Yirenkyi's goal highlights Ghana's growing talent pipeline, potentially boosting their international competitiveness and player development.

The post Caleb Yirenkyi scores for Ghana in international friendly against Wales appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Shazeer's move to OpenAI could significantly shift AI innovation dynamics, impacting competitive strategies and technological advancements in the field.

The post Noam Shazeer joins OpenAI after leaving Google appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The case highlights increased regulatory scrutiny on market influencers, potentially impacting both traditional and crypto markets.

The post Andrew Left loses mistrial bid over court error, for now appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The BoE's rate hold reflects caution amid persistent inflation and geopolitical uncertainties, impacting economic stability and investor confidence.

The post Bank of England expected to hold interest rates at 3.75% as inflation stays stubbornly above target appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

This digital-first diplomacy could redefine international relations, fostering peace and economic stability through innovative negotiation methods.

The post Iran and US sign historic memorandum of understanding in digital-first diplomatic move appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Fed Signals Possible Rate Hikes as Kevin Warsh Opens ‘New Chapter’ at Central Bank

The Federal Reserve held interest rates steady at its June meeting, but signaled a shift toward tighter policy under new Chair Kevin Warsh, marking a decisive turn away from expectations of near-term easing.

The Federal Open Market Committee left the federal funds rate unchanged at a range of 3.50% to 3.75%, in line with market consensus. The policy statement and updated projections, however, pointed to renewed concern over inflation and a growing willingness among policymakers to raise rates later this year.

Officials now expect the benchmark rate to reach 3.8% by the end of 2026, up from a 3.4% projection in March. Rate expectations for 2027 and 2028 also moved higher, signaling that restrictive policy may remain in place for longer than previously anticipated.

The shift comes as inflation pressures persist across the U.S. economy. The Fed now forecasts headline personal consumption expenditures inflation at 3.6% for 2026, with core inflation at 3.3%, both above prior estimates. 

Policymakers pointed to supply shocks tied to the Middle East conflict and elevated energy costs as key drivers.

“Economic activity is expanding at a solid pace despite elevated uncertainty,” the Fed said in its statement, while reaffirming its commitment to restoring price stability.

Bitcoin’s price has dropped after the announcement, trading near $64,000.

Kevin Warsh takes the helm as Fed chair

The meeting marked Warsh’s first as Fed chair following his confirmation last month. His arrival appears to have influenced both tone and communication strategy. The post-meeting statement was shorter and omitted language that had previously suggested a bias toward rate cuts. 

All voting members supported the decision, with no dissent for the first time in a year.

Updated projections showed that nine officials now expect at least one rate increase by year-end. In March, none had forecast a hike in 2026. 

Futures markets moved in response, with traders pricing in a quarter-point increase by October and a high probability of a second move by early 2027.

Treasury yields rose following the announcement, with the two-year yield climbing to around 4.14%. Equities and crypto assets also reacted. Bitcoin fell from near $66,000 to around $64,000 before stabilizing, while the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 each dropped close to 1%, erasing earlier gains.

A ‘good family fight’

Warsh used his first press conference to frame the decision as part of a broader shift in how the Fed approaches policy and communication. He described the meeting as a “good family fight” and emphasized that the central bank is entering a “new chapter.”

He declined to provide forward guidance on the rate path and reiterated skepticism toward the Fed’s traditional use of projections. Warsh did not submit his own rate forecast, underscoring his long-standing criticism of the dot plot as a policy tool.

Instead, he signaled openness to changes in how the Fed interprets economic data. Warsh noted that many official indicators rely on survey-based methods that may lag real-time conditions. He suggested that alternative data sources and improved analytics could play a larger role in future policy decisions.

On the economic outlook, Warsh pointed to mixed signals on how restrictive current policy is. He cited weakness in housing as evidence of tight financial conditions, while noting that strength in broader markets complicates that assessment.

He also highlighted the growing impact of artificial intelligence on the economy, calling it one of the most significant structural shifts in decades. The Fed has established a task force to study how AI could affect productivity, employment, and the transmission of monetary policy.

The policy pivot comes amid political pressure for lower rates, though Warsh stressed the importance of central bank independence. President Donald Trump has called for easing in recent months, but has also stated that the Fed should act without direct influence from the White House.

For markets, the message from June’s meeting is clear: the Fed no longer sees a path toward imminent rate cuts. With inflation above target and growth holding firm, the risk of further tightening has returned to the forefront.

This post Fed Signals Possible Rate Hikes as Kevin Warsh Opens ‘New Chapter’ at Central Bank first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Mexican Billionaire Ricardo Salinas Bets 70% of His Portfolio on Bitcoin, Eyes $1 Million Price

Long before bitcoin existed, Ricardo Salinas Pliego was learning about hard money at the family dinner table.

Born in Mexico City in 1955, Salinas is the founder and chairman of Grupo Salinas, a corporate conglomerate with interests in telecommunications, media, financial services, and retail. In 1987, he took over from his father as CEO of Grupo Elektra — originally a family-owned furniture manufacturing company founded in 1906 by his great-grandfather — and refocused it on appliances, electronics, and consumer credit for Mexico’s emerging middle class. 

Today, his empire includes Banco Azteca, TV Azteca, and dozens of other enterprises spanning the country.

But Salinas’ financial philosophy was shaped well before any of that. He traces his deep belief in fiat devaluation to the era when President Richard Nixon severed the U.S. dollar’s direct convertibility into gold, ending the gold standard. 

“The conversation at the family table, way back then, with my grandfather and my father was always about gold,” he told CoinDesk in a recent interview, adding that “the famous fiat fraud committed by Richard Nixon” was a constant topic of discussion at home. The Salinas family, long involved in gold and silver mining, had direct skin in the game.

Salinas: Bitcoin is unseizable 

Those early lessons hardened into conviction. Salinas has argued for years that bitcoin is unseizable and can be transferred instantly worldwide — advantages he sees as superior to both fiat money and the gold standard, which he says “has always been subject to governmental intervention.”

Salinas didn’t arrive at bitcoin all at once. His bitcoin allocation has grown dramatically — from just 10% of his investment portfolio in 2020 to 70% today, a trajectory that mirrors his deepening conviction in the asset over half a decade.

In June 2021, Salinas publicly announced he was working with his bank, Banco Azteca, to make it the first in Mexico to accept bitcoin — a bold move that drew both applause from the crypto community and swift pushback from Mexican financial regulators, who issued warnings about virtual assets. The banking ambitions stalled, but his personal conviction only grew.

That same year, his hunger for bitcoin exposure led him into one of the stranger episodes of his financial career. Salinas wanted to put $400 million into bitcoin in 2021 but didn’t have the liquid cash readily available, so he borrowed against his shares in Grupo Elektra — pledging $416 million as collateral for a $150 million loan. 

His instincts about bitcoin were correct. The only problem was the lender turned out to be a fraud: a firm calling itself Astor Capital Fund, whose CEO “Thomas Astor-Mellon” introduced himself on a video call from what appeared to be a yacht, but was actually a man with prior convictions for forging prescriptions and stealing jewelry.

Even that painful episode didn’t shake him loose. At Bitcoin 2022, Salinas gave a keynote address discussing what he calls the “fiat fraud” — his term for centralized institutions that assure users of generational wealth while quietly destroying their currency’s purchasing power. He told the crowd his conviction was personal, not theoretical: “It’s one thing to understand a theoretical problem, and another to have lived it in your skin.”

The 70% bet — and why you should mortgage your house to buy Bitcoin

As of today, Salinas has placed approximately 70% of his investment portfolio into BTC — a figure he discussed in the interview with CoinDesk. 

The allocation dwarfs what most wealth advisers would sanction. But Salinas has never been one for conventional wisdom. He is so convinced of BTC’s long-term superiority that he persuaded his own wife to act. 

“I know this is a controversial topic, but I convinced my wife to mortgage the house that she has and take a loan to buy bitcoin,” he said. And she did.

He wants ordinary investors to think similarly. “For most people, the biggest investment, their nest egg, is their home equity,” he said. “Find a way to transform that into some kind of bitcoin exposure to a larger or to a smaller degree.”

His argument is grounded in a straightforward historical comparison. In January 2016, bitcoin hovered near $400 and the average Central London home cost roughly $1.6 million — about 4,000 bitcoin. With London property prices little changed a decade on, that same home would now cost fewer than 30 bitcoin. For Salinas, that comparison is all the proof anyone needs.

“It’s an asymmetrical bet to the upside,” he told CoinDesk. “The more people find out about bitcoin, the more demand there will be.”

When asked on the price predictions of fellow BTC bulls like Cathie Wood and Michael Saylor — who have suggested bitcoin could eventually reach seven figures — Salinas was uncharacteristically brief.

“So it will be a million dollars,” he said. “I just don’t know when.”

This post Mexican Billionaire Ricardo Salinas Bets 70% of His Portfolio on Bitcoin, Eyes $1 Million Price first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

U.S. Congressman Nick Begich Wants America to Stop Selling Its Bitcoin — And Start Treating It Like Gold

Congressman Nick Begich (R-AK) sat down with the Bitcoin Policy Institute at PubKey in New York for a wide-ranging conversation that touched on his path from startup founder to Capitol Hill, his landmark American Reserve Modernization Act, and the dual promise and peril of artificial intelligence.

The interview offered a window into one of Congress’s more technologically fluent members — a distinction Begich traces not to his political career but to the decades before it.

Begich’s resume reads unlike most of his colleagues. After undergraduate studies in entrepreneurship at Baylor University and an MBA from Indiana University focused on information technology and decision sciences, he spent time at Ford Motor Company before returning to Alaska to found a software development firm. 

Starting with a credit card and a laptop, he built the company to roughly 150 employees across three countries, with a practice centered on early-stage startups — helping founders transform PowerPoint pitch decks into fundable products, often in exchange for equity stakes.

That background, he said, shapes how he operates in Washington. “Congress can be a frustrating place,” Begich said. “You’re not a CEO. You can’t say, ‘We’re doing this.'” 

He drew a parallel between the consensus-building required in the House and the kind of obstacle navigation that defines startup life — facing capital constraints, entrenched competitors, and perpetual skepticism from investors. The difference, he noted, is that in Congress the runway is measured in election cycles, not funding rounds.

The case for a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve

Begich entered Bitcoin in early 2013, operating on the thesis that it could serve as a hedge against dollar depreciation for his business. 

He lost roughly 440 Bitcoin in the Mt. Gox collapse — “I got Goxed,” he said — but emerged from the bankruptcy process with what he described as a positive outcome, and his conviction in the asset intact.

That conviction is now law in proposal form. The American Reserve Modernization Act, or ARMA, which attracted significant co-sponsorship, would create a mechanism for the federal government to retain Bitcoin seized through law enforcement rather than auction it off. 

The idea, Begich said, stems from a simple question: if Bitcoin can function as a reserve asset for a private company, what could it do for a government?

His argument rests on two properties he considers non-negotiable for reserve assets: scarcity and diffusion. Gold, he said, satisfies both — it is hard to produce, and broad ownership has built consensus around its value over centuries. 

Bitcoin, he argued, is approaching that same status within the digital asset ecosystem, representing close to 60 percent of total cryptocurrency market capitalization.

“Once those network effects are in play,” Begich said, “the earlier you are to that cycle, the more advantaged you will be.”

He also framed ARMA as an insurance policy — not a bet on Bitcoin’s dominance, but a hedge against the possibility that the dollar does not remain the world’s reserve currency. 

“Every 93 years on average, that reserve currency changes hands,” he noted, pointing to historical transitions through Portugal, Spain, France, and Britain. Holding gold is an acknowledgment of that reality, he argued. Bitcoin should be viewed in the same light.

AI: Promise and peril 

The conversation shifted to artificial intelligence, where Begich was measured but direct about the stakes. He described two competing visions of an AI future: one defined by abundance — cheaper healthcare, higher productivity, broader access to economic opportunity — and one defined by displacement, where the removal of human roles at scale creates what he called “a disintermediation of purpose.”

On the question of open-source AI models, Begich pushed back against the idea that openness is an unqualified good at advanced capability levels. He cited the logic behind keeping nuclear and certain biotechnology research restricted — some asymmetric risks, once released, cannot be contained. 

“The genie is out of the box,” he said of AI broadly, but argued that the full open-sourcing of frontier models, particularly post-AGI systems, hands negative actors a tool with no practical upper bound on the harm they can cause.

He was pointed in his characterization of China’s open-source model strategy, suggesting it is less a gesture of openness than an economic tool — a way to undermine the investment case for American AI development and collapse the domestic ecosystem from the outside.

This post U.S. Congressman Nick Begich Wants America to Stop Selling Its Bitcoin — And Start Treating It Like Gold first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Oman Launches Mandatory National Bitcoin Mining Pool in State-Backed Push for Regulatory Control

Oman has taken one of the most direct steps by any government to bring bitcoin mining under formal state oversight, launching a mandatory national mining pool that licensed operators across the sultanate are required to join.

