Moonbeam přesouvá GLMR z Polkadotu na Base a ukončuje tak své čtyřleté napojení na Polkadot. Držitelé mají do 31. července možnost vyměnit GLMR 1:1 za novou ERC-20 verzi.
Moonbeam Network, one of the earliest and most prominent parachains on Polkadot, announced on July 3 that it will fully migrate its GLMR token to Base, Coinbase’s Ethereum Layer 2. The move effectively ends Moonbeam’s four-year relationship with Polkadot and repositions the project within the Ethereum ecosystem.
Holders have until July 31 to bridge their GLMR tokens 1:1 to a new ERC-20 version on Base through a dedicated migration portal. Centralized exchanges are expected to handle the swap automatically for tokens held in custody.
Advertisement
What’s actually happening here Moonbeam launched in January 2022 as the first parachain on Polkadot. Its entire selling point was giving Ethereum Virtual Machine developers a home inside the Polkadot ecosystem, complete with staking, cross-chain compatibility, and familiar tooling.
Now it’s leaving. The project is rebranding around something called the Moonbeam Protocol, described as a decentralized network focused on AI agent communication and settlement for on-chain economies.
Users currently participating in DeFi protocols on Moonbeam’s parachain need to withdraw their assets before the migration completes. Tokens stuck in liquidity pools, staking contracts, or lending protocols need to be manually unwound before the chain winds down.
What investors should be watching The 1:1 token migration means GLMR holders aren’t being diluted. The more nuanced question is whether the move to Base and the pivot to AI agent infrastructure actually improves the token’s long-term value proposition.
The migration deadline of July 31 creates a compressed timeline that could lead to confusion, lost tokens, or liquidity disruption. Users who don’t actively manage the transition risk complications. The automatic migration through centralized exchanges should catch a large portion of passive holders, but on-chain users need to be proactive.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Wallets belonging to the Royal Government of Bhutan sent 700 BTC valued at about $43.75 million to the crypto exchange Binance. This move comes as Bitcoin pushed past $62,000 on Saturday.
Bhutan Govt. Offloads $43 Million In Bitcoin The largest single transaction, according to Arkham Intelligence data, was 634 BTC worth approximately $39.6 million was transferred from a wallet associated with the government to a Binance deposit address. Another 66 BTC valued approximately $4.12 million were also sent to the same exchange deposit wallet in a separate transaction.
Moreover, the combined amount of the two transfers amounted to 700 BTC. It is worth approximately $43.75 million based on the current BTC price.
Even with the whiff of a large sell-off, a move to a central exchange does not necessarily indicate a real sale. Exchange wallets can be used by governments and institutional investors for various purposes. These include over-the-counter (OTC) trades, collateral management, intra-fund consolidations, or liquidity operations. It remains unclear what prompted the transfers.
The Royal Government of Bhutan deposited 700 $BTC ($43.75M) into #Binance.https://t.co/TEKoW47knShttps://t.co/f2cL5LdzN2 pic.twitter.com/1WAWC0VN1a
— Onchain Lens (@OnchainLens) July 4, 2026
According to the blockchain records, around 1,750 BTC is still in Bhutan’s hands. This stash is valued at around $109.27 million after the most recent transfers.
The recent activity comes after a couple of past Bitcoin transactions by Bhutan-related wallets back in the previous month. Some of the earlier transfers that have been traced to Arkham involved 364.984 BTC worth some $22.26 million and 188.558 BTC valued near $11.47 million.
It also included movement of 150.458 BTC valued at approximately $9.14 million. Overall, it sent 1,095 BTC, totaling over $67 million at the time.
Bitcoin Climbs Above $62,000 Meanwhile, Bitcoin’s resurgence above $62,000 coincided with the most recent U.S. labor market data. The U.S. economy created 57,000 jobs in June, far short of the 115,000 expected and a downward revision of 43,000 jobs in May, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.
The U.S. jobless rate was 4.2%, just below the 4.3% forecasts. It suggests that the markets’ fears that employment data may have been weaker than anticipated were unwarranted. This narrative is supporting hopes that the Federal Reserve will keep cutting rates to combat inflation.
If you’re looking for staking rewards, visit our page on Crypto Staking Platforms.
CryptoQuant varuje před vyšší volatilitou, protože vklady Bitcoinu na burzy vyskočily téměř na 49 000 BTC. Podle firmy za tím stojí hlavně velcí držitelé a Bitcoin se zároveň drží u supportu 60 000 USD.
Why Are Bitcoin Exchange Deposits Raising Concern? Bitcoin deposits to exchanges have surged to levels seen only a handful of times this year, a pattern that has historically preceded sharper volatility and larger directional moves across the crypto market, according to CryptoQuant.
Daily bitcoin deposits climbed to nearly 49,000 BTC on June 30, close to the 50,000 BTC threshold that has appeared only 4 other times this year. Julio Moreno, head of research at CryptoQuant, described the move as a “rare extreme” and said similar spikes have previously been followed by stronger price swings.
“At these inflow levels, the market is absorbing a large volume of bitcoin being repositioned to exchanges, a pattern that has historically preceded significant directional moves,” Moreno wrote.
The concern is not only the size of the inflow. Exchange deposits often rise when holders are preparing to sell, adjust collateral, rebalance positions, or move assets into more liquid trading venues. When the increase is large and sudden, it can change market depth and make price action more sensitive to order flow.
Are Whales Driving the Latest Move? The latest increase appears to be driven mainly by large holders rather than retail investors. Moreno said the average bitcoin deposit to exchanges doubled from about 1 BTC to 2 BTC, pointing to larger transfers by whales and institutional investors.
That detail matters because average deposit size can carry a different market message than total deposits alone. High deposit volumes may reflect broad activity across many participants. A jump in average deposit size suggests larger holders are moving more bitcoin at once, which can create heavier selling pressure if those coins are placed into active exchange liquidity.
Moreno said spikes in average deposit size have historically been a more bearish signal than deposit volume alone because they reflect “deliberate repositioning” by larger market participants. He added that such moves have been a reliable leading indicator of downward price pressure.
The spike also comes as bitcoin tests the $60,000 support area. Moreno said a break below that level could put bitcoin on course toward its realized price near $53,000. Bitcoin was recently trading around $62,180, while U.S. spot bitcoin ETFs recorded $221.7 million in net inflows on Thursday, ending a 10-day outflow streak, according to SoSoValue data.
Investor Takeaway The exchange inflow data does not confirm that a sell-off has started, but it shows that larger holders are moving bitcoin into venues where selling, hedging, or repositioning becomes easier. That raises the risk of wider price swings while bitcoin remains close to key support.
Why Are Ether And Altcoin Deposits Also Important? The pattern is not limited to bitcoin. Ether deposits to exchanges climbed above 1.25 million ETH in late June, a level Moreno said is consistent with elevated selling pressure.
Simultaneous increases in bitcoin and ether deposits are more important than isolated weakness in one asset. When both major crypto assets see exchange inflows rise at the same time, the signal points to a broader risk-off move rather than a single-asset adjustment.
Altcoin deposits have also increased sharply. The number of altcoin deposit transactions reached nearly 45,000 earlier this week, the highest level in almost 2 months. Moreno described the move as “a historical inflection-point signal for prices.”
For altcoins, exchange deposit spikes can be especially sensitive because liquidity is often thinner than in bitcoin or ether markets. A rise in deposits can quickly translate into sharper price moves if holders decide to sell into weaker order books.
What Does This Mean For Market Direction? The current setup resembles an earlier pattern that preceded a broad crypto decline. Moreno said a similar spike in altcoin deposits occurred before bitcoin fell from about $82,000 in early May to below $58,000 in late June.
“With the threshold being breached again while bitcoin tests $60,000 support, the current configuration closely mirrors the pattern that preceded the prior leg down, warranting heightened caution from market participants,” Moreno said.
The immediate market risk is a volatility break rather than a guaranteed move lower. Exchange inflows show that assets are being moved into tradable venues, but they do not reveal whether holders will sell immediately, hedge exposure, provide liquidity, or prepare for other transactions.
Still, the mix of higher bitcoin deposits, larger average transfer sizes, rising ether inflows, and stronger altcoin exchange activity creates a more fragile market structure. If bitcoin fails to hold the $60,000 area, the same inflow pressure could deepen momentum toward lower realized-price levels.
Investor Takeaway CryptoQuant’s data points to a market entering a higher-risk phase. The clearest issue is not just that more coins are moving to exchanges, but that larger holders appear to be behind the move while bitcoin trades near a major support level.
JPMorgan varuje, že nová politika společnosti Strategy kolem prodeje bitcoinů vytváří „two-way risk“, protože firma může BTC podle potřeby i prodávat. Společnost má v trezoru 847 363 BTC.
For a while now, Michael Saylor’s Strategy has been on a wild ride of criticism. Now, major players like JPMorgan are beginning to issue some warnings. In fact, the banking giant recently called out Strategy’s Bitcoin sales policy.
For context, Strategy has long relied on a straightforward business model: Raise capital through debt and equity offerings, then use that money to purchase additional Bitcoin [BTC].
As a result, a sizeable amount of the circulating supply was essentially locked away rather than actively traded due to its enormous treasury of 847,363 BTC. However, the company’s most recent capital structure is now altering that dynamic.
Strategy’s new game plan raises red flags To pay dividends on its preferred stock or other financial commitments, Strategy has now formally permitted itself to sell a limited quantity of Bitcoin. At the same time, it authorized preferred stock repurchases and launched a $1 billion common stock buyback program.
Even though the company’s cash reserves of about $2.55 billion cover about 17 months’ worth of preferred dividends and interest costs, JPMorgan thinks this buffer is still insufficient to completely rule out the possibility of future Bitcoin sales.
The team led by Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou argued,
A higher coverage of 24-36 months would be needed (by issuing common equity to further increase dollar reserves even if this leads to the common equity trading at a discount to NAV) to make investors more comfortable with the idea that Strategy would not need to sell bitcoins in the foreseeable future.
What is the underlying issue? The primary issue is the rise of what JPMorgan refers to as “two-way risk.”
In the past, Strategy operated virtually solely as a Bitcoin buyer, continuously consuming supply whenever it raised new funds. However, under the new framework, the business can switch between buying and selling based on how much cash it needs.
The fact that Strategy is no longer assured of removing Bitcoin from the market—it might even turn into a source of supply when money is needed—introduces uncertainty.
What’s ahead? In fact, in one of the few times the company has sold Bitcoin for operational rather than portfolio adjustments. Even though the $1.25 billion authorized sale capacity only makes up a small portion of its total holdings, the psychological impact could be far greater than the volume of sales.
Unfortunately, these shifts occur at a time when the U.S. Spot Bitcoin ETFs are facing net withdrawals, and the price of Bitcoin is also struggling.
Henceforth, the only hope at this point is the approval of the CLARITY Act. It has the potential to restore market integrity and the price of Bitcoin, in turn improving the air surrounding Strategy.
Final Summary Instead of an actual warning, JP Morgan has suggested a higher coverage of 24-36 months for Strategy. Though the recent sell-off by Strategy was minimal, it has still induced fear and uncertainty in the market.
Spotové DOGE ETF přerušily devítidenní klid a zaznamenaly čistý odliv asi 871 000 USD, celý z Grayscale Dogecoin Trust ETF (GDOG). Přesto zůstává největším spotovým DOGE ETF s AUM kolem 6,92 milionu USD.
Nine Quiet Days, Then a Sharp ExitSpot Dogecoin ETFs broke a long stretch of inactivity on July 2, 2026, but not in a positive way. After nine consecutive trading days with no recorded flows, the sector logged approximately $871,000 in net outflows, according to data shared by @BSCNews.
The selling came entirely from @Grayscale's offering, the Grayscale Dogecoin Trust ETF (GDOG), which trades on NYSE Arca under that ticker. The shares trade on NYSE Arca under the symbol GDOG. Despite the capital exit, the fund retains its position as the largest spot $DOGE ETF by assets, with an AUM of approximately $6.92 million at the time of writing.
The trust was formed in January 2021 and commenced operations on January 30, 2025. Its registration statement was declared effective by the SEC on November 21, 2025, and shares began trading on NYSE Arca shortly after.
A Small but Growing Market Under PressureThe broader spot $DOGE ETF market remains modest compared to other crypto ETF categories. The structural shift began with the November 2025 launches of the Grayscale and Bitwise Dogecoin spot products, which slipped through during the US government shutdown via an automatic effectiveness process rather than a formal SEC sign-off, and was confirmed in January 2026 when 21Shares received the first direct SEC approval for a Dogecoin spot product (TDOG, listed on Nasdaq).
Three spot products collectively holding around $14.7 million in AUM is the institutional market voting with its wallet. That figure contrasts sharply with the multi-billion-dollar inflows that greeted spot Bitcoin and Ether ETFs in their early months. DOGE is now a listable, custodiable, regulated-wrapper asset, meaning compliance friction for offering it has collapsed. But the demand signal remains weak enough that desks should size DOGE exposure as a retail-engagement product rather than an institutional-flow story, at least until ETF AUM shows a sustained inflection.
For memecoins like Dogecoin, the road to sustained institutional adoption is still far from certain. For memecoins such as Dogecoin, episodic rallies may continue to be driven by retail enthusiasm and leveraged vehicles , rather than steady ETF-driven demand. Whether the second half of 2026 brings a reversal in flows, or a continued drift, will likely depend on broader altcoin sentiment and any renewed retail appetite for memecoin exposure.
Sources:
The Block: Grayscale Dogecoin ETF (GDOG) Status and Key Details
FinanceFeeds: Dogecoin ETF AUM and Utility Case, May 2026
StockTitan: Grayscale Dogecoin Trust ETF Q1 2026 10-Q Filing
The Canary Capital Hedera ETF (Nasdaq: HBR) recorded its largest single-day inflows in nearly seven weeks on July 2, pulling in $989,000 in net new capital. The figure marks the first inflows the product has seen since June 12 and comes close to matching the fund's previous high-water mark of $1.01 million, set on May 15.
The timing is notable. The U.S. spot ETF for $HBAR, launched by Canary Capital, had recorded zero investor inflows for multiple consecutive weeks as of late June 2026, with another week of no capital flows noted as recently as June 27. The July 2 reading breaks that run of silence and puts the fund back in positive territory, at least for now.
A Brief History of HBRCanary Capital launched the Canary HBAR ETF (Nasdaq: HBR), a U.S. exchange-traded fund providing spot exposure to $HBAR, the native token of the Hedera network, with the fund declared effective by the SEC and beginning trading on October 28, 2025. Unlike futures-based funds, HBR holds actual HBAR tokens in custody, making it the first-ever spot ETF offering direct exposure to HBAR.
The ETF currently holds 1.56% of $HBAR's circulating supply, according to data cited by @BSCNews. That figure has grown steadily since launch. As of late March 2026, the fund had accumulated 549 million HBAR, representing 1.3% of circulating supply and $93 million in total inflows.
Context and What to WatchThe brief return of inflows comes against a backdrop of mixed signals for the product. The prior stretch of stagnation contrasted with active flows into other altcoin ETFs, indicating a lack of fresh institutional capital specifically for HBAR.
On the regulatory front, the picture is more constructive. Hedera's regulatory position strengthened on March 17, 2026, when the SEC and CFTC jointly classified HBAR as a "digital commodity," removing major legal uncertainty. That foundation supports the 15 active spot ETF filings, including those from Grayscale and Bitwise, alongside the existing Canary product.
Whether July 2's inflows represent a turning point or a one-off remains to be seen. For now, the fund's holders will be watching closely to see if institutional interest can sustain itself through the summer.
Solana dosáhla nového maxima v oblasti RWA na 3,62 miliardy USD po růstu o více než 2 miliardy USD za 6 měsíců. Za posledních 30 dní přibylo do sítě asi 967 milionů USD, nejvíc ze všech blockchainů.
Solana's RWA ecosystem has reached another major milestone after climbing to a new all-time high of $3.62 billion in total value.
The network added more than $540 million in RWA value over the past 7 days alone, extending a growth trend that has accelerated throughout 2026. At the start of the year, Solana's RWA ecosystem stood at approximately $1.4 billion. In just 6 months, the network has added more than $2 billion in tokenized assets.
The latest milestone places Solana behind only Ethereum, which holds approximately $15.9 billion in RWAs, and BNB Chain, at roughly $3.9 billion.
Growth Continues Across Over the past 30 days, Solana's RWA market has grown by more than 33%, but the expansion extends well beyond asset value. The ecosystem now hosts 2,119 distinct RWAs and 292,818 RWA holders, reflecting continued growth in both the number of available products and user participation.
Tokenized financial products continue to attract new users, while existing issuers expand their offerings on the network.
Solana Leads 30D Capital Flows According to RWA.xyz data, Solana recorded approximately $967 million in net inflows over the past 30 days, the highest among all blockchain networks by a wide margin.
Ethereum moved in the opposite direction, recording approximately $202 million in net outflows during the same period.
The flow data indicates that new capital has increasingly favored Solana as institutions and issuers expand their onchain products.
Spiko Brings Native Tokenized Fund to Solana Part of that momentum comes from the continued arrival of institutional issuers. On July 2, Spiko officially launched on Solana, becoming the first European issuer to deploy natively on the network.
Spiko is one of the world's largest real-world asset issuers and one of the fastest-growing tokenized fund platforms in history. Its flagship product, the Spiko Amundi Overnight Swap Fund (SAFO), is managed by Amundi, Europe's largest asset manager with €2.4 trillion in assets under management.
Investors can mint, transfer, and redeem fund shares directly onchain, with subscriptions and redemptions settled in Circle's stablecoins.
SAFO is a UCITS-compliant money market fund that offers overnight liquidity while targeting yields above risk-free benchmarks. The launch expands the availability of institutional-grade investment products on Solana and demonstrates growing confidence in blockchain-based financial infrastructure.
With more than $2 billion added in just 6 months, record capital inflows, and increasing participation from major financial institutions, Solana continues to establish itself as one of the leading blockchain networks for real-world asset tokenization. The latest all-time high of $3.62 billion highlights the pace at which traditional finance and blockchain infrastructure continue to converge.
Read More on SolanaFloor Crypto Projects Pivot From Tokens to Equity as KAST and Claynosaurz Challenge the Traditional Playbook
Solana Breaks Records Across Trading, Revenue, and Transactions in Q2 2026
SOL vyskočil na 30denní maximum 83 USD díky růstu tokenizovaných aktiv, stablecoinové likvidity a návratu memecoinů na Solaně. Zájem o pákové longy ale prudce ochladl.
Solana’s tokenized assets and memecoin revival drove SOL to a 30-day high at $83.Bullish leveraged appetite cooled sharply, suggesting traders are hesitant to bet on further gains to $90.Solana’s SOL token jumped to its highest mark in over 30 days on Friday at $83, marking a decoupling from the altcoin market. SOL’s rally gained steam from a surge in tokenized trading volume on Solana, inflows of stablecoin liquidity, and an unexpected comeback in memecoin activity. Can SOL reclaim the $90 level?
Total altcoin market capitalization, USD (left) vs. SOL/USD (right). Source: TradingView
SOL’s bullish momentum ignited on June 23, coinciding with cumulative tokenized stock transfers on Solana surpassing $10 billion. The launch of SpaceX shares trading by Backpack propelled Solana’s decentralized finance (DeFi) utilization. In contrast, the broader altcoin market extended its downtrend, hitting the lowest level since December 2023.
30-day tokenized assets net flows ex-stablecoins, USD. Source: RWA.xyz
Tokenized assets on the Solana network surged to a record-high $3.5 billion on Wednesday, up from $2.7 billion one month prior. The recent boost came from corporate credit tokens and stock market indexes, such as the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq-100. According to RWA.xyz data, Solana leads with 294,274 active addresses in the tokenized industry, followed by Ethereum with 204,955.
Memecoins, prediction markets surge may push SOL toward $90The airdrop of The Black Bull (ANSEM) memecoin on Sunday re-ignited interest in the sector. The token, launched on Pump.fun, reached a $60 million market capitalization on Tuesday. The anonymous developer directed some 65% of the supply to the crypto influencer Ansem’s public wallet. The distribution lacked transparency, but involved 74,000 addresses over the initial 3 days.
Top 7-day performances of Solana tokens. Source: CoinRanking
Multiple memecoins on Solana surged on the back of the memecoin airdrop, but the biggest winner was the Pump.fun platform token (PUMP). The 27% weekly gains were enough to send PUMP back into the top-100 crypto rankings, with a $630 million market capitalization. ANSEM memecoin extended its gains on Friday, reaching an all-time high market capitalization of $112 million.
The launch of World prediction markets integrated on Phantom wallet has created expectations for increased Solana activity. The project gathered nearly $890,000 in total value locked in two days and aims to compete with the extremely successful Polymarket amid the World Cup betting frenzy. Jupiter has also unveiled its prediction markets under beta test on June 29.
SOL perpetual futures annualized funding rate. Source: Laevitas
The appetite for bullish leveraged positions has vastly declined since Wednesday, when SOL’s price crossed above $75 for the first time in 30 days. SOL futures annualized funding rate dropped to 3% on Friday from an 11% peak two days prior. Under neutral conditions, the indicator should range from 6% to 12% to offset the capital cost.
Investors are not comfortable betting on a SOL rally to $90 merely on the back of a temporary memecoin demand surge. Unless there is sustainable demand for blockchain activity, there are no apparent drivers for SOL to further widen its performance gap relative to the remaining altcoins.
This article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph's Editorial Policy and is intended for informational purposes only. It does not constitute investment advice or recommendations. All investments and trades carry risk; readers are encouraged to conduct independent research.
Securitize v rámci IPO tokenizovala na Solaně vlastní akcie za 295 milionů USD a stala se první veřejně obchodovanou firmou, která k tomuto kroku přistoupila. Jde o další signál rostoucího přijetí blockchainu v tradičních financích.
Securitize, an SEC-registered firm backed by BlackRock, has made headlines by becoming the first publicly traded company to tokenize its stock on the Solana blockchain at its initial public offering. The company tokenized $295 million of its own NYSE-listed stock, marking a significant milestone in the convergence of traditional equity markets with blockchain technology. This move is part of a broader trend, as Solana’s real-world asset ecosystem has surged in growth, now settling $644 million in equity volume and attracting major players like Franklin Templeton and Fidelity.
Market participants appear to view this development as consistent with increased demand for Solana’s native token, SOL, which is currently priced around $82. The tokenization represents a boost to Solana’s credibility and utility, potentially driving the price towards the $90 mark. The market for Solana price predictions in July reflects this sentiment, with the likelihood of reaching $90 currently priced at 62.5% YES.
Advertisement
This development may also indicate a shift in the financial sector’s adoption of blockchain technology, as more traditional institutions explore the possibilities offered by decentralized platforms. The presence of major financial entities in Solana’s ecosystem further underscores this transition.
Key Takeaways Securitize’s tokenization of $295 million in NYSE-listed stock on Solana appears to enhance Solana’s credibility in financial markets. Market pricing suggests participants are increasingly supportive of SOL reaching $90 in July, with current odds at 62.5% YES. The involvement of major financial players like Franklin Templeton and Fidelity indicates a growing institutional interest in Solana’s blockchain infrastructure. What to Watch Observers will be keen to see if Solana’s ecosystem continues to attract institutional interest, potentially driving further price increases. Key developments to monitor include any technical advancements within Solana, changes in regulatory landscapes, and shifts in market sentiment towards blockchain adoption. Additionally, any significant changes in SOL’s volume or price support levels could provide further indications of market direction.
Get prediction market intelligence as a structured API feed. Early access waitlist.
Term Structure
Contract Odds Δ since publish Volume 24h August 1 2026 62.5% — — View market → August 1 2026 1.1% — — View market → August 1 2026 0.3% — — View market → August 1 2026 5.5% — — View market → August 1 2026 4% — — View market → August 1 2026 1.1% — — View market → August 1 2026 29% — — View market →
MEXC zařadila na spotový trh výnosový token navázaný na Ondo Finance, čímž rozšiřuje přístup k tokenizovaným výnosovým produktům. Krok odráží rostoucí poptávku po tokenizovaných Treasury produktech.
Tokenized yield products are continuing to move toward retail-facing crypto venues. MEXC has listed an Ondo Finance-linked yield asset on its spot market, giving traders another route into the growing market for blockchain-based exposure to traditional income products.
The listing matters because Ondo has become one of the more visible names in the real-world asset sector, especially around tokenized Treasury-style products. For exchanges, adding these assets is a way to meet demand for yield products that sit somewhere between DeFi and traditional fixed-income exposure.
For more details, visit the official Chainwire platform.
TL;DR MEXC has listed an Ondo-linked tokenized yield asset on its spot market.The listing reflects growing demand for tokenized real-world asset products.Yield-bearing tokens still carry product, liquidity, and counterparty risks that traders need to understand. Tokenized Yield Keeps Moving Into Exchanges The RWA narrative has matured from a niche DeFi theme into one of crypto’s most persistent institutional stories. Tokenized Treasury products, yield-bearing stablecoin alternatives, and on-chain money-market style assets have all attracted attention because they connect crypto rails with familiar sources of yield.
An exchange listing does not automatically make these products simple. It does, however, make them more visible. Retail traders who may not interact directly with protocol interfaces can encounter tokenized yield through the same venues they already use for spot trading.
The Risk Is Different From A Standard Token The key distinction is that yield-bearing tokenized assets are not just speculative crypto tokens. Their performance can depend on the structure of the underlying asset, issuer policies, redemption mechanisms, market liquidity, and interest-rate conditions.
For NewsBTC readers, the clean takeaway is that tokenized yield is becoming more accessible, but not risk-free. The expansion of listings may help the sector grow, but it also puts more responsibility on exchanges and issuers to explain exactly what holders are buying.
RWAs Keep Finding Distribution One reason tokenized Treasury products have gained traction is that they give crypto users a familiar on-chain wrapper around a familiar traditional asset category. That makes them easier to understand than many purely experimental DeFi products.
Distribution is now the next battleground. Protocols can build tokenized yield products, but exchanges and wallets decide how many users actually see them. A listing on a venue such as MEXC can increase visibility, liquidity, and speculative interest around the product.
Still, the category needs careful handling. If users treat a yield-bearing RWA token like a standard spot altcoin, they may miss the risks that sit underneath the yield mechanism.
Ondo’s broader significance comes from the fact that tokenized Treasuries have become one of the few crypto categories with a clear real-world benchmark. Traders can debate valuations, but the underlying demand for on-chain yield products is no longer theoretical.
The cleaner takeaway is to treat this as a specific development inside DeFi, not as a blanket prediction for the whole market. It gives readers a concrete data point to watch while keeping the limits of the story clear.
This article is based on information from Chainwire.
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
Hyperliquid s HIP-3 a HIP-4 rozšířil obchodování o tvůrci nasazované perpetuals a outcome trhy. HIP-3 už od 13. října 2025 umožňuje tokenizované akcie a komodity, HIP-4 přidává predikční trhy a další event kontrakty bez tokenového hlasování.
Two protocol upgrades turned Hyperliquid from a crypto perpetuals exchange into something closer to an operating system for markets. HIP-3 lets anyone with enough staked HYPE launch a perpetuals exchange for stocks, oil, or gold. HIP-4 adds prediction markets that settle without a token vote. Here is how both work, what they have built so far, and where the risks sit.
Hyperliquid spent its first two years being described as the fastest decentralized perpetuals exchange in crypto. The description was accurate and incomplete. Since late 2025, the network has been executing a more ambitious plan: turning its core trading infrastructure into a platform that other builders deploy markets on top of, the way developers deploy apps on cloud infrastructure. Grayscale Research made the comparison explicit in a June 2026 note, writing that Hyperliquid now looks less like a stock exchange and more like Amazon Web Services.
Two upgrades carry that transformation. HIP-3, live on mainnet since October 13, 2025, opened perpetual futures listing to outside builders and brought tokenized stocks, commodities, and indices onto the platform at scale. HIP-4, live since May 2, 2026, added a second market primitive built for prediction markets and other event contracts. Together they explain why seven of the top ten markets by volume on a crypto exchange are now things like Nvidia stock and gold, and why the platform is picking a direct fight with Polymarket and Kalshi.
