China's cooling inflation allows for continued monetary easing, but persistent weak demand and low consumer spending pose economic challenges.

The post China’s monthly inflation cools to 0.5% as Iran war impact eases appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Rising PPI in China signals potential global supply chain cost pressures, impacting competitiveness and pricing strategies across industries.

The post China PPI jumps 3.5% year over year in July, says National Bureau of Statistics appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The case underscores the critical intersection of corporate security and national security, highlighting the geopolitical tensions in tech industries.

The post SK Hynix employee sentenced to 18 months for leaking chip technology to Chinese firm appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

China's easing producer inflation may pressure industrial margins and complicate monetary policy, highlighting fragile domestic demand.

The post China’s producer inflation eases in July, falls below expectations appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Lukaku's potential move to Fenerbahe highlights the complexities of modern football transfers, impacting club finances and player career paths.

The post Romelu Lukaku agrees to join Fenerbahçe, transfer fee talks ongoing appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Trump Media Pulls Back From Crypto Deals: Report

The President Donald Trump-backed media company, Trump Media and Technology Group, is pulling back from two of its crypto deals, according to a report by Axios. 

The publication reported Friday that the two deals with Crypto.com — a prediction market and treasury — would not go ahead. 

Citing comments from fusion energy company TAE’s interim CEO, Kevin McGurn, the publication said that Trump Media had pulled the deals as the market for digital asset treasury companies had become saturated over the past year.

Trump Media last year said it was working with crypto exchange Crypto.com to build a Cronos treasury with $6.4 billion in backing. Cronos is the native coin of Crypto.com’s platform. 

It later in 2025 said it was working with Crypto.com on Truth Predict, a betting platform to allow users to put money on sports games, elections and other events.

Digital asset treasuries exploded in popularity last year, with companies following in the footsteps of Nasdaq-listed software company Strategy to build balance sheets with Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies. 

But a slump in prices since October has hurt the stock of a number of companies who adopted the business idea. 

McGurn was quoted saying that the decision to scale back was driven more by “competitive dynamics” rather than regulatory concerns surrounding a crypto company backed by the president.

President Trump campaigned on a ticket to help the crypto space and received backing from major players in the space. 

The president since taking office has launched a meme coin and he and his family backed a crypto project, World Liberty Financial. 

Axios added that the exchange-traded funds debuted last year by Trump Media, special purpose acquisition company Yorkville Acquisition Corp., and Crypto.com would continue. 

This post Trump Media Pulls Back From Crypto Deals: Report first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Senators Cynthia Lummis and Angela Alsobrooks Say Bipartisan Work on Clarity Act Continues Despite Delays

The Clarity Act may be delayed — for now — but pro-crypto senators remain committed to the fight. 

And not just Republicans: Democratic Senator Angela Alsobrooks accompanied conservative “Bitcoin Senator” Cynthia Lummis in assuring voters that work was being done on the bill. 

Lawmakers were hoping a crucial vote on the long-awaited crypto market structure bill was to go ahead before a five-week recess but news dropped Friday that it was too little, too late. Now, the Senate will vote on the bill in September. 

“We’ve worked for over a year on a bipartisan basis to protect consumers, limit deposit flight, fight illicit finance, and include a fair deal on ethics,” Alsobrooks said in a statement. 

Lummis, who had previously blasted Democrats for holding back the bill, added: “There will be a time where I can say more, but for now, let me say this, we’ve come too far to quit. I will continue working with my colleagues to get this done — this fight is far from over.”

Passed last year in the House of Representatives, the Clarity Act started small but its text has grown over the months. 

This is partly because of banking lobby chiefs locking horns with crypto exchanges over concerns they pay customers too much yield with their stablecoin products. But Democrats also have wanted more work on the ethics side of the bill. 

A bill banning government officials from promoting and making money was circulating among lawmakers in July though some lawmakers said it still fell short. 

Lummis last week said she was genuinely “struggling to understand” what else Democrats wanted for the bill. Some suggested they may have been playing politics ahead of the midterms. 

A number of Democrats have criticized the way the Trump family has profited from digital asset ventures, such as the President’s memecoin, $TRUMP, and World Liberty Financial project. 

Trump and the White House have always denied any conflicts of interest, and the President has also highlighted that Democrats have cashed in trading stocks. 

This post Senators Cynthia Lummis and Angela Alsobrooks Say Bipartisan Work on Clarity Act Continues Despite Delays first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Coldcard Bitcoin Hack: Victims Report Median Loss of 1 BTC as Theft Tops $111 Million

New analysis of Bitcoin theft reports reveals that stolen funds overwhelmingly came from long-dormant wallets, with victims reporting a median loss of over one coin.

Data posted on X from Galaxy Research’s Alex Thorn looked at 250 victim reports and found the typical stolen coin had sat untouched for 3.5 years, and a striking 88% of pilfered funds were at least a year old. 

By address, losses ranged from a median of 0.014 Bitcoin to a mean of 0.212 Bitcoin, while individual victims reported a median loss of 1.022 Bitcoin and an average of 4.04 Bitcoin — with one unlucky holder losing as much as 58.97 coins. 

Hackers started by taking over $35 million in Bitcoin from wallets last week Thursday. Coinkite, which makes Coldcard, said that a firmware bug in Coldcard Mk3 devices — starting with version 4.0.1 in March 2021 — caused seed generation to fall back to a weak software Pseudorandom Number Generator instead of the hardware true random number generator, allowing hackers to essentially guess investor seedphrases. 

The theft continued throughout the weekend while Coinkite and other Bitcoiners urged Coldcard users to immediately move their funds.

Galaxy Research said Friday that a total of $111 million has been confirmed stolen but the number could be much higher as it continues its research. 

“We have many more coins we are vetting for confirmation — we think total losses likely exceed $130 million,” the firm wrote on X. 

Since the attack, cautious investors have been moving their coins to other storage solutions — including exchanges.

Coinkite said in a statement this week that the bug in its software “silently went unnoticed” and “its potential impact grew with every release” of its products. 

Days after the first hack, the company urged investors to update their software or move their funds off the popular hardware wallet. 

This post Coldcard Bitcoin Hack: Victims Report Median Loss of 1 BTC as Theft Tops $111 Million first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoin Shrugs off Coldcard Hack and Clarity Act Delays, Price Chops Higher as Investors Buy ETFs

Bitcoin was trading higher on Friday — despite negative news circulating regarding the Clarity Act delay and a massive exploit of the popular Coldcard wallets. 

The biggest cryptocurrency was trading above $65,170 today, up nearly 4% over the past week, despite significant headwinds against the asset. 

Little over a week ago, hackers started stealing millions in Bitcoin from Coldcard wallets after discovering a vulnerability in the product’s software. Some estimates put the amount of Bitcoin lost now at over $130 million. 

The incident has rattled the BTC community that typically praises cold storage solutions. 

And news dropped late Thursday night that the crypto market structure bill would be delayed until September as lawmakers break for recess. The bill, if approved, would set in stone digital asset regulation in the U.S. and would be bullish for the biggest cryptocurrency. 

Still, Bitcoin made gains as investors carried on buying shares of the exchange-traded funds: BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust, and Morgan Stanley’s fund have both seen significant inflows this week, according to data from Farside Investors. 

Bitcoin’s price has typically done well when investors have thrown cash at the products, managed by Fidelity, Grayscale, and other top asset managers. 

Since the beginning of this week, $763.6 million in fresh cash has hit the funds. 

Bloomberg Intelligence’s senior ETF analyst, Eric Balchunas, said the flows might not be related to the Coldcard hack, but it would make sense for investors to rotate into the highly successful products. 

A firmware flaw in the popular Coldcard hardware wallets, built by Canadian company Coinkite, has allowed an attacker to guess weak private keys.

Millions of dollars in Bitcoin has been drained on a daily basis since the attack, and cautious investors have been moving their coins to other storage solutions — including exchanges. 

This post Bitcoin Shrugs off Coldcard Hack and Clarity Act Delays, Price Chops Higher as Investors Buy ETFs first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoin ETFs Add Nearly $800 Million in the Wake of Coldcard Exploit

One of the biggest Bitcoin security stories of the year unfolded last week as a firmware exploit affecting certain Coldcard hardware wallets renewed industry debate around self-custody and operational security.

At the same time, another story was developing in the background.

Over the same seven trading days, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs attracted $790.6 million in net inflows, according to the Bitcoin For Corporations ETF Dashboard. More than $1.0 billion entered the funds while $212.7 million exited, resulting in one of the strongest weekly periods in recent months.

The two developments are not necessarily related. ETF flow data cannot tell us why investors bought Bitcoin. What it does tell us is what they actually did. And during a week dominated by security headlines, institutional capital continued flowing into regulated Bitcoin investment products.

One Red Day Didn’t Change the Trend

The seven-day flow chart tells a simple story. There was one notable setback.

On July 31, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $212.7 million in net outflows, the only negative session during the period.

After that, buyers returned almost immediately.

The next four trading sessions posted consecutive gains:

• Aug. 3: +$170.1M
• Aug. 4: +$207.8M
• Aug. 5: +$241.6M
• Aug. 6: +$99.4M

By the end of the week, the positive days had more than offset the lone selloff.

Instead of focusing on individual trading sessions, the seven-day view shows where capital ultimately moved—and during this period, it moved into Bitcoin.

BlackRock Continued to Lead the Way

As has been the case for much of the ETF era, BlackRock’s IBIT accounted for the majority of inflows.

Over the seven-day period:

• IBIT attracted $757.5 million in rolling net inflows.
• It extended its streak to four consecutive inflow days.
• On the latest trading day alone, it added $128.3 million.

Other issuers also participated.

Fidelity’s FBTC added $11.2 million on the latest session, while Bitwise’s BITB added $1.7 million. A handful of funds experienced modest outflows, but none came close to offsetting IBIT’s continued strength.

The result was a week where inflows remained broad enough to keep total ETF demand firmly positive.

What ETF Flows Can and Can’t Tell Us

ETF flows are one of the clearest windows into institutional participation in Bitcoin. They show where money moved. They do not explain investor motivation.

It’s impossible to conclude from one week’s data whether buyers viewed the Coldcard exploit as insignificant, saw it as an opportunity to buy, or simply continued executing long-term allocation strategies that were already in motion.

What can be observed is that institutional demand remained resilient during a week when Bitcoin security dominated industry headlines.

A security incident involving one custody solution is different from the broader investment case for Bitcoin, and ETF investors appeared comfortable continuing to allocate capital through regulated products.

Why This Matters

Bitcoin is no longer accessed through a single path. Some investors choose self-custody. Others hold Bitcoin through public companies. Many institutions access Bitcoin through regulated ETFs. Each approach comes with its own tradeoffs, operational considerations, and risk profile.

Events like the Coldcard exploit naturally increase attention on custody practices. At the same time, ETF flow data provides a useful lens into whether institutional demand is changing beneath the headlines.

This week, the numbers suggest demand remained intact.

Follow Institutional Bitcoin Demand in Real Time

Daily ETF flows have become one of the most important indicators of institutional participation in Bitcoin.

