Brazil has arrived at MetLife Stadium for their Round of 16 clash against Norway, with legendary former captain Dunga calling Vinícius Júnior a “decisive” player in big matches.
The crypto infrastructure behind the beautiful game FIFA built its FIFA Collect platform on the Avalanche blockchain, handling digital collectibles and ticketing infrastructure for the tournament.
Kraken secured the distinction of becoming FIFA’s first official crypto exchange partner ahead of the 2026 World Cup. The deal puts a major centralized exchange’s branding in front of billions of viewers.
Advertisement
Brazil’s national team has its own digital asset play. The Brazil National Football Team Fan Token, traded under the ticker BFT on Bitcichain, offers holders voting rights on certain team decisions and access to NFT-related utilities.
The Vinícius factor, and its darker side Vinícius is not officially affiliated with any tokens or digital asset projects. His only known venture into the space was an NFT collection from early 2022.
Unauthorized meme coins, including one trading under the ticker VINI, have circulated without any endorsement from the player. These tokens pop up around major tournament moments, hoping to catch a wave of retail enthusiasm from fans who don’t know the difference between an official partnership and a Telegram pump group.
What this means for investors FIFA choosing Avalanche for its collectibles platform is a meaningful signal about which Layer 1 chains are winning enterprise deals. Powering ticketing for the World Cup is the kind of real-world use case that blockchain advocates have been promising for years.
Kraken’s FIFA partnership represents a credibility play following the broader industry’s brand perception struggles since the FTX collapse. It signals that FIFA’s compliance team was comfortable enough with Kraken’s regulatory standing to put the brand on the tournament.
Fan tokens like BFT have historically been correlated more with team performance and tournament outcomes than with broader crypto market trends, making them behave less like traditional crypto assets and more like sports betting instruments with extra steps.
For traders, the actionable insight is straightforward: watch how Avalanche network activity responds to World Cup milestones, track BFT volume around Brazil’s tournament results, and avoid anything with a player’s name on it that doesn’t have a verifiable partnership announcement.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
AVAX One Technology, the Nasdaq-listed Avalanche treasury and bitcoin-mining company, said Chief Executive Jolie Kahn resigned effective July 3, with Chief Operating Officer Pete Wylie stepping in as interim CEO, according to an 8-K filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
AVAX One Technology, the Nasdaq-listed digital infrastructure company that mines bitcoin and holds a strategic Avalanche treasury, said Chief Executive Jolie Kahn resigned effective July 3, with Chief Operating Officer Pete Wylie stepping in as interim CEO, according to an 8-K filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
The company, which trades as AVX, said the departure came "by mutual agreement" and that there was no disagreement over the company's operations, policies or practices, per the filing. The board has retained ZRG Partners, a global executive search firm, to find a permanent successor.
Separation TermsKahn will receive a $160,000 lump-sum cash payment in lieu of remaining consulting fees, reimbursement for certain medical insurance costs, and a grant of unregistered common stock with a fair market value of $250,000, under a Separation and Release Agreement dated July 5, according to the 8-K filing. The agreement terminates Kahn's consulting agreement with the company, dated November 1, 2025, and keeps her bound to non-competition, non-solicitation and non-disparagement terms.
Wylie will receive total compensation of $40,000 a month in the expanded role while continuing as COO, the filing shows.
Leadership TransitionBoard chairman Matt Zhang said in the announcement that Kahn "played an instrumental role in positioning AVAX One for long-term success as we transformed into a digital infrastructure company," and that the board has "full confidence in Pete's ability to lead the Company through this transition."
Wylie previously served as CFO of Napster Holdings through its 2025 acquisition by Infinite Reality and as CFO/COO of consumer lender CommonBond, according to the press release. He also co-founded fintech company Gradible, which CommonBond acquired in 2016.
"I am honored and grateful for the opportunity to lead AVAX One through this transition," Wylie said in the release, adding that he is "committed to keeping the team focused on execution and delivering long-term shareholder value" while the board runs its search.
Nasdaq Compliance BackdropThe leadership change comes as AVAX One works to clear a Nasdaq listing deficiency. The company received a notice for falling below Nasdaq's $1.00 minimum closing bid price requirement and faced a compliance deadline of July 6 — the same day its CEO transition became public — to show 10 consecutive trading days back above that threshold. Shareholders approved a 1-for-12 reverse stock split on May 29, which took effect June 15 and cut AVAX One's share count from roughly 92.3 million to about 7.7 million, according to a company press release.
AVAX One describes itself as a digital infrastructure company building modular data centers for AI and high-performance computing, while also mining bitcoin in Alberta and Ohio at roughly 300 PH/s of hashrate and holding a strategic AVAX treasury that earns staking yield, according to the press release.
Avalanche Treasury Corp (AVAT), a separate Nasdaq-listed AVAX treasury vehicle that The Defiant reported in July disclosed a going-concern warning to the SEC after its stock crashed 93% in a month.
AVAX One Technology has started a search for a permanent chief executive after Jolie Kahn resigned as CEO.
Summary
AVAX One is searching for a permanent CEO after Jolie Kahn left the company. Pete Wylie will lead as interim CEO while also staying chief operating officer. Weak AVAX prices keep pressure on public companies tied to Avalanche treasury strategies. The company said Kahn left the role effective immediately, while Chief Operating Officer Pete Wylie will serve as interim CEO.
Wylie will continue to serve as COO while leading the company during the search. AVAX One said its board has retained ZRG Partners to help find a permanent successor.
“We have full confidence in Pete’s ability to lead the Company through this transition,” said Chairman Matt Zhang.
AVAX One has appointed COO Pete Wylie as interim CEO, following the resignation of Jolie Khan.
Wylie is a seasoned entrepreneur-investor with multiple exits, and deep ties to Avalanche, including serving as a Build Games judge this year.
— AVAX One (AVX) (@avax_one) July 6, 2026 Filing details Kahn’s exit In its latest 8-K filing, AVAX One said Kahn’s departure came by mutual agreement and was not linked to any disagreement over the company’s operations, policies, or practices. The filing said she was not removed for cause.
The filing also outlined the separation terms. Kahn will receive a $160,000 lump-sum cash payment, reimbursement for certain medical insurance costs, and $250,000 worth of unregistered common shares. Wylie will receive $40,000 per month while serving as interim CEO.
Avalanche treasury pivot remains central Kahn led the company during its shift from AgriFORCE into an Avalanche-focused digital asset treasury company. In September 2025, AgriFORCE announced plans to rebrand as AVAX One and raise about $550 million.
The company said the strategy aimed to build more than $700 million in AVAX holdings. SkyBridge Capital founder Anthony Scaramucci was named to lead the strategic advisory board. The plan placed AVAX One among the first Nasdaq-listed companies built around an Avalanche treasury strategy.
AVAX One said its business now includes digital infrastructure, Bitcoin mining, and an Avalanche treasury. The company operates Bitcoin mining facilities in Alberta and Ohio with about 300 PH/s of hashrate, while also holding AVAX and seeking yield through staking and ecosystem participation.
AVX and AVAX remain under pressure AVX stock traded at $5.63 at the latest check, up 5.13% on the day, according to Google Finance. The stock opened at $5.21, reached an intraday high of $5.86, and fell as low as $5.24, with a market cap near $549.1 million.
Source: Google Finance Avalanche traded near $6.73, down 1.89% on the day. The token traded between $6.71 and $7.01 over the same period, keeping pressure on companies whose treasury value is linked to AVAX.
The broader Avalanche treasury market has also weakened. As previously reported, Avalanche Treasury Co. shares fell about 73% from their Nasdaq debut level as lower AVAX prices weighed on its digital asset holdings.
As previously reported, Avalanche Treasury Co. closed 38.13% lower on its first Nasdaq trading day in June. The company held about 15 million AVAX at the time, linking its public-market value closely to the token’s price.
AVAX One’s leadership change now comes during a difficult period for public Avalanche treasury firms. The next CEO will inherit a company tied to digital infrastructure, Bitcoin mining, and AVAX accumulation at a time when token prices remain weak and investors are still testing demand for altcoin treasury stocks.
A single malicious governance proposal drained roughly $20 million from BonkDAO’s treasury on Tuesday, laying bare the thin security margins that protect token-weighted voting systems on Solana. Details from the original report show the attacker pushed a governance measure after quietly building a voting block with $4 million worth of BONK, enough to steer the outcome.
The treasury loss hits BonkDAO at an awkward time. BONK remains one of Solana’s largest memecoins by market cap, and its DAO controls a treasury designed to fund ecosystem grants, liquidity incentives, and marketing pushes. Losing $20 million in a single proposal undercuts the notion that large token holders reliably protect community treasuries.
How the Attack Unfolded The attacker did not exploit smart contract code. The vector was far simpler: buy enough governance tokens to dominate a vote. After acquiring $4 million in BONK, the entity submitted a standard-looking treasury transfer proposal. When the vote closed, the treasury moved roughly $20 million in BONK to addresses the attacker controlled.
BonkDAO confirmed it has identified exchange accounts used to acquire the voting block before the proposal. It is now coordinating with exchanges, bridges, and the Solana Foundation to freeze or trace the funds. The speed of the response matters. Exchange compliance teams often have a narrow window to flag suspicious withdrawals before assets cascade through mixers or cross-chain routes.
The Weakness of Token-Weighted Governance DAOs built on pure token-voting models have been taking fire for years, but the memecoin sector has been especially slow to adopt safeguards like time-locks, quorum thresholds tied to active participation, or multi-phase proposal reviews. Many meme coin DAOs optimize for speed and community engagement, not treasury security.
This incident fits a pattern that governance researchers have warned about repeatedly. A well-capitalized actor can purchase enough tokens to pass almost any proposal on chains where governance power is cheap and concentration is low. While BonkDAO’s treasury is substantial, its governance token liquidity did not make the $4 million buy particularly difficult to hide until the vote concluded.
Still, Solana’s broader DeFi and developer activity remain robust. As BlockchainReporter noted in its recent breakdown of top blockchains by developer activity, Solana continues to draw strong builder interest, a trend that exists apart from the speculative winds that drive memecoin treasuries.
Recovery Efforts and What Comes Next The most pressing variable is whether any of the drained BONK can be recovered. Centralized exchanges that hold attacker-linked accounts may freeze remaining balances, but if the tokens have already moved off-platform or been sold, the chances drop sharply. The Solana Foundation’s involvement suggests some hope of freezing on-chain assets, though a truly determined adversary will have planned for that possibility.
What remains uncertain is how BonkDAO adjusts its governance parameters. The community will likely push for higher proposal thresholds and mandatory delay periods, but implementing changes requires another governance vote — the very process that was just compromised. A short-term solution could involve a multisig override controlled by a limited set of trusted contributors, a move that centralizes control but buys time while permanent fixes are debated.
For the wider Solana memecoin corridor, the attack serves as a reminder that treasury size is not a substitute for treasury security. Other DAOs sitting on eight-figure token reserves will now face pressure to explain why their own governance designs cannot be gamed with a fraction of their treasury value.
AUTHOR
Farhan Karim is a technology writer and content strategist with 15+ years of experience writing thousands of articles, blogs, whitepapers, and ebooks on Blockchain, Cryptocurrency, and other tech niches. His expertise in content strategy, SEO, and a keen eye on the ever-evolving tech space have led him to work with companies like Pepsi, Huawei, Arab News, and now Blockchain Reporter.
The BONK price dropped around 8% on July 6 after BonkDAO. The decentralized governance body behind Solana’s popular memecoin $BONK, confirmed that a malicious governance proposal drained an estimated $20 million from its treasury. The attacker strategically planned the attack by using DAO’s voting rules to carry out the exploit. The exploiter carted away an estimated sum of $20 million.
How the Attacker Bought Their Way Into BonkDAO’s Treasury Insights from on-chain analysis and data reports disclosed that investors invested about $4 million in the purchase of BONK via Binance and Bybit days before the vote.
This move gave him enough voting power on Solana’s Realms governance platform needed to manipulate the Bank into approving the transaction proposal without suspicion.
Onchain data showed approximately 4.426 trillion BONK, worth about $20 million, missing after Sowellian BonkDAO authorized a direct treasury transfer. The transaction of the stolen assets was seamless, as the proposal passed with minimal community participation, no execution delay, and the voting power was based on liquid tokens.
At the close of the voting exercise, the attacker immediately moved the funds to a wallet linked to a Bybit account, then transferred them to a second Solana address. Blockchain tracker Lookonchain traced the movement and posted it on X.
Someone spent $4.4M to steal $21.2M from the #BONK treasury, making a profit of $16.8M.
How did it happen?👇
➡️ On June 30, the attacker submitted a governance proposal to transfer 4.426T $BONK($21.2M) from the treasury to a wallet he controlled (9bxW…JHvQ).… pic.twitter.com/VElnDuazki
— Lookonchain (@lookonchain) July 7, 2026
A similar event occurred in March 2026, when attackers hijacked Bunk.fun and deployed wallet drainers to milk users’ accumulated assets. Reports noted that the $BONK case differs sharply, as the attacker moved the stolen funds through the DAO’s own sanctioned process, making it harder to reverse.
Nasdaq-listed Bonk Holdings had recently made a major $32 million purchase of BONK ahead of this incident. This therefore makes the governance breach a particularly sharp setback for institutional confidence in the token.
BONK currently trades at $0.0000054398, down 7.2% in the last 24 hours. The recorded 24-hour trading volume was $116,895,394 with a market cap of $388,771,163.
BonkDAO Coordinates With Exchanges and Law Enforcement to Recover Funds Plans are being made to track down the exchange wallets involved in the malicious transaction and recover the stolen assets. This move was disclosed on X by BonkDAO in a recently released official statement. The Solana Foundation and the law enforcement agents would be maximally utilized in this exercise.
BonkDAO was the target of a malicious governance proposal resulting in an estimated $20M worth of BONK tokens being drained from the BonkDAO treasury.
During the investigation, BonkDAO identified the exchange wallets used to purchase BONK ahead of the proposal. BonkDAO is…
— BONK!!! (@bonk_inu) July 6, 2026
In solidarity, South Korean exchanges Upbit and Kraken have contributed their quota in capturing the attacker by suspending BONK deposits and withdrawals in the meantime.
