Iran's potential participation in US peace talks could shift geopolitical dynamics, impacting market expectations and diplomatic strategies.

The post Iran positively reviews participation in US peace talks appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Pakistan's mediation could shift US-Iran relations, impacting regional stability and global diplomatic dynamics amid volatile market reactions.

The post Pakistan mediates as US-Iran ceasefire talks gain momentum appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The incident heightens geopolitical tensions, potentially disrupting oil markets and complicating diplomatic efforts in the region.

The post US forces capture Iranian ship near Strait of Hormuz, Iran warns of retaliation appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Trump's denial impacts market confidence, highlighting geopolitical uncertainty and the challenges of diplomatic breakthroughs with Iran.

The post Trump denies Pakistan urged changes to US blockade on Iran appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Adobe's strategic alliances could accelerate AI advancements, potentially reshaping industry standards and competitive dynamics globally.

The post Adobe partners with Microsoft, Anthropic, OpenAI, Nvidia: WSJ appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Strategy (MSTR) Buys $2.54B in Bitcoin in Third-Largest Purchase, Surpasses BlackRock Holdings

Strategy added 34,164 bitcoin to its treasury last week, spending about $2.54 billion in one of the largest single purchases in its history, according to a Monday regulatory filing.

The acquisition was made at an average price of $74,395 per bitcoin and brings the company’s total holdings to 815,061 BTC. Strategy has now spent roughly $61.56 billion accumulating bitcoin at an average cost basis of $75,527 per coin. This is Strategy’s third largest bitcoin purchase.

With bitcoin trading near $75,000, the firm’s position sits close to its aggregate purchase price, leaving the holdings near break-even after recent market volatility.

Strategy has overtaken BlackRock in total bitcoin holdings with this latest purchase.The firm led by Michael Saylor now holds 815,061 BTC, surpassing BlackRock’s 802,823 BTC, which is primarily held through its spot bitcoin ETF products. 

The latest buy marks the company’s third-largest purchase on record and its most aggressive accumulation since late 2024. Strategy remains the largest publicly traded holder of bitcoin, continuing a balance sheet strategy first introduced in 2020.

Executive Chairman Saylor signaled the move ahead of the announcement, posting a message over the weekend urging observers to “think even bigger,” a phrase that has become associated with the company’s ongoing bitcoin accumulation campaign.

Strategy’s billion dollar bitcoin rails

The purchases were financed through a combination of equity issuance and preferred stock sales. Strategy raised about $366 million through the sale of common shares and approximately $2.18 billion through its perpetual preferred stock offering known as STRC.

The STRC instrument has taken on a central role in funding recent acquisitions. The preferred stock carries a variable dividend structure designed to maintain a price near par value while offering an annualized yield of about 11.5%. The company recently proposed shifting dividend payments from a monthly to a semi-monthly schedule, a move aimed at improving liquidity and reducing reinvestment delays.

Strategy continues to expand its capital raising capacity. Billions of dollars in additional common and preferred shares remain authorized for issuance under existing programs. These efforts form part of a broader plan to raise significant capital through equity and convertible instruments to fund further bitcoin purchases through 2027.

The scale of Strategy’s holdings now represents more than 3.8% of bitcoin’s fixed supply of 21 million coins, underscoring the firm’s outsized role in the market.

Shares of Strategy declined about 2.5% in pre-market trading following the disclosure, reflecting investor sensitivity to both bitcoin price movements and the company’s continued reliance on capital markets to fund acquisitions.

Bi-weekly STRC payouts

Strategy is moving to increase the frequency of payouts on its STRC preferred stock, signaling a push to make the Bitcoin-backed instrument more attractive to income-focused investors.

In a proposal, the company said it plans to shift STRC (Variable Rate Series A Perpetual Stretch Preferred Stock) dividends from a monthly to a semi-monthly schedule. The change would effectively split the current 11.50% annualized yield into two payments each month, offering more frequent cash flow and input to shareholders.

The adjustment reflects growing demand for shorter-duration income streams, particularly as Bitcoin markets remain volatile. With BTC trading near $74,000, Strategy appears to be positioning STRC as a more responsive yield product for both institutional and retail investors seeking regular liquidity.

STRC’s structure is designed to maintain a stable $100 par value through a variable dividend mechanism. When the share price dips below that level, the yield is increased to incentivize demand and support price stability. This dynamic rate-setting process — currently adjusted monthly — could become more reactive under a semi-monthly framework.

At the time of writing, the bitcoin price is dancing between $75,000 and $76,000.

This post Strategy (MSTR) Buys $2.54B in Bitcoin in Third-Largest Purchase, Surpasses BlackRock Holdings first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Lydian Launches Visa Platinum Crypto Card to Enable Everyday Spending of Digital Assets

Lydian has launched the Lydian Card, a co-branded Visa Platinum card issued by Rain that allows users to spend more than 300 supported digital assets, including stablecoins and major cryptocurrencies, across Visa’s global merchant network.

The card is available in both physical and instant-issue virtual formats and can be used wherever Visa is accepted, giving cardholders access to more than 150 million merchants worldwide, according to a release seen by Bitcoin Magazine. Users will be able to fund, manage, and track transactions through an app or online dashboard, aiming to streamline the conversion of digital assets into everyday purchasing power.

The launch comes amid rapid growth in crypto-linked payment cards. Industry data cited by the company shows monthly crypto card spending has surged from $100 million in early 2023 to more than $1.5 billion today, with forecasts suggesting digital asset spending access could expand by 66%. The trend reflects a shift among crypto holders from passive storage toward active spending.

Crypto use cases to make life less clunky

Lydian is leveraging Rain’s stablecoin-native infrastructure, which supports wallets, cards, onramps, and offramps. Rain recently reported significant growth, including a 30-fold expansion in the past year and a $250 million Series C round that brought its valuation to $1.95 billion.

Executives from both companies said the goal is to reduce friction in crypto payments and make digital assets usable in everyday commerce through existing Visa infrastructure.

Carl Grimstad, CEO of Lydian, said: “Digital asset holders have long struggled to use their funds in everyday life. Converting tokens manually, navigating limited merchant acceptance, and wrestling with clunky user experiences has made spending crypto more complicated than it needs to be. The Lydian Card turns this all on its head.

“Whether tapping in-store or making a purchase online, the Lydian Card makes it simple to spend digital assets. Supported by Visa’s global network and powered by Rain’s infrastructure, the card enables a seamless shift from digital ownership to everyday use, helping users and merchants participate in the $4 trillion digital asset economy.”

Farooq Malik, CEO & co-founder of Rain, said: “Tokenized money and digital assets hold huge potential, but mainstream adoption only happens if spending them in the real-world is actually easy to do. Historically, getting this right has been tricky and complex.

“By using Rain’s on-chain card issuance solution, Lydian is making it convenient for cardholders to use their digital assets everywhere Visa is accepted — a critical step toward unlocking continued usage around the world.”

This post Lydian Launches Visa Platinum Crypto Card to Enable Everyday Spending of Digital Assets first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

When Quantum Computers Come for Your Bitcoin: What Classical Property Law Says Happens Next

Bitcoin’s quantum debate keeps slipping sideways because people keep arguing about two different things at once.

One question is technical: if quantum computing gets good enough to break Bitcoin’s signature scheme, the protocol can respond. New address types, migration rules, soft forks, deprecations, key rotation. That is a real engineering problem, but it is still an engineering problem.

The other question is legal: suppose someone uses a quantum computer to derive the private key for an old wallet and sweep the coins. What, exactly, just happened? Did he recover abandoned property, or did he steal someone else’s bitcoin?

In April 2026, BIP-361 proposed freezing more than 6.5 million BTC sitting in quantum-vulnerable UTXOs, including an estimated million-plus coins associated with Satoshi. No longer just an abstract discussion, it’s now a live fight over ownership, confiscation, and the meaning of property inside a system that ultimately recognizes only control.

I am not taking a position here on when a quantum computer capable of attacking Bitcoin will arrive. The narrower question is the one that matters first: if it does arrive, and someone starts moving long-dormant coins with quantum-derived keys, does the law treat that as legitimate recovery or theft?

Classical property law gives a fairly blunt answer. It is theft.

That answer will frustrate some Bitcoiners, because Bitcoin itself does not enforce title in the way courts do. It enforces control. If you can produce the valid spend, the network accepts the spend. But that only sharpens the point. The harder the network leans on control, the more important it becomes to state clearly what the law would say about the underlying act.

And on that front, the law is not especially mysterious.

Old coins are not ownerless just because they are old.

The actual quantum risk

It helps to begin with the narrower, more realistic version of the threat. Not all bitcoin is equally exposed. In the ordinary case, an address does not reveal the public key until the owner spends. That matters because a quantum attacker cannot simply look at any untouched address on the chain and pluck out the private key.

The real risk sits in a more limited category of outputs. Early pay-to-public-key outputs reveal the full public key on-chain. Some older script constructions do the same. Taproot outputs do as well: a P2TR output commits directly to a 32-byte output key, not a hash of one. Address reuse can also expose the public key once a user spends and leaves funds behind under the same key material. Those are the coins people really mean when they talk about exposed bitcoin.

The timeline for this scenario has compressed. On March 31, 2026, Google Quantum AI published research showing Bitcoin’s secp256k1 curve could be broken with fewer than 500,000 physical qubits, a twenty-fold reduction from prior estimates of roughly nine million. The same paper models the mempool attack vector directly: during a transaction, the public key is exposed for approximately ten minutes before block confirmation, giving a quantum adversary a window to derive the key before the spend confirms.

Current hardware remains far from these thresholds: Google’s Willow chip sits at 105 qubits and IBM’s Nighthawk at 120. But algorithmic optimization is outrunning hardware scaling. NIST’s own post-quantum migration roadmap calls for quantum-vulnerable algorithms to be deprecated across federal systems by 2030 and disallowed entirely by 2035. That federal timeline does not bind Bitcoin, but it supplies the benchmark against which institutional holders and regulators will measure Bitcoin’s preparedness.

A great many of those coins are old. Some are certainly lost. Some belong to dead owners. Some are tied up in paper wallets, forgotten backups, ancient storage habits, or estates that no one has sorted out. Some probably belong to people who are very much alive and simply have no interest in touching them.

That last point matters more than the “lost coin” crowd usually admits. From the outside, dormancy tells you very little. A wallet can sit untouched for twelve years because the owner is dead, because the owner lost the keys, because the owner is disciplined, because the owner is paranoid, because the coins are locked in a multi-party setup, or because the owner is Satoshi and would rather remain a rumor than a litigant. The blockchain does not tell you which explanation is true.

That uncertainty is precisely why property law has never treated silence as a magic solvent for ownership.

Dormancy is not abandonment

The casual “finders keepers” intuition that floats around these discussions has almost nothing to do with how property law actually works.

Ownership does not evaporate because property sits unused. Title continues until it is transferred, relinquished, extinguished by law, or displaced by some doctrine that actually applies. Time alone does not do that work. Inaction alone does not do that work. Value certainly does not do that work.

So if someone wants to argue that dormant bitcoin is fair game, the path usually runs through abandonment. The claim is simple enough: these coins have been sitting there forever, nobody has touched them, they are probably lost, therefore they must be abandoned.

The law is much stricter than that. Abandonment generally requires both intent to relinquish ownership and some act manifesting that intent. The owner must, in substance, mean to give it up and do something that shows he meant to give it up. Simply failing to move an asset for a long period is not enough, particularly where the asset is obviously valuable.

That is not some fussy technicality… it’s one of the core tenets of property law. If nonuse alone were enough to destroy title, the law would become a standing invitation to loot anything whose owner had been quiet for too long. That is not our rule for land, for houses, for stock certificates, for buried cash, or for heirlooms. It is not the rule for bitcoin either.

Take the easy edge case. If someone deliberately sends coins to a burn address with no usable private key, that begins to look like abandonment because there is both a clear act and a clear signal. But that example proves the opposite of what quantum raiders want it to prove. It shows what relinquishment looks like when a person actually intends it. Most dormant wallets do not look anything like that.

The better reading is the ordinary one: old coins are old coins. Some are lost. Some are inaccessible. Some are forgotten. Some are sleeping. None of that converts them into ownerless property.

And recent legislation has begun to formalize the same instinct. The UK’s Property (Digital Assets etc) Act 2025, which received Royal Assent on December 2, 2025, creates a third category of personal property explicitly covering crypto-tokens. In the United States, UCC Article 12 has now been adopted by more than thirty states and the District of Columbia, recognizing “controllable electronic records” as a distinct legal category. Neither regime treats dormancy as relinquishment. By formally classifying digital assets as property, both raise the bar for anyone arguing that old coins are ownerless by default.

Death does not erase ownership

The next move is usually to shift from abandonment to mortality. Fine, perhaps the coins were not abandoned, but surely many of these early holders are dead. Doesn’t that change the analysis? 

Not in the way the raider would like.

Some early wallets invite a kind of Schrödinger’s-heir problem: the owner is confidently declared dead when the raider wants ownerless property, then treated as notionally available whenever the burdens of succession come into view. Property law does not indulge the superposition.

When a person dies, title does not disappear. It passes. Property goes to heirs, devisees, or, in the absence of both, to the state through escheat. The law does not shrug and announce an open season. It preserves continuity of ownership even when possession becomes messy, inconvenient, or impossible to exercise.

The analogy to physical property is almost insultingly straightforward. If a man dies owning a ranch, the first trespasser who cuts the lock does not become the new owner by initiative and optimism. The estate handles succession. If there are no heirs, the sovereign has a claim. Valuable property does not become unowned merely because the original owner is gone.

Bitcoin is no different on that point. Lost keys do not transfer title. Inaccessibility is not a conveyance. A stranger who derives the private key later with better tooling has not uncovered ownerless treasure. He has acquired the practical ability to move property that still belongs to someone else, or to someone else’s estate.

