Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

Rubio: US and Iran to continue technical consultations at the end of this month

Multiple foreign media outlets reported on the 24th that US Secretary of State Rubio said technical teams from the United States and Iran will hold further talks in Switzerland by the end of June. (Xinhua News Agency)

6 hours ago

Over the past 24 hours, total crypto market liquidations hit $606 million, with more than 130,000 traders liquidated.

According to Coinglass data, the global cryptocurrency market recorded $606 million in liquidations over the past 24 hours, including $542 million in long-position liquidations and $68.22 million in short-position liquidations. A total of 135,785 traders worldwide were liquidated in the same period, with the largest single liquidation order occurring on Binance’s BTCUSDT trading pair, valued at $12.0111 million.

6 hours ago

Bitcoin falls below $60,000

According to HTX market data, Bitcoin has fallen below $60,000, with a 4.3% drop in the past 24 hours.

6 hours ago

US Treasury Secretary: AI boom may boost productivity and help curb inflation.

US Treasury Secretary Bessent told CNBC in an interview that he hopes the Federal Reserve will remain "open-minded" about the inflation pattern after the reversal of Iran-related energy price hikes. Bessent noted that the U.S. could enter an economic environment marked by high GDP growth without a corresponding rise in traditional inflation. He cited that in the 1990s, Alan Greenspan foresaw that office modernization and the internet could drive non-inflationary growth, and allowed the economy to keep expanding. Bessent believes the U.S. has a strong chance of seeing a similar scenario again. When asked whether the Fed still needs to worry about potential inflation and whether interest rate cuts are possible this year or next, Bessent declined to comment. However, he argued that it is necessary to stay open-minded about the price or inflation impacts from the Iran conflict, and monitor inflation performance after those effects subside. Bessent also said an open mind is needed, as the AI boom could boost productivity and deliver disinflationary effects, helping inflation return to the Fed’s target level. He added that he believes Kevin Warsh will choose the optimal path that meets both the Fed’s inflation and growth mandates. Bessent also noted that Warsh previously took a hawkish stance on inflation.

6 hours ago

US stocks' intraday storage sector sees broad declines, with Western Digital and Seagate Technology both falling over 4%.

According to Bitget data, during U.S. stock trading hours, the storage sector saw broad declines: Western Digital (WDC) fell 4.47%, Seagate Technology (STX) dropped 4.17%, SanDisk (SNDK) declined 2.31%, and Micron Technology (MU) edged down 0.96%. Most optical communication concept stocks rose, with Corning (GLW) leading the gains at 9.75%, followed by Ciena (CIEN) up 3.24%, Coherent (COHR) rising 2.93%, Lumentum (LITE) gaining 2.61%, and Nokia (NOK) advancing 1.82%. Additionally, Marvell Technology (MRVL) fell 2.59% and Applied Optoelectronics (AAOI) declined 1.90%.

6 hours ago

During intraday trading in U.S. stocks, crypto-related concept stocks fell broadly, with MSTR dropping more than 7%.

According to Bitget market data, the three major U.S. stock indexes rose broadly: the Dow Jones Industrial Average gained 0.94%, the S&P 500 increased 0.60%, and the Nasdaq rose 0.63%. Crypto-related stocks fell across the board, with declines as follows: Strategy (MSTR) down 7.33%; Circle (CRCL) down 4.35%; Bitmine (BMNR) down 3.97%; Coinbase (COIN) down 3.73%; Robinhood (HOOD) down 3.70%; Gemini (GEMI) down 3.27%; Bullish (BLSH) down 3.25%; Sharplink (SBET) down 3.19%.

6 hours ago

PANews reported on April 9 that, according to official sources, DeFi protocol Splyce Finance has announced the completion of a strategic funding round. Investors include the Sui Foundation, Stellar Organization, Solana Foundation, Lucid Drakes, Sarson Funds, and Kin Capital.

Splyce is described as aiming to provide borrowers with interest rate certainty and lenders with real returns.

Delegated proof-of-stake (DPOS) is a consensus mechanism in which coinholders stake their coins with large node operators (aka delegates, witnesses, or block producers). Instead of mining, coinholders elect delegates to create blocks and provide computing power.  This is less energy-intensive than proof-of-work schemes, and allows much higher transaction throughput than other blockchains.

DPOS was created by Dan Larimer, who introduced the system via Bitshares, Steemit, and EOS. Many other platforms also use DPOS as well, including Lisk, TRON, Tezos, and ARK.

But although DPOS has become popular, it has also attracted plenty of controversy from critics who say it’s too centralized. Is that a real issue? Let’s take a deeper look.

How Many Node Operators Does DPOS Give Power To? The most basic concern comes from the fact that most DPOS-based blockchains put power into the hands of just a few delegates. EOS, for example, has just 21 active delegates (or “block producers”) at any time. However, other blockchains have more delegates. Here are the numbers at a glance:

Number of delegated block producers for various DPOS chains. Tezos stands out because it uses a variant of DPOS called liquid proof-of-stake. The number of delegates (or “bakers”) who are active on Tezos is always in flux. In practice, Tezos has had more than 400 bakers at times, and about 100-150 are active each day—but the protocol can support even more bakers if needed.

Additionally, some blockchains use a “hierarchical” variant of DPOS, in which different parts of its blockchain network serve different roles. Vite, for example, has just 25 snapshot block producers at the top of its hierarchy. However, it can also support an unlimited number of consensus groups, which provides greater decentralization.

How Widely Distributed Is Coinholder Voting? Now let’s look at how coinholders vote for delegates. In theory, some delegates might accumulate a lot of votes, but in practice, coinholders tend to vote more or less equally for each active block producer. For example, take EOS and TRON, where each delegate gets roughly equal support from coinholders:

Vote distribution for EOS and TRON, based on data from TronScan and EOSAuthority. These charts only show votes for active delegates. If we were to include votes for standby delegates (aka candidates), voting would be even more widely distributed. That doesn’t mean that power would be more widely distributed, though – just that other delegates might gain power at different times.

Advertisement

Is Bitcoin More Centralized Than DPOS? Bitcoin doesn’t rely on DPOS. It relies on mining, which is usually considered far less centralized than DPOS because each miner competes individually to create blocks. Bitcoin does not have large delegates, but miners usually combine their hash power in mining pools, which do gather power.

In fact, mining pools have made Bitcoin mining very centralized at times. By some measures, Bitcoin is more centralized than EOS and other DPOS-based blockchains. Currently, about 12 pools dominate Bitcoin mining.

Compare the distribution of Bitcoin hashpower among mining pools, against how EOS users have distributed their votes among block producers:

Bitcoin mining hashrates by pool, based on data from Blockchain.com, vs votes for EOS block producers. Since 51% of hashing power can exert control over a network, it would only take four mining pools to collaborate in order to reverse a BTC transaction. Mining and DPOS work in different ways, so this is a very reductionist (but widely circulated) portrait of power consolidation.

However, delegates and mining pools do have one thing in common: both types of entities wield influence. Users can, in either case, express their approval or disapproval — either by moving between pools, or by voting for other delegates.

Is Proof-of-Stake More Decentralized Than DPOS? Proof-of-stake (POS) is an older consensus model that allows coinholders to stake their own holdings by locking up funds in a contract. Unlike DPOS, this is not done to support a delegate – instead, individual stakers are chosen to create new blocks. This selection process is usually weighted in favor of those with more at stake and/or the age of their stake.

Proof-of-stake and DPOS both rely on economic incentives and penalties to prevent power from centralizing around wealthy entities. However, this is hard to visualize, and there are two areas in which staked wealth could be concentrated: staking pools and exchange-based custodial staking.

That said, Emurgo has discussed the ways in which Cardano could prevent centralization among stake pools, and SFOX has speculated about the implications of exchange-based staking for Ethereum 2.0. In any case, proof-of-stake allows users to allocate their funds to large entities, but it still requires precautions against centralization.

Is the Lightning Network More Centralized Than DPOS? One of the main advantages of DPOS is the fact that it provides excellent scalability and high transaction throughput. DPOS can achieve this because it relies on just a few high-powered nodes rather than many small nodes. EOS can handle about 3000 transactions per second, whereas Bitcoin can handle only seven.

Bitcoin and other non-DPOS blockchains typically achieve greater transaction speeds through second-layer scaling solutions like the Lightning Network. Although Lightning is quite unlike DPOS, it does have a tendency toward centralization. One Lightning node operator, LNBig, provides about 2/3 of Lightning’s channel capacity:

Lightning Network channel capacities, based on data from 1ml.com At first glance, Lightning would seem to be far more centralized than anything we’ve looked at, and naturally, many people have observed this.

