Market Signal Briefing

Things are going from bad to worse for Novo Nordisk (NVO 1.27%). The Denmark-based drugmaker had already seen its blockbuster weight loss medicine, Wegovy, lose ground to Eli Lilly's (LLY +0.70%) Zepbound in this fast-growing market. But Novo Nordisk just released data from a clinical trial for its newer obesity drug, CagriSema, in which it was pitted against Zepbound. The result: Zepbound came out on top, suggesting that even Novo Nordisk's next launch in this niche won't allow it to keep pace with its rival.

Is there any hope left for the pharmaceutical leader? Novo Nordisk quietly announced results from a phase 2 study of another candidate that investors should consider.

Image source: Getty Images.

Impressive mid-stage data Last year, Novo Nordisk acquired the rights to commercialize UBT251, an investigational weight loss medicine, in most countries from a China-based drugmaker. There's one notable thing about this therapy: It mimics the action of three different gut hormones: GLP-1, glucagon, and GIP, which play various roles in the body, including blood sugar and insulin regulation, and satiety control. Targeting three different pathways to induce weight loss could improve efficacy.

On Feb. 24, Novo Nordisk announced that, in a study conducted in China, UBT251 led to a mean weight loss of up to 19.7% in just 24 weeks. Comparing results across studies is always tricky, but it's worth noting that in Novo Nordisk's recent phase 3 study pitting CagriSema against Zepbound, the former led to an average weight loss of 23% compared to the latter's 25.5% -- but that was over 84 weeks.

In fact, in a 72-week study, Zepbound's 20.2% mean weight loss was only slightly better than UBT251's 24-week performance. UBT251's phase 2 results suggest it could outperform Zepbound and CagriSema (and Wegovy) in a study of equal length.

Today's Change

(

-1.27

%) $

-0.49

Current Price

$

38.58

What this means for Novo Nordisk There are several things to keep in mind here. First, UBT251's results in China won't support approval in the U.S. Second, this was still a mid-stage study. Late-stage clinical trial results may not be nearly as strong as that. Third, Eli Lilly is working on its own triple agonist, retatrutide. In a recent phase 3 study, retatrutide achieved best-in-class weight loss of 28.7% over 68 weeks.

That's a high bar to emulate, even for the so far very impressive UBT251. What does this tell us? Even if UBT251 performs well in late-stage clinical trials, that alone likely won't allow Novo Nordisk to capture the weight loss medicine lead back from its longtime rival. However, CagriSema's performance, albeit below Zepbound's, was still very competitive and ahead of Wegovy. With UBT251 also making steady progress, and several other candidates in the pipeline, the pharmaceutical leader should at least maintain its position as the second-leading drugmaker in this large and fast-growing market.

With the stock near multi-year lows and the weight-loss space projected to exceed $100 billion in sales over the next decade, Novo Nordisk could bounce back and deliver competitive returns over the next few years, provided UBT251 and other candidates pan out.

23.66K Followers

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

United Airlines flight attendants speak with students about job opportunities inside a Boeing 757 during Aviation Career Day at LAX in October 2025. (Photo by Patrick T. Fallon)

AFP via Getty Images

Both United Airlines and its flight attendants union said Friday that they are close to reaching a revised tentative contract agreement.

The United contract became amendable in August 2021. The airline’s 30,000 flight attendants, members of the Association of Flight Attendants, rejected a tentative contract agreement in July 2025. That deal offered 27% raises, but 71% of members voted against it.

“This week, we met in federal mediation in Chicago,” AFA said Friday, in a negotiations update to members from its four-person negotiating committee. “The parties made substantial progress on all outstanding issues and we are very close to a final tentative agreement.

“We are down to several open issues which we anticipate resolving at our next mediation session in Washington, DC, from March 24th to the 27th,” the committee said. “We expect we will be able to reach a compete tentative agreement at that session.”

“Given the substantial progress towards reaching an agreement,” the union said it would postpone a scheduled membership action day that had been scheduled for March 19th,” the committee said.

Meanwhile, in a message to flight attendants from Nathan Lopp, vice president of labor relations, United said, “ While there is still work to do, we are encouraged by the progress made this week and remain confident we’re on track toward a new tentative agreement.”

MORE FOR YOU

At the next session, “We expect to finalize signing bonuses and other remaining items,” Lopp wrote.

“At our last session, United offered a proposal that would deliver the highest flight attendant pay among U.S. carriers,” he wrote. “Over the term of the agreement, pay for every flight attendant at every level would be top of industry. During this session, we made progress on several other areas that the AFA has indicated are priorities for you, including wage rates and alignment on language for redeye rules and sit pay.

“Our discussions centered around the pathways to delivering those priorities while preserving our industry-leading pay proposal and ensuring the overall agreement remains balanced, competitive and financially sustainable for our airline,” he wrote.

In the past few weeks, AFA President Sara Nelson has made clear that the union is focused on getting a deal quickly. She has compared United CEO Scott Kirby unfavorably to American Airlines CEO Robert Isom, who has reached contract deals with all major work groups.

“Scott Kirby keeps saying that if our people are happy, they are going to make our customers happy,” but if he believed that, Nelson said in a February interview, “He would do what Robert Isom is doing. One knows how to do labor deals and one has yet to finish them.”

It now appears that the two sides have found a way to bridge the negotiating gap and to reach a deal they hope will win approval.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP Securities Litigation Partner James (Josh) Wilson Encourages Investors Who Suffered Losses In Zynex To Contact Him Directly To Discuss Their Options

If you purchased or acquired securities in Zynex between February 25, 2021 and December 15, 2025 and would like to discuss your legal rights, call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

[You may also click here for additional information]

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - March 7, 2026) - Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, a leading national securities law firm, is investigating potential claims against Zynex, Inc. ("Zynex" or the "Company") (OTC Pink: ZYXIQ) and reminds investors of the April 21, 2026 deadline to seek the role of lead plaintiff in a federal securities class action that has been filed against the Company.

Faruqi & Faruqi is a leading national securities law firm with offices in New York, Pennsylvania, California and Georgia. The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors since its founding in 1995. See www.faruqilaw.com.

As detailed below, the complaint alleges that the Company and its executives violated federal securities laws by making false and/or misleading statements and/or failing to disclose that: (a) Zynex shipped products, including electrodes, in excess of need; (b) as a result of this practice, the Company inflated its revenue; (c) the Company's practice of filing false claims drew scrutiny from insurers, including Tricare; (d) on August 21, 2023, Travelers commenced an action against Zynex, Sandgaard, Lucsok and Fox in the Superior Court of California alleging that Zynex and the defendants had embarked on a fraudulent overbilling scheme and sought more than $23 million in damages and civil penalties relating to hundreds of fraudulent claims between 2018 and 2023; (e) management had prioritized aggressive sales strategies to drive orders over compliance with industry laws, rules and regulations; (f) the Company was not committed to maintaining a strong internal control environment; (g) the Company's order growth was a result of illegal overbilling; (h) as a result, it was reasonably likely that Zynex would face adverse consequences, including removal from insurer networks and penalties from the federal government; and (i) as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

On March 11, 2025, after the market closed, Zynex reported its fourth quarter and full year 2024 financial results, revealing a significant revenue "shortfall" in the quarter "due to slower than normal payments from certain payers." Zynex further revealed "Tricare has temporarily suspended payments as they review prior claims." Tricare is the health insurance program for the U.S. military, and Zynex's largest customer, accounting for 20-25% of revenue.

On this news, Zynex's stock price fell $3.59 per share, or 51.3%, to close at $3.41 per share on March 12, 2025, on unusually heavy trading volume.

Then, on July 31, 2025, the full extent of Defendants' misdeeds were revealed when the Company acknowledged that it had not been in compliance with industry regulations. Also that day, the Company remarked on the "transformational" leadership change during the quarter with the appointment of new Chief Executive Officer ("CEO") Steven Dyson ("Dyson") to replace Sandgaard, and the announced departure of the Company's Chief Financial Officer ("CFO") Daniel Moorhead ("Moorhead"). The Company also temporarily suspended revenue and profitability guidance.

On August 1, 2025, the stock fell from the previous day's $2.23 per share to $1.26 per share, a 45% decline in heavy trading volume.

The court-appointed lead plaintiff is the investor with the largest financial interest in the relief sought by the class who is adequate and typical of class members who directs and oversees the litigation on behalf of the putative class. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. Your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision to serve as a lead plaintiff or not.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP also encourages anyone with information regarding Zynex's conduct to contact the firm, including whistleblowers, former employees, shareholders and others.

To learn more about the Zynex, Inc. class action, go to www.faruqilaw.com/ZYXIQ or call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, on X, or on Facebook.

Attorney Advertising. The law firm responsible for this advertisement is Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP (www.faruqilaw.com). Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter. We welcome the opportunity to discuss your particular case. All communications will be treated in a confidential manner.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/286588

Source: Faruqi & Faruqi LLP

Ready to Announce with Confidence? Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.

Contact Us

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP Securities Litigation Partner James (Josh) Wilson Encourages Investors Who Suffered In Ramaco To Contact Him Directly To Discuss Their Options

If you purchased or acquired securities in Ramaco between July 31, 2025 and October 23, 2025 and would like to discuss your legal rights, call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

[You may also click here for additional information]

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - March 7, 2026) - Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP, a leading national securities law firm, is investigating potential claims against Ramaco Resources, Inc. ("Ramaco" or the "Company") (NASDAQ: METC) and reminds investors of the March 31, 2026 deadline to seek the role of lead plaintiff in a federal securities class action that has been filed against the Company.

Faruqi & Faruqi is a leading national securities law firm with offices in New York, Pennsylvania, California and Georgia. The firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors since its founding in 1995. See www.faruqilaw.com.

As detailed below, the complaint alleges that the Company and its executives violated federal securities laws by making false and/or misleading statements and/or failing to disclose that: (1) that Defendants had not commenced any significant mining activity at the Brook Mine after groundbreaking; (2) that no active work was taking place at the Brook Mine; (3) that, as a result, the Company overstated development progress at the Brook Mine; and (4) that, as a result of the foregoing, Defendants' positive statements about the Company's business, operations, and prospects were materially misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis.

On October 23, 2025, Wolfpack Research published a report alleging, among other things, that Ramaco's Brook Mine in northern Wyoming is a "hoax" and a "Potemkin Mine" which was not, in fact, mined after its July groundbreaking. The report alleges that the Company "built this mine for show," and reveals that, as shown by drone footage taken three months after the mine's opening, no active work appears to have occurred. The report states that "[d]espite multiple site visits during working hours over several weeks" Wolfpack researchers "never observed the equipment mentioned in news reports or any active work."

