The study highlights the urgent need for enhanced security measures and regulatory frameworks to protect DeFi users from evolving threats.

The post Flash loan attacks drained $1.211 billion from DeFi, University of Winchester study finds appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Wajo's Fo could redefine AI trust and safety standards, but scalability and external validation will be crucial for widespread adoption.

The post Vinod Khosla backs Wajo’s Fo as a safer personal AI agent appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

China's potential crypto market reopening could significantly boost global digital asset demand, contingent on effective risk management.

The post China’s crypto rollout could trigger Bitcoin supercycle, says Solana Company CEO appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Nvidia's dominance in the MSCI ACWI highlights the growing influence of tech giants on global markets, impacting passive investment strategies.

The post Nvidia’s weight in the MSCI All Country World Index climbs to 5.21% appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Mandatory AI breach reporting in Australia could enhance accountability, drive regulatory clarity, and bolster public trust in AI systems.

The post OpenAI and Anthropic back mandatory AI breach reporting in Australia appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Now Accepting Bitcoin: Buy Coffee and Bacon Across 200 Indiana Bitcoin Merchants

My trip into the Indiana Bitcoin market started at Kaffeine Coffee Co. on Fulton Street. The coffee was tasty, but my real surprise was running into a local Bitcoiner who was also paying for his order in satoshis, making me feel like not such a rare breed in this fiat world.

The friend I made shared about a network of Indiana merchants the Indianapolis local Indy Bitcoin Group has been orange pilling. 

First Up: Old Major Market LLC (Artisan Meats)

A common complaint of merchant Bitcoin adoption is that the shop owners will liquidate 100% of their Bitcoin back into cash using payment processors like Square. This is true to start, but a fascinating shift occurs once a business owner reads about bitcoin. Old Major LLC, an artisan meat distributor based in Indianapolis, is a prime example of that shift.

The Big Update for Indiana Bitcoin

According to owner Mark LaFay, Starting in 2026, Old Major Market made a major strategic decision: they are keeping 100% of the Bitcoin they receive directly on their balance sheet. They realized that holding bitcoin opens up significant long-term upside.

Big shout out to the Bitcoiners in Central Indiana that have been stopping by Old Major for over a year to buy bacon, sausages, and specialty meats with sats. While the shop originally agreed to accept Bitcoin and instantly converted every transaction to cash, the steady stream of Bitcoin payments caught their attention.

The “1% Orange Pill” Math

When a dedicated community directs its routine spending toward supportive merchants, the business case for the owner becomes undeniable:

• The Baseline: A local merchant generating $1 Million in annual revenue with a 10% profit margin brings home $100,000 in net profit.
• The 1% New Customer Shift: If local Bitcoiners represent just 1% of total sales, that’s $10,000 in annual Bitcoin transactions. If the owner sells the coins, regret creeps in, “what if I held the coins?”…
• The BTC Holding Strategy: Let’s assume the store instead decides to hold that Bitcoin in 2026, and BTC doubles in value this year. Holding the coins increases the owner’s total annual profit +20% to $120,000.

That financial reality is the ultimate orange pill. A focused group of customers directing their commerce toward open-minded owners can move the needle for merchant adoption, whether the owner holds from day one or learns along the way that they are missing profit.

Notable Mentions: Local Indy Staples: Coffee & Wine

• Kaffeine Coffee Co. (Downtown Indy): Third Wave craft coffee meets native Bitcoin rails. Meeting fellow Bitcoiners at the counter proves how coffee hubs act as the natural gateway for real-world community building.
• The Rejoicing Vine (Northwest Indy): A mission-driven winery specializing in sparkling wines that doubles as the host spot for local “Lightning Socials”. Owner Brent Kumfer agreed to accept Bitcoin over a year ago through Square, enjoying zero processing fees and a steady stream of local Bitcoiner events. They are not yet holding bitcoin, but they are considering it.

Have a Story or a Local Merchant Network to Feature?

As always, a growing directory of verified Bitcoin-accepting merchants is listed below. If you want your business added to the map, or if you have a new city and story to feature in an upcoming column, write directly to vagabond@b.tc to be included in “NOW ACCEPTING BITCOIN“.

APPENDIX – 200 Indiana Stores Accepting Bitcoin (Source: BTC Map)

Arts & Entertainment

• LangLab (Arts Centre) — 1302 High St, South Bend
• AMC Castleton Square 14 (Cinema) — 6020 E 82nd St, Indianapolis
• AMC Washington Square 12 (Cinema) — 10280 E Washington St, Indianapolis
• AMC CLASSIC Bloomington 12 (Cinema) — 2929 W 3rd St, Bloomington
• AMC Perry Crossing 18 (Cinema) — 380 Cinema Blvd, Plainfield
• AMC Showplace Traders Point 12 (Cinema) — 5920 W 86th St, Indianapolis
• AMC Indianapolis 17 (Cinema) — 4325 S Meridian St, Indianapolis
• AMC CLASSIC Crawfordsville 8 (Cinema) — 205 Dry Branch Rd, Crawfordsville
• Fort Wayne Improv (Theatre) — 1314 E State Blvd, Fort Wayne
• Pine Acres Miniature Farm (Zoo) — 6801 Union Chapel Rd SE, Corydon

Automotive & Repair

• 317 Auto Service — 499 Wall St, Greenwood
• Hobbs Automotive Diagnostics & Repair — 3594 SR 9, Anderson
• McIntire Auto Repair — 1927 S Curry Pike, Bloomington
• Salvadors Collision — 30841 Old US 33, Elkhart
• 2nd Chance Towing & Repair — 2252 Straight Line Pike, Richmond
• Bulls Tire Shop — 2233 E Washington St, Indianapolis
• Direct Tire — 1506 N Post Rd, Indianapolis

Bars, Breweries & Wineries

• Westfield Wine Vault — 100 N Union St, Westfield
• Mad Hyena Bar and Grill — 1538 Indiana Ave, New Castle
• Fish Moon Brewing Company — 309 N Main St, Rushville
• The Health Club Taproom & Cafe — 6420 Cornell Ave, Indianapolis
• Books & Brews — 9402 Uptown Dr, Indianapolis
• Tollys Bar and Grill — 2341 Maple Ave, Terre Haute
• Easley Winery — 205 N College Ave, Indianapolis
• The Rejoicing Vine — 8440 W 82nd St, Indianapolis

Beauty, Hair & Wellness

• Apothecary Salon & Spa — 2050 Burton Ln, Martinsville
• Allure Salon — 100 S 1st St, Zionsville
• Angel Barber Studio — 1990 Conner St, Noblesville
• B Beauty — 11717 E Washington St, Indianapolis
• Brow Ink — 5250 E US Hwy 36, Avon
• Bryans Barbershop — 224 N 12th St, Decatur
• Cutting Loose Salon — 3815 S Main St, Elkhart
• Exotic Nails — 1617 E Michigan Rd, Shelbyville
• Harmony Day Spa — 7654 N Bleck Rd, Trail Creek
• Indulge Beauty Salon — 3521 Lake Ave, Fort Wayne
• Lee’s Barber Lounge — 409 W Taylor St, Kokomo
• Lux Esthetics Lab — 1251 US-31 N, Greenwood
• Luxury Spa & Nails — 217 S Green River Rd, Evansville
• Marengo Barber Shop — 109 Main St, Marengo
• Mdg Salon — E 116th St, Carmel
• Midou Studio — 9935 E 42nd St, Indianapolis
• Modern Barbershop and Salon — 1641 N Lebanon St, Lebanon
• Naturally You — 6101 N Rural St, Indianapolis
• Sarah L Studio — 6251 Winthrop Ave, Indianapolis
• The Station Hair Parlor — 200 Byrd Way, Greenwood
• Wax that Cat — 3009 25th St & 3042 State St, Columbus
• Indy Holistic Massage — 1133 W Main St, Greenfield
• Sacred Roots Custom Massage — 26 W Broadway St, Shelbyville

Cafes, Bakeries & Desserts

• Gramz Bakey and Cafe — 409 Washington St, Columbus
• Kaffeine Coffee — 707 Fulton St, Indianapolis
• Moar Tea — 448 Massachusetts Ave, Indianapolis
• Seoul Fresh — 49 W Maryland St, Indianapolis
• The Beach Hut — 100 W Moss Pkwy, Michigan City
• The Java Bean Cafe — 151 N 2nd St, Decatur
• Cosmic Cardinal Cafe — 101 W Ohio St, Indianapolis
• Capstone Cafe & Bookstore — 6620 Northview Way, Indianapolis
• Rocky Mountain Cafe — 209 Lincolnway, La Porte
• Wildflour Bakehouse — 1012 E County Rd 750 S, Nineveh
• Brown’s Shuga Shack — 6099 State Rd 16, Monticello
• Heartland Homemade Ice Cream — 4911 S Emerson Ave, Indianapolis
• Sugar + Ice — 103 S Randolph St, Garrett
• Sugarfield Creamery — 1051 E Tabor St, Indianapolis

Contractors, Repair & Home Services

• 33 Electric — 7939 Dix Rd, Indianapolis
• AR Engineering (HVAC) — 3002 W Western Ave, South Bend
• Bravo Carpentry — 305 Railroad Ave, Wheeler
• DEG Electronic Repair Services — 3712 N Mitthoeffer Rd & 2818 Westlane Rd, Indianapolis
• Energy Efficient Replacements / 574-Sunroom — 51285 Bittersweet Rd, Granger
• KM Electronics — 8238 Madison Ave, Indianapolis
• NGR Electric — 4320 Calhoun St, Gary
• Roman Tech Computer Repair — 3611 E US Hwy 12, Michigan City
• TechBar — 4121 Cleveland St, Gary

Groceries, Specialty Foods & Farms

• Old Major (Butcher) — 4201 Millersville Rd, Indianapolis
• The Wurst (Butcher) — 130 N Broad St, Griffith
• For You Brewing Supplies — 503 Honey Creek Dr, Terre Haute
• Hidden Acres (Farm) — 10645 W 425 S, Wilkinson
• K&B Liberty Farms — 2254 Nature Ln SE, Corydon
• Binford Farmers Market — 6620 Northview Way, Indianapolis

Professional & Financial Services

• D M Property Management — 6446 Ralston Ave, Indianapolis
• Dennis Hartley & Son Monuments — 89 E Walnut St, Martinsville
• Great Lakes EV Charging — 51285 Bittersweet Rd, Granger
• Inguard Insurance — 231 W Canal St, Wabash
• Olive Tree Resources (NGO) — 110 E Market St, New Albany
• Overhauser Law Offices — 101 W Ohio St, Indianapolis & 18 E Main St, Greenfield

Restaurants, Fast Food & Delis

• Amorè Fine Italian Ristorante — 730 Highlander Point Dr, Floyds Knobs
• Food King Chinese Restaurant — 1472 E 86th St, Indianapolis
• Full Circle Grill & BBQ — 110 W Berry St, Fort Wayne
• George’s Gyros Spot #2 — 1201 W 37th Ave, Hobart
• Grateful Grubs BBQ — 5654 IN-10, DeMotte
• Guadalupe’s Mexican Grill — 2031 South Bend Ave, South Bend
• Lonestar Bar B Que — 905 N Park Dr, Evansville
• Major Munch — 101 NW 1st St, Evansville
• Oscar’s Pizza — 515 N Buckeye St, Kokomo
• Panini Panini — 1720 Franklin St, Michigan City
• Rusted Silo Southern BBQ — 411 N State St, Lizton
• Social Que BBQ and Catering — 1701 Franklin St, Michigan City
• The Lincoln Kitchen — 704 Silhavy Rd, Valparaiso
• The Owlery Restaurant — 118 W 6th St, Bloomington
• Tlaolli — 2830 E Washington St, Indianapolis
• Tsunami Sushi & Korean Wings — 700 Sagamore Pkwy N, Lafayette
• Turkuaz Cafe — 301 E 3rd St, Bloomington
• Union Jack Pub — 921 Broad Ripple Ave, Indianapolis
• Uptown Cafe — 102 E Kirkwood Ave, Bloomington
• Griller’s Restaurant — 1240 119th St, Whiting
• Oh Mamma’s On The Avenue Deli — 1202 Mishawaka Ave, South Bend
• OyVey! Bakery & Deli — 901 Lafayette Ave, Terre Haute
• Cracklin Shack — 5058 S 800 W, Swayzee
• Hoosier Spice & BBQ Company — 11622 NE Executive Dr, Edinburgh
• Las Cubanitas — 53 Valparaiso St, Valparaiso
• Los Dos Amigos by Awiwi — 202 Carrie Ln, Columbus
• Steak ‘n Shake — 30+ locations statewide (Avon, Indianapolis, Fort Wayne, Lafayette, Bloomington, Elkhart, South Bend, Terre Haute, Greenwood, Valparaiso, Columbus, Clarksville, Seymour, Merrillville, Schererville, Muncie, Bedford, Lawrenceburg, Franklin, etc.)
• Steve’s Una Pizza — 1005 S Saint James Blvd, Evansville
• Union Jack Pub Food Truck — 924 Broad Ripple Ave, Indianapolis

Retail, Apparel, Hobbies & Specialty Shops

• Above ALL Bowling Supply — Valparaiso & Hobart
• Blossom Floral Design — 615 N Michigan St, South Bend
• Geeked Out Games — 10830 Bennett Pkwy, Zionsville / Fishers
• Its Not Corn (Apparel) — 120 N Miller Ave, Marion
• Jayla’s Gifts, Plants, Flowers — 207 E Market St, Nappanee
• Jewelry Gallery — 17425 Carey Rd, Westfield
• Lake Effect Florals — 278 E 1500 N, Chesterton
• Mr. Kay’s Fashionable Shoes — 2218 Southlake Mall, Merrillville
• Nature’s Mercantile — 122 N Main St, Auburn
• Nick Nackery — 201 E Virginia St, Evansville
• Old-School Outpost (Games) — 3825 S East St, Indianapolis
• Prideland Comics & Collectibles — 5668 Crawfordsville Rd, Speedway
• Rock Bottom Resale — 11186 County Rd 34, Goshen
• Rock Daddy (Esoteric) — 418 E McGalliard Rd, Muncie
• Sewer Lair Toys — 3197 S 3rd Pl, Terre Haute
• Smoke Xpress (Tobacco) — Michigan City & Elkhart
• Svpplements — 316 W Cleveland Rd, Granger
• The Co Op Shop (Video Games) — 3540 State Rd 38 E, Lafayette
• Unique Creations by Joe — 1148 S 17th St, Kokomo
• Versed Skateboard Shop — 1006 Virginia Ave, Indianapolis
• War Room Tabletop Gaming — 10830 Bennett Pkwy, Zionsville
• 710 Lounge (Cannabis) — 3673 W 86th St, Indianapolis
• A Pooch Palace (Pet Grooming) — 3839 S Lafountain St, Kokomo
• First & Wilkerson Designs / Farmkidz Apparel — Fort Wayne & Lebanon

Second-Hand & Thrift Stores

• DTF Sales — 51 N Main St, Cloverdale
• Millie’s Thrift Store — Lafayette (2 locations) & West Lafayette
• MoJo’s Thrift-N-Collectibles Store — 527 Cass St, Wabash
• Mood — 248 Spring St, Jeffersonville

Tattoo & Piercing Studios

• A1 Art Tattoos — 4606 E Michigan St, Indianapolis
• Altered Image — 10030 E US Hwy 36, Avon
• Big Time Tattoos and Piercings — 5353 Madison Ave, Indianapolis
• Crown Point Tattoo — 114 W Hack Ct, Crown Point
• Evolution Tattoo — 2901 Mitchell Rd, Bedford
• La Familia Tattoo — 529 W Chicago Ave, East Chicago
• Resurrection Studios Tattoos & Piercing — 2200 Elmwood Ave, Lafayette
• Tracy Scott at Bankai Tattoo Collective — 421 7th St, Columbus

This post Now Accepting Bitcoin: Buy Coffee and Bacon Across 200 Indiana Bitcoin Merchants first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Vagabond.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bringin Opens Euro Business Accounts for Bitcoin Companies Across 30 European Countries

Bringin today opened an invite-only beta of euro business accounts that let companies hold, accept, and pay in Bitcoin and stablecoins, and run SEPA payments from a vIBAN in the company’s own name. The launch builds on Bringin’s consumer platform, which has processed more than €15 million according to a press release shared with Bitcoin Magazine.