However, it’s not clear if LNBig’s dominance actually puts Lightning at risk of an attack, as Lightning nodes don’t work like DPOS nodes – instead, they simply provide payment channels.

Why Does It Matter? Decentralization matters for two reasons (and possibly more). If a blockchain or related system becomes centralized over time, it is possible for those who have gained power within that system to attack or undermine it. Second, if a system is centralized by design, the operators of that system can exert control over users.

However, it’s important to consider that resource centralization doesn’t translate directly to centralized power. Every system is designed to allocate power to node operators in a different way, which means that direct comparisons can be misleading. Simplified charts are popular, but they present an incomplete picture of reality.

So what’s the verdict? Well, on one hand, delegated proof-of-stake blockchains are somewhat more decentralized than their critics give them credit for. On the other hand, DPOS chains are still quite centralized in an absolute sense. Since DPOS is still quite young, it’s hard to say how it will be seen in the future — and the next few years could be critical.

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

Coinbase, the leading cryptocurrency exchange, has added two new assets to its roadmap today. The newly listed assets are Solana ecosystem’s Shadow Token (SHDW) and Neon EVM (NEON), both of which are SLP tokens. Moreover, the SHDW and NEON prices skyrocketed after the latest announcement.

Coinbase Lists Shadow & Neon Shadow Token is described as the utility token powering the Shadow dePIN ecosystem. Furthermore, it aims to revolutionize the way transactions are conducted within its ecosystem. On the other hand, Neon EVM is a smart contract operating on the Solana blockchain, offering innovative solutions within the decentralized finance (DeFi) space.

Following the announcement of their addition to Coinbase’s roadmap, both SHDW and NEON experienced a remarkable surge in their prices. This reflects the market’s enthusiasm for these new listings, especially amid the Solana community.

In a recent blog post, Coinbase reaffirmed its commitment to expanding its asset offerings while maintaining rigorous standards for legal, compliance, and technical security. The exchange emphasized that its evaluation criteria do not consider factors such as market capitalization or project popularity. Instead, Coinbase focuses on ensuring that listed assets meet stringent requirements to safeguard users’ funds and uphold the integrity of its platform.

However, Coinbase also noted that not all projects meet its standards. This indicates that there are assets that have been excluded from listing at this time due to regulatory concerns or other reasons. Hence, the addition of SHDW and NEON to Coinbase’s roadmap represents a significant milestone for both projects, providing them with increased exposure and credibility within the cryptocurrency ecosystem.

Also Read: Coinbase To Store Users’ USDC Balances On Base Network

Shadow & Neon Price Rally The Shadow Token price propelled toward a new all-time high after the Coinbase announcement. As of writing, the Shadow price skyrocketed by 55.39% to $2.26 on Wednesday, March 27. In addition, its market cap surged to $362.25 million. Moreover, the SHDW 24-hour trade volume spiked by a whopping 1241.52% to $21.41 million.

Whilst, the Solana ecosystem’s Neon crypto price surged 21.94% to $1.78 today. Furthermore, the crypto’s market valuation soared to $102.92 million. Additionally, the trading volume for Neon jumped by a staggering 638.25% to $35.54 million in the past 24 hours. However, the peak of $1.79 attained during the rally was still 53.62% short of its all-time high of $3.86.

Also Read: Bitcoin Exchange Supply Hits All-Time Low With 58K BTC Pulled Out Of Coinbase

Solana tokens Shadow Token and Neon rose sharply on Wednesday, hitting highs of $2.49 and $1.96 respectively. Coinbase announced it will list SHDW and NEON tokens. Solana tokens Shadow Token (SHDW) and Neon (NEON) are among those to post huge upside moves in the past 24 hours. SHDW has spiked more than 50% while NEON added more than 21% as the Solana ecosystem continues to experience greater growth.

At the time of writing, Shadow Token price was at $2.09, slightly lower from the intraday high of $2.49 reached earlier.

Meanwhile, NEON changed hands at $1.78. The token had earlier jumped to highs of $1.96 as the market reacted to Coinbase related news.

Coinbase to list SHDW and NEON Leading US-based crypto exchange has announced that two Solana-based tokens – Shadow Token and NEON EVM are now added to its listing roadmap. This is a formal communication from the Coinbase team that they will be listing the given token(s).

Assets added to the roadmap today: Shadow Token (SHDW) and Neon EVM (NEON) https://t.co/rRB9d3hSr2

— Coinbase Assets 🛡️ (@CoinbaseAssets) March 27, 2024

In this case, an official announcement is yet to be made. However, the exchange has confirmed plans to list SHDW and NEON.

SHDW is the native utility token of Shadow, a decentralised physical infrastructure network (dePIN). The project provides for blockchain-based storage and compute capabilities. The SHDW powers this ecosystem, allowing users to pay for services including decentralised data storage and compute.

NEON is the utility token of the Neon EVM platform. Developers can tap into the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM)-compatible network to build and deploy Ethereum-native decentralised applications (dApps) on Solana.

09.04.2024 - 15:59

Update: 09.04.2024 - 16:04

Coinbase, the largest cryptocurrency exchange in the USA, announced that it will add Shadow Token (SHDW) support to the Solana network (SPL token).

“Coinbase will add Shadow Token (SHDW) support to the Solana network (SPL token).

If liquidity conditions are met, trading will begin around 12:00 PM ET on April 10, 2024. Trading will begin gradually on our SHDW-USD trading pairs once sufficient supply of this asset is ensured. SHDW support may be restricted in some supported jurisdictions.

Coinbase will add support for SHDW under the experimental label.”

Coinbase will add support for Shadow Token (SHDW) on the Solana network (SPL token). Do not send this asset over other networks or your funds may be lost. Transfers for this asset are available on @Coinbase & @CoinbaseExch in the regions where trading is supported.

— Coinbase Assets 🛡️📞 (@CoinbaseAssets) April 9, 2024

Following the news, the SHDW price experienced a huge increase.

*This is not investment advice.

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

Coinbase will list Shadow Token, the native cryptocurrency of the ShdwDrive, a high-performance decentralized data storage network.

The largest crypto exchange in the U.S. announced that Shadow Token (SHDW) will be live on the platform from tomorrow if liquidity conditions are met.

Following the announcement, Shadow Token immediately surged by 20%. The token has been up nearly 80% in a month. 

https://twitter.com/CoinbaseAssets/status/1777725910977773808

Since last month, SHDW has been listed by several major centralized exchanges, including Crypto.com and Gate.io. As a result, the token’s daily trading volume has consistently increased, surging over 200% today. 

Shadow Token gained notable attention following its inclusion in Coinbase’s listing roadmap, leading to a significant price surge. With the recent surge in Solana’s network activity, utility tokens like SHDW have seen major interest, as developer engagement has increased across the platforms. 

Launched in January 2022, Shadow Token allows for on-chain events to confirm the continued integrity and existence of stored data, a significant advancement over previous attempts by other web3 storage providers to integrate with Solana, which had limited success. The network supports various use cases, including web hosting, archival and backup services, social media applications, datasets, and personal storage solutions.

Shadow Token (SHDW), the native cryptocurrency of ShdwDrive, has experienced a 20% surge. This increase comes on the heels of an announcement that the token will be listed on Coinbase, the largest crypto exchange in the U.S.

What Happened: Coinbase has plans to list Shadow Token (SHDW), provided liquidity conditions are met. The listing is slated to go live tomorrow. Following the announcement, Shadow Token saw an immediate 20% surge in value, marking an overall increase of nearly 80% in a month.

Shadow Token (SHDW) will be supported on the Solana network by Coinbase. The exchange has cautioned users against sending this asset over other networks to prevent potential loss of funds. Transfers for this asset are now available on Coinbase and CoinbaseExch in regions where trading is supported.

See Also: Is Crypto Fueling The ‘Dumbing Down Of America?’ Mad Crypto Alpha With Ivan

In the past month, Shadow Token has been listed by several major centralized exchanges, including Crypto.com and Gate.io. This has led to a consistent increase in the token’s daily trading volume, which surged over 290% today.

Launched in January 2022, Shadow Token has garnered significant attention due to its advanced on-chain events, which confirm the continued integrity and existence of stored data. This is a major advancement over previous attempts by other Web3 storage providers to integrate with Solana.

Price Action: At present, SHDW has seen a 20% surge followed by a subsequent drop of nearly 12%, now trading at $1.95. Within the past 24 hours, it hit a peak of $2.49. Notably, over the last year, the coin has skyrocketed by an impressive 1483.22%, according to the data from Benzinga Pro.