This guide walks through what each proposal does, how the mechanics work, what has happened since launch, and what can still go wrong.
First, the basics: what a HIP is Hyperliquid is a layer 1 blockchain built around a fully on-chain central limit order book. Its core engine, HyperCore, processes around 200,000 orders per second and handles matching, margining, and liquidations for every market on the chain. A separate component, the HyperEVM, runs Ethereum-style smart contracts on the same consensus layer. The native token, HYPE, secures the network through staking, pays fees, and absorbs most protocol revenue through a continuous buyback program. Cumulative protocol revenue passed $1 billion in late June 2026, with an annualized run rate near $840 million.
Changes to the protocol arrive through Hyperliquid Improvement Proposals, or HIPs, which the community debates and HYPE stakers weigh in on before the core contributors ship the code. The first two set the pattern. HIP-1 created the standard for launching spot tokens, with ticker slots sold through recurring Dutch auctions, so listing a token became a market process instead of an application form. HIP-2 added a protocol-native liquidity mechanism that seeds order books for new tokens automatically, solving the empty-book problem that kills most new listings on other venues. Both dealt with spot markets, and both introduced ideas that return later: auctions as the allocation mechanism for scarce listing slots, and protocol-level guarantees standing behind builder-created markets. The third and fourth proposals took those ideas after the two bigger prizes: perpetual futures on everything, and event contracts on anything.
HIP-3: builder-deployed perpetuals Before HIP-3, listing a new perpetual market on Hyperliquid worked the way it works on most exchanges: the core team decided. That created a bottleneck and a gatekeeper, two things the platform’s own community had complained about as the asset universe stayed narrow while demand for stock and commodity exposure grew.
HIP-3, called Builder-Deployed Perpetuals, removed the gatekeeper. Since October 2025, any builder who stakes 500,000 HYPE can deploy an independent perpetuals exchange on HyperCore, without core team approval. At current prices near $64, that stake represents roughly $32 million, a number that matters for reasons covered below.
The deployer controls nearly everything about their market. They choose the assets, the oracle that sets the mark price, the collateral token, margin requirements, leverage limits, funding parameters, and the front-end experience. The first three assets in any HIP-3 exchange deploy without an auction. Additional assets go through a Dutch auction shared across all HIP-3 deployers, similar to the HIP-1 ticker auctions.
What the deployer does not control is the plumbing. HIP-3 markets inherit the full HyperCore stack: the same matching engine, the same order types, the same margining and liquidation logic, and the same solvency guarantees as the validator-operated markets. A trader interacting with a builder-deployed market gets the same execution quality as on the flagship crypto perps.
The economic design has three pillars:
The stake is a bond, not just a ticket. The 500,000 HYPE can be slashed if the deployer misbehaves, for example by manipulating an oracle or breaking market rules, and the requirement holds for 30 days even after a deployer halts all markets. Fees split down the middle. HIP-3 markets charge users twice the fee of validator-operated perps, and the deployer keeps 50%. The protocol collects the same revenue per trade either way, so builder markets grow the pie without cannibalizing it. Cross margin has eligibility standards. Validators only allow cross margin on HIP-3 assets with sufficient observable liquidity, a reliable external oracle, and resistance to price manipulation, and any 50% intraday move in the reference price triggers a review. The design goal is alignment: builders with $32 million at stake and a 50% revenue share have every reason to run clean, liquid, well-oracled markets, and a slashing mechanism waits for the ones who do not.
What HIP-3 actually built The proposal would be a footnote if nobody used it. The opposite happened. The first market, a synthetic Nasdaq-style index called XYZ100, went live within days of activation. Its deployer, TradeXYZ, then built out United States equities including Nvidia, Tesla, Google, and Amazon, plus gold and silver contracts benchmarked to COMEX front-month futures, and later secured official licensing rights to the S&P 500 ticker, a landmark moment for a DeFi protocol.
The numbers followed. Open interest across HIP-3 markets passed $1.43 billion within months of launch. By spring 2026, seven of Hyperliquid’s top ten markets by volume were tokenized equities or commodities, not crypto pairs. During the West Asia crisis earlier this year, when traditional commodity venues closed for the weekend, traders moved to Hyperliquid to trade oil, gold, and silver around the clock, and HIP-3 markets drove up to 40% of the platform’s total volume. Non-crypto assets showed 60% trader retention in late March, a signal that around-the-clock access to traditional markets is a durable product, not a novelty. At peak HIP-3 activity the platform generated $2.3 million in daily fees, funding $11 million in HYPE buybacks.
Other deployers took different angles. Kinetiq built around its liquid staking token. Liminal used HIP-3 markets to run fully on-chain delta-neutral yield strategies across equities, FX, and commodities, including markets collateralized with yield-bearing assets like Ethena’s USDe. In June, Hyperliquid and TradeXYZ launched the FOMO app, a single interface for trading equities, pre-IPO stocks, crypto, indices, and commodities. Access also spread through consumer wallets: HIP-3 markets can be traded through any Hyperliquid-compatible front end, including Phantom.
The listing economics also flipped in a way worth pausing on. Under the old model, and on centralized exchanges generally, a new asset waits for an exchange’s business development calendar, and projects have long complained about the cost and opacity of the process. Under HIP-3, listing latency collapsed from a governance or negotiation timeline to a deployment transaction plus an auction, and the gatekeeping moved from relationships to capital. A pre-launch project that wants a perpetual market for hedging no longer needs a major venue’s blessing; it needs a deployer willing to run the market. Comparable systems show how unusual this is: dYdX v4 still routes every new market through a governance vote with a week or two of latency, and GMX listings run through its core team. Hyperliquid is the first chain-level implementation where market creation itself carries no approval step.
The concentration is the caveat. TradeXYZ accounts for more than 90% of all HIP-3 open interest, and Blockworks Research has flagged the deployer economics as a structural risk: with a roughly $30 million lockup, auction costs, and stiff competition, a smaller deployer’s break-even period can stretch to four years. Blockworks has proposed lowering the stake for small builders and letting them keep 100% of revenue until they recover their costs. Hyperliquid’s own documentation says the 500,000 HYPE threshold is expected to fall as the infrastructure matures. Until it does, HIP-3 is permissionless in principle and an oligopoly in practice.
HIP-4: outcome markets HIP-3 covered continuous markets, things with a price that moves all day. It could not cleanly handle discrete events. A perpetual future needs an oracle that updates continuously with limits of roughly 1% deviation per update, a design suited to leveraged trading on a live price and incompatible with questions that jump from uncertainty to a hard answer in one instant, like an election call or an inflation print.
HIP-4, announced on February 2, 2026 and live on mainnet since May 2, added a purpose-built primitive for exactly that. Outcome markets are fully collateralized contracts that settle to exactly 0 or 1 at expiry. Each market has two sides, typically Yes and No, and the order books for the two sides are merged: an order to buy Yes at a price of 0.62 is the same order as one to sell No at 0.38, so all liquidity concentrates in one book. Positions are collateralized in USDH, the network’s native stablecoin, and because every position is fully backed, there is no liquidation risk.
The market lifecycle has a distinctive opening. Each new outcome market starts with a single-price clearing auction lasting around 15 minutes, during which traders submit limit orders but nothing executes. The auction clears at the price that matches the most volume, and unfilled orders roll into continuous trading on the standard order book. The mechanism exists to concentrate early liquidity and produce a fair opening price instead of a thin, gappy first print. It borrows a page from how traditional exchanges open trading each morning, which is fitting for a protocol that keeps hiring ideas from the market structure it wants to replace.
The architecture runs natively inside HyperCore, sharing the matching engine, order types, and throughput of every other market on the chain. That matters for one under-discussed reason: liquidity providers can quote prediction markets with the same tooling and speed they use on perps, instead of the bespoke market-making setups that thinner prediction venues require. Deep books were always the missing ingredient on long-tail event markets, and Hyperliquid’s bet is that professional liquidity follows familiar infrastructure.
The fee structure is openly aggressive. Opening or minting an outcome position costs nothing. Fees apply only on closing, burning, or settling, and makers pay zero. That pricing targets Polymarket and Kalshi, which processed a combined $44.8 billion in June on the back of the World Cup, and the community reaction at announcement made the intent plain. When the proposal dropped in February, crypto.news covered the market pricing in exactly that ambition, with traders framing HIP-4 as Hyperliquid trying to house all of finance.
Initial markets are curated and validator-deployed, starting with recurring daily Bitcoin price threshold contracts that reset each day, run by the prediction platform Outcomexyz. Planned categories include politics, sports, macro data releases, crypto events, and entertainment. A later phase opens permissionless deployment: builders will stake 1,000,000 HYPE per market slot, slashable and burned if validators find oracle manipulation, invalid state transitions, or prolonged downtime. One slot supports rolling and recurring markets, recycling after each settlement.
Settlement without a token vote The deepest difference between HIP-4 and the incumbent on-chain prediction markets is not fees. It is how truth gets decided.
Polymarket outsources contested resolutions to UMA’s optimistic oracle, where token holders vote on disputed outcomes, an architecture that has produced repeated controversies in 2026, including a $60 million market on a Strategy Bitcoin sale that resolved against the documented facts. The full mechanics and failure modes of that system are covered in our companion guide to how prediction markets resolve.
HIP-4 replaces the token vote with the chain itself. Settlement runs through Hyperliquid’s validator set executing automated resolution against pre-specified, objective data sources. There is no dispute window, no escalation, and no path for a token holder with a position in the market to also vote on its outcome. The trade-off is scope: deterministic settlement works for objective questions with a clean data source, which is why the first markets are price thresholds. Ambiguous questions, the kind that generate the worst oracle disputes elsewhere, are exactly the kind HIP-4’s design avoids listing.
What all of this looks like from the trader’s side For a user, the machinery above mostly disappears. HIP-3 markets sit in the same interface as the flagship crypto perps, trade through the same API, and settle against the same margin account. A trader shorting gold on a builder-deployed market places the order the same way they would short Ethereum, and the differences show up in three places worth knowing.
Fees are higher on builder markets. The headline rate on a HIP-3 perp is twice the validator-operated rate, which at base tiers works out to roughly 3 and 9 basis points for makers and takers before discounts, with the deployer keeping half. Staking discounts, referral rebates, and collateral-based reductions still apply on top, so an active HYPE staker narrows the gap considerably.
Oracle quality varies by deployer. On validator-operated markets, the network itself maintains the price feed. On a HIP-3 market, the deployer chooses and operates the oracle, which is why the mark price on a weekend oil contract can drift from where Monday’s COMEX open eventually prints. During the West Asia crisis, Hyperliquid’s oil market traded on its own oracle through days when no traditional reference price existed at all. That independence is the product and the risk in one feature.
Collateral differs by market. Most markets margin in stablecoins, but HIP-3 supports alternative collateral where the deployer enables it, including yield-bearing assets, and HIP-4 outcome positions collateralize in USDH. Settlement demand for outcome markets flows through the stablecoin into the same fee-and-buyback loop that already routes nearly all protocol revenue toward HYPE, which is why analysts treat HIP-4 volume as a direct token catalyst rather than a side business.
The practical entry points have multiplied too. Beyond the native app, HIP-3 and HIP-4 markets surface through Phantom, through the FOMO app for the equities lineup, and through any front end built on the public API, since every builder market shares the unified HyperCore order flow.
The risk column Every part of the story above has a counterweight, and an honest explainer lists them.
Deployer concentration is the loudest one. A permissionless system where one builder holds 90% of open interest has recreated a gatekeeper one level up, and the $32 million entry stake keeps it that way for now. Regulatory exposure is the second. Hyperliquid operates without KYC in most of the world, the United Kingdom’s FCA has declared the platform unauthorized, and pending United States market structure legislation could either validate or constrain synthetic stock perpetuals, a product category regulators have barely begun to examine. Institutional ceilings are the third: a June JPMorgan report saw limited institutional demand for perpetual futures generally, citing unbounded basis risk and missing clearing protections, which matters for a token whose valuation leans on volume growth. And the products themselves are dangerous instruments. Leveraged perpetuals on any underlying can liquidate a position in minutes, and cross margin across markets adds its own failure modes.
There is a subtler risk in the oracle layer that the slashing design only partially covers. A deployer’s oracle is a single point of interpretation for its markets, and unusual conditions expose the gap: when traditional venues close and a HIP-3 commodity market keeps trading, the mark price is whatever the deployer’s methodology says it is, with no external reference to check against until markets reopen. Validators review any 50% intraday reference move and slashing punishes proven manipulation, but a subtly mispriced weekend, honest or otherwise, transfers money between longs and shorts without tripping any threshold. Traders in builder markets are underwriting oracle methodology whether they think about it or not.
None of that has slowed the platform yet. Hyperliquid controls an estimated 70% of on-chain perpetuals volume, spot HYPE ETFs drew $111 million in inflows in late June while Bitcoin and Ethereum funds bled, and the ecosystem is spending on the long game, including a $29 million policy center in Washington. Whether the moat holds is a different question from whether it exists.
The bigger picture for L1 competition HIP-3 and HIP-4 also reframe what layer 1 blockchains compete on. Ethereum and Solana fight over DeFi liquidity, users, and fees, a race with its own 2026 scoreboard. Hyperliquid opted out of the general-purpose contest and vertically integrated one thing: markets. The bet is that an exchange-shaped blockchain with permissionless market creation captures more value than a general-purpose chain hosting exchange apps. dYdX tried a dedicated appchain with governance-gated listings. GMX built on someone else’s layer 2. Hyperliquid is the first to make market creation itself permissionless at the chain layer, and the early evidence, an order of magnitude expansion in what can be traded on-chain, suggests the design space was bigger than the industry assumed.
What to watch from here Three markers will tell the story over the next year. First, whether the HIP-3 stake requirement drops and the deployer set widens beyond one dominant builder. Second, whether HIP-4 volume becomes measurable against Polymarket and Kalshi once permissionless deployment opens and categories expand past crypto prices. Third, whether regulators treat builder-deployed stock perpetuals as an innovation to license or a loophole to close. The upgrades themselves are shipped and working. The open question, as always in this industry, is what survives contact with scale.
Frequently asked questions What is Hyperliquid HIP-3? HIP-3, called Builder-Deployed Perpetuals, is a Hyperliquid protocol upgrade live since October 13, 2025. It lets any builder who stakes 500,000 HYPE deploy an independent perpetual futures exchange on HyperCore, choosing the assets, oracle, collateral, and fee capture, while inheriting Hyperliquid’s matching engine, margining, and liquidation systems. It moved market listing from a core team decision to a permissionless, stake-secured process.
What is Hyperliquid HIP-4? HIP-4 is the outcome markets upgrade, announced February 2, 2026 and live on mainnet since May 2, 2026. It adds fully collateralized event contracts that settle to exactly 0 or 1 at expiry, with merged Yes and No order books, USDH collateral, no liquidation risk, and zero fees to open a position. It is Hyperliquid’s entry into prediction markets.
How much does it cost to deploy a HIP-3 market? A deployer must stake 500,000 HYPE, worth roughly $32 million at current prices near $64. The stake is slashable for misconduct and must be held for 30 days even after all of the deployer’s markets are halted. The first three assets deploy without an auction; additional assets go through a shared Dutch auction. Documentation says the threshold should fall over time.
What can you trade on HIP-3 markets? Builder-deployed markets cover tokenized United States equities such as Nvidia, Tesla, Google, and Amazon, index products including a licensed S&P 500 contract and the Nasdaq-style XYZ100, commodities such as gold, silver, and oil benchmarked to COMEX and other references, FX, and long-tail crypto assets. Seven of Hyperliquid’s top ten markets by volume are now non-crypto assets.
How does HIP-4 settlement differ from Polymarket? Polymarket resolves contested markets through UMA’s optimistic oracle, where token holders vote on disputed outcomes. HIP-4 settlement is deterministic: Hyperliquid’s validator set resolves each contract against a pre-specified objective data source, with no dispute window and no token vote. The design avoids governance attacks but limits markets to questions with clean, objective answers.
Who is TradeXYZ? TradeXYZ is the dominant HIP-3 deployer, accounting for more than 90% of builder-deployed open interest. It launched the first HIP-3 market, the XYZ100 index, built out the equities and commodities lineup, secured S&P 500 ticker licensing, and co-launched the FOMO trading app with Hyperliquid in June 2026. Its dominance is also the center of the deployer concentration debate.
Is trading on Hyperliquid safe? The protocol has strong solvency engineering and a clean track record on its core markets, but the products are high-risk by nature. Leveraged perpetuals can liquidate quickly, HIP-3 markets depend on each deployer’s oracle quality, the UK’s FCA lists the platform as unauthorized, and synthetic stock perpetuals sit in a regulatory gray zone. Position sizing and jurisdiction checks matter.
Does HIP-4 have liquidation risk? No. Outcome positions are fully collateralized in USDH at purchase, so the maximum loss is the amount paid for the position and no liquidation engine is involved. That distinguishes outcome markets from perpetuals, where leverage means positions can be forcibly closed. The risk in outcome markets is being wrong about the event, or holding through a settlement data error.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Digital asset markets are volatile and you can lose your entire investment. Always do your own research. Information current as of July 3, 2026.
Strategy držela ke konci června 2026 847 363 BTC za zhruba 64,1 miliardy USD. Při průměrné nákupní ceně 75 651 USD za minci má nyní asi 14 miliard USD nerealizované ztráty.
Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) held 847,363 BTC as of late June 2026, acquired for approximately $64.1 billion at an average cost basis of $75,651 per coin, making it the largest corporate holder. Bitcoin’s 52% decline from its October 2025 peak of $126,080 exposed the leverage embedded in Saylor’s treasury model, with Strategy reporting a $12.5 billion loss in Q1 2026 alone. Strategy raised $25.3 billion in 2025 through equity offerings and preferred stock instruments, including STRF, STRK, STRC, and STRD, making it the largest U.S. equity issuer that year. Michael Saylor broke his longstanding pledge never to sell Bitcoin when the company made its first-ever BTC liquidation in May 2026, signaling a shift in operational flexibility. JPMorgan warned in July 2026 that Strategy’s concentrated buying could increase volatility, and any forced liquidation could have an outsized impact on Bitcoin’s overall price dynamics. Few corporate strategies have generated more debate than Michael Saylor’s transformation of Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) into what he calls a Bitcoin Treasury Company. Since buying its first 21,454 BTC in August 2020, Strategy has accumulated more Bitcoin than any public company or government, SEC filings show.
With 847,363 BTC as of late June 2026, it controls over 4% of Bitcoin’s total supply, StealthEX confirms. But Bitcoin’s steep decline from its October 2025 peak has raised questions about sustainability. This article examines the mechanics, rewards, risks, and how Saylor’s strategy fits the broader crypto ecosystem.
How the Treasury Model Works Strategy’s approach is built on a capital markets flywheel. The company raises capital through at-the-market (ATM) equity offerings, convertible debt, and perpetual preferred stock, and uses the proceeds to purchase Bitcoin. The company’s Q1 2026 SEC filing disclosed that it held 818,334 BTC as of May 3, 2026, reflecting 22% year-to-date growth. The company raised $11.68 billion in that same period.
Strategy measures performance using a proprietary metric called BTC Yield, which tracks the increase in Bitcoin holdings relative to diluted shares outstanding. The company reported 9.4% BTC Yield year-to-date through Q1 2026.
Michael Saylor has described the strategy as stretching Bitcoin from a nonyielding asset into a capital-markets engine, CoinDesk reported at an April 2026 Mizuho event. Strategy’s preferred stock product STRC carries an 11.5% yield, which the company considers well below Bitcoin’s expected long-term appreciation rate.
The BTC Yield metric obscures a critical dynamic: it measures Bitcoin accumulation relative to diluted shares, but dilution itself has been extreme. Fortune reported in February 2026 that Strategy’s Class A common shares outstanding grew from 76 million in mid-2020 to approximately 314 million by February 2026, an increase of 313%.
No other major U.S. company has diluted shareholders at anywhere near this rate. This means existing shareholders are receiving more Bitcoin per share, but each share represents a smaller piece of the overall company.
The Risks Materializing in 2026 Bitcoin hit an all-time high of $126,080 in October 2025, and by late June 2026, it had fallen over 52% to approximately $58,500. With an average cost basis of approximately $75,651, Strategy has roughly $14 billion in unrealized losses at current prices.
In May 2026, Saylor broke his longstanding pledge never to sell Bitcoin. Strategy executed its first-ever BTC liquidation, a small sale relative to total holdings, BYDFi reported. The sale was modest, but it shattered the narrative of unconditional accumulation that had underpinned investor confidence.
JPMorgan issued a warning in early July 2026 that Strategy’s concentrated buying could lead to increased volatility and market instability, Phemex reported. The bank cautioned that any liquidation could have outsized impacts on Bitcoin’s price.
Broader pressure compounded: $2.8 billion left spot Bitcoin ETFs in nine consecutive sessions through late May 2026, the longest withdrawal streak since their 2024 debut, Axios reported.
The Reward Case: What Has Worked Despite the drawdown, Saylor’s strategy created significant value over its five-year run. Strategy’s stock appreciated over 1,000% from pre-Bitcoin levels at the peak. The model inspired copycat treasury strategies, including Strive, whose CEO Matt Cole disclosed 14,557 BTC as of April 2026, CoinDesk reported.
Saylor’s thesis received indirect validation from the U.S. government. The White House announced a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, lending government weight to the argument that Bitcoin can sit alongside gold on national balance sheets.
At the Bitcoin 2026 conference, Saylor argued that as capital flows into the Bitcoin network, the price should increase, and outlined conditions under which Bitcoin could eventually reach $10 million per coin.
TD Securities maintained a buy rating on Strategy with a $500 price target, citing the company’s $2.25 billion cash reserve as a buffer against a prolonged crypto winter, The Block reported. Understanding the interplay between Bitcoin treasury strategies and broader market dynamics is essential for evaluating whether the reward thesis still holds.
Regulatory Implications Strategy faces regulatory scrutiny on multiple fronts, and the SEC has reviewed its accounting under ASU 2023-08, which requires fair-value measurement and recognizes price changes in net income.
Strategy urged MSCI to reject a proposal to bar companies with over 50% of their assets in crypto from equity benchmarks. Pending U.S. market structure legislation could reshape how corporate Bitcoin treasuries are reported.
What’s Next? Strategy’s near-term trajectory is tethered to Bitcoin’s price. If Bitcoin recovers toward its cost basis, the model’s leverage amplifies gains. If it declines further, the company faces growing pressure on its preferred stock dividends and potential credit downgrades. Saylor’s 42/42 Plan aims to raise $84 billion over two years to continue accumulating Bitcoin, TradingKey reported.
Whether capital markets remain willing to fund that ambition at current prices is the central question. Projections about Bitcoin’s future price are speculative and should not be treated as forecasts. The leveraged model carries the risk of substantial loss if sustained weakness forces sales at depressed prices.
FAQs How much Bitcoin does Strategy own?
Strategy held 847,363 BTC as of late June 2026, acquired for approximately $64.1 billion at an average cost basis of $75,651, representing more than 4% of total supply.
What is BTC Yield?
BTC Yield is Strategy’s proprietary metric measuring the percentage increase in Bitcoin holdings per diluted share, designed to show value creation for shareholders over time.
Has Michael Saylor ever sold Bitcoin?
Yes, Strategy executed its first-ever Bitcoin sale in May 2026, breaking Saylor’s longstanding pledge never to sell, though the amount was small relative to total holdings.
What is the 42/42 Plan?
The 42/42 Plan is Strategy’s goal to raise $84 billion over two years through equity and debt offerings to fund continued Bitcoin accumulation at unprecedented institutional scale.
What risks does Strategy’s model face?
Key risks include Bitcoin price declines below cost basis, extreme shareholder dilution, preferred stock dividend obligations, potential forced liquidation, and regulatory or accounting changes.
What did JPMorgan warn about Strategy?
JPMorgan warned in July 2026 that Strategy’s concentrated Bitcoin buying could increase market volatility and that any forced liquidation could disproportionately impact Bitcoin’s price.
Is Strategy’s Bitcoin strategy financial advice?
No, Strategy’s model is a corporate treasury strategy with substantial leverage and concentration risk that may not be appropriate for individual investors with different risk profiles.
References Strategy Inc. “Q1 2026 Financial Results 8-K Filing.” SEC. https://www.sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/0001050446/000105044626000024/mstr-20260505x8kxex991.htm CoinDesk. “Michael Saylor Says Bitcoin Has Likely Bottomed.” April 2026. https://www.coindesk.com/markets/2026/04/08/michael-saylor-says-bitcoin-has-likely-bottomed-quantum-risk-overblown Fortune. “When Bitcoin Prices Turned Against Michael Saylor.” February 2026. https://fortune.com/2026/02/20/michael-saylor-bitcoin-prices-preferred-shares-dilution-strategy/ Axios. “Bitcoin Faces Mounting Pressure Beyond Strategy Sale.” June 2026. https://www.axios.com/2026/06/03/bitcoin-saylor-strategy-stocks
Americké spotové Bitcoin ETF po deseti dnech odlivů otočily trend a přilákaly čistý příliv 221,7 milionu dolarů. Hlavní zásluhu měl Fidelity s asi 166 miliony, zatímco BlackRock IBIT dál zaznamenal odliv 40,4 milionu dolarů.
After ten consecutive sessions of capital outflows, US spot Bitcoin ETFs have finally regained momentum with 221.7 million dollars of net subscriptions. This rebound ends a historic sequence of disengagement that had weakened institutional investors’ sentiment. Is this the first sign of a sustainable capital return or just a pause in an still fragile trend ? Behind this recovery lie major divergences between issuers and on-chain indicators, which invites to temper the significance of this rebound.
In Brief Bitcoin ETFs end ten consecutive sessions of capital outflows thanks to 221.7 million dollars of net inflows, a first positive signal for the market. The rebound remains mixed, with Fidelity carrying the bulk of subscriptions while BlackRock continues to record significant withdrawals. On-chain data shows that long-term investors continue their accumulation, despite hesitations observed on the ETF side. The confirmation of a true turnaround will now depend on several consecutive days of capital inflows and broader participation of major issuers. Bitcoin ETFs regain positive flows after ten days of capital outflows The US spot Bitcoin ETF market has recorded a break in its outflow momentum. Data compiled at the close of the July 2 session reveal the following accounting elements :
A reversal of net flows : regulated financial products captured a total net inflow of 221.7 million dollars, breaking a ten-session consecutive withdrawal streak ; Fidelity (FBTC) dominance : the fund managed by asset manager Fidelity carried most of the recovery, recording net inflows of about 166 million dollars on its own ; A negative streak in June : this technical performance comes immediately after the worst month ever for US spot ETFs, with June 2026 ending with about 4.5 billion dollars of cumulative net outflows. This sudden liquidity injection marks a statistical break from the massive outflows that heavily damaged short-term investor confidence. The surge led by Fidelity shows there is responsive demand and that some traders were ready to inject liquidity as soon as the price tested institutional support zones. This outcome temporarily stabilizes the general sentiment by putting an end to a correction phase on these financial instruments.
The persistence of outflows at BlackRock Although the overall balance of July 2 is positive, a detailed analysis of issuers reveals fundamental disparities, led by the case of BlackRock. The IBIT fund, the largest vehicle in the category, did not participate in this positive momentum and showed a net outflow of about 40.4 million dollars during the same session.
This negative performance extends a critical trend, with IBIT having been the main driver of June’s decline with about 3.55 billion dollars of withdrawals alone, bringing its recent wave of capital outflows to about 2.2 billion dollars. This lack of synchronization between Fidelity and BlackRock highlights the absence of widespread issuer participation, a factor considered essential to turn an isolated technical reaction into a true lasting trend reversal.
Alongside this contrasted situation on traditional stock markets, on-chain data provides a different perspective on the available supply structure. Research firm Glassnode reveals that long-term investors are in an accumulation phase, despite the turbulence observed in ETFs.
At the same time, the supply breakdown showed that about 10.83 million bitcoins were held at a loss, versus about 9.22 million in profit. This fact demonstrates a progressive absorption of volumes by the network’s historical investors, who take advantage of the price drop to accumulate tokens even as the traditional institutional sector shows signs of uncertainty and portfolio restructuring.
