The integration enhances Starknet's accessibility and could boost transaction volumes, fostering broader adoption and interoperability in DeFi.

The post Starknet integrates with ShapeShift, cutting the bridge step from swaps appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The significant Ether ETF outflows highlight investor caution towards volatile assets amid macroeconomic pressures, impacting market dynamics.

The post Ether ETFs lose $320M in a week, outpacing Bitcoin fund outflows appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Investor confidence in China's AI hardware sector suggests resilience, but geopolitical risks and potential downturns could test market stability.

The post Citi sees China AI supply-chain IPOs holding firm despite valuation pullback appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The significant outflows from Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs indicate a cautious investor sentiment, potentially signaling a broader market risk aversion.

The post Bitcoin ETFs post $82.39 million in net outflows as Ethereum funds shed $69.68 million appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The escalation in Taiz highlights the growing instability in Yemen, potentially affecting regional power dynamics and the strategic city of Aden.

The post Houthi shelling in Taiz kills woman, wounds five civilians appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Poetic Justice: Scammer Lost $5M in Bitcoin After Being Targeted by Ledger Thieves

Call it poetic justice: one of the biggest victims of last week’s Ledger theft happened to be a scammer themself, according to blockchain analysts, and lost nearly $5 million in bitcoin. 

In a post Thursday, Chainalysis wrote that a crook lost 60 bitcoins worth about $4.8 million they’d stolen via a so-called task scam. 

According to Chainalysis, the address was linked with a con where people were paid to fake sales and reviews of real items. They were told to add their own money in order to get paid — and then stolen from. 

But the mastermind behind the task scam moved the stolen money to Ledger addresses which were then targeted by different scammers last week.

“On Sep 22, the person behind the scam moved the proceeds into three separate Ledger addresses,” Chainalysis said. “On Oct 9, thieves emptied all three. One transfer each, into the same wallet. The wallet is reported as stolen funds.”

Paris-based Ledger last week said it had started an investigation after customers in South East Asia reported they’d lost funds after buying from Malaysia-based reseller, CryptoBilis. 

Ledger has since said that the scam was a massive organized crime operation where a group installed implants into devices and put them back on the market. The implants could read users’ seed phrases so criminals could then drain wallets. 

Calling it one the most “sophisticated attacks” the digital asset industry has experienced, Ledger is yet to reveal how much money has been lost — but blockchain investigator Specter said $86 million had been drained. 

And the task scam conman, according to Chainalysis, was one of the victims.

Ledger has said that it is working with law enforcement to “follow the funds and dismantle the attackers’ infrastructure” and has made sure no other vendors have been targeted by scammers. 

CryptoBilis has stopped selling Ledger products, the company said. 

Criminals have targeted bitcoin hardware sellers this year, with a huge attack taking place in July on the popular Coldcard products. 

Crooks were able to steal close to $120 million in bitcoin from Coldcard users because the devices had a firmware bug which led to faulty seed generation, allowing hackers to guess investor seedphrases. 

This post Poetic Justice: Scammer Lost $5M in Bitcoin After Being Targeted by Ledger Thieves first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

BFFS26 Denver: Joseph Kelly on Bitcoin Custody and Credit; Alan Lane on Banking Lessons

The Bitcoin for Financial Services Summit (BFFS26) returns to Denver October 20–22, 2026, bringing together CPAs, wealth advisors, attorneys, lenders, and finance leaders who are building Bitcoin into their practices. Now in its second year, the summit has grown to more than 30 sessions across two full program days, with a speaker lineup drawn from the firms defining Bitcoin custody, credit, and advisory.

Headlining the program are Joseph Kelly, CEO and co-founder of Unchained, who opens the summit with a keynote on custody, credit, and trust at scale; Alan Lane, former CEO of Silvergate Bank, on lessons for Bitcoin and banking; Patrick Lowry, CEO of Samara Asset Group, on holding Bitcoin as a public-company treasury reserve; and Colin Crossman, Wyoming’s Deputy Secretary of State, on the regulatory outlook for banks, exchanges, and advisors. Additional speakers include Kate Goldman of Anchorage Digital, Sam Baker of River, Eric Yakes of Epoch Ventures, Daniel Hillery of UTXO Management, Moish Peltz of Falcon Rappaport & Berkman, and CJ Konstantinos of Peoples Reserve.

Sessions focus on practical application: bringing Bitcoin into wealth planning and family offices, Bitcoin-backed lending and mortgages, treasury accounting and valuation, retirement and income planning, charitable giving strategies, mining as an asset class, and fiduciary duty when clients hold Bitcoin. Dedicated workshops will offer continuing education credit for financial advisors and CPAs.

“Last year proved that financial professionals want more than a Bitcoin primer. They want to know how to serve clients who already own it,” said Jordan Guess, CPA, co-host of the summit in a press release shared with Bitcoin Magazine. “This year’s program is built around the questions advisors and accountants are actually getting from clients, answered by the people building the infrastructure.”

The summit opens Tuesday, October 20, with the Better Money Invitational golf tournament at City Park Golf Course, hosted with Bitcoin Sports Network, followed by a welcome party at The Space sponsored by Falcon Rappaport & Berkman. Evening programming includes wine and whiskey tastings, and Thursday begins with an optional sunrise hike in the Rocky Mountains.

BFFS26 is co-hosted by Jordan Guess and Wyatt O’Rourke of BFFS Media, producers of the Bitcoin for Financial Services podcast. Sponsors include Unchained, Anchorage Digital, UTXO Management, River, SOUND HSA, SustainHash, and Stormrake.

Registration is open now at https://www.bffs.media/summit.

Media contact: Wyatt O’Rourke, wyatt@bffs.media

This post BFFS26 Denver: Joseph Kelly on Bitcoin Custody and Credit; Alan Lane on Banking Lessons first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Juan Galt.

Bitcoin Magazine

Sazmining Now Sells Jack Dorsey’s Proto Immersion Hashboards 

Bitcoin mining just got a lower barrier to entry. 

Sazmining announced Thursday that it is now selling Proto’s immersion hashboards directly to individual and institutional buyers through its mining-as-a-service platform. Previously, the hardware was mostly in the hands of large-scale operators.

Each hashboard delivers roughly 200 TH at around 15 J/TH, and buyers own them outright while Sazmining handles deployment, monitoring and maintenance at a US facility. Mining rewards go straight to the owner’s wallet.

The move follows a multi-megawatt supply deal between Sazmining and Proto — the bitcoin mining arm of Jack Dorsey’s Block (NYSE: XYZ) — which both companies expect to expand as demand grows.

“Because of our aligned-incentive model, Sazmining only earns when we produce bitcoin for our clients,” said Kent Halliburton, CEO and co-founder of Sazmining. 

He also pitched mining as a form of bitcoin acquisition diversification: rather than paying the market price on the day of purchase, a miner’s costs are spread across the machine’s working life.

Wyoming-based Sazmining, founded in 2018, operates renewable-powered facilities across the US, Paraguay, and Norway. It says its fleet runs more than 20 percentage points ahead of the Bitcoin network’s carbon-free share.

Proto is Jack Dorsey’s Block’s bitcoin mining play. The Twitter founder has spent years arguing bitcoin is the foundation of “a more open financial system,” funding everything from Cash App’s buy-and-send rails to the Bitkey self-custody wallet, and he framed mining as the obvious missing piece back in 2021: “Bitcoin mining should be as easy as plugging a rig into a power source.” 

Block formally announced it was building an open bitcoin mining system in January 2022, with the stated aim of making mining “more distributed and efficient.”

This post Sazmining Now Sells Jack Dorsey’s Proto Immersion Hashboards  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Hot Inflation Data Puts Bitcoin Under Pressure, but ‘Difficult’ Isn’t ‘Bearish’: CoinShares

Bitcoin’s price has dropped this week as new inflation data has come in hot. 

But while the largest cryptocurrency’s near-term setup is difficult, it’s not “fundamentally bearish,” according to European asset manager CoinShares’ Head of Research, James Butterfill. 

In a report Friday, the analyst said that bitcoin’s near-term challenge stems from a macro environment that’s caught in an awkward middle ground: inflation is too elevated for the Fed to ease up, while the economy is too resilient to force a policy pivot. 

“Bitcoin and the broader digital asset market have moved lower on the resulting hawkish repricing, a reminder of how sensitive Bitcoin remains to monetary policy over short horizons,” he wrote. 

Bitcoin’s price recently stood at $81,473, down 2% over a seven-day period. 

The price of the leading cryptocurrency dropped Wednesday after data showed that U.S. consumer prices shot up more than expected in September. 

Then, on Thursday, the Labor Department’s Bureau of Labor Statistics said that U.S. producer prices rose in September at the fastest pace in more than four years. 

