Rising UK gilt yields amid external pressures may prompt the Bank of England to consider rate hikes, impacting economic growth and borrowing.

The post UK 10-year gilt yield rises amid higher oil prices, US Treasury yields appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Power infrastructure delays could slow AI advancements, potentially prompting regulatory actions and impacting market dynamics significantly.

The post Goldman Sachs warns power delays may hinder AI data center growth appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The interception highlights persistent regional tensions, potentially prompting stricter airspace security measures and impacting market perceptions.

The post Saudi-led coalition intercepts Houthi missile targeting Riyadh appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Enhanced AI governance in FX markets could mitigate risks like volatility spikes but may also challenge liquidity and trading efficiency.

The post FX market tightens AI governance as autonomous trading spreads appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The incident underscores the critical importance of robust randomness in cryptographic systems, highlighting vulnerabilities in seed generation.

The post SlowMist traces Qubic wallet theft to weak randomness in seed generation appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Now Accepting Bitcoin: Gyros, Cocas, and 219 Arizona Bitcoin Merchants

In 2025 the state government passed a Strategic Arizona Bitcoin Reserve, but I understand the state still hasn’t bought any coins. We can’t wait for the government to use bitcoin before we use it, or it will never happen.

The question is, can a normal person walk into a shop and pay with bitcoin? I have some friends in Scottsdale who have never used bitcoin in real life, so I asked them to test it. I recommended downloading a lightning wallet, sent them some satoshis, and sent them the BTC Map. They were surprised how easy it was to download a wallet and move satoshis across the internet; it felt very natural and how money should be, they said.

First Stop: Pita Cafe (23535 N Scottsdale Rd #102, Scottsdale, AZ 85255)

Their first stop was Pita Cafe, a Mediterranean spot attached to Scottsdale Burger Bar. Both accept bitcoin. My friends came back raving about the food: everything is made fresh to order, and they say to get the spanakopita and the gyro pita. The place was packed at lunch, but service stayed fast with plenty of seating.

The cashier wasn’t sure at first whether they took bitcoin. Then he noticed the Square terminal was already set up for it, and the payment went through quickly. It was his first time seeing customers pay in bitcoin, and he was excited about it. My friends also told me he looked at the amount on the screen and said he was shocked that they’d just paid “22,000 bitcoin”. They walked out feeling like royalty.

Next Up Echo Coffee (2902 N 68th Street, Ste. 135 Scottsdale, Arizona 85251)

Next they got hot cocoa at Echo Coffee. This cashier didn’t need to figure anything out. She knew they accepted bitcoin, switched the terminal over, and asked my friend to scan the QR code. She told them she thinks it’s super cool every time someone asks about it. Echo also donates 1% of purchases to the humane society, and the coffee bags have puppies on them. 

Why this matters

It’s a blast to send your loved ones out to a store along with some bitcoin to spend. Some friends already have bitcoin in investment portfolios, but the act of spending btc for tangible items shows what this movement is all about. 

As always, a growing directory of over 219 verified Bitcoin-accepting merchants across Arizona is listed below. If you want your business added to the list, or if you have a new city and story to feature in an upcoming column, write directly to vagabond@b.tc.

Appendix of 219 Arizona Bitcoin Merchants (Source BTC MAP)

Coffee Shops & Cafés

• Beal Beans — 509 West Hatcher Road, Phoenix, AZ 85021
• Beal Beans — 5757 N Central Ave, Phoenix, AZ 85012
• Bobaholic Milk Tea Lounge — 6135 North 35th Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85017
• The Buzzed Goat — 2795 South Market Street, Gilbert, AZ 85295
• The Buzzed Goat — 3415 South McClintock Drive, Tempe, AZ 85282
• The Buzzed Goat — 4302 East Ray Road, Phoenix, AZ 85044
• Cactus Coffee Works — 971 North Jason Lopez Circle, Florence, AZ 85132
• Echo Coffee — 2902 North 68th Street, Scottsdale, AZ 85251
• Good News Phoenix — 1306 East Van Buren Street, Phoenix, AZ 85006-3438
• Piccola Casa Internacional — 2200 El Mercado Loop, Sierra Vista, AZ 85635-5215
• Stemistry — 618 East Adams Street, Phoenix, AZ 85004-2351
• Stemistry — 6601 East McDowell Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85257-3164
• Sweet Sage Coffee Co. — 15 North Central Street, Colorado City, AZ 86021
• Wildcraft Kitchen — 345 Jordan Road, Sedona, AZ 86336
• Writer’s Block Coffee Shop — 17212 North Scottsdale Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85255-9615

Restaurants & Quick Bites

• All Pierogi Kitchen Restaurant & Euro Market — 1245 West Baseline Road, Mesa, AZ 85202-5824
• Best Life Nutrition — 4158 Goldwater Boulevard, Scottsdale, AZ 85251-3816
• Black Mountain Bistro & Bar — 1595 Mohave Drive, Bullhead City, AZ 86442-3724
• Born’s Best Sandwiches — 2231 McCulloch Boulevard North, Lake Havasu City, AZ 86403
• Cilantros Mexican Cocina — 20928 North John Wayne Parkway, Maricopa, AZ 85139-2924
• Don Guerra’s Barrio Bagel & Slice — 689 North Arizona Avenue, Gilbert, AZ 85233-3414
• Dos Gordos Grill — 3552 West Baseline Road, Laveen, AZ 85339-3042
• Foch — 21 East 6th Street, Tempe, AZ 85281
• Gadzooks Enchiladas and Soup — 3150 East Ray Road, Gilbert, AZ 85296-1229
• Gadzooks Enchiladas and Soup — 3313 North 7th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85014-5433
• Galaxy MunchBox — 11701 West Glendale Avenue, Glendale, AZ 85307-2601
• Galaxy MunchBox — 701 West Beloat Road, Buckeye, AZ 85326
• George’s Famous Gyros & Pasta — 20206 North 27th Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85027
• George’s Famous Gyros & Pasta — 7620 East McKellips Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85258
• Haritz Ona — 6061 East Cave Creek Road, Cave Creek, AZ 85331-8517
• Knuckle Sandwiches — 1140 North Higley Road, Mesa, AZ 85205
• Lazy E Grill — 7107 South Nucci Lane, Hereford, AZ 85615-9206
• Local Juicery — 3150 West State Route 89A, Sedona, AZ 86336
• Lollygag Waffles and Drinks — 13060 West Bell Road, Surprise, AZ 85378-1200
• Mancuso’s Restaurant — 201 East Washington Street, Phoenix, AZ 85004-2428
• One Hot Mess — 683 North Main Street, Eagar, AZ 85925
• Pita Cafe — 23535 North Scottsdale Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85255
• Riot Grill — 405 East American Avenue, Oracle, AZ 85623-6119
• Scottsdale Burger Bar — 23535 North Scottsdale Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85255
• Seattle Fish House — 4419 East Main Street, Mesa, AZ 85205-7900
• Sonson’s Pasty — 1430 West Warner Road, Gilbert, AZ 85233-7039
• Soup & Sausage Bistro — 13240 North 7th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85022-5309
• Soup & Sausage Bistro — 4030 East Bell Road, Phoenix, AZ 85032-2299
• Stoop Kid — 901 North 1st Street, Phoenix, AZ 85004-2140

Bakeries, Sweets & Desserts

• Chocolita — 2710 North Steves Boulevard, Flagstaff, AZ 86004
• Chocolita Downtown — 123 South San Francisco Street, Flagstaff, AZ 86001
• Cookie Brokers Bakery of Phoenix — 3931 East Indian School Road, Phoenix, AZ 85018
• The Gelato Tavern — 343 East Monroe Avenue, Buckeye, AZ 85326-2705
• Keto Keto Carnivore — 713 East Andy Devine Avenue, Kingman, AZ 86401
• Layla’s Bakery — 3190 State Route 89A, Sedona, AZ 86336
• Nite Creamery — 17865 West Bell Road, Surprise, AZ 85374-3108
• Nite Creamery — 922 East Apache Boulevard, Tempe, AZ 85281-6170
• Scooptacular — 4730 East Indian School Road, Phoenix, AZ 85018
• Scooptacular — 5150 West Baseline Road, Laveen, AZ 85339
• Sweet Amore Creations — 1850 McCulloch Boulevard North, Lake Havasu City, AZ 86403-5797
• Twisted Cultures Yogurt Shop — 9240 West Northern Avenue, Peoria, AZ 85305
• Udder Delights — 1385 East Warner Road, Gilbert, AZ 85296

Bars, Breweries & Lounges

• Alcove Wine, Beer & Provisions — 1002 East Pierce Street, Phoenix, AZ 85006-3784
• Founding Fathers Collective — 218 North Granite Street, Prescott, AZ 86301
• Lochiel Brewing — 7143 East Southern Avenue, Mesa, AZ 85209
• O’Leary’s Pub — 1063 Highway 95, Bullhead City, AZ 86429-5202
• Rancho Silverado — 4809 North 27th Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85017-3540
• Sahara Hookah Lounge — 6333 North 59th Avenue, Glendale, AZ 85301
• Wilhelm Family Vineyards — 21 Mountain Ranch Drive, Elgin, AZ 85611-7321

Groceries & Specialty Food

• Hive Grab N Go — 425 South Mill Avenue, Tempe, AZ 85281-2803
• Los Primos Meat Market — 2510 East Hunt Highway, San Tan Valley, AZ 85143
• Red Ridge Farm — 1000 East Hall Street, Show Low, AZ 85937
• TNT Nutrition — 1418 West 2nd Street, Winslow, AZ 86047
• Water and Ice Arizona — 940 North Alma School Road, Chandler, AZ 85224

Barbers & Hair Salons

• Barber Supply — 3825 North 75th Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85033-3738
• Brooklyn’z Barbershop — 1800 West Bethany Home Road, Phoenix, AZ 85015
• CaveCutz — 4451 South White Mountain Road, Show Low, AZ 85901
• Dallas Taylor Hair — 13802 Scottsdale Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85254-3459
• Daniel Rausch at Ashten’s Salon — 1141 East Cooley Street, Show Low, AZ 85901
• Erika Starr Hair — 4933 East Ray Road, Phoenix, AZ 85044
• FadezCostaFeez — 4500 North Oracle Road, Tucson, AZ 85705
• Famoso Cutz Barber Studio — 101 South La Cañada Drive, Green Valley, AZ 85614
• Hair by Sheila — 2594 East Canyon Crest Street, Sierra Vista, AZ 85650
• Headquarters Barbershop — 9393 90th Street, Scottsdale, AZ 85258-5041
• HH Hair Harmoney — 381 Commercial Way, Chino Valley, AZ 86323
• Indielocks — 4251 North Winfield Scott Plaza, Scottsdale, AZ 85251
• Jessica Sisko Hair — 10636 North 71st Place, Scottsdale, AZ 85254
• Kopper Blonde Company at Salon Lofts — 15323 North Scottsdale Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85254-2676
• LuvieStyles — 2923 North 67th Place, Scottsdale, AZ 85251
• The Manner Barbershop — 4251 Brown Avenue, Scottsdale, AZ 85251
• Michaelangel The Barber — 4302 East Ray Road, Phoenix, AZ 85044
• Michaelangel The Barber — 4933 East Ray Road, Phoenix, AZ 85044-6420
• OutKast Barbershop — 10855 North 116th Street, Scottsdale, AZ 85259
• Payán Styles — 310 North Dobson Road, Mesa, AZ 85201
• Pikasso Barber Shop — 914 East Camelback Road, Phoenix, AZ 85014
• Queen Creek Barber Shop and Salon — 20827 East Ocotillo Road, Queen Creek, AZ 85142
• RookieFresh Barbershop — 10540 West Indian School Road, Phoenix, AZ 85037
• Salon Suede — 7309 East Stetson Drive, Scottsdale, AZ 85251
• Sophisticated Cuts Barbershop — 4120 South 6th Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85714
• Styles by Sol at The Remedy Beauty Lounge — 81 South McQueen Road, Gilbert, AZ 85233
• Sunny’s Barbershop — 8745 East Broadway Boulevard, Tucson, AZ 85710
• Surgeon Cuts Barbershop — 1201 West Iron Springs Road, Prescott, AZ 86305-1443
• Surgeon Cuts Barbershop — 2700 South Woodlands Village Boulevard, Flagstaff, AZ 86001-2935
• TikiStylez Hair Care — 3163 South McClintock Drive, Tempe, AZ 85282
• The Urban Shave — 824 West Route 66, Flagstaff, AZ 86001
• Xavier’s Barber Shop — 1185 South 4th Avenue, Yuma, AZ 85364-8426

Beauty, Spa & Body Art

• All Seasons Beauty Bar — 11838 South Foothills Boulevard, Yuma, AZ 85367
• Aromatouch by Caitlin — 7850 North Silverbell Road, Tucson, AZ 85743
• Big Time Beauty — 15224 North 59th Avenue, Glendale, AZ 85306
• Blue Sage Day Spa — 60 Stutz Bearcat Drive, Sedona, AZ 86336
• Dan Duke Body Piercing Artist — 217 South San Francisco Street, Flagstaff, AZ 86001
• Dr33ds and Braids — 822 East Indian School Road, Phoenix, AZ 85014-4628
• Eric’s Electrolysis — 930 North Switzer Canyon Drive, Flagstaff, AZ 86001
• Ethereal Esthetics — 6522 East Carondelet Drive, Tucson, AZ 85710
• Kiss Kreations Permanent Makeup — 123 East Baseline Road, Tempe, AZ 85283
• Kiss Kreations Permanent Makeup — 3450 West Chandler Boulevard, Chandler, AZ 85226
• Lucky Prick Tattoo — 2948 East Bell Road, Phoenix, AZ 85032
• Massageworks — 1865 Paseo San Luis, Sierra Vista, AZ 85635
• Premier Wellness — 2394 East Camelback Road, Phoenix, AZ 85016-3464
• Pure Blue Massage — 16551 North Dysart Road, Surprise, AZ 85378
• Serenity Lounge Massage — 177 North Church Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85701
• Simply Divine Massage — 18775 North Reems Road, Surprise, AZ 85374-8647
• Skin Results — 5115 Scottsdale Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85250
• Your Brow Bar — 4515 North 16th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85016

Health & Wellness

• Antheas Healing Hands — 10505 North 69th Street, Scottsdale, AZ 85254
• Ascend Spiritual Center — 671 State Route 179, Sedona, AZ 86336
• AZ IV Medics — 14891 North Northsight Boulevard, Scottsdale, AZ 85260
• Blissful Health Haven — 2235 South State Route 89, Chino Valley, AZ 86323
• Desert Mountain Medical and Chiropractic — 21321 East Ocotillo Road, Queen Creek, AZ 85142-5994
• Flagstaff Osteopathy — 2708 North Fourth Street, Flagstaff, AZ 86004
• Harmonizing Healthcare — 2405 North Rose Street, Flagstaff, AZ 86004
• Healing Journey Acupuncture – Julie K Laffen, L.Ac. — 855 East Brown Road, Mesa, AZ 85203
• Parkside Dental Health — 5865 West Ray Road, Chandler, AZ 85226-1881
• Pifer Psychology — 2230 East Speedway Boulevard, Tucson, AZ 85719
• Psych Assist — 405 West Main Street, Payson, AZ 85541
• Real Health Regenerative Medicine — 9364 East Raintree Drive, Scottsdale, AZ 85260
• Western Glow — 2123 Sunset Point, Globe, AZ 85501

