Andrew Hill Investment Advisors ve třetím čtvrtletí zvýšila podíl ve společnosti Cheniere Energy o 310,8 % na 22 350 akcií v hodnotě 6,013 milionu USD.
Andrew Hill Investment Advisors Inc. lifted its stake in shares of Cheniere Energy, Inc. (NYSE:LNG – Free Report) by 310.8% during the third quarter, according to the company in its most recent filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission. The institutional investor owned 22,350 shares of the energy company’s stock after purchasing an additional 16,910 shares during the period. Cheniere Energy accounts for 4.8% of Andrew Hill Investment Advisors Inc.’s holdings, making the stock its 5th biggest position. Andrew Hill Investment Advisors Inc.’s holdings in Cheniere Energy were worth $6,013,000 as of its most recent filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission.
Other institutional investors also recently made changes to their positions in the company. First Horizon Corp raised its holdings in Cheniere Energy by 7.7% in the 1st quarter. First Horizon Corp now owns 517 shares of the energy company’s stock valued at $147,000 after buying an additional 37 shares during the last quarter. Signal Advisors Wealth LLC lifted its stake in Cheniere Energy by 2.9% during the first quarter. Signal Advisors Wealth LLC now owns 1,497 shares of the energy company’s stock worth $425,000 after purchasing an additional 42 shares during the last quarter. Eagle Strategies LLC grew its position in Cheniere Energy by 4.0% during the 3rd quarter. Eagle Strategies LLC now owns 1,083 shares of the energy company’s stock worth $291,000 after acquiring an additional 42 shares during the last quarter. Titleist Asset Management LLC raised its holdings in shares of Cheniere Energy by 1.6% during the third quarter. Titleist Asset Management LLC now owns 2,867 shares of the energy company’s stock valued at $771,000 after acquiring an additional 45 shares in the last quarter. Finally, Independence Bank of Kentucky raised its holdings in Cheniere Energy by 6.8% in the first quarter. Independence Bank of Kentucky now owns 725 shares of the energy company’s stock worth $206,000 after purchasing an additional 46 shares in the last quarter. Institutional investors own 87.26% of the company’s stock.
More Cheniere Energy News
Here are the key news stories impacting Cheniere Energy this week:
Positive Sentiment: Large QatarEnergy contract strengthens long-term visibility: Cheniere agreed to supply QatarEnergy with 4 million metric tons of LNG annually through 2054—2 million tons each from its Sabine Pass and Corpus Christi facilities. The decades-long, take-or-pay-style demand commitment could support stable cash flows and reduce marketing risk. Cheniere Energy Boosts LNG Contract Backlog With QatarEnergy Deal
Positive Sentiment: Potential support for Sabine Pass expansion: The agreement helps underpin Cheniere’s planned capacity expansion, potentially improving utilization and creating additional long-term earnings and cash-flow opportunities. QatarEnergy is seeking U.S. LNG as geopolitical disruptions affect Middle Eastern supply routes. Cheniere signs LNG supply deals with QatarEnergy through 2054
Positive Sentiment: One analyst raised its valuation: JPMorgan increased its price target from $334 to $344 and maintained an “overweight” rating, indicating confidence in Cheniere’s contracted growth outlook.
Positive Sentiment: Related partnership continues returning cash: Cheniere Energy Partners, L.P. declared a quarterly cash distribution of $0.890 per common unit, highlighting ongoing cash generation from the associated LNG infrastructure. This distribution is made by the partnership rather than directly by Cheniere Energy.
Neutral Sentiment: Earnings expectations are favorable but unconfirmed: Analysts expect Cheniere to potentially exceed estimates in its upcoming report, though this is based on consensus indicators rather than reported results.
Negative Sentiment: Valuation and analyst views are mixed: Bernstein reaffirmed an “outperform” rating but set a $283 price target, below the current trading level. Investors may also weigh execution, financing, and construction risks associated with expansion projects.
Wall Street Analyst Weigh In
LNG has been the topic of a number of recent analyst reports. Raymond James Financial reiterated a “strong-buy” rating and set a $340.00 price target on shares of Cheniere Energy in a report on Monday. Argus set a $330.00 price objective on Cheniere Energy in a research report on Tuesday, August 18th. Scotiabank set a $311.00 target price on Cheniere Energy in a research report on Thursday, October 15th. Zacks Research lowered shares of Cheniere Energy from a “strong-buy” rating to a “hold” rating in a report on Tuesday, August 11th. Finally, TD Cowen reiterated a “buy” rating on shares of Cheniere Energy in a report on Friday, October 16th. One investment analyst has rated the stock with a Strong Buy rating, seventeen have issued a Buy rating and two have assigned a Hold rating to the stock. According to MarketBeat, the company has a consensus rating of “Moderate Buy” and an average target price of $310.65.
Get Our Latest Analysis on LNG
Cheniere Energy Trading Up 4.1%
Shares of LNG stock opened at $298.80 on Friday. The stock has a 50 day simple moving average of $278.86 and a 200-day simple moving average of $261.05. The company has a debt-to-equity ratio of 1.97, a current ratio of 0.87 and a quick ratio of 0.72. The company has a market cap of $61.71 billion, a price-to-earnings ratio of 18.62, a PEG ratio of 1.14 and a beta of 0.06. Cheniere Energy, Inc. has a 1-year low of $186.20 and a 1-year high of $300.89.
Cheniere Energy (NYSE:LNG – Get Free Report) last released its quarterly earnings data on Thursday, August 6th. The energy company reported $3.02 EPS for the quarter, missing analysts’ consensus estimates of $3.11 by ($0.09). Cheniere Energy had a net margin of 13.57% and a return on equity of 29.80%. The business had revenue of $5.73 billion during the quarter, compared to analyst estimates of $4.92 billion. During the same quarter in the prior year, the company posted $7.30 earnings per share. The company’s revenue was up 23.5% on a year-over-year basis. On average, equities research analysts expect that Cheniere Energy, Inc. will post 16.75 EPS for the current fiscal year.
Cheniere Energy Announces Dividend
The business also recently disclosed a quarterly dividend, which was paid on Tuesday, August 18th. Stockholders of record on Monday, August 10th were given a $0.5550 dividend. This represents a $2.22 annualized dividend and a dividend yield of 0.7%. The ex-dividend date was Monday, August 10th. Cheniere Energy’s dividend payout ratio is currently 16.53%.
Cheniere Energy Profile
(Free Report)
Cheniere Energy, Inc is an energy infrastructure company engaged primarily in the production and export of liquefied natural gas (LNG). The company purchases natural gas, processes it through liquefaction facilities, and delivers LNG to customers in international energy markets. Its operations also include natural gas procurement, transportation, storage, and LNG marketing.
Cheniere operates the Sabine Pass LNG facility in Cameron Parish, Louisiana, and the Corpus Christi LNG facility near Corpus Christi, Texas.
Read More
Five stocks we like better than Cheniere Energy
Spotify Soars After Earnings as the Company Touts AI Benefits and Moderating Costs
Lockheed Martin’s Record $292 Billion Backlog Comes With a Delivery Test
Palantir’s Next Big Test Isn’t a Partnership—It’s the Numbers
Kinder Morgan’s $4.7 Billion Pipeline Bet Could Be Bigger Than Its Earnings Beat
Receive News & Ratings for Cheniere Energy Daily - Enter your email address below to receive a concise daily summary of the latest news and analysts' ratings for Cheniere Energy and related companies with MarketBeat.com's FREE daily email newsletter.
Společnost Bloom Energy ve 2. čtvrtletí překonala hranici tržeb 1 mld. USD, což představuje meziroční nárůst o 166 %, díky poptávce po palivových článcích pro datová centra.
While many will tell you the biggest bottleneck in AI is the chip supply, I actually believe it's electricity. Because of this, Bloom Energy (BE -11.24%) will be the biggest winner of the AI power crunch for one reason in particular: The company's speed to power is top-notch.
AI hyperscalers and their data centers cannot wait years for utility hookups. Bloom's solid oxide fuel cells help businesses avoid this wait. The company's systems can bring a data center online in about three months and don't require grid connectivity. This is a massive advantage, and customers are coming on board at record scale.
$193.30-$24.47 (-11.24%)
NYSE · As of 4:00 PM ET 10/23/26
The demand behind Bloom is quickly converting to revenue, as the company crossed $1 billion in the second quarter, a 166% year-over-year increase. Bloom's balance sheet is improving rapidly, with the company boasting about $2.7 billion in cash.
Management raised its full-year guidance to reflect a substantial increase in revenue, with a range of $3.9 billion to $4.2 billion. That's just about double what the company did in 2025.
Image source: The Motley Fool.
All this momentum means the stock isn't cheap. Shares have skyrocketed more than 150% year to date. The stock is trading at a whopping 357 times trailing earnings. For long-term investors, the premium is justified by the ever-improving balance sheet and incessant demand for fast power. We're still early on in the AI and data center days. Bloom's systems will be needed for years to come.
Catie Hogan has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Bloom Energy. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.
Útočník, který napadl burzu Bitget, přesunul v 52 transakcích aktiva v hodnotě 19,48 milionu USD, přičemž BTC tvořilo 19,33 milionu USD a zbytek ETH. Téměř všechny prostředky putovaly na nové neidentifikované adresy, uvádí Arkham.
The Bitget hacker has moved $19.48 million in 52 transfers, almost entirely in Bitcoin, as Arkham tracks fresh outflows from wallets linked to the exchange’s September breach.
Summary
Arkham tracked $19.48 million across 52 transfers, with Bitcoin accounting for $19.33 million. Hacker-linked wallets sent $78.01 million to new addresses between Oct. 15 and Oct. 23. Arkham valued remaining labeled holdings at $242.54 million, mostly held in Bitcoin. The latest transfers’ destinations remain unidentified, leaving potential laundering unconfirmed. Arkham put the transfers between 10:02 UTC on Oct. 21 and 02:48 UTC on Oct. 24, with Bitcoin accounting for $19.33 million and ETH making up the rest. Its thread said almost all the funds went to new addresses.
The blockchain intelligence firm framed its update as a question.
“Is the Bitget Hacker laundering the stolen funds?”
Arkham’s posts do not name an exchange, mixer, or over-the-counter desk receiving the latest transfers. The update documents money leaving labeled wallets, without establishing whether those assets were sold, cashed out, or recovered.
Bitget hacker movements total $78 million since Oct. 15 Across a longer reporting window, Arkham said the attacker had sent $78.01 million to new addresses since Oct. 15. Its daily breakdown showed $23.31 million moving on Oct. 15, followed by $8.68 million on Oct. 16 and $1.15 million on Oct. 17.
Another $10.51 million moved on Oct. 18. After no recorded movement on Oct. 19, the firm listed $15.13 million on Oct. 20, $11.74 million on Oct. 21, $184,160 on Oct. 22, and $7.3 million on Oct. 23.
The dates in Arkham’s opening post cover 64 hours and 46 minutes. A later post in the same thread described the $19.48 million as moving over “the past 48 hours,” leaving a mismatch between its shorthand description and the precise timestamps.
Using the firm’s rounded asset figures, Bitcoin represented approximately 99.2% of that $19.48 million. The implied ETH component was $150,000, although Arkham did not provide an exact token quantity in the opening post.
Arkham’s remaining balance uses a $350 million baseline In its thread, Arkham valued the hacker’s remaining labeled holdings at $242.54 million, including 2,960.01 BTC worth $241.99 million. It listed smaller balances on Ethereum, Hypercore, Solana and Tron.
The firm described that balance as 69% of a $350 million theft. Bitget’s own accounting puts the incident at approximately $387.5 million, after revising its initial $351.6 million estimate.
In its Sep. 25 recovery notice, the exchange said the revision included Zcash and TRON assets omitted from the first calculation. Bitget attributed the change to a more complete classification of the original transfers and said it did not represent further theft.
Against Bitget’s $387.5 million estimate, Arkham’s $242.54 million snapshot equals approximately 62.6%. Neither percentage establishes how much has been recovered, because the figures compare remaining labeled holdings with dollar estimates from the original incident.
Arkham data shows $239.34 million, including approximately 2,958 BTC valued at $238.79 million.
Source: Arkham Earlier tracing identified CoinJoin and cross-chain routes Fund movements linked to the attack began before October. As crypto.news previously reported, AMLBot traced roughly four BTC into CoinJoin in September, describing the activity as an apparent effort to obscure stolen funds.
AMLBot’s account followed assets from TRON into USDT, across to Ethereum through USDT0, and through ETH swaps and THORChain before they reached Bitcoin. The firm said approximately 4.59 BTC emerged from that route before the Bitcoin was split into smaller amounts.
Independent tracing by Bitquery documented other September conversions through THORChain and Chainflip. Its investigation matched 66 swaps to 126.71 BTC in payments by 14:38 UTC on Sep. 25, while identifying two swaps still waiting at that snapshot.
Those historical routes do not establish the destinations of Arkham’s latest transfers. The October screenshots contain transaction graphs but no readable transaction-level evidence connecting the new outflows to the same services.
Bitget says withdrawals have resumed while recovery continues Bitget’s incident explainer, updated Oct. 20, says its phased withdrawal restoration finished on Oct. 2 after BTC, ETH and USDT services reopened in September. The company says customer account balances remain unaffected and that it has identified no further unauthorized transfers following containment.
In the same explainer, Bitget attributed the breach to a vulnerability in a third-party security product. The company said the attacker obtained high-level internal credentials and submitted fraudulent withdrawal commands that bypassed existing risk controls. Bitget said the affected systems were isolated and the vulnerability was fixed.
Earlier coverage of the withdrawal reopening and reserves recorded CEO Gracy Chen’s statement that the Protection Fund had returned above $300 million on Sep. 30. Bitget has said the fund would absorb the financial loss from the breach.
The Sep. 25 notice names Mandiant and SlowMist as investigation partners and publishes receiving addresses across Ethereum-compatible networks, XRP Ledger, Zcash and TRON. Its recovery section says some assets had already been frozen through coordination with industry partners, but does not give an aggregate frozen amount in that notice.
The exchange’s recovery program offers separate 5% rewards for eligible voluntary actions that directly freeze or recover affected assets. Bitget excludes actions carried out under court orders, law-enforcement requests, or other legal processes, and retains discretion over eligibility and payment.
SWIFT pilotuje sdílenou účetní knihu pro nepřetržité přeshraniční platby se 17 bankami na šesti kontinentech; cílem jsou programovatelné digitální peníze a atomické vypořádání.
Jack Pouderoyen, Head of Digital Asset Strategy at SWIFT, shared insights on the evolution of the global financial system in a recent discussion with Finextra Research. He emphasized a shift towards 24/7 cross-border payments, programmable forms of digital cash, atomic settlement, and tokenized securities as core objectives for the industry.
SWIFT’s digital asset ecosystem and industry goalsSWIFT, the renowned global financial messaging network, is piloting a new ledger initiative that currently involves 17 banks across six continents, with over 40 institutions contributing to its development. Transactions on the platform span major currencies, including the US dollar, euro, British pound, Hong Kong dollar, and Singapore dollar.
Pouderoyen detailed the industry’s focus on enabling banks to efficiently move liquidity worldwide at any hour, particularly through tokenized deposit functionality. He noted a rising demand for a digital cash leg suitable for continuous, programmable settlement, which would streamline not only securities transactions but also payment versus payment (PvP) for FX deals.
Pouderoyen identified 24/7 payment capability as a critical component for banks looking to manage international liquidity and settlement outside of traditional operating hours. He underlined the importance of programmable money in unlocking atomic settlement efficiencies across both securities and foreign exchange arenas.
Ripple’s infrastructure and market parallelsCommentator X Finance Bull highlighted that Ripple’s XRP-centric infrastructure closely mirrors the developments outlined by SWIFT. Ripple, a San Francisco-based fintech company specializing in blockchain-based global payments, has implemented atomic settlement processes utilizing RLUSD for digital cash transactions. Recent collaborations involving Ondo, Kinexys (a J.P. Morgan solution), Mastercard, and Ripple resulted in a tokenized US Treasury redemption settled on the XRP Ledger (XRPL) in under five seconds.
A broad array of institutions—including Standard Chartered, DBS, Franklin Templeton, BNY, Aviva Investors, DriveWealth, CSD BR, BTG Pactual, and Meritz Securities—are actively developing tools around RLUSD, tokenized funds, and new digital settlement models.
Mini dictionary: RLUSD – A Ripple-issued stablecoin designed for fast, secure, and programmable digital transactions, often serving as a settlement asset on the XRP Ledger and in atomic settlement processes.
The FX dimension and XRP’s roleX Finance Bull pointed out that foreign exchange (FX) settlement is a pivotal opportunity. With global FX turnover estimated at $9.6 trillion daily and total gross settlement obligations exceeding $14 trillion per day, the demand for instant settlement solutions is significant. XRP’s architecture supports native cross-currency transactions and features auto-bridging, attributes that align with SWIFT’s described roadmap for digital settlement.
FeatureSWIFT (New Ledger)Ripple (XRP/RLUSD)24/7 cross-border paymentsIn piloting phase with banksOperationalProgrammable digital cashUnder developmentImplemented with RLUSDAtomic settlementHighlighted as targetLive on XRPLFX auto-bridgingDescribed as goalNative to XRPIndustry observations and future outlookPouderoyen’s interview did not reference XRP directly, but analysts like X Finance Bull see a notable overlap in technological objectives. He noted that Ripple’s long-standing efforts to position XRP for this type of financial world now reflect the priorities discussed by SWIFT.
X Finance Bull wrote, “They are describing the exact financial world Ripple has been preparing $XRP for, and I think that is massive.”
While the commentary does not amount to an official partnership or endorsement, it underscores a growing convergence in approach between traditional banking infrastructure and blockchain-based financial solutions. SWIFT and Ripple appear to be moving in parallel toward 24/7, programmable, and atomic settlement capabilities, even if their paths have not formally crossed.
Franklin Templeton přidal na XRP Ledger tokeny sgBENJI v hodnotě přibližně 150 milionů USD, čímž zvýšil počet držených podílů na téměř 193 milionů v celkové hodnotě zhruba 200 milionů USD.
Franklin Templeton has added roughly $150 million in sgBENJI shares to the XRP Ledger (XRPL). The move nearly quadrupled the asset manager’s tokenized fund position on the ledger overnight.
On-chain data shows two separate $75 million cash subscription receipts recorded on Wednesday.
The matching share issuances followed on Thursday. Each batch delivered just over 72.18 million sgBENJI shares at a price of $1.039 per share.
Before the inflow, Franklin held roughly 48 million shares on the XRPL. That figure has now climbed to nearly 193 million shares. At current pricing, the position is worth approximately $200 million.
One Wallet, Eight Signers, What the Structure Means
The entire sgBENJI balance on XRPL sits inside a single wallet. That wallet shares the same eight signing addresses as Franklin’s issuing account.
Any two of those eight addresses can jointly approve a transaction. Franklin retains the right to freeze balances or recover tokens if needed.
This design is typical of regulated tokenized fund structures. Issuers use multi-sig accounts to enforce compliance controls while keeping assets on a public ledger.
Still, concentrating the full position in one wallet raises operational questions, particularly around who the end investor is. Franklin has not clarified whether the wallet is an omnibus account holding multiple clients or a single large allocation.
The move extends a broader institutional push on XRPL. Ripple’s partnership with DBS and Franklin Templeton, announced in September 2025, set the stage for this: it enabled DBS Digital Exchange clients to swap between sgBENJI and Ripple’s RLUSD stablecoin and explore using the fund tokens as collateral.
Franklin’s commitment to XRPL is not incidental. Franklin Templeton’s digital assets head has publicly backed XRP for its practical utility, citing throughput, cost, and reliability as reasons institutions are choosing the ledger over alternatives.
XRPL’s RWA Market Grows, Franklin Now Ranks Second
RWA.xyz now ranks Franklin Templeton second among tokenized asset issuers on XRPL. Ripple’s RLUSD leads with roughly $930 million.
Ondo Finance sits third at $185 million. Franklin’s sgBENJI position at ~$200 million slots in between.
This ranking shift matters in context. XRPL’s real-world asset market cap hit $2.25 billion earlier this year, rising 124% in Q1 2026 alone. Franklin’s fresh inflow adds weight to that trend.
The asset manager has also been laying regulatory groundwork in parallel. It secured SEC clearance for its funds to hold tokenized assets and met with the SEC’s Crypto Task Force on 1940 Act issues to clarify how tokenized funds interact with the Innovation Exemption.
Beyond regulation, Franklin has been expanding utility for its tokenized shares. Its partnership with Bybit lets eligible clients pledge sgBENJI shares as collateral to secure stablecoin credit lines while still earning fund yield.
It also tapped HashKey to bring the tokenized fund to Asia, reaching professional investors through HashKey Exchange’s Earn channel.
Ripple, for its part, has continued deepening infrastructure on the ledger. Its strategic investments in ZILO and Licuido expand regulated token issuance and collateral services, building exactly the rails that institutions like Franklin now use.
For those exploring where to access real-world assets on-chain, leading crypto exchanges now offer RWA trading options as the sector grows.
Austin Griffith ukázal, že boti během několika sekund zacílili na ethereum peněženku s privátním klíčem 6969; vklad 0,0004 ETH vybrali v následujícím bloku, za 12 sekund.
The Ethereum Foundation’s Austin Griffith put about $1 behind an easy-to-guess private key, and bots tried to take it within seconds.
Austin Griffith shows bots draining a wallet with a guessable private key
Posted October 23, 2026 at 8:35 pm ET.
Austin Griffith of the Ethereum Foundation put about $1 in an Ethereum wallet whose private key was the number 6969, and bots went after it almost at once. “As soon as the dollar landed, there were three transactions in the mempool pending trying to steal it,” Griffith said on Oct. 21 on Uneasy Money, the Unchained show he co-hosts.
A private key is the secret number that controls a wallet, so anyone who guesses it can move the funds. Griffith ran the test after a security failure at eMudhra, an Indian certificate authority. A disclosure site for the incident, set up by Mozilla’s Dennis Jackson, said the keys behind eight eMudhra intermediate certificates, created in April 2025, had been compromised, and researcher Scott Helme wrote that each was a number below 256, one of them 4. Firefox and Chrome blocked the certificates on Oct. 17, the day the problem was reported, and Microsoft followed on Oct. 20. On Oct. 22, after the episode was taped, eMudhra said it would leave the global SSL/TLS certificate business.
Get Unchained’s crypto news in your inbox with the free Unchained Daily newsletter.
What the Chain Shows
On-chain records reviewed by Unchained show that 0.0004 ETH, about $1, reached the address for key 6969 at 20:35 UTC on Oct. 21 in a deposit. A transaction signed with that same key moved it out in the next block, 12 seconds later, and spent most of the deposit on network fees. Transactions from three other addresses hit the wallet just after, and two of them failed. The deposit came from a wallet named slop.atg.eth, which was funded by austingriffith.eth.