The pool, Omanhash.com, was launched by Oman’s Ministry of Transport, Communications and Information Technology and will run in cooperation with Frontier Technologies LLC, an Omani blockchain and Web3 company. 

Enegix Global, a vertically integrated digital energy and infrastructure company, built the technology platform and liquidity infrastructure behind it. The company called it the official national cryptocurrency mining pool of the Sultanate of Oman.

Under the approved regulatory framework, Omanhash.om is the sole official and mandatory mining pool for all licensed cryptocurrency mining companies in the country. The pool is expected to consolidate roughly 10 exahashes per second of computing power in its initial phase — a measure of the total computational work directed at securing the Bitcoin network and, by extension, minting new coins.

That hashrate matters for Bitcoin in a direct way. The more concentrated and regulated that hashrate becomes within a national framework, the greater the government’s visibility into mining revenue, energy consumption, and the flow of newly minted bitcoin. It seems the country is not trying to ban or restrict the activity — it is pulling it into a structured, trackable system.

Oman’s mining push

The country has been one of the most active jurisdictions in the Middle East for industrial-scale mining investment since 2022, when the ministry launched a $370 million hydro-cooled mining facility in Salalah. 

Total investments in mining and data center infrastructure in the Salalah Free Zone have since surpassed $700 million, including two major facilities built in 2022 and 2023. Alps Blockchain, an Italian firm, brought a 150 MW facility in Salalah to full operation in mid-2025. Oman’s Omanhash.om reflects the government’s next phase: pulling that accumulation of capacity into a regulated, transparent national architecture.

For Enegix, the mandate is its second sovereign-pool contract. The company built and operates btcpool.kz in Kazakhstan, where a 2023 digital assets law requires licensed miners to operate through government-accredited pools and report revenue to tax authorities through an automated system. 

The addition of Omanhash.om brings Enegix’s combined pool operations to about 25 EH/s across three pools.

“This is our second sovereign mandate, and it validates the model we have been building since Kazakhstan,” said Olzhas Amirov, chief business development officer of Enegix Global in a company press release, noting that licensing frameworks help miners operate within the law, avoid punitive taxation, and communicate with regulators.

Oman’s approach stands as a contrast to jurisdictions that have pushed back against mining with outright bans or heavy tax burdens. Instead, the sultanate has embedded mining within a broader economic diversification strategy — and is now adding a layer of centralized control that keeps bitcoin production inside the country’s regulatory reach. 

Enegix said its next target is to grow its combined pool hashrate to 30 EH/s.

This post Oman Launches Mandatory National Bitcoin Mining Pool in State-Backed Push for Regulatory Control first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

79% of Bitcoin Supply Now Locked by Long-Term Holders. Analyst Sees Bear Market Nearing Exhaustion

Bitcoin is showing signs of stabilization after a brutal stretch, and research firm K33 says the on-chain evidence is difficult to ignore. In its latest market report, K33 Head of Research Vetle Lunde pointed to a record share of Bitcoin supply held by long-term holders — a metric that, historically, has preceded the end of every major bear market in Bitcoin’s history.

Long-term holders now control 79% of Bitcoin’s circulating supply, an all-time high that K33 says reflects a continued accumulation trend and a gradual shift toward a more constructive market environment. 

That figure carries weight not as a standalone data point, but as part of a broader pattern: in every prior Bitcoin bear market, the circulating supply has tilted toward long-term holders as the market approached its trough.

The data on old coin reactivation reinforces the picture. As of June 6, only 218,421 BTC aged two years or more had been reactivated in 2026 — a near-historic low. The only year with lower reactivation by the same date was 2012, when 70,600 BTC had been reactivated. 

The contrast with 2024 is stark: 1.18 million BTC had been reactivated by June 6 of that year, reflecting the heavy distribution that characterized the top of the previous cycle. 

Lunde frames the current environment as one where long-term holders show diminished motivation to sell, with patient buyers absorbing whatever supply reaches the market.

Bitcoin ETF selling has eased

Other on-chain and market-structure indicators align with that thesis. Exchange-traded fund outflows — a dominant source of selling pressure in recent weeks — have eased. Trading volume has retreated to yearly lows, a pattern K33 associates with the late stages of Bitcoin bear markets rather than the beginning of fresh sell cycles. 

Last week, Lunde noted that 50% of BTC’s circulating supply is now underwater, a level historically reached only within weeks of major bear market bottoms — though often with one final leg lower before a turn.

Not all analysts share K33’s cautious optimism. Wintermute, Glassnode, and Bitfinex have each flagged that ETF flows, stablecoin growth, and institutional demand have not yet reached levels consistent with a durable reversal. 

Some forecasts put Bitcoin as low as $30,000 before any sustained recovery takes hold.

Bitcoin’s macro conditions

Macro conditions add another layer of uncertainty heading into the week. Today’s FOMC meeting — the first under new Fed Chair Kevin Warsh — has drawn close attention from the crypto market. 

Rates are expected to hold steady, though markets are still pricing in the possibility of hikes later in 2026. With Bitcoin’s 30-day correlation to the S&P 500 sitting near 0.6, any shift in the Fed’s tone could hit BTC with an amplified reaction, as the asset tends to be more sensitive to macro developments during bear market conditions.

Against that backdrop, BTC posted a 5.5% gain over the past week, clawing back from two consecutive weeks of double-digit losses to trade near the $65,000 region as of this morning, June 17. 

Month-over-month, the price remains down roughly 16% from a level near $79,000 in mid-May, and it trades nearly 40% below its all-time high of $126,198 reached in October 2025. 

This post 79% of Bitcoin Supply Now Locked by Long-Term Holders. Analyst Sees Bear Market Nearing Exhaustion first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Elon Musk’s personal fortune has surpassed the market value of Bitcoin, a milestone that shows how quickly SpaceX’s public-market debut has reshaped both wealth rankings and the broader conversation around speculative risk.

According to Bloomberg's Billionaire Index, Musk’s net worth rose to about $1.32 trillion as SpaceX shares traded above $200, extending a rally that began with the company’s record initial public offering last week.

At that level, his estimated personal wealth exceeds Bitcoin’s roughly $1.29 trillion market capitalization, based on CryptoSlate's pricing for the digital asset.

While this comparison is imprecise by design, it offers a striking snapshot of how SpaceX's rapid rise has moved into the center of global markets and catapulted Musk's wealth into uncharted territory.

Bitcoin’s pullback makes the comparison possible

Bitcoin remains the largest digital asset by market value, but its lead has narrowed as the broader crypto market has cooled from last year’s highs.

Over the past year, the total cryptocurrency market has fallen from a peak of about $4.21 trillion to roughly $2.23 trillion, according to CryptoSlate data. During this period, Bitcoin has dropped by more than 50% from its late-2025 record high near $126,000, amid months of selling pressure and weaker risk appetite.

The reversal follows a powerful rally that began during Donald Trump’s 2024 presidential campaign and continued through his return to the White House.

At the time, BTC crossed $100,000 for the first time as investors responded to industry-friendly appointments, regulatory proposals, and expectations that Washington would take a softer approach toward digital assets.

However, those gains have since faded this year as crypto exchange volumes have declined, leveraged positions have been flushed out, and capital has moved back toward large technology stocks, private-market proxies, and newly listed growth companies.

That backdrop makes Musk’s wealth milestone less about Bitcoin losing its role as crypto’s benchmark and more about the speed at which SpaceX has become a competing outlet for speculative capital.

Meanwhile, this comparison is even sharper outside Bitcoin. With the crypto market worth about $2.23 trillion and Bitcoin accounting for roughly $1.29 trillion, Musk’s estimated fortune is now larger than the combined value of the rest of the digital-asset market.

SpaceX becomes the market’s new crowded trade

The immediate driver of Musk’s wealth gain is SpaceX, which trades on Nasdaq under the ticker SPCX.

The company priced its IPO at $135 a share and has since rallied by more than 50%, pushing its market value to about $2.7 trillion. The move has placed SpaceX among the world’s most valuable public companies, ahead of Amazon and near Microsoft’s market capitalization.

The rally has been fueled by a rare combination of scarcity, brand power, and momentum. CryptoSlate previously reported that only a limited portion of SpaceX’s equity entered public trading, leaving investors to compete for a small float in one of the most anticipated listings in years. That imbalance has helped turn demand into price pressure.

At the same time, retail investors have been central to the stock's rapid rise.

South Korean individual investors bought about $795.9 million of SpaceX shares on June 12, the stock’s first day of trading, according to market-flow data cited by Global Market Investor. That made SPCX the most purchased US stock among South Korea’s retail traders in a single session.

The buying exceeded three-month net purchases in several major US technology names. Over the prior three months, South Korean retail investors bought $748.3 million in Micron Technology, $696.2 million in the Nasdaq 100 ETF, and $694.5 million in Marvell Technology, according to the same data.

Meanwhile, the rush for SPCX is also evident in leveraged exchange-traded funds tied to the firm, which have seen heavy trading in their first days on the market.

Eric Balchunas, senior ETF analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence, said total volume across 2x SpaceX ETFs topped $3 billion, up from about $1 billion the previous day.

One product, trading under the ticker SPCH, recorded about $1.3 billion in day-two volume. Balchunas said that was the highest second-day trading volume ever recorded by an ETF, above the roughly $500 million logged by BlackRock’s spot Bitcoin ETF (IBIT) on its second trading day.

This demand is notable because many of the products track the same underlying stock and offer similar leverage. That suggests investors are not simply looking for long-term exposure to SpaceX. Many are using the funds to express short-term directional bets.

Ultimately, these numbers show that SpaceX is being treated less like a conventional aerospace listing and more like a global momentum trade.

Investors who missed the IPO allocation have been buying the stock in the open market, while others have turned to exchange-traded funds, options, and crypto-linked derivatives to gain exposure to the same product.

SpaceX valuation questions grow louder

The pace of the rally has intensified questions about whether SpaceX’s valuation is outpacing its business fundamentals.

Musk has said SpaceX could reach $1 trillion in annual revenue by 2030, a target that has helped investors price the company as more than just a rocket-and-satellite business. The market is also assigning value to Starlink, artificial intelligence, launch infrastructure, and Musk’s wider technology ecosystem.

Current financials show a company still spending heavily to build that future. SpaceX reported a net loss of $4.94 billion in 2025 on revenue of $18.67 billion. The company recorded another $4.27 billion loss in the first quarter of 2026, reflecting capital spending on Starlink, launch capacity, computing infrastructure, and artificial intelligence initiatives.

Those losses have not stopped the rally. But they have widened the gap between what SpaceX is today and what investors are paying for it to become.

That is where the Bitcoin comparison becomes useful. Bitcoin’s market value has always depended on what buyers are willing to pay for scarcity, network strength, and future monetary relevance. SpaceX is now being priced with a similar forward-looking logic, only through the structure of a public company attached to Musk.

For now, public markets are rewarding that story more aggressively than crypto.

While Musk’s fortune may not stay above Bitcoin’s market value forever because SpaceX shares could fall, Bitcoin could rebound, or both could move sharply in opposite directions.

However, the milestone captures the current state of risk appetite: the biggest speculative trade in markets is no longer necessarily a token. It is a rocket company.

The post Elon Musk’s wealth has now surpassed Bitcoin market cap amid SpaceX’s continued rally appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Spain controlled the ball for nearly 75% of the match and took 27 shots at Cape Verde's goal on June 14, a stat line that usually ends in a win.

Cape Verde's 40-year-old goalkeeper, Vozinha, walked away with player-of-the-match honors after a 0-0 draw that cost Polymarket bettors millions and made one obscure wallet roughly $9 million richer in a single day.

The wallet belongs to an account called fishalive, which joined Polymarket in June 2026 and has placed exactly two recorded predictions.

The account redeemed about $4.7 million on a “Spain not to win” contract and another $8.5 million on a Cape Verde +2.5 spread, converting roughly $400,000 in stake into a profit of nearly $9 million.

Polymarket Sports reported a bet of $400,000 at 9% odds cashed out for $4,702,769.23. The size, timing, and newness of the account are drawing attention online, with some commentators noting that a $4.5 million position was landed just eight minutes before kickoff.

A brand-new wallet read Cape Verde's chances better than the market did, and Polymarket's public ledger let everyone watch the payout land in real time.

Polymarket's World Cup Winner market alone has logged $2.46 billion in volume, with France leading the outright field at roughly 17.6%, Spain next at around 13.9%, and Portugal and England trailing close behind at roughly 10.8% and 10.5%, respectively.

The contract resolves around July 20, and Polymarket says its broader 2026 World Cup lineup spans 362 active markets pulling in over $2.5 billion combined.

That scale turns individual matches into standalone financial events, and the Spain game produced about $64 million in trading on its own.

Favorites keep losing

A trader identified as betoor619 backed Spain to win at roughly 92% implied odds, risking close to $1 million for a potential gain of only about $85,000, and the draw erased the position entirely.

