The SEC's dismissal may embolden blockchain innovators but raises concerns about regulatory clarity and investor protection in decentralized finance.

The post SEC drops fraud case against BitClout founder Nader ‘Diamondhands’ Al-Naji appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The Ethereum Foundation's ETH sale to Bitmine highlights its strategic focus on sustainable growth and decentralized network stewardship.

The post Ethereum Foundation sells 5,000 ETH to Bitmine to fund operations and grants appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The long-term accumulation trend among crypto ETF investors suggests a stabilizing influence on the volatile crypto market landscape.

The post BlackRock says over 90% of Bitcoin ETF investors are long-term accumulators appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Musk's restructuring of xAI highlights challenges in leadership transitions and the impact of aggressive management on company morale and talent retention.

The post Elon Musk removes more xAI founders during restructuring ahead of potential IPO appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The launch of Velotrade's crypto prop platform could democratize access to capital for traders, potentially reshaping the crypto trading landscape.

The post Ex-JP Morgan and Dresdner Kleinwort traders launch crypto prop platform appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

AI Pivot Won’t Save Everyone, Wintermute Tells Bitcoin Miners

Bitcoin miners are caught in the tightest squeeze of the network’s history, and a new Wintermute report argues that simply waiting for the next bull run is no longer a strategy. 

Instead, the firm says miners will have to reinvent themselves as infrastructure and treasury managers if they want to make it to the next halving.

Wintermute analyst Jasper De Maere says the current mining cycle is structurally different from prior ones in 2018 and 2022. Bitcoin’s design cuts block rewards in half every four years, but this time the price has not doubled over the same window, which means miner revenue is shrinking in real terms. 

On a rolling four‑year basis, Bitcoin has only returned about 1.15x in this epoch, far below the 10x–20x multiples seen in earlier cycles.

In past cycles, huge price gains covered up a lot of problems. Miners could count on bull markets to bail out weak margins after each halving. 

Today, with institutions, ETFs, and corporate treasuries in the mix, Bitcoin trades more like a mainstream macro asset, and those explosive 20x runs are less likely. 

For miners that built their business on the assumption of permanent hypergrowth, Wintermute frames this as a regime change, not a bad quarter.

Margins are getting crushed

Under the hood, Bitcoin mining has a very simple cost structure: energy and compute. That simplicity means there are not many ways to protect profits when revenue falls. Wintermute’s analysis shows gross margins in this epoch peaked around 30%, a level that marked the bottom during prior bear markets, not the top. 

Earlier epochs saw long stretches where miners enjoyed 70–80% margins; now, the “good times” look more like prior stress points.

Transaction fees are not saving the day either. Fee spikes tied to hype cycles and mempool congestion show up on charts, but they fade fast and rarely contribute more than a few percent of total miner revenue over time. 

Wintermute notes that even when you include fees, the margin lines for each cycle barely move apart, especially in the current epoch. In other words, the protocol’s built‑in “second revenue stream” is not acting as a reliable backstop.

The AI pivot is an opportunity for a few

One path out of the squeeze is getting plenty of attention: pivoting into high‑performance computing (HPC) and AI workloads. Big tech firms and AI startups are racing to lock in power and data center capacity, and they do not want to wait five to ten years for new grid connections and construction. 

Miners, who already control cheap power and built‑out sites, are a natural shortcut.

Wintermute points out that sites once valued at roughly 1–7 dollars per watt as pure mining operations have changed hands at close to 18 dollars per watt after being repositioned for AI compute, helped by deals like HUT’s work with Google and Anthropic. 

Public‑market investors have rewarded miners that announce credible AI plans with higher valuations and cheaper capital through equity and convertible debt. 

The catch is that not every miner has the location quality, balance sheet, or operational capacity to turn into a data‑center business.

Putting “idle” Bitcoin to work

That is where Wintermute sees a second, underused lever: active balance sheet management. Miners together hold close to 1% of all Bitcoin, a legacy of the “HODL” playbook that dominated earlier cycles. 

At the same time, many listed miners have been selling down parts of their treasuries to cover tighter margins and debt, with some even wiping out holdings altogether.

Instead of letting reserves sit idle until they are dumped in a liquidity crunch, Wintermute argues miners should treat BTC like a working asset. On the “active” side, that means using derivatives strategies such as covered calls and cash‑secured puts to earn yield on holdings, at the cost of taking some market risk. 

On the “passive” side, miners can deploy coins into on‑chain lending markets, including a new wrapped‑BTC market on Wildcat that Wintermute has highlighted, to generate interest income.

Wintermute’s bottom line is that Bitcoin’s design is working, but the easy era for miners is over. Difficulty can still adjust, yet it cannot overcome slower price growth, a fee market that has not scaled, and rising energy costs that eat into every block reward. 

The AI pivot will likely reshape the upper tier of the industry, turning some miners into full‑blown infrastructure companies.

This post AI Pivot Won’t Save Everyone, Wintermute Tells Bitcoin Miners first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

South African Eskom Considering Discount Power for Bitcoin Miners as Solar Creates Surplus

Eskom, a South African electricity public utility,  is exploring plans to sell excess daytime electricity to Bitcoin mining companies as rooftop solar installations reduce grid demand during daylight hours.

Speaking at the Biznews Conference 2026 in Hermanus, Eskom chairman Mteto Nyati said the utility is evaluating ways to monetize surplus power generated during the middle of the day, according to local reporting.

South Africa’s rapid adoption of rooftop solar systems has begun to reshape the country’s electricity demand profile. Many households and businesses now generate their own power during daylight hours, leaving Eskom with unused capacity once solar panels begin producing electricity.

Nyati said the pattern is increasingly predictable.

Demand spikes in the early morning as households prepare for work and businesses open. As solar generation ramps up later in the day, grid demand falls, leaving Eskom with surplus electricity.

Eskom is looking at creative ways and means of using that capacity. One option under review is offering discounted electricity to Bitcoin mining companies operating in South Africa. The sector runs large data centers that perform energy-intensive computations to secure the Bitcoin network.

Nyati said industries such as Bitcoin mining are contributing to rising global electricity demand. He said that the technology did not exist two decades ago but now represents a growing source of power consumption.

Selling excess electricity to miners could allow Eskom to generate revenue from power that might otherwise go unused during solar-heavy hours.

South African Bitcoin mining opportunities

The idea also builds on earlier comments from Eskom chief executive Dan Marokane, who said the state-owned utility is examining opportunities tied to Bitcoin mining, artificial intelligence infrastructure, and large-scale data centers.

Those sectors require large, continuous electricity supplies and could provide new demand for Eskom’s generation fleet.

Nyati framed the initiative as part of a broader strategy to adapt to structural changes in South Africa’s electricity market.

The country’s power sector is opening to private investment, allowing independent companies to build generation capacity and compete in electricity distribution. At the same time, rising rooftop solar adoption is shifting demand away from the national grid.

Nyati said Eskom must adapt to remain viable in a more competitive environment.

Alongside new revenue strategies, Eskom is pursuing cost reductions. Nyati said the utility plans to eliminate about R112 billion in expenses over the next five years.

Reducing those costs could help lower electricity prices for households and energy-intensive industries such as mining and smelting.

Despite the changes in the energy landscape, Nyati said South Africa still needs a strong national utility.

He argued that Eskom’s coal and nuclear power stations provide the base-load electricity required to support industrial growth and economic development.

The proposal to supply discounted electricity to Bitcoin miners reflects how utilities are beginning to treat flexible energy consumers as tools for balancing supply and demand in an evolving power system.

This post South African Eskom Considering Discount Power for Bitcoin Miners as Solar Creates Surplus first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoin Price Reclaims $73,000 as War Shakes Markets, Outperforming Gold and Stocks

The Bitcoin price has outperformed gold, silver, and major U.S. equity indexes since the outbreak of the Iran–Israel conflict escalation 2026, climbing above $73,000 even as oil surged and expectations for near-term interest rate cuts faded.

Market data shows Bitcoin price rising about 8% since the first strikes against Iran, reaching a one-month high above $73,000. The move placed the digital asset ahead of several traditional safe-haven and risk assets during a period of geopolitical stress.

Gold declined during the same stretch, falling roughly 3% from levels seen before the conflict began. Silver dropped more than 10%, sliding from above $90 to around $82. U.S. equities also weakened, with the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq Composite each down between 1% and 2%.

The divergence came as global markets responded to a surge in energy prices. Crude oil climbed close to 20%, breaking above $100 per barrel for the first time in nearly four years as tensions threatened supply routes across the Middle East. 

These conditions often pressure crypto markets because higher oil prices and tighter financial conditions raise inflation concerns and reduce risk appetite across global portfolios.

The bitcoin price followed that pattern at first.

In the hours after the conflict began, the asset dropped sharply as traders cut exposure across crypto derivatives markets. Roughly $300 million in leveraged positions were liquidated during the initial weekend selloff. Bitcoin briefly fell toward the mid-$63,000 range as uncertainty spread through global markets.

The selloff matched Bitcoin’s historical behavior during geopolitical shocks, where it often trades in line with other high-beta assets during the first wave of risk reduction.

The market response changed during the following week.

Bitcoin price recovery

Instead of remaining near those lows while energy prices climbed, Bitcoin price recovered steadily and broke back above the $70,000 level. The rebound left it outperforming metals and equities during the same window despite the challenging macro backdrop.

Derivatives data via Bitcoin Magazine Pro shows that part of the recovery followed a reset in market leverage. After the liquidation event cleared large speculative positions, traders began rebuilding exposure.

Open interest across major exchanges climbed back to roughly 88,000 BTC. The increase signals renewed participation without reaching extreme leverage levels that often precede sharp corrections.

Institutional demand also contributed to the rebound.

U.S. spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds recorded strong inflows during the week. Data from ETF trackers shows the funds attracted about $586 million, marking one of the largest inflow weeks of the year.

The flows represent a steady source of demand entering the market even as geopolitical tensions intensified and inflation concerns returned.

Robert Mitchnick, head of digital assets at BlackRock, said the behavior of ETF investors has remained stable during periods of volatility.

Speaking on CNBC, Mitchnick said ETF flows show a long-term accumulation pattern even during large price declines in Bitcoin price. 

He said the investor base across financial advisors, institutions, and direct retail buyers has taken a steady approach to the asset, with many participants using price weakness to add exposure.

He also pointed to the performance of the iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT), which continued attracting inflows despite a sharp drop in Bitcoin’s price from its previous peak.

Mitchnick said IBIT ranked among the largest ETF inflows globally during 2025 even while the underlying asset declined, highlighting sustained demand from long-term investors.

The growth of spot ETFs has expanded Bitcoin’s investor base and deepened market liquidity compared with earlier geopolitical episodes. Institutional capital can now enter the market through regulated products that trade alongside equities.

For now, Bitcoin’s performance during the conflict has reinforced its status as a liquid macro asset that reacts to both global market forces and crypto-native demand.

While oil, inflation expectations, and central bank policy continue to shape the backdrop, the digital asset has managed to recover faster than many traditional benchmarks during one of the most volatile geopolitical episodes of the year.

At the time of writing, Bitcoin price is trading at $72,941.

This post Bitcoin Price Reclaims $73,000 as War Shakes Markets, Outperforming Gold and Stocks first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Strategy (MSTR) Bought Over 4,000 Bitcoin Today via STRC As Strong Week Continues

Strategy appears to have purchased more than 4,000 bitcoin on Thursday, according to estimates derived from real-time trading data and community tracking dashboards monitoring the firm’s preferred equity sales.