Griffith also said “there’s not a number less than 256 that doesn’t already have a nonce,” the counter of transactions an address has sent. Unchained checked the addresses for all 255 such keys, 1 through 255, on Ethereum mainnet, and every one has sent transactions.
Testing Longer Keys
Before the result came in, Griffith guessed that bots would stop finding keys somewhere “between eight and 12” digits. Later in the episode, he said 10-digit keys were drained “right away,” while 12-digit keys had “not yet” been drained. He said he had also seeded a 14-digit key and a 16-digit key, “looking for someone to steal my dollar.”
Griffith did not name those keys, and Unchained could not independently check which ones he used. On-chain records show slop.atg.eth funded four more addresses about 14 minutes after the first deposit. One was emptied within 12 seconds, and three still held their funds as of Oct. 23, but the records do not show which key length each belongs to.
The hosts said they would check next week whether the 14- and 16-digit keys had been drained.
Related Listen: Uneasy Money: Is the Internet Breaking Because Bots Never Get Lazy?
AI-assisted content: This article was produced with the assistance of AI tools and was reviewed, edited, and fact-checked by a member of the Unchained editorial team before publication.
Síť Initia zůstává po bezpečnostním incidentu pozastavená a termín obnovení provozu nebyl stanoven. Útočník podle spoluzakladatele Zona prostřednictvím chyby v MoveVM vytěžil a odcizil aktiva AUSD, ETH a USDC v hodnotě zhruba 2,7 milionu USD.
Co-founder Zon's preliminary read points to a MoveVM flaw, while D2 Finance traced the payouts to LayerZero adapters on Ethereum.
Initia's chain stays halted after an attacker minted and bridged out tokens
Posted October 23, 2026 at 10:35 pm ET.
Anyone holding assets on Initia is waiting on a restart. Initia’s layer 1 and its rollups have been offline since 11:41 a.m. ET on Friday, when the team cited a “security incident,” and it had not said when they would come back as of 5:52 p.m. ET. Initia said in the same notice that it was working “to establish the full scope of any impact with security teams, validators, and exchanges.”
Co-founder Zon pointed to Initia’s own software, citing preliminary findings. He wrote that it was “a Day 0 bug related to Initia’s MoveVM on CosmosSDK that allowed the exploiter to mint additional tokens on the Initia L1 but does not apply to native INIT tokens.” The attacker managed to “mint and bridge out ~$2.7m worth of AUSD, ETH, and USDC before the chain was paused,” he added.
Pseudonymous researcher Spreek flagged the attack at 11:27 a.m. ET, 14 minutes before the halt, estimating $2.6 million cashed out.
Get Unchained’s crypto news in your inbox with the free Unchained Daily newsletter.
How the Funds Left D2 Finance, which published a breakdown of the transactions, said one transaction at 10:59 a.m. ET minted 2 million AUSD on the Initia side. By D2’s account, those unbacked tokens were burned and sent over LayerZero to Ethereum, where OFT adapters, lockbox contracts holding the real tokens behind Initia’s bridged versions, paid out. D2 wrote that “an OFT adapter cannot check whether burned tokens were ever backed.”
D2 said the attacker pulled 1.4 million AUSD, 71% of the AUSD adapter’s holdings, leaving about 576,000, plus 105 ETH, 96% of the native-ETH adapter. Another 1.08 million USDC arrived as new mints through Circle’s CCTP. In D2’s telling, $2.65 million had reached Ethereum within seven minutes and 21 seconds of the mint.
Agora Says AUSD Is Unaffected Agora, which issues AUSD, said at 12:57 p.m. ET that it “has no smart contracts deployed on Initia.” At 2:26 p.m. ET it added that “AUSD does not exist on Initia,” and that “AUSD is fully backed.” Agora’s statements indicate the token minted on Initia was a bridged representation rather than AUSD itself. D2 said the AUSD that left came from an Ethereum lockbox adapter backing that bridged token.
Onchain records show the 1.4 million AUSD sat in the attacker’s Ethereum address for about 84 seconds before it was traded away on the 1inch aggregator at 11:03 a.m. ET. Agora froze that address at 12:31 p.m. ET, roughly 89 minutes later and before its first statement, when the address held no AUSD.
The same address sent 1,135.5 ETH, which D2 valued at about $2.7 million, to a newly used wallet at 11:41 a.m. ET, the minute the halt took effect.
Initia’s own account has not confirmed Zon’s loss figure or published a post-mortem. It said it would post verified updates through its official channels.
Related Listen: Who’s to Blame for How KelpDAO’s DVN Was Set Up? KelpDAO or LayerZero?
AI-assisted content: This article was produced with the assistance of AI tools and was reviewed, edited, and fact-checked by a member of the Unchained editorial team before publication.
Deflační výhoda Etherea slábne: za posledních 30 dní bylo spáleno ETH v objemu odpovídajícím jen 2,7 % nově vydaného ETH. Počet aktivních adres však vzrostl na 627 tisíc a čistý odliv ETH z burz činil 169 tisíc ETH.
Ethereum’s [ETH] deflationary edge over Bitcoin may be fading.
Since the merge, 55.4% of the newly issued ETH has been burned. However, this number has dropped significantly to only 2.7% over the last thirty days. In addition, ETH’s yearly supply growth has increased to 0.86%, which is almost Bitcoin’s 0.82%. That’s a sharp pullback in ETH burning, impacting its scarcity argument and potentially challenging the long-term bullish thesis versus BTC.
So, with ETH’s deflationary narrative being challenged, its next leg higher could increasingly rely on demand for Ethereum’s Layer 1 block space. As the chart below shows, gas prices have dropped from 2.76 Gwei to just 0.03 Gwei in two days, fueling the “Is ETH the new SOL?” debate. But cheaper prices are not always good, as they can also signal weaker demand for the block space.
Source: EtherScan Notably, this is where a key on-chain metric comes into play.
According to CryptoQuant data, Ethereum Velocity is at 11.03, implying that ETH is circulated actively on the blockchain. Moreover, the number of active addresses has hit 627k, suggesting growing adoption. And if the demand is sustained on a declining gas fee, the cost to transact on ETH will remain cheap despite active use.
In this context, declining gas fees could be a bullish sign, which brings ETH/BTC back to the forefront. While Ethereum’s deflationary edge is being eroded, strong Layer 1 activity could offset it. The important question is whether ongoing on-chain demand will catalyze a rebound in ETH/BTC. In turn, translate into a stronger relative performance against Bitcoin [BTC].
Ethereum’s bullish positioning raises hopes of BTC outperformance The divergence between ETH’s technical and fundamental setup is growing interesting.
While the overall whale activity seems to be cooling, the Bitfinex whales’ ETH long positions are rising sharply, suggesting smart money is positioning for further upside. Meanwhile, ETH/BTC is also showing a pattern similar to its pre-altseason setup in 2021, forming higher highs and retesting its trendline.
On-chain data adds another bullish sign. According to Santiment, about 169k ETH left exchanges on a net basis. This marked the largest daily outflow in more than four months. A similar development occurred on the 5th of June when roughly 223,800 ETH left exchanges as ETH reached its lowest price since the beginning of April 2025, only to climb rapidly in the following days.
Source: Santiment Taken together, strong network activity, rising whale longs, and a significant ETH exchange outflow make up Ethereum’s bullish case. Should ETH/BTC follow the same pattern as it did in 2021 ahead of the altseason, another breakout could be on the way.
The logic is simple: While Ethereum’s advantage over Bitcoin in terms of deflationary properties has weakened, an increase in layer 1 demand, rising whale longs, and ongoing exchange outflows may create conditions for a supply squeeze. Taken together, these factors suggest ETH could be building momentum for a potential breakout against BTC once the market turns back to risk-on.
Final Summary Rising Ethereum activity could support ETH’s recovery against BTC.
Whale longs and ETH outflows could help Ethereum outperform Bitcoin when market sentiment improves.
Analýza varuje, že mechanismus inactivity leak v síti Ethereum PoS mohou koordinovaní byzantští validátoři zneužít k finalizaci konfliktních řetězců a k překročení kritické třetinové hranice hlasovací síly.
In May 2023, the Ethereum blockchain faced its first inactivity leak, a mechanism designed to restore chain finalization amid prolonged network disruptions. This feature aims to reduce the voting power of validators who become unreachable, redistributing their power to active validators. Our investigation delves into the safety implications of this inactivity leak within the Ethereum blockchain. Through theoretical analysis, we explore how Byzantine validators might expedite the finalization of conflicting branches or reach a voting power exceeding the critical safety threshold of one-third. Additionally, we revisit the probabilistic bouncing attack, demonstrating how the inactivity leak might allow Byzantine validators to breach safety thresholds. This article uncovers how penalizing inactive nodes can undermine blockchain properties, especially when Byzantine validators can coordinate their actions.
I. Overview
Background
In September 2022, Ethereum transitioned from a proof-of-work (PoW) consensus mechanism to a proof-of-stake (PoS) protocol. This change aimed to improve energy efficiency and scalability. The Ethereum PoS protocol is unique due to its hybrid nature, combining elements of classical Byzantine Fault-Tolerant (BFT) Consensus with the Nakamoto-style blockchain framework. In BFT blockchains, validators explicitly vote on block proposals, ensuring that once a block is added, it remains permanently incorporated. In contrast, Nakamoto-style blockchains allow forks but eventually reconcile to a single chain.
Motivation
The motivation behind this study stems from Ethereum's introduction of the inactivity leak, a penalty mechanism designed to address prolonged network disruptions. When validators become unreachable, their voting power is reduced and redistributed to active validators. While this mechanism aims to restore chain finalization and maintain liveness during network partitions, it raises significant concerns about its impact on the blockchain's safety. Specifically, the potential for Byzantine validators to exploit the inactivity leak to expedite the finalization of conflicting branches or gain a voting power exceeding the critical safety threshold of one-third necessitates a thorough investigation.
Contributions
This article is mainly based on the many sources, one of our main contents came from Byzantine Attacks Exploiting Penalties in Ethereum PoS from authors: Ulysse Pavloff, Yackolley Amoussou-Genou, Sara Tucci-Piergiovanni
This paper makes several key contributions:
Formal Analysis of the Inactivity Leak: They provide the first formal description of the inactivity leak, detailing its operational mechanics and its intended purpose within the Ethereum PoS protocol.
Impact on Safety: Our analysis explores various configurations and scenarios to understand how the inactivity leak influences the safety of the Ethereum blockchain, particularly under the influence of Byzantine validators.
Revisiting Known Attacks: We reexamine the probabilistic bouncing attack in the context of the inactivity leak, demonstrating how this attack can be leveraged to probabilistically breach safety thresholds.
Theoretical and Practical Insights: The findings offer valuable insights for both theoretical research and practical implementations of penalty mechanisms in PoS blockchains.
Organization of the Paper
The paper is structured to provide a comprehensive exploration of the inactivity leak and its implications. The organization is as follows:
Introduction: An overview of the motivation, contributions, and structure of the paper.
System Model and Ethereum Protocol: A detailed description of the Ethereum PoS protocol, including its safety and liveness trade-offs, Byzantine fault tolerance, and the inactivity leak mechanism.
Analysis of Safety Loss Scenarios: An in-depth analysis of scenarios where safety might be compromised, including conflicting finalization with honest validators and coordinated Byzantine attacks.
Revisiting the Probabilistic Bouncing Attack: A thorough reexamination of the probabilistic bouncing attack, assessing its impact in the presence of the inactivity leak and presenting simulation results.
Future Work: A discussion of the implications of our findings for Ethereum and other PoS blockchains, along with directions for future research.
Conclusions: A summary of our findings, emphasizing the importance of refining penalty mechanisms to ensure blockchain safety and stability.
II. System Model and Ethereum Protocol
Ethereum PoS Protocol Overview
Ethereum's shift to proof-of-stake (PoS) in September 2022 was a landmark event, transitioning from the energy-intensive proof-of-work (PoW) to a more sustainable and scalable consensus mechanism. The Ethereum PoS protocol combines elements of classical Byzantine Fault-Tolerant (BFT) Consensus with the Nakamoto-style blockchain, creating a hybrid model. In this system, validators are selected based on their stake to propose and validate new blocks, aiming to achieve consensus through voting. The protocol leverages a fork-choice rule to determine the canonical chain from a tree-like structure of blocks, ensuring that the blockchain can adapt and reconcile forks to maintain a single chain.
Safety and Liveness Trade-offs
In the context of blockchain protocols, safety and liveness are critical properties that need to be balanced. Safety ensures that the blockchain does not fork, meaning that once a block is finalized, it cannot be revoked. Liveness, on the other hand, ensures that the blockchain continues to grow and accept new transactions.
BFT Consensus: BFT blockchains achieve safety by using super-majority quorums to finalize blocks, preventing forks but potentially halting growth during network partitions or failures. This trade-off means that while the blockchain is safe, it may not always be live.
Nakamoto-style Blockchains: These blockchains are designed to remain live even during network disruptions, as they allow for the existence of multiple forks. Eventually, they reconcile to a single chain, but this means they can experience temporary forks, which poses a challenge to safety.
Ethereum PoS: Ethereum PoS aims to balance these trade-offs by maintaining a finalized chain alongside a forkable chain. The finalized chain is protected by BFT mechanisms, ensuring safety, while the forkable chain continues to grow, ensuring liveness.
Byzantine Fault Tolerance
Byzantine Fault Tolerance (BFT) is a critical aspect of blockchain security, ensuring that the protocol can withstand malicious actions by up to one-third of the validators. In BFT systems, validators vote on proposed blocks, and a block is only considered finalized if it receives votes from a super-majority of validators. This mechanism ensures that even if some validators act maliciously or become unreachable, the blockchain can still achieve consensus and finalize blocks.
Inactivity Leak Mechanism
Definition and Purpose
The inactivity leak is a penalty mechanism introduced to handle scenarios where validators become inactive or unreachable due to network disruptions. When validators fail to participate in the consensus process for an extended period, their stake and voting power are gradually reduced. This reduction is intended to reallocate voting power to active validators, thereby restoring the blockchain's ability to achieve finalization and maintain liveness.
Impact on Voting Power
The inactivity leak directly affects the distribution of voting power among validators. By penalizing inactive validators, the mechanism ensures that the remaining active validators have increased influence in the consensus process. This reallocation is crucial for restoring liveness during network partitions, as it allows the blockchain to continue finalizing blocks despite the absence of some validators. However, this mechanism also introduces potential risks, particularly if Byzantine validators can exploit it to gain a disproportionate amount of voting power.
Restoring Liveness: During network partitions or disruptions, the inactivity leak helps maintain liveness by reducing the influence of inactive validators and empowering active ones to continue finalizing blocks.
Risks to Safety: The redistribution of voting power can create scenarios where Byzantine validators, through coordinated actions, may exploit the inactivity leak to increase their influence. This can lead to safety breaches, such as the finalization of conflicting chains or exceeding the critical one-third threshold of Byzantine voting power.
Ethereum's Unique Hybrid Model
Ethereum PoS's hybrid model of maintaining a finalized and non-finalized chain within a single data structure aims to offer the best of both BFT and Nakamoto-style blockchains. The finalized chain guarantees safety, ensuring that once a block is finalized, it remains unaltered. The non-finalized chain allows for continued growth and transaction processing, ensuring liveness even during adverse network conditions.
The Ethereum PoS protocol's innovative combination of BFT and Nakamoto-style elements, along with the introduction of the inactivity leak, represents a significant advancement in blockchain technology. However, this complexity also introduces new challenges, particularly regarding the balance between safety and liveness and the potential exploitation by Byzantine validators. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for ensuring the robustness and security of the Ethereum blockchain.
III. Analysis of Safety Loss Scenarios
Conflicting Finalization with Honest Validators
Network Partitions and CAP Theorem
Network partitions can disrupt the Ethereum blockchain's operation, potentially leading to conflicting finalization of blocks. The CAP theorem, which states that a distributed system can only achieve two out of three properties—consistency, availability, and partition tolerance—underlines the challenge of maintaining both safety and liveness during network partitions. In Ethereum PoS, this means that while efforts are made to maintain liveness by allowing the chain to continue growing, safety can be compromised if different parts of the network finalize conflicting blocks independently.
Independent Finalization on Different Chains
During network partitions, validators in different network segments may finalize different blocks independently. This situation arises when validators in one partition finalize one set of blocks, while validators in another partition finalize a different set. As a result, the blockchain can face conflicting finalization, where multiple chains claim to be the valid continuation of the blockchain. This scenario challenges the blockchain's safety guarantees, as transactions on conflicting branches may lead to inconsistencies and potential double-spending.
Byzantine validators can exploit network partitions and the inactivity leak to accelerate conflicting finalization intentionally. In scenarios where Byzantine validators strategically coordinate their actions, they can exploit the reduced influence of honest validators (due to network partitions or penalties from the inactivity leak) to finalize conflicting blocks quickly. This coordinated action undermines the blockchain's safety guarantees, as it introduces uncertainty about the true state of the blockchain.
Breaching the Safety Threshold
Another significant risk arises when Byzantine validators coordinate to exceed the critical one-third threshold of voting power. In Ethereum PoS, maintaining safety relies on ensuring that less than one-third of validators are Byzantine. However, if Byzantine validators can increase their influence through strategic actions during network disruptions or by exploiting the inactivity leak, they may collectively control more than one-third of the voting power. This breach of the safety threshold can lead to irreversible decisions and compromises the integrity of the blockchain.
IV. Revisiting the Probabilistic Bouncing Attack
Original Attack Description
The probabilistic bouncing attack is a known strategy in blockchain environments, particularly relevant in proof-of-stake (PoS) protocols like Ethereum. This attack exploits periods of network uncertainty or synchronization to delay block finalization intentionally. Validators participating in the consensus process strategically withhold their votes or propose conflicting blocks, leading to prolonged ambiguity about which chain should be considered the canonical one. By introducing delays in the finalization process, the attack undermines the blockchain's liveness guarantees, as transactions may remain pending or reversible for extended periods.
sources: arxiv.org
Impact of the Inactivity Leak
The introduction of the inactivity leak mechanism amplifies the effectiveness of the probabilistic bouncing attack. This penalty mechanism penalizes validators who become inactive due to network disruptions or strategic inactivity. As inactive validators lose stake and voting power over time, active validators gain a disproportionate influence in the consensus process. This redistribution of voting power alters the dynamics of the blockchain's security model, potentially creating opportunities for malicious actors to exploit.
In the context of the probabilistic bouncing attack, the inactivity leak exacerbates the impact during periods of network synchrony. Byzantine validators can strategically become inactive to avoid penalties and then coordinate attacks when network conditions are favorable. By delaying finalization through strategic inactivity and subsequent coordinated actions, malicious validators can prolong uncertainty about the blockchain's state, further compromising its liveness and integrity.
Conditions for Safety Threshold Breach
Our analysis identifies specific conditions under which the probabilistic bouncing attack, augmented by the inactivity leak, can breach the safety threshold of Ethereum PoS. These conditions include prolonged network partitions, strategic coordination among Byzantine validators to exploit penalties, and the operational mechanics of the inactivity leak itself. The combination of these factors creates a scenario where Byzantine validators can probabilistically control the blockchain's decision-making process, potentially leading to irreversible decisions or conflicting finalizations.
Simulation Results and Discussion
Simulation studies provide empirical evidence of how the probabilistic bouncing attack, enhanced by the inactivity leak, impacts Ethereum's safety and liveness properties. By modeling various attack scenarios and network conditions, we illustrate the potential vulnerabilities introduced by the inactivity leak and the strategies employed by Byzantine validators to exploit them. Discussions delve into the implications of these findings for blockchain security and propose strategies for mitigating the risks posed by such attacks.
source: arxiv.org
V. Future Work
Summary of Findings
Our study has highlighted significant vulnerabilities in Ethereum's proof-of-stake (PoS) protocol, particularly concerning the probabilistic bouncing attack and the inactivity leak mechanism. These findings underscore the importance of enhancing blockchain security while maintaining robustness in consensus mechanisms. We have identified critical areas where future research and development efforts can focus to address these challenges effectively.
Implications for Ethereum and Other PoS Blockchains
The implications extend beyond Ethereum to other PoS blockchains that utilize penalty mechanisms and face similar security challenges. Understanding these vulnerabilities provides a foundation for improving the design and implementation of future blockchain protocols. Key implications include:
Security Enhancements: Develop more resilient penalty mechanisms that mitigate the risks posed by Byzantine attacks and strategic network disruptions.
Consensus Protocol Optimization: Refine consensus algorithms to improve their ability to handle network partitions and maintain safety and liveness guarantees simultaneously.
Governance and Protocol Design: Implement governance structures that can adapt dynamically to emerging threats and vulnerabilities, ensuring continuous improvement and adaptation of blockchain protocols.
Directions for Future Research
Future research efforts should prioritize the following areas to advance blockchain security and resilience:
Enhanced Penalty Mechanisms: Investigate novel penalty mechanisms that discourage malicious behavior while incentivizing active participation and network stability.
Dynamic Governance Models: Explore governance frameworks that enable swift responses to security threats, including protocol upgrades and adjustments to consensus rules.
Formal Verification and Security Audits: Conduct rigorous formal verification and security audits of blockchain protocols to identify and mitigate potential vulnerabilities before deployment.
Cross-Chain Interoperability: Address interoperability challenges between different PoS blockchains to foster collaboration and enhance overall blockchain ecosystem resilience.
Related Work and References
Our study builds upon existing research in Ethereum PoS, Byzantine fault tolerance, and consensus algorithm design. Further exploration into related work can provide deeper insights and inspire innovative solutions to address current and future challenges in blockchain security.
Conclusion
Our exploration of the probabilistic bouncing attack and the inactivity leak in Ethereum PoS has underscored critical vulnerabilities that require immediate attention. By focusing on enhancing security mechanisms, optimizing consensus protocols, and fostering collaborative research, the blockchain community can strengthen the resilience of PoS blockchains against malicious actors and network disruptions. Through these efforts, we aim to contribute to the evolution of blockchain technologies towards more secure, efficient, and trustworthy decentralized systems.
BFA Law prověřuje převzetí společnosti Penske Automotive Group Rogerem Penskem a Mitsui za cenu 212 USD za akcii kvůli možné nespravedlivé ceně pro menšinové akcionáře.
BFA Law is investigating the announced $212.00 per share merger in which Roger Penske and Mistui & Co., Ltd. are set to acquire Penske Automotive Group, Inc.; current shareholders are notified to contact the firm.
New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - October 24, 2026) - Leading securities law firm Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP announces that it is investigating the going private merger whereby Penske Automotive Group, Inc. (NYSE: PAG) is being taken private by its controlling stockholders, Roger Penske and Mitsui & Co., Ltd. Penske is incorporated in Delaware.
If you are a current shareholder of Penske, you are encouraged to obtain additional information by visiting: https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/penske-investigation.
