The significant short positions by Hyperliquid whales suggest a prevailing bearish sentiment, potentially leading to market volatility and short squeezes.

The post Hyperliquid whales stack Bitcoin shorts to highest level since October 2025 appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The establishment of a House Select Committee on AI could significantly enhance legislative oversight and accountability in AI development.

The post Rep. Don Beyer pushes for House Select Committee on AI with subpoena power appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Democratic control may lead to stricter AI and data center regulations, impacting tech markets and aligning with public safety concerns.

The post Democrats eye data center limits, AI legislation after electoral win appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Wehner's move to Fireworks highlights the growing allure of AI startups, signaling a shift in executive focus towards AI model deployment.

The post Fireworks hires former Meta executive Dave Wehner as CFO appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The attacks may heighten regional tensions, impacting market dynamics and potentially leading to further conflict escalation in the Middle East.

The post Houthis claim missile, drone attacks on Saudi oil, military sites appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

U.S. Treasury Cuts Off MEXC From U.S. Financial System Over Alleged $16 Billion in Illicit Flows

The U.S. Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network issued a final order Friday that will cut offshore exchange MEXC Global off from the American banking system over alleged links to sanctions evasion by Iran, North Korea and Russia, the department said.

FinCEN’s order, published as a PDF pending Federal Register placement, finds MEXC a “primary money laundering concern in connection with Russian illicit finance” under section 9714(a) of the Combating Russian Money Laundering Act. Thirty days after that Register notice, covered U.S. financial institutions will be barred from any funds transfer — including convertible virtual currency — to or from MEXC.

Reuters reported the same cut-off Friday afternoon. Treasury framed the move as part of Operation Economic Outcast. It is not an OFAC sanctions designation: the order says it does not rewrite Bank Secrecy Act duties or OFAC rules, and it is a FinCEN funds-transmittal ban rather than a Section 311 proposed rulemaking.

Treasury alleges MEXC facilitated at least $16 billion in illicit flows from May 2021 through May 2026, including nearly $1.5 billion tied to Russian sanctions evasion and about $22 million linked to Iran’s Central Bank and the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps’ Qods Force. The platform was still processing trades with sanctioned Garantex and successor Grinex as recently as June 2026, more than four years after OFAC designated Garantex, the release says.

What the order does — and when

The order, signed by FinCEN Deputy Director Jimmy L. Kirby, covers MEXC Global and named affiliates operating outside the United States, including Seychelles-incorporated MEXC Global Ltd / MX Global Ltd, Estonia’s MEXC Estonia OÜ, Switzerland’s GIDA Technology AG and the U.K.’s MXC Global Ltd, plus successors. Covered institutions face civil or criminal penalties for willful violations.

Until the Federal Register publishes the notice, the 30-day clock has not started. As of Friday evening eastern time the Register’s public index still showed no MEXC document, matching the order’s own cover note that publication is pending.

Background on MEXC

Founded in 2018 and formerly branded MXC, MEXC ranks among the world’s 20 largest centralized crypto venues by volume. Treasury puts daily turnover above $1 billion and reserves near $5 billion as of mid-2026, with access claimed across more than 170 countries. The exchange already lists the United States as a prohibited jurisdiction in its user terms, so Friday’s action mainly hits any remaining dollar rails, banking partners and counterparties that still touch U.S. institutions.

Regulators elsewhere have been circling for years. The U.K. Financial Conduct Authority put MEXC Global Ltd on its warning list in March 2024 as unauthorized. Hong Kong’s Securities and Futures Commission warned the same month that the platform was marketing to local investors without a licence. Seychelles’ Financial Services Authority said in May 2026 it took action against MX Global Ltd for unlicensed virtual-asset operations — footnoted in FinCEN’s order.

Those compliance gaps matter because the illicit-flow thesis is specific, not guilt by association. Beyond Russia, FinCEN cites about $1 billion in direct traffic with more than 40 Iranian crypto exchangers, nearly $26 million with the OFAC-sanctioned A7 sanctions-evasion network, and almost $200 million tied to the A7A5 stablecoin. DPRK facilitators and cybercrime flows are also alleged. MEXC has not issued a public response to the Friday order; its main X account kept posting marketing content through the afternoon.

Why it matters for bitcoin markets

Practically, once the order bites, U.S. banks, money transmitters and other covered firms cannot move dollars or crypto to MEXC wallets or accounts. Offshore users may keep trading peer-to-peer, but dollar on-ramps and any bank that still clears for MEXC become legal risk. The template tracks earlier 9714 cut-offs of venues such as Bitzlato, and it lands beside a busy sanctions week that has already seen North Korea crypto designations, an Iranian exchange action, and Russia’s push to put bitcoin trading on the Moscow Exchange.

Whether MEXC contests the finding, seeks an exemption, or quietly reroutes liquidity is the open question. For now the paper trail is clear: a final FinCEN order under 9714(a), a 30-day fuse after Federal Register publication, and Treasury’s claim of at least $16 billion in illicit volume sitting behind the cut-off.

This post U.S. Treasury Cuts Off MEXC From U.S. Financial System Over Alleged $16 Billion in Illicit Flows first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoin Magazine Books Opens 333-Copy Genesis Book Collector Edition for 3rd Anniversary

Bitcoin Magazine Books opened a third-anniversary campaign Friday for Aaron van Wirdum’s The Genesis Book, offering a redesigned Collectors Edition limited to 333 hand-signed, individually numbered hardcovers in an exclusive Genesis Block slipcase.

Each Collectors Edition hardcover is hand-signed and hand-numbered by van Wirdum, the former Bitcoin Magazine editor-in-chief whose book traces the people, projects and ideas that preceded Satoshi Nakamoto’s peer-to-peer cash design. The standard package is priced at $221 and pairs the book with a limited trading card carrying a Certificate of Authenticity, a collector pin, a sticker sheet, the slipcase and a digital package.

Two one-of-one packages sit outside the ordinary number queue. The #1 package is listed at $5,000 and the #21 package at $2,500; each includes the matching numbered copy, a matching one-of-one collector card and the same accessories as the standard collector package.

Standard collector numbers are assigned in purchase order starting at #2 and skipping #21, the campaign FAQ says. Once preorders close, the signed Genesis print run will not be reproduced.

What ships with the anniversary editions

Beside the signed run, Bitcoin Magazine Books is selling a Premium Edition hardcover for $160 with foil stamping, a ribbon marker, stained page edges and custom endsheets. That edition is not limited, signed, numbered or slipcased, and it does not include the collector accessories or digital files.

A standalone Digital Package at $9.99 delivers the ebook in EPUB and the audiobook in MP4 immediately after purchase, independent of whether the physical campaign clears its funding bar.

Physical collector and premium orders are scheduled to ship in calendar year 2027.

Van Wirdum, who discovered bitcoin in 2013 and later led Bitcoin Magazine‘s editorial desk, frames The Genesis Book as a history of computer scientists, privacy activists and heterodox economists who chased government-independent digital money long before the 2008 white paper — from early cypherpunk culture through experiments such as David Chaum’s ecash, Wei Dai’s b-money, Adam Back’s Hashcash and Hal Finney’s reusable proof of work.

Store images for the slipcase and accessories are artistic renderings; the campaign page notes that color, materials and finishes may vary in production. The campaign is operated by BTC Inc., which publishes Bitcoin Magazine.

This post Bitcoin Magazine Books Opens 333-Copy Genesis Book Collector Edition for 3rd Anniversary first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Thailand SEC Files Criminal Complaint Against Bitget Ahead of Dec. 5 Access Block

Thailand’s Securities and Exchange Commission filed a criminal complaint Thursday against BG Limited, the operator of cryptocurrency exchange Bitget, alleging it ran an unlicensed digital-asset exchange for Thai users from 2022 to 2025, and notified the government to block the platform from Dec. 5.

The complaint, lodged with the Economic Crime Suppression Division, also names Mr. Kritsana Kritsananuwat as an alleged supporter who promoted Bitget through Facebook and YouTube channels, the SEC said in statement No. 241/2026.

From 2022 through 2025, the regulator found, Bitget offered a trading system in the ordinary course of business, charged fees, ran a Thai-language website that could show values in baht, and solicited Thai users on social channels including “Bitget Thailand” on X, “BGB Thai Holder” on Telegram and “bitgetthailand” on TikTok.

That conduct amounts to operating a digital-asset exchange under Section 3 of the Emergency Decree on Digital Asset Businesses B.E. 2561 (2018) without a license, a violation of Section 26 punishable under Section 66, the SEC said. The case now moves to an inquiry official, then prosecutors and the courts.

Separately, the SEC submitted Bitget’s website, other domains and its app to the Ministry of Digital Economy and Society under a 2025 royal decree that authorizes access blocks on unlicensed trading platforms. From Dec. 5, the public “will be unable to access the platform,” the statement said, and investors still holding assets there were told to consider acting before the cutoff.

A licensed path that now sits next to a criminal case

The enforcement push lands weeks after Bitget announced a planned acquisition of GMO-Z.com Cryptonomics (Thailand), a Bangkok digital-asset exchange and brokerage that already holds Thai licenses, through its interest in BTGT Management (Thailand) Ltd.

Under that deal, GMO Internet and its Thai holding company would transfer their entire stake in GMO-Z — about 49% and 50.94%, respectively — to BTGT or a designee at completion, a Sept. 24 GMO Internet filing showed. Bitget said completion remains subject to regulatory approval and, after a change-of-control nod, it intends to introduce its trading platform to Thai users under local rules.

“Thailand is an important part of Southeast Asia’s digital asset landscape, and this acquisition gives us a great opportunity to establish local operations,” Bitget CEO Gracy Chen said in the Oct. 20 release.

The timetable has already slipped. GMO Internet Group pushed the effective date of the share transfer from Oct. 31 to Nov. 30, citing careful work on Thai regulatory applications and closing procedures. That revised date sits five days before the planned Bitget access block.

CoinDesk reported that Bitget’s own terms of use, updated in October, already list Thailand among jurisdictions where its services are prohibited, and that the SEC has not said whether the criminal complaint will weigh on the GMO-Z change of control.

What the block does and does not settle

Thailand has used the same access-blocking tool before. In mid-2025 the SEC referred Bybit, OKX and three other unlicensed platforms for a June 28 cutoff, telling users to move assets first. The Bitget action follows that template — and adds a criminal complaint against the exchange operator and a named promoter.

Licensed venues still sit at the center of Bangkok’s policy mix. Thailand has approved a multi-year capital-gains tax break only for trades on SEC-regulated platforms, and has been expanding regulated crypto products in derivatives and capital markets. Unlicensed platforms get the opposite treatment: investor alerts, access blocks and, now for Bitget, a police referral.

What is not yet clear is whether a criminal case against BG Limited for the 2022–2025 period bars, slows or leaves untouched BTGT’s bid to take over a licensed local operator. The SEC statement does not mention GMO-Z. Bitget has not publicly answered the complaint in a statement posted with the acquisition release.

For Thai users still on Bitget, the practical clock is Dec. 5. For Bitget, the test is whether Nov. 30 closes a regulated door into Thailand — or whether the complaint filed Thursday makes that licensed path the next question the ECD and the SEC have to answer.

This post Thailand SEC Files Criminal Complaint Against Bitget Ahead of Dec. 5 Access Block first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Former FBI Agent Pleads Guilty to Stealing $2.47 Million in Crypto From Investigations

A former FBI agent pleaded guilty Thursday to stealing about $2.47 million in cryptocurrency with wallet credentials the bureau had collected in its own cases, the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Virginia announced.