The spot Bitcoin ETF Dashboard tracks:

• Daily net inflows and outflows
• Rolling 7-day momentum
• Issuer-by-issuer rankings
• Estimated Bitcoin held by U.S. spot ETFs
• Market share and concentration trends
• Historical flow data across every issuer

Whether you’re monitoring institutional adoption, evaluating market structure, or simply trying to separate headlines from capital flows, the dashboard provides a real-time view of where money is moving.

Explore the live Bitcoin ETF Dashboard: https://bitcoinforcorporations.com/bitcoin-etf-dashboard/

As new flow data is published each trading day, the dashboard updates to help investors and corporate decision-makers track one of the market’s clearest signals of institutional Bitcoin demand.

Disclaimer: This content was prepared on behalf of Bitcoin For Corporations for informational purposes only. It reflects the author’s own analysis and opinion and should not be relied upon as investment advice. Nothing in this article constitutes an offer, invitation, or solicitation to purchase, sell, or subscribe for any security or financial product.

This post Bitcoin ETFs Add Nearly $800 Million in the Wake of Coldcard Exploit first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Nick Ward.

US-listed spot Bitcoin and Ethereum exchange-traded funds pulled in more than $1 billion in fresh cash this week, with both groups registering their strongest inflows since April as demand for regulated crypto investment products rebounded.

Data from SoSoValue shows that spot Bitcoin ETFs attracted $853.54 million during the week ended Aug. 7, their biggest haul in nearly four months.

The funds recorded inflows in every session, including $170.09 million on Monday, $211.49 million on Tuesday and $244.42 million on Wednesday before demand moderated toward the end of the week.

The total surpassed the roughly $824 million collected during the week of April 24 and was the strongest since the week ended April 17, when Bitcoin funds drew about $996 million.

BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust, or IBIT, dominated the latest inflow week, accounting for roughly $693 million of the weekly total. That means the world’s largest asset manager captured more than four-fifths of the new money entering the spot Bitcoin funds.

These inflows add to the scale the products have amassed since their landmark US debut in January 2024. The group has recorded more than $52 billion in cumulative net inflows and now oversees about $80 billion in net assets.

Coldcard hack puts custody back in focus

The renewed demand arrived days after disclosures of a security flaw affecting Coldcard hardware wallets, adding a custody backdrop to the ETF rebound.

Researchers at TRM Labs estimated that attackers drained roughly 1,816 BTC, worth about $116 million, from more than 5,200 addresses beginning July 30. Other estimates have placed losses around $130 million as researchers continue to trace the thefts.

Bloomberg Intelligence ETF analyst Eric Balchunas pointed to the timing of the fund flows following the Coldcard losses, while stopping short of claiming that affected self-custody investors had moved directly into ETFs.

He argued that the breach could strengthen the case for institutional custody among investors whose primary objective is long-term Bitcoin exposure rather than using the asset for transactions or censorship-resistant payments.

For those investors, Balchunas said the security infrastructure behind large financial institutions could become increasingly difficult to dismiss after a failure involving hardware designed specifically to keep Bitcoin outside the traditional financial system.

There is no evidence yet that the Coldcard breach directly caused this week’s ETF inflows. The timing, however, puts the trade-off between self-custody and institutional custody back into focus just as regulated Bitcoin funds are seeing their strongest demand in months.

Ethereum ETFs extend five-week comeback

Ethereum-focused ETFs also staged an even sharper improvement, collecting $244.94 million for their strongest week since April and extending their run of weekly inflows to five consecutive periods.

The run has now brought roughly $566 million into the products and represents their longest weekly inflow streak this year. It is also their longest since a 14-week run between May and August 2025 that attracted nearly $10 billion.

Unlike Bitcoin funds, the Ethereum ETFs started the week in negative territory, recording $11.42 million of net outflows on Monday.

Demand reversed sharply thereafter. Investors added about $53.75 million on Tuesday, $60.86 million on Wednesday and $92.15 million on Thursday, while another $49.60 million entered the products on Friday.

BlackRock again accounted for most of the buying. Its iShares Ethereum Trust, or ETHA, attracted roughly $203 million during the week, equivalent to more than 80% of the category’s total inflows.

The concentration means the strongest week for both Bitcoin and ETH ETFs since April was largely a BlackRock story. IBIT and ETHA together absorbed about $896 million, or more than four-fifths of the nearly $1.1 billion that flowed into the two groups.

That renewed demand marks a sharp improvement from the weaker flows that characterized much of the summer, while giving both crypto assets their clearest sign in months that investors are rebuilding exposure through Wall Street’s regulated vehicles.

The post Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs break $1B in their best week since April and BlackRock brought in 80% of the cash appeared first on CryptoSlate.

A customer opens an exchange account, copies a string of numbers and follows a path through a Merkle tree. The page processes the request and returns a reassuring result: the customer’s balance was included in the exchange’s proof of reserves.

The verification is most likely technically sound, establishing that the account appeared in a dataset and that the exchange controlled wallets that contained enough of a particular asset to cover the balances represented there.

However, it can easily leave out whether every customer appears in that dataset, how much the exchange owes to lenders, whether the displayed coins have been pledged as collateral, and whether the company actually controlling the wallet is the same company that's legally required to repay the customer.

The interface on most exchanges makes this reserve verification process feel pretty comprehensive and final because people tend to give more authority to cryptographic evidence than to corporate promises.

But what many miss is the fact that the result only establishes that an exchange demonstrated control over specified assets at a specified moment. A determination of solvency, on the other hand, requires both a deeper and a wider view of the company’s obligations, ownership structure, and access to funds.

What proof of reserves actually proves for exchanges

Proof of reserves became an industry priority after FTX collapsed in November 2022, when Binance founder Changpeng Zhao urged exchanges to publish wallet evidence and major platforms began releasing dashboards, Merkle-tree tools, and reserve ratios.

CryptoSlate documented that initial rush as exchanges tried to contain a crisis of trust, then followed the industry’s attempt to develop more advanced forms of cryptographic verification.

An exchange can publish wallet addresses and sign a message using the private keys attached to those wallets, demonstrating control without moving the assets, while a Merkle tree converts each customer balance into a cryptographic hash and combines those hashes into a single root.

A customer can use that structure to verify that their balance contributed to the root without gaining access to anyone else’s account. Newer systems add zero-knowledge proofs, which can confirm that calculations followed a stated set of rules while keeping individual balances private; Binance, for example, incorporated zk-SNARK verification into its reserve system after the first post-FTX disclosures.

Major platforms now publish different versions of this process. Binance provides a reserve dashboard and customer verification, OKX publishes wallet information and downloadable proof files, Kraken offers account-level verification for covered balances, and Crypto.com provides a Merkle-based verification interface.

These systems improve on a model that required users to trust claims. They can expose false claims about asset holdings, make large withdrawals more visible, and allow customers to confirm that their balances appeared in the published dataset.

But these systems have limits, and most of them come from the dataset itself. A Merkle tree can authenticate the records placed inside it, but it can’t identify accounts omitted before the tree was built. It also can’t identify a bank loan, tax bill, legal judgment, or guarantee made to an affiliated company, leaving a rigorous mathematical process tied to a financial perimeter chosen by the exchange.

Most reserve reports also measure assets at a particular time and may be published after an accountant, security firm, or internal team has completed its work. A snapshot can accurately represent just one moment without reflecting the company’s normal position, because assets move before or after the measurement. The resulting total then reveals little about the origin of the funds or their availability during the next withdrawal surge.

Historical reporting, frequent snapshots, and permanent wallet archives help outsiders place each measurement in context. They increase the amount of evidence available across time, but the resulting record remains focused on assets rather than the full financial condition of the company responsible for returning them.

Beyond the wallets, a maze of liabilities

Crypto exchanges have an unusual advantage over banks and brokerages because much of what they hold can be observed on public blockchains. However, liabilities are recorded across internal databases, bank accounts, contracts, and corporate ledgers, so public blockchain analysis provides little visibility.

Customer claims are recorded in an exchange database, fiat balances depend on banks and payment companies, and derivatives produce gains and losses that change rapidly. Lending products, institutional loans, vendor bills, taxes, and legal claims can also easily belong to several companies operating across multiple jurisdictions.

A dashboard showing $10 billion in crypto provides no comprehensive account of whether the exchange owes $8 billion, $10 billion, or $15 billion, whether another creditor holds a claim over the same assets, or how readily those assets could meet a wave of withdrawals.

The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board has warned investors that proof-of-reserve reports vary widely because they fall outside its audit oversight, and may provide an inadequate basis for deciding whether a company has enough assets to meet its obligations.

The SEC chief accountant’s warning addresses a related source of confusion: reviews, attestations, and agreed-upon-procedures engagements usually examine a narrower body of evidence than a financial-statement audit, even when an accounting firm performs the work.

An exchange may advertise the involvement of an outside accounting or security firm, though that firm may have been hired only to compare selected wallet balances with selected customer liabilities. An engagement like that can exclude corporate debt, internal controls, related parties, litigation, and the company’s ability to remain in business, so its value depends on readers understanding exactly what the firm examined.

There's also the problem of the exchanges' corporate structure. A global exchange brand can operate through numerous companies, with one serving European retail customers, another contracting with institutions, another controlling wallet keys, and another employing staff. Lending, derivatives, and custody services can each operate under separate terms.

A reserve page may refer to assets held across a global group without identifying which company owns each wallet, while the customer agreement may assign repayment responsibility to a particular subsidiary. During insolvency, those distinctions help determine which law applies and how to prioritize creditors.

The most valuable disclosures identify the legal entities, products, and jurisdictions included in the review. They also explain what exactly is covered (fiat, derivatives, institutional accounts, margin balances, third-party custodians, etc.), and disclose what affiliates can do with customer assets.

There's currently no unified way to provide these results, so they vary across exchanges, producing public records that range from account-level cryptographic checks to broader statements about global holdings.

As a listed company, Coinbase publishes audited consolidated financial statements. Its annual filing covers debt, collateral, derivatives, commitments, subsidiaries, and related-party transactions alongside crypto holdings. Deloitte addresses the financial statements and internal control over financial reporting in its audit reports.

None of that can, of course, guarantee that Coinbase will avoid a withdrawal surge, management failures, or technical failures. Nonetheless, it shows how much broader the available evidence becomes when reviewers examine the company as an economic whole rather than evaluating a collection of wallets.

The public approaches summarized below come from the exchanges’ reserve pages and Coinbase’s audited filing, and they should be read as different disclosure models rather than a ranking of financial strength.

Strong disclosure can’t guarantee survival, while limited public disclosure doesn’t establish insolvency. The comparison shows what an outsider can establish from each platform’s published evidence and how much interpretation remains once the reader moves beyond wallet balances.

The industry often presents proof of reserves as a tool available to every customer. However, the process can require locating an account code, downloading a file, running software, and understanding how a hash connects to a Merkle root. Even after a successful verification, the customer must understand that the result covers one account’s inclusion rather than the completeness of the exchange’s accounting records.

A user can confirm that their own balance appeared, but they can’t inspect every other customer account, reconcile the liability total with the company’s general ledger, or identify an undisclosed corporate loan from a cryptographic branch. For many users, the verification badge becomes the practical endpoint, with phrases such as “verified,” “fully backed,” or a reserve ratio above 100% carrying a broader financial meaning than the published work supports.

