Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

A month has gone by since the last earnings report for Paychex (PAYX - Free Report) . Shares have added about 14.4% in that time frame, outperforming the S&P 500.

But investors have to be wondering, will the recent positive trend continue leading up to its next earnings release, or is Paychex due for a pullback? Before we dive into how investors and analysts have reacted as of late, let's take a quick look at its most recent earnings report in order to get a better handle on the important drivers.

Paychex's Q4 Earnings:Paychex, Inc. reported solid fourth-quarter fiscal 2026 results, with adjusted earnings beating the Zacks Consensus Estimate and revenues coming in line. Adjusted earnings of $1.32 per share surpassed the consensus estimate of $1.31 by a slight margin and increased 10.9% from the year-ago quarter. Total revenues of $1.61 billion rose 12.5% year over year and beat the consensus estimate by a slight margin.

The earnings upside was backed by segment growth, Paycor contributions and disciplined expense performance. Management Solutions led the quarter, while PEO and Insurance Solutions, and client fund interest added further support.

PAYX's Management Solutions Powers GrowthManagement Solutions’ revenues increased 14% year over year to $1.18 billion in the fiscal fourth quarter. The segment benefited from higher product penetration and growth in client worksite employees within Human Resources Solutions.

Paycor, acquired in April 2025, contributed about 8 percentage points to Management Solutions revenue growth. The acquisition also supported price realization and higher revenues per client, reflecting Paycor’s upmarket client base.

Management noted that the quarter included a full period of Paycor revenues and expenses compared with a partial period in the prior-year quarter. That comparison helped drive the sharper contribution from the acquired business in the latest quarter.

Paychex's PEO & Client Funds Add SupportProfessional Employer Organization and Insurance Solutions revenues were $369.7 million, up 9% from the year-ago quarter. Growth in the number of average PEO worksite employees supported the segment’s performance.

PEO insurance revenues also increased during the quarter. Interest on funds held for clients rose 15% to $52.2 million, driven by higher average investment balances resulting from the Paycor acquisition.

Total service revenues came in at $1.55 billion, up 12% from the year-ago period. The broad advance across core services showed that growth was not confined to one operating line.

PAYX's Margin Profile Expands in Q4Total expenses were relatively flat year over year at $1 billion. Increases in compensation-related expenses, amortization of intangible assets, technology investments, selling initiatives and marketing spending were offset by lower acquisition-related compensation and professional service costs.

Operating income rose 40% to $604.7 million. The operating margin expanded to 37.7% from 30.2% a year earlier, while the adjusted operating margin improved to 42.1% from 40.4%.

Adjusted operating income increased 17% to $675.8 million. The adjusted figure excludes acquisition-related costs, which were lower than in the prior-year quarter.

Paychex's Profitability Shows Earnings LeverageNet income increased 41% year over year to $420.6 million in the fiscal fourth quarter. Diluted earnings were $1.17 per share, up 43% from the prior-year period.

Adjusted net income rose 10% to $474.6 million. EBITDA increased 39% to $719.1 million, while adjusted EBITDA advanced 17% to $729.7 million, reflecting revenue gains and reduced acquisition-related drag.

Interest expenses increased to $64.7 million from $63.7 million. Other income, net, declined to $14.2 million from $21.9 million due to lower average balances on corporate investments and higher share repurchases in fiscal 2026.

PAYX's Balance Sheet Remains SolidPaychex ended fiscal 2026 with cash, restricted cash and total corporate investments of $1.2 billion. Short-term and long-term borrowings, net of debt issuance costs, totaled $4.6 billion as of May 31, 2026.

Cash flow from operations was $2.6 billion for the fiscal year. The company paid out cumulative dividends of $4.43 per share, totaling $1.6 billion, and repurchased 5.6 million shares for $611 million.

Fiscal 2026 total revenues increased 17% to $6.51 billion. Adjusted diluted earnings advanced 11% to $5.51 per share, whereas adjusted operating income grew 19% to $2.81 billion.

Paychex's FY27 View Points to GrowthFor fiscal 2027, Paychex expects total revenues to grow 5-6%. Management Solutions’ revenues are also projected to rise 5-6%, while PEO and Insurance Solutions revenues are expected to increase 6-7%.

Interest on funds held for clients is expected to be $195-$205 million. The company anticipates an adjusted operating margin of 44%, an effective income tax rate of 24% and adjusted diluted earnings growth of 7-9%.

Paychex also highlighted the launch of WISE, its AI-powered intelligence engine, across HCM platforms and internal operations. Management said that the platform is designed to unlock insights from unstructured data, increase productivity and enhance client outcomes.

Adjusted earnings of 99 cents per share beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate by 4.2% and increased 8.8% on a year-over-year basis. Total revenues of $1.2 billion also beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate by 0.5% and increased 7.4% year over year.

Revenues in Detail     

Revenues from Management Solutions segment increased 8% year over year to $895.3 million. The segment benefited from growth in the number of client employees served for human capital management (HCM) and additional worksite employees for HR Solutions. Also, improved revenue per client on price realization and higher product penetration, strong demand for HR Solutions, retirement, time and attendance solutions and expansion of HCM ancillary services acted as tailwinds.

Professional employer organization (“PEO”) and Insurance Solutions’ revenues were $273.3 million, up 4% from the year-ago quarter’s level. The uptick was owing to growth in the number of average worksite employees. Interest on funds held for clients increased 54% year over year to $21.7 million.

Operating Performance

Operating income increased 7% year over year to $472.3 million. EBITDA of $518.6 million increased 4.7% year over year.

Balance Sheet & Cash Flow

Paychex exited second-quarter fiscal 2022 with cash and cash equivalents of $1.1 billion compared with $1.18 billion reported at the end of the prior quarter. Long-term debt was $797.9 million compared with $797.8 million in the prior quarter. Cash provided by operating activities was $321.6 million in the reported quarter. During the reported quarter, PAYX paid out $284.7 million as dividends.

Fiscal 2023 View Tweaked

Paychex upped its adjusted earnings per share view with respect to year-over-year growth for fiscal 2023. Adjusted EPS is now expected to register 12-14% growth compared with the prior expectation of 11-12% growth. PAYX continues to expect total revenues to register 8% (prior view: 7-8%) growth. Management Solutions’ revenues are expected to grow 7-8% (prior view: 5-7%). PEO and Insurance Solutions’ revenues are expected to grow 5-7% (prior view: 8-10%).

How Have Estimates Been Moving Since Then?In the past month, investors have witnessed a upward trend in estimates revision.

VGM ScoresAt this time, Paychex has a nice Growth Score of B, though it is lagging a lot on the Momentum Score front with a D. Charting a somewhat similar path, the stock has a grade of C on the value side, putting it in the middle 20% for value investors.

Overall, the stock has an aggregate VGM Score of C. If you aren't focused on one strategy, this score is the one you should be interested in.

OutlookEstimates have been broadly trending upward for the stock, and the magnitude of these revisions indicates a downward shift. Notably, Paychex has a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). We expect an in-line return from the stock in the next few months.

Looking for a stock that has been consistently beating earnings estimates and might be well positioned to keep the streak alive in its next quarterly report? Steven Madden (SHOO - Free Report) , which belongs to the Zacks Shoes and Retail Apparel industry, could be a great candidate to consider.

This footwear and accessories retailer has seen a nice streak of beating earnings estimates, especially when looking at the previous two reports. The average surprise for the last two quarters was 5.75%.

For the most recent quarter, Steven Madden was expected to post earnings of $0.42 per share, but it reported $0.45 per share instead, representing a surprise of 7.14%. For the previous quarter, the consensus estimate was $0.46 per share, while it actually produced $0.48 per share, a surprise of 4.35%.

Price and EPS Surprise

With this earnings history in mind, recent estimates have been moving higher for Steven Madden. In fact, the Zacks Earnings ESP (Expected Surprise Prediction) for the company is positive, which is a great sign of an earnings beat, especially when you combine this metric with its nice Zacks Rank.

Our research shows that stocks with the combination of a positive Earnings ESP and a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold) or better produce a positive surprise nearly 70% of the time. In other words, if you have 10 stocks with this combination, the number of stocks that beat the consensus estimate could be as high as seven.

The Zacks Earnings ESP compares the Most Accurate Estimate to the Zacks Consensus Estimate for the quarter; the Most Accurate Estimate is a version of the Zacks Consensus whose definition is related to change. The idea here is that analysts revising their estimates right before an earnings release have the latest information, which could potentially be more accurate than what they and others contributing to the consensus had predicted earlier.

Steven Madden has an Earnings ESP of +13.68% at the moment, suggesting that analysts have grown bullish on its near-term earnings potential. When you combine this positive Earnings ESP with the stock's Zacks Rank #2 (Buy), it shows that another beat is possibly around the corner. The company's next earnings report is expected to be released on July 30, 2026.