Data from STRC.live and market trackers suggests the purchases were funded through heavy issuance of the company’s Variable Rate Series A Preferred Stock (STRC), a perpetual preferred instrument that Strategy has increasingly used to raise capital for bitcoin accumulation.

By end of day in New York, trading activity implied the firm had already raised enough capital to acquire more than 4,000 BTC, marking the largest single-day bitcoin purchase funded through STRC since the instrument launched.

The surge follows unusually strong activity earlier in the week. On March 10, STRC recorded a record $409 million in daily trading volume while maintaining roughly 3% 30-day volatility and a one-month volume-weighted average price near $99.78.

On-chain indicators and community monitoring suggested that day’s activity funded the purchase of more than 2,000 BTC, already one of the largest one-day accumulations tied to the instrument.

Thursday’s pace easily surpassed that figure.

Strategy, already the largest public corporate holder of bitcoin, has increasingly leaned on its preferred equity program to finance additional acquisitions.

Earlier this year the company amended its at-the-market (ATM) program, allowing multiple agents to sell STRC shares simultaneously. The change increased liquidity in the instrument and made it easier for Strategy to raise large amounts of capital quickly, with proceeds directed toward bitcoin purchases.

Real-time dashboards tracking STRC trading attempt to estimate how many shares Strategy itself is issuing versus secondary market trades. 

Because the company previously indicated it may sell shares when the price trades above its $100 stated amount, analysts can approximate capital raised when trading occurs above that threshold.

A recent SEC filing disclosed that the company purchased 17,994 BTC between March 2 and March 8 for approximately $1.28 billion. That acquisition lifted the firm’s total holdings to about 738,731 BTC, representing roughly 3.5% of bitcoin’s circulating supply.

The filing showed the purchase was funded through a combination of $377.1 million in STRC sales and $899.5 million raised through common stock issuance.

Based on those figures, STRC accounted for about 29.5% of the funding for that five-day accumulation period, equivalent to roughly 5,300 BTC acquired through preferred share sales.

If Thursday’s estimates prove accurate, the day’s purchases alone could exceed the average daily bitcoin acquisition pace seen during that earlier buying window.

The data remains unofficial. Strategy typically confirms purchases later through SEC filings or public disclosures.

How does Strategy’s STRC work?

STRC acts as a bridge between traditional income investors and Strategy’s Bitcoin-focused balance sheet. Income investors typically seek steady payouts, while Strategy’s large Bitcoin holdings bring long-term upside along with short-term price swings. The preferred stock helps connect these two profiles.

The security is structured to keep demand near its $100 par value while paying a monthly dividend that yields about 11.5% annually. In effect, it converts the economics of a Bitcoin treasury into a format that appeals to fixed-income investors who prioritize regular income.

Strong liquidity and relatively low volatility suggest that the investor base is shifting toward income-focused capital. That shift can help stabilize trading activity compared with instruments driven mainly by speculation.

These early results point to product-market fit. Rather than relying on marketing or hype, the structure appears to meet a clear demand among investors seeking yield tied to Bitcoin exposure.

For corporate leaders considering Bitcoin treasury strategies, STRC offers a way to integrate Bitcoin into broader capital structures. It allows companies to draw funding from multiple investor groups while building a shared strategic reserve around the asset.

At the time of writing, Bitcoin trades near $70,000, while shares of MicroStrategy (MSTR) are down about 0.75% on the day.

This post Strategy (MSTR) Bought Over 4,000 Bitcoin Today via STRC As Strong Week Continues first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

David Bailey Confirmed As A Bitcoin 2026 Speaker

David Bailey has been officially confirmed as a speaker at Bitcoin 2026, returning to the conference he helped build to share his perspective on Bitcoin’s expanding role across media, capital markets, and corporate strategy. As the Chairman and CEO of Nakamoto Inc. (NASDAQ: NAKA), Bailey has executed one of the most ambitious consolidation plays in Bitcoin’s history — bringing together BTC Inc., and UTXO Management under a single publicly traded Bitcoin operating company. His vision extends far beyond media: Nakamoto is positioned as a diversified Bitcoin enterprise spanning asset management, advisory services, and institutional infrastructure, with Bitcoin accumulation at its core.

Bailey has long been a central force in shaping how the global Bitcoin community organizes, communicates, and grows. Under his leadership, BTC Inc. became the parent company of Bitcoin Magazine — the longest-running source of Bitcoin news and commentary, first published in 2012 — while also building The Bitcoin Conference into the largest Bitcoin event series in the world, drawing more than 67,000 attendees across U.S., Asia, Europe, and Middle East events in 2025 alone. His work through Bitcoin for Corporations has further accelerated institutional adoption, connecting over 40 member companies with the education and networks needed to integrate Bitcoin into their treasuries.

With the Nakamoto acquisition of BTC Inc. and UTXO now complete, Bailey arrives at Bitcoin 2026 at a defining moment — not just for his own company, but for the broader Bitcoin ecosystem.

Bitcoin Magazine is published by BTC Inc, a subsidiary of Nakamoto Inc. (NASDAQ: NAKA)

Bitcoin 2026 Returns to Las Vegas Bigger Than Ever

Bitcoin 2026 will take place April 27–29 at The Venetian, Las Vegas, and is expected to be the biggest Bitcoin event of the year.

Focused on the future of money, Bitcoin 2026 will bring together Bitcoin builders, investors, miners, policymakers, technologists, and newcomers from around the world. The event will feature a wide range of pass types, including general admission passes designed specifically for those new to Bitcoin, alongside premium passes for professionals, enterprises, and institutions.

With multiple stages, immersive experiences, technical workshops, and headline keynotes, Bitcoin 2026 is designed to serve both first-time attendees and long-time Bitcoiners shaping the next era of global adoption.

Past Bitcoin Conferences in the U.S.

Bitcoin’s flagship conference has scaled dramatically over the past five years:

• 2021 – Miami: 11,000 attendees
• 2022 – Miami: 26,000 attendees
• 2023 – Miami: 15,000 attendees
• 2024 – Nashville: 22,000 attendees
• 2025 – Las Vegas: 35,000 attendees

Get Your Bitcoin 2026 Pass

Bitcoin Magazine readers can save 10% on Bitcoin 2026 tickets using code ‘ARTICLE10‘ at checkout.

Stay at The official hotel of Bitcoin 2026, The Venetian, and get a guaranteed low rate plus 15% off your pass. Be in the middle of where the fun is all happening, and where the networking never ends.

Bring your whole team to Bitcoin 2026 and get 20% off your entire order, bring more than six in a group and get 25% off for a limited time.

Volunteer at Bitcoin 2026 and get Pro Pass access plus exclusive perks.

Location: The Venetian, Las Vegas
Dates: April 27–29, 2026

With tens of thousands of attendees expected and hundreds of major speakers like David Bailey already confirmed, now is the time to lock in your ticket.

Buy Bitcoin 2026 Tickets — Save 10%

Why Attend Bitcoin 2026?

Bitcoin 2026 is the definitive gathering for anyone serious about the future of money. With 500+ speakers, multiple world-class stages, and programming spanning Bitcoin fundamentals, open-source development, enterprise adoption, mining, energy, AI, policy, and culture, the conference brings every corner of the Bitcoin ecosystem together under one roof.

From headline keynotes on the Nakamoto Stage to deep technical sessions for builders, institutional strategy discussions for enterprises, and beginner-friendly Bitcoin 101 education, Bitcoin 2026 is designed for everyone—from first-time attendees to the leaders shaping Bitcoin’s global adoption.

Whether you’re looking to learn, build, invest, network, or influence, Bitcoin 2026 is where Bitcoin’s next chapter is written.

Bitcoin 2026 Pass Types: Something for Everyone

Bitcoin 2026 offers a range of pass options designed to meet the needs of newcomers, professionals, enterprises, and high-net-worth Bitcoiners alike.

Bitcoin 2026 General Admission Pass

Ideal for newcomers and those looking to experience the heart of the conference.

• Limited access on Days 2 & 3
• Entry to Main Stage
• Access to Genesis Stage
• Full access to the Expo Hall

Bitcoin 2026 Pro Pass

Designed for professionals, operators, and serious Bitcoin participants.

Includes all General Admission features, plus:

• Full 3-day access, including Pro Day
• Entry to the Pro Pass Reception
• Access to Enterprise Hall, Enterprise Stage, and Networking Lounge
• Conference App networking features
• Access to the Bitcoin For Corporations Symposium
• Entry to Compute Village and Energy Stage
• Complimentary lunch, coffee, tea, and snacks
• Dedicated registration and check-in
• Reserved seating at Main Stage
• Huge savings when you bundle your hotel and Pro Pass

Bitcoin 2026 Whale Pass

The all-inclusive, premium Bitcoin 2026 experience.

Includes all Pro Pass features, plus:

• Reserved seating at Main Stage
• All-inclusive gourmet food and beverages
• Entry to Whale Night and Whale Reception
• Access to all official after-parties
• Networking app access to connect with other Whales
• Premium access to The Deep — an exclusive networking lounge with intimate speaker sessions
• Complimentary stay at The Venetian when you bundle your whale pass and hotel (use promo code ‘WHALEHOTEL’ here)

This is the most immersive way to experience Bitcoin 2026.

Bitcoin 2026 After Hours Pass

Your ticket to the night.

Most deals are done with a drink in your hand. Get exclusive access to 3 official Bitcoin 2026 after-parties across Las Vegas — each with a 2-hour open bar — where the real conversations happen and the best connections are made.

• Access to 3 official Bitcoin 2026 after-parties
• 2-hour open bar at each event
• Evening events across Las Vegas, April 27–29
• Network with Bitcoiners, builders, and industry leaders after hours

More headline speaker announcements are coming soon.

Don’t miss Bitcoin 2026.

This post David Bailey Confirmed As A Bitcoin 2026 Speaker first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Jenna Montgomery.

Polymarket and Kalshi are trying to raise money at valuations that put them in the top tier of consumer-fintech names, even as Washington moves closer to writing new rules for the product they sell. Both companies are reportedly in early fundraising talks that could value each at around $20 billion.

That fundraising chatter is taking place in the middle of a political storm.

Iran-related contracts turned prediction markets from a quirky forecasting niche into a question about insider information and incentives around war. Reuters reviewed Polymarket markets tied to the timing of attacks and Khamenei's removal and found about $529 million wagered on timing-of-attack contracts and about $150 million on Khamenei-related contracts, alongside claims of unusually well-timed trading that generated about $1.2 million in profit across six accounts.

Now lawmakers are drafting legislation, and the CFTC said it's also moving toward new rulemaking.

Wall Street believes that probabilities will become part of the information system. But Washington is standing in its way because it believes the system can reward the wrong people at the worst moments.

Wall Street is buying the probability layer story

Prediction markets convert attention into transactions and transactions into fees, while also producing a live probability feed that can be packaged as data.

That second product is the part that pulls prediction markets out of the gambling bucket and into the same group as market data, polling, and financial terminals, because the output is designed to look and behave like a quote.

Media partnerships have started doing the distribution for them. CNBC signed a multi-year deal with Kalshi to integrate its probabilities into TV and digital programming starting in 2026, which puts event-contract pricing into the everyday flow of business news.

