China's strategic focus on AI datasets and infrastructure aims to secure technological autonomy amid global data scarcity and geopolitical tensions.

The post China unveils massive plan to build AI training datasets as global data shortage looms appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The escalation in maritime threats could severely disrupt global oil supply chains, heightening geopolitical tensions and economic instability.

The post ADNOC reports 15 vessel attacks as Hormuz risks escalate appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The escalation in Yemen could destabilize the region further, potentially leading to broader conflicts and impacting global markets.

The post Yemeni military launches operation after Houthi attacks escalate conflict appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Ajinomoto's price hike highlights the critical role of supply chain bottlenecks in shaping AI chip costs and market dynamics globally.

The post Ajinomoto raises prices 30% amid AI chip supply shortage appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Nvidia's investment in Lancium highlights the strategic importance of securing energy infrastructure to support AI growth, reshaping tech capital allocation.

The post Nvidia could boost Lancium stake to 30% with $1B investment appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Trump Media Pulls Back From Crypto Deals: Report

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bitcoin Magazine

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bitcoin Magazine

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bitcoin Magazine

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Bitcoin Magazine

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

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

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

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

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

One Red Day Didn’t Change the Trend

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

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

After that, buyers returned almost immediately.

The next four trading sessions posted consecutive gains:

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

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

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

BlackRock Continued to Lead the Way

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

Over the seven-day period:

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

Other issuers also participated.

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

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

What ETF Flows Can and Can’t Tell Us

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

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

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

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

Why This Matters

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

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

This week, the numbers suggest demand remained intact.

Follow Institutional Bitcoin Demand in Real Time

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

The spot Bitcoin ETF Dashboard tracks:

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

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

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

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

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

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

AI-assisted security campaign focused on the Bitcoin ecosystem, Bitcoin Red Team, said it generated 6,700 findings across 425 projects in its first 55 hours. The campaign labeled 1,029 of them high or critical.

The Aug. 6 update measures how much material entered a security triage pipeline, and its effect on software security remains unreported.

The retrieved thread omitted audit-ready definitions and denominators for the severity counts, as well as case-level outcomes, an aggregate false-positive rate, and a fix rate.

Those missing fields prevent a calculation of how many alerts became confirmed vulnerabilities, how many maintainers rejected or downgraded, and how many led to patches.

The first 55 hours still reveal a consequential capability, noting how AI systems can fill an ecosystem-scale review pipeline quickly. Expert prompting, reproduction, disclosure, and maintainer response remained necessary at every later stage.

What the campaign numbers measure

The campaign published two snapshots as its roster and workload expanded:

The 27.5-hour update covered 390 projects and 4,962 findings. By the 55-hour mark, the project count had risen by 35 and the finding count by 1,738. The later thread put high-or-critical findings at 15.4% of the total and clarified that three of the 24 reported participants were bots.

The earlier post separated critical and high findings, while the later one combined them, with both sets of figures reflecting campaign assessments. Maintainer-confirmed exploitability and remediation outcomes require separate evidence.

Rob Hamilton described Kimi K3 as handling the heavy analysis, with GPT Sol, Fable/Opus, and GLM 5.2 supporting the documentation. He said OpenAI's Cyber Harness covered selected components he considered load-bearing.

A day later, Hamilton wrote that subject-matter experts could change an assessment with one or two sentences of context or a small block of code. In examples he described, that input pushed middling concerns into high or critical territory. He also identified operations, disclosure handoff, and triage as bottlenecks.

In Hamilton's account, models searched broadly while specialists shaped prompts, interpreted output, attempted reproduction, and decided which reports were ready for disclosure. That division of labor makes the campaign a human-AI review system.

Related Reading

OpenAI’s new cybersecurity push has a lesson for crypto: stop waiting for the hack

OpenAI’s Daybreak may point to the crypto industry’s next security standard of becoming resilient before vulnerabilities are exploited.

May 12, 2026 · Gino Matos

The developer known as Calle said most critical reports were quickly verified by project owners. The post supplied no denominator, verified-report count, rejection count, or patch status, leaving the breadth and outcome of that verification unresolved.

Related Reading

Firefox finds 20 year old bug and patches 14 months of fixes in 30 days using Anthropic’s Mythos AI

Mozilla’s 20-year Firefox bug shows the risk of AI-accelerated zero-day discovery

May 10, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

Outreach and outcomes define the security value

In the 55-hour update, Bitcoin Red Team reported that 19.5% of scanned projects had a SECURITY.md file and 13.1% had an email there. The retrieved thread omitted the project corpus, denominator interpretation, and measurement method, so the percentages only describe the campaign's scan.

On Aug. 3, Hamilton said the effort had spent over $10,000 scanning over 100 repositories and had immediately disclosed critical findings when a proof of concept demonstrated exploitability. On Aug. 4, he reported about $20,000 in spending, more than a dozen disclosures and 150 repositories scanned.

Scanning continued to expand, while the campaign described outreach, handoff and triage as active operational constraints. The published snapshots offer no comparable disclosure denominator at 55 hours, so they cannot establish the relative speed of scanning and resolution.

Hamilton later identified the separate Coldcard incident as a catalyst for the wider campaign. The campaign record attributes no discovery of the Coldcard flaw to this sprint.

Related Reading

Coldcard’s $89M wallet bug triggers the biggest Bitcoin movement since FTX and completely distorts market signals

More than 77,000 BTC moved from older wallets as users raced to secure funds, complicating bearish readings across key on-chain indicators.

Aug 2, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

A useful public accounting would separate findings that were reproduced, acknowledged, downgraded, rejected, and fixed, with definitions and denominators for each rate. That breakdown would show how much of the campaign's volume became actionable security work.

A public critic, JW Weatherman, argued that the campaign could not triage its output. His post identified no campaign-linked issue, patch, or advisory, so it supplies criticism without a measurable failure rate. The campaign's missing disposition data leaves the underlying question open.

For now, 6,700 represents campaign-labeled findings and triage candidates. The sprint demonstrated the speed of machine-assisted review. Its lasting security value depends on the share that experts can validate, disclose, and convert into fixes.

The post Bitcoin’s AI security sprint found 6,700 issues in 55 hours, but no one knows how many are real appeared first on CryptoSlate.

SUI Group Holdings has lent 6 million SUI tokens to Bluefin Markets under an uncollateralized agreement that lets the borrower reuse the assets and gives the Nasdaq-listed treasury company a share of Bluefin’s revenue. The arrangement may improve income, but SUI Group has not disclosed the revenue base needed to show that it can compensate for the added counterparty and liquidity risk.

The company’s Aug. 6 results filing said it held 109.1 million SUI as of Aug. 3, including the 6 million SUI recorded as loan receivables. It marked the total position at $75.3 million using a $0.69 SUI reference price. Its management-defined, non-GAAP mNAV calculation put market capitalization at 0.72 times its company-calculated net asset value, implying a 28.4% discount.

Related Reading

Metaplanet bets Bitcoin treasury firms can survive by packaging Bitcoin income

Regulated securities rails could give BTC treasury firms a new engine, if product demand and mNAV math hold up.

Jun 26, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

How the revenue share works

A June 19 amendment increased Bluefin’s loan from 2 million to 6 million SUI and raised SUI Group’s fee from 5% to 11%. The agreement defines that fee as 11% of gross operating revenue across Bluefin and specified associated companies, including revenue tied to acquired Suilend assets. Payments are normally due twice monthly in SUI.

