Ripple a Arf nabídnou licencovaným platebním společnostem krátkodobé financování v tokenu RLUSD na platformě XRP Ledger pro přeshraniční platby, obvykle se splatností od jednoho do pěti dnů.
Ripple, a blockchain payment solution, has partnered with Swiss-regulated payment platform Arf to bring RLUSD-powered funding to the XRP Ledger (XRPL). The partnership will help licensed payment companies access short-term funds for cross-border payments without keeping large amounts of money in accounts across different countries.
Arf and Ripple Join to Speed Up Cross-Border PaymentsIn a press release on October 22, 2026, Arf and Ripple announced a partnership to help payment companies access money when and where they need it.
Cross-border payments move trillions of dollars each year, but payment companies often need working capital available in different countries before transactions are completed. Traditional bank credit lines can take months to establish and may require significant collateral.
This creates a problem for companies that need funds available in the right market at the right time. Through the partnership, Arf and Ripple aim to address this gap using RLUSD and the XRP Ledger’s settlement network.
Jasmine Cooper, Head of Product for RippleX at Ripple, said that “Settlement liquidity is exactly the kind of use case XRPL and RLUSD are built to support.”
Settlement liquidity is exactly the kind of use case @XRP Ledger and RLUSD are built to support.@Arf_One is bringing its approach to settlement liquidity to the XRP Ledger, using RLUSD to support short-term working capital for licensed payment companies as cross-border payments… https://t.co/h4XdEzA3IF
— Ripple (@Ripple) October 22, 2026 Under the first phase, Arf will provide short-term funding in Ripple USD (RLUSD) on the XRP Ledger. Licensed payment companies can use these funds to send money across borders and repay them once payments are complete, usually within one to five days.
Arf Brings $10B in Annual Settlements to XRPLArf payments platform has scaled to around $10 billion in annual global settlement volume since launching in November 2022. Its capital turns over about four times a month, allowing funds to support repeated payment flows rather than sit idle.
Ali Erhat Nalbant, Arf’s co-founder and CEO, said the partnership would bring stablecoin working capital to the XRP Ledger.
“We’re bringing stablecoin working capital to the XRP Ledger to help payment companies bridge that gap and support more payment volume.”
Arf Plans to Use XRPL’s Native Lending InfrastructureThe partnership could expand once the XRP Ledger’s native lending infrastructure becomes available. Arf plans to use the proposed Single Asset Vaults to pool capital and the Lending Protocol to support structured loans on-chain.
Arf would continue managing underwriting and working capital decisions off-chain, while the blockchain handles the lending infrastructure.
However, the proposed features must pass XRPL’s amendment process before they can launch on the main network.
Story Ends Here
Trust with CoinPedia:CoinPedia has been delivering accurate and timely cryptocurrency and blockchain updates since 2017. All content is created by our expert panel of analysts and journalists, following strict Editorial Guidelines based on E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness). Every article is fact-checked against reputable sources to ensure accuracy, transparency, and reliability. Our review policy guarantees unbiased evaluations when recommending exchanges, platforms, or tools. We strive to provide timely updates about everything crypto & blockchain, right from startups to industry majors.
Investment Disclaimer:All opinions and insights shared represent the author's own views on current market conditions. Please do your own research before making investment decisions. Neither the writer nor the publication assumes responsibility for your financial choices.
Sponsored and Advertisements:Sponsored content and affiliate links may appear on our site. Advertisements are marked clearly, and our editorial content remains entirely independent from our ad partners.
Flare na konferenci Korea Blockchain Week popsala fungování FXRP, které držitelům XRP umožňuje využívat jejich tokeny v DeFi jako zajištění pro půjčky a generování výnosů.
Flare outlined its XRP DeFi strategy on Korean TV at Korea Blockchain Week, detailing how FXRP works, how collateral protects users, and its Korean partnerships.
Flare used an appearance on South Korean television to pitch its approach to bringing XRP into decentralised finance (DeFi). Speaking on Korea Economic TV's Crypto Labs at Korea Blockchain Week, @FlareNetworks APAC lead Kyle Kim (@Banktheworld) described Flare as a blockchain for data.
How FXRP worksKim said Flare checks outside information, such as prices or transactions on other chains, and makes it available to smart contracts. Holders of $XRP can convert their tokens into FXRP on Flare to lend, borrow against, or earn yield, and can swap back whenever they choose.
FXRP is issued through Flare's FAssets system. FXRP was the first live deployment of the system, which turns tokens that lack smart contract support, such as XRP, into overcollateralised assets that can interact with DeFi protocols. At launch, Flare's chief product officer Filip Koprivec told The Block that FXRP is designed to be non-custodial and over-collateralised, with onchain, protocol-level verification rather than reliance on a single custodian.
Kim said approved operators hold the XRP behind FXRP. Each must lock up collateral worth more than the XRP it holds, which is meant to protect users if something goes wrong. DefiLlama's research describes these operators as agents, independent operators who post collateral worth more than the XRP they back, partly in stablecoins and partly in FLR. If the collateral's value falls below the required level, the agent's position can be liquidated.
Growing usage and Korean partnershipsDemand for the token has built since launch. A DefiLlama report published on October 21 counts about 129 million of the 145 million FXRP in circulation deployed across protocols, close to 90% of supply. The same report notes the base is still small: 145 million FXRP equals roughly 0.23% of circulating XRP. Lending is the biggest use. Most of the lending demand comes from holders who use FXRP as collateral and borrow against it while keeping their XRP.
In Korea, Flare is working with hardware wallet maker D'CENT. In May, D'CENT's maker IoTrust announced a three-week campaign with the Flare network , and said D'CENT is an official partner of Flare Smart Accounts , which removes the need for users to buy extra gas tokens.
Flare is also running a pilot finance product with weather data firm K-Weather (Kweather). The two companies signed a letter of intent to pilot the integration of meteorological data onchain. The data will be delivered through Flare's Time Series Oracle and could support products such as parametric climate insurance. CoinDesk's Omkar Godbole cautioned that the initiative is still very early, and a letter of intent is not a working product.
The appearance shows Flare targeting the Korean market with a dual message: XRP holders can put idle tokens to work, and data-driven products can extend beyond price feeds.
Sources:
DefiLlama Research: How Flare uses data to expand what capital can doCrypto Briefing: Kweather taps Flare to develop weather finance productsGlobeNewswire via Manila Times: D'CENT launches Flare campaign
Počet peněženek XRP Ledger s nenulovým zůstatkem dosáhl rekordních 8,24 milionu. Santiment při ceně XRP kolem 1,36 USD zaznamenal vznik 4 772 nových peněženek denně.
As volatility continues in the cryptocurrency market, data from the XRP Ledger network has caught the attention of investors. On-chain analytics platform Santiment reported that the number of wallets on the XRP network has reached an all-time high, with a significant increase in new user participation.
According to data shared by Santiment, the number of wallets with a balance greater than zero on the XRP Ledger network has reached a new all-time high of 8.24 million. It was noted that this steady increase in wallet numbers continues despite the fluctuations in the XRP price in recent months.
The acceleration of network growth during the period when XRP was trading at approximately $1.36 was also noteworthy. According to Santiment data, 4,772 new wallets were created in a single day. This figure marks the fifth largest daily increase recorded since March.
Analysts believe the acceleration in new wallet creation activity could signal a renewed surge in interest in the XRP ecosystem. However, Santiment stated that for growth on the network to support bullish expectations, price movements must also confirm this trend.
XRP Price at $1.40 Critical: Two Different Scenarios Santiment stated that the first important level to watch for the XRP price in the short term is $1.40.
According to the platform, a rapid return to the $1.50 level could become possible if XRP maintains a sustained move above $1.40 and the number of new daily wallets remains around or above 4,000.
However, in a negative scenario, if XRP loses the $1.30 support level and daily new wallet creation falls below approximately 3,000, it could indicate that the positive signals from increased adoption on the network are weakening in the short term.
*This is not investment advice.
Follow our Telegram and X account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!
Hard fork Glamsterdam na testnetu Hoodi byl odložen poté, co společnost ChainSecurity odhalila dopady změn v práci s gasem na stávající kontrakty; identifikovala 13 reálných případů.
On October 22, 2026, ChainSecurity said the Glamsterdam hard fork on Ethereum’s Hoodi testnet had been delayed after its researchers identified security impacts in existing contracts. The firm said it had found 13 real-world examples and was conducting responsible disclosure with the affected projects. Its announcement asked teams to check their contracts while the Ethereum Foundation assessed the extent of the impact.
The problem affects contracts that catch a failed external call and keep executing. Under the gas changes ChainSecurity examined, a failure handler can finish where it previously would have run out of gas and reverted. A caller can deliberately supply too little gas for an operation while leaving enough for the surrounding contract to record a permanent failure. An operation that should have remained retryable can then lose its recovery path.
ChainSecurity’s technical disclosure examines EIP-8037 and EIP-8038 using specifications reviewed on October 13. Its gas examples describe proposed execution behavior, not balances read from affected contracts. The announcement names neither the projects under disclosure nor their contract addresses.
The failure handler gets another source of gas
Contracts defend against insufficient-gas griefing in several ways. Some check before an external call that they can forward a chosen gas budget. Others examine the gas left after a failed call and revert when too little remains. Others rely on the failure handler itself running out of gas. That rolls back the surrounding operation without an explicit check.
Checks after a call and handlers that rely on running out of gas depend on how much gas the call forwards, consumes and returns. Under EIP-150, a call can forward approximately 63/64 of its available gas. When the immediate target exhausts that allocation, the caller retains only a small share. A check can reject that remainder, or an expensive storage write can force the caller to revert.
The state-gas reservoir gives the caller another source of funding. ChainSecurity describes a separate pool that travels with calls in full, while the forwarding limit applies to execution gas. Solidity’s gasleft() reports only the execution balance. A contract with a low reading can still have reservoir funding for state creation. If the target reverts or runs out of gas, its reservoir returns to its call-entry value and remains available to the caller.
In the report’s example, around 15,000 execution gas can cover a cold fresh-slot write and a short continuation when the reservoir pays the state-creation charge. Under Osaka, the corresponding write costs 22,100 gas. A handler that previously could not record a failure may now commit it. Because the reservoir is forwarded in full, an outer wrapper can combine a funded reservoir with a limited execution budget.
Clearing storage can refill the execution balance
A contract can also allocate a persistent storage slot, call another contract, catch a failure and clear that slot before continuing. Under Osaka, clearing storage allocated earlier in the transaction produces a refund subject to a cap. The refund settles at the end of the transaction, so it cannot pay for the next instruction.
Under the Glamsterdam rules examined in the disclosure, undoing state creation triggers an immediate refill. The refill first restores execution gas up to the outstanding state-creation charges paid from that balance. Any remainder enters the reservoir. Clearing a slot can restore up to 97,920 execution gas, enough to change whether the rest of the failure handler completes.
For this to happen, the slot must have been zero at the start of the transaction. The frame must have outstanding state-creation charges funded from execution gas, either from its own work or successful subcalls. It also needs enough execution gas to clear the slot: the SSTORE stipend check still requires more than 2,300 execution gas, regardless of reservoir funding.
A gas check performed after the clear can see a replenished balance even though the target ran out of gas. ChainSecurity says a check that rejects the failure before the clear is unaffected by that refill. Its review instructions ask teams to locate storage refills relative to checks, since the order determines whether the check sees the restored gas.
Gas can also return through an intermediary. In ChainSecurity’s example, a defending contract calls an intermediary, which creates state and calls a target. The target runs out of gas. The intermediary then propagates that failure with REVERT.
Under the reviewed changes, reverting restores the intermediary’s state-gas accounting. It credits outstanding execution-funded state-creation charges back to the intermediary’s execution balance. That restored gas can return to the defending contract and lift the remainder above a post-call check’s threshold. It can also fund a failure handler that previously would have reverted.
The intermediary must retain enough gas to execute REVERT. If it runs out of gas itself or halts exceptionally, its resulting execution balance is consumed and no execution gas returns. Tests need to distinguish those paths, even when both ultimately report that a subcall failed.
What contract teams need to review
Pre-call checks avoid inferring the cause of failure from returned gas, but their budgets need revalidation too. A check can guarantee delivery of the requested allocation even when that allocation no longer covers the target’s work. ChainSecurity calls for bounds covering every permitted execution path under the new schedule, including cases where the reservoir cannot contribute. Forwarding overhead also needs rechecking.
The review starts with external calls that let execution continue after failure. Teams should trace the target’s complete path, including proxies, and the caller’s instructions before it commits a failure response. Tests should force a subcall failure and compare Osaka and Glamsterdam using the same relevant pre-state and explicit gas assumptions. The outcomes to inspect are disabled retries, removed claims and incorrect recorded results.
Where possible, ChainSecurity recommends propagating call failures so the entire operation reverts. Where execution must continue, it recommends preserving a recovery path instead of making an irreversible decision from remaining gas alone. Responsible disclosure continues with the affected projects unnamed. The firm’s announcement gives no replacement date for the Hoodi fork.
Jednoměsíční implikovaná volatilita Etheru činí 49 %, zatímco 30denní realizovaná volatilita dosahuje 37 %; rozdíl 12,5 procentního bodu je za poslední dva roky na 90. percentilu.
Ethereum options traders are bracing for turbulence. The actual price chart has been far calmer.
According to Coinbase Markets data dated October 21, 2026, Ether’s one-month at-the-money implied volatility stands at 49%. Its 30-day realized volatility is 37%. That leaves a 12.5-point premium, which ranks in the 90th percentile of readings over the past two years.
Reading the volatility gauges Implied volatility (IV) is the market’s forecast of future price swings, backed out of what traders are willing to pay for options. Realized volatility measures how much the asset actually moved over a past window, in this case 30 days. “At-the-money” refers to options with strike prices near the current market price.
The gap between the two is often called the variance risk premium. A spread landing in the 90th percentile of the past two years suggests demand is running well above the usual baseline.
The numbers line up across platforms Options analytics platforms including Swolecharts and Coinotag reported that Ether’s 30-day ATM implied volatility held steady between 49% and 51% through mid-to-late October 2026. Those same sources put realized volatility around 32% during that stretch.
On October 22, 2026, ATM implied volatility was approximately 49.7% to 50.0% on Bybit and Binance.
Broader figures from Derivasys and Glassnode show Ether’s options implied volatility sitting in the mid-to-high 40s up to the low 50s across various near-term tenors throughout October 2026.
Why the premium is notable A 90th-percentile reading over two years means that in roughly nine out of ten observations across that period, the gap between expected and actual volatility was smaller than it is now.
The source data does not point to a specific catalyst. No commentary on upcoming events or trader positioning accompanied the figures.
What this means for traders and the market For option buyers, purchasing protection or directional exposure when IV sits well above realized volatility means paying a hefty premium. If Ether keeps moving at its recent pace, those options can lose value even if the eventual direction is right.
For option sellers, collecting premium priced at around 49% to 50% volatility while the underlying moves at 32% to 37% is the core logic behind many volatility-selling strategies. The catch is obvious: sellers carry the risk if the expected storm actually arrives.
Wide gaps between implied and realized volatility tend not to persist forever. Either realized volatility rises to meet expectations, or implied volatility drifts lower as the anticipated turbulence fails to show up.
Traders watching this setup will likely track whether realized volatility begins climbing from its recent range in the 30s, and whether IV holds near 50% across Coinbase, Bybit and Binance, or starts slipping back into the mid-40s range that also appeared across some near-term tenors this month.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Vivian Nguyen. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Komunita Starknetu předběžně podpořila průzkum přechodu z L2 řešení Etherea na vlastní L1: pro hlasovalo přes 93,5 % odevzdaných hlasů a hlasování se zúčastnilo více než 2 800 peněženek.
The Starknet community has strongly supported exploring a transition from the Ethereum-based second-layer structure to an independent first-layer blockchain. In a seven-day preliminary vote that concluded today, over 93.5% of the votes cast were in favor of the proposal.
According to information shared by StarkWare, more than 2,800 wallets participated in the vote. The company stated that it did not participate in the voting in order to avoid influencing the community’s decision with its own votes.
The primary reason for the change in focus is post-quantum security. The team argues that even if Starknet makes progress in its own computational structure, it will remain dependent on the underlying network due to Ethereum bridge and data accessibility connections.
StarkWare CEO Eli Ben-Sasson said they aim to release a first draft of the technical document resulting from the research to the public in November.
However, the vote does not mean that the separation from Ethereum is final. A genuine transition proposal will also need to be prepared and resubmitted for community approval. According to the Starknet Foundation, whichever path is chosen, STRK will remain the native token, no new tokens will be issued, and Ethereum bridges will remain open.
*This is not investment advice.
Follow our Telegram and X account now for exclusive news, analytics and on-chain data!
Cardano’s public Dijkstra testnet has opened to stake pool operators ahead of node 11.2, which will support a planned test-network upgrade to protocol version 12 without Leios.
Summary
DijkstraNet currently runs node 11.1.3, with the protocol upgrade waiting for the next release. A separate MusashiNet prototype includes Leios, while formal node 11.3 development remains unfinished. Input Output estimates Leios activation will need voting keys covering roughly 90–95% of stake. Constitutional changes, BLS key management and ecosystem risk reviews remain part of upgrade preparations. Intersect said in its Oct. 22 Upgrade Bulletin #39 that DijkstraNet became publicly available after an Oct. 21 restart, inviting stake pool operators to begin joining before the next node release.
The organization described two parallel testing paths. DijkstraNet will use node 11.2 to test Dijkstra features without Leios, while MusashiNet gives downstream teams early access to a prototype containing the Leios-inclusive feature set.
The bulletin provided no mainnet activation date or required percentage of operators that must upgrade their node software.
Cardano DijkstraNet awaits its protocol version 12 upgrade Intersect said DijkstraNet currently runs protocol version 11, within the Conway era, using node 11.1.3. Once the node 11.2 pre-release becomes available, a hard-fork initiation action will be submitted to move the network to protocol version 12, known as Dijkstra.
For operators joining now, the bulletin directs participants to configuration files and a testnet faucet through Cardano book. Intersect listed one-day epochs and an available Kleioscan explorer among the network’s testing resources.
Node 11.2 remained in development when the bulletin was published, with a tagged version expected during the week. Intersect described its scope as:
“Includes the full Dijkstra hard fork feature set, apart from Leios”
The release is expected to clear LSM for mainnet use, with memory requirements estimated at approximately 12 GB when using LSM, according to the bulletin. Intersect said it was already working with operators to test LSM and gather feedback.
Cardano previously activated the van Rossem hard fork on July 18, moving mainnet to protocol version 11. The current bulletin concerns preparations on separate test networks, not another completed mainnet upgrade.
Leios testing proceeds separately on MusashiNet Intersect described the weekly RC 2026w42 pre-release as a Leios-based prototype containing the complete Dijkstra hard-fork feature set. Downstream tooling teams can use it on MusashiNet to explore integrations before the formal node 11.3 release.
For node 11.3 itself, the bulletin said substantial development work remained, and a tagged release was still at least two weeks away. Intersect presented the prototype as an early integration opportunity, without describing it as a finished release.
Input Output’s Oct. 20 rollout plan, previously reported by crypto.news, set initial Leios capacity targets at three to five times Cardano’s current transaction capacity, followed by later targets of 10–15 times.
The developer’s plan separates the hard fork from full Leios operation. Input Output said pools must register BLS voting keys after the fork, with roughly 90–95% of stake registered before Leios can begin operating.
Its proposed sequence then moves through mainnet load exercises and at least two protocol parameter updates, with capacity changes dependent on network results and governance approval. The throughput figures remain targets, not performance delivered by the public opening of DijkstraNet.
Earlier Intersect planning placed Linear Leios in Dijkstra’s first phase and Peras activation in a separate, later hard fork. The two-phase Dijkstra roadmap described its dates as estimates, with testing and governance able to affect the mainnet schedule.
BLS key management remains under discussion Intersect said developers were considering two ways to handle BLS key registration and rotation without requiring pool owners to participate in those operations.
The existing pool registration certificate mechanism requires signatures from the pool cold key and every pool owner, according to the bulletin. The proposed alternatives are a dedicated BLS key management certificate or permission to update BLS keys in pool parameters without owner signatures.
Intersect identified the second approach as the more likely option for Dijkstra, while noting that a more comprehensive solution could be deferred to the Euler era. The bulletin identified stake pool operators, wallet providers and tooling teams as affected participants.
On upgrade scope, Intersect confirmed that CIP-23 is fully included in Dijkstra. It said several operators had welcomed the development teams’ response to that long-standing request.
The organization reported that the Technical Steering Committee had reviewed an updated Leios impact assessment, which was expected to be merged into the Cardano Upgrades GitBook. Other assessments would follow after outstanding review comments were addressed.
Intersect asked downstream teams to compare the assessments with their own integrations and flag missing dependencies or impacts.
Governance and node diversity work continue Intersect said the Hard Fork Working Group had completed an initial walkthrough of the Dijkstra risk log. Each risk will receive an owner with editing access, and the log will gain a column for formal risk assessments.
Following discussions between the Parameter Committee and developers, an updated constitutional draft was expected during the week, according to the bulletin.
Intersect scheduled a constitutional update and guardrails meeting for Oct. 23 at 14:00 UTC, open to Constitutional Committee members, stake pool operators, and delegated representatives. The organization said the session would be recorded and shared afterward.
The bulletin listed a separate Node Diversity Workshop organized by the Amaru team for Nov. 12–13 at the London Marriott Hotel Canary Wharf. Its working agenda includes reviewing future hard-fork features through implementation costs and community needs to help inform how subsequent upgrades are scoped and prioritized.
Zakladatel Cardano Charles Hoskinson vyvíjí pro tuto síť nový programovací jazyk s podporou záměrů a dat nesoucích důkaz, které využívají důkazy Groth16.
Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson revealed on October 18, 2026, that he is personally developing a new programming language intended for the Cardano blockchain.
In a post on the social platform X, Hoskinson stated that the project is underway and that he is collaborating with another developer.
He characterized the language as the first of its kind, designed to support intents alongside proof-carrying data through the use of Groth16 proofs.
The collaborator identified by the handle @rvcas is Lucas Rosa, a software engineer associated with Input Output Global.
Rosa is recognized as a co-creator and maintainer of Aiken, an existing smart-contract language used on Cardano.
Public materials for Aiken list him among its authors, and his personal site notes a role connected to tooling for the Midnight project.
Cardano already offers developers two primary options for writing smart contracts:
Plutus, which draws from the Haskell functional programming tradition that underpins much of the network’s original design, and Aiken, a more recent alternative aimed at improving accessibility.
I'm actually personally developing a programming language for Cardano. It's the first of its kind, enabling intents and PCD via Groth16 proofs. @rvcas is building it with me
— Charles Hoskinson (@IOHK_Charles) October 18, 2026
Hoskinson’s announcement positions the new language as an additional tool rather than a replacement whose precise relationship to these existing options has been clarified.
At a conceptual level, the features Hoskinson highlighted address common challenges in blockchain application design.
An intent allows a user or application to declare a desired outcome—such as completing a token exchange only if a certain price condition is met—while leaving the precise sequence of intermediate steps to be determined by the surrounding system or other parties.
Proof-carrying data refers to a technique in which computational results are accompanied by cryptographic evidence that every preceding step satisfied the required rules.
A verifier can then confirm the entire history by examining a single compact proof instead of re-executing the full computation.
Groth16, the specific zero-knowledge proof system referenced, is a well-established construction published in 2016.