On this news, Ramaco's stock price fell $3.81, or 9.6%, to close at $36.01 per share on October 23, 2025, on unusually heavy trading volume.

The court-appointed lead plaintiff is the investor with the largest financial interest in the relief sought by the class who is adequate and typical of class members who directs and oversees the litigation on behalf of the putative class. Any member of the putative class may move the Court to serve as lead plaintiff through counsel of their choice, or may choose to do nothing and remain an absent class member. Your ability to share in any recovery is not affected by the decision to serve as a lead plaintiff or not.

Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP also encourages anyone with information regarding Ramaco's conduct to contact the firm, including whistleblowers, former employees, shareholders and others.

To learn more about the Ramaco Resources class action, go to www.faruqilaw.com/METC or call Faruqi & Faruqi partner Josh Wilson directly at 877-247-4292 or 212-983-9330 (Ext. 1310).

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn, on X, or on Facebook.

Attorney Advertising. The law firm responsible for this advertisement is Faruqi & Faruqi, LLP (www.faruqilaw.com). Prior results do not guarantee or predict a similar outcome with respect to any future matter. We welcome the opportunity to discuss your particular case. All communications will be treated in a confidential manner.

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/286583

Source: Faruqi & Faruqi LLP

Ready to Announce with Confidence? Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.

Contact Us

This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.

TQQQ has delivered a 47.69% gain over the past year and 2,653.53% over the past decade. Those numbers explain why retail investors keep coming back to it. The appeal is simple: own the Nasdaq-100, but with the accelerator pressed to the floor. In a sustained bull market, that logic works extraordinarily well. The problem is what happens when it the music stops.

ProShares UltraPro QQQ seeks to deliver three times the daily performance of the Nasdaq-100 Index, before fees and expenses. It does this through swaps and derivatives, resetting that 3x exposure at the close of every trading day. That daily reset is the key detail most investors gloss over, and it is where the fund’s most serious risk lives.

The Math That Quietly Erodes Your Position The daily reset mechanism creates a problem called volatility decay, sometimes called beta slippage. The core issue is that compounding works asymmetrically. The compounding math works against leveraged holders in choppy markets. A fund that drops and then recovers by the same percentage does not return to its starting point — the percentage gain required to recover always exceeds the percentage lost. This asymmetry compounds with each daily reset.

This is not a theoretical concern. In a trending market, the daily reset causes no meaningful harm and can even slightly enhance returns. But in a choppy, volatile, or sideways market, each daily reset locks in a small loss that compounds against the holder. The fund does not need to fall sharply in a straight line to destroy value. It can grind an investor down through repeated oscillations that leave the underlying index roughly unchanged while TQQQ steadily loses ground.

The VIX, which measures expected 30-day volatility in the S&P 500, sits at 23.75 as of March 5, 2026, placing it in the elevated uncertainty range. That reading is higher than 88.4% of readings over the past year. More telling is the trajectory: the VIX has risen 31.9% over the past month, climbing from around 18 in early February to its current level. That kind of rapid shift from calm to uncertainty is precisely the environment where volatility decay accelerates.

TQQQ is already down 8.27% year to date through March 6, 2026. Over the same period, QQQ, the unleveraged Nasdaq-100 ETF, is down only 1.78%. That divergence illustrates exactly how volatility decay operates in real time. The underlying index has barely moved, yet the leveraged version has lost more than four times as much.

When the Underlying Index Itself Becomes a Liability The second major risk compounds the first. The Nasdaq-100 is not a diversified index. It is heavily concentrated in a handful of mega-cap technology and technology-adjacent companies. TQQQ’s top individual equity holdings reflect this directly: Nvidia sits at 5.42% of the portfolio, Apple at 4.70%, Microsoft at 3.56%, Amazon at 2.59%, Tesla at 2.47%, Meta at 2.26%, and both share classes of Alphabet together at roughly 4.09%. The Information Technology sector alone accounts for 29.9% of the portfolio weight.

When you apply 3x leverage to a concentrated index, a sector rotation or a macro shock does not hit you proportionally. It hits you three times harder. During 2022, when rising interest rates compressed growth stock valuations, QQQ fell roughly 33%. TQQQ fell more than 80% from its peak. During the COVID crash in early 2020, TQQQ dropped approximately 70% in a matter of weeks.

The April 2025 VIX spike to 52.33 on April 8 provides the most recent extreme stress test, thought with the current war with Iran the VIX may test those same levels again very soon.. That reading placed the VIX firmly in the extreme panic category, a rare event that would have triggered severe daily rebalancing losses for anyone holding TQQQ through the drawdown.

The rate environment adds another layer. The 10-year Treasury yield currently sits at 4.09%, having pulled back from a 12-month high of 4.58% in May 2025. Growth stocks, which dominate the Nasdaq-100, are particularly sensitive to rate movements because their valuations depend heavily on discounting future earnings. A renewed push higher in yields would pressure the underlying index and amplify through TQQQ’s 3x structure.

ProShares is explicit about this in its own documentation. The fund is designed as a short-term trading instrument, not a buy-and-hold position. The prospectus makes clear that performance over periods longer than a single day will differ from the stated 3x objective, often significantly in volatile conditions.

What to Monitor and When It Matters Two indicators deserve consistent attention from anyone holding TQQQ.

The VIX is the most direct signal. FRED publishes daily VIX data and it updates each trading day. When the VIX is below 15, the environment is relatively favorable for leveraged exposure. Between 20 and 30, volatility decay becomes an active drag, which is where the market sits right now. Above 30, the risk of severe compounding losses rises sharply. The current reading of 23.75 warrants caution. A move toward or above 30 would be a meaningful escalation signal.

The Nasdaq-100’s trend direction matters equally. TQQQ only works as intended in a consistently trending market. Sideways chop is its enemy even when the index ends roughly flat. Watching whether QQQ is making higher highs or oscillating within a range gives a practical read on whether the compounding math is working for or against the holder.

The 10-year Treasury yield is worth checking around Federal Reserve meetings and major economic data releases, particularly CPI and jobs reports. A rapid move back toward the 12-month high of 4.58% or beyond would likely pressure Nasdaq-100 valuations and amplify through TQQQ’s leverage.

The Honest Assessment for Current Holders TQQQ does exactly what it promises for traders who understand its mechanics and use it tactically over short windows in trending markets. The problem is holding it through volatile, choppy, or declining conditions where the daily reset works against the investor every session.

Right now, the VIX is elevated and rising, the Nasdaq-100 is under mild pressure year to date, and the rate environment remains uncertain. None of those conditions are catastrophic in isolation, but together they describe an environment where volatility decay is actively eroding value. The year-to-date gap between TQQQ’s -8.27% and QQQ’s -1.78% is not a fluke. It is the mechanism working exactly as the math predicts.

Investors who own TQQQ as a long-term position because of its 10-year return chart should understand that those returns were generated through one of the strongest sustained technology bull markets in history. The same structure that produced those gains will amplify the next sustained downturn by the same factor.

After sharp sell-offs that began on Jan. 29, the prices of gold and silver have rebounded. Most recently, the impetus for those precious metals’ bullish price action has been the war between Iran and an allied United States and Israel, which began on Saturday, Feb. 28.

But as impressive as the precious metals rally was last year—and how it has notably continued this year—both gold and silver are being outperformed by one critical industrial metal: lithium. 

Gold’s nearly 19% year-to-date (YTD) gain and silver’s nearly 17% YTD gain are impressive and continue to generate eye-catching headlines. But so far in 2026, lithium has generated a YTD gain of almost 30%. 

Get LIT alerts:

Here’s why the metal’s price is surging, and three ways investors looking to gain exposure can add it to their portfolios.  

Global Demand Is Robust and Growing More than 75% of the world’s supply is used for lithium-ion electric vehicle (EV) batteries and electronics, but the metal’s applications also include grid storage, heat-resistant materials, medications, and aerospace alloys, as well as a thickening agent in lubricating greases. 

According to industry consultancy firm Grand View Research, the global lithium market finished 2025 with an estimated value of more than $32 billion and is forecast to undergo a compound annual growth rate (CAGR) of 14.5% from 2026 to 2033. At the end of that forecast period, the total addressable market is expected to be valued at $96.45 billion.  

And while EV adoption is only slowly taking hold in the United States, the U.S. lithium market—valued at $1.06 billion in 2023—is expected to grow at a CAGR of 12.6% through 2030, with major driving factors for rising demand including lithium-ion batteries, consumer goods, and grid storage.

Tap Into the Rally With the World’s Largest Lithium ETF Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF Today

LIT

Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF

$68.97 -0.17 (-0.25%)

As of 03/6/2026 04:10 PM Eastern

52-Week Range$31.44▼

$78.00Dividend Yield0.45%

Assets Under Management$1.66 billion

With $1.67 billion in assets under management (AUM), the Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF NYSEARCA: LIT is the largest lithium exchange-traded fund (ETF) in the world. 

The fund sees average daily trading volume of nearly 456,000 shares, and had gained more than 16% this year before a healthy pullback began on Feb. 25. Today, shares of LIT are trading nearly 8% lower but are already ticking higher again.  

Among its top five holdings are Albemarle NYSE: ALB—the world’s largest lithium producer—Sociedad Quimica y Minera de Chile NYSE: SQM, and British-Australian mining company Rio Tinto NYSE: RIO, the fund’s largest holding at nearly 23%. 

While the LIT’s focus is primarily mining, it also provides exposure to companies operating in the chemicals, electronics, renewable energy, and EV markets. By geographic exposure, 39% of the ETF’s companies operate in the United States, while more than 29% are located in China, and another 11% call South Korea home.   

The fund receives an aggregate rating of Moderate Buy based on 103 analyst ratings issued over the past year covering six companies in the LIT’s portfolio.

A Lithium Fund With a Mining Focus iShares Lithium Miners and Producers ETF Today

ILIT

iShares Lithium Miners and Producers ETF

$16.10 -0.11 (-0.68%)

As of 03/6/2026 03:50 PM Eastern

52-Week Range$6.46▼

$19.97Dividend Yield2.17%

Assets Under Management$19.37 million

With a focus on lithium miners and producers, the iShares Lithium Miners and Producers ETF NASDAQ: ILIT also pulled back beginning on Feb. 25 after gaining nearly 17% YTD. Like the LIT, the fund has already begun ticking back up again. 

Considerably smaller than its counterparts, the ETF has $19.63 million in AUM and average daily trading volume of just under 50,000 shares, which could present short-term traders with liquidity concerns. But for buy-and-hold investors with longer horizons, the fund can provide them with access to a basket of lithium miners and compound manufacturers. 

