The airstrikes exacerbate geopolitical tensions, destabilizing markets and highlighting the fragility of recent diplomatic efforts.

The post Israeli airstrikes kill family of four in Lebanon as crypto markets shed $1B in liquidations appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

China's AI cost efficiency could disrupt global AI markets, challenging US dominance and lowering barriers for AI-driven innovations worldwide.

The post China’s AI models compete on cost efficiency for training and inference appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Iran's demands for reopening the Strait of Hormuz could escalate regional tensions, affecting global oil markets and geopolitical stability.

The post Iran ties Strait of Hormuz reopening to $12B assets, oil waivers, Israel exit appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The World Cup 2026 is catalyzing crypto market dynamics, highlighting sports-crypto synergies and potential long-term growth opportunities.

The post World Cup 2026 fever hits Houston as Netherlands fans descend for Sweden clash, and crypto markets are paying attention appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The integration of crypto in the World Cup highlights its growing influence in sports, impacting fan engagement, investment dynamics, and digital infrastructure.

The post Argentina faces Austria in Group J as crypto fan tokens and prediction markets surge during 2026 World Cup appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

JPMorgan: Bitcoin Mining Costs Have ‘Worsened’ as BTC Trades Below Production Cost

Bitcoin has traded below the estimated cost to mine it for five straight months, according to JPMorgan analysts, leaving roughly one in five miners unprofitable and pushing publicly listed operators to sell a record volume of coins.

In a client note circulated this week, analysts led by managing director Nikolaos Panigirtzoglou said bitcoin mining economics have “worsened” in 2026. JPMorgan places the current all-in production cost of bitcoin at about $78,000, a figure derived from electricity, hardware depreciation, and overhead expenses across public miners. 

With bitcoin trading near $63,000, the gap between spot price and breakeven has created a sustained squeeze across the sector.

One of the most notable shifts JPMorgan flags is a structural change in how the Bitcoin network itself responds to price movements. The beta of mining difficulty to BTC prices — a measure of how much difficulty moves for a given move in price — has risen to 0.62 over the past six months. That figure reflects a network in which a higher share of miners sit at or near their cost floor, switching machines on or off as prices shift rather than maintaining consistent operations.

The pattern became visible in early June, when mining difficulty fell 10.09%, its second-largest single decline of the year. Bitcoin’s hashrate dropped 12% in June, according to Galaxy Research. A comparable 10% difficulty drawdown occurred in January, marking two episodes of this scale within one calendar year.

The financial strain has pushed publicly traded miners into a corner. Operators including MARA, CleanSpark, Riot Platforms, Cango, Core Scientific, and Bitdeer sold a combined 32,000 bitcoin in Q1 2026 alone to fund operating expenses, according to data from TheEnergyMag cited in the JPMorgan report. That figure surpasses those companies’ total bitcoin sales for all of 2025, and it sets a new quarterly record — eclipsing the previous high of 20,000 bitcoin set in Q2 2022, during the bear market that followed the Terra-Luna collapse.

Hashprice, a metric that captures mining revenue per unit of computing power, sits at roughly $33 per petahash per second per day, according to Hashrate Index. That level places approximately 20% of the global mining industry in unprofitable territory, per CoinShares’ Q1 2026 Bitcoin Mining Report, which JPMorgan cited in its analysis.

A contrarian signal for bitcoin 

Despite the grim conditions, JPMorgan’s analysts stopped short of a bearish conclusion. The team noted that weak market sentiment of this kind has, in past cycles, served as a contrarian indicator for future price appreciation. 

They expect elevated hashrate sensitivity and larger difficulty adjustments to persist as long as BTC remains well below its production cost.

Further capitulation among higher-cost operators is possible in the first half of 2026 without a material price recovery. Miners collectively held approximately 1.8 million bitcoin at the time of publication, down from 1.86 million at the end of 2023, a sign that treasury drawdowns are an ongoing feature of the current environment.

This post JPMorgan: Bitcoin Mining Costs Have ‘Worsened’ as BTC Trades Below Production Cost first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Prediction Market Kalshi Eyes IPO as Revenue Hits $2 Billion 

Kalshi, the prediction markets platform that has become the dominant force in U.S. event contracts, is in informal talks with investment banks about a potential initial public offering, The Information reported Thursday, citing sources familiar with the company’s financials.

The disclosure caps a period of rapid transformation for the four-year-old company. Kalshi’s annualized revenue has crossed $2 billion — triple its November 2025 figure — after spikes in trading tied to the NBA playoffs and the FIFA World Cup drove volume to record levels. 

In May, the platform recorded $16.81 billion in monthly trading volume, up from $14.81 billion in April.

The IPO conversations remain at an early stage, and no listing is expected before late 2027 or 2028. As part of the discussions, Kalshi is asking prospective bank advisers to integrate with its platform, a move designed to give institutional clients of those banks direct trading access.

The news lands weeks after Kalshi closed a $1 billion Series F round led by Coatue at a $22 billion valuation — double the company’s valuation from January. The round drew participation from Sequoia Capital, Andreessen Horowitz, Paradigm, IVP, Morgan Stanley, and ARK Invest.

Kalshi’s monster numbers

Kalshi commands more than 90% of U.S. prediction market activity. Its annualized trading volume climbed from $52 billion to $178 billion over the past year, and institutional trading on the platform jumped 800% in the six months ended in early May. 

Those numbers have drawn attention from Wall Street firms looking for new venues to deploy capital.

The company was founded in 2020 by Tarek Mansour and Luana Lage, graduates of the MIT and Y Combinator programs, to build a regulated exchange where users can trade on the outcomes of real-world events — from Federal Reserve decisions and economic indicators to sports results and political races. 

For years, Kalshi waged a legal battle against the CFTC for the right to list political event contracts. It prevailed in late 2024 when a federal court ruled in the company’s favor, unlocking a market that now generates billions in annual trading volume.

Kalshi plans to deploy its latest capital toward institutional expansion, including block trading capabilities, new risk products for hedge funds, asset managers, and insurers, and upgrades to its core trading infrastructure.

IPO timing will depend in part on broader market conditions and the durability of Kalshi’s growth. The prediction market space has attracted a wave of competitors, including Polymarket, but Kalshi’s status as a CFTC-regulated exchange gives it advantages in institutional adoption that decentralized rivals cannot replicate.

Should Kalshi go public in 2027 or 2028 at a valuation near its last private round, it would rank among the largest U.S. fintech IPOs in recent years. 

This post Prediction Market Kalshi Eyes IPO as Revenue Hits $2 Billion  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Kevin Warsh Still Needs to Manage the Dollar, While Bitcoin Runs Automatically

Kevin Warsh chaired his first Federal Open Market Committee meeting this week and immediately showed his hawkish colors. Rates stayed steady, but the new Fed Chair made it clear he intends to prioritize price stability and reduce loose forward guidance. While Warsh is focused on managing the dollar’s ongoing challenges, his debut actually highlights something much deeper: the dollar still requires constant human intervention to avoid dilution and debasement.

Bitcoin, by contrast, has a hard-capped supply and predictable issuance that no chairman can change. Warsh’s first meeting as Fed Chair makes the advantage of Bitcoin’s fixed supply more obvious than ever.

The System Warsh Is Trying to Manage

Warsh inherited a central bank that must constantly adjust the money supply to balance inflation and employment.

This is not a temporary problem. Its built into how fiat currencies operate. The Federal Reserve can expand or contract the money supply at will, and history shows it tends to expand over time.

Since the U.S. left the gold standard in 1971, the dollar has lost roughly 88% of its purchasing power. A dollar from that era now buys what about twelve cents buys today.

U.S. M2 money supply has grown from hundreds of billions of dollars to more than $22 trillion. Every major expansion represents dilution for existing holders.

The Structural Problem Fiat Cannot Escape

Even a disciplined and hawkish chairman like Warsh must work inside a system where the money supply is discretionary. Policy decisions, political pressures, and economic shocks all influence how much new money enters circulation. This creates recurring cycles of inflation and erosion of purchasing power. Bitcoin removes this discretion entirely.

Bitcoin’s Fixed Supply Changes the Equation

Bitcoin has a hard cap of 21 million coins. New supply is issued on a transparent schedule that halves every 210,000 blocks, roughly every four years, until issuance approaches zero around 2140. No individual, committee, or government can increase that total.

This creates a level of monetary predictability that fiat systems cannot match. The rules are enforced by code and network consensus rather than policy statements. Once a block is sufficiently confirmed, the transaction history becomes practically immutable.

Why Warsh’s Approach Makes the Contrast Clearer

Warsh’s emphasis on price stability and reduced forward guidance is an attempt to bring more discipline to the current system. That effort itself reveals the core difference: the dollar needs active management to prevent excessive debasement. Bitcoin’s supply rules do not require ongoing intervention or trust in any central authority.

A hawkish Fed Chair trying to restrain inflation is not a threat to Bitcoin’s long-term case. It is evidence that the fiat system continues to need restraint. Bitcoin was designed so that restraint is built into the protocol from the start.

The Practical Difference

Warsh’s first FOMC meeting shows a serious attempt to manage the dollar responsibly. At the same time, it underscores why a money with truly fixed and unchangeable supply rules offers a fundamentally different foundation.

Bitcoin does not promise stable prices in the short term. It promises something narrower but more powerful: a monetary base that cannot be diluted by policy decisions. In a world where even committed central bankers must constantly fight against expansion, that fixed supply stands out as the clearest structural advantage.

For public companies and operators sitting on large cash reserves, this reality carries direct consequences. Cash sitting in bank accounts or short-term instruments continues to face gradual erosion through inflation, even under a more disciplined Fed Chair. Warsh’s emphasis on price stability is welcome, but it does not change the fundamental design of fiat — where the supply can still expand when policymakers decide it must.

Many CFOs are now quietly reevaluating what it means to hold hundreds of millions, or even billions, in a currency whose value is subject to ongoing management. Bitcoin’s fixed supply offers a fundamentally different option: an asset that cannot be diluted by policy decisions and whose scarcity is guaranteed by protocol rather than promise.

For operators thinking beyond the next few quarters, treating a portion of treasury reserves as a long-term store of value rather than pure liquidity is becoming a more serious strategic consideration.

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

This post Kevin Warsh Still Needs to Manage the Dollar, While Bitcoin Runs Automatically first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Nick Ward.

Bitcoin Magazine

Franklin Templeton Files for Two ETFs That Reinvest Stock Dividends Into Bitcoin

Franklin Templeton has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission to launch two exchange-traded funds that channel corporate dividend payments directly into bitcoin, the latest sign of Wall Street’s push to embed cryptocurrency into traditional investment structures.

The Thursday filing registers the Franklin US Equity Bitcoin DRIP Index ETF and the Franklin US Innovation Bitcoin DRIP Index ETF, with an effective date as early as Sept. 1, 2026. 

The “DRIP” name borrows from dividend reinvestment plans — a mechanism long used by investors to compound stock positions over time — and repurposes it to accumulate bitcoin rather than additional shares.

Both funds launch with a 95% allocation to U.S. large-cap equities and a 5% allocation to bitcoin. The first tracks the VettaFi US Large-Cap 500 Bitcoin DRIP Index, offering broad market exposure across approximately 498 securities with market caps ranging from $7.5 billion to $4.9 trillion, while the second tracks a VettaFi innovation-focused variant concentrated on growth companies.

Under the index methodology, dividends generated by the underlying stock portfolios flow into bitcoin-linked instruments — including spot bitcoin exchange-traded products, futures contracts, options, and in some cases a wholly-owned subsidiary in the Cayman Islands — rather than being redistributed to investors or reinvested in equities. 

The structure creates what one analysis described as “an automatic, low-maintenance 5% bitcoin feed funded entirely by equity dividends.”

Quarterly rebalancing rules would trim bitcoin allocations above 5% back to 4.5%, while a hard cap limits bitcoin exposure to 20% of the portfolio between rebalancing periods. No fees have been disclosed in the preliminary filing.

Bitcoin ETFs are getting popular

The proposal arrives amid a wave of crypto ETF innovation following the SEC’s publication of generic listing standards for crypto-linked funds in late 2025. 

Bitwise predicted more than 100 such ETFs could launch in 2026, and Bloomberg Intelligence counted well over 100 filings in the pipeline at the end of last year. Franklin Templeton’s dividend-into-bitcoin design is the latest variation on a theme that has produced covered-call income products and other structured wrappers competing for assets beyond plain spot exposure, where BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust dominates with tens of billions in net assets.

