Track market-moving stories before they get noisy

Key Points:Gold settled at $4,052.85 Friday, barely higher after Thursday’s 1.94% drop, signaling stabilization, not recovery.Brent fell nearly 4% to $96.78 and yields eased, yet gold buyers showed no appetite to leave the $4,000 area.Rate-hike odds rose to 35.8% for next week and near 80% for September, keeping the dollar firm and gold capped.

PREMIUM

Read what the experts are trading this weekExclusive analysis from FXEmpire top analysts — curated insights you won't find on the free site.

In-depth analysis

Curated reports

Top analysts

Unlock Premium

Gold Steadies but Buyers Are Not Convinced Gold held near $4,050 Friday after Thursday’s sharp selloff but the session felt more like a pause than a turn. Crude pulled back from triple digits, Treasury yields eased from their highest levels since January 2025 and the dollar stalled. That combination stopped the selling. It did not start a recovery. Volume was lighter, the range was tight and neither side showed real commitment heading into next week’s FOMC meeting.

Spot Gold settled at $4,052.85, up $3.07 or +0.08%. The small gain followed Thursday’s 1.94% decline.

Gold has fallen about 23% since the U.S.-backed war with Iran began in late February. Friday showed the metal can stabilize when crude and yields pull back. It did not show that buyers are ready to chase prices higher with the Fed meeting next week and the war still escalating.

Crude and Yields Gave Gold Room but Not a Reason Daily September Brent Crude Oil Futures Brent settled at $96.78, down nearly 4%, and WTI finished at $89.31, down 3% after reports that Pakistan is exploring renewed U.S.-Iran talks with China’s support. The 10-year Treasury yield slipped to 4.681% after clearing 4.70% Thursday. The 2-year eased to 4.333% and the 30-year settled near 5.16%.

Daily US Government Bonds 10-Year Yield Gold responded but only modestly and that tells you something. The metal held together as yields eased but did not show any appetite to break away from the $4,000 area. The S&P Global flash PMI came in at 53.8, below the 54.4 estimate, which helped bring buyers back into bonds. Still expansion but not the strong print that would have kept the yield surge going.

The crude pullback did not come with a real improvement in the supply picture. U.S. forces completed a thirteenth consecutive night of strikes on Iranian targets. Iran is still disrupting Hormuz traffic. The Houthis said they struck Saudi tankers near Bab el-Mandeb this week. The diplomats are discussing talks while the military is still conducting strikes and those two things do not give gold a clean signal heading into the weekend.

Dollar Held Its Weekly Gain Daily US Dollar Index (DXY) The dollar index slipped 0.04% Friday to 101.48 but was still up 0.7% for the week, on track for its strongest weekly gain in five weeks. Dollar-yen traded near 163.84 after touching its strongest level since 1986 on Thursday as Japan’s verbal intervention efforts have done nothing to change the move.

Gold does not need the dollar to collapse but it needs it to stop climbing before a larger recovery gains traction. Friday’s pause was not enough to change the weekly direction and the greenback is still drawing support from the same forces working against gold.

FOMC Decides Whether the Pause Holds Traders are pricing a 35.8% chance of a rate hike at next week’s meeting, up from 12.8% a week ago. September odds are near 80%. A hold remains the likely outcome but the statement and Warsh’s tone matter more than the decision itself. The Fed is sitting on crude near $100, yields at their highest since January 2025 and jobless claims at their lowest since 1969. That is not the backdrop for a dovish shift.

Warsh dropped easing language from the June statement and has been skeptical of forward guidance since he took the chair. A hawkish statement focused on energy costs and sticky inflation keeps yields elevated and the dollar firm. Even a hold with no change in tone leaves the rate trade intact because the bond market is already doing the tightening.

Spot Gold (XAUUSD) Technical Analysis Daily Spot Silver (XAG/USD) When I look at the gold chart several things stand out to me. I clearly see the series of lower tops and the 50-day moving average at $4231.43, which tells me we’re still in a downtrend. However, I also see a secondary higher bottom at $3959.80 and a main bottom at $3942.10 that suggest an elongated support base may be forming.

I also see the market straddling a short-term retracement zone at $4072.40 to $4041.65. Some traders are treating this area as a pivot zone. In other words, bullish over $4072.40 and bearish under $4041.65. Additionally, bullish traders want to see the formation of another higher bottom.

Bearish traders want to see selling pressure build under $4041.65 after the market formed a new lower top at $4166.13 earlier in the week. The retracement zone that stopped the rally was $4162.36 to $4214.34. This zone also stopped the rally at $4202.71 on July 6.

To simplify the current situation, in order to shift momentum to the upside, XAUUSD has to break the long-term pattern of lower tops.

What to Watch Gold enters next week balanced between the relief from lower crude and the risk that the inflation trade comes back on the next war headline.

The downtrend is intact with lower tops and the 50-day average well overhead. The market is straddling the pivot zone that has been defining the short-term direction. Bullish traders need another higher bottom to confirm the base is building. Bears need selling pressure under the lower end of the pivot to reaffirm the pattern of lower tops that has been controlling this market since January. The pattern of lower tops has to break before this market can shift direction.

If you’d like to know more about how to trade gold, please visit our educational area.

Related Articles

Oil News: WTI and Brent Slide on Report of Pakistan-Backed Iran TalksGold (XAU/USD) Price Forecast: Can Gold Break Above $4,203 Resistance?Natural Gas Price Forecast: Bearish Pressure Builds Below Key ResistanceAbout the Author

James Hyerczyk is a U.S. based seasoned technical analyst and educator with over 40 years of experience in market analysis and trading, specializing in chart patterns and price movement. He is the author of two books on technical analysis and has a background in both futures and stock markets.

World Foundation has secured $52.5 million in a private token sale for its native WLD token, with Pantera Capital taking the lead in the investment round. The fundraising saw participation from several major investors, including Bain Capital Crypto, Selini Capital, Susquehanna Crypto, and Eightco Holdings.

Major Backers and Fundraising TermsAlongside Pantera Capital, strategic backers such as Eightco Holdings, which is listed on the Nasdaq stock exchange under the ticker ORBS and already holds significant WLD assets, joined the private sale. World Foundation emphasized that all investors have agreed to a 12-month lock-up of their tokens, aligning interests for the platform’s development over the medium term.

The foundation described this successful closing as the first in its current fundraising series. It has not yet disclosed plans regarding additional upcoming closings or targets for subsequent investment rounds.

As enterprises intensify their focus on secure digital identification and zero-knowledge proof systems, aggregated information and market intelligence tools have become increasingly crucial. Investors and traders seeking seamless portfolio management with real-time updates are gravitating toward integrated platforms. CryptoAppsy, which requires no account creation hassle, combines your crypto investments with real-time prices, detailed charts, and multi-currency portfolio management on a single screen. With this all-in-one financial assistant, you can instantly seize opportunities by setting up smart price alerts, filter news specific to your coins, discover newly listed altcoins without missing them, and always stay one step ahead of the market with critical macroeconomic data such as Fed interest rates.

World ID and Enterprise AdoptionThe newly raised funds will be directed toward expanding the World ID platform, a digital identity solution designed to verify users’ identities while ensuring that personal details remain confidential. The platform’s latest version, World ID 4.0, enables developers to issue secure digital credentials using enterprise-grade zero-knowledge proof technology.

According to the company, a number of established firms—including Zoom, DocuSign, Okta, Vercel, and Tinder—have already integrated World ID into their systems, suggesting growing enterprise demand for advanced verification tools.

Cosmo Jiang, general partner at Pantera Capital, stated that rapid advances in AI technologies have heightened the importance of proof-of-human solutions and cited increasing enterprise interest in platforms such as World ID. He expects the technology to help address challenges related to deepfakes, synthetic identities, and automated user accounts.

Token Structure and Past FundingWorld Foundation clarified that WLD tokens do not constitute equity stakes in Tools for Humanity, the entity responsible for developing both the hardware and software for the World ecosystem. Previous to this round, the foundation has raised approximately $200 million from earlier WLD token sales, while Tools for Humanity has attracted around $240 million in venture capital funding.

The company aims to use its most recent funding to accelerate the adoption and development of its privacy-focused digital identification technology, serving both consumers and enterprises confronting evolving security threats.

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

Tesla (TSLA -2.14%) has continued its habit of providing overly optimistic forecasts, and investors are realizing that the company's prospects may not be as good as they say.

*Stock prices used were the afternoon prices of July 22, 2026. The video was published on July 24, 2026.

Parkev Tatevosian, CFA has the following options: long December 2026 $320 puts on Tesla. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Tesla. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Parkev Tatevosian is an affiliate of The Motley Fool and may be compensated for promoting its services. If you choose to subscribe through his link, he will earn some extra money that supports his channel. His opinions remain his own and are unaffected by The Motley Fool.

Amazon: Sustaining Broad Revenue ScaleAmazon (AMZN -0.70%) primarily generates revenue by selling diverse consumer goods online, operating physical retail stores, and providing cloud computing solutions to global enterprise clients.

It introduced Amazon Supply Chain Services to open its internal logistics network to third-party businesses in May 2026, and it reported a 17% net income margin for the quarter ended March 31, 2026.

Booking: Navigating Cyclical Travel RevenueBooking (BKNG +2.68%) mainly earns revenue by facilitating online travel accommodations, flight bookings, car rentals, and restaurant reservations across its multiple digital platforms for individual consumers.

It integrated new artificial intelligence booking tools into its platforms in mid-2026 while simultaneously managing workforce reductions, and it generated a 23% EBIT margin for the quarter ended March 31, 2026.