While less diversified than the LIT, current short interest stands at just 1.86%—lower than the LIT’s 2.26% and nearly 26% less than short interest was the month prior.  

The ILIT receives an aggregate rating of Hold based on 71 analyst ratings issued over the past year covering seven companies in the fund’s portfolio, which also includes market dominators Albemarle and Sociedad Quimica y Minera de Chile.

A Lithium ETF With EV Maker and EV Battery Exposure Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF Today

BATT

Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF

$14.60 -0.25 (-1.68%)

As of 03/6/2026 04:10 PM Eastern

52-Week Range$6.78▼

$16.68Dividend Yield1.71%

Assets Under Management$113.55 million

Before also pulling back on Feb. 25, the Amplify Lithium & Battery Technology ETF NYSEARCA: BATT—a lithium fund with an EV battery bent—had gained more than 17% YTD. After pulling back nearly 9%, like the LIT and ILIT, the fund is back on the rise. 

The ETF, which has $115.50 million in AUM and daily trading volume of nearly 83,000 shares, holds lithium producers including Albemarle, it also provides exposure to EV makers and EV battery tech. Its second-largest holding, for example, is Magnificent Seven member Tesla NASDAQ: TSLA with a 7% weighting. 

The current short interest of 1.67% is the lowest of all three lithium ETFs on this list and is more than 47% lower than the month prior. Meanwhile, institutional inflows of nearly $6 million over the past year have far outpaced outflows of just $731,000.

Should You Invest $1,000 in Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF Right Now?Before you consider Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF, you'll want to hear this.

MarketBeat keeps track of Wall Street's top-rated and best performing research analysts and the stocks they recommend to their clients on a daily basis. MarketBeat has identified the five stocks that top analysts are quietly whispering to their clients to buy now before the broader market catches on... and Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF wasn't on the list.

While Global X Lithium & Battery Tech ETF currently has a Hold rating among analysts, top-rated analysts believe these five stocks are better buys.

View The Five Stocks Here

Click the link to see MarketBeat's list of seven stocks and why their long-term outlooks are very promising.

Get This Free Report

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

On-chain data shows the Bitcoin Difficulty has seen little change in the latest adjustment as a result of the recent sideways trend in the Hashrate.

Bitcoin Difficulty Has Only Seen A Change Of 0.45% In The New Adjustment The Bitcoin “Difficulty” refers to a metric built into the blockchain that controls how hard the miners would find it to mine a block on the network right now. This indicator’s value automatically changes about every two weeks based on network conditions.

Satoshi wrote in one simple rule for the chain to follow: bring block production rate to a consistent value of 10 minutes per block. Whenever miners produce blocks in an interval faster than this, the network raises its Difficulty just enough to slow them back down to it. Similarly, BTC eases things up instead if miners are slower than expected.

The latest Difficulty adjustment has just occurred on the Bitcoin network. This event, however, didn’t lead to any notable changes in the metric, with its value going up by just 0.45%.

Below is a chart from CoinWarz that shows how the recent Difficulty adjustments have looked for the cryptocurrency.

The value of the metric seems to have gone up during the last two adjustments | Source: CoinWarz From the graph, it’s visible that the Bitcoin Difficulty saw a huge decline two adjustments ago. The reason behind this aggressive drawdown in the indicator lied in special circumstances in the United States: the snow storm of late January.

Miners become faster or slower at their task when they change their computing power, collectively known as the network Hashrate. This metric saw a huge drop following the onset of the snow storm; miners were forced to curtail their power in order to ease pressure on the nation’s electricity grid, which was facing disruptions due to the extreme weather event. The resulting network slowdown is what forced the Difficulty decrease.

Since this event was extraordinary and lasted only shortly, it didn’t take long for the Hashrate to bounce back. Here is a chart from Blockchain.com that shows the trajectory that the 7-day average value of the indicator has followed recently:

Looks like the 7-day average value of the indicator has gone down in recent days | Source: Blockchain.com The quick recovery in the Bitcoin Hashrate led into a Difficulty increase that corrected the earlier sharp drawdown. Since the rebound in the indicator, however, its value has taken to sideways movement, suggesting miners are neither expanding nor decommissioning.

This flat trajectory in the Hashrate is why the Difficulty also mostly remained unchanged during the latest adjustment.

BTC Price Bitcoin broke above the $70,000 level earlier this week, but the asset has now seen a drop back below it as its price is now trading around $68,300.

The trend in the price of the coin over the last five days | Source: BTCUSDT on TradingView Featured image from Dall-E, chart from TradingView.com

Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.

Sign Up for Our Newsletter! For updates and exclusive offers enter your email.

Keshav is a Physics graduate who has been employed as a writer with Bitcoinist since June 2021. He is passionate about writing and through the years, he has gained experience working in a variety of niches. Keshav holds an active interest in the cryptocurrency market, with on-chain analysis being an area he particularly likes to research and write about.

TLDR Ripple unveiled a comprehensive whitepaper detailing its “Digital Prime Broker” framework designed for institutional and banking clients XRP and the XRP Ledger facilitate early settlement mechanisms through on-chain credit infrastructure Clients of Ripple Prime can now trade CFTC-regulated futures for Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP, and Solana via Coinbase Derivatives with Nodal Clear settlement XRP Ledger’s Permissioned DEX enables institutional participation within a KYC/AML-compliant regulatory framework XRP currently hovers around $1.40, experiencing decline over the past 24-hour period Ripple has introduced a comprehensive whitepaper detailing its strategy to streamline institutional access to cryptocurrency markets. At the heart of this initiative is a “Digital Prime Broker” framework, with XRP serving as a fundamental component of the system’s functionality.

Have you read Ripple’s new whitepaper in full?$XRP isn’t just payments now. They’re expanding into institutional trading infrastructure

Onchain credit lines. Prime brokerage netting Transparent funding costs

Payments was the start. This is the next layer
NEW DEMAND FOR $XRP! pic.twitter.com/S9tWuKMasz

— X Finance Bull (@Xfinancebull) March 2, 2026

The primary objective addresses the currently disjointed approach institutions face when accessing digital asset markets. Presently, major financial entities navigate multiple trading partnerships, disparate credit arrangements, and substantial regulatory compliance burdens. Ripple’s proposed framework consolidates these elements into a unified access layer.

Within this architecture, a prime broker would provide on-chain credit facilities to brokers and market makers. This structure enables participants to tap into liquidity prior to standard settlement completion, accelerating transactions while improving capital efficiency.

The XRP Ledger manages settlement operations. According to Ripple, the platform supports accelerated settlement by facilitating on-chain credit lines that finance transactions before the conventional net settlement timeline concludes. Associated funding expenses are disclosed with complete transparency.

Ripple possesses existing infrastructure to support this vision. The firm’s acquisition of Hidden Road last year—now rebranded as Ripple Prime—provides an operational prime brokerage platform rather than merely a conceptual framework.

Permissioned DEX Opens Door for Regulated Institutional Trading A recently activated Permissioned DEX on the XRP Ledger represents a crucial element of this strategic initiative. This feature enables institutional trading on-chain while maintaining control over counterparty interactions through credential-based access restrictions.

This architecture embeds KYC and AML protocols directly into the trading infrastructure. For institutions operating under stringent regulatory mandates, this integrated compliance framework proves essential.

The Permissioned DEX effectively establishes a regulated pathway within a decentralized framework, addressing what has traditionally been a significant barrier to institutional cryptocurrency adoption.

Ripple Prime Now Offers Crypto Futures on Coinbase Ripple has further announced that Ripple Prime users can now access cryptocurrency derivatives through Coinbase Derivatives. Available products include futures contracts for Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP, and Solana.

These contracts operate under CFTC regulation and trade continuously around the clock. Nodal Clear provides clearing services. With Ripple Prime maintaining a Futures Commission Merchant license, the platform delivers these products directly without intermediary involvement.

Coinbase additionally provides U.S. perpetual-style futures contracts, broadening the available product suite. In the previous month, Ripple Prime integrated Hyperliquid support, enabling client access to on-chain derivative products.

XRP trades near $1.40 currently, showing decline over the recent 24-hour window based on CoinMarketCap reporting.

SOL rebounds after dipping near $82, but analysts warn a break below $83 could trigger a deeper drop toward the $75 zone.

Solana (SOL) is navigating a tense period as traders closely monitor key support and resistance levels. The coin has experienced significant price swings over the past week, highlighting the influence of liquidity clusters and market structure on its short-term trajectory. Currently trading at $84.43 with a 24-hour decline of 2.2%, SOL shows a 6.7% gain over the past seven days, signaling ongoing volatility and trader uncertainty.

Liquidity Clusters Signal Potential MovesAnalyst TedPillows points out that SOL is concentrated around two major liquidity clusters. The first cluster sits near $95 on the upside, representing a modest resistance zone. 

Conversely, the downside features a larger liquidity cluster between $78 and $85, which could act as a magnet for price in the event of a decline. Consequently, a sweep of the lower cluster followed by a rebound appears plausible, as traders position themselves for a potential rally after testing support.

Mid-Range Defense Key for BullsAccording to Poseidon, the $83 level has emerged as a critical mid-range point for SOL. Bulls must maintain control here to prevent a decline toward $75, the next major liquidity zone. The coin recently faced rejection around $90–$92, reinforcing this range high as a significant resistance area. 

Source: X

If buyers can defend $83, SOL could stabilize and potentially retest the $90 level, maintaining short-term structure. However, a clean break below $83 would suggest sellers dominate, increasing the likelihood of a move toward range lows.

Market Sentiment and Speculative ActivityMilk Road observes that some traders consider SOL “cooked,” citing the weakened memecoin ecosystem that powered Solana’s speculative gains in 2024 and 2025. Yet, the crowd may overreact. 

After hitting $82, SOL rebounded to $94 over three days, showing that short-term support remains intact. While targets around $59 exist if support fails, these levels are not confirmed. Solana has historically withstood severe market disruptions, including the 2022 FTX collapse, suggesting resilience even during bearish trends.

ENRICH your inbox with our best storiesDon’t miss out and join our newsletter to get the latest,
well-curated news from the crypto world!

Izabela Anna is a knowledgeable freelance journalist, who boasts over five years of experience covering the cryptocurrency market. Her tenure has seen her navigate through the ebbs and flows of multiple market cycles, giving her a deep understanding within. Her journalistic focus lies in dissecting price action dynamics, scrutinizing the on-chain landscape, and providing insights from a technical perspective, making her a trusted voice in the realm of cryptocurrency reporting.

