Tesla's focus on AI and robotics, despite impacting operating income, signals a strategic shift towards innovation-driven growth.

The post Tesla beats Q3 earnings estimates as AI spending weighs on profits appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The resurgence in tech stocks and Bitcoin's rise highlight a renewed risk appetite, potentially stabilizing crypto markets amid volatile equities.

The post Bitcoin climbs to $84,737 as tech stocks rebound and risk appetite returns appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Collins' alignment with Trump may weaken her support among independents, potentially shifting Maine's Senate race dynamics toward Democrats.

The post Collins’ 96% alignment with Trump scrutinized in tight Maine Senate race appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Meta's AI investment strategy may strain cash flow, but its substantial reserves and potential AI-driven revenue growth offer long-term promise.

The post Meta posts first negative free cash flow in over a decade as AI spending soars appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

AI-assisted vulnerability discovery highlights the urgent need for rapid patching and collaboration to secure critical web infrastructure.

The post OpenAI model helps researchers uncover severe PHP flaws affecting most websites appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Three Companies Have Notified the SEC of Intention To Start Tokenized Stocks Trading

Three companies have notified the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission of their plans to operate tokenized securities venues following a new rule, according to the top regulator. 

Tokenized Stock Venue, Perpetuals.com, and OKX have all submitted plans to operate by allowing trading of tokenized stocks, the SEC said in a Wednesday announcement. 

Along with the Intercontinental Exchange, crypto exchange OKX was the first to file with the regulator to debut tokenized securities trading on a new platform, OKXICE. 

The SEC in September said it was offering a five-year exemption to platforms that facilitate trading of tokenized stocks. Regulators like the SEC are pushing ahead with regulating the crypto space despite lawmakers blocking major digital asset legislation in September. 

Tokenized stocks are the latest example of firms wanting to utilize Bitcoin’s underlying technology to help upgrade traditional finance. By putting stocks on the blockchain, traders can operate 24/7, according to proponents. 

The SEC said Wednesday that just because the firms are on the list, doesn’t necessarily mean they meet all the requirements for the rule. 

Wall Street’s top regulator is now very pro-crypto under U.S. President Donald Trump. SEC Chair Paul Atkins has said the regulator wants to “update” how it watchdogs securities, and “modernize them in the age of blockchain and crypto assets.”

Atkins has said that the regulator wants the U.S. to be on track to be the “crypto capital of the world.” 

Under the previous Democratic Joe Biden administration, the SEC was hostile towards the crypto industry and hit major companies — including Coinbase and Kraken — with lawsuits. The regulator attracted criticism for so-called regulation by enforcement. 

But under Trump, that has changed: the Republican campaigned on a ticket to help the crypto space and has signed a number of laws and executive orders aimed at helping the digital asset space. 

Traditional finance titans like BlackRock and Franklin Templeton for years have used blockchain rails to tokenize money funds.

In January, the S&P 500 gave crypto platform Trade[XYZ] the green light to debut a new derivative contract on decentralized exchange Hyperliquid, giving traders the ability to trade the stock index 24-7. 

This post Three Companies Have Notified the SEC of Intention To Start Tokenized Stocks Trading first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Standard Chartered Signs Agreement To Acquire Crypto Custodian Zodia Custody

British multinational Standard Chartered will buy digital asset custodian Zodia Custody, months after signing an agreement. 

A statement from London-based Zodia Custody on Wednesday said that the deal will see the company’s service integrated into Standard Chartered’s existing digital asset custody activities. 

Standard Chartered is expanding its crypto-related offerings worldwide. Earlier this month, it said it had plans to offer crypto custody services for institutional clients in Singapore. It already offers the service in the UAE, Luxembourg, and Hong Kong. 

“As institutional adoption of digital assets accelerates, custody is increasingly becoming part of the global banking landscape,” Zodia Custody CEO Richard Clark said. 

He added: “Zodia Custody has built a strong business with the specialist expertise and capabilities to meet the needs of institutional clients. 

“Bringing that expertise together with Standard Chartered’s global reach and established banking platform will strengthen its digital asset custody offering and provide institutions with greater access to trusted, regulated custody services worldwide.”

Ying Ying Tan, global head of securities services and digital assets at Standard Chartered, added that the deal “further deepens our digital asset custody portfolio and reinforces our position as a leading provider of digital asset services globally.”

Zodia Custody shareholders in May approved Standard Chartered’s offer to buy the company. 

The company works to custody bitcoin and other digital assets for institutional and asset managers. 

Standard Chartered has delved deeper into the crypto space in recent years. In 2025, the bank set up a trading desk for bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies in London, making it one of the first global banks to enter spot cryptocurrency trading.

It has since debuted custody and trading services in countries around the world. 

Top banks worldwide are debuting or planning to debut crypto custody services, with State Street, Standard Chartered, U.S. Bank, and Citigroup all committing to direct crypto custody over the past 18 months.

Crypto custody is often a starting point for banks moving into the digital asset space. BNY Mellon in 2022 became the first major U.S. bank to offer digital asset custody services.   

This post Standard Chartered Signs Agreement To Acquire Crypto Custodian Zodia Custody first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Beyond HODLing: How Bitcoin-Backed Loans Can Unlock New Financial Opportunities

For long-term Bitcoin holders, accessing capital has traditionally presented a difficult choice: sell a portion of their holdings or leave that value untouched.

Bitcoin-backed lending offers another option, allowing holders to borrow against their Bitcoin while maintaining exposure to the asset.

In a recent video shared on X, SALT Lending highlighted how borrowers can use Bitcoin-backed loans for more than simply accessing cash, outlining several ways liquidity can support broader financial goals.

Turning Bitcoin Holdings Into Financial Opportunity

Rather than selling Bitcoin to fund a major purchase or investment, borrowers can pledge their holdings as collateral to access capital while preserving their long-term position.

One potential use case is real estate. Bitcoin holders looking to purchase property may be able to leverage their holdings for liquidity instead of liquidating Bitcoin to fund the transaction.

Business expansion presents another opportunity. Entrepreneurs and business owners can potentially use Bitcoin-backed loans to fund operations, hire employees, or pursue growth opportunities without selling their Bitcoin or giving up equity in their businesses.

SALT Lending also pointed to investment diversification as another possible application. Borrowers may use loan proceeds to access other markets or investment opportunities while retaining exposure to Bitcoin.

Another consideration is tax planning. Selling appreciated Bitcoin can trigger capital gains taxes, while receiving proceeds from a properly structured loan generally does not constitute a taxable sale. However, individual tax circumstances vary, and borrowing introduces additional financial risks.

A Strategic Approach to Bitcoin Liquidity

The broader takeaway from SALT Lending’s video is that Bitcoin-backed borrowing should be viewed as a financial planning decision rather than simply a way to access cash.

Real estate purchases, business investments, and other opportunities all require borrowers to weigh the potential benefits of liquidity against borrowing costs, repayment obligations, and the risks associated with Bitcoin’s price volatility.

Because Bitcoin-backed loans are secured by a volatile asset, significant price declines can increase loan-to-value ratios and potentially require additional collateral or trigger liquidation, depending on the loan terms.

For borrowers with a clear financial strategy, however, the ability to access capital without immediately selling Bitcoin creates another avenue for putting their holdings to use.

SALT Lending provides Bitcoin-backed lending solutions designed to help eligible borrowers access liquidity while maintaining their long-term Bitcoin exposure.

As Bitcoin continues to evolve beyond an asset primarily associated with buying and holding, lending may play an increasingly important role in how holders manage their finances and pursue opportunities without necessarily selling their Bitcoin.

SALT Lending is the Official Liquidity Sponsor of BMTV. Learn more about borrowing against your bitcoin and explore SALT’s BMTV offer at https://saltlending.com/bmtv/?utm_source=bmtv&utm_medium=article&utm_campaign=52783658-BMTV%20article&utm_term=BMTV.

Disclaimer: SALT Lending is a paid sponsor of BMTV and serves as BMTV’s Official Liquidity Sponsor. This article is sponsored content and does not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of Bitcoin Magazine. The information provided is for promotional purposes and should not be considered financial advice. Readers are encouraged to conduct their own research before making any investment decisions related to Bitcoin or other financial products mentioned herein.

This post Beyond HODLing: How Bitcoin-Backed Loans Can Unlock New Financial Opportunities first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Josh Plischke.

Bitcoin Magazine

Kalshi Pushes Deeper Into Crypto Derivatives With Bitcoin-Backed Margin Loans

Kalshi is doubling down on its bid to become the regulated U.S. home for crypto perpetual futures, pairing a new bitcoin-backed lending arrangement with digital-asset custodian BitGo alongside a distribution deal that will put its perpetual contracts in front of Webull’s more than 6 million customers.

Bloomberg first reported Wednesday that customers of Kalshi Prime, the company’s U.S.-registered futures commission merchant, will be able to borrow against digital assets held at BitGo and use the proceeds to fund margin positions on perpetual futures traded on Kalshi’s main exchange. 

Under the tri-party structure, loans will be issued by Kalshi Katalyst, a lending affiliate of Kalshi Prime, and secured against assets held at BitGo Bank & Trust, the firm’s federally chartered trust bank.

Eligible collateral will include bitcoin, ethereum and stablecoins deemed compliant with the GENIUS Act, with additional custodians expected to join Kalshi’s network over time. 

Prime CEO Jeff Bandman told the outlet the product was designed with crypto-native traders in mind, including those already active on unregulated offshore perpetuals venues and large holders who would rather not sell their bitcoin to fund futures positions. 

He also pointed to unexpected demand from businesses, such as Latin American firms that run their operations on U.S. dollar stablecoins.

The move targets a segment where the company has acknowledged a structural disadvantage against Polymarket, its offshore, blockchain-based rival, which has long catered to crypto whales and trading firms that prefer to keep their capital in digital assets. The two platforms have been racing to build out perpetuals since the spring.

Webull debuting crypto-linked perpetual futures via Kalshi rails

The BitGo arrangement landed a day after Webull announced Tuesday that eligible U.S. customers will be able to trade perpetual futures on its platform beginning in November, starting with bitcoin and a handful of other crypto assets. 

The contracts will trade on KalshiEX LLC, Kalshi’s CFTC-regulated designated contract market, and clear through Kalshi Klear LLC, its derivatives clearing organization. Access will initially be limited to customers already approved for futures trading through existing Webull Futures accounts, with broader availability expected before year-end.

Webull Group President and U.S. CEO Anthony Denier said in the company’s release that perpetual futures saw more than $90 trillion in global volume in 2025 and that American investors should be able to access them through a regulated platform. 

These two announcements extend a product buildout for the company, which secured CFTC clearance for the first U.S.-regulated bitcoin perpetual in late May and went live with the contract in early June, before adding gold and silver perpetuals in September and a US500 stock index perpetual earlier this month. 

The expansion comes amid mounting state-level legal pressure, with Utah becoming the latest state to sue Kalshi on Monday over what it alleges is illegal sports gambling, following New York’s similar action against Polymarket last month.

This post Kalshi Pushes Deeper Into Crypto Derivatives With Bitcoin-Backed Margin Loans first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoin Nears $85,000 as SpaceX Earnings Reignite Risk Appetite

Bitcoin’s price rose above $84,500 on Wednesday as investors flooded back into risk-on assets — particularly tech-related stocks. 

The leading cryptocurrency was recently priced at $84,461 after rising nearly as high as $84,588 earlier on Wednesday morning in New York. 