The filings extend a broader digital asset buildout at Franklin Templeton. 

In May, Franklin Templeton entered a partnership with Payward — the parent of crypto exchange Kraken — to tokenize traditional investment products and offer its BENJI tokenized money market fund on Kraken’s platform as a collateral management tool for institutional clients. Earlier this month, Franklin Templeton integrated BENJI into MoonPay Trade, enabling institutional users to swap between stablecoins like USDC and USDT and the tokenized fund through MoonPay’s on-chain infrastructure.

This year, Franklin Templeton also launched a dedicated Franklin Crypto division through its acquisition of CoinFund spinoff 250 Digital, and struck a separate agreement with Ondo Finance to offer tokenized versions of its ETFs for 24/7 trading from crypto wallets, targeting investors outside the United States. Taken together, the moves position the $1.5 trillion asset manager as one of the most active traditional finance firms in the digital asset space.

The new Franklin Templeton DRIP ETFs join a broader institutional push into bitcoin at a moment when the asset is under price pressure. BTC trades below $62,700 as of Friday morning, off more than 50% from its October 2025 peak near $126,000. 

Just this week, BlackRock launched the iShares Bitcoin Premium Income ETF (BITA), a new fund that holds exposure to Bitcoin through IBIT while selling covered-call options on 25–35% of its holdings to generate monthly income, targeting annual yields of 15%–25%. BlackRock ETF executive Jay Jacobs said the product is designed to attract traditional investors by turning Bitcoin’s volatility into a source of income, while offering a lower-volatility alternative to holding Bitcoin directly.

This post Franklin Templeton Files for Two ETFs That Reinvest Stock Dividends Into Bitcoin first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

BlackRock Executive Calls Bitcoin “Too Big to Ignore”, Discusses New Bitcoin Premium Income ETF

BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager with more than $10 trillion under management, has launched a new Bitcoin exchange-traded product designed to generate monthly income for investors — a move the firm’s top ETF executive says is aimed at pulling in a wave of traditional investors who have kept their distance from the asset due to its volatility.

Jay Jacobs, BlackRock’s US Head of Equity ETFs, spoke to CoinTelegraph to discuss the launch of the iShares Bitcoin Premium Income ETF, ticker BITA, which began trading this week. The product represents a departure from conventional Bitcoin exposure by layering a covered-call strategy on top of the firm’s existing iShares Bitcoin Trust, known as IBIT.

“You can think about this as a hybrid strategy for investors,” Jacobs said. “You both have upside opportunity in Bitcoin, as well as the ability to generate income off of Bitcoin.”

BITA holds exposure to Bitcoin through IBIT and sells call options at the money on approximately 25 to 35% of the portfolio. The premium collected from the sale of those options is distributed to holders as income. 

Jacobs said the strategy targets an annual yield of between 15 and 25%, though the actual figure will depend on Bitcoin’s volatility at any given time — a direct application of the Black-Scholes options pricing model, where higher volatility produces higher premiums.

The trade-off is a cap on upside participation. 

If Bitcoin rises 10%in a year and the fund is selling roughly 30%of that upside through options, the fund’s price return would be approximately 7 percent. Add the 15% income component, and total return reaches around 22% — a figure that Jacobs noted would outperform spot Bitcoin in that specific scenario.

In a major Bitcoin rally, the math tilts the other way. If Bitcoin gains 100% in a year, BITA holders would see roughly 70%in price appreciation plus 15% in income, totaling approximately 85%. That underperforms a straight long position, but Jacobs framed that outcome as an accepted trade-off, not a flaw.

Turning bitcoin volatility into a feature

One of the central themes of Jacobs’ conversation was the idea that Bitcoin’s long-criticized volatility is precisely what makes a product like BITA viable. Options prices are a function of volatility, and Bitcoin’s high historical volatility means the premiums available from selling covered calls are substantial.

“You’re monetizing volatility by selling options that are primarily driven by that volatility,” Jacobs said. For investors who have seen Bitcoin’s price swings as a barrier to entry, the product offers a different frame: volatility as a source of income rather than a source of risk.

Jacobs outlined several distinct investor profiles for BITA. Income-oriented investors seeking yield across asset classes represent one group. Long-term Bitcoin holders in a bear or sideways market represent another — people who remain bullish on the asset but want cash flow in the interim. 

A third group, which Jacobs described as more institutional in character, is made up of portfolio managers who have historically required cash-flow-generating assets to justify an allocation.

“Assets that don’t have any cash flows associated with it had always been somewhat difficult, if not impossible, to put in those portfolios — Bitcoin, gold, silver — the cash flow is zero,” Jacobs said. BITA is designed to change that calculus for those investors.

IBIT is the foundation

Jacobs also addressed the broader trajectory of IBIT since its launch roughly two and a half years ago. He said approximately three quarters of IBIT buyers were purchasing an iShares product for the first time, indicating that Bitcoin ETFs have functioned as an on-ramp into the broader ETF ecosystem rather than just a new wrapper for existing investors.

Financial advisors on major bank platforms, who were restricted from accessing digital assets until those platforms opened up access to IBIT, represent a segment Jacobs called out as a source of growing momentum — one that is intersecting with generational wealth transfer as millennials enter higher earning years and accumulate investable assets.

This post BlackRock Executive Calls Bitcoin “Too Big to Ignore”, Discusses New Bitcoin Premium Income ETF first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

The Bank of Japan raised its benchmark interest rate to 1% on June 16, the highest level the country has seen since September 1995 and the furthest point yet in a normalization campaign that has slowly dismantled three decades of near-free money.

Going into the decision, the track record pointed one way: every one of Governor Kazuo Ueda's rate increases since March 2024 had been followed by a Bitcoin drawdown of 18% to 33%, and the August 2024 surprise hike sent the price from roughly $64,000 to $49,000 inside 48 hours, erasing around $600 billion in crypto market value.

This time the pattern broke, with Bitcoin dipping briefly in the Asian session before recovering to trade near $66,000, close to where it had sat before the announcement.

Japanese monetary policy reaches Bitcoin through one of the most powerful funding channels in global finance, and a quarter-point move to a 31-year high is the kind of event that has rekt crypto before. The hike was held without triggering the usual chaos because of how the BOJ packaged it, and the calm leaves a much larger question hanging over where Japan's exit from cheap money eventually leads.

Why a BOJ rate decision lands on crypto screens worldwide

For most of the modern crypto era, Japan was the cheapest source of funding on the planet. Investors borrowed yen at rates pinned near zero, converted the proceeds into dollars or other higher-yielding assets, and pocketed the difference, a structure known as the yen carry trade.

That borrowed money went into US equities, emerging-market debt, and crypto, where the same leveraged macro funds shorting the yen often held long Bitcoin positions at the same time.

When Japanese rates climb, that trade falls apart. As borrowing yen becomes more expensive, the currency tends to firm up, and funds with leveraged positions can be forced to cut exposure across everything they hold at the same time.

Bitcoin is almost always the first to absorb that selling because it trades around the clock and sits inside leveraged books that need to raise cash fast. We saw that in August 2024, when one surprise hike set off a cascade that erased a large slice of the crypto market in two days and led to more than $1 billion in liquidations.

Energy costs and a sliding yen drove the BOJ's decision to act now, with Japan's producer price index rising 6.3% year-on-year in May, the fastest pace in more than three years, driven by oil costs tied to the US-Iran conflict. Headline inflation came in at 1.4% in April, the fourth straight month below the bank's 2% target, held down by government measures such as scrapping the gasoline tax and eliminating public high-school tuition.

The BOJ is raising interest rates in response to an inflation reading that remains below its target. This shows us just how worried policymakers are about energy prices feeding through to everyday goods and about a yen that had slid back toward the 160-per-dollar level that previously triggered intervention. The board approved the increase in a 7-1 vote, with Ueda absent while recovering from a hospital stay and Deputy Governor Shinichi Uchida fronting the press conference.

Market positioning ahead of the meeting raised the stakes on both sides, since speculative yen short positions had climbed to roughly 115,000 contracts, the highest since November 2017, and a yen rally could have forced a painful unwind across risk assets.

The opposite read had support too, because Bank for International Settlements data showed yen-denominated foreign-currency credit contracted by 4.9% during 2025, leaving the carry complex feeding global leverage smaller than it was during the 2024 blowups and softening the impact of any forced exit.

Why Bitcoin held this time, and why the next hike is the real test

Bitcoin held because of one feature buried in the announcement. Alongside the rate increase, the BOJ paused the taper of its government bond purchases and committed to buying around 2 trillion yen of Japanese government bonds a month from April 2027, a move markets saw as an effort to cap upward pressure on long-term yields even as short-term policy tightens.

Long-dated Japanese yields have been the real pressure point for global leverage, and capping them blunted what would otherwise have been a purely hawkish decision. The hike was almost fully priced anyway, with market-implied odds above 90% in the days beforehand, and a cooling of the US-Iran conflict pulled some of the energy-shock risk off the table.

The Nikkei 225 added 0.46% after the decision, and the yen firmed only marginally to 160.22 against the dollar, both consistent with a market reading the package as controlled.

Japan's weight in crypto comes from regulation and funding far more than raw trading volume. The country runs one of the oldest licensing regimes for crypto exchanges, with around 16 licensed venues, including bitFlyer, Coincheck, Bitbank, GMO Coin, and BTCBOX, serving a large and experienced retail base.

IMARC valued the country's crypto exchange market at roughly $3.66 billion in 2025 and projected it could reach about $28.07 billion by 2034, a compound growth rate above 25%. Tokyo continues to tighten the regulatory framework, and on June 11, Japan's lower house passed legislation to treat digital assets more like securities. Japan views Bitcoin mainly as a yen-linked, heavily regulated node within a much larger global liquidity system.

The consequences of continued tightening will be felt well past Tokyo. If the BOJ keeps lifting rates, yen-funded leverage will become less attractive, and the pool of borrowed money flowing into risk assets will shrink.

Rising Japanese yields can pull capital back home and push global investors to rethink bond allocations, and bond-market stress tends to spill over into equities and crypto. Japan's normalization also hands crypto traders a second gauge of global liquidity on top of the Federal Reserve, which still commands most of their attention.

The real risk is cumulative: a single 1% hike leaves Bitcoin intact, but a string of them could reshape the cheap-money backdrop that let risk assets expand in the first place.

Bitcoin's composure on June 16 stemmed from a dovish bond-market hike fully anticipated by traders, and it failed to put a dent in the market's appetite for risk.

The harder test showed up within a day, and it came from Washington. On June 17, the Federal Reserve held its rate at 3.5% to 3.75%, but Kevin Warsh used his first meeting as chair to strip the easing bias out of the statement and lift the year-end dot-plot median to 3.8%, with nine of 18 officials now projecting at least one hike in 2026, and the PCE inflation forecast was raised to 3.6%.

Bitcoin saw that as the real threat, sliding toward $64,000 by June 18 even as a signed US-Iran peace deal lifted equities, with spot Bitcoin and Ether ETFs shedding a combined $111 million on the day of the decision.

The carry-trade stress test passed cleanly, and the tightening it warned about came anyway from the other side of the Pacific. Japan's era of nearly free money won't vanish in a single afternoon, but every step away from it redraws the liquidity map Bitcoin trades inside.

The post Bitcoin shrugged off Japan’s rate hike – The bigger liquidity test came from Washington appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Texas spent years courting AI companies, cloud providers, and Bitcoin miners with cheap electricity, abundant land, and a sales tax exemption that's grown into one of the state's costliest incentive programs.

But now, Governor Greg Abbott has told state regulators to flip the arrangement, directing them to require data centers to fund the grid they depend on, so households would “stop subsidizing one of the fastest-growing industries in the world.”

That rather sudden change in sentiment could become the template for how the rest of America regulates the AI buildout.

The state spent the better part of the last decade making itself the easiest place in America to build a data center, and the bill for that hospitality seems to have come due.

Texas now has roughly 6.5 gigawatts of capacity under construction, about a fifth of the national pipeline, and the real estate firm JLL projects it could overtake Northern Virginia as the world's largest data center market by 2030.

The state's sales tax exemption for qualifying facilities will cost it roughly $3.2 billion in forgone revenue over the next two years, with about $1.3 billion of that landing this year alone, according to the comptroller's office.

There are 121 facilities currently drawing on the break, which waives the state's 6.25% sales tax on everything from servers and cooling systems to the enormous quantities of electricity these sites consume.

