The escalation may destabilize regional markets and heighten tensions, potentially influencing the conflict's trajectory and diplomatic efforts.
The post Saudi airports targeted as conflict with Yemen’s Houthis escalates appeared first on Crypto Briefing.
Marvell's revenue growth highlights the increasing reliance on AI and connectivity, but dependency on major tech firms poses significant risks.
The post Marvell lifts FY28 revenue outlook to about $20 billion as AI spending climbs appeared first on Crypto Briefing.
WisdomTree's potential TXSE listing could challenge NYSE/Nasdaq dominance, signaling broader acceptance and growth for emerging exchanges.
The post WisdomTree reportedly taps Texas Stock Exchange for an ETF listing appeared first on Crypto Briefing.
The rapid rise and fall in trading volume highlights the volatility and speculative nature of memecoin markets, raising concerns about sustainability.
The post Robinhood Chain memecoin trading hit $443M a day, then fell 96% appeared first on Crypto Briefing.
Google's tier restructuring may push free users to upgrade, impacting accessibility and potentially increasing revenue from subscriptions.
The post Google limits free Gemini users to Flash Lite starting October 9 appeared first on Crypto Briefing.
Bitcoin Magazine

Now Accepting Bitcoin: Buy Coffee and Bacon Across 200 Indiana Bitcoin Merchants
My trip into the Indiana Bitcoin market started at Kaffeine Coffee Co. on Fulton Street. The coffee was tasty, but my real surprise was running into a local Bitcoiner who was also paying for his order in satoshis, making me feel like not such a rare breed in this fiat world.
The friend I made shared about a network of Indiana merchants the Indianapolis local Indy Bitcoin Group has been orange pilling.
A common complaint of merchant Bitcoin adoption is that the shop owners will liquidate 100% of their Bitcoin back into cash using payment processors like Square. This is true to start, but a fascinating shift occurs once a business owner reads about bitcoin. Old Major LLC, an artisan meat distributor based in Indianapolis, is a prime example of that shift.
According to owner Mark LaFay, Starting in 2026, Old Major Market made a major strategic decision: they are keeping 100% of the Bitcoin they receive directly on their balance sheet. They realized that holding bitcoin opens up significant long-term upside.
Big shout out to the Bitcoiners in Central Indiana that have been stopping by Old Major for over a year to buy bacon, sausages, and specialty meats with sats. While the shop originally agreed to accept Bitcoin and instantly converted every transaction to cash, the steady stream of Bitcoin payments caught their attention.
When a dedicated community directs its routine spending toward supportive merchants, the business case for the owner becomes undeniable:
That financial reality is the ultimate orange pill. A focused group of customers directing their commerce toward open-minded owners can move the needle for merchant adoption, whether the owner holds from day one or learns along the way that they are missing profit.
As always, a growing directory of verified Bitcoin-accepting merchants is listed below. If you want your business added to the map, or if you have a new city and story to feature in an upcoming column, write directly to vagabond@b.tc to be included in “NOW ACCEPTING BITCOIN“.
This post Now Accepting Bitcoin: Buy Coffee and Bacon Across 200 Indiana Bitcoin Merchants first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Vagabond.
Bitcoin Magazine

Bringin Opens Euro Business Accounts for Bitcoin Companies Across 30 European Countries
Bringin today opened an invite-only beta of euro business accounts that let companies hold, accept, and pay in Bitcoin and stablecoins, and run SEPA payments from a vIBAN in the company’s own name. The launch builds on Bringin’s consumer platform, which has processed more than €15 million according to a press release shared with Bitcoin Magazine.
More European businesses want what Bitcoin and stablecoins offer: instant settlement, global reach and lower costs. Buying Bitcoin in Europe is easy enough; the challenge is running a company on Bitcoin and stablecoin rails. Many Europeans face bank account restrictions and blocked transfers when they operate with Bitcoin or other virtual assets. Every conversion to euros adds friction, records sit across disconnected tools, and the Travel Rule requirements turn simple payments into paperwork. As a result, Bitcoin’s potential as money gets tangled up in bureaucracy.
Bringin for Business seeks to bridge Bitcoin and banking. According to the press release, companies can add Bitcoin to their treasury, accept Bitcoin, Lightning, or stablecoin payments, and pay suppliers and payroll in Bitcoin. Euro accounts and the company’s Bitcoin wallet sit in one place, with the governance and security a business needs. A dedicated virtual IBAN, a euro account number in the company’s own name, connects it to SEPA payments, with additional global payment rails planned.
Keys are generated and stored in a hardware security module rather than omnibus exchange wallets. Only designated company owners can move funds, make payments, and add approval policies, according to the press release.
Separately, Bringin plans APIs and MCP servers so companies can work with AI agents. With support for Lightning and stablecoins, companies can accept payments from artificial intelligence bots, building on Bringin’s 2025 demonstration of agent payments over the Lightning Network.
“Bitcoin is the first money native to the internet, and Lightning makes it fast enough for everyday commerce. I’ve seen that potential since I started building on it in 2018,” said Prashanth Chandrashekar, founder and CEO of Bringin. “We proved it with consumers first. Now companies can use Bringin to get paid, hold value and move money globally, with accounts designed around self-custody and a seamless payment experience.”
Built on the MiCA-authorized infrastructure of Lightspark Payments Europe AS, Bringin for Business is currently in pilot with 15 businesses, including Lightning payment tools, mining-rig sellers, and Bitcoin conferences, handling cross-border payments and instant Bitcoin-to-euro conversions. It is available to companies across 30 European countries.
This post Bringin Opens Euro Business Accounts for Bitcoin Companies Across 30 European Countries first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Juan Galt.
Bitcoin Magazine

Coinbase’s Ryan VanGrack: CFTC Approval “Opens Many Doors” for Bitcoin
The SEC’s proposed custody rules could make it easier for investment advisors to help clients own Bitcoin directly. Coinbase’s Ryan VanGrack explains why institutional capital tends to flow where there are clearer rules, and why he sees direct ownership and ETFs as “both and, not either or.” He also shares why traditional finance is accelerating its push into Bitcoin and digital assets.
Chapters:
00:00 Coinbase Wins CFTC Approval for Its Own Clearinghouse
01:29 Can SEC Guidance Last Without the Clarity Act?
02:40 SEC Custody Proposal: Helping Advisors Hold Bitcoin Directly
04:14 Tokenization: The Biggest Upgrade Since Electronic Trading
05:41 How Tokenization Cuts Out Wall Street’s Middlemen
07:34 What Washington Still Needs to Fix for Bitcoin Holders
08:56 Institutional Adoption Accelerates After the Clarity Act Vote
11:07 How Coinbase Is Bringing Digital Asset Infrastructure to Community Banks
12:01 Sponsor: Square
12:34 Is Crypto Really a Tool for Illicit Finance?
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
This post Coinbase’s Ryan VanGrack: CFTC Approval “Opens Many Doors” for Bitcoin first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Patrick Green.
Bitcoin Magazine

Coinbase Business Chief: Big Banks Increasing BTC Exposure | Shan Aggarwal
New SEC rules could open the door for financial advisors to hold Bitcoin for their clients, and Coinbase is already at the center of that custody story. Shan Aggarwal, Coinbase’s first-ever Chief Business Officer, explains how Coinbase custodies most of the Bitcoin ETFs and supports the advisor community. He sees the advisor rule as expanding the pie for Bitcoin access, with Coinbase providing the infrastructure behind it.
Chapters:
00:00 How the SEC’s New Advisor Rules Could Bring Bitcoin to Wealth Managers
01:13 What BlackRock and JPMorgan Want From Bitcoin Infrastructure
02:16 What Will Drive the Next Wave of Bitcoin Adoption
03:28 Can the Coinbase One Card Turn Spenders Into Bitcoin Owners?
04:22 Coinbase’s Trillion-Dollar Stablecoin Opportunity
05:14 Coinbase and Citi Bring Stablecoin Payments to Merchants
05:56 Sponsor: SALT Lending
06:26 How Coinbase Customers Are Using Bitcoin Lightning
07:37 Will AI Agents Pay in Bitcoin or Stablecoins?
08:30 Coinbase Expands Into Collectibles and Everyday Bitcoin Rewards
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
This post Coinbase Business Chief: Big Banks Increasing BTC Exposure | Shan Aggarwal first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Patrick Green.
Bitcoin Magazine

