Maresca's proactive approach in the transfer market could enhance Manchester City's squad depth, impacting their competitiveness this season.

The post Manchester City will remain active in transfer market, says Maresca appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Barcelona's potential signings of Cancelo and Rodri signal a strategic shift, highlighting their recovery from financial instability and ambition to compete.

The post FC Barcelona close to signing João Cancelo and Rodri in major transfer deals appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The price cuts in AI inference could accelerate AI adoption but challenge financial models, impacting investment strategies and valuations.

The post US labs cut AI inference costs nearly 25% amid price war appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Liverpool's pursuit of PSG wingers highlights the financial challenges and strategic decisions clubs face in the competitive transfer market.

The post Liverpool pursues PSG wingers Barcola and Mbaye amid stalled negotiations appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Economic shocks and inflation pressures may lead to more volatile markets, challenging traditional investment strategies and monetary policies.

The post Daniel Moss warns of increased economic shocks and inflation pressures appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Edelman Financial, Tudor Investment Reveal Significant Bitcoin Holdings 

Edelman Financial Engines has disclosed a $34 million position in spot Bitcoin ETFs — a stake that now exceeds some of the firm’s other holdings in major tech companies. 

While the position is still tiny in the investment advisor’s portfolio, it is still larger than its $25 million position in Amazon. 

The position — held in BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust and Grayscale’s flagship product — tracks closely with the public views of its founder, Ric Edelman. 

Edelman has been advocating for Bitcoin ETFs since 2019, years before the SEC approved spot products in January 2024. He also founded the Digital Assets Council of Financial Professionals, an organization built to educate financial advisors on crypto and blockchain technology. 

And Edelman Financial isn’t the only one: In a filing submitted this afternoon, Tudor Investment Corporation, the firm run by legendary macro trader Paul Tudor Jones, reported owning 688,529 shares of IBIT as of June 30, valued at $22.9 million. 

That’s up from the 579,083 shares Tudor reported the previous quarter. 

It’s worth remembering that few investors have built a career reading inflation cycles and their historical patterns as successfully as Jones, making the size of the add notable in its own right.

This post Edelman Financial, Tudor Investment Reveal Significant Bitcoin Holdings  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Abu Dhabi Sovereign Wealth Funds Keep Big Bitcoin Positions 

Bitcoin is the most important asset in two of Abu Dhabi sovereign wealth funds, according to regulatory filings. 

Abu Dhabi’s Mubadala Investment Company disclosed Friday that it held a $490 million stake in BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust — the second-largest single holding across its entire 13F portfolio. 

And a Thursday filing from the Abu Dhabi Investment Council, another state-run fund, revealed a $273.6 million position in the popular Bitcoin exchange-traded fund. The stake is the biggest position in its portfolio. 

Both wealth funds’ position in Bitcoin is unchanged since last quarter. 

Earlier this year, blockchain analytics firm Arkham Intelligence attributed approximately 6,782 Bitcoins — worth roughly $453.6 million at the time of its analysis — to wallets connected to Bitcoin mining activity linked to the UAE’s Royal Group.

The findings highlight a distinction between how the UAE has built its bitcoin position compared with other governments known to hold large amounts of the asset. Countries such as the United States hold substantial Bitcoin reserves that largely originated from law enforcement seizures. 

The UAE’s holdings, by contrast, stem primarily from domestic mining activity rather than confiscated assets.

Since the SEC approved a slew of Bitcoin funds in January 2024, major firms have been able to buy exposure to the asset via shares of the regulated vehicles that trade on stock exchanges. 

BlackRock’s IBIT is the most successful crypto ETF: The fund has received more cash than any other crypto ETF and currently has $47.3 billion in assets under management. 

Pension funds and U.S. states have all bought exposure to Bitcoin via the ETFs, along with more traditional investments like tech stocks and other U.S. equities.

This post Abu Dhabi Sovereign Wealth Funds Keep Big Bitcoin Positions  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoiners Warned After French Tax Authority Confirms Data Breach Affecting Hundreds of Thousands

Bitcoiners have been warned after France’s tax administration confirmed that hackers breached its information system, exposing sensitive financial and personal data belonging to hundreds of thousands of taxpayers and businesses.

Writing on X on Friday, Bitcoin developer Jameson Lopp said the leak was “more bad news for Bitcoiners living in the leading country for wrench attacks.”

Lopp has created a tracker counting wrench attacks — when physical violence is used to steal crypto — across the world. A large amount happens in France, where data has been leaked before. 

The news comes one day after hardware wallet manufacturer Trezor announced a data breach exposing customer data. 

Cybersecurity researchers at FrenchBreaches, who reviewed samples of the leaked data, reported that the affected records break down to roughly 392,867 individuals and 285,570 businesses. 

Among the individuals, an estimated 26,805 have a reported annual taxable income of €100,000 or more, 386 exceed €1 million, and eight exceed €10 million. The hacker is said to be offering the full dataset for sale for several thousand euros.

The breach first surfaced publicly on August 12, when a hacker using the alias “ZeroBytes” posted on a cybercrime forum claiming to have infiltrated internal DGFiP servers and obtained VPN credentials that unlocked an internal lookup tool covering millions of taxpayers. 

According to the hacker’s own account, the extraction was interrupted before it could be completed, leaving what they described as only a partial dataset of 678,438 records.

The exposed sample reportedly includes highly sensitive information: full legal names, dates and places of birth, home and mailing addresses, marital status, number of dependents, internal tax identification numbers, reference taxable income, individual withholding tax rates, phone numbers, email addresses, and records of past correspondence with tax officials.

Security analysts warn that this combination of identity, contact and financial data could fuel highly convincing phishing campaigns impersonating tax authorities, as well as identity theft and fraud schemes tailored to victims’ income levels or family circumstances.

2025 was the worst on record for wrench attacks (crypto targeted kidnappings), with around 55 reported globally last year, according to TRM Labs. Lopp’s tool counted over 70 throughout last year. And this year is already looking bad, according to the tracker: 54 attacks have been documented so far. 

Wrench attacks made headlines last year when crooks kidnapped David Balland, co-founder of crypto hardware wallet brand Ledger, and his wife in France.

Criminals held the pair for around 24 hours before they were rescued by the French authorities.

This post Bitcoiners Warned After French Tax Authority Confirms Data Breach Affecting Hundreds of Thousands first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Citi CEO Wants ‘Good’ Crypto Clarity Act To Get Passed

Citigroup CEO Jane Fraser has said that while some improvements need to be made to the crypto Clarity Act, the bank wants a “good bill to go through.”

The banking executive said that the bank was a “leader in digital assets” so wanted “safe adoption” of the technology. 

Lawmakers were trying to get a vote on the Clarity Act through before splitting for recess last week but ran out of time. A vote will now take place in September. 

“We want to have good regulation that supports innovation and also encourages the safe adoption of the capabilities of digital assets,” Fraser said. 

“I think it would be excellent for the system.”

A sticking point for the bill has been from the banking lobby, who raised concerns over crypto companies paying customers yield for holding stablecoins. U.S. banks have said they could lose customers if crypto exchanges offer more attractive products for their deposit base.

Fraser reiterated the point on Friday, saying that small banks play an important role in the U.S. and a reward system on deposits could have a “detrimental effect.” But she added: “We have not given up on pushing to get some improvements made to the bill, but we would like to see a good bill go through.”

America’s biggest crypto exchange, Coinbase, pulled support for the bill in January after clashing with banking chiefs who said that earning yield on stablecoins should be banned. 

The Clarity Act was passed last year by the House of Representatives but has been deadlocked since 2026. 

Still, the bill has been worked on by both Republicans and Democrats — despite crypto legislation being something pushed by pro-crypto President Donald Trump. 

Major institutions, including Fidelity and Goldman Sachs, as well as crypto lobby groups and politicians, have said the revised bill works in its current form. 

This post Citi CEO Wants ‘Good’ Crypto Clarity Act To Get Passed first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoin Treasury Strategy Bites Back After MSCI Announces Possible Index Removal

Bitcoin treasury Strategy has said it “doesn’t need” Morgan Stanley Capital International after the index provider said it could remove the Bitcoin company from its Global Investable Market Indexes.

MSCI said in a consultation that it was consulting on a plan to define “Non-Operating Companies” and make them ineligible for its Global Investable Market Indexes (GIMI).

The removal of such companies would exclude companies like Strategy from indexes visible to a large pool of institutional investors. MSCI said it was weighing up the decision as Strategy is primarily known for holding a large amount of Bitcoin rather than running a traditional operating business.

Writing on X Friday, Strategy wrote: “Digital assets are assets. Index providers should measure markets, not decide which assets companies are allowed to own. MSCI’s proposal puts it out of step with regulators, markets, and its own customers.”

It added: “Bitcoin doesn’t need MSCI. Neither does Strategy.”

The consultation also included Japanese Bitcoin treasury Metaplanet, which trades on the Tokyo Stock Exchange, and uranium investment company Yellow Cake. 

Based on financial filings as of May 2026, Strategy and Metaplanet already meet the criteria for removal under MSCI’s proposed rule. 

If MSCI adopts the proposal as currently written and their financial profiles remain unchanged, both companies would be deleted from the MSCI ACWI IMI Index as part of the November 2026 Index Review, triggering forced selling by index-tracking funds and loss of future passive inflows.

MSCI is still gathering feedback on the proposal through September 30, and has explicitly said the consultation “may or may not result in changes to MSCI indexes” — meaning the rule could be modified, delayed, or dropped entirely based on responses from affected companies and market participants. Even if adopted, any changes to a company’s underlying financials before the review could also shift the result.

Nasdaq-listed Strategy — formerly MicroStrategy — started buying Bitcoin in August 2020 as a way to generate better returns for its shareholders during the COVID-19 pandemic.

It has since spent around $63.3 billion on Bitcoin and is the largest corporate holder of the asset. Investors can buy its shares to gain exposure to the leading cryptocurrency without having to buy and hold digital coins themselves. 

Strategy spawned a long-list of copycat firms which have bought not only Bitcoin, but other cryptocurrencies to boost their stock prices. 

Strategy’s stock (MSTR) was trading nearly 3% lower Friday at nearly $95 per share. MSTR year-to-date has dropped by nearly 40%. 

This post Bitcoin Treasury Strategy Bites Back After MSCI Announces Possible Index Removal first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

GD Culture Group reported a $211.8 million first-half unrealized Bitcoin loss on its holdings while its split-adjusted share count rose to more than 18 times its year-end level, exposing two distinct pressures behind the company’s crypto-treasury strategy.

The Nasdaq-listed digital media and technology company held 7,500 BTC with an original cost of $842 million and a June 30 fair value of $451.2 million, according to its Aug. 14 quarterly filing. The Bitcoin loss accounted for about 97.9% of GD Culture’s $216.2 million net loss for the first six months of 2026.

That charge reflected fair-value accounting as Bitcoin prices changed. It was not a cash outflow or a sale of the core reserve. GD Culture separately reported selling about 1.08 BTC purchased for short-term trading, receiving $71,201 and recording a $28,799 realized loss.

The 7,500-BTC reserve entered GD Culture through its September 2025 acquisition of Pallas Capital Holding, the company’s 2025 annual report shows. The company identified working capital and general corporate purposes as the intended uses for its 2026 offering proceeds.

Related Reading

The $100 billion corporate Bitcoin surge is down to one buyer as other companies stop adding

Market pressure forces Bitcoin treasury firms to reassess strategies, with Strategy emerging as a key player.

Mar 26, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

Equity sales supported liquidity amid the Bitcoin loss

GD Culture ended 2025 with 229,278 shares outstanding and finished June with 4,162,500, after retroactively adjusting both figures for the June 29 one-for-250 reverse split. The increase of 3,933,222 shares left the ending count 18.15 times its year-end level.

Cash issuances accounted for 3,919,455 of those additional shares, or 99.65% of the increase. From May through June, the company sold 2,882,249 split-adjusted shares through its at-the-market program for about $42 million net. It also sold 1,037,206 split-adjusted shares in a June placement at an adjusted $5.25 each, raising about $5.45 million gross.

Related Reading

Bitcoin treasury investors are turning on companies diluting them to keep buying

For two years, buying more Bitcoin was enough to lift a treasury stock. Strategy's BTC Yield is now sliding, Metaplanet sits below the value of its coins, and Europe's new entrants are asking investors to fund them on terms nobody has priced yet.

Jun 29, 2026 · Andjela Radmilac

The company received $25.1 million of financing cash during the first half. Another $21.5 million in ATM proceeds remained in the underwriter’s brokerage account at quarter-end, so GD Culture recorded the amount as a receivable. The company said it received those funds immediately afterward.

At June 30, GD Culture reported $7.2 million in operating bank accounts and $36.6 million of working capital, which included that ATM receivable. The company used $12.3 million of cash in operations during the half. Management concluded it had enough liquidity to meet its obligations for at least 12 months after the interim financial statements were issued.

Related Reading

Bitcoin treasury firms race to buy more BTC, but shareholders may pay the price

Capital B and BTC AB want more Bitcoin exposure, but their funding plans test how much dilution and financial risk investors will accept.

Jun 22, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

The filing therefore presents two distinct shareholder exposures. Bitcoin price volatility drove a large noncash accounting loss, while the rapid expansion of the share base made dilution the direct cost to shareholders. The stock sales did not cause the Bitcoin loss, but the filing shows equity issuance was a major source of near-term liquidity as GD Culture kept its 7,500-BTC reserve.

The post This Nasdaq-listed Bitcoin treasury diluted shareholders 18-fold to survive a $212 million crypto loss without selling its stash appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Cboe BZX is asking the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for an exception to its own generic listing rules so it can list funds targeting three times the daily performance of Bitcoin and Ethereum futures.

The Aug. 10 proposal covers six Volatility Shares funds tied to Bitcoin, Ethereum, gold, silver, crude oil and natural gas. The crypto products would use futures traded primarily on CME rather than hold BTC or ETH directly.

The filing remains pending. An SEC notice dated Aug. 14 said the funds' registration statement was not yet effective and the shares had not been authorized for trading.

The proposed funds would reset leverage every trading day, making longer-term returns dependent on the sequence of daily moves, futures performance, costs, and rebalancing rather than simply three times Bitcoin or ETH's return.

Related Reading

Bitcoin price is being held up by $79B in futures market bets that could unwind fast

BTC's futures activity has surged as ETF inflows resume, creating a market that could extend higher or unwind quickly if liquidity fades.

Jul 8, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

Cboe needs a specific exemption

The proposed funds do not qualify for Cboe's normal commodity-trust listing route because they seek three times the daily performance of their benchmarks.

