Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

Circle just pulled a quarter-billion dollars worth of USDC off Ethereum and stamped out $910 million in fresh tokens on Solana. Think of it as moving cash between registers at a store, except the registers are blockchains and the cash is the second-largest stablecoin in crypto.

The net effect: a $660 million liquidity swing toward Solana.

How the burn-and-mint machine works Circle manages USDC supply through what it calls the Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol, or CCTP. The mechanics are straightforward: burn tokens on one chain, mint an equivalent amount on another. Every USDC in circulation is supposed to be backed 1:1 by cash and cash equivalents, so these operations don’t change the total supply. They just change where the tokens live.

Advertisement

The $250 million Ethereum burn and $910 million Solana issuance fit a pattern that’s been accelerating throughout 2026. Earlier in June, Circle minted $1 billion USDC on Solana in a single day. Days before that, there was a $500 million Solana mint. The cumulative gross issuance on Solana has been approaching $57 billion for the year.

USDC’s total circulation sits at approximately $73.6 billion as of late June 2026. The stablecoin is now native on over 30 networks.

Why the migration matters The institutional angle has gotten more concrete this month. Circle expanded its partnership with BNY Mellon in June 2026, enabling direct mint and burn capabilities through the bank’s custody services. That means institutional clients can now create and destroy USDC without going through Circle’s standard pipeline.

What this means for investors For Solana, more USDC on the network means deeper liquidity pools, tighter spreads on decentralized exchanges, and more attractive conditions for both traders and protocol developers.

The BNY Mellon partnership adds another layer to consider. Institutional access to direct minting and burning means that large players can respond to market conditions faster than ever.

Tether’s USDT still dominates overall stablecoin market share, but USDC’s multi-chain expansion and emphasis on full reserve transparency have carved out a distinct institutional niche. The $73.6 billion in circulation represents significant ground gained.

The risk worth flagging: concentrated minting on any single chain creates dependency. If Solana experienced a significant outage or security event, having tens of billions of USDC sitting on the network would create redemption pressure that could test Circle’s operational capacity.

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

The Solana influencer has sent roughly $6.7M in tokens to more than 700 wallets onchain, even as he controls about 60% of the supply.

Crypto influencer Ansem has airdropped about $7 million worth of the $ANSEM memecoin to Solana users, and said he will keep distributing tokens as the price rises in a push to grow the holder base to 1 million wallets.

Ansem, who posts under the handle @blknoiz06 and counts close to 1 million followers on X, has sent roughly $6.7 million in $ANSEM to more than 700 wallets, onchain analytics firm Bubblemaps said in a post on X. One wallet received more than $1 million, six received more than $100,000 each, 40 received more than $10,000, 300 received more than $1,000, and 400 received more than $150, according to Bubblemaps. The token currently has about 25,000 holders, Ansem said, short of the 1 million he is targeting.

The campaign is a live test of one of crypto's most contested ideas: that a person's online reputation can be packaged into a tradable asset. $ANSEM has no product, revenue or roadmap, and its value rests almost entirely on the attention of the influencer whose name it carries. That makes the airdrop both a marketing engine and a concentration risk, because the same wallet funding the giveaways still holds the majority of the supply.

Fee Redistribution“Sent out another round of the airdrops, have airdropped about ~$7M so far, will do more as market cap goes higher," Ansem wrote on X. “Goal is to get $ANSEM to 1M holders, currently at ~25k holders.”

Ansem has framed the distributions as a way to return the creator fees he earns on the memecoin launchpad pumpfun to holders, rather than as a token sale. He did not deploy $ANSEM himself. A separate wallet created the token on pumpfun around June 17 and transferred the bulk of the supply to Ansem's address, onchain tracker Lookonchain said. That deployer spent about $6,300 to launch the token, bought 792.45 million $ANSEM, sent 650 million to Ansem and later sold the rest for about $11,800, netting roughly $5,500, according to Lookonchain.

Ansem now controls the largest single position. He holds about 604 million tokens, or roughly 60% of the supply, data from Bubblemaps how.

Token Touched a Nine-Figure Valuation$ANSEM, nicknamed "The Black Bull," was trading at about $0.10 with a circulating market cap near $43 million and a fully diluted valuation of about $105 million as of 5:30 p.m. ET on June 29, according to CoinGecko. The token rose about 22% over the prior 24 hours, compared with a 7% gain in Solana's SOL and a 1% rise in Bitcoin.

The token hit a record of about $0.12 earlier on June 29, CoinGecko data show, briefly pushing its fully diluted valuation above $120 million. Reported market caps for the token have varied widely depending on the source and whether the calculation uses circulating or total supply.

Reputation CoinsThe airdrop has reopened a debate over so-called key-opinion-leader, or KOL, coins, tokens tied to an individual's social following rather than a product.

“$ANSEM is a fascinating example of tokenized attention and reputation," DeFi researcher Ignas wrote on X. He argued that influencer coins are surprisingly less reviled than other ways creators monetize an audience, because buyers opt in. “You can opt out and simply not buy. If you bought and lost money, all you can blame is yourself," he wrote, adding that most such tokens will fail because they have "no revenue or business tied to them."

Ignas also flagged a tension in the airdrop model. The tokens being distributed, he noted, are "coming from someone else's degen pockets" — funded by new buyers rather than business cash flow — and warned that recasting a memecoin as a "revenue token" is "usually bad news" for the price.

Crypto analyst 0xNairolf called the token "a perfect reminder that one of the biggest unsolved markets in crypto is letting people speculate on other people," predicting that "whoever cracks that is the next pumpfun."

The episode lands as Solana's memecoin activity recovers. The Defiant has reported on a broader revival in low-cap Solana tokens, and influencer-driven coins have repeatedly drawn scrutiny, from Iggy Azalea's MOTHER to the contested NEIRO listings that Ansem himself helped move.

Polarizing FigureAnsem is a polarizing figure. In October 2024, onchain investigator ZachXBT publicly accused him of promoting a series of low-cap Solana memecoins in a way that resembled pump-and-dump dynamics, arguing his reach could leave followers holding losses. Ansem rejected the criticism, defending his early calls on tokens such as Dogwifhat. The accusations were not accompanied by formal findings and remain unproven.

Concentration is the more immediate concern. With roughly 60% of the supply in a single wallet, the holder doing the airdropping also has the ability to move the price sharply.

Ansem has said further airdrops will follow as the market cap climbs, tying continued distributions to the token's price.

Think of a mid-sized Japanese hotel company pivoting to become one of the world’s largest corporate Bitcoin holders. That’s Metaplanet in a nutshell.

Metaplanet (TSE: 3350) now counts approximately 212,571 domestic shareholders, a figure that works out to roughly 0.2% of Japan’s population. That shareholder base grew 66% in recent months.

From 10,000 to 212,000 shareholders in two years When Metaplanet launched its Bitcoin treasury strategy in April 2024, the company had around 10,000 shareholders. It blew past 64,000 on the way to today’s 212,571 figure. The company’s long-term target is exceeding one million shareholders.

Advertisement

Metaplanet is essentially trying to redirect capital toward Bitcoin through the comfort of a traditional stock listing. Strategy, formerly MicroStrategy, pioneered this model in the US.

The company now holds 40,177 BTC, making it Asia’s largest corporate Bitcoin holder and the third-largest among public companies globally, behind Strategy and Twenty One Capital. It purchased 5,075 BTC in Q1 2026 alone as part of its ongoing accumulation push.

Building the infrastructure for Bitcoin yield products In June 2026, the company acquired Siiibo Securities for approximately $13 million. The deal gives Metaplanet a Type I financial instruments business license, which is the regulatory key needed to sell Bitcoin-linked yield products directly to Japanese investors.