Read more about

Latest Solana (SOL) News Today

Journalist

Posted: March 7, 2026

Jane Street and market manipulation often go hand in hand.

From a technical perspective, the firm’s involvement in the infamous 10 A.M. Bitcoin [BTC] moves can have dual effects – It may trigger risk-off sentiment, or it may act as a market test, revealing underlying resilience.

In line with this, a wallet linked to Jane Street recently transferred $19 million worth of Bitcoin, immediately drawing market attention. The question is – Does this signal another bearish phase, or will existing liquidity absorb the shock and reinforce market conviction?

Source: TradingView (BTC/USDT)

Notably, the timing of this move is critical.

Bitcoin began the week bullish, rallying by roughly 12% from the $65k support level. However, in the latter half of the week, nearly 8% of those gains were wiped out, leaving only about 3% of the weekly advance intact. The result? A long liquidity crunch.

Coinglass data revealed that traders liquidated nearly $200 million in the derivatives market within 48 hours. Especially as long positions closed following a week of sustained short squeezes.

In such an environment, Jane Street’s Bitcoin transfer might appear deliberate.

With BTC trapped in a volatility loop, such large moves can increase liquidation risk while creating opportunities for traders to profit. Hence, the key question is – Will this FUD trigger another corrective phase, or can underlying liquidity reveal the market’s resilience?

Jane Street move puts Bitcoin’s resilience to the test Given historical trends, absorbing this shock will be difficult.

Jane Street’s past actions provide some context though. The firm was sued for manipulating Bitcoin and played a role in the October crash last year, which triggered a 30%+ correction and drove market sentiment to all-time lows.

The question now is whether history will repeat itself. According to CryptoQuant, short-term hodlers are selling, with 27k BTC offloaded in the last 24 hours. This coincided with Bitcoin’s nearly 4% correction from the $70k-level.

Source: CryptoQuant

The lack of follow-through highlights Bitcoin’s weak underlying bid. 

ETF flows support this view too. Nearly $600 million flowed out over the past two days after peaking at roughly $1 billion in net inflows earlier this week. This simply reinforces the link between capital flows and BTC’s volatile weekly action.

In this environment, Jane Street’s $19 million Bitcoin move reflects strategic positioning rather than speculation. As the market slowly flips back to risk-off, this action could trigger another long squeeze, creating opportunities for bears to capitalize.

If this thesis holds, a crash could unfold, making this a key event to watch.

Final Summary Jane Street’s $19 million Bitcoin move tests market resilience as weak bids and ETF outflows highlight growing downside pressure. Market faces the risk of a cascading long squeeze, pushing Bitcoin towards another sharp corrective phase.

Cryptocurrency prices are tumbling as some investors take profits from the midweek rally to $74,000, while others shift toward safer assets amid escalating tensions in the Middle East. The conflict between the United States and Iran showed no signs of easing this week, with hostilities continuing to escalate across the region.

Bitcoin has dropped about 4.3% over the past 24 hours, hovering around $67,800 as of publication time, according to CoinGecko data.

This comes as U.S.-listed spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded their largest daily outflows in three weeks on March 5, with investors withdrawing roughly $228 million from the funds. The outflows highlight continued institutional caution toward Bitcoin, extending the risk-off sentiment that emerged after the market crash in early October.

The outflow trend was led by BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT), which saw $89 million exit the fund on Thursday, according to data from Farside Investors. Fidelity Investments’s Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC) followed with $48 million in outflows, while the Bitwise Bitcoin ETF (BITB) from Bitwise Asset Management recorded $46 million leaving the fund.

Thursday’s withdrawals represented the biggest single-day outflow since the $410 million exit recorded on Feb. 12. So far in 2026, cumulative inflows into spot Bitcoin ETFs stand at $3.58 billion, while total outflows have reached $4.49 billion amid a cautious macro backdrop.

Advertisement  

Solana ETFs Show Surprising Strength Despite 57% Price Drop Negative sentiment weighed on altcoin ETFs, with Ethereum funds recording $91 million in withdrawals. XRP and Solana ETFs also posted smaller redemptions of $6 million and $5 million, respectively.

Notably, the outflows from Solana ETFs represent their first losses since early February, although year-to-date inflows still stand at around $200 million. By comparison, XRP funds have attracted about $86 million in inflows so far this year.

According to Eric Balchunas, a senior ETF analyst at Bloomberg, Solana ETFs have attracted about $1.5 billion in cumulative inflows even though SOL’s price has fallen 57% since spot ETFs launched in July. Balchunas shared the figures in a Friday post on X.

“Yet they managed to not only accumulate $1.5 billion in flows but not really give any of it up,” Balchunas said, adding that many institutions have increased exposure to Solana in the fourth quarter of 2025. “Both are really good signs for the future,” Balchunas noted.

Crypto exchange-traded funds (ETFs) ended the week under pressure as bitcoin funds recorded a second consecutive day of heavy outflows. Ether, XRP, and solana ETFs also posted losses, marking another broad selloff across the sector.

Meanwhile, another analyst said that BTC's run could resume soon as long as it remains above $60,000.

Bitcoin’s deviation from its price compression below $70,000 didn’t last long despite the price surge to $74,000 on Wednesday, and the asset struggles below $68,000 as of press time.

Although it has essentially returned to its familiar trading range as of the past month, one analyst believes the best is yet to come, at least according to the BTC Inter-exchange Flow Pulse metric.

30 to 40 Days for the Next Rally? CW noted on X that the metric, which tracks the flows of BTC between spot and derivatives exchanges, had just formed a golden cross, which has acted as the catalyst for an “explosive upward movement” in the past. However, the rally hasn’t been instant after the formation of such a golden cross in previous years.

The analyst said that it took BTC roughly 30 days to go on a wild run after the bear market had ended in 2019. In 2023, the necessary timeframe went up by 10 days. As such, CW believes the next month could be similarly choppy for bitcoin as the previous one was, but added that “the trend has reversed, and an explosive upward rally is not far away.”

The $BTC Inter-exchange Flow Pulse (IFP) has formed a golden cross. This indicator’s golden cross marks the beginning of an explosive upward movement.

However, the rally did not begin immediately after the golden cross.

In 2019, the explosive upward movement began 30 days… https://t.co/QZDHPO9oZs pic.twitter.com/6oVS7mlG01

— CW (@CW8900) March 7, 2026

Late Bitcoin Buyers to Be Humiliated? Merlijn The Trader also weighed in on BTC’s current cycle and latest moves, indicating that the cryptocurrency’s patterns are quite obvious and easy to follow. After each “blow-off top,” which was the early October all-time high of over $126,000, the liquidity drains, momentum fades, and the price returns to the macro trendline.

In the case of the current cycle, that level sits around $60,000. He added that as long as BTC doesn’t lose that coveted support for good, the “cycle structure survives.”

You may also like: ‘Iran Will Be Hit Very Hard Today,’ Warns Trump: How Will BTC’s Price React? Analysis: Bitcoin Exchange Outflows Signal Holder Conviction Amid Hormuz Crisis Bitcoin Adoption and Offline Storage on the Rise Despite Weak Market Conditions (Santiment) THE BITCOIN CYCLE ALWAYS HUMILIATES LATE BUYERS.

After every blow-off top comes the same pattern.

Liquidity drains.
Momentum fades.
Price returns to the macro trendline.

That level now sits near 60K.

Hold it and the cycle structure survives.

Lose it and history may repeat. pic.twitter.com/XpPsAETajM

— Merlijn The Trader (@MerlijnTrader) March 7, 2026

Tags:

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission moved to end its civil case against Justin Sun and the Tron entities on March 5, 2026, after filing a proposed settlement in federal court. Under the deal, Rainberry Inc. would pay a $10 million civil penalty, while the SEC would dismiss its remaining claims against Rainberry and all claims against Sun, Tron Foundation Limited, and BitTorrent Foundation Ltd., if the court approves the resolution.

The SEC said the settlement covers its wash trading claim against Rainberry under Section 17(a)(3) of the Securities Act. The agency added that Rainberry would be permanently barred from violating that provision. At the same time, the regulator filed to dismiss a separate pending claim against DeAndre Cortez Way, known as Soulja Boy.

The case began in March 2023 and later expanded through an amended complaint in April 2024. The SEC had accused Sun and his companies of illegally distributing Tronix and BitTorrent tokens, inflating trading activity, and hiding payments to celebrity promoters. Reuters reported that the regulator alleged Sun generated about $31 million through fraudulent trades.

SEC narrows case to Rainberry wash trading claimIn its March 5 litigation release, the SEC said Rainberry allegedly facilitated wash trading in 2018 and 2019 to inflate TRX trading volume. The agency described wash trading as transactions without a real change in beneficial ownership, which can create a false picture of market demand.

The proposed judgment does not require Sun or the Tron entities to admit or deny wrongdoing on the settled claim. Reuters said the SEC confirmed that point in a letter to U.S. District Judge Edgardo Ramos in Manhattan. Court approval is still required before the settlement becomes final.

This outcome sharply reduces a case that once targeted several parts of the Tron ecosystem. Instead of pursuing the broader complaint through trial, the SEC is now asking the court to approve a narrower resolution centered on Rainberry and then close the rest of the action with prejudice.

Why the settlement matters nowReuters reported that the SEC paused the case in February 2025 to explore a possible resolution. The settlement now lands during a wider shift in U.S. crypto enforcement, as the agency has recently pulled back or reworked several digital asset cases filed in earlier years.

Sun said on X that the SEC had moved to dismiss all claims against him, the Tron Foundation, and the BitTorrent Foundation, adding that the resolution brought closure. The SEC did not offer further public comment beyond its filing and litigation release.

For Tron, the immediate result is legal relief, but the court still has the final word. Until Judge Ramos signs off, the $10 million settlement remains a proposed deal rather than a completed judgment.

Ethereum is testing a key breakout zone after two separate chart analyses pointed to narrow resistance levels just overhead. If buyers clear them, ETH could target higher supply zones, but if momentum fades, the price may slip back toward support.

Ethereum Price Faces Key Breakout Level at $2,147Ethereum approached a critical resistance level near $2,147 on the four hour chart, according to data shared by Ali Martinez on X. The chart shows ETH trading inside a horizontal range for several weeks before pushing toward the upper boundary. This level now acts as a technical decision zone where price momentum may either continue upward or stall.

Ethereum 4H Resistance Levels: Source: Ali Charts / X

Price action between mid February and early March shows repeated reactions inside a range roughly between $1,813 support and $2,147 resistance. Buyers defended the lower zone several times. Meanwhile, sellers rejected attempts near the upper boundary. As a result, Ethereum moved sideways while forming multiple short term swings inside the channel.