TD Cowen’s Lance Vitanza: BTC to $132k in 2027 & MSTR Price Outlook
Institutions are no longer debating whether to own Bitcoin. Now the question is how. TD Cowen Managing Director Lance Vitanza explains why Bitcoin is evolving from a standalone asset into a capital markets ecosystem of common stock, preferreds, bonds and income products. He shares what he heard at the Bitcoin Treasuries conference in New York and why institutional investors increasingly evaluate Bitcoin within a portfolio.
Chapters:
00:00 Bitcoin Is Evolving From an Asset Into a Capital Markets Ecosystem
01:36 Bitcoin Preferreds, Bonds and Dividend-Paying Instruments
03:25 How Analysts Are Evaluating Digital Credit
05:23 Which Bitcoin Treasury Companies Survive a Downturn
07:28 Strive, Metaplanet and Nakamoto: Why Operating Businesses Matter
10:24 Could MSCI Index Removal Hurt Bitcoin Treasury Companies?
12:27 Blockchain Surveillance, Front-Running and Trust in Bitcoin Prices
14:20 Sponsor: Cash App
15:01 TD Cowen’s Bitcoin Price Target for 2027
16:38 Why Well-Run Bitcoin Treasury Companies Could Outperform Bitcoin
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this show are those of the participants and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of BTC Inc., Bitcoin Magazine, or any affiliated entities. This content is provided for informational and educational purposes only and should not be construed as investment, legal, tax, or accounting advice. Nothing contained in this show constitutes a solicitation, recommendation, endorsement, or offer to buy or sell any securities or financial instruments. Viewers should consult their own advisors before making financial or business decisions.
This post TD Cowen’s Lance Vitanza: BTC to $132k in 2027 & MSTR Price Outlook first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Patrick Green.
HTTP error 429 on https://cryptoslate.com/feed/
Failed to fetch feed.
The Dogecoin price stood at €0.084357, or $0.094847, on Tuesday morning. That is 1.63 percent lower in euro terms and 1.38 percent lower in dollar terms than the previous day. Over the week the price is all but unchanged at minus 0.15 percent, and over the month it is up 4.42 percent. Price data comes from CoinGecko, as of October 6.
More important than the daily move is a question many holders are asking right now: can a DOGE balance earn a running yield, the way Ethereum or Solana can? Offers marketed in exactly those terms are circulating, often with the word staking in the name. The short answer: there is no staking in the Dogecoin protocol. Whatever is paid out as yield comes from a lending transaction, and in Germany that carries different rules on liability, deposit protection and tax than a plain purchase does.
The daily range ran from €0.083552 to €0.085781. Market capitalisation stands at about $14.82 billion, and spot turnover over the past 24 hours at $519 million. There are 156,210,086,384 DOGE in circulation.
That last figure is the key to the whole subject, because it grows every day. Our own review of the chain through the Blockchair interface put the count at 6,403,759 blocks on October 6. In the 24 hours before that, 1,362 blocks were added. The three most recently found blocks each carried exactly 10,000 DOGE in reward, plus a handful of DOGE in fees.
1,362 blocks at 10,000 DOGE each come to 13,620,000 new units in a single day. Annualised, that is roughly 4.97 billion DOGE. Work instead from the nominal cadence of one block a minute and the figure comes to 5.256 billion a year. Both numbers belong side by side: the annual expansion of supply runs between 3.18 and 3.36 percent.
Staking, in the narrow sense, means holders lock up their units as collateral and the protocol itself grants them a share of the newly created units. That requires a consensus mechanism called proof of stake, as used by Ethereum since 2022 and by Solana from the start.
Dogecoin works on a different basis. The chain uses proof of work with the Scrypt hashing algorithm. New blocks arise from computational work by specialised machines, and the reward of 10,000 DOGE per block goes to whoever found the block. A holder who simply leaves coins sitting in a wallet takes no part in that whatsoever. The protocol contains no mechanism that allocates anything to holders.
This is not a shortcoming and not a temporary state of affairs, but a property of the design. Anyone looking at a product that promises yield on DOGE therefore knows before reading a word of the fine print: that yield cannot come from the chain. The return has to be earned and paid out by a third party.

The computing power behind Dogecoin averaged around 2.69 petahash per second over the past 24 hours, with difficulty at 39,397,744. Over the same period the chain recorded 18,059 transactions.
Only a small part of that computing power, however, belongs to machines running for Dogecoin alone. Since 2014 Dogecoin has been mined together with Litecoin under a method called merged mining: both chains use the same hashing algorithm, and the same computational work counts for both at once. Dogecoin thus inherits a large share of its security from an outside chain.
For you as a holder, that yields a point of context rarely found in yield prospectuses. The security of your holding depends on decisions taken in another network. It has held steadily for twelve years, but it remains a dependency, and it belongs in the risk picture.
If the chain pays out nothing, only one source is left. The provider takes in your DOGE and lends it on, usually to traders betting on falling prices who need units for that, or to market participants who have to post collateral. Your yield is funded out of the interest those traders pay. The technical term is lending: handing over crypto assets for a fee so a third party can use them.
That changes your legal position fundamentally. Before the deposit you own DOGE. After the deposit you own a claim against a provider who is supposed to return the same quantity of DOGE. Should that provider become insolvent, you stand in line with the creditors. This is the real price of the interest rate, and it appears in no percentage figure.
Three features turn up almost every time. The units leave your own custody and sit with the provider. There is a minimum term or a notice period during which you cannot sell. And the yield is quoted as a variable rate that the provider may change unilaterally. If you want to lay the terms of different houses side by side, our comparison of crypto lending providers sets out the conditions in one overview.
Here the figure from the first section comes back. The total supply of DOGE grows by 3.18 to 3.36 percent every year. Your share of the total therefore falls continuously if you do nothing. A yield on DOGE, paid in DOGE, has to offset that dilution before it so much as holds your share steady.
The calculation below works through a holding of 100,000 DOGE, worth about €8,436 at the current price. It assumes a year with no price movement, so that the supply effect alone is visible.
| Interest rate offered | Holding after one year | Share of total supply |
|---|---|---|
| 0 percent, holding only | 100,000 DOGE | falls by around 3.2 percent |
| 2 percent | 102,000 DOGE | still falls by around 1.2 percent |
| 3.2 percent | 103,200 DOGE | stays roughly level |
| 6 percent | 106,000 DOGE | rises by around 2.7 percent |
The table answers no question about the price; it places the interest rate alone in context. An offer paying 2 percent on DOGE slows the dilution, it does not reverse it. Only above a good 3 percent does your share of the network genuinely grow. Anyone taking on the default risk of a lending transaction can hold the terms up against that benchmark.