It generates proofs that consist of only three group elements, keeping them small enough for efficient verification on-chain.
Because the proofs are zero-knowledge, they can demonstrate that certain conditions were met without exposing the private inputs that went into the calculation.
Combined, these elements could enable applications to coordinate complex multi-step interactions and transfer verified information between services while limiting the data that must be revealed publicly.
Hoskinson has not released a name for the language, published any code, shared technical specifications, or indicated a development or launch timeline.
The announcement itself appeared as a reply in a broader discussion about Cardano’s characteristics as a decentralized foundation for applications.
Separate recent comments from Hoskinson have referenced ongoing conceptual work related to Midnight, a privacy-oriented companion chain, though no direct technical linkage between that effort and the new language has been detailed.
The disclosure adds another layer to Cardano’s evolving developer tooling at a time when the network continues to introduce features such as enhanced programmable token standards. Whether the language ultimately streamlines the creation of applications that rely on verifiable outcomes and privacy-preserving checks will depend on the concrete design choices that have yet to be made public.
Strict editorial policy that focuses on accuracy, relevance, and impartiality
Created by industry experts and meticulously reviewed
The highest standards in reporting and publishing
Strict editorial policy that focuses on accuracy, relevance, and impartiality
Morbi pretium leo et nisl aliquam mollis. Quisque arcu lorem, ultricies quis pellentesque nec, ullamcorper eu odio.
Geneva, Switzerland, October 22, 2026 — TRON reinforced its position as a leading blockchain network for stablecoin settlement in the third quarter of 2026, with trillions in transaction volume, record USDT supply, growing payment card adoption, and the debut of the first U.S. spot staked TRX exchange-traded fund (ETF), according to independent research reports from CoinDesk Data and Nansen.
CoinDesk
CoinDesk’s TRON Network Quarterly Report: Q3 2026 provides a technical assessment of the TRON network from July to September 2026. The findings span network and ecosystem developments, core on-chain metrics, and DeFi activity across lending and decentralized exchanges (DEX).
Key Insights from CoinDesk:
Stablecoin Settlement: TRON accounted for approximately 73% of stablecoin transfer volume at the end of Q3 2026, the highest share among blockchain networks. Stablecoin Market Share & USDT Growth: USDT on TRON reached an all-time high of just over $92.7 billion in Q3 2026, lifting TRON’s share of the total USDT market to a 2026 high of 50.6% in mid-September. TRON’s share of total stablecoin market capitalization also rose to 30.2%. Crypto-Card Payments & DeFi Activity: TRON ranked first among chains by crypto-card payment volume in Q3 2026, capturing a 27.5% share worth approximately $638 million as total card volumes grew 60.5% QoQ to $2.32 billion. Total value locked (TVL) on the network rose 26.6% QoQ to $5.7 billion with lending the largest sector at 68%, and JustLend active loans up from $127M to $199M. Read the full report from CoinDesk here.
Nansen
Nansen’s TRON Quarterly Report: Q3 2026 examines the network’s settlement scale and on-chain behavior over the quarter. It covers stablecoin settlement volume, transaction and address activity, institutional developments, and how users and transactions are distributed across labeled entities on TRON.
Key Insights from Nansen:
Stablecoin Settlement at Scale: TRON settled $2.21 trillion in stablecoins in Q3 2026, with average daily settlement rising 3.9% to $24.05 billion. Cumulative transaction volume on the network also surpassed $30 trillion as of September 23. User Growth & On-Chain Activity: TRON’s user base continued to grow in Q3 2026, with average rolling monthly active addresses up 9.8% QoQ to 18 million, while the network processed an average of 11.68 million successful transactions per day. Expanded Institutional Access: Canary Capital launched the Canary Staked TRX ETF (TRXS), the first U.S. spot staked TRX ETF, on September 9, and TRON DAO rang the Cboe closing bell on September 29 to mark its debut. Anchorage Digital also added native TRX staking and TRC-20 custody as the second phase of its TRON integration. Read the full report from Nansen here.
Across both reports, TRON’s third quarter showed a network growing in volume and in reach at the same time. Stablecoin settlement continued to climb, everyday spending through crypto cards accelerated, and new regulated products gave institutions a direct path to TRX. With that foundation in place, TRON enters the final quarter of 2026 as a settlement network that is increasingly accessible to retail users and institutions alike.
About TRON DAO
TRON DAO is a community-governed DAO dedicated to accelerating the decentralization of the internet via blockchain technology and dApps.
Founded in September 2017, the TRON blockchain has experienced significant growth since its MainNet launch in May 2018. Today, TRON hosts the largest circulating supply of USD Tether (USDT) stablecoin, which currently exceeds $94 billion. As of October 2026, the TRON blockchain has recorded over 410 million in total user accounts, more than 15 billion in total transactions, and over $28 billion in total value locked (TVL), based on TRONSCAN. Recognized as the global settlement layer for stablecoin transactions and everyday purchases with proven success, TRON is “Moving Trillions, Empowering Billions.”
TRONNetwork | TRONDAO | X | YouTube | Telegram | Discord | Reddit | GitHub | Medium | Forum
Media Contact
Yeweon Park
[email protected]
Disclaimer: The information found on NewsBTC is for educational purposes only. It does not represent the opinions of NewsBTC on whether to buy, sell or hold any investments and naturally investing carries risks. You are advised to conduct your own research before making any investment decisions. Use information provided on this website entirely at your own risk.
TL;DRJenner is scheduled for BSC testnet on October 28, 2026.Node operators must upgrade before activation.Changes include Payment Lane and millisecond timestamps.Jenner enables functionality for a new Compliant Asset Standard (CAS20)The Jenner hard fork introduces changes to payment capacity, native asset controls, and the timestamp information available to smart contracts on BNB Smart Chain (BSC).
Validators, node operators, block builders, and application developers should review the changes and prepare for testnet activation. This notice covers the upgrade requirements, included proposals, and compatibility checks.
Upgrade Scheduled & Required ActionJenner is scheduled for testnet on October 28, 2026. Confirmed mainnet timing will be announced separately.
All BSC nodes must run a compatible client release before their network’s activation. Check the release instructions for your client and network, including the exact activation time, before scheduling the upgrade.
For Chapel testnet operators using Reth, reth-bsc v0.1.3 is available for Jenner. Review its RPC compatibility changes before replacing the binary and restarting. Operators using the BSC Geth client should follow the release instructions for that client.
The official Jenner upgrade notice provides the reference for rollout updates and upgrade information.
What Changes in JennerPayment Lane: Reserved capacity for eligible paymentsBEP-703 introduces Payment Lane, which reserves 5% of each block’s gas capacity for qualifying payment transactions by default. Governance can adjust that share up to a protocol maximum of 10%.
Eligible payments include nonzero BNB transfers to accounts without code and eligible transactions sent to governance-listed payment contracts. The contract list starts empty, so stablecoins and CAS20 tokens require separate governance approval to qualify.
Payments can compete for capacity beyond the reserved share. General transactions cannot use unused payment capacity. Existing fee and transaction-ordering rules remain in place, and the reservation does not guarantee inclusion for an individual payment.
Payment providers should review the transaction eligibility rules. Block builders must account for the reservation when constructing blocks.
CAS20: Native asset controls, coming soonBEP-702 introduces the Compliant Asset Standard, CAS20, for assets such as stablecoins and tokenized real-world assets. It provides protocol-native token functionality with transfer policies, allowlists and blocklists, pausing, and separate mint, burn, and seizure roles.
Jenner includes the underlying capability. Token creation and policy-registry updates require separate activation by a governance-appointed administrator. CAS20 retains BEP-20 selector and event compatibility; its technical controls do not themselves establish legal compliance.
CAS20 is coming soon. A separate announcement will cover its availability, functionality, and integration details.
Millisecond timestamps for smart contractsBEP-706 adds a precompile at address 0x70 that returns the executing block’s timestamp in milliseconds. Applications can use it for timing-sensitive logic such as quote expiry, auction cutoffs, and price-feed freshness checks.
Contracts must explicitly call the precompile to use it. Existing block.timestamp behavior remains in seconds.
The change exposes finer timing precision already present in block headers. It does not change block speed or provide stronger timing guarantees than the existing validator-supplied block timestamp.
RPC compatibility & block builder updatesReth operators and teams using its RPC endpoints should review a compatibility change in reth-bsc v0.1.3. It applies immediately after upgrading, including before Jenner activates.
For eth_call, eth_estimateGas, debug_traceCall, and eth_simulateV1, a supplied blockOverrides.prevRandao must encode the millisecond remainder, from 0 to 999, as a 32-byte hex value. The time field remains in seconds. Overriding only time resets the millisecond remainder to zero.
The release also includes BEP-675 improvements to builder-proposed blocks: binary BidBlock submission over gRPC, stronger validation, and builder revocations that persist across restarts. These accompanying client improvements do not require a hard fork.
Review the Reth release notes for the full compatibility details.
Prepare for Testnet ActivationValidators and node operators: Check the applicable client release and activation time, review compatibility changes, and complete the upgrade before activation.MEV block builders: Verify Payment Lane gas accounting and review the updated BidBlock submission interfaces.Application developers and integrators: Check affected RPC overrides and test millisecond timestamp integration where relevant. Payment teams should verify eligibility rules, while CAS20 integrations should account for separate feature activation.Use the Jenner upgrade notice and your client’s release notes to track confirmed rollout details.
U.S. Bank provedla reálný přeshraniční převod svého dolarového stablecoinu USBDC mezi severoamerickou a evropskou entitou prostřednictvím veřejného blockchainu Stellar ($XLM). Šlo o interní test, nikoli o platbu klienta.
U.S. Bank completed a live cross-border transfer of its USBDC dollar-backed stablecoin on the Stellar network ($XLM) between its North American and European entities.
U.S. Bank has completed a live cross-border payment using USBDC, its proprietary dollar-backed stablecoin, on the public Stellar blockchain ($XLM). According to the bank's filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the pilot moved funds between U.S. Bank entities in North America and Europe and demonstrated the potential for 24/7 transactions.
The bank, the fifth-largest commercial lender in the United States, said the deployment ran on @StellarOrg while staying connected to its existing finance, risk, compliance and operations systems. LeapRate reported that U.S. Bank described USBDC as one of the first bank-issued stablecoins deployed on a public blockchain.
An internal treasury transfer, not a client paymentThe transaction was an intra-group movement of funds. Ledger Insights noted that it was not a client payment, which points to corporate treasury and the bank's own liquidity rather than consumer use.
That limits what the result shows. CryptoSlate said both ends of the payment stayed inside U.S. Bank's corporate structure, so the test did not involve settlement with an outside bank, merchant or retail customer.
The bank has not disclosed the amount moved or a commercial rollout date, according to crypto.news. It also did not announce public access to USBDC.
What the pilot testedBeyond the transfer itself, the exercise evaluated several issuer functions. The bank's filing says the pilot validated its internally developed Digital Asset Platform and assessed minting, payment redemption, freezing and clawbacks.
Stellar's own write-up says the effort follows an announcement last November that U.S. Bank was testing custom stablecoin issuance on the network. At that stage, Ledger Insights reported, the bank was building issuance capability rather than running live transactions.
U.S. Bank CEO Gunjan Kedia said the pilot shows the bank can speed up global cash management and money movement for clients within a regulated banking framework, per LeapRate. The bank is exploring liquidity management, collateral mobility and cross-border treasury uses as next steps, crypto.news reported.
For now, the pilot is a proof of concept for how a regulated U.S. bank can use a public network while keeping issuer controls in place, rather than a commercial stablecoin product.
SourcesU.S. Bancorp Form 8-K, third-quarter 2026 earnings release (SEC)
Stellar: A Bank-Issued Stablecoin Moves Real Money on Stellar
Ledger Insights: US Bank completes live cross border pilot of USBDC stablecoin
LG CNS navázala partnerství se společností Chainlink v oblasti infrastruktury pro stablecoiny, tokenizované cenné papíry a propojení blockchainů určené korejským bankám a finančním institucím.
LG CNS, LG Group’s South Korean IT-service arm, is teaming up with Chainlink to develop digital asset infrastructure for local banks and financial institutions. The move targets stablecoins, tokenized securities and interoperability between blockchain networks, the companies said Thursday.
As part of the partnership, LG CNS will incorporate Chainlink’s oracle and cross-chain technology into its digital asset platform solutions for Korean institutions. The companies also plan to support the adoption and distribution of Korean stablecoins in a market with more than 11 million eligible users.
South Korea is one of the world’s most active digital asset markets, with technical and regulatory initiatives advancing. According to Chainalysis, the country’s crypto economy grew about 12% to $449 billion between July 2025 and June 2026, outpacing other East Asian markets.
LG CNS supports financial institutions in building blockchain-based digital asset services that integrate with existing financial infrastructure. The company is the lead contractor for Project Hangang, a Bank of Korea initiative focused on digital currency systems and bank participation.
“By combining LG CNS’s institutional expertise with Chainlink’s technology standards, this partnership establishes the foundation for compliant digital asset infrastructure in Korea,” Johann Eid, Chief Business Officer at Chainlink Labs, said. “Together, LG and Chainlink are providing Korean institutions with a secure and reliable foundation for moving tokenized money across systems and networks.”
Chainlink and LG CNS will work on technical standards for South Korea’s digital asset market, which could help financial institutions build systems that can support regulated digital assets and work across different networks.
“Korea’s financial infrastructure is entering the tokenization era. LG CNS is committed to leading this transition, and together with Chainlink, we aim to accelerate the growth of Korea’s tokenized securities market by enabling secure interoperability and real-world data, while creating a foundation for global expansion,” Hongkeun Kim, Executive Vice President and Head of the Digital Business Division at LG CNS, said.
LG CNS has developed blockchain-based financial infrastructure since 2015 and recently introduced KITL, a platform for institutional digital asset use cases.
The company has also partnered with the Canton Foundation to promote institutional adoption of the Canton Network in South Korea, including work with local banks and financial institutions.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Vivian Nguyen. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Decentralizovaná burza Extended dokončila migraci ze Starknetu na síť Circle Arc s TVL kolem 120 milionů USD. Pro obchodování perpetuálních kontraktů nyní přijímá USDC a cirBTC jako zajištění.
Extended, a decentralized exchange built around perpetual contracts, has fully moved to Arc. Trading is live, with USDC and cirBTC as the accepted collateral.
How the move went down The migration took place on October 22, 2026, at 13:00 UTC. Extended shifted its settlement infrastructure from Starknet to Arc, carrying approximately $120 million in total value locked (TVL) with it.
Open positions and orders came along intact. Traders did not need to close out and rebuild their books on the other side.
Deposits and withdrawals did pause briefly during the transition. Both have since been restored.
The collateral menu changed, though. On Arc, Extended now accepts native USDC as its main collateral and cirBTC as its Bitcoin collateral asset.
cirBTC is a token issued by Circle and backed 1:1 by Bitcoin.
Two familiar assets did not survive the trip. USDT and wBTC are not supported on Arc.
Users holding more than $1 of USDT or wBTC had to act by October 21, 2026. They could either withdraw or convert into USDC or cirBTC at a 1:1 rate plus a 0.50% premium.
ETH holders got off easier. Their balances converted automatically to wETH during the migration.
What Arc brings to the table Arc is Circle’s EVM-compatible Layer 1 blockchain. The network launched its mainnet on September 16, 2026. Extended’s arrival comes roughly five weeks later.
Arc offers sub-second deterministic finality. Gas fees on Arc are paid in USDC.
The validator lineup includes founding validators such as BlackRock, DTCC, ICE, Visa, and Mastercard.
Extended also gains access to Circle’s Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP). CCTP lets USDC move natively between blockchains, rather than relying on wrapped versions issued by third-party bridges.
The Circle partnership and Extended’s track record The migration is described as the first step in a broader partnership between Extended and Circle.
Extended reports more than $200 billion in lifetime trading volume across multiple asset classes, including traditional stocks and digital currencies.
What this means for traders and the perps market For existing Extended users, the immediate changes are practical. Collateral options narrowed to USDC and cirBTC, and anyone still holding USDT or wBTC had to make a decision before the October 21 deadline.
The 0.50% conversion premium sweetened that deal. Exchanges rarely pay users to switch assets, so the incentive suggests Extended wanted the collateral base consolidated quickly and cleanly.
The things to track from here: whether TVL grows beyond the approximately $120 million that made the trip, how cirBTC adoption develops as Bitcoin collateral, and what the next phase of the Extended and Circle partnership actually delivers.
Disclosure: This article was edited by John Chen. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Zcash Foundation vydala Zebra 7.0.0 s podporou NU7; provozovatelé uzlů hlavní sítě musí aktualizovat software před blokem 3 543 405, očekávaným přibližně 5. listopadu, aby zůstali na řetězci shodném s konsenzem.
Zcash Foundation has released Zebra 7.0.0 with NU7 mainnet support, telling node operators to upgrade before block 3,543,405, expected around Nov. 5.
Summary
Mainnet operators must upgrade before activation to remain on the consensus chain.
Zebra 6.4.x releases are scheduled to stop operating days before the upgrade.
NU7 introduces 25-second blocks while preserving the scheduled daily issuance of ZEC.
The foundation says Zebra 7.0.0 includes fixes for five security advisories.
Zcash Foundation said in its Oct. 22 announcement that mainnet operators must install the upgrade to remain on the consensus chain, while older 6.4.x releases will stop themselves days before activation.
“All Mainnet operators MUST upgrade before height 3,543,405 (~Nov 5) to stay on the consensus chain.”
The foundation listed 25-second blocks, a Network Sustainability Mechanism, and fixes for five security advisories among the release’s features.
Zebra operators face an earlier shutdown
The foundation’s Oct. 6 engineering update put the expected shutdown of Zebra 6.4.x around Nov. 2. Developers shortened the software’s operating period from 15 weeks to 12 weeks to bring that halt ahead of the planned network upgrade.
In the same update, the engineering team said expiry calculations and synchronization estimates had been adjusted to follow the block time in effect at each height. Without that adjustment, faster block production could make software stop earlier than intended.
NU7 reached public testnet at block 4,465,026 on Oct. 4, the foundation confirmed. The testnet activation introduced the consensus changes for observation before mainnet deployment.
As crypto.news previously reported on Oct. 21, developers had selected the mainnet activation height after an Oct. 20 meeting of ZIP editors. At that reporting cutoff, the change still awaited integration into the deployment specification.
The current ZIP 259 text now lists mainnet block 3,543,405. Its compatibility rules say upgraded nodes will disconnect peers advertising an older network protocol version after activation.
The specification warns that unsupported software can remain online and follow a pre-NU7 consensus branch. It does not establish how many operators are still using incompatible software.
Zcash targets faster confirmations without faster issuance
ZIP 218 sets the new block target at 25 seconds, down from 75 seconds. Its authors identify payments, exchange deposits, and cross-chain operations as uses affected by the wait for confirmations.
The proposal does not advise clients to cut their confirmation counts. Its discussion of rollback risk distinguishes between security models, including models based on an attacker’s share of mining power and those based on the economic cost of reversing a payment.
The foundation’s Oct. 2 release-candidate explanation says daily scheduled issuance stays unchanged because the software divides scheduled block rewards by three and adjusts the remaining halving intervals.
Its description retains the four-year halving schedule and the 21 million ZEC supply cap. Faster block production therefore does not mean the scheduled daily mining subsidy triples.
The September coinholder poll recorded roughly 99.9% support for shorter block spacing and 98.9% support for preserving halvings. Nearly 2.4 million ZEC participated, representing around 66% of eligible Ironwood balances at the snapshot, according to the published results covered on Sep. 16.
Voting closed on Sep. 14 after balances were recorded at mainnet block 3,459,350 on Aug. 24. Eligibility depended on spendable shielded funds held in Ironwood at that snapshot.
NU7 redirects fees into future mining rewards
The foundation’s release-candidate explanation describes a split in which 60% of transaction fees leave circulation for a reserve, while miners keep the remaining 40%.
Under the Network Sustainability Mechanism, the reserved funds can return gradually through future block rewards. The Oct. 21 activation coverage identified mainnet block 8,939,664 for the start of reissuance, expected around February 2031.
Coinholders had favored that timing with approximately 96.6% support in September’s poll. The deployment specification lists the reissuance height separately from the NU7 activation height.
The Oct. 2 technical explanation gives mining pools a related instruction. Because a coinbase transaction depends on selected transaction fees and the parent block’s reserve, miners should request a fresh block template instead of changing its transaction set or previous block themselves.
The foundation described shielded activity limits covering individual pools and a shared budget across pools. Its engineering update says those restrictions are designed to protect light wallets from spam while the network produces blocks more frequently.
ZIP 218 places the shared shielded budget at 330 actions per block, alongside separate pool limits. Its authors estimate that the changes cut worst-case daily light-wallet synchronization bandwidth from 271 megabytes to 169 megabytes, a reduction of roughly 37%.
The proposal notes a separate privacy trade-off. More frequent blocks give observers finer timing information, which can be combined with observations from networks or applications. Its authors say the new limits do not prevent traffic analysis or eliminate denial-of-service risk.
Sprout funds face a separate spending deadline
The Oct. 5 testnet coverage described another NU7 change affecting funds in Sprout, Zcash’s original shielded pool. Disabling version 4 transactions prevents spending those funds after activation unless holders move them beforehand.
ZIP 259 specifies that the prohibition applies to every version 4 transaction, including transparent-only and Sapling transactions. Saved transactions signed offline require the same activation checks.
The specification says versions 5 and 6 keep their existing structures, but their signatures commit to a consensus branch identifier. An unchanged transaction format does not guarantee a transaction remains valid across activation.
RedStone spustil na hlavní síti Filecoin cenový datový kanál FIL/USD pro chytré kontrakty FVM. Aktualizuje se při cenové odchylce o 0,5 % nebo každé čtyři hodiny.
RedStone has integrated Filecoin and deployed a FIL/USD push price feed on Filecoin mainnet, delivering a dollar price for the network’s native token to smart contracts on the Filecoin Virtual Machine (FVM).
How the FIL/USD Price Feed Works on Filecoin Mainnet RedStone’s FIL/USD feed publishes a signed FIL price to a contract on Filecoin mainnet that any FVM application can read. Getting there took a chain integration: RedStone set up the relayer and onchain contracts Filecoin needed to receive push feeds in the first place.
The feed runs on RedStone’s push model. An off-chain relayer collects FIL prices from RedStone’s data providers and writes an update onchain when one of two conditions is met, a 0.5% price deviation or a four-hour heartbeat. Each update carries the providers’ signatures and a timestamp, and the adapter contract validates both before storing the price. Consuming contracts read that stored value directly.
Because the FVM runs Solidity through its EVM runtime, integration looks the same as it does on Ethereum. A lending contract calls latestRoundData() through the standard aggregator interface and gets back the price along with the time it was last updated. The Calibration feed lets teams test collateral and liquidation logic against real FIL prices before any mainnet funds are involved.
Why FVM Applications Need a Dollar Price for FIL Much of Filecoin’s DeFi activity grew out of storage. Providers lock FIL as collateral to take on storage deals, and protocols such as GLIF run leasing pools where FIL holders deposit tokens, receive a liquid token in return, and lend to those providers for a share of their rewards. The loans are denominated in FIL. The decisions around them, how much a provider can borrow and when a position gets too thin, depend on what FIL is worth in dollars on a given day.