Polymarket Sports had captured the setup days earlier when a separate user placed $1 million on Spain to beat Cape Verde, resulting in a payout of $1,085,943.48. Cape Verde held its line through stoppage time and grabbed the first World Cup point in its history, draining both positions at once.

The pattern repeated within 24 hours, as Inc. reported that a trader called FlickRaw lost about $4.2 million across a $2.7 million bet on the Netherlands to beat Japan, then $1.5 million on Belgium to beat Egypt.

Japan equalized twice, including an 88th-minute goal that finished the match 2-2. Belgium conceded in the 19th minute to Egypt and settled for a 1-1 draw despite leveling the score in the 66th minute.

The same Belgium result wiped out the tournament's largest single bet so far: a trader called leeeroyjenkins staked $8.6 million on Belgium, a position that would have paid roughly $13.1 million had Belgium won.

Polymarket Sports tracked the match in real time, posting Egypt's 1-0 halftime lead before confirming the final draw that erased the wager.

Why now

Spain, the Netherlands, and Belgium were the stronger sides on paper, a read the betting markets shared. Win-only positions pay out for one outcome alone, and soccer's draw rate turns a dominant performance into a worthless ticket the moment the final whistle confirms a tied score.

A 92-cent “Yes” share prices in near-certainty, then collapses to zero the instant the team it tracks fails to score one more goal than its opponent. fishalive's two positions worked because a “Spain not to win” contract and a Cape Verde spread both paid out on a tie, the exact outcome that erased every favorite bet placed that week.

The winner board functions as a sentiment gauge, tracking how the crowd reranks national teams as results come in. Match-level contracts function as the viral engine because they resolve in roughly 90 minutes, generate visible profit-and-loss screenshots, and immediately punish bad sizing.

Whales have concentrated their biggest bets on favorites to win outright matches, while the largest asymmetric payouts have come from spreads and “not to win” contracts that explicitly price in draw risk.

Goldman Sachs' pre-tournament model had given Spain a 26% chance of winning the tournament, ahead of France at 19%. Polymarket's crowd has since repriced France ahead of Spain, a move that followed directly from the Cape Verde result.

The World Cup offers a global audience already fluent in football outcomes, a compressed group-stage schedule that produces a match-driven news cycle every few hours, national-team stakes that carry emotional weight independent of money, and a settlement structure that turns every big bet into a traceable, screenshot-ready story.

These are nearly all the ingredients that make a prediction market spread beyond crypto circles.

Two outcomes ahead

World Cup volume continues to compound as the knockout rounds approach, and the combination of public wallets, live repricing, and emotionally charged national outcomes makes Polymarket a fixture of sports media coverage.

The Cape Verde trade and the Belgium wipeouts become the first entries in a tournament that produces a new viral wallet story every few days, with match markets establishing themselves as a faster, more visceral complement to traditional sportsbooks.

A pullback scenario consists of whales who got burned on thin-upside favorite bets, like the Spain position that risked $1 million for $85,000 in return, scaling back oversized win-only wagers, and liquidity migrates toward spreads and hedges that already price in draw risk.

Regulatory friction adds to the pullback, given that the CFTC's June 10 draft rules aim to formalize federal oversight of prediction markets while acknowledging that sports contracts can aid price discovery.

Yet states, tribes, and gaming interests are fighting the move, and the American Gaming Association points to survey data showing 85% of Americans view these contracts as gambling.

Spain itself briefly blocked Polymarket and Kalshi in late May over licensing gaps, which turns the story away from raw market growth and toward a fight over whether anonymous wallets and sportsbook-sized bets belong in the same regulatory category as financial derivatives.

Whether fishalive is sharp, lucky, or simply early to a structural mispricing in win-only contracts is still an open question, and Polymarket's ledger won't settle it alone.

What the ledger does show, match after match, is a direct flow of money from bettors who priced in certainty to the ones who priced in soccer.

The post World Cup bettors are losing millions on Polymarket’s “safe” favorites appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Strategy’s (formerly MicroStrategy) flagship dividend-paying preferred stock is trading at its weakest level this year, pressuring one of the company’s most important tools for raising capital to buy Bitcoin.

The $10.5 billion variable-rate perpetual preferred stock, which trades under the ticker STRC, closed Tuesday at $91.79.

The settlement marked its third-lowest close since trading began in July 2025 and left the security well below the $100 level that the Michael Saylor-led firm has tried to keep it near.

Over the past year, STRC has expanded from $2.8 billion to $10.5 billion, adding $7.7 billion through at-the-market issuance. This made it one of the fastest-growing financial products in history.

So, the decline has turned STRC into a live test of investor appetite for Bitcoin-linked income products. Strategy built the instrument to offer a high dividend while giving the company another way to raise capital.

However, the market is now tacitly demanding a higher yield as Bitcoin pulls back, rival preferred stocks offer more attractive terms, and investors reassess the risks attached to Strategy’s expanding capital structure.

Bitcoin’s pullback reaches the preferred stack

STRC’s weakness shows how quickly Strategy’s income products can start trading under the same pressure as the asset underlying the company’s balance sheet.

During the spring, strong demand and a rising Bitcoin price allowed Strategy to keep the STRC dividend rate unchanged at 11.5%. The stock traded close enough to par that management had little reason to raise the payout.

However, that changed as Bitcoin rolled over and investors began asking for more compensation to hold a preferred stock tied to a company whose value is deeply exposed to the cryptocurrency.

Kraken chief economist Thomas Perfumo said about 86% of the variation in STRC’s yield spread can be explained by moves in Bitcoin’s price. His analysis suggests investors are treating STRC less like a stable preferred stock and more like a credit product whose risk premium moves with Bitcoin.

That relationship is not unique to STRC. Other Strategy preferred securities, including STRK, STRD, and STRF, have also shown pressure.

The difference is that investors expect those instruments to move around. STRC was marketed with a stronger price-stability objective, making its extended discount more difficult for holders to dismiss.

The market math is straightforward. STRC pays an annual dividend of $11.50. At a price near $92, investors are earning about 12.6%.

To bring the stock back toward $100, Strategy would likely need to raise the dividend closer to the yield investors are already demanding. Andre Dragosh, Bitwise Europe's head of research, stated:

“Saylor essentially needs to raise the dividend by slightly more than 1$ to pull STRC to par. Equilibrium dividend is at around 12.6$ right now.”

The soft-peg problem

STRC’s design gives Strategy flexibility, but it does not force the market to value the stock at $100.

The product has a stated amount of $100, and Strategy can adjust the dividend rate to encourage trading near that level. But there is no automatic mechanism requiring buyers to step in at par. That distinction has become central to the current selloff.

Parker White, chief operating officer and chief investment officer at DeFi Development Corp., said the product’s soft $100 anchor may have made it vulnerable to short sellers.

He argues that STRC’s retail-heavy investor base expected the stock to stay close to par, so a move even a few dollars below that level can trigger outsized concern.

According to him, short sellers may be able to exploit that reaction because the cost to borrow STRC is relatively low.

White continued that the outright borrowing cost is about 60 basis points, making the trade cheap to maintain compared with similar products. Strategy’s at-the-market issuance program may also limit upside above $100, reducing the risk that short sellers face if they position against the stock.

The theory gives traders a clear pressure point. If investors treat $100 as a promise rather than a target, every move away from that level can weaken confidence.

That risk is more pronounced because some crypto protocols have been built around STRC or use Strategy-linked securities as part of broader yield strategies. A sustained decline could force some holders to reassess collateral values, liquidity assumptions, and expected returns.

Strive's SATA raises the comparison

White also noted that STRC’s discount has become more visible because a rival product is holding up better.

Strive’s bitcoin-backed preferred stock, SATA, has continued to trade close to its $100 par value while offering a higher annualized payout of about 13%. It also pays dividends daily, rather than monthly or semi-monthly, giving investors faster cash distribution and making the product more expensive to short.

That structure has strengthened SATA’s appeal among income-focused investors. Daily dividends reduce the pressure that often builds around ex-dividend dates, when holders decide whether to collect the payout or rotate elsewhere.

They also increase the carrying cost for short sellers, who must account for dividend obligations more frequently.

White estimated that SATA’s baseline borrowing cost is about 460 basis points. Including the effect of daily dividend obligations, he said the annualized cost to short SATA rises toward 17.6%, compared with about 60 basis points for STRC.

The comparison puts Strategy in a difficult position. STRC still offers a high stated payout, but the market is showing a preference for both higher yield and faster payments.

Restoring STRC comes with a cost

STRC’s decline has left Strategy with a narrower path to restore confidence in one of its most important funding channels.

White has argued that the company could stabilize the product by raising the dividend to 12%, calling a shareholder vote to move to daily payments, increasing the call price from $101 to at least $110, and rebuilding the cash buffer to $2.5 billion.

According to him, higher dividends and daily payments would make STRC more expensive to short. A higher call price would give the stock more room to trade above $100, increasing the risk for traders betting against it.

Additionally, the larger cash reserve would reduce concerns about dividend coverage and help reassure income-focused investors.

However, each step would carry a significant trade-off that could impact Strategy.

For context, A higher payout could help pull STRC closer to par, but it would also increase Strategy’s recurring cash burden. Daily dividends may improve market confidence, but would require another structural change. A larger reserve could strengthen the credit profile, but may slow the pace of new Bitcoin purchases.

The larger challenge is the investor base. STRC still appears to be owned heavily by Bitcoin-native buyers, who compare the preferred stock with Bitcoin itself.

When Bitcoin falls, those investors can either collect income from STRC or rotate back into spot Bitcoin at lower prices. That competition forces Strategy to offer a higher return than traditional fixed-income buyers might require.

A broader investor base could reduce that pressure. For money-market, preferred-stock, and fixed-income investors, an 11.5% cash dividend remains large.

However, attracting that capital may require stronger proof that STRC can hold its range even during Bitcoin drawdowns.

The post Strategy’s $10 billion STRC Bitcoin yield product sinks to yearly low as market demands higher payout appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin is falling while Brent crude trades below $80 after the US-Iran peace framework.

The oil shock that dominated Bitcoin's 2026 macro trade has eased, yet BTC is still trading near $64,900, down roughly 2.5% over 24 hours on CryptoSlate's Bitcoin price page.

Brent's drop should have given risk assets a cleaner relief trade. Instead, it has exposed the next problem.

The market has moved past the simple oil-up, Bitcoin-down model. Lower crude removes a bearish driver. Restored liquidity support will still have to come from rates, ETF flows, and risk appetite through the end of 2026.

Global oil prices settled below $80 for the first time since the Iran war began, after the US-Iran framework pointed toward reopening the Strait of Hormuz. Ships were still not moving normally through the chokepoint, leaving the peace deal's operational effect unresolved.

President Donald Trump's public message that the Iran deal was complete gave traders the catalyst to remove part of the war premium from crude. Bitcoin's response puts liquidity, rates, risk appetite, ETF demand, and crypto buyers' willingness to step in after the geopolitical pressure at the center of the next trade.

Related Reading

Bitcoin Iran-deal rally faces its real test in oil flows and Fed pricing

The rally has a clear macro path, but oil flows, gasoline prices, inflation data, Fed pricing, and nuclear terms still have to confirm the trade.

May 25, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

Oil Moves To The Background

The old Bitcoin trade was coherent. When the Iran war lifted crude prices, it threatened to push fuel costs through supply chains, keep inflation expectations elevated, delay Fed rate cuts, and leave risk assets with less oxygen.

That earlier oil-pressure setup was already evident when Bitcoin fell, as higher oil prices, higher yields, and the vanishing of rate-cut expectations tightened financial conditions. Oil became the first signal because it was the fastest way for the war to reach inflation, yields, and the Federal Reserve.

The Iran-deal rally framework made the same point from the other side. A peace framework could help Bitcoin only if lower crude oil prices translated into real oil flows, lower gasoline prices, softer inflation compensation, and a Fed path that looked less hostile to risk assets.

The first link in the confirmation chain has now moved. Crude has broken lower, and Bitcoin is failing to trade like an asset with a clear path back to upside.

Oil has shifted from main driver to background risk. If Hormuz traffic fails to normalize, or if energy markets reprice disruption, oil can still hurt Bitcoin. If crude keeps falling without a matching improvement in Fed expectations, ETF flows, and risk appetite, Bitcoin has less reason to rally.

The Fed remains central. The April FOMC minutes kept energy-driven inflation risk in view, and the 10-year Treasury yield was around 4.47% in the latest visible data.

That is a restrictive backdrop for a non-yielding asset that still trades like high-beta liquidity in stress periods.

The next Fed communication sits directly in that path. Bitcoin needs the market to believe lower oil will give policymakers room to stop leaning against risk.

A hawkish Fed message, sticky inflation language, or another push higher in real yields would leave the peace deal looking like a crude-market event rather than a Bitcoin liquidity event.

