Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

TLDR

A whale bought more than 80,000 LINK worth $1.02 million through CoWSwap.
Chainlink’s Whale vs Retail Delta climbed to 0.594 on October 22, up from near 0.10.
Spot and futures Taker CVD readings on CryptoQuant remain seller-dominant.
LINK pulled back from $14.218 resistance and is holding the $12 support.
A break above $14.218 could open a path toward the $18 zone.

Chainlink (LINK) drew fresh interest from large investors this week. A whale bought more than 80,000 LINK worth about $1.02 million, according to on-chain data shared on X.

$LINK — Chainlink
ㅤ
Everyone is watching $BTC, $ETH, and $SOL.
ㅤ
But what about the infrastructure connecting blockchains to the global financial system?
ㅤ$LINK is betting that the future of finance will depend on secure data, interoperability, and tokenized assets.… pic.twitter.com/m2Yv9I61U8

— Jus7Degen (@Jus7Degen) October 23, 2026

The post showed the wallet made the purchase through CoWSwap. It also showed the wallet’s total crypto portfolio was close to $3 million, including stablecoin holdings.

The buy came during a period of wider market uncertainty. It has raised questions about whether large holders expect stronger LINK performance in the fourth quarter.

Whales Return as Sellers Hold Ground
The single purchase was not the only sign of whale activity. Chainlink’s Whale vs Retail Delta indicator climbed to 0.594 on October 22, according to CoinGlass.

That reading followed an earlier drop toward the 0.10 level. The rise shows whales are now more active relative to retail traders.

The metric has stayed mostly positive through much of 2026. Its latest increase brought whale participation closer to levels seen during past accumulation phases.

However, trading data from CryptoQuant shows sellers remain in control. The Spot Taker CVD is still seller-dominant, meaning market sell orders outweigh aggressive buying.

The Futures Taker CVD shows the same pattern. Traders using leverage have not yet built steady buying demand.

This leaves a gap between whale buying and the wider market. So far, large purchases have not reversed the selling pressure.

Chainlink’s recovery may depend on whether other market players follow the whales. For now, that shift has not appeared in the data.

LINK Holds $12 Support After Rejection
LINK’s weekly recovery from the $8 support area stalled at $14.218. The rejection pulled price back toward $12, where buyers stepped in.

Chainlink Price on CoinGecko
Holding that level kept LINK above its recent recovery base. The $12 area is now the key support on the weekly chart.

On the weekly TradingView chart, the MACD is still leaning bullish. The MACD line sits at 0.800 above the signal line at 0.433, but the histogram has cooled to 0.367, so momentum is fading, not flipping. RSI is at 54.79, just under its 55.43 average but still above neutral.

Simple setup here: $12 is the floor, $14.218 is the ceiling. What to watch next is a clean weekly close above $14.218, which would put the $18 zone back on the table, where sellers stepped in before.

As of October 22, LINK continued to hold above $12. The Whale vs Retail Delta stood at 0.594, while both spot and futures CVD readings still favored sellers.

Injective ($INJ) has grown its native $USDC supply by 43% in 30 days to $16.5M, as it positions itself as the canonical dollar standard for Cosmos and 20+ chains.

@Injective has expanded its native $USDC supply by 43% over the past 30 days, lifting the total on-chain dollar supply on the network to $16.5M. The financial Layer-1 blockchain is positioning itself as the canonical dollar standard across more than 20 chains, including @Cosmos.

The increase comes ahead of a liquidity rotation in which protocols are expected to allocate more than $100M in bridged and native stablecoins to $INJ.

How Injective Became a Dollar HubThe growth follows a series of integrations over the past several months. , giving the chain direct access to the largest regulated stablecoin without wrapped assets. That design avoids reliance on third-party bridges.

Native USDC later went live on mainnet. That figure refers to the broader USDC ecosystem, not the amount currently held on Injective.

The Cosmos link followed in May.

Why Cosmos Liquidity Is ShiftingThe move addresses a long-standing issue in Cosmos.

For $INJ, the potential benefit is indirect. That outcome is not assured, and the current $16.5M supply remains small next to the wider stablecoin market.

Investors will be watching whether the planned stablecoin allocations materialise and whether more Cosmos chains complete the move to Injective USDC.

Sources:

Injective: USDC adopted by Cosmos and dYdX as canonical stablecoin standardBlockchain.News: Circle brings native USDC to Injective with CCTPCrypto Economy: Injective's USDC becomes the stablecoin standard for Cosmos and dYdX

Santiment data shows Internet Computer ($ICP) median daily active addresses up 35% and new addresses up 45%, but activity is still about half its November 2025 level.

Internet Computer (@dfinity) $ICP is facing criticism over adoption, but its on-chain activity is recovering. Data from analytics firm Santiment shows a clear pickup in network usage over the past two months, though activity remains well below last year's levels.

Active and new addresses climbMedian daily active addresses on Internet Computer rose 35%, according to Santiment. The daily median climbed from 2,838 between July 24 and August 22 to 3,860 between September 22 and October 21.

New addresses rose faster. Over the same periods, the figure increased 45%, from 481 to 710.

Santiment defines daily active addresses as the number of distinct addresses that took part in a transfer for a given asset on a given day. Each address is counted once per day, and both senders and receivers are included. The metric measures network participation but does not show how much value is moving, or whether activity comes from organic users.

The gap to November 2025 remainsThe recovery comes with a caveat. The latest weekly readings remain roughly half the 9,500-address average recorded in early November 2025. That leaves the network well short of its recent peak, even after the improvement.

The user growth has also not been matched by price. COINOTAG reported that ICP lost 8.29% over the past month while new daily addresses rose 45% to 710, and that traders are watching the $2.50 to $2.85 range for the next decisive move. That divergence between usage and token performance is now a central question for holders, the outlet said.

For investors, the data points to early signs of stabilising demand for the network rather than a full rebound. Whether the increase in addresses can be sustained, and whether it translates into deeper usage, will determine if $ICP can close the gap with its late 2025 activity levels.

Sources:

COINOTAG: ICP new addresses up 45% as price slides, Santiment showsSantiment Academy: Daily Active Addresses metric definition

Crypto asset management company Bitwise stated in its latest research that Solana stands out.

Accordingly, 72.8% of all SOL staked on the Solana network is concentrated among validators located in Europe.

Europe Leads in Solana Stake Distribution!
According to Bitwise’s Staking Report, the majority of SOL staked on the Solana network is concentrated in Europe. Europe ranks first with a 72.8% share, followed by North America with 16.2%, Asia with 10.6%, and South America with 0.4%.

The concentration in Europe is particularly evident in the region between Amsterdam, Frankfurt, and London. This distribution presents a remarkable picture in terms of geographical centralization and connection delays in the Solana network infrastructure.

According to the Bitwise report, the reduction in slot times has exacerbated regional disparities. This is because Solana gradually reduced slot times from 400 milliseconds to 250 milliseconds between August and September 2026 in an effort to increase network processing speed and reduce finalization times.

According to Bitwise, this change has contributed to faster transaction finalization while also reducing the time validators have to receive blocks, verify them, and submit votes.

The concentration of staking in Solana within Europe raises questions about the impact of MiCA regulations on staking services. However, the mere presence of a validator in Europe does not automatically necessitate licensing. According to ESMA, companies offering staking and custody services must comply with the relevant MiCA regulations, but neither Bitwise nor the Solana Foundation have provided an assessment of the direct regulatory implications of this concentration in Europe.

*This is not investment advice.

Follow our Telegram and X account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!

THORSday Community Podcast #244 ft. CBarraford, KentonC137 & Patriotsounds | October 22, 2026 | Watch the full episode on YouTube

By Raynalytics

TL;DRv3.21 was about 13 hours from adoption. Chad expects to cut v3.21.1 next week once two more pull requests merge, and once the paused churn resumes, $XMR is ready to launch.In its second week, SwapKit Rev-Share spent $841.60 in credits on swaps that earned THORChain $3.72K in fees, a 4.4x return that held steady as spending doubled.Chad is turning block time into an adjustable mimir so THORChain can step down from 6 seconds to 2 seconds one second at a time, and step back up without a new binary.About 20% of nodes have started voting to end rewards to liquidity pools. Kenton wants a formal ADR, while Denny and Chad made the case for protocol-owned liquidity (POL) instead.Chad unveiled Visual Review, a tool that turns any code change into an explainer page, and the solvency checker halted a small IBC exploit on its own at a loss of about $800.1. Monero Is Two Pull Requests and a Churn AwayAt recording time, v3.21 was roughly 13 hours from adoption. Chad said two more pull requests need to merge before the team can cut v3.21.1, which he expects next week. The churn is currently paused for issues that v3.21 fixes, so the remaining sequence is: adopt v3.21 and v3.21.1, restart the churn, and launch Monero.

"Once that's out and the churn is churning, we're live." (Chad)A community member asked whether THORChain could be a reorg target, citing the Qubic selfish-mining incidents on Monero. Chad said it comes down to confirmation counting. He described a method JP created years ago: wait enough blocks that the block rewards in that window exceed the value coming into the protocol. More confirmations mean slower trades, but because THORChain has no decentralized competition for $XMR and competes mainly with centralized exchanges, speed matters less at launch. Chad leans toward a higher confirmation count to start, with the exact number still to be researched. For contrast, he recalled Erik Voorhees telling him that ShapeShift used a single confirmation on Bitcoin for its whole history without a reorg incident.

Shielded Zcash addresses are not coming soon. Chad used AI to generate a full implementation in about 12 hours, but it added roughly 20,000 to 30,000 lines of code, and the devs pushed back on the complexity. What tipped Chad was Maya Protocol's data: only about 15% of its Zcash volume uses shielded addresses. The Zcash community is also working on rotating transparent addresses, which Chad expects would need no changes on THORChain's side. He will be at Zcash Foundation's Zcon7 in Cancún next week.

Beyond Monero, BSC is now on Router v6 alongside Base and Avalanche, and churnless chain additions are targeted for the next release or the one after. Asked about Zano, Chad said it is still well back in the queue. He named Substrate-based chains, Bittensor's $TAO and Dash as the short list after Monero, which he called by far the hardest chain THORChain has integrated.

2. SwapKit Rev-Share Holds at 4.4x in Week TwoChad returned to Ray's SwapKit Revenue Share dashboard for a second weekly check-in. Under the 20% Rev-Share, SwapKit has accrued $7.03K in credits and spent $841.60 of it on quote discounts, leaving a $6.19K balance. Swaps carrying those discounts earned THORChain $3.72K in fees, a 4.4x return, slightly below the 4.6x of week one. The discounted swaps added up to $1.96M in volume across 778 swaps, an average of about $2,500 each.

Chad's summary was that the numbers held. Spending roughly doubled over twice the time, and the ratio barely moved, which the hosts called a great sign.

The open question is still scale. Chad expects SwapKit to raise its spending after v3.21, and the hosts noted that the release fixes an affiliate code bug that should let SwapKit add more partners. If the ratio stays around 4.4x to 4.5x, he said raising the share from 20% to 25% would create the flywheel discussed last week, where every dollar SwapKit spends returns more than a dollar to its bucket, until SwapKit's market saturates. Week one is covered in last week's recap.

3. Should THORChain End LP Rewards?Kenton raised a vote already in motion: roughly 20% of nodes, about 27, have started voting to cancel rewards going to liquidity pools. Because it would be a big change to THORChain's economics, he suggested someone write a formal ADR.

The backdrop: for months the incentive pendulum sent nearly all rewards to nodes, then 20% of system income began flowing to POL. Now the pendulum is swinging back, and rewards are reaching legacy LPs again. Kenton's concern is that LPs need $RUNE to outperform to break even, but that same outperformance erodes the value of their accumulating rewards through impermanent loss. He believes POL should replace LPs over time. He also steelmanned the other side: if $RUNE never outperforms enough, those rewards could help pay LPs back. Boone has proposed paying rewards out to LPs directly to shield them from impermanent loss, and wrote in chat that most LPs would not benefit from rewards at current prices because synth leverage is so severe.

Denny, speaking as an LP, backed POL over LP rewards. Ray's POL Income dashboard shows 1.23M $RUNE of system income collected for POL, about $791,500 at current prices. Kenton added that $RUNE tracks volume, volume needs liquidity, and THORChain has lost roughly 75% to 80% of its liquidity since THORFi. He would end the rewards if it were his call, while acknowledging that node operators are also struggling on low yields. Node income is tracked on Ray's THORChain Financials page.

"We are grinding our way out of this hole. It's happening." (Denny)Chad favored POL because it is not mercenary capital. If there were another hack, POL would likely be first in line to absorb losses, rather than the Treasury, which paid for most past incidents. He said he wished THORChain had launched with both streaming swaps and POL from day one. For background, see the recap covering POL's launch.

