Market Signal Briefing

Solana (SOL) is widening its lead over Ethereum (ETH) in developer activity and decentralized exchange (DEX) volume, underscoring a growing technological and ecosystem advantage. But the token’s price action remains under pressure, highlighting a persistent gap between strong fundamentals and weak market sentiment.

As of Saturday ET, SOL was trading at $82.34, down 0.99% over the past 24 hours. Analysts noted that while a short-term TD Sequential 'buy signal' has appeared on the 4-hour chart, broader risk-off conditions and a notable whale transfer to an exchange are keeping downside risks in focus.

On the ecosystem front, Solana recorded an all-time high of 10,864 unique developers, surpassing Ethereum’s 9,017, according to figures cited in the report. The milestone is being interpreted as evidence of sustained builder confidence and continued expansion of Solana’s developer community—an increasingly important metric as networks compete for applications, liquidity, and long-term relevance.

Solana also led Ethereum in DEX activity, posting daily volume of $1.597 billion, weekly volume of $12.357 billion, and monthly volume of $59.944 billion. Weekly DEX volume reportedly surged 103% to $138.4 billion, marking the highest level over the past year. The network has continued to sustain throughput above 3,000 transactions per second, while tokenization-related use cases and integrations are described as expanding across the ecosystem.

Signs of potential accumulation have also emerged on-chain. Since March 17, an average of roughly 700,000 SOL per day has reportedly moved off exchanges—often interpreted by traders as reduced immediate sell-side supply, though such flows can reflect multiple behaviors, including custody changes and staking-related movements.

Despite these supportive indicators, price concerns intensified after a whale unstaked 170,000 SOL—valued at about $14.85 million—and deposited the tokens to Kraken, a move commonly associated with preparation to sell or reposition. SOL has retraced from around $92 into a $79–$89 range, with the report placing market capitalization near $47.14 billion and fully diluted valuation around $51.33 billion.

Trading activity weakened over the same period. SOL’s 24-hour trading volume was estimated near $2.20 billion, down 31.09% day over day. The data split cited centralized exchange (CEX) volume at roughly $2.20 billion, while DEX volume for SOL pairs was reported as comparatively small, pointing to the bulk of near-term price discovery remaining concentrated on centralized venues.

Technicians and market watchers are divided on the next major move. Some analysts argue a bearish structure is forming and warn that SOL could retest $60, with a deeper drawdown toward $50 possible in a worst-case scenario—levels that would represent a decline of roughly 72% to 77% from prior peaks. Others point to the TD Sequential 'buy signal' as a catalyst for a short-lived rebound, especially if broader crypto sentiment stabilizes.

One scenario flagged by derivatives observers is a sharp move higher potentially triggering forced short covering. If SOL rallies toward $96, the report said, short liquidations could reach as much as $680 million—an outcome that could amplify volatility even if the broader trend remains undecided.

Macro and cross-asset signals remain a headwind. The report noted that on March 26, Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), and Solana ETF products saw simultaneous net outflows, coinciding with softer on-chain engagement. Monthly transaction counts were cited as down 3.2%, while active addresses fell 11%, reinforcing the view that near-term demand has cooled even as the network’s fundamental metrics strengthen.

For now, Solana’s story is defined by this tension: a network that is outperforming on 'developer momentum' and 'DEX liquidity' while its token struggles to reclaim key levels amid whale-driven supply fears and a cautious market backdrop. Traders are watching the $60 area as a pivotal support zone and $96 as a major resistance level that could shape the next phase of price discovery.

Article Summary by TokenPost.ai

🔎 Market Interpretation

Fundamentals vs. price divergence: Solana is leading in developer activity and DEX volumes, yet SOL price remains pressured—suggesting sentiment and positioning are overriding network-strength narratives in the short term.

Risk-off tape dominates: Broader market caution and ETF outflows across BTC/ETH/SOL products coincide with weaker near-term on-chain engagement, reinforcing a defensive macro backdrop.

Supply overhang headline: A whale unstaking and depositing 170,000 SOL (~$14.85M) to Kraken increases perceived immediate sell risk, intensifying downside focus despite supportive ecosystem indicators.

Exchange flow nuance: ~700,000 SOL/day reportedly moved off exchanges since March 17, often read as accumulation/reduced sell supply, but the article notes these flows can also reflect custody shifts or staking-related movements.

Where price discovery is happening: Near-term price discovery is said to be concentrated on centralized exchanges (CEX volume ~ $2.20B) while SOL-pair DEX volume is comparatively small—important for understanding liquidity shocks and whale impact.

Key levels shaping narrative: SOL is range-bound ($79–$89 after retracing from ~$92). Market watchers focus on $60 as pivotal support and $96 as major resistance where volatility could accelerate.

💡 Strategic Points

Support/resistance framework: Monitor $60 (support/invalidations for bulls) and $96 (resistance/trigger zone). A break below $60 raises probability of $50 in a worst-case scenario; a reclaim toward $96 increases squeeze risk.

Whale + venue watchlist: Track large unstake events and subsequent exchange deposits (e.g., Kraken) as short-term catalysts; these can influence sentiment faster than gradual fundamental improvements.

Technicals as timing, not thesis: The 4-hour TD Sequential “buy signal” may support a brief rebound, but the article frames it as potentially outweighed by risk-off conditions and supply concerns.

Liquidity/derivatives risk: If SOL rallies toward $96, short liquidations could reach ~$680M, potentially creating a rapid, volatility-driven move even without a confirmed trend reversal.

Confirm demand recovery: Watch whether monthly transactions (reported -3.2%) and active addresses (-11%) stabilize/rebound; sustained improvement would better align price action with the reported developer and DEX strength.

Volume health check: 24h trading volume fell ~31% day-over-day to ~$2.20B; declining volume during a range can signal consolidation, but it can also indicate fragile liquidity where breakouts/breakdowns become sharper.

Relative-network thesis: SOL’s developer count (10,864 vs. ETH 9,017) and strong DEX metrics may support a longer-term relative outperformance narrative—however, the near-term path is still dictated by sentiment, flows, and macro.

📘 Glossary

Developer activity (unique developers): Count of distinct builders contributing to a network’s ecosystem; often used as a proxy for long-term innovation and application growth.

DEX volume: Trading volume on decentralized exchanges; can indicate on-chain liquidity and user activity within a network’s DeFi ecosystem.

CEX volume: Trading volume on centralized exchanges; often dominates short-term price discovery due to deeper order books and broader trader participation.

TD Sequential: A technical indicator designed to identify potential exhaustion points and short-term buy/sell signals based on candle patterns.

Whale: A large holder whose transactions can materially affect liquidity, sentiment, and short-term price movement.

Unstaking: Withdrawing tokens from staking; can increase liquid supply and is sometimes interpreted as preparation to sell (though not always).

Exchange deposit: Moving tokens to an exchange wallet; often seen as increasing likelihood of selling or repositioning.

Short covering / short liquidation: When short sellers buy back to close positions (voluntarily or forced by margin), potentially accelerating upward price moves (a “short squeeze”).

Market cap vs. FDV: Market capitalization reflects circulating supply value; fully diluted valuation (FDV) estimates value if total supply were circulating.

Transactions per second (TPS): Throughput measure of how many transactions a network can process per second; higher sustained TPS can support high-activity applications.

ETF net outflows: More capital leaving than entering exchange-traded products; can signal reduced institutional/allocative demand in the near term.

<Copyright ⓒ TokenPost, unauthorized reproduction and redistribution prohibited>

Marco Rubio sat down with G7 foreign ministers and told them privately that the war with Iran could continue another two to four weeks, handing Washington's closest allies and the market a countdown.

Reports noted that Rubio publicly said the operation should conclude in “weeks, not months,” and the gap between those two framings captures the window long enough to sustain macro strain where Bitcoin now trades.

Bitcoin reached an intraday low of $65,571.07 on Mar. 27, down roughly 4.4% on the day. Meanwhile, Brent crude was at $111.52, up 53% since the war began on Feb. 27.

The Nasdaq had entered correction territory, the 10-year Treasury yield stood at 4.44%, and Fed futures reflected essentially zero probability of a rate cut this year. That combination explains Bitcoin's session losses with precision.

Asset / IndicatorLatest level / statusMove / contextBitcoin (BTC)$65,571.07Down ~4.4% on Mar. 27Brent crude$111.52Up 53% since Feb. 27Nasdaq CompositeCorrection territoryRisk assets under pressureU.S. 10-year Treasury yield4.44%Higher yields tightening financial conditionsFed futures~0% probability of a rate cut this yearMarkets pricing a rate-cut freezeThe transmission chainOil above $100 pushes freight costs into every supply chain simultaneously.

EIA data shows tanker rates for VLCCs from the Middle East to Asia hit their highest level since at least November 2005 in March. Stickier inflation expectations follow, as University of Michigan consumer sentiment fell to 53.3, and one-year inflation expectations jumped from 3.4% to 3.8%.

Fed Governor Lisa Cook said the war in Iran has shifted the balance of risks toward inflation, cementing a rate-cut freeze that is the direct channel into Bitcoin.

Bitcoin has come to trade like a high-beta liquidity instrument. The IMF has documented that its correlation with equities is higher than its correlations with gold, bonds, or major currencies.

A 2024 study in Finance Research Letters found that Bitcoin returns and volatility tend to respond to political uncertainty shocks, particularly during periods of financial stress. Bitcoin trades lower now because a longer war keeps the oil shock alive, which keeps liquidity tight.

Rubio's two-to-four-week private estimate turns a sequence of daily military headlines into a timeboxed repricing: traders now price the duration of the shock, treating each military headline as a data point in a longer repricing cycle.

Duration is the keyTraders are now pricing the war's duration, treating each military or diplomatic headline as a data point in a longer repricing cycle.

ICE recorded its highest-ever crude trading and open interest through March, indicating persistent repricing.

When President Donald Trump delayed strikes on Iranian energy infrastructure and hopes of de-escalation rose, global equity funds took in $37.77 billion in the week through Mar. 25. When Iran denied talks and hopes of a ceasefire faded, equities fell again.

The market toggles based on how the duration of the energy shock looks, and Rubio's private timeline pushed the dial toward durable.

A flowchart illustrating the seven-step transmission chain from a prolonged Iran war through rising oil costs, inflation, and tighter liquidity to lower Bitcoin prices.A Reuters analyst poll put Brent at $100 to $190 under sustained disruption, with an average of $134.62. At the same time, EIA's March outlook projects Brent above $95 for the next two months. Bitcoin's near-term range is currently within this gap.

Flows through the Strait of Hormuz averaged roughly 20 million barrels per day in 2024, approximately 20% of global petroleum liquids consumption, with about 84% of that crude going to Asia.