That conclusion matters most for the largest block of old, vulnerable coins: Satoshi’s. Whether Satoshi is alive, dead, or permanently off-grid does not change the legal classification. Those coins belong either to Satoshi or to Satoshi’s estate. They do not become a bounty for the first actor who arrives with a quantum crowbar.

Unclaimed property law does not rescue the theory

Some people assume dormant bitcoin can be swept up under unclaimed property law. That confusion is understandable, but it misses how those statutes actually operate.

Unclaimed property law generally runs through a holder. A bank, broker, exchange, or other custodian owes property to the owner. If the owner disappears long enough, the state steps in and requires the holder to report and remit the asset, subject to the owner’s right to reclaim it later. The doctrine is built around intermediaries.

That framework works well enough for exchange balances. It works for custodial wallets. It works for assets sitting with a business that can be ordered to turn them over.

It does not work the same way for self-custodied bitcoin. A self-custodied UTXO has no bank in the middle, no exchange holding the bag, and no transfer agent waiting for instructions. There is no custodian for the state to command. There is only the network, the key, and the person who can or cannot produce the valid spend.

That means governments can often reach custodial crypto, but self-custodied bitcoin presents a harder limit. The law can say who owns it. The law can sometimes say who should surrender it. What it cannot do is conjure the private key.

The same problem defeats a more dressed-up version of the argument under UCC Article 12. A quantum attacker who derives the private key may gain “control” of the asset in a practical sense. But control is not title. It never has been. A burglar who finds your safe combination gains control too. He still stole what was inside.

Adverse possession does not fit, and salvage is worse

Two analogies get dragged out whenever someone wants to dignify quantum theft with a veneer of doctrine: adverse possession and salvage.

Neither one survives contact with the facts.

Adverse possession developed for land, and it carries conditions that make sense in land disputes. Possession must be open and notorious enough to give the true owner a fair chance to notice the adverse claim and contest it. A quantum attacker who sweeps coins into a fresh address does nothing of the sort. Yes, the movement is visible on-chain. No, that is not meaningful notice in the legal sense. A pseudonymous transfer on a public ledger does not tell the owner who is asserting title, on what basis, or in what forum the claim can be challenged.

The policy rationale also collapses. Adverse possession helps resolve stale land disputes, quiet title, and reward visible use of neglected real property. Bitcoin has none of those structural problems. The blockchain already records the chain of possession. 

Salvage is worse. Salvage rewards a party who rescues property from peril. The quantum raider does not rescue property from peril. He exploits the peril. In many cases, he is the reason the peril matters at all. Calling that “salvage” is like calling a pirate a lifeguard because he arrived with a boat: a euphemism masquerading as a legal theory.

What BIP-361 is really fighting about

This is why BIP-361 matters. It is the first serious proposal to force the issue at the consensus layer rather than wait for courts and commentators to argue over the wreckage afterward.

In broad strokes, the proposal would roll out in phases. First, users would be barred from sending new bitcoin into quantum-vulnerable address types, while still being allowed to move existing funds out to safer destinations. Later, legacy signatures in vulnerable UTXOs would stop being valid for purposes of spending those coins. In practical terms, any remaining unmigrated funds would freeze. A further recovery mechanism has been proposed using zero-knowledge proofs tied to BIP-39 seed possession, though that portion remains aspirational and incomplete.

Critically, the recovery path works only for wallets generated from BIP-39 mnemonics. Earlier wallet formats, including the pay-to-public-key outputs associated with Satoshi, have no realistic route back under the current proposal. That limitation is not incidental. It means Phase C, as currently designed, would preserve the property rights of more recent adopters while permanently extinguishing those of the earliest ones. That is a de facto statute of limitations imposed not by a legislature but by a protocol change.

The attraction of the proposal is obvious. If the network knows a category of coins is likely to become loot for whoever reaches them first, it can refuse to bless the looting. That is, in substance, a defense of ownership against a purely technological shortcut. It treats the quantum actor as a thief and denies him the prize.

But that is only half the story. The other half does not vanish merely because protocol designers would rather not observe it.

The proposal also creates a second legal problem, and it is harder to wave away. Phase B does not only stop thieves. It also disables actual owners who fail, or are unable, to migrate in time. That matters because property law does not ask only whether a rule has a good motive. It also asks what the rule does to the owner.

Calling that “theft” is too imprecise. BIP-361 does not reassign the coins to developers, miners, or some new claimant. It does not enrich the freezer in the ordinary way a thief enriches himself. But “not theft” does not end the inquiry. The closer analogy is conversion, or at least something uncomfortably adjacent to it. If the rule is that an owner had a valid spend yesterday and will have none tomorrow, not because he transferred title, not because he abandoned the coins, and not because a court extinguished his claim, but because the network decided those coins were too dangerous to remain spendable, the network has done something more than merely “protect property rights.” It has intentionally disabled the practical exercise of some of those rights.

That is what makes the freeze legally awkward. Freeze supporters can defend it as the lesser evil, and they may be right. But lesser evil is not the same thing as legal cleanliness. A rule that permanently prevents an owner from accessing his own coins begins to look less like ordinary theft and more like forced dispossession by consensus.

The strongest objections appear in the hardest cases. Timelocked UTXOs are the cleanest example. If a user deliberately created a timelock that matures after the freeze date, that owner did not neglect the coins. He did not abandon them. He affirmatively structured them to be unspendable until a future date. Yet the protocol could still freeze them permanently before that date ever arrives. Other older wallet constructions create a similar problem. If the eventual recovery path depends on BIP-39 seed possession, some earlier wallet formats may have no realistic route back at all. Estates create the same tension in another form. The owner may be dead, but title has not vanished. It passed somewhere. Freezing the coins does not eliminate the underlying property claim. It only eliminates the network’s willingness to honor it.

That is why the better description of Phase B is not “anti-theft rule” in the abstract. It is a confiscatory defense mechanism. Maybe a justified one. Maybe even a necessary one. But still confiscatory in effect for at least some owners. The proposal does not just choose owner over thief. In some cases it chooses one class of owners over another, then treats the losses of the disfavored class as the price of securing the system.

That does not make BIP-361 unlawful in any straightforward, courtroom-ready sense. Bitcoin consensus changes are not state action, so the takings analogy is imperfect unless government enters the picture directly. But as a matter of private-law reasoning, the conversion analogy lands harder. Title may remain rhetorically intact while practical control is intentionally destroyed.

That is the real symmetry at the center of the quantum debate. Letting a quantum attacker sweep dormant coins looks like theft. Freezing vulnerable coins by soft fork may be the lesser evil, but it is not costless, either materially or morally. For some owners, it begins to look a great deal like confiscation.

The legal answer is clear, even if Bitcoin’s is not

Classical property law is not going to bless quantum key derivation as some clever form of lawful recovery.

Dormancy is not abandonment. Death transfers title; it does not dissolve it. Unclaimed property law reaches custodians, not self-custody itself. Adverse possession does not map onto pseudonymous UTXOs. Salvage is a bad joke.

So if someone uses a quantum computer to derive the private key for a dormant wallet and move the coins, the legal system will almost certainly call that theft.

But BIP-361 shows that Bitcoin may not face a choice between theft and pristine protection of ownership. It may face a choice between theft by attacker and dispossession by protocol. Freezing vulnerable coins may be a defensible response to an extraordinary threat. It may even be the only response the network finds tolerable. Still, it should be described honestly. For some owners, especially those with timelocked outputs, old wallet formats, or no realistic migration path, the freeze begins to look less like protection than confiscation.

That is what makes the issue more than a simple morality play. Bitcoin collapses the distinction property law usually relies on between title and possession. Courts can say a quantum raider stole the coins. Courts can say a protocol-level freeze substantially interfered with an owner’s rights. But the chain will still recognize only the rules its economic majority adopts.

So the fight is not simply over whether Bitcoin should defend property rights during the quantum transition. The fight is over which property rights Bitcoin is willing to impair in order to defend the rest.

Welcome to classical politics.

This is a guest post by Colin Crossman. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.

This post When Quantum Computers Come for Your Bitcoin: What Classical Property Law Says Happens Next first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Colin Crossman.

Bitcoin Magazine

The Whole Entire Universe: 21 Million, One Painting

There are 21 million bitcoin. That number is fixed, coded into the protocol, finite. It is one of the most consequential design decisions in the history of money, and yet for most people it remains an abstraction. Green digits cascading down a black screen like something out of The Matrix, or a talking point tossed around on a podcast.

The Japanese artist On Kawara spent nearly fifty years hand-painting a date onto a canvas every day — if he didn’t finish by midnight, he destroyed it. Anik Malcolm spent 900 hours painting 21 million beads. The impulse is the same: make the abstraction physical, make the counting matter, let the labor carry the meaning.

“The Whole Entire Universe” is a concept first conceived in early 2025 and now in its third and most ambitious incarnation: a meticulous, large-format oil painting in which every single bitcoin is represented as an individual bead, painted by hand over the course of more than 900 hours. The work will debut at Bitcoin 2026 at The Venetian Resort in Las Vegas.

The premise was somewhat simple— show 21 million of something. But in working out how to do it, Malcolm stumbled into something closer to a tesseract — a shape that revealed more dimensions the longer he looked at it. Twenty-one million does not divide cleanly into a cube — its cube root is an irrational number. But if you round up to the nearest whole number, 276, and cube it, you get 21,024,576 — exactly 24,576 more than 21 million. That surplus divides evenly by six (one for each face of the cube), yielding 4,096 beads to remove per side. The square root of 4,096 is 64 — a perfect square and a power of two. Which means those removed areas can be halved repeatedly: from 64×64, to 32×32, to 16×16, all the way down to 2×2 — mirroring, with startling precision, bitcoin’s halving mechanism.

He opened the box and the pattern was already inside. To him, the work is not an illustration of Bitcoin — it is a still life of it. The most literal depiction that could be made, rendered in a form so structurally resonant that it has drawn the attention of Adam Back.

From early drawings exhibited in Lugano to digital renderings to the oil painting debuting at B26 — and a planned monumental public sculpture in Roatán — “The Whole Entire Universe” keeps demanding a bigger canvas. 

I spoke with Anik Malcolm about how a simple question produced an extraordinary answer.

BMAG: The Whole Entire Universe began with a deceptively simple premise — make an artwork that shows 21 million of something. How did you land on that idea, and what was it like when your wife — herself an artist and jeweler — suggested a cube of beads? How does that kind of creative exchange between partners work for you? 

Anik Malcolm: The original impetus was literally that simple — it struck me that although the 21M number is so critically important to us as bitcoiners, it’s also a number that is difficult to fathom without seeing. How simultaneously large it is in volume, but also overseeably small and “human” in scale — so I wanted to find a way of bringing the number to life, of making it graspable. My wife Una and I have collaborated on many projects over the years, both in the visual and sonic arts, so we have honed the skill well of making it a constructive flow. I suggested this idea to her in conversation, and her instantaneous response was “a cube of beads.” I loved this both for the fact that a cube is such a deeply ubiquitous symbol in bitcoin, visually and metaphorically, and that the bead was one of the very first methods of exchange — the combination just made perfect sense, and was additionally manageable in scale. I immediately set to working out the practicalities, calculator in hand, and could barely believe what I found..!

BMAG: When you started working out whether 21 million could fit into a cube, you stumbled into a series of mathematical coincidences — 276 cubed, the 4,096 remainder dividing evenly by six, the square root landing on 64 (I can’t help hearing the Beatles lyric “When I’m 64” in my head), a power of two. Walk us through that moment. Did you realize right away what you were looking at, or did it unfold gradually?

Anik Malcolm:  Haha — wow, I hadn’t even made the Beatles connection yet! Fantastic. Yes, it happened very quickly. Obviously the cube root of 21M wasn’t going to be a rational number, so I knew I would have to do some tinkering to make it fit. I naturally started with the idea of rounding the cube root up to 276 and subtracting from there — as you said earlier, to reach 21,024,576, and it was already a rush when the surplus 24,576 divided cleanly into 6, meaning I could give the desired structure symmetry. That rush, however, was greatly amplified by the fact that I felt I recognized the number 4,096, and I was literally shaking when I inputted “square root of 4096” into my calculator, and when I saw the result I was absolutely dumbstruck — Una witnessing the whole process in amusement! The fact that I could not only spread the subtracted number equally over all six sides, but ALSO do so in perfect squares to obtain exactly 21,000,000 felt like a moment of divine providence, as if this symmetry had been encoded from the start and had been waiting to be found, and that there was possibly some deeper significance that someone, some day, might fathom. I knew right away that I had been entrusted with a very meaningful project.

BMAG: The pattern you found — squares halving from 64×64 down to 2×2 — mirrors bitcoin’s halving mechanism. You’ve described the piece as a “still life of Bitcoin.” How much of that connection did you set out to find, and how much of it felt like it was already embedded in the number waiting to be discovered?

Anik Malcolm: Yes — I was actually so moved by the initial finding that it wasn’t until some time later that I realized, to my EVEN greater astonishment, the obvious fact that I could divide 64 into 32, 16, 8, 4, and 2 — not only making the cube much more visually interesting, but in the process also representing both the halving function so deeply integral to bitcoin’s mechanism, but simultaneously also the exponential growth that, conversely, is a direct result of that halving. It felt that this single cube embodied everything that bitcoin is and does, and in such incredible symmetrical elegance — I was, and am still, more than a year later, absolutely in awe of the beauty of it all, which is why I have made it pretty much into my life’s work, for the time being at least. So to answer the question — I didn’t set out to find it at all, which is why I really feel I’m just a messenger, a role which permits me to stand so strongly behind it as it is not my own creation but merely a discovery.

BMAG: The oil painting debuting at Bitcoin 2026 took over 900 hours — each bead representing an individual bitcoin, painted by hand. What does that kind of sustained, meticulous labor do to your relationship with the subject? Does spending that long with 21 million change how you think about the number?