The company is also pursuing a $5.4 billion equity facility, denominated at roughly 770.9 billion yen. That capital is earmarked for buying more Bitcoin. Metaplanet’s stated ambition is to accumulate up to 210,000 BTC in total, which represents 1% of Bitcoin’s total 21 million supply cap.

What this means for investors The dilution risk is a key consideration. A $5.4 billion equity facility means Metaplanet will be issuing a lot of new shares. If Bitcoin’s price rises fast enough, the BTC-per-share metric improves. If Bitcoin stalls or drops, shareholders absorb dilution without the offsetting gain.

If Metaplanet successfully launches Bitcoin yield products for Japanese retail investors via the Siiibo Securities acquisition, it creates a revenue stream beyond simple price appreciation, potentially differentiating it from pure treasury plays.

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

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.

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.

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.

BNY has added USDC minting, redemption, custody and transfer services to its Digital Asset Custody platform, giving institutional clients direct access to Circle’s stablecoin through the bank.

Summary

BNY has enabled institutional clients to mint, redeem, store and transfer USDC directly through its Digital Asset Custody platform. The bank has expanded its role with Circle beyond safeguarding USDC reserves by adding client-facing stablecoin services. BNY joins Invesco, JPMorgan and State Street as major financial institutions rolling out products tied to stablecoin reserves and infrastructure. According to BNY, the update allows clients to turn U.S. dollars into USDC and redeem the stablecoin back into dollars from within its platform. The bank said clients can also hold and transfer USDC through its digital asset custody service, making Circle’s token the first stablecoin supported by the platform.

The service deepens BNY’s existing relationship with Circle. BNY already serves as the primary custodian for the assets backing USDC, and the latest expansion moves the bank beyond reserve custody into direct stablecoin services for institutional clients.

BNY said it plans to add support for more stablecoins and digital cash workflows over time. The bank did not name the next assets it may support or give a timeline for the expansion.

BNY is taking USDC deeper into institutional custody BNY said it oversees $59.3 trillion in assets under custody and administration and serves more than 90% of Fortune 100 companies. Its USDC support gives large institutions a bank-based route to access stablecoin issuance and redemption without moving outside a regulated custody environment.

USDC is the second-largest stablecoin by market value, with more than $73.8 billion in circulation, according to DefiLlama data. Tether’s USDT remains the largest stablecoin, while DefiLlama data places the total stablecoin market at about $313 billion.

The announcement also follows BNY’s recent work in other areas of digital asset custody. In May, the bank partnered with Abu Dhabi-based Finstreet and the ADI Foundation to develop institutional custody services for Bitcoin and Ether, with plans to later include stablecoins and tokenized real-world assets.

By adding USDC minting and redemption to its platform, BNY is placing stablecoin activity closer to the custody and settlement systems already used by institutional clients. Circle’s role remains tied to USDC issuance, while BNY’s expanded service gives clients custody and movement tools around the token.

Banks are building products for stablecoin reserves BNY’s move comes as large financial firms develop products tied to stablecoins, reserve assets and tokenized cash management.

Last week, Invesco filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to launch a tokenized money market fund for stablecoin reserve management. According to the filing, the fund would invest in cash and short-term U.S. Treasury securities.

In May, JPMorgan filed to launch a tokenized money market fund designed for stablecoin issuers. The Ethereum-based fund would invest in U.S. Treasury bills and overnight repurchase agreements used to back payment stablecoins.

State Street also launched a government money market fund for stablecoin issuers earlier this month. The fund invests in U.S. government securities and repurchase agreements, with State Street Bank and Anchorage Digital listed among its first investors.

Other financial firms have also moved into stablecoin-related services. In January, Fidelity Investments launched its U.S. dollar-backed stablecoin FIDD after receiving conditional approval to operate a national trust bank.

Together, the announcements show how major banks and asset managers are building around the reserve, custody and payment layers of stablecoins as institutional demand for digital cash infrastructure grows.

@dfinity's Caffeine platform has launched a direct integration with @AnthropicAI's Claude, allowing users to generate and deploy production-ready applications on the Internet Computer blockchain entirely through natural language prompts, without writing a single line of code.

Building Apps Through Conversation @CaffeineAI is an AI-powered development platform built by the DFINITY Foundation. Caffeine generates web applications from text descriptions and deploys them directly on the Internet Computer blockchain. The Claude integration extends that capability into Anthropic's own LLM environment, meaning users can build, iterate on, and ship complex software without ever leaving the chat interface.

The move targets both casual "vibe coders" and enterprise teams. Unlike tools such as Cursor that help human developers write code faster, Caffeine positions itself as a complete replacement for technical teams. Users describe what they want in plain language, and an ensemble of AI models writes, deploys, and continually updates production-grade applications with no human intervention in the codebase itself.

Unlike many existing AI development tools, Caffeine handles everything from secure backend logic to full-stack deployment, enabling users to build secure, resilient, and sovereign apps with minimal effort. Once code is generated, Caffeine deploys the app directly onto the Internet Computer blockchain, where ICP's canister-based architecture ensures the app is secure, tamper-proof, and runs entirely on-chain without relying on centralized servers.

A Technical Edge on Data Safety One of Caffeine's more notable claims is around data integrity during updates, a recurring problem in AI-generated software. The platform builds applications using Motoko, a programming language developed by DFINITY specifically for AI use, which provides mathematical guarantees that upgrades cannot accidentally delete user data. The system employs what DFINITY calls "loss-safe data migration," where the framework automatically verifies that any transformation to an application's data structure will not result in data loss, refusing to compile or deploy code that could delete information unless explicitly instructed.

The Anthropic relationship is not entirely new. Pierre Samaties, chief business officer at DFINITY, noted at a San Francisco launch event that Anthropic had partnered with DFINITY on Caffeine, with developers observing that DFINITY had been using Anthropic's Claude Sonnet to drive Caffeine's backend logic on the ICP. The latest announcement formalises that relationship by surfacing Caffeine's capabilities directly inside Claude for all users.

The integration arrives as agentic AI tools gain broader enterprise traction. Anthropic's own enterprise case studies highlight organizations including Rakuten, CRED, TELUS, and Zapier as having deployed multi-agent coordination systems built on Claude. Bringing Caffeine into that environment gives ICP-based app development a direct route to that growing user base.

Sources:
VentureBeat: Dfinity launches Caffeine, an AI platform that builds production apps from natural language prompts
Business Wire: DFINITY Opens Early Access to Caffeine
SiliconAngle: The self-writing internet: Is Dfinity's Caffeine AI a wakeup call for application developers?

TLDR:

Solana RWA distributed asset value climbed to $3.03B after posting a 13.2% increase over 30 days. Monthly RWA transfer volume surged 120.5% to $8.53B, marking the fastest-growing network metric. RWA holders reached 290,481 after growing 24.4% in one month, showing wider ecosystem participation. Solana stablecoin market cap rose to $15.77B, supporting liquidity across the expanding RWA market. Solana’s real-world asset market continues to expand as fresh on-chain data points to stronger activity across tokenized assets. 

The latest figures show higher asset values, growing participation, and a sharp rise in transfer volume. Stablecoins also remain a major source of liquidity across the network. The new metrics highlight steady growth across multiple parts of the Solana ecosystem.

Solana RWA Ecosystem Records Higher Asset Value and User Growth Data shared by Everstake shows the Solana RWA ecosystem reached $3.03 billion in distributed asset value. That marks a 13.2% increase over the past 30 days.

❗@solana's RWA ecosystem is reaching a whole new level.

Every month, the numbers get bigger.

And more importantly, they show that real-world assets are becoming an increasingly important part of the Solana ecosystem.

• $3.03B in distributed asset value, up 13.2% over the… pic.twitter.com/vpyj2eJowj

— Everstake (@everstake_pool) June 29, 2026

The same dataset shows the number of RWA holders climbed to 290,481. Monthly holder growth reached 24.4%, indicating broader participation in tokenized assets.