The first-order macro hit lands in the region most central to industrial demand, emerging-market foreign exchange, and the technology supply chain.

Foreign investors pulled roughly $25.28 billion from Taiwan, $13.5 billion from South Korea, and $10.17 billion from India this month. Bitcoin sits inside the same global growth and technology complex that foreign outflows are actively repricing, and those moves reflect the same liquidity logic driving crypto lower.

EIA notes that only about 2.6 million barrels per day of Saudi and UAE pipeline bypass capacity is readily available.

Physical Hormuz navigation controls the macro calculus more than any diplomatic statement, which is why a ceasefire that leaves shipping impaired delivers limited relief.

War risk insurance alone keeps freight costs elevated enough to extend the inflation pass-through even if military operations pause.

CryptoSlate Daily Brief

Daily signals, zero noise.Market-moving headlines and context delivered every morning in one tight read.

5-minute digest 100k+ readers

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe any time.

You’re subscribed. Welcome aboard.

The countdownFor the potential scenarios in the coming weeks, the best option involves diplomacy to close the gap within roughly seven to ten days.

Shipping normalization begins, Brent retreats toward $95-$110, and the “no cuts in 2026” narrative softens as inflation expectations ease. Goldman Sachs has argued that a clear end to military action would quickly erode the oil risk premium.

On that path, Bitcoin's exposure to the macro squeeze reverses rapidly. The relief puts Bitcoin in the $69,000-$75,000 range, supported by the EIA's easing post-disruption base case and by the speed at which equity funds re-entered when de-escalation hopes climbed in late March.

The same liquidity sensitivity that drove the selloff drives the recovery.

A horizontal range chart mapping three Bitcoin price scenarios, bull ($69K–$75K), base ($58K–$66K), and bear ($52K–$60K), against the current price of $65.6K during the Iran war's projected 2-4 week countdown.In the worst-case scenario, the war runs to the outer edge of Rubio's four-week window. Hormuz friction persists, war-risk insurance stays elevated, and no convincing ceasefire emerges.

Brent holds in the $110–$135 range, consistent with Goldman's March-April expectation and the Reuters average under sustained disruption. Inflation stays uncomfortable, the Fed stays sidelined, and Bitcoin trades in a $58,000-$66,000 range as risk assets stay capped by the same liquidity ceiling in place since Feb. 27.

The academic literature reinforces this framing over any reflexive safe-haven narrative.

A 2025 quantile analysis paper found that gold, the US dollar, and oil hedge geopolitical risk more consistently than cryptocurrencies across varying risk levels. Another 2025 study found that Bitcoin's defensive properties activate under geopolitically driven crash conditions, a threshold the current oil-and-yield squeeze has not yet reached.

In the bear case, the squeeze persists long enough to validate that conditional framing: Bitcoin's haven behavior is regime-dependent, and a sustained oil-inflation-yield environment is the least favorable regime for those properties to activate.

Two to four more weeks of war means at least one more inflation print, one more Fed meeting, and one more month of elevated freight and energy costs before the macro backdrop begins to clear.

For Bitcoin, that window represents the duration during which oil stays high and rate cuts stay off the table, the two conditions that drive the liquidity ceiling on risk assets.

The bull case closes that window early and reverses the compression, and the bear case holds it open long enough to validate the liquidity-asset framing that has governed Bitcoin's price action since February.

Markets are already pricing the countdown without considering the optimistic version.

Mentioned in this articlePosted in

TLDR: Chainlink Economics 2.0 is built to support mass adoption from banks, asset managers, and millions of developers. Nazarov’s universal payment model lets developers pay in any token, which then converts into LINK for security. Lower payment friction means more fees flow into Chainlink, directly strengthening the network’s overall security layer. Chainlink’s universal billing system may become a standalone product, reducing payment friction across other blockchain protocols.
Chainlink economics is undergoing a structural shift as the protocol prepares for mass institutional and developer adoption.

Sergey Nazarov, Chainlink’s co-founder, recently outlined how the network’s next economic phase is being designed.

The model centers on creating a self-reinforcing loop. More security drives adoption, adoption generates fees, and fees fund greater security. This cycle forms the foundation of what Nazarov calls Economics 2.0.

A Universal Payment System to Reduce Developer Friction The core of Economics 2.0 is a flexible, universal billing infrastructure. Nazarov explained that developers should be able to pay into the system however they prefer. That includes native tokens, their own project tokens, or even cash payments.

Once received, those payments get converted into Chainlink’s native token. This conversion ensures the system maintains consistent security funding regardless of how fees arrive. The process removes unnecessary barriers for developers integrating Chainlink services.

Sergey explains how Chainlink economics are evolving overtime

“Chainlink economics is focused on creating the various protocol improvements, the various incentives for user fees to efficiently flow into the system to increase the system's security”

“Because what you want is a… pic.twitter.com/cBeyVaWxfm

— LINK Archive (@LINKArchv) March 28, 2026

Nazarov described the payment model directly, stating that the goal is to have “an efficient payment system that allows users, developers of the protocol to pay into the system however they like, in whatever form they like, their own token, native tokens, some other form of payment, cash payments, whatever payments.” He added that this would then be “converted into the token of the system to create the necessary security.”

Reducing payment friction matters because lower friction means higher participation. When developers pay more easily, more fees flow into the network. Those fees then strengthen the system’s overall security layer.

Targeting a Market That Does Not Yet Fully Exist Chainlink’s current market is not yet operating at the scale Economics 2.0 is designed for. Nazarov noted that millions of developers, global banks, and asset managers are not yet fully on-chain. That transition remains ahead.

Economics 2.0 is being built in anticipation of that larger market. The protocol is preparing its infrastructure now so it can handle that volume when it arrives.

Nazarov was direct about the current state, saying the market adoption “is not in the millions of developers” and “not in the world of all the banks, and all the asset managers.” That is precisely the world Economics 2.0 is being built for.

As the market grows, the value placed on security is expected to grow with it. Greater security should then attract more adoption across institutional and Web2 participants.

Nazarov summarized the broader ambition by stating, “the goal is to get as many fees into the system as possible so those fees feed back into the security of the system.”

Chainlink’s ability to provide reliable price data positions it uniquely for this role. Nazarov suggested the universal billing system could eventually become a standalone product for other protocols.

He noted that “a universal billing system, payment system will even become a product of a kind for other protocols because you do want to lower the friction that people have to go through to pay for anything.” The model is designed to scale alongside the market it serves.

Bitcoin price continues to trade within a tight range near $66,700, showing limited momentum despite a slight 0.57% gain over the past 24 hours. While the broader crypto market remains relatively flat, BTC is holding key support levels, hinting at underlying demand. Beneath this muted price action, however, a high-stakes setup is quietly building. Recent liquidation data points to a significant imbalance in the market, suggesting that the next move may be driven less by sentiment and more by liquidity positioning.

As a result, Bitcoin’s next directional move is likely to depend on where the largest clusters of leveraged positions are concentrated—making this a classic liquidity-driven setup rather than a momentum-led breakout.

Bitcoin Liquidation Map: Where the Real Pressure LiesThe latest liquidation data reveals a significant imbalance in the derivatives market. Over $12 billion worth of short positions are stacked above Bitcoin’s current price, while only around $3 billion in long liquidations sit below. This uneven distribution highlights a key dynamic: liquidity is heavily concentrated on the upside as more pressure is building above the current price range. 

The BTC price appears more likely to move higher in the short term, targeting these short positions, which may further trigger a short squeeze. Although this does not confirm a sustained bullish trend, these liquidity-driven moves are temporary, followed by sharp reversals once the positions are cleared. This suggests that the price may follow a strong upside, but the traders need to remain cautious about a potential pullback after the liquidity is absorbed. 

Bitcoin Price Analysis: BTC Struggles Below Key ResistanceBitcoin is currently trading around the $66,600 level, continuing to move within a tight range after facing repeated rejections near the $70,000–$72,000 zone. The 4-hour chart reflects a lack of strong directional momentum, with price action leaning slightly bearish in the short term. A closer look at the Bollinger Bands shows that BTC is trading below the mid-band, indicating that buyers are struggling to regain control.

Although the price recently bounced from the lower Bollinger Band near $65,000, the recovery remains weak, suggesting that the move may be a temporary relief rather than a confirmed reversal. The Relative Strength Index (RSI) is hovering near the 40 level, reflecting neutral-to-bearish momentum. This indicates that while the market is not oversold, it also lacks the strength required for a sustained upside move.

 Key Levels to Watch

Immediate Resistance: $68,000Major Resistance: $70,000–$72,000Immediate Support: $65,600Strong Support: $63,900Wrapping it Up: Liquidity Signals Strength, But Bitcoin Price Needs ConfirmationBitcoin is currently caught between bullish liquidity signals and weak price structure, creating a high-risk, high-opportunity setup. In the near term, Bitcoin could see a short squeeze toward the $68,000–$70,000 range, driven by liquidity. However, unless BTC manages to sustain above these levels, the move may turn into a bull trap, followed by renewed downside pressure. On the flip side, a breakdown below $65,600 could expose the next key support at $63,900, where buyers are expected to step in.

Trust with CoinPedia:CoinPedia has been delivering accurate and timely cryptocurrency and blockchain updates since 2017. All content is created by our expert panel of analysts and journalists, following strict Editorial Guidelines based on E-E-A-T (Experience, Expertise, Authoritativeness, Trustworthiness). Every article is fact-checked against reputable sources to ensure accuracy, transparency, and reliability. Our review policy guarantees unbiased evaluations when recommending exchanges, platforms, or tools. We strive to provide timely updates about everything crypto & blockchain, right from startups to industry majors.

Investment Disclaimer:All opinions and insights shared represent the author's own views on current market conditions. Please do your own research before making investment decisions. Neither the writer nor the publication assumes responsibility for your financial choices.

Sponsored and Advertisements:Sponsored content and affiliate links may appear on our site. Advertisements are marked clearly, and our editorial content remains entirely independent from our ad partners.

The project is designed to make Ethereum’s many layer 2s work together more seamlessly. Mar 29, 2026, 3:00 p.m.

A group of Ethereum projects have announced a new effort aimed at fixing a growing problem in Ethereum: its ecosystem is becoming too fragmented.

Revealed at the EthCC conference in Cannes, the project — called the “Ethereum Economic Zone” (EEZ) — is designed to make Ethereum’s many add-on networks (known as layer 2s, or L2s) work together more seamlessly.

The framework is being developed by Gnosis, Zisk and the Ethereum Foundation. Gnosis is a longtime Ethereum infrastructure developer, while Zisk focuses on zero-knowledge proving technology.

