Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

In the latest close session, PagSeguro Digital Ltd. (PAGS - Free Report) was up +2.78% at $9.25. The stock's performance was ahead of the S&P 500's daily gain of 0.42%. Meanwhile, the Dow experienced a rise of 0.29%, and the technology-dominated Nasdaq saw an increase of 0.29%.

Heading into today, shares of the company had gained 0.67% over the past month, lagging the Business Services sector's gain of 2.8% and the S&P 500's gain of 2.2%.

The upcoming earnings release of PagSeguro Digital Ltd. will be of great interest to investors. On that day, PagSeguro Digital Ltd. is projected to report earnings of $0.4 per share, which would represent year-over-year growth of 17.65%. Alongside, our most recent consensus estimate is anticipating revenue of $1.05 billion, indicating a 17.55% upward movement from the same quarter last year.

Regarding the entire year, the Zacks Consensus Estimates forecast earnings of $1.7 per share and revenue of $4.25 billion, indicating changes of +19.72% and +16.27%, respectively, compared to the previous year.

Investors might also notice recent changes to analyst estimates for PagSeguro Digital Ltd. These latest adjustments often mirror the shifting dynamics of short-term business patterns. As such, positive estimate revisions reflect analyst optimism about the business and profitability.

Our research suggests that these changes in estimates have a direct relationship with upcoming stock price performance. To utilize this, we have created the Zacks Rank, a proprietary model that integrates these estimate changes and provides a functional rating system.

The Zacks Rank system, running from #1 (Strong Buy) to #5 (Strong Sell), holds an admirable track record of superior performance, independently audited, with #1 stocks contributing an average annual return of +25% since 1988. The Zacks Consensus EPS estimate remained stagnant within the past month. PagSeguro Digital Ltd. is currently a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy).

Valuation is also important, so investors should note that PagSeguro Digital Ltd. has a Forward P/E ratio of 5.31 right now. This expresses a discount compared to the average Forward P/E of 11.31 of its industry.

Also, we should mention that PAGS has a PEG ratio of 0.36. This popular metric is similar to the widely-known P/E ratio, with the difference being that the PEG ratio also takes into account the company's expected earnings growth rate. Financial Transaction Services stocks are, on average, holding a PEG ratio of 0.83 based on yesterday's closing prices.

The Financial Transaction Services industry is part of the Business Services sector. Currently, this industry holds a Zacks Industry Rank of 67, positioning it in the top 28% of all 250+ industries.

The Zacks Industry Rank assesses the strength of our separate industry groups by calculating the average Zacks Rank of the individual stocks contained within the groups. Our research shows that the top 50% rated industries outperform the bottom half by a factor of 2 to 1.

Be sure to follow all of these stock-moving metrics, and many more, on Zacks.com.

UnitedHealth Group (UNH - Free Report) ended the recent trading session at $424.62, demonstrating a -1.64% change from the preceding day's closing price. This change lagged the S&P 500's 0.42% gain on the day. Meanwhile, the Dow experienced a rise of 0.29%, and the technology-dominated Nasdaq saw an increase of 0.29%.

Shares of the largest U.S. health insurer have appreciated by 6.44% over the course of the past month, outperforming the Medical sector's gain of 5.6%, and the S&P 500's gain of 2.2%.

Analysts and investors alike will be keeping a close eye on the performance of UnitedHealth Group in its upcoming earnings disclosure. The company's earnings report is set to go public on July 16, 2026. The company is forecasted to report an EPS of $4.84, showcasing a 18.63% upward movement from the corresponding quarter of the prior year. Meanwhile, our latest consensus estimate is calling for revenue of $110.05 billion, down 1.4% from the prior-year quarter.

For the annual period, the Zacks Consensus Estimates anticipate earnings of $18.32 per share and a revenue of $443.74 billion, signifying shifts of +12.05% and -0.85%, respectively, from the last year.

Investors should also note any recent changes to analyst estimates for UnitedHealth Group. Recent revisions tend to reflect the latest near-term business trends. Consequently, upward revisions in estimates express analysts' positivity towards the business operations and its ability to generate profits.

Our research demonstrates that these adjustments in estimates directly associate with imminent stock price performance. To capitalize on this, we've crafted the Zacks Rank, a unique model that incorporates these estimate changes and offers a practical rating system.

The Zacks Rank system ranges from #1 (Strong Buy) to #5 (Strong Sell). It has a remarkable, outside-audited track record of success, with #1 stocks delivering an average annual return of +25% since 1988. Within the past 30 days, our consensus EPS projection remained stagnant. UnitedHealth Group is currently sporting a Zacks Rank of #2 (Buy).

Investors should also note UnitedHealth Group's current valuation metrics, including its Forward P/E ratio of 23.57. This signifies a premium in comparison to the average Forward P/E of 21.55 for its industry.

We can also see that UNH currently has a PEG ratio of 1.74. The PEG ratio is similar to the widely-used P/E ratio, but this metric also takes the company's expected earnings growth rate into account. The Medical - HMOs was holding an average PEG ratio of 1.43 at yesterday's closing price.

The Medical - HMOs industry is part of the Medical sector. This industry currently has a Zacks Industry Rank of 43, which puts it in the top 18% of all 250+ industries.

The Zacks Industry Rank assesses the strength of our separate industry groups by calculating the average Zacks Rank of the individual stocks contained within the groups. Our research shows that the top 50% rated industries outperform the bottom half by a factor of 2 to 1.

To follow UNH in the coming trading sessions, be sure to utilize Zacks.com.

The Euro to Dollar (EUR/USD) exchange rate has slipped back towards 1.1415 as investors continue to favour the US Dollar following resilient US economic data and expectations that the Federal Reserve will keep interest rates higher for longer.

HSBC believes EUR/USD is likely to face renewed downside pressure as markets shift their focus back to interest-rate differentials.

The bank notes that geopolitical concerns in the Middle East have eased, reducing one source of support for the Dollar. However, it argues that renewed disruption to shipping routes could quickly restore safe-haven demand for the US currency.

According to HSBC, firm US labour market conditions and sticky inflation continue to justify a cautious approach from the Federal Reserve, keeping longer-term yield support firmly behind the Dollar.

The bank also highlights that Eurozone inflation has cooled, but underlying price pressures remain elevated, leaving the European Central Bank in a difficult position.

HSBC argues that "the EUR loses out on fundamentals", with interest-rate differentials now re-emerging as the dominant driver of EUR/USD.

The bank adds that the outlook could deteriorate further if energy prices rise again, warning that renewed disruption in the Middle East would increase stagflation risks for the Eurozone and add fresh pressure on the single currency.

The first five months of 2026 were rough on Vertex Pharmaceuticals (VRTX 2.22%). The biotech's shares moved in the wrong direction through early June. However, the drugmaker has bounced back in style over the past month, with its stock gaining 10%. Vertex Pharmaceuticals is now up 9% this year and recently hit a fresh 52-week high. Is there more upside left for the stock? Let's find out.

Potential catalysts on the horizon Several recent developments explain why the market is increasingly excited about Vertex Pharmaceuticals' prospects. First, the company recently received a label expansion for Casgevy, a gene-editing medicine for sickle cell disease (SCD) and transfusion-dependent beta-thalassemia (TDT), two blood-related diseases. Casgevy is now indicated to treat patients as young as two who have TDT or SCD (it was previously approved for people 12 and older).

Image source: The Motley Fool.

This regulatory milestone adds 5,500 patients to Vertex's addressable market, but, even more importantly, it allows patients and their families to treat these diseases before they have had time to significantly impact their lives. Casgevy has not generated much revenue since its 2023 approval. This label expansion should help boost its sales. Second, Vertex Pharmaceuticals is awaiting approval for povetacicept, an investigational medicine for IgA nephropathy (IgAN), a kidney disease. U.S. regulators could give this therapy the green light by the end of November.

Povetacicept would be a key addition to Vertex's lineup. Given the more than 1.5 million IgAN patients worldwide and the medicine's potential approval across other indications, some analysts project it could reach peak sales of about $4.3 billion. Third, Vertex Pharmaceuticals has several other late-stage clinical trial candidates that could make good progress. For instance, the company is developing inaxaplin, a potential therapy for APOL-1-mediated kidney disease, and expects some data readouts later this year.

Lastly, Vertex Pharmaceuticals announced the acquisition of Crinetics Pharmaceuticals (CRNX 0.05%), a biotech company focused on developing medicines for endocrine diseases, for $10 billion in cash. Vertex estimates that this buyout adds more than $5 billion in potential peak annual sales to its lineup. All these developments make Vertex Pharmaceuticals' medium-term prospects attractive.

Today's Change

(

-2.22

%) $

-11.03

Current Price

$

485.47

The core business is still going strong Vertex Pharmaceuticals remains the leader in its core therapeutic area: developing medicines for patients with cystic fibrosis (CF). This rare disease causes thick mucus to form in the lungs, disrupting the airways and leading to chronic infections. Vertex remains the only game in town. It markets the only drugs that treat the underlying causes of CF. Though the biotech has been dominating this area for a long time, business is still good. In the first quarter, Vertex Pharmaceuticals' revenue increased by 8% year over year to $2.99 billion. The company's adjusted earnings per share climbed 10% year over year to $4.47.

Vertex Pharmaceuticals still has a decent patient population to address as it expands into new territories and earns new label expansions, especially for younger patients. The company's core business should remain a growth driver over the next decade, as its most important products won't face patent cliffs until the late 2030s. Even though some pharmaceutical companies are developing competing therapies, all previous attempts have failed. Successes may come, eventually, but that's also why Vertex has diversified its lineup.

The company's newer non-CF approvals, including Casgevy and Journavx, a medicine for acute pain, should start meaningfully contributing to top-line growth within a couple of years. Vertex expects at least $500 million in non-CF revenue this year. That will represent less than 5% of its revenue, but with Casgevy gaining traction thanks to label expansions and Journavx meeting strong demand for non-opioid pain drugs, they should post solid sales growth over the next few years. So, Vertex Pharmaceuticals still has plenty of upside ahead, even though it recently hit a new 52-week high. Investors can safely hold this stock for the long term.

MILWAUKEE, July 10, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Artisan Partners Asset Management Inc. (NYSE: APAM) today reported that its preliminary assets under management ("AUM") as of June 30, 2026 totaled $183.4 billion. Artisan Funds and Artisan Global Funds accounted for $93.5 billion of total firm AUM, while separate accounts and other AUM1 accounted for $89.9 billion.

  PRELIMINARY ASSETS UNDER MANAGEMENT BY STRATEGY2   As of June 30, 2026 - ($ Millions) Growth Team Global Opportunities$13,441Global Discovery 1,885U.S. Mid-Cap Growth 10,359U.S. Small-Cap Growth 2,981Franchise 1,112Global Equity Team Global Equity 420Non-U.S. Growth 16,465U.S. Value Team3 Value Equity 473U.S. Mid-Cap Value 1,298Value Income 8International Value Group International Value 57,099International Explorer 1,230Global Special Situations 39Global Value Team Global Value 38,967Select Equity 1,068Sustainable Emerging Markets Team Sustainable Emerging Markets 3,508Credit Team High Income 14,288Credit Opportunities 417Floating Rate 290Custom Credit Solutions 1,515Developing World Team Developing World 3,292Antero Peak Group Antero Peak 2,562Antero Peak Hedge 254International Small-Mid Team Non-U.S. Small-Mid Growth 4,309EMsights Capital Group Global Unconstrained 1,825Emerging Markets Debt Opportunities 1,506Emerging Markets Local Opportunities 1,941Grandview Property Partners Grandview Property Partners4 837  Total Firm Assets Under Management ("AUM")$183,389 1 Separate account and other AUM consists of the assets we manage in or through vehicles other than Artisan Funds or Artisan Global Funds. Separate account and other AUM includes assets we manage in traditional separate accounts, as well as assets we manage in Artisan-branded collective investment trusts, and in our own private funds.
2 AUM includes $381.8 million in aggregate for which Artisan Partners provides investment models to managed account sponsors (generally reported on a lag not exceeding one quarter).
3 In June, the termination of a U.S. sub-advisory mandate resulted in approximately $5.7 billion of net outflows from the Value Equity strategy. Artisan has commenced an orderly wind-down of the US Value team's strategies, with the process expected to continue throughout the third quarter.
4 Represents NAV plus uncalled and recallable capital.