Dow Jones signed an exclusive deal with Polymarket to bring prediction market data into The Wall Street Journal, Barron's, and MarketWatch products, which effectively treats a contract price like a piece of reporting infrastructure that can sit next to earnings, rates, and election coverage.

Those deals also tighten the consequences of a scandal, because the markets are no longer a novelty that people can ignore. Once probabilities are embedded in mainstream outlets, they start shaping what readers think is plausible, urgent, or imminent. This is why regulators believe the platforms have to answer a higher standard around integrity, surveillance, and settlement.

It also explains why the companies' valuation kept rising even as the Iran markets drew political heat.

Iran turned prediction markets into a Washington problem

The market's cleanest edge is early knowledge, and the Iran contracts clearly showed that these platforms deal with the kind of information governments try to control.

On March 2, there was about $529 million wagered on timing-of-attack markets and around $150 million on contracts related to Khamenei's death and removal from office. Just six accounts made $1.2 million in profit from these contracts, all funded just several hours before the raids that killed the Iranian leader.

Multiple other reports of newly created accounts making unusually well-timed Iran bets also began popping up as the conflict escalated. This kind of mainstream reporting pulled Polymarket out of the crypto novelty category and landed it in the midst of government surveillance and enforcement.

The main issues these platforms now face are trust and fairness.

A prediction market only works when people believe the rules are stable, the outcomes are adjudicated consistently, and the playing field isn't tilted toward insiders. When the underlying event is military action, that trust problem becomes political, because the incentive to trade early becomes an incentive to leak sensitive and even classified information.

That's why the policy response escalated so fast.

Rep. Mike Levin and Sen. Chris Murphy are already working on legislation aimed at reining in prediction markets after the Iran bets. This puts Congress directly in charge of defining what event contracts should be allowed to cover.

Separately, CFTC Chair Michael Selig said the agency submitted an advance notice of proposed rulemaking to the White House budget office and would move soon on a prediction-markets rule proposal. This tells us a regulatory framework is in the works that could affect everything from contract design and monitoring to enforcement priorities.

The choice Washington faces is pretty straightforward, even if the implementation is technical.

Regulators can treat prediction markets as legitimate event contracts and build stronger monitoring and clearer limits, which could help the category keep scaling with a more defined rulebook.

They can also fence off categories tied to war, assassination, and leadership removal, because those contracts concentrate the insider-information risk and create ugly incentives.

A snapshot shows why this collision is hard to smooth over:

Kalshi’s own dispute shows why regulation alone doesn't end the trust question.

On March 5, Kalshi was sued for failing to pay $54 million to users who bet that the Iranian Supreme Leader would leave office before March 1. The class action suit, filed in California, alleges that the company didn't invoke a “death carveout” provision until after the Iranian leader was killed to avoid paying customers.

Kalshi, however, says its rules about trading on death outcomes were explicit, and that it reimbursed fees and losses so users didn't lose money.

That's the kind of tension investors and policymakers are now dealing with.

Investors want growth, distribution, and a clean case for a probability feed that belongs in the mainstream.

Users want rules that feel stable when outcomes become contentious and emotionally loaded.

Regulators want to prevent a market from turning sensitive state action into a tradable instrument where the best trade is the best leak, because that risk becomes a governance problem the moment these prices start shaping the information environment.

The post $700M in Iran war bets and $1.2M in suspicious profits push Washington toward prediction-market crackdown appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Some of Bitcoin’s most trusted bottom signals rest on the simple assumption that when old coins move, something meaningful has changed.

Traders and analysts often interpret that as renewed selling, fresh distribution, or signs that the market hasn't bottomed. That logic helped turn HODL Waves, Coin Days Destroyed, and long-term holder supply into some of the most widely used metrics in Bitcoin cycle analysis.

The problem with that is that Bitcoin’s blockchain records movements and has no way of showing the motive behind them.

On Nov. 22, 2025, Coinbase said it was transferring BTC and ETH from its legacy wallets to new internal wallets as part of a routine security practice. The company said the transfers were planned, internal, and unrelated to any breach or market event.

But on-chain, it looked like a huge block of old coins suddenly waking up. If Coinbase hadn't published the announcement beforehand, it would have taken some time before the movement stopped looking like pure selling pressure.

At the time, CryptoSlate reported that the company moved nearly 800,000 BTC, representing roughly 4% of Bitcoin's circulating supply and worth around $69.5 billion at the time. That's large enough to overwhelm raw age-based readings and distort the story traders think the chart is telling.

Why Bitcoin traders trust age-based signals so much

HODL Waves are one of the most widely used metrics because they compress a wide range of holder behavior into a single view.

It's a macro snapshot of coin age across the total supply. As coins remain dormant, they mature into older age bands. So, when those same coins move, they leave those older bands and re-enter the youngest category. Analysts use that shift to judge whether long-term holders are still sitting tight and whether older supply is being spent.

That framework became popular because it fit the rhythm of Bitcoin cycles.

In bear markets, traders look for signs that weak hands are gone, long-term holders are absorbing supply, and the available pool of sellers has thinned out. High levels of long-term holder supply often support that interpretation.

That's why these metrics carry so much weight in down markets. They often appear cleaner than price alone, because price can bounce and fail, and derivatives can quickly turn into noise.

Age-based supply, on the other hand, is slower, sturdier, and looks much closer to actual conviction.

That is also why it's such a massive event when one custodian’s wallet reorganization can shift the data and create a false impression of real holder behavior.

Coinbase said on-chain data would show very large volumes of BTC and ETH moving from existing to new wallets, and that deposit addresses and normal customer activity wouldn't be affected. It said it was a planned internal migration tied to security standards and said explicitly that it was unrelated to any data breach or external threat.

CryptoSlate’s reporting explained why the move looked so dramatic on-chain even though the beneficial owner didn't change: Bitcoin analytics tools register spent outputs, transaction volume, and age resets immediately, while wallet labels and entity-level interpretation often catch up later.

If a large holder sells, ownership changes, and the potential sell-side liquidity changes with it. But if a large exchange moves coins from one internal wallet cluster to another, the blockchain still records those coins as spent and recreated. For age-sensitive charts, those two events can look nearly identical at first glance, even though one reflects genuine distribution and the other is just internal wallet maintenance.

Why a wallet reshuffle can look like Bitcoin holders are selling

HODL Waves change when dormant coins mature into older age bands, and they also change when old coins are spent, resetting their age into the youngest category. Coin Days Destroyed follows the same basic logic: every day a coin remains unspent, it accumulates coin days, and once it is spent, those accumulated coin days reset to zero and are counted as destroyed.

That means a large internal wallet migration can create the same mechanical footprint as long-dormant investors finally spending, even when no sale happened at all. Old supply wakes up, young supply thickens, and coin days get destroyed. A trader looking only at the raw chart can come away with a bearish read or decide the bottom is still farther off, even though actual ownership never changed.

This is a clear example of the fact that some of the market's favorite holder-behavior charts are also wallet-behavior charts unless they are adjusted carefully and read with enough context.

That doesn't mean HODL Waves or other age-based indicators aren't useful.

The bigger issue here is methodology. Glassnode says both its LTH and STH supply metrics are entity-adjusted, use an entity’s average purchase date, and exclude supply held on exchanges. That's a meaningful safeguard against exactly the kind of false signal raw address-level data can produce.

That nuance splits the debate into two fairly reasonable camps.

One side argues that age-based metrics still work when analysts use entity-aware versions and understand exactly what's being measured.

The other sees the Coinbase episode as a reminder that any bottom call built from a single chart deserves more skepticism than it usually gets.

What loses credibility is the lazy version of the argument: old coins moved, therefore long-term holders are dumping, therefore the bottom is still out of reach. That was always too neat. Coinbase’s migration just made the flaw much harder to miss.

What traders should trust more than a single bottom signal

A much stronger indicator of where Bitcoin is in the bull/bear cycle comes from confirmation across a few different methods, rather than faith in one chart.

Age-based signals still have value, though, especially when they're entity-adjusted, and the exchange supply is filtered out. But they work best when they are checked against market structure and flow data. If old coins appear to move, the next question should be whether exchange balances actually increased, whether ETF flows weakened, whether realized behavior changed, and whether price reacted the way it usually does during genuine distribution.

That's the broader lesson from Coinbase’s migration.

Bitcoin’s transparency is real, but meaning still has to be extracted carefully. The chain records movement with precision, but interpretation is where mistakes happen.

In a market obsessed with calling bottoms, a routine wallet migration can end up exposing something larger than one noisy chart: that on-chain analysis still depends heavily on knowing who moved the coins, not simply that they moved.

The blockchain can show that coins have moved. It can't, on its own, tell traders whether anyone actually sold.

The post Coinbase’s $70B Bitcoin move made it look like investors were selling — but no one actually did appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Washington has spent years talking about a US CBDC as a distant possibility. It was an abstract policy idea, safely contained inside white papers and partisan messaging. But then the Senate put a number on it and made it very real.

On March 2, senators voted 84-6 to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed to H.R. 6644, a broad housing and banking package that would bar the Federal Reserve from issuing a CBDC until the end of 2030.

Only six senators voted no. Cory Booker voted present, and nine senators did not vote.

That margin meant that a CBDC stopped being a crypto-policy side fight. CBDCs are now at the center of every Senate-floor fight over privacy, state reach, and control.

The procedural caveat still matters to the legal reading of the vote. March 2 wasn't the final passage, and the roll call doesn't prove that the six holdouts actually support a Fed digital dollar.

However, it shows that a Senate supermajority was comfortable advancing a package that includes anti-CBDC language.

The six holdouts, and what their votes actually show

The six senators who voted no were Ron Johnson of Wisconsin, Mike Lee of Utah, Chris Murphy of Connecticut, Rick Scott of Florida, Tommy Tuberville of Alabama, and Chris Van Hollen of Maryland.

All of them voted against moving H.R. 6644 forward at that stage, inside a package that stretches well beyond digital-money policy.

• Ron Johnson (R-Wis.). Wisconsin Republican first elected in 2010. Johnson’s Senate biography centers on manufacturing, fiscal policy, and oversight work, and he has held senior roles on Budget and investigations-related committees.

• Mike Lee (R-Utah). Utah Republican first elected in 2010. Lee has built much of his public identity around constitutional structure, civil liberties, and limits on federal power, which makes his inclusion in this six-senator bloc especially notable in a fight over state control of money.

• Chris Murphy (D-Conn.).
Connecticut Democrat and one of only two Democrats in the March 2 no bloc. Murphy is better known nationally for foreign policy and gun legislation than for crypto or payments debates, which leaves room for multiple readings of his vote absent a direct office explanation.
• Rick Scott (R-Fla.).
Florida Republican and former governor, elected to the Senate in 2018. Scott’s vote stood out because anti-CBDC politics have often found a particularly friendly home among Florida Republicans.
• Tommy Tuberville (R-Ala.).
Alabama Republican elected in 2020. Tuberville still carries the “Coach Tuberville” nickname from his long football career, and he joined the small group that broke from the larger Senate wave on March 2.
• Chris Van Hollen (D-Md.).
Maryland Democrat and the second Democrat in the no bloc. Van Hollen serves on the Senate Banking Committee, which gives his vote added weight inside a package that blends housing, finance, and CBDC language.

H.R. 6644’s size and breadth are the reason a simple ideological scorecard doesn't quite fit here.

The anti-CBDC provision sits inside the “21st Century ROAD to Housing Act,” and the substitute amendment goes well beyond digital currency.