CryptoSlate’s analysis of Binance reserve movements illustrated how these dashboards can provide valuable information during periods of heavy withdrawals while also showing how dollar-denominated reserve totals can move. Reserve data can inform an assessment of an exchange, though the assessment becomes credible only when the asset record is joined to information about liabilities and corporate responsibility.

What full financial accountability would require

A credible solvency framework would bring blockchain verification and conventional financial reporting into one continuous system, requiring exchanges to prove control over on-chain assets, reconcile every customer balance with the general ledger, identify the legal entities responsible for repayment, disclose assets pledged to other creditors, and explain how fiat, derivatives, lending products and institutional accounts are treated.

Historical reports would remain publicly accessible, while external firms would state the exact scope, methodology and limits of their work. Large custodial platforms would also publish audited consolidated financial statements or equivalent regulatory disclosures covering debt, liquidity, collateral, related-party exposure and customer-asset segregation.

Within that framework, cryptographic proofs would serve as clear and precise evidence about assets and customer balances, while financial audits and legal disclosures would establish how those assets relate to the obligations of the wider company. Each layer would address a different part of the same financial picture, allowing customers, auditors and regulators to evaluate custody, accounting completeness and corporate responsibility together.

FTX made visible reserves a basic expectation for any exchange holding customer funds. The next standard must connect those visible assets to every material liability and legal entity behind them, giving customers evidence that extends from the wallet address to the company responsible for returning their money.

The post Four years after FTX, crypto exchanges still prove assets without proving solvency appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Crypto’s favorite buy-the-dip strategy failed to make money for Ethereum and Cardano investors who stuck with it since the start of 2022.

An investor who placed $100 into Ethereum every month from January 2022 through August 2026 would have contributed $5,600 but ended up with about $4,898, a 12.5% loss, CryptoRank data showed. The same strategy applied to Cardano would have left just $2,616, representing a 53.3% loss.

Elsewhere, the results were far stronger. The $5,600 invested in Tron's TRX token would have grown to $16,521, a 195% return. Bitcoin would have produced $8,660, XRP $8,465, and Solana $8,025, leaving all three with gains of more than 40%.

The differences show how dollar-cost averaging, or DCA, can soften poor entry prices without guaranteeing a profit. Buying a fixed amount regularly allowed investors to accumulate more tokens during downturns, but the outcome still depended on how strongly each asset recovered.

2024 rally created most of the gains before the reversal

The strongest returns from the strategy were built during the 2024 crypto rally, when portfolios accumulated through the previous two years surged in value.

By the end of 2024, the hypothetical Solana portfolio had reached $17,728, while XRP stood at $14,345, Bitcoin at $10,193 and Cardano at $7,251.

That rally coincided with a major expansion of institutional access to crypto. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved spot Bitcoin exchange-traded products in January and spot Ethereum products in May, giving investors regulated vehicles for gaining exposure to the two largest digital assets.

The rally further accelerated after Donald Trump won the November 2024 presidential election. Trump had campaigned on making the US a global crypto hub, building a national Bitcoin stockpile and replacing SEC Chair Gary Gensler, whose enforcement-heavy approach had drawn years of criticism from the industry.

Following his electoral victory, Bitcoin reached repeated record highs as traders bet on a more favorable regulatory environment, while ETF inflows also accelerated.

Trump has since followed through on parts of that agenda. His administration established a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and US Digital Asset Stockpile, while he signed the GENIUS Act, creating a federal regulatory framework for payment stablecoins.

The subsequent market downturn, however, erased much of the wealth those recurring buyers had accumulated.

Solana's portfolio fell from $17,728 at the end of 2024 to $8,025 by August 2026, wiping out $9,703, or nearly 55%, even as the investor continued adding $100 every month.

XRP dropped by $5,880 from its 2024 level to $8,465, while Cardano surrendered $4,635 to finish at just $2,616. In Cardano's case, the reversal was severe enough to turn what had been a profitable position at the end of 2024 into a 53.3% loss on the full $5,600 invested by August 2026.

Bitcoin proved more resilient. Its portfolio rose further to about $10,800 in 2025 before retreating to $8,660 this year. Ethereum followed a similar path, reaching $6,501 in 2025 before falling to $4,898, below the investor's cumulative contributions.

The retreat has also reduced the value of assets held by US crypto ETFs. SoSoValue data shows the market has fallen from more than $123 billion during its expansion to roughly $92 billion as crypto prices declined. Bitcoin ETFs alone now hold about $78.3 billion, while Ethereum products hold roughly $10.6 billion.

TRX was the clear exception. Its DCA portfolio increased at every annual snapshot, climbing from $1,000 in 2022 to $3,679 in 2023, $11,032 in 2024, $13,723 in 2025 and $16,521 by August 2026.

DCA softened crashes but also diluted winning trades

Even the losing Ethereum and Cardano portfolios show how recurring purchases reduced the damage from entering the market near the beginning of 2022.

Ethereum traded around $3,770 at the start of that year and near $1,900 in early August 2026, leaving the token roughly 50% lower. The hypothetical DCA portfolio, however, lost only 12.5% because later purchases were made at considerably lower prices.

Cardano produced a similar result. ADA fell about 85% from roughly $1.38 to $0.20 over the period, while the recurring investment lost 53.3%. Buying through the decline lowered the investor's average cost, although not enough to return the position to profit.

Meanwhile, Solana shows how powerful that effect can be when an asset stages a strong recovery.

SOL remained about 59% below its early-2022 price of $170 by August 2026, yet the monthly investment was still up 43.3%.

This is because buyers who continued purchasing through its post-FTX collapse, when it traded below $10, accumulated far more tokens before the subsequent rebound.

However, TRX demonstrated the other side of the strategy. The token climbed from roughly $0.075 at the beginning of 2022 to about $0.33 by August, a gain of more than 300%, while the DCA portfolio returned 195%.

Because each successive $100 purchase bought fewer tokens as TRX appreciated, recurring purchases captured less upside than deploying the same capital earlier would have.

The results show that DCA was most effective when prices collapsed and later recovered strongly. It reduced losses in Ethereum and Cardano and transformed Solana's poor starting point into a profitable position, but it also limited the gains available from an asset such as TRX that rose relatively consistently throughout the period.

The post Bitcoin, XRP, Solana and Tron beat Ethereum and Cardano every month since 2022 on investor buying appeared first on CryptoSlate.

In an institutional bear market, a Bitcoin ETF redemption is almost aggressively boring. An investor sells shares, an authorized participant returns a large block to the trust, and the fund either pays cash or transfers BTC. Its assets shrink while the shares keep trading near net asset value and the custodian carries on.

Since the SEC approved in-kind redemptions in July 2025, the coins themselves can leave through this process without forcing the trust to sell them on the market.

In 2022, the exit often began with a disabled withdrawal page and ended in bankruptcy court. But now, in 2026, it can begin with a portfolio rebalance and end on an account statement. The fund gets smaller, a source of demand fades, and, depending on how the redemption is handled and hedged, selling can appear elsewhere in the market.

The machine keeps working while the investor takes the loss.

That difference is getting harder to dismiss. Bitcoin reached $126,223 in October 2025, traded below $59,000 on July 1 and recovered to roughly $64,000 in early August. The deepest leg erased about 53%, and the price was still down almost half from its peak at the start of this week. Reuters calculated a 33% loss for 2026 by early June, Bitcoin's worst start to a year in more than a decade.

A drop that large qualifies as a bear market under any useful definition. It has also left the biggest investment products, custodians and market makers functioning normally.

Bitcoin may be going through its first institutional bear market, one in which Wall Street distributes losses efficiently enough to keep any single failure from defining the entire decline.

The crash moved to the redemption desk

Most of the previous Bitcoin bear markets came with easy villains. The 2018 one followed the initial coin offering boom and erased about 84% from the price in a market still dominated by retail buyers. The 2021–2022 one cut Bitcoin by roughly 77%, then moved through the balance sheets of Terra, Three Arrows Capital, Celsius, Voyager, BlockFi and FTX.

A Federal Reserve review of the 2022 collapse traced how Terra's failure damaged Three Arrows, whose defaults then struck the lenders that had financed it. Falling collateral triggered margin demands and forced sales. Withdrawal freezes sent customers running for whatever cash they could recover, pushing more firms toward court. Every broken institution made the remaining ones look weaker.

The current cycle has delivered a different mix of causes and conditions. Galaxy Research measured the drawdown at 51% by June 9, eight months from the peak, while each of the previous two cycles took roughly 12 months to travel from the top to the bottom.

The later move below $59,000 added another two percentage points. This decline is shallower so far, and it is passing through far larger institutional channels.

Drawdown and duration figures use Galaxy's cycle study, with the current low updated from Reuters. Current realized-cap and market-activity readings come from Glassnode. Source: Galaxy Research. The current cycle was ongoing at the June 9, 2026 cutoff.

Spot Bitcoin ETFs provide the clearest evidence of an institutional bear market. They saw $4.21 billion of outflows across three weeks by June 3, the largest redemption run of 2026, while the average ETF holder's cost basis stood near $83,000. Citi counted $3.3 billion of net outflows for the year through June and cut its 12-month flow assumption from $10 billion of inflows to zero.

But ETF outflows can’t be translated dollar-for-dollar into Bitcoin dumped on exchanges. Some investors sell ETF shares to other investors, leaving the fund’s holdings unchanged; when an authorized participant redeems shares, the fund may pay cash or hand over BTC that the participant can hold, hedge, or sell.

What the outflows do establish is that the ETF bid that helped carry Bitcoin higher had reversed. Capital was leaving the funds faster than it entered, so one of the market’s largest recent buyers was no longer absorbing supply.

BlackRock’s IBIT showed what makes this decline different from 2022. The fund still held $47.48 billion of net assets on Aug. 4, while its 0.03% median bid-ask spread allowed investors to trade close to the value of the underlying bitcoin. Shareholders took the losses and retained an easy route out as the fund continued operating normally.

That’s the institutional bear market in its simplest form: a large regulated product made Bitcoin easier to exit, allowing the retreat to unfold through daily trading and redemptions instead of frozen withdrawals and bankruptcy claims.

Why an institutional bear market can hurt for longer

Bitcoin's daily volume has been shrinking for years. Charles Schwab found that its 2025 historical volatility was 42%, roughly half the 2021 reading and below both Tesla and Nvidia.

Across the three years through February 2026, Bitcoin's maximum drawdown was 50%, close to Tesla's 54%, even though Bitcoin's day-to-day volatility was lower.

That combination explains why a deep loss can feel strangely uneventful. A leveraged crash crams selling into a few violent sessions, throws collateral onto exchanges, and gives everyone a date they can mark as capitulation.

An investment committee can cut a risk budget over several meetings. An adviser can lower a model allocation at the next rebalance, while an ETF holder can sell at any point during the trading day. The market can digest each sale and then return the next morning for another.

Fewer forced liquidations also remove the violent rallies that follow them. Once a heavily leveraged position is gone, its forced selling is gone too, and short sellers often cover into the wreckage. Gradual institutional selling offers less of that release. It can keep feeding the market for months because the decision comes from allocation rules, volatility limits and funding needs rather than a single margin call.

