Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

The US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) sanctioned 10 targets on Wednesday. They are tied to an ATM jackpotting scheme run by Tren de Aragua (TdA).

The network allegedly washed the stolen cash through cryptocurrency, among other channels. The action also listed 7 crypto addresses belonging to ringleader “Prometheus,” an FBI Most Wanted fugitive, and his associates.

Inside Tren de Aragua’s Alleged ATM Jackpotting PlaybookTdA originated in Venezuela, and the State Department designated it a Foreign Terrorist Organization in February 2025. According to Treasury, ATM fraud has since become a key revenue source for the group.

Jackpotting attacks use malware to make ATMs release cash without debiting any account. Court filings in Nebraska name the strain as Ploutus, which was set to erase itself after each attack.

Treasury identifies Prometheus as Anibal Alexander Canelon Aguirre, the alleged engineer of that malware. He sits on the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted Fugitives list and faces charges in Nebraska federal court.

Treasury said reported US losses from alleged jackpotting attacks reached $40.73 million as of August 2025. That total spans more than 1,500 incidents.

OFAC separately sanctioned Juan Gabriel Rivas Nunez, a senior TdA leader linked to illicit gold mining.

Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens

How the Sanctioned Wallets Tie Into Wider Laundering NetworksTRM Labs says each of the 7 addresses is a deposit account held at a centralized exchange. They took in about $6.1 million since March 2022, though TRM notes not all of it necessarily ties to jackpotting.

The addresses also sent funds to other TdA-linked wallets. Those wallets, in turn, moved roughly $35 million to a network US authorities link to Jorge Figueira. Figueira, a Venezuelan national, faces charges of laundering about $1 billion and has not been convicted.

Separately, Chainalysis found the wallets’ counterparties had exposure to a laundering network used by Colombian and Mexican cartels. Chainalysis Senior Intelligence Analyst Kaitlin Martin described the pattern.

“The on-chain insights show us that criminal organizations are leveraging common infrastructure for laundering,” Martin said.

Chainalysis added that these networks rely heavily on stablecoins. Tether had previously frozen Tether (USDT) balances on several wallets exposed to the newly sanctioned addresses.

Because OFAC used Executive Order (E.O.) 13224, foreign financial institutions knowingly handling significant transactions for designees risk secondary sanctions. Meanwhile, TRM said the exchange hosting all 7 addresses may be able to identify the account holders behind them.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights

Chainlink [LINK] launched the Cross Chain Interoperability Protocol 2.0 recently, allowing institutions to have greater control over asset flows between chains. The launch coincided with tokenization, payments, and stablecoins gaining traction with institutions.

As it stands, there is increasing more demand for cross-chain infrastructure. Chainlink’s partnership with SWIFT gave it a bridge to TradFi too.

In other news, Grayscale bought 159,480 LINK valued at $2.36 million via its Chainlink ETF. The combined September purchases came to 629,100 LINK, worth around $8.3 million.

Bitwise filed a new SEC prospectus for its Chainlink ETF that would also allocate 20% of the fund’s holdings towards staking.

Hence, the question — Can the ETF news and the CCIP 2.0 launch catalyze a bullish price reaction?

LINK challenges December 2025 highs Source: LINK/USDT on TradingView Chainlink has shifted its weekly structure bullishly. The $10.87 swing level from May was breached in mid-August (green), and retested as support too. This retest was the launchpad for the move to the next key swing level at $15.01 (white).

A weekly session close above this swing level too would be an encouraging sight. The DMI indicator highlighted a strong uptrend in progress, in agreement with the weekly structure’s findings.

The RSI on this timeframe was not yet overbought, nor did it show any kind of bearish divergence yet. The OBV has also been recovering since July, showing steady buying pressure.

Overall, the odds of a bullink LINK recovery in the coming months seemed to be good. A price drop below $10.6 would be the first sign of trouble.

Traders’ call to action — Stay bullish Source: LINK/USDT on TradingView The 4-hour structure has been bullish. The retracement from $15.77 dropped from just under $14 and into a local demand zone that had formerly been a resistance in late August. So far, the bulls have defended this area.

Technically, a Chainlink retracement down to $12.85 may be possible, especially if Bitcoin [BTC] sees significant selling pressure and is forced to correct below $80K.

However, the H4 swing structure would be bullish so long as the price remains above $12.05. At the time of writing, the evidence showed that a price dip below $13.91 would be a buying opportunity.

Final Summary Chainlink CCIP 2.0 and steady institutional interest could catalyze a bullish Q4 for the altcoin. Higher timeframe price action was showing signs of recovery and was beginning to establish an uptrend.

Zcash holders have approved $8.39 million in retroactive grants for completed work, including $1.5 million tied to the researcher who uncovered the critical Orchard vulnerability during an AI-assisted security audit.

Summary

Zcash holders approved $8.39 million in retroactive grants, funding 17 of 37 proposals this quarter. Zcash holders approved $1.5 million for Taylor Hornby after his discovery of Orchard’s critical vulnerability. Coinholder participation reached 2.18 million ZEC, representing 10.4% of Zcash’s fixed 21 million coin supply. ZEC trades near $1,407 after September’s rally as short-term momentum cools below recent highs. One whale withdrew 2,000 ZEC from Binance, taking its main wallet near $66 million. OpenZcash shows that 17 of 37 proposals in the Q3 2026 Coinholder-Directed Retroactive Grants round were funded, representing 93.1% of the $9.01 million requested. The largest single vote involved roughly 2.18 million ZEC, equal to 10.4% of Zcash’s maximum 21 million supply.

Zcash co-founder Zooko Wilcox wrote on Oct. 1 that the grants rewarded people who worked on the network during this year’s security crisis. He described the vote as evidence for Zcash’s system of coinholder-directed funding and governance, though his assessment of the model’s strength represents his own view.

Zcash just gave away more than $8m in retroactive grants, including millions of dollars of retroactive grants to a lot of people who selflessly worked to protect all users during the AI bug crisis this year.

But that’s not even the best thing about what just happened… ⤵️ pic.twitter.com/yRtVUvkt5y

— zooko🛡🦓🦓🦓 ⓩ (@zooko) October 1, 2026 Zcash holders approved $1.5M for the Orchard bug discovery Among the largest approvals were two $750,000 grants tied to Taylor Hornby’s discovery of the Orchard counterfeiting vulnerability. One covered the original bug bounty, while a second community nomination increased the total award to $1.5 million.

Shielded Labs disclosed in June that Hornby found the flaw on May 29 while reviewing Orchard with traditional security techniques and Anthropic’s Opus 4.8 model. The bug affected Orchard’s zero-knowledge proof circuit and could have allowed an attacker to create counterfeit ZEC inside the shielded pool without leaving an obvious onchain trace.

Hornby immediately disclosed the issue to Zcash Open Development Lab engineers. Developers, miners, exchanges and infrastructure providers then coordinated an emergency response.

The Zcash Foundation said the network first temporarily disabled Orchard transactions before activating NU6.2 with a corrected circuit. Its analysis found no evidence of unauthorized value creation, and Zcash’s total supply remained intact under the network’s turnstile accounting.

The $1.5 million approval is retroactive compensation for the completed security work. Large grants still pass through the program’s administration process, which includes compliance checks for awards above $50,000 before keyholders coordinate payouts.

Security work took most of the largest grants The Q3 vote extended well beyond Hornby’s bounty. Several of the largest funded proposals covered security research, audits, protocol development and work completed during Zcash’s response to vulnerabilities earlier this year.

Coinholders approved $1.95 million for ZODL’s Q1 and Q2 core protocol development and $1.203 million for ValarGroup’s Ironwood work. A further $738,942 went toward formal verification of the Ironwood zk-SNARK circuit, while $599,000 covered external audit costs.

Other funded security work included $425,000 covering five critical Zebra consensus-divergence vulnerabilities, a $400,000 award connected with a temporary detectable unlimited-mint-and-sell exploit, and a $150,000 Zebra vulnerability bounty.

Ironwood itself followed the Orchard incident. The Zcash Foundation released Zebra 6.0.0 in July with support for the NU6.3 Ironwood upgrade, which introduced a new shielded pool using Orchard’s Action and Halo2 proof system while maintaining separate accounting data.

Coinholders did not approve every request. Twenty proposals were rejected or otherwise failed to receive funding, while the approved projects captured most of the dollars because the largest security and protocol-development proposals received strong support.

Coinholders directly decided where the money goes The grant system pays for work after it has already been completed. Funding comes from the Coinholder-Controlled Fund established through Zcash’s network funding structure.

Under the current rules, at least 420,000 ZEC must participate in a proposal for the vote to qualify. A simple majority then determines approval, excluding abstentions from the majority calculation.

Shielded Labs and the Zcash Foundation act as keyholders for the fund’s 2-of-3 multisignature arrangement. They process approved payments but retain limited veto powers defined by the program, including legal grounds. They cannot reverse a proposal rejected by coinholders.

Participation increased sharply this quarter. OpenZcash records the largest Q3 vote at approximately 2.18 million ZEC, compared with around 500,608 ZEC during Q1. Q2 voting was postponed after the Orchard vulnerability, pushing several proposals into the Q3 round.

Zooko said the round involved Valar, ZODL, Vizor, the Financial Privacy Foundation and coinholders voting privately with billions of dollars in ZEC. His claim that the process proves Zcash is “capture-resistant” is an interpretation of the governance outcome, not a measurable property established by the vote.

The next grant round is scheduled to accept proposals from Oct. 30 through Nov. 13, followed by a review period and voting from Dec. 17 through Dec. 29.

How is Zcash price doing after the grants vote? Zcash is trading near $1,407 at the time of research, with CoinGecko showing a 24-hour range between roughly $1,382 and $1,458. ZEC remains below the $1,600-$1,700 area reached during its September rally but far above the levels seen before the month’s breakout.

The daily chart supplied for this analysis places the 14-day RSI at 55.45, below its moving average near 64.49. Momentum has therefore cooled from the overbought readings reached during the rally, although RSI remains above the neutral 50 level.

Zcash (ZEC) price chart, source: TradingView MACD is weaker in the short term. The MACD line stands around 120.13 compared with a signal line near 153.14, leaving the histogram negative at roughly -33.01. The configuration points to fading bullish momentum while ZEC consolidates below its September highs.

The pullback follows a strong run that carried ZEC above $1,600 late last month. In recent analysis of Zcash’s leverage reset, open interest on one major derivatives venue fell quickly as price retreated, showing traders reducing exposure after the rally.

Onchain Lens reported that a whale withdrew another 2,000 ZEC, worth roughly $2.82 million at the time, from Binance through two wallets before consolidating the coins into a primary address. The tracker put that wallet’s ZEC holdings near $66.19 million.