The package includes housing-supply and affordability measures, disaster-recovery block grant structures, rural housing data, modernization provisions, and support aimed at manufactured housing communities.

In other words, none of these senators were voting on a single-question referendum on a Fed digital dollar, but on whether to move a much larger package onto the floor.

Why the CBDC language is bigger than the roll call

Still, the CBDC language is uncharacteristically direct.

The Senate amendment defines a CBDC as a digital asset denominated in US dollars, treated as US currency, carried as a direct liability of the Federal Reserve System, and widely available to the general public.

It then says the Fed Board or any Federal Reserve Bank may not issue or create such a currency, or a substantially similar digital asset, either directly or indirectly. The provision sunsets on Dec. 31, 2030.

That sunset date shows that Congress wants to fence off this issue for the rest of this decade, not settle the issue of digital dollars forever.

But the Fed's own stance towards CBDC makes this entire effort almost obsolete.

The Federal Reserve has publicly said it made no decisions on issuing a CBDC. In a 2022 paper, it laid out strict requirements for any potential CBDC in the US, but noted that it doesn't authorize direct Fed accounts for individuals.

A later research note repeated that point, saying that the central bank doesn't intend to proceed with a CBDC without clear support from the executive branch and Congress, in the form of a specific authorizing law.

So, senators are now moving to block a form of money that the Fed says it has chosen not to issue and couldn't issue on its own anyway. This makes the vote an effort to settle the ground rules early, while the idea of CBDCs is still abstract enough to shape and controversial enough to gain support.

When it comes to the effects this will have on the crypto industry, the interesting part starts here.

Every harder line against a government-backed digital dollar sends attention back toward private-sector dollar rails: bank deposits, tokenized deposits, exchange cash infrastructure, and stablecoins.

CryptoSlate has already tracked different pieces of that argument.

When the House passed its own anti-CBDC bill in 2024, it was an attempt to stop unelected officials from building a digital dollar without explicit congressional authorization. More recently, CryptoSlate's report on whether stablecoins can become “CBDCs in disguise” pushed the debate one step further, arguing that private digital dollars can carry many of the same control levers people fear in a state-issued version.

Kraken gaining a direct link to Federal Reserve payment rails made the same point, but in operational terms: whoever controls access to dollar settlement controls far more than branding.

Access shapes speed, resilience, predictability, and competitive advantage. That's part of the same Washington fight, only viewed from the infrastructure side rather than the Senate floor.

The same policy logic runs through the White House's stablecoin timetable slipping and the Senate’s broader CLARITY Act gridlock. Washington is trying to decide what kind of digital-dollar system it wants, who gets to operate it, and how far federal control should reach into the machinery. The CBDC vote sits neatly inside that bigger struggle.

Then came the follow-through. On March 4, the Senate agreed to the motion to proceed by 90-8.

That second vote gave the March 2 result a second anchor point, as it showed it wasn't just a one-day spike built around an 84-6 split. We can now see that the second vote is the proof of real floor momentum behind a package carrying anti-CBDC text.

While the six holdouts make this an interesting partisan debate, the bigger story is with the 84 who helped pull anti-CBDC language into the center of Senate politics, and with the broader message behind that vote. Washington wants the digital-dollar argument constrained before the Fed ever gets close to testing how far it can go.

The post Who are the six senators who just opposed a US plan to block a digital dollar through 2030? appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin entered the weekend hovering near $71,000, well off the previous week's spike above $74,000, but far below the highs it touched at the beginning of the year. On price alone, the market looks pretty composed.

However, underneath, its structure looks much less comfortable.

Data shows spot activity fading while derivatives keep doing more of the work. Almost every day this month saw derivatives trading at roughly nine times the spot volume, and that's not the profile of a market pushed forward by spot demand. What we're seeing now is a market propped up almost exclusively by leverage.

Related Reading

Bitcoin options just overtook futures for the first time, and the new way institutions hedge is trapping retail leverage

Options just became Bitcoin’s largest derivatives position.

Jan 18, 2026 · Andjela Radmilac

While the distinction between Bitcoin spiking due to spot demand and spiking due to increased leverage might sound too technical, the consequences of this setup are very simple and affect everyone and everything.

Spot trading means that someone buys BTC that's been put up for sale and takes possession of the coins. It's a very binary way of assessing demand: if a lot of people want to pay to own Bitcoin and keep it, its price will inevitably increase. If nobody wants it, the sellers have to lower their prices until they find willing buyers, decreasing its global value.

But derivatives are different. They're sophisticated financial instruments that enable traders to run complex trading strategies with futures, options, basis trades, and short-term hedges, often with leverage layered on top.

These strategies keep activity high and the price moving, but they create a market that looks deeper than it really is. When too much of the action sits in derivatives, price becomes more volatile, dependent on positioning, and more vulnerable to abrupt air pockets once liquidations start.

Related Reading

Why Bitcoin keeps snapping back to $70k — and the $13B options “magnet” behind it

The Iran and Hormuz headlines hit first, then the options market took over, pulling Bitcoin back above $70,000 as positioning tightened.

Mar 7, 2026 · Andjela Radmilac

A Bitcoin rally built on contracts, not coins

The combined spot and derivatives volume on centralized exchanges fell by around 2.4% to $5.61 trillion in February, its lowest level since October 2024.

Spot trading volume was responsible for a better part of that drop, as trading remained heavily skewed towards derivatives.

The global spot exchange complex saw a notable drop in its volumes while synthetic exposure kept rising. That's a very different backdrop from a rally built on expanding spot demand. While this kind of price spike can look good from a distance, the foundations underneath it are much, much thinner.

The price action we've seen from Bitcoin last week is a perfect illustration of this. BTC recovered back above $70,000, and for a moment, it looked as though buyers were stepping in with much-needed conviction. However, the rebound showed up in leveraged activity more than in spot.

The issue here is not that futures or options volumes are inherently bad. Bitcoin has matured into a market where derivatives are central to price discovery. Nevertheless, when price steadies while spot stays soft, the rally can be much more fragile than it appears.

A move like that is easier to reverse because the support comes from positioning that can be reduced quickly, not just from investors absorbing coins and sitting on them.

The institutional adoption of derivatives has made this bigger than a crypto-native issue.

Earlier in February, CME said that its crypto products were posting record volumes in 2026, with the average daily volume of crypto derivatives up 46% from the previous year. That tells you that there's still room for growth in institutional exposure to Bitcoin. It also tells you where the largest share of that growth is happening: through regulated derivatives.

fInstitutions aren't necessarily expressing weak conviction when they use futures. In most cases, they're doing exactly what large, regulated players prefer to do, which is to gain exposure and hedge risk as efficiently as possible.

However, the effect on the market is still the same. More of Bitcoin’s day-to-day behavior is being shaped through contracts rather than through direct buying of the asset.

Why this gets dangerous for Bitcoin when the outside world turns

That shift wouldn't feel awkward in a calm macro environment. However, Bitcoin is now trading through a period when the outside backdrop has become harder to trust.

On March 13, US equity funds posted a second straight week of outflows as the Iran war and the oil shock darkened sentiment across risk assets. In that kind of atmosphere, leverage stops being a background feature of the market and becomes its main vulnerability.

A market supported by steady spot demand absorbs fear more gradually. But a market supported by derivatives reprices much faster because positions get cut and margins tighten.

That's the real risk now. Bitcoin can keep grinding higher in a derivatives-heavy setup, as it's done many times before.

However, a market carried by leverage depends on these calm conditions staying calm.

That leaves less room for error. A macro scare, another wave of ETF outflows, a jump in yields, a sharp equity selloff, or a sudden hit to sentiment can all produce the same effect: positions unwinding faster than cash buyers can step in.

We saw that in February, when the crypto market was hit by a burst of liquidations during a global risk unwind. While the trigger came from outside crypto, the speed of the reaction was very much a function of how the market was positioned. That's what makes the current imbalance worth watching, as the danger isn't just that Bitcoin is now volatile, because it's always volatile. The danger is that the thing propping up the price is transmitting stress quickly.

There's also a perception problem here.

Bitcoin has spent years building a stronger institutional base. Spot Bitcoin ETFs reached $100 billion in AUM, crypto derivatives on CME are setting records, and more and more corporate treasuries hold BTC.

However, better access to regulated crypto products doesn't automatically produce a sturdier foundation for day-to-day trading. What it does produce is a quick and efficient way to take large leveraged positions. The market is mature because the infrastructure is more mature, but the fragility in behavior is still there.

That's why the spot-versus-derivatives split deserves more attention than it usually gets.

It's one of the best ways to judge what's actually carrying the market at any given moment. Right now, the answer is definitely not spot or retail demand, but leverage, hedging, and synthetic exposure.

Bitcoin remains very liquid, but most of that liquidity is now synthetic, and it's usually the first kind to thin out when the market gets stressed.

That doesn't guarantee a breakdown, though. Bitcoin can stay resilient for longer than skeptics expect, and leverage can keep feeding rallies as long as the flows line up.

Nevertheless, the setup is less sturdy than the price alone makes it look. If spot buying doesn't return in a more visible way, the market may keep climbing with a weaker foundation than many traders realize.

The post Bitcoin price jumped over $71k – but most of the rally isn’t coming from real buyers appeared first on CryptoSlate.

On Mar. 12, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) issued a staff advisory telling exchanges to tighten surveillance on event contracts.

Simultaneously, the regulator opened a 45-day rulemaking process that asks pointed questions about inside information, manipulation, and whether some markets serve the public interest at all.

Two weeks earlier, the agency had spotlighted two Kalshi disciplinary cases involving traders who appeared to hold decisive informational edges.

One is a California gubernatorial candidate who bet on his own race, the other a YouTube editor who traded contracts tied to “Mr. Beast” while likely holding material nonpublic information.

The Mar. 12 move treats prediction markets as a real market-structure problem.

When prices influence news coverage, political narratives, and investor sentiment, insider edges and weak guardrails become public trust issues.

Growth without guardrails

From 2006 through 2020, designated contract markets listed about five event contracts a year on average. That jumped to 131 in 2021 and hit roughly 1,600 event contracts certified for listing in 2025, representing 12 times the 2021 level and 320 times the historical baseline.

Applications for exchange registration have more than doubled over the past year, largely from firms focused on running prediction markets.

Under current rules, an exchange can self-certify a new contract by giving the CFTC written notice just one business day before launch. In a market that can scale overnight, the burden of integrity falls on exchanges before problems become public.

The CFTC is not speaking in the abstract about insider-style abuse.

In the Langford case, Kalshi found a California gubernatorial candidate traded on his own candidacy and imposed a five-year suspension plus a $2,246.36 penalty.

In the Kaptur case, Kalshi found a YouTube editor traded “Mr. Beast” contracts while likely possessing material nonpublic information and imposed a two-year suspension plus a $20,397.58 penalty.

The enforcement division said both fact patterns could implicate the Commodity Exchange Act anti-fraud rules.

The advance notice of proposed rulemaking goes further.

It explicitly asks whether asymmetric information can ever serve the public interest, whether prediction markets are especially vulnerable to cross-market manipulation, whether participants skew younger, and whether self-exclusion programs, monetary or time limits, ad restrictions, disclaimers, and warnings should be factored into the Commission's public-interest analysis.

The line between crowd wisdom and single-actor vulnerability

The Mar. 12 advisory offers the sharpest frame for understanding what the CFTC now considers risky.

Some prediction markets still look like information aggregation, but others resemble insider-sensitive micro-markets.

