Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

TL;DR

Large LINK holders reportedly moved millions of dollars worth of tokens to Binance wallets. The transfers came before public disclosure of Project Pangea at the Point Zero Forum in Zurich. The article frames the activity strictly as on-chain monitoring, not an accusation of insider trading. Whales moved millions of LINK to Binance ahead of Pangea news.

— Lookonchain (@lookonchain) June 26, 2026

Timing Of Exchange Deposits Before Institutional News: Why This Story Matters Chainlink Whales Shift Millions in LINK to Binance Prior to TradFi Pangea Disclosure has become one of the stronger weekend crypto stories because it sits at the intersection of price action, market structure, and the kind of narrative that traders tend to follow closely when the broader news cycle slows down.

The key point is not simply that large LINK transfers moved to Binance deposit wallets. It is that the development gives the market a fresh way to judge whether the current crypto environment is being driven by genuine network adoption, regulatory progress, liquidity shifts, or short-term speculation.

The Main Details According to on-chain data, large LINK transfers moved to Binance deposit wallets. The report also notes that the transfers occurred before public Project Pangea disclosures.

That distinction matters because crypto markets often move first on headlines and only later separate durable developments from short-lived momentum. In this case, the verified boundaries are especially important: Do not accuse whales of illegal insider activity.

Market Context For traders, the story arrives at a moment when crypto assets are still trying to define a clearer direction. Bitcoin remains the anchor for broader sentiment, but altcoin narratives are increasingly being judged on their own fundamentals, including usage, liquidity, compliance, treasury activity, and developer progress.

That makes this development relevant beyond a single token or company. If the underlying trend proves durable, it could help shape how investors evaluate Chainlink, LINK, Whales, Binance, Lookonchain over the coming weeks. If it fades, however, it may become another example of a strong weekend narrative that struggled to translate into sustained market follow-through.

What To Watch Next The next important question is whether the market receives further confirmation from primary sources, dashboards, official announcements, or on-chain data. Follow-up disclosures, exchange data, governance updates, or wallet activity could all help clarify whether this is an isolated headline or the start of a broader theme.

Readers should also watch whether liquidity responds. In crypto, even fundamentally meaningful developments can fail to move prices if traders remain defensive, leverage is being unwound, or capital is rotating into other sectors. That is why this story should be read alongside broader market structure rather than in isolation.

This report is based on information shared by Lookonchain on X.

This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.

US spot Chainlink ($LINK) ETFs have recorded their first week of net outflows since the products launched, snapping a streak that lasted more than 200 consecutive trading days. The figure, roughly $220,000 in negative weekly flows, is modest in absolute terms, but the symbolic significance is hard to dismiss.

A Historic Streak Comes to an End Grayscale launched the first US spot Chainlink ETF, GLNK, on NYSE Arca on December 2, 2025. The ETF attracted $37 million in first-day inflows, and LINK rebounded more than 7% as investors responded to renewed institutional attention. From that point forward, the LINK spot ETF complex went on an almost unbroken run of positive flows.

Analyst data shows the outflow ended 203 days without a negative daily reading. The turning point came on June 22, when data shared by Arca showed the LINK spot ETF complex posting a daily net outflow of approximately $490,920. That reduced cumulative net inflows from about $123.82 million to $123.33 million, while total net assets fell to roughly $100.88 million, compared with more than $107 million one week earlier.

Institutional interest appears to be wavering, as evidenced by the first net capital outflow from LINK spot ETFs after a record-breaking streak of entries that lasted over half a year. LINK ETFs had been among the best-performing altcoin ETFs, though only Avalanche (AVAX) spot ETFs are yet to see outflows since their own debut.

Blip or Broader Shift? There are early signs the outflow may be temporary. According to SoSoValue data, Chainlink spot ETFs recorded net inflows of approximately $137,710 on the Tuesday following the outflow session. Although the inflow remains relatively small, it could signal improving investor sentiment if the trend continues over the coming days.

The broader price picture for $LINK remains under pressure. The asset has logged a year-to-date loss of nearly 45%, with price testing levels not seen with this much downside pressure in quite some time. LINK is currently trading below all its major moving averages, including the critical 200-day SMA near the $10.15 mark.

On the fundamental side, @Chainlink continues to expand its real-world footprint. The protocol announced the formation of a new working group involving multinational organizations across Europe and South Korea, collectively representing more than $10 trillion in assets under management, focused on modernizing foreign exchange infrastructure and evaluating a shift from traditional T+2 settlement to real-time T+0 settlement. Whether that kind of adoption news is enough to restore positive ETF flow momentum remains the key question heading into July.

Sources:
Brave New Coin: Chainlink Price Analysis, LINK Spot ETF Ends 203-Day Inflow Streak
Invezz: Can LINK Price Reclaim $8 as Chainlink Targets Real-Time FX Settlement?
FXStreet: Chainlink Price Forecast, FX Partnership Fails to Lift Sentiment

Chainlink recorded its two strongest network growth days of 2026 as fresh user participation accelerated despite subdued price action. 

According to Santiment, the network added 3,142 new wallets on the 25th of June, followed by 3,040 new wallets on the 26th of June, marking the highest daily expansion this year. 

The surge reflected growing adoption instead of recycled trading activity, as new addresses historically pointed to fresh capital entering the ecosystem. 

Interest also remained supported by Chainlink’s expanding institutional use cases, including tokenized real-world assets and data infrastructure. However, Chainlink continued trading near local lows despite the remarkable on-chain activity. 

The divergence suggested market participants had not fully priced in the increase in network usage, leaving room for price to respond if broader market conditions continued improving.

Source: Santiment/X Why have top traders stayed confidently long? Professional traders continued favoring bullish exposure even as LINK traded close to its recent lows. 

Binance’s Top Trader Long/Short Ratio showed 68.75% of accounts remained long, while only 31.25% held short positions, producing a 2.20 long-to-short ratio. Those figures indicated experienced participants had maintained confidence despite the recent weakness. 

Rather than reducing exposure during the decline, many traders appeared willing to position for a recovery from current levels. 

Their positioning aligned with the improving on-chain fundamentals, even though price had not yet reflected stronger adoption. Still, bullish positioning alone does not guarantee a rally. 

Buyers still required additional demand before LINK could reclaim higher resistance levels and confirm that sentiment had translated into sustained market strength.

Source: CoinGlas Double-bottom keeps recovery hopes alive for Chainlink Chainlink [LINK] defended its major demand zone near $7.23 after buyers repeatedly absorbed selling pressure around that level. 

The repeated defense created a developing double-bottom structure, which often signals exhaustion among sellers before a trend reversal emerges. 

Buyers also kept the price above the demand zone despite several rejection attempts, showing that demand remained active at lower prices. 

If that structure continues holding, the first upside objective would likely remain near $8.33, where previous resistance had limited earlier advances. 

The Relative Strength Index (RSI) stood at 33.82, remaining below the neutral 50 level despite recovering from oversold territory. A successful move beyond that barrier would then place $9.00 into focus. 

However, losing the current demand zone would invalidate the bullish setup and could expose LINK to another round of downside pressure.

Source: TradingView Final Summary Record wallet growth suggested adoption strengthened even while LINK traded near recent lows. Double-bottom support and bullish trader positioning could guide LINK toward higher resistance levels.

How MiCA is Testing Binance’s Four Competitive Advantages

Three Altcoin ETFs Stuck at ZeroSpot ETFs tied to @Polkadot ($DOT), @Hedera ($HBAR), and @avax ($AVAX) have recorded zero dollars in flows this week, extending what is now a multi-week streak of complete inactivity. The products are live, the wrappers exist, but institutional capital simply is not arriving.

The pattern points to a broader dynamic playing out across the altcoin ETF market. Data from mid-June 2026 showed U.S. spot altcoin ETF inflows concentrated on Hyperliquid, XRP, and Solana, while HBAR's ETF segment returned to flat, joining other altcoins with no incremental demand. This suggests investors are making high-conviction bets on select assets rather than seeking broad altcoin exposure.

Selective Capital, Not a Rising TideThe divergence is stark. On one side, XRP and Hyperliquid are capturing strong institutional inflows and price momentum. On the other, Polkadot, Avalanche, and Hedera are effectively frozen in terms of new capital interest. This is not a traditional altcoin season.