ABOUT ARTISAN PARTNERS
Artisan Partners is a global multi-asset investment platform providing a broad range of high value-added investment strategies in growing asset classes to sophisticated clients around the world. Since 1994, the firm has been committed to attracting experienced, disciplined investment professionals to manage client assets. Artisan Partners' autonomous investment teams oversee a diverse range of investment strategies across multiple asset classes. Strategies are offered through various investment vehicles to accommodate a broad range of client mandates.

Investor Relations Inquiries: 866.632.1770 or [email protected]
Source: Artisan Partners Asset Management Inc.

Key Takeaways QBTS bookings jumped 1,994% year over year as commercial momentum continued into first-quarter 2026. QBTS is expanding beyond annealing with a gate-model roadmap after the Quantum Circuits acquisition. QBTS revenues can fluctuate as larger contracts depend on customer deployment schedules and milestones. D-Wave Quantum’s (QBTS - Free Report) shares have surged 42.9% over the past year, showing impressive momentum. It has significantly outperformed the industry’s 14.2% decline and the S&P 500 composite’s 23.1% gain.  

With healthy fundamentals and strong growth opportunities, this Zacks Rank #3 (Hold) company appears to be a solid wealth creator for its investors at the moment.

D-Wave Quantum develops and delivers quantum computing systems, software, and services for commercial customers. Core use cases focus on optimization-workforce and production scheduling, vehicle routing and resource allocation, with expanding applications in AI and research. The current sixth-generation annealing system is Advantage2. Revenues come from three primary sources — cloud-based quantum computing as a service (QCaaS), professional services that help customers deploy solutions and on-premises system sales. 

Key Catalysts for QBTS’ GrowthD-Wave Quantum’s share price is trending upward, prompted by its commercial momentum carried into the first quarter of 2026. Bookings were up 1,994% from the year-ago period. Over two dozen commercial customers represented over 31% of bookings, while the largest order was the $20 million Florida Atlantic University system sale. Remaining performance obligations were $42.4 million as of March 31, 2026, with about 54% expected to convert to revenues in the next 12 months and 71% in the next two years. 

Investors are also focused on the company’s annealing platforms - Advantage2 and the Leap cloud service. The company is extending its product set into gate-model computing following the Quantum Circuits acquisition in January 2026. It highlighted dual-rail qubits with built-in error detection and on-chip cryogenic control as key elements of its gate-model approach. It is targeting roughly 175 physical qubits by the end of 2028 to demonstrate error correction and logical operations, then 10 logical qubits by 2030 and 100 logical qubits by the end of 2032. Alongside this long-dated gate-model roadmap, D-Wave continues to add commercial annealing applications in production and expand research use cases, including work in quantum AI and blockchain benchmarking.

From solvency view point, cash and cash equivalents totaled $338.2 million and marketable investment securities amounted to $250.2 million. Operating cash outflow was $45 million in the first quarter, while investing cash outflow included $250.8 million of cash consideration for the Quantum Circuits acquisition. Even after that step-down, the balance sheet supports continued investment in R&D, sales coverage and system installations. Leap cloud utilization was below 50% entering 2026, which leaves capacity headroom, and additional annealing systems can be installed within months at modest cost.

Factors That May Offset QBTS’ GainsD-Wave’s revenue mix still depends on the timing of larger contracts and system deliveries. First-quarter 2026 revenues fell to $2.9 million from $15.0 million in the first quarter of 2025 because the prior-year quarter included $12.6 million from the first system sale, with no comparable system revenues recognized in the current period. 

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

While deferred revenues increased to $11.6 million and remaining performance obligations rose to $42.4 million, conversion depends on customer deployment schedules and contract milestones. This setup can drive quarter-to-quarter volatility and delay reported revenues even when bookings are rising.

A Glance at QBTS’ EstimatesIn the past 30 days, the Zacks Consensus Estimate for 2026 loss per share EPS has remained unchanged at 25 cents. 

Revenues are projected to grow 63.3% to $40.16 million in 2026, while the same for 2027 is expected to reach $91.76 million (up 128.5%).  

Key PickSome better-ranked stocks in the broader internet space are Atlassian (TEAM - Free Report) , BILL Holdings, Inc. (BILL - Free Report) and Compass (COMP - Free Report) .

Atlassian has an earnings yield of 7.1%, well ahead of the industry’s 4.5% yield. Its earnings surpassed estimates in each of the trailing four quarters, the average surprise being 21.5%. The company’s shares have rallied 43.8% against the industry’s 4.8% decline over the past year.

TEAM carries a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy) at present. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank stocks here.

BILL Holdings, carrying a Zacks Rank #1 at present, has an earnings yield of 8.4% compared to the industry’s negative 4.5% yield. Shares of the company have gained 22.8% compared with the industry’s 4.5% growth. BILL’s earnings topped estimates in each of the trailing four quarters, the average surprise being 21.7%.

Compass, carrying a Zacks Rank #1 at present, has an earnings yield of 0.8% compared with the industry’s 4.5% yield. Shares of the company have climbed 43.1% against the industry’s 27.9% decline. COMP’s earnings beat estimates in two of the trailing four quarters, missed in one and matched in the other, the average surprise being 37.8%.

A person points to an iPhone during Apple's event at the Steve Jobs Theater on its campus in Cupertino, California, U.S. September 9, 2025. REUTERS/Manuel Orbegozo /File Photo Purchase Licensing Rights, opens new tab

SummaryCompaniesApple alleges coordinated effort to steal designs and manufacturing processesMore than 400 former Apple employees now work for OpenAI, Apple saysOpenAI bought io Products last year in a $6.5 billion ​dealTensions between Apple and OpenAI have simmered for monthsJuly 10 (Reuters) - Apple (AAPL.O), opens new tab on Friday sued OpenAI ‌and two former employees, alleging misappropriation of its trade secrets to benefit the ChatGPT-owner's foray into consumer hardware, in a dramatic escalation of already simmering tension between the two companies.

The complaint, filed in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, alleges a coordinated effort to steal Apple's confidential information, including product designs, manufacturing processes and ​supply chain strategies.

Jumpstart your morning with the latest legal news delivered straight to your inbox from The Daily Docket newsletter. Sign up here.

OpenAI did not immediately respond to a request for comment.

The lawsuit was filed against Chang Liu, a former senior system ​electrical engineer, and former Vice President of Product Design for iPhone and Apple Watch Tang Yew Tan, as well ⁠as OpenAI Foundation, OpenAI Group PBC and io Products. Neither immediately responded to a request for comment.

Apple alleged that Liu failed to return a ​company-issued work laptop and later used an authentication bug to access Apple's internal network, downloading "dozens of Apple's confidential hardware-related files."

The iPhone maker also claimed that OpenAI’s ​hardware chief Tan had been "methodically using Apple’s confidential information to benefit OpenAI" by emailing himself information about Apple suppliers and internal industry summaries before his departure.

Apple alleged that Tan encouraged Apple employees to bring parts from Apple to job interviews at OpenAI for “show and tell” sessions, citing an incident in its filing where one OpenAI job candidate ​allegedly said that he “didn’t even know we could take those from the office.”

More than 400 former Apple employees now work for OpenAI, Apple said in ​the filing, saying that “it is not surprising” that some of them have knowledge of its confidential information.

“That OpenAI now employs people who were once entrusted with Apple’s trade ‌secrets does ⁠not entitle OpenAI to use that information to jumpstart its hardware efforts,” the iPhone maker wrote in its complaint.

Apple also alleged that OpenAI employees sought confidential information from Apple suppliers, at one point allegedly having one of those suppliers carry out what Apple called a secret metal finishing technique on the belief that OpenAI had Apple’s permission to use the technique.

OpenAI bought hardware startup io Products, founded by former Apple designer Jony Ive, last year in a $6.5 ​billion deal, in a push to ​move beyond software into consumer hardware. ⁠Ive is not named in the lawsuit.

TENSIONS BREWED FOR MONTHSTensions between the two tech companies have strained their relationship, as the race to develop AI products has intensified competition for talent and proprietary technology.

In its complaint, Apple claimed it ​wrote to OpenAI in February with concerns that its confidential information was making its way to OpenAI, asking ​to discuss the ⁠matter, but received no reply.

A person familiar with the matter told Reuters in May that OpenAI was exploring legal options against Apple, including notifying the technology giant of a breach of contract but potentially not filing a full lawsuit.

In 2024, Apple announced the integration of its "Apple Intelligence" technology across its apps including Siri and ⁠brought OpenAI's ​chatbot ChatGPT to its devices.

Their partnership allows users to access ChatGPT results through Siri, while ​iPhone users can also sign up for ChatGPT memberships directly from the iOS settings menu.

Apple rolled out a long-delayed overhaul of Siri last month. The update comes two years after Apple ​first promised major upgrades that were repeatedly delayed.

Reporting by Jaspreet Singh in Bengaluru and Stephen Nellis and Deepa Seetharaman in San Francisco; Editing by Maju Samuel

Our Standards: The Thomson Reuters Trust Principles., opens new tab

Jaspreet Singh joined Reuters as a technology reporter in April 2023. He covers a raft of developments including deals, layoffs, management changes, quarterly earnings and the latest in the world of AI. He is interested in stories that bring to light any corporate misconduct, abuse of power and innovation. Jaspreet graduated from Panjab University with a degree in Journalism. If you have any sensitive information or a tip to share, contact him for an off-the-record introduction chat. He will explain what it means to speak with a reporter on background.

Store

SubscribeSign In

My Subscriptions

Founder's ClubSwingTraderLeaderboardMarketSurgeeIBDIBD DigitalIBD LiveCustomer Center

My Stock Lists

Email Preferences

Help & Support

Sign Out

Search stocks or keywords

Sections

My IBD

MARKET TREND

STOCK LISTS

STOCK RESEARCH

NEWSECONOMY

VIDEOS & PODCASTS

HOW TO INVESTEDUCATIONAL RESOURCESStoreMy Products

Founder's ClubSwingTraderLeaderboardMarketSurgeeIBDIBD DigitalIBD Live

Recently Searched

SK Hynix Raises $26.5 Billion In U.S. Listing; Memory Giants Micron, Sandisk Rise

Broadcom Inks Pact With Meta, Leads 21 Top Performers Onto Best Stock Watchlists

Leaderboard Quarterly Scorecard Webinar Q&A Summary For Thursday, July 9, 2026 Tesla faces a new bill in New Jersey that could potentially ban its autonomous vehicles because of the method in which they operate. At the same time, on the other side of the world in China, Elon Musk's car company made slight gains in EV market share, despite a year-over-year decline in retail sales. Amid all this news, Tesla (TSLA)…

Copyright ©2026 Investor's Business Daily, LLC. All rights reserved. 87990cbe856818d5eddac44c7b1cdeb8

Coca-Cola is pounding Pepsi on Wall Street, riding a lean beverage strategy to near-record highs while its bloated rival chokes on a slumping snack business.

Coke shares are nearly the highest ever since the Atlanta-based drinks giant entered the stock market over a century ago. Meanwhile, PepsiCo’s stock has tumbled nearly 30% since peaking just below $200 in 2023.

Pepsi reported better-than-expected second-quarter earnings on Thursday, but the results failed to reassure investors as sales dropped in its core North American beverage division.