The 11% applies to qualifying revenue, leaving the return on the 6 million SUI dependent on Bluefin’s revenue base. SUI Group’s Form 10-Q reported $35,600 of digital-lending income across all arrangements in the second quarter, within $363,000 of total revenue. The amendment took effect late in the quarter, and the company did not identify Bluefin’s contribution, its qualifying revenue or post-amendment payments.

Related Reading

BitMine made $46 million staking Ethereum then lost twice that betting on it

Staking generated nearly all quarterly revenue as the company issued billions of dollars in stock to finance a treasury sitting $8.2 billion below cost.

Jul 15, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

The prospective fee sits against a heavy loss base. Operating loss was $19.744 million and net loss was $18.907 million. Separately, SUI Group recorded $18.910 million of realized digital-asset losses, including $14 million tied to the additional Bluefin transfer. The company attributed the loss primarily to derecognizing SUI and recognizing a lower-valued receivable, describing that effect as noncash. The filing tied it to SUI price and derecognition accounting; it disclosed no principal shortfall or credit loss.

The loan also restricts access to the tokens. Bluefin may pledge, rehypothecate, sell or lend them, and the agreement runs through Sept. 30, 2028. Even after a continuing termination event makes repayment due, Bluefin has up to six months to return the SUI.

Related Reading

Bitcoin treasuries already faced two collateral calls in 2026 and some loans can liquidate after just 12 hours

Empery disclosed two February calls, but missing collateral balances and trigger ratios make it impossible to rank which treasury is closest to another lender demand.

Jul 14, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

SUI Group’s 0.72 mNAV calculation used an Aug. 3 SUIG share price of $0.87 and a $0.69 SUI price, producing $70.38 million of market value against $98.36 million of company-calculated NAV. A static sensitivity that holds the adjusted share count and all non-SUI NAV inputs fixed and substitutes the Aug. 6 closes of $0.90 for SUIG and $0.672 for SUI produces roughly $72.81 million of market value against $96.40 million of NAV. That is about 0.755 times mNAV, or a 24.5% discount.

At fixed conversion values, the resulting $23.6 million gap is roughly equivalent to 11% of about $214.5 million in cumulative qualifying gross revenue.

The arithmetic offers a rough sense of scale, while any quarterly, annual, or breakeven estimate would need a clearer revenue base. Fee income would also lift NAV, and moves in SUIG or SUI could widen or narrow the gap, leaving Bluefin’s undisclosed revenue base as the key unknown.

Liquidity remains another constraint. At June 30, SUI Group had $7.53 million of current assets against $12.14 million of current liabilities, including $3.14 million of cash and cash equivalents.

The later $12.91 million cash-and-stablecoin figure was reconciled by starting with that June cash balance, which already included $1.7 million of USDC, subtracting $263,000 of subsequent cash movement, and adding $10.04 million of SuiUSDe.

The next test is whether SUI Group discloses qualifying Bluefin revenue and identifiable fee receipts. Those figures would show how much income the 11% share contributes while the company carries an uncollateralized receivable with long repayment terms.

The post Inside the uncollateralized deal that locked up 6 million SUI until 2028 while SUI Group trades at a 25% NAV discount appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin climbed back above $65,000 this week, extending an unusual stretch of resilience as the cryptocurrency absorbed a string of developments that would typically pressure prices.

The top digital asset rose about 2% over the past 24 hours to as high as $65,212, its strongest level since late July, CryptoSlate data shows.

The move coincided with $191.6 million in crypto liquidations across more than 80,000 traders, CoinGlass data showed, including a $1.66 million BTC position on Hyperliquid.

The price performance came as investors digested a major hardware-wallet security breach, another delay to the landmark CLARITY Act legislation and months of stagnant price action that have left some holders selling at losses.

Yet none of those pressures has produced the kind of sustained liquidation that accompanied Bitcoin’s sharper declines earlier this year.

Andre Dragosch, head of research at Bitwise Europe, said Bitcoin’s muted reaction to negative developments has pushed its sensitivity to bad news close to historical lows, which he views as a sign that much of the market’s readily available supply has already been sold.

Loss-taking fades as sellers lose urgency

Bitcoin holders are still realizing losses, but the intensity of that selling has fallen considerably from the capitulation episodes that accelerated previous declines.

CryptoQuant data shows Bitcoin’s weekly average net realized profit and loss remains negative at about $368 million, meaning investors are collectively selling some coins below their acquisition prices.

However, that remains far below the roughly $2 billion in net realized losses recorded during a February decline and the approximately $1.2 billion seen during another bout of capitulation in June.

The difference suggests holders are still being worn down by months of weak price action, but without the concentrated rush toward the exits that previously overwhelmed available demand and drove sharper declines.

The Coldcard security breach provided another test of that dynamic.

The vulnerability, linked to weak randomness used in generating wallet seed phrases, forced owners of potentially affected devices to move previously dormant Bitcoin into new addresses after the incident emerged around July 30.

The resulting spike in blockchain activity initially carried the risk of releasing a large amount of dormant supply into the market.

Instead, much of the movement appears to have involved holders securing their assets rather than preparing to sell them.

Glassnode estimated that roughly 119,000 BTC held for at least a year moved during the three days following the initial incident. Only a fraction of those coins reached exchanges, limiting the amount of additional supply available for immediate sale.

That distinction helps explain why an event that threatened confidence in one of Bitcoin’s most established forms of self-custody failed to translate into comparable pressure in the spot market.

ETFs and whales absorb Bitcoin as smaller holders retreat

The decline in selling intensity is increasingly being met by fresh demand, with US spot Bitcoin ETFs pulling in hundreds of millions of dollars while larger wallets accumulate coins being shed by smaller holders.

Data from SoSoValue shows that US-listed spot Bitcoin ETFs have attracted about $754.7 million this week, putting the products on pace for their strongest weekly inflow since April.

The recovery follows a prolonged period of uneven demand as Bitcoin struggled to regain momentum through the summer.

However, the current inflows are particularly important as they show that Bitcoin’s largest institutional demand channels continued drawing capital through a security scare that might otherwise have weakened appetite for the asset.

At the same time, large BTC holders have also been accumulating directly on-chain under these conditions.

Santiment data shows wallets holding between 10 BTC and 10,000 BTC have added more than 20,000 Bitcoin since July 29 while smaller wallets reduced their balances.

Those purchases are worth more than $1.2 billion based on Bitcoin’s trading range during the period.

Together, the ETF flows and wallet data suggest Bitcoin’s current consolidation is facilitating a transfer of supply.

Smaller holders frustrated by months of stagnant prices are reducing exposure while investors with larger balance sheets increasingly take the other side.

Derivatives traders remain reluctant to chase the rally

Santiment sees the accumulation by larger holders as improving Bitcoin’s odds of eventually breaking above $70,000 rather than falling below $60,000.

However, the derivatives markets are showing little conviction that such a move is imminent.

Data from Glassnode shows BTC upside implied volatility has fallen to about 23%, the lowest level in its data. This indicates traders are paying unusually little for contracts that would benefit from a sharp rally.

Demand for downside protection is also relatively restrained. That leaves options positioning looking defensive largely because expectations for a large upside move have faded, rather than because traders are aggressively preparing for another selloff.

CME Bitcoin futures positioning points to a similarly cautious market.