That is why the lower oil print places a different burden of proof on Bitcoin. The next confirmation has to come from the parts of the market that set liquidity: Fed communication, Treasury yields, dollar pressure, equity-risk appetite, ETF flows, and derivative positioning.

Related Reading

Bitcoin’s loses $78k while the US markets sleeps – risk takes over from oil as crude prices stay flat

Bitcoin’s pullback near $80K mirrors a risk-off move in equities, with oil and Fed expectations still framing the macro backdrop.

Apr 23, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

Liquidity Becomes The Year-End Test

Bitcoin ETF flow data showed a small positive daily flow on June 16, but the magnitude is too small to account for the entire regime shift.

Earlier ETF-flow coverage showed how quickly institutional demand can turn from support into a stress point when oil, rates, and risk appetite move against Bitcoin.

That is why the year-end path depends less on one green ETF print than on repetition. Bitcoin needs several sessions in which lower oil is joined by steady ETF demand, softer yields, and a broader risk appetite.

Without that combination, the market may interpret the latest inflow as a pause in de-risking before any new allocation cycle begins.

Related Reading

Bitcoin’s $63k slide shows ETF demand fighting AI equities for dollar liquidity

Bitcoin’s break from the S&P 500 now hinges on ETF flows, AI equity demand, and whether the $66,900-$70,000 shelf can be reclaimed.

Jun 4, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

Crypto-native liquidity is the final test. BTC open interest and futures volume were large enough to make positioning relevant for short-term price transmission, according to CoinGlass data.

Direction still depends on the catalyst. Any surprise from the Fed, ETF desk, or equity market can travel quickly through leveraged positioning.

The base case into year-end is a fragile, liquidity-led recovery attempt.

That is a more cautious view than the oil chart alone would suggest. Brent below $80 removes one of the biggest bearish inputs for 2026, but Bitcoin still has to rebuild the demand side.

The asset can recover if lower crude becomes lower inflation expectations, if yields drift lower, and if ETF flows shift from one-off positive days to steady demand.

The recovery lane is straightforward. Hormuz traffic normalizes, gasoline pressure eases, inflation compensation falls, and the Fed gets enough cover to sound less restrictive.

At the same time, Bitcoin ETF flows stabilize, spot demand improves, and BTC reclaims the $66,900 to $70,000 shelf that recent market-structure coverage highlighted as important.

In that lane, oil's job is to prevent the liquidity trade from being blocked. The upside would come from capital returning to Bitcoin as a scarce, liquid risk asset once rates and flows stop arguing against it.

The pressure lane is just as clear. The peace framework can stall at implementation, tanker traffic can remain impaired, or crude can reprice if shippers and insurers lose confidence in the route.

Even with lower oil, Bitcoin can remain pinned if the Fed removes easing hopes, if Treasury yields hold firm, or if ETF flows return to redemptions.

That is the key shift. Liquidity and risk appetite now carry the trade. Bitcoin's next move depends on whether the market sees the peace deal as a real disinflation shock or as a crude reset that leaves rates, dollar pressure, and ETF demand unresolved.

For the rest of 2026, liquidity and risk appetite have outpaced oil. Bitcoin's bullish case is still alive, but it now runs through the Fed, ETF desks, and the willingness of crypto capital to buy the dip after the war premium has already come out of crude.

The post Oil finally loses its grip on Bitcoin – but now liquidity takes over the sell pressure appeared first on CryptoSlate.

A megawatt leased to an AI tenant now commands a different price on Wall Street than a megawatt sitting in a Bitcoin miner's pipeline, and the distance between the two has become the central pricing question for the entire sector.

VanEck's latest framework for valuing publicly traded miners shows that companies with signed AI and high-performance computing leases trade at more than 10 times gross energy output, while miners with little or no contracted capacity trade at roughly 2 to 6 times that metric.

Investors have started treating leased megawatts as a distinct, more valuable asset class than mined Bitcoin or unsold power capacity.

The premium is arriving before the capacity

VanEck puts delivered AI and HPC capacity across the peer group at only about 25% of what has been leased. Wall Street is paying for contracts today and for construction outcomes the sector has not yet delivered.

The near-term funding shortfall for that construction totals roughly $50 billion across the group, with long-term capital needs climbing toward $221 billion if the full pipeline of announced projects ultimately converts into built sites.

VanEck's valuation model assumes a baseline net operating income of about $1.5 million per megawatt for AI and colocation sites and applies an enterprise value multiple of 15 times that figure.

The model also offsets the result against greenfield construction costs of roughly $10 million per megawatt, climbing to about $12 million for projects further out as construction inflation compounds.

A single megawatt implies a gross enterprise value near $22.5 million, against a pre-financing value of about $12.5 million after capex, before any probability discount for delivery risk or financing costs is applied.

Pushing the capex per megawatt up by a few million dollars, or stretching the delivery timeline by a year, and the equity value attached to that megawatt moves by a proportionally large amount.

VanEck's framework treats a megawatt leased to an investment-grade hyperscaler as supportable at an effective cost of capital between 6% and 10%. A similar megawatt leased to a smaller GPU cloud tenant can warrant a discount rate above 10%, the cost of capital growing directly with tenant risk.

A signed lease and an energized megawatt carry different values once the tenant's balance sheet is factored in. The same power, sold to a weaker counterparty, commands a smaller premium.

Financing the shortfall without giving away the upside

Closing a $50 billion near-term shortfall pulls miners toward financing tools drawn from infrastructure and project finance.

Project finance and debt bring fixed obligations onto balance sheets built around volatile mining margins. Bitcoin treasury sales convert an asset some miners spent years accumulating into construction capital, undercutting the original thesis that drew Bitcoin-focused investors into the stock in the first place.

Strategic partnerships and tenant prepayments offer a softer path, but they typically come with terms that shift a portion of the AI-era upside away from existing shareholders and toward whichever partner supplies the capital.

The International Energy Agency projects that global data center electricity consumption will roughly double from about 485 terawatt-hours in 2025 to around 950 terawatt-hours by 2030, with AI-specific data center consumption tripling over the same period.

McKinsey estimates that global data center spending could reach about $7 trillion by 2030, with roughly $5.2 trillion directed toward AI-capable facilities.

KKR's recently launched $10 billion AI infrastructure venture with Nvidia, and Vistra shows large financial institutions treating power-backed AI capacity as its own asset class, with capital scaling at a pace that matches the size of the opportunity miners are chasing.

Bitcoin's shadow hasn't lifted

The market continues to price miners based on Bitcoin's daily swings, even as VanEck's framework describes a business model migrating toward AI leases.

The peer group's average one-year weekly beta to Bitcoin is near 1.05, meaning the typical mining stock still moves in near lockstep with Bitcoin's price, even as its underlying cash flow story shifts toward AI leases.

Meaningful Bitcoin treasury exposure, the kind that would justify that beta, is concentrated in a handful of names.

MARA holds Bitcoin worth about 51% of its market cap, CLSK around 24%, RIOT near 11%, and HUT roughly 7%, while most peers hold Bitcoin at 1% or less of their market cap.

AI-focused winners can trade too cheaply during a Bitcoin selloff, while pipeline-heavy laggards can trade too richly whenever Bitcoin rallies.

VanEck's governance scorecard evaluates insider ownership, management KPIs, executive compensation structure, leadership tenure, and related-party transactions, and finds no company in the group scoring close to a perfect mark, with HIVE and BTDR ranking lower on the relative scale.

Funding tens of billions of dollars in AI infrastructure requires investors to trust management teams with capital budgets several orders of magnitude larger than anything a mining-era balance sheet previously demanded.

Governance gaps carried little consequence in a hash-rate business, and real weight in one that sells power to hyperscalers under long-dated contracts.

Two paths from contract to cash flow

A bull case for the sector is that miner valuations migrate toward the framework already used for data-center REITs and infrastructure landlords.

Hyperscaler demand for power-dense, interconnection-ready sites stays intense, financing markets open up for creditworthy projects, and the miners furthest along in construction begin reporting delivered megawatts and recurring lease revenue.

Multiple-on-delivered capacity holds near or above the 10x level that VanEck already observes, and the premium the market assigned early is validated by the cash flow that eventually follows.

A bear case has the funding shortfall resolved through dilution, as construction costs climb past the $10 million-per-megawatt baseline due to rising labor, equipment, and grid interconnection expenses.

Debt gets priced for a sector with limited operating history as an infrastructure landlord, pushing miners toward equity issuance or Bitcoin monetization to bridge the shortfall before AI revenue materializes.

Shareholders fund the buildout, and a meaningful share of the eventual upside flows instead to lenders, strategic partners, or the buyers of newly issued equity who priced their entry after the dilution.

The test that decides which case plays out has nothing to do with the size of a miner's next AI announcement.

It comes down to delivered megawatts relative to leased megawatts, the credit quality of the tenant signing each lease, and the actual capex required per megawatt once ground is broken.

It also depends on the financing structure chosen to bridge the distance between today's cash and tomorrow's revenue, and on whether each company's governance can support capital allocation at infrastructure scale.

Wall Street has already decided these companies are worth more as AI infrastructure than as Bitcoin miners.

What remains unsettled is whether investors are paying for AI cash flow that has not yet materialized, or for a construction pipeline that still needs tens of billions of dollars before it becomes AI revenue at all.

The post Wall Street is paying up for Bitcoin miners’ AI infrastructure before most of it is built appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Binance is facing a major regulatory test in Europe, and the timing could not be more important for the crypto market.

According to Reuters, Binance could lose permission to serve European Union clients from next month because its MiCA license application in Greece is reportedly expected to be rejected. The report comes just before the end of the EU’s MiCA transition period, when crypto companies must secure proper authorization to continue offering services across the bloc.

For Binance, this is more than another regulatory headline. It could affect the exchange’s European operations, investor sentiment around BNB, and the way crypto users across the EU access trading, custody, and other digital asset services.

Why Is Binance EU Access at Risk?

Binance applied for a MiCA license through Greece’s Hellenic Capital Market Commission. If approved, that license would allow Binance to operate across the European Union through MiCA’s passporting system.

But Reuters reported that the application is expected to be rejected, citing people familiar with the matter. Binance, however, has said it worked with regulators for months and believes it has met the requirements for MiCA authorization. The exchange also said it plans to provide another update before the June 30 deadline.

That means the situation is still not fully finalized. Binance has not officially announced an EU shutdown, and there has not yet been a confirmed final decision from the Greek regulator. Still, the risk is now serious enough to matter for users, traders, and the broader crypto market.

What Is MiCA and Why Does It Matter?

MiCA, short for Markets in Crypto-Assets, is the European Union’s regulatory framework for the crypto industry. It is designed to create one unified rulebook for crypto companies operating across EU member states.

Instead of dealing with completely separate rules in every country, crypto asset service providers can apply for authorization in one EU member state. Once approved, they can use that license to serve clients across the wider EU through passporting.

This is why the Binance case is so important. A MiCA license is not just a local approval. It can decide whether an exchange has access to the entire EU market.

For crypto users, MiCA is meant to bring more transparency, stronger investor protection, and clearer oversight. For exchanges, it creates a stricter compliance environment where operating without authorization may no longer be tolerated.

What Could This Mean for Binance Users in Europe?

For European Binance users, the biggest question is whether services could be limited, paused, transferred, or restructured if Binance fails to secure MiCA approval in time.

At this stage, users should avoid panic because nothing has been officially confirmed as a final outcome. However, Binance may need to give clear guidance quickly if the deadline arrives without approval.

Possible outcomes include a last minute regulatory solution, a temporary transition plan, restrictions in some EU markets, or a broader restructuring of Binance’s European business. The exchange may also need to explain how it would protect user access, balances, withdrawals, and account services if the regulatory issue escalates.

The main uncertainty is not whether Binance remains a major global exchange. It is whether Binance can continue serving EU users under the new MiCA framework without disruption.

Could BNB Be Affected?

BNB could come under pressure if the Binance EU situation worsens. The token often reacts to Binance related headlines because traders associate BNB with the strength, reputation, and activity of the Binance ecosystem.

If Binance secures MiCA approval or finds a smooth regulatory solution, BNB could stabilize as uncertainty fades. But if the reported rejection becomes official and Binance announces service restrictions in Europe, the token may face renewed selling pressure.

This does not mean BNB would collapse automatically. Binance remains one of the largest crypto exchanges in the world, and its business extends far beyond Europe. However, Europe is a major regulated market, and losing access or facing uncertainty there would be a negative sentiment event.

For BNB traders, the next major catalyst is likely not only the broader crypto market. It is Binance’s next regulatory update.

Why This Story Matters Beyond Binance

The Binance MiCA issue is also important because it shows how Europe’s crypto market is changing.

For years, many crypto platforms operated across multiple jurisdictions under different national rules. MiCA is changing that model. The EU is moving toward a more formal licensing system where exchanges must meet clear requirements or risk losing access to users.

