The downing of the aircraft underscores Iran's military resilience, complicating predictions of regime instability and affecting market confidence.

The post Iran regime fall odds drop to 13.5% after US military aircraft downed appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Iran's robust air defenses complicate regime change scenarios, highlighting the regime's resilience and reducing expectations of imminent collapse.

The post Iranian regime collapse odds drop to 13.5% after US aircraft losses appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The diplomatic stalemate underscores the challenges in achieving a timely resolution, impacting market confidence and geopolitical stability.

The post Iran’s denial of US negotiations drops April 7 ceasefire odds to 1% appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Iran's stance heightens market skepticism, indicating prolonged conflict and delaying potential diplomatic resolutions.

The post Iran’s rejection of US demands fuels skepticism in ceasefire markets appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Escalating US-Iran tensions and military actions undermine diplomatic efforts, increasing market volatility and reducing ceasefire prospects.

The post Ceasefire odds drop sharply amid escalating US-Iran tensions and military strikes: FT appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Charles Schwab Teases Direct Bitcoin Trading With New ‘Schwab Crypto’ Account

Financial services giant Charles Schwab is preparing to expand deeper into digital assets, announcing plans for a forthcoming product that will allow clients to buy and sell cryptocurrencies directly through its platform.

The firm revealed that “Schwab Crypto” is in development and will be offered through Charles Schwab Premier Bank, positioning the product as a gateway for retail investors seeking direct exposure to leading cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin. The company has opened a waitlist for clients interested in early access, though availability will be subject to regulatory approval and eligibility requirements.

The move marks a notable shift for Schwab, which until now has limited crypto exposure to indirect investment vehicles. Currently, clients can access digital asset markets through exchange-traded products (ETPs), crypto-related equities, and thematic funds. Examples include publicly traded firms like Coinbase, MicroStrategy, and Riot Platforms, as well as funds tied to blockchain and crypto industry performance.

All aboard the Charles Schwab Bitcoin train

Schwab’s entry into spot trading places it in more direct competition with established crypto platforms such as Coinbase, Robinhood, and Webull. 

CEO Rick Wurster first signaled the firm’s intent to enter spot crypto markets in late 2024, citing expectations for a shifting regulatory environment under the administration of Donald Trump. The company has since positioned itself to move once conditions allowed for broader participation by traditional financial institutions.

Schwab is also preparing additional crypto-related products, including a potential stablecoin offering following the passage of the GENIUS stablecoin bill.

A recent report from Charles Schwab found that Bitcoin volatility has declined significantly, with historical volatility falling to 42% in 2025 — about half its 2021 level — making it comparable to or lower than major tech stocks like Tesla and Nvidia. 

Despite fewer extreme swings, bitcoin still experiences sharp drawdowns, including a 32% drop in 2025 and a 50% peak-to-trough decline over three years. 

Long term, volatility remains elevated versus traditional assets. The report suggests bitcoin is maturing as it integrates into mainstream finance, with growing institutional adoption and ETF developments signaling increased acceptance.

Editorial Disclaimer: We leverage AI as part of our editorial workflow, including to support research, image generation, and quality assurance processes. All content is directed, reviewed, and approved by our editorial team, who are accountable for accuracy and integrity. AI-generated images use only tools trained on properly license material. In Bitcoin, as in media: Don’t trust. Verify.

This post Charles Schwab Teases Direct Bitcoin Trading With New ‘Schwab Crypto’ Account first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Jack Dorsey Reveals Bitcoin Faucet Revival with “Bitcoin Day” Announcement

Tech entrepreneur and longtime Bitcoin advocate Jack Dorsey sparked excitement in the BTC community on Friday when he posted a link to a new page titled “Bitcoin Day | Earn Free Bitcoin.”

The post quotes an announcement from the “Bitcoin at Block” account stating that “The bitcoin faucet is back” on April 6, 2026, with a link to btc.day. Dorsey’s shared URL (hosted on AWS CloudFront) currently displays only the bold headline promoting free BTC on “Bitcoin Day,” with a countdown timer. 

No further details were given. 

In 2010, a site known as the Bitcoin Faucet gave visitors 5 BTC after they completed a simple captcha challenge. This was done to help spread awareness and use of BTC, which at the time was a new digital currency with almost no market value.

The site was created by Gavin Andresen, a software developer who later became one of BTC’s lead developers. Andresen loaded the faucet with his own BTC to distribute to visitors who solved the CAPTCHA.

Over the months the faucet operated, it handed out about 19,700 BTC in total. At today’s prices, that amount would be worth in the billions of dollars.

Bitcoin’s rough price performance

Over the past six months, BTC has experienced one of its weakest performance periods in years, with the price declining sharply from late 2025 highs. According to price history data, BTC’s value is down roughly 50% over the last half-year, reflecting a significant drawdown from levels above $120,000 in November 2025 to around the mid-$60,000s today.

BTC’s retreat has erased gains made earlier in the cycle and marked its worst six-month streak since 2018, driven by a mix of macroeconomic headwinds and reduced risk appetite among investors.

In March, it seems like the price stabilized near the high $60,000s, with market participants watching key technical levels and macro signals for clues on the next move. 

Block has held 8,883 BTC since October 6, 2020, currently worth about $593.74 million at an average cost of $32,939 per BTC, for a gain of roughly +102.92% at today’s prices.

The company, trading under ticker XYZ, has a market cap of about $36–$37 billion. At the time of writing, BTC is trading near $67,000.

Editorial Disclaimer: We leverage AI as part of our editorial workflow, including to support research, image generation, and quality assurance processes. All content is directed, reviewed, and approved by our editorial team, who are accountable for accuracy and integrity. AI-generated images use only tools trained on properly license material. In Bitcoin, as in media: Don’t trust. Verify.

This post Jack Dorsey Reveals Bitcoin Faucet Revival with “Bitcoin Day” Announcement first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Cathie Wood Calls Bitcoin’s 50% Crash a “Victory” as Market Tests New Floor

Nearly six months after the Oct. 10 flash crypto crash erased millions of dollars in a single day, Bitcoin remains under pressure, trading well below its recent peak. The asset reached an all-time high of $126,080 on Oct. 6, but has since fallen about 47% to roughly $67,000.

Despite the drawdown, Cathie Wood, a long-time BTC advocate and chief executive of ARK Investment Management, is urging investors to maintain a long-term perspective.

Wood, whose firm was among the first publicly listed asset managers to gain exposure to Bitcoin in 2015, has maintained an active presence in crypto-related equities. ARK Invest continues to trade shares of companies tied to the digital asset sector, including Coinbase, Robinhood Markets, Block, Circle Internet Group, Bitmine Immersion Technologies, and Bullish, adjusting positions in response to market conditions.

In an interview on CNBC’s Squawk Box, Wood addressed the current downturn, framing the magnitude of BTC’s decline as a sign of maturation rather than weakness. 

She argued that a roughly 50% drop from peak levels represents a shift from the extreme volatility seen in earlier cycles, when Bitcoin routinely experienced drawdowns of 85% to 95%.

According to Wood, such severe collapses are unlikely to recur. She described Bitcoin as a “proven technology” and a “new asset class,” suggesting that its market behavior has evolved alongside broader adoption and institutional participation. 

In her view, the current correction would be considered a “real victory” within the Bitcoin community if losses remain limited to around half of its peak value.

Bitcoin’s vicious cycles

Historical data supports the comparison to prior cycles, though the current downturn has yet to match earlier bear markets in severity. During the 2021–2022 cycle, Bitcoin fell nearly 80% from its then-record high of about $69,000, eventually bottoming near $15,600. 

Onchain data from Glassnode indicates that the present decline, measured against the October 2025 high, has reached roughly 52% at its lowest point.

All this is happening as bitcoin’s price decline forces a growing number of public companies and sovereign entities to unwind their BTC treasuries, marking a sharp reversal from the accumulation trend of the past two years. Firms that once championed long-term holding are now selling to manage liquidity, repay debt, and fund strategic pivots.

Companies like Riot Platforms, Genius Group, Empery Digital, Nakamoto Holdings, and Marathon Digital have all reduced holdings, in some cases significantly. Marathon alone sold over 15,000 BTC for $1.1 billion to cut debt, while Genius Group fully exited its position. Riot has also been offloading bitcoin as it shifts focus toward AI and high-performance computing infrastructure.

Even firms still committed to bitcoin are trimming reserves. Empery Digital sold part of its holdings to repay loans, while Nakamoto Holdings liquidated a smaller portion to support operations. Meanwhile, Bhutan has been reducing its state-backed bitcoin reserves after previously accumulating through mining.

Despite the sell-off, public companies still collectively hold about 1.16 million BTC, over 5% of the total supply. 

This post Cathie Wood Calls Bitcoin’s 50% Crash a “Victory” as Market Tests New Floor first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Riot Platforms Sells 3,778 Bitcoin in Q1 as Miner Strategy Shifts Toward AI Infrastructure

Riot Platforms sold 3,778 bitcoin in the first quarter of 2026, generating $289.5 million and marking a shift in strategy as the miner redirects capital toward infrastructure and high-performance computing.

The volume sold exceeded the company’s quarterly production of 1,473 BTC by roughly 2.6 times, signaling a drawdown of treasury holdings rather than routine profit-taking. Riot ended the quarter with 15,680 BTC, down 18% from 18,005 BTC at the close of 2025.

The selling appears to have extended beyond the reporting period. Blockchain analytics firm Arkham Intelligence flagged a 500 BTC outflow from a wallet linked to Riot following the end of the quarter, suggesting continued liquidation activity.

The imbalance between production and sales comes as Riot accelerates its expansion into artificial intelligence and high-performance computing colocation. The company has begun repositioning its business model away from sole reliance on bitcoin mining, seeking to monetize its energy assets and data center footprint through long-term infrastructure contracts.

In January, Riot sold 1,080 BTC to fund the purchase of 200 acres at its Rockdale, Texas site. It also entered a ten-year agreement with Advanced Micro Devices to provide 25 megawatts of capacity, with an option to scale to 200 MW. The deal is expected to generate about $311 million in contract revenue over its initial term.

Operational metrics complicate a distress narrative. Riot reduced its all-in power cost to 3.0 cents per kilowatt hour, a 21% decline from the prior year, while increasing deployed hash rate by 26% to 42.5 exahashes per second. Average operating hash rate rose 23% to 36.4 EH/s, reflecting continued investment in mining capacity.

The company also generated $21 million in power credits during the quarter, more than double the year-ago period, through participation in grid services and energy programs.

Bitcoin HODLers like RIOT are selling

Industry conditions remain a factor. Rising energy costs tied to geopolitical tensions have pressured margins across the mining sector, prompting several operators to liquidate holdings. MARA Holdings, Genius Group, and Nakamoto Holdings collectively sold more than 15,000 BTC in recent days, reflecting a broader shift in capital allocation.

Riot’s Q1 activity underscores a turning point for the sector, where bitcoin reserves are deployed as funding sources for diversification rather than held as long-term balance sheet assets.

The trend extends beyond corporate treasuries. Bhutan has continued to reduce its BTC holdings, selling a total of 3,103 BTC. A single transaction on March 30 accounted for 375 BTC, according to Glassnode data. 

The country had built its position through state-backed mining operations, reaching more than 13,000 BTC at its peak in October 2024.

Despite the recent selling, public companies still hold about 1.16 million BTC, or more than 5% of bitcoin’s fixed supply of 21 million, according to BitcoinTreasuries.net.