Transfer activity expanded even faster. Solana recorded $8.53 billion in 30-day RWA transfer volume, representing a 120.5% increase from the previous month.

Everstake highlighted transfer volume as the strongest metric during the latest reporting period. The figures suggest assets moved across the network at a much faster pace than before.

The platform also reported 2,115 tokenized real-world assets operating on Solana. Represented asset value stood at $125.86 million during the same period.

Stablecoins Continue Powering Solana RWA Market Activity Stablecoins remained the largest segment supporting the Solana RWA market. Network data placed the total stablecoin market capitalization at $15.77 billion, up 3.43% over 30 days.

Stablecoin transfer volume reached $487.08 billion during the month. Activity increased 3.59%, even as stablecoin holders declined 7.77% to 10.95 million.

The league table published alongside the data ranked Circle as the largest platform by asset value. Circle accounted for approximately $7.1 billion across three supported asset classes.

Tether Holdings followed with roughly $3.8 billion, while Paxos ranked third at $1.4 billion. BitGo, Securitize, Anchorage Digital Bank, Ethena, Ctrl Alt, Solstice, and Ondo completed the top ten.

Among individual assets, USDC remained the largest tokenized product on Solana with nearly $6.97 billion in distributed value. USDT followed at about $3.77 billion, while BitGo’s USD1 exceeded the $1 billion mark. 

Other leading products included Anchorage Digital Bank’s USDGO, Paxos-issued PYUSD, and Securitize’s BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund. 

According to Everstake’s published figures and the accompanying Solana RWA dashboard, stablecoins continue to dominate network value while tokenized treasuries, private equity, and corporate credit products steadily expand their presence.

Zano sets block height for Hard Fork 6, expected August 25-27, bringing Gateway Addresses and two-way cross-chain access to the privacy blockchain.

A privacy-focused blockchain is about to become a lot easier for the rest of crypto to work with, without giving up what makes it private in the first place.

Zano, a cryptocurrency network built around strong transaction privacy, has announced the block height at which its sixth hard fork will activate. 

The upgrade, known as HF6, is scheduled to go live at block 3,833,000, expected between August 25 and 27, 2026. 

Wallets, miners, node operators, and infrastructure providers now have a concrete deadline to upgrade ahead of the fork. The updated wallet is already live.

The problem HF6 is solvingZano's privacy model has historically made it difficult for exchanges, decentralized exchanges, bridges, and other platforms to integrate with the network using their standard workflows. 

The way private blockchains handle balances and transaction tracking does not map cleanly onto how most crypto infrastructure is built.

HF6 addresses this directly by introducing Gateway Addresses, a new account-based address type that gives services a directly trackable balance and instant sync.

This makes it significantly easier for third-party platforms to connect to native ZANO and Confidential Assets, while leaving standard private Zano addresses completely unchanged for regular users.

"Hard Fork 6 could make a real difference for Zano's adoption, as it opens an easier path for ZANO into DeFi liquidity pools and broader exchange listings," said Quinten van Welzen, Head of Growth at Zano. 

Scroll to Continue

Recommended Articles

"Zano is already in touch with platforms including Thorchain and other DEXs about post-HF6 integrations."

Cross-chain without a bridgeHF6 also makes Zano's Bridgeless integration two-way for the first time. Native ZANO and supported Confidential Assets will be able to move outward to Ethereum, TON, and Solana, while external assets will be able to move into Zano. 

This gives ZANO a non-custodial path into public-chain liquidity, and users can return to Zano whenever they want private transactions again.

Trending on TheStreet Roundtable:Analyst sends blunt message on Elon Musk's Bitcoin tiesEx-Trump advisor unveils new Bitcoin price targetAnalyst issues bold call on Cathie Wood's favorite crypto stockWhat else is changing under the hoodBeyond the headline features, HF6 ships a wave of security and reliability improvements. Wallet encryption has been strengthened, making a stolen or copied wallet file significantly harder to crack. 

Per-output payment IDs now allow exchanges and merchants to match payments cleanly while keeping recipient privacy intact. Mining pools can now dry-run a block before finalising it, automatically dropping bad transactions rather than stalling. 

Nodes have been hardened against denial-of-service attacks, with added support for routing traffic through a proxy such as Tor via SOCKS5.

Developer RPC interfaces have also been tightened for safer integrations. At the consensus level, tighter validation rules and a more decisive fork-choice mechanism strengthen network-wide agreement.

The upgrade is the result of more than a year of development work and represents one of the most significant steps in Zano's history, an attempt to make the network accessible to the broader crypto ecosystem without compromising the privacy that defines it.

BlackRock and Ethena Labs have deepened their partnership through a new initiative that will provide institutional investors on BlackRock’s Aladdin platform with expanded access to Ethena’s products and enhanced liquidity for the BUIDL tokenized Treasury fund, according to a Monday statement.

https://x.com/ethena/status/2071579878282174586?s=20

Advertisement

The agreement includes a $100 million liquidity facility provided by Ethena through Securitize, enabling eligible BUIDL holders to seamlessly convert BUIDL into USDC, USDtb and other supported stablecoins, with the ability to reverse those transactions outside regular market hours.

The companies said the collaboration is intended to expand digital dollar infrastructure and support the wider institutional use of tokenized real-world assets. BlackRock said the facility enhances the utility of tokenized Treasury funds, while Ethena said it simplifies institutional access to onchain financial markets.

The partnership extends the firms’ prior collaboration involving USDtb, Ethena’s stablecoin backed primarily by BUIDL. BUIDL debuted in 2024 and has grown to roughly $3 billion in total value locked according to DefiLlama, making it one of the largest tokenized US Treasury funds.

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

@BinanceWallet has formally joined @Aster_DEX as a network validator, marking a meaningful step up from its previous role as a front-end integration partner. The move gives Binance Wallet a direct vote in Aster's on-chain governance and decentralised listing decisions.

From Interface to Infrastructure The distinction matters. Rather than simply routing users to Aster's trading environment, Binance Wallet now participates in the protocol's underlying decision-making. As part of the arrangement, it will support "Aster Open Standards," the framework Aster launched in late June 2026 that allows tokens already listed on Binance Spot or its Alpha programme to apply for an Aster spot listing through an on-chain validator vote.

Aster Open Standards (AOS-1) launched around June 25, 2026, and allows any token already listed on Binance Spot or in its Alpha programme to apply for a listing on Aster via an API check. Projects pay a 50,000 USDT application fee, which is refunded if the on-chain validator vote fails. With Binance Wallet now holding a validator seat, it has a direct say in which tokens pass that threshold.

The validator integration also gives Binance Wallet influence over Aster's broader protocol governance. Token holders and designated participants in the Aster DAO vote to steer roadmap decisions, and validator status places Binance Wallet within that decision-making structure rather than at its periphery.

Trading Campaigns to Follow The partnership will launch with a series of exclusive trading campaigns and perpetuals incentives aimed at growing retail participation on the platform. The move builds on an existing commercial relationship: Aster DEX had previously been integrated into the Binance Web3 Wallet, enabling millions of users to access professional-grade trading tools directly from their self-custody wallets.

Aster is a privacy-focused decentralised exchange offering perpetual markets on crypto, stocks, and commodities. Its Aster Chain is a high-performance, privacy-focused Layer 1 blockchain designed specifically for derivatives trading. The chain uses Proof-of-Staked Authority (PoSA) as its consensus mechanism, the same model that underpins BNB Chain, making Binance Wallet's validator role a natural fit within that architecture.

For Aster, securing a validator of Binance Wallet's scale adds institutional weight to a governance model that is still maturing. For Binance Wallet, it deepens its footprint in DeFi infrastructure at a time when the line between wallets and decentralised exchanges continues to narrow.