Anik Malcolm: This is a very interesting question, and one I actually pondered much during the process. As it is a two-dimensional representation of a still-theoretical 3D object, I “only” had to paint the 227,701 visible beads — each one, however, three times: body, highlight, shadow, not to mention the underlying grid.

The whole process, as you can imagine, was deeply meditative, and I found that “intrusive” thoughts would affect my efficiency, so that in itself became an exercise in recognizing, accepting, and letting go — a growth process of sorts which many report encountering on their bitcoin journey.

Next, I realized that music that was more demanding of my attention would have the same effect, so over time the playlist evolved into a soundtrack which resonated with the cube’s essence rather than rubbed against it — Arvo Pärt, David Lang, Kjartan Sveinsson, and the like, which I will also provide for listening at B26, as it forms an added dimension to the artwork’s presence.

Thirdly, I started noticing many other patterns within the numbers, many of which linked with Tesla’s “3,6,9” ideas, and I even spontaneously started reciting personal mantras as I painted, dot by dot, in a 3,6,9 pattern!

So I would say that rather than actively applying meaning to the number and its cubic manifestation, I became deeply under its influence as time progressed — physically, mentally, and spiritually. There is a certain “holiness” to bitcoin upon which I feel we all agree to a greater or lesser extent, and my experience of representing it so very literally was a true reflection of that.

BMAG: This concept has moved from drawings in Lugano to digital versions and tutorial videos to a full-scale oil painting, and you’re planning a monumental public sculpture in Roatán. What is it about this particular idea that keeps demanding a bigger format?

Anik Malcolm: Actually, both the Lugano drawings and the B26 painting (each 128×128 cm — about 4’2″) are on the smallest scale at which I could accurately represent the number! Each bead is 2mm (5/64″) — even smaller on the top face — so any smaller would have been unfeasible. I would also like to make a sculpture version of the same or similar size, hopefully within the next 12 months, as 55.2cm (under 2′) is still manageable in size. However, I met someone in Lugano who had spent years looking for a suitable idea for a monumental Bitcoin sculpture in Roatán, and felt that this worked perfectly. Even at a bead size of only 1cm (roughly ⅜”) with a 1cm gap in between for visual and kinetic effect, the cube alone quickly expands to 5.52m (approx. 18′), not counting the supporting structure and elevation from the ground. I feel that being able to be in the presence of all 21 million at such a grand and imposing scale would be an experience that would do bitcoin and all it stands for the appropriate justice.

BMAG: Adam Back has taken notice of the work. But if someone walks up to this painting at B26 with no math background and no particular interest in Bitcoin’s technical architecture — what do you want them to see or infer?

Anik Malcolm: I think my teenage daughter is a good representative of that demographic! She told me the other day that she would frequently come into the room where the painting has been drying “just to look at it for a while.” As I experienced while painting — I feel there is a deeply calming effect that the cube’s sheer symmetry and pattern exudes, floating and glowing in its abyssal setting, and combined with the provided soundtrack it becomes a deeply meditative and engrossing experience. And even on a basic math entry level — there are 21 subtracted squares visible on the painting! (Another beautiful coincidence — 1 square of 64², 4 squares of 32², and 16 squares of 16².) I feel, and hope, that both visitors of B26 and eventually the painting’s future owner will derive deep and sustained pleasure from this calm that was quietly encoded into that magical number, in the way both I and my whole family have during the journey of its creation — the calm methodical truth that is reflective of the bitcoin experience as a whole.

Fix the money. Fix the world.

“The Whole Entire Universe” by Anik Malcolm debuts in the BMAG art gallery at Bitcoin 2026, April 27–29, at The Venetian Resort, Las Vegas. Preview the work and explore more from the BMAG B26 exhibition HERE.  A limited edition shirt based on the painting is available HERE.

The Bitcoin Museum & Art Gallery (BMAG) is the curatorial and cultural programming division of BTC Inc and the Bitcoin Conference. Since 2019, the BMAG conference art gallery has facilitated more than 120 BTC in art and collectible sales. Learn more about BMAG at museum.b.tc. Follow BMAG on twitter @BMAG_HQ.

Bundle your Bitcoin 2026 pass with a stay at The Venetianand get your fourth night free. Use code AFTERS for a free After Hours Pass, or get your pass alone here. 

This post The Whole Entire Universe: 21 Million, One Painting first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Dennis Koch.

Bitcoin Magazine

Congresswoman Sheri Biggs Discloses Up to $250,000 BTC Investment via iShares Bitcoin ETF

Representative Sheri Biggs of South Carolina has disclosed a purchase of up to $250,000 in Bitcoin exposure via the iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT), marking one of the largest single Bitcoin-related buys by a sitting member of Congress. 

The Periodic Transaction Report filed with the House shows a transaction in the $100,001–$250,000 range executed on March 4, 2026 and reported in mid‑April, in line with disclosure deadlines under the STOCK Act.

The trade places Biggs among Congress’s most aggressive adopters of Bitcoin investment products, a cohort that already includes Senator David McCormick and Representative Brandon Gill, who have collectively reported hundreds of thousands of dollars in Bitcoin ETF purchases over the past year. 

Biggs has previously been identified by crypto advocacy groups as strongly supportive of digital assets, and her latest filing underscores how lawmakers are increasingly gaining direct financial exposure to the sector they help regulate.

The move comes as BTC trades below recent highs but remains a central focus of Washington’s ongoing debate over digital asset regulation and potential federal Bitcoin reserve policy. 

Bitcoin price action 

Bitcoin price rose sharply above $77,000 today after Iran announced the Strait of Hormuz had been fully reopened under a ceasefire framework, easing fears of a potential supply shock and triggering a broad risk-on move across global markets.

Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said the key shipping route is open to all commercial vessels for the duration of a 10-day truce tied to de-escalation efforts involving Israel and Hezbollah in Lebanon. The announcement signaled a temporary stabilization in a region that had been on edge for weeks over escalating tensions and threats to energy flows through one of the world’s most critical maritime chokepoints.

President Donald Trump amplified the development on social media, declaring that the “Strait of IRAN is fully open and ready for full passage,” reinforcing expectations that diplomatic momentum could continue. The White House has suggested that broader talks with Tehran remain possible within days, with additional regional meetings under discussion.

Markets reacted quickly. Oil prices fell as the geopolitical risk premium unwound, and equities and crypto moved higher in tandem. BTC pushed back into the $76,000–$78,000 range, a zone that has repeatedly acted as resistance since February’s pullback from earlier highs.

With liquidity thin and positioning crowded, BTC now sits at a key inflection point where continued geopolitical de-escalation could fuel a breakout above resistance, while renewed tensions risk sending price back toward the low-$70,000 range.

This post Congresswoman Sheri Biggs Discloses Up to $250,000 BTC Investment via iShares Bitcoin ETF first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Institutional investors are looking past the crypto market’s two largest behemoths, aggressively rotating capital into alternative cryptocurrencies as geopolitical tensions in the Middle East agitate traditional markets.

Data from SoSoValue shows that US-based investment vehicles tracking the spot price of XRP absorbed $55.39 million in fresh capital over the past week, positioning the asset as the undisputed leader among alternative cryptocurrency funds.

Related Reading

Bitcoin faces critical weekend test as Iran closes Strait after immediately disputing the US narrative on Hormuz deal

Bitcoin’s post-Hormuz rally faces a weekend test as Iran disputes Trump’s deal claims and shipping, oil, and bond risks remain unresolved.

Apr 17, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

When combined with substantial allocations into Solana, Avalanche, and Chainlink, Wall Street poured more than $100 million into altcoin-focused exchange-traded funds last week, signaling a sophisticated diversification strategy beyond Bitcoin and Ethereum.

The surge in altcoin demand comes amid severe macroeconomic crosscurrents. Digital asset markets are currently navigating deeply fragile sentiment driven by escalating military confrontations between the United States and Iran, alongside a looming ceasefire deadline.

Yet, rather than retreating entirely to the safety of cash, institutional and retail participants are utilizing regulated crypto investment vehicles to capture yield and position themselves for potential supply shocks.

Overall, the US crypto ETF landscape witnessed massive inflows across the board last week. Bitcoin funds commanded $996.38 million, while Ethereum products pulled in $275.83 million.

However, it is the rotation down the market capitalization spectrum that has captured attention, highlighting a maturing market in which traditional finance is increasingly willing to underwrite the risk of decentralized payment networks and smart contract platforms.

Related Reading

US Bitcoin ETFs pull in $664M in largest daily inflow since January, because Iran reopened Hormuz for a few hours

The Strait of Hormuz reopening eased energy shock fears and triggered institutional rotation into Bitcoin exposure.

Apr 18, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

Rotating down the market cap spectrum

The nearly $56 million allocated to XRP-linked funds marks the product category's second-best weekly performance of 2026, trailing only the week of Jan. 16, which saw $56.83 million in net additions.

This latest wave of capital cements XRP as the best-performing crypto asset outside of the industry's two majors.

By comparison, Solana-linked funds secured $35.17 million during the same period, its strongest performance since February.

Meanwhile, Avalanche and Chainlink ETFs registered slightly over $5 million each. Notably, this represents the strongest weekly performance since launch for Avalanche, and the highest weekly buy-in for Chainlink since last December.

Smaller-cap products also saw minor activity, with Dogecoin ETFs registering $187,310 and Hedera pulling in roughly $123,300. In a testament to the highly targeted nature of this altcoin rotation, only Litecoin products recorded zero flows during the week.

For XRP, the latest figures represent a major reversal from sluggish March, when the funds saw their first notable outflows of the year.

The resurgence was characterized by a relentless six-day positive streak, with the funds averaging double-digit, million-dollar inflows daily.

According to SoSo Value data, these investment products are now on track to record their strongest month of the year, having already attracted $65.89 million in April.

This latest push has elevated total historical inflows to $1.27 billion, pushing cumulative assets under management to approximately $1.11 billion.

Product expansion broadens the XRP market

Beyond the confines of traditional ETFs, XRP's fundamental demand is being bolstered by aggressive expansions into decentralized finance (DeFi).

Last week, a wrapped version of the asset (wXRP) officially went live on the Solana blockchain. Issued by the institutional custodian Hex Trust, the integration makes the token natively available in Solana's bustling DeFi ecosystem for the first time.

According to Hex Trust, every wXRP is backed 1:1 by native XRP held in segregated custody accounts, ensuring immediate redeemability.

The development allows XRP holders to deploy their assets to major Solana-based decentralized applications to generate yield, without being forced to liquidate their underlying spot positions.

This launch is part of a sweeping interoperability rollout that Hex Trust initiated late last year, with future expansions targeting other networks, including Ethereum and layer-2 network Optimism.

The Solana launch extended XRP into a part of the market where trading, liquidity provision, and collateral use are more active than on the XRP Ledger itself.

That does not change XRP’s core role in payments and settlement, but it does broaden the token’s role within crypto infrastructure.

Notably, Ripple has been leaning into that broader institutional pitch over the past year. The crypto payments firm has linked XRP demand to a broader stack built around custody, prime brokerage, payments, and the XRPL's settlement functions.

As Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse stated:

“Demand for XRP keeps growing. More access, more ecosystems, more utility.”

US-Iran sends geopolitical shockwaves

The accelerated pace of these developments initially coincided with easing expectations surrounding the US-Iran conflict, but the geopolitical baseline remains exceptionally volatile.

Market sentiment was jolted following reports that US naval forces fired upon and seized an Iranian cargo ship in the Gulf of Oman, marking a drastic escalation in the region's naval standoff.

President Donald Trump confirmed the military action, stating that the vessel was given “fair warning to stop” while attempting to bypass a US blockade of Iranian ports. Trump stated on Truth Social:

“The Iranian crew refused to listen, so our Navy ship stopped them right in their tracks by blowing a hole in the engineroom. Right now, U.S. Marines have custody of the vessel. The TOUSKA is under U.S. Treasury Sanctions because of their prior history of illegal activity. We have full custody of the ship, and are seeing what’s on board!”

The incident is deeply intertwined with the ongoing crisis in the Strait of Hormuz.

The vital shipping artery was briefly opened on April 17 under strict Iranian conditions requiring commercial vessels to obtain authorization from Iran's Ports and Maritime Organization and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) to transit through designated safe lanes.

However, as the US maintained its broader shipping blockade of Iranian ports, Tehran once more closed the Strait on April 18.

This naval brinkmanship has pushed global markets into a tense countdown toward an April 22 ceasefire deadline.

Furthermore, there has been increased uncertainty about Iran’s willingness to participate in forthcoming diplomatic talks in Islamabad, keeping risk-asset managers on high alert.

For the crypto sector, these geopolitical developments and the looming threat of retaliatory strikes are acting as a double-edged sword: introducing severe near-term volatility while simultaneously reinforcing the narrative of decentralized assets as a hedge against sovereign supply chain shocks.

The post Wall Street moves beyond the Bitcoin ETF trade as XRP leads altcoins on fragile macro relief appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Publicly listed Bitcoin miners liquidated more than 32,000 Bitcoin during the first quarter of 2026, marking a record sell-off as the industry's largest operators redirect billions in capital toward artificial intelligence.

This historic shift is unfolding precisely as the economics of Bitcoin validation reach a critical pressure point.

With mining profitability hovering near cyclical lows, weighted production costs surging, and network hashrate showing persistent signs of strain, the infrastructure giants that defined the last crypto boom are fundamentally reengineering their business models.

Related Reading

Latest Bitcoin data proves BTC miners need price to retake $80k to stop lure of $4B in AI revenue

Yet top 10 public miners could earn $4.7B–$9.3B from BTC vs up to $4.1B in long-term AI contracts, reshaping Bitcoin’s security base.

Apr 18, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

Public BTC miners turn to the balance sheet

The sheer magnitude of the first-quarter liquidation reflects the severity of the capital pivot.

Public mining firms unloaded more Bitcoin in the first three months of 2026 than they did throughout 2025.