This post Riot Platforms Sells 3,778 Bitcoin in Q1 as Miner Strategy Shifts Toward AI Infrastructure first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

The Bitcoin Treasury Model With a Built-In Valuation Floor

There is a version of the Bitcoin treasury conversation that has become almost routine at this point. Bitcoin is hard money. Fiat debases. Companies that hold Bitcoin on their balance sheet are making a rational long-term decision. All of this is true, and none of it is the interesting question anymore.

The interesting question is structural. Not should a company hold Bitcoin, but what kind of company should hold it, and what that choice implies for how the company performs across a full market cycle, not just a favorable one.

Three models have emerged. Each reflects a different level of conviction, a different capital structure, and a different set of tradeoffs.

• The pure-play. A company whose primary purpose is accumulating Bitcoin through capital raises, financial engineering, etc, with no core operating business. Lean structure, singular mission.

• The digital credit issuer. The most sophisticated expression of the pure-play thesis. These companies issue Bitcoin-backed financial instruments, preferred stock, convertible notes, and similar products, to fund continued accumulation. At scale, this creates a compounding accumulation engine that simpler models cannot match.
• The operating company with a Bitcoin treasury. A business with real revenue, real clients, and operational activity, which holds Bitcoin as a long-term reserve asset in deliberate strategic relationship with the business itself.

All three are legitimate expressions of the Bitcoin treasury thesis. They are not optimized for the same objectives, and the differences matter more than most treasury conversations acknowledge.

What pure-play gets right

The pure-play case deserves genuine treatment because its strongest version has real force.

Financial engineering pure-plays are capital-efficient in a specific and important sense: every dollar raised goes directly to Bitcoin accumulation with no operational drag. The mission is singular and the structure reflects it. For investors, this creates clarity. Allocators know exactly what they are underwriting, direct Bitcoin exposure at the corporate level, and the investment thesis is legible and short.

The digital credit model extends this further. Companies that have successfully issued preferred instruments and Bitcoin-backed products have built accumulation engines that operating businesses cannot match on a per-dollar-raised basis. The compounding effect of a sophisticated capital structure, at scale, is genuinely powerful. It represents the fullest expression of the Bitcoin treasury thesis, and the destination it points toward is one every operator in this space should understand.

The prerequisite problem and what it means in practice

The digital credit model has a prerequisite that is rarely stated plainly: it requires scale, institutional credibility, and market infrastructure that most companies building a Bitcoin treasury today do not yet have. It is a destination, not a starting point.

The path there runs through an intermediate period where the financial engineering structure carries more exposure than is often acknowledged. During that period:

• There is no operating revenue to fall back on
• The ability to raise capital tracks closely with Bitcoin market sentiment
• Strategic options narrow when conditions are not favorable
• The company’s cost structure depends entirely on capital markets remaining open

This is not a criticism of the model. It is a description of the journey. The question for executives is what structure best serves the company while that journey is underway.

What the operating company model actually provides

The operating company with a Bitcoin treasury does not accumulate Bitcoin faster than a well-run pure-play. At meaningful treasury scale, operating cash flow is not moving the needle on accumulation. The advantage is different, and worth stating precisely.

An operating business generates revenue independently of where Bitcoin is trading. That revenue covers fixed costs, which means the company is not dependent on capital markets remaining open to fund its basic operations. It can continue hiring, serving clients, and accumulating at a measured pace without being forced into capital decisions driven by timing rather than conviction.

The compounding effect works like this:

• Operating revenue covers costs and preserves the Bitcoin position through the cycle rather than drawing it down under pressure
• A preserved balance sheet improves the terms on future capital raises, lower dilution, better access to facilities, stronger negotiating position with partners
• Operational credibility widens the available capital base by providing an investment thesis that reaches allocators who cannot underwrite pure Bitcoin exposure within their current mandates

None of these mechanisms make Bitcoin accumulate faster in favorable conditions. Together, they make the company more durable across the full range of conditions it will face.

The built-in valuation floor

Most Bitcoin treasury company valuations are driven by a single number: mNAV, the premium the market assigns to Bitcoin held at the corporate level. When sentiment is strong and capital is flowing into the space, that premium expands. When the narrative cools, it compresses. The valuation moves with the market’s appetite for Bitcoin exposure, not with anything the company is doing operationally.

The operating company model introduces a second component that behaves differently. A profitable operating business carries an earnings multiple underwritten by revenue, client relationships, and operational track record. It does not expand dramatically when Bitcoin is performing. But it does not compress when sentiment turns either. It is stable in a way that mNAV alone is not.

These two components, Bitcoin NAV and an earnings multiple on the operating business, do not move together. That is the point. When mNAV compresses, the earnings multiple holds. The company retains a defensible valuation floor that a pure-play structure, with a single-component valuation entirely dependent on sentiment, does not have.

In practice this matters in three specific ways:

• Capital raises. A company with a defensible valuation floor can raise capital on reasonable terms even when Bitcoin sentiment is cold. A pure-play with a compressed mNAV and no earnings component has less room to maneuver.
• Talent. Equity compensation tied to a two-component valuation is a more legible and stable proposition for prospective hires than equity tied entirely to Bitcoin’s market sentiment.
• Allocator access. Many institutional allocators cannot underwrite a valuation built entirely on mNAV within their current mandates. The earnings component creates a bridge, opening the door to capital that would otherwise be unable to participate regardless of conviction.

The floor is not just a comfort during difficult conditions. It is a structural advantage that compounds over time, widening the capital base, strengthening the talent proposition, and maintaining strategic momentum across the full cycle.

How to think about the decision

These three models serve different objectives. The right framework starts with honest answers to a few questions:

• What does the existing business look like? A company with established revenue and clients already has the foundation for the operating company model. A company without it is choosing between building that foundation and committing to a pure-play path.
• What is the realistic path to scale? The digital credit model is the most powerful expression of the thesis but requires scale and credibility that takes time to build. The operating company model does not depend on reaching that threshold to function well.
• What does the investor base look like? Pure-play structures appeal most clearly to allocators who want direct Bitcoin exposure. Operating companies reach a broader set of capital partners, including those whose mandates require an operating business to participate.
• What kind of company do you want to be running across a full cycle? This is the question underneath all the others. The answer should drive the structure, not the other way around.

Conclusion

The companies that define the next era of corporate Bitcoin adoption will not all look the same. Digital credit issuers will operate at the frontier of Bitcoin-native capital markets. Financial engineering pure-plays will build toward that destination with focused conviction. Operating companies will build businesses where the treasury and core operations strengthen each other across the cycle.

Each model is a genuine expression of the thesis. The goal of this framework is to make the differences legible, so executives can choose the structure that fits what they are actually building, with clear eyes about what each model asks of them in return.

The question was never which model holds the most Bitcoin. It was always which model fits what you are trying to build.

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

This post The Bitcoin Treasury Model With a Built-In Valuation Floor first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Nick Ward.

On March 31, 2026, Wall Street saw its best trading day in nearly a year. The Dow Jones Industrial Average gained over 1,100 points, the S&P 500 rose 2.9% for its best single-day performance since last May, and the Nasdaq jumped 3.8%.

The mood, as one market recap cheerfully dubbed it, was “Hormuz Hope,” a rally built on the possibility that the US-Iran war and the stranglehold it had on global oil supplies might finally be winding down.

President Trump had signaled openness to ending the military campaign, and Iran's president said his country had “the necessary will to end the war” if its security conditions were met.

Beneath those headlines, however, the traders who deal in the more complex products of financial markets (the options, the futures, and the hedges) weren't buying it. While the market might have looked like it was finally stabilizing with upside potential on the surface, the positioning underneath it remained far from certain,

Understanding why requires grasping two straightforward concepts: what “open interest” means, and what it signals when it shrinks. Open interest is simply the total value of bets that remain active in the derivatives market, futures, and options contracts that haven't been settled or closed. When open interest grows, more traders are putting money to work, expressing conviction about where a market is headed. When it falls, they're closing their positions, cutting their losses, and stepping away.

Bitcoin's $46 billion derivatives problem

Bitcoin trades around the clock across hundreds of exchanges around the world, essentially acting as a live barometer of global risk appetite, and right now that barometer is giving an ambiguous reading.

The total open interest in Bitcoin derivatives sits at roughly 703,940 Bitcoin, or about $46.85 billion in notional value, showing a market still loaded with leverage after a period of significant stress. If peace hopes were really returning, confident re-risking would look like traders buying in aggressively. That makes the 4.41% single-day retreat in open interest we've seen on Apr. 1 more caution than conviction.

The funding rate, a fee that traders holding bullish positions must pay to maintain them, has been only slightly positive and punctuated by repeated negative dips. When funding rates surge, it signals that bullish sentiment has driven open interest to unsustainable heights, with buyers outnumbering sellers significantly. The muted, flat-to-barely-positive funding Bitcoin has shown in the past two weeks signals a lack of appetite for new risk.

What makes this harder to dismiss as noise is that the institutional presence in Bitcoin derivatives has grown considerably. Of that $46 billion in open interest, more than $7 billion sits on CME, the same regulated exchange where pension funds and sophisticated asset managers do most of their hedging. Rising institutional open interest has established Bitcoin as a mainstream financial instrument, which means the retreat reflects decisions being made in boardrooms and on trading desks, far beyond the speculation of the retail market.

The ratio of options to futures in Bitcoin has also shifted. Earlier this year, options, which act like insurance policies and cushion against sudden price moves, accounted for a far larger share of the Bitcoin derivatives market, but that ratio has since dropped to about 65%, down sharply from highs near 90% last month.

When options exposure shrinks, and futures dominate, the market becomes more directional and less insulated: manageable, until something goes wrong quickly. Data shows particular sensitivity clustered in the $66,000-to-$67,000 price range, a zone where large positions appear concentrated and where a move back into that band could destabilize things rapidly.

Oil options tell the same story

The Strait of Hormuz, the 21-mile chokepoint through which roughly 20% of the world's daily oil consumption flows, has seen commercial traffic reduced to a trickle since the conflict began. Nearly 17.8 million barrels per day of oil and fuel flows have been disrupted, with close to 500 million barrels of total liquids lost so far, according to Rystad Energy.

When Brent crude dipped briefly below $100 a barrel on April 1, retreating from highs above $112 just days earlier, markets treated it as confirmation that the worst was behind them.

The options market, however, remained considerably less certain. Ownership of Brent call options betting on crude reaching $150 a barrel by the end of April has risen tenfold in the past month, with open interest in those contracts now standing at nearly 29,000 lots, each representing 1,000 barrels of oil. This is a clear sign that the markets see tail risk outcomes to this conflict.

The largest concentration of open interest remains in $100 call options, the kind of positioning that reflects a market still hedging for further upside shock rather than celebrating an all-clear.

deVere CEO Nigel Green explained the underlying concern:

“Brent at $115 is being treated as a spike. The data tells a different story. Prices are up close to 60% in a single month, options markets are actively pricing scenarios of $150 oil, and up to 20% of global supply has been disrupted through the Strait of Hormuz. Those are not conditions associated with a short-lived shock.”

That view finds an uncomfortable echo in the diplomatic record itself. Trump said Iran had asked for a ceasefire; Iran's foreign ministry called the claim “false and baseless.” With two governments offering irreconcilable accounts of the same negotiation across the same chokepoint, the market rallied on the more optimistic version while the hedges continued pricing both.

The result is a gap that's simple but consequential. Stocks are cheering a ceasefire framework that remains unconfirmed, Bitcoin open interest is shrinking when it should be rebuilding, and oil options are still pricing meaningful probability for another energy spike.

The VIX, Wall Street's own fear gauge, dropped but held at 24.54, a level that still shows elevated anxiety. Markets are generally skilled at pricing the future they want, but the derivatives underneath them tend to price the future they fear, and right now those two futures look quite different.

The rally has calmed the headlines without cleaning up the positioning, and if the ceasefire unravels, Bitcoin and oil will likely be among the first places it becomes obvious.

The post Bitcoin derivatives flash warning as $46B market pulls back from Iran ceasefire rally appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Washington is in a generous mood with its banks. In March, federal regulators unveiled a sweeping overhaul of capital requirements (the financial cushions that banks must hold to absorb losses in hard times), and the headlines wrote themselves: deregulation, relief, billions freed up for lending and buybacks. The proposal would cut the required capital for the largest Wall Street firms by nearly 5%.

The Federal Reserve estimated that roughly $20 billion in capital could be released for the eight largest banks alone. Former Fed Vice Chair for Supervision Michael Barr put the figure even higher, warning the total could reach $60 billion once all related changes were factored in.

Why this matters: Bank stability depends less on reported capital and more on what markets believe is actually there. If unrealized losses are still sitting on balance sheets, confidence can break faster than regulation can react, turning a technical accounting issue into a liquidity crisis.

Related Reading

White House crypto czar leaves office after securing crypto wins for banks and institutions instead of Bitcoin

David Sacks exits after shaping U.S. crypto policy, delivering institutional gains while Bitcoin promises remain unresolved.

Mar 27, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

But something unexpected surfaces when you read the fine print. Regulators carved out one specific exception: certain large regional banks would have to begin accounting for unrealized losses on their books, a change directly tied to the collapse of Silicon Valley Bank in 2023. That provision, largely overlooked in coverage of the broader rollback, amounts to a regulatory admission.

To understand why, you need to understand what an “unrealized loss” actually is for banks. Imagine you buy a ten-year government bond for $100. Interest rates then rise sharply, new bonds now pay more, making yours less attractive as its market value drops to, say, $80.

Even though you sold nothing and lost no cash, this means that you're now sitting on a $20 loss, unrealized and invisible to most financial scorecards.

For years, midsize banks were allowed to exclude those paper losses from the capital figures they reported to regulators, as though the gap between market value and book value didn't exist.

How Silicon Valley Bank's unrealized losses triggered a bank run in 2023

Silicon Valley Bank's collapse resulted from something far more mundane than fraud or reckless lending: a portfolio of perfectly legal long-term bond investments that shed much of their value as interest rates climbed.

We began seeing the first signs of a crisis in early March 2023, when SVB announced a $1.8 billion loss on the sale of securities, a direct consequence of those unrealized losses, alongside a plan to raise $2 billion in fresh capital.

Shares fell 60% the following day as uninsured depositors began withdrawing their assets en masse; by that evening, $42 billion had left the bank, with another $100 billion staged for withdrawal by morning.

Related Reading

Contagion from SVB's collapse highlights need for banking system resilience, says Fed official

Federal Reserve Vice Chair for Supervision, Michael Barr, is set to testify before lawmakers on Tuesday.

Mar 27, 2023 · Dorian Batycka

Nearly 30% of its deposits evaporated in a matter of hours. SVB was killed by panic, and the panic was caused by the losses that had been there for quite a while, suddenly becoming visible.

The bank's capital looked substantially more adequate than it was, given that almost none of its supervisors, depositors, or investors could gauge the true size of the unrealized securities losses.

Under the rules then in place, SVB had exercised a legal and widely available option, simply opting out of including those losses in its reported capital figures, a decision that turned out to be catastrophic.

Banks that were required to reflect unrealized losses in regulatory capital, meanwhile, managed their interest rate risk considerably more carefully. The lesson of SVB is that hiding losses of this magnitude guarantees that no one will act until it's too late.

Why the new bank capital rules still require regional banks to report unrealized losses

Which brings us back to the current proposal. The change requiring large regional banks to account for unrealized losses will increase their capital requirements by 3.1%, although their total capital is still expected to fall by 5.2% when all pending changes are considered.

Banks with assets below $100 billion face no such requirement, and their capital is projected to fall even further. The message we get from this is clear: the problem was real, and it was real at a specific scale. The carve-out is Washington saying, in its characteristically bloodless bureaucratic language, that SVB's collapse was due to bad regulation.

Barr, who left his vice chair role earlier this year rather than face removal by the Trump administration but retained his seat on the Fed board, has been vocal about his unease with this. In a formal dissent, he warned that capital requirements are being significantly reduced, that liquidity requirements could also be reduced, that Federal Reserve supervisory staff have been cut by over 30%, and that banking is built on trust.

That final phrase deserves attention. A bank can survive deteriorating accounting right up until the moment the people whose money sits inside it stop believing it.

Supporters of the broader rewrite have a reasonable case. The original 2023 Basel proposal was widely seen as overcalibrated, a blunt instrument that pushes risk out of the regulated system into the shadows instead of actually reducing it. Fed Governor Michelle Bowman said that capital will remain robust and that the new framework now better aligns with requirements and actual risk.

But the unrealized-loss carve-out survives even inside the loosened framework. If the problem were truly solved, if duration risk and depositor confidence were no longer the market's concerns, there would be no reason to keep the provision. Regulators don't impose expensive requirements out of nostalgia.

The temptation is to see the new proposal as straightforward deregulation. But the more accurate interpretation is also the more interesting one. Even as Washington hands banks relief, it's quietly preserving a single hard lesson from SVB: that when rates jump and losses pile up, what a bank is actually sitting on still matters, whether the rules say so or not.

The post US frees up billions for banks while quietly admitting SVB’s core failure never went away appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin, once promoted by some investors as a hedge against geopolitical turmoil, is behaving like a liquidity-sensitive risk asset at a time when energy prices are climbing, and macro stress is spreading.

This comes as the conflict between the United States and Iran deepens, with shock rippling through oil, the dollar, and broader financial conditions before landing in a crypto market that is already showing signs of fatigue.

That has reopened discussion of a far steeper downside path than the market had been willing to entertain only weeks ago.

Why this matters: This marks a shift in Bitcoin's behavior under stress. Instead of attracting defensive flows amid geopolitical risk, it is reacting to tighter financial conditions, rising oil prices, and a stronger dollar. That changes how investors position around macro shocks and raises the likelihood of deeper drawdowns if liquidity continues to contract.

Related Reading

Iran threatens major US companies in the Middle East creating new risk for crypto

Iran’s warning is not just a geopolitical headline. It could hit parts of the infrastructure and corporate balance sheets now tied to crypto.

Apr 1, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

Oil shock drives the first wave of repricing

The latest leg of the market’s repricing accelerated after President Donald Trump’s April 1 remarks dimmed hopes for a near-term easing in the Middle East.

By signaling that US military operations could intensify over the next two to three weeks, without offering a clear timeline for an end to hostilities, the administration pushed investors back into a defensive stance.

The initial reaction showed up across equities, though the deeper signal came from energy.

US stocks fell intraday before paring losses by the close, with the S&P 500 down 0.23% and the Dow Jones Industrial Average off 0.39%. In Asia, the sell-off was sharper, with South Korea’s KOSPI dropping 4.2% and MSCI Emerging Asia falling 2.3%.

Oil moved more decisively. Data from Oilprices.com showed that West Texas Intermediate crude jumped 11.41% to $111.54 a barrel, its biggest absolute gain since 2020, while Brent rose 7.78% to $109.03.

The move followed US-Israeli strikes that began on Feb. 28 and Iran’s effective closure of the Strait of Hormuz, the chokepoint that carries roughly one-fifth of global oil and liquefied natural gas flows.

These developments have significant impacts on the crypto market as a sustained rise in crude directly feeds into inflation expectations, tightens financial conditions, and reduces the market’s tolerance for speculation.

With the dollar index up 0.48%, Treasury market spreads wider by 27%, and the VIX climbing toward 25, the broader macro picture is turning against risk assets that depend on abundant liquidity and steady investor appetite.

Related Reading

Bitcoin, stocks rally because of chatter that Iran is ready to ‘end the war' as Dollar Index sinks below 100

Bitcoin's bounce back above $68,000 hinges on hopes for Middle East peace amid fluctuating oil prices.

Mar 31, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

Bitcoin entered the shock already weakened

The Iran escalation may have accelerated the latest sell-off, but it did not create the market’s fragility. Bitcoin was already losing support before the geopolitical backdrop deteriorated.

CryptoQuant data show selling pressure has continued to outweigh institutional accumulation despite earlier support from spot exchange-traded funds and corporate buyers such as Strategy. The firm’s 30-day apparent demand growth stands at -63,000 BTC, indicating that fresh demand has not been strong enough to absorb supply.

The same pattern is visible across large holders. Whale wallets holding between 1,000 and 10,000 BTC have shifted from accumulation into one of the sharpest distribution phases of the cycle. The one-year change in whale holdings has swung from an increase of about 200,000 BTC at the 2024 peak to a deficit of 188,000 BTC.

Mid-sized holders have also pulled back. Wallets holding between 100 and 1,000 BTC, often seen as an important layer of market support, have seen their holdings grow by only 429,000 BTC in the current market cycle, compared to about 1 million BTC in late 2025.

This weakness is especially clear in the United States. Coinbase Premium, a common gauge of US spot demand, has remained negative even as Bitcoin fell into the $65,000 to $70,000 range. That suggests American buyers, both retail and institutional, have not returned in enough size to stabilize the market.

Essentially, those figures help to describe a market that had already begun to lose resilience before war headlines intensified.

Related Reading

Bitcoin ready to record fourth straight red month and the $81,000 floor is suddenly everything

Bitcoin is below its 2 year moving average again, and traders fear this signal could trigger a brutal capitulation.

Jan 30, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

Leverage is turning a weak market into a fragile one

Meanwhile, Bitcoin's current weak spot demand became more dangerous when leverage is doing too much of the market’s work.

In calmer markets, that kind of positioning can help maintain price levels. However, it becomes a vulnerability in a macro shock as contracts that might otherwise have rolled forward are more likely to be cut, either by choice or through forced liquidation.

That is how orderly weakness turns into a cascade. Prices fall, leveraged longs are forced out, more selling follows, and the market starts moving on positioning stress rather than conviction.

Analysts at Bitunix told CryptoSlate that Bitcoin remains stuck in a passive pricing regime, with resistance around $69,400 still uncleared and downside liquidity continuing to build near $65,500. In a more hostile macro setting, that lower band could become the trigger point for a broader liquidation wave.

Options markets are sending a similarly cautious message. Greeks.live data show 28,000 BTC contracts expired on April 3 with a put-call ratio of 0.54 and a max pain point at $68,000, representing $1.8 billion in notional value.

According to the firm:

“Bitcoin performed poorly in both price and market sentiment during the first quarter of this year, and the first week of the second quarter has also been weak. Rebuilding confidence may require time and capital support; currently, all indicators point to bear market conditions.”

Why $10,000 is still a tail risk

Bitunix has described the current environment as a triple-constraint regime shaped by elevated inflation expectations, policy limits, and widening geopolitical risk.

That framework helps explain why crypto is reacting so sharply, as liquidity cannot ease much if oil stays high. At the same time, market confidence cannot recover easily if war risk continues to rise, speculative positions become harder to defend as the dollar strengthens, and volatility rises across asset classes.

Against this backdrop, the more plausible cases for BTC still point to lower levels.

In a moderate scenario, where the conflict remains contained but inflation stays elevated, unwinding leveraged futures could drag Bitcoin from around $70,000 to $50,000, within a roughly 25% to 30% correction.

Meanwhile, a harsher bear-case path would emerge if ETF outflows accelerate, spot demand remains weak, and the dollar continues to tighten financial conditions. In that setting, Bitcoin could slide into the $20,000 to $30,000 range, erasing 60% to 70% of its value from recent levels.