The European Union's Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, MiCAR for short, has applied since 2024. It governs who may hold, exchange and broker crypto assets, and attaches licensing duties and ongoing supervision to those activities. Custody of your DOGE with an authorised provider falls under it.
Granting and taking out loans in crypto assets is expressly not among the services MiCAR covers. That follows from BaFin's guidance notice on crypto-asset services under MiCAR, which lists the activities requiring authorisation. Lending is not on it.
That gap has a practical consequence. A provider can hold a MiCAR licence for custody and advertise it, while the yield product alongside is not covered by that licence at all. On top of that comes a point many underestimate: there is no deposit protection for crypto assets in any circumstances, not even with authorised providers. The €100,000 you know from your current account has no equivalent here.
Germany's Federal Ministry of Finance restated the treatment of crypto assets in a circular dated March 6, 2025, file reference IV C 1 - S 2256/00042/064/043. It replaces the circular of May 10, 2022 and is the authoritative administrative position.
For lending income held as private assets, it provides the following: handing over crypto assets for a fee is a service, and the consideration counts as other income under section 22 of the Income Tax Act. It is taxed at your personal rate and not at the flat withholding rate of 25 percent. For income from services under section 22 number 3 there is an exemption limit of €256 per calendar year. Exceed it and the entire amount is taxable, not merely the part above the threshold.
On a holding of 100,000 DOGE at an interest rate of 3 percent, 3,000 DOGE accrue over the year, worth about €253 at the current price. That sits just below the exemption limit. A somewhat larger holding or a higher price is enough to tip the calculation, and then the full amount has to be declared. Anyone using several products adds up all income from services for the year. A crypto tax tool records these inflows with date and price, which is barely manageable by hand once payouts are daily.
Here the 2025 circular clears up a persistent misconception. The draft of the original 2022 circular provided for the holding period to extend to ten years where crypto assets are used to generate income. That rule was not carried over into the version in force.
So the position stands: gains on the sale of crypto assets are tax free under section 23 of the Income Tax Act where more than a year lies between acquisition and sale. That applies expressly even where the assets were used for staking or lending in the meantime. Within the year an exemption limit of €1,000 applies, raised from €600 previously.
From this follows a clean separation that you should carry through your own records. The capital gain on the original holding follows section 23 with its one-year period. The interest income follows section 22 and is taxable in the year it is received. Each unit received as interest also starts a holding period of its own, because it counts as acquired at the price on the day it arrives.
Anyone looking not for interest but for leverage runs into a second peculiarity of the German framework. Our own review of CoinGecko derivatives data found 101 live perpetual markets on DOGE on October 6, carrying some $2.18 billion in open positions between them. The three largest venues held 31.0 percent of that, the ten largest 65.1 percent. Other counts arrive at lower figures; the data service Coinglass was most recently quoted at around $1.52 billion. Depending on the set of exchanges captured, the total therefore lies between $1.52 billion and $2.18 billion, in every case a multiple of daily spot turnover of $519 million.
Most of these venues are not permitted to serve German retail clients. For those that are, a hard limit applies: under BaFin's general administrative act of July 23, 2019, reference VBS 7-Wp 5427-2018/0057, contracts for difference on cryptocurrencies sold to retail clients must be collateralised at 50 percent of notional value. That corresponds to maximum leverage of 2 to 1. Added to it are close-out once the account falls below half of initial margin protection, and negative balance protection capping liability at the capital paid in. How these limits bear on perpetual contracts is set out in our classification of perpetuals under MiFID.
At 2 to 1 it takes a price fall of roughly 50 percent to reach close-out. At leverage of 20 to 1, common abroad, roughly 5 percent is enough. Today's daily range of €0.083552 to €0.085781 already amounts to 2.6 percent.
On the chart picture, expressly as context on other people's analysis and not as an expectation of our own: according to a TradingView review cited at Parameter, the 50-day line crossed the 200-day line from below over the weekend, the first such cross since August 2025. The next resistance levels named there are $0.10 and $0.106, with the September low at $0.079.
Against that reading stands positioning in the derivatives market. A Blockchain.news review dated October 6 puts 78 percent of positions held by larger accounts on the long side and 22 percent on the short side, with retail accounts at 72 to 28. The ratio of aggressive buys to sells stood at 0.67 and the funding rate at a neutral 0.01 percent. One-sided positioning without matching funding costs is treated there as a pointer to a possible flush lower, with a target zone named at $0.078 to $0.082. Both readings stand side by side, and neither is a forecast.
(As of October 6, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)
If you hold VELO, it becomes a different token in November. Velodrome and Aerodrome, the two largest decentralised exchanges on Optimism and on Base, are merging into a single protocol called Aero. At Coinbase the swap runs from November 2 to November 4, 2026; for each VELO you receive around 0.044 new AERO, and the exchange takes no fee for it. Anyone holding VELO in their own wallet, however, is not covered by this swap at all and has to act themselves.
November 2 is not actually the date on which things get tight for you. They get tight earlier: at Coinbase, VELO can already only be traded with a limit order today, and the exchange no longer accepts a plain market order. Anyone assuming there is time until November to sell the position in the normal way is therefore already wrong.
Both exchanges belong to the category of decentralised exchanges, DEX for short. A DEX is a venue that works without a custodian: you swap directly out of your own wallet, and pricing is handled by a program on the blockchain instead of an order book inside a company. Velodrome is that venue on Optimism, Aerodrome the same blueprint on Base, the secondary network of Ethereum operated by Coinbase. Behind both stands the same development firm, Dromos Labs.
Both work on the so-called ve(3,3) model. That means: whoever locks their tokens for a fixed period receives voting rights in return and thereby steers which trading pairs the rewards flow into. The value of the token arises from this mechanism, and it is precisely this that is now being merged. Instead of two separate voting systems on two chains, there is to be one in future serving several networks. Among the first chains of the new protocol are OP Mainnet and Ink alongside Base.
To place the setting, it is worth a look at the ecosystem of the Coinbase chain Base, in which Aerodrome has played the largest role so far. The merger changes exactly that map: what were two regional top dogs becomes one provider across several networks.
For holders of AERO nothing changes arithmetically; one old AERO becomes one new AERO. For VELO the factor of roughly 0.044 applies. That number derives from the announced split of the new supply: 94.5 percent of the new AERO quantity goes to the existing AERO holders, 5.5 percent to the VELO side. The basis for that split is the economic performance of both protocols in the 52 weeks before the announcement, that is essentially the trading fees and revenues each of the two exchanges earned in that period.
That split can be checked against the market, and this is the point at which the matter becomes verifiable for you. In early October, Aerodrome carries a market capitalisation of around $835.5 million, Velodrome around $48.6 million. Together that is about $884 million, and Velodrome's share of it is 5.50 percent. The announced split of 94.5 to 5.5 and what the market actually pays today therefore agree to a hundredth. The market has long since priced the merger in.
Concretely, with the prices of October 6: AERO stands at $0.8355 or 0.7455 euros, VELO at $0.036265 or 0.032355 euros. A holding of 1,000 VELO is thus worth $36.26 or 32.36 euros in the market. After the swap that becomes 44 AERO, and at the same prices those are worth $36.76 or 32.80 euros.
The difference comes to 50 cents, that is 1.38 percent in favour of the swap. The market ratio of VELO to AERO stands at 0.0434, the offered factor at 0.044. For you that means one thing above all: there is no discount here that you would avoid by selling quickly beforehand, and no premium you could collect by buying in. Anyone trading hectically because of the swap factor pays trading fees for an advantage that does not exist in that order of magnitude.
One caveat belongs with it: this calculation is a still image. Prices move, and the factor of 0.044 is fixed, while the market prices of both tokens will fluctuate until the window in November. Whether the difference will then still be 1.38 percent, larger, or reversed cannot be said today and is not worth a forecast either.

Trading in VELO at Coinbase has already been switched to so-called limit-only operation. A limit order is an order with a price condition: you set the price at which you want to buy at most or sell at least, and the order waits in the order book until someone takes it at that price. A market order, by contrast, is executed immediately at the next best available price, and that option no longer exists for VELO there.
That this is not a normal state for small trading pairs is shown by the counter-check on the sister pair: AERO can still be traded at the same exchange without that restriction. Limit-only operation is the first stage of an announced two-stage wind-down path, on whose second stage VELO trading is discontinued entirely.
In practice that means three things. First, you no longer have an execution guarantee: your order sits in the book and may never be filled, or only in part. Second, the spread between bid and offer typically widens in such phases, because fewer participants are quoting. Third, exiting thereby becomes a decision with lead time rather than a click. Anyone reconsidering their choice of venue anyway will find in the crypto exchange comparison the points that matter on trading pairs, fees and authorisation in Germany.
Two dates structure the process. On October 21, 2026 the unified protocol is to launch, initially on OP Mainnet and Ink among others. From November 2 to November 4, 2026 the swap window then runs at Coinbase, in which the two legacy tokens become the new AERO.
Within that window the exchange pauses deposits and withdrawals of the legacy tokens. Anyone wanting to move holdings to or from Coinbase during those three days therefore cannot. Anyone wanting to shift their holding before the window is better off doing it well in advance and not on the evening of November 1, because a withdrawal on a network can take time depending on load.
Coinbase charges no fee for taking part in the swap, according to its own announcement. That concerns the conversion itself, not the trading fees that arise on a purchase or sale as they otherwise would.
Here runs the dividing line at which, in experience, money gets lost. If your VELO sits in the Coinbase account, the swap happens without any action from you. You have to click nothing, confirm nothing and apply for nothing; after the window, AERO is in the account.
If instead you hold VELO in your own wallet on Optimism, you are not covered by Coinbase's handling at all. For that case there is the protocol's own migration route, and you have to take it yourself. Anyone who misses it holds, after the swap, a token that is no longer traded at its home venue.
A precautionary rule applies here that matters more at any token migration than the migration itself: migration pages are a classic target for fraud attempts. Around every announced swap, replica pages appear demanding a wallet connection and an approval, and with it they clear out the holding. You obtain the address of the genuine migration route exclusively via the official project page, never via a link from a direct message, a comment or a search ad. How to custody holdings in general so that a single bad approval does not cost everything is set out in the hardware wallet comparison.
In the ve(3,3) model there are, alongside the freely tradable tokens, the locked positions, called veVELO at Velodrome. Whoever locks gives up availability for a set period and receives voting rights and a share of the protocol's revenues in return. These positions sit, by their nature, in the protocol itself and not on an exchange.
It is precisely on this that the least solid information is publicly available. The announced split of 94.5 to 5.5 percent expressly includes the locked positions on both sides, so there is no indication that they come away empty-handed. How a running lock period is treated at the transition, whether voting rights continue seamlessly, and what happens to positions whose term reaches beyond the swap cannot currently be answered conclusively from the outside. Anyone holding a locked position therefore follows the project's announcements more closely than someone who only has free tokens sitting on an exchange.