To contextualize the scale of the sell-off, the Q1 offload easily surpassed the roughly 20,000 Bitcoin dumped by the industry during the chaotic Terra-Luna collapse in the second quarter of 2022.

According to on-chain data from CryptoQuant, miner reserves have steadily eroded throughout the cycle, with prominent operators now using their digital treasuries as vital liquidity engines rather than long-term strategic holdings.

The firm noted that, since the start of the current cycle, miners have recorded a net sell of 61,000 BTC. This heavy selling activity is led by Marathon Digital, which offloaded over 13,000 BTC and has since dropped out of the top three Bitcoin holders.

Other BTC miners selling their holdings include Cango, which sold 2,000 Bitcoin for roughly $143 million to extinguish Bitcoin-backed debt obligations and clear its balance sheet. Core Scientific unloaded around 1,900 Bitcoin in January to raise $175 million, while Riot Platforms sold 4,026 BTC.

Post-halving economics break the old model

The engine driving this mass exodus of capital is a broken economic model, exacerbated by the April 2024 halving, which slashed block rewards from 6.25 BTC to 3.125 BTC.

The programmatic 50% cut in block subsidies fundamentally repriced the revenue baseline for the entire sector, leaving operators highly vulnerable to market fluctuations.

Since that reduction, BTC mining economics have been defined by unrelenting downward pressure.

James Butterfill, head of research at digital asset manager CoinShares, noted that the weighted average cash cost to produce a single Bitcoin for public operators surged to nearly $80,000 in the final quarter of 2025.

Meanwhile, the revenue side of the equation continues to deteriorate. Hashprice, the metric tracking expected revenue per unit of computing power, plummeted to between $28 and $30 per petahash per second per day in Q1 2026, marking some of the lowest profitability levels on record.

With transaction fees remaining structurally weak at less than 1% of total block rewards, miners are highly dependent on spot price appreciation.

However, with Bitcoin hovering around $77,000, substantially below its cycle peak of approximately $126,000 reached in October 2025, miners are caught in a vise.

Ballooning debt burdens and massive electricity overheads are squeezing cash flow to the breaking point, forcing executives to look elsewhere for earnings.

Why Wall Street is rewarding the AI pivot

Faced with shrinking margins, pure-play operators are finding that boards of directors and institutional investors are aggressively rewarding a pivot toward AI and high-performance computing.

Unlike the volatile, spot-market nature of Bitcoin mining, AI data centers offer stable, predictable, multi-year revenue contracts with technology giants like Google, Microsoft, and Anthropic.

The equity market’s verdict has been unambiguous. Mining companies that set AI revenue targets of 80% or higher have seen their stock prices skyrocket by an average of 500% over the past two years, securing vastly superior market multiples compared to their pure-play mining peers.

Butterfill estimates that public miners could derive up to 70% of their revenues from AI by the end of this year, a steep climb from roughly 30% today.

With more than $70 billion in cumulative AI and high-performance computing contracts announced across the public mining sector, capital is no longer flowing toward next-generation ASIC replacements.

Instead, debt and equity are being funneled into data-center-style infrastructure. Operators like TeraWulf, IREN, and Cipher have taken on billions in collective debt to fund these buildouts, driven by the underlying unit economics.

While electricity accounts for roughly 40% of Bitcoin mining revenue, energy costs for AI cloud operators leasing high-powered chips are in the low single digits.

Does less Bitcoin mining investment mean less security?

The wholesale migration of computing infrastructure has ignited a sharp debate over the long-term security of the Bitcoin network.

On the one hand, the bearish thesis holds that as public miners halt reinvestments in mining hardware and commit their massive energy capacities to AI, the network’s security backbone risks hollowing out at a critical juncture.

Charles Edwards, founder of Capriole Investments, views the trend with profound alarm, noting projections that the average Bitcoin revenue share among top public miners will collapse to just 30% within three years.

He observed:

“If these numbers are even half accurate… the energy and commitment to Bitcoin is under significant threat.”

Adding cultural texture to this shift, Bitcoin researcher Paul Sztorc noted that the industry is quietly scrubbing its original roots.

According to him, dedicated mining publications have rebranded to focus on broader energy themes, and major industry conferences have swapped out mining stages for energy-focused platforms, reflecting a sector actively distancing itself from pure crypto workloads.

Yet, veterans of the protocol argue this is precisely how the system was engineered to survive.

Blockstream CEO Adam Back countered the alarmism, pointing to Bitcoin's self-adjusting difficulty mechanism. If computing power leaves, mining difficulty drops, instantly improving profit margins for the remaining operators.

Back argued:

“It's an arbitrage, with equilibrium when mining margin is the same as AI workloads.”

He also described a “positive reflexivity” in which higher margins mean surviving miners sell less Bitcoin to cover power costs.

Meanwhile, James Check, an on-chain analyst at CheckOnchain, views the transition through the lens of pure capitalism. He noted:

“Massive turnover is literally the intended design of the difficulty adjustment.”

In his view, the AI pivot is a highly rational diversification strategy for infrastructure firms that simply “buy power and compute,” noting that AI serves as a constant baseload while Bitcoin mining remains an intermittent tool to balance grid loads.

The second half of the halving cycle

As the Bitcoin network progresses through the second half of this halving epoch by recently crossing block 945,000 in April 2026, the public mining industry faces a profound identity crisis.

Hashrate Index argued that the next two years, leading up to the 2028 halving, will severely test the protocol's self-correcting mechanisms against the gravitational pull of Wall Street's AI capital.

The outstanding questions facing the market are now structural, rather than cyclical. It remains to be seen whether the spot price of Bitcoin can stage a robust enough recovery to comfortably clear the near-record cash costs of production, or if network transaction fees will permanently remain a negligible fraction of total revenue.

If the underlying spot economics do not materially improve, the market will be forced to weigh whether the current, unprecedented pace of treasury liquidations can be sustained without permanently dampening asset prices.

Furthermore, the industry must determine the baseline at which the network's computing power will stabilize definitively once the marginal players have exited the ecosystem.

Ultimately, the most pressing tension is existential. By 2027, the publicly traded companies that heavily drove the industrialization of Bitcoin validation over the past half-decade may no longer be miners in the traditional sense.

Instead, they are on track to become diversified energy and high-performance computing conglomerates, holding only residual, legacy exposure to the digital asset that originally built them.

The post Public miners dump record BTC and are pivoting to AI — is Bitcoin’s security backbone starting to hollow out? appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Michael Saylor has signaled that Strategy, formerly MicroStrategy, may be preparing to buy more Bitcoin, reviving a pattern investors now treat as an early marker for another weekly treasury announcement.

On April 19, the company’s executive chairman posted a screenshot of Strategy’s Bitcoin portfolio tracker on X with the phrase “Think Even ₿igger.”

Historically, Saylor has used such cryptic public statements in the days immediately before official regulatory filings detailing new Bitcoin purchases.

The timing is particularly notable given that Strategy funded its most recent acquisition using its Variable Rate Series A Perpetual Stretch Preferred Stock, traded under the ticker STRC

Last week, Strategy added 13,927 Bitcoin to its treasury at an average price of about $71,902 per coin, for a total cost of roughly $1 billion. The purchase was fully funded by $1 billion raised through sales of STRC, according to the company’s latest SEC disclosures.

That transaction pushed Strategy’s total holdings to 780,897 BTC, valued at more than $59 billion. The company remains the largest corporate holder of Bitcoin globally, and its pace of accumulation has made its weekly filings a closely watched event across the market.

STRC could fund a bigger Bitcoin acquisition

STRC is designed to trade near a $100 par value and currently offers a variable dividend with an annualized rate of 11.5%.

The dividend rate resets monthly, and Strategy has said the structure is intended to keep the stock trading close to par while limiting sharper swings in value. In practice, the instrument has become an increasingly important part of the company’s funding toolkit as it expands its Bitcoin treasury.

To further optimize this mechanism, Strategy recently proposed changing STRC’s dividend schedule from monthly to semi-monthly payments. The company stated the adjustment aims to reduce reinvestment lag and improve liquidity, market efficiency, and price stability.

Speaking on this move, Jeff Park, a Bitwise advisor, said:

“STRC attempting to offer semi-monthly dividend is a pretty revolutionary moment for corporate finance…it sets a new standard for corporates to do better, for the benefits of their investors to achieve higher liquidity with less cyclicality.”

Against that backdrop, the focus now is whether STRC generated enough capital over the past week to fund another purchase that exceeds the roughly $1 billion BTC buy Strategy disclosed last week.

That view gained traction after CryptoSlate reported that STRC posted back-to-back trading days with more than $1 billion in volume last week. Based on that performance, market observers have argued that the company may have raised enough to support a materially larger Bitcoin acquisition.

Estimates from the Bitcoin for Corporations suggest this activity could translate into the purchase of nearly 30,000 BTC.

If confirmed, that would mark one of the company’s strongest weeks since the product launched and could add around $2 billion to STRC’s market capitalization, which currently stands at just over $6 billion.

It would also reinforce STRC's growing role in Strategy’s capital-raising model. The preferred stock was initially framed as another instrument in the company’s broader financing stack, alongside STRF, STRE, STRK, and STRD.

Over time, however, STRC has become more central to the company’s ability to keep buying Bitcoin at scale.

Taken together, those estimates have shifted attention from whether Strategy is preparing another purchase to the size of the next disclosure.

A larger buy could put Strategy ahead of BlackRock

If these numbers materialize, Strategy is positioned to surpass BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) in total Bitcoin holdings.

According to BitcoinTreasuries.net, BlackRock’s IBIT, the largest Bitcoin fund, holds 798,026 BTC. Strategy, by comparison, holds 780,897 BTC.

That leaves a relatively narrow gap between the two. Based on current estimates, a purchase of more than 20,000 BTC this week could allow Strategy to move past IBIT’s holdings.

If this happens, Strategy would become the second-largest holder of Bitcoin behind the blockchain network's pseudonymous founder, Satoshi Nakamoto.

So, this potential shift carries significant symbolic weight in the broader financial market.

A purchase large enough to overtake BlackRock would mark a striking development in the competition for Bitcoin exposure, with a single corporate treasury moving ahead of the flagship fund managed by the world’s largest asset manager.

For the market, the next disclosure is important on two fronts. It could show whether STRC’s recent trading surge translated into another outsized Bitcoin purchase, and whether that purchase was large enough to push Strategy ahead of BlackRock in total holdings.

Formal confirmation, however, will come only when Strategy releases its next SEC filing on April 20.

The post How Strategy’s STRC could propel the Michael Saylor’s firm Bitcoin holdings past BlackRock’s IBIT this week appeared first on CryptoSlate.

A $292 million exploit at KelpDAO set off a broad retreat across decentralized finance over the weekend, draining roughly $10 billion across the DeFi industry and forcing multiple protocols to freeze markets tied to rsETH.

The breach began late Saturday when an attacker drained about 116,500 rsETH from KelpDAO’s cross-chain bridge. The stolen tokens were worth about $292 million at the time, according to CryptoSlate data.

KelpDAO issues rsETH to users who deposit ETH into its liquid restaking system. The platform then deploys those ETH through the restaking platform EigenLayer to generate additional yield on top of standard staking returns.

KelpDAO’s loss now stands as the largest DeFi exploit of 2026 in the report, surpassing earlier attacks this year.

Related Reading

EigenLayer's native token debut sees high stakes activity from crypto whales

The digital asset has a fully diluted valuation of $6.5 billion, according to CoinMarketCap.

Oct 1, 2024 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

How KelpDAO was exploited for $292 million

rsETH circulates across the broader market via LayerZero, a cross-chain messaging network that moves instructions and assets between blockchains.

Yearn Finance core developer Banteg explained that the exploit hit the route linking Unichain to the Ethereum mainnet.

According to the on-chain analyst, the attacker pushed through a fraudulent message that the system accepted as valid, prompting the Ethereum-side adapter to release pre-funded rsETH reserves.

This route was configured as a one-of-one decentralized verifier network path without secondary verifiers that could have flagged the transaction.

Banteng stated that the malicious transaction, identified as nonce 308, was verified and delivered at 17:35 UTC.

Following the attack, the KelpDAO’s emergency multisignature wallet froze the protocol’s core contracts. This blocked two further attempts that together could have removed another roughly $100 million in rsETH.

The initial stolen funds were moved through Tornado Cash, obscuring the trail before the protocol’s response could contain the damage.

Meanwhile, the drained reserve-backed wrapped rsETH circulated across secondary networks, including Base, Arbitrum, Linea, Blast, Mantle, and Scroll. Once those reserves were depleted, users holding rsETH off Ethereum faced rising uncertainty around redemption and backing.

And that pressure quickly fed into the rest of the market.

Aave takes the heaviest blow

The most severe aftershock hit Aave, the largest crypto lending platform, where the attacker allegedly deposited the stolen rsETH as collateral.

During the attack window, Aave’s pricing oracles continued to read rsETH near its normal peg, allowing the protocol to issue 106,467 ETH against the compromised collateral.

That left the platform facing a potential $236 million bad-debt exposure and triggered a rush for the exits.

Data from DeFiLlama showed Aave’s total value locked dropped from more than $26 billion to about $20 billion as users withdrew funds.

The drawdown amounted to one of the sharpest pullbacks on the platform in recent memory and turned a bridge exploit into a liquidity event for the largest lending venue in DeFi.

On-chain analysts revealed that large ETH holders on the DeFi platform accelerated the move.

For context, TRON founder Justin Sun reportedly withdrew more than 65,580 ETH, worth about $154 million, in a single transaction.

As these kinds of withdrawals mounted, Aave’s ETH utilization rate reached 100%, leaving all available Ether on the platform either borrowed or withdrawn.

Meanwhile, the pressure also spilled into Aave’s market price. The AAVE governance token fell more than 18% as traders priced in the possibility of deeper losses.

