Bitcoin (BTC) trades at an important inflection point as retail investors are selling, big institutions are in a hold despite the discounted valuation and the market is paused at $60,300—awaiting the next significant move. The situation reveals two very different investor groups making opposite bets.
Retail investors sell, TradFi watches
The general mood is fearful, with the Crypto Fear & Greed Index sitting at 36 out of 100, indicating fear but not total panic. This number masks a sharp divide. In June alone, investors pulled $4.4 billion from US spot Bitcoin ETFs—the worst month this year. At the same time, Strategy continues to buy BTC, although the pace and size of its purchases have slowed. While ETF flows and Bitcoin treasury accumulation are not in a buying phase, a majority of corporate BTC treasuries have not reduced their existing positions.
Spot Bitcoin ETF net flows. Source: SoSoValue.com
Leverage unwinds, but slowly
The aggregate open interest in Bitcoin futures contracts across all exchanges is $19.92 billion. Two weeks ago, it was $20.1 billion. This unwinding—when traders close positions to reduce risk—is happening in an orderly way, not in a panic.
The borrowing costs for holding long positions have dropped from 0.25% to 0.12%, suggesting that the worst of the forced selling is over. However, longs are still paying to hold their positions, meaning traders believe in a recovery but aren't willing to bet their full account on it.
The current danger zone is $58,800, Bitcoin's low for the day. If the price breaks below this level, the next $500 million worth of traders holding long positions could be forced to close their trades, sending Bitcoin toward $56,000. That move may extend the selling pressure into next week.
Bitcoin open interest, funding rate. Source: Hyblock
The market is waiting, not acting
When fresh capital flows into Bitcoin, volume spikes and the action shows up in the data. Right now, it doesn't, as trading volume is down, and open interest changes are small. This suggests the market is in an indecisive phase where retail traders may be done selling, but nobody is confident enough to buy in size yet. That's not surprising.
MicroStrategy, which has accumulated Bitcoin for corporate reserves, did buy 3,600 Bitcoin in June for $236 million, betting on a recovery. But overall, institutions are holding rather than aggressively buying. This pause could break in either direction: lower (if one more wave of sellers emerges) or higher (if confidence returns).
For Bitcoin to move meaningfully higher, it needs to reclaim $62,000. The risk is real: a macro news event at any point in the week, like the June employment report or the resumption of military action in Iran, could weigh on investor sentiment and tip BTC back under the $60,000 handle.
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.
Strategy Inc. just did something it rarely does: acknowledged that holding Bitcoin in massive quantities requires, well, an actual plan for when things get bumpy.
On June 29, the company announced what it calls a “Digital Credit Capital Framework,” a multi-pronged liquidity strategy designed to stabilize its stock and securities while keeping its long-term Bitcoin thesis intact. The announcement snapped a nine-day losing streak.
Advertisement
What the framework actually does The new framework has three main pillars. First, a BTC monetization program that allows Strategy to sell up to $1.25B in Bitcoin. Second, the company authorized up to $2B in buybacks, split evenly between MSTR common stock and its STRC preferred shares, at up to $1B each. Third, the STRC preferred stock dividend rate is set to jump to 12% annually, effective July 1, with the goal of pinning STRC’s trading price close to its $100 par value.
The balance sheet behind the plan Strategy’s current USD reserve sits at roughly $2.55B. According to the company’s own estimates, that cash pile covers between 17 and 26 months of financial obligations, depending on how things shake out. Having nearly two years of runway in fiat currency means the company doesn’t need to panic-sell Bitcoin during a downturn. It can be strategic about when, and whether, it taps that $1.25B monetization program.
Why the losing streak mattered For context, Strategy has spent years transforming itself from a sleepy enterprise software company into the world’s most prominent corporate Bitcoin holder. Under Michael Saylor’s direction, the company accumulated a massive Bitcoin position that dwarfs any other public company’s holdings. The STRC preferred shares had recently traded well below their par value, reflecting pressure from both the declining Bitcoin market and wider economic uncertainties.
What this means for investors The $2B in buyback authorizations is a meaningful amount relative to Strategy’s market presence. The 12% STRC dividend is designed to attract income-focused investors who want exposure to Bitcoin’s upside. If STRC stabilizes near that $100 level, it becomes one of the higher-yielding preferred instruments in the market.
The risk hasn’t disappeared, though. That $1.25B Bitcoin monetization program is a double-edged sword. Selling Bitcoin generates liquidity, but it also reduces the very asset that justifies Strategy’s premium valuation.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Ondo Finance’s native token, ONDO, is approaching a critical technical zone that could determine its short-term price direction. As of the time this article was prepared, ONDO was trading at $0.3084, with a 24-hour trading volume of $61.48 million and a market capitalization of $1.5 billion. While trading action has remained relatively subdued over the last day, ONDO’s price structure and rising institutional interest have attracted notable attention in the market.
Technical setup points to a breakout thresholdCrypto analyst Crypto With Gopal has noted that following a recovery from recent lows, ONDO is moving within an ascending wedge pattern. This formation indicates that the token has been registering higher lows, but a persistent overhead resistance suggests that bullish momentum may be starting to wane.
According to Crypto With Gopal, ONDO is nearing a pivotal technical phase; if the price breaks above the upper trendline, a move towards $0.325 is on the table, while a drop below the pattern’s support could trigger short-term selling pressure.
In technical terms, such compressed trading ranges are often viewed as precursors to heightened volatility. Investors are therefore closely watching to see whether ONDO can break above its resistance or hold the ascending support line. Analysts suggest that confirmation of the next move could play a key role in shaping ONDO’s short-term trend.
Data from Token Terminal highlights how blockchain-based exchange-traded funds (ETFs) are increasingly bridging traditional finance and digital asset infrastructure. The overall global ETF market is valued above $20 trillion, while ETF tokens issued on blockchains collectively total less than $450 million in value. This contrast underscores the vast room for growth as real-world assets make further inroads into decentralized finance.
Mini glossary: A tokenized ETF is a blockchain-based digital token that represents a traditional ETF. RWA stands for real-world asset and refers to moving instruments such as stocks, bonds, or funds onto blockchain networks.
Ondo Finance stands out in this niche market, commanding a dominant 74.5% share. The company is known as a fintech platform focused on integrating real-world assets with blockchain infrastructure. Ondo Finance’s strong position in the tokenized ETF segment is widely seen as a sign of institutional investors’ growing appetite for blockchain-based financial products.
Market sentiment remains cautiousDespite these positives, ONDO’s price has yet to confirm a clear direction. Even with a constructive technical outlook and robust standing in the tokenized ETF market, the token remains affected by broader market conditions, particularly Bitcoin’s sideways movement. This cautious atmosphere is consistent with the current behavior observed across many altcoins.
In the short term, attention is focused both on whether ONDO will see a technical breakout and on continued demand for tokenized financial products. A decisive move above the resistance could propel prices toward $0.325, while losing the support line risks triggering a bout of short-term selling.
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.
Cryptocurrency miners are seen in a liquid immersion cooling mining tank at the TMG Core stand during the Bitcoin Conference 2022 in Miami Beach, Florida, U.S. April 6, 2022. REUTERS/Marco Bello Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab
CompaniesJune 29 (Reuters) - Bitcoin miner and AI infrastructure firm Ionic Digital filed on Monday to go public through a direct listing.
The company was formed in January 2024 to acquire the cryptocurrency mining assets of Celsius Mining, a subsidiary of Celsius, which received U.S. bankruptcy court approval for a restructuring in November 2023.
Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.
A direct listing allows a company to list its existing shares on an exchange without an underwritten offering. No new shares are created, and insiders can sell their holdings instantly.
Ionic's registered stockholders plan to sell up to 10.8 million shares of common stock in the listing.
As part of Celsius' reorganization, Ionic issued about 37 million Class A shares to Celsius creditors, turning them into shareholders in the new company.
New Jersey-based Celsius filed for Chapter 11 protection in July 2022, one month after freezing customer accounts to prevent withdrawals. It is one of several crypto lenders to go bankrupt following the rapid growth of the industry during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Last week, Ionic raised $400 million at a pre-money valuation of $2 billion in a funding round led by new investors Attestor, Oaktree Capital Management and Sachem Head Capital Management.
Ionic plans to list its shares on Nasdaq under the symbol "IOND". J.P.Morgan, Jefferies and BTIG are the financial advisors for the listing.
Reporting by Pragyan Kalita in Bengaluru; Editing by Vijay Kishore
Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab
June 29 : Bitcoin miner and AI infrastructure firm Ionic Digital filed on Monday to go public through a direct listing.
The company was formed in January 2024 to acquire the cryptocurrency mining assets of Celsius Mining, a subsidiary of Celsius, which received U.S. bankruptcy court approval for a restructuring in November 2023.
A direct listing allows a company to list its existing shares on an exchange without an underwritten offering. No new shares are created, and insiders can sell their holdings instantly.
Ionic's registered stockholders plan to sell up to 10.8 million shares of common stock in the listing.
As part of Celsius' reorganization, Ionic issued about 37 million Class A shares to Celsius creditors, turning them into shareholders in the new company.
New Jersey-based Celsius filed for Chapter 11 protection in July 2022, one month after freezing customer accounts to prevent withdrawals. It is one of several crypto lenders to go bankrupt following the rapid growth of the industry during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Last week, Ionic raised $400 million at a pre-money valuation of $2 billion in a funding round led by new investors Attestor, Oaktree Capital Management and Sachem Head Capital Management.
Ionic plans to list its shares on Nasdaq under the symbol "IOND". J.P.Morgan, Jefferies and BTIG are the financial advisors for the listing.
Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.
Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.
The debate over whether Ripple’s stablecoin RLUSD is slowly cannibalising XRP’s utility has circulated through the crypto community for months. Versan Aljarrah, founder of Black Swan Capitalist, has a different view entirely, and he makes it with conviction.
RLUSD and XRP Are Not Competing. They Are a Two-Part System.
In an interview with Coinpedia, Aljarrah has addressed this question publicly over a hundred times by his own count, and his answer has not changed. RLUSD is a complementary liquidity layer, not a replacement for XRP. The two assets serve structurally different functions on the same ledger.
“RLUSD brings the easy dollars that institutions want,” Aljarrah told Coinpedia exclusively. “XRP remains the engine that moves value across systems efficiently. They expand the total addressable market rather than compete for the same slice.”
His argument is that RLUSD acts as a regulated, stable on-ramp that gives institutions the comfort they need to put capital onto the XRP Ledger in the first place. Once that capital is on the ledger and needs to move across currencies or jurisdictions, it requires a neutral bridge asset for efficient routing.
That role, Aljarrah says, belongs to XRP. Every RLUSD transaction moving into another currency creates demand for XRP as the intermediary. Activity on the ledger also burns XRP in fees, creating a direct deflationary effect from increased stablecoin volume.
How the Liquidity Model Actually Works
Aljarrah explained that the XRPL was designed with this tension in mind from the start. The ledger operates on a two-tier liquidity model. Retail participants earn yield by providing liquidity in public AMM pools. Institutions, however, do not rely on those same retail pools. They access deeper, more stable liquidity through direct ledger integration, over-the-counter arrangements, and private liquidity facilities.
As institutional volume grows on the ledger, it increases overall fee generation and improves routing efficiency, which actually makes providing liquidity more attractive for retail participants over time rather than less. The system separates high-frequency institutional pathways from yield-generating public pools while allowing both to coexist and benefit from overall network growth.
The First Real Use Case to Watch
When asked which corridor or institution will first demonstrate XRP’s role in commodity settlement in a verifiable, documented way, Aljarrah pointed to Japan and non-dollar energy trade.
“I’d watch for the first documented on-chain settlement where a tokenized or stablecoin representation of energy or commodity value is bridged using XRP between two non-USD currencies or payment systems,” he said. “It will probably start small and show up through corporate or regulatory disclosures rather than through big marketing announcements.”
His reasoning centres on the post-OPEC fragmentation of energy trade and the growing desire among Middle Eastern producers and Asian buyers to reduce reliance on traditional correspondent banking and dollar clearing. Once one corridor proves reliable and cost-effective at scale, others will follow quickly because the infrastructure friction is already being removed and the regulatory support from central banks and financial institutions is already in place.
The Decoupling Signal Is Already Visible
Aljarrah was asked what the first measurable signal of XRP decoupling from Bitcoin would look like, given that he has predicted this decoupling happens gradually then suddenly. His answer was direct.
“The signal has been visible for some time if you look beyond the price,” he said. “Regulatory clarity, infrastructure development, and institutional integration are being built specifically around the XRP Ledger, not around Bitcoin.”
When payment providers, banks, and central bank experiments route through or reference XRPL capabilities while treating Bitcoin primarily as a reserve asset, that is the decoupling in action. The market, he argues, intentionally misprices strategically important assets during the build-out phase. This creates what he described as a classic dynamic where everyone sees it coming but most still get positioned too late.
“The gradual phase is the quiet infrastructure work,” Aljarrah said. “The sudden phase arrives when real volume forces the market to reprice the asset based on actual usage rather than narrative correlation.”
Integration and Disruption at the Same Time
On the question of whether Ripple can simultaneously embed XRP into existing financial infrastructure while the underlying ledger disrupts that same infrastructure, Aljarrah sees no contradiction.
“Ripple can embed XRP into current infrastructure while the underlying ledger continues to offer efficiency gains that legacy players will eventually have to adopt or compete against,” he said. “It is not a contradiction. It is a multi-phase strategy.”
One layer works within existing systems to gain adoption and volume. Another layer uses the technology’s ability to reduce friction and counterparty risk in ways that gradually shift power dynamics. Both operate simultaneously on different time horizons.
Story Ends Here
Trust with CoinPedia:CoinPedia has been delivering accurate and timely cryptocurrency and blockchain updates since 2017. All content is created by our expert panel of analysts and journalists, following strict Editorial Guidelines based on E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness). Every article is fact-checked against reputable sources to ensure accuracy, transparency, and reliability. Our review policy guarantees unbiased evaluations when recommending exchanges, platforms, or tools. We strive to provide timely updates about everything crypto & blockchain, right from startups to industry majors.
Investment Disclaimer:All opinions and insights shared represent the author's own views on current market conditions. Please do your own research before making investment decisions. Neither the writer nor the publication assumes responsibility for your financial choices.
Sponsored and Advertisements:Sponsored content and affiliate links may appear on our site. Advertisements are marked clearly, and our editorial content remains entirely independent from our ad partners.
For more details, visit the official Beincrypto platform.
TL;DR XRP spot ETF products reportedly extended their inflow streak to eight consecutive weeks. Bitcoin ETFs have moved in the opposite direction, with heavy outflows reported in June. The split suggests investors may be separating broad crypto risk from targeted altcoin exposure. XRP Funds Keep Drawing Inflows XRP-linked ETF products have reportedly extended their inflow streak to eight consecutive weeks, pulling in fresh capital while Bitcoin funds have been dealing with heavy outflows.
That contrast is the story. In a weak market, investors are not simply selling everything crypto-related at the same pace. Some are reducing Bitcoin exposure, while pockets of demand remain for specific assets and wrappers. XRP is one of the names showing up in that rotation.
For readers, this matters because ETF flows are a cleaner signal than social hype. They do not tell the whole story, but they do show where capital is moving through regulated products. If XRP continues to attract inflows while Bitcoin bleeds, it suggests that some investors are making more selective decisions rather than exiting the sector entirely.
What The Bitcoin-XRP Split Says The split between Bitcoin outflows and XRP inflows is especially interesting because Bitcoin is usually treated as the institutional gateway into crypto.
When BTC products lose assets, the easy assumption is that institutional appetite for crypto is weakening. But XRP inflows complicate that view. They suggest investors may still want exposure to certain narratives, even if they are reducing broad market beta.
That does not automatically make XRP stronger than Bitcoin from an investment standpoint. It simply shows a difference in flow behavior. XRP has its own investor base, legal history, payments narrative, and community structure. Those factors can create demand that does not always move in lockstep with Bitcoin.
It also raises a question about maturity in crypto markets. Earlier cycles often moved together: Bitcoin led, altcoins followed, and risk appetite rose or fell as a block. ETF flow divergence suggests a more segmented market, where investors can express narrower views through specific products.
The Caveat For XRP Bulls XRP inflows are constructive, but they should not be treated as a guaranteed price signal.
Flows can support a market, but price still depends on liquidity, broader sentiment, technical structure, and whether new demand is large enough to overcome selling. Inflows also need to persist. One strong streak is useful; a durable trend would be more meaningful.
For Bitcoin, the pressure remains clear. Heavy ETF outflows in June have weakened one of the market’s most important demand channels. For XRP, the opposite is happening: regulated-product demand is still showing signs of life.
The takeaway is not that XRP has “won” the institutional race. It is that crypto flows are becoming more selective. That is a healthier, more complicated market — and one traders will need to read asset by asset rather than assuming everything moves as one trade.
For readers, the useful approach is to treat this as a signal to monitor rather than a standalone trading call, because confirmation still has to come from follow-through in price, flows, and broader market behavior.
—
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
The XRP Ledger ecosystem has taken a significant step toward attracting institutional capital. The XRPL Foundation has announced a partnership with fintech platform VS1 Finance to develop an open source reference application tailored for compliant, permissioned credit solutions on the XRP Ledger. The new initiative aims to give developers a ready-made regulatory and technical framework to build enterprise-grade lending services.
Framework for institutional lendingAt the heart of this partnership is a structure that clarifies compliance requirements for businesses seeking to offer on-chain credit services. The goal is to lower the initial cost and barriers for companies—particularly in sectors facing strict regulations—by providing a robust foundation to build on, rather than requiring them to start from scratch.
The XRPL Foundation remains an important force in the ecosystem, contributing open source tools and supporting the advancement of the XRP Ledger network. VS1 Finance, meanwhile, is positioned as a fintech platform dedicated to institutional finance applications.
VS1 Finance emphasizes that a permissioned lending structure is essential for bringing major institutional capital to the XRP ecosystem. An open source template, they note, could accelerate adoption throughout the market.
Native network components over external smart contractsThe announcement closely follows VS1 Finance’s participation in Ripple’s UDAX accelerator program on June 25, focused on on-chain capital markets. A key feature of the project is the decision to design with native components embedded directly within the XRP Ledger protocol, rather than relying on external plugins or third-party smart contracts.
This approach is intended to limit security vulnerabilities or risks that can arise from externally sourced smart contract code. By anchoring application logic at the validator level within the network, the architecture promises greater control and oversight for institutional players.
Mini glossary: Permissioned Domains are an XRPL feature allowing only approved parties to access the network or specific liquidity pools. Credentials refer to a built-in mechanism that verifies identity and compliance information within the network.
On the identity and access front, the solution plans to integrate KYC and AML processes natively, making use of the Credentials and Permissioned Domains modules. This structure will separate liquidity pools and limit access solely to verified counterparties, providing large funds with confidence that their capital will not intermingle with unknown sources.
Highlights in liquidity management and open source modelFor liquidity management, the system is expected to automate specific term lending operations and asset allocation using Single Asset Vaults and a platform-level Lending Protocol. While removing traditional intermediaries from the process, the design aims to preserve credit risk parameters familiar to banks and institutional lenders.
AreaComponentPurposeCompliance & accessCredentials, Permissioned DomainsRestrict access to verified partiesLiquidity managementSingle Asset Vaults, Lending ProtocolAutomate term lending and asset allocationDevelopment modelOpen source reference applicationEnable code review, adaptation, and extensionRather than launching a closed commercial product, the XRPL Foundation and VS1 Finance are opting for an open source release. This model will allow financial institutions and developer teams to audit the code, adapt it to their own requirements, or integrate its functionality into existing services.
The partners’ strategy centers on creating an open reference framework on XRP Ledger that lowers deployment costs and streamlines compliance, paving the way for more accessible institutional onboarding.
Regulatory experience from Georgia feeds the projectVS1 Finance’s software development work coincides with their involvement in the regulatory sandbox of the National Bank of Georgia, preparing for an institutional bond tokenization pilot. This connection ensures that the application architecture directly incorporates lessons learned from working with a real-world banking regulator.
The resulting reference application is anticipated to provide both technical and compliance-oriented foundations for any party seeking to build institutional credit offerings on the XRP Ledger.
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.
In brief Developers are beginning to test the proposed XRP Ledger Lending Protocol, Ripple said Monday. If approved by network validators, then the dual upgrade would allow network participants to put digital assets to work that currently sit idle. XRP’s price recently fell to its lowest level since November 2024. XRP’s native blockchain inched closer on Monday toward functionality allowing institutions to borrow and lend digital assets directly on-chain, with Ripple announcing that developers can start experimenting with the XRPL Lending Protocol within a testing environment.
In a blog post, the firm outlined how two technical specifications dubbed XLS-65 and XLS-66 would introduce native credit infrastructure directly to the XRP Ledger (XRPL), providing financial firms with a novel way to structure agreements on-chain.
If approved by network validators, then the dual upgrade will enable tokenized real-world assets (RWAs)—such as money market funds and commodities—to be deployed as working capital on XRPL, as opposed to sitting as static inventory across millions of network accounts.
According to the announcement, the XRPL Lending Protocol relies on two components. The “Single Asset Vault” provides a standardized format for pooling assets on XRPL, while the “Lending Protocol” helps dictate loan terms, servicing elements, and repayment logic.
Under the arrangement, Ripple noted that underwriting stays off-chain. That means the process lenders use to determine a borrower’s creditworthiness isn’t reflected on XRPL, a design intended to let institutions retain control over lending decisions.