Key Details of the Penske ($PAG) Investigation:
Investigation Overview: Breaches of Fiduciary Duty in connection with the merger under which Roger Penske and Mitsui will acquire the public stock of Penske for $212.00 per shareAction: Contact BFA Law to discuss your rightsWhy is the Penske Transaction being Investigated?
Penske Automotive Group, Inc. ("Penske") is a company that is controlled by two majority stockholders—Roger Penske (via "Penske Corporation") and Mitsui & Co., Ltd. ("Mitsui"). Those two stockholders alone control 72.3% of the company's voting power.
Penske's initial disclosures have reported that the company utilized a special committee to evaluate the merger and that the merger is conditioned on the approval of the public stockholders at an upcoming stockholder vote. Penske has not yet disclosed the full details of the process that resulted in the merger, and key questions about whether those protective mechanisms were effective remain unanswered.
BFA is investigating whether the terms of the merger comply with Delaware law, including whether the $212.00 per share price is a fair price for the public stockholders' shares of Penske stock.
Click here for more information:
https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/penske-investigation
What Can You Do?
If you are a current holder of Penske stock, you may have legal options and are encouraged to submit your information to the firm.
All representation is on a contingency fee basis; there is no cost to you. Shareholders are not responsible for any court costs or expenses of litigation. The firm will seek court approval for any potential fees and expenses.
Submit your information by visiting:
https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/penske-investigation
Why Bleichmar Fonti & Auld LLP?
BFA is a leading international law firm representing plaintiffs in securities class actions and shareholder litigation. It has been named a top plaintiff law firm by Chambers USA, The Legal 500, and ISS SCAS, and its attorneys have been named "Elite Trial Lawyers" by the National Law Journal, "Litigation Stars" by Benchmark Litigation, among the top "500 Leading Plaintiff Financial Lawyers" by Lawdragon, "Titans of the Plaintiffs' Bar" by Law360 and "SuperLawyers" by Thomson Reuters.
Most recently, The Legal 500 awarded BFA the most client satisfaction accolades of any plaintiff's securities litigation law firm, with clients noting: "[t]here is no better service provider in the practice area," "[t]he interest of the client is always front and center," and "[t]here isn't a better firm in this space." One testimonial described the firm as "nimble and entrepreneurial," with a "relentless focus on adding value for clients."
Among its recent notable successes, BFA recovered over $900 million in value from Tesla, Inc.'s Board of Directors, as well as $420 million from Teva Pharmaceutical Ind. Ltd.
For more information about BFA and its attorneys, please visit https://www.bfalaw.com.
https://www.bfalaw.com/cases/penske-investigation
Attorney advertising. Past results do not guarantee future outcomes.
To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/320508
Source: Bleichmar Fonti & Auld
Ready to Announce with Confidence?
Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.
Kraken stáhl kontroverzní požadavky na údaje o zaměstnavateli a způsobu využití XMR. Spoluvýkonný ředitel Arjun Sethi potvrdil, že Monero zůstává zalistované.
Kraken co-CEO Arjun Sethi said the exchange’s Monero emails were “wrong” and confirmed that XMR stays listed, after Kraken asked customers who bought Monero with their own money and withdrew it to disclose their employer, source of funds, and what they planned to do with the coins. Sethi said no rule required the inquiries, and that the questions have now been withdrawn. The statement, posted on X on October 24, came in response to a public call-out over the messages.
the $XMR emails were us. they were wrong. here is what happened and what changed. what happened – clients who bought xmr with their own money and withdrew it got an email asking for employer, source of funds and what they planned to do with their coins – no rule required it. someone saw a young client with a lot of money and called it a red flag. that is not a red flag. that is our customer and client what changed – those requests are withdrawn and the clients have been told nothing is required of them – the “what will you do with your coins” question is gone and unacceptable. where your money came from is a fair question. what you do with it after it leaves is not xmr stays listed. buy it here, take it home. that is the product.. we’ll keep making it better. thx for the call out.
— Arjun Sethi (@arjunsethi) October 24, 2026
What the Emails Asked, and Why Kraken Says They Were Wrong
According to Sethi’s account, the emails went to clients who had already bought XMR with their own funds and moved the coins off the platform. The message asked for three things: the customer’s employer, the source of the funds, and what they intended to do with the withdrawn coins. Sethi wrote that “no rule required it,” and traced the trigger to a single judgment call. “Someone saw a young client with a lot of money and called it a red flag. That is not a red flag. That is our customer and client.”
The correction is procedural as much as it is reputational. Sethi said the requests have been withdrawn and the affected clients have been told nothing is required of them. The question about what a customer would do with their coins after they left Kraken is “gone and unacceptable,” he wrote.
The Line Kraken Now Draws
The episode turns on a distinction Kraken is now making explicit: the origin of funds is a legitimate compliance question, but their destination is not. “Where your money came from is a fair question. What you do with it after it leaves is not,” Sethi wrote. That framing separates the anti-money-laundering obligation that exchanges actually carry from an inquiry into a customer’s post-withdrawal activity, which Kraken has no legal requirement to police and now says it will not.
Monero remains listed. “XMR stays listed. Buy it here, take it home. That is the product,” Sethi wrote, adding that Kraken will keep improving the product. The confirmation matters because Monero is the most prominent privacy coin, and its availability on major exchanges has been a recurring point of tension as regulators pressure venues over anonymity-enhancing assets.
What the Walkback Does Not Settle
The correction is limited to Kraken’s own conduct. It does not change the broader regulatory environment for privacy coins, and it does not mean other exchanges will follow. Sethi’s statement resolves one episode at one venue; the questions of whether and how exchanges should gather information on self-custodied privacy-coin withdrawals remain open across the industry.
Monero traded near $602 with a market capitalization of about $11.3 billion on October 24, up roughly 2% over the prior 24 hours and about 11.5% over the prior week, according to CoinGecko. The token has traded in the range of roughly $584 to $606 over the past day, and sits below its January 2026 record near $798. The walkback is a customer-service and compliance-policy event, not a market event; the price figures are context, not a reaction to the statement.
Kraken’s retreat from the withdrawal questions lands in the middle of a longer conversation about how exchanges treat privacy coins, a subject BlockchainReporter has tracked through Monero’s privacy trade and the exchange’s own regulatory expansion. The next observable signal is whether other venues that have restricted or questioned Monero activity adjust their own approaches, and whether any regulator weighs in on post-withdrawal questions of the kind Kraken has now disowned.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
AUTHOR
Jide Idowu is a skilled freelance writer with expertise in blockchain technology, cryptocurrency, and digital finance. Known for his ability to break down complex topics into clear, engaging content, Jide crafts articles, blog posts, and analyses that resonate with both beginners and seasoned professionals. His work spans a wide range of subjects, from emerging crypto trends to in-depth explorations of blockchain innovations. With a keen eye for detail and a passion for educating readers, Jide is a reliable voice in the rapidly evolving world of digital assets.
Grayscale uvádí, že růst nabídky tokenů převážil nad odkupy a odměnami: výnos pro držitele AAVE činí −1,0 % a pro držitele JUP −2,6 %, a to navzdory kladným výnosům z poplatků.
24 October 2026 | 12:11 Grayscale’s latest valuation data shows Aave and Jupiter with positive earnings yields, yet holders of both tokens face negative yields once buybacks, rewards and supply growth are netted.
Key Takeaways ✓AAVE: 3.7% earnings yield, -1.0% holder yield ✓JUP: 3.5% earnings yield, -2.6% holder yield ✓Aave bought 205,000 AAVE in ten months ✓Litterbox Trust has burned about 134 million JUP Grayscale head of research Zach Pandl set out both measures in an October 21 note on crypto valuations.
Earnings are positive, holder yields are not Grayscale’s adjusted earnings yield divides a protocol’s earnings by its circulating market value, then subtracts the rate at which circulating supply grew. Its tokenholder yield counts only what reaches holders: staking rewards plus buybacks, minus new issuance, divided by circulating market value. Earnings here means fees left after paying lenders, liquidity providers and other suppliers.
Both measures subtract supply growth, so the gap between them approximates earnings that stayed with the protocol instead of reaching holders, as long as Grayscale’s issuance figure tracks circulating-supply growth. A negative tokenholder yield also means, by Grayscale’s formula, that new issuance outweighed buybacks and staking rewards combined.
AAVE
Adjusted earnings yield3.7%
Tokenholder yield−1.0%
Gap≈ 4.7 points
JUP
Adjusted earnings yield3.5%
Tokenholder yield−2.6%
Gap≈ 6.1 points
Source: Grayscale, chart accompanying its October 21 note.
Aave’s buybacks refill a reserve that pays out AAVE Aave began buying AAVE on the open market in April 2025. Its official documentation lists a $50 million annual budget, with weekly purchases of $250,000 to $1.75 million executed by the Aave Finance Committee. The DAO’s funding report says the program acquired more than 205,000 AAVE, about 1.28% of total supply, in its first 10 months.
Aave does not burn the tokens it buys. They go to the Aave DAO Ecosystem Reserve, which pays staking rewards, grants and service providers, so AAVE taken off the market can return to circulation. That may help explain how a sustained buyback program sits beside a negative tokenholder yield.
Operating costs draw on the same revenue. A March governance proposal sought to cut the buyback budget to $30 million. It cited borrow-fee revenue about 25% below its peak, January 2026 revenue of $7.95 million against $13.5 million a year earlier, and an optimistic 2026 operating budget of $190 million against 2025 revenue of $142 million. The proposal also made the case against bigger buybacks: spending on GHO stablecoin liquidity and growth could return more to holders than repurchases.
Jupiter spends half its onchain revenue on JUP Jupiter’s transparency page says 50% of onchain revenue has gone to the Litterbox Trust since February 2025, which buys JUP through automated onchain purchases. The trust operates as a long-term reserve and has burned about 134 million JUP. The other half of onchain revenue and all offchain revenue fund the team’s operations, with any excess going to treasury reserves.
In Grayscale’s figures, those purchases and burns have not kept pace with new JUP entering circulation. The note names token unlocks alongside issuance as sources of dilution, which makes Jupiter’s unlock schedule the other half of the JUP picture.
Ordinary holders sit below the published figure. JUP holders receive no direct share of protocol fees, and Active Staking Rewards go quarterly to stakers based on time-weighted stake. Under Jupiter’s tokenomics rules, locked team tokens cannot earn them. Because Grayscale’s tokenholder yield includes staking rewards, anyone holding JUP or AAVE without staking earns less than it shows.
Burns remove tokens for good, minus new minting A burn is the one destination that cannot pay tokens back out, though minting can still eat into it. PancakeSwap’s September burn report puts numbers on that offset.
Minting offset about 22% of the burn. The report excludes mints tied directly to burning and spreads weekly burns across reporting months. According to PancakeSwap’s tokenomics documentation, minted CAKE funds farms, the lottery and ecosystem growth.
Hyperliquid burns without a matching mint on this side. Its fee documentation says the Assistance Fund converts allocated trading fees into HYPE and burns them. Hyperliquid has since added reserve-income funding to its buyback model, which raises the money available for purchases without itself showing how much was bought.
Three disclosures that will test these numbers What to watch Where it appears Timing Aave’s buyback budget and executed purchases Aave governance forum, TokenLogic dashboard As budget proposals are voted on JUP unlocks against Litterbox buys and burns Jupiter transparency page, Litterbox Trust wallet Alongside each quarterly staking reward round CAKE net supply change PancakeSwap monthly burn report The October report If Grayscale updates its chart, a narrower gap between the two yields would show more of AAVE’s and JUP’s earnings reaching holders, while a wider one would point to supply growth or retained spending absorbing more of them.
This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Research yield estimates are not guaranteed payouts or forecasts of token-price performance.
Author
Alexander Zdravkov is a market analyst and crypto journalist with interests in economics, broader financial markets and digital assets. His journey into crypto began more than four years ago, driven by a fascination with the rapid evolution of blockchain technology and the transformative potential of decentralized finance. He began analyzing market cycles and identifying emerging trends before they reach the mainstream. He holds a degree in International Relations - a background that helped shape his broader perspective on global economics, geopolitics, and the interconnected nature of modern financial markets. Whether covering the latest developments in the crypto sector or exploring broader macroeconomic themes, Alexander focuses on giving readers context rather than simply repeating headlines. During his career, he has authored more than 5,000 articles covering cryptocurrencies, traditional finance, and global market developments. His work spans everything from Bitcoin and altcoins to macroeconomic trends influencing risk assets worldwide.
Canary's spot Hedera ETF (HBR) has seen little activity in October, including a $559K net outflow on October 16. Here is what the flows say about demand for HBAR.
Activity in Canary Capital's spot @Hedera ETF has been subdued this month, raising questions about investor appetite for $HBAR exposure. The Canary HBAR ETF (ticker: HBR) has recorded net flows on only three days in October, and one of them, October 16, was only the product's second day of net outflows since launch, at about -$559K.
Quiet flows after a slow startHBR is not the first time the fund has struggled for traction. It began trading on October 28, 2025.
Demand picked up briefly afterwards.
Recent sessions have been far quieter. Data compiled by SoSoValue and reported by TokenPost shows that Earlier in the week,
What it means for more Hedera ETFsThe weak flow pattern is not new. In August, one report noted that The same report said
That matters for issuers weighing new products. If trading and flows do not improve, it appears unlikely that additional Hedera ETFs will follow. Fund sponsors typically look at sustained inflows and trading volume when deciding whether a new listing is worth the cost, and HBR's recent record offers little encouragement.
For now, HBR remains the main regulated route into HBAR in the US. Whether October's muted activity is a temporary lull or a sign of fading interest will become clearer as the market moves into the final weeks of the year.
Sources:
TokenPost: Altcoin spot ETF flows on October 22, 2026Yahoo Finance: HBAR and Litecoin ETFs show life after silent debutBusiness Wire: Canary Capital launches spot HBAR ETF
Arthur Hayes uzavřel celý účet Maelstromu pro směrové obchody a prodal ETH, ENA, UNI i další altcoiny v hodnotě zhruba 22,28 milionu USD kvůli makroekonomické a geopolitické nejistotě.
Arthur Hayes, co-founder of BitMEX and chief investment officer of Maelstrom Fund, has exited his entire directional trading book.
On October 24, 2026, he confirmed the move on X, selling Ethereum (ETH), Ethena (ENA), Uniswap (UNI), and other altcoins worth roughly $22.28 million.
The exit signals a sharp defensive pivot amid rising macro and geopolitical uncertainty.
Hayes Closes the Book: What He Sold and Why In his own words on X, Arthur Hayes wrote: “I dumped it all. The Maelstrom directional book, took profits on $ETH, $ENA, $UNI and other shitcoins. I think we gotta go down to go up. It looks a bit dicey out there in macro and geopolitical land. Going to sit on the sidelines and wait for the all clear signal … Brrrrr.”
On-chain data from Lookonchain confirmed the scale of the exit. The sales included 6,400 ETH worth approximately $15.2 million.
Hayes also offloaded 14 million ENA (~$2.76M) and 323,000 UNI (~$2.24M). Smaller positions in ETHFI, AERO, PENDLE, and ZAMA were also closed.
The timing is striking. Just weeks ago, Hayes predicted Ethereum could reach $10K alongside massive ENA and ETHFI gains. That bullish stance is now paused. Hayes is not abandoning his long-term thesis, he is managing short-term risk.
The broader market context supports his caution. Multiple factors have been dragging crypto prices lower this week, including hawkish Fed signals, ETF outflows, and risk-off sentiment across tech and AI names. Geopolitical tensions have added another layer of uncertainty.
A Tactical Retreat, Not a Change of Heart This is not the first time Arthur Hayes has stepped back from altcoin exposure during uncertain periods.
He previously flagged crypto’s ‘no-trade zone’ and outlined his Bitcoin, Gold, and Hyperliquid outlook. That cautious streak is now showing up in his portfolio.
Earlier this year, a wallet linked to Hayes bought $5.4M in ETH following the US-Iran deal. That aggressive accumulation has now been reversed.
The pattern is consistent: Hayes cycles between deep alt exposure and full cash when macro conditions deteriorate.
His long-term structural view remains intact. Hayes has doubled down on Bitcoin reaching $1 million and laid out a potential timeline.
The current cash position is a tactical pause, not a permanent exit from crypto markets. For ENA specifically, Standard Chartered has separately forecast ENA reaching $2 by 2028.
The longer-term narrative around Ethena remains, even as Hayes steps aside in the near term. It is also worth noting that Hayes sold his entire Hyperliquid position earlier this year, sending HYPE down 4%.
That precedent shows that his sell announcements carry real market weight. ETH, ENA, and UNI could face near-term selling pressure as the market digests this exit.
Arthur Hayes said he is waiting for the ‘all clear signal’ before re-entering. Until then, Maelstrom sits in cash, and the market will be watching closely for his next move.
TLDR: Horizen is changing. The Horizen L3 is winding down over the next two weeks.
Users should bridge their assets to Base at their soonest possible convenience, including unstaking and withdrawing any funds from ZEN staking on the Horizen chain. A new ZEN staking program will commence on Base soon.
While L3 wind-down has quietly been in preliminary planning phases as part of ongoing roadmap development, migration is being accelerated due to upcoming Base network upgrades that will break compatibility with existing Base L3 chains on the OP (Optimism) stack.
Why this change? As the Horizen L3 on Base has been operational on mainnet for nearly one year, the most compelling projects being built on Horizen today use privacy technologies like zero-knowledge proofs and TEEs that do not require the operation of dedicated block space as an L3 blockchain settling to Base.
With the emergence of Vela as a TEE-based confidential execution environment for private onchain finance – Base will now be utilized as the primary chain for the Horizen ecosystem.
Applications currently in development by independent teams in the Horizen ecosystem will also make this transition. Additionally, we expect the pace of project development to increase in future quarters due to reduced architectural complexities with respect to bridging and cross-chain token mechanics.
As part of this wind-down and migration, ZEN staking on the Horizen L3 will come to an orderly but immediate conclusion. Expect more information in the coming days about ZEN staking on Base.
Horizen chain wind-down and migration will occur over approximately the next two weeks as Base upgrades to its Denim release, with breaking changes to OP-stack chains settling to Base. Please migrate all funds before November 4, 13:00 UTC. Details follow below:
ACTION REQUIRED: Move your assets off the Horizen L3 by November 4, 13:00 UTC The Horizen L3 is shutting down.
Bridging from the L3 to Base closes at 13:00 UTC on Tuesday, November 4. If you hold ZEN, ETH or other assets on the L3, please move them to Base before that date and time.
What happens if I miss the date to bridge to Base?
Any ZEN or ETH still on the Horizen L3 after the bridge closes will be returned to you on Base by the Horizen DAO after funds are made recoverable. This process is expected to take several weeks. Withdrawing now is the fastest path to returning your assets to Base.
WHAT TO DO
1. If you are staking ZEN: Go to https://staking.horizen.io. Withdraw your stake first, then claim your rewards. Staking rewards on the L3 end on October 25; there is nothing to wait for.
Withdraw from ZEN staking 2. Bridge your ZEN and USDC.e to Base: https://stargate.finance
Bridge your ZEN and USDC.e to Base via Stargate (LayerZero) 3. Bridge your ETH to Base: Withdraw your ETH via the native bridge at https://bridge.horizen.io. Start this before November 4; the transaction will be finalized for you and completed on Base in approximately two weeks.
USDC.e is operated by Stargate, not Horizen, and is not covered by the DAO return; you must bridge USDC.e out before November 4.
If you need ETH on Horizen for gas to bridge out other assets, bridge a very small amount of ETH from Base to the Horizen L3 using the native bridge at https://bridge.horizen.io.
Bridge your ETH to Base L3 gas costs a fraction of a cent, so bridge the minimum the bridge allows and no more; ETH left on the L3 below 0.001 ETH after network wind-down will not be returned.
If you are using a Safe multi-sig or any other vault or smart contract wallet on the L3 and are unable to withdraw assets before Nov 4, contact [email protected] to open coordination for a return of funds.
Bridging ZEN from Base to the Horizen L3 is already disabled. ETH deposits remain open only for users to bridge ETH to Horizen for gas to withdraw other assets.
IF YOU MISS THE DEADLINE At 13:00 UTC on November 4, a snapshot of every balance and every staking position on the L3 will be taken. The Horizen DAO will recover funds and subsequently send each holder their ZEN, including unclaimed staking rewards, to the same address on Base, after a one-week public review of the snapshot. ETH balances above 0.001 ETH are returned the same way. The anticipated timeframe for return of funds is second half of November. If your Horizen L3 wallet address is a smart contract wallet that does not similarly exist on Base, please contact us at [email protected] before Nov 4 to open coordination for a return of funds.
WHY IS THIS HAPPENING SO QUICKLY?
Earlier this week, Base scheduled its “Denim” upgrade, which moves Base to 200-millisecond blocks, for November 5. OP Stack chains that settle to Base, including the Horizen L3, cannot follow that change: about 40 minutes after activation the L3 can no longer include user transactions, permanently. We identified this, confirmed it on the Base Sepolia testnet where Denim is already live, and our infrastructure provider has confirmed there is no fix. We set the bridging cutoff one day earlier than hard shutdown so that the snapshot is clean and nothing is in flight when the chain stops.
STAKING WILL CONTINUE ON BASE
We expect to redeploy ZEN staking on Base in the coming days. The program remains funded per ZenIP-42408, so staking will resume where ZEN already lives natively, on Base. Details will follow in separate posts to come. Unstaking your ZEN from the L3 today will position you for the start of staking on Base.
WHAT COMES NEXT
Base will become the home chain for the Horizen ecosystem. ZEN already lives on Base natively, and the work ahead – including a compliant privacy pool with staked ZEN-powered nodes and Vela for confidential compute – does not require its own blockspace. A proposed three-year roadmap will be presented to the Horizen DAO Special Council and the larger community for input and governance before execution.
KEY DATES (UTC) Completed: Bridging ZEN from Base to the Horizen L3 is disabled
Now: Users begin to bridge all assets from Horizen to Base
Nov 4, 13:00: Horizen L3 to Base bridging closes; snapshot taken
Nov 5, 18:00: Base Denim activates; the L3 stops processing transactions
Nov 7 (approximated): snapshot published for review
Nov 15 (approximated) onward: DAO distributes remaining balances on Base
HAVE QUESTIONS?
Horizen Discord: https://discord.gg/xAwdQGnc7
SECURITY REMINDER Trust Only Official Sources
Website: horizen.io
Discord: https://horizen.io/invite/discord
Telegram Community Group: https://t.me/horizencommunity
Telegram News Channel: https://t.me/horizenglobal
X / Twitter: https://x.com/horizenglobal
Never Trust Unsolicited Help
Get help from the official team when you need support.
