Fidelity's dominance in Bitcoin ETF inflows highlights growing investor confidence and could intensify competition among ETF providers.

The post Fidelity ETF clients buy $103M worth of Bitcoin in a single day appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

China's export surge highlights the critical role of AI hardware in global trade, potentially prompting shifts in international trade policies.

The post China’s exports surge 36% as AI-related shipments boom appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

AI-driven vulnerability discovery accelerates exploit timelines, challenging security protocols and potentially increasing attack risks.

The post XBOW uses OpenAI’s GPT-5.6 to exploit Chrome, earns $250,000 bounty appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The potential acquisition could bolster OpenAI's financial stability and strategic positioning, reducing perceived bankruptcy risks.

The post OpenAI in talks to acquire cybersecurity firm Trail of Bits appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Ripple's partnership with Meritz Securities could accelerate digital asset integration in South Korea, potentially reshaping its financial landscape.

The post Ripple taps Meritz Securities to bring custody, tokenization to Korea’s capital markets appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Kraken Parent Payward Wins Full Dubai License, Plans UAE Launch

Crypto exchange Kraken’s parent company Payward has said it has plans to launch in the United Arab Emirates. 

After receiving full market approval from Dubai’s Virtual Asset Regulatory Authority, Payward said Tuesday that Payward can now operate as a regulated virtual asset service provider serving retail, professional and institutional investors. 

It follows a preliminary approval in May that allowed the company to complete its operational set-up ahead of onboarding clients.

At launch, Kraken clients in the UAE will be able to trade spot and margin with dirham-denominated pairs and fund and withdraw directly in dirhams. 

They’ll also have access to on-chain staking, xStocks tokenized equities and Krak for crypto transfers, while institutional clients gain OTC spot trading and Kraken Prime. Crypto derivatives and new yield products are expected later in 2026 and into 2027, subject to regulatory approval.

Payward holds more than 100 licenses and registrations worldwide, spanning Europe, the Americas, Asia-Pacific and the Middle East.

The expansion comes as the company increasingly makes a number of deals. In September, Bloomberg reported that Nasdaq Inc. was investing $100 million in Payward in a deal valuing the company at $21 billion. Kraken will distribute Nasdaq’s tokenized stocks on its own platform, according to the report.

Payward and SoFi Technologies also recently announced a deal to route SoFi customers’ crypto orders through Kraken Prime, Kraken’s prime brokerage arm launched in 2025, and to list SoFi’s stablecoin on the exchange.

Kraken, like other crypto exchanges, is pushing into the traditional finance world, allowing users to trade stocks, bonds and other assets. The company has sold its app as a “primary account for everything.”

This post Kraken Parent Payward Wins Full Dubai License, Plans UAE Launch first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Researchers Build First Working Post-Quantum Defense for Bitcoin’s Lightning Network

Whether or not quantum computers will break Bitcoin one day is a hot topic. 

But what about second-layer solutions like Lightning? 

Well, researchers from East Texas A&M University, North American University, Florida Gulf Coast University, and Florida Institute of Technology have been working on that. 

In an announcement Tuesday, the team of researchers said that they built what they describe as the first full post-quantum security design for the Lightning Network.

As first uncovered in a research paper in September, the team said they added post-quantum cryptography to Lightning’s communications, payment requests and related systems, implemented in Rust-Lightning. 

It works like this: The solution layers new quantum-resistant cryptography on top of Lightning’s existing cryptography rather than replacing it. It uses ML-DSA digital signatures and ML-KEM key exchange, post-quantum algorithms standardized by the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology, alongside the classical methods Lightning already relies on. 

In this hybrid design, an attacker would have to break both the new and the old cryptography to compromise a connection or forge a payment request.

According to the team led by Dr. Ahmet Kurt, an assistant professor in East Texas A&M’s Department of Computer Science and Information Systems, it took about three to four months and roughly 11,000 lines of code — and it’s a complete working implementation, not just a small demo.

Lightning lets users make fast, cheap Bitcoin payments through a network of off-chain channels instead of recording each one on the blockchain. 

Its cryptography could eventually be broken by powerful quantum computers, and that risk exists even if Bitcoin itself gets upgraded, because Lightning has its own communication and payment systems, the team said. 

They added that their work demonstrates that Lightning’s off-chain systems can begin preparing for the quantum era independently while others focus on solutions for the mainnet. 

Quantum researchers have warned that a time will come when Bitcoin’s software — which underpins the biggest and strongest computer network in the world — will need to be upgraded to deal with quantum computing. 

While some crypto VC firms have urged action, top developers in the space have argued that many of today’s quantum computers have limited capabilities.

Still, they have noted that their development could arrive unexpectedly — just like advances with artificial intelligence — and have started developing some solutions, including top Bitcoin infrastructure firm, Blockstream. 

This post Researchers Build First Working Post-Quantum Defense for Bitcoin’s Lightning Network first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

The Amount of Bitcoin on Exchanges Is Shrinking. Is a Rally Imminent?

Bitcoin’s price could be due a move upwards as the supply of the leading cryptocurrency on exchanges shrinks. 

That’s according to a researcher at data firm CryptoQuant, who wrote in a Monday report that bitcoin on exchanges has dropped to 2.67 million from 2.8 million since February. 

The price of bitcoin was recently $83,485, unmoved over a 24-hour period but up 8% over the past 30 days after having its best quarter in years. Its surge in August and September has led a number of analysts to declare the bear market is over.  

“If buying demand continues to improve while exchange supply remains low, BTC could benefit from a supply-demand imbalance, creating favorable conditions for a longer-term upward trend,” the report by on-chain researcher Rei Researcher read. 

It added: “More importantly, in recent weeks, bitcoin has recovered from its lows while exchange reserves have continued to decline. This is a notable development, suggesting that the supply readily available for trading is decreasing even as the market recovers.”

The report further noted that it was possible investors were taking bitcoin off exchanges to put in cold storage solutions. 

Bitcoin’s price was mostly trading under $65,000 for the first half of 2026. The coin spent most of this year in a bear market following the all-time high of $126,080 it hit in October 2025. 

But that all changed in August. News that the U.S. Treasury would double the size of its liquidity-support buyback operations, weakening the dollar but strengthening bitcoin and other non-yield bearing assets. 

Now, the so-called debasement trade — where investors throw money at an asset to hedge against a currency losing its value — is hot again. Bitcoin is benefiting from the trade, analysts say, as it did in 2024 and 2025. 

Bitcoin’s price is still more than 30% below its record. 

This post The Amount of Bitcoin on Exchanges Is Shrinking. Is a Rally Imminent? first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Trezor Reduces Number of Resellers Following Ledger Drainage Incident 

Hardware manufacturer Trezor has said it has reduced the number of resellers it works with following supply-chain incidents related to its competitor Ledger. 

The Prague, Czech Republic-based company added in a Tuesday post on X that it was in the process of checking which vendors it works with. 

It added that there were no reports of any issues with Trezor devices. “Let us be very clear: there is not a single piece of evidence that Trezor devices have been compromised,” the company wrote. 

“This is a preventive step, taken out of an abundance of caution.”

Signing device manufacturer 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 then said that one of the impacted users’ devices contained an unauthorized hardware implant. 

More reports of what appear to be tampered devices have since surfaced on social media but Ledger said Tuesday that only devices sold through CryptoBilis have been linked to lost funds. 

It added that it had only confirmed an unauthorized hardware implant in one affected user’s device. The implant, according to Ledger, was able to read a seedphrase when it appeared on the device. 

Ledger did not reveal how much money had been lost but blockchain investigator Specter said $86 million had been drained from devices. 

“We have not confirmed the total number of affected users or the total value lost,” Ledger added on X. “Figures circulating online come from third parties and Ledger has not fully verified them.”

Ledger did not respond to Bitcoin Magazine’s questions. 

CryptoBilis has also stopped selling devices, Ledger added, and advised customers who bought from CryptoBilis to not set up their devices and contact the Ledger support team. 

Criminals have been targeting hardware wallets this year. Hackers in July were able to steal close to $120 million in bitcoin from Coldcard users due to a firmware bug in the devices. 

Canadian company Coinkite, which makes the popular products, said that the bug led to faulty seed generation, allowing hackers to guess investor seedphrases. 

In a separate incident, hardware wallet manufacturer Trezor last month reported that close to 81,000 customers had their details leaked after its third-party fulfillment partner had data stolen. 

Scammers earlier this year were able to get hold of customer information via crypto wallet Ledger’s payment processor Global-e to send phishing emails.  

This post Trezor Reduces Number of Resellers Following Ledger Drainage Incident  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Strive Buys More Bitcoin, Crosses 30,000 BTC Mark 

Nasdaq-listed Strive isn’t slowing down with its bitcoin buys.

The company now has more than 30,000 BTC after buying 3,311 coins last week, according to a Tuesday filing. 

Strive now holds 32,773 coins worth $2.7 billion at today’s prices, keeping its position as the  fifth biggest publicly traded bitcoin company, according to Bitcoin Treasuries. 

Strategy, Twenty One, Metaplanet, and MARA all hold more bitcoin than Strive.  

Strive’s stock (ASST) was trading slightly lower on Tuesday. Unlike other treasuries, though, Strive shares are up significantly this year: year-to-date, ASST has risen by close to 60%. 

A number of top bitcoin treasuries have seen their stock plummet this year since the price of bitcoin took a hit. Some top treasuries have had to sell bitcoin or rethink their model altogether. 

Dallas, Texas-based Strive debuted as an official bitcoin treasury last year, following in the footsteps of software company Strategy, the biggest corporate holder of bitcoin. 

Unlike Strategy, though, Strive hasn’t used debt to buy the cryptocurrency. CEO Matt Cole has described the company as debt-free with zero margin requirements and zero encumbered bitcoin.

Like with other digital asset treasuries, the idea is that investors can get amplified returns from Strive’s stock. 

In January 2026, it completed the acquisition of Semler Scientific in an all-stock deal — the first instance of a publicly traded Bitcoin treasury company acquiring another such company. 

The company was founded by former Ohio gubernatorial candidate and tech entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy. 

This post Strive Buys More Bitcoin, Crosses 30,000 BTC Mark  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

SkyAI reports about 80% of the required cash and approximately 600,000 SOL retained, while its proposed tender still carries waivable conditions.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

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

Metaplanet plans to raise $329 million to refinance Bitcoin-backed loans and fund share buybacks after its stock has declined 90% from its peak. On Oct. 13, the Japanese Bitcoin treasury company announced plans to issue ¥52 billion ($329 million) in unsecured, zero-coupon Euro-yen convertible bonds due in 2031. Expected to close on Oct. 29, the…

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

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

Historical estimates point to stronger USDC growth sensitivity to deposit repricing, while exchange rewards complicate adoption forecasts.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

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

A proposed budget link could pass genuine savings into LDO purchases, while corrected scenarios show why counter resets cannot improve underlying profit.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

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

Trezor is cutting authorized resellers after a hardware-implant attack against rival Ledger exposed vulnerabilities in cryptocurrency wallet distribution. In an Oct. 13 letter, Trezor Chief Commercial Officer Danny Sanders said selected partners would lose their authorization on Jan. 1, 2027, as the company tightens oversight of its supply chain. The decision marks an escalation in…

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

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

Morgan Stanley is bringing tokenized equities to its own trading venue later than announced. Instead of the second half of 2026, trading is now due to begin in the first quarter of 2027. Amy Oldenburg, who runs the bank's digital asset strategy, explained the delay on October 12, 2026 to the trade publication The Block with a simple gap: the products do not exist yet, and without products hardly any client asks for them. In Germany the bank does not sell equity tokens to retail clients in any case. Buy something like that here today, though, and you are not buying what Morgan Stanley is planning, and that difference decides what the instrument is worth if it comes to the test.