Validation conditions for a true market pivot The evaluation of the long-term viability of this rebound now rests on compliance with a strict technical protocol to which analysts and allocators frequently refer. The first validation milestone requires recording three to five consecutive days of positive net inflows, ideally accompanied by an expansion of participation to other mid-sized funds.
The decisive factor will remain the ability of BlackRock’s IBIT fund to stabilize its flows and stop its negative trend, which would send a capitulation signal among the largest base of institutional holders. Without this convergence, the gains of a single day will amount to a mere statistical anomaly.
In the short and medium term, the implications of this divergence between ETF flows and on-chain accumulation require cautious monitoring of market indicators. If capital inflows do not extend to the majority of issuers and the funding rates of perpetual futures contracts spiral speculatively, this rebound could quickly be invalidated.
Conversely, the conjunction of a drop in institutional selling pressure and continued accumulation by historical wallets could lay the foundation for a solid floor for the coming months. Fund managers must therefore orchestrate their inflows in a phased manner, closely monitoring the five-day cumulative average of flows and the maintenance of low closing prices on the US market to avoid exposure to false recovery signals.
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.
XRP ETF v USA přilákaly 6,55 milionu USD čistých přílivů, a to už osmý týden v řadě. Bitwise pokryl celý denní příliv a aktiva ve správě dosáhla 987,91 milionu USD.
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.
TL;DR
XRP ETFs took in $6.55M in net inflows on July 2, all from Bitwise. That marks an eighth consecutive positive week, pushing assets under management to $987.91M across seven funds — about 1.5% of XRP's market cap. The coin is trading at $1.09 against $1.10 resistance heading into a low-liquidity holiday weekend.Blockstream CEO Adam Back called the BIP-110 transaction-filtering proposal effectively dead, with mining-pool support at just 0.31% of hashrate.Shiba Inu coin slipped to 32nd place with a $2.55B market cap, overtaken by NEAR Protocol and Tether Gold. Exchange reserves are climbing back toward 87 trillion tokens after whales returned 493B coins in early July, following a 781B withdrawal in June. About $50M separates SHIB from re-entering the top 30.Bitcoin is holding its $59,000–$62,000 accumulation zone after whales added 270,000 BTC and spot ETFs flipped back to $221.7M in net inflows, but the prolonged Independence Day weekend leaves the market exposed to thinner order books, miner selling pressure, and exaggerated moves if BTC fails to hold above $61,000.American XRP ETFs closed their eighth positive week before the weekendFresh capital entered American spot XRP ETFs right before trading closed for the U.S. Independence Day holiday. The final pre-holiday session brought the funds a net inflow of $6.55 million, closing an eighth consecutive week of institutional buying firmly in positive territory, as per SoSoValue.
Bitwise's fund accounted for the entire day's haul, taking all of the week-ending volume while competitors such as Canary and Grayscale stood at zero. Total assets under management across the seven approved XRP funds have now moved close to the $1 billion mark, reaching $987.91 million. For a young sector, that is a meaningful 1.5% of the asset's total market capitalization.
HOT Stories
Total XRP Spot ETF Net Inflow Over the Last 30 Days, Source: SoSoValueTraders calmly absorbed even the freezing of the CLARITY Act crypto bill, whose vote on Capitol Hill was postponed until the end of the summer because of the recess. Accumulation was also not disrupted by the scheduled release of 1 billion tokens from escrow contracts on July 1. The network absorbed the entire volume without a drawdown, against the backdrop of a three-month record in new wallet creation on the XRPL blockchain.
The coin is now trading at $1.09, pressing against key resistance at $1.10. Thin trading over the holiday weekend could easily tip the balance: if buyers lock in a breakout, the asset will have an open road toward the psychological $1.15 mark, justifying July's historically strong status for XRP.
Adam Back declares collapse of Bitcoin's censoring BIP-110 soft forkBlockstream CEO Adam Back entered the ongoing debate around the BIP-110 proposal, calling the attempt to introduce transaction filtering into Bitcoin commercially stillborn. The well-known cypherpunk reacted harshly to the current disputes in the ecosystem, stating that the initiative had failed because of a lack of interest from investors and traders.
At the center of the conflict is a proposal to limit the network's capacity for non-monetary data such as Ordinals and Runes. According to Back, the desire to artificially clean blocks in the name of imaginary security directly contradicts Bitcoin's p2p nature.
i'm a cypherpunk, and have been running nodes since 1990s. exit remailers, tor, file sharing, bitcoin nodes. p2p networks don't exist unless people with mettle run nodes. filter bippers are weak leeches, scared to p2p, demanding to censor to make nodes "safe" for the weak to run.
— Adam Back (@adam3us) July 3, 2026 He stressed that this filtering fork is already dead on arrival, as the market has completely rejected it and exchanges currently have no long positions in fork futures. Back's words are also confirmed by current on-chain metrics: support for BIP-110 from mining pools has stalled at 0.31% of the total hashrate, making soft-fork activation through the UASF mechanism unrealistic.
Back compared the proposal's authors to people who unsuccessfully tried to burn down a rented house, only to end up outside and now "living in a tent" of their own filtering coin. At the same time, BIP-110 supporters continue to strengthen the defenses around their "granite castle."
The industry veteran concluded that the network's antifragility had once again rejected poorly thought-out ideas, and urged censorship supporters either to adapt or finally split off into their own altcoin.
87 trillion trap: Why Shiba Inu fell out of the top 30Shiba Inu (SHIB) has fallen out of the world's top 30 cryptocurrencies, settling at 32nd place with a market capitalization of $2.55 billion. The meme token failed to withstand direct pressure from NEAR Protocol at $2.6 billion and the tokenized gold asset Tether Gold (XAUt) pushing from behind.
While retail traders remain passive, keeping SHIB's daily trading volume at a modest $70.2 million, major players have started a tough positional battle as exchange reserves return to the critical level of 87 trillion coins, as per CryptoQuant.
This trillion-coin barrier has become a liquidity trap for the token. In late June, whales temporarily eased the pressure by moving 781 billion SHIB to cold wallets, but by early July they had replayed the scenario and returned a fresh batch of 493 billion tokens to exchanges.
Netflow of Shiba Inu (SHIB) coin on centralized exchanges month-to-month, Source: CryptoQuantThe rise in supply to 87 trillion is weighing on price action: investors see it as a sign that large wallets are ready to lock in profit on any local rebound, which firmly blocks growth in market capitalization.
Still, it is too early to write SHIB off. The gap from the coveted top 30 is a symbolic $50 million. Against the backdrop of Japanese competition between Mercari and Rakuten Wallet and expectations for a U.S. ETF from T. Rowe Price, the current drop looks more like a prolonged consolidation.
Whether the token returns to the top league depends on only one thing: whether July demand can absorb those trillions of coins hanging in exchange order books.
Crypto market outlook: Bitcoin accumulation and stablecoin pressure define July openingThe crypto market enters the prolonged Independence Day weekend with Bitcoin recovering above $61,000 after ETF outflows stopped, whales rebuilt exposure near $59,000–$62,000, and stablecoin competition intensified against Circle’s USDC dominance.
Bitcoin price action in Summer 2026, Source: TradingViewKey checkpoints:
Bitcoin accumulation phase confirmed: Whales added 270,000 BTC around $59,000 over two weeks, equal to roughly $16.7 billion in fresh accumulation. Long-term holders also shifted from distribution back to accumulation. The $59,000–$62,000 range is now the main investor positioning zone. Whale behavior and sentiment capitulation show larger holders are treating this area as a buy zone.ETF pressure eased before the holiday weekend: Bitcoin cleared $61,000 after a 10-day spot ETF outflow streak ended. U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $221.7 million in net inflows on July 3 after the jobs report reduced fears of a fresh rate-hike shock.July 4 liquidity risk: U.S. markets are entering a prolonged Independence Day weekend. That leaves crypto exposed to thinner liquidity, weaker institutional participation and exaggerated weekend moves.Stablecoin competition is escalating: OUSD launch pressure hit Circle, USDG scaled to $100 million on Robinhood Chain, and non-USD stablecoins reached $1.1 billion in supply, with transfer volume up 16x since 2023.Open USD targets USDC dominance: A new Open USD consortium backed by more than 140 firms, including Visa, Mastercard, BlackRock, Coinbase and Stripe, went live with free minting/redemption and shared reserve yield for partners. Circle stock dropped 14–17% as investors priced in direct competition.What matters next week: BTC needs to hold the $59,000–$62,000 accumulation base and keep ETF flows positive. The upside trigger is continued ETF demand plus progress on U.S. crypto market-structure legislation; the downside risk is renewed miner selling, failed ETF follow-through or thin-liquidity weekend pressure. You Might Also Like
Ripple spouští XRPL AI Starter Kit pro platby řízené AI agenty na blockchainu XRP Ledger (XRPL). AI agenti budou moci používat XRP i RLUSD pro digitální transakce.
Ripple has unveiled plans to integrate agentic AI payments into the XRP blockchain, marking a significant technological advancement. The integration will occur through the new XRPL AI Starter Kit, enabling autonomous AI agents to utilize XRP and the RLUSD stablecoin for various digital transactions. This development positions XRP to play a pivotal role in machine-to-machine commerce, with RLUSD offering a stable settlement option. Ripple’s initiative aligns with its broader strategy to enhance agentic systems and strengthen security controls, evidenced by its recent strategic hires and the launch of an AI-driven operations platform.
Advertisement
Key Takeaways Recent developments suggest Ripple’s integration of agentic AI payments could enhance XRP’s utility in machine-to-machine commerce. Market pricing indicates a modest increase in optimism, with the probability of XRP reaching $1.60 in July rising from 4% to 6%. Current activity levels in XRP markets suggest participants are closely monitoring potential impacts on adoption and price movement. What to Watch Market participants will be watching for further announcements from Ripple and its partners that could influence XRP’s adoption. Key indicators to monitor include regulatory developments such as the CLARITY Act and potential market catalysts like an XRP ETF announcement. Continued shifts in market odds may indicate how participants are interpreting the impact of these developments on XRP’s price trajectory.
Get prediction market intelligence as a structured API feed. Early access waitlist.
Term Structure
Contract Odds Δ since publish Volume 24h August 1 2026 0.6% — — View market → August 1 2026 6% — — View market →
XRPL posouvá institucionální DeFi: hlasování validátorů běží u XLS-65 a XLS-66, které mají přinést nativní fixní půjčky pro regulované instituce. Na síti už běží permissioned DEX a tokenizovaná aktiva přesáhla více než 3 miliardy USD.
While the market argues about XRP price levels, the ledger underneath it is assembling something more ambitious: a full stack of compliance-native DeFi rails aimed at banks, funds, and treasury desks. Here is what is already live, what is in validator voting right now, and why the whole bet could still fail.
Summary
XRP Ledger is expanding its institutional DeFi infrastructure with compliance focused features including a permissioned DEX, native lending, and tokenized asset support. XRPL contributors are advancing XLS 65 and XLS 66 through validator voting to introduce fixed term lending designed for regulated financial institutions. Ripple’s RLUSD and more than $3 billion in tokenized real world assets are strengthening XRPL’s push to become a compliance ready blockchain for institutional finance. The XRP Ledger has spent most of its fourteen-year life being described as a payments chain. Fast, cheap, boring. The description was accurate for a long time, and it also missed what has been happening on the ledger over the past eighteen months. Piece by piece, amendment by amendment, XRPL contributors and Ripple have been laying down infrastructure for something the rest of the industry mostly talks about in conference keynotes: DeFi that regulated institutions can actually use.
The phrase itself, institutional DeFi, tends to produce eye rolls among crypto natives. It sounds like a contradiction, a way of saying decentralized finance with the decentralization filed off. But the buildout on XRPL is concrete enough, and far enough along, that it deserves a serious look. As of this week, the two amendments that would bring native fixed-term lending to the ledger, XLS-65 and XLS-66, are in active validator voting following the Rippled v3.1.0 release in late January. Tokenized real-world assets on XRPL have passed $3 billion. Ripple’s stablecoin RLUSD crossed $1 billion in supply and ranks among the fastest-growing stablecoins in the market. A permissioned exchange layer with protocol-level compliance controls has gone live. None of this made much noise. That is partly the point.
The core bet: compliance at the protocol layer Every major smart contract chain has tried to court institutions, and almost all of them have run into the same wall. Banks and asset managers cannot deploy client capital into open pools where the counterparty might be a sanctioned entity, a mixer, or a teenager with a hardware wallet. The standard industry answer has been to bolt compliance on afterward: whitelisted front ends, wrapped permissioned versions of open protocols, off-chain legal agreements draped over on-chain positions.
XRPL made the opposite bet. Instead of adding compliance on top, its contributors embedded identity and access controls into the protocol itself. Three primitives do most of the work.
Credentials, linked to decentralized identifiers, let trusted issuers attest on-chain that a wallet belongs to a KYC-verified entity, an accredited investor, or a firm with a specific regulatory permission. The attestation lives on the ledger. The underlying documents do not.
Permissioned Domains, which went live under the XLS-80 amendment with 91% validator support, use those credentials to gate access to specific markets. A domain can require that every participant holds a valid credential from an approved issuer. Anyone outside the domain simply cannot trade inside it.
The Permissioned DEX extends the ledger’s native order book exchange, which has existed since 2012, into these controlled environments. Regulated firms can run foreign exchange or tokenized asset markets with full AML and KYC enforcement while settlement still happens on a public blockchain. Activation followed within weeks of validator consensus earlier this year.
Alongside those three sit the supporting pieces: Multi-Purpose Tokens, a standard that embeds metadata and transfer rules at the asset layer so structured financial instruments do not need custom smart contracts; Batch Transactions for atomic delivery-versus-payment, the settlement pattern institutions use for cross-asset swaps; and Token Escrow support extended to IOUs and MPTs.
The design philosophy separates XRPL from nearly everything else in the market. On Ethereum or Solana, an institution wanting a compliant venue has to build one out of general-purpose parts and hope the auditors sign off. On XRPL, the compliance tooling is the venue.
The lending protocol is the real test Infrastructure is necessary but not sufficient. The feature that will decide whether institutional DeFi on XRPL is a real business or a well-documented ghost town is the lending protocol, defined in the XLS-65 and XLS-66 specifications.
The two amendments work as a pair. XLS-65 introduces Single Asset Vaults, which aggregate liquidity from depositors and issue vault shares that can be transferable or locked depending on configuration. XLS-66 builds the actual credit machinery on top: fixed-term, fixed-rate loans with preset amortization schedules, issued through on-ledger contracts between lenders and borrowers.
The design choices are telling. Where open DeFi lending runs on overcollateralization and instant liquidations, the XRPL protocol supports uncollateralized loans with off-chain underwriting. Borrower evaluation, credit scoring, and risk management stay where institutions already have mature models, while issuance, repayment, and default records live on the ledger. First-loss capital structures add a protection layer familiar to anyone who has looked at securitization. Vault operators can restrict participation to KYC and AML compliant entities at the protocol level, which is precisely the feature that separates this from open DeFi.
Doppler Finance, a tokenized capital markets infrastructure firm, put the honest caveat on record this week: a protocol can define how lending activity is recorded and executed on-chain, but it cannot, by itself, create an institutional credit market. Underwriting, treasury management, portfolio monitoring, and regulatory oversight all need operational layers that no amendment can ship. XLS-66 provides the rails. Someone still has to run trains on them.
There is at least one committed passenger. Evernorth, one of the largest XRP treasury firms, has said it will make the lending protocol a core pillar of its digital asset strategy, describing it as a potential fundamental shift in how institutional liquidity moves on-chain and pointing to what it called a multi-billion-dollar annual yield opportunity for the XRP community. Treasury firms holding large XRP positions have an obvious incentive here: idle tokens earn nothing, and a native, compliance-gated lending market is the most direct way to change that.
The amendments are testable on devnet now, and developers can integrate against the lending stack ahead of mainnet activation. The open question is the validator vote. XRPL amendments require sustained support above the 80% threshold for two weeks before activation, and that process can stretch for months with no guarantee of passage. The framework is credible. The activation path is not automatic.
How amendments actually pass, and why it takes forever Because so much of the XRPL story now hangs on validator votes, it is worth understanding the machinery, which differs from every other major chain’s governance.
XRPL has no token voting and no foundation decree. Protocol changes ship as amendments inside validator software releases, and each amendment activates only after more than 80% of trusted validators signal support continuously for two full weeks. Dip below the threshold for an hour and the clock resets. The validator set doing the voting is defined by Unique Node Lists, the curated rosters of validators that operators choose to trust, populated by exchanges, universities, infrastructure firms, and long-time community operators across jurisdictions.
The design makes XRPL upgrades slow, conservative, and hard to capture, three adjectives that read as insults on crypto Twitter and as compliments in a bank’s vendor-risk review. It also means every roadmap date in this article carries an implicit asterisk. Permissioned Domains cleared activation with 91% support, a comfortable margin. The lending amendments face a more complicated vote because they change the ledger’s risk surface in ways some conservative operators have historically resisted; earlier programmability proposals spent long stretches stuck below threshold while operators debated attack surface. The voting is live now following the v3.1.0 release, testable code is on devnet, and the realistic activation window stretches from weeks to quarters depending on how fast the holdouts move.
For traders, this creates a strange information asymmetry. Amendment support percentages are public, on-chain, and updated continuously, yet almost nobody prices them. Watching XLS-66 support climb toward 80% is about as close to a scheduled, verifiable catalyst as this market offers, and it sits in plain sight.
The competition is building the same thing with different parts XRPL is not the only chain that noticed institutions want compliant rails, and an honest assessment has to place the ledger against the two ecosystems actually holding the money.
Ethereum remains the default venue for tokenized institutional product, full stop. BlackRock’s tokenized fund complex, Franklin Templeton’s on-chain money market operation, and the JPMorgan digital asset stack all touched Ethereum first, and the chain holds roughly 68% of global DeFi deposits along with about 70% of stablecoin supply. Its institutional DeFi answer is assembled from general-purpose parts: permissioned pool deployments of Aave, KYC-gated hooks on Uniswap V4, wrapper tokens with transfer restrictions, and off-chain agreements binding it together. The approach works, and its weakness is exactly what XRPL is betting on: every assembled solution is bespoke, every audit is novel, and the compliance burden lands on the builder instead of the protocol.
Solana has moved fastest recently. Token-2022 extensions gave issuers protocol-adjacent controls, transfer hooks, confidential amounts, and interest-bearing logic, and the Solana Developer Platform launched in March with Mastercard, Worldpay, and Western Union attached. Solana’s pitch is throughput plus tooling; its gap is that compliance remains a token-level option instead of a market-level guarantee, and its validator economics and outage history still appear in institutional risk memos even after the Firedancer-era reliability turnaround.
XRPL’s differentiation survives the comparison in one specific sense: it is the only major venue where identity, market access, and settlement controls are native ledger objects that no application can misconfigure. The cost of that purity is a smaller developer surface, a shallower liquidity base, and no general-purpose composability on mainnet. Institutions choosing between the three are effectively choosing which risk they prefer: Ethereum’s complexity, Solana’s history, or XRPL’s emptiness.
Three billion dollars of quiet traction Skeptics can reasonably ask whether any of this is being used. The answer, increasingly, is yes, though the numbers remain small next to the giants.
Over $3 billion in tokenized real-world assets currently sit on XRPL, which places the ledger inside the top ten chains for RWA value. The most striking single data point came from a pilot earlier this year in which Ripple and JPMorgan processed a tokenized U.S. Treasury redemption in under five seconds, settling on XRPL what normally crawls through legacy market plumbing. The ledger also recorded its first month with more than $1 billion in stablecoin volume, and RLUSD passed the $1 billion supply mark while expanding into consortium settlement arrangements.
On the payments and FX side, XRP itself does structural work that most native assets do not. The ledger routes trades through XRP automatically whenever doing so improves pricing, a mechanism called autobridging. If there is no direct liquidity between two stablecoins or two tokenized currencies, the trade hops through XRP. The mechanism works inside the new permissioned environments as well as on the public DEX, though trades cannot bridge between the two. Every account reserve, every transaction fee, and a growing share of FX routing runs through the native asset, which ties institutional adoption of the ledger back to demand for the token in a way that is mechanical instead of narrative.
That linkage matters for anyone holding XRP, which trades near $1.08 at the time of writing after spending weeks pinned around the psychologically loaded $1.00 level. The token is still down more than 50% over twelve months, and the gap between infrastructure progress and price performance has become one of the more uncomfortable facts in the ecosystem. Readers who want the market-structure side of that story can find it in our coverage of why the broader market has been trading risk-off since the spring.
The gap XRPL still has to close For all the compliance tooling, XRPL remains a shallow DeFi venue by the numbers that crypto natives actually check. Chain TVL sits far below rivals: Solana holds roughly $9 billion in DeFi deposits and BNB Chain about $6.5 billion, while XRPL’s locked value is a fraction of either. Deep liquidity attracts deep liquidity, and the ledger has not had it.
Part of the problem is technical, and it is being addressed with unusual candor. XRPL’s native automated market maker, live since 2024, launched with only a constant product curve at a time when roughly 60% of AMM volume across major ecosystems runs through concentrated liquidity designs. In late May, a draft amendment titled AMM Swappable Curves was filed on the XRPL standards repository, proposing three pluggable curve types: constant product, concentrated liquidity, and StableSwap, with a fully programmable Smart AMM reserved for a follow-up specification. Existing pools would stay untouched. If it passes, the ledger’s biggest capital-efficiency gap starts to close. If it stalls in the amendment process, XRPL keeps asking institutions to trade on 2024 infrastructure.
The other gap is programmability. XRPL mainnet deliberately avoids general-purpose smart contracts, which keeps the attack surface small and the behavior predictable, qualities institutions like, but it also means builders who need full flexibility have to go elsewhere. The ecosystem’s answer is a dual track: measured programmability on mainnet through Smart Escrows, which let developers write custom release conditions into the existing escrow primitive, and a live EVM sidechain bridged via Axelar for teams that want Solidity and full composability. Whether liquidity follows that split or gets fragmented by it remains an open question.
Privacy is the next frontier, and the strangest one The roadmap item that best captures XRPL’s institutional positioning is also the one that sounds least like crypto: confidential transfers. Multi-Purpose Tokens are getting zero-knowledge-proof-based encryption of transaction amounts and balances, letting institutions move tokenized assets and manage positions without broadcasting their book to every competitor running a block explorer, while preserving selective disclosure for regulators and auditors.
Full transparency, it turns out, is a bug for professional money, not a feature. No trading desk wants its inventory legible in real time. The XRPL community has moved past exploration into prototyping ZKP integrations with research and compliance teams, with confidential MPT transfers slated as the first milestone. Privacy with accountability is the stated frame: encrypted by default, provable on demand.
Put the pieces in sequence and the shape of the strategy becomes clear. Identity first, through credentials. Access control second, through domains and the permissioned DEX. Assets third, through MPTs and tokenization. Credit fourth, through the lending protocol. Confidentiality fifth, through ZKPs. It reads less like a crypto roadmap and more like someone rebuilding the back office of a mid-sized bank, one amendment at a time.
The sidechain wildcard One more piece complicates the tidy mainnet story: the XRPL EVM sidechain, live and bridged through Axelar, running on eXRP as gas. Its job is to catch the builders mainnet’s minimalism turns away, Solidity teams who want full composability with a route into XRPL liquidity and identity features. The dual-track design is defensible, mainnet stays lean while experimentation happens next door, but it imports the exact problem Ethereum has spent years managing: liquidity and users split across environments with a bridge in between, and bridges remain the industry’s most reliably exploited component. If institutional flows land on mainnet while DeFi innovation concentrates on the sidechain, XRPL ends up running two half-ecosystems instead of one whole one. The optimists’ version is that the sidechain functions as a proving ground, with successful patterns graduating into mainnet amendments the way ZKP research moved from prototype toward the confidential transfer roadmap alongside partners such as Hidden Road, the prime broker Ripple acquired to give institutional clients a familiar front door. Which version plays out is a 2027 question; the split exists today.
RLUSD is the demand engine hiding in plain sight If the lending protocol is the supply side of XRPL’s institutional buildout, the stablecoin is the demand side, and it deserves more attention than it usually gets.
RLUSD launched under a New York trust charter, which put it in the small club of stablecoins that compliance departments can approve without a fight, and its growth since has outpaced nearly every peer on a percentage basis: past $1 billion in supply, expanding into multi-issuer consortium arrangements, and increasingly the settlement leg in XRPL’s FX corridors. The strategic logic is circular by design. Stablecoin corridors generate ledger volume, ledger volume generates XRP fee burn and autobridge demand, and a trusted on-ledger dollar makes every other institutional product viable, because tokenized Treasuries need something to trade against and vaults need a funding currency.
The lending protocol makes the loop explicit. The first wave of XLS-66 vaults is widely expected to be RLUSD-funded, with institutional borrowers taking fixed-term dollar credit against off-chain underwriting. If that market reaches even single-digit billions, XRPL hosts a native short-term credit curve denominated in a regulated stablecoin, which is the kind of boring financial primitive that payments desks, market makers, and treasury managers actually budget for. Whether regulated entities deploy capital into RLUSD-funded vaults at scale is, in one sentence, the whole question the next two quarters will answer.
The watchlist for the next two quarters For readers who want to track the buildout instead of the discourse, the roadmap compresses to a short list of verifiable checkpoints.
• XLS-65 and XLS-66 validator support crossing and holding the 80% threshold, the single highest-signal event on the board.
• Confidential MPT transfers shipping in the stated first-quarter window, XRPL’s first production zero-knowledge feature.
• Permissioned DEX volume and domain creation after activation, the difference between compliance theater and used infrastructure.
• MPT integration with the native DEX, scheduled alongside Smart Escrows, which lets tokenized instruments trade against XRP and IOUs directly.
• The AMM Swappable Curves amendment advancing from draft to vote, closing the concentrated liquidity gap.
• Follow-through from Evernorth and any second public institutional commitment to the lending protocol, because one anchor tenant is a pilot and two is a market.
Each item is public, dated, and falsifiable, which is more than can be said for most crypto roadmaps.
What could still go wrong The bear case does not require much imagination, because pieces of it are already visible.
• Validator activation risk is real and immediate. XLS-65 and XLS-66 need sustained supermajority support, and amendment votes have stalled before. Every month of delay is a month rival chains spend courting the same institutions.
• Infrastructure is not demand. XRPL has built the rails ahead of proven appetite, and outside Evernorth’s stated intent, no regulated lender has committed capital publicly. The chain could end up with the best-documented empty credit market in crypto.
• The competition is not standing still. Ethereum remains the default for tokenized funds from BlackRock and Franklin Templeton, and Solana launched a developer platform this spring with Mastercard, Worldpay, and Western Union as early adopters. XRPL’s compliance-native design is a differentiator, not a moat.
• Regulatory frameworks cut both ways. The same clarity that lets institutions touch permissioned DeFi also lets them demand terms, and there is no assurance the economics of on-ledger credit will beat what prime brokers already offer off-chain.
There is also a subtler risk: that permissioned DeFi succeeds and simply fails to matter for XRP. If activity concentrates in gated domains trading tokenized Treasuries against RLUSD, the native asset’s role could shrink to fees and reserves, a payments-era footprint under an institutional-era ledger. Autobridging and escrow denominated in XRP push against that outcome, but the tension is real and worth watching in the data rather than the marketing.
A ledger playing a long game Step back far enough and the XRPL story inverts the usual crypto sequence. Most chains launch permissionless, attract speculation, and then spend years retrofitting the controls institutions require. XRPL is running the film backward: build the controls first, accept years of looking sleepy next to memecoin casinos, and wait for the moment when regulated capital decides it finally wants on-chain settlement, credit, and FX.
That moment may be closer than the price chart suggests. Tokenization has become the fastest-growing corner of the industry, stablecoin legislation has unlocked bank participation across several jurisdictions, and the first generation of tokenized funds is now large enough to need somewhere to borrow, lend, and hedge. The chains that win that flow will be the ones where a compliance officer can sign off without a novel-length risk memo.
Whether XRPL becomes one of them comes down to two things it does not fully control: an 80% validator threshold, and the willingness of institutions to move from pilots to production. The infrastructure argument has been made, and made well. The adoption argument is still being written, one vault and one loan at a time. For a network that has been declared irrelevant more times than any other top-ten asset, quietly shipping the plumbing while nobody watches might be the most on-brand strategy available.