However, the real distress can still be seen in on-chain data. Glassnode found realized capitalization had fallen 1.45% over 90 days to $1.07 trillion by June 17, which means coins were moving at prices below their previous acquisition value. By July 8, long-term holders were realizing about $280 million of losses per day on a 30-day average, the highest since December 2022.

Panic and capitulation are present in this cycle; they're just spread across more holders and more weeks.

The state of the derivatives market this year also points to an institutional bear market. Glassnode found that the June break below $60,000 was led by spot selling while futures reacted, and open interest contracted as the price fell. Options dealers' hedging helped contain movement near large strike prices. Reduced leverage lowered the odds of one giant liquidation cascade, while spot owners retained plenty of capacity to sell.

ETF flows can't explain the full decline either. By late July, they had briefly turned positive and then slipped modestly negative, while spot volume measured in bitcoin had fallen to its lowest level since 2019. The institutional channel had stopped pushing the market down with the force seen in June, but it had failed to restore the bid that carried Bitcoin upward.

In a thin market, a missing buyer can do nearly as much damage as a new seller.

The corporate bid became a corporate bill

Public treasury companies form the more fragile bridge between the old and new regimes. During the boom, their shares offered leveraged Bitcoin exposure, while management teams issued stock or debt and used the proceeds to buy more coins. The trade fed itself as long as the shares commanded a premium to the value of the treasury.

Falling prices reverse that loop well before bankruptcy even becomes a concern. The premium shrinks, new issuance becomes punishing for existing shareholders, and what was once a dependable Bitcoin buyer disappears. The lost purchases affect the market first; actual coin sales can come later, once dividends, interest or debt repayment require cash.

Strategy has already crossed that line. An Aug. 3 SEC filing showed that the company sold 1,638 BTC for $104.73 million during the previous week, using half for preferred dividends and half to repurchase its STRC preferred stock. It retained 842,138 BTC acquired for $63.51 billion, or $75,419 per coin.

A separate filing recorded an $8.32 billion second-quarter loss on digital assets, almost all of it unrealized, and the board has authorized up to $1.25 billion of Bitcoin sales to fund its dollar reserve.

While the sales are tiny beside Strategy's holdings, their purpose carries more weight than their size. Bitcoin accumulated during the boom is now servicing securities that helped finance the treasury structure. Smaller treasury companies have sold coins to repay obligations as well, pushing losses into common equity, dilution, and incremental Bitcoin sales.

The missing bankruptcies support several explanations. Regulated custody and daily fund liquidity have reduced the chance of a run among ETF holders, while common and preferred shareholders absorb losses that once landed on depositors. Treasury companies can sell early enough to avoid insolvency. Offshore leverage may also be harder to see, and a cycle only ten months past its peak still has time to produce a major failure.

This thesis gets weaker if offshore leverage rebuilds and ends in a 2022-sized liquidation wave, ETF redemptions prove minor beside retail spot selling, or a large intermediary fails as the decline ages. It gets stronger if volatility stays compressed, fund liquidity holds, treasury-company credit deteriorates, and capital keeps leaving through thousands of ordinary transactions instead of one fatal run.

The next warning may show up as an ETF cost basis that caps every rally, a treasury company trading below the value of its coins, or a preferred yield that closes another financing route.

Wall Street's arrival gave Bitcoin two efficient machines. One pulled capital in at astonishing scale. The other is now sending it back out, one redemption, rebalance, and corporate payment at a time.

The post Bitcoin’s first institutional bear market is starting to take shape and draining liquidity appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bybit sued North Korea, its Reconnaissance General Bureau, and Lazarus Group in the US District Court for the District of Columbia. The exchange won a preliminary injunction blocking unnamed defendants from moving or selling stolen crypto.

Public court reporting describes the order as covering those identified assets, without confirming the full $1.5 billion stolen in February 2025 or disclosing the dollar value the injunction protects.

This injunction landed roughly 532 days after the hack—about 17 months after North Korean hackers pulled off the largest crypto theft on record. Chainalysis tracked a consistent laundering pattern by DPRK-linked groups after a major theft, moving stolen funds through exchanges, bridges, mixers, and laundering services over roughly 45 days.

Coordinated action by industry partners froze $42.9 million in the first days after the theft, and mETH Protocol recovered another 15,000 cmETH, worth nearly $43 million. Combined, that early save came to about $85.9 million, roughly 5.9% of the $1.46 billion stolen.

Elliptic, citing a six-month review from zeroShadow, said more than $1 billion of the stolen funds had already moved through the laundering pipeline well before this new court order existed.

Whatever value the injunction protects now probably represents a small residue that never fully escaped that pipeline.

Why a blockchain never has to reverse anything

Stolen crypto becomes stoppable the moment it lands somewhere a court order can reach: an exchange, a stablecoin issuer, a custodian, or any other operator capable of freezing what passes through it.

That is why the FBI asked exchanges, bridges and RPC operators to block Lazarus-linked transactions within days of the hack. It is also why Bybit's own stolen stETH and cmETH were swapped into native ETH almost immediately.

Elliptic says token issuers can often freeze wallets holding their own tokens, but no central party directly controls ETH or Bitcoin balances. Converting stolen liquid-staking tokens into native ETH removes one of the easiest tools available to victims for freezing assets.

Native ETH or Bitcoin sitting in self-custody is nearly impossible to freeze directly, while stablecoins sit at the other end, since issuers can blocklist addresses depending on the chain and contract design.

Centralized exchanges sit close behind, able to block withdrawals or comply with a warrant. Bridges, swap services and DAO-controlled recovery wallets fall somewhere in between, and OTC brokers operating across borders remain the hardest targets of all.

A Lazarus-linked theft from the crypto platform Rain drew a similar response. The FBI froze roughly 2,204 SOL at the exchange WhiteBIT and served a seizure warrant. WhiteBIT transferred the funds to the US government, and a federal court later granted default judgment forfeiting the crypto outright.

A second fight brewing over who gets frozen funds

Holders of old terrorism judgments against North Korea served a restraining notice on roughly 30,766 ETH, worth about $71 million, that had been frozen when an unrelated exploit hit the Kelp protocol on Arbitrum.

Arbitrum's governance records show a DAO vote that later moved ETH to an Aave-controlled wallet, with the restraining notice accompanying the assets to their new location.

No public record shows that competing creditors have claimed the assets Bybit is now pursuing, though the Kelp episode establishes a real pattern. Once DPRK-linked crypto sits frozen somewhere reachable, other parties holding judgments against North Korea can try to get in line for it too.

The US Treasury Department designated Lazarus Group, Bluenoroff and Andariel in 2019 as entities controlled by North Korea through their ties to the Reconnaissance General Bureau. Treasury says the country's cyber operations generate revenue that can fund weapons and ballistic missile programs.

Chainalysis says North Korean hackers stole over $2 billion in crypto in 2025 alone, a 51% jump from the year before, even as the number of known attacks fell sharply.

Cumulative DPRK crypto theft has reached at least $6.75 billion, and the pattern points toward fewer, larger hits and away from a broad spray of small ones.

What happens to the crypto from here

The bull case is that more of the stolen $1.46 billion will turn up at reachable chokepoints than anyone currently expects.

Investigators trace additional funds held by exchanges, stablecoin issuers, bridges, or custodians willing to cooperate, and Bybit's injunction becomes a template other victims use to chase down DPRK-linked funds long into a hack's aftermath.

Recovery climbs meaningfully above the roughly $85.9 million secured so far, and courts prove that persistence still beats time even against a state-backed hacking operation.

The bear case is that the injunction covers only a small residual balance already trapped by ordinary compliance systems before Bybit filed suit.

Most of the $1.46 billion stays gone, laundered through the 45-day window Chainalysis describes long before any court could act.

The lawsuit proves that legal reach exists, but it also proves that a 17-month head start is nearly fatal to recovery, whatever it says about accountability.

Bybit's lawsuit is proving that the assets sitting at the end of one blockchain transaction can still be stopped, just not for free and never on a predictable schedule.

The post This $1.5 billion hack is exposing just how ‘irreversible’ stolen crypto really is appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin is trading around $64,925 on the daily chart, barely moved on the session at +0.05%. That flat close hides how tight the setup has become. Price is pressed up against the upper half of a two month range, and the levels above and below are close enough that the next daily candle could set the direction for weeks.

The chart has been range bound since the June breakdown. Bitcoin lost the low $70,000s in early June, dropped hard toward the high $50,000s in July, and has been grinding back up ever since. Now it is back at the top of that range with the same question in front of it: does resistance break, or does the range hold again?

Why Is $67,000 The Level Bitcoin Has To Break?

The $67,073 area is the single most important line on the daily chart right now.

• It capped the bounce in mid June after the crash.
• It capped the rally again in early August, where Bitcoin pushed toward it and got rejected.
• It sits directly above the current price, which means every bid from here is buying into known supply.

Two rejections from the same zone turn it into a reference point that both sides of the market are watching. $BTC coin is targeting it, and a daily close above it changes the structure of this chart.

Until that happens, the move off the July low is a range recovery, not a trend reversal.

What Happens If Bitcoin Breaks Above The Resistance?

A clean break and hold above $67,073 opens the door to $74,000.

That is not an arbitrary number. The $74,000 area is where the June sell off began, the origin of the large breakdown candle that took Bitcoin out of the low $70,000s. There is very little structure between $67,000 and $74,000 because the drop through that zone was fast and vertical. Price tends to move quickly back through areas it fell through quickly.

So the bull path is simple:

• Daily close above $67,073 confirms the breakout.
• $74,000 becomes the next meaningful target and the next major resistance.
• A retest of the broken $67,000 zone as support would strengthen the case.

One caveat worth keeping in mind: the 200 EMA sits at $72,339 and is still sloping down. Bitcoin would run into it on the way to $74,000. That makes the $72,000 to $74,000 band the real test of whether this is a genuine trend change or another lower high.

Where Does Bitcoin Go If $64,000 Fails To Hold?

The downside map is more detailed, and that is exactly why the $64,000 area matters.

If $Bitcoin cannot stay above $64,000, the sequence of supports below is:

• $61,858 first, the range floor that has been defended repeatedly since June.
• $60,000 next, the round number where the July basing action took place.
• $57,884 last, the July low and the deepest level on this leg.

Losing $61,858 would be the more serious signal. That line has held every meaningful test for two months. A daily close below it would turn the entire July recovery into a failed bounce and put the July low back in play.

What Do The Indicators Say About Bitcoin Right Now?

The momentum picture is neutral, and that is worth saying plainly instead of forcing a bias.

• RSI is at 49.98, sitting right on the midline. There is no overbought stretch to unwind and no oversold spring to load.
• RSI is below its own moving average at 54.72. Momentum has cooled since the early August push, even though price has held up.
• The 200 EMA at $72,339 is above price and declining. On a higher timeframe, Bitcoin is still in a downtrend.

That combination describes a market that has stopped falling but has not started trending. It is the classic profile of a range that resolves with a breakout, not a slow drift.

What Is Driving Bitcoin Right Now?

The macro backdrop is doing the heavy lifting this week. The July US jobs report came in far weaker than expected, with the economy shedding jobs against forecasts for solid growth and the unemployment rate ticking higher. Weak labour data pushes rate cut expectations forward, and futures markets moved to price in a meaningful chance that the Fed pauses at its September meeting.