The broader DeFi security picture in 2026 adds context to this incident. A $45 million breach of the Aave V3 protocol via oracle manipulation occurred in March, and an exploit on Solana-based DEX Jupiter followed in April.
The BONK price had been riding positive sentiment in recent months. Earlier this year, BonkDAO executed a major treasury burn of 1.69 trillion BONK, and BitCapital moved to launch a BONK-backed ETP on the Swiss Exchange.
The governance attack now threatens to undo that goodwill. Community analyst @zubic_eth highlighted on X how token-weighted voting with no lockup requirements made this drain almost inevitable.
This is wild!! 🤯
BONKDAO just got rugged for $20M in BONK through a governance proposal. No smart contract hack, no flash loans. Just an attacker who bought around $4M worth of tokens, stacked enough voting power, and passed a malicious proposal that drained the treasury… pic.twitter.com/FuSEDitFN4
— zubic (@zubic_eth) July 6, 2026
In order for the BONK price to stabilize, strategic moves need to be put in place. Higher quorum thresholds and multisignature controls on treasury movements are some of the determinants of BonkDAO’s success rate.
Our guide compares top decentralized futures exchanges by liquidity and fees.
BonkDAO—the entity managing aspects of the BONK memecoin ecosystem on Solana—has confirmed the loss of roughly $20 million worth of BONK tokens from its treasury. The incident stemmed from a malicious governance proposal that successfully authorized the transfer of funds to an attacker-controlled wallet.
According to BonkDAO’s official statement, the attack exploited the DAO’s voting system rather than any underlying smart contract flaw.
The perpetrator reportedly accumulated sufficient BONK tokens—estimated around $4 million worth—through purchases on exchanges in the lead-up to the vote.
This allowed them to secure enough voting power in the token-weighted governance framework on Solana’s Realms platform to push through the proposal.
BonkDAO was the target of a malicious governance proposal resulting in an estimated $20M worth of BONK tokens being drained from the BonkDAO treasury.
During the investigation, BonkDAO identified the exchange wallets used to purchase BONK ahead of the proposal. BonkDAO is…
— BONK!!! (@bonk_inu) July 6, 2026
The measure reportedly passed with minimal participation, highlighting how low voter turnout and quorum thresholds can enable such exploits.
BonkDAO investigators traced the attacker’s activity to specific exchange wallets used for the pre-proposal token acquisitions.
The stolen tokens, totaling approximately 4.426 trillion BONK at the time, began moving toward centralized exchanges shortly after the proposal executed.
In response, platforms such as South Korea’s Upbit temporarily halted BONK deposits and withdrawals to mitigate further risks.
The DAO has taken swift action by notifying law enforcement and actively collaborating with exchanges, bridges, the Solana Foundation, and other relevant parties.
The goal is to recover the funds, freeze assets where possible, and identify those responsible.
While recovery efforts are ongoing, the immediate market reaction saw the BONK token decline sharply—reports indicated drops of 8% to over 9% in the hours following the announcement.
This event adds to a growing list of governance-related incidents in the crypto space, where attackers leverage economic power rather than technical exploits.
Token-weighted voting systems, common in many DAOs, can become susceptible when a single actor or coordinated group amasses a critical mass of governance tokens at a relatively low cost, especially amid apathetic participation from token holders.
The BonkDAO case underscores the need for stronger safeguards, such as higher quorum requirements, time delays on proposal execution, or hybrid governance models that incorporate reputation or multisig oversight.
BONK, launched on Solana in late 2022 as a community-driven memecoin with a notable airdrop, has positioned itself among more established projects in its category, even appearing in certain investment products.
The treasury drain represents a material setback for the ecosystem’s decentralized governance arm, potentially affecting community initiatives and development funding managed by BonkDAO.
As investigations continue, the incident serves as yet another concerning reminder of the evolving security landscape in decentralized finance and governance. Projects and communities are increasingly urged to audit voting mechanisms, encourage broader participation, and implement protective measures against economic attacks that bypass traditional code vulnerabilities.
Solana has extended its July rally after record on-chain activity, tokenized stock issuance, and steady ETF inflows revived bullish sentiment.
Summary
Solana climbed above $81 after tokenized stock issuance and record network activity boosted buying interest. Technical charts show bulls defending $80 support while traders watch $83 and $90 as the next resistance levels. Analysts remain optimistic on long-term upside, though macro risks and liquidity could limit near-term gains. According to data from crypto.news, Solana (SOL) extended its recovery this week, gaining roughly 11% over several sessions to trade around $81 after briefly reclaiming the $82 level. The rally accelerated as institutional adoption on the network continued to expand, led by Securitize tokenizing $295 million worth of New York Stock Exchange-listed common stock on Solana following its SPAC debut.
The development arrived alongside the launch of the Solana Foundation’s Governance Proposals framework, introducing formal on-chain validator voting and adding another utility milestone for the ecosystem.
Network activity has expanded at the same time. Solana processed more than one billion weekly non-vote transactions for the first time, while tokenized asset spot volume reached an all-time quarterly high of $5.77 billion, reinforcing the network’s growing role in real-world asset issuance.
Institutional demand also remained positive, with spot Solana ETFs recording approximately $5.75 million in net inflows even as several other crypto investment products experienced persistent capital outflows.
Technical structure has shifted back in favor of buyers The daily chart shows Solana recovering from its June selloff after buyers defended the long-term support zone near $73, close to the 0.786 Fibonacci retracement level referenced by many traders during last month’s decline. Price has now reclaimed the previous breakdown area around $80.14 and is attempting to convert it into support while approaching horizontal resistance near $83.13.
Solana daily price chart — July 7 | Source: crypto.news Momentum indicators have improved alongside the rebound. The daily RSI has climbed above 62 after recovering from oversold conditions in June, while the Supertrend indicator has remained bullish with dynamic support near $69.6. A successful close above $83 could expose the next resistance around $90, whereas failure to hold above $80 may invite another test of the $75.4 support region.
Shorter-term charts also favor bulls. On the 4-hour timeframe, SOL continues trading above its 20-, 50-, 100- and 200-period moving averages, with the 20 SMA near $81.4 providing immediate dynamic support. The moving average alignment remains constructive even as price has entered a brief consolidation after last week’s sharp advance. The Aroon indicator still favors buyers, although the slight decline in Aroon Up suggests momentum has slowed while the market waits for another catalyst.
Solana 4-hour price chart — July 7 | Source: crypto.news Derivatives positioning presents a similar picture. CoinGlass liquidation heatmaps show one of the largest nearby short liquidation clusters sitting around the $84 level. A decisive move through that zone could trigger forced short covering and accelerate upside toward the upper liquidity pocket near $87. On the downside, dense long liquidation levels have accumulated between $78 and $79, making that area an important support if profit-taking intensifies.
Solana liquidation heatmap | Source: CoinGlass Analysts target triple-digit prices while key resistance remains intact Market participants have also become more optimistic after Solana strengthened against Bitcoin. Commenting on the latest structure, analyst Michaël van de Poppe wrote that SOL “is still in an uptrend here,” adding that it has broken its year-long downtrend versus Bitcoin.
“I don’t think that we’ll stall, I do think that we’ll continue to see strength happening here,” he wrote, adding that he would buy lower levels if a deeper correction develops before concluding that “it’s a matter of time until $SOL regains the $100+ levels.”
Despite the improving technical backdrop, Solana remains roughly 74% below its all-time high near $293 and more than 40% lower year to date. Macro uncertainty surrounding future Federal Reserve policy, geopolitical risks, and relatively thin crypto spot liquidity continues to limit aggressive positioning. Until bulls establish sustained closes above the $90 and $100 resistance zones, the current recovery is likely to remain vulnerable to renewed selling pressure despite the network’s strengthening institutional fundamentals.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
The total value of real world assets (RWAs) tokenized on the Stellar network has surpassed 3 billion dollars, according to the latest figures released by the RWA Foundation. This new milestone not only highlights the rising institutional interest but also points to increased on-chain adoption of the Stellar blockchain in bringing traditional assets to digital platforms.
A new threshold in institutional adoptionCrossing the 3 billion dollar threshold marks one of Stellar’s most significant breakthroughs to date. Data shows that this figure covers both the value of assets actively distributed on-chain and those represented digitally. The surge reflects a sharp acceleration in the tokenization of traditional financial products on Stellar, reinforcing the platform’s appeal as a blockchain of choice for major players seeking to digitize real-world assets.
Stellar, often compared to XRP Ledger, has carved out a strategic position by focusing on payment infrastructure, asset issuance, and tokenization. This technical direction has made Stellar a favored network for financial institutions aiming to bridge conventional assets with blockchain innovations. The growth is further supported by the Stellar Development Foundation, a nonprofit committed to advancing the platform’s capabilities globally.
Data from the RWA Foundation revealed that the value of on-chain real world assets on the Stellar network has breached the 3 billion dollar mark, representing a pivotal moment in the ecosystem’s evolution.
Rising to the top in tokenized investment strategiesStellar’s boom isn’t limited to overall RWA value. The network now holds the top spot in the category of value distributed in tokenized active investment strategies, reaching 620 million dollars. This reflects not only asset representation but a growing adoption of digital investment vehicles on the Stellar blockchain.
Setting itself apart from the competition, Stellar’s distributed value in this space outpaces leading rivals. Ethereum, for instance, claims second place with 342.9 million dollars, while Mantle and Avalanche lag behind at 113 million and 108.6 million dollars, respectively. These figures underscore Stellar’s growing clout among both institutional and retail investors seeking blockchain-based investment products.
NetworkDistributed ValueStellar620 million dollarsEthereum342.9 million dollarsMantle113 million dollarsAvalanche108.6 million dollarsStellar pulls ahead of Ethereum and SolanaThe ranking continues with Polygon at 82.3 million dollars, Arbitrum at 70.8 million, Monad at 61.3 million, Base at 40.4 million, and Plume Network at 36.9 million dollars. Solana trails with only 26.7 million dollars in distributed value, occupying a lower position on the list.
This landscape reveals that Stellar has overtaken even larger ecosystems like Ethereum and Solana specifically within the sphere of tokenized investment products. The platform’s recent gains signal a changing dynamic in the pursuit to bring real world assets into the blockchain space, intensifying the competition among major networks.
Stellar has surged ahead of rival networks in tokenized active investment strategies, boasting a distributed value of 620 million dollars.
Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.
The crypto market may be sitting on a fragile foundation. According to a recent market health assessment from the CEO of Alphractal, unliquidated long positions have piled up across Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP, and Solana, creating conditions where even a modest pullback could trigger a broader wave of selling.
The concern isn’t that prices have already collapsed. It’s that leveraged traders continue betting on higher prices while the market has produced only a weak advance. That imbalance, if left unresolved, could become the catalyst for a much sharper move lower.
Long Positions Continue To Stack UpLeverage has been doing most of the heavy lifting lately. The diagnosis suggests that BTC, ETH, XRP, and SOL now carry a significant buildup of long positions accumulated over the past month. These trades all depend on continued upside momentum, but without a strong breakout, they become increasingly vulnerable.
When too many traders are positioned on the same side of the market, price weakness can quickly turn into forced liquidations.
Domino Effect Could Hit Multiple AssetsThe warning extends beyond a single cryptocurrency. If a meaningful pullback begins, the analyst believes liquidations could spread rapidly across both derivatives and spot markets, amplifying selling pressure through a chain reaction. Among the major assets, Ethereum, Solana, and XRP are viewed as carrying greater short-term leverage risk than Bitcoin because of the heavier concentration of long positions.
That doesn’t guarantee a correction, but it does increase market sensitivity to negative price momentum.
Why A Cleanup May MatterOnce again, unliquidated Long positions are dominating BTC, ETH, XRP, and SOL.
The market has moved up very weakly over the past few days, and the current moment deserves a bit more attention.
Any slip in the next few hours could allow bears to take control, triggering a new… pic.twitter.com/PsDowAswSY
— Joao Wedson (@joao_wedson) July 7, 2026 The crypto market has seen this pattern before. Excess leverage often fuels sharp volatility, but it can also clear out speculative positions.
According to the assessment, removing excessive leverage may ultimately create healthier market conditions and lay the groundwork for a stronger recovery later. Until then, however, traders could face additional downside pressure and elevated fear if long positions begin unwinding across the market.
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.
BonkDAO, stewards of Solana’s favorite memecoin, has lost over $20M from its treasury after an opportunistic attacker took advantage of decentralized governance.
While BonkDAO has commenced legal action against the “attacker”, market participants have argued that the exploit is simply another example of DAO governance “functioning as intended”.
Despite plummeting 8%, the Solana community has rallied around $BONK, a lore-rich coin that once breathed new life into the chain and pulled Solana out of its darkest days.
Opportunistic Attacker Sends Themself $20M $BonkDAO Treasury On June 30, a malicious actor began a calculated governance attack on the BonkDAO treasury, resulting in the unexpected transfer of ~$21M in funds on July.
After acquiring enough $BONK to float a new governance proposal, the attacker floated BIP-76, a proposal that would transfer 4.4T $BONK to their own wallet if passed.
Unfortunately for BonkDAO, inactivity and voter apathy meant that BIP-76 went through completely unchallenged, with 99% of votes supporting the malicious proposal. Funds have since been moved to a separate holding wallet.
While at first glance the complete siphoning of the BonkDAO treasury funds looks like a hack or exploit, commentators have argued that this is nothing more than a clumsy governance blunder.
BonkDAO Seeks Legal Action Devoid of its treasury, BonkDAO is now actively taking legal action against the attacker. According to onchain data, the wallets used to both create the proposal and receive 4T $BONK were originally funded from ByBit, meaning that the exchange should have some KYC-verified information regarding the attacker’s identity.
However, while BonkDAO looks towards the firm arm of the law, market participants are unconvinced whether the attack was in any way illegal.
However, there may be a glimmer of hope for aggrieved $BONK holders and DAO supporters. Onchain analyst Tay argues that yesterday’s governance attack could be constituted as Wire Fraud under 18 U.S.C. § 1343. BIP-76 outlined that the exploiter’s intention was to cover the attack by promising to “stop the bleeding”, “rebuild”, and “install new members”. These could be construed as ‘false promises’ to defraud people out of their funds, perhaps giving BonkDAO an argument in the court of law.