The move to $10,000 sits beyond that as a black swan outcome. It would likely require a prolonged closure of the Strait of Hormuz or a wider regional war severe enough to push oil toward $150 to $200 a barrel, drive a much sharper tightening in global liquidity, and knock equities down by more than 30%.

Under those conditions, speculative capital across crypto would shrink dramatically, leaving Bitcoin exposed to the kind of 80% drawdown seen in earlier cycle washouts.

For now, the immediate takeaway is that Bitcoin is not acting as a safe haven amid war. Instead, it is trading like a highly sensitive risk asset whose direction still depends on liquidity, leverage, and the market’s willingness to absorb macro shock.

The post Bitcoin’s safe haven story breaks as war shock revives $10,000 risk if oil hits $150 a barrel appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Stablecoin issuer Circle is facing mounting scrutiny from blockchain researchers after millions of USD Coin (USDC) were stolen and flowed unimpeded through its proprietary bridge during the $285 million exploit of the Solana-based Drift Protocol.

The inaction during the April 1 attack, which is now the largest decentralized finance (DeFi) hack of 2026, stands in stark contrast to Circle’s aggressive asset freeze tied to a sealed US civil case just days prior.

This juxtaposition has reignited debate over the responsibilities and inconsistencies of centralized stablecoin issuers operating within permissionless markets.

According to on-chain investigator ZachXBT, the attackers bridged more than $230 million in USDC from Solana to Ethereum across over 100 transactions using Circle’s Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP).

Why this matters: The episode highlights a structural tension in crypto markets: stablecoins like USDC operate inside permissionless systems but retain centralized control. When that control is applied inconsistently, it raises new risks for users, protocols, and regulators trying to understand where intervention will, or will not, occur during a crisis.

The transfers occurred over several hours during the US business day, giving the New York-headquartered issuer ample time to intervene.

This view was corroborated by other security experts, who noted that the attacker held stolen USDC across multiple wallets for one to three hours before bridging to Ethereum.

The hacker notably avoided converting the funds to Tether's USDT, suggesting a calculated bet that Circle would not deploy its smart-contract blacklist authority.

That bet paid off because USDT is the largest stablecoin by market capitalization, and its issuer is renowned for blacklisting malicious attackers using its asset to shift funds.

Related Reading

Tether reportedly puts FTX's $46M in USDT on ice

Reports revealed that the seizure was carried out following orders of law enforcement agencies.

Nov 10, 2022 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

The civil contrast

The timing of the exploit has intensified the backlash. On March 23, Circle froze the USDC balances of 16 unrelated corporate hot wallets and disrupted legitimate exchanges, casinos, and payment processors in response to a civil dispute.

ZachXBT previously characterized that action as “potentially the single most incompetent” freeze he had witnessed in five years.

Critics are now asking a fundamental question: If Circle claims the authority to freeze assets to enforce compliance, why does it apply that power aggressively against legitimate businesses while ignoring a confirmed, nine-figure heist transiting its own infrastructure?

However, Santisa, the pseudonymous CIO of investment firm Lucidity Cap, argued the opposite. He stated:

“Circle not blacklisting is actually quite cypherpunk of them, no matter the reason. The industry pushing for active blacklisting puts us ever further away from decentralisation — not necessarily a bad thing! Just a trade-off.”

To date, Circle has blacklisted roughly $117 million across 601 wallets, according to Dune Analytics data, showing that the capability exists.

Anatomy of the Drift exploit

The attack on Drift, previously the cornerstone of Solana’s DeFi ecosystem with over $550 million in Total Value Locked (TVL), was a highly sophisticated, weeks-long operation.

According to Drift Protocol’s post-mortem, the attackers compromised the protocol's Security Council.

Related Reading

Drift's BET platform brings prediction markets to Solana blockchain

The Solana-based platform introduces novel features that distinguishes it from rivals in the market.

Aug 19, 2024 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

On March 30, they exploited a mechanism known as a “Durable Nonce” to quietly gain necessary multisig approvals.

The durable nonce is a tool designed to keep unconfirmed transactions valid indefinitely for offline approvals. Yu Xian, the founder of blockchain security firm Slowmist, said:

“Another encounter with the durable nonce offline pre-signature mechanism exploit. This phishing technique has been prevalent for at least 2 years. Once such a signature is phished away, the attacker can initiate “legally signed” on-chain operations at a future opportune moment—for instance, in the Drift scenario, it resulted in the takeover of its on-chain admin privileges.”

On April 1, the attackers shifted admin authority, initialized a fake asset called CVT, artificially inflated its value via oracle manipulation, and borrowed against the false collateral.

In short order, they drained the JLP Delta Neutral, SOL Super Staking, and BTC Super Staking vaults. DefiLlama data shows Drift’s TVL collapsed to under $250 million following the attack.

The fallout has spread rapidly across the Solana DeFi ecosystem, considering Drift's prominent role.

According to reports, at least 20 third-party applications that relied on Drift's vaults to generate yield have confirmed financial impact, including Prime Numbers Fi, which estimates losses exceeding $10 million.

Who is behind the attack?

While the identity of the attackers remains unknown as of press time, Drift stated on X that it had identified critical information about the parties involved in the exploit.

Meanwhile, security experts have noted that the sophisticated laundering methodology points to a familiar adversary of North Korean attackers.

Blockchain intelligence firm Elliptic reported that the on-chain behavior and network-level indicators align with operations conducted by the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK).

Another blockchain security firm, Diverg, further stated:

“We can confirm along with TRM Labs and Elliptic that North Korea's Lazarus Group (TraderTraitor) [was behind the Drift attac]. [The] same unit [was] behind Bybit's $1.5 billion hack [and] Ronin's $625 million attack.”

If confirmed, the Drift exploit would mark the eighteenth DPRK-linked crypto theft this year, pushing the regime's 2026 illicit haul past $300 million.

It arrives amid an escalation in state-sponsored attacks targeting crypto infrastructure, including a recent software supply chain compromise attributed by Google to the North Korean threat actor UNC1069.

The post Circle under fire as $230M in stolen USDC flows unblocked days after freezing legitimate accounts appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Washington has escalated its fight with states over prediction markets, launching lawsuits that could decide whether these platforms operate as national financial products or state-regulated gambling. The outcome will determine if sports contracts can scale or get forced back into local licensing regimes.

On Apr. 2, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) sued Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois, with the Department of Justice as a litigation partner.

The regulator demanded expedited rulings that federal derivatives law preempts state efforts to classify event contracts as illegal gambling.

Washington moved to the offensive, trying to establish, as a matter of national market structure, that these products belong under exclusive federal jurisdiction.

Why this matters: This is no longer a niche regulatory dispute. The CFTC is asking courts to confirm that once an event contract is listed on a federally regulated exchange, states lose the ability to shut it down as gambling. If that argument holds, prediction markets become a national product category. If it fails, operators face a fragmented system where their most valuable contracts, especially sports, must comply with dozens of state regimes.

The CFTC's published FAQ makes the ambition explicit. The suits are registrant-agnostic, deliberately detached from any individual company's fact pattern so that courts can rule on the preemptive scope of the Commodity Exchange Act itself.

Washington wants category-wide declarations on CEA preemption, binding regardless of which operator or exchange triggers enforcement.

The CEA's exclusive jurisdiction provision is the lever.

The CFTC's theory holds that once an event contract is listed on a CFTC-regulated exchange, states cannot relabel it as unlawful gambling without destabilizing the uniform national derivatives framework, potentially opening the door for states to assert authority over other exchange-traded derivatives that have operated without controversy for decades.

That framing becomes sharper against the legal map heading into April.

Massachusetts had secured an injunction against Kalshi's sports contracts, and Nevada won a temporary block on Mar. 20. Arizona escalated to criminal charges on Mar. 17. Tennessee produced an early ruling in Kalshi's favor. A 39-state-and-DC coalition filed amicus briefs backing Nevada.

The prediction market category was surviving on patchwork, while the CFTC played defense from the sidelines.

Related Reading

The bets that made crypto prediction markets popular now targeted by ban threat

A national fight is now underway over whether sports prediction markets are federally regulated derivatives or unlicensed gambling platforms. The answer could determine not just who regulates them, but whether their current growth model survives at all.

Mar 28, 2026 · Andjela Radmilac

Sports as the fault line

Sports contracts are where the category stops looking like abstract forecasting and starts colliding with the full compliance architecture states built since the Supreme Court's 2018 Murphy decision. The structure consists of licensing, age verification, KYC and AML protocols, self-exclusion databases, suspicious-wager reporting, and integrity monitoring.

Illinois told the CFTC that these platforms entirely bypass its licensing, responsible-gaming, AML, and tax regimes. Connecticut pointed to under-21 access that no licensed operator could legally offer.

The American Gaming Association translated those gaps into fiscal terms, claiming that sports bets on prediction markets have cost states more than $620 million in lost gaming taxes since the start of 2025.

The advocacy estimate converts legal theory into budget politics at a moment when the US sports betting revenue, which reached $1.61 billion in January 2026 alone, shows a market with year-over-year handle declines and incumbents with clear motivation to fight back.

The leagues arrived as actors with a concrete grievance and a clear agenda.

The NBA said sports prediction markets were expanding into single-game contracts through self-certification, without anything resembling the oversight framework states require of licensed sportsbooks.

MLB pressed the same argument directly with the CFTC. On Mar. 19, the agency signed a memorandum of understanding with the league, establishing the first formal agency-league information-sharing channel around baseball-related contracts.

That MOU is both a practical integrity measure and an acknowledgment that the current framework carries a meaningful gap that the litigation leaves open.

The regulator's internal contradiction

The CFTC is simultaneously trying to lock states out of the lane and build the public record that the lane requires far tighter policing.

On Feb. 4, Chairman Brian Quintenz withdrew a prior event-contract rulemaking proposal and an earlier sports advisory, framing the move as a permissive opening for the category. Within weeks, the agency moved in the opposite direction on nearly every other front.

On Feb. 25, the CFTC publicly described two Kalshi-related misuse-of-nonpublic-information cases, imposed penalties and multi-year suspensions, and stated that insider trading, wash trading, fraud, and manipulation rules fully apply to prediction markets.

On Mar. 31, enforcement chief David Miller said insider trading is “potentially happening” in these markets, citing injury-related and person-specific contracts as obvious integrity risks.

On Mar. 12, a staff advisory directed designated contract markets to consider league integrity standards, restricted-participant lists, and cooperation with league investigations. On the same day, the agency opened an advance notice of proposed rulemaking seeking input on which event-contract types may run contrary to the public interest.

Congress arrived in the same space on Mar. 23, when Senators Adam Schiff and John Curtis introduced the Prediction Markets Are Gambling Act, targeting contracts that resemble sports bets or casino-style games on CFTC-registered platforms.

The fight now runs in three venues at once: state courts, federal courts, and the Senate.

In the bull case, Washington's suits in Illinois and Connecticut produce fast rulings endorsing the preemption theory, and a federal circuit affirms that the CEA displaces state gambling law for exchange-listed event contracts.

States lose the tools to block platform expansion, and the Schiff-Curtis bill stalls. Prediction market operators build sports offerings under a federal compliance wrapper consisting of league MOUs, restricted-participant lists, and whatever tighter rulebook emerges from the CFTC's ANPRM process.

The category survives in sports as a regulated national market with a heavier obligation stack than operators currently carry. Developer incentives skew toward exchanges already holding CFTC registration rather than new entrants, compressing the number of platforms that can realistically compete.

In the bear case, state-favorable reasoning from Nevada and Massachusetts spreads at the appellate level.

Courts find that Murphy-era state sports-betting frameworks constitute the kind of traditional police power that federal preemption cannot readily displace.