The programmable side of the network is growing as well. Filecoin Onchain Cloud, which moves storage and payments onchain, went live on Filecoin mainnet on 26 March 2026 after more than 100 teams built on its testnet, according to the Filecoin blog. Its payment layer, Filecoin Pay, settles usage onchain, and the network’s 2026 strategy calls for adding stablecoin payments to it. Once storage is priced in dollars and paid in FIL, or the reverse, the contract in the middle needs a conversion rate it can trust, updated often enough to settle against.
What the Integration Unlocks For Filecoin builders, the change is practical. A team launching a FIL-collateralized lending market or a dollar-priced storage service can point its contract at an existing feed and skip running price infrastructure of its own. The same reference price is a starting input for liquid staking tokens that need a dollar value, for insurance products that price cover in dollars and pay out in FIL, and for AI and data applications that bill for services onchain. Where those products need something beyond FIL/USD, such as an exchange rate for a liquid token, RedStone’s custom feeds can be deployed on the same infrastructure.
For RedStone, the integration extends its footprint into the network that describes itself as the world’s largest decentralized storage network, and into a DeFi market built around provider collateral. Chain integrations tend to widen after launch. RedStone went live on Tempo in March 2026 with FX feeds for payments, and by May it was supplying the feeds behind a full lending stack on Tempo. The feeds also carry a record of zero mispricing events, including correct ezETH and wstETH prices during episodes when those assets were mispriced elsewhere.
Filecoin’s 2026 network strategy puts paid onchain deals at the top of its objectives, alongside network profitability and adoption by paying flagship clients. Its go-to-market focus includes AI agents, chain data and real-world assets. Each paid deal is a contract that moves FIL, and every one budgeted in dollars needs a price to settle against.
See the FIL/USD feed’s contract addresses and update parameters on the RedStone app.
Is there a FIL/USD price feed on Filecoin mainnet? Yes. RedStone operates a FIL/USD push feed on Filecoin mainnet that any smart contract on the Filecoin Virtual Machine can read. A matching feed runs on the Calibration testnet for development and testing.
How often does the RedStone FIL/USD feed update? The feed pushes a new price onchain whenever FIL moves 0.5% from the last stored value. If the price stays inside that band, a heartbeat forces an update every four hours.
How do FVM smart contracts read the FIL/USD price? The FVM supports Solidity, so contracts read the feed with latestRoundData(), which returns the latest price and its update timestamp. The mainnet relayer contract sits at 0x434F8D17c0301cfEa143dba912972E24B827C968, and addresses for both networks are listed on the RedStone app.
Can RedStone deploy other price feeds on Filecoin? Yes. The chain integration means the relayer and contracts are already in place on Filecoin, so teams can request additional feeds from the RedStone team.
RedStone is the data layer for institutional DeFi, delivering secure, low-latency price feeds for digital assets, RWAs, stablecoins, LSTs, LRTs, and Bitcoin LSTs across 110+ chains. Trusted by 200+ clients, including Securitize, Morpho, Pendle, Spark, Ether.fi, Ethena, Lombard, Venus, and Compound, RedStone powers lending, stablecoins, perpetuals, and tokenized asset markets with custom pricing infrastructure built for complex onchain systems. RedStone provides data for tokenized products including BlackRock’s BUIDL, Apollo ACRED, and Hamilton Lane SCOPE. Zero mispricing events. 100% uptime. Learn more at redstone.finance.
Filecoin is a peer-to-peer network to store files, with built-in economic incentives to ensure files are stored reliably over time. It’s designed to create a decentralized, efficient, and robust foundation for humanity’s information. Learn more at filecoin.io.
NEAR Protocol na platformě pro perpetuální kontrakty poháněné Hyperliquid spustil křížovou marži, takže pozice sdílejí jediný zůstatek pro perpetuals jako marži při zachování deklarovaného důvěrného obchodování.
NEAR Protocol has rolled out cross-margin on its Hyperliquid-powered perpetuals platform, allowing trading positions to share a single perps balance while retaining what the project describes as confidential trading.
Summary
Positions can draw collateral from a shared perps balance instead of holding separate margin. NEAR’s privacy explanation describes dedicated Hyperliquid accounts with confidential deposits and withdrawals. Hyperliquid documents account-level liquidation rules for positions that use shared cross margin. The platform advertises more than 50 markets, with U.S. persons excluded from access. NEAR Protocol announced the feature on Oct. 22, saying positions now share the user’s perps balance as margin. Its accompanying image presents cross and isolated margin alongside the platform’s confidentiality claim.
“Positions now share your perps balance as margin instead of each holding its own,” the project said.
The announcement identifies perps.near.com as the trading interface and Hyperliquid as the underlying provider. NEAR’s message says the feature is live, although it does not provide trading volume, user counts, or figures showing how much collateral customers have committed.
NEAR describes confidentiality through a dedicated trading account NEAR’s product page gives a more specific description of privacy than the short launch announcement. The service says each user receives a dedicated account for trading perpetuals on Hyperliquid, with confidential deposits and withdrawals to and from that account.
The Oct. 22 post describes positions as confidential, stating “nobody can tell they’re yours.” The product page’s explanation centers on the account and its funding flows, without establishing that every order, execution, or position record disappears from Hyperliquid’s public infrastructure.
Neither the announcement nor that explanation provides an independent assessment of whether observers could identify users through other information. The material supports reporting NEAR’s confidentiality claim, but not a guarantee that trading activity cannot be linked to a person under any circumstances.
For funding, the site says NEAR Intents converts supported assets into the required margin currency. Users can start with assets held across connected networks, while funding and settlement transactions are signed on their devices, according to the service.
Cross margin shares collateral across eligible positions Hyperliquid’s documentation describes cross margin as collateral shared among cross-margin positions. Isolated margin assigns collateral to an individual position, separating it from the collateral used elsewhere in the account.
Its rules allow unrealized profits from cross-margin positions to become available as initial margin for new trades. For isolated positions, unrealized profit instead becomes additional margin for the existing position, the documentation states.
Hyperliquid calculates initial margin from position size, mark price, and the leverage selected by the trader. Maximum leverage depends on the asset, so the platform’s advertised ceiling does not apply equally to every market.
The documentation says leverage is checked when a position opens. Afterward, users must monitor their exposure, with available actions including closing positions, adding collateral to isolated trades or depositing USDC for cross-margin positions.
Hyperliquid distinguishes how cross-margin works across different perpetual exchanges deployed on its infrastructure. Its documentation says collateral sharing across those venues depends on the account mode and collateral type. NEAR’s announcement does not specify which of those configurations its interface supports.
Hyperliquid applies account-level liquidation rules Hyperliquid’s liquidation rules say positions become subject to liquidation when account equity falls below the required maintenance margin. The platform first attempts to close positions through orders sent to its order book. Remaining collateral stays with the trader when the resulting closures restore compliance with margin requirements.
If account equity falls below two-thirds of maintenance margin and liquidation through the book has not succeeded, the documentation describes a backstop process involving the liquidator vault.
For a cross-margin backstop liquidation, Hyperliquid says the trader’s cross positions and cross collateral transfer to the liquidator. An isolated backstop liquidation transfers the affected position and its assigned margin while leaving cross-margin positions untouched.
The exchange uses a mark price for liquidations. Its pricing documentation says that measure combines external market information with Hyperliquid trading data and is used for margin calculations, unrealized profit and loss, and take-profit or stop-loss triggers.
Funding payments can change an account’s balance while positions remain open. Hyperliquid states that funding is exchanged hourly between long and short holders, with the payment direction determined by the funding rate. The exchange says it collects no fee on those transfers.
NEAR’s perps service excludes U.S. persons The product page advertises access to more than 50 perpetual markets with leverage of up to 40 times. It explicitly states that perpetuals are unavailable to U.S. persons and users in other restricted jurisdictions, alongside a warning that leveraged trading carries a substantial risk of loss.
NEAR’s relationship with Hyperliquid includes direct token trading. On Sep. 23, crypto.news reported that NEAR spot trading had become available against USDC, alongside an existing perpetual market for the token. The announcement cited in that article said inclusion on Hyperliquid’s Strict List would take several more days after deployment.
Charles Schwab označil Avalanche za lídra v oblasti institucionálních blockchainů a tokenizace RWA, ale varoval, že tento zájem nemusí zvýšit poptávku po tokenu AVAX.
AVAX is testing the lower boundary of a falling wedge at key Fibonacci support.
A death cross on the 4-hour chart keeps the rebound unconfirmed.
Charles Schwab calls Avalanche a leader in institutional blockchains and RWA tokenization.
The broker warns that institutional adoption may not translate into demand for AVAX.
AVAX price is trading near $9.21 on the 4-hour chart, sitting on its most important support zone at $9.00-$9.20 after a 23% pullback from the late-September high of $12.01, with a falling wedge pattern set to resolve within days. The test comes as Charles Schwab, the brokerage with roughly $13 trillion in client assets, published an analysis of Avalanche and Chainlink on October 20 that names Avalanche a leader in institutional blockchains and real-world asset (RWA) tokenization, while questioning whether that position will ever translate into demand for the token.
JUST IN: Charles Schwab identifies Avalanche as a leader in RWAs and institutional use cases.
New research from @CharlesSchwab points to custom L1s and high-utility financial activity as key differentiators for the network. pic.twitter.com/vLhdjuebkL
— Avalanche🔺 (@avax) October 21, 2026
A rally on volume, a pullback without it
Between September 17 and September 29, AVAX rallied nearly 68% in just over 12 days, climbing from $7.17 to $12.01. Over the following 23 days it gave back more than 23% of its value. Total volume was almost identical in both phases, about 84.8 million AVAX in the rally and 83.6 million in the correction, but the decline lasted nearly twice as long, so average volume per candle during the pullback is roughly half of what it was on the way up. Sellers have been pushing price lower with fading participation, a pattern that tends to accompany a correction more often than a trend reversal.
A falling wedge at the 0.618 level
AVAX/USDT 4H chart. Source: Alexander Stefanov on TradingView
Since early October, price has compressed into a falling wedge, a pattern of two converging downward lines in which each high is lower than the last ($11.70, $11.00, $10.50, $9.95) while the lows drop by shrinking steps. AVAX is now testing the wedge’s lower boundary just above $9.02, the level where price would retrace 61.8% of the September rally and where pullbacks within strong trends often stall. That overlap makes $9.00-$9.20 the decisive support on the chart, and the wedge’s apex falls around October 26-27.
The death cross and the $9.90 wall
The 50-period exponential moving average ($9.79) has just slipped below the 200-period average ($9.90), which in practice means the average price of roughly the last eight days is now lower than the average of the past month. On October 21, AVAX attempted a breakout but was rejected exactly at the upper wedge line, where both averages also sit, turning $9.80-$9.90 into a dense resistance cluster.
The Relative Strength Index (RSI) stands at 35, close to the 30 mark below which the market is considered oversold, and remains under its signal line at 45. The indicator’s lows have stayed roughly flat while price kept printing lower lows, a mild bullish divergence that still lacks confirmation.
Level
Price
Role
Top of the wedge
$11.50-$11.70
Breakout target
Fibonacci 0.382
$10.16
Resistance
Wedge line and EMAs
$9.80-$9.90
Key resistance
Fibonacci 0.5
$9.59
Support after breakout
Fibonacci 0.618
$9.00-$9.20
Key support
Fibonacci 0.786
$8.20
Breakdown target
Levels from the AVAX/USDT 4-hour chart on Binance as of October 22.
What Schwab sees in Avalanche
Analysts at the Schwab Center for Financial Research do not put Avalanche in a head-to-head fight with Ethereum or Solana for overall dominance. They describe it as infrastructure on which banks, funds and companies build their own blockchains, with access rules, fees and compliance settings tailored to their needs. The report credits the network with capacity above 4,500 transactions per second, an activity mix led by stablecoins, lending, asset management and liquid staking, and favorable tokenomics thanks to the 720 million maximum supply and the burning of every transaction fee.
$3.4B
Total value locked, fifth among smart contract chains
< $2B
Tokenized RWAs on Avalanche
~$50B
Total tokenized RWA market
200x-1,200x
AVAX value vs. three years of network fees
Source: Charles Schwab, August-September 2026 data.
Why the institutional story may not lift AVAX
The sharpest argument in the report targets Avalanche itself. An institution that launches its own chain can run nearly all of its activity outside the primary network, and those transactions do not generate the burned fees that create demand for AVAX. Tokenized bonds and funds also change hands rarely, so even a large volume of issuance can produce little fee revenue.
Schwab values the network through a kind of network “GDP”, meaning the economic activity users actually pay for. On that basis, AVAX carries a market value between 200 and 1,200 times the fees collected over the past three years, comparable to an extremely high price-to-earnings multiple in equities, and those fees have been declining since 2023. Avalanche also holds less than 4% of the tokenized asset market, where Ethereum controls a far larger share.
The research is separate from Schwab’s August 27 decision to add SOL, AVAX and LINK to Schwab Crypto “in the coming months”, which will give the broker’s clients access to AVAX trading at a 0.75% fee per trade. The listing concerns trading access only and does not mean Schwab uses Avalanche for its own settlement or tokenization.
The wedge resolves by October 27
To cancel the death cross signal, AVAX price needs a 4-hour close above the wedge and the moving averages at $9.80-$9.90. That would flip $9.59 into support, put the next resistance at $10.16, and leave the pattern’s measured move pointing back toward $11.50-$11.70. A decisive close below $9.00 would break both the wedge and the 0.618 level, opening the way toward $8.20, which also lines up with the early-September highs.
A falling wedge on declining volume, resting on the 0.618 level after a strong impulse, more often ends with a continuation of the prior rally, so the structure leans slightly in favor of buyers. The death cross and the rejection at the averages show the bounce is not confirmed, and until AVAX reclaims $9.90, the $9.00 support decides the direction.
Beyond the next few sessions, two catalysts sit outside the chart. Schwab has not set a launch date for AVAX trading and has reserved the right to delay or change its plans, while daily fees on Avalanche’s primary network, the weak spot the report singles out, are public data that will show whether institutional interest starts turning into real demand for the token.
Alex is a financial markets journalist and co-founder of Millennial Media Group, and he's spent close to ten years trying to answer one stubborn question: what's really driving this?
It started in 2016, when Bitcoin refused to make sense to him - and rather than shrug, he stayed with it until it did. That patience became his method. He's less interested in what an asset is doing today than in the plumbing behind it: how liquidity flows, where risk hides, what a chart is quietly telling you that the headline isn't. That lens eventually stretched well past crypto into traditional markets, because the same forces - fear, leverage, incentives, timing - show up everywhere once you know how to look.
Most coverage, in his view, insults the reader by stopping at the surface. Price up, price down, moving on. He'd rather leave someone genuinely understanding a move than merely informed that it happened.
His path into markets ran through a Tourism degree at New Bulgarian University - proof, maybe, that curiosity beats credentials. With more than 200 deep analyses and over 10,000 articles behind him, he still walks away from most trading days having learned something he didn't know that morning.
Institucionální velryba Avalanche po šesti měsících převedla na Coinbase 119 416 AVAX v hodnotě přibližně 1,1 mil. USD. Šlo o její první vklad na burzu Coinbase za toto období.
An institutional Avalanche (AVAX) whale moved 119,416 AVAX, worth about $1.1M, to Coinbase, its first exchange deposit in six months.
An institutional Avalanche ($AVAX) whale has sent a seven-figure deposit to Coinbase, ending a long stretch of accumulation, according to data from @Arkham.
The address beginning 0x55De moved 119,416 $AVAX, worth about $1.1 million, to a @Coinbase exchange wallet. It is the wallet's first deposit to a centralized exchange in six months. Exchange deposits of this kind are typically read as a sign the holder may sell, though the transfer alone does not confirm that.
End of a 727-day accumulation runThe deposit also breaks the pattern that defined the wallet's activity. The address began accumulating 727 days ago, building its position through withdrawals from the Coinbase and Bitstamp order books. Moving tokens back onto an exchange reverses that direction for the first time in the period.
The sale, if it happens, would be small relative to the wallet's size. The address still holds more than 1.36 million $AVAX, for a total portfolio value of $12.52 million. The deposit therefore represents less than 10% of the stack by value, and the whale remains a large holder.
Market contextWhale deposits have drawn attention in the AVAX market before. AMBCrypto reported that Avalanche faced exchange-side selling pressure after a separate whale sent $2.4 million of tokens to Coinbase in multiple transactions over four hours.
On price, Coinbase data shows AVAX trading near $9.64, down about 12% over the past month and roughly 49% over the past year. The token remains far below its 2021 peak of $147.50, according to the same page.
Avalanche is described by Crypto.com as an open, programmable smart contracts platform that launched its mainnet in September 2020, with $AVAX used for payments, security and connecting the network's functions.
Traders will be watching whether further transfers follow from the same address, and whether the remaining 1.36 million $AVAX stays in place or also moves to exchanges.
SourcesAMBCrypto: Avalanche whale deposit and AVAX selling pressure
Coinbase: Avalanche (AVAX) price and market data
Crypto.com: Avalanche (AVAX) price and network overview
Objem obchodů na decentralizovaných burzách (DEX) v síti Avalanche za 30 dní v říjnu 2026 meziměsíčně vzrostl o 29 % na 4,1 miliardy USD; Pharaoh Exchange se na něm podílela 76 %.
Avalanche’s decentralized exchange (DEX) activity has seen a significant increase, with 30-day trading volume rising to $4.1 billion in October 2026, marking a 29% month-over-month gain. This growth comes amid a broader decline in DEX volume across other major Layer-1 blockchain networks, positioning Avalanche as a notable outlier capturing greater trading market share during the period.
Pharaoh Exchange dominance and concentrated liquidityThe recent momentum within Avalanche’s DEX sector is highly concentrated among a few platforms. Pharaoh Exchange, an automated market maker with specialized liquidity solutions, accounts for roughly $3.12 billion, or 76%, of Avalanche’s total DEX trading volume. According to DeFiLlama, the platform achieved this dominance with just $43 million to $53 million in total value locked (TVL), signaling a turnover ratio far higher than traditional constant-product market makers.
Uniswap and LFJ also posted strong performance. Uniswap’s trading volume on Avalanche surged 95% to $392 million, while LFJ’s volume climbed 165% to $201 million, both benefiting from heightened attention to concentrated liquidity design and adaptable fee structures.
Collectively, the three leading DEXs now account for more than 89% of Avalanche’s entire DEX trading activity, resulting in deeper liquidity pools capable of accommodating larger trades and minimizing slippage for both traders and liquidity providers.
DEX PlatformVolume (30 days)Change (%)Share of Avalanche DEX VolumePharaoh Exchange$3.12 billionN/A76%Uniswap$392 million+95%9.5%LFJ$201 million+165%4.9%For developers, rising DEX throughput frequently spurs increased lending, bridging, and related derivatives activity across the platform.
Technical drivers and capital efficiencyPharaoh Exchange’s remarkable efficiency relies on the V3 and DLMM (Dynamic Liquidity Market Maker) protocols. DLMM enables liquidity providers to target their capital within specific price ranges, maximizing fees per dollar locked. This mechanism has reportedly been customized for Avalanche’s infrastructure, making use of the chain’s low fees and high throughput.
However, while active market makers can benefit from this model, passive liquidity suppliers may face elevated risks, such as impermanent loss if their chosen price ranges prove suboptimal. Furthermore, the heavy concentration of activity on Pharaoh raises concerns about a single point of failure in network liquidity, as reliance on its infrastructure becomes more pronounced.
Mini dictionary: DLMM (Dynamic Liquidity Market Maker) is a protocol that allows liquidity providers to set capital allocations for specific price bins, dynamically optimizing for market conditions. This design maximizes capital efficiency but introduces complexity compared to traditional market makers.
Broader DeFi implications and future risksThe DEX sector’s momentum on Avalanche aligns with industry-wide adoption of concentrated liquidity mechanics, first popularized by Uniswap V3 in 2021. Avalanche’s ability to offer high throughput and low transaction costs has made it a favored network for stablecoin settlements and tokenized asset trading.
A core strength of the current ecosystem is the depth of liquidity, attracting aggregators, integrations, and external incentives. Yet this same concentration increases potential vulnerabilities, exposing the network to governance disputes, fee allocation challenges, and heightened resilience risks should a leading protocol encounter issues.
With volume highly concentrated, a single exploit impacting a dominant DEX such as Pharaoh could significantly disrupt the broader Avalanche network’s liquidity and market confidence.
For investors and institutional participants, sustained DEX activity reflects differences in how Layer-1 ecosystems compete beyond simple transaction volumes. Observers point to indicators such as ongoing fee generation and user retention as signals of lasting DeFi growth, rather than temporary trading patterns.
For DEX operators on other blockchains, Avalanche’s experience highlights the impact of capital efficient models and platform specialization. While Pharaoh currently leads the market, competitors like Uniswap and LFJ are gaining ground. Whether the upward trend continues may depend on evolving incentive schemes, market volatility, and users’ willingness to remain engaged with Avalanche-based DeFi services.
Solana Company (NASDAQ: HSDT) získala v Hongkongu status strategického podniku a otevřela zde své sídlo pro region Asie a Tichomoří. Vlastní více než 2,2 milionu SOL.
A Nasdaq-listed company that used to be called Helius Medical Technologies now carries a strategic seal of approval from the Hong Kong government.
Solana Company (NASDAQ: HSDT) has been recognized as a strategic enterprise by Hong Kong’s Office for Attracting Strategic Enterprises, better known as OASES. Alongside that designation, the firm has opened an office in the city to act as its Asia-Pacific headquarters.
The detail that stands out: Solana Company was the only blockchain infrastructure firm in the 2026 OASES batch.
What Solana Company is building in Hong Kong
The new Hong Kong office will serve as the executive hub for the company’s operations across the Asia-Pacific region.
The centerpiece of that plan is something the company calls the Pacific Backbone. It is an initiative to develop low-latency infrastructure linking four major financial centers: Hong Kong, Seoul, Tokyo, and Singapore.
The Pacific Backbone is aimed at staking and validation services. On a proof-of-stake blockchain like Solana, validators are the operators who process transactions and keep the network honest. Staking is how token holders put their coins to work backing those validators, typically in exchange for rewards.
The company is also expanding its validator operations. That includes partnerships with the Jito Foundation, a name familiar to anyone who follows Solana’s staking ecosystem.
On the balance sheet side, Solana Company holds more than 2.2 million SOL tokens.
Joseph Chee, the company’s Chairman and CEO, pointed to Hong Kong’s rapid progress on digital assets as a key reason for the move. He also stressed the city’s standing as a global financial center.
The firm says its broader goal is to build institutional engagement within compliant frameworks.
From Helius Medical to a SOL treasury
The company shifted its focus to a Solana-centric strategy in 2025. The rebrand to Solana Company came in September 2025. It followed a funding round that exceeded $500 million.
What this means for Solana Company and the region
As the only blockchain infrastructure firm in the 2026 OASES batch, Solana Company has a head start on positioning itself as a go-to partner for compliant Solana staking in Hong Kong.
The milestones worth tracking are concrete. Watch for progress updates on the Pacific Backbone, new validator partnerships beyond the Jito Foundation, and any announced institutional clients in Hong Kong.
Disclosure: This article was edited by John Chen. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Solana has promoted Quantumglow, a proposed post-quantum adaptation of Alpenglow designed to protect consensus while preserving the network’s fast finality.