Investors should note, however, that a negative Earnings ESP reading is not indicative of an earnings miss, but a negative value does reduce the predictive power of this metric.

Many companies end up beating the consensus EPS estimate, but that may not be the sole basis for their stocks moving higher. On the other hand, some stocks may hold their ground even if they end up missing the consensus estimate.

Because of this, it's really important to check a company's Earnings ESP ahead of its quarterly release to increase the odds of success. Make sure to utilize our Earnings ESP Filter to uncover the best stocks to buy or sell before they've reported.

Key Takeaways PulteGroup's wider community base lifted second-quarter net new orders 6.4% to 7,536 homes.Build-to-order homes rose to 45% of orders as PulteGroup cut spec homes in production 13%.PulteGroup's gross margin fell 200 basis points to 25.0% as incentives reached 10.4% of prices. PulteGroup (PHM - Free Report) is widening its community base to support orders across first-time, move-up and active-adult buyers. That broader reach is helping offset ofter affordability conditions.

The trade-off is clear. Closings, average selling prices and margins remain under pressure, making inventory discipline central to PHM’s near-term execution.

PulteGroup’s Community Growth Supports New OrdersSecond-quarter net new orders increased 6.4% year over year to 7,536 homes. The gain came as average community count rose 8% to 1,074.

Absorption slipped 1% to 2.3 homes per community per month. That suggests community expansion, rather than stronger demand at each location, remains the main volume driver.

PHM Shifts Back Toward Build-to-Order HomesPulteGroup is moving back toward its long-term mix of 60% build-to-order homes and 40% spec homes. Build-to-order properties represented 45% of second-quarter orders, up from 40% a year earlier.

The shift is helping reduce inventory risk. Spec homes in production declined 13% to 6,638, while finished spec inventory fell to about 1.3 homes per community.

PulteGroup Reaches Multiple Buyer SegmentsPulteGroup’s second-quarter orders were balanced across buyer groups: 39% first-time, 36% move-up and 25% active adult. That mix reduces reliance on one customer category.

Orders increased across all three groups. Active-adult orders rose 12%, while first-time and move-up orders advanced 5% and 4%, respectively.

PHM Uses Geographic Scale to Manage VolatilityOrders rose in every region except the West, led by 19% growth in Florida. Demand was also favorable in several Midwest markets, Greenville and the Coastal Carolinas.

This geographic breadth gives PulteGroup room to adjust incentives, inventory and capital by local market. Peers such as D.R. Horton (DHI - Free Report) and Lennar Corporation (LEN - Free Report) face similar affordability and pricing trade-offs, making local scale an important competitive lever across the homebuilding group.

PulteGroup Faces Persistent Margin PressureHome sale gross margin declined 200 basis points year over year to 25.0%. Incentives equaled 10.4% of gross selling prices, up from 8.7% a year earlier.

Lower closings and a softer average selling price weighed on revenues, while selling, general and administrative expenses rose as a percentage of home sale revenues. Higher lot costs also remain a risk, even if lower construction costs provide some offset.

PHM’s Ratings Reflect Balanced Near-Term SignalsThe bottom line is that PulteGroup is generating orders through broader market coverage and tighter inventory control, but affordability pressure is still limiting operating leverage. The setup is resilient, not risk-free.

PHM currently carries a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy), indicating a favorable short-term earnings-revision signal. The stock also has a Value Score of B, Momentum Score of B and VGM Score of B, which support a constructive near-term profile. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.

The Growth Score of D keeps the outlook mixed. Projected declines in earnings and sales suggest investors should balance PHM’s order resilience against ongoing margin and demand pressure.

IMAX Corp (NYSE:IMAX) received a price target increase from Wedbush to $54 from $46, with the firm reiterating its Outperform rating as it expects continued growth from a stronger film pipeline, market share gains and global expansion.

The analysts wrote that IMAX remains on Wedbush’s Best Ideas List as the company benefits from an increase in the volume and quality of films produced for IMAX, a broader mix of local-language and global releases, expanded alternative content offerings and further international footprint growth.

“IMAX remains on Wedbush’s Best Ideas List given our view that it is benefitting from an uptick in volume and quality of filmed-for-IMAX titles in the second half of 2026 through 2028, which is driving market share gains,” the analysts wrote.

Wedbush highlighted IMAX’s second-quarter results as evidence of the strength of its business model, noting that the company exceeded expectations despite weaker Chinese box office performance and a modest domestic share decline during a quarter with a heavier focus on family films.

“IMAX’s results demonstrated the quality of its business model that handily beat expectations despite a shortfall in its Chinese box office and a modest domestic share loss in a quarter heavier on family fare,” the analysts wrote.

IMAX reported second-quarter revenue of $103 million, up 12% year over year and above Wedbush’s and consensus estimates of $94 million. Adjusted EBITDA came in at $45 million, ahead of Wedbush’s estimate of $39 million, driven by higher installations, improved margins and operating expense leverage.

The analysts wrote that additional installations during the quarter supported results and helped ease concerns around IMAX’s ability to reach its 2026 box office target of $1.4 billion, given the strength and diversity of its upcoming release slate.

Wedbush also highlighted IMAX’s profitability outlook, writing that the company’s target of achieving EBITDA margins above 45% in 2026 and surpassing 50% by 2028 now appear conservative.

“IMAX’s 45% plus EBITDA margin target for 2026 and guidance to surpass 50% EBITDA margins by 2028 now appear conservative,” the analysts wrote.

Looking ahead, Wedbush wrote that the next phase of IMAX’s growth story will focus on improving the timing and flow of major film releases. The analysts noted that while 2026 includes several major IMAX titles, including The Odyssey and Dune 3, a crowded release schedule has limited the ability of studios and IMAX to maximize overall box office performance.

“Focus will now shift to the next leg of IMAX’s growth story: better orchestrating the flow of the annual release slate,” the analysts wrote.

Wedbush wrote that the 2027 release schedule already appears less crowded, as IMAX has become an increasingly important partner for studios across genres, languages and geographies. The analysts added that improved release timing, market share gains and international expansion provide additional opportunities for growth.

The revised $54 price target is based on a 13 times enterprise value-to-EBITDA multiple applied to Wedbush’s updated 2028 EBITDA estimate, compared with a previous 12 times multiple. It also implies upside from current levels of about $45.

Wedbush also noted potential upside if IMAX were to attract acquisition interest, writing that the company’s combination of a globally recognized premium brand, an asset-light licensing model and a structurally expanding earnings profile could make it attractive to a potential buyer.

The Board of Directors of ArcBest (Nasdaq: ARCB) has declared a quarterly cash dividend of twelve cents ($0.12) per share to holders of record of its Common

Circle is facing criminal charges in Wisconsin because, in relation to some investment fraud, "Circle Internet Financial LLC has declined to repatriate the corresponding fiat reserves" and "Circle has not complied with a Circuit Court Judge’s seizure warrant."

Law enforcement secured a seizure warrant which Circle will not enforce. Circle claims they cannot enforce it. The government is charging Circle for declining to enforce it. Whatever is going on: everyone agrees Circle is not currently enforcing it.

This column has a long history of pulling entertaining and contradictory bits out of company public statements and (usually much later) legal settlements where those companies got caught doing something they were not supposed to do. Much of the time the company in question made explicit statements that it would not do the conduct it eventually admitted doing. And much of the time those public statements were contemporaneous with the bad conduct. But we only found out they were lying years later.

Here we have the rare opportunity to work through seemingly-false statements made by a company during a public dispute with law enforcement in real time. So that is what we are going to do. Some of this was covered by the ICIJ but we think their narrative is too generous towards Circle.

Some BackgroundTether routinely seizes funds for law enforcement. Tether has the power to transfer USDT out of your address and burn them without your knowledge or consent. So to seize funds Tether just burns tokens from anywhere and then issues fresh replacement USDT to whatever address law enforcement wants. In theory Tether could also take the funds back from law enforcement — the same process can be used for any address — though that has not yet happened. Tether has had these powers for many years. Nothing is this paragraph is new or controversial.

Circle is a little bit different. Circle does not currently have a seize function in their tokens. Both Tether and Circle can freeze funds – immobilizing them in an address – but Circle's current smart contracts do not support seizure. Circle routinely freezes tokens but it does not seize them. This is presumably what Circle was referring to when it told the Walworth County Circuit Court:

Beyond the ability to blocklist wallets, however, Circle has no control of USDC held in third-party wallets and has no ability to invalidate and reissue such USDC or to transfer them.The key words here are "has no control" and "has no ability." Circle uses the conjunction "and" meaning Circle believes both of those claims to be independently true. If Circle has any way to wrangle invalidation then Circle made a false statement to the court. Given invalidation we know reissuance is possible because once you invalidate the "bad" tokens the reissuance is just issuance. Which happens all the time. So the threshold question here is whether Circle can "invalidate" USDC in an address specifed by law enforcement.