In Germany, gains from the sale of crypto assets held privately fall under section 23 of the Income Tax Act, the private disposal. The basic rule is familiar: hold for more than a year and you stay tax-free; sell within the one-year period and you pay tax on the gain at your personal rate, provided the exemption threshold is exceeded. The Federal Ministry of Finance most recently set out the treatment of crypto assets in its circular of March 6, 2025.
The point of dispute in a process like this one is: is the swap of one token for another a disposal that starts a new holding period? A swap from one crypto asset into another is in principle treated like a sale for tax purposes. Whether that also applies to a conversion in which the same project replaces its token and the holder economically keeps the same thing is a question of the individual case that nobody here can answer for you across the board. This is expressly not tax advice, and with meaningful amounts the question belongs with a tax adviser.
What you can do regardless is secure the evidence. Record which VELO holding you had at which point in time, at what factor it was converted and when. Anyone recording their purchases and swaps as they happen anyway has an easier time at year end; the comparison of tax tools and portfolio trackers shows which tools map such conversions cleanly.
Anyone researching the topic comes across reports from the announcement period stating an entirely different ratio: 0.55 AERO per VELO. That ratio was a proposal from an early phase and was expressly marked as non-final at the time. It is not the factor at which the swap now takes place.
What governs is the number the exchange states for the November window, and that stands at around 0.044. The best protection against an outdated search hit is the cross-check from the second section: a factor of 0.55 would assign the VELO side around 40 percent of the new supply, while its market capitalisation today sits at a good 5.5 percent of the combined total. A number that is off by a factor of seven from what the market pays is in all likelihood out of date.
A swap rearranges the tokens, but it does not turn a risky asset into a safe one. Three points remain unchanged.
First, protocol risk. Decentralised exchanges run on program code, and errors in that code have repeatedly proved expensive in recent years. A merger means new, altered code, and new code is least tested in its first weeks.
Second, liquidity risk. VELO currently turns over around $2.0 million a day, on a market capitalisation of around $48.6 million. In such a market even a medium-sized order moves the price, and in the limit-only phase that applies all the more. Anyone wanting to sort out the terms around decentralised trading, fee models and settlement in general will find the basics in the explainer on what a perp DEX is.
Third, price risk. On the direction of AERO after the merger this text deliberately says nothing. The combination widens the addressable market of both protocols; that is a fact about the structure, not a statement about the price. A total loss is possible at any time with crypto assets of this size.
The announcement of the combination comes from the development firm behind both exchanges and is documented on its own project page; the details on the window at Coinbase, on the factors and on the absence of fees were compiled among others by Cryptobriefing.
The swap itself is unspectacular and for exchange holdings even convenient. The work lies beforehand, and it consists of three steps.
(As of October 6, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)
The US financial regulator FinCEN closed two projects on October 5, 2026 that would have made transfers to self-custodied crypto wallets reportable. For you as an investor in Germany, nothing changes immediately. What happens when you withdraw to your own wallet is governed by European law, and European law is currently moving in the opposite direction.
FinCEN is the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, the anti-money-laundering unit of the US Treasury. It prescribes which data banks and financial service providers must retain about payments and when they must file a report. Two of its proposals would have extended those duties explicitly to crypto transfers to wallets without a custodian for the first time. Both are now off the table.
On Monday, October 5, 2026, the agency filed two withdrawal notices; publication in the Federal Register, the US official gazette, was scheduled for October 6. Two so-called NPRMs are affected, that is Notices of Proposed Rulemaking. An NPRM is the formal announcement of a planned rule on which anyone affected may comment before it takes effect.
The first project dates from December 23, 2020 and ran under the docket number 1506-AB47. The second was published on October 23, 2023 and carried the number 1506-AB64. The older one had thus sat unresolved for almost six years, the newer one for three. Neither was ever in force; they hung in the state in which an agency has announced a rule but not adopted it.
The December 2020 proposal would have required banks and payment service providers to keep records on crypto transactions involving a self-custodied wallet from $3,000 upwards, including details of the counterparty. From $10,000 a report to FinCEN would have become due. A self-custodied wallet, an unhosted wallet in the agency's English, is a wallet whose private key nobody but you holds; there is no company there that could provide information.
That was precisely where the dispute lay. Anyone sending money to an address with no service provider behind it can say about the recipient only what that recipient states themselves. The criticism of the proposal therefore came down to the duty being either impossible to fulfil or an invitation to guess. In 2021 the industry filed several thousand comments within an unusually short window.
The second project targeted mixers. A mixer is a service that pools payments from many users and pays them out in a new distribution, so that the trail between deposit and withdrawal can no longer be drawn unambiguously in the blockchain. FinCEN wanted to designate international crypto mixing under section 311 of the USA Patriot Act as a class of transactions of primary money-laundering concern. The consequence would have been a duty to report wallet addresses, transaction hashes and IP addresses.
That it comes to nothing is justified by the agency, according to Decrypt, by the reporting burden and by the objection of many commenters that the broad definition could deter lawful use. FinCEN stated verbatim that it would take no further action on this NPRM. Both withdrawals refer to the White House digital asset report of July 2025 and its sentence that lawful users of digital assets should be able to transact privately on a public blockchain.
A withdrawal is not a ban on the rule but the end of a single proceeding. Peter Van Valkenburgh of the advocacy group Coin Center said on that point that the underlying statutory authority to create new, similarly bad rules remains. That is the sober reading: what was withdrawn is the proposal, not the power to write a new one.

That FinCEN is pulling back across the board cannot be inferred from the day. On October 5, 2026 the same agency published a new finding together with a proposed rule in the Federal Register under the number 1506-AB77. It is directed at companies outside the US controlled by the so-called A7 network, a service for sanctions evasion and money laundering with links to Russia. The legal basis is section 9714(a) of the Combating Russian Money Laundering Act.
What is proposed is a prohibition on certain transmittals of funds by covered financial institutions. The comment period ends on November 4, 2026. The pattern is therefore recognisable: the agency is abandoning blanket capture of private transfers and working instead with targeted prohibitions against named networks.
In the European Union, Regulation (EU) 2023/1113, the transfer-of-funds regulation for crypto assets, has applied since the end of 2024. Its Article 14 requires that, for a transfer to a self-hosted address above 1,000 euros, the originator's crypto service provider take appropriate measures to establish whether that address is owned or controlled by the originator. A self-hosted address is the same thing FinCEN calls an unhosted wallet: an address with no service provider behind it.
In practice that means your exchange wants to see proof above this threshold that the destination address belongs to you. What that proof looks like we set out in a separate assessment of which providers demand which evidence from 1,000 euros. Below the threshold it stays with the details that are collected anyway. Anyone intending to self-custody permanently cannot avoid the question of which device the keys sit on; our hardware wallet comparison sorts the devices by price, handling and supported networks.
So the EU demands precisely what the US is now dropping: an attribution of transfers to wallets without a custodian. The difference is the direction of access. The American rule would have produced a report to the agency. The European one produces a duty of verification at the service provider, the result of which is documented there.
The second building block is not yet in force. Regulation (EU) 2024/1624, the EU anti-money-laundering regulation, applies from July 10, 2027. Its Article 79 prohibits credit institutions, financial institutions and crypto service providers from keeping anonymous accounts. At the same time it prohibits dealing in anonymity-enhancing coins, that is crypto assets whose protocol systematically conceals sender, recipient or amount. Monero is the best-known case.
For regulated exchanges in the EU that means taking such coins out of their offering. What exactly this prohibition captures and what holders can do until then we treated separately in an assessment of the privacy coin ban from 2027. What stands for today's occasion is this: while surveillance of private transfers is being rolled back in Washington, a deadline is running in the EU after which a part of private transfers will not be possible at all through regulated providers.
Which provider sits under which supervision is therefore no longer a formality but decides which coins you will still be able to trade there in two years. Our overview of regulated crypto exchanges lists who holds an authorisation under the European crypto market regulation MiCA and in which member state it was granted.

