Microsoft's integration of Anthropic's Claude into Copilot diversifies AI options, impacting enterprise decision-making and compliance dynamics.

The post Anthropic pledges $30B in Azure compute as Claude moves into Copilot appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Microsoft's diversified AI strategy may enhance competitive dynamics, influencing AI model market rankings and future tech collaborations.

The post Microsoft integrates Anthropic models into Copilot, diversifies AI strategy appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Cerebras' stock plunge highlights the volatility and competitive pressures in the AI chip market, impacting investor confidence and future growth.

The post Cerebras stock hits record low of $146.98, down 62% from its first-day high appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Heightened geopolitical tensions may lead to increased airspace restrictions, impacting regional stability and international aviation operations.

The post Saudi coalition destroys Houthi missile aimed at Riyadh appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The CFTC's temporary crypto framework risks instability and market uncertainty if political shifts alter or delay its completion before 2028.

The post CFTC’s leveraged crypto framework may run out of runway before 2028, TD Cowen warns appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoin Extends Slide — Can ‘Uptober’ 2026 Beat Last Year’s?

Bitcoin’s price dipped further on Monday, sliding 2% over a 24-hour period to trade at a little over $82,423. 

The coin over the past week has dropped by 3%, and so far this month, it’s trading down. 

October is usually a strong month for the OG cryptocurrency. Data from Coinglass shows that it has finished eight of the last 10 Octobers in the green. 

Last year was one of the exceptions: while bitcoin’s price notched an all-time high of $126,080, it then started to enter a bear market after October 10 — when the biggest crypto liquidation event in history battered the asset’s price. 

Markets across the board got hit hard following tariff threats from U.S. President Donald Trump. Crypto long positions got wiped out and over $19 billion in digital asset bets were liquidated. 

Bitcoin then spent most of 2026 in a bear market. 

The good news? That the coin just had its best quarter in years and a good September — historically a rough month for the cryptocurrency. Analysts now are saying that while it’s got off to a bad start so far in “Uptober”, signs of a bottom this month may already be in. 

Writing for data firm CryptoQuant, Japanese asset management platform XWIN said it could be up from here. 

“Now, signs of a potential bottom are emerging,” XWIN said in a note. “On October 12, markets priced roughly an 18% chance of an October Fed hike, while Brent crude had eased from nearly $110 to around $103.”

It added: “‘Uptober’ need not mean uninterrupted gains: a correction can build the foundation for the next advance.”

High oil prices have — at least in the short-term — hurt bitcoin’s price as investors then expect the Federal Reserve to hike interest rates in order to control inflation. 

But while the U.S. central bank last month raised interest rates, bitcoin’s price was unfazed and rose following the news. 

Other analysts have now said the biggest cryptocurrency is out of a bear market due to it crossing its 365-day moving average — a signal that has marked the start of its bull markets in past cycles.

This post Bitcoin Extends Slide — Can ‘Uptober’ 2026 Beat Last Year’s? first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Ledger Investigates Fund Losses Tied to Southeast Asian Reseller After Implant Found in Device

Ledger has said it is working with authorities after users last week reported losing funds and one received a tampered device. But the company reassured customers that the number of impacted products was “limited.” 

The hardware wallet manufacturer added in an announcement on Sunday that it had reached out to affected customers. 

Paris-based Ledger on Friday said it had started an investigation after customers in South East Asia reported they’d lost funds after buying from a reseller. 

Then, on Saturday, Ledger said it confirmed that one of the impacted users’ devices contained an unauthorized hardware implant. 

Ledger would not confirm the amount of money lost but blockchain investigator Specter said $86 million had been drained from devices. 

“As the investigation continues, we are working with relevant authorities,” Ledger wrote on Sunday. 

It added: “Also, we strongly advise users not to purchase from unauthorized resellers, where the risk of buying suspicious, counterfeit or modified devices is important as nothing operates under ledger security guidelines.

“Security isn’t static and this incident underscores why we continuously review and strengthen our distribution and anti-tamper processes.”

Customers in South East Asia last week reported losing funds after buying from Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia-based vendor CryptoBilis. 

Ledger then advised customers who’d bought from CryptoBilis to not set up their devices. 

CryptoBilis has since stopped selling its hardware wallets, Ledger said on Sunday. 

People on social media posted picture evidence of devices implanted into Ledger products, claiming it could get users’ private keys. It isn’t clear how many of Ledger’s signing devices contained the implant. 

Neither Ledger nor CryptoBilis immediately responded to questions from Bitcoin Magazine. 

Hardware wallet security has been a hot topic ever since hackers in July were able to steal close to $120 million in bitcoin from Coldcard users. 

The products, made by Canadian company Coinkite, contained a firmware bug which led to faulty seed generation, allowing hackers to essentially guess investor seedphrases. 

In a separate incident, hardware wallet manufacturer Trezor last month reported that close to 81,000 customers had their details leaked after its third-party fulfillment partner had data stolen. 

Criminals have been targeting data this year, with scammers getting hold of customer information via crypto wallet Ledger’s payment processor Global-e to send phishing emails. 

This post Ledger Investigates Fund Losses Tied to Southeast Asian Reseller After Implant Found in Device first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Strategy Smash Buys $21.5M in BTC as It Continues Bitcoin Accumulation

Bitcoin juggernaut Strategy has bought more BTC as it pivots back to accumulating on a weekly basis. 

The Nasdaq-listed bitcoin treasury spent $21.5 million on 250 bitcoins from October 5 and October 11, according to a Monday filing. 

It added that it also spent $192.4 million repurchasing its STRC preferred stock. 

Strategy now holds 848,250 bitcoins worth $70.2 billion at today’s prices. Its stock (MSTR) on Monday was trading nearly 2% higher. 

The company — formerly MicroStrategy — has spent the past four weeks buying bitcoins after months of more sporadic buys or sometimes halting purchases for months altogether in order to build a bigger cash buffer. 

Monday’s filing also shows that the company bought last week’s bitcoin using net proceeds from MSTR Stock sales with its USD Cash buffer. Strategy has two cash reserves: “USD Reserve”, used to support the payment of dividends on the company’s preferred stock offerings and interest on its outstanding indebtedness, and “USD Cash”, which it uses to buy bitcoin. 

It first bought the cryptocurrency in 2020 to protect its shareholders from inflation. Since then, it has aggressively bought the asset and pivoted to being a bitcoin treasury. 

Investors can now buy its shares to get heightened exposure to the cryptocurrency, or get paid a yield via its digital credit products. 

The company is now focusing on products that pay investors yield via its STRF, STRC, STRK, and STRD preferred shares. 

Its Nasdaq-listed stock is down over 50% over the past year after the price of bitcoin took a hit. 

But since the company started buying bitcoin in August 2020, MSTR has appreciated by nearly 1,000%. 

This post Strategy Smash Buys $21.5M in BTC as It Continues Bitcoin Accumulation first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Congressman Warren Davidson: The Future of Money Will Decide Western Civilization

America is carrying $40 trillion in debt, and the dollar has lost about 30% of its purchasing power since 2020. Rep. Warren Davidson, founder of the Sound Money Caucus, explains why rising default risk and inflation are pushing rates higher, and why he believes people without real assets will lose purchasing power. He also warns that the future of Western civilization is centrally tied to the future of money.

Chapters:
0:00 – Why the Future of Western Civilization Is Tied to the Future of Money
0:40 – Clarity Act Cloture Vote Fallout and Section 305’s Threat to Self-Custody
3:48 – Will the Clarity Act Return After the Midterms?
6:22 – Open-Source Developer Protections and Trump Family Ethics Provisions
9:46 – The American Reserve Modernization Act and U.S. Government Bitcoin
13:58 – Has Bitcoin Become a Partisan Issue?
16:31 – CBDCs, Financial Surveillance and Bank Secrecy Act Reform
21:34 – Stablecoins as a “Hydra” CBDC and the GENIUS Act
25:02 – Bitcoin, $40 Trillion in Debt and the Dollar’s Reserve Status
29:37 – Why Bitcoiners Should Defend Freedom in the Midterms

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.

This post Congressman Warren Davidson: The Future of Money Will Decide Western Civilization first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mark Mason.

Bitcoin Magazine

Ark Invest’s Lorenzo Valente: Bitcoin’s 5-Year Forecast – Stablecoin & Gold Impacts

Bitcoin has been flat to down this year, but ARK Invest isn’t changing its view. Lorenzo Valente, Director of Research for Digital Assets at ARK Invest, explains why the firm looks at Bitcoin on a five-year horizon and still believes it’s very early in the Bitcoin journey. He discusses ARK’s Big Ideas report, Bitcoin’s role as digital gold and permissionless money, and what still keeps institutional money on the sidelines.

Chapters:
0:00 – ARK Invest’s Lorenzo Valente on How Wall Street Sees Bitcoin Now
1:36 – ARK’s Big Ideas Bitcoin Price Target for 2030
2:51 – How Stablecoins Changed ARK’s Emerging Market Bitcoin Thesis
4:53 – The Rise of Tokenized Stocks and Real-World Assets
7:13 – What Tokenized Stocks Can Do That Brokerage Accounts Can’t
9:35 – Higher Rates, Inflation, AI and Bitcoin’s Macro Outlook
12:49 – Which Tokenization Business Models Will Win?
15:41 – Exporting U.S. Assets Offshore Through Tokenization
17:34 – ARK’s Bitcoin Outlook for the Next 12 to 18 Months
18:29 – The Four-Year Cycle and What to Watch Next

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.

This post Ark Invest’s Lorenzo Valente: Bitcoin’s 5-Year Forecast – Stablecoin & Gold Impacts first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Patrick Green.

SWI Group has raised €800 million to expand AI infrastructure, advancing its plan to repurpose FTX-backed Bitcoin miner Genesis Digital Assets.

On Oct. 12, the Amsterdam-listed company announced a capital increase backed by institutional investors, valuing the group at €6.1 billion and bringing total equity raised since March above €1 billion.

The financing will support data-center development, power infrastructure and computing deployments across Europe and the United States, where SWI is converting its digital infrastructure portfolio toward artificial intelligence and high-performance computing.

The expansion includes Genesis Digital Assets (GDA), a former major investment of bankrupt crypto exchange FTX's trading affiliate, Alameda Research, which SWI acquired control of earlier this year.

The fundraising comes as Bitcoin miners increasingly redirect capital toward AI infrastructure, attracted by stronger projected profitability and rising valuations for companies with access to electricity and data-center capacity.

Former FTX investment becomes foundation for AI expansion

Genesis was among Alameda Research's largest venture investments before FTX collapsed in November 2022.

The trading firm invested approximately $1.15 billion in Genesis between 2021 and 2022, when the miner was valued at about $5.5 billion.

The investment later became the subject of bankruptcy litigation, with FTX's recovery trust seeking to reclaim funds it alleged Alameda improperly transferred. The trust dismissed the lawsuit in June 2026.

SWI has since consolidated control of Genesis, completing the acquisition of a stake exceeding 70% in August through share purchases and restructuring.

The company plans to rename the miner SWI Digital and use its US mining infrastructure as a foundation for high-performance computing and AI services.

Genesis's existing power-connected sites are central to that strategy, giving SWI access to infrastructure it can redevelop for more demanding computing workloads.

SWI previously disclosed that its combined European and American digital infrastructure portfolio exceeded 4 gigawatts of power capacity, with more than 80% of its capital allocated to the sector.

The group also plans to develop its own AI cloud platform, extending its business beyond data-center ownership into computing services for enterprises and developers.

SWI Chief Executive Max-Hervé George said the latest fundraising would help the company expand alongside growing demand for computing capacity.

The new shares will be issued in several series, although SWI did not identify the participating investors or disclose how much of the proceeds would be allocated specifically to Genesis.

Bitcoin miners' AI pivot delivers stronger returns

SWI's expansion follows a sharp divergence in the financial outlook for Bitcoin mining and AI infrastructure.

According to CoinShares' second-quarter mining report, AI computing infrastructure could generate approximately $1.5 million in annualized profit per megawatt, compared with an estimated $500,000 from Bitcoin mining.

That threefold difference has helped drive a substantial revaluation of former mining companies pursuing AI opportunities.

CoinShares found that 10 of the 12 publicly traded mining companies it tracked gained between 70% and 195% during the second quarter.

Companies focused on AI infrastructure, including Hut 8, Cipher Mining, TeraWulf and Core Scientific, traded at an average of 19.4 times forward sales, compared with 6.6 times for a group of more mining-focused competitors.

The shift reflects growing investor demand for companies with existing electricity connections and infrastructure capable of supporting AI workloads.

However, converting those assets remains capital-intensive.

CoinShares estimates that developing AI-grade facilities from mining infrastructure can cost $8 million to $15 million per megawatt, compared with approximately $700,000 to $1 million for mining infrastructure.

The report also found that more than $100 billion in disclosed AI computing contracts across the covered companies supported only about $1.1 billion in annualized revenue, with roughly 550 megawatts generating billings against more than 4 gigawatts of contracted capacity.

