Guadalajara's successful hosting of World Cup matches highlights its enduring appeal and sets a precedent for integrating digital collectibles in sports.

The post FIFA thanks Guadalajara for successful World Cup 2026 stint appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Chinese AI matches Anthropic in cybersecurity capabilities, raising alarms over US export controls

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 17:05:00

China's AI advancements challenge US export controls, potentially accelerating global cybersecurity risks and altering geopolitical dynamics.

The post Chinese AI matches Anthropic in cybersecurity capabilities, raising alarms over US export controls appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Banco de Mexico adds bond-buying tool to support liquidity as rate cuts reshape fixed-income landscape

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 17:02:42

Banxico's bond-buying tool may stabilize liquidity but could challenge peso stability and impact capital flows amid rate cuts and slow growth.

The post Banco de Mexico adds bond-buying tool to support liquidity as rate cuts reshape fixed-income landscape appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

2007–2009—The Global Financial Crisis and the Birth of Bitcoin

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:45:53

Bitcoin Magazine

2007–2009—The Global Financial Crisis and the Birth of Bitcoin

On January 1, 2000, the world was supposed to end. As the date changed and the next millennium rolled in, computer systems programmed in the 1960s and 1970s were expected to crash. Storage space was very expensive back then. As a result, programmers often saved space by recording years with only two digits instead of four, omitting the century. Once the century changed, the logic would be lost, and systems would malfunction.

Massive IT projects were launched to fix the problem and prevent looming disasters, like nuclear power plants exploding. Alongside a booming tech industry, an even more booming survival industry emerged. Guidebooks were published on how to survive the impending catastrophe — hide under the table — while there was a healthy trade in bunkers and overpriced survival packs.

In a preemptive move, the U.S. Federal Reserve loosened monetary policy. The burgeoning internet and its early successes had brought technology to the masses. Together with loose financing conditions and growing public enthusiasm at the turn of the millennium, this ignited a unique boom on the stock markets, especially for tech and internet stocks.

The world did not come to an end. Instead, people started to wonder what would become of companies that had no chance of turning a profit and depended on continuous injections of investor funding. Doubts began to spread, share prices started to fall, and over the course of the year 2000, the dot-com bubble burst.

2007–2009—The Global Financial Crisis and the Birth of Bitcoin 1

The final nail in the coffin of the 2000s bubble came on September 11, 2001. The terrorist attack on the World Trade Center in New York made it seem as though the world really was ending. Air traffic shut down, war broke out, and a recession followed. Stock markets plunged, and they just kept falling.

Once again, the U.S. Federal Reserve stepped in to save the economy and the financial markets. Interest rates were slashed, credit became cheap, and with this, the economic downturn was slowed. Starting in early 2003, the stock markets began to recover. Slowly at first, then faster. The exceptionally low interest rates stimulated economic activity, albeit not as intended. The burst tech bubble was soon replaced by a gigantic housing bubble, especially in the United States.

The film The Big Short begins with a quote from Mark Twain:

“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.”

History provides us with many examples that show how stubbornly and for how long people, indeed entire societies, have clung to false beliefs. A good example is the geocentric worldview that many held in the Middle Ages: they believed that the universe revolved around the Earth. Galileo Galilei held an opposing belief and was threatened with death and excommunicated from the Church for it. The Church’s self-image and vested interests forbade such an inconvenient truth. But as it is with the truth, a point comes when it can no longer be denied.

The same was true of the financial crisis of 2007–2009. Behind many financial products on offer were mortgage-backed securities of little or no value. This truth, too, eventually could not be denied. The markets for these securities and the financial products built on them collapsed, along with a lot of the banks and financial institutions that held them. In the end, the entire financial system imploded. Major, well-known banks went bankrupt, financial markets dried up, and even healthy companies were put at risk of failure.

The terrifying yet fascinating part was the reaction of governments and central banks — through bailouts. With the exception of Lehman Brothers and a few others, virtually all the major institutions were saved. At the time, Chancellor Angela Merkel guaranteed the German public that their bank deposits were safe — a promise she likely could not have kept if it had been called out.

The central element of the bailouts was and still is the printing of money. Governments generously rescued important, systemically relevant banks and companies with the input of fresh money. Central banks financed and continue to finance this by purchasing government bonds, cutting interest rates, and providing very favorable financing conditions to banks.

This point is very important. When a central bank buys an outstanding government bond, that means it is increasing the money supply or printing money. In the film Oeconomia, Peter Praet, at that time the chief economist of the ECB, says this quite explicitly: “It is not physical money, but electronic.”

Printing money means increasing the amount of money in circulation. And that results in all of our money getting watered down. Ultimately, this makes it worth less since there’s more money but the same amount of goods.

When new money is created — that is, when money is inflated and then spent, no matter what it’s spent on — prices will eventually rise, and the money everyone else holds becomes less valuable. Put another way, when new money is created, everyone who already holds money is slightly dispossessed.

Only those who receive the new money first benefit, which is usually the banks, shareholders, and companies as well as borrowers and thus the government. Also benefiting are those who hold the goods or assets that are first purchased with the newly created money. This primarily includes real estate, stocks, and tangible assets in general.

Such inflation must be distinguished from individual price increases. If the demand for city-center locations suddenly rises because people are moving from the country to the city, property prices in city centers will rise, while they fall in the countryside. With inflation, prices rise almost everywhere. Price increases caused by rising demand or falling supply, such as after a poor harvest, are limited and are offset by a drop in prices elsewhere.

Inflation acts like a tax, but it isn’t perceived as such. The government could just as well take a small amount of money from every business and citizen to cover its spending instead of creating new money by issuing a government bond. In practice, it would be the same thing, only it wouldn’t be so easy, and many people would complain and might vote those politicians out in the next election.

Inflation is vague, and in public perception it’s not the government’s fault but rather that of others who are creating shortages of goods and profiting from rising prices. Political and public scapegoats for rising prices can always be found.

The former ECB chief economist, Peter Praet, states quite clearly that the functioning of today’s financial and economic system depends on the creation of more and more money — in other words, on continuous inflation. If the last financial crises have shown us anything, it’s the automatic reaction of governments: printing money. And crises will always keep coming for a variety of reasons: the ongoing climate crisis, pandemics, wars, migration, demographics, etc. Justification and excuses for printing money can always be found.

What does this have to do with Bitcoin?

A major and very valid criticism of a sound monetary system, in which money cannot be multiplied uncontrollably, is that it provides no way to intervene quickly by increasing the money supply in severe crises. That’s true. You would have to save beforehand, to set aside reserves.

And if there is one thing politicians cannot do, it’s save. There is always a good reason to spend money, whether it’s simply doing good, solving problems, winning over voters before an election, or even supporting a friendly entrepreneur in one’s own constituency.

The alternative would be to raise taxes in order to finance these unforeseen expenses. That would be politically and economically counterproductive. It would scare off voters and take away their purchasing power.

The crucial point is this: without the ability to print money at will, the boom that precedes a crisis wouldn’t arise in the first place, or at the very least would be much smaller. And the subsequent crises would also be a lot smaller. This is evident in the economic cycles of the 19th century, when a strict gold standard was in place.

Yes, there were numerous crises at the time. But they were short and less severe. And periods of falling prices certainly did not end in the dreaded deflationary spiral.

The ability to print unlimited amounts of money leads to correspondingly large misallocations, which then lead to correspondingly large corrections, and therefore, crises. These crises in turn trigger even more money-printing, and on it goes.

The greater the misallocations beforehand, the greater the corrections afterward. A healthy monetary system leads to sounder economic decisions, sustainable upturns, and brief downturns in which misallocations are corrected.

Money that cannot be arbitrarily multiplied limits misallocations during a boom, and accordingly, limits corrections during a downturn.

At the height of the financial crisis, on October 31, 2008, an anonymous person or group published the Bitcoin white paper — six weeks after Lehman Brothers, one of the largest banks in the U.S., filed for bankruptcy.

On January 3, 2009, Satoshi Nakamoto launched the Bitcoin blockchain. The very first block was mined. This first block contains the following message:

“The Times 03/Jan/2009 Chancellor on brink of second bailout for banks”

This was an explicit reference to a headline in The Times on January 3, 2009 — the repeated bailout of a financial system still teetering on the brink of collapse.

Bitcoin was, and still is, the answer to a fragile financial system: to uncontrolled money printing, to willful denial of reality, but also to the unfair and socially unjust expropriation that accompanies money creation.

The cap of 21 million bitcoin and the lack of central control make a policy of inflation impossible. Someone who holds bitcoin cannot be dispossessed by the uncontrolled printing of even more bitcoin.

Nor can they be dispossessed by banks that go bankrupt or deny access to bitcoin, provided they hold their bitcoin in a self-hosted wallet and thereby manage their own access. No central authority can revoke that access.

The timing of Bitcoin’s launch was no coincidence. It was the reaction to a financial system that would have collapsed had money not been printed in a pretty much uncontrolled manner.

Bitcoin is sound money — a response to a broken financial system. It is a system that is not imposed from above. Participation is voluntary and open to anyone. No one with a computer or smartphone and an internet connection can be excluded from it. For many, it’s a lifeline out of the fiat money system that is not sustainably viable.

In contrast to an inflationary and opaque system, Bitcoin is decentralized, transparent, and fundamentally honest.

2007–2009—The Global Financial Crisis and the Birth of Bitcoin 2

Discover more in Bitcoin: The Honest Money!
This excerpt is just the beginning. Dive deeper into how inflation devalues your money, your savings, and your time in Bitcoin: The Honest Money by Alex von Frankenberg, Ph.D. The paperback is available now.

Order your copy here!

This post 2007–2009—The Global Financial Crisis and the Birth of Bitcoin first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Alex v. Frankenberg.

Strive (ASST) Holds 19,864 BTC With No New Purchases Last Week, Balance Sheet Hits $141.7M Cash

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:15:57

Bitcoin Magazine

Strive (ASST) Holds 19,864 BTC With No New Purchases Last Week, Balance Sheet Hits $141.7M Cash

Strive, Inc. (NASDAQ: ASST) filed an 8-K with the SEC on June 29, 2026, disclosing its latest balance sheet snapshot: 19,864 in Bitcoin, $141.7 million in cash, and a $37.7 million fair-value position in Strategy’s Variable Rate Series A Perpetual Stretch Preferred Stock (STRC). The company made no Bitcoin purchases in the most recent reporting week.

The filing, signed by CEO Matthew Cole, covers the period ending June 26, 2026. Cash declined $2.8 million from $144.5 million on June 18, while the STRC position shed $7.1 million in fair value despite the share count holding at 505,000.

Bitcoin held remained flat at 19,864 BTC — the seventh-largest corporate Bitcoin holding in the world, a position Strive built from zero in under a year.

On X, Cole described the balance sheet as “built to move aggressively or wait patiently with deep reserves, no debt, no margin & no encumbered Bitcoin.” That structure, patient accumulation without leverage, has defined the company’s approach since it completed its merger with Semler Scientific in January 2026.

The most recent purchase came the week prior: 759 BTC acquired between June 15 and June 21 at an average cost of $65,850 per coin. That transaction, disclosed in a separate 8-K, cost $50 million.

Strive sits on a paper bitcoin loss

With Bitcoin trading near $59,000 today, the position sits below that acquisition price by about $6,000 per coin — a paper loss that Strive’s cash-heavy, debt-free structure is designed to absorb.

Cole has built the company around a single thesis: Bitcoin should serve as the hurdle rate for all capital allocation. Every investment Strive makes is benchmarked against Bitcoin’s performance. The company reported a Q1 2026 Bitcoin yield — a metric tracking per-share growth in BTC holdings — of over 15%, a figure that reflects the pace of its acquisition campaign.

Strive’s preferred stock instrument, SATA, began paying cash dividends on each business day starting June 16, 2026. The company bills it as the first listed security in U.S. capital markets history to distribute cash on every trading day.

To backstop that obligation through a potential downturn, Strive has extended its cash reserve runway to 18 months — calibrated against the depth of the 2022–2023 Bitcoin bear market.

The pause in accumulation this week leaves the treasury at 19,864 BTC. At current prices, that stack carries a market value near $1.19 billion. With $141.7 million in unencumbered cash and no margin exposure, the company sits in a position to scale or hold — both outcomes built into the structure from the start.

This post Strive (ASST) Holds 19,864 BTC With No New Purchases Last Week, Balance Sheet Hits $141.7M Cash first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Strategy (MSTR) Raises STRC Dividend, Authorizes $2B in Buybacks, and Unlocks Further Bitcoin Sales

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 12:48:15

Bitcoin Magazine

Strategy (MSTR) Raises STRC Dividend, Authorizes $2B in Buybacks, and Unlocks Further Bitcoin Sales

Strategy Inc. (Nasdaq: MSTR), the world’s largest bitcoin treasury company, announced a sweeping capital management overhaul earlier today, introducing what it calls a Digital Credit Capital Framework. The announcement sent MSTR shares up 6% in pre-market trading and pushed bitcoin above $60,000.

The framework has five parts: a board-approved USD reserve policy, a dividend rate increase on one class of preferred stock, a $1 billion buyback program for digital credit securities, a $1 billion buyback program for common stock, and a bitcoin monetization program that authorizes the sale of BTC to fund company obligations.

Strategy’s bulked up USD Reserve

At the center of the framework is a $2.55 billion USD reserve, cash and cash equivalents held to cover dividend payments and interest expense on the company’s debt. Strategy carries roughly $1.76 billion in annual preferred dividend and interest obligations, which means the current reserve represents 17.4 months of coverage.

The board has set a floor: the reserve must stay at a minimum of 12 months of coverage at all times. Any reduction below that threshold requires explicit board authorization. The reserve can only be used for two purposes — paying preferred stock dividends and servicing interest on debt. Any other use of those funds also requires board approval.

Beyond the cash reserve, Strategy is counting its bitcoin monetization capacity as part of its liquidity cushion. Combined, the $2.55 billion reserve and $1.25 billion in authorized BTC monetization capacity give the company $3.80 billion in total coverage — the equivalent of 25.9 months of preferred dividend and interest obligations.

STRC dividend increase

Strategy raised the dividend rate on its Variable Rate Series A Perpetual Stretch Preferred Stock, known as STRC, by 50 basis points to 12% per year. The increase takes effect for dividend periods with record dates on or after July 1, 2026. A basis point is one one-hundredth of a percentage point, so the increase moves the rate from 11.5% to 12%.

The company said its target is for STRC to trade between $99 and $100 over time, close to its $100 stated value. STRC has risen 9% on the news. Strategy said it will evaluate the STRC dividend rate on a monthly basis, taking into account trading levels, credit spreads, bitcoin price and volatility, and the overall state of its balance sheet.

Two buyback programs

The board authorized up to $1 billion in repurchases of its Digital Credit Securities — a category that includes STRC, STRF, STRK, and STRD, four series of preferred stock the company has issued. It also authorized up to $1 billion in buybacks of its Class A common stock.

Neither program obligates the company to purchase any specific amount of securities, and both can be modified, suspended, or canceled at any time. Repurchases under both programs can be made through open-market purchases, block trades, private negotiations, or tender offers.

CEO Phong Le framed the buyback programs as a shift in how Strategy operates. “Strategy is evolving from one-way capital issuance to active capital management,” he said. “We intend to move between issuing securities when capital is attractive and repurchasing securities when our instruments trade at levels that make buybacks accretive.”

Neither buyback program will draw from the USD reserve. If Strategy funds buybacks through bitcoin sales, those sales fall under the BTC Monetization Program.

The Bitcoin Monetization Program

The Bitcoin Monetization Program authorizes Strategy to sell BTC for three specific purposes: to build or replenish the USD reserve (up to $1.25 billion), to fund preferred dividends and interest payments when management judges BTC sales more favorable than issuing new stock, and to fund buybacks of preferred or common stock.

Any sale outside those three purposes requires a new board vote. The program does not obligate the company to sell any bitcoin.

CFO Andrew Kang said the program gives Strategy a tool to use part of its bitcoin reserve without abandoning its core thesis. “Bitcoin is capital,” Kang said. “This program gives Strategy the flexibility to use a portion of its BTC Reserve to strengthen Digital Credit, fund dividend payments and interest expense, and fund accretive repurchases when BTC monetization is more favorable than issuing common equity.”

Founder and Executive Chairman Michael Saylor said bitcoin remains the company’s primary treasury asset. “Digital Credit requires liquidity, discipline, and active capital management,” he said. “This framework is designed to strengthen credit quality and enable the Company to reduce expected preferred stock dividend payments when accretive.”

This post Strategy (MSTR) Raises STRC Dividend, Authorizes $2B in Buybacks, and Unlocks Further Bitcoin Sales first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Galaxy Research Cuts CLARITY Act Passage Odds to 50-50 as Senate Clock Runs Out

Fri, 26 Jun 2026 20:48:42

Bitcoin Magazine

Galaxy Research Cuts CLARITY Act Passage Odds to 50-50 as Senate Clock Runs Out

Galaxy Digital’s research arm has cut its estimate of the CLARITY Act becoming law in 2026 to 50-50, down from 60% just three weeks ago, citing a Senate floor calendar that grows shorter each week and a bill that still lacks a merged text, a scheduled vote, or public commitment from leadership.

The downgrade, published by Galaxy researcher Alex Thorn, is a calendar story more than a substance story. The bill itself — the CLARITY Act, short for the Digital Asset Market Structure and Investor Protection Act — cleared the Senate Banking Committee 15-9 on May 14 and has sat on the Senate Legislative Calendar as item No. 423 ever since. No floor date has been set. No motion to proceed has been scheduled.

The CLARITY Act represents the most significant attempt yet by Congress to build a comprehensive regulatory framework for digital assets. It draws jurisdictional lines between the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, establishes standards for when a digital asset is a commodity versus a security, and includes the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act (BRCA), which provides protections for certain blockchain developers and node operators.

The bill passed out of the Senate Banking Committee with bipartisan support, a notable threshold in a political environment where crypto legislation has often stalled on party-line divisions.

The House passed a version of market structure legislation in 2024, but Senate action has been the harder lift. Banking and Agriculture committees both have jurisdiction, and staff-level reconciliation of the two committee texts is still underway. No unified legislative text has been made public.

The calendar problem with the CLARITY Act

For a 60-vote bill — one that needs to clear the filibuster — the math is tight. The Senate is scheduled to begin its August recess at the end of July. Between now and then, a merged Banking-Agriculture text still needs to be finalized, a motion to proceed must be filed, floor debate must occur, and an amendment process must run.

After all that, the House would need to act on whatever the Senate produces.

Thorn wrote that Senate Majority Leader John Thune needs to announce floor time by early July “at the latest” for a July vote to be realistic.

Without a scheduling announcement on that timeline, the path shifts to September — and September runs into midterm-election dynamics that make scheduling controversial votes difficult.

The competition for floor time has intensified. Section 702 of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act lapsed on June 12 after Congress failed to pass a reauthorization, and a Grassley-Cotton-Warner product still needs floor time.

The FY2027 National Defense Authorization Act, a must-pass annual defense bill, also remains unfinished.

And on June 24, President Trump canceled the scheduled signing of a bipartisan housing bill that passed 358-32 in the House and 85-5 in the Senate, conditioning his signature on Congress first passing the SAVE Act, a proof-of-citizenship elections bill that Thune has said lacks the votes to pass the chamber. That condition injects another leadership-consuming fight into an already packed queue.

The calendar is the headline, but the bill’s substance has not been fully resolved. The ethics question remains the central open issue: a Van Hollen conflict-of-interest amendment failed 11-13 in committee, and Senators Ruben Gallego and Cory Booker continue to make enforceable ethics standards a condition of their support.

Thorn wrote that at least two Republican no votes — Josh Hawley and Rand Paul — are expected, which means Democratic crossover support is not optional. Law enforcement-aligned senators are also pressing for further changes to the developer-protection language inside the BRCA.

Galaxy’s note identified conditions that would push the odds back up: a public agreement on a combined Banking-Agriculture text, credible resolution of the ethics or BRCA disputes in a way that locks in a durable Democratic bloc, and a floor commitment from leadership for July. A scheduling announcement in the next two weeks, Thorn wrote, would push the firm back toward 60% or higher. Continued silence into mid-July would push it lower.

For now, the bill waits at No. 423 on the Senate calendar — real, but unscheduled, in a chamber that keeps finding other things to do.

This post Galaxy Research Cuts CLARITY Act Passage Odds to 50-50 as Senate Clock Runs Out first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Billionaire Investor Jeremy Grantham: Bitcoin Will ‘Dwindle Away With a Whimper’

Fri, 26 Jun 2026 17:57:49

Bitcoin Magazine

Billionaire Investor Jeremy Grantham: Bitcoin Will ‘Dwindle Away With a Whimper’

Legendary investor Jeremy Grantham — co-founder of asset management firm GMO and one of Wall Street’s most prominent bubble-spotters — came at Bitcoin again on Friday, calling the asset a “useless, speculative mechanism” destined for slow decline into irrelevance.

Speaking on CNBC’s Squawk Box, Grantham predicted that Bitcoin will “dwindle away, I suspect — not with a bang, but a whimper.” He said he has never owned Bitcoin and believes it will fall to zero, not through a sudden crash but through a gradual erosion of interest over years and decades.

“All Bitcoin does is allow fraudsters to move money around,” he said.

Grantham pointed to Bitcoin’s instability as evidence against its status as a store of value. The coin “halved for no particular reason in a strong economy,” he noted — a critique with fresh teeth given where Bitcoin stands today.

Gold, he added, has delivered solid gains over the same period.

Perhaps Grantham is right, the selloff has been severe. BTC hit an all-time high near $126,000 in October 2025. Since then, the digital asset has shed more than 50% of its value. As of Friday, BTC traded in the $60,000 range, testing what analysts consider a critical support zone that, if broken, could open a path to the $40,000s.

Bitcoin fell toward $62,000 in mid-June as hawkish signals from the Federal Reserve spooked risk markets. Rising U.S.–Iran geopolitical tensions sent oil prices higher and reignited inflation fears, pushing Fed officials to abandon any talk of rate cuts — with some floating the possibility of rate hikes. U.S. spot BTC ETFs posted four consecutive days of net outflows totaling around $113.8 million.

Bitcoin’s attempt to reclaim higher ground ran straight into its 200-day moving average, which served as hard resistance and triggered a roughly 30% decline from that ceiling. The current drawdown is among the 5th worst in Bitcoin’s history — territory that tests the resolve of long-term holders. Some institutional buyers, however, are treating the dip as an entry point, with Coinbase reporting that major institutions have stepped in to buy the crash.

Another billionaire bets big on bitcoin

On the flip side, Mexican billionaire Ricardo Salinas Pliego has placed 70% of his investment portfolio into BTC — up from just 10% in 2020 — and has even convinced his wife to mortgage their home to buy more.

The founder of Grupo Salinas traces his skepticism of fiat currency to family dinner table conversations about Nixon ending the gold standard, and views Bitcoin as superior to both cash and gold because it is unseizable and borderless.

His conviction has survived a $150 million loan scam, regulatory pushback on his plans to make Banco Azteca Mexico’s first Bitcoin-accepting bank, and multiple market cycles.

He recently pointed to a decade of London property prices as proof of his thesis — a home that cost 4,000 BTC in 2016 now costs fewer than 30 — and urges ordinary investors to convert their home equity into BTC exposure, calling it “an asymmetrical bet to the upside.”

This post Billionaire Investor Jeremy Grantham: Bitcoin Will ‘Dwindle Away With a Whimper’ first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

CryptoSlate

Aave rally makes DeFi lending look more like a bank to investors

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 16:15:15

Aave's latest market move is becoming a referendum on how investors value DeFi lending as its economics begin to resemble those of financial infrastructure.

The token rallied as AAVE traded around $94.32 on June 27, up 13.16% over 24 hours. At the same time, a reported Standard Chartered bull case described Aave in automated-bank terms, while reports of Kraken parent Payward discussing a strategic stake in an Aave-related entity put fresh attention on the line between Aave Labs and AAVE-aligned protocol economics.

Stani Kulechov moved that line to the center by saying Aave protocol, GHO, and product revenue flow to AAVE rather than Aave Labs. The practical question is how that revenue reaches the Aave DAO after partner shares, incentives, governance decisions, and product-specific arrangements.

Aave is being tested as a DAO-owned financial infrastructure that can capture net revenue, allocate capital, and reach institutional markets while keeping core economics outside a conventional company balance sheet.

Why investors are reaching for bank-style math

Aave already has a scale that outside capital can recognize. The Aave protocol dashboard tracks the lending market's locked value and activity, while AAVE ranks among the leading lending and borrowing assets by market value.

Those figures explain why bank-style language has entered the discussion, even though they require careful translation before they become tokenholder economics.

Traditional lenders are valued through inputs that investors know well: liquidity, borrower demand, fee capture, risk management, and capital return. Aave has crypto-native versions of those inputs.

It has supplied liquidity instead of bank deposits, smart-contract markets instead of loan officers, governance instead of a board, and tokenholder-aligned buyback debates instead of corporate capital-return policy.

The comparison is useful, yet every input has a structural caveat. The protocol scale is visible, but suppliers are users of smart-contract markets rather than bank depositors.

Fees and product activity can grow, but gross protocol activity differs from the net revenue retained by the DAO. Buybacks can create a clearer capital-allocation lens, but the budget and execution depend on public governance rather than corporate management.

Aave's current valuation debate sits inside that gap. The market is trying to decide whether open lending infrastructure can be underwritten with familiar financial tools while the governance and revenue rights remain token-native.

Aave is bank-sized, but $2.9T in corporate loans reveals the risk DeFi still can’t price

US business loans are nearing $2.9 trillion, and Aave growing into a bank-sized DeFi lender shows that this is an addressable market.

May 27, 2026 · Gino Matos

The Aave Will Win framework gives that debate a concrete mechanism. A governance temp check and later ARFC discussion describe Aave-branded product revenue as flowing to the DAO.

The same framework defines revenue after external partner shares, rebates, subsidies, and user incentives, which keeps the cash-flow case tied to net economics rather than headline activity.

SEC decisions setup revenue pathway for top DAOs to earn hundreds of millions of dollars

Aave cites emerging regulatory clarity as SEC crypto actions reportedly fell in 2025, and DeFi fee switches are reappearing fast.

Feb 16, 2026 · Gino Matos

Aave's DAO funding discussion adds the capital-allocation layer. Buybacks give investors a familiar signal, but the relevant decision-making sits in treasury runway, governance appetite, and contributor priorities.

That structure is central to Aave's difference: the protocol can adopt financial-company tools while keeping the levers in DAO hands.

Bank-style input	Aave analogue	Why it supports the analogy	Where the analogy breaks
Deposits and liquidity	Supplied assets across lending markets	Shows scale and user trust	Suppliers use smart-contract markets rather than bank accounts
Lending income	Protocol fees, GHO, and product revenue	Gives investors a revenue lens	Gross activity differs from DAO-retained net revenue
Capital return	DAO-governed buybacks	Creates a clearer tokenholder economics story	Budgets and execution depend on governance
Institutional products	Horizon and tokenized collateral markets	Makes Aave legible to regulated capital	Compliance, partner economics, and risk controls remain product-specific

Strategic interest sharpens the Labs-versus-protocol distinction

The reported talks between Kraken and Payward add pressure, suggesting centralized crypto firms may seek strategic exposure to Aave's lending stack. The evidence supports reported talks around an Aave-related stake, while Kulechov's clarification separates Aave Labs-related allocation or partnership interest from AAVE/DAO protocol and product revenue.

That distinction changes the market interpretation. If strategic interest is about an entity, allocation, or distribution relationship, the protocol economics still need to be traced through governance frameworks and DAO-controlled revenue paths.

Investors cannot simply treat AAVE as corporate equity in Aave Labs. They also cannot ignore the fact that commercial partners may help the protocol reach users, liquidity, and regulated distribution channels.

Aave already has a Kraken-related commercial precedent. A governance proposal for Ink, Kraken's Ethereum layer 2, laid out a whitelabel Aave V3 instance with revenue-share mechanics for the DAO.

That record makes the latest strategic-interest discussion part of a broader commercial question: how much distribution, branding, and economics should the DAO share to expand the protocol's reach?

Bank-style valuation is both attractive and fragile here. Predictable revenue, capital returns, and institutional channels can support a higher-quality multiple. Public governance, tokenholder rights, and partner economics can complicate the comparison.

Aave's test is whether those pieces can stay coherent as more traditional capital tries to model the protocol.

That framing keeps the reported stakeholder discussion in proportion. It shows a path for strategic partners to plug into Aave's distribution and product surface, while token economics still depend on governance-level decisions.

The more centralized partners appear around the protocol, the more valuable the Aave Labs/DAO distinction becomes. Investors looking for bank-style metrics have to follow the economics from product revenue to DAO treasury, then from treasury policy to buybacks or other allocations.

That route is slower than corporate earnings guidance, yet it preserves the protocol's native structure.

Horizon turns the test toward institutions

Horizon makes the institutional side of the argument concrete. Horizon gives Aave a venue for real-world-asset collateral and permissioned institutional markets, and the VanEck VBILL update said Horizon had reached more than $450 million in net deposits and about $135 million in borrowing after adding the fund.

Aave now has a regulated path from bank accounts to DeFi lending – The hard part is keeping users there

Aave’s UK payments approvals revive old fears that the protocol is drifting beyond lending, but Push may be the exception if it turns payments into a regulated funnel.

Jun 1, 2026 · Gino Matos

Those figures support the idea that Aave can become legible to regulated borrowers, asset managers, and tokenized-asset issuers. They also keep the valuation debate grounded.

Horizon is an institutional RWA product, rather than the whole Aave protocol, and its economics still need to be read through the lens of product design, partner terms, and DAO governance.

The next signal is governance quality as much as price. Institutional capital tends to reward familiar cash-flow structures, service expectations, and clarity of compliance.

Aave's value proposition depends on making those rails useful while preserving DAO-controlled economics.

If governance keeps revenue capture, buybacks, and institutional partnerships coherent, Aave could become the clearest case for a DAO-owned financial network earning a traditional-finance multiple.

If that balance weakens, the bank analogy becomes a ceiling rather than validation, because the economics that make Aave distinct would become harder to price through the token.

The post Aave rally makes DeFi lending look more like a bank to investors appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Why a collapse in $1 trillion AI spending boom could hit Bitcoin traders first

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:10:21

Over the past year, the artificial intelligence trade has become one of the main pillars supporting global risk appetite.

However, the Bank for International Settlements (BIS) is now warning that the same spending boom could become a source of financial stress if expected returns fail to arrive.

The Basel-based organization, which advises central banks, said in its annual economic report that the five largest hyperscalers are on track to spend more than $1 trillion on AI-related capital expenditure across 2025 and 2026.

The BIS said the scale of investment has raised questions about whether companies are committing too much capital before the business case has been fully proved.

According to the BIS:

“Disappointment in returns could trigger a sudden pullback in financing and turn the capex boom into a protracted investment bust, with potential knock-on effects on financial conditions.”

For Bitcoin traders, the warning reaches beyond Silicon Valley’s race for chips and data centers.

A sharp reversal in AI spending could tighten liquidity across equities and credit, forcing crypto into a difficult test: whether Bitcoin trades first as another risk asset in a selloff, or whether its longer-term monetary argument begins to regain force after the shock.

AI spending boom draws central-bank scrutiny

The BIS, which serves as a forum for central banks, used its annual economic report to warn that the race to dominate artificial intelligence may be pushing investment beyond levels that future returns can support.

BIS stated:

“The current surge in capital expenditure could prove unsustainable if supply bottlenecks restrain production. Intense competition for market leadership may fuel overinvestment further, as seen in previous innovation waves, increasing the risk of a sharp reversal if AI payoffs disappoint.”

The concern is not that AI lacks economic potential. The BIS said the technology could eventually lift productivity in ways that separate it from earlier waves of automation and software development. If AI systems become capable of improving their own performance and helping generate new ideas, the long-term macroeconomic impact could be significant.

However, the near-term financial risk is different. Companies like Google, OpenAI, and Anthropic are committing enormous sums before there is clarity on how much revenue the spending will produce, how durable that revenue will be, and how quickly the infrastructure behind AI will become obsolete.

Indeed, the largest technology companies have poured money into chips, cloud capacity, data centers, electricity supply and networking equipment as they compete for users and market share.

AI Infrastructure Spending (Source: BIS)

The scale of that race has helped reinforce investor confidence in technology stocks, while also lifting demand across suppliers and infrastructure firms tied to the AI buildout.

However, the BIS warned that fierce competition can create its own vulnerability. If every major player spends heavily to avoid falling behind, the sector can end up with too much capacity, lower returns, and a financing structure that becomes difficult to sustain once optimism fades.

That dynamic has appeared before. The BIS pointed to earlier investment booms tied to canals, railways, electrification and the internet.

While each technology later changed the economy, they also produced periods when investors financed too much too quickly, which eventually resulted in painful reversals.

In view of this, the BIC concluded:

“The scale and pace of the current AI investment boom accompanied by expectations of large productivity payoffs bear resemblance to these precedents, highlighting potential downside risks in the near term.”

Compounding the problem are severe physical bottlenecks. The voracious appetite for computational power is straining the supply of advanced semiconductors, grid equipment, and raw electricity.

According to the BIS, this surging demand is already pressuring electricity prices upward, threatening to bleed into broader inflation metrics at a time when geopolitical conflicts in the Middle East have independently strained global supply chains.

Credit risks build beneath the equity rally

Meanwhile, the BIS concern extends far beyond a simple stock market correction and into how the AI shock could impact the broader financial system.

While the early stages of AI development were largely financed through the massive cash reserves of Silicon Valley leaders, the current trillion-dollar scale of investment requires a heavier reliance on debt and increasingly opaque financing structures.

BIS pointed out that AI infrastructure now reaches across corporate debt markets, private credit, lease financing, data-center construction, energy contracts and supplier agreements.

Chipmakers, cloud providers, AI labs, and data-center operators are increasingly linked through equity stakes, purchase commitments and long-term capacity deals.

In fact, Onramp Bitcoin, a BTC-focused financial service firm, recently pointed out that:

“A web of overlapping commitments now binds the AI buildout into a roughly $1 trillion loop: Nvidia invests in AI labs like OpenAI, the labs rent cloud capacity from Oracle and CoreWeave, and the clouds buy Nvidia chips. The same dollar can be booked as investment, funding, revenue, and sales at once, so the headline demand figures stop meaning quite what they seem to.”

AI Firms $1 Trillion Investment — AI Firms $1 Trillion Cyclical Investment (Source: Onramp Bitcoin)

The BIS warned that those arrangements can make risks harder to see, noting that the web of claims is built on expected future demand. If AI adoption keeps accelerating, the structure can reinforce itself.

However, stress can move back through the chain if demand disappoints.

This would result in a situation where suppliers may lose orders, and data-center developers may struggle to fill capacity.

At the same time, private credit funds may face pressure on loans tied to software, infrastructure or technology borrowers. And banks may find that their exposure to private credit and nonbank finance is more complicated than headline numbers suggest.

That is why the BIS warning extends beyond technology shares. A fall in AI-related equities would hurt investors directly. A broader reassessment of AI financing could tighten credit conditions for companies that depend on the same funding environment.

Credit spreads have remained relatively narrow, reflecting investor confidence that borrowers can keep servicing debt.

A sharp repricing of equity risk could change that quickly. Once lenders demand more compensation for risk, weaker borrowers face higher refinancing costs, reduced access to capital and pressure to cut investment.

That is the path through which an AI disappointment could become a macro event.

Bitcoin’s first reaction may be defensive

Bitcoin’s role in that kind of economic shock would be complicated as the asset is often presented by supporters as a hedge against monetary debasement, fiscal stress and the fragility of the financial system. Its supply is fixed, it has no corporate issuer, and it does not depend on a company’s earnings or debt repayment schedule.

Those features may become more attractive if an AI credit bust eventually forces policymakers to ease financial conditions. But in the early stage of a broad selloff, Bitcoin would likely face the same pressure as other risk assets.

When liquidity tightens, investors often sell liquid positions first. Bitcoin trades continuously, can be sold quickly, and is held by many investors who also own equities, exchange-traded products, derivatives, and other high-beta assets. That makes it vulnerable when portfolios are being de-risked.

Recent market behavior supports that concern. CryptoSlate recently reported that Bitcoin fell under $63,000 after South Korea’s benchmark KOSPI stock index plunged nearly 10% last week.

That decline showed that liquidity conditions, leverage, and risk appetite can dominate scarcity narratives for long periods.

An AI-led market shock could follow a similar sequence. Technology stocks tied to the buildout would likely fall first. Credit spreads could widen as investors reassess debt linked to data centers, suppliers and private financing vehicles. Funds facing losses or margin pressure may then cut positions across crypto and other liquid assets.

In that phase, Bitcoin would not need a direct connection to AI infrastructure to be affected. It would only need to be part of the same risk budget.

The liquidity question comes next

However, the second stage depends on the government's response to the ensuing market carnage.

If a reversal in AI investment remains contained within a small group of technology companies, the damage may stay limited. Equities would reprice, suppliers would adjust, and investors would reassess valuations without forcing a major shift in monetary policy.

But the risk flagged by the BIS is that the spending boom has grown large enough to affect the wider financial system.

This suggests that a significant pullback in AI capex could hit corporate investment, employment, household wealth and credit availability at the same time. Those pressures could become more severe if inflation remains elevated and central banks feel unable to cut rates quickly.

That creates a difficult setup for risk assets. Higher inflation could keep policy tight even as investment weakens. Tighter credit could expose leverage in private markets. Falling equity prices could reduce household wealth and slow consumption. Each channel could reinforce the others.

For Bitcoin, the policy path is crucial. The asset has often performed best when liquidity expands, real rates fall, and investors expect central banks to support markets. A credit shock that eventually brings easier money could revive that trade.

Arthur Hayes, the co-founder of BitMEX, has argued that an AI bust could help drive Bitcoin much higher if authorities respond with renewed liquidity creation and investors rotate away from debt-heavy financial structures.

That view remains speculative, but it captures why some crypto traders are looking at AI capex and credit markets as potential drivers of the next Bitcoin cycle.

However, the timing is uncertain. So, a trader betting on the eventual liquidity response may still have to endure the drawdown that comes before it.

The post Why a collapse in $1 trillion AI spending boom could hit Bitcoin traders first appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin treasury investors are turning on companies diluting them to keep buying

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 13:45:56

On June 22, Strategy sold $335.5 million of its own common stock, set aside roughly $300 million of it in cash to bring its reserve up to $1.4 billion, and bought a total of 520 Bitcoin with what was left.

So the company that wrote the entire corporate Bitcoin playbook spent the bulk of a dilutive equity raise topping up a cushion for preferred dividends, and it did so right after its STRC perpetual preferred slid to a record intraday low and weakened one of its main funding channels.

Its year-to-date BTC Yield, the figure CEO Michael Saylor uses to show that each financing leaves common shareholders holding more Bitcoin per share, slipped to 11.8% from 13% a month earlier, while the diluted share count climbed to about 388.6 million.

That week is a pretty good snapshot of where the whole Bitcoin treasury trade has ended up. For most of the past two years, public companies holding Bitcoin got rewarded for doing one thing, which was buying more of it, so a fresh purchase or a bigger target or a new financing authorization could lift the stock on its own.

What's changed now is that investors have started applying a much sharper test to every deal. They're looking past the headline buy to weigh whether the raise actually grows their claim on Bitcoin when you net out the dilution, the preferred dividends, the debt costs, and the cash being held back, or whether it just grows the company's pile while their slice of it gets thinner.

The first phase of this trade was about accumulation, and the phase we're in now is about attribution: how much of that growing pile still belongs to the common shareholder once every layer of financing has taken its cut.

The market stopped writing blank checks

The first sign of the shift is something called mNAV compression, which is the ratio of a treasury company's market value to the value of the Bitcoin it holds. When the stock trades above the value of its coins, the company can issue new equity at that premium and buy Bitcoin, thereby lifting Bitcoin per share for everyone who already owns it.

The trouble starts when the premium fades, because at that point the same maneuver begins handing value to new buyers at the expense of those already holding the stock.

Metaplanet, the largest corporate holder in Asia, is sitting on 40,177 BTC, worth around $2.4 billion, and its enterprise value has dropped below that, giving it an mNAV of about 0.9x and implying the market now values the whole company at less than the Bitcoin on its books. The stock has fallen hard, down roughly 47% YTD, and its quarterly BTC Yield has gone negative, to -0.40%.

CEO Simon Gerovich has been open about the response, saying the company will strongly consider buying back its own shares whenever mNAV drops below 1.0x, and that its policy already halts new common-share issuance at that level. It's carrying an unrealized loss of around $1.6 billion on coins bought well above where Bitcoin trades now, and CryptoSlate has tracked how it's navigated that brutal repricing while peers stalled out.

What we're seeing here is the discipline cycle playing out inside balance sheets. The shareholders refuse to pay a premium, the accretive financing engine seizes up, and management ends up defending Bitcoin per share by shrinking the share count, since growing the actual stack is off the table for as long as the discount holds.

Strategy's numbers get bigger at every turn. It held 847,363 BTC as of June 21, more than 60% of all the Bitcoin on public-company balance sheets anywhere in the world, and stacked ahead of the common shareholders is over $13.5 billion of preferred equity.

The company has bought roughly 174,300 Bitcoin this year, and Bitwise reckons about 55% of that was financed through STRC preferred issuance. When that started to wobble, Strategy diluted its common shareholders to defend the dividend. CryptoSlate has covered the argument that Strategy keeps buying Bitcoin while MSTR holders end up owning less of it.

Every serious treasury company now points to Bitcoin per fully diluted share as its headline measure of success, and the honest assessment is that more Bitcoin on the balance sheet and more Bitcoin per shareholder have stopped moving together the way they once did.

Europe inherits the same problem

In Europe, Capital B, the France-listed company formerly known as The Blockchain Group, just won shareholder approval on June 17 for up to €5 billion in capital increases and €100 billion in credit instruments. That works out to about $120 billion in authorized financing capacity, backed by a current stack of 3,139 BTC worth around $200 million.

The company frames everything it does around increasing Bitcoin per fully diluted share, and it's told the market it wants to hold 15,000 BTC by the end of 2027, with a much longer ambition of owning 1% of all the Bitcoin there will ever be.

Sweden's BTC AB is running a smaller, faster version of the same idea. It's opened a rights issue for up to 195,078 Class A preference shares priced at SEK 120 apiece, raising about SEK 23.4 million, or roughly $2.5 million.

Every one of those shares pays a 10% annual dividend, paid monthly, all of it layered on top of holdings of around 171 BTC. The subscription window closes on June 30, and early commitments have already covered about 27% of the issue, so there's quite a bit of appetite even at this smaller scale.

Put those two side by side, and the request to investors is identical: underwrite an increasingly complicated capital structure and trust that the Bitcoin coming down the line outweighs the dilution, preferred dividends, and redemption terms layered in to get it there. The conversation has moved away from who's buying Bitcoin and toward who's actually paying for it, and on what terms.

Four of the biggest names in the market now sit in four very different positions. A year ago, the market would have rewarded all of them for the same behavior, and today it's pricing each one on the terms of its financing.

Four companies, four positions in the treasury trade
Company	BTC held	Trades vs. its own Bitcoin	Latest financing move	The shareholder catch
Strategy (MSTR)	847,363	~1.18× on an enterprise basis, but common equity sits behind $13.5B+ of preferred	Sold $335.5M of stock, kept ~$300M as cash, bought 520 BTC	BTC Yield slipped to 11.8% as dilution went to fund the dividend
Metaplanet	40,177	~0.9×, below the value of its Bitcoin outright	Halted new share issuance; weighing buybacks while mNAV is under 1.0×	Quarterly BTC Yield has turned negative, at -0.40%
Capital B	3,139	Premium-dependent and thinly traded	€5B in equity plus €100B in credit approved (~$120B)	Capacity is authorized, not yet priced; the dilution terms are still unknown
BTC AB	~171	Premium-dependent and thinly traded	SEK 23.4M (~$2.5M) preference-share rights issue	A 10% annual dividend ranks ahead of common holders

Strategy still carries a premium once you count its preferred and debt, yet its common shareholders sit below the Bitcoin-per-share line, while Metaplanet has slipped under its Bitcoin entirely, and the two European names are asking the market to fund them before anyone can see what the terms will cost.

A big part of why the bargain changed comes down to ETFs. They gave investors clean, cheap, direct exposure to Bitcoin, so a treasury company now has to explain why anyone should hold a levered, diluted corporate wrapper when a few billion dollars can flow out of US spot ETFs in a single six-week stretch, and the coin itself is one click away.

Those stocks once carried real scarcity value as the public market's way to own Bitcoin, but that scarcity is now gone, so the wrapper now has to justify itself with something extra, whether that's leverage, yield, or sharp capital-markets execution. A company that offers nothing beyond diluted Bitcoin exposure will trade at a discount.

None of this is automatically bad news for Bitcoin itself. A shareholder base that punishes reckless raises can push the whole sector toward better capital allocation, cleaner disclosure, and more honest per-share accounting. CryptoSlate's reports framed these companies as both a genuine tailwind and a potential stress amplifier, depending on how they finance themselves.

The companies that can still issue equity above NAV and keep growing Bitcoin per share will come out of this with their credibility intact, while the weaker ones will get repriced or cut off from fresh capital.

The real danger is in the funding loop. A treasury company that can no longer issue stock above NAV has lost its path to buying more Bitcoin, and if it's still on the hook for preferred dividends and debt coupons, its remaining options get ugly fast: dilute anyway, lend the coins out, or start selling assets.

CryptoSlate has covered Strategy's own exploration of Bitcoin lending, a move that turns a holding company into a credit business carrying a whole new category of risk. Once that premium is gone, a Bitcoin accumulation machine becomes a balance-sheet problem with a recurring dividend bill attached.

The companies that won the first phase of this trade did it by proving they could buy more Bitcoin faster than anyone else. The ones that will win the next phase will do it by proving that their common shareholders still own more of that Bitcoin after every financing has closed, and the market has finally started keeping score.

The post Bitcoin treasury investors are turning on companies diluting them to keep buying appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Polymarket’s $3.3B World Cup boom exposes the longshot trap inside prediction markets

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 12:30:51

Prediction markets are drawing one of their largest sports audiences yet from the World Cup, but the surge is creating an unusual picture beneath the headline numbers.

World Cup-linked contracts on Polymarket have generated more than $3.3 billion in trading volume, a level that puts the tournament well ahead of this year’s Super Bowl, which drew about $1.4 billion in prediction-market trading.

The comparison reflects how quickly event-based trading has moved into major sports, with soccer’s global reach giving platforms a much larger and longer runway than a single championship game.

Meanwhile, the boom is not limited to Polymarket. Kalshi and other prediction-market venues are also seeing heavy activity tied to match results, tournament outcomes, and related soccer contracts.

Yet the trading activity is not flowing cleanly toward the teams most likely to win. As the tournament moves into the Round of 32, prediction markets are showing two stories at once: a narrow race between the top contenders and a large amount of capital still attached to teams priced as extreme longshots.

France and Argentina set the pace

France has become the market’s narrow favorite to win the 2026 FIFA World Cup, with Argentina close behind.

On Polymarket, France is priced at a 23% chance of winning the tournament. Argentina follows at 21%, leaving the two finalists from the 2022 World Cup almost level at the top of the board. Spain is third at 11%, England is fourth at 10%, and Brazil is fifth at 6%.

World Cup Winner Bets on Polymarket (Source: Polymarket)The same pattern is visible in the market for teams to reach the final. France leads that contract with a 39% implied chance, while Argentina is second at 38%. Spain follows at 23%.

That positioning suggests traders are increasingly preparing for the possibility of another France-Argentina final, four years after the Messi-led Argentine team lifted the trophy in Qatar.

The volume around the leading teams also reflects that concentration of attention. Argentina has drawn about $81 million in winner-market trading, while France has attracted about $77 million. Portugal has seen roughly $76 million, Spain about $68 million, and England about $61 million.

Those numbers show a clear demand for the favorites, but they do not explain the largest imbalance on the board.

Longshots carry billions in volume

About $1.6 billion has been traded on teams with an implied winning probability of 1% or less. That figure accounts for roughly two-thirds of the trading on the winner market, even though those teams are priced as having little realistic path to the title.

Several of the heavily traded longshots still show large historical volume. Ivory Coast has drawn about $101 million. Mexico has moved about $97 million. Egypt has attracted roughly $90 million. Cape Verde is near $87 million, while Morocco has seen about $82 million.

Teams With Less Than 1% Chance of Winning The World Cup (Source: Polymarket)

The gap between volume and probability points to a quirk of prediction markets. A high-volume contract does not always mean traders currently believe an outcome is likely. It may simply mean many trades occurred earlier in the tournament, before odds shifted sharply.

Additionally, some positions may also be tied to longshot speculation, fan-driven buying, hedges, parlays, or trades that users have not closed.

That leaves some markets looking more active than the current probabilities suggest.

This is because Money can remain attached to teams even after the market has largely moved on from them. Unlike a sportsbook, where odds can reset around new betting lines, prediction-market contracts continue trading until settlement or until users exit their positions.

The effect is especially clear when compared with the leading group of contenders. A basket of France, Argentina, Spain, England, and Portugal costs about 72 cents combined at current prices. If any one of those five wins the tournament, the position pays $1.

That trade reflects how concentrated the market’s confidence has become, even as billions in historical volume remain scattered across outsiders.

In that sense, the World Cup board is not just a ranking of who is most likely to win. It is also a record of how traders moved through the tournament, where they entered early, which tickets became stale, and where liquidity has failed to unwind fully.

A wider prediction market surge

The intense activity surrounding the global soccer tournament is driving broader institutional adoption and user acquisition across the prediction market sector.

Wall Street brokerage firm Bernstein projects that World Cup-related trading could ultimately surpass $10 billion in total wagers before the tournament concludes on July 19.

This sporting catalyst is also having a measurable spillover effect on non-sporting contracts.

Last week, venture capital firm Andreessen Horowitz published data indicating that non-sports trading volume, encompassing geopolitical events, macroeconomic data releases, and elections, reached $3.6 billion across Kalshi and Polymarket combined.

According to the firm, this non-sports volume alone is now larger than the total aggregate volume of all prediction markets recorded just one year ago. In July 2025, weekly non-sports volume hovered near the $200 million mark, representing an 18-fold increase over the past 12 months.

Overall, the venture capital group noted that weekly trading volumes across the prediction market ecosystem reached an unprecedented $14.5 billion last week, with outstanding open interest at a record $1.6 billion for the third consecutive week.

Oversight questions grow louder

The commercial success of the World Cup markets arrives alongside renewed legal scrutiny for the sector.

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has reportedly opened an investigation into Polymarket.

The probe, first reported by The Wall Street Journal, comes as consumer protection advocates and some states push for closer oversight of prediction-market platforms. Polymarket and Kalshi have grown rapidly as users bet on everything from sports and elections to crypto prices and financial-market outcomes.

For Polymarket, the investigation adds uncertainty after the platform resumed limited US operations last year. The company had previously been barred from serving US customers following a 2022 enforcement action.

The timing is notable because it comes as prediction markets are posting record volumes, just as regulators are taking a closer look at how the sector operates, how consumers are protected, and where the line should be drawn between regulated event contracts and gambling.

The post Polymarket’s $3.3B World Cup boom exposes the longshot trap inside prediction markets appeared first on CryptoSlate.

CLARITY Act chances of passage this year falls to 50% after Trump’s new demands

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 11:15:52

The CLARITY Act, the crypto industry’s most important bill in Congress, is running out of time.

The bill, which would establish federal rules for the crypto industry, is increasingly at risk of slipping deeper into the 2026 election year amid renewed partisan fights and a new demand from President Donald Trump that has made an already difficult path more uncertain.

As a result, crypto firm Galaxy Digital has cut its estimate of the bill becoming law this year to 50%, down from 60% earlier in June. The firm said the downgrade was tied mainly to the Senate calendar, not to a collapse in negotiations over the legislation's substance.

Meanwhile, participants on the decentralized prediction platform Polymarket have adopted an even more skeptical outlook, currently pricing the probability that the legislation will become law this year at just 44%.

Policy Clarity Act signed into law in 2026?

No 51%

Yes 49%

Senate calendar tightens

The primary obstacle facing the digital asset framework is time. Lawmakers are confronting a severely truncated schedule before departing Washington for the traditional late-summer recess.

In a recent note to clients, Galaxy Digital researchers emphasized that the downgrade in their forecast stems strictly from scheduling realities.

For the legislation to clear the upper chamber, it requires a unified text bridging the Senate Banking and Agriculture committees, followed by a formal floor debate and a potentially lengthy amendment process. Any final Senate product would then need subsequent approval in the House of Representatives.

However, the timeline for these maneuvers is rapidly evaporating.

Analysts note that Senate Majority Leader John Thune would likely need to formally schedule debate time by the first week of July to ensure a final vote before the August break. Failing to secure a firm commitment for July floor time would likely push consideration into September.

Historically, advancing complex or contentious financial regulations becomes exceedingly difficult in the immediate run-up to a national election.

Currently, the legislation remains stalled on the Senate calendar, where it was placed after advancing out of the Banking Committee in mid-May. No procedural motions to initiate debate have been filed.

Trump's demand adds pressure

CLARITY Act's delay is also exacerbated by fierce competition for the Senate’s most valuable commodity: floor time.

Galaxy Digital noted that the digital asset bill is currently vying for attention against several urgent national security and domestic policy priorities, including the annual defense authorization act and the reauthorization of key surveillance programs under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA).

Complicating matters further is an unexpected political standoff involving President Donald Trump, which threatens to derail the legislative queue.

Trump recently declared his opposition to a bipartisan housing bill unless lawmakers concurrently pass the SAVE Act. The housing bill had sailed through both chambers with overwhelming support, but its signing was abruptly canceled by the US president.

The SAVE Act is a deeply contentious elections bill that would mandate strict documentary proof of US citizenship for voter registration, as well as new photo identification requirements for federal ballots.

While the measure narrowly passed the Republican-controlled House earlier this year, it faces steep opposition in the Senate, where it lacks the 60 votes necessary to bypass a filibuster.

By tying the broadly supported housing legislation to the polarizing voting measure, the president has injected a volatile fight into the pre-recess schedule.

Market observers note that this type of high-stakes political maneuvering inevitably consumes leadership's attention and crowds out specialized sector legislation such as the CLARITY Act.

CLARITY Act still needs work

Even if Senate leaders find floor time and the Trump-driven standoff eases, the crypto market-structure bill still faces unresolved policy fights that could determine whether it has enough votes to pass.

Democratic lawmakers continue to press for tougher ethics rules, stronger conflict-of-interest provisions, and tighter anti-money laundering standards. Those concerns have gained urgency as digital asset ventures tied to political figures draw greater scrutiny in Washington.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren has been among the bill’s sharpest critics, arguing that the current version would weaken safeguards against illicit finance. She said:

“Our adversaries exploit crypto to move billions. The Clarity Act, as it’s currently written, would make this problem worse. Congress should be strengthening illicit finance standards, not creating new loopholes.”

An amendment from Sen. Chris Van Hollen that sought to tighten conflict-of-interest rules failed during committee consideration. Sens. Ruben Gallego and Cory Booker have also pushed for enforceable ethics standards as part of any final agreement.

Law enforcement concerns remain another obstacle. Some lawmakers want changes to developer-protection language tied to the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act (BRCA), which is designed to prevent software developers and infrastructure providers from being treated as financial intermediaries when they do not control customer funds.

Supporters say those protections are needed to avoid holding open-source developers responsible for activity they cannot direct or stop. Critics counter that the language could limit enforcement against illicit finance, money laundering, and sanctions evasion in decentralized finance.

The disputes do not make passage impossible. But they make the vote count harder.

The bill is expected to lose at least some Republican support, including from senators who oppose the broader framework or object to federal digital asset rules. That leaves supporters dependent on a durable bloc of Democrats to clear the Senate.

Any unresolved fight over ethics, illicit finance, or developer liability could weaken that coalition at the point when the bill can least afford defections.

Industry Keeps Pushing

Despite the deteriorating odds, cryptocurrency firms and digital asset advocacy organizations are refusing to concede the calendar year.

Crypto firms' lobbying efforts on Capitol Hill have accelerated in recent weeks, aimed at pressuring Senate leadership into scheduling a summer vote.

Payments company Ripple recently deployed a mobile advertising campaign, dubbing a vehicle the “Clarity Truck,” to circle the capital and broadcast messages promoting the legislation as lawmakers conclude their weekly sessions.

The company framed the bill as a way to protect consumers, support responsible digital asset development, and keep the US competitive in financial technology.

Other industry groups have made a similar argument. They say the absence of federal market structure rules has left US crypto firms dependent on court rulings, agency enforcement actions, and state-level requirements. They also argue that uncertainty has pushed activity toward overseas jurisdictions with clearer frameworks.

Supporters in Congress have leaned into that message. Sen. Cynthia Lummis, a pro-crypto lawmaker, has said the US should not fall behind Europe, the UK, and the United Arab Emirates, all of which have moved to establish digital asset regimes.

The lobbying campaign reflects the industry’s view that July may be the last practical window for action this year.

Once Congress returns in September, the midterm campaign will dominate Washington, and Senate leaders may be less willing to devote floor time to a complex crypto bill that still attracts opposition from consumer advocates and some Democrats.

Crypto market looks to Washington

The uncertainty surrounding the CLARITY Act is unfolding during a weaker period for digital asset markets, giving the bill significance beyond Capitol Hill.

Market analysts have argued that the passage or failure of the legislation could influence whether the current crypto downturn stabilizes or deepens. Bitcoin fell below $60,000 last week, extending a decline of more than 50% from its October peak of $125,000.

The selloff has revived questions about how much support remains from institutional buyers after a cycle shaped by spot exchange-traded funds, corporate treasury purchases, and broader Wall Street participation.

Grayscale has described the current downturn as a cyclical pullback, but the firm has also tied the market’s recovery path to several policy and macroeconomic variables.

In its baseline scenario, the CLARITY Act clears the Senate, Strategy takes steps to strengthen its balance sheet, and the Federal Reserve avoids further rate increases. Under that outcome, Bitcoin may already be close to a bottom.

The downside scenario is more difficult. If the CLARITY Act fails to pass this year, digital asset treasury companies continue to deleverage, and inflation forces the Fed to resume rate increases, crypto prices could face additional pressure.

Grayscale does not expect a drawdown as severe as the roughly 80% declines seen in previous cycles, citing a more mature market structure and deeper institutional demand. Still, the firm sees regulatory progress as one factor that could help shape sentiment.

That has made the CLARITY Act one of the most closely watched bills in crypto. For investors, the legislation is no longer only a Washington policy fight. It has become part of the market’s broader search for a catalyst that could restore confidence.

The post CLARITY Act chances of passage this year falls to 50% after Trump’s new demands appeared first on CryptoSlate.

CryptoTicker.io

AI Bubble Crash Warning: Could It Send Bitcoin to $20K?

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 09:01:29

The biggest fear hanging over markets right now isn't a crypto problem at all — it's artificial intelligence. A growing chorus of analysts is warning that the AI boom has inflated into a bubble, and that an AI bubble crash could send shockwaves straight into Bitcoin ($BTC) and the broader crypto market.

Here's the uncomfortable part: the early warning signs analysts flagged have already played out. Crypto has been bleeding for months as capital rotated out of digital assets and into AI stocks — Bitcoin has already fallen from above $100K to around $60K. So the real question now isn't "what if there's a small AI wobble." It's: what happens if the AI bubble actually crashes from here, on top of an already-weakened market?

What is the AI bubble — and why are analysts warning about it?

The "AI bubble" refers to the fear that valuations across AI stocks and infrastructure have inflated far beyond what the underlying economics justify. The warning signs are flashing in institutional surveys. In a Bank of America survey, 45% of fund managers flagged an "AI bubble" as the market's biggest tail risk, up from just 11% two months earlier, and more than half said they believe AI stocks are already trading in bubble territory due to huge spending and poor return on investment.

The core problem is a massive mismatch between spending and revenue. Financial analyst HedgieMarkets warned the AI boom risks a far harsher crash than the 2000s dot-com bubble, arguing the sector spent roughly $400 billion to generate just $60 billion in revenue in 2025, with most firms seeing no returns. Worse, the way it's been financed makes it fragile. Unlike the equity-funded dot-com era, today's AI expansion is debt-driven, raising the risk of cascading failures across private equity, banks, insurers and already-stressed consumers if growth expectations collapse.

The scale of the liquidity involved is staggering. Arthur Hayes estimates roughly $1.5 trillion in debt was issued by hyperscalers and AI infrastructure companies between November 2022 and mid-2026 — almost exactly matching the $1.5 trillion rise in M2 money supply over the same period — leading him to argue "AI sucked up all created dollars."

The correction analysts warned about has already started

This is the key context most coverage misses. Back in late 2025, when analysts first sounded the alarm, $Bitcoin was trading above $100K, and the warning was that an AI-driven risk-off move could drag it down toward $60K–$75K.

At the time, that was the bear case. Analysts warned Bitcoin could fall to the $60,000–$75,000 range if the AI bubble pops, with institutional support helping limit losses compared to past crashes. There was even a fundamental floor argument. Analyst Nomad Bullstreet suggested Bitcoin's price may not decline below its average production cost, estimated around $71,000–$75,000.

*Bitcoin price in USD over the past 6 months*

But here's the thing: the market has already fallen into that zone. Bitcoin slid from above $100K all the way to around $60K — and the driver was exactly the dynamic analysts described. The warning was never about AI directly attacking crypto code — it's about capital, the vast rivers of speculative money that have flowed into both sectors. A loss of faith in AI valuations would trigger a broad risk-off panic, and digital assets, sitting on the speculative end of the spectrum, often get sold first.