For readers newer to the mechanics referenced here, our explainers on Ripple Prime and institutional brokerage, consortium stablecoins, and the earlier lending and escrow roadmap cover the building blocks in more depth.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Digital asset markets are volatile and you can lose your entire investment. Always do your own research. Information current as of July 3, 2026.
The XRP Ledger is carving out a more prominent role within Brazil’s rapidly expanding stablecoin ecosystem. According to crypto researcher SMQKE, the blockchain network has become a key platform, especially for issuing and transferring digital assets pegged to the Brazilian real (BRL). The number of BRL-backed stablecoins in circulation across Brazil has now surpassed 10, with these assets serving both retail users and institutional players in the country’s dynamic fintech sector.
BRL stablecoin adoption rises in BrazilProjects such as BRZ, BRLA, and BRLM are driving the growth of digital payment channels, enabling faster and cheaper cross-border money transfers and fueling the rise of tokenized finance applications. This trend underscores Brazil’s emergence as one of Latin America’s most vibrant fintech markets and highlights the growing appetite for digital assets among consumers and businesses.
SMQKE notes that several of these BRL-pegged stablecoins are leveraging the XRP Ledger infrastructure. The network’s ability to process transactions within seconds and at low cost stands out as a major draw for high-volume stablecoin issuers operating in the Brazilian market.
SMQKE emphasizes that with a portion of Brazil’s BRL-based stablecoins operating on the XRP Ledger, the network is increasingly proving itself as a robust foundation for tokenized financial assets.
Institutional use cases expandThe XRP Ledger is being recognized not just as a theoretical blockchain platform but as a reliable system that powers real-world financial applications. Its native tokenization features, scalable architecture, and solid track record of technical stability make it particularly appealing to institutions developing blockchain-based payment systems and digital asset issuance projects.
Within Ripple’s broader strategy, the XRP Ledger is seen as a foundational infrastructure for stablecoins, tokenized assets, and potentially in the future, central bank digital currencies (CBDCs). Ripple—which operates in the payments technology sphere—has long played a crucial role in supporting the growth and evolution of the XRP Ledger ecosystem.
IMF interest and technical upgrades in focusThis approach recently received additional validation when the International Monetary Fund (IMF) included the XRP Ledger among blockchain networks used by banks for stablecoin issuance. The move reflects not only the network’s relevance in crypto markets but also its growing profile in connecting crypto with traditional finance infrastructure.
Technical innovation is also underway on the network. The reintroduced Batch amendment now enables users to combine payments, token swaps, NFT purchases, and similar operations into a single secure transaction. This feature is designed to streamline operations and lower costs associated with complex transactions.
Mini glossary: The Batch amendment is a technical update on the XRP Ledger aimed at executing multiple operations in one connected action. It is intended to boost efficiency and lower transaction costs, particularly for payment and asset transfer uses.
The fact that the International Monetary Fund lists XRP Ledger among networks used by banks for stablecoin issuance is considered a sign of growing institutional interest.
With Brazil seeing more real-world stablecoin applications, increasing institutional engagement, and ongoing network enhancements, the XRP Ledger is steadily advancing beyond its origins as a speculative blockchain to become a critical piece of financial infrastructure in the region.
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 amount of XRP tokens locked in Ripple’s escrow accounts continues to drop, according to XRP advocate and legal expert Bill Morgan. Morgan revealed that the portion of XRP held in escrow has now slipped below 32.5% of the total supply. This figure marks a significant shift, sparking renewed debate over longstanding claims that escrow accounts hold between 35% and 40% of all XRP—a range now proven outdated.
Morgan noted that nearly a year ago, escrow accounts constituted close to 36% of all XRP in circulation, but this share has been gradually decreasing over time. While Ripple unlocks 1 billion XRP from escrow every month, only a fraction is returned to escrow accounts. Naturally, this means the locked balance gets smaller as months pass.
Bill Morgan pointed out that the share of XRP held in escrow has now dipped under 32.5%, yet some market watchers continue to cite outdated figures of 35% or even 40%.
Morgan explained that, on average, around 300 million XRP released each month are not relocked in escrow. These tokens, instead, are deployed in institutional partnerships, liquidity services, and ecosystem development. This use case has steadily reduced the share Ripple holds in escrow accounts over time.
Mini glossary: An escrow account refers to token balances locked under a predetermined schedule and released over time. Ripple uses this system to plan the future supply of XRP entering the market.
Challenge to outdated supply dataDespite blockchain data being publicly available, Morgan expressed concern that outdated supply statistics continue to circulate. He especially called out some Bitcoin supporters who still claim Ripple controls more than half of all XRP, dismissing these assertions as inaccurate in light of current numbers.
Should current trends persist, Morgan estimates that by July next year, the share of XRP in escrow accounts could fall below 29% of total supply. This would mean Ripple’s locked token holdings will exert even less influence on overall XRP liquidity.
The fact that Ripple relocks most of the 1 billion XRP released each month into escrow restricts the net amount entering the market, which helps allay concerns over potential sell pressure.
Market sees limited price impactMorgan’s latest remarks came just after Ripple completed its planned release of 1 billion XRP for July. While such monthly unlocks often raise concerns about possible sell pressure, Ripple’s history shows that most released tokens are relocked rather than sold, mitigating market anxiety.
The most recent event did not trigger a significant negative market reaction. XRP’s price climbed between 3% and 4% to break past $1.10, ultimately reaching $1.12. Persistent demand at higher price levels increased confidence that the $1.10 region may now act as a key support, rather than resistance.
IndicatorLevelCurrent escrow account shareBelow 32.5%Share roughly one year agoClose to 36%Monthly unlock from escrow1 billion XRPAverage not relocked300 million XRPCurrent price$1.12These disclosures have reignited debate around XRP’s tokenomics. Supporters see the dwindling escrow balance as a sign of a more market-oriented and dispersed supply structure, which they argue leads to healthier asset distribution over time.
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.
Držitelé XRP čelí phishingové kampani s falešnými NFT „reward“ a „payout“, která po schválení transakcí odčerpává peněženky. Jeden uživatel přišel zhruba o 15 000 USD.
The wallets of XRP users are currently being drained with the help of a new sophisticated phishing campaign that is based on the distribution of fake non-fungible tokens (NFTs).
A recent alert from XRP blockchain explorer Bithomp states that scammers are using fake "reward" and "payout" tokens to trick investors into authorizing malicious transactions.
A single user lost a staggering $15,000 to the exploit in such a way.
HOT Stories
The screenshots shared by Bithomp show that the transaction type was logged as an NFTokenAcceptOffer.
The victim believed they were claiming a digital asset called "Ripple Payout Token #7357".
The code executed a massive withdrawal valued at roughly $15,000 from the victim's balance and transferred it to the scammer's wallet. Obviously, the user ended up with a worthless bogus NFT.
The anatomy of a scam Bad actors exploit the low transaction fees on the XRP Ledger to mint hundreds of such fraudulent NFTs every single day.
The scammers use highly official-sounding terminology to give the scam some sort of urgency and legitimacy.
You Might Also Like
There is a massive stream of new tokens with the names of the likes of "Securing XRPL Proof", "XRP Earning Permit", "XRP Cashback Card", "Ripple Benefit Badge", "Boosting Ripple Card" and "Ripple Grant Voucher."
The scammers distribute these tokens to active XRPL wallets or promote them on social media platforms,
The site prompts them to sign a transaction once they connect their wallets.
Crypto scam epidemic The scale of cryptocurrency fraud has reached unprecedented levels, with a recent FBI report showing that cryptocurrency-related fraud accounted for the most reported losses among all scam categories last year. Americans lost over $11.3 billion to crypto-related scams in 2025.
A 2026 report by blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis estimates that a record $17 billion was stolen globally through crypto scams. Impersonation scams continue to reign supreme, and the rise of generative AI makes it more challenging to fight the scammers.
Ripple a Brinc spustily v Hongkongu 12týdenní fintech akcelerátor zaměřený na řešení na XRP Ledgeru. Program cílí na startupy od pre-seedu po Series A.
Brinc and Ripple have jointly announced a new accelerator program in Hong Kong aimed at supporting early stage cryptocurrency and financial technology startups. Unveiled on July 3, the Hong Kong Financial Innovation Programme will run for 12 weeks, with a particular focus on blockchain-based financial services built on the XRP Ledger platform.
Program scope and objectivesThe accelerator is open to companies ranging from the pre-seed stage up to Series A, targeting teams working on practical digital finance solutions for the broader Asian market. Applications have officially opened via Brinc’s dedicated submission platform.
The program is designed especially for founders developing products in cross-border payments, foreign exchange operations, trade finance, lending solutions, stablecoins, tokenization, settlement networks, and AI-powered payment systems. Selected startups will receive mentorship over the 12-week program from experts in finance, blockchain technology, and business development.
Brinc emphasizes that the program is not only about advancing technology, but also about fostering commercial partnerships and creating real market use cases.
Participants will have opportunities to connect with potential investors, corporate partners, and financial institutions. Eligible projects can also apply for grant funding that does not require any equity transfer, allowing startups to develop products without diluting their ownership structure.
XRPL infrastructure at the forefrontAll participating startups will build their products on the XRP Ledger. Known as Ripple’s native blockchain, XRPL stands out for its rapid transaction speeds, relatively low fees, and suitability for payment and settlement applications. The program is oriented toward developing solutions that can fulfill real financial needs—especially in Hong Kong and across Asian markets.
Mini glossary: Tokenization refers to creating a digital representation of a real world or financial asset on the blockchain. A settlement network is the infrastructure that finalizes and records financial transactions between parties.
Regulatory landscape evolves in Hong KongHong Kong is moving forward with its regulated stablecoin market, having recently introduced a new licensing regime for fiat-referenced stablecoin issuers. Following two license approvals earlier this year, authorities expect to see the first Hong Kong dollar backed stablecoins roll out by mid-2026.
These regulatory developments make the timing of the accelerator especially significant. A clearer regulatory framework could enhance the prospects for startups building payment infrastructure and digital finance solutions to achieve commercial success in the region.
New technical proposal for XRPLMeanwhile, Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer David Schwartz has put forward a new transaction ordering system for the XRPL decentralized exchange (DEX) and automated market maker (AMM). The aim is to reduce risks of front running and sandwich attacks—both of which can harm the integrity of decentralized trading—and to enhance the predictability of transaction execution on the network.
David Schwartz’s proposed transaction ordering system is designed to limit front running risks for DEX and AMM transactions on XRPL.
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.
Ethereum withdrawals on Binance have caught the crypto world’s attention with one of the most remarkable moves in recent months. According to CryptoQuant data, 166 thousand ETH left the exchange in the past 24 hours, marking the strongest daily outflow recorded since March 2023.
Outflows hit a three-year highThe data show that Ethereum withdrawals from Binance have surged to their highest level in over three years. This move comes as the market is searching for direction and signals a notable shift in investor behavior. As one of the world’s highest-volume crypto exchanges, large withdrawals from Binance tend to be watched closely by market observers.
CryptoQuant data revealed that the Ethereum withdrawals on Binance have reached their highest point in more than three years, with 166 thousand ETH leaving the platform in the past 24 hours.
The sharp spike in withdrawals has fueled the view that crypto investors may be choosing to move their assets off exchanges and into long-term storage. The fact that this activity took place while the Ethereum price hovered around $1,500 has fueled speculation that some investors find this zone a compelling buying opportunity.
Mini glossary: CryptoQuant is an analytics platform that tracks the crypto market using on-chain blockchain data and exchange flows. Large outflows from exchanges are at times interpreted as a signal that investors may prefer holding over selling.
Ethereum seeks a recoverySince its latest peak at the start of 2025, Ethereum has faced sustained correction pressure, with its value dropping about 67%. Interestingly, over the same period, Ethereum’s decline has outpaced Bitcoin’s pullback by roughly 15 percentage points.
MetricDataDaily ETH outflow from Binance166 thousand ETHPrevious similar outflow recordHighest since March 2023ETH change since 2025 peak67% declinePrice movement in last 48 hoursApproximately 10% riseDespite this, there have been signs of price recovery over the last two days. Ethereum climbed roughly 10% in 48 hours to again top $1,700. The timing of both the withdrawal surge and rising prices has prompted debate over whether accumulation momentum is returning to the market.
The sharp withdrawal activity in Ethereum took place while the price steadied near $1,500, fueling expectations that some investors view this level as a bargain-buying opportunity.
The latest volatility shows how quickly investor sentiment can shift. Especially for major exchanges, sizable asset outflows offer key signals on how investors are positioning themselves and may hold clues beyond short-term price action.
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.
Na Ethereu se vrací býčí sázky: funding rate stouply na 0,016 % i přes nižší cenu ETH. Celkový open interest je 4,35 mld. USD, takže trh zatím nepůsobí přehřátě.
3 July 2026 | 19:55 The Ethereum derivatives market is flashing a fascinating divergence: trader conviction is recovering much faster than the underlying spot price.
Following a sharp flush out in early June, leverage is quietly returning to the market. However, unlike previous speculative peaks, this rebuilding phase is characterized by localized aggressive positioning rather than market-wide exhaustion.
Key Takeaways ETH funding rates hit 0.016% despite lower prices. Total open interest sits at $4.35B, avoiding overheating. Bullish conviction rebuilds with ETH 15-20% below peaks. Conviction Leading Price The first clear signal of returning bullish sentiment shows up in funding rates, the periodic fee paid between long and short traders to keep perpetual contract prices pegged to the spot index.
Ethereum funding rates across all exchanges. Currently, funding rates across major exchanges have accelerated back to approximately 0.016%. To put this in perspective, this is significantly higher than the 0.009% levels observed in late May, even though Ethereum was trading much higher at the time ($2,000–$2,150).
Late May Pre-Washout vs. Current Stabilization ETH Spot Price: $2,000 – $2,150 in late May vs. $1,730 at the time of writing. Average Funding Rate: ~0.009% in late May vs. ~0.016% currently. Total Open Interest: High peak over $12B in late May vs. ~$4.35B (below the 30-day average) currently. When ETH fell to its early June floor near $1,540, a massive wave of leveraged long positions was wiped clean from the order books, temporarily cooling the market. Crucially, funding rates refused to stay negative for any meaningful duration. Short sellers never took dominant control. Instead, as spot prices consolidated and stabilized around the $1,700–$1,730 liquidity pocket after 9% gain for the week according to CoinMarketCap data, buyers aggressively stepped back in, driving the cost of holding leverage to its highest point in weeks.
ETH/USDT daily technical price chart. The Structural Volatility Shield While funding rates show that active traders are increasingly eager to bet on upside, the second dataset proves that the broader market is not yet dangerously over-leveraged.
Binance’s 30-day Open Interest (OI) Z-Score, which measures how far current leverage volume deviates from its statistical average, currently sits at -0.56, according to report, shared by CryptoQuant. Total open interest across the market is hovering around $4.35 billion, remaining comfortably below the 30-day baseline of $4.81 billion.
Binance ETH Open Interest Z-Score analysis. What this tells us is that while individual participants are using higher leverage (high funding), the total volume of leveraged positions in the system is still entirely manageable. The speculative excesses of early cycle shifts might be successfully digested.
This localized positioning marks a pivotal shift from the retail-led euphoria that defined the 2025 cycle peaks. In previous rallies, market-wide leverage was often driven by speculative cascades, where retail over-leveraging forced rapid, correlated liquidations. Conversely, the current fragmentation suggests that institutional allocators are re-entering with a more surgical approach.
Data from SoSoValue reinforces this thesis, showing a clear, consecutive ramp in Ethereum Spot ETF inflows, climbing from $14.89M on July 1 to $29.08M by July 2. This reversal follows a grueling nine-day streak of consecutive net outflows, underscores a deliberate, capital-intensive accumulation phase.
For these desks, a non-correlated recovery is actually a health signal; it indicates that the market is currently supported by structural demand rather than reactive, emotion-driven sentiment. By avoiding a broad, systemic blow-up, the market is constructing a more durable floor. This layout makes the current environment significantly more attractive for institutional mandates that prioritize structural stability over parabolic, high-risk exposure.
Will Spot Follow Derivatives? This structural layout sets up a high-stakes race between derivatives conviction and spot market demand.
Positive funding rates are fundamentally healthy during sustained uptrends; they signal an appetite for risk and structural momentum. The underlying risk surfaces when derivatives positioning outpaces spot market accumulation.
If Ethereum’s spot demand strengthens and absorbs this momentum, the rising funding rates could serve as fuel for a clean, sustainable recovery. However, if spot buying fails to break key overhead resistance levels, these newly minted, high-funding long positions will become exposed. A failure to move higher could transform this growing optimism into a localized liquidation trap, prompting short-term cascade liquidations and heightened volatility.
The early June washout effectively cleared the board, but it did not break the underlying risk-on bias of the market. With traders front-running a recovery while ETH still sits 15-20% below its spring highs, all eyes now turn to spot order books to validate the move.
This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Always conduct your own research before making investment decisions.
Author
Alex is Editor-in-Chief of Coindoo and co-founder of Millennial Media Group, with nearly a decade of experience covering financial markets - crypto first, then everything else. It started in 2016 with Bitcoin. Like most people at the time, he didn't fully understand it - so he kept digging. Blockchain, tokenomics, the projects, the cycles. That curiosity never stopped, and eventually pulled him into traditional markets too: equities, commodities, macro. Not because he left crypto behind, but because you can't properly understand one without the other. What drives him is straightforward: he wants to know why something is happening, not just that it's happening. Most market coverage stops at the headline - price up, price down, here's a chart. Alex finds that kind of reporting actively unhelpful. If you walk away from an article without understanding the mechanism behind the move, what did you actually learn? He holds a degree in Tourism from New Bulgarian University - not the most obvious path into financial markets, but markets have a way of pulling in people who are simply too curious to stay out. He has authored over 200 in-depth analyses and more than 10,000 articles across crypto and traditional finance. He still thinks every day in markets teaches him something new. That's probably why he hasn't stopped.
Charles Hoskinson říká, že exploit SecondFi může Cardanu prospět, protože urychlí vyšší standardy zabezpečení peněženek. Incident zasáhl aplikaci, ne samotný Cardano protokol.
Charles Hoskinson believes that the recent SecondFi wallet exploit could ultimately strengthen the Cardano ecosystem rather than weaken it.
As concerns continue to grow that the incident could expose ADA users to additional attacks, Hoskinson has pushed back against those fears. In his recent commentary, he argued that the event will accelerate improvements across the ecosystem and lead to stronger security standards for wallet providers.
SecondFi Exploit Is a Fundamental Win for Everybody: Hoskinson According to Hoskinson, ADA holders will benefit from a broader range of security options following the exploit. These improvements may include more resilient wallet architectures, stronger authentication methods, and additional protective mechanisms designed to reduce the risk of similar exploits in the future.
Consequently, Hoskinson views the incident as a catalyst for innovation in wallet security rather than evidence of any weakness within the Cardano blockchain itself.
Furthermore, he expects the exploit to reinforce the ecosystem’s commitment to open-source development while increasing skepticism toward closed-source solutions. Hoskinson described this shift as “a fundamental win for everybody.”
SecondFi Users Continue Recovery Efforts Meanwhile, ADA users are still recovering from the attack on SecondFi, formerly known as Yoroi Wallet, which is operated by EMURGO, one of Cardano’s founding entities.
The exploit, which occurred last week, resulted in losses totaling 16 million ADA across three separate wallet-draining incidents.
In a statement released today, EMURGO confirmed that its teams are collaborating with technical experts from across the Cardano ecosystem on an on-chain recovery process that remains on schedule.
https://t.co/Wud0K5WIkG
— EMURGO (@emurgo_io) July 2, 2026
Notably, the company is developing an on-chain claims portal that will enable affected users to recover their assets once the reimbursement process begins. SecondFi also urged users not to delete the app and advised them to keep their seed phrases secure to simplify future recovery efforts.
In the meantime, the company has launched an official wallet checker tool that allows users to determine whether they were affected by the exploit. EMURGO further disclosed that assets recovered by white-hat responders remain secure and will contribute to the reimbursement effort.
Additionally, the company has established a recovery fund aimed at compensating victims affected by the exploit.
Hoskinson Reiterates That Cardano Was Not Hacked Amid widespread fear, uncertainty, and doubt surrounding the incident, Hoskinson reiterated that the attack targeted a specific application built on the network rather than the Cardano protocol itself.
He emphasized that Cardano has never been hacked since launch and continues to operate normally, with block production proceeding at a consistent pace.
DisClamier: This content is informational and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author's personal opinions and do not reflect The Crypto Basic opinion. Readers are encouraged to do thorough research before making any investment decisions. The Crypto Basic is not responsible for any financial losses.
Cardano je téměř připraveno na hard fork V11 „van Rossem“ a Binance s Coinbase už potvrdily technickou připravenost. Čeká se jen na finální souhlas Ústavního výboru.
According to recent ecosystem data, the layer-1 blockchain is approaching full readiness for the V11 hard fork, which has been officially dubbed "van Rossem."
Major cryptocurrency exchanges, including industry giants Binance and Coinbase, have already signaled their operational readiness.
The much-anticipated upgrade is essentially ready to go, but it still needs to receive the final sign-off from the Constitutional Committee (CC).
HOT Stories
The "van Rossem" hard fork?The upgrade has been named after the late Max van Rossem, and it is meant to honor his substantial contributions to building the Cardano community and developing its governance structure.
Technically, V11 is categorized as an "intra-era" hard fork. This means developers can introduce new features and optimize the protocol without moving to a new blockchain era (this makes it possible to minimize protocol disruptions).
You Might Also Like
According to Cardano ecosystem contributors, the hard fork will introduce cheaper smart contracts, ZK-ready cryptography, as well as some new built-in functions.
The van Rossem hard fork is supposed to act as a bridge to Cardano's next Dijkstra era.
Full readiness The van Rossem hard fork requires the decentralized approval of multiple independent actors.
The network has already successfully executed the hard fork on its Preview and Preprod testnets to make sure that it is stable enough for a grand launch.
Currently, on-chain metrics show overwhelming support and operational readiness.
Stake Pool Operators (SPOs) have rapidly upgraded their infrastructure. Currently, 88% of all blocks minted in the past seven days were produced using the V11 node software.
Binance and Coinbase, the world's leading cryptocurrency exchanges, have thrown their support behind the fork.
The required voting thresholds from both Delegated Representatives (DReps) and SPOs have been reached.
Bitwise upravil 2. dodatek k podání S-1 pro spotový NEAR ETF u SEC a přidal staking, přičemž jako burzu pro listing zvolil NYSE Arca. Schválení zatím čeká.
Crypto asset manager Bitwise has updated its filing for the proposed NEAR ETF, advancing progress after almost a year. The issuer revealed key details related to staking, listing exchange, listing plans, custodians and others. NEAR price has jumped almost 12% amid the latest crypto market recovery.
Bitwise NEAR ETF Updates Filing with the US SEC Bitwise submitted a 2nd amendment to the S-1 form for its spot NEAR ETF, according to the latest filing with the US SEC. It added staking as a second objective to derive additional income for investors, along with providing regulated exposure to NEAR held by the trust.
Bitwise NEAR ETF also named NYSE Arca as the selected exchange for listing and trading the spot ETF. The issuer has not yet revealed management fees, ticker, or potential fee waiver.
Moreover, The Bank of New York Mellon is selected as cash custodian, administrator, and transfer agent. Coinbase Custody to serve as crypto custodian.
Bitwise Asset Management, parent of Bitwise Investment Advisers, plans to provide seed capital to launch the NEAR ETF. The issuer currently awaits approval from the US SEC.
The amendment refines disclosures around risks, including staking-related tax events, redemption liquidity, and market volatility.
As CoinGape reported earlier, Grayscale also amended its NEAR ETF filing with the US SEC. This came amid institutional interest in artificial intelligence (AI) amid the blockbuster SpaceX IPO frenzy.
Will Price Rally Further? NEAR Protocol price rebounded 5% amid the latest crypto market recovery. The price is currently trading at $2.03, with a 24-hour low and high of $1.90 and $2.04, respectively.
Furthermore, trading volume has increased by 6% over the last 24 hours, indicating a rise in interest among traders. However, the price is trading below the 50-day moving average. Notably, Kalshi also launched NEAR perpetual futures recently amid massive interest from investors.
CoinGlass data showed massive buying in the derivatives market in the last few hours. The total NEAR Protocol futures open interest jumped more than 13% to $472 million in the last 24 hours. The 4-hour futures OI on Binance, OKX, and Bybit climbed more than 6%, 5%, 5.50% respectively.
If you’re looking to earn passive income with crypto, check out our 8 proven ways to earn passive income in July 2026.
Solana už překonala Ethereum v objemu obchodů, aktivních uživatelích i poplatcích na L1. Ethereum dál vede v TVL, stablecoinech a institucionálním zázemí.
Solana now beats Ethereum on trading volume, active users, and fee revenue. Ethereum still holds the money. Halfway through 2026, the question is no longer who is faster. It is whether the two chains are even running the same race.
Summary
Solana has overtaken Ethereum in Layer 1 activity with higher transaction volume, more active users, stronger DEX trading, and greater fee revenue. Ethereum continues to dominate in total value locked, stablecoin liquidity, institutional adoption, and developer activity despite losing ground in onchain usage. The rivalry has shifted from a direct competition into two distinct models, with Ethereum focused on settlement and custody while Solana leads in trading and execution. There was a time when the Ethereum versus Solana debate could be settled with a smirk and an outage screenshot. Solana was the chain that went down. Ethereum was the chain that mattered. Then Solana stopped going down, its trading volume flipped Ethereum’s, its ETF launched to institutional inflows while Ethereum funds bled for seventeen straight days, and the smirk changed sides.
Halfway through 2026, both tokens are deep in a bear market. ETH trades near $1,714 after a brutal second quarter that included a 29.5% thirty-day drawdown at the June lows, its worst quarterly stretch in years. SOL trades near $81, down roughly 78% from its cycle high, hit even harder in raw percentage terms. Price settles nothing here. The interesting story is underneath, in the on-chain data, where the two networks have diverged so completely that comparing them now requires deciding which metrics count.
So: is Ethereum losing the L1 race to Solana? The honest answer is that Solana has already won several of the events, Ethereum still owns the ones with the most prize money, and the race itself has split into two different sports.
How we got here: a short history of a long feud The rivalry has run through three distinct acts, and the current one makes no sense without the first two.
Act one, 2021 through 2022, was Solana as the venture-backed challenger: a chain built for speed, championed by Sam Bankman-Fried, and dismissed by Ethereum partisans as a centralized science project. The dismissal briefly looked like prophecy. Solana suffered repeated full-network outages, including the infamous February 2024 halt that lasted nearly five hours after a legacy loader bug forced a coordinated validator restart, and when FTX collapsed in November 2022, SOL crashed toward single digits as the market priced in guilt by association. Obituaries were published. Several were smug.
Act two, 2023 through 2024, was the resurrection nobody ordered. Solana’s developer community kept shipping through the winter, the Jupiter and Jito ecosystems matured, memecoin mania found its natural home on the only chain where a thousand trades cost less than a sandwich, and DEX volume began the climb that ended with the flip of Ethereum in late 2024. Ethereum spent the same period executing its own plan flawlessly and discovering the plan had a hole in it: the Dencun upgrade in March 2024 introduced blob space and cut L2 costs by an order of magnitude, which supercharged rollup adoption while gutting the fee burn that had underwritten the ultrasound money narrative. Activity exploded across the Ethereum stack, and ETH the asset captured almost none of it.
Act three is now: both chains institutionally legitimate, both tokens deep underwater, and the argument relocated from architecture threads to fund flow tables. Uniswap founder Hayden Adams warned back in 2025 that Ethereum’s confused scaling identity could hand DeFi leadership to Solana; in 2026 that warning reads less like a hot take and more like a memo the market already acted on.
The scoreboard, metric by metric Start with what Solana has flatly won: activity.