This has weighed on bitcoin’s price because higher inflation means the Federal Reserve may hike interest rates. Higher borrowing costs can restrict the liquidity the digital coin needs to rally. 

The Federal Reserve hiked rates in September and will meet at the end of this month. 

But Butterfill added that investors should be patient and advised investors to instead think in the long-term and not react to any single weekly data point. 

“For investors, that argues for reading the coming weeks as a data-driven range rather than a trend, and for sizing digital asset exposure against a strategic allocation rather than against this week’s print,” he wrote. 

Bitcoin spent the first half of 2026 in a bear market but had its best quarter in years after surging in August and September. Analysts have now said the leading cryptocurrency is now back in a bull market after trading above its 365-day moving average. 

This post Hot Inflation Data Puts Bitcoin Under Pressure, but ‘Difficult’ Isn’t ‘Bearish’: CoinShares first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Deutsche Bank To Debut Bitcoin Custody Within Weeks: Report

German multinational Deutsche Bank is just weeks away from its crypto custody service, according to reports. 

The lender — which is Germany’s biggest — also plans to ​expand the custody platform into Asia next year​, according to a Friday Reuters report, which quoted its corporate banking chief. 

Top banks worldwide are debuting or planning to debut crypto custody services, with BNY Mellon, State Street, Standard Chartered, U.S. Bank, and Citigroup all committing to direct crypto custody over the past 18 months.

Deutsche Bank first officially announced plans to debut a bitcoin custody service for European corporate and institutional clients in September, with the German multinational at the time saying service was subject to the completion of the applicable regulatory timeline.

Friday’s report added that the service will support custody of ​major ⁠cryptocurrencies such as bitcoin before moving to services that help clients move money into and out of ⁠stablecoins.

Gerald Podobnik, co-head of the corporate ⁠bank, was quoted by Reuters saying that the financial system will need to “offer tokenized or blockchain solutions.” 

A number of top banks have started using the technology that powers bitcoin, the blockchain, for their own products in recent years. 

Stablecoins and tokenization in particular have become a hot topic as traditional financial firms aim to accelerate certain services. 

Crypto custody is often a starting point for banks moving into the digital asset space. BNY Mellon in 2022 became the first major U.S. bank to offer digital asset custody services.  

Banks like Citi and Standard Chartered have this year debuted or announced plans for bitcoin custody around the world. 

This post Deutsche Bank To Debut Bitcoin Custody Within Weeks: Report first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

The bitcoin price stands at $81,437 on Saturday morning, $526 below its level at the same time on Friday. The real news of the morning sits not in the chart but in an interview: according to Gerald Podobnik, co-head of its corporate bank, Deutsche Bank is only weeks away from holding bitcoin and ether in custody itself for institutional clients. Frankfurt is the first market. This article sets out what that means in practice, which assets are covered from day one, and why retail investors gain nothing from it for now.

Bitcoin price on Saturday morning: $81,437 and €72,460

Bitcoin trades at $81,437 at around 6:50 a.m. German time on Saturday, October 17. In euros that is €72,460. Over the past 24 hours the loss stands at 0.62 percent, and at 1.29 percent over the week. The 24-hour range runs from $80,761 to $82,816, a span of $2,055 or a good 2.5 percent between low and high. The market value of all bitcoin in circulation stands at $1.64 trillion. All figures come from the CoinGecko market query and refer to Saturday morning.

That leaves $44,643 to the all-time high of $126,080. Put differently, the price would have to rise by 54.8 percent to reach the old peak again. That puts the daily dip in context. Half a percent down on a Saturday morning is not an event; the picture since mid-October is another matter.

Podobnik talks about weeks, not months

Gerald Podobnik, co-head of Deutsche Bank's corporate banking business, said in an interview with Reuters on October 16, 2026 that the launch of the bank's own custody for digital assets was only weeks away. He gave no exact date and named no first client. That is the difference from the statement of September 16: back then the bank wrote of a launch still this year, subject to completion of the relevant supervisory procedure. Year-end has become weeks.

Formally, one condition still stands before the launch, and it does not rest with the bank. The service goes live only once the supervisory procedure is complete and the technology has been signed off. The bank puts it the same way on its own product page. The date to mark in a calendar is a window, not a day.

Bitcoin, ether and three tokens: the scope on day one

The bank names five assets for the start: bitcoin, ether and the three e-money tokens USDC, EURC and EURAU. Stablecoin transfers, tokenised deposits and digital securities are to follow later. The service is offered not through an app but through the existing channels of the corporate bank, namely the Autobahn portal and the Corporate Bank portal.

The target group is narrowly drawn and consists of institutional and corporate clients: asset managers, investors, multinational companies, and state or state-linked bodies. Germany is the first market, and settlement sits in Frankfurt. Podobnik holds out the prospect of expansion to Asian financial centres in 2027 without naming a location. A custody account for retail clients is not part of the announced package.

E-money token is no throwaway phrase here but a defined term from the European regulation on markets in crypto-assets: an e-money token tracks exactly one official currency and must be fully backed. EURAU is the euro token in which Deutsche Bank holds a stake through its fund subsidiary. Its presence alongside USDC and EURC shows where the bank actually wants to take the service: towards payments and settlement rather than trading.

Why only now: BaFin application in 2023, Taurus deal in 2023, announcement in September

The backstory reaches three years back. In 2023 Deutsche Bank applied to BaFin for a licence for the crypto custody business. In September of the same year it signed a global contract with the Swiss infrastructure provider Taurus, which supplies the technology for custody and tokenisation. After that it went quiet for a long time. The official announcement came only on September 16, 2026, which we covered in detail at the time.

Roughly three years therefore lie between application and launch. That is not a sign of hesitation alone but also a consequence of the legal framework: operating custody for third-party crypto-assets requires a licence in Germany, and the European crypto-asset regulation recast the requirements on segregation, liability and documentation during that period. Article 75 of the regulation provides, among other things, that client holdings be held separately and returned on demand at any time.

The route there is notable: according to industry observers this is not a fresh authorisation application as a crypto-asset service provider but a notification to the home supervisor. A bank with a full banking licence has to register the service rather than apply from scratch. That explains how months could suddenly turn into weeks.

The keys sit with the bank, not with the client

The technical core of the offering is quickly described: Deutsche Bank manages wallets and private keys on behalf of its clients. A private key is the string of characters that allows bitcoin to be moved. Whoever holds it controls the holdings. That control is exactly what the client hands to the bank here, and in return the client is spared building custody of its own.

As safeguards the bank names hardware security modules, a split into warm and cold storage, multi-person approvals for transfers, and backup and failover procedures. Clients can tailor the approval paths themselves, setting for instance the amount above which two signatures are required. Warm storage is connected to the network and allows fast movement; cold storage is separated and therefore slower.

One point remains even in the safest design, and the bank writes it into its own statement: crypto-assets are not covered by deposit insurance. A balance in a current account is protected by law up to €100,000 per client and institution; a bitcoin in custody is not. Protection there comes from the segregation of holdings and the right of separation in insolvency, not from a guarantee fund.

Retail clients are not included: the gap stays with exchanges and brokers

For investors in Germany the launch changes nothing about their own route to buying, at least for now. Buying bitcoin today still runs through a crypto exchange, a broker, or one of the banks and savings banks that already offer trading through partners. Custody therefore stays either with the provider or in the investor's own hands. Self-custody means a device that keeps the key offline; the common models and their costs are set out in our hardware wallet comparison.

The news still has an indirect effect. Once asset managers, foundations and companies can leave their holdings with a large European bank, a hurdle falls away for that group which regularly became a deal-breaker in investment committees. Whether inflows follow will show up not in the announcement but in the holdings a few months from now. So far only the intention is documented.

Friday's ETF flows: $82.39 million out

The American spot bitcoin ETFs lost a net $82.39 million on Friday, October 16. BlackRock's fund recorded the largest single outflow at $71.78 million, followed by Fidelity at $10.61 million. The figures come from SoSoValue and were documented on Saturday morning in market reporting.

That flips the picture from the previous day. On Thursday the same funds gathered a net $5.06 million, carried solely by BlackRock at $16.79 million. A small gain has turned into an outflow equal to roughly 1,011 bitcoin. For comparison, miners bring about 450 new bitcoin to the market each day. Friday's outflow therefore weighs a good two days of production.

What has changed since our bitcoin article of October 16

On Friday morning the price stood at $81,963 in our report on the ETF standstill, fund flows were at plus $5.06 million, and the levels were set at $79,806 below and $82,508 above. Three things have happened since.