Patrick Steven Yaroch, 37, of Ashburn, Virginia, entered pleas to wire fraud and money laundering in federal court in Alexandria. U.S. District Judge Patricia Tolliver Giles accepted the plea. He faces up to 20 years in prison and is scheduled for sentencing on March 4, 2027.

Court papers put the illicit haul at $2,474,380.66. Prosecutors say Yaroch made roughly 100 fraudulent transfers using credentials tied to 35 separate FBI investigations, drawing on wallets controlled by investigation subjects, adversarial nation-state actors and at least one wallet the FBI itself had created for an operation.

The Justice Department Office of the Inspector General had flagged the case in August after Yaroch’s arrest on a criminal complaint. That earlier account described a smaller set of transfers — about 10 moves totaling roughly $1 million — and noted that Yaroch self-reported the activity to two department employees on July 29, 2026. The plea figures are larger.

From 2017 through early 2025, Yaroch worked in the FBI Boston Division on a squad focused on an adversarial nation-state. From February 2025 through July 31, 2026, he served in the FBI’s Counterintelligence and Espionage Division at headquarters, with access to systems that stored cryptocurrency credentials gathered in investigations.

How the FBI credentials turned into cash

Beginning no later than December 2024, Yaroch used that access to move coins out of those wallets and into ones he controlled. After the transfers, he swapped the stolen cryptocurrency into other digital assets and ran further transactions meant to obscure its source, nature and ownership.

Between Nov. 25, 2025, and Jan. 13, 2026, he moved about $93,082 into one of his accounts, then shuffled funds among other accounts to cover debts, including credit cards, car payments and loans, the office said.

FOX 5 DC, citing the same U.S. Attorney’s Office release, noted the Portugal planning that appears in the plea papers. Yaroch asked ChatGPT how to maximize investment returns and where to live in the European Union. After the chatbot suggested buying a vineyard in Portugal, he gave Portuguese lawyers a power of attorney on June 15, 2026, to register him with the Portuguese Tax and Customs Authority, obtain a tax identification number and collect the password to his finance portal. He arranged travel to Portugal for September 2026.

What the plea says the FBI lost

The agreed statement of facts goes beyond the dollar figure. Yaroch’s conduct compromised multiple FBI investigations into criminal groups and nation-state adversaries, the office said, and it compromised FBI sources and methods used in foreign intelligence collection and criminal cases. It also “deprived FBI employees of their ability to carry out their functions to protect public safety and national security.”

First Assistant U.S. Attorney Theophani K. Stamos and Daniel S. Wierzbicki, special agent in charge of the FBI Washington Field Office’s Counterintelligence Division, announced the plea. Assistant U.S. Attorneys Kathleen Robeson and Russell Carlberg are prosecuting, with help from the National Security Cyber Section of the Justice Department’s National Security Division and the DOJ inspector general’s Mid-Atlantic region. The case is 1:26-CR-208 in the Eastern District of Virginia.

The admission lands in a week when federal crypto-crime stories keep stacking up — from a failed bitcoin kidnapping plot that produced its own guilty plea last month to FBI tallies putting U.S. crypto fraud losses above $11 billion in 2025, a figure the White House has used to frame a wider crackdown.

What sentencing will do with the gap between Yaroch’s July self-report and the $2.47 million plea figure is still open. So is how many of the 35 FBI cases can be repaired after an insider treated the bureau’s own wallet credentials as a personal ATM. March 4, 2027, is when Judge Giles gets to answer the first question.

This post Former FBI Agent Pleads Guilty to Stealing $2.47 Million in Crypto From Investigations first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Strive (ASST) Posts $474.8 Million Common Net Income as Bitcoin Yield Hits 63.2%

Strive reported $474.8 million of net income attributable to common stockholders for the third quarter ended Sept. 30, a print that arrived Friday alongside a company claim that Class A total return had outperformed bitcoin by 103.7% year to date through the same date.

GAAP net income was $509.0 million, or $5.24 a share on a fully diluted basis. Almost all of that came from a $533.7 million unrealized gain on digital assets marked to fair value. Operating revenue for the quarter was just $2.7 million, so the earnings line is a treasury mark, not a fee business.

In a post on X that led with the outperformance figure, Strive also highlighted a year-to-date bitcoin yield of 63.2% and a bitcoin dollar gain of $9.00 per assumed diluted share outstanding, both measured through Sept. 30. Chairman and CEO Matthew Cole tied those metrics to the stock’s relative showing against the asset.

“Strive has continued to successfully execute on its treasury management strategy, delivering a strong bitcoin yield year to date in 2026, which I believe is the primary driver of our common equity’s outperformance relative to Bitcoin so far this year,” Cole said in the earnings release.

Bitcoin yield, buys and the preferred stack

Bitcoin yield, as Strive defines it, is the percentage change in bitcoin per share over a period — not a cash yield. On that measure the company posted 18.5% in the third quarter alone and 19.3% from Oct. 1 through Oct. 30, after the SATS preferred debut.

Strive acquired 8,136 bitcoin in the third quarter at an average cost of about $78,885 and 20,373 bitcoin over the nine months ended Sept. 30. Another 15,124 coins followed between Oct. 1 and Oct. 30. Holdings stood at 28,000 bitcoin on Sept. 30 and 43,124 by Oct. 30, keeping Strive among the largest public corporate stacks after recent multi-thousand-coin buys and smaller weekly adds that still trailed Strategy.

Digital assets at fair value were $2.34 billion on the Sept. 30 balance sheet. Cash had risen to $490.4 million by Oct. 30, and Strive still held Strategy’s variable-rate STRC preferred with a fair value of about $50.1 million.

The capital stack that funded the buys is mostly perpetual preferreds. On Oct. 20 Strive closed a registered offering of 7 million shares of its 15% Series A perpetual preferred (SATS) for about $609 million in net proceeds. Preferred dividends of $34.2 million in the quarter are what turned the $509.0 million GAAP profit into the $474.8 million common figure.

Strip the story to nine-month GAAP and the picture flips. For the nine months ended Sept. 30, Strive posted a net loss attributable to common stockholders of $88.4 million. The third-quarter profit is real under fair-value accounting, but it is concentrated in one mark-to-market line.

What ASST stock has done over the past year

ASST itself has not moved in a straight line with the company’s bitcoin-yield scoreboard. Shares closed at $20.59 on Thursday, down about 10% on the day, and traded near $20.70 early Friday. That leaves the stock roughly 29% below its level a year earlier, when Yahoo Finance data put the close near $29, and about 33% under its Oct. 21 local high of $30.75.

The 52-week range on Yahoo Finance runs from $7.02 to $34.40. Year to date, the price path from the Jan. 2 close near $17.30 into the mid-$20s is a gain of roughly 20%, with a February low near the 52-week floor and a September push back toward $30. Through Sept. 30 — the cutoff on Strive’s outperformance claim — ASST had risen about 70% from that January close while bitcoin was down roughly 7% over the same window on Yahoo Finance data, a wide gap even before the company’s own total-return methodology.

The longer chart still carries the scar of 2025, when Asset Entities became the public shell for Strive’s bitcoin-treasury reverse merger and the share price spiked into triple digits on weekly closes before collapsing. Investors who held through that conversion saw a different ride than the tidy year-to-date relative-return figure Strive put at the top of Friday’s note.

Cole said the recent SATS issuance leaves Strive “never been in a better position to generate long-term returns in excess of Bitcoin for our common equity shareholders.” The test for ASST from here is whether another quarter of bitcoin yield and preferred-funded buys can reopen the gap to bitcoin after a year in which the stock still sits well below where it traded twelve months ago, even as the treasury has climbed past 30,000 then 40,000 bitcoin.

This post Strive (ASST) Posts $474.8 Million Common Net Income as Bitcoin Yield Hits 63.2% first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Preliminary Q3 productivity outpaced hourly compensation, offering a cost counterpoint while inflation keeps the Fed cautious.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

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

Coin Metrics’ November 4 notice complicates Binance balance signals as traders look for evidence of demand before CPI.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

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

Costco recently made news when it strongly objected to a blockchain version of its shares. And while the supermarket giant did raise a set of pretty valid concerns regarding the potential risks of tokenization, the problem was that traders can actually already buy a blockchain-based contract (i.e., token) that follows its stock price. The company…

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

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

FinCEN’s order starts 30 days after Federal Register publication and gives covered institutions limited discretion over unsolicited crypto receipts.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

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

The dated comparison pairs a reserve rebound with shrinking dollar-token circulation, leaving the link to Bitcoin buying unestablished.

Read the full story on CryptoSlate

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

HODL means buying cryptocurrencies and holding them for a long time, even when the price falls sharply. The term comes from a typo in a Bitcoin forum in December 2013 and was only later reinterpreted as the acronym “Hold On for Dear Life”. When people say HODL, they mean an investment strategy: betting on a long time horizon and sitting out short-term price swings.

For investors in Germany, holding has a second, very practical core. Under current law, anyone who holds coins as private assets for more than a year can sell them tax-free. That makes HODL more than a meme of the crypto community. The term lies behind many decisions to buy on a crypto exchange or through a savings plan. What holding has actually delivered in recent years is shown further down in our own analysis of daily prices.

HODL meaning: holding instead of trading, even through price swings

At its core, HODL describes an attitude. A hodler buys a coin, usually Bitcoin, and does not sell it when the market gets nervous. In this logic, price drops of 20 or 30 percent are part of the journey. The opposite approach is active trading, where investors try to catch highs and lows.

As a verb, the term has become part of everyday crypto language: you “hodl” your coins, you are “hodling”, or you call yourself a hodler. Writing it in capital letters is common because it recalls the origin. On forums and on X, HODL today often serves as shorthand for conviction: anyone who hodls believes in the long-term value of an asset, whatever the price happens to be doing.

The distinction from classic buy and hold on the stock market matters. The idea is the same; only the volatility differs. Volatility measures how strongly a price fluctuates around its average. For Bitcoin it has been well above that of major stock indices for years, and that is exactly why HODL in crypto demands more patience than an index fund.

“I AM HODLING”: the Bitcointalk post of December 18, 2013

The history of the term can be traced to the minute. On December 18, 2013, a user named GameKyuubi published a post on the Bitcointalk forum with the title “I AM HODLING”. He meant “I am holding”. In the very first sentence, the author admits that he typed the title twice and it was still wrong.

The backdrop was a price crash. Bitcoin had cost more than $1,000 for the first time at the end of November 2013 and climbed once more to just over $1,130 in early December, then the price slid; on the Bitstamp exchange it closed at $520 on December 18. In his post, GameKyuubi says, in essence, that he is a bad trader and knows it. Good traders could spot highs and lows, everyone else should hold, because in a zero-sum game traders can only take your money if you sell. He also openly admitted to having been drinking whisky at the time.

The text became a meme. Images with the HODL lettering, reworked film scenes and slogans spread through the crypto scene within days. The post itself is still online today, and according to the forum's own counter it has been viewed almost 800,000 times.

Hold On for Dear Life: why the acronym only came later

Many explainer pages trace HODL back to the abbreviation “Hold On for Dear Life”. That is an interpretation after the fact. The expression does not appear in the original post; the acronym emerged in the community long after the typo had become well known. It fits well because it describes the attitude: clinging on when the market is in a storm.

For the meaning, the difference matters little. Anyone who wants to understand where crypto terms come from should know it, though. An acronym is a word formed from the initial letters of several words. HODL is in fact what is known as a backronym: the word came first, and the matching long form was invented later.