Lower rates are generally supportive for risk assets, and Bitcoin caught a bid on the news. That is what carried price back toward the top of the range. Whether it is enough to break $67,073 is the open question, because the last time Bitcoin reached this zone it was rejected.

What Should Traders Watch Next?

The setup reduces to two lines and a bit of patience.

• Above $67,073 on a daily close: structure flips, $74,000 becomes the target, with the 200 EMA around $72,339 as the checkpoint on the way.
• Below $64,000: momentum shifts down, with $61,858, $60,000 and $57,884 as the levels in order.
• Between the two: the range is still the range. Chasing moves inside it has been punished repeatedly since June.

Volume on the breakout attempt matters more than the first candle that pokes through. A high volume daily close above resistance is a signal. A thin wick above it that closes back inside is the same rejection Bitcoin has already produced twice.

Bitcoin is trading around $65,167 on Coinbase, up roughly $900 on the day for a gain of about 1.4%. That comes less than 24 hours after the US Senate confirmed it would not vote on the CLARITY Act before the August recess.

Bad news for regulation. Green candles anyway. Here is what the chart actually says.

What Is Bitcoin Price Doing On The Chart Right Now?

The daily chart shows a market that has stopped falling, not a market that has broken out.

• $Bitcoin sits at roughly $65,167, having opened at $64,267 and printed a daily high near $65,231.
• Price is trading inside a well-defined range with resistance at $67,074 and support at $61,858.
• Below that sits a deeper floor at $57,885, which marked the summer low.
• From here, resistance is only about 2.9% away. Support is roughly 5.1% below. The risk-reward from the middle of a range is rarely attractive.
• The 200 EMA sits at $72,417 and is still sloping downward. Bitcoin is trading roughly 10% beneath it.

That last point is the one that matters most. As long as price is below a falling 200 EMA, the higher timeframe trend is still down. What we are watching is a recovery inside that downtrend, not a reversal of it.

Momentum supports the short-term bounce without confirming anything bigger. The RSI reads about 55.8 against its own moving average near 49.8. Momentum has crossed higher, which is constructive, but 55.8 is a mid-range figure. There is no exhaustion here, and no conviction either.

Why Did The Market Ignore The CLARITY Act Delay?

Three reasons, and none of them are especially bullish on their own.

• The delay was already priced in. Traders had been discounting the odds of a pre-recess vote for over a week. Prediction market odds on the bill passing this year had already fallen from around 30% to roughly 15% before the confirmation landed. By the time Thune spoke, the disappointment was old news.
• Bitcoin is trading on macro, not on Washington. June CPI came in at 3.5% year over year with core inflation easing, and the market is positioning around the latest US jobs data and what it implies for Fed policy. Rate expectations are moving this tape far more than committee negotiations are.
• The delay is not a rejection. The bill cleared Senate Banking in May and merged text landed in July. Nothing was voted down. The calendar moved, not the substance.

There is a fourth reason worth naming: the CLARITY Act was never a near-term price catalyst for Bitcoin specifically. It matters far more for altcoin classification, exchange listings and US custody rules than it does for the asset with the clearest regulatory status in the market.

Is The Whole Market Actually Bullish Here?

This is where the popular framing gets ahead of the data.

• $BTC is still well below its May peak near $82,000.
• It is trading about 10% under a declining 200 EMA.
• It has not reclaimed range resistance at $67,074, a level it has been rejected from repeatedly since June.
• Broader risk assets are outperforming it. Equities have pushed to fresh record highs this month while Bitcoin has added only a couple of percent, which is relative weakness, not leadership.

A better description of the current tape is resilient. Bitcoin absorbed a genuine regulatory disappointment without breaking down, and it did so while sitting above its June and July lows. That is meaningful. It is not the same thing as a bull market.

Bitcoin Price Prediction: What Levels Matter Next For Bitcoin Price?

Keep it simple and watch three prices.

• $67,074. Range resistance. A daily close above it turns the structure constructive and opens the path toward the 200 EMA.
• $72,417. The 200 EMA. Reclaiming this on a closing basis is what would actually flip the higher timeframe trend. Until then, rallies are counter-trend.
• $61,858. Range support. Losing it puts the summer low at $57,885 back in play quickly.

The realistic base case is continued chop between $61,858 and $67,074 into September, when the Senate returns and the CLARITY Act gets its next window. If the bill clears then, the assets most likely to react are not Bitcoin but the altcoins whose legal status the bill would finally define.

Transparency note: This article was produced with the assistance of artificial intelligence and reviewed by our editorial team before publication. All figures and claims were checked against the primary sources linked in the text.

The most important piece of crypto legislation in the United States was supposed to move this week. It did not. Senate Majority Leader John Thune confirmed late Thursday that the CLARITY Act will not get a floor vote before lawmakers leave for the August recess, pushing the whole thing into September.

For an industry that has spent more than a year lobbying for exactly this vote, the timing stings.

What Exactly Happened With The CLARITY Act?

The short version is that the window closed without a deal.

• Thune confirmed the Senate is delaying a vote until lawmakers return from the August recess.
• He said the bill would be queued up first thing when the chamber reconvenes in September.
• Procedural steps such as filing cloture could still happen, but the actual floor vote is off the table until next month.
• The delay reverses expectations set by Senate Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott, who had pushed for a vote before recess.

The bill itself is not dead. It cleared Senate Banking 15 to 9 back in May, and negotiators released merged text in July. What it lacks is 60 votes.

Why Did The Senate Push The Vote To September?

Ethics. Specifically, whose crypto holdings get scrutinised.

• Democrats declined to agree to a time agreement that would have cleared a path to the floor before recess.
• The sticking point is a proposed divestment rule from Senators Thom Tillis and Ruben Gallego, which would force the president and senior federal officials to sell stakes in digital asset companies above a certain size threshold.
• Democrats are also pushing for changes to enforcement provisions and to the commodities section of the bill.
• Illicit finance concerns remain unresolved, with some lawmakers arguing the bill leaves law enforcement without adequate tools. The industry disputes that reading.
• Banks and crypto firms are still fighting separately over rules on rewards paid on stablecoin balances.

Republican support has also wavered, which means this is not a simple one-party holdout.

What Does The Delay Mean For Crypto Markets?

Mostly it means the uncertainty premium stays on the table for another month.

• Prediction market odds on the bill being signed into law this year dropped sharply, falling to roughly 15% from around 30% a week earlier.
• The regulatory question of who supervises what, the SEC or the CFTC, stays open. That keeps listing decisions, custody arrangements and token classifications in limbo for US firms.
• September puts the bill uncomfortably close to the November midterms, when floor time gets scarce and every vote becomes a campaign issue.

Industry reaction was disappointed but not defeated. The Digital Chamber and the Crypto Council for Innovation both framed the delay as a setback in timing rather than direction.

What Happens Next For The CLARITY Act?

Three plausible paths from here:

1. Talks continue through August. The White House and congressional leaders hammer out ethics language during recess, and the Senate votes early in September.
2. Revised text lands first. Senators return with new language on ethics, stablecoin yields and enforcement, then schedule a fresh procedural vote.
3. It slips again. A crowded autumn calendar and campaign season squeeze the bill out, and the whole thing rolls into 2027.

Even if the Senate passes it, the bill goes back to the House before it reaches the president's desk. That is another step, and another calendar.

Transparency note: This article was produced with the assistance of artificial intelligence and reviewed by our editorial team before publication. All figures and claims were checked against the primary sources linked in the text.

Nikita Bier announced on Wednesday that he is stepping down as X's head of product. After a little more than a year, in his own words: "time to pass the torch and demote myself to my natural state: a poster." He stays on as an adviser.

Crypto circles have been treating his exit as a turning point since yesterday. That overstates it — Bier was not the crypto lead at X. The timing is interesting all the same, for one concrete reason: he leaves a few weeks after X launched its payments product, and the question of whether cryptocurrencies will ever arrive there remains unanswered.

What Bier actually built at X

Bier took over product in July 2025. Across roughly 400 days, around 30 new products shipped under his responsibility, and practically every major part of the platform was reworked: the timeline feed, the Android app, new-user onboarding, the notification system, chat and direct messages. TechCrunch has the detail.

His responsibilities are being split rather than refilled: design, core product engineering and mobile engineering go to three different leads. For a company standing up a financial service, that is a notable choice — payment products tend to depend on one hand holding the whole thing together.

The crypto connection: two points, both documented

The first is Smart Cashtags, announced in January 2026. Cashtags have been X's shorthand for tickers for years — a dollar sign in front of a symbol. The smart version was meant to turn that into a financial toolkit. That feature is still described in reporting as the most likely entry point through which cryptocurrencies could reach the platform.

The second point is less flattering. Also in January, X changed its algorithm, and the consequences hit the platform's crypto corners harder than most: shifted reach, a noticeable rise in automated accounts, and a discussion culture that got worse for many users. Anyone following on-chain debate in real time follows it mostly on X — so the complaints were loud.

X Money is running — without crypto

At the end of July, X rolled out its payments product in the US, initially by invitation for Premium and Premium+ subscribers. Two years of groundwork sit behind it, including money transmitter licences across most US jurisdictions. What it does:

The figures and terms are documented at crypto.news. Six percent on balances is an aggressive offer, and it shows what this is about first: gathering deposits, not selling bitcoin.

That is the real finding of the week. Elon Musk has talked about crypto for years and says he holds bitcoin, ether and dogecoin — and the payments product of his own platform launches with Visa and interest. Not with a wallet.

Why that makes sense

A payments product needs licences, and licences come more easily without crypto. In the US, X acquired money transmitter licences state by state. Any crypto capability would have extended that process and brought additional supervisors into it. Launching without them is not a rejection; it is the order every payment provider chooses.

The US Senate wrote to Musk in April about the planned launch and asked questions about oversight — a preview of how closely this will be watched once digital assets are added.

For European users it is further away still

X Money exists only in the US so far. An EU launch would require an e-money licence and, once cryptocurrencies were involved, a MiCA authorisation as a crypto-asset service provider on top. Neither is known to have been applied for.

For a sense of how long that takes: Coinbase received its MiCA licence via Luxembourg in June 2026, after a process that ran for months. The last MiCA transition period expired on 1 July 2026 — since then that authorisation decides who may offer crypto services in Europe at all. Binance withdrew its application in June and is winding down its EU business accordingly.

So anyone waiting to buy bitcoin through X in Europe is waiting on two approvals, neither of which is in progress. Realistically, that is not a 2026 story.

What to take away

A product chief leaving is not, by itself, news that moves a portfolio. What it makes visible is:

• The platform where the crypto debate happens is building a bank — without crypto. That is a more realistic signal about the coming months than any announcement.
• Smart Cashtags remain the thing to watch. If cryptocurrencies come to X, they will likely come there, and likely no earlier than late 2026.
• A feed is not a broker. Buying crypto requires an authorised platform — and those exist today, with names and supervisors.

The concrete step, if you were considering it anyway: check whether your exchange is still permitted to operate under regulation in Europe after 1 July. Since this summer that is no longer a formality but the dividing line between providers who stay and providers who leave. The overview is in our comparison of regulated crypto exchanges. If you buy regularly rather than speculate, the terms are in our guide to buying bitcoin.