Over a 24-hour period, the coin is up 2%. Zooming out over a seven-day timeframe and it is up 3%. 

Bitcoin’s rise comes as SpaceX reported surging revenue growth in its third quarter, and its owner, Elon Musk, talked of a potential SpaceX-Tesla merger.

SpaceX — which debuted in June on the Nasdaq in the biggest initial public offering ever — reported third-quarter revenue on Tuesday of $14.6 billion, up 161% from the previous year and smashing estimates. 

Technology stocks rallied on the news. Bitcoin has in the past risen with risk assets and been correlated with the Nasdaq. 

But this year, the OG cryptocurrency has moved with gold as the so-called debasement trade becomes hot again. The trade is when investors buy certain assets to hedge against currency being devalued. 

The dollar slid in value in August after the U.S. Treasury Department said it would more than double the size of its government debt repurchases. Bitcoin had its best quarterly run in three years and third best August ever.   

U.S. investors this week have piled back into spot bitcoin exchange-traded funds, too. On Monday and Tuesday, the funds managed by BlackRock, Fidelity, Grayscale, and others received new investment of over $549 million, according to Coinglass data. 

Bitcoin’s price is still over 30% below its all-time high of $126,080 — reached in October 2025 — but analysts are saying the cryptocurrency is now back in a bull market after spending most of this year in a bear. 

This post Bitcoin Nears $85,000 as SpaceX Earnings Reignite Risk Appetite first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Elon Musk confirmed that Tesla and SpaceX are exploring a merger that could combine their existing Bitcoin holdings under one company. Speaking during SpaceX's Oct. 20 earnings call, Musk said both companies had established special committees of independent directors to evaluate a potential combination. Musk described the merger as a good idea but said he…

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

Understand the crypto stories that matter and what to watch next. Get The Catalyst in your inbox

The manager wants usable Form TR filings, while Hyperliquid Policy Center challenges mandatory public analysis and seeks earlier protection.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

Understand the crypto stories that matter and what to watch next. Get The Catalyst in your inbox

Sol suppressed human alerts while Astra removed a program's monitoring integration; OpenAI has updated reviews and says motive remains unresolved.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

Understand the crypto stories that matter and what to watch next. Get The Catalyst in your inbox

The preliminary interpretation turns on applicable credit offers and actual delivery, rather than the buyer’s use of financing alone.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

Understand the crypto stories that matter and what to watch next. Get The Catalyst in your inbox

PHP released fixes on Oct. 21 for two critical vulnerabilities that can let unauthenticated attackers run code on web servers, as crypto security executives urged operators to patch and check overlooked infrastructure. The PHP team's security advisory identifies CVE-2026-109618 and CVE-2026-109619, following its Oct. 20 advance warning. Both have a critical CVSS v4.0 severity score…

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

Understand the crypto stories that matter and what to watch next. Get The Catalyst in your inbox

Hyperliquid is a trading platform for crypto assets that keeps its order book not on a company server but on its own layer-1 blockchain. Every order, every cancellation, every fill and every liquidation is recorded there as a transaction in a block. The matching token is called HYPE and stood at $81.42 around midday on October 21, 2026, which puts Hyperliquid 11th among all crypto assets with a market value of $18.12 billion. For how the price has moved since, see our Hyperliquid price prediction.

This profile answers four questions: what the platform is technically, what the HYPE token does, what trading costs, and what applies to access from Germany. All figures are as of October 21, 2026 and come from Hyperliquid's developer documentation, from the publicly available data of the blockchain itself, and from price services. Where two sources give different values, the range appears in the text rather than the more convenient number.

What is Hyperliquid? An order-book exchange on its own layer-1 blockchain

A layer-1 blockchain is a standalone blockchain with its own consensus mechanism that does not sit on top of another one. Hyperliquid runs such a blockchain and places on it what other venues keep inside closed software: the order book. An order book is the continuously maintained list of all buy and sell offers for a trading pair, sorted by price.

The focus is on perpetual futures. These are futures contracts on a price without an expiry date, in which a settlement payment between buyers and sellers, the funding rate, holds the contract price close to the spot price. How funding rate, leverage and liquidation work together is set out in detail in our article perp DEX explained; this profile takes the mechanics as given and describes the platform instead.

Alongside the futures contracts runs a spot market on which tokens are swapped directly. Both markets share the same blockchain and the same liquidity. That bundling is exactly why market overviews often list Hyperliquid separately from decentralised exchanges, which work with liquidity pools rather than order books.

HyperCore and HyperEVM: two systems on the same blockchain

The platform consists of two parts that the developer documentation describes explicitly as separate. HyperCore runs the order books for futures contracts and for spot trading. Everything there is built for speed and strict sequencing: an order is queued, processed and final after a single block.

HyperEVM is the second part, an environment for smart contracts that is compatible with the Ethereum Virtual Machine. A smart contract is a program that sits on a blockchain and executes by itself once certain conditions are met. Anyone who has developed on Ethereum can move their code to HyperEVM with little effort. The practical gain is that these programs can reach the liquidity and the prices held in HyperCore without fetching them across a bridge from an outside network.

HyperBFT: where the figure of 200,000 orders per second comes from

The consensus mechanism is called HyperBFT. Consensus mechanism is the term for the rules by which the operators of a blockchain agree on the valid order of transactions. According to the developers, HyperBFT draws on HotStuff and its successors, a line of protocols from research into byzantine fault tolerance, and was built together with its networking layer for the platform's own requirements.

The developer documentation cites a capacity of 200,000 orders per second for HyperCore and states that this figure is set to rise further. Two qualifications belong with it: this is a vendor figure for capacity, not a measured sustained load, and an order is not the same thing as a fill. A large share of the load in any order book comes from offers that are placed and withdrawn again shortly afterwards.

The second figure from the same source is more tangible for investors: Hyperliquid describes finality of one block. Finality is the point from which a transaction can no longer be reversed. In a liquidation, that decides whether a position is already closed or still hanging in an intermediate state.

The HYPE token: gas, staking and a fee discount in one

HYPE serves three purposes on the platform. First, the token pays for computation on HyperEVM, which other networks call gas. Second, HYPE can be delegated to validators and earns a reward for doing so. Third, a staked balance lowers trading fees, on a fixed scale.

That scale is unusually flat at the entry level and steep at the top. From ten staked HYPE, trading fees fall by 5 percent, from 100 by 10 percent, from 1,000 by 15 percent, from 10,000 by 20 percent, from 100,000 by 30 percent and from 500,000 by 40 percent. Ten HYPE came to roughly $814 on October 21, while 500,000 HYPE came to a good $40 million. The first discount step is therefore within reach for private investors; the highest one is aimed at trading firms.

What HYPE explicitly is not: a claim on payouts. The staking reward comes from a reserve of the network set aside for that purpose, not from a profit that a company distributes. Confusing the two means expecting a dividend where an issuance stands.

Supply and circulating supply: why two sources say 222 and 302 million

The maximum supply of HYPE is one billion tokens. On circulating supply the sources diverge, and the gap is wider than a rounding difference. Price services put roughly 222.4 million HYPE in circulation on October 21, 2026. The blockchain itself reports 302.0 million in its data set for the token. The same source gives total supply as 998.8 million, plus 410.6 million tokens still earmarked as future releases.

Both numbers are correct and measure different things. A circulating supply strips out locked and not yet distributed holdings, and where that line falls is decided by whoever is counting. In practice that means every metric built on circulating supply depends on that decision. The market value of $18.12 billion rests on the smaller number. Anyone using 302.0 million arrives at roughly $24.6 billion at the same price.

How the holdings were distributed at issuance

HYPE came to market on November 29, 2024 in a genesis event. Around 310 million tokens, or 31 percent of maximum supply, went out as a distribution to users who had traded on the platform beforehand. The largest single position, just under 38.9 percent, is earmarked for future emissions and community rewards; 23.8 percent went to the core team and 6 percent to the foundation's budget.

According to the announcement, the core team's shares were placed under a lock-up and unwind over years. That puts the same underlying pattern behind HYPE as behind many young tokens: a substantial part of the supply is not yet in the market and arrives on a schedule. How strongly such a release lands was calculated for a single date in our article on HYPE's circulating supply and unlocks of September 29, 2026.

The Assistance Fund: 48.17 million HYPE from trading fees

Part of the trading fees flows to an address that Hyperliquid calls the Assistance Fund. That fund uses the revenue to buy HYPE on the market on an ongoing basis. The developer documentation describes the process as removing the acquired tokens permanently from circulating and total supply.

On October 21, 2026 this address held 48.17 million HYPE. The reported cost basis of that holding was roughly $1.38 billion, its market value at the same day's price just under $3.9 billion. Against a total supply of 998.8 million tokens, the fund's holding amounts to 4.8 percent.

A close reading pays off here. The tokens demonstrably sit at an address from which they do not return to trading, and they are therefore economically out of the market. Technically destroyed they are not: the total supply of 998.8 million reported by the blockchain itself sits only 1.2 million tokens below maximum supply, not 48 million below it. Treating the fund as a buyback program is closer to the facts than calling it a burn.

Staking: roughly 2.3 percent a year and a seven-day queue

Holders of HYPE can delegate their balance to one or more validators. According to Hyperliquid's staking documentation, the reward is inversely proportional to the square root of the total amount staked; at 400 million HYPE staked, the documentation gives roughly 2.37 percent a year.

On October 21, 2026, 442.4 million HYPE were delegated across all validators. By the stated formula that works out to roughly 2.25 percent a year. The order of magnitude itself is striking: the staked amount exceeds every reported circulating supply, because holdings that price services do not count as circulating are delegated too.

Three deadlines matter more in staking than the yield does. A delegation is locked for one day, after which it can be undone in full or in part at any time. The route back from the staking account to the spot account takes seven days, and the platform accepts no more than five simultaneous withdrawals per address. Rewards are accrued by the minute, paid out daily and automatically redelegated, so they compound.

Trading fees: 0.045 percent for takers, a discount from ten staked HYPE

Base fees on perpetual futures are 0.045 percent for the taking side and 0.015 percent for the making side. The taking side, taker in market jargon, is whoever accepts an existing offer; the making side, maker, is whoever puts an offer into the book. In spot trading the figures are 0.070 and 0.040 percent.

Above that sits a scale based on trading volume over the past 14 days. From $5 million, the taker fee on futures contracts falls to 0.040 percent, from $500 million to 0.028 percent with zero for the making side, and from $7 billion to 0.024 percent. Spot volume counts double towards the tier. Above certain shares of maker volume there are rebates of up to 0.003 percent.

Where the fees go is the notable part. According to the documentation they flow entirely to HLP, the platform's community liquidity provider, to the Assistance Fund, and to whoever has set up a market. Anyone who establishes a spot market or a futures market under the HIP-3 standard may keep up to 50 percent of the trading fees arising there. A company collecting fees as revenue does not appear in that list.

Validators: 27 active operators and no automatic slashing

The blockchain is run by validators. On October 21, 2026 the network listed 35 validators, 27 of them in an active state. Becoming a validator requires self-delegating 10,000 of one's own HYPE, and that self-delegation is locked for a year. If the balance falls below it, the validator moves into a state in which its delegations can only decrease.

One point from the documentation is decisive for assessing the risk: automatic slashing is not currently implemented. Slashing is the penalty under which a validator loses part of its staked balance for misbehaviour. Hyperliquid works with jailing instead, meaning exclusion from consensus; delegations are left untouched by it but earn nothing.