HODL strategy versus trading strategy: what sets the approaches apart

The HODL strategy is deliberately passive. You buy, store and wait. A trading strategy, by contrast, relies on many transactions, technical analysis and often leverage as well. Both approaches have their logic, but they demand very different skills and generate different costs.

The case for holding

• Lower fees, because there is hardly any trading. Every purchase and sale costs a spread and order fees.
• No pressure to hit the right moment. The Bitcointalk post describes exactly this point.
• In Germany, tax-free gains after a holding period of more than one year.

The case against

• Long stretches in which the portfolio sits deep in the red.
• No protection against the total loss of an individual coin. Many projects from 2017 no longer exist today.
• Gains remain paper gains for as long as you never realise them.

The tax differences between the two approaches are an important factor in their own right and are covered in the section on the holding period below.

Bitcoin held since 2013: roughly 146 times the money in dollars

How much holding has paid off can be recalculated using Bitstamp's daily closing prices. Anyone who bought one Bitcoin on December 18, 2013, the day of the forum post, at the closing price of $520 now owns a coin worth about $75,850 (as of November 7, 2026). That is roughly 146 times the original stake, before fees.

This calculation is the nicest side of the story, but not the whole of it. It assumes that someone did not sell the coin for twelve years, did not lose it and did not leave it on an exchange that later went bust. The Mt. Gox exchange, then the largest in the world, halted trading just two months after the post.

More telling than a single lucky day is the question of how often holding has worked over a given period. To answer it, we ran the numbers in euros for every day since April 2016 as a possible purchase date:

The pattern is clear. Over one month it was almost a coin toss; over one year, a good one in three purchase days ended in the red. With a four-year holding period, every single entry in this period ended in profit, and with five years almost every one. This is a look back at just under eleven years and not a promise for the next four.

Buying at the all-time high: how long hodlers had to wait to get back to their entry price

The toughest test for any HODL strategy is buying at the peak. An all-time high is the highest price a coin has ever reached up to that day. Measured in euros, there were three such peaks over the past nine years:

Anyone who bought at the peak in December 2017 waited almost three years to break even. The buyer from November 2021 needed a little over two years and four months. And anyone who bought in October 2025 at the record so far of just over €106,000 is now at €68,125, roughly 36 percent below their entry.

For hodlers, this means the timing of the purchase determines less about the final result than about the length of the dry spell. If you cannot sit out that dry spell because you need the money, pure holding is the wrong strategy for you.

Drawdowns of more than 80 percent: the flip side of patience with Bitcoin

A drawdown measures how far a price falls from its last high to the following low. For hodlers it is the most important number, because it shows how large a paper loss you have to endure. For Bitcoin, the figures were enormous in every major cycle:

• December 2013 to January 2015: minus 85 percent in dollars.
• December 2017 to December 2018: minus 82 percent in euros.
• November 2021 to November 2022: minus 74 percent in euros.
• October 2025 to the end of June 2026: minus 52 percent in euros.

A decline of 82 percent means that €10,000 temporarily turns into €1,800. To get back to the starting value from there, the price has to more than quintuple. It is precisely in such phases that many investors who previously called themselves hodlers sell.

An honest question to yourself in advance helps: would you sleep soundly with a loss of 70 percent? If not, the position is too large. With hodling, position size is the real risk control, because this strategy has no stop-loss.

Bitcoin savings plan as a HODL variant: €100 a month since 2016

Many long-term investors combine HODL with a savings plan. With dollar-cost averaging, you buy a fixed amount at fixed intervals. If the price falls, you get more fractions of a Bitcoin; if it rises, fewer. This automatically spreads your entry point over many months.

We recalculated this as well, using prices at the start of each month in euros, €100 on the first of every month, before fees:

The comparison with a one-off purchase is revealing. Anyone who invested everything at once on November 8, 2021, is now 17 percent ahead. Anyone who started a savings plan in the same month is 70 percent ahead, because they picked up the cheap prices of 2022. And even a savings plan that began at the October 2025 high is slightly in profit despite the slide, while a one-off purchase on the same day has lost 36 percent. Which providers offer savings plans and at what fees is shown in our Bitcoin savings plan comparison.

Holding period under Section 23 EStG: HODL is tax-free in Germany after one year

In Germany, cryptocurrencies held as private assets count for tax purposes as “other assets”. A sale is a private disposal transaction under Section 23 of the Income Tax Act, but only if no more than one year passes between purchase and sale. Anyone who holds for longer sells tax-free. This one-year period is called the holding period.

Within the period, an exemption limit applies: gains from private disposal transactions remain tax-free if their total for the calendar year is less than €1,000. An exemption limit is not an allowance. If the gain exceeds it by even one euro, the entire amount is taxed at your personal rate. Where the same coin has been bought several times, the tax authorities generally apply the FIFO method, first in, first out: whatever was bought first is deemed to have been sold first.

That is exactly why HODL fits German tax law so well. In the end, what counts for the tax office is proof. You should keep purchase receipts, wallet addresses and transaction lists even after the period has expired. An overview of all the rules is provided in our guide to crypto tax in Germany.

The planned reform affects future purchases

According to consistent media reports, the federal government wants to abolish the holding period for crypto assets and tax gains in future much like capital income. Nothing has been decided yet: as of November 5, the cabinet had not passed a resolution, according to our reporting. Reportedly, only coins bought after a cut-off date are to be affected. Under current law, nothing changes for holdings you already own.

Custody for long-term investors: exchange account or hardware wallet

If you hold for years, sooner or later you have to think about custody. On an exchange, coins are convenient, but within the provider's reach. If the exchange fails or is hacked, the balance can be frozen. The story of Mt. Gox in February 2014 is the oldest example, and the collapse of FTX in November 2022 the best known.

A hardware wallet is a small device that stores the private keys offline. For hodlers it is the standard tool, because coins can sit there for years without a connection to the internet. What matters is the seed phrase, a sequence of usually 24 words with which the wallet can be restored. If you lose it, you lose the coins. Which devices are suitable is shown in the comparison in the final section.

Crypto terms around HODL: diamond hands, weak hands and FUD

The forum post has spawned an entire vocabulary. The most important expressions in brief:

• Diamond hands: investors who do not sell even during severe price declines. The counterpart to paper hands.
• Weak hands or paper hands: those who sell at the first setback. GameKyuubi already spoke of “weak hands” in his post.
• HODL waves: a chart based on blockchain data that shows how long Bitcoin has been sitting unmoved in addresses.
• To the moon: the expectation of a steep rise, often used ironically.
• FUD: fear, uncertainty and doubt, meant to push hodlers into selling.

HODL in practice: since 2016, every purchase was in profit after four years

HODL is a decision about time, position size and custody. The figures since 2016 show that patience with Bitcoin has been rewarded so far, but also that declines of half or more are part of the normal course. Three steps to make holding something you can plan:

1. Choose your entry: Buy through a regulated platform with low fees. Which providers are licensed in Germany is shown in our comparison of the best crypto exchanges.
2. Spread your timing: Instead of waiting for the perfect day, spread your purchase over many months with a Bitcoin savings plan.
3. Store securely: Anything you plan to hold for more than a year belongs in your own wallet after the purchase. You will find suitable devices in the hardware wallet comparison.

(As of November 7, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Ethereum's next major upgrade stays on the test bench for now. On November 6, the Ethereum Foundation announced in a blog post by developer Marius van der Wijden that Glamsterdam will only move to the Hoodi testnet once the problems found during testing have been resolved. The trigger is two changes to gas costs, EIP-8037 and EIP-8038, which according to the auditing firm ChainSecurity could leave existing smart contracts open to attack. Ether traded at $2,233 on Saturday evening according to CoinGecko, roughly €2,005, which put it 11.7 percent below its level of 30 days earlier.

What is established: the network itself is not affected, but the upgrade schedule no longer has a fixed next date. Our assessment follows further down. In short, the pause is a side issue for the price in the near term, yet it takes away a catalyst that many buyers had been counting on before the end of the year. Where the price could head over a horizon of months is covered in our Ethereum price prediction. This article explains what lies behind the delay, which costs on the network are set to change, how the derivatives market prices the situation through December and which price levels for Ether matter now.

Glamsterdam halted before Hoodi: what the Ethereum Foundation announced on November 6

Glamsterdam is the collective name for Ethereum's next hard fork package. A hard fork is a change to the rules that every node on the network has to adopt at the same time. The name combines two parts: Amsterdam for the execution layer, where transactions and smart contracts run, and Gloas for the consensus layer, where validators confirm blocks. The package includes enshrined proposer-builder separation in the protocol (ePBS, EIP-7732) and block-level access lists, which are meant to let nodes process transactions in parallel more quickly.

On Ethereum, new rules move through testnets in stages before they reach mainnet. On Sepolia, the testnet for app developers, Glamsterdam was activated on October 6, according to reports by the trade outlet CryptoPotato. Hoodi is the final dress rehearsal, above all for validator operators and staking services. It is exactly this step that has now been put on hold. According to the blog post, the core developer group known as All Core Devs has delayed the hard fork process, and Hoodi will not be forked until the problems are solved. The Foundation gives no date for mainnet.

Two points from the post matter for holders. First, this is not about a bug in the live network but about other projects' programs that rely on today's cost model. Second, work on the upgrade after next, Hegota, continues in parallel. Besides its own reviews, the Foundation has brought in the security firms ChainSecurity and Dedaub, and it writes itself that they cannot cover every project. Affected teams are asked to get in touch through a dedicated address.

EIP-8037 and EIP-8038: how gas costs for storage shift

Gas is the unit in which Ethereum bills every computational step of a transaction. Anyone who sends a transaction pays gas multiplied by the gas price. The two proposals change how much gas certain steps cost and, above all, how the network accounts for data that is stored permanently. Such data is called state: account balances, smart contract storage slots and deployed program code. Every node has to keep the state, which is why its growth is meant to become more expensive.

To that end, EIP-8037 introduces a separate state gas that is counted apart from regular gas. The figures are in the glamsterdam-gas-invariants test repository that the developers published on GitHub. A new storage slot costs 22,100 gas today; under Amsterdam it would be 110,020. A transfer that creates a new account comes to 183,600 state gas. Deployed code costs 1,530 gas per byte. On top of that comes a reservoir that only kicks in when a transaction carries more than 16,777,216 gas.

EIP-8038 concerns overwriting existing storage slots. Such a write costs 2,900 gas today if the slot has already been read in the transaction, otherwise 5,000 gas. Under the proposal it would be 10,100 and 12,100 gas, roughly 7,200 gas more per operation.

Why higher storage costs do not automatically raise fees

For users, this does not necessarily mean higher fees. Glamsterdam is also meant to speed up processing on the network, for instance through block-level access lists. What becomes more expensive is specifically whatever places a permanent burden on the network; simple transfers between existing accounts are barely affected. How this eventually translates into euros per transaction depends on the gas price that the market sets.

Eight invariants: which smart contracts could break in the switchover

An invariant is an assumption that a program silently treats as true forever. ChainSecurity found projects whose security depends on such assumptions, and the developers have published eight of them along with examples. Three illustrate what is at stake.

Many contracts work with fixed amounts of gas, such as the 2,300 gas stipend that a transfer passes along to another contract. Under the new prices, this amount is no longer enough to create a new storage slot. Other contracts measure their consumption by comparing the remaining gas before and after a call. With the reservoir, that remainder can even rise during a call, and the calculation no longer adds up. A third assumption is that gas consumed by a failed call is lost. Under EIP-8037, the caller would get it back, up to 183,600 gas in the case of a failed contract creation.