Exchange withdrawals alone do not show whether a holder intends to keep or later sell the coins. The transaction nevertheless occurred while ZEC was consolidating below recent highs.

WHALE ACCUMULATES $66M WORTH OF ZEC

A whale withdrew 2K $ZEC (~$2.82M) from Binance across two wallets, then consolidated the funds into its main accumulation wallet.

The main wallet now holds ~$66.19M worth of $ZEC. pic.twitter.com/nQ8aUNTMOq

— Onchain Lens (@OnchainLens) September 30, 2026 Trader that1618guy wrote that ZEC was testing its daily 21-day EMA for the first time since August after climbing from above $400 to around $1,700. The analyst identified the 55-day EMA, then near $1,100, as a deeper area to watch if the correction extends.

At current levels, $1,400 remains the nearest price area for buyers to defend, while a recovery toward $1,500-$1,600 would return ZEC toward the zone where sellers emerged during September. The current RSI and MACD readings show the rally has cooled, but neither indicator by itself confirms that Zcash’s larger uptrend has ended.

Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.

Looping strategies on Aave just got more rewarding.

Following the approval of TIP 12, Treehouse is launching a new incentives campaign for tETH on Aave Prime, with up to 400,000 TREE allocated in Community Rewards. 

From 28 September to 3 December, users who supply tETH as collateral and borrow wstETH against it can earn up to 0.5% APR in TREE, lowering the effective cost of borrowing wstETH on Aave Prime. 

Funded through the Community Rewards token allocation, this campaign builds on tETH’s growing utility across lending markets and directs Community Rewards toward deeper adoption of Treehouse’s tAssets across DeFi. 

About the Campaign From 28 September 2026, 11:00 UTC to 3 December 2026, 14:00 UTC, eligible tETH positions on Aave Prime can earn TREE rewards, with distribution powered by Merkl, an onchain rewards distribution infrastructure.

To participate, users simply:

Supply tETH as collateral on Aave Prime Borrow wstETH against their tETH position Eligible positions opened during the campaign period are automatically tracked onchain.

Rewards are distributed using a Capped Reward Rate at up to 0.5% APR in TREE, earned on top of the position’s own yield. Your TREE rewards are calculated based on the amount of tETH collateral supporting your eligible wstETH borrow. The more collateral your borrow uses, the more you earn. 

Rewards accrue automatically and can be tracked on-chain and claimed anytime through the Merkl dashboard.

With TREE incentives, borrowing wstETH on Aave Prime becomes a more cost-efficient alternative to borrowing wstETH or ETH on other major lending markets. This makes it a prime opportunity for users building looping strategies or seeking more efficient ways to deploy their ETH exposure across DeFi. 

View the opportunity on Merkl and participate in tETH strategies on Aave Prime.

What Is tETH? tETH is Treehouse’s liquid staking tAsset for Ethereum, designed to enhance ETH staking yield through Market Efficiency Yield (MEY) while remaining liquid and composable across DeFi.

Through a rate arbitrage strategy, tETH captures differences between Proof-of-Stake rewards and DeFi lending markets to add an additional source of yield for holders while contributing to greater interest rate convergence across DeFi.

Beyond earning yield, tETH can be deployed throughout DeFi. On Aave Prime, for example, users can supply tETH as collateral and borrow against their position, creating additional opportunities to deploy capital without giving up their underlying tETH exposure. 

Read more about how tETH revolutionizes DeFi yield in our blog, Branching Out 4.

What Is Looping? Looping is a lending strategy that uses supplied collateral to borrow additional assets, which can then be redeployed to increase exposure to an underlying position.

In a traditional looping strategy, users repeatedly borrow against supplied collateral and redeploy the borrowed assets, cycling through multiple rounds to build up leveraged exposure.

For tETH on Aave Prime, the strategy begins by supplying tETH as collateral and borrowing wstETH against it. Because tETH and wstETH are two closely related Ethereum staking assets, this pairing is the natural starting point for building leveraged exposure.

While a full looping strategy may involve repeatedly redeploying borrowed assets and borrowing again, this campaign does not require users to complete those additional steps. Supplying tETH and borrowing wstETH during the campaign period is all it takes to qualify for rewards.

This creates a straightforward way for tETH holders to deploy their position in one of DeFi’s established lending markets while earning additional TREE incentives during the campaign.

Why TREE Rewards? TREE is the native token of the Treehouse Protocol, connecting governance, ecosystem incentives, and participation in Treehouse’s benchmark rate infrastructure. 

Through Decentralized Offered Rates (DOR), TREE also aligns participants contributing to decentralized benchmark rates designed to support fixed income markets in digital assets. 

TIP 12 enables Community Rewards to be directed toward initiatives that expand the Treehouse ecosystem. For this campaign, up to 400,000 TREE is being deployed to encourage greater use of tETH on Aave Prime and reward users actively putting tETH to work across DeFi.

As tETH becomes more deeply integrated across lending and liquidity markets, these incentives help expand its utility while strengthening the broader tAsset ecosystem.

Learn more about TREE and its full utility.

Onchain Reward Distribution Powered by Merkl Reward distribution is powered by Merkl, an onchain distribution infrastructure that provides transparent, verifiable onchain tracking throughout the campaign. 

Eligible tETH supply and borrow positions are tracked automatically, allowing TREE rewards to accrue automatically without manual snapshots.

Users can monitor their accumulated TREE rewards and claim them directly through the Merkl interface at any time. 

Expanding tETH Across DeFi The tETH Incentives campaign on Aave Prime is another step in Treehouse’s broader commitment to deepening tETH’s utility and integrations across DeFi.

As tETH’s DeFi integrations continue to mature, Treehouse will continue exploring new opportunities for users to deploy tETH across lending markets, liquidity venues, and other DeFi primitives.

Each new integration makes tETH more composable and creates more ways for users to deploy their tETH positions, advancing Treehouse’s vision of a more liquid, efficient, and capital-efficient fixed-income ecosystem across DeFi.

Roots run deep. Put your tETH to work on Aave Prime.🌳

Frequently Asked Questions (FAQs) Q: What is the tETH Incentives campaign?
A: The campaign distributes up to 400,000 TREE to eligible tETH positions on Aave Prime. Users who supply tETH as collateral and borrow wstETH against it earn up to 0.5% APR in TREE, on top of their position’s own yield.

Q: When does the campaign run?
A: The campaign runs from 28 September 2026, 11:00 UTC to 3 December 2026, 14:00 UTC.

Q: How do I participate?
A: During the campaign period, simply:

Supply tETH as collateral on Aave Prime. Borrow wstETH against your tETH position. If your position meets the campaign’s eligibility requirements, it will automatically begin accruing TREE rewards.

Q: Do I need to complete multiple looping transactions to qualify?
A: No. While looping can involve repeatedly borrowing and redeploying assets to increase exposure, no additional looping steps are required for this campaign. To qualify, you need to supply tETH and borrow wstETH in an eligible position during the campaign period.

Q: How are TREE rewards calculated?
A: Rewards are calculated based on how much of your tETH collateral is used to support your wstETH borrow. The more tETH collateral your borrow uses, the more you earn.

Q: Why is the reward rate “up to” 0.5%?
A: The campaign uses a maximum APR. If participation grows faster than the budget can support, the rate adjusts down pro rata so rewards last for the full campaign period.

Q: Do I need to do anything besides holding my borrow position?
A: No. Once opened during the campaign period, TREE rewards accrue automatically for as long as the position is held.

Q: Where do I track and claim my rewards?
A: Rewards are claimed directly through Merkl.

Q: What network does this campaign run on?
A: The campaign runs on Ethereum.

Q: Can positions be withdrawn before the campaign ends?
A: Yes, positions can be withdrawn anytime. Rewards accrue only while an eligible position is held during the campaign period.

About Treehouse 🌳

Treehouse, the decentralized arm of digital assets infrastructure firm Treehouse Labs, is building the fixed income layer for digital assets.

Treehouse Protocol develops fixed income products and infrastructure across chains through tAssets, a new class of liquid staking tokens designed to support on-chain interest rate convergence while remaining liquid and composable across DeFi.

Treehouse is also developing Decentralized Offered Rates (DOR), a consensus mechanism for decentralized benchmark rate setting that provides the foundation for a broader range of fixed income products in digital assets.

Together, these products are designed to bring more structured and transparent fixed income markets on-chain for both individual and institutional participants.

Website: https://treehouse.finance

X: https://x.com/TreehouseFi

Discord: https://discord.gg/treehousefi

October 2026 brings another broad round of token unlocks across the Solana ecosystem, with $2Z, $TRUMP, $PUMP, $DBR, and $CARDS among the largest scheduled releases by value.

This month's calendar combines ongoing linear vesting with several cliff unlocks. The largest event belongs to $2Z, while $TRUMP and $PUMP continue their recurring distributions.

Here is a breakdown of the most notable Solana ecosystem token unlocks scheduled for October:

$2Z DoubleZero leads October's schedule with a 1.78 billion $2Z unlock worth approximately $113.36 million. The release begins on October 2 alongside linear vesting and represents 34.78% of circulating supply and 17.8% of total supply.

According to DoubleZero's tokenomics disclosure, $2Z’s initial 1-year vesting cliff expires on October 2, triggering a 1.66B $2Z unlock tomorrow. After that, the token gradually unlocks over a 3-year linear vesting schedule through October 2029. 

The October release arrives as DoubleZero expands its market data infrastructure. Since August, the protocol has made Kalshi, Hyperliquid, and Phoenix data available to trading firms, in addition to the Solana data it previously provided.

$TRUMP $TRUMP will unlock 28.02 million tokens through linear vesting, valued at approximately $60.82 million. The release represents 9.94% of circulating supply and 2.8% of total supply.

The October distribution remains one of the month's largest recurring supply events by dollar value.

$PUMP Pump.fun will release 7 billion $PUMP through linear vesting, valued at approximately $40.25 million. The unlock represents 1.50% of circulating supply and 0.84% of total supply.

The distribution continues the vesting schedule that followed July's major cliff. Pump.fun allocated 33% of its 1 trillion token supply to team members and existing investors under a 12-month cliff followed by 36 months of linear vesting. With the cliff now complete, October marks the 4th month of those recurring monthly distributions.

$DBR deBridge will unlock 618.33 million $DBR on October 17, valued at approximately $12.50 million. The release represents 10.42% of circulating supply and 6.18% of total supply.

The unlock comes after deBridge hit $24 billion in all-time volume during September.

Sanctum's $SANC Supply Cut Sanctum plans to burn 259 million $SANC on October 9, reducing total supply by roughly 25% from 1 billion to 741 million tokens.