This was exacerbated by heavy sales from large AAVE wallets. Blockchain analytics platform Lookonchain reported that one entity identified as smaugvision sold more than 20,000 AAVE for $2.06 million, while another investor sold a similar amount for $2.05 million. A third whale sold nearly 19,700 AAVE in exchange for wrapped Bitcoin and ETH.

In response to these issues, Aave froze the rsETH markets on both V3 and V4. The platform's founder Stani Kulechov stated on X:

“rsETH has been frozen on Aave V3 and V4, the asset does not have any borrowing power as a measure due to KelpDAO bridge exploit that happened outside of Aave. Both Aave V3 and V4 does not have further exposure to rsETH.”

Contagion spreads across DeFi

Apart from Aave, other DeFi protocols also experienced significant withdrawals from their platform due to the attack.

0xngmi, the pseudonymous founder of DeFiLlama, reported that the incident triggered a $10 billion drop across the DeFi sector. This includes the $6 billion exodus from Aave.

Notably, data from DeFiLlama show that TVL for DeFi protocols has dropped 10% from around $99 billion on April 18 to $89 billion as of press time.

Meanwhile, the incident has also led several DeFi platforms to move quickly to reduce their exposure to the embattled rsETH token.

DeFi analyst Ignas flagged eight additional DeFi protocols, including Lido, SparkLend, Fluid, Compound, and Euler, which froze their rsETH lending markets.

He added:

“I suppose LayerZero is probably affected too, as rsETH were bridged from L2s, so I wonder if those rsETH on L2s aren't worthless right now.”

Meanwhile, Ethena, the developer of the synthetic USDe dollar, temporarily suspended its LayerZero bridges as a precaution, while stating that it had no exposure to rsETH.

Those moves reflected how widely rsETH had been embedded across DeFi as it was deeply used in lending markets, vault products, and collateral strategies that depended on smooth cross-chain transfers and confidence in reserve backing.

As that confidence weakened, protocols moved to ring-fence risk before further withdrawals or price dislocations could deepen the damage.

The strain also exposed the speed at which capital can move once collateral quality comes into question. A bridge exploit at one venue was enough to send shockwaves through multiple markets within hours, pushing platforms to suspend activity even when their own contracts had not been directly breached.

Crypto community calls for solution to DeFi bridge hacks

Jonathan Man, the Head of Multi-Strategy Solutions & DeFi Strategies at Bitwise, said:

“This is another setback but we can bounce back stronger. We as an industry need to collectively up our game to make sure we are building the future of finance on solid foundations.”

Meanwhile, the KelpDAO exploit also prompted broader discussion about how lending protocols and token issuers can limit the damage from hacks targeting bridged or thinly traded assets.

Keone Hon, co-founder of Monad, said pooled lending protocols should consider imposing rate limits on how quickly an asset can be deposited and used as collateral.

Under that model, an asset with a current circulating supply of $100 million and a formal cap of $300 million would not be allowed to jump straight to the full cap in a single burst. Instead, the supply allowed into the system would rise gradually over a set period, such as 10 minutes or a few hours.

Hon said that approach would narrow the available exit paths when an exotic asset is exploited, especially in cases involving infinite-mint bugs.

He argued that the size of the loss is often determined less by the mint itself than by how much of the compromised asset can be offloaded into lending venues or other liquid exits before markets react.

In that framework, large lending protocols become the main release valves because decentralized exchange liquidity is often too limited to absorb a major exploit.

He added that asset issuers should also have an interest in tighter caps, particularly when they issue receipt tokens with delayed redemption. In those cases, the issuer is not necessarily exposed to immediate redemption pressure from an attacker, but still benefits when downstream exit routes remain constrained.

Hon pointed to the Hyperbridge DOT exploit and the Resolv incident as examples where losses stayed below more catastrophic levels because the available paths for exiting the hacked asset were limited.

Guy Young, founder of Ethena, endorsed that view and said issuers should consider adding rate limits at the mint and redemption layer, as well as custom throttles on top of LayerZero’s OFT standard.

The post DeFi users pull $10 billion out of the market as $292 million exploit sparks bank-run optics appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Users paid $9.7 billion in on-chain fees in the first half of 2025, up 41% year over year and the second-highest total on record.

1kx projects more than $32 billion in on-chain fees for 2026, driven by accelerating application growth. That growth has pushed the word “revenue” into every crypto investor pitch deck, every sector report, and every valuation conversation.

The report added that a Bitcoin drawdown may stress-test protocol fees.

1kx's April sector analysis finds that nearly every crypto fee category shows a positive correlation with BTC price. There is also wide dispersion across sectors, and the critical variable of downside beta is still unresolved.

The firm says a 0.6 correlation can mean very different things depending on whether sector fees fall at 0.8x Bitcoin's pace or at 1.5x, and it identifies the decomposed upside versus downside fee sensitivity.

Related Reading

Bitcoin miner fees are close to zero as cost to mine nears $80,000 with difficulty about to drop 5%

With fees contributing almost nothing, miners depend on price, efficiency, and cost control as the next reset approaches.

Apr 10, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

In crypto, a fee line can look like a business in an up market and still trade like amplified BTC beta when macro fear arrives.

The reflexive fee cluster

The sectors 1kx identifies as most correlated with Bitcoin price share a common economic architecture that improves when prices rise and deteriorates when they fall, often faster than the underlying asset itself.

Liquid staking and restaking sit at the top of that cluster, with their fee streams depending on yields that expand as borrowed capital and risk appetite grow and contract as they retreat.

Vault curators face the same pull, as assets flow in when price momentum is positive and out when sentiment reverses. Launchpads are the most acutely sentiment-driven category in the report, with launch activity accelerating in directional bull markets and stalling when confidence cracks.

Automation and DeFAI protocols, which earn fees tied to transaction activity and strategy deployment, also track the same directional pulse.

1kx says that layer-1 (L1) blockchains' fee correlation to BTC varies widely, with many inheriting market direction through native token price movements and activity mix, while others show more independence depending on their application base.

That variability makes the directional pull of token prices on on-chain activity mean most L1s still carry meaningful BTC sensitivity in their fee lines.

Reflexivity connects these categories, as their fees are largely an output of the same speculative, position-driven activity that drives Bitcoin itself.

When investors talk about fee growth in these sectors during an up market, they are partly describing business momentum and partly describing the same macro tailwind that lifted every risk asset in the portfolio.

The delivered-services layer

DePIN stands apart in 1kx's framework as the lowest-correlation category, earning the distinction as the standout for non-directional crypto revenue exposure.

The reason is that DePIN fees track the dollar value of compute, bandwidth, storage, and other delivered services. Demand for those services comes from users with real operational needs, and while token prices affect incentive structures, they do not directly set the fee rate, as asset prices do for yield or launch activity.

1kx projects DePIN fees above $450 million in 2026, sustaining triple-digit growth.

Stablecoin issuers and real-world asset protocols sit in a similar lower-correlation band, with 1kx estimating their BTC correlation at roughly 0.2. Their fee economics depend more on issuance volume, reserve management, and AUM than on speculative trading alone.

A lower correlation indicates a fee structure less tied to BTC price direction. 1kx's framework supports “more differentiated revenue exposure” and stops well short of claiming immunity to a selloff.

The more precise claim is that DePIN and issuance-linked businesses have a better structural case for defending their fee lines during a BTC-specific drawdown.

Decentralized exchanges (DEXs), lending protocols, and perpetuals platforms occupy a contested middle ground. 1kx puts DEX median correlation at roughly 0.33 and lending at around 0.3, while derivatives show wide variation, sometimes exceeding 0.4.

Volatility can support trading volume even in down markets, providing these sectors with a partial buffer. Still, fee-rate compression and position unwinds during stress episodes make their revenue lines unstable in ways that simple average correlation fails to capture.

Why valuation is the real payoff

1kx's broader revenue report shows that price-to-fee ratios across crypto sectors span several orders of magnitude. Blockchains had a median P/F ratio of 3,902x in the third quarter of 2025, with L1s at around 7,300x, compared with 17x for DeFi and finance.

DePIN's median P/F ratio had fallen to 211x from roughly 1,000x a year earlier. Blockchain valuations still account for more than 90% of the analyzed fee-generating market cap, even though DeFi and finance produce most of the fees.

1kx also says fee changes lead valuations in DeFi and finance, and to a lesser extent in blockchains.

If that directional relationship holds on the downside, with fees dropping first and multiples compressing in the weeks that follow the initial price move, then a BTC drawdown that exposes fee fragility in high-correlation sectors could trigger a second-order valuation adjustment.

Investors who had assigned business-quality valuations to beta-exposed fee streams would face a rapid repricing.

The test gets deferred

If macro conditions keep easing, such as oil lower, Fed-cut expectations holding, and geopolitical risk fading, Bitcoin could keep holding firm in the mid-to-high $70,000s and push toward Citi's 12-month base target of $112,000.

In that environment, fee lines across most sectors would continue to expand, and the downside beta would remain theoretical. 1kx projects application-led fee growth accelerating into 2026, with DeFi and finance expanding above 50% year over year.

The risk in that scenario is that the market continues to treat cyclically strong fee growth as evidence of durable business quality. Launchpad activity stays elevated in a buoyant market, restaking yields look robust when risk appetite is healthy, and vault curators report strong AUM figures.

The audit gets postponed, and capital keeps flowing into sectors whose fee quality has never been tested under real stress. The environment of falling oil, easing inflation fears, and revived Fed-cut bets is exactly the kind of environment where that postponement extends.

February repeats at scale

On Feb. 5, Bitcoin fell 14.1% to an intraday low of $62,254.50 in a single session as risk sentiment weakened, tech stocks sold off, and ETF outflows accelerated.

The crypto market shed roughly $2 trillion from its October peak during that episode. Launchpad activity cooled, borrowed-capital positions unwound, and restaking yields compressed.

Fee lines that had looked impressive through the end of 2025 showed their directional dependence within a matter of weeks.

A repeat of that pattern would move the downside-beta question from 1kx's stated next step to a live market event.

Sectors with reflexive fee structures would face the hardest examination, with the market looking for launchpads seeing launch volume decline, restaking yields compressing as borrowed capital exits, and vault curators watching AUM decline faster than token prices.

DePIN and issuance-linked businesses would still face headwinds, but their relative fee resilience would become legible in the data for the first time.

If fee changes drive valuations in DeFi and finance higher, the same mechanism works in reverse.

Protocols that report fee compression in the first quarter of the next down cycle give the market a reason to compress their multiples before the full macro picture has even resolved.

Investors who had assigned business-quality valuations to beta-exposed fee streams would face a rapid repricing.

Bitcoin is currently around $78,000, holding near the top of its recent range from the April geopolitical relief rally, exactly the window in which the fee-quality question sits unresolved.

The post Crypto traders spend $9.7B on fees as the next Bitcoin drawdown will expose which on-chain costs are real appeared first on CryptoSlate.

DeFi Crash: The rsETH Contagion

Confidence in the Decentralized Finance (DeFi) ecosystem has plummeted to an all-time low following a cascading series of security failures. What began as a targeted exploit on Kelp DAO’s rsETH (Liquid Restaked ETH) has rippled through the industry’s most trusted protocols, most notably Aave, the world’s largest lending market.

The incident has reignited a fierce debate over the risks of "DeFi composability"—the practice of layering different protocols on top of one another. Critics argue that a simple Ethereum deposit should not be vulnerable to the failure of a complex, cross-chain restaking bridge.

Aave and LayerZero: What Happened?

The crisis was triggered by a sophisticated exploit targeting the bridge infrastructure of rsETH. According to forensic reports, the attacker—widely identified as the North Korean state-sponsored Lazarus Group (DPRK)—executed a multi-stage attack on LayerZero’s Decentralized Verifier Network (DVN).

The Anatomy of the Exploit

Contrary to initial speculation that the DVN itself was compromised, the attackers targeted the RPC (Remote Procedure Call) nodes that the DVN relied on for data.

1. The Lure: Attackers identified two specific RPCs used by the DVN.
2. The Sabotage: A Distributed Denial of Service (DDoS) attack was launched against the DVN’s primary, healthy RPCs.
3. The Deception: This forced the system to fail over to the two compromised RPCs. These malicious nodes served accurate data to the public but fed fraudulent state information to the DVN, bypassing traditional security safeguards.

Impact on Aave: Frozen Markets and Bad Debt

The exploit allowed the attacker to mint fraudulent rsETH and deposit it into Aave to drain approximately $300 million in ETH. This sudden exodus of liquidity caused a "Whale Panic," with figures like Justin Sun reportedly withdrawing over $150 million in a single transaction.

Current Protocol Status

In an official statement, Aave confirmed that rsETH is now frozen across Aave V3 and V4. Additionally, WETH reserves remain frozen on several networks, including Ethereum mainnet, Arbitrum, Base, Mantle, and Linea, to prevent further contagion.

• Utilization Crisis: Lending rates for ETH spiked to 10-15% as utilization hit 100%.
• Liquidity Lock: Many lenders are currently unable to withdraw their assets because all available ETH in the pool is technically "borrowed."

Is the Debt Recoverable?

Aave’s official analysis suggests that rsETH on the Ethereum mainnet remains fully backed, and the exposure has been capped. However, the market remains skeptical. The "bad debt" looming over the protocol remains a primary concern for crypto news analysts. Until it is clear who will bear the brunt of the $300 million hole, trust in the "money lego" architecture of DeFi will remain suppressed.

For those looking to secure their remaining assets, diversifying into hardware wallets or reviewing top exchange comparisons for safer exit ramps has become a priority for many retail users.

Return to Pristine Collateral

The fallout from this incident suggests a shift in investor sentiment. There is an increasing demand for a "return to basics"—using pristine collateral like Bitcoin or native ETH rather than complex derivative products. While LayerZero has restored its DVN services, the industry now faces weeks of introspection regarding RPC security and the dangers of single-point-of-failure configurations.

What Is Happening in the Crypto Market Right Now?

The crypto market is entering a phase of tight compression, where price action looks stable on the surface—but pressure is building underneath.