Horizen team will never DM you first
We will never ask for private keys or seed phrases
We will never ask you to send your funds to us
If you need help, use our official Discord ticketing system
Apple ve třetím fiskálním čtvrtletí vykázal čistý zisk ve výši 29,8 miliardy USD. Autor považuje akcie při ocenění na úrovni 30násobku očekávaného zisku za férově oceněné při ceně 295 USD.
Apple (AAPL -0.14%) is one of the greatest businesses we've ever seen. That's indicated by its shares soaring 1,080% in the past 10 years (as of Oct. 21) and its market capitalization of $5 trillion. It is perhaps second to none when it comes to hardware and software design, supporting its position as a powerful consumer brand with loyal customers.
The Cupertino success story is one of the most profitable companies on the face of the planet. Here's why it might be worth $295 a share right now, which represents a 14% discount to the current stock price of $344.
Image source: The Motley Fool.
Pricing power is key to Apple's profitability During the most recent fiscal quarter (third-quarter 2026 ended June 27), the company reported $29.8 billion in net income. That's truly a massive figure. Investors must understand why Apple has built such an extremely lucrative business model.
Credit goes to constant pricing power. Apple's popular devices aren't cheap. But historically, customers have not only shown a willingness to pay up for these products, they tend to upgrade when new iterations come out.
The services segment deserves some attention, too. Last quarter, it represented 28% of the company's revenue, a share that has trended higher over time. Its gross margin of 76% is much better than the 40% that products generate.
Besides the fat margins, what's equally impressive is the durability of the profits. Unlike many of today's artificial intelligence winners, which could end up being one-hit wonders, Apple has been raking it in for a long time. A decade ago, in fiscal 2016, it reported a net margin of 21%. In recent history, this has helped the business produce significant free cash flow that flows to share buybacks and dividends.
AAPL Apple$347.73-$0.50 (-0.14%)
NASDAQ · As of 4:00 PM ET 10/23/26
Shares are currently overvalued The "Magnificent Seven" stock currently trades at 35 times forward earnings estimates. That's certainly an expensive valuation. The S&P 500 index trades at a forward price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio of 19.3, giving Apple a sizable premium of 81%. Value investors might turn away from this business.
There are two sides to the story here. I think it's very easy to argue, based on the forward P/E multiple, that Apple is overvalued right now. The challenge is figuring out what the right multiple should be. Because this is such a high-quality company, maybe a forward P/E ratio of 30 is correct. This implies that the stock is worth $295 right now.
On the other hand, Apple bulls won't hesitate to say that the shares are deserving of a high price tag. This business has certainly earned the market's respect, and there's nothing that says it can't keep producing winning returns in the future.
Experimentální lék JNJ-6143 od Johnson & Johnson snížil PSA nejméně o 50 % u 77 % z 31 hodnocených pacientů s pokročilou rakovinou prostaty užívajících dávku 50 mg.
Johnson & Johnson (JNJ.N) on Saturday said its experimental once-daily oral prostate cancer drug caused tumors to disappear or shrink in an early-stage trial.
J&J had gained access to the drug through its $3.05 billion deal to buy Halda Therapeutics last year.
Here are more details:
The company was testing JNJ-6143 in patients with advanced prostate cancer who had received multiple treatments
Its novel approach selectively kills cancer cells by interfering with a protein they need to survive
In the trial, 77% of 31 evaluable patients receiving the 50-milligram dose saw their PSA levels, a blood marker used to monitor prostate cancer, fall by at least 50%; in 48% of patients, PSA levels fell by at least 90%
Among patients whose tumors could be measured using imaging, 69% had a confirmed complete or partial response
"It adds a new mechanism of action to J&J's prostate cancer portfolio," a Johnson & Johnson spokesperson said
Common side effects were nausea and elevated cholesterol and triglyceride levels. One patient discontinued treatment due to adverse effects
The data were presented at the European Society for Medical Oncology Congress
Společnost Pfizer zvýšila ve 2. čtvrtletí tržby o 3 % na zhruba 15 mld. USD, a to navzdory poklesu prodejů přípravků proti covidu. Novější a akvizované produkty generují roční tržby ve výši 13 mld. USD.
The S&P 500 is full of quality dividend stocks. But is Pfizer (PFE -1.28%) one of them? On the one hand, the drugmaker has one of the highest yields in the index. However, some would point out that Pfizer has faced significant challenges and still has important ones on the horizon. Still, in my view, Pfizer is an attractive income stock to buy and hold. Here's why the dividend is safer than it appears at first.
Recent financial results have exceeded estimates Reduced demand for coronavirus products has affected Pfizer's financial results in recent years. In the second quarter, the company's COVID-19 vaccine, Comirnaty, reported $261 million in sales, down 32% year over year. Pfizer's coronavirus medicine, Paxlovid, performed even worse. The drug posted only $21 million in revenue, down 95% compared to the year-ago period.
Image source: The Motley Fool.
Despite that, Pfizer's total revenue climbed by 3% year over year to about $15 billion. As management has pointed out, the company has exceeded revenue expectations in nine out of the past 10 quarters, and it beat earnings estimates in all 10 of them. True, Pfizer is racing toward important patent cliffs, including that of Eliquis, an anticoagulant, its best-selling medicine.
Eliquis will lose its U.S. patent by the end of the decade. Two other drugs facing patent-exclusivity losses are Ibrance and Xtandi, both of which are cancer drugs. Still, Pfizer's newer and acquired products will help the company overcome this challenge. CEO Albert Bourla noted that these products generate $13 billion in annualized sales and are growing 20% year over year.
Suppose these medicines grow at a compound rate of 15% through the next four years. Their annualized revenue would get to $22.7 billion by 2030. As of the first half of the year, Ibrance, Xtandi, and Eliquis have combined annualized sales of $15.27 billion. That will certainly grow meaningfully before they hit their patent cliffs, and it's not as if their revenue will immediately drop to zero following their loss of patent exclusivity. Does that mean the new (and acquired) products will more than offset the loss-of-exclusivity products? Probably not.
But Pfizer is preparing for this challenge better than some investors realize. We can also look at the work it has done to increase profits. The company eliminated $7.2 billion from its cost base in the past three years. That's a meaningful amount, and future cost-cutting measures could also positively impact the drugmaker's results and help it navigate the difficult period it is entering.
PFE Pfizer$30.03-$0.39 (-1.28%)
NYSE · As of 4:00 PM ET 10/23/26
Pipeline progress is key Is Pfizer's dividend program -- which boasts a juicy 5.8% forward yield -- in trouble as the company faces several patent cliffs? Probably not. Here are two reasons why. First, Pfizer hasn't reduced its dividend in recent years, despite the challenges it has faced. The past isn't a guarantee of the future, but recent history suggests that management prioritizes returning capital to shareholders through dividends.
In the past five years, the company has increased its payouts by 10.26%. That's not extraordinary, but given the challenges it has faced, it's still fairly impressive. Second, beyond recent brand-new approvals, Pfizer boasts a deep pipeline that should help the company significantly expand its lineup of approved products over the next few years.
This is where even stronger growth could come from, especially since Pfizer boasts several highly promising candidates. For instance, the company's investigational long-acting GLP-1 weight-loss medicine, berobenatide, could eventually generate well over $1 billion in sales, given its monthly dosing schedule, strong tolerability, and the predicted rapid growth of the anti-obesity market.
That's just one of the more notable products in Pfizer's pipeline. Of course, the company could face clinical setbacks. But Pfizer's pipeline is deep: It boasts some 16 brand-new products in Phase 3 studies. That's not including earlier-stage programs. Even a modest Phase 3 success rate of 50% -- which is well in line with the industry average -- will lead to a good number of brand-new products over the next few years. These are all good reasons why Pfizer's outlook appears fairly strong, and the dividend looks safe, despite recent headwinds.
Palantir (PLTR +0.28%) investors have had a fairly rocky 2026. For most of the year, the stock was losing money. However, starting in August, Palantir reversed the decline and has now gained about 12% for the year. That is roughly in line with the gain for the S&P 500 (^GSPC -0.52%).
However, if you survey the average Palantir investor, almost all of them will say that beating the market is their long-term priority for holding Palantir shares. So, 2026 has been a disappointing year so far. But as long-term investors, there is still plenty of time to deliver strong returns.
So, if you invested $10,000 into Palantir now, what could that be worth by 2030? And will it be good enough to beat the market? Let's take a look.
Image source: The Motley Fool.
Palantir's AI business is booming Palantir originally started off offering its AI platform to government entities. This was an incredibly popular offering, and Palantir's government contracts still make up the majority of its revenue stream today. However, Palantir also expanded to the commercial side of the business, and it's seeing huge adoption of its AI platform.
Essentially, Palantir is an AI platform that plugs into existing data streams and helps derive actionable insights. Through automation, Palantir can also assist in deploying AI agents that do tasks on behalf of its users. Palantir's platform dramatically improves the efficiency of one person in their role and can provide decision-making capabilities that far exceed what a human can deliver.
PLTR Palantir Technologies$196.75+$0.56 (+0.28%)
NASDAQ · As of 4:00 PM ET 10/23/26
Companies and governments are adopting Palantir's software at a breathtaking pace, which is evidenced by its 93% revenue growth rate in Q2. U.S. commercial revenue grew even faster, with revenue from this segment increasing at a 149% pace. AI adoption is happening rapidly, and Palantir is one of the companies that's taking market share.
One of the biggest surprises with Palantir is how great its margins are. New headlines are filled with stories about how quickly some AI firms are growing, but also highlight that they're spending far more than they make. Palantir isn't in that boat, as it delivered an impressive 55% profit margin in Q2.
It doesn't get better than that, but this also opens up a new problem.
Palantir's stock is pricey Palantir's stock is one of the more expensive on the market, and it trades for almost 125 times this year's earnings.
PLTR PE Ratio (Forward) data by YCharts
That's a very pricey stock, and with its profit margin being incredibly high, it can't increase that figure too much to get itself out of this high valuation pickle. Instead, the only path is to grow out of it. Most big tech stocks trade for about 30 times forward earnings, regardless of how fast the business is growing. Take Nvidia (NVDA -0.59%), for example. Its revenue rose 106% in Q2 (faster than Palantir), yet shares trade for 23 times this year's estimated earnings.
So, for Palantir to get to a reasonable 30 times forward earnings valuation, it must quadruple its revenue, which results in its earnings quadrupling as well. That could take a long time, especially considering what Wall Street thinks Palantir's growth rate will be next year. The average Wall Street analyst estimate is that Palantir's revenue will rise 50% during 2027. Palantir has a history of outperforming expectations, so this may be an undershoot. However, if we utilize a 50% growth rate from 2027 to 2030, then it becomes a rather aggressive projection.
Should Palantir's revenue increase at a 50% compounded annual growth rate (CAGR) from 2027 to 2030, that would result in its revenue rising fivefold. That's more than the quadrupling we established above that was required to get Palantir to a reasonable valuation. So, the remaining double could turn a $10,000 investment into about $20,000. That is still market beating-growth, but there are other AI stocks that appear to be in-line for better performance due to a much lower starting valuation.
All of this is because of how expensive Palantir's stock is now. I think this could damp future returns, and it's something that Palantir will have to grow out of.
EUR/AUD’s down trend resumed by breaking through 1.5951 last week. Initial bias stays on the downside this week for 100% projection of 1.6334 to 1.5951 from 1.6264 at 1.5881. Firm break there will target 161.8% projection at 1.5644. On the upside, above 1.6004 minor resistance will turn intraday bias neutral again first.
In the bigger picture, down trend from 1.8554 (2025 high) is in progress. Firm break of 1.5963 (2024 low). Should confirm that it’s already reversing whole up trend from 1.4281 (2022 low) and pave the way to this support. However, decisive break of 1.6264 resistance will indicate medium term bottoming, and bring stronger rebound back to 1.6842 resistance, even as a corrective bounce.
In the longer term picture, fall from 1.8554 is seen as the third leg of the pattern from 1.9799 (2020 high), which is part of the pattern from 2.1127 (2008 high). Deeper fall should be seen to 1.4281 and possibly below. This will now remain the favored case as long as 55 M EMA (now at 1.6523) holds.
ActionForex
ActionForex.com was set up back in 2004 with the aim to provide insightful analysis to forex traders, serving the trading community for two decades. We started providing only a daily and a mid-day report, now known as Action Insights. Gradually, we added a lot more in-house contents to the site. Technical Outlook section was expanded to cover more pairs. In addition to that, Top Movers, Heat Map, Pivot Point Charts and Pivot Meters, Action Bias and Volatility Charts, are tools used by traders from all over the world.
EUR/GBP’s decline continued last week and outlook is unchanged. Initial bias remains on the downside this week for 100% projection of 0.8728 to 0.8453 from 0.8611 at 0.8336. Firm break there will target 138.2% projection at 0.8231. On the upside, above 0.8393 minor resistance will turn intraday bias neutral and bring consolidations first, before staging another fall.
In the bigger picture, rise from 0.8221 (2024 low) should have completed at 0.8863, just ahead of 38.2% retracement of 0.9267 (2025 high) to 0.8221 at 0.8867. Deeper fall would be seen back to 0.8221. For now, outlook will be stay bearish as long as 0.8611 resistance hold.
In the long term picture, price action from 0.9499 (2020 high) is seen as part of the long term range pattern from 0.9799 (2008 high). Range trading should continue between 0.8201 and 0.9499, until there is clear signal of imminent breakout.
ActionForex
ActionForex.com was set up back in 2004 with the aim to provide insightful analysis to forex traders, serving the trading community for two decades. We started providing only a daily and a mid-day report, now known as Action Insights. Gradually, we added a lot more in-house contents to the site. Technical Outlook section was expanded to cover more pairs. In addition to that, Top Movers, Heat Map, Pivot Point Charts and Pivot Meters, Action Bias and Volatility Charts, are tools used by traders from all over the world.
EUR/JPY resumed by breaking through 176.19 last week. Initial bias stays on the downside this week with focus on 175.26/41 support zone. Strong rebound from there, followed by firm break of 177.95 resistance will indicate short term bottoming. However, sustained break of 175.26/41 will carry larger bearish implications. Next target is 100% projection of 186.00 to 177.82 from 181.53 at 173.35.
In the bigger picture, price action from 187.93 is seen as a corrective pattern to up trend from 154.77 (2025 low). Strong support should be seen from 175.41 cluster support (2025 high) and 38.2% retracement of 154.77 to 187.93 at 175.26 to contain downside. However, decisive break will raise the chance of larger bearish reversal and target 61.8% retracement at 167.43.
In the long term picture, as long as 175.41 resistance turned support holds, up trend from 94.11 (2021 low) is still expected to resume through 187.93 at a later stage. However, considering bearish divergence condition in M MACD, firm break of 175.41 will argue that a major top is already in place, and target 55 M EMA (now at 163.51).
ActionForex
ActionForex.com was set up back in 2004 with the aim to provide insightful analysis to forex traders, serving the trading community for two decades. We started providing only a daily and a mid-day report, now known as Action Insights. Gradually, we added a lot more in-house contents to the site. Technical Outlook section was expanded to cover more pairs. In addition to that, Top Movers, Heat Map, Pivot Point Charts and Pivot Meters, Action Bias and Volatility Charts, are tools used by traders from all over the world.
GBP/JPY po dosažení 211,96 minulý týden ustoupil. Průraz pod podporu na úrovni 208,34 by mohl prohloubit pokles k 206,10, zatímco překonání maxima 211,96 by obnovilo růst.
GBP/JPY rose to 211.96 last week but retreated since then. Initial bias remains neutral this week first. On the downside, break of 208.34 support will extend the larger decline through 206.85 to 206.10 key fibonacci level. On the upside, above 211.96 will resume the rebound from 206.85.
In the bigger picture, price action from 219.56 is seen as correcting the up trend from 184.35 (2025 low). Deeper fall could be seen to 38.2% retracement of 184.35 to 219.56 at 206.10. Strong support is expected from there to bring rebound. However, decisive break will raise the chance of larger trend reversal, and target 61.8% retracement at 197.80.
In the long term picture, up trend from 116.83 (2011 low) is in progress. Next target is 251.09 (2007 high). This will remain the favored case as long as 55 M EMA (now at 191.13) holds.
ActionForex
ActionForex.com was set up back in 2004 with the aim to provide insightful analysis to forex traders, serving the trading community for two decades. We started providing only a daily and a mid-day report, now known as Action Insights. Gradually, we added a lot more in-house contents to the site. Technical Outlook section was expanded to cover more pairs. In addition to that, Top Movers, Heat Map, Pivot Point Charts and Pivot Meters, Action Bias and Volatility Charts, are tools used by traders from all over the world.
USD/CHF’s fall from 0.8394 extended to 0.8190 last week but recovered. Initial bias is turned neutral this week first. Below 0.8190 will target 38.2% retracement of 0.7603 to 0.8394 at 0.8092. On the upside, above 0.8629 minor resistance will turn intraday bias back to the upside for stronger rebound.
In the bigger picture, rise from 0.7603 should at least be reversing the medium term trend. Focus is on 0.8332 support turned resistance (2023 low) for confirmation. Firm break there will target 61.8% retracement of 0.9200 (2025 high) to 0.7603 at 0.8590. For now, this will remain the favored case as long as 0.7948 support holds.
In the long term picture, price action from 0.7065 (2011 low) are seen as a corrective pattern to the multi-decade down trend from 1.8305 (2000 high). It’s uncertain if the fall from 1.0342 is the second leg of the pattern, or resumption of the downtrend. But in either case, outlook will stay bearish as long as 55 M EMA (now at 0.8571) holds.
ActionForex
ActionForex.com was set up back in 2004 with the aim to provide insightful analysis to forex traders, serving the trading community for two decades. We started providing only a daily and a mid-day report, now known as Action Insights. Gradually, we added a lot more in-house contents to the site. Technical Outlook section was expanded to cover more pairs. In addition to that, Top Movers, Heat Map, Pivot Point Charts and Pivot Meters, Action Bias and Volatility Charts, are tools used by traders from all over the world.
EUR/USD stayed in sideway consolidations last week and outlook is unchanged. Initial bias remains neutral this week first, and further decline is expected with 1.1276 resistance intact. . Below 1.1111 will extend larger fall from 1.2081 to 1.0904 fibonacci level. However, firm break of 1.1276 will indicate short term bottoming, and bring stronger rebound to 55 D EMA (now at 1.1373).
In the bigger picture, current development suggests that fall from 1.2081 medium term top could be reversing the rise from 1.0176 (2025 low), and probably even that from 0.9534 (2022 low). Deeper fall should be seen to 61.8% retracement of 1.0176 to 1.2081 at 1.0904 next. For now, risk will stay on the downside as long as 1.1710 resistance holds, in case of rebound.
In the long term picture, immediate focus is now on 55 M EMA (now at 1.1246). Sustained break there will argue that rise from 0.9534 (2022 low) has completed as a three wave corrective move at 1.2081, after rejection at 38.2% retracement of 1.6039 to 0.9534 at 1.2019, which is close to 1.2000 psychological level. That will keep the long term down trend from 1.6039 (2008 high) intact.
ActionForex
ActionForex.com was set up back in 2004 with the aim to provide insightful analysis to forex traders, serving the trading community for two decades. We started providing only a daily and a mid-day report, now known as Action Insights. Gradually, we added a lot more in-house contents to the site. Technical Outlook section was expanded to cover more pairs. In addition to that, Top Movers, Heat Map, Pivot Point Charts and Pivot Meters, Action Bias and Volatility Charts, are tools used by traders from all over the world.
Eli Lilly: Sofe-M v kombinaci s bevacizumabem dosáhl ve studii fáze 1 u platinově citlivého karcinomu vaječníků 79,3% potvrzené míry objektivní odpovědi a 100% míry kontroly onemocnění.
Sofetabart mipitecan (Sofe-M) in combination with bevacizumab demonstrated a 79% confirmed objective response rate and 100% disease control rate, with similar activity observed across FRα expression levels
Clinical activity with Sofe-M was maintained even in patients with prior PARP inhibitor exposure, patients who typically experience poor outcomes with platinum-based chemotherapy
Sofe-M is currently being studied in both platinum-sensitive and platinum-resistant ovarian cancer in multiple Phase 3 studies as part of the FRAmework-01 master protocol
, /PRNewswire/ -- Eli Lilly and Company (NYSE: LLY) today announced new Phase 1 data showing that its investigational folate receptor alpha (FRα) antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) sofetabart mipitecan (Sofe-M) plus bevacizumab achieved a confirmed objective response rate (cORR) of 79% and a disease control rate (DCR) of 100% in patients with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (PSOC). A cORR of 79% or higher was seen in both poly (ADP-ribose) polymerase inhibitor (PARPi)-treated and PARPi-naïve patients. These data will be shared in an oral presentation at the European Society for Medical Oncology (ESMO) Annual Congress in Madrid, Spain.
FRα is expressed in almost all ovarian cancers, at much higher levels than in healthy tissue, making it a target that can help direct treatment to tumor cells. Sofe-M is an FRα-targeting ADC composed of an Fc-silent, FRα-specific humanized monoclonal antibody linked to exatecan, a topoisomerase I inhibitor, via a proprietary cleavable polysarcosine linker. The antibody is designed to bind FRα on the surface of tumor cells, delivering exatecan directly into the tumor cell to disrupt DNA replication.
Jacob Van Naarden, Executive Vice President and President of Lilly Oncology: "The standard of care for platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer has remained unchanged for a decade and demands new treatment options. Results for Sofe-M show a promising efficacy and tolerability profile across both platinum-resistant and platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer, regardless of FRα expression levels or prior treatment. These data give us confidence as we continue to study Sofe-M in our Phase 3 FRAmework-01 program to bring this potential new medicine to the women who need it."
The Phase 1 study is evaluating Sofe-M plus bevacizumab in patients with advanced solid tumors, including a cohort of 33 women with PSOC who received Sofe-M (4 mg/kg) plus bevacizumab (15 mg/kg). Patients received a median of three prior systemic regimens (range 1–6), including prior PARPi (67%) and prior bevacizumab (70%). As of the July 6, 2026, data cutoff, the cORR among the 29 patients with measurable disease was 79.3% (23/29; 6 complete responses [CR, 20.7%] and 17 partial responses [PR, 58.6%]), and DCR was 100%. Responses were consistent across FRα expression levels and prior PARPi exposure. Median duration of response (DOR) and median progression-free survival (PFS) were not reached at median follow-ups of 6.2 and 10.2 months, respectively.
Chrisann Kyi, MD, Gynecologic Medical Oncologist & Early Drug Development Specialist at Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center: "The durable and robust responses we've seen in patients with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer are important, particularly in a PARPi pretreated population, where the response rate seen with Sofe-M exceeds what has been reported in published platinum re-challenge studies. The observed safety profile and low discontinuation rates, combined with early efficacy results, support the continued investigation of Sofe-M as a potentially meaningful new option for patients."