That gap has made project execution increasingly important as investors assign higher valuations to companies transitioning away from Bitcoin mining.

SWI's €800 million capital increase provides additional financing for its expansion, but the company has not disclosed which Genesis facilities will be converted first, their development costs or when they will begin generating AI computing revenue.

The post FTX’s former Bitcoin mining bet gets new life as parent raises €800 million for AI appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Standard Chartered has launched custody for Ripple's RLUSD stablecoin as it prepares to expand its use as collateral for institutional trading.

On Oct. 12, the bank announced that eligible institutional clients can now hold RLUSD issued on the XRP Ledger (XRPL) through its Dubai International Financial Center branch, regulated by the Dubai Financial Services Authority.

The launch forms part of a broader arrangement with Ripple and trading group LMAX that would allow institutions to use RLUSD as collateral while keeping their stablecoin holdings with Standard Chartered.

Under the proposed model, the bank would mirror the value of eligible RLUSD holdings to LMAX, enabling clients to support trading positions without transferring the underlying tokens directly to the venue.

The arrangement could reduce counterparty exposure and operational risks associated with moving assets between custodians and exchanges, while allowing institutions to deploy capital across trading activities.

Ripple expands RLUSD's institutional reach after rapid supply growth

The development comes as RLUSD emerges as one of the fastest-growing stablecoins by absolute market value added, reflecting Ripple's efforts to expand its use across financial markets.

According to RWA Foundation, Ripple recorded the second-largest increase in stablecoin market capitalization during the third quarter, adding $765.3 million over 90 days.

Only Circle's USDC posted a larger increase, $915 million, while United Stables ranked third at $474.2 million.

Data from DeFiLlama shows RLUSD's total circulating supply has since climbed to about $2.4 billion, with about $1.14 billion issued on XRPL and another $1.3 billion on Ethereum.

The expansion gives Ripple a larger pool of dollar-denominated tokens as it seeks to establish RLUSD beyond payments and transfers, including as collateral for institutional trading.

That effort gained momentum in January when Ripple and LMAX announced a multiyear partnership to integrate RLUSD across the trading group's infrastructure.

Ripple committed $150 million in financing to support LMAX's expansion, with the agreement targeting RLUSD adoption across spot cryptocurrency trading, perpetual futures, contracts for difference, and other institutional products.

Standard Chartered's involvement adds a traditional banking custody channel to the arrangement, allowing participating institutions to maintain custody arrangements with the bank while accessing LMAX's trading infrastructure.

Waqar Chaudry, Standard Chartered's global head of digital assets in Securities Services, said institutional investors increasingly want to participate in digital asset markets without compromising asset safeguarding and risk management.

For Ripple, accepting RLUSD as trading collateral could drive additional demand from banks, brokers, and investment firms that need dollar-denominated assets to support their positions.

However, the commercial impact will depend on how widely institutions adopt the arrangement and which LMAX products ultimately accept the stablecoin.

Standard Chartered has not disclosed the amount of RLUSD held in custody or identified participating institutional clients.

The companies have also not announced when the collateral integration will become operational. Implementation remains subject to final documentation, technical testing, regulatory requirements and internal approvals across relevant jurisdictions.

Those remaining steps will determine when institutions can begin using RLUSD held at Standard Chartered to support trading positions on LMAX.

The post Standard Chartered brings Ripple’s RLUSD into banking custody after $765 million quarterly surge appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin options expiring Friday carry substantial put exposure below the market price, while short-term volatility pricing has fallen ahead of Wednesday's US inflation report.

Data from Coinbase-owned Deribit, a crypto options exchange, showed that in an Oct. 12 snapshot the Oct. 16 settlement carried approximately 15,502 BTC in outstanding options, comprising 9,128 BTC in puts and 6,373 BTC in calls. The put-to-call ratio stands at 1.43, with about $451 million in underlying notional exposure concentrated in puts at $76,000, $78,000 and $80,000.

The snapshot put Bitcoin near $83,450 after last week's selloff, while derivatives platform Laevitas reports declining short-term volatility expectations ahead of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) release.

Bitcoin puts cluster between $76,000 and $80,000

Deribit's options data shows the largest concentration of puts at the $80,000 strike, with outstanding contracts carrying about $188 million in underlying notional exposure.

Another $162 million is concentrated at $78,000, while the $76,000 strike accounts for approximately $101 million.

Combined, the three levels represent nearly 35% of the $1.29 billion options expiry, highlighting the scale of downside positioning after Bitcoin briefly fell toward $80,000 during last week's market downturn.

Additional put exposure worth about $89 million is concentrated at $83,000, near Bitcoin's current trading price.

The concentration suggests traders remain concerned about renewed selling pressure, although put open interest also includes contracts sold by investors seeking to collect premiums rather than exclusively buyers seeking protection.

Deribit data shows approximately $94 million in call exposure at $90,000, followed by $70 million at $87,000 and $55 million at $85,000.

Together, the three levels account for $219 million in outstanding notional exposure, less than half the amount concentrated at the three major downside put strikes.

The distribution leaves Bitcoin's largest downside positions relatively close to prices tested during the recent decline, while the $90,000 call strike requires an advance of nearly 8% from current levels.

Meanwhile, Deribit's maximum pain calculation stands at $83,000, indicating the settlement level that would minimize the aggregate intrinsic value of outstanding options based on current positioning.

Later-dated Bitcoin options also carry substantial upside exposure: Deribit’s Oct. 30 expiry has approximately $4.54 billion in call notional across the $90,000, $95,000 and $100,000 strikes.

Bitcoin volatility expectations retreat before Wednesday's CPI

Laevitas’s Oct. 12 brief described a volatility curve that prices Wednesday’s CPI as a non-event.

Bitcoin's seven-day at-the-money implied volatility declined to 32.01% from approximately 34.5% a week earlier.

That compares with 34.66% for 30-day contracts, 37.29% for 90-day options and 38.24% for 180-day maturities.

For illustration, converting the annualized seven-day implied volatility to a weekly move at the $83,450 snapshot price gives a one-standard-deviation move of roughly 4.4%, or $3,700, under conventional volatility assumptions.

That would place the modeled weekly range between approximately $79,750 and $87,150, encompassing the $80,000 put strike but falling short of the substantial call concentration at $90,000.

Meanwhile, Laevitas reported that Bitcoin's seven-day 25-delta options skew shifted from +1.98 to -2.40 over the past week, a 4.38-point reversal.

Laevitas characterized the move as an unwind from a call-bid extreme toward nominally put-bid pricing, with puts still cheaper relative to calls than their 52-week median.

Bitcoin perpetual-futures open interest fell 1.9% over the past week to approximately $29.33 billion, while annualized funding rates stood at 5.6%, according to Laevitas.

The positioning comes as investors assess whether US inflation could prompt the Federal Reserve to raise interest rates again at its Oct. 27-28 policy meeting.

MarketWatch’s Oct. 12 preview cited expectations for September headline inflation to accelerate to approximately 3.7% annually from 3.4% in August, partly reflecting higher energy costs. Monthly core inflation, which excludes food and energy, is forecast to rise 0.2%.

Laevitas described an October increase as close to priced out, with December pricing around an 85% probability of a hike.

However, elevated oil prices and Treasury yields continue to complicate the outlook for risk assets, with stronger-than-expected inflation potentially reviving expectations of another rate increase.

In illustrative price scenarios, hotter inflation could pressure Bitcoin toward the heavily populated $78,000–$80,000 put strikes, while softer inflation could encourage a recovery toward the higher call concentrations.

The CPI report arrives Wednesday, Oct. 14, at 8:30 a.m. Eastern Time, followed by producer-price inflation and retail-sales data Thursday, Oct. 15, giving traders two days of economic releases to absorb before Friday's $1.29 billion options expiry.

The post Bitcoin options price a quiet CPI week while shorts cluster at $76,000–$80,000 appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Solana’s plan to retire durable nonces, which let transactions be signed offline and broadcast later, would preserve cold-key approval while changing which addresses control the affected assets. For exchanges, custodians and treasury operators using that signing method, the proposed replacement adds a program between the cold key’s approval and execution.

The Solana Foundation’s October deprecation plan points to onchain signer programs that verify an offline signature and execute its approved instructions. A program-derived address, or PDA, would control the affected accounts. The original key would still authorize actions, while a separate online operator submits them and pays the network fee.

The replacement creates a different custody architecture: operators must migrate the relevant assets or permissions, applications must accept actions arriving through another program, and risk teams must approve the new signing path.

Durable nonces remain usable. The Foundation has not set a removal date or made a final choice between Anza’s Programmatic Signer and Blueshift’s Vector. Its roughly six-month migration window is conditional on a suitable replacement being ready, audited and live on mainnet.

The key keeps approving, but the account changes

Durable nonces solve a timing problem. Instead of signing a transaction tied to a recent blockhash that soon expires, an offline signer can approve one using a stored nonce. That allows approval and broadcast to happen at different times.

Solana’s separate 200ms slot upgrade reached its final mainnet stage on Oct. 9. Faster block production leaves less wall-clock time for ordinary blockhash-based approvals, although expiry depends on block production rather than a guaranteed timer. CryptoSlate’s earlier coverage examined that timing change; the nonce proposal concerns the architecture used to avoid the short approval window.

Under Programmatic Signer, the cold key signs an authorization message rather than the transaction sent to the network. A relayer places that approval in a fresh-blockhash transaction. The signer program verifies the authorization and executes the approved instructions with the key’s derived address as signer.

The PDA has no private key of its own. Its ability to act comes from the signer program verifying the original key’s approval. Deriving the address does not move any assets or permissions: those must be transferred separately.

The migration guide describes moving native SOL into the derived address, transferring token balances into accounts controlled by it, and moving mint or freeze permissions to it. Stake accounts can move the staker authority, withdraw authority or both, depending on the permission being migrated. These are separate controls, rather than one universal wallet switch.

The Foundation proposes completing those handoffs while legacy durable nonces still work. For an affected treasury, approving the new signing software is therefore only part of the job. Its account inventory and the permissions each key currently holds determine what must change.

The two candidate designs also handle native SOL differently. Programmatic Signer’s derived SOL account is System-owned and can send SOL through an approved ordinary transfer. Vector initializes a program-owned account and releases SOL through its own authorized withdrawal or closing operation.

What the cold signature lets a relayer do

The implementation choice affects how tightly an approval constrains the transaction around it.

Programmatic Signer’s message documentation says the cold signatures bind the executor, nonce account and embedded execution message. A relayer cannot alter those authorized bytes while retaining valid signatures. It can, however, choose the outer fee payer and blockhash and add instructions before or after the submission.

Vector commits to the top-level instruction buffer, including the data and accounts used to pass approved actions into other programs. Instructions surrounding those actions must already be included when the cold key signs. A relayer cannot insert, remove or reorder them afterward without invalidating the approval.

Programmatic Signer allows an execution context to be assembled around an approved action; Vector requires the surrounding instruction sequence to be approved in advance. In both cases, paying for broadcast does not grant permission to rewrite the signed action.

A failed execution attempt can leave a cold approval executable later. A current durable-nonce transaction that passes validation but fails during execution still consumes its nonce. Programmatic Signer’s architecture commits the nonce advance and application changes together, or rolls them back together. Vector documents the same ability to retry a failed action.

For operators, retryability means a failed submission has not necessarily invalidated the approval. Without an enforced deadline, it can remain available for later execution while its nonce is unchanged.

Vector explicitly warns that a relayer could withhold a transaction until conditions change, or that a signature exposed by a failed attempt could execute later. A timeout included in the signed instructions can reject execution after a deadline. Revocation requires a separately authorized nonce advance to land. A deadline rejection itself does not consume a nonce whose changes roll back with the failed transaction.

Application access is a separate custody test

The Foundation’s rationale is to simplify validator handling. Durable nonces require special replay-prevention rules, complicate asynchronous execution and make invalid transactions harder to filter. Moving approval and replay state into ordinary programs leaves validators processing normal blockhash transactions.

Applications then receive approved actions through cross-program invocation, or CPI: one program calls another. That can conflict with an application’s rule that an action must arrive directly as a top-level instruction. Checks that inspect only top-level repayment or signature-verification instructions can also miss an action nested inside the signer program.

More available call depth does not resolve a rule that rejects the call’s position or cannot inspect the nested instructions. The Foundation suggests supporting known signer programs or offering another execution path. Whether an application accepts a PDA’s signature is consequently a different question from whether the offline approval is cryptographically valid.

Token-2022’s CPI Guard shows why compatibility needs a precise account-level assessment. With the guard enabled, CPI transfers and burns require delegate authority; approvals through CPI are prohibited, and changing the owner is prohibited even outside CPI. Permanent delegates have transfer and burn exceptions.

Those rules are more specific than a blanket ban on every PDA action. A delegate-based transfer route may exist, but establishing or using that authority introduces its own permission and custody-policy decision.