Why Revenue Matters for Retail InvestorsRevenue represents the total amount of money a company brings in from selling its goods or services before any expenses are deducted, and it matters because it serves as the foundational indicator of customer demand and overall business growth.

Quarterly Revenue for Amazon and BookingQuarter (Period End)Amazon RevenueBooking RevenueQ2 2024 (June 2024)$148.0 billion$5.9 billionQ3 2024 (Sept. 2024)$158.9 billion$8.0 billionQ4 2024 (Dec. 2024)$187.8 billion$5.5 billionQ1 2025 (March 2025)$155.7 billion$4.8 billionQ2 2025 (June 2025)$167.7 billion$6.8 billionQ3 2025 (Sept. 2025)$180.2 billion$9.0 billionQ4 2025 (Dec. 2025)$213.4 billion$6.3 billionQ1 2026 (March 2026)$181.5 billion$5.5 billionData source: Company filings. Data as of July 24, 2026.

Foolish TakeExamining the revenue trends for Amazon and Booking Holdings reveal the quirks in their businesses. The fourth quarter is the largest in terms of sales for the former, thanks to the winter holiday shopping season, while the latter sees its biggest revenue quarter during the summer travel time.

Both are seeing a trend of strong sales expansion. Amazon’s $181.5 billion in its most recent quarter was a 17% year-over-year increase. Booking’s $5.5 billion represented 16% year-over-year growth.

While revenue trends indicate healthy businesses, Booking warned the U.S. conflict with Iran is expected to hurt sales just as the 2026 travel season is ramping up. This caused the company’s stock to drop to a 52-week low of $150.14 in May. The dip creates a buy opportunity.

Amazon’s share price fell from its 52-week high of $278.56 reached in May due to its massive capital expenditures to provide the tech infrastructure needed to grow its artificial intelligence business. Its spending caused Q1 free cash flow to plunge 95% year over year, but the expense is helping to fuel its AWS cloud computing division’s revenue growth, which rose 28% year over year in Q1. Its share price drop also presents investors with an opportunity to pick up shares.

I think the primary reason people are talking about Netflix (NFLX +1.73%) is because of the price crash.

*Stock prices used were the afternoon prices of July 22, 2026. The video was published on July 24, 2026.

Parkev Tatevosian, CFA has positions in Netflix. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Netflix. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Parkev Tatevosian is an affiliate of The Motley Fool and may be compensated for promoting its services. If you choose to subscribe through his link, he will earn some extra money that supports his channel. His opinions remain his own and are unaffected by The Motley Fool.

A stunning one‑day plunge has put IBM (IBM +3.60%) under the microscope, spotlighting mainframe softness, software timing, and its AI ambitions. Watch the video below to see what this stumble could mean for long‑term investors.

*This video was published on Jul. 23, 2026.

Andy Cross has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Asit Sharma, CPA has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. Jason Hall has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends International Business Machines. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

On Thursday, the Department of Defense awarded Oracle (ORCL -4.27%) a consolidated software agreement covering the entire U.S. military, the Coast Guard, and the intelligence community. The initial award is worth $3.31 billion over five years, and a second five-year option, if exercised, would carry the total to $6.99 billion.

On Friday, the stock fell 4.2%. Shares closed at $114.99 -- 24 cents above the 52-week low of $114.75 they had touched earlier in the same session.

A contract that size usually buys a company at least a good day. This one didn't buy an hour.

And the reason isn't that investors missed the announcement. It's that they have stopped pricing Oracle on the contracts it wins and started pricing it on what winning them costs. I think that shift is the most important thing to understand about this stock right now.

Image source: The Motley Fool.

What the Pentagon actually agreed to The agreement is unusual in scope. Negotiated by the Department of the Navy under the Department of Defense's Enterprise Software Initiative, it is the first direct award covering the department's on-premises Oracle usage. It folds what had been a scatter of separate purchases across the services into a single contract, spanning perpetual and subscription licenses, maintenance, consulting, and software-as-a-service.

The department expects the consolidation to save taxpayers at least $441 million.

Which points at the part that matters for shareholders. Consolidating purchases is not the same as adding them. The Pentagon was already buying this software, and what changed is how it buys it -- fewer contracts, better visibility into the spending, and a smaller bill.

Considering the award against the context of the company, Friday's shrug makes more sense. A $6.99 billion ceiling spread across ten years works out to about $700 million a year. Oracle's fiscal 2026 revenue was $67.4 billion.

So even at the ceiling, the award is worth about 1% of a single year's sales. Of course, a ceiling is the best case and not the plan, so the actual figure is likely smaller.

Further, Oracle spent $55.7 billion on capital expenditures in fiscal 2026. The entire 10-year contract ceiling comes to about an eighth of what the company spent on data centers in twelve months.

What the market is pricing instead It's not surprising that Oracle investors are skittish. Its capital spending figure is up 162% year over year, from about $21 billion in fiscal 2025.

Sure, Oracle's operating cash flow rose to a record $32 billion in fiscal 2026 (the year ended May 31, 2026). But the build-out consumed all of it and then some, leaving free cash flow for the year at negative $23.7 billion.

And the financing bill has followed. S&P Global Ratings cut Oracle's credit rating to BBB- this month, one notch above junk status.

Even more, the company has said it expects to raise about $40 billion through debt and equity this fiscal year, including a share sale of about $20 billion that would dilute existing holders.

But demand has never been the problem here. Fiscal 2026 revenue rose 17% year over year to $67.4 billion, and revenue in the fiscal fourth quarter climbed 21% year over year -- so growth accelerated through the year instead of fading.

Remaining performance obligations, or Oracle's signed contract value that hasn't yet become revenue, finished fiscal 2026 at $638 billion after climbing $85 billion in the fiscal fourth quarter alone. Management has guided for about $90 billion of revenue this fiscal year, growth of about 34%, and for $8.05 in non-GAAP (adjusted) earnings per share.

At $114.99, that puts the stock at about 14 times the earnings management says it will produce this year. Against the 52-week high of $345.72, that same guidance implied more than 40 times. The market has cut what it will pay for Oracle's earnings by roughly two-thirds in a year, while the earnings themselves kept climbing.

Today's Change

(

-4.27

%) $

-5.13

Current Price

$

114.91

Which is why I'd argue the Pentagon award changed very little. Against $638 billion of backlog, $7 billion of ceiling over a decade barely registers.

What would get me to consider buying Oracle stock isn't a bigger contract. It's the financing.

A company that plans to sell about $20 billion of stock, at $115 a share after those shares traded at $345, is not negotiating from strength. So I'd rather own it once that sale is behind it than in front of it. And if Oracle gets the raise done without another leg down, and capital spending flattens while cloud revenue keeps compounding, then 14 times guided earnings could look like an obvious mistake in hindsight.

Still, there are too many red flags for me to consider buying the stock here.

ServiceNow (NOW +7.38%) reported mixed results in its latest investor update.

*Stock prices used were the afternoon prices of July 22, 2026. The video was published on July 24, 2026.

Parkev Tatevosian, CFA has no position in any of the stocks mentioned. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends ServiceNow. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy. Parkev Tatevosian is an affiliate of The Motley Fool and may be compensated for promoting its services. If you choose to subscribe through his link, he will earn some extra money that supports his channel. His opinions remain his own and are unaffected by The Motley Fool.

SAN FRANCISCO, July 25, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- National shareholder rights firm Hagens Berman alerts investors in Roblox Corporation (NYSE: RBLX) that the alleged class period in the ongoing securities class action litigation has been expanded. A new lawsuit now covers investors who purchased or otherwise acquired Roblox common stock between October 31, 2024 through April 30, 2026, inclusive.

National shareholder rights firm Hagens Berman is investigating the legal claims that Roblox and its co-defendants violated the federal securities laws. The firm encourages Roblox investors who suffered substantial losses to submit your losses now.

Class Period: Oct. 31, 2024 – Apr. 30, 2026
Lead Plaintiff Deadline: Aug. 7, 2026
Visit: www.hbsslaw.com/investor-fraud/rblx
Contact the Firm Now: [email protected]
844-916-0895
Roblox Corporation (RBLX) Securities Class Action:

The primary focus of the litigation is on the propriety of Roblox’s disclosures about its commitment toward protecting the safety of young users of its platform and the recent the impact on its business and prospects of the age-check verification rollout aimed at increasing safety within certain social features on its platform. The rollout began in November 2025.

During the Class Period, Roblox and its senior management have assured investors that “safety would be paramount[,]” “building safety into our products has been a huge effort[,]” and “[o]ur approach to safety includes multiple proactive measures as well as parental controls[.]” They have also emphasized that “b]ecause our Platform includes children aged 5 and over, our safety and civility policies are purpose-built to be strict.”

Investors slowly learned the truth through a series of disclosures beginning on October 30, 2025. That day, the Company revealed that it would be instituting enhanced age verification technology globally beginning in January 2026. On this news, the price of the Company’s common stock declined 16% from $133.74 per share to $113.00 per share, wiping out $13 billion in market value.

Then, on April 30, 2026, Roblox revealed a steep deceleration in year-over-year and sequential DAU growth, slashed its 2026 revenue guidance (reflecting ongoing shrinkage in DAU growth), and severely cut its 2026 bookings growth midpoint from 24% to just 10%, investors glimpsed what was really going on.

Roblox said just 51% of its global DAUs age checked and also said that “as a result of age check […] we have seen a reduction in app store ratings, and we believe this may be contributing to a reduction in organic sign-ups that typically flow from app stores.” Roblox also said its lowered prospects are the result of “continued friction” resulting from the age-check rollout.