Sources:
CoinMarketCap: Aster Latest Updates and Market Insights
Aster Official Documentation
CoinDesk: Binance Wallet Unlocks In-App Leveraged Crypto Futures Trading With Aster

Strategy, the company formerly known as MicroStrategy, has officially broken its own cardinal rule. The company can now sell Bitcoin to buy back stock, repurchase debt, and pay preferred dividends.

Strategy already sold 32 BTC for approximately $2.5 million at the end of May 2026, marking the first Bitcoin sale in the company’s treasury history. The company still holds roughly 843,738 BTC.

The new framework, explained On June 29, 2026, Strategy formally introduced what it calls the Digital Credit Capital Framework, a set of rules that lets the company treat Bitcoin as a flexible treasury asset.

Advertisement

The framework authorizes up to $2 billion in stock repurchases. It also includes a Bitcoin monetization program allowing for up to $1.25 billion in sales to shore up the company’s USD reserves and overall liquidity.

Back on May 15, 2026, Strategy announced plans to repurchase $1.5 billion of its 0% convertible senior notes due 2029 at a discount. The proposed funding sources for that buyback included cash reserves and Bitcoin sales.

CEO Phong Le stated the firm would sell Bitcoin “when advantageous,” marking a shift from passive accumulation to active balance-sheet management. The same framework update also raised the dividend on STRC preferred shares to 12%.

What this means for investors For Strategy shareholders, stock buybacks funded by Bitcoin sales could boost per-share value in the near term. The $2 billion buyback authorization suggests management sees its own equity as undervalued. The 12% dividend on STRC preferred shares also gives income-oriented investors a concrete reason to stick around.

The risk is that this new framework erodes the very premium that made Strategy stock attractive in the first place. Many investors bought shares precisely because they believed the company would hold Bitcoin indefinitely, acting as leveraged long exposure to the asset. If that conviction trade unwinds, the stock could lose its appeal as a Bitcoin proxy, forcing it to be valued more on its software fundamentals.

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

Ripple ex-CTO David Schwartz has pushed back on claims that the XRP Ledger leaves everyday traders exposed to sandwich attacks, saying the risk is real but overstated.

Concerns surfaced on X after an account argued that validators and well-connected nodes gain a timing edge by observing pending transactions before each ledger closes. Sophisticated actors can then calculate whether front-running a trade is profitable, and spam multiple transactions to secure a favorable slot in the canonical order.

Sandwich Attack Mechanics on the XRP LedgerTransaction ordering on the XRP Ledger uses a deterministic formula involving transaction hashes. That formula is public. This lets actors position transactions ahead of a target trade on the XRP Ledger DEX and AMM, worsening slippage for ordinary users.

Concerns arose that the issue creates an uneven playing field, particularly for traders using popular wallets and decentralized applications.

Concerns have been raised about the possibility of front running or transaction sandwich attacks on XRPL payments and offer crossing.

For the reasons I've explained, I'm not that concerned about this issue. But I have a proposal for a fairly simple scheme that would eliminate… https://t.co/lnhTv1bhBK

— David 'JoelKatz' Schwartz (@JoelKatz) June 29, 2026 David Schwartz. Source: XSchwartz Says Validators Cannot Act QuietlySchwartz acknowledged the concern but pointed to several mitigating factors, drawing on his earlier positions in XRP Ledger design debates. First, pending transactions are publicly visible to everyone before a ledger closes. No party holds exclusive early access. Second, a single validator gains no meaningful advantage. Coordinating multiple validators would leave clear evidence, since validators sign all proposals and validations.

“Running a validator does not help you do this unless multiple validators conspire. If multiple validators did conspire, or a single validator attempted it, it would be very obvious to everyone exactly who was doing this and that validator would be immediately removed from everyone’s trust lists.”

Schwartz also noted that confirmed attacks, beyond proof-of-concept testing, remain unreported. The core economic barrier is straightforward. Profitable attacks need high liquidity to justify the effort and low liquidity to move the price. Those two conditions rarely coincide. Recent XRP Ledger institutional privacy work addresses a related concern at the data layer.

A 2-Step Reservation Scheme for the XRP LedgerFor traders who want firmer guarantees, Schwartz outlined a transaction reservation approach. A user first broadcasts a reservation specifying a future ledger sequence number, a transaction ID, and a small fee. If that reservation confirms, the actual trade executes before any transaction submitted after the reservation went public. The approach requires two submissions per protected trade.

The method complements XRP Ledger privacy transfer proposals by targeting front-running at the execution layer rather than at the data layer.

XRP continues to trade well below its all-time high as attention turns to whether fairness improvements like this could support longer-term adoption.

Ripple is pushing the XRP Ledger into institutional lending territory with the XLS-66 Lending Protocol, paired with XLS-65 Single Asset Vaults, a framework that enables fixed-term credit facilities funded by pooled deposits and settled automatically on-ledger. Institutions put assets into a vault, borrowers draw from that pool on defined terms, and the ledger handles repayment mechanics without a middleman touching the money.

The underwriting still happens off-chain. Risk assessment, credit decisions, compliance checks: all conducted before anything touches the ledger. Once approved, execution is automated.

How the protocol actually works Single Asset Vaults, defined under XLS-65, are the deposit side of the equation. Liquidity providers deposit into these vaults, which then fund fixed-term loans to institutional borrowers.

The loans themselves are uncollateralized in the traditional crypto sense. There is no overcollateralization requirement like you would see on Aave or Compound. Instead, underwriting happens through off-chain credit assessment, which means the protocol is explicitly designed for institutions that can be evaluated like real-world borrowers, not anonymous wallets.

Advertisement

The protocol also integrates with Multi-Purpose Tokens, XRPL’s flexible tokenization standard, as well as Credentials and Permissioned Domains, features that allow the ledger to enforce compliance rules at the infrastructure level. An institution can participate only if it meets the criteria embedded in the domain.

Rippled v3.1.0, which shipped in late January 2026, moved the Lending Protocol amendment into validator voting. The amendment has since received a re-audit by Halborn, a blockchain security firm, clearing one of the last major technical hurdles before broader deployment.

The tokenized RWA context Tokenized RWAs on the ledger exceeded $3 billion in value by late April 2026, according to RWA.xyz data. That figure represents a 59% increase in a single month. The growth is being driven by two main asset classes: energy-backed tokens and Ondo Finance’s tokenized US Treasuries.

Energy-backed tokens represent physical energy assets, typically tied to production or reserves, that have been tokenized for on-chain trading and financing.

Evernorth, a firm holding a significant quantity of XRP, publicly announced in January 2026 its intent to participate in the Lending Protocol once live. The firm’s interest is straightforward: deposit XRP holdings into vaults, earn yield from borrower interest.

What this means for XRPL’s competitive position The institutional DeFi space is not empty. Ethereum has a substantial head start in DeFi infrastructure, and networks like Avalanche and Polygon have also made dedicated pushes toward institutional adoption. What XRPL is betting on is that compliance-native infrastructure, meaning a ledger where permissioned access and credential verification are built into the base layer rather than bolted on top, will matter more to regulated institutions than raw liquidity depth.

The Halborn re-audit is part of that story. Institutional risk teams want documented security reviews before they allocate, and XRPL has now cleared that bar for the lending layer.

For XRP as an asset, the lending protocol introduces a new demand variable. Vault deposits denominated in XRP create holding incentives that go beyond simple speculation. If institutions are depositing XRP to earn yield, that represents a category of demand that is less sensitive to short-term price volatility and more tied to the protocol’s utilization rate.