In other words, the mild correction the analysts forecast isn't a future risk — it's already happened. Capital has been rotating out of crypto and into AI infrastructure all year, and Bitcoin pre-emptively priced in a lot of that pain. The old $60K–$75K "production cost floor" has already broken.

That reframes everything. The relevant question is no longer "what if AI corrects" — it's "what if the bubble actually crashes now, from a starting point that's already deep in the red?"

How would a full AI bubble crash hit crypto from here?

If the warned-about rotation was phase one, an outright crash would be phase two — and it would land on a market with far less cushion than it had at $100K.

Crypto's behavior makes it especially vulnerable. The crypto market in 2026 continues to act as a high-beta risk asset, meaning it tends to amplify broader market sentiment, particularly in response to tech and AI-linked equity volatility — and a crash could trigger an outsized initial drop even if crypto fundamentals haven't changed.

There's also a forced-selling dimension that accelerates everything. Institutional funds and quantitative traders that allocate across both tech stocks and crypto may cut both simultaneously in times of stress, while leveraged positions in crypto futures and perpetuals can trigger cascading liquidations that accelerate the downward move. And the liquidity logic is brutal: if AI stocks collapse, no excess capital remains to flow into Bitcoin, and banks that lent against AI valuations would pull back credit, tightening conditions broadly.

It's not unanimously bearish, though. Some see a crash as ultimately bullish for Bitcoin further out. Arthur Hayes believes an AI bubble crash could create short-term pressure on Bitcoin, but his long-term outlook remains bullish because a major market shock could push governments and central banks back toward liquidity support, stimulus, and money printing — a "dump then pump" thesis.

The extreme bear case: Bitcoin at $20K, ETH at $800?

Here's the scenario circulating among the most aggressive bears — and a clear caveat upfront: these are worst-case, low-probability targets that would require a full systemic financial crisis, not just a sector correction.

But with Bitcoin already at ~$60K — having broken the old "floor" — a true AI bubble crash from current levels is what makes these deeper targets even thinkable. In a systemic unwind, where the AI bubble crashes violently, debt-driven contagion spreads to banks and credit markets, and crypto's high-beta nature plays out fully, the speculative cascade from here looks like:

Bitcoin ($BTC) toward $20,000 — roughly another 65% down from current levels, requiring the institutional bid to evaporate entirely amid forced selling.
Ethereum ($ETH) toward $800 — consistent with ETH's tendency to fall harder than BTC, amplified by relentless ETF outflows.
XRP ($XRP) toward $0.30 — reflecting how altcoins typically lose multiples of Bitcoin's percentage in a deep flush.
Solana ($SOL) toward $20 — among the most exposed, given its high-beta profile and reliance on speculative capital.

Be clear-eyed about what this requires: not just an AI correction (which has arguably already begun), but a full-blown global financial crisis with cascading credit failures. As one expert warned, economic historian Carlota Perez cautioned that an AI and crypto bust could lead to a global economic collapse of "unimaginable proportions." That's the tail risk these numbers reflect — a doomsday cascade, not the probable path.

Will the AI Bubble Affect Crypto Prices?

The framing that matters most: the correction analysts warned about has largely already happened — that's a big part of why Bitcoin fell from $100K to $60K as capital rotated into AI. What hasn't happened yet is a full AI bubble crash, and if it comes, it would hit a market that's already weakened and has far less cushion than it did six months ago.

That's what makes the extreme targets — BTC $20K, ETH $800, XRP $0.30, SOL $20 — worth knowing as a worst-case stress test. They're not a base-case forecast; they'd require systemic financial contagion, not just an AI sector wobble. But starting from $60K rather than $100K, the downside math is no longer as far-fetched as it once sounded.

The smart takeaway: respect the AI-correlation risk, keep your leverage in check, and watch the Nasdaq and AI-stock sentiment as closely as the crypto charts — because right now, that's where Bitcoin's next big move is being decided.

What Is Coinbase One? Inside Coinbase's Zero-Fee Subscription

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 08:08:22

What Is Coinbase One?

Coinbase One is Coinbase's paid subscription membership. Instead of paying a fee on every trade, members pay a flat recurring price and unlock zero-fee trading up to a monthly cap, along with a bundle of rewards, protection, and support benefits.

The idea is simple: turn a series of per-trade costs into one predictable subscription, while layering on perks that active users tend to value. Coinbase One began in the US as a straightforward subscription that let traders pay zero trading fees up to $10,000 in monthly volume, and has since expanded in both geography and benefits. It has grown into a sizeable community — the membership has passed 600,000 members across 42 countries.

How Much Does Coinbase One Cost?

Coinbase One now comes in three tiers, so members can match their plan to how much they trade. Basic costs $4.99 monthly or $49.99 yearly, Preferred costs $29.99 or $299.99, and Premium costs $299.99 or $2,999.99.

The zero-fee trading allowance scales with each tier:

Basic — waives trading fees up to $500 in monthly volume.
Preferred — waives trading fees up to $10,000 in monthly volume.
Premium — advertises unlimited zero-fee trading.

What Benefits Does Coinbase One Include?

Beyond zero-fee trading, the membership bundles several features designed to add ongoing value:

USDC rewards. Members earn 3.5% APY on USDC balances, with daily accrual, weekly Friday payouts, no minimum balance, and the choice to receive rewards in USDC or $Bitcoin.
Advanced trading rebate. Preferred and Premium members can receive 25% back on Coinbase Advanced spot fees in USDC, capped at $100 monthly.
Boosted staking and onchain rewards, including free gas on Base.
Account protection. Up to $250,000 of protection against unauthorized access to your account.
Priority support. Preferred and Premium members get 24/7 priority support, typically connecting with a representative within minutes — and Premium members gain access to a concierge desk with a dedicated account manager.

Does Coinbase One Remove All Fees?

It's worth being clear on what zero-fee actually means. Coinbase One removes the explicit trading fee on eligible buys and sells up to your tier's cap, but it doesn't eliminate every cost. Quoted prices can still include a spread, and the zero-fee benefit is not universal across all order types or products. Understanding this distinction helps members set accurate expectations about their real all-in trading costs.

Who Is Coinbase One For?

Coinbase One is built around a simple question: will the benefits you use outweigh the subscription you pay? That makes it a strong fit for some users and unnecessary for others.

It tends to serve these groups well:

Frequent traders who would otherwise pay recurring per-trade fees, and can offset the subscription through the zero-fee allowance.
Long-term holders with meaningful balances, who benefit from USDC rewards and account protection.
Active Coinbase ecosystem users who stake, use Base, or trade on Coinbase Advanced and can stack the rebate and reward perks.

The membership can pay for itself through fee discounts, USDC rewards, and card cashback for users who hold a significant amount on Coinbase or trade frequently.

When Might Coinbase One Not Be Worth It?

To keep things balanced, the subscription isn't for everyone. For casual traders who won't take full advantage of the benefits, Coinbase Advanced offers low fees for free without any subscription. If your trading volume is light and you don't hold much USDC or use the wider ecosystem, the math may not justify the monthly cost. The lower-priced Basic tier exists partly to address this, giving occasional users an entry point at a smaller commitment.

Is There a Coinbase One Card?

Yes. There's a related product, the Coinbase One Card, a US-only American Express credit card offering 2–4% Bitcoin back on spending. It's tied directly to the membership: an active, paid Coinbase One subscription is required to open and maintain the card, and if the membership lapses, the card account may be closed.

Is Coinbase One Worth It?

Coinbase One packages several perks — zero-fee trading, USDC yield, staking boosts, protection, and priority support — into a single subscription with tiers to match different activity levels. For users who trade regularly, hold meaningful balances, or lean into the broader Coinbase ecosystem, the benefits can comfortably outweigh the cost. For lighter, occasional users, the free Coinbase Advanced route may make more sense.

The practical takeaway is to estimate how much you'll actually use each benefit, then weigh that against your chosen tier's price. With the option to cancel anytime and a low-cost Basic entry point, it's straightforward to test whether the membership fits how you use Coinbase.

Disclaimers:

Trading in crypto is highly risky and may not be suitable for all as the entire amount invested could be lost.
Information is provided for informational purposes only and is not investment advice. This is not a recommendation to buy or sell a particular digital asset or to employ a particular investment strategy.
Coinbase offers simple and advanced trading in eligible jurisdictions. Advanced trading is for experienced traders and is subject to the Trading Rules. Fees on the two platforms vary; maker fees based on volume.
Staking is available only in eligible jurisdictions and for eligible networks. Rewards rate is based on the estimated protocol rate and is subject to change. Terms apply.
Coinbase One zero trading fees: Coinbase Advanced, DEX fees, and derivatives excluded. Coinbase includes a spread in the price when you buy, sell, or convert cryptocurrencies. For Basic and Preferred tiers, a monthly trading volume limit (found in member home) applies. Trades over this limit incur trading fees.

Polymarket Hack: $3.1M Stolen as Prediction Market Hype Faces Its Biggest Test

Sun, 28 Jun 2026 19:12:08

Polymarket Hack: A Major Warning for Prediction Markets

Polymarket has become one of the most talked-about platforms in crypto, especially as prediction markets continue to attract traders, political observers, sports fans and macro speculators. But the latest Polymarket hack is now testing one of the sector’s biggest questions: can prediction markets go mainstream if users still face serious security risks?

According to recent reports, hackers stole around $3.1 million from 11 user wallets after a third-party vendor connected to Polymarket was compromised. The attack reportedly allowed malicious code to be injected into the platform’s frontend for some users, leading to stolen funds before the issue was contained.

Polymarket has promised to refund affected users in full, which may help reduce the immediate damage. But the bigger issue is not just whether users get their money back. The bigger issue is trust.

Prediction markets are built on the idea that users can trade on real-world outcomes, from elections and sports to economic data and global events. But if users start worrying about frontend attacks, wallet drains and third-party vulnerabilities, the industry could face a much harder path toward mainstream adoption.

What Happened in the Polymarket Hack?

The Polymarket hack was not reported as a direct failure of the platform’s core market idea. Instead, the issue appears to have come from a compromised third-party vendor. This allowed attackers to inject malicious code into Polymarket’s website for some users.

That distinction matters.

A smart contract exploit would raise questions about Polymarket’s core settlement infrastructure. A frontend or supply-chain attack raises a different concern: even if the core protocol is secure, users can still be exposed if the website, vendor stack or software dependencies are compromised.

In this case, the reported losses reached around $3.1 million in PUSD from 11 user wallets. The stolen funds were reportedly moved from Polygon to Ethereum, showing how quickly attackers can shift assets across chains once funds are drained.

Polymarket said the incident was contained and that affected users would be refunded. That response is important, but it does not erase the reputational damage. For many users, the question now becomes simple: if a major prediction market can be hit through its frontend, how safe is the average user really?

Why This Hack Matters Beyond Polymarket

The timing of the hack is especially important because prediction markets have been gaining serious attention. Polymarket is no longer just a niche crypto platform. It has become a place where traders try to price real-world probabilities before traditional media, polls or analysts catch up.

That is exactly why the hack matters.

When a platform becomes more popular, it also becomes a bigger target. Hackers do not only attack obscure DeFi protocols anymore. They target platforms with liquidity, attention, and users who are already connecting wallets and approving transactions.

This is the risk that many crypto users underestimate. A platform can look smooth, simple and mainstream on the surface, while still carrying the same wallet-level risks that exist across Web3.

Prediction markets want to become the future of information trading. But for that to happen, they need more than exciting markets and viral screenshots. They need users to believe that the platform is safe enough to trust with real money.

The Bigger Problem: Frontend Risk in Crypto

One of the biggest lessons from the Polymarket hack is that crypto security is not only about smart contracts. Users often hear that a protocol is audited, decentralized or on-chain, and assume that means they are fully protected.

But frontend risk is different.

If a website is compromised, users may be tricked into signing malicious transactions without realizing what is happening. If a third-party dependency is attacked, even a trusted platform can become dangerous for some users. If a wallet approval is abused, funds can disappear quickly.

This is why supply-chain attacks are so serious. They do not always require breaking the blockchain. They can target the layers around the blockchain: websites, vendors, scripts, hosting services, browser wallets or software packages.

For Polymarket, the problem is not only the dollar amount stolen. The problem is that the attack reminds users that crypto platforms still depend on many off-chain systems, even when the final settlement happens on-chain.

Are Prediction Markets Ready for Mainstream Adoption?

Prediction markets have a strong argument. They can turn public opinion into tradable probabilities, often reacting faster than traditional forecasts. During major political, sports and macro events, they can become powerful real-time sentiment tools.

But mainstream adoption requires trust.

A casual user may accept price volatility. They may accept that a bet can lose. But they are less likely to accept losing funds because of a hacked vendor, malicious frontend or wallet-draining script.

This is the challenge facing Polymarket and the broader prediction market sector. The product is interesting. The demand is real. The narratives are strong. But the security model still has to become easier, clearer and safer for ordinary users.

If prediction markets remain too risky for non-technical users, they may stay popular with crypto-native traders but struggle to reach a truly mainstream audience.

Could the Hack Slow Polymarket’s Growth?

The short-term damage may be limited if every affected user is fully refunded. In crypto, quick refunds can help calm panic and show that a platform is willing to protect users.

However, the long-term impact depends on transparency.

Users will want to know how the attack happened, which vendor was compromised, what was changed after the incident, and how similar attacks will be prevented in the future. Without clear answers, the hack could become a trust problem rather than just a security incident.

The platform also faces a bigger perception risk. Polymarket’s appeal comes from being fast, sharp and ahead of the crowd. But if users start associating it with hacks, insider concerns, or wallet risks, that image could weaken.

This does not mean Polymarket is finished. Far from it. But it does mean the platform now has to prove that it can protect users at the same speed that it scales.

What Users Should Learn From the Polymarket Hack

The main lesson is simple: in crypto, the website matters as much as the wallet.

Users should be careful with wallet approvals, avoid keeping more funds than needed on active trading platforms, and regularly check which contracts have access to their assets. Hardware wallets, separate trading wallets and limited approvals can reduce risk, especially for users interacting with DeFi or prediction markets.

But this should not be only the user’s responsibility. Platforms also need stronger security monitoring, safer frontend systems, better vendor controls and clearer warnings when users are signing sensitive transactions.

If prediction markets want mainstream users, they cannot rely on crypto-native habits alone. They need security that feels simple, visible and reliable.

Final Thoughts: The Prediction Market Boom Just Got a Reality Check

The Polymarket hack does not end the prediction market story. In fact, it may prove how important the sector has become. Hackers usually follow attention, liquidity and growth. Polymarket has all three.

But the incident is still a major reality check.

Prediction markets are trying to become one of crypto’s most useful real-world applications. They offer a new way to trade information, sentiment and probability. Yet the $3.1 million hack shows that the industry still has to solve basic trust and security problems before it can fully go mainstream.

Polymarket’s promise to refund affected users is a positive step. But the real test comes next: whether the platform can convince traders that this was a contained incident, not a warning sign of deeper infrastructure risk.

For now, the prediction market hype is still alive. But after this hack, users may be much more careful before placing their next bet.

Bitcoin Price Prediction: Has Saylor’s Strategy Lost Its BTC Premium?

Sun, 28 Jun 2026 15:12:59

Bitcoin Price Prediction: The Saylor Story Is Getting More Complicated

Bitcoin is once again trading near the critical $60,000 level, and the market is struggling to find a strong recovery signal. But this time, the biggest story may not be Bitcoin’s price alone. The more important question is what is happening around Strategy, Michael Saylor’s Bitcoin-focused company, and whether one of the strongest bullish engines in the market is starting to lose power.