Coca-Cola’s stock is trading near all-time highs, while shares in Pepsi have tumbled by close to one-third since peaking just below $200 in 2023. monticellllo – stock.adobe.com The company posted a 6.4% increase in overall net revenue to $24.2 billion, with North American beverage sales accounting for $7.2 billion of the total.

After years of rivalry featuring “Pepsi challenges,” ill-fated experiments like “New Coke” and relentless ad campaigns, Coke was widely seen as coming out on top some years ago. Investors are seconding that opinion, pointing to disparate financials.

The financial gap between the competitors is most evident in their profitability. Coca-Cola reported a 35% operating margin in the first quarter, up from about 33% a year earlier. PepsiCo’s operating margin hovered around 16.5% for the first half of the year, less than half of its rival’s.

“It’s becoming more obvious to the investor base that Coke has a superior business model,” Nik Modi, co-head of global consumer research at RBC Capital Markets, told Barron’s.

PepsiCo’s challenges stem primarily from its snack division and its approach to bottling operations.

Packaged foods and snacks, including Lay’s, Doritos and Cheetos, generated 58% of PepsiCo’s revenue in 2025.

But aggressive price increases implemented during the COVID pandemic have hurt demand. Consumers have increasingly traded down to cheaper store brands to slash their grocery budgets.

Investors appear yet to be convinced by Pepsi’s strategy, which has been criticized for being bloated and overpriced. REUTERS In North America, snack food revenue fell 2% in the second quarter compared with a year ago, and unit sales remained flat.

PepsiCo CEO Ramon Laguarta attributed the slowing snack sales partly to high gasoline prices, which deter customers from making impulse buys at convenience stores.

“I think the consumer is worse than what we had anticipated and driven mainly by gas prices,” the exec said Thursday during a conference call with investors.

Citi analyst Filippo Falorni said the company faced “continued weakness in North America” in a note to clients on Friday, warning that the sales slump would persist for as long as inflationary pressures caused by the Iran war hit the US economy.

PepsiCo also owns a string of snack brands, including Lays chips and the best-selling Doritos products. Bloomberg via Getty Images “This dynamic also creates carryover risk to numbers in 2027,” he added, “with still elevated cost inflation pressuring margins.”

Coca-Cola, by contrast, focuses almost exclusively on beverages. It has driven growth with products like Fairlife ultra-filtered milk and smaller, premium-priced soda cans.

Coca-Cola also keeps overhead costs low by franchising most of its bottling operations. PepsiCo still owns about 80% of its bottlers, creating higher structural costs that cut into its margins.

PepsiCo’s lagging performance recently drew the attention of activist investor Elliott Investment Management.

After disclosing a $4 billion stake in PepsiCo in September, the hedge fund pushed the company to streamline operations, lower prices, and consider refranchising its North American bottling network, similar to Coca-Cola’s model.

In response, Pepsi struck an agreement with Elliott late last year. The company agreed to a sweeping restructuring plan that includes cutting 20% of its US product lines by early 2026, lowering prices on core brands, and shuttering several manufacturing plants.

While PepsiCo has resisted a full refranchising of its bottling operations, it has begun testing the integration of its snack and beverage distribution systems to improve efficiency.

To improve profitability, RBC’s Modi suggested the company might need to rethink its heavy ownership of manufacturing and distribution facilities.

“They may have to make some tough choices,” he said.

Shares of Coca-Cola Co. rose in midday trading Friday, continuing to widen the financial gap with PepsiCo.

As of 2 p.m. EDT, Coca-Cola stock was trading at $83.34, up 71 cents, or nearly 1%, from Thursday’s close of $82.63. The stock continues to hover near its 52-week high of $85.68.

Meanwhile, shares of PepsiCo were down 56 cents, or 0.4%, trading at $137.30. The stock is lingering closer to its 52-week low of $133.75 after closing at $137.86 on Thursday.

Coca-Cola is set to report its second-quarter earnings July 28

The US energy industry is bracing for a huge windfall from the Iran war, but oil majors aren’t planning to ramp up drilling – even as the Trump administration pushes them to lower gasoline costs.

President Trump has repeatedly pressured American energy giants to “Drill, baby drill!” and recently threatened to investigate the industry for price-gouging as Americans feel pain at the pump – a concern for Republicans ahead of the midterms.

But oil majors are reluctant to build out more rigs and wells, resisting White House pressure as they claim their bumper profits are just a temporary boost.

The US energy industry is bracing for a huge windfall – but oil majors are hesitant to ramp up production. USA TODAY Network via Reuters Connect “I think the industry is strong,” Joe Adamski, managing director of ProcureAbility, a supply chain consultancy, told The Post. “We are sitting at a very good position compared to the rest of the world … [but] oil companies are looking at it and saying this is a blip on the radar.”

In a preview of its second-quarter earnings, Exxon Mobil said this week it could see a $5 billion jump in profits – pushing adjusted earnings to $15.7 billion, or triple the previous quarter. 

Experts said Chevron and Shell are also expected to report blowout second-quarter earnings later this month, similar to their first-quarter results – which came in 45% and 37% higher than expected, respectively.

“It’s going to be extra billions of dollars, as we saw with Exxon Mobil,” Jeff Krimmel, founder of Krimmel Strategy Group, told The Post. “It’ll be a multibillion gain across the industry just based on all the disruptions that continue to exist that really peaked toward the end of the second quarter.”

Big markups The huge windfall for US oil majors comes as attacks on vessels and airstrikes in the Middle East have largely choked off the Strait of Hormuz, a vital maritime route for 20% of the world’s oil. That has sent demand skyrocketing for alternatives like US crude, which peaked above $110 a barrel in April.

Markups on US crude jumped to an all-time high – as much as an extra $30 to $40 a barrel – as Asian and European refiners competed for the limited supply while scrambling to replace Middle Eastern oil stuck in the strait.

As of Friday, US crude oil futures traded at $71.25 a barrel while Brent crude hit $75.61 – set to end the week higher after Trump said the ceasefire with Iran was “over” and military strikes near the Persian Gulf again derailed traffic through the strait.

Trump has been pushing for more fossil fuel output, repeatedly urging companies to expand drilling operations and declaring a national energy emergency on the first day of his second term in January 2025.

US crude oil production hit a new record in 2025, according to the US Energy Information Administration. Bloomberg via Getty Images Last year, the Interior Department issued an aggressive proposal to expand offshore drilling near Florida and along the entire California coastline – fueling fierce pushback from local politicians fearful of oil spills.

In March, the Trump administration exempted drilling in the Gulf of America from the Endangered Species Act, citing “national security” concerns about oil supplies amid the war in Iran. Conservationists have decried the move, citing a risk to wildlife, particularly endangered whales.

Despite the policy changes, oil majors have been reluctant to spend their profits on building out more rigs and wells, as they expect demand to normalize quickly once the war ends unless there is severe lasting damage.

In a worst-case scenario for the oil industry, OPEC – the world’s most powerful oil cartel – could fall apart, and dominant Saudi Arabia could ramp up its energy production too far for others to compete, potentially sending oil as low as $40 a barrel, according to a CNN report.

Efficiencies, not new drilling US giants’ stance does not mean production has been slowing. US crude oil production hit a new record in 2025 of 13.6 million barrels per day according to the US Energy Information Administration. By comparison, the entirety of Europe, excluding Russia, reportedly produced about 4 million barrels per day – or less than 4% of the global share.

However, it was efficiencies like better equipment and technology – not extra drilling – that helped boost production last year, according to Krimmel. 

In a preview ahead of its second-quarter earnings, Exxon Mobil said this week that it could see a jump of $5 billion. Christopher Sadowski The number of active rigs and wells that were drilled in the US actually dipped, according to the EIA.

“We saw oil prices get above $90, even $100 temporarily during this war, and there was no huge rush to add rigs, to add production,” Krimmel said. “We already had a production surplus going into the war. A lot of analysts are expecting to reapproach that surplus as these flows normalize now.”

In May, Exxon Mobil and Chevron said that despite the Iran war, they did not intend to drill much more oil than initially planned.

Adamski said fears of political blowback are also likely keeping oil majors from building out new rigs, an expensive process that can take years and face opposition from environmentalists.

“They are sensitive to being in a political storm, that they would have a target on their back and Congress will start talking again about windfall profit taxes and things like that,” Adamski said.

“So they want to avoid putting in the appearance that they are taking advantage of this, so instead they’re doing share buybacks, they are paying down debt. They’re doing things like that.”

Pain at the pump But oil majors’ massive profits could draw scrutiny as the war in Iran eats into wallets, costing Americans roughly $1,000 per household in higher fuel, food and other expenses, according to economist Mark Zandi. 

Trump has been eager to lower gasoline prices ahead of the November midterms, most recently heralding a new chain of gas stations on social media that are selling gas for $3.479 a gallon – well below market prices and wholesale costs. 

The White House said these “Freedom Fuel” stations, which are mostly located near Philadelphia and in southern New Jersey, are run by a private company with no government support. It is unclear who is running the stations and for how long.

Last week, the Department of Justice asked state attorneys general to investigate potential antitrust violations by energy giants – after Trump accused them of price-gouging.

“I have instructed the DOJ to immediately start looking into this. Gasoline prices better start going down a lot faster than what I’m seeing!” the president wrote in a Truth Social post in June.

Gas has been slower to come down than oil, hitting $3.88 a gallon Friday after peaking at $4.56 this spring, according to AAA – but experts said that is a normal reaction since there is typically a lag between gasoline and oil prices.

“It really is just politics. The public gets angry when gas prices go up, and politicians need to be seen as being responsive to that anchor,” Krimmel told The Post.

“That’s about the extent of the action that you’ll see out of the federal government…There is zero indication that anything nefarious is happening there.”

-

WINONA, Minn.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Fastenal Company (Nasdaq:FAST) ('Fastenal,' 'we,' 'our,' or 'us') reported its board of directors declared a dividend of $0.26 per share to be paid in cash on August 25, 2026 to shareholders of record at the close of business on July 28, 2026. Except for share and per share information, dollar amounts are stated in millions.

We began paying annual dividends in 1991, semi-annual dividends in 2003, and then expanded to quarterly dividends in 2011. In addition to these regular dividend payments, we have previously paid special one-time dividends in December 2008, December 2012, December 2020, and December 2023. Our board of directors currently intends to continue paying quarterly dividends, though all future determinations as to payment of dividends will depend upon the financial condition and results of operations of Fastenal and such other factors as are deemed relevant by the board of directors at that time.

In 2026, 2025, and 2024, we paid (or declared) dividends as follows:

Year

First

Quarter

Second

Quarter

Third

Quarter

Fourth

Quarter

Total

2026

$

0.240

$

0.240

$

0.260

2025

$

0.215

$

0.220

$

0.220

$

0.220

$

0.875

2024

$

0.195

$

0.195

$

0.195

$

0.195

$

0.780

Dividend and common stock repurchase activity during the last ten years is as follows:

Average Per

Total

Dividends per Share

Total Value of

Total Number

Share Price of

Dividend

Dividends

Regular

Special

Total

Common Stock

of Shares

Common Stock

Year

Payments

Paid

Dividend

Dividend

Dividend

Purchased

Purchased

Purchased

2026

Three (1)

$

849.3

$

0.740

$

—

$

0.740

$

49.8

1,075,000

$

46.33

2025

Four

$

1,004.2

$

0.875

$

—

$

0.875

$

—

—

$

—

2024

Four

$

893.3

$

0.780

$

—

$

0.780

$

—

—

$

—

2023

Five (2)

$

1,016.8

$

0.700

$

0.190

$

0.890

$

—

—

$

—

2022

Four

$

711.3

$

0.620

$

—

$

0.620

$

237.8

10,000,000

$

23.79

2021

Four

$

643.7

$

0.560

$

—

$

0.560

$

—

—

$

—

2020

Five (2)

$

803.4

$

0.500

$

0.200

$

0.700

$

52.0

3,200,000

$

16.27

2019

Four

$

498.6

$

0.435

$

—

$

0.435

$

—

—

$

—

2018

Four

$

441.9

$

0.385

$

—

$

0.385

$

103.0

8,000,000

$

12.88

2017

Four

$

369.1

$

0.320

$

—

$

0.320

$

82.6

7,600,000

$

10.86

Ten Year Total

$

7,231.6

$

5.915

$

0.390

$

6.305

$

525.2

29,875,000

$

17.58

In the second quarter of 2026, we purchased 650,000 shares of our common stock at an average price of $45.72 per share.