For delegators that cuts both ways. The risk of losing a balance through a validator's misbehaviour does not exist in this form. At the same time, the economic pressure that enforces clean operation in other networks is absent. And 27 active operators is a modest figure set beside established networks with validator counts in the thousands or tens of thousands.

MiCA and BaFin: why perpetual futures fall outside the crypto regulation

For access from Germany the most important point is a legal one, and it is often presented wrongly. The European regulation on markets in crypto assets, MiCA for short, governs crypto assets and services in them. Perpetual futures, on the prevailing classification, are derivatives and therefore financial instruments. Financial instruments are not covered by MiCA but by the framework around the MiFID II directive. A MiCA authorisation would thus be the wrong permit for this business, and its absence does not answer the licensing question.

What can be stated is the verifiable single fact: Hyperliquid is not entered in any EU register as an authorised provider of crypto-asset services. What a MiCA authorisation requires and who needs one is covered in our overview of MiCA obligations for crypto companies. What the absence of such an entry means in practice for balances, keys and records was broken down in our article using Hyperliquid from Germany of September 15, 2026.

Whether a provider based outside the European Union may approach German customers, and which permission it needs to do so, is decided by BaFin on the circumstances of the individual case. No public decision by the supervisor on Hyperliquid exists. For practical purposes one thing follows above all: anyone trading there has neither deposit protection nor a German complaints body behind them, and enforcing their own claims would have to be attempted at the provider's place of business.

On top of that, access runs through the user's own wallet. There is no account with a username that can be reset after the login details are lost. The key to the wallet is the access to the balance, and whoever loses it loses the holding.

Tax in Germany: what separates perpetual futures from selling a coin

For tax, the platform's two markets follow different rules, and the distinction costs money in case of doubt. Spot trading in tokens follows the rules for private disposals under section 23 of the German Income Tax Act: after a holding period of one year a gain remains tax-free, while within the year it is captured at the personal tax rate.

Gains from futures transactions, by contrast, are regularly treated as investment income, at the flat withholding tax rate and with no holding period at all. Losses from futures transactions were also subject in recent years to special offsetting restrictions whose application has been the subject of legislative changes and case law. Anyone moving meaningful amounts should have this checked for their own assessment year rather than relying on a blanket statement.

Regardless of the classification, the burden of proof applies. A platform without German authorisation supplies no tax report that fits the local return, and reports nothing to the tax office. The transactions sit in the blockchain, readable and complete, but not in a form that fills in an Anlage SO. Anyone trading regularly needs their own records for that; an overview of suitable tools is in our comparison of crypto tax tools and portfolio trackers.

The four risks a profile has to name

First, custody risk. The holding sits in a self-managed wallet whose key nobody can replace. Second, leverage risk: perpetual futures are traded with leverage, and a liquidation can consume a position's margin entirely, within minutes when prices jump hard.

Third, supply risk. 410.6 million HYPE are earmarked as future releases, more than twice the circulating supply reported by price services. Each of those releases increases the supply, and what that can do to a price is visible in the moves around individual dates in the past.

Fourth, legal risk. The legal framework for crypto derivatives in the European Union is in motion; the European Commission's review of MiCA was still running in 2026. A change in the rules can make access easier or harder for investors in Germany, and neither can be predicted today. A total loss of the amount committed is possible under each of the four points.

Hyperliquid: 11th by market value, with no entry in the EU register

The situation can be summed up in one sentence: a technically self-contained trading platform with a substantial market value, whose fees flow back to the user community, without authorisation in the European Union and with a supply of which the larger part is still to come. Three steps help in placing it.

1. Measure the need against an authorised provider. Anyone who does not need futures contracts can get spot trading at providers with a European permission, a deposit regime and a German-language complaints route. Our overview of regulated crypto exchanges ranks providers by authorisation.
2. Measure the futures platforms against each other. Fees, leverage limits and liquidation rules differ considerably, and the base fee says the least about them. The perp DEX comparison sets the terms side by side.
3. Settle custody before the first amount moves. Without a user account, everything hangs on the key. Which devices qualify and what they do is in the hardware wallet comparison.

(As of October 21, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Here is what is documented: four versions of the Fearless Wallet browser extension sent a copy of the private key to a server belonging to an attacker whenever the wallet was unlocked. Eight users have reported unauthorised transfers so far, totalling 17,286 DOT. Our assessment follows further below: the number of reported cases is the smaller part of the problem.

The notice is dated October 21, 2026. The product affected is a third-party one, not the network's official software: Fearless Wallet was never an official Polkadot wallet. In concrete terms it still means this: if that extension sat on your machine at any point since February 2025, every account created with it counts as exposed, whether or not anything has drained from it so far.

What the Polkadot Community Foundation reported on October 21

The security notice describes neither an attack on the blockchain nor a flaw in the network itself. At its centre is a browser extension that did something other than what it claimed to its users. On unlocking the wallet, the extension sent the private key to an external address on the network. The key is the master key to an account: whoever holds it can sign any transfer without knowing the password and without needing access to the machine.

Among others, Cryptobriefing covered the notice the same day, and the report ran in parallel across several industry outlets. The foundation's recommendation fits in one sentence: anyone who used the affected extension since February 2025 should treat all accounts connected to it as compromised, generate fresh keys in a different wallet and send the balance there. The foundation names Nova Wallet as the destination.

These four versions of the extension are affected

The notice names four releases: 3.0.1, 3.0.3, 3.0.4 and 3.0.5. You will find the version number of a Chrome extension in the browser's extensions overview, reachable from the address bar with chrome://extensions and listed there under the wallet's entry. It does not appear inside the wallet itself. Anyone who has since deleted the extension will no longer find the number there. In that case the same rule applies as to everyone else in doubt: take February 2025 as the cut-off date and assume an exposed key.

When the warning went out, an affected release was still available for download in the Chrome Web Store. The listing showed around 6,000 users. That figure is not a count of victims but a count of installations, and precisely there lies the gap between eight reported cases and what is actually exposed.

How the malicious code entered the project in February 2025

The route in is unusually well documented. The code entered the project on February 19, 2025 through a pull request, that is, a proposed change submitted on GitHub of the kind any outsider can send to an open project. The proposal was tied to the orbit of the TON ecosystem. It was accepted like an ordinary extension of the feature set.

This design of attack does not hit the blockchain but the software supply chain ahead of it. It works because the malicious part only takes effect after the build and release, and because nothing looks different to the user. According to the foundation, the leak ran intermittently, and at least until October 10, 2026. More than 19 months therefore lie between the insertion and the last documented outflow.

A second point belongs here, uncomfortable as it is: complaints with the same pattern, money gone after an update, were already being described in the network's public forums in October 2025. The detailed technical explanation came a year later. That gap between the first signals and the full account is the part of the episode that counts beyond this single case.

Why an update or a reinstall rescues nothing

This is the point at which most of those affected take the wrong turn. A private key is not a set of login credentials that can be swapped out. It is the mathematical basis of the account itself. Whoever obtains it once keeps a working copy, even if the extension is deleted, reinstalled or updated to a clean version. A new password protects only the local vault on your own machine, not the account on the blockchain.

That leaves exactly one effective step: generate a new key pair in a different wallet and transfer the balance there. The old address stays unsafe for good, even if nothing happens for months. An attacker holding a copy of the key can wait until the grab is worth making, and that waiting is exactly why eight reported cases against roughly 6,000 installations are no all-clear.

The notice also refers explicitly to mobile devices. The malicious code was not found there. Anyone who once imported the same private key into the browser extension must nonetheless treat it as exposed, wherever else it sits. For long-term custody of larger holdings, a device that never passes the key to a browser in the first place remains the sensible choice. Which models cost what and which blockchains they support is set out in the hardware wallet comparison.

Staked and locked DOT: a 28-day unbonding period stands in the way

Moving out is simple as long as the balance is freely available. With Polkadot it often is not. Anyone who has staked their DOT cannot reach them at once: between unbonding and free availability lies the 28-day unlocking period that we broke down on October 11 in our calculation of the staking yield. During that time the balance sits at an address whose key may be in someone else's hands.

The foundation concedes that locked and staked holdings require additional steps, and for certain cases it points to tools such as PAPI Rescue. In practice that means moving the freely available holdings first, starting the unbonding from staking in parallel, and putting the day the period expires in the calendar. Postponing the unbonding only extends the window in which someone else's key stays usable. How other networks set their lock-up periods is shown in the staking provider comparison.

The DOT price sits at $1.16, and the report barely moves it

DOT traded at around $1.16 on Wednesday afternoon, down about 1.8 percent within 24 hours according to CoinGecko data. The daily high was $1.18 and the daily low $1.14. Market value stands just under $2 billion, which corresponds to rank 51.

On October 17, when we wrote about the cap of 2.1 billion DOT, the price stood at $1.18. Little has moved since then, and Wednesday's report has not changed that so far. There is an explanation: 17,286 DOT equal around $20,000 at today's price. Against a daily trading volume of some $139 million, that quantity goes unnoticed on the market.

The levels that count today are therefore the same as before the report. On the downside, the daily low at $1.14 is the first line, below it the monthly low of October 9 at just under $1.09. On the upside stands the daily high at $1.18, and only above that does the area around $1.24 come back into view, where the price last sat on October 11 and 12.

Holding period and tax: moving to your own new wallet is not a sale

Many hesitate over the move because they fear a taxable event. Under the German Federal Ministry of Finance's guidance on crypto assets, a transfer between two of your own wallets is not a disposal: the place of storage changes, not the owner. The one-year holding period pursuant to Section 23 of the German Income Tax Act therefore continues to run; it does not start afresh.

Documentation does matter, though. Record the date, the amount, the sending and receiving addresses and the transaction receipt, so that acquisition dates can be matched up later. Anyone who has received staking rewards keeps those items separate. What is currently moving politically on these deadlines we track continuously in the status of the holding period reform.

Recovery fraud: the second wave after every leak

In the same notice the foundation warns of a follow-on phenomenon that appears after every major incident: people posing as helpers who promise, against payment up front, to recover lost holdings. Technically that is ruled out. A confirmed transfer on a blockchain cannot be reversed, and nobody can undo one without holding the recipient's key.

Anyone who is approached should know the rule: legitimate bodies never demand an advance payment for a recovery and never ask for the recovery words. If the seed phrase is requested, the matter is settled. The incident belongs instead in a report to the local police, and the transaction receipts belong secured before the old wallet is deleted.

Our assessment: the number of reports is no measure

From the newsroom's point of view, the loss of 17,286 DOT is not the story. Three things are documented that together weigh more heavily: a span of more than 19 months between the insertion in February 2025 and the last documented outflow on October 10, 2026; roughly 6,000 installations in the Chrome Web Store when the warning appeared; and first public complaints with the same pattern as early as October 2025. Concluding from eight reports that this is the extent of it confuses reported with affected.

A serious qualification speaks against that: nobody knows how many of the 6,000 installations held any balance at all, and many extensions sit unused in the browser after being tried once. An extrapolation would therefore be unsound. Only the direction is reliable, and it reads: the number of exposed keys is higher than the number of emptied accounts, and it stays that way as long as those keys are not replaced.

For the network itself, nothing follows from this about the technology. The blockchain did what it is supposed to do and executed validly signed transfers. The problem sat in the software ahead of it, and it sat there for a year and a half. That is exactly why the question of how long an exposed extension stays up in a browser vendor's store is the more interesting issue than the price on this Wednesday.