However, the latest move shows ETH climbing back toward the $2,147 resistance line. According to the chart levels highlighted by Martinez, a confirmed move above that zone would shift attention to the next supply areas. The first resistance sits near $2,335, while the next potential barrier appears higher around $2,542.

These levels represent areas where previous trading activity concentrated. Therefore, they often attract increased selling pressure when price revisits them. If Ethereum holds above $2,147, traders will likely monitor how price reacts near those zones. At the same time, the lower range near $1,973 and $1,813 remains the main support structure that previously stabilized the market during pullbacks.

Ethereum Break Above $2,100 Shifts Focus to $2,150 ResistanceMeanwhile, Ethereum moved above the $2,100 level on the daily chart, signaling a potential change in short term momentum. According to analysis shared by Ted Pillows on X, the next critical threshold now sits near $2,150, where a confirmed daily close could strengthen the upward structure.

Ethereum Daily Support and Resistance Zones: Source: Ted Pillows / X

The chart shows Ethereum previously falling from higher resistance zones before stabilizing near lower support levels. After that decline, the asset began forming a recovery structure while pushing back above the $2,100 area. This level now acts as a pivot where buyers attempt to regain control of the trend.

However, the analysis notes that Ethereum still requires a daily close above $2,150 to confirm continuation toward the next major supply zone. If that move occurs, the next visible resistance area appears near $2,400, where earlier trading activity created a concentration of sell orders.

At the same time, the chart highlights downside risk if the breakout attempt fails. Without confirmation above $2,150, Ethereum could return to test the $2,000 support zone again. That level previously acted as a stabilization area during recent consolidation phases.

The executive order to build President Donald Trump's Strategic Bitcoin Reserve has awaited congressional action, and sources say there's one idea left for 2026. Mar 7, 2026, 3:00 p.m.

President Donald Trump's move to establish what he called a "Strategic Bitcoin Reserve" within the federal government was greeted with crypto-sector celebration at the start of his administration. The industry cheered it as further cementing the arrival of bitcoin BTC$67,901.40 as a mature asset, but a year has passed, and there's still no reserve.

Trump's administration performed the initial job of accounting for the government's crypto holdings, but the U.S. bitcoin reserve is no closer to forming because of the outcome of one concept in the March 6, 2025, order: "the need for any legislation to operationalize any aspect of this order." Trump's Treasury Department lacks the needed authorizations for building the specialized accounts. That requires action from Congress, the White House has acknowledged, with Trump's crypto adviser, Patrick Witt, saying the situation presents "novel legal questions" that must be answered.

Lawmakers such as Senator Cynthia Lummis have pitched reserve legislation, and the current best chance for passage, according to people familiar with the legislative strategy, may be to get it into the National Defense Authorization Act at the end of the year. But Trump's White House would probably have to re-adopt the issue as a priority cause in order to make that happen.

Conjecture about the planning and funding of the reserve — and its cousin, a separate digital assets stockpile also ordered by Trump to gather every other type of cryptocurrency — has ebbed and flowed. Last month, CNBC markets talking head Jim Cramer spouted a rumor that Trump's people were poised to start filling the reserve when BTC hit $60,000, despite the lack of a place to put it or money to buy it with.

The president's crypto officials continue to demur when asked how much bitcoin the feds actually possess, though some estimates put it at more than 300,000, totalling more than $20 billion.

The major disappointment from the crypto sector about Trump's bitcoin order was that it didn't come with any new government purchases of the leading crypto asset. It instead encouraged creative policies that would allow the government to add to the stockpile without spending taxpayer dollars.

Witt, Trump's adviser, hasn't been willing to share the leading ideas for obtaining more bitcoin for the fund, which is meant to be held for long-term appreciation, not technically as a strategic reserve that would imply its contents would be released to mitigate any emergencies.

The White House didn't respond to a request for comment on the halt in progress, but it further underlines that executive orders — a mainstay of Trump's administration — don't have the power of law and often act as little more than a high-level steer from the president.

If Trump's congressional allies come up with a pitch for the reserve bill to be tucked into the defense bill later this year, that legislative process usually concludes in December. The must-pass funding bill is often used as what DC insiders like to call a "Christmas tree," a piece of legislation on which they hang a wide array of unrelated bill ornaments, because the package has to get passed. If that's the plan, it would happen in this session's "lame duck" period, the point at which some members of Congress will have been voted out of office or chosen to retire — like Lummis — but haven't yet come to their departure dates.

Lummis' own bitcoin reserve bill calls for a spending program that gets the U.S. to a holding of a million tokens — about 5% of the total eventual supply. The Wyoming Republican, who is the inaugural chair of the Senate Banking Committee's first digital assets subcommittee, has so far only managed to get the legislation into the committee, but the panel's major priority is another crypto matter: passing the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act.

Read More: Why Doesn't the U.S. Have a Bitcoin Reserve, Yet?

More For You

CoinDesk Research looks into how Pudgy Penguins disrupts traditional toys market via a phygital model. With 2M+ units sold, they scale via global partnerships and events.

What to know:

Disrupting a Stagnant Market: Pudgy Penguins is utilizing a "Negative CAC" model to challenge the traditional $31.7B licensed toy industry by treating physical merchandise as a profitable user acquisition tool rather than just a final product.More For You

Kraken's surprise Fed win may harken onslaught of crypto firms with narrow Fed access

Mar 5, 2026

The Kansas City Fed may term this "Tier 3" access, but Kraken's entry into the vaunted Fed payments system has riled bankers and raised crypto hopes.

What to know:

Kraken could be the first of many to get direct access to the Federal Reserve payments system, analysts say after this week's approval of the crypto exchange's limited master account. This was an approval from the regional Fed bank in Kansas City, leaving some uncertainty about how Kraken's new status will relate to what the national-level Federal Reserve Board has been doing in writing a new "skinny" master account framework. The Kraken development surprised some in the crypto sector who'd been awaiting the policy process on the new system, but the traditional banking industry argued it represents a threat to the financial system.

Journalist

Posted: March 7, 2026

The broader crypto market crashed following poor-than-expected macroeconomic data from the United States. Investors pulled significant capital out of risky assets and turned to capital preservation.

As a result, crypto assets, especially Ethereum, recorded notable losses across the board. The altcoin breached the $2k support again, hitting a low of $1956 before rebounding slightly. 

With ETH facing a greater risk of downside, it would seem that whales might be stepping in across Futures and Spot markets to take positions.

Ethereum whales in the Futures show bearishness After Ethereum fell below $2k, some long holders were forced out of the market. Long position liquidations surpassed $56 million according to Coinglass data.

Source: Coinglass

With longs facing liquidations, some whales flipped and turned to short positions, according to Onchain Lens. In fact, a whale deposited $2.18 million into Hyperliquid and opened an ETH short position with 10x leverage.

Interestingly, this was not an isolated case either as ETH saw a significant increase in short positions too. CoinGlass revealed that the altcoin’s Long/Short Ratio fell below 1, dropping to 0.96 at press time.

Source: Coinglass

This finding suggested that Futures participants were bearish and took short positions, in anticipation of further losses.

Dormant whale stakes ETH worth $16 million While whales on the Futures are betting against the market, others have exhibited more long-term optimism. Thanks to a prolonged bearish structure, long-term holders, especially whales, have seen their profit margins erode, while others have fallen into unrealized losses.

These prevailing conditions prompted a dormant whale to wake up after a year and turn to staking. Onchain Lens reported that the whale staked 8,208 ETH, worth $16.85 million, with Kiln_finance.

Initially, this whale had accumulated these tokens for $16.09 million over four years. Now, his assets sit at only $768k in unrealized profits – A significant drop from their 2025 peak.

Typically, when whales choose staking over market closure during a dip, it is a sign of strong confidence in the market. Thus, the whale is positioned for the long haul and expects the phase to pass.

Can ETH hold $2k? Ethereum failed to hold above $2k thanks to intense downside pressure. Although whale activity across the market has been elevated, their demand-side activity proved inadequate in driving ETH higher. Hence, a potential upside move was not triggered.

On the contrary, downside momentum has grown in strength lately, as evidenced by the DMI-ADX Smoothing indicator.

Source: Tradingview

Based on this indicator, the positive momentum has been weak, sitting within the oversold territory at 20. At the same time, the negative index sat above the +DI at 22 – Evidence of bearish bias.

Worth pointing out, however, that based on the Future Grand Trend indicator, Ethereum could recover from this slip and climb to $2186, before dropping to $1.8k.

Final Summary A whale deposited $2.18 million into Hyperliquid and opened an ETH short position with 10x leverage. A dormant Ethereum whale returned after a year and staked 8,208 ETH, worth $16.85 million.

16h05 ▪ 4 min read ▪ by Evans S.

Summarize this article with:

Curve Finance accuses PancakeSwap of having reused a sensitive part of its architecture without respecting the required license. Behind this accusation, it is not just a conflict of egos between two big names in DeFi. The issue touches on code ownership, user security, and how crypto protocols reuse technical building blocks that have become quasi-standards.

In brief Curve Finance accuses PancakeSwap of having used its StableSwap code without an appropriate license. The dispute concerns both security and usage rights in DeFi. A discussion between the two teams remains possible, but the case marks a turning point for crypto. A crypto conflict that goes beyond a simple technical quarrel Curve Finance accuses PancakeSwap of using its StableSwap code without proper authorization. Curve considers this reuse as a violation of its license and has publicly invited PancakeSwap to regularize the situation through official collaboration.

The core of the dispute concerns StableSwap, a mechanism designed to facilitate exchanges between stablecoins or assets very close in value. This type of technology seems discreet from the outside. Yet, it plays a crucial role in execution quality, price slippage, and liquidity pool stability on the DEX.

In the wake of this, PancakeSwap adopted a tone more conciliatory than aggressive. Its team indicated a desire to discuss with Curve. Curve’s response left the door open to an agreement. This is an important point. In crypto, some disputes end up in court. Here, the case can still shift towards a more pragmatic agreement.

Why StableSwap code has become so strategic in crypto StableSwap is not just a simple piece of interchangeable code. It is a formula that optimizes exchanges between assets meant to remain close, such as stablecoins. When it works well, the user experience is smooth. When poorly integrated, the damage can be swift.

Curve stresses exactly this point. The protocol reminds that deep expertise is necessary to integrate this kind of function without creating vulnerabilities. The message is also political. Curve does not just say “you copied”. It mainly says: “you are playing with a delicate mechanism that can expose user funds if implemented poorly.”