Congress advances a carveout that pushes platforms listing sports contracts into state licensing processes. Political, macro, and business-event contracts, categories without a natural state-regulatory home, clear the bar more easily, while sports-adjacent contracts migrate toward the same licensing, tax, and integrity regime as conventional sportsbooks.

Operators who built their growth story around sports face a product retreat or a compliance restructuring that they did not price into their models.

The federal bet

Washington is wagering that “listed on a CFTC-regulated exchange” is the decisive jurisdictional fact that overrides states' classifications of the underlying contract.

The courts' acceptance of that wager will determine if prediction markets become a genuinely national product category or a nationally marketed product that still has to negotiate dozens of licensing regimes for its most commercially valuable contracts.

The CFTC's own calendar compresses the timeline, as the ANPRM closes Apr. 30.

The agency expects expedited resolution in Connecticut and Illinois within a few months, and a preliminary injunction ruling in Arizona is due within weeks.

By mid-2026, federal preemption power over event contracts will have a legal foundation or a legal ceiling.

The post CFTC sues 3 states in bid to redefine crypto prediction markets as federal products appeared first on CryptoSlate.

• XRP enters a pivotal 2026 phase despite weak price action
• Ripple is expanding utility via XRP Ledger and RLUSD
• Strong fundamental growth continues, especially in Asia and institutional adoption

XRP Price Today: Bulls Struggle at Key Support

As of April 4, 2026, the XRP price (referenced against major pairs) is trading near the $1.31 mark. Following a rejection at the $1.60 resistance level in late March, the token has entered a period of consolidation. Technical indicators like the Money Flow Index (MFI) are currently hovering around 35, suggesting that XRP is approaching oversold territory.

Traders are closely watching the $1.25 support level. A breakdown below this could see a retest of the 52-week low near $1.21. Conversely, a daily close above the 7-day Moving Average ($1.33) is required to signal a short-term trend reversal.

Ripple News Today with RLUSD

A major highlight in today's news is the continued expansion of Ripple’s dollar-pegged stablecoin, RLUSD.

• South Korean Expansion: Ripple recently secured a listing for RLUSD on Coinone, one of South Korea's premier regulated exchanges. This allows for direct KRW/RLUSD trading, tapping into one of the world's most active XRP trading communities.
• Institutional Minting: On-chain data reveals significant activity, including a massive 69 million RLUSD mint earlier this month linked to Gemini.
• SWIFT Partnership: Ripple Treasury has officially joined the SWIFT partner program, a move designed to bridge traditional banking infrastructure with digital asset settlement.

The CLARITY Act: A Double-Edged Sword?

The legislative landscape is shifting with the introduction of the CLARITY Act in the U.S. Senate. This bill aims to provide a definitive framework for stablecoins and digital assets.

The latest draft of the CLARITY Act proposes a ban on yield for passive stablecoin holdings. While this could hurt competitors like USDC, analysts suggest that RLUSD is uniquely positioned. Because RLUSD’s growth is driven by cross-border payments and institutional collateral rather than retail yield incentives, it may emerge as a primary beneficiary of these new rules.

XRP Price Prediction for 2026

Despite the current price stagnation, institutional sentiment remains cautiously optimistic. Many analysts, including those from Standard Chartered, maintain year-end targets for XRP above $2.50, citing the eventual "re-risking" of the market as regulatory clarity settles.

After a volatile first quarter dominated by geopolitical tensions in the Middle East and concerns over the Strait of Hormuz, the market appears to be searching for a definitive floor.

Leading financial institutions and regulatory bodies have provided the "one-two punch" of confidence that many traders were waiting for. From Goldman Sachs declaring the bottom is near to the highly anticipated release of the Clarity Act draft, the narrative is shifting from fear to structural accumulation.

Is the Bitcoin Bottom Finally In?

According to a recent analyst note from Goldman Sachs, the six-month downward trend for Bitcoin may finally be exhausted. Analysts point to a reversal in institutional flow as the primary indicator. After four months of consistent net outflows, spot Bitcoin ETFs saw a staggering $1.32 billion in net inflows during March.

"The re-entry of institutional liquidity suggests that the 'leveraged washout' is complete," says James Yaro, lead analyst at Goldman Sachs. "With BTC testing critical support at $68,000, we are seeing a transition from speculative selling to long-term institutional holding."

Currently, the Bitcoin price is oscillating near the $67,000 mark. While it remains nearly 45% down from its previous highs, the stabilization at this level is viewed by many as a "springboard" for the next leg up, especially as the Federal Reserve hints at potential rate softening.

Regulatory Clarity: The "Clarity Act" and SEC Taxonomy

One of the biggest hurdles for the crypto market in 2026 has been the "gray area" of regulation. However, early April marks a turning point with the expected release of the Clarity Act draft. This legislation aims to provide a definitive framework for U.S. digital assets, separating "Digital Commodities" from "Digital Securities."

The SEC has also recently updated its token taxonomy, clarifying that:

• Digital Commodities: Assets like Bitcoin, where value is derived from automated network mechanics.
• Payment Stablecoins: Regulated under the GENIUS Act, providing a safer environment for users of Tether (USDT) and USDC.
• Digital Tools: Tokens used for utility, such as event tickets or identity badges, are increasingly being shielded from traditional securities litigation.

For investors, this means less "regulation by enforcement" and more "regulation by rulebook," which is a prerequisite for the next wave of massive institutional adoption.

Ethereum and Solana: Technical Upgrades on the Horizon

While $Bitcoin battles for its bottom, the "Big Two" altcoins are preparing for massive fundamental shifts.

Ethereum's "Glamsterdam" Upgrade

Ethereum is currently moving through its "Strawmap" and "Glamsterdam" upgrades. These developments are focused on PeerDAS and Zk-cryptography, with the goal of pushing the network's throughput toward 10,000+ transactions per second (TPS).

Solana's Alpenglow Protocol

Not to be outdone, Solana is rolling out the Alpenglow protocol. Developed by Anza, this upgrade introduces "Votor" and "Rotor," which could allow block finality in as little as 100 milliseconds. This competition between L1 giants is driving a "flight to quality" among developers and investors alike.

Crypto Price Today: Key Levels to Watch

The first quarter of 2026 has concluded, leaving the cryptocurrency market in a state of significant reassessment. After a bullish end to 2025, the start of the year brought a harsh "risk-off" reality. Major assets, led by Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH), saw substantial drawdowns as investors grappled with a perfect storm of geopolitical conflict, surging energy costs, and a hawkish shift in global monetary policy.

Why did Crypto Crash in 2026?

If you are looking for the primary reason for the crash: Q1 2026 was defined by a liquidity drain. As Bitcoin fell 23%, capital fled volatile assets in favor of traditional safe havens. While the broader market bled, specific utility-driven tokens like Tron (TRX) and UNUS SED LEO (LEO) managed to defy the trend, posting gains of 10% and 4.6% respectively.

Q1 2026 Market Performance Overview

The following table summarizes the Year-to-Date (YTD) performance of the top cryptocurrencies as of the end of March 2026:

The Macroeconomic "Pressure Cooker"

To understand the Q1 crash, one must look at the "Macroeconomic Pressure Cooker." This refers to the simultaneous rise in inflation expectations and interest rates. In early 2026, the US Federal Reserve signaled that interest rates would remain "higher for longer" to combat a sticky 2.7% inflation rate. This strengthened the US Dollar, making riskier assets like Ethereum less attractive to institutional desks.

Crypto Crash Reasons

The downturn was accelerated by significant global events:

• Geopolitical Conflict: Escalating tensions in the Middle East—specifically involving Iran—reignited fears of a broader war. This uncertainty historically triggers a flight to quality.
• Oil Prices: Crude oil prices surged in Q1, with Brent crude hitting over $118/bbl. High energy prices act as a tax on the global economy and increase the operational costs for Bitcoin miners, often leading to "miner capitulation" sell-offs.
• The Gold & Silver Hedge: Unlike crypto, Gold posted steady gains of roughly 8% earlier in the quarter, reaching near-record levels as investors sought a store of value that doesn't rely on digital network uptime or speculative sentiment.

Why Altcoins Suffered More

While Bitcoin’s 23% drop was painful, Solana (SOL) and BNB were hit harder, losing 36% and 32% respectively. This is a classic "beta" move; altcoins typically amplify Bitcoin's movements. When liquidity dries up, speculative "high-growth" ecosystems are the first to see capital outflows. Investors moved their holdings from high-risk dApp platforms into stablecoins or exited the market entirely.

The Outliers — Tron and LEO

Why did Tron (+10%) and UNUS SED LEO (+4.6%) survive the carnage?

• Tron (TRX): Tron has solidified itself as the "Global Settlement Layer" for USDT. During a crash, the demand for stablecoin transfers spikes. As users move to safety, the burning of TRX for transaction fees increases, creating deflationary price pressure that supported the TRX price.
• UNUS SED LEO (LEO): As a utility token for the Bitfinex ecosystem, LEO benefits from a consistent buy-back and burn mechanism. In periods of high volatility, exchange-based tokens often act as a "defensive" play, as trading volumes (and thus burn rates) remain elevated.

Institutional Sentiment and ETF Outflows

The latest crypto news highlights that Bitcoin ETFs saw their first sustained period of net outflows in Q1 2026. Institutional investors, who were the primary drivers of the 2025 rally, shifted their focus to the S&P 500 and banking stocks, which showed more resilience during the "war-inflation" scare.

Crypto Markets Are Moving — But Something Is Missing

Over the past 24 hours, the crypto market has reacted to a wave of major geopolitical and macroeconomic developments. Rising tensions, escalating military actions, and a sharp surge in oil prices have already introduced volatility across Bitcoin and altcoins.

Yet despite all this, the overall market remains relatively stable.

Bitcoin is holding near the $66,000–$67,000 range, Ethereum is hovering around $2,000, and total crypto market capitalization remains largely flat.

👉 At first glance, this may seem like resilience.

👉 In reality, it signals something else: the market has not fully reacted yet.

Why the Real Move Hasn’t Started

The most important factor right now is simple:

👉 Wall Street is closed.

Due to the Good Friday holiday, U.S. stock markets are not trading. This means:

• Institutional investors are inactive
• ETFs are paused
• Large capital flows are temporarily frozen

At the same time, major developments are unfolding:

• Escalation in U.S.–Iran tensions
• Announcements targeting critical infrastructure
• Oil prices surging above key levels
• Gold behaving unexpectedly under pressure

👉 These events are happening without full market participation.

As a result, crypto is currently trading in a partial-information environment, where only retail and limited global flows are active.

Monday Is the Real Catalyst

👉 The U.S. market will reopen on Monday at 9:30 AM ET (3:30 PM Central European Time).

This moment could act as a major reset point for global markets.

Why?

Because all the news that broke during the market closure will be priced in simultaneously:

• Equity markets will react
• Oil markets will continue adjusting
• Institutional portfolios will rebalance
• Risk exposure will be reassessed

👉 In short: Monday is when the real repricing begins.

Why the Pressure Is Building

Markets are currently sitting in a fragile equilibrium.

On one side:

• Bullish crypto fundamentals (institutional adoption, regulatory progress)
• Bitcoin holding key levels

On the other:

• Rising oil prices tightening global liquidity
• Escalating geopolitical risk
• Uncertainty around further military actions

👉 This creates a compression phase — where price stays relatively stable while pressure builds underneath.

When markets reopen, that pressure is likely to release quickly.

How Big Could the Move Be?