The advisory says sports and other event contracts are often consistent with anti-manipulation standards when settlement depends on the aggregate performance of multiple participants over an extended period, because breadth makes manipulation harder.

It warns that contracts tied to injuries, unsportsmanlike conduct, physical altercations, officiating actions, or outcomes driven by a single person or small group pose a heightened risk of manipulation or price distortion.

That distinction separates broad contracts, which can plausibly claim price-discovery value, from narrow contracts that begin to look like monetized access to privileged information.

Prediction markets are moving into ordinary retail finance distribution. Robinhood offers event contracts through CFTC-regulated partner exchanges across politics, sports, culture, crypto, climate, economics, and health.

Interactive Brokers' ForecastTrader is live for political, economic, finance, and climate contracts.

They are also moving into mainstream media. In January, Dow Jones signed an exclusive deal with Polymarket to bring real-time prediction data to The Wall Street Journal, Barron's, and MarketWatch, and CNBC signed a similar deal with Kalshi.

These prices are becoming headline inputs.

Once market-implied odds are embedded in coverage of elections, company events, the economy, wars, or sports, a distorted market can become a distorted news signal.

The rulemaking request itself asks how event contracts should be judged under the Commodity Exchange Act's public interest goals of price discovery, price dissemination, anti-manipulation, and protection against abusive sales practices.

The CFTC is warning that prediction markets are becoming too important to run on trust-based mechanics.

Reuters Breakingviews framed the risk in classic adverse-selection terms: people may choose not to participate if they think the other side knows more than they do.

The central tension is whether prediction markets can stay useful once insiders know the public is watching the odds.

The regulatory subtext

The CFTC is effectively asking whether prediction markets are a derivatives market, a gambling-adjacent consumer product, or both.

The rulemaking request asks about “gaming,” whether sports competitions should be treated differently from award competitions, whether responsible-gaming tools should matter, and how the Commission should weigh the needs of younger participants.

The language signals a regulator testing how far financial market logic can stretch before it collides with gambling-style consumer protection.

The state-federal fight makes this more urgent. Massachusetts blocked Kalshi's sports markets in January and February, and Nevada sued in February, arguing that the contracts constitute illegal gambling under state law.

The CFTC has insisted it has exclusive federal jurisdiction over many event contracts traded on registered markets.

A recent American Gaming Association analysis said nearly 43% of digital sports betting ads seen by US consumers in the first two months of 2026 came from prediction market operators and therefore were not subject to state gaming rules requiring responsible-gaming messaging.

The same analysis said Kalshi generated about 5.2 billion digital ad impressions this year, versus 2.9 billion for FanDuel.

What comes next

The CFTC says comments are due 45 days after Federal Register publication, and the rulemaking notice was filed for public inspection on Mar. 12, with a scheduled publication date of Mar. 13, which suggests a likely deadline of Apr. 27.

The most natural outcome is that the CFTC allows growth but pushes narrower guardrails.

In this scenario, the market can expect tougher scrutiny of single-person and small-group markets, more explicit restricted-trader lists, stronger settlement-source requirements, and heavier exchange surveillance.

Broad macro, election, climate, and full-game contracts likely survive. At the same time, the most integrity-sensitive micro-markets are squeezed.

The alternative paths are clear. If the process produces durable rules, broker distribution expands, and prediction markets become a normalized retail derivatives category.

Robinhood and IBKR distributions are already live.

Cboe is launching a new prediction market framework in the second quarter, Nasdaq has sought SEC approval for binary index options, and ICE has invested up to $2 billion in Polymarket.

However, if the federal framework remains muddy while states keep litigating, product menus fragment by state, and regulated operators hesitate to list anything that resembles a prop bet or a gambling-adjacent micro-market.

One high-profile scandal could settle the debate overnight. A case involving political insiders, league insiders, military information, or a market-resolution fiasco could trigger emergency freezes, category-level prohibitions, or rapid bipartisan calls for tougher laws.

Broad public forecasting versus narrow, insider-sensitive micro markets may define the future more than the distinction between crypto and traditional finance.

The CFTC acknowledges the potential informational value of informed trading while also asking whether the same asymmetry can lead to unfairness and the misuse of inside information.

The agency's warning is clear: prediction markets are influential enough that the same problems people understand from traditional markets now apply. This includes insider information, weak surveillance, conflicts of interest, and the risk that ordinary users stop trusting the market if they believe they are trading against better-informed insiders.

The post The CFTC is cracking down on the growing insider problem in prediction markets appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Global markets are once again facing rising geopolitical tension. News surrounding Iran, the United States, and Israel — including concerns over the Strait of Hormuz — has triggered uncertainty across traditional financial markets.

Yet despite these developments, the cryptocurrency market has shown surprising stability. Bitcoin continues to trade near the $70,000 level, resisting the kind of sharp panic selling that often accompanies geopolitical crises.

This unusual market behavior is raising an important question: why is Bitcoin ignoring the Iran war?

Bitcoin Briefly Dropped — Then Recovered

When the first headlines about escalating tensions appeared, the crypto market initially reacted with a short-term sell-off. Bitcoin briefly dipped as traders reduced risk exposure across global markets.

However, the decline was short-lived. Within hours, buyers stepped in and the market stabilized. Bitcoin quickly returned to the $70K range, suggesting that demand remains strong despite the uncertain macro environment.

This pattern — a quick dip followed by strong recovery — has become increasingly common in recent years.

Institutional Demand Is Changing Market Behavior

One of the biggest reasons Bitcoin is showing resilience today is the growing presence of institutional investors.

Large companies, hedge funds, and ETFs have significantly increased their exposure to Bitcoin over the past few years. These investors often take longer-term positions and are less likely to panic during short-term geopolitical events.

Institutional demand can therefore act as a stabilizing force in the market, helping absorb selling pressure during moments of uncertainty.

Bitcoin Is Starting to Behave Like a Macro Asset

Another reason Bitcoin is holding strong is its growing role as a macro asset.

In the past, geopolitical crises often caused crypto to fall sharply as investors rushed into traditional safe havens such as the US dollar or government bonds.

Today, however, Bitcoin is increasingly being viewed as an alternative store of value. Some investors now treat BTC as a hedge against monetary instability, geopolitical risk, and long-term inflation.

This shift in perception is gradually changing how Bitcoin reacts to global events.

Oil, Inflation, and the Strait of Hormuz

The current tensions are particularly sensitive because of the Strait of Hormuz, a strategic shipping route through which roughly 20% of global oil supply passes.

Any disruption in this region could push oil prices significantly higher, which would have a direct impact on inflation and global financial markets.

Historically, rising inflation and monetary instability have often strengthened Bitcoin’s long-term narrative as an alternative financial asset.

What Happens Next for Crypto?

For now, Bitcoin appears to be consolidating around the $70K level while global markets digest geopolitical developments.

If tensions escalate further, short-term volatility could increase. However, the fact that Bitcoin has remained relatively stable during such a major geopolitical event suggests that the market structure has matured.

In other words, crypto may no longer react to global crises in the same way it did during its early years.

Instead of collapsing under pressure, Bitcoin may gradually be evolving into a global macro asset that responds differently to geopolitical shocks.

Conclusion

The Iran crisis is testing financial markets once again. Yet Bitcoin’s ability to remain stable near $70,000 despite rising geopolitical tensions is an important signal.

Rather than triggering panic selling, the conflict appears to be highlighting Bitcoin’s growing role in the global financial system.

Whether this resilience continues will depend on how geopolitical events unfold — but one thing is becoming increasingly clear: Bitcoin is no longer just a speculative asset.

It is becoming part of the global macro landscape.

The crypto market is finally back in the green. After weeks of boring sideways trading and scary news headlines, Bitcoin ($BTC) blasted back past $71,500 this week. When the "Big Brother" of crypto pumps like this, it usually pulls the rest of the market up with it. Right now, everyone is talking about "Altseason" again, as traders start moving their money into smaller coins to chase even bigger gains.

Here are the five tokens that made the most noise over the last seven days.

1. River (RIVER)

$River has emerged as the breakout star of the week, leading the pack with a massive rally that caught many traders by surprise.

• 7-Day Gain: ~41%
• The Catalyst: On March 11, the project reached a major milestone with over $1 million in tokens staked, creating a supply shock that effectively reduced exchange liquidity.
• Market Move: The price successfully cleared the $20 resistance zone, with technical indicators suggesting a strong trend reversal after months of accumulation.

2. Bittensor (TAO)

Continuing its dominance in the Decentralized AI sector, Bittensor has once again proven why it is a favorite among institutional investors.

• 7-Day Gain: ~38.6%
• The Catalyst: Optimism surrounding General Tensor’s $5M funding round and the news that the Grayscale Bittensor Trust is now an SEC-reporting company has provided the "institutional seal of approval" for $TAO.
• Market Move: TAO surged past the $260 level, with open interest hitting a yearly high as the network scales to 256 subnets.

3. Render (RENDER)

$Render continues to benefit from the global demand for decentralized compute power and its close ties to the AI hardware narrative.

• 7-Day Gain: ~30%
• The Catalyst: Bullish sentiment ahead of major AI conferences (like Nvidia's GTC) has kept RENDER in the spotlight. Furthermore, increased network usage for AI training has led to a significant uptick in RENDER token burning.
• Market Move: Despite some weekend profit-taking, Render remains one of the strongest infrastructure plays, comfortably holding above its 50-day moving average.

4. DeXe (DEXE)

The $DeXe protocol has become a focal point for the "Governance-as-a-Service" trend, attracting significant volume from DeFi enthusiasts.

• 7-Day Gain: ~20.1%
• The Catalyst: A series of Marketing SubDAO initiatives and high-volume buying—up over 100% in 24 hours—indicated that "whales" are actively accumulating the token.
• Market Move: DEXE broke out of its long-term descending channel, now targeting the $5.50 psychological level as its next major objective.

5. Artificial Superintelligence Alliance (FET)

The $FET token (representing the merged Fetch.ai, SingularityNET, and CUDOS ecosystem) is showing renewed strength as its unified vision takes shape.

• 7-Day Gain: ~16%
• The Catalyst: Positive market reaction to the ASI:Cloud infrastructure expansion and the rollout of new autonomous agent tools that lower the barrier for AI development.
• Market Move: FET reclaimed the $0.18 level, a key support-turned-resistance zone. A sustained hold here could signal the start of a multi-month recovery.

As Operation Epic Fury enters its third week, the global financial landscape is being rewritten in real-time. For decades, the "War Playbook" was simple: sell stocks, buy Gold, and hide in U.S. Treasuries.

However, as the conflict between the U.S. and Iran escalates in March 2026, that playbook has been set on fire. While traditional markets face a staggering $5 trillion evaporation, Bitcoin ($BTC) and the broader crypto ecosystem are doing something unprecedented: they are holding the line.

Why is Institutional Money Flowing to BTC?

In 2026, the "War Discount" that usually drags down risk assets is failing to suppress the Bitcoin price. Institutional investors are no longer viewing BTC as a "risk-on" tech trade, but as a "risk-off" sovereign asset. While the S&P 500 has plummeted since the February 28th strikes, Spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded over $760 million in net inflows this week alone.

The $5 Trillion Collapse of the "Old Guard"

The numbers coming out of Wall Street and the London Bullion Market this week are nothing short of apocalyptic. The massive capital flight is no longer rotating into traditional safety nets.