For years, Strategy was more than just a public company holding Bitcoin. It became a symbol of institutional conviction. Every new BTC purchase from Michael Saylor reinforced the idea that large balance sheets could keep absorbing Bitcoin supply, even during market weakness.

Now, that narrative is facing its biggest test.

Strategy’s valuation has reportedly fallen below the value of its Bitcoin holdings, meaning the company’s famous BTC premium has disappeared. For Bitcoin traders, this matters because Strategy was not just another holder. It was one of the most visible buyers in the market. If that buying machine slows down, Bitcoin could lose an important psychological support level.

By TradingView - BTCUSD_2026-06-28 (YTD)

Why Strategy’s Lost Premium Matters for Bitcoin

The key issue is Strategy’s mNAV, or market value to net asset value. In simple terms, this compares how the market values Strategy against the value of the Bitcoin it holds.

When Strategy traded at a premium to its Bitcoin holdings, the model was powerful. The company could issue stock or preferred shares, raise capital, buy more Bitcoin, and potentially increase BTC per share. That created a cycle: higher MSTR valuation helped fund more BTC purchases, and more BTC purchases strengthened the bullish story.

But when the premium disappears, the math changes.

If Strategy issues new shares while its valuation is below the value of its underlying Bitcoin, that can become dilutive for shareholders. In other words, the company may still be able to raise money, but doing so becomes less attractive and more controversial.

This is why the current Bitcoin price prediction is no longer only about charts. It is also about whether Strategy can keep playing the same role it played during the previous bull market.

Strategy’s Bitcoin Holdings Are Now Under Pressure

Strategy still owns a massive Bitcoin stack. The company holds more than 847,000 BTC, with an average acquisition price above $75,000. With Bitcoin trading around $60,000, the market value of that stack is now far below its aggregate purchase cost.

This does not mean Strategy has realized losses. Bitcoin losses only become realized if the company sells. But the gap matters because it affects market confidence, shareholder sentiment, and the company’s ability to raise capital cheaply.

The pressure is also visible in STRC, Strategy’s perpetual preferred stock. STRC has traded well below its $100 par value, with investors now watching the June 30 ex-dividend date and monthly dividend reset. If the market demands a higher yield, Strategy’s cost of capital rises.

That is the real concern.

The Bitcoin market is not just asking whether Saylor is still bullish. It is asking whether the structure around Strategy can stay strong if Bitcoin remains weak.

Is Strategy Still a Bullish Signal for BTC?

Michael Saylor has continued to signal long-term confidence in Bitcoin, and Strategy remains the largest corporate BTC holder. From a long-term perspective, the company’s thesis has not changed: Bitcoin is still treated as a strategic treasury asset.

But short-term market conditions have changed.

In the past, Saylor buying more Bitcoin was seen almost automatically as bullish. Today, investors are looking deeper. They are asking how the purchases are funded, whether new issuance is accretive or dilutive, and whether preferred stock pressure could limit Strategy’s future buying power.

This does not mean Strategy is finished. The company still has options. It can manage its capital structure, adjust financing decisions, use cash reserves, or wait for better market conditions. But the easy part of the trade may be over.

The old story was: Strategy buys Bitcoin, Bitcoin goes up, MSTR trades at a premium.

The new story is: Bitcoin must recover before Strategy’s premium can fully return.

Bitcoin Price Prediction: Is $55K Next?

Bitcoin’s next major test is the $60,000 zone. This level is both psychological and technical. If BTC manages to hold above it and reclaim the $62,000 to $64,000 area, the market could stabilize and attempt a recovery toward $65,000 and then $70,000.

However, if Bitcoin loses $60,000 with strong selling pressure, the next important downside target is around $55,000. A deeper breakdown could then open the door toward the $52,000 to $50,000 region, especially if risk assets remain weak and Strategy-related fears continue to grow.

For now, the short-term Bitcoin price prediction remains cautious. BTC needs to prove that the $60,000 area can hold. Without a clean rebound, traders may continue pricing in a move toward $55,000.

Why This Crash Feels Different

This Bitcoin correction feels different because it is not only about macro pressure, regulation, or a normal crypto pullback. It is also about the market questioning one of the strongest Bitcoin accumulation stories of the past few years.

If Strategy’s premium has disappeared, then investors may start viewing MSTR less like a high-growth Bitcoin proxy and more like a leveraged Bitcoin holding vehicle. That change in perception matters.

It could reduce enthusiasm for other Bitcoin treasury companies. It could make future BTC purchases harder to finance. And it could weaken one of the narratives that helped Bitcoin during previous rallies.

At the same time, this fear could also mark a late-stage panic moment. If Bitcoin holds $60,000 and begins recovering, Strategy’s valuation could improve quickly, STRC pressure could ease, and the bullish treasury narrative could return.

That is why the next few days are crucial.

Final Thoughts: Saylor Is Still Bullish, But the Market Wants Proof

Michael Saylor may still be one of Bitcoin’s loudest bulls, but the market is no longer reacting to conviction alone. Investors now want proof that Strategy’s model still works under pressure.

If Bitcoin reclaims $64,000, the current panic may fade and the focus could shift back to accumulation. But if BTC breaks below $60,000, Strategy’s lost premium may become a bigger bearish signal, with $55,000 becoming the next serious target.

For now, the Bitcoin price prediction remains fragile. The market is not only watching BTC charts anymore. It is watching Saylor’s balance sheet, Strategy’s premium, and whether the biggest corporate Bitcoin bet can survive a much tougher phase of the cycle.

Bitcoin Price Prediction: Why Some Analysts Warn of a Crash to $16K

Sun, 28 Jun 2026 09:44:27

A grim narrative is making the rounds in crypto circles: that Bitcoin ($BTC) is fundamentally broken, that AI and quantum computing have signed its death warrant, and that the price could collapse toward $16,000 or lower. With Bitcoin already bruised below $60,000 after a brutal sell-off, the fear is spreading fast.

So is the "death of Bitcoin" thesis real, or is this just the latest cycle of extreme FUD? Let's break down the actual argument behind the crash call — and then weigh it against what the evidence really shows.

What is the bear case behind a $16K Bitcoin?

The most aggressive bear thesis ties together several threads into one dark picture. The argument goes roughly like this: encryption is on borrowed time, anonymity is already gone thanks to mass data collection and chain-surveillance, and the combination of AI and quantum computing will eventually crack the cryptography Bitcoin depends on. In that framing, Bitcoin's core value proposition — censorship resistance and cryptographic security — is fatally undermined, and the price simply reflects a slow realization that the "case for Bitcoin is dead."

It's worth being clear: a $16,000 target is not a mainstream analyst forecast. It sits at the extreme end of the bear spectrum. The most pessimistic credible published views are far less severe — veteran trader Peter Brandt has warned that if Bitcoin's parabolic advance is truly broken, BTC could face declines exceeding 80% from peak levels, potentially as low as $25,000, which represents the most bearish outlook in the current forecast landscape. Even on-chain bears land higher than $16K — analyst Ki Young Ju has argued that history, if it rhymes, puts a worst-case scenario somewhere near or below $30,000.

In other words, $16K is a narrative-driven doom number, not something the data-driven bears are modeling.

Is the quantum and AI threat to Bitcoin real?

Here's where it gets nuanced: the underlying fear isn't pure fantasy. There is a genuine, active debate about quantum computing and AI as long-term threats to crypto cryptography.

The catalyst was a major piece of research. On March 31, 2026, Google's Quantum AI team published a whitepaper showing that breaking the elliptic curve cryptography protecting Bitcoin could require 20× fewer quantum resources than estimated in 2019 — fewer than 500,000 physical qubits — and identified roughly 6.9 million BTC (about 32% of supply) in wallets with exposed public keys. That's a real, fixed pool of vulnerable coins.

AI is the accelerant in this story. Security researchers warn that AI is accelerating the development of quantum computing, creating a new cybersecurity arms race, and an AI model recently uncovered a four-year-old bug in Zcash that could have enabled unlimited token issuance, triggering a steep sell-off and intensifying fears that AI will expose hidden vulnerabilities across crypto. The concern that "AI killed Bitcoin" stems partly from this — the idea that machine learning compresses the timeline on threats that once felt decades away. As one observer put it, the synergy has shifted quantum from a "physics problem" to an "engineering challenge."

There's also a real concern about harvested data. State actors are almost certainly collecting blockchain data today, planning to decrypt it once quantum hardware matures — and the 6.9M exposed BTC are fixed targets. That's the kernel of truth behind the "anonymity is gone through collected data" claim.

Why the "Bitcoin is dead" thesis is likely overblown

Now for the other side — and it's a strong one. The expert consensus is that this threat is real but not imminent, and that Bitcoin has ample time to adapt.

On the hardware timeline, the gap is enormous. ARK Invest concluded in March 2026 that we're still at "Stage 0" — quantum computers exist but lack any commercially relevant capability — and the most optimistic hardware projections don't place us at 500K qubits before 2033–2035. Some of the most respected voices in cryptography are even more dismissive of near-term panic. Blockstream CEO and cypherpunk Adam Back argues a cryptographically relevant quantum threat is likely 20 to 40 years away, emphasizing that Bitcoin's security is about digital signatures, not just encryption, and that the network has ample time to integrate quantum-secure signature schemes.

Crucially, most Bitcoin isn't even exposed in the way the doom thesis implies. The threat depends on whether a public key is visible: modern hashed addresses (P2PKH and SegWit) don't reveal public keys until the moment a transaction is broadcast, so those coins are not quantum-vulnerable until spent — and never reusing an address leaves only a tiny window to crack a key.

And the network is already hardening. BIP-360, which introduces a quantum-resistant address type, was merged into Bitcoin's official repository in February 2026, with a testnet implementation already live across 50+ miners. The experts' bottom line is blunt: the consensus among Google, ARK Invest and most cryptographers is that quantum attacks are not imminent — the advice is to move to modern address types and support the migration, not to panic sell.

So what's really driving the Bitcoin crash?

If the "AI killed Bitcoin" story is overblown, why is the price actually down? The real drivers are far more mundane — and far more familiar.

The current sell-off has two main engines. The first is the mechanical cycle, where late leverage gets flushed, sentiment collapses, and everyone declares Bitcoin dead — it happens every time. The second is AI, but as a capital-rotation story: since April, memory chip ETFs pulled in $12.7 billion while Bitcoin ETFs bled over $2 billion. People sold Bitcoin to buy AI stocks. That's the key distinction — AI is hurting Bitcoin by competing for capital, not by breaking its cryptography.

Sentiment did the rest. For years the narrative was that Strategy's Michael Saylor never sells; the moment he did sell a tiny fraction, the market treated it like a five-alarm fire, and roughly $1.6 billion in leveraged positions were liquidated in the cascade that followed. None of that is about quantum computers — it's classic FUD and forced selling.

Tellingly, the smart money is doing the opposite of panicking. The MVRV-Z score sits deep in the accumulation zone, and long-term holders just posted their largest 30-day accumulation on record — buying more aggressively right now than at any point in Bitcoin's history.

Will Bitcoin Price Continue Crashing?

Could Bitcoin fall further? Absolutely. The credible bear cases see real downside risk, with targets clustering anywhere from the mid-$50Ks down to $25K–$30K in worst-case scenarios, driven by ETF outflows, AI capital rotation, and broken bull narratives. That's a genuine risk worth respecting.

But a crash to $16,000 driven by "AI and quantum killing Bitcoin" is a narrative running well ahead of the evidence. The quantum threat is real but years — likely a decade or more — away, most BTC isn't exposed, and the network is already upgrading its defenses. Meanwhile the long-term holders who've survived every prior "Bitcoin is dead" cycle are accumulating, not capitulating.

The honest takeaway: separate the genuine macro risk (which is real) from the doom narrative (which is mostly fear). Respect the downtrend, manage your risk, and don't make decisions based on a "death of Bitcoin" thesis that the actual cryptographers say is decades premature.

Decrypt

California Strikes Deal With Anthropic to Bring Claude AI to State Agencies

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 16:54:09

Anthropic’s agreement makes Claude the first AI tool available to all state agencies and local governments, at half price.

What Is Strategy (MSTR)? The Bitcoin Treasury Company

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:54:02

Software firm Strategy (formerly MicroStrategy) and its co-founder Michael Saylor have become synonymous with Bitcoin. Here’s what you need to know.

Tom Lee's BitMine Adds $43 Million in Ethereum as Strategy Halts Bitcoin Buys

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:13:16

BitMine Immersion Technologies continued adding to its Ethereum stockpile, even as its Bitcoin counterpart Strategy stood pat.

Strategy Could Sell Up to $1.25B of Bitcoin Under 'Digital Credit Capital Framework'

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 12:48:39

The Bitcoin treasury firm has approved a framework for "active capital management," its Chair Michael Saylor said in a statement.

Morning Minute: Bitcoin Headed for Rare Back-to-Back Quarterly Loss

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 11:50:53

Another $1.79B in ETF outflows last week certainly isn't helping—but if history repeats, there is reason for hope.

U.Today - IT, AI and Fintech Daily News for You Today

Shiba Inu (SHIB) Re-Enters Crypto Top 30 as Exchange Reserves Plunge to 87.18 Trillion Coins

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 16:51:00

Whales spark a supply squeeze by pulling 781 billion SHIB off exchanges, creating an on-chain deficit that forced Shiba Inu coin back into the top 30.

XRP Ledger Foundation to Create Open-Source Lending Blueprint With New Partner

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:23:00

XRPLF and VS1 Finance are building an open-source compliance framework for permissioned lending on the XRP Ledger — aimed at institutional DeFi developers.

Death Spiral? Schiff Says Falling BTC Will Force Strategy to Sell More

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 14:42:18

Financial commentator and long-time crypto skeptic Peter Schiff has sounded the alarm on Strategy's newly announced "BTC Monetization Program."

Shiba Inu Suffers Biggest Loss of 2026 in June

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 14:18:22

Shiba Inu is about to close June with the biggest monthly loss recorded so far in 2026, showing a substantial decline of 24% for June.

XRP Records 115% ETF Shift Ahead of Historically Positive Q3; 2024 Shiba Inu (SHIB) Billionaire Appears On-Chain; Saylor Legalizes Bitcoin Sales With 12% Dividend Boost - Morning Crypto Report

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 13:20:00

XRP ETF inflows surge 115% ahead of historically strongest quarter, a dormant SHIB whale moves $2.7M on-chain, and Saylor approves a structured Bitcoin sell program at Strategy.

Blockonomi

Roblox (RBLX) Stock Surges 14% Following Arete Research Upgrade to Buy

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 16:59:32

Key Takeaways

Shares of Roblox surged more than 14% Monday, starting at $50.90 and reaching approximately $54.29, following Arete Research’s upgrade from Neutral to Buy alongside a $95 price target.
The stock broke above both its 20-day and 50-day moving averages, though it continues trading roughly 30% under its 200-day moving average.
First-quarter revenue reached $1.44 billion, falling short of the $1.74 billion estimate, while EPS of -$0.35 exceeded the consensus forecast of -$0.41.
In May, Roblox approved a $3 billion stock repurchase program, representing up to 9.5% of shares outstanding.
Arkansas’s Attorney General launched legal action against Roblox, claiming the company misled users about child safety protocols.

Shares of Roblox (RBLX) kicked off Monday trading at $50.90, rising from Friday’s closing price of $47.56, before advancing to approximately $54.29—marking a roughly 14.5% increase—accompanied by elevated volume exceeding 2.5 million shares.