Each of these deviations is small on its own. It becomes dangerous where a contract manages money and an attacker could deliberately exploit the new accounting, for example to get around a lock or to distort a settlement. That is precisely why the developers are pulling the brake before Hoodi: after this testnet, usually only the mainnet date remains.

Ethereum price on Saturday: $2,233 and little movement since Friday

So far the market has absorbed the news without major swings. In our analysis of the staking queue on Friday evening, Ether stood at $2,229; on Saturday evening it is $2,233. The trading range of the past 24 hours runs from $2,218 to $2,249 according to CoinGecko, narrower than on any other day this week. On Wednesday, after the US election, Ether had still reached an intraday high of $2,447, based on daily data from Kraken; since then the price has given back the entire gain.

What has changed since Friday: the 200-day moving average, which stood yesterday as the next support at $2,157, now sits at $2,156 based on Kraken's daily closes and has not been tested. Twice in a row, on November 5 and 6, the price turned higher just above $2,200, at $2,202 and $2,201. That zone has therefore gained weight. Compared with the all-time high of $4,946 on August 24, 2025, Ether is down about 55 percent.

Ethereum options on Deribit: calls for late December clearly dominate

The derivatives market deserves a second look. An option is the right to buy Ether at a fixed price (call) or to sell it (put). The ratio of open puts to open calls shows whether traders are mainly hedging against falling prices or betting on rising ones. Values below 1 mean more calls than puts.

We analysed open positions on Saturday afternoon directly through the API of the options exchange Deribit. For the November 13 expiry, 86,095 ETH in puts face 39,457 ETH in calls, a ratio of 2.18. In our article on this expiry from November 5, puts still stood at 77,441 ETH. Hedging for the coming week has therefore grown. Further out, the picture flips: for November 27 there are 156,832 ETH in calls against 82,230 ETH in puts, a ratio of 0.52. For the large quarterly expiry on December 25, it is 452,588 ETH in calls against 175,538 ETH in puts, a ratio of 0.39.

The figures say nothing about who bought and who sold the options. What they do reveal is where interest lies: on protection in the short term, on upside for December. A postponement of Glamsterdam into next year would touch part of this December hope, to the extent that it was tied to the upgrade.

Ethereum price levels through December: $2,156, $2,332 and $2,499

Price, moving averages and the derivatives market point to three paths. They are not a forecast; they show the points at which the picture changes.

Bear case: a daily close below the 200-day moving average

If Ether closes a day below $2,156, the 200-day moving average is broken, and the 30-day low at $2,170 goes with it. The double turn above $2,200 would then be worthless. The next zone where the price found lasting support this year lies well below; Ether marked its 120-day low on July 13 with a close of $1,775. The put overhang for November 13 supports this path.

Sideways range: $2,200 to $2,332

If the zone above $2,200 holds and the 20-day moving average at $2,332 remains a ceiling, Ether would swing in a range of around six percent until next week's expiry. That is the path that fits this weekend's quiet trading range.

Recovery: a daily close above the 50-day moving average

Only a daily close above $2,499 would break the downtrend of recent weeks. On the way there lies the November 4 high at $2,447. The call weighting for late November and December argues for this path; the missing date for Glamsterdam argues against it.

If you use leverage to bet on one of these paths, align your distance to liquidation with these levels rather than with round numbers. A position with fivefold leverage is closed out after an adverse move of just under 20 percent, minus fees; with tenfold leverage, after just under 10 percent. Which regulated providers in Germany offer derivatives on Ether, and what they charge, is shown in our comparison of regulated crypto exchanges.

Holding Ether in Germany: holding period, custody and upgrade scams

For holders in Germany, the delay initially changes nothing about their wallet or holdings. Ether does not have to be swapped or moved to a new wallet during a hard fork; that applies to Glamsterdam just as it did to every earlier upgrade. If you receive a message saying you must migrate, verify or send your ETH to a new address because of the upgrade, you are dealing with a scam attempt. Such messages appear regularly before and after major upgrades, by email, on social networks and as fake wallet notices.

Ether is safest in a wallet whose keys only you know. A hardware wallet keeps the key offline and shows every transaction on its own display for confirmation, so a fake website cannot trigger a payment. Which devices support Ether and Ethereum tokens is set out in our comparison of hardware wallets.

For tax purposes, the familiar rule still applies in Germany: gains from selling Ether are tax-free after a holding period of more than one year, and within that period an exemption limit of €1,000 applies to all private disposal gains in a year. According to the Federal Ministry of Finance's guidance, staking does not extend the holding period to ten years. Where the debate about abolishing the holding period stands is summarised on our page on the crypto holding period and its reform. If you have bought on several exchanges over the years, it is easy to lose track of purchase dates; tax software calculates the deadlines for each purchase, and our comparison of crypto tax tools shows the differences.

If you stake Ether through an exchange, you do not need to do anything because of the pause either. Validators keep running under the existing rules, and the yield does not depend on the upgrade schedule. Our overview of staking platforms compares the providers' terms.

Our assessment of the Glamsterdam delay

In the editorial team's view, the pause is a sign of working oversight rather than a setback for the network. The evidence: the problems were found on a testnet, not after launch on mainnet; the Foundation made them public, published the assumptions along with examples and brought in two external auditors. For an upgrade that raises gas costs for storage fivefold, a thorough review is appropriate.

Two things follow for the price. In the short term, the put overhang for November 13 and the position relative to the 200-day moving average dominate, and the upgrade hardly plays a role there. Through the end of the year, however, there is no date for buyers to orient themselves by. On the other side, the call weighting for December remains high at a ratio of 0.39, and the developers are explicitly working on solving the problems in parallel. We do not derive a buy signal from this: cryptocurrencies are highly volatile, and a total loss is possible.

If you want to buy Ether or add to a position, pay attention to fees and licensing. Exchanges licensed under the EU's MiCA regulation are subject to supervision in the EU. Fees vary many times over from one provider to the next, and our comparison of crypto exchanges lists them.

Glamsterdam pause: below $2,156 the picture tips

1. Watch the level: What matters is the daily close relative to the 200-day moving average at $2,156 and the zone above $2,200. You will find a low-fee way to buy in the exchange comparison.
2. Secure your holdings: No upgrade requires you to send or swap Ether. If you hold your own coins, keep the key on a hardware wallet.
3. Record your deadlines: Note the purchase date of every tranche so that you know when the one-year period for a tax-free sale ends. Tax software can do this for you.

(As of November 7, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Sentiment has caught up with price. After Friday's sell-off the Crypto Fear and Greed Index sits at 28, in the fear zone, a few points above the "extreme fear" line at 24. It has been there twice already this year, and both times the readings were among the lowest ever recorded. So what happens when crypto gets this scared? We went through every episode.

What does the Fear and Greed Index actually measure?

The index compresses volatility, trading volume, social media activity, Bitcoin dominance and Google search trends into a single score from 0 to 100. Below 25 is extreme fear, 25 to 49 is fear, 50 to 74 is greed and 75 and up is extreme greed. It is a mood ring, not a forecast: it tells you how the crowd feels today, not what price does tomorrow. Its value lies in the pattern that tends to follow the extremes.

What happened after each extreme fear episode?

• March 2020, index 8. The COVID crash took Bitcoin from 9,000 to around 3,800 dollars in a week. The index stayed in single digits for days. Two months later Bitcoin was back at 9,000; a year later it was above 50,000.
• June 2022, index 6 to 8. The Terra collapse and the Celsius freeze pushed Bitcoin to around 18,000 dollars. This is the counterexample: BTC spent months stuck between 19,000 and 22,000 and the index barely left fear territory all summer. Buying the first extreme fear print did not pay for half a year.
• November 2022, index 8 to 15. FTX's bankruptcy marked Bitcoin's cycle low at 15,649 dollars. Within two months Bitcoin was one of the best-performing assets of early 2023, and the index never revisited those lows.
• August 2024, index 17. The yen carry-trade unwind sent Bitcoin to about 49,000 dollars. Three months later it was above 90,000.
• March 2025, index 10. Tariff fears pushed Bitcoin toward 77,000 dollars and kept the index in extreme fear for weeks. By May, Bitcoin was back above 100,000.
• February 2026, index 9. Bitcoin crashed below 61,000 dollars in a reading last seen after FTX. The rebound came, though not overnight.
• June 2026, index 5 to 8. The lowest reading in the index's history, after Strategy's first ever Bitcoin sale rattled the market. The recovery that followed took the index back above 70 by October.

What is the pattern?

Three things hold across the data. First, buying extreme fear has beaten buying greed over a six to twelve month horizon in every single case. Second, the bottom is almost never the first extreme fear reading; the index usually stays depressed for weeks, and 2022 shows it can stay there for months. Third, the shift from extreme fear back to ordinary fear has often been the point where the worst was over, which is why a reading of 28 today is less interesting than whether the index drops below 25 next week.

Is a reading of 28 a buy signal right now?

On its own, no. Fear at 28 is uncomfortable but ordinary; the market has been here dozens of times without marking a bottom. What would make it interesting is a drop into the low 20s combined with the kind of forced selling we saw on Friday, when over a billion dollars in leveraged positions were wiped out. That combination, panic plus liquidation, is what preceded the strongest rebounds in the list above. Until then, the honest read is: sentiment is washed out, not capitulated.

Watch the index daily on the CryptoTicker charts page, alongside liquidations and Bitcoin dominance, and check live prices on the CryptoTicker crypto prices page. This is not financial advice.

Robert Kiyosaki is the author of "Rich Dad Poor Dad", one of the best-selling personal finance books in the world, and one of the loudest advocates of Bitcoin, gold and silver. On X he has been predicting the biggest crash in history for years and naming price targets such as $500,000 per Bitcoin. On November 7, 2026, one Bitcoin costs around $75,800. We compared eleven of his predictions since 2020 with what actually happened.

Here you will learn who Robert Kiyosaki is, what his bestseller says, why he backs Bitcoin, gold and silver and what became of his targets.

Who is Robert Kiyosaki? The Rich Dad author's background

Robert Toru Kiyosaki was born in 1947 in Hilo, Hawaii, into a family of Japanese descent. His father was a teacher and later headed the state's education system. In the book he is the "poor dad", an educated man who never made money. Kiyosaki describes the "rich dad" as the father of a school friend, an entrepreneur without a degree who taught him early on how money can work for you.

After the Merchant Marine Academy at Kings Point near New York, Kiyosaki flew helicopters for the Marine Corps in the Vietnam War. He then sold copiers for Xerox and founded his own companies, including a firm making nylon-and-Velcro surfer wallets that failed. In 1997, with his then wife Kim, he self-published "Rich Dad Poor Dad" after several publishers had turned it down, as the Rich Dad Company itself writes. The co-author was accountant Sharon Lechter.

Today Kiyosaki sees himself as a teacher of financial education, a real estate investor and an owner of gold and silver mines. His books, the board game Cashflow and his daily posts on X make the bestselling author one of the best-known voices against today's financial system.

Rich Dad Poor Dad: Robert Kiyosaki's bestseller and its key messages

"Rich Dad Poor Dad" is a personal finance book written as a story. Kiyosaki contrasts the advice of his two fathers: the poor dad recommends good grades, a secure job and owning a home. The rich dad advises buying assets that bring in money on an ongoing basis. According to Publishers Weekly in October 2025, the book has sold more than 44 million copies; it turns 30 in April 2027. Its subtitle reads "What the Rich Teach Their Kids About Money That the Poor and Middle Class Do Not".