On June 10, Abbott sent a letter to the Public Utility Commission and ERCOT instructing them to keep the cost of all that growth from passing on to residential customers and to start placing it with the companies creating the demand.

What Abbott laid out could serve as a regulatory roadmap for other states. He said that the PUC and ERCOT should require data centers to fully fund the electric infrastructure built to serve them, ordered the commission to begin lowering residential transmission costs by the end of July, and asked both agencies to deliver a joint memo by July 17 spelling out what they can do under existing authority and what will need fresh legislation in 2027.

His directive also included calls for water-efficient cooling, mandatory reporting on power and water use, and a hard look at whether that expensive sales tax exemption should survive at all.

What changes when the meter runs the other way

Demands at this scale explain why a state as friendly to industry as Texas has decided to step in. ERCOT set its all-time peak at 85,508 megawatts in August 2023, and the grid operator's preliminary long-term forecast now estimates peak demand of up to 367,790 megawatts by 2032, more than quadrupling the record.

Even the conservative version of the picture climbs steadily, from roughly 98,000 megawatts in 2026 toward 111,000 by 2032 before any of those large loads are layered in. The interconnection queue shows the same acceleration, with large-load requests rising about 270% in 2025 to roughly 226 gigawatts by late in the year, with 73% of that demand coming from data centers.

Those numbers mean that a new project will look very different once Abbott's directive works its way through the rulemaking process. Developers should expect to shoulder the upfront costs of substations, transmission upgrades, and interconnection work that used to be spread across the broader base of ratepayers. That raises the capital required to break ground and pushes more operators to generate or store their own power on-site.

Behind-the-meter generation, co-located gas or solar, and large battery installations all become more appealing once a company knows it's financing its own connection from day one, an approach already visible in projects like Fermi America's Project Matador near Amarillo, which is funding its own private power grid, so the campus brings new generation onto the system as it draws from it.

Stricter water rules and annual usage reporting are also expected, and the long-running sales tax exemption that made Texas so cheap could shrink or vanish when the Legislature convenes in 2027.

Operators already operating in Texas have less to manage in the near term, since signed interconnection agreements remain contractual and difficult to reopen, so the heaviest effects fall on new builds and major expansions.

But much of this still hinges on what the PUC and ERCOT decide they can do without a new statute and how aggressively the 2027 session moves. Abbott pointed back to Senate Bill 6, the 2025 law that already requires large loads to bring backup power and curtail it during grid emergencies, as a sign that the state had already started down this road before concluding that more was needed.

The reaction from much of the industry has been better than expected because clear rules written in advance provide developers and lenders with the certainty they love and spare projects the political backlash that follows AI wherever it goes.

Why Bitcoin miners might come out ahead in Texas

One of the most overlooked parts of Abbott's directive is the line Texas regulators keep drawing between flexible and inflexible demand, since Bitcoin miners sit on the winning side of that divide.

A mining facility can power down within minutes and bring its draw to near zero when prices spike, which is why ERCOT has spent years integrating miners into its controllable load resource programs and leaning on them to curtail within seconds when reserves thin.

AI inference and training generally have to run flat out on continuous power, so the more a future rulebook rewards loads that can flex with the grid, the better a miner looks beside a hyperscaler. By one estimate, ERCOT's decision to integrate miners as flexible load after the 2021 blackouts helped the state avoid roughly $18 billion in new gas peaker construction.

Flexibility cuts in both directions, though, because any miner seeking a new interconnection will meet the same demand as everyone else to fund its own infrastructure, and the larger threat to mining economics is the competition for cheap power itself.

As CryptoSlate has documented through 2026, AI operators are bidding up firm electricity to levels that squeeze the thin margins miners survive on, and BlackRock has warned clients that data centers could consume as much as 24% of US electricity by 2030, a number large enough to reorder where every kind of compute gets built.

Miners have already tasted the upside of Texas volatility, with one stretch showing a 31% rise in mining energy use alongside an 80% drop in local electricity prices, and the open question is whether dispatchable demand keeps that privileged status as the grid tightens.

Texas almost certainly won't be the last state to work through this. The backlash is already strong at home, where the San Marcos City Council recently rejected a proposed $1.5 billion data center after nearly nine hours of public comment. It also runs nationwide, with a March Quinnipiac poll finding 65% of Americans oppose an AI data center in their own community.

Virginia, Georgia, and Arizona are wrestling with the same surge in demand and strain on transmission, making the Texas approach an early test case the rest of the country will be watching.

We've now got one of the most business-friendly states in America, which built its data center boom on the most generous incentives ever seen, and was the first to move to make that industry pay its own way.

Abbott is betting that clearer rules and fairer cost allocation will keep the investment flowing while sparing households the bill, and if that bet pays off, the next phase of the AI boom will be shaped by the politics of the electric grid and the question of who pays for the power.

The post Texas questions whether AI data centers should pay for the grid they strain appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Artificial intelligence is commoditizing news and routine research across the industry, and it's pushing crypto media companies to rebuild themselves as data platforms, analytics providers, and institutional infrastructure. The firms racing to assemble AI-ready databases are positioning to become the industry's reference layer, the source that investors, regulators, and algorithms rely on to understand digital assets.

On June 12, Blockworks acquired Messari, folding two of the largest data and research operations in crypto into a single platform covering more than 40,000 digital assets.

The Wall Street Journal put the price above $10 million, a steep markdown from the roughly $300 million valuation Messari carried after its 2022 Series B, and that discount tells you how much the economics of crypto information have changed in four years.

Blockworks raised money in April at a $192 million valuation in a round led by ParaFi Capital and Reciprocal Ventures, with Coinbase Ventures participating, and it openly said it intended to use that capital to buy competitors. Co-founder Jason Yanowitz has described the goal in plain terms: he wants to build the Bloomberg of crypto.

The Messari purchase reflects a shift that's been building underneath the AI hype for a couple of years. The value in financial information is moving away from the article and toward the database on which the article was built. The companies positioned to dominate the next few years are the ones that own the canonical datasets institutions and machines treat as authoritative.

A research and reference operation of that kind earns its money from feeds, terminals, and API calls rather than from readers, and it answers to compliance officers and quants more than to an audience, which makes it a structurally different business than the newsroom it usually grows out of.

Why publishing stopped being an advantage in the age of AI

The pressure on media companies starts with distribution, where the traffic that funded digital publishing for two decades is steadily draining away across the broader media business. Google search referrals to publishers fell about 33% globally in the year leading up.

to November 2025, according to the Reuters Institute's annual trends report, with US referrals down 38% and European referrals down 17%, while referrals from Google Discover dropped 21%. By early 2026, roughly 58% of Google searches ended without a click to any outside site, as AI-generated summaries answered the question on the results page.

Penske Media has taken Google to court over the change, arguing that the search company is cannibalizing the traffic that publishers were promised in exchange for allowing their work to be indexed.

For a crypto outlet, the consequence is that breaking news and routine explainers, the formats that carried the traffic model for years, are worth steadily less each quarter. A summary of a token unlock or a treasury disclosure gets generated in seconds and consumed inside a chat window, and the click that used to follow it is now completely gone.

Every financial market tends to move through the same sequence as it matures. It starts with reporting and opinion, when information is scarce, and simply explaining a new asset class builds an audience. It moves into research, as institutions arrive and want context and frameworks rather than headlines.

It then standardizes into data, when investors would rather query a database than read fifty notes on the same thing. And it ends in infrastructure, where that data essentially becomes the workflows that the market can't operate without.

Bloomberg reached that final stage decades ago, which is why it earns somewhere around $11 billion a year, charges close to $31,980 for a single terminal seat in 2026, and keeps more than 325,000 subscribers wired into its system.

The journalism it produces is just a nice little bonus next to its core business. The reason markets can't switch the terminal off is the information that feeds their models, pricing, and compliance systems.

Crypto is entering that fourth stage, and by Yanowitz's reckoning, it could get there much faster than equities did. Building a research and reference operation in traditional markets required large teams of human analysts to key in filings by hand, whereas crypto generates structured, real-time, machine-readable information natively, both on-chain and through standardized disclosures, making it an ideal input for automated systems.

CryptoSlate's own reporting has tracked corporate AI adoption climbing from 8.7% in 2023 to 14.2% in 2024 and 20.2% in 2025 on OECD figures, and the agents doing the consuming are beginning to transact on their own.

What does a reference layer control?

Once a market reaches that stage, whoever controls the reference data has leverage over everyone downstream, because asset managers price portfolios off it, index providers build products around it, exchanges wire it into their systems, regulators cite it, and AI models train on it.

A company that owns the canonical figure for a protocol's circulating supply or a treasury's holdings can shape how billions of dollars get allocated without ever publishing an opinion about any of it, and the future gatekeepers in this market are the database operators who sit further upstream than any editor ever did.

Consolidation of power and influence is already underway, and Blockworks' acquisition of Messari is only the latest example. Paris-based Kaiko acquired Amberdata earlier in June to deepen its derivatives and on-chain coverage and add AI-focused research tools for banks, asset managers, and hedge funds.

In January, the oracle provider RedStone bought Security Token Market along with a dataset spanning more than 800 tokenized assets. Each of these deals pulled fragmented sources of very valuable information into fewer hands.

The reason this is more important than ordinary media consolidation is what institutions need before they can scale into digital assets. Large allocators require standardized disclosures, clean historical datasets, legal-entity mappings, governance archives, and risk metrics that they can defend to their own compliance committees.

Crypto has already institutionalized custody, settlement, and trading; information is the piece being institutionalized now, and the demand for trustworthy data grows alongside the demand for capital.

AI raises the stakes of all this rather than lowering them. In the very near future, an analyst will rarely open a protocol's documentation by hand and will instead ask a model to compare every Layer 1 network on treasury composition, validator concentration, governance participation, and revenue.

The quality of that answer depends on which databases the model has been trained to trust, so whichever companies own those datasets are the chokepoint that every automated comparison has to pass through. That position compounds over time, because each new institutional or machine consumer makes the underlying data more valuable and a little harder to dislodge.

Established publications have been feeling this pressure for a while. The economics of publishing on its own keep getting tougher as distribution fragments and machines absorb routine reporting, eroding the advertising and referral revenue that funded newsrooms for years.

However, they are also sitting on years of reporting, structured metadata, proprietary research, and editorial credibility, and that archive can become the raw material for institutional intelligence products and the AI-ready knowledge bases that models depend on.

The durable position for crypto media may be to supply the trusted information layer that AI consumes, while holding onto the editorial judgment that decides what belongs inside it.

Crypto was built to remove trusted intermediaries from money and allow people to transact without a bank or a clearinghouse standing in the middle.

As institutions and AI move in, it's begun assembling a fresh set of trusted intermediaries that sit over its information, and the companies that end up owning the canonical datasets, the supply figures, the governance records, and the on-chain metrics that every investor, regulator, exchange, and model treats as ground truth could hold more influence than any newsroom ever did.

The post AI is pushing crypto media into a fight over trusted market data appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin’s emerging digital-credit trade broke below its promise of calm this week.

This week, Strategy’s STRC preferred shares fell as low as $82.50 before rebounding, while Strive’s SATA slid from around par into the low $90s and also recovered. Both products had been sold into the market as income instruments built around Bitcoin treasury companies, with double-digit dividends and an intended pull toward $100.

The break jolted a market that has grown to roughly $10 billion in less than a year. It also gave investors their first look at how these Bitcoin-linked yield products behave when a quiet trade meets margin pressure.

A quiet income trade draws borrowed money

STRC and SATA sit in a new corner of the Bitcoin treasury market. The products are generally structured as perpetual preferred shares, meaning they pay recurring dividends but have no fixed maturity date.

Strategy, the largest public Bitcoin holder, helped create the category with STRC. Strive followed with SATA. Both issuers used the instruments to reach investors who wanted yield from Bitcoin-heavy balance sheets instead of direct coin exposure.

The products found demand because Bitcoin itself does not produce income. A preferred share paying roughly 11% to 13% can appeal to investors who want a dividend stream and believe the issuer’s Bitcoin reserves provide long-term balance-sheet strength.

The trade became more attractive as STRC stayed close to $100. A security that rarely moves far from par while paying a double-digit dividend invites investors to treat it as a stable income product.

However, some buyers went further. They borrowed against the shares to increase exposure and lift returns. The dividend remained the same, but leverage allowed investors to hold more shares with less upfront capital.

That trade required one condition: the preferred shares had to remain near par.

Once STRC began to slip, leveraged holders lost that cushion. The share price fell, margin pressure rose, and accounts that had borrowed against the position faced forced sales.