CryptoQuant data shows leveraged funds remain heavily net short, with their positioning near the upper end of its three-year historical range. Asset managers are still net long, but their exposure has fallen substantially from its 2024 peak and remains below its 50-week average.

The gap creates the potential for an asymmetric move if Bitcoin strengthens enough to force short covering.

However, participation has also weakened. Open interest, the number of reporting traders, and the share of positions held by reportable participants are near or below typical levels, suggesting the extreme positioning is concentrated among fewer market participants.

Still, leveraged-fund shorts cannot be read entirely as outright bearish bets. Such positions frequently form part of basis trades, ETF hedges and other relative-value strategies, while CFTC classifications do not reveal the economic purpose behind individual positions.

That makes the current setup less conclusive than the size of the short position alone might suggest.

A stronger breakout signal would likely require Bitcoin to rise alongside expanding open interest and broader futures participation, while leveraged funds begin covering their shorts. Further declines in asset-manager exposure would instead reinforce signs that institutional conviction remains weak.

For now, spot and derivatives markets are sending different signals. Smaller holders are selling with less intensity while ETFs and larger wallets absorb available supply, helping Bitcoin withstand negative headlines. Futures and options traders, however, are still showing little willingness to bet heavily on what comes next.

That makes Bitcoin increasingly difficult to push lower, although the market has yet to establish the demand needed to drive a sustained move higher.

The post Bitcoin’s $65K recovery shows its growing immunity to bad news as ETFs and whales buy $2 billion appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin nears the deadline for BIP-110, a proposed temporary soft fork that would shrink block data. Once the current signaling period ends, nodes enforcing it will reject blocks that do not signal support.

A third-party monitor showed only 48 of 1,831 blocks signaling as of 14:41:49 UTC on Aug. 7, just 2.62%, with 185 blocks left before the period closes.

BIP-110 requires 1,109 signaling blocks in a 2,016-block period to meet its 55% threshold. Even if every one of those 185 remaining blocks signaled, the period would finish at 233 of 2,016, or about 11.56%.

Related Reading

Bitcoin’s BIP-110 fork fight gives exchanges an August deadline before miners signal support

BGeometrics data show BIP-110 miner signaling at 0.42% since May 1, while Farside's alerts make the August lock-in window harder for exchanges, wallets, pools, and node operators to ignore.

Jul 4, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

Different rules at height 961,632

From height 961,632, continuously enforcing BIP-110 nodes reject blocks that do not signal bit 4. Nodes following existing Bitcoin rules may accept the same blocks if they otherwise satisfy those rules.

The result can be divergent block acceptance, while any sustained enforcing branch depends on miners producing BIP-110-valid work after the boundary.

Under the proposal, mandatory signaling runs through block 963,647, lock-in won't happen once the height reaches 963,648, and the reduced-data rules activate at 965,664. That schedule governs BIP-110-enforcing nodes without binding every Bitcoin participant.

Related Reading

Bitcoin is less than 10,000 blocks away from its most contentious fork fight in years

BIP-110 supporters want to keep the blockchain focused on money, while critics say filtering valid transactions could weaken Bitcoin’s neutrality.

Jun 11, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

The 2.62% reading measures version bits in observed blocks, and the monitor says it sources block data from mempool.space and checks each block's version field for bit 4.

A BIP-110 implementation pull request in the Bitcoin Core repository closed unmerged on March 26. Core contributor Antoine Poinsot wrote in a personal capacity on June 4 that Core does not enforce the proposal.

Mining pool OCEAN announced separate signaling and non-signaling endpoints and said its default would switch on July 15. Confirming that the switch actually took place and that every miner using the pool now enforces BIP-110 would require independent verification.

Related Reading

Bitcoin’s sudden node surge may be one actor posing as thousands

Jameson Lopp says a sudden wave of BIP-110 signaling nodes may be inflating visible support for a controversial anti-spam proposal.

Mar 24, 2026 · Gino Matos

Alternative Bitcoin node implementation Bitcoin Knots used its Aug. 7 release to warn that older non-enforcing software, explicitly including current Bitcoin Core, could stop fully validating BIP-110 rules and leave chainstate unsafe in some scenarios.

Independently reproducing the Core-specific warning on Bitcoin Core or on mainnet remains outstanding.

A July 17 BlockSlop technical write-up reproduced a narrower late-upgrade problem on regtest using enforcing and non-enforcing Knots builds. A data directory could retain a block accepted under the old rules after the operator switched builds because normal startup did not reconnect the inherited history. The test left out physical database corruption or a mainnet incident.

Knots then merged a safeguard that scans inherited headers for mandatory-signaling violations, invalidates offending blocks, and reorganizes. Transaction or script violations that are not visible in headers still need reconnection validation and can require reindexing.

The first blocks after height 961,631 will reveal which miners change signaling and whether an enforcing chain accumulates work. Measuring economic support would take separate evidence, such as exchange listings, node adoption data, or holder behavior.

The post Bitcoin has 185 blocks left before BIP-110 rules begin rejecting blocks appeared first on CryptoSlate.

A wave of law-firm alerts is warning BitGo investors about an Aug. 7 deadline. However, the cutoff applies only to those seeking to lead a proposed securities class action against the crypto custodian.

Over the past few days, several law firms, including DJS Law Group, Faruqi & Faruqi, and Schall Brown & Schwartz, have issued notices. They urged the crypto custodian’s shareholders to act by Aug. 7.

However, the disclosures clarify that appointment as lead plaintiff is not required to participate in any eventual financial recovery.

Under the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act, the 60-day window sets the lead-plaintiff process. It determines who may petition the court to oversee the litigation and select counsel. The law generally favors a qualified candidate with the largest financial interest. That candidate must also satisfy applicable class-action requirements.

This means investors who do not seek the lead role do not need to act by Aug. 7. Separate opt-out or proof-of-claim deadlines could arise later if the litigation progresses.

BitGo’s own filings sit at the center of the dispute

The Aug. 7 deadline stems from Arsenault v. BitGo Holdings, a lawsuit filed June 8 in the US District Court for the Eastern District of New York.

The complaint alleged BitGo and its executives downplayed their vulnerability to declining digital-asset prices in the firm’s prospectus. The prospectus portrayed the firm’s business fundamentals as resilient.

According to the lawsuit:

“The Offering Documents were negligently prepared and, as a result, contained untrue statements of material fact or omitted to state other facts necessary to make the statements made not misleading and were not prepared in accordance with the rules and regulations governing
their preparation.”

The plaintiffs also argued that BitGo understated how severely crypto-market volatility could affect its financial performance, adding that these issues contributed to the BTGO stock’s volatility.

Related Reading

Strategy faces $8.3 billion Bitcoin Q2 loss as Saylor sells over $200M in BTC

Michael Saylor’s company sold Bitcoin to help fund preferred-stock payouts, testing a model built on years of accumulation.

Jul 7, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

However, a look at BitGo's IPO prospectus showed that it explicitly warned investors about its exposure to digital-asset prices. At the time, it said a hypothetical 50% change in Bitcoin's fair value would have altered its net income for the first nine months of 2025. It estimated the change at approximately $135.1 million.

That exposure later became visible in BitGo's results. The company reported a $60.7 million loss during the first quarter. That included a $53.7 million unrealized digital-asset loss, while staking revenue fell 66.2% amid lower token prices.

BitGo, a major crypto custodian with over $100 billion in assets, went public this year. It was one of several crypto companies, including Circle, to do so.