Bitcoin is holding around the $74,000 level, showing resilience despite negative headlines. Ethereum, meanwhile, is hovering near key support zones, with no clear breakout direction yet.

At the same time, traditional markets are sending a very different signal. U.S. equities are pushing toward new all-time highs, absorbing liquidity and attention, while crypto lags behind.

👉 This divergence is critical.
It suggests that crypto is not weak—it is waiting.

The $90M Ethereum Whale Bet: Confidence or a Trap?

One of the most striking developments comes from a large Ethereum position:

• A whale opened a $90.8 million long on ETH
• Using 20x leverage
• Liquidation level near $1,392

This kind of positioning is not noise—it’s a statement.

What it could mean:

• Strong conviction that ETH is near a bottom
• Expectation of a sharp upside move
• Or a high-risk play in a low-volatility environment

But there’s another side to this.

👉 High leverage positions often appear before major volatility spikes, not during calm trends.

This raises a key question:
Is the whale early—or is this liquidity bait?

Geopolitical Tensions: The Silent Market Trigger

Beyond charts and trades, macro events are quietly escalating.

Recent developments around U.S. naval actions and tensions in the Middle East are adding a layer of uncertainty across global markets. Historically, such events act as volatility catalysts rather than directional signals.

Crypto reacts fast to these shocks because it sits at the intersection of:

• Risk assets
• Global liquidity flows
• Investor sentiment

👉 Any escalation could trigger:

• A sudden risk-off move (crypto drop)
• Or a flight to alternative assets (crypto spike)

Right now, the market is pricing uncertainty—but not panic.

Bitcoin Holding $74K: Strength or Exhaustion?

Bitcoin’s current position is deceptively important.

• Price remains near key support around $74K
• Selling pressure is present, but not dominant
• Momentum is slowing across lower timeframes

This creates a neutral zone, where both bulls and bears are waiting.

Two possible scenarios:

• Bullish: Support holds → breakout toward higher resistance levels
• Bearish: Support breaks → fast move downward due to liquidity gaps

👉 The longer Bitcoin stays in this range, the stronger the eventual move becomes.

Stocks vs Crypto: A Growing Disconnect

Another key signal is the widening gap between traditional markets and crypto.

• U.S. stocks are pushing higher
• Crypto is consolidating or slightly declining

This is not typical in strong bullish environments.

What it suggests:

• Liquidity is rotating into equities
• Institutional focus is temporarily elsewhere
• Crypto is being left behind—temporarily

But this type of divergence rarely lasts.

👉 When capital rotates back, crypto tends to move faster and more aggressively than traditional assets.

Why the Real Move Hasn’t Started Yet

All current signals point to one conclusion:

👉 The market is not trending—it is compressing.

You have:

• Large leveraged positions building
• Macro tension increasing
• Bitcoin holding but not rallying
• Capital rotating unevenly

This combination typically precedes a liquidity event.

Not a slow move.
A fast, decisive one.

What to Watch Next

Instead of reacting to noise, focus on the triggers:

• Bitcoin holding or losing the $74K level
• Ethereum reacting to whale positioning
• Any escalation in geopolitical tensions
• Rotation of liquidity back into crypto

These are the signals that will define the next move.

Conclusion: A Market Waiting to Explode

Crypto right now is like a coiled spring.

Nothing dramatic is happening—yet.
But everything is aligning for a major shift.

The presence of high leverage, macro uncertainty, and diverging markets creates one clear expectation:

👉 Volatility is coming.

The only question is direction.

Ethereum Price Analysis: What the Chart Shows Right Now

Ethereum is trading around the $2,330–$2,350 zone, sitting directly on a strong support level that has been tested multiple times. This area is clearly acting as a short-term decision point for the market.

The key structure is tightening between nearby resistance and deeper support:

• Resistance sits around $2,417 – $2,450
• Immediate support holds at $2,300
• Lower supports extend toward $2,179 and $2,066

The recent failure to hold above $2,400 signals that bullish momentum is fading, with price starting to form lower highs in the short term.

Trend Breakdown: From Breakout to Cooling Phase

$Ethereum previously surged from the $2,200 region to nearly $2,450 in a strong breakout move. That rally, however, quickly met selling pressure at the top, leading to a gradual slowdown.

Since then, price has slipped below short-term moving averages, which are now flattening. This shift doesn’t confirm a full trend reversal yet, but it clearly shows that the market has entered a cooling and consolidation phase rather than continuation.

RSI Signals: A Bounce, But Not a Reversal Yet

The RSI is currently near 34, hovering just above oversold territory. It recently dipped lower and is now attempting a small recovery, which often hints at a potential short-term bounce.

Still, the signal remains weak:

• No clear bullish divergence has formed
• Momentum recovery is limited

This suggests that while a bounce is possible, it may not be strong enough to immediately reverse the trend.

Key Levels to Watch

Ethereum is sitting at a critical support zone around $2,300, and the reaction here will likely define the next move.

If buyers defend this level, the recovery path becomes clearer:

• First target: $2,360
• Then: $2,417
• Breakout zone: $2,450+

A move above $2,450 would shift momentum back in favor of bulls and open the path toward $2,500.

On the flip side, if this support breaks, the downside could accelerate quickly:

• First drop toward $2,179
• Then deeper into $2,066 – $2,030

Market Structure: A Transition Phase

The chart reflects a classic post-rally structure. After a strong upward move, $ETH entered a distribution phase, followed by a gradual decline toward support.

This type of structure often leads to a decisive move once compression ends. Right now, price is caught between holding support and breaking down, making this a make-or-break zone for the short term.

Ethereum Price Prediction (Short-Term Outlook)

The most likely scenario is continued consolidation between $2,300 and $2,400 as the market builds momentum.

• Bullish case: Hold support → reclaim $2,417 → target $2,450–$2,500
• Bearish case: Lose $2,300 → drop toward $2,180–$2,060

The breakout from this range will likely be sharp, as volatility is currently compressing.

Crypto News: What Just Moved the Market

The latest crypto news cycle has been dominated by one key reality: macro events are now driving crypto more than crypto itself.

Over the past days, markets reacted sharply to geopolitical tensions in the Middle East. Oil prices surged, risk assets dropped, and crypto followed.

Bitcoin briefly lost momentum as fear spread across global markets — but quickly rebounded once de-escalation signals appeared. At the same time, something more important happened behind the scenes:

Institutional money continues to flow into crypto.

Large inflows into Bitcoin, combined with growing involvement from traditional finance players, are supporting prices even during macro uncertainty.

This combination is critical:

• Short-term volatility driven by headlines
• Long-term strength driven by institutional demand

This is exactly why the next move could be explosive.

Why Bitcoin Is at a Critical Level Right Now

Bitcoin is currently trading near a key resistance zone.

This level has acted as a barrier multiple times, and the market is now testing it again under very different conditions:

• Stronger institutional backing
• Higher macro uncertainty
• Increased liquidity sensitivity

If Bitcoin breaks above this level, the move could accelerate quickly due to:

• Short liquidations
• Momentum traders entering
• Increased media attention

If rejected, however, a pullback or consolidation phase is likely.

👉 In both scenarios, volatility is expected to increase.

Crypto News Alert: 3 Events That Could Move Bitcoin Next

1. U.S. Regulation Developments

Crypto regulation remains one of the most powerful catalysts for price action.

Any progress in U.S. legislation could:

• Unlock new institutional capital
• Improve market confidence
• Drive long-term adoption

On the other hand, delays or negative signals could slow momentum.

👉 This is a high-impact, long-term trigger.

2. Federal Reserve & Liquidity Shifts

Bitcoin is now highly sensitive to macro liquidity conditions.

Key drivers to watch:

• Interest rate decisions
• Inflation data (CPI, PPI)
• Market expectations for rate cuts

If liquidity increases, crypto typically benefits.
If conditions tighten, pressure returns quickly.

👉 This is the most powerful short-term driver.

3. Geopolitical Tensions & Oil Prices

Recent crypto news made one thing clear:

Markets are reacting instantly to geopolitical headlines.

Rising tensions → risk-off → crypto drops
De-escalation → risk-on → crypto rebounds

Oil prices are a key indicator here, as they directly impact inflation and global sentiment.

👉 This is the most unpredictable but fastest-moving catalyst.

While the broader crypto market in 2026 has faced significant volatility, a select group of high-cap altcoins is defying the trend. Investors are increasingly shifting focus toward projects with tangible utility, institutional backing, and robust ecosystem growth. From decentralized perpetuals to DAO governance and gold-backed stability, five assets have demonstrated remarkable resilience and growth.

Which Altcoins are Up in 2026?

As of April 2026, the standout performers in the "billion-dollar club" include DeXe (DEXE), which leads with a staggering 363% YTD gain, followed by MemeCore (M) and Hyperliquid (HYPE). These tokens have successfully captured liquidity despite a general market retraction of approximately 22% in early 2026.

1. DeXe (DEXE) – The Governance Powerhouse

DeXe has emerged as the undisputed leader among major altcoins this year. With a Year-to-Date (YTD) increase of +363.67%, the token is currently trading at $15.03.

The primary driver behind this surge is the massive influx of capital into DAO governance structures. On-chain data shows that DeXe's open interest recovered from near zero in January to over $20 million by mid-April. This indicates fresh capital inflows rather than mere speculative liquidations. The project’s focus on professionalizing decentralized autonomous organizations has made it a favorite for institutional "smart money."

2. MemeCore (M) – Culture Meets Infrastructure

Ranked #21 by market cap, MemeCore has proven that "Meme 2.0" is more than just a trend. Trading at $3.44, MemeCore has secured a 118.53% YTD gain. Unlike traditional meme coins, MemeCore operates as its own Layer 1 blockchain, turning viral culture into a governance and economic engine.

The recent hard fork in late March 2026 acted as a major catalyst, sending the M token price up significantly as speculative flows shifted toward its growing ecosystem of dApps and social-finance (SoFi) tools.

3. Hyperliquid (HYPE) – The Perpetual King

Hyperliquid has become the go-to platform for decentralized perpetuals. Currently priced at $42.88, it has seen a +68.62% YTD increase.

The sentiment around HYPE is extremely bullish due to several factors:

• Spot ETF Filings: Heavyweights like Bitwise, Grayscale, and 21Shares have filed for HYPE ETFs in the U.S.
• Institutional Adoption: Major figures, including Arthur Hayes, have been actively accumulating the token.
• HIP-4 Mainnet: The upcoming 2026 mainnet rollout is expected to introduce event-based trading and prediction markets.

4. TRON (TRX) – The Stablecoin Safe Haven

While other Layer 1s have struggled, TRON continues its steady climb. Trading at $0.3329, it maintains a +17.14% YTD performance. In a year where the total crypto market cap retracted by 22%, TRX’s positive growth highlights its status as a "safe haven."

TRON’s dominance in the USDT (Tether) supply remains its strongest fundamental. Its utility in global payments and low-cost transactions ensures constant demand, while daily token burns provide deflationary pressure on the TRX price.

5. Tether Gold (XAUt) – Hedging with Digital Gold

For investors seeking stability without leaving the blockchain, Tether Gold has been a top choice in 2026. Priced at $4,775.53, XAUt is up 10.45% YTD.

As geopolitical tensions and inflation concerns persist, the demand for gold-backed tokens has spiked. XAUt provides a seamless way to hold a hardware wallet-compatible version of physical gold, offering a 1:1 peg to London Good Delivery gold bars. Its performance reflects the broader trend of "flight to quality" during periods of crypto market uncertainty.

Top Altcoins YTD as of April 2026

DeFi TVL fell by $13B after the KelpDAO exploit, and now the Vercel CEO is saying "highly sophisticated" actors used AI for its exploit.

Attackers forged a cross-chain message, came within minutes of a second drain, and wiped their tracks on the way out.

The security incident compromised some customer credentials of the cloud platform, which is used by many crypto frontends to host their UI.

The exchange is trialing AI agents that replicate the decision-making styles of co-founder Fred Ehrsam and former CTO Balaji Srinivasan.

After attackers drained $291 million in crypto from Kelp DAO-linked infrastructure, DeFi users struggled on Aave to withdraw funds.

Strategy's total holdings have topped 800,000 Bitcoins following the latest purchase..

Ethereum developer says recent crypto hacks expose ETH's greater goal.

Shiba Inu is seeing an activity surge across all frontiers, but it might be the wrong kind of activity.

Top analyst Ansem outlines five key risks behind a potential drop in Ethereum to $1,000, citing DeFi exploits, $6 billion outflows from Aave and weakening network fundamentals.

Binance's CZ does not seem too happy about his follower count on X, but it is pretty easily explainable.

TLDR:

• Nike stock has fallen 76% from its 2021 all-time high of $179.10, now trading between $42 and $46 per share.

• China sales are projected to drop 20% as local brands like Li-Ning capture the mid-to-high-tier footwear market.

• Converse recorded a 35% revenue plunge, reflecting Nike’s broader loss of relevance in lifestyle and streetwear segments.

• Tim Cook and Director Bob Swan purchased a combined $3.5M in Nike shares, signaling boardroom confidence at decade lows.

Nike stock has fallen to its lowest level in over a decade, trading between $42 and $46 following an April 2026 earnings shock.

The decline represents a 76% drop from its 2021 all-time high of $179.10, erasing 12 years of gains for long-term shareholders.

Meanwhile, board members are purchasing shares at these levels, creating a split between public sentiment and insider conviction.

Overseas Pressure and Brand Challenges Drive Nike’s Decline

Nike faces a projected 20% sales drop in China, one of its highest-margin markets. The shift stems from Guochao, a cultural movement among Chinese millennials and Gen Z embracing domestic brands and national identity.

Local competitor Li-Ning sold over 26 million pairs of professional running shoes last year, moving firmly into the mid-to-high-tier segment.