Community Divided as $BONK Tumbles 8% Optics, governance flaws, and voter apathy aside, the Solana community has lamented the attack against one of its favorite cultural icons. While the new cohort of Solana’s onchain traders know Bonk primarily as the branding behind its launchpad, bonk.fun, OGs remember $BONK much more fondly.
Quietly to tens of thousands of wallets on Christmas Day, 2022, $BONK quickly became Solana’s most iconic memecoin. From the ashes of the FTX collapse, $BONK became a Solana success story when the rest of the industry was criticizing the network for outages and for only having 75 devs.
With its runway effectively evaporating overnight with no guarantee of its return, $BONK has dropped ~8%, currently trading hands at a market capitalization of $375M
Read More on SolanaFloor Memecoin mania puts pump.fun back on top
Pump Leads DEX Volume Across All Chains Ahead of $135M Token Unlocks
Cover image via youtu.be Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.
A new round of debate is gaining momentum on X over why investors should hold base-layer network tokens at all. In the crypto community, the view has taken hold that only Bitcoin has established itself as a valuable asset, while all other tokens are just attempts to build technology platforms that cannot retain value and do not provide compound returns.
Solana founder Anatoly Yakovenko tried to put an end to the latest discussion in a new post, explaining why this myth is wrong and why there are "true tokens" on the market with a fundamentally different form of ownership.
Why holding 'true tokens' isn't useless: Solana's Yakovenko explainsAccording to Yakovenko's logic, traditional stocks provide only legal rights, which any government can freeze with a single click. In contrast, the head of Solana points to infrastructure tokens, which provide not paper promises of profit but real mathematical power.
HOT Stories
For him, network rights in a blockchain are legally unenforceable, because no one in the world is obligated to run someone else's software, but they also cannot be taken away if anyone who wants to can run that software.
True tokens exist, as apposed to bad equity or debt. Network rights are unenforceable because no one has the obligation to run your software. But also cannot be taken away when anyone can run it. You have no rights, but you have all the power to enforce your own guarantees.…
— toly 🇺🇸 (@toly) July 7, 2026 In Yakovenko's view, the holder of such a token enforces their own economic guarantees without relying on courts. The blockchain developer describes the blockchain itself as a "Schelling point" — a neutral digital space where millions of people coordinate capital simply because the rules of the game are the same for everyone and cannot be forged.
You Might Also Like
The market reality shown by current CoinMarketCap statistics clearly highlights this debate. On the one hand, the total capitalization of assets based on Solana stands at $195.71 billion, meaning that large capital clearly believes in the reliability of this coordination environment.
On the other hand, the network's native token, SOL, is trading at around $81.67 — a price level that lags behind record operational activity, which is exactly what fuels the arguments of skeptics.
Market capitalization of Solana ecosystem, Source: CoinMarketCapThis gap between infrastructure utility and asset value is forcing developers to move from discussion to code. To prove the ability of technology platforms to accumulate capital, Solana is currently changing its tokenomics.
Through new technical proposals, including SIMD-547 on burning base fees, the network is introducing mechanisms for stronger value retention. The goal is to support the mathematical freedom of tokens described by Yakovenko with economic logic that investors can understand, proving through action that value can belong not only to Bitcoin.
Makrovision, an analytics company closely followed in the market for its analyses, has released its updated forecasts and expectations for Solana.
Accordingly, in their latest assessment of Solana’s technical outlook, Makrovision analysts stated that SOL has now returned to a critical decision zone.
Solana noted that after its price dropped below $85,000, it is now moving back towards its old support area and the descending trend line.
Analysts also identified three key levels for Solana:
“• Initial retracement level at $85
• Next resistance at $97
• Larger buying zone between $117–126”
Analysts concluded that as long as Solana remains below these levels, its movements are currently only a technical recovery within a downward trend.
However, if the SOL is cleanly recovered and held at the $97 level, the short-term outlook could improve significantly.
Solana is still trading at $80.7 at the time of writing.
*This is not investment advice.
Follow our Telegram and Twitter account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!
G2 Esports and Nongshim RedForce squared off at the Esports World Cup 2026, with the group stage clash on July 3, 2026, seeing NS RedForce take the series 2-1 over G2, including a dominant 13-5 performance on the Breeze map.
G2’s crypto playbook is already paying off G2 Esports made a significant investment in Solana tokens around 2023, putting approximately €3.2 million into SOL. That bet turned into roughly €16 million in returns.
The org also maintains an ongoing sponsorship partnership with Betpanda, a crypto-centric betting platform. That deal puts a digital asset brand in front of millions of esports viewers across tournaments like the EWC.
Advertisement
Not every crypto venture has gone smoothly for G2, though. A previous collaboration with NFT platform Bondly ended in litigation, a reminder that the intersection of esports and crypto still carries meaningful risk alongside the upside.
Prediction markets are turning matches into tradeable events Platforms like Coinbase Predictions and Kalshi have started listing active betting and prediction markets for EWC Valorant matches.
For traders, these markets offer on-chain transparency, programmable settlement, and the ability to integrate match data into broader trading strategies. When G2 plays a high-profile match, the prediction market activity around it generates real-time sentiment data that savvy participants can use.
Why this matters beyond gaming G2 isn’t just accepting sponsorship dollars from crypto firms. They’re holding crypto on their balance sheet, partnering with crypto-native betting platforms, and competing in tournaments where prediction markets provide real-time financial infrastructure around every match.
The risk, as G2’s Bondly litigation reminds us, is that not every crypto partnership delivers. Regulatory scrutiny around prediction markets and crypto betting is intensifying in multiple jurisdictions.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Debate has reignited among crypto investors on X over whether holding base layer network tokens remains a smart strategy. A section of the crypto community argues that only Bitcoin stands out as an asset capable of producing lasting value, viewing other tokens as mere technical platforms that struggle to maintain enduring worth.
Yakovenko pushes backAnatoly Yakovenko, one of Solana’s co-founders, believes this perspective is incomplete. According to Yakovenko, there are “real tokens” present in the market whose ownership structures diverge fundamentally from most traditional financial assets. Solana itself is known as a high-throughput blockchain offering fast and low-cost transactions.
Yakovenko points out that while traditional shares typically grant legal rights, network infrastructure tokens offer, not paper promises of profit, but direct mathematical and network-based authority.
Yakovenko emphasizes that rights within blockchain networks are not enforced through courts in the conventional sense. However, those same rights cannot be unilaterally revoked, as anyone with technical knowledge can run the open-source software. In this way, token holders can exercise economic security independently, without relying on any central authority.
He describes blockchain as a neutral digital arena where capital can be coordinated by large numbers of individuals under the same rules. This system, he argues, works precisely because the rules are identical for everyone and cannot be easily changed.
Mini glossary: A Schelling point is a concept describing how people converge on a common choice without prior communication. In blockchain, it refers to a shared digital ground where users agree to the same set of rules and thus recognize the same reference network.
Market data fuels ongoing debateRecent market figures help illustrate the differing views. According to CoinMarketCap, assets based on the Solana ecosystem together command a market capitalization of $195.71 billion. This suggests that major capital trusts the network’s coordination capabilities to some extent.
Meanwhile, Solana’s native token, SOL, currently trades around $81.67. Despite strong operational activity within the network, the price’s relatively modest level strengthens the case for those who remain skeptical about lasting value in such tokens.
The discrepancy between protocol usage and token market cap once again raises the question of how effectively network tokens can translate technical utility into financial value.
New directions in token economicsThese diverging views have prompted developers to move beyond theoretical arguments. Solana is exploring changes to its token economics in a bid to demonstrate that technology platforms can, in fact, accumulate significant capital.
Among the technical proposals under discussion is SIMD 547, which introduces burning of base transaction fees. With mechanisms like these, Solana seeks to strengthen the token’s value retention. The aim is to complement Yakovenko’s vision of mathematical freedom with an economic framework that investors can more easily follow.
Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.
The mood around crypto investment products has started to improve after one of the darkest periods for institutional demand this year. Fresh inflows into Bitcoin, Solana, and Hyperliquid ETFs suggest investors may be regaining confidence, although it remains too early to conclude that the broader market has fully recovered.
Bitcoin Leads the Recovery As shown by SoSoValue data, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $265.69 million in net inflows yesterday, their strongest daily performance since May 5. The rebound follows a difficult stretch in which Bitcoin ETFs lost billions of dollars as investors reduced exposure during the recent market downturn.
Bitcoin has also stabilized after briefly falling below $60,000 in late June. It is currently trading around $63,000 today after an overnight move above $64,000 faded. Despite the pullback, the asset remains up about 7% over the past week.
The recovery has also held despite Strategy selling 3,588 $BTC, worth about $216 million, in its largest Bitcoin sale since abandoning its previous never-sell approach.
Solana and Hyperliquid See Matching Inflows U.S. spot Solana ETFs attracted $8.36 million in net inflows yesterday, July 6, their strongest daily inflow in nearly 2 months. Every dollar came through Bitwise's $BSOL fund.
Hyperliquid ETFs recorded $8.43 million in net inflows during the same session, with Bitwise's $BHYP accounting for the entire amount.
The nearly identical flows into $BSOL and $BHYP have also appeared at other times over recent days. The pattern has led some market observers to speculate that a single investor may be allocating capital equally between Bitwise's Solana and Hyperliquid ETFs.
Meanwhile, $SOL climbed as high as $83.50 earlier today and has continued to trade above $80 after recovering from recent lows near $60.
A Sharp Contrast From June The renewed buying marks a significant change from late June, when crypto ETFs experienced one of their weakest periods since spot products launched in the United States.
Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and XRP investment products collectively lost about $5 billion over 30 days as Bitcoin fell below $60,000. June also became the first month in which U.S. spot Solana ETFs posted net monthly outflows, while Bitcoin ETFs recorded their largest monthly withdrawals on record.
Are We Back? The recent improvement in ETF flows offers an encouraging sign, but it does not yet confirm that institutional demand has fully returned.
Earlier this year, Hunter Horsley, CEO of Bitwise, argued that Solana and Hyperliquid are both benefiting from the broader shift of capital markets onto blockchain networks. He suggested their long-term success depends less on competing with each other and more on the continued adoption of onchain capital markets.
For now, the return of meaningful ETF inflows suggests sentiment has improved from the lows seen just weeks ago. Whether this marks the beginning of a sustained recovery or only a temporary rebound will depend on several factors. One of which is whether or not institutional buying continues in the weeks ahead.
Read More on SolanaFloor $20M of Treasury Funds Lost in BonkDAO Governance Blunder
Solana Reclaims No. 1 Spot for Network REV After 4 Months as Onchain Demand Explodes
Hyperliquid is a purpose-built Layer 1 blockchain optimized for perpetual futures trading, commanding approximately 70% of all decentralized perpetual futures volume and $6.5 billion in daily activity. Solana operates as a general-purpose Layer 1 blockchain hosting thousands of applications across DeFi, NFTs, gaming, payments, and consumer apps, with over $5 billion in total value locked. Hyperliquid generates approximately $830 million in annualized revenue with 97 to 99% of fees flowing into token buybacks, creating one of the strongest value-accrual mechanisms in decentralized finance. Solana processes over 40 million daily transactions with SOL-denominated TVL reaching an all-time high of 80 million SOL in early 2026, supported by institutional adoption from Goldman Sachs and BlackRock. Cathie Wood of ARK Invest compared Hyperliquid to early-stage Solana in late 2025, but the two protocols serve fundamentally different markets and carry distinct risk and diversification profiles for participants. In May 2026, Hyperliquid’s fully diluted valuation briefly overtook Solana’s, reaching $56 billion compared to $50 billion. A single-application blockchain outvaluing a general-purpose ecosystem forced reassessment of how markets price crypto infrastructure.
This article examines architecture, revenue models, ecosystem breadth, and risk profiles to determine what each chain actually offers.
Architecture: Specialized vs. General Purpose Hyperliquid runs on its own Layer 1 blockchain using HyperBFT, a custom consensus algorithm inspired by HotStuff and optimized for low-latency, high-throughput financial applications. The chain supports approximately 200,000 orders per second with a 0.07-second block time and sub-second finality.
Every order, cancellation, trade, and liquidation executes onchain. The network comprises HyperCore for specialized trading applications and HyperEVM for Ethereum-compatible smart contracts.
Solana uses Proof of Stake combined with its proprietary Proof of History mechanism, processing over 40 million daily transactions. The network hosts a full spectrum of applications, from Jupiter’s $1.2 billion daily DEX volume to Kamino’s $1.48 billion lending protocol.
The architectural difference is fundamental. Hyperliquid optimized every stack layer for high-frequency derivatives. Solana is optimized for breadth, trading off single-application performance for general smart-contract flexibility. This mirrors traditional finance, where specialized venues like CME coexist with general-purpose infrastructure.
ARK Invest CEO Cathie Wood stated on the Master Investor podcast in late 2025 that Hyperliquid “reminds me of Solana in the earlier days,” calling it “the new kid on the block.” The comparison captures trajectory similarity but obscures the structural difference between these platforms.
Revenue Models and Token Value Capture Revenue mechanics represent the starkest divergence between these ecosystems. Hyperliquid charges taker fees of 0.045% and maker fees of 0.015% on its perpetual order book. Approximately 97 to 99% of resulting protocol revenue flows through the Assistance Fund, which executes automated buybacks of HYPE tokens on the open market, according to multiple 2026 analyses.
Cumulative protocol revenue has surpassed $1 billion, with an annualized run rate near $830 million. Solana generates approximately $6.8 million per day in ecosystem fees, but most flows to individual applications.
Network-based fees are fractions of a cent. The value proposition for SOL holders is indirect: staking rewards and the option value of an expanding ecosystem.
Data from Nexo Research illustrates the efficiency gap. Hyperliquid generated $844 million in revenue in 2025 from a single product. Solana’s $1.3 to $1.4 billion came from hundreds of applications.
