phase is long gone.

Robert Izquierdo has positions in Zoom Communications. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Zoom Communications. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

American Express (AXP +1.11%) stock has been sliding this year as the market continues to worry about interest rates, inflation, oil prices, and how they're going to impact the economy. The Warren Buffett favorite, though, continues to demonstrate growth and momentum. Are the worries unfounded?

Here's why card-fee growth matters more than spending growth right now, and what to expect when the company reports second-quarter earnings on July 24.

Image source: American Express.

The inflation-proof model American Express isn't the largest credit card network in the world, but it targets the affluent, who tend to spend more. It has a fee-based model for most of its cards that attracts a higher-income population, and even though it only has 155.9 million cards in force, its revenue is actually much higher than that of Visa (V +0.27%), which services about 5 billion cards worldwide.

Data by YCharts.

This model works well and provides resilience in challenging economic environments because it has a recurring revenue stream that flows directly to the bottom line. Whether members shop more or less, they still pay the annual fee. There have been times when even its higher spenders have been under pressure, and the fee-based model has provided protection during those periods.

So far, business has been robust despite the challenging macroeconomy. In the 2026 first quarter, revenue increased 11% year over year, while card fees, which accounted for 14.5% of the total, increased 18%. Billed business was up 10%. Earnings per share (EPS) were up 18% as well to $4.28, and Wall Street is looking for $4.40 in EPS for the second quarter, a 7.8% increase year over year.

The future growth engine Another feature that plays into this is its successful pivot targeting younger shoppers, who are buying into the long-term model. Millennials accounted for 30% of the total in the first quarter but increased 13%, while Gen-Z cardmembers accounted for 6% of the total but grew 38%. That's in contrast with Gen-X members, who accounted for 36% and grew 8%. These shoppers should provide years of growth as they engage with the platform, pay annual fees, and spend.

Today's Change

(

1.11

%) $

3.86

Current Price

$

350.58

American Express, which is looking a lot more like a subscription business than a volume play, can navigate challenges more smoothly than a company like Visa, which simply takes a small cut of every swipe. In Visa's case, fewer swipes mean less revenue. In Amex's case, more swipes sweeten the deal, but it's still coming out ahead.

It's also a lot cheaper than Visa, trading at 21 times trailing-12-month sales vs. 31 for Visa. That likely figures into why Buffett likes it so much more, and it could be undervalued as a subscription-based model at this price.

Costco (COST +0.36%) has never been a cheap stock. But premium businesses rarely are. The warehouse retailer has spent decades building one of the strongest business models in retail, and several long-term trends suggest it could continue rewarding shareholders well into the next decade.

Membership has its privileges The biggest advantage for Costco isn't bulk groceries or discounted televisions. It's membership. During fiscal 2025, Costco generated approximately $5.32 billion in membership fee revenue, up 10% from $4.83 billion the prior year. Even more impressive, its U.S. and Canada membership renewal rate clocked in at 92.3%, while its worldwide renewal rate was 89.8%. Those are among the highest retention rates of any subscription-based business and help explain why membership fees remain one of Costco's biggest competitive advantages.

Image source: Getty Images.

Costco's membership engine has continued to strengthen this year, too. During the third quarter of fiscal 2026, membership fee revenue climbed 10.7% year over year to $1.37 billion, outpacing overall sales growth. Paid memberships increased 4.1%, while executive memberships (the company's highest-spending customers) grew 9.6%. Worth noting: renewal rates also remained strong at 92.2% in the U.S. and Canada and 89.7% worldwide, reinforcing the stability of Costco's recurring revenue stream.

Today's Change

(

0.36

%) $

3.28

Current Price

$

916.25

That recurring revenue gives Costco tremendous flexibility. It can afford to sell merchandise at thinner margins than most retailers because memberships provide a reliable source of profit. That pricing advantage keeps customers coming back, creating a virtuous cycle that's difficult for competitors to replicate. Meanwhile, the company continues to expand quite rapidly.

Penetrating new markets Costco's physical footprint continues to expand alongside its membership base. As of the third quarter of fiscal 2026, the company operated 931 warehouses worldwide, including 639 in the United States and Puerto Rico. Management continues to see significant opportunity for new locations, too, particularly in international markets where warehouse clubs remain relatively underpenetrated.

Every new warehouse not only drives additional merchandise sales but also brings in thousands of new paying members, reinforcing Costco's recurring membership revenue model. At the same time, e-commerce is becoming a bigger contributor, too. For Q3 2026, the company reported digitally enabled comparable sales growth of 21.5%.

Balance sheet remains strong Costco's financial position remains one of its greatest strengths. During fiscal 2025, the company generated $13.3 billion in operating cash flow and ended the year with about $14 billion in cash and cash equivalents. That financial strength allows Costco to fund new warehouse openings, invest billions in distribution infrastructure and technology, raise its regular dividend, and continue returning capital to shareholders without placing significant strain on its balance sheet.

Of course, you can't ignore valuation. Costco trades at a premium earnings multiple compared to other retailers, leaving less room for disappointment if consumer spending weakens or growth slows.

Still, it's difficult to find many retailers with Costco's combination of recurring membership income, exceptionally loyal customers, consistent store expansion, and strong cash generation. Those advantages have allowed the company to grow through multiple economic cycles, and there's little reason to believe those competitive strengths will disappear before 2030.

NEW YORK, July 11, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) --

WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds purchasers of Class A or Class C common stock of Zillow Group, Inc. (NASDAQ: ZG) (NASDAQ: Z) between February 11, 2025 and May 7, 2026, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”), of the important August 10, 2026 lead plaintiff deadline in the securities class action first filed by the Firm.

SO WHAT: If you purchased Zillow common stock during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement.

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Zillow class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/cases/zillow-group-inc/join or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than August 10, 2026. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation.

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually handle securities class actions, but are merely middlemen that refer clients or partner with law firms that actually litigate the cases. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered billions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs’ Bar. Many of the firm’s attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period made materially false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Zillow’s agreement with Redfin Corporation was not a “partnership,” but rather an acquisition of Redfin’s business; (2) as a result of the Redfin Agreement, Zillow faced a materially heightened risk of regulatory scrutiny and liability under federal antitrust laws; (3) upon the filing of an antitrust lawsuit, Zillow continued to downplay its legal exposure; and (4) as a result, defendants’ statements about Zillow’s business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the Zillow class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/cases/zillow-group-inc/join or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action.

No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-rosen-law-firm or on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rosen_firm or on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rosenlawfirm.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

-------------------------------

Contact Information:

        Laurence Rosen, Esq.
        Phillip Kim, Esq.
        The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
        275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
        New York, NY 10016
        Tel: (212) 686-1060
        Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
        Fax: (212) 202-3827
        [email protected]
        www.rosenlegal.com