Liquidations cluster near the lows

In a social media post, Parker White, co-founder of DeFi Development Corp., explained that STRC's recent decline to $82 pointed to a forced liquidation event.

According to him, many buyers had entered the trade near $100, where STRC had spent much of its time. If those investors used similar brokerage margin terms, their risk levels would also sit near similar prices.

White said STRC’s move toward the low $80s may have pushed some accounts through maintenance margin thresholds. Once those levels were reached, brokers could force sales regardless of whether the investor still believed in the product.

The timing of the volume added to that view. White said heavy midday trading during the decline looked consistent with broker-driven liquidation rather than ordinary repositioning.

Traditional equity markets often see the most volume near the open and close. A burst of selling in the middle of the day suggested accounts were being closed out as prices broke through margin levels.

Short sellers may have helped accelerate the move. A crowded long trade financed with borrowed money creates an obvious target. Bearish traders can press the price lower, trigger forced sales, and then buy back shares as liquidation selling adds volume.

SATA’s decline followed the same pressure. Investors facing margin calls do not always sell only the position that caused the problem. They often sell what is available. That can pull related securities into the same decline, especially in a young market where the investor base overlaps.

The move did not require a default, a missed dividend, or a collapse in issuer assets. It required a security that looked stable enough to borrow against and enough holders crowded into the same trade.

Strive says reserves were not hit

In response to the market situation, Strive Chief Executive Officer Matt Cole said the volatility marked the most difficult day yet for digital credit, but he rejected the idea that the price action reflected a weakening of the issuer’s credit profile.

Cole said Strive’s dividend reserves remained intact and that the company was positioned to meet its obligations. He described the move as a leverage liquidation rather than a deterioration in the underlying business.

According to him:

“When markets move against leveraged holders, forced selling can create a cascade. Prices fall, margin calls increase, more selling occurs, and the cycle feeds on itself. The selling becomes disconnected from fundamentals and becomes driven by balance sheet constraints.”

He added that the liquidation event did not mean Strive had lost the ability to pay dividends.

Supporters of Strategy made the same case for STRC. Jesse Myers, head of Bitcoin strategy at The Smarter Web Company, said Strategy’s balance sheet had not changed because STRC traded lower.

He said the company could continue paying dividends for decades under current conditions and that modest Bitcoin appreciation would extend that runway.

The lower price also lifted the effective yield for new buyers. A preferred share pays the same stated dividend regardless of where it trades. An investor buying near $85 receives a higher yield than one who bought at $100, while also gaining potential upside if the share returns closer to par.

That helped bring buyers back after the steepest selling. STRC and SATA both bounced from their lows, suggesting some investors viewed the move as forced selling rather than a permanent repricing of the issuers.

The next version of the Bitcoin yield trade will cost more

While STRC and SATA recovered from their lows, the selloff has left brokers, issuers and investors with less room to treat Bitcoin-linked preferred shares as quiet income products.

Brokerages are likely to review margin rules after STRC’s drop showed how quickly forced selling can gather around a single level. Tighter requirements would make it harder for investors to build large borrowed positions, cutting the risk of another clustered unwind while also reducing the appeal of using the shares to magnify yield.

Issuers may also have to offer stronger protections. Larger cash reserves, clearer buyback plans, higher call premiums and more flexible dividend terms could help reassure buyers that companies have tools to support the products during stress.

However, any fix would come with a cost.

While a higher dividend could help pull STRC or SATA closer to par, it would also make the securities more expensive for the companies issuing them. Buybacks could signal confidence, but they would require cash or fresh financing. Bigger reserves would strengthen the structure, but they could leave less capital available for Bitcoin purchases.

Meanwhile, the selloff gave investors a cleaner measure of the risk as it showed that a preferred share tied to a Bitcoin treasury company can keep paying dividends and still fall sharply in the market. An issuer can defend its balance sheet while leveraged holders are forced out. A product designed to soften Bitcoin’s volatility can still transmit panic when too much borrowing builds around it.

As Cole noted:

“Today's events were difficult for some investors, but they were also instructive. Digital Credit is still in its infancy. It is better for the market to experience and learn from these dynamics now, while the market remains relatively small, than years from now when the market is many times larger. Investors, issuers, and market participants all benefit from understanding the risks associated with leverage and liquidity before the asset class reaches full scale.”

The post Bitcoin’s ‘digital credit’ yield trade breaks below par as margin calls hit $10 billion market appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Franklin Templeton, the $1.78 trillion asset management firm, is attempting to push cryptocurrency deeper into conventional investment portfolios with a new proposal that would automatically redirect stock dividends into Bitcoin exposure.

On June 18, the asset manager filed paperwork with the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to launch two exchange-traded funds that would hold US equities while filtering corporate payouts into digital asset investments.

The proposed funds, the Franklin US Equity Bitcoin DRIP Index ETF and the Franklin US Innovation Bitcoin DRIP Index ETF, would combine one of Wall Street’s most established practices, dividend reinvestment, with exposure to the world’s largest cryptocurrency.

The structure would give investors a primary base in large US stocks while using income generated by those companies to slowly accumulate Bitcoin-linked assets. That design avoids requiring investors to make a direct upfront allocation to crypto, instead building the position over time through a rules-based mechanism.

This filing reflects how major financial institutions are looking beyond standard spot Bitcoin funds and toward more complex portfolio products.

After the first wave of US spot Bitcoin ETFs solved the basic access problem, issuers are now experimenting with strategies that wrap the asset inside income, options, and allocation frameworks familiar to financial advisers and brokerage investors.

Notably, Franklin already operates in the digital asset market through the Franklin Bitcoin ETF, which trades under the ticker EZBC. The fund has attracted about $330 million in cumulative net inflows and manages roughly $360 million in assets, giving the firm a foothold in a category dominated by larger rivals.

The new filing suggests Franklin is seeking a more specialized lane. Rather than compete only through a spot Bitcoin wrapper, the firm is proposing a product that could appeal to investors who are comfortable with equity ETFs but less willing to buy Bitcoin directly.

Dividends become the Bitcoin entry point

The two proposed ETFs would function as passive index trackers built around VettaFi benchmarks.

The Franklin US Equity Bitcoin DRIP Index ETF would seek to mirror the VettaFi US Large-Cap 500 Bitcoin DRIP Index. Its equity portfolio would be tied to the 500 largest US companies by market capitalization.

The Franklin US Innovation Bitcoin DRIP Index ETF would track the VettaFi US Innovation 100 Bitcoin DRIP Index, targeting the 100 largest non-financial companies listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market.

Both funds would invest at least 80% of net assets in the securities that make up their respective indexes and in Bitcoin-related instruments corresponding to each index’s crypto allocation. At launch, each index would begin with a 95% allocation to equities and a 5% allocation to Bitcoin.

The reinvestment mechanism is the defining feature. When the underlying stocks distribute regular or special dividends, those payouts would be automatically reinvested into Bitcoin-related assets at the market open on the day after the dividend ex-date.

That turns corporate income into the funding source for crypto exposure. For investors, the pitch is not simply price appreciation from Bitcoin, but automated accumulation through the dividend stream of US companies.

Franklin built limits into the design to prevent Bitcoin from overtaking the equity base. At each quarterly review, if the Bitcoin allocation has drifted above 5%, it would be trimmed back to 4.5%. If the allocation remains at or below 5%, no downward adjustment would be made.

The indexes also include an emergency cap. If a sharp rally pushes Bitcoin exposure above 20% between scheduled reviews, the allocation would be cut back to 4.5% by the close of the second business day after the threshold is breached.

Meanwhile, the equity portion has its own concentration limits. Individual stocks are capped at 20%, while the combined weight of companies above 5% cannot exceed 40%. Those rules are designed to keep the funds from becoming overly dependent on a small group of mega-cap stocks or on Bitcoin itself.

Franklin has not disclosed the funds’ tickers, listing exchanges, fees, or expense ratios. The prospectus also states that the securities cannot be sold until the registration statement becomes effective.

Franklin Advisory Services LLC would serve as investment manager, while Franklin Templeton Institutional LLC would serve as sub-adviser. The listed portfolio managers are Dina Ting, Hailey Harris, Joe Diederich, and Basit Amin.

Franklin gives itself several routes to crypto exposure

The SEC filing gives Franklin flexibility in how the funds obtain Bitcoin exposure.

The funds may use Bitcoin-backed exchange-traded products, including products sponsored by Franklin affiliates.

They may also invest through other investment companies that provide Bitcoin exposure, futures contracts, options, depositary receipts representing ownership interests in Bitcoin, or investments held through a wholly owned Cayman Islands subsidiary.

That subsidiary is central to the tax architecture of the proposal. Each fund may invest up to 25% of total assets through a Cayman-based entity designed to help income or gains from certain Bitcoin-related investments qualify as “good income” under the US Internal Revenue Code.

Maintaining regulated investment company status is critical for the tax efficiency expected from ETF products. Franklin says it intends to limit subsidiary investments to stay within diversification requirements at each quarter-end.

The structure also introduces vulnerability. The filing warns that future Internal Revenue Service guidance, congressional legislation, or changes in tax treatment could disrupt the strategy.

If that happens, the funds may need to change their investment approach. In some circumstances, the board could approve a strategy change or liquidation.

The tax section shows the complexity behind what appears to be a simple consumer-facing idea. The headline pitch is easy to understand: stocks generate dividends, and the dividends build Bitcoin exposure.

The implementation requires a layered structure involving ETPs, derivatives, index rules, and offshore subsidiaries.

Risks follow Bitcoin into the wrapper

Franklin’s prospectus makes clear that placing Bitcoin inside an equity ETF structure does not remove the asset’s volatility.

The filing describes Bitcoin as having a limited history compared with stocks, bonds, and currency instruments. It also characterizes the digital asset market as highly speculative and warns that Bitcoin’s price can fall sharply because of regulatory changes, declining confidence, technology failures, network disruptions, or competition from other digital assets.

The document also flags market-structure concerns. Many digital asset trading venues operate with less oversight than traditional securities exchanges, creating risks tied to manipulation, fraud, theft, and limited investor recourse.

Bitcoin ownership concentration is another disclosed concern. A significant amount of Bitcoin is held by a relatively small number of large holders, often referred to as whales. Large sales or transfers by those investors could have an outsized effect on market prices.

Custody adds another layer of risk. Digital assets depend on private keys and specialized security systems, making them vulnerable to hacking, malware, operational failures, and loss. Franklin also warns that bankruptcy treatment for digital assets can remain uncertain, adding legal complexity if a custodian or service provider fails.

The funds would face further risks from the instruments used to track Bitcoin exposure. Spot Bitcoin ETPs are not registered under the Investment Company Act of 1940 and do not provide the same protections as traditional registered funds. Futures, options, and swaps could introduce leverage, counterparty exposure, tracking error, and losses that exceed the initial investment.

Those disclosures are important because the proposed products are designed to make Bitcoin feel more accessible to traditional investors. The familiar wrapper does not change the underlying risk profile of the digital asset.

Bitcoin ETF race shifts from access to design

Franklin’s filing comes as the Bitcoin ETF market enters a more complicated phase, with issuers trying to build new products around an asset class that has already moved quickly into mainstream portfolios.

Since their 2024 launch, US spot Bitcoin ETFs have attracted $53.40 billion in net inflows since launch and hold $78.32 billion in assets, SoSoValue data show.

These numbers reflect how rapidly the products pulled Bitcoin into brokerage accounts, model portfolios, and institutional allocation strategies.

Yet the recent flow picture has weakened. The funds have shed about $6 billion over the past six weeks during a stretch of sustained outflows.

That mix of scale and renewed pressure is pushing issuers beyond plain spot exposure. The first wave of Bitcoin ETFs gave investors regulated access to the asset. The next wave is focused on shaping how Bitcoin fits inside broader portfolios.

BlackRock has already moved in that direction with the iShares Bitcoin Premium Income ETF, which trades under the ticker BITA. The actively managed fund seeks to provide Bitcoin exposure while generating monthly option premiums by writing call options on IBIT, BlackRock’s spot Bitcoin ETF, across roughly 25% to 35% of the portfolio.

That strategy is aimed at investors seeking cash flow from Bitcoin’s volatility rather than only directional exposure to its price. Franklin’s proposed DRIP funds would take a different route, using stock dividends to build a capped Bitcoin allocation over time.

Together, the products point to a new phase in the Bitcoin ETF market where issuers are now competing to define whether the asset belongs in income strategies, equity portfolios, accumulation products, or other parts of traditional wealth management.