4. A Gradual Path to 2-Second BlocksChad is revisiting 2-second blocks. The original code was merged about a year and a half ago, then pulled back because a hard switch felt risky and difficult to undo. His new approach is to make block time a mimir rather than a code change, so THORChain can move one step at a time and roll back if needed without releasing a new binary.

"We can walk it down from 6 seconds, what it is now, to 5 seconds to 4 seconds to 3 seconds to 2 seconds." (Chad)His analysis of mainnet suggests 2 seconds is a safe target: about 99% of blocks already complete in under 2 seconds. Around 1.5 seconds might be possible with Cosmos SDK performance gains, but Chad would be cautious. The mimir will be hard-coded to a range of 1 to 10 seconds, and going below 1 second would mean forking or replacing CometBFT, the consensus layer underneath.

On paper, the benefits are clear: streaming swaps would execute three times faster, arbitrage bots would rebalance pools more often, and the Rujira app layer would gain from faster blocks. Chad wants to measure how much of that shows up in practice before pushing lower, and hopes to move ahead within the next month or two. The idea first resurfaced in last week's recap.

5. The Quote-Versus-Fill Test Gets CheaperThe test proposed last week, comparing swap providers' quotes with what users actually receive, is moving forward with Treasury support. Kenton said he and Ray are working out the procedure, and credited Ray for running the numbers. The original plan of $1,000, $10,000 and $100,000 swaps would have meant a few million dollars in volume and, once fees and spreads were included, a cost of a couple hundred thousand dollars. The revised plan uses only $1,000 swaps: around 400 to 500 of them, roughly $400,000 to $500,000 in volume, for a cost of a few thousand dollars. Kenton said THORChain already wins larger quotes, and the low end of the size curve is where it misses volume, so that is the range worth studying.

On marketing, Kenton listed THORChain on a no-KYC exchange directory and asked the community to leave a review. THORChain will appear on the directory's exchange list once it has an XML quote feed, which Liquify agreed to build. He also asked the Unstoppable Wallet devs about Tor (.onion) and I2P addresses for THORChain Swap and set up a THORChain page on Bitcointalk.

Kenton's focus remains AI search. thorchain.org sits in the top 500 of about 120,000 sites on an AI-visibility tracker, though still at a B grade, and new affiliates requesting API keys say they found THORChain through ChatGPT, Claude or Google search. He is also looking into ChatGPT's new advertising, which could open a paid channel crypto lacks on Google.

After a press outlet turned a post about a 140 $RUNE Zcash pool bug into a negative story, Kenton said issues will still be disclosed on Discord and GitLab, but the main X account does not need to spotlight every minor bug.

6. Visual Review Turns Code Changes Into ExplainersChad unveiled Visual Review, a skill he built that turns a code change into a web page explaining it visually. He showed it on his dynamic fee merge request. The page includes a five-minute explainer video with chapters, interactive graphs, and a narrated walkthrough of every changed line, with fuzzy search by file name, function or snippet of code. The goal is to let anyone, technical or not, understand a change before it merges.

"It's my attention and my focus that is the most valuable resource in this process." (Chad)The merge request he showed runs to about 27,000 lines, of which roughly 1,483 are logic changes; the rest are tests and documentation. Huginn will generate these pages automatically, with a button at the top of each pull request. Chad has open-sourced the skill on GitLab, and Kenton added a Visual Review link to the thorchain.org footer during the show.

The dynamic fee change itself replaces the current step search, which moves 1 bps at a time, with a bracket search. Instead of trying 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 bps, the model jumps from 1 bps to 20 bps, then tests the midpoint and narrows in. Bigger jumps make the market's reaction clearer and reach the best fee in fewer epochs. The change also lets the team switch an affiliate such as Symbiosis off and on to reset its data. Chad hopes to merge it for v3.22.

7. The Solvency Checker Stops an IBC ExploitTHORChain had what Chad called a tiny mini hack this week. A bug in the IBC implementation let an attacker make THORChain believe it had received $ATOM it never received. The first fake deposit was about 16 $ATOM, roughly $20, sent with a bad memo that triggered a refund. The attacker kept doubling that amount across five transactions.

The solvency checker only acts once a shortfall reaches $500, a buffer that avoids halting the chain over small discrepancies. Once that line was crossed, it halted things within about 20 to 30 seconds, with no human involvement, after an attack lasting seven or eight minutes. Chad expects the roughly $800 shortfall to be refilled from the reserve, probably in the next release. In chat, a viewer offered to open a merge request setting the threshold at $42,069.

"It's a success story in my mind, even though it's only $800." (Chad)Chad also wants more math-based safety checks. AI recently helped solve how to account for synthetics in LUVI, a measure that separates pool earnings from price moves and should almost always rise, so it can now act as an invariant that flags broken pool accounting without knowing the cause. LUVI checks were added to regression testing last week, and Chad plans to add them to mainnet code eventually, though it is not a top priority.

A community member also asked why the reserve holds about 25M $RUNE. Chad was not sure and suspects it relates to accounting from the summer hack. Kenton thought a store migration in v3.21 might address it. Long term, Chad said, the reserve would have a cap, with anything above it paid out as system income.

8. Faster CI and Huginn's Growing RoleChad shared a summary of recent changes to THORChain's continuous integration (CI), the automated tests every code change must pass. The team now runs nearly three times as many CI jobs per day, has added more than 1,300 unit tests, and introduced fuzz testing, mutation testing and adversarial-quorum testing. Typical CI time fell from 97 minutes to 24 minutes, and even the worst cases now finish in under 50 minutes, down from waits as long as seven hours.

Asked whether a large language model could formally verify the THORChain stack using Lean, Chad said Lean is a language for mathematical proofs and he does not think it applies to code. Instead, Huginn reviews every change and continuously audits the codebase, tracking which files it has scanned. By Chad's count, Huginn has found more security issues in the past year than every human contributor combined, by orders of magnitude, and it currently reports only the two highest priority levels. A full audit by the security team also turned up a few dozen issues, which are being addressed.

The bottleneck is human review. A community developer recently opened six or seven merge requests; generating one can take five minutes, while reviewing it can cost several engineers 45 minutes each. Chad estimated THORChain could merge 10 to 20 times more code per release without that constraint, though he stressed humans still review everything. Huginn now runs on its own Treasury-funded accounts, which freed Chad's own AI usage for projects like Visual Review.

"If you write code without having AI involved in that process, you're probably doing it wrong." (Chad)What to Watchv3.21 adoption, the v3.21.1 cut expected next week, and the churn resuming ahead of the $XMR launch.Whether SwapKit scales its Rev-Share spending after v3.21, whether the return holds near 4.4x, and whether the share moves to 25%.Whether an ADR on ending LP rewards is written, and how many nodes join the vote.The 2-second block mimir, hoped for within the next month or two.The dynamic fee bracket search in v3.22, and Visual Review pages on every pull request.The quote-versus-fill test, once Kenton and Ray finalize the procedure.Kenton's quarterly report, which he hopes to work on this weekend.Chad at Zcon7, a possible technical Rujira session with Pragmatic Monkey or CodeHans, and Chad's planned appearance on Joel Valenzuela's show.Schedule changes: Zodl on Friday, October 23, and the Saturday show moving an hour later.More THORChain data, check out raynalytics.net

Follow Raynalytics for more Weekly Analytics and Podcast recaps.

Table of contents

Last Updated: October 23, 2026

The most reliable way to track Shiba Inu (SHIB) burns is to combine three sources: Shibburn for daily totals, a blockchain explorer such as Etherscan to verify each burn transaction, and ShibWatch or the official shib.io site for the state of ShibTorch, Shibarium’s own burn mechanism. No single tracker is official, and they do not count burns the same way.

About 410.85 trillion SHIB, or 41.08% of the original 1 quadrillion supply, has been burned according to Shibburn, but almost all of it comes from a single transaction by Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin in May 2021. Burns today are tiny: about 673 million SHIB in the past 30 days, worth roughly $3,810. ShibTorch, the official burn portal, is under maintenance and has not burned SHIB since August 2025, according to ShibWatch.

Key Takeaways

Total burned: about 410.85 trillion SHIB according to Shibburn, of which about 410.44 trillion sits in a single dead address that holds Vitalik Buterin’s 2021 burn.
Recent burns: about 2.47 million SHIB in the past 24 hours (about $12), 67.2 million in seven days and 673.4 million in 30 days, according to Shibburn on October 23, 2026.
ShibTorch is paused: the Shibarium burn portal is under maintenance because the SHIB route on the Shibarium bridge has stayed closed since a September 2025 exploit.
Trackers disagree: Shibburn counts about 340 billion more burned SHIB than the three main burn addresses hold on-chain, and supply figures differ by several trillion SHIB between Shibburn and CoinMarketCap.
Headline burn rates mislead: recent spikes of 492% and 2,349% involved burns worth about $13 and $5.

SHIB Burn Data Today
MetricValueTotal SHIB burned (Shibburn)410,845,024,873,680 SHIB (41.08% of 1 quadrillion)Burned in the past 24 hours2,472,769 SHIB (about $12)Burned in the past 7 days67,240,450 SHIB (about $341)Burned in the past 30 days673,379,117 SHIB (about $3,810)Largest burn address balance410,437,114,516,937 SHIB (0xdEAD…2069)SHIB priceAbout $0.0000050ShibTorch statusUnder maintenance; last burn in August 2025 (ShibWatch)
Sources: Shibburn and Etherscan, October 23, 2026; price from CoinMarketCap; ShibTorch status from ShibWatch and U.Today, October 22, 2026. Shibburn’s 24-hour figure is a rolling window, so it changes through the day.

For live price levels, see our Shiba Inu price page.

Where to Check SHIB Burns: Trackers Compared
SourceWho runs itWhat it showsBest forCaveatsShibburn (shibburn.com)Independent; now managed by BurnalyticsTotal burned, 24-hour, 7-day and 30-day burns, recent burn transactions and top burnersQuick daily totalsNot affiliated with the Shiba Inu team; counts several burn addresses; does not publish the cut-off time of its 24-hour windowEtherscanIndependent block explorerSHIB balance of each burn address and every individual transactionVerifying a specific burnShows raw transfers and balances, not daily totals; you need the correct SHIB contract and burn addressShibWatchCommunity tracker; operator not namedShibTorch burn totals, the BONE waiting to be burned and the status of each Shibarium bridge laneChecking whether ShibTorch is workingUnofficial; reads contracts directly but is not auditedshib.io (ShibTorch page)Shiba Inu teamShibTorch burn activity and contractsThe official view of Shibarium burnsIts burn page was failing to load data on October 22, 2026 because the indexer behind it no longer runsThe Shib DailyShiba Inu teamAnnouncements about ShibTorch, Shibarium and burn mechanismsOfficial changes and explanationsThe team’s own outlet, so confirm claims on-chainShibariumscanShibarium block explorerTransactions on ShibariumChecking Shibarium-side activityHad indexed only about 54% of Shibarium blocks as of October 1, 2026
The practical setup is simple: bookmark Shibburn for the daily number, check any large or unusual burn on Etherscan, and look at ShibWatch or shib.io when headlines talk about Shibarium or ShibTorch burns.

SHIB Burn Addresses
The SHIB token contract on Ethereum is 0x95aD61b0a150d79219dCF64E1E6Cc01f0B64C4cE. Burned SHIB sits in addresses that no one controls, so the tokens can never move again.

AddressWhat it isSHIB held on October 23, 20260xdEAD000000000000000042069420694206942069Dead address used for Vitalik Buterin’s May 2021 burn410,437,114,516,936.90x000000000000000000000000000000000000dEaDCommon dead address; Shibburn says the team used it for ShibaSwap listings49,460,833,155.30x0000000000000000000000000000000000000000Null address; sending SHIB here destroys it and lowers the on-chain total supplyAbout 17.67 billion destroyed
Balances from Etherscan. The null address holds no balance because burns to it reduce SHIB’s on-chain total supply, which now stands at 999,982,327,167,466 SHIB instead of 1 quadrillion.

Why SHIB Burn Trackers Show Different Numbers
The three addresses above add up to about 410.50 trillion SHIB. Shibburn reports about 410.85 trillion, roughly 340 billion more, and does not publish the full list of addresses it counts. Media outlets have attributed the gap to Shibburn summing several burn addresses, but the exact method is not public.

