Arbitrumový DeFi protokol Ostium pozastavil obchodování po exploitu OLP vaultu, který podle Blockaid způsobil ztrátu zhruba 18 milionů USDC. Útočník měl použít registrovaný PriceUpKeep forwarder a zpětně datované autorizované oracle reporty k vytvoření falešných zisků.
Arbitrum-based DeFi protocol Ostium has halted trading after a reported exploit in its OLP vault led to an estimated $18 million USDC loss.
Security firm Blockaid, the first to report the incident, said the attacker manipulated oracle data to generate fake trading profits.
Advertisement
🚨 Blockaid detected an @Ostium Vault exploit on Arbitrum.
An attacker used a registered PriceUpKeep forwarder and future-dated authorized oracle reports to create artificial trade profit, triggering a ~$18M USDC payout from the vault.
More details in 🧵
— Blockaid (@blockaid_) July 15, 2026
Blockaid said the attacker used a registered PriceUpKeep forwarder and future-dated authorized oracle reports to fabricate trading profits, allowing them to extract roughly $18 million USDC from the vault.
Ostium said it was aware of the incident. The project has suspended all trading activity, and is actively investigating the issue.
We are aware of the issue with the OLP vault. We have paused all trading. The team is investigating.
— Ostium (@Ostium) July 15, 2026
Ostium provides perpetual trading for tokenized real-world assets, giving users onchain access to markets beyond crypto. The project recently secured $20 million to grow its decentralized platform for trading real-world assets via perpetual futures.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Vivian Nguyen. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Adresa musti_akrep zneužila zranitelnost na Ostium a získala 23,75 milionu USDC, které na Arbitrum okamžitě směnila za 12 085 ETH za cenu 1 965 USD za kus.
According to EmberCN’s monitoring, an hour and a half ago, the DeBank address under the username musti_akrep exploited a vulnerability on Perp DEX Ostium to gain 23.75 million USDC, transferred the funds to the Arbitrum blockchain, and immediately converted the USDC into 12,085 ETH at a purchase price of $1,965.
Crypto clearing startup Glacis Labs has closed a $6.8 million seed round. The round was led by Lightspeed Faction, with participation from Franklin Templeton, Coinbase Ventures, A.GAIN (formerly IDC Ventures), Protein Capital, and Techni Ventures, structured as an equity-plus-token warrant deal. The funding will primarily be used to expand its core product, the ZeroDelta platform, and support the growth of its engineering, compliance, and marketing teams. ZeroDelta is a multi-chain clearing platform that facilitates matching, netting, and final settlement of cross-chain digital assets. It currently focuses on serving stablecoins and has processed over $1 billion in cumulative trading volume to date.
24 minutes ago
The United States will issue a $1 Trump gold coin to commemorate the 250th anniversary of its founding.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced today that the U.S. Mint will produce a $1 commemorative "gold coin" — gold in appearance but containing no actual gold or precious metals — to mark the 250th anniversary of the founding of the United States. The obverse features a portrait of President Trump in a suit and tie, paired with the inscriptions "LIBERTY," "IN GOD WE TRUST," and the dates 1776-2026; the reverse displays the U.S. Great Seal eagle, marked with "$1" and "250." The coin is expected to be released this fall. The move breaks the longstanding tradition that living presidents typically do not appear on U.S. currency, with Bessent describing it as a "lasting symbol of patriotism" and "a commemoration of the legacy of freedom."
24 minutes ago
Trump: Data centers are a cash cow and one of the largest drivers of future job growth.
Trump posted that data centers are one of the biggest drivers of future job growth. They are large-scale, powerful, and have broad prospects, serving as cash cows for their respective states. However, for political reasons, the Governor of New York State terminated all data center projects under construction or planned in New York. These companies are now flocking to Alabama, Florida, Texas, Arizona, and many other states. The tax revenues and jobs brought by data centers are truly a huge source of wealth! New York State has made a bad decision. All this revenue and other benefits will flow to so-called "red states" (states dominated by the Republican Party) and some "blue states" (states dominated by the Democratic Party). These states not only have lower taxes but also can create record job opportunities. They will bear their own water and electricity costs, and the remaining funds will be returned to state governments and local communities. For the states and communities fortunate enough to secure data centers, these facilities are undoubtedly huge assets. New York State should immediately reverse its policy. We must never allow radical left-wing Democrats to make us lose data centers, artificial intelligence, and all these amazing new technologies, letting them fall into the hands of other countries!
24 minutes ago
Goldman Sachs' View: Storage Market Shows Structural Shifts, Partial Replacement of DRAM by NAND for Cost Reduction Becomes a Practical Trend
Citirni analyst Jukan referenced Goldman Sachs’ monthly conference call remarks on the memory sector, noting clients’ strong resistance to DRAM price hikes approaching 30%, leading to a modest downward revision of third-quarter DRAM price growth expectations. Meanwhile, the outlook for NAND has grown more optimistic: AI-related KV cache offloading demand continues to exceed expectations, paired with an emerging trend of using NAND to replace expensive DRAM, further supporting NAND demand. The analyst holds a positive view on SK Hynix’s second-quarter performance, projecting revenue of approximately 85 trillion won and a gross margin of 63%. Relevant stocks include SK Hynix, Micron, and SanDisk. The commentary also reveals structural shifts in the memory market. Previously, explosive HBM demand from AI servers drove DRAM prices soaring, but once price increases hit the 30% threshold, clients began resisting further hikes, leading to a temporary slowdown in the pace of DRAM price growth. NAND is taking on a new role in AI infrastructure: KV cache is critical in inference scenarios, and using cheaper NAND to partially replace expensive DRAM to reduce costs is becoming a practical trend. This divergence also implies that internal capital rotation within the storage industry chain may continue; investors should exercise greater caution regarding short-term earnings expectations for DRAM-related stocks, while the fundamental improvement in the NAND segment may not yet be fully priced in.
24 minutes ago
Kraken Launches Customized Crypto Vaults, Allowing Users to Earn Yields on Idle Bitcoin, Ethereum (ETH) and Stablecoins
Kraken Institutional has announced a partnership with on-chain yield platform Upshift, allowing qualified institutional clients to earn returns on idle Bitcoin, Ethereum, stablecoins and other crypto assets directly within Kraken’s compliant custody framework. Unlike traditional pooled vaults, Upshift will build dedicated, customized vaults for each client, fully tailored to their investment strategies, risk parameters, liquidity needs and asset portfolios. Assets will be allocated to these non-custodial vaults, then deployed to selected on-chain contracts, with clients’ segregated Kraken custody accounts receiving a receipt token.
24 minutes ago
SpaceX falls below its $135 IPO price for the first time; US-listed space-related stocks decline across the board.
According to market data from BIT (bit.com), during U.S. stock intraday trading, SpaceX (SPCX) fell below its IPO price of $135 for the first time, currently trading at $133.6. U.S. space-related stocks declined across the board: AST SpaceMobile (ASTS) dropped 5.26%, Rocket Lab (RKLB) fell 3.4%, and Redwire (RDW) declined 3.4%.
LayerZero Addresses Theft Fears Head-OnCross-chain messaging protocol LayerZero (@LayerZero_Core) has moved to quash fears of a security breach, confirming that funds flagged as suspicious were not stolen. According to the protocol's own disclosure, the movements were carried out as part of "standard inventory operations" and do not represent a loss of user assets.
The team was clear on two points: funds are not at risk, and the executor wallet in question was not compromised. The statement came in response to circulating reports that suggested a potential exploit or unauthorised withdrawal had taken place.
What Is a LayerZero Executor and Why Does It Matter?The executor wallet sits at the centre of how LayerZero delivers messages across blockchains. Executors ensure the seamless execution of messages on the destination chain by following instructions set by the application owner on how to automatically deliver omnichain messages. In practical terms, an executor is an off-chain service that executes messages on the destination chain after verification. Because executor wallets handle destination-chain gas and delivery, they hold operational balances that can be moved in the ordinary course of protocol management, making routine withdrawals easy to misread from the outside.
It is also worth noting that, by design, even if all executors go offline, messages remain safe and can be delivered later, while verifiers cannot censor execution. This architectural separation between verification and execution is a core safety feature of LayerZero v2.
LayerZero is one of the more widely used cross-chain infrastructure layers in the market. The protocol is the messaging foundation behind more than 733 omnichain fungible tokens, including Tether's USDT0 and PayPal's PYUSD, that have collectively processed over $166.9 billion in cross-chain transfers.
For now, LayerZero says operations are normal and users have no cause for concern. The episode is a reminder of how quickly on-chain wallet movements can be misread, particularly for infrastructure protocols where operational wallets regularly cycle funds as part of day-to-day management.
Sources:
LayerZero Documentation: Executors
LayerZero Official Website
Virtuals Protocol na Robinhood Chain zavedl otevřený a bez povolení fungující mechanismus pro skládání více aktiv do jednoho tokenizovaného indexového koše. Tvůrci koše získávají poplatky pokaždé, když ho někdo mintuje.
A New Way to Bundle Assets on Robinhood Chain@Virtuals_io has introduced a new architecture on Robinhood Chain that allows users to aggregate multiple assets into a single, customizable token. The mechanism lets any participant combine several Robinhood-native assets, including $VIRTUAL, $CASHCAT, $ARROW, and $VEX, into a tokenized index basket, effectively bringing index fund logic on-chain.
The design is open and permissionless. Anyone can publish a composite asset, and as other users mint the basket, the creator earns passive protocol fees. This structure removes the need for a centralized index provider and distributes that role across the network.
Virtuals and Robinhood Chain: A Growing PartnershipThe index fund feature builds on a broader integration between the two platforms. Robinhood unveiled its mainnet on July 1, describing it as a fast, secure, AI-native blockchain built for real-world assets, with Virtuals confirmed as an infrastructure partner from day one. On July 10, Robinhood confirmed the infrastructure was officially live, enabling developers to begin building AI agents directly on the chain.
Virtuals Protocol is already one of the more active platforms in the tokenized AI agent space. The protocol describes itself as decentralized infrastructure enabling AI agents to conduct commerce, coordinate tasks, and generate economic value on-chain, with $VIRTUAL serving as the base liquidity pair across the ecosystem. The protocol's architecture is built around the Agent Commerce Protocol, a tokenization platform, and the GAME framework, a modular decision-making engine for autonomous agents.
The tokenized index feature extends this composability in a new direction, allowing users to construct and publish their own basket products rather than simply trading individual agent tokens. By earning fees each time another user mints the basket, index creators have a direct financial incentive to curate well-performing asset combinations, a model that mirrors passive income structures seen in traditional finance but executed entirely on-chain.
Sources:
Coinpedia: Virtuals Protocol price jumps 20% as Robinhood Chain integration fuels AI trading narrative
Datawallet: What is Virtuals Protocol?
QuickNode: Virtuals Protocol Builders Guide
Hyperliquid přidal před IPO perpetual na CXMT, který na trhu implikuje valuaci asi 535 miliard USD, tedy 526 % nad IPO cenou. Jde jen o syntetickou expozici, ne o vlastnictví akcií.
Hyperliquid has added a pre-IPO perpetual market linked to ChangXin Memory Technologies, or CXMT, giving traders synthetic exposure to the Chinese chipmaker before its Shanghai debut.
Summary
Hyperliquid listed a CXMT pre-IPO perpetual as the chipmaker prepares its July 27 Shanghai debut. CXMT’s contract price near $8 implied a $535 billion valuation, 526% above its IPO price. The market offers synthetic exposure, not ownership of CXMT shares listed on Shanghai’s STAR Market. The contract, listed as xyz, traded near $8 on July 15, according to on-chain market data cited by Hyperinsight. Applied to CXMT’s expected post-IPO share count of 66.881 billion shares, that price implies a valuation near $535 billion, about 6.3 times its official IPO valuation.
Hyperliquid Lists CXMT, Potentially A-Share’s Largest IPO and 4th-Largest DRAM Maker
Following the listing of the “CSI STAR Market 50 ETF”, Hyperliquid has officially added ChangXin Memory Technologies (CXMT). As A-share listings such as CXMT on the STAR Market require a RMB… pic.twitter.com/eGSQvziPpZ
— Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) July 15, 2026 Hyperliquid opens a synthetic route to CXMT The CXMT contract operates through Hyperliquid’s HIP-3 framework, which allows outside deployers to create perpetual markets linked to assets beyond cryptocurrencies. These markets trade as derivatives rather than spot securities, so the CXMT contract does not provide ownership, dividends or voting rights in the Shanghai-listed company.
Individual investors on China’s STAR Market generally face a RMB 500,000 asset threshold and a two-year trading-experience requirement. Hyperliquid offers a separate synthetic market that can give eligible users price exposure without access to the underlying A-share. The distinction also means the contract price can differ sharply from CXMT’s official share price.
CXMT contract trades far above IPO valuation CXMT priced its IPO at RMB 8.66 per share and expects to raise about RMB 57.9 billion, or $8.55 billion, before any over-allotment option. Reuters reported that the deal will be Asia’s largest IPO of 2026 so far and China’s biggest A-share semiconductor offering, surpassing SMIC’s 2020 share sale.
At the offer price, CXMT’s expected post-listing value is about RMB 579.2 billion, or roughly $85.5 billion. A synthetic price near $8 implies about $535 billion, placing the Hyperliquid contract around 526% above the dollar equivalent of the IPO price. The gap reflects pricing in a separate derivatives market and does not set CXMT’s official equity valuation.
China’s largest DRAM maker prepares for listing CXMT is China’s largest DRAM producer and ranks fourth globally, behind Samsung Electronics, SK Hynix and Micron. Recent market estimates place its global DRAM share near 8%. The company has expanded as China invests heavily in domestic semiconductor production and demand for memory chips grows alongside artificial intelligence infrastructure.
Reuters also reported that CXMT secured a long-term memory supply agreement with Tencent worth more than RMB 20 billion, or about $2.94 billion. Investor subscriptions for the STAR Market offering begin on July 16, while the shares are scheduled to start trading in Shanghai on July 27. CXMT plans to use the IPO proceeds for production and technology investment.
Hyperliquid widens its real-world asset markets Hyperliquid’s HIP-3 framework allows builders to launch perpetual markets linked to stocks, commodities and other real-world assets. A pre-IPO SpaceX contract also traded through the framework, showing how on-chain derivatives can create markets around companies before their public shares become available.
Hyperliquid has also expanded its connection to tokenized securities. As reported by crypto.news, Ondo Finance brought 35 tokenized U.S. stocks and ETFs to HyperEVM in June. Those products differ from the CXMT perpetual because tokenized securities can use structures backed by assets held through custodians, while perpetuals provide synthetic price exposure.
The CXMT market gives traders another route to speculate on a major public offering before its debut. Attention will now turn to whether the 526% premium narrows before subscriptions start and after the underlying shares begin trading on the STAR Market.
Pump.fun released a total of 57.279 billion PUMP tokens worth $86.49 million at their first release from the lock-up. These tokens have been distributed among 121 wallets. This marks the start of a three-year vesting period for team and investor allocations. Pump.fun has reached the next stage in its roadmap for the team and investors. This milestone is in the wake of the expiration of the one-year lock-up period of the project. According to blockchain analysis firm EmberCN, Pump.fun issued a total of 57.279 billion PUMP tokens at its first unlock. The market value of the distributed allocation was approximately $86.49 million.
The tokens were distributed to 121 wallets instead of being concentrated in fewer numbers of wallets. The distribution process has officially begun the three-year vesting schedule for the team members and early investors. This unlock is considered the first unlock in the framework of the token distribution plan that has been created by the Pump.fun team. It is common practice to track vesting periods because they help gradually increase token circulation over time. Vesting periods differ from other distribution methods because tokens are released over several years rather than all at once.
— 余烬 (@EmberCN) July 15, 2026 Distribution Occurs after One-Year Lock-Up Period Ends Pump.fun has implemented a one-year lock-up during which no team and investor allocation was allowed to enter into circulation. After this lock-up ended, the project proceeded with its first intended distribution while retaining the vesting process that was previously announced. The distributed tokens became the first part of a three-year-long distribution period.
The number of 121 wallets involved shows that more than one address was allocated with the distributed tokens and that the tokens were not distributed to a single wallet. Blockchain analysts can trace these transactions by using blockchain explorers, as token allocations are transparent for supported blockchain networks.
The vesting periods ensure that the founders, contributors, and investors get access to the tokens allotted to them. Typically, the vesting periods can assist in preventing fast supply increases compared to other token distribution methods.
Market Keeps an Eye on Upcoming Vesting Events With the completion of the one-year lock-up period of one year for Pump. fun, the first unlock takes place at the start of its three-year vesting period. In the future, the token unlock events will occur according to the timeline set up. The market players will keep watching the upcoming unlock events.
Highlighted Crypto News:
Cumberland Secures Singapore MAS MPI Licence for Regulated Crypto Payment Services
I specialize in Web3 and crypto writing, producing clear, research-driven content on blockchain, cryptocurrencies, and market trends.
NOXA bylo dva po sobě jdoucí dny offline, takže ohrozilo rozhraní, přes které se na Robinhood Chain vybírají poplatky a zobrazují nové tokeny. CASHCAT přitom zůstává obchodovatelný a jeho tržní kapitalizace byla 226 milionů USD.
For five consecutive days, a launchpad that did not exist a month ago collected more protocol fees than Pump.fun. On its best day, NOXA took in $2.33 million while the Solana incumbent, the platform that has minted eleven million tokens and defined an entire market cycle, managed $575,500.
Summary
NOXA briefly out-earned Pump.fun and became Robinhood Chain’s dominant launchpad before its website went offline. CASHCAT’s $226 million market capitalization depends less on token mechanics than on attention, discovery, and launchpad infrastructure. The outage did not stop CASHCAT from trading, but it threatened the interface that drives creator fees, discovery, and momentum. Locked liquidity protects against one kind of rug, but it does not protect a memecoin from losing attention. The real test is whether NOXA’s interface, fee claims, and market share recover before competitors absorb its launchpad flow. NOXA had launched more than 60,000 tokens, captured roughly 75% of all deployments on Robinhood Chain, and pulled 267,642 unique wallets onto a network that went live on July 1. Its flagship asset, a cat themed memecoin named CASHCAT, had run to a market capitalization of $226 million.Then the website went down. It stayed down for two days.Not the chain. Not the pools. Not the tokens. The front end, the thing that made all of it legible, the interface where creators claimed fees and buyers found what was trending and the entire machinery of manufactured urgency lived. It returned an error, and it kept returning an error while the market it had built continued trading without it.
The official explanation is a Cloudflare problem. The team’s account remains active, telling users a new site is in testing and that creator fees will be claimable through the interface once it goes live. Nothing in the public record contradicts that account. Nothing in the public record confirms it either, and in a market where the base rate for launchpad tokens dying is somewhere around 98%, two days of silence from the infrastructure holding a nine figure ecosystem is not a neutral event. It is a live experiment in what a memecoin is actually worth when the machine that made it stops answering.That experiment has a number attached, and the number is $226 million.
Noxa the launchpad on Robinhood casually decided to rug and take down their website after making $10m in a week
They could've just kept it live and disappeared, they would've made more money
People can't even scam properly these days 😭😭😭 https://t.co/zj2gbXDQar
— Jeremy (@Jeremybtc) July 14, 2026 What CASHCAT is, and why it exists Cash Cat was the original name Robinhood’s founders considered for the company, a detail preserved in a decade old tweet from chief executive Vladimir Tenev and in an early mascot the brokerage used before it became a mainstream financial institution. When Robinhood launched its own layer 2 network on July 1, the mascot was sitting there, unclaimed, perfectly formed as a memecoin premise: the discarded name of a company now worth tens of billions, revived on that company’s own chain.
Somebody launched it on NOXA. It worked spectacularly. CASHCAT rose more than 5,530% over seven days and more than 1,400% in a single twenty four hour stretch, hitting an all time high near $0.1418 while bitcoin fell roughly 2% over the same window, which is the clearest possible evidence that nothing macro was driving it. Onchain analysts surfaced the trades that make these markets self sustaining: one wallet turned $838 into $1.05 million over twenty days, another converted $86 into $1.6 million. Tenev himself posted about the chain’s ability to host both memecoins and real world assets, and attention did the rest.
There were no exchange listings. There was no protocol upgrade, no partnership, no treasury, no roadmap, and no team in any conventional sense. There was a joke about a company’s abandoned name, deployed on that company’s chain, at the exact moment the chain became interesting. That is the entire fundamental basis of a $226 million asset, and stating it plainly is not a criticism. It is a description of the category, one that governs the whole meme coins sector and has for years. Attention was the product, and the product sold.
Công nhận chain Robinhood nhà giàu có khác.
Chỉ trong vòng chư đầy 1 tuần lễ con hàng top 1 meme CASHCAT đạt hơn 180M mcap.
Dòng tiền đang đổ dồn về Robinhood Chain volume mỗi ngày đâu đó toàn gần 1B$ trong lúc market đang down sml.
Nếu mà con hàng meme CASHCAT… pic.twitter.com/apGbjqhdXv
— LeDuc (@LeDuc_03) July 14, 2026 The launchpad that ate Robinhood Chain NOXA’s rise is the more revealing half of the story, because it exposes how much of a memecoin ecosystem is infrastructure rather than tokens.NOXA Fun is a hybrid launchpad. Where Pump.fun runs a custom bonding curve and migrates liquidity to an open exchange at graduation, NOXA deploys an ERC-20 and adds single sided liquidity to a Uniswap V3 pool in one transaction, making the token tradable on a public exchange from its first block. The liquidity position is locked permanently in a locker contract that never moves and cannot be pulled, which removes the classic liquidity drain rug and eliminates the migration window that has historically been the riskiest moment in a bonding curve launch. On its own terms the design is more conservative than the model it competes with, and understanding why requires knowing how liquidity pools and automated market makers actually work.
The platform layered on protections as it scaled: anti-vampire measures, anti-bundling detection, multi wallet controls, iterating fast enough that observers noted it week by week. Its native token, deployed on a different chain entirely and pending migration, carried a fully diluted valuation of $11 to $12 million after the team burned about 40% of supply, against $11 million in cumulative fees across four days. Pump.fun’s fully diluted valuation, for comparison, sits near $1.5 billion.
That gap is the valuation paradox the market has been arguing about all week. A platform earning at the rate of the category leader, valued at under 1% of it. There are three readings and they cannot all be right. The bullish one says the market has not repriced yet and NOXA is the most obvious mispricing on any chain. The structural one says fee run rates from a chain in its second week are not a business, they are a spike, and pricing a spike at Pump.fun multiples would be insane. The dark one says the discount is the market’s estimate of how likely the whole thing disappears.
Two days of downtime moved that argument out of theory.It is worth noting how quickly the market found the argument in the first place. Traders were circulating the fee-to-valuation gap within days of NOXA’s rise, framing it as an obvious mispricing against Pump.fun. That enthusiasm is itself information: a discount this visible on an asset this liquid is rarely a gift. Markets price launchpad tokens cheaply for the same reason they price mining stocks cheaply during a boom, because everyone can see that the current rate of extraction has nothing to do with the durable rate.
The mechanics of a two week fee explosion The scale of what NOXA collected deserves unpacking, because the number is doing something other than what it appears to do.Launchpads earn on activity. A creation fee when a token deploys, a share of trading fees on every swap through the pool, and in NOXA’s structure, fees flowing from Uniswap V3 positions at the 1% tier that the platform’s tokens use. None of that revenue depends on any token succeeding. It depends only on churn, and churn is exactly what a brand new chain with a retail audience and 19,000 daily deployments produces in abundance. Across four days the platform booked roughly $11 million against a token valued at $12 million, which reads as an obvious arbitrage until you ask the question underneath: is that four day rate a business or a weather event?
The comparison to Pump.fun cuts both ways here. Pump.fun’s $1.5 billion valuation rests on two years of proven durability across multiple attention cycles, a graduated exchange of its own, a completed billion dollar token sale, and a fee base that survived the collapse of the memecoin mania that created it. NOXA has a fortnight, on a chain with a fortnight, in the single most favorable conditions any launchpad will ever see: a novel network, a mainstream brand halo, no competitors holding entrenched positions, and a flagship token running 5,000% in a week. Annualizing that is not analysis. It is extrapolation from a peak.
Which is why the outage is such an efficient test. If the fee run rate was a business, it survives two days offline and resumes. If it was a weather event, the two days are the whole event, and the rate never returns because the conditions that produced it were never repeatable. The market gets its answer within a week, and it gets it cheaply, which almost never happens in this asset class.
What the outage actually threatens Here is the part that matters for CASHCAT holders, and it is more subtle than it first appears.The tokens are fine. That is not a reassurance; it is a technical fact with sharp edges. CASHCAT is an ERC-20 on Robinhood Chain, trading against a Uniswap V3 pool whose liquidity is locked in a contract that operates whether or not anyone can load a website. Uniswap does not need NOXA. The chain does not need NOXA. Any wallet can interact with the pool directly, and any aggregator can route to it without the launchpad’s involvement or permission. In the strict sense, a launchpad outage cannot touch the assets it launched, and anyone claiming CASHCAT holders are trapped has confused the interface with the market.