Bearish Scenario (Higher Probability Short-Term)

If macro pressure dominates:

• Bitcoin could break below $66K, targeting $64K or lower
• Ethereum may lose the $2,000 level
• Altcoins could see sharper declines

👉 This would likely happen if:

• Oil continues rising
• War headlines intensify
• Equity markets open significantly lower

Bullish Scenario (Lower Probability but Possible)

If markets interpret the situation as contained:

• Bitcoin could push toward $68K–$70K
• Short squeezes could accelerate upside
• Risk appetite may temporarily return

👉 This would require:

• De-escalation signals
• Oil price stabilization or drop
• Strong dip-buying from institutions

Most Likely Outcome: Volatility First

Regardless of direction, one thing is highly likely:

👉 Volatility will expand sharply.

Expect:

• Fast moves in both directions
• Liquidations across leveraged positions
• Sudden reversals as markets search for direction

Oil Is Now Driving Crypto

One of the most important shifts in this cycle is clear:

👉 Crypto is no longer reacting only to crypto news.

Instead, it is increasingly tied to macro forces — especially energy markets.

As oil rises:

• Inflation expectations increase
• Central banks face pressure
• Liquidity tightens

👉 And when liquidity tightens, risk assets — including crypto — come under pressure.

This makes oil one of the key indicators to watch ahead of Monday.

What to Expect Until Then

Until Wall Street reopens:

• Markets may remain choppy
• Liquidity will stay relatively low
• Price movements may be misleading or incomplete

👉 The current market action is not the final move — it is the setup phase.

Conclusion: Crypto Is Waiting — But Not for Long

Crypto markets are currently reacting, but not fully.

The absence of institutional participation means that what we are seeing now is only a partial response to a much larger macro shift.

👉 Monday changes everything.

As global markets reopen, all delayed reactions will converge — creating the potential for a significant move across Bitcoin and the broader crypto market.

For investors, the key takeaway is simple:

👉 The real move hasn’t started yet — but it’s getting closer.

Coinbase has officially received conditional approval from the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) to establish the Coinbase National Trust Company. This move brings the largest U.S. exchange under federal oversight, effectively bridging the gap between Silicon Valley innovation and Wall Street’s regulatory rigors.

Is Coinbase a Bank?

No. While the news is massive, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong clarified that the firm is not becoming a commercial bank. Instead, the national trust charter allows Coinbase to provide fiduciary services, asset custody, and investment management across the entire U.S. under a single federal framework, rather than navigating a patchwork of state-by-state licenses.

What Does the OCC Approval Actually Mean?

The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) is the primary federal regulator for national banks and federal savings associations. By granting this charter, the OCC is allowing Coinbase to operate as a National Trust Bank.

• Federal Uniformity: Coinbase can now offer custody services nationwide with consistent federal standards.
• Institutional Magnet: Large-scale institutional investors, who are often wary of state-level regulations, now have a federally overseen partner for their digital assets.
• No Retail Deposits: Unlike a commercial bank, this trust cannot take retail demand deposits or engage in fractional reserve lending.

The Perfect Storm: Market Structure Bill and Fundamentals

This approval comes at a pivotal moment. The U.S. Congress is currently advancing the CLARITY Act and other market structure bills aimed at defining how digital assets are regulated. With Coinbase securing a seat at the federal banking table, the fundamental strength of the crypto market has arguably reached an all-time high.

Why This Could Trigger the Biggest Bull Run Yet

The entry of a federally chartered trust company within the Coinbase ecosystem acts as a "green light" for trillions of dollars in sidelined institutional capital. As the crypto market structure becomes more defined, the barriers for pension funds, sovereign wealth funds, and major insurance companies to hold $Bitcoin are effectively dissolving.

Institutional Custody and the Future of Payments

According to reports from Coinbase's institutional blog, the new charter will focus heavily on custody and settlement. As of late 2025, Coinbase already held over $370 billion in assets under custody. With this new federal status, that number is expected to skyrocket.

Furthermore, the charter lays the groundwork for advanced crypto payment rails. By working directly with the OCC, Coinbase intends to explore infrastructure products that allow for seamless, instant settlement of digital assets, potentially challenging traditional systems like SWIFT.

Researchers say internal emotion-like signals shape how large language models make decisions.

Financial giant Charles Schwab is set to launch spot buying of Bitcoin and Ethereum by the end of the quarter, the firm said Friday.

The FIFA World Cup will feature a prediction market platform built on ADI Chain, with the network’s token hitting a new high Friday.

Publicly traded Bitcoin miner MARA cut 15% of its staff this week after selling $1.1 billion in Bitcoin to fuel an AI push.

President Trump insisted that the Strait of Hormuz could easily be reopened "with a little more time."

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong says the ultimate goal of crypto in the hands of 1 billion people is being worked on.

XRP has broken its two-week inflow streak with a week close of net outflows as institutional investors continue to withdraw their engagement with the funds.

Ripple Prime is scaling amid strong regulatory and capital backing.

Shiba Inu (SHIB) traders are facing a wave of uncertainty as recent technical signals show conflicting momentum in the short term.

Dogecoin's breakout is likely as Bollinger Bands hint at a potential uptick.

TLDR:

• HyperCore burned 49,360.33 HYPE at ~$35.09 on April 2, pushing the protocol into net deflationary territory.

• Even with 26,665 HYPE distributed to stakers and validators, net circulation still dropped by 17,075 tokens.

• Hyperliquid’s annual deflation rate stands at ~6.15M HYPE, contrasting sharply with Solana’s 25.19M SOL inflation.

• The HIP-3 flywheel ties protocol revenue directly to buybacks, creating self-sustaining and organic supply reduction.

Hyperliquid recorded a net removal of 17,075 HYPE tokens from circulation on April 2, 2026. HyperCore repurchased and permanently burned 49,360.33 HYPE at an average price of approximately $35.09.

Alongside this, HyperEVM gas fees contributed an additional 146.43 HYPE to the burn total. Even after distributing 26,665 HYPE as staking and validator rewards, the protocol remained firmly in net deflationary territory for the day.

Buyback Mechanism Drives Daily Deflationary Pressure

The April 2 activity placed Hyperliquid’s annualized deflation rate at roughly 6.15 million HYPE per year. On a monthly basis, that translates to approximately 512,262 HYPE removed from circulation.

These figures reflect a consistent pattern emerging from HyperCore’s revenue-backed buyback program. The numbers stand in sharp contrast to Solana, which inflates by around 25.19 million SOL annually through staking and validator rewards.

HyperCore’s buyback model operates on a price-sensitive basis, which makes it naturally self-adjusting. When HYPE prices rise, fewer tokens are repurchased with the same revenue.

Conversely, when prices fall, the same revenue buys and burns more tokens. This mechanism creates a built-in buffer against extreme supply pressure at different points in the market cycle.

The burn also accounts for a worst-case assumption regarding team token unlocks. Hyperliquid Labs is allocated 173,000 HYPE per month in vesting, equal to about 5,766 HYPE per day.

Even if this entire allocation were sold into the market, the protocol would still achieve net deflation under the current numbers. That assumption was already factored into the 17,075 HYPE net removal figure.

This structure sets Hyperliquid apart from many protocols that rely on token emissions to incentivize participation.

Here, buybacks are funded by actual trading revenue from HyperCore, not newly minted supply. That distinction matters when evaluating the long-term sustainability of the deflationary model.

HIP-3 Adoption Strengthens the Protocol’s Revenue Flywheel

Greater adoption of HIP-3 is central to sustaining and potentially accelerating this deflationary trend. As more users trade through the protocol, activity increases and so does revenue.

Higher revenue, in turn, supports larger buybacks and more burns. The cycle reinforces itself without depending on external capital injections.

This flywheel effect ties protocol growth directly to supply reduction. Each new participant adds to the trading volume that funds the next round of buybacks.

Over time, this creates persistent and organic buy pressure on HYPE. The pressure comes from protocol economics, not from speculative demand or marketing cycles.

Trading activity on HyperCore feeds directly into the buyback pool used for burns. The April 2 figures show that this model is already producing measurable results at current price levels.

As HIP-3 usage grows, the mechanism is designed to scale accordingly. The connection between adoption and deflation is direct and quantifiable.

Validators and stakers received 26,665 HYPE in rewards during the same period. That distribution ensures continued network participation while the broader supply still contracts.

The balance between rewarding contributors and reducing circulating supply appears to be working as intended on April 2.

The post Hyperliquid Burns 49,000+ HYPE Tokens in a Single Day, Confirming Net Deflationary Status appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• LayerZero has integrated 165+ chains and processed over $200B in volume, creating deep operational lock-in for builders. 
• Canton Network processes $8T in monthly RWAs and $350B daily in Treasury repo, with LayerZero as its only live interoperability rail. 
• On-chain data shows coordinated ZRO accumulation between $1.30–$2.00, with sizing patterns inconsistent with typical retail behavior. 
• Activating the fee switch on $150B in annualized volume would shift ZRO’s valuation from pure optionality to measurable cash flow.

LayerZero, Canton Network, and Zero Blockchain are drawing attention as a potential interoperability stack in the crypto space.

Analysts and on-chain observers are tracking how these three protocols connect crypto-native messaging, institutional liquidity, and execution infrastructure.

The arrangement positions ZRO as a central asset across gas, staking, and value capture functions. Early accumulation patterns and institutional backing are adding weight to the narrative.

Institutional Rails and Network Lock-In

LayerZero has integrated over 165 chains and processed more than $200 billion in cross-chain volume. That scale creates what researchers describe as “infra gravity.” Once an application builds on a messaging layer, migration becomes operationally expensive.

Switching providers for marginal fee savings means reworking compliance systems, risk models, and liquidity routing. That dependency is where network effects become structural rather than speculative.

Canton Network adds a different dimension to this stack. It connects over 800 institutional firms, including Goldman Sachs and J.P. Morgan. The network processes roughly $8 trillion in real-world assets monthly and around $350 billion in U.S.

Treasury repo volume daily. LayerZero is currently the only interoperability rail operating inside that environment. That positioning means the cross-domain liquidity rails for institutions are already in place.

Researcher Nick Research noted on X: “LayerZero is the only interoperability rail live inside that environment. It means if institutional liquidity ever needs to move cross-domain, the rails are already chosen.”

That framing points to a first-mover advantage that is operational rather than theoretical. The integration is live, not pending.

Zero Blockchain rounds out the stack as an execution layer. Its backers include Citadel Securities and the DTCC. Those are not venture bets on technology — they are strategic positions from firms that process real financial volume.

The thesis is that interoperability with proper execution controls is where value capture actually concentrates.

On-Chain Signals and the Fee Switch

On-chain data has started reflecting accumulation behavior ahead of any major narrative shift. Clusters of wallets funded through Coinbase Prime accumulated tens of millions in ZRO between $1.30 and $2.00.

The buying patterns showed identical sizing and tight timing, which does not match typical retail activity. Long-duration holders including a16z and ARK have also taken multi-year positions in the asset.

The fee switch is the mechanism that would make this shift visible at the protocol level. Currently, LayerZero routes approximately $150 billion in annualized cross-chain volume with no protocol revenue.

Once fees activate, the valuation framework moves from optionality toward cash flow. That transition tends to reprice assets quickly when it happens on top of an embedded network.

Nick Research summarized the stack plainly: “LayerZero is the messaging layer → Canton is the institutional liquidity pool → Zero is where that liquidity can actually settle and scale.”

The value capture relative to how far network effects have already progressed remains the core observation driving current interest.