Why It Matters: The recent surge in Shadow Token’s value is indicative of the growing interest in cryptocurrencies.

Read Next: Can Dogecoin Flip Ripple? Here’s What It Would Take

Image Via Shutterstock

Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs

© 2026 Benzinga.com. Benzinga does not provide investment advice. All rights reserved.

To add Benzinga News as your preferred source on Google, click here.

Venture capital firm Stratos announced a 109% net return for its liquid token fund in the first quarter, attributing the substantial gains to its investments in Solana, Nosana, and the meme coin Dogwifhat (WIF), which alone provided a 300-fold return. The total net value is over 25 times when compared to its second early-stage venture fund.

Advertisement

“We’re very pleased to share such high returns with our LPs, who are aligned with our investment philosophy, which is based on investing early and with conviction in high-quality projects with exceptional teams,” said Rennick Palley, founding partner at Stratos. “One aspect of our approach that may be more unique among our peer group is that we incorporate memecoins into our liquid fund portfolio.”

Palley added that meme coins have consistently outperformed other digital assets, have limited correlation to other alts sectors, and function as pure monetary assets with theoretically uncapped upside. “As an example, we started buying WIF around $0.01 in December, delivering a 300X return since then for our liquid token fund.”

Moreover, Stratos continues to explore new trends and technologies within the crypto space, with a current focus on Layer-2 solutions for the Bitcoin ecosystem. Palley remarked on the importance of scaling Bitcoin transactions in a trustless manner and enhancing the overall utility of the Bitcoin network.

The Bitcoin decentralized finance (BTCfi) ecosystem is expanding rapidly this year, registering a year-to-date growth of 265% after surpassing $1 billion in total value locked, data aggregator DefiLlama shows.

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

Memecoins Becoming Hedge Funds Ultimate Risk-on Asset Could Spell Disaster for Institutional Trust in Crypto

Shalini Nagarajan

Crypto Reporter

Shalini Nagarajan

Part of the Team Since

Jan 2024

About Author

Shalini is a crypto reporter who provides in-depth reports on daily developments and regulatory shifts in the cryptocurrency sector.

Has Also Written

Last updated: 

May 8, 2024

Tradu, a trading platform owned by Jefferies’ Stratos Group, went live with a new crypto exchange aimed at active traders on Wednesday.

Beginning May 8, crypto traders have the opportunity to invest in more than 40 coins, including Bitcoin and Ethereum on the platform, according to a statement.

In a bid to undercut competitors, the crypto exchange said it significantly lowers trading fees. Tradu claims fees are up to 95% lower than other platforms, with a standard commission of just 0.1% and additional rebates for larger trades. The comparison is based on a standard account type and information from broker websites, the statement said.

“The commission for a 1 BTC trade (at a price of $60,000) is just $30 at Tradu versus as much as $600 at other exchanges,” the company added.

Tradu Offers Institutional-Grade Trading Tradu, headquartered in London, operates as a multi-asset trading platform. In addition to facilitating crypto exchange transactions, it enables trading across a broad spectrum of assets, spanning stocks, indices, commodities, and forex, totaling over 10,000.

With customer service available 24/5 in 15 languages, Tradu ensures global traders can access assistance and advice whenever required.

“We are bringing institutional-grade pricing and infrastructure to the retail crypto market, providing traders with upfront costs and tight, transparent spreads enabling active traders and investors to maximise their returns,” said Tradu CEO Brendan Callan.

Spot Crypto ETFs Unlock Institutional Floodgates The approval of spot Bitcoin ETFs in the US and Hong Kong has triggered an influx of institutions into the crypto space. Major players like BlackRock and Fidelity are leading the charge, and traditional finance (TradFi) is scrambling to establish a foothold.

These regulatory green lights allow institutions to invest in crypto through secure channels, fueling wider adoption and boosting the overall liquidity of the market.

Quick take:

Web3 app developers use OpenSocial for managing intellectual property, community relationships, monetization and financial incentives. The company plans to use the capital to expand its multichain tech offerings and increase ecosystem support for Web3 community apps. Its infrastructure platform is designed to enhance user retention and user growth while mitigating bot activity. OpenSocial a Web3 infrastructure platform helping app developers to build multi-chain economic communities has raised $6 million in a strategic round co-led by Framework Ventures and North Island Ventures.

The fundraising also attracted participation from Hivemind Capital Partners, Stratos, Moonrock Capital, Chorus One, HV Capital, X Ventures, Gat Labes, Panga Capital, and Aspen Digital, with Selini Capital’s Jordi Alexander, EigenLayer’s Sreeran Kannan, Pudgy Penguin’s Luca Netz and Polygon Labs’ Sandeep Nailwal joining as angel investors.

OpenSocial has now raised $26 million in total and plans to use the latest funding to expand its multichain tech offerings whilst increasing ecosystem support for Web3 community apps.

The company’s infrastructure platform allows developers to manage intellectual property, build community relationships, integrate monetization mechanisms and offer financial incentives to their communities.

Some of the tools and features that developers can leverage include a Data Availability Layer, Account Abstraction wallets, social graphs and prepaid gas credits, a statement on the OpenSocial website reads. These tools enable developers to focus on building quality apps, accelerating the launch process.

OpenSocial believes the walled garden approach to Web2 social media applications “lacks composability, interoperability across apps, true ownership, and incentives for communities, creators and users who provide the content, attention and value for these networks,” The Block reported.

“OpenSocial hopes to solve this by empowering creators and communities to fully own and realize the value of their social graphs and assets, presenting new avenues for monetization and ownership in the community economy,” the company shared.

Stay on top of things:

Subscribe to our newsletter using this link – we won’t spam!

Follow us on X and Telegram.

Coin PricesThis Hedge Fund Buys Meme Coins. Here’s Why.

Crypto hedge fund Stratos bought Dogwifhat (WIF) when it was just 1 cent and has since continued investing in meme coins. We spoke with Rennick Palley, founder of Stratos, to hear the firm’s perspective on investing in these tokens.

Interviews

Aug 15, 2024

Interviews

Candid chats and deep dives with the biggest names in crypto.

Stratos Jets Pioneers Crypto Payments in Private Aviation Industry

Nick Sawinyh on 13 Mar 2026

Tokenized RWAs have blown past $26 billion in distributed asset value as of March 2026, according to RWA.xyz, with an additional ~$340 billion in represented (platform-locked) value sitting behind permissioned systems. Projections for $100 billion in distributed value by year-end are circulating from credible sources like Bitfinex and Centrifuge’s COO. BlackRock and Apollo have moved well past pilots, with BUIDL and ACRED deploying real institutional capital on-chain. JPMorgan and KKR are running production tokenization initiatives, though their scope remains narrower.

And yet, most of the public conversation about RWAs still focuses on opportunity: fractional ownership, 24/7 trading, yield, composability, the trillion-dollar TAM. The risk side gets a few bullet points at the bottom of a report and a perfunctory “DYOR.”

That’s a problem. Because tokenization does not eliminate the economics of the underlying asset. It wraps them in a new layer of complexity, one that sits at the uncomfortable intersection of traditional finance and decentralized infrastructure. A tokenized Treasury bill is still subject to interest rate movements. A tokenized private credit position still depends on whether the borrower pays back the loan. And the on-chain wrapper adds its own failure modes: oracle lag, smart contract bugs, redemption bottlenecks, and regulatory ambiguity that can freeze liquidity overnight.

This article breaks down what those risks actually look like in practice, how the leading risk curators (Gauntlet, Credora by RedStone, Chaos Labs) are quantifying them, and what a real due-diligence process should include before you allocate capital or integrate an RWA into a DeFi protocol.

What We Mean by “Yield-Generating RWAs” Yield-generating RWAs are tokenized representations of traditional assets that produce income on-chain. That income might come from interest (U.S. Treasuries), coupons (corporate bonds), loan repayments (private credit), or rental flows (real estate). Common examples include BlackRock’s BUIDL fund, Ondo Finance’s USDY, Apollo’s ACRED (via Securitize), and various private credit pools on platforms like Maple, Centrifuge, and the now-troubled Goldfinch.

The appeal is obvious. A tokenized Treasury product can deliver 4-6% yield with 24/7 access, compared to the T+1 settlement cycle that traditional U.S. securities moved to in May 2024. Private credit instruments on-chain can offer 8-12%. For corporate treasurers and DeFi protocols alike, the math is attractive.

But the yield has to come from somewhere. And the path from the off-chain borrower’s repayment to your on-chain wallet is longer, more fragile, and more opaque than most participants realize.

The Seven Risk Dimensions Yield-generating RWAs carry risk across seven interconnected categories. These aren’t abstract. Every one of them has produced real losses in the short history of on-chain RWAs.