BZX Rule 14.11(e)(4) allows qualifying Commodity-Based Trust Shares to list under generic standards, but Rule 14.11(e)(4)(F) specifically excludes products seeking a multiple of a benchmark. Cboe is therefore using a Section 19(b) filing to seek case-specific SEC approval for the six Volatility Shares funds.

The filing says the products would otherwise operate within Cboe's commodity-trust framework.

Volatility Shares LLC would sponsor the funds, which would be organized as a series of the VS Trust. The sponsor is registered with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission as a commodity pool operator and would handle the day-to-day management of each fund's assets.

US Bancorp Fund Services would serve as transfer agent, fund accountant, and administrator, while US Bank National Association would act as custodian.

The funds themselves would operate as commodity pools registered with the CFTC rather than as investment companies registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940. They would still require an effective Securities Act registration statement and SEC approval of Cboe's proposed listing rule before trading could begin.

Related Reading

Crypto won the ETF fight but now the SEC is questioning if things have gone too far

The SEC is reconsidering whether increasingly complex ETFs are stretching retail investors’ trust in the familiar fund structure too far.

Jul 11, 2026 · Andjela Radmilac

The sponsor would actively increase or decrease each fund's futures holdings to account for benchmark changes and investor creations or redemptions, keeping exposure aligned with the daily 3x objective.

For Bitcoin and Ethereum, the benchmarks would use first- and second-month futures contracts traded primarily on CME. The near-month position would be rolled into the following contract over five business days, with about 20% of the expiring position moved each day.

That structure introduces risks beyond the direction of Bitcoin or ETH itself. Futures basis, roll execution, financing, expenses and tracking error can all affect shareholder returns.

The filing also allows the funds to use later-month futures, linked exchange-traded products or listed options if preferred contracts become unavailable because of price limits, margin requirements, position restrictions or risk controls imposed by exchanges and futures commission merchants.

Those alternatives could preserve exposure while changing how closely the funds track their intended benchmarks.

SEC approval would therefore resolve the specific exchange-rule problem created by the 3x leverage target. It would not, by itself, complete the separate registration and trading steps required before the funds could launch.

Existing 2x funds show how 3x leverage could amplify losses and rebalancing

Volatility Shares already offers 2x Bitcoin and Ethereum futures ETFs, giving investors a live comparison for how daily leveraged crypto products can behave over longer holding periods.

Its 2x ETH ETF, ETHU, reported a -48.81% NAV return for the second quarter, -79.61% for one year, and -96.15% on an average annualized basis since its June 4, 2024 inception, with all periods ending June 30.

Its 2x Bitcoin ETF, BITX, reported a -29.76% quarterly NAV return and a -78.93% one-year return over the same quarter end.

Those results do not predict how the proposed 3x funds would perform, nor can the losses be attributed solely to leverage. Crypto prices, futures performance, roll execution, expenses, and daily compounding all contributed to the realized path.

Compounding alone can create a substantial gap between a leveraged fund and the benchmark it tracks.

FINRA illustrates the effect with a benchmark that falls 10% and then rises 10%. The benchmark moves from 100 to 90 and then to 99, leaving it down 1%.

A 2x daily product falls from 100 to 80, then gains 20% from that smaller base to finish at 96, down 4%. On the other hand, a frictionless 3x version would fall to 70, then rise 30% to 91, leaving it down 9%.

The example excludes fees, financing, futures basis, roll costs, and tracking error, isolating the effect of daily resetting.

That is also why ETHU and BITX cannot simply be scaled up to estimate a hypothetical 3x return. Even when Bitcoin or ETH finishes at the same level, different sequences of gains and losses can produce materially different outcomes for a daily leveraged fund.

The same daily reset that creates that path dependence also determines how much the fund must trade to restore its target exposure after each market move.

In a simplified model, a 3x fund beginning with assets of A starts with exposure of 3A. After a one-day benchmark return of r, restoring exposure to three times the fund's new NAV requires an approximate gross adjustment of 6Ar.

Related Reading

Are 24/7 CME Bitcoin futures a volatility cure — or a new leverage trap?

Wall Street wanted a regulated way to trade Bitcoin around the clock. What it got instead was a front-row seat to one of the ugliest deleveraging weeks of the year.

Jun 13, 2026 · Andjela Radmilac

For a hypothetical $100 million fund, a 5% benchmark move implies roughly $30 million of additional buying or selling in the direction of that move.

The calculation does not estimate market impact. The filing provides no launch asset level or flow forecast, and execution would depend on fund size, liquidity, investor creations and redemptions, positioning, and the instruments used.

It does, however, show how moving from 2x to 3x raises both sides of the structure: investors take greater path-dependent exposure, while the fund must make larger daily adjustments to maintain that exposure.

The post Cboe pushes for 3x Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs after 2x crypto funds suffer losses of up to 96% appeared first on CryptoSlate.

DV Labs’ planned Aug. 15 Aztec exit was still incomplete by 2 a.m. UTC on Aug. 16: seven DV Labs-listed attesters remained in the on-chain VALIDATING state with 1.386 million AZTEC in effective stake.

The infrastructure operator announced the wind-down on July 16 and asked delegators to begin exiting by Aug. 5. DV Labs said late delegators would be penalized, but the available evidence does not identify a mechanism for that penalty or show that missing Aug. 5 caused a principal loss or any observed balance reduction.

Related Reading

Privacy-focused layer 2s will transform Ethereum's enterprise future

Zero-knowledge cryptography sets a new privacy standard for institutional blockchain use cases.

Feb 9, 2025 · Zac Williamson

Aztec’s staking dashboard provider feed still attributed 16 delegations and 3.2 million AZTEC to DV Labs at the observation time. The API does not establish that all of that stake belonged to unrelated third parties, and its provider total cannot be reconciled one-for-one with canonical attester status. Direct reads of the canonical Rollup contract returned seven DV Labs-listed attesters as VALIDATING, none as EXITING or ZOMBIE, and 62 as absent from the set. Nine of the API’s 16 delegations remained unclassified from the canonical view, so no full provider-exit completion time could be established.

Current Aztec staking documentation does not define Aug. 5 as a forfeiture date or a cutoff that closes the withdrawal path, leaving the Aztec exit process open. Its voluntary Alpha flow requires an exit to be initiated, followed by a four-day delay and a finalization step. The stake stops earning rewards during that delay and remains exposed to slashing for conduct that occurred while the sequencer was active. Stakes used in governance can face a longer process.

Four of the seven VALIDATING positions tied to the Aztec exit were below the 200,000-AZTEC activation stake: three held 198,000 AZTEC and one held 192,000, for a combined reduction of 14,000 AZTEC. The cited evidence does not establish why those balances fell or whether a delegator absorbed the reduction. Aztec’s current slashing rules list a 2,000-AZTEC inactivity penalty and 5,000-AZTEC duplicate-proposal or duplicate-attestation penalties, but none of the available sources ties those offenses to DV Labs’ balances.

Related Reading

Ethereum’s 2026 roadmap includes this validator risk that's bigger than you think

The planned jump in capacity relies on a fragile shift to ZK-proof verification that could buckle under network stress.

Dec 28, 2025 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

The positions remaining after the Aztec exit were small relative to the sequencer set. A network snapshot showed 3,230 active attesters and 645.576 million AZTEC in active stake. The seven DV Labs-listed positions represented about 0.22% of the active set and their balance about 0.21% of active stake. The snapshot does not establish a before-and-after concentration change attributable to DV Labs.

Related Reading

Vitalik Buterin takes shot at Coinbase's corporate control of Base which dominates 60% of layer 2 income

As Ethereum reduces transaction costs, Base must innovate beyond serving as a cheaper Layer-2 solution.

Feb 4, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

The evidence therefore points to an unfinished Aztec exit, not a network-wide disruption. Aztec’s documented withdrawal route remains available, but the economic meaning of DV Labs’ warning and whether late delegators lost principal, incurred another cost or simply face a delay remain unresolved.

The post Over 1.3 million staked tokens remain stranded onchain after a major validator missed its deadline to exit Aztec appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin's calm near $62,941 masks a split in Bitcoin futures positioning: either a downside break or an upside breakout could gain speed from forced trades.

At 09:30 UTC on Aug. 15, CoinGlass showed $47.88 billion of Bitcoin open interest, $38.49 billion of 24-hour futures volume and $2.234 billion of spot volume. Futures turnover was 17.23 times CoinGlass's spot-volume measure during the same rolling window.

The ratio measures relative trading activity. Open interest measures contracts that remain outstanding, and every contract has a long and a short. The aggregate therefore leaves direction unresolved.

The directional evidence splits across markets. Small positive funding on offshore perpetuals exposes longs if price falls, while a large net-short position among CME leveraged funds creates covering demand if price rises. The first side forced to retreat will depend on which range boundary attracts enough cash-market demand or supply to keep Bitcoin moving.

Bitcoin futures positioning points in opposite directions

Related Reading

Bitcoin price is being held up by $79B in futures market bets that could unwind fast

BTC's futures activity has surged as ETF inflows resume, creating a market that could extend higher or unwind quickly if liquidity fades.

Jul 8, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

Funding supplies the clearest downside channel. OKX showed a current-period BTC-USDT perpetual rate of about 0.00752%, and Deribit showed a smaller positive eight-hour rate in the retained snapshot. Positive rates mean longs paid shorts on those instruments.

A price decline accompanied by closing positions could turn those longs into additional sellers. Falling open interest and a funding reset during such a move would strengthen the evidence that deleveraging was underway.

The rates were small, venue-specific observations. They show a pathway for a long unwind while leaving the scale of market-wide long crowding uncertain.

CME positioning creates the opposite pathway. CFTC data for Aug. 11 classified leveraged funds with 4,997 outright long and 12,049 outright short standard CME Bitcoin futures contracts. The resulting net short was 7,052 contracts, equivalent to 35,260 BTC of contract face value, alongside 1,958 spread positions. Asset managers held a net 2,234 outright long contracts alongside 157 spreads.

If Bitcoin rises out of its range, leveraged funds reducing short exposure would add futures buying to the move. The weekly figures reflect CME positions at Tuesday's close and lag the live market by four days. The classification also includes strategies such as basis trades and hedges, leaving the intent and liquidation price of individual positions unknown.

Taken together, the offshore and CME snapshots show how Bitcoin futures positioning leaves different groups vulnerable. Offshore funding points to a contingent long-unwind channel, and CME positioning points to a contingent short-covering channel.

Spot demand will decide the first casualty

US spot Bitcoin ETF flows show why the trigger remains unsettled. Farside Investors recorded a combined $385.2 million of net outflows from Aug. 10 through Aug. 14, marking a reversal in recent net demand.

The broader August window still carried a surplus. Flows from Aug. 3 through Aug. 14 remained $480.1 million net positive after strong inflows earlier in the month. Recent ETF demand weakened while the wider period retained a positive balance.

Related Reading

Bitcoin’s ETF rebound just lost 38% of its gains in four sessions as BTC fell below $63,000

Morgan Stanley and Grayscale’s Mini Trust were the only Bitcoin funds to attract fresh capital in the sector during the latest trading session.

Aug 14, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

A downside cascade would become more plausible if renewed selling pushes Bitcoin through the range as positive funding persists and open interest contracts. An upside squeeze would gain evidence if cash-market or ETF demand returns while futures shorts cover. Price, spot activity and changes in open interest need to move together before either mechanism becomes the dominant explanation.

Liquidation maps can show where forced activity may accelerate, although CoinGlass's methodology calculates those zones from market data and leverage assumptions. They represent conditional estimates rather than queued orders.

This leaves the answer deliberately two-sided. Bitcoin has enough outstanding derivatives exposure for a range break to feed on position closures, yet the retained evidence does not locate a guaranteed cascade threshold within 1% or 2% of spot. A move of that size would accelerate only if it crossed concentrated margin levels and drew follow-through from the cash market. Until those conditions appear, Bitcoin futures positioning remains two-sided, with both longs and shorts candidates for the first forced exit.

The post A $48 billion Bitcoin leverage trap is about to trigger a massive forced exit the moment price boundaries break appeared first on CryptoSlate.

XRP is back near $1 even as network activity rebounds, whale deposits to Binance collapse, and derivatives exposure builds near recent lows.

The token fell to about $0.98 this week before recovering toward $1, according to CryptoSlate data, extending a retreat that has erased much of its May rally. Crowd commentary around XRP simultaneously reached its most bearish level in three months across X, Reddit, Telegram, and other crypto channels tracked by Santiment.

Beneath that price weakness, several parts of the market have strengthened. More addresses are using the XRP Ledger (XRPL), large holders are moving less XRP onto Binance, and traders are adding leveraged exposure.

Yet, fresh investment demand has moved in the opposite direction, while growth in parts of XRPL's user base has outpaced the capital and transaction value accompanying it.

XRPL participation broadens as capital depth lags

XRPL activity has returned to its May peak even though XRP is trading roughly 35% below the price reached during that earlier surge.

The network logged 49,929 active addresses during a 24-hour period this week, its highest level in more than two months and about 3% above the 48,453 recorded when XRP traded above $1.54 in May.

The backdrop is markedly different this time. Santiment linked part of the May increase to enthusiasm around XRP's price breakout. The latest surge followed weeks of weaker price action, including a drop below $1, while social sentiment deteriorated to a three-month low.

May also showed how quickly those gains can disappear. Daily active addresses fell to 25,350 by July 10, the second-lowest reading of 2026, before recovering over the following month.

Meanwhile, network participation has since broadened beyond the active-address count.

Stablecoin holders on XRPL climbed 37% over the past month to about 82,100 from roughly 60,000, RWA.xyz data show. Stablecoin transfer volume rose 8.4% over the same period to $4.61 billion.

However, XRPL's stablecoin capital moved in the opposite direction, with market capitalization falling 6.8% to $906.8 million despite increases in holders and transfer volume.

Tokenized real-world assets showed a wider gap. The number of RWA holders increased 29% to 217, while 30-day transfer volume fell almost 27% to $242.35 million. Distributed RWA value declined 1.9% to $485.18 million, while represented asset value slipped 0.3% to about $4.05 billion.

Related Reading

Why XRP Ledger is becoming a $3.6B hot spot for tokenized energy commodities

XRP Ledger posted the biggest 30-day jump in RWA assets as commodities are using blockchains less like trading venues and more like ledgers for energy contracts, traceability, and reconciliation.

May 3, 2026 · Gino Matos

XRPL has therefore entered August with more active addresses, stablecoin holders and RWA holders, while growth in the capital and economic turnover accompanying that participation has been considerably less consistent.