The procedure differs by provider, but the components are the same everywhere. You enter the destination address, and above the 1,000-euro threshold the provider asks for proof that it belongs to you. Common forms are a signed message from the wallet, a screenshot of the address in the wallet software, or a small test transfer. Some providers additionally work with an allowlist on which a new address only becomes usable after a waiting period.
The American withdrawal changes nothing about that, for a simple reason: the duty falls on your service provider, and your service provider is as a rule based in the EU or serves you under European supervision. A provider licensed in Germany follows the transfer-of-funds regulation, not whatever FinCEN plans or drops. Anyone trading with a provider outside the EU leaves that framework; then what applies there applies, and the way back to a German bank account runs through the European rules again.
Before you pull holdings off an exchange and onto your own wallet, five points are worth a look, as they cause most of the delays in practice.
A transfer between two of your own wallets is not a sale and in itself produces no taxable gain. What it does produce is documentation work: after the move, the holdings sit where no service provider draws up an annual statement any more. The duty to be able to evidence the acquisition date and acquisition cost stays with you. Tools that read addresses along permanently and build a statement from that we set side by side in the crypto tax tool comparison.
That a reorganisation of crypto taxation is being negotiated in Berlin at the same time is a separate matter and has nothing to do with the American reporting duties. For the question of where your coins sit it is nonetheless not immaterial: the longer a holding sits with you yourself, the more important it becomes that the origin of every position stays traceable.
The news from Washington is a relief for American financial service providers and a signal to everyone who treats self-custody as a case for suspicion. A change in your situation in Germany it is not. Three steps follow from it.
(As of October 6, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)
Sources for further reading: the withdrawn proposal of December 2020 in the Federal Register and the mixing special measure of October 2023 in the same place.
Shibarium's block explorer is showing only part of the network this Tuesday morning. Of the 10,700,889 blocks the chain has produced so far, 55 percent have been read into the index. Around 4.8 million blocks are still missing from it. For you as a holder of Shiba Inu that means every transaction figure, every address counter and every daily statistic you read there right now describes the state of the index, not the state of the network. cryptoticker.io compiled this assessment itself on October 6, 2026, on the basis of the Shibariumscan status display for indexing progress.
This is not an outage and not a fault in the chain. Shibarium keeps producing blocks, one every eight seconds on average. What is being rebuilt is the catalogue of those blocks. And as long as the catalogue is unfinished, the figures in it are incomplete. Anyone reading them as evidence of growth or contraction is drawing a conclusion the data cannot support.
The status display at Shibariumscan gives three values that together make up the picture. The share of blocks read in stands at 0.55, that is 55 percent. The flag for whether indexing is complete reads no. And the flag for whether at least the blocks have been worked through also reads no. The home page carries a note alongside it saying the chain is currently being read in and that individual counters may be inaccurate.
The 55 percent are a snapshot. Two queries on the morning of October 6 returned the same value, so progress is moving slowly. Rebuilding an index covering 10.7 million blocks is computing work that takes days, not hours.
A block explorer is a searchable database covering a blockchain. The chain itself stores its data in blocks that reference one another, but it offers no search. The explorer reads each block individually, breaks it down into transactions, addresses and events, and files the result in tables that can be queried. If that database disappears, the chain carries on unchanged; only looking things up becomes laborious.
Reindexing means the explorer rebuilds its database from the start, going through every block of the chain again. At Shibarium this was triggered by an infrastructure change that has been running since late summer. Part of it was a switch of the access nodes through which wallets and applications talk to the network. We reported on that change of access addresses on September 29, when the subject was the settings in your wallet.
Alongside it, a reorganisation of the chain was cleaned up, during which two variants of the same block sequence were briefly in circulation. According to the developers, that point is settled. What remains is the rebuilding of the index. The project's technical documentation describes the architecture of Shibarium and its tools.
The decisive sentence for you: the percentage measures the progress of a database, not the health of a network. A transfer that cannot currently be found in the explorer may nonetheless sit complete and final in the chain.
The position is even clearer with internal transactions than with blocks. Their indexing share currently returns no value at all; the field is empty. Internal transactions are movements that do not originate directly from a wallet but arise inside a smart contract, for instance when a swap runs through several steps.
That hits precisely the processes that matter when retracing a swap. Anyone who has swapped on Shibarium, provided liquidity or used a bridge will not find the intermediate steps broken down in the explorer right now. The outer transaction is visible, the chain beneath it is not.

The daily counter stood at 4,859 transactions on the morning of October 6. In total the index reports 639,100,978 transactions and 267,880,184 addresses. Those sums sound solid; at present they are not, because they come from the same 55 percent.
How badly that can mislead is shown by an episode from September. Between September 6 and September 8 the number of daily transactions rose from 786 to 1,750, a jump of 122 percent. Several trade publications reported it as an increase in network load. In the early stages of a rebuild, however, an explorer shows markedly fewer blocks and transactions than the network has actually processed. A jump upwards can therefore simply mean that the catalogue has moved along a stretch.
From that follows a plain rule for the coming weeks: as long as the share sits below 100 percent, no change in these counters serves as proof of a change in the network. A report that claims otherwise has skipped a step.
There is one reading that the rebuilding of the index leaves untouched, because it comes from live operation: the gas price. Gas is the fee unit a network uses to charge for computing work, and Gwei is a subunit of it. On the morning of October 6, Shibarium quoted the same value for all three urgency tiers, 0.04 Gwei, once for slow, once for normal, once for fast.
That the three tiers coincide is telling. Different prices arise only when transactions compete for space in a block and whoever wants to get through faster pays more. When they coincide, that jostling does not exist. Network utilisation confirms it at 0.22 percent. For comparison: Ethereum stood at around 0.19 Gwei at the same time, roughly five times as much, and that too is historically low.
For you as a user this is the good news in the situation. A transfer on Shibarium costs very little right now, and it goes through quickly. The thin loading is pleasant from a fee perspective and, from the standpoint of network usage, a finding that leaves the question of viability open.
Here lies the practical consequence that makes work this week. Anyone who has so far produced their records by pulling up a page in the block explorer is left without a reliable basis. The transaction exists; its depiction in the explorer may be missing.
What makes you independent of that is the transaction hash. This is the unique identifier of a transaction in the chain, a long string your wallet shows you after every transfer. With it the transaction can be looked up again at any time later, even if a single explorer finds nothing today. Without it you depend on searching for your address, and that is precisely what is currently incomplete.
In practice that means noting the hash of every Shibarium movement from the wallet, together with the date, time, amount and euro value at the time of the transaction. A portfolio tool takes this bookkeeping off your hands and reads the movements along as they happen, instead of reconstructing them after the fact. Which providers cover German specifics is shown in our overview of tax tools and portfolio trackers.