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

Blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis has published an in-depth examination of a sophisticated exploit that drained at least $7.5 million from JaredfromSubway.eth, widely regarded as Ethereum’s most active sandwich-attack operator. According to insights from Chainalysis, the incident unfolded over June 20–21, 2026, when an unknown attacker used a reverse honeypot to turn the bot’s own aggressive trading logic against it.

As explained by Chainalysis, these so-called sandwich attacks are a common maximal extractable value (MEV) tactic on Ethereum.

Bots monitor the public mempool for pending user transactions and insert their own orders around them.

They typically buy a token immediately before the victim’s purchase to push the price higher, then sell right after, profiting from the resulting slippage while the original trader receives a worse execution price.

JaredfromSubway.eth, operating pseudonymously since 2023, built one of the most successful versions of this strategy.

At its peak, the bot was among the network’s largest gas consumers and was estimated to have cost other traders roughly $60 million annually in unfavorable trades while generating tens of millions in profits for its operator.

The June exploit began weeks earlier when the attacker deployed 66 fake token contracts that closely mimicked legitimate assets such as WETH, USDC, and USDT.

These were paired with fabricated liquidity pools engineered to appear as profitable sandwich opportunities.

JaredfromSubway.eth’s bot, optimized for rapid detection of mempool activity, repeatedly interacted with the deceptive contracts.

In doing so, it granted token-spending approvals to the malicious smart contracts.

These approvals were never revoked and accumulated across multiple transactions.

Once sufficient approvals were in place, a tripwire smart contract controlled by the attacker activated.

A single coordinated transaction then swept the bot’s wallets, extracting approximately $7.5 million in Ether and stablecoins.

Chainalysis tracked the subsequent flow using its on-chain tools: the attacker quickly swapped the stablecoins for Ether to reduce freeze risk from issuers, distributed the funds across several wallets, and routed them through Tornado Cash. No recoveries have been reported.

The attack succeeded because the bot granted spending permissions to contracts it never properly vetted.

Chainalysis notes that the operator prioritized speed over basic due diligence, such as checking contract verification status on Etherscan or reviewing deployment history.

This oversight allowed the fake pools to function as an effective honeypot.

The incident carries broader lessons for DeFi participants.

Token approvals function as ongoing permissions that can remain active indefinitely unless explicitly revoked.

Many users—retail traders and automated systems alike—grant broad or unlimited spending rights to contracts they have never reviewed.

Chainalysis highlights the risks of interacting with newly deployed or unverified liquidity pools that lack an established track record.

The firm recommends regularly revoking unused approvals and exercising caution with unfamiliar contracts before approving any spending rights.

Even highly optimized MEV bots are not immune to deception when security hygiene is neglected.

The JaredfromSubway.eth case demonstrates that the same on-chain mechanisms enabling profitable trading can be weaponized by attackers who understand how these systems operate. As Chainalysis observes, protecting against such exploits requires consistent attention to approvals and contract verification, practices that apply equally to sophisticated operators and everyday DeFi users.

The Cardano ecosystem recorded several major developments over the past week. Most notably, the launch of the Leios public testnet led activity. There were also upcoming decentralized finance (DeFi) initiatives, renewed ecosystem funding, and an application-level security incident involving the SecondFi wallet.

Here’s what happened in the Cardano ecosystem in the last week:

Leios Public Testnet Goes LiveCardano officially launched the public testnet for Leios, its next-generation scaling protocol, on June 23. Named Musashi Dojo after the legendary samurai Miyamoto Musashi, the testnet marks one of the network’s most known technical milestones in years. Moreover, the upgrade is seen as a major boost to Cardano’s transaction throughput by up to 65X. A mainnet hard fork is targeted for November 2026.

The rollout is structured into five phases: Earth, Water, Fire, Wind, and Void. These will progressively test the protocol from initial design validation to adversarial testing before mainnet deployment. As a result, the testnet allows stake pool operators (SPOs) to deploy Leios-enabled block producers. Developers can also begin testing decentralized applications (DApps), wallets, and infrastructure ahead of the upgrade.

RealFi Testnet Set for July LaunchInput Output Global (IOG) also announced that Phase 1 of its RealFi testnet will launch on July 6.

The project aims to improve capital efficiency by enabling stablecoins to generate yield instead of remaining idle. The initiative represents IOG’s latest effort to expand decentralized finance (DeFi) use cases within the Cardano ecosystem.

Big news: the RealFi Phase 1 Testnet goes live on 6 July. 🚀

This is our first public step toward next-generation stablecoin infrastructure on Cardano – and a direct response to a problem we've been vocal about:

Crypto's clearest success story has scaled as money. But not as… pic.twitter.com/uQe68ds6iM

— RealFi (@realfi_co) June 24, 2026 Project Catalyst Returns with 2 Million ADACardano’s community funding program, Project Catalyst, will return in August with a 2 million ADA grant pool.

A new Catalyst pilot fund will start in August 2026, with a total grant pool of 2M $ADA.

We look forward to working with the community and supporting the Cardano builders. More details soon.

Read the announcement on the Forum and share your thoughts.https://t.co/MbM7xZ7IKc

— Project Catalyst (@Catalyst_onX) June 26, 2026 The upcoming funding round will prioritize projects building around technologies such as Pyth, Brale, stablecoins, programmable tokens, and on-chain identity. This will provide fresh capital for developers and ecosystem builders.

AlphaGrowth Proposes Treasury-Funded DeFi InitiativeMeanwhile, AlphaGrowth unveiled PRIME, a proposal with a vision to accelerate DeFi adoption on Cardano.

1/11

Cardano DeFi is ready for prime time.

Today we’re introducing PRIME:

a 12-month AlphaGrowth-run program to help Cardano attract liquidity, deepen DeFi usage, and become a first-class destination for capital. pic.twitter.com/nJ11h3jQWr

— alphagrowth (@alphagrowth1) June 22, 2026 The firm plans to request 120 million ADA from the Cardano treasury to fund the initiative. It is also showcasing its previous work with major blockchain ecosystems including Compound, Uniswap, and Arbitrum. Notably, it says it helped support more than $1 billion in total value locked (TVL).

SecondFi Exploit Prompts Security ReminderThe week also saw a security incident involving SecondFi, formerly known as the Yoroi wallet. A vulnerability reportedly resulted in the theft of approximately 16 million ADA.

SecondFi stated that affected users will be fully compensated and advised users to follow updates through its official channels.

Addressing concerns, Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson emphasized that the blockchain itself was not compromised. He stated that Cardano’s protocol, cryptography, and core infrastructure remain secure. 

He described the exploit as an isolated application-level issue rather than a network-wide vulnerability.

Cardano’s native token ADA traded at $0.1439, declining 0.8% over the past 24 hours despite a series of ecosystem developments. 

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

Table of contents

Local traders in India are now paying more than eight and a half percent extra for Tether’s USDT, a sharp dislocation from the typical 3% to 4% premium. The sudden jump points to a genuine supply shock rather than routine market noise. According to the market update citing The Economic Times, USDT was quoted at INR 102.88 on Saturday, while the dollar-rupee official closing rate sat at 94.65. The gap reveals a market scrambling for stablecoin liquidity at almost any price.

The trigger is not a minor technical adjustment. India’s Enforcement Directorate recently cracked down on INR 250 billion in money transfers conducted through virtual digital assets. That action alone was enough to choke off the normal flow of USDT into domestic exchanges. With fewer fresh inflows arriving, the local order books have thinned, and the price of immediate settlement has shot upward. For traders who use USDT as their primary on-ramp to altcoin markets, the higher premium eats into margins instantly.

A Liquidity Freeze Across India’s Crypto Desks The 8.5% figure is not just an academic spread. It represents a real cost that Indian users must absorb every time they convert rupees into the most liquid dollar-pegged asset. Many exchanges in the country rely on peer-to-peer platforms and OTC desks to move large volumes of stablecoins, and those channels are now severely disrupted. When supply drops, market makers widen their bid-ask spreads, and the entire trading ecosystem slows down. The result is a self-reinforcing cycle: high premiums deter new capital, and lower liquidity pushes premiums even higher.