The post Franklin Templeton new ETFs would convert US companies stock dividends into Bitcoin exposure appeared first on CryptoSlate.

The Geopolitical Yo-Yo Rattling Crypto Prices

Crypto prices are caught in a familiar trap: every time the Middle East situation looks like it's calming down, a fresh headline flips the script. The latest twist landed today. Iran says it closed the Strait of Hormuz again over Israel's strikes in Lebanon, while US Vice President Vance says there is "no evidence" the strait is closed.

That direct contradiction — one side declaring a shutdown, the other flatly denying it — captures exactly why crypto prices have been whipsawing. Markets hate uncertainty, and right now there's an abundance of it. This is the same waterway that has been at the center of a months-long crisis, and traders have learned that each "closure" or "reopening" headline can swing risk assets in minutes.

Did Iran Close the Strait AGAIN?

The backdrop matters. Just days ago, the situation looked like it was de-escalating. Trump announced on Sunday that the US and Iran had reached a deal, the memorandum of understanding was read to reporters on Wednesday, and both presidents signed it that day. Optimism was building that the worst was over.

Then the ceasefire wobbled. Israel and Hezbollah exchanged fire despite the ceasefire, possibly prompting the Hormuz Strait closure. Iran's response was to once again declare the strait shut — but as has happened repeatedly through this crisis, Washington disputes that any real closure is in effect.

There's a near-term catalyst to watch closely: technical-level talks to implement the US–Iran deal are scheduled for June 21 in Bürgenstock, Switzerland, with Pakistani and Qatari mediators participating. That's tomorrow — meaning the situation could shift again within hours.

Latest Crypto Prices Right Now

Despite the noise, crypto prices have so far held up better than you might expect. Here's where the major coins stand as of June 20, 2026:

• Bitcoin ($BTC): ~$63,600, pushing toward the $64,500 area as it attempts to reclaim recently lost support.
• Ethereum ($ETH): ~$1,725, up modestly on the day.
• $XRP: ~$1.15, testing this zone after losing it earlier in the week.
• Solana ($SOL): ~$72, one of the stronger weekly performers among the majors.

The total crypto market cap sits around $2.18 trillion, well off its highs but stabilizing. Notably, prices are green on the day even amid the closure claim — a sign markets may be treating today's Iran headline with skepticism, much like the US response suggests they should.

Why Does the Strait of Hormuz Move Crypto Prices?

For readers wondering how a Middle East shipping lane affects Bitcoin, the link runs through oil and risk sentiment. The Strait of Hormuz normally carries around one-fifth of the world's oil and LNG. A genuine closure spikes energy prices, which feeds inflation, which in turn pushes back expectations for interest-rate cuts — a chain reaction that tends to hurt risk assets like crypto.

The transmission works like this:

• Real closure → oil spikes → inflation fears rise → rate-cut hopes fade → crypto prices fall.
• De-escalation → oil falls → inflation pressure eases → risk appetite returns → crypto prices rise.

This is why crypto has been so reactive to every Hormuz headline. Bitcoin in this cycle has behaved less like a geopolitical safe haven and more like a high-beta risk asset — selling off on fear and rallying on relief, much like tech stocks.

How Could Crypto Prices React From Here?

Given the conflicting reports, two clear scenarios are on the table:

If the closure proves real (or the ceasefire breaks down):

• Expect oil to spike and risk-off pressure to hit crypto prices.
• High-beta altcoins like Solana and XRP typically fall harder than Bitcoin in these moves, since they amplify BTC's direction.
• A renewed leverage washout is a risk — the market has already seen large liquidation cascades during this crisis.

If it's another false alarm (as the US suggests):

• The relief could extend the recent stabilization, with crypto prices continuing to grind higher.
• Tomorrow's Switzerland talks becoming productive would reinforce the de-escalation narrative and support risk appetite.

The fact that prices are holding green today hints the market is leaning toward the second scenario — but that can change the instant a headline confirms or denies the closure.

What Should Crypto Traders Watch?

In a yo-yo environment like this, the headlines are the market. Key signals to monitor:

• Confirmation either way on the closure — official shipping data and traffic reports will cut through the he-said-she-said.
• The June 21 Switzerland talks — a breakthrough or breakdown is a direct catalyst.
• Oil prices — the cleanest real-time gauge of whether markets believe the strait is actually shut.
• Bitcoin's key levels — whether BTC holds above support near $62K–63K or reclaims $64,500 will signal which way momentum is leaning.

What's Happening With Bitcoin Right Now?

Bitcoin is having a rough stretch. The asset is trading around $63,600, a far cry from its October 2025 all-time high near $126,000 — a drawdown of roughly 50% from the peak. But the price alone doesn't tell the full story. The more significant development is where the selling is coming from: the spot Bitcoin ETFs that were supposed to be crypto's steady institutional anchor.

Those ETFs have been bleeding capital at a historic pace. The recent weeks have seen one of the most sustained institutional withdrawals since these products launched in 2024 — a clear signal that big-money sentiment has turned defensive.

How Bad Are the Bitcoin ETF Outflows?

The numbers are striking. Spot Bitcoin ETFs recently posted their longest losing streak on record. From May 15 to June 3, spot bitcoin ETFs faced their longest outflow streak since their 2024 launch — 13 consecutive trading days, losing $4.33 billion, roughly 59,400 BTC.

The pressure didn't stop there. For the week ending June 6, US spot bitcoin ETFs posted $1.72 billion in net outflows — the largest weekly outflow since February 2025 — marking a fourth consecutive week of outflows totaling $5.4 billion. Even the biggest fund wasn't spared: BlackRock's IBIT led the outflows, losing $1.34 billion for that week.

The cumulative effect on assets under management has been severe. Total assets in bitcoin ETFs fell to $80.40 billion from $104.29 billion at the start of the streak, with fund holdings dropping to 1.277 million BTC, about 7.2% below the October 2025 peak.

Why Are Institutions Selling?

The exodus isn't really about $Bitcoin itself — it's largely a macro story. The main driver is a shift in interest-rate expectations:

• Fading rate-cut hopes. Analysts link the outflows to macroeconomic factors, with strong US jobs data significantly reducing expectations for an imminent Fed rate cut. 
• Bonds look more attractive. When rate cuts get pushed back, yield-bearing assets win. This made yield-bearing bonds more attractive compared to "non-yielding" bitcoin.
• Risk-off positioning. A weaker macro backdrop pushes leveraged and momentum traders to unwind, accelerating the selling.

In other words, this looks like a capital rotation driven by the rate environment rather than a collapse in Bitcoin's fundamentals.

What Does the Sentiment Data Show?

Market psychology has turned deeply negative — arguably to an extreme. The Crypto Fear and Greed Index sat at just 8 points, deep in the "Extreme Fear" zone, as of June 8, 2026.

Historically, readings this low are notable for a counterintuitive reason: extreme fear has often coincided with local bottoms rather than the start of deeper crashes. It's not a guarantee — fear can always get worse — but it tells you sentiment is washed out, and a lot of weak hands may have already sold.

Is There a Bullish Side to This?

Balance matters here, and there are genuine counterpoints to the gloom. Several analysts frame the current drawdown as a normal, even healthy, part of the cycle rather than a structural breakdown:

• Supply is changing hands, not leaving. One reading of the data is that short-term leveraged strategies are unwinding and supply is redistributing from momentum players to long-term holders such as advisors, banks, and sovereign funds.
• Not all institutions are fleeing. The selling isn't uniform. On June 17, Fidelity's FBTC captured $14 million in inflows while rival ETFs bled, showing selective institutional buying.
• Relief rallies are appearing. Bitcoin showed a recovery after the sharp drop, with analysts calling it a classic oversold relief rally.

The bullish interpretation is that this is a redistribution phase — speculative money exiting while patient, long-term capital quietly accumulates.

What Should Crypto Traders Watch Next?

With ETF flows now a primary market driver, the signals to monitor are clearer than ever:

• ETF flow data. A sustained reversal from outflows back to inflows would be one of the strongest signals that institutional sentiment is turning.
• Fed expectations. Since rate-cut timing is the core driver, upcoming inflation and jobs data will heavily influence Bitcoin's direction.
• The Fear & Greed Index. Watch whether extreme fear deepens or begins to recover — sentiment shifts often precede price.
• Key price levels. With BTC around $63K and roughly 50% off its high, traders are watching whether prior support zones hold or give way.

Bitcoin Future: What's the Bottom Line?

Bitcoin's record ETF outflow streak is a real and significant development — billions in institutional capital have exited, AUM has fallen sharply, and sentiment is at extreme-fear levels. The honest read is that the near-term picture is genuinely weak, driven mostly by a macro environment where delayed rate cuts make Bitcoin less attractive than yielding alternatives.

But the same data carries a more constructive subplot: this may be a rotation rather than an exit, with speculative holders giving way to long-term accumulators, and pockets of selective institutional buying already appearing. For traders, the key isn't to pick a side on conviction alone — it's to watch ETF flows and Fed expectations closely, since those are the forces that will likely decide whether this drawdown becomes a bottom or a longer downtrend.

Solana ($SOL) is changing hands around $71.50, up about 2.6% on the day, as it tries to build on a recovery off its early-June lows. The daily chart tells a clear story: SOL peaked near $98 in mid-May, then sold off sharply through late May and early June, bottoming around the $62–63 zone before buyers stepped in and pushed the price back toward the low-$70s.

That makes the current setup a classic post-crash recovery attempt — price has bounced off a major support, but still sits well below the levels that defined its previous range. The question now is whether this bounce has the strength to reclaim lost ground, or whether it's a relief rally inside a broader downtrend.

Solana Analysis: What Do Key Support and Resistance Levels Show?

The chart maps out a clean structure of levels that traders are watching closely. These are the lines that will likely define SOL's next move:

• $60.00 — major support (green). This is the floor that held during the early-June capitulation. As long as SOL stays above it, the recovery thesis remains intact.
• $76.00 — immediate resistance (green). Once a support level, this has flipped to overhead resistance. It's the first real test for buyers and the gateway to higher targets.
• $90.21 — key resistance (orange). The upper boundary of SOL's prior trading range. Reclaiming this would signal a genuine shift back to strength.
• $100.00 — psychological resistance (orange). The round number that capped the May rally. A move here would mark a full recovery of the recent decline.

Right now, SOL sits in the no-man's-land between $60 support and $76 resistance — a zone where the next decisive break tends to set the tone.

What Is the RSI Telling Us About Momentum?

Momentum is where the picture gets interesting. The RSI (14) reads 46.45, with its moving average down at 38.38. Two takeaways stand out:

• The RSI is recovering from oversold. During the early-June plunge, RSI dipped sharply (the shaded zone on the chart), reflecting heavy selling. It has since climbed back toward the midline — a sign the worst of the selling pressure has eased.
• It hasn't reclaimed 50 yet. Staying below the neutral 50 line means momentum is improving but not yet bullish. The RSI crossing back above its moving average is an early positive signal, but bulls need a clean break above 50 to confirm a shift.

In short: the momentum reading supports a recovery attempt, but doesn't yet confirm a trend reversal.

What Are the Bullish Targets if SOL Breaks Out?

If buyers maintain control and SOL pushes higher, the path is mapped by the resistance levels above. A realistic bullish sequence looks like this:

1. Reclaim $76.00. The first hurdle. A daily close above this flipped level would confirm the bounce has legs and open the door higher.
2. Target $90.21. With $76 cleared, the next logical objective is the prior range high near $90 — a roughly 26% move from current levels.
3. Challenge $100.00. A break and hold above $90 would put the psychological $100 mark back in play, completing a full recovery of the May–June decline.

For this scenario to unfold, SOL likely needs supportive conditions from the broader crypto market — particularly $Bitcoin — alongside the RSI reclaiming the 50 level to confirm momentum.

What Happens if Solana Support Fails?

Balance requires looking at the downside too. The recovery is real but fragile, and a failure to hold current levels would shift the bias back to the bears:

• Losing the low-$70s would suggest the bounce is fading and bring the recent lows back into focus.
• A break below $60.00 would be the more serious signal. It would invalidate the recovery structure and expose SOL to deeper downside, with the $50–55 region emerging as the next major demand zone.

This is why $60 is the line that matters most on the downside — it's the difference between "healthy pullback within a recovery" and "resumption of the downtrend."

Solana Future: What Is the Overall Solana Price Outlook?