1. Structural Risk The first question is deceptively simple: does your token actually give you a claim on anything?

Some tokenized assets represent direct ownership. Others represent a claim on an SPV (Special Purpose Vehicle) that holds the asset. Others still are synthetic exposures with no direct claim at all. As Animoca Brands noted in its late-2025 report on tokenized stocks, 95% of the tokenized equity market is synthetic, meaning holders get price exposure but no voting rights, dividends, or legal ownership.

For yield-generating assets, the structure determines whether you’re actually entitled to the cash flows or whether you’re trusting an intermediary to pass them through. Bankruptcy-remote structures (where the SPV is legally separated from the issuer) protect holders if the issuer goes under. Weak structures leave you as an unsecured creditor in a jurisdiction you may not even know.

What to check: Read the offering memorandum and SPV documentation. Confirm bankruptcy-remote status. Understand the redemption mechanics, including timing, pauses, lock-ups, and any discretionary gates. If you can’t find these documents, that’s your answer.

2. Counterparty Risk Every yield-generating RWA depends on a chain of counterparties: the issuer who creates the token, the custodian who holds the underlying asset, the servicer who collects and distributes payments, the originator who sourced the loans (for credit products), and the auditor who verifies everything.

Any one of them can fail, and when they do, the failure doesn’t show up on-chain until it’s too late.

The Goldfinch case is instructive. In 2022, the protocol facilitated a $20 million loan to Stratos, a fintech credit fund. According to CoinDesk’s reporting and Warbler Labs’ own governance forum disclosure, Stratos allocated $5 million to REZI, a real estate tech startup that stopped paying, and $2 million to digital asset investments (POKT) that the protocol’s contributor and underwriter, Warbler Labs, claimed to be unaware of. The write-down hit $7 million. Earlier, borrower Tugende, a Kenyan motorcycle financing company, experienced a credit event on a separate $5 million loan after what Warbler Labs described as unauthorized intercompany loans to a struggling parent entity. A third borrower, Lend East, later proved unable to fully repay a $10.2 million loan.

Three credit events, three different counterparty failures, all on the same platform. Warbler Labs backstopped the losses, but community members were blunt in governance forums about the repeated failures of oversight. One commenter pointed out the pattern of discovering borrower problems only after the damage was done.

This is what counterparty risk looks like in practice. It’s not a line item in a spreadsheet. It’s a borrower quietly misallocating funds while the on-chain representation shows everything is fine.

What to check: Analyze the financial health and track record of every entity in the chain. Look at proof-of-reserves frequency and auditor independence. For private credit, dig into borrower underwriting standards and historical default rates. A single point of failure anywhere in the chain is a red flag.

3. Legal and Regulatory Risk RWAs live in a regulatory gray zone that varies by jurisdiction and changes frequently. The token might be classified as a security in one country and a commodity in another, or fall into no existing category at all. The EU’s MiCA framework and the DLT Pilot Regime provide some structure in Europe. In the U.S., the SEC is still evaluating tokenized money market funds and similar products on a case-by-case basis, issuing bespoke exemptive orders rather than broad guidance.

This matters because legal classification determines who can buy the token, where it can trade, and what recourse you have if things go wrong. Cross-border enforcement is another open question. If an SPV in the Cayman Islands holds the underlying asset and the issuer is in Singapore, which court do you petition when the redemption mechanism breaks?

IOSCO’s Decentralized Finance and Digital Assets report flagged these issues directly, noting that tokenized markets introduce technology-related risks layered on top of the familiar legal uncertainties of cross-border finance.

What to check: Determine the token’s securities classification in your jurisdiction. Map the governing law and dispute resolution process. KYC/AML and transfer restrictions (whitelisting) can limit secondary liquidity, so understand who can actually trade the token. Ambiguous status is not neutral; it’s a liability.

4. Operational and Custodial Risk Operational risk in RWAs is about what happens between the off-chain asset and the on-chain representation. Misreporting, infrequent attestations, poor internal controls, and custody lapses can all create a gap between what the token says and what the underlying asset is actually worth or doing.

Chaos Labs, in their risk assessment work for Aave Horizon and their frxUSD review, flagged several specific operational concerns: restricted pricing schedules (daily or weekly NAV updates), weekend market closures that leave valuations stale, and custodial coordination delays that slow liquidations. Even fully backed assets can face temporary illiquidity if reserves are exhausted at a single custodian.

The gap between off-chain reporting cadence and on-chain expectations is a structural problem. DeFi operates in real time. Fund administrators update NAVs daily at best. That mismatch is fine during calm markets. During stress, it becomes a trap.

What to check: How often are attestations or audits published, and by whom? Is there a single custodian or diversification across multiple providers? What’s the reporting lag between an off-chain event (like a default) and its reflection on-chain?

5. Liquidity and Market Risk Liquidity risk in RWAs has a particular character: the on-chain wrapper can trade continuously, but the underlying asset may not be liquid at all. A tokenized private credit position might show a live price on a DEX, but the actual loan has a multi-year maturity and no secondary market.

This creates what Gauntlet, in their section of the June 2025 RedStone/RWA.xyz report, described as a fundamental liquidity trap during stress. Redemption timelines for certain RWAs may require weeks or months, while DeFi users expect immediate settlement.

The “State of RWA Tokenization 2026” report quantified part of this problem: 1-3% pricing gaps for identical assets across different chains, and 2-5% friction costs when moving capital cross-chain. These aren’t theoretical. They’re measured inefficiencies that widen during volatility.

What to check: Examine on-chain trading volume, spreads, and order-book depth. Model what happens during mass redemptions. Compare the token’s liquidity profile against the underlying asset’s actual redemption timeline. If there’s a mismatch, you need to understand how it resolves under stress.

6. Smart Contract, Oracle, and Technology Risk The technical layer adds failure modes that don’t exist in traditional finance. Smart contract bugs can drain funds. Oracle manipulation can distort valuations. Admin-key compromises can allow unauthorized changes. Upgradeability mechanisms, if poorly designed, can introduce vulnerabilities after deployment.

For yield-generating RWAs specifically, oracle risk is acute. Most tokenized funds use NAV data supplied by a single fund administrator on a delayed schedule (T+1 or slower). Gauntlet noted that liquidation triggers in leveraged RWA positions operate on this same delayed schedule, meaning a credit default might not be reflected in on-chain pricing for days.

IOSCO’s report echoed this concern, noting that tokenized markets introduce smart contract vulnerabilities, cyber risks, and the need for secure key management as distinct technology-related considerations.

What to check: Require multiple independent security audits (firms like PeckShield, Trail of Bits, or OpenZeppelin). Verify oracle redundancy, specifically whether there are multiple data sources and fallback mechanisms. Understand admin-key controls and who has the ability to pause or upgrade the contract.

7. Yield-Specific Risks The yield itself is a risk factor. Interest rate changes directly affect Treasury-backed products. Credit defaults erode private credit returns. Income volatility in real estate or receivables creates unpredictable cash flows.

In leveraged strategies (where protocols borrow against RWA collateral to amplify returns), these yield risks compound. Gauntlet curates leveraged vault strategies on Morpho that use Apollo’s ACRED tokenized credit fund as collateral, employing looping strategies to target enhanced returns. ACRED itself is a tokenized credit fund via Securitize; the leverage layer is applied by the vault strategy on top. But variable borrow costs in DeFi can spike unpredictably, compressing or eliminating the spread that makes the strategy work.

The general principle: high yields signal elevated underlying risks. Tokenization adds transparency to some aspects of the asset, but it does not change the fundamental credit quality of the borrower or the duration sensitivity of the instrument. A tokenized junk bond is still a junk bond.

What to check: Calculate risk-adjusted metrics like the Sharpe ratio (yield vs. volatility). Run scenario models for rate hikes, credit defaults, and borrow-cost spikes. For leveraged strategies, understand the liquidation mechanics and what happens when the yield spread compresses or inverts.

What the Risk Curators Are Saying Three organizations have emerged as the primary risk curators for on-chain RWAs, each approaching the problem from a different angle. Their work converges on the same conclusion: tokenization adds DeFi amplification to TradFi risks, and the biggest dangers are timing, pricing, and access mismatches that become acute under stress.

Gauntlet: Practical Risk Management for Leveraged Vaults Gauntlet specializes in quantitative simulation and risk-parameter optimization, particularly for leveraged RWA strategies on Morpho. They manage risk for vaults holding billions in RWA-backed positions, including strategies built on Apollo’s ACRED tokenized credit fund.