Supply figures differ for a similar reason. CoinMarketCap and CoinGecko put SHIB’s total supply at about 589.50 trillion, which equals the on-chain supply minus the two dead addresses above, and its circulating supply at about 589.24 trillion. Shibburn shows a total of about 589.15 trillion and a circulating supply of about 585.49 trillion, because it treats more tokens as burned and excludes more wallets from circulation. Neither side lists every wallet it excludes, so a difference of a few trillion SHIB between sites is normal and does not mean anyone is wrong about the burns themselves.

This comparison is our own analysis of Shibburn, CoinMarketCap, CoinGecko and Etherscan data from October 23, 2026.

Why SHIB Burn Rate Headlines Mislead
Burn rate headlines compare one day’s burns with the day before, so tiny amounts can produce huge percentages. On October 19, the burn rate jumped 2,349% on about 1.10 million SHIB, worth about $5. On October 21, it rose 492% on about 2.7 million SHIB, worth about $13. In early October, a 182,140% spike was followed the next day by a reading of zero burned SHIB.

The more useful measure is burns as a share of supply. About 673 million SHIB burned in 30 days is roughly 0.0001% of the circulating supply. At that pace, burning just 1% of the supply would take about 714 years, according to Cryptoticker. By comparison, about 87 trillion SHIB sat on exchanges on October 21, roughly 129,000 times the monthly burn. Our analysis of SHIB’s burn rate explains the math in more detail.

What Happened to ShibTorch?
ShibTorch went live on August 16, 2024 as Shibarium’s community burn portal. Shibarium charges transaction fees in BONE, and under the network’s design about 70% of base fees is set aside to buy and burn SHIB, with 30% going to the treasury. A hard fork on August 9, 2024 automated that burn, and ShibTorch V2, released in January 2025, moved the portal into shib.io and simplified the bridge route the burns use.

The process has stalled. According to community member Mazrael, cited by U.Today on October 22, 2026, ShibTorch now swaps BONE for SHIB on Shibarium and then bridges the SHIB to a dead address on Ethereum. That SHIB lane on the Shibarium bridge has been closed since the September 12, 2025 exploit, in which an attacker used a flash loan of 4.6 million BONE and control of 10 of 12 validator signing keys to drain about $2.4 million. The BONE lane reopened on October 14, 2025 with a seven-day withdrawal delay, but the SHIB lane has not moved since October 2025, according to ShibWatch.

ShibTorch is now listed as under maintenance, with about 371 BONE waiting to be burned, below the threshold of 1,000 BONE that community members say triggers a burn. ShibWatch counts about 69.32 billion SHIB burned through Shibarium-related mechanisms in total, worth about $1.27 million at the time of the burns, and says ShibTorch has not burned since August 2025. Our report on what Shiba Inu is building covers the wider Shibarium roadmap.

A Short History of SHIB Burns
DateEventMay 16 to 17, 2021Vitalik Buterin burns about 410.24 trillion SHIB, about 41% of the supply and 90% of his remaining SHIB, worth up to $6.7 billion at the timeApril 2022A burn portal launches on ShibaSwap, rewarding burners with tokens that earn a share of RYOSHI fees; more than 8 billion SHIB is burned in its first 24 hoursDecember 5, 2023First Shibarium-linked burn: 8.2 billion SHIB, worth about $76,000, from fees collected on the networkAugust 9, 2024Shibarium hard fork automates the burn of 70% of base feesAugust 16, 2024ShibTorch goes live as Shibarium’s community burn portalJanuary 30, 2025ShibTorch V2 moves into shib.io with a simpler bridge routeSeptember 12, 2025Shibarium bridge exploit drains about $2.4 million; the SHIB bridge lane stays closedJuly 2026About 2.96 billion SHIB burned in the week to July 30, the biggest weekly total of the yearOctober 2026ShibTorch under maintenance; 30-day burns near 673 million SHIB
How to Verify a SHIB Burn Yourself

Find the transaction hash. A reliable burn report links to the transaction or names the wallet that sent it.
Open it on Etherscan. Check that the token is SHIB, at contract address 0x95aD61b0a150d79219dCF64E1E6Cc01f0B64C4cE, and not a copycat token.
Check the destination. The tokens should go to one of the burn addresses above or be destroyed through a verifiable contract.
Match the amount and time. Compare the on-chain amount with the reported figure, and check whether a burn rate refers to 24 hours, seven days or another period.
Separate burns from pledges. Tokens that are pledged, locked or waiting in a contract, like the BONE sitting in ShibTorch, are not burned until the transaction happens.

Do SHIB Burns Affect the Price?
Not meaningfully at today’s pace. With about 589 trillion SHIB in circulation and burns of under a billion a month, supply is effectively fixed, so SHIB’s price depends on demand, Bitcoin’s direction and meme coin sentiment far more than on burns. Our analysis of whether Shiba Inu can reach 1 cent shows how many tokens would need to be burned for that to change, and our Shiba Inu price prediction covers the forecasts from 2026 to 2040. If you plan to buy SHIB, our guide on where to buy Shiba Inu compares exchanges and wallets.

Data sources: Shibburn and Burnalytics (burn totals), Etherscan (SHIB contract and burn address balances), ShibWatch (ShibTorch and bridge status), U.Today and CoinTurk (ShibTorch maintenance), The Shib Daily (ShibTorch launch, V2 and bridge reopening), The Block (bridge exploit), Decrypt and CoinDesk (Vitalik Buterin’s 2021 burn), Cryptoticker (burn rate math and exchange balances), CryptoPotato and U.Today (burn rate spikes) and CoinMarketCap and CoinGecko (supply and price), as of October 23, 2026.

This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial advice. Cryptocurrency markets are volatile; always do your own research before investing.

Frequently Asked Questions
How much SHIB has been burned?
About 410.85 trillion SHIB, or 41.08% of the original 1 quadrillion supply, according to Shibburn on October 23, 2026. Almost all of it comes from Vitalik Buterin’s burn of about 410.24 trillion SHIB in May 2021. The main dead address holding that burn has about 410.44 trillion SHIB, and burns since 2021 add up to only a small fraction of the total.

How much SHIB was burned today?
Shibburn showed about 2.47 million SHIB burned in the 24 hours to October 23, 2026, worth about $12, along with about 67.2 million SHIB in seven days and 673.4 million in 30 days. The 24-hour figure is a rolling window that changes through the day, so always check the time of any reading before comparing it with another source.

What is the most reliable SHIB burn tracker?
Shibburn is the most widely cited tracker for daily totals, but it is independent and does not publish its full method. For accuracy, check any important burn on Etherscan, which shows each transaction and the balance of every burn address. For Shibarium and ShibTorch burns, ShibWatch and the official shib.io site show whether the mechanism is actually working.

What is the Shiba Inu burn address?
The main SHIB burn address is 0xdEAD000000000000000042069420694206942069, which holds about 410.44 trillion SHIB, including Vitalik Buterin’s 2021 burn. The common dead address 0x000000000000000000000000000000000000dEaD holds about 49.46 billion SHIB. Sending SHIB to the null address destroys it, which has removed about 17.67 billion SHIB from the on-chain total supply. Always confirm the SHIB contract address before sending or checking any burn.

Why is ShibTorch not burning SHIB?
ShibTorch is under maintenance because the SHIB route on the Shibarium bridge has been closed since a September 2025 exploit that drained about $2.4 million. The portal swaps BONE fees for SHIB and bridges it to a dead address on Ethereum, so without the bridge it cannot complete burns. About 371 BONE was waiting in ShibTorch on October 22, 2026.

Why do SHIB burn trackers show different numbers?
Trackers count different addresses and exclude different wallets from supply. Shibburn reports about 340 billion more burned SHIB than the three main burn addresses hold, and it puts circulating supply near 585.49 trillion, against about 589.24 trillion on CoinMarketCap. Neither publishes a full list of the wallets it counts, so small differences between sites are normal.

Can token burns push SHIB to 1 cent?
Not at the current pace. About 673 million SHIB was burned in the past 30 days, roughly 0.0001% of the circulating supply, so burning even 1% would take about 714 years. One cent would require removing almost all of the remaining 589 trillion SHIB, or a market value of about $5.9 trillion, more than twice the entire crypto market.

Cysic dangles a 10% bounty, hacker pours loot into Tornado CashThe attacker moved $744,000 in ETH and BNB to Tornado Cash after exploiting Cysic’s bridge to mint 10 million tokens on BNB Smart Chain.

The wallet linked to the Cysic bridge exploit sent about $744,000 in cryptocurrencies to Tornado Cash on Friday after the Cysic Foundation offered the attacker a 10% recovery bounty.

The address transferred 300 Ether (ETH) and 30.4 BNB to the crypto mixer, according to blockchain security company PeckShield.

The hacker exploited a bridge vulnerability to mint 10 million Cysic (CYS) tokens on BNB Smart Chain on Saturday. Cysic suspended the bridge and blacklisted the recipient address, freezing about 2.8 million of the newly minted tokens. The foundation said its mainnet and existing assets in user wallets were unaffected.

The following Thursday, the Cysic Foundation offered the hacker a 10% bounty in exchange for returning 275.872 ETH, worth about $665,000, representing roughly 90% of the identified Ether proceeds.

Tornado Cash pools deposits from multiple addresses, making the funds harder to trace. The attacker’s Ethereum wallet held just $45 in ETH at press time, according to Akham data.

Cointelegraph contacted the Cysic Foundation for comment on fund recovery efforts but did not receive a response by publication.

Subscribe to daily byte-sized crypto news from Cointelegraph Subscribe 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.

HackersHacksTornado CashCybersecurityCybercrimeCrimesScams & Cybercrime

More on the subject

Gate.io has released its latest Proof of Reserves (PoR) report, showing that it holds more XRP than its customers collectively have on the exchange. 

The Proof of Reserve, released on Oct. 20, 2026, puts XRP’s reserve ratio at approximately 115%, meaning Gate holds 15% more tokens than customers have deposited.

Based on the audit snapshot from Oct. 18, 2026, the report also shows that the exchange holds more than its customers’ balances across every other major asset class. Gate has published verified reserve reports since 2020.

Gate Strengthens Its Overall Reserve Coverage Gate’s October report reveals that customers held a combined $7.332 billion in assets on the platform at the time of the snapshot, including more than 52 million XRP. 

The exchange held $8.688 billion in total reserves, bringing its overall reserve ratio to 118.49%. This marks an increase from the 117.26% recorded in the previous reporting period. 

Gate’s reserves exceeded customer balances by $1.356 billion, giving the exchange an additional buffer to meet withdrawals if many customers seek to withdraw their assets at once.

Gate has maintained excess reserves throughout 2026, building on its first PoR audit in 2020. Its reserve ratio stood at 125% in January, when total reserves reached $9.478 billion, before falling to 122% in March. 

The October ratio is lower than both earlier figures, partly due to the effect of a larger and faster-growing customer base. However, Gate still holds more than $1.3 billion above its customers’ combined balances, which keeps its total reserves well above its reported liabilities.

Gate Proof of Reserves Shows Small XRP Holdings Gate’s October PoR puts its XRP reserve ratio at approximately 115%. Specifically, customers held 52,529,328 XRP on the exchange, worth about $69.8 million at the time of the snapshot. 

Gate.io Proof of Reserves shows XRP overcollateralized at 115% Meanwhile, Gate held 60,396,694 XRP, valued at approximately $78.9 million. By press time, XRP had risen to $1.33, pushing the value of the exchange’s XRP holdings above $80.3 million.

Interestingly, on-chain data provided by XRPScan shows that Gate now holds 58.65 million XRP across four XRP Ledger (XRPL) accounts. This represents approximately 0.88% of the 68.4 billion XRP tokens in circulation.

Onchain data shows Gate.io holds 58M XRP across 4 accounts Gate’s XRP holdings remain relatively small compared with those of the largest centralized exchanges. South Korea’s Upbit leads with approximately 4.4 billion XRP across 13 XRPL accounts, accounting for 6.43% of the circulating supply. 

Coinbase follows with 3.99 billion XRP across 343 accounts, representing 5.84%, while Binance ranks third with 1.874 billion XRP across 145 accounts, giving it a 2.74% share.

Robinhood, Bithumb, Uphold, and Kraken also rank among the top 10 XRP exchange holders, holding between 958 million and 1.6 billion XRP. Phemex, meanwhile, reported an XRP reserve ratio of 153.55% in its September 2026 PoR.

Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Stablecoins Equally Well-Covered Gate also holds more Bitcoin and Ethereum than its customers collectively own. Customers held 21,156 BTC on the exchange, while Gate maintained 25,727 BTC in reserves, worth $2.115 billion. This brought its Bitcoin reserve ratio to 121.6%. Essentially, the exchange held more than 4,500 BTC above customer balances.