Pulling it together, SOL sits at a genuine decision point. The bullish case is that price has defended a major support at $60, momentum is recovering off oversold, and a reclaim of $76 would open a path toward $90 and potentially $100. The bearish case is that SOL remains below its key moving averages, RSI is still under 50, and a loss of $60 would reopen significant downside.

For traders, the roadmap is clean:

• Bullish trigger: a daily close above $76, targeting $90 then $100.
• Bearish trigger: a daily close below $60, targeting $50–55.
• Neutral zone: between $60 and $76, expect choppy, range-bound action until one side breaks.

As always with Solana, the broader market backdrop — Bitcoin's direction, risk appetite, and ETF flows — will likely be the deciding factor in which way this resolves.

Why Is XRP Price Down in 2026?

$XRP has had a difficult year. The token has fallen to around $1.12, sitting right on its 2026 year-to-date low and down roughly 40% year-to-date, putting the psychologically important $1 level uncomfortably close. After starting the year much higher, it has steadily drifted down to these lows.

Crucially, this weakness doesn't appear to be an XRP-specific problem. The slide fits a broader crypto drawdown rather than a Ripple-specific catalyst — Bitcoin is down around 30% year-to-date and Ethereum is down about 45%. In other words, XRP is moving with the market, not against it. As one analysis put it, the selling looks more like a risk-off rotation than a token-specific event.

**CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. 74% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs with this provider. You should consider whether you understand how CFDs work and whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money.

How Far Has XRP Price Fallen, and Where Are the Lows?

XRP's descent through 2026 has been fairly orderly rather than a single dramatic crash. The decline began in January following a brief rally to $2.41. By early February, the price had fallen to around $1.11, then consolidated within a narrow $1.27–$1.67 range from mid-February to mid-May before resuming its slide.

That early-February low near $1.11–$1.12 is exactly where XRP trades today — the 2026 YTD low that buyers now have to defend, with little technical cushion between here and the round-number $1.00 mark.

Is XRP Coin at Risk of Falling Below $1.00?

With XRP now resting on its lows, the risk of a break toward $1.00 is very real — and it's mostly about momentum, not fundamentals. With the token sitting just above $1, even a modest additional decline puts the threshold in play, and a further slide in overall crypto sentiment could pull XRP through round-number support.

Recent momentum hasn't helped. XRP is down about 20% over the past month, with the one-month moves steeper than the YTD figures, suggesting recent acceleration of selling. Technically, the structure leans cautious: XRP's structure currently favors consolidation with a bearish bias unless bulls reclaim overhead resistance. A clean break of the current low would likely expose XRP to a retest of the $1.00 psychological level, with $0.95 as the next major demand area.

With Solana trading around $70 — a fraction of its cycle high above $260 — the question on many investors' minds is simple: is SOL a good buy at current prices, or is it a falling knife? The answer depends on weighing two things against each other: where the price sits relative to Solana's historical performance, and what the network is actually doing right now.

On the technical side, SOL on the monthly chart is the most oversold it has ever been in its history. On the fundamental side, Solana just set a new single-day record for tokenized stock trading. That combination — a beaten-down price alongside accelerating real-world usage — is exactly the kind of divergence worth examining closely before deciding whether current prices represent value or a trap.

How Does Solana's Current Price Compare to Its Historical Performance?

To judge whether $SOL is cheap, it helps to put today's ~$70 price in the context of where it has been:

• 2021 cycle peak: SOL ran from under $2 to roughly $260 at its first major top.
• 2022 bear market: It collapsed into the low single digits and teens during the broader crypto winter.
• 2024–2025 recovery: SOL rebuilt all the way back above $260 at this cycle's high.
• Now: It has retraced to around $70, testing a long-term support zone in the low $60s to $70 — a level that has acted as significant support in past cycles.

The pattern tells the story: SOL is a high-volatility asset that has historically delivered enormous gains from depressed levels and equally brutal drawdowns from its tops. At ~$70, it sits far closer to its accumulation zones than to its euphoric peaks — which is the first reason the current price draws value-hunters' attention.

Why Is Solana Dominating Tokenization?

Solana's grip on tokenized stocks comes down to its core technical strengths as a blockchain:

• Speed. Solana is one of the fastest chains in production, with high throughput and sub-second finality suited to rapid-fire equity trading.
• Low costs. Transaction fees often amount to a fraction of a cent, making high-frequency tokenized-stock trades economically viable where congested, high-fee chains can't compete.
• Deep liquidity and infrastructure. A mature ecosystem of DEXs, aggregators, and on-chain stockholders has formed around the network, creating a self-reinforcing liquidity advantage.

When the cost and speed of settling a trade approach zero, the friction that holds tokenization back on other chains largely disappears — which is why volume keeps concentrating on Solana.

Is Solana a Good Buy at Current Prices?

Here's how the two sides stack up. The bull case: SOL trades at historically oversold levels, sits on long-term support, and is winning one of crypto's fastest-growing categories outright. When price weakness and rising adoption diverge like this, the market is often pricing the asset on macro sentiment rather than what the network is doing.

The bear case: oversold can get more oversold, and a genuine turn requires a turn in broader risk appetite — likely tied to easing macro conditions and returning crypto liquidity. Until that happens, "cheap" assets can stay cheap or get cheaper.

A balanced read: at ~$70, SOL offers an arguably attractive risk-reward for investors with a long time horizon and tolerance for volatility, precisely because price is depressed while fundamentals strengthen. But it is not a low-risk bet, and nobody can reliably call the exact bottom. This is a setup that historically rewards patience and position sizing — not all-in timing.

The Bottom Line

Solana presents one of the more striking divergences in the current market: the most oversold monthly reading in its history paired with record-setting dominance of tokenized stock trading. Measured against its own historical performance, ~$70 places SOL deep in value territory rather than euphoria.

Whether that makes it a "good buy" depends on your time horizon and risk tolerance. For short-term traders, the lack of a confirmed reversal argues for caution. For long-term investors who believe in tokenization and Solana's role in it, the current setup — depressed price, record usage — is exactly the kind of moment that tends to look attractive in hindsight, even if the timing is never certain.

Why Is Solana Dominating Tokenization?

Solana's grip on tokenized stocks comes down to its core technical strengths as a blockchain:

• Speed. Solana is one of the fastest chains in production, with high throughput and sub-second finality suited to rapid-fire equity trading.
• Low costs. Transaction fees often amount to a fraction of a cent, making high-frequency tokenized-stock trades economically viable where congested, high-fee chains can't compete.
• Deep liquidity and infrastructure. A mature ecosystem of DEXs, aggregators, and on-chain stockholders has formed around the network, creating a self-reinforcing liquidity advantage.

When the cost and speed of settling a trade approach zero, the friction that holds tokenization back on other chains largely disappears — which is why volume keeps concentrating on Solana.

Is Solana a Good Buy at Current Prices?

Here's how the two sides stack up. The bull case: SOL trades at historically oversold levels, sits on long-term support, and is winning one of crypto's fastest-growing categories outright. When price weakness and rising adoption diverge like this, the market is often pricing the asset on macro sentiment rather than what the network is doing.

The bear case: oversold can get more oversold, and a genuine turn requires a turn in broader risk appetite — likely tied to easing macro conditions and returning crypto liquidity. Until that happens, "cheap" assets can stay cheap or get cheaper.

A balanced read: at ~$70, SOL offers an arguably attractive risk-reward for investors with a long time horizon and tolerance for volatility, precisely because price is depressed while fundamentals strengthen. But it is not a low-risk bet, and nobody can reliably call the exact bottom. This is a setup that historically rewards patience and position sizing — not all-in timing.

The Bottom Line

Solana presents one of the more striking divergences in the current market: the most oversold monthly reading in its history paired with record-setting dominance of tokenized stock trading. Measured against its own historical performance, ~$70 places SOL deep in value territory rather than euphoria.

Whether that makes it a "good buy" depends on your time horizon and risk tolerance. For short-term traders, the lack of a confirmed reversal argues for caution. For long-term investors who believe in tokenization and Solana's role in it, the current setup — depressed price, record usage — is exactly the kind of moment that tends to look attractive in hindsight, even if the timing is never certain.

Activity on the Bitcoin network is surging, CryptoQuant said, but it's not correlating with price movement for its native asset.

Global financial institution Charles Schwab is the latest firm hoping to steal a piece of the growing prediction market pie.

The bill is meant to curb potential insider trading, blocking lawmakers and family members from policy-related prediction market bets.

Many AI users are convinced that OpenAI is quietly running GPT-5.6 inside ChatGPT. OpenAI isn't confirming anything.

Institutions are gobbling up Solana for their balance sheets. These are the top publicly traded treasuries.

Michael Saylor reflects on Strategy’s dark moments and recovery over the years, all thanks to its resilience in Bitcoin regardless of the market condition.

Cardano’s next hard fork clears key governance milestone with timelines emerging.

XRP notes 17% surge in its burn rate as its network continues to strengthen despite the broader market weakness, flashing signs of a potential recovery.

2026 deadline puts spotlight on ISO 20022 compliance readiness.

Ethereum might be preparing for its next rally to $2,850 despite the bearish market outlook as the asset is seen sitting at a familiar bottom level.

TLDR:

• OpenAI’s 2025 net loss hit $38.5 billion despite revenue tripling to $13.07 billion overall.
• Uber, Amazon and JPMorgan now restrict employee AI usage after costs spiraled unexpectedly.
• Anthropic and OpenAI filed confidentially for IPOs, both targeting valuations near $850 billion.
• Chinese models DeepSeek and Kimi undercut Anthropic and OpenAI pricing in benchmark cost tests.

Anthropic and OpenAI are pushing toward public markets while facing mounting questions about AI spending sustainability.

OpenAI posted a $38.5 billion net loss in 2025, even as revenue tripled to $13.07 billion. Rising pay-per-token costs have prompted major employers to limit staff usage, raising doubts about near-term profitability for both companies.

Enterprise Costs Spark Internal Crackdowns

Several large corporations have begun restricting employee access to AI tools after expenses climbed sharply. Uber reportedly exhausted its 2026 AI budget by April and now caps spending at $1,500 per employee monthly.

Amazon told staff to avoid using AI tools without clear purpose, following reports that engineers ran automated agents to climb internal usage leaderboards.

JPMorgan circulated an internal memo this month addressing excessive AI spending across departments. Some employees reportedly generated AI bills exceeding their own monthly salaries.

These examples reflect a broader pattern among companies that adopted AI tools aggressively over the past two years.

One pricing shift illustrates the scale of the problem. Workato saw its Anthropic bill increase 700% in a single day after the company moved from flat-rate to pay-per-token pricing in May.

Workato’s chief information officer said earlier subsidized pricing had encouraged widespread adoption before actual costs became visible.

IPO Timing Collides With Spending Concerns

Anthropic and OpenAI filed confidentially for public offerings this month, both reportedly targeting valuations near $850 billion.

Neither company has reached profitability, and OpenAI’s losses nearly tripled year over year. In 2024, the company lost $5.09 billion, a figure that grew to $38.5 billion in 2025.

This timing creates friction for both firms as they court investor confidence. Public offerings typically require evidence of sustainable revenue growth, yet enterprise clients are simultaneously scaling back usage. The same trend driving corporate cost-cutting threatens the growth narrative needed for successful IPO valuations.

OpenAI is reportedly considering token price reductions to retain customers shifting toward Anthropic’s offerings. According to the Wall Street Journal, Anthropic’s Claude Code product helped push annualized revenue from $9 billion to $47 billion within five months. That growth has intensified competitive pressure between the two firms.

Competitive Pricing Pressure Intensifies From Chinese Models

Artificial Analysis tested major AI models on identical benchmark tasks, comparing total operational costs. Anthropic’s flagship model cost $4,811 to complete the test suite, while OpenAI’s model cost $3,357 for the same workload.

Chinese alternatives showed substantially lower costs in the same testing. DeepSeek completed the benchmark for $1,071, while Kimi finished for $948.

These figures suggest Chinese developers prioritize cost efficiency over matching premium-tier performance metrics.

Bain surveyed nearly 1,000 companies regarding AI return on investment, finding that 40% reported actual cost savings below 10%.

One investor told Axios that a corporate finance officer spent $500 million on Claude access in a single month before anyone noticed.

As Anthropic and OpenAI prepare investor pitches, enterprise customers are demonstrating measurable resistance to current pricing structures.