Analysis: Hyperliquid’s buyback model creates a tight feedback loop between activity and token demand. Solana’s diffuse model distributes value broadly but lacks a comparable concentration mechanism. This makes Hyperliquid more attractive during bull markets but more fragile during downturns.
Ecosystem Breadth and Risk Diversification Solana’s architecture has produced a broad ecosystem. DeFi TVL reached approximately $5.1 billion by mid-2026. Institutional adoption accelerated with Goldman Sachs disclosing $108 million in SOL ETF holdings and BlackRock’s BUIDL fund clearing $550 million on the network.
The developer ecosystem supports roughly 4,000 active developers. SushiSwap migrated to Solana in early 2026, and Jupiter evolved from a DEX aggregator into a comprehensive financial platform with lending and stablecoin issuance.
Hyperliquid’s ecosystem is intentionally narrower. The HyperEVM hosts approximately 243 protocols with $1.5 billion in TVL, but the core perpetuals exchange dominates economic activity.
The protocol controls 66 to 73% of all decentralized perpetual futures flow, processing roughly $50 billion in weekly volume. Product expansion into binary options trading via HIP-4 and permissionless perpetual market creation via HIP-3 diversifies the product suite while remaining within the derivatives vertical.
Solana’s breadth provides multiple segments to absorb downturns. Hyperliquid’s revenue concentration in perpetual futures makes it highly cyclical. With only 27% of HYPE supply in circulation, token unlock events such as the July 2026 release of 9.9 million tokens, worth approximately $645 million, introduce supply-side pressure.
Regulatory Implications Both protocols face regulatory exposure, but through different vectors. Solana’s growing institutional adoption through ETFs and tokenized securities places it squarely within SEC and CFTC oversight frameworks.
Hyperliquid’s derivatives-focused model operates in a regulatory gray zone, as decentralized perpetual futures trading remains largely unregulated in most jurisdictions. The Digital Asset Market Clarity Act could affect the classification of tokens and services for both protocols.
What’s Next? Solana’s Firedancer client upgrade, continued ETF adoption, and the expansion of tokenized real-world assets on the network represent near-term catalysts.
Hyperliquid’s trajectory depends on sustaining growth in trading volume, absorbing token unlocks without significant price dilution, and fending off competition from Aster and emerging Solana-based perpetual venues.
Both ecosystems are expanding, but toward different destinations. The market may value them side by side, but they are not playing the same game.
FAQs What is the main difference between Hyperliquid and Solana?
Hyperliquid is a purpose-built Layer 1 optimized for perpetual futures trading, while Solana is a general-purpose blockchain hosting thousands of diverse applications across DeFi, NFTs, and payments.
Which has higher trading volume?
Hyperliquid processes approximately $50 billion in weekly perpetual futures volume, while Solana’s DEX ecosystem handles billions in daily spot trading volume across multiple decentralized exchange protocols.
How do their revenue models compare?
Hyperliquid directs 97-99% of protocol fees toward token buybacks, creating direct value accrual, whereas Solana’s fees are distributed across individual applications, with minimal direct flow to SOL holders.
Is Hyperliquid riskier than Solana?
Hyperliquid carries higher concentration risk due to revenue dependence on perpetual futures and significant upcoming token unlocks, while Solana’s diversified ecosystem provides more downside resilience across cycles.
What did Cathie Wood say about Hyperliquid?
ARK Invest CEO Cathie Wood compared Hyperliquid to early-stage Solana on the Master Investor podcast in late 2025, citing trajectory similarities while noting ARK does not hold HYPE tokens.
Can Solana compete with Hyperliquid in perpetual futures?
Solana hosts six perpetual trading venues, but Hyperliquid commands 66 to 73% of decentralized perpetual futures volume, a dominance gap that multiple Solana protocols are actively trying to close.
Which ecosystem has more institutional adoption?
Solana leads in institutional adoption with Goldman Sachs and BlackRock exposure, ETF products, and traditional finance integrations, while Hyperliquid attracts institutional trading flow through execution quality.
References Hyperliquid vs. Solana: The Battle for Liquidity King in 2026 (CryptoNews, May 2026) Hyperliquid vs Solana: Are They Really the Same? (Nexo Blog, May 2026) Solana perps venues compared against Hyperliquid in new analysis (CryptoBriefing, May 2026) Better Crypto Buy: Solana vs. Hyperliquid (The Motley Fool, July 2026)
Solana Mobile continues to spoil Seeker users, unveiling yet another mouth-watering slew of benefits, boosts, bonuses, and rewards.
Highlighting some of the best new apps the dApp Store has to offer, Seeker Summer will run until the end of August. Users can expect everything from free Gacha pulls and collectible badges to live interviews with the Seeker ecosystems top-founders.
Seeker Summer comes as $SKR continues to proliferate across the crypto economy, with hundreds of apps, DeFi protocols, and exchanges integrating the token.
What to Expect from Seeker Summer Alongside a renaissance of onchain activity across the network, Seeker Summer is bringing a renewed sense of excitement and curiosity in the Solana dApp store. Starting July 7, Seeker Summer showcases some of the ecosystem’s most promising dApps, with boosts, bonuses and additional rewards helping users to get the most out of their onchain activity.
Seeker Summer kicks off with a collaboration with Collector Crypt, Solana’s fastest-growing consumer application. When buying a Seeker device with Solana Pay, new owners can get 20% off their purchase price when paying in $SKR, alongside a free $50 gacha spin.
As Seeker Summer progresses, Solana Mobile will highlight featured apps from within the Seeker ecosystem. Across four two-week rounds, users will be able to complete quests in their favorite applications, collecting badges and enjoying rewards throughout the duration of the event.
As each round begins, spotlighted apps will be steadily unveiled on a day-by-day basis. Once all apps in a round have been revealed, users will have eight days to complete quests and earn badges before the next round begins.
Seeker dApp Launches Trend Upwards While general sentiment towards blockchain is floundering, onchain data suggests that crypto-native builders are heads down shipping harder than ever. According to Blockworks, the Solana dApp store now plays host to over 1,670 apps, with the development trajectory showing no signs of slowing down.
The wildfire growth of apps in the Solana dApp Store is largely driven by the platform’s unrivalled distribution. Developers across the ecosystem have remarked that their applications gain significant traction following their launch in the Solana dApp Store, which boasts an active, engaged, and financially-motivated userbase.
Many developers report onboarding hundreds of users to their applications within one day of launch, reinforcing the belief that Seeker owners are some of crypto’s most active and engaged users.
The $SKR Economy Uniting a thriving ecosystem of applications, $SKR is the lifeblood of the Seeker economy. While $SKR is primarily used as a governance token guiding the growth and expansion of the Seeker ecosystem, the token is becoming more widely integrated across the crypto industry.
Dozens of popular platforms like refineORE, Sp3nd, and ClashofPerps have integrated $SKR into their applications, expanding the utility of the asset beyond contributing to Seeker governance.
Beyond novel apps, $SKR is also tradable across many of crypto’s biggest centralized exchanges, like Kraken, Coinbase, and ByBit, and is also listed on leading perps venues like Phoenix.
To keep track of all the featured apps and rewards running throughout Seeker Summer, visit SolanaFloor’s Seeker Hub. Additionally, users can tune into SolanaFloor’s Seeker-centric livestream show, Shipped, to hear directly from the founders and builders shaping the Solana dApp Store's most popular protocols.
Read More on SolanaFloor $PUMP unlocks loom large over markets
Pump Leads DEX Volume Across All Chains Ahead of $135M Token Unlocks
Colombia meets Switzerland on July 7 at BC Place in Vancouver, and the match is generating as much noise in crypto markets as it is in football circles. The Chiliz (CHZ) token jumped 28% following Colombia’s group stage victory, a move that underscores how tightly sports sentiment and token speculation have become intertwined during this World Cup cycle.
Colombia enters as the betting favorite for this knockout stage clash, with Switzerland trying to reach the quarterfinals for the first time since 1954. Kickoff is set for 4 p.m. ET.
Neither Colombia nor Switzerland has an official fan token on platforms like Socios, which is the usual conduit for football-crypto crossover trades. That hasn’t stopped speculators from finding other ways in.
Advertisement
CHZ, the native token of the Chiliz ecosystem that powers fan token platforms, has become the de facto proxy bet for World Cup enthusiasm. When traders can’t buy a specific team token, they buy the infrastructure layer instead.
Decentralized prediction markets have also absorbed significant activity around match outcomes. Platforms like Polymarket are seeing fans and traders wager on results using crypto rails, blurring the line between sports fandom and financial speculation.
FIFA named Kraken as its first official crypto exchange partner in June 2026, a deal that signals the governing body is fully committed to weaving digital assets into the tournament experience.
This World Cup also features Avalanche-powered digital collectibles designed to boost fan engagement, adding another blockchain-native layer to the event. Then there’s FIFA’s blockchain-based ticketing system, which drew regulatory scrutiny from Swiss authorities back in 2025, adding an ironic wrinkle to today’s match. Switzerland’s own regulators questioned the technology that now underpins the tournament their team is competing in.
The 28% CHZ surge after Colombia’s group stage win is a textbook example of speculative momentum tied to a fleeting catalyst. CHZ specifically occupies a unique position: it benefits from any uptick in sports-crypto crossover activity, even when specific teams don’t have their own tokens.
The volume flowing through Polymarket and similar venues during the World Cup is stress-testing these protocols at scale. The Kraken-FIFA partnership also sets a precedent as the world’s most-watched sporting event now has an official crypto exchange sponsor.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Cover image via U.Today Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.
Shiba Inu has completed a golden cross on its short-term price charts, with indicators now suggesting it might be time for the market to pay attention.
A golden cross has emerged on the Shiba Inu 2-hour chart as the MA 50 has crossed above the MA 200. The signal follows last week's rebound, which saw SHIB hit $0.00000458 on July 4.
SHIB/USD 2-Hour Chart, Image By TradingViewMost majors, including SHIB, were little changed on the day; Shiba Inu was up 0.37% in the last 24 hours to $0.00000436. The token was, however, up 3.19% in the last seven days.
HOT Stories
You Might Also Like
The crypto market is seeing mixed trading action on Tuesday as investors await further economic data. Investors are looking ahead to Wednesday's FOMC minutes, the first under new Fed Chairman Kevin Warsh, which will provide further clues on monetary policy. Thursday will see the release of the weekly initial jobless claims for June.
Time to pay attention?Shiba Inu advanced for most of the past week, reaching a high of $0.00000458, but the move lacked follow-through. Since then, Shiba Inu has fallen, marking two days of decline since July 5.
You Might Also Like
But a key indicator for altcoins looks positive. CoinMarketCap's Altcoin Season indicator rose to 47/100, suggesting optimism might be returning to the altcoin sector. Open interest in the crypto market has surged by $108 million in the last 24 hours, according to CoinGlass data. Meanwhile, some key indicators are flashing mixed signals, with positive funding rates potentially signaling bullish sentiment.
For Shiba Inu, bulls are eyeing a decisive break above the daily MA 50, which is at $0.00000489, to achieve a rise to $0.000005. Shiba Inu defended the $0.00000405 level but failed to turn the rebound into a sustained move to $0.000005.
Buyers stepped in after a continued drop to a low of $0.00000405 on June 26, with Shiba Inu rebounding afterwards, but the rise failed to reach the levels needed to confirm momentum.
Let me tell you about the quietest room in crypto this week. Ethereum ran 11.7%. Solana ran 10%. PEPE, the noisy neighbor, jumped 15.67%. And Shiba Inu, once the loudest token on the planet, moved 2.92% and barely anyone mentioned it. Silence like that is never neutral. It is either a graveyard or a loaded spring, and the difference is worth understanding before you touch the chart.
SHIB trades at $0.00004360 as of July 7, 2026, up 0.63% on the day, per CoinGecko. Market cap sits at $2.56 billion, still comfortably the second largest meme coin behind Dogecoin. So far, so ordinary. The interesting part is what is not happening.
The Unique Angle: a $2.5 billion coin trading like a ghost town Here is the number nobody puts in a headline. SHIB’s 24-hour volume is $73.9 million. Against a $2.56 billion market cap, that is a turnover of about 2.9%. Now walk one floor down the meme building: PEPE, less than half SHIB’s size, turned over $207 million in the same 24 hours, roughly 18.5% of its cap. The smaller coin is doing nearly three times the absolute volume of the bigger one.
Think of trading volume as foot traffic through a shop. PEPE’s shop has a line out the door. SHIB’s shop has the lights on, the inventory intact, and almost nobody walking in. And here is the thing about that shop: the owners are not selling either. A coin with this little turnover that still holds a $2.5 billion valuation is a coin whose holders have gone dormant rather than gone away. They locked the doors from the inside.
I have covered SHIB long enough to know this pattern. It compressed like this before, in stretches where weeks of nothing made everyone stop watching. Then the repricing came fast, because a thin order book cuts both ways: the same illiquidity that lets a coin drift can make it jump when real volume finally shows up.
The One Number That Matters 2.9%. The daily turnover ratio. Remember it, because it is the single cleanest way to track whether the SHIB story is changing. When that ratio starts climbing toward 8% or 10% while price holds steady, attention is returning before the move. If price rises on the same dead volume, distrust it; thin rallies in thin books collapse just as easily. The ratio is the tell, not the price.
Price Prediction Scenarios I will not hand you invented decimal targets; that game got this industry its reputation. Conditions instead.
Base case: the long sleep continues. The market keeps favoring majors and high-velocity memes like PEPE. SHIB drifts in its range, and $0.00004360 a month from now looks a lot like $0.00004360 today. Dormancy is a valid forecast, and honestly the most probable one on current data.
Bull case: the sleeper wakes. Meme rotation broadens past PEPE, volume returns to the second-biggest brand in the sector, and SHIB does what illiquid giants do: gap upward through empty order books. A weekly close above $0.00004800 with turnover above 8% would be the first credible signal. Above that, the chart thins out quickly. To be explicit: this is speculation, a scenario with conditions attached, not a prediction of timing.
Bear case: the graveyard reading. Dormancy is not always a spring. Sometimes it is exhaustion. If the wider market rolls over, a coin nobody is actively bidding falls with almost no cushion. Below $0.00004000 the shop analogy inverts: the owners finally start selling into no bids, and the drawdown compounds. SHIB’s all-time high near $0.00008845 from October 2021 stands almost exactly double today’s price, a reminder of how long silence can last.