With Ethereum, Gate’s customers held 362,785 ETH, while the exchange maintained 449,042 ETH worth $1.082 billion. These holdings resulted in an Ethereum reserve ratio of 123.78%.

Gate’s stablecoin reserves also exceeded customer balances. The exchange held $929.8 million in USDT, giving it a reserve ratio of 111.68%. Its USD1 reserves reached $395.594 million, producing a ratio of 100.98%. As for GUSD, Gate held $317.3 million, giving it a reserve ratio of 181.11%.

US spot Bitcoin ETFs bled $635 million on October 22, according to SoSoValue data reported by Odaily. That is a sharp reversal for a product category that had spent the previous few days collecting cash.

BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT), the biggest name in the space, was the largest single source of the outflow. Investors pulled $254 million from the fund in one session.

A busy week in reverse The timing is what makes the number stand out. In the three days before October 22, these funds attracted more than $1 billion in combined inflows.

October 21 alone brought in approximately $528 million. Most of that came from the two heavyweights of the category.

IBIT took in $235 million that day. Fidelity’s Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC) added $212.7 million.

Then the next day happened. IBIT’s $254 million outflow on October 22 was larger than its entire $235 million haul from the session before, which means the fund gave back a full day of gains plus about $19 million more.

With IBIT responsible for $254 million of the $635 million total, other issuers accounted for roughly $381 million in redemptions between them.

October has been choppy overall. Earlier in the month, certain stretches saw outflows reaching as high as $600 to $900 million, and mid-October brought only a modest uptick in flows before the late-week rally in demand.

The bigger picture since launch One rough day does not erase the longer trend. Cumulative net inflows into US spot Bitcoin ETFs since their January 2024 debut have now approached $57 to $58 billion.

Total net assets held across these funds are estimated at between $100 billion and $109 billion. That puts a $635 million day into perspective: meaningful, headline-worthy, but well under 1% of the asset base.

The Bitcoin price itself held a relatively steady range of $82,000 to $85,000 around this period. The research shows minimal direct correlation between the ETF flow figures and Bitcoin’s price during these swings.

What this means for investors For anyone tracking institutional demand, the key question is whether October 22 marks a turn or a blip. Earlier October buying has been read as a sign of resilient institutional appetite amid ongoing macroeconomic uncertainty.

The fact that Bitcoin stayed within its $82,000 to $85,000 band is arguably the more important data point. If $635 million in redemptions cannot push the price out of its range, it suggests there is enough buying elsewhere in the market to absorb that selling.

Watch whether cumulative inflows keep climbing toward and past the $57 to $58 billion mark, and whether total net assets hold within or above the $100 billion to $109 billion range.

When the two largest issuers move in the same direction, as they did on the inflow side on October 21, it tends to say more about broad institutional sentiment than scattered moves among smaller funds.

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

Casa chief security officer Jameson Lopp has urged Bitcoin holders not to abandon self custody in favor of ETFs and third party custodians following a series of cryptocurrency wallet security incidents.

Summary

Jameson Lopp has urged Bitcoin holders not to abandon self custody despite.
Lopp warned that Bitcoin ETFs and third party custodians do not eliminate security risks but leave investors dependent on institutions to safeguard their holdings.
Recent incidents have raised questions about the safety of managing Bitcoin independently.
Lopp recommended multisig wallets and distributing private keys across different locations and hardware suppliers to reduce the risk of losing funds.
Bitcoin holders are advised to review their security arrangements and prepare for situations where they may no longer be able to access their funds.

In an October 22 open letter addressed to Casa clients and the Bitcoin community, Lopp argued that recent attacks had raised genuine concerns about managing private keys but did not justify giving up direct control of Bitcoin holdings.

Lopp pointed to recent incidents involving hackers using AI to find security flaws, compromised hardware wallet supply chains, drained cold wallets and more sophisticated scams, which have left many Bitcoin holders questioning whether they can safely manage their own funds.

According to him, many of the attacks making headlines today were already known to security professionals, although their emergence in actual incidents had made the risks more difficult for ordinary holders to ignore.

Lopp warns Bitcoin ETFs do not eliminate custody risks
Lopp took particular issue with the idea that moving Bitcoin into exchange traded funds or other managed custody arrangements offered a straightforward solution to recent security problems.

He acknowledged that investors could feel more comfortable relying on financial institutions after hearing about wallet compromises, but argued that transferring control of private keys merely placed responsibility with another party.

In his view, Bitcoin ETFs provide investors with exposure to the cryptocurrency’s price without giving them direct control over the underlying coins.

The arrangement requires investors to depend on the fund, its custodian and other parties responsible for safeguarding the assets. Lopp warned that holders could have little influence over decisions affecting their Bitcoin, including situations involving freezes or seizures by authorities.

He maintained that Bitcoin’s defining properties came from its fixed supply, publicly verifiable rules and the ability of users to access their holdings without obtaining permission from an intermediary.

Although investors could benefit financially from Bitcoin without holding private keys, Lopp argued that they would not enjoy the same degree of control available through direct ownership.

The warning followed reports that some Bitcoin holders had moved assets toward centralized platforms after recent wallet compromises.

In August, crypto.news reported record OKX inflows following the Coldcard hardware wallet exploit, with the exchange saying that customers were increasingly turning toward managed custody.

Recent Bitcoin wallet exploits have raised security concerns
The concerns outlined in Lopp’s letter followed several incidents involving weaknesses in wallet software, hardware distribution and private key generation.

One of the most significant cases involved Coldcard hardware wallets, where a firmware configuration error dating back to March 2021 caused affected devices to generate recovery seeds using a weaker source of randomness.

An August 3 report on the Coldcard security exploit detailed suspected Bitcoin thefts worth nearly $90 million at the time and calls from Kraken chief security officer Nick Percoco for independent testing of wallet seed generation.

The flaw allowed attackers to reconstruct vulnerable private keys without physically accessing the devices or obtaining their recovery phrases.

Coldcard subsequently released corrected firmware, although previously generated vulnerable seeds required users to create new wallets and transfer their holdings.

More recently, an October 13 investigation into compromised Ledger hardware wallets detailed cases involving devices distributed through Southeast Asian reseller CryptoBilis.

Ledger confirmed that an unauthorized hardware implant had been identified in one affected device, while the investigation had not established that its own systems or direct sales channels were compromised.

Security problems involving weak recovery seeds have affected other cryptocurrency networks as well.

On October 18, Qubic disclosed a wallet security breach involving approximately 2.94 trillion QU tokens worth $1.4 million stolen from 1,404 wallets.

Developers traced the incident to insufficient randomness in certain wallet recovery seeds and subsequently corrected the affected software.

Multisig security remains central
Against this background, Lopp argued that the response to failed security controls should involve improving wallet protection instead of abandoning self custody altogether.

Drawing on more than 15 years of security incidents across the cryptocurrency industry, he said effective custody arrangements needed to account for human mistakes and the possibility that individual safeguards could fail.

His preferred approach involved multisignature wallets, which distribute transaction authorization across multiple private keys and can prevent a single compromised key from providing complete access to funds.

Lopp cautioned that multisig was not a complete solution by itself, although he maintained that carefully designed arrangements could provide stronger protection than conventional custody systems.

He encouraged Bitcoin holders to review their existing setups and distribute keys across different geographic locations and hardware supply chains to reduce their dependence on any single device or location.

The letter addressed inheritance planning as another important consideration, particularly what would happen to someone’s Bitcoin if they became unable to access or manage their holdings.

Casa, which provides assisted self custody services, positions its role around helping customers manage these arrangements without taking possession of their private keys.

Lopp closed by warning that both malicious actors and well intentioned intermediaries could ultimately gain control over someone else’s Bitcoin, leaving holders responsible for deciding how much control they were prepared to surrender.

XAO DAO says several proposals have passed in the last couple of weeks, and a community forum is now live, calling it a huge milestone.

XAO DAO co-founder Santiago Velez announced that proposal 66 had passed, authorizing the decentralized autonomous organization to deploy 80% of its XRP treasury into Firelight, a DeFi protocol focused on decentralized insurance and yield.

The decision would put a large share of the DAO’s XRP holdings to work in a strategy intended to generate returns for members while contributing capital to protection services for decentralized finance.

XAO DAO Vote Approves XRP Deployment to Firelight In his announcement, Velez described the proposal as, to his knowledge, the first time a DAO had deployed treasury funds into a multichain DeFi strategy combining decentralized insurance with yield generation.

He thanked co-manager Fabio Marzella, Flare Networks co-founder Hugo Philion, and the Flare team for developing the Flare Smart Accounts technology, as well as Firelight for the opportunity.

The plan connects XRP with Firelight through Flare Smart Accounts, which provide a route for XRP holders to use DeFi applications. In an October 6 post, Flare described Firelight as a way to put XRP behind a protection layer for DeFi with a single XRPL signature.

Firelight posted the same day that anyone deploying XRP through the feature should connect a supported XRPL wallet and choose to mint and deposit FXRP into the Firelight vault, adding: “So bullish on this.”

Meanwhile, XRP itself was changing hands at $1.34 at the time of writing, having barely shifted in 24 hours but dropping nearly 4% of its value in the last seven days and over 11% across one month. It is also more than 44% lower than where it was a year ago, with the current price a 63% dip from its $3.65 all-time high attained in July 2025.

You may also like: XRP Ledger’s Latest Fix Pushed to November After Voting Setback Ripple Backs SEC’s Proposed Crypto Regulation, Calls for End to Case-by-Case Enforcement XRP Ledger Bug Fixes Set for Friday Activation as DeFi Lending Awaits Approval Governance Changes Aim to Broaden Community Participation The treasury vote follows a wider push to improve how XAO DAO members take part in decisions. In an October 22 update, the organization announced that several proposals had passed in recent weeks and introduced a community forum.

Marzella also outlined updates to the governance app, including proposal management, discussion tools, XRP and RLUSD donation tracking, support for several languages and searchable records.

As CryptoPotato reported in August, XAO DAO was preparing governance changes that included wallet delegation, revised quorum rules and community mini-grants. Delegation would let members assign their voting power to others, while changes to quorum rules were intended to address inactive wallets that could obstruct proposals.

The broader concern was how to turn community participation and funding into lasting activity across the XRP Ledger ecosystem. That question also arose after XRPL infrastructure team Gen3 announced on August 12 that it would wind down its retail products Aigent.run and AxiomProtocol, citing weak demand and rising infrastructure costs.

Tags:

Updated Published

3 min read

Cardano holders are being asked to bet $5 million on copper hitting a new record. (Shutterstock)Summary

Toto Finance is seeking 22 million ADA, or about $5 million, from Cardano’s treasury to buy and tokenize copper, with voting set to close Nov. 15.Copper would need to rise about 49.4% for the treasury to recover its investment if the full budget is spent and ADA’s dollar price remains unchanged.The proposal would use more than half of Cardano’s remaining withdrawal allowance, while Toto could receive up to 3.36 million ADA and retain commercial rights to its separately funded tokenized-copper business.Cardano’s community treasury is being asked to spend about $5 million on a copper reserve, with costs that would require the metal to rise nearly 50% to recover the original investment under the proposal’s assumptions.

Toto Finance, a company that turns physical commodities into blockchain tokens, wants 22 million ADA for what it calls the Cardano Strategic Copper Reserve. Voting closes Nov. 15.

Copper, also known as “Dr. Copper” for its role as a barometer of global growth, is widely tracked as a signal of industrial expansion, with rising prices often pointing to an economic boom.

About two-thirds of the money would buy exchange-grade copper stored in a COMEX-approved warehouse near New Orleans. A token called CuTT would represent each verified pound. The metal would be held for 18 to 24 months, then sold over the following year, with net proceeds and unused funds returned to the treasury by month 36.

There is no guarantee the treasury gets its original ADA back.

The other third covers storage, insurance, audits, oversight and Toto’s work. If the full budget is spent and ADA’s dollar price stays unchanged, copper would need to rise about 49.4% to recover the withdrawal.

The proposal assumes copper is bought at $6.73 a pound and sold at about $10.06. Lower spending would reduce that hurdle, while a stronger ADA would raise it.

“Copper has significant upside potential, with bullish scenarios projecting approximately 30% annual appreciation. At that rate, copper would appreciate 69% over 24 months, potentially more than covering the 49.4% break-even threshold. Of course, commodity prices can also decline,” Monty Metzger, Toto’s founder and chairman, told CoinDesk in an email.

“Toto takes no profit from this proposal,” Metzger added, attributing much of the additional spending to Cardano’s constitutional requirements for oversight and auditing.

The budget allocates 2.64 million ADA to Toto for technology and project management, plus a 441,732 ADA execution fee. Toto could also receive up to 278,291 ADA through a margin on third-party storage and insurance invoices, included within the operating budget. Together, those payments could reach about 3.36 million ADA, roughly 15% of the request.