The protocol officially changed the ticker from $CLOUD to $SANC in September, while keeping the token address and tokenomics unchanged. Separately, the October schedule lists 10.80 million $SANC for linear vesting, worth approximately $778,000.

What to Watch October's schedule stands out for the scale of the $2Z release, with 1.78 billion tokens representing 34.78% of circulating supply. $TRUMP and $PUMP follow with $60.82 million and $40.25 million in scheduled releases.

Meanwhile, $DBR enters the month after deBridge reached $24 billion in all-time volume, while DoubleZero expands its market data infrastructure and Sanctum prepares a major $SANC supply reduction.

As always, token unlocks do not automatically determine price performance but provide only one part of the broader market picture. However, tracking the size of each release, its impact on circulating supply, and developments around each project can help investors better understand changing supply dynamics across the Solana ecosystem.

Read More on SolanaFloor What is JTX: Solana’s Most Complete Trading Platform
Solana’s $SI Memecoin Hits $60.9M ATH as Trump Renames AI “Super Intelligence”

Solana Is Getting Faster While Prices Go Up

Founder-Linked Wallet Breaks Seven Years of SilenceA wallet associated with the founder of @quantnetwork has sprung back to life after seven years of dormancy, sparking fresh attention across crypto markets. According to on-chain monitoring by Lookonchain, on September 30.

That makes it one of the largest single-wallet positions in the token.

Context: A Surging Token and a High-Profile ProjectThe wallet activity comes during a notable period for $QNT. Those announcements helped drive a sharp price rally in the days leading up to the wallet movement.

The timing of the wallet's reactivation has drawn scrutiny, given that However, no official statement has been made by Quant Network or its founder regarding the purpose of the transfer.

Sources:
Brave New Coin: Quant (QNT) Founder-Linked Wallet Moves After Seven Years
Phemex: Quant Network Founder Moves $6.97M in QNT After 7-Year Dormancy
The Crypto Basic: Dormant QNT Whales Move Nearly $10M as Quant Price Surges

StraitsX plans to issue its Singapore dollar stablecoin XSGD and its US dollar stablecoin XUSD natively on Monad in early 2027, the company announced on October 1. XSGD will be the first SGD-denominated stablecoin issued natively on the network, and the launch remains subject to technical, regulatory and compliance requirements.

StraitsX is targeting cross-border payment and settlement flows, card programmes that may use XSGD or XUSD as settlement infrastructure, and payment applications built across Monad's ecosystem. The announcement does not name any card partners.

XSGD is set to become the first SGD-denominated stablecoin natively issued on Monad in early 2027.

We’re collaborating with @monad to bring $XSGD and $XUSD natively to their high-performance EVM network.

This integration expands on-chain currency options while opening up… pic.twitter.com/xhjwZ6ASry

— StraitsX (@StraitsX) October 1, 2026 "Bringing XSGD to Monad as the network's first SGD-denominated stablecoin gives us a way to put a Singapore dollar stablecoin to work in new card and payment products," said Tianwei Liu, co-founder and CEO of StraitsX.

Keone Hon, general manager of the Monad Foundation, said payments, card settlement and consumer financial products "require infrastructure that can process transactions quickly and inexpensively at high volumes," and that Monad is "designed for such activity while remaining compatible with the broader EVM ecosystem." Monad, a high-throughput EVM-compatible layer 1, launched its mainnet in November 2025.

Both tokens are issued by StraitsX entities licensed as Major Payment Institutions under Singapore's Payment Services Act. The Monetary Authority of Singapore has recognised them as substantively compliant with its single-currency stablecoin framework.

StraitsX says it has processed nearly US$70 billion in annualised stablecoin transaction volume across its infrastructure. Circulating supply is far smaller. XSGD has about 16.5 million tokens outstanding, worth roughly US$12.9 million, according to CoinGecko, spread across chains including Ethereum, Solana, Polygon, Avalanche, Arbitrum, Base, Hedera and Zilliqa. The gap suggests the tokens are mostly minted and redeemed quickly for settlement flows, with relatively little XSGD held in wallets or DeFi pools at any one time.

The card and payment products StraitsX describes have yet to be named. The test for the Monad launch will be whether those integrations arrive alongside the token in 2027 and bring sustained SGD settlement volume onto the network.

Ondo Finance’s tokenized stock platform just set a new high. Total value locked on Ondo Stocks reached a record $1.26 billion.

How Ondo Stocks got to $1.26 billion Ondo Stocks launched in September 2025. It first pushed past the billion-dollar line on or around August 15, 2026, posting a TVL of $1.01 billion.

It didn’t stop there. The platform later climbed to its record $1.26 billion, a gain of roughly a quarter billion dollars on top of that first milestone.

What goes into that pile here is tokenized exposure to US stocks and ETFs. Ondo offers total-return exposure, so holders track both price moves and the returns that come with owning the underlying asset.

The product is aimed at retail and institutional users outside the US. Americans are not the target customer, at least for now.

Advertisement

The tokens also live on several networks. As of August 2026, Ondo Stocks supported a range of assets across Solana, Ethereum, and BNB Chain.

Ondo Global Markets, the business behind Ondo Stocks, ranks among the largest tokenized equity platforms by TVL.

Tokenized stocks are doing more than sitting still Ondo’s tokens have found their way into leveraged trading. They are also being posted as collateral in lending markets, where users can borrow against them.

Cumulative trading volume for the tokenized equities has exceeded several billion dollars, well above the platform’s current TVL.

The regulatory backdrop shifted In September 2026, the SEC issued a five-year innovation exemption covering on-chain trading of certain tokenized national market system stocks. NMS stocks are, broadly, the shares listed on major US exchanges.

The exemption is set to open the door to round-the-clock, 24/7 on-chain trading of select tokenized NMS stocks.

What this means for Ondo and tokenized equities A tokenized equity platform crossing $1 billion in under a year suggests demand is real rather than theoretical.

Ondo executives project TVL could reach $5 billion by the end of 2026. They point to improving regulatory clarity and growing interest from users who want direct, low-friction access to global stock markets.

For now, Ondo has a clean scoreboard to point at: launch in September 2025, $1.01 billion in mid-August 2026, and a record $1.26 billion after that.

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

PANews reported on October 1 that the Bitcoin Policy Institute released a report titled "Wall Street's Invisible Committee," questioning MSCI's proposed changes to index inclusion rules that could exclude certain Bitcoin treasury companies (Digital Asset Treasury Companies, DATCOs). The institute stated that MSCI-managed indices involve roughly $21 trillion in benchmark assets, and when index rules change, funds tracking the relevant indices may need to adjust their holdings, triggering large-scale capital reallocation.

The Bitcoin Policy Institute said that MSCI had previously proposed in 2025 to exclude digital asset treasury companies (i.e., enterprises with at least 50% of assets in digital assets), but suspended the move after encountering opposition. This year, MSCI reintroduced a broader classification standard targeting "non-operating companies," and simulations showed that the rule could exclude companies such as Strategy and Metaplanet. The institute found an internal file path containing "Projects/DATCOs/Operating vs Non Operating" in the metadata of MSCI's public consultation documents, which it said raised questions about whether the rule was designed to target digital asset companies. However, the institute also acknowledged that metadata alone cannot prove that MSCI predetermined the exclusion outcome.

In addition, the Bitcoin Policy Institute noted that MSCI published an article titled "Creeping Crypto" in 2021 discussing the impact of crypto assets entering the stock market, and examined companies' crypto asset exposure from an ESG perspective. At the same time, the institute pointed out that MSCI's management has publicly supported ESG investment principles in the past.

The Bitcoin Policy Institute believes that the "operating assets" standard MSCI intends to adopt lacks a sufficiently clear classification framework and could affect companies in emerging industries, and called for greater transparency and reproducibility in the index-setting process. The report represents the views of the Bitcoin Policy Institute, and MSCI has not yet responded to the report.

Coinbase has secured approval from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to launch its own US-based crypto derivatives clearinghouse, a development that could have significant implications for XRP within the regulated derivatives market.

XRP’s integration with Coinbase derivativesXRP is already traded on Coinbase’s derivatives platform, underscoring its established presence within the exchange’s trading ecosystem. Market observers note that Coinbase focuses its infrastructure efforts around assets that are actively supported, not marginalized. This move signifies that XRP is situated within a market Coinbase views as important for the future of regulated crypto trading.

Crypto analyst Levi Rietveld from Crypto Crusaders emphasized the importance of regulated infrastructure, stating that the development is not about short-term price speculation, but rather an expansion of robust market foundations. Rietveld noted, “This isn’t about guessing where XRP’s price goes next; it’s about Coinbase expanding the regulated infrastructure around a market where XRP is already traded.”

This development centers on Coinbase increasing regulated infrastructure in markets where XRP is already present, which analysts say could make the asset more accessible to institutional participants.

The focus remains on infrastructure and compliance, moving beyond volatile sentiment to highlight the environment in which XRP now operates.

Institutional adoption through regulatory clarityInstitutional investors often require regulatory certainty before allocating significant capital to crypto markets. The establishment of Coinbase Clearing LLC as a CFTC-registered derivatives clearing organization addresses this need, supporting fully collateralized instruments such as futures, options on futures, and swaps, with USDC as collateral and 24/7 settlement available for participants.

Coinbase, a leading American cryptocurrency exchange, now controls all key components of a regulated derivatives infrastructure: a futures commission merchant, a derivatives exchange, and a clearinghouse. This comprehensive structure is expected to provide the support and confidence institutions look for when considering large-scale entry into digital assets.

Rietveld explained that if institutional investment in crypto continues to rise, regulated infrastructure such as this gives XRP an advantage as it is already included on Coinbase’s derivatives platforms.

Mini dictionary: CFTC-registered derivatives clearing organization, an entity approved by the CFTC to clear and settle derivatives trades in compliance with US regulations, offering transparency and security for institutional and retail participants.

$10 price projection linked to infrastructure developmentRietveld connected the regulatory advancement directly to a potential XRP price target of $10 and higher, suggesting that the growth of regulated infrastructure is critical for unlocking institutional participation at scale. He argued that significant financial flows are likely to move through venues with strong compliance frameworks, which could boost demand and liquidity for XRP moving forward.

He further indicated that as Coinbase’s regulated clearinghouse expands and supports XRP, it could facilitate access for institutional traders, who are typically required to operate within regulated environments.

Access to regulated clearing venues could be the catalyst that increases institutional demand for XRP, a trend that some analysts believe is essential for major price appreciation.

The projection draws a direct line from regulatory clarity and market infrastructure to potential price milestones, highlighting the role of institutional engagement in driving expansion.