That pattern has sharpened the focus on retention across the XRP Ledger ecosystem. Vet, a prominent XRPL validator, said developers need to keep more of the activity that arrives during stronger crypto-market cycles rather than allowing those bursts to fade.

As a result, the network development efforts have increasingly centered on deeper liquidity, decentralized trading, consumer applications, stablecoins and tokenized assets that could give users more reasons to remain active on-chain.

Related Reading

Ripple bets XRPL lending can give XRP a future beyond payments as price struggles

The XRPL upgrade would standardize loan execution while leaving risk checks, legal terms and compliance to institutions.

Jun 30, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

The August rebound now gives those efforts another test. Network participation has already recovered beyond the levels seen during XRP's May rally, but sustaining that growth will require the activity to carry more persistent liquidity and capital as XRP trades back around $1.

Whale deposits collapse as leverage rebuilds near $1

Outside the ledger, XRP's market structure is also shifting, with large holders sending far less XRP to Binance just as derivatives traders rebuild exposure around the token's recent lows.

The three-month average of whale inflows to Binance has fallen to about $61 million, its lowest level since 2021, CryptoQuant contributor Darkfost said. The measure stood near $456 million in January 2025 and $355 million in October 2025.

Current whale inflows are therefore six to eight times below those earlier levels, sharply reducing the amount of XRP that large holders are moving within reach of Binance's spot market.

Still, net flows remain positive at about $18.8 million, meaning whale inflows continue to exceed outflows. The broader reduction in deposits has nevertheless removed a substantial source of potential exchange-side supply while XRP trades around $1.

Meanwhile, derivatives positioning in XRP has moved higher during the same period.

Bybit's 30-day change in XRP open interest reached 54 million XRP on Aug. 12, almost matching the 54.5 million increase recorded on May 21. Binance added another 29.5 million XRP over the latest 30-day period, taking the combined increase across the two exchanges to about 83.5 million XRP.

The distribution has shifted since earlier in the summer. Binance recorded a 70.4 million XRP increase on June 6, while Bybit now accounts for the larger share of the latest build-up.

Because the measure is denominated in XRP, the increase reflects growth in coin-denominated open interest rather than an expansion created by a higher dollar price. The positions include both longs and shorts, leaving the direction of the new exposure unresolved.

XRP is therefore carrying more leverage even as substantially less whale supply reaches Binance. Neither shift has yet pulled the token materially away from $1.

Spot buyers remain the missing piece

The clearest weakness in XRP's setup remains fresh spot demand, with US-listed ETFs drawing only modest new money as the token struggles around $1.

XRP ETFs attracted $131.94 million in May, when the token traded above $1.54, and XRPL activity reached its previous peak. Monthly inflows then fell to about $59.46 million in June and $27.29 million in July.

August has slowed further. Data from SoSoValue shows that the products have drawn only about $3.27 million through the first half of the month. Notably, most of these flows came on Aug. 13, when the funds drew $2.25 million in fresh capital.

Related Reading

XRP tests $1.31 as ETF demand clashes with spot selling

ETF inflows and exchange outflows still look supportive, but XRP needs to reclaim $1.34 to show buyers have control.

Jun 1, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

This shows that the pace of new institutional capital entering the market has declined significantly for three consecutive months, alongside XRP's price retreat.

For context, June inflows were roughly 55% below May's total, while July fell another 54%. August's $3.27 million intake is already about 88% below July's full-month figure, though half of the month remains.

Nevertheless, cumulative ETF demand remains strong, with the products attracting roughly $1.51 billion since launch and holding about $942 million in net assets as of Aug. 13.

Essentially, the slowdown is occurring at the margin, where the amount of fresh capital arriving each month has fallen sharply.

That weakening flow provides the missing link between XRP's underlying indicators and its price.

So, a stronger return of spot capital would meet a market with stronger network participation and lighter exchange-side pressure, which could generate the demand needed to sustain a recovery.

The post Record user activity and a collapse in whale selling should send XRP soaring, so why is it still pinned at $1? appeared first on CryptoSlate.

The XRP price is trading at $0.9996 at the time of writing. Not above $1. Not comfortably below it. Exactly on the line that has defined the token's entire summer.

The weekly candle tells the story better than any headline: open at $1.0289, high at $1.0402, low at $0.9852, close at $0.9996, down 2.87% on the week. XRP has now poked below the psychological $1 mark several times in August and clawed its way back each time, but every recovery has been weaker than the last. The bounces are getting smaller, the closes are getting lower, and the buyers who defended this level in June and July are visibly running out of ammunition.

That matters far more than it sounds, because XRP is not falling on its own bad news. It is falling in a market where Bitcoin itself is struggling. And if BTC loses its own footing, XRP does not have a soft landing waiting below.

Why is the $1 level so important for XRP?

$1 is the last structural support XRP has left before a long air pocket down to $0.90 and $0.80. It is not just a round number, it is where buyers have repeatedly stepped in since late June, and it is now the only thing separating $XRP from levels it has not traded at in almost two years.

Round numbers matter in crypto because they concentrate orders. Stop losses cluster just beneath them, limit buys stack just above them, and derivatives desks build positions around them. XRP has spent roughly two months grinding sideways against this line, which means an enormous amount of leverage has been built directly on top of it.

When that kind of level breaks with conviction rather than in a wick, the resulting move is rarely orderly. The stops trigger, the liquidations cascade, and the price does not stop at the first sign of demand. It stops where the next real bid sits.

What do the charts actually say about XRP right now?

XRP is trading below its 200-week EMA at $1.3745, its weekly RSI has fallen to 31.02 against a signal line at 33.50, and the entire structure since March has been a clean series of lower highs and lower lows.

Break that down:

• The 200 EMA at $1.3745 is now overhead resistance, not support. XRP lost it in May and every attempt to reclaim it since has been rejected. Until price closes back above it, the weekly trend is bearish by definition.
• Weekly RSI at 31.02 is nearly oversold, but on a weekly timeframe that is not automatically bullish. Oversold in a downtrend usually means the trend is working, not that a reversal is due. RSI can sit in the low 30s for months.
• RSI below its signal line means momentum is still deteriorating, not stabilising.
• The rejection map above is brutal: $1.20, $1.30, the EMA at $1.3745, then $1.50 and $1.80. Every single one of those was support on the way down. They are all resistance now.

The performance table underlines how relentless this has been. XRP is down 3.80% over one week, 7.99% over one month, 32.78% over six months, 45.67% year to date, and 67.54% over twelve months. Even the five year figure is negative at 22.29%. This is not a healthy asset taking a breather. This is an asset in a sustained, multi-quarter distribution.

Want to buy the dip or build a position gradually? Buy XRP on Bitpanda with the signup code CRYPTOTICKER. Regulated in the EU, with savings plans that let you average into positions instead of timing a falling market.

What happens to XRP if Bitcoin drops?

This is the part most XRP holders are underestimating.

XRP has no independent bid right now. If Bitcoin breaks below $60,000, XRP loses $1 almost mechanically, and the next levels that offer any real support are $0.9049 and $0.8052.

Bitcoin is currently stuck around $63,000 after repeatedly failing to reclaim $65,000. Analysts are watching support in the $60,000 to $61,000 zone, with resistance stretching toward $65,000 to $66,000, and the 0.618 Fibonacci retracement near $57,825 marked as the clearest support on the weekly chart. In other words, BTC has maybe 4% of cushion before it enters a zone where its own structure starts breaking.

Altcoins do not fall proportionally with Bitcoin in these moments. They fall harder. A 5% $BTC drawdown routinely translates into 8% to 12% on a weak large cap altcoin, and XRP is currently one of the weakest large caps in the market by flow data. If BTC slides from $63,000 toward $57,800, that is a 8.3% move for Bitcoin. Applied to XRP with a typical high beta multiplier, that alone would put XRP in the $0.85 to $0.90 region without a single piece of XRP-specific bad news.

That is the asymmetry XRP holders need to understand. XRP does not need its own catastrophe. It just needs Bitcoin to have a bad two weeks.

XRP Price Prediction: Where is the next support if XRP loses $1?

The two levels that matter are $0.9049 and $0.8052. Between $1 and $0.90 there is very little historical trading activity, which means the drop can be fast and shallow on volume.

Here is the downside map:

The $0.90 area is the first genuine test. It lines up with prior consolidation from the 2024 range and it is where a lot of longer-term accumulation sat before the late-2024 breakout. If sellers push through it, $0.8052 becomes the line that decides whether this is a deep correction or a full retrace of the entire 2024 to 2025 move.

Below $0.80 the chart is essentially empty until the $0.60 region. That is not a prediction, it is just what the volume profile looks like.

Why is nobody buying XRP at these levels?

Because the institutional money that was supposed to be XRP's catalyst simply is not showing up.

Weekly net inflows into US spot XRP ETFs collapsed 93% to $1.01 million for the week ending August 8, down from $14.86 million the previous week, even though the seven spot XRP ETFs hold roughly $1 billion in combined assets. There have been multiple days this month with literally zero net flow activity, something Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs did not experience once over the same stretch.

Meanwhile, the CLARITY Act missed its window before the Senate recess, which pushes any legislative clarity on XRP's commodity status to September at the earliest. The single biggest regulatory catalyst on XRP's calendar has been kicked down the road, and the market has repriced accordingly.

There is one genuine counterpoint. Whale wallets holding more than 10 million XRP have been absorbing over 10 million tokens per day, and large holder outflows from Binance now account for 91% of total exchange outflows, the highest concentration since 2024. Someone with size is buying. Whether that is conviction accumulation or slow-motion bag catching will only be clear in hindsight, and whales have been early before.

What would actually turn XRP bullish again?

XRP needs a weekly close above $1.22 to neutralise the immediate bearish structure, and a reclaim of $1.30 to $1.3745 to genuinely flip the trend.

The sequence looks like this:

1. Defend $1 on a weekly closing basis, not just intraweek wicks.
2. Reclaim $1.20 to $1.22, which would break the run of lower highs since May.
3. Close above $1.30, the last major horizontal resistance.
4. Reclaim the 200 EMA at $1.3745, which would be the first real trend change signal since spring.

Realistically, step one is the only thing on the table this month. Everything above requires either a Bitcoin recovery above $70,000 or a hard regulatory catalyst, and neither is scheduled before September.

What should XRP holders watch this week?

• The weekly close. A weekly candle that closes below $0.985 confirms the breakdown. A close back above $1.05 buys time.
• Bitcoin at $60,000. This is the trigger level for the whole altcoin complex, XRP included.
• XRP ETF flow reports, published every Monday. Four consecutive weeks below $5 million would confirm the demand collapse is structural rather than seasonal.
• Whale accumulation data. If the large wallets stop buying while price falls, the last remaining bid disappears.

The bottom line

XRP is not in a dip. It is in a downtrend that has now compressed against its final support, with weekly momentum deteriorating, institutional flows evaporating, and its main regulatory catalyst delayed to September. The token has broken below $1 several times already, and each defence has been thinner than the last.

The dangerous part is not XRP's own chart. It is that XRP has become almost entirely a leveraged expression of Bitcoin's direction, and Bitcoin is sitting 4% above a support zone that analysts already consider the last clean line on the chart. If BTC goes, XRP does not drift lower. It gaps to $0.90, and if that fails, $0.80.

For traders, the levels are simple: $1 decides everything, $1.22 changes the picture, $0.9049 and $0.8052 are where you find out how bad it gets.

Prefer trading crypto and equities from one regulated account? Open an account with XTB, a regulated broker with EEA approval for spot crypto trading.

Toncoin changes hands at 1.3260 USD, roughly 62.5 percent below the twelve-month high of 3.5328 USD reached on 14 August 2025. A discount of that size is what keeps the question alive: is Toncoin a good buy at current prices, or has the market marked the asset down for reasons that have not gone away?

One point needs clearing up first. The listing formerly known as Toncoin now trades as Gram, ticker GRAM, and the project's own site at ton.org uses the new name throughout. It is the same listing under a new label rather than a fork or a token swap. We keep the familiar name here because that is what readers search for.

cryptoticker.io collected the price data for this analysis on 14 August 2026. Market data comes from CoinMarketCap, and every indicator quoted here was calculated in house from 365 daily closing prices using standard formulas: exponential moving averages for the trend, Wilder's method for the relative strength index.

Toncoin price analysis: where the TON price stands and which levels matter

At 1.3260 USD the Toncoin price sits below both reference lines that medium-term investors watch. The 50-day exponential moving average stands at 1.4925 USD, which puts the current price 11.2 percent underneath it. The 200-day exponential moving average, the slower of the two, sits at 1.6695 USD, a further step up and 20.6 percent above the current quote. In chart terms, Toncoin is trading in the lower third of its own annual range.

The floor of that range is well defined. The twelve-month low of 1.2022 USD dates from 2 March 2026, and the current price is only 10.3 percent above it, a narrow cushion. The ceiling is far away: the 3.5328 USD high from August 2025 would require the price to more than double.

Three levels therefore frame any decision at current prices. The March low near 1.20 USD is the zone buyers defended once before. The 50-day line at 1.4925 USD is the first hurdle a recovery would need to clear. The 200-day line at 1.6695 USD separates a bounce from a trend change.

Is the Toncoin downtrend broken or only interrupted?

The data says interrupted rather than broken. Over 30 days Toncoin is down 16.7 percent, over 90 days down 30.6 percent, and over twelve months down 62.5 percent. Each window points the same way, and the sequence of lower highs behind them has not been reversed.

What has changed is the pace. The gap between the current price at 1.3260 USD and the March low at 1.2022 USD has held for months, which means sellers have not forced a new low despite a weak tape. A base of that kind is a precondition for a trend change without being one in itself.

For the downtrend to count as broken, the price would need to reclaim the 200-day line at 1.6695 USD and hold above it rather than tag it and fall back. Until then, the defensible description is a downtrend in a pause, and anyone buying at current prices is assuming that pause resolves upward.

What RSI and moving averages mean for a Toncoin entry

The relative strength index over 14 days reads 38.3, below the neutral midpoint of 50 and above the 30 mark conventionally treated as oversold. The practical meaning is unspectacular: selling pressure has eased, but no washout has occurred of the kind that often precedes sharp rebounds.

The two moving averages add the structural picture. With the price at 1.3260 USD below the 50-day line at 1.4925 USD, and that line below the 200-day line at 1.6695 USD, the alignment is the one technicians call bearish: the recent average price sits under the longer one, which is what a sustained decline looks like from the inside.

For an entry decision, the combination offers no timing signal at all. It rules out the argument that Toncoin is technically oversold and due a bounce, and equally the argument that the asset is overheated. Investors who need a technical trigger will not find one at 1.3260 USD, which is a reason to think about position sizing rather than entry precision.