“This separation mirrors real financial infrastructure,” Ripple said. “By preserving that distinction, XRPL can support a wider range of credit structures over time, rather than hard-coding one lending model into a single application.”
Still, repayment schedules, interest calculations, and default conditions operate under predefined rules once a loan is originated, Ripple said. On top of that, losses from defaults are designed to be compartmentalized using a multi-tiered approach where capital from pool managers and underwriters is put at risk first, mirroring structures in traditional finance.
Ripple referenced public lending protocols such as Aave. Although they’ve shown that lending can operate on-chain at scale, the firm argued that their crypto-native governance models and risk frameworks don’t align with Wall Street’s risk management procedures.
The company listed several examples of what the dual upgrade would enable, including the ability for a payment provider to access short-duration liquidity and a way for treasury teams to generate revenue by lending digital assets under clearer terms.
The lending protocol follows a major milestone for the network in May, when Ondo Finance used the XRPL to execute the first cross-border, cross-bank redemption of tokenized U.S. Treasuries. However, Ripple described this new dual lending upgrade as on-chain finance's true “missing layer,” arguing that moving an asset on-chain is only half the battle.
The XRPL Lending Protocol would likely bolster the use of Ripple’s stablecoin on-chain. Since its debut in late 2024, RLUSD has grown to a market cap of $1.5 billion, according to CoinGecko.
On Monday, XRP changed hands around $1.05, an 8.2% decrease over the past week. Last Thursday, the cryptocurrency fell to its lowest point since President Donald Trump’s reelection, tumbling one cent shy of a dollar in sympathy with Bitcoin.
Daily Debrief NewsletterStart every day with the top news stories right now, plus original features, a podcast, videos and more.
In brief Developers are beginning to test the proposed XRP Ledger Lending Protocol, Ripple said Monday. If approved by network validators, then the dual upgrade would allow network participants to put digital assets to work that currently sit idle. XRP’s price recently fell to its lowest level since November 2024. XRP’s native blockchain inched closer on Monday toward functionality allowing institutions to borrow and lend digital assets directly on-chain, with Ripple announcing that developers can start experimenting with the XRPL Lending Protocol within a testing environment.
In a blog post, the firm outlined how two technical specifications dubbed XLS-65 and XLS-66 would introduce native credit infrastructure directly to the XRP Ledger (XRPL), providing financial firms with a novel way to structure agreements on-chain.
If approved by network validators, then the dual upgrade will enable tokenized real-world assets (RWAs)—such as money market funds and commodities—to be deployed as working capital on XRPL, as opposed to sitting as static inventory across millions of network accounts.
According to the announcement, the XRPL Lending Protocol relies on two components. The “Single Asset Vault” provides a standardized format for pooling assets on XRPL, while the “Lending Protocol” helps dictate loan terms, servicing elements, and repayment logic.
Under the arrangement, Ripple noted that underwriting stays off-chain. That means the process lenders use to determine a borrower’s creditworthiness isn’t reflected on XRPL, a design intended to let institutions retain control over lending decisions.
“This separation mirrors real financial infrastructure,” Ripple said. “By preserving that distinction, XRPL can support a wider range of credit structures over time, rather than hard-coding one lending model into a single application.”
Still, repayment schedules, interest calculations, and default conditions operate under predefined rules once a loan is originated, Ripple said. On top of that, losses from defaults are designed to be compartmentalized using a multi-tiered approach where capital from pool managers and underwriters is put at risk first, mirroring structures in traditional finance.
Ripple referenced public lending protocols such as Aave. Although they’ve shown that lending can operate on-chain at scale, the firm argued that their crypto-native governance models and risk frameworks don’t align with Wall Street’s risk management procedures.
The company listed several examples of what the dual upgrade would enable, including the ability for a payment provider to access short-duration liquidity and a way for treasury teams to generate revenue by lending digital assets under clearer terms.
The lending protocol follows a major milestone for the network in May, when Ondo Finance used the XRPL to execute the first cross-border, cross-bank redemption of tokenized U.S. Treasuries. However, Ripple described this new dual lending upgrade as on-chain finance's true “missing layer,” arguing that moving an asset on-chain is only half the battle.
The XRPL Lending Protocol would likely bolster the use of Ripple’s stablecoin on-chain. Since its debut in late 2024, RLUSD has grown to a market cap of $1.5 billion, according to CoinGecko.
On Monday, XRP changed hands around $1.05, an 8.2% decrease over the past week. Last Thursday, the cryptocurrency fell to its lowest point since President Donald Trump’s reelection, tumbling one cent shy of a dollar in sympathy with Bitcoin.
Daily Debrief NewsletterStart every day with the top news stories right now, plus original features, a podcast, videos and more.
Despite persistent selling pressure across the cryptocurrency market, the XRP network has witnessed an eye-catching surge in new users. Over recent weeks, around 19000 new accounts have been activated each week. This trend is fueling speculation that, even with muted price action, accumulation around XRP could be gaining momentum.
Network expansion and capital inflows set XRP apartAccording to Evernorth, this pace of growth is occurring while the Altcoin Season Index remains at 46. This figure suggests the market has yet to enter a full-scale altcoin rally. Nevertheless, some investors appear to be adopting a more selective approach, positioning XRP as one of the standout assets amid a cautious environment.
Capital flows into investment products reinforce this narrative of divergence. While numerous crypto ETFs and digital asset products have registered net outflows, funds targeting XRP have continued to attract new capital. This pattern hints that institutional and sophisticated investors may be increasing their exposure to XRP despite prevailing caution in the market.
Investment products focused on XRP are drawing new capital, even as most of the market faces outflows.
Technical indicators point to a critical thresholdAlongside capital inflows, the expanding user base strengthens the case for a bullish scenario. The steady rise in XRP wallet numbers indicates growing adoption and engagement on the network. Remarkably, this trend has persisted even during market corrections, suggesting durable confidence beyond short-term speculation.
Data from CoinCodex puts XRP trading near the pivotal $1.05 support level. Holding above this price region could nurture hopes of a rebound, provided market conditions improve in the weeks ahead.
A notable indicator in the long-term technical landscape has also emerged. Market analyst Cryptollica points out that XRP’s Relative Strength Index (RSI) has entered its deepest oversold territory in thirteen years, underscoring a potentially significant juncture for the asset.
Mini glossary: RSI is a technical indicator measuring the speed and strength of a price movement. Generally, a low RSI signals oversold conditions, while a high RSI points to an overbought market.
According to Cryptollica, XRP’s long-term RSI has now reached the most extreme oversold reading in its 13-year history.
Markets reflect on past cyclesHistorically, similar periods of deep RSI fatigue have preceded notable rallies in XRP. However, while past cycles offer signals, they do not guarantee identical outcomes in the future. Even so, the current technical setup is reviving expectations that XRP could be approaching a decisive turning point.
When combining the network’s consistent expansion, ongoing capital inflows, and the historically weak technical outlook, XRP stands out as more robust than many of its altcoin peers. The continuing ability to attract both users and investment remains under close watch for potentially shaping price action in the near term.
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 whale outflows becoming less concentrated on Binance and increasingly distributed across other trading platforms.
Large XRP transfers are becoming more prominent across centralized exchanges overall, while their activity on Binance has declined. Data from the 7-day moving average of the XRP Whale vs Retail Spread across all centralized exchanges rose from 26% on May 6 to 50.9% on June 29. This is an increase of 24.9 percentage points.
According to CryptoQuant, the latest trend indicates that transfers involving more than 100,000 XRP are making up a much larger share of exchange outflows compared to smaller retail-sized transactions than they did in early May.
Whale Presence Outside Binance The same cannot be said for Binance. CryptoQuant found that the exchange’s Whale vs Retail Spread dropped from 62% on June 11 to 44.6% on June 29, a decline of 17.4 percentage points. As a result, Binance’s reading now stands 6.3 percentage points below the broader centralized exchange average of 50.9%.
The Whale vs Retail Spread measures the difference between XRP outflow volumes generated by transfers above 100,000 XRP and those involving 100,000 XRP or less. Higher readings indicate that whale-sized transactions account for a larger share of exchange outflows than retail transfers.
The analysis revealed that the growing gap between Binance and the wider exchange market essentially suggests that large XRP transfers are becoming less concentrated on Binance and increasingly distributed across other trading platforms.
Price Struggles XRP spent most of June under pressure after falling from above $1.30 at the start of the month to around $1.05 at the time of writing. Although the crypto asset saw a brief rebound in mid-June, the recovery quickly faded as sellers regained control and pushed prices lower again.
It even slipped behind BNB and USDC in market capitalization. With XRP currently testing the crucial $1.06 support previously identified by Ali Martinez, the asset is now exposed to lower support areas at $0.80, $0.62, and $0.51.
You may also like: Everyone Expects XRP to Crash Further: Is Ripple About to Surprise the Market? Ripple (XRP) Boosts Global Blockchain Adoption With Over $70M in Donations XRP’s Slide to Sub-$1.00 Could Set Up ‘Risk-Reward’ Zone: Analyst Meanwhile, Glassnode reported that XRP investors are realizing more losses than profits. Despite the weakness, some analysts remain optimistic. EGRAG CRYPTO, for one, believes that if XRP follows historical price patterns linked to its “Central Line,” the asset could eventually reach between $5.70 and $8, based on gains seen during previous market cycles.
Australian-based cryptocurrency broker Caleb & Brown has announced a partnership with Ripple aimed at speeding up US dollar withdrawal processes. By replacing part of its traditional correspondent banking framework with Ripple Payments, the company has revamped its payments infrastructure. This move is designed to allow customers to access faster US dollar settlements, all while leaving their crypto buying, selling, and custody routines unchanged.
Infrastructure shift for US dollar withdrawalsManaging more than $2 billion in client assets, Caleb & Brown targets operational delays and friction in cross-border payments with this latest integration. While crypto assets can move across blockchains in seconds, traditional banking channels still depend on multiple intermediaries for fiat currencies like the US dollar, resulting in slower transactions and higher costs.
Glossary: Correspondent banking is a system where a bank processes transactions in another country’s currency or on its behalf via a partner institution. This model often extends transaction timeframes and increases costs due to extra intermediaries, especially in cross-border payments.
The collaboration between Caleb & Brown and Ripple is less about launching a new customer-facing product and more about strengthening the payment backbone that supports the company’s services. The goal is to ensure US dollar withdrawals are completed more efficiently, slashing wait times linked to legacy banking systems.
Jake Boyle highlighted that Ripple Payments combines the speed and innovation of the crypto sector with the enduring structure of the traditional US dollar banking system.
Strategic aims of the partnershipJake Boyle, Caleb & Brown’s Commercial Director, commented that the partnership reflects a need to bridge blockchain innovation with conventional financial realities. Boyle’s insights underline a market paradox: while crypto markets run 24/7, traditional fiat transfers remain tied to decades-old banking rails.
Ripple Payments is Ripple’s enterprise-grade payment network, designed to modernize payment flows while remaining compatible with the existing financial infrastructure. With Caleb & Brown, this utility spans beyond cross-border transfers and extends into day-to-day US dollar withdrawal operations for clients.
The company emphasized that the investment focuses on infrastructure, simplifying the processes of buying, selling, storing, and withdrawing digital assets.
Institutional demand and regulatory backdropCrypto platforms adhering to regulatory standards are increasingly prioritizing operational efficiency, as blockchain-powered settlement networks gradually replace outdated banking channels. The announcement arrives at a time when global institutional interest in blockchain infrastructure is accelerating.
Frameworks like the European Union’s MiCA (Markets in Crypto-Assets) regulation continue to fuel demand for compliant digital asset solutions. Against this backdrop, blockchain networks such as Ripple, Hedera, Cardano, and XDC are emerging as leading platforms in the fields of institutional payments and tokenized finance.
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 Ledger Foundation and VS1 Finance are building an open-source compliant lending reference application for XRPL. The project combines Credentials, Permissioned Domains, Vaults and Lending Protocol into one institutional framework. Developers will be free to fork, study and extend the reference application for regulated lending use cases. The initiative focuses on permissioned lending infrastructure designed for institutions operating on XRP Ledger. The XRP Ledger Foundation has partnered with VS1 Finance to develop an open-source reference application for compliant lending on the XRP Ledger. The initiative focuses on regulated lending by combining native XRP Ledger features with permissioned access controls.
The project aims to provide developers with a reusable framework for building institutional lending products. It also highlights the network’s growing focus on compliance-ready blockchain infrastructure for financial markets.
XRP Ledger Foundation expands compliant lending infrastructure on XRP Ledger The new application will use several native XRP Ledger building blocks designed for regulated financial activity. These include Credentials, Permissioned Domains, Single Asset Vaults, and the Lending Protocol.
The XRP Ledger Foundation is partnering with @vs1_finance to build an open-source reference app for permissioned, compliant lending on the XRP Ledger.
The app leverages the native primitives: Credentials, Permissioned Domains, Single Asset Vaults, and the Lending Protocol. pic.twitter.com/thbXFABtH2
— XRP Ledger Foundation (@XRPLF) June 29, 2026
According to the XRP Ledger Foundation’s announcement on X, the application will serve as an open-source reference implementation rather than a closed commercial product. Developers will be able to examine its architecture and adapt it for their own use cases.
The framework targets permissioned lending environments where participants must satisfy compliance requirements before accessing financial services. That approach allows institutions to operate within predefined identity and authorization rules.
The project reflects continued development around institutional blockchain infrastructure. Instead of introducing new protocol features, the application combines existing XRP Ledger primitives into a practical lending workflow.
XRP Ledger lending app targets institutional crypto finance VS1 Finance said the collaboration focuses on creating infrastructure that institutions can readily adopt for compliant capital deployment. The company stated on X that permissioned lending can help bridge traditional financial firms with blockchain-based markets.
Honored to be partnering with @XRPLF on this.
Compliant, permissioned lending is the bridge institutions need to move serious capital on {XRP}.
Building a reference app that any team can fork, study, or extend is how we accelerate that across the ecosystem.
More soon. https://t.co/fjwMk5wZgy
— VS1 (@vs1_finance) June 29, 2026
Rather than limiting access to a single platform, the partners intend to publish the application as open source. Development teams will have the option to fork, modify, or extend the codebase for different lending products.
The announcement places strong emphasis on transparency and ecosystem growth. Open-source reference applications often reduce development time by providing tested implementation examples for builders across the network.
Neither organization disclosed a launch date or technical roadmap alongside the announcement. The initial statements instead centered on the application’s design goals and its role within the broader XRP Ledger ecosystem.
The collaboration arrives as blockchain networks continue developing compliance-focused infrastructure for regulated financial institutions. By combining permissioned access with native lending components, the project seeks to provide a standardized foundation for future XRP
Ledger lending applications, according to updates shared separately by both the XRP Ledger Foundation and VS1 Finance on X.
The long-standing ideological battle between Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse and MicroStrategy (now operating under the ticker Strategy) Executive Chairman Michael Saylor has flared up once again.
In a new social media post, Garlinghouse fired a fresh shot at the Bitcoin maximalists' aggressive accumulation tactics.
He quoted a segment from CNBC's Squawk on the Street, declaring: "Financial engineering doesn't drive long-term value. Utility does." The quote reinforced Garlinghouse's televised remarks where he explicitly stated, "I think team Michael Saylor wasn't focused on the right stuff, and that has hurt the overall market."
HOT Stories
Utility or financial engineering? The latest social media dig serves as an extension of Garlinghouse’s recent appearance on CNBC, where he openly criticized Saylor's playbook for financing corporate Bitcoin purchases.
Garlinghouse argued that Strategy's heavy reliance on issuing preferred securities to buy more Bitcoin amounts to "financial engineering" rather than building real-world technological utility. To illustrate his point, the Ripple executive pointed directly to the market performance of Strategy's preferred shares, specifically STRC. The STRC shares, which carry an 11.5% cumulative annual dividend obligation, have recently traded roughly 25% below their $100 face value.
According to Garlinghouse, this steep discount is a "serious negative signal" from the market, suggesting that a highly leveraged accumulation strategy can compound negatively during downturns and ultimately harm the broader crypto industry. Garlinghouse maintains that the long-term value of digital assets will naturally flow toward those that solve real-world problems and provide institutional utility, not those propped up by debt-driven capital structures.
A history of animosity The friction between the two prominent crypto executives is well-documented and deeply rooted in their opposing views on the digital asset landscape.
In 2022, Saylor famously called XRP an "unregistered security" and actively urged the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to shut down XRP alongside other altcoins. Saylor's insistence that Bitcoin is the only legitimate institutional digital asset has naturally positioned him as a direct antagonist to Ripple's core mission.
Though Saylor recently surprised the market by expressing support for a U.S. multi-token cryptocurrency reserve that might tentatively include XRP, the clash seemingly remains unresolved.
For Garlinghouse, Strategy's current market woes present an opportunity to vindicate Ripple's utility-first approach while throwing a very public jab at his long-time industry critic.
XRP has lately been trading in a narrowing price band, with a crucial technical juncture now on the horizon. Market analyst Tektonic highlights that the asset is caught between a significant support zone and a robust resistance level, a situation that may be setting the stage for a sharp new move in price.
Intense squeeze in a narrowing rangeOn the four hour and two hour charts, XRP has repeatedly managed to stay above its main support area, even as selling pressure has continued to test it. The fact that there has been no downward breakdown suggests the price is compressing into an increasingly tight range. In technical analysis, this type of setup often indicates an intensifying tug of war between buyers and sellers, potentially ushering in a period of heightened volatility.
Tektonic identifies $1.04 as the key resistance level to watch. According to the analyst, the most powerful bullish scenario could unfold if the price briefly dips below support to collect liquidity, only to then swiftly recover and reclaim resistance. Such a move could flush out weaker market positions, paving the way for renewed buying momentum.
Tektonic assesses that the most robust bullish outlook for XRP would emerge if the price cleans out liquidity just below support, then regains resistance shortly thereafter.
Key support and resistance levels in focusAccording to CoinCodex data, XRP is currently trading at $1.06, sitting just above a demand zone between $1.02 and $1.01. Should the price pull back, this area is expected to attract strong buying interest. As long as this support holds, XRP could regain upward momentum and potentially target $1.10 or higher.
However, Tektonic remains cautious and is waiting for stronger confirmation before adopting a distinctly bullish stance. The first sign the analyst highlights is a successful retest of the demand zone at $1.02 to $1.01, followed by a clear rebound. The second indicator would be a decisive break above resistance backed by high volume. If such conditions are met, it could signal that XRP is strong enough to continue its rally without falling back to lower levels.
Network growth fuels optimismWhile a cautious outlook prevails in the short term, market participants are closely monitoring which direction the constricting price range will eventually resolve. Historically, extended periods of low volatility in XRP have often been followed by substantial price swings, keeping attention firmly centered on the asset’s next move.
Beyond the technical outlook, on-chain data also paints an optimistic picture. The XRP network is reported to be adding approximately 19,000 new users per week, despite a general slowdown across the broader cryptocurrency market. As a digital asset linked to the Ripple ecosystem, XRP continues to stand out for its use cases in cross border payments.
Additionally, XRP is reported to have reached its most oversold level in 13 years. This situation is strengthening expectations that a breakthrough above key resistance could ignite a broader upward move for the asset.
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 has slid to around $1, down from its $3.66 high last year, with retail in fear even as whale wallets hit record highs. Where could it finish 2026? Credible forecasts run from below $1 to $8, and the gap comes down to one question. Here is what would push XRP to each level, and which path looks most defensible.
Summary
XRP trades near $1.04 as of late June 2026, down from a July 2025 cycle high near $3.66, with relative strength near oversold and moving averages around $1.13 to $1.14 sitting overhead as resistance. The forecast range for year-end 2026 is unusually wide: bearish models point below $1, conservative models to roughly $1.40 to $1.80, Standard Chartered to $2.80, and bullish publishers toward $4.36 to $8. Standard Chartered’s Geoffrey Kendrick cut his year-end target from $8 to $2.80 while keeping a $28 call for 2030, capturing the split between near-term caution and long-term conviction. The entire range turns on one question: whether the XRP token itself, not just Ripple’s network, captures the cross-border payment and settlement volume flowing through it. A move to $2 or $3 needs stabilization, ETF support, and better sentiment, while $5 or higher needs a genuine shift in market structure and proven token utility. XRP (XRP) is trading near $1.04 as of late June 2026, and for holders it has been a deeply frustrating year: the token has cleared nearly every obstacle its community spent years waiting for, yet the price has done close to nothing but fall. XRP is down from a cycle high near $3.66 reached in July 2025, having declined through the back half of last year and the first half of this one, and it now sits roughly a third below where it began 2026.
XRP daily price chart | Source: crypto.news The technical picture is heavy. The relative strength index hovers near 30, at the lower boundary where downtrends sometimes exhaust themselves, and the 50-day and 200-day moving averages cluster overhead around $1.13 to $1.14, acting as the resistance XRP must reclaim to change its trend. Sentiment is weak, with retail traders fearful, even as on-chain data shows whale wallet counts at record highs, a contrarian split in which large holders appear to be accumulating while smaller holders capitulate. The question this article addresses is where that leaves XRP at the end of 2026, and the honest answer is that the credible range is enormous.
That range, from below $1 to $8, is not a sign of lazy forecasting; it reflects a real and unresolved disagreement about what XRP fundamentally is and whether its token captures value. This article works through the question methodically: where XRP stands and how it got here, the bearish case for a finish below $1, the base case in the $1.40 to $2.80 zone, the bullish case for $4 to $8, the meaning of Standard Chartered’s high-profile cut from $8 to $2.80, the enormous valuation gap that Bitwise’s own model reveals, the catalysts that could actually move the price, and three concrete scenarios for year-end.