We have authority to purchase up to 11,325,000 shares of our common stock under the July 12, 2022 authorization. This authorization does not have an expiration date.

All share and per share information reflects the two-for-one stock split in each of 2019 and 2025.

About Fastenal

Organizations around the world rely on Fastenal to help them simplify and secure the supply chain for a broad range of industrial products. To understand our customers' challenges and provide services and solutions that fit their unique needs, we've built out the most extensive presence in our industry, with a vast network of local teams and embedded technology. At the heart of it all is a simple commitment: great people, close to the customer, backed by world-class logistics, technology, and resources.

Additional information regarding Fastenal is available on our website at www.fastenal.com.

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements

This press release contains statements that are not historical in nature and that are intended to be, and are hereby identified as, "forward looking statements" as defined in the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995, including statements regarding expectations as to payment of a quarterly cash dividend and stock repurchase activity in the foreseeable future. Any future determination as to payment of dividends or stock repurchases will depend upon the financial condition and results of operations of Fastenal and such other factors as are deemed relevant by the board of directors. For example, a change in business needs including working capital and funding for acquisitions, or a change in income tax law relating to dividends or stock repurchases, could cause us to decide not to pay a dividend in the future or not to repurchase common stock pursuant to the existing share repurchase authorization. A discussion of other risks and uncertainties is included in our filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission, including our most recent annual report and subsequent quarterly reports. FAST-D

More News From Fastenal Company

Back to Newsroom

The Nasdaq listed company said it sold 1,400 BTC since May 7 at an average price of $62,200 per Bitcoin, generating about $87.1 million in gross proceeds. The sale left Empery with 1,514 BTC and about $73.9 million in cash as of July 10.

Advertisement

The proceeds are being used to repay debt, fund a previously announced property acquisition, cover legal expenses tied to ongoing stockholder litigation and support operations. Empery said it repaid $10 million of outstanding debt on July 7 and still has $45 million outstanding on its debt facility.

The move marks a sharp reversal for a company that adopted a Bitcoin treasury strategy last year. Empery, formerly Volcon, said in August 2025 that it held more than 4,018 BTC and described its strategy as becoming a low cost, capital efficient aggregator of Bitcoin.

The company had already disclosed that Bitcoin sales could be part of its capital strategy. In its annual report, Empery said it had sold 722 BTC for $50 million from January 1 through March 25, 2026, and warned that future Bitcoin sales could affect its results and financial condition.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Estefano Gomez. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

Japan’s Finance Minister Satsuki Katayama announced at the Open QUICK 2026 seminar, organized by leading financial information provider QUICK on July 10, that the government is progressing as scheduled in the process to legalize crypto asset exchange-traded funds (ETFs) in the country. This development follows growing international interest in similar financial products abroad.

Regulatory shift for crypto assetsRecently, Japan’s House of Representatives approved a regulatory change transferring the oversight of spot crypto assets from the Payment Services Act to the Financial Instruments and Exchange Act. This move paves the way for crypto assets to be classified as fully regulated financial products, aligning their legal framework more closely with that of equities and bonds.

Finance Minister Satsuki Katayama confirmed that the government is proceeding with the legalization of crypto asset ETFs as originally intended.

The new regulation strengthens the legal basis for crypto asset ETFs to be listed and traded on Japanese exchanges. Under the current timetable, these products may begin trading on Japan’s markets as early as next year.

SBI develops two innovative fund offeringsIn May, SBI Holdings announced the launch of a new crypto asset ETF. The company’s plans include a dual-asset ETF structure that will provide investors with regulated access to both Bitcoin and XRP. As one of Japan’s largest financial groups, SBI operates across banking, brokerage, and asset management services.

In addition, SBI proposed a hybrid investment fund bringing together gold-based ETFs and crypto asset ETFs. In this structure, 51% of the portfolio would be allocated to gold ETFs, while the remaining 49% would be dedicated to crypto assets such as Bitcoin ETFs. This approach targets more cautious institutional and retail investors seeking diversified exposure.

ProductContentTarget audienceDual-asset ETFBitcoin and XRPInvestors seeking regulated crypto accessHybrid fund51% gold-based ETF, 49% crypto asset ETFMore cautious institutional and retail investorsAmbitious asset growth and competitionSBI aims to reach approximately 5 trillion yen, equivalent to $32 billion in assets under management, within three years of launching these products. This target represents a bold step for crypto-themed investment products within Japan’s financial sector and signals significant anticipated demand.

The company also hopes to secure an early market advantage by moving ahead of major Japanese financial groups such as Nomura and Rakuten Securities. With expanding regulatory clarity, competition in the crypto ETF space in Japan is expected to intensify in the coming period.

Ripple partnership comes to the foreSBI’s inclusion of XRP in its ETF plan aligns with its longstanding corporate partnership with Ripple. Known for its XRP-focused payment solutions, Ripple has established close business relationships in the Japanese market, and this collaboration continues to play a significant strategic role for SBI.

SBI is developing a structure uniting Bitcoin and XRP within the same fund, while also introducing a separate model that combines gold and crypto asset ETFs in a single portfolio.

Through these initiatives, SBI seeks to attract both aggressive crypto investors and more risk-averse clients, offering diverse routes to engage with digital assets under a regulated framework.

Market analysts expect SBI’s pioneering approach and regulatory developments to spur wider adoption of crypto ETFs in Japan, potentially altering the landscape for both institutional and retail participation in the coming years.

As Japan prepares to launch crypto asset ETFs, the convergence of traditional finance and blockchain technology is poised to reshape investment options in the country, with major players vying for leadership in a rapidly evolving sector.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

BlackRock has transferred 8,700 ETH—valued at approximately $15.81 million—to Coinbase Prime in the latest significant move tracked on the blockchain. According to data from Onchain Lens, the transfer originated from wallets linked to BlackRock’s Ethereum ETF, known by its ticker ETHA, coinciding with escalating outflows from the fund.

Transfer coincided with mounting ETF redemptionsOn the same day, BlackRock’s spot Ethereum ETF, ETHA, saw a net outflow of 7,240 ETH, representing around $12.67 million. This continued a trend of weak capital inflows into Ethereum ETFs, underlining continued pressure on the investment products amid challenging investor sentiment.

BlackRock, one of the world’s largest asset managers, remains under close observation in the cryptocurrency ETF sector. Coinbase Prime, on the other hand, serves as a leading platform offering custody, trading, and execution services tailored to institutional clients navigating the digital asset space.

According to Onchain Lens, 8,700 ETH was moved from BlackRock’s ETHA-linked wallets to Coinbase Prime during the exact period when substantial outflows hit ETHA.

Outflows deepen in Ethereum ETFsData for July 9 shows total daily outflows from spot Ethereum ETFs reaching $52.08 million. The largest single-fund withdrawal was recorded in Fidelity’s FETH. These figures highlight persistently weak short-term investor demand across the sector.

ETF flows have become a key barometer of overall market sentiment in recent quarters. June stood out as a period of heightened redemptions, with Ethereum ETFs seeing $690 million in net outflows—extending the negative streak that began in the first quarter of the year.

ItemAmountBlackRock transfer8,700 ETHTransfer value$15.81 millionETHA daily outflow7,240 ETHETHA daily outflow value$12.67 millionTotal daily Ethereum ETF outflow$52.08 millionNet figure after June$690 million net outflowMarket looks to Q3 signalsFollowing a lackluster first half of the year, investors have begun watching for signals that could shape the remainder of 2026. Historical data suggest that the third quarter has sometimes marked the beginning of recovery phases for Ethereum.

Analytics from CoinGlass reveal that since 2016, Ethereum has averaged an 8.08% return in third quarters, finishing seven out of the last eleven Q3 periods in positive territory. Notably, Q3 of 2025 saw a robust 66.55% surge.

Despite prior years hinting at stronger Q3 trends, investors are cautious, noting that a lack of new catalysts means past performance alone might not be enough to spark a sustainable recovery.

It is repeatedly emphasized that historical results are no guarantee of future outcomes. Over the past 24 hours, Ethereum posted a 2.6% gain, outperforming Bitcoin and climbing to $1,790. This price action fuels ongoing debate about whether ETH can break above its pattern of descending highs and lows.

Disclaimer: The information contained in this article does not constitute investment advice. Investors should be aware that cryptocurrencies carry high volatility and therefore risk, and should conduct their own research.

An exploit drained roughly 16 million ADA, about $2.4 million, from 374 Cardano wallets in late June. What happened next is the interesting part: EMURGO, one of Cardano’s founding entities, announced a recovery path to return the assets within two weeks, while an independent forensic team including Mt. Gox veterans published competing findings. Crypto has spent fifteen years insisting stolen funds are gone forever. Cardano is running a live experiment in whether that has to be true, and every chain is watching the precedent.

Summary

A Cardano linked exploit drained about 16 million ADA from 374 wallets, with EMURGO outlining a two week plan to return affected users’ funds. Independent investigators challenged parts of the official account, putting competing forensic findings at the centre of how victims could qualify for restitution. The recovery effort is testing whether a blockchain ecosystem can compensate theft victims without reversing the ledger or compromising decentralization principles. Between June 21 and 23, an exploit connected to a protocol called SecondFi drained approximately 16 million ADA, worth about $2.4 million, from 374 addresses on Cardano. As crypto thefts go, it barely registers: the industry loses that much most weeks, and 2026’s running total makes $2.4 million a rounding error. The theft is not the story.

The story is the response. Within days, EMURGO, the commercial arm among Cardano’s founding entities, announced it had identified a recovery path for affected users and would begin returning assets within roughly two weeks, one week to build the recovery mechanism and one to test it. Simultaneously, an independent forensic team, Tibane Labs, whose personnel include investigators from the Mt. Gox case, crypto’s original catastrophic theft, published a competing analysis of what actually happened, disputing elements of the official account. And the affected community, 374 wallets whose owners did nothing wrong beyond using a protocol, became the test population for one of the most consequential questions in the industry: whether a blockchain ecosystem can make theft victims whole without breaking the properties that make it a blockchain.

That question has a fifteen-year history of being answered no, at enormous cost, and a handful of famous exceptions that each bent the rules in a different way. Ethereum rolled back its ledger once, in 2016, and the decision split the chain permanently. Exchanges have reimbursed hacks from their own treasuries. Protocols have negotiated with attackers, paying bounties for returns. But a founding entity engineering restitution for users of a third-party protocol, on a chain whose ledger will not be rolled back, through a mechanism built and tested in two weeks, is a new entry in the genre, and its outcome, success, failure, or messy middle, will be cited in every post-exploit governance fight for years. This piece covers the exploit as best the competing forensics allow, the anatomy of the recovery mechanism and the hard constraints it must respect, the restitution genre’s history and where this attempt sits in it, the moral-hazard and precedent questions that make recovery controversial even when it works, and what the two-week experiment will actually prove.

What happened, as far as the forensics agree The reconstruction begins with an unusual feature: there are two of them. The official account, from EMURGO and ecosystem responders, describes an exploit connected to SecondFi that extracted funds from user wallets across a three-day window, with 374 affected addresses and roughly 16 million ADA taken. The independent account, from Tibane Labs, a forensic team whose resume includes the Mt. Gox investigation, examines the same on-chain evidence and disputes elements of the official narrative, a disagreement whose specifics matter less, for this piece’s purposes, than its existence: three weeks after the event, the ecosystem’s official and independent investigators have not converged on a single story of what occurred.