The key messages can be summed up in six lessons:

• The rich don't work for money: they let money work for them instead of trading time for wages.
• Financial literacy: an asset puts money in your pocket, a liability takes it out. Kiyosaki counts your own home as a liability.
• Mind your own business: alongside your job, you should build up holdings of shares, property or businesses.
• Taxes and corporations: business owners pay expenses before tax, employees after tax.
• The rich invent money: those who spot opportunities create value instead of just saving.
• Work to learn: selling, leadership and handling money matter more than a good salary.

Later came "Cashflow Quadrant", in which Kiyosaki divides earners into employees, the self-employed, business owners and investors. In his view only the last two become truly free.

Robert Kiyosaki and Bitcoin: why he backs "real money"

Kiyosaki's world view begins in 1971. That year US President Richard Nixon ended the dollar's link to gold, and since then the dollar has been "fake money" to Kiyosaki, money the central bank can multiply at will, like any unbacked fiat currency. Against inflation, debt and growing government borrowing, he has recommended gold and silver, which he calls "God's money", for decades, and for some years also Bitcoin as "people's money". He says he has been buying gold since 1971.

Kiyosaki says he bought his first Bitcoin at $6,000. On November 9, 2024, he wrote on X that he owned 73 whole Bitcoin and wanted to have 100 within a year. At that day's price of $76,779, that was around $5.6 million. His motto: poor people watch the price, rich people watch the quantity they own.

A year later he sold. On November 21, 2025, Kiyosaki reported that he had sold Bitcoin for $2.25 million at around $90,000 per coin, equivalent to about 25 Bitcoin and 15 times his entry price. With the money he was buying two outpatient surgery centres and entering a billboard business, which together were to yield around $27,500 a month from February 2026. In January 2026, by contrast, he wrote that he had sold Bitcoin and later gold for his new house and called it a "big mistake". In hindsight the timing for Bitcoin was good: by June 30, 2026, the price had fallen to $58,559.

Since then, by his own account, he has been buying again. On February 17, 2026, he wrote that the "giant crash" was imminent and that he was buying Bitcoin as the price fell. On November 4, 2026, he followed up: when gold, silver and Bitcoin crashed, people panicked, he bought more and could hardly wait for the next crash. How hard the bear market has hit Bitcoin since its record is shown in our guide to the bear market.

Robert Kiyosaki's predictions fact-checked

How accurate are Kiyosaki's predictions? The table sets eleven of his statements on X against the price on the day of the statement and what actually happened. Bitcoin prices are daily closing prices from CoinMarketCap, gold and silver are closing prices of COMEX futures on Yahoo Finance; highs and lows are also closing prices.

The statements are documented on X, such as the triple target from May 2020, the 2025 target from February 2023 and the 2026 target from November 2025.

The result is clear: of nine checked price targets whose deadlines have passed, none was met on time. The market reached five of them later, and for gold at $5,000 it fell short by only 26 days. The direction was often right, the pace almost never. Kiyosaki was right in 2022 with his expectation that Bitcoin would fall below $20,000, and with silver above $100 in 2026. Several targets also did not come from him: he cited the $500,000 for 2025 "according to AI", took the $27,000 gold target from Jim Rickards and himself called the $350,000 for August 2024 a "target, dream and wish".

Gold and silver: what became of Robert Kiyosaki's targets

On precious metals Kiyosaki was closer to reality than on Bitcoin. Gold rose from $1,753 an ounce in May 2020 to a close of $5,318 on January 29, 2026, and silver from $17.05 to $115.08 on January 26, 2026. Anyone who followed his advice and bought silver in 2020 has tripled their stake despite the decline since: on November 6, 2026, an ounce costs $51.80, gold $4,075.

The figures also show how far his numbers were from the market. For silver he named a target of $500 by the end of 2025 in February 2023; it reached $77.37. He maintained his $200 target for 2026 in January 2026, when silver stood at around $92, adding that he could also be wrong. Since then the silver price has fallen by more than 40 percent. For gold he now names targets of $27,000 to $35,000, just under seven to nine times today's level.

Criticism of Robert Kiyosaki: the case against his advice

Three points above all speak against Robert Kiyosaki's advice. First, the permanent warning: he has been announcing the biggest crash in history since his book "Rich Dad's Prophecy", and again and again on X. The stock market rose nonetheless, and the S&P 500 closed at a record on October 6, 2026. Where markets stand today is covered in our overview of the stock market crash 2026.

Second, the role of debt. Kiyosaki recommends buying property on credit and writes that he himself uses debt for rental properties with positive cash flow. For an investor without his wealth, the same leverage carries big risks and in a crisis can cost the entire capital. Third, his own business record: his company Rich Global LLC filed for bankruptcy at the bankruptcy court in Wyoming on August 20, 2012, after a federal court in Manhattan ordered it to pay around $23.7 million to seminar organiser Learning Annex, as the ABA Journal reported. The debtor was the company, not Kiyosaki personally; the bankruptcy court file is public.

In his favour, he backed Bitcoin, gold and silver early, when many investors still scoffed at them. His basic idea of buying assets instead of consumption and taking your own financial education seriously has made millions of people think about money for the first time.

What investors can learn from Robert Kiyosaki

Take Robert Kiyosaki's attitude, not his numbers. The distinction between assets and liabilities, focusing on quantity rather than the daily price and buying in phases of panic are useful rules. His price targets are not, according to our analysis: of nine checked price targets whose deadlines have passed, none was met on time. What analysts expect for Bitcoin can be found in our Bitcoin price prediction.

Anyone who, like Kiyosaki, wants to accumulate Bitcoin over the long term can do so with a savings plan and keep the coins in self-custody. Which providers are cheap is shown in our comparison of where you can buy Bitcoin. Coins can be stored safely on a hardware wallet, and the best devices are listed in our hardware wallet comparison.

(As of November 7, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Cathie Wood is the founder, CEO and chief investment officer of the US investment firm ARK Invest and probably Wall Street's best-known Bitcoin optimist. Her firm manages around $16 billion and, in its base case, expects about $730,000 per Bitcoin by 2030. On November 7, 2026, one Bitcoin costs around $75,800. The price would therefore have to rise almost tenfold by the end of 2030.

Here you will learn who Cathie Wood is, how ARK Invest works and which crypto stocks she holds. We also check eight of her Bitcoin statements since 2022 against the actual price history.

Who is Cathie Wood? The ARK founder's career

Catherine Duddy Wood, known as Cathie, was born in Los Angeles in 1955. In 1981 she graduated summa cum laude in finance and economics from the University of Southern California. From 1977 she was already working as an assistant economist at the Capital Group in Los Angeles.

That was followed by 18 years at Jennison Associates in New York, where she worked as chief economist, analyst and portfolio manager. She co-founded the hedge fund Tupelo Capital Management and then moved to AllianceBernstein. There, as chief investment officer, she ran the thematic strategies and managed more than $5 billion, according to ARK's team page.

Because AllianceBernstein did not want to pursue her idea of an actively managed, exchange-traded innovation fund, she went out on her own. In January 2014 she registered ARK Investment Management as an investment adviser with the SEC. The investor became widely known by 2020 at the latest, when her fund, with Tesla, Square and Teladoc, ranked among the most successful equity funds in the US. Since then her interviews on CNBC and Bloomberg have regularly moved prices.

ARK Invest: how Cathie Wood's investment firm works

ARK Invest has been based in St. Petersburg, Florida, since 2021 and focuses exclusively on disruptive innovation: artificial intelligence, robotics and autonomous vehicles, energy storage, genomics, space and blockchain. The funds invest in a few dozen companies and tech stocks that, according to ARK's analysis, could be worth a multiple of today's value in five years.

Unlike traditional fund houses, the firm publishes its positions every trading day and discloses its research: since 2017 it has published the "Big Ideas" report each year, with the tenth edition in 2026.

According to its Form ADV with the US Securities and Exchange Commission, last amended on August 24, 2026, ARK manages around $15.98 billion. Besides the ARK Innovation ETF (ARKK), its funds include the ARK Blockchain & Fintech Innovation ETF (ARKF) and the spot Bitcoin ETF ARKB, which ARK has offered with 21Shares since January 2024. How Bitcoin ETFs work and which ones exist is explained in our guide to Bitcoin ETFs.

Cathie Wood's ARK Innovation ETF: performance since 2014

The ARK Innovation ETF, ticker ARKK, is Cathie Wood's flagship. Since its first trading day on October 31, 2014, it has gained around 310 percent with distributions reinvested, or 12.5 percent a year. An ETF on the Nasdaq 100 returned 608 percent, or 17.7 percent a year, over the same period.

In 2020 ARKK rose 153 percent, and on February 12, 2021, the fund closed at its record of $156.58. By December 28, 2022, it had fallen to $29.64, a loss of 81 percent. 2025 brought a gain of 35.5 percent, while ARKK is down 1.9 percent since the start of 2026. On November 6, 2026, the fund closed at $75.46, a little more than half below its record.

That history shows why Cathie Wood is so controversial. Anyone who bought in 2017 or 2018 is still clearly in profit today. Anyone who bought five years ago in November 2021 has lost around 9 percent a year since then, while a Nasdaq 100 ETF gained 11 percent a year. On November 6, 2026, ARKK holds positions worth around $5.6 billion, the largest being Tesla at 10.7 percent.

Cathie Wood and Bitcoin: ARK's scenarios for 2030

Bitcoin has for years been Cathie Wood's best-known thesis; other cryptocurrencies play a smaller role at ARK. ARK sees Bitcoin as digital gold, a hedge against currency debasement in emerging markets and a new asset class for institutional investors. From these markets ARK derives the share Bitcoin could gain by 2030 and converts it into a price per coin.

Bitcoin prices: daily close at CoinMarketCap.

The most detailed derivation is in ARK's study on the 2030 Bitcoin price target from April 2025. In the base case, ARK assumes Bitcoin captures 40 percent of the gold market and 2.5 percent of global investable assets excluding gold, which total around $200 trillion. In the optimistic case the figures are 60 and 6.5 percent. Using only actively traded coins, the targets would be around 40 percent higher, according to ARK. The biggest lever is therefore institutional investors entering via spot Bitcoin ETFs.

In November 2025 Wood scaled back the bull case. Stablecoins were taking over part of the role ARK had envisaged for Bitcoin, she said in a CNBC interview reported by Decrypt, so one could "take $300,000 off the bull case". In the Big Ideas 2026 report ARK then put Bitcoin's market capitalisation for 2030 at around $16 trillion and called the outlook "pretty stable", according to The Block: ARK raised its estimate for the digital gold market by 37 percent because gold's market value had risen 64.5 percent in 2025. It cut the share for Bitcoin as a safe-haven currency in emerging markets significantly, because stablecoins are spreading quickly there. At the end of April 2026, Wood stressed in an interview with The Rollup podcast that gold often rises before Bitcoin, even though the correlation between the two has been just 0.14 since 2019.

Cathie Wood's Bitcoin predictions fact-checked

Whether Cathie Wood is right will only be decided for the 2030 targets in four years, but for the short-term statements it can be judged today. The table sets eight statements since 2022 against the Bitcoin price on the day of the statement and the November 6, 2026 close of $75,747.