Sofe-M plus bevacizumab demonstrated a safety profile consistent with the known profiles of each medicine. No new safety signals were observed. The most common treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) across all patients included epistaxis (73%), nausea (73%), anemia (58%), neutropenia (55%), and fatigue (52%). The most common Grade ≥3 TEAEs were neutropenia (42%) and anemia (24%); febrile neutropenia occurred in 3% of patients, and G-CSF prophylaxis was not mandated. Any-grade neuropathy occurred in 9% of patients, with no Grade ≥3 events. Dose reductions occurred in 42% of patients, and 6% discontinued treatment due to an adverse event.
The FRAmework-01 program is evaluating Sofe-M in three global Phase 3 trials across both platinum-resistant and platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer: Part A tests Sofe-M as monotherapy in platinum-resistant disease; Part B tests Sofe-M plus bevacizumab in platinum-sensitive disease that progressed on or within six months of completing a PARPi; and Part C tests Sofe-M plus bevacizumab in PARPi-naïve platinum-sensitive disease. The study is being conducted in partnership with the European Network for Gynaecological Oncological Trial groups (ENGOT - lead groups GINECO/NOGGO e.V.), the GOG Foundation (GOG), and the Asia-Pacific Gynecologic Oncology Trials Group (APGOT).
For more information on Lilly's oncology pipeline, click here.
Frequently Asked Questions
What is sofetabart mipitecan (Sofe-M)? Sofetabart mipitecan (Sofe-M) is an investigational folate receptor alpha (FRα)-targeting antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) being studied for the treatment of ovarian cancer and other solid tumors. It is designed to selectively bind to cancer cells expressing FRα and deliver a topoisomerase I inhibitor payload directly to those cells. What is an antibody-drug conjugate? An antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) is a type of medicine that pairs an antibody with a cell-killing payload. The antibody is designed to recognize and bind to a specific protein found on the surface of cancer cells, and the payload is released once the ADC reaches its target, allowing the medicine to attack cancer cells while limiting exposure to healthy tissue.1 How is Sofe-M different from other FRα-targeted ADCs? Sofe-M is designed to target FRα across a broad range of expression levels, including in tumors with lower FRα expression. In this Phase 1 study, Sofe-M plus bevacizumab showed a confirmed objective response rate of 79.3% in platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (PSOC), with consistent activity across FRα expression levels and regardless of prior PARP inhibitor exposure. Earlier studies in platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) also demonstrated responses observed across all FRα expression levels and in patients previously treated with mirvetuximab soravtansine (MIRV).2 These results are being further evaluated in Lilly's ongoing Phase 3 FRAmework-01 program, which is studying Sofe-M across both platinum-resistant and platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. What are the results with sofetabart mipitecan (Sofe-M) in the treatment of platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (PSOC)?The Phase 1 study demonstrated encouraging clinical activity, including a confirmed objective response rate (cORR) of 79.3% and a disease control rate (DCR) of 100%, in heavily pretreated patients with platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer. Activity was observed across FRα expression levels and regardless of prior PARP inhibitor exposure. Median duration of response (DOR) and median progression-free survival (PFS) were not reached at median follow-ups of 6.2 and 10.2 months, respectively. Sofetabart mipitecan (Sofe-M) plus bevacizumab demonstrated a safety profile consistent with the known profiles of each medicine, with no new safety signals observed and a low rate of discontinuation due to adverse events (6%). These findings support continued investigation of Sofe-M in the ongoing Phase 3 FRAmework-01 trial. In this study Sofe-M was dosed at 4 mg/kg. Why is it dosed at 3mg/kg in the Phase 3 FRAmework-01 trial? The 3 mg/kg dose of Sofe-M was selected as the recommended phase 3 dose (RP3D), based on analysis of the safety, efficacy and PK data as monotherapy. The ORR was comparable between the two doses, with ORRs of 59.0% (95% CI 42.1, 74.4) and 58.8% (95% CI 32.9, 81.6), at 4 mg/kg and 3mg/kg doses, respectively. Safety signals were higher at 4 mg/kg versus 3 mg/kg, with Grade ≥3 TRAEs at 56.4% vs 35.3% and dose reductions of 41.0% vs 23.5%. What are historical clinical trial results for standard of care in platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (PSOC)? For patients who recur after platinum-based chemotherapy and PARP inhibitor (PARPi) maintenance, published real world data on subsequent platinum re-challenge have shown modest response rates, with an objective response rate (ORR) of 41.9%.3 Other studies of platinum-based regimens, such as OCEANS, were conducted prior to the routine use of PARPi maintenance and did not include patients previously treated with a PARPi,4 a population that now represents a majority of patients with recurrent PSOC, including those enrolled in Sofe-M's Phase 1 study. What is platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (PSOC)? Platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (PSOC) is characterized as ovarian cancer that comes back more than six months after platinum-based chemotherapy. While people with PSOC can often be treated with platinum again, the disease tends to return, and each recurrence can leave fewer treatment options and shorter remissions.5 What is the current unmet need in platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (PSOC)? The standard of care for PSOC has remained largely unchanged for more than a decade, even as understanding of which patients benefit from it has evolved. Approximately 50% of PSOC patients have HRD-positive tumors, meaning their tumors carry a specific DNA-repair deficiency.6 These patients tend to have longer progression-free survival with upfront platinum-based chemotherapy plus a PARP inhibitor (PARPi).6 However, when these patients do recur after PARPi maintenance, response rates to subsequent platinum-based treatment are modest.6 Patients with non-HRD-positive tumors see minimal benefit from PARPi to begin with and generally have a poorer prognosis overall.6 Despite these different outcomes between HRD-positive and HRD-negative patients, treatment approaches for PSOC have not meaningfully changed to reflect that distinction. What is the difference between platinum-resistant (PROC) and platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer (PSOC)?The difference comes down to timing. If ovarian cancer returns more than six months after platinum-based chemotherapy, it's considered platinum-sensitive, and patients often respond well to platinum treatment again. If the cancer returns within six months, or continues growing during treatment, it's considered platinum-resistant, and platinum-based chemotherapy is generally no longer effective. Because platinum resistance tends to develop gradually, each recurrence can bring a shorter remission, even while a patient's disease is still classified as platinum-sensitive.6 What is folate receptor alpha (FRα), and why is FRα expression level important in treating ovarian cancer? FRα is expressed in almost all ovarian cancers, at much higher levels than in healthy tissue, making it a target that can help direct treatment to tumor cells.7 FRα expression level refers to the amount of the protein present on a tumor and may influence eligibility for or response to certain FRα-targeted therapies.7 How is the FRAmework-01 clinical trial designed? FRAmework-01 is a global, three-part Phase 3 trial studying sofetabart mipitecan (Sofe-M) across both platinum-resistant and platinum-sensitive ovarian cancer in a single program: Part A tests Sofe-M as monotherapy in platinum-resistant disease; Part B tests Sofe-M plus bevacizumab in platinum-sensitive disease that progressed on or within six months of completing a PARPi; and Part C tests Sofe-M plus bevacizumab in PARPi-naïve platinum-sensitive disease. The trial's main measure of success across all three parts is how long patients go without their cancer progressing. The study is being conducted in partnership with the European Network for Gynaecological Oncological Trial groups (ENGOT - lead groups GINECO/NOGGO e.V.), the GOG Foundation (GOG), and the Asia-Pacific Gynecologic Oncology Trials Group (APGOT). Enrollment is ongoing globally with first registrational dose in Q4 2025 for PROC and in Q1 2026 for PSOC.
About Ovarian Cancer
Ovarian cancer is the sixth leading cause of cancer death among women in the United States.8 While most patients initially respond to platinum-based chemotherapy, approximately 70% will experience recurrence, leading to progressively shorter remission periods with each subsequent treatment.6 When cancer recurs during or within six months of platinum therapy, known as platinum-resistant disease, patients face limited treatment options.6,9
About Sofetabart Mipitecan
Sofetabart mipitecan (Sofe-M; LY4170156) is composed of an Fc-silent, folate receptor alpha (FRα) specific humanized monoclonal antibody linked to exatecan, a topoisomerase I inhibitor, via a proprietary cleavable polysarcosine linker (PSARlink). Sofe-M was designed to target FRα across all expression levels with improved therapeutic index. FRα is a cell-surface glycoprotein encoded by the gene FOLR1 that binds to the essential nutrients folic acid and reduced folates, bringing them into cells to facilitate cell division and growth. FRα is overexpressed in many solid tumors such as ovarian and endometrial cancers. Sofe-M has received Breakthrough Therapy Designation from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration for platinum-resistant ovarian cancer (PROC) and is currently being evaluated in the Phase 3 FRAmework-01 program. The study is being conducted in partnership with the European Network for Gynaecological Oncological Trial groups (ENGOT - lead groups GINECO/NOGGO e.V.), the GOG Foundation (GOG), and the Asia-Pacific Gynecologic Oncology Trials Group (APGOT).
About FRAmework-01
FRAmework-01 (NCT07213804) is a Phase 3, randomized, open-label, three-part study evaluating sofetabart mipitecan (Sofe-M; LY4170156) in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian, fallopian tube, or primary peritoneal cancer. Part A tests Sofe-M as monotherapy in platinum-resistant disease; Part B tests Sofe-M plus bevacizumab in platinum-sensitive disease that progressed on or within six months of completing a PARPi; and Part C tests Sofe-M plus bevacizumab in PARPi-naïve platinum-sensitive disease. The primary endpoint is progression-free survival (PFS), assessed by the investigator in Part A and by blinded independent central review (BICR) in Parts B and C. Key secondary endpoints are overall survival, objective response rate, duration of response, and safety. The FRAmework-01 study is in partnership with the European Network for Gynecological Oncological Trial groups (ENGOT - lead groups GINECO/NOGGO e.V.), the GOG Foundation (GOG), and the Asia-Pacific Gynecologic Oncology Trials Group (APGOT).
More information on FRAmework-01 can be found on clinicaltrials.gov.
References
Drago JZ, Modi S, Chandarlapaty S. Unlocking the potential of antibody-drug conjugates for cancer therapy. Nat Rev Clin Oncol. 2021;18(6):327-344. doi:10.1038/s41571-021-00470-8 2. Ray-Coquard, et al. Sofetabart mipitecan, an antibody drug conjugate targeting folate receptor alpha, in high grade ovarian cancer: Results from the first-in-human phase 1 study, Annals of Oncology (2026), doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.annonc.2026.10.001. Romeo M, Gil-Martín M, Gaba L, et al. Multicenter real-world data of subsequent chemotherapy after progression to PARP inhibitors in a maintenance relapse setting. Cancers (Basel). 2022;14(18):4414. Aghajanian C, Blank SV, Goff BA, et al. OCEANS: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled phase III trial of chemotherapy with or without bevacizumab in patients with platinum-sensitive recurrent epithelial ovarian, primary peritoneal, or fallopian tube cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2012;30(17):2039-2045. Lesnock JL, Temin S, Bouberhan S, et al. Systemic Treatment of Ovarian Cancer Recurrence: ASCO Living Guideline, Version 2026.1.0. J Clin Oncol. Published online July 13, 2026. doi:10.1200/JCO-26-01591. Lheureux S, Braunstein M, Oza AM. Epithelial ovarian cancer: evolution of management in the era of precision medicine. CA Cancer J Clin. 2019;69(4):280-304. doi:10.3322/caac.21559. Bax HJ, Chauhan J, Stavraka C, et al. Folate receptor alpha in ovarian cancer tissue and patient serum is associated with disease burden and treatment outcomes. Br J Cancer. 2023;128(2):342-353. doi:10.1038/s41416-022-02031-x. American Cancer Society. Cancer Facts for Women. Accessed September 9, 2026. https://www.cancer.org/cancer/risk-prevention/understanding-cancer-risk/cancer-facts/cancer-facts-for-women.html. Colombo N, Sessa C, du Bois A, et al. ESMO-ESGO consensus conference recommendations on ovarian cancer: pathology and molecular biology, early and advanced stages, borderline tumours and recurrent disease. Ann Oncol. 2019;30(5):672-705. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdz062. About Lilly
Lilly is a medicine company turning science into healing to make life better for people around the world. We've been pioneering life-changing discoveries for 150 years, and today our medicines help tens of millions of people across the globe. Harnessing the power of biotechnology, chemistry and genetic medicine, our scientists are urgently advancing new discoveries to solve some of the world's most significant health challenges: redefining diabetes care; treating obesity and curtailing its most devastating long-term effects; advancing the fight against Alzheimer's disease; providing solutions to some of the most debilitating immune system disorders; and transforming the most difficult-to-treat cancers into manageable diseases. With each step toward a healthier world, we're motivated by one thing: making life better for millions more people. That includes delivering innovative clinical trials that reflect the diversity of our world and working to ensure our medicines are accessible and affordable. To learn more, visit Lilly.com and Lilly.com/news, or follow us on Facebook, Instagram, and LinkedIn. P-LLY
MSK Disclosure: Dr. Kyi has financial interests related to Eli Lilly and Company.
Trademarks and Trade Names
All trademarks or trade names referred to in this press release are the property of the company, or, to the extent trademarks or trade names belonging to other companies are references in this press release, the property of their respective owners. Solely for convenience, the trademarks and trade names in this press release are referred to without the ® and ™ symbols, but such references should not be construed as any indicator that the company or, to the extent applicable, their respective owners will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, the company's or their rights thereto. We do not intend the use or display of other companies' trademarks and trade names to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, any other companies.
Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains forward-looking statements (as that term is defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995) about sofetabart mipitecan plus bevacizumab and reflects Lilly's current beliefs and expectations. However, as with any pharmaceutical product, there are substantial risks and uncertainties in the process of drug research, development, and commercialization. Among other things, there is no guarantee that planned or ongoing studies will be completed as planned, that future study results will be consistent with study results to date, that any of these therapies will prove to be a safe and effective treatment or receive regulatory approval, or that Lilly will execute its strategy as expected. For further discussion of these and other risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ from Lilly's expectations, see Lilly's Form 10-K and Form 10-Q filings with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission. Except as required by law, Lilly undertakes no duty to update forward-looking statements to reflect events after the date of this release.
Investigation follows the October 22, 2026 disclosure regarding FirstCash Holdings, Inc.; investors who lost money may have claims to recover their losses
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Investors who lost money on FirstCash Holdings, Inc. ("FirstCash" or the "Company") stock may have claims to recover their losses. Glancy Prongay Wolke & Rotter LLP ("Glancy") today announced a securities fraud investigation on behalf of FirstCash Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: FCFS) investors into whether the Company may have violated the federal securities laws. The investigation follows the October 22, 2026 disclosure regarding FirstCash Holdings, Inc.
Investors who lost money on FirstCash Holdings, Inc. securities can submit their FirstCash Holdings, Inc. loss information to learn about potentially pursuing claims to recover their losses.
Key facts in the FirstCash Holdings, Inc. investigation
Disclosure date: October 22, 2026Stock price decline: $31.97 per share, or 14.75%Closing price after the decline: $184.78 on October 22, 2026What happened?
On October 22, 2026, the Company reported third quarter financial results earnings, including that the Company’s American First Finance (“AFF”) segment operating income fell approximately 28% year over year to $33 million, “due primarily to the loss of earnings from previously reported merchant partner bankruptcies,” referring primarily to Conn’s and American Freight, which filed for bankruptcy in 2024. The Company further reported gross transaction volume of lease and loan originations during the third quarter decreased 15% compared to the prior-year quarter, due in part to an alleged “increased strategic focus on merchant quality.”
On this news, FirstCash shares fell $31.97 per share, or 14.75%, to close at $184.78 on October 22, 2026, thereby injuring investors.
"The price of FirstCash Holdings, Inc. shares fell 14.75% following the October 22, 2026 disclosure that FirstCash's American First Finance segment operating income fell approximately 28% year over year to $33 million and its third quarter lease and loan origination volume decreased 15%. Investors who suffered losses deserve to know whether they were given complete and accurate information prior to the disclosure, and our investigation seeks to answer that question," said Charles H. Linehan, Partner at Glancy Prongay Wolke & Rotter LLP.
What's the next step?
Glancy is investigating potential claims on behalf of FirstCash Holdings, Inc. investors. Investors who lost money can contact Glancy about the FirstCash Holdings, Inc. investigation, email [email protected], or call 310-201-9150 (toll-free: 888-773-9224).
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is eligible? Investors who bought FirstCash Holdings, Inc. securities and lost money may have claims and can contact Glancy to learn whether they are affected by the FirstCash Holdings, Inc. investigation.
What is a securities fraud investigation? In the FirstCash Holdings, Inc. investigation, Glancy is reviewing whether the Company or its executives may have made false or misleading statements to investors in violation of the federal securities laws.
Has a lawsuit been filed? This release announces Glancy's investigation, not a lawsuit. If a securities class action is later filed against FirstCash Holdings, Inc., investors may have the opportunity to seek appointment as lead plaintiff.
Does it cost anything to contact Glancy or participate in this investigation? Glancy represents FirstCash Holdings, Inc. investors on a contingency fee basis, so investors pay no attorneys' fees out of pocket. Any attorneys' fees and litigation expenses are paid only from a recovery, if one is obtained, and are subject to court approval.
Why work with Glancy on the FirstCash Holdings, Inc. investigation? Glancy Prongay Wolke & Rotter LLP is a premier law firm with decades of experience representing investors and consumers in securities litigation and other complex class action litigation. Contact Glancy about the FirstCash Holdings, Inc. investigation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Whistleblower notice
Persons with non-public information about FirstCash Holdings, Inc. should consider their options to aid the investigation or take advantage of the SEC Whistleblower Program. Under the program, whistleblowers who provide original information that leads to a successful SEC enforcement action may receive awards of 10 to 30 percent of the sanctions collected, when those sanctions exceed $1 million. For more information, contact Charles H. Linehan at 310-201-9150 or 888-773-9224, or email [email protected].
About Glancy Prongay Wolke & Rotter LLP
Glancy was named one of Law360's Securities Groups of the Year and ranked second in total investor recoveries by ISS Securities Class Action Services in 2025.
Glancy's successes have been widely covered by leading news and industry publications, including The Wall Street Journal, The Financial Times, Bloomberg Businessweek, Reuters, the Associated Press, Barron's, Investor's Business Daily, Forbes, and Money.
Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Related links
FirstCash Holdings, Inc. investigation page, Glancy Prongay Wolke & Rotter LLPFirstCash Q3 ReportFirstCash Holdings, Inc. SEC filings index, EDGARSEC Whistleblower ProgramGlancy Prongay Wolke & Rotter LLPThis press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
Společnost Chemours snížila celoroční výhled upravené EBITDA na 775–825 mil. USD; její akcie 5. srpna 2026 klesly o 18,63 % poté, co společnost přiznala přezásobení trhu chladivy.
The Chemours Company Securities Fraud Class Action Result of Overstatement of Refrigerant Aftermarket Demand and 18% Stock Decline - Investors may Contact Lewis Kahn, Esq., at Kahn Swick & Foti, LLCPR Newswire
NEW YORK and NEW ORLEANS, Oct. 23, 2026
, /PRNewswire/ -- Kahn Swick & Foti, LLC ("KSF") and KSF partner, former Attorney General of Louisiana, Charles C. Foti, Jr., remind investors with substantial losses that they have until December 7, 2026 to file lead plaintiff applications in a securities class action lawsuit against The Chemours Company ("Chemours" or the "Company") (NYSE: CC), if they purchased or otherwise acquired the Company's securities between February 20, 2026 and August 4, 2026, inclusive (the "Class Period"). This action is pending in the United States District Court for the District of Delaware.
What You May Do
If you purchased securities of Chemours as above and would like to discuss your legal rights and how this case might affect you and your right to recover for your economic loss, you may, without obligation or cost to you, contact KSF Managing Partner Lewis Kahn toll-free at 1-833-538-3666 or via email ([email protected]), or visit https://www.ksfcounsel.com/cases/nyse-cc/ to learn more. If you wish to serve as a lead plaintiff in this class action, you must petition the Court by December 7, 2026.
>>>CLICK HERE for more information
About the Lawsuit
Chemours and certain of its executives are charged with failing to disclose material information during the Class Period, violating federal securities laws.
On August 4, 2026, post-market, the Company announced its 2Q 2026 financial results and cut its full-year adjusted EBITDA guidance to $775–$825 million, down from $800–$900 million. On the earnings call the next morning, CEO Denise Dignam admitted that "[a]s a result of the initial channel fill, aftermarket customers built additional inventory, creating an oversupplied channel heading into 2026." CFO Shane Hostetter added that, "from the Q2 and Q3 perspective, there's probably about $65 million of aftermarket sales that . . . probably should have been allocated to more of this year."
On this news, the price of Chemours' shares fell $3.34 per share, or 18.63%, to close at $14.59 per share on August 5, 2026.
The case is Darcy v. The Chemours Company, et al., No. 26-cv-01299.
>>>To Learn More, Click HERE
About Kahn Swick & Foti, LLC
KSF, whose partners include former Louisiana Attorney General Charles C. Foti, Jr., is one of the nation's premier boutique securities litigation law firms. This past year, KSF was ranked by SCAS among the top 10 firms nationally based upon total settlement value. KSF serves a variety of clients, including public and private institutional investors, and retail investors - in seeking recoveries for investment losses emanating from corporate fraud or malfeasance by publicly traded companies. KSF has offices in New York, Delaware, California, Louisiana, Chicago, and a representative office in Luxembourg.
TOP 10 Plaintiff Law Firms - According to ISS Securities Class Action Services
To learn more about KSF, you may visit www.ksfcounsel.com.
>>>For More Information about the case, Click HERE
Contact:
Kahn Swick & Foti, LLC
Lewis Kahn, Managing Partner
[email protected]
1-833-538-3666
1100 Poydras St., Suite 960
New Orleans, LA 70163
View original content to download multimedia:https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/the-chemours-company-securities-fraud-class-action-result-of-overstatement-of-refrigerant-aftermarket-demand-and-18-stock-decline---investors-may-contact-lewis-kahn-esq-at-kahn-swick--foti-llc-302918520.html
SummaryLattice Semiconductor is entering a new growth phase, driven by accelerating data center demand and strategic expansion beyond niche FPGAs.I initiate a Buy rating, citing rising FPGA attach rates, higher ASPs, and the transformative AMI acquisition, which doubles LSCC's SAM and enhances platform capabilities.LSCC's I&E segment is recovering from destocking, posting 36% YoY growth, with edge AI applications providing further upside.Despite a 46.1x FY2026 P/E, LSCC's premium is justified by a $1B run rate, a >40% targeted revenue CAGR to 2030, and conservative consensus estimates.Igor Paszkiewicz/iStock via Getty Images
Introduction While FPGAs have generally received less attention as an AI beneficiary, Lattice Semiconductor's (LSCC) Q2 2026 results show that the company is becoming an integral part of the data center buildout. Revenue accelerated to
1.45K Followers
Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have no stock, option or similar derivative position in any of the companies mentioned, and no plans to initiate any such positions within the next 72 hours. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.
Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.
Integra LifeSciences snížila výhled tržeb pro rok 2026 o 30,5 mil. USD v polovině původního rozpětí kvůli červencové povodni; akcie 2. října klesly o 21,2 %.
Investigation follows the October 2, 2026 disclosure regarding Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation; investors who lost money may have claims to recover their losses
LOS ANGELES--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Investors who lost money on Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation ("Integra" or the "Company") stock may have claims to recover their losses. Glancy Prongay Wolke & Rotter LLP ("Glancy") today announced a securities fraud investigation on behalf of Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation (NASDAQ: IART) investors into whether the Company may have violated the federal securities laws. The investigation follows the October 2, 2026 disclosure regarding Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation.
Investors who lost money on Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation securities can submit their Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation loss information to learn about potentially pursuing claims to recover their losses.
Key facts in the Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation investigation
Disclosure date: October 2, 2026Stock price decline: $3.41 per share, or 21.2%Closing price after the decline: $12.68 on October 2, 2026What happened?
On October 2, 2026, Integra announced updated full year guidance and preliminary third quarter results. The Company disclosed, among other things, that due to a July flood at its Cincinnati manufacturing facility, “disruption negatively impacted third quarter revenue by approximately $7 million and is expected to negatively impact fourth quarter revenue by approximately $15 million to $20 million.” Integra also slashed its 2026 revenue guidance by approximately $30.5 million at the midpoint.
On this news, Integra shares fell $3.41 or 21.2%, closing at $12.68 on October 2, 2026, thereby injuring investors.
Then, on October 21, 2026, Integra reported final third quarter results. Among other items, the Company disclosed “the Cincinnati disruption proved more significant than initially expected.” The Company announced it expected fourth quarter revenue of $413 million to $433 million (down 0.5% to 5.2%). The Company further disclosed “more measured expectations for portions of our Tissue Reconstruction business” in part because “growth in Tissue Reconstruction did not materialize as anticipated.”
On this news, Integra’s stock fell $1.49 or 11.18% to close at $11.84 on October 21, 2026, thereby injuring investors further.
"The price of Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation shares fell 21.2% following the October 2, 2026 disclosure that Integra had cut its 2026 revenue guidance by approximately $30.5 million at the midpoint and said a July flood at its Cincinnati manufacturing facility reduced third quarter revenue by about $7 million and would reduce fourth quarter revenue by $15 million to $20 million. Investors who suffered losses deserve to know whether they were given complete and accurate information prior to the disclosure, and our investigation seeks to answer that question," said Charles H. Linehan, Partner at Glancy Prongay Wolke & Rotter LLP.
What's the next step?
Glancy is investigating potential claims on behalf of Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation investors. Investors who lost money can contact Glancy about the Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation investigation, email [email protected], or call 310-201-9150 (toll-free: 888-773-9224).
Frequently Asked Questions
Who is eligible? Investors who bought Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation securities and lost money may have claims, and can contact Glancy to learn whether they are affected by the Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation investigation.
What is a securities fraud investigation? In the Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation investigation, Glancy is reviewing whether the Company or its executives may have made false or misleading statements to investors in violation of the federal securities laws.
Has a lawsuit been filed? This release announces Glancy's investigation, not a lawsuit. If a securities class action is later filed against Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation, investors may have the opportunity to seek appointment as lead plaintiff.
Does it cost anything to contact Glancy or participate in this investigation? Glancy represents Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation investors on a contingency fee basis, so investors pay no attorneys' fees out of pocket. Any attorneys' fees and litigation expenses are paid only from a recovery, if one is obtained, and are subject to court approval.
Why work with Glancy on the Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation investigation? Glancy Prongay Wolke & Rotter LLP is a premier law firm with decades of experience representing investors and consumers in securities litigation and other complex class action litigation. Contact Glancy about the Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation investigation. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Whistleblower notice
Persons with non-public information about Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation should consider their options to aid the investigation or take advantage of the SEC Whistleblower Program. Under the program, whistleblowers who provide original information that leads to a successful SEC enforcement action may receive awards of 10 to 30 percent of the sanctions collected, when those sanctions exceed $1 million. For more information, contact Charles H. Linehan at 310-201-9150 or 888-773-9224, or email [email protected].
About Glancy Prongay Wolke & Rotter LLP
Glancy was named one of Law360's Securities Groups of the Year and ranked second in total investor recoveries by ISS Securities Class Action Services in 2025.
Glancy's successes have been widely covered by leading news and industry publications, including The Wall Street Journal, The Financial Times, Bloomberg Businessweek, Reuters, the Associated Press, Barron's, Investor's Business Daily, Forbes, and Money.
Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.
Related links
Integra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation investigation page, Glancy Prongay Wolke & Rotter LLPIntegra Q3 Financial ResultsIntegra LifeSciences Holdings Corporation SEC filings index, EDGARSEC Whistleblower ProgramGlancy Prongay Wolke & Rotter LLPThis press release may be considered Attorney Advertising in some jurisdictions under the applicable law and ethical rules.
Amazon po šesti letech urovnal spor s bývalými manažery Carlem Nelsonem a Caseym Kirschnerem, kteří přiznali, že přijali osobní platby související se zakázkami na datová centra.
Two former Amazon real estate managers acknowledged receiving personal payments tied to data center deals they handled for the company, under a settlement that resolves the company’s claims against them in a six-year lawsuit.
Carl Nelson and Casey Kirschner “regret their actions, apologize for failing to meet Amazon’s high ethical standards, and are glad this matter has been resolved,” according to a joint statement that the parties agreed to as part of the settlement.
The payments “violated Amazon’s Code of Conduct & Ethics, broke the trust Amazon places in its employees, and put Amazon’s reputation at risk in the communities it serves,” says the statement, which Amazon provided Friday evening in response to GeekWire’s inquiry.
The statement doesn’t call the payments kickbacks or say they were illegal. Nelson was investigated by the FBI but never charged, and a federal judge ruled in 2023 that Amazon’s Code of Conduct wasn’t a legally enforceable contract. The other terms of the settlement are confidential, including whether any money changed hands.
Before the settlement, Nelson had maintained that he abided by the terms of his Amazon employment agreement, which his attorneys said gave him broad leeway to do outside business.
Rodney Atherton, a Colorado attorney who set up business entities for the two men, also settled and “regrets the role he played in the conduct at issue in this case,” according to the statement.
The settlement closes a long legal ordeal for Nelson’s family. His wife, Amy Nelson, the former Seattle entrepreneur who founded The Riveter, a network of co-working spaces for women, has been his most outspoken advocate, defending him for years on social media and in interviews and criticizing Amazon and the Justice Department for pursuing him.
“All disputes with my husband’s former employer have been resolved,” she said in a short video posted Friday on social media.
The case upended the family’s life. The FBI seized $892,135 from the Nelsons’ bank accounts in 2020, including hundreds of thousands of dollars Amy Nelson earned as CEO of The Riveter.
The government returned most of it in a 2022 settlement. By then, the Nelsons had sold their West Seattle home and emptied their retirement accounts to pay lawyers, and they had moved with their four daughters to Hawaii and then Ohio, where Amy’s parents live. The family had spent more than $3 million on legal fees, she told KIRO 7 in 2023.
“Many of the things that we lost over the past four years, we can never get back. We can never get our home back. We can never get our jobs back. We can never get our reputation back,” she told The Seattle Times in 2024, after federal prosecutors moved to drop the related criminal cases.
Amazon told the judge on Oct. 20 that it had reached the settlement, less than two weeks before the case was set to go to trial in U.S. District Court in Alexandria, Va., according to court filings.
The case continues against the remaining defendants, Brian Watson and his Denver-based real estate firm, Northstar Commercial Partners, which Amazon hired for nine data center development projects in Northern Virginia between 2018 and 2020. Amazon alleges that Northstar won that business by paying kickbacks to Nelson and Kirschner, which Watson denies.
Watson and Northstar are headed to trial Nov. 2. In a filing Friday, they asked the judge to make Amazon hand over the settlement agreement so they can see its terms.
The settlement follows years of rulings that went both ways. In April 2023, a federal judge dismissed most of Amazon’s claims, including its breach of contract claims against Nelson and Kirschner. In September 2025, a federal appeals court revived several of the claims, including racketeering and fraud, and sent the case back for trial.
In January 2024, federal prosecutors moved to vacate the guilty pleas of two other men in the case, Kirschner’s brother, Christian Kirschner, and former Northstar account manager Kyle Ramstetter, calling prosecution “not in the best interests of justice.”
Prosecutors added that they had declined to prosecute the other alleged co-conspirators, including Nelson.
Lunit a Summit Therapeutics uzavřely výzkumnou dohodu: platforma SCOPE IO bude analyzovat nádorové mikroprostředí na podporu imunoonkologických vývojových programů s ivonescimabem.
Research Will Use Lunit's AI-powered Pathology Platform to Analyze H&E Whole-Slide Images and Generate Scalable Insights into Tumor Microenvironment Biology
, /PRNewswire/ -- Lunit Inc. (KRX: 328130) and Summit Therapeutics Inc. (NASDAQ: SMMT) today announced a research agreement to evaluate the use of Lunit SCOPE IO, Lunit's AI-powered pathology platform, for tumor microenvironment analysis in support of Summit's immuno-oncology development programs with ivonescimab.
Lunit and Summit Therapeutics The effort will focus on applying Lunit SCOPE IO to hematoxylin and eosin-stained (H&E) whole-slide images to characterize tumor microenvironment features. The companies aim to explore how AI-powered pathology analysis can support biomarker discovery, patient stratification or selection, and a deeper biological understanding of response to ivonescimab therapies.
Summit is developing ivonescimab, a novel, potential first-in-class investigational PD-1 / VEGF bispecific antibody, in several solid tumors. Lunit SCOPE IO is designed to support immuno-oncology research and biomarker development through AI-powered analysis of H&E slides, enabling scalable assessment of tumor microenvironment features without requiring additional stains or assays.
"Understanding the tumor microenvironment is increasingly important as immuno-oncology moves beyond single-axis checkpoint inhibition toward more complex mechanisms and combinations," said Allen Yang, MD, PhD, Chief Research and Development Strategy Officer of Summit. "We are pleased to work with Lunit to explore how AI-powered pathology can help generate deeper, more scalable insights from routine tissue samples and inform the continued development of ivonescimab."
"Summit is at the forefront of next-generation immuno-oncology development, and we are excited to support its efforts with Lunit SCOPE IO," said Brandon Suh, Lunit CEO. "By extracting quantitative, spatially resolved immune and tumor microenvironment features from standard H&E slides, we believe SCOPE IO can help biopharma partners better understand which patients may benefit from immuno-oncology therapies and why."
This agreement reflects the growing importance of computational pathology in oncology drug development. Routine H&E slides contain rich information about tumor architecture, immune infiltration, stromal organization, and spatial interactions within the tumor microenvironment. However, traditional manual assessment can be difficult to scale and may not fully capture the quantitative and spatial complexity of the tumor-immune interface. AI-powered analysis offers the potential to convert these routinely generated pathology images into reproducible, high-dimensional biomarker data.
The companies expect the work to generate tumor microenvironment insights that may inform future translational research, exploratory biomarker strategies, and clinical development planning. No clinical outcome data are being announced as part of this release.
*Lunit SCOPE products are for research use only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures or decisions.
About Ivonescimab
Ivonescimab, known as SMT112 in Summit's license territories, North America, South America, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and Japan, and as AK112 outside of Summit's license territories, is a novel, potential first-in-class investigational bispecific antibody combining the effects of immunotherapy via a blockade of PD-1 with the anti-angiogenesis effects associated with blocking VEGF into a single molecule. By design, ivonescimab displays unique cooperative binding to each of its intended targets with multifold higher affinity to PD-1 when in the presence of VEGF.
This design is intended to differentiate ivonescimab as there is potentially higher expression (presence) of both PD-1 and VEGF in tumor tissue and the tumor microenvironment (TME) as compared to normal tissue in the body. Summit believes ivonescimab's specifically engineered tetravalent structure (four binding sites) enables higher avidity (accumulated strength of multiple binding interactions) in the TME (Zhong, et al, iScience, 2025). This tetravalent structure, the intentional novel design of the molecule, and bringing these two targets into a single bispecific antibody with cooperative binding qualities have the potential to direct ivonescimab to the tumor tissue versus healthy tissue. The intent of ivonescimab's design, together with a half-life of 6 to 7 days after the first dose (Zhong, et al, iScience, 2025) increasing to approximately 10 days at steady state dosing, is to improve upon previously established efficacy thresholds, side effects, and safety profiles associated with prior approved drugs to these targets.
Ivonescimab was invented by Akeso Inc. (HKEX Code: 9926.HK) and is currently utilized in multiple Phase III clinical trials. Over 5,000 patients have been treated with ivonescimab in clinical studies globally and over 100,000 patients when considering those treated in a commercial setting in China, as noted by Akeso.
There are currently 17 Phase III clinical studies that are either announced, ongoing, or have been completed studying ivonescimab, five of which are Summit-sponsored global studies, two of which are studies sponsored by cooperative groups, and 10 of which are being or have been conducted in China by Akeso. Summit began its clinical development of ivonescimab in NSCLC (HARMONi, HARMONi-3, HARMONi-7) and expanded its sponsored Phase III clinical development program into colorectal cancer (CRC; HARMONi-GI3) and urothelial carcinoma (bladder cancer; HARMONi-GU1). The two cooperative studies are in head and neck squamous cell carcinoma (HNSCC; ILLUMINE) and biliary tract cancer (BTC; EA2251).
Five Phase III ivonescimab clinical trials have read out to date, all five with positive data. Four of these five studies are in NSCLC and one is in BTC. In addition to Summit's positive HARMONi study in NSCLC, Akeso has had positive read-outs in four single-region (China), randomized Phase III clinical trials, HARMONi-A, HARMONi-2, HARMONi-6 (each in NSCLC), and HARMONi-GI1 (in BTC) for ivonescimab, including a statistically significant overall survival benefit in all four studies from China.
Akeso is actively conducting additional Phase III clinical studies in settings outside of NSCLC and biliary-tract cancer, including triple-negative breast cancer, head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, small cell lung cancer, colorectal cancer, and pancreatic cancer.
Ivonescimab is an investigational therapy that is not approved by any regulatory authority in Summit's license territories, including the United States and Europe. Ivonescimab was initially approved for marketing authorization in China in May 2024.
About Lunit
Founded in 2013, Lunit (KRX: 328130) is a global leader on a mission to conquer cancer through AI. Our clinically validated solutions span medical imaging, breast health, and biomarker analysis, empowering earlier detection, smarter treatment decisions, and more precise outcomes across the cancer care continuum.
Lunit offers a comprehensive suite spanning risk prediction and early detection to precision oncology. Our FDA-cleared Lunit INSIGHT Breast Suite and breast health solutions support cancer screening in thousands of medical institutions worldwide, while the Lunit SCOPE platform is used in research partnership with global pharma and laboratory leaders for biomarker research, and companion diagnostic development.
Trusted by over 10,000 sites in more than 65 countries, Lunit combines deep medical expertise with continuously evolving datasets to deliver measurable impact for patients, clinicians, and researchers alike. Headquartered in Seoul with global offices, Lunit is driving the worldwide fight against cancer. Learn more at lunit.io.
About Summit Therapeutics Inc.
Summit Therapeutics Inc. is a biopharmaceutical oncology company focused on the discovery, development, and commercialization of patient-, physician-, caregiver- and societal-friendly medicinal therapies intended to improve quality of life, increase potential duration of life, and resolve serious unmet medical needs.
Summit was founded in 2003 and the company's shares are listed on the Nasdaq Global Market (symbol "SMMT"). Summit is headquartered in Miami, Florida, with additional offices in Palo Alto, California, Princeton, New Jersey, Dublin, Ireland, and Oxford, UK.
For more information, please visit https://www.smmttx.com and follow Summit on X @SMMT_TX.
Lunit Forward-Looking Statements
This press release contains forward-looking statements, including statements regarding the expected benefits of the collaboration, the potential use of AI-powered pathology in immuno-oncology development, and the potential application of tumor microenvironment analysis in biomarker research and clinical development. These statements are based on current expectations and involve risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially. Neither company undertakes any obligation to update these forward-looking statements, except as required by law.
Summit Forward-Looking Statements
Any statements in this press release about the Company's future expectations, plans and prospects, including but not limited to, statements about dilution to existing stockholders and potential adverse effects on the market price of the Company's common stock, including from future sales by AstraZeneca, the Company's broad discretion over the use of proceeds, and the possibility that the proceeds will not be sufficient to fund operations as long as anticipated, AstraZeneca's ownership and contractual rights, including Third Party acquisition participation, and registration rights, and potential conflicts of interest, the completion of the Private Placement does not depend on the parties entering into a definitive collaboration agreement, the Company's reliance on AstraZeneca for the supply of AstraZeneca's products and other contributions to the clinical trials, the clinical and preclinical development of the Company's product candidates, entry into and actions related to the Company's partnership with Akeso Inc. and other collaborations, the intended use of the net proceeds from the private placements, the Company's anticipated spending and cash runway, the therapeutic potential of the Company's product candidates, the potential commercialization of the Company's product candidates, the timing of initiation, completion and availability of data from clinical trials, the potential submission of applications for marketing approvals, the expected timing of BLA submissions or FDA decisions, potential acquisitions, statements about the previously disclosed At-The-Market equity offering program ("ATM Program"), the expected proceeds and uses thereof, the Company's estimates regarding stock-based compensation, and other statements containing the words "anticipate," "believe," "continue," "could," "estimate," "expect," "intend," "may," "plan," "potential," "predict," "project," "should," "target," "would," and similar expressions, constitute forward-looking statements within the meaning of The Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Actual results may differ materially from those indicated by such forward-looking statements as a result of various important factors, including the Company's ability to sell shares of our common stock under the ATM Program, the conditions affecting the capital markets, general economic, industry, or political conditions, including the effects of geopolitical developments, domestic and foreign trade policies, and monetary policies, the results of our evaluation of the underlying data in connection with the development and commercialization activities for ivonescimab, the outcome of discussions with regulatory authorities, including the Food and Drug Administration, the uncertainties inherent in the initiation of future clinical trials, availability and timing of data from ongoing and future clinical trials, the results of such trials, and their success, global public health crises, that may affect timing and status of our clinical trials and operations, whether preliminary results from a clinical trial will be predictive of the final results of that trial or whether results of early clinical trials or preclinical studies will be indicative of the results of later clinical trials, whether business development opportunities to expand the Company's pipeline of drug candidates, including without limitation, through potential acquisitions of, and/or collaborations with, other entities occur, expectations for regulatory approvals, laws and regulations affecting government contracts and funding awards, availability of funding sufficient for the Company's foreseeable and unforeseeable operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements and other factors discussed in the "Risk Factors" and "Management's Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations" sections of filings that the Company makes with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Summit defines a "positive study" as a clinical study with one or more prespecified primary endpoints in which one of those endpoints achieves a statistically significant benefit according to the protocol or statistical analysis plan. Any change to our ongoing trials could cause delays, affect our future expenses, and add uncertainty to our commercialization efforts, as well as to affect the likelihood of the successful completion of clinical development of ivonescimab. Accordingly, readers should not place undue reliance on forward-looking statements or information. In addition, any forward-looking statements included in this press release represent the Company's views only as of the date of this release and should not be relied upon as representing the Company's views as of any subsequent date. The Company specifically disclaims any obligation to update any forward-looking statements included in this press release.
Spor Boeingu s dodavatelem Vaero téměř na dva měsíce zastavil výrobu nákladního letounu 777 a narušil produkci modelu 767. Boeing se kvůli výpadku dodávek součástek snaží přesunout výrobu tohoto dílu do vlastních závodů.
Boeing's (BA.N) dispute with a small Florida-based supplier has halted production of its 777 freighter for nearly two months and disrupted output of the 767, including freighters and KC-46 aerial refueling tankers, according to Boeing workers and court filings.
Boeing filed a complaint in August alleging supplier Vaero had stopped delivering a critical wing component known as the trailing-edge rib kit, stalling work at the Everett, Washington, wing-production facility that supports the 777 freighter and 767 programs, according to a copy of the complaint reviewed by Reuters. The disruption was costing Boeing as much as $6.5 million a day, the complaint said.
Boeing said in the complaint that the trailing-edge rib kit was an "indispensable" part and Vaero was the sole supplier.
Although the companies reached a settlement in late September, production of the 777 freighter has yet to resume, according to three Boeing workers familiar with the matter. They declined to be named because they were not authorized to speak publicly.
The dispute also disrupted production of the 767, a widebody cargo and military aircraft, the people said. Since the settlement, Boeing has received some parts for the 767 line, according to one of the workers.
The prolonged disruption highlights the fragility of aerospace supply chains, showing how a dispute involving a single supplier can halt production of aircraft that remain in strong demand.
The lawsuit was first reported by Law.com in August, but the nearly two-month production disruption has not previously been reported.
Boeing declined to comment. Vaero did not respond to requests for comment.
BRINGING PRODUCTION IN-HOUSE
Boeing is trying to bring production of the trailing-edge rib kit in-house, according to two of the people. The component is used in wing assembly for the 767 and current-generation 777 freighter. Boeing's 777X, which uses composite wings, has not been affected.
Without the Vaero parts, Boeing removed two partially assembled 777 freighters from its final assembly line, according to one Boeing worker.
Using data from aviation consultancy IBA, Reuters identified one of the aircraft as destined for FedEx (FDX.N).
FedEx did not respond to a request for comment.
Boeing has delivered 21 777 freighters so far this year, company data show. It also has a handful of freighters whose wings were assembled before the dispute and could still be delivered before year-end, according to two of the Boeing workers.
Hyperliquid Strategies Inc. (NASDAQ: PURR) has increased its stock repurchase program from $30 million to $100 million, expanding its authorization as shares of the HYPE treasury company have declined more than 30% from their October high.
The company said Friday that approximately $72 million remains available under the expanded program, while its board extended the authorization’s expiration date from December 5, 2026, to October 31, 2027.
Hyperliquid Strategies said the increase reflects its board’s confidence in the company’s long term capital strategy and provides additional flexibility to repurchase shares as part of its treasury management operations.
Repurchases may be conducted through open market purchases, privately negotiated transactions or other methods permitted under federal securities laws.
The company said the timing and size of purchases will depend on market conditions, share prices and regulatory requirements. The authorization does not guarantee that the remaining funds will be used, and the program may be suspended or discontinued.
PURR shares and HYPE underperform Bitcoin in October
The announcement comes as Hyperliquid Strategies and HYPE, the native token of the Hyperliquid blockchain, have experienced steeper declines than Bitcoin this month.
PURR shares traded near $8.80 on Friday, down approximately 33% from an October 5 high of $13.05, according to Yahoo Finance data.
