XRP has undercut the $1.31 level needed for its current correction, leaving room for a rebound without necessarily sweeping the $1.25 support.
XRP has reached a support area where its current correction could begin to turn higher without first falling all the way to $1.25.
XRP’s 24-hour structure shows price entering its corrective support area after undercutting the earlier $1.31 low. The setup allows a rebound without a full sweep of $1.25, while the lower blue demand zone remains the broader invalidation area. The setup centers on the recent $1.31 low: under one Elliott Wave interpretation, XRP only needs to move beneath that earlier low to complete the final leg of the correction before attempting another advance.
XRP currently trades near $1.33, according to CoinMarketCap, after reaching a 24-hour low around $1.29. That means price has already traded beneath the $1.31 reference level highlighted in the structure.
The question now is whether that undercut was enough—or whether sellers will continue pressing XRP deeper into the support zone.
Why $1.31 Could Mark the Turning Area The current decline is being treated as an A-B-C correction.
The important detail is the shape of the B-wave. If that wave developed as a flat containing an “unorthodox low,” the final C-wave does not necessarily need to produce a dramatic new low.
It may only need to push beneath the earlier A-wave low around $1.31 before the corrective sequence can finish.
XRP has now done that intraday.
With price recovering toward $1.33 after dipping below $1.31, the market is already testing whether buyers will defend this portion of the structure.
That gives the current area more technical significance than a simple horizontal support.
XRP Does Not Have to Touch $1.25 The chart also marks a broader white demand zone below current price, extending roughly through the upper-$1.20s toward $1.25.
That area remains available if the correction stretches further, but the wave interpretation does not require XRP to sweep $1.25 before rebounding.
From $1.33, a move to $1.25 would represent another decline of roughly 6%.
This distinction matters. The scenario is not that $1.25 cannot break or cannot be tested. Rather, price may already have satisfied the minimum condition for the corrective C-wave by taking out the $1.31 A-wave low.
The next candles need to show whether buyers agree.
A Rebound Would Put $1.50 and $1.70 Back in View If XRP establishes a floor around the current region, the first meaningful recovery would require a move back toward $1.45-$1.50.
Above that sits the descending resistance line and the former B-wave region. The chart places a larger resistance reference around $1.70, which would need to be cleared before the bullish structure could expand toward higher extensions.
Further levels shown include approximately $1.93-$2.00, followed by the $2.08 area.
Those are later-stage targets and only become relevant if XRP first confirms that the current correction has ended.
From $1.33, a recovery to $1.50 would equal roughly 13%, while $1.70 would require about 28% upside.
Lower Blue Zone Is the Broader Bullish Invalidation Test The more serious downside risk sits below the white support area.
A larger blue demand zone stretches around roughly $1.05-$1.15 on the chart. This represents the broader support holding the bullish higher-timeframe interpretation together.
A higher-timeframe close beneath that region would undermine the current recovery thesis and increase the risk that XRP returns toward the $0.99 area or produces new lows.
For now, however, XRP is much closer to the first potential turning point.
The $1.31 low has already been undercut, meaning XRP could begin recovering without ever touching $1.25. Whether that happens now depends on buyers turning the current $1.29-$1.33 region into a durable floor.
XRP has entered a period of subdued retail interest, with global search activity for the cryptocurrency dropping significantly from its previous highs. Data from Google Trends shows that, by mid-October 2026, interest in XRP measured by global search volume had declined by more than 90% compared to July 2025, when the token surged toward the $3.65 level.
The search popularity index for “XRP” slipped to 13 points out of 100, reflecting the sharpest decline in sentiment among retail traders within the past year.
Sharp fall in search volume, but price remains resilientA review of search data since 2012 highlights the scale of last year’s surge. The spike in July 2025 appears as an isolated peak in long-term charts, with search interest returning to minimal levels before and after that event.
The trend has persisted over the past 12 months. On an annual time frame, search queries have fallen by half, and even the local uptick seen between August and September had disappeared by mid-October.
While general activity around XRP has dropped to multi-year lows, the price of the coin has demonstrated notable resilience. Despite reduced enthusiasm from smaller traders, XRP’s price has held within a narrow band of $1.30 to $1.34, establishing critical support at $1.25.
Contrasting apathy in search engines and stability in the marketThis extended period of low retail interest reflects a broader pattern affecting the entire crypto sector, as similar apathy has also dampened search volumes for bitcoin. In the case of XRP, analysts note a paradox: even as curiosity wanes, there has been no significant selling pressure pushing the price lower.
According to derivatives market data, excess leverage has disappeared as speculative positions have unwound. With many prediction platforms and algorithmic tools indicating that a psychological bottom in retail attention has been established, market observers are watching for signs of change in momentum.
Looking ahead, most models see XRP stabilizing in a consolidation range between $1.40 and $1.50 for the remainder of October. The return of heightened demand from retail traders, particularly visible in Google search activity, is likely required before any attempt at new all-time highs can be made.
Even with this pause, some analysts believe that the calm period could provide a base for the next extended market cycle. As the technical outlook tightens within key resistance and support zones, many traders are searching for tools that allow them to react quickly to sudden developments, such as Federal Reserve decisions or new altcoin listings, both of which can move the market in a matter of seconds. In this context, privacy-focused apps like CryptoAppsy are gaining popularity by offering real-time charts, smart price notifications, coin-specific headlines, and macroeconomic data on a single interface—without the need to register an account.
Financial analyst Austin Hilton has unveiled Market Vitals, a new trading platform aggregating data from 115 cryptocurrencies to offer real-time market health scores. Hilton presented the tool in a recent video and tweet, addressing $XRP holders and highlighting its potential for traders seeking advanced analytics.
Real-time market health score explainedMarket Vitals provides a single health score ranging from 0 to 100, designed to reflect current conditions across the broader cryptocurrency market. According to Hilton, this aggregate score draws on live data from an institutional-grade trading desk and includes comprehensive input from millions of dollars in trading activity.
“The data behind this is running an institutional-grade trading desk, millions of trading dollars.”
At the time of Hilton’s demonstration, the overall market received a health score of 56. A score between 50 and 65 signals a generally healthy environment, but Market Vitals projected a short-term pullback, with a forecasted -3.6% move expected over the following 10 days. The platform also anticipated a positive turn over a 30-day period but expressed caution for the 90-to-120-day outlook.
Mini dictionary: Market Vitals is a proprietary platform using real-time institutional data, advanced algorithms, and sector analysis to produce market health metrics and signal trading opportunities across multiple cryptocurrencies.
Sector breakdowns revealed that infrastructure coins held the strongest positions, while meme coins showed a sector score of 36, placing them among the weakest performers currently tracked by the platform.
SectorCurrent ScorePositionInfrastructureHighStrongestMeme coins36WeakestXRP’s signal: Caution for tradersHilton examined $XRP during his walkthrough, noting that Market Vitals currently rated XRP as a sell. This signal had been in place since October 7, 2026, according to the platform’s trading rule. He explained that the sell rating should be viewed as a tool for short-term trading and not as advice for long-term holders to exit their positions entirely.
While presenting Market Vitals, Hilton stated that its signals are targeted at active traders, not those holding long-term positions.
Analyzing the prior six months, Hilton referenced the platform’s buy and sell signals. The last major buy indication led to a 32% rally in XRP’s price, while a later sell alert preceded a 26% drop. The trading signals are intended to help users time entry and exit points around their core investments.
Platform features and subscription termsMarket Vitals is currently available for $99 per month, with a quarterly subscription option providing a lower rate. Hilton emphasized the inclusion of a 30-day, no-questions-asked refund for new users.
The platform features a portfolio tool allowing users to enter their holdings and get a composite health score, while individual asset rankings highlight which coins among the top 100-plus are currently in buy or sell zones. As of Hilton’s demonstration, coins such as Python, Arbitrum, Filecoin, and Injective ranked among the preferred buy signals.
Hilton described Market Vitals as a resource integrating years of proprietary data with AI-driven analytics, aiming to make institutional-grade tools accessible to retail investors for the first time.
17 October 2026 | 12:41 XRP has failed to stay above $1.34 and is moving closer to a support cluster at $1.26-$1.28 after 2.5% daily loss. Search activity and futures open interest are lower than during the earlier rally, but neither measure can show whether buyers or sellers will control the next move.
The XRP/USD daily chart showed price at $1.3082 on October 17 at 06:46 UTC. Its low of $1.30 left XRP above the $1.26-$1.279 range, where two longer-term moving averages meet a Fibonacci retracement.
XRP approaches the $1.26-$1.28 support cluster. The chart has changed in a specific way: $1.34 has shifted from support to resistance. XRP can bounce from the lower range, but it must reclaim $1.34 before that bounce begins to repair the breakdown.
XRP has given up the midpoint of its prior rally XRP’s latest decline follows a failed attempt to sustain a recovery above $1.34. Price has broken below its rising trendline and the 50-day simple moving average, while a descending resistance line from the measured rally high remains above the market.
That is a weaker setup than during the earlier recovery above $1.34, when XRP was trying to reach the $1.42-$1.43 resistance area. The support range identified in that analysis is now much closer, although the current candle has not reached it.
The Fibonacci grid measures the move from $0.99 to the $1.70 local high. XRP has fallen about 23% from that high and now trades below the 50% retracement at $1.34.
A move back above $1.34 would be the first repair, not a full trend reversal. XRP would still have to deal with the 50-day average, the 38.2% retracement and the descending trendline above.
The next test sits between $1.26 and $1.28 The 200-day SMA stands at $1.279, the 100-day SMA at $1.274 and the 61.8% Fibonacci retracement at $1.26. These are different tools pointing to the same small price area: the averages track longer price trends, while the retracement measures how far XRP has pulled back from its prior advance.
At $1.30, XRP was still about 2.2% above the upper edge of the range and 3.6% above its lower boundary. It is approaching the area, not testing the whole band yet. A brief wick into the range would be less meaningful than a close back above it after a sell-off.
Daily relative strength index, or RSI, stood at 36.07, below the neutral 50 mark and its smoothing line at 44.27. The reading fits the current weak momentum, but it is still above the conventional oversold threshold of 30. RSI alone does not show that sellers are finished.
Follow the price route
$1.34: The lost 50% retracement is XRP’s first recovery level. Holding back above it would show that the breakdown is losing force. $1.26-$1.279: The 61.8% retracement, 100-day SMA and 200-day SMA meet here. This is the first area where a more substantial response from buyers would matter. $1.14: The 78.6% retracement becomes relevant only if XRP closes below the nearer range and cannot recover it. $1.417-$1.427, then $1.53: A sustained recovery would still need to clear the 50-day average, the 38.2% retracement and the falling trendline before XRP could target higher resistance. Retail attention arrived early, then faded before futures did The sharp shift in XRP retail search interest is visible in Google activity. The worldwide Google Trends series for “xrp” reached 100 in December 2024 and remained high at 91 in January 2025. By October 2026, the reading had dropped to 16, a partial-month result that is 84% below the historical peak.
XRP searches fade after the 2024 peak. Futures exposure did not peak at the same time. The CoinGlass chart shows XRP open interest continuing to build after the search spike, eventually rising above $10 billion around July. Retail curiosity came first; the largest build-up in derivatives positions followed months later.
XRP open interest remains below its peak. Both measures have since cooled. CoinGlass listed XRP futures open interest at about $2.80 billion, well below the earlier area near $11 billion. After falling from that peak, it recovered into the roughly $3 billion-$4 billion range during later bursts of activity, but did not return to the previous high.
Google Trends does not count investors or their trades. It measures XRP’s share of searches, normalized for the selected period and geography. Open interest is also not directional because it includes both long and short positions, while its dollar value can fall alongside XRP’s price.
The charts show a much cooler backdrop than during XRP’s earlier run. They cannot determine whether the $1.26-$1.28 support range will hold. That answer will come from the price reaction and the participation behind it.
The support reaction could set the next direction If XRP reaches $1.26-$1.28 and rebounds, the first test would be $1.34. A daily close above that level, followed by the ability to hold it on a pullback, would carry more weight than a single green candle near support.
Above $1.34, XRP would face $1.417-$1.427, where the 50-day average sits near the 38.2% retracement. The descending trendline remains a further obstacle. Only after those references are recovered would $1.53 come back into focus.
If XRP closes below $1.26 and cannot regain the range, attention would shift to $1.142. A break below that level would leave $0.99, the starting point of the measured rally, as the deeper reference.
Spot volume and contract-denominated open interest would offer a clearer read on participation around that support test than search interest alone.
This article is provided for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Technical indicators and market data are interpretive tools, not guarantees of future price movement.
Author
Kosta has reported on cryptocurrency markets and blockchain infrastructure since 2020, bringing over six years of hands-on experience in the crypto industry built through daily tracking of markets, trends, and emerging blockchain developments. Specializing in Bitcoin on-chain analysis, institutional ETF flows, and digital asset price action, his work at Coindoo has been cited by other news agencies and consistently covers market developments with a focus on data-driven reporting across Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and XRP. Over the years, Kosta has contributed to multiple crypto media outlets in different regions, authoring over 6,000 articles across the sector. His reporting spans cryptocurrency markets and the broader fintech industry, tracking not only price action but also the technological and regulatory forces shaping the ecosystem. To support his analysis, Kosta actively leverages on-chain data and metrics from leading platforms such as Santiment, Glassnode, and CryptoQuant, enabling deeper, evidence-based market insights. He believes in the power of transparency and the data that underpins the blockchain ecosystem. His academic background in Marketing Management from Denmark further complements his analytical approach, adding a strong understanding of communication strategy and content positioning to his work.
XRP is trading around 1.33 dollars, 62.5% below its January 2018 peak, while Bitcoin and Ether have largely surpassed their levels from that time. This underperformance does not mean that all its holders have lost money: it mainly concerns those who bought close to the peaks, while the increase in supply has diluted the value represented by each token.
In brief XRP is trading around 1.33 dollars, 62.5% below its January 2018 peak. Unlike Bitcoin and Ether, XRP struggles to maintain its gains in the long term. The circulating supply has increased by 63% since 2017, which weighs on the value of each token. Limited institutional demand and still modest adoption of XRP hinder its progress. A sustained rise in XRP will depend on demand capable of absorbing new units put into circulation. XRP remains far from its January 2018 peak While its capitalization has just fallen by 117 billion dollars, XRP’s journey strongly depends on the date chosen to measure its return. An investor who entered at a low price could have made a significant profit, but one who bought during the euphoria of early 2018 remains largely at a loss nearly nine years later.
Several figures illustrate this gap :
XRP trades around 1.33 dollars ; Its January 2018 peak was near 3.55 dollars ; The token thus remains about 62.5 % below this level ; It briefly reached 3.66 dollars in July 2025 before dropping again ; Its circulating supply has increased from 38.7 to 63.1 billion XRP since 2017. The situation contrasts with that of Bitcoin and Ether. Despite their decline since the record highs of 2025, both assets remain well above their peaks of the 2017 cycle. Investors who have held their positions since that period therefore show, on average, significantly better performance.
However, it would be an exaggeration to say that XRP has enriched no holder. Purchases made during market lows, particularly below 0.30 dollars, have generated high returns. The comparison mainly concerns a buying strategy at the peak of 2017-2018 followed by holding without trading.
The brief record in July 2025 also shows that some investors found a profitable exit window. However, its temporary character highlights XRP’s inability to sustainably maintain a valuation higher than its former peak.
The increase in supply dilutes the value of each token XRP has a fixed cap of 100 billion units, all created at the launch of the XRP Ledger. The protocol does not issue new tokens by mining or staking. However, the supply available on the market keeps increasing as Ripple releases and distributes a portion of the XRP held in escrow.
Nicolai Sondergaard, an analyst at Nansen, explains:
The circulating supply has increased by 63%, from 38.7 billion in 2017 to 63.1 billion, while the total value of XRP has only fallen by about 3%. More XRP in circulation means each token represents a smaller share of an almost identical total value.
This distinction between unit price and market capitalization is essential. If the market capitalization remained stable while supply grew by 63%, the theoretical price of each XRP would decrease by about 39%. The price can therefore remain much lower than its former record even if the total value assigned to the network approaches it.
Oliver Carding, marketing manager of Tesseract Group, thus considers that the performance seems less bad when measured by capitalization. “In value, XRP has recovered”, he states. However, this collective recovery does not benefit former holders in the same way, as it is spread among more tokens.
In the 90 days preceding October 10, about 898 million XRP are said to have joined the circulating supply. At the same time, transaction fees have only destroyed about 44,800 XRP. The burn mechanism therefore remains too weak to offset the distributions.
Insufficient institutional demand and usage The increase in supply alone does not explain XRP’s lag. Institutional demand remains much weaker than that observed for Bitcoin and Ether. ETFs related to these two assets have attracted several billion dollars, while XRP products have more modest assets under management and flows.
Trading activity has also declined after periods of euphoria. A drop in volumes limits market depth and reduces XRP’s ability to absorb new units put into circulation without price pressure.
XRP’s positioning also played a role. Ripple develops its use in international payments and strengthens its ecosystem with the stablecoin RLUSD. However, the token has benefited less from successive big trends in the sector, such as decentralized finance, NFTs, staking, or applications related to artificial intelligence.
Finally, the long legal battle between Ripple and the Securities and Exchange Commission fostered regulatory uncertainty for several years. Even after favorable advances obtained by the company, this period hindered access to the U.S. market and weakened the confidence of some investors.
XRP therefore suffers not from a single weakness but from a combination of supply dilution, weaker demand, and limited adoption of the token itself. A sustained rise would require purchases to absorb future distributions rather than relying only on speculative episodes.
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
Luc Jose A.
Diplômé de Sciences Po Toulouse et titulaire d'une certification consultant blockchain délivrée par Alyra, j'ai rejoint l'aventure Cointribune en 2019. Convaincu du potentiel de la blockchain pour transformer de nombreux secteurs de l'économie, j'ai pris l'engagement de sensibiliser et d'informer le grand public sur cet écosystème en constante évolution. Mon objectif est de permettre à chacun de mieux comprendre la blockchain et de saisir les opportunités qu'elle offre. Je m'efforce chaque jour de fournir une analyse objective de l'actualité, de décrypter les tendances du marché, de relayer les dernières innovations technologiques et de mettre en perspective les enjeux économiques et sociétaux de cette révolution en marche.
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.
Former Ripple CBDC adviser Anthony Welfare says the XRP Ledger (XRPL) has the technology to support large-scale banking and cross-border payments. But there is a catch.
He believes that strong technology does not automatically lead to overall institutional adoption or guarantee gains in XRP’s price.
XRP Ledger Is Ready for Large-Scale BankingSpeaking on the AllinCrypto Podcast, Welfare said XRPL can support cross-border payments, tokenized assets, and fast, low-cost transactions. He sees no fundamental reason the network cannot scale to meet the needs of banks, payment systems, and governments.
“The tech is there, I don’t believe it couldn’t scale to whatever is needed for any banking system, payment system, or government.”
He further pointed to XRPL’s ability to process transactions in seconds.