This could create a stronger divide between regulated and unregulated crypto platforms. Exchanges that secure MiCA licenses may gain credibility with users, banks, institutions, and regulators. Platforms that fail to secure approval could face user migration, liquidity pressure, or enforcement risk.

That makes this story much bigger than Binance alone. It is a test of how strict Europe will be with the world’s largest crypto companies under the new regulatory framework.

Binance EU Outlook: What Happens Next?

The next key date to watch is June 30. Binance has said it will provide another update before that deadline, which makes the coming days critical.

If Binance confirms a clear path to MiCA authorization, the market reaction could become more positive. It would remove a major uncertainty and allow the exchange to continue competing in Europe under a regulated structure.

If the reported rejection becomes official, the consequences could be more serious. Binance may have to limit services, shift users to another structure, or pause certain activities for EU clients.

For now, the safest way to frame the story is clear: Binance has not officially lost EU access yet, but its European operations are under pressure as the MiCA deadline approaches.

Final Thoughts

Binance has faced major regulatory challenges before, but MiCA is different because it affects access to the entire European Union market.

The EU is no longer only asking crypto companies to improve compliance. It is creating a licensing system where authorization determines whether platforms can legally serve users across the bloc.

For Binance, this could become one of the most important regulatory moments of 2026. For BNB, it could become a major sentiment driver. And for European crypto users, it could decide how they access one of the world’s largest exchanges in the months ahead.

SpaceX and Ethereum represent two very different bets on the future — one a stake in the most valuable private space and satellite company ever to go public, the other the leading smart-contract network underpinning most of decentralized finance. Over the past year, their performance has diverged sharply. This comparison measures each on a like-for-like basis: an Ethereum position opened one year ago versus a SpaceX position taken at its IPO, both valued against current prices.

SpaceX (SPCX) vs Ethereum (ETH): Entry Prices and Current Price Compared

The starting and current values for each asset:

• Ethereum ($ETH): ~$2,600 in mid-June 2025 → ~$1,760 today
• SpaceX (SPCX): $135 at IPO → ~$201 today

In percentage terms, that's roughly −32% for Ethereum over twelve months and +49% for SpaceX in a matter of weeks.

What Would $5,000 Invested in SpaceX vs Ethereum Be Worth Today?

Applying a $5,000 investment to each entry point makes the gap concrete.

Ethereum at ~$2,600:

• $5,000 buys ≈ 1.92 ETH
• 1.92 ETH × ~$1,760 ≈ $3,385
• Result: a loss of roughly −$1,615 (−32%)

SpaceX at $135:

• $5,000 buys ≈ 37 shares
• 37 shares × ~$201 ≈ $7,444
• Result: a gain of roughly +$2,444 (+49%)

On identical starting capital, the two positions are separated by more than $4,000 — the SpaceX holding is worth over double the Ethereum holding.

Why Did SpaceX Stock Rise So Much After Its IPO?

SPCX's outperformance reflects a combination of structural and market factors:

• Constrained access. Asian buyers and much of the retail market were excluded from the IPO allocation, leaving unmet demand to chase the stock in open trading.
• A differentiated business. Launch dominance, a clear lead in reusable rockets, and Starlink's recurring revenue give SpaceX a moat that is difficult to replicate.
• Post-IPO momentum. Record-breaking listings attract trend-driven capital, and the tokenized-equity products mirroring SPCX kept demand visible around the clock.

Why Did Ethereum's Price Fall Over the Past Year?

Ethereum's decline is a function of cycle timing rather than any breakdown in its fundamentals. ETH peaked near $4,950 in 2025 before entering a multi-month correction and consolidation phase, weighed down by tighter macro conditions, moderating institutional inflows, and a broad crypto risk-off period. An investor who entered near last year's elevated levels is therefore underwater today, even though the network continues to settle substantial value and remains central to DeFi and tokenization.

The critical variable is entry timing: an Ethereum position opened two years ago would show a gain today, whereas one opened a year ago, closer to the highs, shows a loss. Volatility cuts both ways depending entirely on the entry point.

What Are the Risks of Comparing SpaceX and Ethereum Returns?

A few factors temper the headline result:

• Unequal time frames. SpaceX produced its +49% over weeks; Ethereum's −32% spans a full year. Extrapolating a recent IPO's debut performance over a longer horizon is unreliable, as newly listed stocks are prone to sharp reversals.
• Post-IPO volatility. SPCX at ~$201 sits well above its $135 listing price and could retrace meaningfully if the initial momentum fades.
• Different asset classes. SPCX is equity in a revenue-generating company; ETH is a network asset that generates staking yield and utility rather than corporate earnings. They serve distinct roles and risk profiles within a portfolio.
• Track record versus novelty. Ethereum has weathered multiple full market cycles; SpaceX has a trading history measured in weeks.

Which Is Better Positioned for the Next Year?

Past performance and forward prospects are separate questions. SPCX has delivered the stronger return, but at ~$201 it carries elevated post-IPO risk, and a move back toward its IPO price would not be unusual for a stock that has risen this quickly. Ethereum, at ~$1,760, trades closer to historically oversold territory than to euphoria, which gives it clearer room to recover should the crypto cycle turn on easing macro conditions and renewed risk appetite.

SpaceX vs Ethereum: Which Was the Better Investment?

Measured strictly on the trades described, SpaceX is the clear winner, converting $5,000 into roughly $7,444 while the same amount in Ethereum declined to about $3,385. The decisive factors were entry price and timing rather than any inherent superiority of one asset over the other.

The broader takeaway is that returns are driven primarily by entry point, time horizon, and asset type — not by which name carries more momentum at any given moment. SpaceX was the better investment over the past year; the better investment over the next year remains an open question that depends on each asset's distinct trajectory from here.

Two of the most talked-about assets of the past year sit at opposite ends of the performance table right now. SpaceX (SPCX) just completed a record-shattering IPO and has been ripping higher ever since, while $Bitcoin — the original "number-go-up" asset — is actually well below where it traded a year ago. So if you had money to put to work, which one would have rewarded you more?

Let's run the numbers on both, using a clear apples-to-apples comparison: a SpaceX investor who bought at the IPO launch versus a Bitcoin investor who bought one year ago, both measured against today's prices.

*Investments carry risks. Trade responsibly.

SpaceX or Bitcoin: The Headline Numbers

Here's where each asset stands today versus its entry point:

• SpaceX (SPCX): IPO priced at $135, now trading at ~$201 — a gain of roughly +49% since launch.
• Bitcoin ($BTC): Trading around ~$105,000–$107,000 in mid-June 2025, now at ~$65,200 — a decline of roughly −38% over the past 12 months.

On the surface, it's not close: the SpaceX IPO buyer is sitting on a near-50% gain in a matter of weeks, while the year-ago Bitcoin buyer is deep in the red.

What $1,000 Would Have Become

Numbers feel more real in dollars. Imagine you put $1,000 into each:

SpaceX at IPO launch ($135):

• $1,000 ÷ $135 ≈ 7.4 shares
• 7.4 shares × $201 ≈ $1,489
• Profit: roughly +$489 (+49%)

Bitcoin one year ago (~$106,000):

• $1,000 ÷ $106,000 ≈ 0.00943 BTC
• 0.00943 BTC × $65,200 ≈ $615
• Loss: roughly −$385 (−38%)

Same $1,000, wildly different outcomes. The SpaceX position nearly grew by half; the Bitcoin position lost more than a third of its value. The gap between them is over $870 on a $1,000 stake.

Why SpaceX Price is up so Hard

SpaceX's debut wasn't just big — it was the largest IPO in history, opening at a ~$1.77 trillion valuation. A few forces drove SPCX higher out of the gate:

• Scarcity of access. Asian buyers and many retail investors were shut out of the IPO book, leaving unfilled demand chasing the stock in the open market.
• A unique, hard-to-replicate business. Launch dominance, Starlink's recurring revenue, and a clear lead in reusable rockets give SpaceX a moat few companies can match.
• Momentum and narrative. Hot IPOs attract trend-followers, and the tokenized-equity stack mirroring SPCX kept it in front of crypto-native traders around the clock.

Why Bitcoin Price is Down

Bitcoin's decline isn't a knock on the asset's long-term thesis — it's a reminder of its volatility. The past 12 months saw BTC hit an all-time high near $126,000 in late 2025 before a sharp retracement, dragged lower by tightening macro conditions, ETF outflows, and a months-long geopolitical conflict that crushed risk appetite. At ~$65,200, Bitcoin sits well off both its highs and its year-ago level.

The key nuance: your Bitcoin return depends enormously on when you bought. A buyer from two years ago is still comfortably in profit; the year-ago buyer who caught the top is not. That timing sensitivity is the whole story with a volatile asset.

Difference between Bitcoin and SpaceX Investment

Before crowning SpaceX, a few critical caveats matter:

• Different time frames. SPCX's +49% came in weeks; Bitcoin's −38% is over a full year. Annualizing a few weeks of a hot IPO is misleading — new listings are extraordinarily volatile and can give back gains just as fast.
• Post-IPO risk is real. Freshly listed stocks frequently cool off hard after their debut pop. SPCX at $201 could just as easily retrace toward its $135 IPO price as continue climbing.
• Bitcoin has a longer track record. Over multi-year horizons, Bitcoin has historically rewarded patient holders through brutal drawdowns. One down year doesn't invalidate that — but it doesn't guarantee it either.
• They're fundamentally different assets. SpaceX is equity in a cash-flowing company with real products. Bitcoin is a decentralized monetary asset with no earnings. Comparing them is useful for framing, but they serve different roles in a portfolio.

SpaceX vs Bitcoin: Which Was the Better Investment?

If you're scoring purely on the trades described — SpaceX at IPO versus Bitcoin a year ago — SpaceX is the clear winner, turning $1,000 into ~$1,489 while Bitcoin shrank it to ~$615. The IPO buyer caught a once-in-a-generation listing; the Bitcoin buyer caught a cycle top.

But investing isn't about the cleanest backtest — it's about what happens next. SpaceX carries classic post-IPO froth risk at $201, while Bitcoin at $65,200 is closer to historically oversold territory than to euphoria. The better past investment was clearly SPCX. The better future investment depends on your time horizon, your risk tolerance, and whether you believe a hot IPO keeps running or a beaten-down Bitcoin mounts another comeback.

As always: past performance tells you what happened, not what will.

DeFi emerged in 2020 with a vision to build solutions on top of the existing bottlenecks in the centralized financial system. In the last two years since its inception, by riding on some of the unparalleled use-cases like flash loans, liquidity mining, staking, yield farming, and compounding interest rates, the ecosystem exploded to $87 billion. DEXs emerged as the hotspots for witnessing maximum DeFi activities. Some of the users within the ecosystem who had earlier registered on Cex or Centralized exchanges moved their assets to Dex or decentralized exchanges for interacting with the DeFi protocols via wallets. 

However, one thing which was like an elephant in the room was inconvenience causing trouble for the users. For example, users had to buy cryptocurrencies on one exchange and transfer the same to another DEX for operation. In this way, the process not only killed a lot of time, wasted their resources and caused inconvenience to users; but also deprived them of a good earning opportunity. Hence, to quicken decision-making, maximize ROIs and fix the fragmented operational process, crypto aggregators are an amenable choice moving forward in 2023.

What are Crypto Aggregators? 

Crypto aggregators establish a system through the use of Dapps,  smart-contract,  oracles, and APIs, where data from different DEX and CEX are clubbed together on a single platform with price feeds integrated. In this way, the traders need not have to shuffle between exchanges to find out the best prices for an asset. On the contrary, they can simply log in to the crypto aggregator and trade from those platforms. In some rare instances, some of the crypto aggregators allow trading in cryptocurrencies pairs which are not supported even on some of the renowned exchanges operational across the world. 

How Do Crypto Aggregators Work? 

Crypto aggregators use price oracles that connect to multiple exchanges to provide the latest price feeds. You can take this as an example. Suppose, if you are visiting a holiday destination, there may be multiple hotels available for accommodation. If you have to go and check every hotel to find the best prices, it would take a lot of time and money. However, to ease the process, there’s a website that directly connects with all the hotels present in that holiday destination and tracks all their offers and prices to facilitate quick booking on the go. Using that website, the user can track even the smallest fluctuations in the prices that the hotels provide and grab the opportunity to book their services.

A crypto aggregator works much like the same where it tracks all crypto exchanges through price oracles and APIs to give the latest price for the crypto. Once the user/trader picks up a trade, the protocol runs the trade across all exchanges and swap protocols. Upon finding the best platform for the trade, the protocols execute the trade and the trader ends up making the maximum profit which would have been otherwise impossible without the crypto aggregator’s help. 

Top 3 Crypto Aggregators of 2026

🥇 1inch — The EVM Default

1inch is the most-used aggregator on EVM chains and the project that popularized split routing back in 2019. It remains the benchmark for anyone trading on Ethereum, BNB Chain, Arbitrum, Base, and the wider EVM ecosystem.