“We’re focused on when Roblox and its management knew of the adverse consequences of the age-check rollout and whether they intentionally misled investors it,” said Reed Kathrein, the Hagens Berman partner leading the firm’s investigation.

If you invested in Roblox and have substantial losses, or have knowledge that will assist the firm’s investigation, submit your losses now.

If you’d like more information and answers to other frequently asked questions about the Roblox case and the firm’s investigation, read more.

Whistleblowers: Persons with non-public information regarding Roblox should consider their options to help in the investigation or take advantage of the SEC Whistleblower program. Under the new program, whistleblowers who provide original information may receive rewards totaling up to 30 percent of any successful recovery made by the SEC. For more information, call Reed Kathrein at 844-916-0895 or email [email protected] .

About Hagens Berman
Hagens Berman is a global plaintiffs’ rights complex litigation firm focusing on corporate accountability. The firm is home to a robust practice and represents investors as well as whistleblowers, workers, consumers and others in cases achieving real results for those harmed by corporate negligence and other wrongdoings. Hagens Berman’s team has secured more than $2.9 billion in this area of law. More about the firm and its successes can be found at hbsslaw.com. Follow the firm for updates and news at @ClassActionLaw. 

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome in any future case.

Contact:
Reed Kathrein, 844-916-0895

South Korea’s dominant crypto exchange is rolling out the welcome mat for DeFi lending. Upbit will list Morpho (MORPHO) in its KRW trading market on July 25 at 18:00 KST, with Euler (EUL) following one day later on July 26.

The announcement alone was enough to nudge Morpho’s price up 4.8%.

Why these two protocols, and why now Morpho and Euler both belong to a newer generation of lending protocols that take a modular approach, essentially letting users and developers customize lending markets rather than relying on one-size-fits-all pools. This contrasts with legacy monolithic platforms like Aave and Compound, where governance committees set parameters for the entire protocol. Modular lending flips that model, giving market creators more granular control over collateral types, interest rate curves, and risk parameters.

Morpho has been on a tear lately. The protocol raised $175 million in June, pushing its valuation north of $2 billion. Its active deposits now surpass $11 billion, with roughly $4 billion in outstanding loans.

Advertisement

Just days before the Upbit listing, on July 22, Morpho launched a fixed-rate lending feature called Morpho Midnight on the Base mainnet. Fixed-rate lending has long been a white whale in DeFi, something traditional finance takes for granted but decentralized protocols have struggled to implement cleanly.

Euler suffered a major exploit back in 2023, but rebuilt, and its modular lending infrastructure has since expanded to new chains. On July 17, the protocol deployed on HSK Chain, broadening its capacity to offer loans against tokenized assets. Its token, EUL, was trading in the $1 to $1.70 range around the time of the listing announcement.

Morpho’s market cap sat in the $1 billion to $1.3 billion range prior to the listing, placing it roughly between the 50th and 60th largest crypto assets by market capitalization.

The Upbit effect When a token gets a KRW trading pair on Upbit, it gains direct fiat on-ramp access to millions of Korean traders who might otherwise never interact with it. Historically, this has produced sharp, short-term price spikes as new capital floods in. The 4.8% Morpho bump on announcement alone is textbook.

The back-to-back scheduling is notable. Listing both on consecutive days suggests Upbit sees enough demand to justify two DeFi lending tokens in rapid succession, rather than spacing them out to avoid cannibalizing attention.

What this means for investors Morpho’s $11 billion in deposits demonstrates real demand for more customizable credit infrastructure. First, expect increased liquidity for both MORPHO and EUL. KRW pairs tend to generate meaningful volume, particularly in the first few weeks after listing.

Second, Morpho’s fixed-rate lending launch adds a fundamental catalyst that sits underneath the listing hype. If Morpho Midnight gains traction on Base, it could attract institutional borrowers who have historically avoided DeFi’s variable-rate structures.

Euler presents a different risk-reward profile. The protocol’s recovery from the 2023 exploit is notable, and its expansion to HSK Chain shows technical ambition. EUL’s price range of $1 to $1.70 suggests the market hasn’t fully re-rated the token.

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

Bitcoin is consolidating just above the $60K region after a volatile first half of 2026 that saw the asset collapse from its January highs near $96K. The recent rebound off the June lows has restored some short-term optimism, but the price is now stalling directly beneath a heavy confluence of moving-average resistance.

Whether this becomes the start of a genuine trend reversal or simply another lower high inside the broader downtrend will likely be decided over the next several sessions.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: The Daily Chart On the daily timeframe, BTC remains capped below both its 100-day and 200-day moving averages, which are converging near the $70K zone and still slope downward. This is a sign that the higher-timeframe trend has not yet flipped bullish.

Since dropping from $96K in January, Bitcoin has carved out a sequence of lower highs, with the April and May recovery stalling around $82K before rolling over into the June and July low near $58K. However, the asset has since printed a series of short-term higher lows relative to the broader structure amid a clear bullish divergence with the RSI, and the market has reclaimed the $64K mark.

A sustained close above the confluence of moving averages and the $74K supply zone would be the first real evidence that the downtrend is losing control, potentially opening the door toward the prior resistance zone near $82K.

On the downside, failure to build on this recovery would put the $60K zone back in focus as the immediate support. A breakdown below that level would expose the major demand region around $54K, which remains the key higher-timeframe floor.

BTC/USDT 4-Hour Chart The 4-hour chart shows a cleaner picture. Bitcoin bottomed inside the $58K-$60K demand zone in late June and has been climbing steadily within a rising wedge pattern, printing higher lows along the lower trendline.

That advance carried price into the $65K–$67K resistance cluster formed by June highs. However, the latest candles show a rejection from this area, with the price breaking the wedge to the downside and slipping back toward $64K.

The RSI has also cooled from overbought territory near 70 down toward the 40 zone, reflecting fading momentum rather than outright bearish pressure. A rebound and reclaim of the recent highs around the $67K zone would support a push toward $72K–$74K, while continued rejection and decline here would validate the rising wedge breakdown and likely send the price back to retest the $58K support area, which, as things stand, is the more probable scenario.

Sentiment Analysis Looking at Bitcoin’s spot average order size, large whale orders have dominated the tape through the entire decline and subsequent recovery since June. This is a marked shift from the retail-heavy order flow seen back in December 2025 near the $90K region.

This metric tracks the size distribution of executed spot orders, distinguishing retail-sized trades from large block orders typically associated with institutional or high-net-worth participants. Persistent big-whale activity through a drawdown generally signals accumulation rather than capitulation, since larger players tend to scale into weakness rather than chase strength.

The continued presence of big whale orders through both the $58K low and the recovery above $64K suggests accumulation has been underway at these depressed levels. If this behavior persists as price approaches the $72K-$74K resistance, it would lend credibility to the case for a deeper structural reversal. A sudden shift back toward retail-dominated flow near resistance, by contrast, would be a caution flag worth watching, and could point to another potential decline in the coming weeks.

Tags:

Spot Bitcoin ETF‘leri yaklaşık iki haftalık güçlü giriş serisinin ardından sert bir yön değişimi yaşadı. ABD’de işlem gören spot Bitcoin ETF’lerinden son işlem gününde toplam 225,18 milyon dolarlık net çıkış gerçekleşti. Yazının hazırlandığı sırada Bitcoin yaklaşık 65.300 dolar seviyesinde işlem görürken, analistler kurumsal yatırımcıların yükselen ABD Hazine tahvili getirileri nedeniyle daha düşük riskli varlıklara yöneldiğini belirtiyor.

Spot Bitcoin ETF’lerinde Giriş Serisi Sona Erdi Farside Investors verilerine göre, 24 Temmuz tarihinde ABD’de listelenen spot Bitcoin ETF’leri toplam 225,18 milyon dolarlık net çıkış kaydetti. Böylece yaklaşık 1 milyar dolarlık girişin yaşandığı yedi günlük pozitif seri sona ermiş oldu. En büyük çıkış 202,5 milyon dolarla BlackRock’ın iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) fonunda gerçekleşti. BlackRock’ı Bitwise’ın BITB ve Fidelity’nin FBTC fonları takip etti. Günün dikkat çeken tek pozitif gelişmesi ise Morgan Stanley destekli MSBT fonuna yaklaşık 5 milyon dolarlık giriş olmasıydı. Son haftalarda güçlü ETF girişleri Bitcoin fiyatının 67 bin dolara yaklaşmasını desteklerken, son çıkışlar kurumsal yatırımcıların risk iştahında kısa vadeli bir değişime işaret ediyor.

İlginizi Çekebilir: Altın 4 Bin Dolar Direncinde!: Gözler Fed Faiz Kararında!

Bitcoin ETF’lerinden yaşanan çıkışların en önemli nedenlerinden biri, ABD Hazine tahvillerindeki yükselen getiriler olarak gösteriliyor. Gösterge niteliğindeki 10 yıllık ABD Hazine tahvilinin faizi yüzde 4,71 seviyesine yükselerek son 18 ayın en yüksek seviyelerinden birini gördü. Öte yandan 30 yıllık tahvil faizi ise yüzde 5,18’e çıkarak Nisan 2006’dan bu yana en yüksek seviyesine ulaştı. Yüksek tahvil getirileri, özellikle kurumsal yatırımcılar için daha düşük riskle cazip getiri fırsatı sunarken, Bitcoin gibi volatil varlıklardan sermaye çıkışını hızlandırabiliyor.