Institutional concerns raised in March centered on application access and the controls under which funds may move. In the March 4 discussion, a participant identifying himself as Michael from Fireblocks supported nonce deprecation while objecting to CPI Passthrough’s migration, contract dependence and DeFi compatibility burdens. He favored transaction envelopes, with Sudo as an alternative, rather than the proposed CPI-based signing path.

Grant, who identified himself as being at Unit 410, said the same day that a small, auditable signer program might make authority migration acceptable. He rejected a workaround that temporarily moves assets to a hot signer, even for an atomic operation, because funds must remain associated with cold storage in its noncustodial model.

A testable design still needs a production migration path

Programmatic Signer’s current documentation reports devnet deployment and audits in progress, with remediation required before its v1 release and any mainnet deployment. Its interfaces may change. The usage documentation still marks simulation and relay submission as coming soon, while several migration operations are similarly unfinished in the guide.

Vector publishes implementation code and program IDs; its README does not state an audit or mainnet deployment status.

Meanwhile, Fireblocks’ current protocol onboarding kit still describes automatic durable-nonce injection for selected WalletConnect integrations, including Jupiter and Kamino, with a default provider-managed 15-minute validity window. That describes an existing approval workflow which a replacement must accommodate.

An operational migration needs an audited mainnet replacement, usable tools and application paths that retain each operator’s approval controls.

The post Solana’s offline-signing proposal would keep approvals valid after failed transactions appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Eclair, ACINQ's Lightning node software, has merged two repairs for gaps that could make a node lose Bitcoin through excessive mining fees during channel funding and splicing. One limits a peer's fee-bump demands when Eclair contributes funds; the other checks transactions from a compromised Bitcoin backend while Eclair retains the signing keys.

The repairs merged into the project's master branch on Oct. 2 and Oct. 5. As of Oct. 12, its release page still listed September's v0.14.3 as latest. The two October fixes postdate that packaged release.

Bitcoin Optech's Oct. 9 newsletter highlighted both changes as closing protection gaps during dual funding and splicing.

The first repair, PR #3388, concerns peer-initiated replace-by-fee, or RBF, attempts during a dual-funded channel opening or a splice that adjusts a channel's funding. A peer could request a replacement transaction with a higher fee rate. Eclair kept its wallet contribution and paid for its inputs at that rate, without an upper bound or fee budget on this path.

That let a malicious peer impose an arbitrary mining fee rate on the contributing node while contributing nothing itself. The loss would be paid as fees to miners rather than transferred directly to the peer.

The repair rejects attempts above the maximum funding fee rate Eclair recommends to its peer. Two exceptions remain: the peer buys liquidity and pays the fees for Eclair's inputs, or the Eclair node contributes no funds to the transaction. In those cases, Eclair does not bear the cost addressed by this limit.

Keeping keys is only part of the defense

PR #3390 addresses a separate threat in Eclair-signer mode. Bitcoin Core's backend, bitcoind, selects coins and builds transactions, while Eclair retains the keys and signs.

A compromised backend could report a fee within budget while constructing a transaction that actually paid more, including by dropping the change output. Under Bitcoin's transaction accounting, input value not assigned to outputs becomes a miner fee. Missing change can therefore spend funds without paying an attacker's address.

When a fee budget is supplied, the repair calculates the actual fee from the amounts of the coins being spent, fetched by transaction ID to authenticate their values. It checks that the backend's reported fee matches and applies the budget to the actual fee. It also checks that Eclair's rebuilt contributions pay the same verified fee and rejects invalid change-output positions.

These are distinct from the cooperative-closing fee flaw covered in CryptoSlate's September report and the restart denial-of-service issues covered Oct. 2.

These repairs address Eclair's dual-funding, splicing and signer configurations. Operators should check that their installed build contains the October changes.

The post Eclair merges fixes for Lightning flaws that could burn Bitcoin in fees appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Unichain, the layer-2 chain run by Uniswap, is changing its technical foundation. The testnet migrates on October 13, 2026, with the mainnet following on October 29. For your balance on the chain, Uniswap says this means nothing at all. Chain ID, contracts, balances and applications stay the same, and Uniswap v2, v3 and v4 keep running as before. What changes is the operation behind the scenes, and that is the part that concerns you as a holder.

Uniswap announced the move on its own blog on October 9, 2026. The stated goal is native interoperability across the OP Stack: transfers between Unichain and other chains built from that toolkit should eventually work without a separate bridge, starting with Ether. Meanwhile the Uniswap price is under pressure. UNI trades at $7.34 on October 12, 2026, down 6.3 percent over 24 hours and 18.1 percent over seven days.

What Uniswap has announced for October 13 and October 29

The announcement is short and names two dates. The Unichain testnet migrates on October 13. The mainnet follows on October 29. That leaves a little over two weeks in which the switch runs on the testnet only, the sandbox where developers test their contracts against real network conditions without moving real money.

Uniswap spells out the effect for users: nothing changes for Unichain users. That promise covers the four things a chain hangs on for the people who use it. The chain ID stays the same, the identifier your wallet uses to address the right network. Contracts keep their addresses. Balances stay where they are. And the applications running on the chain remain reachable.

Why an unchanged chain ID matters more than it sounds

The chain ID is the number a network uses to identify itself to wallets and tools. If it changes, you have to set up the network entry again in every wallet, and any signature issued against the old identifier loses its validity on the new network. A genuine chain migration with a new identifier would force holders to act. Here the number stays, which removes that whole block of work.

OP Enterprise: Optimism takes over sequencer, RPC and incident response

The substance of the switch sits in a subordinate clause of the announcement. Optimism will run production operations for Unichain from now on. According to Uniswap, that covers the sequencers on mainnet and testnet, the RPC endpoints, monitoring and the response to incidents.

The sequencer is the point at which a layer-2 chain decides the order in which transactions enter a block. That makes it the most important operational lever on such a chain. Whoever runs it can delay or reorder transactions, and if it fails, the chain stops. The RPC endpoint is the access point your wallet uses to talk to the chain at all. Both now sit with Optimism.

This is neither trivial nor a disaster. It is a shift of responsibility: Uniswap hands day-to-day operations to the team that builds the OP Stack, and buys early access to new releases of that toolkit in return. Uniswap names exactly that as the benefit, namely first access to native interoperability and to OP Stack releases as soon as they ship.

Stage 1 and fault proofs: why the rollup status decides how much trust is needed

Uniswap states in the announcement that Unichain remains a stage 1 rollup with permissionless fault proofs. Both terms are decisive for the question of how much you have to trust the operator.

A fault proof is the proof with which someone can challenge an incorrect state of the chain. Permissionless means no approval is needed to do so: anyone can submit such a proof. That is the mechanism protecting you from an operator of a layer-2 chain writing an invented balance onto the main chain.

Stage 1 describes the middle of three development stages for a rollup chain. It means the proof machinery is running, but a security council still holds powers to intervene. At Unichain, the rights over contract upgrades remain with Optimism governance and the security council, Uniswap says, just as they do today. That is precisely the point the switch leaves untouched.

What remains open

The announcement names no risks and describes no changes to sequencer technology, proof machinery or governance beyond the statement that everything stays. The promised interoperability is explicitly in the future tense: once it is live, transfers should work without a bridge. As of October 29 it is announced, not committed. Technical detail on the chain sits in Uniswap's Unichain developer documentation.

Native interoperability: Ether should move between OP Stack chains without a bridge

Today, moving from one layer-2 chain to another usually requires a bridge. A bridge locks your coins on one side and issues you a claim on them on the other. That detour is why bridges have been among the costliest points of failure in the crypto market for years: whoever breaks a bridge reaches a pot holding many users' money.

Native interoperability aims to abolish that pot. Instead of two separate chains with an intermediary in between, the chains of one toolkit should recognise each other directly as valid. Uniswap names Ether as the first asset to move this way. For everything else, UNI included, the announcement sets no date.

In practice: if you want to move coins off Unichain today, you use the route you already know, and that stays true immediately after October 29. The benefit only arrives once interoperability is actually running, and at first only for Ether.

Unichain by the numbers: $27 million on the chain against $6.2 billion on Base

The announcement reads large. A look at the size of the chain puts it in proportion. According to DefiLlama, Unichain holds around $27.3 million in total value locked on October 12, 2026. OP Mainnet, Optimism's own chain, holds around $455.7 million at the same time. Base, the best-known chain from the same toolkit, holds around $6.18 billion.

Measured by capital deposited, Unichain is roughly 250 times smaller than Base. That explains the switch more plausibly than any story about technology: a small chain hands its operations to the team that builds the software anyway, and saves itself a staff for sequencers, endpoints and on-call duty.

What the size means for you

The less capital sits on a chain, the thinner its order books tend to be. Trading larger amounts on a small chain costs more spread between buying and selling price than on a large one. That holds equally before and after October 29 and has nothing to do with the change of operator.

UNI at $7.34: down 18 percent in seven days despite the fee switch running

The price is not moving towards the date but away from it. UNI stands at $7.34 on October 12, 2026. Over 24 hours that is a 6.3 percent loss, and 18.1 percent over the week. Market value sits at around $4.59 billion and 24-hour turnover at around $253.8 million, putting UNI 31st among coins by market value. It remains 83.6 percent below its high of $45.01 on May 3, 2021. All figures from CoinPaprika.

In our article of October 7, 2026 on Uniswap's burn mechanism, UNI still stood at $8.11. The price has shed a further 9.5 percent since then, and the situation measured there has not turned: the squeeze through burned UNI continues, and the price does not register it. The same analysis counted 112.6 million UNI at the burn address, 11.26 percent of total supply, including the 100 million UNI from the one-off treasury burn.

Protocol revenue and price are diverging

By an FXEmpire calculation dated October 12, 2026, protocol fees in October so far add up to around $25 million, which annualised over the month would come to roughly $125 million. The figure comes from FXEmpire rather than from our own measurement, and it describes the same gap: the protocol's revenue and the price of its coin are currently moving in different directions.

Anyone holding UNI should read that gap for what it is: a sign that the market is not currently rewarding the link between protocol revenue and token price. Where your coins sit matters more to your own risk than the price does. If you want to hold UNI or Ether for the longer term, the key belongs in your own hands, and our hardware wallet comparison is worth a look for that.

Our assessment: a change of operator, not a turn in the price

From this newsroom's point of view, this date is a story about infrastructure and not about the price. Three verifiable points support that. Uniswap itself says nothing changes for users and that chain ID, contracts and balances stay. The rights over contract upgrades remain with Optimism governance and the security council, so no question of power moves. And the benefit, interoperability, sits in the future tense in the announcement and applies to Ether only at first.

Against that, running a chain's operations is no sideshow. Whoever runs sequencer and RPC determines order and availability. That dependency moves from Uniswap to Optimism, and after October 29 it cannot be reversed without scheduling another migration. That is an assessment of the situation and not a recommendation to buy or sell UNI. With crypto assets, total loss is possible.

Bridge risk and custody: what to check before October 29

The switch demands no action from you. Even so, a date on which the operation of a chain changes hands is a good moment for three questions that apply regardless.

First: do you know which chain your coins actually sit on? Many holders do not know precisely, because wallets combine several networks in one view. The network entry in your wallet carries the chain ID, and at Unichain that number stays the same.

Second: do you hold coins inside a bridge or in a bridged form? A bridged version of a coin is a claim on an original locked up somewhere else. That claim hangs on the bridge, not on the chain. The migration changes nothing about this, which is exactly why the risk stays until native interoperability is running.

Third: who holds the key? If your UNI sits with an exchange, the switch is not your responsibility in the first place, but you carry the exchange's risk instead. If they sit in your own wallet, you carry the key risk yourself.

What happens on the testnet on October 13, and what leaves your balance untouched

On October 13 the switch affects the testnet only. No real value runs there. Developers get a little over two weeks to test their contracts and tools against the new foundation before the mainnet follows on October 29.

For a holder, October 13 is therefore above all a date to watch. If the testnet migration passes without incident, that is a sign October 29 will be uneventful too. If problems show up there, you have two weeks of warning before the same switch touches real value. The announcement itself names no planned downtime and no suspension of withdrawals; anyone claiming such a pause would have to prove it.

How to tell it has happened

After October 29 you will see the result neither in the price nor in your wallet. It becomes visible only once Uniswap and Optimism release interoperability. Only then can Ether move between the chains of the toolkit without a bridge, and only then does the migration bring you a visible benefit. The original announcement sits in the Uniswap blog of October 9, 2026.

Unichain migration: the mainnet follows on October 29

Nothing happens to your balance between October 13 and October 29, nor immediately afterwards. What changes is who runs the chain. These three steps make sense regardless of the date:

1. Sort your holdings. Check which of your coins sit on a layer-2 chain and which on the main chain. If something is held in bridged form, you now know your dependency on that bridge. For a running overview and the records the tax office wants, the tools in our comparison of crypto tax software and portfolio trackers help.
2. Settle custody. Decide for each position whether it should sit with an exchange or in your own wallet. Which software wallets support which chains is set out in our software wallet comparison.
3. Check your trading route. If you want to add to or reduce your UNI, compare licensing, spread and withdrawal routes first, because a larger trade on a small chain costs more spread. The terms are in our crypto exchange comparison.