The Fearless Wallet leak: old keys stay exposed for good

Three steps order the rest:

1. Check in your browser's extensions overview whether one of the versions 3.0.1, 3.0.3, 3.0.4 or 3.0.5 was installed. For permanent custody afterwards, the hardware wallet comparison lists the devices that never hand the key to a browser.
2. Generate a fresh key pair in a different wallet and transfer all freely available DOT there. Where holdings are staked, also start the unbonding and factor in the 28 days that the staking provider comparison lists for Polkadot.
3. Document every transfer with the date, the amount and both addresses, so that the holding period demonstrably continues. You can follow the current state of the law through the holding period report.

Further reports on the notice and on the timeline have been collected by PANews.

(As of October 21, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Here is what is documented: on Tuesday, October 20, 2026, Elon Musk confirmed on SpaceX's quarterly call that SpaceX and Tesla are exploring a merger. Both companies have set up special committees of independent directors for the purpose, and nothing has been agreed on the terms of a transaction. Our assessment follows further below: the combined holding of 30,221 bitcoin is a side effect of that review, not its trigger.

The case is still interesting for holders, because it makes visible a question that usually stays in the background: how much bitcoin actually sits inside a share, and how much of it reaches you? At the price of $83,820 that CoinGecko reports for Bitcoin, the two companies together stand behind around $2.53 billion in bitcoin. That sounds like a lot. Measured against the size of both groups it is a marginal position, and that is exactly what decides whether a share works as a detour to the coin.

What Musk confirmed on the SpaceX quarterly call

The talks are not market speculation but confirmed by the chief executive himself. Musk said on the call: “Do I think it would be a good idea, yes. But at the end of the day, the shareholders have to be supportive of this.” The order within that sentence is the important information. Musk considers the merger sensible; others will decide.

On the process itself he was unusually candid. He described his own role as “an odd kabuki dance where two groups of people are talking, and I can't be in the conversation”. On the state of the negotiations, the CoinDesk report records that the special committees have not agreed on the terms of a transaction.

The occasion for the call was the third quarter, and it came out better than expected. Revenue and earnings per share beat estimates, and the SpaceX share rose around nine percent to $161 in pre-market trading on Wednesday. Tesla's figures were still outstanding at the time this article was published; they are expected after the closing bell on Wednesday.

30,221 bitcoin: how the holding splits between the two companies

A treasury holding is the part of a company's cash that sits not in euros or dollars but in another asset, here in bitcoin. The two positions come from separate disclosures and differ in size.

• SpaceX: 18,712 BTC, or 61.9 percent of the combined holding, worth around $1.57 billion at the price quoted above.
• Tesla: 11,509 BTC, or 38.1 percent, around $0.96 billion.
• Together: 30,221 BTC, around $2.53 billion.

The figure of 30,221 is the addition of two disclosures, not a joint treasury. As long as no merger has closed, the holdings stay where they sit today, on two separate balance sheets with two separate shareholder bases. Only a completed transaction turns two positions into one.

To put the size in context: the Bitcoin protocol caps the total supply at 21 million units. At 30,221 BTC that is 0.144 percent of it. A combined holding of that size would be a visible corporate position, but not a figure that moves the market as long as it only changes which balance sheet it sits on.

Two special committees, no Musk: where the negotiations stand

A special committee is a body of independent directors that reviews a transaction in which the main actor has a conflict of interest. That is precisely the situation here: Musk holds a leading stake in both SpaceX and Tesla, so a merger of the two firms would be a deal with himself. That is why two committees are negotiating, and why Musk cannot sit at the table.

In practice that means three things. There is no exchange ratio, so no number saying how many shares of one company a share of the other would be worth. There is no timetable. And there is no assurance that anything will come of it at all; Musk himself warned against treating a merger as settled.

Reading the news as a price driver skips that part. Between confirmed talks and a completed merger lie valuation opinions, shareholder votes and, at companies of this size, antitrust proceedings as well. The current Bitcoin price with ETF inflows and the upcoming Fed meeting explains the move of the past 24 hours considerably better than a merger report without terms.

Bitcoin per share: why a merger does not enlarge the holding

Bitcoin per share describes a company's holding divided by the number of its shares. That ratio is the only honest measure of how much bitcoin a shareholder co-owns, and it explains why a merger does not automatically improve the holding for everyone involved.

In a merger, two holdings are added together and so are two shareholder bases. 18,712 plus 11,509 BTC become 30,221 BTC, but the shares of both companies are exchanged against each other. Whether a shareholder ends up holding more or less bitcoin per share depends solely on the exchange ratio, and that has not been negotiated yet. Not a single bitcoin is bought. For the market that means no fresh demand impulse, only a different allocation of the same quantity.

That sets the case apart from the reports that usually bring movement into the price. A company that buys takes supply off the market. A company that merges shifts ownership within the balance sheet. The two often sit side by side in headlines looking much the same, yet they act on the market in entirely different ways.

Treasury companies as a Bitcoin detour: the difference from holding the coin

Investors repeatedly buy shares in companies with a bitcoin holding, expecting bitcoin-like performance without having to handle custody themselves. At SpaceX and Tesla that calculation works particularly badly, and the reason sits in the figures above. Around $2.53 billion in bitcoin stands against two companies whose value derives from spaceflight, satellite communications, vehicle manufacturing and energy storage. The bitcoin share is a marginal position there.

What moves the share price is therefore quarterly figures, launch cadence, delivery numbers and interest rate decisions, not the Bitcoin price. Tuesday showed that directly: the share jumped on a set of figures and on the merger news, not on a move in Bitcoin. Anyone who wants bitcoin gets mostly corporate risk through these shares, with a small bitcoin component on top.

There is also a difference that weighs more in everyday use than any ratio. A share sits in the securities account of your bank or broker, and you cannot hold it in your own custody. Bitcoin you can buy from a provider licensed under MiCA and then take into your own custody. Which providers are licensed in the EU and how they differ is set out in our overview of regulated crypto exchanges.

Holding period versus flat-rate tax: the tax dividing line in Germany

For tax purposes, bitcoin and shares are two different worlds in Germany, and that is the most concrete difference between the coin and the detour through a share.

Bitcoin counts as another asset. Gains from a sale fall under private disposal transactions pursuant to Section 23 of the German Income Tax Act: after a holding period of one year the gain stays tax-free, within the year it is charged at your personal income tax rate, and an exemption limit of 1,000 euros a year applies to all private disposal transactions taken together. If the exemption limit is exceeded, the entire gain becomes taxable, not only the part above it.

Shares follow a different rule. Gains count as investment income and are charged the flat-rate withholding tax of 25 percent plus the solidarity surcharge and, where applicable, church tax, regardless of how long you have held them. In return there is the saver's allowance of 1,000 euros per person. A holding period after which a gain on shares becomes tax-free does not exist.

The consequence is awkward for the detour idea: anyone wanting to track bitcoin through a share gives up the holding period that makes buying directly attractive for long-term investors in tax terms. Which route is cheaper in your case depends on holding period, income tax rate and allowances already used. That is a calculation that only works with your own numbers, and one for a tax adviser rather than an article.

MiCA and custody: where the differences show up in everyday use

Since the EU's MiCA regulation applies in full, providers that hold or exchange crypto assets in the EU need an authorisation as a crypto-asset service provider. For a direct purchase that means you can see who is regulated, and you decide after buying whether the provider holds your coins or you transfer them to a wallet of your own.

With a share, that choice does not exist. Custody sits with the depository bank, and the bitcoin behind the company is held by the company, not by you. Whether it uses a dedicated custodian, to what extent the holdings are insured and when they are disclosed is set out in the company filings and changes with every quarterly report. Control over the keys is not something a share delivers.

The sensible approach is therefore not to play the two routes against each other but to treat them as different products: the share is a stake in a company that happens to hold bitcoin as well. The coin is the asset itself.

Our assessment: the holding is a side effect, not the occasion

From the newsroom's point of view, the bitcoin figure is the smallest of the quantities involved in this report. Three documented points speak for that: no bitcoin is being bought, only added up. The special committees have not agreed on a single term, so there is neither an exchange ratio nor a date. And the roughly nine percent jump in the SpaceX share coincided with a quarterly report above expectations, not with a move in Bitcoin.

One argument speaks against that view, and we will not talk it down: a combined holding of 30,221 BTC inside a company that is also publicly traded raises the visibility of bitcoin in conventional portfolios. Funds not permitted to buy a coin would come into indirect contact with it through such a share. That is an effect over years, not days, and it depends on the merger happening at all. We derive no price target from it, and no purchase or sale follows from it; with crypto assets a total loss is possible.

A merger with 30,221 bitcoin: shareholders first, then the balance sheet

The news changes nothing about your holding today. It is a good occasion, though, to hold your own setup against the differences described above.

1. Separate share and coin in your overview. Anyone holding both easily counts the bitcoin behind a share twice. A portfolio tracker separates the positions and shows the tax treatment per position; the tools for that are in our comparison of crypto tax software and portfolio trackers.
2. Check where your coins sit. The custody question is decided not by a merger report but at your key. Which device makes sense for which sum is covered in the hardware wallet comparison.
3. Settle your buying route before you need it. A licensed provider, the fee model and the withdrawal route belong fixed in advance, not improvised. The routes and their costs are set out under buying Bitcoin.

The next hard data will come not from the merger talks but from Tesla's quarterly figures and from whatever the special committees finally put forward. Until then it remains a confirmed review with two separate balance sheets.

(As of October 21, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Here is what is documented: the mining difficulty on the Bitcoin network will rise by 6.44 percent at the next adjustment on October 29, after it had already climbed 5.92 percent on October 16. Our assessment follows further below. The two jumps explain why the price has not fallen below $81,400 since October 18, and they do not explain where it runs next. For that, the options expiry on October 30 is the more important date.

Bitcoin traded at $83,532 on Wednesday afternoon, 2.5 percent above Tuesday's level, according to CoinGecko data. The daily high was $83,568 and the daily low $81,273. Market value stands at $1.679 trillion, leaving the price 33.7 percent below its record of $126,080. Where the price can point over a horizon of months, and which time frames our newsroom keeps apart in that view, is set out in our Bitcoin price prediction.

What happens on October 29: difficulty rises 6.44 percent

The mining difficulty is the value that sets how hard the computation is that a miner has to solve to attach a block to the Bitcoin blockchain. The value currently stands at 140.58 trillion and, according to data from mempool.space, jumps to around 149.6 trillion at the coming adjustment. The expected date is October 29, with 1,250 blocks to go and the running cycle 38 percent complete.

The reason for the jump sits in a single number: blocks are arriving too fast. In the current cycle the gap between two blocks is 9 minutes and 24 seconds instead of the targeted 10 minutes. Computing power on the network averages 1,048.7 exahash per second over three days. More machines online mean shorter block times, and shorter block times mean a higher difficulty at the next checkpoint.

How a retarget works and why it hits miners' costs

Every 2,016 blocks, on average roughly every two weeks, the network recalculates how long the past blocks took and sets the difficulty so that the ten-minute cadence holds again. That process is called a retarget. It runs without a vote, without a committee and without discretion, purely by the rule written into the protocol. Each adjustment is capped at a factor of four upwards and a quarter downwards.