He also noted that companies are moving beyond blockchain trials toward pilot programs and real-world applications, although much of this work remains private.
XRPL Has the Technology for Payments and TokenizationWelfare said XRPL allows users to trade assets and send money between wallets in less than three seconds.
He also pointed to Ripple (RLUSD), a dollar-backed stablecoin, as an example of how the network can support digital payments. In the future, users could also transfer digital versions of currencies, stocks, and other assets through blockchain networks.
Liquidity and Interoperability Remain Major ChallengesDespite these capabilities, institutions need more than speed to adopt XRPL. Welfare said they also require sufficient liquidity, reliable asset backing, custody services, and compliance systems.
Connecting different networks is another challenge, as businesses may use Ethereum, Arbitrum, private blockchains, or other systems instead of relying on one ledger.
“The tech is there. There’s no reason why it shouldn’t work, apart from humans.”
This means that the challenge is not only about transaction speed or cost. Institutions must also decide which networks to use and how to connect them.
XRPL Adoption Does Not Guarantee XRP Price RallyAt last, when asked whether growth in the XRPL ecosystem would lead to an XRP price rally. Welfare said banks and companies can use the XRP Ledger to send money and move digital assets. But more use of the network does not mean the XRP token will gain the same value.
The benefit to XRP depends on how it is used in payments. Other factors, such as available funds, asset backing, safe storage, and how payments move, also matter.
Therefore, higher XRPL transaction volumes do not automatically lead to higher XRP demand or prices.
As of now, XRP is trading near $1.31 amid a broader crypto market correction.
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.
Cross River Bank has integrated RLUSD on the XRP Ledger (XRPL) into its proprietary Core Operating System (COS), enabling fintech firms to access RLUSD settlements alongside ACH, wire transfers, and real-time payments through a single API connection. This development positions RLUSD as a direct settlement option within the banking infrastructure already used by Cross River’s fintech partners.
New settlement rail for fintechsWith this integration, fintechs connected to Cross River’s COS platform can now move between U.S. dollars and RLUSD directly. RLUSD, a stablecoin backed on a 1:1 basis by U.S. dollars, is issued on the XRP Ledger and supports real-time, low-cost settlement. Transactions on the XRPL are processed within three to five seconds, allowing for 24/7 settlement at minimal fees.
The enhanced system supports intraday settlement for both issuers and acquirers, helping to significantly reduce latency. This improvement is especially relevant for payment companies seeking immediate, secure, and regulated settlement without managing multiple vendors or blockchain systems.
Adam Goller, Head of Fintech Banking at Cross River, explained that this partnership removes complexity and streamlines payments, making it possible for fintechs to access all payment options, including RLUSD, through a single system.
Mini dictionary: Cross River Bank is a US-based financial institution specializing in technology-driven banking and payment solutions, serving both fintech companies and enterprises by providing regulated access to financial infrastructure.
XRP Ledger’s role and technical featuresAccording to XRPL validator Vet, integrating RLUSD on the XRPL marks a major step for XRP’s role as a bridge asset. The XRPL supports functions such as tokenization, trust lines, and account reserves, features that contribute to its efficiency and ability to serve as a settlement layer.
The ledger’s decentralized exchange also leverages an autobridging mechanism powered by XRP, which automatically provides liquidity between different token pairs. As more assets are issued on the XRPL, activity and demand for XRP are expected to grow in tandem.
Vet described the XRPL as a “purpose-built settlement machine,” adding that RLUSD’s integration opens the door for broader network usage and allows the ledger to manage the complexity of settlement autonomously.
Mini dictionary: XRPL (XRP Ledger) is a decentralized, open-source blockchain platform developed to enable fast, low-cost, and reliable cross-border payments and token issuance, using XRP as its native currency.
Adoption, scale, and industry impactRLUSD’s market capitalization has surpassed $2.5 billion, with more than $1 billion currently circulating on the XRP Ledger. To date, the XRPL network has settled over $1.3 trillion in value. RippleX, a division of Ripple dedicated to XRPL development, highlighted Cross River’s adoption as a major opportunity for advancing regulated blockchain payments in banking.
Markus Infanger, SVP of RippleX at Ripple, noted that Cross River’s deployment of RLUSD and the XRPL’s settlement capabilities demonstrates how regulated financial systems are increasingly leveraging blockchain for efficiency and scale.
The RLUSD integration is currently live only in a limited number of U.S. states. Ripple and Cross River have emphasized that this initiative creates shared infrastructure allowing RLUSD and traditional U.S. dollar transactions to coexist within a regulated framework.
MetricValueRLUSD total market cap$2.5 billionRLUSD supply on XRPL$1 billionValue settled on XRPL$1.3 trillionFor validators and participants in the XRPL ecosystem, the Cross River integration provides a live example of regulated, real-time settlement running at scale via public blockchain technology.
As countries continue exploring alternatives to reduce dependence on the US dollar, Phil Kwok, co-founder of EasyA—a prominent platform focused on blockchain education—suggested that XRP’s original mission should be reconsidered. Kwok argued that XRP can enable cross-border payments between different currencies without linking transactions to any particular government.
XRP’s design as a bridge assetAccording to Kwok, the XRP Ledger was created to solve inefficiencies in exchanging money between various fiat currencies. Traditional currency exchange often requires access to pairs with high liquidity. When these pairs lack sufficient volume, transactions become costly or complicated for users seeking to move value internationally.
The XRP Ledger uses a mechanism known as auto-bridging, allowing XRP to serve as an intermediary asset when exchanging two less liquid currencies. This setup can link markets that otherwise lack robust direct trading pairs and could lead to broader financial connectivity.
Kwok described XRP as intentionally built for this global intermediary role.
“The world needs a neutral bridge currency, and XRP was designed exactly for that. The question now is what happens as the landscape shifts,” he stated.
The auto-bridging feature stands out for its ability to facilitate transactions across otherwise fragmented currency markets.
Mini dictionary: EasyA, a blockchain accelerator and educational platform that provides resources for developers and entrepreneurs in the crypto industry.
Stablecoins: Limits and unanswered questionsAcknowledging the growing popularity of stablecoins, Kwok noted examples such as RLUSD—a stablecoin pegged to the US dollar and issued by a Ripple subsidiary. These digital assets let users transfer and retain dollar-based value without needing a US bank account, offering convenience in global commerce.
Despite this, Kwok raised concerns over scenarios in which two parties wish to transact without involving a currency tied to any national government. In such cases, stablecoins may not offer a truly neutral medium of exchange.
“There needs to be something in the middle unaffiliated with any specific government, and XRP is positioned for this role,” he emphasized.
This perspective highlights the ongoing debate within the crypto sector over the need for a digital asset capable of bridging multiple monetary systems.
Geopolitical tensions and growing demandKwok believes that rising geopolitical tensions could accelerate the search for alternative payment systems. Drawing a parallel with the global shift to remote work during the COVID-19 pandemic, he suggested that international disputes may act as a catalyst for the adoption of new financial technologies.
Crypto advocate John Squire expressed a similar opinion, highlighting that XRP was envisioned as a neutral bridge long before most market participants recognized the potential need. Squire cautioned that real-world adoption remains the true test ahead.
Kwok argued that geopolitical shifts increase the relevance of a neutral bridge asset, but also stated that demand alone does not guarantee XRP’s widespread adoption among financial institutions. The asset’s technical abilities for currency-to-currency transfers offer significant promise, yet actual take-up from banks and payment providers will ultimately determine its importance in the global system.
The outcome depends on whether financial institutions are willing to embrace XRP for its intended cross-border function. Sustained adoption, rather than just technical capability, will decide the extent of the asset’s impact.
Ripple has entered a strategic partnership with DriveWealth, a global provider of Brokerage-as-a-Service technology, to bring RLUSD stablecoin settlement and payments infrastructure to an international network of financial partners. DriveWealth serves as a technology backbone for more than 100 fintech platforms and financial institutions, offering white-label brokerage services to enable investment access without requiring firms to develop their own infrastructure.
RLUSD stablecoin integration with brokerage operationsThe collaboration will introduce RLUSD stablecoin-based settlement on the XRP Ledger (XRPL), starting in Europe with plans for future expansion into the US market. According to Ripple, the integration targets institutional finance and aims to simplify how fintechs, digital wallets and financial institutions manage payment and collateral flows.
With this partnership, DriveWealth clients may gain the capability to fund and manage collateral accounts using RLUSD stablecoins, which can be rapidly converted to cash. The infrastructure leverages the digital asset minting and redemption features of Ripple’s ecosystem, potentially streamlining operations and improving liquidity management for participating partners.
Standard Chartered, a multinational bank, recently launched custody services for RLUSD, further highlighting growing institutional use of Ripple’s stablecoin technology.
Despite the media attention, DriveWealth and Ripple have not revealed the list of partners that will immediately use the RLUSD settlement option. There were no transaction volume figures or a defined launch date announced.
Mini dictionary: DriveWealth is a US-based fintech firm specializing in API-driven brokerage infrastructure, enabling its clients to offer global investment access without building regulatory and technical systems from scratch.
DriveWealth will enable stablecoin-based funding and settlement solutions on a network of over 100 brokerage partners worldwide, building a link between the blockchain and traditional equities infrastructure.
Potential impact on stock settlement efficiencyOne of the core challenges for global brokerage operations relates to slow processing times for cross-border funding. While US equities now settle under a T+1 cycle, requiring trades to clear one business day after execution, international bank transfers may still lag due to time zone differences and the legacy payment system.
DriveWealth already offers its platform partners access to extended trading hours; however, the movement of cash across borders remains a constraint. RLUSD stablecoin transactions could allow for real-time fund transfers, unrestricted by conventional banking hours.
This structure reflects broader trends in institutional finance, where digital assets are increasingly used to facilitate rapid collateral movement and transaction settlement. Nonetheless, instant funding via RLUSD does not replace the regulatory clearing and settlement required for US stock transactions, but rather focuses on cash management before and after trades.
While rapid stablecoin funding increases efficiency, the regulated clearing process for US equities will continue to operate separately from blockchain-based collateral flows.
Expanding Ripple Prime’s digital asset servicesBeyond payments and collateral, the Ripple and DriveWealth partnership extends into digital asset custody and equity financing services. Ripple Prime—the institutional division of Ripple—aims to enhance market access for large clients by providing secure storage for digital assets and potential financing via equity-linked products.
This development follows DriveWealth’s acquisition of brokerage and market infrastructure player Hidden Road for $1.25 billion, which expanded its capabilities in equity and derivative product offerings.
Ripple is also working to expand its XRPL wallet functionality, which helps integrate digital asset payments into broader financial applications. For $XRP holders, the direct impact of this deal on token demand remains uncertain, as transaction fees and account reserves on XRPL will continue to require XRP, but major inflows or volumes have not been disclosed.
Further details regarding the rollout, partner adoption, and customer usage may be revealed at Ripple Swell, an industry event scheduled in New York on October 28.
Ethereum, XRP, and Hyperliquid face resistance as Celestia rallies and Lighter rebounds. Daily charts identify support levels and breakout tests for each coin.
Asset Price Rolling 24-hour change Aggregate 24-hour volume Ethereum (ETH) $2,425.66 −0.43% $11.90 billion XRP $1.31 −1.78% $1.36 billion Hyperliquid (HYPE) $79.99 −1.00% $642.82 million Celestia (TIA) $0.733617 +21.77% $302.67 million Lighter (LIT) $3.22 +5.38% $76.72 million Ethereum: MACD Weakness Eases Without a Bullish Crossover Ethereum closed October 16 at $2,420.22 on Kraken, down 0.79% from the previous daily close. Its $2,490.84 session high failed to extend the recovery, leaving price below the $2,527–$2,535 highs recorded earlier in the week.
Ethereum’s daily Kraken USD chart shows a narrowing negative MACD histogram, but no bullish crossover. Support lies at $2,390.35 and $2,313.42. Daily MACD, using 12- and 26-period exponential moving averages with a nine-period signal line, remained negative.
The MACD line stood at −38.59 against a −9.18 signal line. The histogram improved from −31.29 to −29.41, indicating a narrower bearish gap rather than a confirmed bullish crossover.
Four-hour MACD was above its signal line but still below zero at the latest completed candle. That supports a short-term recovery attempt, not confirmation that the daily decline has ended.
A daily price close above $2,490.84 would strengthen the case for another test of $2,527–$2,535. Holding above that second area would weaken the recent lower-high pattern.
A close below $2,390.35 would instead expose the October 15 low of $2,313.42 and invalidate the immediate rebound setup.
Compared with the October 16 report’s $2,435.07 snapshot, ETH was about 0.39% lower. The focus shifts from moving averages to momentum, but the need to reclaim overhead resistance remains unchanged.
XRP: RSI Slips as Support Near $1.28 Comes Into Focus XRP closed October 16 at $1.30952, down 1.79%. Its daily range remained above the October 15 low of $1.28274, but the lower close showed that the rebound had not established sustained demand.
RP’s daily RSI fell to 36.37 as price held above $1.28274–$1.28724 support. A close above $1.35208 would strengthen the recovery case. The 14-period daily RSI, calculated with Wilder smoothing, fell to 36.37 from 38.75. That reading remains below the neutral 50 level without reaching the conventional sub-30 oversold threshold.
It indicates weak momentum, not an automatic reversal signal. Four-hour RSI at 39.31 also remained below neutral.
The $1.28274–$1.28724 area contains the lows of the last two completed sessions. A daily close beneath $1.28274 would invalidate that short-term support and bring the September 16 low of $1.24610 back into view.
For a recovery, XRP first needs to reclaim $1.33338 and then close above $1.35208, Friday’s high.
That would improve the prospects for a move toward $1.38076–$1.38535. Until those levels are recovered, holding support alone does not establish a new uptrend.
The October 15 report used Bollinger Bands. Since then, Kraken’s daily close has fallen from $1.32990 to $1.30952, about 1.53%, reinforcing the weaker momentum picture.
Hyperliquid: Price Stays Below Falling Moving Averages HYPE closed Friday at $80.22, down 1.80%, after trading between $78.35 and $82.44. Successive highs below $83 since October 14 show that recovery attempts have struggled to regain the earlier trading range.
Hyperliquid closed below its falling 20-day and 50-day EMAs, with support at $77.35–$78.35 and initial resistance at $82.44–$82.69. The 20-day exponential moving average stood at $85.23 and the 50-day EMA at $83.33. Both declined from the previous session, while price remained below them.
The faster average is still above the slower one, so the latest candle did not produce a fresh bearish moving-average crossover. The immediate weakness comes from price position and the falling averages.
Support sits at $77.35–$78.35, encompassing the October 15 and 16 lows. A daily close below $77.35 would put the September lows around $76.53 and $75.11 in focus.
A close above the $82.44–$82.69 recent-high area would be the first recovery checkpoint. Regaining the 50-day EMA would strengthen that attempt, with the 20-day EMA the next dynamic resistance.
A move back beneath $77.35 would invalidate the near-term recovery case. Search interest alone does not resolve this technical weakness.
Celestia: Breakout Arrives With Higher Exchange Volume TIA’s October 16 close of $0.6877 marked a 16.60% daily gain on Kraken and cleared the $0.6321–$0.6325 highs established on October 11 and 13. Unlike an intraday excursion, that move was confirmed by a completed daily candle.
Celestia closed above $0.6325 as Kraken daily volume reached 2.71 times its preceding 20-session average. The $0.7617 level is an October 17 four-hour high, not a completed daily breakout. Kraken recorded 6.97 million TIA traded during the session, approximately 2.71 times the mean of the preceding 20 completed sessions.
The higher matching exchange volume gives the breakout more support than a price move on thin turnover. It does not identify the buyers or establish why they traded.
The first completed four-hour candle on October 17 reached $0.7617 and closed at $0.7330, above Friday’s $0.7221 high. However, the daily candle had not closed above that level.
A daily finish above $0.7221 would confirm a further advance, with $0.7617 the next observed price hurdle rather than a guaranteed target.
On a pullback, the $0.6195–$0.6325 breakout area becomes the main retest zone. Closing below $0.6195 would weaken the breakout, while losing Friday’s $0.5808 low would invalidate the latest upward leg and expose the earlier $0.5200 low.
Lighter: Rebound Remains Below the Bollinger Midpoint Lighter closed Friday at $3.174 on Kraken’s LIGHTER/USD market, up 4.86%. That recovered the previous day’s $3.133 high, but the close remained beneath Friday’s $3.336 intraday peak and the October 14 high of $3.415.
Lighter rebounded below its $3.685 Bollinger midpoint, with $3.336–$3.415 the nearest resistance area. Daily Bollinger Bands, calculated from a 20-day simple moving average and two population standard deviations, placed the midpoint at $3.685, the lower band at $2.890 and the upper band at $4.481.
Price rebounded inside the lower half of the envelope, while the midpoint continued to fall. This remains a recovery within a declining trend rather than a confirmed trend reversal.
A daily close above $3.336–$3.415 would clear the nearest resistance area and improve the prospects for a midpoint retest. Because the bands recalculate each session, $3.685 is a current reference, not a fixed future target.
Support is defined by the $2.918 and $2.997 lows of October 15 and 16. A close below $2.918 would invalidate the rebound and put the current lower band in focus.
The completed four-hour close of $3.218 showed early follow-through, but did not clear daily resistance.
The largest long position holder of STRK has an unrealized loss of $1.01 million.
Hyperliquid’s STRK contract is currently trading at $0.0665, down approximately 13% from the prior day’s reference price. Two whale addresses holding STRK long positions have incurred large unrealized and liquidation losses respectively. The largest STRK long address, 0xd978…2fd9, holds around 64.2 million STRK in long positions, with a position value of roughly $4.25 million, using 5x cross leverage, and currently has an unrealized loss of about $1.019 million, resulting in a position return of approximately -96%. Separately, the STRK long positions of address 0x3392…d367 were liquidated tonight: around 21.36 million tokens were forcibly closed, valued at ~$1.466 million, with a realized loss of ~$207,000. The address subsequently opened ~4.79 million new STRK long positions, with a latest position value of ~$319,000, using 5x isolated leverage, and a liquidation price of ~$0.059.
18 minutes ago
UNCX discloses cross-chain attack on Smart Token Vesting V2, resulting in approximately $807,600 in losses.
According to an official incident report from UNCX Network, on October 14, attackers exploited a set of public vesting operations of Smart Token Vesting V2 to create a mismatch between the pool’s token balance and recorded shares, enabling controlled positions to withdraw excess tokens. The attack impacted four blockchains: Ethereum, BNB Chain, Base, and Robinhood, involving 10 tokens, with 11 confirmed withdrawal transactions. The verified economic value totals approximately $807,600, of which BNB Chain accounts for about $567,500. All involved contract calls did not utilize administrator privileges. Post-incident, white hats have returned 82,143,500 X tokens and 23.8682 ETH, with no major tokens remaining to be disposed of at this time.
18 minutes ago
The team behind Trump reaped $779 million to $1.16 billion in profits from crypto buyers, while the buyers have suffered 97% losses.