Fitness & Martial Arts

• Body Focus Fitness & Performance — 8400 South Kyrene Road, Tempe, AZ 85284
• Immortal Kung Fu — North Wilmot Road, Tucson, AZ 85710
• Scottsdale Boxing Club — 10427 North Scottsdale Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85253-1440
• Those Guys Fitness – CrossFit Shokunin — 2850 East Main Street, Mesa, AZ 85213

Shopping & Retail

• Alter Up — 3111 West Chandler Boulevard, Chandler, AZ 85226
• Art Paint Draw — 830 South Main Street, Cottonwood, AZ 86326
• AZ Cleaning Supplies — 2435 South 11th Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85007
• B&R African Styles — 6719 West Thomas Road, Phoenix, AZ 85033
• Blue Gecko Gardens — 15521 West Blue Gecko Place, Tucson, AZ 85736
• Brio Jewelry — 414 South Mill Avenue, Tempe, AZ 85281
• Deer Valley Collectibles — 42211 North 41st Drive, Phoenix, AZ 85086
• Desert Rat Games — 118 East Florence Boulevard, Casa Grande, AZ 85122-4052
• Dog-Eared Pages Used Books — 16428 North 32nd Street, Phoenix, AZ 85032
• Finer Custom Engagement Rings and Diamonds — 4211 North Winfield Scott Plaza, Scottsdale, AZ 85251
• Firearms Unknown — 801 West 32nd Street, Yuma, AZ 85364
• Gifted Delights — 810 Gemstone Avenue, Bullhead City, AZ 86442-6477
• Goliath Fuel — 7303 Hawes Road, Mesa, AZ 85212
• Import Corner — 9000 East Government Way, Kingman, AZ 86401
• The Kallie Edit — 455 North 3rd Street, Phoenix, AZ 85004-3924
• Mel’s Bisbee Bodega — 2 Main Street, Bisbee, AZ 85603
• Mr.E Comics — 1855 West Greenway Road, Phoenix, AZ 85023-3475
• Mr.E Comics — 20800 North John Wayne Parkway, Maricopa, AZ 85139-2728
• NEST Home Decor & Gifts — 1450 East White Mountain Boulevard, Pinetop, AZ 85935-7091
• Next Block Vending — 450 West Cool Drive, Tucson, AZ 85737
• Next Block Vending — 475 North Granada Ave, Tucson, AZ 85701
• The Plant Mill — 51 West Vaughn Avenue, Gilbert, AZ 85234
• The Plant Mill — 518 South Mill Avenue, Tempe, AZ 85281
• The Puzzle Shop — 110 South Montezuma Street, Prescott, AZ 86303-4734
• Simple Pure CBD — 18255 North 83rd Avenue, Glendale, AZ 85308-0515
• T-Shirt Plug Az — 7537 West Thomas Road, Phoenix, AZ 85033-5445
• Tropica Botanical Nursery — 10520 East Apache Trail, Apache Junction, AZ 85120-3330
• Visions — 1 Ok Street, Bisbee, AZ 85603-1061
• Wanted in Jerome — 110 Main Street, Jerome, AZ 86331
• Zenith Vape & CBD — 1800 East Fort Lowell Road, Tucson, AZ 85719-2390
• Zenith Vape & CBD — 1996 East Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714-1807
• Zenith Vape & CBD — 3280 South Camino del Sol, Green Valley, AZ 85622-4649
• Zenith Vape & CBD — 3655 North Oracle Road, Tucson, AZ 85705-3270
• Zenith Vape & CBD — 4572 East Broadway Boulevard, Tucson, AZ 85711-3510

Automotive

• Aeon Fives — 1329 North 29th Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85009
• All Valley Powder Coating Services — 23449 North 35th Drive, Glendale, AZ 85310
• BBB Motorwërks – A Revline Motorsports Company — 4818 South 40th Place, Phoenix, AZ 85040
• Dave’s Auto Refinishing — 3150 East Ajo Way, Tucson, AZ 85713
• David & Sons Collisions — 2604 North 36th Street, Phoenix, AZ 85008
• Desert Tint — 1660 South Research Loop, Tucson, AZ 85710-6737
• Don Licho’s Tire Shop — 843 West Highway 92, Bisbee, AZ 85603-9769
• Easy Auto Rents — 1642 North McCulloch Boulevard, Lake Havasu City, AZ 86403
• FineDetailing — 7900 East Greenway Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85260-1713
• King Garcia Auto Detail — 702 West Melinda Lane, Phoenix, AZ 85027
• Magnum Truck Gear — 9800 North 91st Avenue, Peoria, AZ 85345
• Viper Automotive — 1402 East Fair Street, Tucson, AZ 85714
• World of Racing — 3227 East Bell Road, Phoenix, AZ 85032-2700
• The Wrap Room — 2140 East 5th Street, Tempe, AZ 85281

Tech & Electronics

• Baker Amps — 2636 West Baseline Road, Mesa, AZ 85202
• Computer Nerds — 2404 Stockton Hill Road, Kingman, AZ 86401
• Computer Nerds — 2840 AZ 95, Bullhead City, AZ 86442
• Electronic Solutions — 3818 South 6th Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85714
• LJJM Tech — 2310 North Wyatt Drive, Tucson, AZ 85712
• Quik Fix Repair — 245 South Wilmot Road, Tucson, AZ 85711
• Quik Fix Repair — 2843 North Campbell Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85719
• Quik Fix Repair — 702 West Irvington Road, Tucson, AZ 85714

Home Services & Trades

• Air Conditioning Associates — 150 South Camino Seco, Tucson, AZ 85710
• Andrews Lock & Key — 65 South Sycamore, Mesa, AZ 85202-1143
• Brenovations HVAC — 3210 South Dodge Boulevard, Tucson, AZ 85713
• Clean Geeks Cleaning Services — 13444 North 32nd Street, Phoenix, AZ 85032
• Click and Done Home Services — 4150 West Northern Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85051-5781
• Gover Property Management
• Jay Lewis Architectural Design — Goodyear, AZ 85338
• Pest Control Bros — 40110 West Wade Drive, Maricopa, AZ 85138-2742
• True Tucson Woodworks — 3075 West Placita del Pasillo, Tucson, AZ 85746

Professional & Business Services

• Beyond Attorneys — 7014 East Camelback Road, Scottsdale, AZ 85251-1247
• Box & Tape | Aerocav — 2820 East University Drive, Mesa, AZ 85213-8546
• The Map Lady — 31 North 6th Avenue, Tucson, AZ 85701-1503
• Photography Is Unique — 2941 West Indian School Road, Phoenix, AZ 85017
• Property Clicks Media — 3550 North Goldwater Boulevard, Scottsdale, AZ 85251-5538
• Salvador Ongaro Law Offices — 320 East McDowell Road, Phoenix, AZ 85004
• Saving Lives CPR — 8805 West Union Hills Drive, Peoria, AZ 85382
• Strap Film Lab — 1301 Grand Avenue, Phoenix, AZ 85007
• Strap Film Lab — 36 South Robson, Mesa, AZ 85201
• Terrace Mail – Tu Dirección Segura — 82 North Terrace Avenue, Nogales, AZ 85621
• Waypoint Creative — 1 West Elliot Road, Tempe, AZ 85284

Pets

• Oh My Dog! — 7137 East Stetson Drive, Scottsdale, AZ 85251
• The Pet Clinic — 725 East Main Street, Somerton, AZ 85350
• See Ash Go Dog Training — 25817 South Mandarin Drive, Queen Creek, AZ 85142-9463

Entertainment & Community

• Cochise Harm Reduction — 1556 South Naco Highway, Bisbee, AZ 85603
• Heritage Amusements — 6555 East Southern Avenue, Mesa, AZ 85206-3718
• Iglesia Vida — 3002 North Arizona Avenue, Chandler, AZ 85225-7158
• Neighborhood Comedy Theatre — 214 West Main Street, Mesa, AZ 85201

This post Now Accepting Bitcoin: Gyros, Cocas, and 219 Arizona Bitcoin Merchants first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Vagabond.

Bitcoin Magazine

AnchorWatch Launches Nevada Trust Company, Caps Bitcoin Custody Fees at $10,000 a Month

Bitcoin custody and insurance firm AnchorWatch has said that its Nevada state-chartered trust company opened for business, offering qualified custody for fiduciaries, public companies, trusts and high-net-worth individuals.

AnchorWatch Trust Company, authorized by the Nevada Financial Institutions Division to act as a custodian, opened on Monday, according to AnchorWatch. 

The service is aimed at public companies holding BTC, a category that has expanded sharply as more corporations have added the asset to their balance sheets.

The company’s flagship differentiator is pricing: fixed-dollar annual fees tiered by vault size, capped at $10,000 per month, rather than the percentage-of-assets charges typical among qualified custodians. Once a client hits the cap, additional bitcoin purchases or price appreciation do not increase the annual fee.

“For large enterprises, the pricing cap will translate to potential six- or seven-figure annual savings for qualified custody,” the company said in its announcement.

ATC offers clients two qualified-custody models. Flagship Custody, where ATC holds the keys required for qualified custody while the client’s trustees or executives hold additional keys, and multi-institution custody, where key control is distributed across three institutions — AnchorWatch Trust Company, BitGo in the United States, and CoinCorner in the Isle of Man.

The multi-institution model addresses a growing concern among institutional bitcoin holders: concentration risk at a single custodian, an anxiety sharpened by past industry failures.

Clients may also apply for insurance issued in the covered client’s or entity’s name — a structure AnchorWatch contrasts with policies held in the custodian’s name, where coverage terms may leave ambiguity about the client’s position in a claim. The insurance is provided by AnchorWatch and backed by A+ rated Lloyd’s of London syndicates.

As a Lloyd’s of London Coverholder, AnchorWatch says it has authority to write up to $370 million in limits per ATC client, covering loss of Bitcoin from perils including violent coercion and kidnapping, as well as losses arising from fraudulent acts by AnchorWatch itself. Coverage is subject to underwriting approval and policy terms.

Insurance is available to U.S.-domiciled companies and subsidiaries and U.S.-resident individuals. Custody without insurance may be available across a broader range of jurisdictions, subject to KYC and AML requirements.

AnchorWatch’s underlying custody platform, Trident Vault, has secured customer Bitcoin for 20 months, according to the company. It has been audited or reviewed by security firms Halborn and Doyensec, and by the technical underwriters at the Lloyd’s syndicates backing the policies. 

AnchorWatch describes itself as a Bitcoin-native insurance and custody company; ATC is its Nevada state-chartered trust company arm.

This post AnchorWatch Launches Nevada Trust Company, Caps Bitcoin Custody Fees at $10,000 a Month first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

The Architecture of Money: Mapping Financial Power in the Age of Bitcoin

Money determines where we live, what we can afford, and how wealth accumulates across generations. Yet the mechanisms that create and distribute it remain largely occluded, even as their consequences become harder to unsee. For Dutch artist Carlijn Kingma, investigative financial journalist Thomas Bollen, and monetary researcher Martijn Jeroen van der Linden, that disconnect became the impetus for The Waterworks of Money. This ambitious project maps the hidden architecture of the financial system through drawing and animation, rendering it understandable to the people living within it without flattening its complexity.

The Waterworks of Money depicts the financial system as a vast network of reservoirs, channels, and pumps, revealing how money moves through banks, governments, businesses, and households. Some areas receive an abundance of liquidity, while others remain perpetually dry. The resulting drawing operates simultaneously as an artwork, an educational tool, and an examination of financial power.

The project emerged from two years of research, including interviews with more than 100 experts across banking, government, academia, and monetary reform movements. Kingma spent more than 2,200 hours translating that research into an intricate architectural landscape. Bollen, whose investigative journalism examines the workings of the financial system, and van der Linden, whose academic research explores money and monetary reform, helped develop the economic research and narratives behind the work.

One of the project’s scenarios explores a monetary future shaped by bitcoin. As bitcoin enters traditional finance, an alternative monetary system either challenges existing structures of financial power or eventually becomes part of them, and the project’s collaborators have watched both happen.

Ahead of Bitcoin Amsterdam, November 5-6, where Bollen joins two panels, I sat down with all three of the project’s collaborators to discuss making money visible, the relationship between monetary systems and inequality, and bitcoin’s place in Europe’s financial future.

BMAG: The Waterworks of Money illustrates the financial system as a network of reservoirs, pumps, and channels, with some parts of society receiving abundant liquidity while others remain dry. After two years of research and interviews with financial experts, what surprised you most about how money actually works? What do you think the public most fundamentally misunderstands about it?

Thomas Bollen: What surprised me most is that many people inside the system know a great deal about their own corner of it: interest rate derivatives, asset management or mortgage lending. Very few of them can oversee the larger system in which they operate.

What is clearly not well understood is that banks create new money when they make a loan. They are not just intermediaries that pass on the savings of their depositors.

But can you blame ordinary people for that? During the research phase we spoke to many bankers and even a CEO of a major bank who did not know they were working for a money creating institution.

If we want to improve understanding we should start at our schools and universities. Many textbooks still get it wrong, and economics education hardly pays any attention to it. In 2022 even the Riksbank’s prize in economics (the Nobel prize that is not really a Nobel prize) was awarded for research that presents banks as mere intermediaries.

BMAG: One of the central ideas in The Waterworks of Money is that money doesn’t flow evenly through society. Housing affordability has become a major issue in Europe and the United States, while asset prices and financial wealth have increasingly outpaced wages. How much of this inequality results from the design of our monetary system, rather than broader economic forces?

Thomas Bollen: It is impossible to capture that in a precise number, because so many factors play a role. But it is quite clear that the money system exacerbated inequality enormously during all those years when credit was extremely cheap.

Ray Dalio, founder of the hedge fund Bridgewater Associates, summed it up in 2019: “Money is free for those who are creditworthy.” For everyone without money or creditworthiness, it was out of reach.

Cheap credit for rich people and large multinationals (who used it for share buybacks and M&A deals) drove up the price of shares, and of houses. Bank money creation produced a specific kind of inflation: asset inflation. Wealthy households and large multinationals, who already owned those assets, profited far more from it than people without them or small businesses that did not have the same kind of access to cheap credit as their larger competitors.

BMAG: The Waterworks of Money is filled with details that help explain how the financial system works. What was the most difficult part of the monetary system to illustrate? Did anything you learned during the research change how you approached the drawing?

Carlijn Kingma: The biggest challenge was the way all the parts are connected. How do you show that clearly?

Water is the obvious metaphor for money, and it takes you a long way. Liquidity, cash flows, money drying up: they are already in the language of finance. It was also great for connecting the different parts of the system, because I could draw the pipes and canals that run between them.

But in some places you need more than that if you want to be completely accurate. Money comes in many forms: commodity money, public money, private credit money, and further out short-term debt and repo contracts can also serve as money or near-money. It was not possible to draw that many different kinds of water running through the system.