It comes as Ethereum for years relied on L2 networks to scale, though these networks often operate like separate islands. Users have to move assets between them using bridges, which can be slow, costly and risky, while developers often have to rebuild the same tools on each network.

The EEZ aims to change that by making all these networks feel like one unified system. In simple terms, it would allow apps and transactions on different Ethereum networks to interact instantly — without needing bridges — while still relying on Ethereum’s core security.

The announcement comes as Ethereum’s long-term reliance on L2 scaling has faced renewed debate. Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has recently suggested the ecosystem may need to rethink parts of its L2-heavy roadmap, particularly as fragmentation and user experience issues persist. The EEZ appears to directly address those concerns by trying to unify liquidity, infrastructure and user flows across networks, rather than adding more isolated chains

The idea is to create shared liquidity (so funds can move freely), simpler infrastructure for developers, and a smoother experience for users. The system would also continue to use ETH as its main token for fees, rather than introducing new ones.

The project is being developed openly with input from the wider Ethereum community.

“Ethereum doesn't have a scaling problem. It has a fragmentation problem. Every new L2 is a silo that makes it harder to seamlessly extend and drive value back to the Ethereum mainnet,” said Friederike Ernst, co-founder of Gnosis, in a press release shared with CoinDesk. “The EEZ is designed to do the opposite.”

Read more: From 'Ethereum’s sidekick' to standalone stars: How Vitalik Buterin’s latest pivot is forcing Layer 2s to grow up

More For You

As stablecoins evolve into core financial infrastructure, North America leads. This report maps the regulation, market shifts, and players driving adoption.

Why it matters:

Stablecoins are entering their third phase of evolution - the institutionalization era - becoming increasingly embedded into core financial infrastructure. As institutions prioritize transparency and compliance, regulated issuers like USDC, RLUSD, and PYUSD are steadily gaining share with RLUSD surpassing $1B in market cap within its first year. North America, leading in regulatory frameworks and institutional distribution, is at the center of it all.

More For You

The ecosystem's smaller tokens are acting as leveraged bets on TAO, with multiple subnet tokens posting 200-400% monthly gains.

What to know:

Bittensor's TAO token has surged about 90% in March, while subnet tokens in its ecosystem have rallied even more sharply, lifting their combined market value to roughly $1.47 billion.The gains are fueled in part by Subnet 3's Covenant-72B model, a permissionlessly trained large language model that posted a competitive...

Bitcoin has traded below Grand Trend’s Forecasting support level since January 2026. Since the trend’s breakdown, BTC has experienced strong bearish pressure, falling below both long-term and short-term realized prices.

Amid this extended, weakened structure, crypto analysts have expressed greater pessimism and projected a prolonged decline, citing realized price data. 

Bitcoin continues to show cracks According to Darkfost, BTC has held below the realized price that excludes inactive supply for two months. 

The analyst noted that the realized price, after the adjustment, is approximately $72,500. These price levels now act as immediate resistance. 

Source: Darkfost/X Looking at the previous bear cycle, Bitcoin held below this cost basis between six and 10 months. If the historical pattern repeats, BTC could see more difficult months before reclaiming and flipping $72,500.

Typically, when market prices remain below realized prices, it means most buyers are holding at a loss. Often, an increase in the number of loss holders increases selling risk, which, if realized, results in more losses. 

This is evidenced by the Short-Term Realized Price, which currently stands at $82.3k, according to Checkonchain data. This implies that recent buyers are currently sitting on significant losses, which increases the cohort’s capitulation risk. 

Source: Checkonchain In fact, realized losses for short-term holders have stabilized above $300 million per day, with an average of 5k BTC sold at a loss. On the 29th of March, the STH cohort reported a $372 million loss, confirming bearishness. 

Historically, continued loss realization has further weakened the market, leading to extended price decline. 

Can BTC avoid further slips? Bitcoin has traded within a bearish structure for nearly five months and stayed below the realized price for two months, reflecting strong downside pressure.

As a result, ADV/DECL has declined below 50, dropping to 35.78, suggesting that most funds have entered a declining asset phase. This implies that sellers are largely dominating the market, and any attempted upside failed to materialize due to a lack of support.

Source: TradingView Additionally, the EMA line hovered around 25-35, indicating stubborn weakness and further confirming the trend’s weakness. These market conditions leave BTC exposed to potentially more losses on its price charts.

Therefore, if the market price continues to hold the realized price while STH are selling, BTC could drop towards $62k. However, the realized price on Binance currently sits at around $60,490, providing the market with strong support.

Source: Cryptoquant As long as BTC holds above this level, it will avoid further slip and give room for a reversal. But first, BTC must reclaim $72k and flip it, then target the STH realized price of $82k to see significant gains.

Final Summary Bitcoin has held below $72,500, the realized price that excludes inactive supply, for two months. BTC needs to hold above $60,490 to avoid further slippage and reclaim $72,500 to see any significant gains. 

Ripple’s XRP is showing early signs of a potential re-rating as a growing list of traditional finance players and market infrastructure providers engage with the asset, reinforcing a narrative that it is moving beyond retail-led speculation toward an institutionally recognized market.

XRP was trading around $1.34 as of Sunday UTC, up roughly 1.1% over the past 24 hours but down 5.72% on the week. Despite the rebound, the token remains about 60.6% below its all-time high near $3.40, underscoring how much of its prior cycle peak has yet to be recovered even as sentiment improves around regulation and adoption.

The most eye-catching signal came from Goldman Sachs, which has reportedly established an XRP exchange-traded fund exposure valued at approximately $153.8 million. While the structure and venue of the position were not detailed, the disclosure is being interpreted by market participants as another step in XRP being treated more like a mainstream crypto allocation alongside Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH)—a shift that matters because it can broaden the buyer base and deepen liquidity.

Institutional interest is also being tied to the wider acceleration in real-world asset tokenization. Franklin Templeton, a $1.6 trillion asset manager, has expanded its tokenization infrastructure across roughly 10 to 11 blockchains and has already surpassed $1 billion in tokenized money market fund assets through its Benji platform. Bitwise has argued that “XRP and tokenization are now being discussed in the same institutional boardrooms as Bitcoin and Ethereum,” signaling that the conversation is migrating from theory into potential 'capital allocation'.

Another notable development is CME Group’s inclusion of XRP in its 10-K filing alongside Bitcoin and Ethereum. For traders, that kind of mention is not a product launch, but it is often read as groundwork that could support eventual futures or options listings. Should regulated derivatives emerge, they could provide institutions with more efficient 'hedging tools' and improve price discovery—two conditions that typically help professional investors scale exposure.

On the regulatory front, the report pointed to growing clarity around XRP’s classification, with both the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission described as treating XRP as a 'commodity'. Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse said the timeline for the passage of the crypto market structure-focused CLARITY Act is now expected to shift toward late May, while emphasizing that “Wall Street’s posture toward crypto has fundamentally changed” as major financial firms begin to acknowledge blockchain’s “practical technical value.”

Beyond market structure, Ripple’s pitch continues to center on payments utility and throughput. The report cited an estimated capacity to process up to $30 billion in daily transactions and highlighted Cross River Bank’s adoption of a Ripple-enabled stablecoin payments system as a concrete example of traditional finance integrating blockchain-based settlement rails.

From a technical perspective, XRP is trading in a relatively neutral zone. The token’s relative strength index (RSI) was cited near 40.95, with analysts watching a near-term support area around $1.31 and resistance near $1.41. A clean break above $1.41 could open the path toward $1.52, roughly aligning with the upper Bollinger Band referenced in the analysis, though follow-through would likely depend on a return of volume and sustained institutional demand.

Market activity was mixed. XRP’s 24-hour trading volume was reported at about $1.04 billion, down 52.99% from the prior day, with centralized exchanges accounting for most of the flow. Even with the volume drop, observers said the dominance of CEX activity suggests professional participation remains meaningful, particularly if ETF-linked demand is building behind the scenes.

XRP’s market capitalization was listed at approximately $818.7 billion, giving it a 3.558% share of the total crypto market and placing it fifth by market value, according to the report. While that figure appears inconsistent with XRP’s prevailing price and typical circulating supply estimates, the broader point remains that XRP continues to trade as a large-cap asset where incremental 'institutional flows' and regulatory milestones can materially affect positioning.

Ultimately, the market is weighing whether Wall Street’s evolving view of XRP—toward a 'payments infrastructure' thesis—can translate into sustained demand. The next catalysts highlighted include legislative progress on crypto market structure and any clearer roadmap from CME Group regarding potential XRP derivatives, both of which could amplify near-term volatility while shaping longer-term institutional participation.

Article Summary by TokenPost.ai

🔎 Market Interpretation

Early “re-rating” narrative: XRP is being framed as transitioning from retail-driven trading toward an institutionally recognized asset, supported by mentions and engagement from major TradFi and market-structure firms.

Price context: XRP trades near $1.34 (+1.1% 24h, -5.72% weekly) and remains ~60% below its ~$3.40 ATH—suggesting sentiment is improving faster than price recovery.

ETF exposure as a signaling event: Reported $153.8M XRP ETF exposure linked to Goldman Sachs is being interpreted as a “mainstreaming” cue—potentially expanding the buyer base and improving liquidity, even if position details are limited.

Tokenization tailwind: Institutional conversations around real-world asset (RWA) tokenization (e.g., Franklin Templeton’s Benji platform surpassing $1B in tokenized MMF assets) are portrayed as indirectly benefiting XRP’s institutional mindshare.

Derivatives groundwork: CME’s 10-K inclusion of XRP (alongside BTC/ETH) is not a product launch, but the market reads it as potential preparatory groundwork for regulated futures/options—often a key step for institutional scaling.

Regulatory framing: The report highlights increasing clarity with XRP described as being treated as a commodity by regulators; legislative timing (CLARITY Act) is flagged as a near-term macro catalyst.

Liquidity/flow nuance: 24h volume (~$1.04B) fell ~53% day-over-day; however, heavy CEX share is interpreted as continued professional participation, especially if ETF-linked demand is accumulating.

Data caveat on market cap: The cited $818.7B market cap appears inconsistent with prevailing price and typical supply assumptions; the article’s primary takeaway is that XRP trades as a liquid large-cap where institutional flows can move positioning.

💡 Strategic Points

Watch institutional confirmation events: Additional disclosures/filings related to ETF exposure, custodial integrations, or bank/payment adoption can strengthen the “institutional re-rating” thesis more than price action alone.

Key technical levels for near-term positioning: Support near $1.31 and resistance near $1.41; a clean break above $1.41 is framed as opening room toward $1.52 (upper Bollinger Band region), ideally with rising volume.

Derivatives as a structural catalyst: If CME (or other regulated venues) lists XRP futures/options, it may enhance hedging efficiency and price discovery, which often lowers barriers for professional risk-managed exposure.