More European businesses want what Bitcoin and stablecoins offer: instant settlement, global reach and lower costs. Buying Bitcoin in Europe is easy enough; the challenge is running a company on Bitcoin and stablecoin rails. Many Europeans face bank account restrictions and blocked transfers when they operate with Bitcoin or other virtual assets. Every conversion to euros adds friction, records sit across disconnected tools, and the Travel Rule requirements turn simple payments into paperwork. As a result, Bitcoin’s potential as money gets tangled up in bureaucracy.

Bringin for Business seeks to bridge Bitcoin and banking. According to the press release, companies can add Bitcoin to their treasury, accept Bitcoin, Lightning, or stablecoin payments, and pay suppliers and payroll in Bitcoin. Euro accounts and the company’s Bitcoin wallet sit in one place, with the governance and security a business needs. A dedicated virtual IBAN, a euro account number in the company’s own name, connects it to SEPA payments, with additional global payment rails planned.

Keys are generated and stored in a hardware security module rather than omnibus exchange wallets. Only designated company owners can move funds, make payments, and add approval policies, according to the press release.

Separately, Bringin plans APIs and MCP servers so companies can work with AI agents. With support for Lightning and stablecoins, companies can accept payments from artificial intelligence bots, building on Bringin’s 2025 demonstration of agent payments over the Lightning Network.

“Bitcoin is the first money native to the internet, and Lightning makes it fast enough for everyday commerce. I’ve seen that potential since I started building on it in 2018,” said Prashanth Chandrashekar, founder and CEO of Bringin. “We proved it with consumers first. Now companies can use Bringin to get paid, hold value and move money globally, with accounts designed around self-custody and a seamless payment experience.”

Built on the MiCA-authorized infrastructure of Lightspark Payments Europe AS, Bringin for Business is currently in pilot with 15 businesses, including Lightning payment tools, mining-rig sellers, and Bitcoin conferences, handling cross-border payments and instant Bitcoin-to-euro conversions. It is available to companies across 30 European countries.

This post Bringin Opens Euro Business Accounts for Bitcoin Companies Across 30 European Countries first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Juan Galt.

Bitcoin Magazine

Coinbase’s Ryan VanGrack: CFTC Approval “Opens Many Doors” for Bitcoin

The SEC’s proposed custody rules could make it easier for investment advisors to help clients own Bitcoin directly. Coinbase’s Ryan VanGrack explains why institutional capital tends to flow where there are clearer rules, and why he sees direct ownership and ETFs as “both and, not either or.” He also shares why traditional finance is accelerating its push into Bitcoin and digital assets.

Chapters:
00:00 Coinbase Wins CFTC Approval for Its Own Clearinghouse
01:29 Can SEC Guidance Last Without the Clarity Act?
02:40 SEC Custody Proposal: Helping Advisors Hold Bitcoin Directly
04:14 Tokenization: The Biggest Upgrade Since Electronic Trading
05:41 How Tokenization Cuts Out Wall Street’s Middlemen
07:34 What Washington Still Needs to Fix for Bitcoin Holders
08:56 Institutional Adoption Accelerates After the Clarity Act Vote
11:07 How Coinbase Is Bringing Digital Asset Infrastructure to Community Banks
12:01 Sponsor: Square
12:34 Is Crypto Really a Tool for Illicit Finance?

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.

This post Coinbase’s Ryan VanGrack: CFTC Approval “Opens Many Doors” for Bitcoin first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Patrick Green.

Bitcoin Magazine

Coinbase Business Chief: Big Banks Increasing BTC Exposure | Shan Aggarwal

New SEC rules could open the door for financial advisors to hold Bitcoin for their clients, and Coinbase is already at the center of that custody story. Shan Aggarwal, Coinbase’s first-ever Chief Business Officer, explains how Coinbase custodies most of the Bitcoin ETFs and supports the advisor community. He sees the advisor rule as expanding the pie for Bitcoin access, with Coinbase providing the infrastructure behind it.

Chapters:
00:00 How the SEC’s New Advisor Rules Could Bring Bitcoin to Wealth Managers
01:13 What BlackRock and JPMorgan Want From Bitcoin Infrastructure
02:16 What Will Drive the Next Wave of Bitcoin Adoption
03:28 Can the Coinbase One Card Turn Spenders Into Bitcoin Owners?
04:22 Coinbase’s Trillion-Dollar Stablecoin Opportunity
05:14 Coinbase and Citi Bring Stablecoin Payments to Merchants
05:56 Sponsor: SALT Lending
06:26 How Coinbase Customers Are Using Bitcoin Lightning
07:37 Will AI Agents Pay in Bitcoin or Stablecoins?
08:30 Coinbase Expands Into Collectibles and Everyday Bitcoin Rewards

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.

This post Coinbase Business Chief: Big Banks Increasing BTC Exposure | Shan Aggarwal first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Patrick Green.

Bitcoin Magazine

TD Cowen’s Lance Vitanza: BTC to $132k in 2027 & MSTR Price Outlook

Institutions are no longer debating whether to own Bitcoin. Now the question is how. TD Cowen Managing Director Lance Vitanza explains why Bitcoin is evolving from a standalone asset into a capital markets ecosystem of common stock, preferreds, bonds and income products. He shares what he heard at the Bitcoin Treasuries conference in New York and why institutional investors increasingly evaluate Bitcoin within a portfolio.

Chapters:
00:00 Bitcoin Is Evolving From an Asset Into a Capital Markets Ecosystem
01:36 Bitcoin Preferreds, Bonds and Dividend-Paying Instruments
03:25 How Analysts Are Evaluating Digital Credit
05:23 Which Bitcoin Treasury Companies Survive a Downturn
07:28 Strive, Metaplanet and Nakamoto: Why Operating Businesses Matter
10:24 Could MSCI Index Removal Hurt Bitcoin Treasury Companies?
12:27 Blockchain Surveillance, Front-Running and Trust in Bitcoin Prices
14:20 Sponsor: Cash App
15:01 TD Cowen’s Bitcoin Price Target for 2027
16:38 Why Well-Run Bitcoin Treasury Companies Could Outperform Bitcoin

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.

This post TD Cowen’s Lance Vitanza: BTC to $132k in 2027 & MSTR Price Outlook first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Patrick Green.

Ethereum’s institutional demand is weakening around the same time derivatives positioning shows traders are selling aggressively without yet breaking the broader price structure.

US spot ETH exchange-traded funds recorded $50.76 million of net outflows on Oct. 5, extending their losing streak to five consecutive sessions, according to SoSoValue data. The products have shed $205.88 million since Sept. 29, reducing cumulative net inflows to about $13.75 billion.

The streak followed a $17.1 million inflow on Sept. 28 and has coincided with ETH trading near $2,711, leaving one of the market’s major sources of incremental demand in retreat.

Yet the pressure has not spread uniformly across Ethereum’s investor base.

Blockchain analytics firm Santiment said Ethereum’s Age Consumed metric surged to 580 million token-days on Sept. 30, roughly nine times its September weekday average and the highest reading since June 2. The indicator tracks previously dormant coins moving onchain, weighted by how long they had remained untouched.

Large spikes can signal that long-term holders are repositioning assets and, in some cases, preparing to sell. Aggregate exchange balances, however, barely changed across Sept. 30 and Oct. 1.

Ethereum held on exchanges rose by only about 18,000 ETH on Sept. 30 before falling roughly 21,000 ETH the next day, against approximately 5.9 million ETH held on trading venues. When Age Consumed last registered a larger spike on June 2, exchange balances increased by more than 140,000 ETH.

That contrast leaves open the possibility that the September activity reflected custody transfers, staking movements or wallet reorganizations rather than broad distribution by older holders.

ETH derivatives traders lean bearish without forcing a breakdown

The more immediate pressure is showing up in the derivatives markets, though signals there are also unusually mixed.

CryptoQuant data shows Ethereum’s Estimated Leverage Ratio has fallen to 0.66, its lowest level in seven months, indicating that open derivatives exposure has declined relative to ETH reserves held on exchanges. The ratio stood near 0.68 on Binance and 0.64 on OKX after trending lower in recent weeks.

CryptoQuant contributor Arab Chain interprets the decline as weaker appetite for heavily leveraged positions as ETH trades around $2,700, potentially easing liquidation pressure.

On Binance, ETH open interest remains near $3.3 billion, up from about $2.3 billion on Aug. 6, a roughly 43% increase, CryptoQuant data shows. At the same time, Cumulative Net Taker Volume, or CVD, has swung sharply in the opposite direction.

Binance ETH CVD fell from $1.94 billion on Aug. 21 to -$1.36 billion on Oct. 5, a $3.30 billion reversal and its weakest reading since Aug. 6. The metric captures the balance between aggressive market buying and selling, with the negative reading showing sellers increasingly crossing the spread to execute trades.

Ethereum, however, remains roughly 44% above its Aug. 6 level, meaning the surge in aggressive selling has yet to unwind the broader price advance.

That divergence is reinforced by the relationship between CVD and open interest. CVD has continued to make lower lows while open interest lows have generally moved higher, a pattern consistent with substantial outstanding derivatives exposure as aggressive sellers take a larger role in order flow.

The combination can become constructive if ETH continues absorbing that supply. Heavy taker selling alongside resilient prices can indicate that buyers are absorbing aggressive sell orders.

A short squeeze remains a conditional scenario, with funding rates providing additional evidence about positioning. If funding turns persistently negative while ETH holds its range, short sellers would increasingly pay long positions to maintain exposure, raising the potential for covering to become an additional source of demand.

For now, three forces are pulling the market in different directions. ETF investors are withdrawing capital, dormant coins are moving while aggregate exchange balances remain little changed, and derivatives traders are selling more aggressively while maintaining substantial exposure.

The next break in that balance could come from either side.

Continued ETF withdrawals, paired with a meaningful rise in exchange balances, would broaden selling pressure beyond financial products. But if exchange reserves stay contained and ETH continues absorbing negative derivatives flow, traders running short exposure could become increasingly vulnerable to any recovery in institutional demand or a shift in funding conditions.

The post Ethereum bears keep selling but ETH price stays near $2,700 as US spot ETFs record $206M in outflows appeared first on CryptoSlate.

At ETHU's Oct. 6 disclosed futures valuation, a 3x Ethereum ETF with $362.1 million in assets would target about $1.09 billion of exposure. If held entirely in standard CME Ether futures, that would equal 8,000 contracts, CME's single-month and all-month accountability level.

The SEC approved Cboe BZX's rule change to list Volatility Shares' proposed ETHK on Oct. 2; ETHK's first trading date is pending. The sponsor's live fund shows that Volatility Shares' existing ETHU held 19,204 October CME Ether futures contracts worth $2.61 billion as of Oct. 6, against $1.31 billion of net assets as of Oct. 5.

Those holdings imply $135,800 of notional per contract, which puts 8,000 contracts at $1.0864 billion. A fund targeting three times daily exposure needs one-third of that in assets, or about $362.1 million. ETHU's position already stands at 2.40 times the 8,000-contract level.

What the 8,000 level means for Ethereum futures

CME cut its single-month and all-month Ethereum futures accountability level to an aggregated 8,000 standard contracts effective March 2.

An accountability level is a threshold, and participants can hold positions above it, as ETHU does. CME Market Regulation can request information about the position under Rule 560, including below the 8,000-contract level.

CME's rules also let it order a participant to stop adding to a position or reduce it when needed to maintain an orderly market.

If ETHK holds its full target exposure in standard CME Ether futures, its contract equivalent equals its assets times three divided by $135,800: about 2,209 contracts at $100 million of assets, 11,046 at $500 million, and 22,091 at $1 billion. Those counts use ETHU's Oct. 6 valuation and move with futures prices and portfolio construction.

Ethereum's aggregation hinge

CME aggregates positions by ownership or trading control, including accounts where a person controls trading or holds a 10% or greater ownership interest.

Volatility Shares manages both funds, so if CME treats them as one controlled position, ETHK would add to a footprint already above 8,000. The combined position would reach about 21,400 contracts at $100 million of ETHK assets, 27,200 at $362.1 million, and 41,300 at $1 billion.

An exemption from aggregation could give ETHK a separate count. The public record leaves that answer open, and CME's confirmation would clarify the combined footprint.

The CFTC's Sept. 29 futures-only report counted 27,392 open Ethereum cash-settled futures contracts, so ETHU's Oct. 6 holdings of 19,204 equal about 70% of that earlier figure, though the two dates differ.

Daily rebalancing and the fallback routes

A 3x fund resets its exposure every day by trading roughly six times its starting assets times the benchmark's daily move in a simplified calculation before investor flows and fees. At $362.1 million of assets, a 5% benchmark move implies about $109 million of rebalancing flow, buying after a rally and selling after a decline.

ETHK's SEC filing describes a fund that seeks three times the daily performance of an Ethereum futures benchmark through derivatives.

It allows later-dated futures, ETH-linked ETPs and ETFs, exchange-traded options, and cash when benchmark futures become unavailable because of accountability levels, exchange position limits, margin requirements, or FCM limits and risk controls.

For holders, that route hinges on tracking quality and execution cost, while Ethereum derivative traders focus on the size and timing of futures flows.

Bitcoin reaches its threshold at twice the assets

Volatility Shares' BITX held 6,368 CME Bitcoin futures contracts across October and November worth about $2.74 billion as of Oct. 6, and CME's Bitcoin accountability level sits at 5,000 contracts. Using BITX's blended disclosed valuation, a 3x Bitcoin fund reaches that level at about $718 million of assets, roughly double ETHK's $362.1 million.

If ETHK's assets stay near $100 million, it adds roughly 2,209 contract equivalents under the same all-futures assumption. That is material beside ETHU's position; how readily futures absorb it depends on liquidity and tracking.

If assets climb to between about $362.1 million and $1 billion, ETHK's own position reaches or exceeds the 8,000-contract equivalent, and the combined footprint could move far past it if CME aggregates the funds.

That raises the odds the fund leans on later-dated futures, linked ETPs or options, with wider execution costs or larger tracking error for holders.

ETHK's holdings disclosures once it trades will show whether front-month Ethereum futures can carry its 3x exposure as assets build, or whether the fallback instruments take over.

The post Ethereum’s proposed 3x ETF could reach CME’s futures threshold with just $362 million appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Aave is approaching a $67 million collateral rollover as one of its fastest-growing fixed-yield trades reaches maturity.

About 67.4 million PT-AUSD-8OCT2026 tokens were supplied as collateral on Aave V3’s Monad market as of Oct. 2, according to risk adviser LlamaRisk. The Pendle principal tokens mature Oct. 8, when each becomes redeemable for one AUSD and its fixed-yield appreciation ends.