Broader market impactCoinbase’s approval marks one step in a larger shift toward more regulated frameworks within US crypto markets. This trend, characterized by clear regulatory oversight and expanded access to compliant derivatives, is seen as a catalyst for higher trading volumes and potentially greater price discovery.

XRP’s position within this environment is notable, as regulated infrastructure developments support larger market participation and may differentiate XRP from assets lacking similar integration. Rietveld and other analysts point out that the long-term significance of these developments may outweigh short-term speculation on price movements.

Two of DeFi’s better-known liquidity hubs are becoming one. Aerodrome Finance and Velodrome Finance are merging into a single platform called Aero, and the pitch is all about reach.

According to the announcement, Aero will grow its addressable market from $7 billion to over $63 billion in total value locked. It will also serve chains that together handle $135 billion in monthly trading volume.

What the merger actually involves The consolidation was announced in mid-November 2025. The integration is set to go live in October 2026.

The end product is meant to be simple on the surface. Users get one token and one interface instead of two of each.

Advertisement

Under the hood, Aero merges the existing ve(3,3)-style tokenomics that both Aerodrome and Velodrome run on. Holders lock up tokens for a period of time, receive voting power in return, and use that power to steer where new token rewards flow. Combining two of these systems into one means a single set of voters directing incentives across a much bigger map.

The unified protocol is planned to operate across chains including Base, Optimism, and Ethereum mainnet.

What happens to VELO holders For anyone holding VELO, the key question is the swap. VELO holders are expected to convert into AERO at a defined ratio, with one proposed ratio set at 0.55:1. Put simply, under that proposal each VELO would become 0.55 AERO. The word doing the heavy lifting there is “proposed,” so holders should treat the figure as a draft rather than a signed contract.

Why fragmentation is the real target The stated goal of the merger is to cut down on the inefficiencies created by fragmentation in Layer-2 ecosystems. Layer-2 networks are separate chains built on top of Ethereum to make transactions cheaper and faster. The catch is that each one tends to develop its own pool of liquidity. Money sitting on one chain does not automatically help a trader on another.

Aero is positioning itself as a single liquidity layer for Ethereum-aligned chains instead of a scattered collection of smaller pools.

What this means for traders and the DEX landscape For liquidity providers, the draw is scale. A protocol that can tap into chains carrying $135 billion in monthly volume offers far more fee-generating opportunities than one confined to a narrower footprint.

That assumption matters. Serving chains with $135 billion in monthly trading volume is not the same as processing $135 billion in monthly trading volume. The figure describes the size of the pond, not the size of the catch.

The same logic applies to the $63 billion number. It reflects the total value locked across the markets Aero intends to serve, not deposits Aero already holds.

For AERO and VELO holders, the practical items to watch are clear. Keep an eye on whether the conversion ratio is finalized as proposed, how the merged ve(3,3) voting system is structured, and how quickly liquidity actually shows up on new chains once Aero goes live in October 2026.

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

September Shapes Up as a Banner Month for $DOGE ETFsSpot Dogecoin ($DOGE) ETFs are closing out September 2026 in strong form. The three U.S.-listed funds have collected $3.71 million in net inflows during the month, putting them on course for their second-best monthly performance since launch, according to @BSCNews.

CoinGape reported that the $3.71 million in September inflows represent the highest monthly figure posted by these ETFs since January 2026, when the funds pulled in $4.07 million during their debut month. The data also shows that the funds have now recorded three consecutive weeks of positive flows, a streak that underscores a clear shift in sentiment toward the asset.

The bulk of the recent inflows have been concentrated in Grayscale's GDOG. KuCoin News noted that cumulative inflows into GDOG rose to $15.46 million following a record week ending September 25, when the combined funds drew $2.89 million, their strongest weekly figure since launch per SoSoValue data.

Bitwise Exit and the Broader Market ContextThe picture is not entirely straightforward. Bitwise announced on September 10 that it would liquidate its DOGE ETF, BWOW, with final trading set for October 14. After that date, only two U.S. spot Dogecoin funds will remain active. Some of the recent inflow momentum into Grayscale's GDOG may partly reflect capital rotating out of the Bitwise product ahead of its closure.

The broader $DOGE market has also seen renewed life. Dogecoin gained roughly 13% in September 2026, coinciding with the uptick in ETF flows. The U.S. spot Dogecoin ETF market itself is still relatively young. 21Shares launched TDOG on Nasdaq on January 22, 2026, the first SEC-approved spot Dogecoin ETF, physically backed on a 1:1 basis and carrying a 0.50% management fee.

With total ETF assets still representing a fraction of Dogecoin's overall market cap, the scale of institutional interest remains modest in absolute terms. However, three straight weeks of inflows and a near-record monthly total suggest that appetite is building heading into the final quarter of 2026. Whether this marks the start of a sustained memecoin season or simply a short-term uptick in risk appetite remains to be seen.

SourcesCoinGape: Dogecoin Price Prediction, Whales Remain Bullish Amid 3-Week DOGE ETF Inflow Streak
KuCoin News: Dogecoin ETFs See Record $2.89M Inflows Amid Bitwise Exit
GlobeNewswire: 21Shares Announces Launch of the 21Shares Dogecoin ETF (TDOG)

Iran has been leaning on Tether’s dollar-pegged USDT to dodge a U.S. sanctions dragnet and move money for the regime and proxies such as Hezbollah, according to a new Senate Democrats report.

The Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations says the token has become a primary payment rail for Tehran and a funding tool for terrorist proxy groups, reports The Wall Street Journal, which viewed a copy of the findings.

Tether’s USDT accounts for about 60% of all stablecoins by market capitalization. Because the token tracks the dollar, it is less volatile than other crypto — making it useful for payments and, the Journal notes, for money laundering.

Treasury has been tightening the economic squeeze since U.S. military strikes in Iran earlier this year, including August’s Operation Economic Outcast.

Sen. Richard Blumenthal (D-Conn.) led the probe, which reviewed 846 wallets sanctioned by the U.S. and Israeli governments over Iran ties and found that 84% of them traded exclusively or almost exclusively in USDT.

Blumenthal told the Journal the report “exposes how Tether and its flagship token have become central to Iran’s shadow banking system, allowing the Iranian government to fund its regional proxies, commit human-rights abuses, and pursue hostile drone and missile programs as they defy our sanctions regime.”

A Tether spokesman did not return requests for comment. The company has worked with law enforcement to freeze some regime-linked wallets.

Iran may be easing off: TRM Labs data shows USDT’s share of volume in Iran-attributed wallets fell from 72% in 2024 to 67% in 2025, and to 14% of on-chain volume in August.

Generated Image: Midjourney

@openstandard has named @chainlink as the official data oracle for its Open USD stablecoin, a move that opens OUSD up to a broad range of decentralized finance applications on the day of its public launch.

Chainlink's price feeds will allow DeFi platforms to use OUSD as collateral for lending protocols, in liquidity pools, and as margin for perpetual futures contracts. Securing a reliable oracle from day one is a meaningful step for a new stablecoin looking to gain traction in DeFi markets, where accurate and tamper-resistant price data is a baseline requirement.

A heavyweight debut for OUSD Open USD went live on September 30, 2026, putting Open Standard's token directly into a market long ruled by Tether and Circle, but with a structure that spreads ownership far wider than either of its rivals. Open Standard's wider partner network has grown from over 140 to more than 200 companies, with UBS, SBI Holdings, and Jeeves among the newest additions.

Coinbase, Mastercard, Shopify, Stripe, and Visa have invested as the company's first five founding partners, each receiving an equal initial equity stake, and together the group has committed more than $1 billion to help establish OUSD liquidity over the coming months.

OUSD is being issued natively on Base, Ethereum, Solana, and Tempo. The token is issued by Bridge, the stablecoin infrastructure firm Stripe owns, with reserves held at BlackRock, Lead Bank, and BNY. Bridge will publish reserve attestations monthly.

Built for business, not just crypto markets Open Standard launched OUSD so that businesses everywhere can use stablecoins as easily as they use fiat. OUSD is purpose-built for use cases across banking, cross-border payments, settlement, institutional trading, and more.

The twist is in the economics: businesses can mint and redeem OUSD at par without fees or volume caps, while participating companies collect most of the income generated by the token's reserves. The stablecoin market OUSD is entering is worth over $300 billion, with Tether's USDT at roughly $143 billion and Circle's USDC at about $74 billion.

The Chainlink integration is designed to ensure OUSD can move fluidly through that DeFi landscape from the outset, rather than waiting for oracle support to be retrofitted after launch.

Sources:
Open Standard: OUSD is live (Official blog)
CoinDesk: New stablecoin Open USD goes live
Unchained: Open USD Stablecoin Goes Live

Coinbase has unveiled plans to build financial accounts tailored for artificial intelligence (AI) systems and autonomous agents, aiming to expand its agentic finance initiative. CEO Brian Armstrong stated on X that the company is creating a financial account designed for the needs of AI, extending work already underway with agent wallets and stablecoin payment tools that support software-based trading and transactions.

Coinbase ramps up agentic wallet infrastructureCoinbase has been working to integrate digital asset management solutions for AI agents. Its Agentic Wallets, introduced in February, enable autonomous spending, earning, and trading, while incorporating security safeguards. These wallets allow software agents to make payments directly, addressing a key limitation where agents previously could only recommend actions rather than execute them independently.

Building on the infrastructure for AI systems, Coinbase for Agents was launched in June. This service lets approved AI agents connect to Coinbase user accounts and perform trades or make payments within limits set by human users. The coming expansion will see these capabilities scale up from wallets to broader AI-oriented financial accounts, following Coinbase’s ongoing product development strategy rather than introducing a completely new model.

Coinbase is building the financial account for AI, aiming to streamline how autonomous agents manage assets, make payments, and execute trades under secure, user-defined conditions.

Rise of AI agents in global paymentsAutonomous agents increasingly require the ability to purchase computing power, access APIs, and pay for various digital services directly. To address this, Coinbase developed the x402 protocol, which supports machine-to-machine payments in stablecoins like USDC. This infrastructure allows agents to transact with digital services seamlessly, reducing the need for human intervention in routine purchases.

In May, Coinbase reported processing over 100 million payments through the x402 protocol, with more than 99% settled in USDC. While not all these transactions involved AI agents, the volume underscores the scalability and adoption of its machine-oriented payments platform.

Mini dictionary: x402 protocol, a Coinbase-developed payments layer allowing autonomous machine-to-machine stablecoin transfers and designed to serve the transactional needs of digital and AI agents.