The post LayerZero, Canton, and Zero Blockchain Are Building the Rails for Institutional Cross-Chain Value appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Metaplanet added 5,075 BTC to permanent holdings in Q1 through a structured options income rotation system.
• The firm generated $18.63 million in options income, reducing its net Bitcoin cost to roughly $76,227 per coin.
• MicroStrategy acquired 89,599 BTC at $80,929 average, while Metaplanet’s net cost came in nearly $4,700 lower.
• Metaplanet separates Bitcoin into two buckets — income generation and long-term holdings — never mixing the two.

Metaplanet, the Japanese hotel company turned Bitcoin treasury firm, has drawn attention after shifting to quarterly Bitcoin purchase announcements.

The company added 5,075 BTC to its permanent holdings in Q1 2025. Its average purchase price came in near $79,898.

Meanwhile, a detailed breakdown from a prominent analyst suggests the firm may have outperformed MicroStrategy, widely regarded as the benchmark for corporate Bitcoin acquisition.

Metaplanet’s Two-Bucket Bitcoin System Explained

Metaplanet reportedly operates two distinct Bitcoin buckets. One is dedicated to income generation, and the other holds long-term Bitcoin positions.

According to analyst Ragnar, the two buckets remain strictly separate. Long-term holdings are never exposed to options contracts under this structure.

The income generation bucket works through a rotation of cash-secured puts and covered calls. When the team holds cash, they sell put options below the current Bitcoin price.

If Bitcoin stays above the strike price minus the premium, the puts expire and the premium is collected. This process repeats weekly, compounding returns over the quarter.

If Bitcoin falls below that threshold, Metaplanet gets assigned and acquires Bitcoin below market price. At that point, the team pivots to selling covered calls against those holdings.

The calls either expire, generating more premium, or get assigned, returning the position to cash and restarting the cycle.

At the quarter’s close, the team transfers the accumulated Bitcoin into the permanent holdings bucket. This transfer marks the official addition to their long-term treasury, which is what gets announced publicly each quarter.

Q1 Numbers Show Metaplanet Acquired Bitcoin Cheaper Than MicroStrategy

The Q1 figures offer a clearer picture of performance. Metaplanet generated $18.63 million in income from its options activity during the quarter.

Dividing that by the 5,075 BTC added to permanent holdings gives roughly $3,671 of income per Bitcoin acquired.

Ragnar’s post breaks this down further. Subtracting the income generated from the average purchase price of $79,898 brings the effective net cost to approximately $76,227 per Bitcoin.

That figure excludes direct capital deployment and accounts only for options-based income offsetting acquisition costs.

By comparison, MicroStrategy purchased 89,599 BTC in Q1 at an average price of $80,929. That puts Metaplanet’s net cost roughly $4,700 lower per Bitcoin when income generation is factored in. Even without that adjustment, Metaplanet still came in around $1,000 cheaper per coin.

Ragnar noted that Metaplanet achieved this result while its preferred share structure still awaits approval. The analyst added that he remains more bullish on the company following this analysis, though he clarified the post represents personal speculation pending confirmation from the Metaplanet team.

The post Metaplanet Outperforms MicroStrategy in Q1 Bitcoin Acquisition Using Options-Based Treasury Strategy appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Binance ETH reserve fell to 3.3M ETH, breaking below both the February and August 2024 historical lows.

• Bitcoin reserves on Binance declined from 670,000 BTC in early February to 636,000 BTC by early April 2025.

• USDT reserves on Binance grew from $35 billion on March 12 to $38 billion by April 2, reflecting rising dry powder.

• USDC balances climbed from $4.6 billion in February to $6.6 billion by April 2, adding to total stablecoin buying power.

Binance ETH reserve has dropped to its lowest level in over a year, falling below key historical lows. At the same time, stablecoin balances on the exchange have been rising steadily.

On-chain data from CryptoQuant shows that these two opposing trends are reshaping the exchange’s liquidity structure.

The shift points to easing sell-side pressure alongside growing buying power among traders holding dollar-denominated assets.

ETH and BTC Reserves Record Notable Declines on Binance

Binance’s Ethereum reserve has fallen to 3.3 million ETH, according to CryptoQuant analyst Amr Taha. This level sits below the February 2024 low of 3.53 million ETH and the August 29, 2024 low of 3.49 million ETH. Breaking below both historical support levels marks a clear downward trend in ETH holdings on the exchange.

Bitcoin reserves on Binance have also moved lower over recent weeks. The BTC balance declined from approximately 670,000 BTC in early February to 636,000 BTC by early April. That drop reflects a similar pattern of reduced crypto asset supply sitting on the exchange.

When fewer coins rest on an exchange, available sell-side supply tends to shrink. This shift often reduces the immediate pressure that sellers can place on spot prices during periods of market activity.

Rising Stablecoin Reserves Point to Growing Buying Power

As crypto reserves declined, stablecoin balances on Binance moved in the opposite direction. USDT reserves grew from $35 billion on March 12 to $38 billion by April 2. USDC reserves also climbed from $4.6 billion in February to $6.6 billion over the same period.

Taha noted in his analysis: “If this trend continues, it could create a more supportive setup for price expansion.” The combined growth in USDT and USDC balances reflects an accumulation of dry powder sitting ready on the exchange.

Stablecoin reserves rising while crypto reserves fall is a well-known market structure among experienced traders. It suggests that capital has rotated out of volatile assets and into dollar-pegged holdings, without leaving the exchange entirely.

Whether buyers begin deploying those stablecoin balances into spot markets remains the key variable to watch in the coming weeks.

The post Binance ETH Reserve Hits Lowest Level Since 2024 as Stablecoin Balances Surge appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Leap Wallet will sunset all products, including extensions and mobile apps, on May 28, 2026, across iOS and Android.

• Users can migrate safely using their recovery phrase, as Leap is non-custodial and assets remain on the blockchain at all times.

• ATOM delegators staking with Leap’s Cosmos Hub validator must redelegate early due to network unbonding period delays.

• After the May 28 deadline, all installed Leap apps will stop functioning, though fund recovery via recovery phrase remains fully possible.

Leap Wallet has officially announced that it will discontinue all its products on May 28, 2026. The crypto wallet provider has been active since 2022, serving users across more than 100 blockchain networks.

The shutdown covers extensions, mobile apps, and several associated services. Users are advised to begin migrating their assets to other supported wallets ahead of the deadline.

All core wallet functions will remain available until that date to allow a smooth transition.

Products Scheduled for Discontinuation After the May Deadline

The shutdown affects a broad range of products tied to the Leap ecosystem. These include Leap Wallet browser extensions and mobile versions on iOS and Android.

Compass Wallet, the Leap WebApp, and the Swapfast service are also on the list. Leap Cosmos Hub Validator and Leap Cosmos Snaps will be discontinued as well.

The team behind Leap shared the news through an official tweet. They noted the wallet was launched to change what crypto wallet experiences could offer users.

Since launch, it expanded to support over 100 chains across multiple ecosystems. The post also reflected the care and responsibility the team felt toward its user base.

In the announcement tweet, the team wrote that the decision to shut down was not made lightly. They added that they continue to believe in the long-term future of the crypto space.

They also extended appreciation to partners and users who supported the product over the years. The message was direct, measured, and absent of any bitterness or blame.

Until May 28, 2026, all listed products will retain their existing core functionality. Users can still view balances, send tokens, and manage their staking positions.

Exporting recovery phrases and private keys will also remain available throughout this period. No core feature will be removed before the official sunset date arrives.

What Users Must Do Before the Shutdown Date

Users holding assets in Leap Wallet are encouraged to move to another wallet provider. The team recommended Keplr, MetaMask, Phantom, and Rabby as compatible alternatives.

Since Leap is a non-custodial wallet, assets are held on the blockchain and not within the app. This means migration does not require any complex transfer of funds between addresses.

Any user with a recovery phrase can import it directly into another supported wallet. That process will restore all addresses and balances automatically across compatible chains.

No manual transfers are necessary for this to work correctly. Starting early reduces the risk of delays or missed steps before the deadline.

Those who delegated ATOM to Leap’s Cosmos Hub validator must also take a separate action. They need to redelegate to another validator to keep earning staking rewards.

Network unbonding periods can stretch over several days, so acting promptly matters. A detailed migration guide with full instructions is available at leapwallet.io.

After May 28, 2026, all Leap products will stop functioning, including already-installed apps. Users who miss the deadline can still recover their funds using their recovery phrase.

Importing it into any compatible wallet will restore full access to holdings. Migration support remains available at support@leapwallet.io until the shutdown date.

The post Leap Wallet to Shut Down All Products on May 28, 2026 appeared first on Blockonomi.

The cross-border token of the Ripple ecosystem has presented some mind-blowing price rallies in a few previous market cycles, with the latest example coming after the US presidential elections in late 2024 to mid-2025.

However, it has been in a free-fall state since the July 2025 all-time high of $3.65, currently trading more than 60% away from that peak. Many analysts remain bullish on its future price performance, though, including EGRAG CRYPTO, who recently published a post claiming that XRP’s chart now presents “one of the best buying opportunities and upside potential.”

10x XRP?

The post, dubbed the “red chart,” acknowledges that the cross-border token has underperformed lately, but it has happened in the past. In fact, the previous such falling wedge pattern began in 2020 when the asset exploded to a local peak of over $2.00, only to correct to under $0.60 at the end of it in late 2024.

Then came the aforementioned rally that drove XRP to $3.40 by January 2025 and the new peak in July of the same year. Now, with the token erasing over half of its value in months, the triangle could be close to completion, but it would still need to drop to a “crystal clear” bottom of somewhere around $0.83 to confirm the thesis.

If it does, then it could head toward the cycle’s new peak of $8.30, which would be “the simplest 10x trade of your life.” However, the analyst warned that a close above $1.80 in the short term would invalidate the falling wedge, while a break below the $0.83 bottom would mean “we are in serious trouble.”

#XRP – The RED Chart :

It’s red… but it’s offering one of the best buying opportunities and upside potential for #XRP.

Closing above $1.80 = invalidation of the falling wedge
Cross of the 2 red lines is coming = Bearish

Otherwise:
Bottom target: crystal clear →… pic.twitter.com/TcXESiXvzK

— EGRAG CRYPTO (@egragcrypto) April 3, 2026

Here’s the $8 Target Again

EGRAG CRYPTO has dabbled with an $8 price target for XRP on a couple of occasions lately, including in another analysis based on the asset’s Fibonacci extensions. In fact, this was actually the more modest and conservative prediction, as the most bullish case scenario would place the token at over $20 or even up to $27. And, these targets were to be reached by August 2027.

While these numbers might sound unreasonable at the time being, we asked ChatGPT and Gemini whether there’s something we are not seeing. Both AI solutions concluded that reaching $8 is “not impossible,” but said the actual chances of reaching anywhere near $27 are slim to none by next year.

The post Is This the Best XRP Buying Opportunity Setup? Analyst Maps Out 10x Ripple Strategy appeared first on CryptoPotato.

With BTC’s price compressed below $70,000 and almost 50% away from its October 2025 all-time high of over $126,000, the overall sentiment within the cryptocurrency community remains deeply negative.

The ongoing war and uncertainty about the fate of the CLARITY Act are also contributing to investors’ grim outlook, but the analysts from Santiment recently revealed that this could be a blessing in disguise.

Record Fear Could Be Good

The analytics company has long been a proponent of Warren Buffett’s immortal advice for investors – be greedy when others are fearful and be fearful when others are greedy. Santiment has explicitly reaffirmed this thesis for the cryptocurrency industry, which is particularly susceptible to overblown emotions.

In the latest post on the matter, the analysts acknowledged that social media platforms such as X, Reddit, Telegram, and others have shown the “highest ratio of bearish discussions (fear) since February 28th” for bitcoin. At the time, the US and Israel first struck Iran, beginning what has now become a prolonged war.