What matters for context is what a retarget does NOT do. It does not change how many bitcoin the network pays out. The reward stays at 3.125 bitcoin per block, and there are still 144 blocks a day on average. What changes is the distribution: after a 6.44 percent increase, the same machine earns around 6 percent fewer bitcoin than before. For an operation with fixed electricity costs per kilowatt hour, the cost per bitcoin produced rises by the same measure.

That is where the link to the price comes in, and it is an indirect one. A producer with higher costs cannot sell as low without taking a loss. Miners who hand over their coins continuously to pay for power and salaries need a higher price for the same bill once their costs rise. That is an argument for a floor, not proof of one. A miner with reserves can also sell below cost, and a network with a falling price eventually switches machines off, which lowers the difficulty again at the following adjustment.

Two jumps in 13 days: the comparison with recent months

Taken on its own, 6.44 percent is no record. The sequence is what makes it interesting. On October 16 the difficulty rose from 132.72 to 140.58 trillion, a gain of 5.92 percent. If the expected 6.44 percent follows on October 29, the difficulty will sit 12.7 percent higher than in mid-October within 13 days.

For comparison, the adjustments before that, also according to mempool.space: on October 3 the difficulty barely moved, on September 19 it rose 4.2 percent, on September 5 by 1.3 percent, on August 23 it fell 1.3 percent and on August 8 it rose 1.3 percent. In the three months before mid-October, then, not a single adjustment exceeded 4.2 percent. Two consecutive jumps of around 6 percent each are the exception this year, and they land in a stretch in which the price has given up almost 4 percent.

That combination is the actual finding: computing power is growing while the price falls. Miners bringing machines online now decided on the investment months earlier, when Bitcoin stood above $85,000. That computing power is being delivered into a market that pays less than the calculation assumed.

That is the change since our last piece on the Bitcoin price prediction. On October 20 the focus here was the premium on the futures market: expected volatility stood at 38.3 percent, while the price delivered 20.1 percent. Back then the price was $81,875. Since then $1,657 or 2.0 percent has been added, and the $81,481 level at the centre of that October 20 analysis has held. New today is the cost side for miners, which does not appear in a view of the futures market at all.

October 30: 35.3 percent of all Bitcoin options expire in one day

One day after the retarget comes the bigger date in the calendar. At the options exchange Deribit, 384,688 bitcoin sat in open options contracts on Wednesday according to its own statistics. Of those, 135,924 bitcoin expire on October 30, or 35.3 percent of total open interest. At a price of $83,532 that equals $11.35 billion.

An options expiry does not move the price by itself. What moves it is the hedging on the other side. Whoever sold options holds bitcoin or futures contracts against them and adjusts that counter-position continuously as the price moves. The closer the expiry, the larger those adjustments become near important strike prices, and the more readily short, sharp moves arise with no fresh news behind them. After the expiry that mechanism falls away, because most of the contracts have lapsed.

For the next nine trading days that means two dates are fixed: October 29 and October 30. The first works slowly and through costs, the second quickly and through hedging. Anyone holding a leveraged position this week is dealing with the second.

Buying without leverage, by contrast, comes down mostly to fees and spreads. At $83,532 per bitcoin, a spread of 0.5 percent costs around $418, and on a purchase of 1,000 euros a 1.5 percent fee amounts to 15 euros that the price has to make up first. Which providers in Europe trade at which costs, and which hold a licence under the EU's MiCA regulation, is set out in our overview of the best crypto exchanges.

The levels above and below, and where they come from

Levels are only worth something if you can say where they come from. These four follow from the daily closing prices of the past 60 days according to CoinGecko, as of October 21.

On the downside, the first one that counts is the 50-day average at $81,574. It sits 2.4 percent below the current price and almost exactly on the 30-day low, which was $81,408 on October 18. Those two values form a narrow band 166 dollars wide. As long as the price stays above it, the decline since the start of October is a sideways move with a slight downward tilt. Should it fall below, both the 50-day average and the monthly low will have broken for the first time since July.

On the upside, Bitcoin reclaimed the 20-day average at $83,224 on Wednesday, which now sits 0.4 percent below the price. The next level above it is $83,691, the highest daily close since October 12 and only 0.2 percent away. Only beyond that does the path open to $86,490, the monthly high from October 5. From here that is 3.5 percent.

The range in which all of this plays out is narrow. Between the October 18 low and Wednesday's daily high lie 2.7 percent. That is exactly what makes the two October dates important: in a narrow range, one trigger is enough to touch both edges.

How to check your distance to liquidation

A forced liquidation is the automatic closing of a leveraged position once the collateral no longer covers it. The distance to it can be estimated in one sentence: at 10x leverage it is roughly 10 percent, at 20x leverage about 5 percent, in each case before fees and funding costs.

Hold that against the figures above. Wednesday's daily range alone was 2.7 percent. A position at 20x leverage has around 5 percent of room, so a single trading day this week eats more than half of it. At 30x leverage, a buffer of about 3.3 percent sits inside the normal daily move of the past week.

Three values matter in that check, and all three appear in an exchange's position panel: the liquidation price, the distance in percent to the current price, and the funding rate, which is settled every eight hours on perpetual futures. If the liquidation price falls inside the $81,273 to $83,568 range the price covered on Wednesday, then the position is decided not by the market's direction but by a single hour. Where funding rates and collateral rules differ between individual providers is shown in our overview of the best perp DEXs.

Our assessment: difficulty supports the lower level, the expiry sets the week

From the newsroom's point of view, two documented numbers speak for the lower level and one against it. In favour: difficulty rises 12.7 percent within 13 days, the cost per bitcoin produced rises accordingly, and the price has not retested the October 18 low of $81,408 for three trading days. Against: 135,924 bitcoin in options expire on October 30, and expiry dates of that size regularly bring moves in narrow ranges that no piece of news explains.

Our reading is therefore split in two. Up to October 30 we weight the expiry above the cost side, because it works faster. After that, the higher difficulty becomes a standing factor that applies to miners every day. What would refute this reading is a daily close below $81,408: at that point the market has dismissed the cost side as an argument. Bitcoin remains an asset in which a total loss is possible, and neither of the two numbers changes that.

Holding period and tax: what October means for purchases from 2025

One point that has nothing to do with mining but counts today for many investors in Germany. Under Section 23 of the German Income Tax Act, the gain from a private sale of Bitcoin stays tax-free if more than one year lies between purchase and sale. Anyone who bought their bitcoin on October 21, 2025 or earlier passed that deadline on Wednesday. Anyone who bought in November 2025 reaches it in the coming weeks.

Within the year, an exemption limit of 1,000 euros applies to all private disposal transactions in a year taken together. If it is exceeded, the entire gain becomes taxable, not only the part above it. What decides is the purchase date of each individual tranche, not the portfolio average. How far the political debate about this deadline has come and what currently applies, we track continuously on our page on the status of the crypto holding period.

Difficulty and expiry: two dates before October 30

Two dates and four levels add up to a manageable list for the next nine trading days.

1. Note the levels. Below, $81,574 as the 50-day average and $81,408 as the monthly low; above, $83,691 and $86,490. Anyone looking to buy or sell in this area sets the limits in advance and checks the fees at the provider. Which exchanges in Europe trade at which costs is set out in our overview of the best crypto exchanges.
2. Hold the liquidation price against the daily range. 2.7 percent of daily range against 5 percent of buffer at 20x leverage. If your own liquidation price sits between $81,273 and $83,568, the leverage is too large for this week. The differences in funding rates and collateral are shown in the comparison of the best perp DEXs.
3. Look up the purchase date of the oldest tranche. Everything bought on October 21, 2025 or earlier has the one-year deadline under Section 23 EStG behind it. We track the current state of the rule on our page on the crypto holding period.

(As of October 21, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

The European Banking Authority wants crypto lending brought under the MiCA regulation, explicitly including cases where providers give their customers access to DeFi lending protocols. That is the position in its response of September 24, 2026 to the European Commission's review of MiCA. We put three questions to Wojciech Kaszycki, Strategy Advisor at Warsaw-listed BTCS S.A. and founder of the payments company Mobilum. His short version: collateralized lending to businesses and wealthy clients fits MiCA and stays, while retail yield moves away. His test for supervisors: "If the firm can lose your money, regulate the firm. If it can't, you're regulating a website."

About the interviewee: Wojciech Kaszycki is Strategy Advisor at BTCS S.A.. The company holds bitcoin on its balance sheet; its shares trade on the NewConnect market of the Warsaw Stock Exchange under the ticker BTF and on the Frankfurt Open Market. Kaszycki founded the payments company Mobilum and chairs it. He gave his answers in writing in October 2026.

What the EBA proposes for crypto lending under MiCA

MiCA has applied in full since December 30, 2024 and covers the issuance of crypto-assets and the services of exchanges, custodians and brokers. Lending and borrowing crypto-assets is not yet one of the services that require authorization. Article 142 of the regulation only called for a stocktake, for which the EBA and ESMA delivered a joint report in January 2025. The Commission is now reviewing MiCA, and its MiCA consultation closed on September 30, 2026.

In its response to the MiCA review, the EBA recommends regulating crypto lending, including where crypto-asset service providers facilitate access to DeFi protocols. It points to earlier research showing crypto lending and borrowing in at least 16 EU member states, and notes that easy access through crypto firms and AI tools is blurring the line between centralized and decentralized finance. These are the measures it puts on the table:

The recommendation is not binding. Whether it becomes law depends on a legislative proposal from the Commission, which Parliament and Council would then negotiate.

Crypto lending in the EU: what survives and what moves offshore

CryptoTicker: If the EBA gets its way and crypto lending falls under MiCA, which part of the EU lending market actually survives and which part moves offshore?

Wojciech Kaszycki: What survives is the boring part, and the boring part is most of the money. Collateralized lending to businesses and wealthy clients, run by licensed firms that already do custody and KYC, fits MiCA easily. Banks will like this: a rulebook for Bitcoin-backed loans invites them in, and they have the balance sheets. Suitability tests and leverage caps cost them nothing because they already do that for every other product.

What moves is retail yield. The 8% on stablecoins, the leveraged loops, the "deposit and earn" buttons. Those live on DeFi front ends today, and a front end moves jurisdictions in an afternoon. We've seen this film: when MiCA's stablecoin rules landed, non-compliant tokens didn't disappear; EU users got geofenced and went to self-custody and offshore venues. The EBA says lending already happens in 16 member states. After the rules, it will still happen in 16 member states, just with a VPN. So Europe keeps the institutional book and loses the retail flow. That may be the trade the regulator wants. It should say so openly.

For context: no issuer may pay interest on stablecoins in the EU even today, article 50 of MiCA forbids it. Where a yield is shown, it comes from lending, as we explain in our piece on stablecoin interest and the MiCA ban.

What MiCA lending rules change for a listed bitcoin treasury company

CryptoTicker: BTCS put bitcoin into a yield program in March. From a listed treasury company's view, what would the lending rules change in practice about how that bitcoin is put to work?

Wojciech Kaszycki: In our case, less than people think, and that's the point. BTCS put 50 BTC into a Bitcoin L2 liquidity program in March. It's our own balance sheet, not client money, approved under a board treasury policy, every step disclosed in ESPI filings in Warsaw. MiCA regulates people who provide services to clients. We're the client. Six months later we got 51.84 BTC back, paid in bitcoin, and reported that too.