First, the price took the upper level: the 24-hour high stands at $82,816, which is $308 above Friday's mark. It did not hold there. Second, the lower level of $79,806 still stands, with the daily low of $80,761 staying barely $1,000 above it. Third, the standstill in fund flows is no longer a standstill but an outflow. The price sits $526 lower on Saturday than on Friday, even though it was higher in between.

The levels for the weekend: $80,761 below, $82,816 above

On the upside the next level with a reason behind it is $82,816, the high of the past 24 hours. That is where the market found sellers on Friday. A close above it would be the first argument that the recovery since the drop below $80,000 is more than a counter-move.

On the downside the first level is $80,761, the low of the past 24 hours, followed by the round number at $80,000, which was briefly breached on Thursday. Volumes are thin at the weekend and the ETFs do not trade because the American exchanges are closed. Both widen swings in either direction without a new piece of news behind them.

The editorial view: custody weighs more than the daily dip

Our assessment: of this morning's two pieces of news, the smaller one is the more important. A loss of 0.62 percent and an ETF outflow of $82.39 million are daily noise, and October has seen bigger single days. That a bank with a balance sheet in the trillions is holding bitcoin in custody on its own books, by contrast, changes the list of possible counterparties for every institutional investor in Europe.

The evidence sits above: application to BaFin since 2023, technology contract with Taurus since 2023, official announcement on September 16, 2026, a timeframe of weeks given on October 16, 2026, Germany as the first market. Three things speak against it, and we are not concealing them: there is no date, there is no named first client, and the service does not reach retail investors. Reading a price impulse into this news reads more into it than is documented. This is expressly not a recommendation to buy or sell.

One-year holding period and a change of custodian: moving is not selling

For investors in Germany, custody carries a tax question. Gains from the sale of bitcoin are tax-free under section 23 of the Income Tax Act if more than a year lies between purchase and sale. This holding period is currently up for political debate, but it remains the law in force.

The distinction matters: a mere change of custody, meaning the transfer of your own bitcoin from an exchange to your own device or to a custodian, is not a sale and does not restart the clock. What counts is the date of acquisition, not the storage location. Several purchases at different times do require clean records for each tranche, otherwise the period cannot be proven in case of doubt. Documentation is the taxpayer's responsibility in a dispute.

One more note for context: when large custodians enter the market, holdings move between addresses without anyone selling. On-chain movements alone therefore say nothing about selling pressure. That holds in both directions and is one of the most common false conclusions drawn from large transfers.

Bank custody: no launch in 2026 without the regulator's green light

Deutsche Bank's launch hangs on a condition the bank names itself, not on a date. Until then the situation for retail investors stays unchanged. Three steps make sense now:

1. Check your buying route if a purchase is coming up. Fees and spreads differ far more sharply on €100 than on €10,000. The terms of the providers available in Germany are set out in our comparison of crypto exchanges.
2. Settle your custody. Holdings meant to sit for more than a year do not belong in a trading account. Which devices do the job and what they cost is shown in the hardware wallet comparison.
3. Secure your acquisition data. Date, quantity and price for each tranche belong in a record that stays readable after a change of provider. Tools for that are listed in the overview of tax tools and portfolio trackers.

(As of October 17, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

On October 23, 2026 at 09:34 UTC, the amendment fixCleanup3_4_0 becomes active on the XRP Ledger. If you simply hold or trade XRP, there is nothing to do: balances, addresses and payments already in flight stay as they are. The only people who have to act are those running a node or a validator of their own, because that software has to know the amendment by then.

The bundle is notable for a different reason. Among other things it repairs Single Asset Vaults and the lending protocol, the credit function that has been written about for weeks as a thing of the future. Neither is live on mainnet to this day. The repair, in other words, arrives before the feature it repairs.

What the XRP Ledger does on October 23

An amendment is a change to the rules by which the network checks transactions. The change bites only once enough validators have agreed, and from then on it holds permanently for every subsequent ledger version. Undoing such a change takes another amendment.

fixCleanup3_4_0 carries the identifier 98433DD0…CA76 and reached the required majority on October 9, 2026 at 09:34:30 UTC. That fixes the date exactly two weeks later, October 23 at the same hour.

A look at the ledger itself shows how quiet the network otherwise is: of 107 known features, 97 are active and 10 are not. Among those ten sits exactly one majority entry, and it belongs to fixCleanup3_4_0. The bundle is therefore the only item on the ledger with a clock running at all.

How an amendment takes effect: 80 percent and two weeks

The rule sits in the XRP Ledger documentation and is short: an amendment needs more than 80 percent approval from the trusted validators and has to hold that approval for two weeks. A validator is a server whose vote other participants treat as trustworthy; it confirms transactions and votes on changes of this kind.

The reverse side of the rule matters just as much. If support drops below 80 percent, the amendment is temporarily rejected and the two-week window starts over. An amendment can win and lose a majority as often as it likes before it goes permanently active. October 23 is not a date carved in stone, then, but one that holds only as long as the majority does.

The same pattern ran in September, when the preceding bundle, fixCleanup3_3_0, went live. What applied back then to wallet, node and AMM users is set out in our piece on the amendment activation of September 11. fixCleanup3_1_3, fixCleanup3_2_0 and fixCleanup3_3_0 are all three active by now; the series is routine rather than an exception.

Nothing changes for holders, something does for node operators

The picture splits cleanly in two. Anyone holding XRP on an exchange or in a wallet of their own will notice nothing on October 23: no hard fork, no new address, no token swap, no freeze on deposits and withdrawals. Exchanges and wallet providers run their nodes themselves and keep the software current.

It looks different if you run a rippled server yourself. Should that server be on a version that does not know fixCleanup3_4_0 on the day, it becomes amendment-blocked: it no longer follows consensus and no longer serves reliable data. The safeguard is deliberate, because a server that does not understand the new rules would otherwise spread a divergent view of the ledger.

For almost all readers that means sitting tight. If you hold your XRP through a trading venue, the most this day calls for is a glance at the fees and the licence of that venue; our crypto exchange comparison sets the terms side by side. It has nothing to do with the amendment itself, but it is the only lever a holder can actually pull on that day.

fixCleanup3_4_0 repairs vaults, loans and the permissioned DEX

The bundle is not a single patch but a collection of corrections running right across the protocol. According to the XRP Ledger amendment overview, it touches Single Asset Vaults, the lending protocol, the automated market maker, the permissioned DEX, trust lines, NFTs, multi-purpose tokens, escrow, sponsoring, the transaction signature and rights delegation. The last comparably targeted intervention was the patch to the payment engine at the start of October.

Single Asset Vaults: rounding and the ValidVault rule

A Single Asset Vault is a protocol-level pot into which users deposit a single asset and receive shares in return. The corrections land exactly where decimal places decide who gets money: deposits, withdrawals and clawback will round more precisely, so that a vault pays out neither too much nor too little. A withdrawal at a fixed share quota from a fully impaired vault will be allowed to move zero assets instead of failing with an error. And the ValidVault rule will no longer block a vault change when accrued interest alone pushes past the upper limit.

Lending: default only once the due date has truly passed

In the credit section, a small thing shifts to large effect: the checks for arrears, impairment and default will require the due date to have strictly elapsed. Until now a loan could count as overdue on the due date itself. There is also an exception that exempts a loan default from freeze, deep freeze and MPT lock when the transfer runs from the broker to the vault.

AMM, trust lines, NFTs and escrow

The automated market maker is the protocol's own trading venue, where buyer and seller do not meet but a pool sets the price. Here a bid will be prevented from taking the auction slot of a fee-free pool at a price of zero or for scattered amounts. With trust lines, the lines of credit through which an account holds foreign currencies, an attempt to create a line that already exists will simply return a duplicate notice instead of running into nothing. NFT offers that use the currency code XRP for a non-XRP amount will be rejected. And with escrow, the protocol's own trust arrangement, the owner's reserve will be released before the returned or delivered amount can create a new balance.

One change stands out because it concerns security: sponsor and counterparty signatures get their own signature prefixes. A signature can no longer be moved from one role into the other.

Why the fix arrives before the feature

This is where the real finding lies. The validators' software has long known the code for vaults and loans: SingleAssetVault, LendingProtocol and LendingProtocolV1_1 are listed in the ledger as supported, which means the features are contained in the shipped server versions. They are still not active, because they lack a majority.

The corrections to those very features, by contrast, are going through first. Technically that makes sense: a bug that costs money only in use should be fixed before use becomes possible at all. For readers it also means the activation on October 23 brings no new feature. The bundle clears the path for features whose start date remains open.

What has changed since October 11

On October 11 the lending amendment stood at 17 of 25 evaluated votes; the arithmetic behind that is in our article on the 17 of 25 votes for the lending amendment. Two things have happened since, and only one of them concerns the credit function.

First, on October 9, two days before that article, fixCleanup3_4_0 cleared the 80 percent threshold and started its clock. Second, as of October 17 the ledger still shows only that one majority entry. Whether the number of yes votes for the lending protocol has risen since, the ledger does not say; it shows only that the threshold was not crossed in those six days. Had it held, a second entry with its own timestamp would be sitting there.

The lending protocol still has no majority

Of the ten features not yet activated, five feed directly into the new financial layer: SingleAssetVault, LendingProtocol, LendingProtocolV1_1, ConfidentialTransfer for confidential transfers and Sponsor for sponsored reserves. All five count as supported; not one has a majority.

That the lending protocol sits in the ledger in two versions, once as LendingProtocol and once as LendingProtocolV1_1, has so far appeared nowhere in German-language coverage. It is a sign that development carried on while the vote was still open.

That yields a calculation anyone can follow: as soon as one of these features reaches a majority, another two weeks pass before activation. Were the majority to come together today, the earliest conceivable start would be October 31, 2026. Since it is not there today, that date moves out with every passing day.

Until then, lending against crypto assets stays what it is now: a business run through platforms and providers rather than through the protocol itself. If that interests you, the terms and the risks are in our crypto lending comparison. Every one of these platforms carries a counterparty risk that a protocol loan would not, and a total loss is possible.

Default vote no: the open question in the documentation

One data point does not fit the picture, and it belongs out in the open. The amendment overview lists the default vote of the latest stable version for fixCleanup3_4_0 as a no. The default vote is what a server casts as long as its operator sets nothing else.

An amendment that reaches a majority although the default vote stands at no allows two readings: either operators set their approval individually, or the documentation page no longer reflects the state of the current server version. Which of the two applies could not be settled from the accessible sources. Also documented is that no feature from the time before the amendment is switched off; nothing disappears.

Our assessment: the order is the signal, not the date

October 23 itself is a maintenance date and worth little as news. The order of events is the interesting part. The evidence: a single majority entry in the ledger, and it belongs to a correction bundle that touches vaults and loans; five features of the same financial layer sit alongside it, supported but undecided. If you follow this development, keep an eye on the next majority entry rather than on this date.

Against reading too much into that order: correction bundles pass on the XRP Ledger regularly, and three predecessors have long been active. A majority for a fix amendment says nothing about when the large features will get one of their own. A price target certainly cannot be derived from it, and none of the figures named here is a recommendation to buy or sell.

XRPL lending: without an 80 percent majority, the credit function stays off

The amendment on October 23 does not concern the vast majority of readers. Three points are still worth a look while the timetable for the credit function stays open:

1. Settle custody. Do your XRP sit on an exchange or in your own custody? That makes no difference to protocol changes, but a considerable one to your risk. The devices and how they differ are in the hardware wallet comparison.
2. Look at your venue's licence. For buying and selling in Europe, what counts is whether the provider is authorised under MiCA. Which houses meet that is shown in the overview of regulated crypto exchanges.
3. Document your gains. Purchases, sales and earnings belong on record without gaps, because the tax office asks you for the evidence, not the exchange. Suitable tools are in the crypto tax software comparison.

(As of October 17, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Coinbase published a position paper on the future of Bitcoin signatures on October 13, 2026. Its central claim is that the move to schemes a quantum computer cannot break has to begin before such a machine exists. Bitcoin is untouched by it at around $81,600 (CoinGecko, October 16). The paper names neither a deadline nor an activation mechanism, and that is precisely its message: the debate is starting, the implementation is not.

Coinbase sets out a position paper on post-quantum migration

The document carries more weight than the usual industry comment, because Coinbase custodies around five percent of all existing Bitcoin according to consistent reports, mostly for banks, asset managers and hedge funds. A firm holding that much of other people's money does not carry migration risk in theory.

The company's reasoning is set down verbatim in the paper: "Bitcoin consensus changes and ecosystem migrations can take years, so it is important that we begin this work now." Elsewhere it states that preparation should start "well ahead of any CRQC". CRQC stands for cryptographically relevant quantum computer, meaning a machine actually strong enough to break today's signatures. No such machine exists so far; the most capable known devices work with fewer than 1,000 qubits.

For the timing, the paper cites an estimate by Google researchers under which a CRQC could emerge around 2029. That number is someone else's forecast, not a commitment by Coinbase, and the expert debate rates it differently.

BIP-360 separates the output type from the signature

Technically the paper rests on one idea that is the real point of the proposal: the container of a Bitcoin output and the signature scheme used to spend it later should be separated from each other.

Pay-to-Merkle-Root as an interchangeable container

Under the name Pay-to-Merkle-Root, or P2MR, BIP-360 describes an output type that is not tied to one particular signature scheme. A Merkle root is the condensed root of a hash tree, under which several possible spending conditions can be hidden without all of them being disclosed. Its advantage during migration is that a new, quantum-safe scheme can be added later without changing the output format again.

P2TRv2 as a second, less mature route

Alongside it the paper names P2TRv2, a second version of Taproot pursuing the same separation. Coinbase publicly rates it as less advanced than BIP-360. Both are drafts so far. BIP-360 has the status of a proposal, P2TRv2 has not been adopted, and no Bitcoin upgrade covering these points has been agreed.

The 1-of-2 wallet avoids a hard cut-off date

For the early phase of the switch, Coinbase proposes a construction the paper calls 1-of-2. A balance can be spent either with the classic key or with an additional, quantum-safe key. Both routes are valid at the same time.

The practical benefit is a network that does not have to flip on a single date. Nor does it create outputs movable only under the old scheme, which would then be stranded when that scheme is switched off. Anyone who has carried a wallet through a format change knows the difference between a transition and a cut.

Stateful schemes such as XMSS and LMS carry a forgery risk of their own

On the choice of the future scheme, Coinbase keeps its distance. Stateful signature schemes such as XMSS and LMS count as small and fast, but they have to remember which part of the key material has already been used. Manage that state wrongly and use a part a second time, and forging a signature becomes immediately possible. Coinbase therefore demands that such schemes ship only together with a stateless fallback.

The paper expressly avoids settling on a particular algorithm. It names no activation mechanism either. Readers expecting a finished upgrade find a description of the problem with guard rails.

Exposed keys sit in P2PK and in already-spent addresses

The part that matters most to holders concerns which balances would be vulnerable at all. The public key of an address is not always visible. With modern address formats the blockchain initially holds only a hash of it, and the key itself becomes public only with the first spend.

How to recognise an exposed address

The paper lists the exposed set along that logic: very old P2PK outputs, where the public key stands in the clear from the start, plus P2PKH and Taproot outputs that have already been spent from, and finally deposits arriving during an ongoing migration. The rule of thumb is therefore this: an address you have already sent Bitcoin from has given up its public key. An address that has only received has not.

How to go through your own holdings on that basis is set out in a separate cryptoticker.io piece on the quantum risk of individual Bitcoin addresses. The size of the affected stock is given differently: Coinbase's own advisory board arrived at around 6.9 million Bitcoin with potentially exposed key material in April 2026, while older analyses name about 6.7 million. Both figures describe an upper bound of what is theoretically exposed, not damage done.

The timeframe stays open and the estimates diverge

Figures on how long the rebuild takes differ, and the paper contributes to that by setting no deadline. Part of the coverage reports an estimate of up to seven years for replacing the signature scheme. Other reports speak generally of several years and note explicitly that Coinbase deliberately fixes no schedule. What holds is therefore only the span from several years up to an estimate of seven, not a single number.

That is less unsatisfying than it sounds. A consensus change in Bitcoin needs agreement among developers, miners, exchanges and wallet providers. A date set by a single company would carry no binding force.

A transfer to a fresh address leaves the German holding period intact

The obvious reaction for many holders would be to move balances to new addresses as a precaution. In tax terms that is uncritical in Germany: in its circular on the income tax treatment of crypto assets, the federal finance ministry does not treat a transfer between your own wallets as a disposal. The one-year holding period under section 23 of the Income Tax Act therefore keeps running when you send Bitcoin from one address of your own to another.

Two points still matter. First, your records have to be right, because a portfolio tracker or a tax tool might otherwise book such a transfer as a sale and a repurchase. Second, every transfer costs a network fee. Against a horizon of years, panic is the worse adviser. How the legislator will handle the holding period is open in the ongoing reform debate.

Anyone thinking about custody anyway will find the models, their setup and their running costs in our hardware wallet comparison. Only one property matters for this article: the device has to be able to add signature schemes by firmware update.

Holding on an exchange hands the migration to the provider

If your Bitcoin sits with an exchange or a broker, what you own is a claim against the company, not a private key. Moving to quantum-safe signatures would then be the custodian's job. Among other things, Coinbase describes multi-party computation in the paper as a building block of its own infrastructure and states: "When implemented effectively, MPC can provide strong protection against key theft." Under MPC a key is never assembled in full in one place but split across several parties.

That creates a division of labour worth knowing. In custody with a provider you carry the counterparty risk but not the technical migration. In self-custody it is the other way round. Both are defensible; the decision should simply be a deliberate one rather than the result of inertia.

Dormant Bitcoin and lost keys remain the open flank

The paper deliberately leaves the thorniest point outside the bracket: a balance that never moves cannot be migrated either. That covers the early holdings from the network's first years and every coin whose keys are lost. Coinbase treats this question as a separate problem and not as a precondition for the rest of the rebuild.

That is a political choice, not a purely technical one. Whether such outputs are eventually frozen, given a deadline or left untouched touches on questions of ownership that the Bitcoin world has argued over for years. Coinbase states its expectation that Bitcoin will "continue to be the most trusted cryptocurrency in a post-quantum world". That is no answer on the dormant holdings.

Post-quantum switch: nothing happens until BIP-360 is activated

As long as no output type is activated, your wallet keeps working exactly as it does today. Three steps make sense, in this order:

1. Look at your address behaviour. Make sure your wallet creates a fresh receiving address for every deposit and that you do not reuse an address. Which programs do that reliably is shown in the software wallet comparison.
2. Choose custody deliberately. Decide which part of your holdings should sit with a provider and which in self-custody. Fees, domicile and custody model of the providers are in the exchange comparison.
3. Keep clean records. Document every transfer between your own wallets so the holding period stays provable. Tools for that are in the comparison of tax and portfolio tools.

The next reliable signal will not come from a corporate release but from the development process: only once BIP-360 leaves draft status and an activation route exists does the paper turn into a roadmap.

Sources on the position paper: The Quantum Insider and crypto.news.

(As of October 16, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Rain (RAIN) trades at $0.00887 on Friday evening. That makes it the 21st largest cryptocurrency by market capitalisation, and that is exactly what is odd about it: on paper the market value is $6.30 billion, yet only $7.14 million changed hands over the past 24 hours. Anyone unwinding a larger position meets a market too small to take it.

Since the token unlock of October 12, our own analysis puts 709.25 billion RAIN in circulation out of 1,142.41 billion units issued in total. That is 62.08 percent. The price sits 13.68 percent below last week's level and 54.42 percent below the high of August 25.

How many RAIN are in circulation today

A token unlock is the end of a lock-up: units that were contractually tied up become transferable and can be sold. For RAIN that process runs in stages rather than in a single step.

The position after the October date, taken from CoinGecko's supply and trading data:

• Circulating supply: 709.25 billion RAIN
• Total issued supply: 1,142.41 billion RAIN
• Maximum supply: 1,150 billion RAIN
• Not yet transferable: 433.15 billion RAIN, or 37.92 percent
• Market capitalisation: $6.30 billion

cryptoticker.io compiled this analysis itself on October 16, 2026. It rests on the supply and trading data of the 25 largest cryptocurrencies by market capitalisation, as of Friday evening.

What the 62 percent figure does not say

A ratio of 62 percent sounds like a project that has most of its dilution behind it. Count in dollars and the picture changes. The fully diluted valuation stands at $10.14 billion, the market capitalisation at $6.30 billion. Between those two numbers sit $3.84 billion that have not reached the market yet. That is more than half of today's market value and, for comparison, more than all of Litecoin is worth.

The October 12 unlock and the estimates that disagree

Ahead of the date, the figures for its size were far apart. An analysis by data provider RootData, cited by ChainCatcher on October 5, put the release at a value of around $417 million. Our own preview of October 3 named $785 million, calculated on the price of $0.0103 at the time. Both figures still stand as they are; they are not smoothed over here, because the underlying release schedules are read differently in public.

What can be verified is the amount in circulation today. That figure is the benchmark against which dilution can be measured, and it is the starting point for everything that follows.

Why the price gave way before the date

An announced unlock usually works before the date, not after it. Market participants who know that supply is coming sell beforehand. The record fits: over a month RAIN is down 32.49 percent, over a week 13.68 percent, and over the past 24 hours only 0.88 percent. The move came before the date, not at it.

Market value $6.3 billion, daily turnover $7.1 million: what that ratio says

The most telling number on RAIN is not a price but a quotient. Divide daily turnover by market capitalisation and you get the share of market value that actually changes hands in a day. For RAIN that is 0.113 percent.

For context, the same calculation for all 25 names in the top group, as of Friday evening. The median is 2.387 percent, 21 times higher than RAIN. Only one name in the group trades thinner: LEO Token at 0.003 percent. At the other end sit Bitcoin at 1.747 percent, Ethereum at 4.254 percent and NEAR Protocol at 17.712 percent.

What market depth means in practice

Market depth decides the price at which you actually get out of a position. With daily turnover of $7.14 million, a sell order in the six figures is enough to move the price visibly. The quoted price holds for small amounts; for large ones it does not. That gap is called slippage, the difference between the expected and the achieved price.

So before buying, it pays to look at the trading pairs and the order book depth of the venue in question. Which licensed European houses carry which pairs and what they charge is in the crypto exchange comparison.

The price path since the high of August 25

RAIN set its all-time high on August 25 at $0.01946. It is 54.42 percent short of that today. Over the past 24 hours the price moved between $0.00882 and $0.00976, a range of a good ten percent, on the turnover named above.

Levels above and below

Two reference points emerge from the past few days, both meant as orientation and expressly not as a price target or a recommendation.

Below, the session low of $0.00882 is the next level; beneath it there is no support from recent weeks that can be pinned to a number. Above, the session high of $0.00976 would be the first, then the round $0.01 level where the price still stood before the unlock date.

Why levels carry less weight in thin trading

Support and resistance form because many participants buy or sell at the same place. Where daily turnover is 0.113 percent of market value, such zones form more weakly, and single larger orders shift them. Chart levels on RAIN are therefore softer than on a broadly traded asset.

Where RAIN stays tradable after Kraken's exit

Trading routes changed twice in 2026. Kraken liquidated its customers' RAIN holdings and set a withdrawal deadline for the proceeds; the detail, and what holders could still do afterwards, is in our report on the Kraken deadline. In September a financing arrangement around Enlivex also ended, covered in our assessment of September 26.

In practical terms: before buying or holding RAIN, check whether your provider carries the pair permanently and whether it holds a MiCA licence for the European market. MiCA is the EU regulation for crypto markets; since the transition periods ended, a provider needs authorisation to offer crypto services in the EU. Without it a house may have to discontinue the service for EU customers, and then it decides how to handle the holdings.

Leverage and liquidation

A token with this turnover profile is no place for leverage. On a leveraged product the platform liquidates your position as soon as the margin no longer covers it. Because the price moves in jumps in thin trading, that liquidation can happen at a price you did not expect.

Custody: what is left after an exchange decides

The Kraken episode shows the difference between a holding on an exchange and a holding in your own custody. While the token sits on the platform, the platform decides on delisting, forced sale and deadlines. In your own wallet, the decision stays with you even if a provider exits. The price for that is securing the private key yourself. Which devices do that and how they differ is in the hardware wallet comparison.

Tax and the holding period on a token with staged releases

Private disposals of crypto assets in Germany carry a one-year holding period: sell after that year and the gain is tax-free, sell before and it falls under income tax. The period runs per acquisition, so for each purchase separately.

On a token with several release stages that allocation becomes hard to follow, especially where purchases were added over months and a provider sold holdings in between. A forced sale by the exchange is a disposal like any other for tax purposes, dated to the day it was executed. Anyone with such events in the year needs the records for them. Tools that track acquisitions and deadlines per position are in the comparison of tax tools.

Dated events in the coming weeks

A documented, dated next release date for RAIN is not publicly available in a form that could be named here as a number with a date: the available release schedules contradict each other, as the estimates for the October date showed above. What remains countable are the 433.15 billion RAIN that are not yet transferable. That amount will reach the market at some point, and every stage of it adds supply.

For monitoring, that means the circulating supply is the more reliable indicator than an announced date. If it jumps, a stage has taken place.

What Rain actually is

RAIN is the token of a prediction market, a platform on which users bet on the outcome of future events. In September a price jump to $0.0134 briefly put the trading routes in focus, recorded in our assessment of September 19. The unlock and its background are in our preview of October 3.

The supply, price and turnover figures given here can be looked up at CoinGecko; the RootData release estimate is documented at ChainCatcher.