Statement 5 was made on Fox Business, according to Decrypt; statement 7 on CNBC's Squawk Box, quoted by Cointelegraph; statement 8 on ARK's podcast "In the Know", reported by Benzinga. The figures from Big Ideas 2023 are summarised by Bitcoin.com.

Our calculation shows how big the gap is. Had Bitcoin moved from its January 31, 2023 price at a constant annual rate towards the $682,800 from Big Ideas 2023 by the end of 2030, it would have to stand at around $116,000 today; it is 35 percent below that. For the current base case of $730,000 to materialise by the end of 2030, Bitcoin would have to rise by around 73 percent every year from today's level, and for $1.5 million it would be around 105 percent a year. What other analysts expect is collected in our Bitcoin price prediction.

Where is Cathie Wood investing now? Crypto stocks in the ARK portfolio

In the crypto sector, Cathie Wood relies mainly on stocks. On November 6, 2026, the ARK Innovation ETF holds five crypto and fintech names with a combined weight of 16.2 percent, while the blockchain fund ARKF also holds shares in the in-house Bitcoin ETF and in staking ETFs on Ether and Solana. The figures come from the daily holdings lists ARK publishes on ark-funds.com.

Circle is now the largest crypto position in ARKK, of all things the stablecoin issuer whose success Wood cited as the reason for temporarily cutting her Bitcoin target. If you want to buy crypto stocks or Bitcoin yourself, you will find suitable providers and their fees in our comparison of crypto brokers.

Criticism of Cathie Wood: the case against her theses

Cathie Wood's critics focus on three points. First, the track record: over twelve years ARKK lags well behind the Nasdaq 100, and anyone who bought in 2021 is still in the red. Second, concentration: a few dozen growth stocks from the same sectors fall together when rates rise. Third, the models: ARK's Bitcoin targets depend on assumptions about market shares in 2030, and ARK itself notes that its forecasts are shaped by its own positive expectations.

In Cathie Wood's favour, she discloses her theses and adjusts them. Her April 2026 statement that the era of 85 to 95 percent crashes is over has so far been confirmed by the market: the current bear market cost Bitcoin 53.1 percent to the low, whereas after 2013 and 2017 the declines each exceeded 80 percent. More on this in our guide to the bear market.

What investors can take from Cathie Wood's approach

Cathie Wood's strength is thinking in long arcs: she asks which technology will change the market in five years and sticks to her theses even in weak phases. For your own investment strategy, that does not mean adopting her price targets. It means having your own thesis, testing it with numbers and only committing as much as lets you withstand a 50 percent decline, of the kind Bitcoin has suffered several times and ARKK suffered from 2021 to 2022.

Our view: Cathie Wood was right with her early commitment to Bitcoin, and the price has more than doubled since Big Ideas 2022. Her 2030 targets, however, require growth that would be exceptional even for Bitcoin. Regulated providers for your own Bitcoin savings plan and their costs are shown in our comparison of where you can buy Bitcoin.

(As of November 7, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Apple and Meta’s objections mean all seven of the biggest U.S. tech companies have now asked to keep their shares off the planned OKX-ICE venue.

A Friday rebound offered relief after a historic selloff. The question now is whether politics and mounting debt could turn an AI correction into something much worse.

Experts say a disc-free PlayStation will price out low-income players, while in much of Africa, digital-only gaming means breaking Sony’s rules.

FinCEN’s order, part of Operation Economic Outcast, bars U.S. institutions from any transfers to or from MEXC, which Treasury says facilitated $16 billion in illicit finance tied to Iran, North Korea and Russia.

Greece has approved a crypto tax framework with a €500 ($557) annual gains threshold and new rules for staking and DeFi income, but lawmakers left important questions about token swaps unresolved.

Crypto wallet users alerted to hidden dangers of social signing.

Ripple contributes to tokenization white paper commissioned by Dubai Financial Services Authority (DFSA).

BNB Chain activates 'Red Alarm' in major security push.

Peter Schiff congratulates Bitcoiners over Bitcoin's recent price crash, throwing sarcastic jabs as Bitcoin's largest treasury firm returns to its cost basis.

Ethereum whales have accumulated more than $42 million worth of ETH, even as U.S. spot Ethereum ETFs report $365 million in weekly outflows.

TLDR:

• Binance hack attackers converted $175 million in stolen altcoins into roughly 2,300 BTC. The swaps changed the form of previously stolen assets.
• Elliptic tracked more than 20,000 wallets across 16 blockchains. The laundering involved at least 36 services and 65,000 transactions.
• Elliptic tracked 88 BTC entering coinjoins in its November 7 account. It said the primary bitcoin and ether holdings remained dormant.
• Arkham’s labeled balance showed a much smaller increase than Elliptic’s conversion estimate. The difference between the reports remains unresolved.

Attackers behind the Binance hack converted $175 million in stolen altcoins into approximately 2,300 BTC, blockchain analytics firm Elliptic reported. The additional bitcoin came from exchanging assets already taken during the October 29 exchange breach. 

Elliptic’s report, updated November 7, described extensive transfers across thousands of wallets, multiple blockchains, and dozens of services. Its detailed daily account also tracked bitcoin entering coinjoins, which complicate tracing.

Binance Hack Report Tracks $175 Million in Bitcoin Conversions

Elliptic co-founder and chief scientist Tom Robinson described the Binance hack laundering operation as heavily automated. His analysis counted more than 20,000 wallets across 16 blockchains, involving at least 36 services and 65,000 transactions.

The pace averaged roughly one new wallet every 30 seconds and one transaction every 10 seconds. Those figures describe aggregate activity rather than proof that artificial intelligence directed the transfers. 

Stolen altcoins, including SOL, XRP, and TRX, contributed to the Bitcoin conversions. About $90 million in SOL moved through swaps, bridges, and privacy services, with much of the value eventually becoming bitcoin.

Bitcoin laundering also involved THORChain, which facilitated conversions between networks. Ethereum made up a smaller part of the assets converted, while the primary Bitcoin and Ether holdings remained stationary. 

The November 7 entry said about 88 BTC, valued at $6.7 million, had entered Wasabi-style coinjoins. These transactions combine inputs from multiple participants, making direct links between incoming and outgoing bitcoins more difficult to identify.

Robinson also identified about 412,000 NEAR, worth $1.5 million, leaving the main account in small batches. The Binance hack report placed the newly converted 2,300 BTC in separate bitcoin addresses. 

Wallet Totals Differ as Investigators Trace Stolen Funds

Reportedly, 18,384.725 BTC in the Arkham-labeled entity at 10 a.m. Eastern on November 7. That compared with the 18,270.2 BTC drained during the Binance hack.

The difference was roughly 114.525 BTC, well below Elliptic’s 2,300 BTC conversion estimate. Arkham’s entity page reviewed for this article displayed approximately 18,387 BTC in its labeled wallets. 

Those readings do not by themselves reconcile the two platforms. A comparison would require matching addresses, timestamps, and assumptions about which wallets belong to the attackers.

Elliptic’s figure covers converted stolen altcoins, while Arkham’s balance covers addresses grouped under its entity label. Differences in coverage or timing could explain the gap, although the available reports do not establish the cause.

Bitcoin deposits from THORChain vaults and TRX swaps through Sun.io. Those records show ongoing activity connected to the Binance hack, alongside the dormant primary bitcoin holdings. 

Bitcoin laundering remains distinct from cashing out proceeds into spendable funds. Elliptic assessed that only a negligible amount had likely reached that stage, despite extensive transfers between assets. 

Investigators examining the Binance hack identified unauthorized access to an internal wallet signing service. Binance described compromised employee devices and malicious software preceding the unauthorized transfers.

Binance said it had closed the identified entry points and rebuilt or replaced affected systems. Its response included tighter device controls and stronger checks on wallet services after the incident.

Binance put the affected assets at approximately $6.34 billion in its November 3 incident report. The exchange said it had set aside more than enough funds to absorb the financial impact.

Binance also cited FBI information attributing the incident to North Korea. It said 98% of impacted token assets had been replenished by October 31, while purchases of remaining illiquid assets continued. The company reported approximately $2.85 billion in frozen or intercepted assets, subject to reconciliation and changes in market prices.

The post Binance Hack Update Reveals 2,300 BTC From Stolen Altcoin Swaps appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• XRP price trades near $1.17, roughly 24.5% below the cited October level of $1.55. Analysts are watching several potential support zones.
• David Schwartz will block accounts posting insults or irrelevant XRP content. He welcomes substantive criticism in appropriate discussions.
• Coinglass data shows a 12.36% decline in XRP open interest. XRP ETF cumulative net inflows remained $1.81 billion despite fewer inflow days.
• Analyst ChartNerd identified demand between $1.04 and $1.16, while Ali Martinez highlighted $0.99. Dark Defender emphasized support at $1.12.

David Schwartz has urged the XRP Army to stop posting insults and unrelated cryptocurrency comments beneath his social media replies. Ripple’s CTO emeritus said he would block accounts that disrupt conversations, including supporters promoting XRP in unrelated threads. 

He said criticism remains welcome when people offer substance, avoid slurs, and choose an appropriate discussion. The message arrived as the XRP price traded near $1.17, with sellers maintaining pressure after an October decline.

David Schwartz Sets Boundaries for XRP Army Discussions

Schwartz published the message on X on November 7 amid criticism of him and Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse. The public exchange raised questions about how community members can reach him. 

Schwartz said irrelevant replies had increased, especially when he joined conversations about subjects outside cryptocurrency. He explained that leaving those replies unchecked exposes other participants and their followers to unwanted crypto posts.

Blocking, he said, helps protect those conversations from repeated disruption. His policy covers hostile comments and enthusiastic promotion when either appears beneath an unrelated exchange. 

David Schwartz also addressed accusations involving fraud or scams. He said people could challenge him, provided their comments contained substance and avoided personal slurs. Relevance and placement remained central to his expectations.

The warning extended to accounts that follow his activity and repeatedly insert XRP references into separate discussions. Even praise for the token could breach his boundaries when it interrupted another topic. 

Responses from the XRP Army included a suggestion for a weekly thread welcoming introductions from new ecosystem participants. Schwartz reacted positively to the proposal, which would give community promotion a dedicated venue.

Another participant argued that unanswered messages encouraged people to keep seeking his attention. Schwartz nevertheless offered a path back for blocked users who agreed to stop disruptive replies. He said they could contact him about removing the block and stressed that he held no personal hatred. 

XRP Price Tests Support as Traders Cut Leveraged Positions

The XRP price stood near $1.17 in CoinGlass data, down 2.43% over 24 hours. Compared with the cited October level of $1.55, that represents a decline of approximately 24.5%.

CoinGlass listed roughly $10.71 million in total futures liquidations during the preceding day. Open interest stood around $2.76 billion, reflecting substantial outstanding derivatives exposure despite the selloff. 

XRP saw a 12.36% decline in open interest as the XRP price lost the $1.21 support level. Falling open interest indicates reduced outstanding exposure, although it does not independently establish the direction of remaining positions.

The report also described social sentiment at its weakest since July. XRP exchange-traded funds recorded inflows on six days during the previous month, while cumulative net inflows remained $1.81 billion. Sessions without inflows can include both withdrawals and flat readings, so that pattern does not establish continuous outflows.

Analyst ChartNerd identified demand between $1.04 and $1.16 after a breakdown beneath weekly support. He said XRP price reclaiming $1.34 could improve the technical outlook.

ChartNerd also noted that XRP price remained below its 20-week and 50-week moving averages. Those levels added resistance for buyers after the loss of the 10-week support floor.