What would change is the menu. If the firms that structure these programs for institutions need a MiCA license to offer "DeFi access", the EU-based ones that stay will cost more, and the rest will stop serving EU companies. The reward leg matters as well: our program paid in BTC and USDC, and the EBA floats restricting lending that touches stablecoins that need MiCA authorization. That alone could force a redesign.

The upside: a certified protocol list would shorten the auditor conversation. Honestly, that's where we spend most of our time today, not on the trade.

The figure can be checked against the terms BTCS published in March 2026: a six-month program with 50 to 100 BTC on the Hemi network, with a minimum annualized yield of 10 percent for the first two months and 6 percent for the following four. On 50 BTC that works out as follows:

The repayment he cites therefore sits at the promised floor. For retail investors it is no benchmark: anyone who lends crypto carries the risk of the protocol and of the counterparty, and a floor only holds as far as the party promising it can pay. How such returns arise and which risks remain is covered in our guide to crypto lending, interest and risks.

Where regulating DeFi lending through its access points breaks down

CryptoTicker: Regulating DeFi through the companies that connect users to it sounds workable on paper. Where does it break down?

Wojciech Kaszycki: It breaks at the definition. "Facilitating access" sounds precise until you ask what it covers. A website? A wallet with a browser inside it? An AI agent that moves funds for you? The EBA itself admits AI tools are blurring the line, which is another way of saying the perimeter won't hold.

Second, it breaks on cost. A licensed front end carries liability for a protocol it doesn't control. So it will offer only two or three whitelisted protocols, or none. Users don't stop lending. They open the unlicensed front end or talk to the contract directly, at zero cost. You get concentration and no protection.

Third, protocol certification assumes the code stays still. It doesn't. Versions change, forks appear, and the certified one is yesterday's.

Where it does work: when the intermediary actually holds your money. Custodial "DeFi" products are just CeFi with a longer explanation, and regulating that firm is right. My test is simple. If the firm can lose your money, regulate the firm. If it can't, you're regulating a website.

What the MiCA plans for crypto lending mean for you today

As of October 21, 2026 nothing changes yet for lenders in the EU. The EBA has made a recommendation, the Commission is evaluating the consultation, and there is no legislative proposal. Kaszycki's distinction still works today as a check for any lending offer: if the provider holds your coins, you carry its default risk, and its licence matters. If it only routes you to a protocol, you carry the risk of the smart contract.

Which providers offer which terms is shown in our crypto lending comparison, and which exchanges already hold a MiCA licence in our comparison of regulated exchanges.

The MiCA review continues now that the consultation has closed, and whether lending ends up in the regulation will be decided by the Commission's proposal. You can follow the next steps from the Commission and the supervisors in the crypto news on CryptoTicker.

(As of October 21, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Crypto lending carries high risks up to a total loss; check the terms with the provider before every deposit.)

Nvidia's OpenShell Reference Architecture pairs a software sandbox on Vera CPUs with Sentry monitoring on BlueField-4 chips, aiming to let companies run autonomous agents while enforcing limits agents cannot reach.

OpenAI says its models found PHP2Shell and led a two-month coalition to fix it. It's the same AI that broke into Hugging Face and an Australian government portal this year.

Both boards are now studying a tie-up that would put Grok, X, Starlink, orbital data centers, a chip megafactory and Optimus robots under one roof—and under one man's control.

Bitcoin is back near $84,500 as XRP and Zcash lead a broad crypto rebound from October's slide, putting "Uptober" back on the table.

Formed with the Dogecoin Foundation and led by MyDoge founder Jordan Jefferson, the new company consolidates the MyDoge wallet, DogeOS app platform, and Such App to build an economy around DOGE.

Legendary trader John Bollinger has discovered a hidden Bitcoin-themed arcade game on CoinMarketCap that challenges players to navigate BTC's historical price movements while staying within his famous Bollinger Bands.

Cardano has achieved a major real-world adoption milestone, with 100,000 Indian farms now registered on its blockchain.

Ripple's prime brokerage platform has expanded its services to institutional clients following the launch of 24/7 stock trading.

Official Dogecoin X account sets social networks on alert by backing a massive new ecosystem consolidation project under 'Dogecoin Labs' monicker.

Cryptocurrency giant Binance has announced a massive giveaway of 600,000 XRP for users holding Ripple's RLUSD stablecoin, with weekly airdrops starting October 30 and bonus multipliers of up to 1.3x for eligible participants.

TLDR

• Tesla stock gains 3.41% to $386.47 despite a 56% drop in Q3 operating profit.
• Tesla Q3 revenue holds near $28B, but operating earnings plunge 56% year over year.
• Tesla’s cash reserves reach $45.4B after generating $1.5B in free cash flow.
• Vehicle deliveries slip 2% in Q3 as Tesla faces continued battery supply limits.
• Tesla FSD subscriptions surge 67% as Cybercab begins Robotaxi rides in Austin.

Tesla reported a sharp decline in third-quarter operating profit despite maintaining revenue above $28 billion and expanding its cash reserves. The electric vehicle maker also increased production, although deliveries fell and battery shortages limited further growth. Meanwhile, Tesla (TSLA) stock surged 3.41% to $386.47, gaining $12.76, before rising another 1.07% to $390.61 after hours.

Tesla, Inc., TSLA

Tesla Q3 Revenue Reaches $28 Billion as Operating Profit Falls 56%

Tesla reported third-quarter 2026 revenue of $28.046 billion, compared with $28.095 billion during the same period last year. However, operating income dropped 56% to $718 million, reducing its operating margin to 2.6%. GAAP diluted earnings per share also declined to $0.22 from $0.39 a year earlier.

Despite weaker earnings, Tesla increased gross profit to $5.494 billion from $5.054 billion in the previous year. Meanwhile, research and development spending climbed to $2.761 billion as the company expanded artificial intelligence and robotics projects. Total operating expenses reached $4.776 billion, compared with $3.430 billion in the third quarter of 2025.

Tesla generated $6.3 billion in operating cash flow and recorded $1.5 billion in free cash flow. Consequently, cash and short-term investments increased by $1.9 billion sequentially to $45.4 billion. Services and other revenue also grew to $4.605 billion, helping offset weaker automotive and energy revenue.

Tesla Vehicle Deliveries Decline as FSD Subscriptions Jump 67%

Tesla produced 464,391 vehicles during the quarter, representing a 4% increase from the previous year. However, deliveries declined 2% to 486,532 vehicles, despite strong demand across several markets. The company attributed its limited vehicle volume growth partly to battery availability constraints.

Model 3 and Model Y deliveries reached 478,237 units, while other models contributed 8,295 deliveries. Meanwhile, active Full Self-Driving subscriptions and upfront purchases increased 67% annually to 1.74 million. Tesla also reported an FSD attach rate exceeding 75% among new vehicle deliveries in North America.

The company expanded its autonomous driving operations by introducing Cybercab rides in Austin on September 3.  Cumulative unsupervised Robotaxi miles increased eightfold compared with the previous quarter. Tesla also completed its 10 millionth vehicle milestone and reported record production at Gigafactory Berlin.

Tesla Expands Energy Storage and Robotics Operations

Tesla deployed 13.7 GWh of energy storage during the quarter, marking a 10% annual increase. Meanwhile, Megafactory Texas began production with planned annual manufacturing capacity of 50 GWh. The company also reported record energy storage orders and backlog amid growing demand from data centers.

Tesla continued expanding its manufacturing operations while preparing new products for commercial production. The company began Tesla Semi production in Nevada and Optimus robot production in Fremont. Tesla unveiled its next-generation Roadster on October 15 as part of its broader product expansion.

Tesla plans to increase factory utilization while securing additional battery supplies to support production growth. The company also expects software, autonomous driving, and robotics operations to contribute more to future profitability. However, its latest results highlight a widening gap between revenue stability and operating earnings despite stronger cash generation.

The post Tesla (TSLA) Stock: Surges 3.41% as Q3 Revenue Hits $28 Billion Despite 56% Profit Drop appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Netflix stock plunges 5.12% to $65.17 as weak Q4 guidance rattles Wall Street.
• Netflix cuts its 2026 advertising revenue outlook from $3 billion to $2.7 billion.
• Wall Street analysts slash Netflix price targets as revenue growth concerns deepen.
• Netflix posts $12.87 billion in Q3 revenue, but its Q4 outlook misses estimates.
• Netflix cuts 1,000 jobs and names Peter Rice content chief amid fierce competition.

Netflix dropped 5.12% to $65.17 on Wednesday, losing $3.52 as disappointing revenue guidance intensified selling pressure. Shares reached their lowest level in over two years after the streaming company reported weaker fourth-quarter growth expectation. Reduced advertising revenue forecasts and analyst downgrades added pressure despite third-quarter earnings beating Wall Street estimates.

Netflix, Inc., NFLX

Netflix Stock Slides as Q4 Revenue Forecast Misses Estimates

Netflix expects fourth-quarter revenue of $13.44 billion, below the $13.51 billion consensus forecast from Wall Street analysts. The $70 million shortfall raised questions about future growth despite continued demand for the company’s streaming services worldwide. The weaker outlook followed several quarters of slowing revenue growth and growing competition across the entertainment industry.

The streaming company reported third-quarter revenue of $12.87 billion, broadly matching market expectations and reflecting approximately 12% annual growth. Earnings reached $0.87 per share, exceeding analysts’ estimates of $0.82 and showing stronger profitability during the quarter. The positive earnings performance failed to offset concerns about the company’s revenue outlook and advertising business.

Netflix also projected fourth-quarter earnings of $0.67 per share, below Wall Street expectations of approximately $0.73 per share. The company expects annual revenue of approximately $51.1 billion, representing growth of about 13% compared with 2025. The latest projections highlighted slower expansion as streaming competition and changing viewing patterns continued reshaping the market.

Netflix Cuts 2026 Advertising Revenue Forecast to $2.7 Billion

Netflix reduced its 2026 advertising revenue forecast from $3 billion to $2.7 billion following delays in product development. The company attributed the adjustment to slower implementation of certain advertising capabilities across its streaming platform. The $300 million reduction raised questions about the speed of its advertising business expansion.

Netflix introduced its advertising-supported subscription model to attract price-sensitive customers and expand revenue beyond traditional membership fees. The strategy also allows advertisers to reach streaming audiences through targeted campaigns across supported markets. Advertising technology development remains important as the company works to increase commercial opportunities from its growing audience.

Wall Street analysts responded to the earnings report by revising their expectations for Netflix’s financial performance. Bernstein lowered its price target to $80, while MoffettNathanson reduced its target to $90 following the results. Needham analyst Laura Martin downgraded Netflix from Buy to Hold, citing stronger competition and potential margin pressure.

Netflix Restructures Leadership as Streaming Competition Intensifies

Netflix recently announced plans to eliminate approximately 1,000 positions, representing about 6% of its global workforce. The reduction marks its largest workforce restructuring since 2022 and follows efforts to improve operational efficiency. The company continues reviewing spending priorities while strengthening its entertainment offerings and pursuing sustainable business growth.

The company also appointed former Disney executive Peter Rice as its next chief content officer. Rice replaces Bela Bajaria, who led Netflix’s content operations after serving the company for nearly a decade. The leadership transition comes as Netflix seeks stronger audience engagement and improved programming performance across major markets.

Competition from YouTube, TikTok, and rival streaming platforms continues changing how audiences consume television and digital entertainment. Netflix management maintains that domestic engagement remains solid, although the company sees opportunities to improve viewing activity. The company plans to strengthen its content strategy while expanding advertising capabilities and protecting profitability amid slower revenue growth.