(As of October 12, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

The most important number this week is not the Bitcoin price but the US consumer price index on Wednesday. It lands on October 14 at 8:30 a.m. New York time, 2:30 p.m. in Germany, and it is the last inflation print the Federal Reserve will have on the table before its rate decision on October 28. The next consumer price index does not follow until November 10, two weeks after the meeting. For Bitcoin that means the range it trades in will be set between Wednesday midday and October 28.

On Monday evening a Bitcoin costs $82,663, or roughly 74,100 euros. The daily high was $84,250 and the daily low $82,318; the figures come from the Kraken exchange, as of October 12 around 6:45 p.m. Against the previous day that leaves a loss of 1.2 percent.

Bitcoin Forecast: Why Wednesday Weighs More Than Today's Price

A daily loss of 1.2 percent says little. What counts is the expectation the market carries into the Fed meeting. The CME futures exchange currently prices a probability of around 19.4 percent for a further rate rise of 25 basis points on October 28. A week ago it was 22.1 percent, a month ago 42.5 percent. The expectation of tighter monetary policy has therefore more than halved within four weeks, and a surprisingly high inflation print on Wednesday is exactly what could gather that expectation back up.

The direction is open both ways. Come in below expectations and the probability falls further, giving risk assets room to breathe. Come in above and it rises, with the pressure landing first where borrowed money is at work. Either way it is in the price within minutes on Wednesday afternoon.

$82,663 on Monday Evening: Where Bitcoin Stands Right Now

The daily closes of the past eight days trace a sideways move with a slump in the middle. On October 5 Bitcoin closed at $85,752, after which it went through $85,542 and $83,276 down to $81,684 on October 8. That day's low of $80,329 still marks the deepest point of the move. Since then came $82,559, $82,913 and $83,676, before Monday closed at $82,654.

The midpoint of that move is the interesting part. From the October 5 high of $86,974 to the October 8 low of $80,329 is $6,645. Half of that sits at $83,651. Sunday closed exactly there, and Monday failed exactly there at a daily high of $84,250. The market has tested the middle of the slump twice and fallen back twice.

What Has Changed Since Yesterday's Forecast

Yesterday this slot carried the Bitcoin forecast on the distance to the 200-day line, then 15.4 percent at a price of $83,676. That gap has since shrunk to 14.7 percent, because the price has given up a good $1,000 while the 200-day line keeps rising slowly. The cushion below is getting smaller, then, without anything dramatic having happened.

Two things are new. First, the calendar has sharpened: that Wednesday's print is the last one before the Fed meeting was not yet a theme in the coverage yesterday. Second, the price has not won back the 20-day line from below. Yesterday it sat just under it and was rising; today it sits under it and is falling.

October 14 Is the Last Inflation Print Before the Rate Decision

The calendar grid can be read in two official schedules, and it is worth doing that yourself rather than taking it on trust. The US Department of Labor publishes the release plan for its statistics: the consumer price index for September appears on Wednesday, October 14, 2026, at 8:30 a.m. local time, with the producer price index following on Thursday at the same hour. The Federal Reserve, in turn, publishes its meeting dates in the FOMC calendar, which lists the 27th and 28th for October.

Put the two calendars together and you get the situation at issue here. No further consumer price index falls between Wednesday and the meeting. The print of October 14 is therefore the last hard piece of information the market can lean on when pricing, and it stays that way for two weeks.

How an Inflation Print Actually Feeds Through to the Bitcoin Price

The route is shorter than many assume, and it does not run through sentiment. A higher inflation print first shifts rate expectations in the futures market. Rate expectations determine the yield on short-dated US Treasuries. If that yield rises, borrowing money becomes more expensive and parking it risk-free becomes more attractive at the same time. Both pull capital out of assets that pay neither interest nor a dividend, and Bitcoin is one of them.

The second route is mechanical. Part of the trading on futures markets runs on borrowed money. As funding costs rise, leveraged positions become more expensive to hold, and in a fast price move they are closed out by force. That amplifies the original move without a single investor having changed their mind. This is why the first minutes after an inflation print regularly turn out more violent than the hours that follow.

Purvang Mashru, chief analyst at BitDelta India, points out in this context that US Treasury yields reached a 24-year high in the week to October 9. The rate channel is already wide open, then, before Wednesday's print even arrives.

681 Million Dollars Out of the Funds: What the Outflows Show and What They Do Not

A net 681 million dollars flowed out of the American Bitcoin spot funds last week. That is the largest weekly outflow since June and ends a run of three weeks of inflows. The figure comes from the data service SoSoValue and was reported by CoinDesk, among others. By far the largest share fell on Wednesday and Thursday, October 7 and 8.

That detail is the real finding. The outflows landed precisely on the two days when the price fell from $83,276 to $81,684 and the low of $80,329 formed. On Friday, Saturday and Sunday, by contrast, the price moved calmly and slightly higher. Read the weekly figure on its own and you see a week full of selling. Spread it across the days and you see two heavy days and three quiet ones.

Vikram Subburaj, chief executive of the Giottus exchange, reads the outflows as caution ahead of the data. He and Mashru both name $82,000 as the support that matters now, and the inflation print of October 14 as the next trigger. Neither of them names a price target.

These Three Moving Averages Are Framing the Price Right Now

For this article we calculated the moving averages ourselves from the daily closes of the Kraken exchange, data as of October 12. The result explains why the price has not budged for days.

The price is therefore sitting in a band a good $3,000 wide, between $81,038 and $84,052. That is barely four percent of room, and both of the levels named in the coverage lie inside this band: the $82,000 of the two analysts and the $82,500 that went through the charts last week as the neckline of a bottom formation.

What That Means for Both Directions

On the upside the first real hurdle is the 20-day line at $84,052, then the October 5 high of $86,974. On the downside the 50-day line at $81,038 is the first stop, then the October 8 low of $80,329. Lose that low and the next defensible level is not until the round $80,000 figure, and below that it thins out all the way into the region of the 200-day line.

Leverage and Liquidation: How to Check Your Liquidation Price Before Wednesday

If you hold a leveraged position, Wednesday afternoon carries the biggest risk in your portfolio, and that holds whether or not your view turns out to be right. The calculation is simple enough to do yourself in a minute: a long position is liquidated, roughly speaking, when the price falls by the reciprocal of the leverage. At five times leverage that is 20 percent, at ten times 10 percent, at twenty times 5 percent.

Applied to a price of $82,663, that gives the following points: five times leverage is liquidated on paper at around $66,130, ten times at around $74,400 and twenty times at around $78,530. Fees and funding costs push each of these points somewhat higher; the exact value is in the position overview at your provider.

Twenty times leverage deserves particular attention here. Its calculated liquidation point of $78,530 sits below the October 8 low, but only by $1,800. A move on the scale of October 8, when the price gave up almost $3,000 within a day, would therefore be enough. Hold positions like that and you check the distance today, not on Wednesday at 2:31 p.m. Which platforms charge which funding costs is set out in our perp DEX comparison.

Holding Period and Exemption: What a Sale on Wednesday Triggers for Tax

The second point concerns anyone thinking about selling, and it is regularly overlooked. In Germany, Bitcoin counts as another asset within the meaning of Section 23 (1) no. 2 of the Income Tax Act. A gain on a sale stays tax-free if more than a year lies between acquisition and disposal. Below that, the gain is taxed at your personal rate, and an exemption threshold of 1,000 euros a year applies to such private disposal transactions.

An exemption threshold is not an allowance. If the total gain from all private disposal transactions in a year comes to 999 euros, it stays entirely tax-free. If it comes to 1,001 euros, the whole amount is taxable, not just the euro above the line. So if you are sitting just short of the threshold and want to sell into a move on Wednesday, you should know where you stand for the year beforehand.

In practice that means two checks before Wednesday. First: which of your holdings did you buy more than twelve months ago, meaning before October 14, 2025? Only those are tax-free under the holding period. Second: how large is your gain from private disposal transactions so far this year? Both numbers are in your exchange's transaction history, and both determine whether a sale on Wednesday nets more than a sale in November.

Our Assessment: Wednesday Sets the Range, Not the Trend

In our view the data argues for treating Wednesday as a range event rather than a turn in trend. The evidence: the long-term trend is intact, at 14.7 percent above a rising 200-day line. The outflows from the funds concentrated on two days and did not continue afterwards. And the rate expectation for October 28, at 19.4 percent, is already so low that a mild inflation print brings little that is new, while a high print hits above all the short-term leveraged positions.

Against that stands the narrowness of the band. Between the 50-day line at $81,038 and the October 8 low of $80,329 lie only $709. Break the first level and the second is reached quickly, and below it there is no defensible floor until $80,000. This is an assessment of the situation, not a buy or sell recommendation: with cryptocurrencies a total loss is possible at any time.

Fed Meeting on October 28: Until Then, $82,500 Stays the Line

Three steps that can be done before Wednesday midday:

1. Settle your buying route and its licence. If you want to add or sell, you should know whether your provider is authorised in the EU and what fees apply in a fast move. The differences are in our crypto exchange comparison.
2. Pull together your acquisition data. Export the transaction history and mark which tranches were bought before October 14, 2025. The tools for that are in our crypto tax software comparison.
3. Decide whether you want to trade the date at all. If you are building a position for the long run, you can simply sit out a data release; how regular purchases defuse the timing question is shown in our Bitcoin savings plan comparison.

(As of October 12, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Ripple has held assets from the Canton Network since October 5, 2026. Its custody product, Ripple Custody, supports Canton Coin (CC) and tokens built to the CIP-56 standard as of version 1.43. Crypto Briefing reported this on October 7, and the trade service TokenPost announced the same release on the same day with its own details on the technical integration.

For retail investors, nothing changes about the route to buying, at least for now. Ripple Custody is a custody solution for banks, funds and depositaries, not for individual portfolios. The news matters for a different reason: it reveals how Canton assets are actually held, and that route differs markedly from the one you know from Bitcoin or Ether.

The price is taking the news calmly. CC trades at $0.1254 on Sunday evening according to CoinGecko's market data, up 5.73 percent within a day. Over a week it is still down 2.55 percent. Market capitalisation stands at 4.99 billion dollars, which is rank 24 among all cryptocurrencies.

Ripple Custody 1.43 Adds Canton Coin and CIP-56 Tokens

Version 1.43 is, as Crypto Briefing describes it, a release with extended support for installations in an institution's own data centre and for hybrid operating models. What is new is that an institution can hold and move Canton Coin and CIP-56 tokens in the same environment as its other digital assets.

CIP-56 is the token standard of the Canton Network, comparable to what ERC-20 is for Ethereum: a shared set of build instructions so that software can treat every token on the chain alike. It covers the tokens issued through the so-called DA Registry, the issuance register behind the network. TokenPost additionally names a second build-out stage of the ledger as a prerequisite for the rollout.

Canton Coin carries the name Amulet in the protocol. The token pays for use of the network and rewards the operators of the nodes, much like a network fee.

Canton Network and Canton Coin, Explained in One Sentence

The Canton Network is a blockchain for financial institutions in which every application has its own walled-off area and only the parties to a transaction can see its contents. That walling-off is precisely why banks work with it: a trading book does not have to become public just because it sits on a chain.

We last covered the network on October 4, when the US settlement house DTCC started up its tokenisation on Canton. For the background, see our piece on the launch of DTCC tokenisation on Canton. The Ripple news picks up exactly there: once institutional assets sit on the chain, someone needs a custody solution for them.

The Validator Stays With the Client, and So Does the Key

This is the part that matters for understanding it. Ripple does not run the network nodes itself. The model is known in the trade as bring your own validator: the institution or its service provider runs the validator, and Ripple Custody manages the accounts through it.

What a Validator Does in the Canton Network

A validator is a machine that checks and keeps a record of a blockchain's transactions. On Bitcoin you do not need one to own coins; a key pair is enough. On Canton, by contrast, account-keeping hangs on a party on the chain, and that party has to be served by a validator.

The signing keys stay in the client's vault, according to Crypto Briefing, and can be secured through a hardware security module or a key management service. A hardware security module is a dedicated device that generates and uses secret keys without ever releasing them. Prepared transactions have a 24-hour window in which they can be signed.

For custody in a private portfolio, that is an unfamiliar construction. Our hardware wallet comparison shows how to take charge of the keys for common cryptocurrencies yourself; on Canton that route does not readily apply, for the reasons set out above.

What Version 1.43 Does Not Yet Cover: No DvP Settlement

The integration has clear limits, and both reports name them. In this version Canton runs exclusively through Ripple Custody's programming interface. Arbitrary commands to a Canton application are not provided for, and nor is deploying your own contracts.

Above all, delivery versus payment is missing. That means the exchange in which delivery and payment are technically coupled, so that neither side has to go first. For securities trading that is the real prize, and it is still outstanding. Read the news as finished trading infrastructure and you are reading too much into it.