What Toncoin trading volume reveals about demand

Volume deserves the most attention here. Toncoin turned over 35.6 million USD in the last 24 hours. The 30-day average sits at 49.5 million USD, the 90-day average at 145.6 million USD, and the full-year average at 161.6 million USD. Activity is running at roughly a fifth of the annual norm.

Thin volume has two consequences for a buyer. Price moves in either direction require less capital, so rallies and declines can both be sharper than the market capitalisation of 3.66 billion USD would suggest. And the drop in turnover indicates departed attention rather than accumulating demand.

Market capitalisation places Toncoin at rank 22 among crypto assets, a large-cap position by any measure. The gap between that rank and current activity is the tension in this asset: a top-25 valuation supported by turnover at a quarter of its own yearly average. The broader market offers little support either, with the Fear and Greed Index at 36, in fear territory.

Structural factors that speak for Toncoin: supply, usage and regulation

Supply mechanics come first. Roughly 2.758 billion coins circulate out of a total supply of about 5.231 billion, with no hard maximum in the sense that Bitcoin has one. Inflation is bounded by protocol rules rather than a fixed cap, so the circulating share can keep rising. A buyer at 1.3260 USD is buying a claim on a supply base that is not fixed, and that belongs in any valuation.

Usage is the more distinctive argument. The network's design and its documentation at docs.ton.org centre on cheap, high-throughput transfers aimed at consumer payments inside a messenger environment rather than on complex financial contracts. That distribution channel is the asset's genuine differentiator among large-cap chains, and it is why the listing survived a 62.5 percent drawdown without losing its top-25 rank.

Regulation is the third factor, and the picture is neutral to mildly favourable. Under the European framework supervised by ESMA, crypto assets face harmonised disclosure and custody requirements across the bloc, which has made large-cap tokens easier for regulated venues to list and keep listed. That lifts no single price, but it lowers the risk that a top-25 coin becomes inaccessible on European platforms.

Against those points, the rename to Gram carries a practical cost that is easy to underestimate: ticker changes fragment search traffic, complicate portfolio tracking and occasionally delay listings on smaller venues. We regard this as transitional friction rather than a structural flaw, and flag it as interpretation rather than measurement.

What speaks for buying Toncoin at current prices

Three arguments carry weight at 1.3260 USD.

The entry sits near a tested floor. At 10.3 percent above the twelve-month low of 1.2022 USD, a buyer here has a reference level close enough to define risk precisely. That is a materially different proposition from buying in the middle of a range, where the nearest meaningful support may be 30 percent away.

The valuation has already absorbed a severe repricing. A decline of 62.5 percent over twelve months has removed most of the optimism priced in at 3.5328 USD. Whatever expectations remain at 1.3260 USD are modest, and assets that have completed their repricing need less good news to move.

The distribution advantage is intact. The messenger-linked reach that made the network interesting remains in place, and a rank-22 market capitalisation of 3.66 billion USD indicates that large holders have not abandoned the listing. Where analysts expect the price to go from here is set out in our Toncoin price prediction.

What speaks against buying Toncoin at current prices

Three counterarguments deserve equal weight.

The trend is still against the buyer. With the price at 1.3260 USD below the 50-day line at 1.4925 USD and the 200-day line at 1.6695 USD, every moving-average signal points down. Buying here means positioning against the prevailing trend and accepting that the asset may spend further months below both lines.

Liquidity has thinned to a worrying degree. Turnover of 35.6 million USD against an annual average of 161.6 million USD means larger orders move the price more, spreads widen when volatility arrives, and exits in a falling market cost more than the screen suggests. This is the most concrete risk in the current setup.

The supply side keeps expanding. With about 2.758 billion of a roughly 5.231 billion total supply in circulation and no fixed cap, new coins keep reaching the market. Where demand has fallen to a fifth of its yearly norm, that puts a structural weight on the price which technical support levels cannot offset.

How to buy Toncoin at current prices: costs, custody and providers

The cost of buying matters more than usual when an asset is this illiquid. Spreads on thinly traded pairs can exceed the visible trading fee by a wide margin, so the headline commission is only part of the bill. Our crypto exchange comparison sets out the fee models side by side.

For European investors, regulatory status is the second filter. Supervised platforms offer clearer complaint routes and stricter custody rules, the relevant distinction once positions grow beyond pocket money. The candidates are collected in our overview of the best regulated crypto exchanges, and among individual venues we have examined Bitpanda in detail and Kraken's fee structure and features separately.

Custody is the third decision and independent of the first two. Coins left on an exchange remain in someone else's control, which is convenient for trading and unhelpful for holding. Investors planning to hold across a full cycle generally move to self-custody, and the trade-offs between the leading devices are laid out in our hardware wallet comparison. Toncoin support varies by device, so check before buying rather than after.

So is Toncoin a good buy at current prices?

The data supports different answers over different horizons, and separating them is the only honest way to close.

Short term, the setup offers no edge. An RSI of 38.3 is neutral, both moving averages sit above the price, and volume at 35.6 million USD gives any move a fragile foundation. The risk of another test of the 1.2022 USD low is real, and if that level gives way on rising volume, the assumption that a base has formed is refuted.

Long term, the case rests on one question: does the messenger-linked distribution advantage translate into sustained usage, or does it remain a promise? If usage grows and turnover recovers toward the 161.6 million USD annual average, the current price will look like the discount phase of a cycle. If turnover keeps falling while supply expands, a rank-22 market capitalisation of 3.66 billion USD becomes hard to defend, and the drawdown from 3.5328 USD reads as a repricing rather than an overreaction.

The condition that would refute the constructive scenario is specific enough to monitor: a sustained close below 1.2022 USD, or a further decline in volume from an already depressed 35.6 million USD. The condition that would confirm it is equally specific: a reclaim of the 200-day line at 1.6695 USD with turnover moving back toward its annual norm. Neither has happened, which is why the answer at 1.3260 USD is a matter of position sizing rather than conviction.

Buying Toncoin: what to take away

1. The price sits low in its own range, and the range is what defines the risk. At 1.3260 USD, Toncoin trades 10.3 percent above the twelve-month low of 1.2022 USD and 62.5 percent below the 3.5328 USD high, with both moving averages overhead. Where analysts see the price heading from this zone is covered in our Toncoin price prediction.
2. Thin volume is the risk that costs money in practice. Turnover of 35.6 million USD against a 161.6 million USD annual average widens spreads and makes exits expensive, which makes the choice of venue a financial decision rather than an administrative one. The fee models are compared in our crypto exchange comparison.
3. Custody is a separate decision from the purchase. Anyone planning to hold beyond a trade should settle the storage question before buying rather than afterwards, and the options are set out in our hardware wallet comparison.

Disclosure: Some of the providers mentioned in this article work with us through partner programmes. This has no influence on the price analysis or on our assessment of the chart situation; the price data comes from a public market data source and can be verified there.

(As of 14 August 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices, fees and terms change; check them with the provider before every purchase. Crypto assets are subject to high price volatility, and a total loss is possible.)

Stellar trades at around 0.1612 US dollars on 12 August 2026. That is 64.4 percent below the twelve-month high of 0.4526 US dollars set on 14 August 2025, and 12.4 percent above the twelve-month low of 0.1434 US dollars from 23 May 2026. The sixteenth-largest crypto asset by market capitalisation therefore sits in the lower third of its yearly range. Is Stellar a good buy at current prices, or is this a weakness that has further to run?

cryptoticker.io compiled the price data for this analysis on 12 August 2026. The market data comes from CoinMarketCap, and we evaluated the daily closing prices of the past 365 trading days up to and including 11 August 2026. The indicators are calculated with standard formulas: the 200-day average and the 50-day average as exponentially weighted means, the RSI over 14 days according to Wilder. Every value changes with each trading day.

Stellar price analysis: where XLM trades and which levels matter

The Stellar price of 0.1612 US dollars sits below both moving averages. The 200-day average stands at 0.1986 US dollars and thus 23.2 percent above the current price. The 50-day average stands at 0.1787 US dollars, which XLM would have to gain 10.9 percent to reach. The nearest level to the downside is the twelve-month low of 0.1434 US dollars, reached on 23 May 2026.

The past 30 trading days span a range of 19.1 percent, from 0.1612 US dollars on 7 August to 0.1919 US dollars on 22 July. Within that range the price has drifted towards the lower edge, and the seven most recent closes all fall between 0.1613 and 0.1686 US dollars. A market that narrows in this way is usually waiting for a reason to move, and the direction is not readable from the chart alone.

Between the current price and the May low the market barely traded over the past year, which means there is little accumulated support in that stretch. Longer-dated scenarios are collected in our Stellar price prediction.

Is the Stellar downtrend broken or only interrupted

The quarterly figures give a mixed answer. Over 90 days the price is 1.5 percent higher, which is close to unchanged. Over 30 days it is 12.8 percent lower, and over twelve months it is down 62.6 percent from 0.4311 US dollars. The picture is one of a market that stopped falling in the spring without beginning to rise.

The sequence matters. Stellar found its low at 0.1434 US dollars on 23 May 2026 and recovered to 0.2607 US dollars by 30 May. That rally has since given back 38.2 percent, and the price now stands closer to the May low than to the interim high. A downtrend counts as broken once a market sets a higher low and then clears its previous high; Stellar has managed the first half of that condition and not the second.

The most plausible reading in our view is an interruption rather than a reversal. The price has held above the May low for eleven weeks, which argues against an immediate continuation of the fall, and it has failed twice to hold the 50-day average, which argues against a turn that has already happened. Both statements are assumptions drawn from the chart.

What RSI and moving averages mean for a Stellar entry

The RSI over 14 days stands at 33.9 points. Readings below 30 are conventionally treated as oversold, so Stellar is close to that zone without having entered it. An RSI at this level tells you that the market is weak, and it does not tell you when the weakness ends.

The two moving averages are stacked against the price. With the 50-day average at 0.1787 US dollars sitting below the 200-day average at 0.1986 US dollars, and the price below both, the trend structure is intact to the downside on all three horizons. That configuration has held since the spring.

For an entry this has two practical consequences. Buying at 0.1612 US dollars means buying against the trend, which historically requires either a long holding period or a tight exit. Waiting for a close above the 50-day average means paying at least 10.9 percent more for a market that has confirmed a change. The two routes price risk and certainty differently.

What Stellar trading volume reveals about demand

Turnover over the past 24 hours amounts to 80.6 million US dollars against a market capitalisation of 5.56 billion US dollars, a turnover rate of 1.4 percent. The 30-day average sits at 116.5 million US dollars per day. The 90-day average is far higher at 338.6 million US dollars, and the average across the full year is 234.8 million.

The comparison is the informative part. Current turnover runs at roughly a third of the 90-day average and at about a quarter of the twelve-month average. Trading interest in Stellar has thinned considerably since the spring, and the thinning coincides with the drift towards the yearly low.

Thin volume cuts both ways for a buyer. A market that few people trade needs less capital to move, so a return of interest can lift the price quickly. The same thinness means larger orders move the price against the person placing them. Where trading costs are lowest differs by venue, and our exchange comparison sets the fee models side by side.

Structural factors that speak for Stellar: supply mechanics, usage and regulation

Stellar's supply is capped and largely issued. Of a maximum of 50.0 billion XLM, 34.49 billion are in circulation, which is 69.0 percent. The remaining 15.5 billion sit with the Stellar Development Foundation and are released according to published mandates. There is no ongoing inflation in the sense of newly mined units, and the foundation burned roughly half of the original supply in 2019. The details of the model are documented on the Stellar Lumens overview.

The network's purpose is payment settlement and asset issuance rather than general-purpose computation, with a stated focus on cross-border transfers and tokenised deposits. The documentation for issuers and anchors is published at developers.stellar.org. Whether that focus translates into sustained demand for the asset is a separate question from whether the network is used, and the two have diverged before.

On regulation, European rules now apply in full to service providers rather than to the asset. The European Securities and Markets Authority supervises the framework and publishes the register of authorised firms. For a buyer in the European Union the practical effect is that the venue matters as much as the coin, and the comparison of regulated exchanges tracks which providers hold which permissions.

What speaks for buying Stellar at current prices

Three arguments carry weight at 0.1612 US dollars.

1. The price sits 64.4 percent below the twelve-month high of 0.4526 US dollars and 23.2 percent below the 200-day average of 0.1986 US dollars. Anyone buying now pays a fraction of what buyers paid a year ago for the same asset and the same supply schedule.
2. The May low at 0.1434 US dollars has held for eleven weeks across several tests. A level that repeatedly attracts buyers is a more useful reference than one derived from a formula, and it gives an entry a measurable point of failure 12.4 percent below the current price.
3. Supply is capped and 69.0 percent issued, so the dilution risk that weighs on assets with open emission schedules is comparatively limited here. What remains is release from a known holder under published mandates rather than open-ended issuance.

What speaks against buying Stellar at current prices

Three arguments point the other way.

1. The trend is down on every horizon that matters. The price is below the 50-day average of 0.1787 US dollars, which is itself below the 200-day average of 0.1986 US dollars, and the twelve-month change is minus 62.6 percent. Buying here is buying against that structure.
2. Turnover of 80.6 million US dollars a day is roughly a third of the 90-day average of 338.6 million. Falling participation is a poor foundation for a recovery, because a price that few people are trading is a price few people have agreed on.
3. The broader market is in a defensive mood. The CoinMarketCap Fear and Greed Index reads 38 points, in the fear range. Assets in the lower half of the ranking table tend to lag when sentiment is defensive, and Stellar sits at rank 16.

How to buy Stellar at current prices: costs, custody and providers

Three cost blocks decide what an entry actually costs. The trading fee is charged per order and typically ranges from about 0.1 percent on maker-taker models to well above one percent on simplified buy interfaces. The spread between bid and ask is not shown separately. The withdrawal fee applies when you move XLM off the exchange, while the on-chain cost on the Stellar network is a fraction of a cent.

The provider question separates two use cases. For a position you intend to trade, an exchange account with low per-order costs is usually adequate; our Kraken review covers one such venue. For a position you intend to hold, the relevant criteria are the provider's regulatory permissions and its withdrawal terms, which our Bitpanda review examines.

Custody is the second decision. Coins left on an exchange are a claim against that exchange rather than an asset you control, which is acceptable for a short holding period and less so for a long one. Moving XLM to your own wallet removes that counterparty risk and adds the obligation to secure a recovery phrase. Suitable devices are ranked in the hardware wallet comparison.