Payment protocolTotal paymentsMain stablecoin usedx402100 million+USDC (99%+)Stablecoins power autonomous agent transactionsStablecoins have played a central role in Coinbase’s approach, supporting dollar-denominated transfers across blockchain networks without relying on conventional banking or card systems. Coinbase has integrated USDC and other stablecoins within its payment platform, while its Base network serves as an Ethereum-layer-2 solution for processing these transactions efficiently.

The payments stack now supports both agent-initiated and enterprise-focused payment flows, aiming to make programmable payments accessible for software-driven activity. Expanding these capabilities enables a broader range of financial activity by autonomous agents across digital platforms.

Agentic finance becomes wider strategy for CoinbaseCoinbase is advancing its agentic finance model across trading, payments, and comprehensive financial management. Its broader vision connects autonomous agents with user accounts and introduces tools like Advisor, an AI-powered interface for retail users. Coinbase has also upgraded its business payments system to enable AI-initiated transactions at scale.

Financially, Coinbase reported a third consecutive record for quarterly crypto trading volume market share in the second quarter, reflecting a push to diversify products beyond traditional trading in response to evolving market dynamics.

Shares of Coinbase closed at $190.02 on September 29, slipping 0.92% that day. However, this decline cannot be directly linked to the agentic finance developments.

As Coinbase advances its agent-focused roadmap, the main challenge will be developing a scalable, secure financial framework for software agents. Issues such as identity verification, spending control, liability, fraud prevention, and regulatory compliance are expected to take on greater significance as autonomous agents gain more financial independence.

The company’s expansion moves from agent-specific wallets toward comprehensive accounts, aiming to form the backbone of non-human economic activity in digital finance.

Filecoin was built from day one to persist the InterPlanetary File System (IPFS): cryptographic proof that content-addressed data is actually still there. That's been the idea since before the network existed. Thousands of developers already rely on IPFS to host websites, apps, datasets, and agents, and today new tools make that premise ready to use right now.

Storing IPFS data? You might be paying too much to pin. IPFS doesn't promise that your data sticks around on its own. Nothing on the network is obligated to keep a copy, so most people pay a pinning service (such as Pinata, or previously Infura or Storacha) to guarantee their files stay hosted and reachable, the way you'd pay for web hosting. You can now get that same guarantee from Filecoin: your pinned IPFS data, same CIDs, no changes needed, at roughly a third the cost of the cheapest pinning alternative we compared.

Step one: Meet IPFS → Filecoin Migrate your existing CIDs from any public IPFS gateway.

Your CIDs don't change. Nothing is re-chunked. Every CID stays byte-identical and keeps resolving from any public IPFS gateway. A fraction of pinning-service pricing. $2.50 per TiB per month per copy, two copies by default. You pay storage providers directly, streamed per epoch, with no plan tiers and no minimum commitment. Verifiable proof. Storage providers prove possession onchain on a schedule. You get a receipt with transaction links, and you can check any piece yourself. Your wallet holds it. No signup and no vendor account to lose. The data set belongs to your wallet address. Reading never touches your key. Retrieval works straight from any public IPFS gateway, so your content stays reachable no matter what happens to that wallet. If you're already paying a vendor to pin data you don't fully control, this is a way to keep the same links working while holding the guarantee yourself, at a fraction of the price.

The process is scriptable, too. You can hand a coding agent like Claude Code or Cursor a single line and let it read the migration guide and run the steps itself.

Step two: pin everything new on Filecoin Pin from now on. Filecoin Pin connects IPFS and Filecoin directly, persisting content-addressed data on a verifiable storage network, with no separate migration step required.

It's available now as a CLI, JS library, and GitHub Action, with dedicated migration guides for moving pins from any IPFS gateway, including a command-line walkthrough.

You use Filecoin Pin the way you'd use any pinning service. The difference is what's underneath: proofs run onchain where anyone can check them, and the storage itself is spread across a decentralized network of providers instead of living on one company's servers.

When you pin a file through Filecoin Pin, your IPFS content is uploaded to an audited Filecoin storage provider. Each provider must verify continuous data storage and access. Payments and uptime are handled automatically through Filecoin Pay. If proofs fail, streaming payments pause.

Who's already migrating to Filecoin Teams are already choosing to store their pinned IPFS data on Filecoin, from NFT platforms to institutions with legal and compliance obligations around their data.

Large-scale content platforms. Some products embed IPFS CIDs directly into customer-facing records at a scale where a single point of failure becomes a real production risk. NFT platforms are a great example: metadata and media for millions of live tokens, all needing to keep resolving indefinitely. Moving that volume onto Filecoin trades a vendor's uptime promise for onchain proof and a network of dedicated storage providers. NFTs2Me is a no-code NFT creation platform with more than 2.17 million IPFS CIDs associated with NFT artwork and metadata, now using Filecoin as its storage layer.

"We're responsible for the metadata behind millions of live tokens, and it all has to keep resolving. Filecoin gives us onchain proof that data is stored and available, backed by a global network." - The NFTs2Me Team

Legal and institutional recordkeeping. Some organizations reference IPFS links in legal, regulatory, or fiduciary contexts, where a document that stops resolving can mean a broken chain of evidence. For teams like DI GEA Trusts Confederation, persistence is a requirement. Onchain proof gives them something a standard pinning service can't: independent, checkable evidence that the document is still there, rather than a vendor's word for it. This is what brought DI GEA Trust Confederation storing legal and fiduciary documents referenced in court and tribunal contexts onto Filecoin.

"Our documents get referenced in legal and regulatory contexts years after they're filed, so we need real proof they're still there. Filecoin gives us onchain verification we can check ourselves, which is exactly the guarantee our fiduciary work requires." - The DI GEA Trusts Confederation Team

The infrastructure IPFS gateways sit on is evolving IPFS public gateway infrastructure is changing but whatever happens at the gateway layer, the CIDs themselves don't have to depend on it. Once your data is on Filecoin, it stays stored, verifiable, and retrievable.

Migrate your CIDs to Filecoin here: https://filecoin.cloud/ipfs2filecoin

Solana’s validators take turns producing blocks, and right now the order of those turns has nothing to do with where anyone actually lives.

Anza’s research team wants to shrink that toll. Its proposal, SIMD-0675, would line up validators that sit close to each other so they produce blocks back to back. In a simulation built on real mainnet data, the change cut block production handover delays by 53%.

What Anza is proposing The work comes from Anza researchers Quentin Kniep and Roger Wattenhofer. They authored two Solana Improvement Documents, known as SIMDs, which are the formal channel for suggesting protocol changes.

The two documents are SIMD-0674 and SIMD-0675. Both were opened on approximately 29 September 2026.

Together, they describe a system where validators register their geographic location on-chain. The network then uses those locations to build what the authors call a geo-aware leader schedule.

Every handover involves some waiting. The incoming leader needs the previous leader’s work before it can build on top of it, and distance stretches that wait.

The current schedule is random with respect to geography. The proposed one groups validators into geographic bins and runs them consecutively, so the baton mostly passes between neighbors instead of across the planet.

Advertisement

The design caps each bin at a maximum of 3 consecutive leaders. A full run through a region lasts approximately 2.4 seconds before the schedule moves on.

The numbers behind the pitch The researchers tested the idea against mainnet data from epoch 1038, which involved 661 validators.

Under the existing random scheduling, mean leader handover latency came in at 36.2 milliseconds. Under the geo-aware model, it dropped to 17.0 milliseconds.

That is the 53% improvement.

One detail matters a lot for validators worried about their revenue. According to the proposals, stake weights and slot allocations stay exactly the same.

Every validator keeps its original share of slots. The proposal only reshuffles when those slots occur, not how many each validator gets.

There is a catch, and it is not a small one. Validators that choose not to register a location would be excluded from block production and voting.

On process, SIMD-0675 moved to “ready for review” status on 30 September 2026 at 14:27 UTC. SIMD-0674 remains in draft.

Why Alpenglow makes this urgent The timing is not random, even if the current leader schedule is. The proposals are tied to Alpenglow, Solana’s upcoming consensus protocol.

Alpenglow aims for finality of around 150 milliseconds. Finality is the point at which a transaction is considered permanent and cannot be reversed.

The protocol was transitioning into testnet and devnet environments in late September 2026, right as these SIMDs appeared.

When your total finality target is measured in the low hundreds of milliseconds, a handover that eats tens of milliseconds is not background noise. It is a meaningful slice of the whole budget.

What this means for validators, builders and SOL holders For validator operators, the biggest shift is disclosure. Registering a physical location on-chain becomes the price of admission for producing blocks and voting.

The near-term milestones are clear enough. Watch how the community responds to SIMD-0675 now that it is open for review, and whether SIMD-0674 moves out of draft.

Also watch Alpenglow’s progress through testnet and devnet. If that protocol keeps advancing, pressure to squeeze out delays like handover latency will only grow.

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

When @TCHtweets announced on September 24 that it had chosen @quantnetwork to power its new tokenized deposit network, most coverage focused on what it meant for $QNT. The more instructive question is who The Clearing House actually is, and why its endorsement carries so much weight.

The Infrastructure Behind US Banking The Clearing House was founded in 1853 by 38 New York banks and served as a de facto central bank before the Federal Reserve existed. Today it is owned by the largest US commercial banks and sits at the center of the country's payment system.

It operates three core payment systems: CHIPS for large-value wire clearing, the EPN automated clearing house (ACH), and the RTP network, the private-sector real-time payments rail it launched in 2017. Its networks clear and settle more than $2 trillion per day across wire transfers, ACH, checks, and real-time payments. In 2024, EPN alone handled 20.7 billion payments worth $56.4 trillion, roughly half of all US commercial ACH volume. CHIPS is the largest private-sector USD clearing and settlement network in the world for high-value wire payments.

Why Quant Was Chosen The Clearing House selected Quant, described as a leading provider of programmable money infrastructure, to power its On-Chain Money Initiative, a new interoperable payments network that will enable financial institutions to clear and settle tokenized deposit transactions.

Tokenized deposits are digital representations of bank balances. A tokenized deposit remains a deposit liability of the bank that issued it, which distinguishes them from public stablecoins and preserves the existing protections depositors rely on.

Quant will handle the interoperability and transaction layer, linking the network to systems like RTP and CHIPS. The selection reflects Quant's positioning as a provider of programmable money infrastructure that supports interoperability across multiple ledgers rather than requiring institutions to commit to a single blockchain.

The initiative is backed by 25 of the country's largest financial institutions, naming Bank of America, Citi, J.P. Morgan, Wells Fargo, HSBC, BNY, PNC Bank, U.S. Bank, and Truist among others. The On-Chain Money Initiative is designed to create new opportunities across corporate treasury, liquidity management, cross-border payments, and digital asset settlement. The network is expected to become available to participating institutions in the first half of 2027.