Morgan Stanley pushes the launch to the first quarter of 2027

The bank wants to make tokenized equities tradable on its own alternative venue, a so-called alternative trading system. Oldenburg first described the plan on March 24, 2026 at the Digital Asset Summit in New York, then with the second half of 2026 as the target. The Block now calls the first quarter of 2027 the more realistic timetable.

A delay of around six months sounds like little. The date falls, however, into a phase in which several large institutions are working on the same thing at once. The US Securities and Exchange Commission deliberated in September 2026 on an exemption for tokenized securities, and the service provider Securitize launched its own offering in October. Lose six months in this field and you lose them against competitors who deliver.

What exactly has been delayed

What has been delayed is support for tokenized equities on the trading venue, not the bank's digital asset business as a whole. Morgan Stanley already brings together equities, derivatives and swaps for clients through the same model. Tokenization extends that model with a second representation of the same securities; it does not replace it.

Alternative trading system: what sets the bank's own venue apart from Nasdaq

An alternative trading system is a venue that matches buy and sell orders away from the public exchanges. The Block describes it in exactly those terms: orders are matched outside public venues such as Nasdaq. In the United States this form has been regulated and widespread for decades, and it plays no part in retail business.

The mechanism matters more than the name, because it explains why the date hangs on a product at all. On a venue of this kind, no price arises out of nothing. It takes a security that exists in tokenized form, a custody route for it, and somebody on each side willing to buy or sell. Where the first link is missing, the rest runs empty, and that is precisely what Oldenburg's explanation points to.

A second point tends to get lost in the reporting. A bank-run venue serves institutional clients. Even a successful launch in the first quarter of 2027 would not mean that you could trade there as a retail client. To see where equities and crypto assets converge in one account today, the route runs through the brokers with a crypto offering, not through Wall Street.

The explanation in her own words: no product, no demand

Oldenburg is quoted by The Block with two sentences that belong together. On the product she says: "We need product in order to be able to support them within the ATS." And on demand: "And the client demand really isn't there because the product doesn't exist. So we just need a little more time to pass."

That is an unusually open account. In the tokenization debate, demand is normally described as given and only the technology as the obstacle. Oldenburg reverses the order: only once there is something to buy does it become clear whether anyone wants to. What that documents is the assessment of a manager responsible for the area, not the state of the wider market.

Fed permissibility and the failed Clarity Act: the open legal question in the US

As a third reason Oldenburg names supervision. Her words: "Permissibility from the Fed is also [a factor] with Clarity not going through." At issue is what a bank supervised by the US Federal Reserve is allowed to do if the planned market structure legislation does not arrive. The Block also names January as the point at which the GENIUS Act takes effect.

A look at the other side of the Atlantic helps place this. In the EU, the question of which rulebook applies to tokenized equities has been settled since MiCA, though not in the direction of crypto. More on that below.

The timeline: from the second half of 2026 into the first quarter of 2027

Comparing the dates shows how far the field has moved in six months while Morgan Stanley waited.

On March 24, 2026, Oldenburg held out the second half of 2026 as the launch window at the Digital Asset Summit. In September 2026 the SEC deliberated on an exemption for tokenized securities intended to set the framework for precisely such offerings. In October 2026 the service provider Securitize launched with tokenized equities. On October 12, 2026, Oldenburg then named the first quarter of 2027.

Alongside that, trading in equity tokens is already running, just not at the large investment banks. We described on October 5, 2026 how questions of collateral valuation arise there, taking the margin treatment of tokenized equities as the example. The market, in other words, is not waiting for Morgan Stanley; it keeps growing without the bank.

The DTCC tokenization service: the date Oldenburg points to

As the next milestone Oldenburg names the launch of the tokenization service of the US securities depository DTCC, which she expects for the end of October 2026. The DTCC is the central depository and settlement institution of the US equity market. What it supports counts there as marketable.

This is an expectation and not a completed step: no confirmation from the DTCC itself was available at the time of writing. The distinction is worth making, because in the tokenization debate announced and completed launches often end up in the same sentence.

On the order of magnitude, Oldenburg names a range of 3 to 10 trillion dollars for tokenized assets by 2030, adding: "We'll definitely be within that range without question." A range whose upper and lower bounds differ by a factor of three is an industry expectation and not a planning figure for a portfolio.

Tokenized equities in Germany: what retail investors can buy today

Replication and ownership: the difference is in the product sheet

Crypto venues and individual brokers have been selling products here for some time that track the price of a share. What matters is the construction underneath. Where a token tracks the price through a claim against the provider, you hold a replication and not the security. Voting rights and a direct dividend entitlement are then absent, and if the provider becomes insolvent the claim queues with all the others.

How far ownership and replication diverge is something we took apart on August 15, 2026 in our piece on ownership and issuer risk in tokenized equities. The question it opens with still applies: does the product sheet say you become a shareholder, or does it say the provider owes you the price?

MiFID II rather than MiCA: the legal framework for equity tokens in the EU

Here lies the point that counts in practice in Germany. Tokenized equities are financial instruments within the meaning of the MiFID II directive. That expressly puts them outside the scope of the MiCA crypto regulation. A MiCA authorization therefore says nothing about such a product.

That brings obligations that go beyond those for a crypto asset. For a first public offering, according to BTC-Echo, a securities prospectus approved by BaFin under the EU Prospectus Regulation is required, not a crypto whitepaper. Market abuse rules and the conduct obligations of securities trading apply on top.

In practice that means you recognize a serious offering by the documents it brings with it. A prospectus and an investment services licence are a different order from a whitepaper. Whether a provider is supervised can be checked in BaFin's register, not in the provider's advertising.

Issuer risk and custody: the two points that make the difference

Two factors determine whether an equity token is more than a bet on the price. The first is issuer risk. Depending on the construction, your claim hangs on the provider's solvency, and that is a risk a real share in a securities account does not carry.

The second is custody. Where the token sits in a wallet you control yourself, you carry the responsibility for the key. Where it sits with the provider, that provider's terms apply to freezes, withdrawals and conversions. Both are manageable, and both belong read before you buy, because in a dispute they decide what you can actually enforce.

Where legal title is recorded

On the route Morgan Stanley is planning, that question shifts. Where a supervised custodian such as the DTCC records legal title and the bank only organizes trading, counterparty risk drops markedly against today's replications. That is exactly why the DTCC's date matters more to Oldenburg than her own.

Our assessment: a postponed date is not a retreat

In our view, more points to an orderly catch-up than to a failure. The evidence: the bank is delaying only tokenization and not its digital asset business, it names a specific new window, and it does not soften the explanation but states plainly that products are missing and demand has not materialized. It fits that Oldenburg refers to an external date she does not control.

Against that stands the explanation itself. Saying after two and a half years of tokenization debate that the product is missing confirms that this market is smaller than its announcements. And the supervisory question is out of the bank's hands: if no market structure legislation arrives in the United States, the GENIUS Act's January date could shift the next timetable just as it shifted this one. This is an assessment of the situation, not a recommendation to buy or sell.

Tokenized equities: the offering stays institutional until Q1 2027

1. Read the product sheet before money moves. With any equity token, check whether it transfers ownership or securitizes a claim against the provider. To see terms and licences side by side, look at the comparison of brokers with a crypto offering.
2. Check the supervision, not the advertising. A MiCA authorization does not cover tokenized equities; what counts there is the investment services licence. Which venues in Germany operate under supervision is shown by the overview of regulated crypto exchanges.
3. Keep an eye on the DTCC date. If the tokenization service launches at the end of October 2026 as Oldenburg expects, that is the most reliable indication of whether the first quarter of 2027 holds at Morgan Stanley. Until then, trading in equity tokens runs through the existing venues, which the overview of the major crypto exchanges sorts by fees and licensing.

(As of October 13, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

A single person stands behind Quant and the QNT token: Gilbert Verdian, founder and chief executive of Quant Network Ltd in London. He spent some twenty years in cybersecurity, most recently as security chief at the operator of the United Kingdom's payment infrastructure, and has run his company since September 2015. Search for the Quant founder and you mostly find what the company writes about him. This article sets the British companies register alongside that account, and the two versions diverge in two places.

That matters if you hold QNT or are considering it. The token is tied to a software company with exactly one appointed director, and the price reacts to news about the banking mandates that company wins. On October 13, 2026, QNT traded at around $216, or about 193 euros, with a market capitalization of roughly $3.1 billion and rank 35 in the market. If you are putting that much money behind a corporate history, it is worth knowing which part of it can be verified in a public register and which part exists only in a company biography.

Who is behind Quant? The Quant founder in three sentences

Quant founder Gilbert Verdian, who as CEO also chairs the board, is a British citizen, lives in the United Kingdom and has been an appointed director since September 28, 2015 of the company now called Quant Network Ltd. Before Quant he was security chief at Vocalink, the Mastercard-owned operator of the British payment infrastructure, and before that he worked at the UK Treasury, at HSBC and at the health department of the Australian state of New South Wales. His firm sells software that lets banks settle payments across different blockchains, and the QNT token is the means of payment for the licence to that software.

Quant Network Ltd is a British limited company with registration number 09798383, registered at 20-22 Wenlock Road in London. The register lists three activities as its business purpose: software publishing, information technology consultancy and other information service activities. The company is active, and its latest annual accounts were filed for the period ending September 30, 2025.

Quant Network Ltd in the register: incorporated 2015, renamed 2017

The company was incorporated on September 28, 2015. That matches the entry in Verdian's own curriculum vitae, which gives 2015 as the founding year of Quant. The register holds something else, though, that appears in no company biography: the firm carried a different name until June 2, 2017. The registered name was REMITT LTD, and only after a good twenty months did it become QUANT NETWORK LTD.

A second entry in the register fits with that. Alongside Verdian, a second director was appointed on September 28, 2015: Sassoon Grigorian, an Australian citizen resident in Australia. He resigned on May 26, 2017. A week later the company name changed. Verdian has run the company as its sole appointed director ever since.

Both versions of the history hold up, they simply stress different things. The company has indeed existed since 2015, as the firm says. Under the Quant name and with today's product, however, it only appears from mid-2017, which is why some profiles date the start of Quant to 2018, when Verdian left Vocalink. Where you read that Quant has been "on the market since 2015", that refers to the legal entity and not the brand.