Beneath the macro weakness, a sharper trend is emerging: institutional investors are no longer treating altcoins as a single basket. Instead, they are selectively allocating capital into specific narratives, leaving others behind.

The lack of flows is notable given that these products have only recently come to market. Hedera already has a live product in Canary Capital's HBR ETF, which launched on October 28, 2025, and pulled in $93 million in inflows, holding 549 million HBAR. That early momentum has since faded. This stagnation indicates that institutional investors are not currently treating these assets as priority exposure targets, and that ETF listings alone are not enough to generate demand without a strong narrative or active accumulation strategy behind them.

Broader market structure is not helping. The macro environment plays a major role in suppressing altcoin flows, with Bitcoin dominance remaining close to 60% and the Altcoin Season Index sitting at just 24. Historically, this combination signals a market where capital is concentrated in Bitcoin rather than rotating into smaller assets.

With multiple altcoin ETF products now on the shelf and institutional interest concentrated in a handful of names, the question for $DOT, $HBAR, and $AVAX is whether a narrative catalyst or a broader rotation can eventually unlock the flows their products were designed to capture.

Sources
HokaNews: XRP and HYPE Crush Altcoin ETF Flows While DOT, LTC, AVAX Freeze
Yellow.com: 10 New Crypto ETF Filings Set To Reshape Wall Street In 2026
SoSoValue: HBAR Spot ETF Dashboard

Bitcoin and Stablecoins Become Lifelines After Venezuela Earthquakes

Sat 27 Jun 2026 ▪ 12 min read ▪ by Ghiles A.

Summarize this article with:

The refusal of Binance’s MiCA license in Greece shakes the European crypto market. As the world’s largest platform sees its access to the EU restricted, regulatory tensions rapidly intensify. Behind this decision, a larger power struggle pits institutions against crypto players, against the backdrop of European monetary transformation in a context of accelerating the digital euro and European financial control. Does the Binance case mark a turning point for the European financial system? 

In Brief Greece refuses Binance’s MiCA license, illustrating the tightening of access to the European crypto-asset market. Binance confirms the failure of its application, amid growing restrictions on its activities in Europe. Suspicions of political pressure arise, although no official involvement of the ECB has been demonstrated. Stablecoins and the digital euro emerge as major strategic issues for European authorities. The Binance case symbolizes the strengthening of European institutions’ control over digital finance. Binance Facing MiCA: A License Refusal Marking a Turning Point for Access to the European Market The refusal of Binance’s MiCA license in Greece stands as one of the most important events under the new European regulatory framework applied to cryptocurrencies. The platform, still the largest in the world with over 300 million users, aimed to obtain a regulatory passport allowing it to operate freely throughout the European Union.

Binance confirmed the failure of this procedure amid already tense circumstances marked by a message to its European users announcing the gradual suspension of certain activities on the continent. This internal communication reinforced the idea of a real regulatory turning point for the platform, forced to review its strategy facing MiCA’s requirements.

Binance informs its clients of the progressive restriction of its services starting July 1, 2026, while confirming that crypto-asset withdrawals will remain accessible. With this new framework, Europe intends to uniformly regulate crypto players, but in practice, it also becomes an extremely selective access filter for international platforms.

This refusal is not just about a simple administrative authorization. It highlights a structural evolution of the European market, where entry conditions are becoming increasingly strict for non-bank players and large global crypto platforms.

For Binance, this blockage occurs in a context where demand for crypto services remains high in Europe, but regulatory requirements are strongly tightening. The company thus finds itself in an environment where access to the European market now depends on full compliance with standards imposed by European institutions.

This first regulatory shock lays the foundation for the debate surrounding the Binance case today: an issue that goes far beyond a simple license and touches on the very place of crypto infrastructures in the European financial system.

The ECB Behind Binance’s Refusal? Suspicions Grow Around a Financial Control Strategy The refusal of Binance’s MiCA license in Greece continues to raise questions about the behind-the-scenes of this decision. According to information published by The Big Whale media, the crypto platform’s file was technically finalized before a turnaround occurred in the last stages of the regulatory process.

According to sources cited by the media, the Greek Capital Market Commission (HCMC) deemed Binance’s application complete and compliant with regulatory requirements. The officer in charge of anti-money laundering within the Greek regulator also maintained a favorable opinion regarding obtaining the license.

The forty-day review period provided by the MiCA regulation also expired on June 4 without any European objection. Binance had even anticipated a positive outcome by filing passporting notifications with the HCMC to prepare its expanded access to the European market.

The file thus seemed close to completion. The president of the DFSC, the coordinating body within the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), reportedly indicated during a phone call on June 2 that it was the “last call” regarding the Binance procedure.

The situation reportedly changed between June 7 and 15. The shift in position came after political pressure attributed to the European Central Bank. Christine Lagarde, ECB president, apparently told Greek Prime Minister Kyriakos Mitsotakis during a meeting held in May that Binance was not considered a desirable player for Europe.

The Greek finance minister, also president of the Eurogroup and favorable to granting the license, ultimately failed to convince the prime minister to continue the process. The national political context, with the possibility of early elections before the end of the year, also reportedly pushed Kyriakos Mitsotakis to avoid a direct confrontation with the ECB.

These revelations now fuel criticism from part of the crypto industry, which believes the Binance file goes beyond the regulatory issue and reveals a broader desire to control the evolution of the European digital financial sector.

Binance and Stablecoins: A Battle for Control of European Financial Infrastructures At the heart of questions lies the issue of stablecoins. According to sources cited by The Big Whale, the stance attributed to Christine Lagarde, long known for her criticisms of stablecoins and Bitcoin, is mainly related to Binance’s strategic role in this ecosystem.

As the world’s leading exchange platform, Binance also represents one of the main liquidity channels for stablecoins in Europe. A dominant position that could compete with the vision promoted by the ECB around the digital euro.

This situation appears paradoxical to some industry observers. Binance, primarily an exchange platform and distribution infrastructure, could theoretically contribute to the development of new digital financial uses, including around a future European digital currency.

“It’s paradoxical because Binance is an exchange platform, a distribution channel. It could quite support the digital euro project,” a source cited by The Big Whale reportedly explained.

This source also reportedly drew a parallel with the case of Revolut, which faced obstacles in the European Union due to concerns about its internal control mechanisms. According to this analysis, European institutions’ worry concerns less the existence of new financial actors than their ability to reach a sufficiently large size to compete with traditional structures.

“The concern is about the size of new entrants; Christine Lagarde would prefer traditional banks to manage the flows,” this source added.

This vision is also legally contested. An expert cited by The Big Whale believes that any political interference in a MiCA process would be a major problem, recalling that the ECB officially has no direct competence over crypto license granting.

“This is political interference in a process under the exclusive competence of an independent regulator,” this expert reportedly said. “The ECB has no authority over MiCA licenses.”

Although no direct intervention by the ECB has been officially demonstrated, the Binance case fuels a broader debate about Europe’s financial future. For its critics, the regulatory tightening against large crypto platforms occurs at the very moment the ECB is developing a public digital alternative with the digital euro.

“And It is adopted, digital euro is adopted, this is a historic day for Europe” These are the words with which Aurore Lalucq, chair of the European Parliament’s Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs, announced the official adoption of the digital euro project.

This timing does not go unnoticed. At a time when this declaration marks a major political acceleration around European digital currency, Binance, the world’s largest crypto platform with over 300 million users, finds itself blocked in Europe with the refusal of its MiCA license in Greece.

It is hard to see here a simple coincidence of timing. On one side, Europe pushes a digital monetary infrastructure entirely controlled by public institutions. On the other, it slows the expansion of a global private actor that has structured a large part of global crypto liquidity.

The digital euro is not a neutral evolution of payments. It is a profound transformation of the European financial architecture, harboring an unprecedented extreme control mechanism aimed at preserving a completely dysfunctional economic system rejected by citizens.

Binance, conversely, represents a parallel finance already functional on a global scale. An infrastructure independent of traditional banks, organizing crypto exchanges on a very large scale, largely escaping classical financial circuits.