What makes it stand out:

• Pathfinder routing engine. 1inch's algorithm scans hundreds of liquidity sources across multiple chains, slicing a single trade across the optimal combination of pools to minimize slippage.
• Fusion mode. Its intent-based system delivers MEV protection and gasless swaps, where resolvers compete to fill your order — you sign once and they handle execution.
• Cross-chain reach via Fusion+. Seamless multi-chain swaps make it a versatile choice for altcoin and cross-chain traders.
• Proven scale. 1inch has reported lifetime swap volume above $700 billion across roughly 13 chains, and is expanding into AI-agent infrastructure and tokenized-stock trading.

Best for: Most EVM same-chain swaps, multi-hop altcoin trades, and traders who want a single battle-tested router across all the major chains.

Watch for: On Ethereum, gas can be significant, and 1inch sometimes captures value through positive slippage. For large EVM trades, default to Fusion (intent) mode rather than classic routing.

🥈 Jupiter — The Solana King

If your assets live on Solana, the choice is effectively made for you. Jupiter is the uncontested default, routing roughly 80% of all aggregator volume on the network — its next three competitors combined don't match its weekly throughput.

What makes it stand out:

• Dominant liquidity. Jupiter routes across every major Solana DEX (Orca, Raydium, Meteora, Phoenix, Lifinity, and more) to find the deepest, cheapest route.
• Near-zero fees. Solana's low-cost infrastructure means transaction fees are often less than a cent — a structural advantage no EVM aggregator can match.
• Massive cumulative volume. Jupiter has processed well over $1 trillion in cumulative swaps and consistently handles billions in daily volume.
• Rich feature set. Beyond spot swaps, it offers limit orders, DCA (dollar-cost averaging), and one of the most polished trading interfaces in DeFi.

Best for: Any swap on Solana, from memecoin trades to stablecoin routing to portfolio rebalancing.

Watch for: Solana has no public mempool in the EVM sense, but it has its own forms of priority gaming — Jupiter's transaction simulation helps, but be mindful on volatile, low-liquidity pairs.

🥉 CoW Swap — The MEV Protection Specialist

For traders who care more about protection than speed — especially on large orders — CoW Swap is purpose-built. It takes a fundamentally different approach to execution that makes sandwich attacks structurally difficult.

What makes it stand out:

• Batch auctions. CoW Swap settles all orders in a batch at a single uniform clearing price, meaning no transaction within the batch can be sandwiched by another.
• Coincidence of wants. When two traders want opposite sides of a trade, CoW matches them directly — sometimes producing near-zero slippage without even touching a liquidity pool.
• Solver competition. Professional solvers compete to give you the best execution, with their reputation on the line.
• Strong large-trade performance. Processing $9 billion+ in monthly volume, CoW Swap is consistently rated the strongest choice for trades above $100,000 where minimizing market impact matters most.

Best for: Large EVM trades, stablecoin swaps at size, and anyone who prioritizes MEV-resistant execution over instant settlement.

Watch for: Batch settlement adds a little latency. If you need immediate execution, a classic router may suit you better — but never publish a five-figure swap to the public mempool without protection.

How to Choose the Right One

The simplest way to think about it in 2026:

• Trading on Ethereum or another EVM chain? Start with 1inch for everyday swaps.
• Trading on Solana? Jupiter, every time.
• Moving a large size or worried about MEV? CoW Swap for trades above $100,000.

A few universal tips: going direct to the aggregator's own site usually nets the same or better price than the wallet integration, and unlocks advanced modes (Fusion, batch auctions) that wallets don't always surface. For maximum safety, pair any aggregator with a hardware wallet so you keep full custody of your funds throughout.

Best Crypto Aggregator in 2026

The aggregator category is in the middle of an architectural shift toward intent-based trading — you express what you want, and solvers compete to deliver it. By the end of 2026, most retail EVM volume is expected to flow through intent systems like 1inch Fusion and CoW Swap rather than direct router calls, while Jupiter keeps its iron grip on Solana.

For most traders, you don't need to overthink it: pick the leader for your chain, default to intent mode on large trades, and let the aggregator do the work of finding your best price across a fragmented market.

Two markets moved in opposite directions on the same headline. As the United States and Iran confirmed a peace deal to end their nearly four-month war and reopen the Strait of Hormuz, crude oil tumbled to a three-month low — while Bitcoin and the entire top 10 crypto market posted a green week. The reason is the same for both: the single biggest geopolitical risk premium weighing on global markets is finally unwinding.

Here's the full breakdown of the oil crash, the latest US–Iran war developments, and how the top 10 cryptocurrencies performed over the past 7 days.

Oil Crashes to a Three-Month Low

The de-escalation hit energy markets hard. US crude oil closed down 4.8% to $80.75 per barrel, while international Brent crude fell 4.7% to $83.17 — the lowest closing prices for both benchmarks since the first week of March, right after the war began.

The slide was not a one-day event. Oil had already tumbled more than 6% over the prior week in anticipation of an agreement, meaning the market front-ran the news before the official confirmation even landed. Heating oil, a proxy for jet fuel, dropped more than 3.5%, and wholesale gasoline fell more than 2.5%.

The catalyst is the Strait of Hormuz. Roughly 20% of the world's oil supplies passed through the strait before tanker traffic collapsed in early March, and its closure triggered one of the largest oil supply shocks on record. With Trump authorizing the toll-free reopening of the strait and lifting the US naval blockade, traders are pricing in the return of Gulf energy flows.

• The caveat: prices may not fall much further from here. Crude is still up significantly on the year, and analysts caution that getting supplies back to pre-war levels will take time. Almost 600 ships — mostly oil and LNG carriers — remain stuck in the Gulf, unable to transit Hormuz due to mine threats and costly war-insurance premiums. Shipowners and insurers will need convincing that passage is safe before full-scale maritime transit resumes, and clearing mines from the strait could take weeks.

**CFDs are complex instruments and come with a high risk of losing money rapidly due to leverage. 74% of retail investor accounts lose money when trading CFDs with this provider. You should consider whether you understand how CFDs work and whether you can afford to take the high risk of losing your money.

Latest US–Iran War Developments

The diplomatic picture firmed up over the weekend but still carries open questions:

• The deal is reached, signing set for Friday. Pakistan's Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif — the lead mediator — announced both sides declared the immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including Lebanon. The official signing ceremony is scheduled for June 19 in Switzerland.
• Trump confirmed and reopened Hormuz. The president declared the deal complete, authorized the toll-free opening of the strait, and ordered the removal of the US naval blockade.
• An oil waiver for Iran. The US is reportedly granting Iran a waiver to sell its oil during a 60-day window — significant given oil and gas typically generate around 60% of Iranian government revenues.
• Discrepancies remain. Iranian state media indicated Hormuz would be toll-free for only 60 days, after which Iran and Oman would administer the strait. Neither side has released a full text of the truce, suggesting the terms are still fluid.

The takeaway: the framework is in place and markets are treating it as real, but the June 19 signing in Switzerland is the event that converts intention into commitment. Until then, expect headline-driven volatility in both energy and risk assets.

Top 10 Crypto: 7-Day Performance (Excluding Stablecoins)

While oil sank, crypto climbed. The lifting of the geopolitical overhang pushed risk appetite back into digital assets, with every major name green over the trailing 7 days. Here's how the top 10 (excluding stablecoins Tether and USDC) performed:

• Bitcoin ($BTC): ~$66,389 — ▲ 2.93% (7d). BTC reclaimed the $65,000 level, recovering from the war-driven selloff that had dragged it toward multi-month lows.
• Ethereum ($ETH): ~$1,719 — ▲ 1.89% (7d). ETH held firmly above $1,700, though its weekly gain lagged the higher-beta names.
• $BNB: ~$612 — ▲ 1.08% (7d). A steady, modest advance in line with the broad recovery.
• $XRP: ~$1.23 — ▲ 0.89% (7d). The smallest weekly gain among the majors, but still green.
• Solana ($SOL): ~$70 — ▲ 4.62% (7d). The standout of the majors, leading the weekly board as high-beta appetite returned.
• TRON ($TRX): ~$0.319 — ▼ 2.24% (7d). The lone laggard, slipping on the week despite the broader market strength.

The pattern is textbook risk-on rotation: the higher-beta, more speculative names (SOL leading at +4.62%) outperformed the steadier large caps (BTC, ETH, BNB), while the broad-market index of the top 20 climbed roughly 5% on the week.

Crypto Market Update: What to Watch for Next

The oil-down, crypto-up split tells a single story: markets are repricing a world with less war risk. Cheaper energy eases inflation pressure at the margin, a lifted naval blockade restores global trade flows, and the removal of the geopolitical premium frees up risk appetite for assets like Bitcoin that sold off hardest during the conflict.

But this is a relief rally built on an agreement, not yet a signature. Three things to watch into the week ahead:

• The June 19 signing in Switzerland. A clean execution validates the move; a slip — as past "deal is near" headlines have shown — could reverse both the oil drop and the crypto bounce.
• Hormuz reopening in practice. Mine clearance and insurer confidence, not the announcement, determine whether oil keeps falling.
• Crypto follow-through. Whether Bitcoin can build above $65,000 and Solana can extend its lead will signal if this is a durable rotation or a short-lived bounce off Extreme Fear.

For now, the message from both markets is aligned: the war premium is coming out, and risk assets are breathing again.

French authorities said that government cybersecurity researchers will stop certifying security products that lack quantum-resistant encryption beginning in 2027.

A new APA survey found that more than a third of psychologists have patients using AI as an additional mental health professional, even as clinicians warn that the technology can reinforce delusions.

The judge said Polymarket is not likely to succeed on the merits of its case against Michigan state regulators.

Defunct crypto exchange FTX gained exposure to SpaceX in 2022, and the rocket-maker’s post-IPO rally has lifted hopes among creditors.

Nvidia's ENPIRE hands an entire robot fleet to coding agents like Codex and Claude Code, letting them write training code, test it on real hardware, and improve without a human watching.

Crypto markets are showing mixed recovery signals, with some assets holding strong uptrends while others continue to struggle beneath key resistance levels.

Hollywood A-lister Matt Damon will be joining upcoming Ripple Swell conference in New York City.

The boundary separating traditional finance (TradFi) and the cryptocurrency sector is rapidly dissolving.

On-chain data from blockchain analytics platform CryptoQuant reveals that nearly half of the entire circulating supply of stablecoins has remained dormant on cryptocurrency exchanges.

Eli Ben-Sasson warns of a historic crypto downturn as startups face mass closures, but explains why a market reset is necessary.

TLDR:

• The Fed voted 12-0 to hold rates at 3.5–3.75%, but raised inflation forecasts and slowed its rate-cut outlook.
• Bitcoin fell 2.2% to $64,150 while Ether dropped 3.6%, with XRP and Solana each losing around 3%.
• The GMCI 30 dropped 2.6%, pushing its year-to-date decline to nearly 36% across the broader market.
• Warsh ditched Powell’s forward-guidance style, opting for shorter, fact-based statements with no market direction.

Crypto markets retreated Wednesday after the Federal Reserve held interest rates steady but delivered a hawkish policy outlook.

The Federal Open Market Committee voted 12-0 to maintain its target rate at 3.5% to 3.75%. The decision came during Kevin Warsh’s first meeting as Fed chair.

Updated projections pointed to slower rate cuts ahead, rattling risk assets across the board. Bitcoin, Ether, and several altcoins fell between 1% and 3% following the announcement.

Markets React to a Hawkish Policy Signal

Bitcoin traded near $64,206 as of writing, down roughly 2.54% over the prior 24 hours. Ether shed 2.8%, while XRP and Solana each declined around 3% according to CoinGecko data. Hyperliquid’s HYPE token, which hit a new all-time high just a day earlier, pulled back 1.5% to $72.

The GMCI 30, tracking the 30 largest cryptocurrencies by market cap, dropped roughly 2.6%. That move extended its year-to-date decline to nearly 36%. Traditional safe-haven assets weren’t spared either, with gold sliding 2.2% and silver shedding a sharper 4%.

Matt Mena, senior crypto research strategist at 21Shares, framed the broader picture: “Taken together, the picture is one of a crypto market absorbing a hawkish macro backdrop while rotation and genuine demand continue to surface in the strongest names.”

The rate hold itself was broadly anticipated and mostly priced in before the meeting. What caught markets off guard was the tone of the updated Summary of Economic Projections, which flagged persistent inflation concerns despite easing geopolitical tensions and softer energy prices.

Warsh Charts a New Course for Fed Communication

Wednesday’s meeting marked more than just a rate decision—it offered the first look at Warsh’s communication style as chair.

His policy statement was notably shorter than those issued under former chair Jerome Powell. It also dropped the forward-guidance language that Powell used consistently throughout his tenure.

Warsh described the new format as focused on presenting “the facts” rather than steering market expectations. That approach aligns with his long-standing skepticism toward forward guidance, which he has argued ties the Fed’s hands unnecessarily.