Circle's PowersCircle cannot currently invalidate USDC and seize funds. But Circle can upgrade USDC to have whatever functionality it desires. So it cannot follow this roadmap to comply with a seizure order:

Seize the fundsBut absolutely it can comply with this roadmap:

Upgrade USDC to allow seizureSeize the fundsIn a strange turn, Circle told the government the required process to seize the funds was as follows. And bear in mind we are quoting Circle's own court filing here so this is presumably a generous phrasing from Circle's perspective:

Circle also communicated to Detective Kuchta that (1) the address was not held at Circle; (2) Circle did not have the private keys for the address; (3) Circle could not, therefore, transfer USDC from the wallet; and (4) to recover the USDC for the victim law enforcement would need to locate the private keys for the address. By telling the police to go find the private keys Circle is being, well, let's call it intransigent. Actually, no, let us be a bit more direct (with apologies to Andy Samberg and Justin Timberlake). Circle looks to prefer these steps:

Get charged for no function to seizeMoan how it sucks to seizePut in a function to seizeThat’s the way they do it. Circle is being a...go watch the video in that last link.

It is hardly a secret Circle can upgrade the USDC contracts so it looks pretty likely this capability will eventually come up in court and the judge will sort Circle out. Circle's terms also provide the company with incredibly broad discretion to deny anyone access at any time and in any manner at all for pretty much any reason. This text is in the Acceptable Use Policy describing a list of things you are not allowed to do with USDC and which might lead Circle to cut you off:

For clarity, the following lists are not exhaustive and we may, at our sole discretion, modify them without notice.So Circle can decide anything it likes is out of bounds. And that document covers:

services provided by Circle Internet Financial, LLC, Circle Payments, LLC, Circle UK TradingLimited and/or Circle International Bermuda Limited (together, “Circle”), inclusive of, but not limited to, Circle Mint account,Application Programming Interface products, card processing, and the Circle Yield offering (together and separately, the “Services”), The "but not limited to" would seem to provide sufficient cover to enforce a court order by including whatever corners of Circle's operation are needed to effect the required upgrades. Remember: in this case a court is telling Circle to do something and Circle is not doing it. Maybe you think reading that clause in such a broad manner is squirrely. Sure, maybe. But that is a problem when a strained reading is used to evade a court or the clear intent of a contract or some other agreement. In the present case not reading these powers broadly led to criminal charges and is, in a real and on-going sense, blocking enforcement of a court order. Using this ambiguity to comply with the court is not going to anger the court. Certainly not any more than the current behaviour will.

Circle's Terms vs. ActionsIn Circle's documentation the company anticipates that court orders may come in to request asset freezes. There is an Access Denial Policy which sets out the freeze framework. And there is even a section entitled "Blocked Addresses & Forfeited Funds" in the USDC Terms. That later section includes this text:

Circle may also be required to freeze USDC and/or surrender associated USD held in Segregated Accounts in the event it receives a legal order from a valid government authority requiring it to do so.This anticipates the idea that a court order may mandate sending USD somewhere the court directs. The word "forfeited" appears in a section heading. And if we look at the government's description in Wisconsin we find something very much on point:

The Court’s Warrant ordered Circle to “facilitate the seizure” of Victim #1’s USDC and invalidate that USDC so that it had no value. The Warrant then ordered Circle to issue approximately $381,000 in new USDC to compensate Victim #1 and transfer that new USDC to a digital wallet owned by the Walworth County Sheriff’s Department. This procedure is known as “burn and reissue”."Facilitate the seizure" is a broad directive. The court is not telling Circle precisely how to satisfy the court's desires. The court is simply saying "find a way to do this." And Circle's on-the-record response is weird. Above we quoted Circle's broad claim of "no ability." The government's narrative gives a bit more colour there too:

In subsequent discussions, Circle’s representatives have explained that the company holds approximately $381,000 in US Currency in reserve to cover the value of Victim #1’s USDC, even though that USDC cannot be redeemed by anyone for US Currency because Circle froze it. Circle protested that if it issued $381,000 worth of new USDC, it would also have to hold an additional $381,000 in US Currency to cover the new USDC. Circle objected that it would be unfair for the company to have to set aside that much US Currency in reserve. Circle also stated that by the terms of its own contracts, it will not “burn and reissue” USDC.This is some twisted logic. Circle seems to believe it is required to maintain backing for all USDC, frozen or not, and that because it currently cannot burn and reissue USDC this would require holding double reserves for the recovered amount and that – the double reserving Circle just imposed on itself – is unfair.

We will immediately concede that double reserving here is unreasonable and dumb. But the double reserving is only "required" if we accept Circle's claim it cannot do the burn and reissue. This is a strained attempt for Circle to look like the victim. Possibly so that Circle can continue to collect interest on the US$381,000 in reserves it holds against the frozen tokens

Said another way: Circle's protest assumes Circle will not use its power to upgrade the USDC to allow seizures. We know this is Circle's thinking because, again quoting the Wisconsin government:

Circle also stated that by the terms of its own contracts, it will not “burn and reissue” USDC.This is weird. The word "reissue" does not appear on circle.com, as of this writing, per a number of searches. And the USDC Risk Factors also include a section entitled "Blocked Addresses & Forfeited Funds" so this is puzzling. If we read the reference to "its own contracts" in that last quote from Circle as pertaining to the USDC smart contracts it is again true in a literal-and-useless sense. By the terms of the currently deployed smart contracts there is no reissue power. But by the terms of those same contracts Circle can simply change the contracts.

Circle looks to be playing games so it can collect interest on frozen USDC forever. Holding frozen scam-related funds forever and keeping the interest is an interesting business model.

ContractsIf you have ever entered into any sort of commercial agreement you have probably seen clauses that allow someone to modify the terms under extreme circumstances and maybe also in a "commercially reasonable manner" if the need arises. Most contracts contemplate the idea that things can change and some amount of flexibility is required. For example, a company may change its office address. Or it may change where it banks. Or any number of other things. If you enter into a contract which includes bank details and the other party changes where it banks that does not mean you automatically can stop paying. If the company tells you where to send the money instead you cannot just decide to terminate the contract (unless it is a very strange contract indeed).

Similarly, you might enter into a contract based on some published reference price – think oil or gold or a commercial property index or some interest rate benchmark – and the name of that thing might change. Or where or how it is published might change. Someone is supposed to keep things up to date in a commercially reasonable manner. There is standard verbiage for this in many industries and if you end up in court the judge will make you do the sensible thing. Yes there are corner cases. But the Circle mess is really quite simple. Circle's term look to allow for enforcement here. And there is a simple sequence of steps Circle can follow to do the enforcement. None of this makes much sense.

Circle looks to be trying to interpret things in an incredibly narrow and self-serving way to manufacture an injury Circle would suffer if it complied. And then to moan that imagined injury is unfair. If we go back to Circle's own words to the court this is clearly exactly what they are doing:

The Complaint’s sole allegation regarding Circle’s intentional disobedience is that “Circle...refused to invalidate the stolen USDC or issue new USDC,” Compl. ¶ 9. But the Complaint clearly misrepresents the content of the relevant communication. Circle did not “refuse” to invalidate the stolen USDC; it stated that it “does not hold the private keys to the address.” Compare Compl. ¶ 9 with Ex. 6. That is an accurate statement that Circle lacked the tools required to “invalidate” the USDC held in the Blocklisted Wallet, not an intentional refusal to comply with the terms of the Second Warrant.Circle was directed to "facilitate the seizure" of the funds. And then Circle asserts it did not refuse to invalidate the USDC in question – its just that Circle has no button labelled "seize" to press. But Circle did refuse to upgrade the USDC contracts to add a seize button.

Circle also presented the total non-sequitur that it "does not hold the private keys to the address" of the fraud-linked funds. This is also arguable. It is true in the sense that Circle does not hold the fraudster's private keys. But the term "private keys" is not being used in a technically precise sense here because there are two sets of private keys that can move the funds. The term "private keys" as used here connotes control over funds. And so long as Circle has the private keys to upgrade USDC it has one set of private keys that can facilitate a seizure out of the addresses in question. Remember: USDC and USDT are not true bearer assets. The issuers retain a lot of control over "your" funds.