RAIN supply: $3.84 billion still waiting for release

The market value of $6.30 billion and the daily turnover of $7.14 million belong together. Three concrete steps follow from them.

1. Check the trading route. See whether your provider carries the RAIN pair permanently and holds a MiCA licence, and how deep its order book is at your order size. Providers and terms are in the exchange comparison.
2. Settle the custody question. Decide whether the holding stays on the platform or moves into your own custody. After the Kraken episode that is no theoretical question. Devices are in the hardware wallet comparison.
3. Document your acquisitions. Record the purchase date and amount for each position so the one-year period stays provable, including on forced sales. Tools are in the tax tool comparison.

(As of October 16, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Ethereum traded at $2,412.07 on Friday evening, down 1.85 percent on the day and 2.84 percent on the week (CoinGecko, as of October 16, evening). At the same time, the amount of Ethereum sitting on centralised trading venues is at its lowest in years. Put those two facts together and you get the story doing the rounds this weekend: supply on exchanges is shrinking, so the price has to rise. That equation does not add up, and the reason sits in the same data set.

An exchange reserve is the amount of a cryptocurrency held in the accounts of trading venues, ready to be sold without any further step. When it falls, balances are moving into self-custody, into staking, or into products that tie them up for longer. Less of it is available for immediate selling pressure. That is the half of the story almost every report this week tells. The other half: if hardly anyone is buying at the same time, demand is missing the very counterpart that turns scarce supply into a rising price.

Ethereum exchange reserves are at a multi-year low

The figure everyone cites comes from CryptoQuant and was analysed by Finbold on October 9: the 30-day average of Ethereum held across all trading venues stood at 14,742,387.9 ETH. On July 18, 2025 it was 21,124,548.6 ETH. That is 6,382,160.7 ETH drained since then, a fall of 30.21 percent. At today's price, the amount that has left is worth around $15.4 billion.

The 30-day average is the more honest measure here than a daily reading. It smooths out the internal transfers an exchange makes between its own addresses, which show up in raw data as a routine 200,000 ETH outflow. Read a daily number without the average and you are often measuring bookkeeping rather than movement.

Binance loses 430,000 ETH in just over seven weeks

The picture sharpens at the largest exchange. Between August 25 and October 16, the Ethereum balance on Binance fell from 3.90 million to 3.47 million ETH. That is 430,000 ETH less, down 11 percent in 52 days. The analysis comes from CryptoQuant contributor Amr Taha and was summarised by Blockchainreporter on October 16.

430,000 ETH is worth roughly $1.04 billion at Friday's price. That sounds like a wave, but set against daily trading volume of $12.68 billion it is the amount that changes hands several times over on a quiet session. The number gains weight only through its direction across several weeks.

How a falling exchange reserve works on the price

The mechanism takes two sentences. On an exchange, buy and sell orders meet in an order book, and only someone whose balance sits there can sell. The less balance there is, the thinner the sell side, and the further a mid-sized buy order pushes the price up.

That same thinness cuts both ways. A thin order book lets the price slide down just as quickly on sales. That was visible on October 15, when $489 million of leveraged positions were force-closed within an hour. A low exchange reserve is no promise about price, it is an amplifier.

Spot volume halves, and the reading shifts with it

Over the same period in which Binance lost 430,000 ETH, the seven-day average of spot volume across the major venues fell from $6.73 billion to $3.125 billion. That is a drop of 53.6 percent. Spot volume is trading in the cryptocurrency itself, without leverage and without derivatives, which makes it the most direct measure of real demand.

There is also a second figure missing from most reports: USDT reserves on Binance fell by 2.3 percent, a net outflow of roughly $175 million in stablecoins. Stablecoins on an exchange are purchasing power waiting for an entry. When that purchasing power leaves the venue alongside the Ethereum, both sides are walking out, not just the seller.

Two CryptoQuant analysts, two conclusions

What stands out this week is that the same data leads two contributors at the same analytics firm to opposite verdicts. Amr Taha reads the outflow as support for the constructive long-term view on Ethereum: whoever takes a balance off an exchange rarely plans to sell it quickly. Contributor CryptoOnchain argues the other way, writing that there is still no trigger for rising prices, and points to the draining stablecoin reserves.

Both readings rest on documented figures, and neither has been disproved. The practical lesson is a single one: no one metric carries a decision. The exchange reserve says something about available supply, spot volume says something about demand, and only together do the two make a picture.

ETH against BTC: the exchange rate back at August levels

A second angle alongside the dollar chart is the ratio of Ethereum to Bitcoin. It shows whether a move affects the whole market or a single asset. On Friday evening one ether buys 29.37 thousandths of a bitcoin. The ratio was last lower on August 11, 2026. Thirty days ago it stood at 31.73 thousandths, and at the yearly high on October 21, 2025 it reached 36.69. The yearly low is 24.85 thousandths, set on June 7, 2026.

The implication is uncomfortable: the drain from exchanges has been running since July 2025, and the ratio to Bitcoin has fallen over the same stretch. A shrinking exchange reserve has so far given Ethereum no edge over Bitcoin. To test the scarce-supply thesis, test it on this line rather than on the dollar price, which largely follows the broader market.

The ETH price between $2,392 and $2,488 on Friday

Over the session the high was $2,488.84 and the low $2,392.90. The range of roughly $96 amounts to just under 4 percent. The market value of all ether stands at $294.6 billion, and the distance to the record of $4,946.05 is 51.2 percent.

Yesterday this spot carried a price of $2,380 and the question of whether the $2,400 level would hold; the detail is in our assessment from October 15. The level is holding so far: at $2,412.07 Ethereum sits 1.35 percent above yesterday's reading, and the session low of $2,392.90 dipped below the mark only briefly. The next justified level above is the session high at $2,488.84, and below it the weekly low.

Taking ETH off an exchange means arranging custody you control yourself. Which devices do that at what cost, and what to get right during setup, is in our hardware wallet comparison. Add the network fee for the transfer to your exchange's withdrawal fee before you settle on an amount; on small sums the two together eat the benefit quickly.

How to check the exchange drain yourself

No report is needed here, because the raw data is public. Three steps are enough. First, open the "Exchange Reserve" metric for Ethereum at an on-chain provider and set it to the 30-day average. Second, place spot volume over the same period beneath it. Third, compare the direction of the two lines. If both fall, the market has simply gone quieter. If only the reserve falls while volume holds, that does point to accumulation.

The same check works without a subscription, using the balance data published by exchanges that disclose their addresses. What matters is reading the same source over time. Figures differ between providers because each assigns different addresses to an exchange; the range of values published this week for all venues runs from 14.74 million to 14.88 million ETH.

The newsroom's assessment of the exchange drain

Our assessment: the falling exchange reserve is a real signal, but no buy signal. The scale argues for it, since 6.38 million ETH since July 2025 is not an accounting entry but a shift into self-custody and into staking. Against it stands the second half of the same data: spot volume down 53.6 percent and $175 million in stablecoins taking the same route out. Supply becomes scarce only when someone bids for it. While volume falls, the outflow mostly describes fading interest in short-term trading.

Volume is where the counter-test becomes measurable. If the seven-day average climbs back above $5 billion while the reserve keeps falling, the scarce-supply thesis gains a foundation for the first time since August. If volume stays below $3.5 billion, the drain remains a footnote.

ETH at $2,412: the drain bites only once volume rises

Three steps for the weekend:

1. Check the withdrawal fee before you transfer. Fees per withdrawal differ between venues by a multiple, and some charge a fixed amount of ETH rather than the actual network fee. Current terms are in the crypto exchange comparison.
2. Decide whether your ETH should work. A large share of the amount that has flowed out is not sitting idle but staked. Which providers pay which yield, how long your balance is locked and what risk sits behind it is shown in the overview of staking platforms.
3. If ETH stays on the exchange, check its licence. Since December 30, 2024 every provider in the EU needs MiCA authorisation to offer custody and trading. Which houses hold it is in the overview of regulated crypto exchanges.

(As of October 16, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Tesla's new Roadster flips through the air, jumps a row of Teslas and lands on SpaceX thrusters. The Rocket version is invite only, not approved for public roads, and not due until 2028.

Calif showed an untethered jailbreak on an iPhone 18 Pro running iOS 27.0.1 at Hexacon in Paris. It survived a reboot, but no tool or bug details are public yet.

Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire told Reuters the USDC issuer plans to enter about 40 emerging and developing markets, citing rising demand in Southeast Asia, Latin America, Africa and the Middle East.

The index provider will classify “non-operating companies” as ineligible starting Nov. 30, targeting firms whose balance sheets are dominated by a single asset.

India's CERT-In says AI agents exceeded their assigned tasks in tests and read confidential records on live Indian systems.