What Toto getsToto would retain the platform’s commercial rights and income from its separately funded CuTT business. The treasury’s financial return would come from its copper sales and unused funds.

Metzger said the company wants to scale the product to “$5 billion in tokenized copper assets” and that “Cardano could become our flagship showcase.”

The tokens would first be minted on Ethereum and locked in a bridge, software that allows matching tokens to be issued on Cardano. The contracts and their security reviews remain future work. Metzger said trackers of tokenized real-world assets have “historically focused heavily on Ethereum-based assets.”

Toto would hold legal title to the copper. Metzger said “an independent collateral agent and first-priority security arrangements” would protect the treasury if Toto failed, but did not name the agent.

The request lands with Cardano’s spending room nearly used up.

A 500 million ADA withdrawal cap runs through about July 2027, and 457.4 million had been used as of Oct. 16 — meaning the copper proposal would consume just over half the remaining allowance. Under the existing rules, returning the proceeds would not replenish it.

In late May, the Cardano Foundation’s 7.8 million ADA request for its 2026 summit won 65.21% support, short of the two-thirds required, and the event was canceled. Toto is asking for nearly three times as much.

Read More: Cardano Summit 2026 canceled after community votes against Foundation funding proposal

12345678910

BNB Chain has emerged as the leading blockchain for tokenized-equity trading in the third quarter of 2026, recording approximately $25.6 billion in transactions and $1.13 billion in tokenized stock supply.

Summary

BNB Chain recorded $25.6 billion in tokenized-equity trading during Q3 2026, roughly eleven times the previous quarter. Blockworks ranked BNB Chain first among tracked networks for tokenized-equity trading, supply and holder count. Tokenized-equity supply reached $1.13 billion, while the network recorded approximately 1.8 million holders at quarter-end. Network revenue rose 54% to $54.2 million, although average daily active addresses declined 14%. Lending deposits grew 42% to $3.57 billion, with tokenized equities accounting for less than 2%. Meanwhile, the network ranked first among tracked chains for tokenized-equity trading volume, outstanding supply and holder count, according to the Blockworks Q3 token-holder report. The report recorded growth in lending deposits and network revenue, although some user activity indicators declined.

BNB Chain had a huge Q3, ranking #1 among all chains in tokenized equity trading volume, supply and holders.

The latest quarterly report by @Blockworks shows how that momentum extended into stronger network earnings, growing lending markets, core infrastructure upgrades, BNB… https://t.co/15ZF2KWf83

— BNB Chain (@BNBCHAIN) October 22, 2026 BNB Chain leads tokenized equity trading across tracked networks Tokenized-equity trading reached $25.6 billion during Q3, compared with $2.4 billion in the preceding quarter. Decentralized exchange venues accounted for $24.4 billion, while Ondo Global Markets contributed another $1.2 billion.

Blockworks compared $45.8 billion in tokenized-asset DEX trading across its tracked networks, excluding pairs involving memecoins. Within that dataset, BNB Chain held more than half the volume, ahead of Robinhood Chain’s $10.2 billion and Solana’s $6.4 billion.

BNB Chain tokenized equities trading volume by venue, source: Blockworks The trading surge followed bStocks’ June 11 launch, making Q3 its first complete reporting quarter. Activity peaked on July 26, when tokenized-asset DEX trading reached $1.2 billion in a single day.

Much of that activity centered on QQQB, the tokenized Invesco QQQ ETF product, which generated approximately 80% of bStocks’ DEX volume. Other traded products included SPCXB, SPYB and NVDAB, while the Native trading venue handled approximately 36% of bStocks volume.

Although trading accelerated, volumes moderated after the July peak. From mid-August, weekly activity generally ranged between $600 million and $1.1 billion, with one week in September reaching $2.1 billion.

Tokenized stock supply doubles to $1.13 billion By September 30, BNB Chain held approximately $1.13 billion in tokenized public equities, compared with $560 million at the end of Q2. That represented 39% of the $2.89 billion supply tracked across blockchains.

The report placed the network’s tokenized-equity holder count at approximately 1.8 million, equivalent to 38% of its tracked cross-chain total. bStocks accounted for $810 million of the network’s tokenized-equity supply.

BNB Chain’s position comes during growing competition among blockchain networks supporting tokenized financial products. A recent tokenized-equities market report found that DEX activity had spread across multiple networks as issuers expanded their product offerings.

Robinhood Chain’s DeFi total value locked stood near $1.14 billion on October 22, according to DefiLlama. However, that figure measures deposits across decentralized finance applications and cannot be directly compared with BNB Chain’s tokenized-equity supply or quarterly trading volume.

BNB Chain revenue climbs 54% despite lower active addresses Network real economic value, or REV, reached $54.2 million during Q3, rising 54% from $35.2 million in Q2. The total consisted of $49.1 million in transaction fees and $5.1 million in payments associated with maximal extractable value.

Blockworks calculated token-holder net income at $45.1 million, up 57% from the preceding quarter. Under its methodology, the measure combines delegator rewards and BNB burned through the BEP-95 mechanism.

BNB Chain transactions, source: Blockworks BNB Smart Chain processed 1.51 billion transactions, an increase of 7.5%, while average transaction fees climbed to $0.032. Daily active addresses, however, declined 14% to 2.10 million, indicating that transaction growth did not coincide with growth in active addresses.

The Pasteur hard fork activated on August 25, changing the network’s block-building process. Its BidBlock V2 system subsequently produced approximately 98% of blocks and averaged 28% more gas per block than the previous approach.

Lending deposits rise as BNB supply continues falling Lending deposits reached $3.57 billion at quarter-end, growing 42% from $2.51 billion, while outstanding borrowing climbed 33% to $940 million. Tokenized equities used in lending markets grew from $6 million to $62 million, although they represented less than 2% of total deposits.

Meanwhile, stablecoin supply declined 4.6% to $13.22 billion, largely because of lower USD1 balances. Non-stablecoin real-world asset supply increased 24% to $4.96 billion, including $3.77 billion in tokenized Treasuries.

BNB Chain RWA supply by asset class, source: Blockworks BNB’s quarterly supply reductions continued after the reporting period. The network’s 37th quarterly token burn removed approximately 1.646 million BNB on October 19, worth around $1.2 billion at the time.

In an October 21 update, BNB Chain said the remaining supply stood near 131.51 million BNB. The network continues using quarterly auto-burns and BEP-95 transaction-fee burns toward its long-term target of 100 million BNB.

ValueChain‘s SoDEX trading and wealth application has integrated Morpho, the on-chain credit network that reported more than $16 billion in deposits as of October 2026. The integration allows SoDEX users to deposit USDC into a Morpho Vault curated by Unified Labs, earning yield generated by borrowing activity across the markets to which the vault allocates. The product is live now at sodex.com/wealth.
The vault’s allocation policy, collateral parameters and risk limits are set by Unified Labs, which describes itself as Asia’s first institutional-grade risk curator focused on the intersection of real-world assets and decentralised finance. Deposits and redemptions are handled within the SoDEX interface, removing the need for a separate wallet connection or a standalone DeFi workflow.

How the product works
The earn product sits inside SoDEX Wealth and is enabled by the ValueChain-Base bridge, which routes stablecoin deposits from ValueChain’s layer-one blockchain onto the Base network where the Morpho Vault operates. Yield accrues from borrowing demand rather than from token emissions, a structural distinction that matters to institutions and advisers assessing sustainability of returns. The release did not disclose an indicative annual percentage yield or detail the specific collateral types the vault currently accepts.

May Wang, co-founder of ValueChain, framed the integration as a diversification of the ecosystem’s opportunity set further along the risk spectrum, consistent with ValueChain’s stated aim of giving self-custodial investors access to a range of on-chain financial products alongside spot and perpetuals trading and AI-powered research.

For Morpho, the deal is primarily a distribution move into Asia-Pacific. Shanshan Shui, APAC go-to-market lead at Morpho, said the integration allows the protocol to reach SoDEX and SoSoValue users inside their existing interface, rather than requiring those users to navigate to Morpho directly.

Market context
The integration illustrates a structural pattern that has accelerated across the DeFi and crypto-adjacent fintech space: protocols such as Morpho, Aave and Compound are increasingly positioned as shared yield infrastructure that product teams embed rather than replicate. Morpho’s publicly listed partners include Coinbase, Robinhood and Société Générale, which signals an appetite among regulated and semi-regulated distribution platforms to access on-chain credit yield without building the underlying credit infrastructure themselves.

From a regulatory standpoint, the product occupies a zone that regulators in multiple jurisdictions are actively examining. In the European Union, the Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation came into full application in 2024 and covers certain stablecoin and crypto-asset service activities, though pure DeFi protocols sit in a grey area pending further Commission guidance. In Singapore, where ValueChain is based, the Monetary Authority of Singapore has indicated that yield-bearing digital-asset products may attract licensing requirements depending on their structure. Neither ValueChain nor Morpho addressed the regulatory framing of the earn product in the release.

Unified Labs’ role as vault curator is the risk-management layer that makes the product viable for a broader audience. Louis Wan, co-founder and chief executive of Unified Labs, said Morpho is becoming the yield layer that fintech platforms integrate rather than rebuild, which captures the infrastructure logic of the arrangement. Whether the vault’s curated parameters are sufficient to satisfy institutional or regulated-platform risk standards will depend on how Unified Labs documents and publishes its collateral and allocation methodology over time.

AI level 1 of 5: written by Darlyn Ho; AI helped with tone, structure or wording; edited and signed off by Mark Walker, Editorial Director. What the levels mean

On 2nd September 2026, engineers within the Tezos ecosystem built a post-quantum previewnet, covering user keys, consensus, and randomness generation.

Though the launch was experimental, it was still further than any major chain has ever gone.

The market noticed. In fact, AMBCrypto reported that XTZ rallied by 30% after the news, hitting a four-month high on an 878% volume surge. Open Interest climbed by 44%, while derivatives volume spiked by 272%.

Tezos’s co-founder Arthur Breitman has been blunt about the stakes. Previously, he has called Bitcoiners’ quantum theories “half-baked crank theories about quantum mechanics.” However, in a recent conversation with AMBCrypto, he clarified,

The crank theories represent a small group of people, though there’s a broader group that sees no urgency, or believes Bitcoin can handle post quantum without any soft or hard fork.

Urgency comes from Google’s “9-minute problem” What exacerbated the debate on crypto and quantum computers? Well, in March 2026, Google published a research paper that compressed the timeline of the quantum threat from a “2040s problem” to a preparation window for “2030–2035.”

The paper cut the estimated physical qubits needed to break Bitcoin’s elliptic curve cryptography by roughly 20x — From millions to fewer than 500,000.

That paper triggered a scramble in the industry. What was even more notable was the “9-minute problem.” For the uninitiated, public keys are exposed in Bitcoin’s mempool while the network confirms it.

Google’s paper also claimed a powerful enough quantum computer could potentially extract a key within approximately 9 minutes under specific assumptions. And Bitcoin’s average block time is 10 minutes.

Google puts the odds of a successful hijack at 41% — not a guarantee, but much too close for comfort. 

However, Maksym Sakharov, CEO & Co-Founder of WeFi, told AMBCrypto,

I would be careful about treating the 41% figure as a prediction of what will happen in practice.

He explained,

Google’s paper models a specific attack scenario under a defined set of assumptions, including a sufficiently capable fault-tolerant quantum computer, a public key becoming available almost immediately, and conditions that can favor either the attacker or the legitimate user depending on network behavior.

According to Google’s paper, the attack doesn’t need to crack your cold wallet or steal your seed phrase. It just needs to catch your transaction in that brief window when your key is visible.

Sakharov, talking about the long-term, hypothesized,

Preparation matters more than prediction. The objective should be to ensure that migration paths, governance, and upgrade mechanisms are in place well before advances in quantum computing become an operational concern.

It’s not so easy for Bitcoin For Bitcoin, however, the problem can get even more complicated. Glassnode’s May 2026 research found that over 6 million Bitcoin, or roughly 30% of BTC’s current supply, sits in addresses where the public key is already visible on-chain. That’s roughly $500–600 billion ripe for the taking.

And yet, the contrast between the exchanges is striking. About 1.66 million BTC held on exchanges falls into the exposed category — roughly 40% of all operationally exposed Bitcoin. Coinbase has 5% exposure; Fidelity at 2%.

Binance sits at 85%. Bitfinex, Robinhood, and several others are at or near 100%.

Christopher Smith, co-founder and CEO of Quantus, elaborated on Bitcoin’s exposure problem in conversation with AMBCrypto.