It is precisely here that the case becomes strategic. The refusal of the MiCA license no longer looks like a simple regulatory decision. It fits into a larger dynamic where access to the European market is increasingly conditioned on integration into the institutional framework.

And What Next? We are clearly changing worlds.

The ECB and European institutions are very aware of what is happening: the European population is progressively turning away from the traditional financial system. Bitcoin is no longer a marginal asset. Cryptos are no longer a “speculative bet.” They have become a parallel infrastructure used by millions of users to store, transfer, and protect value outside the classical banking system.

And these figures are already known internally. Central banks and financial institutions closely monitor crypto-asset adoption, the explosion of Bitcoin wallets, and the rise of stablecoins as an alternative payment method. They know exactly that usage is not slowing down — it is accelerating.

It is in this context that everything aligns.

On one side, Binance — the world’s largest crypto platform, with over 300 million users — finds itself blocked in Europe with the refusal of its MiCA license. On the other, the ECB is pushing its digital euro at full speed, a programmable, centralized currency fully controlled by the institution.

This is not a simple coincidence of timing. It is a reaction.

A reaction to a simple reality: decentralized finance is gaining ground. Bitcoin becomes a global store of value. Stablecoins already dominate part of on-chain flows. Platforms like Binance have become critical infrastructures of global finance, outside the traditional banking system.

And facing this, the European response is clear: take back control.

MiCA is not only for “regulating.” It also serves to filter who can access the European financial system. And in practice, actors that are too big, too global, or too independent become potential systemic problems for institutions.

The result is brutal: while crypto adoption explodes among individuals and investors, institutions tighten access, harden rules, and accelerate their own centralized alternatives.

This is exactly where the clash becomes obvious. On one side, an open, global, borderless finance, driven by Bitcoin, cryptos, and platforms like Binance. On the other hand, European institutional finance is progressively closing in around the ECB and the digital euro. And the more crypto adoption continues to rise, the more regulatory pressure increases. What we observe today is not a simple regulatory adjustment. It is a control shift over the very architecture of European finance.

Maximize your Cointribune experience with our "Read to Earn" program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.

Join the program

A

A

Lien copié

Ghiles A.

Journaliste et rédacteur web passionné par l’univers des cryptomonnaies et des technologies Web3. J’y traite les dernières tendances et actualités afin de proposer un contenu de haute qualité à un large public du secteur.

Digital collectibles on Telegram seems to be in trend. Today, Telegram founder Pavel Durov recently purchased Plush Pepe for 7,500 GRAM on The Open Network before transferring the NFT to Adler Toberg, a designer closely associated with Telegram’s interface and gift ecosystem.

The move immediately caught attention across the TON community, not because of the price tag alone, but because it marks Durov’s third confirmed purchase of a TON collectible in just over six months.

Durov Keeps Returning To TON CollectiblesHis first known collectible purchase arrived in December 2025 with another Plush Pepe acquisition. A month later, he added a Telegram Gift NFT to the collection.

Three purchases in half a year may not sound dramatic in crypto terms. Yet for Telegram’s founder, the pattern suggests something more deliberate than occasional experimentation.

The message is subtle but difficult to ignore: Telegram’s collectible ecosystem appears to have personal engagement from the very top.

TON Infrastructure Keeps Moving FasterThe purchases also arrive as TON development accelerates rapidly. A recent protocol upgrade reportedly made the network ten times faster, pushing transaction finality into sub-second territory. Meanwhile, projects such as GOAT Gaming’s Underground Pepe have expanded Plush Pepes beyond collectibles and into active gaming assets with their own rewards economy.

Secondary market demand has followed closely behind. A Telegram username NFT recently changed hands for 500,000 USDT, highlighting growing interest in assets tied directly to Telegram’s ecosystem.

The story took another turn when Durov transferred Plush Pepe to Adler Toberg. Interestingly, the TON community had joked that the NFT would eventually end up with a Telegram employee as a workplace bonus. The joke landed surprisingly close to reality.

Within Telegram’s growing digital economy, collectibles increasingly appear to function as social currency, community markers, and signals of contribution.

For now, Plush Pepe may simply be another NFT transfer. But inside Telegram’s ecosystem, these assets are beginning to carry meaning far beyond ownership alone.

Story Ends Here

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

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

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

Read the Next News

According to data from the official @kaspaunchained explorer, Kaspa's Layer 1 blockchain has now processed roughly 2,347,000,000 transactions, placing it among the highest cumulative transaction counts of any major network. The figure represents a dramatic leap in activity for a proof-of-work chain that only launched in November 2021.

Built for Speed on a Proof-of-Work Foundation Kaspa's transaction throughput is underpinned by its blockDAG architecture, which uses the GHOSTDAG consensus protocol to allow parallel block creation rather than the single-block linear approach used by Bitcoin and Ethereum. Following the Crescendo hardfork earlier in 2025, Kaspa's block rate increased from one block per second to ten blocks per second, drastically boosting throughput. Since that upgrade, the network has operated at a steady 10 blocks per second, delivering 100-millisecond block times and sub-7-second finality.

The numbers behind that architecture are hard to ignore. On October 2, 2025, Kaspa set a new world record for proof-of-work throughput by reaching 5,584 transactions per second under real network conditions, surpassing its own previous record of 4,757 TPS achieved just days earlier. These figures were recorded on Kaspa's live mainnet under genuine transaction load, not testnet simulations. On October 5, 2025, the network processed 158,441,966 transactions within a single 24-hour window.

The Valuation Question: $770M Market Cap vs. 2.35 Billion Transactions Kaspa currently holds a live market cap of approximately $770 million, with a circulating supply of around 27.5 billion KAS coins out of a maximum supply of 28.7 billion. That places $KAS in a middle tier of Layer 1 assets by market value, despite its outsized on-chain activity relative to peers.

The supply picture is a key part of the valuation debate. Approximately 95.4% of Kaspa's 28.7 billion maximum supply is already in circulation, with emissions nearing zero by end-2026. New selling pressure primarily comes from miners selling rewards, not token unlocks. That dynamic could reduce dilution risk over time, but it also means the network must attract fresh demand to sustain price levels.

On the protocol side, a significant catalyst is imminent. The upcoming Toccata hard fork marks Kaspa's shift from a payments chain to a programmable Layer 1, introducing native KRC-20 token issuance, covenant programming via the SilverScript compiler, and zero-knowledge verification opcodes. The upgrade is seen as bullish for $KAS because it enables decentralized finance, NFTs, and complex applications to settle directly on Kaspa's secure base layer, potentially driving developer adoption and new utility.

Whether 2.35 billion transactions and an imminent programmability upgrade justify, or undervalue, a $770 million market cap is a question the market is still working through. The on-chain fundamentals are difficult to dismiss. The price action, for now, tells a more cautious story.

Sources:
Kaspa (KAS) Market Data, CoinMarketCap
Kaspa TPS Guide 2026, Our Crypto Talk
Kaspa Daily Transactions Surpass 150M, BSC News

https://football-italia.net/new-inter-star-sucic-interview-onboard/

In a crucial Group L match of the 2026 FIFA World Cup, Petar Sučić scored the opening goal for Croatia against Ghana in the 31st minute. The match, held at Lincoln Financial Field in Philadelphia, has significant implications for both teams’ prospects of advancing to the next stage. With this goal, Croatia leads 1-0, altering the dynamics of the game’s prediction markets. Both teams are vying for a spot in the Round of 32, with Croatia currently sitting at 3 points and Ghana at 4 points in the group standings. Sučić, known for his impressive physical performance, continues to be a pivotal figure in Croatia’s midfield strategy.

Advertisement

Key Takeaways Croatia’s current 1-0 lead appears to decrease the likelihood of a 0-0 final score, resolving some prediction markets to NO for that outcome. Sučić’s goal suggests potential changes in market pricing for scenarios involving Croatia’s advancement in the World Cup. The match’s outcome remains crucial for determining both teams’ chances of advancing in the tournament. What to Watch Observers will be keenly watching for any further scoring that could impact the prediction markets for the exact score. The match result will influence Croatia’s and Ghana’s positions in Group L and their potential advancement to the Round of 32. Further goals by either team could reshape market expectations and participant confidence in various outcome scenarios.