This argument is not theoretical. Reminders of past incidents in DeFi serve to show that copy-pasting is never neutral. In this environment, reusing a swap logic without mastering its parameters can turn a profitable innovation into an entry point for an attack. This is where the crypto debate becomes concrete: it concerns both security and usage rights.

PancakeSwap Infinity also shows how far the crypto innovation race goes The timing of the conflict is no coincidence. PancakeSwap Infinity, the latest version of the DEX, was launched in April 2025 on Arbitrum and the BNB Chain. The platform added hooks, pool customization tools, and a significant fee reduction for creation. In short, PancakeSwap wants to appear as a more flexible, modular, and ambitious infrastructure.

In this context, integrating a StableSwap-type function makes sense. Users want efficient exchanges on stable assets. Protocols want to capture this traffic. And DEXs know the battle is no longer only about volumes but also about the quality of architecture. This conflict thus arises at a time when every technical detail can become a competitive advantage.

What emerges, fundamentally, is the growing maturity of the crypto sector. A few years ago, many projects copied, forked (fork) and launched quickly. Today, the stakes are higher. Code reused without a clear framework can open a legal front, weaken a protocol’s reputation, and worry a community already very sensitive to security issues.

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

Evans S.

Fascinated by Bitcoin since 2017, Evariste has continuously researched the subject. While his initial interest was in trading, he now actively seeks to understand all advances centered on cryptocurrencies. As an editor, he strives to consistently deliver high-quality work that reflects the state of the sector as a whole.

DISCLAIMER

The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this article belong solely to the author, and should not be taken as investment advice. Do your own research before taking any investment decisions.

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - March 7, 2026) - WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of common stock of Boston Scientific Corporation (NYSE: BSX) between July 23, 2025 and February 3, 2026, inclusive (the "Class Period"). A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than May 4, 2026.

SO WHAT: If you purchased Boston Scientific common stock during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement.

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Boston Scientific class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=55398 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than May 4, 2026. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation.

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved, at that time, the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, during the Class Period, defendants made positive statements to investors while, at the same time, disseminating materially false and misleading statements and/or concealing material adverse facts concerning the true state of Boston Scientific's U.S. Electrophysiology segment; notably, that management was aware that the segment's growth rate was unsustainable and that it was approaching an earlier tipping point than the market was anticipating. Due to defendants' statements of confidence and lofty expectations, investors and analysts were left surprised by Boston Scientific's net income miss and underwhelming guidance for the first half of fiscal 2026. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the Boston Scientific class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=55398 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action.

No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-rosen-law-firm, on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rosen_firm or on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rosenlawfirm/.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

-------------------------------

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/286624

Source: The Rosen Law Firm PA

Ready to Announce with Confidence? Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.

Contact Us

This article is part of our monthly series where we highlight five large-cap, relatively safe, dividend-paying companies offering significant discounts to their historical norms. We go over our filtering process to select just five conservative DGI stocks from more than 7,500 companies that are traded on U.S. exchanges, including OTC networks. In addition to the primary list that yields 3.88%, we present two other groups of five DGI stocks each, from moderate to high yields of up to 8%.

Michael McKee, Bloomberg News Economics Editor, discusses the recent market volatility as all three major U.S. stock indexes dropped about 1% amid a sharp rise in oil and gas prices with Bloomberg's David Gura, Christina Ruffini on “Bloomberg This Weekend.”

NEW YORK, March 07, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) --

WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds purchasers of securities of Kyndryl Holdings, Inc. (NYSE: KD) between August 7, 2024 and February 9, 2026, both dates inclusive (the “Class Period”), of the important April 13, 2026 lead plaintiff deadline in the securities class action first filed by the Firm.

SO WHAT: If you purchased Kyndryl securities during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement.

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Kyndryl class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=38139 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than April 13, 2026. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation.

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually handle securities class actions, but are merely middlemen that refer clients or partner with law firms that actually litigate the cases. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company at the time. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs’ Bar. Many of the firm’s attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Kyndryl’s financial statements issued during the Class Period were materially misstated; (2) Kyndryl lacked adequate internal controls and at times materially understated issues with its internal controls; (3) as a result, Kyndryl would be unable to timely file its Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2025; and (4) as a result, defendants’ statements about Kyndryl’s business, operations, and prospects, were materially false and misleading and/or lacked a reasonable basis at all times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the Kyndryl class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=38139 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action.

No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-rosen-law-firm or on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rosen_firm or on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rosenlawfirm.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

-------------------------------

Contact Information:

        Laurence Rosen, Esq.
        Phillip Kim, Esq.
        The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
        275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
        New York, NY 10016
        Tel: (212) 686-1060
        Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
        Fax: (212) 202-3827
        [email protected]
        www.rosenlegal.com

I believe in seeking long-term gains from exposure to the technologies of the future, which matches ARK Innovation ETF's investment approach. However, ARKK now triggers a tactical 'sell' signal as its 50-day moving average crosses below the 200-day. In addition, ARKK's discretionary management and 'trim winners, add to losers' approach are inconsistent with secular growth investing, raising concerns about execution.

The stocks erased some of those losses to end the week down around 1.2%.

CNBC.com's Yun Li quotes Keefe, Bruyette & Woods analyst Meyer Shields as saying he views "both the resumed share repurchases and Greg's commitment to annual buying as positives, but they don't change the earnings challenges at units like GEICO or Berkshire Hathaway Reinsurance."

Gabelli Funds portfolio manager Macrae Sykes thinks "it's great to see more economic alignment with shareholders after the announcement from Greg about future stock purchases."

Cathy Seifert at CFRA Research calls the resumption of buybacks "positive," but "at this juncture my view is that Berkshire's Class B shares are fairly valued, particularly given the tepid financial results."

BECKY QUICK: Good morning, everybody, and welcome back.

We have some breaking news right now coming from Berkshire Hathaway. The company has just filed a Form 4 and an 8K.

And joining us to talk about those topics and his first letter to shareholders after taking the reins from Warren Buffett is Berkshire Hathaway's CEO Greg Abel.

Greg, welcome. It is great to see you this morning.

GREG ABEL: It's great to be here. Good morning, Becky. Morning, Joe.

QUICK: We really appreciate your coming on set. We have so much to talk about.

But let's jump in with the news that is just crossing the wires, and that's what's coming from the 8-K. That's the big headline here, that Berkshire Hathaway has begun repurchasing shares of the common stock under the previous policy that had been out there before.

How many shares are you buying back? Why are we hearing about this?

ABEL: Yes, so we've had a longstanding policy that when the intrinsic value, as we see it, and computed on a conservative basis, when it exceeds our market price, Berkshire has always acquired shares. That's been our longstanding policy.

We highlighted that in the 10-K and in my letter that that remained in place, and we've just recommenced yesterday.

So, the point being we see value, the intrinsic value exceeds the current market value, and we started — recommenced purchasing.

And we felt it was important to communicate to our shareholders, our partners, our owners, that with the transition of leadership and that this is the first time we're purchasing shares, it was important to let them know we've recommenced.

QUICK: Yeah. The last time that you had bought back shares was May of 2024. Berkshire shareholders have long realized that it might be Charlie, maybe Warren, talking to each other, kind of figuring what they thought was a fair value for the price of things.

Did you talk to anybody about it, or you looked at it and you thought this is a good time to be buying back?

ABEL: No, I absolutely talked to Warren. So, how we — how I approached it was obviously looking at the value, having a view of intrinsic value, consulted with Warren relative to the value and the timing of is it ready to — are we ready to recommence?

And the thought there was after the consultation, we filed our 10-K, we —there's a 70 — a 48-hour cooling off period Monday and Tuesday, and we commenced purchasing on Wednesday morning.

QUICK: Have you been looking at this for a long time?

ABEL: We look at it continuously.

KERNEN: What are the three top things that would make you think— is it something to the price of sales? Is it — what jumps out as a signal that the intrinsic value is not recognized by the share price? Which things?

ABEL: Well, what we always look at is what are the economic prospects of each of our companies in Berkshire. And we look at that over the long term.

KERNEN: Is it a gut feeling more than — are there numbers where you'd say, OK, this hit, you know, 80 percent of this part of Berkshire or something that —nothing that specific?

ABEL: It's really just looking at the economic opportunities that exist within Berkshire and are we comfortable that the value proposition is very strong, and we're doing it on behalf of obviously our shareholders and owners.

We have to view this as value, that we're creating value for our shareholders long term.

KERNEN: So, if the stock goes up from the announcement or from the buybacks, how long would you do this? How much — will you keep doing it until it remains the case that you feel it's undervalued? You can do as much as you want?

ABEL: Correct. As long as our intrinsic value exceeds the market value, again, conservatively determined, we'll continue to repurchase.

But the one thing we have never done is we don't disclose the amount, the timing, or the computation. But we did feel this time it was important because of the change in leadership that we should.

KERNEN: Not even a ballpark.

QUICK: So, we're not going to hear something like this from you again. We won't know when you're in the market buying back?

ABEL: This is a one-time event to let our shareholders know.

KERNEN: And you won't say it's a $20 billion buyback and we're halfway through? We won't know anything.

ABEL: Correct.

KERNEN: Is that a reasonable number? Could it be — it could be a lot more at Berkshire.

ABEL: It's completely dependent upon the intrinsic value and how that equation remains in place.

QUICK: So, Berkshire shares up until a minute ago were down maybe one percent over the last year. Market's been up. You guys have $373 billion in cash as of the last filing.

ABEL: Correct.

QUICK: I guess you're looking around, and it tells you that this is something that makes way more sense to you than buying other things —other stocks — making other purchases?

ABEL: Exactly. We always look at, effectively, three buckets when we're allocating our capital.

We have our existing businesses, deploying capital back into those, both for their current operations and incremental opportunities. That really exists every day. And we're constantly challenging ourselves, are we thinking about that properly?

As you highlighted, Becky, there's also, do we acquire stock? And when we're looking at companies, do we acquire whole companies also?

And then there's the, do we acquire equities, other equities? And as we've highlighted, we always look at that as very similarly to buying 100 percent or two percent.

And then the third bucket where we deploy our capital is share repurchases.

Each of those with the amount of capital they have are — can be done independently. So, when we're purchasing our shares, it's not taking away from any of the other decisions.

QUICK: OK, we're going to come back to this line of questioning and some of these issues here.

But before we do, I want to talk about another form that you put out today, too. That's a Form 4. It may not jump out as people as being as significant as I think it is.

But in it, you say that you are buying 21 class A shares. This is the disclosure of that — $15.3 million dollars. What's the significance behind that purchase?