The Enforcement Directorate’s action focused on massive sums flowing through virtual asset rails, an area that has been under increasing scrutiny since India imposed a 30% tax on crypto gains and a 1% tax deducted at source on every transaction above a certain threshold. That tax regime already pushed many high-frequency traders offshore, and now the enforcement sweep is accelerating the exodus of liquidity. Less onshore USDT means less depth, and less depth means more volatility in the premium.

Regulatory Fear Adds a Risk Premium Purushottam Anand, founder of Crypto Legal, noted that the recent rise likely includes a risk premium driven by regulatory uncertainty. His observation points to a market that is not just responding to a supply shortage but also pricing in the probability of further enforcement actions. Every new probe or seizure redefines what market participants think about the safety of keeping assets on domestic platforms. That uncertainty gets baked into the price of the most critical settlement asset—USDT.

India’s relationship with virtual asset regulation has been ambivalent. While there is no outright ban, the government has used taxation and enforcement as indirect tools. The result is a gray zone where rules are enforced selectively, and the cost of compliance is unpredictable. This week’s premium surge is not the first time Indian traders have paid above market rates for stablecoins, but the magnitude suggests a growing discomfort. When the premium stays elevated, it can push users toward riskier unofficial channels, which paradoxically may be what regulators want to avoid.

While Indian authorities tighten the screws on virtual asset transfers, United States lawmakers face their own regulatory inflection point, with banking interests mobilizing to block a landmark crypto bill just days before a Senate vote. The contrast highlights a global regulatory patchwork that makes capital flows uneven and quick to react to local enforcement signals. Markets treat these events as liquidity events, and India’s premium spike is the latest example.

What Traders Are Watching Next The immediate question is whether new USDT inflows can normalize the premium in the coming days, or if the supply crunch will persist. Much depends on how seriously OTC desks and large holders interpret the Enforcement Directorate’s signals. A single large settlement or a clearer policy statement could bring the premium back toward 4% quickly. But if the current environment lingers, the Indian market may see more trading volume shift toward decentralized platforms and foreign exchanges that do not require onshore stablecoin pools.

The squeeze in India stands in stark contrast to the global surge in tokenized real-world assets, which recently crossed $20 billion in on-chain value as institutional adoption accelerates. While one corner of the crypto ecosystem faces a liquidity drain, another is absorbing record capital. This divergence underlines how local regulatory actions can create micro-market dislocations even when the broader industry trends remain upward.

Yet on the technical front, blockchain infrastructure shows no sign of retreat, with developer activity remaining concentrated across the top networks according to recent weekly data. Protocols continue to iterate, but for Indian crypto users, the immediate challenge is not code—it is access to the very asset that greases the rails of trading. Until the regulatory posture clarifies or fresh supply returns, the 8.5% premium will act as a tax on every trade.

AUTHOR

Freelance writer and crypto enthusiast with a focus on Web3, delivering clear and engaging articles. Known for his well-researched articles and insightful analysis, Shayan covers a broad range of topics including market trends, blockchain technology, decentralized finance (DeFi), and emerging crypto projects. His writing aims to educate both beginners and experts, providing clear, engaging content that helps readers stay informed about the fast-evolving crypto space. Shayan's expertise and dedication make him a trusted voice in the blockchain community.

Bitcoin infrastructure company Breez has added a feature to its developer toolkit that lets users send USDC (USDC) and USDt (USDT) across more than 30 blockchain networks directly from a Bitcoin balance, without first converting or holding stablecoins.

According to an announcement shared with Cointelegraph, the feature uses the Lightning Network alongside automated conversion to route payments from Bitcoin (BTC) to USDC or USDT before delivering funds to the recipient's preferred blockchain.

When a user enters a recipient's wallet address, the Breez SDK identifies the destination blockchain, calculates a conversion route and displays the amount, network and fees before the payment is confirmed. The transaction is then routed through liquidity providers, including Flashnet and Boltz, which convert the sender's Bitcoin into stablecoins and deliver it on the recipient's chosen blockchain.

Roy Sheinfeld, CEO of Breez, told Cointelegraph the feature does not require USDT or USDC to be issued on the Lightning Network. Instead, it relies on "interoperability" to let users spend from a Bitcoin balance while recipients receive stablecoins on supported blockchain networks.

Breez said users continue holding Bitcoin until they initiate a payment, while recipients receive stablecoins on their preferred blockchain without requiring the sender to manage separate stablecoin balances. The feature is non-custodial and initially supports only outbound stablecoin payments, with support for receiving stablecoins from external blockchain networks planned for a future release.

The feature is designed to allow developers to add stablecoin payments without integrating multiple blockchain networks or requiring users to manage separate Bitcoin and stablecoin balances.

Bitcoin payment infrastructure expandsThe launch comes as companies expand Bitcoin and the Lightning Network, a layer-2 payment network designed to make Bitcoin transactions faster and less expensive, into new financial and commercial applications.

In February, Secure Digital Markets, an institutional trading and lending desk, completed a $1 million Bitcoin payment to Kraken over the Lightning Network in less than half a second, demonstrating the protocol's potential for high-value institutional transfers. The transaction illustrated how Lightning is increasingly being tested for use cases beyond small retail payments.

That same month, Bitcoin infrastructure company Voltage introduced a US dollar-settled revolving credit line that embeds business credit into Lightning payment flows, allowing companies to settle repayments in either US dollars or Bitcoin. The product is intended to enable businesses to access working capital using Lightning for payments, without holding crypto on their balance sheets.

Event platform Satlantis also launched a Bitcoin-native ticketing platform with embedded Lightning wallets, allowing organizers to sell tickets and accept BTC alongside traditional payment methods.

In March, Tether-backed Bitcoin infrastructure startup Ark Labs in a $5.2 million funding round to develop technology supporting stablecoin issuance, transfers and settlement on Bitcoin.

Lightning adoption has continued to grow. A February report from River estimated the network surpassed $1 billion in monthly transaction volume in late 2025, up from around $12 million in 2021.

Lightning Network transaction volumes continue to grow. Source: River

Magazine: Bitcoin decouples from tech stocks, Ether eyes ‘selling wave’: 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.

We’re excited to announce that USDC, EURC, and CCTP support are live on Cronos.

Cronos Network is a high-performance, EVM-compatible, Layer-1 (L1) blockchain network supported by Crypto.com, supporting payments, AI-native workflows, and DeFi trading. Native USDC, EURC, and CCTP bring trusted and interoperable stablecoin infrastructure to Cronos’ large and established ecosystem. USDC will also serve as the settlement layer for the Cronos app, the upcoming mobile-first trading platform where users will be able to trade tokenized stocks, crypto, and prediction markets from a single account, with 24/7 markets, and access in 180+ countries.1

With the launch of native USDC, EURC, and CCTP, Cronos gains access to the leading regulated2 dollar and euro stablecoins. This unlocks dollar- and euro-denominated DeFi trading, payments, treasury management, and more on a blockchain designed for EVM compatibility, AI-friendly workflows, and transaction efficiency. Native USDC will also serve as the dollar settlement layer for the Cronos app. Users will be able to deposit dollars and trade every asset class from one account.