Get prediction market intelligence as a structured API feed. Early access waitlist.

Fifwc Hrv Gha 2026 06 27 Exact Score

Contract Odds Δ since publish Volume 24h June 27 1% — — View market → World Cup Group L Winner

Contract Odds Δ since publish Volume 24h $100,000 79% — — View market → $100,000 3.3% — — View market → $100,000 17.6% — — View market →

In This Article What Kalshi Actually Is and Why the Structure MattersThe Growth Numbers and the World Cup CatalystBull Case, Base Case, Bear Case on the Valuation Kalshi is in talks to raise fresh capital at a $40Bn valuation, according to a Financial Times report, nearly double the $22Bn price tag attached to its Series F round just weeks earlier in May 2026.

That $40Bn figure is nearly triple the $15Bn that rival Polymarket is reportedly targeting. The central tension this story forces onto the table is that a valuation that has moved roughly 20x in twelve months deserves more scrutiny than a funding press release typically gets.

The ongoing regulatory scrutiny of prediction markets is dominating the discussion around the Kalshi IPO, and until the situation is resolved, it is unlikely to become a publicly traded company.

What Kalshi Actually Is and Why the Structure Matters Kalshi is not a crypto exchange or a sportsbook. It is a federally regulated event-contracts exchange, operating under the oversight of the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Think of it as a stock exchange, except instead of shares in Apple, users trade binary contracts on the probability of real-world outcomes: whether the Federal Reserve raises rates, which party wins a Senate seat, or who advances in a tournament bracket.

That CFTC license is the structural asset that separates Kalshi from Polymarket, which runs on blockchain infrastructure, settles positions in cryptocurrency, and operates without US regulatory approval.

Polymarket is faster and more internationally accessible, but it cannot credibly pitch itself to institutional allocators who require regulated counterparties. That credibility gap is the direct cause of the $25Bn spread between the two companies’ current fundraising targets.

Co-founders Tarek Mansour, a former trader at Citadel Securities, and Luana Lopes Lara, a quantitative finance specialist and MIT classmate, launched Kalshi in 2018 and built the company around precisely this regulatory positioning.

On June 24, Mansour confirmed on CNBC that Kalshi is evaluating a potential IPO, though he said a public listing is unlikely before 2027. IPO speculation around Kalshi has been circulating since earlier this year, but this was the first on-record confirmation from the CEO.

⚡️ @Kalshi is negotiating a funding round at ~$40bn, per the FT, nearly double the $22bn valuation it secured in May.

CEO Tarek Mansour also said an IPO conversation at the company's scale is inevitable, though he ruled out a debut this year.

— Sandmark (@sandmark_news) June 25, 2026

DISCOVER: Best Meme Coin ICOs to Invest in 2026

The Growth Numbers and the World Cup Catalyst Monthly trading volume on Kalshi’s platform recently surpassed $17Bn, up from roughly $5Bn a year earlier, a more-than-threefold increase in twelve months.

Bernstein Research puts Kalshi’s May 2026 monthly volume at $17.9Bn, versus Polymarket’s $7.1Bn, giving Kalshi a 57% market share versus Polymarket’s 22.7%. On an annualized basis, Kalshi’s trading volume reached approximately $178Bn by April 2026.

The World Cup 2026 is a meaningful near-term accelerant. DeFi Rate estimates Americans will trade more than $2.5Bn across prediction markets on the 2026 FIFA World Cup, with $1.47Bn on Kalshi alone under the base-case scenario.

Bernstein has called the tournament a “watershed moment” for the sector. That kind of volume event helps justify momentum-based fundraising conversations, but it also concentrates near-term revenue into a window that ends when the final whistle blows.

Polymarket’s World Cup markets have drawn scrutiny over integrity and liquidity, a dynamic that further sharpens Kalshi’s regulatory differentiation argument.

The May 2026 Series F, a $1Bn round that drew Coatue Management, Sequoia Capital, Andreessen Horowitz, Morgan Stanley, and ARK Invest, valued the company at $22Bn. The current $40Bn target, if it closes in Q3 2026 as reported, would represent a near-doubling in a matter of weeks.

At roughly $2Bn in annualized revenue, that $40Bn figure implies approximately a 20x revenue multiple, a level that Finimize has noted: “prices it more like exchange infrastructure than a consumer app.”

(SOURCE: Kalshi)

EXCLUSIVE: Earn $10 USDC Via Binance Sign-Up

Bull Case, Base Case, Bear Case on the Valuation Bull case: The Supreme Court upholds CFTC pre-emption, Kalshi’s sports contracts survive intact, World Cup 2026 volume pushes monthly figures above $20 billion, and the company executes an IPO at exchange-infrastructure multiples that dwarf the $40Bn private price. The Polymarket gap widens further as institutional capital consolidates around the regulated venue.

Base case: Legal battles drag into 2027 without a definitive ruling, volume moderates post-World Cup, and Kalshi closes the round at or near $40Bn on the strength of its regulatory moat and long-term IPO narrative, but operates in a grey zone where state-level enforcement remains a live risk.

Bear case: A federal court ruling narrows CFTC pre-emption, forcing Kalshi to restrict or restructure sports contracts. Monthly volume drops sharply from its World Cup peak, annualized revenue falls well below $2Bn, and the 20x revenue multiple looks like a venture bet that mis-priced the regulatory outcome.

EXPLORE: Best Crypto Presales With Asymmetric Upside in the Current Market

#Altcoin News Today

Why you can trust 99Bitcoins

10+ Years

Established in 2013, 99Bitcoin’s team members have been crypto experts since Bitcoin’s Early days.

90hr+

Weekly Research

100k+

Monthly readers

50+

Expert contributors

2000+

Crypto Projects Reviewed

Follow 99Bitcoins on your Google News Feed

Get the latest updates, trends, and insights delivered straight to your fingertips. Subscribe now!

Subscribe now

Alex Ioannou

On-Chain Journalist

Alex is a seasoned cryptocurrency trader and market analyst with over seven years of active experience in the digital asset space. Since entering the markets in 2017, Alex has specialized in identifying emerging "meta" trends and high-volatility narratives. Notably, Alex... Read More

ARK Invest, led by Cathie Wood, took swift action in the crypto-linked stock market on June 26, ramping up its investments in the wake of notable declines. The most significant purchase targeted Coinbase, with ARK’s ARKK, ARKW, and ARKF funds acquiring a total of 68,366 shares. This buy is valued at approximately $10.19 million, based on Coinbase’s closing price of $149.06 per share.

In addition to the Coinbase acquisition, ARK Invest expanded its portfolio by purchasing Bullish and Robinhood shares on the same day. The company allocated $1.34 million for 57,511 Bullish shares and $1.21 million for 12,269 Robinhood shares. These moves came on the heels of recent pullbacks in stocks tied to the broader crypto sector.

The numbers reveal the volatility: On Thursday, Coinbase shares slid by 5.06 percent, Circle fell by 3.06 percent, and Robinhood recorded a loss of 3.83 percent. Bullish experienced the steepest drop, tumbling 6.77 percent. In the aftermath of these dips, ARK Invest’s aggressive purchases underscore its commitment to leveraging market weakness.

CompanyDaily changeARK transactionCoinbase5.06% drop68,366 shares, $10.19 millionBullish6.77% drop57,511 shares, $1.34 millionRobinhood3.83% drop12,269 shares, $1.21 millionARK Invest emphasizes that it adheres strictly to portfolio limitations, ensuring no position exceeds 10 percent of any fund.

Investment surge continues through the weekThese latest trades are a continuation of ARK Invest’s investment momentum earlier this week. Notably, the firm recently purchased an additional 111,799 Coinbase shares, a transaction worth close to $18 million.

Expanding beyond crypto, ARK Invest also increased its holding in SpaceX. The acquisition—210,121 SpaceX shares valued at roughly $32.5 million—was executed through ARK’s ETFs. SpaceX is widely recognized as Elon Musk’s privately held venture devoted to space and satellite technology.