Mena addressed the weight of the occasion directly: “The Fed’s decision to hold rates was fully expected, but it carried unusual weight as the first meeting chaired by Kevin Warsh.”

He added that “the real signal came from the updated projections,” pointing to revised forecasts that suggest policymakers remain wary of inflation pressures despite some easing on the energy front.

The committee’s updated dot plot marked a meaningful shift from March projections. Policymakers now see a slower path toward lower rates than they did just three months ago.

That pivot, combined with Warsh’s leaner communication style, set a more cautious tone for markets heading into the second half of 2026.

The post Crypto Slides After Fed Holds Rates in Warsh’s First Meeting appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• The tokenized RWA market surpassed $10B in mid-2026, up from under $1B in early 2024.
• Binance Research projects a $6.78T market cap at 4% penetration, representing 645x upside. 
• Around 80% of tokenized stock traders on Binance originate from emerging market regions. 
• Median bStock trade size is $18.81, with 93% of all trades involving fractional ownership. 

Tokenized RWA market capitalization crossed $10B in mid-2026, up from under $1B in early 2024. The tenfold growth spans tokenized equities, commodities, and ETFs. Binance Research projects the sector could reach $6.78T at 4% market penetration.

Emerging market users account for 80% of tokenized stock trading on Binance. Fractional ownership dominates, with 93% of trades below one unit and a median size of $18.81.

From $1B to $10B: A Market Rebuilt On-Chain

Tokenized RWA market growth accelerated sharply in Q4 2025, driven by a commodity price surge that pulled significant on-chain activity. Weekly tokenized asset volume peaked near $20B during that period.

Volume has since normalized, averaging $735M weekly through 2026. The infrastructure supporting this growth is also expanding, with platforms like Binance rolling out tokenized equity products known as bStocks.

Binance Research outlines four scenarios for where the tokenized RWA market could head next. A conservative case puts market cap at $203B, representing 18x upside from current levels at 0.12% penetration.

A base case projects $661B at 0.4% penetration. A bull case reaches $1.6T at 1% penetration. The exceptional case places the market at $6.78T, assuming tokenized products become default instruments across retail and institutional portfolios.

The current penetration rate sits below 0.01% of total addressable value across global equities, commodities, and ETFs.

That gap between current size and potential is what makes the Binance Research projections so wide. As @BinanceResearch noted: “The tokenized market just crossed US$10B. About a year ago it was under US$1B.”

Three structural advantages drive this growth. Tokenization extends asset access geographically, removes time restrictions through around-the-clock trading, and allows on-chain yield generation on top of underlying asset exposure. Together, these mechanics reframe how traditional assets can be held and traded.

Emerging Markets Lead as Fractional Access Reshapes Participation

Approximately 80% of bStock trading activity on Binance originates from emerging market users. Traditional brokerage access in these regions carries high account minimums, restricted availability, and elevated fees.

Trading tokenized equities with stablecoins removes the conventional off-ramp infrastructure entirely. Users avoid an average 3.6% off-ramp fee and roughly $40 in SWIFT transfer costs per transaction.

The fractional ownership data reinforces how differently users are engaging with these markets. The median bStock trade size is $18.81, against an average unit price of roughly $680.

That gap is only bridgeable through fractional trading. The 93% fractional trade rate reflects structural exclusion being removed, not speculative behavior.

Price discovery data adds another dimension to the asset class’s maturity. SPCXB, the tokenized equivalent of SPCX, independently tracked a 6.5% weekend gap while traditional markets were closed.

SPCX opened Monday within 9 basis points of where SPCXB had already marked the asset. The tokenized market had pre-discovered the move entirely.

Staking mechanics may eventually extend these properties further. If tokenized shares could be staked, locked tokens would reduce circulating float and obligate custodians to hold equivalent underlying shares.

Research from the National Bureau of Economic Research estimates that each $1 of net equity inflow lifts market capitalization by approximately $5. For individual large-cap equities, price uplift from locked supply is estimated at $0.30 to $1 per dollar locked.

The post Tokenized RWA Market Hits $10B as Emerging Markets Lead appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Binance XRP CVD recorded a negative reading of -4.56M XRP, showing sell orders continue to dominate the market.
• The 30-day price-CVD correlation stands at 0.81, linking recent XRP price moves to real trading activity.
• XRP RSI climbed to 44.7 from oversold levels below 30, pointing to weakening bearish pressure and early recovery.
• XRP faces key resistance at $1.25–$1.30; a breakout could fuel recovery while failure risks a $1.10 retest.

Binance XRP CVD data continues to reflect weak buying momentum across the XRP market. The Cumulative Volume Delta recorded a negative reading of approximately -4.56 million XRP, showing that sell orders dominate over buy orders.

XRP traded near $1.18 with a 24-hour volume of $1.94 billion as of this writing. The token posted a 2.84% price decline in the past 24 hours but gained 7.78% over the prior seven days.

Source: Coingecko

CVD Correlation Points to Genuine Market Activity

The 30-day price-CVD correlation coefficient stands at roughly 0.81. That level points to a strong positive relationship between price movements and actual trading flows. As a result, recent XRP price action appears driven by real market activity rather than thin liquidity conditions.

Source: CryptoQuant

The relatively high correlation reading carries weight for traders monitoring XRP’s near-term direction. When price and CVD move together closely, the data tends to reflect actual supply and demand dynamics more accurately. This makes the persistently negative CVD reading more telling, not less.

Selling pressure continues to weigh on the market despite the price holding above the $1.18 level. This pattern points to ongoing distribution activity by market participants at current price levels. That activity is limiting XRP’s ability to mount a stronger recovery or build a sustained short-term uptrend.

Any shift toward positive CVD readings could provide additional support for the price and signal improving buying interest.

Conversely, continued negative readings may suggest that market conditions remain tilted in favor of sellers. Traders are closely watching CVD developments for early signs of a shift in that balance.

XRP Technical Structure Shows Early Recovery Signals

XRP on the daily timeframe is attempting a recovery after a sharp June selloff. Price dropped from the $1.35 region to a local low near $1.08 before rebounding toward $1.23. Profit-taking then pulled the price back to around $1.18.

Despite that pullback, momentum indicators are improving. The RSI has climbed to 44.7 from oversold territory below 30. That move signals weakening bearish pressure and growing buying interest in the market.

The MACD is also turning bullish, with the histogram printing positive bars. The MACD line is approaching a crossover above the signal line, which traders typically read as a shift in short-term momentum.

Volume expanded during the rebound, suggesting genuine demand rather than a weak technical bounce.

However, XRP remains below key resistance around the $1.25–$1.30 range. A break above that zone could trigger a stronger recovery phase.

Failure to clear that resistance may invite another retest of the $1.10 support area, keeping the overall picture cautious for now.

The post Binance XRP CVD Flags Persistent Selling Pressure as Price Holds Near $1.18 appeared first on Blockonomi.

The paradigm of crypto-native gaming has shifted significantly from complex, slow-layered decentralized applications (dApps) toward high-frequency, provably fair arcade mechanics. Within this digital ecosystem, proprietary gaming titles have established a distinct niche by blending classic gameplay loops with transparent cryptographic verification. A good example of this synthesis is the Mission Uncrossable game, an iterative, lane-based crash alternative that adapts the structural logic of classic obstacle-avoidance titles into a rigorous risk-management model.

For users seeking to transition from theoretical understanding to on-chain execution, analyzing the game requires looking past the visual presentation and focusing on probability distribution, volatility settings, and capital preservation strategies. This guide provides an analytical breakdown of how to play Mission Uncrossable while optimizing risk-adjusted exposure and maximizing conversion efficiency.

Understanding the Core Mechanics: How to Play Mission Uncrossable

At its core, the Mission Uncrossable game operates on a gamified multi-stage multiplier trajectory. The user’s objective is to navigate a digital asset—represented as a character traversing a multi-lane highway—across successive tiers of moving traffic. Each successfully negotiated lane applies an incremental multiplier to the initial stake. Conversely, if a collision occurs with passing traffic, the round terminates instantly, resulting in a total loss of the accumulated capital for that specific round.

To initiate an operational round, a participant executes a highly streamlined onboarding sequence designed to minimize friction and accelerate time-to-play:

1. Capital Allocation: The user inputs a specific wager size. The platform allows micro-wagers (stakes below $0.01 scale the user interface into a low-risk testing mode), allowing for granular bankroll evaluation without significant capital drawdown.
2. Difficulty Parameter Selection: Prior to deployment, players must select one of four distinct volatility configurations: Easy, Medium, Hard, or Daredevil.
3. Multiplier Accrual: The player advances the asset lane by lane. Each successful step updates the real-time payout value based on the chosen risk curve.
4. Cash Out: At any point before an adverse collision event occurs, the player can manually trigger a “Cash Out” sequence to lock in the achieved multiplier and secure the yielded funds directly into their platform balance for immediate withdrawal.

Difficulty Calibration and the Risk-Reward Matrix

The primary strategic lever available to the user is the difficulty configuration. Adjusting the difficulty tier directly alters the density and velocity vectors of the digital traffic, manipulating both the probability of survival and the steepness of the multiplier’s mathematical scaling.

The Technical Infrastructure: Provably Fair and RNG Verification

For analytical publications on platforms like Blockonomi, establishing the technical integrity of the underlying code is paramount to building player trust and driving high-value user acquisitions. Unlike legacy online casinos relying on opaque, server-side Random Number Generators (RNG) that lack external visibility, Roobet’s proprietary catalog utilizes a Provably Fair cryptographic framework.

Every outcome within the game is predetermined by a deterministic combination of three distinct variables:

• Server Seed: Provided by the host platform and cryptographically hashed prior to the commencement of the round, preventing real-time manipulation.
• Client Seed: Generated by the user’s local browser architecture (and customizable manually), ensuring the operator cannot dictate or alter the random pathing unilaterally.
• Nonce: An automatically incrementing counter that tracks the exact number of wagers executed utilizing the current seed pair.

This algorithmic configuration allows any participant to extract the SHA-256 hash post-round and independently verify that the lane generation and collision thresholds were mathematically absolute. The platform maintains an optimized Return to Player (RTP) profile that minimizes the structural house edge common to traditional video slots, making it a highly attractive destination for mathematically minded players.

Strategic Frameworks for Capital Preservation

Because outcomes are cryptographically randomized and independent, pattern recognition is mathematically invalid. Strategic optimization must therefore rely on structured risk management frameworks rather than predictive assumptions.

Low-Volatility Scalping (The Conservative Protocol)

Executed primarily on the Easy difficulty setting, this framework focuses on high-frequency, low-margin returns. The technical objective is to systematically cash out wagers after navigating only 1 to 2 lanes. While the returns per individual round are minor, the probability density heavily favors the user, allowing for the methodical compounding of a base bankroll while mitigating tail-risk exposure.

Asymmetric Risk Exposure (The Venture-Style Protocol)

Conversely, utilizing the Hard or Daredevil configurations shifts the objective from high win-probability to high asymmetric payoff. Under this protocol, users deploy micro-stakes with the intent of absorbing a high volume of low-cost losses in exchange for capturing an exponential multiplier outlier. This approach mirrors venture capital distribution, where a single successful high-multiplier event covers historical drawdowns.

Comparative Analysis: Discrete Step-Based Risk vs. Continuous Crash Curves

Traditional crypto crash games present a continuous, real-time depreciation of user agency; a multiplier climbs linearly or exponentially on a continuous timeline until an abrupt, singular crash event clears all active stakes simultaneously.

The structural variance implemented in how to play Mission Uncrossable introduces discrete decision points. Instead of a continuous time-based risk curve, risk is segmented into distinct operational steps (lanes). This architectural shift grants the user static windows of reflection between steps, changing the psychological profile of the game from rapid reaction-based survival to a calculated, step-by-step assessment of probabilistic risk. This enhanced sense of user agency acts as a powerful retention vector, driving sustained engagement over traditional, passive alternative titles.

Ready to test the mechanics? You can register seamlessly, deposit your preferred crypto asset, and execute your own risk-mitigation framework on the official Mission Uncrossable game at Roobet.

The post How It Works: Deconstructing Roobet’s Mission Uncrossable appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• BTC open interest on Binance swung nearly $878M, from +$258M to -$620M within 24 hours. 
• ETH Binance open interest dropped $821M, falling from +$131M to -$690M in under 48 hours. 
• Bybit and Deribit also posted negative OI changes, confirming a broad cross-venue deleveraging.
• BlackRock’s IBIT and ETHA led spot ETF inflows even as derivatives exposure contracted sharply. 

Bitcoin and Ethereum derivatives markets recorded a sharp synchronized open interest reset on Binance, the sharpest since April 2026.

BTC open interest change on Binance swung from +$258 million to -$620 million within 24 hours, a net reversal of nearly $878 million.