Summary
Quantumglow proposes changes to validator signatures and block authentication without announcing a deployment date. Anza published the underlying research in July, before Solana’s latest video explainer. Alpenglow’s mainnet activation is separate from the proposed post-quantum changes to its cryptography. Bitcoin’s BIP-360 targets exposed public keys, with additional signatures needed for more complete protection. Solana Developers described the proposal in an Oct. 22 video post, presenting it as a way to secure agreement between validators against quantum attacks. Solana’s main account shared the explainer and said the network “has been early in quantum readiness and remains ahead in its preparation.”
What would Solana’s consensus look like in a post-quantum world?
Meet Quantumglow: a proposed adaptation of Alpenglow that aims to protect consensus while preserving fast finality.@jacobvcreech and @qkniep explain how it works. Full video below👇 pic.twitter.com/G005a4KcSI
— Solana Developers (@solana_devs) October 22, 2026 Neither announcement supplied an activation date or identified a Quantumglow-specific Solana Improvement Document, known as a SIMD. The developer post described an adaptation under proposal, without announcing a deployed security upgrade.
The research predates the latest explainer. Anza published its Quantumglow overview on July 30, naming Quentin Kniep, Kobi Sliwinski and Roger Wattenhofer as its authors and directing readers to Section 5 of the updated Alpenglow whitepaper.
Quantumglow changes how validators authenticate agreement Anza’s July overview identifies two obstacles to replacing Alpenglow’s existing cryptography. Post-quantum signatures take more space, while the compact signature aggregation used to prove validator agreement has no comparable ready replacement under the researchers’ requirements.
The authors propose Ax, short for Alpenglow XMSS, a hash-based signature scheme tailored to the protocol. Validators would exchange and cache one-time public-key material ahead of use, reducing the information that must accompany later signatures.
For block authentication, Anza describes a signed commitment covering the block payload, supported by authenticated communication channels. Its design removes the need to attach a large post-quantum signature to every piece of block data.
The accompanying distributed-quorum-signature research explains the second change. Kniep, Jakub Sliwinski and Wattenhofer describe moving certificates from messages sent across the network to events recorded locally after a node gathers enough evidence.
Their paper, submitted July 20, uses ordinary signatures and an approval-broadcast mechanism. It separates evidence supporting safety from evidence supporting liveness, the protocol’s ability to keep making progress.
The researchers say each message remains a constant size regardless of node count, although total communication grows quadratically. Their performance claim concerns the proposed design and its stated assumptions, without establishing a measured mainnet result.
Solana’s Alpenglow rollout has a separate activation record Solana Foundation’s upgrade page identifies Alpenglow as live on mainnet following activation in epoch 1064 on Oct. 21. The Foundation lists approximately 150 milliseconds as its finality target, compared with 12.8 seconds for TowerBFT.
The Foundation records Alpenglow consensus beginning at slot 459,653,000, after a genesis block certified by votes from 446 of 654 validators. Its documentation separates the deployed Votor voting system from Rotor, a data-distribution component reserved for a later release.
Before that handoff, crypto.news previously reported the planned consensus migration and its operator requirements. The Oct. 19 coverage documented the need for compatible validator software and sufficient vote-account funding.
SIMD-0326 specifies the Votor portions of Alpenglow and references version 1.1 of its whitepaper. The proposal explicitly leaves Rotor for a separate SIMD, showing that the original consensus specification does not cover every component discussed in subsequent research.
Solana Foundation says Alpenglow leaves transaction execution, programs, and transaction fee mechanics unchanged. Its migration guidance states that ordinary users do not need to change how they sign, send, or approve transactions.
The removal of on-chain votes creates separate changes for analytics services. As detailed in Oct. 20 coverage of vote-transaction removal, the Foundation instructs explorers to reset metrics that counted validator votes alongside user transactions.
Wallet protection requires work beyond consensus Anza’s April 27 security assessment identifies distinct quantum vulnerabilities in accounts, block propagation, consensus, and user-defined programs. Max Resnick and Sam Kim warn that an attacker capable of breaking Ed25519 could forge account signatures, while forged consensus votes could support conflicting confirmations.
Their checklist calls for work on account migration, transaction signature verification, networking and program-level cryptographic tools. The assessment makes no commitment to a single post-quantum signature scheme.
Early Falcon implementations formed another part of that preparation. April 28 coverage documented Anza and Firedancer testing the signature technology, with the teams describing it as an option for possible future activation.
Anza’s assessment describes a prototype migration proof that binds an existing account to a new post-quantum public key. The authors distinguish such account migration from optional vault programs, which cannot independently secure consensus, networking, or every application using vulnerable signatures.
Bitcoin’s BIP-360 addresses exposed keys Bitcoin’s BIP-360 specification proposes Pay-to-Merkle-Root outputs through a soft fork, removing the key-path spending option used by Taproot. Its authors describe protection against attacks on public keys exposed for long periods.
The draft explicitly separates that protection from attacks conducted while a spending transaction waits for confirmation. Its authors say protection against those shorter exposures may require post-quantum signatures through a separate proposal.
BIP-360’s motivation describes quantum key recovery as deriving a private key from a public key by breaking the discrete logarithm assumption. The authors say the timing and eventual viability of a cryptographically relevant quantum computer remain unclear. Their proposal does not set a date when such an attack becomes practical or establish that present hardware can perform it.
The repository lists BIP-360 as a draft authored by Hunter Beast, Ethan Heilman, and Isabel Foxen Duke. Its abstract states that the proposed output type retains script-tree functionality while removing the quantum-vulnerable key-path spend.
Reflect Money wants every app on Solana to have its own stablecoin. Its new tool, Create, is designed to make that a one-click affair.
The Solana-based protocol launched Create on October 22, 2026. It lets users and applications deploy custom yield-bearing stablecoins in a single transaction. The pitch is simple. Stablecoins that sit around doing nothing are a wasted opportunity, and Reflect thinks it can put them to work.
How Create works Instead of building collateral systems, liquidity plumbing and redemption logic from scratch, an issuer picks from a menu and ships.
That menu is a set of reviewed collateral options. According to the research findings, these include USDC+, senior tranches and tokenized assets. Each one backs the new token and generates the yield that holders earn.
Tokens launched through Create are built to plug straight into Solana decentralized exchanges, including Jupiter and Titan. So a freshly minted coin can trade on day one instead of languishing in a wallet nobody checks.
Minting and redeeming happen atomically, with no queues. Put plainly, you either get your tokens or your money back in the same instant, without waiting in line behind everyone else trying to exit.
Issuers can keep a percentage of the yield their stablecoin generates. That turns a stablecoin from a cost center into a potential revenue line for whoever launches it.
The numbers behind Reflect Reflect is not starting from zero. By the time Create went live, the protocol had issued 7 assets, with an average annual percentage yield of around 21%.
Total trading volume across the platform stood at $5.52 million at launch.
Reflect is aiming at the approximately $280 billion in idle stablecoin holdings that currently earn nothing.
The company describes its approach as “software-as-a-stablecoin.” The idea is to package on-chain decentralized finance strategies into liquid yield products that feel more like a savings account than a strategy deck.
Reflect also draws a clear line about what it is not. It is not a stablecoin issuer or custodian. Its protocols handle risk-adjusted allocations and asset wrapping transparently on-chain, positioning the company as a neutral operator rather than a traditional issuer.
From hackathon winner to infrastructure play Reflect Money was founded in May 2024. Its founding goal was to fix the inefficiency of stablecoin holdings by programmatically routing capital into DeFi opportunities while keeping that capital liquid and in users’ control.
The project won Grand Champion at the 2024 Solana Radar hackathon. In September 2025, it raised $3.75 million in a seed round.
Before Create, Reflect’s lineup centered on two products. Earn includes USDC+ and USDT+, while Protect offers yield tranches. The infrastructure also includes an insurance pool for risk management and a software development kit that lets developers integrate Reflect into their own products.
Create builds directly on that foundation. USDC+, one of the Earn products, now doubles as a collateral option for other people’s stablecoins.
What this means Yield on stablecoins comes from somewhere, and the around 21% average APY on Reflect’s assets reflects the DeFi strategies and collateral underneath. Those yields depend on market conditions and the performance of the assets backing each token.
Reflect says its collateral options are reviewed, and the insurance pool adds a layer of protection.
The things worth tracking from here are straightforward. Watch how many issuers actually use Create, whether the asset count climbs meaningfully beyond 7, and whether platform volume grows past $5.52 million.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Kaye Quema. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
J.P. Morgan Asset Management zpřístupnila kvalifikovaným americkým investorům prostřednictvím Morgan Money tokenizované fondy peněžního trhu MONY a JLTXX na síti Solana.
J.P. Morgan Asset Management has brought two tokenized money market funds, MONY and JLTXX, to Solana for qualified U.S. investors through its Morgan Money platform.
Summary
MONY and JLTXX give qualified U.S. investors access to tokenized fund shares on Solana.
MONY’s existing FAQ lists a $1 million initial investment minimum and offchain shareholder records.
JLTXX’s May prospectus requires approved wallet addresses for purchases, redemptions and token transfers.
BlackRock and Franklin Templeton brought their tokenized funds to Solana in 2025.
J.P. Morgan Asset Management said investors can subscribe and redeem through Morgan Money, with token balances sent to their blockchain addresses.
“Our clients operate across more than one network, and their liquidity should too,” said Paul Przybylski, the firm’s global head of product, digital and tokenized assets.
JPMorgan’s MONY fund carries a $1 million entry minimum
JPMorgan’s MONY FAQ lists an initial investment minimum of $1 million and fees of 16 basis points. The document describes a private placement fund domiciled in the British Virgin Islands, with investor onboarding subject to anti-money laundering and know-your-customer checks.
The FAQ says MONY holds U.S. Treasury securities and Treasury-backed repurchase agreements. Its investment guidelines seek a stable $1 net asset value, with Treasury purchases limited to securities with no more than 93 days remaining or issued with maturities of 93 days or less.
Although MONY intends to follow investment guidelines for government money market funds, JPMorgan’s FAQ says the private vehicle is not subject to Rule 2a-7. The document identifies SS&C as the transfer agent and says the official shareholder records remain offchain.
Earlier coverage documented JPMorgan’s $100 million seed investment when MONY launched on Ethereum in December 2025. As crypto.news previously reported, the fund formed part of the bank’s move into public blockchain infrastructure through its Kinexys business.
JPMorgan’s FAQ says investors need their own blockchain address to hold MONY tokens. It permits direct token interactions for transfers and transaction requests, while describing peer-to-peer transfers as restricted to clients. The document predates the Solana expansion and does not establish every operational detail of the new deployment.
The December report described institutional cash management as the product’s intended use. Its $100 million figure referred to initial internal capital, not the amount now held on Solana or MONY’s current total assets.
JLTXX’s filing sets out approved-wallet controls
JPMorgan’s JLTXX filing in May described a registered government money market fund built for stablecoin reserve management. The prospectus dated May 13 listed Ethereum as its only available public network at that time and anticipated support for other blockchains.
The same document required approved addresses before investors could buy, redeem or transfer token balances. Its blockchain framework uses an allow list, restricting transactions to participants approved by the fund.
JLTXX’s prospectus says the transfer agent’s investor register determines legal share ownership. Token balances are intended to correspond to shares, but the document warns that the two records may temporarily differ when blockchain instructions arrive outside business days.
The filing lists a $1 million opening minimum, with no minimum for subsequent purchases, and permits investment minimum waivers. Annual operating expenses after waivers and reimbursements are listed at 0.16%, with those arrangements scheduled through June 30, 2028.
A separate section describes optional services for converting USDC into dollars before purchases and converting redemption proceeds back into USDC. The May coverage noted that Circle is not affiliated with the fund, its adviser or Kinexys.
JPMorgan’s Oct. 22 release describes JLTXX as designed to support stablecoin issuers under the GENIUS Act. It does not disclose current assets for either fund or announce a decentralized lending integration.
BlackRock brought BUIDL to Solana in March 2025
BlackRock’s BUIDL expansion to Solana occurred in March 2025 through Securitize, giving the fund a seventh supported network at the time. The other six were Ethereum, Aptos, Arbitrum, Optimism, Avalanche, Polygon.
Securitize’s launch announcement described a new Solana share class for the BlackRock USD Institutional Digital Liquidity Fund. The company said BUIDL invests in cash, U.S. Treasury bills and repurchase agreements.
The March coverage identified Copper, Anchorage Digital and Fireblocks among BUIDL’s custody providers. It placed the fund’s value at $1.7 billion at that point, a historical figure covering the product rather than its Solana deployment alone.
Franklin’s BENJI uses blockchain-integrated ownership records
Franklin Templeton added Solana support in February 2025 for its Franklin OnChain U.S. Government Money Fund. The earlier deployment report listed Stellar as its original network, followed by expansions across Aptos, Ethereum, Avalanche, Arbitrum, Base and Polygon.
Franklin’s current Benji platform describes one BENJI token as representing one share of the fund, which trades under the FOBXX ticker. Its transfer agent maintains the official ownership record through a proprietary system integrated with public blockchains.
The company’s fund page says at least 99.5% of assets go into government securities, cash and fully collateralized repurchase agreements. It lists daily dividend frequency and an April 6, 2021, inception date.
Effective May 18, 2026, Franklin’s fund page lists Western Asset Management as a new sub-adviser responsible for day-to-day portfolio management. The same notice says the fund normally calculates net asset value hourly from 8 a.m. Eastern until its business-day close and intends to declare and reinvest income dividends daily.
Franklin’s platform timeline records the launch of peer-to-peer transfers for retail investors through its redesigned mobile app in May 2025.
Cover image via U.Today Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.
A conversation on Shiba Inu burning kicked off on social media X after SHIB community member Ed Salomons shared a screenshot of Shibarium-based burner Shibtorch's page on the official Shiba Inu website, shib.io, which returned the "failed to load burn" information, with an empty tab for SHIB in the total amount accumulated section.
"Loading, constantly updating..." Salomons wrote, reiterating Shib Torch's founding concept that "every transaction will burn SHIB."
So this does not load because https://t.co/IPYEj4F9ei is paused. But you need the bridge to work for ShibTorch. But it is still collecting bone gas fee. Currently at 371.37. can be triggered at 1000 by anyone. But will fail until bridge Shib route is opened again. First swaps bone to shib on shibarium then bridges to the dead wallet on eth. Added ShibTorch Tab on ShibWatch that shows the current accumulation and gives the info. The reopening of bridge other lanes than bone is tracked already.
HOT Stories
— Mazrael.shib (@Mazrael_shib) October 22, 2026 Long-time SHIB community member Mazrael weighed in, explaining the reason for this. ShibTorch collects BONE from Shibarium fees, swaps its share to SHIB and burns it on Ethereum. The Shib.io ShibTorch page gets every number from an indexer that no longer exists, so it shows "failed to load burn information."
Aside from this constraint, the bridge that marks the SHIB route has been paused. "But you need the bridge to work for ShibTorch, and it is still collecting BONE gas fees," Mazrael added.
You Might Also Like
Citing Shibwatch, Mazrael explained further why nothing is burning on Shibtorch. First, the Shibarium-based burn portal needs 1,000 BONE to trigger a burn. Currently, only 371.37 of the 1,000 BONE needed has been collected, so the contract refuses to start a burn.
Second, the Ethereum half (route) cannot finish. This is because the 'exitandburn' claims SHIB through the bridge's ERC20 lane and the 'rootchainmanager' has not been allowed to release ERC20s from escrow since the 2025 exploit.
Mazrael noted that a potential burn might continue to fail until the bridge for the SHIB route is opened again. He explained the workings of ShibTorch, saying, "First swaps BONE to SHIB on Shibarium then bridges to the dead wallet on ETH.
69.32 billion SHIB burnedWhile the indexer that feeds the Shib.io website information on how much SHIB has been burned through the ShibTorch portal remains unavailable, Mazrael extracts data from the ShibWatch tracker which provides this same data from the contracts instead.
You Might Also Like
Under ecosystem burns, 69.32 billion SHIB has been burned by Shibarium's SHIB Torch, according to ShibWatch. This is worth a total of $1.27 million at the price when each burn happened.
Mazrael believes that ShibTorch might be the biggest burn source for SHIB after Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin.
In May 2021, Buterin sent 410.24 trillion SHIB tokens to dead wallets in one of the largest crypto burns ever. ShibTorch is currently under maintenance, according to Mazrael, as the bridge and other portions of the infrastructure are being worked on.
Trust Wallet uvedla, že nepoužívá PHP, a proto kritické zranitelnosti CVE-2026-109618 a CVE-2026-109619 nemají vliv na její aplikace ani klíčovou infrastrukturu.
Cover image via depositphotos.com Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.
The largest players in the Web3 market have conducted a coordinated campaign to inform investors amid a large-scale internet security crisis. Today, the team behind the Trust Wallet crypto wallet put an end to the growing speculation, officially declaring the complete security of its infrastructure in the face of the critical PHP Shell vulnerability and the potential consequences of this incident.
Trust Wallet clarifies it does not use PHP following a global security alarm, Source: Trust Wallet via X.comThe day before, on October 21, the U.S. National Security Agency (NSA Cyber) issued an emergency warning for organizations using PHP. Two critical flaws were discovered in the core of the language, CVE-2026-109618 and CVE-2026-109619, allowing hackers to execute arbitrary code on a server remotely and without authentication (unauthenticated RCE).
You Might Also Like
HOT Stories
Since a significant part of the classic internet runs on PHP (including WordPress platforms and systems running PHP-FPM), millions of web resources were put at risk. PHP developers promptly released security patches (in versions 8.5.12, 8.4.27, 8.3.36, and 8.2.35), but the panic also affected the cryptocurrency sector, where users are sensitive to any infrastructure risks and to a possible echo of this crisis.
Developers say the panic is unwarrantedTo stop the spread of rumors and completely eliminate speculation around the vulnerability (PHP exploit fallout), Trust Wallet published an official statement on X. In the post, the team directly stated that its applications and key infrastructure are not related to PHP, so the incident does not affect the wallet's clients in any way.
The technology stack of decentralized wallets is isolated from the PHP architecture, so the company's move was preventive. Earlier, similar statements about the absence of PHP in their ecosystems were issued by representatives of BNB Chain and the decentralized exchange PancakeSwap.
You Might Also Like
The situation was noted by Binance founder Changpeng Zhao (CZ), who published a series of posts. He emphasized that most projects should at least publish such confirmations, since silence during global IT outages only gives rise to false rumors and sows panic among users.
No crypto wallet is 100% safe. No software is bug free. No tech is 100% secure. There are risks in everything you do. There are risks if you don't do anything. There will be issues, setbacks and problems to solve. Stay up-to-date. Manage risks. Solve problems.
— CZ 🔶 BNB (@cz_binance) October 22, 2026 At the moment, the only threat to cryptocurrency holders remains the possible activation of phishers, who may use the news backdrop around the vulnerability to send out malicious "security updates."
Počet denně aktivních adres na síti Arbitrum One dosáhl 571 767, což představuje 90denní maximum a mezitýdenní nárůst o 408,2 %. Po 22. říjnu však aktivita polevila.
Arbitrum One just had its busiest day in three months, at least by one measure. Daily active addresses on the Ethereum layer-2 network climbed to 571,767 before activity eased after October 22, The Defiant reported.
The numbers behind the spike
Data from growthepie, updated October 22, 2026, puts daily active addresses at 571.8K. That marks a 90-day high and a 408.2% week-over-week jump.
Transactions told a calmer story. They reached roughly 1.7 million, up 25.7% from the prior week.
That volume was still enough to rank Arbitrum One fifth among the chains growthepie tracks.
Revenue moved in the opposite direction. Chain revenue came in at $19.3K, down 2.4% week-over-week.
DefiLlama’s numbers broadly agree on the headcount. The analytics platform reported 570,079 active addresses as of October 22, 2026, alongside total value locked (TVL) of $1.45B.
Where the activity came from
No single trigger stands out. The research points to broadly heavier network usage rather than one identifiable catalyst.
The biggest contributors to transaction volume were plain native ETH transfers and stablecoin transactions involving USDC.
Stablecoin figures depend on which dashboard you open. Growthepie showed stablecoin supply at $4.39B, down 5.8% week-over-week, while DefiLlama put the stablecoin market cap at around $3.5B.
Context: a choppy year for Arbitrum users
Arbitrum One is one of the leading optimistic rollups on Ethereum. It processes transactions off the main chain and settles them back to Ethereum, which keeps fees lower for users.
Its user counts have swung widely in 2026. Earlier figures from other dashboards showed weekly active addresses ranging from 400K to 1.7M, depending on the exact window measured.
The spike also followed a stretch of lower activity. That base effect helps explain why the week-over-week percentage looks so large: growth from a quiet week always photographs well.
What this means
For investors and builders, the most telling detail is the mismatch between addresses and transactions. When users surge but transactions per user fall, the new arrivals are likely doing very little once they land.
A decline in stablecoin supply on growthepie during a week of rising addresses hints that capital and users were not moving in lockstep.
Arbitrum ranked fifth by transactions among tracked chains, which places it in a crowded field of Ethereum scaling networks fighting for the same users and liquidity.
Three metrics are worth tracking from here: daily active addresses relative to the 571,767 peak, transaction growth against that 1.7 million mark, and whether chain revenue climbs back above $19.3K.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Estefano Gomez. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Arbitrum Foundation otevřela přihlášky do druhého běhu 12týdenního mentoringového programu s Robinhood Chain; nejlepší týmy si rozdělí odměny v hodnotě 100 000 USD.
The Arbitrum Mentorship Program is back for Cohort 2 in collaboration with Robinhood Chain.
Following the success of the first cohort, the Arbitrum Foundation is opening applications for the next group of early-stage teams building the next generation of products on Arbitrum One and Robinhood Chain.
Cohort 2 is a 12-week program built around two things founders need most as they move from early product to scale: access to capital and hands-on support to execute. Selected teams will work closely with mentors, operators, investors, and ecosystem partners throughout the program, with $100K in prizes available for the top-performing teams. The program concludes with Demo Day, where participating teams will present to an audience expected to include 50+ investors.
Applications for Cohort 2 are open until December 6th , 2026.
Building on Cohort 1The first cohort showed what can happen when strong founders get direct access to the right operators, investors, and ecosystem partners early.
More than 900 teams applied for Cohort 1 with ten teams presenting at Demo Day. Since then, Cohort 1 teams have collectively reported raising more than $10M, teams launched across Arbitrum One and Robinhood Chain, and dozens of investor introductions were made throughout the cohort.
Cohort 2 builds on those learnings with a more curated mentor network, closer support around fundraising and go-to-market, earlier investor engagement, and a greater focus on measurable progress throughout the program.
The objective is straightforward: help strong founders build, launch, grow, and raise on Arbitrum.
What Founders Can ExpectCohort 2 is designed around two core pillars: fundraising support and strategic execution.
Fundraising SupportFundraising support starts from the beginning of the program, not just at Demo Day.
Teams will work directly with investors and experienced operators to strengthen how they position their companies, structure their fundraising story, communicate traction, and pitch.
The program will include investment-readiness sessions, investor pitching workshops, pitch reviews, curated introductions to venture funds, and dedicated Demo Day preparation.
Teams will also begin with an internal Demo Day, giving mentors an early view into each company and helping identify the biggest gaps to work on over the following 12 weeks.
By the time founders reach the final Demo Day on the 25th of March 2027, the goal is for them to have a much stronger company story, investor pipeline, pitch, and understanding of what institutional investors are looking for.