• Equities in Freefall: Over $2.4 trillion has been wiped from U.S. stocks since the conflict began. With oil prices surging past $110/bbl due to the Strait of Hormuz blockade, the industrial and tech sectors are bleeding out.
• The Gold Anomaly: In a shock to "boomer" investors, Gold and Silver have seen a combined $2.5 trillion in value destroyed. While physical gold remains a store of value, the "Paper Gold" market is facing a massive liquidity crunch as institutional players dump everything to cover margin calls.

Bitcoin’s "Safe Haven" Graduation

While the S&P 500 and Gold have cratered, Bitcoin (BTC) has shown remarkable resilience. After a brief "flash crash" to $62,400 on Day 1 of the invasion, BTC has surged back, currently consolidating firmly above $70,000.

Why Bitcoin is a Good Investment

• Censorship-Resistant Capital: As the U.S. and Israel tighten the noose on Iranian financial networks, and global banks brace for cyber-retaliation, the "unseizable" nature of on-chain assets has become the ultimate insurance policy.
• Institutional "Diamond Hands": BlackRock and Fidelity aren't selling; they are treating this geopolitical dip as a generational accumulation zone.
• The Scarcity Narrative: On March 10, 2026, the 20 millionth Bitcoin was officially mined. In a world of infinite war spending and fiat debasement, the 21-million-cap has never looked more attractive to those seeking to preserve purchasing power.

Altcoin Watch: Beyond the King

It’s not just Bitcoin. We are seeing a "Flight to Utility" across the board as users seek refuge from failing crypto exchanges and traditional banking infrastructures.

• Ethereum ($ETH): Currently holding above $2,100. The new BlackRock ETHB ETF provides a yield-bearing sanctuary for institutional cash seeking smart contract exposure.
• $XRP: On-chain payments on the XRPL have surged to 2.7 million daily transactions as businesses scramble for alternative settlement layers outside of the threatened SWIFT system.
• Stablecoins: Demand for USDC and USDT has hit all-time highs in the Middle East as citizens seek to preserve their wealth against collapsing local currencies.

Note on Self-Custody: During times of global instability, reliance on centralized platforms can be risky. Many investors are migrating their assets to verified hardware wallets to ensure 24/7 access to their funds regardless of the geopolitical climate.

The Bottom Line

The image of the "$5 Trillion Loss" isn't a warning for crypto—it’s a eulogy for the old financial system. In 2026, the market has rendered its verdict: In times of kinetic war, digital assets provide a level of sovereignty and portability that physical gold simply cannot match. The "Digital Gold" thesis is no longer a theory; we are watching its global implementation in real-time.

The institutional appetite for digital assets is showing renewed vigor as BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) recorded a substantial purchase of approximately $147.7 million worth of Bitcoin. This latest acquisition is not an isolated event; it marks the third consecutive week of net inflows for the world’s largest spot Bitcoin ETF, signaling a decisive shift in market sentiment.

Institutional Confidence Returns to BTC

After a period of stagnant price action and cooling interest in early 2026, the tide appears to be turning. The consistent inflow into IBIT suggests that institutional allocators are viewing current price levels as a strategic entry point. This "three-peat" of weekly gains provides a necessary cushion for the Bitcoin price, which has faced significant volatility in recent months.

Market Impact and "Giga-Bullish" Signals

The magnitude of these inflows often serves as a leading indicator for broader market movements. When a behemoth like BlackRock consistently accumulates, it reduces the available liquid supply on exchanges, creating a "supply shock" environment.

• Sustained Momentum: Three weeks of inflows suggest this is a trend, not a "dead cat bounce."
• Liquidity Concentration: BlackRock now manages a significant portion of the total crypto news cycle, often dictating the daily momentum of the entire asset class.
• Wider Adoption: This streak coincides with BlackRock's expansion into other products, such as their recently launched staked Ethereum ETF (ETHB), further cementing their dominance in the digital asset space.

Strategic Outlook for Traders

While the "giga-bullish" narrative is gaining steam, traders should remain aware of macroeconomic headwinds that could impact the pace of these inflows. However, for now, the data is clear: BlackRock is buying, and the institutional gate is wide open.

The stablecoin sector has officially crossed a historic threshold, reaching a total market capitalization of $320 billion as of March 2026. This vertical climb represents more than a mere recovery from previous cycles; it marks the "industrialization" of digital dollars. Unlike the retail-driven spikes of the past, the current momentum is fueled by multi-billion dollar inflows from traditional finance (TradFi) giants and the implementation of the GENIUS Act in the United States.

What is Driving the Stablecoin Surge?

The primary driver behind the $320 billion market cap is the rapid transition of stablecoins from speculative trading tools to global payment infrastructure. In January 2026 alone, stablecoin networks moved over $10 trillion in transaction volume—a figure that now rivals legacy settlement systems like Visa. This "vertical" adoption is led by institutional demand for 24/7 settlement and the legislative "green light" provided by federal regulators.

Market Composition: The Rise of Regulated Giants

While Tether (USDT) remains the liquidity heavyweight with a market cap of approximately $184 billion, the narrative in 2026 has shifted toward compliant, onshore alternatives.

• Circle (USDC): Has seen explosive growth, reaching $78 billion, outperforming the broader sector in monthly growth due to its status as the "compliance-first" choice for U.S. institutions.
• BlackRock BUIDL: The tokenized liquidity fund has surged 36% recently, hitting $2.46 billion, proving that yield-bearing institutional "stable-assets" are a core growth pillar.
• USAT: Tether’s newly launched, U.S.-regulated stablecoin is already challenging the status quo, aiming to capture the institutional market governed by the GENIUS Act.

The Impact of the GENIUS Act

The Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act, signed into law in mid-2025, has redefined the market. By mandating 1:1 liquid reserves and federal oversight, the act has effectively de-risked stablecoins for the 1,600+ local banks now plugging into these rails via providers like Jack Henry.

This regulatory framework has bifurcated the market:

• Onshore Regulated Rails: Used for B2B payments, payroll, and corporate treasury.
• Offshore Liquidity Routes: Still dominated by USDT for global retail and high-frequency trading.

Institutional "Vertical" Adoption: Beyond Trading

The current growth is "vertical" because it is expanding upward into the highest levels of the financial stack. BNY Mellon now acts as a custodian for major tokenized funds, and Aon has begun settling insurance payments in USDC.

Conclusion: The Path to $1 Trillion

Market analysts, including those from the European Central Bank, suggest that if current trends hold, the stablecoin market cap could hit $1 trillion by 2027. As stablecoins continue to eat into traditional bank deposits, they are becoming a systemically important part of the global economy—no longer a "crypto niche," but the very plumbing of modern finance.

Utopai Studios built a professional-grade cinematic engine that produces stunning long-form AI video—but its learning curve can be punishing.

The governor, who opposes CBDCs, appears poised to sign a regulatory framework for stablecoins in Florida.

Experts say artificial general intelligence lacks a clear definition or arrival point, despite promises from Silicon Valley and abroad.

The Ethereum Foundation said Saturday that it sold 5,000 ETH for approximately $10.2 million to Tom Lee's BitMine Immersion Technologies.

Eddy Alexandre, who pleaded guilty to commodities fraud in 2023, is currently serving out a nine-year prison sentence

Ripple CTO Emeritus David Schwartz has waded into a heated debate over the company’s XRP sales.

A dormant Shiba Inu (SHIB) shark investor just exited their position on Binance, locking in a massive $422,000 loss. After buying 14.5B SHIB at the March 2024 peak, the whale capitulated with an 83% deficit, ending two years of dreadful holding.

XRP on Flare goes Layer 3 by integrating with Yellow Network, a decentralized clearing protocol backed by a $10M investment from Ripple's Chris Larsen.

The Bitcoin community is at a breaking point. What started as a proposal to clean up "spam" has turned into a civil war, with Blockstream CEO Adam Back labeling BIP-110 an "intentional literal downgrade" that threatens the very core of the network.

Shiba Inu's burn rate is up 63% as over 4 million SHIB were sent to dead wallets.

TLDR:

• A fully collateralized stablecoin can still depeg if its reserves cannot be accessed during a run.

• The BIS compares stablecoins to Eurodollars, noting they lack central bank settlement and repo facilities.

• Stablecoins mirror 19th-century wildcat banks, operating across fragmented jurisdictions with no shared backstop.

• Emerging stablecoin regulations follow the same path that brought lasting stability to traditional banking systems. 

Stablecoins face a structural vulnerability that full collateralization alone cannot resolve. The Bank for International Settlements raised this concern in a recent paper titled “On Par: A Money View of Stablecoins.”

Crypto research firm Delphi Digital shared the findings on social media, noting reserves mean little without proper access mechanisms.

The analysis draws parallels between stablecoins and historical banking failures. It compares them to both Eurodollars and 19th-century wildcat banks, pointing to regulation as the path forward.

The Collateral Problem Stablecoins Cannot Escape

A stablecoin can hold enough reserves to cover every dollar in circulation and still depeg. The critical question is whether those reserves can be accessed when market pressure demands it.

Without that access, even fully backed stablecoins remain vulnerable to sudden redemption runs. Collateral ratios alone do not guarantee stability during a crisis.

The BIS paper compares stablecoins directly to Eurodollars — private dollar deposits held offshore outside U.S. regulatory reach. Traditional banking maintains par value through central bank settlement and primary dealer networks.

Standing repo facilities and a lender of last resort further stabilize the system under stress. Stablecoins currently have none of these tools available.

Delphi Digital stated on X that “if there’s a run, there’s no forward market, no credit facility, and no mechanism to absorb the pressure before it hits the reserves directly.”

That absence of institutional backstops creates a fragility that reserve ratios cannot address. The gap between holding reserves and deploying them quickly remains a central, unresolved problem.

This vulnerability becomes most visible during periods of sharp market stress. When redemption demand spikes, issuers must liquidate reserves quickly and under pressure.

Without any institutional buffer, that process can accelerate a depeg rather than prevent it. The result is a feedback loop that turns a manageable outflow into a broader crisis.

Wildcat Banking and the Road to Stablecoin Regulatory Stability

The BIS paper extends its comparison beyond Eurodollars, likening stablecoins to the wildcat banks of 19th-century America.

Those institutions operated across fragmented jurisdictions without uniform oversight or shared infrastructure. The parallel to today’s stablecoin market is direct and observable.

Delphi Digital noted that wildcat banking, despite its early instability, eventually gave way to federal oversight and consolidation.

That regulatory evolution made the traditional banking system functional at the national scale over time. The trajectory for stablecoins appears to follow the same historical pattern.

The current fragmentation across different blockchains and jurisdictions mirrors that earlier era of banking. Multiple issuers operate under differing rules, with no shared settlement layer or system-wide backstop in place. That inconsistency makes achieving broader, durable stability difficult without coordinated oversight.

Regulatory frameworks now taking shape across major markets aim to address these structural gaps directly. Legislation in the U.S., Europe, and Asia is beginning to impose reserve standards and licensing requirements on stablecoin issuers.

These measures closely echo the same principles that brought lasting stability to traditional banking over the past century.

The post BIS Warns Stablecoins Can Depeg Even with Full Reserves: Here’s Why appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Proof-of-Stake requires acquiring over $80 billion in ETH to mount a successful attack on the Ethereum network.

• Ethereum’s slashing mechanism automatically burns the coins of validators who sign two conflicting messages.

• If one-third of validators censor the chain, a community-coordinated soft fork can restore honest operations.