In Germany, gains from the sale of crypto assets count as private disposals under section 23 of the Income Tax Act. The decisive factor is the one-year holding period: sell within a year of buying and the gain is taxable; sell after that and it stays tax-free. On top of that comes an exemption threshold of 1,000 euros a year for the sum of all private disposals.
The burden of proof for the purchase date and purchase price lies with you. The tax office does not demand a block explorer, it demands a traceable record. That is exactly why an incomplete index is not a tax problem as long as you have your own documents, and a considerable one if you have relied on being able to call the data up again at any time.
One point easily lost at Shibarium: moving your own tokens between your own wallets is not a sale and does not restart the holding period. It looks different if you switch via a bridge into another representation of the same token, because views diverge there. Since October 4 SHIB has also existed on a further network; the details are in our piece on the bridge and its two contract addresses. Anyone taking that route documents it with particular care and, in case of doubt, has the classification reviewed by a tax adviser.
While work goes on at the infrastructure, the market barely moves. SHIB was quoted at $0.00000585 on Tuesday morning, down 1.0 percent within a day. In euros the price sits at 0.00000522 euros, where the daily loss comes to 1.47 percent, with a range between 0.00000518 and 0.00000536 euros. The difference between the two percentages comes from the exchange rate and not from the token.
Market capitalisation stands at around $3.45 billion, roughly 3.08 billion euros. Some 589 trillion SHIB are in circulation. The price is far from the peak of October 2021 at $0.00008616. Dogecoin, the larger reference point in the same market segment, stood at $0.094382 the same morning and gave up 1.26 percent, moving very similarly.
That an additional network widens access changes nothing about the circulating supply. The bridge locks the token on the originating chain and reissues it on the destination chain; the total across both chains stays constant. New access creates demand only if buyers use it.
On the upside the next hurdle is the zone around $0.0000060, where the price has failed several times in recent days. Above that lies the area around $0.0000067. On the downside the zone around $0.0000055 serves as a catchment area; it held at the end of September. These levels follow from the price action of the past weeks and are not a promise.
Important for context: with a price carrying eight decimal places, the last tradable digit moves the price noticeably in percentage terms. A one percent move here corresponds to fractions of a millionth of a dollar. Anyone working with tight limits should do that arithmetic beforehand, otherwise an order triggers on a move that is barely visible on the chart.
When buying, the European crypto regulation MiCA requires your provider to hold an EU authorisation. Licensed firms display their licence publicly, and a look at it before the first deposit takes two minutes. Which platforms meet that condition and what they charge is set out in our crypto exchange comparison.
With custody, this week's particularity is added on top. Anyone holding SHIB themselves and using Shibarium needs the network's current access addresses in their wallet, otherwise it shows outdated balances or none at all. Anyone additionally active on the new network runs a second wallet there with its own address format. Two networks mean two backups of your access credentials, and both belong somewhere that is not the same computer.
The situation is less dramatic than half a percentage figure sounds, and it still asks something of you. The chain runs, its index does not run complete, and as long as that holds, the figures from it are not records.
(As of October 6, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)
The attacker who drained about $3.8 million from the cross-chain service NEAR Intents on October 1 has sent the money back in full. Since then the price of NEAR Protocol has turned higher: $5.23 on Tuesday morning, October 6, 2026, a gain of 7.8 percent within a day and of 14.4 percent over the week. Those are CoinGecko's figures. That made NEAR the only coin among the 25 largest crypto assets excluding stablecoins to move more than five percent on the day that morning.
Two documented developments coincide here, and both are older than the price jump: the full return of the drained sum, and the launch of the first US spot ETF on NEAR on September 29. How much each contributes cannot be separated out. What can be said is this: the risk that sat on the token for a week, worth $3.8 million, is off the table.
The incident on October 1 did not hit the NEAR blockchain itself but a service running on it. The affected part was the Omni infrastructure that handles deposits and withdrawals at NEAR Intents. The flaw sat in the way that infrastructure communicated with the smart contracts. The outflow stayed confined to BNB Chain, and the bulk of the haul consisted of the stablecoin USDT.
NEAR Intents is a service for swapping crypto assets across network boundaries. An intent is a statement of purpose: you define what you want to end up with, and a network of service providers finds the route there. Unlike a classic bridge, no token is locked in a contract on one side and reissued on the other. The technical description is set out in the project's technical documentation.
That the attack hit the settlement layer and not the protocol is more than a nicety. Anyone who held NEAR in their own wallet and never used the swap service was untouched by the outflow. What was affected were funds sitting in Omni settlement. The team has pledged to compensate affected users in full.
The service's security layer flagged the access itself, after which NEAR Intents was shut down for about an hour. During that time the gap on the contract side was closed. Core functions ran again afterwards, while individual cross-chain functions stayed switched off during the repair. We described the withdrawal halt and its reasons in detail on October 1.
Within 24 hours of the outflow the team had, by its own account, identified the person behind the access. It then set a 48-hour deadline for the return of the funds and published addresses the money was to go to. This is standard practice in the industry: it leans on the threat of prosecution while leaving the other side a way out.
The way out was taken. A few hours after the deadline was set the other side signalled willingness to talk, and the full sum came back within the time allowed. The team then closed its investigation.
A caveat belongs with that. A return after an ultimatum is no proof that the tactic works reliably. In many cases over recent years the money stayed gone. At NEAR Intents several things came together: the trail was fresh, the sum was small relative to the risk of being found, and the outflow was confined to a single chain.

Alex Shevchenko, general manager of NEAR Intents and co-founder of Aurora Labs, confirmed the return publicly and tied it to an appeal: “The funds from the $3.8M NEAR Intents hack were sent back in full. We are stopping the investigation. Please use bug bounties instead of disrupting the services.”
Illia Polosukhin, co-founder of NEAR Protocol, echoed that: “For security researchers looking for exploits, we encourage you to use bug bounties. They exist for a reason.” A bug bounty programme is an advertised reward for reporting a vulnerability to the operator rather than exploiting it.
For you as an investor, the admonition matters less than the fact that both statements are attributed by name and by role. In incidents of this size, figures from anonymous sources circulate routinely. Here the amount, the cause and the outcome have names behind them.
The second documented reason for the demand is less than a week old. On September 29 the first US spot ETF on NEAR began trading, issued by Bitwise and listed under the ticker NRR on NYSE Arca. The management fee is 0.75 percent a year. Bitwise has said it will stake a substantial share of the tokens it holds.
The provider published the first trading day's figures itself: $36 million of assets under management, $35.5 million of net inflows, $15.1 million of trading volume. That bought roughly 7.2 million NEAR, about 0.55 percent of the circulating supply. The price rose 10.2 percent on the launch day to $5.38.
A spot ETF actually buys the underlying asset. Every inflow is therefore a purchase in the market that shrinks the circulating supply. For a token with around 1.31 billion units in circulation, 0.55 percent in a single day is a size you cannot argue away. The reverse applies just as much: outflows become sales.
The day's range ran from $4.87 to $5.35. That is just under ten percent between low and high within 24 hours. Turnover of around $961 million stands against a market capitalisation of about $6.85 billion, which put NEAR in 21st place.
For context on the upside: the all-time high of $20.44 dates from January 16, 2022. From current levels that is around 290 percent away. Anyone reading the term all-time high in a forecast should read that date alongside it, because it is more than four years back.
The comparison with the wider market is what makes the move interesting. Bitcoin was virtually unchanged the same morning, and so was Ethereum. The rise in NEAR therefore did not come out of a general market move but out of its own news flow.
If you want to buy NEAR in Germany, two practical questions decide the cost. The first is authorisation: now that the EU regulation MiCA applies in full, providers of crypto services need a licence from a European supervisor, in Germany from BaFin. Which firms hold that licence and what they charge is set out in our crypto exchange comparison.
The second question is the trading pair. If NEAR trades against the euro, you pay a trading fee once. If the route runs via the dollar or a stablecoin, conversion and spread are added on top, and for a coin showing a ten percent range in a day, the time lost between two steps weighs in as well.
A third point concerns the very subject of this article: cross-chain services are convenient, but they add a layer that can have faults of its own. If you simply want to buy NEAR and hold it, you do not need them.