Ali Martinez highlighted a channel boundary near $0.99 as potential support. His assessment also pointed to weak volume and declining market share, with Bitcoin dominance complicating a sustained recovery.

Dark Defender offered a different interpretation of XRP price weakness, maintaining that the longer-term structure remained intact. He identified $1.12 as support, describing a level that previously acted as resistance during July and August. He had marked $1.21 and $1.12 on October 25, before the latest decline reached the lower support area.

The post XRP Price Tests Support as David Schwartz Warns the XRP Army appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Wallet 0xC374 accumulated 1.32 million UNI worth $11.05 million over 45 days.
• Another whale sold $7.32 million in UNI but still holds approximately 19.3 million tokens.
• UNI trades near $7.03, with CoinGecko reporting a 1.42% daily price increase.
• A break below $6.85 could expose UNI to $6.50, with $5.80 a deeper downside scenario.

Uniswap whales are taking opposite positions as one large investor accumulates UNI while another reduces holdings. Wallet 0xC374 recently purchased another 308,517 UNI worth $2.13 million, according to blockchain analytics platform Lookonchain.

The latest transaction brings its total purchases to 1.32 million UNI worth $11.05 million over 45 days. Meanwhile, another whale has sold $7.32 million in UNI over two days. The competing transactions came as UNI’s price trades near $7.00.

Uniswap Whale Accumulation Meets Heavy Selling Pressure

Lookonchain reported that wallet 0xC374 purchased 308,517 UNI approximately 10 hours before its update. The transaction represents another addition to an accumulation strategy that has continued for 45 days.

The wallet has now accumulated 1.32 million UNI, valued at approximately $11.05 million. This sustained buying could reduce the amount of UNI available for immediate trading if the investor continues holding.

However, another large holder is moving in the opposite direction. The whale reportedly sold $7.32 million in UNI over two days after receiving 20.32 million tokens from Uniswap’s Timelock wallet more than a year ago.

Despite the recent sales, the address still holds approximately 19.3 million UNI. Its remaining position means further distributions could introduce additional selling pressure.

These transactions reveal different strategies among large UNI holders. One investor continues building exposure, while another gradually reduces an existing position.

The accumulation has attracted bullish interpretations from market observers. Hupzy described the sustained purchases as a potential supply-lock signal, although continued holding remains essential.

UNI Price Faces $6.85 Support as Whale Activity Divides Traders

UNI was trading around $7.03, according to CoinGecko’s latest price data. The token gained 1.42% over 24 hours and 1.19% over seven days.

Its 24-hour trading volume reached approximately $303.59 million. These figures show modest positive price performance despite contrasting whale transactions.

However, traders are also watching UNI’s short-term technical structure. Crypto With Gopal identified a potential head-and-shoulders formation on the one-hour chart.

The analyst highlighted 6.85–6.90 as the neckline support zone. A breakdown below this range could expose UNI to further declines toward $6.50.

The bearish structure introduces uncertainty despite the ongoing whale accumulation. If selling pressure increases, traders could interpret the breakdown as confirmation of weakening momentum.

Analysts also warn that continued weakness could push UNI toward $5.80. However, that remains a downside scenario rather than a confirmed price target.

The competing whale transactions therefore create two different signals for UNI holders. Sustained accumulation could tighten available supply, while continued distributions could limit recovery attempts.

For now, $6.85-$6.90 represents the immediate technical area to watch. Whether UNI holds that support may determine if buyers regain control or sellers extend the decline.

The post Uniswap Whales Split as $11M UNI Accumulation Meets $7.32M Sell-Off appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Algorand will indefinitely pause its xGov grants program starting December 6 under its restructuring.
• The foundation will close its forum and conclude the Ecosystem Advisory Council on November 6.
• ALGO staking rewards remain committed through January 2028 despite the broader strategic changes.
• Algorand drops proposed supply inflation, MEV capture and higher minimum fees from current plans.

Algorand is restructuring its community programs as the foundation shifts toward revenue generation and post-quantum security. The changes include indefinitely pausing its xGov grants program from December 6 and closing the Algorand Forum on November 6.

The foundation will also conclude its Ecosystem Advisory Council (EAC) and end sponsorship of the Algorand Technical Council (ATC). 

However, staking rewards will continue through January 2028, preserving an existing commitment to network participants. The restructuring also removes several proposed economic changes from consideration under Project King Safety.

Algorand xGov Grants Pause as Foundation Restructures Community Programs

The Algorand Foundation announced the changes in its latest community update, outlining a narrower approach to ecosystem development. The organization said its new leadership is prioritizing a sustainable, revenue-generating network model.

Under the restructuring, the xGov grants program will pause indefinitely, effective December 6. The initiative previously allowed community members to submit proposals, vote, and participate in discussions about ecosystem development.

The foundation also confirmed that the Algorand Forum will close on November 6. A read-only archive will remain available for members who need historical discussions and information.

Community members will instead use Algorand’s Discord for technical updates, support, and discussions with the foundation. This shifts communication toward a more centralized channel rather than the previous forum-based structure.

The Ecosystem Advisory Council will also conclude its operations as a company-run body on November 6. Established in January, the council connected community representatives with Algorand leadership.

Its responsibilities included collecting ecosystem feedback and advising leadership on the potential effects of proposed changes. The foundation said it still welcomes community input through Discord.

Separately, Algorand will end its sponsorship of the Algorand Technical Council. However, periodic Developer Council meetings will continue, allowing participants to discuss technical developments.

Algorand Staking Rewards Remain Through 2028 as Project King Safety Pauses

Despite the organizational changes, the foundation reaffirmed its commitment to staking rewards through January 2028. This provides continuity for node runners and stakers who help maintain network security.

The update also indefinitely pauses Project King Safety as a broader roadmap initiative. Three previously discussed proposals are no longer under consideration.

These include lifting ALGO’s maximum supply through inflation-based incentives, introducing mechanisms to capture maximum extractable value (MEV), and increasing minimum transaction fees.

MEV refers to additional value that block producers can extract by changing transaction ordering. Capturing MEV could introduce another revenue mechanism, but the foundation has removed it from current plans.

However, Algorand has not ruled out every potential fee adjustment. Usage-based transaction fees, including those associated with Falcon-1024 post-quantum accounts, may still change.

The foundation is also placing greater emphasis on post-quantum cryptography. Falcon signatures have operated on Algorand since 2022, followed by quantum-resistant transactions in 2025 and native post-quantum accounts in 2026.

Its next objective involves extending these security capabilities beyond its own blockchain. Custodians, wallet providers, asset issuers, and other networks could eventually integrate post-quantum protection.

The changes therefore represent more than administrative restructuring. Algorand is reducing several community-led initiatives while concentrating resources on security infrastructure and long-term network sustainability.

Algorand is changing its development priorities, not abandoning network incentives. Staking rewards remain committed through January 2028, while post-quantum security becomes a central part of its growth strategy.

The post Algorand Pauses xGov Grants, Ends Advisory Councils in Major Strategic Shift appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Bitcoin spot ETFs recorded $411.9 million in net outflows on November 6.
• BlackRock’s IBIT accounted for $403 million in withdrawals, while Fidelity’s FBTC gained $42.8 million.
• Ethereum ETFs lost $93.3 million, with BlackRock’s ETHA recording $90.8 million in outflows.
• Kalshi traders priced Bitcoin’s November low near $70,000 as analysts watched key support levels.

U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $411.9 million in net outflows on November 6, extending pressure on institutional crypto investment products.

BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) accounted for $403 million of those withdrawals, according to Farside Investors. Fidelity’s FBTC provided a partial offset with $42.8 million in net inflows. 

Ethereum spot ETFs also faced selling pressure, recording $93.3 million in net outflows, led by $90.8 million leaving BlackRock’s ETHA. Meanwhile, Bitcoin traded near $75,920, while prediction markets priced its November low around $70,000.

Bitcoin ETF Outflows Accelerate as BlackRock’s IBIT Loses $403M

Farside Investors’ November 6 data showed that Bitcoin ETF outflows were heavily concentrated in BlackRock’s IBIT. The fund recorded $403 million in withdrawals, accounting for almost the entire daily net loss.

Other funds also reported negative flows. Bitwise’s BITB lost $20.5 million, while ARK 21Shares’ ARKB recorded $20.1 million in outflows. Grayscale’s GBTC shed another $11.1 million.

Fidelity’s FBTC was the day’s strongest performer, attracting $42.8 million in fresh investments. However, those inflows failed to offset withdrawals from competing products.

The concentration of selling in IBIT suggests that withdrawals from one major fund drove much of the day’s negative result. However, daily ETF flows alone cannot establish whether investors are abandoning Bitcoin or reallocating capital.

Spot Bitcoin ETFs hold actual Bitcoin to back their shares. When investors redeem shares, fund managers generally sell corresponding Bitcoin holdings to meet those requests.This process can create additional selling pressure in the underlying market. 

Ethereum ETF Outflows Reach $93M as Bitcoin Faces $70K Forecast

Ethereum spot ETFs recorded $93.3 million in net outflows on November 6. BlackRock’s ETHA dominated withdrawals with $90.8 million leaving the fund.

Fidelity’s FETH recorded another $1.7 million in outflows, while Grayscale’s ETHE lost $1.9 million. BlackRock’s staked ETHB attracted approximately $1.1 million, providing limited relief.

The simultaneous withdrawals from Bitcoin and Ethereum products indicate broader weakness in institutional ETF demand. Still, one trading session does not establish a sustained trend.

Meanwhile, Bitcoin’s price outlook remains under pressure. CoinGecko data placed BTC at $75,920.79, up 0.52% over 24 hours but down 1.50% across seven days.

Kalshi Crypto reported that prediction market traders were pricing Bitcoin’s November low near $70,000. That forecast implies approximately 8% downside from its November 6 trading level.

Market analyst More Crypto Online identified $74,804 to $63,326 as a potential correction-ending zone. However, the analyst warned that entering this range would not independently confirm a market bottom.

The analyst also identified $75,580 as a range floor and $81,238 as the recovery level. Until Bitcoin breaks above that resistance, the analysis leaves room for further downside.

The ETF withdrawals and cautious price expectations reflects weakening near-term confidence. Bitcoin’s ability to defend its current support levels could determine whether selling pressure continues.

The post Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs Shed $505M as Kalshi Traders Predict BTC Drop to $70,000 in November appeared first on Blockonomi.

Tensions within the vast XRP community have intensified following a highly emotional post directed at Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse and CTO Emeritus David Schwartz, which was later reposted by several other accounts.

The criticism centers on a familiar concern among some holders: that Ripple’s rapid expansion into stablecoins, treasury products, and institutional finance has not translated into stronger demand or price performance for XRP.

XRP Community vs. Ripple Execs

The original post came from an XRP commentator known on X as Fiduciary Ledger 17, who accused Ripple’s leadership of benefiting from years of community support while allegedly diminishing XRP’s economic importance in favor of RLUSD and other enterprise products.

The X user argued that XRP holders stood behind Ripple through years of regulatory uncertainty and the lengthy SEC battle, only to see the company increasingly emphasize products that do not always require the token. The commentator went considerably further, claiming that the community deserves to see XRP reach a “fair value” of $15-$20 or more and calling on the company’s executives to take steps to support that outcome.

It’s worth noting that these claims represent the commentator’s own views, which were reposted by others, but do not carry any evidence that Ripple has deliberately suppressed XRP’s price.