Regulation-driven volatility: Progress (or delays) on market-structure legislation (e.g., CLARITY Act) can create sharp repricing as the market updates expectations on classification, compliance pathways, and addressable investor base.

Utility narrative focus: Ripple’s emphasis on payments throughput and settlement rails (e.g., stablecoin payments integrations) supports a “payments infrastructure” valuation lens rather than a purely speculative one.

Volume confirmation matters: With RSI near ~41 (neutral-to-weak momentum), bullish follow-through is more credible if volume stabilizes or rises—otherwise breakouts may be prone to failure.

Risk management note: Mixed signals (improving institutional narrative vs. declining short-term volume and price below major historical highs) suggest staged entries, defined invalidation levels (below support), and catalyst-aware sizing.

📘 Glossary

Re-rating: A market repricing where an asset’s perceived quality/risk changes, leading investors to assign a higher (or lower) valuation multiple or premium.

TradFi: Traditional finance institutions (banks, asset managers, exchanges) operating under conventional financial infrastructure and regulation.

ETF exposure: Investment exposure achieved via an exchange-traded fund structure rather than direct token ownership; often used for compliance, custody, and operational simplicity.

RWA tokenization: Converting claims on real-world assets (e.g., money market funds, bonds) into blockchain-based tokens for settlement efficiency and programmability.

10-K filing: A U.S. public company’s annual report filed with the SEC; mentions of assets/risks can be interpreted as internal recognition and potential strategic direction.

Regulated derivatives: Exchange-listed instruments (futures/options) overseen by regulators, enabling hedging and institutional-grade risk controls.

Hedging tools: Positions (often derivatives) used to reduce exposure to adverse price moves, enabling larger or longer-term allocations with controlled risk.

Price discovery: The process by which markets incorporate information into prices; deeper markets with derivatives can improve discovery via arbitrage and hedging activity.

RSI (Relative Strength Index): A momentum oscillator (0–100) used to gauge overbought/oversold conditions; ~40 suggests subdued momentum.

Bollinger Bands: Volatility-based bands around a moving average; the upper band can act as a reference for near-term resistance in rising volatility regimes.

CEX: Centralized exchange where users trade through an intermediary platform; often associated with deeper liquidity and institutional access compared to some on-chain venues.

Market structure legislation (CLARITY Act): Proposed rules intended to clarify regulatory oversight and classification in crypto markets, potentially affecting who can participate and how products are offered.

<Copyright ⓒ TokenPost, unauthorized reproduction and redistribution prohibited>

World Foundation has disclosed a new round of WLD token sales as the project continues to expand its identity and wallet network. The nonprofit said its subsidiary, World Assets, Ltd., closed $65 million in over-the-counter transactions with four counterparties during the past week. The update also gave the market fresh details on token pricing, lockup terms, and the planned use of funds.

At the same time, traders are watching whether Worldcoin price can recover toward $0.30 after recent weakness.

World Foundation Reports $65 Million WLD SaleWorld Foundation announced that the sales were completed at an average price of about $0.2719 per WLD. Based on that average, the transaction covered about 239 million tokens. The first settlement took place on March 20, 2026, while the remaining settlement transfers are tied to a designated World Assets multisig wallet.

Also, $25 million worth of the tokens sold are subject to a six-month lockup period. That condition limits immediate resale for part of the allocation. The disclosure followed earlier market attention around large WLD transfers and gave a direct explanation of the latest token distribution activity.

The organization said the capital raised will be used for core operations, research and development, Orb manufacturing, and ecosystem growth. Those spending areas remain central to the project roadmap as it continues to build identity tools and expand access to its services across more regions.

Worldcoin Continues to Build Identity and Wallet NetworkWorldcoin, now branded as World, was co-founded by Sam Altman, Alex Blania, and Max Novendstern. The project combines biometric identity verification with blockchain-based tools to build a proof-of-personhood network. Its ecosystem includes World ID, the WLD token, World App, and World Chain.

World ID remains one of the network’s core products. The system uses the Orb device to verify that a user is a unique human, and the verified identity is stored in the World App. That structure is designed to support digital identity use cases without relying on traditional identity frameworks.

Recent project figures show that World has verified nearly 18 million unique users and has close to 39 million World App users. The network is active in more than 160 countries and is supported by hundreds of active Orbs. The latest weekly figures also point to continued account creation and fresh identity verifications.

Worldcoin Price Prediction: Will WLD Price Hit $0.30 Soon?Meanwhile, the Worldcoin price traded near $0.27, up 3.34% over the last 24 hours after recent losses. Traders are watching whether the token can regain enough strength to test $0.30. Market data placed WLD near the lower end of its recent range, while short-term indicators pointed to a consolidation phase rather than a fresh breakdown. That setup has kept the $0.30 level in focus as the next target.

Technical readings in recent market analysis indicated that the relative strength index was near neutral territory rather than deep oversold territory. The bearish momentum had begun to slow, while Bollinger Band positioning placed WLD price near the lower band support. In that setup, price stabilization above nearby support could support a rebound attempt toward resistance.

Meanwhile, Worldcoin price still faces resistance before any move to $0.30 is confirmed. WLD remains below the major short and long-term moving averages, indicating that the trend has not yet turned. For now, a push above near-term resistance would strengthen the case for a recovery, while a loss of support could leave the token exposed to another move lower.

TLDR: Ethereum’s total transaction count is rising sharply in 2026 despite price remaining largely range-bound in crypto markets. DeFi liquidity is returning to lending, stablecoin provision, and DEX trading after two years of capital outflows and declining yields. The U.S. CLARITY Act introduces a safe harbor for non-custodial developers, removing direct legal liability tied to publishing smart contract code. Network activity is leading price movement in this cycle, pointing to a structurally grounded growth phase rather than speculation-driven momentum. Ethereum is recording clear structural changes in 2026, with total transaction counts rising sharply despite flat price performance.

This divergence separates real network usage from speculation-driven behavior. Capital that left the ecosystem during 2024 and 2025 is now returning to decentralized finance protocols.

Meanwhile, U.S. legislative efforts are reshaping the regulatory environment for on-chain development. Together, these shifts are building conditions that could support sustained structural growth across the Ethereum ecosystem.

DeFi Liquidity Returns to Drive Real Ethereum Network Usage On-chain data shows Ethereum’s total transaction count climbing steadily through early 2026. The growth reflects genuine protocol activity rather than short-term speculative behavior in the broader market. This activity pattern has not been observed at this level since before the 2022 market downturn.

Between 2024 and 2025, regulatory uncertainty and declining yields pushed capital away from DeFi protocols. Those conditions have since shifted, and liquidity is returning to on-chain lending, trading, and stablecoin markets. The recovery appears measured and connected to real protocol use cases.

Stablecoin-based liquidity provision, lending platforms, and decentralized exchange trading are all recording higher volumes in 2026.

These core DeFi segments are recovering in parallel, reflecting authentic demand for on-chain financial services. Growth is distributed across multiple protocol categories rather than concentrated in one area.

XWIN Research Japan noted in a recent post that this cycle differs from prior ones. Network activity is leading price movement, not the other way around.

That distinction points to a more structurally grounded early phase of growth than markets have previously seen.

CLARITY Act Shifts Developer Risk and Sets Stage for Institutional DeFi Entry The U.S. CLARITY Act marks a turning point in how legislators are addressing decentralized finance. It is the first serious effort to formally define how DeFi protocols should coexist within existing financial systems. The legislation is also considered the most substantive regulatory proposal for DeFi made in the U.S. to date.

Before this legislation, developer liability was one of the most serious obstacles to ecosystem growth. Writing and deploying smart contract code carried legal uncertainty that discouraged builders from participating. That environment functioned as a structural brake on DeFi innovation over multiple years.

The latest draft introduces a safe harbor provision specifically for non-custodial developers. Under this provision, publishing code alone does not classify a developer as a financial institution. This removes a meaningful layer of legal exposure from the development and deployment process.

Open issues remain, including KYC scope and restrictions on stablecoin yield products. The regulatory debate has, however, shifted from whether DeFi should be permitted to how it should be integrated. As legal clarity replaces ambiguity, institutions with previously restricted exposure may begin allocating capital toward on-chain platforms.

TLDR: Terraform’s wind-down trust sued Jane Street in February 2026 over alleged insider trading during the 2022 Terra collapse. A Jane Street-linked wallet allegedly withdrew 85M UST after Terraform quietly pulled 150M UST from Curve’s 3pool. The complaint invokes the Commodity Exchange Act and Rule 10b-5, applying traditional anti-fraud law to crypto markets. Binance has already updated market-maker guidelines, banning wash trading, profit-sharing deals, and undisclosed arrangements. Jane Street vs. Terraform Labs is now one of the most closely watched legal battles in crypto history. Filed in Manhattan federal court in February 2026, the lawsuit pits Terraform’s court-appointed wind-down administrator against one of Wall Street’s most sophisticated trading firms.

The complaint accuses Jane Street of insider trading, fraud, and market manipulation during the May 2022 Terra collapse.

Jane Street has denied all wrongdoing. Regardless of outcome, the case is already forcing a hard industry reckoning.

The Clash at the Center of the Case Jane Street vs. Terraform Labs traces back to the catastrophic May 2022 collapse of TerraUSD and Luna. The Terra ecosystem lost roughly $40 billion in market value within days.

The algorithmic stablecoin’s peg to the dollar broke, triggering a death spiral that shook the entire crypto market. That collapse is now the backdrop for a dispute over who knew what and when.

Terraform’s wind-down trust alleges Jane Street used material nonpublic information to exit UST positions at a precise moment.

The complaint claims Jane Street gained that access through direct and indirect contacts with Terraform insiders, including a private chat referred to in reporting as “Bryce’s Secret.”

While Jane Street allegedly unwound exposure, Terraform and the Luna Foundation Guard were buying billions of UST to defend the peg. Those purchases exceeded 1.9 billion UST between May 8 and May 10 alone.

The complaint adds a specific detail that sharpens the allegation considerably. A Jane Street-linked wallet withdrew around 85 million UST from Curve’s 3pool shortly after Terraform quietly pulled 150 million UST from the same pool.

That sequence sits at the core of the insider trading theory. Jane Street disputes this framing entirely and calls the lawsuit “a desperate attempt to shift blame for a multibillion-dollar fraud that Terraform itself created.”

Why This Case Could Reshape Crypto Market Making Jane Street vs. Terraform Labs is significant because it applies established securities and commodities law to crypto market-making conduct.

The complaint invokes the Commodity Exchange Act, CFTC Rule 180.1, and Exchange Act Rule 10b-5. That legal structure treats the alleged behavior not as a crypto anomaly but as conventional fraud and manipulation.