Maybe you think we are giving the authorities too much credit and we should interpret the claim in narrow technical terms? Under that reading, you may be thinking, it is not Circle's problem the government asked for the wrong thing. We have sympathy for this sentiment. But there is a bigger problem. If we interpret everything in these documents in narrow technical terms Circle is wrong that it has "no ability to invalidate and reissue such USDC or to transfer them." It has the ability to do this by upgrading the contract to give itself the ability. This falsity then gives rise to a litany of other false claims including:

Circle "would also have to hold an additional $381,000 in US Currency to cover the new USDC": false because once Circle has burn power there is no need to double reserve. And that is if we accept the need in the first place as Circle can simply declare the address outlaw and ignore it.Circle also stated that by the terms of its own contracts, it will not “burn and reissue” USDC: this is at most a policy Circle can revise in its sole discretion. And having a policy to defy court orders is pretty much exactly what Circle is charged with here.Circle has no control of USDC held in third-party wallets: false because in a technical sense Circle has more than "no" control via contract upgradability. It has, and we apologize for the technobabble here, "some" control.Circle...has no ability to invalidate: false via upgradability.Circle...has no ability to...reissue such USDC or to transfer them: false via upgradability.If we read the claims in the dispute broadly: Circle is not being candid. If we read the claims narrowly: Circle is not being honest. Unless Circle has somehow lost the ability to upgrade USDC – which would be a far larger problem if kept hidden for so long – we just cannot see a way they are telling the truth here. Maybe there is one but there is certainly no hint of such an explanation in the court filings to date.

Circle's Principled ResistanceWhat makes this even stranger: Circle's terms also contemplate circumstances in which the company will resist court orders. But that too does not fit what is happening here. Again from the Access Denial document:

Circle reserves all rights to object to an access denial order that presents a threat to Circle Stablecoin or that Circle determines is objectionable.USDC holders do not have any rights or derive any value from this. But it presumably empowers the company to do what it is doing in Wisconsin now without worrying about shareholders suing anyone for resisting court orders. The US legal system is adversarial and Circle is 100% entitled to resist government requests and to challenge orders. Within the US system. Telling law enforcement to go pound sand after the judge rules is not something Circle is entitled to.

It is certainly possibly Circle views anything that reduce's Circle's interest income as objectionable. There is a logical, if wacky, corporate theory here: "We prefer to hold frozen assets indefinitely to maximize shareholder value. We view this as part of our fiduciary responsibility to shareholders. Victims are not shareholders sorry." Probably no company wants to come out and say that. But it is true that public companies have a responsibility to shareholders and not victims. They also have a responsibility to judges and to shareholders to not egregiously defy judges. So it is all kind of mixed together there.

Now notice the seizure warrant requests Circle is fighting here date back to August 2025. Multiple seizure warrants have been issued. And Circle has been communicating false claims to Wisconsin officials for many months now. Criminal charges were filed in April 2026. Circle moved beyond objecting to an access denial order to simply refusing to follow one after multiple rounds of back and forth. This happened over many months.

We accept it is possible to read these most recent actions as part of resisting the order. And maybe law enforcement jumped the gun with criminal charges. But it is kind of hard to credit Circle here and think ongoing negotiations without criminal charges would go anywhere. Circle has stated clearly that it cannot comply for technical reasons. Circle claims it is impossible to do what the court wants. But those claims are plainly false (or Circle is covering up something worse). For negotiations to go anywhere Circle would need to concede it was wrong or the police would need to stop asking for seizure. That looks like a stalled negotiation to us.

If Wisconsin officials were demanding Circle seize USDT then we would certainly feel for Circle. Circle is not omnipotent. There are plenty of web3 things Circle cannot do. And, obviously, it is possible for law enforcement to order someone to do something that is technically impossible for them to do. This is true of anyone and any law enforcement unit anywhere in the world. Try this one: a court could issue an order for a witness to not die before a trial. That would not have the effect of conveying immortality on the witness. Law enforcement can be wrong. But here, today, Circle is wrong.

The court wants Circle to do something that Circle can do. So we are going to make two predictions. First, Circle will eventually comply. And second, Circle will blame confusion between the legal and engineering teams for the false statements. The court should not accept that explanation. We kind of hope Circle tries the shareholder value line too. If someone says "victims are not shareholders and our fiduciary responsibility is to shareholders" that will just be too amazing for words. As odd as that outcome seems remember a listed US company is currently engaged in a dispute with law enforcement in Wisconsin in which the listed US company is just straight-up lying. This is all incredibly odd.

We have long predicted the lawyers would need to throw the engineers under the bus at some point. Honk honk.

Licensed to Shill: Retail Barely Touches Stablecoins – Treasury & Remittance Are the Real Adoption (Jeannie Lim, Xweave)

At Xweave, Jeannie Lim says her team moved $1 million for an e-commerce client in under three minutes, cutting settlement costs 30% against a Tier 2 bank’s SWIFT rate.

BlockheadBlockhead

Samsung just made stablecoins a default feature of its mobile wallet. At Galaxy Unpacked 2026 on July 22, the company announced that Samsung Wallet will integrate native stablecoin support, with USDC among the expected options. The move effectively puts digital dollars alongside tap-to-pay, boarding passes, and loyalty cards in the pockets of hundreds of millions of Galaxy device owners.

What Samsung actually announced The stablecoin integration was revealed as part of a broader push to make Samsung Wallet a unified hub for payments, rewards, and digital assets. Samsung framed it as a “secured payments and rewards experience.”

The company hasn’t confirmed a specific launch date for the stablecoin feature. It also hasn’t officially locked in which stablecoins will be supported beyond the strong signals pointing toward USDC, Circle’s regulated dollar-pegged token.

Advertisement

The announcement didn’t happen in isolation. Samsung simultaneously unveiled the Galaxy Card, a credit card issued by Barclays and running on the Visa network, targeting US users with tiered cash-back rewards.

In 2025, the company partnered with Coinbase to give millions of US Galaxy users access to cryptocurrency services directly through their devices. That collaboration laid the groundwork for what’s coming next, essentially graduating Samsung Wallet from a non-custodial blockchain wallet with basic crypto access into something closer to a full-featured digital asset platform.

What this means for investors For Circle, the company behind USDC, this partnership could strengthen its position ahead of any potential IPO or public market activity.

There are risks worth noting. Regulatory frameworks for stablecoins remain a work in progress in many jurisdictions. Samsung will need to navigate varying compliance requirements across its global markets, which could limit the feature’s availability to certain regions initially. The US market, where the Galaxy Card is launching alongside the Barclays partnership, is the likely first target.

The 2025 Coinbase partnership gave Samsung a foundation in crypto services, but stablecoin integration represents a fundamentally different proposition. Offering users the ability to buy Bitcoin through a partner app is one thing. Embedding dollar-equivalent digital currency into the core wallet experience is another.

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

Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.

Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA.

Circle Pushes a MiCA Fix That Could Bring Tether Back to Europe

Coinbase has rolled out direct USDC-BRL trading and conversion for users in Brazil, giving the country’s crypto-curious population a cleaner on-ramp between the Brazilian real and the world’s second-largest stablecoin.

The feature is live on Coinbase’s dedicated Brazilian platform at coinbase.com/en-br, where users can access real-time conversion tools, trade USDC against BRL, and, in some cases, earn yield on their holdings. Promotional rewards of up to 7% annually on USDC are part of the offering.

Why Brazil, why now USDC, issued by Circle, is pegged one-to-one to the US dollar. As of late July 2026, one USDC converts to approximately R$5.08-5.10. For Brazilian users, holding USDC is functionally like holding digital dollars, without needing a US bank account or dealing with traditional forex friction.

Coinbase launched its dedicated Brazilian platform on January 23, 2026, laying the groundwork for this kind of localized feature set. Earlier reports from 2025 had flagged limitations in BRL transaction support on the exchange, so the USDC-BRL integration represents a clear upgrade from where things stood just 18 months ago.

Advertisement

Direct fiat-to-stablecoin conversion eliminates a step that previously required users to either buy Bitcoin or Ethereum first and then swap into USDC, or use a third-party service to bridge the gap.

The stablecoin playbook in emerging markets For Coinbase specifically, Brazil represents one of only a handful of regions where the exchange has explicitly built out USDC trading and conversion infrastructure.

Brazil’s regulatory landscape passed its landmark crypto regulatory framework in 2023, and the central bank has been actively developing its own digital currency, the Drex.

The 7% annual yield promotion on USDC is worth pausing on. A dollar-denominated yield product adds a layer of currency diversification on top of the return itself, providing both yield and a hedge against real depreciation simultaneously.

What this means for investors and the competitive landscape Coinbase isn’t operating in a vacuum here. Binance, Mercado Bitcoin, and other exchanges have been aggressively courting Brazilian users for years. Binance in particular has built deep roots in the country, with BRL payment integrations and localized support that predates Coinbase’s dedicated Brazilian platform launched January 23, 2026.