The post Anthropic, OpenAI Pursue IPOs as Enterprise AI Spending Faces Pushback appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Strategy holds 847,000 BTC worth ~$54B, exceeding debt by approximately $48 billion today.
• The firm raised over $60B post-2022 crisis and added more than 716,000 BTC to reserves.
• Bitcoin trades at $63,703, a level analysts call a critical decision point for the market.
• Critics flag leverage risks in STRC preferred stock while supporters cite Saylor’s track record.

Strategy Inc. has completed one of the most dramatic reversals in corporate financial history. The firm, formerly known as MicroStrategy, held 130,000 BTC worth roughly $2.6 billion in October 2022.

Its stock traded at $24 on a split-adjusted basis, and Bitcoin was near $20,000. Weeks later, debt outpaced the company’s combined Bitcoin and cash reserves by $300 million. At press time, Strategy’s reserves exceed its debt by approximately $48 billion.

From the Edge of Insolvency to a $54 Billion Bitcoin Treasury

The months following October 2022 were the company’s most precarious. Bitcoin fell below $16,000 by year-end, and Strategy’s stock dropped into the $13 range.

The situation was bleak by any measure, yet the company did not liquidate its Bitcoin holdings. Instead, it stayed focused and continued executing its core accumulation strategy.

That commitment proved decisive. Strategy raised over $60 billion in additional capital in the years that followed. Every dollar went into Bitcoin, adding more than 716,000 BTC to the company’s treasury. The firm now holds approximately 847,000 BTC, valued at roughly $54 billion at current market prices.

Michael Saylor, co-founder and executive chairman, reflected on the journey in a recent post on X. He wrote that when he delivered a key speech in October 2022, few could have predicted the turnaround that followed. He credited those who believed in the long-term thesis and endured the drawdown.

Bitcoin trades at $63,703 according to Coingecko data, representing a 1.91% gain in the past 24 hours. Strategy’s BTC and cash reserves now far exceed the company’s debt obligations, marking a total swing of roughly $48.3 billion from the low point in 2022.

Bitcoin’s Technical Level and What Comes Next for the Market

As Strategy’s balance sheet draws attention, Bitcoin itself sits at a critical price zone. Analyst Mister Crypto flagged the $63,000 range as a decisive area in a recent X post.

He noted that this level served as resistance in 2021, acted as a launchpad in 2024, and now functions as support in the current market cycle.

According to the analyst, the outcome from this zone determines the next major move. A hold above $63,000 would suggest range formation and a possible bottom. A breakdown below it could trigger further capitulation before any sustained recovery begins.

This technical context matters for Strategy directly. The company’s entire financial structure depends on Bitcoin’s price trajectory.

Critics have raised concerns about its high-leverage preferred stock, STRC, which trades at $88. They also point to a recent, small BTC sale the company executed to cover dividend payments.

Supporters counter that Saylor has navigated extreme pressure before and emerged stronger each time. The 2022 crisis was a clear test of that thesis.

With reserves now exceeding debt by $48 billion, the data currently favors those who held the long view on Strategy’s Bitcoin strategy.

The post Strategy’s $48 Billion Turnaround: How Bitcoin Transformed A Near-Bankrupt Company appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Venus Core Pool now accepts TSLAB, NVDAB, and SPCXB as collateral for borrowing assets.
• Users keep stock price exposure while unlocking liquidity without selling their holdings.
• Binance, PancakeSwap, and Trust Wallet support the tokenization and transfer pathway.
• Rollout follows conservative risk parameters set through Venus governance procedures.

Venus Protocol has launched tokenized stocks as collateral for the first time, introducing bStocks to its Core Pool on BNB Chain.

The integration lets users borrow against tokenized stock positions without selling their holdings. This marks the first tokenized stock collateral market available on the platform.

bStocks Enter Venus Core Pool

Venus Core Pool now supports TSLAB, NVDAB, and SPCXB as eligible collateral assets. These bStocks represent tokenized versions of Tesla, Nvidia, and SpaceX-linked stock exposure.

Users supplying bStocks retain price exposure to the underlying equities. At the same time, they unlock borrowing power within the protocol.

Borrowers can access supported assets in Venus Core Pool using bStocks as backing. This includes stablecoins like USDT, USDC, and U.

Other listed tokens on the platform are also available for borrowing. The structure allows holders to keep their stock exposure while accessing liquidity.

Venus Core Pool remains the largest decentralized lending market on BNB Chain. bStocks now sit alongside BTC, ETH, BNB, and major stablecoins in the pool.

This places tokenized equities within the same liquidity infrastructure backing billions in active lending. Venus describes the addition as part of its core financial stack rather than a separate offering.

The bStocks launch follows earlier tokenized commodity listings on Venus, including XAUm. Those markets showed demand for real-world asset exposure within decentralized finance.

Venus is now extending that approach from commodities into equities. This broadens the categories of tokenized assets usable as on-chain collateral.

Ecosystem Collaboration Powers the Rollout

The launch involved coordination across multiple platforms within the BNB Chain ecosystem. Binance supplies the tokenization infrastructure behind bStocks.

Users can convert existing Direct Stock holdings into bStocks without fees. Alternatively, bStocks can be purchased directly through Binance Spot.

PancakeSwap and Trust Wallet provide secondary market access for bStocks once tokenized. Holders can move tokens into self-custody wallets through these platforms.

From there, bStocks can be supplied directly to Venus Core Pool. This completes the path from tokenization to active collateral use in DeFi.

Venus Protocol’s Head of BD, Leon, said tokenized assets are turning into a genuine bridge between traditional finance and on-chain systems.

He described the development as a working product rather than a concept, adding that allowing users to borrow against tokenized stock positions without selling expands the meaning of collateral on BNB Chain.

The initial rollout includes a limited set of bStocks under conservative risk parameters. These parameters were set through Venus governance processes.

Any future expansion to additional tokenized stocks will require governance approval. Collateral markets operate continuously, allowing borrowers to access credit at any time.

Capital remains at risk throughout participation in these markets. Tokenized stock values depend on third-party issuers and available liquidity.

Borrowing positions may face automatic liquidation if collateral values decline. Users should review all disclosures before participating in these markets.

The post Venus Protocol Launches Tokenized Stocks as Collateral on BNB Chain appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Hsiao-Wei Wang resigns as Ethereum Foundation co-executive director, effective Thursday this week.
• Both co-executive director roles are now vacant after Tomasz Stańczak’s earlier departure.
• At least eight senior Ethereum Foundation members have exited the organization in five months.
• Board member Bastian Aue takes on interim executive director duties amid governance scrutiny.

Hsiao-Wei Wang has stepped down as co-executive director and board member of the Ethereum Foundation, effective Thursday, becoming the latest senior figure to exit the nonprofit.

Her departure leaves both co-executive director seats vacant and places renewed focus on the organization’s leadership pipeline during a period of intense scrutiny.

Another Senior Exit Rattles the Foundation

Wang’s resignation follows closely behind that of fellow co-executive director Tomasz Stańczak, who stepped back after helping manage a leadership transition at the Switzerland-based organization.

With Stańczak already gone, Wang’s exit means the foundation has lost both individuals who had jointly held its top executive role.

Board member Bastian Aue has stepped into a larger leadership position as a result. Aue had already begun overseeing parts of the transition during Wang’s recent sabbatical, positioning him to take on interim executive director responsibilities now that both co-executive directors have departed.

Wang’s exit is not an isolated event. At least eight senior members have left the Ethereum Foundation within the past five months, a pattern that has drawn growing attention from developers and community members tracking the organization’s direction.

The repeated departures have fueled scrutiny over governance practices, spending decisions, and long-term strategic planning at the foundation.

This comes as Ethereum contends with intensifying competition from rival blockchain networks vying for developers, capital, and active users.

Wang and Buterin Address the Transition

Wang explained that her decision followed a sabbatical period that allowed her to reassess her priorities within the organization.

She took on the co-executive director position last year alongside Stańczak, describing the stretch as a demanding one for the foundation.

In her resignation statement, Wang said she had reached a clear conclusion after stepping away. “I’ve come to feel that this is the right moment for me to step back,” she wrote, signaling a personal rather than contentious departure.

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin responded by recognizing Wang’s decade-long contributions to the ecosystem.

He specifically highlighted her role in organizing the network’s research efforts and shaping its consensus-building processes over the years.

Buterin also credited Wang with helping build an active developer community in Taipei, an effort that expanded Ethereum’s reach beyond its more established hubs.

Wang closed her statement by describing Ethereum as resting on more than any single contributor. The network “has always been bigger than any one role, any one organization, or any one moment,” she wrote.

The foundation must now fill two co-executive director vacancies while managing continued community attention. Aue’s interim leadership will likely remain under close watch as the organization works toward longer-term stability.

The post Ethereum Foundation Co-Executive Director Hsiao-Wei Wang Steps Down appeared first on Blockonomi.

Quick Overview

• SpaceX completed a historic public offering worth approximately $75 billion, momentarily approaching a $2 trillion market cap
• OpenAI has allegedly submitted confidential IPO paperwork, setting up what could be a landmark tech debut
• Intel stock rallied on news of a strategic chip manufacturing partnership with Apple
• Crude oil prices declined amid increasing hopes for U.S.-Iran negotiations and expanded supply
• Equity markets maintained positions near all-time peaks despite persistent inflation and rate worries

Investors had plenty to digest this week. From a landmark aerospace company entering public markets to energy price movements, here are the five key developments that influenced trading.

SpaceX Achieves Unprecedented IPO

SpaceX made Wall Street history this week by executing the largest initial public offering ever recorded, securing approximately $75 billion in capital. The aerospace giant momentarily reached a valuation approaching $2 trillion, generating extraordinary investor enthusiasm worldwide.

The landmark debut thrust the entire space industry into the investment spotlight. Firms such as Rocket Lab, AST SpaceMobile, Planet Labs, and Intuitive Machines experienced heightened investor interest as market participants sought opportunities in space technology.

Market experts suggest the overwhelming success of SpaceX’s public entry may encourage additional major private enterprises to pursue listings in coming years.

The offering immediately became a defining Wall Street moment for 2026.

OpenAI Reportedly Prepares for Public Markets

News surfaced this week indicating that OpenAI has submitted confidential documentation for a potential IPO. Should the company proceed, it would represent one of the most significant technology market debuts in history.

OpenAI has gained prominence through ChatGPT while simultaneously developing a rapidly expanding enterprise platform.

Currently, investors seeking artificial intelligence exposure typically turn to companies such as Nvidia, Microsoft, and Broadcom. An OpenAI public offering would provide investors with direct access to a premier AI innovator.

The development ensured artificial intelligence remained a dominant theme in market discussions throughout the week.

Intel Stock Rallies Following Apple Collaboration Report

Intel shares experienced significant gains this week following reports that Apple intends to collaborate with the chipmaker on domestic semiconductor production and advanced chip design.

The collaboration represents a significant milestone for Intel’s ongoing initiative to restore its leadership position in cutting-edge chip manufacturing.

The partnership also aligns with broader governmental objectives to expand American semiconductor capacity and reduce reliance on foreign production.

Intel concluded the week among the top performers in large-capitalization technology equities.

Crude Prices Decline on Diplomatic Progress

Crude oil markets saw prices retreat this week as optimism increased regarding potential diplomatic breakthroughs in U.S.-Iran discussions.

The possibility of additional Iranian crude entering worldwide markets helped alleviate supply concerns and contributed to the price decline.

Decreasing oil prices typically provide advantages to airlines, hospitality sectors, and consumer-focused businesses through reduced operational expenses.

The energy price movement also contributed to improved overall market sentiment entering the weekend.

Equity Markets Maintain Record Territory

Despite continuing uncertainties surrounding inflation metrics and monetary policy, major stock indexes remained positioned near historic peaks throughout the week.

Robust corporate financial results, sustained artificial intelligence capital deployment, and favorable sector dynamics helped support market stability.

Investors maintained capital allocation toward artificial intelligence, semiconductor technology, enterprise software, and aerospace sectors across the trading period.

The market’s strength as the second half of 2026 progresses demonstrates the substantial confidence investors maintain regarding sustained expansion in transformative technology sectors.

The post Market Movers This Week: SpaceX’s Mega IPO, OpenAI Filing, and Intel’s Apple Partnership appeared first on Blockonomi.

Current prices are not the most important thing when it comes to determining whether it’s the right time to acquire a certain asset, said the person behind one of the most popular investment books, Rich Dad, Poor Dad.

Kiyosaki further explained when he is prepared to start acquiring more BTC, ETH, silver, and gold amid all assets’ recent declines.

When Will Kiyosaki Start Buying Again?