Twenty years in cybersecurity: from HM Treasury to HSBC and Vocalink

Verdian's career before Quant is unusual for a crypto founder because it ran almost entirely through government bodies and banks. His own biography lists some twenty years in cybersecurity with C-level responsibility as CISO, CIO and CTO, along with postings in Downing Street, the Cabinet Office, HM Treasury and the Ministry of Justice. His CV begins in 2001 at Computer Sciences Corporation, followed by Ernst & Young, the UK Treasury as head of security and deputy chief technology officer, HSBC, and the British Ministry of Justice as head of security. From 2013 to 2014 he was director of cybersecurity at PwC. Those two early government postings explain why a fintech founder later sits on standards bodies: he came out of the apparatus that sets the standards.

From 2014 to 2016 he worked in Australia as Chief Information Security Officer, the most senior security role, at the New South Wales health department. A CISO decides which technical and organizational safeguards an institution adopts and is internally accountable for them. From 2016 to 2018 he held the same role at Vocalink, the operator of British payment traffic that carries salaries, standing orders and real-time payments across the country. In 2017 he was named CISO of the year at the Cyber Security Awards. A press release from 2018 announced his move from Vocalink to Quant Network.

That route explains the product. Anyone who has been accountable for the security of a national payment infrastructure for years knows the problem Quant sells into: banks run many separate systems that do not talk to each other, and every new connection costs money and opens a new attack surface.

The ISO standard TC 307: company claim and committee entry side by side

One point is worth checking particularly closely. In Verdian's biography, Quant writes that he initiated the Blockchain ISO Standard TC307 initiative in 2015 and is convenor, that is to say head, of Working Group 7 for Interoperability. ISO is the International Organization for Standardization, TC 307 is its technical committee for blockchain and distributed ledger technologies, and a convenor leads a working group within a committee.

ISO's own committee page gives 2016 as the founding year of TC 307 and Standards Australia as the secretariat. WG 7 is listed there as the working group for interoperability, but no head is named for any of the working groups. The title therefore appears in the company biography and not in the public committee entry.

That is not necessarily a contradiction. An ISO committee is formed only after an application by a national standards body, and more than a year regularly passes between application and formation. An initiative in 2015 and a committee formed in 2016 can both stand. Nor does ISO's practice of not publishing the names of working group leads mean there are none. What holds up here is only this: the claim comes from Quant, not from ISO. What is documented, by contrast, is Verdian's chairmanship of the British national committee DLT/1, which he held from January 2017 to June 2021.

Overledger: the product that carries the licence fee

Overledger is the software Quant earns its money with. The program sits as an intermediary layer above several blockchains and lets a company write one application that works on different networks without building a separate connection for each. Our explainer What Quant (QNT) is and what Overledger does for banks sets out the technical structure in detail.

For the token, the pricing page is what counts. In December 2021 Quant announced an annual licence fee for Overledger of 100 pounds, payable in QNT. Existing customers were given three months free, which put the first due date at March 15, 2022. That was the basis for the argument that every new Overledger customer has to buy QNT and take it off the market.

That argument holds only partly today. Quant's current FAQ page names two routes: a customer can pay the platform fee in US dollars or take out a subscription in QNT. Where a customer pays in dollars, no demand for the token arises in the market. The company does not publish how much runs through which route. We have written up the details of the fee and the tightness of supply in What the QNT token is needed for.

Fusion Rollup: 74 networks, according to the company

In June 2026 Quant brought the Fusion Rollup to mainnet. A rollup is a layer above a blockchain that bundles many operations and writes them to the main blockchain in batches, which saves fees. Quant describes Fusion as an execution environment that, by the company's own account, connects 74 public and private networks.

The figure of 74 comes from the company itself. No independent count of these networks has been published, and none of the trade reports covering the launch recounted the list. Where you read this number as evidence of Quant's reach, a company statement sits behind it. The primary source does not say explicitly what role QNT plays within Fusion, so this point remains open.

The Clearing House: tokenized deposits from the first half of 2027

The most important event in the company's history is only weeks old. In late September 2026 The Clearing House selected the firm as technology partner for a network for tokenized deposits. The Clearing House is a settlement company owned by large US banks that carries a substantial share of American payment traffic. A tokenized deposit is commercial bank money recorded as an entry on a blockchain, so not a coin of its own but a claim against that bank.

Quant supplies the layer for orchestration and transaction management. The network is due to be available to participating institutions in the first half of 2027. According to trade media reports, the project is explicitly not designed as a shared token but as interoperability between the deposit platforms of individual banks. A second strand of the project, a dedicated layer-2 blockchain, still has neither a provider nor a date.

Our report on the award is in Quant and tokenized deposits. We set Quant's approach against that of its competitor Chainlink in Quant or Chainlink.

Murex and Sibos: a repo against tokenized US Treasuries

In parallel, Quant works with Murex, a French supplier of trading and risk software for the capital markets whose MX.3 platform runs the capital markets business from order to settlement at many banks and institutional investors. For the Sibos banking conference, which opened in Miami on September 28, 2026, both firms announced a demonstration of programmable settlement for tokenized assets. The example shown: a repo in US dollars against a tokenized US Treasury, with the cash leg running through tokenized deposits.

A repo is a short-term loan against securities as collateral, the standard instrument banks use to fund themselves overnight with each other. Quant describes the integration as giving Murex clients access through MX.3 to the issuance and settlement of tokenized deposits and digital bonds. A demonstration at a trade fair is not yet live operation with real volumes.

The 2018 token sale: eleven million dollars instead of forty

The QNT token reached its first holders in the spring of 2018 through a public sale. According to data from the aggregator Coincodex, the team raised around 11 million US dollars and sold just under 9.97 million QNT at about $1.10 each, at an exchange rate of 430 QNT per ether. The original target was more than 40 million dollars and was therefore missed by a wide margin. Accounts differ on the exact window: most entries name May 2018, a few a start as early as the beginning of April.

We did not find a primary source for the sale result, so the sum should be read as an approximation. The gap remains striking: a project that failed to raise even a third of its target in 2018 today holds a mandate from a US clearing institution.

What QNT costs today and how tight the supply is

On October 13, 2026, QNT traded at around 216 US dollars, or about 193 euros, after a fall of a good 5 percent within a day. Over twelve months it is up around 130 percent. Market capitalization stood at roughly 3.1 billion dollars, which corresponds to rank 35. The all-time high of $427.42 dates from September 11, 2021 and sits around 49 percent above today's price.

On supply, QNT genuinely is tight, and tighter than most large crypto assets. CoinGecko data puts around 14.56 million tokens in circulation against a maximum supply of 14,612,493 units. More than 99 percent of the possible supply has therefore been issued, so future dilution through new tokens is barely to be expected. One caution on the cap: depending on the data service, a figure of around 14.88 million also appears there, and the circulating amount is calculated differently too. The range is known, and a smoothed number here would be false precision.

A tight supply on its own carries no price. It only prevents new tokens from diluting it. What the demand side actually delivers hangs on the question from the Overledger section: how many customers pay the licence in QNT rather than in dollars.

QNT in Germany: which venues list a euro pair

For buying from Germany, what counts above all is whether a venue offers a direct euro pair. Without one, the purchase runs through an intermediate currency, usually a dollar stablecoin, and a fee falls due twice: once on the exchange from euros into the stablecoin, and once on the purchase of the token.

A look at the trading pairs of the large venues on October 13, 2026 shows a mixed picture. At Kraken, QNT trades against both the euro and the US dollar. At Bitvavo, a euro pair is running in normal trading status. At Coinbase, by contrast, QNT is available only against the US dollar and the stablecoin USDT; a euro pair is missing there. For holders of a euro account, the route through Coinbase therefore costs one detour more than the other two.

Check two things yourself before your first purchase, because both can change. First, whether the venue holds authorization under the EU's MiCA regulation, which has applied to crypto service providers in the EU since 2025. Second, what fee applies to small amounts, since percentage rates and minimum fees hit small purchases harder. Which providers are worth considering from a German perspective and what they cost is set out in our comparison of the best crypto exchanges.

Holding period and tax: what applies to QNT gains in Germany

QNT is treated for tax purposes like other crypto assets. Gains on a sale count as a private disposal under section 23 of the German Income Tax Act. The holding period is decisive: sell a token after holding it for more than a year and no income tax falls due on the gain. Within the first year, the gain is taxable at your personal rate, provided the total of all private disposal gains in a year exceeds the 1,000 euro threshold.

Two points are regularly overlooked. The holding period runs per acquisition, not per wallet, so every additional purchase starts a period of its own. And swapping QNT for another token counts as a sale, even where no euros land in your account. Buying across several venues therefore calls for a clean record of acquisition dates. Tools that take that over can be found among the crypto tax tools. What is binding in the end is always the view of your tax office or your tax adviser.

Our assessment: a documented mandate and an open revenue question

In our view, Quant's founder story carries more substance than that of most projects of this size, and at the same time it has a gap at exactly the point where money is at stake for holders. Three verifiable points speak for it. The British register confirms the company from September 28, 2015 with Verdian as a continuously appointed director. His path through HM Treasury, HSBC and Vocalink is documented through his CV and a press release from 2018. And the mandate from The Clearing House is not a letter of intent but an award with a target date in the first half of 2027.

Against that stands a number nobody knows. The press releases on the mandate do not name the QNT token, the licence fee can now also be paid in dollars, and at least fifteen months lie between today and the launch of the network. Whether and to what extent revenue from the banking business will be settled in QNT appears in no primary source. Buy the token because of this mandate and you are buying an expectation the company has not so far published evidence for. Add to that the usual risk: a total loss is possible with any crypto asset, and particularly worth weighing in a project whose product hangs on a single major client. None of this is a recommendation to buy in either direction.

Quant and QNT: licence revenue only starts flowing in 2027

The corporate history can be verified cleanly; the route from mandate to revenue cannot. Three steps help keep the two apart:

1. Separate product and token. Note down for yourself what is documented (the mandate, the target date in the first half of 2027, the existence of a licence fee) and what is open (the share of payments made in QNT). When a new report appears, look first at whether it fills the open column. For placing the competition, our comparison of trading venues and their fees helps.
2. Check the buying route before the amount. A direct euro pair saves you one exchange fee. Look too at whether your provider holds MiCA authorization before money moves; an overview is available under MiCA-regulated crypto exchanges.
3. Document every purchase the same day. Date, quantity and price per acquisition decide the holding period later. A tax tool or portfolio tracker takes over the record-keeping once you connect the accounts.

The register details in this article come from the Quant Network Ltd entry at Companies House, and the details on the mandate from the report by Ledger Insights.

(As of October 13, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Anyone looking to buy a Ledger at MediaMarkt or Saturn today will find none. Since Tuesday, October 13, 2026, the electronics chain has stopped selling hardware wallets made by the French manufacturer in Germany, neither in its stores nor online. Ledger confirmed the step itself on X: MediaMarkt Saturn has halted sales "in coordination with Ledger" while the investigation runs. The trigger is the report of a customer in Germany who says he found an implant in his device.

The key context first: for the German case Ledger reports no lost customer funds and no indication of a breach of its own systems. All thefts confirmed so far go back to devices sold by the retailer CryptoBilis in Southeast Asia. The sales halt is a clear signal nonetheless, because it affects the country's largest electronics retailer. What follows is what is documented, what is open, and what to do if your Ledger came from a store.