HYPE has also declined more than 18% from its October high near $95, trading around $77 despite Bitcoin remaining relatively stable over the same period.
Bitcoin, meanwhile, has traded largely between $80,000 and $87,000 during October, declining approximately 6% from its monthly high near $87,000.
The comparison highlights the relative weakness of HYPE and PURR, with the company’s shares recording a considerably larger decline than both the underlying token and Bitcoin.
Hyperliquid Strategies operates as a digital asset treasury company focused on accumulating HYPE and providing investors with exposure to the Hyperliquid ecosystem.
Its strategy involves generating returns through HYPE staking, yield optimization and active participation in the network, rather than relying exclusively on changes in the token’s market price.
The company describes itself as the largest digital asset treasury vehicle focused on HYPE, targeting US and institutional investors seeking exposure to the blockchain’s growth.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Estefano Gomez. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
CME Group CEO Terry Duffy has expressed skepticism about Hyperliquid’s ability to enter the U.S. market without addressing Know Your Customer (KYC) requirements. Speaking on Bloomberg’s Odd Lots podcast, Duffy stated that Hyperliquid cannot delegate regulatory responsibilities by merely providing infrastructure. The derivatives protocol, known for its high leverage and automated liquidation features, currently does not require identity verification and is not registered with U.S. regulators. Markets appear to interpret these regulatory challenges as potential obstacles to Hyperliquid’s market expansion, impacting investor sentiment.
Key Takeaways
CME Group CEO Terry Duffy’s comments suggest significant regulatory hurdles for Hyperliquid in the U.S. market.
Markets appear to reflect concerns over Hyperliquid’s lack of KYC measures and regulatory registration.
The developments may indicate a moderation in investor expectations regarding Hyperliquid’s price performance.
What to Watch
The focus will be on how Hyperliquid addresses these regulatory challenges, particularly any initiatives to implement KYC measures. Observers will be closely monitoring any announcements from Hyperliquid regarding partnerships or compliance strategies that could influence market sentiment. Additionally, regulatory actions from U.S. authorities may further impact perceptions of Hyperliquid’s potential U.S. market entry.
For the quarter ended September 2026, Halliburton (HAL - Free Report) reported revenue of $5.7 billion, up 1.8% over the same period last year. EPS came in at $0.60, compared to $0.58 in the year-ago quarter.
The reported revenue represents a surprise of +1.98% over the Zacks Consensus Estimate of $5.59 billion. With the consensus EPS estimate being $0.58, the EPS surprise was +3.45%.
While investors closely watch year-over-year changes in headline numbers -- revenue and earnings -- and how they compare to Wall Street expectations to determine their next course of action, some key metrics always provide a better insight into a company's underlying performance.
As these metrics influence top- and bottom-line performance, comparing them to the year-ago numbers and what analysts estimated helps investors project a stock's price performance more accurately.
Here is how Halliburton performed in the just reported quarter in terms of the metrics most widely monitored and projected by Wall Street analysts:
Revenue- Latin America: $1.12 billion versus $1.06 billion estimated by three analysts on average. Compared to the year-ago quarter, this number represents a +12.7% change.Revenue- Europe/Africa/CIS: $1.02 billion versus the three-analyst average estimate of $924.3 million. The reported number represents a year-over-year change of +22.7%.Revenue- North America: $2.16 billion versus the three-analyst average estimate of $2.29 billion. The reported number represents a year-over-year change of -8.6%.Revenue- Middle East/Asia: $1.41 billion versus $1.3 billion estimated by three analysts on average. Compared to the year-ago quarter, this number represents a -0.5% change.Revenue- Drilling and Evaluation: $2.61 billion compared to the $2.41 billion average estimate based on five analysts. The reported number represents a change of +10% year over year.Revenue- Completion and Production: $3.09 billion compared to the $3.16 billion average estimate based on five analysts. The reported number represents a change of -4.2% year over year.Operating income- Completion and Production: $457 million versus the five-analyst average estimate of $515.8 million.Operating income- Drilling and Evaluation: $391 million compared to the $338.22 million average estimate based on five analysts.Operating income- Corporate and other: $-75 million versus $-102.5 million estimated by two analysts on average.View all Key Company Metrics for Halliburton here>>>
Shares of Halliburton have returned +1.3% over the past month versus the Zacks S&P 500 composite's -1.2% change. The stock currently has a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold), indicating that it could perform in line with the broader market in the near term.
QCP upozorňuje, že Bitcoin nyní podléhá širší averzi k riziku vyvolané obavami z úvěrového rizika v souvislosti s dluhovým financováním infrastruktury AI.
In its market analysis published today, QCP argued that explaining Bitcoin’s weakness solely through developments specific to the crypto sector would be incomplete. The company stated that credit risk in institutions financing AI infrastructure with debt has spread to stocks and crypto assets.
The report highlighted the yields on CoreWeave bonds, which reached approximately 15 percent. According to QCP, this level indicates that investors are demanding a higher risk premium regarding financing costs and debt sustainability.
The company noted that CoreWeave stock fell 10 percent on October 22, indicating that concerns have spread to the broader technology sector.
QCP’s conclusion regarding Bitcoin is noteworthy: instead of appearing as an asset that moves independently of stocks in the current wave, BTC is following the general risk-aversion trend.
The report also addressed energy price pressures originating from the Middle East and financial risks in Europe. It noted that these factors simultaneously complicate growth and inflation expectations.
*This is not investment advice.
Follow our Telegram and X account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!
Large speculators in CME Bitcoin futures held a net long position of 2,418 contracts for the week of October 20, 2026, according to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s latest Commitments of Traders report.
That is a slight pullback from the prior week’s 2,534 contracts.
The report, released October 23, also showed speculators paring bets against most US Treasury futures. Meanwhile, the euro sat deep in net short territory.
What the Bitcoin numbers show
The CFTC publishes its Commitments of Traders, or COT, data every Friday at 3:30 p.m. ET. Each release reflects positions as of the preceding Tuesday.
The 2,418-contract figure covers non-commercial speculators in CME Bitcoin futures. It blends standard and micro contracts under the legacy reporting format.
A standard CME Bitcoin contract represents 5 BTC, while a micro contract represents just 0.1 BTC.
For context, the week ending October 13 showed large speculators net long 2,534 contracts, with total open interest of 20,752 contracts. Open interest measures the total number of outstanding contracts that have not been closed out.
The more granular Traders in Financial Futures breakdown told a split story for that October 13 week. Leveraged funds, a category that typically includes hedge funds, were net short roughly 5,844 standard contracts.
Asset managers and institutions, by contrast, were net long 3,642 contracts.
Treasuries, equities and the euro
The broader report showed a fairly consistent theme in the bond market: speculators trimming short positions.
Speculators cut their net short in CBOT US 2-year Treasury futures by 54,796 contracts to 856,783.
Net shorts in 5-year Treasury futures fell by 6,095 contracts to 1,074,109.
Net shorts in 10-year Treasury futures dropped by 23,809 contracts to 964,293.
Net shorts in CBOT US Treasury bond futures shrank by 58,019 contracts to 68,419.
The lone exception was the long end. Speculators increased their net short in UltraBond Treasury futures by 53,564 contracts to 375,161.
Equity fund speculators trimmed their S&P 500 CME net short by 42,221 contracts to 348,674.
Equity fund managers cut their S&P 500 CME net long by 18,079 contracts to 894,464.
In currencies, the euro held a net short position of 134,524 contracts.
Why the positioning matters
The COT report has an important limitation. It tells you what traders hold, not why they hold it, and it makes no attempt to forecast prices.
A net long can reflect outright bullish conviction. It can also be one leg of a hedged trade, such as a basis trade where a fund buys spot exposure and sells futures to capture the price gap between them.
That caveat is especially relevant to the Bitcoin data. The October 13 split, with leveraged funds net short and asset managers net long, is consistent with a market where some participants are hedging rather than simply calling direction.
The next COT report is anticipated on October 30, 2026. Traders watching Bitcoin will want to see whether open interest holds near the 20,752-contract level recorded for October 13, and whether speculators keep inching back from their net long or start adding again.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Vivian Nguyen. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Americký regulátor OCC dokončil pravidla k zákonu GENIUS Act pro stablecoiny. Jasnější regulace může podpořit přijetí stablecoinu RLUSD od společnosti Ripple a zvýšit spalování XRP při transakcích.
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), a leading US federal banking regulator, finalized its rules implementing the GENIUS Act on October 21. This move marks the OCC as the first regulator to officially complete the framework for stablecoins since Congress passed the GENIUS Act in July 2025.
SMQKE highlights XRP benefitsCryptocurrency researcher SMQKE responded promptly to the OCC’s announcement, suggesting that the regulatory clarity provided by the GENIUS Act could deliver notable advantages for XRP. He openly stated that the new legislation will have positive implications for XRP’s role in digital assets and payments.
SMQKE referenced supporting research that examines Ripple’s RLUSD, a USD-backed stablecoin built on the XRP Ledger. RLUSD transactions incur a small fee denominated in XRP, which is permanently burned. The research asserts that consistent burning of XRP during transactions could drive upward price momentum by reducing the token’s overall supply.
As RLUSD adoption expands in cross-border payments and remittances, XRP could become a crucial bridge currency for providing liquidity, according to research highlighted by SMQKE.
The supporting documentation also implies that a well-defined, regulated framework provided by the GENIUS Act strengthens the credibility of RLUSD among financial institutions, further increasing overall adoption.
Mini dictionary: The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) is an independent bureau within the US Department of the Treasury responsible for chartering, regulating, and supervising all national banks and federal savings associations in the United States.
Institutional adoption and regulatory clarityThe research connects RLUSD’s growth potential to its compliance with strict reserve and audit requirements set by the GENIUS Act. Meeting these requirements could enhance RLUSD’s reputation among banks and payment providers, laying the groundwork for further adoption. Increased adoption would lead to more RLUSD transactions, increasing the frequency of associated XRP burns.
Though XRP is not a stablecoin, the GENIUS Act’s guidance regarding digital asset classification may also influence XRP’s regulatory status. The research points out that the Act could help XRP gain recognition as a utility token rather than a security, an issue that has played a central role in Ripple’s lengthy legal dispute with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
By offering regulatory clarity for stablecoin issuers, the GENIUS Act may also lower entry barriers for financial institutions considering stablecoin solutions. This environment could support joint adoption of both RLUSD and XRP in digital payment networks.
TokenTypeBurn MechanismRegulatory ImpactXRPUtility tokenFee burned per transactionPotential reclassification as utilityRLUSDStablecoin (USD-backed)Generates XRP burnsStronger institutional trust post-GENIUS ActSMQKE’s analysis drew notable attention within the XRP community. By labeling his work “Documented,” the researcher indicated a high degree of confidence in the supporting evidence. Community members emphasized the analysis as a foundation for renewed optimism about XRP’s future use cases.
The GENIUS Act gives Ripple and RLUSD a clear regulatory foundation, which could extend positive effects to XRP as well.
Ripple, the US-based technology company behind XRP, finds itself with improved regulatory clarity for its stablecoin product as a result of the OCC’s latest move. SMQKE argued that this environment creates a ripple effect, potentially benefiting broader digital asset adoption and XRP’s practical function in financial markets.
Ripple vyzval SEC k rychlému přijetí závazného rámce pro kryptoaktiva a žádá o upřesnění, že podání formuláře TR nepředstavuje uznání dřívějšího statusu cenného papíru ani porušení zákona.
Ripple Labs has formally endorsed the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s proposed Regulation Crypto Assets, calling for its swift adoption as a binding rule. The company submitted its comment letter on October 20, 2026, coinciding with the final day for public input on the agency’s releases 33-11434 and 34-106150 (File No. S7-2026-27).
Ripple’s position on crypto regulationChief Legal Officer Stuart Alderoty, General Counsel Sameer Dhond, and Deputy General Counsel Deborah McCrimmon signed Ripple’s letter. The document states that Ripple “fully supports the Commission’s efforts to provide a regulatory framework for crypto assets, and urges the Commission to adopt the Proposal in a final rule.”
Ripple emphasized that a regulatory framework rooted in existing US securities law could offer much-needed clarity to the crypto industry, reducing the need for piecemeal enforcement actions and fostering domestic innovation.
Ripple, a blockchain technology company known for its digital payment protocol and the digital asset XRP, pointed out that the SEC’s proposal builds on a joint interpretation of existing securities laws by both the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). This interpretation relies on the Howey investment-contract test as a legal basis for crypto asset oversight.
The firm argued that the presence of an investment contract does not automatically render the underlying token a security. Instead, Ripple contended, the legal status should hinge on the issuer’s promises and representations throughout the contract’s life—rather than applying a permanent securities designation to the token or using a decentralization test as the sole criterion.
Ripple also incorporated its previous correspondence with the SEC’s Crypto Task Force in 2025 and 2026, providing additional context for its views.
Industry impact and legal contextStuart Alderoty has previously commented that the company spent over $150 million on legal efforts to resolve its longstanding dispute with the SEC over XRP’s regulatory status.
According to Ripple, the proposed regulation could replace the uncertainty of case-by-case enforcement with clearer, predictable rules. The company maintains that this approach would encourage capital formation in the US and reduce the likelihood of crypto innovators seeking opportunities overseas.
While expressing general support, Ripple advocated for targeted improvements. One specific request involved clarifying that Form TR filings should not be treated as an admission of previous securities status or legal violations.
The official comment window for the SEC’s proposal closed on October 20. However, the Commission confirmed that it will continue to accept public feedback as it considers whether to finalize the framework. Ripple’s endorsement arrives as a significant statement from a leading US blockchain firm as policymakers deliberate over the future of crypto regulation.
Mini dictionary: Howey test – A legal test established by the US Supreme Court to determine whether certain transactions qualify as investment contracts and therefore fall under the definition of a security, based on whether there is an investment of money in a common enterprise with an expectation of profits from the efforts of others.
AspectCase-by-case enforcementProposed SEC FrameworkClarityUnpredictableClearer regulatory pathImpact on innovationEncourages offshore movesSupports domestic capital formationLegal foundationAd hoc litigationGrounded in existing lawWith the SEC’s comment period concluded, industry attention now shifts to how the agency will address feedback from market participants. Ripple’s recommendations and support may influence the final form of US crypto regulations as authorities evaluate the balance between investor protection and industry growth.
The company’s public stance underscores the high stakes for both market participants and regulators as new federal rules for digital assets move closer to completion.
David Schwartz ze společnosti Ripple uvedl, že rostoucí využívání XRPL by mělo zvýšit poptávku po XRP, které se používá k úhradě poplatků a jako rezerva na účtech.
David Schwartz, Ripple's CTO emeritus and one of the original architects of the XRP Ledger (XRPL), has argued that the network's growing adoption could eventually translate into stronger demand and higher prices for its native cryptocurrency, XRP.
In a recent discussion on X, the prominent blockchain developer expressed skepticism about the possibility of the XRP Ledger becoming a major financial infrastructure platform without its native token benefiting from that success.
"I think a world where XRPL is highly successful in financial applications but XRP does not have high demand and value is very unlikely," Schwartz wrote.
HOT Stories
According to Schwartz, XRP possesses several unique advantages within the network that could help drive its long-term demand.
For starters, XRP is the only native, counterparty-free asset on the XRP Ledger, meaning that it does not depend on any third-party issuer.
Moreover, XRP is required to pay transaction fees and maintain account reserves on the network.
"All of those things can help drive value and demand," Schwartz explained.
His comments address a persistent debate within the XRP community about whether the growing adoption of the XRP Ledger necessarily translates into increased demand for XRP itself.
XRP could thrive even if Bitcoin dominatesSchwartz also outlined a hypothetical scenario in which Bitcoin becomes the dominant settlement asset, arguing that XRP could still benefit from the XRP Ledger's success.
"About the only way that could happen would be if we wound up in a world with one totally dominant settlement asset. That seems unlikely to me," he wrote, referring to a scenario in which XRPL succeeds without generating substantial demand for XRP.
He went on to explain that even widespread Bitcoin adoption would not necessarily eliminate XRP's role in facilitating transactions.
"For example, even if you imagine a world where nearly all settlement is done using bitcoin, if XRPL is successful, you will still probably have several versions of wrapped/bridged bitcoin on XRPL and XRP will capture value bridging them."
Spotové ETF na ether zaznamenaly v říjnu čistý odliv 1,2 miliardy USD, nejvyšší v letošním roce. BitMine drží 6,04 milionu ETH a blíží se hranici 5 % celkové nabídky.
Spot ether ETFs have lost $1.2 billion in October and Bitmine is weeks from its 5% cap, leaving ETF flows to decide who absorbs ether’s new supply into year-end.
Ether's spot ETF buyers and its largest corporate holder are both pulling back in October.
Posted October 23, 2026 at 3:00 pm ET.
Ether’s (ETH) demand this year has largely come from two places: spot exchange-traded funds (ETFs) and Bitmine Immersion Technologies (BMNR), the company building an ether treasury. In October, both are pulling back at once.
No month this year has seen spot ether ETFs lose as much as October, with $1.2 billion in net outflows so far. Investors pulled money on all but two trading days through Oct. 22.
Bitmine, meanwhile, is about 66,000 ETH short of its goal of owning 5% of all ether, by our count from its latest holdings update. At the company’s current pace, it hits its target late next month.
Ether bulls often parse their outlooks through adoption headlines, like JPMorgan bringing its deposit token to Ethereum this week. Adoption builds the network, but it only lifts the price when someone buys the coin. Presently, the question is who absorbs the roughly 20,000 new ETH the network issues every week once Bitmine stops.
This issue of Bits + Bips measures how much of that supply Bitmine has been taking, why no other ether treasury can take over, and what ETF flows would need to look like for ether to hold up into year-end.
Spot ether ETFs swung from $2.7 billion of net inflows in August and September to $1.2 billion of net outflows in October through Oct. 22. Source: SoSoValue; Farside. Bitmine’s Buying Has Already Slowed Bitmine is finishing its accumulation at a fraction of the pace it started with. The company has bought ether every week since June 30, 2025. In April and May it bought more than 100,000 ETH in a single week four times. In each of the last two weeks it bought about 12,500.
It now holds 6.04 million ETH, or 4.9% of Ethereum‘s circulating token supply, and its cash has fallen by about $30 million a week with no new capital raise in its last three updates.
“We’re done stacking,” Bitmine Chair Tom Lee said earlier this month in a message to investors.
Bitmine’s 5% ether target is “a hard cap,” Lee said at the Token2049 conference, adding, “We’re not gonna be accumulating past 5%.”
One caveat on timing: 5% of ether’s supply is a moving target. Supply grows by about 87,000 ETH a month, so the finish line moves out by roughly 4,300 ETH a month, by our count.
Additionally, Ethereum’s issuance is subject to change, and not fixed at roughly 20,000 new ETH per week. The network uses a fee-burning mechanism that dynamically adjusts to user demand. At times of high use, like in 2023, this mechanism burns more tokens than are created to pay the validators that secure the network, actually turning Ethereum’s token economy deflationary. That said, ether token inflation has stayed relatively stable this year, in part due to a migration of user activity onto Layer-2 networks, which has left mainnet gas fees too low to burn off the newly issued coins.
ETF Money Moves in Billions The ETFs have been the larger and less predictable buyer this year. Net inflows reached $1.85 billion in August and another $832 million in September, then reversed in October.
The funds now hold roughly 6.2 million ETH, about the same as Bitmine, from their combined net assets of $14.6 billion. However, the two buyers move at very different speeds. October’s outflows have averaged about $357 million a week. Bitmine’s recent purchases come to about $30 million a week at its own reported prices. The ETF swing is about 12 times larger.
In the rest of the issue, subscribers get:
How much of ether’s new supply Bitmine has been absorbing, and why part of the hand-off has already happened Why no other ether treasury can step in, judged by what their shares trade at against their coins What is driving October’s ETF outflows The weekly ETF number that would cover ether’s new supply after Bitmine stops, plus bull, base and bear ranges for ETH into year-end Already a subscriber? Keep reading.
Why serious investors subscribe:
Clear thinking during macro regime changes
Fewer trades, better decisions
Avoiding one bad allocation often matters more than finding one great trade
Sentora zjistila, že JPM Coin (JPMD) od spuštění na Ethereu nevydal žádné tokeny ani nezaznamenal žádné převody; ověřený kontrakt obsahuje pouze jednu povolenou adresu.
JPMorgan’s JPM Coin has recorded zero supply and zero transfers on Ethereum in a contract review by Sentora, days after the bank announced the deposit token’s arrival on the network.
Summary
Sentora reported zero JPM Coin supply and transfers on Ethereum, with one allowlisted address.
JPM Coin’s Base supply remained near $1 million across two addresses, according to Sentora.
JLTXX recorded $400 million in Ethereum redemptions as its Solana deployment reached $450 million.
Sentora found no live on-chain integration connecting JPM Coin with JPMorgan’s funds or DeFi protocols.
Sentora said its review found exactly one allowlisted address in the verified Ethereum contract, while the token’s Base deployment held roughly $1 million across two addresses, unchanged since November 2025.
The research firm’s findings cover the deposit token and separate movements in J.P. Morgan Asset Management’s tokenized liquidity fund. Its briefing reported $400 million in JLTXX redemptions on Ethereum across Oct. 21–22, alongside a rise in the fund’s Solana deployment from near zero to $450 million.
Sentora attributed those figures to its contract-level analysis. The timing does not establish that the same investors redeemed on Ethereum and subscribed on Solana, and the briefing did not identify transactions connecting the two movements.
JPM Coin’s Ethereum contract shows no supply in Sentora’s review
JPMorgan brought JPM Coin, which carries the ticker JPMD, to Ethereum for approved institutional clients on Oct. 19. As crypto.news previously reported, the bank’s Ethereum deposit token launch followed its November 2025 rollout on Base.
The deposit token represents U.S. dollar deposits held at JPMorgan. The launch coverage described institutional payments, securities settlement, and collateral payments as intended uses, with access restricted to approved customers despite the use of a public blockchain.
Sentora’s subsequent review reported no issued supply or transfers in the Ethereum contract it examined. Its Base findings described an unchanged supply balance, with holdings concentrated in two addresses.
An unchanged supply figure does not, by itself, establish whether transfers occurred during that period. Sentora’s briefing expressly reported zero transfers for Ethereum but did not provide an equivalent historical transfer count for Base.
The firm further said it had found no live on-chain integration between JPM Coin and the bank’s money market funds or decentralized finance protocols. Its statement concerned the integrations visible in its review, without documenting every potential institutional arrangement.
JLTXX records $400 million in Ethereum redemptions
Sentora reported that JLTXX’s Ethereum deployment recorded $400 million in redemptions across Oct. 21–22. Over the same period, its briefing placed the Solana deployment at $450 million after starting near zero.
The figures describe different measures across two networks. One is a redemption total, while the other is the reported size of a deployment after its growth. They do not establish an exact dollar-for-dollar migration.