CryptoQuant founder Ki Young Ju published a post noting that the team behind the TRUMP crypto token generated a profit of $779 million to $1.16 billion from token holders, while buyers of the token incurred a 97% loss.
18 minutes ago
Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management Co., Ltd. has been registered, with Du Yanjing, co-head of Solana China, serving as its legal representative.
According to Qichacha, Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management Co., Ltd. was registered in June this year with a registered capital of 5 million yuan. Claire Du (Du Yanjing), co-head of Solana China, serves as its legal representative. Separately, Shanghai Yaokun Qiusuo Digital Technology Co., Ltd. was established in August this year with a registered capital of 10 million yuan, with Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management holding a 45% stake in the latter. Even Jiang (Jiang Yiwen), co-head of Solana Foundation’s China region, is chairman of Yaokun Qiusuo, while Du Yanjing acts as a director. Public information indicates Yaokun Qiusuo’s core business includes technical services, development, consulting, exchange, transfer and promotion; computer system services; information system integration services; information technology consulting; data processing services; internet data services; IoT technology services; wholesale of computer software, hardware and auxiliary equipment; information consulting services (excluding licensed services); enterprise management consulting; financial consulting; and conference and exhibition services (overseas exhibitions require approval from relevant authorities). It should be noted that "Solana" is a name adopted by a sole proprietorship, and there is currently no equity evidence linking the two companies to the Solana Foundation. This week, Solana team members shared photos announcing the opening of an office in Shanghai, China.
18 minutes ago
Arthur Hayes: The so-called crypto quantum threat is "nonsense", users only need to focus on wallet management.
In a recent interview with The Rollup, Arthur Hayes dismissed the so-called crypto quantum threat as "bullshit"—exaggerated and overblown, framing it as a known, manageable risk rather than a reason to sell assets. Hayes emphasized that effective protection hinges on wallet hygiene practices, such as avoiding address reuse and using updated signature types, noting that most risks are concentrated among users with poor address management. He does not view quantum computing as a current catalyst for panic or selling Bitcoin.
18 minutes ago
Thai police arrested a Chinese fugitive wanted by China on suspicion of money laundering and crypto transactions in Bangkok.
According to Thai media outlet Khaosod English, Thai immigration police recently arrested a 37-year-old Chinese national in Bangkok. The man is wanted by Chinese police on suspicion of involvement in a transnational criminal network and money laundering. Police said the criminal network in question involved transactions exceeding 500 million yuan (approximately 2.485 billion Thai baht). The suspect is alleged to have processed cryptocurrency and foreign exchange transactions for the criminal group via more than 133 accounts, and assisted members of the transnational criminal network in obtaining visas. Police added that the suspect evaded manhunts by falsifying residence registration documents, changing license plates, and altering vehicle appearances, before finally being apprehended at a luxury residence in Bangkok. Thai authorities will handle his overstay issues in accordance with the law and coordinate his deportation back to China for investigation.
Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.
Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.
NFT sales have climbed 24.57% to $47.14 million over the past seven days, with Ethereum retaining first place among blockchains and a $2.97 million Bitcoin transaction leading individual sales.
Summary
$47.14 million in weekly NFT sales represented a 24.57% gain over the preceding seven days. Buyer addresses rose 252.23% to 107,061, while transactions fell 32.35% to 507,562. Ethereum led blockchain sales with $19.59 million, up 18.48% over the seven-day comparison period. Bitcoin sales rose 132.05% to $8.25 million, placing the network third behind Polygon. Courtyard led collections with $7.68 million, while one $8888 BRC-20 sale fetched $2.97 million. According to data from CryptoSlam captured on Oct. 17, NFT sales reached $47,138,650 in its rolling seven-day dashboard, while seller addresses rose 192.38% to 89,117.
The tracker’s transaction count moved in the opposite direction, falling to 507,562 despite the rise in sales value and participating addresses. Buyer and seller figures count wallet addresses, which do not necessarily represent separate individuals.
Based on the dashboard’s rounded growth rate, the preceding seven-day sales total was approximately $37.84 million. The latest figure was roughly $9.30 million higher, calculated by dividing current sales by 1.2457 and subtracting the result from the current total.
The rolling comparison differs from the snapshot published a week earlier, when crypto.news recorded weekly sales of $39.85m. The Oct. 10 report listed 778,055 transactions and 30,332 buyer addresses at its reporting cutoff.
Separately, CoinGecko listed Bitcoin near $81,523 and Ethereum around $2,429 during checks on Oct. 17. Its global market chart put cryptocurrency market capitalization at approximately $2.84 trillion, down 0.87% over 24 hours. Those spot readings use a different timeframe from the seven-day NFT totals.
Ethereum leads NFT sales with $19.59 million CryptoSlam ranked Ethereum first with $19,590,513 in sales, an 18.48% weekly gain. Buyer addresses rose 261.50% to 15,371, while the tracker separately identified $1.61 million in wash-trading volume.
Ethereum led seven-day blockchain NFT sales with $19.59 million | Source: CryptoSlam Ethereum accounted for approximately 41.6% of the global sales total, calculated from the captured figures. Its sales exceeded the combined $16.63 million recorded by second-ranked Polygon and third-ranked Bitcoin.
Polygon posted $8,377,559 in sales, down 1.99%, while buyer addresses rose 172.77% to 27,419. CryptoSlam listed another $18.72 million as wash volume, separate from the sales figure used for its ranking.
Bitcoin followed with $8,252,706, up 132.05%, and 4,594 buyer addresses, up 269.59%. Its separately tracked wash volume was $86,406. The $2,968,838 sale from the $8888 BRC-20 category represented approximately 36% of Bitcoin’s weekly sales.
In fourth place, BNB Chain recorded $4,100,527, up 116.91%, with 4,857 buyer addresses, a 251.70% gain. Immutable ranked fifth at $2,546,683, down 5.19%, although buyer addresses rose 237.06% to 2,774.
Base completed the leading six with $1,883,050, down 7.33%, and 1,185 buyer addresses, up 276.19%. CryptoSlam separately flagged $4.80 million in Base wash volume. Combined, the six networks generated approximately $44.75 million, or 94.9% of global sales.
Courtyard tops weekly NFT collection sales CryptoSlam placed Polygon-based Courtyard first with $7,682,847, up 1.65%, across 133,157 transactions. Its 18,131 buyer addresses were down 13.99%, while seller addresses fell 3.88% to 15,380.
Courtyard led seven-day NFT collection sales with $7.68 million | Source: CryptoSlam Second-ranked $8888 BRC-20 NFTs recorded $2,968,838, up 807.52%. The category had just one transaction, one buyer address and one seller address, with the single recorded sale accounting for its entire weekly volume.
Ethereum’s Argonauts took third with $2,750,332, up 104.70%, from 994 transactions. CryptoSlam counted 339 buyer addresses and 379 seller addresses, up 26.97% and 30.69%, respectively.
Pudgy Penguins followed with $2,564,945, a 77.03% gain, across 407 transactions. Its buyer count rose 51.75% to 173. In separate coverage, American collector Adam Weitsman said he had bought 117 Pudgy Penguins over the Oct. 10–11 weekend. His stated purchase count is separate from CryptoSlam’s weekly address and transaction totals.
Bitcoin-based $ATMC BRC-20 NFTs ranked fifth at $1,426,998, up 156.87%, with 1,320 transactions and 667 buyer addresses. Guild of Guardians Heroes on Immutable-Zk followed at $1,411,807, up 4.92%, from 990 transactions and 531 buyers.
For Guild of Guardians Heroes, the tracker recorded 536 seller addresses, down 19.64%, while buyer addresses fell 20.75% over the comparison period.
CryptoPunks placed seventh with $1,336,908, down 45.49%. Its 15 transactions involved 13 buyer addresses and 14 seller addresses, according to the same collection table.
Bitcoin leads high-value NFT sales CryptoSlam’s detailed sales ranking listed three Bitcoin transactions ahead of its leading Ethereum and Cardano entries. Its largest sale, an $ 8,888 BRC-20 inscription identified by the prefix 85760015743bc7e, fetched $2,968,838.11, or 36.3755 BTC, approximately two days before the snapshot.
$8888 BRC-20 led seven-day individual NFT sales with a $2.97 million transaction | Source: CryptoSlam Two $X@AI BRC-20 entries followed. The inscription beginning 535f94fd4a2350c52 sold for $638,447.76, or 7.6924 BTC, around six days earlier. Another beginning 2a7bcc4bb16d4bcc sold for $514,872.50, or 6.3536 BTC, approximately two days earlier.
Uniswap V3 Positions NFT-V1 #291 ranked fourth at $217,865.77, settled in 217,865.7656 USDC on Ethereum, roughly 16 hours before capture.
ADA Handle, identified by the asset prefix asset14farmmvsem0z2z5gwh8j88l34z70u56mn, placed fifth at $205,082.85, or 883,062.656 ADA on Cardano, approximately four days before capture.
U.S. crypto ETFs tracked across five Farside Investors tables have recorded $610.7 million in net outflows during Oct. 12–16, with Ethereum funds losing more money than Bitcoin products.
Summary
$610.7 million left the five tracked ETF categories, down from $1.29 billion the previous week. Ethereum ETFs lost $320.1 million, with BlackRock’s ETHA accounting for $299 million. Bitcoin funds recorded $228.4 million in withdrawals despite two positive trading sessions. Solana, Zcash and Hyperliquid products lost a combined $62.2 million during the five-session period. Farside Investors’ daily figures put Ethereum ETF withdrawals at $320.1 million, followed by $228.4 million from Bitcoin funds, while Solana, Zcash and Hyperliquid products finished the week negative.
Crypto ETF withdrawals fall 52.5% from the previous week Calculated from Farside’s five tables, weekly net withdrawals fell 52.5% from $1.2863 billion during Oct. 5–9. Each tracked category remained negative, although Bitcoin, Ethereum and Zcash recorded smaller losses than in the preceding period.
As crypto.news previously reported, the same five groups lost $1.29 billion during that earlier week. Bitcoin accounted for $678.9 million of those withdrawals, while Ethereum products shed $542.2 million.
The latest daily totals, calculated across Farside’s tables, show that Tuesday was the only session with combined net inflows. Funds attracted $194.3 million that day after losing $155.5 million on Monday.
Wednesday brought $393.4 million in withdrawals, the largest daily loss of the reporting period. Another $90.1 million left on Thursday, followed by $166 million on Friday.
Across the five-session window, Bitcoin and Ethereum accounted for $548.5 million, or approximately 89.8%, of the combined net withdrawal calculated from Farside’s figures.
A separate CoinShares update published Oct. 16 reported $434 million in withdrawals from global digital asset investment products during its reporting week. Its global product coverage and reporting cutoff differ from the five U.S. ETF categories aggregated here.
CoinShares attributed its reported withdrawals to changing interest rate expectations after U.S. inflation and retail sales releases. Its assessment concerned its own dataset; Farside’s tables provide fund flows without assigning a cause to individual transactions.
Ethereum ETF losses reach $320.1 million Ethereum funds recorded four negative sessions and one positive day in Farside’s table. Monday’s $85.4 million withdrawal was followed by $24.8 million in Tuesday inflows, before Wednesday brought the week’s largest exit at $129.5 million.
Thursday and Friday added respective withdrawals of $60.3 million and $69.7 million. Calculated across the table’s daily entries, BlackRock’s ETHA lost $299 million, equivalent to 93.4% of the category’s net weekly outflow.
Fidelity’s FETH attracted $10.5 million over the week, while Grayscale’s Ethereum Mini Trust lost $12.4 million. Grayscale’s ETHE recorded an $18.3 million withdrawal, and Franklin Templeton’s EZET shed $900,000.
The remaining Ethereum products showed no net flows during the period in Farside’s table.
Elsewhere in the U.S. Ethereum fund market, VanEck requested withdrawal of its proposed Lido Staked Ethereum ETF registration in an Oct. 14 filing, as reported Oct. 15.
The sponsor’s SEC submission said it “does not intend to proceed with the planned distribution” of the trust’s shares. VanEck confirmed that the registration statement had not become effective and that no securities had been issued or sold under it.
The filing sought the SEC’s consent to withdraw the registration statement under Rule 477. It concerned a proposed offering that had never issued shares, separate from the operating funds in Farside’s weekly flow table.
Bitcoin ETFs lose $228.4 million despite Tuesday buying Bitcoin funds recorded their strongest session on Tuesday, attracting $175.7 million, according to Farside. Wednesday’s $261.4 million withdrawal exceeded that intake, and Friday ended with another $82.4 million exit.
BlackRock’s IBIT lost $165.4 million over the week, calculated from its five daily entries. Fidelity’s FBTC shed $60.2 million, while Morgan Stanley’s MSBT attracted $6.7 million and Bitwise’s BITB added $2.2 million.
Invesco’s BTCO lost $4.1 million, and Grayscale’s Bitcoin Mini Trust recorded $7.6 million in withdrawals.
Earlier in October, Bitcoin funds had suffered $484.9 million in withdrawals during the Oct. 7 session. Coverage published Oct. 8 identified that as their largest daily outflow since June 25, when withdrawals reached $691.7 million.
Solana funds record a second week of daily outflows Solana products lost $25.5 million during Oct. 12–16, with every session negative in Farside’s table. The category recorded $25 million in withdrawals across five negative sessions the previous week.
Bitwise’s BSOL accounted for $18.8 million of the latest weekly loss, calculated from its daily entries. Grayscale’s GSOL shed $6 million on Thursday, while VSOL lost $700,000 on Monday.
Friday’s $12.7 million withdrawal, entirely from BSOL, was the category’s largest daily exit of the week.
Zcash’s tracked ZCSH product lost $19.2 million, according to Farside’s daily figures. Wednesday brought $3.7 million in inflows, but Thursday’s $14.8 million withdrawal exceeded that intake.
Hyperliquid products recorded $17.5 million in weekly withdrawals. Farside’s entries show losses of $6.4 million from BHYP, $8.5 million from THYP and $2.6 million from HYPG.
Thursday accounted for $10.3 million of Hyperliquid’s weekly net outflow, including $7.1 million from THYP. Farside recorded zero net flows across all three products on Tuesday and Friday.
Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin shared a “fun fact of the day” on X, posting two detailed cost tables comparing Bitcoin mining economics to AI inference.
The numbers expose a clear gap: Bitcoin mining costs split roughly 50/50 between compute capex and electricity, while AI inference is dominated almost entirely by hardware capex.
That gap gives power-rich Bitcoin mining operations a structural flexibility advantage that pure AI operators largely cannot replicate.
Vitalik’s Numbers: Bitcoin Mining Is ~46% Electricity, AI Inference Is ~5% Buterin’s tables break down costs per unit of work. For Bitcoin mining, the approximate total cost per BTC mined sits near $93,700.
Compute capex, hardware, cooling, and power gear, accounts for roughly $37,600, or about 40%.
Electricity into the machines adds $40,600, or 43.3%. Other electricity costs lift the total electricity share to about 45.9%.
Labor accounts for $3,200 (3.4%). Facilities rent comes to $2,500 (2.7%). Other expenses, maintenance, insurance, and bandwidth, make up about $7,400 (7.9%).
AI inference per GPU-year tells a very different story. Total costs land near $26,260. Compute capex alone takes up $19,900, or roughly 76% of the total.
Electricity, by contrast, totals just $1,260 across all categories, barely 4.8% of the bill. Labor adds $1,400. Facilities rent comes in at $900. Other overheads make up around $2,800.
Buterin did not frame the comparison as a criticism of either model. He presented it as a factual contrast.
Wu Blockchain highlighted the post as a notable data point for the crypto-AI infrastructure debate, noting that Vitalik has been increasingly vocal on AI and crypto security risks.
He has also built a privacy-focused AI agent that limits identity and data leaks, signaling his deeper engagement with AI infrastructure questions.
Fun fact of the day: Bitcoin mining cost is split about 50/50 between compute capex and electricity. Meanwhile, AI inference is almost completely dominated by compute capex. pic.twitter.com/PCFKZSuNRw
— vitalik.eth (@VitalikButerin) October 17, 2026
Why Bitcoin Miners Are Structurally Positioned to Win in AI Hosting The cost gap carries a direct strategic implication. Because Bitcoin mining electricity costs are large and variable, miners with flexible power contracts can curtail or redirect capacity when hashprice falls.
AI inference operators have no such relief. Once a GPU cluster is financed and deployed, the capex clock ticks whether or not the hardware is fully utilized.
That explains the wave of miner-to-AI pivots already underway. Core Scientific signed an AI data center deal with AMD as it shifted capacity away from mining.
Bitcoin miner MARA is targeting AI growth through a $168M EDF deal. And Anthropic signed a 20-year data center lease with Bitcoin miner TeraWulf, locking in long-term power access through mining infrastructure.
VanEck has also made the case publicly. The asset manager argued that Bitcoin miners’ AI arbitrage could be a game-changer, pointing to the same structural cost gap Buterin’s tables now quantify precisely.
More broadly, Bitcoin miners are diversifying into AI and projecting billions in revenue from hosting and colocation contracts.
Buterin’s post adds a precise, data-backed foundation to a shift the industry has been tracking for months.
Miners that control large, flexible power contracts are not just hedging, they are sitting on a structural asset that AI-only operators cannot easily replicate.
And despite the AI-Bitcoin intersection narrative, Vitalik has rejected claims that AI could crash Bitcoin’s price by 50%, reinforcing his view that the two ecosystems are more complementary than competitive.
Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has compared Bitcoin mining with AI inference, sharing cost estimates that put electricity at 45.9% of mining expenses and computing capital expenditure at approximately 76% of inference costs.
Summary
Electricity represents 45.9% of Bitcoin mining costs in the comparison Buterin shared. Computing capital expenditure accounts for approximately 76% of the AI inference estimate. Both tables include cooling, power equipment, and financing within computing capital expenditure. US operators have pursued AI facilities through customer leases, borrowing and crypto treasury sales. In an Oct. 17 X post, Buterin described Bitcoin mining costs as split roughly evenly between computing investment and electricity, while calling AI inference almost completely dominated by computing capital expenditure.
Fun fact of the day: Bitcoin mining cost is split about 50/50 between compute capex and electricity. Meanwhile, AI inference is almost completely dominated by compute capex. pic.twitter.com/PCFKZSuNRw
— vitalik.eth (@VitalikButerin) October 17, 2026 Bitcoin electricity costs approach half of the estimated total Buterin’s post draws a distinction between the spending required to purchase computing infrastructure and the recurring expense of powering it.
“Bitcoin mining cost is split about 50/50 between compute capex and electricity,” he wrote.
The mining table attached to his post provides a more detailed breakdown. Electricity supplied directly to computers costs an estimated $40,600 per BTC, accounting for 43.3% of the total. Other electricity expenses contribute another $2,400, or 2.6%.
Together, the two electricity categories amount to $43,000 per BTC and 45.9% of the listed cost.
Computing capital expenditure contributes approximately $37,600 per BTC, representing around 40%. The category covers hardware, cooling, and power equipment, including financing, so its scope extends beyond the purchase price of mining machines.