So is Stellar a good buy at current prices, short-term and long-term

Over a short horizon the evidence is unfavourable. The RSI at 33.9 points, the price below both averages, and turnover at a third of its 90-day average describe a market without a catalyst. The nearest resistance is the 50-day average at 0.1787 US dollars, 10.9 percent away, and the nearest support is the twelve-month low at 0.1434 US dollars, 12.4 percent away. Risk and reward are roughly symmetric on those two levels, which is a poor ratio for a directional trade.

Over a horizon of several years the calculation rests on different inputs. A capped supply that is 69.0 percent issued, a network with a defined purpose, and a price 64.4 percent below its twelve-month high are the conditions under which long-term positions have historically been built in this asset class. None of that establishes that a recovery will occur, and the 62.6 percent twelve-month decline is a reminder that discounts can deepen.

The assumption of a floor counts as disproved if the price closes below the twelve-month low of 0.1434 US dollars on a daily basis. It counts as confirmed if XLM reclaims the 50-day average of 0.1787 US dollars and closes above it on rising volume. The test after that would be the 200-day average at 0.1986 US dollars. These three levels let you check your own assessment against the market rather than against an opinion.

Buying Stellar: what to take away

1. The Stellar price of 0.1612 US dollars sits 23.2 percent below the 200-day average of 0.1986 US dollars, 10.9 percent below the 50-day average of 0.1787 US dollars, and 12.4 percent above the twelve-month low of 0.1434 US dollars. The zone between those two levels is where the situation is decided, and the running assessment is in our Stellar price prediction.
2. An RSI of 33.9 points and turnover at a third of the 90-day average describe weakness without capitulation. Anyone entering should know what each purchase costs, and the exchange comparison shows where the differences lie.
3. For a holding meant to sit for years, custody is the second decision alongside the entry price, and the choice of a regulated venue is the third. Both are covered in the hardware wallet comparison.

Disclosure: Some of the providers mentioned in this article work with us through partner programmes. This has no influence on the price analysis or on our assessment of the chart; the price data comes from a public market data source and can be verified there.

(As of 12 August 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices, fees and terms change; check them with the provider before every purchase. Crypto assets are subject to high price volatility and a total loss is possible.)

Bitcoin closed the week at roughly $62,990, down 2.7%, after an in-line July inflation print failed to trigger the expected relief rally. Spot Bitcoin ETFs reversed from their strongest inflow week since April into consecutive days of outflows, and XRP briefly traded below $1 for the first time in nearly two years following a cross-chain bridge exploit.

The structural developments carried more weight than the price action. Goldman Sachs agreed to acquire NEOS Investments for up to $2.25 billion, gaining three crypto income ETFs. Riot Platforms sold 4,300 BTC to fund AI data center expansion. Grayscale withdrew three altcoin ETF registrations days before one of the underlying assets cleared its regulatory threshold. Both major US regulatory catalysts, meanwhile, slipped to September.

Below is a summary of the week's key developments across prices, flows, corporate activity and regulation.

Bitcoin price today after this week's crypto market drop

$Bitcoin is trading around $62,990 on Sunday morning, down 2.7% over the week, with the total crypto market cap holding near $2.19 trillion. Bitcoin fell 2.39% between 7 and 14 August, with five of seven trading sessions ending in negative territory, while Ethereum dropped 1.71%. The slide extended into the weekend, with BTC dipping as low as $62,812 on Saturday before stabilizing.

Where the majors finished the week:

• 🔴 Bitcoin ($BTC) around $62,990, down 2.7% on the week
• 🔴 Ethereum ($ETH) around $1,880, down about 1.7%
• 🔴$ XRP around $1.00, briefly under the dollar mark
• 🔴 Solana ($SOL) around $75.30, down about 1%
• 🟢 Monero ($XMR) up 5.3%, one of the few large caps in green

Since mid July the reading has traced an almost flat line in the mid to high thirties while Bitcoin swung between $63,000 and $66,500 above it, which tells you sentiment has been numb rather than panicked. Bitcoin's nearest support and resistance sat at $61,650 and $67,253. Volatility was almost non-existent. BTC's daily move did not exceed 1.5% on any single day, and the ADX reading of 12.37 confirms there is simply no trend here right now.

That matters more than it sounds. Crypto trading volumes have fallen to their lowest levels in three years, leaving very little firepower to push Bitcoin decisively in either direction.

Why did the July CPI report fail to lift the crypto market?

The July inflation print landed exactly in line with forecasts, but it was still too high to bring rate cuts back onto the table, so crypto got no relief rally. Consumer prices rose 0.1% month over month and 3.4% year over year, with core inflation up 0.2% monthly and 2.5% annually. Headline CPI cooled from 3.5% and core eased from 2.6%.

In a normal cycle, cooling inflation supports risk assets. This time, nothing followed. CPI remaining at 3.4% is still comfortably above the Fed's 2% target, which dampened expectations for rate cuts. Producer prices came in cooler than expected on Thursday, US equities liked it, and crypto still lagged. Bitcoin dropped below $63,000, losing 1.14% since midnight UTC as a second day of ETF outflows and a lack of bullish catalysts weighed on the market.

The read-through is simple: crypto is not currently trading on inflation data. It is trading on flows.

What happened to Bitcoin ETF flows this week?

Spot Bitcoin ETFs flipped from their best week since April into their first back-to-back outflow days since late July, erasing much of the optimism from early August. The previous week had delivered $853 million in weekly net inflows, the largest since April, led by BlackRock's IBIT. Then the direction reversed.

This week opened with a $144 million outflow, with ether ETFs echoing the cautious start at $14 million out. By Thursday, spot Bitcoin ETFs had seen $192 million exit across two consecutive sessions, the first back-to-back outflows since late July. Across the full week, outflows reached $332 million, led by Fidelity's FBTC.

There is a counterweight worth noting. Morgan Stanley increased its holdings in the iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF from 13.4 million shares to 16.5 million shares in Q2, according to a quarterly SEC filing. Institutions have not left. They have simply stopped adding at the pace that would move price.

And the corporate treasury side kept selling. MicroStrategy and Hut 8 sold over $134 million in BTC during the week. Strategy disclosed 1,690 BTC sold between 3 and 9 August for roughly $108.6 million, bringing 2026 disposals to 6,948 BTC across four separate sales, though the company still holds 840,447 BTC.

Why did XRP fall below $1 after the Coreum bridge hack?

XRP dropped under one dollar for the first time in nearly two years after an attacker drained almost the entire XRP reserve backing the Coreum cross-chain bridge. An attacker drained 99.7% of the reserve on 9 August, taking 199,916 XRP across 94 transactions in about 97 minutes and leaving roughly 493 XRP behind.

The mechanics are worth understanding, because they say nothing about XRP itself. The attacker never sent real XRP to the bridge. They moved the bridge's own token between two wallets they controlled while attaching a fake deposit label, the bridge software treated that as a genuine incoming deposit, and the attacker then withdrew real XRP through the normal process. The software never verified that the payment destination was the bridge itself before crediting the balance.

The XRP Ledger was not compromised, no private keys were stolen, and holdings in standard wallets, on exchanges or in US spot XRP ETFs were unaffected. TX, the brand behind Coreum and Sologenic, confirmed the incident, admitted bridged XRP on its chain is not currently fully backed and said a complaint has been filed with the FBI.

XRP dipped to around $0.99 on 11 August before recovering to $1.01. In dollar terms the theft was small, roughly $200,000. But it fits a familiar pattern: bridge exploits account for more than $2.8 billion, or roughly 69% of all DeFi losses since 2022, almost always through flaws in off-chain trust logic rather than breaks in blockchain cryptography.

What does the Goldman Sachs NEOS deal mean for crypto ETFs?

Goldman Sachs agreed to buy NEOS Investments for up to $2.25 billion, instantly handing the bank three Bitcoin and Ethereum income ETFs instead of building them from scratch. The deal was announced on 12 August. NEOS manages $30 billion across 19 options-based income ETFs as of 30 June 2026.

Three crypto-linked funds come with the deal and manage more than $1.1 billion combined: the NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF (BTCI), the Boosted Bitcoin High Income ETF (XBCI) and the Ethereum High Income ETF (NEHI). None of the three invests directly in Bitcoin or ether. They gain exposure through exchange-traded products linked to the assets and use options strategies to generate monthly income.

The combined platform would make Goldman Sachs Asset Management the eighth largest active ETF manager, with $80 billion in active ETFs across a $130 billion global ETF platform. The transaction is expected to close in the first quarter of 2027, pending regulatory clearances.

The subtext is a shift in what institutional crypto demand actually looks like. It is no longer only about spot price exposure. It is increasingly about yield.

Why are Bitcoin miners selling BTC to fund AI data centers?

Mining economics have collapsed to the point where the average miner is producing Bitcoin at a loss, so the largest operators are converting BTC reserves into AI data center capacity. Riot Platforms disclosed it will sell 4,300 BTC and direct the proceeds toward expanding its data center network for AI workloads, after Q2 mining revenue fell 19.3% on rising electricity costs and record-low hashprice. That took Riot's holdings from 15,680 to 11,380 BTC, roughly 27% of its treasury in a single quarter.

The numbers explain the decision. Bitcoin has been trading around $63,500 while industry models put the average market-wide cost of mining a coin at $76,000 to $78,000, with hashprice at a record low of $30 to $35 per PH/s per day.

The scale of the pivot is genuinely large. On 10 August, Riot signed a 20-year agreement worth about $9.1 billion to lease 191 megawatts of data center capacity at its Rockdale, Texas facility to an AI company, and its shares jumped more than 25% in after-hours trading. Bernstein estimates data center contracts between Bitcoin miners and AI or cloud companies now exceed $135 billion. IREN signed a $9.7 billion agreement with Microsoft, and Hut 8 finalized a $7 billion contract with Google-backed partners.

MARA Holdings, Core Scientific and Bitdeer have all previously liquidated part or all of their crypto reserves to fund AI infrastructure. Miners are quietly rebranding themselves as power monetization businesses, and Bitcoin is becoming one of several things they can do with electricity rather than the only thing.

What is the status of US crypto regulation and the CLARITY Act?

Both of the near-term US regulatory catalysts stalled this week, pushing meaningful legislative progress into mid September at the earliest. The Senate's delay in passing the CLARITY Act and the cancellation of the SEC meeting that would have outlined alternative regulator-led crypto rules both weighed on prices.

Cloture on the motion to proceed for H.R. 3633, the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, is now scheduled to take effect on 15 September 2026, with the Senate returning on 14 September. The SEC cancelled its crypto rulemaking meeting with no replacement date announced. Separately, Cboe BZX filed for approval to list 3x leveraged Bitcoin and Ether ETFs.

There was one more altcoin ETF story worth flagging. Grayscale filed three Form RW withdrawals on 7 August, pulling its Cardano, Polkadot and Hedera Trust ETF registrations within 190 seconds of each other, exactly two days before ADA cleared the SEC's six-month CME futures seasoning threshold. A Form RW is a voluntary registration withdrawal, not an SEC rejection and not a statement about the underlying asset. Five other issuers including Bitwise, Canary Capital, VanEck and 21Shares still have active ADA ETF filings, with the earliest possible SEC decision window around 23 October. ADA still fell 9.53% on the news.

Read it as a comment on altcoin ETF economics rather than on Cardano.

What should crypto investors watch in the week ahead?

The three things that matter most are whether ETF outflows continue, whether Bitcoin holds the $61,650 support level, and how the Fed minutes land. Nothing on the calendar looks likely to break the $62,000 to $66,000 range on its own, which means flows remain the deciding variable.

Specific things to track:

• ETF flow direction. Two negative days does not make a trend, but a third and fourth would.
• The $61,650 support level. A clean break there would be the first genuine range break since early summer.
• Miner selling pressure. With hashprice at record lows, more treasury liquidations are likely.
• Corporate treasury behaviour. Strategy has now sold in four separate tranches this year.
• September regulatory calendar. CLARITY Act cloture on 15 September is the next real legislative catalyst.

One more caution: reports circulated late in the week about a Coldcard hardware wallet exploit involving older firmware. Those claims remain unconfirmed, with no official response from Coldcard and no independent incident report as of 14 August. The claims should be treated as unverified pending confirmation, though users running outdated hardware wallet firmware should review their setup regardless.

What is the takeaway from this week in crypto news?

The takeaway is that price did nothing while the industry around it changed shape, which is usually more important than a green candle. This was a week of consolidation with a lot of structural noise underneath. Bitcoin did almost nothing while the industry around it kept rearranging: Wall Street buying yield products, miners becoming power companies, bridges failing the same way they have failed since 2022, and Washington pushing every decision to September.

Shiba Inu trades at roughly 0.00000446 US dollars on 12 August 2026. That leaves the price 68.8 per cent below its twelve-month high of 0.00001429 US dollars, and only 8.5 per cent above its twelve-month low of 0.00000411 US dollars. Anyone buying today is buying the largest meme coin behind Dogecoin close to its weakest level in a year. Is that an entry price or a trap?

cryptoticker.io compiled these price data itself on 12 August 2026. The source is market data from CoinMarketCap, and the calculations use daily closing prices from the past 365 days. The moving averages, the RSI and the distances to the high and the low come from standard formulas applied to that data set, so every figure in this article can be checked against the same source.

Shiba Inu price analysis: where the SHIB price stands today

The Shiba Inu price stands at 0.00000446 US dollars, down 8.7 per cent over seven days and 1.0 per cent over 24 hours. At that level the token carries a market capitalisation of about 2.63 billion US dollars and ranks 30th among all crypto assets.

Three marks frame the current picture. The twelve-month low of 0.00000411 US dollars, set on 17 July 2026, sits 8.5 per cent below the market. The 50-day average of 0.00000464 US dollars runs slightly above the price and has capped every attempt to move higher since late July. Further above lies the 200-day average of 0.00000592 US dollars, which the price would have to gain 32.7 per cent to reach.

The zone between the July low and the 50-day line has contained trading for several weeks, which makes that low the reference point for anyone judging whether the market is building a base or merely pausing on the way down.

Is the Shiba Inu downtrend broken or only interrupted?

Over twelve months the Shiba Inu price has fallen 65.5 per cent, from 0.00001295 US dollars in August 2025 to today's level. Over 90 days the loss is 30.5 per cent. Only the 30-day window shows a gain, at 3.6 per cent. The short-term recovery therefore sits inside a decline that remains intact on every longer horizon.

The relationship between the two averages says the same thing more precisely. The 50-day line at 0.00000464 US dollars trades 21.6 per cent below the 200-day line at 0.00000592 US dollars, and the price sits below both. That is an unbroken downtrend. A trend change would require the price to reclaim the 50-day average and hold it, then close the gap to the 200-day mark.