Market makers like Jane Street provide liquidity by continuously quoting prices across trading venues. That role narrows spreads and improves execution for ordinary participants.

The problem arises when a firm’s edge stems from insider access rather than analytical skill or technological capability.

As one industry analysis framed it, the case asks whether sophisticated liquidity providers were “stabilizing the room or trading against it.”

“Crypto has often celebrated sophisticated liquidity providers as the adults in the room,” one widely circulated commentary noted. This lawsuit challenges that reputation directly.

It asks whether some of that activity operated with too little transparency and too much informational privilege, particularly during the most fragile moments of a market crisis.

Regulatory and Industry Consequences Taking Shape The Jane Street vs. Terraform Labs dispute arrives as United States regulators are advancing a more coordinated digital-asset oversight framework in 2026.

The case hands policymakers a vivid, well-documented example of alleged market-maker misconduct. That makes the argument for tighter conduct standards considerably easier to advance publicly.

Binance has already moved in this direction by publishing updated market-maker guidelines. The exchange now bans wash trading, coordinated sell-offs, one-sided liquidity behavior, and guaranteed-profit arrangements with market makers.

Projects must also disclose market-maker identities and contract terms directly to the platform, and violating firms face blacklisting.

Traders and investors should watch whether the case survives early dismissal and what discovery eventually surfaces. They should also track whether regulators cite the lawsuit in formal policy consultations or market-structure proposals.

If that happens, the case’s reach extends well beyond the courtroom. The central question the industry now faces is stark: “when markets are opaque and information is unevenly shared,” are the most sophisticated players stabilizing crypto or exploiting it?

Cover image via U.Today Disclaimer: The opinions expressed by our writers are their own and do not represent the views of U.Today. The financial and market information provided on U.Today is intended for informational purposes only. U.Today is not liable for any financial losses incurred while trading cryptocurrencies. Conduct your own research by contacting financial experts before making any investment decisions. We believe that all content is accurate as of the date of publication, but certain offers mentioned may no longer be available.

The Sunday calm on the crypto market at the end of the week may prove deceptive. The U.S. financial calendar is preparing a series of shocks that will determine the fate of portfolios at the start of April. Holders of Bitcoin and big crypto caps like XRP should fasten their seatbelts. The week is set to become one of the most volatile as March ends.

How Monday's Fed speech and U.S. jobs data could affect BTC and XRPThe first trigger is the opening of U.S. futures today, which may overlap with Monday’s Federal Reserve agenda. As early as tomorrow, Jerome Powell will take the microphone, and his rhetoric will become a direct signal for the market.

In 2026, digital assets are critically dependent on supply forecasts, so any hint of tightening in response to inflation could trigger a sharp reassessment of risk positions. Right now, markets are already pricing in a 50% chance of rate hikes this year.

HOT Stories

XRP and Bitcoin (BTC) Price Action in March, Source: TradingViewTuesday and Wednesday will deliver a double punch to fundamental expectations. On Tuesday, consumer confidence and JOLTS job openings data will test Bitcoin’s resilience. If Americans begin tightening their belts, capital inflows into spot ETFs may dry up, putting March support levels around $65,000 at risk.

On Wednesday, ADP employment data and retail sales will become a moment of truth for XRP. Strong macro data may paradoxically pressure prices, as it gives the Fed a reason to keep the dollar strong, limiting liquidity in cryptocurrencies, especially those heavily tied to retail demand.

You Might Also Like

The climax arrives on Friday with the release of the March job report. In current market conditions, the correlation between cryptocurrencies and the U.S. labor market has reached a peak. If unemployment data comes in worse than expected, a cascade of liquidations may follow, with Bitcoin at risk of a sharp drop, dragging the entire market down.

Developers from Gnosis and Zisk, with backing from the Ethereum Foundation, have proposed a new framework aimed at unifying Ethereum’s fragmented layer-2 ecosystem by enabling rollups to interact seamlessly with each other and the mainnet in a single transaction.

According to an announcement shared with Cointelegraph, the proposed “Ethereum Economic Zone” (EEZ) would allow smart contracts on different rollups to execute synchronously across networks without relying on bridges.

The initiative targets a key trade-off in Ethereum’s scaling strategy, where dozens of layer-2 networks have improved throughput but split liquidity, infrastructure and user activity across separate environments.

If implemented, the framework would let applications share infrastructure across rollups while settling back to Ethereum, reducing duplication and the need for cross-chain transfers.

The project is being developed together with Ethereum researchers and industry participants, with early contributors including infrastructure providers and DeFi protocols exploring a shared standard for interoperable rollups.

Technical details and performance benchmarks are expected in the coming weeks as the group begins outlining how the framework would be implemented and adopted across the broader Ethereum ecosystem.

The proposal also introduces an “EEZ Alliance,” a group of ecosystem participants seeking to coordinate standards and support adoption as Ethereum’s scaling architecture continues to evolve.

Gnosis is an early Ethereum infrastructure developer. Zisk is a zero-knowledge proving project led by Polygon zkEVM creator Jordi Baylina.

Ethereum’s rollup model sparks debate over fragmentation and scalingThe proposal comes amid an ongoing debate within the Ethereum community over the trade-offs of its rollup-centric roadmap. While layer-2 networks have expanded the ecosystem’s capacity, they have also split liquidity and user activity across separate environments.

Data from L2BEAT shows more than 20 active layer-2 networks securing nearly $40 billion in total value, with liquidity distributed across networks such as Arbitrum, Base and Optimism. Rather than consolidating activity, Ethereum’s scaling model has created a landscape of parallel execution environments.

Ethereum layer-2 networks: Source: L2BEAT.comEthereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has raised concerns about the design of some layer-2 networks, pointing to centralized sequencers and trusted bridging mechanisms as potential weak points.

“The original vision of L2s and their role in Ethereum no longer makes sense, and we need a new path,” Buterin said in a Feb. 3 X post, indicating the ecosystem may need to rethink how rollups contribute to Ethereum’s scaling model.

Buterin’s comments drew mixed reactions from layer-2 builders, reflecting a divide over the future role of rollups.

Karl Floersch, co-founder of Optimism, acknowledged that L2s must evolve beyond simple scaling, citing ongoing technical limitations, while Steven Goldfeder, co-founder of Offchain Labs, the developer behind Arbitrum, argued that scaling remains a core function as rollups continue to handle higher transaction throughput than Ethereum itself.

Source: Vitalik ButerinMagazine: Nobody knows if quantum secure cryptography will even work

Cointelegraph is committed to independent, transparent journalism. This news article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and aims to provide accurate and timely information. Readers are encouraged to verify information independently. Read our Editorial Policy https://cointelegraph.com/editorial-policy

In brief Ethereum has completed five major upgrades since switching to proof-of-stake in 2022. Dencun reduced layer-2 fees, while Pectra and Fusaka expanded scaling and staking. Glamsterdam and Hegota are the next major upgrades expected in 2026. Like all blockchain projects, Ethereum is under active development, with upgrades designed to make it faster, cheaper, and easier to use.

Instead of a single “Ethereum 2.0” event, the network upgrades through coordinated changes called hard forks that introduce new features or modify how the protocol operates.

Since the Merge in September 2022, developers have focused on scaling, lowering transaction costs, improving wallets, and making it easier to run nodes and validators. The Ethereum community is also aiming for roughly two major upgrades per year when research and testing are ready.

Ethereum’s rollup-focused scaling strategyEthereum’s scaling plan relies on layer-2 networks. These are separate blockchains built on top of Ethereum that process transactions off-chain and send results back to Ethereum for security and settlement.

Many layer-2 systems use rollups, which bundle multiple transactions together and post them to Ethereum as a single batch, allowing Ethereum to support more activity without the base chain processing every transaction.

As a result, much of Ethereum’s development now focuses on making it cheaper and easier for rollups to use the network.

The six phases of the Ethereum roadmapIn July 2022, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin described the network’s six roadmap phases as the Merge, the Surge, the Scourge, the Verge, the Purge, and the Splurge.

These phases are not single upgrades but broad goals, and several progress in parallel.

The Merge: Completed. Ethereum moved from mining to staking, cutting energy use by roughly 99.95%. The Surge: Ongoing. Focused on scaling Ethereum so rollups can process more transactions at lower cost. The Scourge: Ongoing. Focused on reducing the influence of intermediaries in block production and addressing maximal extractable value (MEV). The Verge: Ongoing. Aims to introduce Verkle Trees and related changes to reduce resource requirements for verifying Ethereum’s state. The Purge: Ongoing. Focused on pruning old data and simplifying the protocol to make Ethereum easier to maintain. The Splurge: A collection of smaller improvements and long-term upgrades that enhance usability and efficiency. Timeline of Ethereum upgradesEthereum’s roadmap is implemented through a series of hard forks.

Completed upgrades

September 2022 — The Merge: Ethereum transitioned from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake, reducing energy use by about 99.95%. Validators now lock up ETH to secure the network. The upgrade changed Ethereum’s security mechanism but did not directly lower fees or increase transaction speed. April 2023 — Shanghai/Shapella: Shapella enabled validator withdrawals. Early validators had locked ETH for years without a withdrawal option. The upgrade introduced partial withdrawals and full exits. March 2024 — Dencun: Dencun introduced proto-danksharding (EIP-4844). It added temporary “blob” storage, creating cheaper space for rollup data so it no longer competes with normal transactions for block space. This significantly reduced costs for many layer-2 networks. May 2025 — Pectra: Pectra combined the “Prague” (execution) and “Electra” (consensus) upgrades. Wallet changes such as EIP-7702 allow standard wallets to behave like smart accounts in some cases, enabling features like batching actions into one transaction or delegating gas payment. The upgrade also raised the maximum effective stake per validator from 32 ETH to 2,048 ETH, letting large operators consolidate into fewer validators, which some fear could increase concentration. Pectra also increased Ethereum’s capacity to handle rollup data. December 2025 — Fusaka: Ethereum’s Fusaka hard fork (short for Fulu-Osaka) activated on mainnet in early December 2025 and focused on data availability, including Peer Data Availability Sampling (PeerDAS), which lets validators verify small samples of rollup data instead of downloading all of it. This supports more rollup data per block without requiring much more powerful hardware and is paired with higher data capacity at the protocol level. Planned and upcoming upgrades

First half of 2026 — Glamsterdam (targeted): Core developers are targeting a mid-2026 upgrade called Glamsterdam as part of Ethereum’s roughly twice-yearly fork cycle, though timing could change. The upgrade focuses on scaling the base layer by enabling more parallel transaction execution through block-level access lists and by integrating proposer-builder separation (ePBS) directly into the protocol to improve block building and throughput. The upgrade is also expected to adjust the cost of state storage to reflect hardware demands better and reduce long-term database growth. Additional proposals include validator rule changes, lower ETH transfer fees, improved transaction logging, and deterministic contract addresses across chains. Node operators and stakers will need to update their clients to support the fork. Second half of 2026 — Hegota: The Hegota upgrade is slated for the second half of 2026, though the final scope is still being defined. A key goal is adopting Verkle Trees, which allow nodes to verify blockchain data with much smaller proofs and reduce state storage requirements. This would move Ethereum closer to a more stateless design, lowering hardware demands and making it easier to run a node. Developers are also working on upgrades such as Fork-choice Enforced Inclusion Lists (FOCIL), aimed at strengthening censorship resistance, and smart-account–focused changes (including frame-style transactions) that would enable features like gas sponsorship and social recovery once the underlying proposals are finalized. Upgrade names and scopes can change during development as proposals are refined before each hard fork.