As Li-Ning and similar brands gain ground, Nike’s premium positioning in China is becoming harder to defend. Analyst Ali Charts observed on X, noting that Nike is “currently weathering its most significant structural challenge since 2014,” with the stock retreating to a decade-low and erasing 12 years of gains for long-term holders.

The pressure is not limited to performance footwear. Converse, Nike’s lifestyle subsidiary, recorded a 35% revenue plunge, pointing to a broader loss of cultural relevance in the casual and streetwear segments.

This decline serves as a clear signal that the market is moving away from the classic aesthetics Nike has long relied on.

In response, CEO Elliott Hill has moved to rebuild wholesale partnerships with retailers like Foot Locker and Dick’s Sporting Goods.

This shift reverses the Direct-to-Consumer strategy that previously supported Nike’s higher profit margins. While it helps clear inventory, it marks a structural retreat for the brand.

Board Members Buy Shares as Stock Hits Oversold Territory

On the technical side, Nike’s monthly RSI has reached its most oversold reading since the company went public. Historically, Nike’s corrections have ranged from 24% to 73%. The current 76.5% drawdown from its all-time high is the steepest in company history.

Ali Charts further noted that the stock appears to be in the “Anger Phase” of the market cycle. This is the period when negative news feels heaviest, often just as a price floor begins forming. The zone between $35 and $42 is being watched as a potential long-term support area.

Against this backdrop, two Nike board members made notable open-market purchases. Tim Cook, Apple’s CEO and a Nike director, bought approximately $3 million in Nike shares. Director Bob Swan added $500,000 to his position at similar price levels.

Insider purchases of this size, made during a period of broad pessimism, tend to attract attention from value-oriented investors. They suggest that those closest to the company view current challenges as correctable rather than permanent.

The post Nike Stock at Decade Low as Insider Buying Signals Possible Bottom appeared first on Blockonomi.

Key Takeaways

• NFLX shares plummeted nearly 10% following disappointing Q2 revenue guidance
• Annual revenue projection of $51.2B fell short of analyst consensus at $51.38B
• Co-founder Reed Hastings confirmed he will step down from the board in June
• Morgan Stanley maintains Overweight stance with $115 price target on the stock
• Ark Invest’s Cathie Wood purchased additional NFLX shares during Friday’s decline

Shares of Netflix $NFLX plunged nearly 10% on Friday following the streaming giant’s second-quarter guidance that fell short of analyst expectations. The sharp decline erased approximately one month’s worth of gains, leaving shares hovering around $97—a 22% decline over the trailing six-month period.

Netflix, Inc., NFLX

On paper, the first-quarter results looked impressive. The company reported 16% revenue expansion, surpassing its internal projection of 15%. Net income surged 83% to reach $5.3 billion, translating to $1.23 per diluted share—comfortably exceeding both Wall Street estimates and management’s own forecasts.

However, a closer examination revealed important caveats.

When adjusted for currency fluctuations, revenue growth registered only 14%. Additionally, the substantial earnings outperformance included a $2.8 billion termination payment from Warner Bros. Discovery (WBD), which artificially inflated the after-tax profit figures.

Forward Outlook Falls Flat

The market’s negative reaction stemmed primarily from management’s conservative guidance. Despite exceeding first-quarter targets and implementing U.S. price increases in recent weeks, Netflix opted not to raise its full-year projections.

For the second quarter, management projected year-over-year revenue growth of just 13.5%—marking the weakest quarterly expansion rate in over a year. The company’s operating margin forecast of 31.5% also trailed Wall Street’s consensus expectation of 32%. The full-year revenue estimate of $51.2 billion came up short against analyst projections of $51.38 billion.

Adding to investor concerns, Reed Hastings announced his departure from the board. The Netflix co-founder and chairman revealed he will not seek re-election at the company’s annual shareholder meeting scheduled for June. While Hastings previously transitioned away from operational leadership, his complete departure from the board nonetheless rattled investors.

Wall Street Analysts See Opportunity

Despite the selloff, some institutional investors view the decline as a buying opportunity. Morgan Stanley reaffirmed its Overweight rating on NFLX shares and established a fresh price target of $115—suggesting approximately 18% upside potential from Friday’s close near $97.

Morgan Stanley analysts characterized the stock’s retreat as an overreaction, describing the company’s near-term headwinds as “lukewarm” and positioning the sub-$100 price level as an attractive entry point for long-term investors.

Cathie Wood’s Ark Invest evidently shares this optimistic outlook. Wood increased her fund’s Netflix holdings on Friday—her sole purchasing activity for the week—accumulating shares during the stock’s steepest single-day decline in recent months.

This tactical approach aligns with Wood’s established investment philosophy. Ark Invest frequently increases positions during market weakness rather than buying into upward momentum.

Netflix’s advertising-supported subscription tier continues expanding, with management anticipating ad revenue to double by 2026. The streaming platform has delivered positive revenue growth in all 24 years since going public, achieving double-digit percentage gains in 22 of those years.

Morgan Stanley’s $115 valuation target represents the most recent Wall Street assessment following Friday’s market reaction.

The post Netflix (NFLX) Stock Plunges 10% as Ark Invest’s Cathie Wood Doubles Down appeared first on Blockonomi.

Key Takeaways

• President Trump issued an executive directive Saturday requiring the FDA to expedite approval processes for psychedelic-based mental health treatments
• AtaiBeckley stock surged 28% in early Monday trading; Compass Pathways climbed 26%
• The presidential order introduces Commissioner’s National Priority Vouchers for drugs holding “breakthrough therapy” designation, slashing review periods from 6–10 months to just 1–2 months
• The order specifically names ibogaine, currently a Schedule I controlled substance under investigation for treating opioid dependency
• Federal authorities will dedicate $50 million toward ibogaine research initiatives

On Saturday, President Trump issued an executive order mandating the Food and Drug Administration accelerate its evaluation process for psychedelic-based medications. The presidential directive bears the title “Accelerating Medical Treatments for Serious Mental Illness.”

The mandate encompasses therapeutic approaches for conditions such as treatment-resistant depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, and substance use disorders.

FDA Commissioner Marty Makary indicated that regulatory determinations on certain compounds could arrive as early as the coming summer months.

The presidential action compresses standard evaluation timelines from 6–10 months to just 1–2 months for medications already carrying “breakthrough therapy” status. The mechanism involves Commissioner’s National Priority Vouchers.

Shares of companies developing psychedelic therapeutics experienced dramatic gains during Monday’s premarket session. AtaiBeckley skyrocketed 28%, Compass Pathways advanced 26%, GH Research added 19%, Definium Therapeutics increased 15%, Cybin climbed approximately 15%, and Enveric BioSciences gained 7%.

COMPASS Pathways plc, CMPS

AtaiBeckley currently commands a market capitalization of approximately $1.5 billion, positioning it among the largest publicly traded entities in the psychedelic pharmaceutical sector.

Biotech Sector Rallies Following Presidential Action

The company’s primary candidate, BPL-003, represents a nasal spray formulation designed for treatment-resistant depression. Phase 3 clinical trials are scheduled to commence later this quarter.

Compass Pathways, a United Kingdom-based biotechnology firm, is advancing COMP360, a synthetic psilocybin compound. The drug candidate is progressing through late-stage clinical trials for treatment-resistant depression and has secured FDA Breakthrough Therapy designation.

The executive directive explicitly mentions ibogaine, a psychedelic compound extracted from an African shrub. Under current U.S. law, ibogaine holds Schedule I classification, indicating authorities consider it lacking legitimate medical applications.

Researchers are investigating ibogaine as a potential intervention for opioid addiction. The order directs federal regulators to facilitate access through the Right to Try Act, legislation Trump signed into law in 2018.

Clinical data has documented ibogaine’s association with cardiac toxicity risks, a concern that has generated regulatory scrutiny.

Federal Investment and Industry Expert Commentary

President Trump announced the federal government will commit $50 million to support ibogaine research programs.

Jefferies analyst Andrew Tsai characterized the order as an “official stamp of validation to the class,” emphasizing it demonstrates genuine governmental backing.

RBC analyst Brian Abrahams stated the executive action “is a substantial step towards diminishing regulatory risk” surrounding psychedelic medications.

Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has vocally endorsed ibogaine as an alternative therapeutic option for depression and additional psychiatric conditions.

Legislators across the political spectrum have expressed intentions to advance legislative measures expanding access to psychedelic treatment modalities.

FDA Commissioner Makary verified the agency stands ready to implement rapid action under the new presidential directive.

The post Psychedelic Drug Stocks Explode After Trump’s FDA Fast-Track Executive Order appeared first on Blockonomi.

Key Takeaways

• Vertical Aerospace finalized an $850M capital infusion on April 20, 2026, combining debt and equity instruments.
• Existing convertible debt matures in December 2030, with Mudrick Capital providing an additional $50M in convertible notes at $3.50 per share.
• A $250M preferred equity facility from Yorkville Advisors joins a $500M equity line of credit in the financing structure.
• The eVTOL manufacturer secured approximately $160M in immediate working capital, having already accessed $30M.
• Shares of EVTL declined 10.48% following the announcement, primarily due to shareholder dilution concerns tied to the preferred shares and convertible instruments.

On April 20, 2026, Vertical Aerospace (EVTL) completed the closure of its substantial $850 million capital raise. The market response was negative, with shares declining 10.48% during trading.

Vertical Aerospace Ltd., EVTL

Initially disclosed on March 30 as an $800 million arrangement, the final structure grew to $850 million following the completion of a $50 million equity component.

The financing architecture consists of three distinct elements. The first component involves restructuring Mudrick Capital’s existing convertible notes, pushing the maturity date to December 15, 2030. Additionally, Mudrick gains access to $50 million in fresh convertible notes with a conversion price set at $3.50 per share.

The second element features a $250 million Series A convertible preferred equity facility from Yorkville Advisors. An initial $24 million installment was funded immediately at $960 per share. This facility extends across a 24-month period.

Finally, Yorkville also committed to a $500 million equity line of credit spanning 36 months. These combined instruments provide Vertical with phased capital access stretching into the next several years.

The company reports having roughly $160 million in near-term working capital accessible, with an initial $30 million already utilized from the new facilities.

Investor Concerns Over Share Dilution

The preferred equity arrangement grants Yorkville priority over common stockholders in liquidation scenarios. Additionally, the preferred shares carry dividends paid in kind, resulting in additional share issuance rather than cash distributions.

This multi-layered approach—combining dilutive convertible notes, senior preferred equity with conversion features, and a substantial equity line—seems to explain the significant stock price retreat.

Vertical Aerospace currently carries a market capitalization near $272 million. Daily trading volume averages approximately 2 million shares.

Path Toward 2028 Regulatory Approval

CEO Stuart Simpson emphasized that this financing enables the company to capitalize on recent technical achievements, including a successful full-scale piloted bidirectional transition flight.

Vertical intends to deploy these funds toward achieving Critical Design Review for its Valo aircraft, conducting public demonstration flights, and progressing its manufacturing facility development.

The Valo aircraft is engineered to transport passengers across distances up to 100 miles at speeds reaching 150 mph while producing zero operational emissions.

Vertical reports holding approximately 1,500 pre-orders from major customers including American Airlines, Avolon, Bristow, GOL, and Japan Airlines.

The company maintains its target of securing certification by 2028.

Yorkville’s initial $24 million preferred equity installment was disbursed on April 20, coinciding with the official closure of the comprehensive financing package.

The post Vertical Aerospace (EVTL) Stock Tumbles 10% Following $850M Capital Raise Announcement appeared first on Blockonomi.

Key Takeaways

• Morgan Stanley increased Intel’s price target from $41 to $56, driven by robust server market demand
• The firm maintained an Equal-weight stance on Intel amid roadmap uncertainties for upcoming chip generations
• Micron and Sandisk are Morgan Stanley’s top recommendations for capitalizing on AI-fueled CPU growth
• Sandisk entered the Nasdaq 100 index but declined 1.6% in premarket activity following a previous 12% weekly gain
• Wells Fargo increased Sandisk’s price target from $675 to $975 while maintaining an Equal Weight position

Morgan Stanley has elevated its price outlook for Intel this week, though the investment bank declined to issue a buy recommendation. The firm increased its target from $41 to $56, attributing the revision to strengthening server market dynamics and improved earnings projections for 2026 and 2027.

Intel Corporation, INTC

The analyst team headed by Joseph Moore adjusted their 2027 earnings forecast for Intel upward from $0.97 to $1.34 per share. Morgan Stanley’s current projections exceed the Street’s consensus estimates for Intel by approximately 20% across both fiscal years.

The firm anticipates Intel’s data center business will expand by roughly 30% on a year-over-year basis in 2026, generating $21.8 billion in sales.

However, Morgan Stanley maintained its Equal-weight classification for Intel shares. The primary concern centers on the company’s product development trajectory. According to the analysts, Intel’s CEO has publicly acknowledged performance shortcomings in the forthcoming Diamond Rapids server processor.

In contrast, competitor AMD’s Venice chip was characterized as “a clear major step forward.” Morgan Stanley also assigns an Equal-weight rating to AMD, with a $255 price objective.

The research team believes AMD stands to gain more substantially from server market momentum due to its competitive product advantages. However, they observed that AMD’s share price movements correlate more closely with GPU metrics than CPU developments.

Memory Chip Stocks Lead Morgan Stanley’s Recommendations

Morgan Stanley designated Micron and Sandisk as its top investment choices for capturing AI-related CPU demand. Both companies carry Overweight ratings.

“Our favorite way to play CPU strength is through memory stocks,” the analysts wrote. They highlighted constrained data center supply dynamics projected to persist through at least 2027, alongside emerging long-term supply agreements with leading cloud service providers.

The bank expressed doubts regarding Intel’s foundry operations, characterizing a favorable result there as “remote.”

Sandisk Secures Nasdaq 100 Membership

Coinciding with Morgan Stanley’s research release, Sandisk formally became a Nasdaq 100 constituent. Nevertheless, shares dropped 1.6% to $906.48 during premarket sessions.