Their key contribution is specificity. Rather than listing risks abstractly, Gauntlet shows how they manifest in live vault operations: redemption timing mismatches that trap capital, single-source NAV pricing that delays liquidations, variable borrow costs that compress returns, and KYC/whitelisting requirements that limit who can provide liquidity during stress.

Their mitigation approach is equally specific: real-time monitoring of yield vs. borrow rates, dynamic LLTV (Liquidation Loan-to-Value) caps, multi-source price discovery, and continuous stress testing. The argument is not that these risks are manageable in theory, but that they require active, curator-level oversight in practice.

Credora by RedStone: Standardized Risk Ratings RedStone acquired Credora in September 2025 to create the first oracle platform combining real-time price data with standardized risk ratings. The deal was covered by Blockworks, CoinDesk, and confirmed on RedStone’s own blog. Credora provides institutional-grade risk ratings based on its Probability of Significant Loss (PSL) methodology, with ratings now live on Morpho and Spark.

For RWAs specifically, Credora extends traditional credit risk methodology with factors unique to tokenized assets: custodian quality, bankruptcy remoteness, legal entity structure, regulatory/jurisdictional exposure, NAV transparency, and servicer risk. The system operates with over 90% automation, allowing ratings to update as conditions change rather than waiting for quarterly reviews.

The market data supports demand for this kind of transparency. RedStone and Credora reported that rated DeFi strategies such as Morpho Vaults have grown up to 25% faster than unrated peers. For institutions operating under fiduciary mandates, an auditable risk score is not optional; it’s a prerequisite for allocation.

Credora’s explicit position: without standardized risk infrastructure, the RWA market cannot scale to the institutional levels that forecasts project. They frame their ratings as the missing primitive for risk-aware capital allocation.

Chaos Labs: Infrastructure-Level Risk Chaos Labs focuses on protocol-level risk infrastructure, building the automated systems that lending platforms like Aave Horizon use to manage RWA-backed positions. (Horizon launched in August 2025 as Aave’s institutional RWA market, growing to over $440 million in deposits and accepting tokenized collateral from Superstate, Centrifuge, Circle, and VanEck.)

Their contribution is architectural. Traditional price oracles were not designed for assets that update daily, close on weekends, and require custodial coordination for liquidations. Chaos Labs built “Risk Oracles” that automatically adjust lending parameters (LTVs, liquidation thresholds) based on off-chain conditions, combining agent-based stress simulations with cross-validation of NAVs and custom liquidation mechanics that account for settlement delays.

In their frxUSD review, Chaos Labs assessed custodian failure risk as extremely low due to regulation and diversification. frxUSD is backed by tokenized Treasuries from BlackRock’s BUIDL fund (tokenized by Securitize), Superstate’s USTB, and WisdomTree’s WTGXX, per Frax’s own documentation. Chaos Labs noted that redemption paths still need on-chain workarounds to handle temporary illiquidity scenarios.

A Practical Due-Diligence Checklist Based on the curator frameworks and real-world failure cases, here’s a condensed process for evaluating any yield-generating RWA before investing or integrating into a protocol.

Step 1: Read the legal documents. Offering memorandum, token-holder agreement, SPV documentation. Confirm bankruptcy-remote status, direct claim on cash flows, and redemption mechanics. If the documents are vague, incomplete, or unavailable, stop here.

Step 2: Map the counterparty chain. Identify every entity between you and the yield: issuer, custodian, servicer, originator, auditor. Assess each one’s financial health, track record, and incentive alignment. Look for single points of failure.

Step 3: Verify the yield source. U.S. Treasuries carry minimal credit risk but meaningful interest-rate risk. Private credit carries real default risk. Know exactly where the money comes from and what conditions could stop it.

Step 4: Stress-test liquidity. Model what happens during mass redemptions. Compare on-chain trading volume to underlying asset redemption timelines. If there’s a meaningful gap, size your position accordingly.

Step 5: Audit the technical layer. Multiple independent smart contract audits, oracle redundancy, admin-key controls, upgrade mechanisms. For leveraged strategies, verify the liquidation mechanics and the data sources that trigger them.

Step 6: Map the regulatory landscape. Securities classification, KYC requirements, cross-border enforceability. These constraints directly affect who can provide liquidity and what happens when something goes wrong.

Step 7: Score the project holistically. Consider a multi-factor heuristic covering permissionlessness (global retail access), reliability (issuer reputation and yield stability), DeFi integration (composability as collateral, trading pairs), maintenance cost (complexity of the underlying asset), and UX (auto-rebasing yield, simple redemption). Products like Ondo’s USDY, which offer rebasing yield with multi-chain DEX trading and simple redemption, score well on adoption risk. Products requiring manual claims, restricted access, or complex intermediary structures carry higher friction risk even when the underlying asset is solid.

Step 8: Run the numbers. Sharpe ratio, Value-at-Risk, duration sensitivity. Scenario model a +200bps rate hike, a counterparty default, and a borrow-cost spike simultaneously. If the position survives all three, it’s probably sized right.

The Spectrum of Risk in Practice Not all RWAs are created equal. The risk profile varies enormously by underlying asset class and product design.

On the lower-risk end, products like BlackRock’s BUIDL fund or Ondo’s USDY tokenize short-duration U.S. Treasuries through bankruptcy-remote SPVs with strong institutional issuers and auto-rebasing yield. The primary risks are interest-rate movements and, to a lesser extent, the operational risk of the on-chain wrapper. These products have attracted billions precisely because the risk profile is well-understood.

On the higher-risk end, private credit pools carry elevated default, servicer, and liquidity risks. The Goldfinch experience demonstrated that even with a reputable platform, individual loan pools can suffer from borrower misallocation, lack of transparency, and inadequate underwriting controls. The yields are higher because the risks are higher. Tokenization makes the investment accessible but does not make it safer.

In between, there’s a growing category of leveraged RWA strategies that use vault automation to amplify returns on otherwise conservative assets. Gauntlet’s leveraged vaults on Morpho, which use Apollo’s ACRED as collateral, are the leading example. These strategies introduce DeFi-specific risks (variable borrow costs, liquidation mechanics, smart contract dependencies) on top of the underlying asset risk. They require active curator oversight and are not suitable for passive holders.

Where This Is Heading The RWA risk infrastructure is maturing fast. Credora’s ratings are already influencing capital flows on Morpho and Spark. Chaos Labs’ Risk Oracles are automating parameter adjustments on Aave Horizon. Gauntlet is stress-testing leveraged positions in real time with billions at stake.

But the gap between the best-in-class risk management and the average RWA product remains wide. Many smaller issuers still lack independent audits, rely on single custodians, publish infrequent attestations, and operate with opaque legal structures. The market’s rapid growth, potentially reaching $100 billion by year-end, will attract products that prioritize speed to market over risk infrastructure.

For allocators, this means the due-diligence burden is increasing, not decreasing. The tools are getting better, but they need to be used. A Credora rating is valuable, but it’s not a substitute for reading the offering memorandum. A Gauntlet-curated vault is better managed than an unmanaged one, but the underlying asset still carries the same credit risk.

Tokenization brings real benefits: transparency, composability, fractional access, 24/7 markets. It also brings real risks that are easy to overlook when the yield looks attractive and the market is moving up. The curators and infrastructure providers working on this problem are doing some of the most important work in DeFi right now. The question is whether the broader market will adopt their tools before the next credit event forces the lesson.

A data center project originally designed to span nearly three times the size of Manhattan is getting cut in half before a single shovel hits the ground. The Stratos hyperscale campus in Box Elder County, Utah, backed by Kevin O’Leary’s venture firm, has become a lightning rod for community opposition over water, power, and environmental concerns.

Developers have committed to reducing the project by roughly 50% or more after thousands of residents formally protested the facility’s water rights applications. The first filing alone drew approximately 3,700 to 4,000 protest comments, with many locals paying a $15 fee just to register their objections. A second application attracted around 700 more.

What 40,000 acres of data centers actually looks like The original Stratos plan called for 40,000 acres of AI-focused data center infrastructure spread across multiple sites in Utah. To put that in perspective, Manhattan is about 14,600 acres.

The facility’s projected power demand at full build-out would reach up to 9 gigawatts. That figure is roughly twice Utah’s current peak electricity usage for the entire state.

Advertisement

Water consumption projections were equally staggering. The facility would require an estimated 16.6 billion gallons of water annually just for gas generation at full scale. Residents zeroed in on a proposed transfer of 1,900 acre-feet of water from a local ranch to the data center, viewing it as a direct threat to the already vulnerable Great Salt Lake.