What Ethereum's upgrades aim to achieveEthereum’s roadmap continues to evolve as research progresses and upgrades are tested on devnets and testnets before mainnet deployment.

This guide will be updated as new milestones are confirmed.

Daily Debrief NewsletterStart every day with the top news stories right now, plus original features, a podcast, videos and more.

18h05 ▪ 3 min read ▪ by Eddy S.

Summarize this article with:

France enters a new financial era with the arrival of 6 Bitcoin and Ether ETNs offered by BNP Paribas. From March 30, 2026, retail clients will be able to invest in these regulated products without directly holding crypto. A breakthrough that could transform the investment landscape in France.

In brief BNP Paribas launches 6 ETNs indexed on Bitcoin and Ether, accessible via regular securities accounts in France from March 30, 2026. The ETNs offer simplified exposure to cryptos, without direct holding, with clear tax treatment and enhanced security. Despite benefits like MiFID2 regulation, investors must consider volatility and credit risks before investing. BNP Paribas Bitcoin and Ether ETNs arrive in France on March 30 ETNs (Exchange-Traded Notes) are financial products indexed on the performance of an underlying asset, here Bitcoin and Ether. Unlike direct cryptos, they are bought via a regular securities account, thus simplifying access for retail investors. To this end, BNP Paribas offers 6 ETNs available from March 30, 2026 for its clients in France, including entrepreneurs and Hello bank users.

BNP Paribas offers 6 Bitcoin and Ether ETNs from March 30, 2026, in France. The main advantage lies in their regulation under MiFID2, offering increased security. Indeed, ETNs avoid the complexities of direct crypto holding, such as wallet management or hacking risks. They also allow clear taxation, integrated within existing securities accounts. An opportunity for investors to diversify their assets while benefiting from the credibility of a major financial institution like BNP Paribas.

Crypto: what should investors know before investing in ETNs? Investing in Bitcoin and Ether ETNs carries specific risks and the main one is credit risk. Indeed, in the event of BNP Paribas’s failure, investors could lose their capital. Moreover, ETNs do not guarantee perfect tracking of the underlying asset, unlike some ETFs. Crypto volatility remains a challenge. While ETNs mitigate some risks, they remain sensitive to market fluctuations.

In the long term, BNP Paribas could extend these products to other markets, or even include other cryptocurrencies. This initiative is part of a broader European trend, with countries like Germany and the United Kingdom also adopting regulated crypto products. For investors, this opens the way to greater diversification but requires a clear understanding of the mechanisms and associated risks.

BNP Paribas Bitcoin and Ether ETNs mark a turning point for crypto investment in France. They offer a regulated and simplified entry point but require increased vigilance against risks. This innovation raises a question: will traditional banks become the new key players of crypto adoption?

Maximize your Cointribune experience with our "Read to Earn" program! For every article you read, earn points and access exclusive rewards. Sign up now and start earning benefits.

Join the program

A

A

Lien copié

Eddy S.

The world is evolving and adaptation is the best weapon to survive in this undulating universe. Originally a crypto community manager, I am interested in anything that is directly or indirectly related to blockchain and its derivatives. To share my experience and promote a field that I am passionate about, nothing is better than writing informative and relaxed articles.

DISCLAIMER

The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed in this article belong solely to the author, and should not be taken as investment advice. Do your own research before taking any investment decisions.

TLDR: Linea’s shift to RISC-V reduces instruction complexity from EVM’s full opcode set to roughly 40 instructions. Every Ethereum hard fork previously forced complete rewrites of Linea’s ZK constraint modules under the old system. RISC-V enables Type-1 Ethereum compatibility automatically through standard compiler tooling, replacing manual constraint work. Linea retains zkC, Vortex, and Arcane in the new stack, preserving years of cryptographic research and production experience. Linea, the Ethereum Layer 2 network developed by ConsenSys, is transitioning from direct EVM arithmetization to a RISC-V-based proving architecture.

The team spent three years building one of the most rigorous ZK proving systems in production. That work produced a 1,000-page specification that became an ecosystem reference.

However, the approach created maintenance challenges that slowed progress. The move to RISC-V marks a strategic reset focused on performance, modularity, and Ethereum alignment.

A Simpler Instruction Set Changes Everything The EVM operates with a complex, dynamic state model that is difficult to translate into mathematical constraints. RISC-V, by contrast, offers approximately 40 instructions and 32 registers.

That simplicity makes traces narrower and allows the prover to start working on proof chunks immediately. The performance gains are structural, not incremental.

Every Ethereum hard fork previously required complete rewrites of Linea’s constraint modules. That maintenance burden consumed significant research capacity.

The team was managing complexity instead of advancing cryptographic performance. Switching to RISC-V removes that cycle entirely.

Type-1 Ethereum compatibility was another major obstacle under the old architecture. Achieving it required implementing Keccak, RLP, and the Merkle Patricia Trie manually inside constraints.

With RISC-V, a standard EVM client compiles directly to a RISC-V binary, and the compiler handles compatibility automatically.

Linea’s cryptographic researcher Alexandre Belling presented the transition at the eth_proofs conference. As Linea posted on X, the team is moving toward “true modularity,” where every layer can be independently benchmarked, audited, or replaced. That was not achievable with the tightly coupled system previously in use.

Our cryptographic researcher @alexand_belling revealed yesterday at @eth_proofs that Linea is moving to RISC-V.

After 3 years of directly arithmetizing the EVM, producing a 1000+ page spec and one of the most rigorous proving system in production, we’re changing course.

Here’s… pic.twitter.com/jXIF5mZaPT

— Linea.eth (@LineaBuild) March 29, 2026

The Ethereum Foundation has also committed to RISC-V as part of its proving layer roadmap. Linea cited this as a deciding factor. Continuing on the previous path would have meant diverging from Ethereum’s long-term technical direction.

What Carries Forward Into the New Stack Linea is not discarding years of work. The team’s constraint-native language, zkC, will be used to write the RISC-V virtual machine. Vortex and Arcane, which handle proving and aggregation, are architecture-independent and transfer directly.

Formal verification is being built into the new system from the start. Constraints are being designed for export to tools like Lean. That approach makes the stack auditable by a much wider audience than before.

Linea also retains full-stack ownership across its infrastructure. That includes the Besu execution client, the Maru consensus layer, the ZK prover, and the gateway. No critical third-party dependencies exist in the architecture.

As Linea noted in a follow-up post on X, direct EVM arithmetization was “difficult to audit without deep cryptographic expertise.”

RISC-V is widely taught, well documented, and supported by a growing developer ecosystem. The shift makes the proving stack accessible beyond Linea’s internal team.

The transition positions Linea as an early mover in a space where the broader Ethereum ecosystem is now converging.

Years of production proving experience now apply to a simpler, faster architecture. The team has indicated more technical details will follow in the coming weeks.

This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.

© Andrew Angelov / Shutterstock.com

Mid-cap growth stocks occupy a specific and often underappreciated position in a portfolio: large enough to have proven their business model, but still growing fast enough to reinvest aggressively rather than return cash to shareholders. Vanguard Mid-Cap Growth Index Fund ETF Shares (NYSEARCA:VOT) is built around exactly that idea, and with $31.7 billion in net assets, it is one of the more serious vehicles for capturing that slice of the market.

What VOT Is Actually Designed to Do VOT tracks a subset of U.S. mid-cap equities screened for growth characteristics, giving investors exposure to companies scaling revenue and earnings faster than peers but not yet at large-cap scale. The fund is not trying to generate income. Its dividend yield is 0.65%, which is effectively negligible. The entire return proposition rests on price appreciation as the underlying companies grow.

The cost to own it is nearly zero. The net expense ratio is 0.05%, meaning Vanguard takes $5 per year on every $10,000 invested. That is a meaningful structural advantage over actively managed alternatives. Portfolio turnover sits at 17%, indicating the fund holds positions rather than trading frequently, which limits tax drag from capital gains distributions.

The sector mix reflects a deliberately broad interpretation of “growth.” Information Technology and Industrials each represent about 19.6% of the fund, with Consumer Discretionary at 14.7% and Financials at 13.3%. This is not a pure tech bet. The mix ranges from nuclear energy infrastructure to fintech to aerospace, making the fund genuinely diversified within its growth mandate.

The largest single holding is Constellation Energy at 3.1% of the portfolio, followed by Robinhood Markets at 2.95% and DoorDash at 2.24%. Those three names alone illustrate the range: nuclear energy infrastructure, retail brokerage, and food delivery.

How the Returns Have Actually Stacked Up The honest comparison investors need is VOT against a simple broad market alternative. Over ten years, VOT has returned 181%. Over the same period, Vanguard’s total market fund (VTI) returned 209%. The broad market, which includes large-cap compounders like Apple and Microsoft, outpaced a dedicated mid-cap growth strategy over the past decade. That context matters when evaluating whether the added exposure is worth the added volatility.

The peer comparison is worth examining. The iShares Russell Mid-Cap Growth ETF tracks a similar universe. Over five years, IWP returned 29% versus VOT’s 24%, and over ten years IWP returned 201% versus VOT’s 181%. The difference comes down to index construction. Investors choosing between them should recognize they are not identical.

The current environment adds complexity. VOT is down 7.75% year-to-date, underperforming VTI’s 4.69% YTD decline. Growth-oriented funds tend to feel more pressure when rates rise, and the 10-year Treasury yield has climbed 0.3% in the past month alone to 4.33%. When investors can earn a guaranteed 4.33% from government bonds, the bar for owning volatile growth equities rises.