The company added that “FUD has crept back in with the community showing a key lack of optimism,” as social media indicated that this weekend’s ratio of just 0.81 bullish comments per 1.00 bearish ones is “the lowest” since the war began. However, Santiment believes this is “usually a common ingredient for prices rebounding.”

“Remember that markets typically move the opposite direction of the crowd’s expectations. So even with ongoing “what-ifs” that are impacting the market’s ceiling right now (such as the Iran war and Clarity Act), a high level of FUD like this is a good sign that things can turn positive sooner rather than later.”

F&G Index Confirms

Alternative.me’s popular Bitcoin Fear and Greed Index reaffirmed Santiment’s claim that fear continues to dominate the market. Moreover, it has been in an ‘extreme fear’ state for over a month, with a brief exception in mid-March when BTC pumped to $76,000, only to be rejected and pushed below $70,000 within days.

History shows that BTC indeed tends to bounce back following long periods of time spent in ‘extreme fear.’ The same can be said about ‘extreme greed,’ as evident from the chart below. However, the current landscape is mostly influenced by the war against Iran, and FUD might continue as long as there’s no decisive outcome.

The post Bitcoin Enters Weekend With Highest Fear Levels in a Month: Here’s Why That’s Good appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Mining Bitcoin in 2026 is not what it used to be. The last halving cut block rewards in half, network difficulty keeps climbing, and the electricity costs alone are enough to make most retail investors walk away before they even start. Industrial operations with cheap power and purpose-built facilities have essentially taken over. For the average person, mining is no longer a realistic path to earning Bitcoin. But that does not mean earning Bitcoin is off the table. A project called Bitcoin Everlight has been quietly building a completely different model, one where you earn real BTC from network activity without a single piece of hardware involved. The entry point starts at $10, and the whole process takes minutes to set up.

The Network Doing the Work for You

Bitcoin Everlight approaches the Bitcoin ecosystem from a different angle than most projects. Rather than creating a competing chain or modifying Bitcoin’s rules, it built a routing and validation layer that operates in parallel with Bitcoin. Transactions move through the Everlight network quickly and cheaply, with final settlement anchored back to the Bitcoin blockchain where it belongs. Participants who hold BTCL and activate a shard earn a portion of the fees that network generates. The token is currently in Phase 4 of its presale at $0.0014 per BTCL, with the next phase stepping up to $0.0016 and the launch price sitting at $0.0310. Over $2.4 million has been raised so far, and the minimum to participate is just $10.

Earning BTC Without the Equipment

The shard system is where the earning happens, and the Jade Shard is the starting point most new participants reach for first. A $100 commitment in BTCL activates it, and from that moment it begins generating 6% APY paid in BTCL during the presale phase. At mainnet launch, those rewards convert automatically to real BTC drawn from live transaction routing fees. Nothing changes on the user’s end. The conversion happens on its own.

The full reward ladder looks like this:

• Jade at $100 earns 6% APY
• Azure at $500 earns 12% APY
• Violet at $1,500 earns 20% APY
• Radiant at $3,000 earns 28% or more APY

Shards move up automatically when your balance crosses the next threshold. If the balance falls below the required level, the shard steps down and reactivates when the balance returns. That design keeps participants naturally incentivized to hold rather than sell. No ASICs, no electricity contracts, no cooling systems. The comparison to traditional mining is stark, and it favors shards at almost every point.

Building in Public From the Start

Transparency is one of the clearest ways to separate serious projects from ones that disappear after the presale closes. Bitcoin Everlight is on its seventh whitepaper release, with each version publicly available and developer updates posted openly for anyone to read. The roadmap covers expansion of node infrastructure, additional ecosystem applications, and wider adoption of the Bitcoin payment layer.

Every milestone is tracked and communicated rather than quietly missed. When mainnet launches, presale participants transition automatically to live BTC reward distribution without needing to do anything on their end. The project is built to be followed, not just bought.

A Community That Keeps Score

The social layer around Bitcoin Everlight is unusually active for a project still in presale. The official account @BTCEverlight on X posts consistently with shard updates, technical progress, and community highlights. The Telegram group has become a space where participants genuinely help each other, with dashboard screenshots and earning discussions happening daily. The dashboard itself keeps things honest, with leaderboards and a live activity feed that show exactly what is happening across the network in real time.

Security Locked In Before the First Dollar Entered

Every security measure was in place before the presale opened. Smart contracts were independently reviewed by SpyWolf and SolidProof. The entire team passed identity verification through SpyWolf KYC and VitalBlock, with real identities confirmed through regulated providers. Optional checkpointing ties transaction data back to the Bitcoin blockchain for an added layer of verifiable accountability. The system is fully non-custodial throughout, meaning your keys and your BTCL stay under your control at every stage.

The Architecture Behind the Rewards

Bitcoin Everlight is not a fork and it does not rewrite Bitcoin’s consensus rules. It functions as a lightweight transaction routing and validation layer sitting alongside Bitcoin rather than replacing any part of it. Everlight Nodes handle optimized routing paths and efficient validation, cutting transaction times without touching the base protocol. The shard model exists specifically to make node-level participation available to people who do not want to run infrastructure themselves. As post-halving pressure continues to squeeze mining margins and rising network difficulty makes solo mining less viable, this model becomes more relevant rather than less.

The Timing Argument Is Simple

Mining yields are shrinking. Staking returns on other chains are being diluted by overcrowding. Bitcoin Everlight offers something neither of those can: yield paid in actual BTC, sourced from real transaction fees, with no dependence on token inflation to sustain the numbers. Phase 4 pricing at $0.0014 still reflects where the project is rather than where it is heading. The launch price of $0.0310 represents a significant gap that narrows with every phase that passes. Earning Bitcoin without mining in 2026 is not only possible, it is available right now at an entry point almost anyone can reach.

Interested investors can find more information here or check Bitcoin Everlight’s X and Telegram.

Disclaimer: The above article is sponsored content; it’s written by a third party. CryptoPotato doesn’t endorse or assume responsibility for the content, advertising, products, quality, accuracy, or other materials on this page. Nothing in it should be construed as financial advice. Readers are strongly advised to verify the information independently and carefully before engaging with any company or project mentioned and to do their own research. Investing in cryptocurrencies carries a risk of capital loss, and readers are also advised to consult a professional before making any decisions that may or may not be based on the above-sponsored content.

Readers are also advised to read CryptoPotato’s full disclaimer.

The post How to Earn Bitcoin Without Mining in 2026: Bitcoin Everlight Spotlight appeared first on CryptoPotato.

The Swiss-based non-profit organization established over a decade ago to support and develop the broader Ethereum blockchain ecosystem continues to stake ETH tokens and has neared its overall 70,000 target.

At the same time, analysts have weighed in on the underlying asset’s recent performance, outlining the next key levels it has to overcome to reignite another run.

EF Stakes More ETH

On-chain data reveals that the Ethereum Foundation has now staked roughly 69,500 ETH (valued at over $140 million as of current prices) in less than two months. The organization has previously stated that it plans to use the tokens to fuel research, development, and ecosystem growth through yield.

Ethereum Foundation nears its 70K $ETH staking goal.

The Ethereum Foundation has staked ~69,500 Ether in under 2 months—fueling research, development & ecosystem growth through yield.

While boosting sustainability, Vitalik Buterin flags potential risks around validator… pic.twitter.com/Bo5Khyuz5W

— Wise Crypto (@WiseCrypto_) April 4, 2026

The latest batch of 45,034 ETH was staked on Friday by depositing the units in blocks of 2,047 ETH to the Eth2 Beacon Chain deposit contract. According to data from Arkham, the EF holds over 102,000 ETH (worth around $210 million), while its total treasury, spread across 14 addresses, is valued at approximately $270 million.

ETF Investors Continue to Pull Out

In contrast, investors getting ETH exposure through the spot Ethereum ETFs in the US continue to mostly withdraw funds. The financial vehicles were on an eight-day withdrawal-only streak, during which investors pulled out approximately $440 million, before finally ending it on March 30 with a minor net inflow of $5 million.

Another green day followed on March 31 with $31.17 million, but $7.1 million and $71.17 million ended the business week on Wednesday and Thursday (April 3 was Good Friday in the US). As such, the week was again in the red, with over $42 million leaving the funds.

ETH Price Update

Popular analyst Ted Pillows noted that ETH has been trading sideways for a few months now and added that it has to decisively break above the $2,100-$2,150 resistance for a bigger upside move. The asset went toward $2,400 a few weeks back, but was quickly rejected and has stalled below those levels ever since.

In contrast, he warned that if it loses the coveted $2,000 support, a “huge long liquidation wipeout will happen.”

$ETH has been going sideways for now.

For an upside move, Ethereum needs to break above the $2,100-$2,150 level.

Meanwhile, if ETH loses the $2,000 level, a huge long liquidation wipeout will happen. pic.twitter.com/9cURSLExZ4

— Ted (@TedPillows) April 4, 2026

Crypto Tony also acknowledged ETH’s sluggishness in the current range, but said he expects “wicks this weekend,” hopefully to the upside.

The post ETH Nears Key Resistance as Ethereum Foundation Approaches Staking Goal appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Although the primary cryptocurrency has remained relatively stable over the past few days, large market participants known as whales have used the opportunity to accumulate a sizeable portion of the asset.

On-chain data reveals intensifying buying pressure on Binance as well, which could lead to short-term gains. However, one analyst outlined the key resistance level that has to be overcome before the bulls can find a way back.

BTC Whales Go on Accumulation Spree

Ali Martinez updated his 165,000 followers on X that these market participants have increased their BTC holdings by approximately 10,000 units in the past 72 hours alone. In terms of USD, this substantial stash is worth around $670,000,000 as of current prices, as the asset remains rangebound at $67,000.

Whales accumulated around 10,000 Bitcoin $BTC over the past 72 hours. pic.twitter.com/llgji0uoWf

— Ali Charts (@alicharts) April 4, 2026

Such major purchases could have a two-fold impact on bitcoin. First, they decrease the immediate selling pressure. Second, their actions could be followed by retail, which tends to mimic whales. Data from CW show that spot buying of bitcoin on the world’s largest crypto exchange, Binance, has also increased over the past few days, which could serve as a catalyst for a more substantial upside move.

However, fellow analyst Crypto Tony doesn’t support a bullish narrative. He noted that BTC will continue to chart lower highs and lower lows as long as it remains below the $69,000 resistance.

Bitcoin Summer Is Over

Looking at the macro charts, Merlijn The Trader warned that bitcoin’s ‘summer’ is over. The summer in question is not the actual temperate season, but it serves metaphorically to showcase the opposite of ‘crypto winter.’

His chart below demonstrates that BTC tends to grow exponentially for a certain period (summer) before it goes into three consecutive red zones. In 2017, this same sequence led to an 83% drop. Four years later, the decline was by 77%.

After the October ATH of over $126,000, BTC plunged by around 52% to its February bottom of $60,000. Consequently, Merlijn explained that more painful declines might be on the horizon if history is any indication. The graph below shows that BTC has just entered its first red zone; two more could follow.

THE LAST BITCOIN SUMMER OF THE CYCLE IS BEHIND US.

Green zone: done. Red zone: active.

2017: same sequence. Then -83%.
2021: same sequence. Then -77%.
2026: same sequence. Now.

$60K holds or it doesn’t.

The season changed.
Somehow ppl can say:

“The 4-Year Cycle is dead.” pic.twitter.com/hodI4cwc7C

— Merlijn The Trader (@MerlijnTrader) April 4, 2026

The post Bitcoin Whales Go on Big Accumulation Spree but Don’t Be Bullish Just Yet: Analysts appeared first on CryptoPotato.