The Burn Math, Without the Fairy Tale Every SHIB conversation eventually arrives at the burn: tokens sent to dead wallets forever, shrinking supply, and, the theory goes, lifting the price of what remains. The mechanism is real. The math around it usually is not, so let me lay it out the way I would to a friend.
Price is market cap divided by circulating supply. Burns shrink the denominator. For burns to move the price meaningfully on their own, they have to remove a meaningful share of a supply measured in the hundreds of trillions. Removing a few billion tokens from a pool that size is a rounding error, the equivalent of scooping cups of water out of a lake and expecting the shoreline to move. What burns actually do well is narrative: they give the community a live metric to rally around, and in an attention asset, a rallying metric has value of its own.
The version of the burn story that deserves respect is the long one. If burning ever scales into a serious percentage of supply per year through ecosystem activity, the denominator argument starts to matter. That is a structural, multi-year thesis, and it depends on usage numbers that need checking at every update of this page, not on hope. Until those numbers change materially, treat the burn as sentiment fuel, not as arithmetic that guarantees anything.
Key Levels Support: $0.00004000, the level that keeps the structure intact. Resistance: $0.00004800 first, then the round $0.00005000. The honest summary: SHIB is mid-range and directionless, and level-watching matters less here than volume-watching.
Both Sides, Plainly The bull case is brand plus dormancy. SHIB retains one of crypto’s largest communities, a $2.5 billion floor that survived every drawdown since 2021, and a holder base that visibly refuses to sell at these prices. Cheap attention, if attention ever returns.
The bear case is that attention may simply have moved on for good. This week’s tape shows the meme money choosing PEPE by a factor of three in volume. Ecosystems age, narratives migrate, and no rule says they come back. A 2.9% turnover can precede a spring or a slow fade, and the data alone cannot tell you which.
Bottom Line SHIB at $0.00004360 is the market’s forgotten giant, priced for indifference. Do not watch the price; watch the turnover ratio. If foot traffic returns to the shop while the doors are still locked from the inside, that is the moment this page gets rewritten. Until then, the honest word for SHIB is: waiting.
This article is for information only and is not investment advice. Crypto assets are extremely volatile and you can lose your entire stake. Always do your own research.
Frequently Asked Questions What is the Shiba Inu price today? SHIB trades at $0.00004360 as of July 7, 2026, up 0.63% in 24 hours and 2.92% on the week, with a $2.56 billion market cap.
Why is SHIB not moving with the market? Daily volume is only $73.9 million, under 3% of its market cap, the lowest ratio among large meme coins. Trader attention this week concentrated in majors and in PEPE instead.
Can Shiba Inu reach $0.0001? That would require roughly a 2.3x from today and a break above the 2021 all-time high of about $0.00008845. It is a full bull-cycle scenario, not a near-term expectation on current volume.
Will SHIB ever reach 1 cent? At current supply, $0.01 implies a market cap in the trillions of dollars, larger than the entire crypto market. Treat it as effectively unrealistic without massive supply burns.
Is Shiba Inu a good investment in 2026? SHIB is a high-risk attention asset currently in a dormant phase. The holder base is not selling, but volume shows little new demand. Only speculate with money you can afford to lose.
What was Shiba Inu's all-time high? About $0.00008845, reached in October 2021, roughly double the current price.
Binance introduces BTC yield product. (Web Summit/CC By 2.0)Summary
Binance debuts a bitcoin yield product exclusively for BTC holders. The product runs a systematic covered call strategy, bringing yield-generation strategies to a wider pool of potential investors.Returns are not guaranteed, especially if bitcoin's price rises and the call options are exercised.Binance has introduced a product for bitcoin BTC$64,081.00 holders looking to earn extra yield on their investment without selling any of it, joining the likes of BlackRock in helping them maximize returns.
The product, BTC Yield, is available inside Binance Earn and is designed exclusively for people who already hold bitcoin.
Users deposit their bitcoin into the product and receive an internal position called BTCY, which tracks their share in the strategy. Everything remains denominated in BTC, and the product cannot be funded with stablecoins or other assets.
Binance holds the deposited bitcoin as collateral while systematically selling BTC call options, that is, it writes insurance against price rallies in BTC. The call seller, or writer, gets compensated with a premium. Binance collects those premiums and shares most of them with participants.
This covered-call approach, common in crypto and traditional finance, has typically required deep options knowledge to execute. Binance’s version makes it accessible to regular traders by handling everything behind the scenes.
Two types of returnThe product generates potential returns in two ways.
First, a portion of the collected premiums is converted to bitcoin and distributed to users’ spot accounts every Friday as a possible weekly payout.
The remaining premiums stay inside the strategy and gradually increase the value of each BTCY unit. As the retained premiums accumulate, each unit slowly represents more actual BTC. When users eventually redeem, they receive this higher BTC amount, providing a second form of return.
“Covered call strategies have long been used in traditional finance, but they can be complex for retail users to access directly,” Shunyet Jan, head of exchange and trading at Binance, said in a statement shared with CoinDesk. "With BTC Yield, we are simplifying that experience for Bitcoin holders who want income potential without actively trading the market.”
The debut comes as traditional finance embraces similar ideas. BlackRock, for example, recently introduced a Bitcoin income ETF that also uses a covered-call strategy to generate additional returns for holders.
Binance's takeLike any options-based product, BTC Yield carries costs and risks.
Binance takes a 15% share of gross option premiums before calculating user yield, and redemption fees apply when exiting. The product offers no principal protection, weekly distributions are not guaranteed and can be zero, and the strategy can limit upside during strong bitcoin rallies because calls may get exercised. In big bull markets, simply holding spot BTC will often outperform it.
Overall, BTC Yield gives long-term holders a straightforward way to seek income on idle bitcoin, but it is best suited for those comfortable with the trade-offs.
Bitcoin holders sitting on idle spot balances now have a fresh reason to keep their coins on Binance. On Tuesday, the exchange introduced BTC Yield, a covered call strategy designed exclusively for users who already hold Bitcoin, the original report from CoinDesk confirmed. The product arrives as crypto exchanges intensify competition for yield‑seeking capital, a segment that has reshaped the market since decentralized finance protocols first demonstrated the appetite for passive income on digital assets.
BTC Yield employs a covered call options structure. In traditional finance, selling covered calls generates premium income against an existing stock position by capping upside beyond a set strike price. Binance appears to be applying the same logic to Bitcoin, likely using out‑of‑the‑money call options on Bitcoin futures or spot‑backed derivatives. The exchange hasn’t disclosed the exact mechanics, but the core promise is straightforward: users keep their Bitcoin and receive periodic yield while accepting a ceiling on extraordinary price gains. It’s a trade that suits a low‑volatility or sideways market much better than a raging bull run.
Why Bitcoin Yield Products Are Multiplying The launch didn’t happen in a vacuum. Bitcoin has evolved from a purely speculative asset into a collateral‑grade holding for many long‑term participants. Yet, Bitcoin itself pays no dividends or staking rewards, unlike proof‑of‑stake tokens. That gap pushed users toward centralized lending, DeFi bridges, and now exchange‑issued structured products. Binance already operates Binance Earn, which offers simple staking and DeFi farming, but BTC Yield carves out a defined options‑based income stream that avoids the complexity of self‑custodied wrapped Bitcoin.
Competitors like Bybit and OKX have released similar option‑linked products over the past year, turning the covered call format into a recognizable shelf item on centralised venues. Binance, with its enormous Bitcoin reserves and user base, is now scaling the idea. The exclusive focus on existing BTC holders suggests the exchange is less interested in attracting new Bitcoin deposits than in preventing outflows to decentralized alternatives and locking in activity.
Risk and Reward for Users Covered calls are not risk‑free. While the strategy generates yield in sideways conditions, it surrenders all upside beyond the strike price if Bitcoin rallies sharply. Early assignment risk and the credit risk of the option counterparty also come into play, even when Binance acts as the intermediary. Users who opt in will need to accept that a sudden price explosion could leave them with substantially lower net returns than a simple buy‑and‑hold approach. Binance is likely to rotate option expiries to manage that exposure, but the underlying trade‑off remains.
On the regulatory front, any yield‑bearing product that promises returns based on trading strategies could draw attention from authorities who continue to scrutinize exchange‑issued financial instruments. Binance has confronted multiple regulatory challenges, and while BTC Yield is marketed purely as a crypto‑native product, the line between an investment contract and a utility token arrangement can blur quickly under the eyes of U.S. and European regulators.
Centralised Exchanges and the Yield Battleground The move highlights how centralised exchanges are metamorphosing into full‑spectrum asset platforms. Spot trading volume alone no longer locks users in; instead, recurring income, margin services, and structured products have become the retention tools. Binance’s own BNB Chain continues to rank consistently among the top blockchains by developer activity, as shown in recent ecosystem reports, reinforcing the exchange’s capacity to integrate new product layers. The launch of BTC Yield echoes that strategy: use Bitcoin’s deep liquidity to offer a low‑effort yield proposition that keeps users on the platform.
Whether BTC Yield can attract serious volume will depend on how competitive the payouts are and how well Binance communicates the risk‑return profile. If Bitcoin enters a long phase of accumulation and grinding price growth, demand for such products could swell. If volatility spikes, the strategy’s limitations may become apparent fast. For now, the product opens yet another front in the fight among exchanges to become the default hub for every possible interaction with digital assets.
AUTHOR
Max delves deep into the cryptocurrency realm, with a passion for altcoins and NFTs. Convinced of crypto's transformative potential, he envisions a decentralized financial future. Max's background in the financial sector grants him unique insights into global monetary systems. In his leisure, Max embraces the thrill of adventures and is an avid sports enthusiast, finding balance and rejuvenation away from work.
Bitcoin is approaching two major forks scheduled for August 2026. The first, BIP-110, aims to limit certain data recorded on the network. The second, eCash, aims to create a separate chain with new rules. Two very different projects, but the same risk: reigniting the debate about what Bitcoin should remain.
In brief Bitcoin is facing two distinct forks in August 2026. BIP-110 aims to limit certain data recorded on the network. eCash aims to create a separate chain with an asset distributed to BTC holders. Bitcoin faces two very different forks Bitcoin could experience a more political than technical August. The first case concerns BIP-110, a Bitcoin fork of the soft fork type. It seeks to temporarily tighten certain rules without automatically creating a new currency.
The second case concerns eCash. This time, it is an acknowledged hard fork. The project does not seek to modify Bitcoin from within. It wants to create a separate chain, with its own asset, distributed to BTC holders at the moment of separation.
The difference is crucial. A soft fork remains compatible with old nodes if the activation goes smoothly. A hard fork, on the other hand, creates a break. Nodes that do not follow the new rules reject the new chain. BIP-110 targets uses linked to Ordinals, inscriptions, and BRC-20 type tokens. Its goal is to limit certain forms of data integration in Bitcoin transactions.
The proposal would invalidate several technical constructions deemed too heavy. It would notably limit certain witness elements, some scriptPubKey outputs, and the use of undefined Taproot versions. The stated goal is to refocus Bitcoin on its monetary function.
This debate is not new. Since the arrival of Bitcoin Ordinals, part of the community believes that non-financial data unnecessarily clogs blocks. Others on the contrary defend the idea that a block paid for by fees must remain neutral. BIP-110 adds a nuance: it would be temporary. The expected duration is around one year. This is not enough to calm critics, because embedding this type of filter in consensus remains a heavy precedent.
eCash wants to create a new chain The eCash project is led by Paul Sztorc, known for his work on Drivechain. Unlike BIP-110, eCash does not depend on adoption by the main Bitcoin network. It must exist as a separate chain.
The launch is scheduled around block 964,000, likely August 21. BTC holders would receive an equivalent balance on eCash. A coin separation tool is planned to avoid errors between the two assets.
eCash’s big promise is based on Drivechains. These mechanisms, linked to BIP-300 and BIP-301, would allow connecting multiple sidechains to a model close to Bitcoin. Targeted uses range from privacy to specialized markets, including financial experiments.
But the project is already divisive. Some see it as a way to test functions impossible to integrate into Bitcoin Core. Others denounce a risk of confusion, new fragmentation, and controversial economic choices around some old UTXOs.
Bitcoin holders must remain cautious For BIP-110, there is no new asset to claim if activation follows the classic scenario. The main issue concerns wallet, node, and transaction compatibility using advanced constructions.
Miner signaling levels remain low. This reduces chances of smooth activation but does not eliminate the risk of tension. A difficult coordination period between miners, exchanges, and nodes could be enough to create uncertainty.
For eCash, the situation is different. Bitcoins held on a platform or ETF will not necessarily give rights to the new asset. Exchanges can choose not to credit anything, or only allow withdrawals later.
Self-custody users will have more control but also more responsibilities. Reliable tools, replay protection, and clear wallet support must be awaited before any claim attempt.
These two forks remind us that Bitcoin remains a living system. Its strength does not only come from its code. It also depends on social coordination between miners, developers, holders, companies, and institutions. August 2026 may not decide Bitcoin’s future, but it will once again test its capacity to absorb disagreements without losing its course. The eCash project will especially show if a fork can still mobilize a real economic base in a market now dominated by ETFs and major custodians.
Maximize your Cointribune experience with our "Read to Earn" program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.
Join the program
A
A
Lien copié
Lydie M.
Enseignante et ingénieure IT, Lydie découvre le Bitcoin en 2022 et plonge dans l’univers des cryptomonnaies. Elle vulgarise des sujets complexes, décrypte les enjeux du Web3 et défend une vision d’un futur numérique ouvert, inclusif et décentralisé.
DISCLAIMER
The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this article belong solely to the author, and should not be taken as investment advice. Do your own research before taking any investment decisions.
In the run-up to a major release, Aqua, we have strengthened our leadership team by appointing a chief product and technology officer and a new head of product design.
As Chief Product and Technology Officer (CPTO), Holly Atkinson will focus on shaping product strategy to ensure that 1inch continues to innovate with its core routing infrastructure and successfully launches a new shared liquidity product, Aqua.