What has changed is the pace. The steep phase of the decline ran between May and July 2026; since then the market has moved sideways in a narrowing range. Such phases can precede a base as easily as a continuation, and the data available today do not settle which.

What RSI and moving averages mean for a Shiba Inu entry

The 14-day RSI stands at 43.9, below the neutral midpoint of 50 and well above the oversold threshold of 30. For a buyer this is the least helpful reading the indicator can produce, because it signals neither an exhausted sell-off nor renewed momentum.

The distance to the averages is more informative. At 3.9 per cent below the 50-day line the price is close enough that a modest move would reclaim it, which keeps a short-term recovery technically cheap. The 24.6 per cent gap to the 200-day line is a different matter, since averages of that length tend to act as resistance for months after a decline of this size.

For an entry decision the two figures pull in opposite directions. The short average offers a near, testable level against which a position can be measured, while the long average marks how far the market would have to travel before the twelve-month trend could be called repaired. Position sizing should reflect the second number.

What trading volume reveals about demand for Shiba Inu

Shiba Inu turned over about 61.2 million US dollars in the past 24 hours. Measured against a market capitalisation of 2.63 billion US dollars, that is a turnover ratio of 2.3 per cent, which is unremarkable for a token of this size and indicates neither panic selling nor a rush of new buyers.

The trend behind that figure carries more weight. Average daily volume was around 106 million US dollars over 30 days, around 92 million over 90 days, and around 143 million across the full twelve months. Current activity therefore runs well below the annual average.

Thin volume has a practical consequence. Order books are shallower, spreads widen faster in stress, and a position that looks modest on screen can move the market when it is sold. The 30-day uptick in price arrived on falling volume, which is a weak confirmation of demand.

Structural factors that speak for Shiba Inu: supply, usage, regulation

The supply mechanics are the clearest structural argument. Of a maximum supply of about 589.55 trillion tokens, roughly 589.24 trillion are already in circulation. Nearly the entire supply is therefore on the market, and Shiba Inu carries almost no unlock overhang of the kind that weighs on tokens whose team and investor allocations vest over years.

Against that stands the scale of the float. A supply measured in hundreds of trillions keeps the price per token in the millionths, and any narrative built on the token reaching a round number such as one cent implies a market capitalisation far beyond anything the asset class has produced. The project's burn mechanism removes tokens from circulation, but the rate observed to date is small relative to the total.

On usage, Shiba Inu is an ERC-20 token settling on Ethereum, which ties its transaction costs and throughput to Ethereum's development path as set out in the Ethereum roadmap. The project also operates its own layer-2 network, Shibarium, intended to move activity off the main chain. How much sustained economic activity that network carries is the open question for any long-term thesis.

Regulation cuts both ways. Within the European Union, trading venues fall under the MiCA framework supervised alongside national authorities by the European Securities and Markets Authority, which has raised disclosure and custody standards for platforms serving retail clients. That improves the conditions under which a token is traded, and says nothing about the merits of the token itself.

What speaks for buying Shiba Inu at current prices

Three arguments carry weight at 0.00000446 US dollars.

The price sits near a tested level. At 8.5 per cent above the twelve-month low of 0.00000411 US dollars, a buyer has a defined and nearby reference point against which the position can be judged, and a clearer answer to the question of when the assumption has failed.

The supply picture is unusually clean. With almost the entire maximum supply already circulating, future dilution from scheduled unlocks is close to irrelevant. Price moves are driven by demand rather than by new tokens arriving on the market, which removes one variable that burdens many comparable assets.

Liquidity remains adequate. A rank of 30 and daily turnover above 60 million US dollars mean the token can be bought and sold on regulated venues without the execution problems typical of smaller meme coins. That matters most at the point of exit.

What speaks against buying Shiba Inu at current prices

Three arguments point the other way, and they are the stronger set.

The trend is intact and pointing down. The price trades 24.6 per cent below the 200-day average of 0.00000592 US dollars, the 50-day average sits 21.6 per cent below the 200-day line, and the twelve-month loss is 65.5 per cent. Buying here means buying against a trend that has not shown a technical repair on any measure examined in this article.

Demand is thinning rather than building. Daily volume below both the 90-day and the twelve-month average, combined with a 30-day price gain on declining turnover, describes a market with fewer participants rather than one attracting them. Recoveries built on falling volume have a poor record of holding.

The valuation rests on attention. Shiba Inu has no cash flow, no fee claim accruing to holders, and no supply schedule that forces scarcity. What remains is demand driven by sentiment, and the CoinMarketCap Fear and Greed reading of 37 places the wider market in the fear range. Assets of this type tend to fall hardest when sentiment deteriorates further.

How to buy Shiba Inu at current prices

Shiba Inu is listed on most large exchanges, so the practical questions are cost, custody and the standing of the venue. Fees differ more than headline rates suggest, because the spread applied at execution often exceeds the stated commission. Our exchange comparison sets the cost components side by side.

For buyers inside the European Union, the supervisory status of the venue is worth checking before the fee schedule. Platforms authorised under the current framework face disclosure and asset-segregation requirements that unregulated venues do not, and our overview of regulated exchanges shows which providers hold the relevant permissions. For a single provider, our Bitpanda review covers costs, deposit methods and account requirements.

Custody is the decision that follows the purchase. Tokens left on an exchange remain subject to that platform's solvency and security, which is acceptable for a short holding period and less so for a multi-year one. Anyone holding Shiba Inu for longer should compare the options in our hardware wallet comparison and account for the one-off cost of the device, which for a position sized in the low hundreds of euros can exceed any plausible saving on trading fees.

So is Shiba Inu a good buy at current prices?

Over the short term the evidence does not support a purchase. The price trades below both moving averages, the RSI at 43.9 gives no entry signal, and volume is falling. The one constructive element is proximity to the July low at 0.00000411 US dollars, which offers a defined level but not a reason on its own. A short-term case would require the price to reclaim the 50-day average of 0.00000464 US dollars and hold it on rising turnover, and neither condition is met today.

Over the long term the question turns on something the chart cannot answer. The supply structure is clean and liquidity is sufficient, which removes two common objections. What remains open is whether Shibarium develops sustained economic activity, since without it the token's value rests on the durability of attention. Our Shiba Inu price prediction tracks that picture.

Two scenarios frame the outcome. In the constructive one, the July low holds, volume returns above its 90-day average, and the price reclaims the 50-day line, which would put the 200-day average at 0.00000592 US dollars back in view. In the adverse one, the market closes below 0.00000411 US dollars on rising volume, at which point the sideways phase since July resolves downward and the assumption of a base is refuted. That second condition is the clearest test available, and it belongs in writing before a position is opened.

Buying Shiba Inu: what to take away

1. The trend has not turned. At 0.00000446 US dollars the price sits 24.6 per cent below the 200-day average and 3.9 per cent below the 50-day average, with a twelve-month loss of 65.5 per cent. Anyone buying is buying against that, and our Shiba Inu price prediction follows the levels that would have to change first.
2. The July low is the reference point. The twelve-month low of 0.00000411 US dollars lies 8.5 per cent below the market and defines when the current pattern has failed. Execution costs matter at these levels, and our exchange comparison shows where the spread does the damage.
3. Custody belongs in the plan from the start. A position held beyond a few weeks does not belong on an exchange indefinitely, and the options are set out in our hardware wallet comparison.

Disclosure: Some of the providers mentioned in this article work with us through partner programmes. This has no influence on the price analysis or on the assessment of the chart situation; the price data come from a public market data source and can be verified there.

(As of 12 August 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices, fees and terms change; check them with the provider before every purchase. Crypto assets are subject to high price volatility, and a total loss is possible.)

Three weeks after a Flash release that couldn't produce a working file, Google's budget tier zero-shots a playable game. It still can't reason, and a free 27B model still writes better.

A California bill is awaiting an Assembly vote to "place guardrails" around AI chatbots and prevent them from acting as therapists.

Apple is pairing its in-house model with Alibaba’s Qwen as it prepares to bring Apple Intelligence to Chinese iPhones.

The filing would turn raw footage into labeled clips of who did what, without anyone opting in.

The proposed World Liberty Trust Company would take over issuance of the USD1 stablecoin from BitGo.

Binance founder CZ completely abandons his public wallet after a routine spam cleanup accidentally triggered a $30 million meme coin pump.

While stocks hit record highs, Bloomberg’s McGlone breaks down why Bitcoin risks a drop to $10,000.

Non custodial wallet, SafePal issues urgent disclosure after customer information is accessed.

A sustained move lower could increase pressure on Zcash (ZEC), potentially bringing the $450 level into sharper focus.

Dogecoin historical fact resonates as interest returns to the dog themed coin.

TLDR:

• CZ will abandon his public wallet after meme coin spam made it difficult to locate and manage BNB holdings.
• The wallet received over $1 million in unsolicited tokens after Zhao publicly identified the address in 2025.
• Zhao burned 400 million third-party tokens worth about $1.6 million during a July 2026 wallet cleanup.
• CZ plans to donate $960,000 in BNB and BinanceLife tokens to Giggle Academy before abandoning the wallet.

Binance co-founder Changpeng “CZ” Zhao is retiring a public crypto wallet after unsolicited token deposits made the address increasingly difficult to manage. Zhao said on August 16 that he encountered the problem while testing Trust Wallet and struggling to locate his BNB balance.

The wallet had accumulated so many unwanted assets that routine navigation became difficult, turning simple account management into a recurring public event. Attempts to remove tokens created another problem as every burn transaction attracted fresh attention from traders and the wider crypto community.

Zhao concluded that the wallet could not be permanently cleaned because additional tokens continued arriving after earlier cleanup efforts. Instead, he plans to transfer assets he wants to preserve and then stop using the address.

The remaining BNB and BinanceLife tokens bought with BNB will be donated to Giggle Academy before the wallet is abandoned. Odaily valued the planned donation at approximately $960,000, giving the retirement decision a charitable endpoint.

Public CZ Wallet Became a Target for Unwanted Crypto Transfers

The issue began after Zhao publicly identified the address in February 2025 following a donation of 150 BNB. That transfer was worth about $100,000, but public visibility quickly made the address a destination for unsolicited crypto deposits.

More than $1 million in tokens was later sent to the wallet, prompting Zhao to say he would not keep those assets personally. By July 2026, Zhao said the wallet held tens of thousands of separate tokens.

During one cleanup, he sent 400 million third-party tokens, worth roughly $1.6 million, to the standard 0x…dEaD burn address. Meanwhile, Arkham data placed spam assets destroyed from Zhao-linked wallets above $6.24 million during the previous year.

The problem stems from the permissionless nature of blockchains, which allows anyone to send tokens to a public address without the owner’s approval. For high-profile figures, however, those transfers can create confusion as holding, moving, or destroying unwanted assets remains publicly visible on-chain.

As a result, even routine wallet maintenance can be interpreted as a market signal, repeatedly drawing attention to otherwise unrelated tokens. Meme coin spam therefore became more than simple clutter, as ordinary cleanup transactions continued to generate speculation and market discussion.

Giggle Academy to Receive $960K in Remaining Assets

Zhao’s chosen exit is to move legitimate holdings out, donate selected assets, and leave the address inactive. Giggle Academy, which he founded, operates as a free online education platform for children using gamification, artificial intelligence, and multilingual learning resources.

Zhao said in July that the nonprofit generally converts most donated crypto into BNB around month-end before selling BNB when operational funds are needed. BinanceLife, another donated asset, traded near $0.504 on August 16 and was up about 5.7% in 24 hours.

Its market capitalization stood near $500 million, while Binance describes the BNB Chain token as community-driven and primarily influenced by market sentiment. Zhao described the retired wallet as an “effective” burn address, although abandoning an address differs technically from sending assets to an inaccessible burn wallet.

Future Meme coin spam sent there would remain visible, but it would no longer prompt wallet cleanup or public reaction. By pairing the retirement with a $960,000 donation to Giggle Academy, Zhao is closing a year-long wallet problem with a defined final transfer.

The post CZ Abandons Public Wallet After Meme Coin Spam, Donates $960K to Giggle Academy appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Global bond yields are climbing, with the Bloomberg Global Long Bond Index yielding about 4.2%, its highest level since July 2008.
• Traders price roughly 400 basis points of interest rate hikes across seven major markets, while two-thirds of 32 tracked swap markets signal increases.
• South Korea leads the tightening outlook with more than 100 basis points priced, while Japan, Canada, Britain, and the euro area outpace US expectations.
• Higher government borrowing costs make refinancing more expensive, weaken bond diversification, and increase valuation pressure on richly priced equities.

Global bond yields have climbed to levels last seen during the 2008 financial crisis, raising pressure across fixed-income markets. The Bloomberg Global Long Bond Index yield now sits near 4.2%, its highest reading since July 2008. Investors are pricing tighter monetary policy across the world, rather than focusing only on the Federal Reserve. 

Two-thirds of 32 swap markets tracked by Bloomberg now signal interest rate hikes during the coming year. Rising oil prices, heavy public spending, and strong artificial intelligence investment are keeping inflation risks elevated. Governments consequently face costlier refinancing while bondholders confront further price losses in many markets.

Global Bond Yields Reflect a Broader Interest Rate Reset

Market pricing clearly shows the pressure extends far beyond Washington. Traders expect borrowing costs to rise faster in Japan, Canada, Britain, and the euro area. South Korea leads the tracked swap markets, with more than 100 basis points of tightening priced over 12 months. Across seven major markets, expected increases total about 400 basis points.

Several forces are driving the change. The Iran conflict has lifted oil prices, feeding transport, production, and household energy costs. Fiscal spending supports demand while requiring governments to sell more debt. Meanwhile, investment in artificial intelligence infrastructure is strengthening growth and expanding corporate financing needs.

The OECD projects G20 inflation at 4% in 2026, up from 3.4% in 2025. It expects global growth to slow from 3.4% last year to 2.8% this year. Its baseline assumes energy disruptions ease and most policy rates stay broadly stable. In its prolonged-disruption scenario, rates rise 50 to 75 basis points across many economies.

Those pressures leave global bond yields sensitive to energy developments and government funding plans. When global bond yields rise, prices fall, hurting holders of longer-dated debt. Longer maturities carry greater duration risk, so their prices react more sharply to changes in expected rates.

Global bond yields raise the cost of issuing replacement debt. Refinancing risks matter more as public debt ratios exceed crisis-era levels in many economies. The OECD expects its aggregate debt-to-GDP ratio to reach approximately 113% by 2027. Large borrowing needs can keep government borrowing costs elevated even if central banks pause.