Sources:
The Clearing House Partners with Quant to Advance the On-Chain Money Initiative (PR Newswire via Yahoo Finance)
TCH and Quant Partner to Power US Tokenized Deposit Network for Banks (FF News)
The Clearing House Payments Company (Wikipedia)

PANews, September 30 — According to an official Gate announcement, Gate has listed Concrete (CT) as a first listing. CT/USDT spot trading opened at 18:00 (UTC+8) on September 30, and flash swap trading opened at 19:00. Concrete is positioned as a full-stack, institutional-grade operating system for on-chain finance, providing infrastructure support for treasuries, strategies, custody, risk control, and distribution of crypto assets and real-world assets (RWA).

At 22:00 on the same day, Gate Launchpool Season 381 Concrete (CT) opened and will run until 22:00 on October 21, offering a total of 1 million CT in airdrops. Users can stake USDT, GT, or CT to participate, with the USDT pool allocated 600,000 CT, and the GT pool and CT pool each allocated 200,000 CT. Rewards are distributed hourly based on staking share. The event page currently shows estimated APRs of 104.29%, 69.52%, and 6.25% for the three pools respectively, and actual yields will change dynamically.

Three kits, one stablecoin-native stack@arc, Circle's layer-1 blockchain, has shipped three new developer kits designed to give apps a ready-made toolkit for buying, earning on, and borrowing against $USDC, without requiring builders to assemble the underlying infrastructure themselves.

The three new additions extend that approach into funding, earning, and borrowing.

The Onramp Kit lets users purchase $USDC directly inside an app. The feature is initially available to eligible users in the US, UK, and EU.

The Earn Kit adds $USDC and $EURC lending through @Morpho.

Bitcoin collateral, no sale requiredThe third kit, Borrow Kit, may be the most notable for bitcoin holders. Arc has integrated @Morpho as its main lending infrastructure, allowing institutions to borrow stablecoins like $USDC and $EURC using cirBTC, a Bitcoin-backed token, as collateral.

Morpho is the first lending protocol supported by Circle for this product, with Aave planned to be added later. The service is currently available on Arc and Ethereum, but is not available to customers in New York.

The kits arrive roughly two weeks after Arc's public mainnet went live. Circle launched Arc as a layer-1 blockchain for institutional finance, with BlackRock, Mastercard, and Visa among its founding validators. $USDC has more than USD 74 billion in circulation. On launch day, deposits into Morpho markets on Arc exceeded $150 million, pointing to strong early demand.

Sources:
Arc: Onramp Kit, Earn Kit, and Borrow Kit Are Now Live on Arc
Circle: Arc Mainnet launch press release
The Paypers: Circle launches Arc mainnet for institutional finance

A roughly $16 million exchange deposit and a separate $5.78 million sale have been combined into headlines about a $22 million whale dump. The distinction matters because Hyperliquid Strategies has been accumulating HYPE too. Its SEC filing shows how a public treasury chooses when to buy and what its 33.2 million-token position really represents.

Summary

Lookonchain tracked 177,518 HYPE worth $16.08 million deposited to OKX and Bybit on September 28. A separate wallet it linked to Hypersphere Ventures sold 62,869 HYPE for about $5.78 million. A wallet linked to Hyperliquid Strategies bought 494,200 HYPE worth $45.8 million over 16 hours on September 25. The company’s September filing reported approximately 33.2 million HYPE held as of September 8. About 25.1 million of those tokens were delegated to its linked validator, with 8.1 million to Anchorage. One HYPE holder sent 177,518 tokens, worth approximately $16.08 million at the time, to OKX and Bybit on September 28. A different wallet linked by Lookonchain to Hypersphere Ventures sold 62,869 HYPE for about $5.78 million. The tracker’s original item identifies one exchange deposit and one sale. It does not establish that the full $21.86 million was sold.

The distinction is the story. An exchange deposit makes coins readily available to trade, and it can precede a sale. It can also reflect custody, market making, collateral or a later withdrawal. A realized sale has a different evidentiary status. Headlines treating the combined $22 million as executed selling have already promoted a possibility into a fact.

On the other side, a wallet that Lookonchain linked to Hyperliquid Strategies acquired 494,200 HYPE worth about $45.8 million over 16 hours on September 25. That purchase was three days before the September 28 whale activity. Comparing their dollar amounts as if the treasury took those exact coins off the seller on the same day would be false. Public transfers do not name the other side of every trade.

One deposit and one sale were reported The 177,518-token transfer went from a wallet identified as 0xc745 to two centralized exchanges. The 62,869-token sale was attributed by the tracker to a different wallet it associated with Hypersphere Ventures. The latter transaction was estimated to realize roughly $2.13 million in profit. Wallet attribution is a researcher’s classification, not a statement signed by the institution, so the association should be kept attached to its source.

The $16.08 million deposit and $5.78 million sale sum to $21.86 million at the prices used in the report. That is the basis for the rounded $22 million figure. Only $5.78 million is described in the underlying tracker account as an executed sale. The other $16.08 million is a transfer to venues where trading could happen later. Even that valuation can change before the tokens are sold.

Suppose all 177,518 deposited HYPE eventually sold. The combined disposed amount would be 240,387 HYPE including the separate 62,869 sale, subject to transaction details and potential double counting. Suppose none of the deposit sold. The confirmed amount remains 62,869 HYPE under the tracker report. A responsible article should not choose either endpoint without following the exchange balances and execution evidence.

Transfers into an exchange omnibus address make the next step harder to trace. Once coins are credited internally, exchange trades occur on the venue’s private ledger. An outside analyst may observe deposits, subsequent withdrawals or order-book activity, but cannot usually match a precise deposited token with a buyer’s identity. The absence of a visible onchain sale after deposit does not prove the holder kept the position. Nor does a deposit itself prove disposal.

This is why the phrase head for the exits is too strong as a factual headline for the 177,518 HYPE movement. A holder moved inventory into tradable venues; another sold a smaller, documented position. The two events together show potential supply pressure, not a single $22 million completed dump.

The treasury’s purchase is real, but from a different window The September 25 crypto.news report described 494,200 HYPE bought by a wallet linked to Hyperliquid Strategies for about $45.8 million. The tracker attributed the activity to wallet 0x6436. Buying across a 16-hour period is an observed action from a labeled address, not a corporate filing for that exact intraday amount.

At the stated prices, the treasury purchase was about 2.85 times the later $16.08 million exchange deposit and about 7.9 times the separate $5.78 million sale. Those ratios compare public dollar figures from different dates; they do not show one party absorbed the other’s inventory. The September 25 buy may already have been complete before September 28’s transfer. They belong in a chronology, not a netted same-day order book.

The company’s formal filings provide a broader check. In its September registration statement, Hyperliquid Strategies reported approximately 33.2 million HYPE held as of September 8. It said the balance included about 12.5 million tokens contributed at the transaction closing and tokens purchased with proceeds from a roughly $299.9 million PIPE and other capital raises. A 494,200-token reported acquisition later in September is about 1.49% of that September 8 inventory. That is meaningful incremental accumulation, but the dated 33.2 million figure cannot be treated as a current balance after it.

The company says it updates its HYPE balance weekly with a one-week delay. That disclosure lag matters when comparing a fast whale headline with treasury holdings. A balance published today might describe last week’s ownership. A look at an attributed wallet can fill part of the gap, but it may omit other wallets, internal transfers or custodial accounts. The filing and the wallet tracker are complementary evidence with different scopes.

The public company’s stock, PURR, provides exposure to HYPE through a corporate structure. Shareholders do not own a redeemable fraction of the onchain wallet. The issuer can buy more tokens, stake them, raise equity, repurchase its own shares and maintain cash reserves. The share count and obligations determine HYPE per share. A headline about a large treasury buy does not by itself prove accretion for an existing shareholder.

A filing spells out when the company intends to buy Hyperliquid Strategies’ registration statement describes a Treasury Committee composed of its CEO, CFO and COO, subject to board oversight. It says the company seeks to raise equity primarily when its shares trade at a premium to a market net asset value measure. It then considers buying HYPE when the market price is below an internal assessment of long-term fundamental value. It may repurchase its own stock at a meaningful discount to net asset value.

Those are the company’s stated policies, not a guarantee that each purchase meets an external definition of cheap. The internal fundamental-value estimate is not an observable market price, and the filing does not disclose a public threshold at which the September 25 buying was approved. A reader can test the subsequent outcome through HYPE per diluted share, cash, issuance prices and actual purchases, but cannot reverse-engineer the committee’s complete judgment from an address label.

The same filing describes a committed equity facility of up to $2.5 billion with Chardan. Capacity is not cash already raised, and an equity facility can issue new shares. If future share sales finance HYPE purchases at attractive premiums, HYPE per share can rise; if shares are sold too cheaply or expenses absorb proceeds, it can fall. The company’s objective is to maximize long-term HYPE exposure per common share. The measurable unit is therefore per share, not the gross treasury balance.

The capital framework separates a working capital reserve intended to cover at least 12 months of projected operating expenses, a cash reserve available for deployment and HYPE holdings. This explains why a company can announce a large cash raise without immediately buying an equivalent amount of tokens. Some cash is reserved for the business, and the committee can wait. It also means that its buying may continue through a market decline without any promise to support a particular HYPE price.

Another detail weakens the simple whale versus treasury picture. The company’s own filing says HYPE sales are conditioned on its assessment that the prevailing price exceeds its estimate of fundamental value. It is an accumulating treasury, but its policy does not forbid sales. A change in market price, cash requirements or its valuation assessment could put the company on the other side of the market. Present buying as an observed period, not a perpetual floor.

The 33.2 million tokens are largely staked As of September 8, the company said approximately 25.1 million HYPE, or 75.7% of its staked holdings, were delegated to its linked HSIxUNIT validator. Another approximately 8.1 million, or 24.3%, were delegated to Anchorage, described as its only third-party validator at that time. The two balances sum to 33.2 million, matching the rounded treasury figure. The percentages refer to its staked position, not the entire circulating HYPE supply.

The staking detail changes the liquidity interpretation. HYPE moved to a validator is not available for immediate spot sale until the owner initiates unstaking and completes the applicable process. The filing describes an initial one-day lock after delegation and a seven-day unstaking queue following withdrawal from staking. That does not make the treasury immovable; it sets a timing constraint. The company can keep cash and use other financing while coins are delegated.