That divergence is itself a finding about the state of crypto incident response.

On-chain data is perfectly preserved and public, which is why blockchain forensics can achieve certainties conventional financial investigation cannot; but the interpretation layer, which contract behavior was intended, which approvals were informed, where the boundary between exploit and design flaw sits, remains contested terrain where reputations, liability, and recovery eligibility all hang on the framing. The pattern is familiar from the anatomy of every major protocol disaster: the chain records what happened with perfect fidelity and no opinion, and the fight is always over what it meant. For the 374 wallet owners, the practical consequence is concrete: the recovery mechanism’s design, and who qualifies for it, depends on which reconstruction prevails, which is why competing forensics are not academic but constitutive of the restitution itself.

The scale deserves honest framing too. Sixteen million ADA is about 0.04% of circulating supply; $2.4 million is small enough that EMURGO could plausibly reimburse it from corporate resources without any mechanism at all. The choice to build a recovery process instead, engineered, tested, documented, signals that the exercise is understood by its architects as infrastructure, a template being built at low stakes for use at higher ones, which is exactly why it merits the scrutiny this piece gives it.

The mechanism: what recovery can and cannot mean Every recovery attempt on a public blockchain operates inside the same iron constraint: the ledger does not go backward. Cardano’s history will not be rewritten; the stolen ADA sits wherever the attacker moved it, validly, as far as the protocol is concerned. Whatever EMURGO’s two-week build produces, it is not an undo button, and enumerating what it can be maps the entire design space of crypto restitution.

The first family is interception: if stolen funds sit on exchanges or touch regulated venues, they can be frozen and clawed back through compliance channels, the path that has recovered the largest sums industry-wide and the reason attackers launder through mixers and cross-chain routes, the bridge-hopping playbook every major theft now follows. Its reach ends where the attacker’s operational security begins. The second is negotiation: bounty offers converting attackers into white hats retroactively, effective embarrassingly often, and dependent entirely on the attacker’s incentives.

The third is replacement: making victims whole from some treasury, corporate funds, protocol reserves, an ecosystem pool, without touching the stolen assets at all, which is restitution in the economic sense and abandons recovery in the literal one. The fourth, rarest and most Cardano-specific in this instance, is mechanism-level remediation: where the exploited system itself, a protocol’s contracts, a wallet standard, retains any authority over the affected assets or their derivatives, that authority can sometimes be repurposed to restore balances, the approach that requires exactly the one-week-build-one-week-test cadence EMURGO described.

The announced timeline suggests a combination weighted toward the third and fourth families, and the details, at this writing, remain unpublished, which is appropriate caution and also part of the test: restitution mechanisms revealed before deployment invite gaming by exactly the adversaries they respond to. What can be evaluated in advance is the constraint set any design must satisfy. It must distinguish victims from opportunists, on-chain, against forensics that are themselves disputed. It must not create authority that persists after the emergency, because a standing power to reassign user balances is a bigger vulnerability than any exploit. It must not require the base protocol to special-case the event, the line Cardano’s own decentralization principles, governed by DReps precisely to prevent unilateral intervention, will not permit crossing. And it must complete fast, because every week of delay compounds the harm and shrinks the interceptable share. Two weeks, against those constraints, is aggressive, and the aggressiveness is the announcement’s real content: EMURGO believes the mechanism exists and is discoverable on a schedule.

The victims’ fortnight: what waiting inside a recovery is like The 374 addresses deserve a section of their own, because restitution debates chronically abstract the people they are about, and this population is unusually legible. The affected wallets skew small: the $2.4 million total across 374 addresses averages under $6,500 per victim, savings-scale money for the retail holders who dominate Cardano’s famously loyal base, not fund-scale positions with legal departments and insurance. Their fortnight is a specific experience the industry has never bothered to design for: funds visibly gone, an official promise of return on a stated schedule, competing expert accounts of what even happened, and no action available except watching announcements, a limbo in which every day of official silence gets read as bad news and every community rumor moves through the victim population at chat speed.

Two features of this experience matter beyond sympathy. The first is that victim behavior during recovery windows is itself an attack surface: fake recovery portals, phishing campaigns impersonating the restitution process, and advance-fee scams targeting exactly this population appear within days of every publicized exploit, harvesting victims a second time, and the quality of official communication, clear channels, signed announcements, explicit warnings that no one will DM them, is as much a part of the mechanism’s success as its code. The second is that the fortnight sets the template for what users can expect from the ecosystem, and expectations are load-bearing: an institution-courting chain whose retail base learns that infrastructure failures get handled competently retains those users through the next incident, while a botched communication cycle converts a $2.4 million exploit into a permanent trust discount far more expensive than the theft. The recovery’s architects are, whether they framed it this way or not, running crypto’s first serious customer-service operation for a decentralized loss event, and the industry’s notes on it will be as valuable as the mechanism itself.

The genre: how crypto has answered theft before The SecondFi experiment enters a genre with a defined canon, and its position in that canon is what gives a $2.4 million incident industry-wide stakes.

The founding text is Ethereum’s 2016 DAO intervention: facing the theft of a double-digit share of all ETH, the community altered the ledger to reverse it, and the decision’s price was permanent schism, the unaltered chain persisting as Ethereum Classic and the precedent haunting every subsequent governance debate. The lesson the industry took was that base-layer intervention works exactly once, at existential scale, and costs a chain’s neutrality forever; no major network has repeated it, through losses orders of magnitude larger. The second tradition is the exchange model: centralized custodians from the Mt. Gox estate through the modern majors have run reimbursements, creditor processes, and insurance funds, restitution as a corporate liability question, effective where custody was centralized and irrelevant where it was not. The third is the protocol-treasury model: DeFi projects reimbursing exploits from token treasuries or negotiated bounties, case by case, with outcomes ranging from full restoration to governance-vote refusals that left victims holding the loss, a genre in which the liquidation-era bad-debt socializations supplied some of the bitterest chapters.

What the canon lacks, and what SecondFi supplies, is the founding-entity model on a decentralization-first chain: an ecosystem steward, not the thief’s counterparty, not the ledger’s operator, engineering restitution for a third-party protocol’s users without touching the base layer. Cardano is, in one sense, the natural venue for the attempt, its culture prizes formal process and its governance apparatus is unusually explicit, and in another sense the hardest one, because the same culture treats ledger neutrality as close to sacred, and the community debate around the recovery has featured exactly the voices, on exactly the lines, the DAO fight canonized: make victims whole versus code is law, with a decade of intervening history sharpening both sides.

The timing layer: why this experiment, this month The recovery’s context supplies half its meaning, because the experiment is running inside the most delicate month Cardano has had in years, and every audience the mechanism performs for is watching for its own reasons.

The institutional audience arrived the same week: Clearstream, Deutsche Borse’s post-trade arm with trillions in custody, added ADA to its regulated custody services on July 7, the most significant institutional on-ramp in the asset’s history, landing days into the recovery window. Institutions selecting crypto assets audit precisely the thing SecondFi tests, how an ecosystem behaves when its infrastructure fails, and the recovery’s execution is, functionally, a live due-diligence exhibit for every custody and ETF conversation the ecosystem hopes to have. The market audience is watching a fragile turn: ADA rebounded roughly 30% from multi-year lows in the same fortnight, whale wallets accumulated through the crash while on-chain usage thinned, and the recovery sits inside a sentiment window where a competence story compounds the bounce and an incompetence story validates the lows. And the governance audience is internal: Cardano’s DRep apparatus and its constitutional culture have spent two years building the machinery of collective decision-making, the Van Rossem fork is moving through exactly that machinery this month, and a founding entity executing an emergency restitution adjacent to, but not through, the formal governance process is itself a constitutional data point, read closely by everyone who cares where the ecosystem’s real authority lives.

The timing also explains the two-week aggression. A recovery that completes before the news cycle moves on is an asset; one that drags into autumn is a liability regardless of outcome, because unresolved incidents metastasize in exactly the audiences above. The schedule is the strategy, and its keeping or slipping is the first verdict the experiment will render.

Moral hazard, precedent, and the case against success The strongest objections to the recovery deserve their full weight, because they are not callousness; they are the accumulated lessons of the genre.

The moral-hazard argument runs: every successful restitution teaches users that losses get reversed, which erodes the diligence that self-custody requires, subsidizes risk-taking on unaudited protocols, and converts founding entities into implicit insurers of an ecosystem they cannot actually underwrite, a liability that compounds until an exploit arrives at a scale no one can cover, whereupon the implicit promise defaults at the worst moment. The precedent argument runs deeper: a proven capability to restore balances is a proven capability to reassign them, and every government, litigant, and pressure group learns from the proof; the neutrality that makes public chains valuable is precisely the credible inability to do favors, and each benevolent exception prices that credibility down. And the selection argument is the practical edge of both: 374 wallets got a recovery mechanism because their loss was legible, bounded, and adjacent to a founding entity’s reputation, while the ecosystem’s countless smaller victims, of rug pulls, drainers, and their own mistakes, get nothing, which converts restitution from a principle into a lottery whose winners are chosen by newsworthiness.

The answers, from the recovery’s defenders, are also serious. Users harmed by infrastructure failures they could not have evaluated are not moral-hazard cases but consumer-protection ones, and an industry courting mainstream adoption cannot tell mainstream users that their diligence should have included auditing smart contracts. Precedent cuts both ways: an ecosystem that visibly cares for its users compounds trust, the asset every chain claims to optimize, and the intervention line, no base-layer changes, no persistent authority, can be held publicly and verifiably. The honest synthesis is that both sides are describing real gradients, and the experiment’s value is precisely that it will convert the argument into evidence: a recovery that completes cleanly, inside its constraints, without scope creep, is a data point the make-whole side has never had on a decentralization-first chain, and a recovery that fails, stalls, or requires quiet rule-bending is the strongest code-is-law exhibit since the DAO.

The forensics fight: why the second opinion matters The Tibane Labs dimension deserves fuller treatment before the conclusion, because independent forensics entering a live recovery is nearly as novel as the recovery itself, and its implications outlast this incident.

Crypto incident analysis has historically been a monopoly of the responding party: the exploited protocol, the affected foundation, or the security firm they retain writes the post-mortem, and the community consumes it as fact, with no institution playing the adversarial-review role that accident investigation runs on in every mature industry. The entry of an unaffiliated team, staffed by investigators whose formative case was Mt. Gox, the theft whose decade of creditor litigation taught crypto what unresolved forensics cost, breaks the monopoly on exactly the incident where the official account carries financial consequences: eligibility for restitution flows from the accepted reconstruction, and a disputed reconstruction means disputed eligibility, appeals, and the exact procedural morass the two-week schedule cannot absorb.

The dispute’s existence, whatever its resolution, teaches two durable lessons. The first is that restitution mechanisms need an evidentiary standard before they need code: who adjudicates victimhood, against which account of events, with what appeal path, questions the traditional financial system answers with courts and regulators and that a decentralized recovery must answer with something, publicly, in advance, or improvise under fire. The second is that a market for adversarial blockchain forensics is forming, funded by exactly these disputes, and its emergence is unambiguously healthy: official accounts that expect independent review are written more carefully, mechanisms designed under scrutiny are designed better, and the industry’s post-mortem culture, long a public-relations genre, acquires the beginnings of a discipline. If the SecondFi fortnight produces nothing else, a precedent that serious incidents get second opinions would justify the episode’s place in the canon by itself.