• Proof-of-stake security scales with network value, making Ethereum harder to attack as ETH’s price rises.

Proof-of-stake has become one of the most discussed topics in blockchain security. Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin recently outlined why it offers stronger protection than proof-of-work.

His explanation covered attack costs, the slashing mechanism, and network recovery options. Currently, more than 37 million ETH are staked on Ethereum, with another 3 million waiting in the validator queue. Some estimates suggest the cost to attack Ethereum now exceeds even the cost of attacking Bitcoin.

Why Attacking a Proof-of-Stake System Is Economically Prohibitive

Buterin made clear that an attacker must acquire a stake comparable to the rest of the network. To threaten Ethereum today, that means sourcing well over $80 billion worth of ETH. This kind of capital requirement creates an enormous barrier that is difficult to overcome in practice.

Buterin explained the concept directly, stating: “I think proof of stake is very secure because to attack the system, you need to have basically as much stake as the rest of the network. Right now, for example, we have 5 million ETH staking, which means you have to come up with 5 million ETH and then join the network.” That figure has since grown past 37 million ETH, raising the threshold considerably higher.

Beyond the initial cost of acquiring stake, an attacker also risks losing those same funds after the attack. This is a penalty that does not exist in proof-of-work, where mining equipment can simply be redirected after an attack. The dual risk of high cost and asset loss makes a proof-of-stake attack far less appealing.

Buterin also addressed this from a broader security perspective, saying: “The security needs of a thing have to be proportional to the size of that thing, because as a thing gets bigger, its enemies become bigger and more well-motivated.”

Security in a proof-of-stake system therefore scales naturally with the overall value of the network, making it increasingly harder to compromise over time.

Slashing and Community Coordination Provide Layered Defenses

Slashing is a built-in feature that guards against attempts to revert finalized Ethereum blocks. To carry out such an attack, validators would need to sign two conflicting messages on the network. Once those messages are detected, the protocol burns the ETH of every validator involved.

Buterin described the mechanism in clear terms: “In order to revert a finalized block, you basically have to have a big portion of your validators sign two conflicting messages. Once these messages are on the network, you can go and prove ‘these people did it.’ So we have this feature in the protocol where you basically take all these people who provably misbehaved and you burn their coins.” This process runs automatically, without any human involvement.

Ethereum also has a contingency for censorship attacks, where a third of validators stop attesting. In that scenario, Buterin outlined the community response: “Everyone who got censored would create a minority chain, and the community would have to do a soft fork. They would have to say, ‘this chain is clearly attacking us and this one is not attacking us, so we’re going to join this chain.'”

Following that fork, the attacking validators would also face heavy losses to their staked ETH.

Buterin further noted what sets proof-of-stake apart from proof-of-work in this regard: “The difference between proof-of-stake and proof-of-work is that in a proof-of-stake system, you can identify specific participants — and this isn’t a human going in and saying ‘I don’t like you’. It’s all automated.” This level of precision makes proof-of-stake a considerably more resilient consensus model overall.

The post Vitalik Buterin: Proof-of-Stake Is More Secure and Resilient Than Proof-of-Work appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Injective (INJ) price fell nearly 95% from its peak before stabilizing at a higher-timeframe demand zone.
• A strong rebound of roughly 4500% followed the reaction from the monthly order block support area.
• Analysts identified a market structure shift after the asset broke its long-term lower-high trend.
• Liquidity targets near $16, $35, and $53 remain visible if higher-timeframe demand continues holding.

The Injective (INJ) price is drawing attention after analysts identified a macro structural shift on the monthly chart. The asset recorded a sharp 95% decline before rebounding from a higher-timeframe demand zone, suggesting renewed accumulation interest.

Deep Market Correction Resets Injective Structure

The Injective (INJ) price experienced a major correction after reaching its previous cycle peak. The decline erased nearly 95% of its value during the broader market downturn.

Such drawdowns are common in cryptocurrency cycles. Many digital assets undergo deep retracements before stabilizing at lower valuation levels.

These periods usually remove leveraged positions and speculative activity. As liquidity exits the market, long-term investors often begin evaluating discounted entry zones.

In the case of the Injective (INJ) price, the extended correction placed the asset inside a large monthly expansion zone. Price remained under pressure before eventually reaching a higher-timeframe demand region.

Technical analysts identify such areas as zones where institutional accumulation previously occurred. Markets frequently react when price returns to those levels.

This perspective reflects how many market participants interpret deep corrections during long market cycles.

Strong Demand Reaction Points to Potential Expansion

Injective (INJ) price reacted strongly once it reached the monthly order block. The market moved upward rapidly after touching the demand zone.

The rebound produced an expansion estimated at roughly 4500% from the local bottom. Such displacement often signals strong buying pressure entering the market.

Large bullish candles following a demand test usually indicate liquidity absorption. This occurs when buyers absorb sell orders positioned near support.

Analysts also identified a market structure shift on the monthly timeframe. Earlier price action formed a pattern of lower highs and lower lows.

That structure changed once the market invalidated the previous bearish pattern. The shift indicated a possible transition toward macro accumulation.

After the strong rally, the Injective (INJ) price entered a corrective phase. Markets often consolidate after impulsive moves to create new liquidity zones.

Traders are now watching whether weekly higher lows develop inside the demand area. Sustained support would strengthen the bullish structure already visible on the chart.

Liquidity targets above the market appear near $16, $35, and $53. These zones align with previous resistance levels and potential stop clusters.

For now, the Injective (INJ) price remains near a key structural region. Market participants continue tracking higher-timeframe support for further confirmation.

The post Injective Flips Bearish Structure After Monthly Order Block Holds: What’s Next for INJ? appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Tesla’s Terafab targets 1 million monthly wafer starts by 2030, nearly matching TSMC’s current output capacity.
• The $20–25B chip factory covers logic, memory, and advanced packaging under one roof at 2nm scale.
• Tesla’s AI5 chip is reportedly 3x more efficient than Nvidia’s Blackwell at under 10% of the cost.
• Jensen Huang warns Tesla may underestimate the years of expertise required to run a leading-edge fab.

Terafab, Tesla’s newly announced semiconductor manufacturing project, is set to begin construction within seven days.

The initiative targets 2-nanometer process technology and will cover logic chips, memory, and advanced chip packaging under one roof.

Tesla has put the estimated cost at between $20 billion and $25 billion. The move comes as chip demand from Tesla’s AI, robotics, and automotive programs outpaces current supply. Musk warned about this constraint for months, calling it a direct threat to Tesla’s broader ambitions.

Tesla Sets Target of One Million Wafer Starts Monthly by 2030

Tesla’s wafer production targets are substantial by any industry measure. The company aims to reach one million wafer starts per month by 2030.

TSMC, the world’s leading chipmaker, currently produces around 1.42 million wafers each month. Tesla, therefore, wants to nearly match the output of the most advanced foundry on the planet.

Musk addressed the strategy directly in a recent statement. He noted that Tesla plans to start small, make early mistakes, then build a much larger operation.

The Terafab facility targets the 2-nanometer process node. That is the same standard that TSMC and Samsung are racing to achieve.

Tesla holds over $44 billion in cash and investments on its balance sheet. That reserve provides the financial base to fund the project.

The facility will house logic chips, memory, and advanced chip packaging in one location. This approach gives Tesla direct control over its chip supply chain.

As reported by MilkRoad AI, Musk confirmed that drone footage will document the construction live on X. The public will watch the project develop in real time.

Tesla’s AI5 chip, currently made by Samsung in Texas, is reportedly three times more power-efficient than Nvidia’s Blackwell. It also reportedly costs less than 10% of comparable Nvidia pricing.

Industry Experts Weigh In on the Complexity of Building a Chip Fab

Not everyone in the industry views Terafab with the same confidence. Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang publicly stated that Musk may be underestimating the difficulty involved.

Process expertise of that kind takes years to build. No company, he noted, develops that level of engineering capability overnight.

Beyond construction, leading-edge semiconductor manufacturing carries enormous technical risk. Cleanroom engineering, process chemistry, and supply chain coordination must all function with precision.

Even established players like Intel have faced delays at the leading edge. Tesla, as a newcomer to fab operations, faces a steep learning curve ahead.

Tesla’s case, however, centers on supply chain control rather than ambition alone. Even with TSMC and Samsung running at full capacity, chip supply remains short of what Tesla requires.

Autonomous vehicles, humanoid robots, and AI supercomputers all need a steady flow of advanced silicon. Without that supply, Tesla’s expansion roadmap faces real constraints.

Terafab could reshape Tesla’s identity as a company if it succeeds. The automaker would shift from being a chip buyer to a chip producer.

That transition would fundamentally change how the business operates. Construction is set to begin within the week, with global attention already fixed on the project.

The post Tesla Terafab: Elon Musk’s $25 Billion Chip Factory That Could Disrupt the Semiconductor Industry appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Bitcoin rejected the $74,040 high and is currently holding support at the $70,500 price level this week.

• Analyst Lennaert Snyder stays cautiously bullish with stop losses secured above the $73,900 resistance zone.

• A liquidity sweep below $68,950 is viewed as a potentially stronger bullish setup than a direct breakout move.

• MicroStrategy holds 738,731 BTC at a $75,863 average entry as Saylor signals continued Bitcoin accumulation ahead.

Bitcoin is drawing attention from traders and major institutions heading into this week. The cryptocurrency is trading at $71,369.32 after a notable price rejection near the $74,040 high.

Market participants are keeping a close eye on two key support levels right now. The broader outlook stays cautiously bullish, though some short-term price swings remain possible.

Both retail and institutional players are actively adjusting their positions for what lies ahead.

Bitcoin Price Action and Key Levels to Watch

The recent price move saw Bitcoin take out buy-side liquidity on an attempt to break the $74,040 level. After that push, the price met a sharp rejection and pulled back to hold near $70,500. Traders are now watching closely to see if that support holds in the coming days.

Crypto analyst Lennaert Snyder weighed in on the current price setup via social media. He stated his short positions are secured and described himself as “cautiously bullish” for the week ahead. His stop losses are placed above the $73,900 high, reflecting a risk-managed approach to the trade.

The central question among traders is whether Bitcoin holds at $70,500 or dips to sweep liquidity near $68,950. Snyder noted that a liquidity sweep below $68,950 could actually produce a stronger bullish outcome. Either way, he sees both price scenarios as carrying a bullish tone in the near term.

Should a sweep below $68,950 play out, traders will look for reversal signals before entering long positions. Alternatively, a clean break above the $74,040 high could trigger continuation trades. The overall market structure supports a watchful but optimistic stance as the week unfolds.

MicroStrategy and Saylor Signal Further Bitcoin Accumulation

MicroStrategy’s Michael Saylor is once again pointing toward more Bitcoin buying in the near future. His latest public signal, “Stretch the Orange Dots,” is widely seen as a reference to extending the company’s acquisition timeline. The message was shared as the market continues to trade below MicroStrategy’s average entry price.

The company’s Bitcoin treasury now totals 738,731 BTC based on the most recent available data. This makes MicroStrategy one of the largest corporate Bitcoin holders anywhere in the world.

The firm has built up this position through a consistent long-term accumulation strategy across several market cycles.

MicroStrategy’s average entry price for its Bitcoin holdings stands at $75,863 per coin. At the current trading price of $71,369.32, the company carries unrealized losses on its overall position. Despite that, the firm has shown no signs of reducing its holdings through past market downturns.