Related Reading

BitGo files S-1 form for IPO, revealing $3B revenue in 2024

Six-month 2025 data shows continued momentum with $90.3 billion in assets on the platform and 4,621 clients, indicating accelerating market penetration.

Sep 19, 2025 · Gino Matos

However, the IPO wave has reversed amid weaker market conditions and disappointing post-listing performances for some of these offerings.

The post BitGo investors face flood of Aug. 7 class-action deadline warnings appeared first on CryptoSlate.

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

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

What Is Bitcoin Price Doing On The Chart Right Now?

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

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

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

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

Why Did The Market Ignore The CLARITY Act Delay?

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

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

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

Is The Whole Market Actually Bullish Here?

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

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

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

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

Keep it simple and watch three prices.

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

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

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

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

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

What Exactly Happened With The CLARITY Act?

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

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

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

Why Did The Senate Push The Vote To September?

Ethics. Specifically, whose crypto holdings get scrutinised.

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

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

What Does The Delay Mean For Crypto Markets?

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

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

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

What Happens Next For The CLARITY Act?

Three plausible paths from here:

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

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

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

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

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

What Bier actually built at X

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

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

The crypto connection: two points, both documented

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

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

X Money is running — without crypto

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

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

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

Why that makes sense

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

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

For European users it is further away still

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

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

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

What to take away

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Which coins are actually working this year?

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

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

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

Why is the damage so uneven?

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

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

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

What about Zcash Price?

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

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

Crypto Future Price: What should traders watch next?

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

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

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

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

Since 1 July 2026, any platform serving customers in the EU needs a granted MiCA authorisation. An application in progress no longer counts. Anyone who wants to know which firms actually cleared that bar does not have to take a press release on trust: the European Securities and Markets Authority publishes the register of authorised providers as an open file, no login required.

We downloaded that file and worked through all of it. The register is dated 4 August 2026 and was pulled on 6 August. What comes out of it matches the industry's self-description only in part. The most striking finding sits further down and reads: of 329 authorisations, exactly 21 permit the operation of a trading platform.

What the register actually says

At the cut-off date the register holds 329 authorisations, spread across 322 legal entities with their own LEI code and 26 states of the European Economic Area. The gap between the two figures comes down to companies appearing more than once, typically where an authorisation was later extended.

The raw data is available as a CSV. Anyone who wants to redo the arithmetic will find it here: CASPS.csv in the ESMA register. The folder in the path reads 2024-12, but the contents are kept current. The authority's own MiCA overview page is here.

Germany accounts for one authorisation in five

The geographic spread is far more lopsided than the public debate about Malta and Cyprus would suggest. With 72 authorisations Germany leads the field, more than twice as many as second-placed France with 35. The Netherlands follow with 29, Cyprus with 27 and Malta with 22.

Why Germany leads

Together those five countries account for 185 of the 329 authorisations, or 56 per cent. The remaining 21 states share what is left. The German lead has a cause that has little to do with crypto, though: a large share of the domestic authorisations sits with banks, savings-bank networks and investment firms that offer crypto trading as an add-on to an existing business. Of the 72 German authorisations only two permit the operation of a trading platform, and 56 apply to the German market alone.

Germany does not lead because an unusual number of trading venues sprang up here. It leads because the established financial sector filed as a bloc.

The finding that matters most: authorised rarely means exchange

MiCA defines ten separate services, each authorised individually. An authorisation is therefore not a blanket seal but a list of permitted activities. We counted how often each of those ten activities appears in the register.

Custody of crypto-assets is the most common at 221 mentions, followed by transfer services at 206 and exchange for euros or other currencies at 184. At the bottom sits the service most people have in mind when they say "crypto exchange": operating a trading platform appears 21 times. That is 6.4 per cent of all authorisations.

What the difference means in practice

A trading platform under the regulation brings together the orders of different clients in an order book. You trade against other users; the operator only provides the venue. The far more common service, "exchange of crypto-assets for funds", works differently: there the provider is your counterparty. It quotes you a price and you take it or leave it.

Both are legal, both are regulated, and for many retail investors the broker model is in fact more convenient. The pricing simply works differently. In the register 170 providers may exchange against funds without running a trading platform. With them the margin sits in the spread, the gap between the buying and the selling quote, and that is rarely disclosed as clearly as a percentage fee.

Confusing the two models means comparing costs that are not comparable. That is precisely why our comparison of regulated crypto exchanges lists the legal entity and the actual trading costs separately for every provider.

Only half of them use the EU passport

MiCA's central promise is the European passport: an authorisation from one member state is valid across the single market. A provider authorised in Ireland may operate in Spain, Poland and Finland without a further procedure. In practice this is used far less often than expected.

The distribution splits into two camps with almost nothing in between. 125 authorisations cover exactly one country. 150 cover 25 countries or more, most of them 29 or 30. The middle is missing: only 49 providers sit somewhere between two and 24 countries.

Two very different business models sit behind that. One group are regional institutions, often banks, serving an existing client base with no interest in going abroad. The other are platforms that think in European terms from the outset and treat the passport as the actual reason for applying. For consumers this matters, because a provider holding a single national authorisation may not serve you if you live elsewhere.

The June peak and what followed

Plot the authorisations by month and a pattern emerges that supervisors know from other regulatory projects.

For a year and a half monthly authorisations moved in the low double digits. December 2025 brought a first spike to 44. Then, in June 2026, the last month before the deadline, 76 authorisations were granted, more than in the preceding five months combined. July brought 31, August three up to the register date.

The effect has an uncomfortable side. Firms that made it through in June often filed late. Supervisors had little time, and the review period of up to four months that MiCA allows for a complete file is likely to have been used to the limit in many cases.

For others the deadline became the exit. In July 2026 AscendEX, BitMEX and BitMart announced they would give up their EU business or close entirely. At BitMart trading ends on 26 August 2026 and the platform shuts on 31 January 2027. AscendEX ceased operations on 1 July, with withdrawals available only on a limited basis. Anyone still holding balances there should arrange to move them rather than wait for an extension.

The brand is not the legal entity

The most useful point in the register is also the easiest to miss. MiCA protection does not attach to a brand. It attaches to the specific legal person that received the authorisation, and that entity is almost never named after the app on your phone.

Kraken appears in the register as Payward Global Solutions Limited and Payward Europe Solutions Limited, both in Ireland. Crypto.com is listed as Foris DAX MT Limited in Malta. Behind Coinbase sits Coinbase Luxembourg S.A., behind the European Bybit entity Bybit EU GmbH in Austria. Bitpanda holds three authorisations: in Austria, in Germany and through BP23 CA Limited in Malta.

The one-minute check

Look in the terms and conditions or the legal notice to see which company you are actually contracting with. That is the name to search for in the register, not the brand. If the contracting party is based outside the EEA, MiCA protection does not apply, even where a sister company holds an EU authorisation.

What we noticed while working through the data

A word on data quality, because it explains why figures circulating about this register diverge. The field listing the authorised services is not filled in consistently. Most supervisors prefix the service letter, as in b. operation of a trading platform. In 20 of the 329 entries that letter is missing altogether, mostly in Cypriot and Estonian authorisations. Search for the letter alone and those entries drop out of the count, among them one trading platform.