Why Higher Borrowing Costs Threaten Portfolio Diversification

The shift challenges the role government bonds play in portfolios. Investors hold sovereign debt to offset equity losses during growth shocks. Yet inflation-driven tightening can push stock and bond prices lower together. That weakens the protection expected from a traditional stock-and-bond allocation.

Fidelity International portfolio manager George Efstathopoulos has kept government debt exposure low. His holdings include Treasury inflation-protected securities and Brazilian bonds. He argues persistent inflation, fiscal stimulus, energy dependence, and geopolitical shocks reduce bonds’ diversification value.

Equity markets face pressure from global bond yields. Higher discount rates reduce the present value of future corporate earnings. That effect can hit richly valued growth shares hard. Tighter conditions can slow borrowing, investment, and dealmaking across the economy.

Cash grows more competitive as policy rates and short-term yields rise. Columbia Threadneedle portfolio manager Ed Al-Hussainy says higher cash returns give investors choices. Governments and companies must therefore offer stronger yields to attract buyers. That competition can lift financing costs for public and private borrowers.

Currency trades face added volatility. Rising global bond yields can shift international rate differentials and redirect capital flows between currencies. Tightening in Japan, Europe, or Canada could strengthen currencies and disrupt positions built around American rate dominance.

The risk depends on inflation persistence and the scale of interest rate hikes. Lower energy prices could ease pressure, while prolonged supply disruption could deepen it. Bond markets must also absorb government issuance and expanding AI-related corporate debt. Each additional supply wave tests investor demand at yields already near multi-year highs.

The post Global Bond Yields Reach 2008 High as Rate Risks Spread Worldwide appeared first on Blockonomi.

Potential OpenAI or Anthropic IPOs could direct more institutional capital toward artificial-intelligence businesses in 2026. That attention may also spill into crypto, but an AI label does not prove product quality.

MemeToro is strengthening its AI token presale case with a public validation layer that checks whether every proposal uses collected evidence and follows predefined allocation and funding rules.

Watch the most up to date Youtube Video on MemeToro Here:

IPO Attention Could Reprice AI Narratives

Public listings from leading AI companies would give traditional investors direct exposure to the sector. They could also increase media coverage, valuations, and demand for related infrastructure.

Crypto projects may benefit, but the connection is indirect. An OpenAI or Anthropic IPO would not endorse MemeToro or $MT. Investors still need to examine code, liquidity, distribution, and usage.

This distinction matters because smaller AI-linked tokens often suffer from thin liquidity and low holder counts when attention fades.

Evidence Validation Limits Model Fabrication

MemeToro’s trend connector collects news and X signals with source URLs. When the agent creates a token proposal, its evidence must come from that collected set.

If the model cites a link it never retrieved, the validator rejects the draft. This addresses a common AI failure mode: producing a convincing source that does not support the output or was never observed.

The check confirms provenance, not truth. A genuine article can still contain errors, bias, or manipulation. Human and downstream policy review remain necessary.

Allocation Rules Strengthen The AI Token Presale

MemeToro also requires proposal allocations to total exactly 100% and rejects insider allocation above zero. It checks funding values for structural consistency before accepting a draft.

These are software-level checks, not mainnet enforcement. The current pipeline rejects proposal files; future audited contracts must ensure actual token supply, wallet limits, funding thresholds, refunds, and liquidity match the approved manifest.

The public repository lets developers inspect this logic, giving MemeToro an advantage over a private AI token presale.

$MT Links AI Creation With User Products

MemeToro $MT is intended to fund future token concepts and provide access to the platform. Other uses include staking, transactions, rewards, and planned prediction markets.

MemeToro’s AI discovery filters could help traders identify new assets. Native memecoin trading, portfolio visualization, creator fees up to 1.2%, and anti-bot protections expand the product beyond proposal generation.

The news portal provides market summaries and configuration guides, helping less technical users understand the tools surrounding an AI-generated launch.

Stage 5 Offers Early Exposure

MemeToro has raised $89,389 toward its $122,988.62 Stage 5 target, reaching 72.68%. $MT is priced at $0.00285 against a projected $0.02448 launch price.

Buyers can use Visa, Mastercard, Apple Pay, Google Pay, or supported crypto. The price difference supports a bullish AI token presale narrative, but neither an IPO cycle nor projected pricing guarantees gains.

Why Caution Can Become An Advantage

MemeToro’s agent does not control production deployment keys. The scanner gathers, the model proposes, validation checks, and future contracts execute approved terms.

This separated design limits damage from manipulated inputs. If institutional AI interest rises, MemeToro can present checkable evidence rather than hype alone.

More Information on MemeToro ($MT) Presale Here:

Website: https://memetoro.com/

X: https://x.com/memetoro_mt

Telegram: https://t.me/memetoro_mt

The post AI Token Presale: MemeToro Adds Evidence Validation as Institutional AI Capital Eyes 2026 IPOs appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Vitalik credits Bitcoin’s UTXO design as Ethereum explores a hybrid state model targeting 1,000x scaling.
• Native UTXOs could cut permanent payment-state usage by 99.8%, reducing one billion entries to about 300 MB.
• Ethereum’s state grows about 100 GB yearly, making state efficiency a key constraint on 1,000x scaling.
• Recursive STARKs could add about 2 MB/s bandwidth with eight peers and 500ms aggregation as activity scales.

Ethereum is increasingly borrowing ideas from Bitcoin as researchers confront one of blockchain’s hardest scaling problems: keeping state growth manageable as network activity expands. In an Aug. 16 post, Vitalik Buterin credited Bitcoin developers for pioneering concepts now influencing Ethereum research, specifically highlighting the Utreexo project.

Rather than replacing Ethereum’s account system, the emerging strategy would combine UTXO-style structures with dynamic state and other approaches. The objective is to scale activity substantially while preserving decentralization, censorship resistance, and practical node operation.

Ethereum Turns to Bitcoin’s UTXO Model for 1,000x Scaling

The shift forms part of a broader research roadmap targeting roughly 1,000x long-term scaling across execution, data availability, and state management. Buterin wrote in February that execution could eventually scale about 1,000x through ZK-EVMs.

Meanwhile, PeerDAS and blobs could provide roughly 500x data scaling. However, State presents a different challenge as Ethereum’s active state is already expanding by approximately 100 GB annually.

As persistent accounts and storage entries accumulate, nodes must handle an increasingly large amount of information, potentially raising the cost of operating the network. To address that problem, a July proposal from Ethereum researcher Toni Wahrstätter introduced native UTXOs as one possible solution.

Under Ethereum’s current account model, receiving ETH or tokens can create persistent state. By contrast, a UTXO-style payment functions as a one-time object that can later be consumed when spent.

According to the proposal, native UTXOs could reduce permanent state requirements by roughly 99.8% for payment workloads that do not need persistent storage. Rather than keeping each complete payment object in active state, Ethereum could preserve its creation information in historical logs and retain only a compact marker indicating whether it was spent.

The potential reduction becomes clearer at scale. At one billion entries, the proposal estimates that permanent UTXO state could require roughly 300 MB, compared with between 100 GB and 150 GB for equivalent account or storage entries.

That gap helps explain why Bitcoin-inspired architecture has become increasingly relevant to Ethereum’s scaling research. Still, the proposed model would be hybrid rather than replacing Ethereum’s existing account structure entirely.

Smart contracts and applications requiring dynamic storage could continue using conventional accounts. Meanwhile, simpler transfers could move into lighter state classes, reducing the amount of permanent information nodes must retain.

Bitcoin’s Utreexo project provides another reference point for this approach. Instead of requiring every node to store the full UTXO dataset, Utreexo uses a compact Merkle-tree accumulator alongside cryptographic inclusion proofs.

As a result, Bitcoin Optech estimates that the design can reduce local state requirements to only a few kilobytes while still allowing nodes to perform full transaction validation.

Native UTXOs Could Slash Ethereum Payment State by 99.8%

Ethereum researchers are also examining how native UTXOs could work alongside Buterin’s proposed recursive-STARK mempool. Under that system, mempool nodes would periodically combine transaction-validity proofs into recursive STARKs.

Individual proofs could reach roughly 128 kB, yet aggregation would prevent bandwidth requirements from rising proportionally with transaction activity. One example estimates about 2 MB per second of additional bandwidth for a node maintaining eight peers with 500-millisecond aggregation intervals.

A later research discussion connected this design with native UTXOs. Large numbers of independent spends could potentially be proven recursively before being represented by a substantially smaller aggregate proof.

However, the architecture remains experimental rather than an upcoming network change. The native UTXO proposal partly depends on EIP-8141 Frame Transactions, which remains classified as a draft.

The research nevertheless shows how Ethereum’s scaling strategy is broadening. Bitcoin-inspired state structures are now being studied alongside zero-knowledge proofs to reduce node burdens while supporting substantially higher activity.

The post Vitalik Credits Bitcoin as Ethereum Eyes UTXO Model for 1,000x Scaling appeared first on Blockonomi.

Key Takeaways

• XRP held $0.9990 on August 17, 2026, a 3.5% weekly dip that still left $62.6 billion of market value in place.
• Roughly 62.68 billion coins circulate, so one cent of price carries about $627 million of market value.
• Any XRP price forecast has to reckon with the $3.65 record of July 17, 2025, a level spot sits 72.6% below.
• Bullski sells $BULLSKI through a 16-stage presale, where stage 1 sold out at $0.00001 and stage 2 asks $0.000015.

One round number frames this XRP price prediction, and XRP just slipped under it. Spot printed $0.9990 on August 17, 2026, a whisker below the $1.00 mark traders treat as a floor. Sitting behind that quote are a $62.6 billion market cap and a soft week, down 3.5%.

Below we set price bands against the coin’s real supply, then look at why some of the same readers are watching a 16-stage meme coin sale that has already cleared its opening rung.

XRP Price Prediction 2026: The $1.00 Line in Focus

Round numbers stick in traders’ heads. XRP slipped under $1.00 during a soft week, and that single tick changes how the chart gets read. Sellers defend the line from above now, so an XRP price prediction 2026 that assumes a fast reclaim is asking a lot.

Attention drifted toward smaller tickets while this played out, which is why the live $BULLSKI stage keeps turning up in the same browser tabs.

Value behind that price came to $62.6 billion, spread across roughly 62.68 billion circulating coins. Nudge the price one cent and about $627 million of market cap moves with it. Readers who want the raw feed can pull today’s numbers from XRP’s CoinGecko market page.

By the numbers: XRP sits 72.6% under its record of $3.65 from July 17, 2025. Bitcoin trades at $62,970 and is 50.1% under its own $126,080 peak. Records drift a long way from spot in this market, and both charts say so.

How High Will XRP Go? Bands Built Off Real Supply

Forecasts get useful once they carry a market cap. Multiply the roughly 62.68 billion coins by a target and you see what the market must actually fund. Market cap math strips the noise out of a Ripple XRP price prediction fast.

Everything in the table below is arithmetic, not a call.

Reading down that table, $2.00 asks buyers to fund $125.4 billion, twice what XRP carries now. $5.00 would push the token past Ethereum’s current $226.7 billion. An XRP prediction can still point there, though the capital has to arrive from somewhere real.

XRP Outlook for 2030 and 2040: What Would Have to Change

Long horizons are guesses in a suit. An XRP price prediction 2030 leans on settlement volume that has not arrived yet. Stretch the same model into an XRP price prediction 2040 and you are also betting on rules nobody has written.

Analysts who publish those figures usually anchor them to adoption curves, so read the output as one scenario among many.

Nearer in, the picture is quieter than the headlines suggest. Total crypto value stands at $2.250 trillion, close to flat on the day. Chainlink led the majors this week at $9.35 and up 13.6%, while XRP gave back 3.5%.

Money rotated between tickers rather than walking out the door.

Where Bullski Sits Beside an XRP Price Forecast

Bullski is a meme coin issued as an ERC-20 token on Ethereum. Its count is capped at 120 billion and cannot be topped up later. Sale buyers work through 40 percent of that total, the slice set aside for the presale ladder, while the rest covers liquidity, staking rewards and the vested team block.

Buyers took the full 1,192,283,023 allocation of stage 1 at $0.00001, which closed that rung. Pricing on the second rung is $0.000015. Counted on August 17, 2026, 45,829,562 of its 1,400,000,000 tokens had gone and 1,354,170,438 were still there.

Above it sits a $0.00002 step, with $0.0025 marked as the reference price for listing at the end of the 16-stage run.

Good to know: The $BULLSKI contract is verified on Etherscan, which puts the code in public view. Liquidity locks at listing. Team tokens release on a vesting schedule instead of one block, and an audit in process runs alongside the sale.

Readers can also see how each Bullski rung is priced before committing a cent.

Meme money did not vanish in the dip either. Sector value came to $24.77 billion and edged up 0.34% on the day, against flat tape almost everywhere else. Readers tracking the theme usually start with the meme coins buyers are choosing now.

Rungs here advance on sellout, never on a clock. We unpacked that mechanic in our earlier look at this coin, and it explains why a live counter beats a countdown clock for anyone timing an entry.

Take the Stage Two Price Before the Ladder Steps Again

Bullski’s first rung is finished at $0.00001. Today’s rung asks $0.000015, and 45,829,562 tokens of it had been claimed by August 17, 2026. Next along the ladder is $0.00002, a third more per token than the price showing right now.

Buy $BULLSKI at $0.000015: keep ETH, BNB or USDT ready in a wallet that handles Ethereum, load the Bullski page itself, confirm which rung the counter is showing, and set the amount you want at that price.

Remember: Rungs move when they sell out, not when a timer expires. Only the counter on the official site shows which stage is open on the day you buy.

Do your own research before buying any presale token. This article is not financial advice.

XRP Price Prediction: Questions Readers Ask

Will XRP Go Up?

Nobody can promise that. XRP is 3.5% lower over seven days and sits at $0.9990, just under a line traders watch closely. Reclaiming $1.00 with volume behind it would be the first real signal.

An XRP price forecast built on less than that is guesswork with a chart attached.

How High Will XRP Go?

Supply sets the ceiling on that answer. With about 62.68 billion coins out, $2.00 needs $125.4 billion of market value and $3.65 needs $228.8 billion. Both are heavy asks inside a $2.250 trillion market, though neither number is impossible.

What Will XRP Be Worth in 2030?

Honest answer, nobody knows. An XRP price prediction 2030 depends on how much settlement traffic the network actually wins by then. Published ranges shift every quarter as that traffic changes.

Treat them as scenarios and size any position to match.

Why Are XRP Watchers Looking at a Presale Stage?

Scale explains most of it. XRP needs $125.4 billion of fresh market cap just to double, while a stage-priced token starts from a far smaller base. That gap is why plenty of readers hold both, and why they buy $BULLSKI at the stage two price rather than wait for the $0.00002 rung.