A replacement is already being prepared. Pendle deployed a Dec. 17 AUSD principal-token market last month, and TokenLogic has proposed listing it on Aave so borrowers can move into the next maturity without giving up the collateral utility that helped the October market expand.

The timing coincides with accelerating demand for AUSD credit on Monad. On Oct. 3, TokenLogic said active AUSD loans on Aave jumped 113% to $8.7 million from $4.1 million in 15 days, while user deposits more than doubled to $11.2 million.

That creates an emerging cycle between Pendle’s fixed-yield markets and Aave’s lending infrastructure. Investors can lock in a return through PT-AUSD, use the position as collateral to borrow stablecoins, and then move into a later-dated PT when the original token matures.

“Fixed yield becomes collateral. Collateral creates credit. Then the next maturity keeps the cycle moving,” DeFi researcher Andree said, while describing the relationship between the protocols.

The Oct. 8 expiry will provide the first large-scale test of whether that cycle can continue across maturities.

A $20 million market grew past $67 million

The October PT began with considerably less capacity than it ultimately attracted.

Aave initially launched the collateral market with a 20 million-token supply cap. Users filled it by late August, prompting LlamaRisk to recommend an increase to 40 million. That limit was also fully utilized within days, leading the risk adviser to recommend another increase to 80 million.

By Oct. 2, 67.4 million PT was supplied.

The rapid cap expansions show why the proposed December market size should not be treated as a permanent ceiling. TokenLogic proposed another 20 million initial cap for PT-AUSD-17DEC2026, while LlamaRisk recommended starting at 30 million.

That is less than half the amount sitting in the expiring market, but the October precedent shows Aave can expand capacity if demand, liquidity, and borrower health justify it.

LlamaRisk explicitly described the December PT as the rollover destination for the October position and said as much as 67.4 million of Aave collateral could potentially migrate into it.

The October market also shows that much of the supplied PT has been used actively rather than left idle. In an Aug. 31 assessment, LlamaRisk found that the 18 largest suppliers all carried debt, primarily in USDC, with additional borrowing in GHO, USDe and USDT0.

Their median health factor was 1.02 at the time. The tight margin reflected a structure in which both the collateral and debt are dollar-denominated, allowing borrowers to run high loan-to-value positions with less directional price risk than crypto-backed leverage.

Maturity does not itself trigger liquidation. Borrowers can redeem PT for AUSD after expiry, repay loans, or post other collateral. But a user with debt against the October PT cannot necessarily withdraw the collateral until the position remains adequately covered.

Rolling directly into December PT offers another route to keeping the borrowing position intact.

The next market still has to scale

The more immediate constraint may come from the maturity of the replacement market itself.

As of Oct. 2, the December Pendle pool had just $1.61 million of liquidity, 904,717 PT outstanding and $44,000 of trading volume since deployment, according to LlamaRisk.

Those figures are small compared with the tens of millions of dollars held in the October position.

Pendle users can mint additional PT by splitting yield-bearing AUSD positions into principal and yield tokens, meaning existing pool liquidity does not impose a hard limit on how much collateral can eventually be created. Large-scale migration can still affect execution prices and the fixed return available to buyers.

The economics are already tighter than when the October market began.

LlamaRisk put the December PT’s implied yield at 5.64% on Oct. 2. A temporary one-percentage-point campaign incentive lifted the effective rate to 6.64%.

That exceeded borrowing rates of 4.28% for mUSD, 4.64% for GHO, 5.10% for USDT0 and 6.09% for USDC at the snapshot, leaving room for positive carry before transaction costs and price impact. It remained below the 6.82% borrowing rate on USDe.

Those spreads can change quickly. Aave borrowing rates vary with utilization, while PT yields move as traders buy or sell the instrument. The incentive boosting December returns is also temporary.

The surge in AUSD borrowing adds another dimension to the rollout. The $8.7 million of active AUSD loans is separate from the stablecoin debt raised specifically against PT-AUSD, but both point to growing demand for AUSD-linked credit on Monad.

Keeping the principal token usable across successive maturities could help keep fixed-yield capital in Aave after each Pendle market expires.

The next few days will show how much of the October collateral actually attempts to make that transition.

If December PT begins filling its initial cap as rapidly as the October version did, Aave’s risk stewards may again face pressure to raise the limit. Their willingness to do so will depend on Pendle liquidity, borrower health, and whether the new market develops enough depth to support tens of millions of dollars of collateral.

For borrowers, the decision will be more immediate: repay at maturity, replace the collateral or secure space in the December market while the yield spread remains attractive.

The post Aave and Pendle may have found a way to keep yield capital from ever leaving DeFi appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Cardano’s proposed programmable-token standard could let a freeze on one asset temporarily block unrelated tokens held in the same transaction output.

CIP-113, merged into Cardano’s main improvement-proposal repository on Sept. 29, is designed to add issuer-controlled transfer rules to native assets without abandoning the network’s extended unspent transaction output, or eUTXO, model.

The Cardano Foundation has positioned programmable tokens as infrastructure for regulated financial assets, including stablecoins, securities and real-world assets that may require transfer restrictions, freezes and other compliance controls.

The framework could therefore broaden Cardano’s appeal to institutional issuers while introducing new dependencies for wallets and DeFi applications when several assets share the same output.

However, the milestone stops short of full activation. CIP-113’s official page still lists the proposal as “Proposed,” with its path to Active requiring issuance on Preview and mainnet, end-to-end testing and support from a widely adopted wallet.

Still, Matteo Coppola, chief executive officer of Fluid Tokens and a contributor to CIP-113, hailed the milestone, saying the merge followed years of development and puts the framework in Cardano projects' hands.

“This means the official standard for programmable tokens on Cardano, including securities, is out,” Coppola said, adding that contributors had worked to make it production-ready.

Compliance rules can spill across a shared output

That institutional flexibility comes with a structural complication: on Cardano, the rules governing one programmable token can affect other assets bundled alongside it.

Under the eUTXO model, a transaction output can contain several tokens as well as ADA. Spending that output consumes it as a unit, so a restriction attached to one programmable asset can determine whether the entire transaction goes through.

If an output contains restricted token A, unrelated token B, and ADA, for example, a freeze or denylist rule on A can prevent the holder from spending that output to move B. Neither B nor the ADA has been independently frozen, but both become temporarily inaccessible because they share the same output with A.

CIP-113 provides a way to break that dependency through a restructuring mechanism known as “unfracking.”

The process allows one token policy to be separated from the rest of an output without changing ownership. If the transaction is permitted, A can be moved into its own output while B remains in another output controlled by the same holder. A stays restricted, while B is no longer subject to A’s transfer rule on a subsequent spend.

However, the holder does not automatically control the ability to separate the assets.

An unfracking transaction requires the holder’s authorization and must also satisfy the affected token’s registered separation rules. Those rules can require an additional signature, impose conditions through a script, or block the restructuring route entirely.

That means a holder cannot always free unrelated assets simply by signing a transaction. If A’s policy does not allow separation, B and the ADA sharing that output can remain inaccessible until the relevant conditions change.

The proposal draws a line between that kind of blockage and seizure. A token issuer’s control over A does not give it ownership of B or other assets in the same output, and the reference implementation is designed to preserve balances belonging to unrelated token policies during authorized third-party actions.

For wallets and DeFi applications, the practical consequence is that asset ownership alone may no longer determine immediate spendability. How tokens are grouped inside an output, and what separation permissions each policy allows, can become part of the risk attached to holding or accepting them.

Wallets and DeFi protocols inherit the design risk

Avoiding that dependency for wallets and DeFi protocols may require changing how assets are packaged before any restriction is triggered.

The CIP-113 reference implementation describes single-policy outputs as the preferred construction, although the validator does not require developers to use them. Keeping programmable assets separate would reduce the risk that one issuer’s compliance action prevents an unrelated token from moving.

ADA remains exposed to the same constraint. Cardano outputs containing tokens also carry ADA, meaning some of the network’s native asset can become temporarily inaccessible when it shares an output with a restricted programmable token.

That adds complexity for wallets. A displayed balance may show what a user owns without revealing what can immediately be spent. Applications supporting CIP-113 may need to track which policies share an output, the permissions currently attached to each asset, and whether a blocked token can be separated.

For lending protocols, the issue becomes a collateral-management risk.

A DeFi platform accepting a programmable token would need to assess whether its issuer can freeze transfers, whether the protocol can authorize separation, and whether those controls could interfere with withdrawals or liquidations. A restriction arriving during a market downturn could be particularly consequential if a lender cannot move collateral when it needs to close an undersecured position.

Those questions are becoming more relevant as Cardano tries to expand its stablecoin and tokenized-asset market. USDCx, backed one-for-one by USDC through Circle’s xReserve infrastructure, has already added another source of dollar liquidity to the network.

CIP-113 could widen that market by giving prospective issuers the compliance controls required for regulated stablecoins, securities, and other tokenized assets while retaining Cardano’s native-asset architecture.

The cost is that wallets and DeFi protocols may have to treat an asset’s permission structure as another layer of financial risk.

Wallet developers could segregate programmable policies by default, while lending protocols may impose lower collateral values, tighter parameters, or reject tokens whose freeze and separation rules create uncertainty around liquidation.

That puts the focus on the first production integrations. As projects adopt CIP-113, their decisions on output construction and issuer permissions will help determine whether regulated assets can plug into Cardano’s DeFi markets cleanly or require protocols to price the risk that compliance controls could restrict access to collateral when it is needed most.

The post Cardano just added the kind of token controls Wall Street wants and DeFi may hate appeared first on CryptoSlate.

China’s underground crypto economy is increasingly shifting toward peer-to-peer stablecoin payments despite Beijing’s longstanding restrictions on digital assets.

Chainalysis estimates China generated at least $176 billion of crypto activity during the 12 months through June 2026, with 59.1% occurring through domestic peer-to-peer transfers rather than exchanges and other centralized platforms.

That share was 3.5 times higher than in the previous period, marking an unusual divergence from most major crypto markets, where exchanges remain the primary entry and exit point for users.

Stablecoins dominate local activity in China

The shift has been particularly pronounced in stablecoins. Chainalysis said domestic stablecoin payment activity began accelerating around March 2025 and continued expanding for 13 consecutive month-over-month periods, suggesting a gradual migration toward wallet-to-wallet settlement inside the country.

The amount of new activity added each month rose from roughly $240 million in March 2025 to almost $5 billion about a year later. Growth was also concentrated across transaction sizes consistent with individuals and smaller businesses rather than solely large institutional transfers.

Stablecoin volumes below $100 jumped 996% around the start of that shift, while transfers between $100 and $1,000 increased 1,057%. Activity between $1,000 and $10,000 climbed 1,321%, Chainalysis said.

The blockchain analytics firm said the timing raises the possibility that tighter integration of China’s social-credit system with financial and internet infrastructure is encouraging some users to transact outside traditional payment channels.

China expanded aspects of the system into finance and online activity in March 2025. Chainalysis said people whose access to conventional financial services has been restricted could potentially turn to crypto, while others may use stablecoins to settle transactions outside monitored banking or e-commerce platforms.

The firm described that explanation as a working hypothesis rather than evidence of causation. Blockchain data can show when and how assets move but cannot establish why an individual chose one payment method over another.

Stablecoins begin to resemble circulating money

The way stablecoins move through China-attributed wallets also suggests users may be treating them as transactional liquidity.

Chainalysis calculated annual turnover of self-custodied stablecoin holdings in China at 33.2 times, more than triple the global benchmark of 9.3 times and far above every major regional peer included in its analysis.

Japan recorded turnover of 9.9 times, while Hong Kong stood at 6.1, South Korea at 5.1 and Taiwan at 3.5.

China-attributed wallets held an average of about $3.1 billion of stablecoins during the period but transferred $104.1 billion across 18.1 million transactions. The figures indicate that the same pool of tokens was repeatedly returned to circulation rather than remaining dormant in wallets.

High turnover is consistent with stablecoins functioning as working capital or settlement assets, Chainalysis said, a pattern that could emerge as tokens develop into a domestic payment rail.

This P2P structure distinguishes China from neighboring markets, as most crypto economies depend heavily on regulated exchanges and other centralized services, while China’s restrictions have pushed more activity toward direct wallet transfers.

That creates a potential challenge for Beijing as stablecoins become easier to move without relying on domestic financial intermediaries. Restrictions on exchanges can limit formal market access, but self-custodied dollar tokens can still circulate through decentralized networks and private transfers.

For stablecoin issuers and crypto service providers, China represents a large potential source of demand that remains difficult to serve directly because of the country’s regulatory restrictions. Growth may therefore continue through offshore platforms, OTC networks and self-custody rather than conventional consumer-facing crypto businesses.

The next question is whether the acceleration persists as Chinese authorities expand oversight of digital payments and financial activity.

If smaller stablecoin transfers continue increasing alongside high wallet turnover, regulators may face a growing pool of dollar-linked value circulating beyond the exchange infrastructure that earlier crypto restrictions were designed to constrain.

The post China’s crypto ban Is failing to stop a $176 billion P2P economy appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Setting up MetaMask takes less than ten minutes, and in those ten minutes you make the two decisions that determine what happens to your balance: where you get the software from, and what happens to the twelve words the setup wizard shows you once. Almost everything else you can change later. Those two points you cannot.

This text walks you through the setup and explains the terms you meet in the wizard without being told what they mean there: recovery phrase, password, network, chain ID, approval. By the end you will know which steps are one-off, which ones you repeat regularly, and at which points the tax office and the regulator come into play in Germany.

What MetaMask is and what the software does not keep for you

MetaMask is a self-custody wallet, also called a non-custodial wallet. That means the software generates a key pair on your device and encrypts it there. Nobody at the maker holds a copy, nobody can reset access, and there is no hotline that unlocks your account. The difference from an exchange is exactly this: at an exchange you have an account, here you have a key.

Everything else follows from that. A wallet in this sense is not a container holding coins. The coins sit on the blockchain, and the wallet is the tool with which you prove they are yours. If you delete the software, the coins stay where they are. If you lose the key, the coins also stay where they are, except that nobody can reach them any more, you included.

Extension or app

MetaMask comes as a browser extension for the desktop and as an app for Android and iOS. Both fall back on the same recovery phrase when you import it, and then show the same addresses. One version is enough to start with. Anyone using both has not thereby created a backup copy, but two points of access to the same key.

Installing MetaMask: only two sources are genuine

The most dangerous minute of the whole setup comes before your first click in the wizard. Fake wallet extensions turn up regularly in the browsers' own official extension directories, often under names like "Ethereum Wallet" and with an icon resembling the real one. Fakes like these are not waiting to steal something from you later. The recovery phrase is skimmed at exactly the moment the wizard generates it, or the moment you import an existing one, and from there it travels outward unnoticed.

One habit guards against this: you install the extension only through the download button on the maker's site metamask.io, never through a search result, never through a link in a message, a video or a forum post. On a phone you download the app from the official store and check beforehand who publishes it and how many installations it carries. An extension with a few hundred users is a warning sign for a wallet of this size.

That things can go wrong at the maker itself was shown in early October by a confirmed security incident in parts of the MetaMask infrastructure, in which affected Ethereum validators were pulled from the network. What exactly happened there and who it concerned is in our report on the MetaMask security incident. For the setup that changes nothing about the rule, it only sharpens it: the fewer places that know your key, the fewer places that can lose it.

Twelve words from a random generator: the Secret Recovery Phrase

On first launch MetaMask generates a sequence of twelve words and calls it the Secret Recovery Phrase, formerly also seed phrase. These twelve words are not a memory aid and not a password. The private key is calculated from them. Whoever has them has the wallet, on any device, in any country, without you noticing a thing. The maker puts this just as plainly in its guide to creating a new wallet: nobody at MetaMask can restore the phrase once it is gone.

The phrase therefore belongs offline. A sheet of paper is better than a file, a metal plate is better than paper because it survives water and fire. What you never do: photograph it, type it into a notes app, put it in a password manager that lives in the cloud, or read it out to someone posing as support on the phone. There is no case in which a genuine employee needs those words.

Two slips of paper in two places

One copy in a single place is a total loss waiting for a burst pipe. Two copies in two physically separate places, neither of them the home of an acquaintance with access, are the usual compromise. Anyone holding larger amounts does not split the phrase into halves, because that reduces security more than it insures against loss.

Token approvals: what an unlimited spending cap means for your balance

The point at which most losses arise only comes after the setup, and it appears on no welcome screen. As soon as you use a decentralised application, it asks for an approval, in English also token approval or spending cap. With it you permit a contract to move a certain amount of a certain token out of your address. That is not a flaw in the system but the precondition for swapping, depositing or staking to work at all.

The decisive part is the amount. Many applications propose an unlimited approval, because it is convenient and saves fees on every further use. The permission then stays in place until you revoke it, months later too, even when you have long forgotten the application. If the contract is taken over later, or was no good from the start, that old permission is enough to empty your balance without anything having to be confirmed again.

In the setup window you can overwrite the proposed amount and set it to what you are actually moving right now. You can see approvals you have granted later in MetaMask's portfolio view and withdraw them there; the maker describes the route in its guide to revoking approvals. This is supported for the Ethereum mainnet, Polygon, the BNB Chain, Optimism and Base, among others. A revocation is itself a transaction and costs a network fee. What a signature looks like when it is in truth a power of attorney is something we took apart using the example of wallet drainers and their signatures.

The password unlocks this device only

Straight after the phrase the wizard asks for a password. Beginners regularly confuse two things here. The password decrypts the key store on exactly this browser or this phone. So it protects against someone who sits at your computer briefly sending money. On a new device it is no use to you at all, because there MetaMask does not ask for the password but for the twelve words.

In practice that means the password may be long and sit comfortably in a password manager; the recovery phrase never may. If you forget the password, you set the wallet up again with the phrase and assign a new one. If you forget the phrase, the password does not help you.

Adding networks: Ethereum, Solana and the chain ID as forgery protection

After the setup your account initially stands on the mainnet of Ethereum. Alongside that, MetaMask now brings multichain accounts: one account covers not only the EVM networks but also chains such as Solana, whose addresses are derived from the same recovery phrase under the BIP-44 derivation standard. You do not need an additional phrase for that.

Further networks you enter by hand. MetaMask asks for five details: name, RPC address, chain ID, symbol of the network currency and the address of a block explorer. The chain ID is the actual protection: an identifying number assigned uniquely to each chain, and two networks with the same one cannot exist. A fraudulent site offering you an "official" network to set up fails at this number as soon as you compare it with the figure in the chain's documentation.

Where the RPC address comes from

The RPC address is the point of access through which your wallet speaks to the chain. Whoever provides it sees which addresses you query and which transactions you send, and could in case of doubt show you false balances. So take it from the official documentation of the network or from a provider where you hold an account yourself, and not from a collected directory that some unfamiliar site puts in front of you.

The fee on a swap inside the app is 0.875 percent

MetaMask itself costs nothing. The wallet earns its money on the built-in swap function: every swap inside the app carries a service fee of 0.875 percent, regardless of the network. It is disclosed in the quote that appears before you confirm.

On top of that come two further items that do not go to MetaMask. The network fee you pay to the chain you are travelling on; it fluctuates with load and has nothing to do with the swap amount. And the trading venues through which the swap actually runs take a fee of their own and, depending on the depth of the market, deliver a worse rate than the display initially suggests. With small amounts on an expensive network, the network fee can make up the largest part of the costs.

For recurring purchases the route via an exchange with a euro account is therefore usually cheaper, and the wallet becomes the destination rather than the place of purchase. How the various software wallets fare for that is set out in our software wallet comparison.

Hardware wallet instead of browser: the private key never leaves the device

From an amount whose loss would hurt, the next step is worth it. MetaMask can be connected to a hardware device, and then the division of roles changes: the wallet remains the interface through which you operate applications, but the private key sits on the device and never leaves it. Every transaction you have to confirm there with a button. Malware on the computer can then prepare a transaction but not sign it.

In the browser extension MetaMask supports Ledger, Trezor and Lattice among others, and in the mobile app Keystone, Ledger and NGRAVE ZERO among others. Two limitations are worth knowing before you buy a device: from Ledger only EVM accounts can be integrated, and the Trezor connection works exclusively with the BIP-44 derivation path. Both are in the maker's help pages, and both only become apparent once the device is already in the house.

The device does not replace the phrase

A hardware device brings a recovery phrase of its own, and that one then applies to the accounts on this device. Your old MetaMask phrase is untouched by it and continues to secure the accounts the browser created. Anyone moving over shifts the balances explicitly to the new addresses and treats both phrases as equally valuable afterwards.

Does a self-custody wallet need a BaFin licence?

No, and the reason is in the European crypto regulation MiCA itself. What gets regulated are service providers that hold or administer crypto assets for others. Software where only you hold the key and the maker merely supplies the program keeps nothing for anyone and therefore does not fall under the licensing requirement. That applies to MetaMask as much as to other pure self-custody wallets and to hardware devices without custody services of their own.

The line runs where a wallet offers additional services. Anyone holding crypto assets for customers, running an exchange against euros or executing orders is providing a crypto-asset service and needs a licence from BaFin in Germany for it, or a valid notification from another member state.

For you as a user that has an uncomfortable flip side. Because no supervisor stands behind it, there is also no deposit protection, no complaints body and no claim to compensation if something goes wrong. The freedom of self-custody and the complete absence of a safety net are the same coin.

Tax in Germany: moving to your own wallet is not a sale

Sending coins from an exchange to your own MetaMask address is not a disposal transaction. You swap nothing and realise no gain, you merely change the place of storage. The acquisition data carries on, and with it the period that matters.

Section 23 of the German Income Tax Act applies. If you sell within a year of buying, the gain is taxable; after a year has passed it is tax free. For short-term gains there is a threshold of €1,000 per calendar year, and the word threshold is to be taken literally: stay below it and you pay nothing; reach it and you pay tax on the entire gain, not just the part above the line.

Two things your own wallet makes harder than an exchange account. First, you have to carry the acquisition data yourself, because no provider sends you a statement at the end of the year. Second, network fees arise with every transfer, and their treatment is not self-explanatory. A swap inside MetaMask, by contrast, very much is a tax-relevant event, because in it you give up one crypto asset and receive another.

Phishing tricks around the recovery phrase

Attacks on wallet users almost never target the technology but the moment in which somebody is under pressure. Five patterns come up again and again:

• A supposed support message in a chat or forum, shortly after you asked a question there, requesting "verification" of your wallet.
• A form that looks like the genuine setup wizard and asks for the twelve words because your wallet supposedly has to be "synchronised".
• A phone call in which somebody poses as an employee and speaks of a "security incident" requiring immediate action.
• An airdrop page that demands a signature rather than an approval, with text nobody reads.
• A second browser extension that presents itself as an add-on or security check for your wallet.

The counter-rule is the same in all five cases and simple enough to remember: the twelve words get entered at exactly two points, when setting up for the first time and when restoring on a new device. Every other request is an attack, without exception and regardless of how convincing the page looks. Anyone who is unsure closes the window and starts again through a bookmark they set themselves.

MetaMask compared with Trust Wallet and Phantom

MetaMask is the most widely used software wallet in the Ethereum world, and that reach is its biggest practical advantage: almost every decentralised application supports it, guides exist for every special case, and hardware devices are compatible throughout. The price is that it is also the most frequent target for fakes and phishing pages.

Trust Wallet comes from the phone side and covers more chains out of the box, while the desktop extension feels less mature. Phantom has its strength in the Solana world and is often the more convenient choice there, even though it now supports further networks. For someone travelling mainly on Ethereum and the networks built on it, MetaMask remains the obvious starting wallet, and a switch pays off more when the centre of gravity shifts for good.

MetaMask: how to proceed now

1. Set the wallet up on a quiet evening, not between two appointments. Download the extension exclusively through the maker's site, write the twelve words on paper or metal and store two copies in separate places. From which amount a device is worth it instead is shown by our hardware wallet comparison.
2. On first contact with an application, set the approval down by hand to the amount you are moving right now. Put a fixed date in your calendar each quarter on which you withdraw old approvals. Which software wallet suits your focus is in the software wallet comparison.
3. From the first transfer onwards, note the date, the quantity and the acquisition cost. Without those details the one-year period cannot be documented later, and that period is exactly what decides the tax. Tools that carry this along automatically are in the comparison of tax and portfolio tools.

(As of October 6, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

The Solana price stands at $120.36 on Tuesday midday, which is €106.86. Against the previous day almost nothing has moved, 0.09 percent lower. The interesting number of the day is therefore not the price itself but what sits beneath it: the 20-day moving average runs at $117.32, less than three percent below the current level. Above it, the high of the past 90 days waits at $122.08. Solana has been wedged between those two marks for days, while in the background the largest rebuild the network has ever had is under way, and nobody is saying when it arrives.

This article puts both together: where the price really stands, which three levels bound it, what the Alpenglow consensus switch means for holders in Germany, and which deadlines you need to know before you react to a move.

Solana price on October 6: $120.36, €106.86 and a daily range of 2.1 percent

The day's range ran from $118.97 to $121.51. That is 2.13 percent between low and high, an unusually tight day for Solana. Trading volume over 24 hours came to roughly $2.48 billion, market capitalisation to $70.8 billion. That puts Solana seventh among the largest crypto assets by market value. There are 588,385,318 SOL in circulation.

Depending on the period you pick, the same price tells three different stories. Over the week there is a gain of 0.77 percent, which is effectively a flat line. Over 30 days it is up 12.87 percent, with the price coming from $106.49. Over one year, by contrast, it is down 48.25 percent. And from the all-time high of $293.31, set on January 19, 2025, the price is still 58.96 percent away.

Anyone calculating in euros gets a slightly different figure, because the euro-dollar rate moves alongside. We worked through this gap between the euro view and the dollar view in a separate piece on October 5. For your tax return only the euro value counts, not the dollar price in the app.

In brief: Market capitalisation is the price multiplied by the number of coins in circulation. That figure says what all existing SOL would currently be worth together, not how much money has flowed into the network.

The three Solana price levels above and below: $122.08, $117.32 and $106.50

Levels are not an oracle. They are prices at which a striking amount was traded in the past, and therefore places where supply and demand tend to meet. Three of them are cleanly measurable on Solana right now.

$122.08 on the upside. That is the highest daily close of the past 90 days. The price has run at this zone several times in recent days and has stayed below it every time. A daily close above it would be the first signal that the sideways phase is ending.

$117.32 on the downside. That is the average of the past 20 daily closes. This line has run below the price since the middle of September and has caught it more than once. A break of this line would end the short-term uptrend.

$106.50 as the second step. That is the average of the past 50 daily closes and at the same time almost exactly the level of 30 days ago. If the price falls back there, the entire monthly gain would be handed back.

For context on the downside: the low of the past 90 days was $71.89, and the 200-day moving average runs at $86.27. Both are far away. The medium-term uptrend is therefore intact, even if the price is making no headway at the moment. How far the range on Solana can spread out in an October historically is something we recalculated in our review of previous years.

Will the $117.32 level hold? The honest answer is that nobody knows in advance. What you can do with it is another matter. You now know three concrete prices at which you can decide beforehand what you will do, instead of deciding in the moment of the move. That is exactly what levels are for.

Alpenglow: what the consensus switch changes technically

Alpenglow is the name for the largest intervention in the heart of Solana since launch. It sits in client version Agave 4.3, and the project's overview page lists it under Network Upgrades with the status "In Development" and the window October 2026.

In brief: Consensus is the procedure by which all computers in a network agree on which transactions are valid and in what order they stand. Replacing the consensus means replacing the foundation everything else rests on.

Two building blocks are being swapped out. Votor takes over the role of TowerBFT, the voting logic used so far. Rotor replaces Turbine, through which new blocks are distributed across the network. The intended result is stated on the project page: around 150 milliseconds to final confirmation of a transaction, instead of 12.8 seconds today.

For operators the cost calculation changes markedly. So far a validator pays ongoing fees for its voting transactions, up to about one SOL per day according to the analysis by infrastructure provider Helius. Alpenglow replaces these individual votes with a bundled certificate procedure, and the running fee falls away. Helius therefore puts the minimum stake at which running your own validator pays off at around 450 SOL in future, instead of roughly 4,850 SOL today. That is the analysis's figure, not a commitment from the project.

Alpenglow without a fixed date: September 28 passed with no switch

At the end of September it circulated on social networks that Alpenglow would go to mainnet on September 28. The developer team Anza explicitly contradicted this, and the switch did not take place that day. In early October the mainnet is still running under the old procedure.

The project still names only the October 2026 window and no date. For you as a holder that is less irritating than it sounds, but it has one practical consequence: a date that can arrive any day cannot be planned around. Anyone making their reaction depend on noticing the switch beforehand is planning on information that may only be available afterwards.

The sober reading: Alpenglow is an improvement in the technology, not an event that has to move a price mechanically. Experience with network switches points in both directions, and anyone translating the switch into a particular price today is working with a number that does not exist.

Frankendancer ends: your validator and the client question

In brief: A client is the software a validator runs to take part in the network. Several independent clients are considered a security advantage, because a bug in one of them then does not paralyse the whole network.

Alongside the standard client Agave, Frankendancer has been running since 2024, an interim solution from Jump Crypto. This client combines the fast networking part of the Firedancer client with the consensus logic of Agave. That consensus logic is precisely what Alpenglow replaces. Jump Crypto has therefore announced that it will discontinue support for Frankendancer with the activation and concentrate its efforts on the full Firedancer client.

If you have delegated SOL, this affects you indirectly. Your delegation sits with a specific validator, and that operator has to carry out the change. In your wallet's explorer you can see which validator your delegation goes to, how high its commission is and how reliably it has worked recently. That is a detail worth looking at once before a network switch, and before the switch runs rather than after. Anyone staking their SOL through a provider instead of delegating themselves will find the details on commission and payout rhythm at the respective service; our overview of staking platforms sets the terms side by side.

Epoch 1050 is 71 percent through: how long deactivating a delegation takes

Here lies the deadline that matters most in everyday use and that the fewest people know. Solana counts in epochs. One epoch covers 432,000 slots. The network currently stands in epoch 1050 at slot 307,080, so roughly 124,920 slots are still open. At the current roughly 400 milliseconds per slot, that corresponds to just under 14 hours.

The point of it: anyone who deactivates a delegation is not free immediately. The deactivation takes effect at the end of the current epoch, and only after that can the balance be withdrawn and sold. Between your click and the moment you can actually trade there is therefore half a day to a full day on average, depending on when in the epoch you decide.

If you take your levels from the second section seriously, a clear consequence follows: a staked holding is not a tradable holding. Anyone who wants to sell at $117 but only starts deactivating at $117 sells at a different price. Network inflation in the current epoch stands at 3.62 percent a year according to the network query, and that yield is the price you receive for the reduced mobility. Whether the trade is worth it to you depends on whether you were going to leave the holding untouched anyway.

Solana staking taxes in Germany: the €256 threshold and section 22 no. 3 of the Income Tax Act

For tax purposes, price gains and staking income in Germany run through two different sections, and many people confuse the two.