Ledger at MediaMarkt and Saturn: what applies since October 13

Ledger made the sales halt public on October 13 in a post on X. According to it, MediaMarkt Saturn has discontinued the sale of Ledger devices while the investigation continues. The occasion is said to be the report of a customer in Germany about an implant. Ledger writes that there is no indication that infrastructure, systems or services were compromised, and that no customer funds were lost in this case. The security team Donjon is examining the devices sent in, and customer service is evaluating the reports.

MediaMarktSaturn confirmed to the industry service Cointelegraph that it had pulled all Ledger products from its stores and online platforms. It takes the incident "very seriously" and is in contact with the manufacturer, the crypto portal Blocktrainer quotes from the statement. Neither Ledger nor the retailer has said when the devices will return to the shelf. On returns of devices already sold there is likewise no information as of the afternoon of October 13.

How many devices have to be checked, and whether the German case is connected to the tampered devices from Southeast Asia, is open. The portal crypto.news, among the first outlets to report the halt, stresses that too.

The report from Germany: two devices from two stores

The case was made public by a user who writes on X under the name @0xJohannes_. At the weekend he reported a tampered device from a MediaMarkt store, and on Monday a second one from a different store, filming himself unboxing it. In both devices he says he found the same modifications: additional cables and a mobile network module. A member of staff confirmed to him that the second device was not another customer's return. By his own account he sent one device to Ledger and the other to Mark Karpelès, the former head of the exchange Mt. Gox, who has himself taken apart and documented tampered devices in recent days.

These details come from the customer himself. Ledger has not named the model, the store or the type of tampering in the German case. Our article of October 12 still carried the report from European retail as unconfirmed. With the sales halt the position has changed: manufacturer and retailer take the report seriously enough to sell nothing nationwide.

What Ledger has confirmed about the implant

Behind the sales halt stands the CryptoBilis case, which we have been covering since October 9. On October 10 Ledger confirmed that an unauthorised additional circuit board sat inside a device from that Southeast Asian retailer. According to the manufacturer's account, which CoinDesk summarised on October 13, the implant works like this: a microcontroller of its own reads the 24 words of the recovery phrase off the display while the device is being set up, and sends them to the attackers over an eSIM via LTE mobile network.

The secure element, the operating system and the signatures of transactions were not altered, according to Ledger. Chief technology officer Charles Guillemet announced a review of reseller controls and of tamper protection. Chief executive Pascal Gauthier said the investigation should establish who tampered with the devices and at which point in distribution that happened. Ledger notes that every confirmed loss so far concerns a device from CryptoBilis. An outflow from a device bought elsewhere has not been verified.

Damage of more than $100 million, with no figure confirmed

There is no official damage total, and Ledger names none itself. The estimates of on-chain analysts diverge, because they attribute different numbers of wallets to the case:

Tether has frozen USDT worth $10 million linked to the thefts, according to CoinDesk. For those affected that is a small ray of light, because frozen stablecoins can be returned later. Anything that flowed out in Bitcoin or Ether, by contrast, cannot be recovered.

Why the authenticity check does not help here

Many Ledger owners rely on the genuine check in the Ledger Live app. It verifies that the secure element is genuine and that the firmware comes from Ledger. Those are precisely the parts the implant left alone. A tampered device therefore passes the check, as Karpelès showed on his test unit. The additional board can only be spotted by opening the casing.

An uncomfortable truth follows from that: it is not the device that decides your security, but the route by which it reached you, and the moment the 24 words stand on the display. Set up a tampered device and you give away your recovery phrase at the instant you write it down. Background on the sequence is in our article on Ledger confirming the implant in a hardware wallet, and the prior history in the first report on the CryptoBilis case.

A Ledger from MediaMarkt or Saturn: return, new phrase, moving the coins

Ledger officially recommends swapping the device only to buyers from CryptoBilis. For devices from German retail there is no recommendation from the manufacturer yet. These steps serve as orientation for anyone who wants to be on the safe side:

1. Device still shrink-wrapped or not set up: do not set it up. Ask the retailer whether it will take the device back, and contact official Ledger support. Devices bought online can usually be returned within 14 days.
2. Device set up, bought at MediaMarkt or Saturn: the safest solution is a new device straight from the manufacturer, a freshly generated recovery phrase and moving all coins onto it. Important: restoring the old phrase on a new device is no protection. Once it has been read out, the attacker knows it.
3. Device bought directly from Ledger: as things stand today there is no confirmed case from direct sales. Following the situation is enough here.
4. In every case: never enter your 24 words anywhere, neither on a website nor in a form nor over the phone. Ledger never calls unprompted, sends no direct messages and never asks for the recovery phrase.

Fraudsters exploit situations like this deliberately. Fake Ledger pages turned up in Google search as early as October 11. How to spot them is in our guide to spotting a fake Ledger website in Google. We advise non-experts against unscrewing the device: the warranty can lapse in the process, and without a reference image an implant is hard to tell apart from genuine components.

Buying a hardware wallet directly from the manufacturer: what it achieves

The case shows that every additional stop between factory and customer is a risk. A purchase in the manufacturer's own shop shortens the route to the minimum. That holds for Ledger as much as for Trezor, Tangem or OneKey. Which devices exist, how they handle recovery and what they cost is shown in our comparison of hardware wallets. Our experience with the best-selling entry-level model is summarised in our test of the Ledger Nano S Plus.

A second protection is splitting up: larger amounts can be spread across several wallets, and anyone using a multisig setup needs several devices for a payout. A single tampered device then cannot give everything away.

Ledger sales halt: what to take away

The sales halt at MediaMarkt and Saturn is a precaution, not evidence of thefts in Germany. Losses are confirmed so far only for devices from Southeast Asia. What is also clear: an implant that passes the authenticity check makes the route of purchase the most important security question. Buy a hardware wallet and you are best served buying it directly from the manufacturer, setting it up yourself and keeping the 24 words to yourself. We will update this article as soon as Ledger or MediaMarktSaturn provide new information.

South Korea's financial supervisor blocked access to 27 websites on October 13, 2026, through which unregistered foreign exchanges were serving customers in the country. KuCoin, MEXC and BingX are on the list, along with Phemex, XT.com, Bitrue, CoinW, BTCC, BitMart and DigiFinex. For investors in Germany the case is no distant administrative matter: several of those venues hold no workable licence in the European Union either, and in Germany the grandfathering for legacy providers lapsed back on December 31, 2025.

The block does not affect crypto trading in the country, but access to providers that never completed South Korean registration. Anyone holding a balance on one of the affected platforms has to reckon with the route to their account becoming harder. That is precisely the point that turns the case into a question to check here too.

What South Korea's financial supervisor ordered on October 13

Responsibility lies with the Financial Intelligence Unit, the anti-money-laundering reporting office of the South Korean supervisor FSC. It did not enforce the blocks itself but applied for them at the Korea Communications Standards Commission, which approved them after reviews on October 6 and 7, 2026. The financial service FinanceFeeds reports this, citing the authority.

The technical route depends on where a site sits. For offerings hosted abroad, access from South Korea is blocked. For sites with servers or operators in the country, it amounts to shutting the service down. The direction is new: in future the FIU intends to apply for blocks as soon as it establishes unregistered activity, without waiting for a court ruling or documented harm to users. In total the authority says it has handed 44 unregistered operators to the investigating authorities.

A precursor dates back two and a half years. In March 2025 Google Play restricted 17 platforms for the South Korean market, KuCoin and MEXC among them. The browser route stayed open then. This step closes it.

These venues are on the block list

Ten names are publicly documented: KuCoin, MEXC, BingX, Phemex, XT.com, Bitrue, CoinW, BTCC, BitMart and DigiFinex. The authority did not list the remaining addresses of the 27 individually, which also has to do with individual providers running several domains.

Three of those exchanges are familiar to German readers from events of their own. KuCoin pulled 25 tokens from trading at the start of October and set its customers a withdrawal deadline for them. At MEXC an attack through an API key was the theme in September, in which the exchange reimbursed $340,000. Both are separate matters from registration, but they show that the platforms have customers here.

The registration duty in South Korea: ISMS certificate and notification to the FIU

A virtual asset service provider in South Korea is a provider that exchanges, transfers or holds crypto assets for third parties. Serving customers in the country in that role takes two things: an ISMS certificate, the state-audited proof of an information security management system, and registration with the FIU. The two together are the entry ticket, and the blocked providers lack both.

The numbers show how narrow the bottleneck is. In the first half of 2026, 26 providers were registered, of which 17 were exchange operators and nine custody or wallet services. A market with South Korea's trading volume therefore runs through a double-digit number of licensed houses, while alongside them dozens of foreign platforms were taking on customers without registration.

What happens to a balance on a blocked exchange

An access block deletes no account. The authority itself points out that users may run into difficulties managing their account, closing positions or withdrawing existing balances. Existing accounts are left untouched by the decision, and there is no general withdrawal deadline. For the wind-down the FIU intends to provide guidance together with the industry body DAXA and the operators.

In practice that means the platform keeps working but is no longer reachable from the blocked network without detours. Holding open leveraged positions carries the greater risk here, because a margin call takes no account of whether the customer can currently reach their account. The authority has also announced that it will pursue replacement sites should blocked providers resurface under new addresses.

The German framework: since January 1, 2026 the CASP licence counts

The European crypto regulation MiCA requires authorisation as a crypto-asset service provider, CASP for short, for crypto-asset services. Article 143 of the regulation allowed member states to give legacy providers a transition period of up to 18 months, that is until July 1, 2026. Germany did not use that period in full.

The shorter variant sits in the Crypto Markets Supervision Act, KMAG for short. Section 50 paragraph 2 number 3 KMAG provides that the permission deemed to continue lapses "at the latest at the end of December 31, 2025". What matters is who that rule applied to at all: only companies that already held a German permission on December 29, 2024, for instance under the Banking Act or the Securities Institutions Act. A foreign exchange without such a legacy permission could never invoke it. For them the position since the regulation took effect is simply this: no business with German customers without a CASP licence or a notification under Article 60.

The six-month offset between the German and the European deadline explains why the situation differs from country to country. Which duties a licence triggers in concrete terms, from own-funds requirements to the segregation of client money, is set out in our overview of the MiCA duties for crypto companies.

KuCoin holds an EU licence and still may not start

Here lies the part of the case that is missing from the reports on the South Korean block. KuCoin is not simply unlicensed in Europe; the position is more complicated, and less favourable for customers, than a plain yes or no would capture.

The Austrian Financial Market Authority FMA granted KuCoin EU Exchange GmbH authorisation as a crypto-asset service provider on November 27, 2025. On February 19, 2026 it prohibited the company from taking on new business, because key functions for anti-money-laundering and sanctions were unfilled. The authority lifted that ban on May 18, 2026, after the posts had been filled. The decisive sentence comes next: commencement of business operations remains impermissible under a separate order of February 18, 2026, because requirements on governance and further key functions in the management body are outstanding. The FMA states this on its own site.

For a customer in Germany the distinction means more than a formality. A granted licence shows up in registers and in marketing claims; an order prohibiting the commencement of operations does not necessarily show up beside it. Rely on the entry alone and you see half the picture. At MEXC the matter is more straightforward: the South Korean FIU lists the exchange among the unregistered providers, and by the company's own account it has not applied for a licence in the EU.