The post Netflix (NFLX) Stock: Sinks to Two-Year Low as Slowing Growth Raises Wall Street Concerns appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• FreeCast wins 2026 Streaming Technology Platform Company of the Year award.
• FreeCast secures a second 2026 honor for its home streaming platform offering.
• SmartGuide brings free, paid and local TV discovery into one connected service.
• Enterprise PaaS lets telecom and broadband partners offer branded streaming tools.
• FreeCast targets subscription, advertising and commerce revenue through partners.

FreeCast shares traded at $1.025, up 1.49%, at 1:24 p.m. EDT on October 21. Media & Entertainment Business Review named FreeCast its 2026 Streaming Technology Platform Company of the Year. The publisher also named FreeCast its Home Streaming Solution Company of the Year, highlighting its enterprise software strategy.

FreeCast, Inc. Class A Common Stock, CAST

The Orlando-based media company has spent years developing guides that connect viewers to programming across multiple digital sources. Its strategy differs from subscription streaming operators because FreeCast sells software infrastructure rather than competing through exclusive shows. This approach serves both consumers seeking simpler navigation and enterprises seeking branded entertainment services.

FreeCast Wins Dual 2026 Streaming Industry Honors

The award highlights a company that builds shared streaming infrastructure rather than competing mainly for exclusive television programming. Its platform connects free channels, paid services, local broadcasts, and digital content through a common technology system. FreeCast markets its software to both households and organizations that already serve established customer groups.

The publisher featured FreeCast in its October–November 2026 edition and examined its role in simplifying television distribution. Its company profile discussed the costs and inconvenience consumers face when they manage entertainment across many separate services. The publication also placed FreeCast on its home streaming provider page, recognizing the company’s approach to content access.

Founder and Chief Executive William Mobley has positioned FreeCast as a technology supplier for the broader media industry. Under that model, content owners can maintain control of their programming while distribution partners keep existing customer relationships. The software connects discovery, subscriptions, and commercial activity without requiring every partner to build separate systems.

FreeCast Expands Unified Streaming and Enterprise PaaS

FreeCast’s SmartGuide helps users search for and discover programming across supported free and paid entertainment sources. The service also brings local television and other programming into an interface designed to reduce repeated application switching. Alongside that guide, YouBundle helps customers choose and organize subscription packages based on their viewing needs.

MediaPay supports payments and subscription management, giving the platform a commercial function beyond entertainment discovery. FreeCast offers advertising and transaction tools that can support revenue for participating companies. These services form part of its Platform-as-a-Service offering, which businesses can present through their own brands.

The company targets telecommunications operators, internet providers, broadcasters, satellite groups, and businesses serving residential or commercial audiences. Through its business-to-business-to-consumer model, partners can add streaming features while continuing to manage their own customers. As a result, FreeCast seeks wider distribution through existing business networks instead of relying only on direct subscriptions.

FreeCast Stock and Media Monetization Strategy

The recognition arrives as FreeCast pursues commercial deployments and additional ways to earn revenue from media activity. Its fiscal 2026 report recorded approximately $711,000 in revenue, including about $386,000 from advertising operations. The company also reported financing transactions after fiscal year-end that generated approximately $23.7 million in gross proceeds.

FreeCast has described partnerships and initiatives involving DIRECTV, telecommunications providers, satellite services, and international television distribution. Those arrangements support its goal of reaching audiences through companies with established service relationships and customer bases. Announced relationships alone do not establish how many viewers use the platform or how much revenue deployments generate.

FreeCast calls its potential audience through business relationships Partner-Enabled Addressable Customers, or PEAC, as a distribution planning measure. That figure does not represent active subscribers, completed transactions, or revenue already recorded in company financial statements. For FreeCast, the 2026 awards provide industry exposure while its operating results measure progress in converting partners into customers.

The post FreeCast (CAST) Stock: Wins 2026 Streaming Technology Platform Company of the Year Award appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• NVIDIA stock climbs 2.23% to $221.30 after recovering from a midday selloff
• Data Center revenue reaches $89 billion as NVIDIA reports record AI demand
• NVIDIA’s quarterly revenue hits $96.2 billion, surging 106% year over year
• NVIDIA projects $108 billion in next-quarter sales amid strong AI spending
• BYD, Geely, Isuzu and Nissan adopt NVIDIA’s DRIVE Hyperion vehicle platform

NVIDIA Corporation (NVDA) stock climbed 2.23% to $221.30, gaining $4.83 as strong demand for AI computing supported market momentum. The shares recovered from an intraday decline near $218 and moved above $221 during the session. NVIDIA’s strong earnings and expanding data center business highlighted its position in the AI semiconductor market.

NVIDIA Corporation, NVDA

NVIDIA’s Data Center Revenue Surges as AI Demand Expands

NVIDIA reported fiscal second-quarter 2027 revenue of $96.2 billion, representing a 106% increase from the previous year. Its Data Center division generated $89 billion, accounting for most of the company’s quarterly revenue. This performance reflected continued spending on computing infrastructure and advanced processors across the technology industry.

NVIDIA’s operating income increased 124% to $63.7 billion as sales growth strengthened profitability. The company also reported a gross margin of 75%, highlighting strong earnings from its semiconductor operations. Additionally, NVIDIA projected third-quarter revenue of approximately $108 billion, with a possible variation of 2%.

The company’s first-half operating cash flow reached $74.4 billion, supporting its expanding business operations. However, NVIDIA reported $279 billion in supply and capacity commitments, compared with $119 billion in the previous quarter. These commitments support production capacity and future deliveries, while increasing the company’s financial obligations.

NVIDIA Expands Autonomous Driving Technology Partnerships

Beyond data centers, NVIDIA continues expanding its presence in automotive computing and autonomous driving technology. The company supplies processors and software platforms that support vehicle automation, sensor processing, and driving systems. Its DRIVE Hyperion platform provides computing technology for manufacturers developing advanced vehicle capabilities.

In March, NVIDIA identified BYD, Geely, Isuzu, and Nissan as adopters of its DRIVE Hyperion platform. These partnerships extend the company’s automotive technology network across several major vehicle manufacturers. Moreover, the platform supports computing tasks required for autonomous navigation and vehicle system development.

NVIDIA’s automotive operations remain substantially smaller than its established Data Center business. The company’s financial performance therefore continues to depend primarily on demand for AI processors and computing infrastructure. Meanwhile, automotive partnerships provide additional commercial opportunities as manufacturers develop more advanced driving technology.

NVIDIA Stock Valuation Reflects Strong Earnings Growth

NVIDIA traded at 28.51 times trailing earnings and approximately 24.88 times forward earnings. Its forward earnings multiple remained above the technology-sector median of 21.01. However, the company’s expanding earnings have reduced its valuation multiple compared with earlier periods.

On July 31, 2025, NVIDIA’s forward earnings multiple stood at 39.84, compared with 22.88 in July 2026. Separately, hedge fund ownership increased from 275 funds in the first quarter to 285 in the second quarter. Their combined holdings rose from $83.89 billion to $94.67 billion, reflecting increased institutional exposure.

NVIDIA’s earnings growth continues to draw support from expanding demand for advanced AI computing products. Its strong margins, cash generation, and revenue expansion demonstrate the financial scale of its semiconductor business. Meanwhile, autonomous driving partnerships broaden its operations beyond data centers and strengthen its presence across emerging computing markets.

The post NVIDIA (NVDA) Stock: Hits $221 as AI Demand Supports Strong Earnings appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• VivoPower stock gains 4.09% as new AI partnership targets Europe’s 40GW market.
• VivoPower and Open Innovation AI aim to develop at least 1GW within three years.
• AI data center plans span the Nordics, Europe, the Gulf, and select Asian markets.
• VivoPower brings powered sites; its UAE partner handles AI operations and security.
• VIVO retreats from above $3 intraday, ending at $2.29 despite a 4.09% gain.

VivoPower PLC has partnered with UAE-based Open Innovation AI to develop sovereign AI data centers across four regions. VivoPower (VIVO) stock rose 4.09% to $2.29, adding $0.09 as morning trading sent shares above $3.00. However, shares later retreated sharply from that intraday peak, reducing the early gains.

VivoPower PLC, VIVO

VivoPower Targets 40GW European AI Opportunity

The companies estimate more than 40 gigawatts of potential sovereign AI data center demand across Europe. Together, they aim to pursue at least one gigawatt of capacity within three years. Their projects would serve governments and enterprises seeking greater control over computing infrastructure, data, and operations.

Growing AI demand has intensified competition for locations with reliable electricity and suitable infrastructure. Consequently, access to power increasingly determines where companies can develop large data centers. VivoPower plans to pair its development expertise with Open Innovation AI’s software and security capabilities.

The partnership covers the Nordics, mainland Europe, Gulf Cooperation Council countries, and selected Asian markets. Both companies see demand from authorities seeking locally controlled computing services. However, their 40-gigawatt estimate describes a potential market, not capacity already secured under the agreement.

Agreement Combines Infrastructure and AI Operations

VivoPower will handle site sourcing, land acquisition, facility development, and power operations. Meanwhile, Open Innovation AI will provide workload scheduling, system management, cybersecurity, and related AI tools. Together, they plan to offer governments and businesses infrastructure and software through a coordinated development model.

Sovereign cloud systems give countries control over data processing, technology choices, and operational oversight. Such arrangements can help organizations meet domestic rules without relying entirely on foreign cloud providers. Open Innovation AI says its platform supports private cloud, on-site, and fully disconnected environments.

The companies signed their definitive heads of agreement in Abu Dhabi on October 21, 2026. Each proposed development will require a separate project agreement before the partners finalize specific commitments. Therefore, the announcement creates a collaboration framework rather than confirmed construction orders for the targeted capacity.

Nordic Assets Support Regional Expansion

VivoPower expects its Mo i Rana asset in Norway to support opportunities across the Nordics. The company also cites its development pipeline and access to electricity as potential advantages. Across mainland Europe, the partners plan to serve organizations managing sensitive information and critical services.

Their UAE presence provides a base for expansion across the Gulf region. Open Innovation AI has developed platforms for government and enterprise operations requiring local control. Meanwhile, the companies plan to assess Asian markets with suitable power resources and supportive infrastructure policies.

VivoPower also plans to deploy Open Innovation AI software across its existing portfolio and Nordic pipeline. However, the companies have not disclosed budgets, construction timetables, or committed project sites under this framework. Further progress will depend on individual agreements and the conversion of proposed opportunities into operating data centers.

The post VivoPower PLC (VIVO) Stock: Climbs as AI Deal Targets 40GW Europe Market appeared first on Blockonomi.

President Donald Trump will use a White House event on Wednesday to spotlight his administration’s efforts against foreign criminal networks that lure Americans into fraudulent crypto investments, a White House official told Reuters.

His own family, meanwhile, is heavily involved in soliciting crypto investments.

Cabinet Officials Set to Attend Scam Event

Cybercrime prevention more broadly is the theme of the session, and the president and members of his cabinet are expected to point to the government’s seizure of fraudulent crypto investment websites, the official explained. Efforts to stop online impersonation scams are also on the agenda.

Homeland Security Secretary Markwayne Mullin, FBI Director Kash Patel, Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth and Attorney General Todd Blanche are expected to attend, the official added.

According to an FBI report, Americans filed more than a million complaints about internet scams last year, a 17% increase from 2024. The same report noted that Americans who filed complaints reported the highest losses.