At one German institution the letters are shifted by a position, so the text and the label no longer agree. One provider is entered twice with an identical record, and two French companies share the same LEI code. We therefore identified the services from the descriptive text and cross-checked the result against the letter-based method. The analysis script is on file with the newsroom.

None of this is a charge against ESMA, which consolidates what national authorities report. It is a reminder that any number drawn from this register should travel with the method that produced it.

Why we curate at all

A register answers the question of who may operate legally. It does not answer where it makes sense to trade. A Latvian payment provider with a single national authorisation and a pan-European trading venue are worlds apart, yet both sit in the same register and both may legitimately advertise as "MiCA licensed".

That is why we think a curated selection earns its place. Our comparison of MiCA-regulated crypto exchanges states for each provider the legal entity and the date of authorisation, each checked against the register. For a broader view there is the general exchange comparison; and anyone holding for the long run is independent of any platform's licence with a hardware wallet anyway.

What to take away

1. Check the legal entity, not the brand. Find out from the terms which company you are contracting with, then search that name in the ESMA register. It takes a minute and it is the only evidence that holds.
2. Establish whether you trade on a venue or against the provider. Only 21 authorisations cover the operation of a trading platform. Under the more common broker model the cost sits in the spread rather than in a stated fee. Our comparison of regulated exchanges reports both separately.
3. Move balances off platforms leaving the EU market. AscendEX, BitMEX and BitMart have announced their withdrawal. At BitMart trading ends on 26 August 2026. Waiting means negotiating later under time pressure.

Disclosure: some of the providers named in our comparison work with us through partner programmes. This has no bearing on the analysis of the ESMA register — every figure in this article comes from the official file and can be reproduced from it. Whether a provider is a partner changes nothing about its licence status.

This article is not investment advice and not a recommendation to buy or sell crypto-assets. Crypto-assets are highly volatile and a total loss is possible. Analysis as of 6 August 2026; ESMA register as of 4 August 2026.

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

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

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

Bitcoin company BTCPay Server told users to install the latest version of the server and replace credentials that may have been exposed.

A leaked Flock presentation shows the surveillance firm pitching a plan to pull license-plate data from rideshare and delivery drivers.

XRP is taking the Clarity Act news harder than the rest of the crypto market. Here's why.

Shiba Inu's surge in outflows certainly creates a possibility of a rapid price dive.

The market stays at the crossroads as some outsiders attract more attention than anticipated.

Former U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) official John Reed Stark has warned that quantum computing advances threaten to undermine the cryptographic foundations of blockchain networks.

Nasdaq-listed Bitcoin miner MARA Holdings has sold another 726 BTC, reducing its Bitcoin treasury to 35,577 BTC.

Morgan Stanley has purchased Bitcoin for three consecutive days as momentum begins to build again and the demand for Bitcoin surges.

TLDR

• NRGV jumps nearly 18% after signing a major 1.25 GW AI power infrastructure deal.
• Energy Vault will supply battery storage and grid-forming systems for AI campuses.
• The deal targets faster data center deployment without waiting for utility grids.
• Initial projects are expected within four to twelve months under the new agreement.
• Energy Vault expands from storage into integrated power systems for AI data centers.

Energy Vault Holdings (NRGV) shares surged 17.91% to $3.49 Friday, then gained another 0.29% after hours to $3.50. The rally followed a major commercial agreement covering 1.25 gigawatts of power infrastructure for hyperscaler AI data centers. The deal represents Energy Vault’s largest single contract and expands its role beyond traditional energy storage systems.

Energy Vault Holdings, Inc., NRGV

Energy Vault Secures Major AI Power Agreement

Energy Vault will supply battery energy storage systems, grid-forming power conversion technology, and infrastructure control software under the agreement. The company will combine these systems with dispatchable power generation and turnkey engineering services for large computing campuses. Together, the partners plan to create an integrated platform capable of supporting demanding data center power requirements.

The planned systems will operate independently from traditional utility connections during initial deployment phases. As a result, customers could bring computing capacity online faster than projects relying entirely on grid connections. Energy Vault expects initial deployments to begin during the next four to twelve months.

The agreement also creates a repeatable model that the companies can use across future hyperscale developments. Meanwhile, each system will combine generation, storage, power conversion, electrical equipment, and digital controls within one infrastructure package. This structure targets data centers facing long grid connection delays and rapidly increasing electricity requirements.

Platform Targets Growing Hyperscaler Power Demand

Large computing campuses require stable electricity as processing loads rise and fall throughout daily operations. These shifts can create sudden changes in voltage, frequency, power quality, and overall electricity demand.  Energy Vault designed its platform to coordinate generation and storage systems continuously across each site.

The control software will manage power flows while maintaining stable voltage and frequency across the infrastructure. It will also reduce unnecessary generator cycling and improve fuel use during changing computing workloads. The system can respond rapidly when computing clusters create sudden changes in electricity consumption.

The modular design allows customers to expand power infrastructure as their computing campuses grow. Operators can later connect utility electricity, renewable generation, or other distributed energy resources to the existing platform. Consequently, customers can start operations before permanent utility connections become available and expand capacity over time.

Energy Vault Expands Beyond Energy Storage

Energy Vault has traditionally developed utility-scale battery, gravity, and green hydrogen energy storage technologies. However, the latest agreement strengthens its move toward complete energy infrastructure development and power plant integration. The company now plans to combine storage technology with generation, engineering, construction, and infrastructure management services.

Its strategic power infrastructure partner brings experience across natural gas engines, turbines, diesel systems, solar power, and hydrogen technologies. Energy Vault contributes battery systems, grid-forming technology, energy management software, and hybrid power integration capabilities. Both companies plan to deliver complete power systems rather than individual equipment packages.

The companies also plan to pursue more hyperscaler, neocloud, and AI infrastructure projects after the initial deployment. They will target markets facing constrained grid capacity, long interconnection timelines, and rising electricity demand. The 1.25 GW agreement therefore gives Energy Vault a larger platform for expanding its data center power business.

The post Energy Vault Holdings Inc. (NRGV) Stock: Surges 18% on Massive 1.25 GW AI Data Center Power Deal appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• AMD acquires Taalas to strengthen its push into faster AI inference systems.
• Taalas chips hard-wire model weights into silicon for higher inference speeds.
• AMD plans to integrate Taalas technology with Helios, Instinct and EPYC systems.
• The deal expands AMD’s full-stack AI strategy as inference demand accelerates.
• AMD expects its Taalas acquisition to close during the fourth quarter of 2026.

AMD (AMD) stock fell 1.21% to $483.36 at Friday’s close, then slipped 0.12% after hours to $482.80. The company agreed to acquire Taalas, a Toronto startup focused on model-specific processors for AI inference workloads. The deal expands AMD’s push into specialized computing as inference demand grows across commercial AI deployments.

Advanced Micro Devices, Inc., AMD

AMD Targets Faster Inference With Taalas

AMD said the acquisition will add Taalas technology to its broader accelerator and system roadmap. Taalas designs processors that place model weights directly into silicon, reducing reliance on high-bandwidth memory. That method aims to improve speed and efficiency for models with stable architectures and heavy inference demand.

The startup has tested its HC1 chip using Meta’s Llama 3.1 eight-billion-parameter model. Taalas reported throughput near 17,000 tokens per second during early benchmark testing released in February. However, the design sacrifices flexibility because each processor targets a specific model rather than many workloads.