How to check your exchange's licence yourself

A provider's status is public and looked up in a few minutes. Three places are enough.

The first is the MiCA register of the European securities supervisor ESMA. Under Article 109 of the regulation it brings together all CASP authorisations in the European Economic Area, including those refused and withdrawn. It shows whether a provider is licensed at all and which national authority supervises it. The second is BaFin's company database for the German market. The third is the site of the supervisory authority that the register names as responsible: only there do measures such as new-business bans or conditions appear, and those are exactly what the register lacks.

A look at the provider's terms and conditions is worth adding. They say which group company the contracting party is. It happens that a European subsidiary is licensed while the customer contracts with a company outside the EU; the consumer protection of that company then applies, not the European one. Which houses can show a licence in the European Economic Area and how their fees differ is shown by the comparison of regulated crypto exchanges.

Moving to your own wallet: what happens for tax

A transfer from an exchange to an address you control yourself is not a sale. No disposal gain arises, and the one-year holding period under section 23 of the German Income Tax Act keeps running; it does not start afresh. It is different if you sell holdings on the old exchange and buy again at a new one: those are two separate events for tax, and a sale within a year of acquisition is taxable insofar as the year's total gains exceed the exemption threshold.

The order therefore matters. Set up the destination address first and test it with a small amount, then transfer the rest. Sell out of haste instead, and you may pay tax merely because a website was blocked. For the records the rule is: document every withdrawal with its transaction ID and timestamp, because obtaining acquisition data from a blocked customer account later is laborious. The usual tax tools and portfolio trackers help with that, assigning deposits and withdrawals automatically.

Our assessment: why supervisors now hit access rather than users

From the newsroom's point of view, the South Korean step marks a change of method. Until now, proceedings against unregistered exchanges ran through investigations and criminal complaints, in 44 cases in South Korea. That takes years and never reaches the user. An access block works immediately, costs the authority almost nothing and shifts the consequences onto the platform's customers.

The evidence that this will not stay a one-off is on the table: the FIU has announced that it will apply for blocks in future without a court ruling and without proven harm, and it intends to track replacement addresses. Against that stands the fact that a block is technically easy to circumvent and changes nothing about the offering itself; the exchanges stay online, just out of reach. For the EU this does not mean network blocks are coming. The European route runs through the licence: a provider without one may not advertise, may not broker and may not offer a service. The lever sits with the provider, not with the access provider.

What both routes share is the consequence for the investor. A balance held at a provider without a usable licence hangs on a decision they have no influence over. That is the real reason to know the status, rather than looking it up only once the page stops loading. A total loss is possible at any time with crypto assets, independently of supervision; a missing licence lays an operational risk on top.

Exchange block in South Korea: the register decides, not the app

Three steps put your own position in order, and in this sequence:

1. Establish the status. Look in the ESMA register for whether your provider holds a CASP licence, and on the site of the responsible supervisor for whether conditions or prohibitions stand against it. A selection of houses with a licence in the European Economic Area is in the comparison of the best crypto exchanges.
2. Set up the destination address. Before the first withdrawal, create custody you control yourself and transfer a test amount first. Which devices come into question and what they cost is in the hardware wallet comparison.
3. Secure the records. Export the trading and withdrawal history before you empty an account, and keep the acquisition data for the holding period. The tax tools and portfolio trackers read those exports in and track the deadlines per position.

The next mark in the calendar is not a deadline for users but one for providers: a company that has not obtained a licence by the end of the European transition period on July 1, 2026 may not conduct new business in the EU. Which houses have managed it keeps changing, and in Germany the cut-off date of December 31, 2025 already counts.

(As of October 13, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Moving stablecoins across the BNB Smart Chain currently costs no gas. That exemption ends on October 31, 2026 at 23:59 UTC. After that the normal network fees apply again. The price of BNB stands at $742.83, 5.15 percent lower than a week ago.

The operator calls the campaign the "0 Fee Carnival" and has already extended it several times. It covers three stablecoins, seven trading venues and two bridge providers. For investors in Germany this is less a question of price than of cost: anyone who already planned to pull a balance off an exchange and onto an address of their own has a good two weeks left in a window without transfer fees.

Zero fees on BNB Chain: what runs without gas until October 31

According to the BNB Chain announcement, the campaign covers three tokens: USDC, USD1 and U. Three kinds of movement are therefore gas-free, namely withdrawals from participating exchanges, direct wallet-to-wallet transfers on the BNB Smart Chain, and bridging USDC in from other blockchains over two specific bridges.

The operator states that it has already covered more than $4.5 million in gas fees for users as part of the campaign. That figure comes from the platform itself and cannot be verified from the outside; it describes the order of magnitude, no more.

What gas normally costs on the BNB Smart Chain

Gas is the fee a blockchain charges for executing a transaction, paid in the network's own currency. On the BNB Smart Chain it falls due in BNB. It has sat in the range of fractions of a dollar there for years, and is therefore markedly lower than on Ethereum. For a single transfer the saving is hardly noticeable. It becomes tangible for users who make many small movements. Every individual fee can be read up in the network's block explorer, which lists each transaction with the amount actually paid.

These seven exchanges cover the withdrawal fee

According to the operator's list, the withdrawal fee for the named tokens is waived at Binance, Bitget, MEXC, Ourbit, BingX, LBank and HTX. Some of those withdrawals also run over opBNB, the network's second layer; which routes are open depends on the individual venue.

Two restrictions matter. First, the waiver applies only to the listed assets and networks, not to arbitrary tokens and not to every blockchain an exchange offers. Second, the platforms require minimum amounts which, according to the operator, run roughly between five and twenty dollars per provider. Withdraw smaller sums and you drop out of the campaign and pay the regular fee.

That an exchange pays out without a fee says nothing about its licence, incidentally. Which venues hold a MiCA permission in Germany, and what to look at when choosing, is broken down in our comparison of the best crypto exchanges.

Wallet transfer: two free transactions a day for USDC

For direct transfers between two addresses the waiver applies exclusively on the BNB Smart Chain. USD1 and U are unlimited here, while USDC allows two free transfers per user per day. The minimum amount is ten cents. Supported wallets include Binance Wallet, Trust Wallet, SafePal, TokenPocket, Coin98 and imToken, according to the operator.

Bridge: two providers, different mechanics

For bringing USDC onto the BNB Smart Chain the campaign distinguishes two routes. Celer cBridge charges zero fee for USDC from Ethereum, Arbitrum, Polygon, Avalanche and Optimism, according to the operator. Meson.fi works with a full rebate instead and additionally accepts Tron as a source network. The difference is relevant in practice: a rebate presupposes that you front the fee first.

BNB price $742.83: the week in figures

BNB trades at $742.83, according to Coinpaprika as of 17:58 on Tuesday. Over 24 hours that works out at minus 0.19 percent, over seven days at minus 5.15 percent. Market capitalisation stands at roughly $98.9 billion, trading turnover over the past 24 hours at roughly $621 million.

The week split in two. In the daily candles of the trading platform Kraken, the weekly high sits at $779.42 on October 7 and the weekly low at $716.63 on October 8. Between those two days the price fell by a good $60, before steadying in the range between $730 and $760. On Tuesday itself the span ran from $721.76 to $746.84.

One date on the side puts the picture in context: the all-time high of $1,370.98 dates from October 13, 2025 and is therefore exactly a year old. The price currently sits 45.84 percent below that record.

Supply is shrinking, but slowly: 133.16 million BNB in circulation

The second half of this week's BNB story has to do with supply. Total supply stands at 133,158,616 BNB. It is reduced through two separate mechanisms, which are often confused.

The first is the quarterly auto-burn. It destroys an amount determined by a formula built from the BNB price and the number of BNB Smart Chain blocks produced in the quarter. The sum is therefore not at the operator's discretion. The second mechanism runs permanently in the background: a fixed share of the gas fees of every block is destroyed for good, and the size of that share is steered by the validators through the network's governance.

The 36th burn as a yardstick

The 36th auto-burn destroyed roughly 1.62 million BNB, worth about $932 million according to crypto.news. Total supply fell to 133,166,127.91 BNB as a result. The 37th auto-burn is expected in mid-October on the quarterly rhythm. There is no officially confirmed date so far, and certainly no amount, and neither can be calculated seriously in advance because the price feeds into the formula. What the coming burn could mean for the price levels is handled separately in our assessment of the 37th burn.

Our own calculation: 33.16 million BNB left to the burn target

The stated goal of the auto-burn is a total supply of 100 million BNB, half of the 200 million originally created. The tracking site bnbburn.info names that target explicitly. From today's total supply a simple calculation follows: 33,158,616 BNB still have to disappear to reach the goal, which is 24.9 percent of today's supply.

Taking the size of the 36th burn of 1.62 million BNB as the yardstick, roughly twenty more quarters would be needed. That amounts to about five years. The calculation is an extrapolation and not a forecast: if the price falls, the formula destroys more tokens for the same dollar value; if it rises, correspondingly fewer. It does show the order of magnitude at stake in the tightening, though, and it makes clear that a single burn changes supply by a good one percent.

The price and supply figures in this article were collected by cryptoticker.io itself on October 13, 2026. The basis is the seven daily candles from October 7 to October 13 and the total supply of 133,158,616 BNB.

The levels after midweek: $716 below, $779 above

Two traceable points of orientation emerge from the week. On the downside the weekly low of $716.63 is the next place where it shows whether buyers step in again; below that lies the round $700 level, which market participants tend to watch. On the upside the weekly high of $779.42 marks the area where the price turned last week, followed by the $800 mark.

Those are observations from the price action, not price targets and not a recommendation. Working with levels also means bearing in mind that a quarterly burn without a fixed date is an event that can widen the range in the short term.

Dates that count in the coming weeks

Two dates are firm enough to note down. The first is October 31, 2026 at 23:59 UTC, the end of the zero-fee campaign. The second is the turn of the quarter: on the rhythm so far, the 37th auto-burn falls in the second half of October, and the operator usually publishes the transaction only once it has been executed.

A third point is not a date but an ongoing change: with the Pasteur hard fork the BNB Smart Chain has processed 28 percent more gas per block, according to the operator. More capacity per block generally means steadier fees at load peaks, and it is the reason the network can carry the zero-fee campaign at all.

The route to buy under MiCA: what is open in Germany

Since January 1, 2026 a provider offering crypto services in Germany needs authorisation as a crypto-asset service provider under MiCA, or a valid notification. In practice that means buying BNB at a venue that can show that permission, and checking it before the first deposit rather than after. A waived withdrawal fee weighs far less in that decision than the licence.

A second point concerns the stablecoins themselves. Under MiCA, venues licensed in the EU may only offer e-money tokens for purchase if they meet the regulation's requirements. The European supervisor ESMA set a deadline for that on October 8, 2026: providers are to wind down business in non-compliant stablecoins by January 8, 2027, while holding, receiving and sending remain possible. The details are set out in our piece on ESMA's stablecoin deadline. That a fee campaign promotes a token says nothing about that token's licensing status. Check with the provider which of the three tokens you are pulling into your wallet.