And the lesson that outlasts this personnel change: reach does not replace a licence. X built the two separately — first the users, then, slowly and laboriously, the permission. That the crypto capability sits at the end of that sequence rather than the start says more about the maturity of this industry than any announcement on the platform itself.

(As of 6 August 2026. This article is not investment advice. Details of X Money products and terms refer to the US market at the time of publication.)

Transparency note: This article was produced with the assistance of artificial intelligence and reviewed by our editorial team before publication. All figures and claims were checked against the primary sources linked in the text. The feature image was generated with AI.

The crypto market is barely moving today. Bitcoin trades at $64,387.44, up 0.13% over 24 hours, and most of the top ten is drifting within a percent of flat. Look at the year to date column, though, and the calm on the surface starts to look like exhaustion rather than stability.

Crypto Price Today: Where do the majors stand right now?

Ethereum is the strongest of the large caps today with a 1.73% gain to $1,906. It is also the worst performer of the majors on the year, down 35.76%.

Which coins are actually working this year?

Three names, and only three. Hyperliquid is up 126.58% year to date at $55.13, the single best performer on the board by a wide margin, despite giving back 3.39% today. TRON is up 15.26%, and UNUS SED LEO is up 1.90%.

That is the entire list of winners. Everything else in the top ten by market cap is down between 26% and 46% since January.

The HYPE story is the one worth understanding, because it is not a meme rotation. Institutional attention has shifted toward projects where token economics are transparent and where value visibly accrues back to the token rather than to an off-chain entity. Hyperliquid has been repeatedly cited as the clearest example of that model working. When capital is scarce and risk appetite is thin, it concentrates in the few assets that can answer the question of where the revenue goes.

Why is the damage so uneven?

The spread between Bitcoin at -26% and Dogecoin at -46% is not random. It maps almost exactly to how much of each asset's price depends on narrative versus flow.

Bitcoin has an institutional bid underneath it. US spot ETFs have been buying through the first week of August, with several hundred million dollars of net inflows across consecutive sessions and BlackRock's IBIT taking the overwhelming majority. That is a structural buyer who shows up regardless of sentiment.

XRP at -43.22%, Solana at -41.21% and Dogecoin at -45.96% have no equivalent. They depend on retail risk appetite, and retail has largely left. The capital that would have chased them in a normal cycle went to AI equities instead, a rotation that has been running all year.

What about Zcash Price?

Zcash is the oddity on the board. It is down just 3.82% year to date, by far the best relative performance among the older assets, and it added 3.79% over the past week even after shedding 4.95% today. At $492.92 it has held value while almost every peer from its era has been cut in half.

Privacy assets have quietly outperformed through this drawdown. It is a small sector and moves are exaggerated by thin liquidity, so treat the daily swings accordingly.

Crypto Future Price: What should traders watch next?

Bitcoin's behavior around $64,000 is the reference point for everything else. It has slipped 0.81% over the week while ETF money was flowing in, which means spot demand is currently absorbing supply rather than driving price higher. That is a holding pattern, not a breakout.

If Bitcoin loses the low $63,000s, the altcoins with no institutional bid will take the larger percentage hit, as they have all year. If it clears $65,000 on continued inflows, the assets most likely to follow are the ones already showing relative strength on the week: BNB, Zcash and Hyperliquid.

Until then, this is a market where the yearly numbers matter far more than the daily ones.

Transparency note: This article was produced with the assistance of artificial intelligence and reviewed by our editorial team before publication. All figures and claims were checked against the primary sources linked in the text.

A volunteer security effort says it has scanned 150 Bitcoin repositories, disclosed more than a dozen vulnerabilities, and is building an open-source AI platform to automate software security reviews.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune filed the motion to proceed early Saturday, setting up a mid-September showdown.

“We want to show customers that we care about what they care about," Robinhood head of crypto Johann Kerbrat told Decrypt.

Truth Social's parent company is unwinding two major Crypto.com deals as new leadership shifts its focus to media, data licensing, and a planned merger with fusion energy company TAE.

The U.S. Treasury sanctioned two crypto exchanges it says laundered millions of dollars for Iran's Revolutionary Guard, naming a Georgia- and UAE-based operator and an Iran-based platform.

Kalshi traders bet heavily on the chances of XRP falling back to its multi-month low around $1 as it struggles to recover from the prolonged volatility seen recently.

$0.000005 level becomes an important price area for traders watching SHIB's next move.

Shiba Inu selling pressure appears to be easing as traders begin to return fewer SHIB tokens to exchanges, hinting at a potential recovery.

XRP turns corner against BTC after entering oversold territory with traders watching what comes next.

The amount of XRP tokens available for sale has continued to increase as more tokens are being returned to exchanges amid the volatile market conditions.

TLDR:

• Crypto card spending reached a record $759M in July 2026, up roughly 2.5x from $306M a year earlier.
• Nearly 9M crypto card purchases were made in July, with the average transaction size at approximately $86.
• USDC captured 58% of July crypto card spending, while USDT added 26%, making digital dollars dominant.
• RedotPay, EtherFi, and KAST generated about 77% of July’s $759M in tracked crypto card spending volume.

Crypto payment cards recorded $759 million in monthly spending during July 2026, marking the highest level captured by Paymentscan since tracking began in October 2023. The milestone shows how blockchain-linked balances are increasingly being used through card networks for routine transactions.

According to a16z crypto report based on Paymentscan figures, July spending rose from $306 million a year earlier, representing roughly 2.5 times growth. Volume had remained below $1 million when the dataset began, showing how quickly the payment category expanded within three years.

Crypto Card Spending Climbs as Consumer Transactions Surge

Transaction counts rose alongside spending, strengthening the picture of broader consumer use. Nearly 9 million Crypto card purchases were completed in July, compared with about 5.2 million during July 2025.

The average transaction measured approximately $86, indicating that activity was spread across smaller purchases rather than being concentrated only in large-value transfers. That pattern places stablecoin spending closer to everyday commerce, even though the sector remains small against traditional card networks.

RedotPay remained the largest individual program tracked by Paymentscan, generating $395.1 million in July volume. Its spending increased from $266.4 million one year earlier.

EtherFi recorded another $100.3 million, while KAST generated roughly $89.6 million. Together, the three programs represented about 77% of the reported $759 million total.

However, the dataset includes different reporting methods across programs. Paymentscan primarily tracks blockchain transactions, but some figures also come from issuers using off-chain reporting.

RedotPay data, for example, is self-reported. Some Crypto card structures also rely on batched settlements or account top-ups that may not directly match merchant spending.

The network mix has also changed considerably. Gnosis once handled most tracked activity in early 2024, but its share fell to about 2% by July 2026.

Optimism led with roughly 29% of spending, while Solana and Base each represented about 19%. That distribution shows activity spreading across several blockchain networks instead of remaining concentrated on one system.

USDC and USDT Capture 84% of July Crypto Card Spending

The currency mix shifted even more dramatically toward dollar-backed stablecoin assets. USDC accounted for approximately 58% of July spending, while USDT represented another 26%.

By comparison, euro-backed EURe controlled about 88% of tracked spending in early 2024. However, its share had fallen to roughly 2% by July 2026, highlighting the growing dominance of digital dollars within crypto card payments.

As a result, most users are effectively spending digital dollars, while merchants continue receiving conventional local currency through existing payment infrastructure. That model connects blockchain balances with standard checkout systems without requiring merchants to accept cryptocurrency directly.

Meanwhile, Visa reported approximately $5.2 billion in stablecoin-linked card volume during 2025, representing 319% year-over-year growth. The company currently supports more than 130 stablecoin-linked programs across over 50 countries, further expanding access to blockchain-funded payments.

Visa also expects the number of supported programs to roughly double during 2026. In addition, its partnership with Stripe-owned Bridge is targeting stablecoin-linked card availability in more than 100 countries by the end of the year.

Despite that rapid expansion, stablecoin-linked cards still represent a small share of global payments. Visa processed approximately $14.2 trillion in total payment volume during 2025, placing the emerging segment in perspective.

Its $5.2 billion in stablecoin-linked card activity accounted for only about 0.04% of that total. Still, July’s record spending level shows that blockchain-funded cards are becoming a more measurable part of everyday payment activity.

The post Crypto Card Spending Hits Record $759M as Stablecoins Drive Everyday Payments appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Ethereum median mainnet fees fell over 99%, from above $2 in January 2024 to below $0.02 by March 2026.
• U.S. spot Ethereum ETFs drew $244.9M in weekly inflows, extending their positive streak to five weeks.
• Ethereum mainnet throughput roughly doubled while median Layer 2 transaction fees declined by about 95%.
• Crypto Patel’s fractal marks $1,000-$1,500 support, $4,000 resistance, and a $10,000-$16,000 target.

Ethereum is gaining fresh market attention as three measurable trends converge: cheaper network use, stronger institutional inflows, and an improving technical structure. Together, those developments provide a clearer framework for assessing whether the current recovery has broader support beyond short-term price action.

At press time, ETH traded near $1,914, remaining well below previous cycle highs and far beneath the long-term targets circulating among analysts. However, recent data shows network costs, throughput, and U.S. spot ETF flows have improved, giving the bullish case more factual support.

Ethereum Fractal Maps $4K Resistance and $10K-$16K Target

Market analyst Crypto Patel’s long-term chart places Ethereum within a roughly four-year expansion pattern associated with earlier Bitcoin halving cycles. According to Patel, the latest correction held within a historically important accumulation zone, helping preserve the broader technical structure.

Building on that setup, the chart identifies $1,000 to $1,500 as a major support range, while resistance remains near $4,000. If the structure continues to hold, Patel’s fractal also maps a potential Wave 5 expansion toward $10,000 to $16,000.

Source: X

From Ethereum’s price near $1,914, a move to $10,000 would require an increase of about 422%, while reaching $16,000 would represent approximately 736% upside. However, Patel described the scenario as a fractal-based projection rather than a guaranteed price forecast.

Therefore, the outlook remains dependent on technical confirmation rather than expectation alone. Nonetheless, for the bullish structure to remain intact, ETH would need to continue forming higher highs and higher lows while staying above its broader support range.

Ethereum Mainnet Fees Plunge 99% as Throughput Doubles

Besides, the technical structure is developing alongside a sharp reduction in transaction costs. Data presented by BMNR Bullz, citing Ambrosia & Mizrach, showed median mainnet fees falling dramatically.

According to the report, Ethereum’s median transaction fee dropped from more than $2 in January 2024 to below $0.02 by March 2026. That decline represents a reduction exceeding 99%. Meanwhile, mainnet throughput roughly doubled, according to the same data.

Median fees across Layer 2 networks also fell by about 95% during the period. Those figures show that the network processed more activity while users paid substantially less for blockspace. Consequently, lower costs can improve accessibility for decentralized finance, transfers, and frequent on-chain transactions.

Ethereum ETFs Extend Inflow Streak to Five Straight Weeks

Institutional demand has also strengthened through U.S. spot ETF products. SoSoValue data shared by BMNR Bullz showed $244.9 million in weekly net inflows through August 7. That marked a fifth consecutive positive week following approximately $273.3 million in net outflows during the week ending June 26.