The Price Since October 4: From $0.1242 to $0.1254

Little has happened in the market since our last Canton piece. On October 4, CC stood at $0.1242 according to CoinGecko's daily data. On October 5, the day of the Ripple release, it was $0.1294, after which it fell back as far as $0.1188 on October 9. Today it is $0.1254. On balance that leaves the price roughly one percent higher seven days after the DTCC piece.

The levels that follow from this are tight. The daily high was $0.1275 and the daily low $0.1175. The all-time high of $0.1942 from February 3, 2026 is 35 percent away. The DTCC news of October 4 did not lift the price durably, and the custody news of October 5 held for exactly one day.

That points to a sober observation: infrastructure news moves this token briefly and then fizzles out. This is not a value judgement on the network but a description of what the price series of the past two weeks shows.

18 Trading Venues, and Only One of Them Holds a MiCA Licence

Now to the question that counts in practice: where can you actually get CC? CoinGecko lists 26 trading pairs for Canton Coin across 18 venues. Daily turnover of 16.7 million dollars is spread very unevenly. Bybit accounts for 5.60 million dollars, Temple Digital Group for 4.68 million, OKX for 1.73 million, Kraken for 1.47 million and Upbit for 1.16 million. After that it thins out: Bitget 0.95, KuCoin 0.70, Gate 0.54 and MEXC 0.42 million dollars.

Kraken as the Only Venue With an EU Licence

Among these venues, Kraken is the one a European investor can use as a matter of course. Kraken received its European licence under the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation from the Central Bank of Ireland and lists it in its own overview under the entity Payward Europe Solutions Limited. Coinbase, Bitpanda and Bitvavo do not appear in the list of trading venues for CC at all.

What the licensing requirement means in concrete terms for providers in Germany, we set out in our overview of MiCA obligations for crypto companies. If you are looking for a trading venue with a European licence, our overview of regulated crypto exchanges helps with the selection.

How thin trading in CC is relative to its market capitalisation, we already placed in context today in a separate analysis of the 25 largest cryptocurrencies. The short version for this article: rank 24 on the list promises more tradability than the order book delivers.

Pre-Approval and Two-Step Handover for Incoming Assets

One detail of version 1.43 deserves attention, because it solves a real problem. Incoming transfers can be pre-approved, and there are two-step handovers: a transfer is first offered, and the recipient accepts it, rejects it or withdraws it.

On open chains such as Ethereum, anyone can send any token into your account whether you want it or not. That is the basis of a widespread scam in which worthless or poisoned tokens are scattered into other people's accounts. For a bank, an unannounced inbound transfer is also a money-laundering compliance problem. The two-step handover takes that case off the table.

Self-Custody Works Differently on Canton Than on Bitcoin

To sum up the practical part: with Bitcoin, a hardware wallet costing 60 to 150 euros is enough, and you hold your coins without any third party involved. On Canton, account-keeping hangs on a party on the chain that a validator serves. Ripple solves that for institutions by having the client provide the validator while Ripple Custody manages the accounts.

A private investor will not run a validator. In practice that means your CC sits with the exchange you bought it on, and you carry that exchange's counterparty risk. To weigh that up, the selection is in our overview of the best crypto exchanges.

One caveat belongs with this: whether and which wallet providers will support Canton Coin for retail customers in future cannot be read off the available announcements. The Ripple release expressly concerns the institutional side.

Tax in Germany: One-Year Holding Period, 1,000-Euro Exemption

For tax, German law treats Canton Coin like other cryptocurrencies. Gains on a sale count as a private disposal transaction under Section 23 of the Income Tax Act. Sell within a year of buying and the gain is taxable; once a year has passed it stays tax-free. Within the one-year period, an exemption threshold of 1,000 euros applies to all private disposal transactions of a year taken together. Exceed it and the entire gain becomes taxable, not just the excess.

The One-Year Period Meets a Thin Order Book

With a token that has a thin order book, that carries an awkward side effect. If you want to sell at year end to meet a deadline, the order book has a say in the price at which you manage it. At 16.7 million dollars of daily turnover across all venues, a larger order cannot be placed just anywhere.

Our Assessment: Custody Is Solved, Tradability Is Not

In our view the news is worth more to the network than to the token. Three documented points support that: with DTCC since October 4 and Ripple Custody since October 5, Canton has gained both a settlement application and an institutional custody solution within two days. Equally documented points argue against a quick price effect: the price stands roughly one percent higher seven days after the DTCC news, 35 percent below the all-time high of February 3, and trading is spread across a few venues, of which essentially one is readily accessible to European investors.

What follows from that: betting on Canton means betting on an infrastructure story with a horizon of several years, not on an event with a price effect this week. What argues against hanging too much on this assessment: delivery versus payment is still missing, and without it the institutional build-out stays incomplete. A total loss is possible with any crypto asset.

Canton Coin: Without a MiCA Exchange, Access in Germany Stays Narrow

1. Settle the trading venue before you buy. Check whether your provider lists CC at all and whether it holds a European licence. The licensed selection is in our overview of regulated crypto exchanges.
2. Size your order to the order book. At 16.7 million dollars of daily turnover, a limit order beats buying at market. Which exchange offers which order types and fees is shown in our comparison of the best crypto exchanges.
3. Plan custody realistically. Classic self-custody as with Bitcoin is not available for CC. What self-custody looks like for the common coins is set out in our hardware wallet comparison.

(As of October 11, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Since October 8, 2026, the crypto exchange WhiteBIT has accepted Bitcoin over the Lightning Network and pays it out the same way. The fee is 0.25 percent on deposits and 0.15 percent on withdrawals. Both rates are percentages rather than flat amounts, and that is exactly what decides who is better off on the new route than on the Bitcoin main chain.

The exchange's own token, WhiteBIT Coin (WBT), stands at $81.55, or 72.95 euros, which is 4.9 percent below last Monday's level, according to CoinGecko at midday on Monday. The announcement did not carry the price: over the two days around October 8, WBT fell from $82.91 to $80.36, the weekly low.

What WhiteBIT Switched On on October 8: Lightning Channels via Voltage

The exchange has connected its Bitcoin deposits and withdrawals to the Lightning Network, using infrastructure from the provider Voltage. Founder and chief executive Volodymyr Nosov justified the move as making Bitcoin faster and more useful for customers who want to top up their accounts. Bitcoin Magazine reports this, citing the exchange's statement; The Cryptonomist gives the same fee rates.

The exchange's statement says nothing about processing times or minimum and maximum amounts. Anyone using the route will therefore see the applicable limits only in the withdrawal window of their own account.

Lightning Network Explained: Payment Channels Alongside the Bitcoin Main Chain

The Lightning Network is a second layer on top of Bitcoin. Two participants jointly lock an amount in a transaction on the main chain and then move it back and forth between themselves as often as they like, without writing each movement into a block of its own. Only when the channel closes does the final balance land back on the chain.

That is where the speed advantage comes from. A payment does not have to wait for the next block, which arrives on the Bitcoin network roughly every ten minutes, but is passed between channels in seconds. The price is the dependency: it works only as long as channels with enough capacity are open along the route to the recipient.

For an exchange this is above all a question of access. Deposit 40 euros worth of Bitcoin and you pay a network fee on the main chain that fluctuates with congestion and quickly eats a noticeable share of a small amount. Over a channel, that line item disappears.

0.25 Percent to Deposit, 0.15 Percent to Withdraw: The Fee Is a Percentage

The two rates are the real substance of the news. Within the Lightning Network itself, fees are usually tiny and depend on the channel fee charged by the forwarding nodes rather than on the amount. WhiteBIT instead bills a percentage, and with no published cap.

On a 50-euro deposit, 0.25 percent is twelve cents. On 5,000 euros it is 12.50 euros. The same pattern applies on the withdrawal side at 0.15 percent: 7.5 cents on 50 euros, 7.50 euros on 5,000 euros. The fee therefore grows in a straight line with the amount, while the technical effort in the channel does not.

The Maths for Small and Large Amounts: Where the Percentage Tips Over

Convert the rate into Bitcoin once and the difference becomes tangible. Bitcoin trades at $82,875 at midday on Monday, according to CoinGecko. A withdrawal of 0.01 BTC therefore comes to roughly 829 dollars, and 0.15 percent of that is about 1.24 dollars. At 0.1 BTC, or roughly 8,288 dollars, the fee rises to about 12.43 dollars. On a whole Bitcoin it would be around 124 dollars.

A withdrawal over the main chain, by contrast, costs a flat rate in Bitcoin that the exchange sets per network and adjusts with congestion. Review sites quote values for WhiteBIT between 0.00004 and 0.0005 BTC, but contradict each other by a factor of twelve, and no current figure from the exchange itself is publicly available. No reliable threshold at which one route beats the other can be derived from that. What is reliable is the direction: a flat rate becomes relatively smaller as the amount rises, a percentage rate does not.

Under this pricing, Lightning pays off where the technology was designed to work, on small and medium sums. Anyone pulling larger holdings off the exchange should compare the percentage against the main chain's flat rate, and do it in their own withdrawal window, because only there does the rate that applies at the moment of the order appear.

WBT Price This Week: $81.55, Weekly Low $80.36

The token ended the week weaker than it started it. On October 6 WBT stood at $85.70, the weekly high. On October 9 it fell to $80.36, the weekly low, and trades at $81.55 at midday on Monday. Over seven days that works out at minus 4.9 percent, over 30 days a gain of 1.4 percent. All figures come from CoinGecko, as of Monday around 1:00 p.m.

The all-time high of $87.91, which WBT reached on September 21, is 7.2 percent away. Market capitalisation stands at 9.69 billion dollars, which puts the token 16th among all crypto assets. There are 118.79 million WBT in circulation, against a cap of 400 million units.

On the upside the 85.70 from the weekly high is the first level, on the downside the 80.36 from the weekly low, with the round 80 line in between. These are observation points from the token's own price history, not price targets.

Why Trading Fees Feed the WBT Burn

There is a link between the Lightning connection and the token that goes beyond sentiment. According to the exchange, WhiteBIT uses 33 percent of its trading fees and 5 percent of its other revenue to take WBT off the market and burn it. The more trading on the exchange, the larger the amount flowing into that pot.

At the most recent weekly burn on October 1, 32,426 WBT worth around 2.72 million USDT were destroyed, equal to roughly 0.027 percent of the supply in circulation at the time. Those figures come from our own analysis of October 3, set out in our piece on the weekly WBT burn.

A low-friction deposit route can bring trading volume, and volume feeds the burn. Whether that effect materialises will only show in the burn amounts of the coming weeks, not in the announcement. WBT's 24-hour trading volume stood at 68.65 million dollars at midday on Monday.

WhiteBIT EU and the MiCA Licence: What the Authorisation Covers

For the route to buying from within the EU, the authorisation is what counts. The European entity WhiteBIT EU announced on June 19, 2026 that it had received a licence under the EU's MiCA regulation, granted by the supervisor in Austria. Such a licence applies across all member states through the EU passport, including for customers in Germany, without BaFin running a procedure of its own.

In practice that means complaints and supervisory questions go through the authority that granted the licence, not through BaFin. Which obligations a MiCA licence imposes on a provider, from capital requirements to the segregation of client funds, is covered in our overview of MiCA obligations for crypto companies. Anyone deliberately looking for a platform with an EU licence will find the authorised providers in our comparison of regulated crypto exchanges.

Custody and the Holding Period: What Applies When You Withdraw to Your Own Wallet

A Lightning withdrawal does not land in any Bitcoin wallet you like. The destination has to support Lightning and have a channel with sufficient capacity. Many hardware wallets do not speak the second layer directly, only through additional software. If you want to hold your own Bitcoin, check that compatibility first, because a withdrawal to an address that will not accept the channel fails rather than slows down.

For tax purposes, a withdrawal from the exchange to your own wallet changes nothing in Germany. Switching custodian is not a disposal, and the one-year holding period under Section 23 of the Income Tax Act keeps running. All that matters is that the acquisition data survives, because without a purchase record the period cannot be proven later.

One note on the fee side: the 0.15 percent applies to the withdrawal regardless of whether the transaction is relevant for tax. Fees connected with a sale can increase acquisition costs or deductible expenses, but moving coins to your own wallet is not a taxable event.

Our Assessment: An Access Advantage, Not a Price Driver

In our view the connection is a genuine step forward for small deposits and has so far had no effect on the WBT price. The evidence sits side by side: the price fell from $82.91 to $80.36 over the two days around the announcement and stands 4.9 percent lower seven days on. Against that reading stands the fact that an infrastructure change works through volume, and therefore over weeks rather than days. It becomes measurable in the weekly burn amounts, because 33 percent of trading fees end up there. If they rise noticeably in the coming weeks, the access route has delivered; if they stay at the level of October 1, it was a product announcement. No buy or sell recommendation follows from this, and with crypto assets a total loss is possible.