Strategic Execution & MentorshipCohort 2 is designed to help founders make meaningful progress on the challenges that matter most to their companies.
Throughout the program, teams will take part in hands-on sessions covering areas such as product strategy, go-to-market, positioning, user acquisition, partnerships, data and growth, tokenomics, stablecoin infrastructure, AI tooling, and building on Robinhood Chain.
Rather than broad lectures, sessions will focus on practical execution and real company challenges, with the aim of helping founders leave with something they can apply directly to their business whether that is a clearer roadmap, growth experiment, partnership strategy, positioning framework, investor deck, or launch plan.
Founders will also work with contributors and teams from across the Arbitrum ecosystem and wider industry, including Robinhood Chain, Pantera, Pendle, Variational, USD.AI, Paxos, Entropy, Offchain Labs, & others alongside the Arbitrum Foundation. Ongoing access to mentors, ecosystem partners, and investors will give teams opportunities to pressure-test ideas, strengthen their companies, and build relationships ahead of Demo Day.
Who Should Apply?The Mentorship Program is designed for ambitious teams that are already building or are committed to building on Arbitrum One or Robinhood Chain.
We are particularly interested in teams that can demonstrate:
A working prototype, MVP, testnet deployment, or early live productPreseed or seed stage teamsA committed founding team with the ability to execute quicklyA clear problem and differentiated product thesisAmbition to build a category-leading companyA commitment to launch or scale on Arbitrum One or Robinhood ChainThe ability to make meaningful product, growth, or fundraising progress during the programTeams do not need to already be deployed on Arbitrum to apply. Founders currently exploring ecosystems can apply if they are prepared to commit to building on Arbitrum One or Robinhood Chain as part of the program.
From Application to Demo DayApplications will be reviewed on an ongoing basis, with selected teams progressing through the review and interview process ahead of the program kickoff. Kick off date for the program is planned for the 5th of January, 2027 and ends with Demo Day on the 25th of March, 2027. Dates are subject to change.
Demo Day will bring together participating teams, investors, ecosystem partners, and mentors, giving founders the opportunity to showcase what they have built and the progress they have made throughout the program.
Cohort 1 was the starting point.
Cohort 2 is about going further: giving founders earlier access to investors, deeper strategic support, and a clearer path from early product to a company that can launch, grow, and raise on Arbitrum One or Robinhood Chain.
Applications are now open.
Legal Disclaimer: Participation is subject to the Arbitrum Mentorship Program Terms and Privacy Notice . Prizes are awarded at the Arbitrum Foundation's sole discretion and are subject to eligibility, KYC and sanctions screening, as well as entering into a legal agreement with the Arbitrum Foundation which may include project exclusivity provisions, milestones or KPIs to unlock the full amount of the prize and investment rights. Program sessions are educational and don't constitute legal, financial, tax or investment advice. The Arbitrum Foundation doesn't guarantee any investment or funding outcome. Dates and program content may change.
Peněženka spojená s americkou vládou přesunula bitcoiny v hodnotě zhruba 1 mld. USD, pocházející z hacku burzy Bitfinex; není jasné, zda šlo o prodej, nebo změnu správce aktiv.
A US gov wallet moved $1B in BTC. Arkham's Miguel Morel breaks down transaction trails, potential sales vs. custody transfers, and reserve policy factors.
A US government-linked wallet just moved about $1 billion in Bitcoin from the Bitfinex hack, and the market wants to know if a sale is coming. Arkham Intelligence CEO Miguel Morel explains what the transaction trail shows, what it can’t show, and why it’s still unclear whether the coins are being sold or moved to a new custodian. He also breaks down how disposal orders and the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve factor in.
Chapters:
00:00 US Government Moves $1B in Bitfinex Hack Bitcoin
00:47 Sale or Custody Change? What the Government Might Be Doing
01:52 How Arkham Labels Government Wallets
03:30 Tracking Bitcoin Treasury Companies Before SEC Filings
05:18 Why Exchanges Like Coinbase Can Be a Black Box
06:26 Segregated Wallets and Tracking MicroStrategy
07:52 How AI Agents Are Using Arkham Today
09:42 Is There Any Privacy Left On-Chain?
12:02 Does Anonymity Help or Hurt Institutional Adoption?
14:12 How Investigators Trace Stolen Funds From Hacks
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
Patrick Green
Patrick Green is an Assistant Producer and Channel Manager on the multimedia team at Bitcoin Magazine, focusing on production, content distribution, and channel strategy across the network.
A longtime Cardano advocate has stepped down from his governance role, citing Sui’s technology and adoption as the reason. In a post on X, he said the Cardano Foundation and others “have not kept up.”
The move makes him the second well-known Cardano voice this year to shift toward Sui.
Why He Is Leaving His Cardano Governance Role #Cardano fam, this is a tough post to put out there but in the faith of transparency and integrity a must.
I have loved my time in the Cardano community and remain a believer but I have decided in my personal best interests to step away.
I still hold $ADA but it is no longer my…
— Chris O 🌎 Crypto Pundit (@TheOCcryptobro) October 22, 2026 He called the post “tough” but said it was necessary “in the faith of transparency and integrity.” He still holds ADA and describes himself as a believer. However, ADA is no longer his largest position.
“Things move fast and frankly @Cardano_CF and others have not kept up.”
He then compared the two networks directly. In his view, Sui’s technology and adoption are “a candid contrast” to Cardano. He added: “It’s not even close.”
As a result, he is stepping down as a DRep, a delegated representative who votes on governance proposals on behalf of ADA holders. He also asked his delegators to redelegate their voting power, since ADA delegated to him will no longer count in governance votes.
Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson replied to the post. “Thanks for your time here, and it was great to get to know you also,” he wrote.
A Second Cardano Voice Turns to SuiThe post follows a similar move by Dan Gambardello, a prominent Cardano analyst and YouTuber. In June, he moved part of his holdings from Cardano into Sui. Around the same time, he warned of a deep lack of support for the Cardano community.
Both shifts came during a difficult year for Cardano. In June, ADA fell below $0.20 for the first time since 2021. Meanwhile, ecosystem projects such as TapTools and Hosky wound down operations.
The price charts reflect the split. Over the past six months, SUI has edged higher while ADA has lost ground. Over 12 months, however, both tokens have fallen sharply.
Cardano (ADA) vs. Sui (SUI) Price Performance. Source: BeInCrypto (ADA, SUI)Pressure on the Cardano Foundation GrowsThe Sui comparison also lands at a sensitive moment for the Cardano Foundation. In June, the community voted down a 7.8 million ADA treasury proposal, which cancelled the Cardano Summit in Singapore. In addition, Foundation CTO Giorgio Zinetti left the organization at the end of August.
Still, a handful of high-profile departures does not prove a broader migration. For now, the shift toward Sui reflects frustration among some long-standing Cardano supporters rather than a measurable move of builders or capital. Hoskinson, for his part, has insisted that Cardano’s best days are ahead. Projects such as the planned Leios scaling upgrade may decide whether the network can win back its critics.
Worldcoin za posledních 24 hodin klesl o více než 7 % poté, co z peněženky spojované s týmem projektu nebo investory rizikového kapitálu bylo prodáno 2,75 milionu tokenů WLD za zhruba 1,61 milionu USD.
Worldcoin [WLD] is trending down after hitting a strong resistance level at the $0.60 zone. Consequently, the price of WLD has fallen over 7% in the past 24 hours at press time, reducing its weekly gains to 14%.
The drawdown stems from aggressive selling by the WLD team and other market participants, along with generally weak trading activity.
Why is Worldcoin crashing?
The most significant selling activity came from a wallet linked to Worldcoin’s team or venture capital (VC) investors. According to Arkham data, the wallet recently sold 2.75 million WLD worth approximately $1.61 million on Binance.
Before the sale, the wallet conducted a small test transaction of around 10 WLD tokens. This followed a larger transaction roughly six days earlier, when 7.745 million WLD, valued at nearly $4 million, was sold.
Source: Arkham
As a result, the Spot Taker CVD has turned red over the past two weeks, as per data from CryptoQuant. The daily trading volume was also exceeding $408 million, hinting at why the token’s price was falling. This indicates that most participants were selling the token after buying pressure subsided on the 9th of this month.
Additionally, the network was seeing a decline in activity, as seen in the chain fees, which were at $641 at press time.
Moreover, the DEX and Perps Volume have collapsed from levels experienced at the start of this month. For instance, Perps volume has dropped from $634K to $88.3K, while DEX volume has been averaging about $500K per day.
Source: DefiLlama
Still, WLD’s move was consistent with a broader cooling in altcoin sentiment. The Altcoin Season Index dropped from 62 to 58, indicating alts were losing capital.
Is WLD headed toward the $0.46 support zone?
On the charts, the bears rejected WLD at $0.60, a zone that capped the altcoin’s uptrend for the fourth time. This resulted in the altcoin entering a sideways range that has lasted for almost a month.
The Volume Delta reading reinforces this selling activity, showing that traders sold 6.85 million WLD.
The Bull Bear Power (BBP) confirmed bears were gaining strength as it flipped red. But from the market structure outlook, the mid-level at $0.53 may mitigate the downside risk.
Source: TradingView
Therefore, WLD may trade down to $0.46, where bulls have held strong against breakdowns four times. If the pressure selling increases, then WLD may lose $0.46 as support and find $0.40, which is the next demand zone.
Final Summary
Worldcoin declined by about 7% in the past 24 hours as selling pressure from the team and other market participants mounted.
WLD was rejected off the $0.60 resistance zone, and the range pattern hints it may fall to $0.46.
Olenox plánuje rozšířit flotilu zařízení pro těžbu Bitcoinu zhruba z 9 700 na 20 000 zařízení a cílí na vlastní elektřinu za 0,015 USD/kWh oproti současným 0,06 USD/kWh.
Company targets expansion from approximately 9,700 to 20,000 miners, supported by self-generated power strategy targeting a 75% lower electricity rate
CONROE, TX / ACCESS Newswire / October 22, 2026 / Olenox Industries Inc. (NASDAQ:OLOX) ("Olenox" or the "Company"), an integrated energy and infrastructure company, today outlined the next planned phase of its gas-to-power-to-compute strategy: establishing lower-cost electricity, potentially relocating existing Bitcoin miners to that power supply and looking at opportunities to expand its mining fleet.
Olenox is targeting an expansion from approximately 9,700 to 20,000 miners -- more than doubling its fleet -- supported by its strategy to develop lower-cost, self-generated power. Expansion remains subject to its ability to raise substantial financing, power availability, equipment procurement and project execution.
Building on its recent acquisitions, Olenox is evaluating its Wildboy natural-gas platform in British Columbia and its Pecos-area energy platform in Texas as potential locations for self-generated power and mining deployments. If feasible, the plan would connect the Company's expanding energy platform with its established mining business, creating a path to capture more value from both.
Olenox is targeting an electricity rate of approximately $0.015 per kilowatt-hour ("kWh"), compared with approximately $0.06 per kWh under its current operating arrangements. If achieved on a comparable, all-in delivered-cost basis, the target would represent a 75% reduction in the electricity rate -- a potential operating advantage the Company intends to pursue across its existing fleet and future deployments.
"Our strategy has been to bring energy resources, power generation and computing together within Olenox. This plan outlines how we intend to put those capabilities to work," said Mike McLaren, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Olenox. "Our first priority is to establish lower-cost power, then potentially relocate existing miners to that power supply and look to build on that foundation to expand the fleet. That connection between our energy business and our computing operations is central to the long-term value we are working to create."
The Company's plan is structured in three phases. The first focuses on establishing access to lower-cost, self-generated electricity through Olenox's energy platforms. The Company is evaluating generation equipment, fuel supply, infrastructure requirements and site readiness to determine the most attractive deployment locations and validate the complete cost of delivering power to its mining operations.
The second phase involves possibly relocating eligible mining equipment currently operating in Texas to sites supplied by that lower-cost power. The objective is to apply the targeted power-cost advantage to Olenox's existing fleet, strengthening the operating foundation for future growth. Relocation decisions will depend on power availability, infrastructure readiness, relocation expenses and overall operating economics.
The third phase focuses on expanding the fleet toward 20,000 miners, building on the power infrastructure established in the earlier phases. The Company intends to deploy additional machines where Company-controlled energy resources can support competitive operating costs.
The Company's ability to execute on any of the three phases is contingent upon a variety of factors, including, but not limited to, raising substantial funds, determining power availability, the ability to purchase the necessary equipment, and successfully implementing each step necessary to achieve the desired result.
Generating electricity at or near the mining site, commonly referred to as "behind-the-meter" generation, could reduce exposure to certain grid-related charges and provide greater control over power supply. For Olenox, the approach would also create an additional use for its natural-gas resources, connecting energy production directly with computing demand.
The contemplated mining power capacity is not being represented as currently operational or available. In order to generate the contemplated mining power capacity, the Company needs to add and deploy enough generators to increase total capacity to 75 MW. There is no guarantee the Company will be able to achieve any or all of these prerequisites. The $0.015-per-kWh electricity rate and 20,000-machine fleet are targets, not achieved operating results. The targeted 75% reduction applies to the electricity rate and does not represent a corresponding increase in profitability. Actual economics will depend on fuel costs, generation efficiency, equipment and infrastructure investment, maintenance, relocation expenses, uptime and other operating requirements.
About Olenox Industries Inc.
Olenox Industries Inc. (NASDAQ:OLOX) is an integrated energy and infrastructure company focused on acquiring, developing and operating assets across the oil and natural gas, energy services, power generation, modular infrastructure and digital-compute sectors. Through its subsidiaries, Olenox is building a vertically integrated platform designed to connect energy resources with power-intensive infrastructure while delivering engineered and modular solutions across industrial markets.
Forward-Looking Statements
Certain statements contained in this press release constitute "forward-looking statements" within the meaning of the federal securities laws. Words such as "may," "might," "will," "should," "believe," "expect," "anticipate," "estimate," "continue," "predict," "forecast," "project," "plan," "intend," "potential" or similar expressions generally identify forward-looking statements.
These forward-looking statements include, without limitation, statements concerning the implementation and sequencing of the Company's three-phase strategy; targeted electricity rates and potential cost reductions; the relocation of mining equipment; expansion toward a fleet of 20,000 miners; the development and availability of behind-the-meter power generation; the anticipated benefits and integration of acquired assets; the development of gas-powered digital infrastructure; and the Company's future business, operations and financial performance.
Forward-looking statements are based on current estimates, expectations and assumptions and are subject to risks and uncertainties that could cause actual results to differ materially. These risks include, among others, volatility in Bitcoin prices and network difficulty; changes in mining economics; the availability, cost and reliability of natural gas and electrical power; generation efficiency; equipment performance and fleet utilization; infrastructure and relocation costs; permitting and construction requirements; the availability and terms of financing; the Company's ability to integrate acquired assets and execute its growth strategy; regulatory developments; the Company's ability to maintain compliance with Nasdaq listing requirements; and other risks described in the Company's filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including its most recent Annual Report on Form 10-K and subsequent reports filed with the SEC.
Readers are cautioned not to place undue reliance on forward-looking statements. The information in this release is provided only as of its date, and Olenox undertakes no obligation to update any forward-looking statement except as required by law.
Uniswap v4 spustil Aggregator Hooks, které do poolů zapojují externí likviditu včetně Curve, Fluid a PancakeSwap; swapy se vypořádávají v jediné transakci bez nutnosti dalších schválení.
Uniswap Labs announced that Aggregator Hooks is now live, enabling Uniswap v4’s aggregation functionality. The mechanism wraps external liquidity sources into v4 pools via Hooks, allowing any routing to treat these as standard Uniswap pools. The feature is now available on Uniswap’s web interface and API, supporting Ethereum Mainnet, Base, and Robinhood Chain, with additional networks set to be added later. On launch day, seven external liquidity sources are supported, including Curve, Fluid, and PancakeSwap. Per block, routing pulls the latest quotes from integrated sources, constructs the optimal path between Uniswap pools and external sources for swaps, and settles trades in a single transaction—no additional approvals required. Uniswap noted that while most on-chain liquidity resides on its platform, new liquidity may still emerge elsewhere. After integrating external sources into v4, swaps routed through these sources will incur protocol fees, which contribute to UNI token burns.
OKX Europe Limited zveřejnila bílou knihu MiCA pro SEI, která umožňuje obchodování s tokenem SEI na její platformě ve 30 zemích EHP. Nejde o regulatorní schválení.
A MiCA white paper for Sei Network's $SEI token has been filed by OKX Europe Limited, covering 30 EEA countries. It is a disclosure, not regulatory approval.
A MiCA white paper for Sei Network's $SEI token has been filed for public record in Europe by OKX (@okx) Europe Limited. The document supports the admission of SEI to trading on OKX's platform and covers 30 countries in the European Economic Area (EEA). It sets out the token's utility, risks and holder rights. The filing is a disclosure, not regulatory approval.
What the SEI white paper coversThe white paper is published by OKX Europe Limited, not by the SEI project itself. According to the document hosted by OKX, the white paper is published solely in connection with the admission to trading of SEI on the exchange's platform. It also states that no public offer of SEI tokens is being made and that the admission involves no subscription, sale or fundraising process.
The paper includes a section on risks, including those tied to the admission to trading. It names OKX Europe Limited as an authorised crypto-asset service provider (CASP) operating in the European Union. OKX says its MiCA licence from the Malta Financial Services Authority dates from 27 January 2025 and gives it access to all 30 EEA countries, which is why the SEI filing reaches the same footprint.
Why a filing is not an approvalUnder the EU's Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA), white papers for most crypto-assets are subject to notification rather than prior approval. Law firm CMS notes that competent authorities must not require any prior approval for crypto-asset white papers before their publication. The notified information is passed to the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), which makes the white paper available in a public register.
MiCA also requires a disclaimer on the document. The SEI white paper states that it has not been approved by any competent authority in any EU Member State and that OKX Europe Limited is solely responsible for its content. ESMA has itself noted that investors should not overrate the protection MiCA provides, and has since proposed clarifying when a white paper counts as "duly notified" in its response to the European Commission's review of the rules.
For $SEI holders and traders in Europe, the filing is a transparency step tied to the token's availability on a MiCA-licensed venue. It does not amount to a regulatory endorsement of Sei Network (@SeiNetwork) or of the token.
SourcesOKX: Sei (SEI) crypto-asset white paper
CMS: EU regulation mandates crypto-asset white paper
ESMA: Response to the EC consultation on the MiCA review
Coinbase Derivatives 24. října 2026 od 5:00 CT přibližně na devět hodin přeruší obchodování s futures a perpetual futures kontrakty kvůli plánované údržbě.
Coinbase Derivatives, the regulated futures exchange operated by Coinbase, will temporarily halt trading this weekend to conduct scheduled maintenance. The interruption is set for Saturday, October 24, 2026, at 5:00 AM CT and is expected to last approximately nine hours.
Futures Trading Temporarily UnavailableCoinbase Markets announced the upcoming maintenance on its X account, specifying that trading for both futures and perpetual futures contracts will be paused during this window. While users will not be able to execute trades involving these derivatives products, account access will not be affected, allowing customers to monitor balances and other account activities without disruption.
Coinbase Markets has directed users seeking live updates to its status page, urging both traders and institutional clients to prepare for the brief outage. Industry observers view these scheduled maintenance periods as integral for infrastructure reliability and regulatory compliance.
Adjustments to Asset Offerings and ListingsCoinbase recently suspended trading for Blast (BLAST), giving users until October 26, 2026, to move their BLAST holdings in anticipation of the Blast network’s upcoming shutdown. The company has also added Axis Robotics (AXIS) to its trading platform, while Pearl (PEARL) and Stable (STABLE) were included in its asset roadmap, indicating potential near-term listings.
Further reviews resulted in Coinbase announcing the suspension of trading for Neon EVM (NEON) and Syndicate (SYND) on November 16, 2026, at 2:00 PM ET. After this date, these tokens will be delisted from Coinbase Simple and Advanced Trade, Coinbase Exchange, and Coinbase Prime. Coinbase will also suspend trading for Balancer (BAL) and Tensor (TNSR) on November 9, 2026, and for Stargate Finance (STG) and Vulcan Forged (PYR) on November 6, 2026, both at 2:00 PM ET.
Expansion of Perpetual Futures and New ListingsIn October 2026, Coinbase and Deribit introduced six new equity perpetual futures markets—CRWV, ORCL, SOXS, DELL, PLTR, and SNXX—broadening investment options for users interested in equity derivatives. Additionally, PONS and CASHCAT perpetual futures markets launched for both retail and institutional traders on Coinbase, Coinbase Advanced, and Deribit, available in select jurisdictions.
Coinbase’s ongoing commitment to diversifying its asset offerings was also underscored by adding Pons (PONS), Data (DATA), and Whuffie (WHUF) to its trading platform and app. These new listings enable users to buy, sell, convert, send, receive, or store the assets, enhancing access to a broader selection of tokens.
Coinbase’s platform update schedule and asset management policies remain active, as evidenced by its recent listing announcements and maintenance downtime designed to improve trading reliability and customer experience.
Given these technical changes and frequent listing updates, market participants have increasingly turned to platforms that aggregate information and provide real-time alerts. In the meme token market, an internet trend can transform into millions of dollars of interest within days. According to data shared by Fomo App, a trade involving “Niu Lai”—which turned an initial $99 investment into approximately $370,000—stands out as a striking example of this activity. In this market, tracking not only prices but also the timing and token choices of investors is crucial. Fomo App brings token discovery and trading together on a single platform, featuring social feeds, investor rankings, and trade notifications. Discover Fomo App to follow the world of meme tokens alongside investor activity.
In brief Prosecutors in Tianjin have applied to confiscate 61,896 BTC and other assets linked to Zhimin Qian, and a local court has accepted the case. Qian allegedly raised more than 40 billion yuan from the public between 2014 and 2017, leaving more than 102,000 investors with losses. The assets are held in the UK, where the High Court ruled this month that Chinese law should govern victims' claims to the Bitcoin. Prosecutors in China have applied to confiscate the 61,896 BTC seized from Zhimin Qian in the UK, and a court in Tianjin has agreed to hear the case, according to a court notice reported by Chinese outlet The Paper.
The Bitcoin is worth about $5.1 billion at its current price of around $82,000.
The Tianjin No. 2 Intermediate People's Court said it accepted the application from the city's prosecutors on September 28, and published a notice on October 13. The court said there was evidence that Qian had committed fundraising fraud, mainly in Tianjin's Hedong district.
Besides the Bitcoin, prosecutors are seeking about 72,746 units each of Bitcoin Cash, Bitcoin Gold and Bitcoin SV, around 3.6 million XRP, and some 70 million Dogecoin, which UK authorities have already converted and placed in an interest-bearing account. The application also covers U.S. dollar, euro and pound cash, jewelry, bank balances and investment portfolios.
According to the prosecutors' application, Qian was the controller of Tianjin Lantian Gerui Electronic Technology, and between April 2014 and August 2017 sold fake wealth management products across China without a license, promising guaranteed returns. The scheme raised more than 40.38 billion yuan, most of which was not used for any genuine business, and left more than 102,000 investors with losses totaling about 19.98 billion yuan, prosecutors said.
Qian fled China in July 2017 with computers holding Bitcoin wallets and eventually reached the UK, where she converted some of the coins into other assets.
Prosecutors argue the seized assets are proceeds of crime that should be recovered, returned to victims, and otherwise confiscated. Because Qian has been a wanted fugitive for more than a year, the case falls under Chinese rules that allow confiscation without the suspect present.