What the outage threatens is everything around the token. Creator fees accrue through the platform, and the team’s own statement acknowledges that claiming them requires the interface, meaning revenue owed to thousands of token deployers currently sits behind a domain that does not resolve. Discovery collapses without the front end: new tokens launch elsewhere, existing tokens lose the trending feeds and progress bars that manufacture the urgency these markets run on. And the flywheel reverses. Onchain data already showed new memecoin creation on Robinhood Chain climbing past 19,500 in a day while competing launchpads including flap.sh, trensh.today, and bankr absorbed share that NOXA could not defend from behind an error page.
So the honest framing of the risk is not that CASHCAT stops trading. It is that CASHCAT stops mattering. A memecoin’s value is the attention flowing through it, the attention is manufactured by an interface, and the interface has been offline for the two most valuable days a two week old ecosystem will ever have.
🔥 Cuộc chiến meme trên Robinhood đang cực kì căng thẳng. Đâu sẽ là cái tên thay thế vị trí Noxa để lại ?
Ngay sau khi Noxa tuyên bố shutdown rất nhiều meme đã dump vì user thất vọng với dự án
Rất nhiều Kols đang thi nhau shill con hàng $Marian như là kẻ thay… https://t.co/fmDwc9qbmb pic.twitter.com/EQ6U6vKi6H
— HC Gem Alerts (@HCGemAlerts) July 15, 2026 Is this a rug? The question is being asked openly, and it deserves a rigorous answer rather than a vibe.Take the case for calm first. The team is publicly communicating during the outage, which is close to disqualifying as rug behavior: the defining feature of an exit is silence, deleted accounts, and vanished channels, not status updates about a staging environment. Liquidity is locked by design and cannot be withdrawn, so the single most common rug mechanism is architecturally unavailable here. The platform burned 40% of its own token supply days before going dark, an odd move for anyone planning to sell the rest. Cloudflare outages are real, routine, and have taken down far larger properties than a two week old launchpad. And the underlying economics are absurd for an exit: a platform earning millions in fees per day has vastly more to gain from staying online than from disappearing with whatever sits in a fee contract.
Now the case for concern. Two days is a long outage for an infrastructure problem that the operator attributes to a third party content delivery network, and it is exactly as long as it takes for competitors to take a market. Creator fees being unclaimable during the outage means real money is unreachable for real users, whatever the cause, and the promise to make them claimable “once the new site goes live” converts a technical failure into a trust exposure with no deadline attached. The platform’s own token lives on a different chain pending migration, which is an added moving part at precisely the wrong moment. And the category’s history is unkind: the industry’s canonical rug taxonomy distinguishes hard rugs, where developers vanish, from soft rugs, where involvement gradually decays while the thing quietly dies, and soft rugs look exactly like an infrastructure problem that never quite resolves.
The evidence, weighed honestly, favors the boring explanation. A team executing an exit does not typically burn its own supply, lock its liquidity permanently, post status updates, and abandon a business printing seven figures a day. But the market is not pricing the probability of a rug. It is pricing the probability of irrelevance, which is a different and much higher number, and two days offline in a launchpad war is how irrelevance starts.
There is also a category error worth naming, because it is corrupting the discourse around this. A rug is an act by an identifiable party who takes something they controlled and should not have taken. A collapse is a market outcome in which nobody did anything wrong and the money disappears regardless. Memecoin markets produce collapses at overwhelming rates without any fraud involved, which means most tokens that go to zero were never rugged, they were simply correct valuations of nothing arriving on schedule. Applying the word rug to a launchpad outage flattens that distinction and, more practically, sets holders up to look for the wrong evidence. They watch for a villain when the thing actually killing their position is indifference.
What would settle it is specific and observable. Watch whether the new interface ships and creator fees actually become claimable. Watch whether NOXA’s fee share recovers or whether flap.sh and its peers keep the ground. Watch the team’s wallets. Watch whether Robinhood Chain’s daily token creation stays near Solana’s or reverts once the novelty burns off. None of those require trusting anyone’s statement.
What the numbers actually say about the ecosystem Look past the fees at the composition of the activity, and a less flattering picture emerges.More than 60,000 tokens launched through NOXA. Of those, the platform’s own interface displays a handful with meaningful market capitalizations, headed by CASHCAT, with the rest of the visible field clustering in the hundreds of thousands or low millions and the long tail invisible entirely. Peak single day volume of $252.9 million across the platform, with a single project accounting for $224 million of a comparable day, means the flagship was not one asset among many. It was the market, and everything else was noise around it.
That concentration is the ecosystem’s actual risk profile. A launchpad whose fee base is one token’s trading is not a platform, it is a single asset’s plumbing, and its revenue lives or dies with the attention on that one asset. The 640,000 unique holder addresses and 267,000 wallets NOXA brought onto Robinhood Chain are impressive as a distribution achievement and mostly irrelevant as a durability signal, because holders of a token that ran 5,000% in a week are not users, they are a queue.
None of this is unique to NOXA. It describes Pump.fun’s first year, Four.Meme’s ascendancy, LetsBonk’s arrival, and every launchpad that has ever briefly topped a fee chart. What is unique here is the timing: a platform reached that concentration and then lost its interface, in the same fortnight, on a chain that had no proven alternative for anyone to fall back to. The stress test arrived before the structure was finished.
The dependency nobody priced Strip the specifics away and the CASHCAT situation exposes a structural feature of this entire market that the fair launch ideology obscures.
The pitch for permissionless launchpads is that they remove intermediaries. No gatekeepers, no vetting, no company standing between a creator and a market. Bonding curves and locked liquidity mean the platform cannot rug you, which the industry has treated as the end of the argument about platform risk.
It is not. The platform cannot take your tokens, and it does not have to. It can simply stop generating the attention that gives them value, and the tokens will die exactly as thoroughly as if it had drained the pool. Locked liquidity protects the mechanism and does nothing for the market. A permanently locked Uniswap position holding a token nobody is looking at is a monument, not an asset. The lock guarantees you can always sell. It guarantees nothing about whether anyone will be there to buy, and those are the only two facts that matter, in that order.
This is the same lesson that keeps arriving in different costumes. When a DAO’s treasury drained through a governance process working exactly as designed, the failure was not in the code, a dynamic crypto.news traced in detail in its account of how BonkDAO lost $20 million in a single vote. When BNB Chain’s Four.Meme briefly flipped Pump.fun on daily revenue, the lesson was that launchpad dominance is a function of where attention currently lives and nothing more durable than that. Infrastructure risk in crypto is rarely custodial. It is attentional, and no audit measures it.
CASHCAT holders own an asset with permanently locked liquidity on a chain backed by a publicly traded brokerage, launched through a platform with better rug protections than the category leader, and every one of those facts is true and none of them answers the only question that determines their outcome, which is whether anyone is still looking in a month.
Robinhood’s problem, arriving on schedule There is a second party to this that has said nothing, and its position gets more uncomfortable by the day.Robinhood Chain launched as infrastructure for onchain finance and real world asset tokenization. What it got in its first fortnight was a memecoin casino, more than $3 billion in decentralized exchange volume, honeypot tokens proliferating fast enough that cross chain provider Relay Protocol began publicly blocking them, and a scam token that used the hijacked accounts of SpaceX and Starlink to rob buyers on its rails, an episode that arrived within weeks of SpaceX joining the Nasdaq-100 with its trade already running on crypto rails. NOXA, the largest single application on the chain, states plainly in its own interface that it is an independent project not affiliated with Robinhood Markets.
That disclaimer is doing an enormous amount of work. It is legally accurate and commercially irrelevant. A retail brokerage’s brand is on the chain, retail users are the audience, and the flagship asset of the ecosystem is literally named after the company’s original name and modeled on its own former mascot. Robinhood did not build CASHCAT, did not endorse it, and under the architecture it chose, cannot remove it. It will nonetheless own every consequence in the public reading, and its silence through both the SCATMAN affair and the NOXA outage suggests a company that has not decided what it wants to say, or has decided that saying anything invites the responsibility it structured the chain to avoid.
The permissionless design that made the chain’s launch explosive is the same design that makes the next fortnight unmanageable. That is not a contradiction anyone has solved, on any chain, including the ones without a brokerage’s name on them.
Where this lands Three outcomes are live, and the market is currently paying for the middle one.NOXA returns, ships the new interface, unlocks creator fees, and reclaims its share. The outage becomes a footnote, the valuation paradox resolves upward, and CASHCAT trades on whatever attention Robinhood Chain retains once its novelty is priced. This is the likeliest single outcome and the least interesting.
NOXA returns and the market has moved. The fees flowed to flap.sh and the rest during the blackout, the trending feeds rebuilt themselves elsewhere, and NOXA is a large historical fee number attached to a platform nobody defaults to anymore. CASHCAT survives as an artifact of a moment, drifting on whatever residual community persists. This is the outcome that history most often delivers, because attention is the least loyal asset in this market and switching costs between launchpads are effectively zero. A creator chooses a platform in seconds and abandons it just as fast.
NOXA does not return in a form anyone trusts. The creator fees stay unclaimed, the explanation stays thin, and a two week old chain learns that its dominant application was a single point of failure with a status page. CASHCAT’s locked liquidity keeps a market technically alive at a price that reflects nobody caring.
The tokens survive all three scenarios. That is precisely the point that the fair launch pitch never quite says out loud: survival of the contract and survival of the value are unrelated propositions, and the second one depends entirely on infrastructure that owes its users nothing and can go dark for two days without breaking a single promise it ever made.The $226 million question is not whether CASHCAT can still be traded. It is whether $226 million was ever a fact about the token, or a fact about the launchpad, briefly measured through it.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Figures on protocol fees, token counts, market capitalizations, and wallet activity derive from third party sources including DefiLlama, Dune, Lookonchain, and platform interfaces, not from audited disclosures. No rug pull has been confirmed and the platform attributes its outage to a third party service failure. Details reflect information current as of July 14, 2026, and are subject to change. Always do your own research.
PUMP i přes uvolnění tokenů za 76 milionů USD vyskočil o 11 % díky slabší americké inflaci. Tým zatím rozdistribuoval jen 52 miliard PUMP za 76 milionů USD.
The native token of the Solana memecoin launchpad Pump.fun, PUMP, surged over 10% despite the massive token unlock finalized on the 14th of July. The recent token unlock began on the 12th of July, with 54 billion PUMP tokens (5.4% of supply and worth $86 million) for team members.
Another tranche of 35 billion PUMP (worth $56 million) was also released for existing investors. That’s about 89 billion PUMP tokens worth $142 million that could easily trigger massive selling pressure.
As of writing, only 52 billion PUMP tokens (worth $76 million) had been distributed to team members. However, half of the $142 million unlocked tokens remained a massive overhang that could weigh on the market.
Will PUMP’s rally falter amid a $142M supply overhang? On the contrary, the token price blasted 11%, bringing its weekly recovery gains to over 20%. The rally was partly driven by a broader market relief bounce after a softer U.S. inflation print eased Fed rate hike fears.
Source: PUMP/USDT, TradingView But the overhang could quickly reemerge if the broader relief bounce fades. Notably, an analyst warned further wallet distributions were likely in the coming days. If the recipients sell their received tokens, the additional supply could put pressure on PUMP’s price.
On the price chart, the token touched the upper Bollinger Band (BB) near $0.00016 as of writing. Any short-term pullback would likely retest the immediate support (white) at $0.00014 or the lower BB band.
PUMP faces an 18x supply overhang Worth pointing out that PUMP has recorded aggressive buybacks, which have cleared 15% of the circulating supply. Currently, the project is removing an average of 5 billion PUMP tokens per month.
Compared to the total of 89 billion PUMP tokens unlocked, that would be 18x more supply overhang than the current buyback pace. So, if the entire tranche of released tokens hits the market in the coming days, the pressure could drag the PUMP price lower.
Source: Blockworks (PUMP buyback) That said, there was only a minimal distribution from whale wallets with 1 million PUMP and 1 billion PUMP tokens (small dips in lines).
This meant spot selling pressure was still minimal, at least as of writing. However, if they offload more of the unlocked tokens, the recent recovery will likely stall.
Source: Santiment Final Summary PUMP defied a $76 million token unlock distributed to team members and rallied 11% thanks to softer U.S. inflation data. However, there was an 18x more supply overhang than the PUMP buyback rate, which could exert pressure if more team members sell their tokens.
Galaxy Digital Head of Research Alex Thorn stated that between 2024 and 2025, a significant volume of long-dormant Bitcoin (BTC) was reactivated and transferred on-chain, with the activity’s scale second only to 2017. He noted that the "Great Distribution" phase driven by this wave of old BTC reactivation has now largely concluded, and it is projected that the number of BTC reactivated in 2026 will be less than half of the 2025 figure.
Relevant content
Bank of America: Fund managers’ bullishness on US stocks hits highest level since December 2024.
Bank of America’s Global Fund Manager Survey shows that fund managers’ bullishness toward U.S. stocks has reached its highest level since December 2024. A net 24% of respondents expect U.S. equities to outperform other regions, marking the third-highest allocation weight to U.S. stocks over the past five years. In contrast, investors have cut their allocations to British stocks, with fund managers’ confidence in London-listed shares falling to its lowest point since August 2020. Compared to other regions, the UK stock market has underperformed so far this year: London’s FTSE 100 has risen 5.7% year-to-date, while the S&P 500 has gained more than 10%.
6 minutes ago
SK Hynix's US-listed ADR premium over its Korean shares narrowed to 30.7%.
According to market data from BIT (bit.com), SK Hynix (SKHY) is down 5.8% in U.S. pre-market trading, with its current share price at $182.6. Bitget market data shows that SK Hynix’s closing price on the South Korean stock market today is 2,082,000 won, equivalent to roughly $1,397. Given each SK Hynix ADR represents one-tenth of an ordinary share, the $182.6 price is 30.7% higher than $139.7 (one-tenth of $1,397), a sharp narrowing of the premium from the 51.5% recorded at this morning’s U.S. stock close.
6 minutes ago
Warren Buffett: Not investing in Google back then was a mistake, and it is "more likely to be a winner" now.
Warren Buffett just stated that failing to invest in Google back then was a mistake, noting that based on its current performance, the company is now "more likely to be a winner". He also reaffirmed his optimism about Berkshire Hathaway's investment in Apple. Greg Abel is the current "decision-maker", but neither side will take any action that the other does not endorse. According to market data from BIT (bit.com), Google's US-listed stock is down 0.5% in pre-market trading, while Berkshire Hathaway currently holds approximately $310 billion worth of shares in Alphabet, Google's parent company.
6 minutes ago
Trump’s permanent daylight saving time bill passes the US House of Representatives review.
The U.S. House of Representatives passed the Sunshine Protection Act in a bipartisan vote of 308 in favor and 117 against. The bill aims to make daylight saving time permanent, adopting the current March-to-November schedule year-round. This would permanently set the U.S. stock market opening time to 9:30 PM (UTC+8), instead of switching to 10:30 PM (UTC+8) during standard time periods. States may opt out before the bill takes effect. The legislation has now been sent to the Senate for consideration and has not yet passed the upper chamber. Donald Trump publicly supports the bill, noting that the biannual clock adjustments impose huge economic costs, and he will work to push it into law. Some Republicans oppose the measure, arguing that later winter sunrises will harm student safety on their way to school, possibly leading to students commuting in darkness or delayed class start times. Supporters contend that eliminating clock changes can improve sleep, reduce accidents, and boost economic activity.
6 minutes ago
BNB has completed its 36th quarterly token burn, totaling approximately 1.6158 million BNB, valued at around $913.7 million.
BNB Chain completed its 36th quarterly BNB burn today, with a total of 1,615,827.795 BNB destroyed, valued at approximately $931.7 million at the time. The burn was executed via BSC’s on-chain Auto-Burn mechanism, and the transaction hash has been made public. The remaining total BNB supply stands at around 133.17 million. BNB’s ongoing goal of reducing its total supply to 100 million is aimed at boosting its deflationary properties and supporting the growth of the BNB Chain ecosystem.
6 minutes ago
Stable announces the launch of StablePay, a global USDT-based daily payment application.
Stable, a USDT blockchain platform focused on stablecoin payments, has announced the launch of StablePay, a global daily USDT payment application that integrates everyday USDT payment and yield-earning features into a single mobile app, with no delays, no fees, and frictionless transactions.
Japonsko schválilo reformu, která zakazuje insider trading s kryptoměnami a navrhuje jednotnou daň 20 % pro individuální investory. Nový rámec se má vztahovat na zhruba 105 digitálních aktiv a má také usnadnit schvalování Bitcoin a krypto ETF.
Japan has given its approval to a new reform of its digital currency laws as lawmakers enacted digital assets into the country’s financial markets regulatory system. The reform will implement stricter requirements for the industry such as a prohibition on insider trading and a tax cut for crypto. Moreover, it increases the possibility for Bitcoin, crypto ETFs to be launched in the future.
Japan Advances Major Crypto Bill Reform The law classifies cryptocurrencies more as an investment product than a payment product and places them under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA). The Japanese crypto bill was passed by the lower house in mid-June following approval of the proposal by the Cabinet on April 10, 2026. It will go through the upper house and be expected to complete the remaining legislative process in 2027.
The new framework will apply securities-like regulations to about 105 digital assets. Periodic disclosures will have to be made by the token issuers and there will be increased compliance requirements throughout the market. Authorities have also tightened up on explicit bans on insider trading in crypto assets.
Penalties for dealing unlawfully with the market have been raised to higher levels. Violations will be punished by an increase in max prison time from three years to 10 years. Fines will also be raised, up to 10 million yen from 3 million yen.
The reforms also include changes to crypto taxation. At this moment, digital asset trading profits are considered miscellaneous income and tax rates can reach as high as 55%. The government has proposed to replace the current tax system with a new flat tax at rate of 20% for individual investors. If approved by law, the tax changes will go into effect in 2028.
Bitcoin ETF Approval Soon? Previously, Finance Minister Satsuki Katayama has stated that the reforms will enhance investor protection and facilitate capital formation, while keeping financial markets fair.
According to the new classification, the regulation of Bitcoin and crypto ETFs in Japan should become easier as well. The revised framework may facilitate the approval of products like Yen denominated Bitcoins ETF in the future. There are already over 12 million verified crypto users in Japan with approximately $34 billion in crypto assets held under domestic custody.
For tokenized stock trading, visit our page on Best Platforms to Trade Tokenized Stocks.
XRPL EVM sidechain po roce drží jen 25 741 USD TVL a za posledních 24 hodin i 7 dní vykázal nulový objem obchodů. Původní odhad 600 milionů až 12 miliard USD se nenaplnil.
In June 2025, a week before the XRP Ledger’s EVM sidechain went live, the team building it published the arithmetic of what was coming. Polygon had contributed somewhere between $2 billion and $6 billion in total value locked to Ethereum, up to a tenth of the whole.
Summary
The XRPL EVM sidechain promised a $600 million to $12 billion TVL uplift but holds only $25,741 after one year. The chain is technically live, audited, and maintained, but almost no users or capital have arrived. Moai Finance has recorded just $95,008 in cumulative spot volume across the sidechain’s entire existence. XRPL’s institutional mainnet activity grew while permissionless EVM DeFi failed to gain traction. The result suggests EVM compatibility alone does not create demand without users already waiting for cheaper or better execution. If the XRPL EVM sidechain matched that trajectory, the post argued, the uplift to the XRP Ledger would run from $600 million to $12 billion, and it would fundamentally change the demand curve for XRP. Ninety entities were already building. Sixty days of testnet had pulled in developers who had never touched the XRP ecosystem. The technology was ready. The builders were here.The sidechain launched on June 30, 2025. The anniversary passed two weeks ago.
As of July 14, 2026, total value locked on the XRPL EVM sidechain is $25,741, according to DefiLlama. Chain fees over the past 24 hours: zero. Chain revenue: zero. Decentralized exchange volume over 24 hours: zero. Over seven days: also zero. The largest protocol on the chain, a decentralized exchange called XRiSE33 Network, holds $11,909. The second largest, a launchpad named Riddle, holds $8,831. Moai Finance, the only protocol on the chain that has ever recorded meaningful trading, has done $95,008 in cumulative spot volume across its entire existence and currently holds $1,117.
The low end of the projection was $600 million. The delivery is $25,741. That is not a shortfall. It is a rounding error against a rounding error, and it is the most instructive number in the XRP ecosystem right now, because of what else the same ledger accomplished during the same twelve months.
What was actually built The technical work was not the problem, and it is worth stating that clearly before the autopsy.The XRPL EVM sidechain is a Cosmos SDK chain running Ethereum Virtual Machine compatibility, connected to the XRP Ledger mainnet through the Axelar bridge, which links more than eighty networks. XRP is the native gas token. Bridged XRP locks on mainnet and mints a synthetic version on the sidechain, so the design preserves mainnet supply integrity while freeing the asset for smart contract use. Consensus is proof of authority, targeting up to 1,000 transactions per second at fees far below Ethereum’s. Squid handles cross-chain transfers as the official interface. Band Protocol supplies oracles, Grove supplies public RPC endpoints. Wormhole integration was slated to follow, extending reach to more than 200 applications across 35 ecosystems.
Ripple built it with Peersyst and contributors from the Cosmos community. crypto.news covered the mainnet launch on June 30, 2025, where Ripple’s David Schwartz framed the sidechain as extending the ecosystem without altering what makes the XRP Ledger reliable. The launch roster included Strobe, a money market for lending and overcollateralized borrowing; Securd, a lending protocol for financing collateralized leverage; Vertex, a derivatives venue; plus Moai, Elys, XRise, and Hammy. The infrastructure was audited end to end. Subsequent releases hardened it further, with a v11 upgrade focused on economic security, IBC transfer hardening, and proof of authority validator management, and an upgrade to Cosmos EVM v0.4.1 adding ERC-20 mint and burn plus current Ethereum improvement proposals.
None of that is vaporware. Every component works. Someone can bridge XRP to the sidechain right now, deploy a Solidity contract, and trade on a decentralized exchange. The chain is live, secure, and functionally complete.It is also empty.That is the part worth sitting with, because it inverts the usual crypto post-mortem. The standard failure story is a project that promised more than it could build: the whitepaper outran the engineers, the deadlines slipped, the product never shipped or shipped broken. XRPL EVM shipped, on schedule, working, audited, and maintained through multiple upgrades over the following year. Every promise about the technology was kept. The only promise that failed was the one about people.
The decline, measured The most damning fact is not the small number. It is the direction.In August 2025, roughly six weeks after launch, DefiLlama showed the sidechain hosting three decentralized exchanges and a single launchpad, with combined total value locked of $100,818. Twenty four hour volume across the entire chain was $3,238, every dollar of it from Moai Finance. Riddle, XRiSE33 Network, and SurgeDefi recorded no trading activity whatsoever. Developer data at the time counted 168 developers on XRPL EVM against 8,448 on Ethereum, a gap of roughly 98%.
That was the bad news at six weeks. Today, eleven months later, total value locked is $25,741. The chain lost roughly three quarters of the little it had. The protocol count is nominally higher, with Midas RWA, Hyperithm, Portal, Axelar, and an NFT marketplace called Mintiq now listed, but every one of those additions reports zero total value locked on this chain. They are multi-chain protocols that support XRPL EVM the way a restaurant supports a dietary restriction: the option exists on the menu and nobody orders it.
The volume figures are what turn an underperformance into something stranger. Zero over 24 hours. Zero over seven days. Moai Finance, the chain’s only functioning exchange by any historical measure, shows $95,008 in cumulative volume since inception. Not per day. Total, across a year of operation, on the flagship DeFi venue of a chain built for a token with a market capitalization near $68 billion.
A chain with $25,741 of capital and no trading is not a slow start. It is a chain nobody is using, and the trend line says that fewer people are using it every month.For scale, the entire TVL of the sidechain is currently less than the value of roughly 24,000 XRP. Ripple releases a billion tokens from escrow on the first of every month. The whole DeFi economy built on top of the XRP Ledger, through the official sidechain, could be funded out of forty thousandths of a single monthly escrow tranche.
Who was supposed to show up Reading the launch roster a year later is the clearest way to see what went wrong, because the roster was not thin. It was specific.Strobe was announced as a money market for lending and overcollateralized borrowing on XRPL. Securd was to provide passive income by financing collateralized leverage across DeFi positions. Vertex was a derivatives platform optimizing capital efficiency. Between them, those three cover the load-bearing categories of any DeFi economy: lending, leverage, and derivatives. Add a decentralized exchange for spot, an oracle from Band, RPC infrastructure from Grove, and a cross-chain interface from Squid, and the stack on paper was complete. Nothing essential was missing.
Today none of those three names appears among the protocols holding capital on the chain. The entire TVL sits in two decentralized exchanges and a launchpad. The lending market that would have made bridged XRP productive, the derivatives venue that would have given traders a reason to keep collateral there, the leverage layer that generates the recursive deposits which inflate every chain’s TVL figure: none of it materialized in a form anyone funded.