WBT and Lightning: 0.15 Percent With No Cap Hits Large Withdrawals

Three steps to put the change in context for yourself:

1. Weigh the fee against the amount. Take your usual withdrawal size and check whether 0.15 percent of it comes to more or less than the main chain's flat rate in your withdrawal window. The providers' fee models sit side by side in our crypto exchange comparison.
2. Check the destination wallet. Establish whether your custody solution accepts Lightning before you trigger a withdrawal. Which devices can handle it is shown in our hardware wallet comparison.
3. Secure the acquisition data. Export the transaction history before you move holdings, so the holding period stays provable. A tax tool with portfolio tracking helps with that.

(As of October 12, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Crypto futures and perpetuals are taxed in Germany under rules that have nothing to do with spot trading. A gain on a forward transaction counts as investment income and is charged at 25 percent income tax plus the solidarity surcharge. The one-year rule that makes a held Bitcoin tax-free after twelve months does not exist there. Trade a perpetual and you pay from the first closed position, and in return, since the Annual Tax Act 2024, you can again offset losses against other investment income without limit.

That split costs money if you only notice it when filing. Two separate loss-offsetting pools mean one thing: a loss on your leveraged account does not reduce the gain on coins you sold, even when both arose on the same platform and both were bets on the same price. What follows is the split in detail, with the sections of law your tax office relies on, and with a side-by-side calculation showing when the forward transaction actually comes out ahead of the spot purchase.

Two Tax Regimes: Section 20 EStG for Futures, Section 23 EStG for Spot

A coin you buy and the leveraged contract on that same coin are two different things for tax purposes. A crypto asset you buy and sell again is an other asset within the meaning of Section 23 (1) sentence 1 no. 2 of the German Income Tax Act. That is where the one-year rule sits: if no more than a year passes between acquisition and disposal, the gain is a private disposal transaction and taxable. Beyond that, it goes untaxed.

A future or a perpetual is not an asset you acquire and hold. It is a contract on a price difference, and it belongs in the catalogue of Section 20 (2) of the German Income Tax Act. Sentence 1 no. 3 letter a expressly names the gain “on forward transactions through which the taxpayer obtains cash settlement or a monetary amount or benefit determined by the value of a variable reference figure”. That describes a perpetual precisely: you receive or pay the difference between entry and exit price without ever owning the coin.

Forward transaction here means any contract whose performance lies in the future and whose value derives from a reference figure, in this case the price of the underlying. That the underlying is a cryptocurrency rather than a share changes nothing about the classification. How the European supervisor classifies perpetuals, and which leverage caps follow from that, we set out in our piece on the MiFID classification of perpetuals.

Cash Settlement Makes a Perpetual a Forward Transaction

A classic future has an expiry date. A perpetual has none, and that raises the question of whether the classification still holds. It does hold, because the law turns on cash settlement and not on an expiry date: what matters is the mechanism through which your gain arises. A perpetual tracks the spot price through the funding rate, a payment that flows between the long and short side at short intervals. The contract runs on, yet settlement is always in money and never in coins.

For your tax return that means every closed trade is a completed event with a result. There is no holding period that improves anything, and no point from which the gain becomes tax-free. A position closed after four minutes and one closed after four months are treated alike. To see how these platforms are built and who holds the keys, start with our explainer on what a perp DEX is.

25 Percent Flat Tax, Solidarity Surcharge and Church Tax

Section 32d (1) sentence 1 EStG sets income tax on investment income at 25 percent. On top comes the solidarity surcharge of 5.5 percent on that tax, which puts the total burden at 26.375 percent. One point matters here: the solidarity surcharge is still due on investment income, including for incomes that long ago fell below the threshold on wages.

If you are liable for church tax, the law calculates differently from what many expect. The 25 percent is reduced under sentence 3 by one quarter of the church tax, and sentence 4 provides the formula. At a church tax rate of 9 percent, a gain of 10,000 euros produces 2,444.99 euros in income tax, 134.47 euros in solidarity surcharge and 220.05 euros in church tax, together 2,799.51 euros, or roughly 28.0 percent. Without church tax it stays at 2,637.50 euros.

No Holding Period and No 1,000-Euro Exemption on Forward Transactions

Two reliefs that make spot trading attractive in Germany do not apply to leveraged trading. The first is the one-year rule in Section 23 EStG. The second is the 1,000-euro exemption threshold in Section 23 (3) sentence 5: gains from private disposal transactions stay tax-free if total gains in the calendar year came to less than 1,000 euros. Both apply solely to assets, meaning the coin you bought, and never to the contract on it.

Their place in the investment income regime is taken by the saver's allowance of 1,000 euros under Section 20 (9) EStG, or 2,000 euros for jointly assessed spouses. The difference is larger than the identical figure suggests. The spot exemption falls away entirely once you exceed it; at a gain of 1,000 euros the full amount is taxable. The saver's allowance, by contrast, survives as a deduction and is still subtracted at 50,000 euros of investment income. It does cost you the deduction of actual expenses, and for active traders that is the more painful half of the rule.

The 20,000-Euro Cap on Forward Transactions Has Gone From the Law

From 2021 to 2024 a rule applied that made leveraged trading dangerous in tax terms: losses from forward transactions could only be offset against gains from forward transactions up to 20,000 euros a year, with the remainder carried into future years. Anyone who made 100,000 euros and lost 100,000 euros in the same year paid tax on 80,000 euros, even though nothing was left at the end of it. The Federal Fiscal Court held this restriction to be constitutionally doubtful in a decision of 7 June 2024.

That cap is no longer in the law today. The Annual Tax Act 2024 deleted the former sentence 5 of Section 20 (6) EStG, and not only for the future. Section 52 (28) EStG has since carried the sentence that the old version “is no longer to be applied to any open cases”. The same goes for the then sentence 6, which capped losses from bad debts at 20,000 euros. If you still have an open assessment for a past year, through an appeal or a provisional review, the new rule covers you.

Today's Section 20 (6) EStG carries only two restrictions: losses on share sales stay in their own pool, and losses subject to withholding tax require a loss certificate under Section 43a. Forward transactions no longer appear there. For perpetual traders that is the most important change of recent years, and it regularly gets lost in the coverage of holding periods.

Losses on Perpetuals Never Meet Gains From Sold Coins

One hurdle remains, and it is higher than the one that was deleted. Section 20 (6) sentence 1 EStG prohibits offsetting losses from investment income against income from other categories. Gains on sold coins are such other income, namely other income under Section 22 in conjunction with Section 23 EStG. Between your leveraged account and your spot holdings stands a wall that is solid in both directions.

Take an example with round numbers. You lose 8,000 euros on perpetuals and in the same year sell Ethereum at a gain of 8,000 euros after a four-month holding period. In economic terms you are flat. In tax terms the 8,000 euros of spot gain remain fully taxable at your personal rate, and the loss on the forward transaction sits as a carry-forward within investment income until you make gains there again. The reverse holds too: a spot loss does not reduce your tax on perpetual gains. Which losses can be set against which gains, we broke down in detail for offsetting crypto losses against share gains.

Our assessment: the tax rate argues for the forward transaction more often than investors assume, but the offsetting rules argue against it. On a gain of 10,000 euros at a personal tax rate of 42 percent, the spot sale within the one-year period costs 4,200 euros and the perpetual gain 2,637.50 euros, a difference of 1,562.50 euros in favour of the leveraged product. Past the one-year mark the relationship flips completely: the held coin costs nothing, the contract still 26.375 percent. Against that stand the separate offsetting pools, which turn expensive in a losing year, and the fact that a leveraged contract wipes out the whole stake on liquidation. Long-term holders are better placed in spot for tax; traders who are short-term anyway and realise gains within weeks often pay less on forward transactions. Which platform charges what, our perp DEX comparison shows.

Funding Payments, Fees and the Lost Deduction for Expenses

Leveraged trading brings running costs that spot trading does not: funding payments, trading fees on both sides of the trade and, on margin positions, interest on borrowed capital. Section 20 (9) EStG governs these within investment income, and it is worded without mercy: the saver's allowance is deducted as expenses, and “the deduction of actual expenses is excluded”.

Pay 6,000 euros in funding and fees over a year and you cannot claim 6,000 euros; you get a flat 1,000 euros. This is the point where active traders fare worse on forward transactions than in spot, where incidental acquisition costs feed into the calculation of the gain. Trading venues usually net fees and funding directly into the result of the position, so that they reduce the taxable gain without being expenses at all. Whether your provider works that way decides several hundred euros a year, and it is set out in their settlement logic rather than in the statute. Capital borrowed against coins as collateral follows its own logic, because there the coin stays in your holdings.

Annex KAP Instead of Annex SO: Offshore Venues Withhold Nothing

If your provider has a domestic paying agent, it deducts withholding tax and remits it to the tax office. Most perpetual platforms do not. There the gain reaches you gross, and you owe the tax all the same. It is declared in Annex KAP of the income tax return, in the lines for investment income without tax deducted. Gains on sold coins belong in Annex SO instead.

Two forms for two regimes mean double care over records. For the spot side the tax office expects an allocation under the FIFO principle, under which the coins bought first count as sold first and determine the holding period. Forward transactions have no holding period and therefore no FIFO question, but you do need to document every closed position individually with its result. Since the national implementation of the European reporting obligation, crypto service providers report transactions to the tax authorities, which raises the odds that discrepancies get noticed. How to clean up an automated trading account for tax, we described for trading bots and their tax treatment.

Commercial Trading: When Private Trading Becomes a Business

Section 20 (8) EStG makes clear that investment income is attributed to a business where it belongs there. Neither the 25 percent nor the saver's allowance then applies; the personal tax rate does, plus trade tax and an obligation to keep accounts. The line runs between private asset management and trading that organises itself like a company.

Private investors deploying their own money on their own accounts normally stay within asset management, even with many trades a year. It looks different as soon as third-party capital is managed, infrastructure is run for others, or the trader presents itself outwardly as a service provider. Because the consequences are large and the dividing line turns on the individual case, this question belongs with a tax adviser rather than in a self-assessment.

Four Records for Your Trading Log

Your tax return is only as solid as the paperwork beneath it, and with perpetuals no German paying agent delivers a finished annual statement. What you should export from your account and keep:

• Every closed position individually, with opening and closing time, direction, size and realised result. A monthly total from the platform will not do when the tax office asks.
• Funding payments shown separately, because they reduce or increase your result, and that depends on whether they sit inside the position or alongside it.
• Trading fees per trade, for the same reason, and in case you have to justify treating them as part of the result.
• The conversion into euros at the relevant moment, if your account is denominated in dollars or a stablecoin. What is taxable is the euro amount, not the account balance in USDT.
• Liquidations with timestamps, because a forced close is a realised loss and belongs in the offsetting calculation, not in your memory.

For the spot part of your portfolio you also need the acquisition data for the FIFO principle. The two data sets drifting apart is the most common reason a clean return costs days rather than hours at year end.

Crypto Futures Tax: Two Pots the Tax Office Never Connects

The split between Section 20 and Section 23 EStG is the rule from which everything else follows: the flat 26.375 percent, the missing holding period, the separate offsetting and Annex KAP. Three steps to put this in order before the turn of the year:

1. Pull your annual statement separately for both areas. Perpetual results belong in Annex KAP, coin sales in Annex SO. A tax tool with a portfolio tracker separates them if you import both accounts.
2. Check your open losses from 2021 onwards. If an assessment for a year is still open, the deletion of the 20,000-euro cap applies retroactively, and a carry-forward may come out higher than previously determined. Where to trade in future and at what fees, our perp DEX comparison shows.
3. Choose deliberately between contract and coin. Hold for more than a year and spot is tax-free; trade short term and the forward transaction often costs less than your personal rate. Interest on lent holdings follows a third rule again, set out in our lending comparison.

A leveraged contract can wipe out your stake completely, and the tax rule does nothing to change that.

(As of October 12, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

The bank's Dubai branch now offers custody for Ripple's RLUSD stablecoin and plans a link with LMAX that lets institutions post it as trading collateral while the coins stay put.

Meta's new flagship beats GPT-6 Astra and Claude on memory, legal and marathon coding tests, but independent rankings still put Anthropic's Opus 5.5 on top.

REA, a free toolkit that hands AI agents the keys to reverse engineering, crossed 100,000 GitHub stars in a week as AI-decompiled game mods, console ports, and Adobe clones flood the internet.

The Nasdaq-listed company now holds about 2.59 million SOL, but its weekly purchases keep shrinking.

Evernorth's XRPN shares began trading Monday after its SPAC merger closed, but 80% of SPAC investors cashed out first and its XRP stash is worth roughly 40% less than at signing.

The U.K. High Court has delivered a pivotal ruling in the battle over 61,000 seized Bitcoin, potentially denying thousands of Chinese fraud victims access to the cryptocurrency's massive price gains.

Bitcoin is facing mounting selling pressure as the U.S. Dollar Index (DXY) surges to an 18-month high, with bearish derivatives activity and a wave of long liquidations adding to concerns about the cryptocurrency's near-term outlook.

Peter Schiff has declared Michael Saylor’s Bitcoin strategy a failure in 2026.