O’Leary, MIDA, and the regulatory workaround The project is backed by O’Leary Ventures, with partners including Bitzero Blockchain Inc. and West GenCo. First-phase costs alone are estimated above $4 billion, making this one of the most capital-intensive data center builds currently proposed in the US.

Despite the intense backlash, the project received approval in May 2026 through the Military Installation Development Authority, commonly known as MIDA. That partnership is significant because MIDA approval allows developers to bypass certain local zoning requirements.

The Utah Legislature has responded to the broader controversy by passing measures to study the environmental impact of data center developments statewide.

Water rights applications were withdrawn twice after record protest volumes.

What this means for crypto and AI infrastructure investors The involvement of Bitzero Blockchain Inc. as a project partner directly ties this to the crypto infrastructure space. When a project like Stratos gets cut in half because of energy and water concerns, it sends a signal to every operator scouting sites in resource-constrained regions.

For investors evaluating data center and mining plays, the Stratos situation highlights a risk that doesn’t show up on most financial models: community opposition as a material project risk. A $4 billion first phase that gets delayed or downsized by protest isn’t just an inconvenience. It reprices the entire investment thesis.

The MIDA approval pathway, which lets developers sidestep local zoning, may provide a legal shortcut. But legislators are already responding with environmental study requirements.

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

PolySwarm had a strong short-term bullish momentum and saw high demand. A pullback to the range highs would be an ideal buying opportunity. PolySwarm [NCT] broke past the four-month range highs at the time of this writing. The daily trading session hasn’t closed, but the high trading volume makes this move unlikely to fail.

AMBCrypto analyzed the on-chain activity and price action to understand the next bullish targets. As things stand, the long-term consolidation is ending.

Should buyers wait for a retest? Source: NCT/USDT on TradingView Generally, a range breakout is accompanied by a retest of the former highs as support. A positive reaction after such a retest a few days after the breakout would be a strong sign that a bullish continuation is possible.

This is the guideline that NCT investors would want to look out for. The breakout also has a chance of continuation, leaving patient investors sidelined.

The token has rallied 68% in five days, and the RSI reading of 77 showed overbought conditions.

That is no guarantee of a pullback, but investors can look to buy at $0.02 or $0.024 if the latter level is breached without NCT first moving to $0.02.

The Fibonacci levels are likely to act as key resistances on the way upward. Each level that is broken would add to the bullish conviction and could add more volume to the rally.

Dormant tokens show selling isn’t yet prevalent Source: Santiment The 30-day MVRV was at 37.38%, meaning that short-term holders are at a 40% profit on average. Yet, the dormant circulation metric was relatively quiet.

Is your portfolio green? Check out the NCT Profit Calculator

This showed that a wave of profit-taking has not commenced.

It is likely to occur soon, since such high MVRVs have a tendency to reset toward zero. The mean coin age has been in a downtrend since August, showing a distribution phase even before the range breakout.

Disclaimer: The information presented does not constitute financial, investment, trading, or other types of advice and is solely the writer’s opinion

How to Buy Polyswarm (NCT) in 2025

Editor's note: The Matic Network is now known as Polygon.

The Matic Network (MATIC) is a project that’s been working on a solution to the scalability issues of the Ethereum blockchain.

Their vision is to improve scalability through proof of stake sidechains, and they believe that once scalability issues are resolved we’ll also get lower transaction fees, faster confirmations, and a number of other benefits. They are also one of the latest ICOs to be conducted on the Binance Exchange Launchpad.

Yet, how is this project different from the other scalability solutions?

In this Matic Network review I will take an in-depth look into the project and attempt to answer this. I will delve into their tech, development, roadmap and the long term potential and use cases for the MATIC token.

Matic Network GoalsIn addition to solving scalability issues, the Matic Network is also focused on improving usability without losing the benefits of decentralization. They also hope to leverage the existing developer community in providing improved dApp functionality and improved user experience.

The founders of the Matic Network noticed that even though dApps are being proposed and developed in large numbers, the networks they run on are hardly prepared to support mass adoption of dApps. Plus in many cases, the user experience is quite poor, and the dApps are not designed to be approachable for the average user.

Overview of the Matic Network. Image via Matic.network

The first blockchain chosen to highlight the potential of Matic is Ethereum. The developers began with a working implementation on the Kovan testnet. While it is an adapted version of the Plasma network, ultimately the Matic development team envisions using it as a side chain scaling solution for any blockchain.

In 2019 the team was able to first launch an alpha mainnet in June, which was the first Matic sidechain working on top of the Ethereum mainnet, which allowed developers to begin building and testing dApps. That wasn’t the end though. In September the beta mainnet went live as well. This included new features such as Heimdall, Bor and Plasma predicates.

Below is a deeper look at the problems of current blockchains and how the Matic Network plans of solving them.

Addressing Blockchain ChallengesDespite how advanced blockchain technology has become, there are still a number of problems that they face. In some cases, trying to improve one challenge could lead to potential sacrifices on other features.

The Matic Network has taken stock of all of the challenges that blockchains currently face and have attempted to address these through a number of solutions.

ScalabilityScalability can be achieved by adding additional side chains horizontally, with each side chain theoretically adding the capacity for 216216 transactions per second using the same proof-of-stake checkpoint layer. This gives the Matic Network the ability to scale to millions of transactions per second.

Size of BlockchainBecause public blockchains require each node to manage a full copy of the blocks and state of the chain, as time goes by and the blockchain grows larger, fewer nodes tend to participate, which threatens the decentralization of the blockchain.

In the case of the Matic Network, it is possible for the primary layer to store only the blocks from the last checkpoint to the most recent checkpoint. It can do this because all the prior blocks have been submitted to the main chain. This allows even mobile devices to run a node.

Slow TransactionsIn most cases, blockchain transactions are slow, especially when it comes to proof-of-work blockchains. Matic uses Proof-of-Stake (PoS) to avoid this limitation, but in a special way so it is also able to maintain decentralization.

Matic Network Architecture. Image via Whitepaper

In the Matic Network consensus is done through a selection of block producers who are chosen by a set of stakers. Matic then uses proof-of-stake as a layer that validates blocks and publishes Merkle roots of the side chain blocks to the Ethereum mainchain. This allows Matic Network to keep block confirmation times under 2 seconds while also providing a high level of decentralization.

Low Transaction ThroughputIn public blockchains, there is always a lag between blocks as there needs to be enough time between blocks to ensure propagation. Block sizes are also intentionally kept small to encourage rapid propagation. This limits the number of transactions per block.

Matic Network avoids this problem by producing blocks in a Block Producer layer. This allows for the rapid creation of blocks, and decentralization is ensured through the use of proof-of-stake checkpoints. This configuration theoretically allows for 216216 transactions per second on each side chain.

Multiple micropayment channels with other off-chain solutionsSolving the problem of opening multiple channels to allow for micropayments is complex, and several projects have proposed solutions. The Matic Network has solved this issue by using an Ethereum Virtual Machine, which negates the need to open payment channels for micropayments.

Instead, any valid Ethereum address is also a valid Matic address, which means any receiver doesn’t need to be in the Matic Network. They only need a Matic Wallet to retrieve the payment.

High Transaction FeesThe limited block size of most blockchains has led to variability in fees based on the pending transaction pool, and in some cases, fees have become exorbitantly high for periods of time.

Matic is able to take advantage of economies of scale by completing a large number of transactions in the Block Producer layer. This keeps costs for each individual transaction low.

Poor UsabilitySo far most dApp user interfaces are quite poor compared to established centralized counterparts. This needs to change. If mass adoption is to occur the dApp user experience needs to be as good as, or better than, the current centralized apps.

The Matic team is working to create mobile and web browser integrations and protocols to improve usability in a secured interaction environment for dApps.

The MATIC WalletThe team at MATIC has been working on a wallet that aims to bridge the gap between scalability issues and the user experience of the Ethereum network. The wallet plans to make it easier for users to interact with the dApps that are deployed on Ethereum and Plasma chains.

The wallet will significantly increase transaction speed by allowing access to two different networks at the same time. Additionally, it permits connecting desktop Dapps to mobile Wallets using end-to-end encryption as simple as by scanning a QR code. This allows for user interaction with dApps without the private key leaving their device.

Matic Mobile Wallet UI. Image via iTunes Store

The MATIC wallet currently remains in beta and the team is cautioning everyone not to send mainnet tokens to the wallet or they will be lost. Anyone who downloads the wallet now, there are both Android and iOS versions available, will receive MATIC test tokens.

Taking a bit of a closer look at the reviews of the wallet, they are pretty average. Users seem to be taking issue with the fact that the wallet forces either fingerprint access or Facial idea. This is a particularly sticky point especially for privacy hawks in the crypto field. It is also slightly troubling that the Matic support team has not responded to any of these questions.