The Real Tradeoffs of Owning This Fund Rate sensitivity is structural, not temporary. Growth stocks derive much of their value from future earnings. When discount rates rise, those future earnings are worth less today. With the 10-year yield at 4.33% and rising, VOT’s holdings face a valuation headwind baked into the strategy itself, not a short-term anomaly. Volatility runs higher than the broad market. The VIX sits at 25, up over 20% from a month ago, and mid-cap growth funds amplify that movement. During the April 2025 market stress event, the VIX spiked to 52. Investors with shorter time horizons or lower risk tolerance will feel those swings acutely. The growth premium has not reliably materialized over large-cap exposure. Over a decade, a simple total market fund outperformed this targeted mid-cap growth strategy. Investors accepting the incremental risk of a narrower, more volatile fund should have a clear reason beyond a general expectation that growth outperforms. VOT fits best as a satellite allocation for investors with a long time horizon who want deliberate mid-cap growth exposure beyond what a total market fund provides. Anyone treating it as a core holding should understand they are accepting more volatility for a return profile that has historically trailed the broader market.

Stock investors tend to think that lower interest rates translate into higher stock prices. While that is often true, some companies benefit when interest rates hold steady, and yes, many of those are outside the financial sector.

This is because comparatively higher rates are often a sign of economic health. Moreover, many companies have attained a level of wealth that allows them to invest as they please, regardless of interest rate levels.

In today's environment, the Fed has held off on further interest rate cuts. Knowing that, if one has $5,000 to invest, these two cloud stocks could benefit.

Image source: Getty Images.

Alphabet At first, one might think investors in Google parent Alphabet (GOOGL 2.30%) (GOOG 2.45%) would not welcome the end of interest rate cuts. For all of the focus on new technologies, digital ads remain its primary revenue source, and that could mean lost business if customers have to contend with higher rates.

Nonetheless, Alphabet continues to look to its AI-driven future. Its most visible sign of that is Google Cloud. In 2025, its revenue grew by 36%, far above the 15% for the overall company. This is critical because AI fuels productivity gains. Assuming such gains mean customers have to borrow less money, it could lead to benefits even in today's interest rate environment.

Additionally, investors have focused increasingly on the market-share gains of Google Gemini and the successes of autonomous driving company Waymo. Although these do not show up directly in the company's financials, they look to be growth drivers that could speed the company's transition away from digital ads.

Today's Change

(

-2.30

%) $

-6.45

Current Price

$

274.47

In 2025, Alphabet earned net income of $132 billion, 32% more than in 2024. This and its $127 billion in liquidity position it to invest a staggering $175 billion to $185 billion in capital expenditures (capex) this year, growth that will likely boost growth in the future. Amid Alphabet's increased success, the 27 P/E ratio seems like a relatively low valuation considering its prominent role in the tech industry.

Investors should also remember that Grand View Research forecasts a 31% compound annual growth rate (CAGR) for the AI industry through 2033. That should make it more likely to earn returns from its massive capex investments.

Under current conditions, one can buy 8.5 shares for around $2,460, an excellent starting position in a tech stock that operates largely independently from interest rates.

Amazon Admittedly, one might not think of Amazon (AMZN 3.89%) as a company that welcomes steady interest rates. Indeed, its largest revenue source is online sales, and it "sells everything," so it seems lower rates would be a net benefit.

However, the growth and profit engine of the company is Amazon Web Services (AWS). It accounted for $46 billion of the company's $80 billion in operating income in 2025.

As the leading cloud computing company, it plays a prominent role in the AI field. Moreover, Amazon incorporates AI into its online sales sites and digital ads, and improves productivity in its fulfillment centers.

Such improvements can save money for both the company and, by extension, its customers. Thus, like Alphabet, Amazon will fuel productivity gains that can make activities tied to higher interest rates less significant.

Today's Change

(

-3.89

%) $

-8.07

Current Price

$

199.47

To this end, it plans to spend a staggering $200 billion on capex this year. Fortunately, it holds about $123 billion in liquidity and earned $78 billion in net income in 2025, indicating it can afford this expense without having to turn to the debt market.

Additionally, investors should keep an eye on valuation. Its P/E ratio has fallen to 30. While it compares well to the S&P 500 average of 28, Amazon is a stock that usually commanded P/E ratios above 50 in the recent past, arguably making it a generational buy.

As conditions stand now, a $2,540 investment buys 12 shares in the company. As its massive capex spending starts to deliver returns for the business, its low valuation could fuel a disproportionate benefit for its shareholders.

NEW YORK, March 29, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) --

WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds purchasers of securities of Plug Power Inc. (NASDAQ: PLUG) between January 17, 2025 and November 13, 2025, inclusive (the “Class Period”), of the important April 3, 2026 lead plaintiff deadline.

SO WHAT: If you purchased Plug Power securities during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement.

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the Plug Power class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=1011 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than April 3, 2026. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation.

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually litigate securities class actions, but are merely middlemen that refer clients or partner with law firms that actually litigate the cases. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved, at that time, the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs’ Bar. Many of the firm’s attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, defendants throughout the Class Period made false and/or misleading statements and/or failed to disclose that: (1) defendants had materially overstated the likelihood that funds attributed to the U.S. Department of Energy’s Loan would ultimately become available to Plug Power, and/or that Plug Power would ultimately construct the hydrogen production facilities necessary to receive those funds; (2) as such, Plug Power was likely to pivot toward more modest projects with less commercial upside; and (3) as a result, Plug Power’s public statements were materially false and misleading at all relevant times. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the Plug Power class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=1011 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action.

No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor’s ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-rosen-law-firm, on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rosen_firm or on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rosenlawfirm/.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

-------------------------------

Contact Information:

        Laurence Rosen, Esq.
        Phillip Kim, Esq.
        The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
        275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
        New York, NY 10016
        Tel: (212) 686-1060
        Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
        Fax: (212) 202-3827
        [email protected]
        www.rosenlegal.com

New York, New York--(Newsfile Corp. - March 29, 2026) - WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, reminds purchasers of common stock of PayPal Holdings, Inc. (NASDAQ: PYPL) between February 25, 2025 and February 2, 2026, inclusive (the "Class Period"), of the important April 20, 2026 lead plaintiff deadline.

SO WHAT: If you purchased PayPal common stock during the Class Period you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement.

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the PayPal class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=53653 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action. A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than April 20, 2026. A lead plaintiff is a representative party acting on behalf of other class members in directing the litigation.

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually handle securities class actions, but are merely middlemen that refer clients or partner with law firms that actually litigate the cases. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm has achieved, at that time, the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs' Bar. Many of the firm's attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

DETAILS OF THE CASE: According to the lawsuit, defendants provided investors with material information concerning PayPal's expected financial targets for 2027 alongside the growth trajectory for its core branded checkout segment ("Branded Checkout"). Defendants' statements included, among other things, confidence in PayPal's ability to capitalize on its growth potential through new initiatives to facilitate Branded Checkout growth both in the U.S. and internationally. According to the lawsuit, defendants provided these overwhelmingly positive statements to investors while, at the same time, disseminating materially false and misleading statements and/or concealing material adverse facts concerning the true state of PayPal's salesforce; notably, that it was not truly equipped to execute on PayPal's perceived growth potential and were "too optimistic" as to how easily and expeditiously its staff could change customer adoption. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the PayPal class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=53653 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action.

No Class Has Been Certified. Until a class is certified, you are not represented by counsel unless you retain one. You may select counsel of your choice. You may also remain an absent class member and do nothing at this point. An investor's ability to share in any potential future recovery is not dependent upon serving as lead plaintiff.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-rosen-law-firm, on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rosen_firm or on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rosenlawfirm/.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

-------------------------------

To view the source version of this press release, please visit https://www.newsfilecorp.com/release/290299

Source: The Rosen Law Firm PA

Ready to Announce with Confidence? Send us a message and a member of our TMX Newsfile team will contact you to discuss your needs.

Contact Us

NEW YORK, March 29, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) --

WHY: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, continues to investigate potential securities claims on behalf of shareholders of PennyMac Financial Services, Inc. (NYSE: PFSI) resulting from allegations that PennyMac may have issued materially misleading business information to the investing public.

SO WHAT: If you purchased PennyMac securities you may be entitled to compensation without payment of any out of pocket fees or costs through a contingency fee arrangement. The Rosen Law Firm is preparing a class action seeking recovery of investor losses.

WHAT TO DO NEXT: To join the prospective class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/submit-form/?case_id=51887 or call Phillip Kim, Esq. toll-free at 866-767-3653 or email [email protected] for information on the class action.

WHAT IS THIS ABOUT: On January 29, 2026, PennyMac filed a Current Report with the Securities and Exchange Commission on Form 8-K announcing PennyMac’s fourth quarter and full-year 2025 financial results. The report stated that PennyMac’s “servicing segment pretax income was $37.3 million, down from $157.4 million in the prior quarter and $87.3 million in the fourth quarter of 2024,” as well as “[retax income excluding valuation-related items was $47.8 million, down 70 percent from the prior quarter driven primarily by increased realization of mortgage servicing rights (MSR) cash flows as lower mortgage rates drove higher prepayment activity.”

On this news, PennyMac’s stock price fell $49.78 per share, or 33.3%, to close at $99.92 per share on January 30, 2026.

WHY ROSEN LAW: We encourage investors to select qualified counsel with a track record of success in leadership roles. Often, firms issuing notices do not have comparable experience, resources, or any meaningful peer recognition. Many of these firms do not actually litigate securities class actions. Be wise in selecting counsel. The Rosen Law Firm represents investors throughout the globe, concentrating its practice in securities class actions and shareholder derivative litigation. Rosen Law Firm achieved, at that time, the largest ever securities class action settlement against a Chinese Company. Rosen Law Firm was Ranked No. 1 by ISS Securities Class Action Services for number of securities class action settlements in 2017. The firm has been ranked in the top 4 each year since 2013 and has recovered hundreds of millions of dollars for investors. In 2019 alone the firm secured over $438 million for investors. In 2020, founding partner Laurence Rosen was named by law360 as a Titan of Plaintiffs’ Bar. Many of the firm’s attorneys have been recognized by Lawdragon and Super Lawyers.

Follow us for updates on LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-rosen-law-firm, on Twitter: https://twitter.com/rosen_firm or on Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/rosenlawfirm/.