Trump’s family has gotten heavily tied to crypto, with the president’s annual financial disclosure showing that most of the $2.2 billion he made last year came from digital currencies. This includes about $600 million from World Liberty Financial (WLFI) and $636 million more from the sale of Trump-branded meme coins.

The president defended the earnings, saying there was nothing illegal or wrong about them, even as critics like political commentator John Oliver accused him of giving investors access to the White House in exchange for them putting money into his crypto businesses. The White House has said neither the president nor his family have engaged or will engage in conflicts of interest.

Investor Losses Tied to Family Crypto Venture

As CryptoPotato reported earlier, consumer advocacy group Public Citizen estimated that investors in crypto ventures tied to the president and his family are at least $4.7 billion underwater since 2022. Most of those losses remain unrealized, meaning investors still hold the assets and have not sold at a loss.

The TRUMP meme coin accounted for an estimated $3.2 billion of that figure, and the token has lost more than 97% of its value since hitting an all-time high of $73 in January 2025, although at the time of writing it had jumped more than 7% in 24 hours to take its price to around $1.82. WLFI investors are at least $1 billion underwater by the same estimate.

Senators Elizabeth Warren and Richard Blumenthal asked SEC Chair Paul Atkins in August to investigate the meme coin. They suggested that it may have allowed fraud or unfairly enriched people at the expense of everyday investors.

Per Public Citizen’s report, the president continues to own and control his businesses. His stakes, including the meme coin and World Liberty Financial’s two tokens, sit in a revocable trust in which he is the sole donor and beneficiary, and his eldest son is the sole trustee.

The post Report: Trump to Address Foreign Crypto Scams at White House Event appeared first on CryptoPotato.

The crypto market is back in the green on Wednesday, as several major assets have posted gains.

According to Santiment, XRP and Dogecoin are showing potential buying opportunities.

Historically Favorable Zones

The latest 365-day Market Value to Realized Value (MVRV) data puts DOGE at around 0.74, which suggests that holders who bought over the past year are sitting on significant unrealized losses. XRP is also in negative territory, as its MVRV hovers near 0.92. Santiment explained that both assets are in historically more favorable, lower-risk zones compared with periods when holders hold large profits.

Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Chainlink, however, tell a different story. The 365-day MVRV readings of these three tokens range from 0.97 to 1.04, which places average holders close to breakeven.

This points to a more neutral market position for the three assets. MVRV helps traders assess whether investors are sitting on profits or losses. High readings can indicate rising profit-taking risk, while low readings mean selling pressure is nearing exhaustion. However, these signals do not guarantee a price rebound.

Macro Headwinds

Despite the recent uptick, Bitcoin and the wider crypto market continue to face growing pressure from geopolitical tensions and interest-rate uncertainty. According to Bitunix, the standoff between Washington and Tehran has added fresh uncertainty over oil supplies, with the US midterm elections set for November 3.

Higher oil prices could keep inflation elevated and give the Federal Reserve less room to ease monetary policy. While economists expect rates to hold at 3.75%-4.00% at the October meeting, all 100 respondents in a Reuters poll expect another hike in December.

Markets are also showing mixed signals. The S&P 500 remains relatively close to its record high, but the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index has dropped around 14% since October 6. For the crypto market, Bitunix said that the key test is whether energy costs, interest-rate expectations, and AI investment risks begin deteriorating at the same time.

“If they do, markets may need to reprice growth expectations, financing costs, and capital allocation, increasing the potential for volatility across risk assets.”

The post XRP and DOGE Look Undervalued by MVRV Measures, but Will Traders Take Notice? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Cardano’s ecosystem continues to evolve, with the team introducing several advancements that have drawn the crypto community’s attention.

ADA, the project’s native token, is up 4% on a daily basis, yet a combination of bearish factors suggests it may soon head south again.

The Latest Updates

Earlier this week, several sources revealed that Charles Hoskinson (Cardano’s founder) has started building a brand-new programming language for the protocol. According to X account BSCN, the language will be “the first of its kind, enabling intents and PCD via Groth16 proofs” and is co-developed by Input Output engineer Lucas Rosa.

TMA | The Money Ape also commented, claiming that the goal is to make transactions smarter, more secure, and verifiable without revealing private data.

Besides the new programming language, Hoskinson recently introduced Quinelings, an experimental project that turns programs into self-replicating digital creatures.

Each creature blends executable code with mathematics, making its calculations easy to inspect and reuse. They can tackle tasks such as finding roots or measuring water volume, with results that users can verify themselves. At this stage, Quinelings run only on local machines with simulated effects, and the package has not yet been released on npm.

Midnight’s Progress

Midnight is Cardano’s privacy-focused partner chain, designed to let users keep sensitive data private without sacrificing security or compliance. The network’s mainnet launched in March 2026, with NIGHT serving as its utility token.

Earlier this month, Hoskinson said that he’s working on a concept that only Midnight can bring to the cryptocurrency space that “solves most of the problems.”

“Almost have all of it designed conceptually. It’s the magnum opus of my career,” he added.

Several X users commented on the post, with one asking if Cardano is fully completed. Hoskinson said that after the Leios upgrade, the protocol has everything he wanted:

“Decentralized consensus, governance and development, EUTXO, plutus, infinitely scalable, secure, built with formal methods, multiple independent nodes, recursively self-improving, and millions of people hold ADA.”

Just recently, Hoskinson welcomed Tron to Midnight.

ADA Price Outlook

Cardano’s native cryptocurrency experienced substantial volatility over the past month, hovering between roughly $0.20 and nearly $0.28. It currently trades near $0.226, up 4.6% for the day.

Several hours ago, popular analyst Ali Martinez identified several worrying factors that could signal a potential pullback in the near future. First, he revealed that the total amount of coins held by whales has dropped from around 2.9 billion at the start of October to around 2.75 billion. He also noted that their total holdings have been relatively flat for the past 10 days, and so far these large investors aren’t showing a clear directional bias.

He then moved to ADA’s SuperTrend indicator, which has flipped bearish, and cautioned that this development has preceded a 46% correction in the past. Martinez described $0.21 as a level that could confirm a deeper decline, predicting that a daily close below it could trigger a crash to $0.17.

Shortly after, the analyst noted that ADA’s whale activity has increased, with transactions worth more than $1 million rising from 24 to 51. He said the spike coincided with the asset’s price uptick from $0.21 to nearly $0.23.

The post Important Cardano News and ADA Price Update: October 21 appeared first on CryptoPotato.

The cryptocurrency market has staged an evident resurgence over the past 24 hours, with Zcash (ZEC) once again among the top performers.

Many analysts believe this marks the start of a major new rally, while some whales opened long positions worth millions of dollars.

Explosion to $2,000 Comes Next?

As of this writing, ZEC is worth just over $1,330 (per CoinGecko), up 13% for the day. By comparison, Bitcoin (BTC) has rebounded by 3%, while Ethereum (ETH) has risen by 4% within the same period. The privacy coin’s market capitalization stands at over $22 billion, solidifying its spot among the 10 biggest cryptocurrencies and widening the gap with Hyperliquid (HYPE), which ranks 11th.

The most likely catalyst for ZEC’s latest price increase is the green wave sweeping the sector, but there may be more to it. The X account BSCN revealed that Zcash plans to triple its block production speed, with developers targeting November 5 for the NU7 upgrade.

“The upgrade would cut block times from 75 seconds to 25 seconds. It would also temporarily remove 60% of transaction fees from circulation. The existing mining reward halving schedule would remain unchanged. The activation height still needs to be incorporated into node software before the upgrade can take effect,” the disclosure reads.

Besides gaining 13% on the day, ZEC has also climbed 22% from its local bottom of around $1,050, registered just a few days ago. On that note, X user Lucky said:

“ZEC is bouncing back beautifully. Tell me you bought the dip.”

Token Talk and Nehal also weighed in. The former argued that, to maintain its bullish structure, the price would need a healthy consolidation period instead of printing another candle straight to the upside. For his part, the latter predicted that ZEC is gearing up for an explosion toward $2,000.

The Whales’ Activity

Looknochain revealed that two major investors recently bet heavily on ZEC’s further upside. One opened an $18.6 million long position with 10x leverage, whereas the other entered an $18.9 million long under the same conditions.

Such a development is generally considered bullish because it shows strong conviction from large investors, which can encourage smaller players to jump on the bandwagon and distribute fresh capital into the ecosystem.

Nonetheless, heavy leverage also raises the risk of a long squeeze, and if ZEC suddenly reverses course, cascading liquidations of overly risky positions could intensify selling pressure and accelerate the decline.

The post Zcash (ZEC) Rises to a 9-Day High as Whales Bet on Further Gains: Details appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitcoin is pushing back toward $86K after buyers defended the $80K short-term demand zone once again, with BTC trading close to $85K. The rebound comes as markets price in roughly a 25% chance of another Fed hike at the late October meeting, following September’s quarter-point increase. Meanwhile, the NVM Ratio has climbed to its highest level since early 2026, indicating that BTC might be overvalued in terms of network activity.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

BTC continues to trade within the ascending channel that has defined the recovery from the late-June lows near $58K. The rally carried price into the $86K-$90K supply zone, where the February sell-off began. Two attempts to break through this area produced only wicks toward $87K, as the market was rejected to the downside.

The structure remains constructive as long as Bitcoin holds above the channel’s midpoint, currently near $80K. A decisive daily close above $86K would be needed to break into the supply zone and open the way toward $90K.

Losing the channel midline, however, would shift the focus to the $75K-$78K weekly order block, which was the base of the September rally. Below that, the lower channel boundary near $72K is the final structural support before the recovery channel would be invalidated.

BTC/USDT 4-Hour Chart

The 4-hour chart shows Bitcoin inside a rising short-term channel since the mid-September low near $75K. After the October 6 rejection from $86K, the price began forming lower highs. Each decline, however, has been absorbed by the $80K demand zone, which now converges with the channel’s lower trendline.

BTC is currently pressing against the 84K–84.3K supply zone, created by the October 12 lower high. A clean break above it would end the short-term sequence of lower highs and bring the 85.6K–86.6K zone, where the October 6 sell-off originated, into play.

A rejection from the $84K level would likely send the price back toward the same $80K demand area. Losing both this zone and the lower trendline would expose the $75K region, mentioned in the daily timeframe analysis. Still, with the price creating a higher low on the 4-hour chart, the market seems to have a valid chance to break above $84K.

On-Chain Analysis

The NVM Ratio on CryptoQuant compares Bitcoin’s market capitalization with the square of its daily active addresses. It is based on Metcalfe’s law, which holds that a network’s value grows with the square of its users. Active addresses act as a proxy for real economic usage, so a rising ratio suggests that valuation is outpacing that activity.

The 30-day EMA of the ratio peaked above 4.5 during Bitcoin’s 2025 run toward its all-time high. It climbed back toward 4.4 in January 2026, shortly before the February sell-off toward $65K. After falling to around 3.0 in August, the metric has rebounded to approximately 4.1, even though BTC still trades roughly a third below its peak.

This does not constitute a sell signal by itself, as ETFs and custodians move much of Bitcoin’s activity off-chain and likely push the ratio higher over time. Still, the elevated reading implies thinner valuation support from network usage, making the $80K demand zone even more important to hold in the short term.

The post Bitcoin Price Analysis: BTC Blasts Past $84K – Is $90K the Next Target? appeared first on CryptoPotato.