Holly brings experience across full-stack engineering, blockchain architecture, product development and executive leadership. Before joining 1inch, she worked as a Blockchain Architect at The Sandbox, led metaverse technology initiatives at Boson Protocol and began her Web3 career as a Full Stack Engineer at Tracr.
1inch also welcomes George Evans as Head of Product Design. George joins us with more than 15 years of experience building and leading design teams at companies including Careem, Noon and Majid Al Futtaim. At 1inch, he will lead the product design function, focusing on creating intuitive user experiences, strengthening design across the product portfolio and ensuring design plays a central role in product development.
These appointments come as we prepare for major product launches. Following recent major integrations, including the partnership with Robinhood Chain to expand access to tokenized real-world assets, we are preparing the public launch of Aqua, a shared liquidity protocol.
As one of the company's most significant upcoming initiatives, Aqua is designed to address liquidity fragmentation across DeFi and contribute to the next generation of on-chain finance infrastructure.
Market ContextThe crypto market enters the second week of July with cautious optimism. Bitcoin is holding above $63,000 after a sharp macro-driven short squeeze last week, while Ethereum is approaching $1,780. The broader altcoin market is recovering selectively — not everything is moving, but the tokens with real catalysts are separating from the noise.Today's Daily Alpha Drop covers three very different stories: a cautionary tale about DAO governance vulnerabilities, a real-world asset tokenization milestone backed by an SEC filing, and Cardano's most significant DeFi development in years.
$BONK: When Governance Becomes a WeaponWhat HappenedOn July 7, BonkDAO: the decentralised autonomous organisation behind the popular Solana memecoin BONK, confirmed that its treasury had been drained of $20 million via a malicious governance attack. The attacker exploited a fundamental weakness in token-weighted voting systems: they accumulated a sufficient quantity of BONK tokens to pass a fraudulent governance proposal on Solana's Realms platform, then used that proposal to redirect treasury funds to their own wallet.Critically, no individual user wallets were affected. The attack targeted only the DAO treasury, funds held collectively by the protocol, not by token holders directly. Upbit and Bithumb temporarily suspended BONK deposits and withdrawals as a precautionary measure while the situation was assessed.
Why It MattersThe BonkDAO exploit is not just a BONK story, it is a wake-up call for the entire DAO ecosystem. Token-weighted governance, where voting power is proportional to token holdings, creates a structural attack vector: anyone with sufficient capital can accumulate tokens, pass malicious proposals, and drain treasuries before the community can respond.This is not a new vulnerability. Similar attacks have occurred across DeFi history, but the scale and visibility of the BonkDAO incident, involving one of Solana's most recognised meme assets, brings the issue back into sharp focus. BonkDAO is now working with exchanges, the Solana Foundation, and law enforcement to trace and recover the funds.
What to WatchThe incident is likely to accelerate discussions around governance safeguards across Solana-based DAOs, including time-locks on proposals, multi-sig treasury controls, and minimum voting thresholds. For traders, the short-term price impact has been a roughly 7% decline, but the longer-term narrative around BONK's community resilience and governance reform will be the more meaningful signal.
$LINK: Real Estate Tokenization Gets an SEC FilingWhat HappenedOn July 6, Caliber: a US-based real estate investment firm, filed an SEC Form 8-K announcing it is implementing Chainlink's ACE (Automated Compliance Engine) infrastructure to tokenize its private real estate funds. The filing also disclosed that Caliber has invested in LINK, the native token of the Chainlink network, to support its tokenization initiatives.The Chainlink ACE framework enables three core capabilities for Caliber's platform: reusable investor verification (KYC/AML checks that do not need to be repeated for every transaction), enforceable compliance rules embedded directly into smart contracts, and auditable transaction records that provide regulators and investors with transparent on-chain histories.Caliber will begin tokenizing selected investments, including its largest indoor Pickleball and Padel facility project, before expanding to broader real estate fund tokenization.
Why It MattersAn SEC 8-K filing is a material disclosure, it is not marketing copy or a press release. When a company files with the SEC to announce a technology implementation and a token investment, it signals genuine operational commitment, not exploratory interest. This is exactly the kind of institutional adoption signal that the Chainlink ecosystem has been building toward.The broader context is equally significant. The RWA (real-world asset) tokenization sector crossed $63.6 billion in market cap in July 2026, with tokenized real estate emerging as one of the fastest-growing sub-categories. Chainlink's oracle and compliance infrastructure is increasingly the default choice for institutions entering this space, given its established track record with BlackRock's BUIDL, Aave, and dozens of other major protocols.
What to WatchCaliber's implementation is an early-stage rollout, but the SEC filing creates a public record that other real estate firms will reference. If the tokenization of Caliber's funds proceeds successfully, it could serve as a template for the broader private real estate market, a sector with trillions in assets that have historically been illiquid and difficult to access for retail investors.
$ADA: Cardano's RealFi Testnet Goes LiveWhat HappenedOn July 6, Cardano developers launched the RealFi testnet, the first public step toward a next-generation stablecoin and DeFi infrastructure layer on the Cardano blockchain. The RealFi network introduces USDr, a stablecoin backed by traditional real-world assets that offers potential yields of up to 10% per annum without requiring users to lock up their funds.The RealFi testnet launch follows the Van Rossem hard fork (Protocol Version 11), which was completed in mid-June and introduced more efficient smart contracts and enhanced developer tooling. RealFi represents the first major DeFi application built on top of the upgraded Cardano infrastructure.ADA gained 30% in the week to July 6, making it one of the top performers in the top 100 by market capitalisation. The $981M in 24-hour volume is one of the largest prints the asset has recorded in 2026, reflecting genuine market interest in the upcoming developments.
Why It MattersCardano has long been criticised for slow development velocity relative to its market capitalisation. The RealFi testnet launch represents a meaningful shift: for the first time, Cardano is deploying a DeFi product that directly competes with established stablecoin and yield protocols on Ethereum and Solana.The USDr design, backed by traditional assets and offering yield without lockups, positions it as a direct alternative to products like Ethena's USDe and Ondo's USDY. If the testnet performs as expected and the mainnet launch follows, Cardano's total value locked (currently below $90 million) could see significant growth as DeFi users explore the new yield opportunities.
What to WatchThe RealFi mainnet launch date has not been officially confirmed, but the testnet going live suggests a timeline of weeks to months rather than years. Traders and developers will be watching closely for any issues identified during the testnet phase, as well as for announcements about institutional partners backing the USDr reserve assets.
SummaryToday's three stories span the full spectrum of what makes crypto markets worth watching: a governance exploit that exposes structural risks, an institutional adoption milestone backed by regulatory filings, and a long-awaited DeFi breakthrough on one of the industry's most established blockchains. Each tells a different story about where the market is heading and the risks and opportunities that come with it.
Trade smart. Own the future.
Not financial advice. Always conduct your own research before making any investment decisions.
Lido DAO (LDO) maintains a bullish short-term bias, trading around $0.28 at the time of writing on Tuesday. The liquid staking token (LST) has logged consistent gains since last Wednesday, indicating growing risk appetite.
Sentiment in the broader crypto market has also improved but only marginally, as reflected in the Fear & Greed Index at 27 in the Fear Territory on Tuesday, from 24 the day before. Should bullish momentum persist and broader risk appetite in the crypto market grow, the probability of a robust LDO recovery will rise significantly.
Crypto Fear & Greed Index | Source: AlternativeSuppressed retail interest could limit LDO's recoveryRetail participation in Lido DAO remains relatively subdued, as reflected in the perpetual futures Open Interest (OI), with an average of 145 million LDO over a three-day period.
Looking back, OI registered 169 million LDO on Saturday, a notable decline from the 247 million LDO observed in late April. For LDO to maintain upward momentum over the short- to medium-term, a sustained uptick in retail risk appetite remains essential.
LDO Futures OI | Source: CoinGlassMeanwhile, leverage remains positive, as shown by the OI-Weighted Funding Rate of 0.0065% on Tuesday. In hindsight, bulls have since early June increasingly paid a premium to retail their long positions.
LDO OI-Weighted Funding Rate | Source: CoinGlassPrice analysis: LDO extends gains as buyers tighten gripLDO trades at $0.29, with its upside capped by the key moving averages. The LST token sits just under the 50-day Exponential Moving Average (EMA) at $0.29 and remains well below the 100-day and 200-day EMAs at $0.32 and $0.42, respectively, keeping the near-term bias bearish despite the recent rebound.
The Parabolic SAR at $0.24 now trails below price as underlying support, while the Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) histogram has turned increasingly positive on the daily chart, suggesting improving upside momentum.
At the same time, the Relative Strength Index (RSI) around 59 on the same chart points to recovering bullish pressure but stops short of overbought territory.
LDO/USDT daily chartImmediate resistance lies at the 50-day EMA near $0.29, followed by the 100-day EMA at $0.32, while the 200-day EMA at $0.42 marks a broader bearish cap on any extended rally. On the flip side, initial support is seen at the Parabolic SAR around $0.24, with a deeper cushion at the descending trendline break zone near $0.22, where buyers would be expected to reassert if the current pullback extends.
(The technical analysis of this story was written with the help of an AI tool. Know more.)
Open Interest, funding rate FAQs Higher Open Interest is associated with higher liquidity and new capital inflow to the market. This is considered the equivalent of increase in efficiency and the ongoing trend continues. When Open Interest decreases, it is considered a sign of liquidation in the market, investors are leaving and the overall demand for an asset is on a decline, fueling a bearish sentiment among investors.
Funding fees bridge the difference between spot prices and prices of futures contracts of an asset by increasing liquidation risks faced by traders. A consistently high and positive funding rate implies there is a bullish sentiment among market participants and there is an expectation of a price hike. A consistently negative funding rate for an asset implies a bearish sentiment, indicating that traders expect the cryptocurrency’s price to fall and a bearish trend reversal is likely to occur.
Crypto has spent many years asking users to accept complexity in exchange for ownership. But as self-custody moves closer and closer to the mainstream audience, Trust Wallet’s new CEO, Felix Fan, argues that the real challenge is no longer proving why people should control their assets – it’s making that control feel effortless.
In the following interview, we discuss the product lessons shaping Fan’s leadership, why wallets must take more responsibility for user protection, how payments, trading, stablecoins, AI agents, and clear regulation are pushing crypto into a more mature phase.
His message, however, is clear: self-custody may have won the philosophical argument, but the user experience has some catching up to do.
You’ve stepped into a new role at Trust Wallet at a moment when self-custody is becoming both more mainstream and more complex. What parts of your own journey prepared you most for leading a product used by hundreds of millions of people?
My expertise lies in product, complemented by my experience as a serial entrepreneur. Before Trust Wallet, I spent years thinking about how to make complex financial tools feel simple to people who don’t have time or patience to become experts.
Leading at this scale is different. Trust Wallet already has millions of users. The job isn’t only to convince people that self-custody is the future. It’s to make that future feel obvious in the product experience every day. That means listening, moving fast, and being ruthlessly honest about where we fall short so we can fix it quickly.
The part of my journey that prepared me most? Learning that the best products don’t have to explain themselves. If a user has to read a guide to understand what just happened, we haven’t finished building yet.
You may also like: Ethereum Layer 2 Taiko Urges Users to Withdraw Funds From Bridges, Confirms Security Breach DeFi Users Warned to Revoke Approvals Before Anthropic’s Mythos AI Launches Crypto CEO Security Costs Surge as Physical Attacks Rise 75% Before joining Trust Wallet, you were known as a product leader. How does that background shape the way you think about leadership, especially in a sector where user trust, security, and speed of execution all matter at once?
Product thinking means you start with the user problem, not the solution. That sounds obvious, but it’s genuinely rare in crypto, where the default is to lead with technology and hope users catch up.
When I look at trust, security, and execution speed as competing priorities, I don’t see a tension. I see a product sequencing problem. Security can’t be a tax on speed — if it slows users down in a way that’s perceptible, we lose them to worse choices. So the answer is to engineer security that protects users before they know they need protection.
That’s what our Security Scanner does $458 million in prevented losses from malicious contracts. Users didn’t have to become security experts for that to happen. The product did the work. That’s what good product leadership looks like in this sector.
Crypto has gone through several identity shifts — speculation, DeFi, NFTs, institutional adoption, stablecoins, AI agents, RWAs, and more. How would you define the current phase of the industry?
I’d call it the infrastructure coming of age. For years, crypto had the vision, but the experience was too rough for most people to stay. The phases you describe, “speculation, DeFi, NFTs”, each added something real, but also came with so much friction that only the committed stayed.
What’s different now is that the rails are catching up with the ideas. Onchain liquidity is deep enough to compete. Stablecoins have real-world utility. Tokenized RWAs are more accessible. AI is starting to interact with onchain systems in ways that weren’t possible two years ago.
We’re at the point where the question isn’t “Can crypto do this?”, it’s “Can we make it simple enough that the next hundred million people don’t need to already believe in it to try it?”
Self-custody is often framed as a principle, but for mainstream users it can still feel intimidating. What has to change for self-custody to become as intuitive as mobile banking without compromising ownership?
Three things, in order.
First, the language has to change. “Private keys,” “seed phrases,” “non-custodial” etc, these are terms that mean something to insiders and nothing to everyone else. We have to build products that protect users deeply without requiring them to understand the underlying mechanics. That’s how mobile banking worked. You don’t know how your bank’s authentication stack works. You just feel safe.
Second, recovery has to feel safe. The thing that stops most people from trying self-custody isn’t the setup — it’s the fear of losing access permanently. Better recovery options, designed for real humans, not cryptographers, are one of the most important problems the industry needs to solve.
Third, the surrounding experience has to match what people already use. If trading onchain is harder than using an app they already have, we lose. The gap is closing, though there’s still work to be done.
The principle of self-custody is already winning the argument. The product experience is what has to catch up.
Trust Wallet now sits at the intersection of wallets, DeFi, payments, stablecoins, and AI. Where do you see the biggest near-term use case for crypto: trading, payments, savings, identity, AI agents, or something else?
Payments and trading for the near term.