ABEL: Yes. And the significance is if you look at my 2026 compensation that I'll receive this year, what — what we've done is — and what I've done is taken the after-tax dollars of approximately $15.3 million dollars and reinvested it — or purchased Berkshire shares with the after-tax dollars.

QUICK: All of the extra — after-tax.

ABEL: All the after-tax dollars.

QUICK: So, you're basically taking all of your take-home pay and putting it into shares of Berkshire.

ABEL: Yes.

QUICK: Why?

ABEL: And the why is really important.

One, as we've always highlighted, absolute alignment with our shareholders, our partners, our owners is critical. I already have some shares, but the goal was to continue to demonstrate alignment with them.

Two, as CEO, I absolutely obviously believe in Berkshire with — with the transition from Warren. And I inherited a company that has an incredible foundation. I believe in its — you know, future, the opportunities that exist there.

So, I was very excited to use my after-tax proceeds and my compensation, as you highlighted, all of it, and effectively do it as we came out of the blackout period.

Now, there is another part to this that's really important, because I really view this more as a plan or an approach.

I'm committed to doing this every year going forward.

QUICK: Your entire salary?

ABEL: My entire salary, as long as I'm the CEO. And I touched on it in the — in the letter. I hope it's 20 years. But I will do that.

So, we'll file our 10-K. I'll write the letter. And after the 48-hour cooling off period, I'll purchase $15.3 million next year, whatever it is, after-tax dollars.

KERNEN: I love — I love the Midwest. But I was kidding you when you walked in, I said, as your first move, you're going to Miami. You're going to move the headquarters, Miami.

But now I understand. Leave it in — stay in Omaha. What are you going to spend your money on anyway? Might as well buy some Berkshire. You got nothing to do. You're going to go out and watch some cows or something. That's free, isn't it?

ABEL: There's nothing better than Berkshire. And it's what I do every day.

KERNEN: That's right.

ABEL: I wake up, you know, thinking about Berkshire. When I go to sleep, think about Berkshire.

KERNEN: Greg, if you decide to splurge on your compensation, it's like you're looking around — it's like, ah, I'm going to buy Berkshire stock. (Laughter)

QUICK: What I think is interesting about this, Greg, is that you are effectively taking home less pay than Warren Buffett was when he was taking home $100,000. That was the salary that he took. It had to be the lowest pay in all of corporate America. Did he come up with this plan?

ABEL: No, this was completely myself. And by that, I just mean I wanted that alignment. Again, believe in Berkshire. And the thought being that — it did evolve. Like I said, OK, I'm going to do it this year. And then shortly thereafter, I thought, well, no, I'm going to do this every year.

And it's best just to tell the world. And over that period of time, it'll be hundreds of millions of dollars of — of my after-tax dollars, just like our shareholders do.

QUICK: I can't imagine anybody, any other corporate leader doing this. I can't imagine myself doing it.

KERNEN: I — I'm not worried about how you're going to do on this either, so —

ABEL: Well, I believe in Berkshire. But it is interesting, Becky and Joe, you're touching on it. Like, to me, of course, it's a logical thing to do when you're leading the company.

And there's other leaders and CEOs that do the one-offs every once in a while. But to take all your after-tax dollars and to do it on a recurring basis.

KERNEN: I did something similar with Versant stock. I'm with you. I'm an owner. I'm an owner. And I — I —

QUICK: You did not take your entire —

KERNEN: I got a couple hundred shares. No, I didn't. No, I didn't.

QUICK: Greg, what did Warren say about this? What did the board say about it?

ABEL: Both were obviously very supportive.

Warren very much had your reaction, that no one else in corporate America does this. And said — and the other thing is that this is so Berkshire. Because one thing we — we do not do at Berkshire, across any of our businesses or with our executives, we don't have equity stock programs.

QUICK: Right.

ABEL: We don't have option programs.

QUICK: You've never been given a share of Berkshire, ever.

ABEL: Correct.

QUICK: Yeah.

ABEL: So, the whole idea is, our shareholders, our owners, use their after-tax dollars to buy Berkshire. I'll do the same.

So, Warren acknowledged immediately the alignment with our values. And I highlighted this to our Berkshire board in our February board meeting, and they were just absolutely supportive of it, obviously.

QUICK: Greg, Andrew's got a question, as well

ABEL: Yes, Andrew.

ANDREW ROSS SORKIN: Hey, Greg, it's great to see you. I applaud it, too.

But I just — just to contextualize it, because we talked about selling shares, am I wrong, back in 2022, that you sold Berkshire Hathaway Energy and collected effectively $870 million? By the way, which I also applaud, but I just — contextually, what's going on here in terms of your total — total compensation and what's going into this?

ABEL: Correct. So — so, Andrew, back in the summer of 2022, there was the decision to sell my Berkshire Hathaway Energy stock that had really accumulated going back to 1992, I think, is the duration of those holdings. And obviously, we had built the energy company, we were acquired by Berkshire in 2000. And then in 2022, monetized it. And again, with a very similar concept, I took a portion of those proceeds on an after-tax dollar basis and purchased Berkshire stock.

QUICK: Yeah.

KERNEN: I bought — I'll just say I bought a heck of a lot more than 21 shares. (Laughter)

QUICK: Twenty-one shares that cost $730,000.

KERNEN: Oh, that's right. That's right. Yeah. You're right. You're right. This was 32. OK.

QUICK: Greg, let's talk through some other issues.

That $373 billion that you had on cash as of the last filing, do you see other opportunities? Are you looking for a big elephant — elephant hunting — as Warren always said he was doing?

ABEL: Right. So, I touched on it a little bit earlier, but the $373 million and —

QUICK: Billion.

ABEL: A billion, sorry. Thank you. And fortunately, it's a billion.

We really view that as an opportunity. And so we do continue to look across the different investment options that exist out there. And there really are options. We're looking at these different buckets and looking for the right opportunity.

But there is no need to — obviously, we want to deploy the capital into areas that we see long-term value creation for our shareholders. But the goal isn't to just take down the amount.

QUICK: I guess my question is, do you see value out there in the market right now? Are things expensive as you weigh them? Or do you see pockets of opportunity?

ABEL: As we see opportunity, you'll see the capital deployed. And we're deploying it in certain areas across our businesses, across certain repurchases of our shares, across other equity opportunities.

But the repurchase of our own shares is a great example. Is that — Warner and I were just talking about discussing this yesterday. You know, we wish we could purchase more shares of our shares, but the intrinsic value has to be there.

So, if you go back over all the years that we've been purchasing shares, if we could acquire more, that's a great use of our capital. But it has to meet that intrinsic value test.

QUICK: But that's what I'm kind of getting at. You are now the person who's going to be responsible for deploying all of this capital.

ABEL: Right.

QUICK: I guess Ted Weschler is there. He's going to be — he has six percent. He's managing his money and the money that Todd Combs was managing before, too.

ABEL: Right.

QUICK: But what is your view of the market at this point? It's something we asked of Warren all the time. Do you think things are expensive?

If you think Berkshire shares — you're going to buy back some, but you're not going to deploy everything. You'd love to buy back more, but it's not cheap enough. What do you think when you look at the overall market?

ABEL: Yeah. I mean, obviously we've commented on our shares. We file our — where we highlight what we've acquired and what we've disposed of, you know, regularly. And we have some activity there, but it's not significant.

QUICK: Yeah. Are you — I guess are you reading through 10-Ks and 10-Qs constantly and thinking, I'm looking for ways to deploy this? Or are you looking at things a little differently than maybe Warren did because you're such an operator.

ABEL: No, perfect question. Thank you.

QUICK: Yeah.

ABEL: I'm an operator, but I love businesses and I love reading.

QUICK: Yeah.

ABEL: So, I do the same thing. I'm going through Ks, Qs, I'm looking at their — what are they saying about their businesses. I'm looking at the industries that we — we traditionally look at, and incrementally, to make sure, one, have a thorough understanding of the industries, what businesses stand out there.

It doesn't mean it's an immediate — that there's an immediate value proposition there to acquire it, but that doesn't mean — or a portion of the business — but it doesn't mean it won't be there a month from now or three months.

So, I view a lot of it [as] preparation, waiting for when we see that opportunity that the value exists within a specific opportunity.

QUICK: You said you talked to Warren yesterday. How often do you talk to Warren Buffett?

ABEL: Yeah, Warren and I pretty much — he's in the office every day. So, we're talking every — if I'm in Omaha, we're always connecting.

If I'm traveling like I was yesterday, I often check in just to — just to catch up on what he's seeing, what he's hearing, what am I feeling.

So, if it's not every day, it's every couple of days.

KERNEN: Greg, would you do these large positions in, like, S&P bets that Warren has done at times in the past? He sold a lot of puts, brought in billions of dollars in premium back in the — the early 2000s.

You've made some macro — Warren used to make macro calls, or at least hedging calls, on the overall industries, not just individual stocks. Would that continue with you?

ABEL: I mean, if we see the right opportunity, yes. But it's not — it's not a strategy.

KERNEN: He hasn't done it as much lately —

ABEL: Right.

KERNEN: — I don't think. But I don't think he ever lost any money on any of those things, did he?

ABEL: No, not that I'm aware of. But I mean, as we all know, these financial markets have become more fine-tuned and those opportunities — excuse me — may or may not exist going forward, where you can see an opportunity and we would pursue or deploy capital. But if we saw an opportunity that — that made sense to us, absolutely.

KERNEN: How about you remember back in the financial crisis when major companies would say, "Warren, can you?" And he'd say, yeah, I'd be glad to step in. Here's what you'll do. Twelve percent preferred stock convertible into — yeah, eight, ten — Goldman's — blue-chip companies that — it was like a no-brainer. If I could have done it, I would have mortgaged the house and gotten those terms if I could. Would you do that again?

ABEL: Absolutely. We look — (Laughter)

KERNEN: Yeah, let me think about it. (Laughter)

You can have some time if you want.

ABEL: No, we don't need to pause on those. And — and, you know, we still — it's not a distressed time, but we still receive those calls even today. Warren receives them, myself, maybe not in a distressed situation. And we look at them and we evaluate them.

But we're always prepared to act, and we'll act decisively and quickly.

QUICK: Can you act the same way Warren did, which would be to do a deal for tens of billions of dollars and basically get it done in three days, without necessarily telling the board until after the deal had been cut?

ABEL: Well, within that period of time, we — we have a very good process in place between Warren and I and our board as to how we'll act as we have in the past and we'll act very decisively and quickly.

QUICK: So, you can do a big deal without —

ABEL: In three days, yes. Well, I would always — we have certain parameters where I would make sure, for example, our lead director is aware of what we're doing.

QUICK: OK.

ABEL: But it does allow me to act and act quickly.