Matic DaggerAnother really interesting product in the Matic suite is Dagger. This is basically infastructure which provides reliable and scalable real-time events. You can think of it as akin to an offchain solution where information needed within a dApp is fed from.

What's really neat about Dagger is how easily it can be integrated with your current dApps. Very few lines of code are required in order to get any event stream from the Ethereum blockchain. All of the integration code can be obtained from their Javascript library in their GitHub.

Matic Dagger Unique Selling Points

Dagger also helps you to engage with your users when they are offline. Essentially, you can listen for user specific events 24/7. Once these events come through you can send notifications via email or DMs to make the apps more user friendly.

Potential use cases for this? Well, you can use it to ensure the safety of your users and notify them in case their are any suspicious transactions. This could help them react almost instantaneously.

The Matic Network team remains quite small, consisting of the three co-founders, eight engineers, a head of operations and one community manager. The project has also added a pair of Operations & Marketing VPs in the past year, a VP of Finance and Operations, and several individuals whose focus is the design including a Head of Design.

Jaynti Kanani is the CEO and one co-founder of Matic. He comes from a software engineering background and was most recently a data scientist at Housing.com.

Sandeep Nailwal is the COO of Matic and a second co-founder. In addition to working as a blockchain developer he also previously held the position of CEO of Scopeweaver, and CTO (E-commerce) of Welspun Group.

Matic Network Co-founders

And finally, there is Anurag Arjun, who is the third co-founder of Matic and the CPO (Chief Product Officer). His background is in engineering and he has over a decade of product management experience.

The Matic Network is also partnered with several important blockchain projects, including MakerDao and Decentraland. In addition, Ari Meilich and Esteban Ordano, the CEO and CTO of Decentraland serve as advisors to the project.

Matic Marketing and Social NetworksWhile Matic has a good group of partners and advisors, and it is notable that they’ve been chosen to launch their ICO on the Binance Launchpad platform, they have very poor social media presence.

On Reddit, which is known as one of the top social platforms for crypto, the Matic Network has grown from just 13 readers in April 2019 to 1,600 readers in March 2020. The YouTube channel has over 1,300 subscribers, and the Twitter account has grown to 32.5k followers since in the 11 months from April 2019 when there were only 2351 followers.

Matic also has a Medium blog, which was previously updated once a month or every few weeks. It’s been updated more frequently recently, and the team has been doing a good job in keeping the community updated on developments from the project.

The largest group of followers is the project’s Telegram channel, where there are more than 30,000 members.

Taken all together, there has been huge growth in the social presence of the Matic Network in 2019, highlighting just how strongly people have gotten behind the project.

MATIC TokenThe Matic Network conducted an ICO on the Binance Launchpad platform on April 24, 2019. Unlike a typical ICO where tokens are simply sold, Matic conducted their ICO as a lottery, with a total of 16,666 winning lottery tickets.

There is a total supply of MATIC of 10,000,000,000 and 19% of that, or 1,900,000,000 were made available for the ICO. That means each winning lottery ticket received 114,068.44 MATIC, which was $300 worth at the ICO price of $0.00263.

Register on Binance to Participate in IEO

Lottery tickets were allocated based on each users BNB balance, with the final calculation occurring at 00:00 UTC on April 24, 2019. Ticket claims for eligible users begans at 08:00 UTC on April 24, 2019 and continued for 24 hours.

Once the ticket claim period ended the winning tickets were drawn and announced at 14:00 UTC on April 25, 2019. Payments were made in BNB within 24 hours with users ensuring they had sufficient BNB in their account if they had a winning ticket.

The MATIC tokens will allow holders to become stakers and receive staking rewards once staking is implemented on the network. As network usage increases the value of MATIC tokens is expected to increase commensurately.

MATIC Price HistoryFollowing the ICO, in which MATIC tokens were priced at $0.00263, the price took off like a rocket to the moon. In less than one month, by May 21, 2019 price had reached an all-time high of $0.045017.

Of course price didn’t remain at those elevated levels, but it also didn’t sink all the way to ICO levels. In fact, price hasn’t dropped below the $0.01 level, although it did come close in October 2019.

MATIC Price Performance. Image via CMC

December 2019 saw a huge spike that took price from $ 0.012603 to $0.042440 in the span of two weeks, however a week later price had given back all those gains. There was no fundamental reason for the rise or crash, and some have said it was all due to market manipulation.

As of February/March 2020 MATIC has been marching higher again, lifted first by news of staking going live on the testnet, and then a week later by the Indian Supreme Court lifting the ban on Bitcoin and cryptocurrency trading in India. As of March 11, 2020 the MATIC token is trading just above the $0.02 handle

Matic Network StrengthsOne of the strengths of the project is the broad number of available use cases. These include decentralized exchange, identity features, credit scoring, atomic swaps, payments, and gaming networks among others.

One very interesting feature Matic has been developing is Zappier integration through Dagger. This allows developers to connect Ethereum platforms with hundreds of applications and is expected to help boost user and developer adoption.

DevelopmentSomething that I am quite interested in when looking at cryptocurrency projects and ICOs is the amount of development work that is being done. One of the best ways to assess this is through the amount of code commits they have pushed in to their public GitHub.

So, I decided to dig into the Matic Network GitHub and take a look at the code commits that have pushed. These are only the repos that they have made public and there are many more that are still being worked on. Below are the commits for the top two most active public repos.

Code commits to repos in past 12 months

As you can see there has been quite a bit of activity in these repos. This is in fact more than we have seen on other projects that have completed their ICO 2 years ago. There are also a further 13 other public repos.

Moreover, it is important to point out that these are only their public commits to their main GitHub. According to this Binance Rating Report, they are working on a further 17 private repositories that have plenty more code.

All this shows that the Matic Network is indeed actively rolling out product and working on their protocol. This should be seen as another pro of the project when compared to other ICOs.

This frenetic pace of development can be considered reasonable when one is to look into their updated roadmap.

ConclusionMatic is focused on improving the scalability of Ethereum in an adapted Plasma network. Because scalability is so important to the Ethereum network there are several competing projects aiming to do the same, but if Matic can deliver a solution first, or the best solution, they stand to become one of the top blockchain projects.

It was encouraging to see MATIC growing its community rapidly in 2019. It not only shows the ability of MATIC to market its product, but also shows the belief and support from the community. And of course the ruling of the Indian Supreme Court in March 2020 that lifted the ban on cryptocurrency trading is ultimately a positive for Indian blockchain projects like MATIC.

The mission of Matic hasn’t been proven yet, but development on the testnet, and both alpha and beta mainnet implementations seems positive. One thing the project could use is the implementation of staking. They’ve been promising this since the beginning, and actually implementing it could bring a whole new group of MATIC users and investors.

The game has changed. Craze.fun isn’t just another platform – it’s the launchpad for the next wave of meme coin dominance on Ethereum. With our FairLaunch officially LIVE, we’re unlocking the future for creators, investors, and the entire memecoin ecosystem.

Why Craze.fun? Craze.fun is built to empower creators and investors alike, providing a seamless, low-cost platform to launch and grow meme coins. Whether you’re looking to create the next viral token or invest in the most promising projects, Craze.fun is your gateway to a billion-dollar revolution.

Our Mission: Empower Creators: Gasless, accessible tools to bring your meme coin ideas to life. Reward the Community: 50% of platform revenue is shared with $CRAZE stakers. Drive Ethereum Innovation: Cutting-edge tools and utilities built for scalability and impact. This isn’t just a platform—it’s a movement. Craze.fun combines Ethereum’s global liquidity with the explosive power of meme coins, creating a thriving ecosystem where everyone can win.

Why PinkSale? Launching on PinkSale opens the doors to a passionate, crypto-savvy community. With its transparent processes and robust network, PinkSale ensures ease of access and visibility for both creators and investors. In under 1 hour, we smashed our 10 ETH soft cap, proving that Craze.fun is already making waves.

Key Features of Craze.fun: Gasless Launches: No outrageous fees—just seamless launches. Revenue Sharing: Stakers earn from 50% of platform revenue. Future-Proof Design: Built to ride the Ethereum bull run to new heights. Transparent & Secure: Fully audited and KYC verified by Assure DeFi. Presale Details: Soft Cap: HIT in under 1 hour! Platform: PinkSale Dates: LIVE NOW until December 10th, 18:00 UTC Be Part of the Craze Revolution! As Craze.fun takes off, we invite creators and investors to join us in reshaping the memecoin landscape. This is your chance to be part of something truly groundbreaking.