All eyes on inflation and Federal Reserve policyCathie Wood has been sounding the alarm about mounting inflationary pressures. In a recent post on X, she remarked that her meetings in Asia and Europe suggest inflation expectations remain persistent. Her outlook comes as some investors brace for a potentially tougher policy stance from the US Federal Reserve.

Cathie Wood noted that her conversations in Asia and Europe point toward expectations that inflation could linger for longer.

Given ARK Invest’s fund-driven position limits, the firm’s portfolio composition is subject to realignment based on market movements. As turbulence continues across crypto-linked shares, further buying opportunities may emerge, keeping ARK’s next moves on investors’ radars.

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.

Key Takeaways BE shares retreated dramatically from recent peak levels following an extraordinary 1,300%+ advance over the trailing year Chevron and Microsoft’s partnership for natural gas turbine-powered data centers spotlighted alternative energy solutions competing with fuel cells Department of Energy’s $17.5 billion nuclear energy investment program introduced another competing power alternative Prominent short-seller Jim Chanos warned of bubble conditions in AI energy stocks; Barclays established a $276 target matching current price levels Company insiders liquidated more than $83 million in shares net during the past year, raising red flags Bloom Energy (BE) shares plummeted by as much as 18.49% during Friday’s trading session, bottoming at $252.02 intraday. This dramatic reversal occurred just one day after the stock reached its 52-week peak. Prior to the decline, BE had been changing hands near $309.

Bloom Energy Corporation, BE

The sharp correction arrives on the heels of an extraordinary rally that propelled BE upward by more than 1,300% during the previous twelve-month period. Such explosive gains create vulnerability when market sentiment shifts.

Profit-taking emerged as an initial driver behind the wave of selling. Following such a rapid ascent, minimal negative catalysts can trigger significant reversals.

However, several concrete developments accelerated the downturn. A newly announced partnership between Chevron and Microsoft revealed plans to utilize natural gas turbines — rather than fuel cell technology — to energize an AI data center facility in Texas. This agreement clearly demonstrates that Bloom Energy faces legitimate competitive threats within the AI infrastructure sector.

Simultaneously, the U.S. Department of Energy unveiled $17.5 billion in financing designated for nuclear energy projects this week. This substantial commitment introduces yet another viable energy alternative as technology giants evaluate power solutions for their expanding data center requirements.

Prominent Bear Voices Concerns Jim Chanos, a renowned short-seller with decades of experience, openly declared that AI energy stocks have entered bubble territory. His remarks resonated particularly strongly considering BE’s valuation had already exceeded most Wall Street analyst projections.

Barclays upgraded its price objective for BE to $276 on June 23rd while maintaining an Equal Weight stance. This target essentially capped the stock right at its then-current trading range, effectively challenging the bull thesis.

Broader market conditions offered little support. Both the S&P 500 and Nasdaq finished nearly unchanged that session, confirming this was a company-specific event rather than sector-wide weakness.

Competing fuel cell manufacturers experienced similar pressure. FuelCell Energy alongside Plug Power also faced selling activity in recent trading days, suggesting investors were broadly rotating away from high-flying AI energy momentum plays.

Executive Dispositions and Holder Activity Insider dispositions have been a persistent pattern. Company executives and directors collectively offloaded over $83 million worth of BE shares on a net basis throughout the past year. Board member John T. Chambers divested 55,000 shares on May 28th at a price of $297.69 each, generating proceeds exceeding $16.3 million. Insider Shawn Marie Soderberg liquidated 35,000 shares at $279.00 on April 29th.

Despite significant insider selling activity, institutional investors continue holding 77.04% of outstanding shares.

From an operational perspective, BE delivered impressive quarterly results most recently. The company posted earnings per share of $0.44, substantially surpassing the consensus forecast of $0.12. Quarterly revenue reached $751.05 million, dramatically exceeding analyst expectations of $539.94 million — representing 130.4% year-over-year growth.

Wesbanco Bank decreased its BE holdings by 43.9% during the first quarter, retaining 29,932 shares with an approximate value of $4.05 million.

Wall Street analysts maintain a Moderate Buy consensus rating on the stock, with an average price objective of $224.36. UBS maintains the most optimistic outlook with a $322.00 target.

BE’s upcoming earnings announcement is anticipated in late July.

Yuma, a Digital Currency Group-backed investment company, has launched a fund that gives institutional investors diversified exposure to the Bittensor ecosystem, as asset managers expand investment products tied to decentralized AI.

According to a Thursday announcement, the Yuma Total Market Fund provides exposure to Bittensor’s native TAO token and a basket of AI-focused subnets through a single investment vehicle. The strategy is intended to simplify access to the broader Bittensor ecosystem without requiring investors to select individual subnet tokens.

The fund launched with seed capital from an undisclosed anchor investor.

Bittensor is a decentralized network that supports the development of AI infrastructure and applications through specialized subnets spanning areas such as compute, marketplaces and identity. According to Yuma, the network's 128 subnets represent more than $900 million in combined value. However, data from network tracker Taostats shows a combined subnet value closer to $300 million.

TAO, the native token of the Bittensor ecosystem, has a market capitalization of nearly $2.4 billion. Source: CoinMarketCap

Institutional interest in the Bittensor ecosystem has grown alongside the network’s expanding subnet economy. In April, Grayscale increased TAO’s weighting in its Grayscale Decentralized AI Fund to 43% during the fund’s quarterly rebalance. TAO’s allocation has since fallen to about 20%, with Near Protocol's NEAR now comprising the fund’s largest holding at roughly 44%.

Asset managers are also seeking to broaden investor access to TAO. Bitwise filed for a TAO Strategy ETF with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in April, while Grayscale submitted an amended registration statement to convert its existing Bittensor Trust into a spot TAO exchange-traded fund that would list on NYSE Arca if approved.

Grayscale Bittensor Trust (TAO) application with the SEC. Source: SEC

Anthropic restrictions renew focus on decentralized AIThe case for decentralized AI, which distributes AI infrastructure and computing across blockchain-based networks rather than relying on a single provider, gained renewed attention after the US Commerce Department suspended public access to Anthropic’s Fable 5 and Mythos 5 models over national security and export control concerns.

At the time, Grayscale head of research Zach Pandl said the restrictions underscored the risks of relying on centralized AI providers. The government order limiting access to Anthropic’s Fable 5 and Mythos 5 “highlights the risks of centralized control of AI,” Pandl said. “We expect demand for decentralized AI, like Bittensor and its TAO token, to rise as investors seek alternatives.”

The restrictions appear to be easing. The Commerce Department restored access to Mythos 5 on Friday, and Axios reported Saturday that the Trump administration is expected to allow Anthropic to resume public access to Fable 5 as soon as next week.

Magazine: How AI just dramatically sped up the quantum risk for Bitcoin

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.

In brief Billionaire Jeremy Grantham is skeptical about crypto's place in the financial world, calling it "useless" and a "speculative mechanism." Grantham noted Bitcoin's recent fall despite strong economic conditions, highlighting its instability as a store of value. Bitcoin was recently trading more than 50% off its all-time high of $126,080. Billionaire investor Jeremy Grantham won’t be adding crypto to his portfolio any time soon.

Grantham, the co-founder of investment firm GMO, made his position on the asset class well known in an appearance on CNBC’s “Squawk Box” on Friday, where he called crypto a “useless, speculative mechanism.” 

“Years and years, decades and decades—it will dwindle away, I suspect,” Grantham said of its future. “Not with a bang, but with a whimper.” 

Grantham highlighted Bitcoin’s instability as a store of value, pointing to its recent drawdown—a 52% decline from its all-time high of $126,080 set last October, despite strong economic conditions and gold notching sizable gains during the same timeframe.

The commodity and leading store of value asset rose to a new all-time high above $5,500 per ounce earlier this year, but has since fallen more than 25% to trade at $4,096. 

“You can’t depend on it in that way,” he said of Bitcoin. “People don’t use it to make serious trades, they don’t use it to buy their dinner and pay at the supermarket.” 

Instead he said it “allows crooks to move money around without leaving a trace,” adding that it’s “brilliant at that.”

Grantham did concede that blockchain rails could play a transformative role in the future, but made clear his comments were about Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. 