Saylor’s fresh signal comes at a time when the broader market stands at a critical price level. Corporate accumulation has been a recurring theme in recent Bitcoin market cycles.

MicroStrategy’s continued buying stance reflects long-term institutional commitment that has remained firm through market volatility.

The post Bitcoin Eyes Critical Support Levels as Analysts Stay Bullish and Saylor Signals More Institutional Buying appeared first on Blockonomi.

Analysis of the 90 days before and after the December 3 Ethereum Fusaka upgrade indicates a steep rise in the number of address poisoning scams.

Stablecoin transactions on Ethereum are among the biggest hits with this ever-rising problem.

Dust Transfers Explode After Fee Reductions

Researcher Wise Crypto says that dust attacks went up sharply all over the Ethereum ecosystem. They wrote on X on March 13 that there had been a huge increase, especially in stablecoin movements.

The number of USDT transfers under $0.01 went up by 612%, from about 4.2 million to 29.9 million. A similar thing happened with USDC, where the number of transactions went from 2.6 million to 14.7 million, a 473% increase. Dust transfers that were mostly in ETH and DAI went up by 470% and 62%, respectively. The first one saw 65.2 million new transfers.

Address poisoning campaigns insert fake addresses whose beginning and ending characters are nearly similar to genuine ones into the victim’s trading history, hoping users will copy them when sending funds. Often, because wallet interfaces display only shortened addresses, the spoofed entries will appear genuine.

In one case, on-chain investigator Specter reported a victim losing $50 million in an address poisoning attack in late December 2025. Another blockchain enthusiast reported a case where a single wallet address lost more than $388k in those attacks while replying to Wise Crypto’s post.

Analysts at Etherscan attribute the problem to Ethereum’s Fusaka upgrade, which relatively improved the network’s scalability while reducing the fees, hence cutting the costs of sending dust transfers. As a result, attackers can run campaigns at much higher volumes than before.

Industrialized Scams Target High-Value Wallets

In a study of periods between July 2022 and June 2024, security researchers found there were over 17 million phishing attempts targeting about 1.3 million users of the Ethereum network. The result was over $79 million in losses.

The method relies on scale rather than precision, with analysts indicating that in some cases, dozens of poisoning transactions will occur within minutes of a single legitimate stablecoin movement. In fact, an X user known as Nima reported receiving over 89 notifications after merely two stablecoin transfers, in a show of the efficiency of automated scripts.

Only one of every ten thousand dust transfer attempts is successful, according to a study cited by Etherscan. Hence, by sending millions of such transactions, malicious actors are playing a long-term numbers game.

The block explorer explained in the post:

“A single successful attack involving a large transfer can easily cover the cost of thousands of failed attempts.”

According to Wise Crypto, the best defense remains simple: always verify the full destination address before sending funds and avoid copying wallet addresses directly from transaction history.

The post Ethereum Users Warned as USDT Dust Attacks Jump 612% appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitcoin is extending its recovery, but the market is now approaching a more meaningful technical decision point. After holding the $60,000 region and building a series of higher lows, BTC has pushed back into the low-$70,000s, where short-term momentum is improving. Still, the broader structure has not fully flipped bullish, which means this move is best viewed as a test of resistance until proven otherwise.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

On the daily chart, Bitcoin continues to trade below both the 100-day and 200-day moving averages, keeping the higher-timeframe trend cautious. The price is also still sitting inside the broader descending structure, even though the latest rebound has clearly improved conditions compared to the panic sell-off seen near the February lows.

The key level to watch remains the $75,000 to $80,000 resistance area, which previously acted as support before turning into supply. As long as BTC stays below that zone, the broader move can still be interpreted as a rebound within a larger corrective phase. On the downside, the $60,000 to $62,000 area remains the main support base, and it is still the level buyers need to defend to preserve the current recovery structure.

BTC/USDT 4-Hour Chart

The 4-hour chart looks stronger. Bitcoin has been climbing within a rising channel, and price is once again pressing toward the upper boundary of that formation. The market is now trading around $71,000 to $72,000, with RSI also firming near the upper half of its range, which reflects improving short-term momentum.

That said, BTC is approaching a confluence zone where channel resistance overlaps with horizontal supply around $73,000 to $75,000. This makes the current area especially important. A clean breakout above it would strengthen the case for continuation into higher resistance, while another rejection could send price back toward the middle or lower end of the channel and keep the market in consolidation mode.

On-Chain Analysis

The on-chain picture adds a more constructive undertone. The Spot Average Order Size chart shows that recent activity is still being driven more by larger participants than by aggressive retail-style behavior. Historically, that kind of backdrop tends to be healthier than a move led by euphoric small buyers, because it suggests stronger hands are still active even as price trades below the cycle highs.

At the same time, the chart does not show the kind of broad retail frenzy usually associated with late-stage blow-off conditions. In practical terms, that means the current recovery still looks relatively controlled from an on-chain participation perspective. So while Bitcoin is facing an important technical resistance zone on the charts, the order-size data suggests the market has not yet entered a fully overheated phase.

The post Bitcoin Price Prediction: Is This BTC’s Calm Before the Major Storm? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Robert Kiyosaki, the renowned investor, financial guru, and author, has called for yet another financial crash in his latest post on X, indicating that private credit funds are panicked, with investors pulling out funds.

He outlined his strategy during such a time of distress, and doubled down on the assets he wants to continue buying.

Crash Intensifies

After rightfully predicting the major 2008 banking crisis, the author of a few New York best-selling books has been frequently forecasting even more painful crashes. In his latest warning on the matter, he noted that the “crash accelerates,” which is evident from several factors:

“Private credit funds are panicked as investors withdraw their money. Major big-name banks and brand-name financial institutions are in trouble. Jim Rickards formally declares the US in the New Depression.”

These developments could only worsen if the situation in the Middle East continues for weeks or even months. As such, he asked his over a million followers on X, “What are you going to do?”

His strategy is quite promising, as he plans on “getting richer” and refuses to be the “victim who gets poorer.” Additionally, he laid out the financial assets he plans to continue accumulating to help him achieve his goal – oil, silver, gold, Bitcoin, and Ethereum.

He added that smart money is getting richer and stupid money is running like the “proverbial chicken with its head chopped off.” Kiyosaki concluded that this is not the time to be a “headless chicken.”

Recent Bitcoin History

After bashing the crypto industry for a few years, Kiyosaki changed his tune during the COVID-19 crash and has become a vocal proponent, especially for BTC and ETH as of more recently. However, his latest remarks on the matter have stirred some controversy, especially the lack of consistency in his claims about whether he stopped buying bitcoin.

In one post, he noted that he hasn’t bought any BTC at prices over $6,000. In many others, though, he indicated on social media that he was purchasing more bitcoins when the asset traded well within five or even six-digit territory.

Nevertheless, he has asserted on a couple of occasions that he believes bitcoin is a better investment tool than gold.

The post ‘Crash Accelerates,’ Says Robert Kiyosaki as He Continues Buying BTC, ETH, and More appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Perhaps due to its popularity, but Ripple’s token is often the subject of some big price predictions, many of which come from its community, known as the XRP Army, and they are hard to believe, at least at first glance.

One of the latest, though, came from Ali Martinez, a renowned crypto analyst who has shown a lack of bias toward XRP in his commentary. Moreover, he posted a massive, quite unrealistic target (at least for the time being) of $48, but he based it on technical analysis, indicating that this is the potential top during the next bull run, according to the multi-year triangle formation.

While this might sound absurd given XRP’s current price tag of $1.43 and that it would require a 3,300% surge to reach those levels, we decided to ask ChatGPT to dissect this prediction to see if there’s any merit after all.

Reality Check

The AI solution first noted that the multi-year symmetrical triangle has started forming since its 2018 peak, and this measured move is calculated by taking the height of the pattern and projecting it upward from the breakout point. In the asset’s case, the range is quite wide, from $0.20 to $3.84. The current peak was obtained in 2025 at $3.60, while the breakout level is at the whopping $10-$13 zone.

It disclaimed that such measured moves from very large patterns “often exaggerate theoretical targets” because they assume a clean breakout with sustained momentum. If XRP is to reach those levels, its market cap would make it roughly the current size of Apple and 2x that of Bitcoin. To do so, these two factors would need to occur:

• The total crypto market cap would need to expand dramatically (possibly $10-$15 trillion).
• XRP would have to capture a very large share of that capital.

ChatGPT went back to the 2016/2017 cycle when XRP posted a mind-blowing surge of 56,000%, it said, jumping from approximately $0.006 to its then-all-time high of $3.40. In 2020-2021, it gained over 1,000%, but those moves came when XRP was a lot smaller altcoin, which is not the case now.

“Compared with those numbers, 3,300% is not unprecedented in crypto, but it usually happens from much lower starting prices. From a $88 billion market cap – such moves become harder.”

Realistic Targets

After it dismissed the $48 level as a “multi-cycle moonshot” option in which too many factors have to be perfectly aligned, ChatGPT outlined more realistic targets for the cross-border token. Its conservative scenario envisions a substantial rally to somewhere between $3 and $5.

The stronger bull case, in which XRP and the company behind it would have to experience major adoption growth, the ETF inflows would need to skyrocket, and the overall market expansion must be a lot stronger, sees the asset jumping to $8-$12. The probability for this scenario was put at “moderate.”

Even the extreme bull case puts XRP at $15-$25, and nowhere near $48. And this one would be possible if the total market cap reaches $10 trillion, and the cross-border token “captures a large narrative-driven capital inflow.” This probability was set at “low but plausible.”

The post We Asked ChatGPT if XRP Can Indeed Hit $48: Here Is the (Un)Surprising Answer appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Despite the latest developments in the Middle East war, bitcoin’s price has shown strong resilience and even neared $72,000 earlier today.

Most larger-cap altcoins are in the green today, with ETH climbing above $2,100. TAO has become the top performer from the larger caps, gaining over 12% daily.

BTC Eyes $72K

The previous business week began with a short-lived correction that drove BTC to $65,600 as the asset reacted to the weekend actions on the US/Israel-Iran war front. However, the cryptocurrency rebounded in the following days and surged past $70,000 on Wednesday after the release of the latest CPI data and Trump’s rather promising words that the war could be coming to a close.

Bitcoin slipped below $70,000 a day later, but the bulls took complete control on Friday, initiating another impressive leg up that pushed it to a 10-day peak of $74,000. However, it was immediately rejected there and dropped toward $70,000 as the US carried out a massive targeted attack against a key Iranian island.

Nevertheless, BTC remained above that level even as Trump urged other countries to send ships to defend the oil export through the Strait of Hormuz, and France responded positively. Moreover, it charted some gains in the past several hours as bitcoin challenged $72,000 but to no avail yet.

Its market cap has climbed to nearly $1.440 trillion, while its dominance over the alts is up to 57%.

TAO Flies

As the graph below will demonstrate, most larger-cap alts are slightly in the green. ETH has climbed above $2,100, BNB is north of $660, while XRP trades at $1.415. Similar gains come from the likes of SOL, TRX, DOGE, ADA, BCH, while LINK is up by over 3.5% to $9.2.

MNT, TAO, and ZEC are the top performers from the larger-cap alts. TAO has even pumped by double digits and now trades close to $270.

The total crypto market cap has added roughly $40 billion since yesterday and sits well above $2.5 trillion on CG.

The post TAO Surges by Double Digit, BTC Price Eyes $72K: Weekend Watch appeared first on CryptoPotato.