Nová studie Cambridge ukazuje, že 31 % uzlů sítě Ethereum běží v USA a 39 % v EU bez Velké Británie. Síť může přestat finalizovat transakce, pokud současně vypadne více než třetina validátorů.
The Ethereum network continues to evolve, but its geographical distribution remains a subject of monitoring for researchers. A new study from the Cambridge Center for Alternative Finance shows that a significant share of nodes operates in North America and Europe. This snapshot of the network highlights several technical and legal issues. It also reminds us that the location of infrastructures can influence the protocol’s resilience. The updated data finally sheds new light on the network’s energy consumption after the merge.
In brief 31% of Ethereum nodes are hosted in the United States, compared to 39% in the European Union excluding the United Kingdom. The network can stop finalizing its transactions if more than a third of validators become simultaneously inactive. The concentration of infrastructures and client software remains a major issue for Ethereum’s resilience and decentralization. Ethereum’s energy consumption has dropped by about 99.98% since the merge, according to the new Cambridge study. Ethereum’s Geographic Distribution Is Dominated by the United States and Europe The new study indicates that 31% of Ethereum activity is now hosted in the United States. The European Union, excluding the United Kingdom, concentrates about 39% of this activity. In a statement attributed to the daily show The Starting Block, Alexander Neumuller, head of research at the Cambridge Center for Alternative Finance, estimates that the distribution remains heavily oriented towards Western countries. However, it does not indicate excessive concentration in a single state.
Researchers also observe that nodes rely heavily on three major hosting providers: Hetzner, AWS, and OVH. Alexander Neumuller recalls that Hetzner’s terms of use previously prohibited operating blockchain services. However, he notes that this policy may have evolved. This concentration of infrastructures therefore deserves ongoing attention, even if the data do not show a unique national imbalance.
The study also emphasizes that the relationship between nodes and validators remains difficult to measure precisely. The same access point can indeed host several validators. Researchers explain that it is therefore impossible to know exactly the number of validators associated with each infrastructure.
The One-Third Threshold Remains a Key Concern for the Network The analysis conclusions remind us of an important characteristic of Ethereum’s operation. Contrary to some misconceptions, the network does not need to lose half of its validators to encounter a problem. As soon as more than a third of validators simultaneously cease their activity, checkpoint finalization may be interrupted.
This situation explains why the distribution of Ethereum nodes represents a strategic element for the network’s stability. An interruption affecting a widely used infrastructure could slow down overall operation. However, Alexander Neumuller specifies that the available data do not allow a direct link to be established between each node and the exact number of validators it hosts.
Concentration concerns not only physical infrastructures. According to the researcher, client software diversity also plays a crucial role. A technical defect affecting a dominant client could quickly spread to a large part of the network. The report thus presents detailed data on the distribution of consensus clients and execution clients to illustrate this other risk factor.
A New Energy Estimate and Ongoing Legal Challenges The location of nodes goes beyond the simple technical framework. In 2022, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) estimated that it could claim jurisdiction over Ethereum. The authority notably relied on the fact that a majority of the network’s infrastructure was then hosted on U.S. soil. This issue therefore continues to fuel reflections on the legal framework applicable to transactions.
Alexander Neumüller nonetheless presents the current geographical distribution as a balance he considers positive, while specifying that it is his personal assessment. According to him, better geographical distribution is an advantage for a decentralized network.
Geographical distribution is a real asset for the network’s resilience, even if the community must continue to monitor its evolution. At the same time, a strong concentration of client software could amplify the consequences of a bug affecting the most used client.
Alexander Neumuller, Head of Research at the Cambridge Center for Alternative Finance, Source: The Block. He also believes that a strong concentration of client software risks quickly spreading the effects of a bug affecting the network’s main client. On this, the community must continue to closely follow this development.
The report also updates Ethereum’s energy estimates thanks to a new methodology. Researchers now use empirical data on node distribution between residential and commercial hosting, rather than theoretical assumptions. This approach takes into account software changes made after the merge, which can modify equipment consumption.
The new estimates assess the annual network consumption at about 7.9 gigawatt hours, equivalent to a continuous power of one megawatt. This corresponds to the consumption of about 2,000 British households. The study also estimates that this consumption remains about 99.98% lower than levels observed before the merge. Finally, the share of sustainable energy used by the network now exceeds 56%, compared to an estimated global average of 43%.
Researchers also estimate the theoretical cost of fully offsetting annual emissions through high-quality carbon credits. This would be between 25,000 and 55,000 pounds sterling, an amount Alexander Neumuller compares to the price of a car. He indicates that this estimate is the result that surprised him most. The Ethereum Foundation supported this study, while researchers specify that their analyses on decentralization reflect their own interpretation. Upcoming observations will measure whether this geographical distribution continues to evolve while preserving network resilience.
Maximize your Cointribune experience with our "Read to Earn" program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.
Join the program
A
A
Lien copié
Ghiles A.
Journaliste et rédacteur web passionné par l’univers des cryptomonnaies et des technologies Web3. J’y traite les dernières tendances et actualités afin de proposer un contenu de haute qualité à un large public du secteur.
DISCLAIMER
The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this article belong solely to the author, and should not be taken as investment advice. Do your own research before taking any investment decisions.
Hedera’s native token HBAR has fallen more than 2% after blockchain security researchers reported that a suspected exploit had moved more than $5.8 million in assets from the Hedera network to Ethereum.
Summary
Suspected Hedera exploit moved more than $5.8 million in assets to Ethereum, according to blockchain security researchers. Specter and PeckShield said the attacker bridged funds through LayerZero before swapping WBTC for ETH. HBAR fell more than 2%, trading near $0.069 as the reported exploit unfolded. According to blockchain security researcher Specter, the suspected attacker had already bridged more than $3.7 million worth of assets from Hedera to Ethereum before continuing to move additional funds.
There appears to be an ongoing hack involving @hedera Network, with over $3.7M already bridged to Ethereum by the attacker.
The stolen funds are currently being swapped from WBTC for ETH after being bridged from the Hedera network via Layerzero.
Theft addresses:… pic.twitter.com/KSxd3K2vlu
— Specter (@SpecterAnalyst) July 11, 2026 Specter said the stolen assets were being swapped from Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) into Ether (ETH) after crossing chains through LayerZero. The researcher also published two wallet addresses believed to be linked to the incident.
At the time of writing, CryptoBull360 reported that the wallet’s estimated value had increased to roughly $5.8 million, indicating that more assets had reached Ethereum after the initial transfers. The shared wallet data showed holdings of about 3,203 ETH, representing nearly 80% of the portfolio, alongside roughly 20% in WBTC.
According to data from crypto.news, Hedera (HBAR) price traded around $0.069, down more than 2% following the reports of the suspected exploit.
Cross-chain transfers have continued after the initial breach As additional transactions appeared on-chain, blockchain security firm PeckShield said the suspected exploit had already transferred approximately $5.25 million from the Hedera mainnet to Ethereum. The firm added that the wallet held around 2,360 ETH, valued at roughly $4.25 million, and 15.58 WBTC, worth about $1 million, at the time of its analysis.
PeckShield also reported that the wallet had originally been funded with 1 ETH from Tornado Cash, citing on-chain transaction history. The observation identifies the source of the wallet’s initial funding but does not establish who controls the address or who carried out the alleged attack.
The wallet screenshots shared by both Specter and PeckShield showed a series of inbound transfers arriving within a short period before the assets were converted into ETH.
Investigation remains ongoing as official details are limited Neither Specter nor PeckShield identified the party responsible for the suspected exploit, and no official estimate of the total losses had been released at the time of writing. The reported value of the stolen assets continued to change as additional funds were observed moving through the wallet.
The incident is still developing, with blockchain security researchers continuing to monitor the addresses and publish updates as new transactions appear on-chain. Meanwhile, market participants are watching for an official statement from the Hedera team regarding the reported exploit and any measures taken to contain its impact.
The Hedera incident comes amid a series of security-related developments reported by crypto.news in recent weeks. Blockaid recently said it detected an active exploit targeting Summer.fi, estimating losses of about $6 million at the time of its alert.
Separately, Ctrl Wallet announced it will permanently shut down after a security exploit affecting some Cardano wallets, giving users until Aug. 3 to withdraw their assets. Meanwhile, crypto.news also reported that Secret Network has proposed migrating SCRT from Cosmos to Arbitrum, with the team citing security risks, weaker liquidity, and an aging codebase in its July 7 governance proposal.
Z Hedera Network bylo po exploitu Sauce Protocol odcizeno více než 5,25 milionu USD a HBAR po zprávě klesl asi o 3,5 % na téměř 0,0670 USD. Útočník využil manipulaci s cenovým orákulem a prostředky přesunul na Ethereum.
More than $5 million has been stolen from the Hedera Network after hackers exploited the DeFi lending platform Sauce Protocol. The attack caused the HBAR coin price to fall by nearly 3% as the stolen crypto was quickly moved to Ethereum.
So far, the attacker has not been identified, and the Hedera Network team has not released an official statement.
Sauce Protocol Exploit Drains Over $5 MillionAccording to PeckShield, the attacker exploited the Sauce Protocol by manipulating its price oracle after depositing collateral into the lending platform.
By changing asset prices, the hacker borrowed nearly 6.6 million USDC and 35 million HBAR before swapping the stolen tokens on SaucerSwap.
The attacker then used LayerZero to bridge the stolen funds from the Hedera Network to Ethereum, making it more difficult to recover the assets.
The total loss is estimated at more than $5.25 million, with the funds already transferred off the Hedera Network.
Stolen Funds Moved to EthereumOn-chain investigator Specter said the hacker first stole the funds from Sauce Protocol on the Hedera network. After that, the attacker used LayerZero to transfer the stolen crypto from Hedera to Ethereum, where it is easier to swap and move the funds.
The hacker’s Ethereum wallet now holds around 2,068 ETH, worth nearly $3.7 million, along with 15.58 WBTC, bringing the total stolen assets to more than $5 million.
Blockchain records also show the attacker making several transactions, repeatedly moving Wrapped Bitcoin (WBTC) to another wallet, likely an attempt to hide the money trail.
More than $5 million has been stolen from Hedera’s DeFi ecosystem after hackers exploited Sauce Protocol in an oracle manipulation
Before carrying out the exploit, the hacker funded the wallet 0x9A4…6a494 with just 1 ETH from Tornado Cash. Attackers often use Tornado Cash to cover their tracks before launching an exploit.
HBAR Coin Price Falls After AttackFollowing the news, HBAR dropped around 3.5%, falling to nearly $0.0670 as investors feared a more serious breach.
Although the exploit targeted Sauce Protocol rather than the Hedera network itself, the incident has raised concerns across decentralized finance (DeFi) applications built on the blockchain.
The investigation is still ongoing, yet there is no official announcement or post from the Hedera network team.
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.
Bonzo Lend na Hedera přišel o zhruba 9 milionů USD po oracle exploitu, kdy útočník manipuloval cenou SAUCE jako kolaterálu a vybral 6,63 milionu USDC a 34,5 milionu wrapped HBAR.
Hedera-based lending protocol Bonzo Lend lost about $9 million after an attacker manipulated the price of SAUCE used as collateral, allowing the account to borrow assets far beyond the value deposited.
In a preliminary incident report published Saturday, Bonzo said the attacker deposited 250 SAUCE, worth only a few dollars, before submitting a price update that inflated the token’s value by roughly 12 orders of magnitude. The wallet then borrowed 6.63 million USDC and 34.5 million wrapped HBAR from the lending pool.
The case illustrates how oracle failures can turn low-value collateral into a tool for draining large amounts of liquidity from lending protocols, even when the application and underlying network continue operating as designed.
Bonzo attributed the incident to a flaw in Supra’s on-chain oracle verifier, which accepted a manipulated SAUCE price carrying a zeroed signature. The protocol said Supra acknowledged the issue and deployed a fix, while stressing that the incident was not a vulnerability in Bonzo Lend’s contracts or Hedera’s core network.
Estimated economic impact of the incident. Source: Bonzo Finance
DeFi hacks continue to pressure the sector The incident adds to a growing number of exploits targeting decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols in 2026.
The second quarter had become the most-hacked quarter on record by incident count, with 83 exploits and about $755 million stolen. Cross-chain bridge exploits accounted for $351 million, while compromised administrator attacks and fake token price manipulation represented 37% of quarterly losses.
In 2026, DeFi’s total value locked (TVL) had fallen 39% to over $70 billion in June from about $115 billion in January. CryptoRank recorded 121 hacks and roughly $942 million in losses over the period, saying repeated security incidents likely weighed on user confidence and reinforced capital outflows.
The Bonzo incident also follows a similar collateral-pricing exploit on Stellar. In February, attackers drained roughly $10 million from a YieldBlox DAO-managed lending pool after manipulating the price path used to value USTRY collateral, allowing them to borrow assets beyond the token’s real worth.
Magazine: Will the crypto lobby's $189M campaign get CLARITY over the line?
Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.
Na síti Hedera bylo při podezření na exploit odcizeno 5,25 milionu USD a prostředky se přes LayerZero přesunuly na Ethereum. Hedera incident zatím nepotvrdila.
Someone just walked off with $5.25 million from the Hedera network, and they didn’t exactly try to be subtle about it. Blockchain security firms PeckShield and Specter flagged the suspicious activity on July 11, tracking a trail of funds that moved from Hedera’s mainnet to Ethereum through a cross-chain bridge powered by LayerZero technology.
The timing is particularly awkward for Hedera. Just weeks after the network celebrated the launch of the first US spot HBAR ETF, it’s now dealing with a significant security incident.
How the exploit unfolded The attacker funded an Ethereum wallet with 1 ETH routed through Tornado Cash, the privacy mixing service. From there, the attacker bridged assets from Hedera to Ethereum using LayerZero’s cross-chain infrastructure. Once the funds landed on Ethereum, the attacker swapped Wrapped Bitcoin for Ether, consolidating the stolen haul into more liquid assets.
Advertisement
At the time security researchers flagged the incident, the attacker’s Ethereum wallet held approximately 2,360 ETH, valued at about $4.25 million, along with 15.58 WBTC worth roughly $1 million. The wallet addresses involved have been identified as 0x9A4966152F6e10b33Cb7a37975e8619816d6a494 and 0xaf20D792A19fD42dCf697ceBa6100291D96dD93e.
Hedera itself has not confirmed the exploit. On-chain investigators are still picking through the transaction data to determine exactly what vulnerability was exploited and how the attacker gained access to the funds in the first place.
A pattern that should worry everyone This isn’t Hedera’s first brush with a security breach. Back in March 2023, the network experienced an exploit that affected decentralized exchange liquidity pools through a bug in Hedera Token Service transfers.
The 2026 landscape has been particularly brutal. A $6 million exploit hit Summer.fi, and a governance attack on BONK DAO resulted in $20 million in losses. The suspected Hedera incident slots neatly into this growing catalog of multi-million-dollar security failures.
What this means for HBAR and its new ETF In June 2026, Canary Capital launched the first US spot HBAR ETF, which debuted with $52.6 million in assets under management. Now, barely a month later, the network is associated with a multi-million-dollar theft.
The exploit appears to involve assets bridged off the Hedera network rather than a compromise of the network’s core consensus mechanism. The use of Tornado Cash to fund the initial wallet suggests the attacker was prepared for scrutiny, which typically makes fund recovery significantly more difficult.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Uniswap na Robinhood Chain překročil kumulativní objem obchodů 1 miliardu USD za devět dní a denní počet aktivních obchodníků přesáhl 220 000. UNI během růstu objemu vzrostl až o 14 %.
Uniswap just crossed $1 billion in cumulative trading volume on Robinhood Chain. It took nine days.
To put that in perspective, the chain’s public mainnet launched around July 1, and by July 10 the leading decentralized exchange had already processed a billion dollars in trades. Daily active traders surpassed 220,000 during the same stretch.
The numbers behind the surge The trajectory was steep from the start. Uniswap racked up roughly $250 million in trading volume during its first week on Robinhood Chain, then saw a single-day explosion to approximately $500 million on July 8. That one-day spike ranked the chain’s Uniswap activity second only to Ethereum mainnet.
Advertisement
Uniswap’s total value locked on Robinhood Chain topped $30 million by July 10. The broader chain’s TVL cleared $106 million during the same window.
All four of Uniswap’s protocol versions, v2, v3, v4, and UniswapX, were live from day one as the primary public automated market maker.
The trading activity wasn’t driven by a single catalyst. Two categories dominated: tokenized stocks and memecoins.
Why Robinhood Chain matters for DeFi Robinhood Chain is built on Arbitrum’s Layer 2 technology, giving it 100-millisecond block times.
The UNI governance token responded accordingly, climbing as much as 14% during the volume surge.
What this means for investors The tokenized stocks angle deserves particular attention. If traders on Robinhood Chain can seamlessly swap between memecoins and tokenized equities using the same DEX interface, that blurs the line between traditional brokerage services and DeFi in ways regulators will almost certainly want to examine.
The $106 million in total chain TVL is still modest compared to established L2s like Arbitrum One or Base, which hold billions.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Cover image via U.Today Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.
Shiba Inu community veteran Mazrael highlighted Japan's latest crypto push, which stands to benefit Shiba Inu.
According to Mazrael, Japan just took another major step toward becoming one of the world's most crypto-friendly economies.
🇯🇵 Japan just took another major step toward becoming one of the world's most crypto-friendly economies.
• Crypto is being recognized as regulated financial products.
• The government is moving toward legalizing crypto ETFs.
• SHIB is already on Japan's JVCEA Green List,… https://t.co/A05BOgkjdc pic.twitter.com/Gkxqam60kJ
— Mazrael.Shib (@Mazrael_shib) July 11, 2026 This comes as cryptocurrencies are recognized as regulated financial products in the country. Last month, Japan's House of Representatives passed a bill that moves crypto regulation from the Payment Services Act to the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act.
You Might Also Like
HOT Stories
The new rules, due to come into force next year, would treat crypto assets as financial instruments, subjecting them to lower taxes and stricter trading rules. They also open the door to new products such as exchange-traded funds (ETFs).
Mazrael also highlighted Japan's push toward legalizing crypto ETFs. Japan is getting closer to bringing cryptocurrency further into its mainstream financial system after indicating support for crypto exchange-traded funds. Finance Minister Satsuki Katayama stated the government is working on a legal framework to allow these investment products in the domestic market.
Big win for SHIB?Japan has over 14 million open cryptocurrency accounts, with low- to middle-income retail customers driving the growth.
You Might Also Like
Shiba Inu is positioned to benefit from this growing market as it is already on Japan's JVCEA Green List, which makes it easier for regulated platforms in the country to list. JVCEA said it had added Shiba Inu to the Green List last November. This is significant as being on the list is like getting a fast pass for Japanese exchanges.
SHIB is also available through Mercoin, a Tokyo-based subsidiary of Japan's massive e-commerce and marketplace app Mercari, thus expanding access across Japan.
Japan opened a major door for SHIB in April with its listing on Rakuten Wallet, a cryptocurrency trading platform owned by Japan's Rakuten Group. Shiba Inu is now utilized in the ecosystem, which includes Rakuten Pay with 44 million users, allowing SHIB to reach people who have never even thought about crypto.
Pendle oznámil upgrade Bungee Exchange V3, který přináší rychlejší routing, nižší poplatky a cross-chain swapy jedním kliknutím bez nutnosti držet nativní gas tokeny na cílovém řetězci.
Pendle just made cross-chain DeFi a whole lot less painful. The yield-trading protocol announced a full upgrade to BungeeExchange V3, bringing faster routing, lower fees, and a feature that sounds almost too convenient: single-click cross-chain token swaps that don’t require users to hold native gas tokens on the destination chain.
In English: you can now swap any token on any chain directly into Pendle’s principal tokens (PT) or yield tokens (YT) without first scrambling to acquire ETH, MATIC, or whatever gas currency the receiving network demands. The protocol picks up that tab automatically.
Advertisement
What the upgrade actually changes Bungee, powered by SOCKET infrastructure, functions as a bridge aggregator, scanning multiple bridges and DEX routes to find the cheapest and fastest path for a swap. Pendle describes it as “the most powerful bridge aggregator,” and the numbers offer some backing for that claim: Bungee has facilitated over $25 billion in cumulative transaction volume across its lifetime.
The V3 upgrade specifically improves three areas. Routing speed has been enhanced, meaning the protocol can find optimal swap paths more quickly. Transaction fees have been reduced, though Pendle hasn’t disclosed specific percentage improvements. And the gasless execution feature eliminates what has long been one of the most annoying onboarding hurdles in multi-chain DeFi.
Why Pendle is betting big on cross-chain Pendle’s core product lets users split yield-bearing assets into two components: principal tokens (PT) and yield tokens (YT). PT represents the underlying asset’s value at maturity, while YT captures the yield generated over a given period.