Throughout, the goal is to show what each outcome requires rather than to pick a number, because XRP’s path depends on variables that genuinely could resolve in very different directions. The forecasts here are information, not advice, and the single most useful thing to carry through the piece is the question underneath every target: does XRP the token capture the volume that Ripple the company is winning, or does the value accrue elsewhere? Almost everything about the price follows from the answer.
Where XRP stands and how it got here To judge where XRP might end 2026, you need the recent history, because XRP’s price has been driven as much by legal and structural events as by market cycles. The token spent years under the shadow of the United States Securities and Exchange Commission lawsuit against Ripple, and that case formally concluded in 2025, establishing that XRP is not a security when sold on exchanges and removing the single largest overhang on the token.
On the back of the resolution and a friendlier regulatory climate, XRP surged to a cycle high near $3.66 in July 2025, approaching the kind of levels its long-suffering community had anticipated for years. Spot XRP exchange-traded funds launched in November 2025 and drew over $1 billion in net inflows, another long-awaited milestone. By the standards of what the community had been waiting for, 2025 delivered nearly the full checklist.
And yet the price has fallen steadily since. From the July 2025 high near $3.66, XRP declined through the rest of the year and into 2026, sliding to around $1.04 by late June against a backdrop of broad crypto weakness. The frustration in the XRP community is precisely that the token cleared every hurdle and still dropped, which has fueled a debate about whether the good news was already priced in, whether broader market conditions simply overwhelmed XRP’s catalysts, or whether something more structural is limiting how much value flows to the token.
The current setup reflects that tension: XRP is liquid and actively traded, whale wallets are accumulating at record levels in what looks like strategic positioning, but retail sentiment is fearful, and the chart is below its key moving averages. The token sits at a level that is either a coiled accumulation base before the next move higher or a waypoint in a continued decline, and which one it is depends on the catalysts and the value-accrual question explored below. The history matters because it shows XRP has already spent its biggest bullish catalysts, the legal resolution and the ETF launch, which raises the bar for what it takes to push the price meaningfully higher from here.
The bearish case: a finish below $1 The case for XRP ending 2026 below $1 is grounded in both technicals and a structural skepticism that deserves to be taken seriously. Technically, XRP trades below its key moving averages near $1.13 to $1.14, and a market that cannot reclaim those levels is, by definition, still in a downtrend. Several model-based and technical forecasting systems remain bearish on XRP, with some, such as Gov Capital and WalletInvestor, projecting outright losses over a 1-year horizon, treating recent weakness as part of a broader risk pattern rather than a dip to be bought. If macro conditions deteriorate, whether through a broad crypto downturn, a risk-off shift in markets, or disappointing follow-through on ETF flows, XRP could test and break its current support, with technical analyses pointing to downside levels in the low-$1 range and below if the bearish trend persists.
The deeper bearish argument is structural and connects to the value-accrual question at the heart of this piece. Skeptics contend that Ripple’s commercial success, its growing roster of financial-institution partnerships and its cross-border payments business, does not necessarily translate into demand for the XRP token, because much of Ripple’s settlement activity can be conducted without participants holding XRP for any meaningful duration, and because Ripple’s own dollar stablecoin offers an alternative settlement instrument that does not require the token at all. In this reading, XRP could remain a liquid, speculative asset whose price is driven by sentiment and trading rather than by genuine, sustained utility demand, and absent a clear mechanism forcing value into the token, it could drift lower or stagnate even as Ripple thrives as a company.
The bearish case, then, is not merely a chart pattern; it is a thesis that XRP the token may be structurally disconnected from the network’s success, and that a finish below $1 is what happens if the market comes to share that view while macro conditions stay unsupportive.
The base case: $1.40 to $2.80 The base case, where a plurality of serious forecasts cluster, sees XRP recovering modestly to somewhere between roughly $1.40 and $2.80 by year-end, and it rests on a more balanced set of assumptions. Conservative, model-driven forecasters such as CoinCodex and Changelly project XRP in the $1.40 to $1.80 area, with Changelly specifically modeling a December range around $1.29 to $1.55 and an average near $1.42.
These forecasts assume XRP stabilizes, reclaims some lost ground as the broader market steadies, and benefits from continued but not explosive ETF interest, without breaking decisively above its major resistance levels. This is essentially a recovery-without-breakout scenario: XRP stops falling, grinds back toward and through its moving averages, but does not enter a new bull phase.
The upper end of the base case is anchored by the most-watched institutional forecast on XRP. Geoffrey Kendrick at Standard Chartered, after cutting his target, places XRP’s year-end 2026 level at $2.80, a number that sits deliberately between the cautious algorithmic models and the more bullish crypto-publisher calls. That $2.80 figure has become a useful benchmark precisely because it comes from a major bank instead of from automated technical models or retail-facing commentary, and it implies meaningful recovery from current levels without requiring a structural transformation in how XRP captures value.
The base case overall assumes that XRP’s concluded legal status, its live ETFs, and its institutional relationships provide enough of a foundation for a recovery toward the $1.40 to $2.80 band, supported by moderate ETF inflows and a stable-to-improving macro environment, but that the bigger moves toward $5 and beyond require catalysts that are not yet in evidence. For a token that has spent its largest bullish events already, a base-case recovery into the low-single-digits is a reasonable central expectation, and it is where the weight of credible forecasting sits.
The bullish case: $4 to $8 The bullish case for XRP reaching $4 to $8 by year-end is not fringe; it has institutional roots, but it requires conditions that go well beyond a general crypto rebound. The bullish group of forecasts starts near $4.36 and extends above $6, drawing on sources including PricePrediction.net, Telegaon, and commentary such as Dominic Basulto at The Motley Fool, who has floated $5 for XRP in 2026 with asset tokenization as a potential catalyst.
At the top of the credible bull range sits Standard Chartered’s original $8 target for 2026, which Kendrick held before cutting it and which was predicated on sustained ETF inflows and the regulatory clarity following the SEC settlement. The common thread is that these higher targets all assume XRP converts its structural advantages, concluded legal status, live ETFs, and Ripple’s institutional footprint, into real, sustained demand for the token.
What would it actually take to get there? The bullish case requires several things to align: ETF inflows would need to accelerate substantially, with some bullish models assuming flows climbing toward the multibillion-dollar range that Standard Chartered modeled as the trigger for its higher targets; the CLARITY Act or similar legislation would need to pass and codify XRP’s commodity status, unlocking institutional capital that has stayed on the sidelines; Ripple’s expanding use of XRP in cross-border settlement and its banking ambitions would need to translate into demonstrable token demand; and the broader market would likely need an altcoin-favorable phase instead of the current Bitcoin-dominated, risk-off mood.
The cleanest way to summarize it, echoing the analysts who have studied the range, is that a move toward $2 to $3 requires stabilization, ETF support, and better sentiment, while a move toward $5 or higher requires a stronger shift in market structure, institutional demand, and proven token utility. The bull case is achievable, but it is conditional on XRP answering the value-accrual question in the affirmative, which is exactly what remains unproven.
Why Standard Chartered cut from $8 to $2.80 The most instructive single event in XRP’s forecast landscape this year is Standard Chartered’s revision, because it crystallizes the shift from hope to realism. Geoffrey Kendrick, the bank’s digital-assets research lead, had previously set an $8 year-end 2026 target for XRP, a number that implied a large rally and was anchored in expectations of sustained ETF inflows and the post-settlement regulatory clarity.
As the year progressed and XRP failed to sustain the more aggressive assumptions priced into that forecast, Kendrick cut the year-end target to $2.80. The revision fit the broader weakness seen across crypto in 2026 and reflected that the catalysts, while real, were not translating into price at the pace the original target assumed. The cut matters because it came from a credible institutional source recalibrating to reality instead of from a perma-bear or a hype account, which makes the new $2.80 figure a more grounded benchmark than the targets above it.
Crucially, Kendrick left his longer-term call untouched: he kept a $28 target for XRP by 2030 even as he slashed the near-term number. That juxtaposition, $2.80 by year-end but $28 by 2030, captures the defining feature of serious XRP analysis, which is a split between near-term caution and long-term conviction. The long-term bull case rests on XRP becoming a major institutional settlement asset as Ripple’s banking and cross-border infrastructure matures, a process measured in years instead of months.
The near-term caution reflects that, right now, those flows have not materialized at the scale needed to drive the price, and the token remains hostage to sentiment and macro conditions. For anyone trying to forecast year-end 2026 specifically, the lesson of the Standard Chartered cut is sobering: even a committed long-term bull at a major bank concluded that the near-term path was far more modest than the $8 he once projected, and $2.80 now functions as the credible ceiling of the base case instead of the floor of the bull case.
The valuation gap that defines XRP If one piece of analysis captures why XRP forecasts diverge so violently, it is the valuation work from the asset manager Bitwise, which ran XRP through a formal model and produced 2030 outcomes ranging from roughly $0.13 at the bottom to above $29 at the top. That is more than a 200-fold gap between the same firm’s bearish and bullish cases for the same token, and it sounds absurd until you see what drives it. The entire spread rests on a single assumption: whether XRP the token captures a meaningful chunk of the cross-border payment and settlement volume that Ripple is winning. Bitwise’s high case assumes it does, with XRP becoming the bridge asset that institutional value routes through; its low case assumes it does not, with banks sticking to existing systems and dollar stablecoins, including Ripple’s own, moving the money instead while XRP is bypassed.
This is the question underneath every XRP price target, and it is why the same catalysts can be read as wildly bullish or quietly bearish. Standard Chartered’s $28 by 2030 and the high single-digit-to-low-teens targets from other analysts all quietly lean on the assumption that the token captures the volume; the bearish models assume it does not.
The reason the question is so hard to settle is that Ripple can and does conduct much settlement activity without participants holding XRP for long, and its dollar stablecoin offers a token-free alternative, so the mechanism by which network success forces sustained demand into XRP is contested instead of obvious. For year-end 2026, the practical implication is that XRP’s price will be driven less by any single catalyst than by how the market’s collective answer to this question evolves. If confidence grows that the token captures the volume, the higher targets come into reach; if doubt deepens, the lower ones do. Everything else- the ETF flows, the legislation, the partnerships- ultimately feeds into that one judgment, which is why the credible forecast range is a chasm instead of a band.
The catalysts that could move XRP Several concrete catalysts could push XRP toward one end of the range or the other before year-end, and watching them is more useful than fixating on a target. The 1st is the CLARITY Act and the broader regulatory picture. Passage of legislation codifying XRP’s commodity status into law, instead of leaving it resting on the concluded lawsuit, could unlock institutional capital that has stayed cautious, and XRP is widely seen as a beneficiary alongside other payment-focused tokens.
The 2nd is ETF flows. The spot XRP ETFs that launched in late 2025 are central to any serious forecast, because they remove supply from exchanges as providers accumulate, and the trajectory of their inflows, whether they reaccelerate toward the multibillion-dollar levels bulls assume or stagnate, will heavily influence the price. The 3rd is Ripple’s own business: its expanding use of XRP in cross-border corridors, its banking and custody ambitions, and the growth of its dollar stablecoin, which cuts both ways by validating Ripple while offering a token-free settlement path.
The 4th set of catalysts is macro and market structure: the Federal Reserve’s policy path, broad crypto liquidity, Bitcoin’s behavior, and whether the market rotates into altcoins or stays concentrated in Bitcoin. XRP, like most altcoins, tends to need a risk-on, altcoin-favorable environment to sustain large moves, and the current Bitcoin-dominated, fearful market has been a headwind.
The contrarian signal worth watching is the divergence between record whale accumulation and fearful retail sentiment, which historically can precede a reversal if the large holders prove right, though it can also simply reflect long-term holders averaging into a continued decline.
The honest framing is that these catalysts are real, but their effects are conditional, and none of them individually guarantees a direction; collectively, they will determine whether XRP’s year-end print lands in the bearish, base, or bullish zone. For a token that has already spent its biggest catalysts, the marginal mover from here is most likely the combination of ETF-flow momentum and the market’s evolving answer to the value-accrual question.
Three scenarios for XRP at year-end 2026 Drawing the analysis into scenarios clarifies the range. In the bull scenario, XRP finishes 2026 somewhere between $4 and as high as $8. This requires ETF inflows to accelerate meaningfully, the CLARITY Act or similar to pass and unlock institutional capital, an altcoin-favorable market phase to arrive, and growing confidence that XRP the token genuinely captures Ripple’s settlement volume. It is the path the most bullish credible forecasts describe, and it depends on the value-accrual question resolving in XRP’s favor while macro conditions turn supportive. It is achievable but conditional, and the bar is high given that XRP has already spent its legal and ETF-launch catalysts.
In the base scenario, the most heavily populated by serious forecasts, XRP recovers modestly to roughly $1.40 to $2.80. Support holds, the broader market steadies, ETF interest continues at a moderate pace, and XRP grinds back toward and possibly through its key moving averages without entering a new bull phase, with Standard Chartered’s $2.80 marking the credible upper edge. This recovery-without-breakout outcome fits the weight of model-based and institutional forecasting and is arguably the most likely central case. In the bear scenario, XRP finishes below $1. Macro conditions deteriorate, or ETF flows disappoint; the market comes to doubt that the token captures the network’s volume, support breaks, and XRP drifts lower as the structural skeptics’ thesis gains traction, validating the bearish models that project outright losses.
Which scenario unfolds depends primarily on ETF-flow momentum, regulatory progress, the macro backdrop, and above all the market’s evolving judgment on whether XRP the token captures the volume Ripple is winning. All 3 are live, and the wide gap between them is the most honest description of where XRP stands.
Frequently Asked Questions Where could XRP end 2026? The credible range is unusually wide, from below $1 to $8. Bearish models and some technical systems point below $1 if support breaks and the market doubts the token captures value. The base case, where most serious forecasts cluster, sees a modest recovery to roughly $1.40 to $2.80, with Standard Chartered’s $2.80 as the credible upper edge. The bullish case of $4 to $8 requires accelerating ETF inflows, regulatory progress, an altcoin-favorable market, and growing confidence that XRP captures Ripple’s settlement volume. The outcome depends on those catalysts and, above all, on the market’s evolving answer to whether the token, not just the network, captures value.
Why has XRP fallen to $1? XRP is down from a July 2025 cycle high near $3.66, sliding through the back half of last year and the first half of 2026 amid broad crypto weakness. Part of the frustration is that XRP cleared its biggest catalysts: the SEC lawsuit concluded in 2025, and spot ETFs launched that November, yet the price still fell, which suggests the good news may have been priced in or overwhelmed by market conditions. The deeper question is structural: skeptics argue Ripple’s commercial success does not necessarily force sustained demand into the XRP token, especially with Ripple’s own dollar stablecoin offering a token-free settlement path. That value-accrual doubt, plus a Bitcoin-dominated risk-off market, has weighed on the price.
Why did Standard Chartered cut its XRP target? Geoffrey Kendrick, Standard Chartered’s digital-assets research lead, had set an $8 year-end 2026 target for XRP based on expectations of sustained ETF inflows and post-settlement regulatory clarity. As 2026 progressed and XRP failed to sustain the aggressive assumptions behind that number, he cut the year-end target to $2.80, fitting the broader crypto weakness this year. Notably, he kept his $28 target for 2030 unchanged, which captures the split in serious XRP analysis between near-term caution and long-term conviction. The cut matters because it came from a credible institutional bull recalibrating to reality, which makes $2.80 a grounded benchmark and the effective ceiling of the base case instead of the floor of the bull case.
Can XRP reach $5 or more in 2026? It is possible but conditional on several things aligning. The bullish forecasts of $4.36 to $8 assume ETF inflows accelerate substantially, the CLARITY Act or similar passes and unlocks institutional capital, the market rotates into an altcoin-favorable phase, and XRP demonstrably converts Ripple’s settlement footprint into sustained token demand. As analysts who have studied the range put it, a move to $2 to $3 needs stabilization, ETF support, and better sentiment, while $5 or higher needs a stronger shift in market structure, institutional demand, and proven token utility. The bar is high because XRP has already spent its biggest catalysts, so reaching the bull range requires new, larger drivers instead of a simple market rebound.
What is the value-accrual question for XRP? It is the single question underneath every XRP price target: whether the XRP token itself, not just Ripple’s network, captures the cross-border payment and settlement volume flowing through it. Bitwise’s formal model shows why it matters so much, producing 2030 outcomes from about $0.13 to above $29, a more than 200-fold gap driven entirely by this assumption. The high case assumes XRP becomes the bridge asset institutional value routes through; the low case assumes banks and dollar stablecoins, including Ripple’s own, move the money while XRP is bypassed. Because Ripple can conduct much settlement without participants holding XRP for long, the mechanism forcing demand into the token is contested, which is why forecasts diverge so violently.
Are whales accumulating XRP? On-chain data shows XRP whale wallet counts at record highs even as retail sentiment sits in fear, a contrarian divergence in which large holders appear to be accumulating while smaller holders capitulate. Bulls read this as strategic positioning ahead of a potential reversal, on the logic that large, informed holders are buying weakness. The cautionary reading is that record whale accumulation can also reflect long-term holders averaging into a continued decline that does not reverse on schedule, so it is a supportive signal instead of a guarantee. It is one of the more constructive data points in XRP’s current setup, but like every catalyst here, its payoff depends on the broader market and the value-accrual question resolving
This article is information, not financial or investment advice. XRP price levels, indicator readings, and analyst forecasts reflect data available as of June 28, 2026, are point-in-time, and can change rapidly. Cryptocurrency is highly volatile, and you can lose money. Price predictions are inherently uncertain, and the scenarios described are not guarantees. Do your own research and consult a qualified financial professional before making any investment decision.
The proposal aims to give XRPL users guaranteed execution priority if they pay a reservation fee before a ledger closes.
David Schwartz, who co-founded the XRP Ledger, has proposed a transaction reservation scheme as a potential fix for front-running on the network’s decentralized exchange and automated market maker.
His proposal was in response to a post from the XRP-focused account XRPresso.io, which argued that validators and well-connected nodes can exploit pre-validation transaction visibility to extract value from regular traders.
Front-Running Concerns on XRPL According to XRPresso, transfers usually sit in a publicly visible queue before a ledger closes on the XRPL, with validators and some nodes able to see these pending trades. As such, they are in a position to assess whether sandwiching them would be profitable, and then to submit multiple entries to game their position in the final canonical ordering.
And because that ordering is decided by a known, deterministic formula involving transaction hashes, submitting similar entries increases the odds of landing in a favorable slot relative to the target trade. That, as XRPresso claimed, could see everyday users trading through standard wallets and apps getting systematically disadvantaged while more sophisticated operators extract value from their trades.
Schwartz acknowledged that the issue is real but pushed back on parts of the framing. He pointed out that all participants have an equal opportunity to see transfers and argued that validators don’t gain any structural advantage unless several of them conspire. Such an action, he said, would be visible on-chain and lead to the removal of the offending validators from the trust lists.
“If multiple validators did conspire, or a single validator attempted it, it would be *very* obvious to everyone exactly who was doing this,” he wrote.
Furthermore, he said that there have never been any reports of anyone attempting something like that, except as a proof of concept. The biggest issue, according to him, has been profitability, since to make money, the actors would need both high liquidity that would make volumes worth the effort available and low liquidity to move the price measurably and at a reasonable cost.
Still, he offered a solution in which a user would submit a reservation transaction specifying a ledger sequence number and a transaction ID, and pay a reservation fee. If the reservation succeeds and the actual activity is broadcast before that ledger closes, it gets guaranteed priority over any other formed after the original was disclosed.
You may also like: ZachXBT Warns AscendEX Users of Potential Liquidity Issues and Delayed Withdrawals Market Meltdown: MemeCore Crashes 76% as MIM Breaks Peg to $0.50 Important Ripple (XRP) Deadline Concerning Many Users “This guarantees that you can execute your transaction ahead of any transaction that was formed after your transaction was disclosed,” explained the developer. “You would use this approach any time you want to perform a transaction that you want to ensure cannot be sandwiched or front run.”
The Front-Running Debate in DeFi XRPresso responded that while Schwartz’s reservation idea is worth exploring, it would add cost and complexity and does not fully address the underlying visibility problem in the pre-validation stage. According to them, targeted confidentiality for the details of pending actions would be a cleaner long-term fix, with such approaches already being used on other chains.
The front-running problem isn’t unique to the XRP ecosystem, and Binance co-founder Changpeng Zhao proposed a dark pool perpetuals DEX last year that uses zero-knowledge cryptography to hide order data until execution. That idea drew criticism too, with some decentralization advocates claiming that hiding order books will just recreate the insider dynamics that crypto was meant to move away from.
Ripple’s worldwide regulatory approach is getting a new look as market participants wait for the U.S. CLARITY Act to move forward. Some analysts believe that the business is building the groundwork for the large-scale adoption of XRP by institutions prior to the legislation.
Ripple Plans For Mega XRP Adoption Amid CLARITY Act Hype Crypto Crusader, a crypto analyst, recently made a statement on X, asserting that investors are more interested in XRP’s short-term price movements rather than its overall expansion. He wrote, “People are missing the big picture behind Ripple & XRP right now.”
The analyst noted that Ripple is meeting regulatory requirements in various countries around the world. These include Europe, Japan, Australia, the United Kingdom, UAE, Africa, Singapore, and the United States.
Such advances are far from stand-alone approvals, per the post. He stated that he was writing, “Ripple locking in global markets right before Clarity hits.
People are missing the big picture behind Ripple & $XRP right now.