Ethereum followed almost simultaneously, with open interest change on Binance falling from +$131 million to -$690 million. Together, the two assets posted a combined Binance open interest swing of roughly $1.7 billion.

BTC and ETH Derivatives Exposure Contracts Across Major Venues

The Bitcoin open interest reset on Binance marked one of the sharpest single-day reversals recorded since April 2026.

The move from +$258 million to -$620 million represents a net swing of nearly $878 million over 24 hours. That scale of reversal reflects a meaningful shift in how traders were positioning across BTC derivatives.

Ethereum’s open interest change on Binance fell from +$131 million to -$690 million within a window of less than 48 hours.

The net decline came in at approximately $821 million, making it a near-mirror of what played out on the Bitcoin side.

Both moves occurred within the same narrow time frame, pointing to a coordinated reduction in derivatives exposure rather than isolated activity.

The reset was not confined to Binance alone. Other major derivatives platforms recorded negative open interest changes during the same period. Bybit posted approximately -$116 million on Ethereum, while Deribit recorded around -$78 million on Bitcoin.

Together, the cross-venue contraction adds further evidence that this was a broad derivatives deleveraging event. Position closures spanning multiple platforms and both major assets suggest traders were broadly reducing risk rather than rotating within specific markets.

Spot ETF Inflows Continue Amid Derivatives Pullback

On the spot market side, U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded total net inflows of $10.0643 million on June 16, according to SoSoValue data.

BlackRock’s IBIT led the Bitcoin ETF category, pulling in $16.3526 million in net inflows on that date. The inflow data shows continued institutional appetite for Bitcoin exposure through regulated products.

Spot Ethereum ETFs recorded total net inflows of $9.5876 million on the previous day. BlackRock’s ETHA led the ETH ETF category, recording $17.3358 million in net inflows.

The positive flows occurred even as derivatives positioning across ETH markets contracted sharply on Binance and other venues.

This type of synchronized open interest contraction typically reflects aggressive position closures, reduced leverage, or traders cutting risk after a heavily positioned market period.

It does not automatically confirm bearish price continuation. However, it does confirm that derivatives exposure across both BTC and ETH has been sharply reduced.

The divergence between declining open interest and continued spot ETF inflows presents a split picture across market structure.

Derivatives traders appear to be reducing risk, while ETF investors continue adding exposure through regulated channels. How these two dynamics interact in the near term will likely shape price behavior for both assets going forward.

The post Bitcoin and Ethereum Derivatives See $1.7B Binance Open Interest Reset appeared first on Blockonomi.

Matter Labs is reshuffling its team as the company moves to a permissioned privacy chain called Prividium.

The layoffs will include senior engineers, designers, and operators who are no longer aligned with the new direction.

Founder Explains Layoff Decision.

Alex Gluchowski, the company’s CEO, confirmed the news on social media, noting that the decision followed the company’s 2024 shift toward building products for regulated financial institutions.

“Today we reduced the size of the Matter Labs team. This was my decision, and I want to explain it,” he wrote.

According to him, Prividium has since become Matter Labs’ main focus, with the firm now fully committed to building tools that help businesses move on-chain.

The founder added that as the project developed, the company gained a clearer understanding of what customers needed, which heavily influenced the direction of Prividium and the type of talent required to move it forward. As a result, some roles that made sense during earlier stages of building were no longer the best fit for the firm’s current priorities. This, he said, is what prompted the restructuring decision.

The firm’s website states that Prividium is an Ethereum-based blockchain platform for financial institutions and fintech companies that gives organizations a way to do transactions securely while being compliant. Additionally, the product is built on a privacy-focused, permissioned Layer-2 blockchain powered by zero-knowledge technology.

“To everyone leaving, thank you for what you built here, and for the standard you set,” he concluded.

Alex said the move wasn’t a reflection on the employee’s abilities and contributions, adding that the engineers, designers, and operators impacted were some of the best he has worked with. The workers who left have also reportedly been offered financial help and support as they go through the transition.

Community Remains Divided Over Job Cuts

The community’s reaction to the news has been mixed, with some excited about the project and others asking where the $450 million that Matter Labs raised to develop the product had gone.

“Could you please explain? You raised $450 million in investment to develop the product. Where’s the money? And why are you asking for more and laying people off?” they wrote.

Meanwhile, this isn’t the first time the firm has had to let go of its employees. The company also downsized its team in the midst of a pivot toward privacy-focused tools in 2024, with the firm saying that the restructuring was necessary to align its workforce with new priorities rather than a short-term cost-cutting measure.

The post ZKsync Creator Announces Layoffs as It Pivots to Permissioned Privacy Chain appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitcoin’s price is losing ground once again, as the asset was rejected at over $66,000 earlier today and dumped to $64,000 minutes ago, shortly after the conclusion of the latest FOMC meeting and the subsequent press conference by the new Fed Chair, Kevin Warsh.

Unlike what many expected when he replaced Jerome Powell, Warsh maintained a very hawkish tone during his speech, which caught investors by surprise.

Not The Easy-Money Chairman

DoubleLine Capital CEO Jeffrey Gundlach noted in an interview with CNBC that the new Fed Chair will aim for price stability instead of being the ‘easy money Chairman’ people thought.

“He is absolutely telling you that he plans on delivering on price stability. So that means we’re not going to have such easy money policy as everybody thought maybe Chairman Warsh would do back in the first quarter of this year when everyone was counting on rate cuts. He doesn’t sound like that today at all.”

Warsh’s hawkish speech came shortly after the US Federal Reserve maintained the interest rates unchanged for the fourth consecutive meeting.

BTC Slides Further

Bitcoin’s price already dipped after the initial Fed decision, but its situation only worsened following the press conference. The asset had dropped from an intraday high of $66,400 to $65,000, but rebounded to $65,500 before it slumped again to $64,000 minutes ago.

Most altcoins have followed suit. Ethereum is down by 3% daily to under $1,740, BNB has lost the $600 support, while XRP has fallen further below the $1.20 line. Expectedly, these intense price moves in the span of just a couple of hours have impacted the liquidations.

Data from CoinGlass shows that the total value of wrecked positions in the past 24 hours is up to over $400 million, with almost half of those coming in the past 4 hours. Longs are responsible for the lion’s share, with $280 million daily. Moreover, $79 million out of the $82 million in liquidated positions in the past hour alone are from longs.

Nearly 100,000 traders have been wiped out daily, with the largest liquidated position occurring on Binance. It was worth $5 million.

The post $400M Wiped Out in Hours as Bitcoin Crashes After FOMC and Warsh Speech appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Andreessen Horowitz crypto executive Miles Jennings criticized Illinois’ newly enacted Digital Asset Privilege Tax Act on June 17, calling it “one of the most anti-crypto laws in the US.”

The law imposes a 0.2% tax on the exchange, transfer, and custody of digital assets, with no meaningful exemptions for routine self-custody moves.

Backlash From the Crypto Industry

According to Jennings, no other US state has a transaction-based tax on crypto like the one in Illinois, and there are no comparable levies on stocks, bonds, or derivatives anywhere else in the country.

‘That means crypto is being singled out in violation of several federal laws,” he wrote.

His comments were in line with those made in a June 16 letter from the Crypto Council for Innovation (CCI) to Illinois Governor J.B Pritzker, requesting that he veto the legislation. CCI had argued that the law places unique and disproportionate burdens on citizens simply by holding digital assets, thus potentially forcing users and entrepreneurs out of the state.

The group was of the view that the measure will tax blockchain-based activity based on the technology used rather than the nature of the transaction itself. It also raised concerns about the manner in which the law had been passed, noting that affected stakeholders had not been given the chance to weigh in.

On his part, Jennings accused Pritzker of poor timing, considering that Illinois had just adopted the Digital Asset and Consumer Protection Act, something he described as a “constructive approach to blockchain technology.”

“So, rather than embracing innovation and the cost efficiencies blockchain can deliver for ordinary people in Illinois, the state is poised to punish its entrepreneurs and citizens that want to use crypto,” he argued.

Tax Treatment Is a Growing Policy Battleground

The Illinois law comes at a time when the US Congress is working toward a national framework for crypto taxation, and CCI’s letter had argued that Pritzker should have held off on his approach until federal standards were in place. It warned that the Prairie State’s decision could lead to a “patchwork” of crypto tax laws across the other 49 jurisdictions, which would only muddy the waters even more.

That concern has some context. Earlier in the month, Coinbase vice president of tax Lawrence Zlatkin testified before the House Ways and Means Committee, pushing for simpler federal crypto tax rules, including treating federally regulated stablecoins as equivalent to cash and creating de minimis exemptions for small transactions.

The hearing covered six standalone bills aimed at updating how the US tax code treats digital assets, with Jennings’ post on X giving a direct read on what’s at stake:

“When states adopt discriminatory, asset-specific taxes that drive builders and users elsewhere, we all lose.”

The post Illinois Passed the Most Anti-Crypto Law in the US: Miles Jennings appeared first on CryptoPotato.

The first FOMC meeting with the new Federal Reserve Chair, Kevin Warsh, at the helm of the central bank didn’t provide any surprises, as the entity expectedly left the interest rates unchanged.

With the benchmark remaining between 3.5% and 3.75%, bitcoin’s price reacted with minor initial volatility, but there are some warning signs about an upcoming correction.

Recall that nearly two months ago, the Fed under then-Chair Jerome Powell left the rates unchanged for the third consecutive time. However, there were signs from Powell that rate hikes might follow suit.

Despite today’s non-event, as it was described by David Wessel, director of Brookings’ Hutchins Center on Fiscal and Monetary Policy, he also said that Kevin Warsh now finally has the power to change things at the Fed after years of “ranting about” it.

Bank of America’s fund manager survey showed that 55% anticipated Warsh would be hawkish at the press conference, but Stephen Juneau, the bank’s US economist, held the opposite view.

“The investor consensus seems to be that Warsh will lean hawkish in his press conference. We think he’ll be dovish.”

Bitcoin’s price was slightly volatile in the hours leading up to the event, going below $65,000 earlier today before it shot up to $66,400. However, it dipped by over a grand in the first minutes after the news of the unchanged rates went live.

Previous reports from crypto experts noted that the first FOMC meeting and the subsequent Warsh press conference could be one of the most important macro events for the industry.

The post BTC Price Drops as New Fed Chair Kevin Warsh Holds Rates Steady appeared first on CryptoPotato.

HYPE – the native token of the decentralized crypto exchange Hyperliquid – has been on a tear lately, hitting a new all-time high even as most digital assets continue to struggle in the prolonged bear market.

It recently surpassed Dogecoin (DOGE) to become the 10th-biggest cryptocurrency, so we decided to ask three of the most popular AI-powered chatbots whether flipping Ripple’s XRP is also plausible sometime this year. Here are their answers.

Low Probability

Earlier this week, HYPE’s price soared to a historic peak of around $77, while its market cap pumped to approximately $16 billion. Despite the substantial increase, it remains far below XRP, whose capitalization currently stands at around $74 billion.

Given the huge gap, ChatGPT described the scenario in which HYPE surpasses its rival as a low probability. At the same time, OpenAI’s platform outlined several catalysts that could help the asset explode to such levels. Some of those include the rising popularity of Hyperliquid and its future expansion to the point where it becomes a Binance competitor, and backing from prominent industry figures.

Recall that Arthur Hayes (co-founder of BitMEX) was heavily invested in the token, yet he recently sold all his positions. Shortly after, the blockchain-tracking platform Lookonchain suggested he might have spent over $2 million to buy back nearly 34,000 HYPE. However, Hayes rejected the claim.

According to ChatGPT, another factor that may have a positive influence is the institutional interest in the coin. Data show that inflows into spot HYPE ETFs have exceeded outflows recently, with cumulative net inflows of approximately $180 million. Still, this figure is far below the $1.44 billion that exchange-traded funds with XRP as the underlying token have attracted since their launch in late 2025.

Perplexity shared a similar theory, saying that such a rise by HYPE is only possible in “a narrow sense.” It noted that, in addition to its market-cap lead, XRP has a vast and devoted community, which could make a potential flip even harder.

“In 2026, HYPE can plausibly flip XRP on price momentum, narrative strength, or even short-term market cap at times, but XRP has a much larger base to overtake, so a full sustained flip is less likely without a major rotation in capital,” it added.

‘A Massive Uphill Battle’

Google’s Gemini was even less optimistic, claiming that the biggest hurdle for HYPE isn’t its utility but pure math. It praised XRP for being “a highly liquid, large-cap legacy asset,” whose market cap hovers in the tens of billions of dollars even during market corrections, “sustained by deep institutional plumbing and international remittance use cases.”

“For HYPE to flip XRP, it would need to see an astronomical influx of capital, multi-billion-dollar daily trading volumes, and massive speculative retail FOMO – all while XRP would have to severely stagnate or decline,” it concluded.

The post Can Hyperliquid (HYPE) Flip Ripple (XRP) in 2026? 3 AIs Weigh in appeared first on CryptoPotato.