The incident is a lesson in where crypto assets sit. Three places need to be distinguished. On an exchange they sit in the provider's name; in your own wallet they are your responsibility; and in a settlement service such as the Omni layer they sit temporarily in a contract while a swap runs. The third place is the shortest-lived and the least considered.
In practice that means this: a balance caught up in a swap is not part of your holdings but part of a running process. Anyone who swaps across network boundaries regularly should keep the amounts small and not leave them sitting and waiting. For anything meant to stay longer, self-custody is the cleaner route; which devices qualify is shown by the hardware wallet comparison.
A gain of 7.8 percent in a day raises the tax question immediately. In Germany, crypto assets currently fall under the one-year holding period of section 23 of the Income Tax Act: sell after more than twelve months and the gain from the private disposal is tax-free. Sell before that and it counts towards taxable income, provided the exemption threshold is exceeded.
That framework is up for change. A draft bill from the Federal Ministry of Finance provides for a flat 25 percent withholding tax regardless of the holding period. As the draft currently stands, it would apply only to crypto assets acquired after December 31, 2026; anyone buying up to and including that day keeps the old rule. The cabinet is due to take it up on October 14, 2026. We have broken down the draft and its timetable separately.
What this means for you depends on your time horizon, not on the day's move. A draft is not a law, and the Bundestag has not yet taken it up. Anyone who nonetheless wants to plan around the deadline should document the acquisition date of every purchase, because under a cut-off rule that date becomes the decisive piece of evidence.
Bitwise intends to stake a substantial share of the ETF's tokens. Staking means pledging tokens in the network to help secure the blockchain and receiving a reward for doing so. For the fund that is income, set against the 0.75 percent management fee.
If you hold NEAR yourself you can stake too, but you carry the work and the risk alone: choosing a validator, lock-up periods when withdrawing, and the tax treatment of the income, which the draft bill explicitly wants to assign to investment income. Which platforms offer which terms is set out in the staking provider comparison.
The difference is not in the yield alone. With the ETF you buy a security in a brokerage account and hold no keys. With your own tokens you hold the keys and with them the duty to secure them.
A range from $4.87 to $5.35 within a day is the real story for leveraged positions. At ten-times leverage a ten percent move against you is enough to consume the margin; in practice liquidation kicks in earlier, because the exchange holds a safety buffer. On Monday and Tuesday exactly those ten percent lay between low and high.
On top of that, perpetual futures carry a financing charge, the funding rate. It is settled several times a day between the buy and sell sides. After a fast rise it is typically positive, which means holding costs fall on the buy side for as long as the position stays open.
On the upside the day's high of $5.35 is the next marker, and above it the ETF day's starting level of $5.38. On the downside sits the day's low of $4.87, and below that the zone around $4.70 where the recovery began.
These values are observation points, not a forecast. What they are useful for is settling on a decision in advance rather than in the moment of the move. Analyst opinions on price targets are plentiful; each belongs to the person or house that voiced it, not to the market.
(As of October 6, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)
A London quantitative hedge fund joins the round too, seven months after the NYSE's owner bought in at exactly the same price.
Clear rules of the road are here. So what does it all mean and what is the overall impact?
The No Betting on Your Own Race Act also gives prediction markets cover to close accounts and report candidates to regulators.
Adam Iza used off-duty LA deputies to pull warrants and personal data on his rivals, then moved the proceeds through crypto custodians.
Built with input from J.P. Morgan, the open-source "DvP" program lets institutions settle trades atomically on Solana with finality in seconds instead of days.
Shiba Inu's market placement is somewhat complicated, as liquidity keeps flowing in, but in the wrong direction.
Bitcoin sees growing whale accumulation as its outflow on Binance hits the highest level seen in three years, flashing a bullish signal for the asset.
Crypto market briefing this October 6 morning: Caroline Pham triggers Ripple rumors as XRPN heads to Nasdaq and BTC slips to $85,600.
Over 297 million SHIB permanently removed from circulation in a marked increase for Shiba Inu's burn rate.
XRP Ledger is entering a potentially cautious period as volumes are finally recovering.
Pasqal stock received an encouraging signal from Wall Street this week. Gary Mobley, an analyst at StoneX, kicked off his firm’s coverage of the quantum computing specialist on Tuesday with a Buy recommendation.
Mobley’s $15 price objective represents approximately 140% upside from Tuesday’s closing price.
PSQL shares edged up roughly 1% to $6.26 during Tuesday trading. The uptick coincided with the release of Mobley’s positive research note.
Pasqal Holding S.A. Ordinary Share, PSQL
Pasqal completed its public market debut in late August via a business combination with a special purpose acquisition company. The stock has retreated from its initial levels, though Mobley appears undeterred by the near-term weakness.
He characterized Pasqal as “one of only a handful of quantum companies generating commercial revenue from systems installed in customer data centers today.” In an industry where many players remain in experimental phases, this represents a critical competitive advantage.
Mobley’s view finds support from another research shop. Only days before, Needham’s David Williams launched his own coverage with a Buy rating.
Williams highlighted Pasqal as “one of the most commercially advanced neutral-atom quantum platforms.” Securing two bullish initiations within a week provides meaningful validation for a company that just began public trading.
Pasqal’s technological architecture forms a cornerstone of the investment thesis. Unlike chip-based quantum systems favored by several rivals and U.S. government programs, the company employs neutral atoms manipulated by lasers as its qubits.
CEO Wasiq Bokhari outlined the rationale in an August conversation with Barron’s. “You don’t have to manufacture a chip; we use individual atoms as our qubits,” he noted. He emphasized that atomic uniformity eliminates manufacturing defects and removes the need for physical interconnections between qubits.
Mobley sees this architecture as a potential scaling advantage. He argues that neutral-atom platforms can sidestep the expense and engineering challenges that may constrain chip-based competitors as they attempt to expand.
Pasqal entered the second half of 2026 with approximately €70.4 million in secured and contracted business. About half represents commercial commitments, per Mobley’s analysis.
Within that backlog, €12.5 million is scheduled for fulfillment during the year’s second half. That figure alone positions 2026 revenue to exceed Pasqal’s entire 2025 performance.
Mobley tracks several quantum computing names in his research coverage, including IonQ, D-Wave Quantum, and Rigetti Computing. He doesn’t view the quantum sector as destined for monopoly dominance in the near term.
Rather, he proposes that investors may benefit from diversified exposure across multiple quantum players while the technology continues developing. The field remains nascent, and no single company has achieved widespread commercial deployment at meaningful scale.
On a separate front, Pasqal is spearheading the Q-PLANET European project. The three-year initiative has secured €50 million in funding and coordinates 28 organizations across 11 nations.
The program aims to establish a European manufacturing ecosystem for neutral-atom quantum hardware, encompassing lasers and specialized chips. CTO Loïc Henriet remarked that Q-PLANET has progressed “from ambition to execution” just three months following its Brussels announcement.
Pasqal’s responsibilities include advancing chip-integrated laser sources operating at 1013nm wavelength. The company will also participate in testing and certification of microfabricated vapor cells deployed in atomic clocks and precision sensors.
The post Quantum Computing Firm Pasqal (PSQL) Earns $15 Target With 140% Upside Potential appeared first on Blockonomi.
Nvidia shares posted an all-time closing record of $238.90 on Monday, climbing 2% during the session. The achievement positions the semiconductor giant’s market capitalization near $5.76 trillion.
NVIDIA Corporation, NVDA
This marks the company’s first record closing price since May. The stock’s prior peak stood at $235.74.
Reaching a $6 trillion market capitalization would require Nvidia shares to climb beyond $248.96. This calculation uses the firm’s existing outstanding share count, which may fluctuate due to its active repurchase activity.
Karl Ackerman, an analyst at BNP Paribas, believes the rally has further room to run. He elevated his Nvidia price target to $345 from $285 this week.
His thesis focuses on AI agents, which he believes will generate increased demand for the company’s chip infrastructure. Ackerman forecasts that Nvidia will command more than 75% of the global AI computing market by revenue.
According to Ackerman, Nvidia’s rack-scale AI infrastructure combined with its CUDA software ecosystem creates a competitive moat that rivals struggle to replicate. He anticipates the company will sustain gross margins exceeding 70%, despite intensifying competition.
His valuation methodology applies a conservative 15x price-to-earnings multiple to his 2028 earnings projection, adjusted for the company’s cash position. This represents a measured baseline for a stock experiencing consistent appreciation.
The stock appeared in a Barron’s recommendation last May when shares traded around $226. The publication’s 12-month price target of $300 is materializing ahead of schedule.
Manufacturing ally Foxconn provided additional momentum on Monday. The Taiwanese company, officially Hon Hai Precision Industry, disclosed September-quarter revenue reaching 3.03 trillion New Taiwan dollars, equivalent to $95.48 billion.
This represents a 47% year-over-year increase. Foxconn indicated its AI operations would continue expanding through year-end, though it stopped short of issuing numerical guidance.
While Foxconn gained recognition in the United States for Apple device assembly, which declined 0% on Monday, the majority of its current business stems from cloud infrastructure and networking equipment, particularly AI servers powered by Nvidia processors.
Notwithstanding the record share price, Nvidia currently trades near its lowest forward earnings multiple in more than ten years. This valuation appears disconnected from expectations that both revenue and net income will expand approximately 90% during the current fiscal year.
Based on Monday’s closing price, the stock carries a forward price-to-earnings ratio of 17.1x, per FactSet data referenced by Barron’s. CEO Jensen Huang has personally addressed this valuation anomaly.
During last month’s Goldman Sachs technology conference, Huang described Nvidia as “the world’s first and only growth value stock.” He characterized the company as “incredibly misunderstood.”
Goldman Sachs shares fell 1% that same day. Nvidia executed a significant capital allocation announcement last week.
The board approved a $150 billion expansion to its share buyback authorization. This elevates total remaining repurchase capacity to $235 billion, which the company claims represents the largest single increase in corporate history.
Management plans to execute the complete buyback program through fiscal 2028. The consensus price target among FactSet-tracked analysts currently stands at $334.45 per share.
The post Can Nvidia (NVDA) Reach $6 Trillion Valuation After Monday’s Record Close? appeared first on Blockonomi.
BitGo Holdings stock edged higher Tuesday after the company expanded its institutional digital asset partnership with HashKey Cloud. BTGO traded at $7.40 in pre-market trading, gaining 0.27% after closing unchanged at $7.38. The agreement strengthens BitGo’s reach across staking, trading, custody, and real-world asset tokenization in Asia.
BitGo Holdings, Inc., BTGO
BitGo and HashKey Cloud formally signed the strategic agreement during TOKEN2049 week in Singapore. Senior executives from both companies attended the signing ceremony at the Fullerton Bay Hotel. The partnership expands an existing relationship between two firms serving institutional digital asset markets.
The companies will cooperate across four major infrastructure areas under the new agreement. These include institutional staking, trading services, digital asset custody, and real-world asset tokenization. The structure gives institutional clients access to several services through one broader infrastructure relationship.
BitGo provides custody and digital asset infrastructure services to institutions across global markets. Meanwhile, HashKey Cloud operates staking and Web3 infrastructure under Hong Kong-based HashKey Group. Their combined operations could strengthen access to regulated digital asset services across Asian markets.
HashKey Cloud will become a validator partner on BitGo’s institutional staking platform. Ethereum will form one of the first supported networks under the expanded partnership. Eligible BitGo clients will therefore gain another infrastructure option for institutional ETH staking.
The arrangement allows HashKey Cloud to provide validator services through BitGo’s existing platform. BitGo will continue controlling client access based on regulatory and onboarding requirements. The companies will limit services to jurisdictions where local rules permit their operations.
Ethereum staking remains an important service for institutions seeking participation in blockchain infrastructure. However, institutions often require custody, compliance, and operational controls alongside staking services. The partnership combines these functions within a broader institutional framework.
Solana will join Ethereum among the first staking networks supported through HashKey Cloud. The companies will also work together to support institutional digital asset trading flows. This approach expands the partnership beyond staking into wider market infrastructure.
BitGo will separately provide custody solutions to HashKey Capital and associated investment funds. Those services remain subject to standard onboarding procedures and separate agreements. The arrangement could deepen BitGo’s role within HashKey’s institutional investment operations.
BitGo will also serve as a custody partner for HashKey’s real-world asset tokenization projects. Tokenized assets require secure custody infrastructure to connect traditional assets with blockchain-based ownership systems. The agreement therefore expands BitGo’s exposure to another growing area of institutional digital finance.
HashKey Group operates a regulated digital asset business with a strong presence in Hong Kong. BitGo brings global custody infrastructure and services designed for institutional clients. Together, the firms aim to support digital asset adoption through regulated infrastructure across key Asian markets.
The post BitGo Holdings (BTGO) Stock: Rebounds as HashKey Partnership Expands Institutional Crypto Reach appeared first on Blockonomi.
Tesla stock continued its upward trajectory on Tuesday, hovering around $382 with nearly 1% gains in premarket activity. The advance marks the latest leg of a rally that has delivered approximately 8% returns across the last three trading sessions.
Tesla, Inc., TSLA
SpaceX shares are experiencing an even more dramatic surge. The stock has posted gains for three consecutive sessions, accumulating roughly 17% growth during that window.
The parallel movement between these two companies is hardly surprising. Elon Musk helms both organizations, and each is making substantial investments in artificial intelligence initiatives.
Financial markets have consistently speculated about an eventual consolidation of Tesla and SpaceX. While nothing has been announced officially, the trading patterns suggest investors view the companies as increasingly interconnected.
Musk provided fresh fuel for consolidation theories during the weekend. He acknowledged ongoing preliminary discussions between Tesla and SpaceX with Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing concerning the development of a specialized chip production facility dubbed “Terafab.”
The proposed facility would reportedly produce semiconductors for Tesla, SpaceX, and xAI operations. Although no agreements have been finalized, the prospect alone appeared to energize market participants on Monday.
Tesla’s quarterly performance provided tangible reasons for optimism. The automaker reported deliveries of approximately 487,000 vehicles during Q3, surpassing Wall Street forecasts by roughly 5%.
The figure represents sequential momentum and fuels expectations that 2026 could mark Tesla’s return to delivery growth after stagnation since 2023. However, not all business segments performed equally well.
Energy storage deployment figures fell short of analyst projections for the quarter. On the commercial front, Tesla secured a 50-truck Semi order from IMC Logistics—a modest but meaningful indicator of enterprise demand beyond consumer vehicles.
Wall Street sentiment remains divided. Current ratings include one Strong Buy, 23 Buy recommendations, 18 Hold positions, and five Sell ratings, resulting in a consensus Hold rating with a price objective around $412.
Several firms maintained reserved positions despite the stock’s ascent. HSBC lifted its price target while retaining a Reduce rating, highlighting Tesla’s price-to-earnings multiple above 350 as a valuation concern.
The stock surge has elevated Musk back to trillionaire status, per Forbes calculations. His approximately 42% ownership in SpaceX alone approaches $1 trillion in value at current market prices.
Determining Musk’s precise net worth involves complexity. Different methodologies account for outstanding loans, minority stakes in various ventures, and restricted equity compensation differently.
Regardless of the exact calculation, Musk maintains a commanding position among the world’s wealthiest individuals by a substantial margin. The appreciation in Tesla and SpaceX valuations drives the bulk of his wealth.
Tesla’s upcoming quarterly results are due Oct. 21. Analysts forecast earnings of 44 cents per share, representing a decline from 50 cents reported in the corresponding quarter last year.
Market participants will probably focus less on the bottom-line figure and more on management commentary regarding Tesla’s artificial intelligence initiatives and robotaxi deployment. Musk offered a glimpse into that progress during the weekend.
He revealed that Austin robotaxi services now operate through 11 p.m. Musk also quipped on X that the primary technical hurdle currently involves detecting “grey kittens on grey tarmac in the dark” to prevent collisions with household pets during nighttime operations.
The post TSMC Partnership Talks Fuel Tesla (TSLA) and SpaceX Stock Rally Ahead of Earnings appeared first on Blockonomi.
US stock futures posted solid gains in early Tuesday trading as momentum in the technology sector showed no signs of slowing. The upward movement persisted despite ongoing pressure from elevated bond yields and shifting energy markets.
Futures tied to the Dow Jones Industrial Average climbed 317 points, a 0.6% increase. The S&P 500 added 0.5%, positioning itself less than 1% away from its record peak. The Nasdaq 100 futures advanced 0.7%.