Brazil’s crypto framework is still relatively young, and the central bank’s Drex project could eventually introduce a government-backed digital alternative that competes directly with private stablecoins like USDC.

The 7% promotional rate on USDC is tied to what Circle can earn on the reserves backing the stablecoin. If global interest rates decline, so do the yields that make these products compelling.

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

Key Takeaways VLY reported Q2 adjusted EPS of 30 cents, missing the 31-cent estimate.Valley National posts 13.3% y/y revenue growth as NII and non-interest income climb.VLY sees loan and deposit growth, but rising expenses and higher non-performing assets remain concerning. Valley National Bancorp's (VLY - Free Report)

second-quarter 2026 adjusted earnings per share of 30 cents missed the Zacks Consensus Estimate by a penny. However, the bottom line compared favorably with earnings of 23 cents in the year-ago quarter.

Results were hampered by higher non-interest expenses. Higher net interest income (NII), increased non-interest income, lower provisions for credit losses, and growth in loan and deposit balances acted as tailwinds.

Results excluded certain non-core charges. Including those, net income available to common shareholders was $163.6 million, which jumped 29.6% from the year-ago quarter.

Valley National’s Revenues Improve, Expenses RiseTotal revenues (on an FTE basis) were $562.1 million, up 13.3% year over year. The top line beat the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $552.02 million.

NII (FTE basis) was $488.4 million, up 12.6% year over year. The net interest margin (FTE basis) was 3.2%, which expanded 19 basis points (bps).

Non-interest income jumped 17.7% to $73.7 million. The rise was driven by an increase in almost all fee income components, except fees from loan servicing, net gains on sale of loans, and bank-owned life insurance.

Non-interest expenses of $311.1 million increased 9.5% year over year. The rise was due to an increase in almost all cost components, except for FDIC insurance assessment costs and amortization of other intangible assets. Additionally, no loss on extinguishment of debt was reported this quarter.

The efficiency ratio was 52.11%, down from 55.20% in the prior-year quarter. A decline in the efficiency ratio indicates an improvement in profitability.

VLY’s Loans & Deposits RiseAs of June 30, 2026, total loans were $52.5 billion, up 6.2% year over year. This increase was driven by growth across all loan categories. Total deposits were $54.1 billion, up 6.7% year over year.

Valley National’s Credit Quality: A Mixed BagAs of June 30, 2026, total non-performing assets were $467.8 million, up 6.4% year over year, primarily due to higher non-accrual loans, partially offset by other real estate owned (OREO), and other repossessed assets.

However, allowance for credit losses as a percentage of total loans was 1.16%, down 4 bps year over year. In the second quarter of 2026, VLY reported total provision for credit losses of $29.2 million, a 22.8% year-over-year decline.

VLY’s Profitability Improves, Capital Ratios MixedAt the end of the second quarter, adjusted annualized return on average assets was 1.05%, up from 0.87% in the year-earlier quarter. Adjusted annualized return on average shareholders’ equity was 8.75%, up from 7.15%.

As of June 30, 2026, the tangible common equity to tangible assets ratio was 8.71%, up from 8.63% in the corresponding period of 2025. Tier 1 risk-based capital ratio was 11.37%, down from 11.57%. Also, the common equity tier 1 capital ratio of 10.71% was down from 10.85% as of June 30, 2025.

Valley National’s Share Repurchase UpdateIn the reported quarter, VLY repurchased 1.5 million shares at an average price of $13.4 under its ongoing stock buyback program.

Our Take on VLYRobust loan growth, stabilizing funding costs, and efforts to enhance fee income are expected to keep supporting Valley National’s top-line growth. However, elevated expenses and significant exposure to commercial real estate loans remain near-term headwinds. 
 

Valley National currently carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.

Performance of VLY’s PeersHancock Whitney Corp.’s (HWC - Free Report) second-quarter 2026 earnings per share of $1.55 matched the Zacks Consensus Estimate. The bottom line rose 17.4% from the year-ago quarter.

HWC’s results were primarily aided by higher NII and non-interest income along with a decline in provisions. Also, a sequential increase in loans and deposit balances was positive. However, higher expenses were the undermining factor.

BankUnited, Inc.’s(BKU - Free Report) second-quarter 2026 earnings of 97 cents per share missed the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $1.02. However, the bottom line rose 6.6% from the prior-year quarter.

Results were primarily hurt by a rise in non-interest expenses. Also, sequential declines in loans and deposits were negatives. However, higher NII and fee income, along with lower provisions, provided some support to BKU’s performance.

New class action for AeroVironment (AVAV) urges investors to seek recovery for alleged securities fraud violations – lead plaintiff deadline of 7/27/2026

LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--The Law Offices of Frank R. Cruz reminds investors of the upcoming July 27, 2026 deadline to participate as a lead plaintiff in the securities fraud class action lawsuit filed on behalf of investors who acquired AeroVironment, Inc. (“AeroVironment” or the “Company”) (NASDAQ: AVAV) securities between June 25, 2025 and June 18, 2026, inclusive (the “Class Period”). IF YOU ARE AN INVESTOR WHO LOST MONEY ON AEROVIRONMENT, INC. (AVAV), CLICK HERE TO PARTICIPATE IN THE S.

Sensient Technologies NYSE: SXT reported second-quarter 2026 results marked by double-digit local-currency growth in revenue, adjusted EBITDA and adjusted earnings per share, as demand for natural color conversions continued to build ahead of U.S. regulatory deadlines.

Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer Paul Manning said the company delivered 10% local-currency revenue growth, 21% local-currency adjusted EBITDA growth and 26% local-currency adjusted EPS growth during the quarter. He said the performance exceeded the company’s earlier expectations for the year and supported an increase in its full-year outlook.

Get Sensient Technologies alerts:

Revenue rose to $462.1 million from $414.2 million in the prior-year quarter, while operating income increased to $76.7 million from $57.7 million, according to Vice President and CFO Tobin Tornehl. The prior-year operating income figure included $3.3 million of costs tied to the company’s Portfolio Optimization Plan.

Color Group Leads Growth The Color Group was the company’s strongest-performing segment, posting 17.6% local-currency revenue growth and 36.8% local-currency operating-profit growth. Its adjusted EBITDA margin reached 28.3%, up 320 basis points from a year earlier.

That margin included about $4.3 million of one-time tariff refunds, which added 200 basis points to the segment’s adjusted EBITDA margin. Excluding the refunds, the Color Group’s adjusted EBITDA margin would have been 26.3%, Manning said.

The company invoiced approximately $25 million in natural color conversion revenue during the second quarter, in addition to the $20 million cumulatively invoiced through the end of the first quarter. Manning said those invoiced amounts represent orders already billed rather than projections of future sales.

During the question-and-answer session, Manning said $25 million in invoiced quarterly sales would typically correspond to at least $100 million in projected annual revenue under normal ordering patterns. He said natural-color conversions can make the relationship less direct because customers may transition existing shelf inventory from synthetically colored products to natural alternatives over time.

Manning said customers generally aim to maintain the appearance of products when moving from synthetic to natural colors. He said color remains important to consumer expectations around a product’s flavor and overall appeal, while advances in natural-color technologies have helped customers achieve close matches in a broad range of applications.

He added that Sensient’s Flavors & Extracts business supports the conversion work through taste-masking platforms designed to address potential off-notes from natural colors.

The company expects the Color Group to generate local-currency revenue growth in the high teens for full-year 2026. Manning said third-quarter EBITDA margins in the segment are expected to be similar to the prior year’s third-quarter margin of 24.7%, while Tornehl said the company expects Color Group margins to be in the mid-20% range for the full year.

Other Segments Post Gains The Flavors & Extracts Group recorded 3.8% local-currency revenue growth and 6.1% local-currency operating-profit growth. Its adjusted EBITDA margin rose 30 basis points to 18.1%. Manning cited volume growth in agricultural ingredients, as well as continued cost optimization and new flavor wins. Sensient expects mid-single-digit local-currency revenue growth for the group in 2026.

The Asia Pacific Group reported 12.3% local-currency revenue growth and 23.7% local-currency operating-profit growth. Adjusted EBITDA margin increased 210 basis points to 24.4%. The company said the segment’s first-half performance was faster than anticipated and expects high-single-digit revenue growth for the full year.

Tornehl said the company received roughly $5 million of tariff refunds during the quarter, most of which benefited the Color Group. The refunds contributed approximately $0.09 to earnings per share, and Sensient does not expect additional refunds of significance in future periods. Foreign-currency translation increased EPS by about $0.02 during the quarter.