Instead of crying in the casino about price action, you should research what the house is doing…
Ripple has been announcing regulatory moves one after another globally. Europe, Japan, Australia, United…
— Nick | Crypto Crusader (@NCashOfficial) June 29, 2026
Crypto Crusader also wrote that Ripple is “planting seeds for institutional adoption of XRP globally before the real green light happens.” He added that once the CLARITY Act becomes law, “there is absolutely nothing holding back Ripple & XRP adoption.”
What’s Next For Crypto Market Structure Bill? The comments follow the CLARITY Act’s crucial phase in Washington. The U.S. Senate is still in recess until July 13, but talks are still ongoing between crypto industry representatives, administration officials, and congressional staff.
Talks are focused on combining differing committee drafts, as well as on differences regarding ethics rules, anti-money laundering requirements, and the regulation of digital assets markets.
Lawmakers will return and first consider the National Defense Authorization Act, Senate Majority Leader John Thune said. This has put crypto legislation back on hold until late July or early August. Many are feeling that there’s a need to pass the bill before the start of Congress’ August recess to keep momentum going.
XRP’s Technical Setup In Focus The technical sentiment of Ripple’s XRP has also shifted to more positive territory at the same time. Ali Martinez, a crypto analyst, stated that the daily chart of XRP is showing “two bullish signals.” The Tom DeMark Sequential indicator has formed a buy signal with a “9” candlestick. In the past, it has led up to short-term rebounds, Martinez said.
The Morning Star Doji pattern also emerged, a chart pattern that is frequently used to identify possible market reversals, Martinez added. He said that this would be bolstered by increased buying if the trend on the positive side is sustained, which would allow for the possibility of moving to $1.30.
Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.
Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.
Kiyosaki Says The Pin Is Near For The Biggest Bubble In HistoryKiyosaki posted his boldest price targets yet, predicting gold hits $35,000 an ounce and silver reaches $200 an ounce within a year of the bubble popping.
He paired those calls with $750,000 for Bitcoin and $95,000 for Ethereum, framing all four assets as the winners once the current financial system breaks.
“I do not know what pin, what event will pop the biggest bubbles in history,” Kiyosaki wrote. “It’s not IF. It’s WHEN.”
His targets mark a sharp jump from the $250,000 Bitcoin and $60,000 Ethereum figures he gave back in November, when the ETH number itself sparked confusion since the asset hadn’t traded anywhere near that level.
Cowen Says Bitcoin Closing Below The 200-Week Average Isn’t NewProminent analyst Benjamin Cowen pointed out that Bitcoin’s first weekly close below its 200-week moving average this cycle mirrors exactly what happened in June 2022, the last time Bitcoin broke that same level.
He noted Bitcoin tends to drop into June in multiple cycles, including 2018 and 2022, and that the pattern rarely needs to be more complicated than it looks.
Cowen’s base case calls for Bitcoin to form an early summer low, followed by a counter-trend rally into mid-to-late summer, before a final drop into the actual cycle bottom sometime in the third or fourth quarter.
He said this play would only change if a major blowup, similar to FTX or Luna in the last cycle, triggers a faster price-based capitulation instead of the slower time-based pattern.
Cowen’s preferred strategy is dollar-cost averaging into Bitcoin through the second half of midterm years, a method he said has worked across prior cycles even when short-term drawdowns got worse before recovering.
He’s watching for a volume spike similar to those seen at the end of the 2014, 2018, and 2022 bear markets as the real signal that capitulation has actually happened.
Image: Shutterstock
Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs
For more details, visit the official Cryptoslate platform.
TL;DR Institutional products tied to Bitcoin and Ethereum reportedly saw net outflows. XRP and HYPE wrappers attracted inflows during the same period. The divergence points to a more selective crypto market, where investors are not treating every asset the same way. Institutions Are Not Just Buying Or Selling Crypto As One Trade Institutional investors reportedly reduced exposure to Bitcoin and Ethereum ETF products while still adding to XRP and HYPE-linked wrappers.
That is a more interesting story than a simple “institutions dumped crypto” headline. The flow picture suggests that investors are becoming selective. They may be cutting broad exposure to the two largest crypto assets while still looking for targeted opportunities elsewhere.
For Bitcoin and Ethereum, outflows are never a great signal in the short term. These products are major access points for traditional capital, and sustained redemptions can weigh on sentiment. But the fact that XRP and HYPE products saw inflows at the same time shows that the entire sector is not being abandoned.
Why Selective Flows Matter Crypto traders often talk about risk-on and risk-off as if the whole market moves together. That is still true during major volatility events, but flow data can reveal a more detailed picture underneath.
If investors are selling BTC and ETH exposure but buying XRP and HYPE, they may be rotating away from broad market beta and toward specific narratives. XRP has its payments and legal-resolution storyline. HYPE has become tied to the Hyperliquid ecosystem and more specialized on-chain trading demand.
That kind of split matters because it changes how traders should think about the market. The question is not just “are institutions bullish on crypto?” It becomes “which crypto exposures are institutions willing to hold during stress?”
That is a much more useful question. It also means Bitcoin dominance, Ethereum sentiment, and altcoin flows may give different signals at the same time.
The Risk In Reading Too Much Into It There is a caveat. Smaller products can show impressive inflows without matching the absolute scale of Bitcoin or Ethereum ETF flows. A modest inflow into an altcoin wrapper does not cancel out much larger outflows from BTC or ETH products.
So the takeaway should be measured. This is not proof that institutions are rotating into altcoins en masse. It is evidence that some targeted altcoin demand has remained active while broad crypto exposure has weakened.
For Bitcoin and Ethereum, the next test is whether outflows slow. For XRP and HYPE, the test is whether inflows continue once the market stabilizes or if they were simply temporary pockets of interest.
The market message is still useful: institutional crypto demand is no longer one-dimensional. Investors are not just buying the whole sector or selling the whole sector. They are separating assets, narratives, and wrappers — and that makes flow data more important than ever.
For readers, the useful approach is to treat this as a signal to monitor rather than a standalone trading call, because confirmation still has to come from follow-through in price, flows, and broader market behavior.
—
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
Making ETH inevitable and scaling Ethereum to the world. Ethlabs's co-founders sat down with Bankless to unpack the new org's mission.
Listen
0
0:00 0:00
Subscribe to Bankless or sign in
When I wrote about Ethlabs last week, my piece talked about the what. Namely the basics of the new organization, and how it's a new independent R&D lab co-founded by former Ethereum Foundation luminaries like Ansgar Dietrichs and Caspar Schwarz-Schilling.
That said, both Ansgar and Caspar just came on the podcast to cover the why of the org and their thinking around it. It's one of the best conversations about Ethereum's direction I've heard in a while.
— Bankless (@Bankless) June 29, 2026 The core thesis, as Ansgar laid it out early in the convo, is that Ethereum is at an evolutionary crossroads. The network's first 10 years were about infra, bringing assets onchain, figuring out how DeFi protocols should work, and etc. All of that is done, more or less, as we now have the fundamental rails.
Now the question is whether Ethereum will become a central node that the global economy routes through, or whether we end up in a fragmented multichain world. Ansgar said it will be one or the other, and it's not inevitable which way will win.
Tackling this crux head-on is the strategic case for Ethlabs's existence. The EF, per its new mandate, is doubling down on CROPS, i.e. censorship resistance, open source, privacy, and security, the foundational properties that give Ethereum credible neutrality. Ethlabs exists to complement that vision, not compete with it. In Caspar's framing the EF maintains what makes Ethereum Ethereum, and Ethlabs will work to scale that to the world.
Enjoying this article?
Subscribe to Bankless or sign in
The work streamsIn the episode, Ansgar sketched out Ethlabs's focus areas across three buckets:
Chain — Anything core protocol, including a push for L1 scaling that Ansgar has been pushing on for a while now. The upcoming Amsterdam hardfork, per the convo, should deliver something like ~4x throughput gains, and Ansgar's broader north star is a permanent 3x-per-year scaling trajectory for Ethereum going forward.Platform — Here will come the work that stems from the intersection between the chain and apps. This is where interoperability lives, and both Ansgar and Caspar were emphatic that Ethereum cannot be the central settlement node of the global economy if the UX of moving assets across L2s remains as fragmented as it is today. The superpower of a "United Chains of Ethereum," as Ansgar put it, only materializes if being in that bundle is an obvious no-brainer for any chain launching today. Right now, it isn't.Growth — The newest and most explicitly market-facing area of Ethlabs, this area of effort will focus on understanding what DeFi builders, Wall Street, and other finance-adjacent builders actually need from Ethereum, and then propagating those needs back upstream into research and EIPs.On ETH the assetOne of the more interesting threads in the episode was the discussion around ETH specifically, an area where the EF has historically been reticent.
As Ansgar argued, Ethereum and ETH can only win together, which means every protocol development decision needs to account for its effect on ETH's role and value accrual. He draws the Bitcoin comparison deliberately: Bitcoin's success is partly a matter of inevitability, as there's an aura around it that it will simply be there. That's what Ethereum, and ETH, need to build.
On the funding and longevity side, Caspar was candid that the org's accountability structure is quite intentional. Ethlabs has solid two-to-three-year runway and a starting team of five, with ambitious but lean hiring plans. Their plan for continued funding is to deliver impactful work, then come back to the community in a year and ask if their track record justifies further support.
Ansgar noted this accountability loop was a deliberate hedge against the classic nonprofit failure mode of drifting toward irrelevance without any real-world forcing function.
Alas, can Ethlabs pull off their plans and make a difference? We'll see, though it does seem clear to me that this group of Ethereum diehards is uniquely suited for the work they've set out for themselves. They're poised to have a big impact, and that's something everyone in Ethereum can root for. For now, catch up on all their thinking in our latest episode, out now for everyone!
Ethlabs: The New Org to Make Ethereum Win | Ansgar & Caspar on Bankless
Ethereum has a new R&D lab, and its mission is blunt: make Ethereum and ETH win.
Bitcoin is caught between a resistance zone and building liquidity above, while Ethereum mirrors a familiar February structure and XRP shows early signs of seller exhaustion.
Bitcoin: $60.5K to $61K Is the Wall
On the three-day chart, Bitcoin is holding above $60,000 without a confirmed candle close below. If that level breaks with confirmation and fails to be reclaimed, the next meaningful support sits at $54,000 to $55,000.
A bullish divergence is visible across the 12-hour, eight-hour, and daily timeframes, with lower price lows and higher RSI lows. That signal helped produce a short-term relief from recent extreme selling pressure. However, that relief has stalled directly at the $60,500 to $61,000 resistance zone, where previous support has flipped into resistance.
The liquidation heatmap shows significant liquidity clustered above at $62,000 and between $63,200 and $63,500, making a push toward $62,000 plausible once resistance clears. A smaller but growing liquidity pocket is also building below at $58,000, which becomes a target if stocks open weakly on Monday.
The weekly timeframe shows a large bullish divergence forming but not yet confirmed. The super trend indicator remains red.
Ethereum: Repeating February’s Pattern
Ethereum is holding the $1,500 to $1,600 support zone on the three-day chart. The daily chart closely mirrors the February structure, with horizontal lows, an oversold first low, and a higher RSI low suggesting early momentum recovery.
If the pattern continues to echo February, choppy sideways action or a modest relief rally could follow over the coming days. However, if stocks drag Bitcoin back toward $58,000 on Monday, Ethereum is unlikely to sustain any recovery regardless of its own setup.
XRP: Sellers Losing Steam, Not the Battle
XRP’s weekly trend remains technically bearish with no confirmed bottom. Support sits between $0.90 and $1.00, with the recent bounce from almost exactly $1.00. Resistance sits at $1.13.
The past two days have produced extremely small candle bodies, a classic outcome of a bullish divergence. Sellers are losing momentum rather than buyers taking control. Flat price action is the most likely outcome ahead of Monday’s stock market open.
What to Watch
Monday’s US market open is the single most important near-term catalyst. A stable open gives Bitcoin room to target the $62,000 liquidity zone. A weak open risks a move back to $58,000 and invalidates the short-term recovery signals across all three assets.
Story Ends Here
Trust with CoinPedia:CoinPedia has been delivering accurate and timely cryptocurrency and blockchain updates since 2017. All content is created by our expert panel of analysts and journalists, following strict Editorial Guidelines based on E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness). Every article is fact-checked against reputable sources to ensure accuracy, transparency, and reliability. Our review policy guarantees unbiased evaluations when recommending exchanges, platforms, or tools. We strive to provide timely updates about everything crypto & blockchain, right from startups to industry majors.
Investment Disclaimer:All opinions and insights shared represent the author's own views on current market conditions. Please do your own research before making investment decisions. Neither the writer nor the publication assumes responsibility for your financial choices.
Sponsored and Advertisements:Sponsored content and affiliate links may appear on our site. Advertisements are marked clearly, and our editorial content remains entirely independent from our ad partners.
Ethereum has fallen harder than Bitcoin, down nearly 70% from its high while the ETH/BTC ratio sits near multi-year lows. Will Ether keep lagging the market leader through 2026, or is the underperformance setting up a reversal? Here is the case on both sides, and what would flip it.
Summary
Ethereum trades near $1,550 as of late June 2026, down roughly 68% from its August 2025 all-time high near $4,950 and below every major moving average, the weakest technical picture among the large-cap majors. The ETH/BTC ratio sits near multi-year lows because Ether has fallen harder than Bitcoin’s roughly 52% drawdown, extending a multi-year stretch of underperformance against the market leader. The case for continued underperformance rests on Bitcoin’s ETF and treasury-driven institutional dominance, competition from Solana for on-chain activity, and a muddier investment narrative for Ether. The case for a reversal rests on deep-value pricing, staking yield, the Layer-2 and tokenization ecosystem, potential rotation of ETF flows, and the tendency of Ether to outperform in late-cycle altcoin phases. Year-end forecasts span roughly $1,266 at the bearish end to $4,400 to $5,300 at the bullish end, a gap that turns on whether capital rotates back toward Ether or stays concentrated in Bitcoin. Ethereum (ETH) is trading near $1,550 as of late June 2026, and it has fallen harder than almost any other large-cap crypto asset, which raises the question this article addresses: will Ether keep underperforming Bitcoin through the rest of 2026, or is the very depth of its decline setting up a reversal?
The numbers frame the problem starkly. Ether is down roughly 68% from its August 2025 all-time high near $4,950, a far deeper drawdown than Bitcoin’s roughly 52% fall from its own peak, and it trades below every major moving average, from the 20-day exponential average on up through the 200-day near $2,317, with a completed death cross and a relative strength index near 30.
Ethereum daily price chart — June 29 | Source: crypto.news The Fear and Greed reading sits around 13, even deeper in extreme fear than Bitcoin’s, and the $1,500 to $1,600 zone has become the line in the sand that bulls are defending; a clean loss of it opens $1,450 and then $1,400. Most tellingly for this question, the ratio of Ether’s price to Bitcoin’s sits near multi-year lows, the clearest single expression of how badly Ether has lagged the asset the market treats as its anchor.
That ratio, ETH measured against BTC, is the real subject of this piece, because the question is not only where Ether’s dollar price goes but whether it keeps losing ground to Bitcoin specifically. This article works through it from both directions: where Ethereum stands technically, what the ETH/BTC ratio actually measures and why it matters, the structural reasons Ether has underperformed, the case that the underperformance continues, the case that it reverses, what the analysts forecast, the specific conditions that would flip the ratio one way or the other, and three scenarios for both the ratio and the absolute price into year-end. The aim is to give a fair hearing to both sides, because this is a genuinely contested question on which thoughtful people disagree.
The forecasts here are information, not advice. And the framing to carry throughout is that Ether’s 2026 outcome has 2 layers: its dollar price, which depends heavily on the broad market, and its performance relative to Bitcoin, which depends on whether capital rotates back toward Ether or stays concentrated in the market leader. Both layers point to the same underlying question of whether Ethereum can reclaim the narrative momentum it has lost.
Where Ethereum stands right now The technical condition of Ethereum is the weakest among the large-cap majors, and being honest about that is the starting point. Near $1,550, Ether trades below its 20-day, 50-day, 100-day, and 200-day exponential moving averages, the last of which sits up near $2,317, meaning price is far beneath even its slowest-moving trend line. A death cross, the bearish crossover of shorter and longer averages, has completed, confirming the downtrend on the technical framework many traders use.
The relative strength index near 30 indicates oversold conditions and weak buying momentum, and the broader structure since the spring has been one of lower highs and lower lows, with sellers in control through a steep decline from the $2,000-plus range earlier in the year down to the current zone. The $1,500 to $1,600 area is the critical support, having acted as the 2026 floor, and below it the next levels are $1,450 and $1,400.
Sentiment is correspondingly grim. The Fear and Greed reading around 13 is a deeper extreme fear than Bitcoin’s, reflecting how thoroughly the market has soured on Ether specifically. The drawdown of roughly 68% from the August 2025 high near $4,950 is severe even by crypto standards and significantly worse than Bitcoin’s contemporaneous decline, which is the heart of the underperformance story. To improve the picture,
Ether needs, at minimum, to reclaim short-term resistance near $1,700 to $1,750, and a genuine trend change would require recovering the higher averages up toward $2,000 and then $2,317. Until then, the structure is bearish, and the burden of proof sits with buyers.
This is the uncomfortable backdrop against which the underperformance question must be answered: Ether is not merely down; it is down harder than Bitcoin, deeper in fear, and weaker on the charts, which is exactly why some see capitulation and opportunity while others see a structurally lagging asset with further to fall.
What the ETH/BTC ratio is telling us To analyze underperformance properly, you have to understand the ETH/BTC ratio, because it strips out the broad market and isolates the question of Ether versus Bitcoin specifically. The ratio simply expresses Ether’s price in terms of Bitcoin rather than dollars, and it rises when Ether outperforms Bitcoin and falls when Ether lags. Right now it sits near multi-year lows, which is the precise, quantified statement of the problem: over an extended period, and especially through the 2025 to 2026 drawdown, Ether has lost value against Bitcoin, not just against the dollar. When both assets fall, but one falls more, the ratio captures the difference, and Ether’s roughly 68% drawdown against Bitcoin’s roughly 52% means Ether has shed a meaningful chunk of its value relative to the market leader.
Why does this matter beyond bookkeeping? The ETH/BTC ratio is one of the most-watched gauges in crypto because it functions as a barometer of risk appetite and capital rotation within the asset class. When the ratio rises, it typically signals that capital is rotating out of Bitcoin and into Ether and the broader altcoin complex, the classic risk-on, altcoin-season dynamic. When it falls, as now, it signals that capital is concentrating in Bitcoin, treating it as the safer, more institutionally endorsed crypto asset while shunning the higher-beta alternatives.
A ratio near multi-year lows therefore tells a story: the market, in its current risk-off and Bitcoin-dominated mood, has been choosing Bitcoin over Ether decisively. For the question of whether Ether underperforms again in 2026, the ratio is both the scoreboard and the leading indicator.
A continued decline or stagnation in the ratio means underperformance persists; a sustained turn upward would be the clearest sign that Ether is regaining ground. Everything that follows, the structural arguments and the catalysts, ultimately expresses itself through which way this ratio moves.
Why Ethereum has underperformed Understanding the causes of Ether’s underperformance is essential to judging whether it continues, and several structural forces have converged against it. The 1st and arguably most important is the institutional bid for Bitcoin that Ether has not matched in kind.
Spot Bitcoin ETFs and a wave of corporate Bitcoin treasuries have created sustained, price-insensitive demand that treats Bitcoin as digital gold and a primary reserve asset, a role with no clear Ether equivalent. While Ether has its own ETFs, the institutional narrative around Bitcoin as a macro reserve asset has been far more powerful, channeling the bulk of institutional crypto allocation toward Bitcoin and leaving Ether to compete for a smaller, more speculative pool of capital. In a risk-off market, that distinction is decisive: capital flows to the asset with the strongest institutional endorsement, which has been Bitcoin.
The 2nd force is competition for Ethereum’s core use case. Solana and other high-throughput chains have captured a large share of the on-chain activity, particularly the memecoin and high-frequency trading culture, that once would have flowed to Ethereum, challenging Ether’s status as the default smart-contract platform and muddying its growth narrative.
The 3rd is a narrative problem of Ether’s own. Following its technical upgrades, the relationship between network activity and value accrual to the token has become more complicated, with much activity migrating to Layer-2 networks whose fees do not always translate cleanly into demand for Ether, leaving the investment case harder to articulate than Bitcoin’s simple scarcity story.
Together, these forces- Bitcoin’s institutional dominance, Solana’s competitive pressure, and a muddier value-accrual narrative- explain why capital has favored Bitcoin and why the ETH/BTC ratio has fallen to multi-year lows. They are real and structural, not merely cyclical, which is what gives the continued-underperformance thesis its force.
The case that the underperformance continues The bearish-on-ratio case holds that the forces just described are durable and that Ether keeps lagging Bitcoin through 2026. Its strongest pillar is that the institutional preference for Bitcoin is structural rather than temporary. As long as the dominant institutional narrative casts Bitcoin as the crypto reserve asset and digital gold, with ETFs and treasuries channeling allocation toward it, Ether will struggle to attract a comparable bid, and in any risk-off phase capital will continue concentrating in Bitcoin.
This is not a sentiment that flips quickly; it reflects how large allocators have categorized the two assets, and that categorization has only deepened through the current drawdown. On this view, the ETH/BTC ratio at multi-year lows is not an anomaly poised to mean-revert but the accurate reflection of a lasting shift in how the market values the two.