Source: X

Subsequent weekly inflows reached about $84.4 million, $105.4 million, $103.9 million, $27.4 million, and $244.9 million. Cumulative U.S. spot Ethereum ETF net inflows reached roughly $11.46 billion.

The broader institutional footprint extends beyond fund flows. BMNR Bullz also cited BlackRock and JPMorgan tokenization activity, a 52.5% tokenized-ETF share, and $148 billion in stablecoins.

The post Ethereum Bull Case Strengthens as ETF Inflows, Lower Fees, and Bullish Fractal Align appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• BIP-110 fork trails Bitcoin by 21 blocks after enforcing nodes rejected block 961,632 early on August 9.
• Only 51 of 2,016 blocks signaled BIP-110 support in the prior period, equal to just 2.53% miner backing.
• BIP-110 requires version bit 4 signaling through block 963,647 before forced lock-in begins at 963,648.
• The minority fork lacks automatic replay protection, creating operational risks for BTC holders moving coins.

Bitcoin’s BIP-110 activation attempt has created a live minority fork after enforcing nodes rejected a non-signaling block at height 961,632. According to reports, most miners continued extending the existing network, quickly widening the gap between the two competing branches.

Source: X

By about 01:00 UTC on August 9, BIP110Monitor placed the main chain at block 961,654 and the enforcing branch at 961,633. That left the minority chain 21 blocks behind, while zero of the first 23 blocks in the new difficulty period signaled support.

BIP-110 Fork Falls Behind as Miner Signaling Stays at 2.53%

The split began at block 961,632, marking the start of the proposal’s mandatory-signaling window. AntPool mined a non-signaling block, while Roughnecks produced a competing compliant block through OCEAN.

As a result, nodes enforcing BIP-110 rejected AntPool’s block and followed the alternative branch. Meanwhile, the larger non-enforcing network continued extending Bitcoin under the existing consensus rules.

Support for the proposal had already remained limited before the split. During the previous 2,016-block period, only 51 blocks signaled support, representing just 2.53% of the total. Basically, BIP-110 uses a modified BIP9 activation process.

Under its early lock-in rules, 1,109 of 2,016 blocks, or 55%, needed to signal support, but miner participation remained far below that threshold. Because the early threshold was not reached, BIP-110 entered mandatory signaling at block 961,632.

From that point, enforcing nodes began rejecting blocks that failed to set version bit 4. The mandatory-signaling requirement remains in effect through block 963,647. Under the proposal’s rules, the minority branch would then force lock-in at block 963,648. However, the proposal’s transaction restrictions would not activate immediately.

Those rules are scheduled to take effect at block 965,664 and remain active for 52,416 blocks before expiring. Therefore, the current fork centers primarily on signaling requirements and chain selection. It does not yet involve transactions violating BIP-110’s proposed temporary data restrictions.

Replay Risk Grows as Minority Chain Continues Without Protection

Despite some social-media descriptions, BIP-110 is not a quantum-computing security upgrade. Instead, its official title is “Reduced Data Temporary Softfork,” reflecting its narrower purpose of temporarily restricting arbitrary data embedded in Bitcoin transactions.

The proposal introduces seven consensus rules covering scriptPubKeys, OP_RETURN data, witness payloads, and several Taproot-related structures. However, its “Complete” status in the BIPs repository does not mean Bitcoin has adopted the proposal.

Rather, the designation only indicates that the specification itself is considered finished. Actual adoption still depends on miners, users, exchanges, custodians, and other economic participants deciding which software and consensus rules they recognize.

Bitcoin Core has not adopted the BIP-110 implementation, while most hash power continues extending the non-enforcing chain. As a result, the main network has moved ahead considerably faster than the minority branch.

Because only limited hash power is supporting the enforcing fork, block production there can take much longer than Bitcoin’s standard target of roughly one block every 10 minutes. For BTC holders, therefore, the most immediate concern is operational rather than a failure of the dominant network.

The minority fork does not provide automatic replay protection before its later activation stage, creating additional risks when coins are moved. Consequently, a transaction made on one branch could potentially affect the same coins on the other branch. Developers have therefore cautioned holders against treating the split as a risk-free airdrop opportunity.

The post Bitcoin BIP-110 Fork Splits Chain as Main BTC Network Pulls Ahead appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• China added 19.9 tonnes of gold in July, lifting its reported bullion holdings to about 2,366 tonnes.
• SAFE valued China’s gold reserves at $306.35B in July, rising from $303.72B recorded at the end of June.
• China has added about 60 tonnes of gold in 2026, extending its reported buying streak to 21 straight months.
• Hong Kong plans to expand gold-storage capacity more than tenfold, reaching over 2,000 tonnes by 2030.

China accelerated its bullion accumulation in July, adding nearly 20 metric tonnes as authorities continued expanding Hong Kong’s role in international gold trading and storage. According to official SAFE data, reserves rose to 76.08 million fine troy ounces from 75.44 million ounces in June.

The increase of 640,000 ounces was equivalent to about 19.9 tonnes. Moreover, July marked the largest monthly addition since October 2023, when reserves increased by 740,000 ounces. The latest purchase also extended the central bank’s reported buying streak.

The July increase followed earlier purchases of roughly 15 tonnes in June and 10 tonnes in May. Meanwhile, World Gold Council data showed that China added about 40 tonnes during the first half of 2026.

As a result, combined purchases reached approximately 60 tonnes for the year after including July’s addition. At the same time, the latest increase extended China’s reported accumulation run to 21 consecutive months.

China’s Gold Reserves Climb Above $306 Billion

SAFE valued China’s gold reserves at $306.35 billion at the end of July, up from $303.72 billion one month earlier. Meanwhile, the country’s foreign currency reserves stood near $3.42 trillion. The increase in bullion value also came as gold prices gained 0.84% during July, ending four consecutive months of declines.

Spot gold recently traded above $4,310 per ounce. Consequently, the higher market price, combined with continued central-bank purchases, lifted the overall value of China’s official holdings.

China’s accumulation also reflects a broader increase in central-bank demand. World Gold Council data showed official institutions purchased a net 289 tonnes during the second quarter, bringing first-half demand to 345 tonnes.

Moreover, its 2026 survey showed strong expectations for further accumulation. Among participating reserve managers, 89% expected global central-bank gold holdings to rise over the next year, while 45% expected their own institutions to increase reserves.

Hong Kong Expands Clearing, Futures and Gold Storage

China’s reserve growth is unfolding alongside a major buildout of Hong Kong’s physical trading, clearing, and storage network. Bloomberg reporting indicated that the PBOC had increased inventories held in Hong Kong while shifting some reserves from London. 

However, official Chinese reserve figures have not detailed the size or timing of those reported transfers. At the same time, Hong Kong launched a central gold clearing system in July, revived U.S. dollar-denominated gold futures, and introduced new physical settlement arrangements.

The city also established a “Delivery Connect” mechanism with the Shanghai Gold Exchange, allowing physical settlement between mainland China and Hong Kong. Authorities are also considering yuan-denominated futures, adding another possible trading instrument to the city’s expanding bullion market.

Storage capacity forms another major part of the expansion. The city plans to increase vault capacity more than tenfold to above 2,000 tonnes by 2030.

London Retains a Far Larger Global Bullion Footprint

Despite those developments, London remains substantially larger as an established global bullion center. London vaults held 9,464 tonnes at the end of June, more than four times Hong Kong’s planned 2030 storage capacity.

The market also cleared 16.1 million ounces daily during May, demonstrating the scale the Asian financial center is attempting to approach. The latest figures therefore show two measurable developments occurring simultaneously: rising official bullion holdings and rapid investment in regional trading infrastructure.

Together, those changes place reserve accumulation and market development on parallel tracks as China increases holdings while Hong Kong expands its bullion-market capacity.

The post China Adds 20 Tonnes to Gold Reserves as Hong Kong Expands Bullion Hub appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Senate cloture on H.R. 3633 is set for Sept. 15, making the CLARITY Act’s next formal test official.
• Republicans need at least eight Democratic votes to reach the Senate’s 60-vote threshold for cloture.
• The House passed H.R. 3633 by 294-134 in July 2025, with 78 Democrats joining 216 Republicans in support.
• Successful cloture would only open debate, as both chambers must still approve identical legislation.

White House crypto adviser Patrick Witt has framed September 15 as a decisive deadline for congressional negotiations over the CLARITY Act. His warning carries added weight considering the date now aligns with the Senate’s next formal procedural test.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune filed cloture on the motion to proceed to H.R. 3633 before lawmakers began their extended recess. As a result, the legislation now has a defined timetable, with the Senate returning on September 14 and the cloture motion scheduled to ripen at 2:15 p.m. the following day.

September 15 Cloture Vote Becomes CLARITY Act’s Next Test

Patrick Witt criticized the pre-recess delay after months of negotiations failed to produce a procedural vote. He blamed Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and unnamed pro-crypto Democrats for seeking additional negotiating time instead of allowing the process to advance.

Witt argued that market-structure negotiations have already stretched on for years. Consequently, he warned that failure to reach an agreement by September 15 could effectively close the current legislative window.

Despite that warning, the CLARITY Act remains active in the Senate rather than indefinitely stalled. Thune’s cloture filing has instead created a formal test of whether lawmakers can gather enough support to begin considering the legislation.

The September 15 vote will therefore determine whether the Senate can move toward debate on H.R. 3633. Because cloture requires 60 votes, Republicans cannot advance the measure through procedural resistance on their own.

Assuming every voting Republican supports the motion, at least eight Democratic votes would still be required. That arithmetic keeps bipartisan negotiations at the center of the legislation’s path forward.

Moreover, Thune’s decision to file cloture before the recess shows that Republican leaders still intend to test whether a 60-vote coalition can be assembled once senators return to Washington.

Ethics and Stablecoin Disputes Complicate Senate Deal

However, the central disagreement now extends beyond whether digital assets require clearer federal rules. Senators remain divided over investor protections, ethics provisions, stablecoin policy, and illicit-finance controls.

At the center of the debate, the CLARITY Act would establish a broader framework for determining whether digital assets fall under SEC or CFTC oversight. It would also introduce tailored disclosure requirements and market-conduct standards.

Senate Banking Republicans argue that the framework would preserve anti-fraud authority while establishing rules for decentralized finance and centralized digital-asset intermediaries.

Even so, the Senate version has changed substantially during negotiations. Tim Scott, Cynthia Lummis, and Thom Tillis released revised legislation in May after months of consultations with multiple stakeholders.

Those discussions included Democrats, regulators, banks, law enforcement officials, consumer groups, and cryptocurrency companies. Despite that broader engagement, several major policy disagreements remain unresolved.

In particular, Democratic concerns have intensified around five areas identified by Senate Banking minority staff on August 5. These include securities protections, illicit finance, financial stability, consumer safeguards, and ethics.

Among those issues, ethics provisions have become especially contentious. Democrats are seeking stronger restrictions on crypto businesses connected to government officials, adding another obstacle to a bipartisan agreement.

At the same time, banks and cryptocurrency companies remain divided over stablecoin rewards. Their dispute centers on whether reward-bearing stablecoin products could compete directly with traditional bank deposits.