Trading because onchain liquidity has matured. With integrations like Hyperliquid for perps, prediction markets, and tokenized stocks through bStocks, users can do things inside a self-custodial wallet that they’d have needed a traditional brokerage account or CEX for a few years ago.
AI agents are the category I watch most carefully for the medium term. The ability to automate strategies within rules you set, while keeping keys on your device, could meaningfully change the financial landscape. But we’re at the early-infrastructure stage there. In the near term, payments and trading are where the real use is happening.
Security remains one of crypto’s biggest barriers to adoption. What responsibility should wallets take in protecting users, and where should the line be between user sovereignty and platform-level safeguards?
Self-custody wallets should take significant responsibility for protecting users, and I’d push back on the idea that this creates a tension with sovereignty.
The false version of user sovereignty is: “we give you total freedom and total exposure.” That’s not empowering; that’s abandonment. Real sovereignty means users have full control over their assets and real protection against threats they can’t always see.
Our Security Scanner feature has flagged over $458 million directed at malicious contracts, and helped alert users to more than $191 million in suspicious transactions in 2025 alone. Our Address Poisoning Protection, a feature that detects lookalike scam addresses in real-time and alerts users before they send funds, is the latest addition to Trust Wallet’s industry-leading security stack. Users don’t have to understand address poisoning or malicious smart contracts to be protected from them. That’s what we should expect from a wallet.
The line I draw is this: we warn, we protect, we give users the information to make a decision — but we don’t make decisions for them. If a user wants to interact with something our security systems flag as risky, we tell them clearly, and then we respect their choice. Sovereignty with information is the goal. Sovereignty without information isn’t freedom, it’s exposure.
Regulation is becoming clearer in some markets while others remain fragmented or uncertain. How should wallet companies like Trust Wallet navigate the balance between decentralization, compliance, and user access across different jurisdictions?
Regulatory clarity is genuinely good for this industry. Uncertainty can create more problems than it solves; for users, for builders, and for the long-term credibility of crypto.
What’s important to understand is what Trust Wallet is and isn’t. We’re a self-custodial software interface. We don’t hold customer funds, we don’t operate markets, we don’t match orders, and we’re not anyone’s counterparty. That’s a different regulatory conversation than the one centralized exchanges are having.
Our approach is to engage constructively where needed, be transparent about how the product works, and make sure the users have access to the best available services. When regulation creates real clarity, it helps us by setting clear expectations for the industry.
What I’d push back on is regulation as a barrier to access. The populations who benefit most from self-custody — people without access to traditional banking, people in economies with currency instability — are often the least served by fragmented regulatory environments. Good regulation should protect users, not exclude them.
Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.
Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.
Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.
Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.
Will data centers soon leave Earth? This prospect, long reserved for science fiction, takes on a very real dimension with the strategy carried by SpaceX. Faced with the explosion in energy needs of artificial intelligence, Earth’s orbit now imposes itself as a new frontier for digital infrastructures. Far more than a space project, this evolution could reshuffle the cards of the global technological economy, influencing financial market investments as well as the strategies of Tech giants.
In brief SpaceX is preparing a new generation of orbiting data centers to meet the growing energy demands of artificial intelligence. The Gigasat factory and its giant satellites pave the way for unprecedented space computing power, designed to surpass the limits of terrestrial infrastructures. The group’s industrial ambitions already attract financial markets and Tech giants, who see orbital computing as a strategic lever for the future. SpaceX’s solid Bitcoin reserve strengthens its ability to finance this colossal project, despite the technical and economic challenges still to overcome. The Deployment of Gigasat and the Dawn of Orbital Computing The industrial apparatus intended to realize this transition is already underway through unprecedented production structures. On June 8, a few days before its Nasdaq listing, SpaceX unveiled its giant Gigasat factory in Bastrop, Texas, a complex fully configured for the mass production of satellites dedicated to artificial intelligence.
By around 2027, the company aims to deliver a spatial computing capacity reaching 1 gigawatt (GW) per year. The flagship of this fleet will rely on breakthrough technical specifications :
Structural gigantism : the first-generation satellite named AI1 has a wingspan of 70 meters, exceeding the width of a Boeing 747 ; High energy density : each unit carries a computing payload ranging between 120 kilowatts (kW) on average and 150 kW at peak ; Hardware flexibility : the infrastructure uses an architecture of interchangeable chips to avoid exclusive allegiance to a single semiconductor supplier. Faced with the apparent complexity of the project, Elon Musk tempered observers’ enthusiasm during the presentation of this equipment. Thus, he stated that “the AI satellite is much simpler than a Starlink satellite”.
This relative simplicity hides an industrial logic dictated by terrestrial physical constraints, the company having filed an official request with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) to deploy up to 1 million operational satellites. Such a shift to space is explained by the fact that terrestrial server farms critically face capacity limits of electrical networks and the scarcity of available land.
Space, by contrast, offers an environment where solar exposure allows collecting about five times more energy than on Earth’s surface, completely free from night cycles and weather disruptions. It is this unyielding environmental fact that led SpaceX’s leader to reiterate his deep belief that “space has the advantage of always being sunny”, making orbit the logical final destination for deep learning infrastructures, hence his definitive statement: “space is the only way to scale up”.
A Historic Capitalization Driven by AI Demand This deployment of computing constellations is now part of a financial strategy validated by public capital markets. At its Nasdaq listing on June 12, SpaceX raised about 75 billion dollars, closing its first day of trading at a historic market valuation of 2,100 billion dollars.
The company’s S-1 issuance prospectus explicitly relied on the explosion in AI infrastructure demand to justify this value, immediately attracting leading institutional funds such as Cathie Wood’s ARK, which acquired 3.3 million shares. For investors, the appeal lies in the long-term growth projections formulated by management, which targets 1,000 billion dollars in annual revenues by 2030. This growth is driven by orbital power aiming for 100 GW per year at this horizon, then ultimately scaling up to terawatts.
Beyond Wall Street’s enthusiasm, this infrastructure shift triggers concrete interest from the biggest players in the digital sector, who seek to free themselves from terrestrial geographic constraints. The Wall Street Journal reported as early as May that Google entered exclusive negotiations with SpaceX regarding the launch of these orbital data centers. This Big Tech interest confirms the commercial relevance of SpaceX’s model, which no longer positions itself only as a space transporter but as the ultimate supplier of raw power for future computing models. The influx of capital from these global strategic partnerships directly supports the long-term viability of the Gigasat factory.
A Treasury Anchored in Bitcoin Facing Industrial Challenges Beyond stock market performance, the financial robustness of this ecosystem stands out through a corporate treasury strategy heavily exposed to crypto. SpaceX indeed maintains a particularly robust balance sheet including 18,712 BTC, representing a treasury valued at about 1.29 billion dollars.
This position, combined with the 11,509 BTC held by Tesla, places the billionaire-controlled entities among the largest corporate holders of bitcoin on U.S. regulated markets.
Thus, this top-tier financial base proves essential to support the colossal research and development effort needed to conquer the computing orbit. Additionally, the integration of bitcoin as a reserve asset offers unique capital flexibility to simultaneously manage industrial construction and fund successive launch campaigns amid economic uncertainties.
Maximize your Cointribune experience with our "Read to Earn" program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.
Join the program
A
A
Lien copié
Luc Jose A.
Diplômé de Sciences Po Toulouse et titulaire d'une certification consultant blockchain délivrée par Alyra, j'ai rejoint l'aventure Cointribune en 2019. Convaincu du potentiel de la blockchain pour transformer de nombreux secteurs de l'économie, j'ai pris l'engagement de sensibiliser et d'informer le grand public sur cet écosystème en constante évolution. Mon objectif est de permettre à chacun de mieux comprendre la blockchain et de saisir les opportunités qu'elle offre. Je m'efforce chaque jour de fournir une analyse objective de l'actualité, de décrypter les tendances du marché, de relayer les dernières innovations technologiques et de mettre en perspective les enjeux économiques et sociétaux de cette révolution en marche.
DISCLAIMER
The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this article belong solely to the author, and should not be taken as investment advice. Do your own research before taking any investment decisions.
FUNToken continues to make access to its growing ecosystem more convenient by expanding the range of supported deposit assets. Users can now purchase $FUN using BONK (Solana) through the platform’s seamless deposit process.
With this latest addition, BONK (Solana) joins the growing list of supported assets, giving users another simple and efficient way to acquire $FUN. Deposits made with BONK are automatically converted into $FUN with 0% conversion fees, eliminating the need for manual token swaps or additional conversion steps.
A Simpler Way to Access the $FUN Ecosystem FUNToken is committed to creating a frictionless experience for users entering the ecosystem. The addition of BONK (Solana) further expands the available deposit options while maintaining the same straightforward process that users have come to expect.
By depositing BONK (Solana), users receive $FUN automatically, allowing them to begin participating in the ecosystem without unnecessary complexity.
Key benefits include:
Automatic conversion from BONK (Solana) to $FUN 0% conversion fees No manual token swaps required A fast and seamless deposit experience Expanding Access Through Greater Flexibility As the FUNToken ecosystem continues to grow with $FUN mobile games, staking opportunities, community rewards, and new platform features, providing users with more ways to acquire $FUN remains a key priority.
The addition of BONK (Solana) reflects FUNToken’s ongoing commitment to improving accessibility while giving users greater flexibility in how they participate in the ecosystem.
About FUNToken FUNToken powers a growing Web3 gaming ecosystem designed to make digital rewards more accessible and engaging. Through $FUN Games, staking, community incentives, and an expanding range of supported assets, FUNToken continues to simplify how users participate in the ecosystem while creating more opportunities to play, earn, and engage.
Disclaimer: This is a Press Release provided by a third party who is responsible for the content. Please conduct your own research before taking any action based on the content.
Michelle DG
Michelle is an editor at CoinCentral & Blockonomi, covering the latest trends in crypto, blockchain, and digital finance. With a sharp eye for detail and a passion for emerging technologies. [email protected]
Hexens found a critical flaw in Aptos that was patched before any funds moved. The bug could have let an attacker forge assets and push them across bridges. Aptos disputes the severity, yet Polygon’s CTO validated the proof-of-concept. The case revives the argument for on-chain circuit breakers on fast L1s. A security firm has revealed that Aptos, one of the faster layer-1 blockchains, carried a critical flaw for months before it was quietly fixed. On July 4, Hexens went public with a bug it had reported privately to Aptos back on February 25, a weakness in the engine that runs the chain’s smart contracts that, by its own estimate, put as much as $70 billion of theoretical risk in play across bridges, stablecoins and connected exchanges. Aptos Labs had patched it within hours of that first report, and no user funds were ever touched.
So why does a five-month-old patch make news now? Two reasons. The number, obviously. But also the detail sitting underneath it: the thing Aptos markets hardest is raw speed, and raw speed is exactly what turns $70 billion from a scare headline into a defensible estimate.
A record-throughput brag, one day after the story broke On July 5, barely 24 hours after the report, the project’s official account went ahead with its scheduled monthly tokenomics update, reporting 232,500 APT burned over the past 30 days, more than 16 million transactions in a single day for a fresh quarterly high, and an average fee of $0.0005 following a tenfold fee increase, all under the tagline “the full stack for markets and machines at work.” The post reads very differently once you have the Hexens disclosure in front of you, because the near-free transactions and enormous throughput that Aptos is promoting are the exact same properties a security researcher weighs first when calculating how much a single bug in the chain’s core could actually cost.
Every transaction on Aptos burns $APT. New month update:
• 232.5K APT burned in the Last 30D
• 1.4M total APT burned since mainnet
• +16M transactions in a day—a new quarterly high
• $0.0005 avg tx fee since 10x fee increase
The full stack for markets and machines at work. pic.twitter.com/gPEuWzD1Qf
— Aptos (@Aptos) July 5, 2026
The bug lived below the code most audits check Aptos is built on Move, a programming language designed specifically to make this kind of attack hard. Move treats tokens and other digital assets as protected items and checks, at the moment a transaction runs, that nothing is being handled as the wrong type of thing. That safety promise is a big part of why Aptos and Sui both pitch Move as safer than older environments.
The Hexens flaw slipped underneath that promise instead of breaking it head-on. In simple terms, the system briefly worked from outdated information and ended up mistaking one kind of on-chain item for another. Security people call that “type confusion,” an old software problem where a program reads something as the wrong type and walks straight past the checks meant to stop it. On a blockchain, that mix-up is dangerous: an attacker could disguise a malicious item as a legitimate one and trick the network into misreading who owns an asset and who is allowed to move it.
Polygon CTO Mudit Gupta reviewed the proof-of-concept independently and told CoinDesk it ran as claimed, with the caveat that a few conditions had to line up first. Coming from the security chief of a rival chain, that carries more weight than anything Aptos or Hexens could say on their own.
Why cheap fees and huge volume make the bug worse Throughput stops being a marketing line here and starts behaving like a risk multiplier. Hexens ran the attack against a cluster of more than 30 validator nodes, set up to mirror the real network, on a server rig that cost about $3,000 and stood in for roughly a third of the validator set. It worked 17 or 18 times out of 20, with no insider access or special permissions required.
Fold in the live figures and the picture sharpens. At a fraction of a cent per transaction, flooding the chain with malicious payloads is close to free. At 16 million transactions a day, with blocks confirming in seconds, an attacker who could forge assets would need only a short window to create them and move them out before anyone reacted. Speed is neutral. The same engine that clears legitimate volume in seconds would clear a fake mint-and-transfer run at the same pace, and the humans running the network cannot react that fast.
That is the part the burn-metrics post accidentally underlined.
Two very different numbers, and why the gap matters Two figures came out of this, and treating them as one is how the story gets distorted. The smaller one is around $250 million, the value held in Aptos DeFi apps that independent firm Grego AI judged to be at direct risk. The larger one is the $70 billion, and it only appears once you follow the flaw outward through cross-chain bridges like Wormhole and LayerZero, stablecoin systems, and the exchanges that trade APT and its wrapped versions.
Bridges are the soft spot. They pool assets from several chains at once, so a forged-asset event that starts on Aptos could, in the worst modeled case, drain money that originally came from Ethereum. The $70 billion is a worst-case total built on a stack of assumptions, not cash that was ever sitting there to grab in one clean move.