Roblox Corporation, RBLX

The primary driver behind this rally was Arete Research’s decision to upgrade RBLX from Neutral to Buy while simultaneously lifting its price target from $75 to $95. This represents one of the most optimistic outlooks currently on Wall Street for the gaming platform.

During Monday’s trading session, the stock reclaimed territory above its 20-day simple moving average ($46.03) and 50-day simple moving average ($47.92). However, shares remain approximately 30% beneath the 200-day moving average of $79.09, with a death cross pattern having materialized in December 2025.

The MACD indicator now sits above its signal line with a positive histogram reading—suggesting diminishing downward momentum. Critical resistance levels exist around $60.50, while support appears established near $52.50.

Wall Street Remains Divided on RBLX

Not all analysts share the same enthusiasm. Wells Fargo reduced its price objective from $97 down to $78, while maintaining an Overweight rating. Piper Sandler shifted to Neutral with a $50 target back in May. DA Davidson also maintained a Neutral stance while lowering its target to $45.

Goldman Sachs preserved its Buy recommendation but reduced its price objective to $65. BMO reaffirmed its Outperform rating, and Oppenheimer initiated coverage with an Outperform designation.

According to MarketBeat, the consensus rating stands at Moderate Buy with an average price objective of $86.30.

For the first quarter, Roblox reported EPS of -$0.35, surpassing the -$0.41 forecast. Revenue totaled $1.44 billion—representing 43.4% growth year-over-year—but missed the $1.74 billion consensus expectation.

The company’s board greenlit a $3 billion share repurchase authorization in May, permitting buybacks of up to 9.5% of outstanding shares. CEO David Baszucki and insider Matthew Kaufman both executed stock sales in May for tax withholding purposes related to vested equity compensation.

Legal Challenge Over Child Safety Practices

Tim Griffin, Arkansas Attorney General, initiated legal proceedings against Roblox alongside Discord, claiming both platforms provided misleading information regarding their safety measures and facilitated predator access to children.

The filing further asserted that Roblox distributed over $900 million annually to developers whose content included explicit material. Roblox issued a statement saying it “strongly disputes” these allegations and highlighted recently implemented age verification requirements for chat functionality.

Institutional stakeholders control approximately 94.5% of RBLX shares. Multiple funds established new positions during Q4 2024, with Norges Bank acquiring a position worth roughly $435 million.

The company’s next quarterly earnings announcement is scheduled for July 30, 2026. Wall Street analysts anticipate a loss of 34 cents per share alongside revenue of $1.60 billion.

The post Roblox (RBLX) Stock Surges 14% Following Arete Research Upgrade to Buy appeared first on Blockonomi.

Amazon (AMZN) Stock Surges Nearly 5% on Record Prime Day Sales and Bullish Analyst Upgrades

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 16:58:52

Key Highlights

Amazon shares climbed as high as 4.8% during Monday’s session following a record-breaking Prime Day that saw consumer spending reach $26.4 billion, marking a 9.3% increase compared to last year.
Wells Fargo initiated coverage with a buy recommendation and set a $312 price target, implying approximately 35% potential upside from the current trading range near $232.
Citizens JMP reaffirmed its Market Outperform stance with a $315 target, highlighting robust artificial intelligence infrastructure demand.
Amazon Web Services announced a 20% hourly GPU rate increase starting July 1, signaling strong cloud computing pricing authority.
Major enterprise clients are securing 3-to-5-year AWS capacity agreements, which Wall Street analysts view as a positive indicator for revenue stability and margin expansion.

Amazon (AMZN) shares surged by as much as 4.8% during Monday’s trading session, reaching an intraday peak of $246.76 after starting the day at $234.21. The significant upward movement followed a confluence of positive developments across both the company’s e-commerce and cloud computing divisions.

Amazon.com, Inc., AMZN

The company’s extended Prime Day promotional event concluded its four-day span with record-breaking consumer expenditure totaling $26.4 billion, representing a 9.3% year-over-year growth, based on data from Adobe Analytics. This year’s strategic calendar adjustment moved the shopping event from its traditional July slot to June, deliberately avoiding scheduling conflicts with major events including the FIFA World Cup and America’s 250th Independence Day celebrations.

This calendar realignment also capitalized on peak summer vacation spending patterns and early back-to-school purchasing behavior. Bank of America Securities analysts highlighted that this scheduling change is projected to drive a 5% boost in overall gross merchandise value.

Prior to this week’s rally, the stock had experienced significant downward pressure. AMZN declined more than 14% throughout June, retreating from its $270 peak to approximately $232. This substantial correction left market participants searching for support levels.

Wells Fargo stepped in to address that uncertainty. Ken Gawrelski, analyst at the firm, published a buy rating on Friday, June 26, establishing a $312 price objective. This target represents roughly 35% appreciation potential from present levels and translates to an $80-per-share gain for investors entering positions around $232.

Cloud Computing Pricing Strength Draws Wall Street Focus

Citizens JMP also released commentary Monday, maintaining its Market Outperform rating alongside a $315 valuation target. The research firm highlighted AWS’s forthcoming 20% increase in hourly GPU pricing, scheduled to begin July 1, as tangible evidence of sustained AI infrastructure demand and meaningful pricing power in the cloud services market.

AWS Chief Executive Matthew Garman discussed the company’s strong visibility into customer demand extending through the next three to six months. Major enterprise organizations are executing multi-year capacity commitments spanning three to five years, which Citizens JMP characterizes as risk-reducing factors that provide AWS with enhanced revenue predictability.

The investment firm maintains that artificial intelligence technology adoption remains in nascent stages and anticipates demand resilience even if current supply limitations prove temporary. Amazon’s top-line revenue expanded 14% over the trailing twelve-month period, while InvestingPro calculates a Fair Value estimate of $261 compared to the current market price of $233.

Favorable Market Conditions Supported the Rally

Broader market dynamics provided additional tailwinds for Amazon’s performance. The Nasdaq Composite advanced 1.2% Monday while the S&P 500 climbed 0.7%, indicating a return of risk appetite following a challenging previous week that saw significant technology sector selling pressure.

Mega-cap technology stocks experienced widespread gains, though Amazon benefited from company-specific catalysts beyond general market sentiment.

The convergence of exceptional Prime Day performance metrics, favorable analyst commentary from two prominent firms, and the AWS GPU pricing adjustment provided market participants with multiple distinct rationales for renewed buying interest. Market observers are now focused on the company’s upcoming quarterly financial release to determine whether these positive developments will materialize in improved earnings results.

The post Amazon (AMZN) Stock Surges Nearly 5% on Record Prime Day Sales and Bullish Analyst Upgrades appeared first on Blockonomi.

Lam Research (LRCX) Soars to Record High After Bank of America Sets $480 Price Target

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 16:51:38

Key Takeaways

LRCX reached a record peak of $410.41, climbing 8.89% in a single trading session
The semiconductor equipment maker has delivered a remarkable 292% return over 12 months alongside 27% revenue expansion
BofA Securities elevated its price target to $480 while reaffirming a Buy recommendation
Management forecasts advanced packaging revenues to surge more than 50% in 2026
InvestingPro data suggests the shares are trading above Fair Value estimates

Lam Research (LRCX) shares climbed to an unprecedented high of $410.41 during Monday’s trading session, posting gains of approximately 8.89% and hovering near its 52-week peak. The semiconductor equipment manufacturer now commands a market valuation of $512 billion.

Lam Research Corporation, LRCX

Over the trailing 12-month period, LRCX has delivered exceptional returns of 292%, propelled by robust 27% revenue expansion and increasing appetite for semiconductor manufacturing equipment linked to artificial intelligence infrastructure development.

On June 23, Bank of America Securities became the first major institution to significantly raise its outlook, lifting the LRCX price objective from $330 to $480 while maintaining its Buy thesis. This revision followed a 16% rally in the preceding month.

BofA simultaneously updated its comprehensive semiconductor industry financial projections. The investment bank now anticipates the global chip sector will reach $2.7 trillion by decade’s end, representing a substantial increase from its previous $2.3 trillion forecast.

The optimistic outlook hinges on AI-driven demand for memory chips and sophisticated packaging technologies. Lam’s executive team has projected that advanced packaging sales will expand by over 50% in 2026, fueled by high-bandwidth memory requirements and 3D integration demands for AI computing applications.

Wall Street Raises Price Targets Across the Board

Cantor Fitzgerald has demonstrated particular enthusiasm for the stock. The firm increased its price objective to $500 from $425, highlighting the company’s expanding market share in semiconductor capital equipment. A previous Cantor research note had already elevated the target to $425 from $320 based on AI momentum and wafer fabrication equipment expansion.

Mizuho Securities similarly revised its outlook upward to $380 from $330. The firm emphasized favorable prospects for wafer fab equipment, projecting continued growth in AI logic and memory segments extending through 2026 and 2027.

This wave of target increases demonstrates widespread analyst conviction in the semiconductor equipment industry cycle as the year progresses.

Shareholder Returns and Valuation Considerations

Lam announced a quarterly dividend distribution of $0.26 per share, scheduled for payment on July 8, 2026, to stockholders of record as of June 17.

Notwithstanding the positive momentum, InvestingPro analysis indicates LRCX is trading above its Fair Value calculation. The platform categorizes it among the most richly valued equities within its coverage universe of over 1,400 US-listed stocks.

This dynamic — solid operational performance, enthusiastic analyst support, yet elevated valuation metrics — presents a consideration point for prospective investors.

LRCX concluded Monday’s trading at $409.80, registering an 8.89% daily advance.

The post Lam Research (LRCX) Soars to Record High After Bank of America Sets $480 Price Target appeared first on Blockonomi.

AT&T (T) Stock Plummets to Annual Low Amid SpaceX Starlink Mobile Launch

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 16:50:45

Key Takeaways

AT&T shares slumped to a 52-week low of $21.29 on Monday, declining approximately 5% amid widespread telecom industry turbulence
SpaceX disclosed its intention to launch a direct-to-consumer Starlink mobile offering in the United States, positioning itself as a new rival to AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile
Verizon shares plunged more than 7%, while T-Mobile declined 6%, bringing T-Mobile’s yearly losses to 28%
Comcast shares jumped 7.2% following its announcement to separate NBCUniversal and Sky, creating a streamlined broadband entity that poses heightened competitive threats to AT&T and Verizon
The February 2026 regulatory approval of Charter Communications’ Cox acquisition established America’s largest cable company, intensifying fixed-broadband competition for traditional telecommunications providers

Shares of AT&T tumbled approximately 5% during Monday’s trading session, reaching an intraday 52-week low of $21.29 as multiple competitive threats converged simultaneously on the United States telecommunications industry.

AT&T Inc., T

The telecommunications giant has now shed more than 26% of its value over the trailing twelve months, approaching a critical technical threshold that market analysts view as pivotal breakdown support. A definitive close beneath the $21.29 level would establish fresh multi-year lows for the company.

The primary driver behind Monday’s decline emerged from Financial Times reporting on June 26, revealing that SpaceX intends to introduce a direct retail Starlink mobile service targeting American consumers. SpaceX Chief Operating Officer Gwynne Shotwell disclosed these plans throughout the company’s initial public offering roadshow presentations.

Additionally, SpaceX obtained licensed AWS-3 spectrum allocations alongside AT&T, Verizon, and T-Mobile following Federal Communications Commission auction outcomes published June 26. This spectrum acquisition provides SpaceX with necessary regulatory authorization for an independent mobile platform, although the company currently lacks terrestrial tower networks.

Bloomberg News compounded market concerns by reporting that SpaceX and Charter Communications engaged in senior executive discussions regarding a prospective consumer mobile collaboration — potentially combining Starlink’s satellite reach with Charter’s cable foundation.

TD Cowen analyst Gregory Williams indicated T-Mobile would emerge as the “clear choice” for SpaceX should wholesale network negotiations collapse, or if SpaceX determines direct wireless business ownership is preferable.

Verizon experienced the most severe downturn among the three major carriers, plummeting 7.6% to $43.02. T-Mobile retreated 6% to $171.78, approaching its own 52-week floor of $169.00. Over a twelve-month period, T-Mobile has actually underperformed its peers with a 28% decline.

Verizon’s Self-Inflicted Wounds

Verizon simultaneously revealed a 50:50 joint venture with BT Group merging their international enterprise divisions. Verizon is transferring $625 million to BT as part of the transaction, a capital deployment choice that unsettled investors during a period when domestic network infrastructure appears more critical.

Compounding matters, Verizon was eliminated from the Dow Jones Industrial Average — a symbolic setback that amplified prevailing negative market sentiment.

Comcast Transformation Intensifies Competitive Landscape

Comcast surged 7.2% to $24.84 following its announcement to separate NBCUniversal and Sky into an independent publicly-traded entity, establishing a concentrated broadband operation. Trading volume exceeded 62 million shares, approximately double its three-month average.

For AT&T and Verizon, the situation presents notable irony. A streamlined Comcast dedicated exclusively to broadband services may emerge as a more formidable competitor regarding pricing and network expansion, contrary to expectations of diminished competitive pressure.

Charter Communications’ prior Cox Communications acquisition, which received FCC approval in February 2026, already established the nation’s largest cable operation — escalating competitive pressure on AT&T Fiber and Verizon FiOS from cable providers.

Notwithstanding these challenges, AT&T maintains a 4.89% dividend yield and trades at a price-to-earnings ratio of 7.53. InvestingPro analysis identifies the stock as presently undervalued. The corporation also announced a quarterly dividend of $0.2775 per share, distributable August 3, 2026, to shareholders recorded as of July 10.

SpaceX has not disclosed a definitive launch schedule or pricing structure for its consumer Starlink mobile service. Industry analyst commentary regarding AT&T and Verizon is anticipated later this week.

The post AT&T (T) Stock Plummets to Annual Low Amid SpaceX Starlink Mobile Launch appeared first on Blockonomi.

Applied Materials (AMAT) Stock Surges 12% on KeyBanc Price Target Upgrade

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 16:49:41

Key Highlights

KeyBanc Capital Markets increased AMAT’s price target by $200, setting a new level of $750 with approximately 20% potential upside from Friday’s closing price
Shares of AMAT climbed over 12% during Monday’s trading session
Wall Street consensus for Q3 anticipates earnings per share of $3.38 with revenue near $9 billion
The company joined the Russell Top 50 Index while being removed from several Russell Value indexes
Several investment firms including B. Riley, Wells Fargo, and Cantor Fitzgerald maintained optimistic outlooks after AMAT’s latest industry presentation

Shares of Applied Materials (AMAT) experienced significant upward momentum on Monday, surging more than 12% following positive pre-earnings commentary from KeyBanc Capital Markets before the semiconductor equipment maker’s upcoming third-quarter financial results.

Applied Materials, Inc., AMAT

KeyBanc Capital Markets elevated its price objective for AMAT shares by $200, reaching $750 while keeping its Overweight rating intact. This updated target suggests approximately 20% potential appreciation from the stock’s Friday close near $626.

The investment firm highlighted that market expectations across AMAT’s semiconductor capital equipment division, electronic manufacturing services segment, and outsourced semiconductor assembly and test operations are elevated — creating near-term execution risk surrounding the upcoming results.

According to KeyBanc’s analysis, for Applied Materials shares to advance beyond present levels, the company must surpass critical performance benchmarks, provide forward guidance exceeding consensus forecasts, and offer management commentary supporting continued upward estimate revisions for future periods.

The firm cautioned that any hint of underperformance — similar to what occurred during the previous quarterly report — might spark downside price movement.

For the third quarter, Wall Street analysts project Applied Materials will report earnings of $3.38 per share alongside approximately $9 billion in revenue.