The decline followed a substantial 12% jump the preceding Monday when Nasdaq initially revealed the inclusion. This “buy the rumor, sell the news” dynamic frequently accompanies index membership changes.

Broader market weakness contributed to the retreat. S&P 500 futures declined 0.4% after escalating U.S.-Iran tensions during the weekend sparked concerns about a potentially fragile ceasefire.

Atlassian is exiting the Nasdaq 100 to accommodate Sandisk’s entry. Its shares fell 1.4% in premarket trading as passive funds adjusted their holdings.

Wells Fargo analyst Aaron Rakers elevated his Sandisk price target from $675 to $975 on the same day, while preserving an Equal Weight classification. The firm boosted its 2026 earnings per share forecast and established a 2027 EPS estimate of $150.

Wells Fargo admitted it had “clearly missed” Sandisk’s extraordinary rally. Shares have skyrocketed approximately 2,990% over the trailing year, propelled by explosive demand for memory solutions in data center environments.

The firm observed that consensus valuation metrics hover around 6 to 7 times price-to-earnings based on peak EPS, which it views as potentially limiting additional near-term appreciation.

Wells Fargo’s revised $975 target exceeds the current premarket valuation, though its Equal Weight designation indicates the firm isn’t aggressively recommending immediate purchases.

The post Morgan Stanley: Memory Makers Micron and Sandisk Trump Intel (INTC) and AMD for AI Exposure appeared first on Blockonomi.

Things have been quietly shifting in Bitcoin’s market structure over the past two weeks. After spending the better part of Q1 2026 in a relentless grind lower, BTC is now trading around $75.2k, above the upper boundary of the descending channel and at the $75k–$80k key resistance band. The question is no longer whether a recovery is underway, but whether it has enough structural backing to become something more durable.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

For months, every recovery attempt on the daily chart ran straight into the declining 100-day MA (currently located at ~$75k) and the descending channel’s upper boundary, and faded. The current attempt differs in one important respect: the RSI has been making higher lows since February and is far from overbought. This has built momentum beneath the price action, leading to a breakout above the 100-day MA and the channel’s upper boundary.

However, BTC is now sitting directly inside the $75k–$80k zone, and has yet to break above. Reclaiming this band on a closing basis, and more importantly, holding above it on a retest, would represent a genuine structural shift.

The 200-day MA (~$85k) and the $95k–$100k supply zone are the major hurdles above. The 100-day MA just below the current market price and the channel’s former upper boundary near $73k–$74k are now the first lines of support, with the $60k demand zone still remaining as the critical floor for this recovery.

BTC/USDT 4-Hour Chart

The ascending channel from the February lows has done its job. It has been providing a rising structure of higher lows that gradually walked price from the $60k area all the way up to the channel’s upper boundary near $77k–$78k, which BTC tagged earlier this week before pulling back. The price is currently consolidating around $75.2k, sitting just inside the $74k–$76k resistance-turned-support level following the rejection.

The RSI on the 4-hour has also cooled from the high-70s during the push to around the 50s now, which points to a short-term cooling of momentum. This kind of pullback into a former resistance zone that has now flipped to support is textbook consolidation behavior, and the ascending channel’s lower boundary near $68k remains far enough below that the buyers have room to work with.

A reclaim of $76k with RSI holding above 55 would be the green light for another attempt at the upper channel boundary and beyond toward the $80k mark.

Sentiment Analysis

The Estimated Leverage Ratio across all exchanges has surged sharply in recent weeks, with the EMA(7) now pushing toward 0.24 and approaching the elevated levels last seen during the peak of the bull market in late 2025 when BTC was trading between $110k and $125k. This means traders are taking on significantly more leverage relative to the amount of BTC held on exchanges, at a price level that is still nearly 40% below those highs.

The interpretation here is nuanced. On one hand, rising leverage can fuel explosive upside moves if the breakout above $80k materializes, as a heavily leveraged long-side market in a short squeeze scenario is a powerful accelerant.

On the other hand, elevated leverage at a structurally uncertain level creates fragility. If BTC fails to hold the $75k support zone and rolls over, a cascade of liquidations could amplify any downside move significantly. Therefore, the decision time should close for Bitcoin, as to which direction it will accelerate in the coming weeks.

The post Bitcoin Price Analysis: Quiet Market Shift Signals Major Recovery for BTC appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Strategy has really ramped up its bitcoin purchases with two consecutive ones that were worth over $1 billion. However, the latest, announced just minutes ago, set a multi-year record.

The largest corporate holder of bitcoin splashed over $2.5 billion to acquire 34,164 BTC at an average price of $74,395 per unit. This massive acquisition puts the company’s total stash at 815,061 BTC, purchased for $61.56 billion (at an average price of $75,527).

Given the cryptocurrency’s correction and failure at $78,400 last Friday, this means that Strategy still sits on a minor paper loss, but the gap has narrowed since the February lows.

Strategy has acquired 34,164 BTC for ~$2.54 billion at ~$74,395 per bitcoin and has achieved BTC Yield of 9.5% YTD 2026. As of 4/19/2026, we hodl 815,061 $BTC acquired for ~$61.56 billion at ~$75,527 per bitcoin. $MSTR $STRC https://t.co/ifGXjMeIZH

— Michael Saylor (@saylor) April 20, 2026

Recall that the Michael Saylor-founded firm spent $1 billion during the previous massive BTC purchase announced last Monday. However, the one for $2.54 billion outlined now is the biggest since late November 2024, when the firm bought 55,500 BTC for $5.4 billion when the asset traded close to $100,000.

The company’s stock prices jumped last week alongside the rest of the financial markets. MSTR ended with a 32% surge in 5 days, closing at over $166 on Friday. However, it has declined by more than 2% in pre-market trading, and is expected to experience even more volatility after today’s opening bell on Wall Street.

The post Strategy Makes Biggest Bitcoin Purchase in Years as Total Stash Exceeds 815,000 BTC appeared first on CryptoPotato.

The $293 million KelpDAO hack on April 18 has left Aave, rsETH holders, and the wider DeFi ecosystem staring at a hole nobody quite knows how to fill.

But on Sunday, DeFiLlama co-founder 0xngmi laid out three realistic options on the table and ran the numbers on each.

Three Scenarios, None of Them Clean

0xngmi’s first option is to spread the pain. According to them, if KelpDAO socializes losses across all users, it would work out to an 18.5% haircut. There are some 666,000 rsETH sitting across Aave deployments, and most mainnet positions are looped close to the maximum loan-to-value ratio (LTV), so 0xngmi’s model assumes they are essentially at liquidation.

Wiping out all equity in those positions leaves roughly $216 million in bad debt, and Aave’s Umbrella ETH coverage would absorb $55 million of that, while the protocol’s treasury could cover another $85 million, which would leave a gap of about $76 million. To close it, 0xngmi suggested that Aave could either take out a loan or liquidate its AAVE treasury tokens. That stash is currently worth around $51 million.

Option two is much uglier, as it would mean “rugging” rsETH holders on layer 2 chains. This would leave Aave with $359 million of rsETH supply, and assuming it was all looped at maximum LTV, it would create $341 million of bad debt across lending markets. But since Umbrella covers none of it, 0xngmi said Aave would have to pick which markets to salvage and which to abandon, with Arbitrum, Mantle, and Base most likely to suffer the biggest losses.

The third option, while most technically appealing, could be the hardest to pull off. It involves going back to a pre-hack snapshot and trying to make only the direct victims whole. This would mean paying back the $124 million the hacker is said to have taken from Aave and another $18 million from Arbitrum. But the problem is that, since the hack, the money has moved around a lot across pooled protocols, making it difficult to cleanly separate one depositor’s funds from another.

OneKey founder Yishi also pushed for a fourth path that sits outside 0xngmi’s framework: negotiate with the hacker first, offering them a 10% to 15% bounty, and try to get most of the money back before any of the harder decisions need to be made. If that fails, Yishi argued that LayerZero’s ecosystem fund should carry most of the bill, given its resources and long-term interest in preserving the OFT ecosystem.

How $293M Left in Two Transactions

Cyvers founder Meir Dolev reconstructed the on-chain timeline for the KelpDAO attack, and it moves fast. The attacker’s wallet was funded through Tornado Cash about 10 hours before anything happened. Then, at 17:35 UTC on April 18, two transactions occurred: commitVerification on LayerZero’s ReceiveUIn302, followed 24 seconds later by IzReceive on EndpointV2. That second transaction drained 116,500 rsETH, valued at about $293.5 million, in one shot.

KelpDAO’s multisig responded at 18:23 UTC by blacklisting the attacker’s recipient address on rsETH, and it worked. A second attempt, 3 minutes later, which would have taken another 40,000 rsETH worth around $100 million, hit the blacklist and reverted.

According to Dolev, the root cause was quite simple: KelpDAO’s Unichain-to-Ethereum bridge required only one DVN attestation to release funds. Forging that one verification allowed the hacker to move $293 million.

LayerZero also published its own statement attributing the attack to Lazarus Group’s TraderTraitor unit. The company said the protocol worked as designed and also pointed directly at KelpDAO’s 1-of-1 DVN configuration as the cause, noting it had previously recommended multi-DVN setups to all integration partners.

Security researcher Andy was blunter, calling KelpDAO’s decision to run a single DVN while holding $1.5 billion in user funds “extremely irresponsible” and warning that dozens of other protocols are running the exact same setup right now.

The post DeFiLlama Co-Founder Suggests 3 Paths to Resolve $293M KelpDAO Hack Fallout appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitcoin’s price volatility returned over the past 12 hours or so as the tension in the Middle East continued to increase following the weekend developments.

Several of the larger-cap alts have posted notable losses over the past day, led by HYPE’s 5% decline to just over $40.

BTC Dropped Below $74K

Bitcoin’s resurgence began last Monday after that weekend’s peace talk failures, as the asset rocketed from under $70,500 to $75,000. It climbed further to just over $76,000 the next day, where it was stopped and spent the next few days trading sideways between $73,500 and $75,600.

The most impressive breakout attempt came on Friday after Iran’s foreign minister announced that the Strait of Hormuz was reopened. BTC jumped to $78,400 for the first time in 10 weeks, especially after Trump made more promising statements about peace talks during the weekend.

However, Iran denied those claims, and BTC started to lose value, dipping to $76,400 on Saturday and Sunday. As the tension between the two nations built up on Sunday evening, which included strikes against each other, BTC dipped further to $73,700 earlier this morning.

It has recovered about a grand since then and now sits close to $75,000. Its market cap has slipped to just under $1.5 trillion on CG, while its dominance over the alts stands at 57.4%.

XRP to Make a Big Move?

Although most altcoins remained volatile throughout the day (and night), their current market values have remained relatively the same compared to their positions 24 hours ago. Ethereum stands at $2,300, BNB is above $620, and SOL is close to $85. XRP also trades at essentially the same spot as yesterday, but analysts believe the cross-border token is preparing for a major move that can push it north or south by 35%.

HYPE and ZEC have lost the most value from the larger-cap alts, while CC is up by roughly 3% to $0.15. SKY has pumped by more than 4%, while MNT has dropped by 7% daily.

The total crypto market cap remains sideways at around $2.6 trillion on CG, down by over $100 billion since the Friday high.

The post BTC Price Volatility Intensifies as XRP Hints at Big Move Ahead: Market Watch appeared first on CryptoPotato.

RaveDAO’s RAVE token saw a sharp decline over the past two days as it fell more than 60% in the last 24 hours on Monday after an earlier collapse of about 95% from $26 to near $1 on Sunday, according to data shared by prominent on-chain investigator ZachXBT.

The drop followed a series of public disclosures and exchange responses beginning April 18, when ZachXBT called on Binance, Bitget, and Gate.io to investigate suspected market manipulation involving the token. He initially offered a $10,000 bounty for information, but later raised it to $25,000 the same day.

RAVE’s Sharp Collapse

Bitget acknowledged the request publicly within hours, followed by Binance and Gate.io later in the day, while RaveDAO said it had no involvement in the activity. In the days prior, on April 13 and 14, ZachXBT said he had contacted RaveDAO co-founder Yemu Xu regarding concerns, but did not receive a response.

According to his findings, RAVE, which launched in December 2025 on Binance Alpha with a total supply of 1 billion tokens, shows a high level of concentration. It was found that a group of addresses linked to the initial distribution controlled about 95% of the supply.

He also flagged suspicious centralized exchange activity in April tied to wallets associated with the project, which included transactions involving Bitget and Gate.io deposit addresses. ZachXBT said the scale of the price decline appeared disproportionate to recorded liquidations, while adding that around $6 billion in market value was wiped out on approximately $52 million in 24-hour liquidations. He cited this as an indicator of a potentially unstable market structure.

In a subsequent update, he reported that a multisig wallet linked to the initial distribution transferred roughly 23 million RAVE tokens, which is worth around $23 million, to two Bitget deposit addresses. Following this transfer, the token’s price dropped below $0.60.

The investigator also noted that similar price movements have been observed in other tokens, such as SIREN, MYX, COAI, M, PIPPIN, and RIVER. He said he did not take any trading position in RAVE and added that the bounty for verifiable information remains open.

Coordinated Trading Activity

Another token to have drawn scrutiny is BinanceLife. The meme token climbed to a market capitalization of around $300 million after a large portion of its supply was withdrawn from Binance, according to on-chain data.

Analytics firm Bubblemaps reported that 15 wallet addresses withdrew about 13.8% of the total supply over a two-day period. Many transactions occurred within closely aligned timeframes. These wallets reportedly had no prior transaction history, which raised questions about the nature of the activity.

BinanceLife, launched in October 2025 as a meme token inspired by a joke from Yi He, had previously witnessed brief peaks before fading. The recent rally drew attention due to the concentration of supply movements and the possibility that a single entity may be involved.

The post From $26 to Under $1: RAVE’s Historic Crash Draws Investigation Calls appeared first on CryptoPotato.