What the two weeks will actually prove The experiment resolves into observable outcomes on a short clock, and the reading guide is worth writing in advance. Completion on schedule, with victims restored and the mechanism’s design published for audit, proves the founding-entity model viable at small scale and makes it the reference implementation every future incident invokes, on Cardano and beyond. Partial completion, some victims, disputed eligibility, timeline slippage, proves the harder truth that restitution’s binding constraint is not engineering but forensics, and elevates the Tibane-versus-official divergence from footnote to headline. Failure or quiet abandonment feeds the code-is-law canon and, less obviously, damages the specific asset that motivated the attempt: Cardano’s institutional courtship, the Clearstream custody listing landing the same week, leans on the ecosystem’s reputation for process, and a botched recovery is a process failure in the one arena institutions watch.

Beyond the fortnight, the durable questions are two. Whether the mechanism, whatever it is, gets generalized, documented, criticized, and hardened into ecosystem infrastructure, or remains a one-off that future victims cite and cannot access. And whether the precedent’s boundary holds: the recovery’s architects have implicitly drawn a line, exceptional response, no base-layer change, no standing power, and the entire value of the experiment, for Cardano and for the industry, depends on that line surviving its own success. Crypto has proven, exhaustively, that it can build systems where theft is final. The SecondFi fortnight is a test of something the industry has barely attempted: whether it can build justice on top of finality without dissolving the finality, and 374 wallets, $2.4 million, and one founding entity’s reputation are the stakes of the first controlled trial.

Beyond Cardano, the audiences with the most to learn are the ones building the systems where this question arrives at a thousand times the scale. The tokenized-asset rails now carrying equities and Treasuries onto public chains inherit, with the assets, traditional finance’s non-negotiable expectation that errors and thefts get remediated, and every institution wiring real-world value into blockchain settlement is implicitly betting that something like the SecondFi mechanism, generalized, standardized, and legally legible, will exist when it is needed. The corporate chains have answered the question by centralizing it, their operators can intervene, and everyone knows it, which is exactly the answer the decentralized ecosystems cannot give and the reason this experiment matters disproportionately: it is a test of whether the neutral chains can offer remediation without becoming the corporate ones. Regulators, meanwhile, read incidents like this in their own dialect: a shown industry capacity for orderly restitution is an argument against prescriptive consumer-protection mandates, and a shown incapacity is the argument for them, which places the fortnight’s outcome, improbably, inside the same policy conversations deciding the industry’s classification and custody rules.

The final word belongs to proportion, which has been this piece’s method throughout. Two point four million dollars is nothing; 374 wallets are a village; two weeks is a news cycle. And the question the village and the fortnight are answering, whether a system built so that no one can reverse anything can still, when it matters, make things right, is the oldest and largest open question in the industry, older than the DAO, as large as adoption itself. Small experiments that answer large questions are the best bargains in institutional history. This one cost sixteen million ADA, none of it EMURGO’s, and its findings, either way, will be cited for a decade.

For readers tracking the experiment live, the checklist is short: the mechanism’s technical publication, the first restored balances on-chain, the treatment of disputed addresses, the Tibane findings’ final form, and whether any authority created for the recovery is verifiably dismantled afterward. Five items, two weeks, one precedent, and the rare crypto story whose ending will be a matter of public record rather than public argument.

And a housekeeping note befitting a live experiment: this piece freezes a moving story at the midpoint of its two-week window, the mechanism’s details were unpublished at this writing, and the account above should be read against the recovery’s actual outcome, which, by the time most readers arrive here, will be a matter of on-chain record. That the story can be checked against the chain is, fittingly, the whole point of the system being tested.

Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Digital asset markets are volatile, and you can lose your entire investment. Incident details reflect public reporting as of July 9, 2026, and the recovery process described is ongoing; verify current status before relying on any account of it. Always do your own research.

Shares of Trade Desk (TTD 1.19%) fell 52.4% in the first half of 2026, according to data from S&P Global Market Intelligence. The digital advertising platform faced a combination of slowing growth, executive turnover, and a public dispute with one of its largest partners.

Soft guidance and a major client dispute Trade Desk kicked off 2026 with a February earnings report that beat revenue estimates but came with the kind of guidance targets no investor wanted to hear. Management projected a sharp slowdown in Q1 growth, and many shareholders headed for the exits in a hurry.

Then came the Publicis problem. In March, advertising giant Publicis Groupe (PUBGY +1.81%) pulled its recommendation of Trade Desk after an audit alleged the company had been stacking fees in ways that didn't match contractual terms. Trade Desk disputed the findings, but the fallout contributed to reduced ad spending and soft Q2 guidance in May.

Image source: Getty Images.

This clash was a big deal, because Publicis used to be one of Trade Desk's top clients. The French company's market cap is more than twice Trade Desk's nowadays. It also sports roughly $19.9 billion in trailing sales, far outweighing Trade Desk's $3.0 billion.

The two sides eventually settled privately on June 12, with Publicis resuming its recommendation. Terms were not disclosed, and it wasn't market-moving news.

At the same time, Trade Desk's revenue growth is slowing down. The company is still growing at a double-digit percentage clip, year over year, but just barely. Two years ago, the top-line growth rate remained reliably above 20%. And management guided to just 8% sales growth in the upcoming Q2 2026 report. That's a long way from the hypergrowth days Trade Desk investors once took for granted.

Executive turnover added to the uncertainty. The company went through another CFO transition in early 2026; the departure of former CFO Alex Kayyal remains unexplained. The former venture capitalist still holds a board seat, so there can't be a ton of bad blood in his CFO departure. Still, the split raised eyebrows and dragged Trade Desk's stock down again.

Today's Change

(

-1.19

%) $

-0.24

Current Price

$

19.52

A vote of confidence from the CEO Not everything was doom and gloom. In April, CEO Jeff Green made headlines by personally buying $150 million worth of company stock. That's a meaningful vote of confidence from someone with a front-row seat to the business and its prospects.

Trade Desk's stock now trades 84% below its 2024 peak. The company remains profitable and is still growing revenue. It's the pace of growth that's slowing down. For patient investors, the depressed valuation could represent an attractive entry point; for skeptics, it reflects real risks that haven't fully played out.

Key questions for the second half of 2026 include whether growth can stabilize, how Trade Desk will fend off competition from Amazon's (AMZN 0.73%) advertising platform, and whether new AI tools and streaming-TV partnerships can translate into meaningful revenue.

The Q2 earnings report in early August should offer some clarity. I can hardly wait.

Key Takeaways Dynatrace is winning larger platform deals as enterprises replace fragmented monitoring tools.More than 500 customers use agentic capabilities, while 850-plus monitor AI and LLM workloads.Triple-digit log growth topped $100 million in annualized consumption, but hosting costs may pressure margins. Dynatrace (DT - Free Report) is benefiting from several themes shaping enterprise software spending, including artificial intelligence, cloud complexity, platform consolidation and rising telemetry volumes.

The opportunity is clear, but not risk-free. Higher consumption can lift demand while also raising hosting costs, and DT still has to convert usage growth into annual recurring revenue and profit expansion.

Dynatrace Gains as Enterprises Cut Tool SprawlEnterprises are moving away from fragmented monitoring tools and toward end-to-end platforms. Dynatrace has gained from that shift, with larger and more strategic deals supporting its platform story.
 

In the fourth quarter of fiscal 2026, the company recorded 22 deals with incremental annual contract value above $1 million, including nine new logos. That shows consolidation is not just a market slogan. It is affecting buying behavior.

Competition remains intense. Datadog (DDOG - Free Report) is also positioned around cloud monitoring and observability, giving investors another way to track demand for AI-era infrastructure visibility. Cisco Systems (CSCO - Free Report) , through AppDynamics and Splunk, adds scale and breadth to the same competitive field. DT is also facing competition from Elastic (ESTC - Free Report) .

Year to date (YTD), Dynatrace shares have appreciated 1.5% compared with Datadog’s jump of 89.3% and Cisco’s 55.6%. Elastic shares have dropped 19.7% YTD.

DT Stock’s Price Performance
Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

DT Sees AI Demand Shift Toward Autonomous OperationsDynatrace is aligning its platform with the move from reactive monitoring to autonomous operations. Its technology combines observability data, causal context and automation to help enterprises identify problems and take action faster.

The company’s AI positioning is tied to actual workflows. More than 500 customers are deploying its agentic capabilities, while more than 850 customers are using Dynatrace to observe and trust artificial intelligence and large language model workloads in production.

Developer adoption is another part of the story. The Postman collaboration brings AI-powered observability closer to application programming interface design and testing workflows, extending Dynatrace beyond traditional operations teams.

Dynatrace is Tied to the Explosion in Logs and TelemetryTelemetry growth is becoming a major demand driver. Logs were Dynatrace’s fastest-growing product in fiscal 2026, with triple-digit growth, and log management annualized consumption surpassed $100 million.

The planned Bindplane acquisition strengthens this angle. Bindplane is intended to improve telemetry capture, optimization and routing, helping customers manage data quality, ingest costs and governance.

That growth has a margin trade-off. Dynatrace expects about a one-point gross margin headwind in fiscal 2027 as cloud hosting costs rise with platform consumption. Management expects the pressure to be temporary, but execution on cloud cost efficiency matters.

DT Public Sector Push Opens a New Trend LineDynatrace is also extending its trend exposure into regulated markets. Its plan to pursue FedRAMP High authorization builds on its existing FedRAMP Moderate authorization and targets stricter government security requirements.

That push connects observability and AI adoption with compliance needs. For government and highly regulated organizations, the ability to monitor complex environments while meeting data and security standards can influence vendor selection.

This does not remove competitive pressure, but it gives DT another avenue for growth. Regulated-sector demand may support larger platform opportunities when buyers need security, visibility and governance in the same operating environment.

ConclusionDynatrace is a credible beneficiary of AI, cloud and telemetry growth. The company has scale, platform breadth and evidence of customer expansion, but its stock case still depends on cleaner conversion of consumption into annual recurring revenue and profits.

Dynatrace currently carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold). You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank (Strong Buy) stocks here.

CHARLOTTE, N.C., July 10, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Coca-Cola Consolidated, Inc. (NASDAQ: COKE) announced that its Board of Directors has declared a dividend for the third quarter of 2026 of $0.25 per share on shares of the Company's Common Stock and Class B Common Stock payable on August 7, 2026, to stockholders of record as of the close of business on July 24, 2026.

CONTACTS: Brian K. Little (Media)Matt Blickley (Investors)Vice President, Corporate Communications OfficerChief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer(980) 378-5537(704) [email protected]@cokeconsolidated.com About Coca-Cola Consolidated, Inc.
Headquartered in Charlotte, N.C., Coca-Cola Consolidated (NASDAQ: COKE) is the largest Coca-Cola bottler in the United States. We make, sell and distribute beverages of The Coca-Cola Company, and other partner companies, in more than 300 brands and flavors across 14 states and the District of Columbia, to approximately 60 million consumers.

For over 124 years, we have been deeply committed to the consumers, customers and communities we serve and passionate about the broad portfolio of beverages and services we offer. Our Purpose is to honor God in all we do, to serve others, to pursue excellence and to grow profitably.

More information about the Company is available at www.cokeconsolidated.com. Follow Coca-Cola Consolidated on Facebook, X, Instagram and LinkedIn.

Algorand quietly racked up over 1.8 million new smart contract deployments in the past quarter, a 25.7% increase in activity that puts the Layer 1 blockchain in a peculiar position. Developer interest is clearly climbing. The token price, not so much.

The contract deployment surge, tracked by Token Terminal, represents a meaningful acceleration for a network that many crypto observers had written off during the bear market doldrums. For context, Algorand’s January 2026 Algo Insights Report showed 808,000 smart contracts deployed at that point, marking a 31.5% increase at the time.

The numbers behind the builder boom On-chain asset creation on Algorand surged 239% month-over-month, according to the Algorand Foundation’s own evaluation. Contract deployments specifically grew 47% in a recent monthly period.

Advertisement

The most tangible proof point might be Lofty AI, a real estate tokenization platform built on Algorand. As of early July 2026, Lofty crossed $100 million in total value locked. That’s capital flowing into tokenized real-world assets.