Custody: the transfer is only half the way

A gas-free withdrawal moves a balance from the exchange to an address you control yourself. Responsibility for the keys moves with it. The two mistakes that cost money here are the wrong network and the lost recovery phrase. Check before sending that receiving address and network match, because a sum sent on the BNB Smart Chain reaches no address that exists only on Ethereum.

For larger amounts a hardware solution is the more usual route, because the keys never leave the device. Which devices prove themselves in everyday use and how they differ is shown in our hardware wallet comparison.

Leverage and liquidation

BNB also trades as a futures contract. There the rule is unchanged: leverage magnifies gain and loss in equal measure, and liquidation does not come at the end of a day but in the moment the collateral no longer covers the position. With an asset that fell from $779 to $717 within two trading days, that sits closer than a weekly balance of minus 5.15 percent suggests. The difference between a price decline and a forced closure is exactly that span inside the week.

Tax: holding period, exemption threshold and the stablecoin swap

In Germany, gains from selling crypto assets are free of tax after a holding period of one year; inside the year an exemption threshold of €1,000 per year applies to private disposal transactions. The point that matters for this article is one that easily goes missing in fee campaigns: a swap from one stablecoin into another is a disposal like any other swap. That the transfer costs nothing changes none of it.

A pure move between two of your own addresses, by contrast, is not a sale and triggers no tax. It does not interrupt the holding period, but it should be documented so that the acquisition data stay intact. Tools that keep exactly this history are set side by side in our comparison of crypto tax tools and portfolio trackers.

From the 2026 reporting year onwards, providers report their customers' data to the tax administration in any case, with the first transmission to the Federal Central Tax Office scheduled for mid-2027. Keeping your transfers in order therefore adds no work, it saves work later.

Our assessment: a cost campaign, not a price story

Two things about this week are documented: a deadline on October 31 up to which certain transfers cost no gas, and a supply of 133.16 million BNB that keeps falling on schedule through the auto-burn. Both can be looked up.

Our assessment of it, and this is explicitly an assessment: for the price, the fee campaign is the smaller theme. It lowers friction in the network's payment traffic and fits the direction the operator has taken with more block capacity. What would matter for the price is whether this usage volume stays after October 31, once the fee sits with the user again. Only the November transaction figures will answer that.

BNB zero fees: after October 31 the gas is on you again

1. Bring forward open transfers. If you want to pull a balance in USDC, USD1 or U off one of the seven named exchanges anyway, do it before the deadline and mind the provider's minimum amount. Whether your venue is licensed in Germany at all is settled beforehand through our exchange comparison.
2. Prepare the destination. Set up the receiving address on the BNB Smart Chain and send a small amount first, before the whole sum goes. For amounts meant to be held longer, a device from the hardware wallet comparison is the sounder place than an exchange app.
3. Take the records with you. Note the date, amount and equivalent value of every movement, including fee-free transfers between your own addresses. A tool from the comparison of tax tools takes over the bookkeeping, as long as the data are imported in full.

(As of October 13, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

A Saudi national working at OpenAI allegedly hid an encrypted audio recorder behind a TV in an executive meeting room. OpenAI says its own models helped trace it back to him.

The chatbot app once valued at $1 billion is up for sale in a Delaware court, two weeks after launching new models. If nobody buys it, it shuts down.

Binance will discontinue Binance Pool, Pool Savings, Cloud Mining, and other related services in a retreat from mining infrastructure.

A wallet that received 4,581 BTC in March 2020, worth about $40 million then, moved its stash today when it was worth about $377 million.

The Nasdaq-listed asset manager bought the Bitcoin at an average of about $84,500 during a rough week for the market, lifting its total stash to 32,773 BTC.

Cryptocurrency market stays under pressure that's coming from bears, but the recovery is still a possibility.

Ripple has partnered with Stripe-owned Privy to bring AI-powered payments to the XRP Ledger, expanding its push into agentic commerce.

Hardware wallet giant Trezor is severing ties with a significant portion of its authorized resellers following the massive Ledger supply-chain security scare, introducing stricter controls to protect customers from potential attacks.

SEC report exposes who really owns Nasdaq's new XRP stock, revealing massive stakes held by Chris Larsen, Ripple, and SBI Holdings.

Tesla still boasts nearly a billion dollars worth of Bitcoin years after Elon Musk directed the electric vehicle maker to invest $1.5 billion in the leading crypto asset.

TLDR

• Walmart stock gains 0.25% as AI chatbot recommendations boost retail visibility.
• UBS research shows Walmart leads AI shopping suggestions for everyday products.
• Gartner finds 34% of US consumers willing to use AI for holiday gift shopping.
• Walmart’s strong retail presence supports its position in AI shopping results.
• High stock valuation remains a challenge despite new AI-driven growth prospects.

Walmart Inc. rose 0.25% to $113.36 during Tuesday’s intraday trading, gaining $0.28 as shares advanced modestly. The increase came as UBS research highlighted Walmart’s strong position in artificial intelligence-powered shopping recommendations. Analysts identified the retailer as a frequent recommendation across AI chatbots, creating another potential channel for attracting customers.

Walmart Inc., WMT

UBS Research Highlights Walmart’s Strength in AI Shopping

UBS analysts examined how leading AI chatbots recommend retailers when consumers search for everyday products and shopping advice. The research covered several shopping categories, including groceries, household supplies, and other essential consumer goods. Results showed Walmart frequently appeared among the leading recommendations, reflecting its established retail presence and competitive pricing.

The analysts tested 12 shopping questions across New Jersey, New York, and Minnesota to evaluate different recommendation patterns. They examined responses from ChatGPT, Claude, Gemini, and Muse to identify which retailers appeared most frequently. Walmart performed strongly across multiple categories, while Costco and Aldi also gained recognition for their respective retail strengths.

The findings highlight how artificial intelligence could influence where consumers begin their shopping journeys. Chatbots help users compare products, identify retailers, and narrow purchasing decisions without reviewing multiple websites. Walmart could attract additional customer interest as more households incorporate these tools into everyday shopping activities.

Gartner Survey Shows Growing Demand for AI Shopping Tools

A Gartner survey found that 34% of American consumers expressed strong willingness to use AI for holiday gift recommendations. Researchers surveyed 1,004 consumers in August 2026 to examine changing shopping habits ahead of the holiday season. The findings indicate growing acceptance of automated product suggestions, particularly among consumers seeking faster purchasing decisions.

Traditional shopping channels continue playing a central role despite increasing interest in artificial intelligence. Gartner found that 77% of respondents planned to shop in physical stores during the holiday period. Additionally, 75% expected to purchase products through Amazon, highlighting continued demand for established retail platforms.

Walmart’s extensive store network gives the company an established position across both physical and online retail markets. Its product selection covers groceries, electronics, clothing, household goods, and other frequently purchased consumer products. Customers can combine online searches with store visits, pickup services, and home delivery options.

Walmart Stock Valuation Remains a Key Growth Challenge

Despite the potential benefits of AI recommendations, Walmart shares have delivered relatively modest gains during 2026. The stock has advanced approximately 2% this year, trailing the broader market despite the company’s established retail operations. Its valuation exceeds 40 times trailing earnings, placing greater emphasis on future revenue and profit growth.

Walmart generated more than $730 billion in revenue over the preceding 12 months, reflecting its substantial operating scale. However, that size also means incremental sales from AI referrals may produce limited changes in overall growth. The company would need significant additional spending from customers to produce a meaningful improvement in its revenue trajectory.

Walmart continues developing its digital operations while maintaining its position in the competitive US retail market. Its broad product selection and established reputation for affordable goods support its visibility across emerging shopping platforms. The UBS findings identify another potential source of customer traffic, although they do not establish additional sales or earnings.

The post Walmart Inc. (WMT) Stock: AI Chatbot Recommendations Fuel Growth Potential appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• UnitedHealth stock rises 0.25% as management outlines stronger growth for 2027.
• UnitedHealth raises its 2026 earnings forecast following stronger Q3 results.
• Management targets 13% to 16% long-term earnings growth as operations improve.
• AI tools reduce clinical review times by 33% as UnitedHealth cuts paperwork.
• Optum expands pharmacy services while Medicare and Medicaid reforms advance.

UnitedHealth Group Incorporated (UNH) rose 0.25% to $379.47 on Tuesday following its third-quarter 2026 earnings announcement. The healthcare company raised its annual earnings outlook and outlined plans for stronger financial performance in 2027. Management emphasized operational improvements, artificial intelligence adoption, and medical cost controls as major drivers of future growth.

UnitedHealth Group Incorporated, UNH

UnitedHealth Group Raises Earnings Outlook After Strong Q3 Performance

UnitedHealth Group reported third-quarter revenue of $112.7 billion, while operating earnings reached $6.6 billion during the reporting period. Adjusted earnings reached $4.69 per share, exceeding Wall Street expectations as the company improved its cost management. Management raised its full-year 2026 adjusted earnings guidance to at least $20.50 per share.

The company also reduced its medical care ratio to 88.4%, compared with 89.9% a year earlier. Management attributed the improvement to pricing discipline, benefit adjustments, and stronger coordination across its healthcare operations. Specialty pharmacy expenses and higher treatment intensity continued to pressure medical spending across several business segments.

UnitedHealth expanded its operational modernization efforts across UnitedHealthcare and Optum to improve service delivery and efficiency. Approximately 40% of employed clinicians now use AI-powered documentation tools, reducing medical record review times by 33%. The company plans to eliminate 30% of prior authorization requirements by year-end to simplify patient access.

Management Targets Stronger Earnings Growth in 2027

UnitedHealth management expressed confidence in reaching the lower end of its long-term adjusted earnings growth target for 2027. The company maintains a growth framework of 13% to 16%, supported by stronger execution and operational improvements. Chief Financial Officer Wayne DeVeydt also indicated that current analyst earnings estimates may underestimate the company’s recovery potential.

The company’s Medicare Advantage strategy prioritizes health maintenance organizations and specialized plans serving patients with complex medical needs. These offerings include Chronic Special Needs Plans and Dual Special Needs Plans, which support targeted healthcare management. UnitedHealth expects its quality improvement programs to strengthen its competitive position across government-sponsored insurance markets.

Management also expects Optum Insight to advance its technology offerings through new AI-focused products during 2027. The company anticipates further expansion in 2028 as these services gain commercial traction across healthcare organizations. Optum Rx continues developing transparent pharmacy services, with external customers accounting for more than half its membership.

Medical Costs and Regulatory Reforms Shape Recovery

Despite improving operating performance, UnitedHealth continues managing medical expenses and regulatory requirements across its insurance businesses. Medicaid margins remain under pressure, although management expects them to reach their lowest point during 2026. The company targets stronger profitability by 2028 through reimbursement negotiations and improved care for patients with complex needs.

Management identified the No Surprises Act arbitration process as another source of elevated healthcare costs. The company reported that related disputes account for up to 6% of medical spending in certain regions. Consequently, UnitedHealth continues advocating regulatory changes while improving its internal claims management and payment processes.

UnitedHealth also expects 75% of its Medicare Advantage membership to enter plans with ratings of four stars or higher. The target applies to 2028 ratings and reflects continued spending on service quality and patient outcomes. Separately, the United Health Foundation committed $1 billion toward rural healthcare, workforce education, and broader community health programs.

Management expects fourth-quarter performance to reflect seasonal medical spending alongside additional investments in technology and clinical operations. The company will continue expanding administrative automation while strengthening its healthcare delivery network and insurance offerings. These initiatives form part of UnitedHealth’s broader plan to improve operating margins and support earnings growth beyond 2026.

The post UnitedHealth Group Incorporated (UNH) Stock: Climbs as Management Targets Strong 2027 Growth appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Applied Materials (AMAT) stock plunges 8.19% despite strong demand for AI chips.

• Applied Materials targets over two percentage points of market share gains by 2030.

• Applied Materials expects its eBeam equipment revenue to reach $2 billion in 2026.

• Applied Materials projects semiconductor service revenue above $12 billion by 2030.

• Applied Materials plans to more than double its research and production capacity by 2030.

Applied Materials (AMAT) stock plunged 8.19% to $456.77 during Tuesday’s intraday trading, losing $40.76 despite strong demand for AI chips. The decline followed the company’s presentation of ambitious semiconductor equipment growth targets through 2030. Meanwhile, Applied Materials outlined expansion plans across advanced manufacturing, research facilities, and semiconductor services.

Applied Materials, Inc., AMAT

Applied Materials Targets Stronger Growth in AI Chip Equipment

Applied Materials presented its long-term growth strategy during the 2026 SEMICON West Investor Breakfast on Tuesday. The company expects expanding AI infrastructure to support sustained demand for wafer fabrication equipment. Its strategy focuses on advanced chip production, memory technology, and semiconductor packaging.

CEO Gary Dickerson identified AI infrastructure development as a major driver of future semiconductor equipment spending. He emphasized the company’s leadership in technologies that improve computing performance, energy efficiency, and production costs. Applied Materials expects broader AI adoption to increase demand for advanced silicon manufacturing.

The company projects three semiconductor segments will generate approximately 75% of wafer fabrication equipment growth between 2025 and 2030. These segments include leading-edge foundry logic, DRAM memory, and advanced packaging technologies. Applied Materials aims to increase its equipment market share by more than two percentage points during this period.

Applied Materials Expands Semiconductor Services and eBeam Technology

Applied Materials expects its electron-beam inspection equipment business to generate $2 billion in revenue during calendar 2026. The technology helps semiconductor manufacturers identify production defects and improve yields during advanced chip manufacturing. Additionally, its imaging systems support faster production processes and more efficient factory operations.

The company also expects its semiconductor services revenue to increase more than 20% during 2026. Management projects annual services revenue will exceed $12 billion by 2030, supported by a mid-teens compound growth rate. These services help semiconductor manufacturers improve equipment performance, factory productivity, and manufacturing efficiency.

Chief Financial Officer Brice Hill outlined plans to strengthen profitability while expanding research and development spending. According to Hill, previous technology investments have established the company’s position across important semiconductor manufacturing processes. The company now plans to increase operating leverage as semiconductor equipment demand expands.

Applied Materials Plans Major Manufacturing Expansion Through 2030

Applied Materials plans to more than double its research laboratory and manufacturing capacity by 2030. The expansion supports expected growth in semiconductor production and demand for advanced manufacturing equipment. The company continues investing in facilities that support collaboration with semiconductor manufacturers.

On Monday, Applied Materials unveiled its Equipment and Process Innovation and Commercialization Center in Silicon Valley. The new facility supports joint research into semiconductor process technology and equipment development. The company has already announced 15 partnerships involving chipmakers, technology companies, equipment manufacturers, and universities.

Applied Materials has also expanded its manufacturing infrastructure across several international locations. These facilities include operations in Austin, Texas, Singapore, and Treviso, Italy. The investments support the company’s long-term production strategy as semiconductor manufacturers expand capacity for increasingly complex computing applications.

The post Applied Materials (AMAT) Stock: Sinks 8% Despite Strong AI Chip Demand appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• BigBear.ai (BBAI) stock climbs 3.83% as new government awards surpass $225M.
• BigBear.ai secures over 25 generative AI awards across major U.S. agencies.
• FBI, NASA, and the Coast Guard join BigBear.ai’s growing government client base.
• BigBear.ai expands defense operations with new military and intelligence awards.
• BigBear.ai reports a $270M backlog, with only 29% funded as of June 30, 2026.

BigBear.ai Holdings (BBAI) stock rose 3.83% to $2.3877 during Tuesday’s intraday trading, gaining $0.0877. Shares stabilized after an early surge above $2.50, following developments in the company’s government business. BigBear.ai announced more than $225 million in awards across several U.S. agencies since July.

BigBear.ai Holdings, Inc., BBAI

BigBear.ai Secures $225 Million in New Awards

BigBear.ai reported new business and renewals across homeland security, defense, intelligence, and civilian agencies. The agreements support its expansion in national security, trade, and travel technology markets. The latest wins also strengthen its relationships with existing customers while expanding its government presence.

According to the announcement, BigBear.ai secured more than 25 new generative AI awards. Customers include the FBI, NASA, U.S. Coast Guard, Department of Energy, and Department of Veterans Affairs. These projects cover specialized technology services for law enforcement, security operations, and civilian applications.

CEO Kevin McAleenan identified customer retention and new agency relationships as major drivers of the company’s recent activity. He highlighted continued work with Customs and Border Protection alongside new partnerships with security organizations. The developments reflect broader adoption of advanced technology across government operations.

BigBear.ai Expands Defense and Intelligence Operations

BigBear.ai also secured agreements supporting U.S. Central Command, U.S. Southern Command, and classified intelligence operations. These projects extend its services into additional military and intelligence environments. Meanwhile, demand for secure AI platforms continues to shape the company’s product offerings.

Its generative AI products provide access to models and automated tools from leading technology providers. Government teams can select available systems according to their operational requirements and security standards. The platforms also support disconnected networks and restricted environments that require tighter data controls.

BigBear.ai retained important work with U.S. Customs and Border Protection through two competitive renewals. The company supports border operations involving traveler screening, cargo movement, and customs security. Its technology helps personnel assess shipments, process information, and make operational decisions.

BigBear.ai Reports $270 Million Backlog

BigBear.ai reported approximately $270 million in total backlog as of June 30, 2026. The company identified only 29% of that amount as funded at the reporting date. This distinction separates secured financial commitments from the broader value of outstanding business.

The announced $225 million includes potential award values, unexercised options, and maximum contract limits. Consequently, actual revenue will depend on government funding decisions, project execution, and exercised options. Agencies also retain the authority to modify agreements, reduce spending, or terminate work.

The post BigBear.ai Holdings (BBAI) Stock: Gains on $225M Federal AI Contract Wins appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Goldman Sachs (GS) stock rises 0.27% as Q3 revenue jumps 23% to $18.68 billion.
• Goldman Sachs reports $5.29 billion in Q3 profit as earnings reach $17.01 per share.
• Equities revenue surges 72% as stronger financing and derivatives lift results.
• Investment banking fees climb 21% as mergers and underwriting activity rebound.
• Goldman Sachs returns $4.49 billion to shareholders and declares a $5 dividend.

Goldman Sachs Group (GS) stock rose 0.27% to $896.36 during Tuesday’s intraday trading, gaining $2.41 after retreating from earlier highs. The bank reported third-quarter revenue growth of 23% to $18.68 billion, driven by stronger trading and investment banking activity. Meanwhile, net earnings reached $5.29 billion as its major business divisions delivered improved annual results.

The Goldman Sachs Group, Inc., GS

Goldman Sachs Reports Strong Q3 Earnings Growth

Goldman Sachs reported diluted earnings per share of $17.01, up from $12.25 during the same quarter last year. However, earnings declined sequentially from $20.98 per share in the second quarter. The bank recorded an annualized return on average common shareholders’ equity of 18.7%.

For the first nine months of 2026, the company generated $56.24 billion in revenue and $17.55 billion in earnings. Its book value per common share also increased 4.2% during the period to $372.64. These results reflected stronger banking operations and improved profitability compared with 2025.

Operating expenses increased 20% annually to $11.31 billion, primarily due to higher transaction costs and employee compensation. Meanwhile, provisions for credit losses reached $368 million, reflecting impairments related to wholesale loans. Despite these costs, the bank improved its nine-month efficiency ratio to 59.4% from 62.1%.

Investment Banking and Equities Support Revenue Growth

Global Banking & Markets generated $13.46 billion in quarterly revenue, representing a 32% increase from the previous year. Investment banking fees climbed 21%, supported by higher completed merger transactions and increased underwriting activity. Stronger initial public offerings and secondary share sales also contributed to the division’s performance.

Equities revenue surged 72% annually, supported by stronger financing operations and derivatives trading. Meanwhile, fixed income, currency, and commodities revenue remained largely unchanged despite mixed performance across trading products. Higher currencies and commodities revenue helped offset weaker mortgage, credit, and interest rate activity.

Asset & Wealth Management revenue increased 14% from the previous year, supported by higher management and incentive fees. Increased average assets under supervision contributed to stronger recurring fee income during the quarter. However, weaker investment returns and private banking revenue partly offset the division’s growth.

Goldman Sachs Announces Dividend and Capital Returns

Goldman Sachs declared a quarterly dividend of $5.00 per common share on October 12, 2026. The company scheduled payment for December 30 to shareholders of record on December 2. The announcement followed continued capital distributions through dividends and share repurchases.

During the third quarter, the bank returned $4.49 billion to common shareholders through its capital return program. Share repurchases accounted for $3 billion, while common stock dividends represented the remaining $1.49 billion. The company also maintained its shareholder payout strategy alongside increased investment banking activity.

Meanwhile, average global core liquid assets increased to $574 billion from $555 billion in the previous quarter. Headcount also rose 3% sequentially, reflecting the timing of new graduate recruitment. However, the investment banking backlog declined from the second quarter despite stronger completed transactions.

The post Goldman Sachs Group (GS) Stock: Gains as Q3 Revenue Jumps 23% and Profit Hits $5.29B appeared first on Blockonomi.

South Korea is expanding its crackdown on unregistered exchanges. Financial authorities have ordered blocks on 27 overseas cryptocurrency exchange websites operating without registration in the country. The list includes major platforms such as KuCoin, MEXC, BingX, Phemex, XT.com, Bitrue, CoinW, Poloniex, BTCC, and BitMart.

The decision comes after two reviews held on October 6 and 7 by the Korea Communications Standards Commission.

New Restrictions

The Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU) announced the move on October 13. Authorities had already restricted downloads and updates of their apps on Google Play and Apple’s App Store. Now, they are extending those restrictions to the exchanges’ websites.

The enforcement approach is also becoming stricter.

Crypto exchanges that want to serve users in South Korea must meet local requirements, which include obtaining Information Security Management System (ISMS) certification and filing a report with the FIU. Overseas platforms are also covered if they target Korean customers. This can include operating Korean-language websites, marketing services to local users, or supporting payments in Korean won. Companies that operate without the required registration can face up to five years in prison or fines of up to 50 million won (over $37,000).

The FIU has so far referred 44 unregistered virtual asset service providers to investigative authorities. Measures to limit transactions between registered domestic exchanges and unregistered operators were also introduced. Purchases of virtual assets from these platforms using credit cards have been restricted as well.