Staking rewards also enlarge holdings without a new market purchase. The filing cited an average net annualized reward rate of 2.18% at 440.4 million HYPE staked across the network as of September 8. Applying 2.18% to 33.2 million tokens gives about 723,760 HYPE annually as a rough run rate, before the company’s specific fees and changes in balance or network rate. It is not a forecast of actual annual rewards. Rewards accrue and compound under the protocol mechanics, while the market price can change the dollar result substantially.

If a future report shows HYPE holdings rising by 700,000 tokens, it would be wrong to call all of that new spot buying without separating staking rewards, transfers and acquisitions. Conversely, a flat balance could conceal purchases offset by sales or other uses. The split between purchased tokens, contributed inventory and earned rewards is essential to testing whether the treasury is absorbing outside supply.

The initial 12.5 million HYPE contribution is another reason to keep categories straight. Those coins became company property through its corporate transaction, not through an open-market buy on the date the company reported 33.2 million. Roughly 20.7 million tokens above that initial contribution existed in the September 8 balance, but even that difference cannot be labeled net spot purchases without accounting for staking rewards and other transactions since closing.

Buybacks respond to trading revenue, not whale headlines Hyperliquid’s protocol routes most eligible trading fees through its Assistance Fund to purchase HYPE. Tokens acquired under the program are burned according to the protocol’s published structure. That creates an ongoing source of token demand tied to platform activity. It is separate from Hyperliquid Strategies, the public company, even though both can acquire the same asset.

The reported percentage of fees directed to the fund varies across descriptions because fee categories and program terms matter. One crypto.news unlock analysis used 99% of eligible trading fees; another account described 97% of protocol trading fees. The precise percentage should be quoted with its denominator and date. For the present comparison, what matters is the mechanism: trading generates fees, which fund market purchases, while actual buyback size changes with volume and pricing.

An example shows why a constant percentage is not a price guarantee. If eligible fees were $1 million in one day and 99% flowed into the fund, the buyback budget would be $990,000 before execution considerations. A $16.08 million exchange deposit would be more than 16 times that illustrative daily amount. If fees rose tenfold, the relative scale would change. Without matching a real daily fee tally and dated onchain fund transactions, one should not claim the mechanism absorbed September 28’s specific deposit.

The September burn report described about 9,730 HYPE repurchased and burned over a 24-hour period ending September 6, worth roughly $830,000 then. That historical daily print is useful as an order-of-magnitude check, not a claim about September 28. At 9,730 tokens a day, 177,518 HYPE is roughly 18.2 days of purchases. Actual daily activity varies, so that ratio is a dated illustration only.

The Assistance Fund cannot identify who bought a whale’s exchange sale any more than a treasury wallet can. Market makers and other investors stand between flows. Structural buying can help absorb supply across time, but it is not a standing promise to purchase at a particular price. A lower HYPE price changes the number of tokens a fixed fee budget can acquire; a collapse in platform activity lowers the fee budget itself.

Unlocks add potential supply, not automatic sales The September 6 vesting release made approximately 9.92 million HYPE claimable, valued around $820 million at the then-prevailing price of $82.60. Claimable supply is a stock of tokens owners may sell, stake or hold. It is not $820 million of executed sell orders. The prior coverage of that unlock emphasized that historical exchange movements after a previous unlock were a small share of tokens released.

The Multicoin transfer report showed another recent move to a trading venue. The September 28 wallet deposit has a more immediate market implication than a raw unlock count because identified coins reached trading venues. Still, a venue deposit remains one step away from a verified sale. A rigorous supply ladder runs from vested, to claimed, to transferred to an exchange, to sold. Each stage provides stronger evidence of disposal and a smaller, more specific quantity. Rolling all four into a single dollar value exaggerates precision.

The company purchase belongs to a separate demand ladder. Capital raised is potential buying power; cash allocated is a budget; an executed HYPE purchase is actual demand; tokens staked afterward are removed from immediate liquid inventory. Counting the $2.5 billion equity facility as if already spent is as misleading as counting all unlocked HYPE as already sold.

The two ladders are not symmetrical in public visibility. Onchain transfers and staking deposits can be observed quickly. A corporate decision to issue shares or hold cash appears through securities disclosures, sometimes later. Centralized exchange executions are often invisible at wallet level. Any net supply calculation that combines them will have blind spots. The strongest available conclusion is usually bounded: how many tokens were demonstrably sold, how many reached possible sale venues and how many the labeled treasury demonstrably bought during a specified period.

The strongest case for the buyers has limits Supporters of the HYPE thesis can point to real platform usage, fees that feed token purchases and a listed treasury that reported 33.2 million HYPE by September 8. The company’s September 25 wallet activity adds evidence of continuing accumulation. A token that receives recurring protocol purchases and corporate acquisitions can absorb some distributions without a sustained fall in price. The September unlock’s headline dollar figure alone did not establish that holders rushed to sell.

That case weakens if trading activity falls and the Assistance Fund’s purchases shrink. It weakens if corporate issuance becomes dilutive in HYPE-per-share terms or if the treasury pauses buying. It weakens if exchange deposits turn into verified sales at a pace exceeding new demand. The case is testable through actual fee-funded buys, token balances, public-company disclosures and exchange-flow follow-ups. It does not rest on an assumption that every whale transfer is harmless.

The bearish case also needs discipline. The separate 62,869 HYPE sale is evidence of one holder realizing a profit. The 177,518 HYPE deposit makes more inventory tradable. Neither proves broad capitulation or a final buyer’s identity. Calling $22 million a dump when about $16 million is a transfer makes the argument easier to say and harder to defend. A further sequence of deposits followed by verified sales would strengthen it substantially.

The two sides can both describe the same session accurately: a large holder sold, another holder sent inventory to exchanges, and independent buyers continued to exist. Price discovery balances them. A permanent directional conclusion requires the next rounds of flow and fee data, not an attempt to name one wallet as the other wallet’s counterparty.

A matched buyer requires more than matching dollar totals The claim that a treasury took the other side of a whale sale sounds plausible when the treasury’s reported purchase is larger. It requires more than size. At minimum, the buy and sell must overlap in time, occur through a venue or route that could connect the orders, and be supported by transaction records or a clearly described inference. The September 25 wallet accumulation precedes the September 28 deposit. Chronology alone defeats a claim that the former was an immediate response to the latter.

Even trades in the same hour do not automatically pair. A market maker may buy from a whale, hedge on a perpetual market and later sell to a treasury buyer. The economic exposure passes through several hands. An exchange order can be filled against many counterparties at different prices. Onchain wallet movements show entry and exit from a venue, while the actual order matches stay in its private system. A complete matching claim would require exchange records or corroboration from participants, neither of which is in the cited public data.

The better question is whether identifiable demand is large enough over a comparable period to absorb identifiable supply without a persistent price concession. That requires a ledger of actual executed sales, actual treasury purchases, actual Assistance Fund buys and other liquidity. The exchange deposit belongs in a separate potential-supply column. The $2.5 billion equity facility belongs in a possible-future-demand column. Mixing either with executed transactions would make the ledger balance only because its categories were wrong.

One can still learn from the imbalance in published amounts. The $45.8 million labeled treasury purchase shows the company has been willing to deploy substantial capital. The $5.78 million reported sale shows at least one whale has realized gains. The $16.08 million deposited shows more inventory could be offered. None of the three describes the anonymous investors who may have bought on OKX, Bybit or elsewhere. The headline’s question about absorption is not answered by treating the most visible buyer as the only buyer.

Future observations can narrow it. If the deposited wallet’s exchange balance is later withdrawn and HYPE appears in another self-custody address, an immediate complete sale becomes less certain, though exchange internal netting still limits proof. If venue volume and price show heavy selling while the wallet’s funds are credited, the sale case gains circumstantial support. If a company filing confirms purchases in the same period, it demonstrates a buyer class, not necessarily a matched counterparty. The distinction survives every update.

That approach has an editorial advantage. It can state what is known firmly, leave only the unknown part open and identify exactly which record would change the conclusion. The alternatives are a $22 million dump headline that overstates the evidence and a treasury-rescue headline that invents a buyer-seller link. Neither is needed to explain the pressure on HYPE’s market.

The public company is an amplifier, not a price floor Hyperliquid Strategies’ ability to accumulate depends partly on the market for its own shares. If PURR trades at a premium to the value of its underlying assets, the company may raise capital in a way that adds HYPE per old share. If the premium contracts, raising the same cash may be less attractive or more dilutive. Its policy explicitly contemplates buying back company stock when shares trade at a meaningful discount to its adjusted asset value. That choice could benefit shareholders without producing any new HYPE spot purchase.

This distinction matters after a visible treasury buy. A crypto holder may care whether the company removes coins from the market. A PURR shareholder cares whether each share’s economic claim improves after financing and expenses. The company’s earlier results coverage recorded a 29.3 million HYPE balance and stock repurchases at a previous cutoff. The move to 33.2 million by September 8 is a larger token total, but a complete per-share comparison needs the intervening share count and other claims.

The SEC filing also states that substantially all of the company’s HYPE is held with one custodian. That is a corporate concentration risk distinct from whales on an exchange. A custodian disruption could affect access to coins even if the protocol continues to function. The company discloses its dependence on HYPE’s price and liquidity because its treasury is concentrated in cash and this one token.

A 16-hour wallet acquisition is therefore an input into a broader balance sheet story. It can show willingness to buy at prevailing prices. It cannot establish how much future capacity remains, whether future issuance will be accretive, or whether the company will buy the next large exchange deposit. Its filed mandate gives management discretion on all three questions.

The two wallets cannot be joined by an arrow The public record supports a bounded conclusion. Lookonchain reported a 62,869 HYPE sale and a separate 177,518 HYPE exchange deposit. It had previously identified a 494,200 HYPE purchase by a treasury-linked address. The times differ, the venues obscure counterparties and the company filing reports balances with a lag. No cited source establishes that Hyperliquid Strategies bought the specific coins the September 28 wallets moved.

The company may continue to buy, the Assistance Fund may continue to convert eligible fees into token purchases, and other investors may absorb supply. None of those facts can be turned into a guaranteed floor. Likewise, the deposit could lead to a sale without making it a sale at the time it was observed. The next dated wallet update and the issuer’s subsequent balance disclosure will narrow the gap.

The actionable reporting standard is simple. Label the 62,869 HYPE as a reported sale, the 177,518 HYPE as an exchange deposit and the 494,200 HYPE as an earlier reported purchase by a linked wallet. Treat any claim about the final buyer of the whale’s coins as unproven until transaction or venue evidence supports it.