Active wallet growth and transaction volumes have also increased alongside the contract deployment numbers.

The quantum play The Algorand Foundation published a formal roadmap for post-quantum cryptography in June 2026, setting a target of comprehensive quantum resistance by the end of 2027. The initiative builds on work that started back in 2022.

The price disconnect investors should watch ALGO currently trades around $0.08. The disconnect between on-chain activity and token price isn’t unique to Algorand, but the gap here is particularly stark given that contract deployments more than doubled since January, asset creation exploded by 239%, a major DApp hit $100M in TVL, and the foundation is executing on a multi-year quantum security roadmap.

Algorand’s tokenomics have faced criticism over the years regarding early investor unlocks and foundation distributions, which may be suppressing price appreciation even as fundamentals improve. The real-world asset tokenization angle gives Algorand a differentiated narrative, with Lofty AI’s $100M TVL milestone as concrete evidence. Ethereum, Avalanche, and Polygon are all aggressively courting the RWA sector.

Disclosure: This article was edited by Editorial Team. For more information on how we create and review content, see our Editorial Policy.

Key Takeaways Resmed will sell MatrixCare to Frazier Healthcare Partners, with closing expected in fiscal Q1 2027.The divestiture enables Resmed to focus its investments on sleep, breathing and connected home-based care.Brightree and MEDIFOX DAN remain central to Resmed's connected care strategy and are not part of the deal. Resmed (RMD - Free Report) has entered into a definitive agreement to sell its MatrixCare business to private equity firm Frazier Healthcare Partners. The divestiture aligns with the company's long-term strategy to sharpen its focus on higher-growth opportunities across sleep health, breathing health and connected home-based care. The transaction is expected to close in the first quarter of fiscal 2027, subject to regulatory approvals and customary closing conditions.

From an investor's perspective, the divestiture underscores Resmed's disciplined capital allocation strategy and reinforces its commitment to businesses with stronger long-term growth potential and higher scalability. By streamlining its portfolio and reallocating resources toward innovation in its core connected care ecosystem, the company is positioning itself to strengthen its competitive edge and drive sustainable value creation, while enabling MatrixCare to pursue growth under an owner dedicated to the long-term care software market.

Likely Trend of RMD Stock Following the NewsShares of RMD have traded flat since the announcement on July 7. In the year-to-date period, shares of the company have lost 13.5% compared with the industry’s 21.8% decline. The S&P 500 increased 9.5% in the same time frame.

The divestiture is likely to strengthen Resmed's long-term growth profile by enabling the company to concentrate investments on its core sleep and breathing care franchises, where it enjoys strong market leadership and significant innovation opportunities. The transaction should also enhance capital allocation flexibility, allowing Resmed to accelerate product development, expand its AI-powered digital health offerings and scale its connected home-care ecosystem.

By exiting a non-core software business, the company can simplify operations, improve strategic focus and better position itself to capitalize on the growing global demand for home-based healthcare and sleep therapy solutions.

RMD currently has a market capitalization of $29.86 billion.

Image Source: Zacks Investment Research

More on the NewsThe transaction covers the entire MatrixCare business, including Healthcare First, Citus and its home health and hospice software solutions, which together serve more than 15,000 providers across skilled nursing, senior living, life plan communities, home health and hospice settings. However, the deal does not include Resmed's other healthcare software businesses, Brightree in the United States and MEDIFOX DAN in Germany, both of which remain integral to the company's connected care strategy.

Management stated that MatrixCare will continue operating as part of Resmed until the transaction closes, with no disruption to customer service or support. Resmed also noted that it will provide additional details regarding the transaction's financial impact in its fiscal fourth-quarter 2026 regulatory filings and has furnished a Form 8-K with the SEC outlining the agreement.

For Frazier Healthcare Partners, the acquisition represents a strategic investment in the growing post-acute care technology market. The private equity firm, which focuses exclusively on healthcare investments, plans to invest aggressively in product innovation to strengthen MatrixCare's capabilities and support evolving customer needs across long-term and post-acute care settings.

Resmed believes the new ownership structure will allow MatrixCare to pursue its long-term growth ambitions with a dedicated strategic focus, while enabling it to devote greater attention and resources to advancing AI-powered digital health solutions, cloud-connected medical devices and other technologies aimed at improving sleep, breathing and home-based healthcare outcomes.

Favorable Industry Prospect for RMDGoing by the data provided by Grand View Research, the global home healthcare market size was valued at $485.3 billion in 2025 and is projected to grow from $504.8 billion in 2026 to $1015.8 billion by 2033, at a CAGR of 10.5% from 2026 to 2033.

The market is driven by rising demand for cost-effective alternatives to curb rising healthcare costs and the growing penetration of the virtual and remote care industry. 

A Recent Development by RMDRecently, Resmed completed the acquisition of Noctrix Health to broaden its clinical sleep health portfolio with the addition of Nidra Tonic Motor Activation Therapy, an FDA De Novo-classified, non-invasive treatment for moderate-to-severe Restless Legs Syndrome RLS. The deal expands Resmed's presence into one of the most prevalent sleep disorders, complementing its core sleep therapy business while enhancing its ability to offer innovative, drug-free treatment options. The acquisition is also expected to accelerate patient access to the therapy by leveraging Resmed's global commercial and distribution capabilities.

RMD’s Zacks Rank & Key PicksCurrently, RMD carries a Zacks Rank #3 (Hold).

Some better-ranked stocks from the broader medical space are Veracyte (VCYT - Free Report) , West Pharmaceutical (WST - Free Report) and Pacific Biosciences of California (PACB - Free Report) .

Veracyte, currently sporting a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy), has an estimated earnings growth rate of 5.1% for 2026. VCYT’s earnings surpassed estimates in each of the trailing four quarters, the average surprise being 45.9%. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank stocks here.

Veracyte’s shares have gained 33.3% against the industry’s 14.2% decline in the year-to-date period.

West Pharmaceutical, currently carrying a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy), has an estimated long-term earnings growth rate of 13.9%. WST’s earnings surpassed estimates in each of the trailing four quarters, the average surprise being 19.4%.

West Pharmaceutical’s shares have gained 28.5% against the industry’s 1.2% decline in the year-to-date period.

Pacific Biosciences of California, currently carrying a Zacks Rank #2, has an estimated earnings growth rate of 22.6% for 2026. PACB’s earnings beat estimates in each of the trailing four quarters, the average surprise being 29.8%.

Pacific Biosciences’ shares have lost 19.8% compared with the industry’s 14.2% decline in the year-to-date period.

Aave V3 On zkSync Era Gives DeFi Lending Another Push Into ZK Rollups is the kind of crypto story that looks simple at headline level but becomes more useful once you place it inside the wider market backdrop. Aave’s expansion strategy is a good lens for the broader DeFi market: liquidity follows users, but users also follow trusted liquidity venues.

The reason it deserves attention today is not that one announcement or filing magically changes the whole market. It is that the update adds another data point to a sector still trying to work out where capital, users, and regulation are actually moving.

For more details, visit the official Governance platform.

TL;DR Aave DAO approved steps to deploy Aave V3 pools on zkSync Era.The move would bring more lending liquidity into a ZK-rollup environment.It shows major DeFi protocols are still expanding across scaling networks. What The Governance Move Changes Aave V3 deployments give users familiar lending and borrowing tools on new networks.

zkSync Era offers a scaling environment built around zero-knowledge rollup technology.

DeFi is in a more mature phase now. The market is less impressed by vague promises and more interested in where liquidity actually goes, which networks get deployments, and which governance decisions can change usage. That makes protocol-level votes and launches worth watching.

Why DeFi Liquidity Keeps Spreading The DAO approval process also shows how major DeFi protocols are still using governance to decide where liquidity should go next.

The question is whether these moves create practical depth. More chains, more pools, and more governance proposals only matter if users find better pricing, easier access, or stronger risk controls.

For NewsBTC readers, the practical takeaway is to avoid treating this as an isolated headline. The stronger read is to connect it with the current market environment: liquidity is still selective, regulatory pressure has not disappeared, and the projects that keep shipping useful updates are the ones most likely to hold attention when the cycle gets noisy.

That does not mean the story should be stretched beyond what the source supports. The cleaner approach is to keep the facts tight, explain the mechanism, and show readers why it may matter if follow-up data confirms the same direction over the next few sessions.

In other words, this is a development to watch rather than a guaranteed turning point. Crypto moves quickly, but the useful signals are usually the ones that still make sense after the first reaction fades.

The important thing for readers is context. A single development rarely defines the market on its own, but a series of source-backed updates can show where momentum is building. That is why this article keeps the focus on the specific mechanism in play, the source behind it, and the reason traders or builders may care today.

This article is based on information from governance.aave.com.

This article was written by the News Desk and edited by Samuel Rae.

Temp check would extend the fee switch to Uniswap's newest architecture, drawing an early warning that the move "risks killing the protocol."

Uniswap Labs on July 7 proposed activating protocol fees on a subset of Uniswap v4 pools, extending the fee rollout that DAO voters approved under the UNIfication package to the exchange's newest and most flexible pool architecture.

The temperature check went to a five-day Snapshot vote running July 7-12, with an onchain vote scheduled to begin the week of July 13. Because Uniswap's GovernorBravo contract caps proposals at 10 actions, Uniswap Labs said two onchain votes will be posted in parallel to cover all the chains involved.

UNI is up 6.8% to $3.57 in the past 24 hrs, giving Uniswap a market capitalization of $2.2 billion, according to CoinGecko, while ETH is up almost 3%. The token remains down more than 90% from its May 2021 record of about $44.92, though it had climbed more than 40% over the past month amid the UNIfication burns and Uniswap's expansion onto new venues.

UNIfication RolloutThe proposal follows the UNIfication overhaul, which DAO members passed in December with near-unanimous support and which turned on protocol fees and directed them toward burning UNI. It builds on four earlier fee proposals, numbered #93 through #96, and uses the same expedited governance track those proposals established.

Protocol fees are now live across all v2 and v3 pools on 11 chains: Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, Celo, OP Mainnet, Soneium, X Layer, Worldchain, Zora, BNB Chain and Polygon. Uniswap Labs said the protocol set a record last month, citing the UNIBurnBot account's report that 186,000 UNI were burned in a single day.

A New Fee System for v4v4's design forced a different approach. Where v2 pools carry a single static fee tier and v3 pools carry several, v4's hooks allow potentially unlimited fee tiers, and a pool's fee can change from one block to the next. Setting a fee on each pool individually is not workable at that scale.

To handle it, the proposal introduces a V4 Fee Controller split across two contracts. A V4FeePolicy contract computes the fee for any pool from rules that governance defines, and can be swapped out if the logic needs to change. A V4FeeAdapter contract enforces any per-pool overrides governance has set, otherwise applies the policy's fee, pushes it to the pool and routes the proceeds to a TokenJar contract on each chain. The policy sorts each pool into a "family" based on its characteristics, then resolves the fee from the most specific applicable rule down to a global default. The contracts are published in Uniswap's protocol-fees repository.

The temp check would switch on fees for three families: static fee pools without hooks, pools launched through Continuous Clearing Auctions, and aggregator hook pools that route external liquidity into v4. Static and CCA pools follow a curve pegged to a proportion of each pool's LP fee. Aggregator hooks carry a flat fee with a 25x multiplier that lifts the cap to 250 basis points, set at a 10 bps family default and 3 bps for select stable pairs on most chains, and 3 bps and 1 bps respectively on Base. Uniswap Labs stressed the proposal does not enable fees on any v4 pools outside those families. As with v2 and v3, collected fees fund UNI burns, with tokens accumulated on L2s and alternative L1s bridged back to Ethereum and sent to the 0xdead address.