On a representative day in late June, Solana processed 127 million transactions from more than 2 million active addresses. Ethereum mainnet processed 2.8 million transactions from roughly 512,000 active addresses. That is not a gap. That is a different order of magnitude. Solana sustains 600 to 700 real transactions per second on average against Ethereum L1’s 15 to 20, at a cost of roughly $0.00025 per transaction against Ethereum’s dollars-per-swap mainnet pricing.
Trading volume tells the same story. Solana’s weekly DEX volume hit $11.49 billion in April against Ethereum’s $7.62 billion, a 51% lead. In February the monthly gap was wider still: $117 billion on Solana against $52 billion on Ethereum, more than double. Jupiter, the aggregator that routes the overwhelming majority of Solana order flow across Raydium, Orca, Phoenix, and Meteora, alone processes $2 billion to $4 billion in daily volume. Solana flipped Ethereum on DEX volume in late 2024 and has held the lead through every market condition since.
Then comes the metric that should worry Ethereum researchers most: revenue.
Solana generates over $1 million in chain fees per day. The major Ethereum L2s, where most Ethereum user activity now lives, generate under $200,000 combined, because blob-based data posting after the Dencun upgrade pushed L2 costs, and therefore L2 fee revenue, toward zero. Ethereum deliberately commoditized its own execution layer to win the rollup war. The result is a settlement layer with shrinking direct income and a rival that monetizes every swap on a single unified ledger.
Now flip the card, because Ethereum’s wins are just as lopsided.
Total value locked Ethereum L1 holds roughly $55.6 billion in DeFi deposits, around 68% of the entire global DeFi market, and the combined L1 plus L2 figure exceeds $80 billion. Solana holds between $8 billion and $12 billion depending on the week and the methodology, a figure that took a $270 million hit in April when the Drift Protocol exploit tore through its perps ecosystem. The deepest protocols in the industry, Lido at $27.5 billion, Aave at $27 billion, EigenLayer at $13 billion, all live on Ethereum, and Aave V4 launched on Ethereum mainnet in April to reinforce the point.
Stablecoins Ethereum hosts roughly 70% of all on-chain stablecoin supply, around $32 billion in USDC and $60 billion in USDT, and remains the venue where BlackRock, Franklin Templeton, and JPMorgan build tokenized products first. Solana carries about $14 billion in stablecoins, though each of those dollars turns over roughly six times faster than its Ethereum counterpart.
Developers Ethereum counted 31,869 active developers against Solana’s 17,708 at the latest Electric Capital reading, and added more new developers over the trailing year than any other ecosystem. Solana ranked second.
One chain has the users, the volume, and the revenue. The other has the money, the institutions, and the builders. Losing, it turns out, depends entirely on where you point the camera.
How the race split in two The reason the comparison keeps producing contradictory answers is that the two chains stopped competing on the same terms years ago, a divergence we chronicled when the ecosystems first collided in early 2025.
Ethereum abandoned the monolithic race on purpose. Its roadmap treats the base layer as settlement infrastructure while execution migrates to rollups: Base, Arbitrum, Optimism, and a long tail of zk systems that post proofs and data back to mainnet. Base alone captures nearly half of all L2 DeFi value, Arbitrum another 31%, and the top three rollups process close to 90% of all L2 transactions. Measured as a stack, the Ethereum ecosystem still dwarfs Solana on almost every capital metric. Measured as an L1, Ethereum mainnet is a slow, expensive chain that its own designers no longer intend retail users to touch.
Solana made the opposite bet: one ledger, one global state, sub-second finality at 400 milliseconds, and a relentless engineering campaign to make the single chain fast enough that nothing else is needed. The Firedancer validator client built by Jump Crypto, rolling toward full deployment late this year, is the endgame of that bet, with a theoretical ceiling measured in the hundreds of thousands of transactions per second. The network reliability problem that defined Solana’s reputation in 2022 and 2023 has largely disappeared; outages went from routine to rare, and the chain has traded its crash-prone image for something closer to an execution monopoly on retail flow.
The philosophical split produces the statistical one. Capital sits and compounds on Ethereum because that is what the architecture rewards: deep pools, long-duration lending, staking layered on restaking. Capital churns on Solana because sub-cent fees make churning free: high-frequency trading, memecoin rotation, dollar-cost-average bots, payments. Ethereum became the deposit ledger. Solana became the trading floor.
Follow the fees: two broken business models, one working one The revenue gap deserves its own examination, because it is the metric where architecture decisions turn into economics, and where both chains have problems they rarely advertise.
Ethereum’s fee engine used to be the envy of the industry. EIP-1559 burned base fees, high demand made ETH deflationary, and the ultrasound money framing wrote itself. The rollup migration dismantled the machine step by step. Execution moved to L2s, whose sequencers keep the margin between what users pay and what blob posting costs, and Dencun made blob posting cost next to nothing. The result in 2026: mainnet burns a fraction of its former fee load, L2s pay Ethereum pennies for security worth billions, and the value accrual question, what does ETH earn when Base wins, has replaced scaling as the ecosystem’s defining unsolved problem. Ethereum built a settlement business and priced its product like a public good.
Solana’s engine is simpler and currently stronger: one chain captures every fee at every layer. The base fee is fixed at 5,000 lamports per signature, roughly a hundredth of a cent, while priority fees let users bid during congestion, and stake-weighted quality of service plus local fee markets keep hot accounts from clogging the scheduler. On top of the protocol fees sits the Jito MEV economy, where searcher tips flow to validators and stakers, turning order-flow chaos into staking yield. Over $1 million in daily chain revenue against sub-$200,000 for the entire major L2 basket is the visible output.
The caveat is concentration of source. A large share of Solana’s fee revenue traces to speculative trading, memecoins above all, which makes the revenue line high-beta to the exact market segment least likely to survive a deep winter. Ethereum’s fee problem is structural but its demand is diversified; Solana’s fee machine works beautifully and runs on the most flammable fuel in crypto. Neither model is finished.
Fusaka and the second-half Ethereum upgrade path aim at scaling data further without answering value capture, while Solana’s validator economics, where thin margins already pushed the validator count down 68% from its 2023 peak, depend on fee and MEV income holding up.
The other front: stablecoins, payments, and tokenized everything DEX volume gets the headlines, but the war’s second front may matter more by 2027, because it is the one institutions actually fund: who carries the tokenized economy.
Ethereum’s position is incumbency at scale. Roughly 70% of stablecoin supply, the deep USDC and USDT float that institutional desks require, and essentially the entire first generation of tokenized funds. When Ondo debuted its SEC-aligned tokenized stock model with BlackRock ETF shares this week, the underlying rails were Ethereum-ecosystem by default. Stablecoin legislation cleared the path for bank issuance and for the consortium models now emerging among major institutions, and banks build where the auditors already have coverage, which is one more network effect compounding for the incumbent.
Solana’s position is velocity and consumer reach. Its $14 billion stablecoin float turns over roughly six times faster than Ethereum’s, because sub-cent fees make stablecoins usable as money instead of just collateral. USDC settles on Solana in under a second for a fraction of a cent, which is why Visa chose it for settlement pilots, why payment processors keep adding it, and why the Solana Developer Platform launched with Mastercard, Worldpay, and Western Union rather than with hedge funds. Solana is also mounting a genuine RWA challenge through Token-2022, whose compliance extensions target exactly the issuer requirements Ethereum handles with bespoke contracts, and both chains now face a third competitor for the same institutional flow in the compliance-native stack being assembled on the XRP Ledger.
The stakes here dwarf the DEX war. Stablecoins are a $320 billion asset class growing through legislation, and tokenized funds are the institutional product with the steepest adoption curve. If Ethereum keeps the float while Solana takes the flow, the split-decision structure of this whole rivalry repeats at a much larger scale, with Ethereum as the vault and Solana as the checkout lane of tokenized finance.
The institutional tiebreaker For most of crypto history, the institutional column belonged to Ethereum without argument. That is the column where 2026 has produced genuine movement.
The regulatory sequence mattered first. The SEC’s March 2025 classification of sixteen digital assets including SOL as commodities dissolved the securities overhang that had kept allocators away, and spot Solana ETFs began trading on October 28, 2025, making SOL the third asset after BTC and ETH with U.S. spot fund access. The flows since then have been small next to Bitcoin’s but directionally embarrassing for Ethereum: through the spring drawdown, Solana ETFs crossed $1 billion in cumulative inflows while Ethereum funds posted a seventeen-day outflow streak that stripped hundreds of millions, and July has opened with ETF flow reports showing ETH and SOL products gaining together while Bitcoin funds bleed. Goldman Sachs disclosures showed over $100 million in SOL exposure, and CalPERS entered the asset class the same quarter.
Solana’s institutional push went beyond funds. The Solana Foundation launched its Developer Platform in March with Mastercard, Worldpay, and Western Union among early adopters, shipped a quantum-readiness plan built on the NIST-standardized Falcon signature scheme in April, and rolled out on-chain, stake-weighted validator governance this week. Token-2022 extensions gave the chain the compliance hooks, confidential transfers, transfer restrictions, interest-bearing instruments, that enterprise issuers require. The pitch that Solana is a casino chain unsuitable for serious money has aged badly.
Ethereum’s institutional position remains the stronger one on stock rather than flow. It custodies the tokenized funds, hosts the deep stablecoin float, and runs the staking infrastructure through which more than 35 million ETH, nearly 29% of supply, secures the network across a million-plus validators. When a treasury desk needs to move nine figures with minimal slippage, Ethereum’s depth is still the only game available. BitMine Immersion bought its way past 5 million ETH this spring precisely on that thesis. But stock is what you accumulated yesterday. Flow is what you are winning today, and the flow has been tilting one direction for over a year.
The uncomfortable items on both ledgers Neither chain gets to run its highlight reel without the blooper file.
Solana’s validator count has collapsed to roughly 795 active validators from more than 2,500 in 2023, a 68% decline that concentrates block production and hands critics a decentralization argument with real teeth. Its DeFi remains thin and concentrated: one aggregator with 95% market share is a single point of failure wearing a market structure costume, and the $270 million Drift exploit showed what happens when a load-bearing protocol breaks. Its volume mix still leans on memecoin speculation, the most cyclical demand source in the industry, and February’s $117 billion month can become a $40 billion month without a single thing going wrong technically.
Ethereum’s problems are quieter and arguably deeper. Lido alone controls roughly 24% of staked ETH, a concentration risk of its own. The rollup roadmap solved scaling and created a value-capture puzzle nobody has answered: if execution fees accrue to Base and Arbitrum while blobs cost pennies, what exactly does ETH the asset earn from Ethereum the ecosystem’s growth? Retail has already voted, migrating to L2s so completely that mainnet active addresses look like a ghost town next to Solana’s. And the fragmentation tax is real: liquidity split across a dozen rollups with seven-day optimistic exits is a worse user experience than one chain with 400-millisecond finality, no matter how elegant the settlement theory. The KelpDAO exploit this spring, which erased $13 billion of TVL in 48 hours of contagion, showed that composability depth cuts in both directions.
Both assets, meanwhile, have been terrible investments this year, a market-wide condition tied to the macro regime we examined in the context of Bitcoin’s liquidity dependence. Fee revenue and active addresses have not protected SOL holders from a 78% peak drawdown, and settlement supremacy has not protected ETH holders from underperforming Bitcoin for most of the cycle. Whatever race is being run, neither token’s chart looks like a victory lap, and on-chain fundamentals have been decoupled from price across the majors for much of 2026.
So who is actually winning? Frame the question three ways and you get three defensible answers.
If the L1 race means base-layer usage, Solana won it, and the margin is no longer close. Two hundred times Ethereum’s L1 throughput, forty times its transaction count, five times its daily fee revenue, and a lead in DEX volume that has survived every market regime since late 2024. By the definition of Layer 1 that existed when the rivalry started, the contest is over.
If the race means where value lives, Ethereum is not losing and may never lose within this cycle. A 68% share of global DeFi TVL, 70% of stablecoin supply, the institutional tokenization pipeline, and the largest developer base in the industry constitute a network-effect fortress that Solana’s growth has dented but nowhere near breached. Capital has inertia, and inertia compounds.
If the race means trajectory, the tape favors Solana with an asterisk. It is winning new users, new listed products, new enterprise integrations, and the ETF flow battle. The asterisk is that trajectory arguments assume the current regime persists, and Solana’s flow-heavy economy is more exposed than Ethereum’s stock-heavy one to the next collapse in speculative appetite. Ethereum’s Fusaka upgrade cycle and the second-half protocol roadmap that all major chains have queued for late 2026 could reshuffle the technical comparison again.
The most likely outcome is also the least satisfying for partisans: permanent coexistence with divided territory. Ethereum settles and custodies. Solana executes and trades. Builders already behave as if this is settled, deploying on both by default. The 2025 framing of an L1 war with a single survivor has quietly died, not with a bang but with two chains discovering they are optimized for markets the other cannot serve.
What could flip the board before December Split decisions invite the obvious follow-up: what would actually change the standings? Four live catalysts carry enough weight to move the argument rather than the noise.
Ethereum’s upgrade cycle is the first. The Fusaka window and the broader second-half protocol roadmap target another step-change in data capacity, and the ecosystem’s real prize sits next to it: any credible mechanism that routes L2 economic success back into ETH, whether through based sequencing, native rollup designs, or fee-market reform, would repair the value-capture hole that has haunted the asset since Dencun. Markets have front-run Ethereum upgrades before; a roadmap that finally answers the accrual question would be the first fundamental ETH catalyst in two years.
Firedancer completion is the second. Solana’s independent validator client moving to full deployment removes the single-client risk that institutions cite most, and its throughput headroom opens application categories, full order-book markets, high-frequency payment networks, that no chain currently serves. If even one breakout consumer or enterprise application lands on that capacity, Solana’s volume base diversifies away from memecoins, which neutralizes the strongest bear argument against its fee economy.
ETF mechanics are the third. Staking-enabled fund structures, under active regulatory discussion for both assets, would transform the flow picture: a spot product yielding 3% to 7% natively changes the allocator pitch entirely, and the asset that gets staking approval first inherits a durable flow advantage. Watch the filings, not the influencers.
Treasury companies are the fourth and strangest. BitMine’s multimillion-ETH accumulation and the emerging class of SOL treasury vehicles mean corporate balance sheets now sit inside both ecosystems as permanent, price-insensitive holders. The Strategy playbook applied to ETH and SOL is small today; its growth rate through a recovering market could make treasuries the marginal buyer that decides which token outperforms, independent of every on-chain metric in this article.
The verdict for the second half Ethereum is losing the L1 race as originally defined, and it forfeited that race by choice when it went all-in on rollups. Solana is winning everything measurable at the base layer while still trailing badly where the institutional money actually sits. Watch three numbers through December: whether Ethereum ETF flows recover once its next upgrade lands, whether Firedancer’s full rollout converts Solana’s throughput ceiling into new categories of application, and whether Solana DeFi TVL can hold above $12 billion without memecoin volume subsidizing it. The chain that answers its own weakness first will own the 2027 narrative. Until then, the war everyone expected has settled into something stranger: two winners, two different games, and one increasingly obsolete question.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Digital asset markets are volatile, and you can lose your entire investment. Always do your own research. Information current as of July 3, 2026.
Jupiter na Solaně spustil trailing stop loss pro Limit Order V2. Funkce sleduje vrchol ceny a prodává při poklesu o nastavené procento, výchozí je 10 %.
Jupiter, the dominant decentralized exchange aggregator on Solana, just rolled out a trailing stop-loss feature for its Limit Order V2 system. It’s one of those tools that centralized exchanges have offered for years, and DeFi users have been quietly jealous about ever since.
Here’s the thing. A regular stop loss says “sell if the price drops to X.” A trailing stop loss says “sell if the price drops X% from its highest point.” The difference matters a lot when you’re riding a rally and don’t want to leave money on the table by setting a fixed exit too early, or too late.
How the trailing stop loss actually works Think of it like a ratchet that only clicks in one direction. As the price of a token climbs, your sell trigger climbs with it, always maintaining a set percentage distance from the peak. If the price reverses, the trigger stays put and fires when hit.
In English: you set a trailing distance, say 10% (which happens to be the default), and the system tracks the highest price your token reaches. If that peak was $100 and the price drops to $90, the order executes. If the price keeps climbing to $150 first, your new trigger becomes $135. You never manually adjust anything.
Jupiter allows users to configure trailing distances anywhere from 0.5% to 90%. That’s a wide range, covering everything from tight scalps on stablecoins to loose trailing stops on memecoins that might swing 30% in an afternoon before continuing upward.
Advertisement
The feature tracks peaks using either USD price or market cap, depending on how the trader configures the order. Orders can be set with expiration periods of up to 30 days, so you’re not committing to babysitting a position forever.
And it works with any token pair supported on the platform, not just majors like SOL, JUP, or USDC.
Why this matters for Solana DeFi Jupiter’s Limit Order V2 system launched around October 2025, introducing fixed take-profit and stop-loss options alongside more sophisticated order types. Those included OCO (One Cancels Other) and OTOCO (One Triggers Other Cancel Order) bundling, essentially letting traders set up conditional logic chains for their trades.
The problem with V2’s original toolkit was that everything relied on fixed triggers. Set a stop loss at $95, and that’s where it fires regardless of whether the token rallied to $200 first. Traders who wanted to protect gains during volatile uptrends had to manually adjust their orders, which kind of defeats the purpose of automation on a decentralized platform.
Execution runs through Jupiter Ultra, the platform’s routing engine designed to find optimal swap paths across Solana’s liquidity pools. Jupiter Ultra also incorporates protection against MEV (Miner Extractable Value) attacks, which on Solana take the form of sandwich attacks where bots front-run and back-run your trade to extract value.
What this means for traders and the broader market For retail traders, the trailing stop loss lowers the skill barrier for managing risk. The 10% default is sensible for most crypto assets, though anyone trading lower-volatility pairs might want to tighten that, and memecoin traders will probably want to widen it considerably.
For more experienced traders, the combination of trailing stops with OCO and OTOCO order types opens up some genuinely sophisticated strategies. You could set up a position with a take-profit target, a trailing stop loss, and have the system cancel whichever order doesn’t trigger first.
One risk worth noting: trailing stop losses in illiquid markets can create cascading sell pressure. If a token’s price drops sharply and multiple trailing stops trigger simultaneously, the resulting sell orders could push the price down further, triggering more stops.
Traders should also be aware that a 30-day maximum expiration means long-term holders can’t set and forget indefinitely. You’ll need to renew orders periodically if you’re using this as an ongoing portfolio management tool rather than a short-term trade management feature.
The feature is accessible through Jupiter’s interface via a dedicated URL parameter.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
UMA je hlavní oracle pro Polymarket, ale jeho tokenový systém řešení sporů je pod tlakem kvůli koncentraci hlasů a střetu zájmů. Kontroverzní případy ukazují, že o konečném výsledku může rozhodnout tokenová většina, nikoli samotná fakta.
Billions of dollars in prediction market positions settle every month based on a machine for deciding truth that most traders have never examined. This guide explains how UMA’s optimistic oracle turns real-world events into on-chain payouts, why the system usually works, the cases where it has failed spectacularly, and the rival settlement designs trying to replace it.
Prediction markets had their breakout year in 2026. Combined volume across the major venues hit $44.8 billion in June alone, driven by a World Cup that turned Polymarket into a multi-billion-dollar sportsbook. The trading side of these platforms is easy to understand: shares in Yes or No, priced between zero and one dollar, paying out one dollar if you are right. The hard part is invisible until it breaks. Someone, or something, has to decide what actually happened.
That decision layer is called resolution, and it is the load-bearing wall of the entire sector. A prediction market is only as good as its ability to decide truth, and a blockchain cannot observe the real world. It cannot see who won an election, whether a company sold an asset, or whether a bill passed. The bridge between reality and the smart contract is an oracle, and for the largest on-chain prediction market, that oracle is UMA. Understanding how it works, and how it fails, is the single most useful piece of due diligence a prediction market trader can do.
The oracle problem, event edition Crypto solved one version of the oracle problem years ago. Price feeds from networks like Chainlink and Pyth deliver asset prices on-chain by aggregating data from many independent publishers. That works because prices are public, continuous, machine-readable, and available from dozens of redundant sources.
Event markets break every one of those assumptions. The questions are one-off rather than continuous. The answers often live in press releases, court rulings, regulatory filings, or a referee’s whistle. And the phrasing matters enormously: a market asking whether a politician says a specific word five times needs a resolution process that can read, interpret, and withstand challenge. No price feed can answer questions like that. What the sector needed was an oracle for arbitrary facts, with a built-in way to contest wrong answers.
Enter UMA and optimistic verification UMA, short for Universal Market Access, is an oracle protocol built by Risk Labs. Its core product, the Optimistic Oracle, resolves outcomes for Polymarket’s main venue, which cleared around $14 billion in monthly volume during the World Cup peak. The word optimistic describes the design philosophy: submitted answers are assumed true unless someone challenges them, with economic incentives doing the policing instead of a central referee.
The flow for a typical Polymarket market runs through a version of the oracle called OOv2, and it has four stages:
Request. When a market’s end conditions are met, the market contract asks the oracle for the outcome, referencing the exact resolution criteria written when the market was created. Proposal. A proposer submits the answer, Yes or No, and posts a bond of $750 in USDC. If the proposal is wrong, the bond is forfeited. If it stands, the proposer earns a reward. Challenge window. The proposal sits open for two hours. Anyone who believes it is wrong can dispute it by posting a matching bond. Escalation. If a dispute lands, the question goes to UMA’s Data Verification Mechanism, the DVM, where UMA token holders research the question and vote on the correct answer. Voters who side with the final outcome earn rewards; voters who miss or vote against it lose a slice of their stake. The DVM’s ruling is final, the losing bond pays the winner, and the market settles. To make that concrete, follow one uncontested market through its whole life. A market opens asking whether a central bank cuts rates at its June meeting, with resolution criteria naming the official statement as the source. Traders price Yes at 70 cents through the month. The decision lands at 2 p.m., the statement confirms a cut, and within minutes an approved proposer submits Yes with the $750 bond. For two hours, anyone on earth with a matching bond could object; nobody does, because the statement is public and unambiguous. The window closes, the oracle reports Yes to the market contract, and every Yes share becomes redeemable for one dollar in USDC. Total elapsed time from event to payout: under three hours, no human authority involved, no appeal needed. That is the experience for the overwhelming majority of markets, and it is why the system scaled.
The bond arithmetic deserves a sentence of its own, because it is the whole security model in miniature. Seven hundred fifty dollars sounds trivial next to markets carrying tens of millions in open interest, and read one way, it is: a wrong proposal on a whale-scale market risks $750 to potentially swing a payout worth thousands of times that. The design’s answer is that the bond does not defend the market alone, the challenge window does. A false proposal only profits if nobody in the world notices for two hours, on a venue where every large market has thousands of position holders watching resolution like hawks and a matching bond waiting for whoever catches the error. The bond prices the cost of forcing a dispute, not the value of the market, and the escalation layer is supposed to carry the real weight. That framing also locates the true weak point precisely: the system is only as strong as the layer disputes escalate to.
The percentages favor the happy path. Roughly 99% of assertions since 2021 have gone undisputed, meaning most markets settle in the two-to-four-hour window after an event without any human argument. The system processes upward of 7,000 proposals per month, and Risk Labs has automated much of the pipeline: language models draft proposals for around half a cent per request, and bots like OOTruthBot summarize evidence threads and flag suspicious submissions, cutting routine resolution from hours to seconds.
Inside the DVM: what a token vote actually looks like Since the DVM is the backstop everything escalates to, its mechanics deserve a closer look than most traders ever give them.
When a dispute triggers a vote, the question enters a voting round for UMA token holders who have staked into the voting system. Voting runs in two phases. In the commit phase, each voter submits an encrypted vote, hidden from everyone including other voters, which prevents late voters from simply copying the visible majority. In the reveal phase, voters decrypt and publish what they committed. Votes are weighted by staked tokens, and the outcome that carries the stake-weighted majority becomes the oracle’s answer.
The incentive design is the load-bearing part. Voters who land with the final outcome earn rewards from protocol emissions. Voters who miss a round or land against the outcome lose a slice of their stake. The design intends to pay for diligence, and it mostly does, but it carries a known theoretical flaw inherited from every majority-rewarded oracle: the profitable strategy is voting with the expected majority, not with the truth, and in ordinary cases those two targets coincide. The failure cases are the ones where they separate, and where a large holder can make the majority whatever they need it to be.
There is also a timing cost. An undisputed market settles within hours; a disputed one waits for the full commit and reveal cycle, stretching resolution to days while positions stay frozen and traders argue in evidence threads. For anyone holding size, a dispute is not just a risk to the payout but a lockup on capital.
In November 2025 the system got its most significant overhaul, the Managed Optimistic Oracle V2. MOOv2 restricted the right to propose resolutions to 37 pre-approved addresses, a mix of Risk Labs staff and Polymarket users with high historical accuracy, while keeping disputes open to anyone. The change targeted premature and spam proposals, which had been a chronic source of delays and gamesmanship. Proposing became curated; challenging stayed permissionless.
Where the machine breaks The design has one structural soft spot, and 2026 has stress-tested it in public: the final arbiter is a token vote, and tokens can be bought, concentrated, and conflicted. The numbers behind that concern are not speculative. A Wall Street Journal investigation published in May found that in most disputed Polymarket markets, more than half of the UMA votes came from the ten largest wallets. At least 60% of active UMA voters could be linked to live Polymarket accounts, and roughly one in five disputes had at least one voter with a financial stake in the market they were ruling on. The dispute pipeline itself is swelling: Polymarket logged more than 1,150 disputed markets in the first five months of 2026, already past its full-year 2025 total.
Two cases show what that looks like in practice.
The first was a 2025 market on a United States minerals agreement, where a single large UMA holder cast five million tokens across three accounts, about 25% of the vote in that dispute round, pushing a contested market to resolve early against the plain reading of events. Traders on the wrong side of that ruling lost roughly $7 million. The vote was legal under the system’s rules. That was precisely the criticism.
The second came in June 2026 and drew more than $60 million in volume: a market asking whether Strategy would sell any Bitcoin by May 31. A regulatory filing published on June 1 disclosed that the company had sold 32 BTC between May 26 and May 31 at an average price of $77,135, its first disposal since 2022, inside the market’s cutoff. Two proposed resolutions were challenged, the question escalated to a token vote, and the market ultimately resolved No. Shares tracking the documented answer traded at 12 cents while the dispute ran. Critics across the industry framed the episode as a structural verdict: when ambiguous rules meet concentrated voting power, the payout can diverge from the facts, and the holders of the settlement token can be the same people holding positions in the market being settled.
None of this means most markets resolve wrongly. The overwhelming majority settle cleanly and fast. It means the tail risk is governance-shaped: the worst outcomes cluster in high-volume, ambiguously worded markets where a motivated whale has both the tokens and the position.
Why Polymarket keeps the system anyway Given the 2026 dispute record, the obvious question is why the largest on-chain venue has not replaced its oracle. The answer is a stack of practical reasons that critics tend to skip.
The happy path really is that good. Ninety-nine percent of markets settling within hours, at a cost of fractions of a cent per automated proposal, across every category from elections to award shows, is a service level no alternative currently matches for open-ended questions. Deterministic settlement cannot touch subjective markets at all, and regulated clearing brings jurisdiction constraints that would gut the international product.
The system also iterates. MOOv2 was a direct response to the proposal-spam era and measurably cut premature resolutions. The language model pipeline and evidence bots were responses to speed and quality complaints. Bond sizes, challenge windows, and proposer sets are all tunable parameters, and Risk Labs has shown willingness to tune them under pressure. Whether tuning can fix a voting-power concentration problem is the open question, since the DVM backstop itself is the part no parameter change reaches.
And there is a structural argument: for a venue whose regulatory story leans on decentralization, outsourcing truth to an external token-holder process is a feature. Polymarket does not decide outcomes, and that sentence has legal value. The company’s answer to the United States market was not to change the oracle but to split the product, running the domestic venue through a CFTC-regulated framework while the international book kept UMA. The two-track structure is itself a verdict on where each settlement model belongs.
The rival designs The dispute wave has made resolution architecture a competitive battleground, and three alternative models are now live at scale.