The remaining categories include labor at $3,200 per BTC, facility rent at approximately $2,500, and other expenses at roughly $7,400. Maintenance, spare parts, facility operations, insurance, taxes, and bandwidth fall into the final category.
Adding the listed dollar amounts produces an estimated total of $93,700 per BTC. The calculation describes the table Buterin shared and does not establish a uniform production cost for every Bitcoin miner.
AI inference spending centers on computing infrastructure The AI table uses a different unit, dollars per GPU-year, and assigns a much larger share of expenses to computing capital expenditure.
Its estimate places that category at approximately $19,900 per GPU-year, or 76% of the total. As with the mining table, the category includes hardware, cooling, power equipment, and financing.
Electricity supplied directly to computers accounts for $1,050 per GPU-year, representing 4%. Other electricity contributes $210, or 0.8%, bringing the combined electricity share to 4.8%.
Labor adds $1,400 per GPU-year, while facility rent contributes approximately $900. The remaining maintenance, operating, insurance, tax, and bandwidth expenses total roughly $2,800.
The listed amounts sum to approximately $26,260 per GPU-year. Because one table measures costs per Bitcoin and the other per GPU-year, their dollar totals do not provide a direct comparison of the price of performing the same task.
Buterin summarized the difference by writing that AI inference is “almost completely dominated by compute capex.” The accompanying breakdown assigns approximately three-quarters of total inference costs to that category, with electricity, labor, rent and other operating expenses making up the remainder.
TeraWulf separates AI hosting from processor ownership US data center agreements illustrate how companies divide responsibility for facilities and computing equipment.
As crypto.news previously reported, TeraWulf was considering a potential $3.5 billion financing in July to support an AI campus in Kentucky. The financing plans, attributed to Bloomberg, included possible leveraged loans and high-yield bonds.
The planned borrowing followed TeraWulf’s announced 20-year lease with Anthropic at its Justified Data campus in Hawesville. The company said the facility would support approximately 401 megawatts of critical computing capacity and estimated $19 billion in revenue over the initial contract term.
Initial capacity was expected in the second half of 2027, with full deployment targeted for early 2028. The revenue estimate covered two decades of the agreement and was not an upfront payment.
Chief Financial Officer Patrick Fleury described an operating model in which customers remain responsible for servers, processors and technology upgrades, while TeraWulf supplies power and physical infrastructure.
Earlier financing supported its New York operations. In October 2025, a TeraWulf subsidiary priced $3.2 billion of senior secured notes carrying a 7.75% annual interest rate and maturing in 2030.
Crypto sales and power agreements support AI development Other companies have used digital assets to help finance their AI data center projects. A July 31 account documented transactions announced the previous day by Quantum Solutions and US-listed Hyperscale Data.
Quantum’s subsidiary GPT Pals Studio sold 1,000 ETH for $1.903 million after transaction fees to support Japanese AI data center expansion plans. Hyperscale monetized approximately 100 BTC and established a Bitcoin-backed credit facility for construction in Michigan.
Hyperscale’s initial customer deployment covered approximately 20 megawatts under a ten-year agreement with two optional five-year extensions. The company estimated more than $1.2 billion in revenue over the maximum term, subject to those extensions.
MARA’s July announcement focused on securing land and power capacity for future development in Texas. The company disclosed a definitive agreement to acquire a 1,200-acre property intended to support high-performance computing, flexible computing services, and Bitcoin mining.
According to MARA’s announcement, the site was expected to provide access to an initial gigawatt of grid capacity by October 2027, with total available capacity projected to reach two gigawatts by April 2028.
MARA planned to develop the property with Starwood Digital Ventures, with phased construction subject to regulatory approvals. Seller HIF would retain a minority ownership interest once an HPC lease was executed.
TLDR: Vitalik Buterin combines Tor, zkAPI and local AI models to improve privacy when using AI agents. Separate Tor circuits and cover traffic help conceal AI activity, but timing attacks remain a concern. AI agents reportedly proved Ethereum’s Fast Confirmation Rule and helped fix a fork choice bug. ETH trades at $2,428.47 as traders watch 2,390-2,410 support and resistance near $2,488. Vitalik Buterin has demonstrated a privacy-focused setup for AI agents using Tor, zero-knowledge payments and local language models. The Ethereum co-founder described the system as increasingly usable, despite latency issues and limitations against certain timing attacks.
Separately, AI agents at ethlabs_org reportedly generated formal proofs for Ethereum’s Fast Confirmation Rule within days. The work also identified and fixed a fork choice bug while confirming block safety in 24 seconds.
Meanwhile, Ethereum’s native token, ETH, faces continued price pressure. CoinGecko data has seen the token drop 1.08% over 24 hours and 2.43% over seven days.
Market analyst Ella identifies $2,390-$2,410 as the key support zone following a failed rebound to $2,488.
How Vitalik Buterin’s Private AI Agents Use Tor and zkAPI Buterin outlined a privacy-focused wrapper for his AI agent harness, combining Tor routing, zkAPI payments, cover traffic and local prompt rewriting. The setup aims to reduce the information exposed when users interact with AI services.
Each conversation receives a separate Tor circuit, helping separate network connections across sessions. Random cover traffic disguises request patterns, while zkAPI aims to prevent payment activity from revealing a user’s identity.
Wrapped zkAPI + Tor + extra cover traffic + local LLM prompt rewriting in an open-AI compatible daemon, and made a "paranoid mode" wrapper for my agent harness (pi):
Each conversation gets assigned a separate Tor circuit, your requests are masked with random cover traffic, zkAPI… pic.twitter.com/2y236zA0cw
— vitalik.eth (@VitalikButerin) October 16, 2026
The system also rewrites prompts locally using a language model supplied by the user. Buterin said he was using Qwen3.8-flash-next for this process.
The agent runs inside a Bubblewrap sandbox, with MicroVM isolation also under experimentation. Torsocks routes its network activity through Tor, adding another layer of protection.
However, Buterin acknowledged that the setup still introduces considerable latency, especially when starting new conversations. He also warned that Tor offers limited protection against active timing attacks involving collusion between an AI provider and a network guard.
He suggested that a specialized mixnet could offer stronger protection through constant cover traffic, although this would require more bandwidth. Cheaper zkAPI deposit and withdrawal gas costs are also expected on the Ethereum mainnet.
Ethereum AI Agents Prove Block Safety as ETH Tests Support At ethlabs_org, AI agents reportedly generated formal proofs for Ethereum’s Fast Confirmation Rule within days. The process also uncovered and corrected a fork choice bug, while confirming block safety in 24 seconds.
AI is making Ethereum more ambitious.
You might have heard about the challenges that blockchains face in a post-AI world, and while security assumptions will surely be stress-tested in the coming months and years, there is another side to it. I believe AI will let us speedrun… pic.twitter.com/Ljn2mPUyoG
— Francesco (@fradamt) October 16, 2026
Formal proofs use mathematical reasoning to verify that a system satisfies specific properties. For blockchain infrastructure, this can help developers test protocol rules and identify implementation errors before they cause wider problems.
The reported results point to a potential role for AI agents in Ethereum research and protocol verification. However, the supplied information does not establish whether the work has undergone independent review or broader production testing.
ETH’s price action presents a separate concern for traders. Ella reported that the token briefly reached $2,488 before retreating toward $2,416, remaining below a lower-high resistance line.
The $2,390-$2,410 zone is the immediate level to watch. Holding support could open another attempt at $2,450 and $2,488, while a breakdown could expose $2,350.
ETH price on CoinGecko CoinGecko’s latest figures show ETH trading at $2,428.47, with $10.83 billion in 24-hour trading volume. The key takeaway is that Ethereum’s AI research is advancing, but ETH has yet to establish a convincing price reversal.
The largest long position holder of STRK has an unrealized loss of $1.01 million.
Hyperliquid’s STRK contract is currently trading at $0.0665, down approximately 13% from the prior day’s reference price. Two whale addresses holding STRK long positions have incurred large unrealized and liquidation losses respectively. The largest STRK long address, 0xd978…2fd9, holds around 64.2 million STRK in long positions, with a position value of roughly $4.25 million, using 5x cross leverage, and currently has an unrealized loss of about $1.019 million, resulting in a position return of approximately -96%. Separately, the STRK long positions of address 0x3392…d367 were liquidated tonight: around 21.36 million tokens were forcibly closed, valued at ~$1.466 million, with a realized loss of ~$207,000. The address subsequently opened ~4.79 million new STRK long positions, with a latest position value of ~$319,000, using 5x isolated leverage, and a liquidation price of ~$0.059.
18 minutes ago
UNCX discloses cross-chain attack on Smart Token Vesting V2, resulting in approximately $807,600 in losses.
According to an official incident report from UNCX Network, on October 14, attackers exploited a set of public vesting operations of Smart Token Vesting V2 to create a mismatch between the pool’s token balance and recorded shares, enabling controlled positions to withdraw excess tokens. The attack impacted four blockchains: Ethereum, BNB Chain, Base, and Robinhood, involving 10 tokens, with 11 confirmed withdrawal transactions. The verified economic value totals approximately $807,600, of which BNB Chain accounts for about $567,500. All involved contract calls did not utilize administrator privileges. Post-incident, white hats have returned 82,143,500 X tokens and 23.8682 ETH, with no major tokens remaining to be disposed of at this time.
18 minutes ago
The team behind Trump reaped $779 million to $1.16 billion in profits from crypto buyers, while the buyers have suffered 97% losses.
CryptoQuant founder Ki Young Ju published a post noting that the team behind the TRUMP crypto token generated a profit of $779 million to $1.16 billion from token holders, while buyers of the token incurred a 97% loss.
18 minutes ago
Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management Co., Ltd. has been registered, with Du Yanjing, co-head of Solana China, serving as its legal representative.
According to Qichacha, Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management Co., Ltd. was registered in June this year with a registered capital of 5 million yuan. Claire Du (Du Yanjing), co-head of Solana China, serves as its legal representative. Separately, Shanghai Yaokun Qiusuo Digital Technology Co., Ltd. was established in August this year with a registered capital of 10 million yuan, with Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management holding a 45% stake in the latter. Even Jiang (Jiang Yiwen), co-head of Solana Foundation’s China region, is chairman of Yaokun Qiusuo, while Du Yanjing acts as a director. Public information indicates Yaokun Qiusuo’s core business includes technical services, development, consulting, exchange, transfer and promotion; computer system services; information system integration services; information technology consulting; data processing services; internet data services; IoT technology services; wholesale of computer software, hardware and auxiliary equipment; information consulting services (excluding licensed services); enterprise management consulting; financial consulting; and conference and exhibition services (overseas exhibitions require approval from relevant authorities). It should be noted that "Solana" is a name adopted by a sole proprietorship, and there is currently no equity evidence linking the two companies to the Solana Foundation. This week, Solana team members shared photos announcing the opening of an office in Shanghai, China.
18 minutes ago
Arthur Hayes: The so-called crypto quantum threat is "nonsense", users only need to focus on wallet management.
In a recent interview with The Rollup, Arthur Hayes dismissed the so-called crypto quantum threat as "bullshit"—exaggerated and overblown, framing it as a known, manageable risk rather than a reason to sell assets. Hayes emphasized that effective protection hinges on wallet hygiene practices, such as avoiding address reuse and using updated signature types, noting that most risks are concentrated among users with poor address management. He does not view quantum computing as a current catalyst for panic or selling Bitcoin.
18 minutes ago
Thai police arrested a Chinese fugitive wanted by China on suspicion of money laundering and crypto transactions in Bangkok.
According to Thai media outlet Khaosod English, Thai immigration police recently arrested a 37-year-old Chinese national in Bangkok. The man is wanted by Chinese police on suspicion of involvement in a transnational criminal network and money laundering. Police said the criminal network in question involved transactions exceeding 500 million yuan (approximately 2.485 billion Thai baht). The suspect is alleged to have processed cryptocurrency and foreign exchange transactions for the criminal group via more than 133 accounts, and assisted members of the transnational criminal network in obtaining visas. Police added that the suspect evaded manhunts by falsifying residence registration documents, changing license plates, and altering vehicle appearances, before finally being apprehended at a luxury residence in Bangkok. Thai authorities will handle his overstay issues in accordance with the law and coordinate his deportation back to China for investigation.
Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has once again ignited a debate across the crypto ecosystem after spotlighting a key difference between the cost structures of Bitcoin mining and AI inference earlier today.
In what he described as an interesting fact about the matter, Buterin briefly explained how both Bitcoin and AI rely on computing resources but in different ways.
Buterin discusses Bitcoin mining costWhile he pointed to the different roles computing hardware and electricity play in Bitcoin and the AI industry, he explained the cost structure for both.
HOT Stories
According to Buterin, Bitcoin mining costs are split almost equally between computing hardware investments, known as capital expenditure (CapEx), and electricity consumption.
You Might Also Like
As such, miners ensure that they invest heavily in specialized equipment while also paying substantial energy bills to keep their operations running.
AI inference, on the other hand, which refers to the process of using trained AI models to generate responses or perform tasks, has a different cost structure.
Unlike Bitcoin, Buterin notes that AI inference costs are dominated almost entirely by computing hardware investments, as they do not rely on heavy electricity consumption.
Bitcoin and AI comparedNotably, the comparison made by Buterin clearly shows that Bitcoin miners need both powerful hardware and a steady supply of electricity to compete for block rewards, making energy prices a major fraction of their production cost.
Meanwhile, the case is different for AI, as AI inference relies heavily on computing infrastructure capable of processing large volumes of requests.
This means that the cost of acquiring and maintaining that infrastructure takes the major share in the broader economics of running AI systems.
US spot Bitcoin ETFs lost $82.39M on October 16, with BlackRock’s IBIT accounting for $71.78M.
Ethereum ETFs recorded $69.68M in outflows, marking their third consecutive day of withdrawals.
Bitcoin open interest rose 4.5% as its price fell 2.68%, raising concerns about leveraged long positions.
Cryptoinsightuk sees a possible BTC correction toward $75,000, but the outcome remains uncertain.
Bitcoin ETF outflows reached $82.39 million on October 16, as spot Ethereum ETFs lost another $69.68 million. The withdrawals coincided with Bitcoin trading at $81,381.41, down 0.38% over 24 hours and 1.41% over seven days.
BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) accounted for $71.78 million in Bitcoin ETF outflows, while its Ethereum fund, ETHA, recorded $69.68 million in withdrawals.
Meanwhile, market analyst Cryptoinsightuk warned that Bitcoin could face a deeper correction toward $75,000. He cited rising leveraged long exposure, positive funding rates, and liquidity below Ethereum’s market price.
Bitcoin ETF Outflows Reach $82.39 Million as BlackRock Leads Withdrawals
According to Wu Blockchain, US spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $82.39 million in net outflows on October 16.
BlackRock’s IBIT accounted for $71.78 million, while Fidelity’s fund lost $10.61 million. Crypto Patel’s flow data showed that investors withdrew approximately 1,014 BTC across the two funds.
Spot Ethereum ETFs recorded $69.68 million in net outflows, marking their third consecutive day of withdrawals.
BlackRock’s ETHA accounted for the entire daily outflow, equivalent to 28,960 ETH. These figures indicate that selling pressure extended beyond Bitcoin into Ethereum investment products.
Other crypto ETFs also recorded net outflows.
Solana funds lost $12.67 million, XRP funds shed $2.47 million, and Chainlink funds recorded $397,260 in withdrawals. Zcash and Hedera products also posted outflows of $1.22 million and $558,980, respectively.
NEAR ETFs were the exception, attracting $2.61 million in net inflows.
Crypto Patel reported approximately $166.78 million in total net outflows across US spot crypto ETFs. These figures show broad-based withdrawals, although individual fund flows do not establish the direction of the entire crypto market.
Bitcoin Price Faces $75,000 Risk as Leverage Builds
Bitcoin’s price structure remains central to the market outlook.
Cryptoinsightuk said Bitcoin may have completed an initial five-wave advance from lows near $57,000. However, he considers a deeper corrective move toward $75,000 more likely than an already completed correction.
His analysis points to positive funding rates and rising open interest.
Since Bitcoin traded near $84,000, open interest increased approximately 4.5%, while its price declined 2.68%. This combination suggests traders continued adding exposure as the market moved lower.
The market is grappling with whether the next move is a leg higher or a leg lower.
We’ve seen what looks like exuberance across a lot of equities, but recently AI stocks have started to cool off. That’s caused some panic, pushing the Fear and Greed Index back into fear.
I’m… pic.twitter.com/urDmFQ6RTb
— Cryptoinsightuk (@Cryptoinsightuk) October 17, 2026
Positive funding rates generally mean long-position holders pay short-position holders in perpetual futures markets. That can indicate crowded bullish positioning, although funding rates alone cannot confirm whether new positions are predominantly long.
If Bitcoin continues falling, leveraged long traders could face forced liquidations. Those liquidations may add selling pressure, potentially accelerating a decline toward the $75,000 region.
Cryptoinsightuk also identified Ethereum liquidity approximately 6% to 9% below its current price as supporting context for his scenario.
ETF withdrawals and leveraged positioning are adding pressure to an already weakening market structure. However, neither ETF flows nor funding rates guarantee further declines.
Bitcoin’s ability to stabilize above recent lows will help traders assess whether the correction is deepening or losing momentum.
TLDR: PUMP price climbed 3.92% to $0.004649 following Pump.fun’s launch of Hyperliquid-powered perpetual futures trading services. Pump.fun now offers Bitcoin contracts with 40x leverage and Ethereum perpetual contracts with 25x. Hyperliquid handles order execution, margin requirements, and liquidations, while Pump.fun provides the trading interface directly. Pump.fun charges up to 0.10% per order and restricts perpetual trading in certain jurisdictions. Pump.fun’s native token, PUMP, has climbed 3.92% over the past 24 hours to trade at $0.004649 following its derivatives expansion. The recovery follows earlier PUMP token price movements and buyback activity, as traders assess the platform’s latest trading service.
PUMP recovered from a Thursday low near $0.00427 and crossed $0.004482 around midnight before approaching its daily high. The price movement comes as Pump.fun introduces leveraged Bitcoin and Ethereum perpetual futures powered by Hyperliquid’s trading infrastructure.
PUMP Price Recovers as Pump.fun Expands Into Perpetual Futures PUMP traded near $0.004649 during the latest market update, rising approximately 8.9% from its Friday intraday low. Meanwhile, Pump.fun has introduced Bitcoin perpetual contracts offering up to 40x leverage, while Ethereum contracts support up to 25x.
Traders can open long or short positions without purchasing the underlying cryptocurrencies, although leveraged positions carry liquidation risks.
The rollout follows an October 9 discovery of perpetual trading data within Pump.fun’s application programming interface. That data included funding rates, trading volumes, and open interest sourced from Hyperliquid’s HyperCore mainnet.
Pump.fun uses Hyperliquid’s existing order books rather than operating a separate derivatives engine. HyperCore handles execution, margin balances, and liquidations, while Pump.fun provides the interface used to submit trading instructions.