LP PushbackThe proposal drew immediate opposition from Guillaume Lambert, founder of the options protocol Panoptic, who disclosed he had voted "Abstain" on UNIfication and argued the fee switch should never touch v4.

"Turning on the v4 fee switch risks killing the protocol," Lambert wrote, contending that liquidity providers are "structurally short convexity" and, by his analysis, already earn less than the volatility they take on. Taxing v4 pools without compensating LPs, he said, would leave them "nowhere to go except to other AMMs/UniV3-forks." He said he could only support the move if LPs were directly compensated with sustained UNI incentives running "practically forever until organic activity returns."

Not all early feedback was critical. Forum participant Abel189 backed the proposal, calling a deterministic, on-chain fee policy "a more scalable approach than configuring individual pools one by one" and praising the gradual rollout across specific families.

Key Takeaways MSCI and UBS will develop AI-powered tools for private markets research, due diligence and portfolios. The partnership targets fragmented data and limited transparency across major private asset classes. MSCI's run rate rose 12.7% to $3.36 billion, while Private Assets run rate increased 8.4%. MSCI (MSCI - Free Report) is strengthening its private markets platform through a strategic partnership with UBS (UBS - Free Report) , expanding its artificial intelligence (AI)-powered capabilities for institutional investors. Under the collaboration, MSCI will combine its private assets data, analytics and AI technologies with UBS' alternatives expertise to develop more transparent, standardized and scalable private markets solutions. UBS will become an early adopter of MSCI's AI-powered private markets platform, helping enhance investment research, due diligence and portfolio management across private equity, private credit, real estate and infrastructure.

The partnership is expected to improve access to high-quality private markets intelligence while addressing one of the industry's biggest challenges, limited transparency and fragmented data. The integration of AI-powered analytics into institutional investment workflows is expected to help investors make faster, more informed investment decisions while supporting broader institutional adoption of private assets globally. The collaboration also strengthens MSCI's growing ecosystem of AI-enabled investment solutions and reinforces its position as a leading provider of private markets data and analytics.

MSCI Strengthens AI-Powered Private Markets PlatformMSCI shares have gained 5.2% year to date, modestly outperforming the broader Finance sector's return of 4.6%. The stock has benefited from resilient subscription growth, expanding AI capabilities and continued innovation across private markets and investment analytics.

The UBS partnership builds on MSCI's broader strategy of expanding AI across its private markets platform. During the first quarter of 2026, the company enhanced its Private Capital Solutions portfolio with AI-enabled products, including daily private valuation indices, private equity and private credit benchmarks, AI-powered capabilities within Private Capital Intel and AI connectors compatible with leading large language models to simplify private fund research and due diligence. The company achieved nearly 44% recurring net new sales growth in Private Capital Solutions in the first quarter of 2026, with high retention rates across client segments.

MSCI strengthened its AI capabilities through the acquisitions of Vantager, an AI-native private markets due diligence platform, Compass Financial Technologies and PM Insights, expanding its offerings in AI-driven due diligence, index customization, private market pricing and portfolio analytics.

These initiatives are translating into stronger business momentum. In the first quarter of 2026, recurring subscription run rate grew 8.9% reported and 8.2% organically, while recurring subscription revenues increased 8.6%. Recurring net new subscription sales were $39.6 million, up 52%, marking the best first quarter since 2022.

The company also reported a record asset-based fee run rate, while its Private Assets run rate grew 8.4% year over year, supported by rising demand for Private Capital Transparency Data, Total Plan Manager and Private Capital Intel solutions.

MSCI Offers Solid Financial OutlookMSCI's expanding AI-powered private markets platform, growing institutional adoption and strengthening strategic partnerships are expected to support the company's top-line growth.

For 2026, MSCI expects operating expenses of $1.490-$1.530 billion and adjusted EBITDA expenses of $1.305-$1.335 billion.

The Zacks Consensus Estimate for second-quarter 2026 revenues is pegged at $851.32 million, indicating continued year-over-year growth of 10.18%.

The consensus mark for second-quarter 2026 earnings is pegged at $4.82 per share, unchanged over the past 30 days. The figure implies a year-over-year increase of 15.59%.

MSCI's Zacks Rank & Other Stocks to ConsiderCurrently, MSCI carries a Zacks Rank #2 (Buy).

Macro Bank (BMA - Free Report) and Evercore

((EVR - Free Report) are some other top-ranked stocks that investors can consider in the broader Zacks Finance sector. Macro Bank and Evercore sport a Zacks Rank #1 (Strong Buy) each. You can see the complete list of today’s Zacks #1 Rank stocks here.

BMA shares have declined 0.4% in the year-to-date period. The long-term earnings growth rate for Macro Bank is pegged at 30.04%.

EVR shares have declined 0.2% in the year-to-date period. The long-term earnings growth rate for Evercore is pegged at 26.03%.

The real-world asset (RWA) ecosystem of Solana has quadrupled in value during the first half of 2026. 

It grew from $873 million in January to a record $3.62 billion in July. The surge was driven by rapid growth in tokenized stocks, rising institutional adoption, and record trading activity.

According to the latest ecosystem data, Solana is now the third-largest blockchain for tokenized RWAs, with a 10.39% market share. The network hosts 2,119 tokenized assets across 295,853 holders. Its RWA ecosystem has also grown 20.91% over the past 30 days.

Meanwhile, Solana’s stablecoin supply has surpassed $16 billion, making it the second-largest among all blockchains. The large stablecoin base has provided deep dollar liquidity for tokenized asset trading.

Solana RWA Data Tokenized Asset Trading Reaches New Highs Notably, Solana recorded its strongest quarter for tokenized assets in Q2 2026. Spot trading volume climbed to $5.77 billion, up 7.4 times from the $775 million recorded during the second half of 2025.

June alone generated more than $2 billion in tokenized asset trading. That marked the highest monthly volume ever recorded on any blockchain.

The network also led global tokenized equity trading during the week of June 15–21. It processed $1.298 billion of the $1.324 billion traded worldwide, accounting for roughly 97% of the market.

SpaceX Listing Boosts Tokenized Stock Activity Solana’s tokenized stock ecosystem received a major boost after SpaceX’s June 12 Nasdaq listing. Tokenized SpaceX shares launched on the blockchain the same day.

SpaceX-related tokens generated $1.19 billion in June trading volume, accounting for 31% of the month’s total. Backpack Securities’ SPCX contributed $1.08 billion, while xStocks’ SPCXx added $852 million.

On June 24, Solana’s tokenized stock market reached a record $644 million in daily trading volume. The milestone highlights the network’s shift from a memecoin-focused blockchain toward a hub for tokenized financial assets.

Institutional Offerings Continue to Expand The ecosystem has continued to attract institutional issuers and infrastructure providers.

Backed Finance’s xStocks platform now offers 134 tokenized stocks. It has surpassed $3 billion in cumulative on-chain trading volume and attracted more than 57,000 unique holders. 

Solflare, which reports 4 million monthly active users, has integrated all xStocks assets and added a Google Pay on-ramp.

Ondo Global Markets has also launched more than 200 tokenized U.S. stocks and ETFs. At launch, those assets represented roughly 65% of all Solana RWAs.

Meanwhile, Jupiter Lend has added tokenized SPYx, QQQx, NVDAx, and TSLAx as collateral. Users can now borrow against tokenized equities within DeFi.

Institutions Deepen Solana Adoption Institutional participation has accelerated across the network. BlackRock’s BUIDL fund has deployed $615 million on-chain through Securitize. It is now the largest individual RWA position on Solana.

Citigroup completed a tokenized Bill of Exchange settlement pilot with PwC in February. Institutional market maker B2C2 has also chosen Solana as its primary stablecoin settlement network.

Financial firms, including SoFi and R3, have expanded their enterprise banking and tokenization initiatives on Solana. The moves reinforce the blockchain’s growing role in institutional-grade digital asset infrastructure.

DisClamier: This content is informational and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author's personal opinions and do not reflect The Crypto Basic opinion. Readers are encouraged to do thorough research before making any investment decisions. The Crypto Basic is not responsible for any financial losses.

Circle's $USDC now accounts for just 46% of Solana's stablecoin supply, its lowest share in more than 2 years.

According to DefiLlama data, $USDC's share has fallen to 46.13%, while $USDT's share has risen to 16.42%. Other stablecoins now collectively account for more than 26% of Solana's stablecoin market, highlighting broader liquidity diversification across the network.

Drift Fallout Changed Community Sentiment The shift follows the April 1 Drift exploit, which sparked widespread criticism of Circle across the Solana ecosystem. After attackers reportedly moved more than $230M via Circle's Cross Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP), many ecosystem participants urged DeFi users to swap $USDC for $USDT. Critics argued that Circle should have frozen the stolen funds.

When challenged on the decision, Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire said the company would not intercept funds without legal precedent, describing the situation as a "moral quandary." Meanwhile, Tether earned goodwill across parts of the Solana community after supporting Drift during its recovery efforts, strengthening $USDT's standing among many users.

Fresh Legal Challenges Add to Pressure Circle now faces renewed scrutiny following a July 8 report by the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists. According to the report, law enforcement authorities in Wisconsin and New York accused Circle of refusing to assist in freezing or recovering $USDC linked to scams. Wisconsin prosecutors filed a criminal complaint alleging that Circle failed to comply with a court order requiring the recovery of stolen assets.

Although the complaint involves a single misdemeanor count, former FBI financial crime expert Karen Greenway noted that criminal charges against a major financial firm are highly unusual.

Circle rejected the allegations, calling the complaint meritless. The company argued that it lacked the technical ability to comply with the order and maintained that the Wisconsin court lacked jurisdiction.

Stablecoin issuers such as Circle also face pressure from a changing regulatory landscape. Polymarket now places the odds of the CLARITY Act passing in 2026 at 40%, down from 82% in February.

Senator Cynthia Lummis recently warned that failure to pass the CLARITY Act could delay meaningful U.S. stablecoin legislation until 2030, turning what could have been a 1-year delay into a 4-year setback.

Solana's Stablecoin Economy Continues to Expand The decline in $USDC's market share comes even as Solana's stablecoin economy continues to grow at a record pace. During the first half of 2026, Solana recorded $1.12T in peer-to-peer stablecoin volume, up 72%, alongside 83.6M peer-to-peer transactions, up 37%. Active wallets reached an all-time high of 4.3M.

Retail transfers between $100 and $1,000 totaled a record $13.5B. Institutional transfers above $20,000 reached $1.07T, while micropayments between $0.50 and $100 climbed to an all-time high of $1.50B.

Circle has continued to expand its infrastructure despite a decline in market share. Gateway, launched in July 2025 and integrated with Solana in January 2026, allows users and businesses to access a unified $USDC balance across supported blockchains without manual bridging or third-party liquidity. The stablecoin giant recently reported that lifetime Gateway volume has now surpassed $4.5B.

Circle Scores a Major Regulatory Win Despite mounting competitive and legal challenges, Circle recently secured one of its biggest regulatory milestones. The U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency granted final approval for Circle to establish Circle National Trust, a national trust bank operating as First National Digital Currency Bank, N.A.

The approval strengthens $USDC infrastructure through federally regulated custody, with reserve management planned as a future capability, while placing Circle's trust operations under direct federal oversight.

Investors welcomed the development, sending Circle's stock, $CRCL, more than 15% higher to around $71 following the announcement before retracing to its current price of $66.

While $USDC remains Solana's largest stablecoin by a wide margin, its share has fallen below 50% for the first time in more than 2 years. With growing competition, evolving regulation, and changing community sentiment, the battle for stablecoin dominance on Solana appears far from over.

Read More on SolanaFloor Claynosaurz’s HEEBOO Studio Introduces $HEEBOO Fan Token’s Public Sale Through Metaplex Genesis
Solana Memecoin Traders Flock to RobinHood - Will it Last?

Solana Joins the Prediction Market Race