Cardano logs a historic 1,780,896 transactions in Epoch 660, marking its highest network usage since late 2021.

Autonomous AI software drives record traffic on XRP Ledger, outspending human retail users via the new X402 standard.

TLDR

• Navitas (NVTS) stock rebounds 6.21% after hours following a 7.33% daily decline.
• Navitas and NVIDIA introduce a 24 kW power board for next-generation AI data centers.
• The new power delivery board targets 97% efficiency to reduce AI energy losses.
• Navitas’ 800 V-to-12 V technology simplifies power conversion for advanced GPUs.
• Navitas plans to showcase its latest NVIDIA-linked power technology at OCP Summit.

Navitas Semiconductor Corporation (NVTS) stock fell 7.33% to $9.99 at Monday’s close before rebounding 6.21% to $10.61 after hours. The recovery followed developments surrounding its latest AI data center power technology, developed alongside NVIDIA. The company introduced a 24 kW power delivery board designed to improve efficiency across next-generation computing infrastructure.

Navitas Semiconductor Corp, NVTS

Navitas Expands NVIDIA Collaboration With New Power Technology

Navitas Semiconductor announced its latest 800 V-to-12 V power delivery board for NVIDIA’s MGX ecosystem. The technology uses GaNFast components to support advanced power systems across high-performance AI data centers. Furthermore, the development expands Navitas’ existing portfolio of power solutions for demanding computing applications.

The new board delivers 24 kW while targeting 97% efficiency under full operating loads. It also achieves power density exceeding 2,000 watts per cubic inch, supporting increasingly demanding AI hardware. Consequently, the system delivers substantial power within a compact design suited for modern computing infrastructure.

Navitas developed the board using NVIDIA’s latest 400 mm by 60 mm form factor. This configuration allows manufacturers to position power components closer to processors and reduce transmission losses. Additionally, the design supports higher computing demands without requiring larger power delivery systems.

New Architecture Targets AI Data Center Efficiency

The technology converts 800 VDC directly into 12 VDC through a single-stage power architecture. This approach removes an intermediate conversion stage commonly found in existing power delivery systems. As a result, operators can reduce energy losses, hardware requirements, and overall system complexity.

The board incorporates 16 NV6034 GaNFast transistors within its primary power conversion architecture. These components use a stacked half-bridge configuration and Navitas’ latest dual-cooled semiconductor packaging. Together, these features support efficient power delivery and improve thermal management during demanding computing operations.

Navitas previously introduced a 20 kW power board that converts 800 VDC into 6 VDC. The latest development extends that earlier collaboration with NVIDIA and introduces another option for system designers. Meanwhile, both solutions support the industry’s transition toward higher-voltage power infrastructure for AI computing.

Navitas Semiconductor Advances Its AI Infrastructure Strategy

The latest announcement supports Navitas’ broader transformation strategy, which focuses on advanced power semiconductor technologies. Through this initiative, the company aims to replace traditional silicon components with gallium nitride and silicon carbide alternatives. These materials support higher efficiency and greater power density across demanding electrical applications.

Navitas President and CEO Chris Allexandre identified efficient power delivery as an important requirement for expanding AI infrastructure. He also emphasized the company’s work with NVIDIA to simplify power conversion between electrical systems and GPUs. The new technology addresses growing energy requirements across increasingly powerful computing platforms.

Navitas plans to display the new board at the NVIDIA AI Factory MGX Wall during OCP Global Summit 2026. The presentation will highlight its latest power delivery capabilities within NVIDIA’s expanding computing ecosystem. Meanwhile, the stock’s after-hours rebound followed a difficult regular session as the company advanced its AI infrastructure strategy.

The post Intel Corporation (INTC) Stock: Slides as NVIDIA Unveils 24kW AI Power Technology appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Intel Corporation (INTC) stock drops 3.20% to $101.35 despite new AI GPU plans.
• Intel unveils GPU D-series with up to 480GB memory for large AI inference tasks.
• New Xeon 6+ rack designs support over 46,000 cores for enterprise AI workloads.
• Intel’s GPU D-series delivers 1.3 petaflops of compute within a 350-watt limit.
• Intel expands open AI infrastructure with new GPU designs and software upgrades.

Intel Corporation (INTC) stock fell 3.20% to $101.35 at Monday’s close before recovering 0.22% to $101.57 in after-hours trading. The decline came as Intel revealed new GPU specifications and Xeon server designs at the Open Compute Project Global Summit. The announcements highlighted Intel’s efforts to expand its data center business through efficient artificial intelligence infrastructure.

Intel Corp., INTC

Intel Unveils GPU D-Series for Large AI Workloads

Intel introduced further technical details for its GPU D-series, previously known as Crescent Island, during the OCP Global Summit. The new processor uses Intel’s Xe3P architecture and targets memory-intensive AI inference across enterprise data centers. Meanwhile, the company aims to improve processing efficiency while reducing infrastructure costs and power consumption.

The GPU architecture supports up to 480GB of LPDDR5X memory and delivers 1.5TB/s of memory bandwidth. Additionally, the design provides 1.3 petaflops of FP8 computing performance within a 350-watt power limit. These specifications support large language models, long-context processing, and multiple inference workloads running simultaneously.

Intel said a single GPU can support models containing up to 300 billion parameters. Furthermore, an eight-GPU configuration can handle models exceeding one trillion parameters. Customer sampling has started, while Intel continues collaborating with hardware manufacturers and software providers on deployment solutions.

Intel Expands Xeon Server Capacity for Agentic AI

Intel also presented new Xeon-based rack designs that support growing computing requirements across enterprise AI systems. The designs use open infrastructure standards, including Open Rack v3, to simplify integration into existing data centers. Consequently, organizations can expand processing capacity without completely replacing their current infrastructure.

Select Xeon 6+ configurations deliver more than 46,000 processor cores per rack. These systems operate at 133.45 kilowatts of total rack power while supporting high-density computing operations. Intel designed the configurations to handle data processing, workload coordination, and communication between specialized accelerators.

Agentic AI systems require processors to manage several connected tasks rather than complete isolated requests. Therefore, Intel positions Xeon processors alongside GPUs to handle workflow management and data movement. This approach supports concurrent AI applications while improving resource allocation across enterprise computing environments.

Intel Strengthens Open Software and Infrastructure Development

Intel outlined additional software improvements that support applications across its CPU and GPU product lines. The company continues integrating established AI frameworks, inference tools, and open development environments into its platforms. These efforts aim to simplify application deployment and reduce software compatibility barriers.

Intel also highlighted its contributions to the Open Compute Project, including standardized accelerator card designs. Since 2011, the company has submitted 116 contributions supporting open data center infrastructure. Its latest work focuses on improving hardware compatibility and giving system manufacturers greater design flexibility.

The announcements extend Intel’s strategy of combining general-purpose processors, specialized accelerators, and interoperable software. Meanwhile, the company plans further technical presentations during the OCP Summit on October 13. Its expanding hardware portfolio targets enterprise demand for scalable AI processing and more efficient data center operations.

The post Intel Corporation (INTC) Stock: Slides as New AI GPU Details Emerge appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• GRML stock jumps 16.44% to $6.02 before easing to $5.90 in after-hours trade.
• EU selects Neo’s Silmet 2.0 project to strengthen Europe’s rare earth processing.
• Neo holds rights to purchase up to 60% of future Sarfartoq mineral production.
• Sarfartoq could supply key magnet minerals to European separation facilities.
• Greenland Mines advances its North Atlantic critical minerals corridor strategy.

Greenland Mines Ltd (GRML) stock surged 16.44% to $6.02 at Monday’s close, gaining $0.85 before slipping 1.99% to $5.90 after hours. The rally followed developments supporting Europe’s efforts to strengthen rare earth supply chains. Greenland Mines welcomed the European Union’s recognition of Neo Performance Materials’ Silmet 2.0 project in Estonia.

Greenland Mines Ltd., GRML

EU Selects 46 Strategic Projects to Strengthen Rare Earth Supplies

The European Commission selected 46 strategic projects across 16 member states on October 9, 2026. The selections fall under the Critical Raw Materials Act, which supports Europe’s efforts to diversify mineral supplies. The initiative seeks to strengthen regional processing capacity and reduce dependence on concentrated international supply sources.

Neo Performance Materials secured strategic recognition for its Silmet 2.0 development plan in Sillamäe, Estonia. The project will upgrade existing infrastructure and adapt production systems to process additional raw material sources. These improvements aim to maintain European rare earth separation capacity while supporting new supply relationships.

The designation also strengthens the commercial relevance of Greenland Mines’ existing relationship with Neo. Neo holds a strategic equity position in Greenland Mines and maintains rights to future Sarfartoq production. Under their arrangement, Neo can purchase up to 60% of future ore or mineral concentrate output.

Greenland Mines Advances Sarfartoq Rare Earth Development

Greenland Mines sees its Sarfartoq project as a potential supplier to European rare earth processing facilities. The southwest Greenland resource contains neodymium and praseodymium, which manufacturers use in permanent magnets. These materials support electric vehicles, industrial equipment, and other advanced manufacturing applications.

Company President Bo Møller Stensgaard said European processing expansion requires dependable sources of raw materials. He identified Sarfartoq as a potential contributor to Europe’s emerging mineral supply network. However, the company must complete technical, environmental, regulatory, and commercial development requirements before production.

Greenland Mines continues developing its broader North Atlantic Critical Metals Corridor strategy. The initiative seeks to connect Greenland’s mineral deposits with processing facilities across Europe and North America. Its framework combines mineral development, transportation infrastructure, industrial technology, and access to capital.

Arctic Security Cooperation Supports Greenland Mines Strategy

The United States, Greenland, and Denmark signed a security agreement on September 22, 2026. Greenland Mines cited the agreement as another development supporting Greenland’s strategic importance. The company linked regional security cooperation with wider efforts to establish reliable critical mineral supply chains.

Beyond Sarfartoq, Greenland Mines operates the Skaergaard project in southeast Greenland. The project contains palladium, platinum, and gold resources alongside potential additional mineral products. This portfolio gives the company exposure to both rare earth materials and precious metals.

Greenland Mines plans to advance development through cooperation with Greenlandic authorities, local communities, and commercial partners. Its strategy focuses on connecting mineral production with established processing and industrial markets. The EU’s Silmet 2.0 designation supports that direction, although Greenland Mines still faces project development requirements.

The post Greenland Mines Ltd (GRML) Stock: Gains as EU Boosts Rare Earth Supply Chains appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• BMNR stock declined to $23.85 despite Bitmine acquiring another 12,532 ETH during the previous week.
• Bitmine’s Ethereum holdings reached 6,028,946 tokens, worth approximately $15.3 billion at its reported reference price.
• The company now controls roughly 4.9% of Ethereum’s stated supply, approaching its 5% accumulation target.
• Ethereum fell 1.5% to $2,505.74 as broader market weakness continued during Monday’s session.
• Bitmine reported more than 5 million staked ETH, with estimated annual staking revenue reaching $336 million.

Bitmine Immersion Technologies added more Ethereum last week, but BMNR stock traded lower on Monday, October 12. Shares slipped to $23.85 as Ether also declined during the US session.

Bitmine Immersion Technologies, Inc., BMNR

The move followed an update showing that Bitmine now holds more than six million ETH. The company remains close to its goal of controlling 5% of Ethereum’s supply.

BMNR Stock Slides Despite Fresh ETH Buying

BMNR stock opened near $24.21 and traded between $23.78 and $24.43. At 17:30 UTC, it stood at $23.85, down roughly 0.75% from Friday’s close.

Trading volume reached approximately 11.7 million shares at that point, below the reported average of 38.4 million. Its market value stood near $14.4 billion.

The decline came despite another weekly purchase. Bitmine said it acquired 12,532 ETH, continuing a buying program that started in June 2025.

Bitmine Ethereum Holdings Reach 6.03 Million

The latest purchase followed a 15,112 ETH acquisition reported the previous week. Bitmine’s October 12 disclosure put its total holdings at 6,028,946 ETH.

Using a Coinbase reference price of $2,544, the company valued its Ethereum position near $15.3 billion. Its combined crypto, cash, securities, and other investments totaled $16.2 billion.

That included $612 million in cash and marketable securities. The company also listed 214 Bitcoin, alongside investments in Beast Industries and Eightco Holdings, among its assets. Bitmine held roughly 4.9% of Ethereum’s stated 122.1 million supply, leaving approximately 76,054 ETH to reach 5%.

Ethereum Price Falls Alongside Shares

Ether traded at $2,505.74 at 17:30 UTC, according to CoinGecko. It fell 1.5% over 24 hours, following a week marked by Ethereum ETF withdrawals.

The token traded between $2,502.70 and $2,575.42 over the preceding day. Its market capitalization stood around $305.82 billion, based on circulating supply data.

ETH also remained nearly 49.4% below its recorded $4,946.05 peak. Changes in the token price alter the market value of Bitmine’s Ethereum treasury.