The competitive and narrative pillars reinforce the case. If Solana and other chains continue to capture on-chain activity and developer attention, Ethereum’s growth story weakens further, and a weakening fundamental narrative makes it harder for Ether to outperform regardless of price level. The muddled value-accrual picture, with activity on Layer-2 networks not cleanly driving Ether demand, means that even genuine ecosystem growth may not translate into the token appreciation that would lift the ratio. Bears also note that Ether’s deeper drawdown is itself a warning: an asset that falls harder than the market leader in a downturn is displaying higher beta and weaker relative strength, traits that tend to persist until a clear catalyst changes them.
In this reading, the most likely path for 2026 is that Ether’s dollar price may rise or fall with the broad market, but it continues to underperform Bitcoin specifically, with the ratio grinding sideways to lower, because none of the structural forces working against it have meaningfully reversed. The underperformance, on this thesis, is a feature of the current market regime, not a temporary dislocation.
The case for a reversal The bullish-on-ratio case is equally serious and rests on the proposition that Ether’s underperformance has gone far enough to create the conditions for its own reversal. The 1st pillar is deep value. After a 68% drawdown that has driven Ether to multi-year lows against Bitcoin and into extreme fear, the bull argument is that the selling has been overdone, that much of the bad news, the competition, the narrative confusion, the risk-off flight to Bitcoin, is now priced in, and that assets this oversold relative to the leader have historically offered strong mean-reversion potential when sentiment turns.
The 2nd pillar is Ether’s genuine fundamental base, which remains the deepest in the smart-contract world: it anchors the largest decentralized finance ecosystem, hosts the bulk of tokenized real-world asset activity, supports a sprawling Layer-2 network of scaling solutions, and offers a staking yield that gives holders a return Bitcoin does not. These are real assets that a reversal thesis can build on.
The 3rd pillar is the potential for capital rotation, which is how ratio reversals historically happen. In past cycles, after Bitcoin leads a move and its dominance peaks, capital has frequently rotated into Ether and the broader altcoin complex in a late-cycle altcoin season that drives the ETH/BTC ratio sharply higher, and bulls argue the current extreme in Bitcoin dominance and Ether weakness is exactly the kind of setup that precedes such a rotation.
Specific catalysts could trigger it: ETF flows rotating from Bitcoin toward Ether, particularly if Ether ETF staking features attract yield-seeking institutional capital; a stumble in Solana’s momentum that returns activity and attention to Ethereum; a broad macro shift to risk-on that lifts the higher-beta assets most; and the growth of tokenization and institutional finance building on Ethereum translating into clearer token demand.
On this view, the very severity of Ether’s underperformance, the multi-year-low ratio and the extreme fear, is the contrarian signal, and 2026 could be the year the ratio turns as capital rotates back toward a deeply discounted asset with the strongest fundamental ecosystem in its category. The reversal is not guaranteed, but it is a coherent thesis grounded in real catalysts and historical precedent.
What the analysts forecast The analyst forecasts for Ether’s dollar price in 2026 span a wide range that maps onto the underperformance debate. On the bearish side, model-driven and cautious forecasters see continued weakness: Traders Union’s statistical model projects a year-end average near $1,266, and DigitalCoinPrice has pointed to a 4th-quarter low around $1,370, both implying Ether stays near or below current levels and, by extension, likely keeps underperforming a Bitcoin that most forecasters see holding higher absolute levels. These bearish targets are consistent with the thesis that the structural forces against Ether persist and that the ratio does not recover.
On the bullish side, forecasters such as BitScreener have projected Ether reaching toward $4,676 by year-end, and others, including Cryptopolitan and the optimistic scenarios at LiteFinance, point to ranges of roughly $4,400 to $5,300, which would imply a powerful recovery and, if Bitcoin does not rise proportionally, a sharp improvement in the ETH/BTC ratio.
The gap between roughly $1,266 and $5,300 for the same asset in the same year is enormous, and like Bitcoin and XRP, it reflects genuine uncertainty rather than careless modeling. The bearish numbers assume the structural underperformance continues and Ether stays pinned near its lows; the bullish numbers assume a reversal driven by rotation, deep-value mean reversion, and Ether’s fundamental strengths reasserting themselves.
What the forecasts collectively reveal is that Ether’s 2026 outcome is even more binary than Bitcoin’s, because it depends not only on the direction of the broad market but on whether capital rotates back toward Ether specifically. An investor who believes the rotation comes will lean toward the high forecasts; one who believes Bitcoin’s dominance is structural will lean toward the low ones.
The forecasts cannot settle the debate; they can only show how much rides on it. For the underperformance question specifically, the spread is a reminder that Ether is the higher-variance bet, capable of both deeper losses and sharper recoveries than the market leader, which is precisely the profile of an asset whose relative performance is genuinely up for grabs.
What would flip the ratio, and what would keep it down The underperformance question ultimately resolves into a set of watchable conditions, and naming them is more useful than guessing. The ratio would flip in Ether’s favor on several developments. The clearest would be a broad rotation into altcoins, the classic late-cycle dynamic in which Bitcoin dominance peaks and capital flows down the risk curve into Ether first; a sustained turn upward in the ETH/BTC ratio off its multi-year lows would be the signal that this is underway. ETF flows rotating toward Ether, especially if staking-enabled Ether products draw yield-seeking institutional capital, would provide a concrete demand catalyst.
A stumble in Solana’s momentum that returns on-chain activity and developer attention to Ethereum would repair the competitive narrative. A macro shift to risk-on, with the Federal Reserve easing and liquidity improving, would favor the higher-beta asset, which is Ether. And technically, reclaiming resistance near $1,700 to $1,750 and then the higher averages toward $2,000 and $2,317 would confirm a trend change. If these align, the reversal thesis gains the upper hand.
The conditions that keep Ether underperforming are the mirror image. Continued institutional concentration in Bitcoin, with ETFs and treasuries channeling allocation toward the market leader and away from Ether, would preserve the structural imbalance. Ongoing Solana strength and further erosion of Ethereum’s on-chain dominance would keep the fundamental narrative weak.
A persistent risk-off market would keep capital huddled in Bitcoin instead of rotating into higher-beta Ether. And technically, a loss of the $1,500 support that opens $1,450 and $1,400 would confirm that sellers remain in control and that the ratio is still falling. The practical discipline for anyone watching this question is to track the ETH/BTC ratio directly as the scoreboard, alongside Bitcoin dominance, ETF flow data, Solana’s activity trends, and the macro backdrop. Those signals will reveal whether 2026 is another year of Ether lagging the leader or the year the long underperformance finally reverses. The market will answer the question through the ratio; the job is to watch it instead of to assume.
Three scenarios for Ethereum in 2026 Translating the debate into scenarios captures both the dollar price and the relative-performance dimension. In the bull scenario, the underperformance reverses. Capital rotates into Ether in a late-cycle altcoin phase, ETF flows and staking demand pick up, Solana’s momentum cools, the macro turns risk-on, and Ether recovers toward the $4,400 to $5,300 range that the optimistic forecasts describe, with the ETH/BTC ratio turning sharply higher off its multi-year lows.
In this world, Ether not only rises in dollar terms but decisively outperforms Bitcoin, rewarding the deep-value and rotation thesis. It is a coherent path, grounded in historical precedent and real catalysts, but it requires the structural forces that have favored Bitcoin to loosen.
In the base scenario, Ether broadly tracks the market without a clean resolution of the underperformance question. It stabilizes around current levels, recovers modestly if the broad market does, but continues to lag Bitcoin or merely matches it, with the ETH/BTC ratio grinding sideways near its lows instead of reversing decisively. Ether’s dollar price spends 2026 in a wide, volatile band, and the relative-performance question stays unresolved into 2027. This middle path reflects how balanced the structural arguments are and is a reasonable central expectation. In the bear scenario, the underperformance deepens.
Bitcoin’s institutional dominance persists, Solana continues to pressure Ethereum, the market stays risk-off, Ether loses the $1,500 support and slides toward $1,400 and below, validating the bearish forecasts near $1,266, and the ETH/BTC ratio falls further as capital keeps choosing Bitcoin. Which scenario unfolds depends on capital rotation, ETF flows, the Solana competition, and the macro backdrop, all of which express themselves through the ETH/BTC ratio. All 3 are live, and the breadth between them is exactly why Ether is the higher-variance bet among the majors heading into the rest of 2026.
Frequently Asked Questions Will Ethereum underperform Bitcoin in 2026? It is truly contested. Ether has underperformed Bitcoin badly, down roughly 68% from its 2025 high versus Bitcoin’s roughly 52%, pushing the ETH/BTC ratio to multi-year lows. The case for continued underperformance rests on Bitcoin’s structural institutional dominance through ETFs and treasuries, competition from Solana for on-chain activity, and a muddier value-accrual narrative for Ether. The case for a reversal rests on deep-value pricing after the severe drawdown, Ether’s strong fundamental ecosystem and staking yield, and the potential for capital to rotate into Ether in a late-cycle altcoin phase. The deciding signal is the ETH/BTC ratio itself; a sustained turn higher would mark a reversal, while continued weakness would confirm more underperformance.
Why has Ethereum fallen harder than Bitcoin? Several structural forces have weighed on Ether more than Bitcoin. The biggest is the institutional bid for Bitcoin as digital gold and a reserve asset, channeled through ETFs and corporate treasuries, with no equally powerful equivalent for Ether. Competition from Solana and other high-throughput chains has captured on-chain activity that once flowed to Ethereum, weakening its growth narrative. And Ether’s value-accrual story has grown more complicated, with much activity migrating to Layer-2 networks whose fees do not cleanly translate into demand for the token. In a risk-off market, capital concentrates in the asset with the strongest institutional endorsement, which has been Bitcoin, leaving higher-beta Ether to fall harder.
What is the ETH/BTC ratio and why does it matter? The ETH/BTC ratio expresses Ether’s price in terms of Bitcoin instead of dollars; it rises when Ether outperforms Bitcoin and falls when Ether lags. It matters because it strips out the broad market and isolates the question of Ether versus Bitcoin specifically, and because it functions as a barometer of risk appetite and capital rotation within crypto. A rising ratio typically signals capital rotating out of Bitcoin into Ether and altcoins, the classic altcoin-season dynamic; a falling ratio, as now near multi-year lows, signals capital concentrating in Bitcoin. For the underperformance question, the ratio is both the scoreboard and the leading indicator, so watching it directly is the best way to judge whether Ether is regaining or losing ground.
What would make Ethereum outperform again? A reversal would likely require capital rotation into Ether, the late-cycle dynamic in which Bitcoin dominance peaks and money flows into Ether and altcoins, signaled by the ETH/BTC ratio turning up off its lows. Concrete catalysts include ETF flows rotating toward Ether, especially staking-enabled products attracting yield-seeking capital; a stumble in Solana’s momentum returning activity to Ethereum; a macro shift to risk-on that favors higher-beta assets; and Ether reclaiming technical resistance near $1,700 to $1,750 and then the higher averages toward $2,000 and $2,317. The bull thesis also leans on deep value after the 68% drawdown and Ether’s strong fundamentals in decentralized finance, tokenization, Layer-2s, and staking. If these align, the long underperformance could reverse in 2026.
What are analysts forecasting for Ethereum in 2026? The range is very wide. Bearish, model-driven forecasts see continued weakness, with Traders Union projecting a year-end average near $1,266 and DigitalCoinPrice pointing to a 4th-quarter low around $1,370, implying Ether stays near its lows. Bullish forecasts are far higher, with BitScreener toward $4,676 and others, including Cryptopolitan and optimistic scenarios at LiteFinance, in the $4,400 to $5,300 range, implying a strong recovery. The gap from roughly $1,266 to $5,300 reflects genuine uncertainty: the low end assumes structural underperformance continues, while the high end assumes a reversal driven by rotation and deep-value mean reversion. Ether’s outcome is more binary than Bitcoin’s because it depends on whether capital rotates back toward Ether specifically.
Is Ethereum a better buy than Bitcoin right now? This article does not give buy recommendations, and the honest answer is that it depends entirely on the question it examines. Ether offers higher potential reward if the underperformance reverses, because it is more deeply discounted and has more room to mean-revert, but it carries higher risk because the structural forces favoring Bitcoin- institutional dominance, Solana competition, and a muddier narrative- may persist. Bitcoin has been the safer, more institutionally endorsed asset that capital has favored in the risk-off market. Choosing between them is really a bet on whether capital rotates back toward Ether in 2026 or stays concentrated in Bitcoin, which is the unresolved question at the center of this analysis. Both are highly volatile and can lose value.
This article is information, not financial or investment advice. Ethereum and Bitcoin price levels, the ETH/BTC ratio, indicator readings, and analyst forecasts reflect data available as of June 28, 2026, are point-in-time, and can change rapidly. Cryptocurrency is highly volatile, and you can lose money. Price predictions are inherently uncertain, and the scenarios described are not guarantees. Do your own research and consult a qualified financial professional before making any investment decision.
For more details, visit the official Cryip platform.
TL;DR Bitmine Immersion Technologies has expanded its Ethereum treasury to 5,700,040 ETH. The latest update places the company among the largest publicly disclosed corporate Ethereum holders. The move keeps the focus on whether ETH treasury strategies are becoming a more serious corporate playbook, not just a Bitcoin-only story. Bitmine Adds To Its Ethereum Stack Bitmine Immersion Technologies has added to its Ethereum holdings again, expanding its treasury to 5,700,040 ETH after its latest reported purchase.
For readers, the important point is not just that another public company bought more crypto. It is that the company is continuing to treat Ethereum as a treasury asset at a time when the market has been under pressure and sentiment around crypto risk has weakened.
That makes this a little different from the usual “company buys token, price may move” story. Bitmine is building a position that is now large enough to sit in the same conversation as the more familiar corporate Bitcoin treasury strategies. The asset is different, the market structure is different, and the risk profile is different, but the treasury logic is similar: hold a major crypto asset on the balance sheet and let investors decide whether that exposure is a feature or a risk.
Why This Matters For ETH Ethereum has spent years being viewed through several lenses at once. It is the base layer for DeFi, NFTs, stablecoins, tokenized assets, and much of the on-chain economy. But as a corporate treasury asset, it has not had the same simple public-market narrative as Bitcoin.
That is why Bitmine’s continued accumulation is worth watching. A company holding millions of ETH does not automatically create a new institutional trend, but it does add another example for investors trying to understand whether ETH can become a balance-sheet asset beyond crypto-native funds and staking-heavy vehicles.
It also raises a cleaner market question: if companies start holding ETH in size, are they buying it for price exposure, network utility, staking economics, or all three? Those distinctions matter. Bitcoin treasury companies are generally easy to explain: they hold BTC because they want Bitcoin exposure. Ethereum treasury strategies can become more complicated because ETH sits inside a broader network economy.
The Reader-Relevant Takeaway The latest purchase does not prove that corporate Ethereum accumulation is about to accelerate across the market. It does, however, show that Bitmine is still leaning into the strategy despite a weaker crypto tape.
That is the part traders will care about. In soft markets, treasury additions can be read as confidence, but they can also be read as concentration risk. If ETH strengthens from here, the move may look well-timed. If ETH weakens, the size of the position will invite tougher questions about volatility and treasury management.
For now, Bitmine has made the signal clear: it wants to be known as one of the biggest public Ethereum holders, and it is still adding to the stack.
—
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
GameStop said it will continue to advance its $56 billion acquisition plan for eBay.
According to Reuters, GameStop says it will continue advancing its acquisition of eBay, even after the e-commerce giant rejected its roughly $56 billion all-cash and stock offer. GameStop CEO Ryan Cohen’s May proposal to acquire eBay took Wall Street by surprise. Cohen argued the combined entity would be a stronger competitor to Amazon, and stated he would oversee its operations. eBay rejected the offer that same month. GameStop noted it remains committed to the acquisition plan, but did not disclose the deal’s rationale or next steps. Separately, in a brief regulatory filing, GameStop projected its adjusted EBITDA for fiscal 2026 will exceed $600 million, up from the $345.4 million reported for fiscal 2025.
10 minutes ago
The USD/JPY exchange rate has risen above 162, marking the first time in nearly 40 years.
According to data from Bitget, depreciation pressure on the Japanese yen continues to intensify, with the USD/JPY exchange rate breaching the 162 threshold for the first time since December 1986.
10 minutes ago
Crypto KOL Ansem has airdropped 67.38 million ANSEM tokens to over 700 addresses, valued at approximately $9.43 million.
According to Lookonchain’s monitoring, crypto KOL Ansem has airdropped 67.38 million ANSEM tokens to over 700 addresses, valued at $9.43 million. Of the total, 49.89 million ANSEM (worth $6.98 million) went to seven addresses. These seven addresses have sold 38.29 million ANSEM, generating $1.29 million in proceeds, and currently hold 11.6 million ANSEM, valued at $1.62 million.
10 minutes ago
South Korea's KOSPI index extended its decline to 2%, with SK Hynix falling 3%.
According to Bitget data, South Korea’s KOSPI index has extended its decline to 2%, with Samsung Electronics down 0.4% and SK Hynix down 3%.
10 minutes ago
Serenity: Bullish on Agility Robotics and Unitree in the humanoid robot sector
Serenity stated in a post that it favors robotics firms Unitree and Agility Robotics, adding that its largest position in the humanoid robot space is currently concentrated in Agility Robotics, as it personally prefers U.S.-based humanoid robot companies. Regarding exposure to upstream components, Serenity said it currently holds Harmonic Drive (6324), noting that harmonic reducers and related parts account for a large share of the bill of materials. It also holds Vishay Precision, citing its sensor business and potential to become a candidate supplier for Tesla Optimus. It also expresses optimism about LeaderDrive (688017) and Schaeffler, though it does not hold positions in these firms. In other AI data center-related companies, it also gains indirect exposure to robotics through areas like storage. Serenity emphasized that it does not advise anyone to replicate its positions, noting it is only sharing its personal holdings and views. Serenity said the humanoid robot industry is large, citing a Goldman Sachs report that states, "South Korean companies will directly and indirectly account for 30% of global humanoid robot output." It noted that there are numerous players globally, and related companies continue to appear in Goldman Sachs' institutional reports and coverage. Currently, Agility Robotics is its most favored company.
10 minutes ago
SemiAnalysis: AI semiconductor manufacturing bottlenecks may extend to critical materials such as tungsten
Independent semiconductor and AI research institute SemiAnalysis noted in a report that one of the most underrated ways to contribute to AI semiconductor development may not be the chips themselves, but materials. As the industry accelerates production of more advanced semiconductors, demand growth is not limited to GPUs and foundry equipment, but also extends to the critical materials underpinning modern chip manufacturing. Taking tungsten as an example, the report points out that tungsten is one of the most critical materials in semiconductor manufacturing, valued for its high-temperature stability and resistance to electrical wear. Foundries rely on chemical vapor deposition (CVD) to fill deep, high-aspect-ratio vertical vias connecting multi-layer chip architectures, and use physical vapor deposition (PVD) to deposit ultra-thin structural barrier layers around them. Because tungsten is used in both core deposition processes, it is irreplaceable in advanced chip production. Tungsten supplies appear to be increasingly constrained. High-purity tungsten metal powder is the primary raw material for manufacturing tungsten hexafluoride (WF6), a gas used in CVD. Japan hosts key tungsten hexafluoride suppliers including SK Materials and Shin-Etsu Chemical, but is facing sharp price hikes and a significant drop in tungsten raw material imports, making it nearly impossible to continue producing this critical material. This price pressure is also reflected in South Korea’s tungsten hexafluoride import prices, which have surged by 151% year-to-date. As semiconductor complexity and AI demand rise, bottlenecks may emerge not only in chips or equipment, but also in the critical materials at the base of the entire supply chain.
Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.
Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.
Bitcoin climbed back above $60,000 after Strategy Inc. (NASDAQ:MSTR) unveiled its BTC monetization and capital restructuring program, easing near-term concerns and supporting a rebound in crypto sentiment.
Notable Statistics:
Coinglass data shows 86,762 traders were liquidated in the past 24 hours for $355.22 million. SoSoValue data shows net outflows of $444.5 million from spot Bitcoin ETFs on Friday. Spot Ethereum ETFs saw net outflows of $12.9 million. In the past 24 hours, top losers include MemeCore, Velvet and Pi. Notable Developments:
Trader Notes:
Analyst Ted Pillows noted that Bitcoin recorded its first weekly close below $60,000 in nearly two years, signaling a significant technical breakdown.
He also pointed to continued spot Bitcoin ETF selling and the prospect of Strategy selling Bitcoin as additional headwinds, arguing BTC is likely to fall toward $50,000 before eventually rallying to $100,000.
Trader Justin Bennett said Bitcoin’s first weekly close of the year below $60,000 reflects persistent bearish market structure despite expected end-of-month and quarter-end institutional positioning.
A short-term relief rally or bullish reversal is possible.
Expert Benjamin Cowen pointed out that Bitcoin posted a weekly close below its 200-week moving average, calling it another example of the recurring four-year market cycle.
He also noted that the first weekly close below the 200-week moving average during the 2022 bear market likewise occurred in June, suggesting a historical parallel with the current price action.
Image: Shutterstock
Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs
Demand for Shiba Inu is a major issue. Although "buying volume at zero" is not a precise description of the market, current technical and on-chain indicators indicate that significant buying interest has all but vanished, making SHIB susceptible to additional drops. The recent increase in exchange inflows is the most evident cause.
Trillions of SHIB tokens have been moved to centralized exchanges in the past few days. While exchange outflows approached 295 billion SHIB, exchange inflows surpassed 240 billion SHIB. Despite the fact that netflow is still negative overall, the abrupt increase in deposits has sparked worries that large holders are getting ready to sell rather than buy.