With passive staking, the ongoing staking rewards generally count as income from services under section 22 no. 3 of the German Income Tax Act. A threshold of €256 per calendar year applies to it. Threshold means: stay below it and the amount is tax free. Exceed it by even one euro and the entire amount is taxable, not just the part above the line. That is the difference from an allowance, where only the portion above it counts.

What counts is the euro value at the moment of receipt, meaning the day the reward is credited to your account. On Solana that happens epoch by epoch, so several times a week. These many small inflows are the reason why keeping records by hand gets confusing fast with staking; tax and portfolio tools read the inflows automatically and convert them into euros at the rate of the respective day.

The holding period stays at twelve months: the German finance ministry letter of March 6, 2025

Section 23 of the Income Tax Act applies to the sale of the SOL themselves. If you sell within twelve months of buying, the gain is taxable, with a threshold of €1,000 a year for all private disposal transactions together. After twelve months have passed, the gain is tax free regardless of its size.

For a long time it was disputed whether this period extends to ten years if the coins are staked in the meantime. The Federal Ministry of Finance has rejected that. In the letter of March 6, 2025, which replaces the version of May 10, 2022, it expressly remains at twelve months even if the crypto assets were used for staking or lending in the interim.

In practice that means staking does not extend your holding period. It does create a second stream of income that has to be recorded on an ongoing basis, and the rewards received this way start their own holding period from the day they arrive. The letter also stresses the duties to cooperate and keep records: anyone declaring income has to be able to document it.

This section is no substitute for tax advice. With larger holdings, where there is proximity to a commercial activity, or with staking through foreign providers, a visit to a specialist is worthwhile.

Buying and holding Solana: costs, custody and the route through an exchange

If you want to add to a position or get in for the first time after this article, three items decide your result more than any price forecast does.

First, total costs. The advertised trading fee is the wrong number to go by. What decides your result is the sum of fee, spread and deposit costs. The spread is the gap between the buying and selling price and appears in no fee table. In a tight market like Solana it is small, but with small amounts it still carries weight. Which providers in Germany let you trade on which terms is set out in our exchange comparison.

Second, custody. If the SOL sit on the exchange, the keys belong to the provider. For small amounts that is defensible; for a holding you want to keep for years, your own wallet is the cleaner solution. Anyone holding and delegating themselves also keeps the free choice of validator from the section above.

Third, record keeping. Every purchase needs a date, a quantity and a euro equivalent, otherwise the twelve-month period cannot be documented later. At the moment you buy, that is a matter of seconds; two years later it is a matter of hours.

Solana price and Alpenglow: how to proceed now

1. Write down the three levels. $122.08 on the upside, $117.32 as the first step down, $106.50 as the second. Decide beforehand what happens at which daily close. If you want to change provider while you are at it, compare the total costs first in the exchange comparison.
2. Look at your delegation. Which validator, which commission, which client. And build the just-under-14 hours to the end of the epoch into your plan before you set a level as a selling point. The providers' terms are in the staking overview.
3. Check your €256. Add up what has reached you in staking rewards this year, in euros at the rate of each day of receipt. If you are close to the threshold, it is a decision before the end of the year and only a declaration afterwards. A tax tool takes the adding up off your hands.

(As of October 6, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

The Dogecoin price stood at €0.084357, or $0.094847, on Tuesday morning. That is 1.63 percent lower in euro terms and 1.38 percent lower in dollar terms than the previous day. Over the week the price is all but unchanged at minus 0.15 percent, and over the month it is up 4.42 percent. Price data comes from CoinGecko, as of October 6.

More important than the daily move is a question many holders are asking right now: can a DOGE balance earn a running yield, the way Ethereum or Solana can? Offers marketed in exactly those terms are circulating, often with the word staking in the name. The short answer: there is no staking in the Dogecoin protocol. Whatever is paid out as yield comes from a lending transaction, and in Germany that carries different rules on liability, deposit protection and tax than a plain purchase does.

Dogecoin price at $0.0948, 1,362 blocks and 13.62 million new DOGE in a day

The daily range ran from €0.083552 to €0.085781. Market capitalisation stands at about $14.82 billion, and spot turnover over the past 24 hours at $519 million. There are 156,210,086,384 DOGE in circulation.

That last figure is the key to the whole subject, because it grows every day. Our own review of the chain through the Blockchair interface put the count at 6,403,759 blocks on October 6. In the 24 hours before that, 1,362 blocks were added. The three most recently found blocks each carried exactly 10,000 DOGE in reward, plus a handful of DOGE in fees.

What 1,362 blocks a day mean

1,362 blocks at 10,000 DOGE each come to 13,620,000 new units in a single day. Annualised, that is roughly 4.97 billion DOGE. Work instead from the nominal cadence of one block a minute and the figure comes to 5.256 billion a year. Both numbers belong side by side: the annual expansion of supply runs between 3.18 and 3.36 percent.

Scrypt proof of work: Dogecoin has no staking in the protocol

Staking, in the narrow sense, means holders lock up their units as collateral and the protocol itself grants them a share of the newly created units. That requires a consensus mechanism called proof of stake, as used by Ethereum since 2022 and by Solana from the start.

Dogecoin works on a different basis. The chain uses proof of work with the Scrypt hashing algorithm. New blocks arise from computational work by specialised machines, and the reward of 10,000 DOGE per block goes to whoever found the block. A holder who simply leaves coins sitting in a wallet takes no part in that whatsoever. The protocol contains no mechanism that allocates anything to holders.

This is not a shortcoming and not a temporary state of affairs, but a property of the design. Anyone looking at a product that promises yield on DOGE therefore knows before reading a word of the fine print: that yield cannot come from the chain. The return has to be earned and paid out by a third party.

Merged mining with Litecoin: 2.69 petahash secure the chain without dedicated miners

The computing power behind Dogecoin averaged around 2.69 petahash per second over the past 24 hours, with difficulty at 39,397,744. Over the same period the chain recorded 18,059 transactions.

Only a small part of that computing power, however, belongs to machines running for Dogecoin alone. Since 2014 Dogecoin has been mined together with Litecoin under a method called merged mining: both chains use the same hashing algorithm, and the same computational work counts for both at once. Dogecoin thus inherits a large share of its security from an outside chain.

For you as a holder, that yields a point of context rarely found in yield prospectuses. The security of your holding depends on decisions taken in another network. It has held steadily for twelve years, but it remains a dependency, and it belongs in the risk picture.

What a yield promise on DOGE really is: a lending transaction

If the chain pays out nothing, only one source is left. The provider takes in your DOGE and lends it on, usually to traders betting on falling prices who need units for that, or to market participants who have to post collateral. Your yield is funded out of the interest those traders pay. The technical term is lending: handing over crypto assets for a fee so a third party can use them.

That changes your legal position fundamentally. Before the deposit you own DOGE. After the deposit you own a claim against a provider who is supposed to return the same quantity of DOGE. Should that provider become insolvent, you stand in line with the creditors. This is the real price of the interest rate, and it appears in no percentage figure.

How to spot a lending product

Three features turn up almost every time. The units leave your own custody and sit with the provider. There is a minimum term or a notice period during which you cannot sell. And the yield is quoted as a variable rate that the provider may change unilaterally. If you want to lay the terms of different houses side by side, our comparison of crypto lending providers sets out the conditions in one overview.

3.18 percent dilution a year: issuance is the benchmark for any DOGE yield

Here the figure from the first section comes back. The total supply of DOGE grows by 3.18 to 3.36 percent every year. Your share of the total therefore falls continuously if you do nothing. A yield on DOGE, paid in DOGE, has to offset that dilution before it so much as holds your share steady.

The calculation below works through a holding of 100,000 DOGE, worth about €8,436 at the current price. It assumes a year with no price movement, so that the supply effect alone is visible.

The table answers no question about the price; it places the interest rate alone in context. An offer paying 2 percent on DOGE slows the dilution, it does not reverse it. Only above a good 3 percent does your share of the network genuinely grow. Anyone taking on the default risk of a lending transaction can hold the terms up against that benchmark.

Lending falls outside MiCAR, and what that means for your deposit

The European Union's Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, MiCAR for short, has applied since 2024. It governs who may hold, exchange and broker crypto assets, and attaches licensing duties and ongoing supervision to those activities. Custody of your DOGE with an authorised provider falls under it.

Granting and taking out loans in crypto assets is expressly not among the services MiCAR covers. That follows from BaFin's guidance notice on crypto-asset services under MiCAR, which lists the activities requiring authorisation. Lending is not on it.

That gap has a practical consequence. A provider can hold a MiCAR licence for custody and advertise it, while the yield product alongside is not covered by that licence at all. On top of that comes a point many underestimate: there is no deposit protection for crypto assets in any circumstances, not even with authorised providers. The €100,000 you know from your current account has no equivalent here.

Tax on DOGE lending: other income under section 22 EStG and the €256 exemption limit

Germany's Federal Ministry of Finance restated the treatment of crypto assets in a circular dated March 6, 2025, file reference IV C 1 - S 2256/00042/064/043. It replaces the circular of May 10, 2022 and is the authoritative administrative position.

For lending income held as private assets, it provides the following: handing over crypto assets for a fee is a service, and the consideration counts as other income under section 22 of the Income Tax Act. It is taxed at your personal rate and not at the flat withholding rate of 25 percent. For income from services under section 22 number 3 there is an exemption limit of €256 per calendar year. Exceed it and the entire amount is taxable, not merely the part above the threshold.

What that means in numbers

On a holding of 100,000 DOGE at an interest rate of 3 percent, 3,000 DOGE accrue over the year, worth about €253 at the current price. That sits just below the exemption limit. A somewhat larger holding or a higher price is enough to tip the calculation, and then the full amount has to be declared. Anyone using several products adds up all income from services for the year. A crypto tax tool records these inflows with date and price, which is barely manageable by hand once payouts are daily.

The holding period stands: one year under section 23 EStG, even if you lent out

Here the 2025 circular clears up a persistent misconception. The draft of the original 2022 circular provided for the holding period to extend to ten years where crypto assets are used to generate income. That rule was not carried over into the version in force.

So the position stands: gains on the sale of crypto assets are tax free under section 23 of the Income Tax Act where more than a year lies between acquisition and sale. That applies expressly even where the assets were used for staking or lending in the meantime. Within the year an exemption limit of €1,000 applies, raised from €600 previously.

From this follows a clean separation that you should carry through your own records. The capital gain on the original holding follows section 23 with its one-year period. The interest income follows section 22 and is taxable in the year it is received. Each unit received as interest also starts a holding period of its own, because it counts as acquired at the price on the day it arrives.

Leverage of 2 to 1 at German providers against 101 perpetual markets abroad

Anyone looking not for interest but for leverage runs into a second peculiarity of the German framework. Our own review of CoinGecko derivatives data found 101 live perpetual markets on DOGE on October 6, carrying some $2.18 billion in open positions between them. The three largest venues held 31.0 percent of that, the ten largest 65.1 percent. Other counts arrive at lower figures; the data service Coinglass was most recently quoted at around $1.52 billion. Depending on the set of exchanges captured, the total therefore lies between $1.52 billion and $2.18 billion, in every case a multiple of daily spot turnover of $519 million.

Most of these venues are not permitted to serve German retail clients. For those that are, a hard limit applies: under BaFin's general administrative act of July 23, 2019, reference VBS 7-Wp 5427-2018/0057, contracts for difference on cryptocurrencies sold to retail clients must be collateralised at 50 percent of notional value. That corresponds to maximum leverage of 2 to 1. Added to it are close-out once the account falls below half of initial margin protection, and negative balance protection capping liability at the capital paid in. How these limits bear on perpetual contracts is set out in our classification of perpetuals under MiFID.

At 2 to 1 it takes a price fall of roughly 50 percent to reach close-out. At leverage of 20 to 1, common abroad, roughly 5 percent is enough. Today's daily range of €0.083552 to €0.085781 already amounts to 2.6 percent.

Will the $0.10 resistance hold this time?

On the chart picture, expressly as context on other people's analysis and not as an expectation of our own: according to a TradingView review cited at Parameter, the 50-day line crossed the 200-day line from below over the weekend, the first such cross since August 2025. The next resistance levels named there are $0.10 and $0.106, with the September low at $0.079.

Against that reading stands positioning in the derivatives market. A Blockchain.news review dated October 6 puts 78 percent of positions held by larger accounts on the long side and 22 percent on the short side, with retail accounts at 72 to 28. The ratio of aggressive buys to sells stood at 0.67 and the funding rate at a neutral 0.01 percent. One-sided positioning without matching funding costs is treated there as a pointer to a possible flush lower, with a target zone named at $0.078 to $0.082. Both readings stand side by side, and neither is a forecast.

DOGE yield: the key points for your decision

1. Separate the product from the chain. Every offer promising yield on DOGE is a lending transaction with a counterparty, because the chain pays out nothing. Read up on who your debtor is, whether the units leave custody and what notice period applies. The terms of the larger providers sit side by side in our comparison of yield platforms.
2. Hold the interest rate up against issuance. Supply grows by 3.18 to 3.36 percent a year. Below around 3 percent an offer merely slows the dilution. Whether the premium is worth the default risk to you is something you decide with that figure in mind, not with the advertised rate alone. A side-by-side look at the houses is in our lending comparison.
3. Keep two separate records. The capital gain on the holding follows the one-year period under section 23; the interest income has to be declared in the year it is received under section 22, with an exemption limit of €256. Record every inflow with date and price, most easily through a portfolio and tax tool.

(As of October 6, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

If you hold VELO, it becomes a different token in November. Velodrome and Aerodrome, the two largest decentralised exchanges on Optimism and on Base, are merging into a single protocol called Aero. At Coinbase the swap runs from November 2 to November 4, 2026; for each VELO you receive around 0.044 new AERO, and the exchange takes no fee for it. Anyone holding VELO in their own wallet, however, is not covered by this swap at all and has to act themselves.

November 2 is not actually the date on which things get tight for you. They get tight earlier: at Coinbase, VELO can already only be traded with a limit order today, and the exchange no longer accepts a plain market order. Anyone assuming there is time until November to sell the position in the normal way is therefore already wrong.

What exactly happens in the Velodrome and Aerodrome merger

Both exchanges belong to the category of decentralised exchanges, DEX for short. A DEX is a venue that works without a custodian: you swap directly out of your own wallet, and pricing is handled by a program on the blockchain instead of an order book inside a company. Velodrome is that venue on Optimism, Aerodrome the same blueprint on Base, the secondary network of Ethereum operated by Coinbase. Behind both stands the same development firm, Dromos Labs.

Both work on the so-called ve(3,3) model. That means: whoever locks their tokens for a fixed period receives voting rights in return and thereby steers which trading pairs the rewards flow into. The value of the token arises from this mechanism, and it is precisely this that is now being merged. Instead of two separate voting systems on two chains, there is to be one in future serving several networks. Among the first chains of the new protocol are OP Mainnet and Ink alongside Base.

To place the setting, it is worth a look at the ecosystem of the Coinbase chain Base, in which Aerodrome has played the largest role so far. The merger changes exactly that map: what were two regional top dogs becomes one provider across several networks.

The swap factor of 0.044 AERO per VELO and how it comes about

For holders of AERO nothing changes arithmetically; one old AERO becomes one new AERO. For VELO the factor of roughly 0.044 applies. That number derives from the announced split of the new supply: 94.5 percent of the new AERO quantity goes to the existing AERO holders, 5.5 percent to the VELO side. The basis for that split is the economic performance of both protocols in the 52 weeks before the announcement, that is essentially the trading fees and revenues each of the two exchanges earned in that period.

That split can be checked against the market, and this is the point at which the matter becomes verifiable for you. In early October, Aerodrome carries a market capitalisation of around $835.5 million, Velodrome around $48.6 million. Together that is about $884 million, and Velodrome's share of it is 5.50 percent. The announced split of 94.5 to 5.5 and what the market actually pays today therefore agree to a hundredth. The market has long since priced the merger in.

Worked through: 1,000 VELO yield 44 new AERO

Concretely, with the prices of October 6: AERO stands at $0.8355 or 0.7455 euros, VELO at $0.036265 or 0.032355 euros. A holding of 1,000 VELO is thus worth $36.26 or 32.36 euros in the market. After the swap that becomes 44 AERO, and at the same prices those are worth $36.76 or 32.80 euros.

The difference comes to 50 cents, that is 1.38 percent in favour of the swap. The market ratio of VELO to AERO stands at 0.0434, the offered factor at 0.044. For you that means one thing above all: there is no discount here that you would avoid by selling quickly beforehand, and no premium you could collect by buying in. Anyone trading hectically because of the swap factor pays trading fees for an advantage that does not exist in that order of magnitude.

One caveat belongs with it: this calculation is a still image. Prices move, and the factor of 0.044 is fixed, while the market prices of both tokens will fluctuate until the window in November. Whether the difference will then still be 1.38 percent, larger, or reversed cannot be said today and is not worth a forecast either.

At Coinbase the wind-down is already running: VELO by limit order only

Trading in VELO at Coinbase has already been switched to so-called limit-only operation. A limit order is an order with a price condition: you set the price at which you want to buy at most or sell at least, and the order waits in the order book until someone takes it at that price. A market order, by contrast, is executed immediately at the next best available price, and that option no longer exists for VELO there.

That this is not a normal state for small trading pairs is shown by the counter-check on the sister pair: AERO can still be traded at the same exchange without that restriction. Limit-only operation is the first stage of an announced two-stage wind-down path, on whose second stage VELO trading is discontinued entirely.

In practice that means three things. First, you no longer have an execution guarantee: your order sits in the book and may never be filled, or only in part. Second, the spread between bid and offer typically widens in such phases, because fewer participants are quoting. Third, exiting thereby becomes a decision with lead time rather than a click. Anyone reconsidering their choice of venue anyway will find in the crypto exchange comparison the points that matter on trading pairs, fees and authorisation in Germany.

The timetable: launch on October 21, swap from November 2 to 4

Two dates structure the process. On October 21, 2026 the unified protocol is to launch, initially on OP Mainnet and Ink among others. From November 2 to November 4, 2026 the swap window then runs at Coinbase, in which the two legacy tokens become the new AERO.

Within that window the exchange pauses deposits and withdrawals of the legacy tokens. Anyone wanting to move holdings to or from Coinbase during those three days therefore cannot. Anyone wanting to shift their holding before the window is better off doing it well in advance and not on the evening of November 1, because a withdrawal on a network can take time depending on load.

Coinbase charges no fee for taking part in the swap, according to its own announcement. That concerns the conversion itself, not the trading fees that arise on a purchase or sale as they otherwise would.

Those whose holding sits at Coinbase and those who self-custody: two different routes

Here runs the dividing line at which, in experience, money gets lost. If your VELO sits in the Coinbase account, the swap happens without any action from you. You have to click nothing, confirm nothing and apply for nothing; after the window, AERO is in the account.

If instead you hold VELO in your own wallet on Optimism, you are not covered by Coinbase's handling at all. For that case there is the protocol's own migration route, and you have to take it yourself. Anyone who misses it holds, after the swap, a token that is no longer traded at its home venue.

A precautionary rule applies here that matters more at any token migration than the migration itself: migration pages are a classic target for fraud attempts. Around every announced swap, replica pages appear demanding a wallet connection and an approval, and with it they clear out the holding. You obtain the address of the genuine migration route exclusively via the official project page, never via a link from a direct message, a comment or a search ad. How to custody holdings in general so that a single bad approval does not cost everything is set out in the hardware wallet comparison.

veVELO locks: tied positions are the least clear part

In the ve(3,3) model there are, alongside the freely tradable tokens, the locked positions, called veVELO at Velodrome. Whoever locks gives up availability for a set period and receives voting rights and a share of the protocol's revenues in return. These positions sit, by their nature, in the protocol itself and not on an exchange.

It is precisely on this that the least solid information is publicly available. The announced split of 94.5 to 5.5 percent expressly includes the locked positions on both sides, so there is no indication that they come away empty-handed. How a running lock period is treated at the transition, whether voting rights continue seamlessly, and what happens to positions whose term reaches beyond the swap cannot currently be answered conclusively from the outside. Anyone holding a locked position therefore follows the project's announcements more closely than someone who only has free tokens sitting on an exchange.

Tax on a token swap: section 23 of the Income Tax Act and the open holding-period question

In Germany, gains from the sale of crypto assets held privately fall under section 23 of the Income Tax Act, the private disposal. The basic rule is familiar: hold for more than a year and you stay tax-free; sell within the one-year period and you pay tax on the gain at your personal rate, provided the exemption threshold is exceeded. The Federal Ministry of Finance most recently set out the treatment of crypto assets in its circular of March 6, 2025.

The point of dispute in a process like this one is: is the swap of one token for another a disposal that starts a new holding period? A swap from one crypto asset into another is in principle treated like a sale for tax purposes. Whether that also applies to a conversion in which the same project replaces its token and the holder economically keeps the same thing is a question of the individual case that nobody here can answer for you across the board. This is expressly not tax advice, and with meaningful amounts the question belongs with a tax adviser.

What you can do regardless is secure the evidence. Record which VELO holding you had at which point in time, at what factor it was converted and when. Anyone recording their purchases and swaps as they happen anyway has an easier time at year end; the comparison of tax tools and portfolio trackers shows which tools map such conversions cleanly.

An older ratio of 0.55 AERO per VELO is still doing the rounds

Anyone researching the topic comes across reports from the announcement period stating an entirely different ratio: 0.55 AERO per VELO. That ratio was a proposal from an early phase and was expressly marked as non-final at the time. It is not the factor at which the swap now takes place.

What governs is the number the exchange states for the November window, and that stands at around 0.044. The best protection against an outdated search hit is the cross-check from the second section: a factor of 0.55 would assign the VELO side around 40 percent of the new supply, while its market capitalisation today sits at a good 5.5 percent of the combined total. A number that is off by a factor of seven from what the market pays is in all likelihood out of date.

What this swap does not remove in terms of risk

A swap rearranges the tokens, but it does not turn a risky asset into a safe one. Three points remain unchanged.

First, protocol risk. Decentralised exchanges run on program code, and errors in that code have repeatedly proved expensive in recent years. A merger means new, altered code, and new code is least tested in its first weeks.

Second, liquidity risk. VELO currently turns over around $2.0 million a day, on a market capitalisation of around $48.6 million. In such a market even a medium-sized order moves the price, and in the limit-only phase that applies all the more. Anyone wanting to sort out the terms around decentralised trading, fee models and settlement in general will find the basics in the explainer on what a perp DEX is.

Third, price risk. On the direction of AERO after the merger this text deliberately says nothing. The combination widens the addressable market of both protocols; that is a fact about the structure, not a statement about the price. A total loss is possible at any time with crypto assets of this size.

The announcement of the combination comes from the development firm behind both exchanges and is documented on its own project page; the details on the window at Coinbase, on the factors and on the absence of fees were compiled among others by Cryptobriefing.

The VELO swap: What to take away

The swap itself is unspectacular and for exchange holdings even convenient. The work lies beforehand, and it consists of three steps.

1. Settle where your holding sits. In an exchange account the swap happens automatically; in your own wallet on Optimism nothing happens at all unless you take the project's migration route yourself. If you are thinking about the venue anyway, the crypto exchange comparison helps with the question of where trading pairs, fees and authorisation in Germany fit together.
2. Secure the records before the holding is converted. Noting the holding, the date and the factor costs five minutes and spares you a reconstruction in case of doubt. Which tools capture such conversions cleanly is shown by the comparison of tax tools and portfolio trackers.
3. Check your custody before you grant an approval anywhere. Around every announced swap, replica migration pages appear. How to separate holdings so that a single bad approval does not cost everything is set out in the hardware wallet comparison.

(As of October 6, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

The US financial regulator FinCEN closed two projects on October 5, 2026 that would have made transfers to self-custodied crypto wallets reportable. For you as an investor in Germany, nothing changes immediately. What happens when you withdraw to your own wallet is governed by European law, and European law is currently moving in the opposite direction.

FinCEN is the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, the anti-money-laundering unit of the US Treasury. It prescribes which data banks and financial service providers must retain about payments and when they must file a report. Two of its proposals would have extended those duties explicitly to crypto transfers to wallets without a custodian for the first time. Both are now off the table.

What FinCEN withdrew on October 5, 2026

On Monday, October 5, 2026, the agency filed two withdrawal notices; publication in the Federal Register, the US official gazette, was scheduled for October 6. Two so-called NPRMs are affected, that is Notices of Proposed Rulemaking. An NPRM is the formal announcement of a planned rule on which anyone affected may comment before it takes effect.

The first project dates from December 23, 2020 and ran under the docket number 1506-AB47. The second was published on October 23, 2023 and carried the number 1506-AB64. The older one had thus sat unresolved for almost six years, the newer one for three. Neither was ever in force; they hung in the state in which an agency has announced a rule but not adopted it.

The $3,000 threshold and the report from $10,000

The December 2020 proposal would have required banks and payment service providers to keep records on crypto transactions involving a self-custodied wallet from $3,000 upwards, including details of the counterparty. From $10,000 a report to FinCEN would have become due. A self-custodied wallet, an unhosted wallet in the agency's English, is a wallet whose private key nobody but you holds; there is no company there that could provide information.

That was precisely where the dispute lay. Anyone sending money to an address with no service provider behind it can say about the recipient only what that recipient states themselves. The criticism of the proposal therefore came down to the duty being either impossible to fulfil or an invitation to guess. In 2021 the industry filed several thousand comments within an unusually short window.

Why the 2023 mixing special measure fell

The second project targeted mixers. A mixer is a service that pools payments from many users and pays them out in a new distribution, so that the trail between deposit and withdrawal can no longer be drawn unambiguously in the blockchain. FinCEN wanted to designate international crypto mixing under section 311 of the USA Patriot Act as a class of transactions of primary money-laundering concern. The consequence would have been a duty to report wallet addresses, transaction hashes and IP addresses.

That it comes to nothing is justified by the agency, according to Decrypt, by the reporting burden and by the objection of many commenters that the broad definition could deter lawful use. FinCEN stated verbatim that it would take no further action on this NPRM. Both withdrawals refer to the White House digital asset report of July 2025 and its sentence that lawful users of digital assets should be able to transact privately on a public blockchain.

The legal basis remains in place

A withdrawal is not a ban on the rule but the end of a single proceeding. Peter Van Valkenburgh of the advocacy group Coin Center said on that point that the underlying statutory authority to create new, similarly bad rules remains. That is the sober reading: what was withdrawn is the proposal, not the power to write a new one.

The same agency tightens the screws on the A7 network the same day

That FinCEN is pulling back across the board cannot be inferred from the day. On October 5, 2026 the same agency published a new finding together with a proposed rule in the Federal Register under the number 1506-AB77. It is directed at companies outside the US controlled by the so-called A7 network, a service for sanctions evasion and money laundering with links to Russia. The legal basis is section 9714(a) of the Combating Russian Money Laundering Act.

What is proposed is a prohibition on certain transmittals of funds by covered financial institutions. The comment period ends on November 4, 2026. The pattern is therefore recognisable: the agency is abandoning blanket capture of private transfers and working instead with targeted prohibitions against named networks.

Proof of ownership from 1,000 euros: how far the EU transfer-of-funds regulation reaches

In the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2023/1113, the transfer-of-funds regulation for crypto assets, has applied since the end of 2024. Its Article 14 requires that, for a transfer to a self-hosted address above 1,000 euros, the originator's crypto service provider take appropriate measures to establish whether that address is owned or controlled by the originator. A self-hosted address is the same thing FinCEN calls an unhosted wallet: an address with no service provider behind it.

In practice that means your exchange wants to see proof above this threshold that the destination address belongs to you. What that proof looks like we set out in a separate assessment of which providers demand which evidence from 1,000 euros. Below the threshold it stays with the details that are collected anyway. Anyone intending to self-custody permanently cannot avoid the question of which device the keys sit on; our hardware wallet comparison sorts the devices by price, handling and supported networks.

So the EU demands precisely what the US is now dropping: an attribution of transfers to wallets without a custodian. The difference is the direction of access. The American rule would have produced a report to the agency. The European one produces a duty of verification at the service provider, the result of which is documented there.

The anti-money-laundering regulation from July 10, 2027 and the end of anonymous accounts

The second building block is not yet in force. Regulation (EU) 2024/1624, the EU anti-money-laundering regulation, applies from July 10, 2027. Its Article 79 prohibits credit institutions, financial institutions and crypto service providers from keeping anonymous accounts. At the same time it prohibits dealing in anonymity-enhancing coins, that is crypto assets whose protocol systematically conceals sender, recipient or amount. Monero is the best-known case.

For regulated exchanges in the EU that means taking such coins out of their offering. What exactly this prohibition captures and what holders can do until then we treated separately in an assessment of the privacy coin ban from 2027. What stands for today's occasion is this: while surveillance of private transfers is being rolled back in Washington, a deadline is running in the EU after which a part of private transfers will not be possible at all through regulated providers.

Which provider sits under which supervision is therefore no longer a formality but decides which coins you will still be able to trade there in two years. Our overview of regulated crypto exchanges lists who holds an authorisation under the European crypto market regulation MiCA and in which member state it was granted.

What happens on a withdrawal to your own wallet in Germany

The procedure differs by provider, but the components are the same everywhere. You enter the destination address, and above the 1,000-euro threshold the provider asks for proof that it belongs to you. Common forms are a signed message from the wallet, a screenshot of the address in the wallet software, or a small test transfer. Some providers additionally work with an allowlist on which a new address only becomes usable after a waiting period.

The American withdrawal changes nothing about that, for a simple reason: the duty falls on your service provider, and your service provider is as a rule based in the EU or serves you under European supervision. A provider licensed in Germany follows the transfer-of-funds regulation, not whatever FinCEN plans or drops. Anyone trading with a provider outside the EU leaves that framework; then what applies there applies, and the way back to a German bank account runs through the European rules again.

These five details to check before your next withdrawal

Before you pull holdings off an exchange and onto your own wallet, five points are worth a look, as they cause most of the delays in practice.

1. The amount threshold. If the withdrawal is above 1,000 euros, the duty of proof under Article 14 applies. Anyone staying just below it to avoid that runs into the opposite: a series of conspicuously small transfers is a pattern any money-laundering desk examines.
2. The network. The same coin often exists on several networks. A withdrawal on the wrong network does not arrive and in many cases cannot be recovered.
3. The form of the proof. If the provider demands a signed message, your wallet has to be able to do it. Not every app offers the function, and with a hardware wallet it sometimes sits in the companion software rather than in the device.
4. The waiting period on the allowlist. If a newly entered address only becomes usable after hours, a withdrawal is not something for the evening before a deadline.
5. The records. Acquisition date, acquisition cost and the transaction number belong saved before you leave the account. Anyone requesting them from the exchange later gets them in the best case; in the worst, the provider is gone.

In tax terms the withdrawal changes nothing in Germany

A transfer between two of your own wallets is not a sale and in itself produces no taxable gain. What it does produce is documentation work: after the move, the holdings sit where no service provider draws up an annual statement any more. The duty to be able to evidence the acquisition date and acquisition cost stays with you. Tools that read addresses along permanently and build a statement from that we set side by side in the crypto tax tool comparison.

That a reorganisation of crypto taxation is being negotiated in Berlin at the same time is a separate matter and has nothing to do with the American reporting duties. For the question of where your coins sit it is nonetheless not immaterial: the longer a holding sits with you yourself, the more important it becomes that the origin of every position stays traceable.

Self-custody: What to take away

The news from Washington is a relief for American financial service providers and a signal to everyone who treats self-custody as a case for suspicion. A change in your situation in Germany it is not. Three steps follow from it.

1. Settle where your keys are to sit. Anyone wanting to take holdings off an exchange permanently decides on the device first and only then on the timing. Our hardware wallet comparison names the differences that matter in doing so.
2. Check your provider's authorisation. From July 2027 it decides which coins remain tradable there. The overview of regulated crypto exchanges shows who holds a MiCA authorisation.
3. Secure the records before you move. Acquisition data and transaction numbers are harder to obtain after leaving the account than before; a tax tool keeps them together permanently.

(As of October 6, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Sources for further reading: the withdrawn proposal of December 2020 in the Federal Register and the mixing special measure of October 2023 in the same place.

Attacks grew more sophisticated and less predictable over the period, according to researchers who scanned more than 20 billion transactions.

A London quantitative hedge fund joins the round too, seven months after the NYSE's owner bought in at exactly the same price.

Clear rules of the road are here. So what does it all mean and what is the overall impact?

The No Betting on Your Own Race Act also gives prediction markets cover to close accounts and report candidates to regulators.

Adam Iza used off-duty LA deputies to pull warrants and personal data on his rivals, then moved the proceeds through crypto custodians.

XRP Ledger validators reach 100% consensus ahead of fix update.

Ripple has expanded its push into institutional finance by deepening its partnership with Brevan Howard.

Zcash's Zebra node software receives four successive releases as developers prepare for the network’s next big upgrade.

Shiba Inu's market placement is somewhat complicated, as liquidity keeps flowing in, but in the wrong direction.

Bitcoin sees growing whale accumulation as its outflow on Binance hits the highest level seen in three years, flashing a bullish signal for the asset.

TLDR

• Robo.ai stock rises 2.26% after September revenue climbs above $100 million.
• Robo.ai targets about $600 million in total revenue for the full year 2026.
• QC Capital drives September revenue after joining Robo.ai through the June deal.
• Neurovia AI expands into transport, energy, public safety and municipal services.
• ALIF Holding advances its UAE industrial park as Phase I construction moves ahead.

Robo.ai Inc. stock gained 2.26% to $1.1350 after September revenue exceeded $100 million and management issued its full-year outlook. The shares recovered from a sharp mid-morning decline after trading above $1.40 earlier in the session. Robo.ai now expects about $600 million in total revenue for 2026, supported mainly by QC Capital.

Robo.ai Inc., AIIO

September Revenue Strengthens 2026 Outlook

QC Capital generated most of September’s revenue after Robo.ai acquired the business on June 15, 2026. The unit provides operational management and delivery services to enterprise customers through its existing business operations. Robo.ai said QC Capital has maintained stable service activity while adding revenue to the wider group.

Management based the $600 million annual revenue outlook on current year-to-date performance and recent integration progress. The forecast reflects continued contributions from acquired operations and growing activity across the company’s technology businesses. However, management separated revenue growth from profitability and operating cash flow, which remain different financial measures.

Robo.ai continues to focus on integration as it works to strengthen the group’s operating base. The company expects available cash and short-term investments to support operations for another 18 to 24 months. That position gives management room to fund planned capital spending under its current operating strategy.

Neurovia AI Expands Technology and Commercial Focus

Robo.ai is expanding its technology operations through Neurovia AI, which develops data processing and compression applications. The business targets public safety, transportation, energy, and municipal services as potential areas for commercial deployment. Management is also advancing commercial development around these applications under the group’s wider technology strategy.

QC Capital is developing video and content production capabilities as another technology initiative. The project remains at an early stage and has not become a major revenue contributor. Still, the initiative broadens the group’s development pipeline beyond its existing service-based revenue operations.

The company is combining acquired businesses with internal technology projects to create a more diversified operating structure. This approach links service revenue, software applications, and planned industrial projects under one corporate platform. Robo.ai expects the combination to support expansion while keeping near-term execution focused on current operations.

ALIF Holding Advances UAE Industrial Expansion

ALIF Holding broke ground on Phase I of its industrial park in Umm Al Quwain on September 25. The first phase will refurbish existing factory space covering about 8,845 square meters. Robo.ai plans to use the facility for manufacturing, equipment integration, and software systems integration.

The industrial park will develop in three phases as operating needs and capacity increase. Alif Maritec is expected to become the first project based at the Phase I facility. Its planned operations cover marine spill response, border security, and intelligent monitoring systems for critical infrastructure.

The project will combine equipment, sensor data, and analytics for government, industrial, and infrastructure customers. Robo.ai sees the development as a way to connect manufacturing capacity with engineering and technology services. With construction advancing, the company is building local delivery capabilities alongside its growing revenue base

The post Robo.ai Inc. (AIIO) Stock: Rises as September Revenue Tops $100 Million appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Xanadu Quantum Technologies secured a multi-year manufacturing agreement with GlobalFoundries for quantum photonic hardware production.
• The chip manufacturer will fabricate Xanadu’s photon detection systems and silicon nitride photonics at its Malta, New York 300mm plant.
• XNDU shares climbed 9% following the announcement, while GlobalFoundries stock increased approximately 1%.
• The partnership follows GlobalFoundries’ recent $375 million Commerce Department agreement that granted the federal government about 1% equity.
• This collaboration represents Xanadu’s transition from research-phase development to commercial-scale manufacturing.

Shares of Xanadu Quantum Technologies climbed 9% Tuesday following the announcement of a manufacturing collaboration with GlobalFoundries. Trading volume pushed the stock to an intraday peak of $4.82.

Xanadu Quantum Technologies Limited Class B Subordinate Voting Shares, XNDU

The partnership connects Xanadu with GlobalFoundries, an established semiconductor fabrication company. GlobalFoundries will handle volume production of two essential elements of Xanadu’s photonic quantum computing architecture.

These elements include ultra-low loss silicon nitride photonic circuits and superconducting nanowire single-photon detectors. The detection technology measures individual photons within light pulses—a foundational requirement for quantum systems that leverage light particles for computational operations.

Manufacturing Agreement Details

Fabrication operations will utilize GlobalFoundries’ 300-millimeter production line located in Malta, New York. According to both organizations, this agreement represents a significant transition from laboratory prototypes to full industrial manufacturing capacity.

Christian Weedbrook, CEO of Xanadu, described high-volume production capabilities as “fundamental to delivering quantum computing at scale.” The partnership enables Xanadu to enhance and broaden its photonic quantum platform, he noted.

Nicholas Sergeant, who oversees GlobalFoundries’ Quantum Technology Solutions division, shared similar observations. The collaboration establishes a manufacturing pathway for components required in future fault-tolerant quantum architectures, he explained.

Products from this manufacturing arrangement will support Xanadu’s upcoming fault-tolerant quantum demonstration systems. Both partners indicated they’re exploring additional quantum hardware modules for potential future development.

GlobalFoundries Expands Quantum Initiatives

GlobalFoundries has established multiple quantum computing relationships. The semiconductor manufacturer completed a $375 million Commerce Department agreement last month that launched its Quantum Technology Solutions business unit.

The federal funding included an equity component: the U.S. government acquired approximately 1% ownership in GlobalFoundries through the transaction. This initiative reflects broader federal efforts to establish domestic quantum hardware production capabilities.

GlobalFoundries holds “Trusted Foundry” designation from the Department of Defense. This certification validates the company’s compliance with stringent federal security requirements, positioning it favorably for government quantum projects.

The foundry’s quantum involvement extends back years. GlobalFoundries acquired IBM’s chip manufacturing operations in 2015, strengthening its advanced semiconductor production capabilities.

Xanadu began public trading in March following a special-purpose acquisition company transaction. The firm positions itself as the initial publicly traded company focused exclusively on photonic quantum computing technology.

The listing occurred during a surge of quantum company public offerings, with Infleqtion and Horizon Quantum also debuting within weeks. Xanadu has received substantial government support from Canadian agencies.

The company has yet to secure comparable U.S. federal contracts and was excluded from a May funding announcement. Nevertheless, Xanadu maintains connections to American defense research programs: the firm has advanced through DARPA’s quantum benchmarking initiative, which evaluates and validates quantum computing technologies from participant organizations.

The post GlobalFoundries Partners with Xanadu Quantum (XNDU) for Mass Production of Photonic Chips appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• HeartBeam (BEAT) shares rallied as high as 90% intraday, closing up 62% at 71 cents per share.
• The FDA awarded Breakthrough Device Designation to HeartBeam’s home-use heart attack detection platform.
• Approval came in less than 30 days, significantly faster than the standard 60-day review timeline.
• The status opens accelerated pathways for both regulatory clearance and Medicare reimbursement.
• The company estimates the addressable market for heart attack detection at approximately $15 billion.

Shares of HeartBeam (BEAT) posted dramatic gains this week following a significant regulatory milestone. The stock closed 62% higher at 71 cents, after touching intraday highs of 90% during trading.

HeartBeam, Inc., BEAT

The rally followed news that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration awarded Breakthrough Device Designation to the HeartBeam System. This technology is engineered to evaluate suspected heart attacks in a patient’s home environment.

The agency’s review process was notably swift. The application received approval within a 30-day window, cutting nearly in half the typical 60-day statutory timeframe.

Understanding the FDA Designation

Breakthrough Device Designation does not constitute market approval. Rather, it establishes an expedited regulatory pathway that grants HeartBeam enhanced access to FDA personnel throughout the development and review stages.

The status facilitates more direct communication on clinical trial architecture and accelerates the timeline toward potential market authorization. Equally important are the reimbursement implications.

This designation qualifies devices for streamlined Medicare coverage mechanisms. Federal policymakers have proposed frameworks that would enable simultaneous coverage decisions on the same day a device receives regulatory clearance.

HeartBeam has additionally enrolled in a separate federal initiative designed to monitor medical products throughout their commercial lifecycle. This adds another supportive element as the firm advances toward a large-scale clinical study.

Platform Technology and Commercial Opportunity

The HeartBeam System leverages the company’s proprietary 3D ECG technology. This is the same underlying platform that powers its FDA-cleared arrhythmia monitoring device.

Given this technological overlap, the company anticipates minimal need for additional hardware development. It plans to utilize the foundation it has previously validated.

The 3D ECG methodology records cardiac electrical signals from three distinct vectors. This design is intended to enable physicians to identify acute heart attack indicators in real time, regardless of the patient’s location.

Currently, the clinical benchmark for this diagnostic function—the 12-lead ECG—is predominantly confined to hospital and outpatient settings. HeartBeam’s vision is to deliver equivalent diagnostic power in residential settings.

The firm estimates the heart attack detection segment represents a $15 billion market. This figure sits within what the company describes as a broader cardiac technology platform valued at over $40 billion.

According to company figures, more than 20 million American adults face heightened heart attack risk. This population represents a substantial target demographic for an at-home diagnostic solution.

The FDA’s decision was informed by multiple data sets. These include proof-of-concept findings unveiled at the 2025 American Heart Association Scientific Sessions.

Additional evidence came from the ALIGN-ACS pilot study, which included 134 participants. Collectively, this research supported the agency’s expedited decision.

Moving forward, HeartBeam intends to collaborate with the FDA on structuring a larger, multi-site pivotal trial. Patient recruitment is anticipated to commence soon after trial design receives finalization.

The company has several upcoming data presentations scheduled. Additional ALIGN-ACS results are slated for release at the TCT conference in the near term.

Updates on the separate HEADSTART-ACS study are also planned. These presentations should provide investors with deeper insight into the technology’s trajectory toward a definitive pivotal trial.

The post FDA Fast-Tracks HeartBeam’s (BEAT) At-Home Heart Attack Device in Under 30 Days appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Netlist stock rises 13% after Micron agrees to a five-year $600M patent license.
• Micron will pay Netlist $30M quarterly from Q4 2026 through Q3 2031 under the deal.
• Netlist and Micron settle and mutually release all pending patent litigation cases.
• Micron also agrees to buy 10 million Netlist shares for $1 million under the deal.
• The deal adds recurring revenue and removes a major legal overhang for Netlist.

Netlist stock surged 13.10% to $6.39 after the company announced a major patent agreement with Micron Technology. The shares remained sharply higher after briefly climbing above $6.70 during early trading. The deal combines licensing revenue, litigation settlements, and a separate equity transaction between both companies.

Netlist, Inc., NLST

Micron Signs Five-Year $600 Million Patent License

Netlist granted Micron a five-year worldwide license covering its patent portfolio under agreements signed on October 5. The portfolio includes technology related to server DIMMs and High Bandwidth Memory products. These technologies support advanced memory systems used across data centers and artificial intelligence infrastructure.

Micron will pay Netlist $30 million every quarter throughout the five-year licensing period. Payments will start during the fourth quarter of 2026 and continue through the third quarter of 2031. Therefore, Netlist expects to receive $600 million in total licensing payments during the agreement.

The licensing structure gives Netlist a clear stream of recurring revenue from its intellectual property portfolio. Meanwhile, Micron gains access to patented memory technologies without continuing disputes over their use. The agreement also gives both companies a defined commercial framework covering Netlist’s existing patent rights.

Netlist and Micron End Pending Legal Disputes

Netlist and Micron also agreed to settle and mutually release all pending legal proceedings between the companies. The settlement removes existing cases connected with Netlist’s patents and Micron’s memory products. Consequently, both companies can move forward without continuing those disputes through courts and related proceedings.

Netlist has spent years defending and licensing patents tied to advanced computer memory technologies. Its intellectual property covers several areas used in server memory and high-performance computing systems. Therefore, patent enforcement has remained an important part of the company’s wider business strategy.

Netlist also filed a Current Report on Form 8-K with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The filing outlines the agreements and provides formal disclosure of the transaction to shareholders. However, the announced terms provide no additional payments beyond the disclosed quarterly licensing arrangement.

Micron Takes Equity Stake in Netlist

A separate agreement allows Micron to purchase 10 million Netlist common shares for $1 million. The companies structured the transaction as an unregistered sale with a five-year staged lock-up period. The closing was expected on or before October 6, subject to the agreement’s stated requirements.

The equity deal creates another connection between Netlist and Micron beyond their new patent licensing relationship. Meanwhile, the lock-up limits Micron’s ability to dispose of the acquired shares during the agreed period. The structure could support longer-term alignment while both companies operate under the new licensing framework.

The combined agreements give Netlist recurring payments while removing litigation costs and uncertainty linked to Micron. They also provide Micron with long-term access to Netlist’s memory technology portfolio. The stock rally followed the market’s response to the licensing revenue, legal settlement, and expanded commercial relationship.

The post Netlist, Inc. (NLST) Stock: Surge 13% as Micron Signs Five-Year $600M Patent License  appeared first on Blockonomi.

Key Highlights

• On October 5, 2026, Cathie Wood’s ARK Invest divested 90,713 shares of Twist Bioscience, totaling approximately $17.1 million.
• The investment firm acquired 1,482,357 shares of Recursion Pharmaceuticals, representing roughly $6.1 million in value.
• ARK accumulated 96,308 shares of Intellia Therapeutics in a transaction worth approximately $1.18 million.
• The firm also added 115,472 shares of Veracyte valued at roughly $5.29 million while divesting positions in 10x Genomics and CareDx.
• Recursion Pharmaceuticals experienced a surge exceeding 16% on Monday, while Intellia awaits a critical FDA ruling scheduled for March 10, 2027.

Cathie Wood’s [[LINK_START_1]]ARK Invest[[LINK_END_1]] executed multiple portfolio adjustments throughout its exchange-traded funds on Monday, October 5, 2026. Trade disclosure documents were published by the firm the following Tuesday morning.

Through its ARKK and ARKG funds, ARK divested 90,713 shares of Twist Bioscience. The transaction generated approximately $17.1 million in proceeds.

The October sale marks ARK’s second disposition of Twist Bioscience holdings this month. Previously, the investment manager offloaded 46,931 shares on September 29.

ARK’s New Acquisitions

The investment firm purchased 1,482,357 shares of Recursion Pharmaceuticals. This acquisition, executed through the ARKK and ARKG funds, totaled approximately $6.1 million.

Recursion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., RXRX

Recursion Pharmaceuticals operates as a biotechnology enterprise leveraging artificial intelligence technology for pharmaceutical discovery. The company’s stock price climbed more than 16% during Monday’s trading session.

The biotech firm recently announced an extension of its data-licensing partnership with Tempus, now running through 2029. Market analysts maintain a consensus 12-month price objective of $7.22 for Recursion shares, per Koyfin data.

Additionally, ARK accumulated 96,308 shares of Intellia Therapeutics. The transaction carried an estimated value of $1.18 million.

This purchase builds upon previous acquisitions. Since September 29, ARK has accumulated over 1,178,000 Intellia shares across multiple transactions.

Intellia currently awaits regulatory approval from the FDA for its primary therapeutic candidate, designed to treat hereditary angioedema. The agency’s determination is expected by March 10, 2027.

Investment bank Barclays recently initiated research coverage on Intellia with an “Underweight” recommendation. The firm established a price objective of $8, suggesting potential downside of 36% from present trading levels.

Through its ARKG fund, ARK also acquired 115,472 shares of Veracyte. This purchase represented approximately $5.29 million in capital deployment.

Veracyte recently disclosed Phase 3 clinical trial results. The findings demonstrated that its Decipher Prostate diagnostic test can effectively identify prostate cancer patients likely to benefit from combined hormone therapy and radiation treatment protocols.

ARK’s Portfolio Reductions

Beyond Twist Bioscience, ARK liquidated positions in two additional portfolio companies on Monday.

The investment manager sold 27,277 shares of 10x Genomics. This divestment generated approximately $2.55 million.

ARK further reduced its holdings by selling 22,271 shares of CareDx. That transaction yielded roughly $1.5 million in proceeds.

Twist Bioscience stock advanced 8.7% during Monday’s session. The equity has appreciated more than 60% throughout the preceding month.

Market observers attribute the recent rally to the company’s synthetic-DNA technology platform. Twist maintains a collaborative arrangement supporting Eli Lilly’s TuneLab AI-powered drug-discovery initiative.

10x Genomics equity climbed 4.5% on Monday and has surged more than 48% over the past month. CareDx shares gained 4% Monday, touching their highest valuation in over four years.

Through its ARKG fund alone, ARK has liquidated approximately $6 million in Twist Bioscience holdings during recent weeks. The firm maintains its practice of publishing daily trading activity each morning.

The post ARK Invest Acquires $6.1 Million Stake in Recursion Pharmaceuticals (RXRX) While Divesting Twist Bioscience appeared first on Blockonomi.

[PRESS RELEASE – Hong Kong, Hong Kong, October 6th, 2026]

ASICID Inc. has released its IDMINER Series, a new lineup of cryptocurrency mining systems designed for Bitcoin, Litecoin, and Dogecoin mining.

The series includes the IDMINER HomeRack, IDMINER 2 and IDMINER 1, with configurations ranging from 1,150 TH/s to 9,600 TH/s of Bitcoin hashrate and from 350 GH/s to 3,200 GH/s of Litecoin and Dogecoin hashrate.

The three models are designed for different mining setups, from individual and home miners to professional and larger-scale operators.

IDMINER Series Specifications

IDMINER HomeRack

• Bitcoin hashrate: 9,600 TH/s
• Litecoin/Dogecoin hashrate: 3,200 GH/s
• Power configuration: 4 × 1,300W
• Estimated monthly mining revenue: up to $25,590*

IDMINER 2

• Bitcoin hashrate: 2,400 TH/s
• Litecoin/Dogecoin hashrate: 800 GH/s
• Power consumption: 1,300W
• Estimated monthly mining revenue: up to $6,390*

IDMINER 1

• Bitcoin hashrate: 1,150 TH/s
• Litecoin/Dogecoin hashrate: 350 GH/s
• Power consumption: 700W
• Estimated monthly mining revenue: up to $2,790*

*The revenue figures are estimates based on network conditions, cryptocurrency prices, and mining difficulty at the time of publication.

Designed for Simpler Deployment

The IDMINER systems are delivered pre-configured and tested before shipment. Users can connect the miner to power, connect via WiFi or Ethernet, enter their preferred mining pool information, and begin mining.

The systems support major mining pools and also provide access to ASICID’s Zero-Fee Mining Pool option.

Other features include thermal management and hardware testing before shipment.

Built for Bitcoin, Litecoin and Dogecoin Mining

ASICID develops and manufactures its mining hardware through an integrated production process that includes research and development, hardware engineering, assembly, thermal testing, and quality assurance.

The company is headquartered in Hong Kong with additional operations in the United States and serves individual miners, professional mining businesses, and institutional operators.

With the IDMINER Series, ASICID is targeting miners looking for high-hashrate hardware with straightforward deployment and power requirements suited to ongoing mining operations.

For more information about the IDMINER Series, users can visit www.asicid.com.

The post New Generation of Crypto Miners Released by ASICID appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Tokenized stocks had a big year, but the market still has some clear gaps to fill. According to a new report from RedStone, the total on-chain value of tokenized stocks jumped from $640 million to $3.16 billion between September 28, 2025, and September 28, 2026.

That marks a 395% year-on-year increase.

Traders Turn to Perpetuals Instead

According to the report shared with CryptoPotato, stocks were the second-fastest-growing real-world asset category during the period. Tokenized private equity led the way with a much larger 935% jump. The growth also pushed tokenized stocks’ share of the wider RWA market to 8.1%, which is roughly three times higher than a year earlier.

But the numbers also show that most tokenized stocks are not being used much in DeFi. RedStone estimated that only about 2.6% of the total supply is being used as lending collateral. More than half of that amount comes from xStocks on Kamino and Jupiter Lend, worth around $43.8 million. Superstate’s tokenized Forward Industries shares on Kamino’s Opening Bell market accounted for another $25.4 million.

bStocks on Lista DAO add around $7.7 million. Ondo, despite being the biggest issuer, has very little lending activity. Its tokens back only about $1,400 on Morpho, while SPYon has around $4.2 million in Frankencoin. Around 42% of tokenized stock supply can technically be used as DeFi collateral. Despite this, traders appear more interested in derivatives than in lending or borrowing against the actual assets. Tokenized stocks mostly trade as perpetual contracts onchain.

Binance alone recorded $342.9 billion in equity-linked perpetual volume in August 2026. That was between 32 and 43 times the trading volume of tokenized stocks during the same month. On September 28, equity perpetuals on decentralized exchanges had $3.3 billion in open interest, which was already more than the entire tokenized stock supply. Trading also does not stop when traditional markets close. Around 55% of tokenized stock trading takes place outside regular market hours.

RedStone found that Sunday evening perp prices correctly pointed to Monday’s opening direction 65% of the time across 449 market weekends on Trade.xyz. The market now has around 4.04 million tokenized stockholders, with an average balance of about $780. But ownership remains a major concern. The three biggest issuers control roughly 70% of the sector’s on-chain value, yet their tokens do not give holders direct ownership of the underlying shares. There have also been cases involving disputed tokenized products and refunds.

Despite those risks, tokenized stocks have largely avoided major DeFi incidents over the past year. The Edel Finance manipulation was the main exception. Losses were estimated between $353,000 and $403,000.

Global Tokenization Race Heats Up

Regulation is also developing differently across regions. The US is largely moving through SEC exemptions and staff guidance, while Hong Kong, South Korea, and Abu Dhabi Global Market are taking more regulator-led approaches.

Hong Kong has already allowed 24/7 secondary trading for tokenized funds on licensed platforms. South Korea, on the other hand, is taking a slower route, as wider tokenized-stock access is expected after a second phase following its February 2027 registry launch.

The post Tokenized Stocks Surge 395% in a Year, But DeFi Adoption Remains Surprisingly Low appeared first on CryptoPotato.

The company behind XRP has doubled down on its partnership with Brevan Howard, one of the world’s largest alternative investment managers.

Ripple Prime will allow the firm access to multi-asset prime brokerage, clearing, and financing.

Another Institutional Heavyweight

The announcement shared earlier on October 6 reads that Ripple has expanded its ongoing relationship with the Wall Street giant to reflect growing demand from major investment managers for infrastructure that spans both traditional and digital assets. Brevan Howard will be able to use Ripple Prime across different asset classes and products, with the platform designed to simplify operations and improve capital efficiency.

“As digital and traditional markets become more interconnected, the need for institutional-quality digital asset infrastructure that enables a seamless experience for investors is only growing. Ripple has built a differentiated platform that we expect will provide our investment teams with increased operational ease and capital efficiency,” said Alan McGroarty, Group COO of Brevan Howard.

The two have some history, dating from the months after Ripple settled its legal dispute with the SEC. Funds managed by Brevan Howard affiliates participated in Ripple’s $500 million strategic investment in 2025. Consequently, the two parties have built on the ongoing partnership, and the latest agreement receives additional significance beyond standard client onboarding.

Moving Beyond Crypto

CryptoPotato reported recently that Ripple Prime launched a Delta One institutional trading platform allowing hedge funds, asset managers, and other clients to execute Total Return Swaps across US-listed equities, indices, and digital assets. Customers can also cross-margin exposures across asset classes through a single counterparty relationship.

Ripple Prime, formerly known as Hidden Road before the company behind XRP bought it for $1.25 billion, allowing the latter to become the first crypto firm to own and operate a global multi-asset prime broker. The business reportedly cleared more than $3 trillion annually and serves over 300 institutional clients.

The Brevan Howard partnership expansion only builds on Ripple’s latest strategy to move well beyond crypto and solidify its position across Wall Street.

The post Ripple (XRP) Scores Another Major Wall Street Win With Brevan Howard appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitcoin is nearing the US midterm election window, with past performances around that period holding it in good stead, but analysts at XWIN Japan have warned that past gains don’t necessarily mean we will see another rally.

Their analysis suggests a narrow test for BTC, especially if ETF buying continues, Treasury yields cool, and regulatory uncertainty clears up after the vote.

What the Midterm Record Shows

XWIN Japan stated that the S&P 500 had appreciated in all 19 12-month periods following US midterm elections held since 1950, with an average appreciation rate of 15.4%. Moreover, Bitcoin has gone up by 24.5%, 44.9% and 92.3% in the 12 months following the 2014, 2018 and 2022 midterms, respectively.

But there is a catch. BTC fell 45.5% in the first month after the 2018 election, leaving just three historical observations for Bitcoin. XWIN Japan therefore cautioned that “three observations cannot establish a reliable rule.”

Reduced political uncertainty may help risk-taking, but the election itself does not establish a cause for higher crypto prices.

“After the election, watch whether yields stabilize, buying persists and regulation advances,” XWIN wrote. “Political relief could help BTC, but sustained gains still require supportive market conditions.”

However, the analysts were quick to point out that while history offers context, it does not give guarantees.

Bitcoin is now around $86,000 on CoinGecko, little changed over 24 hours, up about 3% over seven days, and almost 8% across one month, although it has lost 31% of its value from a year ago, and remains nearly 32% below its $126,000 record.

How Analysts See the Road to Year-End

The OG cryptocurrency closed the third quarter up 43% after starting it under $58,000, its lowest level in a year and a half. Iliya Kalchev, an analyst at Nexo Dispatch, credits the bond market for that change in fortune, noting that the US Treasury enlarged its long-end bond buybacks in August and that spot ETF flows turned positive soon after.

And with the midterms due in the fourth quarter, Bitcoin has ended that period higher in nine of the past 15 years, although the median gain is only about 9%.

Lacie Zhang, research analyst at Bitget Wallet, still expects the Federal Reserve to raise rates by 25 basis points on October 28, which could affect the state Bitcoin will be in when Americans go to the ballot barely a week after.

She also sees $87,500 as the main hurdle for BTC, with a break above raising the odds of a short squeeze, while losing $82,000 to $82,500 support could open a move below $80,000.

The post These 3 Factors Could Shape Bitcoin’s Post-Midterm Performance appeared first on CryptoPotato.

The native token of the Cardano blockchain has skyrocketed by almost 100% since its multi-year low of under $0.14, marked in late June as the FUD around the protocol spread like wildfire.

The asset recently hit a multi-month peak of over $0.27, and data from Santiment showed that the move cannot be explained simply by short covering alone.

New Positions Are Entering

The crypto intelligence resource challenged the short-squeeze narrative after finding that ADA open interest actually increased about 25% over the same two-day period to over $300 million, during which the underlying asset jumped by 10% to over $0.27. The token marked its highest daily close since early April at that point.

This increase was not simply a consequence of the asset’s higher dollar price, as even measured in ADA, the OI climbed by roughly 13%. This suggests that traders were adding new leveraged positions as the move progressed. Santiment also outlined 314 whale transactions worth over $100,000 on October 5, around 2.2 times the weekday average during the previous month.

Nevertheless, short covering likely played some role, but not as significant as initially believed. Funding rates reached their most negative level of the past month on October 2 before shifting positive. However, Santiment stressed that covering shorts normally reduces open interest rather than increasing it.

Was $ADA’s rally really a short squeeze?

Some coverage said so, pointing to falling open interest. Santiment’s daily closes show the opposite.

$ADA rose ~10% from Oct 3 to Oct 5.
Open interest rose ~25% over the same two days, to $304M, its highest daily close since at least early April.
Measured in coins rather than dollars, open interest still rose ~13%, so this is new positioning, not just a higher price.
Whale transactions ($100K+) hit 413 on Oct 5, about 2.2x the Sep 7 to Oct 2 weekday average.

Social volume on Oct 5 sat at ~1.1x that same baseline.

Some short covering likely helped: funding hit its most negative reading of the past month on Oct 2, then flipped positive. But covering shrinks open interest, it doesn’t grow it.

The headline said squeeze, the open interest says leverage.

Explore ADA open interest in Sanbase: https://t.co/LOdcbV2HOB

— Santiment Intelligence (@SantimentData) October 6, 2026

Even Bigger Move Ahead?

Although ADA has outperformed most other larger-cap alts over the past week, Crypto Patel remains bullish on its longer-term picture. In a recent analysis, he noted that the token is roughly 98% above his previous accumulation zone and believes it could enter its next macro expansion phase.

His targets for the long term are quite optimistic at $0.50, $1.00, $2.00, $3.00, and even $5.00. He placed particular attention on the $2.00-$5.00 zone if the broader structure continues to develop.

The post Cardano (ADA) Just Broke Higher: The Data Says It Wasn’t Just Short Covering appeared first on CryptoPotato.