It has been a wild year for investors in all assets. Bitcoin’s price began the year with a surge toward $100,000, where it was stopped, and the subsequent months were quite painful. The correction culmination, at least for now, was in early June at $59,100. ETH followed a similar path, dumping to $1,500 a few weeks back. Although both have recovered some ground since then, they are still deep in the red YTD.

Even the two largest precious metals, typically considered more stable and reliable, have bled out. Silver pumped above $120 at the start of the month, but now sits nearly 50% away from that peak. Gold rocketed to $5,600/oz, but its crash has been quite painful, ending the business week at under $4,160/oz (a 25% correction).

Robert Kiyosaki believes these dips are not the only factor that matters. In fact, he admitted that he has recently made this mistake of “letting price determine reasons to buy or sell any asset.” He has now learned to “understand the ‘context’ or the environment the asset is in… not the price.”

The author and investor explained that he has shifted his focus to the technical charts of the four assets mentioned above and “will buy when prices reverse their decline.” Moreover, he predicted that the two precious metals are “poised for a massive rise in prices.”

No Safe-Haven Status?

Being down YTD and since their respective peaks marked in January, both bitcoin and gold raised some analysts’ eyebrows regarding their safe-haven status. Market observer and commentator Charlie Bilello recently pointed out that this decline in both assets’ prices is quite hard to explain, especially since most major stocks are up by double digits.

He believes a major part of this is due to rotation, as investors have turned their attention to the tech sector, mostly because of the AI boom. He added that capital has opted to move to assets with earnings momentum rather than staying on stores of value with negligible yield.

The post Why Isn’t Robert Kiyosaki Buying the Dip in BTC, ETH, Gold, and Silver? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

After finding support around $1.5K earlier this month, Ethereum has managed to stage a modest recovery. However, the asset remains positioned below critical technical barriers, and sentiment metrics indicate that buyers have not yet regained control of the market. The latter specifically shows a lack of strong institutional demand, suggesting that recovery attempts could face considerable headwinds.

Ethereum Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

On the daily timeframe, ETH remains firmly inside the large descending channel that has guided price action lower for several months. The asset recently broke below the important $1.85K support area, which has now flipped into resistance. The breakdown accelerated selling pressure toward the major demand zone at roughly $1.5K. This area, coinciding with the mid-line of the channel, has successfully halted the decline so far, producing a relief bounce back toward the $1.8K region.

However, the asset was rejected from the $1.8k zone, and the broader structure remains bearish as ETH continues to trade below both the 100-day and 200-day moving averages, which are sloping downward in the $2.1K-$2.4K range.

The former support zone around $2K now represents the most significant resistance cluster overhead. A recovery into that area would likely attract fresh selling interest unless accompanied by a decisive breakout above the descending channel.

Yet, as long as ETH remains below $1.85K and beneath the channel resistance, the prevailing trend favors sellers. A decline from current levels could expose the $1.5K support region once again, while a breakdown below that demand zone would open the door for a deeper drop toward the lower boundary of the channel below the $1.2K mark.

ETH/USDT 4-Hour Chart

The 4-hour timeframe shows a clearer picture. Following the sharp selloff into the $1.5K support area, ETH formed a rising channel and began carving out higher lows. This recovery structure allowed price to rebound toward the $1.8K resistance zone, where sellers quickly regained control and pushed the asset back lower.

The rejection from that resistance area confirms its importance in the near term. Since then, ETH has broken below the ascending channel and is consolidating around $1.7K. The RSI also currently hovers around neutral territory, indicating that bearish momentum has eased but has not yet shifted decisively in favor of buyers.

Immediate support remains at $1.5K, which served as the origin of the recent bounce. Yet, if the measured move of the broken ascending channel plays out, the market could drop well below this zone. On the upside, buyers must still reclaim the $1.8K resistance region to generate stronger recovery momentum. Yet, as things stand, the overall bearish sentiment is still dominant.

Sentiment Analysis

The Coinbase Premium Index continues to provide a bearish signal for Ethereum. This metric measures the price difference between ETH traded on Coinbase and other major exchanges, often serving as a proxy for U.S. institutional and spot demand. Positive readings generally indicate stronger buying activity from Coinbase participants, while negative readings suggest weaker demand and increased selling pressure.

The latest data shows the Coinbase Premium Index remaining predominantly below zero, with recent readings approaching -0.1. This marks one of the weakest periods of Coinbase demand seen since the beginning of last year. Notably, the deterioration in the premium has occurred alongside ETH’s price decline, which reinforces the view that U.S.-based investors have not yet returned aggressively to the market.

Historically, sustained recoveries in Ethereum have often been accompanied by persistent positive premium readings. Until the metric can reclaim and hold above the neutral line, order flow suggests that rallies may continue to face selling pressure rather than broad-based accumulation.

The post Ethereum Price Prediction: Can ETH Reclaim $2K Before Month-End? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

XRP remains under pressure across both its USD and Bitcoin pairs, with the asset continuing to trade within a well-defined bearish structure. While buyers have managed to defend key support levels in recent weeks, the broader trend has yet to show convincing signs of a reversal, as the token remains below major moving averages and the descending trendline resistance.

Ripple Price Analysis: The USDT Pair

On the USDT pair, XRP continues to trade inside a large descending channel that has governed the price action since the second half of 2025. The recent decline pushed the asset back into the critical support zone around $1.1, where buyers have once again stepped in to prevent a deeper breakdown.

This area has acted as a major demand region throughout the current correction and remains the most important support level on the chart. A decisive loss of this zone could expose the next major downside target around the $0.60 region, which marks the next visible demand area on the higher timeframe.

On the upside, XRP is capped by several layers of resistance. The descending channel’s upper boundary currently coincides with the 100-day moving average near the $1.35 area, while the 200-day moving average is positioned higher around $1.75. Beyond that, the major supply zone at $2.5 remains the key level that buyers would need to reclaim to shift the long-term structure back in their favor.

Meanwhile, overall momentum remains weak. Although the RSI has stabilized above the oversold territory, it has yet to generate the type of bullish divergence or strength typically associated with a sustainable trend reversal.

As long as XRP remains below the descending channel resistance and the major moving averages, the broader market structure continues to favor sellers despite the recent stabilization.

The BTC Pair

The BTC pair paints a similarly cautious picture and highlights XRP’s ongoing relative weakness against Bitcoin. After a prolonged decline within a descending channel, XRP/BTC has recently entered a consolidation phase above the key support area around 1,720 SATs. This level has been tested multiple times since May and continues to attract demand, forming the base of the current range.

However, despite holding support, buyers have repeatedly failed to establish a sustained breakout above the nearby resistance zone around 1,850 SATs. This area coincides with the 100-day moving average and has acted as a ceiling throughout June.

If XRP/BTC loses the 1,720 SATs support floor, the next major demand area sits considerably lower around 1,500 SATs. Conversely, a successful breakout above the 1,850 SATs level could open the door for a move toward the next resistance region near 2,000 SATs, where additional supply is likely to emerge.

Still, the BTC pair suggests that XRP has yet to establish meaningful relative strength, reinforcing the cautious outlook visible on the USDT chart. Until buyers reclaim the nearby resistance levels and break the broader descending structure, rallies are likely to be viewed as corrective rather than the start of a new bullish trend.

The post Ripple Price Analysis: Where XRP Could Go Next After Its Weekly Rejection appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitcoin’s next major leg down might not come from miners, ETF exodus, macro data, unknown large whales, or even wars and worsening economic conditions. Instead, it could be from the market’s largest and most famous corporate BTC buyer if it indeed turns into a recurring seller, as many critics and experts fear.

As such, we decided to ask ChatGPT about its take on the matter: how viable is the threat, and how low can BTC go if Strategy indeed begins disposing of some of its crypto holdings to pay off dividends or other expenses?

Is Strategy a Threat to BTC’s Price?

Consistent crypto critic Peter Schiff is not the only person who has sounded the alarm on Strategy’s strategy (no pun intended) to raise funds through its STRC to accumulate more bitcoin. Just earlier, we reported that a popular crypto analyst, Kaleo, warned that the company would need to sell at least 50,000 bitcoin in the next couple of years to fund dividend payments and other expenses.

ChatGPT warned that if the largest corporate holder of BTC indeed starts offloading more significant portions, not just the 32 units it sold several weeks ago, the initial market shock could send the asset tumbling toward multi-year lows at $52,000. That would be just the base-case scenario and first reaction, before a more profound correction driven by a deeper loss of confidence in Strategy’s capital structure could tumble bitcoin toward $45,000.

The popular AI solution noted that it’s highly unlikely that Strategy will offload “hundreds of thousands of coins,” but the real danger for the asset’s price will stem from the narrative shift.

“For years, Strategy was the market’s most reliable corporate buyer of bitcoin. When BTC dipped, investors expected Michael Saylor’s company to raise capital and buy more. That created a psychological floor. If the same market starts believing Strategy must sell BTC to service its own financial instruments, that floor can quickly turn into resistance.”

Why STRC Matters

Also referred to as Stretch, STRC is the company’s variable-rate perpetual preferred stock. Simply put, investors buy STRC for cash yield, while Strategy uses the capital raised through the instrument to support its bitcoin-focused balance sheet. It’s designed around a $100 stated amount.

The company can adjust the dividend rate to keep STRC trading close to that level. When the shares trade near or above $100, the model operates as designed: the company can issue more preferred shares through at-the-market programs, raise cash, buy more BTC, and keep the machine working.

When that $100 par breaks, the structure is in danger. At current prices of under $90, STRC is no longer behaving like a stable high-yield instrument. Instead, it trades at a meaningful discount relative to the level the firm wants to hold, creating several issues.

Strategy’s ability to issue more STRC becomes weaker as selling new shares below the intended $100 zone would violate the product’s design or signal that investors are demanding a much larger discount.

Additionally, the dividend rate may need to rise to attract buyers back. Lastly, instead of using STRC proceeds to buy more BTC, Strategy may have to utilize its cash reserves, common-stock sales, or, as threatened above, BTC sales, to keep dividends current.

The post What Happens to Bitcoin’s Price if the Biggest Corporate Buyer Becomes a Seller? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Michael Saylor’s bitcoin-buying intelligence software company has come under scrutiny in recent weeks. The tiny sale of 32 BTC at the end of May was just a drop in the ocean, as the Stretch Preferred Stock (STRC) it uses to buy more BTC by raising capital through an at-the-market continuous share issuance program has fallen well below its par price of $100.

Although the firm and its execs continue to try to reassure the market that they have the funds necessary to cover the dividend payments and that the situation is under control, popular analysts and commentators remain skeptical. And it’s not just Peter Schiff, who has called STRC a ‘Ponzi scheme.’

Markets are closed today.
Volatility is never easy.
Bitcoin keeps working.
So do we.
Thank you for your support.

— Michael Saylor (@saylor) June 19, 2026

Strategy to Sell 50K BTC?

The latest substantial increase in tension on the Strategy front came during the business week, as the company’s STRC experienced a significant sell-off, which, according to Strive CEO Matt Cole, was driven by leveraged investors rather than any deterioration in the issuer’s financial strength.

In a recent interview, Kaleo, an analyst with over 700,000 followers on X, warned that Strategy’s best option now would be to sell 50,000 or more BTC in the next two years.

“They have made it their clear mission that they want to increase net Bitcoin, but what does that necessarily do to create value for MSTR holders?”

He further added that the way MSTR and other assets are being advertised is “reckless right now.” Especially for MSTR, which Strategy has referred to as “amplified bitcoin” for years, but that’s “just a fancy word for saying it’s leveraged,” he explained.

“Leverage works great on the way up. I fully agree with that. You can make a lot of money if you have a lot of leverage and the asset keeps going up. But the issue is that you can also lose a lot more on the way down.”

FTX-Like Crash?

The interviewer and Kaleo compared the recent situation with the 2022 fast-crash of FTX. Although there are some differences, such as SBF using customers’ funds to trade, they concluded that Strategy and Saylor are using investors’ capital to buy more bitcoin (not trade) with the hope that its price will eventually go up.

Kaleo added that essentially no one expected FTX, once one of the most prominent crypto exchanges, to crash and burn in days. The same way no one expected BTC to tumble toward $16,000. Consequently, he believes that if Strategy is forced to start selling large portions of its BTC holdings to cover expenses and dividends, the cryptocurrency’s price could reach multi-year lows.

The post Analyst Warns: Strategy Will Have to Sell Over 50,000 BTC by 2028 appeared first on CryptoPotato.