Bitcoin has fallen 17% in the last month of trading, recently trading at $60,529.

Last month, billionaire investor Mark Cuban similarly criticized Bitcoin’s role as a store of value, pointing to its recent underperformance when compared to gold, saying “it is not the hedge I expected it to be.” Cuban added that he has sold most of his BTC as a result.

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

TL;DR

Bitcoin is consolidating near $60,326.78 according to the supplied market check.The highlighted setup focuses on Bitcoin trading close to long-term weekly moving-average boundaries.The setup remains market-analysis context. Do not call the 200-week SMA a guaranteed bottom or make definitive price-target claims. https://x.com/alicharts/status/2070783078969037193

Loading Tweet… View original post on X

Historical significance of the 200-week moving average as a long-term bitcoin boundary Bitcoin Trades Below 200-Week Moving Average as Historical Accumulation Signal Returns is one of the market setups traders are watching as crypto attempts to stabilize after recent volatility. The signal is useful because it points to a clear market level, flow, or positioning theme that can be checked against live data.

This setup surfaced through the X/social discovery lane, which is used as an idea sensor only. It should not be treated as a source of record on its own. The relevant data still needs to be checked against market charts, derivatives dashboards, or on-chain records before readers draw conclusions.

What the available data shows Bitcoin is consolidating near $60,326.78 according to the supplied market check. The highlighted setup focuses on Bitcoin trading close to long-term weekly moving-average boundaries.

That matters because crypto markets often move around concentrated liquidity zones, wallet flows, exchange positioning, and broader macro pressure before those signals become obvious in price. The strongest version of this setup is one where the highlighted level or flow continues to hold after live validation.

Why traders are watching this setup The setup gives traders a defined framework rather than a vague bullish or bearish view. For Bitcoin, the key question is whether the current signal reflects durable positioning or a short-lived reaction inside a volatile range.

Market structure remains fragile. Bitcoin direction, liquidity conditions, derivatives positioning, and macro volatility can still override otherwise clean technical or on-chain setups. That is why the signal is best understood as a watchpoint, not a prediction.

Risk and invalidation context Do not call the 200-week SMA a guaranteed bottom or make definitive price-target claims. The 200-week moving average has historically been watched by long-term accumulation-focused traders.

If the highlighted level fails, if the wallet flow turns out to be internal custody movement, or if derivatives positioning flips quickly, the interpretation should change. The article should therefore be read as a current market snapshot rather than a guarantee of future price action.

What to verify next The next step is external confirmation. For this setup, the validation path is: Verify the 200-week SMA line and Bitcoin's position relative to it on TradingView. Until that confirmation is reviewed, the setup should remain market-analysis context rather than a confirmed directional forecast.

Traders should also watch liquidity, volume, and daily close structure. Those factors will decide whether this signal becomes a durable theme or another short-lived reaction inside a volatile crypto session.

This report is based on publicly available market and on-chain data.

This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.

PANews June 27 news, The Kobeissi Letter published an analysis pointing out that since April, U.S. gold and Bitcoin-related ETFs have seen cumulative net outflows of approximately $12 billion, while semiconductor ETFs recorded net inflows of around $20 billion over the same period, with capital clearly concentrating in tech growth sectors. This trend further accelerated in mid-May: gold and Bitcoin ETF outflows more than tripled, while semiconductor ETF inflows doubled. In terms of market performance, the world’s largest gold ETF GLD has fallen about 13% since early April, and Bitcoin ETF IBIT dropped about 12% during the same period; in contrast, semiconductor ETFs SOXX and SMH rose about 81% and 60%, respectively. The analysis believes the current market is exhibiting a clear "risk appetite shift," with retail funds accelerating out of safe-haven assets and crypto assets into high-growth semiconductor and AI-related sectors, and driving the market in an unprecedented way.

Strategy has an office and business in Hangzhou, currently recruiting for technical positions

PANews, June 27 – According to crypto KOL AB Kuai.Dong’s post on X, Strategy maintains an office in China. The company was founded in 2007, originally doing traditional software outsourcing. Although it later transformed into the world’s largest bitcoin reserve company, this business and office location are still retained in Hangzhou. Current recruitment platforms show the company is still hiring, mainly for technical positions.

Share to:

Author: PA一线

This content is for market information only and is not investment advice.

Follow PANews official accounts, navigate bull and bear markets together

Recommended Reading

Related Topics

PANews, June 27 news, Bitcoin treasury company ProCap Financial Chairman Anthony Pompliano posted on X platform, saying that allegedly Mythos breached the National Security Agency (NSA) classified systems within hours, which will further intensify public concerns about AI risks and push for more regulatory intervention, while the more important signal released is: AGI (Artificial General Intelligence) is actually approaching. Current AI technology not only exceeds human capabilities, but is also self-training and improving at incomprehensible speeds, "humans cannot match these models."

Anthony Pompliano added that each model upgrade brings higher expectations, and people have gradually developed "aesthetic fatigue" towards major technological breakthroughs, which further strengthens confidence in continuous technological progress. Although it is necessary to face the negative impacts brought by AI, this is still one of the most exciting periods in human history, and society may ultimately become the biggest beneficiary. Inflation above 9% has led many to form wrong expectations, and whenever market volatility appears, they predict "high inflation returns." Factors such as tariffs and wars may indeed bring inflationary pressures, but inflation above 9% is at an extremely rare level and is unlikely to recur over the long term in the future.

TL;DR

The supplied setup highlights resistance near the $61,000 area and support/liquidation interest around $58,200.Bitcoin remains compressed inside a relatively tight range while leveraged traders cluster on both sides.The setup remains market-analysis context. Do not predict which side of the range will break first. https://x.com/CryptoDad_DDC/status/2070491689035190665

Loading Tweet… View original post on X

Bitcoin range compression and liquidation clusters around key levels Bitcoin Trapped as Liquidation Maps Spot Major Resistance and Support Clusters is one of the market setups traders are watching as crypto attempts to stabilize after recent volatility. The signal is useful because it points to a clear market level, flow, or positioning theme that can be checked against live data.

This setup surfaced through the X/social discovery lane, which is used as an idea sensor only. It should not be treated as a source of record on its own. The relevant data still needs to be checked against market charts, derivatives dashboards, or on-chain records before readers draw conclusions.

What the available data shows The supplied setup highlights resistance near the $61,000 area and support/liquidation interest around $58,200. Bitcoin remains compressed inside a relatively tight range while leveraged traders cluster on both sides.

That matters because crypto markets often move around concentrated liquidity zones, wallet flows, exchange positioning, and broader macro pressure before those signals become obvious in price. The strongest version of this setup is one where the highlighted level or flow continues to hold after live validation.

Why traders are watching this setup The setup gives traders a defined framework rather than a vague bullish or bearish view. For Bitcoin, the key question is whether the current signal reflects durable positioning or a short-lived reaction inside a volatile range.

Market structure remains fragile. Bitcoin direction, liquidity conditions, derivatives positioning, and macro volatility can still override otherwise clean technical or on-chain setups. That is why the signal is best understood as a watchpoint, not a prediction.

Risk and invalidation context Do not predict which side of the range will break first. Liquidity concentration can increase the risk of sharp wick moves in either direction.

If the highlighted level fails, if the wallet flow turns out to be internal custody movement, or if derivatives positioning flips quickly, the interpretation should change. The article should therefore be read as a current market snapshot rather than a guarantee of future price action.

What to verify next The next step is external confirmation. For this setup, the validation path is: Check CoinGlass or Hyblock liquidation heatmaps for active clusters near $58,200 and $61,000. Until that confirmation is reviewed, the setup should remain market-analysis context rather than a confirmed directional forecast.

Traders should also watch liquidity, volume, and daily close structure. Those factors will decide whether this signal becomes a durable theme or another short-lived reaction inside a volatile crypto session.

This report is based on publicly available market and on-chain data.

This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.