By embedding a bridge aggregator directly into the swap flow, Pendle removes the multi-step process that previously required users to leave the platform, bridge manually, and return. The entire journey from holding Token A on Chain X to holding PT or YT on Chain Y now happens in one click.
Prior to this upgrade, community-built tools had already started enabling PT token trading through Bungee’s SOCKET infrastructure. The V3 release formalizes and expands that functionality.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Morgan Stanley za poslední dva týdny přidal téměř 1 000 BTC a jeho sledovaná držba vzrostla na 5 761 BTC. Podle Arkham má nyní bitcoin v hodnotě zhruba 369,9 milionu USD.
Morgan Stanley has increased its Bitcoin holdings by nearly 1,000 BTC over the past two weeks, lifting its tracked balance above 5,700 BTC, according to on-chain data.
Summary
Morgan Stanley added nearly 1,000 BTC over the past two weeks, pushing its tracked holdings to 5,761 BTC. Arkham data shows the accumulation came through multiple large transfers from Coinbase Prime rather than a single purchase. The latest buying follows Morgan Stanley’s June crypto expansion with Galaxy Digital, allowing eligible clients to convert crypto into spot investment products. According to blockchain intelligence platform Arkham, the investment bank continued adding Bitcoin through its spot Bitcoin investment product during the recent market pullback. Arkham’s latest portfolio data shows Morgan Stanley now holds 5,761 BTC worth roughly $369.9 million, making it one of the larger institutional Bitcoin holders tracked on the platform.
Source: Arkham The latest increase follows a series of transfers recorded over the past two weeks instead of a single purchase. Arkham’s transaction history shows several large inflows from Coinbase Prime wallets, including transfers of 495.8 BTC, 171.9 BTC, 166.2 BTC, 154.8 BTC, 143.3 BTC, 126.1 BTC, 120.4 BTC, and another 34.4 BTC within the last 14 hours. The activity also includes minor operational transfers and a 1 BTC movement back to Coinbase Prime, leaving the firm’s net increase at roughly 1,000 BTC.
Source: Arkham Latest purchases have come through multiple large transfers Recent Arkham data indicates Morgan Stanley accumulated Bitcoin in stages rather than executing a single large transaction. Most of the recorded inflows originated from Coinbase Prime custody and deposit addresses, suggesting institutional settlement activity linked to its Bitcoin investment product.
At current market prices shown on Arkham, the firm’s Bitcoin holdings are valued at nearly $370 million. Arkham also classifies the entity as a fund, an exchange-traded product, and a Bitcoin whale, while linking the portfolio to 11 tracked wallet addresses.
The latest buying extends a pattern of adding exposure during price weakness. Although Arkham describes the activity as another instance of Morgan Stanley “buying the dip,” the platform does not disclose whether the transactions represent direct purchases, client subscriptions, or other operational inflows into the investment vehicle.
Crypto investment services have expanded for wealthy clients The recent accumulation follows Morgan Stanley Wealth Management’s June announcement that it had expanded its digital asset offering through a referral arrangement with Galaxy Digital.
Under the program, eligible high-net-worth clients can lend cryptocurrencies including Bitcoin, Ether, and Solana to Galaxy Digital and receive shares in spot crypto investment products, including the Morgan Stanley Bitcoin Trust. According to the companies, the structure allows investors to move crypto exposure into regulated investment vehicles without first selling their digital assets.
Morgan Stanley and Galaxy Digital also said the arrangement can reduce in-kind crypto-to-exchange-traded product onboarding times by as much as 75%, making transfers into regulated investment products faster than conventional processes.
The expanded client offering and the latest on-chain accumulation come as institutional participation in spot Bitcoin investment products continues to grow. While Arkham’s wallet data tracks assets associated with Morgan Stanley’s Bitcoin product, the platform does not identify the underlying investors or distinguish between firm-owned holdings and assets managed on behalf of clients.
Hyperliquid spustila obchodování futures na meme coin CASHCAT na Robinhood Chain s pákou až 3x. Po zalistování se objevil i velrybí short na 1,11 milionu CASHCAT.
Hyperliquid announces the launch of contract trading for the meme coin CASHCAT on Robinhood Chain, with support for up to 3x leverage.
Relevant content
A whale shorted 1.11 million CASHCAT tokens on Hyperliquid.
According to monitoring by Onchain Lens, a whale deposited approximately $450,000 into Hyperliquid. Within one hour of CASHCAT’s listing on Hyperliquid, the whale shorted 1.11 million CASHCAT tokens with 3x leverage, valued at $222,200. The entry price was $0.195336, liquidation price $0.531304, resulting in an unrealized loss of $4,400.
Per GMGN market data, CASHCAT, a meme coin on Robinhood Chain, briefly hit an all-time high in market capitalization, currently trading at $200 million with an intraday increase of over 20%. Meme coins are highly volatile, so investors should exercise caution regarding associated risks.
11 minutes ago
The White House confirms Trump has 'emptied' the U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
The White House confirmed on the 10th that U.S. President Donald Trump has removed two incumbent members of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission from their posts. In a statement sent to media on the same day, the White House said the president "reserves the right to remove relevant personnel who may not be fully committed to safeguarding U.S. election security and ensuring every legal vote is counted." The statement did not give a specific reason for Trump's move. However, U.S. media reported that the Election Assistance Commission had rejected an executive order signed by Trump, which required voters to provide proof of U.S. citizenship on the national voter registration form. (Xinhua News Agency)
11 minutes ago
A crypto whale shorted Ethereum (ETH) with 25x leverage, holding a position worth $12.43 million.
According to Onchain Lens monitoring, a whale deposited approximately $500,000 into Hyperliquid to open a short position of 6,914 ETH (valued at $12.43 million) with 25x leverage. The entry price was $1,790.36, liquidation price stands at $1,825.58. The position currently has an unrealized loss of around $50,700, with only a 1.55% gap to liquidation.
11 minutes ago
A trader has earned more than $1 million in profits on CASHCAT, achieving a staggering return of up to 1183 times.
According to Lookonchain monitoring, a trader has reaped over $1 million in profits from CASHCAT. The trader spent 0.49 ETH (valued at $838) to purchase 15.04 million CASHCAT tokens, then sold them for 580 ETH (worth $1.04 million), generating a profit of over $1 million (a 1183x return). Had the trader held the tokens until now, the profit would have reached $2.9 million.
11 minutes ago
A crypto whale bought the dip, acquiring 14,007 ETH valued at approximately $25.18 million.
According to monitoring by OnchainLens, a whale purchased 14,007 ETH at an average price of $1,798, with a total value of approximately $25.1 million.
Tether podle EmberCN poslal z rezervní adresy na Binance testovací transakci 4 BTC za zhruba 250 000 USD. Zároveň se po konci Q2 zatím neobjevily nové on-chain vklady BTC.
According to monitoring by EmberCN, Tether allocates 15% of its quarterly profits to its Bitcoin reserve address. Approximately 5 hours ago, this address made a test transfer of 4 BTC to Binance, valued at roughly $250,000. EmberCN stated that this same address previously transferred 204.3 BTC to Bitfinex a month ago, worth approximately $14.36 million at the time, when Bitcoin’s price stood at around $70,000. It remains unclear whether these assets have been sold. Additionally, Tether appears to have not yet completed the on-chain withdrawal of new Bitcoin for Q2 2026. Per its usual practice, Tether typically transfers BTC purchased in the quarter to its reserve address on the last day of each quarter. However, more than 10 days have elapsed since the end of Q2, and no new Bitcoin deposits to this reserve address have been observed on-chain, sparking market concerns over whether it has adjusted its Bitcoin accumulation pace.
Relevant content
A whale shorted 1.11 million CASHCAT tokens on Hyperliquid.
According to monitoring by Onchain Lens, a whale deposited approximately $450,000 into Hyperliquid. Within one hour of CASHCAT’s listing on Hyperliquid, the whale shorted 1.11 million CASHCAT tokens with 3x leverage, valued at $222,200. The entry price was $0.195336, liquidation price $0.531304, resulting in an unrealized loss of $4,400.
Per GMGN market data, CASHCAT, a meme coin on Robinhood Chain, briefly hit an all-time high in market capitalization, currently trading at $200 million with an intraday increase of over 20%. Meme coins are highly volatile, so investors should exercise caution regarding associated risks.
2 minutes ago
The White House confirms Trump has 'emptied' the U.S. Election Assistance Commission.
The White House confirmed on the 10th that U.S. President Donald Trump has removed two incumbent members of the U.S. Election Assistance Commission from their posts. In a statement sent to media on the same day, the White House said the president "reserves the right to remove relevant personnel who may not be fully committed to safeguarding U.S. election security and ensuring every legal vote is counted." The statement did not give a specific reason for Trump's move. However, U.S. media reported that the Election Assistance Commission had rejected an executive order signed by Trump, which required voters to provide proof of U.S. citizenship on the national voter registration form. (Xinhua News Agency)
2 minutes ago
Hyperliquid launches CASHCAT futures trading, supporting up to 3x leverage.
Hyperliquid announces the launch of contract trading for the meme coin CASHCAT on Robinhood Chain, with support for up to 3x leverage.
2 minutes ago
A crypto whale shorted Ethereum (ETH) with 25x leverage, holding a position worth $12.43 million.
According to Onchain Lens monitoring, a whale deposited approximately $500,000 into Hyperliquid to open a short position of 6,914 ETH (valued at $12.43 million) with 25x leverage. The entry price was $1,790.36, liquidation price stands at $1,825.58. The position currently has an unrealized loss of around $50,700, with only a 1.55% gap to liquidation.
2 minutes ago
A trader has earned more than $1 million in profits on CASHCAT, achieving a staggering return of up to 1183 times.
According to Lookonchain monitoring, a trader has reaped over $1 million in profits from CASHCAT. The trader spent 0.49 ETH (valued at $838) to purchase 15.04 million CASHCAT tokens, then sold them for 580 ETH (worth $1.04 million), generating a profit of over $1 million (a 1183x return). Had the trader held the tokens until now, the profit would have reached $2.9 million.
Spotové Bitcoin ETF v USA zaznamenaly 12. června příliv zhruba 86 milionů USD po více než 1,67 miliardy USD čistých odlivů. BlackRockův IBIT přilákal asi 57,7 milionu USD.
After weeks of watching money walk out the door, US spot Bitcoin ETFs finally caught a break. On June 12, roughly $86 million flowed back into the funds, with BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) doing most of the heavy lifting.
IBIT alone pulled in approximately $57.7 million of that total, accounting for nearly two-thirds of the day’s inflows. In Bitcoin terms, the collective haul translated to about 1,350 BTC purchased across all spot ETFs, with IBIT responsible for roughly 907 of those coins.
The $86 million came after a stretch of more than $1.67 billion in net outflows from Bitcoin ETFs.
Advertisement
BlackRock’s growing Bitcoin empire IBIT isn’t just the biggest Bitcoin ETF. The fund now holds over $46 billion in assets under management.
BlackRock recently launched BITA, a Bitcoin Income ETF designed to generate yield from Bitcoin exposure.
What this means for investors The single-day inflow reversal carries a few implications worth unpacking for anyone with skin in the Bitcoin game.
First, institutional demand hasn’t evaporated. BlackRock’s $57.7 million purchase on a single day suggests otherwise.
Third, BlackRock’s expansion into yield-generating Bitcoin products like BITA signals that the firm is building infrastructure for long-term holders, not just speculators chasing momentum.
One green day doesn’t constitute a trend reversal. A single $86 million inflow following $1.67 billion in outflows is encouraging but mathematically modest. That’s about 5% of the outflow recouped in a day.
IBIT’s dominance in capturing nearly two-thirds of the day’s inflows suggests that capital is consolidating around the BlackRock brand.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Americké spotové Bitcoin ETF 10. července přilákaly čistý příliv 90,4 milionu USD a Ethereum ETF přidaly 18,4 milionu USD. Po červnovém odlivu se tak kapitál vrací do regulovaných krypto produktů.
US spot Bitcoin ETFs pulled in $90.4 million in net inflows on July 10, while their Ethereum counterparts added $18.4 million. That translates to roughly 1,791 BTC and 10,550 ETH worth of fresh capital flowing into regulated crypto investment products in a single day.
The recovery after a record-breaking exodus June 2026 set an unwelcome record: approximately $4 billion in net outflows from US spot Bitcoin ETFs. That’s the largest monthly withdrawal since these products launched in January 2024.
A 10-day consecutive outflow streak from Bitcoin ETFs finally snapped on July 2, after hemorrhaging a cumulative $2.73 billion during that stretch alone.
Earlier in the month, Bitcoin ETFs recorded a single-day inflow of $265.7 million, driven primarily by BlackRock’s IBIT. The $90.4 million on July 10 is more subdued, but it reinforces the narrative that capital is rotating back in rather than continuing to flee.
Advertisement
Who’s winning the ETF fee war BlackRock’s IBIT and Fidelity’s FBTC continue to dominate inflows on the Bitcoin side. On the Ethereum front, BlackRock’s ETHA and Fidelity’s FETH have carved out similar positions.
Grayscale’s higher-fee products have faced persistent outflows as investors migrate to cheaper alternatives. Grayscale’s Bitcoin Trust, which converted from a closed-end fund, carried significantly higher fees than competitors who entered the market with aggressive pricing, resulting in a steady asset transfer from Grayscale to BlackRock and Fidelity.
Since spot Bitcoin ETFs launched in January 2024, total net inflows have surpassed $50 billion, reaching approximately $51.3 billion by July 2026.
Macro backdrop and what’s driving sentiment Bitcoin prices have been hovering between $56,000 and $64,000 in early July. Easing inflation expectations have provided some tailwinds for risk assets broadly, and crypto ETFs appear to be catching that breeze.
The $18.4 million flowing into Ethereum ETFs is notable because Ethereum ETFs have historically struggled to match Bitcoin’s momentum in attracting capital. The fact that both products are seeing positive flows simultaneously suggests the recovery isn’t limited to Bitcoin; it’s a broader re-engagement with crypto as an asset class.
What this means for investors For investors watching the competitive landscape, the continued dominance of BlackRock and Fidelity products is worth tracking. The earlier $265.7 million inflow day in July shows the capacity for larger moves when conditions align.
A $4 billion monthly outflow in June demonstrates how quickly sentiment can reverse. With Bitcoin trading between $56,000 and $64,000, investors should watch whether the July inflow trend accelerates or fizzles. If daily inflows consistently stay positive and gradually increase, it would mark a meaningful shift in the institutional positioning that drove the June selloff.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Cardano za posledních sedm dní zaznamenalo 233 commitů a patřilo mezi nejaktivnější projekty Layer-1. Cardano Foundation zároveň připravuje nové otevřené fórum pro správu sítě.
Cardano has emerged as one of the most active networks in blockchain development, recording 233 GitHub code commits over the past seven days. This activity placed Cardano among the leading Layer-1 projects according to data from Token Terminal, which showed that the network accounted for approximately 6.2% of all code contributions across Layer-1 blockchains, a segment that gathered a total of 3,700 commits during this period.
Rising Developer Activity and Ecosystem GrowthEverstake, a prominent staking service provider, recognized Cardano as having one of the most stable foundations in the cryptocurrency sector. The company highlighted increasing engagement from developers, improved project metrics, and sustained ecosystem expansion as factors that could push Cardano back into the ranking of the world’s top ten cryptocurrencies by market capitalization.
Despite Cardano’s smaller market cap compared to some major competitors, the project continues to maintain strong interest from the developer community. Such activity is seen as a significant indicator of potential network growth and innovation.
Ongoing developer engagement, ecosystem expansion, and improved on-chain metrics may support Cardano’s efforts to reclaim a spot among the top ten digital assets.
Analysis of weekly activity showed that Cardano’s development efforts were not uniformly distributed. The number of code commits began relatively high on July 2, tapered to a low point by July 4, then rose sharply to reach the week’s peak on July 6 before leveling off. This pattern of fluctuations corresponds with open-source development cycles, where activity often varies depending on scheduled releases and coordinated team efforts.
Notably, despite these mid-week dips, the network’s daily commits did not fall below previous weekly lows, highlighting persistent developer commitment. Similar trends were also observed in other leading Layer-1 blockchain networks during the week.
BlockchainWeekly Code CommitsShare of Total (%)Cardano2336.2Other Layer-1s (aggregate)3,46793.8Total3,700100Cardano Foundation Advances Governance InitiativesBeyond development statistics, Cardano has been advancing its governance structure. The Cardano Foundation, a non-profit supporting the Cardano protocol, is developing an open, off-chain discussion forum to encourage better collaboration among governance participants. This initiative follows the adoption of the Cardano Constitution, scheduled for implementation in February 2025.
Foundation representatives described the importance of building a transparent and inclusive platform that allows verified users to interact through identity credentials tied to on-chain data. Features under consideration include independent moderation, publicly accessible communication channels, and compliance with open standards for interoperability.
The proposed forum would support separate spaces for ADA token holders, Delegated Representatives (DReps), proposal authors, and committee members. Optional user profiles could include individuals’ voting records and declared governance interests, aiming to improve transparency and stakeholder engagement.
The foundation suggested that selecting the platform for this forum could be achieved via on-chain voting, reflecting Cardano’s ongoing move toward decentralized decision-making and active community involvement.
Mini dictionary: Cardano Foundation, a nonprofit organization dedicated to supporting the Cardano blockchain ecosystem, facilitates sustainable development, governance initiatives, and educational programs to foster ecosystem growth.
Cardano’s governance system continues to evolve as the foundation explores new platforms for community discussion and transparent voting, aiming for a more advanced phase of decentralized oversight.
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.
Velcí držitelé SHIB už osmý den po sobě stahují tokeny z burz do cold peněženek, čímž dál snižují nabídku k okamžitému prodeji. CryptoQuant uvádí, že čistý odtok je rekordně záporný od 3. července.
Cover image via depositphotos.com Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.
Large Shiba Inu coin holders have staged a systematic exodus from exchanges, moving tokens into long-term storage. According to analytics platform CryptoQuant, SHIB's net flow on trading platforms has remained negative for a record eight consecutive days since July 3.
So-called smart money, which controls up to 94.5% of the token's supply, has reduced selling and withdrawn hundreds of billions of tokens to "cold" wallets over this period.
The movement of tokens over the past 24 hours is reflected in the following metrics:
HOT Stories
Massive outflow: 226.3 billion SHIB left exchange accounts for private addresses.Modest inflow: Around 131 billion SHIB was deposited on trading platforms for potential sale.Net deficit: Exchange order books lost a net 95.35 billion SHIB in just one day.Reserves near the bottom: Total SHIB holdings on centralized platforms fell to 86.69 trillion tokens.The meme coin's price stabilized near $0.00000438 as exchange supply continued to decline. SHIB has gained approximately 4.12% since the beginning of July, but it remains trapped in a narrow range after a difficult June, when the asset lost 24%.
Large transfers slow, but reserves keep fallingThe seven-day average number of SHIB deposits to exchanges fell by 69%, while the equivalent figure for withdrawals declined by 78%. This means overall large-transfer activity weakened significantly compared with the previous week.
At the same time, the negative netflow shows that exchange reserves continue to shrink despite the lower number of transactions. The amount of SHIB available for immediate sale on centralized platforms is gradually decreasing.
Shiba Inu (SHIB) exchange netflow since July 3 2026, Source: CryptoQuant You Might Also Like
One important detail is that token withdrawals alone do not prove that all transfers are related to accumulation. Some of the activity may involve funds being redistributed between custodial wallets, internal exchange operations, or changes in storage structure.
What this means for the SHIB priceA decline in exchange supply could reduce potential selling pressure. If demand begins to rise, the smaller amount of available tokens may amplify the price response to new buying activity.
However, the eight-day outflow streak does not yet confirm the beginning of a new uptrend. Trading activity and the number of large transfers are declining alongside exchange reserves, meaning the market will need stronger spot volume to break out of the current consolidation range.
In the coming days, the main indicators for the Shiba Inu coin will be exchange reserves, daily netflow, and trading volume. Continued withdrawals combined with stronger buying activity would provide more reliable confirmation of a shift in the market balance than negative netflow alone.
Oficiální účet Shiba Inu na X se 3,8 milionu sledujících začal nečekaně propagovat nízkokapové meme coiny a launchpad místo vlastního ekosystému. Zatím není jasné, zda jde o dohodu, zneužití účtu, nebo kompromitaci.
Cover image via depositphotos.com Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.
The official Shiba Inu (SHIB) token account on X, which has an audience of 3.8 million followers, has suddenly shifted away from its usual focus. Instead of covering the SHIB token and the development of its own ecosystem, the project's media infrastructure has begun actively promoting third-party meme tokens with extremely low market capitalizations.