Benefits of USDC and EURC on Cronos:

Regulated,2 fully reserved stablecoins redeemable 1:1 for USD and EUR,3 respectivelyInstitutional on/offramps with Circle Mint4 for qualified businesses Integrate easily with apps and protocols on CronosUnlock dollar- and euro-denominated DeFi markets and AI-powered transactionsCCTP on Cronos enables developers to:

Securely and efficiently move USDC between Cronos and other supported blockchainsBuild apps directly on the protocol layer that support high-performance DeFi and AI-powered transactionsKey use cases of USDC and EURC on CronosNative USDC and EURC can help establish a trusted dollar- and euro-denominated ecosystem on Cronos. With MiCA compliance, full reserve backing, and 1:1 redeemability for dollars and euros respectively, USDC and EURC support DeFi, traditional markets, and agent-to-agent transactions by serving as collateral and settlement infrastructure. Establishing deep liquidity for both EUR/EURC and USD/USDC trading pairs can support lower-slippage DeFi activity and AI-driven applications at the scale institutions and enterprises need. Through CCTP, users and developers can move USDC securely across ecosystems without relying on wrapped assets.

Beyond institutional use cases, native USDC will also bring dollar settlement to everyday users. As the dollar layer for the Cronos app, the upcoming mobile-first trading platform, USDC will let people deposit dollars and trade tokenized stocks, crypto, and prediction markets from a single account.

Together, native USDC, EURC, and CCTP can give businesses and developers on Cronos access to regulated2 fiat rails for institutional-grade trading, programmable payments, and compliant onchain settlement. While USDC is widely used around the world, euro-denominated EURC may be especially well suited for payments, settlement, and other onchain activity within the EU, where 1:1 euro redeemability and MiCA compliance can help support trusted euro-denominated use cases.

Popular Cronos apps include: Crypto.com, LI.FI, Relay, VVS, Wolfswap.

Bridged vs native USDC on CronosCronos also supports bridged USDC (i.e., USDC.e), a non-native version of USDC. The Cronos team plans to work with ecosystem apps and protocols to smoothly migrate bridged USDC liquidity to native USDC over time.

This gives Cronos the same native stablecoin features that are already available on other supported chains. There is no immediate impact to existing bridges and they will continue to operate normally. Bridged USDC will remain clearly labeled as “USDC.e” in block explorers, app interfaces, and documentation.

‍

USDC on Cronos, issued by Circle2

Token Name: USDC

Token Symbol: USDC

Mainnet Address: 0x3D7F2C478aAfdB65542BCB44bCeeC05849999d2D

Testnet Address: 0xEb33dc5fac03833e132593659e1dE7256aB59794

‍

Bridged USDC on Cronos

Token Name: Bridged USDC (Cronos)

Token Symbol: USDC.e 

Mainnet Address: 0xc21223249ca28397b4b6541dffaecc539bff0c59 

‍

EURC on Cronos, issued by Circle2

Token Name: EURC

Token Symbol: EURC

Mainnet Address: 0xA6dE01a2d62C6B5f3525d768f34d276652C554c8

Testnet Address: 0x31f7538adb53cF16350e6B0c89d03D91b7D12c46

Get started todayBusinesses can access institutional on/offramps to convert to Circle stablecoins on Cronos by applying for a Circle Mint4 account. Individuals and smaller institutions can access USDC and EURC through various exchanges, wallets, and providers. Visit circle.com/eurc and circle.com/usdc to learn more.

Get started today with our developer docs for USDC, EURC, and CCTP. Both USDC and EURC are open-source, permissionless stablecoin protocols that anyone can build with.

‍

‍

1 Products may be subject to jurisdictional availability

2 USDC is issued by regulated affiliates of Circle. EURC is issued by Circle Internet Financial Europe SAS. A list of Circle’s regulatory authorizations can be found here.

3 Circle Mint customers are able to redeem USDC and EURC directly from Circle. In addition, Circle will redeem all USDC and EURC presented to it for redemption in compliance with MiCAR, regardless of whether the holder is a Circle Mint customer. Circle Mint is currently available only to institutions and is not available to individuals.

4 Circle Mint and money transmission services are provided by Circle Internet Financial, LLC, NMLS # 1201441, and Circle Internet Financial Europe SAS, Electronic Money Institution License No. 17788, when provided in France.

Solana’s decentralized exchange ecosystem just quietly did something that would have sounded absurd two years ago. It out-traded some of the biggest centralized exchanges on the planet.

During the week of June 12-18, Solana DEXs processed $7.19 billion in spot trading volume. That figure placed the network ahead of Coinbase, which handled roughly $6.39 billion, and Kraken, which came in around $4.37 billion. The only centralized venues that stayed ahead were Binance at $34.39 billion and Bybit at $9.47 billion.

The numbers behind the surge Solana’s cumulative DEX volume for 2025 hit $1.6 trillion, capturing roughly 11.92% of the global market. That makes it the second-largest DEX market worldwide, trailing only Binance’s broader ecosystem.

Advertisement

On one Thursday in mid-June, Solana’s DEX volume reportedly surpassed that of the New York Stock Exchange.

The platforms driving this activity are familiar names in the Solana ecosystem. Jupiter, the dominant aggregator that routes trades across multiple liquidity sources, sits at the center. Raydium, Orca, and Meteora handle large chunks of the direct trading volume.

What’s fueling the fire Memecoins deserve a lot of the credit, or blame, depending on your perspective. Solana has become the default launchpad for speculative token trading. The network’s low fees and fast confirmation times make it ideal for the kind of rapid-fire trading that memecoins attract.

Stablecoin pairs have become a significant portion of Solana’s DEX activity. DePIN projects, which tokenize physical infrastructure networks, have also contributed meaningful trading volume.

Throughout 2025 and into 2026, Solana has competed closely with Ethereum in DEX volume metrics.

What this means for investors Coinbase and Kraken generate revenue primarily through trading fees. When volume migrates to decentralized venues, those revenue streams face direct pressure.

Investors watching this space should pay attention to a few key risks. Solana’s network has a history of outages, though reliability has improved significantly. Regulatory scrutiny of DEX platforms is intensifying globally. There’s also concentration risk: Jupiter handles a disproportionate share of routing, which means a single protocol failure could cascade across the ecosystem.

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

Ansem, one of the most recognized voices in the Solana ecosystem, has airdropped roughly $7 million worth of the $ANSEM memecoin to Solana users. The distribution campaign, which unfolded between June 27 and June 29, represents one of the largest influencer-driven token giveaways in recent memory.

The goal is ambitious: grow the $ANSEM holder base from approximately 25,000 wallets to 1 million.

Inside the airdrop mechanics Ansem, who posts under the handle @blknoiz06, controls an estimated 604 million $ANSEM tokens. That’s somewhere between 60% and 66% of the total supply, worth anywhere from $30 million to $71 million depending on which price snapshot you use.

Advertisement

The distribution methods varied across rounds. Some recipients received as little as $23 in tokens, while larger community-focused rounds engaged participants through social actions like following accounts or leaving comments.

Ansem has framed the initiative as a redistribution of Pump.fun creator fees rather than a traditional token launch. Those creator fees reportedly ranged from approximately $200,000 to $378,000 in a single week, providing a recurring revenue stream that funds ongoing distributions.

The numbers behind the frenzy The $ANSEM token, nicknamed “The Black Bull,” has seen its market cap climb above $66 million during late June 2026.

Early participants have done extraordinarily well. One trader reportedly turned an initial $2,330 investment into over $614,000, a 261x return.

Community building or concentration risk The $ANSEM token’s value proposition is, quite literally, one person’s reputation and willingness to keep distributing tokens. Ansem has indicated a commitment to further airdrops tied to the rising market cap, suggesting a structured plan rather than a one-off event.

Even after distributing $7 million worth of tokens, Ansem’s wallet still controls a dominant share of the supply. A 60%-plus ownership stake in any token means one entity has the theoretical ability to crash the price at any moment.

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

Pendle needed less than two weeks to muscle its way into Monad’s top five protocols. The yield-trading platform launched on the chain around June 19 and has already accumulated roughly $51.25 million in total value locked, placing it fifth among all protocols on the network.