Jeopolitik Riskler ve Petrol Fiyatları Baskıyı Artırıyor ABD ile İran arasında artan jeopolitik gerilim ve Brent petrol fiyatlarındaki yükseliş de piyasalardaki risk algısını güçlendiren faktörler arasında yer alıyor. Buna ek olarak ABD Başkanı Donald Trump’ın açıkladığı yeni küresel gümrük tarifeleri, ticaret savaşlarının yeniden hızlanabileceği endişelerini artırdı. Bu gelişmeler, enflasyon beklentilerini yükseltirken Fed’in faizleri daha uzun süre yüksek tutabileceği yönündeki beklentileri de güçlendirdi. Yüksek faiz ortamı ise Bitcoin ve diğer riskli varlıklar üzerinde baskı oluşturmaya devam ediyor.

Ekonomist Peter Schiff, ABD’nin hızla büyüyen kamu borcunun yükselen faiz oranlarıyla birlikte sürdürülebilirliğinin zorlaşabileceğini belirtti.

Piyasa uzmanları ayrıca Japonya’nın ABD tahvili satışlarını artırabileceği, Çin’in ise ABD tahvillerindeki payını azaltarak altın rezervlerini büyütmeye devam ettiği görüşünü paylaşıyor. Bu gelişmeler doğrultusunda bazı kurumsal yatırımcıların Bitcoin ETF’lerinden çıkan sermayeyi ABD tahvilleri ve altın gibi güvenli liman varlıklara yönlendirdiği değerlendiriliyor.

Değerlendirme Spot Bitcoin ETF’lerinde görülen 225 milyon doları aşan net çıkış, kurumsal yatırımcıların kısa vadede daha temkinli bir strateji izlediğini gösteriyor. Yükselen ABD tahvil faizleri, jeopolitik riskler ve küresel ekonomik belirsizlikler nedeniyle riskli varlıklardan güvenli limanlara yönelim hız kazanmış durumda. Ancak Bitcoin’in 65 bin dolar seviyesinin üzerinde kalmayı sürdürmesi, uzun vadeli yatırımcı güveninin tamamen kaybolmadığını ortaya koyuyor. Önümüzdeki günlerde Fed’in faiz politikası, tahvil piyasasındaki hareketler ve ETF akışları, Bitcoin fiyatının yönü açısından belirleyici olmaya devam edecek.

Son Dakika kripto para haberleri için hemen tıkla.

Konu ile ilgili yorumlarınızı bize yazabilirsiniz. Ayrıca, bu tarz bilgilendirici içeriklerin devamının gelmesini isterseniz, bizleri Telegram, Youtube ve Twitter kanallarımızdan takip edebilirsiniz.

SAN FRANCISCO, July 25, 2026 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Hagens Berman Sobol Shapiro LLP alerts investors in Verra Mobility Corporation (NASDAQ: VRRM) that a securities fraud class action lawsuit has been filed, and the firm has broadened its ongoing investigation into the company following an abrupt leadership transition. Investors suffering substantial losses are encouraged to contact the firm now.

Key VRRM Class Action Case Details

Class Period: Feb. 24, 2026 – May 26, 2026Lead Plaintiff Deadline: Aug. 4, 2026Contact Hagens Berman to discuss your rights, evaluate recovery options, or seek appointment as lead plaintiff: [email protected] 
844-916-0895              
www.hbsslaw.com/investor-fraud/vrrm Core Allegations in Verra Mobility Lawsuit

The lawsuit alleges that Verra and certain executives made materially false and misleading statements and concealed critical adverse facts regarding the true state of the company's relationship with Avis Budget Group. Defendants allegedly downplayed the risk of major rental car customers replacing Verra’s services with in-house or outsourced alternatives and misrepresented the likelihood of securing an Avis contract renewal.

Alleged Corrective Disclosure and Market Reaction

DateCorrective EventStock Price ImpactMay 26 – 27, 2026Verra discloses the sudden Avis contract termination notice, slashes its 2026 outlook, announces operational restructuring, and initiates an internal review of negotiations-71.0% single-day crash(Plummeting from $13.08 to close at $3.85 on May 27, wiping out roughly $1.4 billion in market cap)

    View our latest video summary of the allegations: youtu.be/FVEw5XACoGA

Hagens Berman’s Expanded Investigation

In addition to investigating the lawsuit’s claims that Verra misled investors about the stability of key revenue streams and contract negotiations, Hagens Berman’s expanded investigation also focuses on the sudden June 1, 2026 departure of long-time CEO David Roberts—ending a 12-year tenure—and whether this leadership vacuum is causally linked to the catastrophic loss of the Avis contract and subsequent disclosures.

“Our investigation is focused on the extent to which and when Verra and its executives knew that renegotiations with Avis were far from constructive, as the May 26 surprise reveals,” said Reed Kathrein, the Hagens Berman partner leading the firm’s investigation.

What Affected VRRM Investors Can Do

If you purchased or acquired Verra Mobility common stock between February 24, 2026, and May 26, 2026, and suffered losses, you have until August 4, 2026, to ask the court to appoint you as lead plaintiff.

To learn more about your legal options, or if you have knowledge that will assist the firm’s investigation, submit your information to Hagens Berman.

If you’d like more information and answers to other frequently asked questions about the Verra case and the firm’s investigation, read more.

Whistleblowers: Persons with non-public information regarding Verra should consider their options to help in the investigation or take advantage of the SEC Whistleblower program. Under the new program, whistleblowers who provide original information may receive rewards totaling up to 30 percent of any successful recovery made by the SEC. For more information, call Reed Kathrein at 844-916-0895 or email [email protected].

About Hagens Berman
Hagens Berman is a global plaintiffs’ rights complex litigation firm focusing on corporate accountability. The firm is home to a robust practice and represents investors as well as whistleblowers, workers, consumers and others in cases achieving real results for those harmed by corporate negligence and other wrongdoings. Hagens Berman’s team has secured more than $2.9 billion in this area of law. More about the firm and its successes can be found at hbsslaw.com. Follow the firm for updates and news at @ClassActionLaw. 

Attorney Advertising. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome in any future case.

Contact:
Reed Kathrein, 844-916-0895

, /PRNewswire/ -- 

Why: Rosen Law Firm, a global investor rights law firm, announces a class action lawsuit on behalf of purchasers of common stock of Planet Fitness, Inc. (NYSE: PLNT) between November 6, 2025 and May 6, 2026, inclusive (the "Class Period"). A class action lawsuit has already been filed. If you wish to serve as lead plaintiff, you must move the Court no later than September 14, 2026.

So What: If you purchased Planet Fitness 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 Planet Fitness class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/cases/planet-fitness-inc/join 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 September 14, 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. 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 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 billions 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, throughout the Class Period, defendants made materially false and misleading statements and/or concealed material adverse facts concerning the true state of Planet Fitness' customer acquisition and marketing metrics. Notably, Planet Fitness' updated marketing messaging was failing to resonate with, and was actively intimidating, its core target demographic of fitness beginners and casual gym-goers. As a result, Planet Fitness was experiencing a significant headwind in net member joins during its peak first-quarter sign-up period that rendered its previously issued fiscal 2026 guidance and long term financial targets unachievable. Instead, Planet Fitness would be required to restructure its marketing strategy, losing the gains they praised from continuing the same marketing campaign, and entirely halt the planned Black Card price increase which sale projections were premised upon. When the true details entered the market, the lawsuit claims that investors suffered damages.

To join the Planet Fitness class action, go to https://rosenlegal.com/cases/planet-fitness-inc/join 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

SOURCE THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P. A.

The US Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) has expanded its sanctions against Iranian businessman Babak Zanjani and his Dot One commercial network, targeting a wider array of firms including ZEDX DMCC, ZedPay, and BZ Diamond. This latest action broadens enforcement beyond cryptocurrency exchanges, extending into gold production, payments, and logistics infrastructure.

Key sanctioned entities and their connectionsZEDX DMCC, a Dubai-based commercial company, stands out among the newly sanctioned firms. The move illustrates the network’s ongoing realignment toward the United Arab Emirates, with Dubai now serving as a commercial center for these operations. Recent research from blockchain intelligence firm TRM Labs highlights that the Zanjani network has steadily shifted activity from short-lived UK companies to more stable UAE-registered entities.

The list also includes ZedPay, recognized as the group’s primary payment platform. TRM Labs had previously linked ZedPay to exchange operations and identified strong ties to Zedxion and related businesses, pointing to payment processing as a core component rather than a peripheral role. Corporate documents and branding further confirmed these relationships.

BZ Diamond DMCC, a precious metals company, is also now under sanctions. Public records connect Bahareh Zanjani to BZ Diamond, with technical infrastructure revealing shared administration among network members. The company’s addition signals OFAC’s willingness to penalize non-crypto businesses if they support sanctioned activity.

ZEDX DMCC, ZedPay, and BZ Diamond have been identified as key elements of the commercial infrastructure supporting Babak Zanjani’s network, according to TRM Labs’ earlier investigations. OFAC’s latest actions reflect the expanding scope of US enforcement against international sanctions evasion.

Mini dictionary: TRM Labs – A blockchain intelligence provider known for tracking illicit activity in crypto networks and providing advanced analytics for government agencies and compliance teams.

Sanctions extend to key network personnelIn addition to targeting businesses, the Treasury sanctioned Mehdi Rezazadeh, the chief executive of ZedPay. Prior research by TRM Labs had identified him as a significant figure within the Zedxion ecosystem. Rezazadeh is reportedly linked to mining investment discussions spanning Africa, Russia, China, and Iran. UK records also show his previous connections to various network-associated companies.

By naming Rezazadeh individually, OFAC signals a shift in enforcement focus, seeking increased accountability for executives as well as their organizations. Reports from TRM Labs indicate a pattern of shared leadership and personnel moving throughout the group’s entities in crypto, payments, and logistics.

Diversified operations and evolving structuresTRM Labs documented how the Zanjani network adapted by cycling through various corporate formations. UK-based companies often became inactive or adjusted their leadership, replaced by new business entities in differing jurisdictions. Despite these legal changes, much of the network’s digital and technical infrastructure stayed remarkably consistent. Domain registrations and technical oversight frequently carried over across renewed companies.

The group’s activities reach beyond cryptocurrency exchanges, touching aviation, rail transportation, commodity trading, travel, and precious metals. While each company appears autonomous, together they form a risk-spreading structure that endures regulatory scrutiny and company closures.

TRM Labs advocates for investigative strategies that go beyond tracking blockchain wallets and exchange activity. The firm recommends combining on-chain analysis with reviews of corporate records and domain registrations, arguing this approach is necessary to understand the full scope of modern sanctions evasion.

The US Treasury’s latest actions reflect what authorities view as a more realistic understanding of complex global financial networks, signaling that enforcement will address not only point-of-sale crypto activity but also broader commercial and technical support systems underpinning sanctioned operations.

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

Figma: Sustaining Consistent Revenue GrowthFigma (FIG +5.85%) generates revenue by selling subscriptions to its collaborative, browser-based design and prototyping software.

It introduced new timeline-based animation tools at its annual conference in June 2026, and it reported approximately -43% net income margin for the quarter ended March 31, 2026.

IBM: Navigating Revenue FluctuationsInternational Business Machines (IBM +3.60%) delivers comprehensive technology solutions, consulting services, and hybrid cloud infrastructure to global enterprise clients.

It disclosed a shortfall in preliminary results on July 14, 2026, while recording a 15% EBIT margin for the quarter ended June 30, 2026.

Why Revenue Matters for Retail InvestorsRevenue shows investors the total money coming into a business before expenses are deducted. Tracking this figure helps investors understand the total scale and top-line growth trajectory of a business.

Quarterly Revenue for Figma and International Business MachinesQuarter (Period End)Figma RevenueInternational Business Machines RevenueQ3 2024 (Sept. 2024)$198.6 million$15.0 billionQ4 2024 (Dec. 2024)$216.9 million$17.6 billionQ1 2025 (March 2025)$228.2 million$14.5 billionQ2 2025 (June 2025)$249.6 million$17.0 billionQ3 2025 (Sept. 2025)$274.2 million$16.3 billionQ4 2025 (Dec. 2025)$303.8 million$19.7 billionQ1 2026 (March 2026)$333.4 million$15.9 billionQ2 2026Not yet reported$17.2 billion (period ended June 2026)Data source: Company filings. Data as of July 24, 2026.

Foolish TakeVenerable IBM’s revenue towers over newcomer Figma’s sales, but that’s to be expected given the former has existed for over a century. IBM has transformed its business substantially over that time. It now focuses on the fast-growing artificial intelligence sector, providing software and cloud infrastructure for customers seeking to adopt AI, as well as an army of consultants to help clients navigate how to do so.

IBM’s volatile sales trend speaks to the choppy nature of selling hardware and consulting services. Its zSystems line of computer mainframes incorporating AI were a hot seller when they launched last year, but in the second quarter of 2026, Z sales were down 42% year over year. This combined with missing Wall Street’s Q2 revenue expectations amid the AI boom understandably worried investors, sending IBM shares to a 52-week low of $199.19 on July 23.

Figma’s revenue trend speaks volumes about the success of its business. The company’s Q1 sales of $333.4 million represented amazing 46% year-over-year growth as it continued to produce quarterly increases. That trend is expected to extend into Q2 with a forecast of revenue between $348 million to $350 million.

Figma’s design products are clearly winning over customers. Yet its stock fell to a 52-week low of $16.60 in April after Wall Street became concerned AI’s ability to quickly generate images on the fly would take business away from Figma. The company’s sales trend reveals this isn’t happening, and in fact, its business is thriving.

Robert Izquierdo has positions in Figma and International Business Machines. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Figma and International Business Machines. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

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

© zimmytws / Shutterstock.com

The average retiree who claims Social Security at 62 accepts a lifetime benefit cut of up to 30% below full retirement age. Wait until 70, and each year of delay adds roughly 8% to the monthly check. That single trade, eight years of patience for a permanently larger benefit, is the entire premise of the dividend bridge.

The Income Target: What You Are Actually Bridging A worker whose primary insurance amount would pay $2,000 per month at full retirement age receives roughly $1,400 monthly at 62 and about $2,480 monthly at 70. To skip claiming early and preserve the larger check, that retiree needs to replace roughly $30,000 per year in gross income from 62 to 70. Add the 2.8% COLA that applied in 2026 and the target rises modestly each year, but $30,000 is the working number.

The math never changes: income target divided by yield equals capital required. What changes is the risk you accept to hit that yield.

Conservative Tier: 2.5% to 3.5% Yield This is dividend royalty. Johnson & Johnson (NYSE:JNJ | JNJ Price Prediction) yields about 2.1%, backed by 64 consecutive years of increases and a $1.34 quarterly payout raised in April 2026. Procter & Gamble (NYSE:PG) yields roughly 2.9% and just declared a $1.0885 quarterly dividend payable August 17, 2026, extending a payout record stretching back to 1890. Coca-Cola (NYSE:KO) sits at about 2.5% after raising its quarterly dividend from $0.51 to $0.53 in 2026.

Blend these to a 3.5% yield and $30,000 divided by 0.035 equals about $857,000 of capital. You sleep well, the dividends grow, and the share prices tend to appreciate. JNJ has returned roughly 169% over ten years; KO, 145%. The catch is the capital requirement.

Moderate Tier: 5% to 7% Yield Here the portfolio pivots into REITs, higher-yield pharma, preferred shares, and covered-call equity funds. Realty Income (NYSE:O) yields roughly 5.0%, pays monthly, and has delivered 670 consecutive monthly dividends with 114 quarterly increases. AbbVie (NYSE:ABBV) yields about 2.6% but has grown its payout from $0.40 quarterly in 2013 to $1.73 in 2026, and pairs well with higher-yield holdings.

Assume a 6% blended yield across REITs, BDCs, and covered-call ETFs. $30,000 divided by 0.06 equals $500,000. You need far less capital, but distribution growth slows, some strategies cap upside, and inflation matters more when payouts stall.

Aggressive Tier: 8% to 12% Yield Leveraged covered-call funds, mortgage REITs, and high-yield credit push distributions into double digits. At a 10% blended yield, $30,000 divided by 0.10 equals $300,000. The tradeoff is blunt: net asset values often erode, distributions can be cut, and the retiree is spending down the asset while calling the payout “income.” For a strategy meant to protect the option of a delayed Social Security claim, that erosion defeats the point.

Why the Low-Yield Path Usually Wins by 75 Compare the growth engines. JNJ’s quarterly dividend rose from $0.66 in 2014 to $1.34 in 2026. That is the compounding a 12% yielder with a flat or declining distribution never delivers. A retiree who bridges 62-to-70 with a 3.5% dividend growth portfolio arrives at 75 with a larger Social Security check, likely appreciated principal, and rising dividend income. A retiree who bridges with a 10% yield-and-erode portfolio arrives at 75 with the same Social Security check but a smaller nest egg.

The 10-year Treasury at 4.6% and the national 12-month CD average of 1.7% frame the choice: safe cash cannot cover a $30,000 gap on $300,000 of capital, so the dividend tier decision is unavoidable for anyone serious about delaying.

Three Moves Before You File Model your actual PIA at 62, 67, and 70. Use the SSA’s estimator and calculate the exact monthly gap you need to bridge, not a round number pulled from an article. Compare 10-year total return of a dividend growth fund against a 10% yield fund. Include distributions and NAV change. The gap is usually wider than expected. Stress-test the tax bill in your bracket. Qualified dividends, REIT distributions, and covered-call ROC are taxed differently, and CD interest can push more Social Security into the taxable zone once you do claim. Contact [email protected] for any questions or corrections.

Update (July 25, 4:39 pm UTC): This article has been updated to include a response from Wise.

Payments company Wise will to change its strategy for applying for a charter license with the US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) to one “under a GENIUS Act framework,” the legislation to regulate stablecoins in the country.

According to a Thursday notice from Wise, the company plans to submit a new application for a national trust bank charter under a GENIUS Act framework. Investment banking group William Blair said that Wise will likely not shift its position on payment stablecoins with the new OCC application, despite being denied a charter to establish a national trust bank on Tuesday.

“Wise is focused on lowering the cost of cross-border transactions, agnostic of the rail,” said William Blair on the move to apply under GENIUS.

The OCC said in its rejection that the company could not show it had an effective Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Countering the Financing of Terrorism (CFT) compliance program and had “other illicit finance activity risks.”

The GENIUS Act, signed into law in July 2025, offers a framework for payment stablecoin providers in the United States, pending finalized regulations to be approved by federal agencies. However, regulators missed a crucial deadline last week to provide guidance on implementation of the law before its effective date in January 2027.

Following the passage of the stablecoin bill, the OCC has approved several applications from digital asset companies for national trust charters, including Circle, Ripple Labs, Crypto.com and Coinbase.

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.

Wise, a leading global cross-border payments provider, will submit a revised application for a U.S. national trust bank charter. This new move follows the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s (OCC) recent rejection of Wise’s initial request, but the company remains committed to growing its payment infrastructure and services in the U.S.

Regulatory roadblocks and the GENIUS ActWise originally filed for a national trust bank charter in June 2025, aiming for direct access to U.S. payment systems and a Federal Reserve Master Account. However, since the initial application, regulatory conditions have changed significantly. The OCC found that Wise’s plan no longer aligned with new Federal Reserve guidelines, which now restrict access to accounts for uninsured trust banks. As a result, Wise’s earlier strategy became unviable under current regulations.

Mini dictionary: OCC (Office of the Comptroller of the Currency), an independent bureau of the U.S. Department of the Treasury that regulates and supervises national banks and federal savings associations.

The regulatory landscape shifted further with the passage of the GENIUS Act on July 18, 2025. This law established a federal framework for payment stablecoins in the U.S. Wise now considers a fresh application under the GENIUS Act to be the most effective path forward, focusing on compliance with the newest requirements.

Wise stated it will not issue its own stablecoin and instead aims to improve interoperability between conventional payment systems and blockchains, in order to streamline global money flows and connect digital assets with traditional financial infrastructure.

The company emphasized the growing importance of stablecoins throughout the financial industry, noting that increasing numbers of companies are looking for infrastructure that enables integration of digital assets into established payment systems. Wise believes its technology and expertise are well placed to facilitate this transition.

Ongoing growth and service continuityCurrently, Wise serves 18.9 million active users globally. Over its fiscal year 2026, Wise processed $243.5 billion in cross-border payment volume and reported $2.5 billion in net revenue. The company continues to hold money transmitter licenses in 48 U.S. states and four territories, ensuring its ability to operate regardless of the OCC’s recent decision.

MetricFiscal 2026Active users18.9 millionCross-border payment volume$243.5 billionNet revenue$2.5 billionMoney transmitter licenses48 states, 4 territoriesAccording to investment firm William Blair, Wise’s recent actions do not represent a significant strategic shift. The company’s core objective remains lowering the cost of international transactions, while maintaining a neutral position toward stablecoin adoption.

Wise also outlined steps to enhance compliance and strengthen safety programs after past regulatory concerns referenced by the OCC in its July 21 letter. The company reported improvements in reporting systems and an expansion of compliance resources since its previous application.

Broader implications for the stablecoin sectorThe GENIUS Act has attracted attention from other financial firms to the stablecoin sector as well. Wise’s updated application is seen as a potential test case for the new regulatory system, with both market participants and regulators closely monitoring the developments.

In the meantime, Wise continues to advance its main business focus—helping individuals and organizations move money internationally with greater efficiency. The company’s next steps may provide important insights into bridging the gap between traditional finance and digital assets under the evolving U.S. regulatory environment.

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

NEW YORK, /PRNewswire/ -- 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 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 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 billions 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

SOURCE THE ROSEN LAW FIRM, P. A.

When SpaceX went public, the only place most of the world could short it was Hyperliquid, where a perpetual future tracked the IPO of the decade tick for tick, and a whale ran a $14 million leveraged short no brokerage would have offered. Equity perps are the first crypto product Wall Street cannot ignore, and regulators cannot place, and this is the audit of what they actually are.

Summary

Hyperliquid, the dominant on-chain derivatives venue with roughly 70% of decentralized perpetuals volume and around $1.3 billion in annualized fees, now lists perpetual futures on stocks, with its SpaceX contract as the breakout case. The SPCX perp traded the IPO of the decade before, during, and after the listing, ran to a $228.74 high alongside the stock’s $225.64 peak, tracked its 48% collapse, and hosted positions like a 10x-leveraged $14 million short paired with a 40x $60 million Bitcoin short, structures no retail brokerage offers. Equity perps deliver what the equity market rations: 24/7 trading, high leverage, short exposure without locates or borrow fees, and access for the global majority locked out of US brokerage accounts, all against an oracle price and a funding rate instead of shares. The product’s honesty requires its limits: holders own no equity, no dividend, no claim, only a synthetic exposure whose integrity depends on oracle quality and venue solvency, on platforms mostly outside US jurisdiction. The regulatory placement is unresolved by design: synthetic equity exposure with no share changing hands sits between the SEC’s securities world and the CFTC’s derivatives world, on infrastructure neither reaches, and the CLARITY-era jurisdiction map does not cover it. The most interesting trade of June was not in a stock. When SpaceX completed the largest IPO in history and its shares began their 48% descent, an anonymous trader on Hyperliquid, the blockchain derivatives venue, was running a combined position no prime broker would have blessed and no retail app could have executed: a $60 million Bitcoin short at 40x leverage paired with a $14 million short on SPCX at 10x, a pure bet on the deflation of the year’s twin euphorias, placed on rails that never close, require no borrow, and asked no questions.

The instrument making it possible, the equity perpetual future, is the crypto industry’s quiet invasion of the stock market: a synthetic contract that tracks a share price via oracle, settles in stablecoins, charges longs or shorts a funding rate to keep the peg, and trades around the clock at leverage American brokerages reserve for institutions, on venues most of the world can reach with a wallet.

Hyperliquid’s SPCX contract, born before the IPO priced and still trading through the stock’s every convulsion, is the product’s proof of concept and its perfect case study, and this piece uses it as one: what equity perps actually are, what they genuinely fix, what they quietly are not, and why the regulatory map, freshly redrawn for crypto by the CLARITY era, has no square for them at all.

The machine: how a stock trades without shares An equity perpetual is three mechanisms in a trench coat, and each deserves one honest paragraph.

The first is the oracle. No share of SpaceX exists anywhere in the system; the contract’s reference is a price feed, assembled from the listed market’s data during exchange hours and from the perp’s own supply and demand when Nasdaq sleeps. This is the design’s power and its softest point in one: the feed makes the synthetic possible, and every question about the product’s integrity is ultimately a question about the feed, its sources, its manipulation resistance, its behavior when the underlying halts, gaps, or, as with SPCX in its lockup-shadowed churn, moves violently on thin news.

Perp venues have run oracle machinery for crypto assets for years at scale; equities add wrinkles crypto never had, official closes, halts, corporate actions, and the young history of equity perps includes the learning curve those wrinkles imply.

The second is the funding rate, the elegant trick that replaces ownership. Because nothing forces a perp’s price toward the stock’s, the contract pays a periodic transfer between longs and shorts; whichever side is heavier pays the other, so deviation from the reference price becomes expensive and arbitrage pulls the peg tight.

The funding rate is also the product’s honest price tag: holding a leveraged equity view costs whatever the crowd on your side must pay, which in euphoric stretches, SPCX’s first week, say, made long exposure meaningfully expensive, a cost structure entirely unlike owning shares and closer to a rolling options position. Traders who read funding as information, crowding, sentiment, squeeze risk, get a signal equity markets deliver only obliquely.

The third is the venue itself. On Hyperliquid, order book, matching, and liquidations run on-chain, collateral is stablecoin, and the exchange’s economics, roughly $1.3 billion in annualized fees at about 70% of the on-chain perps market, fund the token model this publication has covered as crypto’s clearest value-accrual machine. Equity perps arrived through the venue’s expansion of builder-deployed markets, the mechanism opening listings beyond crypto pairs, and the roster now reaches into stocks, indices, and commodities.

The plumbing matters because it defines the counterparty question: an equity perp holder’s real exposures are the oracle, the liquidation engine, and the venue’s solvency, not any transfer agent or clearinghouse, and those exposures live, for most such venues, offshore and on-chain, exactly where the traditional system’s guarantees do not.

What it fixes, honestly The bull case for equity perps is not hype; it is a list of the equity market’s genuine rationing decisions, each of which the perp un-rations.

Time: stocks trade 32.5 hours a week; the news that moves them does not. The SPCX perp priced Starship’s failed test, the Cursor-acquisition backlash, and every lockup rumor in real time, weekends included, while shareholders waited for Monday.

For an asset class whose defining events, launches, in this case, literally happen at all hours, continuous price discovery is not a gimmick, and the perp’s around-the-clock tape has already become, for SpaceX watchers, the leading indicator the listed market opens to.

Access: a US brokerage account requires US residency, documentation, and, for anything beyond cash equities, suitability gates; the global majority is structurally excluded from the market that prices the world’s most important companies. A perp venue asks for a wallet.

Whatever one thinks of the compliance implications, and they are the final section’s subject, the distributional fact is real: equity perps are the first instrument through which a trader in Lagos or Karachi shorts an American IPO on the same terms as a fund in Connecticut.

Shorting: the equity market’s short path, locate the borrow, pay the fee, face the recall, buy-in risk, and, for a fresh IPO like SPCX with its 911.5 million share lockup, borrow scarcity that makes shorting practically institutional-only, is friction by design. The perp deletes all of it: shorting is symmetric with longing, no locate, no borrow, no recall, which is why the instrument’s clearest use case so far is exactly the whale trade this piece opened with, and why fresh IPOs, where the listed short is hardest, and opinion is hottest, are where equity perps found product-market fit first.

Our own coverage of SPCX’s descent noted the perp and the tokenized versions tracking the collapse in lockstep with the stock, a three-venue price war in which the crypto rails, not the exchange, offered the only practical retail short.

Leverage and capital efficiency complete the list; 10x on a stock position with stablecoin collateral is a different capital regime than Reg-T margin, and together the four fixes explain the product’s trajectory better than any narrative: equity perps grow wherever the traditional market’s rationing binds hardest.

What it is not, and where it cannot be placed The audit’s other half is shorter and sharper, because the perp’s limits are as structural as its fixes.

It is not equity. No dividend, no vote, no claim in bankruptcy, no share: the holder owns a cash-settled bet on a number, and the number’s connection to the company runs entirely through the oracle.

In calm markets the distinction is pedantic; in the scenarios that define instruments, a halt, a delisting, a corporate action, an oracle failure, a venue insolvency, it is everything, and the young product’s stress record is thin precisely where equities generate their worst stresses.

The tokenized-equity reckoning this publication audited after the SpaceX IPO, products scrapped, buyers refunded, late vintages underwater, is the adjacent cautionary tale: synthetic exposure to private and newly public equity is exactly where the gap between marketing and mechanism has already cost real money.

And it is not placeable, yet, on any regulatory map. A perpetual future on a security, offered without the security, settles into a jurisdictional void the American system has spent two years mapping everything except: the SEC governs securities and the platforms that touch them; the CFTC governs derivatives on commodities; the CLARITY framework, whose implementation this publication has covered in detail, allocates digital assets between them, and a synthetic stock position on an offshore chain answers to neither cleanly.

US platforms do not offer equity perps for precisely this reason; offshore and on-chain venues offer them to everyone else, and the enforcement perimeter, as with every offshore derivatives wave before, reaches the marketing, the fiat ramps, and the US-person access, not the protocol.

The honest forecast is the one the product’s own growth writes: volumes concentrating offshore, a widening data gap between the priced world and the regulated one, and eventually, once the instrument prices something systemic, a jurisdictional fight that will make the prediction-market war look tidy, because at least an event contract admits what it is. An equity perp is a security’s price without the security, the purest regulatory-arbitrage instrument crypto has produced, and the system it arbitrages has not yet noticed the size of the hole.

The venue underneath: why this happened on Hyperliquid The product’s story is inseparable from its venue, because equity perps did not emerge on a neutral substrate; they emerged on the one platform whose economics and architecture made them almost inevitable, and the causation teaches something about where crypto’s product frontier actually lives.

Hyperliquid’s qualifications are three. Liquidity first: at roughly 70% of on-chain perpetuals volume, with open interest and depth that dwarf its decentralized rivals, it is the only venue where a $14 million single-position equity short meets a book that can absorb it, and derivatives listings live or die on day-one depth.

Machinery second: a fully on-chain order book, matching engine, and liquidation system, hardened by years of crypto perps at scale, generalizes to any oracle-priced underlying, which is precisely what the builder-deployed markets mechanism formalized, opening the listing function beyond the core team and letting the equity roster grow at ecosystem speed rather than committee speed.

And incentives third: the venue’s fee engine, the roughly $1.3 billion annualized flow whose token mechanics this publication has covered as crypto’s most direct value-accrual machine, means every new asset class listed compounds the platform’s core loop, giving the ecosystem a structural hunger for exactly the kind of frontier products that traditional venues must clear through legal departments first. Where a regulated exchange asks whether it may list synthetic SpaceX, a permissionless listing mechanism asks only whether anyone will trade it, and the answer, June showed, was emphatic.

The concentration cuts both ways, and the audit owes the caveat. A product category living overwhelmingly on one venue inherits that venue’s specific risks: its oracle choices become the category’s oracle standard, its solvency becomes the category’s systemic question, and its governance, including the validator-set concentration questions that have followed the platform since launch, becomes the category’s political exposure.

Traditional equity infrastructure disperses these risks across exchanges, clearinghouses, and transfer agents by regulatory design; the equity-perp stack concentrates them by architectural choice, trading resilience for velocity. That trade has run in crypto’s favor for two years of calm-to-volatile markets. The scenario that would reprice it, a venue-level failure during an equity stress event, with synthetic positions on halted underlyings and no clearinghouse behind the book, is the category’s true tail, unpriced precisely because it is unprecedented, and anyone sizing positions in these instruments should price the venue before pricing the view.

What to watch The roster’s growth. Which equities get perps next, and how fast listings follow retail heat. The pattern so far, fresh IPOs and locked-up names where shorting is hardest, is the tell for where the product’s edge actually lies, and the first perp on a halted or delisted name will write the stress-test chapter early.

Funding rates as the new sentiment tape. SPCX perp funding, and its successors’, is becoming the cleanest continuous read on positioning in names the options market covers only during business hours. Expect equity desks to start quoting it, quietly, the way they came to watch crypto funding.

The basis triangle. Perp versus listed stock versus tokenized versions: three prices for one exposure, on three legal architectures. Divergences in stress are where the instruments’ true differences surface, and the first sustained break will teach the market which venue leads and which merely follows.

The first US regulatory contact. An enforcement action, a no-action letter, or a CLARITY-era rulemaking that names synthetic equity exposure would end the placement void. Until then, the product grows in the gap, and the gap is the story.

One historical rhyme completes the audit, because the market has seen this movie’s structure before. Contracts for difference, CFDs, ran the same play against the equity market two decades ago: synthetic exposure, high leverage, no ownership, offered offshore to retail the regulated market rationed out, and they grew into a permanent, regulated, and repeatedly scandal-scarred fixture of European and Asian trading, banned outright for US retail to this day.

Equity perps are CFDs rebuilt on crypto rails, with three genuine upgrades: transparent on-chain positioning instead of dealer books, funding rates set by market balance instead of broker discretion, and self-custodied collateral instead of client-money accounts, and one genuine downgrade: the absence of any regulatory perimeter at all, even the imperfect one CFDs eventually accepted.

https://x.com/cryptodotnews/status/2066521860502683882

The CFD precedent predicts the arc: rapid offshore growth, a defining blowup that forces structure, then bifurcation into regulated products where allowed and gray markets where not. It also predicts the endgame nobody in crypto says aloud: the traditional exchanges, watching a parallel equity market price their listings around the clock, will eventually either extend their own hours, list their own perpetual-style products, or buy the venues, because that is what incumbents do to successful arbitrage.

The instrument’s deepest significance may be exactly that pressure: equity perps are the market’s demonstration that the 32.5-hour trading week is a policy choice, not a law of nature, and demonstrations of that kind have a way of ending with the incumbents adopting what they could not suppress.

Frequently Asked Questions What is an equity perpetual future? A derivative that tracks a stock’s price without any share existing in the system: an oracle feeds the reference price, traders post stablecoin collateral for leveraged long or short exposure, and a periodic funding-rate payment between longs and shorts keeps the contract’s price pegged to the stock’s. It trades continuously, including when the underlying market is closed, and settles in cash, never in shares.

Why did SpaceX’s perp become the breakout example? Because it offered what the listed market could not. The SPCX contract traded through the IPO of the decade around the clock, tracked the stock from its $225.64 peak through its 48% collapse, and enabled short exposure, including a documented 10x, $14 million short paired with a 40x Bitcoin short, at a moment when the fresh IPO’s lockup made traditional borrowing scarce and practical shorting nearly impossible for retail.

What do equity perps genuinely improve on? Four rationing decisions of the equity market: hours, with 24/7 trading against a 32.5-hour week; access, with a wallet replacing residency-gated brokerage accounts for the global majority; shorting, with no locates, borrow fees, or recall risk; and capital efficiency, with high leverage on stablecoin collateral. The product grows wherever these constraints bind hardest, which is why new IPOs led adoption.

What does a holder of an equity perp actually own? A cash-settled position on a number, nothing more: no dividend, no vote, no bankruptcy claim, no share. The exposure’s integrity depends on the oracle’s accuracy, the venue’s liquidation engine, and the platform’s solvency, typically on offshore, on-chain infrastructure outside traditional investor protections. In halts, delistings, corporate actions, or oracle failures, the differences from equity ownership become decisive.

Who offers these products, and can US users trade them? On-chain derivatives venues, with Hyperliquid, at roughly 70% of decentralized perpetuals volume and about $1.3 billion in annualized fees, as the category leader through its builder-deployed markets. US platforms do not list equity perps because of their unresolved legal status, and offshore venues restrict US persons formally; practical access, as with every offshore derivatives generation, varies with enforcement of the perimeter.

How do funding rates work, and why do traders watch them? Whichever side of the contract is more crowded pays a periodic fee to the other, making deviation from the reference price costly and pulling the peg tight. The rate doubles as a sentiment gauge: expensive long funding signals crowded bullishness and squeeze risk, and because it prints continuously, it offers positioning information about a stock even while the listed market sleeps.

Where do equity perps sit legally? In a void. They are synthetic exposure to securities offered without securities, on infrastructure the SEC does not reach, in a derivative form the CFTC’s commodity jurisdiction does not clearly cover, and the CLARITY-era framework allocating digital assets between the agencies does not address them. That placement question, unresolved and growing with the product’s volumes, is the category’s defining regulatory story.

Should traders use them? That is an individual decision this article does not make. The honest framing: equity perps are powerful instruments whose advantages, hours, access, symmetric shorting, and leverage are real, and whose risks, oracle dependence, venue solvency, funding costs, legal ambiguity, and the absence of every traditional investor protection, are equally real and mostly unpriced until stress arrives. Position sizes that assume the venue is a brokerage misunderstand the instrument. This is educational analysis, not investment advice.

Disclaimer: This article is for information and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Derivatives trading with leverage carries substantial risk of loss; products described may be unavailable or restricted in your jurisdiction, and figures reflect data available at the time of writing. Nothing here is a recommendation to trade any instrument. Always do your own research. Information is accurate as of July 24, 2026.

Hyperliquid [HYPE] has extended its losses to 22% from the July peak of $73, effectively breaking a key trendline as analysts turn defensive. According to renowned crypto analyst Michael Van de Poppe, it was time to be “passive” on the altcoin.