AMD plans to combine Taalas technology with Instinct GPUs, EPYC processors, Helios systems, and ROCm software. That approach could separate prompt processing from token generation across different types of processors. As a result, AMD could offer customers more specialized configurations for high-volume inference workloads.

Helios Strategy Gains Another Specialized Component

The acquisition supports AMD’s wider effort to build complete rack-scale AI systems for major cloud customers. AMD recently started shipping Helios systems designed to compete directly with Nvidia’s integrated server platforms. Meta and Microsoft have already committed to deployments using AMD’s rack-scale infrastructure.

Taalas could add a dedicated inference layer inside future Helios configurations. GPUs could handle flexible computing tasks, while model-specific accelerators could process repeated token-generation workloads. This setup may improve system efficiency when customers run large models at high and predictable volumes.

AMD has also expanded its AI portfolio through several acquisitions during the past two years. The company bought Silo AI for $665 million and ZT Systems for $4.9 billion. AMD also acquired smaller software companies, including inference specialist MK1, to strengthen its platform capabilities.

AMD Builds Position For Inference Growth

The Taalas deal comes as chipmakers shift more resources toward AI inference rather than model training alone. Commercial services now require faster responses, lower operating costs, and higher output across growing user volumes. Specialized processors can address those needs when customers run the same models repeatedly at large scale.

Nvidia made a similar move when it acquired Groq assets for $20 billion in December 2025. That transaction highlighted the rising strategic value of high-speed inference technology across the semiconductor industry. AMD’s Taalas purchase follows the same broader shift but adds a different model-specific architecture.

Taalas has raised $219 million since its 2023 founding and continues developing its second-generation HC2 processor. The company aims to support models containing as many as 20 billion parameters with that design. AMD expects the transaction to close during the fourth quarter of 2026, subject to regulatory approval.

The post AMD (AMD) Stock: Taalas Acquisition Targets Faster AI Inference Growth appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• HEI Q2 profit jumps sharply after Maui wildfire settlement liability remeasurement
• Core earnings weaken despite Hawaiian Electric’s much higher reported Q2 profit
• Wildfire settlement adjustment delivers a major non-cash boost to HEI earnings
• Higher interest and operating costs weigh on Hawaiian Electric core results
• HEI plans major renewable energy procurement as utility spending stays high

Hawaiian Electric Industries (HE) shares fell 0.72% to $12.40 amid volatile trading, as second-quarter earnings showed a sharp headline profit increase. The company reported $123 million in net income, compared with $26 million in Q2 last year. However, a wildfire settlement accounting adjustment drove most of the increase and masked weaker core earnings and utility cost pressures.

Hawaiian Electric Industries, Inc., HE

Wildfire Settlement Remeasurement Lifts Reported Profit

HEI recorded $0.71 per diluted share for the reported quarter, up from $0.15 per share one year earlier. The company remeasured its remaining Maui wildfire settlement liability after the settlement agreement became final during April 2026. That adjustment reduced the liability from $1.44 billion to $1.30 billion and produced a significant non-cash benefit for reported earnings.

Hawaiian Electric recorded a $154 million pre-tax benefit from the remeasurement within utility expenses during the reported quarter. The utility also recognized $9 million in insurance recoveries tied to tort-related legal claims from the Maui wildfire. Higher revenue and interest income added further support, while increased financing and operating costs offset part of those quarterly gains.

Core results showed a weaker operating picture after HEI removed wildfire items and Pacific Current strategic review expenses. Core net income fell to $22 million, or $0.13 per share, from $35 million during the quarter last year. Hawaiian Electric’s core net income also declined to $33 million from $42 million as higher interest and operating expenses weighed.

Utility Spending Pressures Remain Despite Higher Earnings

Hawaiian Electric reported $138 million in second-quarter net income this year, compared with $39 million in the prior-year quarter. Still, interest expense increased by $23 million during the quarter, including $18 million linked to settlement liability accretion. Operating and maintenance costs also rose by $9 million because of generation, grid, labor, employee benefits, and administrative expenses.

The utility expects adjusted 2026 operating and maintenance costs excluding pension expenses to rise well above inflation during the year. Higher insurance premiums, storm response costs, vegetation management, maintenance, cybersecurity spending, and employee expenses continue driving that outlook throughout 2026. Hawaiian Electric also expects a maximum $3.7 million pre-tax penalty under its Fuel Cost Risk Sharing mechanism this year.

The company continues investing in reliability, wildfire protection, renewable energy, and stronger financial stability across its service territories. Hawaiian Electric plans 1,650 gigawatt-hours of renewable energy, 465 megawatts of grid-forming resources, and 111 megawatts of planned firm capacity. The company also plans to securitize approved wildfire mitigation costs while pursuing rate changes before its 2027 rate rebasing framework.

The post Hawaiian Electric Industries (HE) Stock: Profit Jumps on Wildfire Settlement Adjustment appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• PSKY stock gains as Paramount extends WBD-linked debt offers through August 21.
• Paramount keeps tender and exchange offers open as the WBD acquisition advances.
• About 65.43% of tender notes and 76.04% of exchange notes were already submitted.
• Debt settlements remain targeted for the third quarter alongside the WBD deal.
• Paramount may extend the offers again to match the planned WBD closing date.

Paramount Skydance shares rose 1.43% to $9.19 at Friday’s close, then gained 1.41% after hours to $9.32. The move followed another extension of debt offers tied to Paramount’s planned Warner Bros. Discovery acquisition. Paramount pushed the offer deadline to August 21 as it prepares for the proposed transaction.

Paramount Skydance Corporation Class B Common Stock, PSKY

Paramount Extends Debt Offers to August 21

Paramount extended the expiration dates for its tender and exchange offers to 5:00 p.m. New York time on August 21. The company may extend the deadline again if the acquisition closing requires additional time. Settlement remains expected during the third quarter of 2026.

The offers cover several debt securities issued by Discovery Global Holdings and Discovery Communications. Paramount plans to purchase selected notes for cash and exchange other notes for newly issued Paramount debt. Holders can withdraw tendered notes at any point before the new expiration deadline.

Paramount previously extended the offers several times during June and July. Those extensions occurred on June 12, June 26, July 13, July 17, July 24, and July 31. The latest move keeps the debt process aligned with the expected timing of the WBD acquisition.

WBD Debt Participation Supports Paramount Transaction Plan

As of August 6, holders had tendered about 65.43% of eligible tender offer notes. They had also tendered approximately 76.04% of eligible exchange offer notes. Paramount said the current participation levels do not represent final results because further extensions remain possible.

The eligible securities include debt maturing from 2027 through 2052. Discovery Communications notes include maturities between 2028 and 2049, with several coupon rates across the group. Discovery Global Holdings notes include dollar and euro issues with maturities extending through 2052.

The largest listed eligible issue carries a 5.050% coupon and matures in 2042. That Discovery Global Holdings issue has about $4.10 billion in eligible principal. Another large issue includes roughly $2.69 billion of 4.279% senior notes due in 2032.

Paramount Links Debt Process With Proposed WBD Acquisition

Paramount designed the offers to support its proposed acquisition of Warner Bros. Discovery. The company expects future expiration dates to stay linked with the transaction’s eventual closing schedule. That structure would allow settlement to occur on or shortly after the acquisition closes.

The debt offers also give Paramount a clearer path for managing WBD obligations after the planned combination. By extending the deadlines, Paramount keeps participation open while the broader transaction process continues. The approach also limits timing gaps between the debt settlement and acquisition completion.