Hyperliquid has continued expanding its derivatives business throughout 2026, attracting traders across cryptocurrencies and other asset markets. Earlier Hyperliquid trading activity and open interest growth showed rising demand for its perpetual contracts.
Pump.fun previously integrated HyperEVM trading on August 26, allowing users to trade supported tokens against USDC. The perpetual futures launch builds on that earlier connection while adding leveraged positions to the platform.
Pump.fun Publishes Perpetual Trading Fees and Regional Restrictions Pump.fun’s updated fee schedule sets a builder fee of up to 0.10% on each perpetual order. The charge applies when traders open, increase, or close positions through the platform.
Bridge transfers carry an additional Pump.fun fee of up to 0.25%, excluding charges collected by third-party operators. Hyperliquid’s trading and funding charges remain separate, while its account activation fee applies to first deposits.
For example, a $10,000 order would cost $10 at the maximum builder fee. The actual charge may be lower, depending on the rate applied during order confirmation.
These fees introduce another potential revenue source for Pump.fun, which previously relied heavily on memecoin trading activity. Earlier PUMP buyback and revenue figures showed weekly revenue reaching $15.16 million in September, exceeding Hyperliquid’s $15.06 million.
The new service excludes traders located in the United States and Ontario, alongside other restricted jurisdictions. Pump.fun’s terms specify that Hyperliquid manages positions and settlements, while users remain responsible for monitoring their collateral.
The restrictions come amid wider discussions about regulating decentralized derivatives markets. Recent Hyperliquid regulatory developments have examined how perpetual contracts fit within existing financial market rules.
Other companies are pursuing different routes into the derivatives market. Kraken’s parent company, Payward, previously outlined plans for regulated Hyperliquid perpetual trading through its U.S. operations.
Pump.fun’s terms confirm that traders can access existing Hyperliquid positions through other compatible interfaces. Their positions remain subject to Hyperliquid’s margin requirements, funding payments, and liquidation rules.
Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has sparked renewed discussion in the cryptocurrency community by drawing attention to a fundamental distinction between the cost structures of Bitcoin mining and artificial intelligence (AI) inference.
Bitcoin mining cost breakdownButerin stated that Bitcoin mining is characterized by a nearly even split between investment in specialized computing hardware (capital expenditures) and electricity consumption. Miners typically allocate significant resources to obtain advanced mining equipment while also facing substantial energy costs to sustain their operations.
This two-pronged expense model means that both powerful hardware and affordable, reliable electricity are essential for miners aiming to remain competitive in the race to secure block rewards.
Bitcoin mining costs are split almost equally between spending on dedicated hardware and ongoing electricity use, making energy prices a major component in the economics of mining.
As a result, fluctuations in electricity pricing can have a direct and sizable impact on the profitability of Bitcoin mining activities worldwide.
AI inference: A different approachIn contrast, AI inference—the process of applying trained AI models to generate outputs or respond to queries—relies primarily on investments in computing infrastructure. Buterin pointed out that, unlike Bitcoin mining, the bulk of AI inference costs stem from capital outlays on powerful hardware rather than electricity usage.
Operators running AI inference systems focus largely on acquiring and maintaining servers and other specialized equipment capable of handling high volumes of computational tasks. Electricity, while still a factor, plays a comparatively smaller role in the total cost structure for AI applications.
While AI inference does require significant hardware investment, its electricity requirements are far less impactful compared to Bitcoin mining, resulting in a cost structure dominated by the acquisition and upkeep of powerful servers.
This distinction highlights the broader differences between blockchain and AI infrastructure, with energy prices serving as a critical variable for Bitcoin miners but not for providers of AI-driven services.
Tools for adapting to fast-moving marketsThese technical differences underline how swiftly changing market conditions—ranging from Federal Reserve decisions to new altcoin listings—can alter the operating environment for both industries. In this fast-paced context, traders and investors increasingly rely on privacy-focused platforms such as CryptoAppsy to streamline portfolio management. The platform delivers real-time charts, intelligent price alerts, coin-centric news, and major macroeconomic updates on a single, consolidated interface, all without requiring users to register an account.
For cryptocurrency market participants, balancing operational costs while keeping pace with news and technical changes is becoming ever more complex, emphasizing the need for efficient and integrated information tools.
Vitalik Buterin pushes the privacy of his AI agents very far. The co-founder of Ethereum has just unveiled a “paranoiac mode” combining Tor, private payments via zkAPI, dummy network traffic, and local rewriting of prompts. Each conversation goes through a different Tor circuit. Even the payment to the AI provider is designed to no longer directly reveal the user’s identity.
In brief Vitalik Buterin combines Tor, zkAPI, and a local AI model. Each conversation uses a distinct Tor circuit and cover traffic. Buterin acknowledges his system remains slower and still imperfect. Vitalik Buterin pushes AI privacy even further This is not the first time Vitalik Buterin has worried about agents’ security. In April, he already warned about risks linked to AI agents and advocated for more local processing and isolated environments. His new setup goes further. Buterin uses Pi as an environment for his AI agent. Around it, he has added several layers designed to prevent a model provider from easily reconstructing the identity of the person sending the requests.
Each new conversation receives its own Tor circuit. Additional random traffic is generated to make genuine requests harder to distinguish in the network stream. Prompts then pass through a locally run model, which can rephrase them before transmitting to the remote model.
Buterin indicates using Qwen3.8-Flash-Next for this stage, while specifying that other models can take its place. The whole system operates behind a service compatible with the OpenAI API. The idea is to add these protections without rebuilding all the software that already use this interface.
Ethereum also masks AI agents’ payments Tor does not solve everything. A user can hide their IP address, then reveal their identity a few seconds later simply by paying their provider with a named account or an API key associated with their bank card.
This is where zkAPI comes in. The tool was launched on October 1 by the Open Anonymity Project with the Ethereum Foundation. It allows depositing ETH or USDC into a vault on Ethereum, then obtaining private usage credits.
Zero-knowledge proofs are used to demonstrate that a user has enough credit without revealing which deposit specifically finances their request. The AI provider always receives the prompt. However, it does not directly obtain the payment identity hiding behind the temporary key.
This approach fits quite well with the vision Buterin has defended for several months to bring Ethereum and AI closer. His system adds yet another local protection. The Pi agent runs inside a Bubblewrap sandbox to limit its access to the rest of the operating system. Its connections go through Tor with torsocks. Buterin is also testing micro virtual machines to strengthen this isolation. Not really a standard setup to use a chatbot.
The “paranoiac mode” is still imperfect Buterin does not present his setup as a definitive solution. The first problem: speed. He explains that the configuration becomes usable, but the latency remains noticeably higher, especially when starting a new conversation. Tor, new circuits, local processing, and the various privacy layers have a cost.
The Tor network itself also has limits. An AI provider working with a Tor entry relay could try to analyze or manipulate request timings to correlate some connections. Dummy traffic complicates analysis without making it impossible.
Buterin considers that a specialized mixnet, with more continuous cover traffic, could better address this issue. His experiment comes as Ethereum is already using AI in the other direction. The Foundation has deployed AI agents to track critical flaws in the protocol code, with at least one real vulnerability identified and then fixed. Agents are therefore becoming more useful. They also get more access to files, networks, payments, and sometimes wallets. Buterin prefers to assume that all these layers can end up revealing something. Hence the name: “paranoiac mode.”
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
Lydie M.
Enseignante et ingénieure IT, Lydie découvre le Bitcoin en 2022 et plonge dans l’univers des cryptomonnaies. Elle vulgarise des sujets complexes, décrypte les enjeux du Web3 et défend une vision d’un futur numérique ouvert, inclusif et décentralisé.
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.
Ethereum Derivatives carried $30.59 billion in futures open interest, although the aggregate book slipped 0.42% during the latest 24-hour period.
Calls represented 61.75% of Ethereum options open interest, but 24-hour put volume narrowly exceeded call volume, showing balanced near-term flow.
Long liquidations exceeded short liquidations over both 24-hour and 12-hour windows, while positive funding kept leveraged bulls paying shorts.
Max pain levels differed across Deribit, OKX, and Binance for October and December, so they do not form one market-wide price target.
Ethereum derivatives are sending mixed messages as ETH trades inside a weekly range. The token moved between $2,324 and $2,575 during the week, while futures traders maintained $30.59 billion in open interest. Options positioning still tilted toward calls, which accounted for 61.75% of outstanding contracts. Yet the futures book slipped, positive funding persisted, and liquidations struck more longs than shorts.
Ethereum derivatives therefore show substantial bullish positioning without a clear signal. The split matters because calls can serve hedging strategies, while rising leverage creates vulnerability during sharp price moves. ETH traded near $2,428 intraday on October 17.
Ethereum Derivatives Keep $30B in Futures as OI Slips
Outstanding Ethereum futures totaled 12.63 million ETH, valued at $30.59 billion, after a 0.42% daily decline. Open interest tracks active contracts rather than completed trades. Binance held $8.73 billion, or 28.55% of the total. MEXC followed with $3.25 billion, narrowly above CME at $3.24 billion.
Binance’s share made it the largest venue in the reported futures rankings. Other venues held smaller shares of exposure.
Source: Coinglass
Hyperliquid carried $2.61 billion, followed by Bybit at $2.15 billion and Bitget at $2 billion. The distribution shows liquidity remains spread between centralized platforms, a regulated exchange, and a perpetuals DEX. Large open interest does not identify the market direction by itself. It shows the amount of capital still exposed to future price changes.
That distinction matters when comparing dollar open interest across exchanges. ETH price changes can alter the book’s reported value even if contract quantities change less.
Exchange trends were uneven. MEXC added 6.49% to its open interest, and Bitget grew 1.22%. Bitunix fell 11.27%, BingX lost 7.57%, and Hyperliquid declined 1.70%. CME also contracted 1.11%, pointing to selective rather than broad leverage growth.
Ethereum derivatives still held a large aggregate futures book, but the liquidation data put bulls on notice. The market recorded 3,222 long liquidations against 2,181 shorts in 24 hours. The 12-hour count showed 2,651 longs liquidated, compared with 876 shorts. Positive funding near 0.0053 meant longs continued paying shorts.
Ethereum Options Show Bullish Calls but Fragile Long Positions
Ethereum options carried 1.59 million ETH in calls and 983,689 ETH in puts. That composition gave calls a 61.75% share of open interest. Still, the newest flow was nearly balanced. Twenty-four-hour volume reached 414,521 ETH for calls and 420,513 ETH for puts.
Ethereum derivatives can look call-heavy without proving that every holder expects an immediate rally. Traders may use calls to hedge short exposure or structure spreads. The put activity near the spot also remained visible. Bybit’s $2,100 and $2,200 put led several high-volume contracts. $2,500 calls also traded actively on Binance and Bybit.
Deribit’s December 25 $3,200 call held the largest individual position at 69,667 ETH. Its $2,200 call held 51,016 ETH, and an October 30 $2,600 call held 38,043 ETH. These positions show interest across several price levels and expiries. They do not prove a single outright bullish view.
Ethereum options max pain readings differed by exchange. For October 30, Deribit and Binance pointed to $2,500, while OKX stood near $2,650. For December 25, Deribit showed $2,200, OKX $2,300, and Binance $2,500. Max pain represents a theoretical payout-minimizing level, not a price target.
CME options exposure had also declined toward 50,000 ETH by October from above 500,000 ETH earlier in 2026. Its dollar position readings fell near $10 million after exceeding $70 million in late 2025. Ethereum derivatives remain divided between a reduced CME options footprint and larger crypto-native futures markets.
Dogecoin Price hovered at $0.08055 on Saturday, reflecting weakness across the cryptocurrency market. The total crypto market sector dropped by 0.74%, to $2.74 trillion.
BTC price hovered around $81k as the Fear and Greed Index registered 49. The $0.080 level remained in focus as broader cryptocurrency prices weakened.
Crypto Fear and Greed Index Falls to 49 as Market Optimism Cools
Cryptocurrency market sentiment remained neutral as CoinMarketCap’s Crypto Fear and Greed Index registered 49, down from 50 yesterday. The reading also fell below last week’s 57, pointing to weaker confidence among market participants.
CMC data
A month earlier, the index stood at 64, placing sentiment firmly within the greed category. The latest reading was down 15 points from that reading, reflecting a general easing of market optimism.
On August 27, 2026, the index hit its annual peak of 82 at the time when sentiment was at its extreme “GREED” level. Despite the recent decline, the current score remains neutral, suggesting neither fear nor greed has gained clear control.
Dogecoin Whales Add 600 Million DOGE Near Key Support
Dogecoin whales have accumulated about 600 million DOGE since October 12, according to cryptocurrency analyst Ali Martinez. In a post on X, Martinez said large holders appeared to be buying near a support zone.
4/6 Third, whales appear to be buying near that support.
Since October 12, large holders have reportedly added about 600 million $DOGE. Their accumulation adds weight to the buy signal and the on-chain support zone. https://t.co/NXhUxvPDWo
— Ali Charts (@alicharts) October 16, 2026
His accompanying chart showed tracked whale holdings reaching approximately 56.21 billion tokens.
He identified $0.081 as an important support level, where the daily TD Sequential indicator had issued a buy signal. He also cited blockchain data showing roughly 36 billion DOGE were previously acquired around that price.
The concentration of holdings helped explain his focus on $0.081 as a potential base for recovery. Martinez identified $0.16 to $0.17 as a possible profit-taking area if support holds and Dogecoin rebounds.
Dogecoin Price Prediction: Will DOGE Hold $0.08 Level?
The price of DOGE was trading at $0.08069 on October 17, continuing its downward trend but remaining above the support level.
The relative strength index was below the 50 neutral zone at 40.45. The moving average convergence divergence indicator also showed early improvement, with its MACD line slightly above the signal line.
DOGE/USDT 4-hour chart: TradingView
A successful defense of $0.080 could support another attempt toward $0.08500. A sustained break above that resistance would bring $0.090 into focus as per the Long-term DOGE projection. Failure to reclaim $0.085 would leave Dogecoin exposed to further tests of the $0.08000–$0.07800 support area.
Dogecoin Open Interest Reaches $1.29 Billion as Options Activity Surges
Dogecoin derivatives trading volume fell 27.97% to $920.68 million, while open interest increased 2.31% to $1.29 billion. Options trading volume jumped 50,751.50% to $82.11, remaining modest in dollar terms despite that surge.
Source: Coingalss data
Meanwhile, options open interest rose 50,476.50% to $81,650, according to the supplied figures. The data revealed a mix of activity, with total derivatives volume down while outstanding contract values were up.
Dogecoin price has fallen roughly 7.6% on the weekly chart to around $0.0802, slipping below an analyst’s $0.081 support level despite reported whale purchases of 600 million DOGE.
Summary
DOGE traded below the $0.081 level identified by crypto analyst Ali Martinez.
Martinez reported that large holders added approximately 600 million DOGE since Oct. 12.
The daily chart showed DOGE below its $0.08847 Bollinger Band midpoint.
CoinGlass’s three-day heatmap displayed prominent liquidation concentrations near $0.0773 and $0.0844.
TradingView’s Binance DOGE/USDT weekly chart showed a price of $0.08020 on Oct. 17, against a weekly opening price of $0.08678 and a low of $0.07770.
Dogecoin price falls below the analyst’s $0.081 reference
In an Oct. 16 analysis, crypto analyst Ali Martinez identified three reasons for a potential Dogecoin recovery: a daily technical buy signal, a concentration of coins acquired near $0.081, and purchases by large holders.
His daily chart showed a TD Sequential buy signal near that price. The indicator uses sequences of price movements to identify potential exhaustion in a trend, although the signal itself does not establish that a recovery has started.
2/6 First, the TD Sequential has flashed a buy signal on $DOGE daily chart near $0.081.
The indicator has marked potential turning points before for Dogecoin. This signal is especially interesting because of where it appeared. pic.twitter.com/od07wV3lwg
— Ali Charts (@alicharts) October 16, 2026
The analyst’s assessment centered on whether buyers could defend the same area where on-chain data showed a large concentration of previously traded coins.
“The bullish thesis comes down to $0.081: a daily buy signal, a major cost-basis zone, and whale accumulation are converging there,” Martinez wrote.
By the Oct. 17 TradingView snapshot, DOGE was trading slightly below that reference. The daily Binance chart showed $0.08025, with a session high of $0.08094 and a low of $0.07982.
Earlier signs of possible selling exhaustion had appeared during the week. As crypto.news previously reported, DOGE was among four altcoins displaying technical buy signals on Oct. 15, when the token traded near $0.07977. That report placed Martinez’s conditional recovery levels at $0.087 and $0.094.
Whale purchases accompany a large cost-basis cluster
Using a Glassnode UTXO Realized Price Distribution chart, Martinez said roughly 36 billion DOGE had previously traded around $0.081. The distribution groups coins by the price at which they last moved on-chain.
His post qualified the support argument:
“So many tokens changing hands at this price makes it a key level to watch, though it does not guarantee buyers will defend it.”
For large-holder activity, the analyst cited Santiment data showing holdings rising from approximately 55.6 billion DOGE toward 56.2 billion between Oct. 12 and Oct. 16. He described the change as purchases of about 600 million tokens.
At the $0.08025 daily-chart price, that quantity has a quoted value of approximately $48.2 million. The calculation values the reported balance change at one reference price; it does not establish how much holders paid for the coins.
Martinez’s longer-range scenario remained conditional on a $0.081 holding and DOGE rebounding. He identified $0.16–$0.17 as a potential profit-taking area, citing cost-basis concentrations of roughly 12 billion DOGE near $0.16 and another 14 billion near $0.17.
Measured from $0.08025, those prices require gains of approximately 99% and 112%, respectively. The analyst presented them as a possible destination after a recovery, without specifying when either price might be reached.
Daily Bollinger Bands show price near the lower boundary
On TradingView’s daily chart, DOGE traded below the 20-day Bollinger Band midpoint at $0.08847. The upper band stood at $0.09958, while the lower boundary was $0.07736.
Dogecoin price daily chart — Oct. 17 | Source: TradingView
The latest price sat approximately 9.3% below the midpoint and 3.7% above the lower band. TradingView’s Awesome Oscillator reading was negative at approximately minus 0.00803, with the latest histogram bars below zero.
The weekly chart placed DOGE below each of its displayed simple moving averages. The 20-week average stood at $0.08163, followed by the 50-week at $0.10188, the 100-week at $0.17248, and the 200-week at $0.13765. Weekly Chaikin Money Flow read minus 0.06.
Dogecoin price weekly chart — Oct. 17 | Source: TradingView
From the $0.08025 daily snapshot, reaching Martinez’s earlier $0.087 recovery level would require a gain of approximately 8.4%; reaching $0.094 would require 17.1%. Both prices sit above the daily Bollinger midpoint, while the weekly 50-period average remains above them at $0.10188. Each comparison uses the same reference price, keeping the shorter recovery scenarios separate from the analyst’s more distant $0.16–$0.17 zone.
The decline follows a substantially different September setup. DOGE had returned to $0.10 after a 25% weekly rally by Sep. 23. Comparing that round reference with the latest $0.08025 snapshot puts the subsequent retreat close to 19.8%.