SHIB/USDT Chart by TradingViewInstead of waiting for sales to happen, traders respond to the potential for future selling pressure. Instead of attempting to catch a falling knife, many investors would rather step aside when billions or trillions of tokens arrive on exchanges. This lack of confidence is reflected in the chart. Since breaking out of a multi-month rising wedge pattern, SHIB has failed all significant attempts at recovery.
HOT Stories
The asset is still trading below its 50-, 100-, and 200-day moving averages, all of which remain in a bearish formation. Due to the fact that every rally has been sold into, buyers are becoming more and more hesitant to enter the market. The lack of speculative momentum is an additional problem.
Historically, SHIB has depended on social media attention, retail enthusiasm, and quick inflows of risk capital. None of those catalysts are present in the current market environment. Meme coins have found it difficult to compete for investors' attention as Bitcoin, Solana, and other assets draw the little capital that is still entering cryptocurrency markets. It is worth noting that some network metrics are improving.
Over the last 24 hours, there has been an increase in active addresses, active sending addresses, and transaction counts. A recovery narrative would normally be supported by increasing activity. Nonetheless, it seems that investors are more concerned with price action than network usage. Improving on-chain activity is unlikely to alter sentiment as long as SHIB keeps setting lower highs and lower lows.
Dogecoin's Potential Bottom It looks like Dogecoin is finally approaching the point where its downward momentum is running out. Several technical signals indicate that DOGE may be forming a local bottom near current levels following months of unrelenting selling pressure and a nearly continuous series of lower highs and lower lows. After going through one of the worst corrections of the current cycle, the meme cryptocurrency is currently trading at about $0.072. With sellers retaining total control over the market, DOGE has lost more than 35% of its value since reaching a peak above $0.11 in May.
The most recent price action, however, suggests that the decline's intensity may be lessening. The Relative Strength Index is one of the most significant indicators. With its RSI down to about 21, DOGE is firmly in oversold territory. In the past, readings below 30 have been indicative of severe selling pressure.
You Might Also Like
Oversold conditions frequently precede periods of stabilization or relief rallies, but they do not by themselves ensure a reversal. The gap between the current price and major moving averages is another positive indicator. At the moment, DOGE is trading well below its 50-, 100-, and 200-day moving averages. Such dislocations seldom last forever. Over time, markets typically return to their averages, particularly following protracted episodes of panic selling.
The potential for a bottoming process is further supported by volume dynamics. The explosive selling volume that marked previous breakdowns has not coincided with recent declines. This implies that there may be less immediate selling pressure, as many weak hands may have already sold their positions. Nevertheless, it would be premature to declare a complete trend reversal.
The overall market structure is still negative, and DOGE is still below all significant resistance levels. Regaining the 50-day moving average around $0.083 would be the first obstacle facing bulls. The 100-day and 200-day moving averages at $0.093 and $0.11, respectively, would become significant barriers above that.
Bitcoin Is Back in the Trading RangeOne of the most significant psychological levels in the cryptocurrency market is being tested once more by Bitcoin. Following weeks of intense selling pressure, Bitcoin has returned to the $59,000–$60,000 range, where bulls are trying to avert another significant collapse. The technical picture is still very bearish, which is the concern.
Recently, an upward trendline supporting the April–May recovery rally in Bitcoin was lost. The sharp selloff that ensued throughout June was made possible by the breakdown, which signaled the end of the medium-term uptrend. Every attempt at recovery since then has been met with fresh selling pressure.
You Might Also Like
At the moment, Bitcoin is trading below its 50-, 100-, and 200-day moving averages. While the 100-day and 200-day averages, at roughly $69,000 and $76,500, respectively, remain significantly above current prices, the 50-day EMA near $63,700 has emerged as the first significant resistance level.
BTC/USDT Chart by TradingViewThis alignment demonstrates that sellers continue to dominate the overall trend. The $60,000 threshold has become a battlefield. Traders and institutions have historically paid close attention to round numbers, and Bitcoin is no different. Although buyers have so far managed to avoid a clear breakdown below this level, support is eroding with each retest. Momentum indicators are sending conflicting signals. With the RSI declining toward 30, Bitcoin is now close to being oversold.
This raises the likelihood of a relief rally and implies that selling pressure may be running out in the near future. Oversold conditions, however, frequently persist longer than traders anticipate during severe downtrends. Volume remains a concern. Elevated selling activity has coincided with recent declines, suggesting that market participants are still reducing exposure rather than actively accumulating.
Bulls' immediate goals are straightforward: protect $60,000 and push Bitcoin above the 50-day moving average. A more extensive rebound toward the $69,000 area could be sparked by a successful move above $64,000. However, the market may experience another wave of liquidation pressure if support fails. In that case, as traders look for the next significant support zone, Bitcoin would likely enter a new stage of price discovery to the downside.
Arthur Hayes, a well-known figure in the cryptocurrency market, criticized XRP and ADA, both of which have strong communities.
BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes has leveled harsh criticism against Cardano (ADA) and Ripple (XRP).
Hayes argued that while neither project produced anything tangible, their strong communities allowed them to maintain their presence in the market in the long term.
Hayes, in his assessment of Cardano and Ripple, stated, “Cardano and Ripple are absolutely doing nothing. But if the community gets rich along with the founders, it will stay with you forever.” According to Hayes, ADA will likely remain among the top 50 cryptocurrencies by market capitalization even 15 years from now, and its supporters will continue to defend the project.
Hayes further intensified his criticism of Cardano, comparing it to AI stocks and arguing that ADA fails to generate fundamental value. Hayes stated, “An AI stock at least has some fundamentals. Cardano had a chance to revive its fundamentals. At least SK Hynix generates revenue and profit. ADA does absolutely nothing; it promised the world and delivered none of it.”
Hayes stated that Cardano’s long presence on the market and its significant price increases in the past have kept community support alive. However, he argued that the project has not met expectations on the technical development side.
Hayes stated, “Cardano is garbage, they haven’t done anything. The best thing about it was its initially good tokenomics. ADA has been on the market for a long time, its price has risen a lot, so people like it. Smart contracts? Never. What real progress has been made? Zero.”
*This is not investment advice.
Follow our Telegram and Twitter account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!
Cardano’s network has continued to see notably low transaction fees in recent months, alongside progress in decentralization metrics and declining user costs. Data from the platform highlights that despite ADA’s weak price action, Cardano is maintaining technical resilience on the blockchain side.
Transaction fees remain lowAccording to Chainspect data shared by analyst MB, Cardano’s transaction fees have largely fluctuated within a narrow range of $0.07 to $0.09 over the past three months. While transaction costs have surged rapidly during busy periods on many blockchains, Cardano has managed to keep operating costs low despite ongoing transfers and staking activity.
During periods of increased network use, fees briefly approached $0.09, a spike attributed primarily to DeFi and NFT transactions. However, this rise proved temporary; by June 20, transaction costs had slumped to $0.05143. This marks a roughly 35% drop from the previous average of $0.08.
Despite higher on-chain activity, Cardano managed to keep transaction costs low, with fees falling to $0.05143 on June 20.
ADA price outlook remains cautiousAlthough the network’s technical performance appears stable, ADA’s market structure remains fragile. Analyst Ali Charts noted that following a recent attack on Cardano wallets—resulting in the theft of 129 million ADA, worth around $20 million—the daily chart has shown a TD Sequential buy signal.
However, doubts persist about the sustainability of any price rebounds. Analysts highlight a key resistance zone between $0.160 and $0.176. The formation of lower highs and lower lows in ADA’s price structure continues to weigh on sentiment. At the time of reporting, ADA is trading above $0.144, currently near $0.1503.
Mini glossary: TD Sequential is a technical analysis indicator that helps identify possible turning points in price action, while resistance refers to a price region where selling pressure may stall a rally.
Decentralization and institutional interest in focusCardano is showing signs of not only stable fees but also a strengthening network structure. Chainspect data reveals the network’s Nakamoto coefficient has climbed to 28—a figure measuring the minimum number of independent entities required to compromise a blockchain’s control. With this metric, Cardano has surpassed Avalanche to claim third place for decentralization.
In practical terms, this means 28 independent actors would need to act in concert to undermine Cardano’s network. Developed in 2017 under the leadership of Charles Hoskinson, Cardano is known for its research-driven approach to blockchain innovation.
Institutional activity around Cardano is picking up as well. Market analyst Cheeky Crypto reported that asset manager Bitwise is planning to launch an ETF comprising 10 cryptocurrencies, including ADA. Bitwise is a leading developer of crypto-focused investment products, and such a launch could boost institutional interest in Cardano.
Cheeky Crypto stated that Bitwise’s plan for an ETF including ADA could be a catalyst for increased institutional engagement with Cardano.
In the coming period, traders will be watching to see if ADA can establish a foothold above the $0.160–$0.176 resistance range. Network activity, deepening decentralization, and Bitwise’s ETF initiative are expected to be key factors shaping price trends moving forward.
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 CEO of Tether, Paolo Ardoino, has made some serious criticism on big tech in his latest tweet. In his tweet, the CEO of $USDT stablecoin issuer, Tether, has accused major technology companies of waging a campaign against open-source artificial intelligence. He has argued that concerns over AI safety are being raised only to protect struggling business models rather than safeguarding users.
Centralized big-tech AI is starting a warpath against open-source AI models.
The excuse: safety.
The reality: extinction of their business model, already heavily underwater with gazillion dolllars capex.
— Paolo Ardoino 🤖 (@paoloardoino) June 29, 2026 Ardoino Questions Big Tech’s AI Safety Narrative In his tweet, Ardoino claimed that centralized big-tech AI firms are beginning an undeclared war against open-source AI models. According to him, the stated focus on safety is just a mask in an effort to preserve proprietary AI businesses that have required enormous capital investments.
These remarks by Paolo Ardoino come at a time when debate over open-source and closed AI development is intensifying. On one side, several leading AI companies have called for tighter oversight of advanced AI systems, On the other side, advocates of open-source models defend that publicly available AI technology promotes innovation and transparency.
Tether Reaffirms Commitment to Open-Source AI Shortly after Ardoino’s tweet, Tether also made an official tweet regarding this matter and retweeted the CEO’s tweet. Tether retweeted to reinforce the CEO’s stance by claiming that Tether AI is 100% open-source. With this, Tether was referring to its QVAC initiative. QVAC is Tether’s dedicated AI platform and software development kit (SDK). It is designed to let developers build AI applications that run locally on users’ devices instead of relying on centralized cloud servers.
The announcement highlights Tether’s growing focus on AI infrastructure beyond its stablecoin business which already ranked on top in terms of market capitalization. By emphasizing an open-source approach, Tether is promoting its AI efforts around transparency and community-driven development.
AUTHOR
Umair Younas is a cryptocurrency-related content writer linked with this work since 2019. Here, at Blockchainreporter, he serves as a news and article writer. He is a crypto, blockchain, NFTs, DeFi, and FinTech enthusiast. He has strong command over writing authentic reviews about brokers and exchanges and he has collaborated with our education team to write educational content as well. He has a dream to raise awareness among people about digital currencies. His works are well-researched and brimmed with information hence they provide fresh insights. Stay tuned to his posts if you want to stay up-to-date with the crypto-verse.
Ukraine has placed more than $8.3 million in seized crypto under state management, the first time the country has moved confiscated digital assets into a government-controlled wallet.
The National Agency for Finding, Tracing, and Management of Assets, known as ARMA, received the funds from wallets tied to an alleged member of an international hacking group.
Seized Crypto from an International Hacking CaseThe holding is Tether (USDT), the largest stablecoin, valued at over 372 million Ukrainian hryvnias at the time of the transfer, according to prosecutors.
Investigators say the group attacked people and companies across Europe and the United States. The case reflects a rise in stablecoin-driven crypto crime.
The attackers stole confidential data, demanded ransom payments, and laundered the money in Ukraine through real estate and cars.
Authorities estimate the network caused more than $100 million in damage. The pattern mirrors other crypto laundering networks that ended in multiple arrests.
Four suspects, including the alleged organizer, remain in custody. Total seizures in the case topped $11.1 million, covering homes, apartments, vehicles, and cash.
What State Custody Means for the FundsUntil now, crypto seized in Ukrainian cases sat frozen, with no agency actively holding or moving it. The transfer gives ARMA direct control of the wallet.
A 2025 reform law overhauled how ARMA manages seized property, adding independent audits and tighter oversight. The change was a condition of hundreds of millions of euros in European Union support.
The step stops short of confiscation, which requires a court conviction. For now, the agency holds the assets rather than owning them.
USDT sits near its dollar peg, trading close to $1. That gives ARMA a relatively stable asset to manage, hold, or eventually sell.
USDT Near Its Dollar Peg. Source: BeInCryptoA stablecoin avoids the price swings tied to bitcoin, making the holding easier to value. But USDT is centrally controlled, and Tether can freeze tokens at law enforcement requests.
Under Economic Fury, @USTreasury will continue to systematically degrade Tehran’s ability to generate, move, and repatriate funds.
Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control is sanctioning multiple wallets tied to Iran — resulting in the freeze of $344 million in…
— Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent (@SecScottBessent) April 24, 2026 Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
What to do with seized crypto has split governments. The United States ordered forfeited Bitcoin into a strategic reserve it pledged not to sell. It treats confiscated coins as a long-term asset.
Germany took the opposite path, and critics still debate its seizure of Bitcoin sales after prices later climbed.
Ukraine has not said whether it will sell the USDT or hold it. That choice may shape how it treats future seizures, and whether seized tokens become state revenue.
BNB came under renewed pressure on June 29 after slipping below a critical long-term support level. At the time of writing, the asset is trading at $549.05, reflecting a 0.95% decline over the past 24 hours. BNB’s daily trading volume stands at $1.02 billion with a market capitalization of $73.73 billion.
Long-term support breaks downMuted activity across the broader cryptocurrency market has continued to weigh on BNB’s performance. In the aftermath of the latest selloff, major digital assets have seen only limited recoveries, while BNB’s slide has triggered a notable technical breakdown.
Crypto analyst Token Talk observed that on June 29, 2026, BNB’s price broke below its multi-year ascending trendline. According to Token Talk, this trendline had long represented a zone of strong buying interest for the asset. When such levels are breached, it often signals a broader change in market structure, as former support areas can turn into resistance.
Token Talk noted that if buyers are unable to reclaim the broken trendline in the near term, BNB could face a deeper decline.
What do technical indicators say?As of now, BNB is trading close to the lower Bollinger band at $541.57. The middle band stands at $584.21, while the upper band is at $626.86. Since its peak in June, BNB has remained near the lower range of these bands, underscoring persistent selling pressure.
Bollinger Bands are a technical tool used to measure price volatility. Price action near the lower band indicates weakness, while a move above the middle band would signal a potential attempt to regain balance in the near term.
Additional weakness is evident in MACD readings. The MACD line is currently at negative 18.86, with the signal line at negative 16.26. The histogram registers at negative 2.60. Despite the histogram’s limited depth, remaining in negative territory suggests ongoing downward momentum.
Key levels and potential scenariosMarket attention is now focused on two critical levels in the short term. Should buyers regain control and push the price above the $584 middle Bollinger band, optimism could return. In this scenario, the recently broken trendline would be watched for a potential flip back into support.
Conversely, if selling pressure increases and the price falls below the $541 lower band, the decline is likely to accelerate. As a result, upcoming trading sessions are seen as decisive for BNB’s direction.
Given the current setup, technical indicators appear to favor sellers over buyers. Until buying interest strengthens, BNB is expected to remain in a cautious, defensive posture.
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.
Editor's note: Stellar's Developer Previews put new developer tooling and protocol capabilities in developers' hands before they're production-ready. While they're not yet approved for mainnet, the Confidential Token contract is live on testnet. Preview and test them now while the contract and verifier audits are underway.
Today we're introducing our latest privacy feature: Confidential Tokens, a contract suite from OpenZeppelin, wired to an UltraHonk verifier implemented by Nethermind, that adds private balances and private transfer amounts to any SEP-41 token.
Confidential, not anonymousPrivacy on a public blockchain isn't one thing. Different use cases need different properties, and the architecture you choose at the start decides what you can do later.
Confidential Tokens are deliberately scoped: they hide balances and transfer amounts while keeping sender and recipient addresses visible. For developers already transacting onchain, where amounts and balances are public by default, that's a meaningful step forward. Suitable use cases include treasury management, payroll, and institutional settlement, among others.
By comparison, the other option in Stellar's privacy stack—privacy pool implementations like Stellar Private Payments (SPP)—shields both the parties and the amounts. This post focuses on the Confidential Token use case: known counterparties, hidden amounts.
How it works: a wrapper over existing tokensArchitecturally, a Confidential Token is a wrapper contract. A user takes any existing SEP-41 token—USDC issued via the Stellar Asset Contract, a contract-native token, anything that implements the standard—and deposits it into a confidential token contract.
Inside the wrapper, the balance is encoded as a Pedersen commitment—hidden from public view, but fully verifiable by the network. Transfers between accounts inside the wrapper move funds without revealing values. To exit, a user withdraws back to the underlying SEP-41 token.
The base ledger stays open and auditable. Privacy lives entirely at the application layer, in the wrapper contract. This isolation is by design: if a bug were ever found in a confidential token circuit, it could only affect the tokens inside that wrapper. By design, any vulnerability is contained to the token(s) inside that wrapper, without affecting the underlying asset or wider network.
Proofs are written in Noir and verified onchain via Nethermind's UltraHonk verifier, using the cryptographic host functions introduced in Protocol 25 (X-Ray). This is a working testnet implementation you can build against today.
What's in this versionThis preview includes primitives designed to support compliance-oriented workflows:
Auditor view key. A designated auditor role can view transaction amounts and account balances for assets in the wrapper.Selective disclosure. Account holders can prove a specific transaction occurred to a specific party without exposing the rest of their activity.Account-level freezing. Cascades from the existing Stellar Asset Contract (SAC) controls.Configurable compliance policy engine. Lets you plug in policy contracts that act as allow-list or block-list identity registries.The full compliance extensions doc walks through the freeze, SAC passthrough, and policy hook design in detail. These compliance extensions are open source and actively being iterated on.
Try it yourselfThe quickest way to get a feel for Confidential Tokens is to run the demo by OpenZeppelin locally and make a confidential transfer on testnet.
The demo on Stellar Testnet walks through three roles: account holder, disclosure receiver, and auditor. To try it in the browser, connect your wallet—we recommend Freighter on Stellar Testnet. Go to Stellar Lab and select "Fund account" to get test XLM.
To run locally:
Clone stellar-confidential-token-demoReview README for basic and more advanced usagePick the relevant modules from the libSubmit issues during the testnet window.We welcome design partners and community contributions—If you're building compliance-focused privacy solutions on Stellar, an SCF cohort member or joined our recent Stellar Hacks: Real-World ZK hackathon—share what you're working on in our Developer Discord.
Appendix: Privacy on Stellar (a working taxonomy)An easy way to understand privacy solutions onchain is to ask:
What does the network see, and what stays hidden?
Solution
Public
Private
Confidential Token
Sender and recipient addresses; deposit and withdrawal amounts
Balances; transfer amounts
Privacy pool implementations (e.g. SPP)
Deposit and withdrawal addresses are public
Sender and recipient addresses, balances, and transfer amounts inside the pool
Standard SEP-41 tokens
Everything (addresses, amounts, balances)
Nothing
Why both lanes exist. Confidential Tokens are designed for known-counterparty flows where amounts shouldn't be public (e.g. payroll, treasury management, B2B settlement). You could have two banks settling in USDC with each other, where each side already knows who they're transacting with, but the settlement amounts (and the resulting balances inside the wrapper) stays reasonably hidden from the wider network.
Stellar's privacy layering hierarchyApplication layer: Stellar smart contracts that implement specific privacy behavior. These include Confidential Tokens and privacy pool implementations like Stellar Private Payments (SPP).
Verifier layer: An onchain verifier is a smart contract that accepts a compact ZK proof and confirms its validity without re-running the original computation. Examples include Nethermind's UltraHonk Verifier (used by the Confidential Token contract) and the RISC Zero (Groth16) Verifier. The original verifier was built by a community member, @yugocabrio. Nethermind took ownership and updated it to use the Stellar Protocol 25/26 host functions, making it more efficient and practical for testnet evaluation.
Cryptographic host functions: Built into the Stellar protocol at the base layer: elliptic curve operations on the BN254 and BLS12-381 curves, and the Poseidon/Poseidon2 hash function. Introduced in the X-Ray (Protocol 25) and Yardstick (Protocol 26) upgrades.
Base (public) ledger: Privacy lives in the layers above it, never in the base.
After months of correction, Stellar network’s native asset XLM is showing signs of stabilization. While the price remains well below previous peaks, technical indicators suggest that selling pressure has eased and buyers are actively defending key support zones.
Uptrend depends on higher lowsMarket analyst Javon Marks emphasizes that maintaining a pattern of higher lows is crucial for XLM’s bullish outlook. He notes that as long as this trend continues, there is potential for a strong breakout, with the price possibly reaching $0.681. This would represent an increase of more than 294% from current levels.
Javon Marks assesses that if XLM continues to establish higher lows, this technical structure could bring the $0.681 level into focus as a key target.
The monthly XLM/USDT chart reveals a wave-like pattern seen in previous cycles. Historically, long periods of decline have been followed by accumulation phases and sharp rallies. Currently, the rounded bottom formation since the 2025 highs signals a weakening in selling pressure as buyers gradually return to the market.