BMAG: The Waterworks of Money has been shown to both art audiences and people interested in economics, including at Bitcoin Amsterdam last year. Have you noticed differences in how these audiences respond to the work? Has their feedback influenced how you think about the role of art in explaining complex ideas?

Carlijn Kingma: The response depends on what people already know. Visitors with more financial knowledge usually laugh more, because they catch all the small jokes. We renamed Basel III to “Babel III”, for instance, because the bank rules written after the crisis add up to about three bibles.

In our bitcoin future scenario, The Republic of a Thousand Coins, we put in a lot of jokes about central bankers. You can see Alan Greenspan there as an inflatable doll. That works best if you know who he is, and the bitcoin crowd knows far more about monetary history than the general public.

Above all, we noticed that art opens doors. The drawing gives people a visual starting point for a conversation. Even without any prior knowledge, the metaphor lets you see the social outcomes of how money flows.

BMAG: Your research has examined how financial crises can reinforce the influence of institutions considered too important to fail. More recently, you’ve explored the growing power of asset managers such as BlackRock and Vanguard. Are we witnessing a genuine transformation in how financial power operates, or have the same underlying problems simply taken new forms since 2008?

Martijn Jeroen van der Linden: Following the crisis of 2008, there was a general consensus among mainstream policymakers, think tanks and many economists that the banking sector needed to be repaired. In Europe, the influential de Larosière Group concluded that the causes of the crisis were excessive leverage, opaque securitisation, shadow banking risks, and fragmented supervision in the EU, and argued that “repair is necessary and urgent.” The banking repair consisted of new and stricter regulations, stronger coordinated supervision and new crisis management procedures. The underlying architecture remained unaltered, meaning that fundamental change never occurred.

But the architecture remained fragile. Take, for example, 2023. When Silicon Valley Bank and Credit Suisse got into trouble, the crisis playbooks developed after 2008 stayed in the drawer. The US authorities guaranteed all SVB deposits, including the more than 90 percent above the insured limit. In Switzerland, the state backed the rescue of Credit Suisse by UBS.

Advocates of banking repair often claim to have made the system safer. But the inherent fragility of funding long-term loans with runnable bank deposits is still there. Even with all the regulation, you cannot prevent a bank run, and that fragility is precisely what they refuse to solve. The banking system only survives because of massive public safety nets and privileges given to banks.

Large powerful non-banks have indeed emerged but they do not play a pivotal role in money and payments. This is a key distinction between the two sectors.

BMAG: Bitcoin began as an attempt to create money outside the control of governments and banks. Today, it’s increasingly held through investment funds and traditional financial institutions, including some of the same powerful asset managers examined in your recent work. Does this integration strengthen bitcoin’s ability to change the financial system, or risk reproducing the concentration of power it originally sought to challenge?

Martijn Jeroen van der Linden: As a financial asset, bitcoin has benefited from investments from traditional financial institutions. But the increasing use of bitcoin as an investment has compromised its promise of an alternative payment system.

At the same time, bitcoin and the rise of stablecoins have challenged the banks on their payment infrastructure. The banks are now innovating too: look at Wero, the payment wallet that a group of European banks launched in 2024. That is a change. But it is something different from the structural reform of money and banking.

BMAG: Your project imagines bitcoin as an alternative to the existing monetary system. Amsterdam also has a remarkable history of monetary experimentation, from the development of modern financial institutions to David Chaum’s pioneering work on private digital cash decades before bitcoin. Given that history, how do you see bitcoin’s role in Europe’s financial future? Has your perspective changed since you began working on the project?

Thomas Bollen: What I appreciate about bitcoin’s design is that it resembles full reserve banking. A bitcoin is not a claim on something else, so it carries no risk of a bank run. Bank deposits are: they are a promise that you can withdraw your money at any moment, while the bank can never keep that promise to all its customers at once.

We can learn a lot from our history. The Amsterdamsche Wisselbank, founded in 1609 and often seen as the world’s first central bank, started out as a full reserve bank: every bank guilder was backed by coins in its vault. It went under only after it secretly began lending more and more to the Dutch East India Company.

That is the risk of every monetary experiment: it can go in the wrong direction. In the crypto world, all kinds of companies started copying the banks. They lent out their customers’ bitcoins, while those customers still saw their coin-balances in their accounts. Sam Bankman-Fried’s FTX shows how this practice can go horribly wrong.

Thomas Bollen will participate in two panel discussions at Bitcoin Amsterdam on November 6, 2026, on the Treasury Stage. Europe’s Monetary History & Future: Austrian Economics, Banks & Bitcoin (11:00–11:30 AM), alongside Rahim Taghizadegan and Willem Middelkoop, and Staat vs. de Markt: Hoeveel Overheid Hebben We Nodig in Geld? (1:55–2:25 PM), alongside Paul Buitink and Simon Lelieveldt.

Watch the full two-part animated exploration of The Waterworks of Money on YouTube and support the project by purchasing a signed, limited-edition print by Carlijn Kingma or making a donation toward its continued research at waterworksofmoney.com/buy.

The Bitcoin Museum & Art Gallery (BMAG) organizes international exhibitions, auctions, and artist collaborations exploring bitcoin and its cultural implications. Learn more at museum.b.tc.

Join us at Bitcoin Amsterdam, November 5–6, 2026. Get your tickets here and use code BA26-BMAG20 for discounted admission.

This post The Architecture of Money: Mapping Financial Power in the Age of Bitcoin first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Dennis Koch.

Bitcoin Magazine

Super League Stockholders Approve Metaplanet’s 2,100 BTC Investment, Paving Way for ‘Superplanet’

Super League stockholders have approved all proposals tied to Metaplanet‘s 2,100 BTC investment, clearing the way for the Nasdaq-listed company to be renamed Superplanet and become the Japanese firm’s U.S. Bitcoin treasury vehicle.

The proposals passed at Super League Enterprise, Inc.’s 2026 annual meeting of stockholders, held Friday and were disclosed Monday morning. The transaction itself was first announced in August.

Under the definitive agreement, Metaplanet, Inc. will contribute 2,100 Bitcoin and $2.5 million in cash through its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary, Metaplanet Holdings, Inc. 

In exchange, Metaplanet receives 44,859,400 shares of common stock at $3.00 per share, along with preferred stock and warrants.

At closing, Super League will be renamed “Superplanet, Inc.” and trade on Nasdaq under the ticker symbol “SUPA.” Its advertising and media activation business will continue as a distinct operating segment, and Matt Edelman will remain chief executive officer.

Among the measures stockholders approved were the issuance of common stock and warrants to Metaplanet and the corporate name change. The proposals also included an increase in authorized preferred shares from 10 million to 100 million, according to a summary of the meeting posted on X.

“Super League stockholders have voted to approve the proposed Metaplanet transaction, an important step in our transformation from a Bitcoin treasury company into a global Bitcoin-native financial platform,” Metaplanet CEO Simon Gerovich wrote on X. 

“Upon close, Superplanet will be our U.S.-listed Bitcoin treasury platform, providing direct access to U.S. capital markets and greater flexibility to opportunistically raise capital.”

Edelman framed the vote similarly in the company’s announcement: “Their approval brings us one step closer to redefining what this company can become.”

Closing is anticipated in the fourth quarter of 2026, subject to customary closing conditions, including required filings with the Nasdaq Capital Market. The shareholder approvals represent a required step but not the final one.

Super League said the arrangement is intended to establish conditions governing Metaplanet’s ability to dispose of its equity holdings following the transaction. The company did not provide details of exceptions to those restrictions in its announcement.

Metaplanet held 43,000 BTC as of August 18, describing itself as the third-largest corporate Bitcoin treasury among publicly traded companies. The combined structure is intended to give the group two listed Bitcoin treasury platforms — one on the Tokyo Stock Exchange, one on Nasdaq — each with its own investor base and reporting currency.

Super League connects brands with what it describes as a 3.3 billion-person global gaming population through advertising and branded content programs across gaming and digital media platforms. Metaplanet is a Tokyo-listed company building Bitcoin-based financial products and infrastructure.

Shares of Super League moved higher on the news. 

This post Super League Stockholders Approve Metaplanet’s 2,100 BTC Investment, Paving Way for ‘Superplanet’ first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

No ‘Uptober’ Yet: Bitcoin Slips 2% in a Month That’s Historically Bullish

Bitcoin’s price retook $82,000 on Monday as choppy trading last week stunted the coin’s gains. 

The biggest cryptocurrency by market cap was recently trading for close to $82,393 — up by close to 2% over the past day but still down over a seven-day period. 

Bitcoin has gotten off to a slow start for so-called Uptober, a month when the cryptocurrency has typically surged: Since the beginning of October, bitcoin’s price has dropped by 2%. 

U.S. investors last week cashed out of exchange-traded funds, with speculators redeeming $228.4 million in shares from the investment vehicles managed by BlackRock, Fidelity, and Grayscale, according to data from Farside Investors. 

Bitcoin is often moved by investors buying shares of the U.S. ETFs. The funds give investors easy exposure to the asset via shares they can buy on their brokerage accounts. 

Despite the slow October so far, analysts have said that bitcoin is now in a bull market after spending most of 2026 trading under $70,000 — well below its all-time high of $126,080. 

Bitcoin’s price started rallying in August after the U.S. Treasury Department said it would more than double the size of its government debt repurchases. The coin had its best run in three years and third best August ever.  

The coin’s price has recently benefited from the so-called debasement trade: when investors buy certain assets to hedge against currency being devalued. The dollar slid in value in August. 

It continued to have a good September, rising nearly 6% over a 30-day period. Bitcoin in the third quarter of this year had its best three months since 2024. 

After a record third quarter, will October keep the streak alive?

This post No ‘Uptober’ Yet: Bitcoin Slips 2% in a Month That’s Historically Bullish first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Jenner’s testnet release separates CAS20 creation from issuer powers, while shared compliance lists would depend on another network switch.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

Understand the crypto stories that matter and what to watch next. Get The Catalyst in your inbox

JPM Coin gives the bank's institutional clients an Ethereum payment route, with direct fund subscriptions still unannounced.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

Understand the crypto stories that matter and what to watch next. Get The Catalyst in your inbox

The October 16 first-reading votes advance a proposal covering MiCA e-money tokens, with a January 2027 start conditional on enactment.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

Understand the crypto stories that matter and what to watch next. Get The Catalyst in your inbox

Standard includes 250,000 monthly usage credits and live deployment, while users must approve workflows and supply trading funds.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

Understand the crypto stories that matter and what to watch next. Get The Catalyst in your inbox

The unknown trader realized about $469,000 in losses before fees overnight, then added another 1,126 ETH of shorts.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

Understand the crypto stories that matter and what to watch next. Get The Catalyst in your inbox

Bitcoin trades at $81,993 on Tuesday morning, or €73,013 (Kraken, 6.55am). That puts the price $512 above the 50-day moving average at $81,481 and $1,249 below the 20-day average at $83,242. Between those two lines the market has been moving in ever tighter ranges for three trading days. That is the state of play this morning, and the question of whether $81,481 holds hangs on it.

The figures behind this can be checked. We pulled the daily candles of the past 721 days from the public market interface of the exchange Kraken and calculated each day's range as the distance between the daily high and low relative to the close. Where the price may stand over a horizon of months is covered on our page on the outlook for Bitcoin.

The price on Tuesday morning: $81,993 and €73,013

Little has moved since midnight. The daily candle opened at $81,843, the low of the past 24 hours sits at $81,099 and the high at $83,100. That high still dates from Monday, however; today's candle reached $82,157 and so came nowhere near it. The volume-weighted average price of the past 24 hours stands at $82,165, leaving the current price roughly $170 below it.

In euros, Bitcoin stands at €73,013. For investors in Germany that is the more relevant number, because buying, selling and taxation all happen in euros here. The euro price opened at €72,990 and therefore moved all of €23 higher over 24 hours. The daily low in euros was €72,308 and the high €74,075.

The 50-day line at $81,481 is the next level to the downside

A moving average is the mean of the closing prices of the past few days, rolled forward continuously. The 50-day average therefore sums up a good seven weeks. Taking closing prices up to and including Monday, October 19, that line works out at $81,481. The 20-day average, which covers only the past month, sits at $83,242.

That produces a clear geometry. The 50-day line lies 0.63 percent below, the 20-day line 1.52 percent above. The gap between the two amounts to $1,761, or 2.15 percent. As long as the price sits between them, neither the short nor the medium term has the upper hand. Should it fall below $81,481, it loses the support that has carried it since mid-October.

For context, the month's two extremes: the October high stands at $87,229 from October 2 and the October low at $79,709 from October 15. The current price is therefore 6.0 percent below the monthly high and 2.9 percent above the monthly low, placing it in the lower third of the monthly range but not at its edge.

Three daily ranges below the 90-day median

The tightness is more interesting than the level. The daily range, the distance between a session's high and low, came to 1.23 percent on Saturday, 1.96 percent on Sunday and 1.77 percent on Monday. The median of the past 90 days is 2.38 percent. Three consecutive days below that median had not happened yet in October. Today's range so far, at 1.29 percent, also stays well under it.

The other pole, by way of comparison: the daily range was 3.84 percent on October 8, 3.73 percent on October 13 and 3.44 percent on October 15. In the week after the October high, then, Bitcoin moved more than double yesterday's range on every single day. That phase is over and the market has contracted.

A tight range says nothing about direction. It signals that buyers and sellers have settled on a price band and that nobody is willing to bid far above it or sell far below. Historically such phases resolve when one side gives way; the tightness alone reveals neither when that happens nor in which direction.

The comparison with Monday morning: $776 lower

At the same hour on Monday, Bitcoin stood at $82,769. We recorded that in our piece on the thin weekend turnover, along with the finding that Saturday and Sunday produced only about a third of the usual volume. This morning the price is $81,993, so $776 or 0.94 percent lower than exactly 24 hours earlier.

What has changed since then is above all the turnover. On Monday 1,935 Bitcoin changed hands in Kraken's dollar pair, against 987 on Sunday and 599 on Saturday. Trading has returned with the start of the week without the price turning it into a breakout. The past 24 hours brought 1,632 Bitcoin together. The level we called decisive on Monday still sits below the price: the October low of $79,709 was never retested.

The cushion to the downside has changed, though. At Sunday's close of $82,001 the 50-day average stood at $81,397, a gap of $604 or 0.74 percent. After Monday's close of $81,844 the line has risen to $81,481 while the price has fallen. Squeezed from both sides, the gap now stands at $512 or 0.63 percent. Bitcoin trades below the 20-day line on both days.

Implied volatility at 37.44 points, the futures market prices in little movement

Besides the spot market there is a second angle that reveals more than the price itself on days like this: the derivatives market. The options exchange Deribit publishes a volatility index for Bitcoin, DVOL for short. It measures the swing that options prices build in for the coming 30 days, expressed as an annualised rate in points. The higher the reading, the more expensive the hedge and the more movement the market expects.

That index stands at 37.44 points at the time of writing. On October 15, the day of the October low, it was at 39.77 points, the highest level of the month. The low of the past 30 days dates from September 17 at 33.59 points. Hedging has therefore become cheaper since the monthly low without yet being conspicuously cheap. The exchange publishes the detail on its public metrics page.