J.P. Morgan Asset Management announced on Oct. 22 that JLTXX and its My OnChain Net Yield Fund, known as MONY, were available to qualified U.S. investors on Solana. Investors can access the two tokenized funds through Morgan Money, which handles subscriptions and redemptions and delivers token balances to blockchain addresses.
“Our clients operate across more than one network, and their liquidity should too,” said Paul Przybylski, the asset manager’s global head of product, digital and tokenized assets.
The company’s announcement identifies JLTXX as a U.S. registered government money market fund designed to support stablecoin issuers under the GENIUS Act. MONY is a separate private placement fund launched in December 2025. The release does not disclose assets held on Solana for either product.
JPMorgan’s fund documents retain investor and ownership controls
JPMorgan’s MONY FAQ lists a $1 million initial investment minimum and fees of 16 basis points. The document describes a British Virgin Islands private placement vehicle, with access subject to anti-money laundering and know-your-customer checks.
The FAQ says MONY invests in U.S. Treasury securities and Treasury-backed repurchase agreements, seeking a stable net asset value of $1 per share. Although its guidelines follow those applicable to government money market funds, the private vehicle is not subject to Rule 2a-7.
JPMorgan identifies SS&C as MONY’s transfer agent and says the official shareholder records remain off-chain. Investors need their own blockchain addresses to hold tokens, while peer-to-peer transfers are restricted to clients.
The Oct. 22 launch announcement warns that investments in the funds are not bank accounts and are not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation. JPMorgan says the funds seek to preserve a $1 share value but cannot guarantee it.
BNY completes tokenized Treasury financing with Citadel Securities
A separate institutional transaction involved BNY’s tokenized Treasury repo deal with Citadel Securities, announced on Oct. 13.
BNY said Citadel Securities purchased a two-year U.S. Treasury note through the bank on Tradeweb. A tokenized representation of the security settled within minutes on BNY’s private digital ledger before Citadel Securities pledged it as collateral in an overnight triparty repurchase agreement.
BNY supplied cash against the security and described the transaction as the first use of tokenized assets on a major triparty repo platform. Its announcement documented trade execution, settlement and financing within the same workflow.
The bank said it plans to introduce further digital cash and tokenized deposit services. BNY expects to expand operating hours for its traditional settlement platforms covering Fed-eligible securities and U.S. triparty transactions into European and Asian trading hours next year.
Raný investor do Etherea převedl 3 000 ETH v hodnotě přibližně 7,23 milionu USD na Kraken; oproti nákupní ceně 18,83 USD za ETH to představuje odhadované 128násobné zhodnocení.
An early Ethereum investor has moved 3,000 ETH, valued at approximately $7.23 million, to crypto exchange Kraken. According to onchain data tracked by analytics platform Lookonchain, the transfer took place on Friday. The wallet in question acquired the ETH about nine years ago at an average price of $18.83 per token, booking an estimated 128-fold profit on the original purchase price.
Major profit for early Ethereum adopterOnchain monitoring revealed that the investor’s wallet, identified as 0xa4c2CA8d5A6f488604cA417C0aaCe8E2621F02D0 and tagged by crypto intelligence firm Arkham Intelligence, received the initial ETH funds from a Gemini hot wallet and an additional address between 2015 and 2016.
Lookonchain reported that the 3,000 ETH transfer to Kraken signals the possible liquidation of the holdings. While deposits to exchanges often precede sales, there is no public order data confirming that the entire stack was sold in a single transaction or at one price. Nonetheless, assuming a current ETH price near $2,410, the investor’s $56,500 original cost would have appreciated to over $7.2 million.
The 3,000 ETH transferred to Kraken can be traced back to purchases made nine years ago, representing a significant return on investment for the early adopter based on today’s ETH price.
Mini dictionary: Arkham Intelligence is a blockchain analytics company specializing in tracking and labeling crypto wallets to provide transparency and risk assessment for market participants.
Ethereum price steadies despite large holder’s exitDespite the sizable transfer, ETH’s market price held steady. CoinMarketCap data showed Ethereum trading at $2,405.81, up 1.27% in the last 24 hours. Analysts noted that recent gains have been supported by modest capital rotation into alternative cryptocurrencies, while Bitcoin’s market dominance eased during the same period.
No direct evidence suggests that the early investor’s transfer affected market prices. Ethereum continued to trade in a narrow range through the session, with the broader crypto market displaying similar stability. The current movement is seen as part of ongoing price consolidation, rather than a response to isolated large holder actions.
Ethereum demonstrates resilience as it remains within a consolidation range, even after a major early adopter moved 3,000 ETH to an exchange for potential sale.
Support and resistance levels draw trader focusMarket observers are closely watching key technical levels for Ethereum. According to analyst CryptoBusy, ETH is testing an ascending trendline with support between $2,350 and $2,480, following a recent decline from $2,700. If buyers maintain the $2,350 level, a recovery toward $2,500 is projected, with $2,800 identified as the next major resistance point.
On the downside, a decisive break below $2,350 could prompt further losses toward $2,200. CoinMarketCap notes a similar outlook, suggesting a support band at $2,350–$2,390. Across several analyst assessments, $2,350 has emerged as a critical line to monitor. These technical perspectives will likely shape near-term trading strategies.
Key LevelScenarioAction Point$2,350SupportBreak below signals possible drop to $2,200$2,480Support/ResistanceDefend for bounce toward $2,500/$2,800$2,800Major resistanceBreak above signals next upside targetMacro events may influence upcoming moves. CoinMarketCap identified the upcoming Federal Reserve policy meeting on October 27-28 as a relevant potential catalyst. Trader Daan Crypto Trades emphasized the importance of waiting for a clear resolution above or below this range before making directional bets, citing continued price congestion between $2,350 and $2,550.
While the early investor’s transfer drew attention, analysts suggest Ethereum’s immediate trajectory will depend on the defense or loss of key technical support, with broader macro triggers such as central bank policy potentially steering market direction in the coming days.
MyDoge prostřednictvím bota @MyDogeTip umožňuje posílat DOGE na jakýkoli účet na síti X, a to i bez předchozího používání aplikace. Převod vyžaduje potvrzení v peněžence a poplatek hradí odesílatel.
MyDoge lets users tip any X account in Dogecoin (DOGE) via @MyDogeTip. Tips need wallet approval, and MyDoge now sits under the new Dogecoin Labs.
Dogecoin ($DOGE) holders can send tips to any account on X through the MyDoge wallet, including recipients who have never used the app. The feature is run through the @MyDogeTip bot and relies on a request-and-confirm process rather than an instant transfer.
How MyDoge tipping on X works@MyDoge users start a tip by posting to @MyDogeTip. The post includes the command 'tip', the recipient's user handle, and an amount. The post alone does not move any funds.
Recipients do not need to be existing users. In the current V3 version, The DogeOS team also notes that The network fee is paid by the sender when the tip is confirmed.
For recipients who are not yet set up, the bot replies with upgrade instructions. In recent bot replies,
MyDoge now part of Dogecoin LabsThe tipping tool sits inside a newly reorganised Dogecoin ecosystem.
According to Benzinga, Tipping, long associated with Dogecoin's early internet culture, remains one of the simplest ways for new users to receive DOGE without setting up an exchange account first.
Sources
MyDogeTip on Twitter: user guide and non-custodial tipping explainedDogeOS blog: From Dogecoin Wallet to Dogecoin AppUnchained: Dogecoin Labs launches with MyDoge, DogeOS and a Dogecoin Foundation partnership
Gentex snížil výhled tržeb pro rok 2026 na zhruba 2,65 mld. USD z předchozího rozpětí 2,65–2,75 mld. USD. Akcie GNTX po otevření trhu klesly o více než 7 %.
Gentex lowered its 2026 revenue guidance to approximately $2.65 billion, down from a prior range of $2.65 billion to $2.75 billion. Shareholders holding losses may have rights worth reviewing now.
, /PRNewswire/ -- The high end of Gentex Corporation's (NASDAQ: GNTX) 2026 revenue outlook dropped to its previous floor alongside third-quarter results on October 23, 2026, and GNTX shares fell to open at just $20.21, an overnight decline of more than 7%. If you bought Gentex stock and are now looking at a loss, you have rights as a shareholder. Investors who lost money on GNTX are encouraged to find out what rights they have as Gentex shareholders . You may also contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. via email at [email protected] or by telephone at (212) 363-7500.
Before the third-quarter report, Gentex guided for 2026 revenue of $2.65 billion to $2.75 billion. The updated guidance is approximately $2.65 billion. That figure is the low end of the prior range and $50 million below its $2.70 billion midpoint. Third-quarter sales came in at $647.7 million, down from $655.2 million a year earlier. The Company's gross margin outlook decline as well, from a 35% midpoint to about 34.25%.
Levi & Korsinsky is investigating on behalf of Gentex shareholders to evaluate whether potential securities law claims exist. Shareholders who suffered losses may be able to seek recovery whether they still hold GNTX or have already sold. A review of your losses costs nothing and carries no obligation.
Gentex shareholders with losses can have their GNTX losses evaluated today or call Joseph E. Levi, Esq. at (212) 363-7500.
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP | Top 50 Securities Firm | (212) 363-7500 | www.zlk.com
Frequently Asked Questions About the GNTX Investigation
Q: Who is conducting the GNTX investigation? A: Levi & Korsinsky, LLP is investigating potential securities law claims on behalf of investors who purchased GNTX securities. The firm is nationally recognized, ranked in the ISS Top 50 for seven consecutive years, and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for aggrieved investors.
Q: Who is eligible to participate in the GNTX investigation? A: Investors who purchased GNTX stock or securities and suffered financial losses may be eligible. Eligibility is based on purchase date and documented losses -- not on whether you still hold the shares.
Q: What do GNTX investors need to do right now? A: Investors may gather brokerage records showing purchase dates, share quantities, and prices paid. Submit your information for a no-cost, no-obligation evaluation of your potential recovery . No immediate action is required to remain eligible to participate in the investigation.
Q: What documents do I need to participate? A: Brokerage statements or trade confirmations showing purchase dates, share quantities, prices paid, and any subsequent sale dates and prices.
Q: What if I already sold my GNTX shares -- can I still recover losses? A: Yes. Eligibility is based on when you purchased, not whether you still hold the shares. Investors who bought GNTX and sold at a loss may still participate in the investigation.
Q: What if my GNTX losses are small -- is it still worth contacting a lawyer? A: Yes. There is no minimum loss amount required to participate in the investigation.
Q: What does it cost me to participate? A: There is no upfront cost to submit your information and review whether you may be eligible to recover. Should you choose to participate in any resulting action, these matters are generally handled on a contingency basis, with any attorneys' fees and expenses subject to court approval.
CONTACT:
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
Ed Korsinsky, Esq.
33 Whitehall Street, 27th Floor
New York, NY 10
[email protected]
Tel: (212) 363-7500
Fax: (212) 363-7171
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.
Tether (USDT) on BNB Chain recorded $3.69T in 30-day transfers, about 2.5 times Tron and Ethereum combined, per rwa.xyz, despite a far smaller supply.
$USDT on @BNBCHAIN recorded $3.69T across 471 million transfers over the past 30 days, about 2.5 times the combined total of Tron and Ethereum, according to data from rwa.xyz. The figure places BNB Chain well ahead of the two networks that hold most of Tether's supply.
Small supply, very high turnoverThe activity comes from a much smaller base. USDT on BNB Chain stands at $9.18B, compared with roughly $92B on Tron and $75B on Ethereum. On rwa.xyz's asset page, the BNB Chain supply is listed at about $9.18B, tagged as a bridged token rather than a native one.
That gap implies very different usage patterns. Each dollar of USDT on BNB Chain changes hands about 400 times a month, compared with roughly 8 to 9 times on Tron and Ethereum. The two larger networks hold far more supply, but much of it appears to sit in wallets, custody and exchange balances for longer periods.
Transaction counts point the same way. Data from the ACHIVX stablecoin scanner, which tracks settled USDT flows, shows BNB Chain carrying the most USDT transfers of any network at much smaller average sizes than Tron or Ethereum. That pattern is consistent with high-frequency, low-value activity rather than large settlement transfers.
What the totals includeThe headline numbers count every transfer, including trading bots and contract activity. They are a measure of onchain movement, not of unique users or organic payment demand, and repeated transfers of the same funds are counted each time.
There is also a technical caveat on what "USDT on BNB Chain" means. According to an explainer citing Tether data, Tether-issued supply on BNB Smart Chain is $0, and the BEP-20 token there is Binance-Peg BSC-USD. Aggregators such as rwa.xyz classify it as bridged USDT, which is why it appears under the USDT label.
Tron remains the largest USDT network by supply. Datawallet, citing DefiLlama, put Tron's USDT at about $92.4 billion on 1 October 2026, roughly half of global USDT in circulation. The BNB Chain figures show that supply and activity can diverge sharply, and that raw transfer volume says little on its own about where stablecoin capital actually sits.
Sources
RWA.xyz: Tether USDt asset data
ACHIVX: USDT transfers by network
Datawallet: TRC20 USDT market data
VICI Properties má 28. října 2026 zveřejnit výsledky; konsenzus očekává EPS ve výši 0,62 USD a tržby 1,06 mld. USD, což představuje meziroční růst o 3,33 % u EPS a o 5,67 % u tržeb.
VICI Properties Inc. (VICI - Free Report) ended the recent trading session at $23.76, demonstrating a -1.08% change from the preceding day's closing price. This change lagged the S&P 500's daily loss of 0.52%. Elsewhere, the Dow saw a downswing of 1.24%, while the tech-heavy Nasdaq depreciated by 0.21%.
Heading into today, shares of the company had gained 3.22% over the past month, outpacing the Finance sector's loss of 0.78% and the S&P 500's loss of 1.21%.
Investors will be eagerly watching for the performance of VICI Properties Inc. in its upcoming earnings disclosure. The company's earnings report is set to be unveiled on October 28, 2026. It is anticipated that the company will report an EPS of $0.62, marking a 3.33% rise compared to the same quarter of the previous year. Meanwhile, our latest consensus estimate is calling for revenue of $1.06 billion, up 5.67% from the prior-year quarter.
For the full year, the Zacks Consensus Estimates project earnings of $2.47 per share and a revenue of $4.22 billion, demonstrating changes of +3.78% and +5.26%, respectively, from the preceding year.
Investors should also note any recent changes to analyst estimates for VICI Properties Inc. Recent revisions tend to reflect the latest near-term business trends. As a result, upbeat changes in estimates indicate analysts' favorable outlook on the business health and profitability.
Based on our research, we believe these estimate revisions are directly related to near-term stock moves. To exploit this, we've formed the Zacks Rank, a quantitative model that includes these estimate changes and presents a viable rating system.
Ranging from #1 (Strong Buy) to #5 (Strong Sell), the Zacks Rank system has a proven, outside-audited track record of outperformance, with #1 stocks returning an average of +25% annually since 1988. Over the past month, the Zacks Consensus EPS estimate has remained steady. VICI Properties Inc. is currently sporting a Zacks Rank of #2 (Buy).
Looking at valuation, VICI Properties Inc. is presently trading at a Forward P/E ratio of 9.73. For comparison, its industry has an average Forward P/E of 11.85, which means VICI Properties Inc. is trading at a discount to the group.
The REIT and Equity Trust - Other industry is part of the Finance sector. With its current Zacks Industry Rank of 95, this industry ranks in the top 39% of all industries, numbering over 250.
The Zacks Industry Rank assesses the vigor of our specific industry groups by computing the average Zacks Rank of the individual stocks incorporated in the groups. Our research shows that the top 50% rated industries outperform the bottom half by a factor of 2 to 1.
Keep in mind to rely on Zacks.com to watch all these stock-impacting metrics, and more, in the succeeding trading sessions.
Arc’s stablecoin supply expanded sharply over the past week, increasing 33.51% to reach approximately $830.34 million, according to DefiLlama data. This surge stands in contrast to a slight contraction in the total global stablecoin supply, which declined by $1.25 billion during the same period to roughly $304.89 billion.
USDC Drives Arc’s GrowthAlmost all of the stablecoin supply on Arc comes from Circle’s USDC, which alone accounts for around $821 million. This figure represents nearly 98.9% of Arc’s total stablecoin float, marking a weekly gain of around 34% for USDC on this network. Small amounts of euro and sterling-pegged tokens are also present, but their contributions remain marginal.
Globally, Tether (USDT) continues to lead with about $182.51 billion in circulation, making up 59.86% of the total stablecoin market. USDC follows as the second-largest player with approximately $72.10 billion. Despite Arc’s robust growth, the overall market trend points to a net decrease in stablecoin supply, reflecting broader shifts in capital allocation and market sentiment.
Arc’s rapid expansion does not signal a broad recovery across all blockchains. Rather, the data show a significant migration of USDC liquidity specifically toward Arc, with other chains not experiencing similar inflows.
Arc’s Role and Technical PositioningArc serves as Circle’s open Layer-1 blockchain, promoted as an enterprise-focused, EVM-compatible network designed for stablecoin settlement. Circle introduced Arc with the intention of providing predictable transaction fees denominated in stablecoins like USDC, rather than volatile native tokens. The network targets institutional and enterprise use, setting itself apart from chains with larger or more generalized user bases.
The recent spike in Arc’s stablecoin balance largely reflects increased USDC activity. This pattern indicates participants are choosing to hold, transfer, or deploy USDC on Arc rather than on competing platforms. The week’s strong inflows do not alter the primary ranking of stablecoin assets between networks: Arc still trails behind blockchains such as Ethereum and Tron, which maintain multi-billion dollar stables reserves.
Liquidity Migration and Market DynamicsThe decline in global stablecoin supply, coupled with Arc’s outsized weekly gain, underlines a localized shift in liquidity rather than a market-wide rally. Factors such as redemption flows, portfolio rebalancing, or quieter inventory reductions may have contributed to the overall market contraction. Meanwhile, Arc’s segment saw an abrupt concentration of USDC, reinforcing the network’s role as a focused stablecoin hub.
Potential explanations for Arc’s stablecoin surge include fresh issuances and bridging of USDC, internal treasury reallocations by Circle, or other non-public capital moves. However, public float tables reveal only the outcome—more USDC now resides on Arc than seven days ago.
Tracking such liquidity movements remains essential for market participants and observers. Following both pricing trends and investor behavior can offer valuable insights for asset allocation and project development strategies.
In light of the increased emphasis on monitoring stablecoin deployment and asset flows, the meme token segment also serves as an example of rapid changes driven by internet trends. In this area, a low-barrier trade can evolve into substantial profit within days. Fomo App data highlight a remarkable case where the “Niu Lai” meme token turned a $99 initial investment into $370,000. For those navigating meme token volatility, observing not just price action but investor timing and token selection is vital. Fomo App consolidates token discovery, trading, social feeds, investor rankings, and trade alerts into one interface, helping users stay updated on both token moves and investor activity.
Arc float is up sharply. USDC dominates that balance. The broader market is slightly smaller than it was a week ago.
The fundamental stability question for pegged tokens remains unchanged. This week, however, attention has focused on which blockchain networks are holding the largest share of circulating stablecoins.
SLM pozastavila většinu externích vymáhacích aktivit; čisté odpisy ve třetím čtvrtletí dosáhly 90,4 milionu USD. Společnost zvýšila celoroční výhled čistých odpisů na 400 až 420 milionů USD.
SLM shares fell after the student lender disclosed it had paused most of its third-party recovery activities as third-quarter net charge-offs reached $90.4 million. Levi & Korsinsky is investigating potential securities law violations on behalf of SLM investors.
, /PRNewswire/ -- SLM Corporation (NASDAQ: SLM) shareholders are taking losses after the student lender disclosed on October 22, 2026 that it had paused the majority of its third-party recovery activities while third-quarter net charge-offs climbed to $90.4 million. If you bought SLM shares and lost money on this news, you may have legal rights. Investors who suffered losses are encouraged to submit your SLM loss details now . You may also contact Joseph E. Levi, Esq. via email at [email protected] or by telephone at (212) 363-7500.
The disclosure appeared in SLM's Form 10-Q, filed after-market October 22, 2026, which indicated the Company was "pausing the majority of third-party recovery activities while we continue to develop and implement a more effective, customer-aligned approach." Net charge-offs for the first nine months of 2026 reached $292 million, up from $248 million in 2025.
Alongside a reduction of its annual guidance projection by more than a third, SLM increased their net charge-off guidance for the full year by $35 million to a range of $400 million to $420 million. Levi & Korsinsky is investigating whether SLM may not have adequately disclosed how changes to its collection and recovery practices could affect credit losses.
Shareholders who lost money on SLM can request a review of their SLM losses or call (212) 363-7500.
WHY LEVI & KORSINSKY -- Ranked in ISS Securities Class Action Services' Top 50 Report for seven consecutive years, Levi & Korsinsky, LLP is a nationally recognized leader in shareholder rights litigation. With a team of over 70 professionals, the firm has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors.
Frequently Asked Questions About the SLM Investigation
Q: Who is eligible to participate in the SLM investigation? A: Investors who purchased SLM stock or securities and suffered financial losses may be eligible. Eligibility is based on purchase date and documented losses -- not on whether you still hold the shares.
Q: How much did SLM stock drop? A: From a closing price of $21.76 on October 22, 2026, SLM shares declined an initial $0.95, or 4.4%, when the market opened on October 23, 2026. By midday, the stock had fallen nearly than $2, or more than 9%, from the previous day's closing price. Investors who purchased shares at allegedly inflated prices and suffered losses may be eligible to seek compensation.
Q: What do SLM investors need to do right now? A: Investors may gather brokerage records showing purchase dates, share quantities, and prices paid. Submit your information for a no-cost, no-obligation evaluation of your potential recovery . No immediate action is required to remain eligible to participate in the investigation.
Q: What documents do I need to participate? A: Brokerage statements or trade confirmations showing purchase dates, share quantities, prices paid, and any subsequent sale dates and prices.
Q: What if I already sold my SLM shares -- can I still recover losses? A: Yes. Eligibility is based on when you purchased, not whether you still hold the shares. Investors who bought SLM and sold at a loss may still participate in the investigation.
Q: Do I need to go to court or give testimony? A: No. Participating in the investigation does not require court appearances or depositions. If legal action is later pursued, the overwhelming majority of affected investors never appear in court either.
Q: What does it cost me to participate? A: There is no upfront cost to submit your information and review whether you may be eligible to recover. Should you choose to participate in any resulting action, these matters are generally handled on a contingency basis, with any attorneys' fees and expenses subject to court approval.
CONTACT:
Levi & Korsinsky, LLP
Joseph E. Levi, Esq.
Ed Korsinsky, Esq.
33 Whitehall Street, 27th Floor
New York, NY 10004
[email protected]
Tel: (212) 363-7500
Fax: (212) 363-7171
Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee similar outcomes.