Although the price is still trading below its descending trendline, breaking above this line could pave the way for a move towards the $0.68 to $0.70 range. In a broader bullish scenario, the $1.20 to $1.25 band is also being monitored as a future target zone.
Support levels and wave analysisTrend Serra Capital presents a similar technical perspective, suggesting through Elliott Wave Analysis that XLM may have reached the final stage of Sub-Wave 2. Should support hold, they believe Wave 3 could commence, potentially signaling the start of a new upward move.
Glossary: Elliott Wave Analysis is a technical approach that argues price movements unfold in repeating waves, shaped by investor psychology. Fibonacci levels are ratios used to identify probable support and resistance zones.
The analysis highlights $0.139 as the main support for XLM. Maintaining a price above this level is seen as critical to preserving the bullish structure. Conversely, reclaiming the $0.30 level would provide stronger confirmation of a trend reversal.
Intermediate support levels are noted at $0.204, $0.186, and $0.164. While these zones could attract new buyers, a dip below $0.139 would undermine the upward outlook.
On-chain activity and ecosystem growthTechnical indicators are further reinforced by on-chain data. The network averages around 51,500 daily active addresses, demonstrating continued engagement even during periods of weak market performance.
Observer Vijay highlights notable growth in Stellar’s real-world asset segment. Over the last five quarters, the total value of assets on the network has jumped from $760 million to $3.35 billion, driven by tokenized treasury products, credit instruments, gold, and stablecoins. Stellar is recognized as a blockchain focused on cross-border payments and asset tokenization.
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.
Stellar trades near $0.18, but a May 2026 plan for the DTCC to connect its tokenization service to Stellar, with XLM named as the settlement token, could route trillions in traditional securities onto the network. What would that actually mean for the price? Here is the realistic read, separating the landmark from the hype.
Summary
Stellar trades near $0.18 as of late June 2026, down from a July 2025 high near $0.52, with the Fear and Greed reading in extreme fear despite strong network fundamentals. In May 2026, the DTCC, the backbone of United States securities settlement, announced it would connect its tokenization service to Stellar, with XLM designated as the settlement token and live assets targeted for the first half of 2027. The deal is a genuine long-term, high-conviction catalyst because it links potential institutional securities volume directly to the network, but the 2027 timeline means price until then is driven by speculation and sentiment. The central question for the price is value accrual: whether routing securities settlement through Stellar translates into sustained demand for the XLM token, a question complicated by XLM’s fixed supply with no burn mechanism. Year-end 2026 forecasts span roughly $0.18 at the bearish end to $1.20 to $2.50 in bullish models, a gap that turns on whether the DTCC and other catalysts begin converting fundamentals into token demand. Stellar (XLM) is trading near $0.18 as of late June 2026, and it presents one of the sharpest disconnects in crypto: a network with strong and growing fundamentals attached to a token sitting near multi-year lows.
XLM is down from a July 2025 high near $0.52, the Fear and Greed reading is mired in extreme fear, and yet the underlying network is arguably healthier than ever, with tokenized real-world assets on Stellar having climbed past $2.83 billion, stablecoin payment volume around $5.5 billion, developer engagement at record highs, and consensus achieved in under six seconds through its Federated Byzantine Agreement design.
Stellar price chart | Source: crypto.news Into that gap between fundamentals and price landed the most consequential development in Stellar’s recent history: in May 2026, the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation, the institution that sits at the center of United States securities settlement, announced it would connect its tokenization service to Stellar, with XLM named as the settlement token and live assets targeted for the first half of 2027.
The announcement raised an obvious and high-stakes question for anyone watching XLM: if the backbone of traditional securities settlement is routing tokenized assets through Stellar, what does that mean for the price of the token?
This article answers that question as realistically as possible, separating the genuine significance of the deal from the hype that inevitably surrounds it. It works through where Stellar stands now and why the fundamentals-price gap exists, what the DTCC deal actually is, why it could be a landmark, the all-important value-accrual question of whether network volume translates into token demand, the problem of the 2027 timeline, the other catalysts stacking up around XLM, the supply dynamics that complicate the bull case, what the analysts forecast, and three scenarios for the price.
The aim is to give XLM holders and observers a clear-eyed read rather than either dismissive skepticism or breathless promotion, because the DTCC deal is simultaneously a real, high-conviction catalyst and a development whose price impact is years away and structurally uncertain. The forecasts here are information, not advice. And the thread running through the whole analysis is the same question that haunts every payments-token valuation: does the network’s success actually accrue to the token, or can the volume flow through while the token is bypassed? For Stellar, the DTCC deal makes that question concrete and urgent.
Where Stellar stands and the fundamentals gap Begin with the disconnect that defines XLM right now, because it is the context for everything the DTCC deal might change. Stellar near $0.18 is down significantly from its July 2025 high near $0.52, and the Fear and Greed reading sits in extreme fear, the same deeply pessimistic sentiment weighing on the broader crypto market.
On the charts, XLM has spent 2026 oscillating, with periods of consolidation around the high teens to low twenties in cents and sharp volatility, including swings of substantial magnitude within single months, but the broad trend has left the token near the lower end of its range and below where it traded a year ago. By the standard technical and sentiment measures, XLM looks like what it is: a beaten-down mid-cap altcoin in a fearful market.
What makes Stellar unusual is that its fundamentals tell a very different story from its price. The value of tokenized real-world assets issued on Stellar has surged past $2.83 billion, growing at a rapid clip, and stablecoin payment volume on the network has reached roughly $5.5 billion, both signs of genuine, growing utility rather than mere speculation. The network supports a large base of accounts and a wide array of fiat and crypto on-ramps, achieves fast and cheap settlement through its consensus design, and has added the Soroban smart-contract platform to enable tokenization and decentralized finance.
Developer engagement is at record levels. This is the crux of the Stellar investment debate: a network whose real-world usage and institutional positioning are strengthening, attached to a token whose price has fallen to multi-year lows. Bulls read the gap as a buying opportunity and evidence of accumulation, on the logic that price will eventually catch up to fundamentals. Skeptics read it as evidence that network usage does not reliably accrue value to the XLM token, which is precisely the question the DTCC deal forces to the center. The fundamentals-price gap is the setup; the DTCC deal is the potential catalyst that either closes it or exposes it as permanent.
What the DTCC deal actually is To assess its impact, you have to understand precisely what was announced, because the details determine the significance. In May 2026, the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation revealed plans to connect its tokenization service to the Stellar network. The DTCC is not a peripheral player; it is the central infrastructure of United States securities settlement, the institution through which an enormous share of the country’s stock and bond transactions are cleared and settled, handling quadrillions of dollars in securities annually across the traditional financial system. Its decision to build tokenization capability on a public blockchain at all is significant, and its selection of Stellar specifically, with XLM named as the settlement token for the infrastructure, is what makes the announcement material for the token. The plan targets live assets in the first half of 2027, meaning the connection is a forward-looking build rather than something already moving volume today.
The stated logic is that tokenization, representing traditional securities as digital tokens on a blockchain, can make settlement faster, cheaper, and programmable, and that Stellar’s compliance-focused, settlement-oriented architecture is suited to regulated finance. The phrase that captured attention is that the arrangement brings the potential for trillions in traditional securities onto the network over time, with XLM as the settlement token directly linking that future institutional volume to token demand. That is the bullish framing, and it is grounded in real fact: the DTCC genuinely chose Stellar, XLM is genuinely named as the settlement token, and the addressable volume is truly enormous. But three qualifications matter from the outset and shape the rest of this analysis.
First, the assets go live in 2027, not now. Second, the scale of what actually migrates onto Stellar, as opposed to the theoretical addressable market, is unknown. And third, and most important for the price, the mechanism by which settlement volume translates into sustained XLM demand is the contested value-accrual question instead of an automatic pass-through. The deal is real and large in potential; what it means for the token depends on details that are not yet settled.
Why it could be a landmark Taken at its strongest, the DTCC deal is a genuine landmark, and the bull case for its significance deserves a full and fair statement. The first reason is validation. When the institution at the heart of United States securities settlement chooses to build tokenization infrastructure on Stellar, it is an endorsement of Stellar’s architecture for regulated, institutional finance that no marketing campaign could buy. It signals that Stellar’s long-standing bet on compliance and settlement, often overlooked during the speculative manias that drove other chains, is being recognized by exactly the kind of counterparty it was designed to serve. For a network whose pitch has always been institutional and payments-focused instead of retail-speculative, having the DTCC select it is the strongest possible third-party confirmation of the thesis.
The second reason is the direct linkage to token demand, at least in principle. Because XLM is named as the settlement token for the DTCC tokenization infrastructure, future institutional volume flowing through that infrastructure has a potential channel to XLM demand, unlike vaguer partnership announcements that leave the token’s role ambiguous. The third reason is scale and trajectory. The addressable market for tokenized securities is measured in the trillions, and even capturing a modest fraction would represent settlement volume far beyond anything Stellar handles today, which is why the deal is framed as a long-term, high-conviction bullish driver instead of a short-term price catalyst. It fits a broader pattern in which Stellar has positioned itself as compliance-ready infrastructure for tokenization, evidenced by its alignment with regulatory frameworks and its role hosting regulated stablecoins.
NEW: MoneyGram introduces MGUSD native USD stablecoin on Stellar. Built with Stablecoin, M0 and Fireblocks. Now live in the U.S pic.twitter.com/N4CeRg5sHz
— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) June 3, 2026 The strongest version of the bull case, then, is that the DTCC deal is the moment Stellar’s institutional thesis begins to be validated by the most credible possible counterparty, with a direct potential link to token demand and an addressable market large enough to transform the network’s economics. Whether that potential converts into token price is the next, harder question.
The value-accrual question Here is where realism has to enter, because the gap between a network landmark and a token price runs straight through the value-accrual question, and Stellar’s situation has a cautionary parallel close at hand. The question is whether routing securities settlement through Stellar actually creates sustained demand for the XLM token, or whether the volume can flow through the network while the token captures little of the value. This is not a hypothetical concern invented for skepticism; it is the same question that has dogged XRP, where Ripple’s commercial success in cross-border payments has not reliably translated into XRP token appreciation, because much settlement activity can occur without participants holding the token for any meaningful duration. Stellar faces a structurally similar issue: a settlement token may be used transiently to bridge value during a transaction without anyone needing to hold XLM as a durable asset, in which case enormous settlement volume could produce only modest, fleeting token demand.
The specifics of how XLM is used in the DTCC infrastructure will determine which way this resolves, and those specifics are not yet fully clear. If XLM is required as a persistent bridge or reserve asset that institutions must hold to access the settlement rails, and if the volume is large, the demand could be substantial and sustained. If, instead, XLM functions as a momentary settlement medium that is acquired and released within transactions, or if stablecoins denominated in dollars do most of the actual value transfer while XLM plays a minimal technical role, then the token demand could be far smaller than the headline volume suggests.
The honest assessment is that the DTCC deal creates a potential channel for value to accrue to XLM, but it does not guarantee that it will, and the magnitude depends on technical and economic details that remain to be seen. This is the single most important caveat for anyone pricing XLM off the DTCC news. The deal could be a genuine landmark for the network and still deliver a muted token-price impact if the value-accrual mechanism is weak, exactly as has happened with XRP. The network’s success and the token’s success are related but not identical, and conflating them is the most common error in valuing payments tokens.
The 2027 timeline problem Even setting aside the value-accrual question, the DTCC deal carries a timing problem that directly affects how it should be priced today. The plan targets live assets in the first half of 2027, which means that for the entire rest of 2026 and into early 2027, there is no actual DTCC settlement volume flowing through Stellar, only the anticipation of it. This matters because, until the infrastructure goes live and shows real volume, XLM’s price will be driven by speculation and sentiment about the future instead of by current flows, which makes it vulnerable to the same volatility that afflicts any narrative-driven asset. The market has already shown this dynamic, with XLM experiencing sharp moves and pullbacks, including a notable drop after a rally, as enthusiasm about the deal collided with the reality that nothing changes operationally for many months.
The timing problem cuts in two directions, and a fair analysis acknowledges both. On one hand, it tempers the near-term bull case: those expecting the DTCC deal to lift XLM’s price in 2026 are betting on sentiment and positioning instead of on actual usage, and sentiment can fade, reverse, or be overwhelmed by broader market conditions long before 2027 arrives. A deal that goes live in 18 months provides little support for a token if the broad crypto market stays fearful in the meantime.
On the other hand, the long runway means the catalyst is not yet spent: if and when the infrastructure goes live in 2027 and begins showing real volume, that could be a fresh, concrete catalyst at a point when much of the speculative anticipation may have faded, potentially providing an upside surprise to a token that the market had given up on.
For pricing XLM through the rest of 2026 specifically, the timeline problem means the DTCC deal is best understood as a long-term thesis underpinning the token instead of a near-term price driver, and that anyone buying XLM on the DTCC news in 2026 is making a multi-year bet whose payoff, if it comes, is concentrated in 2027 and beyond, contingent on the value-accrual question resolving favorably.
The other catalysts stacking up The DTCC deal does not stand alone; it sits atop a cluster of other developments that collectively strengthen Stellar’s institutional thesis, and a complete picture has to account for them. The most important is the regulatory designation.
On March 17, 2026, United States regulators designated Stellar as a digital commodity, the same classification extended to a short list of major tokens, which removed a significant barrier by clarifying XLM’s legal status and making it eligible for custodial services from institutions that safeguard assets. That designation is foundational because it is what allows firms to build regulated products on Stellar and to hold XLM with legal confidence, and it underpins the DTCC deal and the others.
Building on it, CME Group XLM futures are expected during 2026, which would provide regulated derivatives infrastructure and a potential structural source of institutional demand and price discovery, and an Amundi fund and other institutional vehicles point to growing traditional-finance engagement with the token.
Several more developments round out the picture. Stellar is widely seen as a beneficiary of the CLARITY Act, the legislation that aims to codify digital-asset rules and that could advance in 2026, in the same way XRP is, since both are payment-focused tokens whose institutional adoption hinges on regulatory certainty. Stellar’s design aligns with European regulatory frameworks, evidenced by regulated stablecoins launching on the network, giving it a compliance posture suited to multiple jurisdictions. And the Soroban smart-contract platform expands what the network can host, broadening its addressable market into tokenization and decentralized finance.
The significance of this cluster is that the DTCC deal is not an isolated bet but part of a coherent institutional thesis: regulatory clarity through the digital-commodity designation and potential CLARITY Act passage, derivatives infrastructure through CME futures, traditional-finance vehicles through funds like Amundi’s, and the flagship tokenization linkage through the DTCC.
If the thesis works, these catalysts reinforce one another, with regulatory clarity enabling the institutional products that enable the volume that could drive token demand. The caveat from the value-accrual discussion still applies to all of them, but the breadth of the catalyst stack is itself a meaningful part of the bull case for XLM.
The supply picture that complicates the bull case A factor specific to XLM that any honest price analysis must weigh is its supply structure, which cuts against the simplest bullish narratives in an important way.
Following a 2019 community vote, Stellar ended its annual token issuance, fixing the total supply near 50 billion XLM and removing the inflationary dilution that suppresses price appreciation on many rival networks. That fixed supply is truly favorable: it means new issuance does not constantly dilute holders, and if demand rises against a fixed supply, the price pressure is upward. To that extent, the supply structure supports the bull case, and it is a point bulls rightly emphasize.
But there is a crucial qualification that complicates the value-accrual story. Stellar has no token-burn mechanism that meaningfully reduces circulating supply as the network is used. On some networks, transaction activity burns tokens, so that rising usage automatically tightens supply and creates upward price pressure independent of speculative demand, a direct link between network use and token scarcity. Stellar lacks this channel at scale, which means that fee-driven demand from network activity does not automatically remove XLM from circulation.
The implication for the DTCC deal is significant: even if substantial securities settlement volume flows through Stellar, that activity will not, by itself, shrink the XLM supply the way a burn mechanism would, so 1 of the clearest channels through which network usage could force token-price appreciation is absent.
The price would have to rise through genuine, sustained holding demand for XLM as an asset, not merely through transactional throughput, which loops back to the value-accrual question. The fixed supply is a modest positive; the absence of a burn mechanism is a real limitation on how mechanically network success can translate into token-price gains. Together they mean XLM’s bull case depends more heavily on durable demand for the token itself than on raw volume, which raises the bar for the DTCC deal to move the price.
What the analysts forecast The analyst forecasts for XLM in 2026 span an extraordinarily wide range, even by the standards of the other majors, and the spread maps directly onto the questions this article has raised. At the bearish end, the algorithmic forecaster CoinCodex reads Stellar as bearish on technical indicators and, strikingly, its model does not project XLM reaching $1 until 2047, treating the token as a slow-compounding asset that the current setup does not favor.
Other cautious forecasters cluster low: Traders Union’s model points to roughly $0.40 to $0.48 for year-end, and DigitalCoinPrice sees around $0.32, both well above current levels but far below the bullish targets and treating Stellar as an infrastructure asset that appreciates slowly instead of a narrative rocket. Base-case forecasts that assume regulatory clarity holds and tokenization grows at a moderate pace tend to land in a $0.25 to $0.50 band, a meaningful recovery from current levels without a breakout.
At the bullish end sit forecasters who weigh the institutional catalysts heavily. Coinpedia’s hybrid model is the most bullish of the major platforms for 2026, placing XLM in a moderate range of $1.20 to $1.80 and a stronger scenario toward $2.50 if it reclaims key resistance, explicitly anchoring the thesis in institutional adoption velocity, rising stablecoin and tokenized-asset volume, and the catalysts described above, with a longer-term 2030 target as high as $6.19 under favorable conditions.
CoinLore and others produce aggressive cycle targets in the range of roughly $0.50 to $1.69 for the year. The gap, from a model that does not see $1 until 2047 to 1 targeting $2.50 this year, is enormous, and it reflects exactly the unresolved questions: whether the DTCC deal and the other catalysts convert into token demand, whether the value-accrual mechanism is strong or weak, and whether the 2027 timeline leaves 2026 to sentiment.
The bullish forecasts assume the institutional thesis begins paying off in token demand; the bearish ones assume the fundamentals-price gap persists because usage does not accrue to the token. The forecasts cannot settle which is right; they can only show how much rides on the DTCC deal and its peers actually closing that gap.
Three scenarios for Stellar around the DTCC catalyst Pulling the analysis into scenarios clarifies the range without pretending to certainty. In the bull scenario, the market begins to price the institutional thesis ahead of the 2027 go-live. Confidence grows that the DTCC deal, the digital-commodity designation, CME futures, and the broader catalyst stack will convert into real XLM demand, an altcoin-favorable phase arrives, and XLM recovers toward the $1.20 to $2.50 range that the most bullish credible models describe, with the fundamentals-price gap finally closing as anticipation of trillions in tokenized volume lifts the token. This path requires the market to look through the 2027 timeline and to bet that the value-accrual question resolves in XLM’s favor, and it leans on the breadth of the catalyst stack as the engine. It is achievable but conditional on a favorable read of exactly the questions that remain open.
In the base scenario, the most defensible central case, XLM recovers modestly to a $0.25 to $0.50 band. Regulatory clarity holds, the catalysts develop roughly on schedule, and the token grinds back up from its lows as the institutional thesis slowly gains credibility, but without a breakout, because the DTCC volume is not live until 2027 and the value-accrual mechanism remains unproven through 2026.
This recovery-without-breakout outcome fits the weight of base-case forecasting and reflects the reality that the biggest catalyst is years from delivering actual volume. In the bear scenario, the fundamentals-price gap persists or widens. The broad market stays fearful, the DTCC anticipation fades as 2027 stays distant, doubts deepen about whether settlement volume will ever accrue to the token given the no-burn supply structure, and XLM stalls in the $0.10 to $0.20 range or drifts lower, validating the bearish models that treat it as a slow-compounding asset. Which scenario unfolds depends on the broad market, the pace of the catalysts, and above all whether the market comes to believe that routing securities through Stellar will create durable demand for XLM. All 3 are live, and the DTCC deal is the pivot around which they turn, a genuine landmark for the network whose translation into token price remains the open question.
Frequently Asked Questions What is the DTCC tokenization deal with Stellar? In May 2026, the Depository Trust and Clearing Corporation, the central infrastructure of United States securities settlement, announced it would connect its tokenization service to the Stellar network, with XLM named as the settlement token and live assets targeted for the first half of 2027. The DTCC clears and settles an enormous share of United States securities transactions, so its decision to build tokenization capability on Stellar is a major institutional endorsement. The arrangement carries the potential to bring tokenized traditional securities onto the network over time, with XLM as the settlement token linking that future volume to potential token demand. It is a forward-looking build, not something moving volume today.
Will the DTCC deal make XLM’s price go up? It could, but it is not automatic, and the timing and mechanism matter. The deal is a genuine long-term, high-conviction catalyst because it links potential institutional securities volume to the network with XLM named as the settlement token. But assets do not go live until the first half of 2027, so through 2026 the price is driven by speculation instead of actual flows. More fundamentally, whether settlement volume translates into sustained XLM demand is the contested value-accrual question: a settlement token can be used transiently without anyone holding it durably, and Stellar lacks a burn mechanism that would tighten supply as usage grows. The deal could be a landmark for the network and still deliver a muted token-price impact if value accrual is weak.