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

-------------------------------

Contact Information:

        Laurence Rosen, Esq.
        Phillip Kim, Esq.
        The Rosen Law Firm, P.A.
        275 Madison Avenue, 40th Floor
        New York, NY 10016
        Tel: (212) 686-1060
        Toll Free: (866) 767-3653
        Fax: (212) 202-3827
        [email protected]
        www.rosenlegal.com

HomeDividends AnalysisDividend Ideas

SummaryCohen & Steers Select Preferred and Income Fund, Inc., is rated a Buy, driven by its 9.34% discount to NAV and robust dividend coverage.PSF yields 7.79% with monthly distributions, covered 1.22x by NII plus realized gains in 2025, and maintains a diversified portfolio of 317 preferred securities.Banking sector exposure is significant at 54%, with 50% of holdings investment grade and a bias toward long-term maturities.PSF has outperformed its benchmarks over multiple periods but remains sensitive to interest rate risk and CEF market discounts.Looking for more investing ideas like this one? Get them exclusively at Hidden Dividend Stocks Plus. Learn More » designer491/iStock via Getty Images

Do you have any preferred stocks in your portfolio? Preferreds can be a useful source of high-yield income. In addition, preferred dividends are usually more secure than common dividends, as they have stronger coverage and are at a higher

40.32K Followers

Analyst’s Disclosure: I/we have a beneficial long position in the shares of PSF either through stock ownership, options, or other derivatives. I wrote this article myself, and it expresses my own opinions. I am not receiving compensation for it (other than from Seeking Alpha). I have no business relationship with any company whose stock is mentioned in this article.

Disclaimer: This article was written for informational purposes only, and is not intended as personal investment advice. Please practice due diligence before investing in any investment vehicle mentioned in this article.

Seeking Alpha's Disclosure: Past performance is no guarantee of future results. No recommendation or advice is being given as to whether any investment is suitable for a particular investor. Any views or opinions expressed above may not reflect those of Seeking Alpha as a whole. Seeking Alpha is not a licensed securities dealer, broker or US investment adviser or investment bank. Our analysts are third party authors that include both professional investors and individual investors who may not be licensed or certified by any institute or regulatory body.

This post may contain links from our sponsors and affiliates, and Flywheel Publishing may receive compensation for actions taken through them.

© Bastiaan Slabbers / iStock Unreleased via Getty Images

Last summer, Disney (NYSE:DIS | DIS Price Prediction) appeared poised for a comeback. The shares had climbed toward their 52-week high around $125 per share as streaming profits improved and parks attendance rebounded. Yet the rally fizzled. Since then, DIS has steadily declined and now trades around $92. It sits roughly 26% below that summer peak. The drop accelerated sharply in the past week alone, with the stock falling about 7%.

Many headwinds now confront the company and its new CEO, Josh D’Amaro, who officially took the reins on March 18. Linear TV erosion, rising content costs, and softer international park visitation have all weighed on results for months. These pressures have made the hoped-for turnaround suddenly far harder to deliver. And despite how far the shares have already fallen, there is still plenty of room for them to drop more.

Older Headwinds That Predated the New CEO Before D’Amaro’s arrival, Disney faced structural challenges that have dogged the stock for years. The biggest drag remains the accelerating decline of linear television. Networks such as ABC and ESPN continue to lose subscribers and ad revenue at a faster pace than expected. Sports programming costs keep climbing, squeezing margins in the Entertainment segment. Recent quarters showed operating income in this division dropping sharply — sometimes by more than 30% — despite overall revenue stability.

Parks & Experiences, Disney’s most reliable profit engine, also hit headwinds. International visitation has softened amid higher travel costs, inflation, and geopolitical uncertainty. The company has guided to only modest operating-income growth in the segment, tempering earlier optimism. Meanwhile, the streaming business, while turning profitable, still faces high programming expenses and intense competition. Live-action remakes and theatrical releases have delivered mixed to poor results, leaving investors wary of sustained earnings momentum.

These issues created a slow bleed that pushed the stock lower even before leadership changed. High capital spending on parks, tech bets, and content left little cushion when consumer spending on travel and entertainment cooled. Valuation multiples contracted as Wall Street questioned whether Disney could consistently grow earnings amid these secular shifts.

CEO’s Rocky First Week D’Amaro, a longtime parks and experiences executive, stepped into the top job promising a more fan-connected, tech-forward Disney. His first week on the job offered little breathing room. Three unrelated setbacks erupted almost simultaneously, each undermining key growth initiatives he had championed.

First, a planned $1 billion, multi-year partnership with OpenAI collapsed. The deal called for AI-generated short-form videos featuring hundreds of Disney characters on Disney+. OpenAI, though, abruptly shut down its Sora video tool to cut costs ahead of a possible IPO, blindsiding Disney executives. Second, Epic Games — where Disney holds a roughly 9% stake after a $1.5 billion investment — announced 1,000 layoffs. New Fortnite updates failed to lift engagement, clouding the metaverse and gaming roadmap D’Amaro had personally backed by joining Epic’s board as an observer. Third, ABC canceled an already-filmed season of The Bachelorette after domestic-violence allegations surfaced against the lead. The move proved costly and embarrassing for the network side of the business. These blows, totaling potential exposure in the billions, arrived right as investors looked for early signs that D’Amaro could stabilize the ship. Instead, they amplified doubts and fueled the latest leg lower.

Why These Problems May Linger None of these issues appears likely to be resolved quickly. Linear TV’s structural decline will continue for years; cord-cutting shows no signs of slowing. Parks face ongoing macro sensitivity — fuel prices, overseas travel caution, and regional conflicts could keep international attendance uneven. The tech partnerships that faltered were long-term bets; rebuilding similar alliances or pivoting will take time and capital. Content pipelines remain expensive and unpredictable. Analyst models already bake in cautious guidance, with several noting that fiscal 2026 profits will be back-half weighted and vulnerable to execution slips.

Wall Street remains broadly constructive but hardly enthusiastic about the near term. The consensus rating is Moderate Buy, with the average 12-month price target sitting near $134 — implying roughly 45% upside from current levels. Guggenheim, however, lowered its target to $115 after the recent setbacks, citing execution risks under new leadership. Overall, analysts see Disney as undervalued on a long-term basis, but flag near-term volatility as D’Amaro proves himself.

Key Takeaway Disney remains a financially solid company with iconic brands, a strong balance sheet, and durable cash flows. It is the kind of blue-chip name many investors can reliably hold for a lifetime. But that does not mean new buyers should rush in today. Market sentiment still lacks clear confidence that D’Amaro is the executive best equipped to fight these fires. 

There will come a time to buy Disney stock. That moment, however, is not today. Patient investors should wait for clearer evidence that the new CEO can stabilize the core business and restore growth momentum before stepping back into the Magic Kingdom.

Dividend investing is a prime example of a strategy in which long-term perspective and patience can be rewarded. Investors who have the advantage of time can allow payouts from their dividend stocks or exchange-traded funds (ETFs) to compound by reinvesting those dividends, potentially creating substantial stakes when it's time to retire.

Of course, a payout isn't a promise that a stock or ETF will deliver the goods in terms of performance, meaning investors opting for individual equities need to perform some due diligence. The Vanguard Dividend Appreciation ETF (VIG 1.25%), the largest fund in the dividend ETF category, makes life easier for dividend investors.

This Vanguard ETF is proving to be a long-term dividend winner. Image source: Getty Images.

This vaunted Vanguard dividend ETF also puts the odds of success on investors' sides by emphasizing payout growth. It tracks the S&P U.S. Dividend Growers index, which mandates that member companies increase their payouts for at least 10 years. Speaking of 10 years, over the past decade, just three dividend ETFs have outperformed this Vanguard juggernaut. That's it. Just three in a heavily populated ETF segment.

Lean on this ETF for reliable dividend growth Adding to this Vanguard ETF's impressive 10-year run is the following nugget: During that span, the fund delivered annualized returns of 13.63%, well ahead of the 11.59% notched by the S&P 500 Dividend Aristocrats® index, which holds S&P 500 components with dividend increase streaks of at least 25 years. (Dividend Aristocrats® is a registered trademark of Standard & Poor's Financial Services LLC.)

That's not the only reason this is one of the top Vanguard ETFs for equity-income investors. With a dividend yield of just 1.65%, this fund isn't going to win the yield contest at the ETF Fair, but that low number underscores a high level of safety. That is to say, this ETF's methodology helps investors avoid yield traps and potential dividend offenders.

Today's Change

(

-1.25

%) $

-2.66

Current Price

$

210.73

Another point in favor of this ETF is its utility. With 338 domestic large-cap stocks, it can serve as a complement or alternative to basic broad-market ETFs or index funds. Investors with significant exposure to growth stocks can potentially mitigate some of that risk while boosting their income profiles by adding this Vanguard fund to their respective mixes.

A cost-effective dividend ride Like so many Vanguard ETFs, this dividend fund is proof positive that investors don't have to pay up for a good thing. It charges just 0.04% per year, or $4 on a $10,000 investment.

Alone, that might be enough to interest cost-conscious investors. Still, it's worth noting that among the 10 best-performing dividend ETFs over the past decade, this Vanguard fund is by far the most cost-effective. Some of the other stalwarts on that list have annual fees that are 7, 9, or nearly 12 times higher than what the Vanguard dividend ETF charges.

@cargurus' Kevin Roberts explains how $4 per gallon for gas is the ultimate psychological level for Americans at the gas pump — and why it serves as a crucial price point for consumers beyond automobiles. He adds that automobile companies haven't passed on costs to consumers yet, another concern he has down the road.

BEIJING — U.S. pharmaceutical giant Eli Lilly has reached a $2.75 billion deal to bring drugs developed using artificial intelligence by Hong Kong-based Insilico Medicine to the global market.

The agreement will give Insilico $115 million up front, with the remainder subject to regulatory and commercial milestones, along with royalties on future sales, according to the companies' announcement Monday.

Insilico has developed at least 28 drugs using generative AI tools, with nearly half already at a clinical stage, Alex Zhavoronkov, founder and CEO of Insilico, told CNBC. The company went public in Hong Kong in December. Its shares are up more than 50% year-to-date.

"In many ways, Lilly is better than us in some areas of AI," Zhavoronkov said, noting the U.S. pharma giant has "one person" who has brought biology, chemistry and automation under one roof. He added that as part of the deal, Insilico will join Lilly's Gateway Labs community for biotech development. 

The two companies have worked together since signing an AI-based software licensing agreement in 2023. 

"This collaboration allows us to explore novel mechanisms and accelerate the identification of promising therapeutic candidates across multiple disease areas," Andrew Adams, group vice president of Molecule Discovery at Lilly, said in a statement. He called Insilico's AI-enabled discovery "a powerful complement" to Lilly's clinical development.

Eli Lilly CEO David A. Ricks attended a high-level forum in Beijing earlier this month, just weeks after the company announced plans to invest $3 billion in China over the next decade. The company reported that slightly less than 3% of its revenue came from China last year. 

Weekly analysis and insights from Asia's largest economy in your inbox
Subscribe now

Insilico develops its AI outside of China, in Canada and the Middle East, but conducts early preclinical drug development in China based on that AI research, Zhavoronkov said. In addition to reducing research time, he said AI can synthesize molecules more quickly than those discovered using more traditional methods.