294-134 House Vote Sets Benchmark for Senate Support

Despite those unresolved issues, the legislation previously secured broad bipartisan backing in the House. H.R. 3633 passed in July 2025 by 294-134, with 216 Republicans and 78 Democrats voting in favor.

That result established a significant benchmark for the Senate. However, senators must now determine whether a comparable bipartisan coalition can survive months of revisions and continued disagreements over key policy provisions.

Even if the Senate reaches the required threshold for cloture on September 15, the CLARITY Act would not immediately move to the White House. Instead, the vote would allow lawmakers to advance toward debate, amendments, and eventual final passage.

Moreover, because the Senate has substantially revised the House-approved measure, both chambers would still need to agree on identical legislative language before the bill could reach the president..

The post Patrick Witt Says CLARITY Act Has Until September 15 as Senate Pressure Mounts appeared first on Blockonomi.

XRPL has released version 3.3.0, which takes another step toward becoming infrastructure for institutional tokenization.

It introduces several proposed amendments focused on privacy, payments, and managing real-world assets (RWAs).

Confidential Transfers

Perhaps the most significant new feature is called Confidential Transfer. It’s designed to allow institutions to hide balances and transaction amounts for Multi-Purpose Tokens (MPTs) while keeping the accounts and the asset type involved visible. It uses cryptographic proofs to verify that transactions are valid without publicly revealing the underlying amounts.

According to the GitHub post and previous reports on the matter, this could address an important obstacle for financial institutions, which may want the transparency and settlement benefits of a public blockchain without exposing sensitive position sizes or transaction values.

Data from RWA.xyz shows that roughly $850 million out of the $1.38 billion in RWA distributed on the XRPL is from Ripple’s own stablecoin, RLUSD. This leaves approximately $530 million in other tokenized assets from other big names in the niche, such as Ondo, Archax, Societe Generale, and VERT Capital.

Other Proposals

Aside from Confidential Transfers, the other updates named in version 3.3.0 include Batch, Sponsor, and Permission Delegation. The first amendment would allow up to eight transactions to be grouped together, including an atomic mode in which either all transactions succeed or the entire batch fails. This is expected to benefit complex settlements, swaps, and institutional transactions.

Sponsor is designed to enable one account to cover another user’s transaction fees and reserve requirements. In other words, it could allow companies to onboard customers without requiring them to purchase XRP before interacting with an application.

The last one would enable account holders to grant another party pre-defined transaction permissions without surrendering full control of the wallet. It would align with Dynamic MPT and provide issuers with greater flexibility by allowing certain token characteristics to be modified after issuance.

It’s worth noting that these amendments are not live on the XRP Ledger Mainnet yet, as the governance process requires each to maintain support from at least 80% of trusted validators for two consecutive weeks before activation.

The post Major XRP Ledger Upgrade Targets Institutional Adoption But There’s a Catch appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Scammers impersonating financial regulators and licensed exchanges are targeting crypto holders who are still moving assets five weeks after the EU’s licensing deadline under the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA).

This is according to several regulators, including France’s Autorité des Marchés Financiers (AMF), the Dutch Authority for the Financial Markets (AFM), and the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), which described the pattern to the Financial Times.

Fraudsters contact customers of firms that failed to win authorization, present themselves as staff of a regulator or an exchange, then direct the customer to a website or account the criminals control. Regulators say they never cold-contact consumers with instructions to send funds to a particular account.

The transitional period under the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) closed on July 1. ESMA’s register listed 322 authorized crypto-asset service providers across 26 member states at its August 4 update, and every provider outside it lost the right to serve EU clients.

Regulators Told Users to Move

ESMA’s public statement of June 23 ordered unauthorized providers to “immediately stop onboarding new EU clients” and to limit services to “actions necessary to sell or transfer crypto-assets, reallocate assets, or close positions.” Custody may continue only for the period strictly necessary to complete an orderly exit.

That same statement told clients to check the register and, where their provider is unauthorized, to transfer holdings “to an authorized CASP, where one is identified, or to a self-hosted wallet.”

Regulators said that the overlap is what the fraudsters are exploiting, with large numbers of users being legitimately told to move funds in the same window.

Authorizations clustered ahead of the cut-off. Seventy-six firms entered the register in June, more than in any other month since the regime opened, with 31 added in July. OKX European CEO Erald Ghoos had predicted that 80% of crypto companies would not survive MiCA and would be pushed out of the bloc.

Impersonation Fraud Is Scaling

Chainalysis put the growth of impersonation scams at 1,400% year over year in 2025, with the average payment rising from $782 to $2,764. The firm valued total crypto scam and fraud losses for the year at near $17 billion.

CryptoPotato reported £2.1 million in Bitcoin taken from a cold wallet after a caller posed as a senior UK police officer and sent the victim to a site that captured the seed phrase, and the FBI has warned of a fake token carrying an “FBI message” subject line on Tron built to harvest wallet access.

ESMA said that national competent authorities are directly engaged with the firms concerned and may now take coordinated action against unauthorized providers, as the transitional period has ended.

The post Scammers Pose as EU Regulators to Target Crypto Users Displaced by MiCA Deadline appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Just a day or so after it became known that the most anticipated crypto legislation in the US will not be voted on in August, more details have emerged on when it will hit the Senate floor.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune has filed cloture on the motion to proceed to H.R. 3633, the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, shortly before the Senate departed Washington for its August recess.

Mark The Date

The bill’s path through the US Senate just became a little clearer, with lawmakers now scheduled to vote on it on September 15. According to the Senate Press Gallery’s official floor log, the filing from Thune came at 4:52 AM ET on Saturday following an overnight session.

Popular journalist Eleanor Terrett subsequently confirmed that senators reached an agreement setting the cloture vote for 2:15 PM ET on Tuesday, September 15. This will be the day after the chamber returns from its month-long break.

It’s worth noting that a cloture vote does not mean that the CLARITY Act will pass on that day. In fact, senators won’t be voting on the legislation itself. Instead, the vote will determine whether the Senate can limit debate on the motion to proceed and move it closer to formal consideration.

The measure requires 60 votes. This means that Republicans, who have 53 Senate seats, will need support from at least seven Democrats or independents even if everyone from their party backs it.

Just The Beginning

As we reported earlier this week, the CLARITY Act was pushed into September after Democrats refused to support a procedural vote before the August recess. The delay was another setback for the legislation that once appeared to have substantial bipartisan support.

Its chances of becoming law this year, though, have plummeted, according to experts and prediction platforms. Galaxy Research recently lowered the percentage estimate from 50% to 30%.

The biggest contention issues remain ethics provisions, illicit finance rules, and the integration of language developed by the Senate Agriculture Committee, and the September 15 date doesn’t resolve any of them.

A bipartisan proposal from Republican Senator Thom Tillis and Democratic Senator Ruben Gallego would strengthen restrictions on public officials issuing or sponsoring cryptocurrencies and give state attorneys general a major role in enforcement. However, the White House failed to respond in time.

The November midterm elections also cast doubt on the bill, since most Democrats continue to oppose it, and they are expected to play a significantly larger role.

The post CLARITY Act Gets September 15 Senate Vote as Thune Forces the Issue appeared first on CryptoPotato.

A coordinated Bitcoin security campaign uncovered nearly 5,000 software issues across hundreds of open-source projects in about 30 hours. The effort combined human expertise with artificial intelligence tools to identify software weaknesses.

The initiative brought together 16 security researchers led by developer Calle, with support from OpenSats, OpenCode, and AI inference sponsors. The group worked together on a coordinated review covering hundreds of Bitcoin-related projects.

Breaking Down the Findings

According to figures released by the team, researchers reported 4,962 findings across 390 Bitcoin-related projects during the campaign. The total included 85 critical issues and 635 high-severity findings, bringing the number of the most serious reports to 720.

The campaign maintained a rapid pace, averaging about 166 reported findings every hour throughout the review. Based on the published figures, the team identified roughly 2.3 critical or high-severity issues for every person-hour spent examining software.

Researchers said the campaign differed from a traditional security audit because human reviewers actively guided AI systems during testing. Each participant used different prompts and methods, helping uncover weaknesses that a single approach might have missed.

The final tally also included findings collected by one contributor before the live campaign officially began. After those results were added, crypto libraries and software development kits recorded the largest share of findings with 1,385 reported issues.

What the Findings Revealed

The team said that about one out of every seven reported findings fell into the high or critical severity categories. Only one reviewed project reportedly completed the campaign without any reported issues, prompting a lighthearted remark from Bitcoin Core developer Matt Corallo.

Researchers have already started sending verified critical findings to affected project maintainers with supporting proof-of-concept retest demonstrations. Many maintainers reportedly confirmed the reports quickly, although processing such a large volume remains a significant challenge.

The campaign comes as Bitcoin software security receives greater attention across the ecosystem after several recent security incidents. Separately, Bitcoin recorded about 0.98 million daily active addresses on July 31, the highest level since December 2024. The surge came after attackers began sweeping wallets whose seeds were generated using defective Coldcard firmware.

The post AI Bitcoin Security Campaign Finds Nearly 5,000 Software Issues in 390 Projects appeared first on CryptoPotato.

After a shaky July in terms of ETF performance, the Bitcoin funds started August with a bang, attracting more than $800 million in the first full week of the month.

This coincided with the underlying asset’s price revival, as BTC jumped from a monthly low at $62,200 on Monday to over $65,000 on Friday.

Best Week Since Mid-April

July began with big hopes as investors pulled out more than $2.4 billion out of the spot Bitcoin ETFs in May and another $4.5 billion in June. Although there were many good days throughout the seventh month of the year, it ultimately ended with a more modest net inflow of $172.43 million. Thus, it lost the July inflow war to Ethereum.

The funds attracted nearly that amount on August 3 alone, pulling in $170 million. Another $211.49 million followed on Tuesday, $244.42 million on Wednesday, $128.69 million on Thursday, and $98.85 million on Friday. Thus, the perfect all-green week was complete, and the end number stands at $853.54 million, which is actually more than all four previous weeks combined.

Moreover, it’s the best single-week performance since mid-April, when the funds were on a roll, gaining nearly $1 billion at one point. It’s also the third-best of the year, as the record still belongs to the week that ended on January 16, when the ETFs attracted $1.42 billion.

The past week has been quite positive for BTC’s price performance as well. Perhaps fueled by the ETF inflows, the asset rose from $62,200 on Monday to $65,400 on Friday after the weaker-than-expected US jobs data.

ETH ETFs Extend Streak

Unlike the spot Bitcoin ETFs, the Ethereum counterparts didn’t have a full red week in July, ending the month with $365 million in net inflows. Their first in August has been quite impressive as well, attracting almost $245 million.

The start of the week wasn’t as promising as investors pulled out $11.42 million. However, they changed their tune during the other four trading days, inserting $53.75 million on Tuesday, $60.86 million on Wednesday, $92.15 million on Thursday, and $49.60 million on Friday. Thus, the cumulative net inflows have increased from $11.21 billion last week to $11.46 billion.

ETH’s price has also climbed by around 3% weekly, currently trading well above $1,920 after it dipped toward $1,800 on Monday.

The post Bitcoin ETFs Log a Perfect Week as Inflows Reach a 3-Month Record appeared first on CryptoPotato.