Why is Stellar’s price so low if its fundamentals are strong? This is the central Stellar paradox. The network’s fundamentals are strong and growing, with tokenized real-world assets past $2.83 billion, stablecoin payment volume around $5.5 billion, record developer engagement, and fast, cheap settlement, yet XLM trades near $0.18, down from a 2025 high near $0.52, with sentiment in extreme fear. Bulls read the gap as a buying opportunity on the logic that price will catch up to fundamentals. Skeptics read it as evidence that network usage does not reliably accrue value to the XLM token, the same issue that has dogged XRP. The gap exists because network success and token-price appreciation are related but not identical, and the mechanism linking them for XLM is contested.
What is the value-accrual question for XLM? It is whether routing activity like securities settlement through Stellar actually creates sustained demand for the XLM token, or whether volume can flow through the network while the token captures little value. A settlement token may be used transiently to bridge value within a transaction without anyone needing to hold XLM as a durable asset, in which case large settlement volume could produce only modest, fleeting token demand. This is the same question that has limited XRP’s price despite Ripple’s commercial success. For the DTCC deal, the magnitude of token-price impact depends on whether XLM is required as a persistent bridge or reserve asset or functions only as a momentary settlement medium, details that are not yet fully clear.
Does Stellar’s fixed supply help the price? Partly, but with an important limitation. Following a 2019 community vote, Stellar ended annual issuance and fixed total supply near 50 billion XLM, removing the inflationary dilution that suppresses many rival tokens, which is favorable because rising demand against fixed supply creates upward price pressure. However, Stellar has no token-burn mechanism that meaningfully reduces circulating supply as the network is used. On some networks, transaction activity burns tokens so that rising usage automatically tightens supply; Stellar lacks this at scale, so fee-driven demand does not automatically remove XLM from circulation. The implication is that even large settlement volume will not shrink supply by itself, so the price must rise through durable holding demand instead of throughput, which raises the bar for catalysts like the DTCC deal
What are analysts forecasting for Stellar in 2026? The range is extraordinarily wide. At the bearish end, CoinCodex’s model is bearish and does not project XLM reaching $1 until 2047, while Traders Union sees roughly $0.40 to $0.48 and DigitalCoinPrice around $0.32 for year-end, treating XLM as a slow-compounding infrastructure asset. Base-case forecasts that assume moderate growth cluster in a $0.25 to $0.50 band. At the bullish end, Coinpedia models $1.20 to $1.80 and up to $2.50 if resistance is reclaimed, anchored in institutional adoption, with a 2030 target as high as $6.19. The gap, from no $1 until 2047 to $2.50 this year, reflects the unresolved questions of whether the DTCC deal and other catalysts convert into token demand and whether the fundamentals-price gap finally closes.
This article is information, not financial or investment advice. Stellar price levels, network metrics, the DTCC announcement details, and analyst forecasts reflect data available as of June 28, 2026, are point-in-time, and can change. Cryptocurrency is highly volatile, and you can lose money. Price predictions are inherently uncertain, and the scenarios described are not guarantees. Do your own research and consult a qualified financial professional before making any investment decision.
Chainlink holder count climbed to 892.8K Ethereum wallets after adding more than 8K holders in five days. Recent wallet growth accelerated sharply and pushed LINK closer to the 900K holder milestone. Santiment linked the increase to growing interest in tokenized assets and institutional blockchain projects. LINK holder growth continued even while the token traded near recent local price lows. Chainlink has surpassed another important adoption milestone amid the recent surge in wallet growth over the last few days. The network now has 892,800 non-empty Ethereum wallets, which have swelled by over 8,000 in the last five days, according to fresh on-chain data.
The boost is part of a growing spotlight on the crypto market on tokenized assets and institutional blockchain projects. Despite LINK trading near recent lows, the latest stats suggest more people are joining the network.
Chainlink Holder Count Rises as More Wallets Join the Network On-chain analytics platform Santiment reported that Chainlink’s holder count has entered a much steeper growth phase. The platform tracks non-empty Ethereum wallets holding LINK.
Its latest data shows the network added more than 8,000 holders over five days. That pushed the total number of wallets holding LINK to roughly 892,800.
The recent increase stands out from previous growth trends. According to Santiment, Chainlink could move beyond the 900,000-holder mark before the week ends if the current pace continues.
✍️ TL;DR: Chainlink’s holder count has gone parabolic
📊 Metrics used: Total Holders
🔗 Link to chart: https://t.co/dtIQSALghS
📈 Chainlink’s holder growth is suddenly accelerating in a big way. $LINK on Ethereum is now up to 892.8K non-empty wallets, adding more than 8K holders… pic.twitter.com/rr4POGHn9a
— Santiment Intelligence (@SantimentData) June 29, 2026
Holder growth remains one of the clearest ways to measure network adoption. A larger holder base often reflects increasing participation across an ecosystem, regardless of short-term market movements.
While price often attracts the headlines, wallet data can tell a different story. In Chainlink’s case, more users continue entering the network even as LINK remains close to recent local lows.
Institutional Blockchain Activity Keeps Chainlink in Focus Santiment linked the recent wallet expansion to several developments involving real-world assets and institutional finance.
These include Project Pangea, DTCC’s collateral initiatives, tokenized assets, and 24/5 equity data streams.
Chainlink has become part of a growing number of blockchain projects supporting tokenized financial infrastructure.
Its oracle network provides external data that decentralized applications and financial platforms rely on. The latest wallet figures arrived during a period when institutional blockchain projects continue expanding.
Real-world asset tokenization has also remained one of the industry’s most active development areas throughout the year.
Although LINK has yet to stage a major price recovery, wallet growth has continued moving higher.
Santiment noted that the increase in holders has taken place while the token trades near local lows, suggesting network participation continues to build despite subdued market conditions.
Chainlink’s expanding holder base adds another metric to watch as adoption develops across the ecosystem. The latest on-chain figures show users continue accumulating LINK while institutional blockchain and tokenized asset initiatives remain active across the broader crypto market.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
MoneySimpler promotes passive income strategies for ETH, USDT, and USDC holders through AI-driven digital asset utilization tools.
Summary
MoneySimpler offers AI-driven automated strategies for ETH, USDT, and USDC holders to generate passive income. MoneySimpler uses 24/7 AI quantitative trading to analyze markets and automate digital asset management. MoneySimpler enables simple, automated crypto strategies for ETH, USDT, USDC, and BTC with real-time tracking. For those who hold ETH, USDT, or USDC, they might have wondered: besides waiting for prices to rise, can these digital assets create more value?
In recent years, more and more digital asset investors have begun exploring new avenues for passive income. From staking and DeFi to AI-automated trading, the focus is no longer just on asset prices but on how to more effectively utilize funds to ensure that the digital assets they hold continue to generate value.
MoneySimpler provides daily passive income for ETH, USDT, and USDC holders through an intelligent and automated asset management model.
How can automated strategies help improve returns on assets? The digital asset market operates 24/7, and more and more investors want to reduce the time costs of frequent market monitoring and manual trading while simultaneously increasing asset returns.
MoneySimpler uses an AI-powered quantitative trading system to continuously analyze the market and automatically execute corresponding processes based on preset strategies, helping users to use quantitative trading more conveniently and improve their returns.
The main features of the platform include:
Automated operation 24/7, no need for frequent market monitoring Intelligent quantitative strategies continuously analyze market changes Supports mainstream digital assets such as ETH, USDT, USDC, and BTC Allows users to view account status, profit records, and asset information at any time Simple operation process, no complex trading experience required How to get started with MoneySimpler? MoneySimpler is dedicated to simplifying the AI-driven quantitative trading process. Users can quickly start AI-automated trading without programming, building a trading system, or constantly monitoring the market.
Step 1: Register an Account
Upon completing account registration, new users will receive a $10 sign-up bonus and a $50 trial fund to experience the platform’s AI-powered automated trading features.
Step 2: Choose a Trading Plan
Select a suitable trading plan based on needs and complete asset allocation using cryptocurrency. (Minimum investment starts from $100)
Examples of popular contracts
Basis Arbitrage Strategy: Invest $100, 2-day period, daily return $4, total return at maturity $100 + $8
Digital Asset Trend Tracking 2.05: Invest $600, 5-day period, daily return $7.5, total return at maturity $600 + $37.5
Digital Asset Trend Tracking 2.1: Invest $1,100, 10-day period, daily return $14.3, total return at maturity $1100 + $143
Trend Tracking 2.1: Invest $5,000, 20-day period, daily return $70.5, total return at maturity $5,000 + $1,410
Inter-Exchange Arbitrage 3.5: Invest $12,000, 30-day period, daily return $153, total return at maturity $10,000 + $4,590
Cryptocurrency Statistical Arbitrage Strategy 2.45: Invest $100,000, 40-day period, daily return $1,950, total return at maturity $100,000 + $78,000
For more strategy details, please visit the MoneySimpler website.
Step 3: Activate AI-Automated Trading.
After selecting the corresponding trading contract, daily profits will be automatically settled into an account. The AI system will automatically run the corresponding strategy and execute trades based on market changes.
A secure and transparent smart quantitative trading platform For digital asset users, a platform’s security, transparency, and compliance are often just as important as profit opportunities.
MoneySimpler continuously improves its platform security system and adheres to international digital asset management standards to provide users with more reliable intelligent quantitative services.
The platform’s security and compliance system includes:
Compliant with the UK Financial Conduct Authority and the EU MiCA (Mini-Assets Framework) standards for crypto assets; Quarterly earnings audits by PwC; Lloyd’s of London provides insurance coverage for the platform’s funds; Cloudflare and McAfee provide enterprise-grade cybersecurity and real-time security protection. With a robust compliance, security, and risk control system, MoneySimpler is committed to providing global ETH, USDT, and USDC holders with a safer, more transparent, and intelligent quantitative asset management experience.
Summarize The development of the digital asset market is driving investors to shift from “long-term holding” to “enhancing asset profitability.”
For users holding ETH, USDT, or USDC, MoneySimpler offers a smarter, automated asset management approach, allowing idle digital assets to generate more value.
Register an account now on the Money Simpler official platform, claim new user rewards, experience AI-powered quantitative trading, and start the daily passive income journey.
Disclosure: This content is provided by a third party. Neither crypto.news nor the author of this article endorses any product mentioned on this page. Users should conduct their own research before taking any action related to the company.
Key HighlightsUSDC Integration Launches on BNY’s Custody InfrastructureEnhanced Circle Collaboration Streamlines Institutional USDC OperationsFederal Stablecoin Framework Accelerates Institutional IntegrationGet 3 Free Stock Ebooks BNY shares climb following enhanced Circle collaboration for institutional USDC services.
Custody platform now supports USDC storage, creation and conversion functions.
Institutional investors gain integrated stablecoin access through BNY infrastructure.
USDC marks inaugural stablecoin offering on BNY’s digital custody system.
Collaboration advances traditional finance integration with blockchain payment rails.
Bank of New York Mellon (BNY) shares appreciated 1.41% to reach $145.58 following news of an enhanced collaboration with Circle focused on stablecoin infrastructure. The expansion integrates USDC capabilities into BNY’s Digital Asset Custody solution designed for institutional market participants. This development reinforces the bank’s growing footprint in blockchain-based financial services and digital currency custody operations.
Bank of New York Mellon Corp, BNY
USDC Integration Launches on BNY’s Custody Infrastructure BNY announced that USDC represents the inaugural stablecoin available through its Digital Asset Custody infrastructure. This platform enables corporate and institutional customers to securely store USDC within BNY-managed wallet systems. The integration establishes a streamlined pathway connecting traditional dollar holdings with blockchain-based digital assets.
Institutional participants can now direct Circle to generate USDC tokens from U.S. dollar deposits. Conversely, clients may convert USDC holdings back into fiat currency using identical institutional channels. Consequently, BNY creates operational continuity between stablecoin transactions and its established custody and treasury management functions.
This rollout extends BNY’s current position as the principal custodian holding USDC reserve assets. The service provides regulated entities with a compliant infrastructure for stablecoin safekeeping and blockchain transfers. Looking ahead, BNY intends to incorporate additional stablecoin providers and digital currency transaction capabilities.
Enhanced Circle Collaboration Streamlines Institutional USDC Operations Circle’s USDC token forms the foundation of BNY’s expanded digital asset offerings. USDC maintains its position as the second-largest dollar-pegged cryptocurrency measured by total value. Current market capitalization exceeds $73 billion according to data referenced in the partnership announcement.
The collaboration enables BNY customers to interact with USDC while remaining within the bank’s established operational ecosystem. This arrangement allows organizations to coordinate traditional currency and stablecoin holdings under a unified custody arrangement. Such integration may streamline entry points for companies exploring blockchain-powered payment and settlement infrastructure.
BNY and Circle maintain a longstanding relationship centered on USDC reserve management. The new custody capabilities represent a strategic evolution toward customer-facing product deployment. This initiative positions USDC within a prominent institutional custody environment operated by a major financial services provider.
Federal Stablecoin Framework Accelerates Institutional Integration This partnership expansion follows the 2025 enactment of the GENIUS Act within the United States regulatory landscape. This legislation established comprehensive federal guidelines governing dollar-backed stablecoins. The framework addresses reserve requirements, transparency standards and issuer supervision protocols.
Stablecoins maintain distinct characteristics from speculative cryptocurrency assets through value stabilization mechanisms. Dollar-denominated stablecoins typically maintain reserves comprising cash holdings and short-duration U.S. Treasury securities. Originally developed for cryptocurrency exchange activity, these instruments increasingly support cross-border payments, remittances and transaction settlement applications.
BNY manages approximately $59 trillion in custodial assets, maintaining its status as the globe’s largest custody banking institution. The firm’s stablecoin initiative demonstrates ongoing convergence between traditional financial infrastructure and blockchain-enabled market technologies. Industry counterparts including Standard Chartered and Citigroup have similarly forecasted substantial expansion within the stablecoin sector over coming years.
Oliver Dale
Editor-in-Chief of Blockonomi and founder of Kooc Media, A UK-Based Online Media Company. Believer in Open-Source Software, Blockchain Technology & a Free and Fair Internet for all. His writing has been quoted by Nasdaq, Dow Jones, Investopedia, The New Yorker, Forbes, Techcrunch & More. Contact [email protected]
Bitcoin infrastructure firm Breez has unveiled a major update to its developer toolkit, enabling users to send USDC and USDT stablecoins directly from their Bitcoin balances. The new feature supports over 30 blockchain networks, eliminating the previous need for users to hold stablecoins or convert Bitcoin in advance before making a payment.
Payments flow through the Lightning NetworkAccording to information shared by Breez, the system combines the Lightning Network with an automatic conversion mechanism. When a user initiates a payment, their Bitcoin is instantly converted into USDC or USDT and sent to the recipient’s chosen blockchain network.
Once the sender enters the recipient’s wallet address, the Breez SDK identifies the target network, calculates the optimal conversion route, and transparently displays the amount, network, and transaction fees before approval. The transaction is then processed by liquidity providers such as Flashnet and Boltz, who handle the conversion from Bitcoin to stablecoin and transfer the coins to the selected network.
Roy Sheinfeld clarified that there is no need to issue USDT or USDC directly on the Lightning Network. Thanks to interoperability, users can make payments from their Bitcoin balance, while recipients get stablecoins on any supported network.
Breez also emphasized that users continue to hold Bitcoin right up until the payment is executed. On the recipient side, there’s no need to manage a separate stablecoin balance—the funds are delivered in the chosen network seamlessly. The company stated that the new feature is non-custodial and, in the initial phase, only supports outgoing stablecoin payments. Incoming stablecoin transfers from outside blockchain networks are planned for a future update.
Mini glossary: The Lightning Network is a second-layer payment network operating on Bitcoin, designed for faster and lower-cost transactions. It routes transfers off-chain and later settles them on the main Bitcoin network.
Aims to reduce integration complexity for developersBreez developed this feature with a focus on developers, aiming to streamline stablecoin payment integration into applications without the hassle of connecting individually to each blockchain. This approach could allow users to manage both Bitcoin and stablecoin transactions from a single balance, minimizing complexity.
Renowned for its Bitcoin and Lightning-based payment infrastructure, Breez offers an SDK that lets developers embed Lightning functionalities directly into their products and services.
Lightning Network’s expanding use casesThe rollout comes at a time when startups are seeking broader financial and commercial applications for Bitcoin and the Lightning Network. In recent months, the network has been tested in scenarios well beyond small retail payments, demonstrating its scalability and utility.
In February, Secure Digital Markets, a provider of institutional trading and lending services, completed a $1 million Bitcoin payment to Kraken via the Lightning Network in under half a second—highlighting the protocol’s potential for large-scale corporate transfers.
That same month, Voltage introduced a revolving credit line integrated with Lightning payment flows, supporting settlement in US dollars. Meanwhile, event platform Satlantis launched a Bitcoin-focused ticketing system with built-in Lightning wallets. In March, Ark Labs, a Tether-backed Bitcoin infrastructure startup, secured $5.2 million in funding to develop technologies for stablecoin issuance, transfer, and settlement on the Bitcoin network.
Growth in Lightning Network adoption continues apace. As estimated by River in February, the network’s monthly transaction volume surpassed $1 billion by the end of 2025—a steep rise from approximately $12 million in 2021.
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.
BNY has expanded its Digital Asset Custody platform to let institutional clients store, transfer, mint and redeem Circle's USD Coin, making it the first stablecoin supported on the platform.
The new capabilities allow BNY clients to convert US dollars into USDC and redeem the stablecoin back into dollars directly through the bank while also storing and transferring USDC on its custody platform. BNY said it plans to expand the service to additional stablecoins and digital cash workflows over time.
The expansion builds on BNY's existing role as the primary custodian of the assets backing USDC, extending its relationship with Circle beyond safeguarding reserve assets to include client-facing stablecoin services.
According to BNY, the custodian bank oversees $59.3 trillion in assets under custody and administration and serves more than 90% of Fortune 100 companies. USDC is the world's second-largest stablecoin by market capitalization, with more than $73.8 billion in circulation, according to DefiLlama data.
In May, BNY partnered with Abu Dhabi-based Finstreet and the ADI Foundation to develop institutional custody services for Bitcoin (BTC) and Ether (ETH), with plans to later support stablecoins and tokenized real-world assets.
Source: DefiLlama
Traditional finance expands stablecoin infrastructureBNY's announcement is the latest in a series of stablecoin-focused products launched by major financial institutions in recent months, as traditional banks and asset managers expand services supporting reserve management, custody and blockchain-based payments.
In May, JPMorgan filed to launch a tokenized money market fund that would allow stablecoin issuers to hold reserve assets in a regulated investment vehicle while earning interest. The Ethereum-based fund is designed to invest in US Treasury bills and overnight repurchase agreements that back payment stablecoins.
Earlier this month, State Street launched a government money market fund for stablecoin issuers, offering a vehicle to hold reserve assets in compliance with the GENIUS Act. The fund invests in US government securities and repurchase agreements and counts State Street Bank and Anchorage Digital among its initial investors.
Other large financial institutions are pursuing stablecoin strategies as well. In July 2025, Bank of America said it was exploring stablecoins to modernize its payments infrastructure, while in January, Fidelity Investments launched a US dollar-backed stablecoin, FIDD, after receiving conditional approval to operate a national trust bank.
The stablecoin market is valued at approximately $313 billion, according to DefiLlama, with Tether's USDT accounting for about 60% of the market.
Source: DefiLlama
Magazine: Bitcoin slides to $58K, XRP hits $1 but onchain data promising: Market Moves
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.
BNY has expanded its Digital Asset Custody platform to let institutional clients store, transfer, mint and redeem Circle's USD Coin, making it the first stablecoin supported on the platform.
The new capabilities allow BNY clients to convert US dollars into USDC and redeem the stablecoin back into dollars directly through the bank while also storing and transferring USDC on its custody platform. BNY said it plans to expand the service to additional stablecoins and digital cash workflows over time.
The expansion builds on BNY's existing role as the primary custodian of the assets backing USDC, extending its relationship with Circle beyond safeguarding reserve assets to include client-facing stablecoin services.
According to BNY, the custodian bank oversees $59.3 trillion in assets under custody and administration and serves more than 90% of Fortune 100 companies. USDC is the world's second-largest stablecoin by market capitalization, with more than $73.8 billion in circulation, according to DefiLlama data.
In May, BNY partnered with Abu Dhabi-based Finstreet and the ADI Foundation to develop institutional custody services for Bitcoin (BTC) and Ether (ETH), with plans to later support stablecoins and tokenized real-world assets.
Source: DefiLlama
Traditional finance expands stablecoin infrastructureBNY's announcement is the latest in a series of stablecoin-focused products launched by major financial institutions in recent months, as traditional banks and asset managers expand services supporting reserve management, custody and blockchain-based payments.
In May, JPMorgan filed to launch a tokenized money market fund that would allow stablecoin issuers to hold reserve assets in a regulated investment vehicle while earning interest. The Ethereum-based fund is designed to invest in US Treasury bills and overnight repurchase agreements that back payment stablecoins.
Earlier this month, State Street launched a government money market fund for stablecoin issuers, offering a vehicle to hold reserve assets in compliance with the GENIUS Act. The fund invests in US government securities and repurchase agreements and counts State Street Bank and Anchorage Digital among its initial investors.
Other large financial institutions are pursuing stablecoin strategies as well. In July 2025, Bank of America said it was exploring stablecoins to modernize its payments infrastructure, while in January, Fidelity Investments launched a US dollar-backed stablecoin, FIDD, after receiving conditional approval to operate a national trust bank.
The stablecoin market is valued at approximately $313 billion, according to DefiLlama, with Tether's USDT accounting for about 60% of the market.
Source: DefiLlama
Magazine: Bitcoin slides to $58K, XRP hits $1 but onchain data promising: Market Moves
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.