QUICK: OK. What about the idea of a dividend? That was something that Warren Buffett's never been a fan of. Would you potentially give a dividend back to shareholders if you don't see other opportunities in the market?

ABEL: Yeah. And that's really, as you know, we have our dividend policy in place and the thought — and it's reviewed and approved by our board again on — on an annual basis and one that Warren has put forward every year.

And we've, we've maintained that — that we will retain a dollar if we see the opportunity to create more than a dollar for our shareholders. And that's been the test.

And we — and as long as we meet that test, we would continue to hold the dollar because we believe we can create value for our shareholders long term.

Now, incremental to that, we do see the repurchases as an opportunity, effectively, to deploy — to return capital to our shareholders—

QUICK: Instead of dividends, you're basically saying?

ABEL: Well, it's part of it. So, if we didn't meet that test, we do a dividend. But we do constantly look at the repurchase.

QUICK: I don't think I've — that's more than I think I've heard from Warren and Charlie in the past. Just the idea if you didn't make that test, you'd do a dividend. Is that something you see in the near future?

ABEL: We don't see it in the near future because we —

QUICK: OK.

ABEL: — we're clearly meeting the test as we see it. But we've always stated if we don't meet that test, that's the time.

QUICK: So, basically what you're saying is no change?

KERNEN: Correct.

QUICK: OK.

KERNEN: Could you ever see a time? (Laughter)

QUICK: Would you rather? (Laughter)

KERNEN: Warren — a lot of technology, he may not have been the first person there, but he — he finally did enter and he entered big — Apple, other — other companies.

Is there any chance that some type of blockchain, new technology, crypto-related, maybe not — maybe not bitcoin itself, maybe not — you know, ether or anything like that, but — but a company that builds out a blockchain that suddenly all the tokens are moving on this? It looks like the future.

Would that ever be a possibility or crypto would never be a word you'd see on a Berkshire — ?

ABEL: I don't think you'll see crypto —

KERNEN: Ever, in any —

ABEL: Well, ever is a long time, but I just don't see it.

What I do see is that when it comes to technology, again, from even — from an operational perspective where we're seeing how we use it, the impact it's having, it does allow us to develop strong views and a better knowledge base around certain companies that are technology companies or how we're using the technology. So, technology will always be on the table and looking at —

KERNEN: What could include some type of blockchain — ? No?

ABEL: I don't know, because I haven't seen anything that would make sense that there's a value proposition where you see the asset and how it produces value.

KERNEN: Some people think it's going to disintermediate the entire banking industry. You don't want to just watch while —

ABEL: We'll be happy with our hard assets and the companies we own at that time.

KERNEN: But not gold. But not gold. (Laughter)

What about gold miners? How about airlines? Where — where are you on that now? (Laughter)

Remember how many times Warren's been in and out of that? Oh, my God. I'm in 'em, I'm out of 'em.

ABEL: I know this is one of your favorite topics.

We're very happy that we own NetJets — (laughter) — and the service it provides to its great customers.

QUICK: Greg, let me ask you a couple of quick news questions.

First of all, back in January, Berkshire filed an SEC registration for the potential resale of up to 99.99 percent of the Kraft Heinz holdings that you own.

More recently, you did say that you supported Kraft Heinz's CEO, the decision to pause on that plan split of the company. Have you made a decision about what to do with that investment?

ABEL: Well, we did announce, as I said, support for Steve pausing it.

QUICK: Yeah.

ABEL: And just for a little bit of background, as you know, when they first said they were going to split, we didn't — we expressed concerns with it.

QUICK: You were vocal about it.

ABEL: Right.

QUICK: Yeah.

ABEL: Because they did — when they brought Kraft and Heinz together, the whole idea was that there'd be a lot of synergies, a lot of opportunities.

And then they announced — and it's as I highlight in the letter, it's been a disappointing investment. There's no question.

At the same time to break them apart when they're facing a lot of challenges and haven't resolved a lot of their issues yet, we had concerns with that, including now adding dis-synergies to it.

So, for [Kraft Heinz CEO] Steve [Cahillane] to come in and say we're pausing it, there's opportunities within Kraft Heinz to fix things and get the business back on track and then he'll evaluate things, we thought that was absolutely the right approach.

And we filed our registration — straight — statement really to be in a place that if we ever did sell, we'd be able to. But it's not that we're going to take any immediate action currently.

QUICK: OK, good.

Another issue this week, S&P said that it may own — it may cut PacifiCorp Utility, which is a Berkshire-owned utility, to junk because of the wildfires and the lawsuits that have been resolved about it.

This is another issue you touched on in your letter to shareholders. I think in the letter to shareholders, you basically said you accept responsibility for wildfires, but you're going to fight unjustified claims in court. And you think that this is one of those situations.

ABEL: Correct. So, anytime we're responsible for something, we're willing to take absolute responsibility for it and resolve such matters.

But there is a delicate balance, and it goes well beyond wildfires in the utility industry. The wildfires are very specific to the West, and we've seen some challenges in Texas and the Midwest that, you know, it's not an issue just to the West, but you can see it creeping.

But what we see is a bigger issue in the regular — in the utility industry, and that is, does the regulatory compacts continue to exist? And by the regulatory compact, I mean we deploy capital into these businesses. We were — we receive a return that's reflective of us taking a certain amount of risk.

And the minute they start expanding that risk to be pretty much anything, including things you're not responsible for, we're saying that's — that wasn't the investment thesis. That's not the relationship that existed.

QUICK: Just to put some context to this, this came after a February 25th ruling where an Oregon jury awarded $305 million to 16 plaintiffs. That's about $19 million per plaintiff. Those plaintiffs blame PacifiCorp for not turning off the electricity.

ABEL: Right. And there were lessons learned because if you look — and that's what we're saying — when there are ones where we clearly cause a fire [by] not turning off the electricity, we're taking responsibility for those.

But separately, there were a number of fires there. And this gets beyond. But — but there is one area and one fire we're pushing back and it represents more than 60 percent of claims. It was a lightning strike.

And we're just saying we're not responsible for that. We're sorry, absolutely, that these people's lives have been impacted. We feel for them. But that's not the utility's responsibility to take on those costs and obligations. So, that's where we're drawing the line.

KERNEN: You guys know the insurance business pretty well, I think, don't you?  You know when you're covered or things you need to cover and things that you can't run a business if — 

ABEL: Right. And it goes back to that regulatory compact. That's not part of — we didn't sign up for that.

QUICK: This was your first letter that you wrote. It was a long one. Eighteen pages or so. It's — (Laughter)

KERNEN: Is that AI?

ABEL: No. (Laughter)

But I will say on the length, that's the first response I get from everybody when they text me as they're reading it.

KERNEN: Yeah.

ABEL: Jeez, this is really long and halfway through.

And I use this quote back to them. and it won't be a perfect quote. But I — Lincoln — President Lincoln — said, yes, this letter is very long, but I didn't have time to make it shorter. (Laughter)

QUICK: Was that hard?

ABEL: I use that to everyone because everybody would be texting me, I'm halfway through — but so far, it's going well. (Laughter)

I text them that that quote every time.

QUICK: I mean, you're stepping into some pretty big shoes. Warren's been writing that letter for 60 years and it's something that had a huge following. Was it tough letter to write?

ABEL: Absolutely. So, those are — there's — those — the shoes to fill are tough on all fronts.

But Warren's an exceptional communicator and how he does it.

So, to take the letter and really want to make sure we're communicating to our — again, to our owners and shareholders — something that they would value. It was not easy.

I've told Warren of all the — listen, the responsibilities transferred are great. As far as the work and the task I had to do, that was the toughest to sit down and make sure that that was done, at least from my perspective, well.

And unfortunately, when I — when we were discussing it, he said, and the second letter doesn't get any easier.

QUICK: So, you have that to look forward to.

ABEL: Yeah, exactly. That's not what I wanted to hear. (Laughter)

KERNEN: Every year. And it'll come fast, too. It's like you just finish it like that, like — like taxes.

ABEL: But you know what when you —

KERNEN: Yeah, yeah.

ABEL: You know, when you do write it, it's like everything, or when you prepare for something, it's valuable.

KERNEN: Yeah.

ABEL: I had to reflect on a lot of things.

KERNEN: Right. And then when you're done, it's just leading into this.

ABEL: It's leading into it, right. Exactly.

QUICK: Greg, very quickly.

ABEL: Yes.

QUICK: Operating income was down in the fourth quarter, more than 29 percent. That was largely because of weakness in the insurance business. And underwriting profits were down, I think close to 50 percent. What happened?

ABEL: Yeah. So, in the fourth quarter, which then translated for the 12-month results, is that, yeah, our insurance results were down. You can see a lot of capital coming into the industry.

We're going to — we, or our team — Ajit and his team — will continue to apply the discipline that the price and the risk have to be right for us to write a policy.

So, as we back out of that with capital coming in, you'll see those results be what they are relative to how much capital we deploy into it.

So, that had a significant impact.

And then the other piece of that is we did, across our non-insurance businesses, take a $1.555 billion dollar impairment. And that was across four of our businesses, and realistically, smaller businesses in challenged industries.

If it had been any of our major businesses, I would have touched on it. But it really related to four of our smaller businesses, again, and in industries that we see as challenged.

QUICK: Greg Abel, the new CEO at Berkshire Hathaway, sitting down with us for the first time today. We really appreciate it, Greg. And we look forward to seeing you at the annual meeting.

ABEL: Absolutely.

KERNEN: So, it's not Creighton anymore, is it? Is it — do you have a team that you like in — March Madness is coming and —

ABEL: I'll be — I'll be — I'll be cheering for — let's just say, Joe, as you touched on earlier, all the Midwest teams.

KERNEN: All the Midwest teams. (Laughter)

QUICK: All of them.

ABEL: All of them.

KERNEN: All of them.

ABEL: We've got — you know, my wife's from Iowa State. I have allegiances with Nebraska because I mentioned earlier my one grandfather was born in Unadilla, Nebraska. I've always followed the Cornhuskers. You name it. I've got a spectrum of teams. And my family reminds me of that — pick a team. (Laughter)

KERNEN: I would say it was looking good. And I bet on them. And that's they were number four. Yeah, they lost the last two games, I think.

ABEL: Yeah, they've had a rough couple of games. Hopefully they find it. But it's been a pleasure to be on. Thank you, Becky. Thank you, Joe.

KERNEN: Thank you.

ABEL: And it's great to be here.

KERNEN: Don't be — don't be a stranger.

ABEL: Absolutely not.

KERNEN: Yeah, great to have you back. Thank you.

ABEL: Thank you.