Two unusual posts appeared on the profile one after another. In a reply beneath another account's post, the Shiba Inu account left a brief comment openly claiming that a new, little-known frog-themed token was superior to PEPE, a genuinely major project. The post it replied to included the micro-token's smart contract address.
Official X account of Shiba Inu (SHIB) cryptocurrency project, Source: XShortly afterward, another promotional reply appeared on the account, this time supporting a third-party meme coin launchpad and its native token. The publication was presented in SHIB's signature style, including grandiose slogans about a "mission to save meme culture" and emojis.
HOT Stories
The attention economy and three possible scenariosAmid fierce competition for liquidity, particularly during the summer slump, the entire crypto industry operates according to the rules of the attention economy. Major projects usually try to keep their audience focused on their own products rather than direct valuable traffic toward third-party assets, especially competing meme tokens.
The promotion of micro-cap assets to an audience of 3.8 million followers by a multibillion-dollar giant appears highly unusual and fits three possible scenarios:
Because this third-party launchpad has appeared in Shiba Inu's feed more than once, the publications may be part of an official commercial agreement. However, this raises the question of why the account's management would deliberately dilute its community's attention to promote highly speculative assets.It is also possible that individual SHIB developers or managers with access to the main account decided to monetize the project's enormous audience for personal gain.The possibility of an account compromise also cannot be ruled out. Publishing contract addresses in replies and encouraging users to buy new tokens are classic warning signs of a hacker attack. You Might Also Like
At the time of publication, official ecosystem representatives, including lead developer Shytoshi Kusama, had not commented on the situation. Until the context of these publications is clarified, SHIB investors and holders should exercise extreme caution and avoid rushing to follow links posted through the project's account.
Injective spustila sekci Institutional Infrastructure, která má podnikům usnadnit piloty, tokenizaci aktiv a nasazení kapitálu v řízených onchain prostředích. Platforma zdůrazňuje soulad s KYC/AML pravidly, kontrolovaný přístup a custody přes BitGo a Fireblocks.
Injective has launched a dedicated Institutional Infrastructure section on its website designed to walk enterprises through the process of piloting projects, tokenizing assets, and deploying capital in controlled onchain environments.
What the institutional page actually offers The new page outlines a four-step process for institutions: design pilots, launch in permissioned environments, tokenize assets with controlled access, and operate with institutional custody partners.
The compliance angle is front and center. Injective is highlighting KYC/AML-compliant programmable compliance, jurisdiction-based access controls, and fully configurable real-world asset markets.
Advertisement
On the custody side, Injective is leaning on partnerships with BitGo and Fireblocks. Both firms already custody billions in digital assets for hedge funds, asset managers, and corporate treasuries.
The platform also supports a native Real-World Asset module, letting institutions tokenize everything from debt instruments to commodities within Injective’s ecosystem. Paired with native Ethereum Virtual Machine compatibility launched in November 2025, developers familiar with Ethereum’s tooling can build on Injective without learning an entirely new tech stack.
The network under the hood The blockchain reports over 2.94 billion onchain transactions processed to date, with a block time of 0.64 seconds. Ethereum’s block time hovers around 12 seconds.
The median transaction cost sits at $0.0001. Injective also claims over 500 onchain assets and a reported RWA volume of $6.8 billion.
The native token, INJ, serves as the backbone for governance and staking within the ecosystem.
Broader strategic context This infrastructure page is part of a broader refresh of Injective’s platform, which now features dedicated sections for institutions, developers, and the community.
Injective established the Injective Policy Institute in July 2026 specifically for US regulatory engagement.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Ethena’s USDe na Morpho nasbíral za necelé čtyři týdny vklady ve výši 323,7 milionu USD, což představuje zhruba 40% růst. Coinbase navíc na Morpho spustila výnosový USDC vault využívající USDe.
Ethena’s synthetic dollar token USDe has accumulated $323.7 million in deposits on the Morpho lending protocol in under four weeks. The number represents a substantial jump from the $225 million to $235 million in Ethena-related total value locked on Morpho that was recorded between March and April 2026. In other words, deposits have grown by roughly 40% in a matter of weeks.
What’s actually driving the growth Morpho’s integration with Ethena dates back to March 2024. That early partnership gave the protocol a head start in building curated lending markets around USDe and its staked counterpart, sUSDe. The staked version acts as productive collateral, meaning it generates yield while simultaneously backing borrowing positions.
In June 2026, Coinbase launched a high-yield USDC vault on Morpho that leverages USDe, giving retail users access to lending strategies that were previously the domain of institutional desks. Ethena has also been strategically allocating its backing assets, including USDT, into Morpho vaults. When the issuer of a synthetic dollar is actively deploying its reserves into the same protocol where users are depositing, it creates a self-reinforcing loop of liquidity and confidence.
Advertisement
The bigger picture for USDe supply Ethena’s total USDe supply has stabilized between $4.5 billion and $6 billion in 2026. The token previously peaked above $10 billion, meaning current supply levels still represent a roughly 40% to 55% drawdown from all-time highs.
USDe maintains its dollar peg through a delta-neutral strategy: Ethena holds spot crypto positions and simultaneously shorts equivalent futures contracts. The spread between those positions generates yield. When funding rates are positive, this works well; when they’re not, it gets complicated.
Ethena forged a partnership with Janus Henderson in June 2026, bringing traditional asset management credibility to a protocol that lives entirely on-chain.
What this means for DeFi investors The Coinbase USDC vault integration creates a bridge between traditional stablecoin holders and USDe’s yield mechanics. Users deposit USDC, the vault strategy interacts with USDe on Morpho, and retail participants capture returns they couldn’t easily access before.
USDe’s yield depends on funding rates remaining positive across perpetual futures markets. During sustained bearish periods, those rates can flip negative, compressing or eliminating the protocol’s yield advantage. Ethena’s decision to diversify backing assets by deploying USDT into Morpho vaults reflects an awareness of concentration risk.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Empery Digital prodala od 7. května 1 400 BTC za zhruba 87,1 milionu USD a snížila držbu na 1 514 BTC. Výnosy používá na splátku dluhu, financování dříve oznámené akvizice nemovitosti, úhradu právních výdajů spojených s probíhajícím sporem akcionářů a provoz.
The Nasdaq listed company said it sold 1,400 BTC since May 7 at an average price of $62,200 per Bitcoin, generating about $87.1 million in gross proceeds. The sale left Empery with 1,514 BTC and about $73.9 million in cash as of July 10.
Advertisement
The proceeds are being used to repay debt, fund a previously announced property acquisition, cover legal expenses tied to ongoing stockholder litigation and support operations. Empery said it repaid $10 million of outstanding debt on July 7 and still has $45 million outstanding on its debt facility.
The move marks a sharp reversal for a company that adopted a Bitcoin treasury strategy last year. Empery, formerly Volcon, said in August 2025 that it held more than 4,018 BTC and described its strategy as becoming a low cost, capital efficient aggregator of Bitcoin.
The company had already disclosed that Bitcoin sales could be part of its capital strategy. In its annual report, Empery said it had sold 722 BTC for $50 million from January 1 through March 25, 2026, and warned that future Bitcoin sales could affect its results and financial condition.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Estefano Gomez. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
CEO Strive Matt Cole uvedl, že firma může Bitcoin prodat, pokud to bude ve prospěch akcionářů. Zároveň chce být dlouhodobě čistým nakupujícím a překonat samotný Bitcoin.
Strive CEO Matt Cole just said something you almost never hear from a corporate Bitcoin maximalist: he’s willing to sell.
Cole confirmed that Strive is open to offloading Bitcoin if doing so benefits shareholders, even as the firm commits to being a net buyer of the asset over time. The goal, Cole says, is to outperform Bitcoin itself, not just hold it and hope.
Nearly 20,000 BTC and counting Strive, which trades on Nasdaq under the ticker ASST, held 19,882 BTC as of early July 2026. That puts it among the top 10 public corporate holders of Bitcoin globally.
The accumulation has been swift. The company’s stash grew from roughly 5,000 BTC in fall 2025 to nearly four times that amount through a combination of equity raises and structured financial instruments. In early June 2026 alone, Strive scooped up 2,500 BTC for $185 million.
Advertisement
Strive carries zero debt. No encumbered holdings. Cole has emphasized that Strive’s balance sheet could theoretically survive Bitcoin dropping to $0.01.
The firm also holds enough reserves to cover 18 months of dividend obligations.
The preferred stock play One of the more interesting tools in Strive’s toolkit is its Variable Rate Series A Perpetual Preferred Stock, trading under the ticker SATA. The instrument currently yields a 13% dividend rate.
Rather than selling Bitcoin to fund operations or pay dividends, Strive uses structured products like SATA to generate capital. That capital then gets deployed to buy more Bitcoin, amplifying the amount of BTC attributable to each common share.
Cole has also set a base case Bitcoin price target of $120,000 by year-end 2026. The firm wants to generate alpha over a simple buy-and-hold Bitcoin strategy. Cole’s background managing large fixed-income portfolios is clearly influencing how he thinks about Bitcoin treasury management, treating Bitcoin as the benchmark against which all capital allocation decisions are measured.
Acquiring the competition Strive made waves earlier by acquiring Semler Scientific, becoming the first public Bitcoin treasury company to buy another listed Bitcoin treasury business.
By absorbing Semler Scientific’s Bitcoin holdings and operations, Strive increased its total BTC position without relying solely on open-market purchases or additional equity raises.
What this means for investors The debt-free approach stands out in a market where several Bitcoin treasury companies have taken on significant leverage. If Bitcoin were to experience a sharp correction, the leveraged players would face margin calls and forced liquidations. Strive’s structure is designed to avoid that entirely.
The 13% yield on SATA preferred stock deserves scrutiny as well. A double-digit yield from a company whose primary asset is a volatile cryptocurrency should raise questions about sustainability, even with the current buffer of 18 months of dividend coverage. Investors should watch whether Strive can maintain that payout without eventually being forced to sell Bitcoin at inopportune times, which would undermine the entire “net buyer” thesis that Cole is pitching.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Japonsko podle ministryně financí Satsuki Katayamy postupuje podle plánu k legalizaci ETF na kryptoaktiva. Nové pravidlo má otevřít cestu k obchodování už příští rok.
Japan’s Finance Minister Satsuki Katayama announced at the Open QUICK 2026 seminar, organized by leading financial information provider QUICK on July 10, that the government is progressing as scheduled in the process to legalize crypto asset exchange-traded funds (ETFs) in the country. This development follows growing international interest in similar financial products abroad.
Regulatory shift for crypto assetsRecently, Japan’s House of Representatives approved a regulatory change transferring the oversight of spot crypto assets from the Payment Services Act to the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act. This move paves the way for crypto assets to be classified as fully regulated financial products, aligning their legal framework more closely with that of equities and bonds.
Finance Minister Satsuki Katayama confirmed that the government is proceeding with the legalization of crypto asset ETFs as originally intended.
The new regulation strengthens the legal basis for crypto asset ETFs to be listed and traded on Japanese exchanges. Under the current timetable, these products may begin trading on Japan’s markets as early as next year.
SBI develops two innovative fund offeringsIn May, SBI Holdings announced the launch of a new crypto asset ETF. The company’s plans include a dual-asset ETF structure that will provide investors with regulated access to both Bitcoin and XRP. As one of Japan’s largest financial groups, SBI operates across banking, brokerage, and asset management services.
In addition, SBI proposed a hybrid investment fund bringing together gold-based ETFs and crypto asset ETFs. In this structure, 51% of the portfolio would be allocated to gold ETFs, while the remaining 49% would be dedicated to crypto assets such as Bitcoin ETFs. This approach targets more cautious institutional and retail investors seeking diversified exposure.
ProductContentTarget audienceDual-asset ETFBitcoin and XRPInvestors seeking regulated crypto accessHybrid fund51% gold-based ETF, 49% crypto asset ETFMore cautious institutional and retail investorsAmbitious asset growth and competitionSBI aims to reach approximately 5 trillion yen, equivalent to $32 billion in assets under management, within three years of launching these products. This target represents a bold step for crypto-themed investment products within Japan’s financial sector and signals significant anticipated demand.
The company also hopes to secure an early market advantage by moving ahead of major Japanese financial groups such as Nomura and Rakuten Securities. With expanding regulatory clarity, competition in the crypto ETF space in Japan is expected to intensify in the coming period.
Ripple partnership comes to the foreSBI’s inclusion of XRP in its ETF plan aligns with its longstanding corporate partnership with Ripple. Known for its XRP-focused payment solutions, Ripple has established close business relationships in the Japanese market, and this collaboration continues to play a significant strategic role for SBI.
SBI is developing a structure uniting Bitcoin and XRP within the same fund, while also introducing a separate model that combines gold and crypto asset ETFs in a single portfolio.
Through these initiatives, SBI seeks to attract both aggressive crypto investors and more risk-averse clients, offering diverse routes to engage with digital assets under a regulated framework.
Market analysts expect SBI’s pioneering approach and regulatory developments to spur wider adoption of crypto ETFs in Japan, potentially altering the landscape for both institutional and retail participation in the coming years.
As Japan prepares to launch crypto asset ETFs, the convergence of traditional finance and blockchain technology is poised to reshape investment options in the country, with major players vying for leadership in a rapidly evolving sector.
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.
Ripple tento týden uvolnil z escrow zhruba 1 miliardu XRP, což analytik označil za běžnou měsíční praxi. Zároveň tvrdí, že firma míří k tomu, stát se první digitální bankou v USA a získat bankovní licenci.
Ripple released roughly $1 billion worth of XRP from its escrow this week, an amount large enough to catch the attention of traders watching the token’s price action closely.
Asked how to interpret the timing, given XRP’s recent price weakness, one analyst pushed back on the idea that the unlock signals anything unusual. “This is just the standard playbook for Ripple. We’ve seen this for years,” the analyst said, describing it as part of a broader redistribution of XRP into the hands of people who will actually use the underlying technology.
Ripple unlocks roughly 1 billion XRP tokens from its escrow, every single month. On a high-volume month, the company typically sells between 180 million and 300 million tokens, while Ripple typically relocks 70 to 80 percent of that supply right back into escrow. “It’s not as if Ripple sees the writing on the wall,” the analyst said. “This is standard business practice for the company.”
The bank narrative behind the numbers
The analyst pointed to a bigger story developing alongside the CLARITY Act, the PACE Act, separate legislation that could give Ripple direct access to the Federal Reserve system, too. Citing a previous interview, the analyst argued Ripple has “every incentive in the world” to lock up its remaining escrow and use it as collateral to become the first digital bank chartered in the United States.
A co-host on the discussion noted the relock percentage matters for gauging Ripple’s intent. A 90 percent relock this month would show Ripple is flush with capital, he said, pointing to active ETF inflows and corporate revenue as signs the company does not need to dilute the market by selling more tokens than necessary.
Reading the charts
Beyond the unlock, the hosts flagged a possible technical catalyst: XRP may be breaking out of a year-long descending channel, a move they said could align with historically favorable seasonal trends for the token heading into the fall.
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.
BlackRock has transferred 8,700 ETH—valued at approximately $15.81 million—to Coinbase Prime in the latest significant move tracked on the blockchain. According to data from Onchain Lens, the transfer originated from wallets linked to BlackRock’s Ethereum ETF, known by its ticker ETHA, coinciding with escalating outflows from the fund.
Transfer coincided with mounting ETF redemptionsOn the same day, BlackRock’s spot Ethereum ETF, ETHA, saw a net outflow of 7,240 ETH, representing around $12.67 million. This continued a trend of weak capital inflows into Ethereum ETFs, underlining continued pressure on the investment products amid challenging investor sentiment.
BlackRock, one of the world’s largest asset managers, remains under close observation in the cryptocurrency ETF sector. Coinbase Prime, on the other hand, serves as a leading platform offering custody, trading, and execution services tailored to institutional clients navigating the digital asset space.
According to Onchain Lens, 8,700 ETH was moved from BlackRock’s ETHA-linked wallets to Coinbase Prime during the exact period when substantial outflows hit ETHA.
Outflows deepen in Ethereum ETFsData for July 9 shows total daily outflows from spot Ethereum ETFs reaching $52.08 million. The largest single-fund withdrawal was recorded in Fidelity’s FETH. These figures highlight persistently weak short-term investor demand across the sector.
ETF flows have become a key barometer of overall market sentiment in recent quarters. June stood out as a period of heightened redemptions, with Ethereum ETFs seeing $690 million in net outflows—extending the negative streak that began in the first quarter of the year.
ItemAmountBlackRock transfer8,700 ETHTransfer value$15.81 millionETHA daily outflow7,240 ETHETHA daily outflow value$12.67 millionTotal daily Ethereum ETF outflow$52.08 millionNet figure after June$690 million net outflowMarket looks to Q3 signalsFollowing a lackluster first half of the year, investors have begun watching for signals that could shape the remainder of 2026. Historical data suggest that the third quarter has sometimes marked the beginning of recovery phases for Ethereum.
Analytics from CoinGlass reveal that since 2016, Ethereum has averaged an 8.08% return in third quarters, finishing seven out of the last eleven Q3 periods in positive territory. Notably, Q3 of 2025 saw a robust 66.55% surge.
Despite prior years hinting at stronger Q3 trends, investors are cautious, noting that a lack of new catalysts means past performance alone might not be enough to spark a sustainable recovery.
It is repeatedly emphasized that historical results are no guarantee of future outcomes. Over the past 24 hours, Ethereum posted a 2.6% gain, outperforming Bitcoin and climbing to $1,790. This price action fuels ongoing debate about whether ETH can break above its pattern of descending highs and lows.
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.
Ripple snížil nabídku RLUSD na Ethereu na zhruba 692 milionů USD, protože pokračuje v burnech tokenu. Na XRP Ledgeru je RLUSD stále více než na Ethereu.
Cover image via U.Today Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.
According to recent data from Ripple Stablecoin Tracker, Ripple USD (RLUSD) supply on the Ethereum network has shrunk to about $692 million as Ripple continues to adjust the stablecoin's circulating supply through token burns.
At the start of July, RLUSD supply on Ethereum was above $727 million; now this figure has decreased, with millions in Ripple USD burned on the Ethereum network in the last seven days.
$115.4 million was burned on the Ethereum blockchain in the last seven days as seen on the Ripple Stablecoin Tracker website, while $49.3 million was minted in the same timeframe. On July 29 alone, $25.9 million was burned on the Ethereum blockchain while $6.2 million in RLUSD was minted.
HOT Stories
The last 30 days saw significant RLUSD redemptions on the Ethereum blockchain; a total of $369.4 million was burned while $167.6 million was minted.
You Might Also Like
On the XRP Ledger, a total of $324.1 million was minted in the last 30 days and $217.6 million was burned. The total circulating supply of the RLUSD stablecoin is currently $1.556 billion.
RLUSD expands footprint on XRP LedgerWith RLUSD supply on Ethereum shrinking to $692 million, XRP Ledger remains ahead, hosting more RLUSD than Ethereum network. RLUSD's footprint on XRP has increased significantly, overtaking Ethereum supply for the first time in June.
You Might Also Like
RLUSD in circulation on the XRP Ledger grew from roughly $20 million at the end of 2024 to about $800 million by late June 2026, which is a 40-fold rise, with the largest increase occurring in May and June 2026.
Ripple USD is currently one of the most-traded issued assets on XRP. Its share of all on-chain trading climbed from under 1% to about 12% in 2026, and the RLUSD/XRP pair alone has cleared roughly $900 million over the last six months.
This week, Ripple received authorization of its Crypto Asset Service Provider (CASP) license from Luxembourg's Commission de Surveillance du Secteur Financier (CSSF). The authorization confirms Ripple as fully MiCA-compliant, with its solutions underpinned by XRP and RLUSD made available to financial institutions, corporates and businesses across all 30 countries of the European Economic Area.
An exploit drained roughly 16 million ADA, about $2.4 million, from 374 Cardano wallets in late June. What happened next is the interesting part: EMURGO, one of Cardano’s founding entities, announced a recovery path to return the assets within two weeks, while an independent forensic team including Mt. Gox veterans published competing findings. Crypto has spent fifteen years insisting stolen funds are gone forever. Cardano is running a live experiment in whether that has to be true, and every chain is watching the precedent.
Summary
A Cardano linked exploit drained about 16 million ADA from 374 wallets, with EMURGO outlining a two week plan to return affected users’ funds. Independent investigators challenged parts of the official account, putting competing forensic findings at the centre of how victims could qualify for restitution. The recovery effort is testing whether a blockchain ecosystem can compensate theft victims without reversing the ledger or compromising decentralization principles. Between June 21 and 23, an exploit connected to a protocol called SecondFi drained approximately 16 million ADA, worth about $2.4 million, from 374 addresses on Cardano. As crypto thefts go, it barely registers: the industry loses that much most weeks, and 2026’s running total makes $2.4 million a rounding error. The theft is not the story.
The story is the response. Within days, EMURGO, the commercial arm among Cardano’s founding entities, announced it had identified a recovery path for affected users and would begin returning assets within roughly two weeks, one week to build the recovery mechanism and one to test it. Simultaneously, an independent forensic team, Tibane Labs, whose personnel include investigators from the Mt. Gox case, crypto’s original catastrophic theft, published a competing analysis of what actually happened, disputing elements of the official account. And the affected community, 374 wallets whose owners did nothing wrong beyond using a protocol, became the test population for one of the most consequential questions in the industry: whether a blockchain ecosystem can make theft victims whole without breaking the properties that make it a blockchain.
That question has a fifteen-year history of being answered no, at enormous cost, and a handful of famous exceptions that each bent the rules in a different way. Ethereum rolled back its ledger once, in 2016, and the decision split the chain permanently. Exchanges have reimbursed hacks from their own treasuries. Protocols have negotiated with attackers, paying bounties for returns. But a founding entity engineering restitution for users of a third-party protocol, on a chain whose ledger will not be rolled back, through a mechanism built and tested in two weeks, is a new entry in the genre, and its outcome, success, failure, or messy middle, will be cited in every post-exploit governance fight for years. This piece covers the exploit as best the competing forensics allow, the anatomy of the recovery mechanism and the hard constraints it must respect, the restitution genre’s history and where this attempt sits in it, the moral-hazard and precedent questions that make recovery controversial even when it works, and what the two-week experiment will actually prove.
What happened, as far as the forensics agree The reconstruction begins with an unusual feature: there are two of them. The official account, from EMURGO and ecosystem responders, describes an exploit connected to SecondFi that extracted funds from user wallets across a three-day window, with 374 affected addresses and roughly 16 million ADA taken. The independent account, from Tibane Labs, a forensic team whose resume includes the Mt. Gox investigation, examines the same on-chain evidence and disputes elements of the official narrative, a disagreement whose specifics matter less, for this piece’s purposes, than its existence: three weeks after the event, the ecosystem’s official and independent investigators have not converged on a single story of what occurred.
That divergence is itself a finding about the state of crypto incident response.
On-chain data is perfectly preserved and public, which is why blockchain forensics can achieve certainties conventional financial investigation cannot; but the interpretation layer, which contract behavior was intended, which approvals were informed, where the boundary between exploit and design flaw sits, remains contested terrain where reputations, liability, and recovery eligibility all hang on the framing. The pattern is familiar from the anatomy of every major protocol disaster: the chain records what happened with perfect fidelity and no opinion, and the fight is always over what it meant. For the 374 wallet owners, the practical consequence is concrete: the recovery mechanism’s design, and who qualifies for it, depends on which reconstruction prevails, which is why competing forensics are not academic but constitutive of the restitution itself.
The scale deserves honest framing too. Sixteen million ADA is about 0.04% of circulating supply; $2.4 million is small enough that EMURGO could plausibly reimburse it from corporate resources without any mechanism at all. The choice to build a recovery process instead, engineered, tested, documented, signals that the exercise is understood by its architects as infrastructure, a template being built at low stakes for use at higher ones, which is exactly why it merits the scrutiny this piece gives it.
The mechanism: what recovery can and cannot mean Every recovery attempt on a public blockchain operates inside the same iron constraint: the ledger does not go backward. Cardano’s history will not be rewritten; the stolen ADA sits wherever the attacker moved it, validly, as far as the protocol is concerned. Whatever EMURGO’s two-week build produces, it is not an undo button, and enumerating what it can be maps the entire design space of crypto restitution.
The first family is interception: if stolen funds sit on exchanges or touch regulated venues, they can be frozen and clawed back through compliance channels, the path that has recovered the largest sums industry-wide and the reason attackers launder through mixers and cross-chain routes, the bridge-hopping playbook every major theft now follows. Its reach ends where the attacker’s operational security begins. The second is negotiation: bounty offers converting attackers into white hats retroactively, effective embarrassingly often, and dependent entirely on the attacker’s incentives.
The third is replacement: making victims whole from some treasury, corporate funds, protocol reserves, an ecosystem pool, without touching the stolen assets at all, which is restitution in the economic sense and abandons recovery in the literal one. The fourth, rarest and most Cardano-specific in this instance, is mechanism-level remediation: where the exploited system itself, a protocol’s contracts, a wallet standard, retains any authority over the affected assets or their derivatives, that authority can sometimes be repurposed to restore balances, the approach that requires exactly the one-week-build-one-week-test cadence EMURGO described.
The announced timeline suggests a combination weighted toward the third and fourth families, and the details, at this writing, remain unpublished, which is appropriate caution and also part of the test: restitution mechanisms revealed before deployment invite gaming by exactly the adversaries they respond to. What can be evaluated in advance is the constraint set any design must satisfy. It must distinguish victims from opportunists, on-chain, against forensics that are themselves disputed. It must not create authority that persists after the emergency, because a standing power to reassign user balances is a bigger vulnerability than any exploit. It must not require the base protocol to special-case the event, the line Cardano’s own decentralization principles, governed by DReps precisely to prevent unilateral intervention, will not permit crossing. And it must complete fast, because every week of delay compounds the harm and shrinks the interceptable share. Two weeks, against those constraints, is aggressive, and the aggressiveness is the announcement’s real content: EMURGO believes the mechanism exists and is discoverable on a schedule.
The victims’ fortnight: what waiting inside a recovery is like The 374 addresses deserve a section of their own, because restitution debates chronically abstract the people they are about, and this population is unusually legible. The affected wallets skew small: the $2.4 million total across 374 addresses averages under $6,500 per victim, savings-scale money for the retail holders who dominate Cardano’s famously loyal base, not fund-scale positions with legal departments and insurance. Their fortnight is a specific experience the industry has never bothered to design for: funds visibly gone, an official promise of return on a stated schedule, competing expert accounts of what even happened, and no action available except watching announcements, a limbo in which every day of official silence gets read as bad news and every community rumor moves through the victim population at chat speed.
Two features of this experience matter beyond sympathy. The first is that victim behavior during recovery windows is itself an attack surface: fake recovery portals, phishing campaigns impersonating the restitution process, and advance-fee scams targeting exactly this population appear within days of every publicized exploit, harvesting victims a second time, and the quality of official communication, clear channels, signed announcements, explicit warnings that no one will DM them, is as much a part of the mechanism’s success as its code. The second is that the fortnight sets the template for what users can expect from the ecosystem, and expectations are load-bearing: an institution-courting chain whose retail base learns that infrastructure failures get handled competently retains those users through the next incident, while a botched communication cycle converts a $2.4 million exploit into a permanent trust discount far more expensive than the theft. The recovery’s architects are, whether they framed it this way or not, running crypto’s first serious customer-service operation for a decentralized loss event, and the industry’s notes on it will be as valuable as the mechanism itself.
The genre: how crypto has answered theft before The SecondFi experiment enters a genre with a defined canon, and its position in that canon is what gives a $2.4 million incident industry-wide stakes.
The founding text is Ethereum’s 2016 DAO intervention: facing the theft of a double-digit share of all ETH, the community altered the ledger to reverse it, and the decision’s price was permanent schism, the unaltered chain persisting as Ethereum Classic and the precedent haunting every subsequent governance debate. The lesson the industry took was that base-layer intervention works exactly once, at existential scale, and costs a chain’s neutrality forever; no major network has repeated it, through losses orders of magnitude larger. The second tradition is the exchange model: centralized custodians from the Mt. Gox estate through the modern majors have run reimbursements, creditor processes, and insurance funds, restitution as a corporate liability question, effective where custody was centralized and irrelevant where it was not. The third is the protocol-treasury model: DeFi projects reimbursing exploits from token treasuries or negotiated bounties, case by case, with outcomes ranging from full restoration to governance-vote refusals that left victims holding the loss, a genre in which the liquidation-era bad-debt socializations supplied some of the bitterest chapters.
What the canon lacks, and what SecondFi supplies, is the founding-entity model on a decentralization-first chain: an ecosystem steward, not the thief’s counterparty, not the ledger’s operator, engineering restitution for a third-party protocol’s users without touching the base layer. Cardano is, in one sense, the natural venue for the attempt, its culture prizes formal process and its governance apparatus is unusually explicit, and in another sense the hardest one, because the same culture treats ledger neutrality as close to sacred, and the community debate around the recovery has featured exactly the voices, on exactly the lines, the DAO fight canonized: make victims whole versus code is law, with a decade of intervening history sharpening both sides.
The timing layer: why this experiment, this month The recovery’s context supplies half its meaning, because the experiment is running inside the most delicate month Cardano has had in years, and every audience the mechanism performs for is watching for its own reasons.
The institutional audience arrived the same week: Clearstream, Deutsche Borse’s post-trade arm with trillions in custody, added ADA to its regulated custody services on July 7, the most significant institutional on-ramp in the asset’s history, landing days into the recovery window. Institutions selecting crypto assets audit precisely the thing SecondFi tests, how an ecosystem behaves when its infrastructure fails, and the recovery’s execution is, functionally, a live due-diligence exhibit for every custody and ETF conversation the ecosystem hopes to have. The market audience is watching a fragile turn: ADA rebounded roughly 30% from multi-year lows in the same fortnight, whale wallets accumulated through the crash while on-chain usage thinned, and the recovery sits inside a sentiment window where a competence story compounds the bounce and an incompetence story validates the lows. And the governance audience is internal: Cardano’s DRep apparatus and its constitutional culture have spent two years building the machinery of collective decision-making, the Van Rossem fork is moving through exactly that machinery this month, and a founding entity executing an emergency restitution adjacent to, but not through, the formal governance process is itself a constitutional data point, read closely by everyone who cares where the ecosystem’s real authority lives.
The timing also explains the two-week aggression. A recovery that completes before the news cycle moves on is an asset; one that drags into autumn is a liability regardless of outcome, because unresolved incidents metastasize in exactly the audiences above. The schedule is the strategy, and its keeping or slipping is the first verdict the experiment will render.
Moral hazard, precedent, and the case against success The strongest objections to the recovery deserve their full weight, because they are not callousness; they are the accumulated lessons of the genre.
The moral-hazard argument runs: every successful restitution teaches users that losses get reversed, which erodes the diligence that self-custody requires, subsidizes risk-taking on unaudited protocols, and converts founding entities into implicit insurers of an ecosystem they cannot actually underwrite, a liability that compounds until an exploit arrives at a scale no one can cover, whereupon the implicit promise defaults at the worst moment. The precedent argument runs deeper: a proven capability to restore balances is a proven capability to reassign them, and every government, litigant, and pressure group learns from the proof; the neutrality that makes public chains valuable is precisely the credible inability to do favors, and each benevolent exception prices that credibility down. And the selection argument is the practical edge of both: 374 wallets got a recovery mechanism because their loss was legible, bounded, and adjacent to a founding entity’s reputation, while the ecosystem’s countless smaller victims, of rug pulls, drainers, and their own mistakes, get nothing, which converts restitution from a principle into a lottery whose winners are chosen by newsworthiness.
The answers, from the recovery’s defenders, are also serious. Users harmed by infrastructure failures they could not have evaluated are not moral-hazard cases but consumer-protection ones, and an industry courting mainstream adoption cannot tell mainstream users that their diligence should have included auditing smart contracts. Precedent cuts both ways: an ecosystem that visibly cares for its users compounds trust, the asset every chain claims to optimize, and the intervention line, no base-layer changes, no persistent authority, can be held publicly and verifiably. The honest synthesis is that both sides are describing real gradients, and the experiment’s value is precisely that it will convert the argument into evidence: a recovery that completes cleanly, inside its constraints, without scope creep, is a data point the make-whole side has never had on a decentralization-first chain, and a recovery that fails, stalls, or requires quiet rule-bending is the strongest code-is-law exhibit since the DAO.
The forensics fight: why the second opinion matters The Tibane Labs dimension deserves fuller treatment before the conclusion, because independent forensics entering a live recovery is nearly as novel as the recovery itself, and its implications outlast this incident.
Crypto incident analysis has historically been a monopoly of the responding party: the exploited protocol, the affected foundation, or the security firm they retain writes the post-mortem, and the community consumes it as fact, with no institution playing the adversarial-review role that accident investigation runs on in every mature industry. The entry of an unaffiliated team, staffed by investigators whose formative case was Mt. Gox, the theft whose decade of creditor litigation taught crypto what unresolved forensics cost, breaks the monopoly on exactly the incident where the official account carries financial consequences: eligibility for restitution flows from the accepted reconstruction, and a disputed reconstruction means disputed eligibility, appeals, and the exact procedural morass the two-week schedule cannot absorb.
The dispute’s existence, whatever its resolution, teaches two durable lessons. The first is that restitution mechanisms need an evidentiary standard before they need code: who adjudicates victimhood, against which account of events, with what appeal path, questions the traditional financial system answers with courts and regulators and that a decentralized recovery must answer with something, publicly, in advance, or improvise under fire. The second is that a market for adversarial blockchain forensics is forming, funded by exactly these disputes, and its emergence is unambiguously healthy: official accounts that expect independent review are written more carefully, mechanisms designed under scrutiny are designed better, and the industry’s post-mortem culture, long a public-relations genre, acquires the beginnings of a discipline. If the SecondFi fortnight produces nothing else, a precedent that serious incidents get second opinions would justify the episode’s place in the canon by itself.
What the two weeks will actually prove The experiment resolves into observable outcomes on a short clock, and the reading guide is worth writing in advance. Completion on schedule, with victims restored and the mechanism’s design published for audit, proves the founding-entity model viable at small scale and makes it the reference implementation every future incident invokes, on Cardano and beyond. Partial completion, some victims, disputed eligibility, timeline slippage, proves the harder truth that restitution’s binding constraint is not engineering but forensics, and elevates the Tibane-versus-official divergence from footnote to headline. Failure or quiet abandonment feeds the code-is-law canon and, less obviously, damages the specific asset that motivated the attempt: Cardano’s institutional courtship, the Clearstream custody listing landing the same week, leans on the ecosystem’s reputation for process, and a botched recovery is a process failure in the one arena institutions watch.
Beyond the fortnight, the durable questions are two. Whether the mechanism, whatever it is, gets generalized, documented, criticized, and hardened into ecosystem infrastructure, or remains a one-off that future victims cite and cannot access. And whether the precedent’s boundary holds: the recovery’s architects have implicitly drawn a line, exceptional response, no base-layer change, no standing power, and the entire value of the experiment, for Cardano and for the industry, depends on that line surviving its own success. Crypto has proven, exhaustively, that it can build systems where theft is final. The SecondFi fortnight is a test of something the industry has barely attempted: whether it can build justice on top of finality without dissolving the finality, and 374 wallets, $2.4 million, and one founding entity’s reputation are the stakes of the first controlled trial.
Beyond Cardano, the audiences with the most to learn are the ones building the systems where this question arrives at a thousand times the scale. The tokenized-asset rails now carrying equities and Treasuries onto public chains inherit, with the assets, traditional finance’s non-negotiable expectation that errors and thefts get remediated, and every institution wiring real-world value into blockchain settlement is implicitly betting that something like the SecondFi mechanism, generalized, standardized, and legally legible, will exist when it is needed. The corporate chains have answered the question by centralizing it, their operators can intervene, and everyone knows it, which is exactly the answer the decentralized ecosystems cannot give and the reason this experiment matters disproportionately: it is a test of whether the neutral chains can offer remediation without becoming the corporate ones. Regulators, meanwhile, read incidents like this in their own dialect: a shown industry capacity for orderly restitution is an argument against prescriptive consumer-protection mandates, and a shown incapacity is the argument for them, which places the fortnight’s outcome, improbably, inside the same policy conversations deciding the industry’s classification and custody rules.
The final word belongs to proportion, which has been this piece’s method throughout. Two point four million dollars is nothing; 374 wallets are a village; two weeks is a news cycle. And the question the village and the fortnight are answering, whether a system built so that no one can reverse anything can still, when it matters, make things right, is the oldest and largest open question in the industry, older than the DAO, as large as adoption itself. Small experiments that answer large questions are the best bargains in institutional history. This one cost sixteen million ADA, none of it EMURGO’s, and its findings, either way, will be cited for a decade.
For readers tracking the experiment live, the checklist is short: the mechanism’s technical publication, the first restored balances on-chain, the treatment of disputed addresses, the Tibane findings’ final form, and whether any authority created for the recovery is verifiably dismantled afterward. Five items, two weeks, one precedent, and the rare crypto story whose ending will be a matter of public record rather than public argument.
And a housekeeping note befitting a live experiment: this piece freezes a moving story at the midpoint of its two-week window, the mechanism’s details were unpublished at this writing, and the account above should be read against the recovery’s actual outcome, which, by the time most readers arrive here, will be a matter of on-chain record. That the story can be checked against the chain is, fittingly, the whole point of the system being tested.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Digital asset markets are volatile, and you can lose your entire investment. Incident details reflect public reporting as of July 9, 2026, and the recovery process described is ongoing; verify current status before relying on any account of it. Always do your own research.
Charles Hoskinson popřel, že odchází z Cardana, a označil tyto spekulace za „zcela nepravdivé“ a „naprostý výmysl“. Zdůraznil, že Input Output dál staví na síti a roadmapa pokračuje.
Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson (@IOHK_Charles) has moved to put an end to persistent speculation that he is stepping away from the project. In a new video posted on July 10, Hoskinson flatly denied the claims, calling them "categorically untrue" and "a complete fabrication."
How the rumors spread The exit narrative built over several months from clips stripped of their surrounding context. A New Year 2026 stream in which Hoskinson said he had "outgrown X" and was handing the account to curators circulated without the explicit denial he delivered in the same session. A 26-minute reform video in which he criticized the Cardano Foundation's governance structure also generated clips that left out the surrounding denial. According to Hoskinson, some users edited and manipulated older statements to create a false narrative, and the content spread quickly within the Cardano community.
The rumor spread far enough that a London taxi driver relayed it to visiting Cardano supporters, and contacts at a partner firm had passed the same claim to their own chief executive. Hoskinson asked supporters to share the rebuttal video with anyone still repeating the story.
Doubling down on Cardano, not stepping back Far from retreating, Hoskinson says Input Output remains one of the largest builders on the network, with the roadmap pressing ahead across Leios, RealFi and Pogen. He is also working on a political party initiative. He has also been explicit about his formal position: he holds no governance keys, cannot initiate a hard fork or protocol parameter change, has no treasury access, and does not own the Cardano trademark. The Plomin hard fork in January 2025 transferred key governance powers to ADA holders via DReps, meaning his influence is structural and reputational rather than executive.
The denial comes against a difficult backdrop. EMURGO, one of Cardano's three founding organizations and the developer of the SecondFi wallet, announced it is stepping down from its role in the Pentad governance group to focus on recovering user funds following a $2.4 million exploit. The SecondFi wallet, a rebranded version of the well-known Yoroi wallet that EMURGO relaunched earlier this year, was compromised through a flaw in its address generation system. Attackers exploited that vulnerability to drain roughly 16 million ADA from 374 wallets, valued at approximately $2.4 million at the time.
Cardano's $ADA fell about 5% after the EMURGO announcement, compounding existing pressure. ADA's price action has struggled near multi-year lows, trading around $0.16, roughly 94% below its 2021 all-time high of $3.09. Open calls for Hoskinson to step aside have also surfaced within parts of the community, though he gave no indication he intends to do so. An active funding standoff between DReps and Input Output's research budget also remains unresolved, with Hoskinson warning that the ecosystem could lose scientists if IO's research funding fails.
Sources
Crypto News: Hoskinson Denies Cardano Exit Rumors
The Block: EMURGO Steps Down From Pentad After Wallet Exploit
BeInCrypto: Charles Hoskinson Addresses Rumors He Is Quitting Cardano
Circle zveřejnil open-source startovací sady nástrojů Agent Stack pro LangChain a Claude Agent SDK, které umožňují AI agentům přímo posílat a přijímat USDC. Sady podporují i x402 transakce a on-chain služby.
Circle just handed AI developers a gift bag: open-source starter kits that plug USDC payments directly into the AI frameworks where most agents are actually being built. The kits, now live on GitHub, target LangChain and the Claude Agent SDK, two of the most widely adopted platforms for building autonomous AI agents.
What Circle actually shipped The open-sourced Agent Stack starter kits provide ready-to-use code that connects AI agents to Circle’s infrastructure. That means developers can give their agents wallets, let them send and receive USDC, and interact with onchain services, all without building payment plumbing from scratch.
Advertisement
The kits build on Circle’s broader Agent Stack, which launched on May 11, 2026. That initial release introduced several foundational components, including command-line interface utilities for developers, permissioned agent wallets with built-in access controls, and gas-free nanopayments that allow USDC transfers as small as $0.000001.
The starter kits also support x402-compatible transactions. The x402 protocol is essentially the HTTP 402 “Payment Required” status code brought to life: a machine-readable way for services to demand payment before granting access. When an AI agent hits an x402-enabled endpoint, it can autonomously decide to pay, receive the service, and move on.
Circle’s Agent Marketplace adds another layer. It functions as a discovery hub where AI agents can find and transact with other agents or services.
Why open source matters here The choice to target LangChain and the Claude Agent SDK is also telling. LangChain has become something of an industry standard for building LLM-powered applications, and Anthropic’s Claude SDK is rapidly gaining ground among enterprise developers who prioritize safety and controllability.
The bigger financial picture Circle raised $222 million through a presale of its ARC token, which valued the Arc network at $3 billion.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Algorand za poslední čtvrtletí zaznamenal více než 1,8 milionu nových nasazení chytrých kontraktů, což znamená růst aktivity o 25,7 %. Aktivita vývojářů roste, i když cena ALGO zůstává kolem 0,08 USD.
Algorand quietly racked up over 1.8 million new smart contract deployments in the past quarter, a 25.7% increase in activity that puts the Layer 1 blockchain in a peculiar position. Developer interest is clearly climbing. The token price, not so much.
The contract deployment surge, tracked by Token Terminal, represents a meaningful acceleration for a network that many crypto observers had written off during the bear market doldrums. For context, Algorand’s January 2026 Algo Insights Report showed 808,000 smart contracts deployed at that point, marking a 31.5% increase at the time.
The numbers behind the builder boom On-chain asset creation on Algorand surged 239% month-over-month, according to the Algorand Foundation’s own evaluation. Contract deployments specifically grew 47% in a recent monthly period.
Advertisement
The most tangible proof point might be Lofty AI, a real estate tokenization platform built on Algorand. As of early July 2026, Lofty crossed $100 million in total value locked. That’s capital flowing into tokenized real-world assets.
Active wallet growth and transaction volumes have also increased alongside the contract deployment numbers.
The quantum play The Algorand Foundation published a formal roadmap for post-quantum cryptography in June 2026, setting a target of comprehensive quantum resistance by the end of 2027. The initiative builds on work that started back in 2022.
The price disconnect investors should watch ALGO currently trades around $0.08. The disconnect between on-chain activity and token price isn’t unique to Algorand, but the gap here is particularly stark given that contract deployments more than doubled since January, asset creation exploded by 239%, a major DApp hit $100M in TVL, and the foundation is executing on a multi-year quantum security roadmap.
Algorand’s tokenomics have faced criticism over the years regarding early investor unlocks and foundation distributions, which may be suppressing price appreciation even as fundamentals improve. The real-world asset tokenization angle gives Algorand a differentiated narrative, with Lofty AI’s $100M TVL milestone as concrete evidence. Ethereum, Avalanche, and Polygon are all aggressively courting the RWA sector.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Aave V3 On zkSync Era Gives DeFi Lending Another Push Into ZK Rollups is the kind of crypto story that looks simple at headline level but becomes more useful once you place it inside the wider market backdrop. Aave’s expansion strategy is a good lens for the broader DeFi market: liquidity follows users, but users also follow trusted liquidity venues.
The reason it deserves attention today is not that one announcement or filing magically changes the whole market. It is that the update adds another data point to a sector still trying to work out where capital, users, and regulation are actually moving.
For more details, visit the official Governance platform.
TL;DR Aave DAO approved steps to deploy Aave V3 pools on zkSync Era.The move would bring more lending liquidity into a ZK-rollup environment.It shows major DeFi protocols are still expanding across scaling networks. What The Governance Move Changes Aave V3 deployments give users familiar lending and borrowing tools on new networks.
zkSync Era offers a scaling environment built around zero-knowledge rollup technology.
DeFi is in a more mature phase now. The market is less impressed by vague promises and more interested in where liquidity actually goes, which networks get deployments, and which governance decisions can change usage. That makes protocol-level votes and launches worth watching.
Why DeFi Liquidity Keeps Spreading The DAO approval process also shows how major DeFi protocols are still using governance to decide where liquidity should go next.
The question is whether these moves create practical depth. More chains, more pools, and more governance proposals only matter if users find better pricing, easier access, or stronger risk controls.
For NewsBTC readers, the practical takeaway is to avoid treating this as an isolated headline. The stronger read is to connect it with the current market environment: liquidity is still selective, regulatory pressure has not disappeared, and the projects that keep shipping useful updates are the ones most likely to hold attention when the cycle gets noisy.
That does not mean the story should be stretched beyond what the source supports. The cleaner approach is to keep the facts tight, explain the mechanism, and show readers why it may matter if follow-up data confirms the same direction over the next few sessions.
In other words, this is a development to watch rather than a guaranteed turning point. Crypto moves quickly, but the useful signals are usually the ones that still make sense after the first reaction fades.
The important thing for readers is context. A single development rarely defines the market on its own, but a series of source-backed updates can show where momentum is building. That is why this article keeps the focus on the specific mechanism in play, the source behind it, and the reason traders or builders may care today.
This article is based on information from governance.aave.com.
This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.
Uniswap Labs navrhla aktivovat protokolové poplatky pro vybrané pooly v Uniswap v4; návrh už míří do pětidenního hlasování na Snapshotu. Kritici varují, že fee switch u v4 může poškodit likviditu.
Temp check would extend the fee switch to Uniswap's newest architecture, drawing an early warning that the move "risks killing the protocol."
Uniswap Labs on July 7 proposed activating protocol fees on a subset of Uniswap v4 pools, extending the fee rollout that DAO voters approved under the UNIfication package to the exchange's newest and most flexible pool architecture.
The temperature check went to a five-day Snapshot vote running July 7-12, with an onchain vote scheduled to begin the week of July 13. Because Uniswap's GovernorBravo contract caps proposals at 10 actions, Uniswap Labs said two onchain votes will be posted in parallel to cover all the chains involved.
UNI is up 6.8% to $3.57 in the past 24 hrs, giving Uniswap a market capitalization of $2.2 billion, according to CoinGecko, while ETH is up almost 3%. The token remains down more than 90% from its May 2021 record of about $44.92, though it had climbed more than 40% over the past month amid the UNIfication burns and Uniswap's expansion onto new venues.
UNIfication RolloutThe proposal follows the UNIfication overhaul, which DAO members passed in December with near-unanimous support and which turned on protocol fees and directed them toward burning UNI. It builds on four earlier fee proposals, numbered #93 through #96, and uses the same expedited governance track those proposals established.
Protocol fees are now live across all v2 and v3 pools on 11 chains: Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, Celo, OP Mainnet, Soneium, X Layer, Worldchain, Zora, BNB Chain and Polygon. Uniswap Labs said the protocol set a record last month, citing the UNIBurnBot account's report that 186,000 UNI were burned in a single day.
A New Fee System for v4v4's design forced a different approach. Where v2 pools carry a single static fee tier and v3 pools carry several, v4's hooks allow potentially unlimited fee tiers, and a pool's fee can change from one block to the next. Setting a fee on each pool individually is not workable at that scale.
To handle it, the proposal introduces a V4 Fee Controller split across two contracts. A V4FeePolicy contract computes the fee for any pool from rules that governance defines, and can be swapped out if the logic needs to change. A V4FeeAdapter contract enforces any per-pool overrides governance has set, otherwise applies the policy's fee, pushes it to the pool and routes the proceeds to a TokenJar contract on each chain. The policy sorts each pool into a "family" based on its characteristics, then resolves the fee from the most specific applicable rule down to a global default. The contracts are published in Uniswap's protocol-fees repository.
The temp check would switch on fees for three families: static fee pools without hooks, pools launched through Continuous Clearing Auctions, and aggregator hook pools that route external liquidity into v4. Static and CCA pools follow a curve pegged to a proportion of each pool's LP fee. Aggregator hooks carry a flat fee with a 25x multiplier that lifts the cap to 250 basis points, set at a 10 bps family default and 3 bps for select stable pairs on most chains, and 3 bps and 1 bps respectively on Base. Uniswap Labs stressed the proposal does not enable fees on any v4 pools outside those families. As with v2 and v3, collected fees fund UNI burns, with tokens accumulated on L2s and alternative L1s bridged back to Ethereum and sent to the 0xdead address.
LP PushbackThe proposal drew immediate opposition from Guillaume Lambert, founder of the options protocol Panoptic, who disclosed he had voted "Abstain" on UNIfication and argued the fee switch should never touch v4.
"Turning on the v4 fee switch risks killing the protocol," Lambert wrote, contending that liquidity providers are "structurally short convexity" and, by his analysis, already earn less than the volatility they take on. Taxing v4 pools without compensating LPs, he said, would leave them "nowhere to go except to other AMMs/UniV3-forks." He said he could only support the move if LPs were directly compensated with sustained UNI incentives running "practically forever until organic activity returns."
Not all early feedback was critical. Forum participant Abel189 backed the proposal, calling a deterministic, on-chain fee policy "a more scalable approach than configuring individual pools one by one" and praising the gradual rollout across specific families.
NEC a Ava Labs podepsaly memorandum o porozumění (MOU) ohledně vývoje architektury, která na Avalanche spojí biometrické ověření identity a vypořádání plateb ve stablecoinech v jednom kroku. Biometrická data se přitom nebudou ukládat on-chain.
Biometric Identity Comes to Avalanche@NEC and @Avax have signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to jointly develop a whitepaper outlining how NEC's biometric FaceVC technology and Avalanche's multi-chain architecture could verify identity and settle stablecoin payments in a single step, without ever storing biometric data on-chain. The deal marks a significant step toward bringing sovereign identity verification into decentralized infrastructure.
NEC brings considerable real-world scale to the collaboration. The Japanese technology giant operates more than 1,000 active biometric systems across 70 countries and regions, covering applications from immigration control and national ID programs to banking and public safety. Its FaceVC product issues verifiable credentials anchored to NEC's face recognition technology, allowing a business to confirm both the credential and the identity of the person presenting it, addressing a longstanding gap in digital verification where impersonation remains difficult to detect.
The integration is set to use @Avaxsubnets, Avalanche's customizable Layer 1 framework, to host biometric-secured transaction flows. By anchoring authentication to hardware-linked biometric data, the architecture is designed to remove reliance on traditional mnemonic seed phrases, a vulnerability that has led to significant losses for both retail and institutional users.
Why It Matters for Institutional Blockchain AdoptionThe partnership fits into a broader push by Ava Labs to position $AVAX as enterprise-grade infrastructure. Avalanche's multi-chain design allows institutions to deploy purpose-built networks with their own compliance rules while remaining connected to the wider ecosystem, a feature that has attracted partners ranging from asset managers to government agencies in recent quarters.
For NEC, the move extends its biometrics footprint into the blockchain space. The company's algorithms are rated number one for speed and accuracy by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), and it has spent decades deploying identity systems at a government and enterprise scale. Pairing that track record with Avalanche's settlement speed creates a credible case for biometric-verified decentralized services.
The planned whitepaper will detail how the combined system handles identity confirmation and payment finality without exposing sensitive biometric data on a public ledger, a design consideration that will likely be central to any regulatory review of the technology.
Sources:
Avalanche Official Website, Ava Labs and NEC MOU Announcement
NEC Face Recognition: Biometric Authentication
NEC Technical Journal: FaceVC and DID/VC Identity Verification
RWA ekosystém Solany se v první polovině roku 2026 čtyřnásobil na rekordních 3,62 miliardy USD. Solana je nyní třetím největším blockchainem pro tokenizovaná RWA s podílem 10,39 %.
The real-world asset (RWA) ecosystem of Solana has quadrupled in value during the first half of 2026.
It grew from $873 million in January to a record $3.62 billion in July. The surge was driven by rapid growth in tokenized stocks, rising institutional adoption, and record trading activity.
According to the latest ecosystem data, Solana is now the third-largest blockchain for tokenized RWAs, with a 10.39% market share. The network hosts 2,119 tokenized assets across 295,853 holders. Its RWA ecosystem has also grown 20.91% over the past 30 days.
Meanwhile, Solana’s stablecoin supply has surpassed $16 billion, making it the second-largest among all blockchains. The large stablecoin base has provided deep dollar liquidity for tokenized asset trading.
Solana RWA Data Tokenized Asset Trading Reaches New Highs Notably, Solana recorded its strongest quarter for tokenized assets in Q2 2026. Spot trading volume climbed to $5.77 billion, up 7.4 times from the $775 million recorded during the second half of 2025.
June alone generated more than $2 billion in tokenized asset trading. That marked the highest monthly volume ever recorded on any blockchain.
The network also led global tokenized equity trading during the week of June 15–21. It processed $1.298 billion of the $1.324 billion traded worldwide, accounting for roughly 97% of the market.
SpaceX Listing Boosts Tokenized Stock Activity Solana’s tokenized stock ecosystem received a major boost after SpaceX’s June 12 Nasdaq listing. Tokenized SpaceX shares launched on the blockchain the same day.
SpaceX-related tokens generated $1.19 billion in June trading volume, accounting for 31% of the month’s total. Backpack Securities’ SPCX contributed $1.08 billion, while xStocks’ SPCXx added $852 million.
On June 24, Solana’s tokenized stock market reached a record $644 million in daily trading volume. The milestone highlights the network’s shift from a memecoin-focused blockchain toward a hub for tokenized financial assets.
Institutional Offerings Continue to Expand The ecosystem has continued to attract institutional issuers and infrastructure providers.
Backed Finance’s xStocks platform now offers 134 tokenized stocks. It has surpassed $3 billion in cumulative on-chain trading volume and attracted more than 57,000 unique holders.
Solflare, which reports 4 million monthly active users, has integrated all xStocks assets and added a Google Pay on-ramp.
Ondo Global Markets has also launched more than 200 tokenized U.S. stocks and ETFs. At launch, those assets represented roughly 65% of all Solana RWAs.
Meanwhile, Jupiter Lend has added tokenized SPYx, QQQx, NVDAx, and TSLAx as collateral. Users can now borrow against tokenized equities within DeFi.
Institutions Deepen Solana Adoption Institutional participation has accelerated across the network. BlackRock’s BUIDL fund has deployed $615 million on-chain through Securitize. It is now the largest individual RWA position on Solana.
Citigroup completed a tokenized Bill of Exchange settlement pilot with PwC in February. Institutional market maker B2C2 has also chosen Solana as its primary stablecoin settlement network.
Financial firms, including SoFi and R3, have expanded their enterprise banking and tokenization initiatives on Solana. The moves reinforce the blockchain’s growing role in institutional-grade digital asset infrastructure.
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.
Z peněženky napojené na genesis distribuce Solany zmizelo zhruba 14,2 milionu USD v SOL. Útočník tokeny nejprve unstakoval a poté je přes bridge přesunul na Ethereum.
Someone just made off with roughly $14.2 million in SOL tokens from a wallet connected to Solana’s genesis distribution. The attacker, or attackers, executed a methodical sequence: unstake the tokens, then bridge them over to Ethereum, effectively moving the funds off the Solana chain entirely.
What happened The irregular activity involved a series of unstaking transactions followed by cross-chain transfers. Someone gained access to a wallet holding staked SOL, pulled the tokens out of staking, and then used a bridge protocol to shuttle the assets over to Ethereum.
The specific bridge protocol used in this case hasn’t been publicly identified. Neither has the exact wallet address, the method of compromise, or the identity of whoever was behind it. What is known is that the loss totals approximately $14.2 million, and the wallet had direct ties to Solana’s genesis distribution.
Advertisement
Genesis distribution refers to Solana’s initial non-circulating token allocations. These were tokens set aside at the network’s launch for early backers, the Solana Foundation, ecosystem development, and other foundational purposes.
The attack vector remains unclear Nobody has confirmed exactly how the attacker gained access. The three most likely scenarios are private-key compromise, a phishing attack, or exploitation of a smart-contract vulnerability. The pattern of unstaking followed by bridging is consistent with private-key theft. An attacker who controls the keys can do whatever the legitimate owner could do, including unstaking and moving funds freely.
This isn’t the first time Solana-linked wallets have been hit with this exact playbook. Previous incidents in the ecosystem have followed remarkably similar sequences, suggesting that attackers have identified this as an efficient method for extracting and laundering stolen SOL.
What this means for investors So far, there’s no indication that this incident has triggered a broader sell-off in SOL or meaningfully impacted market prices. There is no evidence of a wider attack campaign targeting multiple genesis wallets or any vulnerability in the Solana protocol itself.
If the attacker attempts to liquidate through centralized exchanges, there’s a chance some portion could be frozen or recovered. If they route through mixers or decentralized protocols, recovery becomes exponentially harder.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Circle's $USDC now accounts for just 46% of Solana's stablecoin supply, its lowest share in more than 2 years.
According to DefiLlama data, $USDC's share has fallen to 46.13%, while $USDT's share has risen to 16.42%. Other stablecoins now collectively account for more than 26% of Solana's stablecoin market, highlighting broader liquidity diversification across the network.
Drift Fallout Changed Community Sentiment The shift follows the April 1 Drift exploit, which sparked widespread criticism of Circle across the Solana ecosystem. After attackers reportedly moved more than $230M via Circle's Cross Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP), many ecosystem participants urged DeFi users to swap $USDC for $USDT. Critics argued that Circle should have frozen the stolen funds.
When challenged on the decision, Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire said the company would not intercept funds without legal precedent, describing the situation as a "moral quandary." Meanwhile, Tether earned goodwill across parts of the Solana community after supporting Drift during its recovery efforts, strengthening $USDT's standing among many users.
Fresh Legal Challenges Add to Pressure Circle now faces renewed scrutiny following a July 8 report by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. According to the report, law enforcement authorities in Wisconsin and New York accused Circle of refusing to assist in freezing or recovering $USDC linked to scams. Wisconsin prosecutors filed a criminal complaint alleging that Circle failed to comply with a court order requiring the recovery of stolen assets.
Although the complaint involves a single misdemeanor count, former FBI financial crime expert Karen Greenway noted that criminal charges against a major financial firm are highly unusual.
Circle rejected the allegations, calling the complaint meritless. The company argued that it lacked the technical ability to comply with the order and maintained that the Wisconsin court lacked jurisdiction.
Stablecoin issuers such as Circle also face pressure from a changing regulatory landscape. Polymarket now places the odds of the CLARITY Act passing in 2026 at 40%, down from 82% in February.
Senator Cynthia Lummis recently warned that failure to pass the CLARITY Act could delay meaningful U.S. stablecoin legislation until 2030, turning what could have been a 1-year delay into a 4-year setback.
Solana's Stablecoin Economy Continues to Expand The decline in $USDC's market share comes even as Solana's stablecoin economy continues to grow at a record pace. During the first half of 2026, Solana recorded $1.12T in peer-to-peer stablecoin volume, up 72%, alongside 83.6M peer-to-peer transactions, up 37%. Active wallets reached an all-time high of 4.3M.
Retail transfers between $100 and $1,000 totaled a record $13.5B. Institutional transfers above $20,000 reached $1.07T, while micropayments between $0.50 and $100 climbed to an all-time high of $1.50B.
Circle has continued to expand its infrastructure despite a decline in market share. Gateway, launched in July 2025 and integrated with Solana in January 2026, allows users and businesses to access a unified $USDC balance across supported blockchains without manual bridging or third-party liquidity. The stablecoin giant recently reported that lifetime Gateway volume has now surpassed $4.5B.
Circle Scores a Major Regulatory Win Despite mounting competitive and legal challenges, Circle recently secured one of its biggest regulatory milestones. The U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency granted final approval for Circle to establish Circle National Trust, a national trust bank operating as First National Digital Currency Bank, N.A.
The approval strengthens $USDC infrastructure through federally regulated custody, with reserve management planned as a future capability, while placing Circle's trust operations under direct federal oversight.
Investors welcomed the development, sending Circle's stock, $CRCL, more than 15% higher to around $71 following the announcement before retracing to its current price of $66.
While $USDC remains Solana's largest stablecoin by a wide margin, its share has fallen below 50% for the first time in more than 2 years. With growing competition, evolving regulation, and changing community sentiment, the battle for stablecoin dominance on Solana appears far from over.
Read More on SolanaFloor Claynosaurz’s HEEBOO Studio Introduces $HEEBOO Fan Token’s Public Sale Through Metaplex Genesis
Solana Memecoin Traders Flock to RobinHood - Will it Last?
Jihokorejská superaplikace Toss s přibližně 30 miliony registrovaných uživatelů testuje stablecoin navázaný na won na platformě Optimism OP Stack. Tříměsíční pilot má ověřit soulad s KYC, AML i ochranou soukromí na veřejném blockchainu.
Optimism says Toss is the fourth regulated financial institution in a year to pick the OP Stack, after Bitpanda, Kraken and Mitsui.
Toss, the South Korean fintech app with roughly 30 million registered users, is testing a Korean won stablecoin on Optimism's OP Stack, Optimism said on X Wednesday. The proof of concept also involves Sunnyside Labs, whose "Privacy Boost" tool is meant to shield transaction data on a public blockchain while preserving compliance access.
Optimism, the company behind the OP Stack framework used to build layer-2 networks, called the tie-up the fourth time in a year a regulated financial institution has adopted the OP Stack in a new market, following Bitpanda's Vision Chain in Europe, Kraken's Ink in the US and Mitsui's Zipangcoin in Japan.
Kyle Jenke, chief business officer at OP Labs, said the pilot is "about demonstrating that the OP Stack can meet the compliance, privacy, and performance standards that regulated financial institutions require." Toss chief business officer Q-Ha Steve Kim said the company aims "to build a highly trusted, compliant digital financial infrastructure tailored to the Korean market," using the same post.
Three-Month TestThe arrangement runs as a three-month proof of concept, according to a post from crypto researcher Jay Chan, covering whether a financial institution can manage settlement, meet KYC and anti-money-laundering requirements, and protect transaction privacy on a public chain at the same time. Toss operates over 500,000 online and offline payment networks, per a summary of Kim's comments on the deal.
Optimism's post frames the collaboration as a test rather than a commitment to launch a stablecoin.
The OP Stack already underpins Sony's Soneium, Uniswap's Unichain and OKX's X Layer, among others, giving Toss an established multi-chain ecosystem to plug into rather than building isolated infrastructure. Whether the pilot converts into a live KRW stablecoin will depend on regulatory sign-off in South Korea, which has not yet finalized its stablecoin licensing framework.
Beefy Finance spustila na Aave Monad nové single-asset autocompounding vaulty pro AUSD, USDC, USDT a WETH. Stablecoiny nabízejí zhruba 9 % APY, WETH asi 4 % APY.
Yield optimizers have one core promise: take the tedious work of manual compounding off your plate and put those gains back to work automatically. Beefy Finance just made that promise a lot more interesting for Aave users, rolling out new single-asset autocompounding vaults on Aave’s Monad deployment with stablecoin yields sitting around 9% APY.
The vaults cover four assets: AUSD, USDC, USDT, and WETH. The stablecoin vaults are advertising roughly 9% APY, while the WETH vault comes in around 4% APY. For context, earning 9% on a dollar-pegged asset in a protocol with over $100M in deposits is the kind of number that makes traditional savings accounts look embarrassing.
What Beefy is actually doing here Aave distributes lending incentives to depositors on top of the base borrowing yield. Without automation, you would need to manually claim those incentives, swap them, and redeposit. Beefy’s vaults harvest the accumulated Aave incentives on your behalf, reinvest them back into the same position, and your balance compounds over time without you lifting a finger.
Advertisement
The single-asset structure is worth emphasizing. These are not liquidity pool vaults, which means depositors are not exposed to impermanent loss, the mechanism where providing two-sided liquidity to a pool can leave you holding less value than if you had just kept the assets. Single-asset vaults carry a cleaner risk profile, which matters for anyone deploying significant capital into stablecoins.
The timing is deliberate. Aave’s Monad market went live around July 2, 2026, and crossed $100M in total deposits within the first two days of operation.
Beefy’s position in the yield aggregator landscape Beefy operates on over 20 chains and runs hundreds of individual vaults, with total value locked ranging between $197M and $420M depending on market conditions.
For Aave specifically, this is a meaningful integration. Aave is one of the largest and most battle-tested lending protocols in DeFi. Beefy layering autocompounding on top of that foundation gives users a way to extract more value from an already trusted venue.
What this means for investors watching DeFi yields A 9% APY on stablecoins is not guaranteed to last forever. Lending incentive rates fluctuate based on utilization, the size of the incentive pool, and how many depositors pile in. What the vaults do offer is a maximally efficient way to capture whatever yield is available at any given moment. If the rate sits at 9% today and drifts to 6% in three months, autocompounding means you will have locked in more of the 9% period than a manual depositor who only reinvested once a month.
The WETH vault at around 4% APY tells a slightly different story. ETH holders using this vault are earning a yield on an asset they might otherwise simply hold. The 4% figure is more modest, but for long-term ETH holders who were not going to sell anyway, it represents pure incremental return without adding significant complexity.
Aave’s Monad market pulling in over $100M in deposits within two days signals genuine appetite for yield on this chain. As of July 10, 2026, mainstream outlets like CoinDesk and The Block have not extensively covered Beefy’s announcement, suggesting the launch has so far been communicated primarily through Beefy’s own social media channels, targeted at its existing user base.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Těžaři Bitcoinu masivně přecházejí k AI infrastruktuře, aby kompenzovali tlak na ziskovost po halvingu. Zároveň rostou otázky kolem správy a řízení společnosti kvůli insider prodejům akcií.
Facing profitability under pressure since the last halving in April 2024, bitcoin mining companies have made a strategic pivot towards AI. Enough to excite Wall Street. However, a report from Blocksbridge Consulting published on July 9, 2026, paints an alarming reality. It highlights massive stock sales by executives and board members of some companies. More details in the following paragraphs!
In Brief Bitcoin miners accelerate their diversification towards AI infrastructures to offset the drop in mining profitability after the halving. Several mining company executives sold shares after the rise in BTC prices. The current situation fuels questions about corporate governance and investor confidence. An industrial pivot forced by the realities of the Bitcoin network At the end of 2025, the global Bitcoin network hashrate had reached a historic peak of 1,160 EH/s. This intensified competition. According to sector reports from CoinShares, the weighted average cost to validate a single BTC was about $80,000 in Q4 2025 for publicly listed entities. Result: 15 to 20% of the global fleet of obsolete ASIC machines were forced to operate at a loss.
To improve their cash flows, major players in bitcoin mining chose to convert their energy capacities to power supercomputers. A striking example: the signing of a 20-year lease contract between TeraWulf and Anthropic. The deal is valued at nearly $19 billion.
For many, this diversification attests to the transformation of the BTC mining industry’s business model. Some analysts nonetheless raise a fundamental point: this requires significant capital. This explains why many firms have had to liquidate their own bitcoin reserves. This is notably the case for Marathon Digital Holdings (MARA), which sold more than 15,000 BTC from its institutional treasury. The latest bitcoin sale dates back to April 2026.
Bitcoin and insider sales: the TeraWulf case closely scrutinized by crypto investors On June 29, Beowulf E&D Holdings, an entity managed by CEO Paul Prager, declared the sale of 275,000 TeraWulf shares. The weighted average price stands at $26.596. This represents about $7.3 million in gross proceeds. This operation attracts particular attention as it occurs one week before the announcement of a 20-year lease with Anthropic for AI infrastructure.
According to data, Prager and his entity have sold a total of about 1.59 million bitcoin-linked shares since the end of March. This equals approximately $32.7 million, with an average price of about $20.55.
On July 6, TeraWulf confirms its lease with Anthropic. According to the official press release, it is expected to generate nearly $19 billion in contractual revenue on 401 megawatts of critical load. At the same time, the company sold its 50.1% stake in the Abernathy joint venture for about $450 million.
The TeraWulf case is not isolated in the bitcoin miners universe engaged in AI CEO of Cipher Digital, Tyler Page, filed a transfer request for 112,500 shares worth $2.38 million on July 8. This action is part of a Rule 10b5-1 plan adopted in December 2025.
At Riot Platforms, CEO Jason Les sold:
175,000 shares for $4.2 million in May; an additional 250,000 shares for $7.03 million on June 22. As for Core Scientific, its legal officer sold 140,000 shares for $3 million on July 6. This brings his total sales to about 260,000 shares and $5.9 million.
That’s not all! At Hut 8, a director also sold 20,000 shares on May 21 for about $2 million. Admittedly, these transactions were executed under pre-established plans, but they still fuel doubt about the alignment between bitcoin mining executives and public shareholders.
The bitcoin mining sector faces another major challenge An analysis by VanEck published on June 16 estimates the short-term funding deficit at about $50 billion. However, this figure could rise to $221 billion to cover all future AI infrastructure needs.
Source: VanEck Research To bridge this gap, bitcoin miners have three options:
dilute shareholders through new share issuances; incur debt in a still high interest rate environment; sell part of their bitcoin reserves. Some have already started liquidating positions. If projections hold, AI could represent up to 70% of some bitcoin miners’ revenues by the end of 2026. Raising questions about the future role of BTC mining in their business model.
Bitcoin and governance: the IREN case and the question of stock tokens On June 30, the board of the former bitcoin miner turned AI cloud actor IREN approved the grant of over 18 million free shares in total to its two co-CEOs, William and Daniel Roberts, over a combined lock-up period of six years. The company assures that no other grants will be made before 2031.
The decision is not unanimous within the crypto community. Many point to the extent of dilution for bitcoin mining shareholders. Yet, IREN’s AI strategy has not yet proven sustainable profitability. Result: the stock price has fallen considerably.
What consequences for investors? For holders of shares linked to bitcoin mining, three points deserve particular attention:
the recurrence of insider sales during uptrends, an indicator of confidence; the method chosen to bridge the funding gap identified by VanEck; the real economics of signed contracts, beyond announcement figures. Dilution, debt or bitcoin sale? Each option will have a different impact on shareholder value.
Tether, for example, reduced its exposure to Bitdeer after increasing it during a market dip. This illustrates growing caution among strategic investors regarding AI-version bitcoin. If miners continue selling their reserves to finance AI infrastructure, this would indeed remove a historical buying pressure source from the bitcoin market.
Anyway, the technological transformation of bitcoin mining companies towards artificial intelligence is redefining industry standards. The current debate on governance and gain allocation could extend throughout the AI-backed crypto ecosystem.
Maximize your Cointribune experience with our "Read to Earn" program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.
Join the program
A
A
Lien copié
Ariela R.
My name is Ariela, and I am 31 years old. I have been working in the field of web writing for 7 years now. I only discovered trading and cryptocurrency a few years ago, but it is a universe that greatly interests me. The topics covered on the platform allow me to learn more. A singer in my spare time, I also cultivate a great passion for music and reading (and animals!)
DISCLAIMER
The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this article belong solely to the author, and should not be taken as investment advice. Do your own research before taking any investment decisions.
EURC od Circle dosáhl 9. července nejvyšší denní aktivity adres a nových peněženek od spuštění před čtyřmi lety, když počet aktivních peněženek dosáhl 1 760. Po konci přechodného období MiCA v EU roste poptávka po regulovaných euro stablecoinech.
Circle's euro stablecoin $EURC logged its highest daily active addresses and new wallet creation since its launch four years ago, according to Santiment data. On July 9, daily active wallets reached 1,760, a milestone that underscores accelerating demand for regulated euro-denominated digital assets.
MiCA Clears the Field for EURCThe timing of the spike is no coincidence. The EU's Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation transition period ended on July 1, 2026, requiring all crypto firms serving EU clients to be licensed. That deadline reshaped the competitive landscape sharply. Tether chose not to apply, with CEO Paolo Ardoino calling MiCA's reserve rules "dangerous," leading major exchanges including Coinbase, Binance, and Kraken to delist USDT for European users. With the market's dominant stablecoin removed from regulated European venues, liquidity has had to go somewhere.
EURC, issued by Circle, held the highest average market capitalisation among MiCA-compliant euro stablecoins at $430.4 million across the past year and led in average weekly trading volume at $34.0 million. Circle's EURC has emerged as the dominant euro stablecoin, holding approximately 41% of total euro stablecoin market capitalisation, up from 17% market share over the past 12 months.
Compliance as a Competitive AdvantageThe primary driver behind the surge in EURC activity is the enforcement of MiCA's stablecoin provisions, which require issuers to hold specific reserves and obtain licenses to operate within the EU. Circle was among the first global firms to secure an Electronic Money Institution (EMI) license, making EURC the first major MiCA-compliant stablecoin.
The leading euro stablecoin for crypto capital markets, EURC is MiCA-compliant, redeemable 1:1 for euro, and accessible globally on Avalanche, Base, Ethereum, Solana, and Stellar. That multi-chain presence matters: several high-profile centralised exchanges have started restricting non-compliant stablecoins for European users, naturally funnelling liquidity into EURC.
Total market capitalisation of MiCA-compliant euro stablecoins rose 128%, climbing from $295.6 million to $673.9 million across the 52 weeks to June 28, 2026. The broader trend points to Europe consolidating its stablecoin market around a small group of fully licensed tokens, with EURC currently leading that pack by a wide margin.
Sources:
Cryptonomist: MiCA Euro Stablecoins Surge Post Transitional Period
Circle: EURC Official Page
Utila: Euro Stablecoin Landscape Report 2026
Oklo dokončilo akvizici Creative Engineers, Inc. a posílilo vývoj reaktoru Aurora o zhruba 20 inženýrů, výrobců a svářečů se zkušenostmi se sodíkovými systémy.
Oklo just went shopping again. The nuclear energy company completed its acquisition of Creative Engineers, Inc. (CEI) on June 30, bringing aboard roughly 20 engineers, fabricators, and welders who specialize in exactly the kind of sodium and alkali-metal systems that Oklo’s Aurora reactor technology depends on.
This is Oklo’s second acquisition in a matter of weeks. Stock reaction was mixed, with some price slips observed around the announcement.
Why sodium experts matter for a nuclear startup Oklo’s Aurora reactor is a compact, modular design that uses liquid sodium as a coolant instead of water. CEI has been doing alkali-metal work for nuclear-related projects for years, and the acquisition brings liquid-metal handling, safety training, and reactor component development capabilities in-house rather than relying on external contractors.
Advertisement
CEI has reportedly been generating positive free cash flow for over five years, which makes this more than a talent acquisition. It’s a profitable business being folded into Oklo’s operations, adding manufacturing capability and applied R&D capacity. The financial terms of the deal remain undisclosed.
The broader Aurora timeline is taking shape On June 18, Oklo announced a letter of intent with Centrus Energy to secure high-assay low-enriched uranium (HALEU) fuel supply for upcoming Aurora units. Initial fuel deliveries are projected for 2029, timed to support what Oklo has described as a 1.2 GW clean energy campus.
The company is targeting its first operational Aurora unit at Idaho National Laboratory by late 2027 or early 2028.
What this means for investors watching the nuclear-AI energy nexus Oklo’s chairman is Sam Altman, the CEO of OpenAI. The company has been positioned at the intersection of nuclear energy and AI infrastructure.
Oklo hasn’t generated meaningful revenue yet, and its first reactor is still at least 18 months from operation. Nuclear regulatory approval processes are famously unpredictable, and the HALEU fuel supply chain remains nascent. Investors should watch regulatory milestones over the next 12 months, the progression of the Centrus Energy fuel supply arrangement toward binding commitments, and whether Oklo announces additional acquisitions ahead of the 2027-2028 launch window.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
New Hampshire zamítl návrh na bitcoinem krytý komunální dluhopis ve výši 100 milionů dolarů, který měl být prvním svého druhu schváleným státem. Hlasování skončilo 3:2.
New Hampshire’s Executive Council voted 3-2 to reject a proposed $100 million Bitcoin-backed municipal bond, preventing what would have been the first state-authorized issuance of its kind.
The decision comes despite the bond receiving a provisional Ba2 credit rating from Moody’s earlier this year.
Advertisement
The decision came months after the state’s Business Finance Authority (BFA) approved the groundbreaking bond structure, which aimed to bring Bitcoin-backed financing to the municipal bond market.
The proposed financing, developed by Wave Digital Assets in partnership with Rosemawr Management and the BFA, would have seen the BFA issue taxable municipal bonds backed by $175 million in Bitcoin collateral provided by CleanSpark, with BitGo Trust acting as custodian.
If Bitcoin’s value dropped below $140 million, the collateral would have been liquidated to ensure bondholders were repaid in full, without exposing taxpayers to losses.
Council members said the proposal failed to demonstrate meaningful benefits for New Hampshire and raised concerns about lending state legitimacy to a transaction tied to a highly volatile asset class.
Meanwhile, backers argued that the decision was a missed opportunity and urged officials to revisit the proposal.
“It was an extremely short-sighted decision,” New Hampshire House Majority Floor Leader Keith Ammon, who has long championed crypto initiatives in the state, said in a post on X. “They should gather all relevant facts and information and reconsider their vote at a future meeting.”
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Metaplanet zahájila společný průzkum Bitcoinem zajištěných digitálních úvěrových produktů s JPYC, Progmatem a svou japonskou divizí pro cenné papíry. Zatím však nebylo rozhodnuto o vydání žádného produktu.
Metaplanet has started a joint study into Bitcoin-backed digital credit products with stablecoin issuer JPYC, tokenization company Progmat and its securities arm in Japan.
Summary
Metaplanet will study Bitcoin-backed credit using JPYC settlement and Progmat’s security token infrastructure in Japan. No product has launched, while issuance timing, yields, terms, and distribution methods remain undecided. Project Nova seeks to turn Metaplanet’s Bitcoin treasury into collateral for regulated digital credit products. The study will assess whether Bitcoin can support digital corporate bonds and other credit products as collateral or a credit-enhancement asset. However, the companies said they have not decided to issue any product.
Metaplanet studies Bitcoin-backed digital credit According to Metaplanet’s July 10 announcement, the four companies will study product design, regulation, investor protection, settlement and technical requirements. Their work will cover digital corporate bonds and other blockchain-based credit instruments.
Metaplanet and Metaplanet Securities will lead product design and distribution. JPYC will examine stablecoin issuance, redemption and payment functions. Meanwhile, Progmat will provide infrastructure for security token issuance, ownership records and transfer controls.
The proposed structure would use security tokens to record investor rights. JPYC or similar yen-based instruments could handle interest payments, distributions and redemptions. The participants will also assess round-the-clock trading and daily interest calculations.
However, Metaplanet warned that “nothing has been determined” regarding issuance timing, yields, terms or distribution. Any future product would require internal approvals, technical checks and talks with relevant authorities.
Project Nova expands Bitcoin’s balance-sheet role The study forms part of Project Nova, Metaplanet’s plan to build a Bitcoin-focused financial services business in Japan. The company said the project treats Bitcoin as “productive collateral on the balance sheet” rather than only a reserve asset.
Under the plan, Bitcoin could back credit instruments while stablecoins and security tokens connect traditional securities infrastructure with blockchain settlement. Metaplanet said it wants to offer yield products and wider capital-market access to retail and institutional investors.
As previously reported by crypto.news, Metaplanet agreed in June to acquire Siiibo Securities for JPY 2.1 billion. The licensed brokerage is scheduled to become Metaplanet Securities on July 13.
The acquisition gives Metaplanet access to an established corporate bond platform and a Type I Financial Instruments Business Operator. The company previously said it could use the platform to distribute Bitcoin-linked bonds and other income products in Japan.
Bitcoin treasury reaches 43,000 BTC Metaplanet’s credit study follows another expansion of its corporate Bitcoin holdings. The company bought 2,823 BTC during the second quarter, raising its holdings to 43,000 BTC.
The company acquired the latest batch at an average price of about JPY 12.7 million per Bitcoin. Its total average purchase price stood near JPY 15.3 million per coin after the transaction.
At the same time, revenue from Metaplanet’s Bitcoin income business fell about 41% from the previous quarter to JPY 1.747 billion. The company has continued adding Bitcoin while developing products that could generate income from its treasury.
Metaplanet has also set a long-term goal of holding 210,000 BTC by the end of 2027. However, the new study does not confirm that the company will pledge its existing holdings to any specific credit product.
Tokenized credit market continues expanding The proposed study comes as demand for blockchain-based financial assets continues to grow. RWA.xyz tracks tokenized government debt, private credit, corporate credit, commodities and other real-world assets across public and private networks.
Metaplanet said credit is suited to digitization because interest, repayment and collateral terms are fixed when an instrument is issued. Blockchain systems can then manage ownership records, payments and redemptions.
Strategy mezi 1. a 5. červencem prodala 3 588 BTC za zhruba 216 milionů USD, což je největší jednorázová likvidace v historii firmy. Po prodeji drží 843 775 BTC.
Strategy, the company formerly known as MicroStrategy, sold 3,588 BTC for approximately $216 million between July 1 and July 5. That’s the largest single Bitcoin liquidation in the company’s history, and it came from the man who once made “never sell” sound like a blood oath.
Michael Saylor’s firm still holds 843,775 BTC after the sale.
From diamond hands to dynamic allocation Strategy didn’t sell Bitcoin because Saylor suddenly lost faith in his thesis. The company sold to replenish USD reserves earmarked for preferred-stock dividends on its Digital Credit securities.
The board authorized potential sales of up to $1.25 billion in Bitcoin on June 29, giving management room to sell significantly more if cash needs escalate. The goal, according to the company’s filings, is to avoid issuing additional equity, which would dilute existing shareholders.
Advertisement
Strategy had already broken the seal in late May 2026, selling 32 BTC for $2.5 million. Selling 3,588 coins at roughly $60,000 each is not a rounding error.
The average sale price of approximately $60,000 per Bitcoin is worth noting because Strategy’s overall cost basis sits above that level — they sold at a loss relative to what they paid for much of their stack. The company reported an $8.32 billion loss in Q2 2026 related to digital assets.
Strategy is now framing this shift as “dynamic capital allocation” designed to improve Bitcoin-per-share metrics.
Why the market cares more than the math suggests 3,588 BTC represents roughly 0.4% of Strategy’s total holdings.
MSTR shares declined several percent intraday on July 6, though they stabilized afterward. Bitcoin itself saw modest selling pressure.
The board authorized up to $1.25 billion in potential Bitcoin sales. That’s roughly 20,800 BTC at current prices, or about 2.5% of the company’s total stack.
The institutional contagion risk The $8.32 billion quarterly loss on digital assets underscores how painful this Bitcoin winter has been for corporate holders who bought aggressively during the bull market. Strategy accumulated the vast majority of its 843,775 BTC at prices that now look elevated compared to current trading levels.
The Bitcoin-per-share metric that Strategy is now optimizing for could actually benefit remaining shareholders if executed well, since selling Bitcoin to avoid equity dilution preserves each share’s claim on the remaining stack.
Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.
Japonský věřitel CRYL spustil úvěry zajištěné bitcoiny až do výše 1 miliardy jenů (6,2 milionu USD), které umožňují získat fiat bez prodeje BTC. Úroky činí 3,5 % až 7 % ročně.
Japanese lender CRYL has launched Bitcoin-backed loans of up to 1 billion yen ($6.2 million), allowing individuals and businesses to raise fiat currency without selling their BTC.
On Thursday, the company announced that borrowers can access between 1 million yen ($6,200) and 1 billion yen ($6.2 million) at annual rates of 3.5% to 7%. The loans carry collateral ratios of 40% to 60%. They run for one year and can be used for expenses, including taxes, business funding and property purchases.
The launch expands Japan’s small market for regulated crypto-backed financing. In 2020, Fintertech, a Daiwa Securities Group and Credit Saison joint venture, launched a similar service and currently lends up to $3 million against Bitcoin or Ether. However, CRYL's service advertises a higher ceiling and a lower minimum, while limiting collateral to BTC.
CRYL framed the service as adding a third option beyond holding or selling their crypto. However, applicants must undergo screening, and most loans use a lump-sum repayment structure, with principal and interest due after one year.
Bitcoin-backed finance takes shape in JapanFintertech’s product shows that Bitcoin-backed lending has been available in Japan for several years. The company’s website currently lists loans for individuals and businesses with annual rates of 4% to 8%, a 50% collateral ratio and a minimum borrowing amount of 5 million yen ($31,000).
The service also gained a wider distribution channel in October 2025, when Daiwa Securities began introducing customers at its branches across Japan to Fintertech’s digital asset-backed loans. Fintertech is owned 80% by Daiwa Securities Group and 20% by Credit Saison.
Other Japanese companies are exploring how Bitcoin could support more complex credit products. On Friday, Metaplanet Securities, yen stablecoin issuer JPYC and tokenization infrastructure provider Progmat announced a study into using BTC as collateral or credit enhancement for digital corporate bonds and other blockchain-based credit instruments.
Unlike the loan products offered by CRYL and Fintertech, the Metaplanet initiative remains at the research phase, and the companies said no issuance has been decided.
Magazine: Bitcoin’s quantum dilemma: Bigger blocks or STARK proofs?
Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently.
Intesa Sanpaolo zveřejnila zhruba 18 milionů USD v XRP, které drží prostřednictvím Grayscale XRP Trust, nikoli přímo v peněženkách ani přes ETF. Ukazuje to, že banky dál volí tradiční cenné papíry místo přímého držení krypta.
Italy’s largest bank disclosed an $18 million XRP position, and the interesting part is not the size but the plumbing: the exposure runs through Grayscale’s trust, not through wallets, keys, or even the shiny new ETFs. Bank crypto exposure has more than doubled in two quarters, and the wrappers banks choose reveal exactly how far the regulated world has actually come. This is the anatomy of how a bank buys a token.
Summary
Italy’s largest bank disclosed an $18 million XRP position through Grayscale’s trust, highlighting how regulated banks continue to prefer traditional securities over direct crypto holdings. European banks’ disclosed crypto exposure has more than doubled to $235 million, although most positions remain small, wrapped and focused on strategic exposure rather than treasury investments. The structure banks choose to hold crypto reflects regulatory, capital and custody constraints, offering a clearer signal of institutional adoption than the size of individual investments. The most institutionally significant XRP purchase of the year fits in a footnote. Intesa Sanpaolo, Italy’s largest banking group with over a trillion dollars in assets, disclosed a roughly $18 million position in XRP, acquired not on any crypto exchange, not through self-custody, not even through the spot exchange-traded funds that launched to such fanfare, but through shares of Grayscale’s XRP trust, a wrapper most retail traders stopped thinking about years ago.
Intesa bought an approximately $18 million position in the Grayscale XRP Trust
— Degi (@bryLFC88) July 9, 2026 Eighteen million dollars is a rounding error for Intesa, less than 0.002% of its balance sheet, and dismissing the disclosure on size would miss what it actually documents. Bank crypto exposure in aggregate has more than doubled across two quarters, from roughly $100 million to $235 million among disclosing European institutions, and each disclosure is a specimen of the same understudied question: when a regulated deposit-taking institution decides to hold a volatile digital asset, what does it actually buy, through what legal object, on whose books, and why that one? The answers are duller than the headlines and far more informative, because the wrapper a bank selects encodes everything, its regulators’ current mood, its capital treatment, its custody constraints, and its honest time horizon.
This piece uses the Intesa position as a dissection subject. It covers the menu of structures through which a bank can hold crypto and what each one costs in capital, operations, and optics; why a trust, of all things, beat both the ETFs and direct custody for this purchase; what the doubling of bank exposure does and does not signal about the institutional wave every forecast depends on; the XRP-specific reading, since the asset choice is itself information; and the checkable signals that would show bank demand becoming the structural bid the market has priced in advance so many times.
The menu: five ways a bank can own a coin A bank deciding to hold crypto chooses among five structures, and the choice is never about preference; it is about what its regulator, risk committee, and accounting framework will tolerate this quarter.
The first is direct ownership with self-custody: coins on the balance sheet, keys in the bank’s control. It is the purest exposure and the rarest, because it triggers everything at once, the harshest prudential capital treatment, under Basel-derived rules a risk weight so punitive that unhedged direct holdings can require capital near the position’s full value, plus operational custody risk the institution must build or buy, plus accounting volatility straight through earnings. A handful of pioneers run small direct books as strategic learning exercises; as a portfolio structure it barely exists.
The second is direct ownership with third-party custody: the bank owns coins held by a qualified custodian. It softens the operational problem and none of the capital problem, and it is the structure banks build for clients, custody as a fee business, far more often than for themselves; Intesa itself has run a proprietary desk and custody buildout along exactly these lines, which makes its choice of a different wrapper for this position all the more instructive.
The third is the exchange-traded fund: regulated, liquid, redeemable, tracking tightly through the creation-and-redemption machinery that keeps share and coin prices glued. For most institutions the ETF is the modern default, which is precisely why a bank bypassing it deserves attention.
The fourth is the trust or closed-end structure, the Grayscale lineage: a fund holding coins, whose shares trade as securities, historically without the redemption loop that disciplines ETF pricing, meaning shares can and famously did trade at large premiums and discounts to the underlying. The fifth is synthetic exposure, futures, notes, certificates, total-return swaps, owning the price without the asset, the structure of choice where regulators permit derivatives more readily than holdings.
JUST IN: Grayscale has categorized $XRP under the
"Global Payments" investment narrative, highlighting its role in cross-border payments and digital financial infrastructure. As institutional interest in blockchain continues to grow, #XRPArmy pic.twitter.com/g4NEi1p86Y
— Michelle Kirby X (@michelekirby623) July 10, 2026 Read as a ladder, the five structures run from maximum conviction and maximum friction at the top to minimum commitment at the bottom, and where an institution steps on reveals its constraints more honestly than its press releases. A bank in a jurisdiction with settled ETF access, clean capital rules, and a supportive supervisor buys the ETF. A bank that buys a trust is telling you something specific.
Why the trust: the unglamorous logic Intesa’s route through Grayscale’s XRP trust looks, at first glance, like choosing a flip phone, and the logic assembles quickly once the constraints are listed.
The first constraint is geography and availability. The US spot XRP ETFs are new, their European availability to a regulated Italian bank’s balance sheet runs through legal and distribution questions that a US-listed trust security, tradeable as an ordinary share, sidesteps; European institutions have bought American trust shares for years precisely because they slot into existing securities plumbing, custody, settlement, and reporting included, with no crypto-specific operational buildout at all. For a first position, or a small strategic one, the wrapper that requires zero new infrastructure wins on cost alone.
The second is the capital and accounting angle. A trust share is a security, held and risk-weighted as one under frameworks the bank already runs, while direct coin holdings drag the punitive crypto-specific capital treatment; the wrapper does not eliminate the exposure’s volatility, and it can materially simplify its regulatory life. The third is discretion and reversibility: an $18 million security position is entered, marked, and exited like any other line in a trading book, with no wallets to explain, no custodian onboarding, no board-level operational review, an experiment sized and structured to be abandonable, which is exactly how serious institutions run first experiments.
In diesem Video geht es um Goldman Sachs, Intesa Sanpaolo, sinkende XRP Bestände auf Börsen und die Frage, warum der Kurs trotz positiver Onchain Daten noch nicht wirklich reagiert.
Außerdem ordnen wir ein, ob die fehlende Krypto Liquidität wirklich verschwunden ist, oder nur… https://t.co/GcYvrwSBk7 pic.twitter.com/ttVelYqLEj
— CryptoTuts (@CryptoTuts) July 9, 2026 The fourth is the trust’s historical quirk turned feature: with spot ETFs now existing as conversion or competition targets, the old discount problem that made trusts hazardous has largely resolved, while the structure retains its accessibility. The instrument that spent years as the cautionary tale about wrappers, its discounts the very evidence that forced the ETF era into being, now serves as the quiet on-ramp for institutions whose plumbing has not caught up to the products the caution produced. Finance rarely wastes an old vehicle; it reassigns it.
The capital rules: the constraint underneath everything The single largest force shaping how banks hold crypto never appears in the headlines, so it earns its own section: prudential capital treatment, the rules deciding how much of a bank’s own equity must stand behind each asset it holds. The international framework finalized by the Basel Committee sorts crypto exposures into groups, with tokenized traditional assets and qualifying stablecoins receiving conventional treatment, and unbacked cryptoassets, the Bitcoin-and-XRP category, consigned to the punitive tier: a risk weight of 1,250%, the framework’s maximum, which in practice requires capital roughly equal to the exposure itself, plus an aggregate cap holding such exposures to a sliver of a bank’s Tier 1 capital. The design intent was explicit, to make direct crypto holdings nearly uneconomic for banks, and it succeeded: no meaningful direct bank crypto book exists anywhere under full Basel-aligned rules.
The wrapper economy documented in this piece is, in large part, the industry’s negotiated response to that number. A trust share or ETF position may, depending on jurisdiction and interpretation, route through securities and funds treatments instead of the maximum weight; synthetic exposures route through derivatives and market-risk frameworks; and client-custody businesses, where the bank never owns the coins at all, sit outside the exposure caps entirely, which is why custody is where bank crypto revenue actually lives. None of this is evasion, every structure is disclosed and supervised, and all of it is arbitrage in the honest sense: institutions selecting, among permitted forms, the one whose capital cost matches their conviction. The forward-looking point follows directly: the capital rules are under active review in multiple jurisdictions, industry bodies have pressed for recalibration as the classification legislation matures, and any softening of the 1,250% regime would do more for bank demand than a decade of conferences, because it changes the only number bank treasurers actually optimize. Watch the consultations, not the keynotes.
The specimen in context: who else, and how Intesa’s disclosure lands within a recognizable cohort, and the cohort’s composition sharpens the reading. European institutions dominate the disclosed-exposure aggregate for a structural reason: MiCA’s arrival gave the continent’s banks a supervisory framework to point to, and supervised clarity, even strict clarity, unlocks more institutional behavior than permissive ambiguity ever has. The cohort’s positions share the Intesa profile almost uniformly, small against the balance sheet, wrapped rather than direct, concentrated in the majors plus, notably, XRP, and framed internally as strategic learning. Around the disclosed positions sits the larger undisclosed economy: bank-run custody for funds and corporates, structured notes and certificates giving private-bank clients crypto exposure, and trading desks making markets in ETPs, all of which generate crypto revenue without crypto balance-sheet exposure and all of which grew straight through the drawdown. The honest map of bank adoption, in other words, is a pyramid: a vast base of client-service activity, a thin middle of wrapped proprietary positions like Intesa’s, and an apex of direct holdings that remains, by regulatory design, nearly empty. Adoption forecasts that conflate the layers, and most do, mistake the pyramid’s base for its apex and misprice both.
What $100M to $235M actually signals The aggregate number behind the Intesa specimen, disclosed bank crypto exposure more than doubling to $235 million in two quarters, invites two opposite readings, and the honest analysis requires holding both.
The deflationary reading starts with scale: $235 million across the European banking system is not institutional adoption; it is institutional curiosity, a few basis points of trading-book capacity spread across a handful of names, an order of magnitude below what single corporate treasuries deployed in the last cycle and three orders below the ETF complex. Banks hold these positions the way they hold any exotic, small, hedged or hedgeable, and structured for exit, and extrapolating a wave from a doubling of a tiny base is the oldest error in institutional-adoption forecasting. The doubling also coincides with the drawdown, which cuts both ways: it is conviction buying weakness, or it is desks accumulating inventory for client products rather than expressing any house view at all, and disclosures rarely distinguish the two.
The inflationary reading counts differently: it counts precedents. Every structure a bank uses for a small position is a structure approved, documented, and reusable for a large one; the expensive part of institutional adoption was never the buying but the permissioning, the risk-committee papers, the regulator conversations, the accounting memos, and each disclosed position is proof that some institution’s permissioning is complete. On this reading, $235 million is not the wave, it is the wave’s paperwork, and the doubling measures how fast the paperwork is clearing. The reading gains force from who is moving: Intesa is not a crypto-adjacent challenger but a systemically important incumbent whose choices get studied by every peer risk committee in Europe, and incumbent behavior is the single best-documented contagion vector in institutional finance.
Both readings share one implication worth stating plainly: the structural bank bid, the one in the conditional price forecasts, remains almost entirely in front of, not behind, the current market, which is precisely why the classification legislation gates so much of every forecast. Banks buy at the pace their constraints dissolve, and the constraints are dissolving on legislative and supervisory calendars, not market ones.
A note on the disclosure mechanics themselves rounds out the specimen. Bank positions of this kind surface through securities filings, fund shareholder registers, and periodic risk disclosures, each with its own lag and granularity, and the analysts who compiled the $235 million aggregate are stitching exactly these sources. The number is therefore a floor, not a census: positions below reporting thresholds, exposures inside synthetic structures, and holdings at institutions with lighter disclosure regimes all escape it, which means the true wrapped-proprietary layer is somewhat larger and its growth rate somewhat smoother than the headline doubling suggests. It also means the series improves mechanically as the asset class formalizes, more filings, finer categories, shorter lags, so part of every future increase will be measurement catching up with reality, a caveat worth carrying into each new headline about bank exposure records.
What a bank position is not Two category errors follow every bank-crypto disclosure, and clearing them sharpens what remains. The first is reading a trading-book position as a treasury strategy. Corporate treasury adopters hold coins as a reserve-asset thesis, financed by their capital structure and marked as conviction; a bank’s wrapped $18 million sits in a book built for exposures that come and go, sized inside limits designed to make its total loss immaterial, and often paired with hedges or client flows invisible from outside. The position’s information value is procedural, not directional: it proves the pipe exists, not that the water is committed. The second error is reading disclosure timing as buying timing. Positions surface through reporting cycles months after their construction, get built across many sessions to avoid moving thin markets, and can be inventory against structured products the bank has sold, not a view at all. The market’s habit of backdating conviction onto the disclosure date has embarrassed every analyst who indulged it, and the professional reading discipline is the same one every filing teaches: the fact is the exposure and its structure; the story is unrecoverable from public data and should be priced accordingly.
There is also the question of what would make a bank sell, which no adoption narrative ever models. Wrapped positions of this size exit for reasons that have nothing to do with crypto, quarter-end optics, risk-limit reshuffles, a supervisor’s raised eyebrow, a desk head’s rotation, and their departure would generate exactly the headlines their arrival did, inverted and equally overread. The institutional bid, when it truly forms, will be identifiable not by any single entry but by its behavior through stress: positions that persist across drawdowns, disclosures that grow through bad quarters, and wrapper migrations toward more committed structures while prices fall. By that standard, the current cohort is untested, the drawdown positions are its first examination, and the next two reporting cycles are worth more than the last ten announcements.
The XRP of it: why this asset, from this buyer The asset selection is its own signal, and it reads differently from a bank than it would from a fund. XRP is, among major assets, the one whose institutional story runs through exactly the world Intesa inhabits: cross-border payments, correspondent banking, and a corporate sponsor that has spent a decade selling to institutions like Intesa, an empire whose honest token accounting this publication has mapped. A European bank taking its crypto first step in XRP rather than only Bitcoin is choosing the asset whose bull case is denominated in its own industry’s plumbing, which makes the position readable as strategic reconnaissance as much as investment: a small, live stake in the asset one’s own payments division will inevitably be asked about.
The timing adds the contrarian layer: the position surfaces with XRP down roughly 70% from its peak, the tradable float at seven-year lows, and sentiment at cycle extremes, which is either exactly when patient institutional money historically steps in, or exactly the environment in which a small position is cheap enough to serve as an option on the payments thesis resolving. Eighteen million dollars does not move the asset. Eighteen million dollars of precedent, from this buyer, in this structure, at this point in the cycle, is the kind of data point the next dozen risk committees cite, and the market’s institutional wave, if it ever arrives, will be assembled out of citations exactly like it.
The historical rhyme deserves a paragraph, because banks have run this exact sequence before. Gold ETFs in the early 2000s, emerging-market debt in the 1990s, and high-yield credit before that each entered bank balance sheets the same way: first as client-service revenue, then as small wrapped proprietary positions justified as market-making inventory, then, after capital treatments matured and a cycle survived, as ordinary allocations nobody announced. The sequence’s clock is measured in years per stage, its motor is regulatory calibration, not price, and its tell, in every prior asset class, was the moment risk committees stopped writing special memos for the exposure, the bureaucratic non-event that never makes news and always precedes size. Crypto’s bank adoption is visibly mid-sequence: the client-service layer is thriving, the wrapped-position layer is doubling off a tiny base, and the special memos are still being written. The Intesa disclosure is one such memo made public, and the forecast it supports is not a price target but a schedule: the asset class is roughly one capital-rule revision and one uneventful cycle away from the stage where positions like this stop being articles.
One more actor deserves mention because it shadows every European bank’s calculus: the ECB and the digital-euro project, whose relationship with private crypto assets ranges from indifference to rivalry depending on the week. A eurozone bank’s crypto position lives under a supervisor whose own institution is building a competing settlement future, and the diplomacy of that position, small enough to be unobjectionable, wrapped enough to be conventional, useful enough to inform the bank’s own digital-asset strategy, explains the specimen’s every parameter as well as any market view does. Banks do not merely hold assets; they hold positions within relationships, and the wrapper is part of the diplomacy.
The signals that would show the wave forming The Intesa specimen suggests its own dashboard, and each line is public. Watch the disclosure aggregate, the $235 million line, for its next doubling and its composition, trusts versus ETFs versus direct, because wrapper migration toward more committed structures is the maturation signal. Watch European ETF and ETP access for banks, the plumbing whose arrival collapses the trust workaround. Watch the supervisory texture, capital-treatment consultations and national supervisor guidance, the constraint whose relaxation moves faster than any narrative. Watch whether custody businesses and proprietary positions converge, banks that custody for clients acquiring house exposure and vice versa, the pattern that preceded every prior asset class’s institutional normalization. And watch the legislation, always, because the classification question sets the risk weights and the risk weights set the size.
The conclusion the dissection supports is deliberately modest and, for that reason, durable. Intesa’s $18 million documents neither a wave nor a fad; it documents a procedure, the specific, replicable, now-approved path by which a trillion-dollar European bank holds a crypto asset without touching a key, and procedures, once they exist, get reused at whatever size conditions permit. The market has spent years pricing the day banks arrive. The disclosure’s quiet news is that the arrival, when it comes, will look exactly like this: no announcement, no wallet, a securities ticket in an old wrapper, and a footnote that compounds.
The dissection closes where it began, with proportion. Eighteen million dollars, one wrapper, one bank: as a market event it is nothing, and the piece has argued it is the most informative kind of nothing, a procedure caught on camera. Institutional adoption was never going to arrive as an announcement, because institutions do not announce; they file, and the filing cadence, the wrapper choices, and the capital consultations are the wave in its only observable form. Readers who want to track it need three bookmarks, the disclosure aggregates, the Basel-review docket, and the European ETP-access rulings, and one habit: when the next bank position surfaces, ask not how much but through what, because in this corner of the market, the plumbing is the story, and it has been telling it, quietly and in public, one footnote at a time.
And one sentence for the traders who read this far looking for the signal: there is none on the tape today, and there is a precise one coming, because bank flows, unlike whale flows, pre-announce themselves through rulemaking, and the rulemaking calendar is public. The edge in this corner of the market is not speed. It is literacy, and the literacy is teachable, which is what this dissection was for.
The specimen will be superseded, probably within a quarter, by a larger name or a bigger number, and the framework will not: five wrappers, one capital regime, a pyramid of adoption layers, and a disclosure lag between them all. Keep the framework, discard the headline, and the next footnote reads itself.
A closing housekeeping note: the exposure figures cited here reflect analyst compilations of public disclosures at this writing, the wrapper landscape is being actively reshaped by ETF access rulings and capital consultations, and readers applying this framework to future disclosures should expect the menu’s relative costs, though not its structure, to have shifted. The structure is the durable part; it always is.
The banks, unlike the traders, are in no hurry, and the wrappers, unlike the narratives, keep perfect records; between those two facts sits everything this piece has argued.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Digital asset markets are volatile, and you can lose your entire investment. Figures are current as of July 9, 2026, and may change. Always do your own research.
Bitmine Immersion Technologies koupila dalších 20 500 ETH za zhruba 35,9 milionu USD od Galaxy Digital. Jde o druhý velký nákup Etherea během dvou dnů.
Bitmine Immersion Technologies (NYSE: $BMNR), chaired by Fundstrat's Tom Lee, has purchased another 20,500 $ETH worth approximately $35.9 million from Galaxy Digital, according to onchain data cited by Lookonchain. The transaction is the company's second major Ethereum buy in as many days and adds further momentum to what has become one of the most closely watched corporate accumulation stories in crypto.
Back-to-Back Buys Push Holdings Higher The latest purchase follows a reported acquisition of 40,000 ETH on July 8, executed through FalconX and Kraken. Combined, the two transactions total roughly 60,500 ETH acquired within days. As of July 5, 2026, Bitmine's holdings stood at 5,742,237 ETH, representing approximately 4.8% of the total ETH supply of 120.7 million tokens. The latest buys reported on July 10 would push that figure higher still, bringing the company closer to its stated target.
The "Alchemy of 5%" and What's at Stake Guided by its philosophy of "the alchemy of 5%," Bitmine is committed to ETH as its primary treasury reserve asset, leveraging native protocol-level activities including staking and decentralised finance mechanisms. A 3.5 million share 9.50% Series A Perpetual Preferred (BMNP) deal raised about $273.8 million to fund additional digital assets, validator growth, and strategic ETH-ecosystem investments.
Chairman Thomas Lee attributed Ethereum's recent outperformance of Bitcoin and Bitmine's continued accumulation to rising investor optimism that the proposed Clarity Act will pass and bring greater regulatory certainty to crypto, especially Ethereum. Lee also believes Ethereum is undervalued, citing tokenization and rising demand from artificial intelligence applications as long-term catalysts.
Annualized staking revenues are projected at $235 million, with 4.9 million ETH representing 85% of the 5.74 million ETH held by Bitmine. Bitmine's crypto holdings rank it as the number one Ethereum treasury and number two global treasury, behind Strategy Inc. (NASDAQ: MSTR).
Sources:
Bitmine official press release via PR Newswire, July 6, 2026
CoinDesk: Bitmine adds $74 million in Ether as Tom Lee bets on Clarity Act boost
Yahoo Finance: Bitmine Purchases Another $74 Million of Ethereum
Ethereum Foundation zrušila tým Protocol Support, který pět let koordinoval upgrady, schůzky vývojářů a fellowship programy. Krok navazuje na širší restrukturalizaci a propuštění zhruba 20 % zaměstnanců.
The Ethereum Foundation has dissolved its Protocol Support team as part of a broader restructuring that recently cut about 20% of the nonprofit’s workforce.
Summary
Ethereum Foundation dissolved Protocol Support after five years coordinating upgrades, developer meetings and fellowship programs worldwide. Several team members lost their roles following the Foundation’s broader 20% workforce reduction announced recently. Core protocol work continues under Ethereum Foundation’s new structure, but some support programs face uncertainty. Protocol Support coordinated several parts of Ethereum’s development process. Its work covered core developer meetings, network upgrade tracking, Ethereum Improvement Proposal support and programs that trained new protocol contributors.
The Protocol Support account confirmed the team’s closure on X. It also invited Ethereum organizations seeking experienced developers to contact former team members.
the EF Protocol Support team has been dissolved 🖖
— EF Protocol Support (@EFprotocol) July 9, 2026 Mario Havel, who worked with Protocol Support for more than five years, said he remains at the Ethereum Foundation. However, he confirmed that the rest of his team had been dissolved and that several colleagues had lost their roles.
“I am still part of EF, continuing my work and figuring out what’s most needed in the future,” Havel wrote on X. “However, all of my team, Protocol Support, that I have been part of for 5+ years, has been dissolved.”
I was getting questions about recent EF layoffs and my situation so I should share something public as well.
I am still part of EF, continuing my work and figuring out what's most needed in the future. However, all of my team, Protocol Support, that I have been part for 5+… https://t.co/KRgKxiXQpa
— Mario Havel (@TMIYChao) July 8, 2026 Havel described the closure as the “bitter end” of a team that had supported Ethereum’s core development process through several forms and leadership changes.
Team managed key Ethereum developer programs Protocol Support helped organize All Core Developers meetings, where client teams and researchers discuss proposed upgrades. It also supported breakout calls, tracked network fork readiness and helped contributors understand Ethereum’s technical roadmap.
The team maintained Forkcast, a public platform that tracks Ethereum upgrades, proposed EIPs, testnet launches and mainnet activation plans. Former team lead William Morriss said the restructuring had ended his Ethereum Foundation role.
Protocol Support also ran the Ethereum Protocol Fellowship. The program trained developers seeking to contribute to Ethereum’s core protocol and connected participants with client teams, researchers and other technical groups.
Havel said he and former colleague Josh Davis built the fellowship over four years. The program has since brought dozens of new developers into Ethereum’s core development community.
The Foundation had opened applications for the seventh Ethereum Protocol Fellowship cohort in April. The available statements did not explain whether the current cohort will continue under another team.
Closure follows wider Foundation layoffs The team’s dissolution follows the Ethereum Foundation’s new organizational structure, announced on June 23. The Foundation cut 54 positions, equal to roughly 20% of its workforce, after a months-long review of its activities and spending.
As previously reported by crypto.news, the Foundation reorganized its work into five main areas: protocol, access, user, community and institutional layers. Separate groups handle operations and management.
The Foundation said affected workers would receive severance, career transition support and grants for related expenses. It described the changes as necessary to focus its staff and resources on work that the organization must perform over the coming years.
The latest closure also follows earlier changes to Ethereum’s research and development structure. The Foundation reduced its Protocol Research and Development team in 2025 and renamed the remaining group Protocol.
Core protocol work remains active The new protocol cluster remains responsible for Ethereum’s underlying technology. Its stated tasks include shipping upgrades safely, reducing technical complexity and improving privacy, security and censorship resistance.
Ethereum developers are also working on the Glamsterdam upgrade. The planned update includes changes to block construction, data access and network performance, as crypto.news previously reported.
However, the Foundation has not publicly detailed where every Protocol Support responsibility will move. The future management of developer meetings, Forkcast, fellowship programs and EIP support therefore remains unclear.
Protocol development does not depend on one Foundation team because Ethereum client developers, researchers and independent contributors work across several organizations. Still, Protocol Support provided coordination services that connected many of those groups during network upgrades.
Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson has confirmed that the ecosystem is close to launching a political party.
He made the announcement during his latest broadcast, where he also dismissed rumors that he plans to retire or leave the Cardano ecosystem. Reaffirming his long-term commitment to the network, Hoskinson revealed that preparations for the political party are already underway. He said the initiative is expected to launch soon, allowing ADA community members to participate.
“We are working on a political party, and we’ll imminently be launching that soon, and give people an opportunity to participate,” Hoskinson remarked.
His commentary signals that the initiative has progressed from a proposal to an active project, although Hoskinson did not provide a specific launch date.
A New Governance Structure for Cardano Hoskinson’s latest remarks build on his earlier proposal to establish a political party that would operate as a large, Delegate Representative (DRep) within Cardano’s on-chain governance system.
The idea emerged after months of governance disputes across the ecosystem. Several treasury proposals, including some associated with Hoskinson, failed to secure DRep approval. The resulting governance tensions eventually contributed to the cancellation of Cardano Summit 2026. In response, Hoskinson first suggested becoming a DRep before unveiling plans to create a political party.
In his view, the proposed organization would coordinate decision-making on ecosystem growth, treasury allocations, and long-term strategic priorities. The initiative would also give ADA holders and ecosystem participants a structured way to engage in governance by joining the organization and voting on key initiatives.
Hoskinson Backs the Cardano PRIME Proposal Meanwhile, Hoskinson has publicly endorsed the Cardano PRIME proposal. He expressed his support by replying “LFG” after AlphaGrowth announced that on-chain community voting for PRIME had officially begun.
PRIME is a 12-month initiative led by AlphaGrowth to accelerate Cardano’s decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem through protocol security audits, responsible liquidity incentive programs, and market expansion. The proposal seeks 120 million ADA in treasury funding, valued at approximately $19.2 million at an assumed ADA price of $0.16. If successful, the initiative aims to increase Cardano’s total value locked (TVL) by more than $200 million.
Such growth would represent a significant expansion from Cardano’s current TVL of roughly $73 million, with stablecoins currently accounting for most of the capital locked on the network.
Hoskinson has repeatedly emphasized that expanding Cardano’s DeFi ecosystem is one of the network’s highest priorities. He has previously described 2026 as a “do-or-die” year for Cardano’s DeFi ambitions, underscoring the need to attract more liquidity, users, and decentralized applications to the blockchain.
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.
TRON DAO, the community-governed DAO dedicated to accelerating the decentralization of the internet through blockchain technology and decentralized applications (dApps), announced today that the total circulating supply of USDT on the TRON blockchain has exceeded $90 billion. The milestone further strengthens TRON’s position as a leading network for USDT activity. According to Token Terminal, TRON leads all networks in USDT transfer volume year to date, with approximately $4.2 trillion.
TRON is one of the most widely used settlement networks in the world for stablecoins. The network’s scale, low transaction costs and consistent activity continue to support digital dollar transfers and a broad range of blockchain-based real-world use cases.
As of July 2026, TRON processes over 12.7 million daily transactions and has surpassed 392 million total user accounts. Additionally, the network supports an average of $23.8 billion in daily USDT transfers. TRON also has the highest active wallet count of any stablecoin on any blockchain according to Stablecoin Insider.
“TRON’s growth reflects the principles that have shaped the crypto industry from the beginning: open access, user ownership and practical utility,” said Justin Sun, founder of TRON. “The use of USDT on TRON reflects demand for blockchain infrastructure that is fast, efficient and accessible. As the industry continues to develop, the TRON ecosystem will remain focused on strengthening the infrastructure for stablecoins, settlement and the growing connection between DeFi and traditional finance.”
TRON’s leadership in the greater stablecoin ecosystem continues to evolve alongside growing institutional demand. Recent developments include Anchorage Digital’s integration of the TRON network, expanding institutional access to regulated custody on TRON, as well as Securitize’s integration of TRON to support tokenized real-world assets. The tokenized Hamilton Lane SCOPE Fund also became the first Securitize-issued asset available on the TRON network, further reinforcing TRON’s role as infrastructure for stablecoins, tokenized assets and institutional blockchain adoption.
Additionally, the TRON ecosystem has deepened its focus on security and safeguarding users through the T3 Financial Crime Unit (T3 FCU), a joint initiative with Tether and TRM Labs. Since its inception, T3 FCU has frozen over USD 450 million in criminal assets across five continents, established rapid response capabilities to address threats, and demonstrated how industry collaboration can effectively combat financial crime while supporting blockchain innovation.
As the digital dollar economy continues to expand, TRON remains a core pillar of the infrastructure that drives greater efficiency, accessibility and financial inclusion.
About TRON DAO TRON DAO is a community-governed DAO dedicated to accelerating the decentralization of the internet via blockchain technology and dApps.
Founded in September 2017, the TRON blockchain has experienced significant growth since its MainNet launch in May 2018. Until recently, TRON hosted the largest circulating supply of USD Tether (USDT) stablecoin, which currently exceeds $90 billion. As of July 2026, the TRON blockchain has recorded over 392 million in total user accounts, more than 14 billion in total transactions, and over $26 billion in total value locked (TVL), based on TRONSCAN. Recognized as the global settlement layer for stablecoin transactions and everyday purchases with proven success, TRON is “Moving Trillions, Empowering Billions.”
TRONNetwork | TRONDAO | X | YouTube | Telegram | Discord | Reddit | GitHub | Medium | Forum
Media Contact
Yeweon Park [email protected] Disclaimer: TheNewsCrypto does not endorse any content on this page. The content depicted in this Press Release does not represent any investment advice. TheNewsCrypto recommends our readers to make decisions based on their own research. TheNewsCrypto is not accountable for any damage or loss related to content, products, or services stated in this Press Release.
Reserve Protocol uvedl na BNB Chain pět tokenizovaných akciových DTF zaměřených na AI: $BUILDOUT, $POWER, $PHOTON, $NEOCLOUD a $ROBOTS. Jsou kryté tokenizovanými americkými akciemi prostřednictvím Ondo Global Markets.
Reserve Protocol has launched five AI-themed Reserve Protocol DTFs (Decentralized Token Funds) on BNB Chain. The aim is to give global investors a single-token route into the full AI supply chain.
The products, $BUILDOUT, $POWER, $PHOTON, $NEOCLOUD, and $ROBOTS, are live now and backed by tokenized U.S. equities via Ondo Global Markets. The announcement was made on Reserve Protocol’s official X account on July 9, 2026, alongside a video explainer and trading links.
Five DTFs, One AI Economy: What Reserve Protocol Just Built Each of the five new Reserve Protocol DTFs targets a different layer of the AI value chain. $BUILDOUT covers AI hardware and infrastructure stocks.
$BUILDOUT covers AI hardware and infrastructure stocks.
$POWER focuses on energy and power generation companies feeding AI data centers.
$PHOTON tracks photonics and optical networking companies. $NEOCLOUD holds cloud computing and AI infrastructure providers. $ROBOTS rounds out the set with robotics and automation equities.
The interesting part of the update is that an investor can buy $NEOCLOUD and get instant exposure to tokenized cloud equities without limit.
The DTFs are built on Reserve Protocol’s open-source infrastructure, which is powered by Ondo Global Markets (OGM). It holds tokenized U.S. stocks via licensed U.S. broker-dealers.
Own your share of the AI industry
Today, Reserve launches not one, but five new tokenized equity DTFs, each for a unique layer of the AI revolution: infrastructure, power, photonics, cloud compute, and robotics.
Live on @BNBCHAIN and powered by @OndoFinance, eligible users can… https://t.co/ZiI6zLMLA4 pic.twitter.com/NSnowuVRTd
— Reserve 🌐 (@reserveprotocol) July 9, 2026
Tokens are currently accessible via app.reserve.org, PancakeSwap, CoWSwap, and Bitget Wallet. They are also available on the BNB chain. Bitget has also reportedly launched an $80,000 prize pool trading campaign in relation to these DTFs.
On June 17, Ondo Finance witnessed a welcoming expansion of its tokenized securities offering. This move added 173 new tokenized stocks and ETFs across AI, robotics, quantum, and defense tech, taking its catalog past 430 assets on Ethereum, Solana, and BNB Chain.
The research protocol leveraged the expanded inventory and took it steps further.
Why BNB Chain, and Why Now BNB Chain currently holds over 709 tokenized stocks and ETFs in custody, with Ondo Global Markets. This accounts for more than $5.1 billion of its $6 billion in cumulative DEX volume. That liquidity depth makes BNB Chain the natural home for new tokenized equity products.
The timing is equally deliberate. Global RWA tokenization crossed $36 billion in on-chain value in 2026, with Ondo alone commanding more than 70% market share in tokenized equities and over $3.7 billion in Total Value Locked.
The broader RWA tokenization platform landscape is experiencing rapid growth, and Reserve Protocol is positioning itself at the intersection of DeFi composability and real-world AI equity exposure.
For non-U.S. investors, historically locked out of AI stocks like Nvidia or TSMC or data center REITs. These Reserve Protocol DTFs offer a first-mover on-chain alternative to traditional AI ETFs. Unlike those ETFs, DTFs trade 24/7, are fully collateralized onchain, and can plug into DeFi lending and collateral protocols.
RSR stakers also stand to benefit. Protocol fees from DTF activity fund $RSR buy-and-burn mechanics, tightening supply as TVL grows.
To understand how these blockchain-based shares function and where to acquire them, read our full review on tokenized US equities trading.
LINK roste nad 7,90 USD, protože spot ETF zaznamenaly druhý den přílivů v řadě a adopce Chainlink CCIP se rozšiřuje přes Mantle a Aave. Spot ETF podle SoSoValue zaznamenaly ve čtvrtek příliv 565 680 USD po přílivu 74 260 USD o den dříve.
Chainlink (LINK) trades above $7.90 on Friday, extending its recovery after posting modest gains in the previous day. Institutional demand shows signs of optimism, with spot Chainlink Exchange Traded Funds (ETFs) logging a second straight day of inflows so far this week. In addition, growing ecosystem adoption through Mantle Super Portal and Aave's integration of Chainlink's Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP) is supporting LINK's bullish outlook.
Institutional demand shows early signs of strengthInstitutional demand shows signs of optimism so far this week. SoSoValue data shows that spot ETFs recorded inflows of $565,680 on Thursday, following an inflow of $74,260 the previous day. If these inflows continue to strengthen, LINK price could extend the ongoing recovery.
Total LINK spot ETF net inflow daily chart. Source: SoSoValueGrowing ecosystem adoption boosts LINKMantle X account announced on Thursday that its Mantle Super Portal, built with Bybit, is upgrading to Chainlink's Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP) as its exclusive cross-chain infrastructure, unlocking enterprise-grade security at scale.
During the same period, Aave announced the launch of Stable Vaults, enabling businesses to embed fixed-rate stablecoin yield into any product, powered by Chainlink CCIP and Price Feeds.
These partnerships and the growing adoption of Chainlink's CCIP signal a bullish long-term outlook for Chainlink and its native token, LINK, boosting ecosystem growth and bolstering investor confidence.
In the short term, these announcements lift prices slightly, with LINK extending its recovery and trading above $7.90 on Friday.
Chainlink Price Forecast: LINK could extend gains if it closes above 50-day EMAChainlink price trades at $7.90 on Friday, extending its rebound after mild gains in the previous day. LINK maintains a capped tone as it holds below the 50-day, 100-day, and 200-day Exponential Moving Averages (EMAs), which all cluster well above price.
The immediate cap emerges at the 23.6% Fibonacci retracement at $7.92, with the 50-day EMA next near $8.12, while the Relative Strength Index (RSI) is around 51 and a positive Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) reading hints at modest upside momentum that so far fails to dislodge these overhead barriers.
On the topside, initial resistance is seen at $7.92 from the 23.6% Fibonacci retracement, followed by the 50-day EMA at roughly $8.12 and the 38.2% Fibonacci retracement level near $8.48. Further up, the 100-day EMA at about $8.68 and the 50% retracement around $8.94 form a thicker supply band ahead of $9.40 and the horizontal cap near $9.93.
On the downside, support is scarce until the horizontal floor around $7.20, with the Fibonacci anchor near $7.01 acting as a deeper line of defense should sellers regain control.
(The technical analysis of this story was written with the help of an AI tool. Know more.)