Figure What it represents Source $250M Value in Aptos DeFi apps at direct risk Grego AI $70B Worst-case systemic risk across bridges, stablecoins, exchanges Hexens $3,000 Server cost to simulate roughly a third of validators Hexens $1M Maximum Aptos bug bounty payout tier Aptos bug bounty program Aptos Labs does not dispute the report itself. It confirms the February 25 notification through the bug bounty program and says the issue was already being worked on internally. What it contests is the severity, arguing that real network conditions made the exploit much harder to pull off than the test setup implied, and putting real-world exploitability at “extremely low.” That claim runs straight into Gupta’s independent validation, and the two positions have not been reconciled in public.
There is a second gap worth flagging, and it is about incentives rather than code. The bounty caps at $1 million. An exploit of this kind would fetch many multiples of that on the black market, and Hexens disclosed anyway, which is the entire point of running a bounty.
The systemic-threat reading The resilience reading A $3,000 setup could threaten a top-tier layer-1 Patched within hours, no network disruption A core bug hints at category risk for Move chains Aptos says real conditions made exploitability very low One flaw could reach bridge and stablecoin assets The bounty steered a white-hat outcome over a sale What the APT chart is doing while the debate runs Traders have mostly shrugged this off. On the 4-hour Aptos/USD chart from Coinbase, pulled via TradingView, APT changed hands near $0.635 on July 7, holding above its 50-period moving average at $0.6061 and its 100-period line at $0.6147, while running into the 200-period average at $0.6410 as resistance overhead. A moving average is just the average closing price over that many candles, and this layout points to a real bounce that has not yet cleared the bigger downtrend, the one that dragged APT from roughly $1.00 in mid-May to about $0.55.
The RSI, a gauge of buying pressure that runs from 0 to 100, sat at 58.77, above the neutral 50 mark but nowhere near the 70 line that signals an overheated market. CoinMarketCap had APT up 9.91 percent on the week at $0.6339, so the disclosure looks like a weight on sentiment rather than a trigger for real selling.
The fix that outlasts this news cycle Builders carry the near-term load. Anyone running an app on Aptos has a reason to re-check how their code handles the kind of edge case Hexens found, and big investors may keep a slightly higher risk premium on Move-based tokens like APT and SUI while they take another look at the network’s foundations.
Two things, though, are likely to stick around after the coverage fades. The first is the bounty ceiling. A $1 million cap looks increasingly small next to the value it is meant to protect, and projects competing with black-market buyers may have little choice but to raise it. The second is a shift in the question researchers actually ask. For years the bragging rights were about how many transactions a chain can push through. This incident nudges the focus toward the opposite skill: how quickly a network can stop itself. Fast chains increasingly need automatic “kill switches” that freeze cross-chain transfers the instant something looks wrong, because once a human notices, the transactions have already gone through.
Aptos is about to run that experiment on itself. A proposal to hide transaction details until after they confirm, which would make front-running harder, is already moving through community voting, while other upgrades chase even faster confirmation times. Every one of those adds speed and adds value at stake, the same combination the Hexens disclosure showed can turn a single bug into a systemic one. Whether Move’s next security moment reads as reassurance or repeat comes down to one thing: whether these upgrades ship with the kind of built-in safeguards this episode made the case for.a
Legal questions over which federal department can lawfully manage a national crypto trove have complicated President Donald Trump’s Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, more than a year after he ordered its creation.
Trump directed the reserve into existence last year as part of his pledge to make the United States “crypto capital of the world.” The plan has since run into a structural problem.
Which Agency Can Legally Hold America’s Bitcoin Remains UnresolvedThe order intended the reserve to sit inside the Treasury Department. Bitcoin (BTC) would come from federal asset seizures. The order also empowered the Treasury and Commerce secretaries to design budget-neutral ways to buy more Bitcoin, provided the purchases cost American taxpayers nothing.
Concerns then surfaced over whether Treasury could legally manage the assets, Bloomberg reported, citing people familiar with the matter. Housing the reserve inside the Commerce Department is now one option.
Another open question is whether Bitcoin can be held indefinitely, as the order intended, given its price swings.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
The Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel is working with both departments to “determine legally available options to accomplish the president’s policy of establishing a strategic Bitcoin reserve.”
White House spokesperson Liz Huston addressed the matter in a statement shared with BeInCrypto. She said the administration was still working out the right setup for the reserve.
“President Trump campaigned on a vision of cementing America as the global capital of cryptocurrency and other cutting-edge technologies,” Huston said. “To deliver on the president’s vision, the Trump administration continues to evaluate the best structure for a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and U.S. Digital Asset Stockpile.”
The US government ranks among the largest holders of Bitcoin worldwide. Its holdings exceed $20 billion at current prices, according to Arkham Intelligence.
US Government Bitcoin Holdings. Source: ArkhamHow the administration resolves the authority question will determine whether one of its signature crypto commitments takes shape or stays on paper.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights
Key Takeaways Iranian forces launched at least two missiles at commercial vessels navigating the Strait of Hormuz on Monday evening Brent crude jumped 1.6% to reach $73.10 per barrel; WTI futures climbed 1.5% to $69.60 per barrel A temporary one-week ceasefire agreement between Washington and Tehran has lapsed OPEC+ members agreed to boost production quotas by 188,000 barrels daily beginning in August Saudi Aramco reduced August pricing for Arab Light crude to a discount versus regional benchmarks—the first such move since 2020 Crude oil markets rallied on Tuesday following an Iranian missile attack targeting commercial vessels transiting the Strait of Hormuz, reigniting concerns about the security of shipping operations in this critical global oil chokepoint.
Brent crude futures advanced 1.6% to $73.10 per barrel during early European trading sessions. U.S. West Texas Intermediate contracts increased 1.5% to $69.60 per barrel.
Brent Crude Oil Last Day Financ (BZ=F) According to reports from Axios citing two American officials, Iranian military forces launched at least two missiles toward vessels in the strait late Monday. The strikes marked the end of a week-long cessation of hostilities that had been negotiated between the U.S. and Iran.
🇮🇷 🇶🇦 The IRGC fired missiles at commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz, hitting TWO vessels, per a U.S. official.
-The IRGC launched at least two missiles at commercial ships transiting the strait, a U.S. official confirms
-Both ships were hit and suffered significant… pic.twitter.com/vmgdtFV5bq
— Mario Nawfal (@MarioNawfal) July 7, 2026
The United Kingdom Maritime Trade Operations agency confirmed that a tanker sailing near Oman’s coastline was struck by an unknown projectile, sparking a fire onboard. While Tehran has not formally acknowledged the attack, unnamed sources speaking to Iranian state media indicated the target may have been a vessel transporting natural gas from Qatar.
Fragile Ceasefire Collapses The missile strikes occurred precisely as the seven-day suspension of attacks in the strait reached its conclusion. That temporary arrangement was connected to a more comprehensive memorandum of understanding inked fewer than three weeks prior, which now appears increasingly fragile.
Tehran has mandated that all vessels transiting the strait must follow Iranian-designated shipping corridors. Iranian officials warned that any American intervention would trigger “a rapid and decisive action.”
Oil markets had retreated to pre-conflict pricing levels following the signing of a peace agreement in June. During the early stages of the conflict that erupted in late February, oil prices had skyrocketed beyond $110 per barrel.
Analysts at Deutsche Bank observed that despite prices normalizing, vessel traffic through the strait remains significantly below historical norms. “There is still supply-chain stress here,” their research note stated.
OPEC+ Boosts Output Amid Gulf Recovery The upward movement in crude prices faced resistance from expanding global supply. OPEC+ members reached an agreement on Sunday to raise production allocations by 188,000 barrels daily commencing in August. This marks the continuation of comparable increases implemented during June and July.
The United Arab Emirates, which exited the OPEC+ quota framework in May, reported production exceeding 3.8 million barrels per day throughout June, surpassing its pre-conflict output capacity.
Saudi Aramco simultaneously lowered the official selling price for Arab Light crude destined for Asian markets. This represents the first instance of discount pricing relative to regional benchmarks since 2020, signaling intensified competition for market positioning as Persian Gulf exports normalize.
Market analysts at MUFG suggested that upward price momentum will likely remain constrained. “Saudi Arabia has cut its August official selling prices, OPEC+ continues to unwind production cuts, Gulf exports are recovering, and the physical market remains well supplied,” explained Soojin Kim from MUFG.
Conditions in the strait remain volatile, with diplomatic negotiations continuing and jurisdiction over the strategic waterway remaining a fundamental point of contention between Iranian and American interests.
Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.
Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.
While Bitcoin and the altcoin market in general continue to trade with high volatility, some on-chain data suggests that cryptocurrency whales are quietly accumulating.
At this point, the cryptocurrency analysis platform Santiment noted an explosion in whale activity in two altcoins.
According to Santiment, the altcoins Lighter (LIT) and Mantle (MNT) have seen their highest whale transactions exceeding $100,000 in the last six months. This indicates that large investors are becoming increasingly active despite the uncertain market environment.
According to the data, LIT is giving a strong signal with 86 trades above $100,000, while Mantle is showing a strong signal with 37 trades above $100,000.
Santiment notes that the increase in whale activity in LIT is “likely driven by renewed interest related to the persistent DEX narrative, token economics updates, buyback and burn mechanisms, staking yield, and recent partnership rumors.”
The increase in Mantle is said to stem from its expansion around tokenized shares, pre-IPO vaults, and deeper ecosystem usage.
Historically, increases in large investor activity have often preceded periods of high volatility or trend reversals, but large investor transactions, such as those by whales, do not alone guarantee a sustainable uptrend.
*This is not investment advice.
Follow our Telegram and Twitter account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!
Key Highlights BTC recovered to surpass $64,000 following a dip to approximately $62,000 early Monday Strategy divested 3,588 BTC totaling $216 million to cover dividend obligations BlackRock’s IBIT ETF attracted $209.4 million — marking its first positive flow in several weeks Combined U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF inflows reached $265.7 million within 24 hours Trump declared himself a “big crypto guy” during a White House announcement Bitcoin’s value slipped from approximately $64,000 on Sunday down to roughly $62,000 by Monday’s opening hours. This decline followed a SEC disclosure revealing Strategy’s divestment of 3,588 BTC valued at $216 million.
Bitcoin (BTC) Price Strategy executed the sale in two tranches. The firm liquidated 1,363 BTC during June 29–30, generating $80.8 million at an average price of $59,256 per token. Subsequently, between July 1–5, another 2,225 BTC were sold for $135.2 million at $60,773 each. Proceeds were allocated toward preferred shareholder dividends and replenishing operational cash reserves.
JUST IN: Michael Saylor announces Strategy sold 3,588 Bitcoin for $216 million to fund dividends for their digital credit securities 👀 pic.twitter.com/QQl2Jih71A
— Bitcoin Magazine (@BitcoinMagazine) July 6, 2026
Michael Saylor’s company simultaneously disclosed an $8.32 billion impairment on digital asset holdings for the quarter concluding June 30. Strategy maintains $1.25 billion in remaining authorized sale capacity.
Sunday’s advance toward $64,000 was predominantly fueled by derivatives activity. Net futures accumulation approached $415 million, while spot market flows registered marginally negative. This imbalance rendered the rally vulnerable, resulting in a swift reversal following Monday’s Strategy disclosure.
Market Reacts to Strategy’s Divestment Futures liquidation activity surged to approximately $456 million during a concentrated four-hour period after the filing emerged. Liquidations affected both directional positions — roughly $42 million in longs and $49 million in shorts were eliminated.
The subsequent afternoon recovery demonstrated stronger fundamentals. Futures accumulation of approximately $568 million coincided with spot purchases totaling $143 million — representing the first substantial spot participation recently observed.
Bitcoin’s funding rate maintained positive territory despite the selloff, with open futures interest hovering around $20.6 billion. This indicates leveraged long positions remain densely concentrated.
Market analyst Daan Crypto Trades (@DaanCrypto) provided perspective on the movement, highlighting Bitcoin’s recapture of its weekly 200-day moving average closure. He stated he “would not be surprised if price just hangs around this $60K–$70K region for a while,” referencing the concentration of significant timeframe levels within that range and noting summer typically delivers choppy trading conditions.
$BTC Did get its close above the Weekly 200MA again after the week below before.
I would not be surprised if price just hangs around this $60K-$70K region for a while seeing how many high timeframe levels we have sitting here.
Especially going into the summer which is generally… https://t.co/6uxkE64oYF pic.twitter.com/ilPTEsVNL6
— Daan Crypto Trades (@DaanCrypto) July 6, 2026
ETF Capital Returns Alongside Trump’s Crypto Comments Market sentiment pivoted later Monday when President Trump addressed attendees at a White House ceremony introducing “Trump Accounts” — a government-backed investment program designed for American children. Responding to questions about potential Bitcoin inclusion in these accounts, Trump stated, “well…I’ve become a big crypto guy.”
This statement catalyzed BTC’s recovery above $64,000, with pricing stabilizing around $64,183.
BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) captured $209.4 million in capital inflows on July 7, representing its first positive session following extended outflow periods. Fidelity’s FBTC, ARK 21Shares’ ARKB, and Grayscale’s Mini ETF contributed additional inflows. Aggregate U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF net inflows totaled $265.7 million for the session — the most robust single-day performance in recent weeks.
According to SoSoValue data, on July 6 (Eastern Time), Bitcoin spot ETFs recorded a total net inflow of USD 266 million, with BlackRock’s IBIT posting the largest single-day net inflow at USD 209 million. Ethereum spot ETFs recorded a total net inflow of USD 29.082 million, led… pic.twitter.com/LspHuB2ki8
— Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) July 7, 2026
Grayscale’s GBTC diverged from the pattern with $44.5 million in redemptions.
IBIT has now accumulated over $60 billion in total inflows. Spot ETF products have registered positive flows across two consecutive trading sessions.
Research firm BIT observed that Bitcoin commenced July with historically favorable seasonal momentum. The firm identifies initial resistance for BTC at $65,955.
The Federal Reserve will publish minutes from its June policy meeting on Wednesday. Current market pricing reflects a 75.6% probability that rates will remain anchored at 3.50%–3.75% throughout July.