That absence explains the volume better than any macro argument. A chain with only spot DEXs and no credit has no reason to hold capital between trades. Money arrives, swaps, and leaves. On chains where TVL compounds, it compounds because deposits are collateral, collateral is borrowed against, and the borrowings are redeposited. Without a lending market, TVL is just the float sitting in a few pools, and $25,741 is what that float looks like when almost nobody is swapping.
The irony is precise. The lending layer the sidechain needed and never got is now being built on the mainnet instead, in a permissioned, institutionally underwritten form that has nothing to do with the EVM. The sidechain was the place DeFi was supposed to happen. Credit went somewhere else, and the sidechain was left holding the part of DeFi that cannot sustain itself alone.
Why the projection was never plausible The Polygon comparison that produced the $600 million to $12 billion range deserves scrutiny, because in retrospect it was comparing two things that share almost no structural features.
Polygon captured Ethereum overflow. It existed because Ethereum’s fees became unbearable during periods of intense demand, and there was a vast population of users and developers already transacting on Ethereum who wanted the same applications for less money. The demand preceded the chain. Polygon did not create appetite for DeFi; it captured appetite that already existed and had nowhere cheaper to go. Add hundreds of millions of dollars in liquidity incentives and a mature Ethereum tooling ecosystem that ported over with a config change, and the TVL followed the demand.
XRPL EVM inverted every one of those conditions. There was no congestion to relieve, because the XRP Ledger has never been congested. There was no population of XRPL DeFi users seeking cheaper execution, because XRPL DeFi barely existed: the ledger’s total value locked has run under 0.05% of its market capitalization, against roughly 20% for Ethereum and 10% for Solana. That statistic was cited in the launch material as the size of the opportunity. It is more accurately read as the size of the demand problem.
Six million XRPL wallet holders were presented as a distribution advantage, but they were six million holders of a payments asset who had spent a decade not asking for smart contracts. The sidechain did not remove a barrier between XRP holders and DeFi. It tested whether the barrier was the reason, and the answer came back no.The Peersyst material was explicit that testnet momentum arrived organically, without incentives or paid marketing, and treated that as evidence of underlying pull. Ninety logos on a testnet is a real signal of developer curiosity. It is not a signal of user demand, and the distinction is the whole story: developers show up to explore new chains constantly, at near zero cost, and the tourism ends when nobody trades.
The comparison that hurts Here is why this matters beyond a dead sidechain: the XRP Ledger had an extraordinary year, on the mainnet, at exactly the same time.
Tokenized real-world assets on the XRP Ledger grew from under a billion dollars at the start of 2026 to roughly $3.5 billion, and the ledger has led the market on 90-day RWA inflows, adding $1.9 billion. In May 2026, Ondo Finance executed the first cross-border, cross-bank redemption of tokenized United States Treasuries on the XRPL, clearing in seconds, with JPMorgan and Mastercard involved in the surrounding work. RLUSD grew past a $1.5 billion market capitalization. The native automated market maker and multi-purpose token amendments both passed validator votes. The XLS-65 and XLS-66 lending amendments are in validator voting now, an effort crypto.news examined in its analysis of what on-chain credit would mean for XRP.
The mainnet, in other words, went and built exactly the thing the sidechain was supposed to enable, using its own native primitives, aimed at institutions instead of Solidity developers, and it worked. Institutional tokenization found the XRP Ledger without an EVM. Permissionless DeFi did not find it with one.
That contrast reframes the sidechain from a failed product into a resolved question. The bet was that XRPL’s problem was programmability, and that giving Ethereum developers a familiar environment on top of XRP liquidity would unlock a DeFi economy. Twelve months of data says the problem was never programmability. It was that the XRP ecosystem’s actual demand is institutional settlement, and institutional settlement does not want an EVM sidechain with proof of authority consensus and a bridge. It wants permissioned pools, credentialed counterparties, and off-chain underwriting, which is precisely what the mainnet amendments deliver.
Notice also where XRP-adjacent DeFi capital actually went. VivoPower allocated $100 million through Flare, a separate network built specifically to give XRP holders DeFi access, rather than through Ripple’s own sidechain. When money did move toward XRP DeFi, it routed around the official product.
The case that this is unfair The bearish read above deserves an honest counterweight, and there is a real one.Timing first. The sidechain launched on June 30, 2025, roughly three weeks before XRP’s cycle high near $3.65, and spent its entire first year inside the worst crypto drawdown since 2022. Bitcoin fell more than 40% from its October peak. Digital asset funds ran multi-billion dollar outflow streaks. Three consecutive losing quarters, the longest streak since the last bear market, with institutional capital rotating into artificial intelligence equities. TVL across the market compressed. Judging a new chain’s ecosystem formation against a projection written in a bull market, and measured entirely inside a bear market, stacks the comparison. Polygon’s $2 billion to $6 billion was built during a mania.
Second, no incentives. Polygon’s TVL was purchased. Hundreds of millions in liquidity mining subsidies pulled capital that largely left when the subsidies stopped. XRPL EVM launched with none, which is defensible as a matter of discipline and fatal as a matter of cold-start economics. Liquidity begets liquidity, and a chain with $25,741 cannot attract a trader who needs to move $50,000 without moving the price against themselves. Every DeFi ecosystem that reached scale bought its first users. Refusing to do so is a choice with predictable consequences, not evidence that the underlying idea is wrong.
Third, sequencing. The credit layer was always the point. RippleX’s own framing describes a deliberate progression: represent value, move value, trade value, finance value. The lending amendments now in voting are the fourth step, and they are being built on the mainnet with institutional design constraints, not on the sidechain. If the strategy is institutional DeFi rather than retail DeFi, then the sidechain was never the main line. It was an option that Ripple bought cheaply, and options that expire worthless are still rational to have purchased.
Fourth, the infrastructure persists. A chain is not a startup that folds. It runs, it gets upgraded, and it costs almost nothing to leave running. If the market turns, if incentives arrive, if a single application finds product-market fit, the environment is there, audited and connected to eighty networks. Twelve months is a short window for infrastructure that took years to build.
Fifth, and least comfortable for the bears: the metric itself is contested. Total value locked measures deposited capital, not usefulness, and it is trivially gamed by recursive lending and mercenary liquidity on chains that do buy their numbers. A chain with honest, unincentivized TVL of $25,741 and a chain with subsidized TVL of $500 million are not obviously ranked the way the figures suggest. That argument does not rescue XRPL EVM, because zero volume is not a metrics artifact, but it is a fair caution against treating one number as a verdict on an entire architecture.
The case that it is worse than it looks Now the harder reading, which the numbers support more directly.The bear market explains compression. It does not explain zero. Solana’s memecoin economy generated tens of billions of dollars of volume through the same drawdown. Robinhood Chain launched on July 1, 2026 into the identical macro and did more than $3 billion in decentralized exchange volume in two weeks, with 19,586 tokens created on a single day. Hyperliquid, Base, and BNB Chain all sustained real activity. Capital did not stop moving in 2026. It moved somewhere else. The absence of incentives explains a smaller number; it does not explain a chain where the flagship exchange has done $95,000 in trading across its entire existence while a two-week-old competitor chain did $3 billion.The declining trend is the tell. $100,818 in August 2025 to $25,741 in July 2026 is not a chain waiting for conditions to improve. It is a chain being abandoned by the little capital that tried it. Bear markets thin the field; they do not usually take three quarters of the liquidity from a chain that started with almost none.
And the developer number from August was the leading indicator everyone skipped: 168 developers against Ethereum’s 8,448. Chains are not built by logos on a testnet. They are built by people shipping applications that someone wants to use, and the ratio said, six weeks in, that the ninety entities had not converted into an ecosystem. The launch roster is the proof. Strobe, Securd, Vertex: named as launch partners, and today the chain’s entire TVL sits in two DEXs and a launchpad nobody trades on. The applications that were supposed to give the chain a reason to exist either never shipped at scale or shipped and found nobody.
The strategic cost is subtler than the wasted engineering. For a year, “XRPfi” and the EVM sidechain functioned as an answer to the hardest question about XRP, which is how any of Ripple’s progress reaches the token. The sidechain made XRP the gas asset of a DeFi economy, which would have generated real, recurring token demand. That answer is now empirically closed, and it closes at the same moment as the structural finding that most of Ripple’s bank partners never touch XRP at all. Two of the three main value-accrual arguments for the token have now been tested against data in the same quarter. Both came back thin.
What the $25,741 is actually evidence of Step back from XRP entirely, because the finding generalizes.The industry has spent five years treating EVM compatibility as a growth strategy. The reasoning is seductive: Ethereum has the developers, the tooling, the mental models, and the applications, so any chain that speaks Solidity inherits access to all of it at the cost of an engineering project. Dozens of chains have run this play. A few worked. Most produced exactly what XRPL EVM produced, which is a technically excellent environment with nobody in it.
The reason is that EVM compatibility removes a supply-side constraint and does nothing to the demand side. It makes building easier. It does not make anyone want the thing built. When a chain has organic demand and a technical barrier, removing the barrier unlocks enormous value, which is the Polygon story and the Arbitrum story. When a chain has a technical option and no demand, removing the barrier produces an empty room with excellent acoustics.
The diagnostic question is therefore simple and almost never asked before a chain commits to the work: is there a queue? Not a waiting list of developers, who are cheap to attract and cost nothing to lose, but users currently doing the thing somewhere worse and paying for the privilege. Polygon had a queue. Arbitrum had a queue. XRPL EVM had a hypothesis that six million payment-asset holders would become DeFi users once the tooling arrived, and hypotheses are not queues.
XRPL had the cleanest possible version of the test. Six million wallets. A top-ten asset. Twelve years of uptime. Deep liquidity. Real regulatory standing. A functioning native DEX. Every input the thesis requires, and a year later the DeFi economy built on top of it holds less capital than a used car. If EVM compatibility were the unlock, it would have worked here. The mechanics of liquidity pools and automated market makers are identical on XRPL EVM to what they are on Ethereum. The pools are simply empty, because pools are filled by people who want something, and nobody wanted this.
The lesson costs Ripple very little and should cost the next chain a great deal. The company retained an option, learned that its DeFi demand is institutional rather than permissionless, and redirected to native amendments aimed at exactly that. That is a reasonable outcome from a cheap experiment. The problem belongs to everyone still pitching an EVM layer as a demand strategy, because the most rigorous public test of that thesis just returned $25,741 and no volume, and the DeFi industry has not noticed.
The number to remember The projection was $600 million to $12 billion. The delivery is $25,741 and zero trading volume, twelve months later, on a chain that works perfectly.That gap is not a failure of engineering, marketing, timing, or macro, though each contributed at the margin. It is a measurement. Somebody asked, with real money and real code and a well-built product, whether the XRP ecosystem wanted permissionless DeFi. The ecosystem answered. The answer was no, and it took a year and a nine-figure projection to hear a number that fits on a single line of a spreadsheet.
XRPL’s institutional story is doing better than it has ever done. Its DeFi story is a chain with $25,741 on it and nobody trading. Both of those things are true at once, and anyone building a thesis on XRP needs to hold both, because the second one used to be an argument and is now just a data point.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Total value locked, volume, and protocol figures are drawn from DefiLlama as of July 14, 2026, and change continuously; TVL is a contested metric and methodologies differ between trackers. Historical figures are attributed to the sources that reported them at the time. Projections cited were published by the sidechain’s development team and are not forecasts by crypto.news. Details reflect information current as of July 14, 2026. Always do your own research.
XRP během sledované seance vzrostl o 3,45 % na 1,10 USD. Zároveň senátorka Cynthia Lummis uvedla, že upravený návrh CLARITY Act může být předložen během několika dnů.
XRP price rose 3.45% to $1.10 during the reported session, following renewed strength across the cryptocurrency market.
The XRP token surged past $1.10 as buyers responded to the increasing stablecoin operations on the XRP Ledger. The supply of RLUSD has gradually migrated to XRPL, which has contributed to higher network usage and transaction demand expectations.
Meanwhile, legislators in the United States are working on another significant effort to promote digital asset market structure law. Senator Cynthia Lummis said revised CLARITY Act text could be introduced within days after nearly ten months of negotiations.
CLARITY Act Faces Crucial Senate Test Lummis said lawmakers are ready to move the proposal forward during four consecutive Senate working weeks. She would like the bill enacted prior to the start of the August 7 recess of the chamber.
Nevertheless, the ultimate floor schedule is determined by Senate Majority Leader John Thune. It is reported that the lawmakers might start discussing the bill next week, July 20.
Lummis says CLARITY text lands in days
Senator Lummis (@SenLummis) says the Senate will introduce CLARITY Act text within days and wants it passed before the August 7 recess. “It’s time to land this plane,” she said on Fox Business, capping nearly 10 months of work. Floor action… pic.twitter.com/57k9UxU1Jc
— BSCN (@BSCNews) July 14, 2026
The measure faces growing resistance from Democratic Senators Chris Murphy, Jeff Merkley, and Chris Van Hollen. According to them, the current proposal is deficient in the form of powerful rules of ethics to deal with the senior government officials and cryptocurrency interests.
Their protests are partly related to the reported crypto income and business ties of President Donald Trump. The senators warned that they might be able to vote against the bill unless significant conflict protections are included.
Democratic support is critical to the eventual passage of the bill as it may require 60 votes in the Senate. Additional contention may paralyze the floor procedure or force additional deliberations prior to a vote of decisiveness.
XRP Price Prediction: Will Bulls Extend To $1.20 Soon? The MACD line has crossed its signal line, and the green histogram bars are still growing. The Chaikin Money Flow is 0.14, which validates positive capital inflows.
A confirmed four-hour close above $1.12 could push the XRP price outlook toward the $1.15 resistance level.
Tradingview A Breaking $1.15 can allow a greater climb into the larger target of $1.20. Nevertheless, the next rejection at around $1.12 might postpone the bullish continuation and prolong the consolidation.
The $1.07 level remains the main support during any pullback. The loss of this area might reveal $1.05 and weaken the existing recovery structure.
XRP ETF Market Stalls Daily While Total Inflows Hit $1.48B According to SoSoValue data, XRP ETF products showed no net inflows in terms of daily net inflows on July 14. But cumulative net inflows were still high at 1.48 billion in the listed funds. The total trading value was the amount of 13.47 million, and combined net assets were 1.01 billion.
Bitwise led cumulative inflows with $493.86 million, followed by Canary Capital at $466.97 million. Franklin Templeton was the second with $413.23 million and Grayscale had 131.46 million.
According to SoSoValue data, spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $181 million in net inflows yesterday (July 14, ET). Spot Ethereum ETFs saw $58.3385 million in net inflows, with none of the 10 ETFs recording net outflows. pic.twitter.com/AUMWhkHPD6
— Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) July 15, 2026
Meanwhile, 21Shares showed cumulative net outflows of $20.06 million. The same session saw higher demands of crypto ETFs. Spot Bitcoin ETFs received inflows of $181 million and Ethereum funds received inflows of $58.34 million. None of the ten Ethereum ETFs reported daily net outflows.
David Schwartz hájí reklamu XRP v univerzitním sportu s odkazem na ochranu pravdivé komerční řeči podle Prvního dodatku. Spor vyvolalo umístění loga XRP na dresech napříč univerzitními sportovními programy Kansasu.
Ripple CTO Emeritus David Schwartz has defended XRP advertising in college sports after critics called for tighter restrictions on crypto promotion.
Summary
David Schwartz argues truthful XRP advertising receives First Amendment protection against broad government restrictions nationwide. His argument cites Supreme Court rulings that struck restrictions on lawful alcohol and gambling advertising. Commercial speech remains regulable, meaning the Constitution does not automatically block every potential advertising restriction. The debate followed the University of Kansas athletics program’s decision to place XRP branding on team uniforms under a multi-year partnership with Ripple.
In a July 15 post on X, Schwartz argued that governments cannot broadly suppress truthful advertising for lawful products simply because officials believe consumers may make poor decisions. His position centers on First Amendment protections for commercial speech.
The United States has the First Amendment. If you want to restrict or can speech, you need to find some exception it fits into. I don't think there is one here. See the cases I cited including one involving liquor and one involving gambling.
— David 'JoelKatz' Schwartz (@JoelKatz) July 14, 2026 Schwartz turns XRP advertising debate into constitutional question The discussion began after critics compared crypto promotion in college sports with advertising for gambling, tobacco and alcohol. They argued that universities should not expose students and younger sports fans to digital asset marketing.
Schwartz responded with a legal argument rather than a defense of XRP as an investment. He wrote that the government cannot suppress truthful commercial speech merely to prevent people from making “bad, but lawful, decisions.” His argument draws a distinction between regulating an activity and banning truthful speech about that activity.
Supreme Court cases support protection for lawful advertising Schwartz cited 44 Liquormart v. Rhode Island, a 1996 Supreme Court case that struck down restrictions on advertising liquor prices. The Court found that Rhode Island could not broadly block truthful price information simply because the state wanted to reduce alcohol consumption.
He also pointed to Greater New Orleans Broadcasting Association v. United States. In that case, the Supreme Court ruled that a federal restriction could not block advertisements for lawful private casino gambling under the circumstances before the Court.
However, those rulings do not make every restriction on XRP advertising automatically unconstitutional. Under the Supreme Court’s Central Hudson framework, commercial speech receives protection when it concerns lawful activity and is not misleading. Governments may still impose properly tailored restrictions that directly serve a substantial public interest.
Kansas deal puts XRP logo across college sports Kansas Athletics announced the Ripple partnership on July 8. The XRP logo will appear on uniforms across the university’s athletic programs, making it the first cryptocurrency jersey patch used across a major college athletics program, according to Kansas.
The agreement also covers branding at athletic venues, digital properties and events. Ripple will fund financial and technology education programs for student-athletes and the wider campus community. The partnership also expands an existing recruitment link between Ripple and Kansas graduates.
As previously reported, the agreement runs for five years and has personal ties to Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse, a University of Kansas alumnus. The sponsorship has since drawn wider attention to how universities should handle digital asset advertising.
XRP legal history adds context to advertising dispute The debate comes three years after a federal court issued its split ruling in the SEC’s case against Ripple. The court found that Ripple’s programmatic XRP sales did not qualify as securities transactions under the circumstances examined, while certain institutional sales violated securities laws. The case formally ended in 2025 with a $125 million penalty and an injunction remaining in place.
That history makes broad claims about XRP’s legal status more complex than simply calling the asset universally exempt from financial regulation. Schwartz’s First Amendment argument instead rests on a narrower point: truthful commercial speech concerning lawful activity receives constitutional protection.
A government attempt to impose a blanket ban on XRP advertising could therefore face a serious First Amendment challenge. But existing Supreme Court doctrine still allows some commercial advertising rules when regulators can satisfy the required constitutional test.
Binance drží zásoby XRP na zhruba 2,61 miliardy tokenů, což je nejméně od února. XRP mezitím za posledních 24 hodin vzrostl o více než 3,7 % na zhruba 1,11 USD.
The divergence between on-chain supply trends and market sentiment highlights how multiple factors are influencing XRP's price.
Binance’s XRP reserves have fallen to about 2.61 billion tokens, their lowest level since February, and the balance has held there since the start of July.
And even though the Ripple token had been sliding toward $1.06 while those reserves were draining out, it reversed course in the last 24 hours, gaining over 3% in that period.
Exchange Reserves Shrink as Selling Pressure Lingers According to CryptoQuant contributor Arab Chain, there have been no meaningful inflows to replenish Binance’s XRP stockpile in recent months, which is why the reserve figure has held near its February 2026 low instead of climbing back.
A falling exchange balance can be considered a bullish signal since it is often taken to mean that investors are moving their stash into private wallets instead of preparing to sell. That signal took a while to show up in price, with Arab Chain noting that XRP had been falling to around $1.06 while reserves were emptying out, suggesting that liquidity, trading activity and investor sentiment were outweighing the effect of declining exchange supply.
In another market update, the same analysts pointed to the Binance CVD Confirmation Score, which blends price with Cumulative Volume Delta to track whether buy or sell orders are winning out in the spot market. That CVD reading is at -6.93 million, meaning that sell orders have outweighed buys as XRP fell from above $2.00 earlier this year toward the $1.07 area.
Meanwhile, the 30-day Price-CVD Confirmation Score is holding near 0.84, a figure Arab Chain says, while reasonably healthy, still falls short of confirming a genuine shift in buying demand. According to them, only a sustained move into positive CVD territory alongside a stronger confirmation score would point to a real reversal in buying interest.
As noted earlier, XRP’s price action has nevertheless improved modestly, with data from CoinGecko at the time of writing showing the asset trading around $1.11 after gaining about 3.7% in 24 hours, having oscillated between $1.07 and $1.12 during that period. However, the world’s sixth-largest cryptocurrency by market cap is still down 7% over the past month and more than 61% across one year, despite daily trading volume jumping 31% higher than the previous day to hit $1.26 billion.
You may also like: Binance Marks Ninth Anniversary With 323 Million Users and Expansion Beyond Crypto XRP and ETH Traders Turn Bullish as FOMO Surges to 5-Week High: Santiment 3 Years After The Key Ripple-SEC Ruling: How XRP Went From SEC Target to Institutional Asset Analysts Divided On Where XRP Heads Next Such is the state of XRP that market watchers are split on what comes next. For example, popular trader Diana has pointed to $1.08 as the level to watch and warned that losing it could send XRP toward the $0.90-$0.93 zone before one last flush to the $0.87 macro support. Fellow analyst CasiTrades holds a similar technical view but frames it as the tail end of a yearlong correction, telling followers on X that a drop toward $0.87 would “finish off the correction we’ve spent the last year building.”
But others are looking past the near-term chop, with one of them, Crypto Patel, arguing that XRP is tracing a pattern that has historically come right before rallies of more than 1,000%. On his part, crypto investor Celal Kucuker pointed to a 500% monthly gain two years ago as a reason not to dismiss $7 by the end of the year.
Sněmovna poradců japonského parlamentu schválila změnu zákona, která řadí Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP a další kryptoměny mezi finanční produkty místo platebních nástrojů. Otevírá tím cestu pro spotové krypto ETF a nižší zdanění zisků.
Japan’s House of Councillors passed an amendment to the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act, which officially recognizes cryptocurrencies as financial products rather than payment tools.
With this, the country is now planning to cut crypto taxes from 55% to 20% and open the door to Bitcoin ETFs.
Japan Moves Crypto Under Financial Product RulesJapan’s parliament has officially passed a landmark law amendment reclassifying cryptocurrencies as “financial assets.” Until now, cryptocurrencies have been mainly regulated under the Payment Services Act as a payment method.
Under the new law, Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP, and other cryptocurrencies will be classified as financial products under the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA), bringing them closer to stocks and other investment assets.
The new law also clears the way for spot crypto ETFs in Japan.
Regulators are aiming to launch them on the Tokyo Stock Exchange by 2027 or 2028, while major firms like Nomura Holdings and SBI Holdings are already preparing crypto ETF products.
List of Changes Under the New LawThe new framework introduces several rules that already apply to traditional financial markets. These include,
Insider trading ban: Trading using non-public information will be strictly prohibited.Annual disclosures: Token issuers must publish annual operational and financial disclosures.Strict penalties: Violators face up to 10 years in prison or 10 million Japanese yen fines.Retail investment cap: High-risk tokens will have a 2 million Japanese yen retail investment limitBigger Fines and Lower Crypto TaxesThe new law also brings stricter rules for the crypto industry. However, the maximum jail term for running an illegal crypto business will increase from three years to 10 years.
And the maximum fine will also increase from 3 million yen to 10 million yen, approximately $18,500 to $61,600. The government says these changes will help make the crypto market safer and protect investors.
Along with the bill, lawmakers are planning to cut the tax on crypto profits from the current maximum of 55% to a flat 20%, the same tax rate used for stock investments.
Another planned change is a three-year loss carryforward. This means investors will be able to use their past trading losses to reduce taxes on future crypto profits. If approved, these tax changes are expected to start in 2028.
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.
Charles Hoskinson uvedl, že RealFi má být pro Cardano velkým motorem TVL i počtu transakcí. 1. fáze testnetu už přilákala přes 1 000 uživatelů a téměř 500 ověřených peněženek.
Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson has expressed strong confidence in the network’s RealFi initiative, arguing that it could significantly expand Cardano’s DeFi ecosystem.
His remarks come shortly after the launch of RealFi’s Phase 1 testnet, which has already attracted strong early participation and fueled community growth.
Hoskinson Explains How RealFi Can Increase Cardano’s TVL In a statement today, Hoskinson highlighted RealFi’s ability to increase Cardano’s total value locked (TVL), one of the most important metrics for measuring capital deposited across DeFi protocols.
According to him, users who participate in RealFi must deposit assets into the protocol’s smart contracts. Those funds remain locked while generating yield, which the protocol later distributes back to participants.
As more users deposit assets and interact with the platform, Cardano’s TVL naturally grows. In addition, every deposit, withdrawal, and yield distribution generates new on-chain transactions, increasing overall network activity.
“The cool thing about RealFi is that it is gonna be a big TVL and TX generator for Cardano,” Hoskinson said.
A Catalyst for Cardano’s DeFi Expansion Furthermore, Hoskinson described RealFi as a key pillar of Cardano’s long-term DeFi strategy. He expects it to become one of the network’s most important financial applications since the protocol revolves around yield-generating deposits.
He also argued that initiatives like RealFi will strengthen Cardano’s DeFi ecosystem by attracting more liquidity and expanding the network’s financial infrastructure.
Since users deposit assets into yield-generating smart contracts, the protocol creates additional opportunities to issue and utilize stablecoins within the network. As a result, RealFi could improve liquidity while supporting the broader growth of Cardano’s on-chain financial ecosystem.
Phase 1 Testnet Gains Strong Early Traction Hoskinson’s optimism follows encouraging progress during RealFi’s Phase 1 testnet.
Earlier, he described the launch as a “wonderful start” after the RealFi team released participation figures from its Pioneer Season. According to the update, more than 1,000 users have joined the testnet, while nearly 500 verified wallets are actively participating in Phase 1. In addition, the project has attracted over 2,000 followers on X and more than 420 new members on its Discord server in just over a week.
The RealFi team emphasized that these numbers represent more than simple user growth. Instead, they reflect rising interest in developing a transparent stablecoin backed by real-world assets.
RealFi Aims to Connect DeFi With the Real Economy Cardano’s RealFi is designed to connect DeFi with real-world financial services by using blockchain liquidity to support initiatives such as microfinance and small business lending. The project aims to improve financial access for underserved communities while showcasing practical blockchain applications beyond trading.
During its initial testing phase, users can swap test assets for USDr, stake USDr for sUSDr, and later redeem their tokens. Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson said RealFi is progressing toward mainnet launch, which could boost Cardano’s DeFi growth and expand its real-world adoption.
In the meantime, Cardano’s TVL stands at $71.56 million, which is significantly lower than Ethereum’s $41.09 billion and Solana’s $4.91 billion.
DisClamier: This content is informational and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author's personal opinions and do not reflect The Crypto Basic opinion. Readers are encouraged to do thorough research before making any investment decisions. The Crypto Basic is not responsible for any financial losses.
The ADA community has reacted strongly after Intersect confirmed that responsibility for delivering Cardano’s presence at TOKEN2049 Singapore will shift from EMURGO to the Cardano Foundation.
The decision has sparked a governance debate across the Cardano ecosystem, with several community members arguing that the transfer bypasses the treasury governance process approved by Delegated Representatives (DReps).
Intersect Explains Why the Cardano Foundation Will Lead TOKEN2049 In a recent announcement, Intersect revealed that EMURGO has been focusing its resources on managing the aftermath of the SecondFi incident. Consequently, the company informed Intersect that it could no longer allocate the personnel required to organize and execute Cardano’s participation at TOKEN2049.
Following discussions among EMURGO, the Cardano Foundation, and Intersect, the three parties agreed to transfer delivery responsibility for the event to the Cardano Foundation.
As the administrator of the treasury process, Intersect emphasized that its priority is to ensure approved governance actions are successfully delivered. Therefore, it described the change in the executing entity as the most practical solution, citing the limited time before the October conference and the need to avoid uncertainty surrounding Cardano’s participation.
The controversy traces back to an earlier governance decision. Cardano’s DReps previously approved EMURGO’s standalone treasury proposal requesting 3.3 million ADA to fund an official Cardano presence at TOKEN2049 Singapore.
Now, Intersect confirmed that the Cardano Foundation would receive the approved funds and execute the project instead.
Community Questions Governance Process Meanwhile, Intersect’s announcement immediately drew criticism from several community members, who argued that the approved proposal specifically authorized EMURGO, not the Cardano Foundation, to execute the project.
Popular DRep Chris O described the decision as a breach of Cardano’s governance framework. According to him, DReps approved a proposal that explicitly assigned execution to EMURGO. Therefore, if EMURGO could no longer fulfill its obligations, the treasury funds should have been returned rather than reassigned to another entity.
Chris also argued that the Cardano Foundation should submit its own treasury proposal if it intends to organize the event. He also criticized what he viewed as Intersect and the Foundation unilaterally changing the terms of an approved governance action without seeking another DRep vote.
Additionally, community member Dramz called for the funds to be returned entirely, expressing frustration with EMURGO’s role in the situation.
Similarly, another community member questioned why Intersect decided on behalf of the broader Cardano ecosystem. He urged the organization to return the funds to the treasury and allow a fresh governance proposal rather than modify the existing one.
Just one quick problem with this. The DReps didn’t vote to fund CF to do Token2049. They voted Emurgo. I think it’d’ve been proper to at least seek DReps’ opinions on the swap before it happened rather than telling us about it after the event.
— Kit Willow 𖤍 (@willow_kit) July 14, 2026
Despite the criticism, not everyone opposed the decision. Some Cardano supporters argued that maintaining an official presence at TOKEN2049 outweighs the need to restart the treasury process.
They contend that requiring a new proposal could delay preparations and potentially jeopardize Cardano’s participation in one of the cryptocurrency industry’s largest conferences. From their perspective, transferring execution to the Cardano Foundation ensures the original objective of the approved proposal is achieved despite EMURGO’s operational constraints.
DisClamier: This content is informational and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author's personal opinions and do not reflect The Crypto Basic opinion. Readers are encouraged to do thorough research before making any investment decisions. The Crypto Basic is not responsible for any financial losses.
BNB Foundation dokončila 36. čtvrtletní burn a spálila 1 615 827,795 BNB v hodnotě asi 931,7 milionu USD. Celková nabídka klesla na 133 166 127,91 BNB.
The BNB Foundation has officially announced the successful completion of the 36th quarterly BNB token burn by BNB Chain.
Here are the facts and figures from the latest burn:
Total BNB burned: 1,615,827.795 BNB Approximate value in USD around the time of burn: ~$931,702,464 Transaction ID (TXID) for BNB burn: View transactionRemaining to be burned: Check real-time data hereRemaining total supply: 133,166,127.91 BNB*at time of writing 15 July, 2026 at 10:35AM UTC.
What You Need to Know About the BNB BurnBNB is the native coin of the BNB Chain ecosystem, essential for powering its multifaceted Web3 environment. It supports transactions on the BNB Smart Chain (BSC), the opBNB L2s, and BNB Greenfield blockchain. Besides transaction fees, BNB serves as a governance token, granting holders the ability to participate in the BNB Chain’s decentralized on-chain governance. Additionally, BNB functions as a strategic reserve asset and enters the radar of more mainstream financial institutions, driving ecosystem growth and incentivizing adoption.
Following its mainnet launch on April 18, 2019, BNB transitioned from the Ethereum Network to BNB Chain. "Build and Build" is the philosophy behind BNB, reflecting its role in fostering development within the ecosystem. BNB employs an Auto-Burn system to gradually reduce its total supply to 100,000,000 BNB. The burn amount is adjusted based on BNB's price and the number of blocks generated on BSC during a quarter, ensuring transparency and predictability.
BNB Auto BurnThe BNB Auto-Burn provides an independently auditable, objective process. The figures are reported quarterly, and the mechanism is independent of the Binance centralized exchange.
This quarter's burn and future burns will occur directly on BSC due to the BNB Chain Fusion. The corresponding BNB amount will be sent to the "blackhole" address: 0x000000000000000000000000000000000000dEaD.
Note: Due to the recent Lorentz, Maxwell and Fermi upgrades, BSC is producing blocks more frequently, compared with the time when the Auto Burn formula was originally defined. The parameters used in the formula have been adjusted to keep the idea and spirit consistent.
BNB Real-time BurnAdditionally, BNB implements a real-time burning mechanism based on gas fees. BSC validators determine the ratio of gas fees collected in each block, which is burned at a fixed rate. Since the introduction of BEP95, roughly 291K BNB has been burnt under this mechanism.
Further Reading35th BNB BurnDesign Mechanisms of the BNB TokenReal-Time Burning MechanismWhat is BNB Greenfield?What is opBNB?
Mizuho snížila Circle z Neutral na Underperform a cílovou cenu z 85 USD na 50 USD kvůli hrozbě konkurence Open USD pro marže u stablecoinů. Banka varuje, že nový model může stlačit ekonomiku USDC.
Mizuho has downgraded Circle Internet Group from Neutral to Underperform and cut its price target from $85 to $50, citing competition from Open USD.
Summary
Mizuho cut Circle’s price target to $50, warning Open USD could further squeeze stablecoin margins. Open USD shares reserve earnings with partners, challenging Circle’s existing distribution economics around USDC globally. Circle also faces margin pressure from Hyperliquid revenue-sharing terms despite recent federal banking approval milestone. The Japanese investment bank said the stablecoin model could pressure the economics behind Circle’s USDC business.
According to a CoinDesk report, analysts led by Dan Dolev said Open USD “could fundamentally alter CRCL’s business model” by changing how reserve income flows to distributors. Circle shares traded at $62.63 when the report was published.
Mizuho cuts Circle’s 2027 earnings outlook Mizuho raised its estimate for Circle’s distribution and transaction expense ratio in 2027 from 64% to 73%. The bank also lowered its adjusted EBITDA forecast from $1.09 billion to $699 million, about 25% below the analyst consensus cited in the report.
The bank said higher interest rates could support reserve income but may not fully offset pressure from changing stablecoin economics. Its concern centers on how much yield Circle can retain after paying distribution partners, including companies that help USDC reach users and financial platforms.
Open USD challenges the existing stablecoin model Open USD was announced on June 30 by Open Standard, with more than 140 companies participating in its ecosystem. Partners include Coinbase, Mastercard, Stripe and BlackRock. The project says businesses will be able to mint and redeem the stablecoin without fees or artificial volume limits.
Under the model, partners receive reserve earnings after a small management fee covers operating costs. That differs from Circle’s structure, where reserve income is generated before revenue-sharing payments to major distribution partners. As previously reported, Open USD’s announcement raised questions over whether Circle’s own partners could support a rival while continuing to distribute USDC.
Coinbase relationship adds another pressure point Mizuho also pointed to Circle’s revenue-sharing relationship with Coinbase. The bank said the agreement is expected to come up for renegotiation in August, and Coinbase’s participation in Open USD could give it more leverage in future talks.
A separate warning came from JPMorgan. As reported by crypto.news, the bank cut earnings forecasts for Circle and Coinbase after a new USDC revenue-sharing arrangement with Hyperliquid. JPMorgan said the deal could reduce reserve income retained by both companies even if USDC usage grows.
Circle continues to expand USDC infrastructure The downgrade comes as Circle expands its regulatory and payments footprint.Circle data showed USDC circulation at about $73 billion as of July 13, down from $77 billion at the end of the first quarter.
Circle also recently received final approval to establish Circle National Trust. The federally regulated entity will initially focus on digital asset custody for Circle and its affiliates, with possible future services for selected institutional clients.
The company is also expanding USDC use in Asia. JCB and Circle announced a pilot covering cross-border treasury transfers and possible merchant payments in Japan. The project will start with JCB’s internal transfers before the companies assess wider retail payment uses.
Mizuho’s downgrade focuses on Circle’s ability to protect margins as stablecoin competition changes how reserve income is shared. Open USD has not proved it can match USDC’s distribution or liquidity, but its partner-led model creates a new pricing benchmark. Circle’s earnings path will depend partly on USDC supply, interest rates and future revenue-sharing agreements.
Lloyds, Aberdeen a Archax dokončily první britské FX obchody kryté tokenizovanými reálnými aktivy na Hedera. Pilot využil tokenizované podíly fondu peněžního trhu a britské státní dluhopisy jako kolaterál.
Lloyds Banking Group, asset manager Aberdeen, and digital asset exchange Archax have completed the United Kingdom’s first foreign exchange (FX) trades backed by tokenized real-world assets as collateral. These transactions were conducted on the Hedera blockchain, using a regulated digital asset framework.
Tokenized collateral supports institutional FX tradesThe pilot project leveraged tokenized shares in Aberdeen’s money market fund and digitized UK government bonds, also known as gilts, as collateral for the FX trades between Lloyds and Aberdeen. Both assets were created in digital form and managed on-chain, representing a new method for handling transaction guarantees in financial markets.
The United Kingdom processes roughly $5.4 trillion in daily FX and interest rate derivatives, placing significant importance on innovations that improve collateral management and efficiency for institutions.
Traditional collateral and margining mechanisms often encounter delays, high costs, and operational friction, particularly during periods of market stress. Many existing workflows rely on manual checks and delayed settlements, making rapid asset movement difficult when it is most critical.
Lloyds, Aberdeen, and Archax piloted a system using regulated, tokenized assets for collateral in the FX market, aiming to address long-standing inefficiencies in collateral movement and reduce operational risks.
In FX markets, firms must quickly move collateral in response to price swings, as any lag can increase pressure and force asset sales. The tokenized model demonstrated by the pilot allowed for near real-time movements, improving liquidity management between financial entities.
Archax issues tokenized assets via Hedera blockchainArchax, the UK’s first FCA-regulated digital asset exchange and tokenization platform, was responsible for issuing, transferring, and safeguarding the tokenized money market fund units and UK gilts on Hedera. This integration connected regulated oversight with blockchain-based asset exchange.
The trial also utilized Archax’s Nest permissioned DeFi collateral transfer network. Permissioned DeFi restricts access to authorized users, enabling financial institutions to explore blockchain features in a secure and compliant context.
The system allowed banks, asset managers, and trading firms to program and transfer tokenized assets on-chain almost instantaneously. This streamlined process reduced the complexity and workload of settlement and margin activities.
Mini dictionary: Archax – A UK-based digital asset exchange and tokenization platform, authorized and regulated by the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), facilitating the issuance and trading of tokenized securities for institutions.
ParticipantRoleContributionLloyds Banking GroupBankFX trades, collateral participantAberdeenAsset ManagerTokenized money market funds, FX tradesArchaxDigital Asset ExchangeIssuing and custody of tokenized assetsHederaBlockchain NetworkOn-chain settlement infrastructureTreasury report recognizes pilot as industry milestoneThe HM Treasury-backed Wholesale Digital Markets Champion report recognized the pilot as a leading example in the field of digital wholesale markets. It highlighted the project’s demonstration of tokenized collateral as tangible industry progress.
The report examined how to scale digital wholesale markets across the UK, emphasizing projects led by regulated financial firms to advance adoption of blockchain-based solutions. Tokenization of collateral was identified as a key area for innovation and broader adoption.
Allan Trimmer, Head of Product at Aberdeen, emphasized the company’s alignment with Hedera, citing the network’s strengths in transparency, robust governance, and environmental sustainability. He described Hedera as one of the most energy-efficient blockchain platforms available.
Aberdeen highlighted Hedera’s transparency, governance structure, and low energy consumption as deciding factors in its use during the FX collateral pilot.
Hedera provided the necessary technology for fast settlements and institutional-grade blockchain infrastructure, managed by a council of major global organizations. This structure offers both security and scalability for large-scale financial operations.
Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.
SBI Global Asset Management a DigiFT spustily na Solaně JX Token, první onchain strategii japonských akcií pro akreditované a institucionální investory. Jde o tokenizovaný fond s vysokým dividendovým výnosem, formálně nazvaný SBI Japan High Dividend Equity Strategy Token.
Japan's First Onchain Equity StrategySBI Global Asset Management and DigiFT have launched the JX Token on Solana, creating what both firms describe as a first for Japan's asset management industry. The product, formally named the SBI Japan High Dividend Equity Strategy Token, is designed to give accredited and institutional investors onchain access to a Japanese high-dividend equity fund strategy managed by SBI Asset Management, a subsidiary of SBI Global Asset Management.
The launch marks the first time a Japanese asset manager's listed-equity strategy has been brought onchain through DigiFT's regulated tokenization and distribution infrastructure. Ecosystem participants in the launch include Solana Company, Huma Finance and Plume.
DigiFT holds Capital Markets Services and Recognised Market Operator licences from MAS, as well as Type 1 and Type 4 licences from the Hong Kong SFC, a dual regulatory standing that has made it a tokenization and distribution partner for global and regional asset managers including UBS Asset Management, Invesco, BNY and Franklin Templeton. Its roster now extends into Japan through SBI GAM's participation, adding a Japanese listed-equity strategy to that lineup for the first time.
SBI's Broader Tokenization Push and the Growing RWA MarketThe launch comes as investor attention returns to Japanese equities, supported by the Tokyo Stock Exchange's continued push for listed companies to improve capital efficiency and demonstrate greater awareness of share-price performance. SBI Holdings itself brings considerable onchain credentials to the partnership. The group has taken direct stakes across the region's tokenization infrastructure, including leading a $50 million investment in Startale Group to build a blockchain purpose-built for tokenized securities, and holding a majority stake in Osaka Digital Exchange, operator of a secondary market for security tokens in Japan.
The JX Token's structure is also designed with the regulatory direction of travel in mind. Regulators are increasingly distinguishing tokenized securities developed with issuer or manager alignment from products that offer only indirect economic exposure. In a joint staff statement issued January 28, 2026, U.S. SEC staff drew a formal line between issuer-sponsored tokenized securities, which can represent true ownership, and third-party products that typically offer only synthetic exposure.
The launch also reflects a broader evolution in tokenization: the value of tokenized RWAs distributed on public blockchains grew from $5.9 billion to $21.9 billion globally in 2025, moving the category beyond cash-like instruments and into actively managed public-market strategies. According to a report by RedStone, Gauntlet and RWA(.)xyz cited by CoinDesk, the RWA tokenization market reached $24 billion having grown 380% in three years.
For $SOL, the deal adds another institutional use case. SBI Holdings recently announced that the Solana Foundation will take an equity stake in SBI R3 Japan, the joint venture it shares with Sumitomo Mitsui Financial Group, with the entity to be renamed SBI Solana Global. The JX Token launch now gives that broader strategic relationship its first live regulated product on the Solana network.
Sources:
The Manila Times: SBI Global Asset Management and DigiFT Launch JX
CoinDesk: SBI Holdings' Blockchain Initiative Pivots to Solana
CoinDesk: RWA Tokenization Market Has Grown Almost Fivefold to $24B in 3 Years
Americké ministerstvo financí nechalo zmrazit čtyři Tron peněženky s USDT v hodnotě 131 milionů USD, které byly podle Scotta Bessenta napojené na íránskou centrální banku.
US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced that the US government ordered the freezing of more than $130 million in cryptocurrency held in wallets associated with Iran, in response to escalating tensions in the Middle East.
Wallet freeze targets Iran’s Central BankBlockchain investigator Specter earlier identified onchain data showing that stablecoin issuer Tether froze four Tron blockchain wallets containing a total of $131 million worth of USDt (USDT). Bessent confirmed that these wallets were linked to the Central Bank of Iran.
Mini dictionary: Tron, a blockchain platform focused on high-throughput and scalable decentralized applications, supports USDT (Tether) token issuance and transactions. Tether is a popular stablecoin pegged to the US dollar, widely used in cryptocurrency trading and payments.
Bessent emphasized the Treasury Department’s efforts to counteract Iran’s financial activities using digital assets. He stated, “US Treasury is committed to disrupting and degrading Iran’s illicit financial activities, including its abuse of digital assets.” He added that authorities will continue tracing and blocking funds to prevent the Iranian government from accessing income generated via illicit operations.
“We will continue to aggressively follow the money and deny the Iranian regime access to the proceeds of its illicit revenue schemes.”
Ongoing pressure campaign against IranThe asset freeze coincided with the breakdown of a ceasefire between the US and Iran. Washington renewed its blockade of Iranian ports, while the US Central Command reported a new wave of military strikes on targets in Iran. On the same day, Iranian defense sources claimed to have conducted drone operations against American military facilities at Jordan’s Al Azraq Air Base.
This is not the first time the US government has coordinated with Tether on such actions. In April, Tether stated it froze over $344 million in USDT at the request of US authorities, as part of broader measures targeting Iran’s access to international financial systems.
MonthFrozen Amount (USDT)Initiated byApril$344 millionTether, US authoritiesJune$131 millionTether, US TreasuryOperation Economic Fury expands seizuresBessent earlier reported in May that the US had seized around $1 billion in Iranian crypto assets since the introduction of Operation Economic Fury, a financial pressure campaign begun in March 2025.
He described the ongoing initiative as a comprehensive effort targeting procurement networks supplying the Iranian military. “Through Economic Fury, the Treasury Department is disrupting the foreign procurement networks that support the Iranian military’s efforts to acquire weapons,” Bessent stated in June.
Treasury has frozen the Iranian regime’s assets, severely disrupted its economy, and dismantled the Iranian war machine. Treasury will not tolerate any support of the Iranian military.
TRM, an analytics firm specializing in blockchain forensics, reported that entities linked to Iran moved $3.8 billion in crypto through CoinEx, a global cryptocurrency exchange, as part of operations scrutinized under the ongoing sanctions framework.
Mini dictionary: TRM Labs is a blockchain intelligence company that analyzes cryptocurrency transactions to detect financial crime, money laundering, and sanction violations.
US authorities have repeatedly signaled that digital assets will remain a focus in efforts to clamp down on Iranian financial networks, with further actions possible as hostilities continue.
Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.
Prediction markets are crypto’s quiet killer app. Polymarket proved that during the 2024 US election cycle. Now Hyperliquid wants a piece of the action, and Outcome.xyz is the team trying to blow the doors open.
The push is simple: let anyone deploy a prediction market on Hyperliquid’s infrastructure without needing permission from validators or anyone else. It hasn’t happened yet. And the community is making noise about it.
What HIP-4 built, and what it’s missing Hyperliquid launched its HIP-4 outcome markets on mainnet back on May 2. These are binary contracts that settle to either 0 or 1, essentially yes-or-no bets baked directly into Hyperliquid’s core trading engine, HyperCore. Shared order books, shared margining, shared data feeds.
Outcome.xyz was the team that deployed the first wave of these markets. They started with recurring daily BTC price binaries, the kind of straightforward contract that lets you stress-test plumbing without getting too creative. Early trading volumes hit several million dollars in notional value on the first days alone.
But here’s the thing: every single market that exists right now had to go through Hyperliquid’s validators. There’s no self-serve option. As of mid-July, permissionless deployment still hasn’t gone live.
Advertisement
Why permissionless matters Hyperliquid’s current model relies on validators to both approve and settle markets. Instead of trusting some external oracle service to report outcomes, Hyperliquid’s own validator set handles settlement. It reduces a major attack surface that has plagued prediction markets for years.
But validator gating for market creation means the menu of available markets is limited to whatever gets approved through that process. Community feedback on July 14 made the frustration clear, with calls for permissionless rollout “asap.”
Outcome.xyz appears to be the team most actively pushing this forward. As the primary frontend developer for HIP-4 markets, they have both the technical proximity and the incentive to see the gates come down.
The competitive chess match Hyperliquid isn’t entering an empty room. Polymarket remains the dominant on-chain prediction platform, and Kalshi has carved out a regulated niche in the US market. Both have significant head starts in liquidity, user base, and market variety.
What Hyperliquid brings to the table is integration. Hyperliquid’s pitch is that prediction markets live inside the same trading engine as perpetuals, spot markets, and everything else on the platform. A trader doesn’t need to move capital to a separate protocol to place a prediction bet. If you’re already running a strategy on Hyperliquid’s perpetuals, you can allocate margin to prediction markets without fragmenting your capital across platforms.
The 2026 FIFA World Cup represents exactly the kind of global event that drives massive prediction market volume, and a permissionless rollout before or during the event could serve as a significant catalyst for adoption.
Volumes on HIP-4 markets remain modest compared to dedicated prediction platforms. Several million dollars on launch days is encouraging infrastructure validation, not market dominance.
What investors should watch The permissionless deployment timeline is the single most important variable here. Until third-party builders can create markets freely, HIP-4 remains a proof of concept rather than a competitive product.
The validator-as-oracle settlement model eliminates oracle risk, which is a real problem that has caused costly misresolutions on other platforms. But it also means every market outcome depends on validator consensus, and as market variety expands into subjective or ambiguous territory, that consensus mechanism will be tested in ways that simple BTC price binaries never will.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Zástupci ekosystému Hyperliquid se setkali s pracovní skupinou SEC pro krypto, aby řešili regulaci decentralizovaných perpetual trhů. Schůzka potvrzuje jednání s regulátorem, ne schválení.
14 July 2026 | 23:44 Representatives connected to the Hyperliquid ecosystem met with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Crypto Task Force on July 14, 2026, bringing the architecture of decentralized perpetual markets into the agency’s regulatory discussions.
Key Takeaways SEC task force met Hyperliquid ecosystem representatives. Talks focused on decentralized perpetual market regulation. HIP-3 separates market deployment from core execution. Meeting confirms engagement, not regulatory approval. U.S. access still requires concrete regulatory action. According to the SEC’s official meeting memorandum, the participants represented the Hyperliquid Policy Center, XYZ Ltd. and Sullivan & Cromwell LLP. The stated topic was how regulators could address issues involving crypto assets.
What the SEC Filing Actually Confirms The attached meeting request sought to brief the task force on the Hyperliquid protocol’s technology, markets and relevant ecosystem participants. It described Hyperliquid Labs as a software contributor and XYZ as a research and product laboratory operating a HIP-3 deployment for traditional-asset perpetual markets.
The proposed attendee list included Hyperliquid Policy Center CEO Jake Chervinsky, policy counsel Bradley Bourque, Hyperliquid founder Jeff Yan, XYZ representative Collins Belton and four lawyers from Sullivan & Cromwell.
The disclosure is more limited than a formal policy proposal. It does not publish a detailed technical presentation, identify specific exemptions requested from the SEC or record any commitments made by the agency. The meeting therefore confirms regulatory engagement, not approval of Hyperliquid, HIP-3 products or access for U.S. traders.
HIP-3 Separates Market Design From Trade Execution The policy question is complicated by how responsibilities are distributed under Hyperliquid Improvement Proposal 3.
HIP-3 allows independent builders to deploy perpetual markets without relying on a centralized listing committee. Each deployer is responsible for several functions that would normally sit with a derivatives venue:
Market definition: selecting the reference asset, contract specifications and oracle methodology. Risk controls: setting leverage limits and determining whether an asset is eligible for cross-margin treatment. Market operation: publishing oracle prices and settling or halting the contract when necessary. A mainnet deployer must maintain a stake of 500,000 HYPE. Validators can slash that stake through a weighted vote when irregular deployer inputs harm protocol correctness, uptime or performance. Slashed tokens are burned rather than distributed as compensation to affected traders.
Trade execution remains inside HyperCore, Hyperliquid’s native trading system. It provides the order books and margining infrastructure, although every HIP-3 exchange retains independent settings and its own market configuration. Cross-margining is not automatic: enabling it is irreversible and requires sufficient external liquidity, a dependable oracle and resistance to price manipulation.
XYZ illustrates that division of responsibilities. Its technical documentation states that HyperCore manages matching, order types, funding, liquidations and auto-deleveraging. XYZ supplies the bespoke oracle, mark price and external price used for its markets through distributed relayers that submit updates approximately every three seconds.
These contracts provide synthetic exposure rather than ownership of the referenced asset. An equity perpetual settled in USDC does not deliver the underlying share, making it legally and economically different from a tokenized security representing ownership rights. The distinction leaves regulators with separate questions around the derivative itself, the trading infrastructure, the oracle operator and any interface providing access.
The regulatory discussion is unfolding as Hyperliquid becomes more important to the economics of stablecoin distribution. JPMorgan recently lowered its earnings estimates for Circle and Coinbase, arguing that their revised USDC arrangement with Hyperliquid could pressure margins as both companies seek to preserve the stablecoin’s dominant position on the platform. The frequently cited $160 million figure represents estimated reserve yield that could be redirected under the arrangement, rather than a confirmed net loss.
The SEC Agenda Offers a Framework, Not a HIP-3 License The meeting took place one week after SEC Chair Paul Atkins published a statement on the agency’s 2026 Regulatory Agenda. Atkins said the Commission intends to establish clearer rules for crypto fundraising, custody and the trading of tokenized securities onchain.
Three pending workstreams are relevant to the broader Hyperliquid discussion: The SEC is considering exemptions and safe harbors for crypto-asset offerings. Proposed amendments could apply broker-dealer net-capital, customer-protection and recordkeeping rules to crypto-asset activities under Rules 15c3-1 and 15c3-3. A separate project would adapt Exchange Act rules for crypto trading on alternative trading systems and national securities exchanges. None of those entries expressly creates a pathway for permissionless perpetual markets. The SEC’s agenda primarily concerns securities offerings, broker-dealers and securities-trading venues, while the operation of derivatives markets also raises Commodity Exchange Act questions overseen by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
Hyperliquid’s policy effort is consequently proceeding on both tracks. In a July 9 submission to the CFTC, the Hyperliquid Policy Center and Phantom asked the derivatives regulator to distinguish software development from regulated financial intermediation.
Their proposed model would keep registration and compliance obligations with entities that handle customer orders, control funds or enter transactions, rather than automatically imposing them on developers publishing protocol code. The submission also called for regulated exchanges, clearing organizations and futures commission merchants to be allowed to use public blockchain infrastructure, subject to their existing market-surveillance, segregation and customer-protection duties.
U.S. Access Still Depends on Concrete Regulatory Action The SEC meeting creates a channel for explaining how Hyperliquid divides functions among validators, deployers, interfaces and users. It does not resolve which participants would need registration when a HIP-3 market references equities, indices or other traditional assets.
The current TradeXYZ disclaimer states that its interface is unavailable to U.S. persons. Changing that position would require more than a policy discussion: regulators would need to define the accountable entity for listing, market surveillance, oracle governance, margining, customer access and settlement.
Evidence of substantive progress would include a proposed SEC or CFTC rule covering onchain market infrastructure, formal guidance separating protocol development from market operation, registration by a venue using HyperCore or published exemptive relief addressing non-custodial access. Until one of those steps occurs, the July 14 session should be treated as regulatory engagement rather than authorization.
The information provided in this article is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or trading advice.
Author
Kosta has reported on cryptocurrency markets and blockchain infrastructure since 2020, bringing over six years of hands-on experience in the crypto industry built through daily tracking of markets, trends, and emerging blockchain developments. Specializing in Bitcoin on-chain analysis, institutional ETF flows, and digital asset price action, his work at Coindoo has been cited by other news agencies and consistently covers market developments with a focus on data-driven reporting across Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and XRP. Over the years, Kosta has contributed to multiple crypto media outlets in different regions, authoring over 6,000 articles across the sector. His reporting spans cryptocurrency markets and the broader fintech industry, tracking not only price action but also the technological and regulatory forces shaping the ecosystem. To support his analysis, Kosta actively leverages on-chain data and metrics from leading platforms such as Santiment, Glassnode, and CryptoQuant, enabling deeper, evidence-based market insights. He believes in the power of transparency and the data that underpins the blockchain ecosystem. His academic background in Marketing Management from Denmark further complements his analytical approach, adding a strong understanding of communication strategy and content positioning to his work.
Pump.fun začal uvolňovat odemčené $PUMP tokeny 14. července a za první hodinu přesunul přes 6 milionů USD; celkově přesuny přesáhly 19 milionů USD. Jde o součást unlocku z 12. července, kdy bylo uvolněno asi 82,5 miliardy tokenů.
Pump.fun, the Solana-based memecoin launchpad that became a cash machine in 2024, just started writing checks. On July 14, the platform’s team wallet began distributing unlocked $PUMP tokens, moving over $6 million worth in the first hour alone. By the time the dust settled, total distributions had blown past $19 million.
The transfers are part of a broader unlock event that hit on July 12, two days prior, when approximately 82.5 billion $PUMP tokens were released from their vesting schedule. That release, roughly 29% of the token’s circulating supply at the time, marked the first major cliff unlock since Pump.fun’s initial coin offering a year ago.
Advertisement
Where the tokens went Here’s the breakdown. Of the 82.5 billion tokens unlocked, about 50 billion were earmarked for the team and 32.5 billion for early investors. In total, around 52 billion $PUMP tokens, valued at approximately $76 million, were distributed from the team wallet.
That still leaves roughly $60 million worth of tokens sitting in the treasury.
The $PUMP token has a total supply of 1 trillion tokens. The tokenomics split looks like this: 20% allocated to the team, 13% to existing investors, 24% to the community and ecosystem, with smaller tranches going to the foundation, liquidity provisions, and an ecosystem fund. The remaining 33% was sold during the 2025 ICO, which raised roughly $1.32 billion.
The platform behind the token Pump.fun generated hundreds of millions in platform fees since its launch, with daily revenue peaking above $7 million during the memecoin frenzy.
The $PUMP token itself launched via ICO in mid-2025, and the vesting schedule was designed with a one-year cliff followed by linear unlocks. The July 12 event was that cliff coming due.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Canaan Inc., the company that builds the machines other people use to mine Bitcoin, has been quietly stacking its own pile. The NASDAQ-listed mining hardware manufacturer disclosed its June 2026 unaudited mining performance on July 14, revealing a net addition of 49 BTC to its corporate treasury.
That brings the company’s total Bitcoin stash to 1,915 BTC, valued at approximately $123.5 million. Alongside the 1,915 BTC, Canaan also holds 3,952 ETH.
Advertisement
The numbers behind Canaan’s June mining haul Canaan’s self-mining operations produced 64 BTC during June 2026. The net addition of 49 BTC reflects the difference between gross mining output and what ends up staying on the balance sheet. Some of those Bitcoin came from customer payments for hardware sales, meaning the company is accepting BTC as payment and holding it rather than converting to fiat.
According to Bitcoin treasury trackers, Canaan now ranks approximately 33rd among public companies globally in terms of Bitcoin holdings.
A strategy that started paying off a year ago The company formally adopted its digital asset holding policy in July 2025, making an explicit corporate commitment to building long-term BTC reserves. At that point, the firm held roughly 1,484 BTC.
By the end of May 2026, the company held 1,867 BTC, meaning the June addition of 49 BTC net represents a steady monthly cadence of accumulation. From July 2025 to July 2026, the treasury has grown from 1,484 BTC to 1,915 BTC — an increase of about 431 BTC, or roughly 29%, in a single year.
As an ASIC chip designer and manufacturer, Canaan sits at the intersection of hardware production, self-mining operations, and treasury management. Unlike companies that issue debt or equity to fund BTC purchases, Canaan generates Bitcoin through its mining operations and receives it as payment from customers.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Maelstrom udělil šestý grant z programu Bitcoin Grant Program Tadge Dryjovi, spolutvůrci Lightning Network. Prostředky mají podpořit výzkum obrany Bitcoinu proti hrozbě kvantových počítačů.
Maelstrom, the family office run by BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes, just handed its sixth Bitcoin Grant Program award to one of the network’s most quietly important builders. Tadge Dryja, best known as a co-creator of the Lightning Network, will use the funding to research how to harden Bitcoin against the looming threat of quantum computers.
What Dryja is actually working on The grant supports Dryja’s research into post-quantum cryptographic defenses for Bitcoin. Bitcoin’s current security relies on elliptic-curve cryptography, which works brilliantly against today’s computers. The concern, shared by a growing number of researchers, is that sufficiently powerful quantum machines could eventually break those protections.
Dryja has already been working on solutions. He’s developed a commit/reveal scheme he calls “Lifeboat,” designed to protect transactions from quantum attacks. He’s also proposed a mechanism called OP_CIV for post-quantum signature aggregation, which would let Bitcoin verify quantum-resistant signatures more efficiently.
Advertisement
Dryja’s broader body of work includes Utreexo, a data structure that could dramatically reduce the storage requirements for running a Bitcoin full node.
Inside the Maelstrom Bitcoin Grant Program Maelstrom launched its Bitcoin Grant Program on July 17, 2024. The program offers grants between $50,000 and $150,000 for a 12-month period, paid out monthly in BTC, USDC, or USDT. The focus areas are resilience, scalability, censorship resistance, and privacy.
Dryja is the sixth recipient. A June 2026 annual report detailed the accomplishments of four prior grantees, whose work has spanned privacy-enhancing tools like Payjoin and Silent Payments, along with scalability improvements to Bitcoin Core.
Payjoin is a transaction method that makes blockchain analysis significantly harder by blending sender and receiver inputs. Silent Payments let users receive Bitcoin without reusing addresses, which is a privacy upgrade that sounds boring until you realize address reuse is one of the easiest ways to deanonymize someone on-chain.
The specific dollar amount of Dryja’s grant hasn’t been disclosed. But given the program’s stated range, we’re looking at something in the $50,000 to $150,000 neighborhood.
The quantum clock is ticking, kind of No quantum computer today can break Bitcoin’s cryptography. Current machines don’t have nearly enough stable qubits to run Shor’s algorithm against the elliptic curves Bitcoin uses. The National Institute of Standards and Technology has already standardized several post-quantum cryptographic algorithms for broader use, which creates a foundation that Bitcoin researchers can build on.
Dryja’s Lifeboat proposal doesn’t require Bitcoin to adopt entirely new signature schemes overnight. Instead, it creates an emergency mechanism that users could activate to protect their funds if quantum capabilities suddenly leapt forward.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
SharpLink tento týden vytěžil 499 ETH ze stakingu a celkovou držbu zvýšil na 887 673 ETH. Od spuštění své treasury strategie už ze stakingu získal 23 490 ETH. Jde o druhou největší veřejně obchodovanou ETH pokladnici.
SharpLink, the Nasdaq-listed Ethereum treasury company trading under the ticker SBET, pulled in 499 ETH from staking rewards in just the past week. That brings the company’s cumulative staking haul to 23,490 ETH since it kicked off its treasury strategy, and its total Ethereum holdings now sit at 887,673 ETH.
For context, that’s the second-largest Ethereum stash held by any publicly traded company on the planet. The only outfit holding more is Bitmine Immersion Technologies (BMNR), which controls over 5.7 million ETH.
The MicroStrategy playbook, but for Ethereum SharpLink provides what it calls structured equity exposure to Ethereum. Investors buy SBET stock on Nasdaq, and that stock price is heavily tied to how much ETH the company holds per share. It’s a way to get Ethereum exposure through a traditional brokerage account without touching a wallet or an exchange.
SharpLink actively stakes its holdings. That 499 ETH earned in a single week is essentially passive income generated from helping secure the Ethereum network. The 23,490 ETH accumulated through staking alone represents a meaningful addition to the balance sheet without the company spending a single dollar.
Advertisement
SharpLink maintains a public ETH dashboard that breaks down its holdings, staking rewards, and per-share ETH concentration metrics. The average purchase price across its entire portfolio sits at $3,586 per ETH, according to that dashboard.
Recent buying spree signals confidence SharpLink resumed active Ethereum purchases in June 2026 after what appears to have been a pause in direct buying. On June 25, the company scooped up 5,000 ETH. Shortly after, it grabbed another 10,000 ETH at an average price of $1,611 per coin. That’s notably below its overall portfolio average of $3,586, which means those recent buys actually improved the company’s cost basis.
The purchases pushed total holdings from approximately 872,984 ETH in May 2026 to the current 887,673 ETH figure. That’s a net increase of roughly 14,700 ETH in about two months, combining both direct purchases and staking rewards.
The company funds these acquisitions partly through at-the-market equity offerings, a mechanism that lets it sell new shares gradually at prevailing market prices rather than through a single large offering. It also executes share repurchases, creating a two-way flow that management can use to manage dilution and signal confidence.
The competitive landscape for public ETH treasuries SharpLink’s position as the number-two public Ethereum holder is noteworthy because this category barely existed a couple of years ago. Bitmine Immersion Technologies, the leader in this space, holds over 5.7 million ETH. SharpLink’s nearly 888,000 ETH treasury held approximately 521,939 ETH as of August 2025. By May 2026, that had grown to roughly 872,984 ETH. Now it’s at 887,673 ETH. The company has added over 365,000 ETH to its balance sheet in less than a year.
That 499 ETH weekly staking reward represents roughly a 0.056% weekly return, or about 2.9% annualized if the rate holds steady. Those staking rewards get added to the total, which then generates more rewards the following week.
What this means for investors For anyone watching SBET as a proxy for Ethereum exposure, the key metric isn’t just total ETH held. It’s ETH per share. At-the-market offerings dilute the share count, while ETH purchases and staking rewards increase the numerator. The interplay between those two forces determines whether shareholders are actually gaining or losing ETH exposure over time.
SharpLink’s dashboard transparency is designed to address exactly this concern, giving investors real-time visibility into whether the company is creating or destroying value on a per-share basis.
The recent purchases at $1,611 suggest management sees current prices as attractive. Buying ETH at roughly 55% below the portfolio’s average cost of $3,586 also means the overall position was significantly underwater at the time of purchase.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Bitmine za poslední čtvrtletí vykázal příjmy 45,7 milionu USD ze stakingu Etheru a validátorů, což tvořilo asi 98 % celkových příjmů. Při plném nasazení odhaduje roční odměny ze stakingu ETH na 284 milionů USD.
Bitmine Immersion Technologies reported $45.7 million in revenue from Ether staking and validator operations for the most recent quarter, reflecting a major shift in the company’s business model following the introduction of its institutional-grade Ethereum staking platform in March.
Staking dominates revenue streamsFor the three months ending May 31, staking activities contributed approximately 98% of Bitmine’s total revenue, according to the company’s latest 10-Q filing. In contrast, self-mined Bitcoin operations generated $624,000, while consulting services added $168,000.
Bitmine disclosed that it has allocated 85% of its Ether holdings—about 4.9 million ETH—into staking. Chairman Tom Lee stated that this is the largest amount of ETH staked by any single entity worldwide.
Bitmine’s projected annual ETH staking reward reaches $284 million at full scale, when both the company’s and its partners’ Ether are fully staked through MAVAN and affiliated staking operations.
A year ago, Bitmine’s quarterly revenue totaled $2 million, driven mainly by equipment leasing, highlighting how the company’s focus on Ethereum staking has transformed its income structure.
Launch and expansion of MAVAN platformThe launch of MAVAN in March marked a new phase for Bitmine. MAVAN, an institutional-grade Ethereum staking service, manages validator infrastructure on behalf of Bitmine and external customers. The platform emerged after Bitmine’s acquisition of Pier Two Holdings, an Australian operator specializing in non-custodial validator services.
Originally developed to support Bitmine’s own Ethereum treasury, MAVAN has grown to serve institutional investors, custodians, and partners within the Ethereum ecosystem.
Mini dictionary: MAVAN (Made in America VAlidator Network) is a staking and validator infrastructure platform focused on institutional-grade Ethereum staking, supporting both Bitmine’s assets and third-party clients.
Robinhood Chain drives Ethereum growthBitmine’s chairman Tom Lee also pointed to the rapid success of Robinhood Chain, a new decentralized trading platform that launched on July 1. He reported that dollar trading volumes on Robinhood Chain have already surpassed $1 billion.
According to Lee, Robinhood Chain now handles more trading volume than any other decentralized exchange, underscoring both its significance and the utility of Ethereum as the underlying blockchain.
Robinhood Chain, utilizing ETH as its native gas token, has introduced millions of users to Ethereum-based transactions, with all network fees and settlement processes occurring directly on the Ethereum blockchain.
Lee emphasized that Robinhood’s 27 million users are now paying transaction fees in ETH, signaling a shift toward mainstream viewing of ETH as a form of money within the platform’s ecosystem.
Quarter EndedTotal RevenueStaking RevenueBTC MiningConsultingMay 31, 2026$45.7 million$44.8 million$624,000$168,000May 31, 2025$2 millionNot disclosedMajority of revenueMinimalDisclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.
Circle vyhrála arbitráž proti fondu Heka Funds podporovanému Tetherem, který byl z platformy vyloučen kvůli podezření z manipulace trhu. Fond požadoval 49 milionů USD na ušlém zisku.
The stablecoin cold war just got a lot less cold. Circle, the company behind USDC, banned a Tether-backed investment fund from its platform in late 2023 over concerns that the fund was engaging in trading activity designed to manipulate markets in favor of Circle’s biggest rival.
The fund fought back with a $49 million arbitration claim. It lost. And now the details are public, offering a rare window into just how aggressively the two dominant stablecoin issuers are competing for control of a market worth roughly $307 billion.
What happened with Heka Funds The fund in question is Heka Funds, a Malta-based investment vehicle managed by London’s Abraxas Capital Management and backed by Tether. Circle determined that Heka’s trading patterns on its platform looked suspiciously like market manipulation, specifically the kind that would benefit Tether at Circle’s expense.
That’s exactly what Circle did. It banned Heka Funds from its platform entirely.
Advertisement
Heka didn’t take it quietly. The fund initiated arbitration proceedings in 2024, claiming Circle’s ban cost it $49 million in lost profits. The arbitrator disagreed. The ruling came down in Circle’s favor, validating the company’s decision to remove Heka from its ecosystem.
The stablecoin rivalry beneath the surface To understand why this matters, you need to understand the dynamics between USDC and USDT. These two tokens together dominate the stablecoin market, which sits at approximately $307 billion in total value. Tether’s USDT is the larger of the two by a significant margin, but Circle’s USDC has carved out its own substantial position, particularly among institutional users and in regulated markets.
Tether has long operated with a degree of opacity that has drawn scrutiny from regulators and skeptics alike. Circle, by contrast, has positioned itself as the compliance-first alternative, publishing regular attestation reports and pursuing a more transparent operational model.
Whether Tether itself had any direct involvement in or knowledge of Heka’s trading strategies remains unclear from the available details. But the optics alone, a Tether-backed entity accused of manipulating markets on Circle’s platform, tell you everything about the trust deficit between these two camps.
What this tells us about stablecoin oversight This dispute, which became public on July 14, highlights a broader shift in how stablecoin issuers police activity on their platforms.
Circle’s decision to ban Heka suggests that stablecoin issuers are now treating platform surveillance as a core business function. When your token’s credibility depends on maintaining a stable peg and market confidence, letting potentially manipulative trading slide is an existential risk.
What this means for investors The $49 million arbitration claim from Heka puts a number on the financial stakes. That figure represents what a single fund claims it lost from being cut off from Circle’s ecosystem.
Circle’s arbitration victory gives it a concrete data point to present to institutional allocators who care about governance and risk management.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
0x Protocol od svého spuštění v roce 2016 zprostředkoval objem obchodů přes 200 miliard USD a jeho Swap API používá více než 500 týmů na více než 20 blockchainech.
0x Protocol has facilitated over $200 billion in cumulative trading volume since its 2016 launch, with more than 500 teams integrating its Swap API across 20 or more blockchains. The protocol’s core innovation uses off-chain order relay with on-chain settlement, reducing gas costs by keeping order matching off the blockchain while settling trades on-chain securely. In June 2026, 0x launched a Cross-Chain API with 12 bridge partners, enabling asset transfers between different blockchain networks through a single developer integration point. ZRX’s market capitalization sits between $85 million and $100 million as of April 2026, despite powering infrastructure used by Coinbase, MetaMask, Robinhood, and Phantom wallet. A January 2026 SwapNet exploit drained $13.4 million from Matcha Meta users through a third-party routing contract, though 0x’s core protocol contracts remained uncompromised throughout. 0x Protocol is open-source infrastructure that enables decentralized token trading across multiple blockchains. It does not operate as a single exchange. Instead, it provides a standardized set of smart contracts and developer tools that allow applications to embed swap functionality without building their own order matching systems.
CoinMarketCap’s overview describes it as a universal liquidity layer that aggregates pricing from automated market makers and order books across 16 or more blockchains. The protocol matters because fragmented liquidity is the central problem in decentralized finance. Hundreds of exchanges and liquidity pools exist across different blockchains, each with different pricing and depth.
0x aggregates these sources through its Swap API, allowing wallets like MetaMask and Phantom, exchanges like Coinbase and Robinhood, and portfolio trackers to offer best-price execution without connecting to each liquidity source individually. Over 500 teams have integrated the API, according to Bitget’s analysis.
Analysis: The gap between 0x’s infrastructure usage and its token valuation is the protocol’s defining tension. The platform has facilitated over $200 billion in volume, yet ZRX trades at a market cap of approximately $85 million to $100 million as of April 2026. That is roughly what a mid-sized restaurant chain might be worth.
How Off-Chain Relay and On-Chain Settlement Work 0x’s foundational innovation from 2017 separated order management from trade execution. Older decentralized exchanges put every step on the blockchain.
Order placement, cancellation, matching, and settlement all consume gas fees. 0x moved the first three steps off-chain, recording only the final trade on the blockchain. That hybrid approach reduced costs while preserving decentralized settlement security, as Gate Learn explained.
The system operates through three participants: Makers supply liquidity and set pricing by signing orders off-chain. Relayers host and distribute these order books. Takers accept trade offers, and when a taker agrees to a maker’s price, 0x’s smart contracts settle the swap on-chain, ensuring both sides complete simultaneously.
The v4 Settler contract suite handles the final atomic settlement. In 2024, 0x v2 introduced a new pricing engine designed specifically for on-chain applications, optimizing trade execution and expanding liquidity source access.
As of 2026, the protocol supports over 20 chains: Ethereum, Base, Arbitrum, Optimism, Polygon, BSC, Avalanche, Scroll, Linea, Blast, Mode, Mantle, Unichain, Berachain, Ink, Plasma, Sonic, and Monad, according to Bitget’s pricing analysis. In March 2026, the team announced that HyperEVM, a high-performance Ethereum Layer 2, went live via the 0x Swap API.
The ZRX Token and Its Governance Role ZRX is the ERC-20 governance and utility token powering the 0x Protocol. Holders vote on protocol upgrade proposals known as ZEIPs, treasury allocation decisions, and expansion to new blockchains through the community DAO.
Staking is built into the system: liquidity providers stake ZRX to earn a share of trading fees from market-making activity. Delegators can assign their ZRX to high-performing market makers and earn rewards, as described in Bitget’s 2026 protocol guide.
Whether governance plus staking creates sufficient economic demand to support ZRX at scale remains the token’s central question. The protocol generated the same fee structure whether ZRX was priced at $0.08 or $2.53, its all-time high from January 2018.
In late 2025 and early 2026, ZRX faced reduced exchange accessibility, with margin and spot trading pairs delisted from Binance and a full delisting from Bitfinex, as CoinMarketCap’s analysis noted. In March 2026, Dune Analytics launched Dune Enterprise in partnership with 0x, providing enterprise-grade on-chain analytics to monitor trader behavior and liquidity routing.
The most significant product launch was Matcha Meta, a meta-aggregator that routes trades to whichever DEX aggregator offers the best execution at any moment, sitting on top of all major aggregators, including 0x itself.
The SwapNet Exploit and Protocol Security In January 2026, a $13.4 million exploit affected Matcha Meta users through a third-party routing contract called SwapNet. The contract was closed-source and lacked sufficient validation of user-supplied parameters, allowing an attacker to redirect funds that users had approved for trading.
The 0x team confirmed that its core protocol contracts were not compromised, and the affected contract was disabled, according to Bitget’s chronology. The incident underscored persistent DeFi security risks but did not affect the core protocol’s integrity. 0x continues to operate a bug bounty program to detect vulnerabilities before exploitation.
The broader question for DeFi protocol security is whether aggregator architectures that route through third-party contracts can adequately vet every integration partner.
Regulatory Implications 0x Protocol operates as a permissionless infrastructure with no centralized controlling entity. Treasury’s March 2026 report to Congress acknowledged that the BSA/AML framework does not fully account for DeFi protocols with distributed governance.
The SEC’s Crypto Task Force has discussed balancing financial privacy with national security transparency. Whether infrastructure protocols like 0x face direct regulatory obligations depends on pending congressional clarification.
What’s Next? The Cross-Chain API, launched in June 2026 with 12 bridge partners, represents 0x’s push beyond single-chain liquidity aggregation. Solana ecosystem integration and continued HyperEVM support expand the protocol’s addressable market. A long-standing community debate about implementing sustainable protocol fees remains unresolved.
If fees are introduced, they could create direct token-level value capture but risk making 0x less competitive against rivals like Uniswap and 1inch. Token performance projections are speculative and should not be treated as financial guidance. Digital assets carry a significant risk of loss.
FAQs What is 0x Protocol?
0x Protocol is an open-source infrastructure providing smart contracts and APIs that enable decentralized token trading across 20 or more blockchains without requiring a centralized exchange intermediary.
How does 0x reduce trading costs?
0x uses off-chain order relay with on-chain settlement, keeping order matching and management off the blockchain to avoid gas fees while settling only the final trade on-chain securely.
What is ZRX used for?
ZRX is the governance and utility token that allows holders to vote on protocol upgrades, stake for trading fee rewards, and participate in treasury decisions through the 0x DAO.
Which apps use the 0x Protocol?
Over 500 teams integrate 0x, including major products like Coinbase, MetaMask, Robinhood, and Phantom Wallet, using its Swap API to offer best-price decentralized token trading.
Is 0x Protocol the same as a DEX?
0x Protocol is not an exchange for end users but rather a trading protocol layer that provides liquidity aggregation and order routing infrastructure for wallets and DEX platforms.
What blockchains does 0x support?
0x supports over 20 blockchains as of 2026, including Ethereum, Solana, Base, Arbitrum, Optimism, Polygon, BSC, Avalanche, Monad, Scroll, Linea, and several additional networks.
Was the 0x Protocol hacked in 2026?
In January 2026, a $13.4 million exploit affected Matcha Meta users through a third-party SwapNet contract, but 0x’s core protocol smart contracts remained uncompromised throughout.
References What Is 0x Protocol (ZRX) And How Does It Work (CoinMarketCap, 2026) 0x Protocol (ZRX) Price Prediction and Analysis (Bitget, April 2026) 0x Protocol Complete Guide (Gate Learn, April 2026) 0x Protocol 2026: Cross-Chain DeFi Guide (Bitget Academy, March 2026)
Anchorage Digital, the $4.2 billion crypto bank with a federal charter, now supports TRON network staking and custody for TRC-20 assets. The integration gives institutional players a regulated pathway into a blockchain that quietly handles more stablecoin volume than most competitors combined.
What Anchorage is actually offering Anchorage first announced its intention to integrate the TRON blockchain on March 26, 2026, starting with custody services for TRX, TRON’s native token, alongside support for TRC-20 assets. Those are the tokens built on TRON’s network, similar to how ERC-20 tokens sit on Ethereum.
As of July 2026, the custody piece for TRX is fully operational. Native TRX staking is being rolled out in phases. That staking component matters because it transforms TRX from a dormant balance sheet item into a yield-generating asset for institutional portfolios.
Advertisement
Anchorage co-founder Nathan McCauley and TRON founder Justin Sun have both signaled that the collaboration is designed to enhance secure institutional access to TRON’s ecosystem.
Why a federally chartered bank matters here Founded in 2017, Anchorage became the first nationally chartered digital asset bank in the US when the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency granted it a trust charter in January 2021. Its investor roster includes Andreessen Horowitz, Goldman Sachs, KKR, GIC (Singapore’s sovereign wealth fund), and Visa.
TRON’s quiet dominance in stablecoins TRON’s mainnet launched in May 2018 under founder Justin Sun. The volume of USDT circulating on TRON exceeds $86 to $90 billion as of early 2026. The network’s 370 million-plus user accounts signal genuine adoption at scale.
What this means for investors The immediate implication is straightforward: institutional capital now has a compliant channel to gain exposure to TRX and TRC-20 tokens. First comes custody (check). Then comes staking yield (in progress).
TRON’s association with Justin Sun, who has faced regulatory scrutiny and legal actions in multiple jurisdictions, remains a consideration for compliance-conscious institutions. Anchorage’s federal oversight arguably mitigates some of that reputational risk by providing a layer of regulatory validation, but it doesn’t eliminate it entirely.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Chainlink hlásí 43,3 mld. USD v TVS a 32,18 bil. USD v kumulativní hodnotě transakcí (TVE). Projekt zároveň eviduje 19,59 mld. ověřených on-chain datových výstupů.
Chainlink Posts $43.3B TVS and $32.18T in Cumulative Transaction Value@chainlink is reporting $43.3 billion in Total Value Secured (TVS) and $32.18 trillion in cumulative Transaction Value Enabled (TVE), along with 19.59 billion onchain verified data outputs. The numbers, shared by the project, reflect the scale of infrastructure quietly sitting beneath much of decentralized finance today.
TVS and TVE measure two distinct things. TVS represents the aggregate dollar value of assets currently dependent on Chainlink's oracles across DeFi protocols. TVE is the all-time sum of transaction value that Chainlink's services have helped facilitate since inception. As Chainlink's own metrics page notes, TVE is calculated by taking the sum of the USD value associated with each transaction utilizing a Chainlink oracle.
To put the TVS figure in context: it is not the same as total value locked, the metric most DeFi observers focus on. TVS measures the value of assets that depend on a network's data services, whether that is price feeds for lending protocols or cross-chain token transfers. A single price feed can underpin value across dozens of protocols on multiple networks simultaneously.
Institutional Adoption and Expanding Network ReachThe figures sit within a broader growth story for the network. Chainlink's Q1 2026 quarterly review showed its Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP) processed over $18 billion in transfer volume during the quarter, a 319% year-over-year increase. The same period saw Amundi, Europe's largest asset manager, launch a tokenized mutual fund powered by Chainlink that reached $400 million in assets under management within three weeks. Robinhood also named Chainlink as the oracle platform for Robinhood Chain, and the Bank of England selected the network to participate in its Synchronisation Lab for synchronized settlement between central bank money and onchain securities.
On the institutional side, data tracked by CoinLaw shows Chainlink holds roughly 59% of the tracked oracle market by TVS, with its CCIP now certified to SOC 2 Type 2, SOC 2 Type 1, and ISO/IEC 27001:2022 standards. Major financial institutions including Swift, Euroclear, Fidelity International, UBS, and J.P. Morgan's Kinexys have adopted Chainlink's infrastructure.
The $LINK token has not kept pace with network growth in this cycle, but the protocol's operational metrics continue to move in one direction. For a piece of infrastructure that most users never directly interact with, Chainlink's reach across DeFi and traditional finance is difficult to ignore.
Sources
Chainlink Official Metrics, chain.link
Chainlink Q1 2026 Quarterly Review, chain.link
Chainlink Statistics 2026: TVS, CCIP and Market Share, CoinLaw
LINK vzrostl o více než 5 % poté, co Mantle dokončil migraci svého Super Portal za 2,5 miliardy USD na CCIP od Chainlinku. Tím se zvýšila poptávka po LINK.
Chainlink price has jumped more than 5% after Mantle completed the migration of its $2.5 billion Super Portal to Chainlink’s cross-chain infrastructure, extending a crypto market rally driven by softer U.S. inflation data.
Summary
Chainlink price rose over 5% after Mantle migrated its $2.5 billion Super Portal to Chainlink’s CCIP. Whale accumulation, rising open interest, and record wallet growth have strengthened LINK’s bullish momentum. Technical indicators point to $8.40 as the next key resistance, while losing $8.00 could weaken the rally. According to data from crypto.news, Chainlink (LINK) price traded around $8.29 after briefly touching $8.40, extending its weekly gain to roughly 7%.
The move came as Bitcoin climbed above $64,600 and Ethereum approached $1,875 after U.S. inflation data strengthened expectations that the Federal Reserve could adopt a less restrictive policy later this year. Total crypto market capitalization also advanced more than 3% to about $2.30 trillion.
Mantle’s infrastructure upgrade adds to a string of recent enterprise integrations for Chainlink. Aave recently selected the protocol for automated vault rebalancing, while Robinhood has incorporated Chainlink infrastructure into its expanding Layer-2 ecosystem.
Network adoption has also continued on-chain, with the number of non-empty Ethereum wallets holding LINK surpassing 900,000 for the first time.
On-chain accumulation suggests large investors positioned ahead of the announcement rather than reacting afterward. Wallets holding more than 1,000 LINK reached their highest level this year, while addresses controlling over 100,000 LINK expanded to a record 805.
These purchases absorbed much of the selling pressure created by the scheduled unlock of 21 million LINK tokens, reducing the impact of the additional supply entering circulation.
Derivatives traders have joined the rally. Open interest increased roughly 10% alongside the price advance, showing fresh leveraged participation instead of a short-lived spot spike. The combination of rising price and rising open interest typically suggests new positions entering the market rather than existing shorts simply closing.
Technical breakout places $8.40 and $8.70 in focus The daily chart shows LINK pressing against the upper boundary of a descending wedge that has contained price since early June. Tuesday’s rally pushed the token above $8.20 and toward immediate resistance near $8.40, where sellers rejected price earlier in the session.
Chainlink daily price chart — July 15 | Source: crypto.news A confirmed daily close above that level would strengthen the breakout case and expose the next resistance zone around $8.70, followed by psychological resistance near $9.00.
Momentum indicators have also improved. The daily RSI has climbed to around 60 after recovering from oversold territory, showing buyers have regained control without entering overbought conditions. The Aroon Up indicator has returned to 100 while the Aroon Down remains near single-digit readings, highlighting a renewed bullish trend.
On the 4-hour chart, the MACD has completed a bullish crossover above the signal line, while the Chaikin Money Flow remains positive above zero, showing capital continues to enter the market.
Chainlink 4-hour price chart — July 15 | Source: crypto.news CoinGlass liquidation data reinforces the technical picture. The one-week heatmap shows a dense concentration of leveraged short positions clustered between $8.15 and $8.30, many of which were cleared during the latest rally. Above current prices, another sizeable liquidity pocket sits around $8.45-$8.70, creating a potential magnet if buyers maintain momentum.
Chainlink liquidation heatmap | Source: CoinGlass Loss of $8.00 support would weaken the bullish case Several risks could still interrupt LINK’s recovery. Markets remain sensitive to upcoming U.S. Producer Price Index data and any Federal Reserve comments that challenge expectations for easier monetary policy. Renewed geopolitical tensions or another rise in oil prices could also reduce appetite for risk assets across digital markets.
From a technical perspective, failure to hold above the $8.20 breakout zone would leave $8.00 as the first important support.
A decisive break below that level could pull LINK back toward the $7.70-$7.50 demand area, where the liquidation heatmap shows another large concentration of leveraged positions. Such a move would invalidate the immediate breakout structure and postpone any attempt to challenge the $9.00 resistance zone.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
Circle a Grupo BIND spouštějí v Argentině regulovaný přístup k USDC pro firmy a finanční zprostředkovatele přes platformu BEN. Cílí na treasury, platby a další digitální transakce v digitálních dolarech.
Circle and Argentine financial group BIND have struck a deal to open institutional access to USDC through BIND’s digital assets platform, giving corporations and financial intermediaries a regulated on-ramp to dollar-denominated stablecoins in a country where the peso has essentially disintegrated.
The partnership, announced on July 14 during Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire’s visit to Buenos Aires, will channel USDC access through BEN, BIND’s digital assets platform, on a peer-to-peer basis. BIND operates as a registered virtual asset service provider (known locally as a PSAV), which means it’s a licensed financial institution building rails for companies that need dollar exposure but face a currency that has lost 99.8% of its value against the USD since 2009.
What the deal actually looks like BEN will serve as the infrastructure layer connecting eligible Argentine institutions to USDC, covering payments, treasury operations, and broader digital asset transactions, all wrapped in a compliance framework that BIND is keen to emphasize.
Advertisement
“Through BEN, we seek to provide companies with transparent, secure, and efficient access to digital dollar infrastructure within a framework designed to support regulatory compliance and operational integrity,” said Andrés Meta, a Grupo BIND shareholder.
Circle isn’t treating this as a one-off announcement. The company is hiring a senior director based in Buenos Aires and actively pursuing additional partnerships with local banks and fintech companies. This follows Circle’s existing footprint in Brazil, where it already has a team of eight people, and planned expansions into Mexico and Colombia.
Why Argentina is ground zero for stablecoins The peso recently hit yet another record low against the dollar, extending a collapse that has made the currency almost worthless in relative terms over the past decade and a half. Persistent inflation, capital controls, and a general distrust in the local monetary system have turned Argentina into one of the most active stablecoin markets on the planet.
What’s changing now is the institutional dimension. Retail adoption was already widespread. This partnership is about bringing corporations, financial intermediaries, and treasury departments into the fold through regulated channels. When individuals buy USDC on an exchange, it’s useful but fragmented. When institutions get compliant access through a licensed financial entity like BIND, it opens the door to much larger capital flows, corporate treasury management in digital dollars, and cross-border payment infrastructure that actually scales.
Circle has also been engaging with Argentine regulatory bodies, including the Central Bank and the Ministry of Economy, to ensure the integration of digital assets within the traditional financial system doesn’t run afoul of existing rules. Allaire has expressed optimism about regulatory advancements regarding how banks treat stablecoins in Argentina, suggesting the groundwork is being laid for a more formalized framework.
What this means for the broader market Circle’s simultaneous push into Argentina, Brazil, Mexico, and Colombia suggests the company sees the entire region as a strategic priority for USDC distribution. Tether’s USDT has historically dominated stablecoin usage in Latin America, particularly in peer-to-peer and informal markets. Circle’s strategy of partnering with regulated financial institutions like BIND targets the institutional and corporate segment where compliance requirements make USDC’s regulatory positioning a genuine advantage over less transparent alternatives.
The risk, as always in Argentina, is regulatory whiplash. The country has a long history of economic policy U-turns, capital control changes, and political volatility that can reshape the operating environment overnight. Circle’s engagement with the Central Bank and Ministry of Economy suggests awareness of this risk, but awareness and immunity are very different things.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
NEAR se blíží deflačnímu prahu: poplatky z Intents už rostou rychleji než nová emise tokenů a 100 % těchto poplatků jde na nákupy tokenu $NEAR. K prahu je ale ještě potřeba zhruba zdvojnásobit denní objem Intents, který je nyní kolem 77 milionů USD denně; deflační hranice leží přibližně na 177 milionech USD denně.
@NEARProtocol says its token buyback program is accelerating, with Intents fees increasingly outpacing new issuance. The mechanism is straightforward: 100% of fees generated through NEAR Intents are used to purchase $NEAR directly on the open market, creating buy pressure that scales with transaction volume. Cumulative Intents volume has now passed $22 billion, and the capture rate has climbed from roughly 12% over its lifetime to near 30% in the past week alone.
Two Structural Changes Set the Stage Two protocol upgrades have made the deflation thesis credible. On October 30, 2025, NEAR's inflation rate was permanently reduced from 5% to 2.5%, cutting annual issuance roughly in half and compressing the volume required to reach net deflation by the same amount. Then on February 23, 2026, the fee conversion mechanism activated for the first time, routing all NEAR Intents fees into $NEAR purchases.
NEAR issues approximately 32.2 million tokens annually. Two mechanisms work against that issuance: base-layer gas fees follow a 70/30 split, with 70% permanently burned by the protocol, while Intents fees go entirely toward open-market buybacks. Halved inflation plus active buybacks via the Intents fee switch create a structurally different supply-demand dynamic than what existed a year ago.
The Threshold Is Real, but Not Yet Crossed At current prices and the 2026 channel-mix-weighted fee rate, the deflationary threshold sits at approximately $177 million in daily Intents volume. The current 90-day average sits at $77 million per day, meaning volume needs to roughly double to cross the deflationary threshold.
The math is not static. As NEAR's price rises, each token purchased via the Intents fee mechanism absorbs more dollar-denominated issuance, meaning price appreciation actively lowers the barrier to deflation in token terms. On an Intents-adjusted basis, NEAR's price-to-sales ratio is approximately 28x, versus Ethereum at 194x and Solana at 40x. That gap has drawn attention from analysts who argue the token is structurally underpriced relative to its fee generation.
The trajectory is real. Whether daily Intents volume can double from here, and hold there, is the question that will determine whether the deflation story moves from thesis to fact.
Sources:
Crypto Briefing: NEAR Protocol targets AI-driven commerce with new products and tokenomics improvements
NEAR Foundation: Supporting Community Proposals to Upgrade NEAR Tokenomics
SVRN: NEAR Protocol 2026: Investment Case, Tokenomics and Deflation Threshold
Alameda Research has resumed its Solana [SOL] transfers. According to Onchain Lens, a wallet linked to Alameda Research moved 201K SOL, worth $15.14 million, to BitGo Custody.
The on-chain monitor observed that the token transfers occurred through multiple transactions. These tokens were distributed to multiple custody addresses.
Source: Nansen Even after these token transfers, the main wallet still holds a significant share, with 3.016 million SOL worth approximately $226.7 million. The firm has occasionally made such transfers. Often, when these tokens move, some end up in exchanges and are sold to repay creditors.
Therefore, even with the latest transfer, the team is either preparing to sell or relocating its holdings.
However, it’s worth noting that the immediate token movement to custody doesn’t imply an immediate sale. Thus, these tokens could be another step towards distributing assets, especially with the upcoming Q3 creditor deadline.
Did the Solana market react? For SOL holders and other market participants, such a major transfer captures market attention.
Although the transfer drew close attention, the market barely reacted. In contrast, Solana rebounded slightly and was trading at $75 at press time, despite a 2.14% daily drop that extended its 7.5% weekly decline.
Source: CoinGlass As expected, this price volatility triggered a wave of liquidation, especially for long positions. According to CoinGlass data, $10.89 million in long positions were liquidated, compared to $1.9 million in short positions.
When a higher volume of longs is liquidated, it suggests that traders were overly bullish and anticipated another rebound.
Traders remain bearish, eyeing another drop As Solana remains below $80, investors have continued to cash out at every opportunity. As a result, exchange inflows have increased significantly.
According to CoinGlass data, Solana Spot Netflow turned positive, rising to $9.02 million as of writing, a major jump from -$1.42 million.
Source: CoinGlass A positive net flow suggests that more SOL has recently flowed into exchanges than out of them. Historically, higher inflows have preceded a weakened market and a price drop.
In fact, the selling pressure has significantly strengthened the downside momentum, with the Aroon Line highlighting this weakness.
The Aroon Up indicator has fallen for ten straight days, dropping from 100% to 28%. Such a sustained decline signals that the trend has lost strength and is now pushing into new lows.
Source: TradingView At the same time, SOL fell below its Momentum-Adjusted Moving Average (MaMa), further confirming the trend’s weakness.
These two momentum indicators indicate the trend to the downside could continue. Therefore, if sellers continue to dominate, SOL risks a drop towards $70. Moreover, to invalidate this bearish outlook, Solana needs a daily close above the MaMa at $78.62.
Final Summary A wallet linked to Alameda Research moved 201K SOL, worth $15.14 million, to BitGo Custody. Solana barely moved on the news, but market momentum remains weak, with sellers dominating.
Morgan Stanley podal další změny u SEC pro ETF na ether a solanu, které by nově měly generovat i stakingové odměny. Fondy by měly obchodovat na NYSE Arca pod tickery MSSE a MSOL, pokud je SEC schválí.
15 July 2026 | 00:18 Morgan Stanley Investment Management filed a third round of amendments with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on July 14 for proposed exchange-traded funds holding ether and solana.
The Morgan Stanley Ethereum Trust and Morgan Stanley Solana Trust are designed to give investors spot exposure through ordinary brokerage accounts without requiring them to buy tokens or manage private keys. If the registration statements become effective, the shares are expected to trade on NYSE Arca under the tickers MSSE and MSOL.
The amended filings expand a crypto product line that already includes the Morgan Stanley Bitcoin Trust, which trades on NYSE Arca with the same 0.14% annual sponsor fee, and the Stablecoin Reserves Portfolio, launched in April to hold assets that meet the GENIUS Act’s reserve requirements. Unlike the passive Bitcoin fund, the proposed Ether and Solana trusts would also generate staking rewards, combining regulated brokerage access with potential onchain income. Together, the products show Morgan Stanley building a broader digital-asset strategy spanning token exposure, stablecoin reserve management and staking rather than treating Bitcoin as a standalone offering.
What the Funds Would Hold Both products are passive trusts that would track CoinDesk’s 4PM New York settlement benchmarks for ether and solana. They would not use leverage, derivatives or active trading strategies, so returns would primarily reflect movements in the underlying tokens, less expenses, together with any net staking income.
BNY and Coinbase Custody are named as custodians, while Morgan Stanley Investment Management would serve as delegated sponsor.
Under normal market conditions, the Ethereum trust intends to stake between 50% and 80% of its ETH, while the Solana vehicle may stake up to 100% of its SOL. Both would periodically keep assets unstaked to cover redemptions, expenses and distributions. The shared 0.14% sponsor fee therefore sits alongside different return mechanics: a larger portion of MSOL’s holdings could earn network rewards, but its liquidity management becomes more important when unstaking is delayed.
Figment, Galaxy Blockchain Infrastructure and Coinbase Canada are listed as staking providers for both products. The providers and custodians would collectively receive 5% of gross staking rewards, leaving 95% for the trusts. Net rewards would initially increase net asset value before being converted into cash for distributions expected monthly, but no less frequently than quarterly.
The prospectuses do not promise a fixed yield. Returns would depend on network conditions and the proportion of assets staked, while validator failures, penalties and unstaking delays could reduce income or complicate redemptions. Morgan Stanley may also suspend staking if it creates material legal, regulatory or tax risks. Retail investors would not be able to exchange shares directly for ETH or SOL. Only authorized participants could create or redeem 10,000-share baskets, meaning the products would remain regulated brokerage wrappers rather than substitutes for holding transferable tokens.
A 0.14% Sponsor Fee Each trust carries a proposed annual sponsor fee of 0.14% of net asset value, accrued daily and paid monthly in arrears. Morgan Stanley would cover ordinary operating costs from that fee, while litigation and other extraordinary expenses could still be charged to the trust. Investors may separately incur brokerage commissions when trading shares.
The July 14 submissions are Amendment No. 3 to the registration statements, not approvals. The SEC must declare the filings effective before shares can be sold, and the documents remain subject to further changes. The trusts would also not be registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940, meaning shareholders would not receive the protections attached to conventional registered investment companies.
The information provided in this article is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or trading advice.
Author
Alex is Editor-in-Chief of Coindoo and co-founder of Millennial Media Group, with nearly a decade of experience covering financial markets - crypto first, then everything else. It started in 2016 with Bitcoin. Like most people at the time, he didn't fully understand it - so he kept digging. Blockchain, tokenomics, the projects, the cycles. That curiosity never stopped, and eventually pulled him into traditional markets too: equities, commodities, macro. Not because he left crypto behind, but because you can't properly understand one without the other. What drives him is straightforward: he wants to know why something is happening, not just that it's happening. Most market coverage stops at the headline - price up, price down, here's a chart. Alex finds that kind of reporting actively unhelpful. If you walk away from an article without understanding the mechanism behind the move, what did you actually learn? He holds a degree in Tourism from New Bulgarian University - not the most obvious path into financial markets, but markets have a way of pulling in people who are simply too curious to stay out. He has authored over 200 in-depth analyses and more than 10,000 articles across crypto and traditional finance. He still thinks every day in markets teaches him something new. That's probably why he hasn't stopped.
On July 14, 2026, $500 million in USDC was minted on the Solana blockchain, indicating a strategic move to enhance liquidity within the network. This issuance was executed in two tranches of $250 million each, underscoring growing confidence in Solana’s capacity to handle large-scale transactions. The additional USDC enhances Solana’s standing as a significant player in the stablecoin market, holding between $7.2 billion and $8.6 billion in circulating USDC. This development aligns with a broader trend of increased institutional interest in Solana as a high-throughput settlement layer, with the network experiencing a record weekly USDC minting volume earlier this year.
Advertisement
Key Takeaways The issuance of $500 million USDC on Solana suggests increased liquidity and institutional confidence in the network. Solana’s share of the global USDC supply reflects its growing role as a key blockchain for stablecoins. Market pricing appears supportive of Solana’s potential to reach higher price benchmarks by the end of July. What to Watch Market participants will closely monitor Solana’s price movements in response to this liquidity boost, particularly in relation to its potential to hit the $90 mark in July. Key indicators such as the network’s volume and additional stablecoin issuances may provide further insights into Solana’s capacity to leverage this increased liquidity. Potential developments, including regulatory actions or changes in institutional demand, could also affect market sentiment and price trajectories.
Get live prediction-market analysis, powered by Vera. Sign up for Vera.
Term Structure
Contract Odds Δ since publish Volume 24h August 1 2026 19% — — View market → August 1 2026 0.7% — — View market → August 1 2026 0.1% — — View market → August 1 2026 1.6% — — View market → August 1 2026 1% — — View market → August 1 2026 0.7% — — View market → August 1 2026 4.2% — — View market → August 1 2026 0.9% — — View market → August 1 2026 9% — — View market → August 1 2026 0.1% — — View market → August 1 2026 1.7% — — View market → August 1 2026 0.1% — — View market → August 1 2026 38% — — View market →
QuickSwap nasadil Orbs’ Perpetual Hub Ultra 2.0 jako výchozí engine pro perpetual futures napříč všemi řetězci. Změnu schválili držitelé QUICK v komunitním hlasování s podporou 81,8 %.
QuickSwap, one of the oldest names in decentralized exchange trading, has officially rolled out Orbs’ Perpetual Hub Ultra 2.0 as the default engine powering perpetual futures across every chain it operates on. The decision wasn’t made behind closed doors. It came after a community vote, “Full Shift of Decentralized Perpetuals to Orbs Network,” which cleared with a decisive 81.8% approval from QUICK token holders.
The shift effectively retires the Orderly-based Falkor setup that had been running on Polygon PoS, replacing it with the same Orbs-driven architecture that QuickSwap already introduced on Base back in the fourth quarter of 2025. It’s not a cold start, either. QuickSwap and Orbs have been working together for years at this point, with tools like dTWAP, dLIMIT, and Liquidity Hub already live in production on both Polygon PoS and Base.
Ran Hammer, VP of Business Development at Orbs, framed the announcement as something bigger than a routine infrastructure swap. “This is what the next phase of DeFi looks like: a top-tier DEX running a complete perps stack natively on Layer-3, with liquidity from day one and execution quality that rivals centralized venues,” he said. He also pointed to the vote itself as a signal of where the industry is heading, adding, “An 81.8% community vote says it all – decentralized markets are ready to compete with traditional finance on its own terms.”
Full-Service Perpetual Trading Stack What QuickSwap gets out of the deal, in practical terms, is a full-service perpetual trading stack that doesn’t lean on outside providers. Execution, settlement, hedging, liquidation, pricing, and the trading interface itself are all handled natively through Orbs’ Layer-3 infrastructure. There’s no bootstrapping period to worry about, either; liquidity is pulled in from day one through Orbs’ integrated system, which taps into several deep liquidity sources at once rather than relying on a single pool building up over time.
Under the hood, the platform runs on a TEE-secured execution environment, meaning trades are processed inside a trusted, hardware-isolated setting rather than out in the open. Price feeds come in cryptographically signed, and the resulting state is periodically committed on-chain through rollup settlement, giving traders a verifiable record without sacrificing speed.
On the trading side, users get access to the usual order types, market, limit, stop-loss, take-profit, along with more advanced bracket orders. Convenience features like one-click trading, account abstraction, and gasless transactions are also part of the package, lowering the friction that’s historically kept some traders away from on-chain platforms.
QuickSwap itself needs little introduction to anyone who’s spent time in DeFi. It’s been running since 2020 and remains the top exchange within the Polygon ecosystem, expanding over the years from Polygon PoS into Polygon zkEVM and Base while holding onto its reputation as Polygon’s flagship DEX.
Like much of its infrastructure, the exchange is steered by its community through QUICK token governance, which is exactly the mechanism that greenlit this latest move. Orbs, for its part, operates as a decentralized Layer-3 network built specifically to handle the kind of complex trading logic that standard smart contracts struggle with.
Its validator network runs on delegated Proof-of-Stake, backed by more than 1.12 billion ORBS tokens staked across the system. Both teams are pitching this integration as a step toward closing the gap between decentralized and centralized trading venues, not just in terms of speed and cost, but in the overall experience, while still keeping self-custody and on-chain transparency intact for users.
AUTHOR
Mushumir Butt is a seasoned crypto journalist with over three years of experience reporting on the world of blockchain and cryptocurrency. At Blockchain Reporter, he delivers insightful news, in‐depth project reviews, and precise price analysis and predictions. With a strong background in SEO and digital marketing, Mushumir excels at breaking down complex trends into clear, accessible content, ensuring readers stay ahead in the fast‐paced crypto space.
SlowMist varuje, že kompromitovaný balíček Injective SDK může krást privátní klíče z peněženek. Vývojáři mají před nasazením kódu pro peněženky ověřovat balíčky.
Injective SDK Compromise Puts Wallet Private Keys Back In The Security Spotlight is a useful reminder that crypto coverage is not only about token prices. Sometimes the more important story is the infrastructure, regulation, security, or product layer sitting underneath the market noise.
The immediate point is straightforward: slowMist warned that a compromised Injective SDK package may steal wallet private keys. That gives readers something concrete to work with, rather than another vague sentiment update.
TL;DR SlowMist warned that a compromised Injective SDK package may steal wallet private keys. The issue highlights the danger of malicious software dependencies in crypto apps. Developers are being urged to verify packages before shipping wallet-facing code. Why This Matters Now The timing matters because Injective is already part of a wider conversation across the market. Traders want to know whether the development changes liquidity or risk. Builders want to know whether it changes what can be deployed. Compliance teams want to know whether it changes how platforms operate.
In that sense, the story is bigger than one headline. It sits inside the ongoing shift from speculative crypto cycles toward more practical questions: who can use these systems, how safe are they, and whether the underlying incentives actually work.
The best way to read it is with discipline. It is not a guarantee of immediate upside, and it should not be treated as one. But it does add a fresh data point to the way the market is thinking about Injective.
The Injective Angle For Injective, the important part is the specific mechanism. If this is a security issue, the risk sits in dependencies and user protection. If it is a listing or product launch, the question is access and liquidity. If it is a governance or research proposal, the question is whether the idea can survive implementation.
That is where this update becomes useful. It is not just a label attached to a trend. It gives readers a way to understand what might actually change if the development gains traction.
Crypto has a habit of turning every announcement into a broad market claim. This one deserves a narrower read. The value is in seeing how it affects the users, developers, institutions, or traders closest to the issue.
The Risk Side There is also a caution attached. Source material can confirm that a development exists, but it cannot prove that adoption will follow. A proposal still needs support. A product still needs users. A chart still needs confirmation. A compliance tool still needs integration.
That is why the responsible reading is not to oversell the story. The stronger takeaway is that this adds to a pattern. The crypto market is steadily becoming more professional, more technical, and more sensitive to real operational details.
Readers should also watch for follow-up signals. That could mean developer feedback, exchange support, regulatory response, wallet adoption, liquidity data, or simply whether market participants continue reacting after the first headline fades.
What Comes Next The next stage will decide whether this remains a narrow update or becomes part of a larger market theme. In crypto, that difference matters. Plenty of stories look important for a few hours and then disappear. The ones that last usually show up again through usage, liquidity, enforcement, governance, or developer adoption.
For now, this gives the market another piece of information to weigh. It is specific enough to be useful, but still early enough that readers should keep the caveats in view.
That makes it worth covering without pretending it settles anything. The story is a signal, not a final verdict.
This report is based on information from slowmist.medium.com.
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
Spark Savings na Arbitrum nově podporuje USDT0, takže vedle USDC a USDS pokrývá tři největší stablecoiny. Uživatelé mohou ukládat USDT0 bez překlápění do jiné mince.
Spark Savings on Arbitrum now supports the three largest stablecoins by market capitalization: USDC, USDS and, from today, USDT via USDT0. For wallets, treasury platforms and other builders, that means users can access Spark Savings while staying in the stablecoin they already hold, through a single savings infrastructure. Here’s why this is important for the programmable economy future we’re building towards.
Why this isn't "just another USDT deployment"
Arbitrum has bridged USDT for years. What's new is USDT0, Tether's omnichain implementation of USDT built on LayerZero's Omnichain Fungible Token (OFT) standard. Instead of yet another wrapped, fragmented representation of USDT moving around different bridges, USDT0 is a single, 1:1-backed unit of Tether liquidity that can move natively between Ethereum, Arbitrum, and a growing number of supported chains without fragmenting liquidity or introducing additional trust assumptions.
For integrators, that means supporting Spark Savings for USDT without asking users to bridge back to Ethereum, swap into another stablecoin or navigate multiple versions of USDT. Users can stay in the asset they already hold while accessing the same Spark Savings infrastructure available across supported stablecoins.
spUSDT is Spark's ERC-4626 USDT savings vault. Deposit USDT0, receive spUSDT, a transferable savings token that represents your position in the vault while continuing to accrue yield.
Like Spark's existing USDC and USDS savings vaults on Arbitrum, spUSDT follows the same ERC-4626 design, giving integrators a consistent way to support savings across multiple stablecoins.
USDT0 (spUSDT) is designed to be simple to integrate and simple to use:
No lockups, deposit and withdraw at any time
Transferable and composable with other DeFi applications through the ERC-4626 standard
Access to Spark's programmatic allocation framework, which coordinates capital across vetted DeFi venues.
Earn sustainable yield without relying on temporary incentives
With USDT0 now supported, users can access Spark Savings directly from one of Arbitrum's most widely used stablecoins without changing assets first.
With USDC, USDS, and now USDT0 supported, Spark Savings on Arbitrum now provides savings infrastructure representing over 90% of the network's stablecoin supply, according to defillama. That gives builders access to savings infrastructure across the stablecoins their users are most likely to already hold.
For users, that means staying in the stablecoin they already hold without bridging back to Ethereum or swapping into another asset just to access savings. For wallets, treasury platforms and DeFi applications, it means broader stablecoin coverage through a consistent integration model.
That matters because USDT remains the world’s largest stablecoin by supply, while Arbitrum has become one of the deepest ecosystems for stablecoin trading, derivatives, and on-chain payments. Bringing Spark Savings to USDT0 expands that coverage, making it easier for builders to offer sustainable savings across the stablecoins their users already hold.
Whatever stablecoin you're already holding or trading with on Arbitrum, there's now a Spark vault for it.
Building on Arbitrum?
Whether you're building a wallet, treasury platform or DeFi application, Spark Savings can help make your business programmable by making it easy to offer savings across the three largest stablecoins on Arbitrum.
Talk to the Spark team to learn how Spark Savings can fit into your product. [email protected]
Robinhood Chain na Arbitrum mainnetu od spuštění veřejně nasbírala téměř 600 mil. USD v TVS, 808 mil. USD denního DEX objemu a přes 800 tis. USD příjmů.
The first half of 2026 ended with a landmark milestone. On July 01, the Robinhood Chain mainnet powered by Arbitrum went live, crystallising what the ecosystem has been actively building: the finance-native platform with enterprise-grade infrastructure to power the programmable economy.
As an Arbitrum chain, Robinhood Chain remits 10% of its net revenue to the Arbitrum ecosystem. This is the same revenue-sharing model that applies across 30+ Arbitrum chains (that settle outside Arbitrum One) as part of the licence economics of this product line.
Enterprise Growth
Robinhood, a $100B fintech with 28 million users and $307B in AUM, has become the world's largest publicly listed fintech with its own blockchain, and it chose the Arbitrum Platform to build it.
In just 2 weeks since its public launch, Robinhood Chain has already achieved:
Securing almost $600M in TVS$808M+ in 24h DEX volume – 3rd-largest chain in crypto$800K+ in Revenue (~$23 million annualized run-rate)Alongside Robinhood, a broader wave of enterprise expansion took shape on Arbitrum in H1:
LG Electronics announced it’s building out a blockchain-based network for its onchain advertising network on the Arbitrum PlatformMastercard expanded stablecoin settlement support to assets on ArbitrumPayPal's PYUSD peaked at $428M on Arbitrum in Q1Cash App announced send and receive support in app for USDC with Arbitrum as a supported chainNetwork activity
Underneath the enterprise momentum, the network continued to grow.
Lifetime transactions surpassed 2.7B while adding 474M transactions in H1 alone. February 2026 accounts for an all-time-high of 133M Chain GDP has surpassed $1.7B, growing 45% YoYStablecoin holders grew 40% to 10.5M, with monthly transfer volumes exceeding $60BMarket position
Arbitrum maintained and strengthened its position across key metrics in H1.
A top-3 blockchain by protocol count, with 1,142 live projects on the Arbitrum PlatformRWA AUM at ~$850M (3x YoY) and consistently leading by deployment count with 2,000+ assetsDerivatives broke out in H1: open interest grew 434% in six months, peaking at $1.5B and exceeding the combined open interests on Ethereum and SolanaFinancial resilience
ArbitrumDAO continued to operate with structural efficiency through H1 despite market volatility.
ArbitrumDAO maintained 97%+ gross margins across protocol revenue streams throughout H1 Held $125M+ in non-native treasury assets (ETH, RWAs & stablecoins) as of June-endProduct readiness
The Arbitrum technology stack continued to outpace adoption throughout H1.
Dynamic pricing went live on Arbitrum One, giving businesses predictable transaction costs at scale. Compliance tooling, ZK-proof settlement, confidentiality infrastructure, and new economic levers for dedicated chains are actively in development. The full architecture is laid out here for anyone evaluating what the platform looks like at the next stage of scale.
The Robinhood announcement is the headline. But the six months that preceded it are the reason it happened here and not somewhere else.
Ledger přidal podporu fee abstraction pro Celo, takže uživatelé mohou platit gas v 18 tokenech místo jen v CELO. Celo uvádí, že téměř polovina transakčního objemu už využívá stablecoiny v USD.
Celo has enhanced its collaboration with Ledger by integrating a key network feature into the hardware wallet provider’s platform, offering more flexible transaction fee options to users worldwide.
Ledger supports Celo’s CIP-64 fee abstractionLedger has implemented support for Celo’s fee abstraction, made possible through the network’s CIP-64 upgrade. This change allows users to pay transaction fees using a variety of Celo-native assets, rather than being restricted to the CELO token.
The new functionality builds on Ledger Live’s December 2025 update, where users gained the ability to transact and exchange CELO and Celo stablecoins through Ledger’s interface.
With this latest expansion, Ledger’s user base of more than 8 million people in over 200 countries can now settle gas fees in any of 18 supported tokens. These payment options include Tether USD₮, USDC, Wrapped Ether (WETH), and multiple fiat-referenced stablecoins developed by Mento Labs.
Accepted fiat-backed tokens span a range of global currencies such as the euro, British pound, Japanese yen, Canadian dollar, Australian dollar, Nigerian naira, Kenyan shilling, and South African rand, offering considerably broader payment flexibility.
Mini dictionary: CIP-64, or Celo Improvement Proposal 64, is an upgrade that enables transaction fees to be paid with approved ERC-20 tokens on the Celo network, rather than requiring users to exclusively use the CELO token for gas payments.
Stablecoins overtake CELO for transactionsLaunched in July 2023 during the network’s Gingerbread hard fork, CIP-64 has allowed users to pay transaction fees with selected stablecoins and other ERC-20 tokens. This approach, now widely adopted across the Celo network, has led to a significant shift in transaction behavior.
Celo reports that nearly half of all transaction volume on the network now uses stablecoins denominated in US dollars, instead of the network’s native CELO token.
By allowing users to handle transaction fees with familiar currencies, Celo aims to lower barriers to entry and streamline the experience of using money across blockchain payments and decentralized finance applications.
The integration with Ledger is expected to further simplify onboarding, particularly for users interested in exploring Celo payments and DeFi solutions.
Celo leads in tokenized gold adoptionBeyond network transactions, Celo highlighted its leading position in the market for tokenized gold. According to network figures, 107,622 users on Celo own Tether Gold (XAUT), positioning the network as the dominant platform for tokenized gold holders.
Blockchain data estimates a total of 118,500 XAUT holders across seven blockchain networks. Of these, Celo accounts for 90.8%, followed by Solana at 4.5%. Other platforms with measurable XAUT user bases include HyperEVM (1.9%), Arbitrum One (1.8%), Plasma (0.6%), Monad (0.3%), and Ink (0.1%).
Blockchain NetworkXAUT Holders (%)Celo90.8%Solana4.5%HyperEVM1.9%Arbitrum One1.8%Plasma0.6%Monad0.3%Ink0.1%Celo attributes its dominance to a growing ecosystem, including applications such as MiniPay, Squid Router, Uniswap, Featherlend, Morpho, and TheoriqAI, that together drive adoption of real-world asset tokenization.
Celo, a mobile-first blockchain that aims to make decentralized financial services accessible to anyone with a smartphone, is now advancing into sectors beyond digital-only payments. By making stablecoin-based gas payments easier and leading the charge on tokenized gold, Celo is seeking new use cases for blockchain technology in mainstream finance.
Celo’s expanding ecosystem and diverse payment options underscore its strategy to position itself as a leading platform for accessible and practical financial instruments on the blockchain.
Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.
Starknet spustil STRK20, nativní rámec ochrany soukromí pro on-chain aktiva, který umožňuje skrýt zůstatky ERC-20, soukromé převody i swapy. První podporovaná aktiva jsou strkBTC a USDC.
Privacy on a public blockchain has always felt like a contradiction in terms. Every transaction is visible, every wallet balance is readable, and your entire financial history is one block explorer search away from being an open book. Starknet thinks it has a fix.
On June 9, 2026, Starknet launched STRK20, a native privacy framework built into its Ethereum Layer-2 ZK rollup architecture. The system lets users shield any ERC-20 token balance, execute private transfers, and run private swaps, all without spinning up a separate privacy coin or fragmenting liquidity into isolated pools.
Advertisement
How STRK20 actually works The framework runs on a note-based privacy pool: instead of broadcasting your token balance to the entire network, your assets are converted into encrypted “notes” that only you can open and spend. The proofs themselves are generated client-side using zero-knowledge cryptography, which means your device does the heavy lifting locally before anything touches the chain. On-chain, the network only verifies that a valid proof exists, not what the underlying transaction contains.
The first asset to use STRK20 was strkBTC, which went live on the framework following Starknet’s v0.14.2 protocol upgrade in April 2026. USDC support followed on June 25, 2026, extending privacy capabilities to one of crypto’s most widely used stablecoins. The system is designed so any ERC-20 token on Starknet can plug in without requiring separate liquidity. Supported wallets at launch include Xverse, AVNU, and Circle integrations.
The compliance piece, and why it matters STRK20 includes an encrypted viewing-key mechanism that allows users to selectively disclose transaction history to auditors, regulators, or legal counterparties without making that information public. Encrypted viewing keys can be held by third-party auditors, meaning a court order or compliance request can unlock a specific user’s transaction history without compromising anyone else’s privacy on the network.
What this means for Starknet’s competitive position Starknet’s rollout of STRK20 follows a deliberate build-up that began in March 2026 with initial privacy-related feature introductions, accelerating through the April 2026 full privacy engine implementation, and culminating in the June mainnet launch.
Starknet has signaled that upcoming phases will expand STRK20 into private lending products and cross-chain functionality.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
XRP ETF už přilákaly asi 1,5 miliardy USD v čistých přílivech kapitálu. Standard Chartered čeká dalších 4 až 8 miliard USD, pokud se CLARITY Act stane zákonem.
The most instructive XRP trade of 2026 was an exit. When it emerged this month that Goldman Sachs, once the largest XRP holder among Wall Street institutions, had sold down its position, the reaction split along familiar lines: bears read it as the smartest money leaving a stalled asset, bulls read it as a bank taking profits on ETF seeding and creation-desk inventory it never intended to hold.
Both camps then arrived at the same, more interesting question, and it is the one that will define XRP’s next year. The first $1.5 billion of ETF money is in. Goldman’s chapter is closed. Standard Chartered says the next tranche is worth $4 billion to $8 billion. So who, exactly, buys it, what has to happen first, and what does XRP look like if they do?
Summary
XRP ETFs have attracted about $1.5 billion in net inflows, with Standard Chartered estimating another $4 billion to $8 billion could follow if the CLARITY Act becomes law. Registered investment advisors, model portfolios, wirehouses, corporate treasuries, and sovereign investors are expected to drive the next wave of institutional XRP ETF demand over time. ETF inflows have continued despite weak price action as long term accumulation, lower exchange balances, and regulatory progress compete with macro pressure and ongoing supply. The question matters because XRP has spent 2026 as the market’s cleanest natural experiment in whether flows alone can move a price. The token trades near $1.08 inside a range that has compressed to roughly $1.00 to $1.13, down around 40 percent on the year, while nearly every input a flow analyst would track has pointed the other way: sustained ETF creations, whale accumulation running at multiples of last year’s pace, exchange balances at multi-year lows, and a parent company stacking regulatory wins across three continents. The demand arrived. The price did not respond. Resolving that contradiction requires taking the flow machine apart piece by piece.
What the first $1.5 billion proved Five spot XRP exchange-traded funds launched in the United States between November and December 2025, arriving in the window after the SEC’s posture shifted and before any statute confirmed it. Through mid-2026 the products have gathered roughly $1.5 billion in net inflows, a figure that deserves more context than it usually gets. That total accumulated during the worst crypto tape since 2022, with Bitcoin falling from the $90,000s toward $60,000, the Federal Reserve pivoting from expected cuts toward a possible hike, and the Fear and Greed Index pinned in the twenties. Gathering $1.5 billion into a falling altcoin during a fear regime is not failure. It is evidence of a persistent bid that did not exist in any prior cycle, because the wrapper that carries it did not exist.
The composition of that bid matters as much as its size. ETF flows in the launch phase come disproportionately from three sources: self-directed retail moving out of exchange custody and into brokerage accounts, hedge funds running basis and arbitrage strategies, and early-adopter advisors making small allocations for aggressive clients. What launch-phase flows conspicuously exclude is the slow money: the wirehouse model portfolios, the pension consultants, the bank trust departments, and the insurance general accounts. Those channels move on compliance calendars, not conviction, and their compliance calendars all point at the same gate.
Benchmarking the figure against the category sharpens the point. The five XRP products collectively rank behind only the Bitcoin and Ethereum complexes among American crypto ETFs by assets gathered, ahead of the Solana products that launched into the same window with a stronger price narrative. Monthly net flows have oscillated with the tape, including redemption stretches during the worst weeks of the drawdown, but the cumulative line has kept its upward slope through eight months that destroyed weaker products across the fund industry. Whatever the price chart says, the wrapper found a durable audience on its first attempt, and product durability is the precondition every larger channel checks before it checks anything else.
The gate: statute, not classification That gate is legal permanence. The SEC and CFTC jointly classified XRP as a digital commodity in March 2026, an interpretive release that ended, in practical terms, the five-year war that began with the SEC’s 2020 lawsuit against Ripple. But an interpretive release binds nobody past the current commissions, and the institutional legal departments that gatekeep the largest pools of American wealth have been explicit about the distinction. Their memos approve products backed by law and defer products backed by guidance. The CLARITY Act, the market structure bill now sitting on the Senate calendar, is the instrument that converts one into the other, which is why Standard Chartered’s $4 billion to $8 billion projection is written as conditional: those flows unlock if the bill becomes law.
The mechanics of the projection are worth spelling out, because the number is not a guess about sentiment. Analysts build it from allocation math: take the advised wealth channels that currently exclude crypto ETFs, apply the small percentage allocations their model portfolios assign to alternatives when products clear compliance, weight by XRP’s likely share of a multi-asset crypto sleeve alongside Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana products, and discount for adoption lag. Run that arithmetic across several trillion dollars of advised assets and single-digit billions fall out quickly. The projection’s fragility is equally visible in its assumptions: it requires the law to pass, the wirehouses to act on it within quarters instead of years, and XRP to hold its place in the standard institutional basket. As crypto.news examined in its analysis of the bill’s falling odds, the first assumption alone now carries roughly 43 percent probability for 2026, which means the headline flow number should be probability-weighted by anyone using it seriously.
The buyers, ranked by likelihood Ranking the candidate buyers of the next $4 billion produces a clearer picture than the generic institutional label. The most probable early source is the registered investment advisor channel, roughly $8 trillion of American wealth where individual firms make their own compliance decisions and where crypto allocations have already normalized at the aggressive end. RIA flows into Bitcoin ETFs led every other channel in that product’s first year, and the pattern would likely repeat down the risk curve.
Second come the model portfolio and turnkey asset management platforms, which matter less for their size than for their automation: once an XRP product enters a model, flows recur monthly with rebalancing, indifferent to headlines. Third, the wirehouses, the largest and slowest pool, where solicited recommendations require the statutory green light and where internal approval processes run quarters after that. Fourth, corporate treasuries, a wildcard channel that Bitcoin normalized and that a handful of firms have already extended to XRP; permanence in law plus an accounting framework would widen that experiment. Fifth and most speculative, sovereign and quasi-sovereign buyers in jurisdictions where Ripple’s payment infrastructure is operationally embedded, a category that generates headlines out of proportion to its realistic near-term size.
The timing across these channels is sequential, not simultaneous, and the sequence is the part most projections flatten. RIA adoption can begin within weeks of a statutory trigger because the decision sits with thousands of small compliance committees rather than a handful of large ones. Model platforms follow within one to two quarters, on their scheduled review cycles. Wirehouse approval historically lags by two to four quarters even after the stated objection is removed, because internal product committees, training requirements, and suitability frameworks each add their own clock. Stacking those lags against Standard Chartered’s range suggests the honest shape of the projection: a thin front edge arriving within months of passage, and the bulk arriving across 2027, which is a materially different trade than the headline number implies.
Against these stand the sellers. Launch-phase arbitrageurs exit as basis compresses. Early holders use ETF liquidity as an exit ramp, which is partly what the Goldman episode illustrated. And Ripple itself remains a structural source of supply through its escrow releases, a flow bulls prefer not to model and bears never stop modeling. Net flow, not gross inflow, is what moves price, and the first eight months of ETF trading have shown the net figure can stay positive while the price goes nowhere if enough legacy supply uses the new demand as liquidity.
The demand stack beneath the ETFs The ETF story sits on top of an on-chain demand picture that has quietly strengthened all year. Whale accumulation, measured by large-wallet inflows and exchange outflows, has run at roughly triple last year’s pace during the 2026 drawdown, the classic accumulation-into-weakness pattern that preceded prior cycle turns. Exchange balances have fallen toward multi-year lows, shrinking the tradable float. XRP Ledger activity has grown across payments, tokenized real-world assets, and the RLUSD stablecoin, which has become the settlement asset for an expanding share of Ripple’s enterprise volume.
The corporate side reads the same direction. Ripple holds more than 75 regulatory licenses and registrations worldwide. It secured full authorization under the European Union’s MiCA framework in Luxembourg this month, opening the entire European Economic Area under a single passport. Mastercard named Ripple a settlement partner in its AI payments network. SWIFT-connected banks have begun routing blockchain settlement pilots through Ripple-linked institutions. And the company stages its largest event of the year, Swell, alongside the XRPL developer summit in New York in late October, a traditional venue for partnership announcements. On any fundamental checklist an equity analyst would recognize, the boxes are ticked. That is precisely what makes the price action so uncomfortable.
The RLUSD complication One development the flow models handle awkwardly is that Ripple’s fastest-growing product is no longer XRP. RLUSD, the company’s regulated stablecoin, has become the settlement asset for a rising share of enterprise volume, the collateral base for Ripple Prime’s institutional services, and the instrument through which many of the bank partnerships actually clear. Every corporate win that routes through RLUSD strengthens Ripple the company while contributing nothing direct to XRP the asset, and the divergence has become a live debate among holders: whether the stablecoin is the wedge that eventually drives ledger activity and XRP demand for bridging and fees, or the quiet replacement of the token’s original use case with a product institutions find easier to hold.
For the ETF flow question, the debate cuts a specific way. Allocators buying an XRP product are buying the token’s monetary premium and its role in the ledger economy, not Ripple’s equity story. If the company’s growth increasingly expresses itself through RLUSD and through services revenue, the fundamental narrative that supports a dedicated single-token allocation weakens at the margin, even as the company itself strengthens. Bulls answer that stablecoin settlement and tokenized asset growth raise ledger throughput, and throughput ultimately prices the native asset. The honest status of that argument is unresolved, and it is the fundamental question hiding inside the flow question: $4 billion buys exposure to XRP, and the market is still deciding what XRP is exposure to.
Why ETF demand behaves differently from spot demand The distinction between a billion dollars of exchange buying and a billion dollars of ETF creations is mechanical, and it decides how the next tranche would express itself in price. Spot demand on exchanges is discretionary and reflexive: it arrives with momentum, leaves with drawdowns, and concentrates in the leveraged venues where liquidations amplify both directions. ETF demand routes through authorized participants who create and redeem shares against the net of each day’s orders. The flow that survives that netting is disproportionately allocation flow: advisors rebalancing models, platforms deploying scheduled contributions, funds equitizing mandates. It arrives on calendars, ignores intraday narrative, and, critically, keeps arriving through drawdowns because rebalancing into weakness is what model portfolios are built to do.
That character difference explains an apparent paradox in the 2026 data: steady net creations against a falling price. The creations were real, but they were met by discretionary sellers using the wrapper’s liquidity as an exit, including, evidently, the largest bank holder on the street. The bull interpretation is that this is exactly what accumulation phases look like when a new demand channel opens into an old holder base: impatient supply migrates to patient hands, the float thins, and the price stays flat until the migration completes. The bear interpretation is that the patient hands are simply early, and patience is not a catalyst. The data cannot distinguish the two until a demand shock tests the thinner book. What the data does show is that the pipe works: shares get created, spreads stay tight, and the products tracked their net asset values through the year’s worst volatility, which is the operational track record the slower channels required before even beginning their reviews.
The Bitcoin ETF playbook, one asset down the curve There is a map for how the channels open, because Bitcoin walked it in 2024 and 2025. The Bitcoin spot ETFs launched into self-directed and hedge fund demand, spent roughly two quarters dominated by basis trades, then inflected when the RIA channel cleared the products for solicited use and the first wirehouses followed. Each gate that opened produced a step change in cumulative flows, and the price responded with a lag measured in weeks, not days, because allocation flow does not chase. By the time the largest platforms had fully opened, the products held a meaningful share of circulating supply and the asset’s volatility profile had visibly compressed.
XRP’s products are one asset class rung below on the institutional risk ladder and roughly three quarters into the equivalent timeline, still waiting on the gate that Bitcoin never needed: statutory classification. Bitcoin entered its ETF era with a commodity status nobody seriously disputed. XRP entered with a court ruling, an interpretive release, and a pending bill, which is why its channel-opening sequence stalled at the compliance stage that Bitcoin’s cleared automatically. The playbook’s lesson is not that XRP repeats Bitcoin’s flow curve at smaller scale, though the analog is tempting. The lesson is that the curve is gated by legal events, and the gates open in order. The March release opened the first. The Senate holds the second.
The supply side of the ledger Flow analysis that counts only buyers is half an analysis, and XRP’s supply side has features Bitcoin’s does not. Ripple’s escrow releases up to one billion XRP monthly, with unused portions returning to new escrow contracts. The net escrow contribution to circulating supply has trended well below the headline figure, and the company has leaned on programmatic sales less as institutional revenue lines have grown, but the overhang is structural: the market prices the possibility of supply even in months when little arrives. Layer on the launch-era holders for whom regulated products finally offered institutional-grade exit liquidity, and the absorption burden on the first $1.5 billion becomes clearer. New demand did not meet a fixed float. It met a float with a scheduled faucet and a queue at the exit.
The counterweight is the on-chain float data. Exchange balances at multi-year lows mean the discretionary sell-side has thinned even as the escrow schedule persists, and RLUSD settlement growth gives a share of monthly releases an internal destination that did not previously exist. The supply picture, like everything else in this asset, resolves into a timing question: whether the faucet or the gate moves first.
Why the price has not followed The bear explanation for the standoff is the simplest and has been the best trade of the year: XRP is a high-beta risk asset in a market being repriced by the Federal Reserve, and no token-specific story survives a regime where inflation prints at three-year highs and rate expectations invert. XRP’s correlation with Bitcoin has remained high through the drawdown, and Bitcoin itself has ignored its own bullish supply dynamics for months. In this reading, the flows are real but small against the macro tide, the $1.5 billion of ETF demand was absorbed by sellers grateful for the liquidity, and the next $4 billion, if it comes, arrives only after the Fed turns, at which point every risk asset rallies and XRP’s story adds beta instead of alpha.
The structural bear adds a colder point: XRP’s investment case has become a regulatory derivative. Strip out the CLARITY Act and the token trades on cross-border payment adoption that, while real, has never been priced by the market as sufficient on its own. If the bill slips to 2027, the one catalyst distinguishing XRP from the general altcoin complex slips with it, ETF inflows could reverse the way they briefly did earlier this year, and analysts have flagged the zone below $1.00 as thin support down to materially lower levels. The Goldman exit, in this telling, was not noise. It was a sophisticated holder concluding that the probability-weighted return of waiting had fallen below its hurdle.
The bull rebuttal: coiled, not broken The bull case does not dispute the macro pressure; it disputes the conclusion. Prices that refuse to fall on bad tape while accumulation triples are compressing, not failing, and the float shrinkage means any demand shock hits a thinner order book than at any point in XRP’s modern history. Seasonality offers a minor tailwind with a major caveat: July has historically been XRP’s strongest month, averaging roughly 10 percent gains, though this July opened deep in a fear regime that blunts seasonal patterns. The levels are unusually clean. The $1.00 floor has been defended repeatedly, resistance sits at $1.13 and then the $1.18 to $1.20 zone, and a legislative surprise into light positioning would find little supply between the breakout level and the low $1.40s where the year’s earlier ranges sat, as crypto.news mapped in its July price prediction.
The deeper bull argument is about market structure rather than price. Every prior XRP cycle ran on retail exchanges and offshore leverage. This one is the first where a regulated wrapper connects the token to the advised wealth system, and wrappers change the character of demand: slower to arrive, slower to leave, price-insensitive on schedule. The first $1.5 billion built the pipe. The debate over the next $4 billion is really a debate over timing, because the channels themselves, once compliance-cleared, allocate mechanically. Bulls can be wrong about 2026 and right about the asset, which is an argument for position sizing instead of abstinence.
What would invalidate the flow thesis Intellectual honesty requires listing the ways the $4 billion never arrives even if the bill passes. The first is product cannibalization. The next generation of crypto ETFs is multi-asset: index products holding baskets weighted by market capitalization, which institutional buyers often prefer to single-token bets. If the advised channels open and allocate through baskets, XRP captures only its index weight of the flows, a fraction of the headline projection built on dedicated products. The second is fee and liquidity concentration. ETF flows historically consolidate into one or two winners per category, and a fragmented five-issuer field splits liquidity in ways that keep the largest allocators waiting for a dominant product to emerge.
The third invalidator is reputational path dependence. A single adverse event, an issuer failure, a custody incident, an escrow controversy, would reset the compliance clocks that took years to run, and crypto’s history suggests assigning that tail a nonzero weight. The fourth is simple opportunity cost: if the gate opens during a macro regime where advisors are cutting risk, the mechanical allocations shrink with the risk budgets they draw from. None of these kills the asset. Each of them turns the projection’s midpoint into its ceiling, and collectively they are why serious flow forecasts carry ranges wide enough to drive a truck through.
What Ripple controls and what it does not It is worth separating the variables by who holds them. Ripple controls its licensing map, its product velocity, RLUSD’s growth, escrow release policy, and the October event calendar. It controls none of the three variables that will actually decide the flow question: the Senate schedule, the Federal Reserve, and the oil price. That asymmetry explains the company’s visible strategy of building the institutional rails before the demand arrives, so that when the gate opens, adoption is an integration task rather than a construction project. It also explains why company news has stopped moving the token: the market has correctly identified which variables bind.
For regulation watchers, the checklist between now and the August recess is short. A scheduled Senate floor vote is the unlock signal. The reconciliation of the two committee texts is its precondition. Public declarations from additional Democratic senators are the vote-count tell. And ETF net flows themselves are the real-time referendum: sustained creations through a stalled news cycle would show the slow money starting to front-run the statute, while accelerating redemptions would show the hope premium leaking out.
The scoreboard to watch through August Condensing the analysis into a watchlist: Senate floor scheduling is the master variable, and everything else is downstream. Weekly ETF net flows are the highest-frequency tell, with sustained creations through stalled news indicating front-running and accelerating redemptions indicating the hope premium unwinding. Exchange balance trends and large-wallet accumulation show whether the patient-hands migration continues. RLUSD supply growth versus XRP ledger fee volume tracks the internal debate about what the token captures. And the $1.00 and $1.13 levels frame the range until one of the above breaks it.
The next $4 billion is neither a fantasy nor a schedule. It is a documented pipeline behind a legal gate, with a probability attached that the market itself now prices below even odds for this year. If the gate opens, the buyer list is specific, the mechanics are boring, and boring is what durable repricings are made of. If it does not, XRP spends the midterm season as a range asset defending $1.00 with strong hands accumulating and weak hands gone, which is not the worst setup an asset has entered a year with.
Goldman answered the question of who sells. The Senate, not the market, holds the answer to who buys.
Disclaimer: This article is information, not investment advice. Prices, flow figures, analyst projections, and legislative timelines reflect reporting available as of July 14, 2026, and can change quickly. ETF flow projections are conditional estimates, not commitments. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy or sell XRP or any other asset. Verify current developments from primary sources and consider your own circumstances before making any decision.
Evernorth tvrdí, že XRP Ledger se má stát platformou pro aktivní využití tokenizovaných RWA, ne jen jejich držení. Hodnota RWA na síti letos vzrostla o 388 % na 4,4 miliardy USD.
Evernorth CEO Asheesh Birla says the XRP Ledger is evolving into a platform where tokenized real-world assets can be actively used, not simply stored.
The value of tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) on the XRP Ledger has climbed 388% from $900 million at the start of the year to $4.4 billion, according to data from RWA.xyz. But for Evernorth CEO Asheesh Birla, there should be more beyond just the general concept of tokenization.
Birla claims that the next phase of tokenization is not about placing traditional assets on a blockchain. Instead, the real opportunity lies in making those assets productive while they remain in their tokenized form.
Tokenized Assets Need Utility, Not Just Presence: Evernorth Birla compares the future of tokenized finance to how traditional financial markets have operated for decades. Notably, capital naturally gravitates toward platforms where it can be deployed with the least friction. Those with the deepest liquidity and the most competitive pricing also attract market users.
Rather than remaining idle in digital wallets, the Evernorth CEO expects tokenized assets to become increasingly dynamic. Since they are more liquid, they should provide better yields based on an owner’s risk appetite. Rebalance portfolios as market conditions change, and interaction with lending and collateral services should also be easier and automated.
From Birla’s perspective, tokenization is only the foundation. The real deal is if a network allows an asset to actively participate in broader financial activities.
XRP Ledger Offers Beyond Tokenization According to Birla, several pieces of that infrastructure are already available on the XRP Ledger.
The network has already developed a built-in decentralized exchange and supports near-instant transaction settlement. Notably, several financial institutions have acknowledged the XRP Ledger as a good fit for cross-border payments, with HSBC calling it a “game changer.”
Additional features, including on-chain lending and collateral vaults, are also under development, creating an environment where tokenized assets can be used rather than simply stored.
He emphasized that this is not a zero-sum game, as multiple networks will support tokenized assets as the sector expands.
However, those like the XRP Ledger, offering deep liquidity, efficient settlement, reliable governance, and broad asset availability, will attract more adoption over time. The over 380% growth in RWAs on the Ledger this year is already reflecting that.
Ripple’s RLUSD Is an Early Proof of Expanding On-Chain Liquidity Birla also pointed to the RLUSD stablecoin as an early example of this trend taking shape on the XRP Ledger.
Citing Evernorth’s June data, he highlighted that RLUSD has grown to approximately $1.6 billion in circulation, while more than 50% of its liquidity now resides on the XRP Ledger, up from just 17% in April. At the time of writing, however, the stablecoin’s circulating supply has dropped to $1.48 billion, with 59% of it on the XRP Ledger.
Birla explained that stablecoins play a central role in digital finance because they provide the liquidity needed for payments, lending, settlement, and other financial services. The increasing concentration of RLUSD liquidity on the XRP Ledger suggests users are choosing its infrastructure, as it allows capital to move quickly and efficiently.
Notably, these comments come days after Birla encouraged crypto treasury companies to move beyond building portfolios. As the industry moves to its next phase, he urged them to explore means of generating returns from their stash, recommending tokenization on the XRP Ledger.
DisClamier: This content is informational and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author's personal opinions and do not reflect The Crypto Basic opinion. Readers are encouraged to do thorough research before making any investment decisions. The Crypto Basic is not responsible for any financial losses.
XRP se drží nad 1 USD, zatímco John Deaton připomněl, že soud uznal, že XRP samotné není cenný papír. Analytik přesto varuje před krátkým propadem pod 1 USD jako možným capitulation bottom.
As XRP (CRYPTO: XRP) is battling to stay above $1, pro-crypto attorney John Deaton said XRP holders played a meaningful role in Ripple’s landmark legal victory against the SEC.
‘Happy XRP is not a security day’In an X post on July 14, Deaton said the court cited his amicus brief, nearly 4,000 affidavits submitted by XRP holders, and an oral argument he made in the LBRY case regarding secondary-market sales of digital assets.
He also noted that his brief argued that the token is merely digital code regardless of how it may have been marketed.
Judge Torres ultimately ruled that XRP itself is not a security, a conclusion Deaton said aligned with that argument.
Ripple chief legal officer Stuart Alderoty also celebrated on X stating, "Happy XRP IS NOT A SECURITY DAY!"
Vet, an XRP Ledger validator, also noted that the legal win led to a more crypto friendly administration and it was the "beginning of the end of the previous SEC war on crypto."
Japan remains one of XRP’s strongest markets, supported by regulatory clarity, significant institutional participation and one of the world’s largest XRP holder communities.
Doppler Finance announced a strategic partnership with SBI Digital Finance to expand institutional XRP finance in Japan. The main goal is to develop compliant XRP-based financial solutions for institutional investors.
Potential Capitulation BottomIn a podcast on July 13, crypto analyst Cryptoinsightuk highlighted elevated open interest, positive funding rates and geopolitical uncertainty as possible triggers for XRP to briefly fall below $1, targeting the $0.925-$0.95 range.
However, the analyst views such a move as a potential capitulation bottom rather than the beginning of a deeper downtrend.
Strong support around $0.95 and relatively limited liquidity below that level could pave the way for a rebound toward $1.70-$1.80.
While a decline to $0.63 remains possible, the analyst considers it a lower-probability scenario.
Image: Shutterstock
Market News and Data brought to you by Benzinga APIs
Ripple se připojil k x402 Foundation jako Premier Member a chce prosadit standard pro platby AI agentů přes XRP a RLUSD. x402 už eviduje více než 120 milionů transakcí a více než 41 milionů USD v vypořádání v USDC.
@Ripple has joined the @linuxfoundation x402 Foundation as a Premier Member, adding its weight to a growing industry push to create a global standard for autonomous machine-to-machine payments using $XRP and the regulated $RLUSD stablecoin.
What Is the x402 Protocol? The x402 protocol was originally created by Coinbase and is now stewarded by the Linux Foundation's x402 Foundation. The concept revives the old HTTP 402 "Payment Required" status code and turns it into a real transaction mechanism. An AI agent requests a paid service, receives a payment challenge, fires an on-chain payment, and resubmits the request with cryptographic proof. From the agent's perspective, it feels almost like a standard API call.
The x402 Foundation initially developed by Coinbase, Cloudflare, and Stripe, launched with a broad set of industry participants as it migrated toward an open source model for internet-native payments. Its membership includes Adyen, Amazon Web Services, American Express, Circle, Google, Mastercard, Microsoft, Shopify, Solana Foundation, Stripe, Visa, and others.
Ripple's Case for XRP and RLUSD Ripple's entry centers on positioning the XRP Ledger as a capable settlement network within the x402 ecosystem. The integration includes support for x402-powered payments using XRP and Ripple USD (RLUSD), enabling AI agents to transact for APIs, compute, and other digital services. Operations on the ledger feature deterministic finality that resolves within a 3-to-5-second range natively, and the system leverages existing institutional controls such as multi-signature schemes, deposit authorization, and escrow contracts.
Ripple promotes the XRP Ledger's three-to-five-second settlement times, predictable transaction costs, native escrow features, multisignature support, and built-in decentralized exchange as advantages for automated payments.
The broader x402 market, however, remains firmly in USDC territory for now. Data from Web3 Trackers shows more than 120 million cumulative x402 transactions and over $41 million in settled USDC volume, with Base accounting for roughly 70 million transactions and Solana processing about 45 million. While Ripple touts fast, low-cost, protocol-level payments as advantages, Ripple has not yet disclosed real-world adoption metrics for agent payments.
The move aligns with Ripple's broader strategy to provide compliant, institutional payment infrastructure for emerging AI-driven commerce.
Sources:
Linux Foundation: x402 Foundation Launch Announcement
Ripple: Introducing the XRP Ledger AI Starter Kit
CoinDesk: Ripple Wants AI Agents to Pay in XRP and RLUSD
Ripple-backed Evernorth v novém podání u SEC uvedl 44milionový akciový balík pro CEO Ashishe Birlu a posouvá fúzi s Armada Acquisition Corp II. Po schválení má vzniknout společnost zaměřená na XRP treasury, kotovaná na Nasdaqu, s tickerem XRPN.
Ripple-backed Evernorth has unveiled a $44 million CEO equity package in a fresh SEC filing while advancing its merger to create a Nasdaq-listed XRP treasury company.
Summary
Evernorth’s latest SEC filing includes a $44 million equity award for CEO Asheesh Birla. The amended filing advances Evernorth’s merger with Armada Acquisition Corp II and planned XRPN listing. Evernorth also launched a Japanese-language XRP information channel without announcing local operations. According to Evernorth Holdings’ fourth amended Form S-4 registration statement filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the company updated executive and director compensation arrangements while advancing the paperwork required for its proposed business combination with Armada Acquisition Corp II, a special purpose acquisition company backed by Arrington Capital.
🚨SCOOP: Ripple-backed Evernorth Holdings files S-4 Amendment with the US SEC
🔸Evernorth moves closer to its merger with Armada Acquisition Corp II and to launch the largest Nasdaq-listed public XRP treasury
🔸Filing announces CEO Ashish Birla’s base salary and a $44 million… pic.twitter.com/wStNBFZ23q
— Rednirav (@CryptoRednirav) July 14, 2026 The filing sets CEO Asheesh Birla’s base salary and grants him an initial equity award valued at about $44 million, together with vesting terms. Chief financial officer Matt Frymier would receive a base salary, annual bonus eligibility and an equity award worth about $5.6 million.
Evernorth also disclosed restricted stock unit awards valued at $750,000 for executives, subject to approval by the board’s compensation committee and the company’s shareholders.
Merger filing moves XRP treasury listing closer Beyond executive compensation, the amended filing moves Evernorth another step toward completing its merger with Armada Acquisition Corp II. If the transaction receives regulatory and shareholder approval, the combined company is expected to trade on Nasdaq under the ticker XRPN while operating what Evernorth has described in its SEC filings as the largest publicly listed XRP treasury company.
According to the filing, Evernorth has secured more than $1 billion in gross proceeds from investors including Ripple, Arrington Capital, SBI Holdings, Pantera Capital and Kraken.
Board appointments were also updated. Ripple chief legal officer Stuart Alderoty is expected to join the board alongside CEO Asheesh Birla and Ted Janus. The proposed board would also include OpenAI Foundation chief financial officer Robert Kaiden and Antalpha chief operating officer Derar Islim.
Separately, Evernorth has expanded its public communications by launching a Japanese-language social media account focused on XRP-related updates and market education. In its introductory message, the company stated that Japan had supported XRP early and that it would continue building from there. However, Evernorth did not announce a new office, regulatory license, investment, product launch, or local operating business in Japan.
The company added that the Japanese account would explain market developments in simple terms and provide professional information without discussing XRP price movements or forecasts. Evernorth has not disclosed local staffing, partnerships or services connected to the initiative, while its website continues to list San Francisco as its primary headquarters.
XRPN stock holds steady as XRP activity grows While the merger still awaits regulatory approval, Armada Acquisition Corp II shares have largely held their gains. The stock is up about 2.25% since the beginning of the year and has gained nearly 0.5% over the past month, although it closed 0.10% lower on Monday. Its 52-week high stands at $10.91.
Source: Yahoo Finance Evernorth has also pointed to rising XRP adoption across several areas. According to the company, tokenized real-world assets on the XRP Ledger increased from roughly $150 million to $4 billion over the past year, supported by growth in spot XRP ETF inflows and an increase in newly created XRP wallets.
Meanwhile, XRP (XRP) traded at about $1.10 after rising 2.3% over the previous 24 hours. The token fluctuated between $1.06 and $1.11 during the session, while trading volume rose nearly 16% ahead of the release of U.S. consumer price index inflation data.