Victims can apply to join the proceedings through a WeChat mini-program, though those who do not will still be able to receive repayments from any recovered assets. The notice period runs for six months, after which the court will hear the case.
Myriad: How high will Bitcoin go? Click to make your prediction.The UK caseQian was jailed for 11 years and eight months in the UK in November 2025, after pleading guilty to acquiring and possessing criminal property. Unnamed Treasury officials had privately raised whether the seized Bitcoin could help fill a shortfall in the UK's public finances, the Financial Times reported at the time, while legal experts argued that victims could be entitled to compensation if they could show a sufficient link to the coins.
Weeks after Qian's guilty plea, UK prosecutors told the High Court they were planning a compensation scheme for victims, without giving details. They have since said victims could be compensated through a redress scheme run from China.
On October 12, the High Court ruled that Chinese law should govern thousands of victims' claims to the coins, a decision seen as improving the UK government's chances of keeping them. Law firm Fieldfisher, which represents the claimants, said it is seeking to appeal.
The ruling does not decide whether the victims own the Bitcoin, since no evidence has yet been heard on the content of Chinese law, David Phillips, a dispute resolution partner at London law firm SMB, wrote on Wednesday. But it shows that "a victim cannot necessarily recover cryptocurrency simply by proving: 'That Bitcoin was bought with money taken from me,'" he wrote.
"Cryptoassets may operate without borders, but proprietary rights in them remain capable of raising intensely territorial questions of applicable law," Phillips added.
Daily Debrief NewsletterStart every day with the top news stories right now, plus original features, a podcast, videos and more.
Join 72,000+ readers
Create an account to save your articles.
Add on Google
Add Decrypt as your preferred source to see more of our stories on Google.
Strategy v období od 14. září do 18. října vynaložila téměř 888 mil. USD na zpětný odkup prioritních akcií, zatímco za 290 mil. USD nakoupila 3 466 BTC.
Strategy has prioritized bolstering its capital base rather than accelerating the purchase of Bitcoin [BTC], using approximately three times more for preferred stock repurchases.
From the 14th of September to the 18th of October, Strategy purchased nearly $888 million worth of its own preferred stock. During that same time frame, it acquired an additional 3,466 Bitcoins at a cost of approximately $290 million.
Although Strategy may be able to reduce future obligations related to dividends, the reduced rate of growth in Treasury holdings is likely to continue.
Source: Santiment
The weekly purchases of Bitcoin declined dramatically from 1,665 in late September to only 267 by the middle of October, while the amount spent by Strategy on buybacks grew to $193.1 million.
This spending switch led to a significant decline in Strategy’s cash reserves from $1.3 billion to $447.3 million.
Whale accumulation outpaces Strategy’s Bitcoin buying
Over roughly a one-month period, large whale buyers accumulated 88,987 Bitcoins, while Strategy purchased only 3,466. This difference illustrates that large whales are currently accumulating significantly more Bitcoin than Strategy is directly contributing to overall demand.
Source: Santiment
However, Strategy’s ability to resume larger purchases depends increasingly on its preferred-stock financing strategy. In fact, Strategy has already expanded its authorization to spend $3 billion on buybacks and has used approximately $1.84 billion of those funds.
Currently, STRC trades for around $99.20 per share and offers a 12% annualized dividend. These commitments may limit the amount of Bitcoin that strategy can purchase going forward should Strategy’s cash reserves continue to dwindle.
Source: Strategy
Meanwhile, exchange reserves edged up from 2.67 million to 2.68 million BTC, suggesting some supply remains available. Sustained accumulation will depend on financing flexibility, dividend coverage, and continued institutional demand.
MSTR outperforms Bitcoin as STRC holds near par
While Strategy has prioritized preferred-stock buybacks over Bitcoin purchases, its market performance reveals how investors value its different securities.
For example, after Bitcoin recovered on the 21st of October, MSTR moved upward by 7.54% to trade at $153.48. However, Bitcoin only experienced a gain of 2.07%.
Source: X
This stronger move suggests investors responded more sharply to Bitcoin’s recovery through Strategy’s leveraged equity exposure. Coinbase also rose 3.65%, while BlackRock’s IBIT gained 2.42%, reflecting broader strength across crypto-linked investments.
Both represented positive performance for other crypto-linked investment vehicles. Conversely, STRC traded higher by only .50% to reach $99.20, remaining very close to its par value of $100.
While STRC’s 12% annualized dividend provides attractive support for income-focused investors, this support limits price movements relative to MSTR.
MSTR’s outperformance highlights stronger near-term equity demand but does not prove Strategy can sustainably finance larger Bitcoin purchases.
Final Summary
Strategy spent $888 million on buybacks versus $291 million on Bitcoin, draining cash reserves.
Strategy trailed whale accumulation, as future Bitcoin buying depends on liquidity and financing.
Webull plánuje v listopadu 2026 zpřístupnit způsobilým klientům v USA perpetuální futures na Bitcoin od KalshiEX prostřednictvím účtů Webull Futures. Kontrakt BTCPERP je vypořádáván v hotovosti a nemá datum expirace.
Webull plans to put Kalshi’s regulated perpetual futures in front of eligible American brokerage customers in November. The contract never expires, but funding, margin and a separate clearinghouse still determine what a position costs and when it closes.
Summary
Webull announced an initial November rollout on October 20, 2026. The CFTC approved Kalshi’s BTCPERP contract on May 29. Kalshi says funding adjustments occur 3 times each day in its app. Webull expects wider access before the end of 2026. The initial lineup includes Bitcoin and selected crypto assets, subject to listing requirements. Webull has announced plans to offer Bitcoin and other crypto perpetual futures to eligible U.S. customers starting in November.
The company’s October 20 release identifies KalshiEX as the exchange and Kalshi Klear as the clearinghouse. Customers approved for futures trading would use existing Webull Futures accounts. Webull has not published the exact launch day, the full asset list or the initial margin schedule for every contract.
For a brokerage customer familiar with stock options or conventional futures, the unfamiliar feature is the absence of expiry. The position can remain open as long as margin obligations are met. It is not a permanent right to hold exposure without fresh cash demands: funding transfers, price moves and maintenance requirements continue while the trade is alive.
November will put an existing contract on a new front end The Commodity Futures Trading Commission approved KalshiEX’s Bitcoin perpetual contract on May 29. Its approval announcement describes BTCPERP as a futures contract referencing Bitcoin’s spot price. Kalshi brought the product to market in June; the coming Webull rollout changes distribution, not the original approval date or the underlying nature of the contract.
Webull says the first offering will include Bitcoin and selected crypto assets. Future additions depend on regulatory review and exchange listing requirements. Its statement gives no basis to promise that every coin a customer can trade on an offshore venue will appear in a Webull Futures account. Wider availability before year-end is a company expectation, not a confirmed national opening for every account holder.
The first Kalshi Bitcoin perp coverage described the May regulatory decision, while Kalshi’s subsequent launch established that the contract was already available on the exchange. Webull adds a separate brokerage relationship and a much more familiar interface for investors whose accounts already hold other products.
KalshiEX is a designated contract market supervised by the CFTC. Kalshi Klear is a registered derivatives clearing organization. Webull provides the customer-facing brokerage route through futures-approved accounts. Those names are not interchangeable. An investor placing an order through Webull is trading an exchange-listed derivative that is cleared at a separate regulated entity; the asset displayed on a Webull screen is not Bitcoin held in a spot wallet.
JUST IN: Kalshi files with the CFTC for equity index perpetual futures
The products would allow leveraged long or short positions on major indexes pic.twitter.com/33F2cExZx9
— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) August 19, 2026 The cash flows do not resemble a spot Bitcoin purchase A Bitcoin spot buyer pays for coins and then owns an asset subject to custody arrangements. A BTCPERP trader posts collateral for a cash-settled futures position. The CFTC’s Kalshi product filing says the contract has no fixed expiration and settles in cash. Price exposure, margin and funding determine the account’s economic result; a trader does not receive onchain BTC merely because the futures price rises.
Conventional dated futures converge through expiration or are rolled to another maturity. A perpetual contract lacks that scheduled endpoint. Its funding mechanism transfers value between long and short positions according to exchange rules so the derivative price stays tethered to the underlying reference. Funding can change over time. A directionally correct view of Bitcoin’s eventual price can still lose money if carrying costs, intraday losses or forced liquidation overwhelm the account before the move arrives.
Kalshi’s educational material says its own application adjusts funding 3 times per day. That information describes the exchange’s current product documentation, not a promise that Webull will present every calculation or notification in an identical way. Before trading, a customer would need the actual contract specifications, funding formula, fee schedule and the timing of cash movements applicable to the position being opened.
Consider a simplified illustration without assuming the live margin rates. A customer has $1,000 in collateral and opens a $5,000 long exposure. A 5% fall in the futures price represents a $250 trading loss before fees and funding, or one quarter of the initial collateral. A 5% rise would yield the same gross gain, but leverage magnifies both directions. The account can face a maintenance call or liquidation before any full 5% move depending on the exchange’s actual thresholds, collateral and interim funding. The numbers illustrate arithmetic, not Webull’s announced leverage limit.
An approved contract is not approval for every client Webull states that initial access is for eligible U.S. customers approved for futures trading. Existing Webull stock or crypto access does not imply a futures account is approved. Futures products have separate disclosures, suitability or account-opening procedures, margin obligations and jurisdictional rules. The company has not disclosed how many existing customers meet its criteria.
Kalshi’s contract approval addressed exchange listing under CFTC Regulation 40.3. The exchange must operate under designated-contract-market obligations and its clearinghouse under a distinct derivatives regime. Brokerage access adds customer onboarding and the futures commission merchant relationship. Those layers do not vanish because the trade is shown alongside stocks and options in one application.
The arrival of Kraken’s U.S. crypto perps and the Coinbase route to global perp liquidity show that Webull is entering a market with multiple structures. Some products trade on U.S. designated exchanges; others route through arrangements involving foreign futures under CFTC staff guidance. Treating every offering labeled a perpetual as the same regulated contract would obscure differences in venue, custody, margin and legal claim.
There is a distinction even within Kalshi’s business. The company operates event contracts as well as crypto derivatives. Its Bitcoin perpetual is a futures contract referencing spot Bitcoin, approved under a specific CFTC order. A dispute about how states regulate sports event contracts does not change that instrument’s reference price, funding mechanism or futures-clearing architecture.
Funding can turn a winning direction into a losing trade Perpetual funding is often described as a small regular adjustment. Small rates compound when a position stays open, and a temporary spike can make holding expensive precisely when leveraged traders crowd into one direction. The funding payment is separate from the profit or loss caused by Bitcoin’s price movement. An account statement that combines them without explanation can give an incomplete account of why equity changed.
Suppose a $10,000 notional position pays an illustrative 0.01% funding rate at each of 3 daily intervals. The payments would total $3 a day, or $90 across 30 days if both notional and rate were constant. They rarely remain constant. At 0.10% per interval, the same calculation becomes $30 daily and $900 over 30 days. Neither figure is a forecast of Kalshi funding. The exercise shows why an advertised zero-expiry position has a continuing price even when the displayed BTC price is flat.
Margin creates a second clock. A long position can lose collateral as the market falls. If account equity drops below maintenance requirements, a liquidation process can close the position, leaving a trader unable to wait for a recovery. Kalshi’s margin explanation describes isolated margin in its own application. The account-level implementation and any brokerage-specific settings must be checked in the product terms when Webull goes live.
Kalshi and Webull emphasize regulated infrastructure and visibility into liquidation levels. Those features make a risk measurable, not absent. An investor can compare the maintenance requirement and expected funding payments before entering, then watch the live balance instead of assuming an evergreen contract can be left alone. The exchange’s rulebook, clearing notices and Webull’s customer disclosures will provide the controlling details.
The case for bringing perps into a brokerage Webull’s U.S. chief Anthony Denier cited substantial global demand for perpetual futures in the company’s announcement, stating annual volume exceeded $90 trillion in 2025. That is Webull’s industry estimate, not a volume figure for its planned November launch or for Kalshi’s Bitcoin contract. The argument for integration is straightforward: investors who already use a regulated futures account could reach an exchange-listed version without moving to an offshore venue.
A separate clearinghouse can net and manage obligations under established derivatives rules, while an approved customer sees information on margin and funding through a broker. Webull says access would sit beside other futures in the account, with stocks, options, spot crypto and event products elsewhere on its platform. The ability to see several assets in one application can simplify navigation, although consolidated presentation does not merge their protections or settlement methods.
Competition is real. Kalshi’s expansion into additional crypto perps gives Webull more than one prospective underlying; Kraken and Coinbase have their own client bases and liquidity routes. If regulated U.S. order books deepen, traders may have more choices about spreads, collateral, hours and execution. The announcement by itself supplies no comparative pricing data showing Webull will be cheaper or more liquid than its rivals.
The counterargument is that offshore venues have years of liquidity, deep order books and familiar collateral practices. A new brokerage distribution channel cannot recreate those conditions on launch day. Volume at a venue is not the same as open interest, and an exchange-wide figure says little about a specific contract’s depth at a volatile hour. The first published trading statistics after Webull launches will give a firmer basis for judging whether new access produces durable activity.
Price formation and the funding reference deserve scrutiny A cash-settled Bitcoin future needs a reference for the underlying spot price. The exchange’s specifications determine the index or calculation, funding intervals, disruption procedures and settlement-related payments. Even an investor whose view is on Bitcoin rather than the derivative has exposure to those contract rules while the position is open.
The spread between perpetual and reference price can widen in a fast market. Funding encourages convergence over time, but it does not guarantee a perp always trades at the exact spot price. Market makers can quote both directions when hedging is available; a thin book can produce a worse fill or a liquidation at a different price from a casual view of the reference chart. The customer’s execution price, reference level and funding rate need to be treated as separate observations.
On a 24-hour market, risk controls must operate outside conventional stock-market hours. Crypto moves on weekends; maintenance margin still applies while U.S. equities are closed. A brokerage user who assumes trades will pause when stock exchanges do may misunderstand the product. Webull has not yet published its precise launch timetable or any product-specific maintenance-window schedule for the new distribution route.
The CFTC approved Kalshi’s BTCPERP after reviewing the filing, but regulatory approval is not a government assessment that a leveraged position is suitable for every investor. Approval concerns the exchange-listed contract and applicable market rules. Customer eligibility, financing cost and individual losses belong to a different decision at the brokerage and account level.
JUST IN: CFTC approves BTCPERP as its first regulated perpetual futures contract. The approval relies on precedent that futurity does not require a fixed final delivery date pic.twitter.com/c7LXxNVNlC
— crypto.news (@cryptodotnews) June 16, 2026 What remains unannounced before November One unresolved question concerns exactly what a trader sees when the collateral in a futures account changes. The exchange calculates margin against its own rules, the clearer manages obligations after a trade, and Webull displays account figures to the customer. Those processes can be presented in one interface but are not the same calculation. A position-level screen needs to distinguish available cash, initial margin, maintenance margin, unrealized profit or loss and accrued funding. The company says it intends to give users visibility into funding, leverage and liquidation levels; the live display has yet to be observed.
An account holder comparing two perps should look at the units in which prices and funding are quoted. A percentage funding rate applies to a notional exposure, not merely to the dollars posted as collateral. In the earlier $5,000 example, a 0.10% funding charge would be $5 for one interval even if the customer put up only $1,000. Quoting that $5 as 0.10% of collateral would understate its effect fivefold. Changes in notional value or position size change the cash payment, so a flat historical funding rate is not an adequate forecast of carrying cost.
The clearing structure has a role when one side of a trade cannot pay. A registered clearinghouse maintains rules for collecting margin and handling defaults between participants. Its presence can reduce bilateral counterparty exposure within that system, but it does not insure a customer’s trading losses or promise a favorable fill during stressed conditions. The trade remains leveraged and can be closed by the applicable liquidation mechanism. A useful post-launch comparison would examine the actual customer agreement and exchange rulebook rather than assuming that the word regulated describes every risk a position faces.
There is an additional question about how the first audience is selected. Webull has said the initial group consists of eligible, approved futures customers. The number of such accounts is undisclosed, as is the fraction Webull intends to activate in November. Even if the exchange lists several underlying assets, the broker can stage customer access. First-week order flow is therefore a joint measure of exchange liquidity and distribution choices, not a clean measure of American appetite for Bitcoin perps overall.
Webull has given a month, not a date. It named Bitcoin but left its other starting assets unspecified. The company promised wider availability before year-end without disclosing how many eligible clients will receive access in the first stage. No launch-day bid-ask spread, open interest or Webull customer volume exists to measure yet.
The primary documents establish a sequence: CFTC approval in May, Kalshi trading beginning in June, and Webull’s distribution announcement in October for a November rollout. They do not establish that Webull will create a new Bitcoin futures contract, change the exchange’s margin rules or deliver Bitcoin into customer wallets. A prudent analysis of the planned product starts with the contract specifications and ends with the first observable account terms and market data.
Webull says eligible users will trade through their Webull Futures accounts. The exchange and clearinghouse are KalshiEX and Kalshi Klear, respectively. Its October 20 release says additional products will follow only subject to regulatory review and exchange listing requirements.
What to watch First trading day: Webull’s launch notice should identify the actual start date and customer eligibility. Contract list: Exchange notices will establish which assets beyond Bitcoin are initially available. Funding and fees: Published specifications can show the true cost of maintaining exposure through several funding intervals. Margin disclosures: Initial and maintenance requirements determine how far a position can move before intervention. Liquidity: Contract volume, spreads and open interest after launch can show whether brokerage distribution brings sustained trading. FAQ When will Webull offer Bitcoin perpetual futures? Webull says the initial rollout begins in November 2026, with wider availability expected before year-end. It had not published an exact launch date as of October 22.
Who can trade the new contracts? The company says access begins with eligible U.S. customers approved for futures trading through Webull Futures accounts. A standard stock account alone does not establish eligibility.
Does the Bitcoin contract ever expire? Kalshi’s BTCPERP has no fixed expiration date. Funding and margin obligations continue while a position remains open.
Do traders receive actual Bitcoin? No. The CFTC filing describes a cash-settled futures contract referencing Bitcoin’s spot price. A futures position is not a spot Bitcoin withdrawal.
Who lists and clears Webull’s perpetual futures? KalshiEX lists the contracts, and Kalshi Klear clears them. Webull provides the brokerage access described in its October 20 announcement.
What is a funding payment? It is a periodic transfer linked to the perp’s price relative to its reference. The payment is distinct from gains and losses caused by a move in Bitcoin itself.
Can a position be liquidated before Bitcoin recovers? Yes. If account equity falls below maintenance requirements, the exchange’s rules can trigger liquidation even though the contract itself has no expiry.
Is November’s full coin lineup known? No. Webull named Bitcoin and selected crypto assets but did not publish a complete starting list. Additional products depend on review and listing requirements. This is educational analysis, not investment advice.
Disclaimer: This article is for information and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Figures reflect regulatory filings and reporting available at the time of writing and change with each disclosure. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any security or asset. Always do your own research. Information is accurate as of October 22, 2026.
Hodnota tokenizovaných aktiv na XRP Ledger dosáhla ve 2. čtvrtletí 2026 v průměru 3,72 miliardy USD, což představuje více než třicetinásobný meziroční nárůst. Průměrný zůstatek RLUSD vzrostl o 642 % na 539 milionů USD.
The XRP Ledger now handles close to 3 million transactions per day and holds about 8.2 million accounts. It is also being used more for stablecoins, trading and tokenized assets.
The mix of activity is changing. The network processed 222.4 million transactions in Q2 2026, its second-highest quarter on record. Yet daily active accounts fell.
At the same time, order-book trading rose 79% year over year in Q2. The average value of tokenized assets on the network reached about $3.72 billion, and adding RLUSD lifted that to about $4.26 billion.
This article reviews the main XRP Ledger statistics for 2026 using data from Blockworks, Evernorth, DefiLlama, Bitquery and others. Providers measure activity in different ways, so we explain how each figure is counted.
XRP Ledger Statistics at a Glance Table of Contents
The table below collects the main figures for 2026. The source is listed for each one.
Metric Figure Source Total accounts About 8.2 million XRPL analytics New accounts, first half of 2026 About 490,000 XRPL analytics Q1 2026 transactions About 238 million (record) Blockworks Q2 2026 transactions 222.4 million Evernorth Current daily transactions About 2.9 million DefiLlama Payment share of Q1 transactions 51.3% Blockworks Q2 DEX volume per day 4.42 million XRP Evernorth Order-book volume growth, Q2 +79% year over year Evernorth Stablecoin market cap Above $1.1 billion DefiLlama Average RLUSD balance, Q2 $539 million Evernorth Average tokenized assets, Q2 $3.72 billion Evernorth Transactions since launch About 5.06 billion Bitquery XRP burned through fees About 14.4 million XRPL Dashboard There is no single accepted definition of an active account, a DEX trade or a tokenized asset. That is why figures from different providers can look far apart.
How Many XRP Ledger Accounts Are There? Current XRPL analytics put the number of accounts at about 8.2 million. At the end of Q3 2025, the total was about 6.9 million. The count grew 6.1% in that quarter alone.
Growth continued in 2026. About 490,000 new addresses were added in the first half of the year. XRP Ledger Dashboard recently recorded more than 22,000 account creations over a seven-day period.
Figure 1: XRPL accounts rose from about 6.9 million at the end of Q3 2025 to about 8.2 million. Account counts are not user counts. One person can control several addresses.
The reverse also happens. A single exchange address can serve thousands or millions of customers. XRPL supports destination tags, which let custodians identify each customer deposit without creating a new address for every user.
Account creation requires XRP An XRPL account must hold a base reserve before it is fully active. The reserve fell from 10 XRP to 1 XRP in December 2024.
Because each account needs some XRP, creating huge numbers of accounts carries a cost. That makes raw account creation harder to spam than on networks where addresses are free. The lower reserve did make accounts cheaper to create than in past years.
How Many People Use the XRP Ledger Each Day? This is harder to answer than it looks. DefiLlama reports about 39,000 active XRPL addresses in 24 hours, along with about 2,800 new addresses. A late-September snapshot showed more than 45,000 active addresses and 3,129 new ones in a single day.
Evernorth’s Q2 analysis found a lower average of 16,587 daily transacting accounts. Blockworks reported a similar figure of about 16,800.
Figure 2: Daily active account counts range from about 16,600 to 45,000 depending on the provider. Why the gap? Providers define activity differently. Evernorth’s measure focuses on addresses that start transactions, while broader datasets can include other kinds of ledger activity.
Provider Measure Figure DefiLlama Active addresses, 24 hours About 39,000 DefiLlama Active addresses, late-September snapshot More than 45,000 Evernorth Daily transacting accounts, Q2 average 16,587 Blockworks Daily active addresses, Q2 average About 16,800 The safe takeaway is not that XRPL has exactly 16,000 or 40,000 daily users. Address-based statistics do not translate directly into unique people.
Active accounts fell in Q2 2026 Even with strong transaction counts, daily participation weakened in Q2. Evernorth’s 16,587 transacting accounts per day was down about 24% to 25% from a year earlier. New accounts averaged 2,783 per day, also down about 25%.
Blockworks’ broader data showed a similar picture. Daily active addresses of about 16,800 were down 10.7% from Q1 and 24.5% year over year.
This sets up one of the main trends of 2026. Transaction counts and asset values stayed high while active-address measures fell.