The FIU plans to keep monitoring alternative domains used by affected exchanges to bypass the restrictions. Additional website blocks could follow if these platforms continue operating through new addresses. For existing users who need to withdraw their funds, authorities said guidance on withdrawal methods and procedures will be provided through the Digital Asset Exchange Association (DAXA).

Balancing Crackdown With Crypto Growth

The country has also taken a tougher stance on crypto-related misconduct. In February, a Seoul court sentenced crypto asset management firm CEO Jong-hwan Lee to three years in prison for manipulating token prices and making around 7.1 billion won ($5 million) in illegal profits. The ruling was the first case under the Virtual Asset User Protection Act. Lee was also fined 500 million won.

Crypto-related betting has also come under scrutiny. In September, police opened cases against 26 South Korean users of the prediction market Polymarket over bets worth around 17.6 billion won.18 of them were referred to prosecutors. Investigators used public blockchain records to trace the users. Police argued the bets may qualify as illegal gambling.

Crackdown aside, South Korea is moving ahead with plans to bring traditional financial assets onto the blockchain as it recently unveiled a phased roadmap to tokenize stocks, bonds, and investment funds. The first phase is expected to begin in February 2027, once amendments to the Electronic Registration Act take effect.

South Korea’s crypto market is also attracting firms looking to build within the regulatory framework. Ripple is one of them. The company recently teamed up with Meritz Securities to explore digital asset custody and tokenization for the country’s financial market. Ripple has already been working with Kyobo Life Insurance to explore using blockchain for tokenized government bond transactions.

The post South Korea Blocks 27 Crypto Exchange Websites, Including KuCoin and MEXC appeared first on CryptoPotato.

A UK High Court judge has ruled that Chinese law, not English law, must govern the claims of victims to more than 61,000 BTC recovered from a multibillion-pound fraud.

But while the decision settles an important preliminary legal question, it does not determine whether the victims can establish ownership of the cryptocurrency or how much, if anything, they may recover.

How Qian’s Fraud Led to the High Court Dispute

This case arises from investment scams arranged by Zhimin Qian in China from 2014 until July 2017. They involved about 10 schemes via the company known as “Tianjin Lantian Gerui Electronic Technology” and others, which included digital currencies, elderly care services, and consumer products. The company lacked authorization to offer financial products and Qian confessed that there was a need for such an authorization under Chinese law.

According to an audit, there were at least 128,409 investment contracts related to the scams; however, as per the court, the number of contracts is not equal to the number of people who were victims of this crime. The total amount of funds collected was approximately 40.23 billion yuan, which is almost £4.1 billion, or over $5 billion.

Most of these funds were used to pay off the previous investors in the schemes whereas some of them were converted into assets, including Bitcoin. More than 100,000 BTC were purchased through a Huobi trading account before Qian left the country in July 2017, crossing into Myanmar to evade arrest.

She arrived in London that September and, together with her associate, Wen, started converting the Bitcoin into other assets. However, she later came under investigation by the Metropolitan Police, who seized four separate devices containing more than 61,000 BTC found in a safety deposit box and a property where the two accomplices were living at the time.

As CryptoPotato reported in October last year, Qian pled guilty at Southwark Crown Court of having possession of criminal property in the form of cryptocurrency. The case established the background to the subsequent dispute over who has the legal right to the recovered assets.

Victims instituted a civil proceeding under Section 281 of the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002, which allows claimants to ask a court to declare the recovered property is theirs, with Justice Turner’s judgement addressing a preliminary question: whether those claims should be assessed under English law, Chinese law, or a combination of both.

Why Chinese Law Matters to Victim’s Claims

According to the judge, Chinese law applies, and he rejected four arguments advanced by applicants seeking to rely on English legal principles. He found that the contracts, investor payments and Bitcoin purchases were rooted in China, and that the location of the cryptocurrency in England did not change which law governed the underlying rights.

Justice Turner also rejected the suggestion that English law should apply by default because the content of Chinese law had not yet been presented in court. As he explained, identifying the applicable law comes before establishing what the law says. The judgement states that applicants’ claimed proprietary rights “must be assessed by reference to Chinese law.”

That distinction matters because Section 281 requires victims to establish an ownership interest in the property, rather than simply show that they lost money in the fraud. The court has not yet determined whether individual applicants have such rights under Chinese law, nor how much they might recover.

The post UK Judge Says Chinese Law Applies to Claims Over £4B Bitcoin Fraud appeared first on CryptoPotato.

The SHIB Army, the collective term for Shiba Inu holders, supporters, traders, and enthusiasts, has once again found itself in the crosshairs of scammers.

Such schemes can lead to painful losses, so here’s how users can protect themselves.

‘This is a Drainer’

Recently, an X account falsely claimed a Shiba Inu airdrop was “back,” telling users they were eligible for the dubious campaign after they completed a supposed wallet verification check. The mysterious person or entity also provided a link, but people should not click it, as it was flagged as a scam.

Long-time Shiba Inu community member Marzael.shib warned that no such token distribution exists, calling the development “a drainer.”  “They are flooding the timeline; recommend not clicking and report,” they added.

The X account BSCN also sounded the alarm on the matter. The team said the real danger comes when users connect their wallets and sign malicious approvals.

“Those permissions can allow scammers to transfer tokens without stealing a victim’s password,” the warning reads.

The popular meme coin boasts a vast and devoted community, making it a frequent target for scammers. Earlier this year, Shibarium Trustwatch (an X account dedicated to warning Shiba Inu users about potential threats) warned about numerous fraud attempts involving the SOU NFT.

Its team clarified that users will never receive the non-fungible token in question, and that eligible users can claim it only through Shiba Inu’s official website.

“Do not click on shared, shortened, or copied links. Scammers often create fake websites that look identical to the real one in order to steal funds. Always type the official address directly into your browser and verify you are on the correct domain before connecting your wallet. Never share your private keys or seed phrase with anyone under any circumstances,” it added.

Prior to that, the same X account warned that bad actors created a malicious website impersonating Shiba Inu’s official platform. The fake site includes “special” promotions and false claims of collaborations and presale bonuses, designed to lure people into connecting their wallets.

SHIB Price Outlook

The meme coin’s price has plunged by nearly 12% over the past week. However, the main reason for the drop appears to be the overall decline in the cryptocurrency market during that period, not the scam warning that could have spread panic across the community.

As of this writing, SHIB trades around $0.000005163 (per CoinGecko), down 95% from its late-2021 all-time high. Analysts have been relatively silent on the token lately, yet certain technical indicators may help traders identify the next potential move.

Today (October 13), Shiba Inu coins stored on crypto exchanges fell to a near one-month low of roughly 87.2 trillion. This can be interpreted as a bullish signal since it reduces immediate selling pressure.

The post Critical Shiba Inu (SHIB) Warning: Here’s the Latest Threat appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Blur will shut down its frontend on November 12, 2026. But the NFT marketplace won’t disappear. Its protocol will keep running on-chain, and the BLUR token will still control the fee switch.

The same date also marks a change for Blend, Blur’s lending platform. It will stop matching new loans, giving borrowers until then to repay or risk default. Users who still have assets on Blend will get a withdrawal tool after the deadline, according to the announcement.

What Happened to Blur?

Blur raised $11 million in seed funding in March 2022 and emerged as a major rival to OpenSea, targeting professional NFT traders. After launching in October, it attracted users with zero marketplace fees, bulk trading tools, and token rewards. Its BLUR token launch in February 2023 brought a wave of activity, while Blend later expanded Blur into NFT-backed lending. By December 2023, it commanded 80% of the NFT market’s share.

Blur still maintained its lead in Q1 2024 after recording $1.5 billion in volume. However, falling NFT activity and declining lending demand gradually weakened its position. By 2025, OpenSea was recovering market share, while Blend went in the opposite direction. In April 2026, KuCoin removed BLUR cross-margin trading. Two months later, Binance placed the token under its “Monitoring Tag.”

Shutdowns in 2026

2026 has seen several crypto and Web3 platforms announce shutdowns or wind-downs. NFT platform Nifty Gateway and social collecting app Rodeo announced plans to wind down, while Foundation announced its closure in April after a sale fell through. Meanwhile, Blur’s news comes less than a fortnight after Blast announced it would close on October 2.

Interestingly, both projects were created by Blur founder Tieshun Roquerre, better known as Pacman, and developed by the same team. Blast, an Ethereum scaling network, also revealed it was ceasing operations just over two years after launch. It said that “the economics of operating the chain no longer make sense.” Activity on the network had faded, which left it unable to cover its running costs.

The post Blur Is Pulling the Plug on Its Frontend, but the On-Chain Protocol Lives On appeared first on CryptoPotato.

The November 2024 election, which saw Donald Trump become America’s 47th president, triggered a major cryptocurrency rally. After all, the Republican presented himself as a strong supporter of the industry throughout his campaign, promising to make the USA a global crypto hub, promote innovation, establish a strategic Bitcoin reserve, ban the creation of a CBDC, and implement a more favorable regulatory framework for digital assets.

During his nearly two years in office, he fulfilled several promises, but other decisions have increased geopolitical tensions and negatively affected financial and crypto markets. With that in mind, we asked three of the most widely used AI-powered chatbots to assess how Bitcoin might react if the Republicans lose the midterms next month. Here’s what they had to say.

Pullback on the Way?

According to ChatGPT, if Republicans lose control of Congress (especially both chambers), BTC could face short-term selling pressure. Specifically, OpenAI’s platform expects a 5-10% drop immediately after the potential news, while a 15% fall was described as “a stress scenario.”

At the same time, ChatGPT said this would not mark the start of a new bear market and would likely be followed by a substantial rebound. It also claimed that if the result is already priced in, BTC might barely move south.

The latest polls suggest Democrats have the upper hand ahead of the November 3 midterm elections. Prediction market Kalshi, for instance, currently assigns Republicans less than a 30% chance of winning Congress despite Trump’s promises for a $5,000 payment if they maintain control.

Perplexity shared a similar view, expecting that a possible loss for Trump’s party could lead to a short-term correction in Bitcoin and not automatically trigger a crypto crash.

Meanwhile, the chatbot warned that a collapse is not completely out of the question and may occur only if election results align with falling ETF inflows, higher interest rates from the Federal Reserve, or a major deleveraging event.

Google’s Gemini agreed with the thesis, estimating that a short-term correction after a Democratic midterm victory is a realistic possibility.

“However, unless accompanied by a major macroeconomic shock (like hawkish Federal Reserve pivots or liquidity contractions), such a pullback would represent a temporary price adjustment rather than a fundamental trend reversal,” it added.

The Historical Data

Not long ago, popular analyst Ali Martinez noted that the US midterm elections have historically preceded a major drop in Bitcoin’s price. He reminded that after the 2010, 2014, 2018, and 2022 elections, the cryptocurrency fell 72%, 65%, 52%, and 27%, respectively.

At the same time, Martinez doesn’t think this could stop BTC’s overall bullish move, viewing a potential drop after the elections as a perfect buying opportunity.

The post What Will Happen to BTC if Trump Loses the US Midterms? (3 AIs Analyze) appeared first on CryptoPotato.