It’s a solvable technical problem, but the social coordination is the difficult part. For various reasons, Bitcoin has cultivated a culture of not changing, but it really is a cultural issue more than a technical issue. If we had a post-quantum address type, then most big addresses could migrate within a few months.

He continued,

The bigger issues are that post-quantum addresses could take years to ship, and nobody has a politically viable solution for Satoshi’s coins, which are currently an $80B quantum canary.

Smith’s argument highlights one of Bitcoin’s unresolved questions. The harder decisions will involve coins that will never migrate, including Bitcoin founder Satoshi’s 1.1 million stash.

Coinbase’s Quantum Advisory Council understands these concerns as well and has thus outlined three options: freeze, burn, or do nothing and take the loss. However, each option here clashes with Bitcoin’s core principles in some way.

So, what’s the solution? For Bitcoin’s network to become quantum-proof, starting today means completion on around 2033. This would uncomfortably overlap with Google’s 2030–2035 preparation window.

One must also remember that Bitcoin’s governance is notoriously slow. It’s an open secret. SegWit took over eight years from conception to adoption, and Taproot underwent the same journey in nearly seven years.

For casual observers on the scene, Bitcoin’s BIP-360 may seem like the solution. It is the network’s quantum-resistance proposal that introduces a new address type called P2MR (Pay-to-Merkle-Root), removes Taproot’s key-path spending, and uses hash-based commitments.

However, be warned, BIP-360 is not quantum-proof. In fact, it does not answer the Bitcoin network’s concerns. As Christopher Smith told AMBCrypto, 

The quantum safety of a BIP360 address is the same as a P2PKH address. To make a fully post-quantum address type, we need post-quantum op codes, which requires a decision on which post-quantum algorithm to support, and there is no official process for this.

In a nutshell, BIP-360 has critical limits that cannot be ignored.

First of all, it doesn’t replace Bitcoin’s cryptography as ECDSA and Schnorr signatures remain in use. P2MR reduces exposure by forcing spending through script paths, but it’s merely a risk-reduction measure.

Also, BIP-360 will not migrate existing coins automatically. There is a 2-step process here. To begin with, every wallet, exchange, and custodian needs to support the new quantum-proof addresses. Next, users will have to voluntarily move funds. That coordination hasn’t started yet, and there’s no timeline as to when it will.

Breitman has a word of advice though,

Offer hash-based signatures now. The chain can soft-fork very quickly in an emergency, I believe it will, and that’s a good thing. But users can be very slow moving, and they need to be given ample time, several years, to migrate.

What are the market’s altcoins doing? Altcoin networks have already started their push towards making crypto future-ready, in a sense. The most notable example is the Tezos network, whose post-quantum previewnet went live on 2nd September 2026, with  tz5 accounts using ML-DSA-44 signatures.

The network also supports STARK-based consensus aggregation, a ZODA data availability layer, and TzEL private payments on testnet, making it the most comprehensive quantum-resistant network out of any major chain.

According to Breitman,

Starks have come a long way in terms of proving speed and ease of deployment, and they pair very nicely with hash-based signatures.

As far as the rest of the market is concerned, Native Falcon-1024 accounts have been live on Algorand’s mainnet since v5.0.0 in August 2026. Since then, the network has processed over 500,000+ post-quantum-signed transactions. Right now, Falcon-1024 is a NIST Level 5 standard — the highest security category.

The Quantum Resistant Ledger, also dubbed to be the “original post-quantum blockchain,” has been running XMSS since June 2018. That’s eight years of quantum-resistant operations!

The list will be incomplete without mentioning Ethereum since it has released a roadmap targeting full quantum protection by 2029. Account abstraction, also dubbed EIP-8141, will let users switch to quantum-resistant signatures before the protocol-wide migration begins. 

‘Quantum-ready’ is already becoming a narrative Today, a network being ‘quantum-ready’ is more than just a talking point. For traders, the differentiator is quite simple — which chains look ready, and which are still dragging their feet?

Currently, only Tezos, Algorand, and QRL have real implementations. Though it is a start, it is concerning, as none of the major altcoin networks, with the exception of Ethereum, even have a concrete roadmap.

Bitcoin does not even have its head in the game.

The window between “we have time” and “we’re out of time” is narrowing. If the transition to post-quantum cryptography arrives sooner, the networks that began preparing early will be the victors.

Maksym Sakharov mulled,

The strongest ecosystems are already thinking about cryptographic migration as part of their long-term roadmap rather than as a future emergency. Good financial infrastructure is designed around the assumption that today’s strongest cryptography will eventually be replaced by
something stronger.

For now, the market is watching, and the chains already in the game have a head start.

For individual users, though, the takeaway is simpler: DYOR. As Sakharov put it,

Individual users cannot realistically prepare for advances in cryptography on their own. Their long-term protection will depend far more on whether the infrastructure they rely on is designed to adapt as security standards evolve.

Final Summary Quantum computers can theoretically steal exposed Bitcoin keys in nine minutes — under the 10-minute window needed for Bitcoin’s mempool. Tezos, Algorand, and QRL are already quantum-ready, while Bitcoin’s BIP-360 is just a risk-reduction measure, not a solution.

Aave founder Stani stated in a Q3 live stream that Aaveonomics 3.0 will include AAVE repurchases, staking, and burns. AAVE repurchases have been suspended since April 19, the day after the rsETH exploit incident. Since then, the DAO has committed 25,000 ETH to DeFi United to cover losses, and arranged a credit line of up to 30,000 ETH from Mantle. Ahead of the repurchase suspension, a forum proposal had suggested cutting the annual repurchase budget from roughly $50 million to $30 million.

Relevant content

Alliance Partner on a16z’s Shift: To Drive Crypto Talent to Build Cutting-Edge Technology

Imran, general partner at Alliance, took to X this morning to share his views on a16z crypto’s shift toward frontier technology sectors. He noted that a16z led Coinbase’s 2013 funding round via Chris Dixon, providing early validation for the crypto industry; Marc Andreessen’s 2014 New York Times op-ed, “Why Bitcoin Matters,” was a key factor in his decision to enter the Bitcoin space. At the time, few institutions and funds were willing to publicly back crypto, with a16z and USV standing out as two that took brand risk. Imran argued that the current development of AI infrastructure owes much to Bitcoin mining infrastructure and talent that has moved from crypto to AI. The shift to frontier technologies including robotics, biotech, AI, energy, and computing power means the talent and capabilities the crypto industry has built over the past decade can be applied to the broader frontier tech space. Citing data centers as an example, he noted that public and government pushback against data centers is growing, much like earlier resistance to crypto—yet today nearly all traditional financial institutions have embraced crypto to some extent. Yesterday’s news: a16z’s flagship blockchain fund will drop the “Crypto” moniker and rebrand as “a16z Frontier.”

6 minutes ago

ZhenFund has launched Ask AI, but it only comes with a single Markdown file.

Beating AI News Brief: ZhenFund has launched "Ask AI" on its official website, enabling entrepreneurs to directly inquire about the firms ZhenFund has invested in, its recent focus sectors, and relevant events tailored to them. The setup is straightforward: ZhenFund has compiled public information including its investment team, portfolio companies, focus areas, startup events, and contact details into a bilingual (Chinese-English) `zhenfund.md` file. Clicking any AI entry point redirects users to one of four platforms—Kimi, ChatGPT, Claude, or DeepSeek—with a pre-filled prompt that instructs the model to first read the `zhenfund.md` file before answering the entrepreneur’s questions.

6 minutes ago

SK Hynix leads AI stock rebound, with South Korean stocks rising over 4% and its US-listed shares gaining 5.5% in after-hours trading.

Midday today, leading chip stock SK Hynix opened lower but rebounded, now up 4%. Driven by the move, South Korea’s KOSPI index turned positive, recovering from an opening 4% decline to a 0.08% gain. Additionally, SK Hynix’s after-hours trading in the US market has risen 5.5%, currently quoted at $138.95.

6 minutes ago

Crypto influencer Kimchi received 1.35 billion PUMP tokens, allegedly as platform endorsement fees.

According to Lookonchain monitoring, crypto influencer Kimchi has removed the '@Pumpfun' tag from his bio just two days after endorsing pump.fun. Additionally, over the past two days, Pumpfun’s revenue has dropped by 16% from $1.61 million to $1.35 million, while the number of active addresses has fallen by 11% from 178,539 to 159,492. Kimchi’s wallet address recently received 1.35 billion PUMP tokens, worth approximately $6.25 million, which is suspected to be the platform’s endorsement fee.

6 minutes ago

Bank of Korea will require users who have cross-border transferred crypto assets to submit their end-of-month balances starting December 2.

According to Digital Asset, the Bank of Korea will require virtual asset transfer service providers to submit monthly reports to the foreign exchange information system starting December 2. The reports must cover end-of-month holdings of users who have made cross-border crypto asset transfers to overseas exchanges, personal wallets, or other destinations since July 19, 2024—even if no cross-border transactions occurred in the reporting month. Submissions include holding amounts, South Korean won-converted balances, and total monthly cross-border inflows and outflows. Dormant accounts, delisted assets, and staked assets are also within scope, with reports due by 17:30 on the 10th of the following month. It remains undecided whether cross-border transfer records prior to the system’s implementation will need to be retroactively submitted.

6 minutes ago

Hong Kong-listed AI stocks are rallying, with Zhipu AI up over 6% and MINIMAX surging more than 9%.

According to Bitget market data, Hong Kong-listed artificial intelligence stocks are rallying: Zhipu rose over 6%, MINIMAX-W gained more than 9%, Xunce climbed over 5%, and Xiaomi advanced more than 4%.

6 minutes ago

Grayscale has named the top 10 crypto assets by tokenholder yield and adjusted earnings yield. HYPE leads the first ranking at 8.0%, while CAKE tops the second at 14.4%.

The report argues that investors can value many crypto assets, unlike Bitcoin, using their cash flows.

Top 10 Tokenholder Yield: $HYPE, $LIT, $CAKE, $AERO, $UNI, $RAY, $PENDLE, $AAVE, $JUP, $CRV

Top 10 Adjusted Earnings Yield: $CAKE, $LIT, $HYPE, $RAY, $AAVE, $JUP, $SKY, $UNI, $AERO, $PENDLE

Crypto valuations don’t have to rely on narratives alone. Many crypto assets can be… pic.twitter.com/up8RqIdZzx

— Grayscale (@Grayscale) October 22, 2026 Which Crypto Tokens Actually Reward Their Holders?Hyperliquid (HYPE) leads Grayscale’s ranking with an 8.0% tokenholder yield. Lighter (LIT) follows closely at 7.9%.

PancakeSwap (CAKE) comes third at 2.6%, followed by Aerodrome (AERO) and Uniswap (UNI).

But the rankings reveal something more troubling.

Five of the top 10 tokens have negative holder yields.

Curve Finance (CRV) sits at the bottom with -5.5%, while Jupiter (JUP) records -2.6%.

The reason is dilution.

Grayscale calculates tokenholder yield by adding staking rewards and buybacks, then subtracting newly issued tokens. When issuance outweighs those benefits, holders face dilution despite the protocol’s economic activity.

Can Crypto Be Valued Like Stocks?Grayscale’s second ranking reveals another surprise.

PancakeSwap leads adjusted earnings yield at 14.4%, followed by Lighter at 14.1% and HYPE at 9.8%.

Jupiter offers an interesting example. Its adjusted earnings yield reaches 3.5%, yet its tokenholder yield remains negative.

A profitable crypto protocol does not automatically make its token rewarding to hold.

Grayscale’s research head, Zach Pandl, argues that Bitcoin resembles digital gold, while many other crypto assets can be valued using cash flows.

“Crypto valuations don’t have to rely on narratives alone.”

Protocols generate earnings through trading and lending fees. Buybacks and burns can help transfer that value to holders, although token issuance may offset the gains.

The rankings offer investors a way to examine the economics behind crypto valuations.

They also expose a weakness in an industry where growing revenue can coexist with disappointing returns for tokenholders.

Saphyre has launched perpetual futures trading on Sei Network, covering stocks, gold, currencies and crypto, with invite-only access and fees of 0.025% to 0.05% per trade.

@saphyre has launched perpetual futures trading on @SeiNetwork, adding a derivatives venue to what is already the chain's busiest exchange. Perpetual futures are contracts that let traders bet on price moves with no expiry date. Saphyre says users can trade stocks, gold, currencies and crypto through the product.

How the Saphyre perps exchange worksTrading fees range from 0.025% to 0.05% per trade, according to the exchange's site. Orders are handled by Monaco's trading engine.