XRP Ledger Transaction Statistics XRPL processed about 222.4 million transactions in Q2 2026. That was its second-highest quarterly total on record. Q1 2026 set the record at about 238 million, so Q2 fell about 6.5% from the prior quarter.
Q2 averaged about 2.44 million transactions per day. DefiLlama recently recorded around 2.9 million in a 24-hour period.
Figure 3: Average daily transactions rose from 1.83 million in Q4 2025 to about 2.9 million in the latest 24-hour reading. Q1 transactions jumped 35% The rise began earlier in the year. Blockworks reported that average daily transactions grew from 1.83 million in Q4 2025 to 2.48 million in Q1 2026. That is growth of 35.3% quarter over quarter.
Activity eased a little in Q2, but throughput stayed well above many earlier periods.
Period Measure Figure Q4 2025 Average per day 1.83 million Q1 2026 Total About 238 million Q1 2026 Average per day 2.48 million Q2 2026 Total 222.4 million Q2 2026 Average per day About 2.44 million Latest 24 hours Total About 2.9 million More than 5 billion transactions since launch Bitquery analyzed the full ledger through September 2026 and counted about 5.06 billion transactions. Few public blockchains have handled that volume over so long a period.
The same research carries a warning. In August 2026, just 793 accounts generated about 93% of transaction traffic.
That points to automated services, market-making bots and other machine activity. A high transaction count does not mean millions of people use XRPL by hand each day.
Payments and Fees on the XRP Ledger XRP was built mainly for moving value, and payments remain the largest transaction type. In Q1 2026, payments made up 51.3% of all transactions.
OfferCreate transactions place orders on the built-in decentralized exchange. They made up another 33.7%. Together the two types were about 85% of network activity.
Figure 4: Payments and OfferCreate orders made up about 85% of XRPL transactions in Q1 2026. Payments had passed OfferCreate for eight straight quarters by Q1. Before 2024, OfferCreate was often the largest category.
What counts as an XRPL payment? A Payment transaction does more than send XRP. It can move XRP, RLUSD, other stablecoins, issued currencies and tokenized assets.
XRPL also supports payment paths that can swap one asset for another along the way. A sender can hold one currency while the recipient receives another. This has been part of the ledger’s focus on payments and foreign-exchange settlement.
Transaction fees are very low The base transaction fee is 10 drops. One XRP contains one million drops, so the fee is a tiny fraction of an XRP. Network dashboards still show the 10-drop base fee.
Fees are not paid to validators. The XRP used for fees is permanently destroyed, and about 14.4 million XRP has been burned since the ledger began.
Against a maximum supply of 100 billion XRP, that burn is small. Its main job is to discourage spam, not to shrink supply quickly.
XRPL Decentralized Exchange Statistics Unlike many blockchains, XRPL does not need a separate smart contract app to run an exchange. A central-limit order-book DEX is built into the protocol. Users can offer to trade XRP for tokens, tokens for XRP or one token for another.
XRPL later added automated market makers, or AMMs, through XLS-30. Order books and liquidity pools now work side by side.
DEX volume averaged 4.42 million XRP per day Total DEX trading in Q2 2026 averaged about 4.42 million XRP per day. That is about 20% higher than Q2 2025 and about 16% below Q1 2026.
In dollar terms, Blockworks-based data put Q2 DEX volume at about $482.9 million. DefiLlama shows about $3.7 million over 24 hours and about $36 million over seven days. Daily volume moves with XRP prices and market conditions.
Order-book volume rose 79% Order-book trading averaged 3.57 million XRP per day in Q2, up from about 1.99 million a year earlier. That is growth of about 79%.
Order books made up 81% of XRPL DEX trading in Q2, compared with 54% a year before. AMMs therefore held a smaller share of volume, though they remain an important part of the network.
Figure 5: Order-book volume rose from 1.99 million to 3.57 million XRP per day year over year. Fewer traders are moving more XRP Trading became more concentrated. The number of accounts placing order-book trades each day fell from 1,864 to about 1,111, a drop of around 40%.
Average activity per account rose from about 1,072 XRP to 3,217 XRP per day. The typical active account moved roughly three times as much XRP.
Figure 6: Daily order-book accounts fell while average XRP traded per account nearly tripled. Order-book measure Q2 2025 Q2 2026 Volume per day 1.99 million XRP 3.57 million XRP Share of DEX volume 54% 81% Accounts trading per day 1,864 1,111 XRP traded per account per day 1,072 3,217 This fits with more activity from professional traders, market makers or institutions. But addresses do not reveal their owners, so the data alone cannot show that institutions replaced retail traders.
AMM pools and token listings XRPL.to indexes more than 30,000 AMM pools. It shows about 25 million XRP of liquidity in the pools covered by its trading statistics.
Many pools hold little liquidity or trade rarely, and a small pool is easy to create. The pool count should not be read as 30,000 real markets.
The same site lists about 20,000 tokens. Its tracked token market has recently shown 4 to 5 million XRP in daily volume, more than 120,000 daily trades and more than 7,000 unique daily traders, depending on the period measured.
As on other blockchains, many tokens have little liquidity. The number of listed tokens is not the number of projects with real economic use.
Stablecoin and RLUSD Statistics on XRPL Stablecoins may be the most important new form of activity on the ledger. DefiLlama estimates XRPL’s stablecoin market cap at about $1.11 billion. RLUSD makes up about 92% of that total.
Other stablecoins on XRPL include USDC, EURCV, USDB, BBRL, EUROP and AUDD. The network was designed to let issued currencies move alongside XRP, which suits stablecoins.
RLUSD balances rose more than 600% Ripple’s dollar-backed RLUSD is now the main stablecoin on the ledger. In Q2 2026, average RLUSD balances on XRPL reached about $539 million. A year earlier they were about $73 million, a rise of roughly 642%.
XRPL’s share of total RLUSD circulation grew from 20% to 34%. The value moved using RLUSD rose about 925% year over year.
Figure 7: Average RLUSD balances on XRPL rose from $73 million to $539 million in a year. RLUSD measure Q2 2025 Q2 2026 Average balance on XRPL $73 million $539 million Share of total RLUSD circulation 20% 34% Value transferred Baseline Up about 925% Stablecoin supply kept growing after Q2. That is why XRPL’s total stablecoin market cap now sits above $1 billion.
The other growth area is real-world asset tokenization. XRPL lets issuers put financial assets directly on the ledger without conventional smart contracts. The ledger supports fungible tokens, multi-purpose tokens, stablecoins, tokenized funds, bonds, Treasury products and other real-world assets.
Issued assets can also trade through the native DEX and AMM.
Tokenized assets averaged $3.72 billion in Q2 Evernorth calculated that tokenized assets on XRPL averaged about $3.72 billion in Q2 2026. That was more than double the Q1 level and more than 30 times the level a year earlier.
Adding average RLUSD balances of about $539 million brings the average network value to $4.26 billion. Six quarters earlier, the same measure was only $99 million.
Figure 8: Tokenization totals range from $21 million to $4.26 billion depending on the definition. Why tokenization numbers differ Tokenization figures change a lot with the method. One tracker reported about $4.10 billion of real-world assets on XRPL at the end of September 2026, but only about $499 million was classed as distributed. DefiLlama uses a narrower active RWA AUM definition and reports about $21 million.
These figures do not necessarily conflict. One may count the total value of tokenized products, while another counts only assets actively issued, distributed or used in DeFi. It is worth checking what any AUM figure measures.
Measure Source Value Average tokenized assets, Q2 2026 Evernorth $3.72 billion Average network value with RLUSD, Q2 2026 Evernorth $4.26 billion Real-world assets represented, end of September Tracker data $4.10 billion Real-world assets classed as distributed Tracker data $499 million DeFi TVL DefiLlama About $40 million Active RWA AUM DefiLlama About $21 million Tokenized Treasuries and institutional controls In Q2 2026, part of a tokenized U.S. Treasury fund was redeemed with the asset leg settling on XRPL in under five seconds. XRPL’s tokenization documentation names Ondo Finance, Société Générale, Ripple and Vert among firms using or building asset infrastructure on the network.
Compliance is a barrier for institutions, since a regulated firm cannot trade with any anonymous wallet. XRPL development has focused on credentials, permissioned domains, permissioned markets, multi-purpose tokens and issuer controls.
These tools let institutions limit access to approved participants while still settling on a blockchain. That is a different target market from fully permissionless DeFi.
Low DeFi TVL does not tell the whole story DefiLlama reports about $40 million in DeFi TVL on XRPL. That is small next to Ethereum or Solana, and it looks at odds with billions in tokenized assets.
The gap is one of definition. A tokenized Treasury issued or settled on XRPL does not necessarily sit inside a lending protocol or liquidity pool. TVL captures only one slice of the network’s economic activity.
More Value, Fewer Participants The clearest theme in the 2026 data is a split between participation and economic activity. In Q2, daily transacting accounts fell about 24% year over year. New accounts fell about 25% and daily order-book traders fell about 40%.
Over the same period, order-book volume rose 79% and total DEX volume rose about 20%. Tokenized asset value rose more than 30 times, RLUSD balances rose more than 600% and RLUSD transfer value rose more than 900%.
Figure 9: In Q2 2026, participation measures fell while stablecoin and trading value measures rose. This does not prove institutional adoption. It does show that the value tied to the active parts of the network is growing much faster than the number of accounts using them.
The Bottom Line The XRP Ledger handles more activity than its small DeFi footprint suggests. It has about 8.2 million accounts and processes roughly 2 to 3 million transactions per day. Q1 2026 set a record at about 238 million, and Q2 followed with 222.4 million.
Payments remain central at 51.3% of Q1 transactions, with DEX orders adding 33.7%. DEX volume is growing even though fewer accounts trade. Q2 volume averaged 4.42 million XRP per day, with order-book trading up 79% and daily order-book traders down about 40%.
The larger change is in stablecoins and tokenization. Average RLUSD balances reached $539 million in Q2, more than six times a year earlier, while tokenized assets averaged about $3.72 billion. Together that put average value on the network near $4.26 billion.
The 2026 story is less about account growth and more about what moves across those accounts. Whether institutional and tokenization use can lead to broader user growth is a key measure to watch.
Sources Blockworks Research: State of XRP Q1 2026. Network transaction totals, transaction-type mix, payments and active accounts. Blockworks Intel: XRP Ledger Analytics. Current transaction, account, stablecoin and DEX analytics. CoinDesk: XRP Ledger Has Fewer Active Accounts but Bigger Trades and More Value. Evernorth Q2 2026 data on order-book activity, accounts, tokenization and RLUSD. DefiLlama: XRP Ledger. Current transactions, active addresses, stablecoin supply, RWA AUM, DeFi TVL and DEX activity. XRPL.org: Decentralized Exchange. Official documentation on the native order-book DEX. XRPL.org: Automated Market Makers. Official documentation on XLS-30 AMMs, liquidity pools and LP tokens. XRPL.org: Real-World Asset Tokenization. Official documentation on tokenized financial assets and institutional use cases. XRPL.org: Stablecoin Issuer. Official information on issuing and trading stablecoins on XRPL. XRPL.to: Token Market Analytics. Live data on token trading, AMMs, traders and liquidity. XRPL.to: On-Chain Analytics. Token counts, AMM pools, trading activity and ledger analytics. Bitquery: XRP Ledger Adoption Audit. Full-ledger study of more than 5 billion transactions and traffic concentration. XRPL Dashboard: Live Ledger Statistics. Account creation, XRP burn, escrow and ledger statistics.
Uphold listed Evernorth stock on Oct. 20, letting eligible U.S. investors trade shares of the XRP treasury company.
Evernorth started trading on Nasdaq on Oct. 12 after merging with Armada Acquisition Corp. II.
The company held about 473 million XRP and raised about $300 million in gross cash proceeds at closing.
Ripple, Kraken, Coinbase, and BitGo were named as initial partners for its treasury strategies.
Uphold’s equities service offers fractional investments starting at $5.
Uphold has added Evernorth Holdings Inc. stock to its platform, giving eligible U.S. investors a new way to gain exposure to XRP. The digital asset trading platform announced the listing on Oct. 20 in a post on X.
Evernorth is a public company that accumulates and manages XRP. It entered public markets holding approximately 473 million XRP tokens.
Buying Evernorth shares is different from owning XRP directly. Shareholders own part of a business, while direct XRP holders own tokens they can move to a personal wallet.
The value of an Evernorth investment depends on more than the price of XRP. It also reflects the company’s financing decisions, operating performance, and treasury management.
New stock listing: $XRPN@Evernorthxrp (XRPN), the public stock backed by a corporate XRP treasury, is now available to trade on Uphold.
Check it out in the Uphold app 📲
Securities are offered via Uphold Securities Inc. in a fractional capacity and custodied by Apex Clearing… pic.twitter.com/XR7Z5tbFRb
— Uphold (@UpholdInc) October 20, 2026
Evernorth’s Path to Nasdaq
Evernorth began trading on Nasdaq on Oct. 12 after combining with Armada Acquisition Corp. II. Armada was a special purpose acquisition company, a business formed to take another company public through a merger.
Armada shareholders approved the deal on Sept. 30. An administrative delay later pushed the transaction past its original schedule.
The first plan called for an Oct. 7 closing and an Oct. 8 trading start. The revised timeline moved the closing to Oct. 9 and the first trading day to Oct. 12.
When the merger closed, Evernorth held approximately 473 million XRP. It had also raised approximately $300 million in gross cash proceeds before transaction expenses.
Backers included Arrington Capital, Pantera Capital, SBI Group, Ripple, Kraken, and GSR. SBI Group is a Japanese financial services company, while GSR is a cryptocurrency trading firm and liquidity provider.
How Evernorth Plans to Use Its XRP
On Oct. 14, Evernorth named Ripple, Kraken, Coinbase, and BitGo as initial execution partners for institutional treasury strategies. The company said deployment was planned to begin in the fourth quarter.
These partnership agreements still depend on customary closing conditions. They also require regulatory and corporate approvals.
Evernorth aims to increase its XRP per share, which measures how much XRP the company holds compared to its outstanding shares. It plans to do this by buying more XRP and earning returns on its current holdings.
Early activities would involve established financial and cryptocurrency firms. Evernorth’s investment and risk team would oversee this work.
A later phase would put capital into decentralized finance applications, which use blockchain-based programs for lending and trading. Evernorth plans to launch these strategies on the XRP Ledger once validators, the servers that verify transactions, activate native lending features and they are proven on the live network.
Uphold’s U.S. equities service requires separate onboarding from its crypto platform. It offers more than 4,000 U.S. stocks and exchange-traded funds, with fractional investments starting at $5.
Users can buy shares with cash or with cryptocurrency converted into dollars. Uphold Securities Inc., a registered broker-dealer, offers the securities, while Apex Clearing Corp. holds them and settles trades.
David Schwartz, Ripple’s Chief Technology Officer, recently drew attention to the Fuzzy Cards project by posting a photo on X of himself opening physical Fuzzy Cards booster packs at home. He publicly expressed his gratitude to the sender and cited the project’s official account in his post.
Schwartz’s engagement spotlights XRP-based card gameFor many in the cryptocurrency community, Schwartz’s gesture was seen as a sign of top-level interest in Fuzzy Cards, a physical trading card game linked to the XRP Ledger. Until this moment, the game had remained under the radar for a sizable number of XRP market participants.
Earlier in May, Schwartz opened a trustline to FUZZY, the meme token powering the project’s game ecosystem. The unboxing photo came just before the Ripple Swell 2026 conference in New York, where XRP supporters are planning a parallel gathering called FuzzyCon dedicated to the card game and its community.
Origins and development of Fuzzy CardsFuzzy Cards traces its story back to a historical event on January 1, 2014, when the FuzzyBear wallet listed an order on the XRP Ledger’s decentralized exchange to swap 1 XRP for 1 BTC. This trade went unfilled, but the anecdote later inspired the creation of FUZZY, launched as a meme token in early 2025. FUZZY had attracted more than 11,500 holders by October 2026.
The project is published by XPUNKS GmbH, a Zug-based Swiss firm led by Kai Leroy, which became the first to introduce a trading card game within the XRP Ledger ecosystem. The debut set offers 150 unique cards grouped into five in-game factions and split between Heroes, Relics, and Events. Of these, around 60 cards are released in special holographic editions.
Mini dictionary: XPUNKS GmbH — A Swiss company specializing in developing NFT and trading card projects on the XRP Ledger, known for its flagship NFT collection and pioneering hybrid Web3 products.
Distribution relies on a hybrid process where users purchase digital packs as NFTs compliant with the XLS-20 protocol. Players then burn these digital packs through a dedicated portal. After each burn is confirmed on the blockchain, the system delivers a sealed physical booster pack containing five randomly drawn cards. These cards are suitable for professional grading by CGC, PCA, and TAG.
AspectFuzzy Cards ProjectTraditional Trading CardsDistribution MethodHybrid (NFT burn-to-physical delivery)Physical sales onlyBlockchain IntegrationXRP Ledger (XLS-20 standard)Not applicableCard Set Size150 unique cardsVariesGrading SupportCGC, PCA, TAGMajor card grading companiesMarket adoption and outlookSo far, collectors and players have burned roughly 100,000 Fuzzy Cards booster packs. XPUNKS GmbH’s founder Kai Leroy assessed that this hybrid mint-and-burn mechanic is gaining traction as part of a broader trend in hybrid Web3 projects, where demand appears to be shifting toward assets with tangible value during the current market upswing.
“A 150-card set can generate trillions of combinations, which helps insulate the sector from rapid speculative launches,” project insiders emphasized, pointing to the challenge of balancing game mechanics with long production timelines.
The difficulty of replicating Fuzzy Cards on short notice is mainly attributed to the intricate balance required for gameplay and the extended timeframes needed for physical production.
Despite ongoing development, FUZZY remains a volatile meme asset, with its market price closely following the broader XRP trend. Meanwhile, efforts to expand retail access through partnerships with local board game stores are still in an early rollout phase, with commissions offered as incentives to partners.
While market activity around $FUZZY grows, most dealers and traders are just beginning to notice the game’s adoption in physical and digital spaces.
Držitelé XRP už kvůli nové vlně podvodů přišli o miliony XRP. Zakladatel společnosti Xaman Wietse Wind upozornil, že denně vzniká více než 20 falešných účtů a 10 podvodných webů napodobujících Xaman.
XRP holders are facing a surge of targeted scams that have already resulted in multi-million XRP losses across the community, according to analyst Zach Rector. Reflecting growing concern within the ecosystem, Rector has publicly called for heightened vigilance from both new and seasoned XRP investors.
Scam operations targeting XRP users are now running on two fronts. On one side, cybercriminals are creating new social media accounts that closely resemble verified gold badge profiles, posing as Xaman, Ripple, and high-profile community members. These impersonations often seek to gain trust by presenting a familiar identity before directing users to malicious links or fraudulent schemes.
In parallel, scammers have managed to compromise genuine gold badge accounts. These verified accounts, after being obtained through illicit means, are resold on underground markets for prices ranging from $1,200 to $2,000. They are subsequently used to share phishing links designed to deceive followers and drain their cryptocurrency holdings.
Xaman Wallet founder Wietse Wind explained that more than 20 fake X accounts and 10 fraudulent websites impersonate Xaman each day, promoting a false desktop app and a non-existent XRP airdrop. Wind emphasized that no “Xaman” token exists and none will be created, following the promotion of a fake “XMN” token by a compromised verified account.
These methods have greatly amplified the threat landscape for XRP holders, making it increasingly difficult to distinguish genuine updates from fraudulent communications.
Mini dictionary: Xaman, a widely used XRP wallet platform, allows users to safely store and manage their XRP and other tokens on the XRP Ledger. Xaman is known for its commitment to security and user privacy, but it does not have any official desktop app or token.
Scam TypeMethodImpersonated EntityFake accountsNew profile creationXaman, Ripple, community leadersCompromised verified accountsHacked, resold, used for scamsGold badge holdersFake Ripple posts, cloned sites, and influencer impersonationsA fraudulent Ripple profile recently promoted an “XRP Holder Tiers” campaign, luring users to a counterfeit website with promises of exclusive XRP badges. BankXRP, a popular news aggregator in the XRP space, stated that Ripple has never issued such an announcement. The platform reiterated that neither Ripple nor the XRP Ledger ask holders to register for badges or special benefits.
Additionally, websites visually mimicking xaman.app have emerged. These sites both replicate Xaman’s branding and feature counterfeit governance vote badges and wallet connection options, which are designed to empty connected wallets. Impersonators have also targeted Ripple CTO David Schwartz and CEO Brad Garlinghouse, with fake accounts proliferating on platforms such as Instagram and Telegram.
Zach Rector warned that no legitimate party will ever contact XRP holders on social media, email, or other channels offering unsolicited help or requesting sensitive information.
As part of an effort to curb damages and protect users, Rector has launched a free “Crypto Basics” course. The initial lesson covers best practices for securing digital assets and is freely available through a Patreon membership. Rector expressed disappointment over the scale of the attacks, indicating that losses already amount to millions of XRP within the community.
He highlighted the evolving nature of scam tactics, stressing the importance of ongoing education for both newcomers and veteran XRP holders. According to Rector, any unsolicited contact regarding XRP should be regarded as a likely scam attempt and treated with caution.
XRP Ledger zaznamenal 25,7 tisíce aktivních účtů, což představuje mezidenní nárůst o 12 %, přičemž vzniklo jen 4,5 tisíce nových účtů. Aktivita tak zřejmě pochází hlavně z reaktivovaných peněženek.
Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.
The XRP Ledger is showing a sharp rise in activity. Data from XRPScan indicates 25.7K active accounts on October 21, up approximately 12% in a single day. The 30-day average is 18.6K, so this is a clear jump above normal levels.
Are They Really New Users?Only 4.5K new accounts were created, a 35.6% increase. That means most of the 25,000 active accounts already existed. Many are probably older wallets that have become active again. The jump looks more like returning users than a flood of newcomers. Still, a rise in both new and returning accounts is a healthy signal for the network.
Source: XRP Ledger Other numbers support the picture. Transactions rose 55.9% to 3.5M, and successful transactions grew 67.8% to 2.9M. Transactions per ledger climbed 61.5% to 179.34, which indicates the ledger is handling more load. XRP burned as fees went up 20% to 747.6 XRP. More activity means more fees are destroyed, which slightly reduces supply.
HOT Stories
Not every metric is positive. Payments fell 4.4% to 741.9K, and payment volume dropped 49.6% to 350.9M XRP. Active users, a separate measure, fell 50% to 85.2K. This indicates the added activity is not necessarily coming from large payments. It may also come from smaller transactions, token activity, or bot-like behavior. The all-time high for active accounts is 106K, so the network is still far from its peak.
What the Price Chart SaysXRP trades near $1.33, after a daily range between $1.32 and $1.37. The price sits just below a key long-term average near $1.37 to $1.40, which has acted as resistance. Support is around $1.25, where the price bounced earlier this month.
You Might Also Like
The RSI is below the midpoint, which indicates weak momentum for now. Volume has also been low in recent weeks. If account activity remains high for several days, it may signal real growth.
A move above $1.40 would be the first sign that price is following the network data. A drop below $1.25 would weaken the outlook. For now, the XRP Ledger is busier, but the price has not reacted yet.
Komunita Starknetu podpořila výzkum přechodu na nezávislý postkvantový blockchain L1 93,52 % hlasovací síly. Starknet zatím zůstane řešením druhé vrstvy Etherea; samotný přechod vyžaduje závazné hlasování.