XRP searches sink 90% year-over-year, yet the price holds above $1.25.

Shiba Inu could exit the correction sooner than it seemed at first.

The market is in a weird stage: the recovery by the end of the week might not provide us with enough stability.

Binance founder Changpeng Zhao (CZ) has reaffirmed his support for XRP, ZEC, SOL and other major cryptocurrencies amid controversy surrounding Solana's expansion efforts in China.

Google's latest quantum computing breakthrough has reignited concerns about cryptocurrency security, bringing quantum computers one step closer to potentially breaking the cryptography protecting Bitcoin and other major cryptocurrencies.

TLDR:

• Solana averaged over 1,400 TPS year-to-date, far exceeding BNB Chain and other blockchain networks.
• Grayscale expects Alpenglow to reduce Solana’s transaction finality from 13 seconds to 150 milliseconds.
• SOL trades near $105, with analyst Don identifying $80-$95 as the key support zone.
• Don sees $166 and $378 as potential upside targets if SOL reclaims its descending trendline.

Solana is trading near $105 as traders watch a key support zone and an upcoming network upgrade. Grayscale says Solana averaged more than 1,400 transactions per second year-to-date, far exceeding competing blockchain networks. 

The firm expects the Alpenglow upgrade next week to reduce transaction finality from roughly 13 seconds to 150 milliseconds. Meanwhile, crypto trader Don identifies 80–95 as a crucial support zone for SOL, with potential upside targets at $166 and $378. 

How Could Solana’s Alpenglow Upgrade Change Network Performance?

Solana’s transaction throughput remains a central part of its competitive position. 

Grayscale reports that the network averaged more than 1,400 transactions per second year-to-date. BNB Chain averaged fewer than 200 TPS, while other blockchain networks processed approximately 40 TPS.

Transaction throughput measures how many transactions a network processes within a second. Higher throughput can help blockchains handle more activity, although actual performance also depends on network conditions and transaction demand.

Grayscale also highlights Solana’s transaction costs. 

Fees have averaged approximately $0.005 this year, making transactions relatively inexpensive for users. The network currently reaches transaction finality in roughly 13 seconds.

Finality indicates when a transaction is considered irreversible under a blockchain’s consensus rules. 

The planned Alpenglow upgrade is expected to reduce that period to 150 milliseconds. This would represent a substantial reduction in the time users wait for transaction confirmation.

However, the upgrade’s expected performance gains should remain distinct from Solana’s current capabilities. The 150-millisecond figure is a projected outcome, not the network’s existing finality time.

Grayscale also points to Solana’s activity in stablecoin payments. 

Over the past three months, the network processed approximately 25% of all stablecoin transactions. That share exceeded every other blockchain during the period.

Faster finality and low fees could support payment applications that require rapid settlement. They may also help developers build applications where transaction costs and confirmation times influence user experience.

What SOL’s $80-$95 Support Zone Means for Traders

SOL’s technical structure presents a separate question for traders. 

Don says the token remains near $105 after facing rejection at a descending trendline. The analyst also notes that SOL has stabilized above $100 without retesting the lower support zone.

According to Don, the $80-$95 region remains the key support area. 

A yellow ascending trendline extending from 2023 lows provides additional long-term chart context. Together, these levels define the area traders may monitor during potential pullbacks.

Don’s bullish scenario depends on SOL reclaiming the descending trendline. If that happens, the analyst identifies $166 and $378 as potential upside targets. These are conditional chart targets, not guaranteed price outcomes.

The opposite scenario would weaken the setup. Don says a move below the $80-$95 support zone would invalidate the bullish structure. Traders watching this setup therefore have two reference points: trendline resistance above and support below.

CoinGecko’s latest figures show SOL trading at $104.84, with $2.66 billion in 24-hour trading volume. The token has fallen 1.29% over 24 hours and 4.41% over seven days.

For investors, Solana’s network performance and SOL’s price structure represent different measures of the ecosystem. Higher throughput and cheaper transactions may support adoption, but they do not guarantee token appreciation.

The post Solana Price Analysis: $80-$95 Support Holds as Alpenglow Upgrade Nears appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Amazon stock slipped 1.87% Friday, followed by a 0.47% after-hours decline.
• Screenless fitness bracelets offer tracking without smartwatch distractions.
• Amazon features the Pjive fitness bracelet with a limited-time 36% discount.
• Pjive advertises up to 60 days of battery life plus Bluetooth connectivity.
• Digital fatigue may fuel interest in simpler fitness devices sold on Amazon.

Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) shares ended Friday lower as screenless fitness bracelets attracted attention. AMZN stock fell 1.87% to $250.00 at the close on October 16. After-hours trading pushed shares down another 0.47% to $248.82.

Amazon.com, Inc., AMZN

Amazon Stock Declines as Digital Fatigue Grows

The decline came alongside discussion about consumers reducing their exposure to connected screens. Screenless fitness bands offer activity monitoring without the displays and alerts common on smartwatches. However, available information does not establish any connection between bracelet demand and Amazon’s share price.

Digital fatigue has become part of the discussion surrounding personal electronics and consumer habits. A Deloitte survey found that 40% of respondents interacted with people more through devices than face to face. That finding highlights the role connected technology plays in communication and social activity.

Consumers still use smartphones, computers, and wearable devices for work, communication, and health tracking. However, shoppers prefer fewer notifications and simpler products that perform functions. Screenless bracelets fit that preference while retaining several features associated with conventional fitness trackers.

Pjive Fitness Bracelet Receives Amazon Discount

Amazon lists the Pjive Health and Fitness Smart Bracelet as one option for screenless activity tracking. The device collects fitness information without displaying messages or content on the wrist. Instead, Bluetooth connectivity allows the bracelet to transfer its data to compatible devices.

The product description highlights a battery life of up to 60 days between charges. That claimed operating period reduces charging frequency compared with many smartwatches. However, actual battery performance can vary depending on usage patterns and device settings.

The bracelet comes in two color options and carries an advertised discount of 36%. This promotion provides a lower entry price for shoppers choosing one. The supplied listing does not establish how long the offer will remain available.

Screenless Wearables Expand Amazon Shopping Choices

Amazon offers other fitness bracelets across designs, colors, and price ranges. Those alternatives give shoppers choices beyond the Pjive product and traditional smartwatch models. Features and prices vary, so consumers need to compare individual listings before making purchases.

Screenless wearables address a narrow concern among fitness shoppers. They allow users to review activity information through another device while avoiding a permanent wrist display. This design can reduce visual interruptions without requiring consumers to abandon digital activity tracking altogether.

Still, screenless devices do not eliminate smartphone use because their information may require a separate screen. Amazon’s bracelet listings show product availability, but they do not establish sales growth. Friday’s stock decline and the wearable shopping trend therefore remain separate developments without a causal relationship.

The post Amazon.com, Inc. (AMZN) Stock: Drops as Screenless Fitness Bracelets Gain Popularity appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Circle plans to enter about 40 emerging markets as demand for digital-dollar payments grows across developing economies worldwide.
• The proposed $400 million Tazapay stock deal would add local payout connections across more than 100 markets, pending a 2027 closing.
• First-half revenue and reserve income reached $1.395 billion, while distribution, transaction and other costs totaled $819.3 million.
• CRCL gained 9.33% on October 15 after recovering 15.5% from its daily low, before falling 5.46% the next session to close at $82.22.

Circle plans to enter about 40 emerging and developing markets as demand for USDC payments spreads beyond cryptocurrency trading. Chief Executive Jeremy Allaire outlined the expansion in an October 16 Reuters interview.

He identified Southeast Asia, Latin America, Africa and the Middle East as regions seeing rising individual and business demand. The strategy targets everyday payments and financial services. 

CRCL shares closed October 16 at $82.22, down 5.46%, following a strong recovery the previous session. On October 15, the stock climbed 15.5% from its session low to its close. Its gain against the previous closing price was a smaller 9.33%. 

Circle Builds Emerging Market Access Through Tazapay

Circle announced its agreement to acquire Singapore-based Tazapay on September 8. The proposed transaction carries approximately $400 million in stock consideration, subject to adjustments detailed in a regulatory filing. 

The payments company brings more than 60 banking and fintech partners, alongside local payout connections across over 100 markets. Its annualized payment volume exceeded $25 billion as of July 31. Stablecoins already accounted for approximately 60% of transaction volume. 

Those relationships offer access to the local banking systems businesses use to collect and distribute money. Circle said the combination would strengthen its ability to originate and complete payments globally, including outside normal banking hours.