Guidance Raised and Investment Continues Based on its first-half performance, Sensient raised its 2026 outlook. The company now expects local-currency revenue growth of high single digits to low double digits and local-currency adjusted EBITDA and EPS growth in the mid- to high-teens range. Its prior outlook had called for high-single-digit to double-digit growth in adjusted EBITDA and EPS.

The company plans to continue investing to support natural color conversion demand. Sensient expects 2026 capital expenditures of $150 million to $170 million, trending toward the upper end of that range, and continues to anticipate spending about $250 million on natural-color capital projects over the next several years.

Cash flow from operations was $48 million in the second quarter, while capital expenditures totaled $39 million. Net debt to credit-adjusted EBITDA stood at 2.3 times as of June 30. Tornehl said the ratio is expected to reach the mid- to upper-2-times range later in the year as the company increases inventory investments to support conversion revenue.

Manning said Sensient will evaluate acquisition opportunities but does not anticipate share repurchases in the near term. He said the company’s supply-chain investments, production capacity additions and product-development work are intended to support its goal of reaching $1 billion in natural color sales.

The U.S. ban on Red 3 takes effect in January 2027 for food, beverage and pet products, with pharmaceutical products facing a January 2028 date. Mexico has also announced a ban on Red 3, with brands required to replace it by mid-2028. Manning said conversion demand is building as customers work toward product-launch and compliance timelines.

About Sensient Technologies (NYSE:SXT)Sensient Technologies Corporation is a global leader in the manufacture and supply of colors, flavors and fragrances for a broad range of end-markets. The company develops and produces ingredients that enhance the appearance, taste and scent of products in the food, beverage, nutraceutical, pharmaceutical, personal care and household sectors. Its portfolio includes natural and synthetic colorants, botanical and artificial flavor systems, fragrance compounds and specialty chemical offerings tailored to customer specifications.

Within its flavor and fragrance division, Sensient provides custom formulations for sweet, savory and umami taste profiles along with fragrance blends for personal care and cosmetic applications.

This instant news alert was generated by narrative science technology and financial data from MarketBeat in order to provide readers with the fastest reporting and unbiased coverage. Please send any questions or comments about this story to [email protected].

Should You Invest $1,000 in Sensient Technologies Right Now?Before you consider Sensient Technologies, you'll want to hear this.

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

While Sensient Technologies currently has a Moderate Buy rating among analysts, top-rated analysts believe these five stocks are better buys.

View The Five Stocks Here

Discover the 10 Best High-Yield Dividend Stocks for 2026 and secure reliable income in uncertain markets. Download the report now to identify top dividend payers and avoid common yield traps.

Get This Free Report

Hayward Holdings delivered impressive Q1 FY26 results, with revenue up 11.5% and profitability sharply higher. Most revenue growth in North America stemmed from price increases (10.3%), with segment profits rising 16.1% on pricing and operational efficiencies. Despite strong fundamentals and resilient aftermarket exposure, HAYW shares now appear fairly valued or even pricey versus peers.

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - July 24, 2026) - Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP announces that a class action lawsuit has been filed against BitGo Holdings, Inc. ("BitGo" or the "Company") (NYSE: BTGO) on behalf of all persons or entities who purchased or acquired: (a) BitGo Class A common stock in and/or traceable to BitGo's January 22, 2026 initial public offering ("IPO"); and/or (b) BitGo securities between January 22, 2026 and May 13, 2026 (the "Class Period").

CLICK HERE TO JOIN THE CASE

If you are an investor in BitGo and have suffered losses, you may CLICK HERE to contact us. You may also contact Kaplan Fox by emailing [email protected] or by calling (646) 315-9003.

DEADLINE REMINDER: If you are a member of the proposed Class, you may move the court no later than August 7, 2026 to serve as a lead plaintiff for the purported class. If you have losses we encourage you to contact us to learn more about the lead plaintiff process. You need not seek to become a lead plaintiff in order to share in any possible recovery.

On or around January 22, 2026, BitGo conducted its IPO, selling 11,821,595 shares of Class A common stock at the offering price of $18 per share.

On March 26, 2026, BitGo issued a press release announcing its fourth quarter and full year 2025 financial results. The Company reported a net loss of $14.8 million for 2025, compared to $156.6 million in net income for 2024, a quarterly margin of 0.21% in its Digital Asset Sales segment, compared to a quarterly margin of 0.47% in the prior year. BitGo stated that the change in its annual net loss was "materially driven by declines in digital asset prices impacting the Company's Bitcoin treasury."

Following this news, the price of BitGo stock fell $1.43 per share, over 15.71%, to close at $7.67 per share on March 27, 2026.

Then, on May 13, 2026, BitGo issued a press release announcing its first quarter 2026 financial results. The Company reported a net loss of $60.7 million, compared to a net loss of $25.7 million in the same quarter one year earlier, stating that its quarterly net loss "was primarily driven by non-cash mark-to-market impacts related to the Company's Bitcoin treasury, as well as elevated IPO-related stock-based compensation expense.".

Following this news, the price of BitGo stock fell $2.05 per share, over 17.2%, to close at $9.86 per share on May 14, 2026.

The complaint alleges, among other things, that throughout the Class Period, Defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that (i) Defendants understated the scope and severity of the risk that declining digital asset prices posed to Company's business and financial performance; (ii) consequently, Defendants' statements regarding, inter alia, BitGo's financial performance and business prospects lacked a reasonable basis; and (iii) as a result, the Offering Documents and Defendants' public statements throughout the Class Period were materially false and/or misleading and/or failed to state information required to be stated therein.

WHY CONTACT KAPLAN FOX?

Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP is a nationally recognized law firm focused on complex litigation, with offices in New York, Oakland, Los Angeles, Chicago, and New Jersey. Founded in 1956, the firm has spent more than 50 years prosecuting securities, antitrust, and consumer protection actions in federal and state courts nationwide, recovering more than $10 billion for clients and the classes it has represented.

Kaplan Fox is widely regarded as one of the nation's premier plaintiffs' securities litigation firms and has received recognition from Chambers and Partners, Benchmark Litigation, Super Lawyers, and Lawdragon. Serving as lead or co-lead counsel in many landmark cases, the firm has secured some of the largest recoveries in the history of securities litigation, including a $2.425 billion recovery on behalf of Bank of America shareholders in In re Bank of America—the largest recovery ever obtained for claims under Section 14(a) of the Securities Exchange Act—$800 million recovered for the Arkansas Teacher Retirement System and other pension funds in ATRS v. Allianz Global Investors, and a $475 million settlement in In re Merrill Lynch.

For decades, Kaplan Fox has represented public pension funds, institutional investors, businesses, and individuals in high-stakes litigation. Through its successful advocacy and precedent-setting victories, the firm has helped shape important areas of securities and corporate law while advancing accountability and protecting investor interests.

This press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.

If you have any questions about this Notice, your rights, or your interests, please contact:

Contacting or submitting information to Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP does not create an attorney-client relationship, nor an obligation on the part of Kaplan Fox to retain you as a client.

https://www.kaplanfox.com/case/bitgo-holdings-inc-class-action-alert-learn-more-now/

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/306386

Source: Kaplan Fox & Kilsheimer LLP

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

Contact Us

Verra Mobility Schedules Second Quarter 2026 Earnings Call PR Newswire MESA, Ariz., July 24, 2026

NEW YORK, July 24, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The Gross Law Firm issues the following notice to shareholders of Verra Mobility Corporation (NASDAQ: VRRM).

All REP holders must migrate their tokens by August 1, 2026, to remain part of the active Augur ecosystem Augur, one of Ethereum’s earliest decentralized prediction-market and oracle projects, today announced that the second and final phase of its Moon Fork is entering its final days, with the two-month migration window for all holders of its REP token closing on August 1.

REP holders must migrate their tokens 1:1 into an outcome-specific version of REP by August 1, 2026. Migration is one-way and irreversible. Tokens that remain in the legacy Augur universe after the window closes will no longer be able to follow the active protocol and are likely to lose their economic value. After that point, unmigrated REP can no longer be converted.

Migration tooling is available through Augur’s official fork interface at 6.augurfork.eth.limo, together with a step-by-step guide and frequently asked questions.

The fork is a live demonstration of how a decentralized system can defend a truthful outcome without any central authority ruling on the result. That security depends on participation: REP only protects the protocol when its holders act.

A live test of Augur’s economic security model The Moon Fork began on April 8 with an intentionally escalated dispute over the question: Did the Artemis II mission successfully lift off in the first week of April?

The dispute was initiated by longtime Augur community member Micah Zoltu to test the protocol’s full resolution process under real economic conditions. The correct outcome was “Yes.”

The process was designed to test the mechanism from beginning to end, including participant incentives, capital formation, dispute escalation and token migration. Augur entered the fork after enough REP was committed across successive dispute rounds to activate the protocol’s final resolution backstop. 