Starknet’s community has voted to support research into becoming an independent, post-quantum layer-1 blockchain.
The network’s potential departure from Ethereum gained overwhelming support. The governance vote that ran for seven days closed on Thursday. The poll drew about 3,200 votes, with 93.52% of voting power in favor of the transition.
The non-binding poll recorded the highest participation in Starknet’s governance history, according to StarkWare, which said it abstained from voting to leave the decision to the community.
The outcome allows StarkWare and the Starknet Foundation to proceed with research into an independent L1. The actual shift itself would require a separate, binding governance vote. For now, Starknet will continue operating as an Ethereum layer-2 network.
“We’re beginning work on a whitepaper even before we start the weekend, and hope to release a draft for public scrutiny in November,” StarkWare CEO Eli Ben-Sasson told Cointelegraph.
Starknet outlines next steps for post-quantum L1 researchStarkWare and the Starknet Foundation have established a working group to examine the proposed transition and develop more detailed technical proposals.
The governance proposal states that STRK will remain the network’s native token, with no new token planned, while existing bridges between Starknet and Ethereum will remain open.
StarkWare first raised the potential transition on Oct. 8, citing concerns about the network’s dependence on Ethereum for security. Although Starknet uses hash-based STARK proofs and supports programmable accounts capable of adopting post-quantum signatures, its bridge and data availability infrastructure remain dependent on Ethereum’s upgrade timeline.
In June, StarkWare unveiled a three-phase quantum-resistance roadmap covering cryptographic upgrades, smart-contract migration and Ethereum-dependent infrastructure.
StarkWare’s Quantum Hub says it has already tested technology designed to withstand future quantum attacks, successfully processing a transaction on Starknet’s live network. However, the technology remains experimental and has not yet undergone a security audit.
Ben-Sasson has set a 2027 target for making Starknet quantum-resistant, ahead of Ethereum’s projected timeline.
“Ethereum’s target of 2029 to become quantum-safe is too late, and deadlines slip,” he said.
Magazine: 5 alternatives to Ledger to store your Bitcoin
After hovering between $2.3K and $2.4K, Ethereum [ETH] finally broke out of the range, climbing to $2,526.
However, the altcoin soon retraced below $2.5K. At press time, Ethereum traded around $2,435, down 0.16% on the daily charts.
Whales continued accumulating through the volatility, but their activity had yet to translate into stronger price momentum.
Can Ethereum whales help reclaim $2.5K? As Ethereum [ETH] struggled to hold $2.5K, whales stepped up on both the buy and sell sides. The Whale Behaviour Shift showed increased accumulation, with 133 whales adding over 426K ETH.
Source: Swiss Intelligence Lookonchain highlighted three whales withdrawing Ethereum from exchanges.
One withdrew 10,954 ETH worth $26.97 million from Kraken and staked it after four months of inactivity. Another withdrew 9,000 ETH worth $22.42 million from Binance and deposited it into Aave.
A third withdrew 4,500 ETH worth $11.29 million from Binance. Together, these withdrawals totaled 24,454 ETH, valued at $60.68 million.
Source: Arkham These moves suggested some large holders preferred staking, lending, or holding Ethereum away from exchanges despite market volatility. Still, those choices alone could not establish expectations of an imminent rally.
Exchange activity echoed that shift. Over 12 hours, outflows exceeded $365 million, pushing Netflow to approximately -$30 million.
Source: CoinGlass That reversed the preceding 24-hour period, when inflows outpaced outflows and Netflow reached $21 million.
Fewer coins on exchanges could ease immediate selling pressure. Even so, Ethereum’s price had yet to reflect that potential support.
Why does Ethereum’s momentum remain bearish? Although some whales increased their holdings, sellers retained the upper hand in Ethereum’s momentum indicators. The Relative Strength Index (RSI) stood at 42, below the neutral 50 level, indicating bearish momentum.
Source: TradingView Likewise, the Positive Directional Indicator (+DI) hovered around 17. The Negative Directional Indicator (-DI) remained above it, reinforcing the bearish reading.
Together, these indicators suggested whale accumulation had yet to overcome broader selling pressure. They did not identify which holders were selling.
If that momentum persists, Ethereum could revisit $2.3K. However, stronger demand following the whale accumulation could help Ethereum reclaim $2.5K, potentially bringing $2.7K into view.
For now, the indicators offered limited support for that recovery.
Výzkumníci z Etherea navrhli zkrátit dobu finality transakcí zhruba ze 16 minut na čtyři minuty, což by mohlo snížit náklady na služby pro převody mezi blockchainy. Návrh nemá stanovené datum aktivace.
Ethereum’s four-minute settlement plan could lower the cost of moving crypto. (Ethereum)Summary
Ethereum researchers have proposed cutting transaction finality from about 16 minutes to roughly four minutes, though the unfinished plan has no activation date.Faster finality could reduce costs for cross-chain transfer services by allowing them to recover and reuse funds more quickly.The proposal would separate validators’ block-selection and finality votes, potentially enabling further speed gains and an eventual shift to quantum-resistant signatures.Ethereum researchers want to cut the wait for a transaction to become final from about 16 minutes to roughly four, a change that could make it cheaper to move money between blockchains.
Ben Edgington, who coordinates Ethereum’s fast-finality research, filed the draft Wednesday with fellow researchers Francesco D’Amato, Roberto Saltini, Yann Vonlanthen and Mikhail Kalinin.
Its initial target is a four-fold improvement, though the design is unfinished and has no activation date.
In the current mechanism, a transaction can land in an Ethereum block well before the network treats it as final, the point where validators, the computers that secure the network, commit to never rewriting it. Anyone moving funds off Ethereum has to decide when it’s safe to release money on the other side.
But sixteen minutes is a long time to have money in limbo.
Say someone sends $10,000 from Ethereum to another network. A transfer service can pay them right away from money it already holds there, then wait to get repaid once the original transaction settles. The customer gets their funds in seconds, and the service has $10,000 tied up until Ethereum is done.
Ethereum Foundation research counts that idle money as a real cost for these firms, and a shorter wait lets them reuse it sooner. In practice, a service fronting a steady $1 million an hour would have about $267,000 waiting on repayment with a 16-minute delay. At four minutes, however, that drops to roughly $67,000.
Stablecoin providers such as Circle CRCL, which issues the dollar-pegged USDC, already charges for speed. Its fast route from Ethereum currently costs 0.01%, or $1 per $10,000, before network and application charges. Its standard route carries no Circle transfer fee.
Circle also caps the total value of fast transfers waiting on final settlement, and each completed settlement frees up room for new ones.
Splitting the voteThe 16-minute wait comes down to how Ethereum’s validators vote. Each one casts a single vote that does two jobs at once, helping pick the next block and helping lock older blocks in for good. Validators take turns casting those votes, and a block only becomes final after two full rounds of everyone voting.
Both jobs share one vote so finality can only move as fast as that rotation. The proposal gives each job its own vote, so the locking-in can run on a faster clock that developers can keep tightening over time.
The researchers say splitting the votes would also make it easier to eventually swap in quantum-resistant signatures. Ethereum would need that upgrade if quantum computers ever get strong enough to break today’s cryptography.
However, four minutes would still be slow next to Solana, which switched on its Alpenglow upgrade Wednesday with a target of finality in about 150 milliseconds.
The draft leaves voting timings, penalties and parts of its security analysis unresolved as of Thursday. Edgington wrote that “many aspects remain TBD” and that the immediate aim was getting a proposal number — which puts the idea into Ethereum’s formal upgrade pipeline.
Read More: Solana’s biggest network change since 2020 is live. Here’s how users benefit
Bitcoin price hovered near $81,800 after falling below $82,000, as forced liquidations erased gains from a brief rally. The overall value of cryptocurrencies fell to around $2.74 trillion as the market dipped 1.21% in 24 hours of selling.
Ethereum hovered at around $2400, while XRP dipped to $1.30, a trend seen throughout the market’s top assets. Liquidations on bitcoin surged 80% in 24 hours to $119.1 million, while funding rates indicated that leveraged bitcoin positions unwinded.
US and Israel Weigh New Iran Strikes After November Midterms The U.S. and Israel are said to be considering “options” for a new strike on Iran following the midterm elections in November. But President Donald Trump has not signed off on the planned operation, and could yet change his mind.
BREAKING: Bitcoin falls below $83,000 and Ethereum below $2,500 as growing signs point to renewed U.S.-Israeli strikes on Iran. https://t.co/yWuL1rNmrM
— Crypto Rover (@cryptorover) October 22, 2026
Targets might include nuclear facilities, energy plants, and Iranian missile and drone bases, the reports said. Military preparations have been ongoing, and officials are mulling on whether additional strikes would force Tehran to make concessions. Iranian officials have threatened that if the attacks were repeated, then there could be a response throughout the region.
Bitcoin ETFs Attract $528 Million as BlackRock Leads Inflows Data from SoSoValue shows that $528 million flowed into U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs on October 21. BlackRock’s IBIT was the top-performing Bitcoin fund, accounting for the highest daily inflows, with $235 million.
U.S. Bitcoin ETFs Draw $528 Million, Ether ETFs Add $15 Million
According to SoSoValue, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $528 million in net inflows on October 21, led by BlackRock’s IBIT with $235 million. Spot Ethereum ETFs attracted $14.96 million, with Grayscale’s Ethereum Mini Trust (ETH) posting the largest inflow at $28.07 million. BlackRock is the world’s largest asset manager, while Grayscale is a leading crypto-focused asset manager.
— Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) October 22, 2026
Overall, spot Ethereum ETFs have accumulated $14.96 million in inflows, with Grayscale’s Ethereum Mini Trust seeing the biggest inflow of all. The trust, whose ticker is ETH, saw $28.07 million coming in, more than the total net inflows of all the Ethereum funds.
Bitcoin Price Prediction: Will BTC Hold $80,500 or Fall Toward $78,000? At the time of writing, the BTC price stood at $81,760.79 on the supplied four-hour chart.
Bitcoin had fallen below $82,000 following its last recovery which failed to break the $85,000 resistance level.
The relative strength index (RSI) showed that decline, dropping to 43.41. The indicator is below the 50 midpoint and below the average shown for it of 55.64.
The MACD line was at -231.22, while the signal line was at -315.76. It was displaying a bearish crossover with a negative histogram of minus 84.54. Both lines were positive, but a negative histogram indicated that the current upward trend was losing strength.
BTC/USDT 4-hour chart: TradingView That is the closest support zone on the chart, having repeated rebounds around $80,500. The potential for a move closer to the $78,000 level may be increased if the 4-hour chart trades below this support.
However, holding $80,500 would keep a rebound toward the nearby $82,000 level possible, per the future Bitcoin outlook. It would take a recovery to over $82,000 for the recent selling pressure to be meaningfully reduced. If a break above $83.5k is sustained, the next marked resistance is $85k.
Another BNB Chain token has learned that clever tokenomics can turn into an attacker’s playbook. On October 22, 2026, CertiK Alert flagged an exploit targeting the $NEM token, with losses estimated at approximately $820,000.
The attack hit the USDT/NEM liquidity pool on PancakeSwap. The culprit was not a stolen key or a rogue insider, but a logic flaw baked into the token’s own smart contract.
Security firm SlowMist corroborated the findings and put the damage at about $821,920.
How the NEM exploit worked
The vulnerable code sits in a contract called NemTokenV2. At its center is a mechanism named ‘pendingLpSellRecycle’, which was designed to track and process sells flowing into the liquidity pool.
Per the findings, the contract made a basic accounting mistake. It treated any transfer of tokens into the liquidity pair as sell volume, without checking whether a real sale had actually taken place.
The attacker repeatedly sent NEM tokens into the PancakeSwap pool, then skimmed the excess funds back out.
Liquidity pools on PancakeSwap keep an internal record of their reserves. When the actual token balance sitting in the pool drifts above that recorded figure, the surplus can be pulled out. The NEM contract’s faulty sell tracking gave the attacker a way to keep manufacturing that surplus on demand.
According to SlowMist, the attacker ran this loop 42 times. Each round chipped away at the pool and distorted its reserves, and the operation also artificially pushed up the token’s price along the way.
Once enough value had been pulled from the pool, the attacker extracted it and bridged the stolen funds over to Ethereum.
A pattern on BNB Chain in 2026
The NEM incident does not stand alone. The research findings describe a recurring trend in 2026 in which BNB Chain tokens with complex tokenomics have proved vulnerable to reserve manipulation.
Earlier in 2026, projects with similar mechanics, including Movie Token, ATM, and LULA, suffered comparable attacks. The shared thread is tokens that bolt custom logic onto their interactions with PancakeSwap pools.
Standard decentralized exchange pools are fairly predictable on their own. Problems tend to show up when a token contract reaches into those pools and tries to keep its own parallel set of books.
What this means for DeFi users and token builders
For anyone holding NEM or providing liquidity to the USDT/NEM pair, the damage is direct. Liquidity providers in a drained pool absorb the losses, and the artificial price movement during the attack adds another layer of disruption for traders who happened to be active at the time.
For developers, the lesson is fairly specific. Any contract that infers user intent from where tokens land, rather than verifying what actually happened in a trade, is making a bet that nobody will game the inference. The NEM attacker won that bet 42 times in a row.
The findings argue that investors may start demanding more transparency from token teams about how their liquidity pool mechanics work. Rigorous audits that specifically test how custom token logic interacts with exchange pools, rather than reviewing the token contract in isolation, would address the exact gap exploited here.
Security firms like CertiK and SlowMist play a growing role in this landscape, often publishing breakdowns within hours of an incident. Their quick alerts help other projects check whether they share the same weakness, though by the time an alert goes out, the funds in question have typically already moved.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Estefano Gomez. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
BNB Chain has completed its 37th quarterly token burn after removing 1.646 million BNB from circulation as the network pushes toward its long-term supply reduction target.
The most recent burn on the 21st of October reportedly brought BNB’s remaining supply to 131.51 million tokens, reflecting significant progress towards the 100 million target.
In fact, the network has already completed approximately over two-thirds of its targeted supply reduction.
Beyond this recent supply reduction, exchange activity also highlighted sustained withdrawals, providing another development to BNB’s market picture.
Source: X BNB exchange withdrawals extend their streak BNB registered 11 consecutive days of negative Spot Netflows, maintaining a withdrawal streak throughout the latest trading period, as per CoinGlass analytics.
At press time, the token’s Spot Netflows had reached -$2.35 million, extending the continued movement of tokens away from exchanges.
These sustained outflows highlighted declining exchange balances, which potentially reduced the amount of BNB readily available for selling.
Also interestingly, the 90-day Spot Taker Cumulative Volume Delta (CVD) also highlighted a taker-buy dominance.
Bulls, therefore, maintained control of aggressive Spot executions, an activity that complemented the exchange withdrawal trend. The combination ultimately reinforced BNB’s Spot market outlook, especially following the latest quarterly supply reduction.
Source: BNB Spot Netflows on CoinGlass Can BNB reclaim $800 after defending support? BNB’s weekly chart structure highlighted buyers defending the $708.48 support region following a recent rejection around $800, which interrupted its earlier recovery.
The correction followed a sustained rebound from the $550.51 support region, which had previously established a stronger recovery foundation.
Despite the pullback, Binance Coin maintained its position above the $708.48 support, preserving the possibility of another rebound.
Importantly, the weekly RSI meanwhile stood at 55.45, above its signal average of 53.91, favoring the possibility of a recovery attempt.
Furthermore, the Money Flow Index (MFI) also reached 74.39, suggesting strong capital inflows despite the indicator approaching overbought territory.
With Binance Coin trading around $739.55 at press time, preserving the $708.48 support could encourage another attempt to reclaim the $800 resistance.
Source: BNB/USDT Chart on TradingView Final Summary BNB’s latest quarterly burn removed 1.646 million tokens as Spot withdrawals continued. BNB maintained $708 support, keeping another recovery attempt toward $800 within reach.
Cover image via depositphotos.com Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.
A security warning about PHP has prompted crypto leaders to speak up. On October 22, 2026, BNB Chain and Binance founder Changpeng Zhao (CZ) each responded to the news, and every message pointed to the same thing: clear communication matters when users are worried about their funds.
What Triggered the ReactionThe alert came from NSA Cyber, which published a notice to organizations that use PHP in their systems. It told them to prepare for an update that fixes critical vulnerabilities. PHP is a very common programming language for web applications, so the warning affects a large part of the internet.
BNB Chain does not use PHP in our tech stack. Stay safe 🙏
HOT Stories
— Nina Rong (@nina_rong) October 22, 2026 The agency explained that flaws like these often give attackers a direct path to a server's file system. That kind of access can be dangerous for any website or service that runs on the affected code.
You Might Also Like
Nina Rong, a BNB Chain representative, published a short statement saying that BNB Chain does not use PHP in its tech stack. She ended the message with a request for people to stay safe. The post drew more than 47,000 views within hours.
The message was brief, but it answered the main question users had: is the network exposed to this issue? According to the team, it is not.
PancakeSwap Sets an ExamplePancakeSwap, one of the biggest decentralized exchanges on BNB Chain, had already shared its own confirmation a few hours earlier. The team said it does not use PHP anywhere in its tech stack and that its platform is not affected. It also told users that their funds are safe.
CZ Calls for More Projects to Do the SameCZ shared the PancakeSwap post and added his own view. He wrote that most projects should at least publish a confirmation like this one. His comment suggests that a short, direct statement is the minimum a project owes its users during a security scare.
Most projects should at least post a confirmation like this.
— CZ 🔶 BNB (@cz_binance) October 22, 2026 His point is simple. When a warning from a major government agency spreads, silence can create fear and rumors. A quick confirmation from a project takes only minutes to write, yet it can calm many users.
Crypto platforms hold real money, and users often react quickly to any hint of risk. Many websites, wallets, and dashboards across the industry may still use PHP somewhere in their systems, even if the main blockchain code does not.
Users should watch for official updates from the projects they use. They should also be careful with fake messages that claim to be security fixes, since scammers often use news like this to trick people.
Chainlink reports $15 billion in CCIP migrations and new Swift, DTCC integrations in its Q3 review as LINK trades near $12 with bearish momentum.
Summary
Chainlink says more than $15 billion in token value migrated to its cross-chain infrastructure in 2026.
CCIP 2.0 introduced new security, compliance and settlement controls during the third quarter.
Chainlink reported over $36 trillion in cumulative transaction value enabled by its services.
LINK traded near USD 12.24 on October 22, with technical indicators pointing to continued selling pressure.
Chainlink has reported more than $15 billion in token migrations to its Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP) during 2026, alongside institutional financing developments and government integrations detailed in its third-quarter review.
According to Chainlink’s October 21 quarterly report, the network introduced CCIP 2.0, launched its Fulcrum financing solution and expanded its work with financial institutions, including Swift and the Depository Trust & Clearing Corporation (DTCC).
⬡ CHAINLINK Q3 MOMENTUM ⬡
• Launched CCIP 2.0
• $15B+ migrates to CCIP
• $140B secured across onchain finance
• TradFi adoption: DTCC, Swift, & more
• Enterprise adoption: Infosys, Robinhood, & more
• Work with policymakers across the U.S., UK, & Hong Kong pic.twitter.com/kWuZop7iLw
— Chainlink (@chainlink) October 21, 2026
Meanwhile, Chainlink said CCIP 2.0 went live during the third quarter, introducing security, compliance and settlement controls for institutions transferring digital assets between blockchain networks.
The report placed token migrations to CCIP above $15 billion during 2026, including assets associated with BitGo and the Wyoming Stable Token Commission. Aave, Coinbase and tokenized equities provider xStocks expanded their use of the protocol, while Nethermind began migrating its infrastructure to Chainlink.
Among the migrations, Wyoming moved its FRNT stablecoin to CCIP in August after completing a security review. The commission selected Chainlink as FRNT’s exclusive cross-chain infrastructure under a multiyear agreement.
Chainlink separately reported that CCIP secured more than $85 billion in cross-chain token value. That figure differs from the $15 billion migration total, which concerns assets moving from other interoperability providers during 2026.
The network’s cumulative transaction value enabled exceeded $36 trillion during the quarter. The metric covers transactions supported by Chainlink services and does not represent company revenue or the amount of money transferred through CCIP.
Swift and DTCC Expand Chainlink’s Institutional Infrastructure
At the Sibos banking conference, Chainlink introduced Fulcrum, a service designed to support securities financing and collateral management across public and private blockchains.
The platform allows financial institutions to establish financing terms and coordinate collateral settlement across supported networks without requiring participants to operate through a single blockchain.
Chainlink separately announced a solution connecting banks to Swift’s blockchain ledger through the Chainlink Runtime Environment (CRE). Financial institutions would retain control of their transaction-signing keys while using CRE to coordinate smart contract operations.
DTCC’s Collateral AppChain represents another institutional application. Chainlink said the platform would use CRE and its data services to support collateral management across financial markets.
In a related institutional financing development, Chainlink demonstrated cross-chain securities financing involving DTCC at Sibos, using its interoperability and data infrastructure to coordinate transactions.
The quarterly review described a separate production transaction in which JPMorgan posted tokenized stock as collateral to satisfy margin requirements with CME Group.
Chainlink identified Bottomline and Infosys among its institutional partners. Bottomline plans to connect its banking customers to blockchain payment networks, while Infosys is working with Chainlink services across banking and financial infrastructure.
Government and Stablecoin Adoption Expand During Q3
Chainlink reported further adoption among government institutions and stablecoin issuers during the quarter.
Wyoming’s Stable Token Commission adopted Chainlink Proof of Reserve in September to distribute independently examined reserve information for FRNT across supported blockchains.
The arrangement supplements Wyoming’s existing reserve disclosures by making verification data available to blockchain applications. The commission is separately working toward reserve-linked minting controls.
Hong Kong’s Tokenized Securities Framework selected CCIP and Chainlink’s Automated Compliance Engine, while the Bank of England’s Synchronisation Lab showcased CRE for coordinating settlement between central bank money and tokenized assets.
Chainlink’s data infrastructure gained further adoption among commercial blockchain projects, including Coinbase, Open Standard, United Stables and Lighter.
In September, Chainlink Data Feeds launched on Tempo, providing market information for stablecoin payments, collateral valuation and automated financial applications.
Prediction markets formed another part of the quarterly activity, with Polymarket, World and LBank adopting Chainlink technology for market resolution and payouts.
LINK Price Approaches $12 as Bearish Momentum Persists
Despite the institutional developments, LINK traded near $12.24 on October 22 after retreating from its recent October high around $15.70.
The token declined approximately 0.67% over 24 hours, according to crypto.news market data, while its seven-day performance remained positive at roughly 1.68%.
Technical indicators showed weakening buying momentum. The Relative Strength Index stood at 44.11, below the neutral 50 level but outside oversold territory.
The Moving Average Convergence Divergence indicator remained bearish, with the MACD line at -0.224 beneath its signal line at -0.121. The negative histogram reading of -0.103 indicated continued selling pressure.
Chainlink (LINK) price chart, source: TradingView
LINK approached immediate support around $12.00, with a sustained breakdown potentially exposing $11.00. A recovery above $13.00 could bring the next resistance level around $14.00 into focus.
Chainlink’s quarterly review reported that its Reserve accumulated 1,543,330.47 LINK during the third quarter, bringing total holdings to 6,047,498.3150 LINK. The network’s Smart Value Recapture service separately surpassed $24.4 million in cumulative recaptured value.