Liquidation concentrations sit above and below $0.080
CoinGlass’s three-day liquidation heatmap, captured on Oct. 17, showed especially bright bands around $0.0844 above the market and $0.0773 below it. Other visible concentrations appeared around $0.083–$0.0836 and $0.078–$0.079.
Dogecoin liquidation heatmap | Source: CoinGlass
The heatmap’s price path showed DOGE falling from above $0.084 on Oct. 14, recovering toward $0.0825 on Oct. 16, and returning toward $0.080 by the end of the displayed period. Its colored bands represent modeled liquidation exposure, not a record of completed liquidations at every highlighted price.
In the U.S. fund market, an October price assessment published Oct. 5 described Bitwise’s planned Dogecoin fund closure. Citing an SEC notice, the report said the fund expected to convert its DOGE holdings to cash on Oct. 14 and distribute proceeds around Oct. 22.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
TLDR: Dogecoin price traded near $0.0802 on October 17, down roughly 7.6% from its weekly opening and below the $0.081 reference. Trader Tardigrade linked the latest monthly trendline test to contacts in 2017 and 2020, preceding earlier rallies on his chart. Ali Martinez reported approximately 600 million DOGE added by large holders since October 12, alongside a daily TD Sequential buy signal. CoinGlass showed modeled liquidation concentrations around $0.0773 and $0.0844, while DOGE remained below the daily Bollinger midpoint. The Dogecoin price traded near $0.0802 on October 17, down roughly 7.6% from its weekly opening. The decline carried the token beneath the $0.081 level highlighted by analyst Ali Martinez.
Analyst Trader Tardigrade compared the monthly setup with earlier contacts along a long-term support trendline. His interpretation pointed to a potential repeat of previous recoveries, while Martinez cited whale accumulation and a daily buy signal.
$DOGE/monthly 🔥#Dogecoin is back on the same long-term trendline that launched it twice before.
❇️ 2017 touch → 3 years later, 2020 touch
❇️ 2020 touch → 6 years later, 2026 touch
Both times, price bounced off the line and surged.
Price is sitting right below it again.… pic.twitter.com/lbyHBKfLvr
— Trader Tardigrade 🧬 (@TATrader_Alan) October 17, 2026
DOGE coin market data shows weakness across several daily and weekly indicators. The weekly session opened at $0.08678 and included a low of $0.07770. Buyers were attempting to recover ground lost during the latest October decline.
Dogecoin Price Retests Monthly Trendline as Whales Add Tokens Trader Tardigrade said the Dogecoin price had returned to a monthly support trendline associated with earlier rallies. He marked contacts in 2017, 2020 and 2026, separated by three-year and six-year intervals. His post placed the token just below that line again.
Martinez focused on a daily TD Sequential buy signal near $0.081. The indicator counts sequences of price changes to flag possible trend exhaustion. It can identify a potential turning point without confirming that demand has reversed the decline.
He also cited Glassnode figures showing roughly 36 billion DOGE last moved around that price. The cost-basis distribution records previous on-chain transfers, rather than orders waiting to buy.
The Dogecoin price remained below that cluster as whale accumulation increased. Martinez cited Santiment balances rising from roughly 55.6 billion to 56.2 billion DOGE between October 12 and October 16.
2/6 First, the TD Sequential has flashed a buy signal on $DOGE daily chart near $0.081.
The indicator has marked potential turning points before for Dogecoin. This signal is especially interesting because of where it appeared. pic.twitter.com/od07wV3lwg
— Ali Charts (@alicharts) October 16, 2026
He described the change as approximately 600 million tokens added by large holders. Valued at $0.08025 each, those tokens equal about 48.2 million dollars. That calculation does not establish the prices paid for individual purchases.
His longer-range recovery scenario depended on the $0.081 area holding and a rebound developing. Martinez identified potential profit-taking zones at $0.16 and $0.17, where approximately 12 billion and 14 billion DOGE previously moved.
From $0.08025, those levels imply gains of about 99% and 112%, respectively. The analyst supplied no timeline for reaching either zone.
Weak Daily Signals and Liquidation Clusters Frame Recovery The Dogecoin price traded near $0.08025 on the daily chart, between a $0.08094 session high and a $0.07982 low. Bollinger Bands placed the 20-day midpoint at $0.08847, the upper boundary at $0.09958 and the lower boundary at $0.07736.
That left the token approximately 9.3% below the midpoint and 3.7% above the lower band. The Awesome Oscillator remained negative near minus 0.00803, with its latest histogram bars below zero.
Source: TradingView The weekly Binance Dogecoin price also sat beneath all four displayed simple moving averages. The 20-week reading stood at $0.08163 and the 50-week at $0.10188. The 100-week and 200-week averages were $0.17248 and $0.13765, respectively. Weekly Chaikin Money Flow registered minus 0.06.
On October 15, DOGE appeared among four altcoins showing technical buy signals, when it traded near $0.07977. Martinez had previously outlined nearer recovery levels of $0.087 and $0.094. Reaching them from $0.08025 would require advances of roughly 8.4% and 17.1%. Both levels exceed the daily Bollinger midpoint but remain below the 50-week moving average.
The three-day CoinGlass heatmap placed prominent modeled liquidation concentrations near $0.0773 and $0.0844. Smaller clusters appeared around 0.078–0.079 and 0.083–0.0836. These bands estimate exposure to potential forced closures, rather than completed liquidations.
Its price path showed a slide from above $0.084 on October 14. The Dogecoin price recovered toward $0.0825 on October 16 before returning toward $0.080.
The Dogecoin price had regained $0.10 after a 25% weekly rally by September 23. The latest daily quote represents a subsequent decline of approximately 19.8% from that round reference.
Separately, Bitwise planned to convert its Dogecoin fund holdings to cash on October 14. Its schedule set cash distributions to shareholders for October 22.
Dogecoin traded around $0.0802 on October 17, representing a 7.6% decline from its weekly opening figure. The move pushed the cryptocurrency below the $0.081 price point identified as key by market analyst Ali Martinez.
Trendline retest and whale accumulationTrader Tardigrade, a cryptocurrency analyst known for technical chart reviews, pointed to Dogecoin’s return to a monthly support trendline that has signaled significant price bounces in the past. Tardigrade identified three such contact points: in 2017, in 2020, and a projected repeat in 2026. His analysis suggested that in both previous instances, the price rebounded sharply after touching this line. Dogecoin is now positioned just below this long-term trendline once again.
Ali Martinez focused on a daily TD Sequential buy signal appearing near $0.081, an indicator designed to identify potential trend reversals by counting distinct price moves. Martinez also referenced on-chain data from Glassnode, which found that nearly 36 billion DOGE last moved close to this price—data reflecting historical transfer activity rather than a snapshot of active buy orders.
Dogecoin has returned to the same monthly trendline that triggered strong rallies in 2017 and 2020. The pattern could signal another attempt at a price recovery, as large holders continue accumulating significant amounts of DOGE.
Between October 12 and October 16, Santiment data showed large holders increased their collective balance from approximately 55.6 billion to 56.2 billion DOGE, amounting to around 600 million additional tokens over four days. At a price of $0.08025, the added DOGE is valued at $48.2 million. It is unclear at what prices each acquisition was made.
Martinez highlighted that a sustained rebound from $0.081 could lead DOGE to profit-taking levels at $0.16 and $0.17, where a combined total of 26 billion DOGE previously changed hands. Such moves would represent a 99% and 112% gain from the $0.08025 level respectively, though Martinez did not give a timeline for these targets.
Mini dictionary: TD Sequential, a technical analysis indicator that counts consecutive price bars in an uptrend or downtrend, seeking to identify trend exhaustion and possible reversal points. Frequently used by traders to spot buy and sell signals on charts.
Technical weakness and liquidation bandsOn the daily chart, Dogecoin traded between a high of $0.08094 and a low of $0.07982, with the 20-day Bollinger Band midpoint at $0.08847. The token remained about 9.3% below this midpoint and 3.7% above the band’s lower boundary, signaling subdued price momentum. The Awesome Oscillator stayed negative, reflecting weak short-term buying interest.
On the weekly timeframe reported by Binance, Dogecoin’s price fell below the 20-week simple moving average of $0.08163, the 50-week at $0.10188, as well as the 100-week and 200-week averages, which were $0.17248 and $0.13765 respectively. The weekly Chaikin Money Flow registered minus 0.06, indicating modest selling pressure.
IndicatorValue ($)Current price0.08025Weekly opening0.0867820-day Bollinger midpoint0.0884720-week MA0.0816350-week MA0.10188Profit-taking targets0.16 / 0.17Dogecoin was also identified among four cryptocurrencies flashing technical buy signals, with recovery levels cited at $0.087 and $0.094. Climbing back to those prices from $0.08025 would require advances of roughly 8.4% and 17.1% and would place Dogecoin above the daily Bollinger midpoint. However, both levels remain below the longer-term 50-week moving average.
Modeled liquidation concentrations for Dogecoin clustered at $0.0773 and $0.0844, according to CoinGlass data, with smaller pockets around $0.078 to $0.079 and $0.083 to $0.0836. These areas suggest where traders’ positions might face forced closure if price volatility increases further.
Dogecoin’s price declined sharply from above $0.084 on October 14, staged a brief recovery to $0.0825 on October 16, then slipped back toward the $0.080 mark. This latest movement represents a 19.8% drop from the $0.10 level reached after a 25% rally on September 23.
Meanwhile, Bitwise, a leading cryptocurrency asset manager, scheduled the conversion of its Dogecoin fund holdings to cash on October 14. Cash distributions for shareholders were set for October 22.
Cardano (ADA) eyes an imminent price recovery if it breaks out of a pattern on its weekly chart, according to crypto analyst Giannis Andreou.
The analyst believes a cup-and-handle pattern is forming after ADA rebounded from the $0.14–$0.16 range last month and formed a rounded bottom.
For the bullish outlook to be confirmed, ADA must close a weekly candle above $0.278 and successfully retest that level.
ADA Eyes $0.416 After $0.278 Breakout According to Andreou’s chart, a confirmed breakout above $0.278 would put $0.3633 and $0.3995 in line of sight. The analyst also identified an approximate cup-depth target of $0.416, representing a potential 73.5% increase from the chart’s reference price of $0.239.
A move beyond these levels could open the door to higher price targets at $0.5116, $0.8059, and $0.9601. The chart places the most ambitious target at $1.3291, implying a potential 477.4% gain from the same reference price.
Meanwhile, these projections depend on ADA clearing the breakout trigger and maintaining its upward structure. Andreou warned that losing the rising support line would weaken the setup, while a breakdown below the $0.14–$0.16 base would undermine the pattern.
Cardano (ADA) 1-Week Price Chart Showing Cup-and-Handle Pattern. Cardano Price Slips 11.5% in a Week However, ADA is currently struggling to maintain its recent gains amid renewed selling pressure. CoinMarketCap data shows the token trading at $0.2238, down 3% over the past 24 hours and 11.5% over the past week.
Despite the recent decline, ADA remains up 13.5% over the past month, indicating that it has retained part of its recovery.
At its current price, ADA remains below Andreou’s $0.278 breakout trigger. The token would need to climb approximately 24.2% to reach that level, where a weekly close followed by a successful retest could strengthen the bullish case. Until that happens, the projected targets remain conditional rather than confirmed price objectives.
ADA 7–10-Day Recovery Outlook Meanwhile, Crypto Banter analyst Sheldon predicts Cardano (ADA) could resume its upward move within the next seven to 10 days.
Speaking during a YouTube livestream, Sheldon said the current market weakness will last another week or two before cryptocurrencies stage sharp recoveries. He expects ADA to turn green once the consolidation phase ends, particularly if prices reach his identified buying zones.
Similarly, crypto commentator George argues Cardano could stage a Solana-style comeback, wherein SOL soared from $8 in 2022 to an all-time high of $294 in 2025. However, ADA’s potential recovery will depend on sustained buying demand and broader market conditions.
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.
In an X conversation, Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson answered whether the Cardano blockchain network is complete. An X user had asked the question, "Is Cardano finished? Meaning completed?"
In response, Hoskinson pointed to one major milestone that remains before he considers Cardano completed: the Leios upgrade.
I'm working on a concept that only midnight can bring to the cryptocurrency space that solves most of the problems. Almost have all of it designed conceptually. It's the magnum opus of my career
HOT Stories
— Charles Hoskinson (@IOHK_Charles) October 17, 2026 "After Leios, yes. It has everything I wanted to do," Hoskinson answered. "Decentralized consensus, governance and development, EUTXO, Plutus, infinitely scalable, secure, built with formal methods, multiple independent nodes, recursively self-improving, and millions of people hold Ada," he continued.
The question from the X user about whether Cardano is complete comes after Hoskinson revealed that he was working on a concept that only Midnight a Cardano-related privacy sidechain can bring to the crypto space and that solves most of the problems. Hoskinson stated that he had almost designed it conceptually, describing it as the magnum opus of his career.
Leios upgradeLeios, which was mentioned by the Cardano founder, refers to Cardano's next-generation consensus and scaling upgrade designed to massively increase transaction throughput and speed without sacrificing decentralization or security.
You Might Also Like
Leios delivers a phased throughput increase on mainnet, scaling from 2x to 30x current capacity, with full capacity demonstrated on testnet first. In September 2026, IOG developers demonstrated about 1,000 TPS with Ouroboros Leios in testing.
The public testnet (known as MusashiNet or Musashi Dojo) launched on June 23, 2026, rolling out through five phases (Earth, Water, Fire, Wind, Void). According to a recent update from Input Output, the Musashi Dojo testnet has entered its Fire phase.
Leios accelerates Cardano throughputCardano's current consensus protocol, Ouroboros Praos, was designed for security and decentralization but was not designed for the throughput that a globally adopted layer 1 needs. Enter Leios, which enhances Praos by adding endorser blocks and committee-based validation, which increase the number of transactions Cardano can process.
You Might Also Like
Leios aims to increase throughput from about 5–10 transactions per second (TPS) to around 100 TPS, with a longer-term target of 1,000 TPS or more, subject to validation and parameter selection.
Areas where higher throughput could have a meaningful impact include global microtransaction ecosystems, decentralized supply chain tracking, scalable DeFi with time-sensitive transactions, decentralized identity for large populations, and real-time voting systems.
Cardano price has fallen more than 11% against its weekly opening level, leaving ADA near $0.223 as market commentator Nehal outlines a conditional recovery toward $0.30–$0.36 from support around $0.21–$0.22.
Summary
Cardano traded near $0.223, with its weekly chart showing an 11.57% decline. Daily RSI stood at 42.07, while ADA remained below its $0.2441 moving average. Nehal outlined conditional targets of $0.30–$0.36, with invalidation below $0.21. CoinGlass showed overhead liquidation concentrations around $0.234–$0.235 and $0.240–$0.244. TradingView’s Binance ADA/USDT weekly chart showed ADA at $0.2231 on Oct. 17, with a displayed decline of 11.57%. The weekly range ran from $0.2159 to $0.2561, while the daily chart placed the token at $0.2232 at 11:40 UTC.
Cardano price retreats toward the lower Bollinger Band On the daily chart, TradingView recorded a session high of $0.2258 and a low of $0.2226. ADA was down 1.11% from the daily opening price of $0.2257, leaving it close to the bottom of that session’s range.
Cardano price daily chart — Oct. 17 | Source: TradingView The Bollinger Bands placed the 20-day simple moving average at $0.2441, the upper band at $0.2694, and the lower band at $0.2187. ADA traded below the average and just above the lower boundary.
Measured from the daily chart price of $0.2232, a return to the middle band would require a gain of 9.4%. The lower band sat approximately 2% beneath that price, while the recorded weekly low was roughly 3.3% lower.
TradingView’s daily relative strength index stood at 42.07, below the neutral 50 threshold. Its displayed average measured 52.62, placing the RSI beneath both reference points without reaching the conventional oversold threshold of 30.
The latest decline follows the loss of an earlier support area. As crypto.news previously reported on Oct. 12, analyst Jesse Olson had identified bearish divergence and a potential lower high while ADA traded near $0.2434.
That coverage placed the previous support zone at $0.224–$0.240, based on a separate assessment by analyst Giannis Andreou. Compared with the Oct. 12 chart reading, the latest daily price was 8.3% lower and beneath that zone’s lower edge.
Nehal’s $0.36 scenario requires a daily breakout In an Oct. 16 post, Nehal described ADA as sitting on support between $0.21 and $0.22 while testing a long-term descending trendline. His accompanying Coinbase daily chart illustrated an upward path from that area.
“A clean daily breakout could send ADA toward $0.30 → $0.36.”
The market commentator attached a clear condition to that forecast.
“Bullish above the trendline; invalidation below $0.21.”
Using the Binance daily reading of $0.2232 as the reference, the two targets would require gains of approximately 34.4% and 61.3%. Those calculations use a different venue and timestamp from the Coinbase chart in Nehal’s post.
His invalidation level lies 5.9% below the Binance reading. The forecast therefore depends on a breakout and continued support above $0.21, rather than treating the current price as confirmation that a recovery has begun.
An Oct. 14 assessment by Andreou used a separate set of conditions. His conditional recovery setup required ADA to hold $0.22–$0.24 and regain $0.26–$0.28 before approaching a breakout test at $0.2910.
According to that assessment, a confirmed break and retest of $0.2910 would bring $0.3206 and $0.3698 into focus. On the downside, Andreou identified $0.2110 and $0.19–$0.20 as possible levels following a loss of $0.22.
The Oct. 14 Binance daily chart recorded ADA at $0.2278. The latest $0.2232 reading was approximately 2% below that earlier observation, although both remained above Andreou’s $0.22 threshold at their respective timestamps.
Weekly MACD remains above its signal line Despite the weekly price decline, TradingView’s weekly MACD line stood at −0.0111, above its signal line at −0.0257. The histogram remained positive at 0.0145.
Cardano price weekly chart — Oct. 17 | Source: TradingView The weekly readings show the MACD line above its signal while both remain below zero. On the daily timeframe, the RSI remained below 50, giving the two charts different momentum readings.
The weekly price chart recorded a rebound from its $0.2159 low to approximately $0.2231. Calculated from those displayed values, the recovery amounted to 3.3%, leaving ADA below the week’s opening level.
CoinGlass’s one-week liquidation heatmap showed estimated liquidation concentrations around $0.234–$0.235 and $0.240–$0.244 above the market. A higher concentration appeared near $0.259–$0.260, with lower bands around $0.220 and $0.215–$0.217.
Cardano price liquidation heatmap | Source: CoinGlass Those heatmap values represent estimated liquidation exposure at different prices, not completed forced closures. The image does not provide a total for realized ADA liquidations during the week.
Earlier network figures show different activity trends In separate large-holder activity figures published Oct. 13, analyst Ali Martinez cited Santiment data showing a reduction of more than 110 million ADA in large holders’ combined balances over five days.
The same coverage recorded daily active addresses falling from 27,248 to 15,977, a decline of 41.36%. Those observations describe the earlier reporting period, rather than a fresh measurement of activity on Oct. 17.