$HYPE has lost the uptrend unfortunately, which means that I’m going to be more passive on a potential trade. Last time this occurred, price fell from €50 to €15.

Source: Michael Popple/X In other words, Poppe preferred more of a slow scaling if the pullback extends. Think of it as a daily average cost (DCA-ing) strategy where one allocates small amounts periodically to the altcoin. 

Another analyst and trader, Dylan Loomer, popularly known as Trader Mayne on X, echoed a similar stance and projected a potential 38% pullback to the monthly demand zone near $35.

No idea if we get down to the monthly demand zone, but if we do, I think buying HYPE as low as you possibly can is a good idea. $35 would be a gift, but I’ll start scaling in earlier than that.

In the first half of 2026, HYPE outperformed the market and became traders’ darling, partly fueled by the early West Asia crisis. So, what happened to its bullish catalysts in H2 2026?  

3 factors driving HYPE selling pressure First, the institutional demand from U.S Spot HYPE that fueled the explosive rally to a new all-time high in June has faded in July.

Since mid-July, the products have remained negative for the longest time since their debut. They’ve been bleeding an average of $1M per day (~20K HYPE) since the 10th of July. 

Source: Glassnode Venture firms like a16z and Multicoin Capital (who unstaked a $120M HYPE this week) further intensified institutional sell-offs. 

Are weaker buybacks hurting HYPE? Besides, trading activity has slowed down since June, cutting revenue by 3x from a weekly average of $21M to $7M. Subsequently, this has impacted the pace of HYPE buybacks by 3x, from 318K HYPE in early June to 108K tokens in late July. 

This was about 20K HYPE on a daily average, meaning the buyback program should be enough to absorb the ETF sell pressure. 

Source: Hyperscreener  It’s likely that HYPE is currently reacting to the Multicoin Capital sell-off headline story and broader market sentiment.

In fact, smart money’s net positioning was negative, with over $150M betting against its recovery. 

Source: Hyperindex Overall, traders are actively shorting the Hyperliquid [HYPE] amid declining buybacks and ETF and VC firms’ sell-off. But some analysts believe deeper corrections could offer new discounted buying opportunities. 

Final Summary HYPE has dropped 22% from $73 to $57 as analysts warn that the pullback could deepen  U.S spot HYPE ETF sell-offs have hit $1M in weekly average, while buybacks decreased by 3x, further weighing on the altcoin’s value.   

Bitcoin faced renewed selling pressure after being rejected for a second time at the $67,000 level, raising the prospect of heightened short-term downside risk. The leading cryptocurrency has now pulled back toward $64,000, with several key supports now being closely monitored by traders.

Weekly stochastic RSI signals prolonged bottoming phaseBitcoin’s weekly stochastic RSI has entered oversold territory, but analysts warn that this is unlikely to mark an immediate market bottom. According to More Crypto Online, earlier market cycles in 2017-2018 and 2021-2022 also saw the stochastic RSI trend in the lower zone for several months before a definitive low was established.

During those cycles, Bitcoin’s price either moved sideways or continued to decline after the indicator turned oversold, delaying the recovery phase. The current chart comparison indicates that the present bottoming process may stretch into late 2026, with a speculative low projected in the $45,000 to $55,000 range.

“Previous cycles took roughly 12 months to move from the major peak into the final low. The current pattern suggests continued volatility and possible further downside before a sustained recovery emerges,” said More Crypto Online, highlighting the indicator’s limitations in calling exact bottoms.

The stochastic RSI tracks price momentum rather than absolute value and may remain suppressed for extended periods during market consolidations. As a result, its current oversold reading does not guarantee a further decline; price can also consolidate or start to recover while the indicator stays low.

For traders, this setup points to a potentially drawn-out bottoming period. A shift to a more positive outlook would require Bitcoin to establish higher highs and higher lows, followed by a successful defense of major support levels.

Mini dictionary: Stochastic RSI, a technical momentum oscillator that measures the level of the RSI relative to its range over a set period, is often used to identify overbought or oversold market conditions and potential trend reversals.

Sellers remain active at key resistance levelThe $67,000 Point of Control has acted as a significant resistance zone for Bitcoin. Analyst Cryptorphic highlighted that the previous rejection at this level was followed by a 13% drop, underscoring its importance for near-term price action.

The Point of Control is defined as the price area seeing the highest trading volume within a selected range. Bitcoin’s recurring failure to sustain levels above $67,000 implies that sellers continue to dominate in this area.

Maintaining support above key levels is critical. A confirmed breakout above $67,000 could shift momentum and open the path to higher targets, while continued weakness keeps support zones at $62,000, $60,000, and $58,000 in focus for potential downside tests.

For now, the local market structure remains bearish as Bitcoin trades below $67,000. Should negative momentum increase, price could revisit the late-June low near $58,000. The previous decline from $67,000 to that region represented an almost 14% move.

LevelRoleNotes$67,000Point of Control / ResistanceRepeated rejection, key decision point$64,000Current areaRecent retreat zone after rejection$62,000SupportNear-term support level$60,000SupportPotential downside target$58,000SupportLate-June low, previous 14% drop after rejection$45,000-$55,000Cycle low (speculative)Analyst projection for possible broad baseIf buyers can reclaim and maintain momentum above $67,000, the rejection would be invalidated, and the path toward $71,000 and higher could reopen. Until then, the risk of further losses persists.

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

The US Department State Department has launched a program to “advance diplomatic efforts on digital freedom and freedom of expression” using a Bitcoin (BTC) advocacy organization as a partner.

In a Friday X post, the Bitcoin Policy Institute (BPI) said that it would be a founding partner in the US State Department’s Freedom Tech Excellence Program (FTEP), alongside Palantir Technologies, Anduril Industries and the Victims of Communism Memorial Foundation. According to the organization, the program will allow its employees “to work alongside state department experts and defend digital freedoms around the world.”

“FTEP brings private sector talent to the Department for limited-term assignments to advance diplomatic efforts on key issues including online freedom of expression, privacy-enhancing technologies, countering digital surveillance, and responsible AI governance,” said the State Department.

Source: Bitcoin Policy Institute

Since its creation as a “non-partisan research and advocacy” organization in 2021, the BPI has endorsed attempts to codify US President Donald Trump’s executive order to establish a strategic crypto reserve into law. As of July, lawmakers in the US Congress had not passed legislation to follow Trump’s March 2025 executive order.

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.

Alex Thorn, head of firmwide research at Galaxy Research, analyzed Strategy’s newly announced Digital Credit Capital Framework as the company seeks solutions for its capital-structure issues amid sizable unrealized losses on its Bitcoin holdings.

Strategy’s capital move: What’s changing?Strategy, listed on Nasdaq under the ticker MSTR, recently filed an 8-K revealing its Digital Credit Capital Framework. The company, which is well known for its significant Bitcoin reserves totaling 847,363 BTC, faces unrealized losses reported to be approximately $14 billion.

According to the regulatory filing, the framework now allows Strategy to sell up to $1.25 billion worth of Bitcoin. It also officially institutes a USD reserve policy, updates dividend terms for STRC preferred shares, and authorizes individual $1 billion share repurchase programs for both preferred stock and MSTR common shares.

The board allocated $2.55 billion of cash reserves, limiting these funds strictly to paying preferred dividends and servicing debt interest. At the company’s current annual outflows of about $1.76 billion, this reserve would cover roughly 17 months. A full $1.25 billion Bitcoin sale would extend total liquidity to around $3.8 billion, supporting about 26 months of obligations.

In May, Strategy executed its first-ever Bitcoin sale, liquidating 32 BTC for around $2.5 million to fund a dividend payment.

JPMorgan has advised Strategy to focus on raising capital by selling shares rather than liquidating its Bitcoin holdings. Alex Thorn at Galaxy Research said the core question is whether these new measures genuinely fix the company’s capital-structure risks, or merely push them into the future.

Strategy’s leadership, including Chairman Michael Saylor, considers the overhaul essential for financial resilience, with Saylor emphasizing, “digital credit requires liquidity, discipline, and active capital management.”

Mini dictionary: Strategy (MSTR): Strategy is a publicly traded company known for its large-scale Bitcoin investments and active role in digital asset capital management.

Market reaction and investor outlookInvestor interest in the new framework was reflected in the stock market. MSTR shares rose 12.6% to $92.68 on the Monday after the announcement, then climbed past $100 by Wednesday. This represented a 27% gain from the previous Friday’s closing price. STRC preferred shares also moved higher, ending at $87.87 on July 3.

AssetPre-announcement pricePost-announcement price% ChangeMSTR Common Shares$78.62$100++27%STRC Preferred SharesNot stated$87.87N/ABenchmark Equity Research reaffirmed its positive stance by maintaining a Buy rating for MSTR and setting a price target of $570 for the stock.

Benchmark Equity Research views the framework favorably and kept its Buy rating in place, citing enhanced financial flexibility for Strategy.

Other players: Strive and SATAStrive, another company aiming to build a capital structure backed by Bitcoin, cautioned investors this week against assuming it would issue new SATA preferred shares at the $100 par value due to market volatility.

Jeff Walton, Strive’s chief risk officer, reported that the short interest in SATA shares rose by 1 million in the 30 days ending June 30, while the annualized borrowing cost for the shares jumped from 6.1% to 68.6% during the same period.

Mini dictionary: SATA preferred shares: These represent specialized stock issued by Strive, offering fixed dividends and priority over common shares, but may be affected by short-selling and market dynamics.

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