The technology-weighted Nasdaq Composite notched its 23rd record finish of 2026 during Monday’s session. Major technology companies spearheaded the rally, with market participants maintaining their focus on artificial intelligence expansion.
Shares of Nvidia advanced over 2% during pre-market activity. The semiconductor giant’s total market capitalization is now approaching the $6 trillion milestone.
The chipmaker received additional momentum from positive news emerging from one of its key partners in Asia. Taiwan-based Foxconn delivered robust quarterly results on Monday. These figures underscored sustained worldwide appetite for AI-related infrastructure and equipment.
Widespread enthusiasm surrounding artificial intelligence applications has, for the moment, eclipsed anxieties about challenges in other economic sectors. Market participants have maintained their buying activity during recent pullbacks.
Yields on government bonds continue to represent a source of unease for certain market observers. The 10-year Treasury yield showed minimal movement at 5.301% in early Tuesday sessions. This represents its loftiest closing position in more than two decades.
The 30-year yield remained stable at 5.663%, a threshold unseen since the early 2000s. Both rates touched even higher territory during Monday’s trading, reaching 5.349% and 5.703% respectively.
Notwithstanding these elevated rates, equity investors have persistently viewed stocks as protection against rising prices. This perspective has helped counterbalance some anxiety related to higher financing expenses.
Market watchers are now focused on a scheduled Treasury sale of three-year securities planned for Tuesday. The offering carries a value of 58 billion dollars.
Shorter-duration government debt is currently viewed as appealing to purchasers. The probability of a Federal Reserve interest rate increase in October has also diminished. That recalculation came after disappointing employment figures released last Friday.
Analysts anticipate the bond sale will proceed without complications under these circumstances.
Oil prices retreated on Tuesday as well, contributing to the constructive sentiment across equity markets. Brent crude, the global pricing standard, declined 0.7% to $99.62 per barrel. The move pulled it back below the psychologically important $100 level.
West Texas Intermediate, the domestic benchmark, slipped 1.1% to $88.41 per barrel.
Market observers attributed the decline to expanding output from Middle Eastern producers. Energy exporters throughout the Persian Gulf have been recalibrating their production volumes.
Kuwait indicated it is currently operating at 75% of its pre-conflict capacity. Meanwhile, Saudi Arabia reduced the official pricing of its Arab Light crude grade for Asian customers receiving November deliveries.
The moderation in energy expenses has helped alleviate wider anxieties regarding price pressures.
The economic calendar contains no significant data releases for the remainder of this week. That dynamic positions AI-fueled stock enthusiasm and inflation-related concerns as the primary catalysts influencing market direction.
Tuesday’s earnings docket includes reports from Constellation Brands and Lamb Weston Holdings. Beyond these releases, the economic schedule remains largely empty through week’s end.
The post Nvidia (NVDA) Market Cap Approaches $6 Trillion as Tech Stocks Power Tuesday’s Rally appeared first on Blockonomi.
HTTP error 429 on https://cryptopotato.com/feed/
Failed to fetch feed.