Nevertheless, the frustration reflects a genuine disconnect visible throughout the entire year. Ripple has announced partnerships with giants like Coinbase, Robinhood, BNY, Standard Chartered, and other major institutions, while RLUSD has expanded rapidly across different markets. XRP, on the other hand, has struggled in the market despite that corporate momentum, currently trading 66% below its all-time high in July last year.

Garlinghouse Pushes Back

Garlinghouse continues to frequently reject the idea that Ripple has abandoned XRP. At Swell 2026, he doubled down on the idea that XRP is the company’s “North Star,” adding that Ripple wants to pursue only initiatives that benefit the asset. However, he also acknowledged that the cross-border token will not necessarily be the best tool for every transaction, with fiat or RLUSD sometimes making more sense depending on the use case.

His argument is essentially that Ripple would rather win a portion of a much larger financial market using XRP alongside stablecoins and traditional currencies that insist every product exclusively uses the token. That message is consistent with comments he made earlier this year, when he said that “all roads lead back” to XRP. In a separate tweet, Garlinghouse argued that RLUSD does not compete with XRP as it has a different purpose.

The company’s own latest business update continues to mention XRP directly. It recently said that its goal is to modernize financial infrastructure using digital assets such as XRP while connecting payments, custody, stablecoins, treasury, and capital markets.

The post XRP Community Tensions Boil Over as Ripple CEO Defends Token’s Role appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Just a day after the post-election relief rally, Wall Street suffered one of its most violent sessions in years, with S&P 500 companies wiping out roughly $3 trillion in market value as the Nasdaq posted its steepest daily drop since the pandemic era.

The scale of the destruction also produced a rather intriguing comparison: more value disappeared from US stocks in one session than the entire cryptocurrency market is currently worth.

Wall Street Calamity

According to the Kobeissi Letter, the S&P 500 alone lost about $3 trillion in market capitalization during Thursday’s session, roughly $750 billion per hour from the opening bell. Dow Jones Market Data independently put the loss at around $2.9 trillion, the largest single-day wipeout on record for the index’s constituents. Nasdaq companies lost another $2.5 trillion, while the Magnificent Seven shed just over $1 trillion.

The scale of the selling was particularly relentless, as analysts from the KL pointed out that the S&P 500 and the Nasdaq staged at least five intraday rebound attempts, including a single rally of 1.7%, but every one was sold. The leading index failed to print a single positive one-hour candle during the entire session.

The Nasdaq 100 ultimately dumped by around 6.4%, while after-hours futures pushed the 12-hour decline to 7.1%. Meanwhile, the S&P 500 was subsequently about $5 trillion below its October peak.

What’s interesting about today’s price action is how consistent the selling was.

As shown in our below analysis, there were at least 5 intraday rallies in the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100.

One of these intraday rallies was as big as +1.7%!

All of these rallies were sold without a SINGLE green 1-hour candlestick in the S&P 500.

Today’s trading session will be referenced for years to come.

— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) November 6, 2026

Kobeissi argued that the collapse appeared more technical than fundamental. Concerns about AI profitability, capital expenditure, and potentially tighter regulation had already spooked investors, while record leverage amplified the move once sentiment turned. US leveraged ETFs attracted roughly $15 billion in October, which was the largest rolling-month inflow in at least two years.

Still Early

Here’s the interesting perspective for the crypto market, which also tumbled hard for its size. CoinGecko and CoinMarketCap put the entire crypto market cap at somewhere between $2.55 trillion and $2.65 trillion. As expected, Bitcoin holds the lion’s share, around 60% of either amount.

In other words, the $2.9-$3 trillion erased from the S&P 500 companies in a single session exceeded the market value of every BTC, ETH, XRP, BNB, stablecoin, altcoin, meme coin, Trump coin, and all other coins combined.

Obviously, this doesn’t mean every crypto asset is undervalued, but it shows the digital asset market is still a fraction of its bigger brothers, despite major adoption news over the past few years.

The post We Are Still Early: One Brutal Wall Street Session Erased More Than the Entire Crypto Market appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Paraguay faces one of its most serious financial and political crises in years after regulators seized Ueno Bank, a fast-growing digital lender used by millions of locals.

Although it began as a solvency issue, the situation quickly worsened, spreading to frozen accounts, protests, criminal investigations, upheaval at the central bank, and an impeachment battle involving President Santiago Peña. So what’s the connection to Bitcoin, and can it actually help?

One Bank Turns Into National Crisis

Ueno Bank quickly grew from a relatively small fintech into a major Paraguayan lender in just a few years, claiming roughly three million customers in a country of about 6.5 million people. It also claimed to have administered approximately $850 million in public funds, including money connected to state institutions and pension bodies.

The problems intensified after regulators found that the bank no longer met minimum solvency requirements. The local central bank said adjustments to Ueno’s financial statements left its solvency ratio below half the legally required minimum, prompting authorities to begin resolution proceedings.

Subsequent investigations also scrutinized alleged excessive lending to companies linked to controlling shareholder Grupo Vázquez, insufficient documentation, and assets that regulators said had been improperly recorded. Later, prosecutors charged bank executives and associates, and several senior figures were detained.

Here’s where the situation escalated further because of the political connection. President Peña previously owned a stake in Grupo Vázquez, though he claims he sold it in March 2025 and denies any wrongdoing. Former central bank chief Carlos Carvallo also previously headed Ueno’s predecessor before getting appointed to supervise the country’s banking system. He resigned after the crisis blew up.

Peña also offered his resignation, but lawmakers rejected it and continued impeachment proceedings while prosecutors opened investigations into Ueno’s oversight, its collapse, and the placement of public money at the institution.

For everyday customers, though, the problem is significantly simpler: their money became inaccessible. Ueno’s app, cards, and transfers stopped functioning, while demand for accounts elsewhere became so intense that other banks’ digital services were disrupted. Paraguay’s central bank has begun paying deposit guarantees and says deposits are protected up to ₲228.3 million (around $37,000) per depositor per institution, with the first groups already receiving money.

BTC, Anyone?

Can Bitcoin help? Well, to an extent, yes. But it’s not in the simplistic sense that it could “solve” Paraguay’s banking crisis. The clearest advantage is self-custody. Someone who already holds BTC in a wallet they control does not need permission from Ueno, the central bank, or any other central authority to access or transfer the bitcoins. A bank entering resolution cannot freeze BTC held outside its infrastructure.

Bitcoin could also provide an alternative rail for moving wealth internationally without waiting for a bank transfer system to reopen. In situations of institutional distrust or political instability, that optionality has real value.

However, there are some practical issues. Buying bitcoin typically requires access to exchanges that are frequently funded via some sort of banking institution. Of course, you can bypass that, but it requires a lot of technical knowledge that everyday consumers still lack. Purchasing BTC also requires internet connectivity, wallet security, and then finding someone who would accept BTC as legal tender. Also, self-custody comes with risks: if you lose your private keys, there’s no deposit-guarantee fund to call.

So, Bitcoin doesn’t fix all of this. But the Ueno crisis demonstrates one specific thing Bitcoin was designed to offer: an alternative asset that can be held without making a commercial bank the ultimate custodian of your savings.

The post Paraguay’s Bank Collapse Exposes a Problem Bitcoin Was Built to Solve appeared first on CryptoPotato.

BTC, ETH, and XRP are all approaching key technical levels that could determine whether the latest correction deepens considerably or if the bulls will finally step up and prevent further losses.

Martinez told his nearly 170,000 followers on X that downside risks for BTC are around $60,000; ETH could dump to $1,960; and XRP might revisit the $0.99 lows from August.

BTC to $60K, ETH Below $2K

In his latest post on X, the popular analyst argued that BTC is still trading inside a broad channel on the three-day chart, with $73,000 representing the crucial mid-range support. If the leading cryptocurrency loses that area decisively, he sees the channel’s lower boundary near $60,000 as the next major zone to watch.

That would represent a substantial additional decline given the already painful pullback from $87,000 to the current $76,000. Moreover, it aligns with other bearish forecasts made by other analysts. As we reported recently, Bren warned that bitcoin could tumble to $56,000, which would mark a fresh multi-year low, before eventually recovering and potentially reaching a new all-time high next year.

Ethereum’s setup looks weaker, according to Martinez. The largest altcoin appears to have broken below a right-angled ascending broadening pattern on the daily chart, with $2,385 no longer holding as support. The measured move from that structure points toward approximately $1,963 if selling pressure intensifies.

This level is also consistent with previous warnings from Martinez that a clean breakdown beneath the $2,350-$2,400 region could put sub-$2,000 ETH back into play.

What About XRP?

XRP’s current landscape is similarly uncomfortable as ETH’s, Martinez said, explaining that the token has broken beneath the mid-range support of the channel it has been trading in, which shifted his attention toward the lower boundary near $0.99. Recall that the asset dipped to that level in August, shortly before it exploded by 70% in 72 hours to $1.70. However, the sentiment around it has quickly deteriorated in recent weeks.

Santiment Intelligence highlighted a trader who previously called for XRP to fall toward $0.99 unless the asset managed to close above $1.36, which it didn’t. The asset has since fallen by roughly 10%, although the analytics platform stressed that the broader market also declined, making it difficult to separate skill from favorable timing.

However, the analysts warned that among some of the most profitable XRP wallets they track, only one is currently long, and that wallet has not traded since August. Meanwhile, three active short positions have collectively added roughly 2.1 million XRP since late October.

The post How Low Can BTC, ETH, and XRP Fall if the Crypto Sell-Off Worsens appeared first on CryptoPotato.

After an intense business week in terms of major price moves, bitcoin has finally calmed at $76,000 as the weekend begins despite the resumed attacks between the US and Iran.

Most larger-cap alts have remained calm over the past 24 hours, aside from ZEC and QNT, which have posted notable gains, while RAIN and CC have dropped hard.

BTC Stable Despite New Attacks

The primary cryptocurrency tanked hard on October 30 following the massive hack against Binance, going from $81,000 to $76,000 within an hour or so. Its subsequent recovery attempt took it only to $79,000 on Monday, but another rejection followed suit. More volatility ensued on Tuesday and Wednesday after the results of the US midterms were in.

The Democratic sweep led to a crash to $75,600 at first for BTC, before the asset rebounded hard on Wednesday afternoon to $81,000. Then came Thursday, though, and the landscape changed for the worse. Bitcoin erased all gains and plunged even further to under $76,000 alongside Wall Street. The situation worsened on Friday when the cryptocurrency slipped below $75,000 for the first time in well over two months.

The bulls finally intervened after the latest leg down and helped bitcoin recover some ground to $76,000 as of press time. The stability over the past 18 hours is rather surprising since US President Trump confirmed that the US Military has struck Iran.

Its market capitalization is down to $1.520 trillion, while its dominance over the altcoins sits inches below 60% on CMC.

ZEC, QNT Up

Ethereum is close to $2,250 after a minor increase over the past 24 hours. BNB has neared $700, while XRP is down to well below the $1.20 support level after a major crash on Friday. SOL, TRX, HYPE, and LINK are slightly in the green as well, while XMR, DOGE, ADA, BCH, NEAR, and UNI are in the red.

ZEC has risen the most among the larger caps, jumping by over 4% to $1,325. QNT has tapped $200 again following a 5.3% increase. In contrast, RAIN and CC are down by roughly 5%.

The total crypto market cap has regained around $50 billion since yesterday’s low, and it’s up to $2.550 trillion on CMC.

The post ZEC and CC Lead Altcoin Swings as BTC Settles at $76K Despite US-Iran Attacks: Weekend Watch appeared first on CryptoPotato.