Deterministic validator settlement. Hyperliquid’s HIP-4 outcome markets, live since May 2026, remove the token vote entirely. Settlement runs through the chain’s validator set executing automated resolution against pre-specified objective data sources: no dispute window, no escalation, no path for a market participant to vote on a market. The constraint is scope, since deterministic settlement only fits questions with clean data sources, which is why the first HIP-4 contracts are Bitcoin price thresholds. Our companion guide to HIP-3 and HIP-4 covers the full design, and the market has been pricing Hyperliquid’s prediction market ambitions since the February announcement.
Regulated clearing. Kalshi reaches finality through the opposite architecture: a centralized exchange clearinghouse, registered with the CFTC as a derivatives clearing organization since August 2024, resolving markets under rules filed with a federal regulator and publishing results on-chain through Pyth and RedStone. Disputes go through exchange procedures, not token votes. The model trades decentralization for accountability, and its structured markets rarely face the ambiguity problems that plague open-ended questions. Polymarket’s separate United States venue, itself a CFTC-registered designated contract market that did $3.04 billion in June, follows the same regulated path, while the international venue still settles through UMA.
Purpose-built feeds. For objective, high-frequency questions, oracles built for prices work fine, and Polymarket already uses Chainlink to settle its fast crypto price markets, where no public discourse about the answer is needed. FIFA’s own licensed prediction market partner for the World Cup runs on Chainlink infrastructure, part of the tournament’s broader crypto buildout. Further out, web proof systems could let a resolution cite a cryptographically verified source document instead of a screenshot, a use case covered in our zkTLS explainer.
History adds a warning label to all of it, because decentralized resolution has been tried before and the graveyard is instructive. Augur, the sector’s first major attempt, launched in 2018 with REP token staking where reporters earned by landing with the consensus outcome, and the platform learned quickly that rewarding agreement with the majority is not the same as rewarding truth, especially once invalid and ambiguously worded markets entered the mix. Omen outsourced disputes to Kleros, a decentralized juror court whose participants were likewise paid for voting with the crowd, and inherited the same incentive plus slow rulings and heavy gas costs. Both platforms also discovered that resolution is a liquidity problem in disguise: traders avoid venues where the payout rules feel lottery-shaped, so unreliable settlement starves the order books that make prediction markets useful at all. Every resolution design since is a wager about which failure mode is most tolerable: token capture, institutional discretion, or narrow scope.
What traders should actually check Resolution risk is checkable before entry, and the checklist is short.
Read the resolution criteria as literally as a hostile lawyer would, because the oracle will. The Strategy market turned on exact wording and an exact cutoff. If the criteria name a specific source, that source is the truth regardless of what every news outlet reports. Check the venue’s settlement path: UMA-resolved international Polymarket, a CFTC clearinghouse, a validator-settled chain, and a Chainlink price feed are four different risk profiles wearing the same Yes and No interface. Prefer markets with objective, single-source answers when size matters, since ambiguity is the raw material of every resolution scandal. And in a disputed market, watch the UMA vote rather than the news cycle, because the vote is what pays.
Two habits separate professionals from tourists here. The first is position sizing by resolution clarity: the same trader who is comfortable with six figures on a rate decision, where the source is official and the answer binary, keeps ambiguous cultural or political wording to entertainment-sized stakes. The second is tracking the dispute docket itself. Markets with pending UMA votes, and the wallets voting in them, are public on-chain information, and the recurring names in contested rulings are known to anyone who looks. In a system where the referee list is visible, not reading it is a choice.
One more number worth holding in mind: UMA’s entire token traded around a $63 million market capitalization earlier this year, while the markets it settles cleared billions per month. The economic security of a token-voted oracle is bounded by the cost of acquiring the tokens, and that ratio is the quiet argument behind every alternative design now gaining ground.
Truth as infrastructure Prediction markets are routinely praised as truth machines, better than polls and faster than newsrooms. The praise is half-earned. Prices aggregate beliefs brilliantly, but the settlement layer decides which beliefs get paid, and that layer is built from bonds, challenge windows, token votes, clearinghouse rules, and validator scripts, each with a distinct way of being wrong. The sector’s next phase will be decided as much by resolution engineering as by volume, because traders forgive losing on the outcome and do not forgive losing on the ruling. The machinery for deciding truth is now a product category of its own. It deserves to be read as carefully as the odds.
Frequently asked questions How does Polymarket decide who won a market? Polymarket’s international venue outsources resolution to UMA’s Optimistic Oracle. After an event, an approved proposer submits the outcome with a $750 USDC bond, and a two-hour challenge window opens. If nobody disputes, the market settles on that answer, usually within two to four hours. If a dispute lands, UMA token holders vote through the Data Verification Mechanism, and their ruling is final.
What is UMA’s optimistic oracle? It is an oracle protocol by Risk Labs for bringing arbitrary real-world facts on-chain. It is called optimistic because proposed answers are assumed true unless challenged during a dispute window, with bonds and rewards making honesty profitable and false proposals costly. Around 99% of assertions since 2021 have gone undisputed, and contested cases escalate to a token-holder vote.
What happens when a Polymarket resolution is disputed? The disputer posts a bond matching the proposer’s, and the question escalates to UMA’s Data Verification Mechanism. UMA token holders research the question and vote, with rewards for voting with the final outcome and penalties for missing or voting against it. The losing side’s bond pays the winning side. Disputes stretch resolution from hours to days, and the DVM ruling cannot be appealed.
Why is UMA’s system controversial in 2026? Concentration and conflicts. A Wall Street Journal investigation found most disputed markets saw over half their votes come from the ten largest wallets, and about one in five disputes included a voter holding a position in the market being judged. More than 1,150 markets were disputed in the first five months of 2026, and a $60 million market on a Strategy Bitcoin sale resolved against a documented regulatory filing.
What was the Strategy Bitcoin market dispute? A Polymarket contract asked whether Strategy would sell any Bitcoin by May 31, 2026. A June 1 regulatory filing showed the company sold 32 BTC between May 26 and May 31, inside the window. The resolution was challenged twice, went to a UMA token vote, and the market resolved No anyway. The episode became the leading exhibit in the argument against token-voted settlement.
What is MOOv2? The Managed Optimistic Oracle V2, deployed in November 2025, restricted resolution proposals to 37 pre-approved addresses with strong accuracy records while keeping disputes open to everyone. Paired with language model automation that drafts proposals for fractions of a cent and bots that summarize evidence, it cut spam proposals and sped up routine settlement without changing the token-vote backstop.
How do Kalshi and Hyperliquid settle markets differently? Kalshi resolves through its CFTC-registered clearinghouse under federally filed rules, then publishes results on-chain via Pyth and RedStone, with disputes handled by exchange procedure. Hyperliquid’s HIP-4 uses deterministic settlement by the validator set against pre-specified data sources, with no dispute window at all. Neither involves a token vote, and both are positioned as answers to UMA’s governance risk.
Can a prediction market resolve incorrectly and stay that way? Yes. DVM rulings are final, and Polymarket has honored controversial outcomes rather than overriding the oracle. The practical defenses are all pre-trade: read the resolution criteria literally, check which settlement system the venue uses, prefer objectively verifiable questions for larger positions, and treat ambiguous wording as a risk factor priced into the odds.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Digital asset markets are volatile and you can lose your entire investment. Always do your own research. Information current as of July 3, 2026.
Gnosis Pay oznámil exploit zranitelnosti v modulech Delay a Roles, při němž útočníci získali 1,5 mil. USD a dalších asi 300 tis. USD bylo znepřístupněno. Gnosis ztráty absorboval a všechny prostředky uživatelům obnovil.
On 1 June 2026, attacker(s) exploited a vulnerability that directly affected software modules (Delay Module & Roles Module) used in connection with the Gnosis Pay card safe infrastructure. This resulted in certain user safe wallets, and the funds stored there, either being compromised or at risk of compromise.
The team quickly contained the issue, taking card services offline and co-ordinating with partners to isolate attacker accounts, while keeping partners and users informed, and guaranteeing user funds.
The attacker(s) were able to extract a total of $1.5m. An additional ~$300k was rendered inaccessible and we are exploring recovery options.
Gnosis absorbed the losses and all funds were restored to users.
The TimelineWhenWhat1 Jun 2026
Monitoring flagged the attacker's first large unauthorized transfer at 06:17 UTC and, following verification, the emergency response was initiated.
Root cause identified as a vulnerability in the Zodiac modules at 08:06 UTC.
1 Jun 2026
Card services taken offline. Bridge to Gnosis Chain paused by bridge validators. Attacker-linked addresses shared with stablecoin issuers to isolate where possible.
1–2 Jun 2026
Gnosis leadership proactively notified external projects that were at risk from the same vulnerability.
The Zodiac modules were repaired and shared with ChainSecurity for a focused review.
3 Jun 2026
On the evening of Wednesday, June 3rd, the first accounts were reactivated, including account balance restoration, card re-enabling, and resumption of normal operations.
An emergency fund was established and made available for users in extremis.
4 Jun 2026
ChainSecurity completed their review, the modules were also reviewed by internal teams, and we began the phased resumption of services.
4–7 Jun 2026
We deployed newly engineered card safe modules in tranches, linking to users' existing profiles. This was followed by phased restoration of full account balances and resumption of normal services.
6 Jun 2026
Full services restored to 99% of users, with the remaining accounts restored early the following week.
No users lost funds in the exploit.
Description of the ExploitThe attack was rapidly detected by treasury manager, NOCA, via their monitoring infrastructure. We immediately triggered our incident response protocol and identified the root cause within 2 hours.
The impact was isolated to the card safe software module components (specifically the Delay and Roles Modules provided by Zodiac). To ensure containment during the active triage phase, we systematically paused card transaction processing, authorisation systems, and new user onboarding.
To let an account owner move funds without holding native gas tokens, the account confirms requests with a signature check. It uses a standard method, ERC-1271, which asks a contract a yes-or-no question: is this signature valid?
The check read the answer the contract returned. It did not check whether the call had succeeded. Attacker(s) could deploy a contract that fails on purpose while still returning the "valid" code. To the account, a forged approval looked real. That let the attacker(s) queue withdrawals from accounts they did not own.
The vulnerability entered the Zodiac code in version 3.4.0, released on 30 October 2023, when signature support was added (commit 9a9e380).
The flawed check worked like this:
The fix is small. Also require the call to succeed:
The initial exploit contract is verifiable here: 0x5a77953caa27ed4638f4dfdc665b8064d0e97a35.
A signature patch was flagged as a security fix by the Zodiac team on 5 June 2026 (days after the exploit began).
The Amounts InvolvedAmountTaken by the attacker(s)
~$1.5M
Funds in inaccessible accounts
~$300k
Total
~$1.8M across 5,281 wallets with balance ≥ $1
Assets taken by the attacker(s):
AssetTaken (USD value)GNO
641,159
EURe
453,175
USDC.e
399,121
SAFE
2,202
WETH
323
xDAI
135
USDC
28
USDT
7
Total
~1,496,151
Actions Now UnderwayGrowing the security team.
We are growing the security team and bringing in external researchers to work alongside them, adding dedicated capacity.
Conducting a full internal review of our security practices.
We have an ongoing review of onchain and offchain systems: smart contracts, infrastructure, processes, and dependencies we rely on.
Completing an independent, holistic security assessment.
We are re-assessing our codebase and infrastructure end-to-end with an external security firm, giving us an outside perspective.
Widening our audit scope.
We have extended our smart contract audits to also cover external contracts we depend on.
Actively monitoring dependencies.
We actively monitor the dependencies we rely on, with a clear process to review and act on upstream security fixes quickly.
Rolling out the new Gnosis Pay product (known internally as v2).
We recently completed a full rebuild of the Gnosis Pay product and it is optimized for observability and streamlined operations. That observability ensures our ability to respond rapidly in future.
Boardwalk plánuje přesunout své systémy protokolových tokenů na Arbitrum a nahradit BMX novým tokenem BWS. Držitelé BMX budou moci později migrovat v poměru 1:1 na BWS.
San Francisco, California, July 3rd, 2026, Chainwire
Boardwalk, a launch and market-formation protocol for token economies, announced plans to move its protocol-token systems to Arbitrum and introduce BWS as the successor to its legacy BMX protocol token.
Under the planned transition, BWS will anchor Boardwalk’s protocol-token systems on Arbitrum, including staking, Voter Points, Fee Direction, and primary protocol-token liquidity. Boardwalk’s application layer will remain multichain, with relaunches planned across six supported networks as integration work is completed.
The transition separates the protocol token’s operating environment from Boardwalk’s broader application infrastructure. Boardwalk will continue to support token-economy launches through its application layer, while protocol-token systems operate from Arbitrum.
Boardwalk’s launch framework is intended to provide a standardized structure for token-economy formation. Its described architecture includes published launch rules, seed liquidity designed to lock at graduation, contract-defined fee routing and vesting, fee-protection mechanisms, liquidity-provider participation systems, and Café Boardwalk, a public coordination space for launches.
Under Boardwalk’s described fee configuration, applicable trades include a 1.15% token fee and a 0.10% pool fee, totaling 1.25%. The token-level fee mechanism is designed to reduce incentives for alternative liquidity arrangements focused solely on capturing trading-fee flows. Fees are routed according to the applicable launch configuration and depend on protocol activity and market conditions.
Boardwalk does not select, vet, or endorse issuers or projects that use its protocol.
“BWS is intended to consolidate the protocol-token systems supporting Boardwalk’s next stage of development on Arbitrum, while the application layer remains multichain,” said Meowphasaurus, Co-Founder of Boardwalk. “The transition provides a defined operating environment for staking, Voter Points, Fee Direction, and protocol-token liquidity, while launches continue to be structured through the Boardwalk application layer.”
BMX holders who meet published eligibility requirements will be able to migrate 1 BMX for 1 BWS through Boardwalk’s official migration process when it opens. Migrated BWS is planned to be received as a staked position on Arbitrum. Boardwalk will publish official contract addresses, eligibility criteria, timing, bridge information, and step-by-step instructions before the migration process becomes available.
BWS is planned to use a token-contract design without an owner, administrator, minter, upgrade path, or post-deployment supply-increase function. Boardwalk expects to publish final contract details and verification materials through its official channels.
Boardwalk will release further information about the multichain application relaunch and protocol-token transition through its official website and communications. Users should rely on those sources for contract addresses, eligibility criteria, and migration instructions.
About Boardwalk
Boardwalk is launch and market-formation infrastructure for transparent token economies. Its protocol framework includes visible launch rules, seed liquidity designed to lock at graduation, contract-defined fee routing, vesting, participation systems, and public coordination through Café Boardwalk.
This release is for informational purposes only. Statements about future integrations, deployments, timing, migration, bridge availability, protocol activity, fees, or burns are forward-looking and subject to change. Migration availability is subject to published eligibility criteria, applicable law, technical availability, and smart-contract risk. BWS, staking, Voter Points, and Fee Direction do not provide ownership, equity, a revenue share, or a claim on Boardwalk or its assets. Voter Points are non-transferable and have no monetary value. Nothing in this release guarantees liquidity, fee amounts, token value, economic benefit, or any financial outcome. References to Arbitrum identify an intended deployment environment and do not imply sponsorship, endorsement, or partnership.
MiCA vytlačila USDT z regulovaných burz v EU a posílila USDC, které může bez omezení fungovat napříč všemi 27 členskými státy. Robinhood zároveň vybral Arbitrum pro svou novou síť, což podtrhuje jeho institucionální náskok.
The layer-2 wars have entered a new phase, and the dividing lines are no longer purely technical. Arbitrum, Base, and Optimism continue to compete on throughput, fee economics, and developer ecosystems. Those factors remain relevant.
But as the past week has made clear, the deciding variables for institutional capital have shifted to regulatory readiness – and the gap between the leading L2s and the rest is now measurable.
MiCA's Stablecoin Re-Sort
July 1 marked full enforcement of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA), and the most immediate impact was on stablecoin routing. Tether's USDT – $186 billion in issuance, the world's largest stablecoin – was removed from regulated EU exchange order books after the company declined to seek an Electronic Money Institution license. Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino publicly argued that placing 60% of reserves ($111 billion) in EU-supervised banks would constitute systemic risk to European financial institutions.
The counterpoint is less discussed: MiCA's reserve transparency requirements, including monthly audited disclosures by registered EU auditors, would have imposed examination standards that Tether has historically avoided. The company has never completed a full independent audit by a major accounting firm; its quarterly attestations confirm balances match what the company reports, not that the reporting is accurate and complete. The CFTC fined Tether $41 million in 2021 and found it had maintained full dollar backing for only 27.6% of days between 2016 and 2019.
Coinbase Europe, Kraken, Crypto.com, and Binance EU pulled USDT for European users. Only 210 of more than 1,200 EU crypto firms had converted to full MiCA CASP authorization as of the July 1 deadline – meaning 83% of operators entered the enforcement period technically in breach. Circle's USDC, backed by approximately $60 billion in reserves and authorized through France's ACPR since 2024, operates freely across all 27 EU member states.
The institutional implication is direct: compliant stablecoin routing is now a precondition for European market access. USDC is the beneficiary. Tether maintains infrastructure partnerships – StablR and Oobit launched MiCA-compliant stablecoins via Tether's Hadron platform – but the direct product presence inside regulated EU venues is gone.
The Enterprise Procurement Signal
One of the more significant institutional signals of the week was Robinhood's choice of infrastructure partner for its newly launched chain. On July 1, Robinhood announced Robinhood Chain, a layer-2 network built on Arbitrum Orbit. The company, which serves nearly 28 million customers across 38 countries and is a regulated financial institution—not a crypto-native startup—made a deliberate platform commitment to Arbitrum's stack. HOOD shares rose approximately 4% on the day of the announcement.
Robinhood Bets on Onchain Finance With AI-Native Ethereum Layer-2 Launch
Robinhood Chain brings 24/7 tokenized stocks, perps via Lighter, and agentic trading to a global audience — as the brokerage pushes deeper into DeFi infrastructure.
BlockheadBlockhead
Day-one ecosystem partners read like an enterprise blockchain procurement checklist: Uniswap deploying a dedicated AMM for public liquidity, Pleiades running a proprietary trading venue, BitGo for custody, Chainlink for oracle infrastructure, and Alchemy for developer tooling. These are the same names that appear in institutional RFPs for enterprise blockchain deployment. The composition of that list is itself a signal.
This matters beyond Robinhood. Arbitrum's institutional partnership infrastructure – custodians, prime brokers, settlement systems – has increasingly become the mechanism that determines which L2s get included in enterprise infrastructure stacks. Base continues to show strong transaction volume growth with Coinbase's regulatory relationships as backdrop. Optimism maintains its op-stack ecosystem and progressive decentralization roadmap. Both remain relevant. But in an environment where institutional clients ask pointed questions about regulatory jurisdiction and compliance pathways, Arbitrum's enterprise-ready infrastructure appears most mature.
What Regulation is Actually Sorting
MiCA's stablecoin provisions are the most visible sorting mechanism, but they are not the only one. DORA cybersecurity requirements, the EU travel rule for crypto-asset transfers, and expanding institutional reporting obligations are compressing the window for chains without compliance-grade frameworks. Custodians and settlement systems are increasingly specifying which L2s meet their due diligence standards as a precondition for integration.
Ethereum hosts approximately $180 billion in stablecoins on mainnet – roughly 60% of total supply – and roughly two-thirds of all tokenized real-world assets, according to DeFiLlama data. The routing question for institutional capital is no longer whether to use Ethereum L2s, but which one offers the compliance foundation, liquidity depth, and infrastructure partnerships for sustained deployment.
The US options market processed more than 15.2 billion contracts in 2025, averaging roughly 60 million per trading day – record levels that reflect broader institutional adoption of listed derivatives for directional trading, hedging, and capital management. As that volume grows and more of it migrates on-chain, the chains that have already cleared the enterprise procurement bar will capture disproportionate flows.
What is sorting the field is not retail volume. It is enterprise procurement that determines which chains get included in institutional infrastructure stacks. The chains that clear that bar will capture meaningful institutional flows. The rest will compete for everything else.
Yuma spustila fond Yuma Total Market Fund pro institucionální a akreditované investory, který kombinuje TAO s expozicí vůči více subnetům Bittensoru. Fond cílí na širší decentralizovanou AI ekonomiku.
Yuma launched a diversified fund focused on the Bittensor ecosystem. The strategy combines TAO with exposure to multiple AI subnets. The fund targets institutional and accredited investors. The new vehicle combines exposure to Bittensor’s native TAO token with a portfolio of subnet assets, allowing investors to access the broader decentralized AI economy through a single managed strategy.
New Fund Targets Decentralized AI Yuma, the digital asset infrastructure and investment firm owned by Digital Currency Group (DCG), announced the launch of the Yuma Total Market Fund on June 25. The vehicle is designed to provide institutional allocators and accredited investors with broad exposure to Bittensor, one of the fastest-growing decentralized artificial intelligence networks.
Unlike traditional crypto investment products that focus on a single token, the new fund combines exposure to TAO, Bittensor’s native cryptocurrency, with assets linked to the network’s expanding ecosystem of application-specific subnets. The approach is intended to give investors access to multiple segments of the decentralized AI economy through a single professionally managed portfolio.
Yuma also confirmed that the fund has secured seed capital from an anchor investor, although neither the investor’s identity nor the size of the commitment was disclosed.
Expanding Beyond Token Exposure The launch reflects growing institutional demand for diversified exposure to blockchain-based artificial intelligence rather than concentrating solely on individual cryptocurrencies.
Bittensor operates as an open-source decentralized machine-learning network that rewards contributors for providing AI models, computing power and specialized data. Its architecture currently supports 128 active subnets, representing distinct AI applications ranging from data marketplaces and cloud infrastructure to cybersecurity, fraud detection and pharmaceutical research.
Collectively, those subnet assets represent an ecosystem valued at more than $900 million, according to Yuma.
By combining TAO with subnet exposure, the Total Market Fund seeks to capture growth across both the protocol’s base layer and its expanding application economy.
Yuma describes the strategy as an alternative to conventional AI investments concentrated in a handful of publicly traded technology companies or long-duration venture capital funds. Instead, the firm argues that decentralized AI offers investors liquid exposure to an emerging sector built around open participation and blockchain incentives.
Third Product in Growing Asset Management Platform The Total Market Fund becomes the third investment strategy within Yuma Asset Management’s expanding product lineup.
The firm’s existing Subnet Composite Fund provides market-cap-weighted exposure across the broader subnet ecosystem, while the Large Cap Subnet Fund focuses on the largest and most established subnet assets. The new strategy combines elements of both approaches by integrating protocol-level exposure through TAO alongside investments spanning the wider Bittensor network.
The launch reflects increasing product specialization as institutional investors seek more sophisticated ways to access emerging digital asset sectors beyond Bitcoin and Ethereum.
Rather than offering passive token exposure, Yuma is positioning its products as thematic investment strategies centered on decentralized artificial intelligence, an area attracting growing attention from institutional capital.
Institutional Interest in Decentralized AI Accelerates The launch comes as artificial intelligence remains one of the fastest-growing investment themes across both traditional finance and digital assets.
Barry Silbert, founder and chief executive of both DCG and Yuma, said the new fund is intended to provide investors with exposure to an open AI ecosystem rather than relying exclusively on a small group of centralized technology companies.
AI is becoming a core portfolio allocation. But for most investors it’s limited to a few, big players
Bittensor $TAO offers access to a decentralized network of AI projects@YumaGroup opens the door for investors to Bittensor and decentralized AI https://t.co/A5C8AXEDMU
— Barry Silbert (@BarrySilbert) June 25, 2026
He argued that decentralized networks such as Bittensor allow developers, researchers and infrastructure providers to participate directly in AI innovation while creating new investment opportunities tied to blockchain-based incentive systems.
The product also reflects broader institutional interest in tokenized infrastructure and blockchain-native investment strategies. As digital asset markets mature, fund managers are increasingly creating sector-specific portfolios targeting themes such as decentralized finance, tokenization, stablecoins and artificial intelligence instead of relying solely on broad cryptocurrency exposure.
For institutional investors, the Yuma Total Market Fund represents another example of how digital asset managers are packaging blockchain infrastructure into traditional investment vehicles. Whether decentralized AI can emerge as a distinct institutional asset class will depend on continued developer adoption, subnet growth and the ability of networks such as Bittensor to compete with established AI platforms in both innovation and commercial deployment.
Hyperliquid provedl zpětný odkup HYPE za 283 milionů USD, největší v kryptu od začátku roku 2026. Celkem už odkoupil přes 1,1 miliardy USD a spálil více než 44 milionů HYPE.
Hyperliquid has cemented its position as crypto’s most aggressive token buyer, recording a single buyback of $283 million, the largest in the industry since the start of 2026. The decentralized perpetual exchange has now crossed $1.1 billion in cumulative buybacks.
The protocol isn’t doing this out of generosity. It’s a mechanical system: 97-99% of Hyperliquid’s trading fees flow directly into open-market purchases of HYPE tokens, which are then burned.
The buyback machine in numbers The Assistance Fund, approved by validators in December 2025, operates as a continuous demand engine for HYPE tokens.
Advertisement
From January to October 2025 alone, the protocol spent $645 million on buybacks. Quarterly figures tell the acceleration story: $316.76 million in Q3 2025, $255.05 million in Q4 2025, and $192.25 million in Q1 2026. Monthly averages have ranged between $65 million and $85 million during earlier periods.
Over 44 million HYPE tokens have been acquired through the program so far. That represents roughly 4.4% of the total supply permanently removed from circulation.
Hyperliquid has generated over $1.16 billion cumulatively, with nearly the entire sum directed toward HYPE token acquisitions.
Eight projects join the buyback trend Eight crypto projects have now conducted buybacks that outstrip their supply growth since January 2026. That $283 million single buyback exceeds what many protocols generate in total revenue across an entire year.
What this means for investors Because buybacks are tied to trading fees rather than discretionary decisions by a core team, investors can model future demand based on trading volume. If the platform generates fees, HYPE gets bought and burned.
With 4.4% of total supply already removed and the program showing no signs of slowing, HYPE’s circulating supply is shrinking at a meaningful pace. For context, Bitcoin’s supply growth from mining is roughly 0.8% annually.
The model’s health depends entirely on Hyperliquid maintaining its trading volume dominance. Any sustained decline in perpetual trading activity would directly reduce the buyback rate.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Obžalovaný „John Doe 33“ chce v New Yorku zamítnout žalobu proti 39 069 neaktivním bitcoinovým adresám s tím, že adresy jsou jen data a nelze je žalovat. Tvrdí také, že kontroluje jednu z neaktivních peněženek uvedených v případu.
A pseudonymous defendant has moved to dismiss a New York lawsuit seeking ownership of 39,069 dormant Bitcoin addresses, arguing that Bitcoin addresses are merely data strings that cannot be sued.
The defendant, identifying themselves as “John Doe 33,” filed a notice of appearance and motion to dismiss on Thursday, claiming they control one of the dormant wallets named in the lawsuit.
According to the motion, the lawsuit is legally defective because Bitcoin address strings are neither persons nor legal entities subject to the court's jurisdiction. The filing argues that a public Bitcoin address cannot itself be “found” under New York's lost-property law because it has always been publicly visible on the blockchain.
The filing challenges the lawsuit filed in May by plaintiff “Noah Doe” and two Wyoming-based LLCs, ABC Company and XYZ Company. The plaintiffs claim the Bitcoin tied to the listed addresses constitutes abandoned property that they reported to the New York Police Department and claimed under New York lost-property law.
Regardless of how the court rules on ownership, it remains unclear how the plaintiffs could recover any Bitcoin without possessing the private keys needed to access the wallets.
Defendant files a motion to dismiss the case seeking ownership of 39,069 Bitcoin wallets. Source: iapps.court.state.ny.us
The complaint lists 39,069 Bitcoin addresses, including wallet addresses widely associated with Bitcoin creator Satoshi Nakamoto and the Mt. Gox hacker. The listed wallets collectively hold an estimated 3.7 million BTC (worth about $234 billion), according to Sani, founder of Bitcoin analytics platform Timechain Index.
Defendant appears to control $300 million Bitcoin walletBlockchain data suggests that “John Doe 33” controls a wallet holding 5,000 BTC received in April 2014 that has remained untouched for more than 12 years, making it worth more than $300 million at current prices, according to a Friday X post from Galaxy Digital head of research Alex Thorn.
“That's ~100x the median defendant address. This is a real holder with real standing choosing to fight, not a bystander.”
Source: Alex Thorn
Thorn added that the filing prevented what had been a “near-certain” default judgment and challenged jurisdictional and statutory defects in the plaintiffs' case.
The supply of Bitcoin has been dormant for the past five and 10 years. Source: Bitbo
There are currently 3.5 million BTC, worth about $215 billion, that have been dormant for the past 10 years and another 6.6 million coins, worth around $406 billion, that have been dormant for over five years, Bitbo data shows.
Magazine: How crypto laws changed in 2025 — and how they’ll change in 2026
Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.
Velcí držitelé nakoupili za dva týdny přes 270 000 BTC za 16,7 miliardy USD, zatímco americké spotové bitcoinové ETF v červnu odčerpaly rekordních 4,06 miliardy USD. Tento rozpor často bývá blízko cyklických minim.
U.S. spot bitcoin ETFs saw a record $4.06 billion in outflows in June, pushing them negative for 2026 before a modest $221 million inflow on Thursday.Large bitcoin holders, or whales, accumulated more than 270,000 BTC ($16.7 billion) over the past two weeks even as U.S. spot demand remained weak, a pattern often seen near market cycle lows.While most major cryptocurrencies have slumped alongside bitcoin, Solana has gained about 15% since early June, whereas some Ethereum Layer 2 tokens have sunk to record lows amid shifting technology and fee dynamics.The next U.S. inflation reading, following a hot 4.2% May print, is seen as crucial for the Federal Reserve’s rate path and could reshape the pressure that has weighed on bitcoin this month.Large bitcoin holders bought more than 270,000 bitcoin BTC$61,899.78 ($16.7 billion) over the past two weeks, stepping in as U.S. institutions pulled money out at a record pace.
U.S. spot bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) shed $4.06 billion in June, their worst month since listing, past the previous record of $3.56 billion set in February 2025.
The outflows pushed the funds into the red for 2026 as a whole for the first time, and these products finally recorded a $221 million inflow on Thursday.
Large wallets, often called whales, went the other way, analysts at crypto exchange Bitfinex shared with CoinDesk in a Friday note. They added more than 270,000 BTC over two weeks while the spot premium, a gauge of how hard U.S. buyers are bidding, stayed negative, meaning the buying was not coming from spot desks.
Institutions selling and large holders accumulating at the same time is the pattern that has shown up near past cycle lows, where long-term holders take coins off sellers before any recovery reaches the price.
Solana is the exception among the majors. SOL has risen about 15% since early June, even as bitcoin touched 21-month lows, helped by protocol upgrades and a jump in onchain transfers of tokenized real-world assets, which rose 120% to $8.53 billion.
Bitfinex analysts called the split a "familiar one," with alts tending to sell off first and recover first.
Not every alt fits that read, however. Optimism and other layer-2 tokens, networks built to take load off Ethereum, are trading near record lows after Base, Coinbase's network, dropped Optimism's shared technology, removing the fee-capture argument that propped up their value.
The next inflation reading is the pivot from here. May inflation ran hot at 4.2%, but Warsh's comment at the ECB's Sintra forum that inflation risks have eased already gave risk assets a small lift. A softer print would start to shift the rate-path story that has weighed on bitcoin all month, ahead of the Fed's next meeting.
Related Assets
12345678910
Building the Zcash Machine: Tachyon and Quantum Readiness
Building the Zcash Machine: Tachyon and Quantum Readiness
Zcash’s Tachyon upgrade aims to scale shielded payments, improve quantum readiness, and test whether its funding, security, and governance can hold.
Jun 30, 2026
Zcash’s Tachyon upgrade aims to scale shielded payments, improve quantum readiness, and test whether its funding, security, and governance can hold.
Why it matters:
Zcash’s Tachyon upgrade aims to scale shielded payments, improve quantum readiness, and test whether its funding, security, and governance can hold.
XRP vystoupal na třídenní maximum po evropské expanzi Ripple a novém buy signálu Supertrend. Analytik Ali Martinez uvedl, že předchozí buy signál předcházel 14% rally.
XRP price has climbed to a three-day high after Ripple’s European expansion and a fresh Supertrend buy signal revived bullish sentiment.
Summary
XRP price climbed to a three-day high as Ripple’s European expansion and stronger market sentiment boosted buying. A breakout above a month-long downtrend and a fresh Supertrend buy signal strengthened the bullish outlook. Short liquidation clusters above $1.11 could fuel further gains, while $1.05 remains a key support level. According to data from crypto.news, XRP (XRP) price rose as much as 3% to an intraday high of $1.11 on July 3, extending its recovery from around $1.02 on July 1. The latest rebound follows Ripple’s regulatory progress in Europe, improving macro sentiment, and a bullish technical reversal that has encouraged buyers to return after weeks of sustained selling pressure.
Since July 1, the market has continued to price in the company’s European expansion after Ripple Payments launched under preliminary Crypto-Asset Service Provider approval through the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets framework.
The development arrived just as some competing platforms scaled back parts of their European offerings to comply with MiCA rules, strengthening Ripple’s position in one of crypto’s fastest-growing regulated markets.
At the same time, investors largely dismissed concerns surrounding Ripple’s monthly 1 billion XRP escrow release after recognizing that most of the unlocked tokens are traditionally returned to escrow rather than sold into the market.
Bitcoin’s stabilization above the $61,000 area has also provided a more supportive backdrop for altcoins after weeks of heavy selling pressure. Risk appetite improved further as easing geopolitical tensions helped push crude oil prices to multi-month lows while softer U.S. economic data reinforced expectations that the Federal Reserve could begin easing monetary policy later this year.
These macro developments have encouraged investors to rotate back into higher-beta digital assets after June’s defensive positioning.
Technical breakout puts $1.12 and $1.15 into focus XRP’s technical structure has improved materially over the past two sessions. On the 1-day chart, price has broken above a descending trendline that had capped every rally since late May, ending more than a month of lower highs. The breakout has carried XRP back toward the $1.12 resistance area after reclaiming the psychologically important $1.10 level.
XRP price is close to breaking above a multi-month descending trendline resistance on the 1-day chart — July 3 | Source: crypto.news The four-hour chart reinforces that bullish shift. XRP has reclaimed its Supertrend indicator near $1.05, while the MACD has completed a bullish crossover with expanding positive histogram bars. Price has also cleared horizontal resistance around $1.075 and is now approaching the next overhead supply zone near $1.125.
XRP 4-hour price chart — July 3 | Source: crypto.news A decisive move above that barrier could expose the $1.15 region, while the Supertrend support near $1.05 and former resistance at $1.075 now serve as the first downside cushions.
Commenting on the setup, analyst Ali Martinez wrote in a July 3 X post:
“The SuperTrend indicator has just flashed a buy signal on XRP for the first time since mid-June. The last buy signal preceded a 14% rally.”
Martinez also noted that the indicator had correctly identified the previous 19% and 16% declines, adding weight to the latest reversal signal.
Derivatives positioning has also shifted in favor of bulls. CoinGlass liquidation data shows one of the largest short liquidation clusters sitting just above the current price between roughly $1.11 and $1.12.
XRP liquidation heatmap | Source: CoinGlass XRP has already begun pushing into that liquidity pocket, increasing the probability of additional forced buying if resistance breaks. Beyond that zone, another concentration of leveraged positions sits closer to $1.14, creating a potential path for an extended short squeeze should momentum continue.
On-chain sentiment has strengthened alongside the technical recovery. Sharing data from Santiment, Whale Factor highlighted that XRP’s average trading returns have fallen to their lowest level in roughly 12 years, leaving both short-term and long-term holders underwater.
Historically, deeply negative MVRV readings have often coincided with major accumulation periods before meaningful recoveries. As Whale Factor summarized, “The more frustrated the crowd the faster the snap back when sentiment turns.”
🐋 WHALE WATCH: Santiment data shows $XRP average trading returns at their lowest point in 12 years. Short term and long term holders are both underwater.
That combination has preceded sharp reversals before.
The more frustrated the crowd the faster the snap back when… pic.twitter.com/HADaIYJt4E
— Whale Factor (@WhaleFactor) July 3, 2026 Key risks remain despite the improving trend The recovery still faces several hurdles before a sustained uptrend can be confirmed. The $1.12-$1.15 region contains multiple layers of technical resistance and dense leveraged positioning that could trigger renewed selling if buyers fail to force a breakout.
Any deterioration in Bitcoin’s price, a resurgence in geopolitical tensions that lifts energy prices, or stronger-than-expected U.S. economic data that delays Federal Reserve rate cuts could quickly reduce appetite for altcoins.
On the charts, a fall back below $1.075 would weaken the current breakout, while a loss of the Supertrend support near $1.05 would place the recent bullish thesis under pressure and raise the risk of another retest of the $1.00 psychological support.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
IMF zařadil XRP Ledger mezi veřejné blockchainy používané finančními institucemi pro vydávání stablecoinů. Zmínil i Société Générale a její EUR CoinVertible na XRP Ledger, Ethereum, Solana a Stellar.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) has identified the XRP Ledger as one of the public blockchain networks used by financial institutions for stablecoin issuance in its latest report. This emphasis signals growing institutional attention to the XRP Ledger in the emerging field of regulated digital assets and tokenization.
Key findings from the IMF reportIn its study entitled “The Rise of Tokenization: Deciphering New Trends in Payments and Asset Tokenization,” the IMF explores how banks are leveraging blockchain technology to transform payment, settlement, and asset management processes. The Fund notes that while some financial institutions still rely on private ledgers, an increasing number are turning to permissionless networks to benefit from greater interoperability and broader market access.
The IMF highlights that certain institutions prefer permissionless blockchains for regulated stablecoin issuance, as this approach offers enhanced interoperability and wider reach in the market.
Among the examples cited in the report is Société Générale’s euro-denominated stablecoin, EUR CoinVertible. According to the IMF, this asset is deployed not only on the XRP Ledger, but also on Ethereum, Solana, and Stellar networks. Société Générale, a leading France-based banking group, is recognized as one of the longstanding pillars of the European financial system.
The impact of tokenization on financeThe IMF describes tokenization as a transformative trend reshaping global finance. By converting real-world assets—such as currencies, bonds, equities, and other financial instruments—into blockchain-based tokens, the report suggests ownership transfers can be streamlined, settlement times reduced, and operational costs lowered. The Fund also points out that tokenization can increase transparency and reduce reliance on traditional intermediaries.
Beyond these efficiencies, the report emphasizes tokenization’s potential to boost liquidity, minimize settlement risk, and broaden access to financial services. Within this context, public blockchain networks are increasingly seen as viable infrastructures for regulated financial products.
Why is institutional interest noteworthy?IMF Senior Economist Itai Agur recently characterized tokenization and programmable money as the next phase for financial markets. Agur has explained that merging programmable money with tokenized assets—enabled through smart contracts—could automate processes and deliver faster, more cost-effective, and more efficient transactions.
This perspective underscores the rationale for grouping XRP Ledger alongside Ethereum, Solana, and Stellar in discussions about next-generation financial infrastructure. As banks broaden their initiatives in stablecoins and asset tokenization, the XRP Ledger continues to attract heightened institutional interest among public blockchain networks.
Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.
XRP, son günlerde yeniden 1 dolar seviyesini test ederken hem kurumsal yatırımcı hareketleri hem de zincir üstü göstergeler piyasada farklı sinyaller üretiyor. Spot XRP ETF‘lerinde mart ayından bu yana ilk kez iki gün üst üste net çıkış görülürken, Binance rezervlerindeki gerileme ve teknik göstergeler ise satış baskısının zayıflayabileceğine işaret ediyor.
Haberin hazırlandığı sırada XRP yaklaşık 1,11 dolar seviyesinde işlem görüyor.
XRP ETF’lerinde Marttan Bu Yana Bir İlk Spot XRP ETF’leri, piyasaya sürüldükleri günden bu yana yaklaşık 1,5 milyar dolar kümülatif net giriş elde etti.
Ancak son iki işlem gününde tablo değişti.
ETF’lerde mart ayından bu yana ilk kez iki gün üst üste net çıkış yaşandı. Bu durum, kurumsal yatırımcı talebindeki kısa vadeli yavaşlamaya işaret etse de tek başına uzun vadeli eğilimin değiştiğini göstermiyor.
ETF çıkışlarının sürmesi halinde ihraççıların portföylerindeki XRP miktarını azaltması gerekebileceği değerlendirilirken, bunun fiyat üzerindeki etkisi piyasa koşullarına bağlı olarak şekillenecek.
1 Dolar Seviyesi Yakından İzleniyor XRP geçtiğimiz günlerde 1 dolar seviyesine kadar gerileyerek yatırımcıların dikkatini çekti.
Alıcıların devreye girmesiyle fiyat yeniden toparlanırken, piyasanın odağı kritik destek bölgelerinde kalmaya devam ediyor.
Piyasa analisti Diana, XRP’nin yeniden 1,08 doların altına gerilemesi halinde 0,87 dolar seviyesine kadar yeni bir düzeltme ihtimalinin oluşabileceğini belirtiyor.
Analiste göre buna karşılık 1,08 doların üzerinde kalıcılık sağlanması durumunda fiyatın 1,30 dolar bölgesini yeniden hedeflemesi mümkün olabilir.
Bu değerlendirme teknik analiz niteliğinde olup kesin bir fiyat tahmini anlamına gelmiyor.
Binance Verileri Satış Baskısının Azaldığını Gösteriyor Öte yandan zincir üstü veriler daha farklı bir tablo ortaya koyuyor.
Binance’te tutulan XRP miktarı son dört ayın en düşük seviyesine geriledi.
Borsalarda tutulan varlık miktarının azalması genellikle kısa vadeli satış baskısının zayıfladığı yönünde yorumlansa da bu veri tek başına fiyat yönünü belirlemek için yeterli kabul edilmiyor.
Yatırımcıların varlıklarını kişisel cüzdanlara taşıması farklı stratejilerin de sonucu olabilir.
Ali Martinez’den Uzun Vadeli Sinyal Kripto analisti Ali Martinez de teknik göstergelerde dikkat çeken bir gelişmeye işaret etti.
Martinez’e göre aylık zaman diliminde Tom DeMark (TD) Sequential göstergesi XRP için alım sinyali üretti.
Aynı göstergenin Bitcoin, Ethereum ve Solana’da da benzer sinyal verdiğini belirten analist, geçmiş döngülerde bu tür eş zamanlı sinyallerin satıcıların gücünü kaybettiği dönemlerle örtüştüğünü ifade etti.
Bununla birlikte teknik göstergeler tek başına fiyat hareketini garanti etmiyor ve yatırımcılar tarafından diğer piyasa verileriyle birlikte değerlendiriliyor.
XRP İçin Gözler Destek ve Direnç Bölgelerinde Mevcut görünümde XRP için kısa vadede 1,08 dolar seviyesi önemli destek konumunda bulunuyor.
Bu bölgenin korunması halinde piyasa yeniden 1,30 dolar direncini gündemine alabilir.
Öte yandan ETF akışları, borsa rezervleri ve zincir üstü göstergeler birlikte değerlendirildiğinde XRP piyasasında henüz tek yönlü bir görünüm oluşmuş değil.
Şimdilik veriler, kurumsal yatırımcı hareketleri ile zincir üstü göstergelerin farklı sinyaller ürettiği ve yatırımcıların yeni yönü belirlemek için kritik seviyeleri izlemeyi sürdürdüğü bir döneme işaret ediyor.
Bu içerik genel piyasa verilerine dayanır ve yatırım tavsiyesi değildir. Kendi araştırmanızı yapmanızı öneririz.
Son Dakika kripto para haberleri için hemen tıkla.
Konu ile ilgili yorumlarınızı bize yazabilirsiniz. Ayrıca, bu tarz bilgilendirici içeriklerin devamının gelmesini isterseniz, bizleri Telegram, Youtube ve Twitter kanallarımızdan takip edebilirsiniz.
Upbit přidá Metaplex (MPLX) do obchodních párů s BTC a USDT a Nexus (NEX) na trh USDT. Obchodování začne 3. července, vklady a výběry už dvě hodiny po oznámení.
Upbit will add Metaplex (MPLX) for BTC and USDT pairs and Nexus (NEX) for a USDT pair on July 3. Metaplex assists in creating infrastructure for digital assets based on the Solana blockchain, and Nexus builds a Layer 1 blockchain. Upbit, South Korea’s largest cryptocurrency exchange platform, announced the listing of Metaplex (MPLX) and Nexus (NEX). MPLX will be available to trade with BTC and USDT trading pairs on the Solana blockchain platform. NEX will be listed in the USDT market on the Ethereum network. Deposits and withdrawals will start two hours from the time of the announcement.
Scheduled Launch of MPLX and NEX Upbit has announced that MPLX will begin trading at 3:00 PM local time on July 3. Trading for NEX will be launched by the exchange at 6:00 PM local time on July 3. The users have been asked to ensure that deposits happen only through the supported blockchain networks, as deposits made via unsupported networks will not be credited. Upbit has also mentioned that insufficient liquidity may lead to delayed trading due to unfavorable market conditions.
The platform implemented temporary trading restrictions to ensure smooth market operations after listing these two cryptocurrencies. Upbit has put a restriction on buying orders in the first five minutes after trading. All orders, except limit orders, will not be available for 2 hours after listing. Upbit has put a restriction on selling orders that are at least 10% below the previous close price.
Metaplex and Nexus Extend Their Infrastructure Services Metaplex is an infrastructure protocol for digital assets with NFT support, token minting, metadata handling, and mass asset creation in the Solana and Solana Virtual Machine blockchain networks. This protocol allows the standardization of metadata of the assets along with NFT collections, compressed NFTs, and token drops using various ecosystem services. Metaplex also unveiled Agent Registry and Agent Tokens, extending the infrastructure of Metaplex in the direction of on-chain identity registration and token creation. MPLX tokens allow participating in governance, managing treasuries, and certain ecosystem services in the Metaplex DAO.
Nexus builds a Layer 1 blockchain by incorporating verifiable computation capabilities with finance use cases. This network leverages Cosmos SDK, CometBFT, and Ethereum-based smart contracts together with Nexus zkVM for the verification of computing resources from outside the chain. Nexus is also going to extend its ecosystem via Nexus Exchange and the USDX settlement ecosystem. The NEX tokens act as the native gas tokens of the network while staking and compensating computation providers. Upbit also advised users that their deposits should be in compliance with the Travel Rule.
Highlighted Crypto News:
Binance Joins Philippines Sandbox as SEC Approves BlockShoals Strategic Testing Program
I specialize in Web3 and crypto writing, producing clear, research-driven content on blockchain, cryptocurrencies, and market trends.
Ethereum vyskočilo o 6,4 % na 1 719 USD poté, co BlackRock spustil stakovaný fond ETHB a ten první den přilákal 100 milionů USD. Růst podpořila i rekordně nízká nabídka na burzách.
Remember when I kept telling you to watch the exit doors instead of the price? For weeks, Ethereum‘s supply was quietly tightening, coins leaving exchanges, staking hitting records, while the price did nothing but bleed and everyone ignored it. Well, this week the ignoring stopped.
ETH is trading at $1,719, up 6.4% on the day, the strongest of all the major coins, and up nearly 9% on the week (live ETH price on CoinGecko). And the thing that lit the fuse is exactly the kind of demand the tight supply was waiting for. Let me walk you through it.
The fund that changed the mood Here is the headline that matters. BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager, launched a new staked Ethereum fund called ETHB, and it pulled in $100 million on its very first day.
Why is that such a big deal? Two reasons. First, “staked” is the magic word: unlike the older Ethereum ETFs, this fund passes staking yield to investors, the roughly 3% that Ethereum pays for securing the network. That was always Solana’s ETF advantage, and now Ethereum has its own yield-bearing product from the biggest name in finance. Second, $100 million on day one is a statement of demand. After months of watching money drain out of crypto funds, institutions just showed up for Ethereum with real size on the first day they got a product they liked.
And it did not happen in a vacuum. Bitcoin ETFs just logged five straight days of inflows led by BlackRock’s IBIT, the first sustained streak in months. The institutional money that vanished this spring is stepping back in, and Ethereum is getting the biggest single dose of it.
Why ETH is moving so hard Now connect this to the supply story we have been following. Ethereum’s exchange reserves have been sitting at all-time lows around 14.5 million ETH, and the staking ratio at record highs near a third of all supply. Translation: there is less ETH available to buy on the open market than at any point in years.
So what happens when fresh demand, a $100 million fund launch, a short squeeze that liquidated $281 million in bearish bets across crypto, and a dovish shift from Fed Chair Warsh, hits a market with record-thin sellable supply? Exactly what you saw: the price moves fast. A 6.4% daily jump is what a supply squeeze looks like when it finally meets a demand spark. This is the mechanism I have been describing for weeks, just running in the direction nobody positioned for.
The macro helped too. Warsh said inflation risks had eased, the first genuinely dovish note from the new Fed chair, and markets are now watching US jobs data as the next potential fuel. After a hawkish June that crushed crypto, even a small change in the Fed’s tone lands with force.
The honest caveats, as always I owe you the other side, because one great day does not erase a hard year. ETH is still down more than 60% from its 2025 high near $4,950, and this bounce, however real its drivers, has not yet broken the larger downtrend. The level that changes that conversation is $1,800, the resistance ETH rejected during the selloff, and then the big one at $2,000. Until those fall, this is a strong rally inside a bear market, not a confirmed reversal.
And remember what carried ETH down: it falls harder than Bitcoin when fear returns. If the jobs data disappoints or the Fed walks back the dovish tone, the same beta that powered this 6% jump works in reverse. Enjoy the move; respect the trend.
The levels I’m watching Above: $1,750 first, then the real test at $1,800, and the prize at $2,000, where the recovery becomes undeniable. Below: $1,650 is the first support, then $1,600, the floor that held through the worst of it. As long as ETH holds above $1,650, this breakout attempt stays alive.
Where this leaves us Ethereum at $1,719 is having its best day in months, leading every major coin, and for once the reason is concrete: BlackRock’s staked ETH fund drew $100 million on day one, right into a market with record-low sellable supply and record-high staking. The squeeze we watched build all spring finally met its demand spark, with a dovish Fed and a short squeeze as accelerants.
It is not a confirmed trend change yet, $1,800 and $2,000 stand in the way, and ETH’s high beta cuts both ways. But the thing the bears said would never come, institutional demand returning to Ethereum, just showed up with a nine-figure opening day. Watch $1,800. The quiet story is not quiet anymore.
FAQ What is the Ethereum price today? Ethereum is trading around $1,719 on July 3, 2026, up 6.4% on the day, the strongest performance among major coins, and up nearly 9% on the week.
Why is Ethereum going up today? BlackRock launched a staked Ethereum fund, ETHB, that drew $100 million on its first day, landing in a market with record-low exchange supply. A dovish signal from Fed Chair Warsh, a $281 million short squeeze, and five straight days of Bitcoin ETF inflows added fuel.
What is BlackRock’s ETHB fund? ETHB is BlackRock’s new staked Ethereum fund, which passes Ethereum’s staking yield (roughly 3%) to investors, unlike older ETH ETFs. Its $100 million first-day inflow signals returning institutional demand for Ethereum.
What are the key Ethereum levels to watch? Resistance sits at $1,750, then the key $1,800 level, with $2,000 as the milestone that would confirm a real recovery. Support is $1,650, then $1,600. Holding above $1,650 keeps the breakout attempt alive.
Is the Ethereum recovery confirmed? Not yet. ETH remains down over 60% from its 2025 high, and the larger downtrend holds until $1,800 and then $2,000 are reclaimed. The rally has concrete drivers, but ETH’s high beta means it would fall hard again if the macro mood reverses.
This is not investment advice. Cryptocurrency is highly volatile. Always do your own research.
Grayscale podal formulář 8-K k Ethereum Staking Mini ETF a oznámil odchod finančního ředitele Edwarda McGee po sedmi letech. Dočasně ho nahrazují Kathryn Masci a Daniel Plourde.
Ethereum News: Grayscale’s Ethereum Staking ETF Just Had Its CFO Resign
Ahmed Barakat
Author
Ahmed Barakat
Part of the Team Since
Aug 2025
About Author
Ahmed Balaha is a journalist and copywriter based in Georgia with a growing focus on blockchain technology, DeFi, AI, privacy, digital assets, and fintech innovation.
Has Also Written
Fact Checked by
CryptoNews Editorial Team
Author
CryptoNews Editorial Team
Part of the Team Since
Sep 2018
About Author
The CryptoNews editorial team is composed of seasoned writers specializing in cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. Their expertise ensures comprehensive, accurate, and insightful content for...
Has Also Written
Last updated:
2 hours ago
Ethereum News: Grayscale Investments filed a Form 8-K for its Grayscale Ethereum Staking Mini ETF on July 2, 2026, disclosing the departure of CFO Edward McGee after seven years and his replacement by co-CFOs Kathryn Masci and Daniel Plourde on an interim basis, a governance shift at one of the most structurally sophisticated crypto ETF products currently listed in the U.S. market.
Discover: The Best Token Presales
Ethereum News: What the 8-K Actually Says, and What It Doesn’tThe 8-K filed with the SEC falls under the category covering departures, elections, and appointments of directors or certain officers, along with compensatory arrangements.
That category requires disclosure of the event but does not mandate full detail on circumstances, severance terms, or strategic rationale in the initial filing itself.
Kathryn Masci signed the filing as Co-Chief Financial Officer and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer of Grayscale Investments Sponsors, LLC.
Source: SEC FilingHer background runs through Ernst & Young and Garrison Capital before she joined Grayscale in May 2020. Daniel Plourde, the second interim co-CFO, brings institutional ETF operations experience from SPDR ETF Trusts at State Street and Gabelli Funds – a combination that reads more like deliberate succession planning than an emergency scramble.
The structural significance of this governance event is modest in isolation. McGee’s exit does not appear to implicate fund strategy, staking policy, or custody operations.
What it does add to is a pattern of active corporate housekeeping at the sponsor level throughout 2025 and 2026, including the creation of a new Board of Managers for the Sponsor on May 4, 2026 – a context that makes the July filing look like a continuation of planned restructuring rather than a reactive disclosure.
Discover: The Best Crypto to Diversify Your Portfolio
The Fund Itself: Numbers That Matter More Than the FilingThe leadership change is the headline event, but the operational data behind the spot Ethereum ETF is where the real story sits.
The fund held over 861,000 Ethereum as of Q1 2026, up from roughly 734,000 ETH at the start of the year, net creations of approximately 218,500 ETH during the quarter, which translated to around $337 million in net inflows and ranked the fund as the top U.S. Ethereum ETP by Q1 inflows as reported by most news.
Source: BitboThe staking yield mechanics are straightforward but worth quantifying precisely. Approximately 67% of the fund’s ETH is actively staked on Ethereum’s proof-of-stake network, generating a gross staking reward rate of approximately 2.88% annualized – the trailing 60-day figure Grayscale cited in January 2026.
Q1 2026 staking income came in at $8.38 million, with net investment income of $7.41 million after the fund’s 0.15% management fee. Total staking rewards generated since October 2025 have crossed $15 million.
That 2.88% gross yield against a 0.15% fee is a genuinely competitive structure. Non-staking spot ETH products capture price exposure only; holders of those funds absorb the fee drag without the partial offset that staking rewards provide.
The question for competing issuers is whether regulatory clarity on staking in registered fund structures,still evolving as of mid-2026, will allow them to match this product’s architecture or whether Grayscale’s first-mover position in staked Ethereum ETPs hardens further.
Don’t Miss Out on Our $1,000 USDT Airdrop on ByBit
ADA tento týden vzrostla o více než 15 % poté, co ADA Pay umožnil přijímat platby v Cardanu více než 7 milionům firem. Velryby zároveň nakoupily 150 milionů ADA.
Cardano’s native token ADA surged more than 15% this week, climbing above $0.160 by Friday. This rally coincided with two significant developments: major wallet holders accumulated ADA during recent price corrections, and a new payment integration expanded ADA’s reach across millions of businesses worldwide.
Expansion of Cardano payment infrastructure draws attentionCommunity contributor MB announced that the recently launched ADA Pay plugin now enables over 7 million businesses globally to accept Cardano for payments. Cardano, known for focusing on smart contracts and digital payment infrastructure, is thus expanding its footprint in global commerce.
MB stated the ADA Pay plugin has opened up Cardano payment acceptance to more than 7 million businesses worldwide.
The new solution reportedly streamlines the process for businesses, reducing the need for extensive custom software development. If adoption continues to grow, consumers could soon use ADA for everyday purchases at a vast network of merchants, lowering adoption barriers for cryptocurrency payments.
Large wallets accumulated during the dipAccording to on-chain analytics platform Santiment, wallets holding between 100,000 and 100 million ADA accumulated a total of 150 million ADA since June 25. This accumulation took place amidst a broader market pullback, suggesting strategic buying on the part of significant investors.
Such concentrated buying in downturns often indicates that major holders see current valuations as attractive. At the same time, less available supply for immediate sale can help ADA prices stabilize or rebound more robustly from recent lows.
MetricValueWeekly price performanceOver 15% increaseADA added by large wallets150 millionMerchants reached via payment integrationMore than 7 millionOpen interest in ADA futures$403 millionInterest grows in the ADA derivatives marketCardano’s market capitalization now stands at approximately $5.78 billion, with daily trading volume approaching $500 million. This surge in activity points to renewed bullish interest among traders and investors.
Open interest in ADA futures climbed from $335 million in mid-June to $403 million by Friday. This simultaneous rise in price and open interest is typically interpreted as a direct inflow of new capital into the market, rather than just traders shifting existing positions.
On Monday, the funding rate for ADA futures turned positive, reaching 0.0085% by Friday’s trading session. In this structure, investors holding long positions pay those holding shorts, signaling a growing optimism about ADA’s near-term trend.
Globe Of Crypto notes that ADA bounced from support within a falling wedge pattern. Should a breakout occur, the platform forecasts a strong mid-term recovery toward the $0.35 level.
Key resistance at $0.173, support at $0.138Technically, the relative strength index (RSI) is hovering near the 50 level, while the MACD indicator remains slightly above zero, reflecting a period of consolidation rather than rapid acceleration.
Dave, one of Cardano’s core developers, highlighted that the network’s eUTXO architecture—short for Extended Unspent Transaction Output—enables clearer estimation of transaction fees and resulting outcomes before execution. This model aims to make transaction logic more predictable, reducing failed transaction risks especially in financial applications where cost management is crucial.
Mini glossary: eUTXO is a model that defines in advance which inputs and outputs a transaction will use. It reduces risks of failure by providing greater predictability for future costs and results, which is particularly valuable for financial applications.
On the technical chart, $0.173 stands out as a critical resistance level for ADA, with further sell pressure expected in the $0.185 to $0.245 range. If the price pulls back, structural support is found near $0.138, offering a safety net for bulls as the market digests this week’s gains.
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.
Zcash spustil testnet Ironwood se dvěma nezávislými implementacemi konsenzu a výrazně zrychlil migraci peněženek z asi 15 minut na 2,5 minuty. Aktivace na mainnetu se očekává kolem 21. července.
TLDR: Ironwood testnet activates with two independent consensus implementations built by separate teams. Zcash reduced ten-note wallet migration times from around 15 minutes to about 2.5 minutes. Multi-transaction signing now supports more than 11 transactions through a single QR code. Mainnet activation could occur around July 21 as audits and ZIP specifications near completion. Zcash is moving forward with its Ironwood network upgrade after confirming a scheduled testnet activation. The update introduces new consensus changes and major wallet performance improvements ahead of a planned mainnet deployment.
Development teams have also completed two independent consensus implementations for the upgrade. The work marks one of the most advanced testnet preparations recorded for a Zcash network upgrade.
Zcash Ironwood Testnet Upgrade Brings Dual Consensus Implementations Zcash developer Dev announced that the Ironwood testnet upgrade would activate on July 4. The release includes two independently developed consensus implementations.
One implementation came from Valar Group, while the other was built by the Zcash Foundation. According to Dev, the Valar Group version has already entered the audit process.
Zcash testnet is updating for Ironwood tomorrow!
We have two independently developed consensus implementations of it. One by @valargroup, and another by @ZcashFoundation. @valargroup's is in audit as well.
We have a desktop wallet fork with migration code you can try! If you…
— Dev 🧪 (@zkDragon) July 2, 2026
The teams also released a desktop wallet fork that supports migration testing on the testnet. Users with Keystone development devices can update firmware and test migration functions before the mainnet launch.
The upgrade introduces multi-transaction signing through a single QR code. Dev said the feature required extensive work behind the scenes and represented a major technical milestone for the testnet.
Contributors from zodl also participated in the process. The group worked on technical specifications, wallet libraries, circuit updates, and application programming interfaces supporting Ironwood.
Zcash Wallet Performance Improves Ahead of Mainnet Activation Development updates shared by Dev showed major gains in wallet migration performance. The time needed to complete a ten-note migration fell from around 15 minutes to approximately two and a half minutes.
Inbound QR scanning dropped from three minutes to one minute. Loading and transaction review declined from two minutes to 45 seconds.
The signing process posted the largest improvement. Signing time fell from roughly nine minutes to about 37 seconds.
Outbound QR scanning also became faster. The process now takes about 10 seconds compared with roughly one minute previously.
In a separate update, Zcash developer Sean Bowe said all Ironwood consensus rule changes had been implemented and were undergoing audits.
He added that the specifications and Zcash Improvement Proposals, known as ZIPs, were approaching their final state.
UPDATE: Over the last couple weeks we've made huge progress on Ironwood activation in Zcash!
1. All of the consensus rule changes have been implemented, and have been undergoing auditing for some time now. Specifications / ZIPs are published and nearing their final state.
2.… https://t.co/rjQSHM1uox
— Sean Bowe (@ebfull) July 2, 2026
Bowe also said developers expected readiness for a mainnet activation around July 21. He confirmed that the official testnet activation was scheduled for the following day and noted that the Zebra release supporting Ironwood should become available around the same time.
According to Bowe, sufficient mining hash rate already signals technical readiness for the mainnet upgrade. He noted that some wallets may not support Ironwood immediately, although alternative options and testnet preparation time remain available before activation.
Shielded Labs vyvolal možnost odkladu upgradu Ironwood u Zcash, protože burzy, těžební pooly a peněženky nemusí stihnout připravit infrastrukturu do konce července. Současně probíhá migrace ze zcashd na Z3 stack.
Shielded Labs has raised the possibility of delaying Zcash's Ironwood network upgrade, warning that ecosystem participants like exchanges, mining pools and wallets may not have enough time to prepare their systems for the planned activation in late July.
Jason McGee, executive director of Shielded Labs, said in a Zcash community forum post that two major projects are moving forward at the same time. Alongside Ironwood, infrastructure providers are being asked to replace Zcash’s longstanding node and wallet software, zcashd, with a new collection of tools known as the Z3 stack.
The concerns highlight the trade-off between quickly restoring confidence in Zcash’s shielded supply and giving ecosystem participants enough time to deploy and audit the new infrastructure safely.
Ironwood was proposed after researchers discovered an “infinity” bug in Orchard, Zcash’s main private transaction pool. The flaw could theoretically have allowed an attacker to create an unlimited amount of counterfeit ZEC tokens inside the pool without detection. Developers said there was no evidence that the pool had been exploited. However, Orchard's privacy features make it impossible to prove that no fake coins were created.
Source: Zooko Wilcox
Ironwood rollout collides with Zcash software migrationIronwood would open a replacement private pool and prevent new activity inside the existing Orchard pool. Funds leaving Orchard would have to pass through an accounting checkpoint that prevents more ZEC from exiting than what originally entered. This would allow users to verify that the circulating supply remains within Zcash’s intended limits.
At the same time, Zcash is retiring zcashd, the software used by many ecosystem participants to connect to the network and process transactions. Its replacement stack includes Zebra for operating a network node, Zaino for supplying blockchain data to applications and Zallet for wallet functions.
The network's official guidance documents said operators may need to modify their systems as some zcashd functions will not have direct replacements.
McGee said Zallet and Zaino were still under development and not ready for production use. Feedback gathered from infrastructure providers suggested that some expect to be ready by late July, while others need more time, he added.
McGee said no delay has been finalized.
Zcash founder Zooko Wilcox said security reviews had found no additional serious bugs so far and that developers are also working to verify the new system before Ironwood activates.
Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.
Fireblocks nově podporuje Hedera Token Service, což otevírá institucionální úschovu pro nativní HTS aktiva. USDC je dostupné globálně a nové peněženky už nepotřebují předem financovat $HBAR.
Hedera has announced that Fireblocks now supports the Hedera Token Service (HTS), opening up institutional-grade custody for native HTS assets through the Fireblocks platform.
What the Integration CoversThe move allows Fireblocks clients to hold HTS tokens alongside their existing digital asset portfolios, with no separate infrastructure or additional setup required. USDC support is live globally from day one, and new wallets no longer need upfront $HBAR funding to get started, removing a longstanding friction point for institutions entering the Hedera ecosystem.
The Hedera Token Service is Hedera's native token issuance and management layer. According to Hedera, it enables the creation of fungible and non-fungible tokens using simple APIs, without relying on smart contracts, and is built for high-throughput operations with predictable fees and fast settlement. Built-in compliance controls include KYC, freeze, and wipe functions, all handled at the consensus layer.
Why Fireblocks Matters for Institutional AccessFireblocks is one of the most widely used institutional digital asset infrastructure platforms available today. The company provides custody, payments, tokenization, treasury management, and network connectivity across 150-plus blockchains to more than 2,400 organizations. Its client base includes major banks, asset managers, and fintechs that rely on the platform for custody and settlement at scale.
For Hedera, landing a Fireblocks integration puts HTS assets directly in front of that institutional client base. The simplified onboarding, particularly the removal of the upfront $HBAR wallet funding requirement, should reduce the operational overhead that has historically made Hedera accounts more cumbersome to provision at scale.
The announcement reflects a broader push by Hedera to build institutional-grade infrastructure partnerships as demand for regulated, on-chain asset management continues to grow.
Sources
Hedera Token Service, Hedera.com
Fireblocks: Leader in Public Blockchain Support Coverage, Fireblocks Blog
SOL prorazil nad 80,84 USD po třech neúspěšných pokusech a za týden přidal téměř 15 %. Na Solaně zároveň poprvé předstihly tokenizované akcie memecoiny a denní objem dosáhl 644 milionů USD.
Yesterday I told you $80 was the test that would decide whether Solana’s rally was another bounce or a trend change. Well, the test just happened. SOL is trading at $80.84, up 4.3% on the day and nearly 15% on the week, cleanly through the level that rejected it three times during this correction (live SOL price on CoinGecko). And while the price was breaking out, the network quietly hit two milestones that make this rally different from the failed ones. Let me show you both, and then the honest work that still remains.
The breakout, and why this attempt is different First, the price. SOL pushed through $80 with the broad market at its back: Fed Chair Warsh signaled inflation risks have eased, a short squeeze liquidated $281 million in bearish bets, and Bitcoin reclaimed $61,000 with five straight days of ETF inflows. Solana, already the strongest major coin for weeks, led the charge again.
The chart now reads like this: the next resistance sits at $82.73, and analysts see a clean break there opening the path toward $87, with the bigger recovery scenario toward $120 that traders have been eyeing since the $80 debate began. Support is $77, the level the breakout needs to defend. Momentum indicators are healthy but stretched, which is normal after a 15% week: strong trends pause, and a pause is not a failure.
Milestone one: tokenized stocks just beat memecoins Here is the development that genuinely excites me, because it answers Solana’s oldest criticism. For the first time ever, tokenized stocks overtook memecoins as a share of Solana’s daily trading, and a day later tokenized stock volume hit an all-time high of $644 million in a single session.
Think about what that means. The knock on Solana was always that its impressive numbers ran on speculative memecoin churn that could vanish overnight. Now the biggest activity category on the network is real-world equities trading on-chain, the use case Wall Street actually cares about. Add the freshest proof point: Securitize, on the day of its NYSE debut, tokenized $295 million of its own stock on Solana, the largest issuer-sponsored tokenized stock ever at launch. The network is not just hosting the tokenized-stock boom; it is becoming its home field, with roughly 95% of global volume.
Milestone two: Solana got a formal voice The second milestone is quieter but matters for the long game: Solana launched on-chain governance this week. Validators with at least 100,000 SOL delegated can now open formal proposals that go to a stake-weighted vote, and stakers can even overrule how their validator votes.
Why care? Because one criticism of Solana versus Ethereum has been informal, foundation-heavy decision-making. A formal, stake-weighted governance system professionalizes how the network evolves, exactly the kind of institutional maturity that matters as Wall Street moves billions onto the chain. Combined with the Alpenglow upgrade, which co-founder Anatoly Yakovenko says could hit mainnet as early as Q3, cutting settlement from about 12 seconds to 150 milliseconds, the network’s grown-up era is arriving on schedule.
Now the honest part, because I promised Two caveats deserve your attention. First, an uncomfortable detail in the tokenized-stock triumph: Solana’s fees are so cheap that billions in stock trading translate into surprisingly little direct demand for the SOL token itself, and SOL’s own ETFs were roughly flat in June. This rally is being carried by traders and network momentum, not fund flows, which means it has to keep proving itself week by week.
Second, the usual macro truth: SOL just rose 15% in a week, indicators are stretched, and if the jobs data or the Fed disappoints, the highest-beta winners give back gains fastest. A pullback to retest $77, or even the $73 support below it, would be normal and healthy, not a broken thesis.
The levels worth watching Above: $82.73 is the immediate gate, then $87, with the $120 recovery scenario alive as long as the breakout holds. Below: $77 is the line the bulls must defend, then $73. Holding above $77 keeps this a confirmed breakout; losing $73 would send it back to the drawing board.
Bringing it together Solana at $80.84 just passed the test we flagged, breaking the level that stopped it three times, with a 15% weekly gain, tokenized stocks overtaking memecoins for the first time, a $644 million single-day tokenization record, the Securitize NYSE-day listing, and formal on-chain governance going live. The breakout has real substance behind it.
The work now is holding it: $77 must survive any pullback, the $82.73 gate is next, and the rally needs fund flows to eventually join the party. But step back and look at what changed this month: Solana went from “the resilient one” to the network Wall Street trades stocks on, with a breakout chart to match. Watch $82.73 above and $77 below, and enjoy a test passed honestly.
FAQ What is the Solana price today? Solana is trading at $80.84 on July 3, 2026, up 4.3% on the day and nearly 15% on the week, breaking above the key $80 resistance that had rejected it three times during the correction.
Why is Solana going up? SOL broke out amid a market-wide rally sparked by dovish Fed comments and a $281 million short squeeze, on top of Solana-specific strength: tokenized stocks overtook memecoins on the network for the first time, hitting a record $644 million in one day, and on-chain governance launched.
What happens after Solana breaks $80? The next resistance is $82.73, with a clean break opening the path toward $87 and keeping the larger $120 recovery scenario alive. Support at $77 is the level the breakout must defend, with $73 below it.
What are Solana’s tokenized stock milestones? Tokenized equities overtook memecoins as a share of Solana’s daily trading for the first time, single-day volume hit an all-time high of $644 million, and Securitize tokenized $295 million of its own stock on Solana during its NYSE debut. Solana handles roughly 95% of global tokenized stock volume.
What is the risk to Solana’s rally? SOL’s fees are so low that tokenized-stock volume creates little direct token demand, and its ETFs were flat in June, so the rally runs on trader momentum rather than fund flows. After a 15% week, a pullback to retest $77 or $73 would be normal.
This is not investment advice. Cryptocurrency is highly volatile. Always do your own research.
Kripto para borsası Binance, kullanıcıları yüksek risk taşıyan projeler hakkında bilgilendirmeye yönelik uyguladığı İzleme Etiketi (Monitoring Tag) listesini genişletmeye devam ediyor. Şirket, 3 Temmuz 2026 itibarıyla Anchored EUR (AEUR), Vulcan Forged PYR (PYR), Secret (SCRT) ve Vanar (VANRY) tokenlarını İzleme Etiketi kapsamına aldığını duyurdu. Binance, kararın projelerin düzenli performans, likidite, geliştirme faaliyetleri ve risk değerlendirmeleri sonucunda alındığını belirtirken, bu varlıkların bundan sonraki süreçte daha yakından izleneceğini ifade etti. Söz konusu güncelleme, yatırımcıların ilgili tokenlarda işlem yaparken olası riskleri daha dikkatli değerlendirmesi gerektiğine işaret ediyor.
Binance Futures (Vadeli İşlemler) %10 İndirimli İşlem Yapmak İçin Tıkla!
Binance İzleme Etiketi Listesini Güncelledi Binance tarafından yapılan resmi açıklamaya göre 3 Temmuz 2026 tarihinden itibaren dört yeni kripto para projesi İzleme Etiketi kapsamına dahil edilecek.
İzleme Etiketi eklenen varlıklar şu şekilde sıralandı:
Anchored EUR (AEUR) Vulcan Forged PYR (PYR) Secret (SCRT) Vanar (VANRY) Borsa, bu güncellemenin düzenli proje incelemeleri sonucunda gerçekleştirildiğini ve kullanıcıların riskler konusunda daha bilinçli hareket etmesini amaçladığını belirtti.
İlginizi Çekebilir: Bitcoin 62 Bin Dolara Yaklaştı: Yükseliş Devam Edecek mi?
Binance’in İzleme Etiketi, diğer projelere kıyasla daha yüksek volatiliteye veya belirli risklere sahip olduğu değerlendirilen kripto varlıklar için kullanılıyor. Bu etikete sahip tokenlar, borsa tarafından düzenli olarak gözden geçiriliyor. Projelerin geliştirme faaliyetleri, ekip performansı, likidite durumu, işlem hacmi, topluluk desteği, düzenleyici riskler ve şeffaflık gibi birçok kriter değerlendirme sürecinde dikkate alınıyor. Binance, gerekli şartları karşılamayan projelerin ilerleyen dönemde platformdan kaldırılabileceğini de hatırlatıyor.
Kullanıcılar Önce Risk Testini Tamamlamalı İzleme Etiketi bulunan tokenları alıp satmak isteyen kullanıcıların belirli aralıklarla Risk Farkındalık Testi’ni tamamlaması gerekiyor. Bu uygulama, yatırımcıların yüksek risk taşıyan projeler hakkında bilgi sahibi olmasını sağlamayı ve olası fiyat dalgalanmalarına karşı bilinçli işlem yapmalarını amaçlıyor. İzleme Etiketi eklenmesi, ilgili tokenların Binance’ten kaldırılacağı anlamına gelmiyor. Ancak projelerin daha yakından izleneceğini ve düzenli değerlendirmelere tabi tutulacağını gösteriyor.
İzleme Etiketi kapsamına alınan projelerin önümüzdeki dönemde göstereceği gelişmeler, Binance’in yapacağı yeni değerlendirmelerde belirleyici olacak. Projelerin teknik geliştirmeleri, ekosistem büyümesi, işlem hacimleri ve topluluk faaliyetleri olumlu yönde ilerlerse İzleme Etiketi kaldırılabilir. Buna karşılık gerekli kriterlerin karşılanmaması durumunda platformdan çıkarılma riski de bulunuyor. Bu nedenle yatırımcıların yalnızca fiyat hareketlerini değil, Binance tarafından yapılacak resmi duyuruları ve projelerin gelişim süreçlerini de yakından takip etmeleri önem taşıyor.
Değerlendirme Binance’in AEUR, PYR, SCRT ve VANRY tokenlarını İzleme Etiketi kapsamına alması, bu projelerin daha sıkı denetim sürecine girdiğini gösteriyor. Karar doğrudan delist anlamına gelmese de, yatırımcıların risk yönetimine daha fazla önem vermesi gereken bir döneme işaret ediyor. Önümüzdeki süreçte Binance’in yapacağı yeni değerlendirmeler ve projelerin göstereceği performans, söz konusu tokenların platformdaki geleceği açısından belirleyici olacak.
Son dakika kripto para haberleri için hemen tıkla
Konu ile ilgili yorumlarınızı bize yazabilirsiniz. Ayrıca, bu tarz bilgilendirici içeriklerin devamının gelmesini isterseniz, bizleri Telegram, Youtube ve Twitter kanallarımızdan takip edebilirsiniz.
Pendle překročil hranici 100 milionů stakovaných PENDLE, což je asi 36 % nabídky, a emise snížil o 71 %. Protokol už také provedl buybacky v objemu přes 1,96 milionu PENDLE.
Pendle Finance just crossed a milestone that most DeFi protocols only daydream about. More than 100 million PENDLE tokens are now staked, representing roughly 36% of the project’s total supply, and emissions have been cut by 71%.
From vePENDLE to sPENDLE: a strategic overhaul Back in January 2026, Pendle scrapped its vePENDLE system, the vote-escrowed lockup model that had become standard fare across DeFi. The problem was simple. Only about 20% of the token supply was actively locked under vePENDLE, which meant the model wasn’t doing its job of aligning long-term incentives.
The replacement, sPENDLE, introduced liquid staking with a 14-day withdrawal period. The 36% staking rate against total supply proves the thesis: give users flexibility, and they’ll still commit capital voluntarily.
Advertisement
The protocol also deployed an Algorithmic Incentive Module, or AIM, to dynamically manage token emissions. The original target was a 30% reduction in emissions. AIM overshot that goal by a wide margin, delivering a 71% cut instead.
Buybacks and airdrops sweeten the deal Since sPENDLE launched, Pendle has executed over 1.96 million PENDLE in open-market buybacks. Every single one of those tokens was distributed directly to stakers. On top of that, approximately $1.5 million in airdrops has been allocated to incentivize participation.
PENDLE’s circulating supply sits around 171 million tokens out of a total supply of approximately 278 million. With 100 million now staked, that leaves a meaningfully smaller float for trading.
Why the old model failed and the new one works The vePENDLE model suffered from a problem common across DeFi governance tokens. Long lockup periods discourage all but the most committed participants. When only 20% of supply is locked, the governance power concentrates in fewer hands, and the vast majority of holders sit on unlocked tokens with no particular reason not to sell.
sPENDLE’s 14-day withdrawal period threads the needle. It’s long enough to prevent purely speculative hot money from gaming staking rewards. It’s short enough that users don’t feel they’re making a years-long commitment in a market where conditions change weekly. The result is a staking rate that jumped from roughly 20% to 36% of total supply.
What this means for investors Investors should watch two things closely going forward. First, whether staking participation continues climbing or plateaus around current levels. Second, the sustainability of buybacks matters. Buybacks funded by genuine protocol revenue are bullish. Buybacks funded by treasury drawdowns are a different story entirely, and the distinction is worth monitoring.
One risk that often gets overlooked in staking-heavy models: a 14-day withdrawal period provides some buffer, but during a genuine market crash, that buffer can feel like an eternity. If a significant portion of stakers rush for the exit simultaneously, the withdrawal queue and subsequent sell pressure could create a cascading effect. It’s the tradeoff for all that locked-up liquidity, and it’s one that hasn’t been stress-tested in truly adverse conditions yet.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Tým za Bittensor subnetem 23 představil HaloGuard 1.0, bezpečnostní AI model pro výzvy, který si nárokuje první místo v sedmi benchmarcích. Menší verze 0,8B má překonávat modely několikanásobně větší.
@trishoolai, the team behind Bittensor's (@opentensor) subnet 23, has released HaloGuard 1.0, a real-time prompt safety model that claims top-one rankings across seven established safety benchmarks. The launch, announced on July 2, puts a relatively compact model up against offerings from much larger AI labs.
Small models, strong resultsHaloGuard comes in two sizes. The 4B parameter version claims first place across all seven benchmarks it was tested on. The 0.8B version is positioned as a lightweight option that outperforms models several times its size, making low-latency deployment far more practical for developers building on AI pipelines or agent frameworks.
The core design philosophy is interception rather than remediation. HaloGuard screens prompts before they reach the underlying model or agent, catching potentially harmful inputs at the front door rather than filtering outputs after damage is done.
Built to break itselfThe subnet's incentive structure is what distinguishes it from conventional safety tooling. The system creates a competitive environment where miners submit adversarial prompts to identify potentially problematic behaviors. In plain terms, miners are paid to find ways to break the model, and each successful attack feeds back into a patch cycle. Trishool turns AI red-teaming into a decentralized, ongoing process, so that as AI gets smarter, the defenses and safety checks improve alongside it.
Trishool describes itself as a decentralized alignment layer designed to establish sovereign, market-validated safety for artificial intelligence, built to create a trustless mechanism for safe superintelligence by automating the safety loop at a planetary scale.
An earlier alpha version of HaloGuard is already running live on the Chutes subnet, the AI inference subnet that generated $43M in Q1 2026 real AI revenue, where it has reportedly recorded an 87% F1 score on real traffic since May. That live deployment gives the benchmark claims some grounding in production data, rather than controlled test conditions alone.
Bittensor is an open-source platform where participants produce digital commodities including AI inference and training. It is composed of distinct subnets, each an independent community of miners who produce the commodity and validators who evaluate the miners' work. HaloGuard's launch is a concrete example of that model being applied directly to AI safety infrastructure.
TradingView has expanded its market coverage by adding real-time data for Hyperliquid and Trade[XYZ], giving users access to onchain perpetual and spot markets directly through its charting platform.
Summary
TradingView has added real-time Hyperliquid and Trade[XYZ] market data to its charting platform. Users can now track crypto, equities, commodities, forex, and pre-IPO perpetual markets around the clock. The integration comes days after Singapore’s MAS placed Hyperliquid on its Investor Alert List. According to TradingView, the new integration brings live pricing for Hyperliquid’s crypto perpetual and spot markets alongside Trade[XYZ] markets covering equities, commodities, foreign exchange, and pre-IPO companies.
Trade[XYZ] and Hyperliquid data is now live on @tradingview. Putting this data where traders live has been a top priority for us.
Markets are increasingly shaped by events unfolding around the clock, and price discovery shouldn't stop when traditional venues close.
Users now…
— trade.xyz (@tradexyz) July 2, 2026 The data is available through TradingView’s Supercharts, allowing traders to follow price movements throughout the day, including when traditional financial markets are closed.
The addition extends the range of assets available on TradingView without requiring users to leave the platform for onchain market data. Hyperliquid markets appear under the HYPERLIQUID symbol prefix, while Trade[XYZ] listings can be accessed using the HIP3XYZ prefix through the platform’s symbol search.
Hyperliquid expands beyond its core exchange Built on its own layer-1 blockchain, Hyperliquid operates an onchain perpetual futures exchange that currently supports more than 300 perpetual and spot markets across cryptocurrencies, commodities, and indices.
The ecosystem has also grown through HIP-3, a protocol upgrade that allows third-party developers to launch perpetual markets using Hyperliquid’s infrastructure. Under that framework, Trade[XYZ] has become the first major deployment, offering perpetual markets tied to multiple asset classes, including cryptocurrencies, equities, as well as crypto spot trading.
By adding both Hyperliquid and Trade[XYZ] feeds, TradingView has made those markets available alongside its existing charting tools, enabling traders to monitor perpetual contracts and spot assets from a single interface.
Regulatory attention has continued alongside platform growth The TradingView integration comes days after the Monetary Authority of Singapore added Hyperliquid to its Investor Alert List, as previously reported by crypto.news.
According to the regulator, the listing covers both the Hyper Foundation website and the Hyperliquid trading application. MAS said the Investor Alert List is intended as a consumer protection measure identifying entities that could be mistakenly viewed as licensed or regulated by the authority. The regulator also stated that inclusion on the list does not constitute a ban or an enforcement action.
Following the listing, Hyperliquid said it had never claimed to be licensed or authorized by MAS.
Despite the regulatory attention, the decentralized exchange has remained one of the largest trading platforms in the sector. According to CoinGecko, Hyperliquid ranks as the sixth-largest decentralized exchange by trading volume. Separately, DefiLlama estimates that the protocol currently secures about $5.76 billion in total value locked.
The latest TradingView integration gives market participants another way to follow activity across Hyperliquid’s expanding ecosystem, combining live data from crypto perpetuals, spot assets, and Trade[XYZ]’s cross-asset markets within a single charting environment.