Access is invite-only. Traders who used the public test version before the October 21 cutoff get in immediately and receive one invite code to share. Every $250K in live trading volume unlocks another code, which ties wider access to how actively users trade.

Perpetual contracts have no settlement date, so traders can hold long or short positions without rolling them over. Positions are typically kept in line with the spot price through periodic funding payments between longs and shorts, a mechanism also used in the regulated SEI contract described below.

Saphyre's position on SeiSaphyre is the dominant trading venue on the network. DefiLlama data shows it with $5.97M in daily spot volume and $16.21M in total value locked (TVL). Crypto Briefing reported that Saphyre handled about $276 million of $278 million in monthly DEX volume on Sei, with the network's cumulative DEX volume reaching $15.9 billion. The exchange evolved from DragonSwap, according to the same report.

That concentration cuts both ways. Crypto Briefing noted that when one exchange processes nearly all monthly volume, the network's trading activity depends heavily on that single protocol. Some analysts have also questioned the exact share: DiarioBitcoin cited DefiLlama data putting Saphyre closer to 83% of monthly volume, depending on how the periods are compared. Methodologies differ, so figures vary by tracker and date.

The launch comes as derivatives exposure to $SEI is also expanding elsewhere. OG.com Markets, a CFTC-regulated platform operated by Nadex, listed a USD-settled SEI perpetual futures contract, which ChainCatcher reported was self-certified on October 8. That product is a separate, regulated offering for US investors and is unrelated to Saphyre's onchain exchange.

Perpetual futures are leveraged products and carry significant risk, including rapid liquidation during volatile moves. The invite-only rollout suggests Saphyre is limiting early access while it scales the product.

Sources

Crypto Briefing: Sei network nears $16 billion in all-time DEX volume as Saphyre dominates tradingChainCatcher: SEI perpetual contracts launched on the CFTC regulated OG.com marketDefiLlama: Sei DEX volume rankings

Ondo Finance now has $4.02B in tokenized real-world assets in circulation, ranking second among tokenization platforms behind Securitize, per RWA.xyz data.

@Ondo now has $4.02B in tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) in circulation, up 5.74% over the past 30 days, according to RWA.xyz data. That places Ondo Finance second among tokenization platforms, behind @Securitize at $4.3B.

Holders and transfer volume riseOver the same 30-day period, the number of holders rose 11.6% to 555,157. Monthly transfer volume jumped 38% to $2.47B, with 165,304 active addresses.

Transfer volume counts token movements between wallets, so it does not necessarily reflect new purchases, sales or fresh investor capital. The same caveat applies to active address counts, which are not a verified tally of individual investors, as analysis from Insights4.VC notes.

Treasuries still anchor the totalUS Treasury products account for $3.0B of Ondo's total, while 408 tokenized stocks add $908.2M. The Treasury figure is consistent with a recent report by Yahoo Finance, which said RWA.xyz data ranks Ondo's tokenized Treasury holdings at $3 billion, higher than any other issuer. Ondo's Treasury offering includes USDY and OUSG. According to RWA.xyz, USDY is a tokenized note for non-US individuals and institutions, secured by short-term US Treasuries and bank demand deposits.

The growth comes as the wider sector gains institutional attention. The IMF's October 2026 Global Financial Stability Report names Ondo among the top tokenization platforms, alongside Securitize, Circle and Tether, TheStreet reported. As of October 9, RWA.xyz reported about $39.02 billion in distributed asset value across the market, according to KuCoin.

Competition is also building in tokenized equities. A DWF Labs report cited by CoinMarketCap put the tokenized equity market at $3.8 billion, up 483% since January, though Ondo's lead has narrowed as rivals gained share. Ondo's native token is $ONDO.

SourcesYahoo Finance: Ondo Finance says total value locked has topped $4 billion

TheStreet: IMF ranks Ondo among largest tokenized asset issuers

RWA.xyz: Ondo U.S. Dollar Yield (USDY)

Market orders amounting to $20 million on the Hyperliquid platform have reportedly influenced the pricing of papertrade at its launch. Jason Pagoulatos of Delphi Digital highlighted this development, indicating significant early interest in the synthetic-perpetuals protocol. Papertrade operates within Hyperliquid’s HyperEVM ecosystem, providing leveraged exposure to BTC and ETH, and it launched without an external order book or market maker. The protocol’s price determination relies solely on Hyperliquid’s best-bid/offer midpoint, reflecting substantial early activity on the platform.

Key Takeaways The substantial market orders on Hyperliquid suggest strong initial demand for papertrade, indicating confidence in its market performance. Current market pricing appears consistent with a positive outlook for Papertrade’s fully diluted valuation (FDV) reaching above $25 million one day after launch. The increase in market activity on Hyperliquid may indicate elevated interest and participation in the papertrade protocol. What to Watch Observers should monitor announcements from Papertrade regarding token transfers and market participation, which could further influence market sentiment. Key indicators of sustained interest would include official confirmations of PAPER token generation events and liquidity pool formations. Additionally, developments such as major exchange listings or collaborative initiatives with recognizable crypto platforms may provide further insights into papertrade’s market trajectory.

Term Structure

Contract Odds Δ since publish Volume 24h January 1 2028 53% +2.5¢ $1K View market → January 1 2028 50.5% -1¢ $581 View market → January 1 2028 37% 0.0¢ $3K View market → January 1 2028 24% 0.0¢ $1 View market → January 1 2028 32% 0.0¢ $1K View market → January 1 2028 30% 0.0¢ $84 View market → January 1 2028 36.5% -3¢ $7K View market → January 1 2028 17.5% +0.5¢ — View market → Updated 4min ago

A shareholder for Circle Internet Financial, the company behind the USDC (USDC) stablecoin, filed a lawsuit against US President Donald Trump, his family’s crypto company World Liberty Financial, affiliate entities, and US Special Envoy to the Middle East Steve Witkoff over a $2 billion deal between a foreign government entity and Binance.

In a Thursday filing in the US District Court for the District of Columbia, Circle shareholder J. Benjamin Greenberg alleged that Trump, Witkoff and World Liberty caused harm to Circle by creating a pathway for foreign governments to funnel money using the Trump family crypto company’s USD1 stablecoin. This “brazen corruption,” according to Greenberg, leaves Circle “unable to compete” in the stablecoin market with its USDC.

Central to the Circle shareholder’s allegations is an Abu Dhabi entity, MGX, tied to the United Arab Emirates royalty, which invested $2 billion into cryptocurrency exchange Binance using the USD1 stablecoin in 2025. The Wall Street Journal reported in February that another investment vehicle backed by Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan agreed to purchase a 49% stake in World Liberty for $500 million.

“By accepting hundreds of millions of dollars from a foreign government, the President and his companies have diverted business from [Circle],” alleged Greenberg, adding:

“Plaintiff asks this Court to declare the President’s corrupt acts a violation of the Constitution, to enjoin the brazen corruption alleged below, to order an accounting of the billions in payments from foreign states to the President and his businesses, to require the companies holding them to disgorge the emoluments the President accepted through them, and for compensatory and punitive damages.”Greenberg reported holding 10,000 ordinary shares of Circle as part of his reasons for the lawsuit. He petitioned the court to declare that Trump violated the US Constitution’s Foreign Emoluments Clause through the crypto deals and to issue injunctions preventing the president and Witkoff from pursuing similar financial interests without Congress’ consent.

Zach Witkoff, the son of the Witkoff named in the lawsuit, is a World Liberty co-founder. Trump and his three sons are also co-founders of the crypto venture.

A Circle spokesperson told Cointelegraph that the company “did not initiate, direct, authorize, or participate in the filing,” declining to comment on pending litigation. Spokespeople for World Liberty and the White House did not respond to requests for comments on the lawsuit.

Democrats use ’corruption’ messaging as midterm elections approachThe US president and his family are tied to several crypto ventures that Trump reported netted him $1.4 billion in 2025, while also costing investors about $4.7 billion, according to reporting by the nonprofit consumer advocacy organization Public Citizen. The crypto ventures are just a few of many controversial deals Trump faces scrutiny over, including accepting a jet from the government of Qatar.

With less than two weeks until the 2026 midterms and early voting having already started in some US states, Democrats running for reelection are using Trump’s crypto deals as a wedge issue for voters to support candidates in their party. Last week, Senator Mark Warner released a campaign ad highlighting that the president made ”more than $600 million alone from the crypto memecoin.”

Magazine: Richard Heart caught ‘off-guard,’ QDay gets even closer: Hodler’s Digest

21h05 ▪
9
min read ▪ by
Ghiles A.

Summarize this article with:

Bitcoin approaches a decisive threshold as markets await new American inflation indicators. After several positive sessions, capital inflows into spot ETFs have sharply slowed, reducing support for prices. On Friday, PMI indices and household inflation forecasts could change investor expectations before the next Federal Reserve meeting. Maintaining the 80,000 dollar level will therefore also depend on these economic signals.

In Brief

Bitcoin defends the 80,000 dollars ahead of new American inflation data.
Net inflows into Bitcoin ETFs drop 95.6% between October 19 and 20.
Glassnode estimates the average cost basis of spot ETFs around 81,500 dollars.
The 85,000 to 87,500 dollar zone concentrates significant potential selling pressure.
Inflation figures and the Fed decision could determine the next market direction.

Bitcoin Defends 80,000 Dollars Against Institutional Acquisition Costs
The price of bitcoin moves around 80,000 dollars, a level that draws institutional investors’ attention. According to the Glassnode report published on October 21, this threshold approaches the average acquisition costs of several holder categories. American spot ETFs display an estimated cost basis of 81,500 dollars. Meanwhile, treasuries of companies followed by Glassnode hold their digital assets at an average cost close to 80,200 dollars.

The massive sell-off on October 15 brought the market near this reference zone. The price closed around 80,100 dollars after briefly falling below the ETFs’ estimated cost basis. This movement tested buyers’ ability to defend their positions. However, the market recovered to a level close to institutional acquisition costs, without confirming a lasting recovery.

Binance’s order book data provide another perspective on this battle. The main cluster of spot buy orders was concentrated around 80,000 dollars before the sharp drop. Selling pressure absorbed much of it, but new orders appeared on October 20. Their volume remains lower than before the drop, which limits the scope of this support.

It is also necessary to distinguish acquisition costs from orders displayed on platforms. An ETF’s cost basis corresponds to the average cost of its assets, while a company’s reflects its past purchases. However, orders in an order book can disappear at any moment. Maintaining the price above 80,000 dollars does not guarantee that buyers will sustainably defend this zone.

Bitcoin ETF Flows Slow Before Inflation Data
Capital inflows into American spot ETFs have sharply lost momentum. According to Farside Investors data, these products recorded 526.7 million dollars in net inflows on October 19. On the following day, inflows remained positive but dropped to only 23.2 million dollars. This decrease represents a 95.6% decline in one session and highlights the recent demand slowdown.

Over these two days, ETFs still attracted 549.9 million dollars in total. Thus, it is not an entirely negative trend, as both sessions recorded net inflows. However, this development shows new inflows are no longer growing at the same pace. For bitcoin, the question is now whether institutional buyers will continue to support prices despite this loss of momentum.

Glassnode also notes a decrease in activity over a longer period. The average trading volume on spot ETFs, calculated over 30 days, now represents less than a quarter of its level observed a year earlier. Corporate purchases of government bonds since June have remained below 10% of the peak reached in November 2024. These figures reflect a broader slowdown in some institutional investment activities.

This development occurs as several American economic indicators are due for release. On Thursday, an auction of inflation-linked Treasury securities, amounting to 26 billion dollars and maturing in five years, will assess demand for these bonds. On Friday, preliminary PMI indices and final inflation forecasts from the University of Michigan will complement available data. These events could shift rate expectations and influence flows into risky assets.

American Inflation Could Change Market Expectations
Recent inflation data show that price pressures remain significant. The consumer price index rose 3.7% year-on-year in September. Moreover, the preliminary University of Michigan survey places one-year inflation expectations at 4.7%. Longer-term forecasts reach 3.5%, maintaining investors’ concerns regarding price trends.

Upcoming releases will verify whether these expectations evolve. Friday’s preliminary PMI indices, expected at 9:45 a.m., will provide indications on prices charged by companies. The final Michigan survey, scheduled at 10 a.m., will clarify household expectations. If these data exceed previous estimates, markets could anticipate more persistent inflationary pressures and reassess their monetary outlook.

The Federal Reserve’s policy is another key element in this sequence. In September, the American central bank set its target rate range between 3.75% and 4%. According to a Reuters survey, 94 out of 100 economists surveyed expect rates to hold at the October 28 meeting. Even without immediate changes, the new data could modify expectations about future decisions.