Website: https://crazetoken.io/ 

Twitter: https://x.com/crazetokeneth

Telegram: https://t.me/crazetokenofficial

The future of memecoins starts NOW. Don’t miss out—secure your spot and thrive with Craze.fun!

NFT Staking — A unique and innovative way crypto investors use not only to buy non-fungible tokens but earn rewards and other privileges by locking them on a platform or protocol — has just gone better. Enterprise DAO-powered by Terra Money has now enabled cross-chain NFT staking for Cosmos chains including Terra, Stargaze, Juno, and soon Terra Classic.

Enterprise Protocol Enables Cross-Chain NFT Staking Enterprise DAO unlocked the cross-chain functionality for Cosmos chains by launching the cross-chain NFT staking. The Terra-powered platform helps to easily and efficiently create, manage, and grow DAOs within Cosmos. In January, the platform enabled cross-chain token staking for Terra and non-Terra tokens.

Cross-chain NFT staking is initially enabled for select NFT collections on Stargaze and Juno. Stargaze and Juno NFT DAOs, powered by Ark Protocol, now offer one-click staking and no-code setup as well as advanced voting, treasury management, and rewards distribution.

Also Read: Binance Labs Sever Ties With Crypto Exchange Binance

Terra Luna Classic to Get Enterprise Support Terra Luna Classic unanimously passed the proposal for Terra Classic v2.4.2 upgrade. This upgrade will introduce IBC-Hooks to the chain to enable the onboarding of dApps on the Terra Luna Classic, most notably Enterprise DAO. The upgrade is scheduled for March 25.

The community-led chain plans to revive LUNC and repeg USTC to $1 with various efforts including token burn, staking, and others. The narrative toward utility recently gained amid new developers revealed by developers groups.

Also Read: Crypto Exchange Joins Binance to Burn Terra Luna Classic (LUNC) Trading Fees

Terra and Terra Classic Tokens Price Performance Terra (LUNA) fell 11% in the past 24 hours amid broader crypto market selloff. LUNA price currently trades at $0.944. The token gradually losing all gains it made in the month.

LUNC price also tumbled, with 13% drop to $0.000150 level. The 24-hour low and high are $0.000148 and $0.000180, respectively. Moreover, trading volume has increased by 97% in the past 24 hours.

Meanwhile, USTC price fell 11% in the past 24 hours, with the price currently trading at $0.0309. The 24-hour low and high are $0.0299 and $0.0347, respectively.

Also Read: Crypto Market Selloff — Top Reasons Why Bitcoin, ETH, XRP, ADA, SHIB Crash Today

Table of contents

Cosmos is set to enter the interchain NFT market with Stargaze, a new addition to its ecosystem. Stargaze is a decentralized application chain developed on the Cosmos SDK with a primary focus on NFTs. Its purpose is to facilitate the expansion of the interchain economy through an easy-to-use NFT marketplace. This platform benefits all creators, traders, and developers by implementing on-chain royalties and zero gas fees for minting and trading; extra rewards from protocol fees for stakers.

2/ Stargaze pioneers interoperability & modularity with IBC and CosmWasm, enabling secure smart contracts in Rust.

It simplifies NFT creation and supports Interchain NFT transfers with ICS-721.

Dive into Stargaze’s unique features & future plans ⬇️https://t.co/Eb5xh2LagW

— Cosmos – The Interchain ⚛️ (@cosmos) May 28, 2024 Stargaze Pioneers Cross-Chain NFT Transfers with ICS-721 Stargaze builds on the Interchain Stack to take the forefront of seamless connectivity through IBC and flexibility. This was among the first to integrate CosmWasm, a smart contract framework that enables the use of Rust. This integration adds the security layers and developer royalties that lead to the strong and friendly environment for developers. Stargaze also adopted ICS-721, a standard used for NFT transfers across chains.

In the broader context of the interchain, Stargaze seeks to serve as an NFT marketplace that lowers barriers for the creation and trading of NFTs across different chains. It covers challenges like high gas fees, low connectivity, and complex NFT transactions that occur in other marketplaces. The platform’s main idea is to create a safe, accessible and adaptable space specifically for the small retail and consumer traders.

Stargaze Aims to Stabilize and Grow the Interchain Ecosystem Stargaze’s app chain design thus allows features such as Live Auction. These are MEV-resistant NFT auctions that are 100% on-chain settled as most other auction protocols rely on keeper networks which hinders protocol revenue. An innovative feature of the app chain architecture is the Stargaze Loyalty Program (SLP).

It provides staking rewards and trading fee rebates to STARS stakers, a privilege that is usually exclusive to centralized exchanges. As an application chain, Stargaze manages its own fee system, which means that the chain can maintain a loyalty program.

The vision of Stargaze is aimed towards the development and stabilizing of the interchain ecosystem by offering an NFT marketplace that is seamless, secure, experienced growth, staking, and governance to investors. It also plays a role in the ecosystem culture by preserving decentralization and encouraging participation from various players to forge the platform.

AUTHOR

Umair Younas is a cryptocurrency-related content writer linked with this work since 2019. Here, at Blockchainreporter, he serves as a news and article writer. He is a crypto, blockchain, NFTs, DeFi, and FinTech enthusiast. He has strong command over writing authentic reviews about brokers and exchanges and he has collaborated with our education team to write educational content as well. He has a dream to raise awareness among people about digital currencies. His works are well-researched and brimmed with information hence they provide fresh insights. Stay tuned to his posts if you want to stay up-to-date with the crypto-verse.

PANews reported on March 1st that MANTRA issued a final reminder on its token upgrade on the X platform, stating that the upgrade will be implemented on March 3rd, including a token code renaming and a token split at a 1:4 ratio. Users holding OM on MANTRA Chain or exchanges supporting the upgrade do not need to take any action; the upgrade will be completed automatically, and their wallet balance will be updated to the new token code with a 1:4 token increase. Users still holding OM in the Cosmos ecosystem (such as Stargaze, Osmosis, etc.) may not receive the 1:4 revaluation and are advised to transfer their OM tokens to MANTRA Chain as soon as possible via the IBC bridge.

Wing is a credit-based, decentralized platform designed for cross-chain communication among crypto asset lending and decentralized finance (DeFi) projects. The project aims to make crypto lending services more inclusive through a credit evaluation module that eliminates the need for large collateral.

Wing is a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) that allows users to participate in decision-making, product design, and operations. Wing uses decentralized governance along with a risk control mechanism to improve the relationships between creditors, borrowers, and guarantors. This is believed to lead to an improvement in the number and accessibility of DeFi projects using the platform. One of Wing DAO’s goals is to solve the problem of over-collateralization that plagues the DeFi industry.

On the other hand, the platform allows for the creation of new blockchain projects and focuses its efforts on a decentralized and autonomous management community. In response to the issues faced by other DeFi projects, Wing DAO created a credit-based DeFi protocol running on the Ontology (ONT) blockchain. The protocol is fully controlled by users and does not require third parties to approve transactions.

A unique feature of Wing is that it allows users to create a DAO proposal or become an investor on the platform even without prior knowledge or interaction with blockchain. Wing offers project developers the chance to receive crowdfunding when they submit proposals. Investors have the opportunity to contribute to the decision-making process and receive a share of future profits through smart contracts in return.

According to statements, Wing was built on the Ontology blockchain due to its ability to create collateral pools across different blockchains. Ontology allows the digitization of new and existing assets.

The blockchain also features OScore, a credit scoring system. OScore evaluates users’ lending/borrowing history and digital asset information. Users on the platform have full control over their accounts and can securely access their OScore to ensure data privacy. Additionally, as borrowers have to rely on OScore data for loans, the collateral required for lending on the platform is reduced.

WING Coin AnalysisIn Wing’s inclusive pool, users are encouraged to achieve a good credit score. Users who pay their loans on time can benefit from lower interest rates on their loans. These features attract the interest of investors. The interest in the platform’s native cryptocurrency is also increasing. We can understand the interest of investors more clearly by looking at current data.

How to Buy WING Coin?WING Coin can be purchased quickly and securely through Binance, the world’s largest cryptocurrency trading platform by trading volume.

To buy WING Coin, you must first sign up for Binance and then transfer fiat currency. After transferring fiat currency such as USD, you can make a purchase in the Binance Coin (BNB), Tether (USDT), BUSD, and Bitcoin (BTC) WING trading pairs.

Additionally, users can place a buy order at a lower value than the market value on Binance, and purchase at their desired price. To do this, you need to use the Limit tab and enter the amount you want to buy and the price you want to buy at.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

Binance Flags 10 Altcoins for Potential Delisting: All You Need to Know