For More Information

Website: Visit the official Bullski website at bullski.io

Telegram: Join the Bullski Telegram channel at t.me/BullskiCoinOfficial

X (Twitter): Follow Bullski on X at x.com/bullskicoin

The post XRP Price Prediction: What the $1.00 Line Means for the Next Move appeared first on Blockonomi.

Equity perpetual futures on major digital asset exchanges reached about $250 billion in monthly volume in July. That marks a seventeenfold jump from roughly $15 billion in April, showing how quickly the market has expanded in just three months.

According to analytics firm CryptoQuant, that expansion has turned crypto exchanges into round-the-clock venues for contracts linked to traditional equities. The products give users continuous access to familiar stocks without being limited by conventional market trading hours.

Binance Leads as AI and Chip Stocks Dominate Volume

Binance remained the dominant venue in July, handling roughly $193 billion in equity perpetual futures volume, equivalent to about 76% of the total market. Bitfer, Bybit, and Gate followed at a considerable distance.

CryptoQuant identified Gate as the fastest-growing venue during the month. Its equity perpetual futures volume increased by about 308% from June, compared with 176% for Bybit and 59% for Binance. The report also noted that Gate had recorded consecutive monthly growth since May.

Despite the broader rise in activity, trading remains concentrated across a small group of technology and semiconductor-related assets. SanDisk, SK Hynix, Micron, and the leveraged semiconductor ETF SOXL made up the core of what analysts describe as the AI-memory complex.

On Gate, in particular, the concentration was especially pronounced. SanDisk and SK Hynix together accounted for 53% of the exchange’s total equity perpetual futures volume last month.

Beyond Gate, the broader market also remained focused on companies linked to artificial intelligence and memory chips. This narrow concentration has made these assets the main focus of activity across the emerging equity perpetual market.

Crypto Platforms Push Beyond Traditional Assets

The products also reflect a broader shift in how digital asset exchanges are expanding beyond traditional cryptocurrency markets. Rather than focusing only on assets such as BTC and Ether, exchanges are offering perpetual contracts linked to traditional financial instruments.

At the same time, the approach allows crypto-native capital to access equity-linked products through infrastructure that operates continuously. The contracts therefore provide exposure to selected traditional assets while retaining the always-on structure associated with crypto markets.

However, CryptoQuant’s report shows a market that has expanded rapidly while remaining focused on a narrow group of assets. Whether activity eventually spreads across a broader range of equity perpetual contracts will depend on how the market develops beyond its current concentration.

The post Crypto Equity Perpetual Volume Hits $250B in July, Up 17x in Three Months: CryptoQuant appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitcoin remains trapped in a low-momentum environment, with price action increasingly characterized by choppy consolidation rather than a decisive directional move. The lack of liquidity and volume continues to limit follow-through, while the current structure leaves room for another liquidity-driven move before a stronger trend develops.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

On the daily timeframe, BTC is still moving sideways after the sharp correction from the $66K area. The broader structure remains compressed, with the price currently around $63K and trading well below the major descending moving averages. The 100-day MA is still acting as an important overhead reference, while the declining white trendline reinforces the broader resistance structure.

The main scenario remains a lack of momentum. With market liquidity and volume appearing limited, the asset has been unable to establish a sustained breakout in either direction, resulting in a prolonged and choppy sideways phase. The first significant resistance is located around $66.2K-$67.2K, where the horizontal supply zone and descending trendline converge.

On the downside, the $58.5K-$59.8K region remains the most important major demand area visible on the chart. A deeper move into this zone would not necessarily invalidate the broader recovery structure, but a decisive breakdown below it would significantly weaken the bullish case.

For now, the absence of volume and momentum favors continued consolidation rather than an immediate breakout.

BTC/USDT 4-Hour Chart

The 4-hour structure provides a more defined setup. BTC has been compressing between a descending upper trendline and an ascending lower trendline, creating a tightening range. The asset is currently trading close to the lower boundary of this structure, around $63K, making the ascending trendline the key near-term support.

A break below this trendline would introduce a bearish scenario. If the breakdown is confirmed with follow-through, BTC could first revisit the $60.3K-$60.9K support zone, followed by the broader $58.1K-$59.6K area. This would also bring the lower liquidity clusters highlighted on the liquidation heatmap into focus.

On the upside, the descending trendline around $64.5K-$65K is the first obstacle. Above that, the $66.2K-$67.2K zone represents a much stronger resistance area. A breakout through this region would be required to materially improve the short-term structure.

Therefore, the immediate setup is largely defined by the two converging trendlines. A break below the ascending support would favor a deeper correction, while a breakout above the descending resistance would invalidate the near-term bearish structure.

Sentiment Analysis

The Binance liquidation heatmap highlights a significant concentration of liquidity around the current consolidation range, with particularly notable clusters extending through the $53K-$56K region. There is also substantial liquidity above the market around $66K-$67K and at higher levels.

This distribution is important because the market has spent an extended period moving sideways without generating a decisive directional impulse. In such an environment, liquidity clusters can become potential targets before the next sustained move develops.

The lower liquidity concentration is particularly notable. The heatmap suggests that a liquidity hunt below the $58K region remains possible if the current 4-hour support structure fails. Such a move could sweep leveraged positions and provide the liquidity needed for a subsequent recovery. However, this remains a potential scenario rather than a confirmed bottom signal.

Overall, the charts continue to point toward a market lacking momentum and volume. A downside liquidity sweep, potentially extending below $58K, could precede a stronger bullish cycle, but BTC would first need to reclaim the key resistance zones and demonstrate meaningful volume expansion to confirm that transition.

The post Bitcoin Price Analysis: Will BTC Finally Break Out of Consolidation Next Week? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

XRP remains under pressure, with the broader structure still favoring the bears as the asset trades near the $1.00 area. The market has lost momentum after the previous decline, and the latest price action suggests that a sustained recovery has yet to develop.

Ripple Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

On the daily timeframe, XRP remains inside a clearly defined descending structure. The price is trading well below the major moving averages. This keeps the broader trend bearish despite the consolidation seen over the past several weeks.

The $1.02-$1.04 area is now an important resistance zone. XRP previously traded around this region before breaking lower, and the latest candles remain below it. A recovery above this zone would be an initial sign that buyers are attempting to regain control, although the descending trendline would remain a larger obstacle.

On the downside, the immediate structure is becoming increasingly important around the $1.00 psychological level. A sustained move below this area could expose the blue demand zone around $0.91-$0.97. This region represents the next major support visible on the chart and could become relevant if the current consolidation resolves to the downside.

For now, the lack of a meaningful bullish reversal suggests that the market is still in a corrective phase. A break above the descending trendline and the $1.02-$1.04 resistance zone would be needed to materially improve the daily structure. Otherwise, another test of the lower support area remains possible.

XRP/USDT 4-Hour Chart

The 4-hour chart provides a more immediate bearish picture. XRP has been forming lower highs beneath a descending trendline, while the recent rebound attempts have repeatedly failed to produce a meaningful structural breakout.

The asset is currently hovering around $1.00 and has already moved below the $1.02-$1.03 support area shown on the chart. This former support could now act as resistance if XRP attempts to recover. The descending trendline overhead further reinforces the bearish structure, making the $1.02-$1.07 region an important area for any potential reversal.

The current consolidation just below $1.00 suggests that sellers have not completely lost control, but momentum is also becoming compressed. If the $1.00 area fails decisively, the next major downside reference is the $0.91-$0.97 support zone visible on the daily chart.

Conversely, reclaiming $1.02-$1.03 and subsequently breaking the descending trendline would weaken the bearish setup. A stronger recovery above the $1.06-$1.08 area would provide a more convincing signal that the current downtrend is losing momentum. Until then, the path of least resistance remains tilted to the downside.

The post Ripple Price Prediction: Can XRP Defend $1 or Will $0.90 Come Into Play Next? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Popular cryptocurrency analysts continue to debate whether BTC has already bottomed in this cycle, and, interestingly, several agree that the actual capitulation event is not here yet, but it’s close.

Beyond predicting when it’s supposed to occur, Ali Martinez went further by outlining potential bearish price targets.

When and How Low

CryptoPotato reported yesterday the combined conclusion from Martinez, Rekt Fencer, Peter Brandt, and other analysts claiming that the long-anticipated and debated BTC bottom will take place in early October. The idea is simple, but it’s surprisingly accurate – history.

Although historical performances do not guarantee a repeat, the fact that the primary cryptocurrency has bottomed out at approximately 364 after the bull market top on more than one occasion has the community waiting for October to see if it plays out again. As such, analysts speculate that the period between October 4 and 16 represents a potential macro bottom.

Since that sounds historically accurate and promising, given the fact that there are perhaps less than two months left, let’s join the fun. Let’s accept that bitcoin indeed bottoms at the start of Q4. The question that comes next is: at what price?

Martinez advised investors to prepare and initiate a long-term dollar-cost-averaging strategy and accumulate more BTC within a wide range between $62,000 and $48,000. He described the latter as the “final capitulation candle,” and concluded that after that it would be “time to get BULLISH.”

Fellow analyst Merlijn The Trader also weighed in on bitcoin’s structure, indicating that the RSI divergence that marked the previous market tops has built the same shape, but inverted, at the bottom now. In contrast to Martinez, he noted that the bottom might actually be closer, and he won’t be waiting for a dip below $50,000, even though a monthly close beneath $58,000 would invalidate the pattern.

OI Suggests Big Move Ahead

The evident dullness of the market hasn’t deterred leveraged investors from opening big futures positions. Data shared by Ted Pillows shows that the BTC open interest has skyrocketed to a three-year high after a sharp uptick in the past week or so.

This means that every larger volatility spike will be exacerbated by the fact that there’s so much leverage in the market now. Recall the events of the October 2025 massacre when such investors lost over $19 billion as prices unraveled. And the BTC OI then was slightly lower than it is now. As such, Pillows concluded that so much leverage typically ends with lots of wrecked positions.

Bitcoin Open Interest is now at its highest level in 3 years.

Too much leverage is back, and this only ends with people getting rekt. pic.twitter.com/N2WbQATT0x

— Ted (@TedPillows) August 15, 2026

The post How Low Will Bitcoin Go? Analysts Pinpoint a Bottom Date and Price Range appeared first on CryptoPotato.

[PRESS RELEASE – Miami, Florida, USA, August 16th, 2026]

BiggerZ is strengthening its position as a fairness-first betting platform, bringing casino gaming, sports betting and prediction markets together under one account while making transparency, verifiability and clearly defined rules central to the player experience.

As online betting platforms expand across crypto, casino gaming, sports and prediction markets, BiggerZ is taking a different approach to how these products are presented to players: fairness should be explained rather than simply claimed.

The platform’s approach is built around four principles – transparency, clarity, verifiability and defined rules – applied at the moments where players would otherwise be asked to simply trust an operator.

BiggerZ combines a crypto casino, sportsbook, and prediction markets product through one account and one balance, supporting cryptocurrency alongside selected fiat payment methods.

Fairness That Players Can Verify

One of the clearest examples of this approach is BiggerZ Touch, the platform’s exclusive collection of short-format fair games, including Mines, Dice, Plinko, Hi-Lo, Keno, Baccarat, Limbo and Soccer.

Eligible BiggerZ Touch outcomes include a provably fair transparency layer, allowing players to independently verify results rather than relying solely on what appears on the platform interface.

This distinction is important. Third-party slots and live dealer games remain governed by their respective providers’ certified systems, RNG controls and audit standards. BiggerZ Touch adds a separate verification mechanism for eligible in-house game outcomes.

For BiggerZ, the principle extends beyond casino results: players should be able to understand the mechanism governing an outcome before committing funds.

Transparency Beyond Casino Games

The same fairness-first philosophy extends across BiggerZ’s sportsbook and prediction markets.

In the BiggerZ sportsbook, fairness is primarily a question of settlement clarity. Market rules, live betting conditions, void bets, cancelled or postponed events and settlement conditions are defined through the applicable rules so players can understand how their bets will be resolved.

With BiggerZ Prediction Markets, transparency centres on defined resolution.

Markets can cover real-world outcomes across crypto, sport, finance, politics, culture, entertainment and major world events. Each market is connected to specific resolution criteria, with its wording, timing, settlement conditions and specified data source determining the final outcome.

The objective is straightforward: users should be able to understand what must happen, when it must happen and what determines the result before taking a position.

Clearer Rules Around Payments and Verification

BiggerZ also applies the same principle to payments and account verification.

The platform supports cryptocurrencies including Bitcoin, Ethereum, USDT and USDC alongside other digital assets and selected fiat payment methods, depending on location and account status.

Crypto deposits are credited following the required network confirmations, while BiggerZ supports instant crypto withdrawals for eligible approved transactions, subject to network conditions and any required account verification.

Verification requirements are governed by the platform’s Terms and Conditions, KYC Policy and AML Policy.

The philosophy is that requirements affecting access to funds or account activity should be available to players before they deposit or place a bet, rather than becoming visible only after a win.

Global Partnerships and Social Proof

BiggerZ has also built brand visibility through partnerships and documented betting activity involving globally recognised figures across music, sport and entertainment. High-profile activity has included names such as Cardi B, Rick Ross, French Montana, Rich The Kid, Nicky Jam and Nate Diaz.

These partnerships provide social proof and brand visibility alongside the platform’s broader focus on transparent game mechanics, settlement rules and verifiable outcomes.

One Fairness Standard Across Three Products

Casino games, sports betting and prediction markets operate differently, meaning fairness cannot rely on one mechanism alone.

For BiggerZ Touch, it can mean independently verifiable outcomes. For third-party casino games, it means provider-level certification and auditing. For sportsbook bets, it means clearly defined settlement rules. For prediction markets, it means transparent resolution criteria. And for payments and verification, it means communicating applicable conditions before they become relevant.

By connecting these products through one account and balance, BiggerZ is working to make that same expectation of transparency consistent across the wider platform.

Rather than treating fairness as a marketing claim, BiggerZ’s approach is to make the mechanisms behind outcomes, settlement and verification easier for players to understand.

About BiggerZ

BiggerZ is a crypto-friendly online betting platform combining casino gaming, sports betting and prediction markets through one account and balance. The platform supports cryptocurrency and selected fiat payment methods and includes BiggerZ Touch provably fair games, pre-match and live sports betting, esports and outcome-based prediction markets.

BiggerZ is operated by CDK PLAY INC SRL and licensed by the Government of the Autonomous Island of Anjouan, Union of Comoros.

The post BiggerZ: Building a Fairness-First Crypto Casino, Sportsbook, and Prediction Markets Platform appeared first on CryptoPotato.