Bond yields and the dollar could then react to the releases. According to Glassnode, the two-year U.S. bond yield approached 4.8% on October 20, after rising by more than one percentage point since early 2026. High inflation numbers could intensify this pressure. Conversely, more moderate indicators could ease yields and provide a more favorable environment for risky assets.

Resistance and Support Levels Clarify Possible Scenarios
Above 80,000 dollars, several levels could slow price advances. Glassnode identifies an excess supply zone between 85,000 and 87,500 dollars. Investors who acquired their assets six to twelve months ago have an average price close to 86,700 dollars. Moreover, potential liquidations on futures markets concentrate between 85,000 and 87,000 dollars, reinforcing the importance of this zone.

With improved economic data, the market could attempt to reach this upper range. If Michigan inflation expectations remain stable or decrease and PMI price components retreat, yields could lose momentum. A drop in the two-year yield, accompanied by a stable or weakening dollar, would strengthen this scenario. Bitcoin could then test the 85,000 to 87,500 dollar zone, provided demand follows.

Crossing 87,500 dollars with higher volumes and repeated ETF inflows would be an additional signal. It would indicate buyers absorb some of the supply above institutional cost bases. However, a price increase alone would not confirm this move. Persistent inflows and bond market reactions would remain decisive factors.

Conversely, higher inflation expectations could strengthen selling pressure. If PMI prices rise, yields and the dollar increase, and bitcoin ETFs register net outflows, buyers could struggle more to defend the 80,000 dollar level. A close below this threshold would bring the liquidation zone near 79,600 dollars to the forefront. The market’s real average, estimated at 77,600 dollars, would then constitute another reference level.

The Fed Meeting Approaches Amid a Still Fragile Market
Market reactions will also depend on how economic data interrelate. A less well-received five-year TIPS auction could push real yields higher, even if inflation expectations remain stable. This is why the evolution of the five-year real yield and the equilibrium inflation rate deserve special attention. Their combination will help better understand investor reactions before Friday’s releases.

The scenario remains conditional, as some recent indicators have sent different signals. On October 15, a favorable producer price report coincided with a decline in the ten-year yield to 5.087%. The dollar also retreated after reaching an 18-month high. This episode reminds that positive economic data can quickly change expectations and influence financial conditions.

In the coming days, the market’s ability to maintain current levels will depend on several factors. More regular inflows into bitcoin ETFs, combined with lower yields, could facilitate a return to higher resistance levels. Conversely, persistent inflation and tightening financial conditions could weaken demand. The Fed meeting on October 28 will then shed new light on monetary perspectives.

Ultimately, Bitcoin remains close to the acquisition costs of several institutional investors, but this support is not enough to confirm a recovery. Friday’s inflation data will verify if demand can absorb supply between 85,000 and 87,500 dollars. If 80,000 dollars breaks, levels of 79,600 and then 77,600 dollars could regain prominence. The reaction of yields, the dollar, and ETFs will determine the next movement before the Fed decision.

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

Join the program

A

A

Lien copié

Ghiles A.

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

Bitcoin Ordinals and Runes supporters have renewed calls for native trading on OpenSea after Leonidas shared a comment attributed to a company marketer saying community feedback helps shape its product roadmap.

Summary

Leonidas has asked OpenSea to add native support for Bitcoin Ordinals and Runes. A shared interface image features Runestone, Bitcoin Puppets and NodeMonkes among Bitcoin collections. OpenSea’s published blockchain compatibility guide does not list Bitcoin among its supported networks. The campaign follows earlier announcements to close Bitcoin services at Magic Eden and Ord.io. Leonidas, in posts dated Oct. 21 and Oct. 22, urged collectors to make their interest known and directly asked OpenSea to support both asset types. His posts included an image of Bitcoin collections displayed in an OpenSea interface and a separate promotional graphic imagining trading support.

“Please add support for Ordinals and Runes.”

The request establishes a public campaign for integration. Neither screenshot contains an official OpenSea announcement confirming native Bitcoin trading, an approved integration, or a release date.

OpenSea supporters press for a Bitcoin integration In his Oct. 21 post, Leonidas reproduced a statement attributed to an OpenSea marketer encouraging people who want Ordinals to keep asking for them. The quoted statement said community feedback “very much directly informs our product roadmap.”

The screenshot does not include the original recording or the full conversation surrounding the remark. Its wording describes how feedback informs product decisions without promising that Bitcoin support has been scheduled.

Alongside the statement, Leonidas shared an interface showing Runestone in a featured position. Bitcoin Puppets and NodeMonkes appeared under a section labeled “Trending Ordinals Collections,” alongside Bitcoin Wizards and Taproot Wizards.

The image displays collection prices in BTC and includes activity figures, but it does not show a completed purchase or a Bitcoin transaction. Collection visibility in that screenshot therefore remains separate from evidence of an available trading service.

A second post, dated Oct. 22, paired the direct request with an OpenSea-branded graphic reading “Ordinals and Runes trading is live!” Because Leonidas published the image while asking for support, the graphic cannot be treated as a company launch notice.

OpenSea’s blockchain compatibility guide lists networks including Ethereum, Solana, Polygon and Arbitrum, without listing Bitcoin. Its older Ordinals explainer, published in April 2023, explicitly says users cannot buy Bitcoin Ordinals through OpenSea; that page is historical documentation, not a fresh roadmap statement.

OpenSea’s mobile launch includes trading and discovery OpenSea’s Oct. 20 mobile announcement describes an app available to everyone on iOS and Android, with token and collectible trading across more than 25 blockchains. The company says users can combine holdings from multiple wallets and synchronize their accounts with its web platform.

The launch description distinguishes trading from discovery features. OpenSea says its social feed displays activity from people a user follows regardless of the app or chain where their trades occurred, while a separate feature shows trending activity by chain.

For the mobile product, the company lists a 0.5% fee on token trades and a 1% fee on collectible purchases, with network fees potentially charged separately. The announcement does not identify a Bitcoin-specific trading rollout.

The company’s earlier OS2 announcement, issued in Miami in May 2025, introduced full token trading across 19 chains, including Solana fungible tokens. OpenSea identified Miami as its headquarters and said further chain integrations were part of its development plans, without naming a Bitcoin launch date.

Bitcoin marketplace operators have announced service closures The appeal follows several earlier announcements affecting Bitcoin asset services. In February, crypto.news previously reported Magic Eden’s planned Bitcoin marketplace exit, alongside the closure of its EVM marketplaces and multichain wallet. That announcement retained support for its Solana business.

Magic Eden had launched Ordinals trading in March 2023. At launch, the marketplace supported secondary sales and said it was investigating tools for creators to inscribe assets, while royalty support remained unavailable.

A separate May announcement set June 1 as the shutdown date for Ord.io and Zap. Leonidas attributed the decision to exhausted funding, while the associated trading app said it had not reached the user growth needed to continue operating.

Other operators announced new services during the same period. Unspendable Labs said on March 30 that Horizon Market had added Ordinal inscriptions alongside Counterparty assets and Bitcoin Stamps. Its announcement described inscription creation, listings, and purchases settling directly on Bitcoin, without an intermediary holding the assets.

Ordinals and Runes use different Bitcoin asset structures The Ordinal Theory Handbook describes inscriptions as content attached to individual satoshis, creating Bitcoin-native digital artifacts without requiring a sidechain or separate token. Those assets can be held in Bitcoin transaction outputs and transferred through Bitcoin transactions.

Runes represent interchangeable units, unlike unique inscriptions. The handbook says Bitcoin transactions can create, mint, and transfer them, with protocol messages called runestones stored in transaction outputs. A transaction can contain at most one runestone, and an individual output can hold balances of multiple runes.

XRP whales sent $112.4 million to Binance, the highest inflow level in seven months, according to crypto analysts. The move signals rising selling pressure from large holders.

However, fresh data suggests the heaviest selling may already be easing, and traders are watching key price levels.

🗞️ XRP Whale Inflows to Binance hit $112.4M, a 7-month high

ripple:native whale activity has intensified in recent weeks, with selling pressure rising sharply. Here, we define whales as transactions exceeding 1 million XRP, which allows us to attribute them to this specific… pic.twitter.com/FsLRe63FTp

— Darkfost (@Darkfost_Coc) October 22, 2026 What XRP Whale Inflows Reveal About Selling PressureWhale inflows track large transfers from major holders to exchanges, usually before a potential sale. In this case, crypto analyst Darkfost counts transactions above 1 million XRP.

These flows matter because holders can sell tokens on an exchange within minutes. Therefore, rising inflows often precede short-term price weakness.

The surge coincides with XRP’s rebound of more than 30% since August. As a result, many large holders appear to have used the rally to lock in profits.

Monthly average inflows also rose by about $72 million, while the previous three months averaged roughly $90 million. In addition, daily spikes topped $400 million at times.

However, recent data shows inflows returning to more normal levels. That suggests the heaviest selling pressure may have eased, at least for now.

At the time of writing, XRP trades near $1.33, according to BeInCrypto data. Its 24-hour range sits between $1.32 and $1.40, while its market cap stands near $84 billion.

XRP Price Performance. Source: BeInCryptoCan XRP Break Above $1.40 or Fall Toward $1.26?Technical analysts remain divided. CryptoBusy notes that XRP is testing a major descending resistance trendline on the four-hour chart. The token recently climbed from $1.26 toward $1.40.

A confirmed breakout above the $1.38 to $1.40 zone could open a path toward $1.45 and $1.50. However, failing to hold $1.33 could send XRP back toward $1.30 or even $1.26.

$XRP is testing a major descending resistance trendline on the 4H chart after recovering from $1.26 toward $1.40.

Price briefly broke above the trendline but faced selling pressure, pulling back toward $1.34.

A confirmed breakout above $1.38-$1.40 could open the door toward… pic.twitter.com/ApW8aoQB1b

— CryptoBusy (@CryptoBusy) October 22, 2026 Meanwhile, EGRAG Crypto offered a more cautious view. His chart sketch raises the possibility of a dip toward $1.18 before a push to $1.63 and $1.80. He also stressed that this remains a hunch until price action confirms it.

On the bullish side, Ali Martiez set an immediate target of $1.55 if key levels hold. For now, the $1.33 level acts as the line between a recovery and a deeper pullback. Traders may want confirmation before acting on either scenario.

Still, large holders can move markets quickly, so exchange inflows remain a key signal to watch.

Ripple, a blockchain payment solution, has partnered with Swiss-regulated payment platform Arf to bring RLUSD-powered funding to the XRP Ledger (XRPL). The partnership will help licensed payment companies access short-term funds for cross-border payments without keeping large amounts of money in accounts across different countries.

Arf and Ripple Join to Speed Up Cross-Border PaymentsIn a press release on October 22, 2026, Arf and Ripple announced a partnership to help payment companies access money when and where they need it.

Cross-border payments move trillions of dollars each year, but payment companies often need working capital available in different countries before transactions are completed. Traditional bank credit lines can take months to establish and may require significant collateral.

This creates a problem for companies that need funds available in the right market at the right time. Through the partnership, Arf and Ripple aim to address this gap using RLUSD and the XRP Ledger’s settlement network.

Jasmine Cooper, Head of Product for RippleX at Ripple, said that “Settlement liquidity is exactly the kind of use case XRPL and RLUSD are built to support.” 

Settlement liquidity is exactly the kind of use case @XRP Ledger and RLUSD are built to support.@Arf_One is bringing its approach to settlement liquidity to the XRP Ledger, using RLUSD to support short-term working capital for licensed payment companies as cross-border payments… https://t.co/h4XdEzA3IF

— Ripple (@Ripple) October 22, 2026 Under the first phase, Arf will provide short-term funding in Ripple USD (RLUSD) on the XRP Ledger. Licensed payment companies can use these funds to send money across borders and repay them once payments are complete, usually within one to five days.

Arf Brings $10B in Annual Settlements to XRPLArf payments platform has scaled to around $10 billion in annual global settlement volume since launching in November 2022. Its capital turns over about four times a month, allowing funds to support repeated payment flows rather than sit idle.

Ali Erhat Nalbant, Arf’s co-founder and CEO, said the partnership would bring stablecoin working capital to the XRP Ledger.

“We’re bringing stablecoin working capital to the XRP Ledger to help payment companies bridge that gap and support more payment volume.”

Arf Plans to Use XRPL’s Native Lending InfrastructureThe partnership could expand once the XRP Ledger’s native lending infrastructure becomes available. Arf plans to use the proposed Single Asset Vaults to pool capital and the Lending Protocol to support structured loans on-chain.

Arf would continue managing underwriting and working capital decisions off-chain, while the blockchain handles the lending infrastructure. 

However, the proposed features must pass XRPL’s amendment process before they can launch on the main network.

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