TL;DR

Mysten Labs’ Hashi framework aims to bring native Bitcoin collateral into Sui DeFi without synthetic wrappers. The global testnet is expected in July 2026. SwissBorg, Cumberland, Fluid, BitGo and Ledger are listed as institutional backers. Native Bitcoin Utility On Sui: Why This Story Matters Institutions Back Sui’s Hashi to Bridge Bitcoin DeFi as Testnet Launch Approaches has become one of the stronger weekend crypto stories because it sits at the intersection of price action, market structure, and the kind of narrative that traders tend to follow closely when the broader news cycle slows down.

The key point is not simply that hashi enables native Bitcoin collateral in Sui-based DeFi protocols without synthetic wrappers. It is that the development gives the market a fresh way to judge whether the current crypto environment is being driven by genuine network adoption, regulatory progress, liquidity shifts, or short-term speculation.

The Main Details According to the official source material, Hashi enables native Bitcoin collateral in Sui-based DeFi protocols without synthetic wrappers. The report also notes that a global testnet is scheduled for July 2026.

That distinction matters because crypto markets often move first on headlines and only later separate durable developments from short-lived momentum. In this case, the verified boundaries are especially important: Do not state the testnet is already live on mainnet.

Market Context For traders, the story arrives at a moment when crypto assets are still trying to define a clearer direction. Bitcoin remains the anchor for broader sentiment, but altcoin narratives are increasingly being judged on their own fundamentals, including usage, liquidity, compliance, treasury activity, and developer progress.

That makes this development relevant beyond a single token or company. If the underlying trend proves durable, it could help shape how investors evaluate Sui, SUI, Bitcoin, Hashi, DeFi over the coming weeks. If it fades, however, it may become another example of a strong weekend narrative that struggled to translate into sustained market follow-through.

What To Watch Next The next important question is whether the market receives further confirmation from primary sources, dashboards, official announcements, or on-chain data. Follow-up disclosures, exchange data, governance updates, or wallet activity could all help clarify whether this is an isolated headline or the start of a broader theme.

Readers should also watch whether liquidity responds. In crypto, even fundamentally meaningful developments can fail to move prices if traders remain defensive, leverage is being unwound, or capital is rotating into other sectors. That is why this story should be read alongside broader market structure rather than in isolation.

This report is based on information from Sui network data and Mysten Labs documentation.

This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.

Jeremy Grantham, co-founder and chief investment strategist of GMO LLC, during an interview on an episode of Bloomberg Wealth with David Rubenstein in Boston, Massachusetts, US, on Thursday, Aug. 17, 2023. Grantham started one of the world's first index funds in the early 1970s and in 2011 he was included in the 50 Most Influential ranking of Bloomberg Markets magazine. Photographer: Vanessa Leroy/Bloomberg

© 2023 Bloomberg Finance LP

Jeremy Grantham went on CNBC and said his Bitcoin prediction was that it would eventually “dwindle away with a whimper.” Joe Kernen pushed back, the conversation became personal, and the clip quickly traveled across the internet.

That is hardly surprising. Put Jeremy Grantham, Bitcoin, CNBC, a prediction of zero and two strong personalities in the same conversation, and the internet will do the rest. I watched the exchange differently. I was less interested in whether Grantham likes Bitcoin than in whether his prediction was remotely useful to an investor.

He may ultimately be right. Bitcoin may gradually lose relevance, collapse in value, or become a historical reminder of what can happen when speculation, liquidity, and collective belief meet at the same time. Grantham has spent decades studying bubbles, and dismissing his argument simply because you own Bitcoin would be foolish. But when the timeframe is “years and years, decades and decades,” we are no longer talking about an investment call. We are discussing an opinion that can remain technically alive for the rest of someone’s career.

I have spent over 30 years in markets, and “eventually” is one of the most expensive words in investing. You can be completely right about the destination and still lose a fortune on the journey. A bubble can grow larger. An expensive asset can become pricier. A poor business can survive much longer than expected, and a speculative asset can continue attracting capital long after intelligent people have declared it finished.

That is the problem with dramatic predictions. They make excellent television because they sound decisive. Portfolios require something much harder: a valuation, a catalyst, a timeframe, a sensible position size and an honest understanding of what would prove the thesis wrong.

MORE FOR YOU

Grantham’s Bitcoin Prediction Has No Expiry DateEvery speculative boom eventually ends. The difficulty lies in knowing when to sell, how to sell, and at what price to sell. An investor who correctly identifies a bubble five years early may still lose more money than the investor who never recognized it at all. A stock believed to be worth $20 can trade at $50, then $100, before the market finally agrees. A short seller can be fundamentally right and still end up financially ruined if they time it wrong. Timing is a major aspect of an investment thesis. It is part of the thesis. Grantham’s argument allows Bitcoin to decline over decades. That may eventually make the prediction look remarkably perceptive, but it offers almost no guidance to an investor today.

Should Bitcoin be shorted now? If so, how large should the position be? What happens if it doubles first? Would a move to a new high invalidate the argument or merely make the bubble larger? How long should an investor continue funding the position while waiting for the eventual whimper? Those are not technical questions. They determine whether the view can be turned into an actual return. Bitcoin could ultimately disappear and still rise substantially before it does. It could remain volatile, divisive, and difficult to value for decades while attracting institutional investors, governments, and individuals who see it as an alternative monetary asset.

Saying that something eventually goes to zero is easy. The challenge is surviving everything it does before reaching zero.

A Bitcoin Prediction Is Not an Investment ThesisThe investment industry often confuses a memorable opinion with an investable idea, but they are not the same. They are not the same thing. An investable thesis should explain what is mispriced, why the market is wrong, what changes next, and how long that change may take. It should identify the catalyst and the major risks. Most importantly, it should explain what evidence would show that the original analysis has failed. A prediction can avoid all of that. It can remain open indefinitely, which makes it almost impossible to disprove. That is why forecasts work so well on television. The audience remembers the destination but rarely audits the journey. Someone predicts a market crash, the market rises for another five years, and then eventually declines, and the original forecast is presented as a remarkable call.

But what happened to the investor who acted five years earlier? Suppose you agree entirely with Grantham and believe Bitcoin will eventually be worth nothing. How do you profit from that belief? Shorting it exposes you to an asset capable of violent upward moves. Buying put options forces you to choose an expiry date, which is precisely what the original prediction avoids. Refusing to own Bitcoin may be a perfectly sensible portfolio decision, but avoiding an asset is not the same as generating a return from its collapse. You can therefore be philosophically correct and financially unrewarded.

This distinction applies far beyond Bitcoin. Investors have spent years predicting the demise of expensive technology stocks, housing markets, government bonds, currencies, and entire industries. Some of those predictions were directionally correct. Many were too early, too vague, or too difficult to implement to create any value. Markets do not pay for eventual intellectual vindication. They pay investors who identify a mispricing and express it in a way that can survive until the thesis works.

Why This Bitcoin Prediction Makes Great TelevisionThe Grantham–Kernen exchange is spreading because it was not a dry conversation about valuation. It became a confrontation. Grantham represented the traditional bubble investor: skeptical of an asset that produces no earnings, pays no dividend, and generates no free cash flow. Kernen represented the other side: investors who believe that traditional valuation methods cannot dismiss Bitcoin’s scarcity, network, and challenge to conventional money. Both sides believe the other is missing something obvious.

That creates excellent television and even better social media. People are not only debating Bitcoin. They are defending identities, generations, and competing ideas about what money and value actually mean. The strongest media moments reduce complicated issues to opposing camps. Bitcoin is either digital gold or worthless. Grantham is either a wise veteran warning investors again or a permanent bear who fails to understand a new financial system. Real investing is rarely that clean.

I do not need to decide that Bitcoin is either the future of money or destined for zero. I need to decide whether the expected return justifies the risk at the price available today. That is a less dramatic question, but it is the one that matters. The absence of traditional cash flow makes Bitcoin difficult to value, but difficulty does not remove the need for discipline. It increases it. Position size, entry price, liquidity, and the ability to withstand volatility become increasingly important. An investor does not need to accept Grantham’s final conclusion to recognize the risks. Equally, an investor does not need to believe in Bitcoin to understand that aggressively betting against it could be disastrous.

The Better Question Behind Grantham’s Bitcoin PredictionGrantham may eventually be proven right. His criticism of Bitcoin’s utility, volatility, and lack of traditional intrinsic value deserves serious consideration. But the more useful question is not whether Bitcoin will still exist in several decades. The more useful question is what the current price assumes, what could change those assumptions, and whether the likely return compensates investors for the risks. That is the same process I apply to stocks, spinoffs, restructurings, and activist situations. What is the asset worth? Why might the market be wrong? What is the catalyst? Who or what controls the outcome? How much time does the thesis require, and what would show that it is failing? Those questions turn an opinion into a process.

The market loves bold predictions because they produce heroes and villains. Investors should focus on whether they can translate the prediction into a position they can afford to hold. Grantham may be right about the eventual destination. But being right about where something ends means little if you cannot explain what happens next or survive the path required to reach that destination.

That is the difference between commentary and investing. Commentary needs a strong opinion. Investing needs a price, a catalyst, a timeframe, and a clear view of risk.

The Bitcoin prediction of “Eventually” provides none of them.

XRP is seeing growing activity in the derivatives market despite recent price weakness. 

The development suggests it could be setting up for a reversal once bearish sentiment reaches an extreme. The token is trading at $1.05, up 2.45% over the past 24 hours. 

However, XRP is still down 8% over the past week and has fallen 43% since the start of the year, reflecting broader weakness across the crypto market.

Open Interest Rises as Price Declines XRP’s open interest has continued to rise even as its price trends lower. Over the past day, XRP open interest rose by 1.13%, reaching $2.37 billion. This figure suggests traders are opening new leveraged positions during the decline. Notably, open interest options dipped 67% to $21.66 million while options volume surged 16% to $5.4 million.

XRP | CoinGlass The accompanying chart shows XRP futures open interest steadily increasing over recent months. Meanwhile, the token has continued to post lower highs and lower lows.

Funding rates have also turned negative. This means short traders are paying long traders to keep their positions open, a sign that bearish sentiment is becoming more dominant in the perpetual futures market.

Negative Funding Could Support a Rebound Rising open interest and negative funding are creating conditions that may support a potential reversal. The market appears to be “charging up for a reversal,” one analyst observed. However, buyers may need to regain momentum before bulls can take control. 

Negative funding rates can sometimes precede sharp rallies. If the price suddenly rebounds, heavily leveraged short positions may be forced to close, triggering a short squeeze that pushes prices even higher.

Possible Sweep to $0.95 Despite the longer-term bullish outlook, XRP could first revisit $0.95. Many market watchers, including Ali Martinez, have forecast a fall to this level and even lower.

The idea is that the market may target liquidity below current prices before reversing. Such liquidity sweeps happen when the price briefly moves into areas with large clusters of stop-loss orders. This can flush out excess leverage before a new trend begins.

If buyers step in after that move and overall sentiment improves, XRP could be positioned for a stronger recovery.

The Case for Deeper Bear Markets Notably, XRP is down about 69% from its July 2025 peak of $3.66. While significant, this decline is milder than past bear markets, which saw drops of 85%–96%, such as in the 2013–2014 and 2018–2020 cycles.

If XRP matched its worst historical drop (96%), the price could fall near $0.15, about 87% below current levels. Ali Martinez recently floated this target as a possibility, which would place XRP at a level last seen in 2017.

Regardless of how low the coin may go, many believe buying XRP under $1 offers significant opportunity for the next bull run.

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

Jun 27, 2026, 7:58 a.m.

2 min read

Summary

Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse said he remains bullish on bitcoin but argued that Michael Saylor’s preferred-share funding model for buying the token has hurt the broader crypto market.Garlinghouse criticized Strategy’s STRC preferred stock, which carries an 11.5% dividend and is designed to trade near $100, as a “damning indictment” of the strategy after it fell about 25% below par to a record low.The pressure on Strategy’s model has intensified as bitcoin slipped below $59,000.Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse said he remains bullish on bitcoin but that Michael Saylor's approach to funding bitcoin purchases has damaged the broader crypto market, in a CNBC interview on Friday, as the preferred stock at the center of Strategy's model fell to a record low.

"Financial engineering does not drive long-term value," Garlinghouse said, arguing that the lasting value of any digital asset comes from its usefulness. "Team Michael Saylor wasn't focused on the right stuff and that has hurt the overall market."

He separated that from his view on the asset itself, saying he is still bullish on bitcoin.

Garlinghouse's target was the machine Strategy has used to accumulate bitcoin. For about a year, the company has issued preferred shares, a class of stock that pays a fixed dividend, to raise cash for more bitcoin.

Its STRC share carries an 11.5% annual dividend and is engineered to trade near $100. Garlinghouse pointed to STRC trading about 25% below that level as a "damning indictment" of the strategy.

The stock hit a record low on Thursday, falling as much as 26% below par, while Strategy's common stock dropped to its lowest since February 2024 and closed around $82 on Friday, all as bitcoin fell below $59,000.

The criticism lands on a week of mounting pressure on the model.

CryptoQuant said in a report that Strategy should pause its bitcoin buying and rebuild its cash reserves, noting the cushion behind STRC's dividends has thinned from more than seven years of coverage to about 14 months. When STRC trades below $100, Strategy's engine for issuing shares and buying bitcoin stalls, which is why the company has paused it.

Benchmark-StoneX analyst Mark Palmer argued that Strategy's funding engine has become "less efficient" rather than broken, and rejected comparisons between STRC and assets that have collapsed outright.

12345678910

Equities on Crypto Rails: A Platform Comparison

Equities on Crypto Rails: A Platform Comparison

US equities on crypto rails: access is easy, on-chain composability is the real test. Only Binance and Backpack deliver both - and only Binance at scale.

Jun 26, 2026

US equities on crypto rails: access is easy, on-chain composability is the real test. Only Binance and Backpack deliver both - and only Binance at scale.

Why it matters:

US equities on crypto rails: access is easy, on-chain composability is the real test. Only Binance and Backpack deliver both - and only Binance at scale.

The 90-day moving average for the XRP Profit/Loss Ratio has dropped to lows the market last saw during the 2022 bear cycle.

This comes as XRP witnesses deeper declines alongside the rest of the crypto market. Specifically, the price collapsed to a new yearly low of $1.0079, dangerously close to losing the $1 psychological mark. Despite recovering to $1.05 at press time, XRP is still down 8% in the past week.

XRP Realized P/L Ratio Hits 2022 Bear Market Lows According to data provided by market intelligence resource Glassnode, this sustained price decline has now pushed the 90-day moving average (MA) for the XRP Profit/Loss Ratio to 0.33, a low the asset last recorded in August 2022, during one of its most devastating bear markets.

For context, the Realized Profit/Loss Ratio compares the total value of coins sold at a gain with those sold at a loss over a specific period. A reading above 1 shows that profits outweigh losses, while a reading below 1 indicates that losses exceed profits.

The 0.33 reading indicates that, among investors who are actively selling, losses significantly outweigh profits. Specifically, for every $1 in losses that investors realize, only $0.38 in profits is being taken. Notably, this does not refer to total selling volume, but to the balance between profitable and unprofitable transactions.

XRP Realized Profit/Loss Ratio | Glassnode Each new drop in the ratio shows that more investors are exiting their positions at a loss, and profit-takers no longer generate enough gains to balance out those losses.

Historical Data Interestingly, despite the ongoing downtrend triggering severe declines as far back as October 2025, the XRP Profit/Loss Ratio did not slip below the 1 baseline until April 2026, as XRP struggled around the $1.3 to $1.4 price level.

By early June, the ratio had collapsed to 0.38, seeing a steep crash after April. XRP has since given up the $1.3 to $1.4 price range, retracing to retest the $1 psychological level. This downward price action pushed the Profit/Loss Ratio to the current reading of 0.33.

During the 2022 bear market, this metric did not slip below 1 until after the Terra ecosystem collapse in May, which led to losses across the crypto market. After reaching 0.33, the metric continued to decline, hitting a low below 0.2, as XRP’s price dropped to $0.31 by June 2022.

While multiple XRP community members believe the recent reading may point to a potential bottom, it is important to note that XRP remained under pressure for months even after the ratio dropped below 1 in 2022. Notably, it wasn’t until September 2022 that the metric recovered above 1, and a full-blown rally only emerged in November 2024.

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