Paramount has not presented the current tender levels as final acceptance figures. Instead, the company expects additional changes before the debt offers close. The August 21 deadline now marks the next key date for the financing process surrounding the proposed WBD deal.

The post Paramount Skydance (PSKY) Stock: Surges as Debt Offers Extend to August 21 Before WBD Acquisition appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Sharplink stock gains as Galaxy launches a $125M institutional Ethereum yield fund.
• Galaxy’s new fund adds onchain yield strategies to Sharplink’s growing ETH treasury.
• Sharplink commits $100M in staked ETH to Galaxy’s new $125M institutional fund.
• The $125M Galaxy fund expands Sharplink’s treasury strategy beyond basic ETH staking.
• Galaxy manages the fund using research, protocol reviews, and strict risk controls.

Sharplink shares gained 2.23% and closed at $6.43 after launching a $125 million onchain fund with Galaxy Digital. The stock then eased 0.16% after hours to $6.42 during Friday’s extended trading session. The deal expands Sharplink’s Ethereum treasury strategy beyond staking and simple asset accumulation.

Sharplink, Inc., SBET

Sharplink and Galaxy Launch $125 Million Fund

Sharplink and Galaxy Digital created the Galaxy Sharplink Onchain Yield Fund with $125 million in committed capital. Sharplink supplied $100 million through assets backed by its staked Ethereum treasury. Galaxy added $25 million and will manage the fund through its digital asset platform.

The fund will target selected onchain yield strategies and other identified digital asset opportunities. Galaxy will use research, protocol reviews, and internal controls when choosing deployments. The structure gives Sharplink another method for generating returns from its Ethereum holdings.

The launch also extends an existing relationship between Sharplink and Galaxy. Both companies now combine Sharplink’s ETH treasury with Galaxy’s institutional digital asset management experience. Their strategy focuses on active blockchain participation rather than passive ownership alone.

Ethereum Treasury Strategy Expands Beyond Staking

Sharplink has made Ethereum a central part of its corporate treasury strategy. The company already stakes ETH to earn network rewards from its holdings. However, the new fund creates a wider route for deploying treasury assets onchain.

Galaxy will assess potential opportunities across blockchain protocols before allocating capital. Its process includes proprietary research, protocol analysis, and structured risk controls. Sharplink expects that approach to support a disciplined expansion of its treasury strategy.

The fund could also direct capital toward emerging crypto protocols that need early activity. Many projects secure venture funding but still struggle to build meaningful onchain usage. Sharplink sees targeted deployment as one way to support activity while pursuing potential returns.

Sharplink Builds Broader Institutional Crypto Exposure

The fund reflects a wider shift in how some companies manage digital asset treasuries. Corporate strategies have traditionally centered on buying assets and earning staking rewards. New structures now allow companies to seek additional returns through blockchain-based financial markets.

Galaxy has deployed capital across digital asset markets since 2020. The firm has built investment products around crypto markets, infrastructure, and institutional asset management. Its role gives Sharplink access to an established platform for evaluating onchain opportunities.

For Sharplink, the fund broadens its Ethereum strategy without replacing its existing staking program. The company now has a dedicated vehicle for selected onchain yield deployments. The move also strengthens SBET’s connection to institutional Ethereum adoption and active treasury management across digital asset markets.

The post Sharplink Inc. (SBET) Stock: Surges as $125M Galaxy Fund Expands Ethereum Treasury Strategy appeared first on Blockonomi.

The unknown hacker behind June’s exploit against the Ethereum maximal extractable value (MEV) bot jaredfromsubway.eth continues to try to time the market with their ETH moves, but with negative consequences.

Using the proceeds they secured from the $7.7 million attack, the bad actor made some questionable decisions that actually cost them a portion of their loot.

Data from Lookonchain indicated that the exploiter sold 2,327 ETH at prices just under $1,700 after the hack. However, they changed their mind on Ethereum and started to accumulate earlier today, purchasing 2,063 ETH at an average price of $1,912 per token.

This meant that the perpetrator booked a $505,000 loss since they received $3.94 million for the sale following the hack and now spent the same amount just to receive 264 fewer tokens.

The Jaredfromsubway exploiter is terrible at trading.

A month ago, the exploiter stole $7.7M and swapped it for $ETH.

The exploiter later sold 2,327 $ETH($3.94M) at $1,695, then bought back 2,063 $ETH($3.94M) at $1,912 10 hours ago.

He lost 264 $ETH($505K).… pic.twitter.com/JRpFrOIkWG

— Lookonchain (@lookonchain) August 7, 2026

The actual attack took place on June 20-21 when the perpetrator tricked the automated sandwich bot using fake liquidity pools and deceptive tokens, swiping around $7.7 million.

They started moving millions of dollars through Tornado Cash immediately, while the team behind the MEV bot offered a 50% bounty and a 48-hour deadline to respond, or would pursue “all available legal and law-enforcement remedies.”

There was no official response, but the hacker’s actions spoke louder, as they have not returned any of the funds, and the trade from above is the latest confirmation of a rejection.

The post Good at Hacking, Bad at Trading: MEV Bot Exploiter Makes Costly ETH Bet appeared first on CryptoPotato.

MARA Holdings, the largest publicly traded Bitcoin miner, reported a net loss of over $611 million for the second quarter of 2026, as revenue fell 27%, the company said in a shareholder letter released August 6.

The quarter shows a widening gap between MARA’s growing computing capacity and the falling value of the Bitcoin on its balance sheet, with holdings down nearly a third even as the company mined more units than a year ago.

Bitcoin Price Decline Hits MARA’s Quarterly Results

According to MARA, revenue in Q2 2026 fell 27% year over year to $174.9 million from $238.5 million. The company posted a net loss of $611.3 million, compared with net income of $808.2 million a year earlier, while adjusted EBITDA dropped to a loss of $360.9 million from a positive $1.2 billion.

The company attributed much of the decline to Bitcoin’s lower price. Revenue benefited from higher production, but a 28% year-over-year drop in Bitcoin’s average price reduced revenue by about $65.9 million.

MARA also posted an unrealized loss of $343 million on its digital holdings as BTC fell about 45% from the same period last year, moving from a large mark-to-market gain in 2025 to a large paper loss in Q2 2026.

Operationally, the miner continued to expand. Energized hashrate climbed 22% to 70.3 EH/s, while production rose 3% to 2,422 BTC, and total blocks won increased to 700. Cost per petahash per day improved by 4%, although purchased energy cost per Bitcoin increased to $38,690 as power expenses and network difficulty rose faster than the company’s hashrate growth.

MARA ended June with 35,577 BTC worth about $2.1 billion, down 29% from a year earlier. The holdings included 9,270 BTC that were either loaned or pledged as collateral.

During the quarter, the company mined 2,422 BTC, sold 2,213 BTC at an average price of $73,078, and generated about $4.3 million in interest income by lending 4,742 BTC. Management said it expects to continue selling the flagship cryptocurrency opportunistically to support liquidity and capital projects when market conditions warrant.

Company Presses Ahead With AI Infrastructure Strategy

Spot On Chain’s Hupzy flagged the results, writing that MARA is “liquidating its BTC treasury to fund operations.” The account called it a supply overhang rather than a one-time event, noting production rose just 3% while holdings fell close to a third, and said the firm’s approximately $2.5 billion in combined cash and Bitcoin sets a ceiling on how much more it can sell.

Recall that between March 4 and 25, the miner sold 15,133 BTC for about $1.1 billion, using most of the proceeds to repurchase around $1 billion in convertible notes due in 2030 and 2031, alongside a roughly 15% workforce cut. It also moved 200 units valued at about $12.86 million to NYDIG yesterday.

The company is now focusing on building infrastructure beyond Bitcoin mining, noting in the shareholder letter that it is awaiting regulatory approval for its Long Ridge acquisition and recently secured rights to a powered land site in Matagorda County, Texas.

If approved, those projects could expand its power portfolio to as much as 4.8 gigawatts as the company continues directing more capital toward AI and high-performance computing alongside its core Bitcoin mining business.

The post Bitcoin Miner MARA Posts $611M Loss as Revenue Falls 27% appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitcoin whales and sharks are continuing to increase their holdings as the cryptocurrency trades in the $63,000 to $65,000 range, according to the latest data from Santiment.

The accumulation trend has strengthened since its previous report earlier this week, which highlighted a surge in network activity driven by the impact of the Coldcard hardware wallet security incident.

Retail Dumps Holdings

At the time, Santiment reported that active Bitcoin addresses had climbed to a three-month high of 712,000 over the previous seven days, while transactions worth more than $100,000 reached a five-month high of 61,800. The firm said affected users rushed to move their funds and reorganize their wallets after the security breach, which ended up triggering a sharp increase in on-chain activity.

In its latest update, Santiment flagged a notable shift. While large holders have continued adding BTC to their wallets, micro holders are reducing their exposure at the fastest pace since December 2024.  The Coldcard hack remains a major factor, as both the accumulation by whales and the selling by smaller investors began around the same period.

The uncertainty surrounding the CLARITY Act also contributed to the trend. Bitcoin’s ongoing period of sideways price action has discouraged retail participants, adding to the selling pressure from smaller wallets. It is this divergence between large and small holders that is becoming more pronounced, Santiment explained.

With key stakeholders steadily accumulating while retail investors continue to exit, the analytics platform said the odds of BTC climbing above $70,000 are increasing. This, in turn, makes that outcome more likely than a drop below the $60,000 level.

The Coldcard fallout was also evident in data from CoinMetrics, which recorded a temporary increase in BTC held on exchanges.

ETFs Stay in Positive Territory

On the institutional side, US-based spot Bitcoin ETFs have recorded four straight days of inflows. On 6th August, these funds attracted nearly $129 million. BlackRock’s IBIT led the numbers with $123 million in inflows, followed by Fidelity’s ETF with $11.2 million. Outflows came from VanEck’s HODL, which shed $32.7 million, and Valkyrie’s BRRR, which lost $9.07 million on the day. The remaining funds either posted smaller additions or ended the session unchanged.

The latest stretch of gains has pushed the monthly figures to almost $755 million.

The post Micro Bitcoin (BTC) Holders Are Vanishing at the Fastest Pace Since December 2024 appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Ethereum has been hovering near the $1,900 level after climbing almost 9% over the past month, but it is still far below its previous all-time high.

New data suggests the crypto asset is building a strong long-term setup, as technical signals and institutional demand continue to support the broader outlook.

Multiple Bullish Signals

Analyst Crypto Patel said that the leading altcoin is showing one of its strongest high-timeframe bullish structures. After several failed attempts, ETH has reclaimed its long-term descending trendline and is now consolidating above it. According to the analyst, the structure remains valid as long as it records daily closes above $1,510.

Based on the technical analysis, upside targets of $2,400, $3,000, $3,600, $4,200, and $5,000 were identified, with the final target potentially pushing ETH toward a new all-time high. Crypto Patel added that breakouts typically follow periods of accumulation.

Another bullish signal came from the MVRV Momentum golden cross, according to Ali Martinez. The analyst said that a move toward $3,000 could be on the cards after the altcoin broke above the MVRV level near $1,800. He explained that similar golden cross signals in the past were followed by major rallies.

While analysts have different short-term targets, they broadly agree that the structure is improving. Michaël van de Poppe also sees more upside for Ethereum. According to the MN Fund founder, a breakout appears to be a matter of time, with ETH potentially moving toward the $2,300-$2,500 range.

Strong Treasury Demand

Beyond price action, corporate treasuries have overtaken exchange-traded funds (ETFs) as the biggest buyers of Ethereum. The analyst also found that nearly 11% of the asset’s total supply is already locked by ETFs and digital asset treasury (DAT) companies. This growing share of ETH held by these entities points to rising institutional participation in the market.

For instance, Bitmine Immersion kept up its aggressive buying streak last week and added another 10,399 ETH to its treasury. The purchase lifted the company’s holdings to nearly 5.8 million units, which is around 4.8% of Ethereum’s circulating supply. It follows a similar purchase of 9,946 units a week earlier. Bitmine Chairman Tom Lee claimed that the crypto outperformed the Nasdaq 100 by 25 percentage points in July.

Earlier this week, Italy’s largest banking group, Intesa Sanpaolo, boosted its Ethereum exposure in the second quarter by significantly increasing its position in a staked ETH ETF from 116,200 shares to 349,600.

The post Ethereum’s $5,000 Path? ETH Reclaims a Key Level as Institutions Keep Accumulating appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Many well-known altcoins, including Cardano (ADA), Hyperliquid (HYPE), and Zcash (ZEC), have posted some gains over the last 24 hours, yet Pi Network’s PI has failed to join the party.

Despite its renewed slump, though, the crypto community sentiment toward it is highly bullish.

Bad News?

It’s quite challenging to find a leading cryptocurrency that has performed worse than PI over the past year or so. The token saw the light of day in February 2025 and at first rocketed to $3, while its market capitalization neared $14 billion.

However, what followed next was a major retreat, and now it trades at around $0.08, which is quite close to the all-time low of approximately $0.07 and represents a 97% crash from the historical peak.

That said, it seems rather strange that the crypto community remains predominantly optimistic about the token. At least that is what CoinMarketCap suggests, noting that it holds the second-highest bullish sentiment in the entire market. The first spot is for Kaspa (KAS), while industry leaders like Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), and Ripple (XRP) rank below PI.

Extreme optimism shouldn’t necessarily be interpreted as good news. The crypto sector is actually a weird one, and euphoria moments are often followed by a plunge, since prices tend to go against overall expectations.

Upgrades and More

The team behind Pi Network has announced multiple ecosystem improvements since the start of 2026. Among the latest was the migration to protocol version 25, which was not disclosed on the project’s X account or website, but numerous users claimed it was in effect.

Next is protocol v26, with Pi Network recently reminding that all mainnet node operators must complete the upgrade by August 11 to remain connected to the network.

X user Ben told their more than 500,000 followers on X that the improvement is already live, with protocol 27 sitting next as “the one they’ve called the final upgrade.”

“Almost nobody watching PI thinks about node compliance, but that deadline tells you how much of the network is genuinely maintained versus just switched on and forgotten. I’d love to see the update rate published on the 12th,” they added.

Some of the ecosystem advancements have managed to stage brief rebounds for PI over the last few months, yet bears were quick to regain control. We have yet to see whether the upcoming upgrades will trigger a more meaningful rally or whether PI will continue to underperform in the near future.

The post Pi Network (PI) Slips 5% Daily, But Community Sentiment Remains Strongly Bullish appeared first on CryptoPotato.