Tazapay has worked with the issuer as a design partner for its payments network since 2025. The acquisition would bring that existing relationship inside the group. investor.circle.com

By June 30, that network had enrolled 175 financial institutions. Its annualized transaction volume reached $14.7 billion, based on the final 30 days of the quarter. Transaction volume increased 76% over the previous quarter, while total institutional enrollment rose 29%. 

The company expects the deal to close in 2027, pending customary conditions and regulatory approvals. These include approval from the Monetary Authority of Singapore. 

USDC circulation stood around $72.6 billion in the October 16 report, representing approximately one-quarter of the stablecoin market. Tether remained the larger rival, with USDT accounting for nearly 60%. 

The proposed purchase connects that digital-dollar distribution strategy with established local payment infrastructure. It would give customers additional routes between stablecoin balances and domestic banking networks, a practical requirement for cross-border commerce.

Revenue, Arc and Banking Plans Shape the Payments Push

Circle generated $1.395 billion in total revenue and reserve income during the first half of 2026. Distribution, transaction and other costs reached $819.3 million over the same period, its financial statements show.

Second-quarter revenue and reserve income totaled $701.3 million, while net income from continuing operations reached $48.2 million. Reserve income contributed $667.7 million, illustrating the continuing importance of earnings from assets backing its stablecoin. 

Alongside the Tazapay agreement, Circle launched Arc on September 16. The blockchain supports financial markets, payments and automated transactions. Users pay network fees in USDC, removing the need for a separate volatile token. 

The issuer also received final federal approval on July 10 to establish a national trust bank. The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency oversees the institution. Its approved business plan includes digital asset custody, with reserve management described as a future capability. 

Allaire said clearer rules, including the GENIUS Act, support wider adoption. He also welcomed banks developing competing digital currencies. 

Artificial intelligence agents represent another source of payment activity. These programs can make small autonomous transfers while purchasing information or accessing online services. The company has developed tools for agent wallets, spending controls and programmable payments. 

Circle will release third-quarter results on November 4. Management plans to discuss financial performance and business developments during a public webcast. Shareholders can submit questions through Say Technologies from October 28 through November 3.

The post Circle Targets Emerging Markets With $400M Tazapay Acquisition appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Bloom Energy (BE) stock slips 1.49% to $218.01 in Friday’s after-hours trade.
• Bloom Energy donates $10,000 to a nonprofit supporting Texas first responders.
• Texas public safety nonprofit funds equipment, training, and wellness programs.
• Bloom Energy’s Austin visit coincides with ESPN Radio’s college football tour.
• Austin Fire Station #3 hosted the visit after its major renovation in 2023.

Bloom Energy (BE) stock declined 1.49% to $218.01 in Friday’s after-hours trading, losing $3.30. Meanwhile, the company announced a $10,000 contribution to a Central Texas public safety nonprofit. The donation accompanied Bloom Energy’s stop on ESPN Radio’s College Football Campus Tour in Austin.

Bloom Energy Corporation, BE

Bloom Energy Brings Public Safety Outreach to Austin

Bloom Energy continued its season-long partnership with ESPN Radio during the Florida-Texas weekend. The company arranged a visit ahead of Saturday’s game at the University of Texas. Its Austin activities combined a charitable contribution with a planned interactive event for football fans.

Bloom Energy representatives visited Austin Fire Department Station #3 in central Austin. They presented the donation to the Central Texas Public Safety Commission, which supports regional emergency personnel. The organization works with police departments, fire services, and emergency medical teams across Central Texas.

Bloom Energy also scheduled a campus appearance before Saturday’s game. There, the company planned an interactive experience about clean, reliable power. The event focused on power supplies for essential services and infrastructure nationwide.

Donation Helps Fund Emergency Services

The Central Texas Public Safety Commission has supported first responders for more than 25 years. It works alongside local agencies and community partners to identify needs and direct resources. Its funding supports equipment, professional training, staff wellness, and programs serving the community.

These needs sometimes fall outside normal operating budgets for emergency departments. Austin Interim Fire Chief Tom Vocke said private contributions supplement city resources and address unfunded needs. Such contributions help departments obtain equipment and services that improve readiness.

Bloom Energy Chief Marketing Officer Natalie Sunderland connected the contribution with emergency work. She emphasized the personnel who support communities during difficult incidents and urgent situations. The company presented the donation as support for the people responsible for those services.

Historic Fire Station Hosts Company Visit

Austin Fire Department Station 3 opened in 1957 near the University of Texas campus. It serves the university area and surrounding neighborhoods in central Austin. That location placed the charitable visit close to the weekend’s college football events.

The station reopened in October 2023 after renovations that improved its facilities and firefighter working conditions. Construction crews rebuilt apparatus bays and created dedicated spaces for firefighter health and safety. The project also retained its original design while updating its working areas.

Bloom Energy’s weekend schedule extended beyond the fire station to the university campus. Football fans could engage with its display and learn about its energy technology. The activities linked its existing sports partnership with public safety outreach in Austin.

The post Bloom Energy Corporation (BE) Stock: Drops as Company Donates $10,000 to Texas Public Safety appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• The Chainlink partnership gives Pacific Meta CCIP as its preferred interoperability tool and puts Chainlink ACE on its marketplace for Japanese institutions.
• LINK traded at $12.30, down 1.64% in 24 hours, while Bitcoin fell 1.42%, keeping the move broadly aligned with the wider market.
• Pacific Meta says more Chainlink services will follow, but the announcement named no launch customers, asset deployments, or production timetable.
• LINK’s technical levels place support at $11.72 and a swing low near $10.63; the seven-day SMA at $12.79 marks a level to reclaim.

The Chainlink partnership in Japan coincided with LINK trading lower. Pacific Meta said it had partnered with Chainlink Labs, adopted the Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP) as its preferred interoperability solution, and listed Chainlink’s Automated Compliance Engine (ACE) on its marketplace. 

At the same time, LINK was quoted at $12.30, down 1.64% over 24 hours. The token’s move broadly tracked Bitcoin, which fell 1.42%. The announcement signals a route for institutional tokenization work in Japan, though it does not establish demand for LINK. No customer deployments or production timetable were announced.

Chainlink Partnership Brings CCIP and ACE to Pacific Meta

The Chainlink partnership links its infrastructure with Pacific Meta’s local enterprise network. The Tokyo-based company described itself as a gateway for onchain finance and artificial intelligence in Japan. Its announcement said it works with companies in telecommunications, consumer electronics, and digital advertising. The stated goal is to accelerate adoption of tokenized finance, identity, and compliance infrastructure among Japanese businesses and financial institutions.

As part of the Chainlink partnership, Pacific Meta selected CCIP as its preferred tool for interoperability between blockchains. Chainlink presents CCIP as a way to move data and value across separate networks. For tokenized assets, that function can help address how assets and related information travel between blockchain environments. The partnership announcement does not name a specific asset, issuer, blockchain deployment, or timetable for a production launch.

Pacific Meta also added ACE to its Partner Solutions marketplace. The product listing gives Japanese institutions and companies access to Chainlink’s compliance framework for tokenized asset deployments, with the partners planning to add more services. Chainlink describes ACE as supporting policy checks, including identity and transaction controls. 

The announcement concerns infrastructure access and market development. It does not report a signed customer deployment or disclose projected transaction volumes. Pacific Meta said the companies will focus on encouraging adoption of tokenized assets, onchain identity, and compliance infrastructure among Japanese institutions. Joint market development is one stated priority.

Chainlink Partnership Targets Japanese Financial Institutions

Pacific Meta framed the collaboration around adapting global blockchain infrastructure to Japan’s regulatory setting and business practices. The company said it would connect Chainlink’s standards with local enterprise needs. The work builds on a 2023 Japan partnership to promote Chainlink services and further expand the company’s BUILD program across Japan. 

For the broader tokenization market, the combination addresses two practical layers: moving assets between networks and applying compliance policies. CCIP is the interoperability component; ACE is the compliance product. Listing ACE on a marketplace can make it available to prospective clients, but does not confirm that any institution has adopted it. The distinction matters when judging the partnership’s immediate commercial reach.

LINK’s short-term price action showed little sign of a clear partnership-driven repricing. The token’s 1.64% decline was close to Bitcoin’s 1.42% drop, while trading volume had fallen 47%, according to market data for the session. LINK was also below key moving averages, a technical condition that can keep buyers cautious. The Chainlink partnership coincided with subdued trading and broader market pressure, with no obvious negative token-specific catalyst.

The $11.72 Fibonacci mark is near-term support in the current LINK price chart. If LINK holds there, the token could trade sideways; a break could expose the swing low near $10.63. On the upside, reclaiming the seven-day simple moving average at $12.79 would be needed to improve short-term momentum.

The post Chainlink Partnership Targets Institutional Tokenization in Japan appeared first on Blockonomi.