Cexplorer’s figures cited in that report showed Cardano processing 1,780,896 transactions during Epoch 660, spanning Oct. 6–11. The previous record was 1,566,974 transactions in Epoch 304 in November 2021. The platform recorded average activity of 83.83 transactions per block and fees totaling approximately 337,720 ADA during Epoch 660.
Separately, DRepTalk’s treasury tracker listed 457,395,629 ADA consumed against a 500 million ADA withdrawal limit covering epochs 613–713. The remaining allowance was 42,604,371 ADA, or approximately 8.5% of the ceiling.
The tracker specifies that the limit caps treasury outflows, not the total treasury balance. Its withdrawal table included 120 million ADA for AlphaGrowth’s Cardano PRIME and 50 million ADA for the Cardano x Draper Dragon Orion Fund.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
Cardano is advancing toward a significant milestone with the upcoming Leios upgrade, which aims to greatly increase blockchain throughput and address scalability concerns. In a recent discussion on X, Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson responded to community questions about the project’s completion status.
Hoskinson outlines final steps for CardanoWhen asked whether Cardano is finished, Hoskinson explained that only one major development remains before he considers the network feature-complete: the Leios upgrade. “After Leios, yes. It has everything I wanted to do,” he stated, listing core attributes including decentralized consensus, governance and development, EUTXO, Plutus, infinite scalability, security backed by formal methods, multiple node independence, automatic improvement capacity, and widespread ADA adoption.
Leios represents Cardano’s next generation consensus and scaling framework. The update is designed to boost transaction throughput and speed significantly, while safeguarding the network’s decentralization and security—priorities long cited by Input Output Global, the company behind Cardano’s core infrastructure.
Leios enables phased throughput expansion on mainnet, targeting an increase from two times to thirty times Cardano’s existing capacity, with initial full-capacity demonstrations on the testnet. In September 2026, Input Output Global engineers validated approximately 1,000 transactions per second during Ouroboros Leios protocol tests.
Musashi Dojo testnet advances to Fire phasePublic testing of the Leios protocol is underway via the MusashiNet (also called Musashi Dojo) testnet, which began on June 23, 2026. This testnet is progressing through five stages named Earth, Water, Fire, Wind, and Void, tracking distinct technical milestones and adoption targets. According to Input Output Global’s latest reports, the project has now moved into its Fire phase, representing increased activity and robustness in the test environment.
Cardano’s current consensus algorithm, Ouroboros Praos, has earned recognition for its strong security and decentralized design. However, it was not built to support the high transaction volumes expected of a global layer 1 platform. The Leios protocol introduces endorser blocks and a committee-based validation framework, key mechanisms intended to raise the network’s transaction capacity while maintaining trustless verification.
Throughput goals and broader implicationsCardano’s developers set an initial throughput target of 100 transactions per second (TPS) for Leios, with a longer-term goal of surpassing 1,000 TPS depending on network parameters and ongoing validation.
Higher throughput would open new possibilities for Cardano’s use in microtransaction platforms, supply chain tracking, scalable decentralized finance applications requiring rapid settlements, broad-based decentralized identity systems, and sophisticated real-time voting for large user groups.
In parallel, the meme token segment continues to demonstrate explosive growth fueled by emerging internet trends. In this context, the Leios upgrade’s focus on rapid transaction capacity could be especially relevant. With sudden surges in interest, as seen in a trade involving the “Niu Lai” meme token—where a $99 investment reportedly yielded approximately $370,000—timing and token selection become critical. Monitoring not only price shifts but also real-time investor activity is now key. Platforms such as Fomo App integrate token discovery, trading, and social signals, providing ranking features and live trade notifications to help users track movements in the meme token space.
Areas expecting the most immediate benefit from higher Cardano throughput include global-scale micropayments, rapid DeFi operations, real-time identity protocols, and secure, scalable governance for mass participation systems.
Cardano Leios is the final requirement in Charles Hoskinson’s personal definition of a complete Cardano network, but the upgrade remains in public testing.
Musashi Dojo’s Earth phase peaked at 26.8 TxkB/s, roughly six times the current Praos ceiling, but the metric measures data throughput rather than TPS.
Linear Leios is targeted for phase one of the Dijkstra hard fork in late 2026, subject to governance approval, pool readiness, and staged parameters.
Hoskinson offered no technical description of the Midnight concept he called his magnum opus, leaving the announcement short of a product confirmation.
Cardano Leios has become Charles Hoskinson’s stated finish line for the network he founded. In an October 17 exchange, Hoskinson said Cardano would be complete only after the throughput upgrade reaches mainnet. The comment defines his personal completion standard, not a formal release declaration.
Cardano Leios remains on a public testnet, where its first phase peaked at 26.8 TxkB/s. That figure measures transaction data per second, rather than transactions per second. Hoskinson also teased an undeveloped Midnight concept he called his career’s magnum opus. He supplied no technical design, launch date, or product specification for the privacy-focused partner network.
Cardano Leios Sets the Final Bar for Network Completion
Hoskinson’s reply did not change Cardano’s roadmap or create a new governance action. It instead framed Leios as the last major element in his original design. He cited decentralized consensus, on-chain governance, continuous development, eUTXO, Plutus, scalability, formal methods, and independent node clients.
I'm working on a concept that only midnight can bring to the cryptocurrency space that solves most of the problems. Almost have all of it designed conceptually. It's the magnum opus of my career
— Charles Hoskinson (@IOHK_Charles) October 17, 2026
He also described a network that can improve through its own governance processes. The statement therefore concerns completeness in the founder’s view. It does not confirm that every future feature, application, or engineering task has ended. He noted that millions of people already hold ADA, which makes the final milestone relevant beyond the engineering team.
Cardano Leios is an Ouroboros extension designed to expand throughput without replacing the Praos chain. Block producers publish larger endorser blocks beside regular Praos blocks. A stake-weighted committee verifies these blocks and creates a certificate for their contents. The arrangement leaves the underlying proof-of-stake chain in place.
Under the design, the committee is weighted by staking share. Certified endorser transactions enter the ledger through the existing Praos sequence. Its objective is to process more transaction data while preserving the consensus system already used on mainnet.
Midnight enters the story separately. Hoskinson said he had almost completed a concept that only Midnight could deliver to crypto. He described it as the magnum opus of his career and said it could address many industry problems. The post contained no architecture, feature list, timeline, or governance proposal.
That leaves the announcement as a personal preview, rather than a confirmed product release. Neither the Midnight tease nor the Leios milestone establishes an immediate effect on ADA.
Cardano Leios Testnet Result Needs Context Before Mainnet
Musashi Dojo launched on June 23 as the public Cardano Leios testnet. Its Earth phase reached a peak of 26.8 TxkB/s, compared with 4.51 TxkB/s for mainnet using Praos alone. The test result is roughly six times the current mainnet ceiling.
TxkB/s measures transaction kilobytes processed each second. It is not a TPS reading, and it cannot be treated as a direct mainnet transaction count. The trial tested the full protocol across real distances and latencies. It was the first public network run rather than a simulation.
The initial phase exercised the protocol publicly, including Praos blocks, endorser blocks, stake votes, and certificates. The development report listed more than 127,000 blocks, 30,000 endorser blocks, and nearly 8,000 certificates. Engineers also found five incidents during testing, including forks and synchronization failures.
The report said they were implementation bugs rather than design failures. Those results still apply to the testnet environment, not production conditions.
Linear Leios is slated for the first phase of the Dijkstra hard fork, targeted for late 2026. The date remains subject to Cardano’s on-chain governance process. DReps, stake pool operators, and the Constitutional Committee must ratify a hard fork action.
Stake pools must then register BLS keys for Leios voting. Parameter changes will raise throughput in steps after activation instead of a single network-wide jump.
Tether's USDT and Circle's USDC hold about 60% and 24% of the stablecoin market, while Ethena's USDe and World Liberty Financial's USD1 remain below $5B.
No alternative stablecoin is close to challenging Circle and Tether. @Tether's $USDT and @Circle's $USDC hold market caps of roughly $183B and $73B, and no other stablecoin has a market cap above $5B.
A two-issuer marketAccording to DefiLlama, the total stablecoin market cap stood at about $302.5B on October 17, 2026. USDT's dominance was 60.63%, with $183.4B in supply, while USDC held $72.7B.
The nearest challengers are far smaller. DefiLlama lists @ethena's $USDe at $4.7B and @worldlibertyfi's $USD1 at about $4B. CoinGape, citing DefiLlama data, puts Sky Dollar ($USDS) at $6.8B, PayPal's PYUSD at $2.8B and Ripple's RLUSD at $2.4B. Sky's USDS is the one token that sits above $5B in that dataset.
Concentration has stayed high for months. A Crypto Briefing analysis from September found that USDT and USDC together control about 85% of supply. It put the market's Herfindahl-Hirschman Index at roughly 4244, where a reading above 2500 is generally considered highly concentrated.
Is there room for alternatives?The case for newer stablecoins rests on differences in design and use. Ethena's $USDe is a synthetic dollar, which DefiLlama-based trackers classify separately from fiat-backed tokens such as USDT and USDC. Others are backed by fiat reserves, as with $USD1, and compete mainly on distribution and partnerships.
The market also shows how hard it is to break the duopoly. In the Crypto Briefing analysis, USDC captured between 60% and 70% of on-chain transaction volume in recent periods despite holding less than half of USDT's supply. USDT circulates widely on chains such as Tron and Ethereum, where it often serves as a dollar substitute.
There are signs competition is building. Benzinga, citing Reuters, reports that banking coalitions in the US and Europe are moving to develop and deploy their own stablecoins. Total supply has also eased from its May 2026 peak of about $322B, according to Stablecoin.nyc, which leaves little room for newcomers to grow simply by riding a rising market.
For now, the data points to scale and network effects favouring the two incumbents. Whether alternatives can win meaningful share will likely depend on whether they offer something USDT and USDC do not.
Sources: DefiLlama stablecoin market data, CoinGape on stablecoin rankings, Crypto Briefing on stablecoin concentration
The team behind Trump reaped $779 million to $1.16 billion in profits from crypto buyers, while the buyers have suffered 97% losses.
CryptoQuant founder Ki Young Ju published a post noting that the team behind the TRUMP crypto token generated a profit of $779 million to $1.16 billion from token holders, while buyers of the token incurred a 97% loss.
19 minutes ago
Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management Co., Ltd. has been registered, with Du Yanjing, co-head of Solana China, serving as its legal representative.
According to Qichacha, Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management Co., Ltd. was registered in June this year with a registered capital of 5 million yuan. Claire Du (Du Yanjing), co-head of Solana China, serves as its legal representative. Separately, Shanghai Yaokun Qiusuo Digital Technology Co., Ltd. was established in August this year with a registered capital of 10 million yuan, with Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management holding a 45% stake in the latter. Even Jiang (Jiang Yiwen), co-head of Solana Foundation’s China region, is chairman of Yaokun Qiusuo, while Du Yanjing acts as a director. Public information indicates Yaokun Qiusuo’s core business includes technical services, development, consulting, exchange, transfer and promotion; computer system services; information system integration services; information technology consulting; data processing services; internet data services; IoT technology services; wholesale of computer software, hardware and auxiliary equipment; information consulting services (excluding licensed services); enterprise management consulting; financial consulting; and conference and exhibition services (overseas exhibitions require approval from relevant authorities). It should be noted that "Solana" is a name adopted by a sole proprietorship, and there is currently no equity evidence linking the two companies to the Solana Foundation. This week, Solana team members shared photos announcing the opening of an office in Shanghai, China.
19 minutes ago
Arthur Hayes: The so-called crypto quantum threat is "nonsense", users only need to focus on wallet management.
In a recent interview with The Rollup, Arthur Hayes dismissed the so-called crypto quantum threat as "bullshit"—exaggerated and overblown, framing it as a known, manageable risk rather than a reason to sell assets. Hayes emphasized that effective protection hinges on wallet hygiene practices, such as avoiding address reuse and using updated signature types, noting that most risks are concentrated among users with poor address management. He does not view quantum computing as a current catalyst for panic or selling Bitcoin.
19 minutes ago
Thai police arrested a Chinese fugitive wanted by China on suspicion of money laundering and crypto transactions in Bangkok.
According to Thai media outlet Khaosod English, Thai immigration police recently arrested a 37-year-old Chinese national in Bangkok. The man is wanted by Chinese police on suspicion of involvement in a transnational criminal network and money laundering. Police said the criminal network in question involved transactions exceeding 500 million yuan (approximately 2.485 billion Thai baht). The suspect is alleged to have processed cryptocurrency and foreign exchange transactions for the criminal group via more than 133 accounts, and assisted members of the transnational criminal network in obtaining visas. Police added that the suspect evaded manhunts by falsifying residence registration documents, changing license plates, and altering vehicle appearances, before finally being apprehended at a luxury residence in Bangkok. Thai authorities will handle his overstay issues in accordance with the law and coordinate his deportation back to China for investigation.
19 minutes ago
The case of Holograph’s illegal additional issuance of 1 billion tokens has opened in Paris, involving approximately $14 million.
Holograph (HLG)’s 2024 illegal issuance of 1 billion tokens went to trial on October 16 in Paris, with the case involving approximately $14 million at the time. Among the three defendants, the main suspect is a Ukrainian former Holograph employee residing in France, accused of modifying token creation conditions to illegally mint 1 billion HLG, transferring them to a personal wallet, and moving the funds via multiple exchange accounts with accomplices. A lawyer for the Holograph Foundation told the court that the incident caused the project to lose client trust, has now come to a complete halt, and the foundation is preparing for liquidation.
19 minutes ago
Analysis: Crypto hackers, including those involved in the Ledger case, are actively using ZEC to transfer funds.
According to crypto analyst Specter, since the Bitget attacker transferred stolen funds via Zcash’s privacy features, other stolen funds have also started flowing into ZEC, including funds from the Cryptobills Ledger incident and the $12 million Triple-A hack.
UNCX discloses cross-chain attack on Smart Token Vesting V2, resulting in approximately $807,600 in losses.
According to an official incident report from UNCX Network, on October 14, attackers exploited a set of public vesting operations of Smart Token Vesting V2 to create a mismatch between the pool’s token balance and recorded shares, enabling controlled positions to withdraw excess tokens. The attack impacted four blockchains: Ethereum, BNB Chain, Base, and Robinhood, involving 10 tokens, with 11 confirmed withdrawal transactions. The verified economic value totals approximately $807,600, of which BNB Chain accounts for about $567,500. All involved contract calls did not utilize administrator privileges. Post-incident, white hats have returned 82,143,500 X tokens and 23.8682 ETH, with no major tokens remaining to be disposed of at this time.
8 minutes ago
The team behind Trump reaped $779 million to $1.16 billion in profits from crypto buyers, while the buyers have suffered 97% losses.
CryptoQuant founder Ki Young Ju published a post noting that the team behind the TRUMP crypto token generated a profit of $779 million to $1.16 billion from token holders, while buyers of the token incurred a 97% loss.
8 minutes ago
Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management Co., Ltd. has been registered, with Du Yanjing, co-head of Solana China, serving as its legal representative.
According to Qichacha, Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management Co., Ltd. was registered in June this year with a registered capital of 5 million yuan. Claire Du (Du Yanjing), co-head of Solana China, serves as its legal representative. Separately, Shanghai Yaokun Qiusuo Digital Technology Co., Ltd. was established in August this year with a registered capital of 10 million yuan, with Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management holding a 45% stake in the latter. Even Jiang (Jiang Yiwen), co-head of Solana Foundation’s China region, is chairman of Yaokun Qiusuo, while Du Yanjing acts as a director. Public information indicates Yaokun Qiusuo’s core business includes technical services, development, consulting, exchange, transfer and promotion; computer system services; information system integration services; information technology consulting; data processing services; internet data services; IoT technology services; wholesale of computer software, hardware and auxiliary equipment; information consulting services (excluding licensed services); enterprise management consulting; financial consulting; and conference and exhibition services (overseas exhibitions require approval from relevant authorities). It should be noted that "Solana" is a name adopted by a sole proprietorship, and there is currently no equity evidence linking the two companies to the Solana Foundation. This week, Solana team members shared photos announcing the opening of an office in Shanghai, China.
8 minutes ago
Arthur Hayes: The so-called crypto quantum threat is "nonsense", users only need to focus on wallet management.
In a recent interview with The Rollup, Arthur Hayes dismissed the so-called crypto quantum threat as "bullshit"—exaggerated and overblown, framing it as a known, manageable risk rather than a reason to sell assets. Hayes emphasized that effective protection hinges on wallet hygiene practices, such as avoiding address reuse and using updated signature types, noting that most risks are concentrated among users with poor address management. He does not view quantum computing as a current catalyst for panic or selling Bitcoin.
8 minutes ago
Thai police arrested a Chinese fugitive wanted by China on suspicion of money laundering and crypto transactions in Bangkok.
According to Thai media outlet Khaosod English, Thai immigration police recently arrested a 37-year-old Chinese national in Bangkok. The man is wanted by Chinese police on suspicion of involvement in a transnational criminal network and money laundering. Police said the criminal network in question involved transactions exceeding 500 million yuan (approximately 2.485 billion Thai baht). The suspect is alleged to have processed cryptocurrency and foreign exchange transactions for the criminal group via more than 133 accounts, and assisted members of the transnational criminal network in obtaining visas. Police added that the suspect evaded manhunts by falsifying residence registration documents, changing license plates, and altering vehicle appearances, before finally being apprehended at a luxury residence in Bangkok. Thai authorities will handle his overstay issues in accordance with the law and coordinate his deportation back to China for investigation.
8 minutes ago
The case of Holograph’s illegal additional issuance of 1 billion tokens has opened in Paris, involving approximately $14 million.
Holograph (HLG)’s 2024 illegal issuance of 1 billion tokens went to trial on October 16 in Paris, with the case involving approximately $14 million at the time. Among the three defendants, the main suspect is a Ukrainian former Holograph employee residing in France, accused of modifying token creation conditions to illegally mint 1 billion HLG, transferring them to a personal wallet, and moving the funds via multiple exchange accounts with accomplices. A lawyer for the Holograph Foundation told the court that the incident caused the project to lose client trust, has now come to a complete halt, and the foundation is preparing for liquidation.
Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.
Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.
The stablecoin market has never looked more lopsided. Data from DefiLlama shows that Tether’s USDT ($183.4B) and Circle’s USDC ($72.7B) together hold roughly $256B, more than 85% of the total $302B stablecoin market.
No other issuer comes close to the $5B threshold. The gap is not narrowing. It is widening.
A Two-Horse Race With a Cliff After the Second Runner
The numbers from DefiLlama as of October 17, 2026, tell a stark story. USDT leads at $183.4B, commanding 60.6% of the stablecoin market alone. USDC follows at $72.7B, driven heavily by institutional and regulated demand.
Then comes the cliff. Sky Dollar (USDS) sits at $6.8B. Ethena’s USDe follows at $4.7B. World Liberty Financial’s USD1 holds $4B. PayPal’s PYUSD sits at $2.8B. Ripple’s RLUSD trails at $2.4B.
Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino has pointed to AI agents as the next frontier for USDT adoption.
He predicts as many as one trillion AI agents will transact in USDT within 15 years.
Agents spending USDT is the future. https://t.co/2HLBrmG3DA
— Paolo Ardoino 🤖 (@paoloardoino) October 15, 2026
Ethena is making calculated moves to escape the challenger trap. The protocol recently entered crypto neobanking with a new app to take USDe beyond DeFi.
It also teamed with FalconX on a $1 billion secured facility for USDe backing assets. Both moves signal that USDe is building real-world utility, but at $4.7B, it remains a fraction of the giants.
USD1 is pursuing a payments angle. Mesh recently acquired Bluvo after a WLFI partnership, a deal designed to deepen USD1’s payment rails. Yet at $4B, USD1 still sits well below the threshold that could threaten the two leaders.
Why Flipping the Duopoly Remains Nearly Impossible
Trust and liquidity are the core barriers. USDT dominates trading pairs and emerging-market corridors. USDC leads in regulated, institutional contexts.
Circle’s distribution strategy is accelerating that lead. Visa recently moved USDC prefunding into live operations on Visa Direct.
Circle paid out $819M to distribution partners in H1 2026 alone, reinforcing network lock-in.
Payment infrastructure is also expanding. Coinbase expanded its Marqeta partnership to bring stablecoin-backed payment cards to businesses. These rails make USDC harder to displace in corporate finance.
Traditional finance is circling the space. Wells Fargo’s CEO confirmed the bank is preparing for potential stablecoin opportunities in the US. New bank-issued stablecoins, however, are more likely to deepen USDC’s institutional moat than challenge it.
Regulatory scrutiny adds another layer. A US Senate probe recently found USDT present in 84% of sanctioned Iran’s wallets. Tether has since defended its compliance posture.
The controversy has not dented USDT’s dominance, but it gives regulators a lever that could reshape the stablecoin market in ways no competitor currently can.
For now, the data is unambiguous. Breaking through the $5B ceiling requires more than innovation.
It demands liquidity, regulatory trust, and distribution at a scale that only two issuers have built, and neither shows signs of giving ground.
Stablecoin issuer Circle plans to expand its operations into around 40 developing markets, according to CEO and chairman Jeremy Allaire. The company aims to leverage rising demand in regions including Southeast Asia, Latin America, Africa, and the Middle East.
Global expansion strategyAllaire outlined Circle’s ambitions while attending IMF and World Bank meetings in Bangkok. He noted that the company sees the current moment as a pivotal turning point, describing it as a shift from the early adopter stage of blockchain technology toward broader, mainstream adoption.
Businesses and individuals in emerging economies are increasingly seeking digital solutions for internet-based financial activities. The growing appetite for stablecoins in these markets reflects broader trends within the global digital economy, Allaire stated. He pointed to factors such as limited access to traditional banking and the need for faster, cheaper cross-border payments as drivers behind this demand.
Circle is a US-based fintech firm known for issuing the USDC stablecoin, which is pegged one-to-one with the US dollar. The company has positioned itself as a key player in providing digital dollar infrastructure to users worldwide.
USDC’s rising market presenceMarket analysts at Bernstein, a global research and brokerage firm, have projected a new growth cycle for Circle’s USDC stablecoin. According to an August 24 report, they expect USDC’s expanding role could offer significant gains for Circle in the coming year.
Bernstein identified several factors that may accelerate stablecoin adoption: recovering momentum in the crypto markets, increasing regulatory clarity in the United States, the rise of tokenized capital markets, and broader payment usage. The analysts also mentioned emerging use cases involving AI-powered agents conducting transactions via stablecoins.
Despite trailing Tether’s USDT in overall market capitalization, USDC has made notable advances in transaction volume. Bernstein reported that USDC’s share of adjusted stablecoin transaction volume grew from about 40% in 2025 to more than 60% in 2026, placing it ahead of USDT by this metric.
StablecoinMarket Cap RankShare of Transaction Volume (2025)Share of Transaction Volume (2026)USDC240%60%+USDT1N/A<60%Bernstein analysts highlighted that the next wave of stablecoin growth may be “driven by several factors, including renewed momentum in crypto markets, greater US regulatory clarity, tokenized capital markets and growing adoption of stablecoins for payments.”
Strategic acquisitionsOn September 8, Circle reportedly agreed to acquire Singapore-based Tazapay, a cross-border payments firm, in an all-stock transaction valued at $400 million. The deal is expected to finalize in 2027 and is intended to strengthen Circle’s cross-border payment infrastructure.
Tazapay provides digital payment solutions for businesses looking to streamline international transactions. The acquisition is likely to boost Circle’s ability to serve enterprise customers and expand in key target regions.
Mini dictionary: Tazapay, a Singapore-based company, specializes in facilitating cross-border payments for businesses, enabling merchants to collect and disburse funds across multiple countries with enhanced compliance and fraud prevention tools.
Allaire commented on the company’s vision, noting that expanding into developing markets aligns with Circle’s broader goal of enabling global access to the internet-based financial system.
Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.
Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.
Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.
Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.
The team behind Trump reaped $779 million to $1.16 billion in profits from crypto buyers, while the buyers have suffered 97% losses.
CryptoQuant founder Ki Young Ju published a post noting that the team behind the TRUMP crypto token generated a profit of $779 million to $1.16 billion from token holders, while buyers of the token incurred a 97% loss.
8 minutes ago
Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management Co., Ltd. has been registered, with Du Yanjing, co-head of Solana China, serving as its legal representative.
According to Qichacha, Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management Co., Ltd. was registered in June this year with a registered capital of 5 million yuan. Claire Du (Du Yanjing), co-head of Solana China, serves as its legal representative. Separately, Shanghai Yaokun Qiusuo Digital Technology Co., Ltd. was established in August this year with a registered capital of 10 million yuan, with Shanghai Solana Enterprise Management holding a 45% stake in the latter. Even Jiang (Jiang Yiwen), co-head of Solana Foundation’s China region, is chairman of Yaokun Qiusuo, while Du Yanjing acts as a director. Public information indicates Yaokun Qiusuo’s core business includes technical services, development, consulting, exchange, transfer and promotion; computer system services; information system integration services; information technology consulting; data processing services; internet data services; IoT technology services; wholesale of computer software, hardware and auxiliary equipment; information consulting services (excluding licensed services); enterprise management consulting; financial consulting; and conference and exhibition services (overseas exhibitions require approval from relevant authorities). It should be noted that "Solana" is a name adopted by a sole proprietorship, and there is currently no equity evidence linking the two companies to the Solana Foundation. This week, Solana team members shared photos announcing the opening of an office in Shanghai, China.
8 minutes ago
Arthur Hayes: The so-called crypto quantum threat is "nonsense", users only need to focus on wallet management.
In a recent interview with The Rollup, Arthur Hayes dismissed the so-called crypto quantum threat as "bullshit"—exaggerated and overblown, framing it as a known, manageable risk rather than a reason to sell assets. Hayes emphasized that effective protection hinges on wallet hygiene practices, such as avoiding address reuse and using updated signature types, noting that most risks are concentrated among users with poor address management. He does not view quantum computing as a current catalyst for panic or selling Bitcoin.
8 minutes ago
Thai police arrested a Chinese fugitive wanted by China on suspicion of money laundering and crypto transactions in Bangkok.
According to Thai media outlet Khaosod English, Thai immigration police recently arrested a 37-year-old Chinese national in Bangkok. The man is wanted by Chinese police on suspicion of involvement in a transnational criminal network and money laundering. Police said the criminal network in question involved transactions exceeding 500 million yuan (approximately 2.485 billion Thai baht). The suspect is alleged to have processed cryptocurrency and foreign exchange transactions for the criminal group via more than 133 accounts, and assisted members of the transnational criminal network in obtaining visas. Police added that the suspect evaded manhunts by falsifying residence registration documents, changing license plates, and altering vehicle appearances, before finally being apprehended at a luxury residence in Bangkok. Thai authorities will handle his overstay issues in accordance with the law and coordinate his deportation back to China for investigation.
8 minutes ago
The case of Holograph’s illegal additional issuance of 1 billion tokens has opened in Paris, involving approximately $14 million.
Holograph (HLG)’s 2024 illegal issuance of 1 billion tokens went to trial on October 16 in Paris, with the case involving approximately $14 million at the time. Among the three defendants, the main suspect is a Ukrainian former Holograph employee residing in France, accused of modifying token creation conditions to illegally mint 1 billion HLG, transferring them to a personal wallet, and moving the funds via multiple exchange accounts with accomplices. A lawyer for the Holograph Foundation told the court that the incident caused the project to lose client trust, has now come to a complete halt, and the foundation is preparing for liquidation.
8 minutes ago
Arbitrum unveils USDG stablecoin growth program, with a 2 million ARB reward pool.
On October 15, the Arbitrum Foundation launched its Stablecoin Growth Program for protocols holding stablecoin balances of no less than $1 million, requiring selected teams to designate USDG as their primary stablecoin on Arbitrum One. The program offers a 2 million ARB reward pool: the first 10 teams that achieve a 30-day average USDG balance of $10 million will each receive up to 200,000 ARB (capped at $200,000). The reward pool is valid through December 31, 2027, and each participant is eligible for only one reward.
Algorand (ALGO) says it has processed millions of post-quantum transactions on mainnet since Google's quantum paper, using NIST-selected Falcon signatures.
@Algorand says it has processed roughly 1.7 million post-quantum transactions on mainnet since @Google published its widely discussed research on quantum threats to cryptocurrencies, as the network pushes its early start on quantum-resistant security as a competitive edge for $ALGO.
The figure is a company claim and has shifted in recent weeks. Algorand's own posts earlier this week cited , and secondary coverage has since reported . The numbers have not been independently audited in the sources reviewed.
What Google's paper changedThe research behind the debate was published on March 30 by Google Quantum AI. The authors stressed that such attacks are not yet feasible.
The paper also pointed to chains already working on the problem. According to a market report, The same report noted that , only that it had implemented features to support future migration.
How Algorand's approach worksAlgorand's technical documentation says The chain's history is also protected: That is only part of the picture, however. Algorand's own write-up says the hardest remaining step
There are trade-offs. , which
Other networks are also preparing. One analysis noted that It also described @Starknet as using hash-based cryptography that is Algorand's transaction count, if it holds, shows live usage rather than roadmaps, though the volume does not settle how the wider industry will migrate.
Sources
Algorand technical brief on Falcon-signed transactionsThe Quantum Insider on Google's quantum paperThe Defiant on the Google Quantum AI whitepaper
OKX CEO Star Xu recalled several Bitcoin crises, including early network attacks and exchange failures.
The Mt. Gox collapse and Bitcoin scaling disputes raised concerns about cryptocurrency’s long-term survival prospects.
Xu explained that resolving major cryptocurrency industry crises can take several months or one year.
OKX founder believes cryptocurrency markets become stronger after addressing past failures and security weaknesses.
OKX founder and CEO Star Xu has recalled several crises that nearly brought Bitcoin and the cryptocurrency industry to collapse. His remarks follow renewed discussions about Bitcoin’s history of market crashes and how digital assets have survived previous downturns.
Star Xu: Bitcoin Nearly Died Several Times, but Crypto Emerged Stronger
In an interview on the New Era Finance Podcast @new_era_finance, OKX founder and CEO Star Xu @star_okx recalled Bitcoin's early forks and hash power attacks, the collapse of Mt. Gox, disagreements over… pic.twitter.com/y5v6i4h26Z
— Wu Blockchain (@WuBlockchain) October 17, 2026
Speaking on the New Era Finance Podcast, Xu described early network attacks, the Mt. Gox collapse and the FTX bankruptcy. He explained that resolving major industry problems can take several months or even a year before recovery begins.
Star Xu Recalls Bitcoin’s Early Crises and Mt. Gox Collapse
Star Xu said Bitcoin faced repeated threats during its early development, particularly between 2011 and 2012. Network forks, security concerns and disputes over mining power raised questions about whether the cryptocurrency could survive.
Among the problems he recalled were hash power attacks and disagreements over how Bitcoin should operate. These incidents occurred when the network was smaller and its infrastructure was still developing.
The OKX founder then pointed to the 2014 collapse of Mt. Gox, once the world’s largest Bitcoin exchange. The platform filed for bankruptcy after reporting approximately 850,000 BTC missing, leaving thousands of customers unable to access their funds.
The collapse damaged confidence in centralized cryptocurrency exchanges and led to years of legal proceedings. More than a decade later, Mt. Gox creditor repayments remain connected to the exchange’s bankruptcy process.
Xu also recalled Bitcoin’s scaling disputes, which divided developers, miners and businesses over the network’s transaction capacity. The disagreements eventually contributed to the creation of Bitcoin Cash through a hard fork in August 2017.
The debate centered on competing proposals to increase transaction throughput while preserving Bitcoin’s decentralized structure. Xu described these disputes as another period when the industry’s future appeared uncertain.
OKX CEO Points to FTX Collapse and Stronger Industry Standards
The discussion later turned to FTX, whose November 2022 bankruptcy disrupted cryptocurrency markets and exposed serious failures in customer fund management. The exchange’s collapse triggered withdrawals across competing platforms and increased pressure for stronger custody controls.
Xu said the industry has repeatedly worked through such problems, although resolving them often requires considerable time. In his view, cryptocurrency businesses become better prepared after addressing the weaknesses exposed during each crisis.
The fallout from FTX renewed attention on exchange reserves and whether customer assets were properly separated from company funds. Years later, former Mt. Gox executives have continued proposing recovery measures, showing how long unresolved exchange failures can remain relevant.
During the podcast, Xu discussed OKX’s approach to handling customer assets and explained why he rejects using deposits for speculative investments. He pointed to monthly proof-of-reserves reporting as one measure intended to help customers verify exchange holdings.
OKX has since expanded beyond conventional cryptocurrency trading through partnerships involving traditional financial institutions. Earlier this month, the exchange secured new funding from Circle, Ripple and Standard Chartered at a $25 billion valuation.
The company is also pursuing tokenized securities and stablecoin services as more regulated financial businesses enter cryptocurrency markets. Its planned tokenized stock trading platform with Intercontinental Exchange forms part of that expansion.
Xu maintained that Bitcoin’s past recoveries support his confidence in the industry’s longer-term development. He expects stablecoins, regulation and tokenized financial products to play larger roles during the coming decade.
Hedera recorded a 168.37% rise in transactions per second over 30 days, while total value locked increased 12.3% to 33.2 million dollars.
The HBAR price traded near $0.0836 on October 17, falling 2.7% over 24 hours and 9.5% weekly despite retaining a 14.9% monthly gain.
The network joined the UK Wholesale Digital Markets Champion Taskforce, whose work covers tokenized repos, collateral, and interoperability.
Hashgraph developed CLPR, which entered Linux Foundation Decentralized Trust Labs on September 24, opening its code to developer contributions.
Hedera reported a sharp rise in network activity over 30 days, even as HBAR extended its weekly decline. Total value locked reached 33.2 million dollars, up 12.3%, while transactions per second increased 168.37%, according to Token Relations.
The HBAR price traded near $0.0836 on October 17, losing 2.7% daily and 9.5% over seven days. The network also joined a UK wholesale markets taskforce and opened CLPR, its cross-ledger protocol to developers.
Source: Coingecko
Hedera Network Activity Grows as HBAR Price Faces Pressure
The HBAR price remained 17.8% lower over two weeks but retained a 14.9% gain across 30 days. Trading volume fell to about 91 million dollars, compared with 1.51 billion dollars during the September spike.
The earlier rally followed IBM adding a network-based identity application to its cloud offerings on September 28. HBAR rose 27% that day before falling 16% the next day.
By comparison, Solana traded near $105 after losing 4.6% over seven days. That weekly decline was less than half the loss recorded by HBAR during the same period.
TVL measures assets deposited into applications, whereas TPS counts the transactions a network processes each second. The percentage increases therefore describe different kinds of activity. Neither figure, by itself, measures revenue or the number of paying customers.
Source: Defillama
Hedera prices network fees in dollars and collects payment in HBAR. That structure means transaction growth alone cannot establish how much additional token buying occurred. Fee revenue and the mix of transactions also affect the economic picture.
Hedera has a maximum supply of 50 billion HBAR, with roughly 44 billion circulating. Market capitalization stood near 3.68 billion dollars, versus a fully diluted valuation of 4.18 billion dollars. At its $0.57 peak, that circulating supply would imply roughly 25.1 billion dollars in market value.
UK Taskforce Membership and CLPR Broaden Developer Access
Hedera joined the Wholesale Digital Markets Champion Taskforce, led by Christopher Woolard CBE and backed by HM Treasury. Its agenda covers tokenized repos, fixed income, collateral, interoperability, and settlement finality. Participants aim to demonstrate an end-to-end repo transaction using blockchain technology. The work examines connections between public ledgers, private networks, and established financial infrastructure.
Separately, Hedera contributed CLPR, developed by Hashgraph, to Linux Foundation Decentralized Trust Labs on September 24. The protocol remains under development, with its code available for external review and contributions.
While CLPR was designed to solve the issue of cross-ledger interoperability and liquidity fragmentation, interoperability from a policy perspective is proving to be a greater challenge.@nilminirubin discusses this and more at the@IMFNews & @WorldBankGroup Annual Meetings in…
— Hedera (@hedera) October 16, 2026
CLPR uses state proofs so independent ledgers can verify each other directly. Applications built around it aim to transfer assets, messages, and data without bridges or intermediary validator networks. The approach targets fragmented liquidity and the additional infrastructure normally involved in moving value between networks.
The Hedera contribution entered LFDT as a lab, rather than a top-level project. Developers can inspect repositories, raise issues, test assumptions, and suggest practical applications as the work develops.
Hashgraph also opened a three-phase CLPR early adopter program. Its focus areas include cross-border payments with in-flight foreign exchange, cross-ledger settlement, and collateral mobility. Selected participants receive access to a hosted testnet and integration support.
The program invites financial institutions, fintech companies, asset issuers, liquidity providers, and corporations. It also seeks participants from different countries to incorporate regulatory and compliance considerations during development, according to the company.
At the application layer, HashPack and SODAX are expanding access to tokenized assets. Developers also received a new account balance query in the JavaScript, Java, and Go Hiero SDKs. It reads HBAR balances through the mirror node interface.
Hedera revised atomic batch rules in September. Batches can currently include one smart contract call, placed last. The network plans to remove that support in March 2027.
Not financial or tax advice. PANews content is strictly educational and informational and is not investment advice, financial advice, tax advice, legal advice, or a solicitation to buy or sell any digital asset, security, or financial product. Do your own research and consult qualified advisers.
Disclosure. PANews may publish sponsored content, partner content, advertisements, affiliate links, event promotions, and market commentary involving Web3 projects, service providers, or financial products. PANews personnel, contributors, or affiliates may hold digital assets or other interests related to covered topics. See our Terms of Service.