Together with the three tight days, that adds up to a coherent picture: the spot market is barely moving, and the derivatives market is not charging more for protection than it recently did. Both point the same way, towards a phase in which nobody wants to pay for a large move.

The $80,000 put: 1,057 contracts expire at 8am UTC

A daily option expires on Deribit every working day. Today at 8am UTC, 10am in Germany, 3,624 Bitcoin in open contracts run out. Measured at the current price, that is around $297 million. By far the largest single position is a put with a strike of $80,000, accounting on its own for 1,057 Bitcoin, or 29 percent of today's expiry.

A put struck at $80,000 is worth something only if Bitcoin sits below $80,000 at settlement. At $81,993 that requires a 2.43 percent drop, and the daily low was $1,390 above the threshold. Whoever sold these contracts therefore has a tangible interest in the price staying up, and will buy rather than sell if it comes to it.

The real date, though, falls later in the month. The monthly expiry on October 30 accounts for 148,855 Bitcoin in open contracts. That is 38 percent of the total open interest of 391,164 Bitcoin across all maturities. The distribution there stands out: 25,570 contracts sit as calls at $95,000, a further 15,300 at $90,000 and 14,312 at $100,000. The price is a long way from those levels. For investors, that means the monthly expiry is a date in the diary, not a price target.

The order book in euros: a ten-cent spread, but only 0.03 Bitcoin at the best bid

Anyone buying or selling on a tight day notices the tightness in the order book rather than in the price. We queried it at 6.55am for the euro pair on Kraken. The best bid stood at €72,992.20 and the best ask at €72,992.30. The spread between them is therefore ten cents, or 0.014 basis points measured against the price. It hardly gets tighter.

The second number is the one that matters. Behind the best bid sit 0.030 Bitcoin, behind the best ask 0.081 Bitcoin. In euros that is roughly €2,190 and €5,910 respectively. An order of €10,000 therefore clears the top rung of the book outright and runs into the next. The spread is tight; the depth is not.

That has a practical consequence. An unlimited market order takes whatever price the book offers; with thin depth that is quickly a good deal more than the ten cents the spread promises. A limit order, by contrast, names a maximum price and sits there until someone fills it. On a day with a 1.3 percent range, that is rarely a long wait. Before placing an order, also check whether your exchange adds a separate trading fee on top of the price or widens the spread itself; either costs more than the difference between ten and twenty cents in the book.

Buying in Germany: MiCA authorisation and the cost per order

Since the European regulation on markets in crypto assets applies in full, every provider serving German retail clients needs authorisation as a crypto-asset service provider in an EU state. That licence is recorded in a public register and is the first thing to look up at a new exchange. An overview of providers with European authorisation is in our comparison of regulated crypto exchanges.

The second point is cost, which comes in three parts: the trading fee as a percentage of order volume, the mark-up on the market price and, if you deposit in euros, the cost of the deposit. A SEPA transfer is free at most providers; a card deposit rarely is. With a price that moves 1.3 percent in a day, the sum of those three items often decides the outcome more than the moment of entry.

The third point concerns custody. Leave the Bitcoin on the exchange and they belong to you as a claim against the company, not as a balance on the blockchain. Anyone holding larger amounts transfers them to an address to which only they hold the key. The network fee for that is currently low: the mempool protocol shows a recommended fee of one satoshi per virtual byte, the minimum rate.

The one-year holding period: Tuesday morning changes little for long-term holders

For tax purposes in Germany the daily price is secondary. What counts is how long you have held the Bitcoin. Under German income tax law, selling privately held crypto assets counts as a private disposal. If more than twelve months lie between acquisition and sale, the gain is tax free. If less than twelve months lie between them, it is taxed at your personal income tax rate as soon as all private disposal gains in a year reach the €1,000 threshold.

That has an immediate bearing on days like this. Anyone holding for more than a year gives nothing away to the tax office by selling into the tightness, but earns no advantage from waiting either. Anyone only a few months in should check, before selling, when the deadline for each individual purchase runs out; a sale a few weeks short of it can cost more than the price move that triggered it. We track the state of the ongoing debate about that deadline in our overview of the holding period.

The order of allocation matters here. Anyone who bought at different times has to show which units they are disposing of on a sale. Without evidence, the order of acquisition applies, oldest unit first. Anyone using several addresses and several exchanges needs continuous records for that.

Our assessment: the tightness argues for a breakout, not for its direction

From the newsroom's point of view, this situation is easier to describe than to forecast. Three pieces of evidence suggest the current calm will not last: three consecutive daily ranges below the 90-day median of 2.38 percent, a gap of just 2.15 percent between the 20- and 50-day lines, and a volatility index that, at 37.44 points, sits in the lower half of its 30-day span of 33.59 to 39.77 points. Experience shows such states resolve, because market participants who take a position need a move.

What argues against reading a direction into it: none of those numbers is directional. The $80,000 put with its 1,057 contracts gives the sellers of those contracts an interest in prices above $80,000 today, but it ends at 10am and has no effect after that. The monthly expiry on October 30, with its large calls at $90,000 to $100,000, sits so far from the market that it exerts no pull. And turnover of 1,632 Bitcoin in 24 hours on one of the large euro exchanges is normal, not remarkable. We see a market ahead of a decision, then, rather than a market that has half made one.

Bitcoin between $81,481 and $83,242: two lines frame the week to Friday

As long as the price sits between the two moving averages, the situation is open. Three steps make sense this morning:

1. Note the two levels. $81,481 to the downside, $83,242 to the upside. A close outside that range is the first reliable signal that the tightness has resolved. If your positions are spread across several exchanges, bring the numbers together in one place; our comparison of tax and portfolio tools shows how.
2. Look up your own exchange's authorisation. It takes a few minutes and is the right thing to do regardless of the price. Which providers hold a European licence is set out in our overview of regulated crypto exchanges.
3. Check the holding period per purchase before any sale. Only then does the price decide. Anyone looking to sell should compare the cost of the routes first; the differences are in our overview of selling Bitcoin.

(As of October 20, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy. Trading crypto assets carries the risk of total loss.)

Cardano ranks among the larger cryptocurrencies by market value, yet the applications on its own blockchain hold just $62 million. Measured against a market capitalisation of $8.15 billion, that is 0.76 percent. Among eleven large blockchains that cryptoticker.io compared for this article, it is the lowest figure of all. Tron reaches 17.5 percent, Ethereum 16.9 percent, and even the far smaller Algorand 3.3 percent.

For investors, this is no footnote. It goes to the question of what the price of ADA actually rests on. A network whose applications tie up almost no capital does not earn its keep from fees. It lives on the expectation that this will change. That is precisely the expectation Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson has been feeding again in recent days.

Cardano week on week: ADA at $0.2169 after an 8.11 percent weekly loss

ADA trades at $0.2169 as of 3am on Tuesday, October 20, according to CoinGecko. That is 1.92 percent lower over 24 hours and 8.11 percent lower over the week. Market capitalisation stands at $8.15 billion, with $223 million turned over in a single day. There are 37.56 billion ADA in circulation.

The weekly high came on October 14 at $0.2358. From there the token slid for six days, with a brief bounce on October 19. The weekly low sits at $0.2156, very close to the current price. ADA remains almost 93 percent below its all-time high of $3.09 from September 2021.

The weekly loss is sharper than the broader market. Bitcoin shed 0.3 percent over seven days and Ethereum 2.6 percent, so ADA lost roughly three times as much as Ethereum without any event of its own behind it: no token unlock, no delisting, no vote with a deadline.

Total value locked: what Cardano's $62 million actually measures

Total value locked, or TVL, is the sum of all deposits users have placed in a blockchain's applications, such as decentralised exchanges, lending markets or liquidity pools. The metric says nothing about a token's price, but a great deal about whether anyone uses the blockchain rather than simply holding it.

On Cardano that figure is $62 million, as published on the Cardano page at DefiLlama. For comparison: Solana holds $5.87 billion and Ethereum $49.59 billion. Solana carries roughly seven times Cardano's market value but ties up 95 times the capital.

Turnover tells the same story. According to an analysis by CryptoSlate published on October 19, daily volume on Cardano's decentralised exchanges came to around $927,000, with weekly volume at $8.35 million, a quarter below the week before. The same analysis counts 12,716 active addresses, 28,146 transactions and fees of roughly $2,196 in a single day. Stablecoin holdings on Cardano amount to some $70 million, against more than $15.5 billion on Solana.

Fees of $2,196 a day extrapolate to a little over $800,000 a year. A network valued at $8.15 billion therefore takes in less than a mid-sized plumbing firm turns over. That is not a verdict on the technology. It is the setting into which the next upgrade arrives.

Cardano has the lowest ratio of DeFi capital to market value among eleven blockchains

On October 20, 2026, cryptoticker.io set the locked capital of eleven large blockchains against their respective market values. The basis is DefiLlama's public figures for locked capital and the market values of the associated tokens at CoinGecko. Eleven networks with their own layer-1 blockchain and their own token were examined. cryptoticker.io compiled this analysis itself on October 20, 2026.

The gap is not a narrow one. Algorand, valued at an eighth of Cardano, ties up more than four times as much in proportional terms. Aptos, at a twelfth of Cardano's market value, manages two thirds of its absolute capital. Cardano is the only one of these eleven networks whose share sits below one percent.

A low share does not prove that a token is overpriced. It shifts the justification: anyone holding ADA today is paying not for usage but for the expectation of usage. Which levels the market derives from that shows up in the price action itself.

Leios: why the throughput upgrade is still on the testnet

Leios is a planned upgrade to the Cardano protocol designed to process several blocks in parallel instead of working through them strictly one after another. According to the CryptoSlate analysis, it promises throughput ten to 65 times higher than today, rolled out in stages.

What counts is the status, not the promise. Leios runs on the public testnet and no date for the main network has been named. Hoskinson described Leios there as the final building block of his original vision for Cardano. No date follows from that, and an upgrade without a date is a direction rather than a deadline for an investment decision.

This is where the 0.76 percent and the upgrade belong together. More throughput helps a blockchain whose capacity limits demand. At 28,146 transactions and $2,196 in fees a day, capacity is not the bottleneck. Leios therefore solves a problem that, on these figures, Cardano does not have today.

Hoskinson's new programming language: intent-based transactions and Groth16 proofs

According to the CryptoSlate analysis of October 19, Hoskinson is working with Lucas Rosa, a developer at Input Output Global, on a new programming language. It is designed to support intent-based transactions and so-called proof-carrying data, secured through Groth16 proofs. Hoskinson called the planned language the first of its kind.

Two terms are worth placing. Intent-based means that you, as a user, state the goal of a transaction, such as a swap at a minimum rate, and the network works out the route itself instead of you specifying every step. A Groth16 proof is a cryptographic attestation that a computation was carried out correctly, without revealing the underlying data.

The language has no name and no launch date. For your assessment, that means this is an announcement by the founder, not a delivery. The difference is regularly lost in the price. An announcement moves ADA for a day; a delivery changes the numbers in the table above.

Cardano's treasury holds 1.38 billion ADA, its DeFi $62 million

Cardano runs a treasury of its own, fed by a share of fees and newly issued tokens, from which the community funds projects by vote. In the current epoch 662 it holds 1.38 billion ADA. At $0.2169 that comes to roughly $300 million. The basis is our own analysis of Cardano's public network data for this epoch, compiled on October 20, 2026.

This comparison carries the real point: the purse Cardano pays for its development out of is almost five times larger than all the capital in the blockchain's applications. The network has no money problem. It has a demand problem.

How much of that purse is already committed is something cryptoticker.io analysed two days ago: 91.5 percent of the Cardano treasury's spending cap has been allocated. Taken together, the two figures describe the room for manoeuvre over the coming months fairly precisely.

Network data puts 36.81 billion ADA in circulation out of 38.94 billion issued so far. A further 6.06 billion ADA sit in the reserves from which future staking rewards are paid. The protocol's ceiling is 45 billion ADA. Rewards are therefore still outstanding that will push the circulating supply higher.

Staking as the counterweight: where Cardano's capital flows instead

Part of the explanation for the 0.76 percent lies in Cardano's own design. When you delegate, you neither lend your ADA nor hand it over: the tokens stay in your wallet, you simply assign them to a stake pool and receive a proportional share of the rewards. Staking on Cardano therefore does not compete with custody, but it does compete with DeFi.

Someone earning a yield without giving up control has little reason to put the same tokens into a lending market or a liquidity pool, where contract risk is added on top. What delegating brings in depends on the stake pool chosen. The flip side is in the table above: capital that is delegated shows up nowhere as locked capital, and the applications stay thin.

If you are looking for a yield on your holdings, it is worth looking beyond Cardano. Above all, check whether a provider takes custody of the tokens itself, because that is the difference from delegating on Cardano.

ADA in Germany: what applies when you buy through a MiCA-licensed exchange

You can buy ADA in Germany through any provider licensed under the EU's MiCA regulation. MiCA governs across Europe who may offer and hold crypto assets, and obliges licensed providers among other things to keep client holdings separate from their own assets. Which houses offer a German-language interface and euro deposits, and what trading costs there, differs markedly from one to the next.

Three points bear on ADA in particular. First, the holding period: if you sell within a year of buying, the gain counts as a private disposal under German tax law. After more than a year, the gain on a sale is tax free. Second, custody: because delegating on Cardano works without surrendering the tokens, you can stake ADA from your own software wallet rather than leaving it sitting on an exchange.

Third, leverage. Many providers also offer ADA as a leveraged derivative. With a price that drops 8 percent in a week, a counter-move of around 10 percent is enough at tenfold leverage to liquidate a position. Collecting delegation rewards while trading on leverage alongside means taking on two very different risks at once.

Levels above and below: $0.2358 at the weekly high, $0.2156 at the low

On the upside, the first level is the weekly high of $0.2358 from October 14, followed by the round $0.25 mark. On the downside sits the weekly low of $0.2156, and below it the round $0.20 level, which ADA has not tested this month.

These are observations drawn from the price range of the past seven days, not price targets. The current price sits just above the weekly low, which leaves little room to the downside. Whether that turns into support is decided by trading, not by the level.

For the week as a whole it stands that the decline came without an event of its own, and the news flow consisted of two announcements without dates. The verifiable usage figures fell over the same period rather than rising. That is the setting in which you take a decision on ADA.

Cardano DeFi: below 0.76 percent, ADA stays a staking play

As long as locked capital sits at 0.76 percent of market value, ADA carries its valuation through staking and expectation rather than usage. That is no rejection of Cardano, but it does set what you watch. Three steps help from here:

1. Settle how you buy. Check whether your provider is MiCA-licensed and what buying, withdrawal and custody cost you. The terms are set out in our comparison of the best crypto exchanges.
2. Put the yield in context. Compare the reward from delegating with what other providers pay for ADA, and look at how they hold the tokens. Our comparison of the best staking platforms gives the overview.
3. Document the holding period. Record the purchase date and amount for each account so you can evidence the one-year threshold. The crypto tax tools and portfolio trackers help with that.

(As of October 20, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

In the European Union stablecoins pay no interest, at least none from the company that issues them. Article 50 of the MiCA regulation expressly bars issuers of e-money tokens from granting interest, and article 40 draws the same line for asset-referenced tokens. If a platform still shows you a yield on USDC or on a euro stablecoin, that money does not come out of the token. It comes from someone putting the token to work. The distinction decides who owes you the money when something goes wrong, and how the tax office classifies the income.

Article 50 of MiCA bars issuers from paying interest on e-money tokens

MiCA, formally Regulation (EU) 2023/1114 on markets in crypto-assets, splits stablecoins into two classes. An e-money token tracks a single official currency, the euro or the US dollar for example; USDC and EURC belong here. An asset-referenced token leans on a basket of several currencies, commodities or other assets.

For the first class, article 50(1) settles the matter in a single sentence: issuers of e-money tokens shall not grant interest. The provision applies without prejudice to article 12 of the E-Money Directive 2009/110/EC, which already imposes the same ban on classic electronic money. The recitals of the regulation also name the purpose: the use of such tokens as a store of value is meant to recede. A payment token should stay a means of payment and should not turn into a savings product.

That is an unusually hard rule, and it holds regardless of where market rates happen to stand. An issuer does earn on its reserve, because it invests the euros or dollars held against the tokens. Passing that income on to holders is what European law forbids.

A discount tied to the holding period also counts as interest

Paragraph 3 of the same article makes sure the ban cannot be relabelled away. Interest covers any remuneration or other benefit related to the length of time a holder keeps the token. Net compensation payments and discounts with an effect equivalent to interest are named explicitly. It makes no difference whether the benefit comes from the issuer itself or from a third party, and whether it attaches directly to the token or arises through the pricing of other products.

In practice that catches more models than the heading suggests. A loyalty scheme paying out more the longer a balance sits untouched falls under the same rule as an openly quoted rate. So does a fee reduction keyed to the average stablecoin balance on an account. What matters is the link to the holding period, not the wording on the product page.

Article 40 draws the same line for asset-referenced tokens

For the second class the rule sits in article 40 and reads almost identically: issuers of asset-referenced tokens shall not grant interest, and the same definition built around the holding period applies there too. One difference remains in the detail. Article 40 carries no reference to the E-Money Directive, because these tokens are not electronic money and the directive never covered them. For the holder the outcome comes to the same thing.

The interest ban also binds exchanges and custodians

The second paragraph of article 50 puts a different group under obligation: crypto-asset service providers, meaning exchanges, brokers and custodians holding a MiCA authorisation. They too shall not grant interest when they provide services related to e-money tokens. The rule therefore bites exactly where retail investors actually keep their balances, on the account of the trading platform.

What else a licensed platform in Europe has to do is collected on our page about MiCA obligations for crypto companies. Where a service provider may hold your euro balance at all was answered separately by the markets regulator ESMA in October 2026; the detail sits in our piece on euro balances at a crypto exchange.

USDC has been under split supervision since October 14, 2026

On October 14, 2026 the European Banking Authority classified the stablecoin USDC as the first significant e-money token in the European Union. Its issuer in the EU is Circle Internet Financial Europe SAS. Of 45 e-money tokens reported across the Union, one now carries that status for the first time.

From November 12, 2026 two authorities will share the work. The EBA takes over direct supervision of own funds, the asset reserve, liquidity requirements and the recovery and redemption plans. France's ACPR stays responsible for governance, qualifying holdings, fit-and-proper assessment, outsourcing and conflicts of interest. How the classification came about is described in our article on EBA supervision of USDC.

For the interest question this status counts for more than it seems at first glance. The stricter requirements on own funds and reserve cover exactly the pot an issuer could pay anything out of. The more tightly the reserve has to be run, the less room any earnings would leave, and under article 50 the issuer may not distribute them in any case.

Yield on stablecoins is created by lending, not by the issuer

If the issuer may pay no interest, where does the yield on stablecoin balances shown by some platforms come from? The income arises one step further along. Your stablecoin is lent out, deposited in a credit protocol or handed to a trading counterparty, and the interest comes from whoever borrows it. The issuer stays out of it, and the token itself throws off nothing.

That is why such offers are almost always called lending, earn or savings and not an interest account. Legally there is a credit transaction with a third party behind them, and no deposit with a bank. To see how the mechanism works, read our article on crypto lending and how the interest arises. Which stablecoins play any role in Europe is shown in our stablecoin overview.

In lending, the investor carries the platform's default risk

The difference between interest and a lending return decides who is liable when things go wrong. A euro bank balance sits behind the statutory deposit guarantee. Lent crypto-assets have no equivalent: if the other side fails, your claim is worth only as much as the debtor. Add to that the risk in the token itself, which can lose its link to the reference currency; what gives that away early is in our article on spotting a depeg.

There is one more layer that rarely appears in marketing copy. Many yield products pass the funds on to a protocol or a partner whose name the customer never learns. To judge a yield, ask who stands at the far end and what happens if that partner fails. A total loss is possible in these structures.

Our assessment: the interest ban protects holders more than the word ban suggests. A holder of an e-money token can redeem it at par at any time under MiCA; an issuer promising interest on top would have to take risks in the reserve that endanger precisely that claim. One side effect argues the other way: the ban does not end the search for yield, it pushes that search out of the regulated space and into lending products where neither a redemption claim nor a deposit guarantee applies. Both points are documented. The redemption claim stands in the regulation, and the shift can be read off the product names of providers who speak of earn and savings where the law sees a loan.

Lending income falls under section 22 no. 3 of the German Income Tax Act

In Germany stablecoins count for tax purposes as other assets and not as money. Income from lending them therefore falls under section 22 no. 3 of the Income Tax Act rather than the flat-rate withholding tax on investment income: income from services, taxed at your personal rate. The Federal Ministry of Finance confirmed this treatment in its circular of March 6, 2025 on the income tax treatment of certain crypto-assets.

What matters is the moment income reaches you and its value in euros on that very day. Anyone paid out weekly or daily collects a correspondingly large number of individual receipts over the year, which are added up at year end. A platform showing only the closing balance therefore delivers too little for a tax return.

The €256 threshold applies per calendar year and to all services together

Section 22 no. 3 contains a threshold of its own, and the statutory wording stays brief: such income is not subject to income tax if it amounted to less than €256 in the calendar year. Three properties of that figure matter in practice.

First, it is an exemption limit and no allowance. At €255 everything stays tax free; at €256 the full amount becomes taxable, and not merely the part above the line. Second, the limit applies to the calendar year and not to individual platforms; anyone earning €100 at each of three providers lands above it with €300. Third, other income from services in the same year counts towards it, from an occasional brokerage fee for instance.

Losses from such services cannot be offset against salary, nor against capital gains. The law allows them to be set only against income of the same kind from other years.

Swapping a stablecoin is a disposal under section 23 of the Income Tax Act

Beyond the income there is a second level: the token itself. Swapping Bitcoin into USDC, or USDC back into euros, is a disposal for tax purposes under section 23 of the Income Tax Act. If no more than a year lies between acquisition and sale, the gain is taxable; after that it is not. On the stablecoin itself little usually arises, because its price barely moves; on the coin swapped away, often a great deal.

Two points tend to get lost here. Section 23 has a threshold of its own: if total gains from such transactions stay below €1,000 in the calendar year, they remain tax free. And the law extends the one-year period to ten years where an asset is used as a source of income in at least one calendar year.

That second provision unsettled investors who lent or staked their coins for years. In its circular of March 6, 2025 the Federal Ministry of Finance recorded that staking and lending do not extend the one-year period. The income received instead starts a one-year period of its own from the day it is credited. For holders that means a lent stablecoin is free of disposal tax after a year, while the running income from it never is.

Stablecoin interest: a €256 threshold, but no yield from the issuer

The legal position is clearer than the product pages of many providers. Nothing comes out of the token, something does come from a borrower, and the tax office treats the two differently. Three steps bring order to it.

1. Establish who pays the yield. If the terms say lending, earn or savings, you are lending your token to a third party. Whether the platform is authorised for that in Europe can be looked up in our comparison of regulated crypto exchanges.
2. Record every receipt separately. Date, amount and the euro rate on the day of the credit belong in the record, because the €256 limit applies across all platforms together. Which programs write that down automatically is shown in our overview of crypto tax tools and portfolio trackers.
3. Separate the balance from the credit business. What you do not lend does not need to sit with the provider either; self-custody takes the counterparty's default risk out of the equation. The devices for it are in the hardware wallet comparison.

(As of October 20, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

World has tailored its identity check to a single industry for the first time. Co-founder Alex Blania presented a package called World ID for banking and finance on Sunday, October 18, 2026, at the Money20/20 conference in Las Vegas. It bundles three products that already existed: the World ID App, World ID for Zoom and World ID for Agents. WLD trades at $0.507 on Monday evening, 7.7 percent above its level 24 hours earlier. Over seven days it is still down 1.1 percent, and over 30 days up 16.3 percent, in each case according to CoinGecko.

The announcement amounts to more than a price move: World is now selling its technology to institutions that are themselves regulated. Whether that turns into revenue is not yet settled, and that is precisely where this token deserves a close look.

World ID for banks: what World presented on October 18

According to the announcement on world.org, the offering is aimed at banks, asset managers and other financial service providers. The company says it is the first time World has pointed its identity network at a single industry. The offering has been available since October 18, and World does not name a price. Prospective customers are directed to a contact address.

World lists the use cases as opening an account, approving large transfers, restoring access to a locked account, and video meetings where a lot of money is at stake. The reasoning behind it: once an AI can convincingly reproduce a voice and a face, a call or a video no longer counts as proof.

No bank named as a customer. Neither the announcement nor the coverage names an institution running the package in production. Five partners are named to assess what the technology is suited for. That is a distinction that matters when placing this news.

Proof of Human, Proof of Presence and Proof of Attributes: the three proofs

World works with credentials it calls Proofs. Three of them appear in the announcement:

• Proof of Human establishes that someone is a real and unique person. It is created by a one-time visit to an Orb, World's verification device. The company says more than 18 million people hold this credential.
• Proof of Presence is a short liveness check on a phone. It shows that a person is actually there at the moment of the check, and it needs no additional hardware.
• Proof of Attributes confirms a single detail from an official identity document, such as nationality or the fact that someone is above a given age. By World's account, only the detail that was queried is disclosed, not the whole document.

Why separating the credentials matters for banks

A bank has to know its customers, but it may not collect data at will. If a credential returns only the one detail that is needed, the volume of data the institution has to store and protect drops. That is exactly World's pitch: confirm nationality or age without collecting paperwork.

What is documented so far is the claim, not its implementation at a German institution. The announcement does not say whether a supervisor in the European Union would accept this route as sufficient verification, and it makes no mention of Europe, the EU, Germany or the General Data Protection Regulation.

World ID for Zoom: how the deepfake check works inside a video call

Of the three building blocks, World ID for Zoom is the only one the announcement describes as generally available. The check had been running in a limited beta since April 2026. It compares a selfie taken during the meeting, plus the live video feed, against the image captured at the first Orb verification. Any participant can request the check in the middle of a call. Hosts are to be able to require Proof of Presence in the waiting room in future, though World gives no date for that.

World ID for Agents is the third component and, by the company's account, still in beta. Behind it sits AgentKit, a tool that lets a verified person pass credentials to an AI agent so the agent may act on their behalf.

The design partners: Bain Capital, VanEck Funds, OpenExchange, Outtake and Pantera Capital

World names five partners accompanying the offering: Bain Capital, OpenExchange, Outtake, Pantera Capital and VanEck Funds. By World's account, VanEck already tested the Zoom check during the beta. The partners are meant to work out what the credentials are good for in financial services.

Two of the five names are familiar in the crypto market: VanEck issues exchange-traded products on crypto assets, and Pantera Capital is one of the sector's venture capital investors. An asset manager that already launches crypto products is an obvious first conversation. It is not a savings bank or a cooperative bank. To see how far German institutions have come on crypto assets, read our report on the launch of crypto trading at the savings banks.

$40 billion in fraud losses: the number behind the product

World backs the offering with two pieces of evidence. First, it points to a Deloitte estimate that fraud enabled by generative AI in the United States could rise to $40 billion by 2027, up from an estimated $12.3 billion in 2023. Second, the announcement cites a case from early 2024 at the engineering firm Arup: an employee transferred roughly $25.6 million after a video call in which the other participants had been recreated as deepfakes.

Both figures come from the provider's own account and describe the market World is addressing. They are no evidence that banks will pay for the package. The coverage by Unchained states explicitly that there is neither a price nor a timetable for the rollout.

Deepfake, Orb and liveness check in brief

A deepfake is an AI-generated imitation of a person's face or voice built to pass as real. The Orb is the spherical device World uses to verify people once; the company says the World ID App is available in app stores in more than 150 countries, and the Orbs currently stand at locations including the New York Stock Exchange. A liveness check is a short test designed to show that a living person is sitting in front of the camera and that no recording is playing.

WLD price at $0.507: weekly high, weekly low and the 24-hour move

According to CoinGecko, WLD costs $0.507 on Monday evening. Over the past 24 hours the range ran from $0.460 to $0.516, a gain of 7.7 percent. Measured on daily closes over the past seven days, the weekly high was $0.516 on October 17 and the weekly low $0.489 on October 19. Market capitalisation stands at roughly $1.94 billion, and turnover over the last 24 hours at roughly $275 million. That puts Worldcoin 51st among the largest crypto assets.

The gap to the record remains wide: the all-time high of $11.74 dates from March 9, 2024, which leaves today's price roughly 96 percent below it. How little a price move says on its own is clear from a glance back: as recently as October 4 we noted that WLD had gained 50 percent within a month with no news behind it. This time there is news.

Circulating supply, cap and regional availability of the WLD token

Three figures matter for the token itself, and all three can be verified. CoinGecko puts the circulating supply at roughly 3.82 billion WLD. The cap is 10 billion. That leaves only 38.2 percent of the total on the market, with the remainder able to arrive over time and enlarge the circulating supply.

There is also a restriction World names in the announcement itself: availability of the WLD token is regionally limited. The page does not say at that point which countries are affected, and the announcement supports no conclusion for Germany. The identity products and the token are two separate things: World ID works without WLD, and a bank customer who gets verified is not buying a token in the process.

Buying route under MiCA, custody and the holding period for WLD in Germany

If you want to buy or hold WLD, four points carry practical weight in Germany.

Buying route. The transition period under Article 143 of the EU's MiCA regulation expired on July 1, 2026. A provider offering crypto-asset services in Germany needs authorisation. Check that authorisation in BaFin's company register before you open an account, not afterwards. Which exchanges charge which fees is set out in our comparison of crypto exchanges. Whether an individual provider lists WLD is its own decision, and a delisting is possible at any time with smaller assets.

Custody. If your balance sits on an exchange, the exchange holds the keys. To hold them yourself you need your own wallet, and for larger amounts sensibly a device that stores the keys offline. The differences between the models are set out in the hardware wallet comparison. Reports in October about tampered devices sold through intermediaries showed that the provenance of the device matters there too.

Holding period. For crypto assets held as private assets, Germany still applies the one-year period under Section 23 of the Income Tax Act: hold for more than a year and the gain on sale is untaxed. The Federal Ministry of Finance is working on a reform intended to change that for newly acquired holdings. There is no cabinet decision, and until a new rule takes effect the one-year period stays in force. We are tracking the progress of that reform.

Leverage and liquidation. WLD moves almost eight percent in a single day. Trading on leverage shortens the distance to forced liquidation accordingly: at five times leverage, a move of roughly 20 percent against you is enough to wipe out the deposit. With an asset ranked 51st and $275 million in daily turnover, execution in a fast move can land away from the price you expected.

Levels between $0.489 and $0.516

On the upside the first level to watch is the weekly high of $0.516, which the price nearly reached on Monday evening; above that comes the round number of $0.55. On the downside the weekly low of $0.489 and the 24-hour low of $0.460 frame the range, with the round number of $0.45 below it. These are reference points taken from last week's price data, not price targets and not a recommendation.

Following the announcement there is no scheduled event that would demonstrably move the price in the coming days. Money20/20 runs until October 21, 2026. Whether an institution will be named as a customer there is an open question.

World ID for banks: no named bank client, no price

The announcement is a sales move with a clear addressee but no figures on the business behind it. Three steps will help you follow this without waiting for the next price headline:

1. Check the authorisation before you buy. Look up in BaFin's company register whether your provider holds MiCA authorisation, and match the result against our overview of regulated crypto exchanges.
2. Settle the custody question. Decide whether the balance stays on the exchange or you hold the keys yourself, and pick the device from the hardware wallet comparison at the manufacturer or an authorised dealer.
3. Record the purchase date. Note the date, the quantity and the price of every acquisition. For the one-year period, and for any new rule, the acquisition date is the decisive detail; the tools for it are in the comparison of tax and portfolio tools.

(As of October 19, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

A crypto GmbH pays tax on every realised gain, and it does so from day one. Depending on the municipality, the burden runs from 25.6 to 33.3 percent. Held privately, the same gain is tax-free after a holding period of one year. Whether a GmbH is worth it for crypto is therefore not a question of the tax rate but a question of the time horizon.

If you buy coins, leave them for a year and then need the money privately, you are almost always better off without a company. If you trade frequently, reinvest the gains inside the company over years and do not take them out, the GmbH structure can win. This article works through both routes at the rates in force, names the three expensive myths and shows what the draft bill of September 30, 2026 would change in the calculation.

Several names circulate for the same thing. Trading GmbH, crypto trading GmbH, Bitcoin GmbH and asset-managing GmbH usually mean the same construction: a corporation that holds and trades cryptocurrencies on its own account. Whether the articles of association name asset management or trading as the purpose changes nothing about the tax position of a crypto GmbH. All that matters is that a corporation stands behind the holding.

Crypto in a GmbH: corporation tax and trade tax from the first sale

For tax purposes, crypto-assets are economic assets. Held inside a GmbH, they form part of the business assets, that is, the assets serving the company's operations. Every realised gain therefore increases the company's profit, and corporation tax and trade tax fall due on that profit. The holding period plays no part: selling Bitcoin after three weeks or after seven years makes no difference to the GmbH's tax rate.

Trade tax is the item most often underestimated. Many assume that a company which merely manages its own assets and conducts no trade in the everyday sense stays exempt. The statute takes a different view. Under section 2(2) sentence 1 of the Trade Tax Act, the activity of corporations counts "always and in full" as a trade or business, and the GmbH is named there expressly. Liability for trade tax therefore attaches to the legal form, not to the activity.

The extended reduction with which property companies avoid trade tax is no help here: section 9(1) sentence 2 of the Trade Tax Act requires the company to manage exclusively its own real property. A company holding coins does not meet that. How the line is drawn when crypto-assets sit inside a business that already exists is something we set out in our article on Bitcoin in a company, between private and business assets.

The one-year holding period under section 23 EStG applies only to private assets

The reason private investors in Germany have so far managed well without a company is in section 23(1) sentence 1 no. 2 of the Income Tax Act. What is taxable there are "disposals of other economic assets where the period between acquisition and disposal is not more than one year". Hold for longer than a year and no taxable event occurs at all. The gain goes untaxed, however large it is.

There is also an exemption threshold. Under section 23(3) sentence 5 of the Income Tax Act, gains stay tax-free if the total gain from private disposals in the calendar year came to less than 1,000 euros. A threshold of that kind is all or nothing: at a gain of 999 euros you pay nothing, at 1,000 euros the entire amount becomes taxable, not just the excess. An allowance would catch only the part above the line.

Both apply exclusively to private assets. Inside the GmbH there is neither the one-year period nor the threshold. The company's disadvantage is therefore no arithmetic slip but built into the statute. The wording can be read at the Federal Office of Justice in section 23 of the Income Tax Act.

25.6 to 33.3 percent: how the company's tax burden is put together

The burden on a GmbH consists of three components. Corporation tax amounts to 15 percent of profit for assessment periods up to 2027. Added to that is the solidarity surcharge, which under section 4 of the Solidarity Surcharge Act is 5.5 percent of the assessment base, that is, 5.5 percent of the corporation tax. Together that gives 15.825 percent.

The third component is trade tax, and this item varies. It arises from the tax base rate of 3.5 percent under section 11(2) of the Trade Tax Act, multiplied by the municipality's multiplier. The multiplier is the percentage each municipality sets for itself; where it decides nothing of its own, it is 280 percent under section 16(4) sentence 2 of the Trade Tax Act. Hence the range:

• Multiplier 280 percent: 9.8 percent trade tax, total burden 25.62 percent
• Multiplier 400 percent: 14.0 percent trade tax, total burden 29.83 percent
• Multiplier 500 percent: 17.5 percent trade tax, total burden 33.32 percent
• Private assets after one year: 0 percent

The company's seat therefore decides around eight percentage points of the tax burden. Which multiplier applies to your municipality is set out in its trade tax bylaw. Working out the figures cleanly for your own holdings is impossible without complete documentation; we have set the tools for that side by side in the comparison of crypto tax software and portfolio trackers.

From 2028 corporation tax falls, reaching 10 percent by 2032

A company is founded for years, and over those years the tax rate moves. Section 23(1) of the Corporation Tax Act now sets out a staged plan: 15 percent for assessment periods up to 2027, then 14 percent in 2028, 13 percent in 2029, 12 percent in 2030, 11 percent in 2031 and 10 percent from 2032.

For the total burden at a multiplier of 400 percent that means a slide from 29.83 percent today to 28.77 percent in 2028 and 24.55 percent from 2032. At a multiplier of 280 percent it falls over the same span from 25.62 to 20.35 percent. A GmbH that still trails the private route in 2026 stands differently in 2032, and anyone running the numbers today should carry those stages into the calculation rather than working with the current rate alone. The staged plan is set out verbatim in section 23 of the Corporation Tax Act.

The distribution costs a second time: 48.3 percent total burden

The rates named so far concern only the company level. The money then sits in the GmbH, not in a private account. Take it out and the second level applies. A profit distribution to a private shareholder attracts withholding tax of 25 percent under section 43a(1) no. 1 of the Income Tax Act, plus the solidarity surcharge, 26.375 percent together.

Calculated on a gain of 100,000 euros at a multiplier of 400 percent, it looks like this: the company pays 29,825 euros, leaving 70,175 euros. Distributing that amount costs a further 18,509 euros. What arrives privately is 51,666 euros, a total burden of 48.33 percent. At the minimum multiplier of 280 percent it is 45.24 percent. The same gain, realised privately after a holding period of one year, arrives undiminished under the law as it stands.

That names the decisive variable. The GmbH is strong where the money stays inside and keeps working, because only the first level then counts and compounding works on a larger amount. As soon as a withdrawal is planned, the advantage reverses.

Tax exemption through a holding company? Why section 8b KStG does not cover crypto-assets

In conversations about crypto structures the claim regularly comes up that a holding company makes 95 percent of profits tax-free. Behind it sits section 8b of the Corporation Tax Act, and the provision does not deliver that for crypto-assets. Its paragraph 1 leaves out of account income within the meaning of section 20(1) nos. 1, 2, 9 and 10(a) of the Income Tax Act. What is meant are profit distributions and comparable income from shares in corporations, that is, the case where one company holds a stake in another.

A Bitcoin is not a stake in a corporation. When a GmbH sells coins at a profit, that profit remains fully taxable, even with a holding company above the GmbH. The relief applies one storey higher and only to a different transaction: when the holding company disposes of the shares in the subsidiary. A holding company can therefore make sense on a later sale of the company; it does not make the running gains on coins any cheaper.

Building a structure on that promise alone means paying twice: once for the formation and advisory costs of a second company, and once for the full taxes you believed you were avoiding.

Contributing private coins to the GmbH counts as a disposal

The second expensive myth concerns the way in. Coins do not move from private assets into your own company free of tax. Whether you sell them to the GmbH or contribute them in kind, in both cases you part with an asset as a private individual and receive consideration for it. That is a disposal within the meaning of section 23 of the Income Tax Act.

A clear order follows. If the purchase is less than a year old, the contribution triggers income tax at your personal rate, and on the entire unrealised gain. Once the year has elapsed, the transaction stays tax-free privately, and the company records the market value as its acquisition cost. That higher entry value reduces later gains inside the GmbH. Waiting out the one-year period before contributing therefore gives nothing away; it raises the company's cost base.

Formally, the formation needs capital. Share capital must come to at least 25,000 euros under section 5(1) of the GmbH Act. Before registration in the commercial register, a quarter of the nominal amount must be paid up on each share under section 7(2), and at least half the share capital in total, so far as no contributions in kind are agreed. A contribution in coins is therefore possible, but it calls for a defensible valuation at the cut-off date, which means work when prices move.

At what point does private crypto trading count as a business?

The calculation above assumes your trading stays private, and that cannot be taken for granted. Business activity is described in section 15(2) of the Income Tax Act: an "independent, sustained activity undertaken with the intention of making a profit and presenting itself as participation in general economic life" is a trade or business. If the tax office classifies a private investor as an entrepreneur, the whole frame shifts: the income becomes business income, the one-year holding period falls away even without a company, and trade tax is added.

This line is not tied to a fixed number of crypto transactions. Trading one's own assets does not meet the criteria through frequency alone. It gets more critical when services for third parties come into play, such as managing crypto assets belonging to others, or when mining and staking are carried on at a larger scale. Where the tax authorities draw the line on mining is something we have written up under crypto mining and the question of business income.

For the decision about a company this counts twice over. If you are at risk of being classified as a business in any case, you lose the main advantage of the private route even without a GmbH. Corporate taxation inside the company then moves closer to the alternative, because the disposal gains are taxable either way.

Crypto losses: what the company may offset and private assets may not

This is the GmbH's strongest point, and it is named less often than the tax rates. A loss inside the company reduces its profit as a whole. It can therefore be set against income from consultancy, letting, interest or any other activity of the GmbH, because a corporation knows only one category of income.

With private assets it is different. Losses from private disposals may under section 23(3) of the Income Tax Act be offset only against gains from disposals of the same kind, in the same year or, via the loss carryforward, in later years. Against employment income or against gains on shares it does not work. What happens to losses already assessed from earlier years is something we have written up under checking the crypto loss carryforward.

For investors that means: carrying large realised losses in bad years while also having other business income recovers something inside the GmbH that lapses privately. That is a real advantage, but it works only if there is in fact something to offset.

Share capital, notary and annual accounts: the running costs of the GmbH structure

A GmbH is a standing obligation. Formation involves notarial recording of the articles of association and registration in the commercial register. After that, the same bundle of duties falls due every year: double-entry bookkeeping, annual accounts with a balance sheet, filing in the company register, corporation tax and trade tax returns, and VAT pre-returns so far as the company carries on activity relevant for VAT.

The size and extent of these items depend on the individual case. Notary fees follow the transaction value, and the tax adviser's fees follow the Tax Advisers' Fee Ordinance and the actual work involved. There are no defensible flat figures for this, and we deliberately name none here, because they diverge widely with the number of transactions and the quality of the preparatory work. What matters is the character of these costs: every one of these items falls due even in a year in which the company sells not a single coin.

That sets the lower bound for the whole consideration. Below a holding whose expected tax saving clearly exceeds the annual fixed costs, the structure does not pay off, even when everything else speaks for it.

How does the tax office review crypto? Record-keeping duties and custody in business assets

A stricter standard applies inside the company than privately. Every acquisition and every disposal is an accounting entry and has to be recorded with date, quantity, price and counter-value. The holding appears on the balance sheet and must be valued at the reporting date. Without clean individual records the profit cannot be determined, and an estimate by the tax authorities rarely falls in the taxpayer's favour.

The administrative frame for the tax treatment within business assets is set by the Federal Ministry of Finance circular of March 6, 2025 on the income tax treatment of crypto-assets. It uses crypto-assets as the umbrella term, allocates the income to the categories of income and requires, for determining the profit, individual valuation of the units disposed of at their carried-forward acquisition cost as a rule; average acquisition costs come into consideration only where that allocation is not possible. The whole crypto taxation of the company hangs on that requirement, because without allocable acquisition costs no profit can be determined.

Separating custody matters in practice. The GmbH's coins belong in wallets and accounts attributable to the company. Mixing company and private holdings in the same wallet jeopardises their attribution to business assets and creates a point of dispute that is hard to resolve after the fact. The same goes for key management: who may access the holdings, and how is that documented?

That the tax authorities find out is no longer the exception. Trading platforms in the EU are subject to reporting duties, and the automatic exchange of information is being extended to non-EU states; we described the state of play under the data exchange under the CARF framework. The assumption that a company draws less attention than a private individual does not hold: the GmbH files returns every year and discloses its figures.

What the planned reform of the holding period would change in this calculation

The entire comparison hangs on the one-year holding period. That is precisely what is up for decision. According to our reporting of October 16, 2026 on the status of the crypto holding period, a draft bill of September 30, 2026 provides for moving crypto-assets out of the private disposal regime and into that for capital investments. As at the date of that reporting, the cabinet had not decided, and the one-year period continued to apply unchanged.

Were the draft to pass in that form, private gains would become taxable regardless of the holding period, on the logic of capital investments at 25 percent plus the solidarity surcharge, so 26.375 percent. Today's advantage of the private route, complete tax exemption after one year, would fall away. The GmbH would then stand roughly level at 25.62 percent on the minimum multiplier and worse at higher multipliers, so long as profits are distributed; with the staged corporation tax plan from 2028 it would be cheaper at the first level.

All that is firm about this so far is the status of the draft. A draft bill is not a statute, and expert views diverge: there are accounts according to which the 2026 Annual Tax Act contains no amendment to section 23 of the Income Tax Act at all. Founding a company on the strength of a draft would be a bet on a legislative procedure.

For whom a GmbH for crypto pays off and for whom it does not

A pattern can be read from the figures. It speaks for the company if you trade so frequently that the one-year period would never apply privately anyway, if the gains are reinvested inside the company over many years and no withdrawal is planned, if realised losses can run against other business income, or if the assets are to be bundled for an orderly succession.

It speaks against the company if you buy and hold for longer than a year, if you will foreseeably need the money privately, or if the holding is so small that the annual fixed costs eat up the tax effect. On balance, the GmbH is a tool for active investors who retain earnings over the long run, and not a tax-saving model for the buy-and-hold case.

This assessment is no substitute for a calculation. Which route is cheaper at your trading volume, your personal tax rate and your municipality's multiplier is something a tax adviser works through on your figures. The provisions and rates named here set the frame within which that calculation takes place.

Crypto GmbH: only permanent reinvestment beats the holding period

1. Count a full year of trading behaviour. Note how many of your sales took place within twelve months of the purchase. If the share is low, the private route stays ahead. If the company needs a trading venue with a corporate account, our overview of regulated crypto exchanges helps.
2. Set the withdrawal against the alternative. Put the total burden of 45.24 to 48.33 percent on distribution next to the zero percent after one year in private assets. If it is about a securities account rather than coins of your own, compare the terms in the crypto broker comparison.
3. Sort custody and records before forming the company. Separate company and private holdings from the outset and keep access traceable. Suitable devices for that are in the hardware wallet comparison.

(As of October 19, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

The Nasdaq-listed bitcoin holder bought as warrant holders exercised, bringing in $369 million, and it now plans a $630 million sale of 15% preferred stock.

Anthropic committed 5% of its shares to a public benefit fund, and within hours Elon Musk promised a SpaceX share to every American child.

XRP developers published a second amendment to repair the ledger’s new uncollateralized lending feature while the original still awaits validator approval.

Hobbyists are booting iOS 16 on Xiaomi and Nothing phones and posting the proof. It barely works, but it suggests Apple's software is no longer welded to Apple's hardware.

Unveiled at Money20/20, the API-based tool combines payment and blockchain intelligence to flag fraud, scams and sanctions exposure before funds move on-chain.

Nullmask is a hot choice right now, but investors must stay cautious considering the token distribution.

Shark Tank star Kevin O'Leary has named stablecoins the safest crypto asset class.

BlackRock has filed for another Bitcoin ETF, this time introducing a product designed to protect investors against downside risks while limiting potential gains.

Starknet, Filecoin, Midnight, and Near Protocol have all pulled back from their October highs and now sit at key support levels that will decide their next move.

Solana has recorded a massive 104% increase in non-vote transactions, processing a staggering 8.92 billion transactions in Q3 2026 compared to Q4 2025.

TLDR:

• JPMorgan projects Bitcoin’s compound annual return at 10% over the next 10–15 years.
• Bitcoin’s forecast exceeds U.S. large-cap stocks at 7.5% and gold at 5.5%.
• JPMorgan estimates Bitcoin’s annualized volatility at 55%, reflecting its elevated risk profile.
• The firm includes Bitcoin in return forecasts but excludes it from its main portfolio allocation calculations.

JPMorgan Asset Management expects Bitcoin to deliver stronger long-term returns than U.S. large-cap stocks and gold.

The investment firm projects Bitcoin’s compound annual return at 10% over the next 10–15 years. Its 2027 Long-Term Capital Market Assumptions place U.S. large-cap stocks at 7.5%, U.S. real estate investment trusts (REITs) at 8.2%, and gold at 5.5%. 

JPMorgan also estimates Bitcoin’s arithmetic annual return at 20.9%, alongside annualized volatility of 55%. The forecast marks the firm’s first attempt to quantify Bitcoin’s long-term return potential.

JPMorgan Bitcoin Forecast Reflects Changing Institutional Views

JPMorgan included Bitcoin in its long-term return assumptions while keeping the cryptocurrency outside its main portfolio allocation calculations. The firm cited Bitcoin’s high volatility and unstable correlations with other assets as reasons for treating it separately.

Compound annual return measures the average yearly growth rate required to reach an investment’s final value over a specified period. By comparison, arithmetic returns represent an average of yearly returns without accounting for compounding.

The distinction matters because Bitcoin’s price swings can produce substantial differences between its average annual return and compounded growth. JPMorgan’s 55% volatility estimate reflects the cryptocurrency’s historically large price fluctuations.

Recent Bitcoin volatility has reportedly declined to around 43%. However, that figure remains below JPMorgan’s modeled assumption and does not eliminate the risk of sharp price movements.

Bitwise Chief Investment Officer Matt Hougan highlighted the forecast on X, framing Bitcoin’s inclusion as a sign of changing institutional attitudes. His comments pointed to the significance of a major asset manager formally assessing Bitcoin alongside traditional investments.

Still, JPMorgan’s forecast does not guarantee Bitcoin will outperform stocks or gold. It represents a forward-looking estimate based on the firm’s capital market assumptions.

What JPMorgan’s Bitcoin Forecast Means for Investors

JPMorgan’s broader outlook anticipates stronger economic growth over the next 10–15 years. The firm attributes this outlook partly to a projected $15 trillion global capital expenditure surge, with artificial intelligence driving technology investment and productivity gains.

It forecasts U.S. real GDP growth at 2.1% and developed-market nominal growth at 4.2%. The report also raises its U.S. large-cap equity return forecast to 7.5%, reflecting expected profit margins above 15%.

Against this backdrop, Bitcoin’s 10% projected compound annual return places it above the report’s forecasts for major traditional assets. Yet investors must weigh that potential return against volatility and Bitcoin’s uncertain relationships with other investments.

JPMorgan also warns that rising stock-bond correlations increase the importance of diversification. Its analysis suggests alternative investments could improve portfolio returns and risk-adjusted performance.

For Bitcoin investors, the central distinction is between projected returns and portfolio suitability. JPMorgan has quantified Bitcoin’s potential but has not incorporated it into its main covariance matrices, which measure how asset returns move together.

The forecast therefore signals growing institutional attention without amounting to a recommendation for every portfolio. Bitcoin’s projected return leads the listed assets, but its risk profile remains a critical consideration.

The post JP Morgan Predicts Bitcoin Will Outperform Stocks and Gold by 2036 appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino claims wallet freezes helped reduce Iran-linked stablecoin volume by 94%.
• Ardoino says Tether froze addresses four weeks before official US and Israeli sanctions designations.
• Tether claims it acted before Chainalysis flagged the relevant addresses in 99% of cases.
• A Senate investigation found 84% of 846 Iran-linked wallets relied almost exclusively on USDT.

Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino says the company’s wallet freezes helped reduce Iran-linked stablecoin transaction volume by 94%. His response challenges a US Senate investigation that accused Tether of enabling Iran’s sanctions evasion through its dollar-pegged stablecoin, USDT.

Ardoino said Tether froze relevant addresses an average of four weeks before official sanctions designations by the US Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) and Israel’s National Bureau for Counter Terror Financing (NBCTF). He also claimed Tether acted before Chainalysis flagged the addresses in 99% of cases.

The remarks directly challenge findings from Senator Richard Blumenthal, the Democratic ranking member of the Senate Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations (PSI). The investigation examined 846 crypto wallets sanctioned or targeted for seizure over links to Iran and regional proxy groups.

According to Blumenthal’s report, 84% of those wallets transacted exclusively or almost exclusively in USDT. The senator argued that Tether’s past enforcement failures allowed Iran’s shadow banking network to use cryptocurrency for international payments.

Ardoino defended Tether’s enforcement record, pointing to its law enforcement partnerships and earlier interventions. The competing accounts raise questions about how effectively stablecoin issuers can prevent sanctioned entities from moving funds.

Tether’s Iran-Linked USDT Response Challenges Senate Findings

Ardoino’s central argument is that Tether acted before authorities formally designated the wallets. His statement suggests the company did not simply wait for official sanctions lists before restricting suspected illicit activity.

He also attributed the reported 94% decline in Iran-linked stablecoin volume to Tether’s actions. However, the supplied information does not establish the measurement period, baseline transaction volume, or methodology behind that figure.

The distinction matters because wallet freezes and sanctions designations serve different purposes. A freeze restricts access to USDT held at a targeted address, while a formal designation comes from the relevant authority.

Tether’s claim that it acted before Chainalysis flagged addresses in 99% of cases adds another measure of its response speed. Still, the statement alone does not independently verify the underlying transaction data or establish how much of the decline resulted from freezes.

Why Tether’s Sanctions Compliance Matters for USDT

Blumenthal’s investigation presents a different picture of USDT’s role in Iran-linked financial activity. It alleges that Tether failed to freeze illicit wallets consistently before 2024 and did not proactively block other clearly illicit addresses.

The report also links USDT transactions to efforts to move funds into and out of Iran. Investigators identified activity involving the Central Bank of Iran and cryptocurrency-based networks connected to regional proxy organizations.

Blumenthal has asked the US Treasury Department and Justice Department to investigate Tether’s anti-money laundering and sanctions compliance practices. He argued that cryptocurrency issuers require stronger oversight to prevent potential sanctions violations.

For USDT users, the dispute highlights a key feature of centralized stablecoins. Unlike decentralized assets, USDT can be frozen by its issuer at designated blockchain addresses, allowing Tether to restrict transfers involving targeted wallets.

That control can support law enforcement efforts, but it also places greater responsibility on the issuer to identify suspicious activity and respond appropriately. For traders and investors, the dispute reinforces the importance of monitoring regulatory scrutiny surrounding major stablecoin providers.

Tether’s 94% reduction claim offers a direct rebuttal to the Senate investigation, but the competing accounts remain unresolved. The central question is whether Tether’s enforcement measures adequately prevent illicit use while meeting its legal obligations.

The post Tether CEO Challenges Senate Report With 94% Iran-Linked USDT Decline appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• XRP whale outflows on Binance fell to a five-year low, with the 90-day average reaching $49.7 million.
• Whale outflows averaged $3.5 billion in February 2025, when XRP approached its cycle peak near $3.30.
• CasiTrades identifies $1.27 as support and $1.65 as the resistance level needed to strengthen its bullish case.
• Crypto Patel sees higher targets if XRP closes above $1.55, but those projections remain conditional on price action.

XRP whale outflows on Binance have fallen to their lowest level in five years, according to market analyst Darkfost.

The 90-day moving average has dropped to $49.7 million, returning to levels last seen in October 2021. That compares with $3.5 billion in February 2025, when XRP traded near its cycle peak of $3.30. 

Meanwhile, XRP is trading around $1.30, down 0.81% over 24 hours and 4.81% over seven days, according to CoinGecko. Analysts are watching whether the token can hold nearby support and break resistance as whale activity remains subdued.

XRP Price Prediction: Whale Outflows Signal Weaker Buying Interest

Darkfost said Binance whale outflows surged during February 2025, with several daily spikes exceeding $10 billion. The 90-day average then stood at $3.5 billion, reflecting far stronger activity around XRP’s cycle high.

Since then, whale outflows have steadily declined. Darkfost said the latest average of $49.7 million marks a five-year low, matching October 2021 levels. The analyst suggested whales may be waiting for a more attractive entry price before returning in force.

Lower outflows do not automatically mean the XRP price must fall. However, Darkfost argued that subdued whale interest could leave the market short of buying volume needed to sustain an advance. The analyst also noted that sentiment can reverse when trading interest and volume are depressed.

The metric shows a sharp change in whale activity, but it cannot guarantee XRP’s next price move. 

At press time, CoinGecko’s data shows XRP with roughly $1.296 billion in daily trading volume. The token’s weekly dip shows that the market is yet to establish a clear recovery.

Can XRP Hold $1.27 and Break the $1.65 Resistance?

Analyst CasiTrades said XRP found support at $1.27, a level tied to the local 0.618 Fibonacci retracement and an Elliott Wave target. The price is now testing resistance near $1.30, according to the analyst.

CasiTrades said repeated tests of $1.27 remain possible, describing a market bottom as a process rather than a single event. 

A break above $1.65 would strengthen the analyst’s bullish scenario and point toward a $2.40 target. If support fails, CasiTrades identified $1.10 and $0.87 as possible downside levels.

Crypto Patel outlined a longer-term bullish scenario, conditional on higher-timeframe candles closing above $1.55. 

The analyst identified $3.67 as resistance and floated macro targets between $10 and $20, while naming $0.98 as a stop-loss threshold. Those levels are analyst projections, not confirmed outcomes.

The immediate levels are clearer than the long-range forecasts. XRP is near $1.30, with $1.27 support and $1.65 resistance shaping CasiTrades’ setup. 

Meanwhile, Darkfost’s data points to sharply reduced whale activity. A sustained recovery would need price strength and renewed demand; low outflows alone do not confirm a bottom.

The post XRP Price Forecast: Whale Activity Hits 5-Year Low as $1.27 Holds appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• The TD Sequential flashed a new buy signal for PENGU on the daily chart, per analyst Ali Charts. 
• Past signals: buy calls gained 77.64% and 66.94%, while the September 25 sell call fell 31.58%.
• SoFi lets its 15 million members buy, sell, and hold PENGU, adding exposure through a chartered bank. 
• PENGU has kept higher highs and higher lows, and a 70% rally from here could lift it toward $0.013.

The PENGU buy signal has appeared on the daily chart, according to analyst Ali Charts. The TD Sequential indicator flashed the setup for the Pudgy Penguins token. Earlier signals from the same tool preceded large price moves.

The development also arrives as SoFi began offering PENGU for buying, selling, and holding. Ali Charts suggests another rally of roughly 70% could push the token toward $0.013. The analysis points to a possible upswing from current levels.

PENGU Buy Signal Follows Earlier TD Sequential Results

Ali Charts shared the update in a post on X, labeling it a new buy signal for PENGU. The post carried the heading “PENGU: NEW BUY SIGNAL.”

According to the analyst, the TD Sequential has been very accurate at anticipating trend shifts for the token. PENGU is the token linked to the Pudgy Penguins brand.

The post listed the last three signals from the TD Sequential. On August 7, a buy signal was followed by a gain of 77.64%. Then, on September 15, another buy signal preceded a 66.94% increase. Together, those two buy signals marked the largest moves in the sequence.

However, not every reading ended in a gain. The September 25 sell signal was followed by a decline of 31.58%. That sell call marked a shift in the opposite direction for the token. The sequence shows the tool has flagged both rallies and reversals.

Ali Charts said the new signal suggests another upswing could be starting. The analyst also noted that PENGU has kept a broader sequence of higher highs and higher lows. He presented that structure as a supporting factor for the PENGU buy signal.

SoFi Listing Adds a Fundamental Angle

The timing also carries a fundamental element. Pudgy Penguins announced on X that PENGU is now available to buy, sell, and hold on SoFi. The listing places the token on a regulated banking platform.

In its post, Pudgy Penguins described SoFi as the first nationally chartered bank to offer crypto services to its members.

The platform serves more than 15 million members. The team added that the listing marks another step toward bringing PENGU to everyone, everywhere. The statement came directly from the project’s account.

Ali Charts quoted the announcement in a separate post. He called the timing interesting from a fundamental perspective, noting that fundamentals and technicals now align.

Access through SoFi gives the token exposure to a large user base. Pudgy Penguins closed its message with the line “Billions will Huddle.”

Ali Charts based the target on the results of earlier signals. The first two buy signals produced gains near 70%. Applying a similar move to the current setup leads to $0.013.

His projection depends on that higher highs and higher lows structure continuing. Therefore, the PENGU buy signal and the SoFi listing form the basis of his outlook.

The post PENGU Buy Signal Appears as SoFi Opens Trading to 15 million Members appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• HPC filed a comment letter urging the SEC to adopt Regulation Crypto Assets with five refinements.
• The proposal allows up to $75 million in offerings per 12 months under a fundraising exemption.
• HPC wants the safe harbor usable without a tacit admission of a prior investment contract.
• The group asks that federal preemption survive after a project satisfies the safe harbor.

Regulation Crypto Assets received formal backing from the Hyperliquid Policy Center (HPC), which filed a comment letter with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

The group urged the agency to adopt the proposal and recommended five refinements before finalization. The SEC released the proposal in August.

It offers token issuers a federal path through offering exemptions, a new safe harbor, and relief from state-by-state registration requirements. The letter also addresses airdrops, secondary trading, and buybacks.

What the SEC Proposed Under Regulation Crypto Assets

The SEC spent much of 2026 working on token clarity. In March, it issued an interpretation covering several token distributions, including airdrops.

Before that, a 1946 Supreme Court case about Florida citrus groves governed the analysis. As a result, many projects launched abroad or excluded Americans.

In August, the SEC proposed the rule. A startup exemption would allow offerings of up to $5 million over four years.

A fundraising exemption would permit up to $75 million in any 12-month period. Tokens sold under these exemptions would also avoid state registration.

The proposal also adds a safe harbor. It would confirm when a token no longer ties to an investment contract. Certain resales would receive the same state-level relief. Meanwhile, HPC announced its filing on X, where it described the purpose of the proposal.

In that post, the group wrote that builders “could not tell when the securities laws applied to their tokens.” It added that the proposal “gives them a federal path.” HPC also said many developers launched abroad or turned away Americans because of that uncertainty.

Five Refinements to HPC Requests for Regulation of Crypto Assets

The first recommendation concerns airdrops. HPC asks the SEC to write the March analysis into the rule text. The comment anchors that analysis to the “tangible and definable consideration” the Supreme Court requires. It also says wallet connections and sanctions screening should not count as payment.

The second addresses secondary trading. The proposal does not say how onchain protocols may facilitate resales. HPC cites the SEC’s economic analysis, which says benefits “may be fairly small” without a liquid secondary market. Therefore, the group wants clarity at adoption.

The third targets the safe harbor. Projects must certify that their essential managerial efforts are complete. However, HPC says some filers would effectively admit a past investment contract. The group wants a certification that no such contract existed, plus access while development continues.

The remaining two cover buybacks and preemption. HPC wants staff buyback guidance added to the final rule, with a single “central party” definition. It also asks that federal preemption survive once a project meets the safe harbor.

Otherwise, tokens would face registration regimes in more than 50 jurisdictions. HPC said it will keep engaging with SEC staff as the rule is finalized.

The post Hyperliquid Policy Center Urges SEC to Adopt Regulation Crypto Assets with Five Refinements appeared first on Blockonomi.

Strive CEO Matt Cole argues that gold and Bitcoin can continue to outperform the dollar as expanding money supply and rising debt erode its purchasing power.

His October 2026 thesis puts less weight on borrowing costs and more on Strive’s ability to amplify its Bitcoin exposure without taking on risks that could undermine the strategy.

Cole Says Scarce Assets Have Outpaced Money Supply Growth

In a post on X, Cole compared gold’s annualized growth with that of the US M2 money supply, a measure that includes cash, checking deposits and other liquid money.

Gold returned 9.0% annually since 1970, against 6.7% for M2, according to his figures. The gap widened in more recent periods: since the 2008 global financial crisis, gold returned 9.5% against 6.3% for M2, while since the COVID-19 period began in 2020, gold gained 18.3% annually against 6.5% for M2.

Bitcoin’s annualized return since 2020 was 43.13% in the same comparison. Cole described the cryptocurrency as “digital gold” and a superior store of value, adding that he expects it to outperform gold as it matures.

Looking at the market, the OG cryptocurrency was trading close to $83,000 at the time of writing, up by over 1% in the last 24 hours after oscillating within a range of roughly $80,700 to $82,800.

However, a seven-day loss of almost 2% sits against a 30-day gain of a similar size, and the price is down nearly 23% from a year ago and about 34% below its all-time high of over $126,000, CoinGecko data shows. Bitcoin also faces the Fed’s October 27 and 28 meeting, with preliminary one-year inflation expectations in the University of Michigan survey at 4.7%, up from 4.6%.

Strive’s Bitcoin Stack and a Test for Treasury Firms

Strive disclosed on October 13 that it had bought 3,311 BTC in a week, bringing its holding to 32,773 BTC. Then on October 14, the firm added another 2,822 BTC to take its stash to 35,595 BTC, worth about $2.9 billion at the current price.

But sentiment toward treasury companies is being tested elsewhere. MSCI finalized rules last week that could remove Strategy from its major indexes, and the stock fell from a Thursday peak above $151 to below $137 at Friday’s close.

Cole’s broader premise is that monetary debasement will continue as the debt crisis worsens. He wrote that the outperformance of scarce assets could accelerate against the dollar rather than slow, although that remains his investment thesis, not a guaranteed outcome.

For Strive, he argued, the practical challenge is maintaining a high “Amplification Ratio,” or the degree to which the company’s structure can magnify Bitcoin performance, without exposing the business to a damaging financial setback.

He believes investors place too much emphasis on the cost of capital and traditional fiat cash flows, while overlooking the company’s ability to sustain that amplification with liquidity.

The post Why Strive’s CEO Wants Investors Short Dollars, Long Bitcoin appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Germany’s Sparkassen opened crypto trading in its banking app on Monday, starting with five savings banks and priced at €0.99 per order.

The first five are Frankfurter Sparkasse, Taunus Sparkasse, Sparkasse Karlsruhe, Sparkasse Rottal-Inn and Niederrheinische Sparkasse RheinLippe. DekaBank, the securities house owned by the savings banks, runs the service under the name Krypto powered by Deka.

Moving on, Sparkasse customers can trade Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), XRP, Solana (SOL) and Polygon (POL) without a securities account, according to a report from Bloomingbit.

Each Sparkasse decides for itself whether and when to join. The German Savings Banks Association (DSGV) told the dpa news agency that 30 to 40 more banks should join every month. DSGV executive board member Joachim Schmalzl said the group aims to connect a large share of interested Sparkassen in the first half of 2027.

Deka Sets the Price

Deka’s price sheet, dated September 2026, sets no minimum order and caps each trade at €250,000. Every trade runs as a request for quote. Deka returns a binding price for a limited window, built from a market reference price plus a spread of its own. The sheet does not disclose that spread, and it lets Deka adjust pricing when volumes are large or volatility rises.

Moreover, Deka keeps the private keys in trust for customers in a shared omnibus wallet, and custody carries no fee. Withdrawals are free but can go only to addresses at four approved providers: Crypto Finance, Tangany, Bullish Europe, and Börse Stuttgart Digital Custody.

Börse Stuttgart Digital Custody, the last of those four, became the first German firm licensed under the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) in January 2025. Börse Stuttgart also works with Deka on custody for the new service, the DSGV told dpa.

The savings banks will not advise customers on crypto or promote the service broadly. Customers who trade get an explicit warning about sharp price swings and the risk of total loss. Deka’s site adds that crypto holdings are not covered by statutory deposit insurance.

DSGV Reversed Course in 2025

The DSGV floated a crypto wallet for its customers in December 2021. Its board voted against a crypto offer the following year, Handelsblatt reported. By early 2024, savings bank committees were urging their banks to stay out of crypto trading.

The board reversed that position in 2025 and tasked Deka with building the service. It cited customer demand and the legal framework that MiCA set.

The post Germany’s Sparkassen Start Crypto Trading in its Banking App at €0.99 per Order appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Most leading cryptocurrencies are well in negative territory on a weekly basis, yet Monero (XMR) has defied the latest correction, rising about 11% to nearly $600.

However, it remains the second-largest privacy coin, with Zcash (ZEC) ranking first. We asked three of the most widely used AI-powered chatbots whether XMR can keep pumping this year and eventually overtake its rival. Here are the answers.

Yes… But

ChatGPT said XMR could flip ZEC by market capitalization in the remaining months of the year, but treated it as “a plausible scenario rather than the most likely outcome.” The reason is that the gap between them is substantial: more than $8 billion.

The chatbot said XMR’s strongest bullish argument is its mandatory privacy, where every transaction uses privacy features automatically, while Zcash supports both shielded and transparent transactions.

“That distinction could help XMR attract capital if investors increasingly prioritize privacy by default, although it does not guarantee stronger price performance,” it added.

On the other hand, ChatGPT claimed Monero’s biggest obstacle is limited access to crypto exchanges. The very few trading venues that have embraced XMR include KuCoin, MEXC, and Kraken (available in select jurisdictions). Binance and Coinbase don’t allow such services, with the former delisting the coin in 2024.

Perplexity also estimated that XMR could overtake ZEC sometime this year, but said the development has a low probability. It praised Zcash for leading its field after a major rally earlier this year and attracting significant capital into its ecosystem.

At the same time, it claimed that Monero remains the stronger “pure privacy” asset but faces tighter venue access. The chatbot said a listing on a popular exchange, the launch of a spot XMR ETF, or a sharp ZEC correction could help narrow the gap.

“XMR can flip ZEC in 2026, but ZEC is the more likely leader under the current setup. A realistic framing is: ZEC retains the edge unless Monero gets a concrete liquidity or regulatory-access catalyst; if that happens, the gap could close quickly because XMR’s core privacy demand remains intact,” it concluded.

The ‘Fundamental Clash’

Google’s Gemini said that, despite being in the same category, the two assets differ significantly. It said XMR remains the default choice for pure privacy and network use, while ZEC has seen major institutional inflows, creating a clear split in how the market values the two coins.

“It comes down to a fundamental clash between pure peer-to-peer usage versus institutional adoption and exchange liquidity,” it stated.

The chatbot estimated that a potential flip by New Year’s Eve is possible but faces significant headwinds. It said it could happen only if the crypto market prioritizes real usage, self-custody, and censorship resistance, increasing interest and demand for XMR.

However, as long as the global regulatory regime favors compliance-ready tokens, ZEC retains the upper hand, it concluded.

The post Monero (XMR) Rises 11% Weekly: 3 AIs Speculate Whether It Can Flip Zcash (ZEC) in 2026 appeared first on CryptoPotato.

The XRP Ledger’s fixCleanup3_4_0 amendment, a package of small bug fixes, is projected to go live on Friday, provided validator support holds.

Meanwhile, the network’s lending protocol is still unapproved, sitting 10 validator votes below the level it needs.

Cleanup Amendment Nears Activation

The XRPL amendment tracker recorded 29 affirmative votes from 35 trusted validators for fixCleanup3_4_0 on October 19, enough to maintain the required majority.

The amendment reached that threshold on October 9 and is projected to activate at 09:34 UTC on October 23, as long as support stays above 80% throughout the 14-day voting period.

Votes are tallied only at flag ledgers, which come roughly every 16.5 minutes, so activation begins at the first flag ledger after the 14 days end, not the minute they expire. The tracker counts from its own node, but the ledger’s record has the final word.

Lending is further back. Lending Protocol and its LendingProtocolV1_1 add-on each hold 19 votes, which is about 54.29%. Single asset vault, the shared pool the loans draw from, has 21 and needs at least eight more to hit the 29 majority needed for it to pass.

Confidential transfer, a privacy feature for multi-purpose token transfers that Ripple presented at XRP Seoul earlier this month, as CryptoPotato reported, is closest at 22. Transaction batching, which was covered at the same event, went live on October 9.

What the Lending Protocol Would Do

As explained in the Lending Protocol’s documentation, loans are fixed-term and uncollateralized, funded by depositors through a Single Vault that brokers manage and borrowers repay on set terms. Credit checks happen off-chain, and the current version “doesn’t include automated on-chain collateral and liquidation management.”

Some brokers may post first-loss capital, a buffer to absorb defaults before depositor money, although documentation says that doesn’t remove credit risk. The worked example shows the limit: on a default of 1,090 tokens, only 10.9 tokens get returned, because payouts are capped at 10% of a minimum cover that is itself 10% of total debt. The vault suffers a loss of 1,079.1 tokens.

Missed payments trigger a grace period, after which the broker may default the loan. A broker who expects a borrower to miss payment can mark the loan impaired, which pulls the next due date forward so a default can come sooner, while a payment made before that date clears the flag.

Issuers of tokens other than XRP can claw back first-loss capital only down to the required minimum, and they can freeze accounts. A frozen borrower cannot repay but still owes the debt and will eventually default. Brokers also set fees, none of which are charged if cover falls below the minimum.

The post XRP Ledger Bug Fixes Set for Friday Activation as DeFi Lending Awaits Approval appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Qubic has confirmed that an attacker drained 1,404 wallets, stealing around 2.94 trillion QU during a security incident between October 17 and 18.

The network said the problem came from weak wallet seed generation, not a flaw in the Qubic protocol itself.

Weak Wallet Seeds

According to the update, some wallet seeds were created with insufficient randomness, making them easier to compromise. The affected seeds were generated on iPhones and iPads using any browser before October 18, on Macs using Safari before that date, or through the Qubic iOS app before July 2025.

Qubic’s validators, known as Computors, coordinated a halt at tick 85,371,949 to prevent further movement of the stolen funds. With transactions paused, 87.1% of the drained funds remain on the network and frozen. The other 12.9% was sent to MEXC, which froze the receiving account within about an hour. Exchanges have also been notified and have suspended QUBIC deposits and withdrawals.

The team asserted that the seed generation issue has been fixed in version 4.26.4. No new weak seeds can be created under the corrected system. The next steps will depend on the Computor quorum, which will decide how the incident is resolved under the network’s rules. The Core team is identifying affected identities and preparing options for the quorum. A community poll is also open on Discord to gather feedback.

The layer-1 blockchain network has urged affected users to report the incident to local police or cybercrime authorities. Reports should include the wallet ID, the amount lost, and the transaction link from the Qubic explorer.

September Nightmare

The Qubic incident comes after a costly September for the crypto industry. As reported by CryptoPotato, PeckShield counted 55 major crypto hacks during the month, as losses reached almost $766.5 million. That was around 462% higher than August’s $136.3 million.

Two incidents accounted for most of the damage. The Bitget breach involved around $387 million, while the Liquid Network theft totaled roughly $320 million. Liquid later recovered $285 million. Bitget CEO Gracy Chen said an attacker exploited a backend system to manipulate transaction data and bypass authorization checks. The exchange plans to cover the loss through its User Protection Fund, which holds more than $464 million.

The Liquid Network theft, on the other hand, involved roughly 4,000 BTC withdrawn from its federation wallet. The attacker promised to return the funds after network nodes were patched, though Ledger CTO Charles Guillemet questioned whether the attacker was a legitimate security researcher.

The post Qubic Pushes Back on Hack Claims: Weak Wallet Seeds Were to Blame appeared first on CryptoPotato.