What to watch Exchange follow-through: Whether the 177,518 HYPE deposited on September 28 is followed by identifiable withdrawals or corroborated selling. Treasury updates: Whether the reported 33.2 million HYPE as of September 8 rises through purchases, staking rewards or both. Assistance Fund purchases: Compare actual daily token buys with trading fees, not with a fixed percentage in isolation. HYPE per share: Track PURR equity issuance and repurchases alongside changes in gross token holdings. Fresh whale sales: Separate confirmed executions from deposits and newly unlocked but untransferred tokens. FAQ Did HYPE whales sell $22 million on September 28? The tracker described about $5.78 million in a separate 62,869 HYPE sale and $16.08 million in a 177,518 HYPE exchange deposit. The combined roughly $22 million is not a confirmed executed-sale total.

Where were the 177,518 HYPE sent? Lookonchain reported deposits to OKX and Bybit from wallet 0xc745. Subsequent internal exchange trading cannot usually be attributed to that deposit from public chain data alone.

How much HYPE did the treasury-linked wallet buy? Lookonchain attributed a 494,200 HYPE purchase, worth about $45.8 million, to a wallet linked to Hyperliquid Strategies over 16 hours on September 25. That preceded the September 28 deposit.

How many HYPE did Hyperliquid Strategies hold? Its September registration statement reported approximately 33.2 million HYPE as of September 8. That dated figure should not be presented as the exact post-September 25 balance.

Were all 33.2 million HYPE bought on exchanges? No. Approximately 12.5 million were contributed in the company’s transaction, while other tokens were acquired with capital proceeds or accrued through activities such as staking.

What does the Assistance Fund do? It uses most eligible protocol fee revenue to buy HYPE, with purchased tokens burned under the described mechanism. The daily amount varies with trading activity and execution.

Are the treasury’s tokens liquid immediately? The company said substantially all HYPE was staked as of September 8. Its filing described a one-day initial delegation lock and a seven-day unstaking queue after an exit request.

What would prove broad whale selling? Further dated exchange deposits corroborated by executions, shrinking wallet balances and sustained selling pressure would strengthen that conclusion. This is educational analysis, not investment advice.

Disclaimer: This article is for information and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Figures reflect regulatory filings and reporting available at the time of writing and change with each disclosure. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security or asset. Always do your own research. Information is accurate as of September 30, 2026.

CryptoBriefing

Hyperliquid Labs has announced a significant token transaction involving the unstaking and private sale of 3.75 million HYPE tokens. This amount is notably 8.65 times larger than the September 6 unlock. According to Hyperliquid’s co-founder Iliensinc, the tokens are intended for a private over-the-counter deal with an institution, rather than being introduced to public markets. This move is reported to remove expected selling pressure from exchanges, though details on the buyer’s holding and hedging terms remain undisclosed. The transaction is set to take place on October 7, with market participants closely watching for further developments.

Key Takeaways Hyperliquid’s decision to sell 3.75 million HYPE tokens privately appears to suggest a reduction in public market supply. Pricing suggests that this could be supportive of a potential price increase, with reduced selling pressure on exchanges. The specifics of the transaction, including the buyer’s intentions, remain unclear, leaving room for market speculation. What to Watch Market participants will be observing any official confirmation of the private sale and the terms agreed upon by the buyer. The impact of this private distribution on Hyperliquid’s market price will likely depend on further announcements from Hyperliquid Labs or any leaks regarding the institutional buyer’s strategy. Additionally, any macroeconomic factors or broader market trends that could influence HYPE’s price trajectory will be key indicators to monitor.

Get live prediction-market analysis, powered by Vera. Sign up for Vera.

Term Structure

Contract Odds Δ since publish Volume 24h December 31 64% — — View market → January 1 2027 2.4% — — View market → January 1 2027 2.1% — — View market → January 1 2027 2.8% — — View market → January 1 2027 1.9% — — View market → January 1 2027 7% — — View market → January 1 2027 3.5% — — View market → January 1 2027 7% — — View market → January 1 2027 12% — — View market → January 1 2027 12% — — View market →

Dutch people could soon be paying tax on their bitcoin gains — if they sell. 

The Dutch government on Tuesday announced that it was planning to introduce a capital gains tax starting from 2028. 

If approved, gains on investments would be paid when they are realized, rather than imposing levies on assumed returns or unrealized increases in value, a Tuesday the Dutch cabinet to the House of Representatives read.

“The earning capacity of the Dutch economy calls for a way of taxing wealth that facilitates investment,” the letter read. 

It added that most financial instruments would be taxed from 2028 while remaining assets would transition two years later. The letter wasn’t clear whether digital assets would be taxed in 2028 or from 2030. 

Bitcoin and digital assets in the Netherlands are currently taxed based on an assumed annual yield rather than your actual or realized profits. Tax authority currently assumes assets earned a notional 4% return, regardless of what you actually earned.

Regulations in Europe regarding crypto and taxes are mixed but on the whole stricter than the U.S. 

Since January, the European Union’s DAC8 directive has required crypto exchanges to collect detailed data on their users and transactions and report it to national tax authorities, much like banks already do for ordinary accounts.

But not all countries within the trading bloc are strict: Germany still exempts crypto held for more than a year, and Portugal does the same after 365 days.

Mathew Di Salvo

Mathew is a reporter who's covered the space since 2019, reporting on everything from Salvadoran president Nayib Bukele's Bitcoin bet to crypto exchange FTX's bankruptcy.

The growing alignment between Distributed Ledger Technology (DLT) and the ISO 20022 global financial messaging standard is drawing renewed attention to XRP, the native digital asset of Ripple. Unlike other cryptocurrencies such as Stellar Lumens and Hedera Hashgraph, XRP’s protocol was developed for native compliance with ISO 20022, positioning it as a key participant as banks and payment providers move toward the new standard.

ISO 20022 standard reshapes paymentsISO 20022, an internationally recognized protocol for electronic data interchange among financial institutions, offers richer, more structured data and enables faster cross-border transactions. Global payment network SWIFT has mandated a transition to ISO 20022 messaging for all banks by the end of the year, pushing the entire financial industry to update their systems.

Recent coverage in nocash Magazine described scenarios where XRP operates as a bridge currency alongside Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs) within centralized payment systems. By using On-Demand Liquidity (ODL), Ripple’s technology allows major banks to exchange XRP for local currencies almost instantly, directly addressing challenges tied to cross-border settlements for SWIFT-participating financial organizations.

The practical implications of this integration could see a significant portion of legacy payment volume being moved on-chain, streamlining international transactions and potentially increasing reliance on digital assets designed for compliance with global standards.

Mini dictionary: ISO 20022, a global standard for financial messaging, promotes interoperability and faster, more secure payments across international banks and financial institutions. Its adoption is reshaping how data is exchanged for cross-border transactions.

XRP’s positioning and projected impactRipple, a US-based fintech company focused on real-time cross-border payments, has emphasized XRP’s potential role in the global payments landscape. Previously, Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse projected that XRP could capture up to 14% of SWIFT’s $155 trillion annual transaction volume.

Last year, Ripple strengthened its payment offerings through the acquisition of GTreasury, a treasury management platform that processed $13 trillion in transfers – although these volumes did not yet include digital assets. Ripple has indicated plans to bridge this gap in 2024 as financial institutions accelerate ISO 20022 adoption.

EntityAnnual VolumeRoleSWIFT$155 trillionTraditional global paymentsRipple$13 trillionCorporate payments (GTreasury, 2023, not digital)SWIFT’s move to ISO 20022 is expected to bring more cross-border activity on-chain, with Ripple promoting XRP as a bridge asset for these transactions.

Debate over Bitcoin and complianceIndustry observers hold differing views on how the ISO 20022 migration might affect established cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin. Blockchain researcher SMQKE has argued that Bitcoin’s global market dominance could weaken if financial institutions value compliance with ISO 20022, a standard where XRP is already positioned favorably.

However, analyst Macro Bombastic countered this perspective, suggesting Bitcoin’s robust infrastructure and deep liquidity would maintain its relevance regardless of the standard. “Bitcoin doesn’t need ISO 20022 to keep doing its thing,” Macro Bombastic commented, noting that Bitcoin continues to lead daily trading volume among digital assets by a wide margin.

ISO 20022 may be a key test for traditional finance institutions adapting to new technology, with Ripple’s XRP holding a unique position due to its native compatibility with the standard.

Interplay with CBDCs and global adoptionThe convergence of CBDCs and ISO 20022 adoption creates further opportunities for XRP. Current research indicates that nearly 80% of countries are piloting or developing their own digital currencies. XRP’s integration with emerging CBDC platforms as a bridge asset could reinforce its role in facilitating efficient, cross-border digital settlements.

As Ripple’s technology enters new corporate and governmental channels, XRP’s alignment with global financial messaging standards is drawing wider institutional attention, especially as banks seek interoperability in a rapidly digitizing landscape.

On September 30, XRP appreciated with the shareholder vote approval of the proposed merger of Evernorth with Armada Acquisition Corp. II. The feat takes a massive obstacle away from the Ripple-backed XRP treasury company, which is now eyeing a Nasdaq debut.

XRP Recovers After Sharp Intraday Drop The vote has caught the eye of the XRP community, with Evernorth’s plans to launch a public XRP treasury under the XRPN ticker on Nasdaq. This move also coincided with a dramatic intraday selloff, putting the latest rebound in check as traders digested the impact of the merger result.

At press time, Ripple’s XRP rose by roughly 1.89% to $1.51 following a dip to below $1.47 ahead of the vote. The chart depicts a choppy trading session.

XRP price chart today. Source: TradingView Earlier in the day, XRP price started to rise to $1.55, but it soon turned around. The Ripple’s native token subsequently drifted around primarily between $1.48 and $1.50 for several hours. The price of XRP regained interest as the buys resumed later, pushing the coin back to $1.51.

This rally came around midday and XRP was soon touching $1.54. The rally was short-lived and the token soon returned to around $1.50. XRP was then able to find support below that level, before making a recovery.

The latest candles indicate that XRP is bouncing towards $1.51, implying that buyers have entered the market after the prior weakness.

XRPL Collaborator Reports Evernorth Vote Passed The Armada shareholders’ vote on the Evernorth merger was a major catalyst for the XRP price rebound today. Bear Champ, who is a collaborator of XRPL, reported this result on X.

“Listened in on the Armada/Evernorth merger vote, it passed,” Bear Champ wrote.

The reported result is an important step for Evernorth. The company hopes to create a big corporate XRP treasury in a publicly traded structure.

There will be over 473 million XRP sold in the proposed transaction. Once the remaining closing conditions are met, the merged company will continue to be traded on the Nasdaq under the “XRPN” ticker.

For XRP, the vote does not directly change individual corporate holders’ balances, for XRP. Rather, it pushes for the formation and development of a giant corporation that has a high stake in the token.

The next focus will be official confirmation of the vote and the remainder of the steps to complete the merger.