Staked ETH Exceeds Five Million Tokens

Bitmine reported 5,067,309 staked ETH as of October 11, about 84% of its position. Chairman Tom Lee estimated annualized staking revenue near $336 million.

A separate report on $542 million in weekly Ethereum ETF outflows described weaker fund demand through October 9. That activity does not establish why BMNR stock fell.

The company continues to target 5% ownership of Ethereum’s supply. Monday’s price snapshot and latest purchase report show separate developments, without proving a direct relationship.

The post BMNR Stock Drops as Bitmine Approaches Major ETH Milestone appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Intel stock approached $100 as selling pressure continued across semiconductor stocks.
• Microsoft’s Maia 300 development renewed attention on custom AI chips and supplier competition.
• OpenAI’s reported $50 billion revenue run rate raised fresh questions about AI infrastructure spending.
• Intel Foundry revenue grew 31%, although the business still recorded a $2.1 billion operating loss.
• Analysts maintain bullish Intel stock targets as investors await the October 29 earnings report.

Intel (INTC) stock approached $100 on October 12 as semiconductor shares weakened and investors questioned the cost of expanding AI infrastructure. The retreat followed September’s rally, placing Intel’s recovery under scrutiny as funding worries spread through markets.

Intel Corp., INTC

Intel Stock Faces Another $100 Test

INTC stock traded near $101 on Monday, down more than 3% during the session. Shares had already fallen 5.3% on October 8, extending their retreat from September’s highs. They closed October 9 at $104.70.

Intel CEO Lip-Bu Tan and Broadcom CEO Hock Tan warned Monday that financing could constrain AI expansion. Rising borrowing costs have renewed questions about returns from expensive data centers, even as chip demand remains strong.

Microsoft Pushes Ahead With Custom Chips

Microsoft plans to introduce Maia 300 processors across its cloud operations in 2027. Its custom AI chip strategy targets lower operating costs and reduced reliance on outside suppliers. The chips will support Azure cloud and AI services.

Microsoft says Maia 300 could produce 40% more tokens per megawatt than leading GPU systems. That shift could change supplier demand, although Microsoft has not announced an Intel manufacturing contract for Maia 300.

Meanwhile, Reuters reported that OpenAI’s September annualized revenue approached $50 billion, below an earlier figure near $70 billion. Different treatment of cloud partner sales largely explained the gap. Annualized revenue reflects a projected yearly rate rather than actual full-year sales.

Intel Foundry Still Faces Losses

The broader selloff also reached Nvidia. Its retreat from record highs reflected renewed concerns about AI spending and custom-chip competition.

Intel’s second-quarter results showed foundry revenue rising 31% to $5.8 billion. However, external customers generated only $293 million, and the division posted an operating loss of approximately $2.1 billion. Most foundry sales came from Intel itself.

Terafab and Earnings Remain in Focus

Intel remains involved in Elon Musk’s Terafab project, according to CEO Tan. The project plans to use Intel 14A technology, although Intel’s commercial role and future revenue remain uncertain.

A recent report on AI stocks dominating market returns found that 42 companies drove 67% of S&P 500 gains since January 2024. The figures provide wider context for chip-sector selling.

Tigress Financial maintains a $145 Intel target, while Northland has set $120. Tan purchased 105,263 shares at $95 in August. Intel plans to report third-quarter earnings on October 29, 2026.

The post Intel (INTC) Stock Under Pressure as Turnaround Faces New Test appeared first on Blockonomi.

Crypto analyst Doctor Profit expects the world’s largest crypto asset to resume its upward move soon, even though BTC failed to overcome $84,000 on Monday morning.

He has a new price target of $94,000.

New Bullish Forecast

In the latest Sunday report, the analyst said the recent market correction could set the stage for the next leg of the bull market. Doctor Profit believes Bitcoin has moved past the correction phase and is now preparing for another rally. He previously expected the asset to reach $88,000 after breaking above $82,500. BTC later reached that target before pulling back to around $80,300.

The analyst now expects it to regain momentum and climb toward $94,000. However, he said the price must first recover the $86,000 to $89,000 region. This area will be important in determining whether the market can support another move higher. Buying demand is also expected to strengthen around $86,000. He believes this zone could turn into support instead of facing the selling pressure seen during the previous rally.

A similar bullish outlook came from crypto analyst Crypto Patel, who projected a potential path toward $100,000. He said Bitcoin had broken above the $67,000 resistance level and could retest it before moving higher. If buyers defend this zone, BTC could form a higher low and gain momentum for another rally.

Meanwhile, $82,800 was flagged as immediate structural support, while $59,809 remains a major downside level.

New analysis by xWIN, meanwhile, revealed that Bitcoin may be showing signs of a potential bottom in October. Several factors have weighed on prices, such as high US bond yields, rising oil costs, and profit-taking. However, conditions now appear to be improving.

Weak Institutional Demand

ETF outflows remain a risk to the recovery outlook. US-based spot Bitcoin ETFs had their worst week of outflows since late June. The investment vehicles saw nearly $90 million leave on Monday, followed by a brief recovery on Tuesday with $118.86 million in inflows. Selling picked up again on Wednesday and Thursday, when investors withdrew a total of over $731 million. Friday brought a small return of $21.13 million, but it did little to offset the earlier losses.

Overall, weekly outflows reached $681.1 million, amid weaker investor demand.

The post Bitcoin Could Rally to $94K, but First It Must Break Through This Key Price Zone appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Transaction fees averaged just 0.64% of Bitcoin miner revenue in the last 30 days, according to analyst Axel Adler Jr.

And with BTC oscillating between $83,000 and $84,000, miners’ finances depend mostly on the asset’s price and the electricity their machines burn, since fees add almost nothing.

Almost All Miner Revenue Still Comes From Newly Issued Coins

In dollar terms, fees brought in an average of 64 cents out of every $100 of daily miner revenue, and newly issued BTC supplied the rest. A week earlier, the 30-day average was 0.65, a change Adler described as small, though the indicator has stayed below 1% since mid-August 2025.

Bitcoin has climbed from $59,000 to $84,000, and the analyst credits that rise for most of the improvement in miners’ conditions. The fee share is the figure to watch: a sustained return above 1% would show fees contributing more to revenue and point to greater network activity.

At an electricity price of $0.05 per kilowatt-hour, the report compared two Bitmain machines. Mining one BTC with an Antminer S19 costs $86,700 in electricity alone, more than the asset is worth even after the price recovery. An S21 needs about $44,300 of power per BTC, leaving more room for equipment, maintenance and other expenses.

Fees at this level do not confirm that miners are shutting down machines or selling reserves, Adler added, since each operator’s position depends on its hardware, power rate and other expenses. The electricity figure also omits equipment purchases and cooling costs, so the full cost of mining a coin is higher.

Bitcoin’s Price Decides How Much Cushion Miners Have

Further price gains would narrow the S19 shortfall and widen the S21 cushion, according to the report, while a decline would cut revenue for both models. CoinGecko data put BTC near $83,000 at the time of writing, up 8% across the last 30 days. However, the seven-day change is more than a 3% decline, and the price is sitting 25% lower than a year ago and nearly 34% below its all-time high of over $126,000.

As CryptoPotato reported earlier today, the September Consumer Price Index report, a gauge of inflation, is due Wednesday, October 14, with producer prices and retail sales following on Thursday. A hotter-than-expected reading could add pressure on BTC, which has not regained most of the losses from last Thursday’s crash.

Miners have also been looking beyond Bitcoin for income. MARA posted a $611.3 million net loss for the second quarter in August, and several public miners sold more than 32,000 BTC in the first quarter of 2026 and put the proceeds into AI contracts worth an estimated $70 billion industry-wide.

The post Bitcoin Miner Fees Fall to Just 0.64% of Revenue, Analyst Says appeared first on CryptoPotato.

The popular altcoin is among the best-performing cryptocurrencies today (October 12), posting a double-digit increase to around $3.40.

Its pump has caught the eye of well-known analysts who believe it could rise further soon. Moreover, key technical indicators reinforce the bullish case.

More Room for Growth?

X user Lucky highlighted ICP’s solid uptrend, saying it has plenty of room to run and projecting a potential jump above $8. The analyst also told their nearly two million followers that the altcoin has “definitely one of the loudest and most passionate communities in crypto.”

CW also weighed in. A few days ago, the analyst predicted that a break above $3.39 (as it happened) would shift ICP back to a bullish mode. For their part, EliZ claimed the price has moved exactly as previously forecasted, expecting a further ascent beyond $4.

For their part, WIZZ argued that Internet Computer tends to perform well in the last quarter of the year, saying they have exposure to the asset and do not plan to sell in the next few months.

A closer look at the statement, though, shows some divergence. ICP finished Q4 deep in the red three out of five times, while the final quarter of 2023 was indeed very successful for the token, with its price exploding by more than 320%.

Additional Factors

ICP’s Relative Strength Index suggests the price may move in line with the aforementioned analysts’ optimistic expectations. The technical analysis tool measures the recent speed and magnitude of price changes to give traders a potential idea about reversal points. It ranges from 0 to 100, where anything around or below 30 is typically interpreted as a buying opportunity, while ratios above 70 signal an impending correction. Currently, the RSI stands just north of the bullish mark.

The asset’s exchange netflow should also be mentioned. Over the past several weeks, outflows have dominated inflows, suggesting investors have shifted from centralized platforms to self-custody, effectively reducing immediate selling pressure.

The post Internet Computer (ICP) Pumps 14% Daily: More Gains Ahead? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

[PRESS RELEASE – Moscow, Russia, October 12th, 2026]

On 13 October, the Russian international settlement system A7, created by Bank PSB, is set to present A7 International, a service enabling payments for a foreign counterparty’s invoice in USDT, with the funds arriving via a standard SWIFT bank transfer in the required currency.

The service will cater primarily to foreign trade operators, but individuals are also eligible customers. The fee remains fixed at 0.3 percent.

Petr Fradkov, Chairman of PJSC Bank PSB, and Ilan Shor, CEO of A7, will provide a glimpse into its new offering on 13 October at 13:13.

To join the live broadcast and learn about the new project, follow the links:

https://a7.biz/live

About A7:

A7 is a global financial technology company specializing in international payments and settlement solutions for international trade. It was established in 2024 with the involvement of PSB Bank.

A7 is developing an independent global payment infrastructure across more than 100 countries, combining global financial expertise, advanced technology and regulatory compliance. The company’s products include international payments, digital financial assets and promissory notes.

A7 Group works with 15,000 clients, with around 2,000 transactions processed through the system every day. In 2025, approximately 19% of Russian companies’ cross-border trade settlements were processed through A7. In October 2025, A7 received an AA(RU) credit rating with a Stable outlook from ACRA.

The post A7 to unveil a service that will re-invent the international payments market appeared first on CryptoPotato.

XRP’s rebound has stalled near $1.40 after a sharp decline from its recent consolidation. Buyers have responded around a major demand zone, but the price remains beneath nearby resistance and within a corrective structure.

Ripple Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

On the daily timeframe, Ripple’s token has extended its correction following the rejection from the $1.61–$1.70 resistance zone. The latest selloff pushed the price below the $1.48–$1.50 consolidation area, with a long lower wick reaching approximately $1.32 before buyers stepped in. Subsequent candles show stabilization around $1.40, although the recovery has so far lacked strong follow-through.

The $1.25–$1.32 demand zone remains particularly important. It overlaps with the 100-day and 200-day moving averages, positioned near $1.265 and $1.281, respectively. The rising 100-day average is approaching the 200-day average from below, suggesting a potential bullish crossover, but confirmation is still pending. Meanwhile, the daily RSI sits around 45, indicating that momentum remains below neutral despite the bounce.

Holding the demand zone could preserve the broader recovery and support another attempt toward the $1.48–$1.52 resistance area. Beyond that, the $1.61–$1.70 supply zone remains the main upside barrier. Conversely, a sustained break below $1.25 would weaken the recovery structure and expose the next highlighted support zone at $1.11–$1.18.

XRP/USDT 4-Hour Chart

The 4-hour chart shows XRP moving within a descending channel, with successive lower highs maintaining the corrective trend. The recent decline broke through the $1.43–$1.45 support zone before briefly reaching the channel’s lower boundary near $1.32. Buyers then drove a rebound toward $1.42, where the recovery encountered renewed selling pressure.

The former $1.43–$1.45 demand zone now represents an overhead resistance area. Its proximity to the descending channel’s upper boundary creates a significant obstacle for buyers. A sustained move above both would provide an initial signal that selling pressure is easing and could open the way toward the $1.48–$1.52 resistance region.

Until that breakout occurs, the rebound appears corrective. Losing nearby support around $1.38 would bring the $1.34–$1.35 area back into focus, followed by the broader $1.25–$1.32 demand zone. The reaction to the $1.43–$1.45 resistance area will therefore be important in determining whether XRP can escape the descending channel or remains vulnerable to another decline.

The post Ripple Price Analysis: What’s Next for XRP After Another Rejection at Key Resistance? appeared first on CryptoPotato.