The fork consists of two phases.

Phase one: The escalation game From April through early June, REP holders could stake on competing answers through a series of increasingly expensive dispute rounds.

Each round required more capital than the one before it. Participants staking on the ultimately accepted outcome were eligible to earn a return funded by the losing side, creating a financial incentive for the wider market to oppose manipulation.

“Most people will interact with Augur during the escalation game, which lets outcomes battle it out by seeing who can raise more money. The losers pay out the winners. Since it’s easier to raise money on an outcome people believe to be true, that’s the one with the advantage. So in this phase we try to outspend the attacker, and if we can’t, we go to phase two,” said Phill Monastirsky, co-founder of the Lituus Foundation, which stewards Augur.

The escalation process continued until the dispute reached Augur’s fork threshold. Phase one is now complete.

Phase two: Mandatory REP migration The protocol has now split into separate outcome-specific universes. Every REP holder must choose a universe and migrate their REP into the corresponding token.

“Failing to outspend the attacker, we now try to maximize their cost by forcing them into a worthless token,” said Phill. “The protocol splits into tokens corresponding to the possible outcomes, with 51% required to win. Since future Augur fees only continue on the truthful token, the attacker is forced to move 51% of the token supply into something worthless. In the Augur Lituus design, this rises to near 100%. As long as it costs them more to do that than they gain from misresolving the market, we are safe.”

Future official Augur development funded by the Lituus Foundation will continue on the universe corresponding with the truthful outcome: that Artemis II successfully lifted off during the period specified by the market.

The Foundation has migrated its own holdings and added liquidity to the corresponding token.

What REP holders need to do REP holders should take the following steps before August 1:

Hold REP in a self-custodied Ethereum wallet or confirm that their exchange will support the migration Visit 6.augurfork.eth.limo/#/migration Connect the wallet holding REP Migrate REP 1:1 into the outcome-specific token corresponding with the truthful result Confirm receipt of the new REP token in the connected wallet Migration cannot be reversed once completed.

REP held on centralized exchanges may require action by the exchange rather than the individual user. The Lituus Foundation has been working with exchanges to support migration on behalf of their users. Kraken has confirmed support; other exchanges have not, and holders should not assume support unless their exchange states it explicitly. Current exchange-support status is maintained at v3.augur.net/#exchange-support.

Exchange support may change during the migration period. Holders who cannot confirm support should withdraw their REP to a self-custodied wallet and complete the migration directly.

Why the fork matters Prediction-market platforms ultimately depend on a resolution process to determine which outcome occurred and where funds should be paid.

Many systems rely on companies, committees, token votes, multisigs or discretionary intervention. Augur was designed around a different model: an open economic process in which participants can challenge an outcome and are financially rewarded for defending the result the broader market recognizes as true.

When a dispute reaches the fork stage, REP separates into tokens associated with each possible outcome. Holders decide which universe will carry the protocol’s future economic activity by migrating into it.

The design shifts the security question away from whether a sufficiently wealthy attacker can temporarily influence a vote. Instead, it asks whether an attacker is willing to acquire and sacrifice enough REP to support a false universe that users, developers and liquidity providers may subsequently abandon.

Demonstrating the mechanism behind Augur’s next chapter The Moon Fork is testing Augur v2’s dispute architecture. Future implementations will differ from the original system, but the live exercise demonstrates the escalation-and-fork pattern underpinning Augur’s continuing oracle research.

That work includes Augur Lituus, a proposed modular resolution layer designed to allow prediction markets and other applications to outsource disputed real-world outcomes to an open, economically secured oracle.

The Lituus Foundation is funding continued work on Augur’s decentralized resolution infrastructure. The prediction-market platform under development through the separate Dark Florist workstream is expected to support the branches created through the fork, rather than the legacy unmigrated REP token.

The live migration provides a practical demonstration of Augur’s core thesis: a prediction market should not depend on any single party having the authority to declare what happened.

Important migration information Migration deadline: August 1, 2026
Migration ratio: 1:1
Migration status: Mandatory for holders who want to remain part of the active Augur ecosystem
Migration direction: One-way and irreversible
Migration portal: 6.augurfork.eth.limo/#/migration

Holders should consult the official migration interface and Augur channels for the latest technical instructions and exchange-support updates.

About Augur Augur is a decentralized prediction-market and oracle project originally built on Ethereum. Its dispute system uses open participation and economic incentives, with algorithmic forking as a final backstop, to resolve contested real-world outcomes.

About the Lituus Foundation The Lituus Foundation stewards the revival and continued development of Augur. The Foundation supports open-source development carrying Augur’s oracle research and engineering forward.

Disclaimer: TheNewsCrypto does not endorse any content on this page. The content depicted in this Press Release does not represent any investment advice. TheNewsCrypto recommends our readers to make decisions based on their own research. TheNewsCrypto is not accountable for any damage or loss related to content, products, or services stated in this Press Release.

NEW YORK, July 24, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- The Gross Law Firm issues the following notice to shareholders of Calix, Inc. (NYSE: CALX).

Key Takeaways Cencora is positioned for growth on U.S. healthcare strength, specialty expansion and product launches.COR is integrating OneOncology and RCA to build a scalable specialty care ecosystem across key therapies.Cencora faces pricing headwinds, higher interest expense and regulatory risks despite logistics gains. Cencora (COR - Free Report) is well-poised for growth on the back of a robust U.S. Healthcare Solutions business and product launches. However, intense competition is a concern.

This Zacks Rank #2 (Buy) company’s shares have lost 9.7% in the year-to-date period compared with the industry’s 1.8% drop. However, the S&P 500 Index has gained 7.4% in the same time frame.

Cencora is one of the world’s largest pharmaceutical service companies. It is focused on providing drug distribution and related services to reduce healthcare costs and improve patient outcomes. The company has a market capitalization of $58.48 billion.

COR’s bottom line is anticipated to improve 10.1% over the next five years. Its earnings beat estimates in three of the trailing four quarters and missed in one, delivering an average surprise of 1.6%.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

Let’s delve deeper.

Positive Factors Driving COR’s ProspectsSpecialty Expansion and MSO Strategy Support Long-Term Growth: Cencora continues to strengthen its position in specialty pharmaceuticals, a market expected to account for more than half of U.S. drug spending in the coming years. During the second-quarter earnings call, management highlighted progress in integrating OneOncology, acquired in February 2026, with Retina Consultants of America (RCA). Management is leveraging both platforms by sharing capabilities in clinical research, trial support and back-office services, creating a scalable specialty care ecosystem. These investments complement Cencora's broader strategy of deepening manufacturer partnerships while expanding services to community providers, positioning the company to benefit from growing demand for oncology, retina and other specialty therapies.

Pharmaceutical Supply Chain Leadership and Expanding Market Opportunity: Cencora's pharmaceutical-centric strategy remains a competitive advantage. The company continues investing in automated fulfillment centers, digital infrastructure and AI-supported tools that improve inventory management, customer visibility and operational efficiency across the pharmaceutical supply chain. These capabilities reinforce Cencora's role as a critical partner for manufacturers and healthcare providers while supporting long-term customer relationships.

The long-term demand backdrop also remains favorable. Industry forecasts project U.S. pharmaceutical spending to grow at an 8.2% CAGR through 2028, supported by rising prescription volumes, specialty therapies and broader patient access. Cencora is well positioned to benefit from sustained GLP-1 utilization, which contributed nearly $1.9 billion of year-over-year sales growth during the quarter despite moderating growth expectations.

International Business and Specialty Logistics Continue to Improve: Cencora's International Healthcare Solutions segment remained another bright spot. International revenues increased 13% year over year, while operating income rose 13.7%, driven by strong European distribution performance and a second consecutive quarter of operating income growth in global specialty logistics. Management highlighted new contract wins in cell and gene therapies, laboratory logistics and continued momentum at World Courier, reflecting improving execution in complex pharmaceutical logistics.

Key Challenges for COR StockRevenue Mix and Pricing Headwinds Could Pressure Reported Growth: Although prescription demand remains healthy, several factors continue to weigh on reported revenue growth. During the second quarter, manufacturer list price reductions created a roughly $2 billion revenue headwind, while faster-than-expected brand conversions at a large mail-order customer and slower GLP-1 growth prompted management to lower full-year revenue guidance. While these factors have a limited effect on operating income because they primarily involve lower-margin products, they can create volatility in reported sales growth and investor sentiment.

Higher Debt and Ongoing Regulatory Risks Remain Watch Points: The OneOncology acquisition has strengthened Cencora's specialty platform but also increased leverage. Net interest expense rose following the acquisition, and management expects approximately $485 million of interest expense in fiscal 2026 despite continued debt repayment efforts.