That’s not a slow drip of capital, either. Pendle also generated $22 million in trading volume during the same stretch, suggesting traders aren’t just parking assets. They’re actively using the platform.

Where Pendle fits in Monad’s growing DeFi landscape Monad’s total DeFi TVL sits near $366 million. Euler V2 leads the pack with approximately $110 million, followed closely by K3 Capital at around $108 million. Pendle, at fifth, is roughly half the size of those leaders but growing at a pace that makes the gap feel temporary.

Advertisement

Monad only activated its mainnet in late 2025, which means the entire ecosystem is still young. The protocol sweetened the deal with weekly incentives of up to $100,000 for participants in its AUSD and earnAUSD yield pools.

What Pendle actually does, and why it matters Pendle is a yield tokenization protocol. It lets users split yield-bearing assets into two separate tokens, one representing the principal and one representing the future yield. Want a fixed yield on your deposit? You can lock it in. Want to speculate that yields will go higher? You can buy just the yield token with leverage.

The platform describes itself as the largest yield-trading platform globally, with over 100 historical protocol deployments across multiple blockchains. Across all chains, Pendle’s total ecosystem TVL sits at approximately $933 million. The Monad deployment, at $51.25 million, represents about 5.5% of that total.

Sky Money’s fixed-yield products on Pendle provide a useful benchmark here. Those products alone amassed between $50 million and $51 million in TVL within two weeks of launch, essentially matching what Pendle achieved on Monad in the same timeframe.

What this means for investors The $100,000 weekly incentive budget is generous, but incentive-driven launches tend to follow a predictable arc: TVL spikes during the rewards period, then either stabilizes at a lower level or collapses entirely once the money faucet turns off.

For traders specifically, Pendle’s yield tokenization mechanics create trading opportunities that simply don’t exist on standard lending protocols. The ability to take directional positions on yields, rather than just passively earning them, adds a layer of sophistication to Monad’s DeFi toolkit. The $22 million in ten-day trading volume suggests early adopters already understand this.

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

Sentiment around cryptocurrency memecoin launch platform Pump.fun [PUMP] has turned positive again following renewed interest in memecoins over the past day.

The platform’s native token moved alongside that momentum, with PUMP surging 12% over the past day.

Even so, the rally remained tied to the platform’s underlying health, leaving investors exposed if protocol activity failed to recover.

Why are investors buying PUMP? PUMP’s recent rally has coincided with growing investor participation. The token’s holder count reached a record 122,440, while retail investors accounted for roughly 38% of holders.

That increase also appeared in on-chain data, suggesting fresh capital supported the recent move.

Source: DeFiLlama Between the 26th of June and now, investors added roughly $15.7 million to Total Value Locked (TVL), lifting it to $217.7 million. Those inflows suggested investors committed more capital despite recent volatility.

Total Value Locked measures assets deposited into DeFi protocols. Rising TVL often reflects stronger long-term conviction while investors earn yield.

Is the protocol keeping up? However, rising TVL did not match the protocol’s underlying performance.

Pump.fun continued underperforming across key metrics, including revenue, fees, and launchpad volume.

Data from Artemis showed launchpad volume and fees generated by memecoins on the platform fell 86.7% and 35.6% to $5.8 million and $587,200, respectively.

Source: Artemis Those declines suggested user activity remained weak despite improving investor sentiment.

Lower activity reduced fee generation and limited protocol utility, making it harder for the recent price recovery to gain stronger fundamental support.

Revenue reflected the same trend.

Protocol revenue fell 23% to $147.8 million, reinforcing signs of slowing activity.

Historically, sustained token rallies have been easier to support when protocol usage improves alongside price. Until those metrics recover, PUMP’s recent optimism could remain vulnerable.

Final Summary PUMP gained 12%, holder count hit a record, and TVL increased sharply, signaling renewed market interest. If protocol metrics fail to recover, investor optimism may prove difficult to sustain.

CoinEx processed billions in transfers with Iranian exchanges, including more than $2.7 billion in transactions with OFAC-sanctioned Nobitex since 2018.

More than $3.84 billion in blockchain transactions have been traced between crypto exchange CoinEx and sanctioned Iranian entities over a period of more than seven years.

The findings come shortly after the US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned four Iranian exchanges, Nobitex, BitPin, Wallex, and Ramzinex, under Executive Orders 13224 and 13902.

TRM Maps CoinEx’s Expanding Iran Connections According to the latest report by TRM Labs, the four exchanges represented roughly $7.7 billion, or 78%, of Iran’s estimated $10 billion in attributed crypto activity in 2025. Despite repeated enforcement actions, Iran’s annual crypto volumes have remained high. CoinEx, which was founded in 2017 by Haipo Yang and operated through entities in several jurisdictions, has processed more than $79 billion in trading volume.

The exchange has also faced regulatory actions in several countries. TRM’s findings reveal that CoinEx is the largest external counterparty of Iran’s biggest crypto exchange, Nobitex. Since late 2018, more than $2.7 billion has moved between the two platforms through roughly 6.2 million blockchain transfers, averaging about $1 million per day. Nobitex has sent around $360 million more to CoinEx than it received, which suggests that funds are consistently moving from Iran to international markets through CoinEx.

Activity between the two exchanges rose from about $13 million in 2020 to $575 million in 2021. After declining in 2022 and 2023, volumes recovered to $714 million in 2024 and $763 million in 2025. In fact, CoinEx accounted for over 16% of Nobitex’s yearly transaction activity.

TRM also identified direct links between CoinEx and more than 60 Iranian crypto businesses, including Wallex, Ramzinex, BitPin, Aban Tether, Excoino, Bit24, Ompfinex, Sarmayex, and Exir. The report said a similar share of transaction volumes was routed through CoinEx across multiple Iranian exchanges, along with the gradual onboarding of platforms over several years, which points to an organized relationship rather than independent market behavior.

The blockchain intelligence company further found that around $67 million originating from the Central Bank of Iran reached CoinEx through a complex laundering structure between June 2025 and June 2026. Funds reportedly moved through multiple blockchains, cross-chain bridges, Gnosis Safe contracts, and Aave tokens before eventually reaching CoinEx. The exchange also allegedly provided transaction fees that helped support these transfers.

You may also like: Is Bitcoin (And Peace) In Trouble as Trump Warns Iran of Fresh Strikes? BTC, ETH, XRP Progress at Risk as Trump Condemns Israel’s Latest Attacks Will BTC Rocket if Trump Delivers on His Iran Deal Promise This Sunday? ViaBTC, a mining pool operated by CoinEx’s parent company, was also closely tied to Iran. TRM traced more than $154 million between ViaBTC and Nobitex-linked wallets, and most transfers flowed from the mining pool to Iranian wallets. Following the 2025 cyberattack on Nobitex, previously inactive mining wallets transferred about $2.7 million to a new Nobitex wallet. ViaBTC also appeared in the transaction chain, which indicates that mining reserves were used to restore liquidity.

Conflict Altered Transaction Patterns CoinEx’s exposure to wallets linked to the IRGC, Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Garantex, Bitzlato, the CoinEx hack, BlackSuit ransomware, and the Wasabi mixing service was also found by TRM. Transaction patterns changed after the US-Iran-Israel conflict intensified in early 2026. Average transfer sizes increased sharply, and larger transactions became more common.

After OFAC sanctioned several Iranian exchanges earlier this month, transaction volumes between CoinEx and Iranian entities fell significantly, although the firm noted that private exchange accounts could still allow activity to continue outside public blockchain visibility.

Meanwhile, CoinEx denied having any relationship with the Iranian government or sanctioned entities and said it has never provided funding or support to them. The exchange further asserted that blockchain transactions do not prove involvement in illegal activity.

Tags: