The governance staking overhaul could enhance decentralized decision-making and align long-term incentives, potentially boosting platform stability.

The post Trump-backed World Liberty plans governance staking overhaul to reward active participation appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

NVIDIA reports $68.1B Q4 revenue and $215.9B fiscal 2026 sales as shares rise 1.4% and jump over 3% after hours on earnings beat.

The post NVIDIA reports $68.1B Q4 revenue as shares jump after hours on earnings beat appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Ethereum Foundation releases Strawmap outlining 7 forks through 2029 and 5 Layer1 goals including throughput and post quantum security.

The post Ethereum Foundation releases Strawmap outlining L1 upgrades through 2029 appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Travala launches global car rentals via CarTrawler, adding 50,000 locations across 150 countries as 2025 revenue tops $113M.

The post Travala launches global car rentals via CarTrawler, expanding crypto travel payments appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Iran threatens retaliation against US forces and the Strait of Hormuz as Washington deploys its largest regional buildup since 2003.

The post Iran warns of ferocious response to any US military action appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Morgan Stanley Has Future Plans for Bitcoin Trading, Lending, and Custody

Morgan Stanley wants to expand its digital asset offerings, including a native custody and exchange solution for crypto, the firm said during a conversation at Strategy World.

Phong Le, President and CEO of Strategy, spoke with Amy Oldenburg, Head of Digital Asset Strategy at Morgan Stanley, about the firm’s upcoming products. 

Morgan Stanley will first allow clients on its E-Trade platform to buy and sell spot cryptocurrencies through a partnership. Last year, the bank said it was pursuing a spot Bitcoin ETF and planning to enable direct trading for clients via E*Trade.

Over the next year, the bank intends to develop a fully integrated custody and exchange platform.

“This is a natural progression,” the executive said. “We can’t just primarily rent the technology to do this. People expect Morgan Stanley – they trust our brand – to be no fail.

Morgan Stanley’s custody option for clients

The planned solution would give clients legal custody of their digital assets under Morgan Stanley’s oversight. The firm acknowledged that some clients will continue to prefer self-custody, particularly in Bitcoin.

Oldenburg outlined their experience in emerging markets as a driver for the firm’s approach to digital assets. 

Over 26 years at Morgan Stanley, including 13 years running the firm’s emerging market investing business, Oldenburg has observed early adoption of Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies in 17 of the top 20 markets globally.

 “As this space continues to institutionalize, we aim to provide comprehensive services to our clients,” Oldenburg said.

The bank is also exploring additional services, including yield and lending products against crypto holdings. 

“It’s a natural part of the roadmap to continue to explore,” the executive said. She said they are in the early stages but are tracking momentum in decentralized finance lending and other crypto products.

Oldenburg noted that the bank manages $8 trillion in assets on its platform, and a significant portion of clients currently hold crypto off-platform.

Bringing those assets onto the platform would allow the firm to offer custody, trading, and potential yield or lending services.

No specific timeline was announced for the launch of yield or lending products, though the firm indicated these would follow the rollout of the custody and exchange platform. 

At the time of writing, Bitcoin is up 8% on the day and trading near $69,000. Other related equities and crypto are up as well.

This post Morgan Stanley Has Future Plans for Bitcoin Trading, Lending, and Custody first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoin Price Roars Over 7% to $69,000 as Market Tests Post-Capitulation Range

Bitcoin price climbed more than 7% today, pushing above $69,000 and marking one of its strongest daily moves during months of sell-offs.

The rally follows weeks of compressed trading and comes as several price-based and miner-linked signals point to exhaustion in the recent drawdown.

The bitcoin price fell close to 50% from its early-October high near $125,000 to a February low around $60,000. That decline placed bitcoin below its estimated average production cost for the first time since late 2022, a zone that has often aligned with late-stage selling and price stabilization. 

Current estimates put average production near $66,000, meaning the market has spent weeks pricing bitcoin below what many miners need to remain cash-flow neutral.

The rebound through $69,000 shifts focus back to price structure. Bitcoin bounced from the 0.786 Fibonacci retracement near $62,000, a level that aligned with prior daily support, according to Bitcoin Magazine Pro data. 

Buyers defended that zone across multiple sessions before the bitcoin price turned higher. The rally off that base unfolded with expanding volume, suggesting fresh participation rather than short covering alone.

Where’s the bitcoin price headed? 

Bitcoin price now trades back inside the range that defined most of January. The next area in focus sits near the point of control around the mid-$70,000s, where trading activity concentrated before the breakdown. 

A reclaim of that zone would place bitcoin back above its volume-weighted center and reset the near-term structure. Failure to do so would keep price range-bound despite the rebound.

Mining data adds context but price remains the driver. The Hash Ribbon, which tracks short- and medium-term hash rate trends, sits close to a recovery signal after nearly three months of miner stress. That period ranks among the longest capitulations on record. During such phases, miners often sell reserves to cover operating costs, adding steady supply to the market. 

As the hash rate begins to recover, that forced selling tends to ease.

Since 2011, similar mining stress events have aligned with local or major bitcoin bottoms roughly 20 times, including early 2015, late 2018, and late 2022. In each case, price stabilized before trend direction resolved. Still, those signals work best as context rather than timing tools.

Despite the rally, bitcoin faces overhead pressure. On-chain data shows a large share of supply remains held at a loss. 

Today, crypto‑exposed stocks broadly rallied in tandem with Bitcoin’s rebound. Coinbase (COIN) surged over 13%, Strategy (MSTR) over 8%, and Robinhood (HOOD) over 6%. 

This post Bitcoin Price Roars Over 7% to $69,000 as Market Tests Post-Capitulation Range first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

GD Culture (GDC) Shares Surge as Board Approves Bitcoin Sale to Fund $100M Buyback

Shares of GD Culture Group (Nasdaq: GDC) surged nearly 15% Wednesday after the company’s board approved the sale of its 7,500 bitcoin holdings, currently valued at roughly $510 million, more than double the firm’s $210 million market capitalization.

Shares have since fallen a bit and are trading up 10% on the day. 

The board said proceeds from the sale would fund a previously announced $100 million share repurchase program disclosed on Feb. 18. 

The program is expected to be executed over the next six months, with management retaining flexibility to sell bitcoin in one or more transactions as market conditions dictate. The company emphasized it is under no obligation to sell a specific amount and can alter or suspend the plan at any time.

The decision highlights a striking valuation gap: GD Culture’s bitcoin alone exceeds its total equity value. Its market cap-to-net asset value ratio (mNAV) sits around 0.5, among the lowest for corporate bitcoin holders. The company’s stock has lost about two-thirds of its value since last year, largely tracking bitcoin’s decline from record highs above $126,000.

Nevada-based GD Culture operates through subsidiaries AI Catalysis and Shanghai Xianzhui Technology Co., focusing on AI-driven digital human technology and live-streaming e-commerce. With 7,500 BTC on its balance sheet, the company ranks among the 15 largest corporate bitcoin treasuries.

GD Culture acquired its bitcoin stash following the 2025 purchase of Pallas Capital Holding, which was partly financed through the issuance of 39.18 million shares. Earlier in 2025, the company sold up to $300 million in stock to fund a broader crypto treasury strategy, which included purchases of bitcoin and the TRUMP memecoin.

The company reported net income of $9.6 million for the nine months ended Sept. 30, 2025, a turnaround from a $14.1 million loss in 2024. Despite the positive earnings, GD Culture’s shares remain under pressure amid bitcoin’s broader sell-off.

Corporations are selling bitcoin

Other corporate bitcoin holders have also adjusted their treasuries recently. Bitdeer sold its entire BTC reserve to fund AI data center expansion, while Riot Platforms reduced its holdings late last year.

GDC shares were trading up about 10% to $3.70 at publication time, reflecting a modest rebound in the price of bitcoin to near $69,000.

Other crypto‑exposed stocks are rallying today as well in tandem with Bitcoin’s rebound. Coinbase (COIN) surged over 13%, Strategy (MSTR) over 8%, and Robinhood (HOOD) over 6%. 

This post GD Culture (GDC) Shares Surge as Board Approves Bitcoin Sale to Fund $100M Buyback first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Strategy (MSTR) Becomes Most-Shorted $25B+ Stock, Shares Surge 8%

Thanks to a surge in bitcoin’s price, Strategy (MSTR) is having a great day on Wall Street despite some alarming balance sheet data.

Among global equities valued above $25 billion, Strategy Inc. (MSTR) now carries the largest short position relative to its size. Roughly 14% of its $41.6 billion market capitalization has been sold short, placing it at the top of rankings compiled by firms including Goldman Sachs and FactSet.

This is not a typical short story. Strategy trades as a corporate balance sheet wrapped around Bitcoin. Its equity functions as a leveraged instrument on BTC, shaped by debt issuance and continued accumulation under Executive Chairman Michael Saylor.

The company holds more than 700,000 BTC acquired through a mix of convertible notes, equity offerings, and cash flow from its legacy software business. When Bitcoin rises, Strategy’s equity often expands at a faster rate due to embedded leverage. When Bitcoin falls, the compression works in reverse.

At the time of writing, Bitcoin is surging 6.5% on the day near $68,000. Strategy shares are up nearly 8%. 

Strategy’s mark-to-market losses mount

Strategy currently sits on roughly $7 billion in unrealized losses tied to its Bitcoin holdings. The losses reflect mark-to-market accounting, not liquidation. 

The coins remain on the balance sheet. Markets, however, price forward risk. Declines in BTC reduce asset coverage relative to outstanding debt. That dynamic sharpens volatility in MSTR.

A 14% short interest ratio at this scale signals conviction. Hedge funds hold about 3% of the equity float, and more than 50 funds report positions. Yet not all short positioning represents outright bearish bets.

Market participants point to basis trades. In this structure, firms purchase spot Bitcoin exposure — often through vehicles such as iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) from BlackRock — while shorting MSTR. 

The objective is to capture the premium or discount between Strategy’s equity value and the underlying Bitcoin it holds, rather than predict a collapse in BTC.

Trading firms including Jane Street have disclosed large positions in both IBIT and MSTR, suggesting paired strategies that aim to remain market neutral.

Still, structural tension remains. If Bitcoin stages a sharp rally, short sellers face pressure to cover. Strategy’s thin float relative to demand can amplify upward moves. Conversely, further BTC drawdowns would intensify scrutiny on leverage and refinancing risk.

Earlier this week, Strategy  said they completed their 100th bitcoin purchase since 2020, acquiring 592 BTC for roughly $39.8 million at an average price of $67,286 per coin, funded through the sale of 297,940 Class A shares via its at-the-market offering program. 

With this latest buy, the company now holds 717,722 BTC acquired for $54.56 billion at an average of $76,020 per bitcoin, maintaining the largest corporate bitcoin treasury globally.

This post Strategy (MSTR) Becomes Most-Shorted $25B+ Stock, Shares Surge 8% first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

U.S. Treasury Sanctions Russian Exploit Broker Over Crypto-Funded Cyber Theft

The U.S. Department of the Treasury has sanctioned a Russian exploit brokerage network accused of purchasing stolen U.S. government cyber tools with crypto and reselling them to unauthorized buyers, marking the first use of new authorities under the Protecting American Intellectual Property Act.

In an announcement Tuesday, the Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control designated Russian national, Sergey Sergeyevich Zelenyuk, and his company, Operation Zero, along with several associates and affiliated firms. 

The action blocks any property or interests in property of the designated parties that fall under U.S. jurisdiction and bars U.S. persons from transacting with them.

Treasury alleges that Zelenyuk, operating from St. Petersburg, built a business acquiring and selling “exploits” — tools that take advantage of software vulnerabilities to gain unauthorized access to systems or extract data. 

Among the exploits obtained by Operation Zero were at least eight proprietary cyber tools developed by a U.S. defense contractor for the exclusive use of the U.S. government and select allies.

Those tools were stolen by Peter Williams, an Australian national and former employee of the contractor.

According to the Department of Justice, Williams stole the trade secrets between 2022 and 2025 and sold them to Operation Zero in exchange for millions of dollars in cryptocurrency. 

He pleaded guilty in October 2025 to two counts of theft of trade secrets following an investigation by the Justice Department and the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

Scott Bessent: We will hold you accountable for stealing trade secrets

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the designations reflect a broader effort to protect sensitive American intellectual property and safeguard national security. 

“If you steal U.S. trade secrets, we will hold you accountable,” Bessent said.

The sanctions were issued pursuant to Executive Order 13694, as amended, which targets malicious cyber-enabled activities that threaten U.S. national security, foreign policy, or economic stability.

In parallel, the State Department imposed sanctions under the Protecting American Intellectual Property Act, a law that provides for penalties against foreign actors who engage in or benefit from significant theft of U.S. trade secrets when the conduct poses a national security or economic threat. Zelenyuk and Operation Zero are the first individuals sanctioned under that statute.

Treasury also designated several associates tied to the network, including Marina Evgenyevna Vasanovich, described as Zelenyuk’s assistant, and Special Technology Services LLC FZ, a United Arab Emirates-based technology firm controlled by Zelenyuk. 

Two additional individuals, Azizjon Makhmudovich Mamashoyev and Oleg Vyacheslavovich Kucherov, were sanctioned for providing material support. Treasury identified Kucherov as a suspected member of the Trickbot cybercrime group, a malware operation linked to ransomware attacks against U.S. government agencies and healthcare providers.

Operation Zero advertised bounties worth millions of dollars in crypto for exploits targeting widely used U.S.-built operating systems and encrypted messaging platforms. Treasury said the firm did not disclose discovered vulnerabilities to affected software companies and instead sought to sell them to customers in non-NATO countries, including foreign intelligence services.

While Treasury stated that crypto facilitated the transactions for the stolen tools, it did not publish specific crypto wallet addresses or impose blockchain-specific designations. 

This post U.S. Treasury Sanctions Russian Exploit Broker Over Crypto-Funded Cyber Theft first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

The US Strategic Bitcoin Reserve could lose nearly 30% of its holdings in a single legal move, even if the government does not sell a single coin.

Last year, President Donald Trump signed an executive order creating a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. The order directed the Treasury Department to consolidate government-held BTC into a reserve account and promised that the United States would not sell those coins.

Yet, the headline number for the reserve may be overstating how much BTC the government can actually treat as a permanent strategic asset.

Data from Bitcoin Treasuries estimates that the US government controls about 328,372 BTC. This makes it the world’s largest known state holder. At today’s bitcoin price of about $65,842, that stash is worth roughly $21.6 billion.

However, here is the complication. A large chunk of that US holdings figure includes BTC held by the government, but not cleanly government-owned in the strategic sense.

The executive order explicitly allows dispositions pursuant to a court order of a competent jurisdiction. It singles out a specific carve-out for assets that should be returned to identifiable, verifiable victims of crime.

That exception matters because roughly 94,643 BTC, about 30% of the government's holdings, is tied to the 2016 Bitfinex hack.

If those coins are returned as restitution, the reserve number would fall mechanically to about 234,000 BTC.

The reserve number is real, but the ownership question is still open

The Strategic Bitcoin Reserve is often discussed as if it were a clean, sovereign balance sheet. In practice, it is a legal and accounting mix.

Some of the BTC attributed to the government has been fully forfeited and is clearly under US control.

However, some are still entangled in criminal cases, restitution claims, or procedural steps that can take years to resolve.

That gap is now central to the debate over the US reserve.

The 94,643 BTC tied to Bitfinex is the clearest example. Those coins are visible in government-linked custody, and markets count them.

However, if a court determines they should be returned to victims, they were never truly a permanent strategic reserve asset in the first place.

This is why both sides of the public debate can miss the point.

The bullish version overstates the durability of the reserve if it treats every government-controlled coin as permanently strategic. The bearish version overstates the market impact if it treats a restitution transfer as a sovereign sale.

The legal distinction matters for price, for sentiment, and for how investors interpret the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve itself.

Why the Bitfinex coins remain frozen

The Bitfinex theft involved the theft of 119,754 BTC in August 2016, one of the largest BTC thefts in crypto history.

In February 2022, US authorities recovered about 94,643 BTC connected to that hack, a seizure that stood out for both its scale and its timing.

The next question was always restitution.

In January 2025, prosecutors asked a federal court to approve returning the recovered assets to Bitfinex as in-kind restitution, meaning the BTC would be returned as Bitcoin rather than sold first and converted into dollars.

That distinction is important for market structure.

A government sale or auction would create a visible supply event, with timing and size known in advance. An in-kind return pushes the next decision downstream, to the recipients.

That could be Bitfinex, its former users, or both, depending on how the court resolves competing claims.

US forfeiture procedure is designed to slow this stage. Third parties claiming an interest in forfeited property may file petitions in an ancillary proceeding. In the Bitfinex case, that process has become the core battleground.

Some customers argue that the stolen assets were theirs individually. On the other hand, Bitfinex argues it ultimately bore the economic loss after socializing losses and later making users whole through internal mechanisms.

So, the outcome of this matters well beyond this case because it could shape how restitution is handled in future exchange hacks.

Until the court resolves those claims or the parties reach a settlement, the coins remain effectively immobilized.

That is why the reserve can appear stable on-chain while remaining uncertain in legal terms.

LEO is acting like a market proxy for the court outcome

The legal process remains slow, but traders are attempting to price the outcome through UNUS SED LEO (LEO), the exchange token for Bitfinex and iFinex.

Bitfinex has stated that if it receives the recovered BTC, it intends to use 80% of the net funds to repurchase and burn LEO within 18 months.

The company noted this process could include over-the-counter transactions, such as direct BTC-for-LEO swaps.

This policy effectively turns a federal court decision into a massive buyback pipeline. It gives the market a mechanism to speculate on the timeline well before a legal resolution.

In light of this, Vetle Lunde, head of research at K33 Research, models LEO with two primary value drivers. These include ongoing buybacks funded by Bitfinex trading revenues and the expected future burn tied to the recovered bitcoin.

Using a baseline of roughly 95,000 recovered BTC, Lunde estimates the 80% allocation would equal about 75,000 BTC. At current prices, that pool is worth roughly $5 billion.

Meanwhile, he calculates that the trade-revenue buybacks alone represent a fair value of about $125 million.

However, trading this catalyst is highly volatile.

Data from CoinMarketCap shows that LEO has a market capitalization of about $8 billion but a 24-hour trading volume of just $7.1 million. That thin liquidity profile can severely magnify price movements.

Meanwhile, the huge market capitalization also shows that LEO is trading at a roughly 60% premium to its implied fair value.

This marks the highest premium since the extended period of elevated pricing that followed the initial seizure announcement in 2022.

According to Lunde, the current premium remains noisy because LEO is highly illiquid and has concentrated ownership, meaning a small number of participants can heavily skew the market.

As a result, traders may be front-running a court transfer, or simply leaning into momentum in an environment where fair value takes a back seat.

Ultimately, LEO's illiquidity will amplify the final outcome. A confirmed transfer could push valuations even higher in the short term.

Conversely, a modest or delayed supply distribution could rapidly compress the premium.

Why the headline may hit harder than the actual BTC flows

The broader macro backdrop explains why this story is likely to move sentiment even before the court decides anything.

Bitcoin has been trading through a risk-off regime in early 2026.

For context, spot Bitcoin ETFs have seen sharp capital exits of more than $4.5 billion this year, amid a 5-week streak of outflows.

In that environment, traders are already sensitive to supply headlines, especially anything tied to state-owned BTC.

So, a headline saying the US is transferring roughly 95,000 BTC would be built to shock markets.

If the coins leave government custody, the move would be restitution, not a government sale.

And if Bitfinex receives the coins and follows its stated buy-and-burn plan, the resulting BTC flow is likely to be time-sliced rather than dumped into the market at once.

Even on the rougher, rounded version of the math, about 75,000 BTC over 18 months works out to about 139 BTC per day.

That could influence LEO’s price, but it does not represent a significant supply shock compared with the far larger distribution pressure Bitcoin has already absorbed from long-term holders and ETF outflows over the past five months.

So, the real market impact may come from narrative framing rather than coin flow.

This is because the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve represents more than a simple stockpile of BTC. It functions as a political and market signal that traders can read as either bullish or bearish, even while the legal status of those coins remains unresolved.

That is why the “US loses 30% of its bitcoin reserves” framing is likely to trigger volatility. It is emotionally clean. It fits in a headline. It also strips out the legal substance.

However, the legal substance is the story.

The SBR was built to coexist with restitution. If the Bitfinex tranche leaves government custody, the reserve number on trackers will fall, and markets will react.

But the deeper point will be unchanged. The United States would not be backing away from its reserve policy. It would be following the rule of law, which is exactly what the reserve framework said it would do.

The post US Strategic Bitcoin Reserve could lose 30% in one ruling as Bitfinex battle intensifies appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin is flashing its most oversold signal on record amid its continued price struggles in this current macroeconomic environment and persistent exchange-traded fund (ETF) outflows.

According to CryptoSlate data, BTC's price dipped to around $62,700 over the last 24 hours, while its weekly relative strength index (RSI) printed roughly 25.7. BTC has risen to above $66,000 as of press time.

Alex Thorn, Galaxy Digital’s head of research, pointed out that this weekly RSI is “lower than any time except the darkest of bears.”

Thorn also noted that the only lower readings since 2016 were in November and December 2018, when BTC price dropped from $6,000 to $3,000, and in June and July 2022, when crypto lending firms Genesis and Three Arrows Capital collapsed.

As a result, market observers have described the current setup as “full capitulation,” arguing that similar RSI extremes have historically been followed by long, messy recoveries rather than instant reversals.

Capitulation signals are flashing, but Bitcoin may still be in the base-building phase

Momentum has reached an extreme, but Bitcoin’s price discovery still appears to be driven by forced selling, fund de-risking, and the transfer of inventory from weaker holders to larger buyers.

That distinction matters because oversold conditions do not automatically mark a bottom. They often emerge when selling becomes mechanical rather than emotional.

In that setup, liquidations, risk reductions, and thinner liquidity can keep a market pinned in a weak momentum regime even after the initial panic phase begins to fade.

Glassnode data supports that reading. The firm’s 90-day realized profit-and-loss ratio for Bitcoin has fallen below 1, a threshold it describes as an “excess loss-realization” regime.

In practical terms, realized losses are dominating the tape, which suggests sellers remain the marginal price-setters.

CryptoQuant is describing the same period as the deepest pain phase of the current drawdown.

The firm says on-chain investors are posting their largest realized losses on record, while active traders are absorbing the biggest losses of this cycle. In its view, that stress has already changed who is participating in the market.

Its interpretation is that retail holders have largely capitulated, while whales continue to accumulate at a greater intensity.

That pattern, weaker hands exiting while larger holders absorb supply, is often seen in later-stage corrections when a market starts building a base.

CryptoQuant also frames the move as a correction rather than a full bear market, comparing the scale of realized losses to November 2019, when Bitcoin later moved higher.

That comparison is best treated as an analog rather than a forecast, but it reinforces the idea that deep realized losses can coincide with longer-term opportunity.

This is where many RSI-based headlines miss the nuance. A record-low RSI can signal that capitulation is underway, and capitulation is often a precondition for a bottom.

However, it does not, on its own, confirm that the market has finished searching for a durable bid.

That helps explain why extreme RSI readings are often followed by choppy, range-bound trading instead of a V-shaped rebound. If the market is still processing heavy realized losses, buyers tend to demand discounts, while trapped holders may sell into rallies to reduce exposure.

In that framing, RSI extremes are often better understood as a phase shift, from capitulation toward base-building, rather than a precise turning point.

Alphractal’s Sharpe Ratio analysis points in a similar direction, but through a different lens.

While CryptoQuant focuses on on-chain loss realization and holder behavior, Alphractal looks at risk-adjusted returns across the broader cycle. Its data suggest Bitcoin is in an advanced stage of a repair process, with the risk-versus-return profile more compressed than it was a year ago.

The firm argues that allocating to BTC at current levels implies lower expected returns over the coming months, but also lower relative risk than earlier in the decline.

Historically, even lower Sharpe Ratio readings have aligned with major bottoming phases, when the market’s risk-return profile becomes most compressed and long-term asymmetry begins to improve.

Alphractal’s point is that Bitcoin may be getting close to that zone, but may not be there yet.

Taken together, the signals describe a market under severe momentum stress, with realized losses still being absorbed and risk-adjusted returns increasingly compressed.

That is consistent with a late-stage repair phase. It is a constructive setup for base formation, but not definitive proof that the repair is complete.

The missing institutional bid, ETFs leak billions, and liquidity is thin

What distinguishes this pullback from earlier ones is that one of Bitcoin’s most visible demand channels has started to fade.

Data from SoSo Value shows US spot Bitcoin ETFs have recorded more than $4.5 billion in net outflows across the 12 funds since the start of the year, extending a five-week redemption streak.

In prior drawdowns, the ETF complex often functioned as a steady marginal buyer. However, that flow has flipped this year, with capital leaving the wrapper as prices weaken.

The impact has been more pronounced because market depth is thinner than it was during earlier selloffs.

Coin Metrics said the average spot Bitcoin order book depth, measured within plus or minus 2% of the mid-price, fell from roughly $40 million to $50 million between August and October 2025, then thinned further to $15 million to $25 million, and then thinned further in February.

In a shallower order book, sell pressure tends to move price more aggressively, creating air pockets and sharper downside gaps even in the absence of a fresh catalyst.

Coin Metrics also pointed to slower stablecoin growth. Aggregate supply for USDT and USDC has been hovering around $260 billion, indicating the market is not seeing a strong wave of new liquidity at a time when Bitcoin is trying to establish a floor.

That pattern suggests stagnation in fresh inflows rather than a broad-based exit from crypto, but the distinction offers limited near-term support when other demand sources are already weakening.

CryptoQuant’s derivatives data adds to the defensive picture.

The firm said bears remain in control of Bitcoin futures, with funding rates in negative territory around the current bottom zone of roughly $62,000 to $68,000. That is a notable shift from the earlier bottom near $80,000, when funding stayed positive for most of the period.

CryptoQuant also said selling has been the dominant force since July 2025, with buy limit orders largely acting as passive absorbers rather than active drivers of price. It added that the current selling pressure is the strongest in three months.

None of that rules out a rebound. Negative funding can create conditions for a short squeeze if bearish positioning becomes crowded and spot selling starts to fade.

But for now, the structure still points to a market trading defensively rather than one showing clear signs of renewed risk appetite.

Options markets have reflected the same caution.

CryptoSlate previously reported that demand for downside protection stayed elevated even after Bitcoin rebounded above $70,000 on Feb. 6, with traders concentrated in $60,000 to $50,000 put strikes ahead of the Feb. 27 expiry.

When put demand remains firm after a bounce, it usually signals that traders still assign meaningful odds to further downside, even if dip buyers are active in spot.

The post Bitcoin reveals a rare bullish cycle bottom signal before bouncing as futures bears tighten their grip appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Social media giant Meta is quietly plotting a return to stablecoins. This time, however, the primary beneficiary may not be Mark Zuckerberg’s metaverse, but the US Treasury market.

On Feb. 24, Coindesk reported that Meta was exploring stablecoin-based payments for a possible rollout in the second half of 2026, likely through a third-party provider rather than a Meta-issued token.

The structure marks a break from the Libra era and suggests Meta is pursuing the utility of digital dollars, cheap and instant settlement, without reviving the full political backlash that followed its earlier attempt to build a private global currency.

If the effort moves forward, the significance may extend beyond crypto adoption.

Stablecoins already have a market capitalization of roughly $309 billion, and under a regulated reserve model, more growth in that market can translate into more demand for short-dated US government debt.

That is the hinge in Meta’s latest stablecoin push. Washington may still resist the platform risk, while Treasury markets gain a new source of structural demand for bills.

A second attempt in a different policy environment

Meta’s first push into this space, through Libra in 2019, faced immediate resistance because it appeared to be a private currency with instant global scale.

At the time, the concern was not only financial stability. It was also power. A platform with billions of users, deep network effects, and control over distribution appeared ready to insert itself into the monetary system.

Those concerns did not disappear. They changed shape.

Stablecoins are now less a theoretical product and more an established settlement layer. They already move capital across exchanges, payment corridors, and savings channels in emerging markets.

The policy backdrop for these digital assets has also significantly shifted.

In 2025, the US established a legal framework for payment stablecoins through the GENIUS Act, with the White House presenting it as a route to regulated growth and the Treasury describing stablecoins as a potential multi-trillion-dollar industry.

That is the key difference between then and now. The debate is no longer centered on whether stablecoins should exist. It is increasingly about who can distribute them, how reserves are managed, and what guardrails apply.

Meta’s reported approach fits that new landscape. By integrating a third-party stablecoin provider instead of issuing its own token, the company can frame the product as a payments feature rather than a sovereign-style monetary experiment.

This also keeps reserve management, and the scrutiny that comes with it, off Meta’s own balance sheet.

How stablecoin growth becomes Treasury bill demand

The Treasury angle in this story is not rhetorical. It comes directly from how stablecoin reserves are built.

If payment stablecoins are expected to be backed by high-quality liquid assets, issuers tend to hold short-dated US government debt.

That reserve design links stablecoin adoption to Treasury bill demand in a straightforward way.

Essentially, more stablecoins in circulation mean more reserves, and more reserves mean more bill buying if issuers stay concentrated in short-term government paper.

The market is already moving in that direction. Tether, the largest stablecoin issuer, says its Treasury exposure exceeded $141 billion at year-end 2025.

At that scale, stablecoin reserve management is no longer a niche crypto topic. It is part of the short-term dollar system.

This is why the growth forecasts matter so much. Standard Chartered projects stablecoins could reach $2 trillion in market cap by end-2028.

In that scenario, the bank estimates stablecoins could generate roughly $0.8 trillion to $1.0 trillion of incremental demand for Treasury bills.

Set that against the size of the market, and the number becomes harder to dismiss.

US Treasury advisory materials show bills outstanding at around $6.55 trillion at the end of 2025. An incremental $0.8 trillion to $1.0 trillion bid is large enough to matter for supply dynamics, bill scarcity, and front-end funding conditions.

It does not mean stablecoins would dominate the Treasury market. However, it does mean they could become a visible source of demand in the part of the curve used as a cash-equivalent reserve base.

That creates the central irony in Meta’s return. A company that once triggered a policy backlash over digital money could, this time, help deepen demand for the US government’s shortest debt.

Meta’s role is distribution, and distribution changes curves

Meta does not need to issue a stablecoin to shape the market. Its advantage is distribution.

The company reported 3.58 billion “Family daily active people” as of December 2025. Even a low single-digit adoption rate across that base can create meaningful payment volume.

In payments, behavior matters more than branding. If users see a cheap, fast transfer option and use it repeatedly, the underlying rail can scale quickly.

The use cases are already clear. Creators want faster payouts. Small businesses want lower-cost settlement. Families sending money across borders want to avoid paying 5% to 10% in fees and foreign-exchange spreads.

Stablecoins fit all three, especially when embedded as infrastructure rather than presented as a standalone crypto product.

That is where Meta can act as a multiplier. It can take a tool that is already common in crypto markets and make it feel ordinary in consumer finance.

Treasury markets do not need consumers to care about stablecoins as a concept. They only need stablecoin balances to grow, because reserve demand follows issuance.

Mike Ippolito, Blockworks co-founder, made that distribution point directly. He said:

“People aren't appreciating how big the Meta stablecoin news is.”

He also tied the current moment to the last Meta cycle. “When Meta first unveiled Libra in 2019, it was a $1 billion market that went to $170 billion in just three years,” he said. “Today, the market for stables is $300 billion.”

Ippolito then pushed the thesis further, arguing:

“Absent ANY other growth, Meta driven payments would send it to $1 trillion easy.”

He added that stablecoin payments on Meta apps would provide the crypto sector with “3 billion (potential) new users.”

The numbers in that argument are not a bank's forecast, and they do not settle the policy question.

They do, however, capture the part of the story markets tend to focus on first: distribution at scale can accelerate adoption faster than most macro models assume.

A scenario range for 2028 to 2030

A cleaner way to frame the outlook is to treat stablecoin growth as a range of outcomes, then map each one to Treasury bill demand.

In a bear case, policy friction remains high and product-market fit is weaker than many expect. JPMorgan has argued that trillion-dollar growth projections are too optimistic, with a much smaller market, around $500 billion by 2028, as a more realistic endpoint.

In that version, stablecoins still expand, but reserve demand for bills is incremental rather than transformative.

Meta may roll out payment features, but adoption remains concentrated in narrow use cases, such as creator payouts and selected remittance corridors, while broader consumer usage stays limited.

In a base case, regulated expansion continues, and platform distribution helps normalize stablecoin usage. Standard Chartered’s $2 trillion by end-2028 scenario becomes the center of gravity.

Stablecoins move deeper into mainstream fintech plumbing, especially for internet-native income and cross-border settlement.

Meta does not need to be the whole market. It only needs to reduce friction and make stablecoin payouts the default option in the products people already use.

In that setting, the estimated $0.8 trillion to $1.0 trillion of incremental Treasury bill demand becomes a plausible market outcome, not a tail-risk forecast.

In a bull case, the story broadens from fintech efficiency to global dollarization. Citi has published scenarios that place stablecoins near $2 trillion by 2030 in a base case and as high as $4 trillion in a bull case. The driver in that world is larger than crypto trading.

Stablecoins become a consumer-facing form of dollar access in countries with volatile currencies and expensive banking rails. Notably, several reports from emerging markets already point to strong stablecoin preference in high-inflation environments.

If that trend spreads, stablecoins become a channel for private dollarization, and Treasury bill demand rises as a reserve consequence.

The point of these scenario ranges are not precision. It is to show that once stablecoins pass a certain scale, reserve allocation becomes a Treasury market issue as much as a crypto market issue.

Why Washington may still push back

Even with a legal framework in place, Meta’s return to stablecoin payments is likely to trigger resistance in Washington, and the objections will be structural.

Concentration is one concern. Stablecoins remain dominated by a handful of issuers. If a major issuer faces a confidence shock, redemptions can force rapid liquidation of reserves or financing activity in short-term markets.

At a small scale, that is a contained event. At larger scale, it becomes a funding and liquidity question.

Run dynamics are another concern. Stablecoins buy bills in calm conditions, but they can become sellers, or heavy liquidity users against those holdings, when users redeem in size.

That kind of behavior does not need to overwhelm the Treasury market to matter. It only needs to become one more moving part in front-end funding conditions.

Meta’s role adds a separate layer of concern.

Even without issuing a token, a wallet or payments layer embedded in social apps raises familiar governance questions, including payment access, surveillance pressure, and the influence a platform can exert over financial behavior for billions of users.

Those risks explain why Meta’s stablecoin returns may still face political resistance, even as the reserve mechanics behind stablecoins make them increasingly useful to Treasury markets.

The post Meta’s digital dollar comeback could unlock a $1 trillion Treasury shift Washington is not ready for appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin spent the last two days sliding down familiar shelves, and the order book kept printing lower bids as liquidity thinned.

However, by Wednesday afternoon, the price traded back toward $65,000 after sweeping the low $63,000s, with the last 24 hours spanning roughly $62,800 to $66,200.

The bounce depicts a market that hit the air pocket, found the next ledge, and then checked whether the wrapper still had buyers behind it.

Related Reading

Bitcoin rejects $62k as spot ETF flows swing positive — but if we lose this floor things get ugly

Bitcoin risks fast repricing toward $56k soon if $61k support gives way.

Feb 24, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

The cleanest signal arrived through U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs, Tuesday flipped to about $257.7 million of net inflows, led by IBIT at +$78.9 million, FBTC at +$82.8 million, and ARKB at +$71.1 million.

This single green day was extremely important as the market had been conditioning traders to expect leaks, mid February featured a string of red prints on flows, including -$104.9 million on Feb. 17, -$133.3 million on Feb. 18, -$165.8 million on Feb. 19, and -$203.8 million on Feb. 23, which built a simple narrative, sell pressure kept finding an exit through the wrapper.

Tuesday interrupted that pattern, showing the market starting to bid as the ledger tightens.

The options market supplied the other half of the picture, and it arrived with a different tone.

Volatility tilted further toward puts on Deribit, and the 7-day put-call skew moved from -6% to -17% in 24 hours, as traders started paying up for downside coverage even while price climbs back toward the first repair rung.

A market can buy spot and buy protection in the same breath, and that combination turns rebounds into tests of follow-through.

Macro data creates the backdrop, tariffs acted like a volatility lever, and the timing lined up with the flush. Trump introduced new 10% global tariffs effective Feb. 24, with the rate rising to 15% this weekend.

Barron’s framed the move as part of broader risk aversion, which keeps the week’s bounce in context. Liquidity assets tend to trade like mood rings when policy uncertainty widens and spreads.

So the recovery carries a narrow question with a wide shadow: do flows keep arriving while macro volatility cools, or does the market return to defending the lower shelf as the default job?

The answer sits inside a ladder of levels: when bids return with patience, price climbs the repair staircase, when bids fade, price revisits the consequence zone and speeds up.

Related Reading

Only 41% of Bitcoin holders are in profit this cycle – threatening worst halving on record

More Bitcoin holders are underwater this cycle than when BTC traded near $3,000.

Feb 24, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

Bitcoin ETF flows flipped green

Tuesday’s +$257.7 million net inflow landed above the long-run daily average of +$101.8 million, a roughly 2.5x day in terms of magnitude, and IBIT, FBTC, and ARKB carried most of the load.

Concentrated leadership can mean one thing in practice, large allocators use the deepest pipes, and the deepest pipes set the tone for the day.

Still, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs sit at around $2.6 billion in net selling year to date, and roughly five straight weeks of outflows totaling around $4.3 billion.

That context turns Tuesday into an early data point inside a larger drawdown story, a single inflow day can mark a turn, and it can also mark a pause; the follow-through decides which interpretation holds weight.

For a price map, the implication stays mechanical, $65,000 remains the first repair rung, and a sustained hold above it sets up the higher rungs at $66,894 and $67,995, the rooms where prior support lives as resistance.

Hedging stays loud, protection gets pricier

The options skew move on Deribit keeps the bounce honest, -6% to -17% over 24 hours is a fast repricing of insurance, and the report described risk appetite deteriorating as spot traded near $62,000.

That combination tells a simple story: the market accepted the bounce, and it also priced the path as unstable, which often leads to rallies that face supply as they approach repair zones.

Deribit’s week 8 report also referenced volatility compression around the 50% area, which matters for scenario framing, a lower vol regime tightens the expected move bands, and tight bands make level interactions more meaningful, each shelf becomes a referendum with sharper consequences for positioning.

Earlier in the month, Kaiko highlighted stablecoin dominance around 10.3% of total crypto market cap, and about $22 billion of net flows into stablecoins over roughly three weeks.

That pool works like cash on the sidelines, it can rotate back into risk, and it can also sit as a sign of caution, a market parking capital while it waits for macro to stop shaking the gears.

This is where the ETF wrapper and the stablecoin pool meet, a sustained ETF inflow streak can represent that rotation, and a fade in flows can represent continued parking.

Tuesday offered a first bid through the wrapper, the coming sessions decide whether that bid grows into a habit.

Bitcoin has fallen from $70,524 to $64,074 over the last three weeks, with an annualized realized volatility estimate around 37%. Pair that with Deribit’s discussion of implied volatility compressing around 50%, and the week ahead looks like a bounded test of shelves rather than a free-fall narrative.

Bitcoin defends key support as bulls attempt to confirm a local bottom

Using a standard volatility model based on how Bitcoin typically trades, with BTC around $65,300, the 7-day expected move (one standard deviation) runs from roughly $60,900 to $69,900. On a 30-day view, that range widens to about $56,500 to $75,300.

Those projected bands align with the liquidity ladder: $61,726 to $61,099 forms the first key decision shelf within the near-term expected move, while $56,048 marks the next rung lower, where price could find acceptance if momentum shifts and sellers regain control.

The market now carries three clean paths, each one ties incentives to observable receipts.

• Repair path: ETF inflows persist, price holds above $65,000, and the tape earns a conversation with $66,894 and $67,995, a slow rebuild powered by wrapper creations and patient spot bids.
• Fade path: Flows revert toward the red streak, skew stays deeply negative, and rallies to meet the $65,000 to $67,000 supply, which pulls price back toward the $61,000 hinge.
• Macro shock path: Tariff uncertainty stays active, spreads widen, liquidity thins, and the market speeds through shelves toward the next acceptance zone near $56,048.

The recovery over the last 24 hours was mechanical: flows finally printed green, hedges priced the downside with urgency, and macro kept pressure on the pipes.

Price reclaimed breathing room toward $65,000, and the market now has a simple job, it has to prove the wrapper can keep absorbing inventory while tariffs keep risk appetite on a shorter leash.

In a channel map, that job stays clear: hold the $61,000 shelf and build acceptance above $65,000.

With that level reclaimed, the repair staircase is back in play, and the market shows its hand at each rung, bids either step in with patience to press the advance, or thin out and force another test of lower support.

The post If Bitcoin can hold $65,000 after its strong bounce it could avoid a deeper crypto winter appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Two regulators converged on the same market from opposite directions in February 2026.

The European Securities and Markets Authority warned that derivatives marketed as “perpetual futures” or “perpetual contracts” tied to Bitcoin and Ethereum likely fall within the scope of contracts-for-difference regulations, regardless of what firms call them.

Days earlier, US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) Chairman Michael Selig announced his agency would use its tools to “onshore” perpetual and other novel derivative products with appropriate safeguards.

Related Reading

Crypto faces an offshore liquidity imbalance as US derivatives policy stalls ahead of 2026 showdown

Lobbying is turning into a moat as lawmakers draft crypto rules and enforcement targets the easiest control points.

Feb 19, 2026 · Gino Matos

The stakes are enormous: if perpetual contracts account for roughly 60% to 90% of the $85.70 trillion in the centralized crypto derivatives market recorded in 2025, regulators are competing to determine where $51 trillion to $77 trillion in annual turnover is legally hosted.

The fight matters because perpetuals are where price discovery concentrates, fee capture accumulates, and liquidation flows cascade.

Centralized crypto derivatives trading hit $85.70 trillion in notional volume during 2025, with daily averages around $264.5 billion and a single-day peak of $748 billion on Oct. 10.

Binance alone processed $25.09 trillion, roughly 29.3% of the global total, and the top four venues captured 62.3% of all activity. Kaiko's analysis shows perpetuals accounted for 68% of all Bitcoin trading volume in 2025, up from 66% the year prior.

Whatever the precise share, perpetuals sit at the center of crypto's derivatives machine, and the regulatory frameworks governing them will determine which jurisdiction captures the clearing fees, custody relationships, and benchmark governance that anchor institutional trust.

Europe's substance test

ESMA's Feb. 24 statement reads like a polite preview of enforcement.

The regulator noted an increase in derivatives marketed as perpetual futures or contracts that provide leveraged exposure to crypto assets.

It also stated that such instruments are likely within the scope of national CFD product intervention measures mirroring ESMA's 2018 restrictions.

The assessment hinges on legal and economic function, not commercial naming.

ESMA explicitly dismissed common industry arguments: trading on a regulated venue doesn't exempt a product, funding rate mechanisms are irrelevant to classification, and voluntary protections such as insurance funds or negative balance protection don't change the outcome.

The practical bite comes from ESMA's CFD leverage ladder, which caps retail leverage on crypto-linked instruments at 2:1 and mandates margin close-out at 50% of the minimum required margin.

However, ESMA added a sleeper constraint: product governance obligations under MiFID II.

ESMA warned that mass marketing campaigns, such as pop-ups, blanket emails telling all clients “get started now,” are inconsistent with a narrow target market. Firms must assess appropriateness, tailor distribution strategies, and prepare a Key Information Document under PRIIPs for retail distribution.

The forward-looking implication is a squeeze on retail access from multiple angles. Even when a venue holds an EU license, perpetual-like products will face leverage caps, appropriateness tests, governance scrutiny, and marketing restrictions.

One Trading, an EU MiFID II-regulated platform offering cash-settled perpetual futures, demonstrates that the “regulated perps” pathway exists in Europe. Still, its phased rollout from institutions to eligible retail shows the compliance friction that ESMA now foregrounds.

Related Reading

Anyone can now create Hyperliquid perp contracts with $20M: Is DeFi about to break?

Listing anything is easy; risk and liquidity are hard, and here’s the model.Hyperliquid’s HIP-3 removes gatekeepers by letting anyone launch perpetuals if they stake $20 million. It’s either DeFi’s boldest safety experiment, or its next stress test.

Oct 15, 2025 · Gino Matos

Domesticating perpetuals into futures infrastructure

The CFTC's approach treats perpetuals not as exotic contraband but as widely used tools requiring common-sense safeguards.

Chairman Selig's Jan. 29 remarks positioned the agency to onshore perpetual contracts within existing regulatory architecture, and market structure already reflects that intent.

Coinbase Financial Markets launched CFTC-regulated perpetual futures for US customers in July 2025. The contracts have 5-year expirations, which is a “perpetual-style” structure that aligns with futures market conventions, and offer up to 10x intraday leverage.

CFTC filings reveal the plumbing beneath: Coinbase Derivatives' nano Bitcoin contract operates under designated contract market core principles, including surveillance, position limits, and disclosures, with clearing through Nodal Clear.

Cboe introduced a parallel design: long-dated, cash-settled Bitcoin and Ethereum continuous futures with daily cash-adjustment funding mechanisms and expiries up to 120 months.

The structure mimics the dynamics of perpetual contracts within a US-regulated futures framework.

Both products signal the US strategy: package perpetual exposure inside institutional-grade infrastructure where clearing, intermediated access, and benchmark governance address the CFTC's oversight priorities.

The leverage wedge between jurisdictions creates arbitrage pressure.

EU retail clients face 2:1 leverage on crypto-underlying CFDs, while Coinbase advertises up to 10x intraday leverage on its US perpetual-style futures. The gap matters to active traders who view leverage as a strategic tool, not a risk to be managed away.

Related Reading

Decentralized exchanges record $1.1 trillion in trading volume as perpetuals drive historic trading month

Perpetual contract volumes drove the record-breaking performance, reaching $648.6 billion in August, representing a 31.3% jump from July.

Sep 2, 2025 · Gino Matos

Policy shifts that move even a few percentage points of market share carry economic weight measured in billions of dollars in annual fee revenue.

What a 5% shift means

A baseline scenario illustrates the stakes.

If US-regulated perpetual-style products and clearer CFTC pathways shift 5% to 10% of global perpetual turnover onshore over 12 to 24 months, primarily from offshore centralized exchanges, the volume captured would range from roughly $2.57 trillion to $6.86 trillion in annual turnover.

At an effective take rate of two basis points, that translates to approximately $514 million to $1.37 billion in gross trading fees annually.

Onshoring succeeds when regulatory clarity combines with better user experience, credible benchmarks, and capital efficiency, not merely legal permission to operate.

The EU faces a different equation. If ESMA-style enforcement and marketing appropriateness pressure materially narrow retail distribution, European retail leverage demand either fades or routes to non-EU offshore venues or decentralized finance platforms.

Europe might host fewer trades while pushing higher compliance certainty for institutional products, effectively ceding retail market share to other jurisdictions.

A third scenario considers volatility-driven fragmentation.

If macro volatility and liquidation cascades keep demand for high leverage elevated while compliance friction slows the onshore ramp, regulated venues grow. Still, offshore and decentralized exchange perpetuals remain the marginal price-setter.

Kaiko's 2026 analysis already noted that perpetual DEXs were steadily gaining market share, suggesting that leverage demand will route around centralized compliance when possible.

Watching the enforcement signals

The near-term tells are enforcement mechanics and product launches.

In Europe, investors should watch whether national competent authorities begin treating specific perpetual offerings as CFDs, forcing 2:1 leverage on crypto underlyings, mandatory risk warnings, and incentive bans.

Large EU-facing venues and brokers may change marketing funnels, such as cutting pop-ups, emails, and affiliate incentives, to align with narrow target-market obligations.

In the US, concrete signals include CFTC rule proposals or interpretations expanding true perpetual availability beyond today's long-dated futures designs. New contract listings, market-maker programs, and clearing integrations will telegraph the pace of build-out.

Cboe's continuous futures adoption indicates whether traditional finance distribution channels can absorb perpetual-like demand without resorting to offshore workarounds.

The macro overlay matters. CoinGlass identified derivatives as the core battlefield during market accelerations, and if 2026 volatility persists, regulators will treat perpetuals as systemically important market structures rather than niche products.

Open interest, a proxy for system leverage, ranged from a 2025 low of $87 billion to a peak of $235.9 billion on Oct. 7, ending the year at $145.1 billion, up 17% from the start.

Defaults, distribution, and control

The perpetuals war is fundamentally about defaults.

Retail traders default to venues offering the highest leverage with the lowest friction. Institutional capital defaults to venues offering clearing certainty, benchmark integrity, and regulatory predictability.

Europe's substance-over-form approach narrows retail distribution while preserving institutional pathways under MiFID II obligations.

The US onshoring strategy embeds perpetuals into futures market plumbing, betting that compliance infrastructure can coexist with competitive leverage offerings.

ESMA's warning that commercial names are irrelevant and circumvention is prohibited signals that enforcement will follow.

The CFTC's commitment to onshore perpetuals with common-sense safeguards signals infrastructure build-out will continue.

In between sits a $51 trillion to $77 trillion market where price discovery, fee revenue, and benchmark governance remain up for grabs.

The jurisdictions that balance leverage access with clearing credibility will host the next cycle's derivatives machine.

11The rest will watch liquidity migrate, either to regulated competitors or to decentralized venues where leverage caps and appropriateness tests don't apply.

The post Crypto traders are chasing 10x leverage in the US while Europe tightens the screws behind the scenes appeared first on CryptoSlate.

The crypto market in early 2026 has been nothing short of a rollercoaster. After the euphoric highs of late 2025, where Bitcoin flirted with the $130,000 mark, a "diffuse cocktail of macro anxieties" has sent prices into a steep correction. As of late February 2026, $Bitcoin has retraced nearly 50% from its All-Time High (ATH), trading in the $63,000 to $70,000 range.

Is it a Good Time to Buy Crypto?

Historical cycles suggest that corrections of 50% to 70% are healthy "purges" that wipe out over-leveraged traders. With Bitcoin currently sitting at a 50% discount, the risk-to-reward ratio for March 2026 has shifted heavily in favor of the bulls.

As geopolitical tensions and tariff uncertainties stabilize, capital is expected to rotate back into "risk-on" assets. Investors who missed the 2025 rally now have a second chance to enter the market. If you are looking to build a portfolio, diversifying across these five projects offers a balance of stability, utility, and explosive recovery potential.

1. Ethereum (ETH) – The Infrastructure King

Despite the rise of "Ethereum killers," Ethereum remains the undisputed home of Decentralized Finance (DeFi) and Real-World Asset (RWA) tokenization. In 2026, the successful rollout of the "Prague" upgrade has further slashed Layer-2 costs, making the network more scalable than ever.

• Why Buy Now? ETH has followed Bitcoin’s slide, dropping from its 2025 high of $4,950 to under $2,000.
• The Catalyst: Major financial institutions like BlackRock and JPMorgan are increasingly using Ethereum for tokenized deposit pilots. At current prices, you are buying the "settlement layer of the internet" at a 60% discount.

2. Solana (SOL) – The Speed Demon

Solana has proven its resilience after the network reliability concerns of previous years. With the Firedancer upgrade now fully integrated in 2026, Solana can process over 1 million transactions per second.

• Status: While it reached $260 in the last bull run, SOL is currently trading significantly lower, creating a "gap" that savvy traders are eager to fill.
• Use Case: It has become the primary chain for consumer AI-crypto applications and high-frequency trading.

3. Chainlink (LINK) – The Oracle Essential

You cannot have a functional DeFi ecosystem without accurate data, and Chainlink owns 90% of that market. In 2026, its Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP) has become the standard for banks moving data between private and public blockchains.

• The Play: LINK often lags behind the initial BTC pump but rallies hard once the ecosystem matures. It is one of the most undervalued "blue-chip" utility tokens heading into March.

4. Sui (SUI) – The Emerging Contender

Sui has emerged as the breakout Layer-1 of the 2025-2026 cycle. Utilizing the Move programming language, it offers a level of security and parallel processing that older chains struggle to match.

• Growth Potential: Sui's Total Value Locked (TVL) has remained stable even during the February crash, suggesting a loyal and committed developer base. As the market recovers, SUI is positioned to be a top performer.

5. Fetch.ai (FET/ASI) – The AI Narrative

2026 is the year of "AI Agents." Fetch.ai, as part of the Artificial Superintelligence Alliance, is at the forefront of this movement. Their autonomous agents are now being used in logistics and decentralized energy grids.

• Why March 2026? The "AI plus Crypto" narrative is the strongest secular trend in the market. With FET down along with the broader market, it offers a high-beta play for those betting on the continued AI revolution.

Conclusion: Strategy for March 2026

Investing during a 50% Bitcoin drawdown requires a long-term mindset. While volatility may persist in the short term, the fundamental value of these projects remains unchanged. Consider using a regulated exchange to dollar-cost average into these positions throughout the month.

The cryptocurrency market has staged a significant comeback today, February 25, 2026, with Ethereum ($ETH) leading the charge among major altcoins. After a grueling period of volatility driven by tariff fears and geopolitical tensions, the Ethereum price surged by over 10% within 24 hours, reclaiming the psychological $2,000 mark.

This rebound comes as a breath of fresh air for investors who saw ETH slide toward the $1,740 support zone earlier this week. The global crypto market capitalization has followed suit, rising 3% to approximately $2.25 trillion.

Why is the Crypto Market Up Today?

Several macro and industry-specific catalysts have converged to trigger today’s "risk-on" sentiment:

1. Trump’s State of the Union Address: President Trump’s recent speech boosted market confidence by highlighting economic strength and a pro-innovation stance. Specifically, his administration's perceived support for digital assets has eased fears regarding restrictive trade policies.
2. Strategic Reserve Rumors: Sentiment was further bolstered by remarks from influential figures like Cathie Wood, suggesting that the U.S. government could eventually include $Bitcoin in a strategic reserve.
3. Institutional Accumulation: While retail traders were shaken out by recent liquidations, data shows that "whales" and long-term holders have been aggressively buying the dip, providing a solid floor for the recovery.
4. Regulatory Progress: The UK's FCA recently selected firms for its stablecoin sandbox, signaling that global regulators are moving toward structured integration rather than outright bans.

Ethereum Price Analysis: Key Levels to Watch

Technically, $Ethereum is sitting at a critical crossroads. The jump to $2,075 represents the largest one-day gain for the asset in months.

Support and Resistance Zones

According to current market data, the following levels are vital for the next move:

• Immediate Resistance: $2,100 – $2,300. This area acted as a "June War" support in 2025 and has now flipped into a major pivot point that bulls must conquer.
• Target Resistance: $2,800. The 20-week Exponential Moving Average (EMA) sits near this level. A daily close above this would signal a long-term trend reversal.
• Primary Support: $1,850. ETH successfully defended this zone during the recent flush.
• Critical Floor: $1,740. Analysts suggest that if this level holds, the "double bottom" scenario for 2026 remains intact.

Indicators and Momentum

The Relative Strength Index (RSI) is currently climbing away from the oversold territory (near 30), suggesting that the "leverage flush" is complete. However, for a sustained bull run, Ethereum needs to see consistent trading volume above its current $21 billion 24-hour average.

Ecosystem Growth: Staking and Upgrades

Beyond price action, the Ethereum Foundation (EF) has launched a solo staking initiative, deploying roughly 70,000 ETH to enhance network security. Total staked ETH has reached a record 37.1 million, effectively reducing the liquid supply available on exchanges.

Furthermore, anticipation is building for the "Glamsterdam" upgrade, Ethereum’s first major protocol improvement of 2026, which aims to further reduce gas fees and enhance Layer-2 throughput.

Is the Bottom In?

While today’s 10% pump is encouraging, Ethereum remains nearly 58% down from its all-time high of $4,955. The market is currently in a "show me" phase, where it must prove that this isn't just a "dead cat bounce" triggered by short-term news. Investors should keep a close eye on macro developments, especially upcoming earnings from tech giants like Nvidia, which often correlate with crypto market liquidity.

After weeks of grueling "Extreme Fear" and a steady decline toward the $60,000 mark, Bitcoin has reminded the market why it is the king of volatility. In a single 4-hour candle on February 25, 2026, $Bitcoin shot up by over 3%, breaking through multiple local resistance levels. This move has effectively invalidated the immediate bearish narrative that saw BTC pinned below $65,000 just hours ago.

What Caused the Bitcoin Pump?

The primary catalyst for today’s move appears to be a combination of macro-economic optimism and technical liquidations.

• The Trump Effect: President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address highlighted cooling inflation and record-low mortgage rates, which boosted risk appetite across the Nasdaq and S&P 500.
• The Short Squeeze: According to data from major exchanges, over $323 million in leveraged positions were liquidated in 24 hours. As short-sellers were forced to buy back their positions to cover losses, it created a feedback loop that accelerated the price upward.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: Breaking the $68,500 Ceiling

Looking at the 4-hour $BTC/USD chart from Bitstamp, we can observe several critical technical developments.

• V-Shape Recovery: The price bounced sharply off the $64,000 level, forming a local double-bottom structure.
• Resistance Flip: The previous resistance at $68,500 has been breached. For the bulls to maintain control, Bitcoin needs to close a 4-hour candle above this line to confirm it as new support.
• Stochastic RSI Overbought: The Stochastic RSI has reached the 100.00 mark. While this shows immense buying momentum, it also suggests that the rally may need a brief "cool-off" or consolidation period before attempting to break the major $72,000 resistance.

What is a Short Squeeze?

In the context of today's price action, a short squeeze occurs when an asset's price rises unexpectedly, forcing traders who bet on a price drop (short-sellers) to close their positions. To close a short, they must buy the asset, which adds even more upward pressure on the price. This often results in the vertical "spikes" seen on the chart today.

Market Sentiment and ETF Inflows

Institutional interest remains a backbone for this recovery. U.S. Spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded a net inflow of $257.7 million on Tuesday, marking the highest single-day inflow since early February. This suggests that while retail sentiment was in "Extreme Fear," institutional "smart money" was actively buying the dip.

Bitcoin Prediction: Can BTC Hit $72,000?

The next 24 hours are crucial. If Bitcoin can flip the $69,500 level into support, the path toward the $72,000 target becomes clear. However, traders should watch for the upcoming nuclear talks between the US and Iran, as geopolitical tensions often cause "flight to safety" moves that can temporarily pull liquidity out of crypto and into gold.

Was Jane Street Dumping BTC Daily?

$Bitcoin recently broke above $67,000–$68,000 in a sharp rally that triggered a wave of short liquidations and added over $100 billion to its market cap within 24 hours.

But beyond the price action, a different narrative took over Crypto Twitter:

• “The 10AM dump has stopped.”
• “Jane Street was behind it.”
• “The lawsuit changed everything.”

So what is the so-called “10AM dump”? And is there any evidence that Jane Street was systematically selling Bitcoin every day?

Let’s separate narrative from facts.

What Is the “10AM Dump”?

The “10AM dump” is an informal term used by traders to describe a pattern where Bitcoin often sold off around 10:00 AM Eastern Time.

Why that time?

• US stock markets open at 9:30 AM ET
• The first 30–60 minutes bring the highest liquidity
• Major macroeconomic data is often released at 8:30 AM or 10:00 AM
• Institutional hedging and ETF adjustments occur during this window

Many traders noticed that after overnight gains during Asia and Europe sessions, Bitcoin frequently reversed lower during the early US session.

Over time, this repeated behavior turned into a narrative:
that a large institutional player was deliberately “slamming” the market at 10AM.

However, time-based volatility around the US open is common across asset classes — not unique to crypto.

Why Was 10AM Important Today?

What made today different is that Bitcoin did not dump during the US open window.

Instead:

• BTC broke resistance
• Shorts were liquidated
• Momentum accelerated
• Price reclaimed key levels

When a widely observed intraday pattern suddenly breaks, traders interpret it as:

• Selling pressure exhausted
• A large seller stepping away
• Positioning flipping
• A short squeeze beginning

The absence of a dump became the signal.

But a pattern breaking does not automatically prove prior manipulation.

What Is the Lawsuit About?

The legal narrative centers around Terraform Labs — the company behind the 2022 collapse of $LUNA and $UST.

Terraform has alleged that certain trading firms, including Jane Street, engaged in structured trading activity related to UST during its peg defense period.

Key points circulating online include:

• Allegations of coordinated trading strategies
• Claims of benefiting from UST depeg mechanics
• Structured derivatives positions

Important clarification:

1. These are legal allegations within litigation.
2. No court ruling has concluded wrongdoing regarding Bitcoin markets.
3. The lawsuit relates to events surrounding UST and Terra — not proven daily BTC manipulation.

There is currently no verified evidence that Jane Street was systematically dumping Bitcoin at 10AM every day.

Was Jane Street Dumping BTC Daily?

Objectively speaking:

There is no confirmed proof of coordinated daily BTC dumping by Jane Street.

More plausible explanations for repeated 10AM volatility include:

• ETF hedging adjustments
• Market maker gamma positioning
• Options expiry dynamics
• Liquidity concentration at US open
• Algorithmic rebalancing
• Macro data releases

Large quantitative firms do trade during peak liquidity windows — because that is when execution is most efficient.

That does not automatically imply manipulation.

What Likely Drove the Recent Bitcoin Rally?

The recent breakout aligns more closely with:

• Short squeeze dynamics
• Heavy positioning imbalance
• Liquidity vacuum above resistance
• Broader macro volatility (tariffs, gold surge, debt concerns)
• Institutional participation during US session

When markets are heavily shorted, the absence of expected selling pressure can trigger rapid upside cascades. That fits today’s structure more convincingly than the “manipulation stopped” theory.

Final Verdict

The “10AM dump” is a trader-observed pattern — not confirmed evidence of daily coordinated manipulation.

The lawsuit involving Terraform and Jane Street relates to Terra’s collapse, not proven systematic Bitcoin dumping. Bitcoin’s recent strength likely reflects positioning shifts and liquidity dynamics rather than the sudden disappearance of a single large seller.

In markets, narratives move fast.
But evidence moves slower.

And so far, the evidence does not support the claim that Jane Street was dumping BTC daily at 10AM.

The "Digital Gold" Debate Returns

In the world of finance, Bitcoin has long been touted as "digital gold"—a decentralized asset that thrives when traditional systems falter. However, as the threat of a direct USA-Iran military engagement looms in 2026, the reality of market mechanics often tells a different story.

Investors are currently weighing two opposing forces: the immediate "risk-off" panic that typically triggers a crypto sell-off, and the long-term narrative of Bitcoin as a hedge against currency debasement and sovereign risk. To understand what might happen next, we must look at the data from the 2024 and 2025 escalations.

Will Prices Go Up or Down?

Based on historical data from similar events in 2024 and 2025, the short-term answer is almost always down. Whenever a major missile strike or a declaration of war occurs, $Bitcoin and altcoins typically experience an immediate "flash crash" ranging from 5% to 15%. However, these dips are often followed by rapid recoveries once the initial shock subsides, sometimes leading to new highs within months.

Geopolitical Risk and "Risk-Off" Sentiment

In financial terms, a "Risk-Off" environment occurs when investors move capital away from volatile assets (like stocks and crypto) and into perceived safe havens (like the US Dollar, Gold, or Treasury bonds). Even though Bitcoin is decentralized, it is still categorized by institutional traders as a "high-beta" risk asset, meaning it often moves in tandem with—but more violently than—the stock market during a crisis.

Comparative Crypto Analysis: Lessons from 2024 and 2025

To predict the future, we look at the three most significant escalations between Iran, Israel, and the West in the last two years.

1. April 2024: Iran Attacks Israel

When Iran launched a barrage of drones and missiles at Israel in April 2024, the crypto market reacted instantly.

1. $BTC Movement: Bitcoin fell nearly 8%, dropping from approximately $67,000 to $61,000 in a single Saturday night session.
2. Altcoin Impact: Ethereum ($ETH) and Solana ($SOL) saw even steeper declines, with some altcoins losing up to 20% in value within hours.
3. Recovery: The market stabilized within 48 hours as it became clear the escalation would not immediately lead to a full-scale regional war.

2. June 2025: Israel’s "Operation Midnight Hammer"

In mid-2025, Israel conducted direct strikes on Iranian soil. This event was particularly notable because Bitcoin was trading at much higher levels (above $100,000) at the time.

1. BTC Movement: The price dipped from $110,000 to $103,000—a sharp but relatively contained 6% correction.
2. Market Sentiment: According to data from Coinglass, over $1 billion in long positions were liquidated in 24 hours.
3. The "Springboard" Effect: Surprisingly, within two months of this conflict, Bitcoin rallied 62% to hit new all-time highs, proving that war-related volatility can often act as a local bottom.

3. Early 2026: The Current Landscape

As of February 2026, the market is more fragile. Following a massive liquidation event in late 2025, Bitcoin has been struggling to hold the $65,000–$70,000 range. A US strike on Iran now would likely be a "de-risking" event, where investors seek immediate liquidity.

Why Crypto Drops During War Headlines

There are three primary reasons why crypto prices nosedive when the USA or its allies attack Iran:

• Liquidity Crises: Large hedge funds often sell their most liquid winners (like BTC) to cover margin calls on other failing positions or to move into cash.
• Oil and Inflation: Conflict with Iran often leads to spikes in oil prices. This raises inflation fears, which in turn leads the Federal Reserve to keep interest rates high—a major bearish factor for crypto.
• Regulatory Fears: During wartime, governments often tighten controls on capital flows to prevent "sanctions evasion," which can lead to crackdowns on exchanges.

The Case for the Upside: When Does Bitcoin Rise?

While the initial reaction is bearish, Bitcoin often rises in the medium term during geopolitical conflict for several reasons:

• Capital Flight: In countries directly affected by war or sanctions (like Iran), citizens often turn to Bitcoin to preserve their wealth as their local currency collapses.
• Alternative Financial System: If the conflict leads to the "weaponization" of the US dollar (e.g., cutting countries off from SWIFT), the narrative for a neutral, decentralized currency grows stronger.
• Safe Haven Maturity: As the market matures, more institutional investors may begin to treat Bitcoin like gold, especially if the traditional banking system shows signs of stress during the crisis.

Navigation Strategy for Traders

If the USA attacks Iran in 2026, history suggests we should expect a sharp, painful dip followed by a period of extreme volatility. For long-term holders, these dips have historically been excellent buying opportunities. However, for those using high leverage, such events are often account-ending.

The proposal details how banks, nonbanks and foreign issuers could operate stablecoins under U.S. banking supervision.

The move follows investor exits, asset sales and a retreat from holding Ethereum on the public company's balance sheet.

Online claims have drawn attention to how institutional middlemen hedge Bitcoin ETF shares, exposing a gap between inflows and spot buying.

Reports show both Anthropic and OpenAI are revising safety commitments amid surging investment and competition.

Nvidia’s earnings lifted technology shares and steadied broader markets, even as investors weigh how long the AI investment cycle can run.

Bitwise advisor Jeff Park has warned that a "structurally unsettling" regulatory carve-out may be suppressing the integrity of Bitcoin’s price discovery.

Market's attempt to recover got shut down by elevated exchange inflows of a substantial transition of capital.

Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) has issued a blistering warning against the proposed CLARITY Act.

Bitcoin staged a violent V-shaped recovery on Wednesday, surging back to the $69,500 level and liquidating over $473 million in short positions.

Wikipedia founder Jimmy Wales has predicted that Bitcoin will plummet to under $10,000 by 2050.

TLDR:

• The CFTC issued a prediction markets advisory on February 25, 2026, following two Kalshi enforcement cases.

• A political candidate received a five-year Kalshi ban and a $2,246.36 penalty for trading on his own candidacy.

• A YouTube editor was fined $20,397.58 and suspended two years for trading on material nonpublic information.

• The CFTC confirmed full federal authority to prosecute fraud, insider trading, and manipulation on any DCM platform.

The CFTC Enforcement Division issued a prediction markets advisory on February 25, 2026. The advisory came after two enforcement cases surfaced involving fraudulent trading on KalshiEX, a Designated Contract Market.

Both cases involved misuse of nonpublic information on event contracts, also known as prediction markets. The CFTC used this opportunity to remind market participants that it holds full authority to prosecute illegal trading on any DCM, including Kalshi.

CFTC Confirms Full Authority Over Prediction Market Violations

The CFTC Enforcement Division made its position clear in the advisory released this week. While Kalshi handled both cases through its internal compliance program, the Division stressed it retains independent prosecutorial power.

The agency cited multiple sections of the Commodity Exchange Act to back its authority. This move signals that federal oversight of prediction markets is becoming more active.

The Division pointed to Section 6(c)(1) of the Act as the primary legal basis for action. Regulation 180.1(a)(1) and (3) also applies, covering manipulative schemes and fraudulent conduct.

The CFTC referenced prior enforcement actions, including CFTC v. Clark, to show its track record. These citations reinforce that prediction markets are not beyond the reach of federal law.

The advisory also addressed other prohibited practices beyond insider trading. These include pre-arranged trading, wash sales, and disruptive trading under Section 4c(a).

Fraud and manipulation under various sections of the Act were also listed. The CFTC made clear these rules apply to event contracts just as they do to traditional futures markets.

The Division further noted that DCMs carry an independent duty under Section 5(d) of the Act. This includes maintaining audit trails, conducting market surveillance, and enforcing rules.

The CFTC stated it will continue coordinating with exchanges on enforcement referrals where needed.

Two Kalshi Cases Prompted the CFTC Advisory

The first case involved a political candidate who traded on his own candidacy in May 2025. Social media videos surfaced showing the trades, prompting Kalshi’s compliance team to act immediately.

The trader admitted knowing the trades were improper under Kalshi’s rules. Kalshi imposed a $2,246.36 penalty and a five-year suspension from the exchange.

The CFTC noted this conduct potentially violated prohibitions on manipulative or deceptive trading practices. The candidate’s trades represented a direct conflict of interest with the outcome of the contract.

This type of self-interested trading threatens the integrity of prediction markets. The Division made clear it could have pursued this matter independently.

The second case involved a YouTube channel editor who traded between August and September 2025. The trader placed bets on a prediction market tied to the very channel where they worked.

Kalshi investigated the unusually profitable trades and discovered the employment connection. The trader likely accessed material nonpublic information through their editorial role before videos were published.

Kalshi imposed a $20,397.58 penalty, including $5,397.58 in disgorgement and a $15,000 fine. A two-year suspension from the exchange was also handed down.

The CFTC identified this as a potential misappropriation of confidential information in breach of a duty of trust. The Division’s advisory serves as a formal warning that such conduct on prediction markets carries serious federal consequences.

The post CFTC Enforcement Division Issues Prediction Markets Advisory Following Kalshi Fraud Cases appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Ethereum Foundation researcher Justin Drake proposed roughly seven protocol forks through 2029 on a six-month cadence.

• The EF protocol team targets 1 gigagas/sec L1 throughput via zkEVMs, equating to approximately 10,000 transactions per second.

• High-throughput L2 via data availability sampling aims to support up to 10 million transactions per second across Layer 2 networks.

• The strawmap introduces post-quantum cryptography and native privacy-preserving ETH transfers as long-term first-class protocol goals.

Ethereum Foundation researcher Justin Drake has released a protocol document called the “strawmap,” proposed by the EF protocol team.

The plan outlines roughly seven forks through 2029, operating on a cadence of one upgrade every six months. Five long-term goals anchor the roadmap: faster L1 finality, 1 gigagas/sec throughput, high-throughput L2, post-quantum cryptography, and native privacy-preserving ETH transfers.

Drake Proposes a Six-Month Fork Cadence Through the End of the Decade

Justin Drake, a researcher at the Ethereum Foundation, put forward the strawmap as a technical coordination tool for the EF protocol team.

The document covers seven planned forks stretching from the present through 2029. It was originally drafted during an internal EF workshop held in January 2026 before being shared publicly.

Drake introduced the document on social media, writing that the strawmap is “an invitation to view L1 protocol upgrades through a holistic lens.”

By placing all proposals on a single visual, the EF protocol team aimed to present a unified perspective on Ethereum’s long-term ambitions. The time horizon extends well beyond what All Core Devs typically covers in its near-term planning cycles.

The six-month fork cadence is central to how the EF protocol team structured the strawmap. Each fork is limited to one consensus headliner and one execution headliner to keep the pace manageable.

For example, the upcoming Glamsterdam fork features ePBS and BALs as its two headliners across the respective layers.

Fork names follow a star-based naming convention on the consensus layer, with letters incrementing from Altair onward.

Upcoming forks like Glamsterdam and Hegotá carry confirmed names, while others such as I* and J* remain placeholders.

The roadmap is publicly accessible at strawmap.org and will receive at least quarterly updates as the protocol evolves.

Five Long-Term Goals Shape the EF Protocol Team’s Technical Vision

The five north stars proposed by the EF protocol team define the technical direction through the end of the decade.

Drake described them clearly: faster L1 targeting finality in seconds, 1 gigagas/sec throughput via zkEVMs, high-throughput L2 via data availability sampling, post-quantum cryptography through hash-based schemes, and native privacy-preserving ETH transfers via shielded transactions.

Each goal connects directly to specific upgrade tracks mapped across the consensus, data, and execution layers. The gigagas target of 1 gigagas/sec translates to roughly 10,000 transactions per second on L1.

The teragas L2 goal targets 1 gigabyte per second, supporting approximately 10 million transactions per second across Layer 2 networks.

Post-quantum cryptography addresses the long-term durability of Ethereum’s security model. Hash-based cryptographic schemes are the proposed mechanism for protecting the network against future quantum computing threats. This upgrade track reflects the EF protocol team’s focus on securing Ethereum well beyond the current decade.

Native privacy through shielded ETH transfers rounds out the five goals. The strawmap treats privacy as a first-class protocol feature rather than an application-layer concern.

Drake described the document as a work-in-progress living document, not a formal prediction, but a structured path proposed by the EF protocol team for advancing Ethereum’s core infrastructure.

The post Ethereum Foundation’s Justin Drake Unveils “Strawmap” Roadmap With Seven Forks Planned Through 2029 appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• TRON Academy now partners with 12 top universities, including Oxford, Cambridge, Princeton, and Dartmouth for 2025–2026.
• Student blockchain organizations across partner campuses range from over 100 to more than 2,500 active members each.
• TRON DAO provides students with mentorship, technical resources, and rewards to build real-world blockchain solutions.
• The initiative supports workshops and hybrid events to strengthen blockchain literacy and developer readiness globally.
  

TRON Academy has added four prominent institutions to its growing global academic network. Dartmouth College, Princeton University, Oxford University, and Cambridge University are the newest partners.

These additions come for the 2025–2026 academic year under TRON DAO’s ongoing education initiative. The program already includes Columbia, Harvard, Yale, MIT, Cornell, Imperial College London, and UC Berkeley.

TRON Academy equips students with blockchain resources, mentorship, and technical tools to advance Web3 development.

New Partnerships Extend TRON Academy’s Global Academic Reach

TRON DAO announced the expanded collaborations through its official channels, drawing attention across the blockchain community. The four newly added universities bring fresh geographic and intellectual diversity to the initiative.

Oxford and Cambridge represent two of the most respected academic institutions in the United Kingdom. Princeton and Dartmouth further strengthen the program’s presence across North America.

Each new partner hosts an active student-led blockchain organization with dedicated memberships. These groups range from over 100 to more than 2,500 members per institution.

For the current academic year, TRON Academy has formalized ties with @UniofOxford and @Cambridge_Uni blockchain societies. @Princeton and @Dartmouth College complete the newest wave of additions.

TRON DAO’s Community Spokesperson Sam Elfarra addressed the expansion in an official statement. “University blockchain organizations are playing a critical role in shaping the next generation of Web3 developers and researchers,” Elfarra said.

He added, “Through TRON Academy, we are committed to providing students with access to infrastructure, mentorship, and practical learning opportunities.” These tools are designed to connect academic study directly with real blockchain innovation.

The formalized collaborations will cover workshops, educational events, and career engagement activities. Both in-person and hybrid programming formats are part of the planned structure.

Through these activities, students will build stronger blockchain literacy and developer readiness. The program is structured to create measurable outcomes across all partner campuses.

TRON Academy Connects Emerging Talent to Decentralized System Development

The expansion comes as leading universities increasingly integrate blockchain and emerging technologies into academic programs. More students are now pursuing career paths tied to decentralized finance and digital infrastructure.

TRON Academy meets this growing demand by offering structured access to technical resources and mentorship. The program also includes rewards tied to building practical blockchain solutions.

TRON DAO has steadily broadened its academic engagement through builder programs and research partnerships over time.

The existing network, which includes @Columbia, @Harvard, @Yale University, @MIT, @Cornell University, @ImperialCollege London, and @UCBerkeley, continues to grow.

These fields are expected to play a central role in the future of global digital infrastructure. As adoption grows, demand for trained developers in these areas continues to rise.

The initiative works directly with student-led organizations rather than formal university departments. This approach allows the program to reach communities of actively engaged learners on the ground.

Students apply classroom knowledge to real-world blockchain challenges through structured programming. The model encourages both learning and direct contribution to the decentralized ecosystem.

TRON DAO’s academic network now spans institutions across North America, Europe, and beyond. The continued growth of TRON Academy reflects a broader industry commitment to developer education.

Each new university partnership adds to an expanding pipeline of future Web3 talent. The program positions TRON DAO as a consistent supporter of blockchain’s next generation of builders.

The post TRON DAO Strengthens TRON Academy With Four New University Partnerships for 2025–2026 appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Russia will begin real-world testing of the digital ruble in coordination with the central bank and finance ministry.
• Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin announced the testing plan during a speech before the State Duma.
• Authorities scheduled a phased rollout of the digital ruble starting in September 2026.
• Major banks and large merchants must enable digital ruble payments from the first stage of implementation.
• Smaller banks and companies will have until September 2028 to comply with the new requirements.

Russia has confirmed it will begin real-world testing of the digital ruble soon, according to Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin. He announced the move before the State Duma while lawmakers reviewed the government’s annual report. At the same time, authorities prepared new legislation to legalize cryptocurrencies under strict state control.

Russia Moves Toward Digital Ruble Rollout

Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin said the government will start active testing of the digital ruble shortly. He spoke before the State Duma and outlined coordination with financial authorities.

He said, “Regarding the digital ruble, my colleagues from the Bank of Russia and the Ministry of Finance and I will now begin actively testing it.”

He added that officials must build infrastructure and assess transactions before defining volumes and usage methods.

The Central Bank of Russia created the digital ruble as a central bank digital currency. It represents the third form of national fiat after cash and electronic bank money. The bank launched a limited pilot in August 2023 and involved selected participants. Authorities had planned a public launch for mid-2025, then postponed it to fall 2026 after President Vladimir Putin urged wider adoption.

Officials scheduled a phased introduction beginning September 1, 2026. Major banks and large merchants must offer digital ruble services from that date. Universal banks and firms with annual revenue above 30 million rubles will have one extra year to comply. Smaller institutions and companies must enable transactions by September 1, 2028, while very small retailers remain exempt.

Crypto Legalization Advances Under Strict Controls

Russian authorities have also prepared legislation to regulate decentralized digital assets. The Finance Ministry and the central bank drafted a bill that defines the structure of the domestic crypto market. According to reports, the draft will legalize activities such as investment and trading. The plan follows a central bank proposal published in December to classify cryptocurrencies and stablecoins as monetary assets.

Lawmakers aim to adopt the framework by July 1 under the current timetable. The bill sets a $4,000 cap on crypto purchases for non-qualified investors. It also establishes capital requirements for domestic platforms and strict compliance standards. Global exchanges must register local subsidiaries and store user data inside Russia or face blocking measures.

The regulatory push also affects digital ruble accounts. A February report stated that the Bank of Russia updated rules for opening such accounts. These rules introduce tighter procedures for users and service providers. Authorities continue to align both the CBDC rollout and crypto regulation under a unified legal framework.

The post Russia Begins Digital Ruble Tests With Crypto Limits appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Kraken has launched Flexline, a fixed-rate crypto-backed loan product for Kraken Pro users.
• The loans offer terms ranging from two days to two years with annual rates between 10% and 25%.
• Users can borrow against supported cryptocurrencies without selling their digital assets.
• Kraken holds collateral in segregated wallets and includes it in its Proof of Reserves attestations.
• The platform may liquidate collateral if users breach maintenance requirements or fail to repay on time.

Kraken has launched Flexline, a fixed-rate crypto-backed loan service for Kraken Pro users. The product allows clients to borrow against digital assets without selling them. Kraken said it designed the service for advanced and institutional traders seeking liquidity.

Kraken rolls out Flexline with fixed terms and instant funding

Kraken offers loan terms from two days to two years with fixed annual rates. The platform lists annual percentage rates between 10% and 25%. However, Kraken has not disclosed specific loan-to-value ratios.

Users can post supported cryptocurrencies as collateral and receive funds almost instantly. They can receive proceeds in crypto or stablecoins based on regional eligibility. They can trade or withdraw the funds on the platform where permitted.

Kraken holds collateral in segregated wallets and includes it in Proof of Reserves attestations. The exchange said these attestations verify client assets on a 1:1 basis. Collateral faces liquidation if users breach maintenance requirements or miss repayment at maturity.

Borrowers can repay loans early using their account balances on Kraken Pro. However, Kraken charges an early repayment fee for such actions. The product remains unavailable in several jurisdictions, including the United States and the United Kingdom.

Kraken excludes Australia, Brazil, Canada, India, New Zealand, Switzerland, and the United Arab Emirates. The exchange restricts access based on local regulations and internal compliance standards.

Exchanges and DeFi platforms expand crypto-backed lending services

Coinbase has expanded its own crypto-backed loan product for eligible United States users. It allows borrowing up to $100,000 in USDC against assets such as XRP, Dogecoin, Cardano, and Litecoin.

The company lets users access liquidity without selling their tokens. It supports multiple digital assets as collateral under the updated program.

Outside exchanges, mortgage lender Rate has introduced a program called RateFi. The initiative allows qualified borrowers to use verified cryptocurrency holdings during underwriting.

Rate permits digital assets to count as reserves and sometimes as income. Borrowers can therefore avoid liquidating their holdings to meet requirements.

Decentralized finance lending protocols also continue to grow in total value locked. Data from DefiLlama shows about $51.9 billion locked across DeFi lending markets.

Active borrowing across these protocols stands near $30.8 billion, according to the same data. Aave holds nearly $26.9 billion in total value locked.

Morpho follows with around $5.8 billion in total value locked. On Feb. 15, Apollo Global Management partnered with Morpho to support blockchain-based lending infrastructure.

Apollo said it could acquire up to 90 million MORPHO tokens under the agreement. The asset manager oversees about $940 billion in assets.

The post Kraken Launches Flexline Crypto Loans for Pro Users appeared first on Blockonomi.

Crypto markets have seen a rare green day with a 3.7% gain in total capitalization, which has increased by around $120 billion to $2.43 trillion.

“Just two days after the crowd was bracing itself with a $60,000 retest, Bitcoin is now on the verge of returning back above $70,000,” commented Santiment on Thursday.

“The bullish narrative has predictably returned,” and the crowd has begun to “flip into FафOMO mode,” it added.

Bitcoin only briefly tapped $70,000 before retreating to $68,000 at the time of writing, so it may have been a bull trap.

Just 2 days after the crowd was bracing itself with a $60K retest, Bitcoin is now on the verge of returning back above $70K. The bullish narrative has predictably returned. In this chart:

High blue spikes indicate major predictions of $BTC moving lower. When retail sells,… pic.twitter.com/ymoAhv4GD2

— Santiment (@santimentfeed) February 25, 2026

Bitcoin Bull Trap and Relief Rally

“Bitcoin has just entered the final bull trap of this cycle,” said analyst Chiefy, who added that charts are “literally mirroring the 2022 chart right now.” They predicted that BTC would dump to $44,000 in ten days.

A bull trap is a false bullish signal in trading when an asset is in a downtrend, and the price suddenly rallies upward, showing signs of reversal, and luring in bullish traders before the price resumes its downtrend, forcing them to sell. This rise in Bitcoin “is just a relief rally,” said CryptoQuant analyst ‘PelinayPA.’

She pointed out that the Fund Flow Ratio, which measures the amount of BTC flowing into Binance relative to the total held on the exchange, remains at a low level of 0.012.

“A low ratio means fewer BTC are being sent to the exchange. This weakens immediate sell-side supply pressure,” she explained.

This setup may slow the downside momentum and “pave the way for a relief rally,” she added.

“In particular, if the ratio remains low, any upward price reaction could create the conditions for a strong short squeeze. In other words, be prepared for a relief bounce.”

Jane Street Suit Ends Manipulation

Analyst ‘Bull Theory’ had a different take. Since Jane Street was sued and manipulation stopped, the crypto market has added over $200 billion in just 48 hours, they said.

“For the first time in two months, no relentless selling has been seen for two consecutive days.”

“Whether it’s Jane Street constantly manipulating the markets,” or the “gamma play on options,” or the correlation with the software companies that have been pushing down Bitcoin prices, “it doesn’t matter,” said MN Fund founder Michaël van de Poppe.

“The current valuation of Bitcoin is extremely low.”

The post Bullish Sentiment Returns as BTC Nears $70K But Is it a Bull Trap?  appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitwise’s Chief Investment Officer Matt Hougan believes there is a fundamental disconnect between perception and reality in the crypto market. He argued that investors often misinterpret what is truly happening because behavioral biases, particularly anchoring bias, distort their view.

Anchoring bias, the tendency to fixate on the first piece of information encountered, shapes how people evaluate opportunities. This leads them to overweight initial impressions even when new evidence emerges. Hougan stated that this factor played a key role in his own entry into crypto in 2018.

Tokenization Is Exploding

In his latest memo, Hougan stressed that Wall Street is moving on-chain and pointed to several concrete developments. Paul Atkins launched “Project Crypto,” a commission-wide initiative aimed at modernizing securities regulation so that US markets can operate on-chain. Larry Fink said the industry is entering the early stages of tokenizing all assets. BlackRock followed that view by launching its $2 billion BUIDL tokenized Treasury fund on Uniswap. Apollo tokenized its $700 billion Diversified Credit Fund across six blockchains and announced plans to acquire a stake in Morpho.

Additionally, major banks, such as JPMorgan, Bank of America, Citigroup, and Wells Fargo, are discussing a joint stablecoin. JPMorgan has already launched a deposit token on Base. Fidelity is hiring a DeFi vaults manager.

Despite these initiatives, the Bitwise exec said that traditional investors fail to register these changes. Even crypto investors themselves, he added, exhibit fatigue from repeated claims of institutional adoption. Data, however, tells a different story.

Where Does the Value Go?

Tokenized real-world assets have grown sharply from 2020 to 2025. Hougan warned that while the opportunity is clear, the exact path to capture it is uncertain. Questions remain about whether value from tokenization will accrue to public Layer 1 networks like Ethereum and Solana, to quasi-private blockchains such as Canton Network and Tempo, to DeFi tokens, or to companies building in the ecosystem, including incumbents like BlackRock and JPMorgan, versus crypto-native firms.

“The biggest alpha opportunities come when the consensus narrative is stale and reality has moved on, but investors are still anchored on the old story. That’s exactly where we are with crypto today. “

Meanwhile, crypto analytics platform Presto Research expects tokenization to be a central driver of crypto’s next institutional phase. In its 2026 outlook, the firm projected that the combined value of tokenized real-world assets and stablecoins will approach $490 billion by the end of 2026.

The report also observed that growth will be fueled by demand for tokenized US Treasury bills and credit instruments.

The post Wall Street Is Going On-Chain, And Investors Still Don’t Get It, Says Bitwise CIO appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitcoin’s Stablecoin Supply Ratio (SSR) has dropped to 9.36, a level historically associated with significant buying power waiting on the sidelines, but on-chain data shows this metric is flashing a false signal.

According to analyst Axel Adler Jr., the decline is being driven by capital leaving the ecosystem rather than stablecoin accumulation, which fundamentally alters how investors interpret this classic bullish indicator.

Liquidity Drain, Not Dry Powder

The SSR measures Bitcoin’s market capitalization against total stablecoin supply, with lower readings traditionally suggesting ample stablecoin liquidity available to purchase BTC. However, current conditions tell a different story.

In a February 25 brief, Adler pointed out that USDT capitalization peaked at $187.2 billion on December 30, 2025, and has since contracted to $183.6 billion, a $3.6 billion outflow over 60 days. Additionally, the 30-day change has remained negative for 34 consecutive days, now sitting at -$3.08 billion.

This matters because SSR’s mathematical decline stems from both components weakening simultaneously. Bitcoin’s market cap has dropped roughly 27% during this period, while stablecoin supply also contracted.

“Technically SSR falls mathematically because BTC market cap has collapsed, but the simultaneous contraction of USDT strips this signal of any bullish potential,” Adler explained.

The Estimated Leverage Ratio confirms the structural weakness, remaining flat around 0.219 across all exchanges for 90 days despite Bitcoin’s sharp correction. This plateau indicates speculative capital isn’t adding new risk, but crucially, isn’t shedding old risk either, thus creating potential for cascading liquidations on further downside.

Aged Supply, Absent Buyers

Bitcoin’s recent price action reflects the fragility described above, with the asset briefly falling below $63,000 on February 24 before recovering to current levels around $65,400. This price represents a dip of more than 25% across the last 30 days and nearly 27% over one year.

HODL Waves data published recently also revealed a defensive market structure beneath the price action. Coins last moved 3 to 6 months ago now comprise approximately 26% of the circulating supply, up from 19% earlier this month.

These correspond to purchases near the November 2025 peak above $120,000, now held at a loss. Meanwhile, the 6 to 12 month cohort has grown to about 20%, while coins moved within the past month account for less than 10% of supply.

Furthermore, the Realized Cap Net Position Change confirms capital exiting the network, standing at -2.26% over 30 days with $33 billion in value compression since late November.

The distinction between SSR decline through outflow versus accumulation carries real implications. According to Adler, for a genuine trend reversal, two things must happen at the same time: the 30-day USDT change returning to sustained positive territory (confirming fresh capital inflow) and ELR beginning to rise during price stabilization. Until then, the analyst says Bitcoin’s low SSR represents not opportunity, but the mathematical residue of capital departure.

The post Bitcoin’s Dry Powder Myth Busted: Outflows – Not Buyers – Driving Low SSR appeared first on CryptoPotato.

The second-largest cryptocurrency hasn’t been at its best lately, plummeting by double digits over the last 30 days and trading far below its all-time high of almost $5,000 witnessed in the summer of 2025.

However, the past 24 hours brought some hope for the bulls, as ETH rocketed from $1,800 to over $2,000. Some market observers believe a more profound rebound could be on the way, while others think the valuation has yet to reach its bottom.

Rally Soon?

Ethereum (ETH) has soared by over 10% daily, currently trading above the $2,000 psychological zone. However, it remains 30% down on a monthly scale, while its market capitalization has shrunk to approximately $237 billion.

Despite the major correction, many analysts remain optimistic. X user KALEO observed the asset’s recent performance and argued that it might be on the verge of a bounce. They assumed that ETH has formed a “clean double bottom off HTF support” and may be ready to spike above $2K.

“More FUD than I’ve ever seen on the timeline. Send it with haste,” the analyst added.

Merlijn The Trader also chipped in lately. He claimed that ETH is sitting in a five-year demand zone, emphasizing that this area has historically acted as a place where investors accumulate rather than distribute.

“You don’t need the exact bottom. You need exposure before expansion. Big bases don’t drift. They reprice,” he stated.

X user StockTrader_Max shared a similar thesis, arguing that ETH has evolved into “a long-term investment with slower, steadier growth that rewards patience and conviction rather than hype and timing.” The analyst believes the asset should be held in many portfolios, with a time horizon of years rather than months.

Meanwhile, some industry participants noted that whales have been quite active lately and increased their exposure to ETH. X user Crypto Rover shared a CryptoQuant chart, showing that large investors now own over 24 million tokens, or more than 20% of Ethereum’s circulating supply.

Whales’ activity is closely monitored by smaller players who might mimic their moves and enter the ecosystem with fresh capital. Additionally, it is commonly believed that large investors rarely make irrational purchases and may have inside information about upcoming events that could influence valuation.

Last but not least, ETH’s exchange reserves remain quite close to the nearly 10-year low recorded earlier this month. This trend shows that investors don’t rush to transfer their holdings to centralized platforms: a move often considered a pre-sale step, and which can cause an additional price slump.

Are the Bears Here to Stay?

Many other analysts presented rather pessimistic views on the matter. X user Crypto Tony warned of new lows if the price plunges below $1,820, describing that level as “the last line of defence.” They later argued that if the bulls decisively reclaim $1,940, then “we are back in business.”

Ali Martinez and Lucky also gave their two cents. The former claimed that the next major support levels for ETH, should it break below $1,800, are $1,584, $1,238, and $1.089.

The asset’s Relative Strength Index (RSI) is another bearish factor to watch. Due to the price rebound experienced over the past hours, the tool’s ratio has risen above 70, signaling that ETH is overbought and could be due for a correction. The RSI is an important metric often used by traders, and conversely, anything below 30 is considered a buying opportunity.

The post Top Ethereum Price Predictions as ETH Reclaims $2K appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Ripple CTO David Schwartz has said that the XRP Ledger (XRPL) was deliberately designed so that neither the company nor any single entity could control it.

His remarks came hours after Cyber Capital founder Justin Bons argued that XRPL is effectively permissioned and centralized, with the exchange cutting to a long-running debate in crypto over what decentralization actually means and whether validator lists amount to hidden control.

Clash Over Control and the Unique Node List

Bons wrote in a February 24 thread on X that networks such as Ripple, Stellar, Hedera, Canton, and Algorand rely on permissioned elements. He claimed XRPL’s Unique Node List, or UNL, gives Ripple and its foundation “absolute power and control over the chain,” arguing that divergence from the published list could cause a fork.

However, Schwartz rejected that characterization, calling it “objectively nonsensical.” He said XRPL nodes individually decide which validators to trust and will not agree to double-spends or censorship unless their operators explicitly choose to.

If a validator attempts to censor or double-spend, “an honest node would just count it as one validator that it did not agree with,” he wrote.

However, Schwartz acknowledged that validators could conspire to halt the chain from the perspective of honest nodes but said they could not force double-spends. In such a case, node operators could switch to a different UNL, which he compared to changing the mining algorithm in Bitcoin after a majority attack.

The XRPL co-architect also addressed regulatory pressure, noting that Ripple must comply with U.S. court orders and cannot refuse them. For that reason, he argued, XRPL was intentionally built so that Ripple itself could not censor transactions.

“The best way to be able to say ‘no’ is to have to say ‘no’ because you cannot do the thing asked,” Schwartz wrote.

Regulatory Pressures and Network Resilience

The exchange comes as XRPL activity metrics have shown significant declines, with analyst Arthur reporting on February 23 that active users fell to roughly 38,000 from more than 200,000, while payment volume dropped to about 80 million XRP from over 2.5 billion.

However, the on-chain observer attributed the drop to the February 18 activation of XLS-81, a permissioned decentralized exchange system that moves institutional transactions off public dashboards.

Questions about validator power also surfaced late last year, when Schwartz proposed a two-tier staking model intended to add rewards without concentrating influence in Ripple’s hands. The idea involved a separate governance token to manage validator lists, with the option to fork if governance failed.

For now, the February 25 exchange highlights a familiar divide. Critics argue that publishing validator lists creates soft control, even if anyone can technically run a node. However, Schwartz maintains that XRPL’s consensus model was built to limit the power of validators and companies alike, even if that means Ripple itself cannot intervene when pressured.

The post Ripple CTO Details Why XRPL Prevents Any Single Entity from Owning the Chain appeared first on CryptoPotato.