Beyond leverage, Cencora operates in a highly regulated pharmaceutical distribution environment. Ongoing opioid-related litigation exposure, controlled-substance monitoring requirements and evolving healthcare reimbursement policies could increase compliance costs or create operational challenges, even as the company continues investing in supply-chain integrity and regulatory compliance.

Estimate TrendCOR has been witnessing a stable estimate revision trend for fiscal 2026. In the past 30 days, the Zacks Consensus Estimate for earnings has remained stable at $17.79 per share.

The consensus mark for third-quarter fiscal 2026 revenues is pegged at $84.89 billion, indicating a 5.2% improvement from the year-ago reported actuals. The bottom-line estimate is pinned at $4.37, implying year-over-year growth of 9.2%.

Other Stocks to ConsiderSome other top-ranked stocks from the broader medical space are West Pharmaceutical (WST - Free Report) , Cardinal Health (CAH - Free Report) and McKesson (MCK - Free Report) , each carrying a Zacks Rank #2 at present. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.

West Pharmaceutical has an estimated long-term earnings growth rate of 14.4%. WST’s earnings surpassed estimates in the trailing four quarters, the average surprise being 19.4%.

West Pharmaceutical’s shares have gained 29.2% against the industry’s 1.6% decline in the year-to-date period.

Cardinal Health has an estimated long-term earnings growth rate of 17%. CAH’s earnings surpassed estimates in the trailing four quarters, the average surprise being 10.3%.

Cardinal Health’s shares have risen 9.9% against the industry’s 1.6% decline in the year-to-date period.

McKesson has a long-term estimated growth rate of 13.7%. MCK’s earnings surpassed estimates in each of the trailing four quarters, the average surprise being 3.1%.

McKesson’s shares have edged up 0.5% against the industry’s 1.6% decline in the year-to-date period.

Both Eaton (ETN -1.76%)and nVent Electric (NVT -2.87%) are direct beneficiaries of the artificial intelligence (AI) data center and global electrification boom. Their revenue trajectories, however, reflect the contrast between an incumbent and a relatively smaller company trying to capture a bigger share of the market.

Eaton: A Steady Upward Revenue TrendEaton primarily generates revenue by providing energy-efficient solutions for electrical, hydraulic, and mechanical power across aerospace, vehicle, and other industrial segments.

While entering an agreement to separate its mobility group in June 2026, it reported a net margin of 12% for the quarter ended March 31, 2026.

nVent Electric: Consistent Quarter-Over-Quarter GainsnVent designs and produces electrical connection and protective equipment for commercial, industrial, and infrastructure applications.

It authorized a new share repurchase program and appointed new executive leadership in mid-2026, while reporting a net margin of 11% for the quarter ended March 31, 2026.

Why Revenue Matters for Retail InvestorsRevenue here refers to the data provider's standardized income statement revenue line item and serves as a baseline indicator of a company's ability to generate sales from its core business operations.

Quarterly Revenue for Eaton and nVent ElectricQuarter (Period End)Eaton RevenuenVent Electric RevenueQ2 2024 (June 2024)$6.3 billion$739.8 millionQ3 2024 (Sept. 2024)$6.3 billion$782.0 millionQ4 2024 (Dec. 2024)$6.2 billion$752.2 millionQ1 2025 (March 2025)$6.4 billion$809.3 millionQ2 2025 (June 2025)$7.0 billion$963.1 millionQ3 2025 (Sept. 2025)$7.0 billion$1.1 billionQ4 2025 (Dec. 2025)$7.1 billion$1.1 billionQ1 2026 (March 2026)$7.5 billion$1.2 billionData source: Company filings. Data as of July 13, 2026.

Foolish TakeEaton is a power management giant that designs and manufactures essential electrical distribution equipment, including transformers, circuit breakers, switchgear, substations, and uninterruptible power supply (UPS) systems. Its $9.5 billion acquisition of Boyd Thermal in March 2026 has given Eaton a huge headway into the rapidly growing liquid cooling market, creating one of the world’s largest grid-to-chip solutions providers.

Eaton’s revenue hit a record in Q1, with sales surging 17%, including 10% organic growth, 4% from Boyd and other acquisitions, and 3% from foreign exchange impact. Last quarter, Eaton raised its FY 2026 organic revenue guidance from 8% to 10% at the midpoint. Backlog as of the end of last quarter was $23 billion.

nVent Electric was spun off from Pentair (PNR +2.32%) in 2018 and has since doubled its sales. It does the work inside data centers, providing the electrical enclosures, cabinets, specialized racks, and thermal management solutions. Its steady revenue growth reflects strong demand.

nVent’s sales surged 51% year over year in Q1 to a record high, and it projects 2026 revenue growth of 26% to 28%. A backlog of $2.6 billion means nVent is almost 10 times smaller than Eaton, but it is growing faster. If you track the revenue trajectory, nVent could achieve higher percentage growth rates, as it’s a smaller company expanding its presence in data center cooling and connection infrastructure.

Look beyond the revenue growth, and both Eaton and nVent are solid AI plays right now.

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - July 24, 2026) - WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of common stock of Primoris Services Corporation (NYSE: PRIM) between August 5, 2025 and June 22, 2026, inclusive (the "Class Period"). A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than September 21, 2026.

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

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Primoris class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/cases/primoris-services-corporation/join or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than September 21, 2026. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation.

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

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, throughout the Class Period, defendants made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) Primoris' cost estimation, cost-to-complete forecasting, and project oversight processes were deficient and failed to provide reliable estimates of the costs and expected profitability of significant fixed-price renewable energy projects; (2) as a result, Primoris systematically underestimated the costs and risks of significant fixed-price renewable energy projects that were experiencing material cost overruns, execution problems, and schedule delays; and (3) accordingly, defendants' statements regarding Primoris' estimating processes, project execution, ability to manage project risk, financial performance, and financial guidance lacked a reasonable basis and omitted material adverse facts. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the Primoris class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/cases/primoris-services-corporation/join or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action.

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

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

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

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

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/306431

Source: The Rosen Law Firm PA

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

Contact Us

1.59K Followers

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

Past performance is not an indicator of future performance. This post is illustrative and educational and is not a specific offer of products or services or financial advice. Information in this article is not an offer to buy or sell or a solicitation of any offer to buy or sell the securities mentioned herein. Information presented is believed to be factual and up-to-date, but we do not guarantee its accuracy, and it should not be regarded as a complete analysis of the subjects discussed. Expressions of opinion reflect the judgment of the authors as of the date of publication and are subject to change.

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

Zcash (ZEC) price hovers around $500 on Friday after five consecutive days of losses, testing a crucial support cluster. The privacy coin holds retail strength, with a positive funding rate despite over $2 million in liquidations over the last 24 hours, suggesting bullish bias persists. Technically, the easing bullish momentum risks a steeper decline below its 50-day Exponential Moving Average (EMA) around $489.

Retail demand in limboZcash derivatives witnesses firm retail demand despite a bullish positional wipeout. CoinGlass data shows a positive funding rate of 0.0076% on Friday, reflecting steady demand among traders to buy long positions at a premium despite a contraction in Open Interest (OI) and trading volume. 

ZEC futures OI is down 3% over the last 24 hours to $998.72 million, with a 2% decline in trading volume to $1.27 billion, together suggesting an easing notional value of active positions as price drops and reduced retail activity. 

However, the long liquidations of $1.64 million outpace short liquidations of $474,280 over the last 24 hours, indicating that bullish traders are facing margin calls. Despite the positional wipeout, the long-to-short ratio of 1.0245 suggests nearly equal active long and short contracts, although their weightings may differ.

Zcash derivatives data. Source: CoinGlassWill ZEC price hold above $500?Zcash tests a local support trendline near $500 on Friday, supported by the 50-day EMA at $489 and sits well over the 200-day EMA at $408. The privacy coin also trades above the 50% retracement of the recent downswing from $690 to $250, at $470, suggesting the broader uptrend is still intact despite the recent pullback.

From a technical perspective, Zcash is poised for a deeper correction below the $500 psychological mark. A sustained close below the 50-day EMA at $489 and 50% retracement at $470 could extend the decline to the 200-day EMA at $408.

That said, the Relative Strength Index (RSI) at 51 shows a downward trend toward the neutral midline as buying pressure wanes. At the same time, the Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) crosses below its signal, hinting at renewed bearish pressure.

ZEC/USDT daily price chart.On the topside, immediate resistance emerges at the 78.6% Fibonacci retracement around $595, reinforced by the overhead trendline near $600. A sustained break above this level would open the way toward the prior swing high area near $690.

(The technical analysis of this story was written with the help of an AI tool. Know more.)