Russell Index Reshuffling

In a separate development, Applied Materials secured a position in the Russell Top 50 Index while simultaneously being dropped from multiple Russell Value indexes. This transition illustrates how index compilers are reclassifying the company, primarily due to its expanding involvement in AI-focused semiconductor production equipment.

Russell Top 50 membership can influence which institutional funds maintain positions in the stock and how passive investment strategies track the equity. Given AMAT’s 39.3% gain during the past 30 days, index-related capital flows may amplify existing price momentum.

Simply Wall St observed that the stock presently trades approximately 14% beyond the analyst consensus price target of $551.91, characterizing it as overvalued at roughly 194% above their calculated fair value estimate.

Wall Street Response Following Company Event

Applied Materials recently conducted its 2026 DRAM and Advanced Packaging Master Class event, during which company leadership projected the semiconductor industry would achieve $1 trillion in revenue this year.

B. Riley characterized AMAT as favorably positioned to capitalize on an extended multi-year equipment investment cycle, expressing conviction in a “larger-than-expected long-term” growth opportunity that includes possibilities for expanding market share.

Wells Fargo indicated the presentation strengthened its positive assessment of AMAT’s product lineup.

Cantor Fitzgerald observed that the AI infrastructure expansion is driving industry revenue growth ahead of prior timelines, creating direct benefits for AMAT — with projections showing the sector reaching approximately $3 trillion by 2029 and potentially surpassing $3.5 trillion by 2030.

On a year-to-date basis, AMAT stock has appreciated 144.52%. The company commands a market capitalization of roughly $497.7 billion, with typical daily trading volume around 8.2 million shares.

The post Applied Materials (AMAT) Stock Surges 12% on KeyBanc Price Target Upgrade appeared first on Blockonomi.

CryptoPotato

Drake Breaks the Curse With a Crypto Win on a World Cup Bet: Details

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 16:51:27

The Canadian musician Aubrey Drake Graham, better known as Drake, placed a sizeable crypto wager on a World Cup match.

Unlike many previous occasions, though, this time he cashed out a substantial profit.

Finally a Win

Yesterday (June 28), Canada (one of the countries hosting the FIFA World Cup 2026) played South Africa in a crucial match that determined the first team to advance to the round of 16. Top-tier games like this tend to draw swarms of gamblers hoping to predict the winner and score a quick profit.

Drake also tried his luck, betting $770,000 worth of USDT on his homeland, Canada, to eliminate its opponent. “The Reds” defeated “Bafana Bafana” after scoring 1-0 at the very end of the game. The odds for Canada to go through were 1.30, meaning Drake made a profit of around $230,000 in USDT.

Drake's Crypto Bet — Drake’s Crypto Bet, Source: Instagram

Seeing the musician’s bet go his way is almost surprising, as the football teams he supports usually end up defeated. In 2022, he wagered over $600,000 worth of BTC on FC Barcelona to beat its biggest rival, Real Madrid. However, the Catalan team lost “El Clásico,” and Drake ultimately parted with his stake.

In 2024, Drake bet $300,000 in BTC that Canada would beat Argentina in the Copa América semi-final. The odds for the North American country were 9.60 since it was the massive underdog, meaning a potential win would have brought the rapper a profit of more than $2.5 million in the leading cryptocurrency.

Nonetheless, Argentina (the reigning world champion) delivered the predictable outcome, cruising to a 2-0 victory, with captain Lionel Messi sealing the match with the second goal.

Drake also tried his luck at this year’s Champions League final, which featured Arsenal and Paris Saint-Germain. He placed a $1 million bet on the British team only to watch them lose 4-3 in a penalty shootout.

The Drake Curse

These unfortunate events have prompted the creation of the phrase “the Drake curse,” which refers to a superstition that whichever team or athlete he publicly supports tends to perform poorly.

His losing bets spread far beyond football matches. In 2024, Drake lost $700,000 worth of BTC on a UFC fight, while earlier this year he parted with $1 million in the cryptocurrency after the New England Patriots lost the Super Bowl to the Seattle Seahawks.

The post Drake Breaks the Curse With a Crypto Win on a World Cup Bet: Details appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Viral Altcoin VELVET Explodes 1,700% in a Month: More Gains Ahead or Perfect Short Setup?

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 15:35:36

The cryptocurrency sector may be stuck in a prolonged bear market, yet some tokens still manage to outperform with significant upward moves.

Velvet (VELVET) is a standout example, having jumped by quadruple digits in the past month. And while some analysts expect more short-term upside, others warn the altcoin could be a ticking time bomb.

Further Rally?

As of press time, the altcoin trades at around $1.58 (according to CG), representing a 250% increase on a weekly scale and a staggering 1,700% pump over the last 30 days.

Its market capitalization has risen to nearly $700 million, making VELVET the 90th-biggest cryptocurrency. One potential catalyst for the price explosion could be the project’s collaboration with AerodromeeFi.

“With the integration, you now:

– Get tighter pricing
– Pay less slippage
– Tap deeper liquidity on every trade
– Land better fills, automatically,” the announcement reads.

Later on, the project introduced Velvet-1: an Artificial Intelligence (AI) model for on-chain intelligence, which could also have positively impacted the price.

Several analysts have highlighted the coin’s performance and believe it might have more fuel for additional gains. X user Crypto With Gopal claimed that the price “is tightening inside a Symmetrical Triangle after a sharp bullish impulse.” He argued that sellers continue to lose control, setting a short-term target of $2.1.

The Boss also issued an optimistic prediction, arguing that the latest breakout attempt shows that buyers remain active after consolidation rather than immediately giving back gains. The analyst claimed that the current structure looks “healthier than it did 24 hours ago, with the chart transitioning from recovery mode into expansion mode.”

“If momentum persists and volume follows through, the market could begin testing higher liquidity zones that were previously rejected during the first impulsive move earlier this month,” they concluded.

‘Generational Short Opportunity?’

Many other analysts believe investors should stay away from the altcoin as it may experience a steep decline in the near future. Yesterday (June 28), X user Crypto with Haris ₿ predicted that VELVET could crash to $0.90 in the next six hours (which didn’t happen), calling the setup a “generational short opportunity.”

For his part, Vuori Trading claimed that the token is another “Binance Alpha aka. CZ scam.” In his view, the token seems to be nearing its top, but if it crosses $2, it might explode to $8.

The coin’s Relative Strength Index (RSI) reinforces the bearish outlook. The ratio has risen past 80, meaning VELVET has entered extreme overbought territory and could be on the verge of a collapse. The technical analysis tool ranges from 0 to 100, with anything below 30 considered a buying opportunity.

The post Viral Altcoin VELVET Explodes 1,700% in a Month: More Gains Ahead or Perfect Short Setup? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Circle’s USDC Becomes First Stablecoin Supported by BNY Mellon for Institutional Clients

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 14:48:37

The Bank of New York Mellon (BNY), the oldest bank in the United States, has expanded its partnership with Circle to introduce new stablecoin services for institutional clients.

Circle’s USDC will become the first stablecoin supported on BNY’s Digital Asset Custody platform under the arrangement. This will allow BNY clients to store, transfer, mint, and burn USDC through the bank’s custody services.

BNY Mellon integrates USDC

According to the official blog post, the latest move broadens BNY’s role as the primary custodian of USDC reserves. Institutional clients using BNY’s digital asset custody platform can now hold USDC in their custody wallets and use the bank to instruct Circle to convert US dollars into USDC.

Clients will also be able to redeem USDC for US dollars through the burning process. Circle said that these services are intended to support the entire lifecycle of institutional stablecoin activity by connecting traditional cash services with digital asset custody within one framework. BNY said the stablecoin capabilities are part of its integrated Digital Assets platform, which is designed to help institutional clients manage the growing connection between traditional finance and digital assets.

By combining custody and cash management services, the bank aims to provide access to blockchain-based networks while maintaining the controls, governance, and operational resilience required by institutional markets. BNY also plans to expand support to other stablecoin issuers and additional digital cash workflows over time.

BNY’s Chief Product and Innovation Officer Carolyn Weinberg commented,

“As digital assets become increasingly integrated into financial markets, institutions need infrastructure that seamlessly works across traditional and blockchain-based systems. With the addition of our enhanced stablecoin enablement capabilities, we’re expanding the ways clients can move value with the operational scale, trust, and resiliency they expect from BNY.”

BNY’s Crypto Footprint

BNY Mellon and Circle first partnered in March 2022, when the bank was selected as a primary custodian for the reserves backing the stablecoin. Since then, the bank has steadily strengthened its presence in digital assets over the past few years.

This year, the Wall Street giant expanded its digital asset custody business by partnering with Finstreet and ADI Foundation to develop regulated crypto infrastructure within Abu Dhabi’s ADGM financial hub.

The post Circle’s USDC Becomes First Stablecoin Supported by BNY Mellon for Institutional Clients appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Ripple Price Analysis: Calm Before the Storm for XRP as Decision Time Arrives

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 14:14:59

XRP is still under heavy selling pressure, mirroring the broader crypto market. Both its USDT and BTC pairs continue to trade within clear downtrend structures. While the dollar pair is testing a major demand zone, the BTC pair is also hovering just above an important support level, leaving the market at a key decision point.

Ripple Price Analysis: The USDT Pair

The daily chart shows XRP extending its broader bearish structure while remaining confined inside a long-term descending channel. The asset is currently trading around $1.05 after losing several higher lows over the past few weeks, confirming that sellers continue to dominate the higher timeframe.

The most important support now sits in the $1.00 to $1.10 zone, where the price is currently attempting to stabilize. This area has previously attracted demand and could produce a relief bounce if buyers manage to defend it once again. However, the overall trend remains bearish as XRP continues to trade below both major moving averages, with the 100-day and 200-day averages sloping lower simultaneously and acting as dynamic resistance levels.

Any recovery attempt is likely to face its first obstacle around the 100-day moving average near the $1.3 area, which coincides with the upper boundary of the descending channel. A breakout above both the channel resistance and the moving average would be required to signal a meaningful shift in market structure.

On the downside, losing the current support area could expose the lower boundary of the descending channel near the $0.80 region, making this support zone particularly important for the medium-term outlook.

The BTC Pair

Against Bitcoin, XRP continues to underperform, with the XRP/BTC pair remaining firmly inside its own descending channel. The pair is currently trading around 1,750 sats, sitting directly above a horizontal support level that has repeatedly prevented deeper declines since May.

Although this support has held on multiple occasions, none of the subsequent rebounds has produced a clear bullish breakout, highlighting persistent selling pressure and a lack of sustained bullish momentum. The repeated failures near the 100-day moving average further reinforce the bearish structure.

Overhead, the first major horizontal resistance is located around 1,850 sats, which converges with the declining 100-day moving average. Above that, stronger resistance emerges near 2,000 sats, followed by the descending 200-day moving average and the upper channel resistance. As long as XRP remains below these resistance clusters, the trend against Bitcoin favors continued relative weakness.

On the downside, a confirmed breakdown below the 1,700 sats support region would likely invalidate the current consolidation and open the door for another leg lower toward the psychological support level around 1,500 sats, and potentially lower. This keeps XRP at a critical decision point on both USDT and BTC charts, as the buyers and sellers fight one another to establish dominance over the trend.

The post Ripple Price Analysis: Calm Before the Storm for XRP as Decision Time Arrives appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: Is $54K Inevitable for BTC if $60K Support Is Decisively Lost?

Mon, 29 Jun 2026 14:07:17

After yielding to heavy selling pressure and losing several key support levels over the past few weeks, Bitcoin is now holding at a key support level. The broader market structure continues to favor the sellers, but the market’s reaction to the $60k critical demand zone could determine the next major move.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

On the daily timeframe, BTC is trading below $60K after extending its decline from the rejection near the $82K region. The breakdown below the $74K resistance area, which also aligns with the 100-day moving average, confirmed a bearish shift in market structure and accelerated the latest leg lower.

The asset is currently testing a major support zone around $60K, where buyers have managed to slow the decline. This area also served as an important demand region earlier in the year and helped prevent the massive February crash, making it a key level to watch. As long as Bitcoin holds above this range, the market could attempt a relief rally.

However, the broader trend remains bearish. The 100-day and 200-day moving averages are both sloping downward, with the 200-day MA positioned around the $75k area and continuing to act as the ultimate dynamic resistance. Meanwhile, the $67K zone represents the first significant resistance on any recovery attempt, followed by the stronger $74K supply region.

To the downside, a decisive daily close below the $60K support would likely expose the next major demand area around $54K and potentially extend the current corrective phase.

BTC/USDT 4-Hour Chart

The 4-hour chart highlights a well-defined descending trendline that has consistently capped every recovery attempt since late May. The price recently tested this trendline again but failed to break above it, reinforcing bearish control over the short-term structure.

BTC is now consolidating just above the horizontal support around $60K, forming a relatively tight trading range after the latest rejection. The RSI has also recovered from oversold conditions and is hovering near the midline, suggesting that downside momentum has cooled, although there is still no convincing bullish momentum shift.

The first hurdle for buyers remains the descending trendline, which is currently located just below the $61K to $62K resistance zone. A successful breakout above both levels could trigger a short-term recovery toward the $67K supply area.

On the other hand, losing the $60K support with a bearish candle closing below it would invalidate the current consolidation and likely accelerate selling toward the next daily demand zone near $54K.

On-Chain Analysis

The Exchange Whale Ratio, which measures the proportion of the top exchange inflows relative to total inflows, has been trending lower alongside Bitcoin’s recent decline. Lower readings generally indicate that large holders are contributing a smaller share of exchange deposits, suggesting that aggressive whale selling has eased compared to previous periods.

While this moderation in whale activity may reduce immediate sell-side pressure, it does not yet signal a confirmed bullish reversal. Bitcoin continues to trade at a major technical support while the broader market structure remains bearish, indicating that buyers still need to reclaim key resistance levels before a sustained recovery becomes more likely.

For now, the combination of stabilizing whale inflows and price holding above the $60K support zone offers the first signs that selling pressure may be cooling. Nevertheless, confirmation will require Bitcoin to break above the descending trendline on the 4-hour timeframe and reclaim the $67K area before sentiment can begin shifting in favor of the bulls.

The post Bitcoin Price Analysis: Is $54K Inevitable for BTC if $60K Support Is Decisively Lost? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Useful links

Home

Definitions Terminologies

Socials

Facebook Instagram Twitter Telegram

Help & Support

Contact About Us Write for Us

Deprecated: Creation of dynamic property DateInterval::$w is deprecated in /home/u558218415/domains/gatehub.org/public_html/index.php on line 1192
1 year ago

When it comes to investing in the world of cryptocurrency, one of the most common debates is whether to choose Bitcoin or altcoins. Bitcoin, the original cryptocurrency, is often seen as a safe investment with a well-established track record. On the other hand, altcoins, which refer to any cryptocurrency other than Bitcoin, offer the potential for higher returns but also come with increased risks.

When it comes to investing in cryptocurrencies, one of the key considerations is security. Whether choosing to invest in Bitcoin or alternative coins (altcoins), it is important to understand the differences in security features to make an informed decision.

When it comes to investing in cryptocurrencies, there are two main choices: Bitcoin and altcoins. Bitcoin, as the first and most well-known cryptocurrency, has long been considered a safe investment option. On the other hand, altcoins offer investors the potential for higher returns but also come with higher risks. So, the question remains: which one to choose?

When it comes to investing in cryptocurrencies, one of the most common dilemmas for investors is choosing between Bitcoin and altcoins. Bitcoin, as the first and most well-known cryptocurrency, has established itself as a digital gold standard in the market. On the other hand, altcoins refer to all other cryptocurrencies aside from Bitcoin, each with its own unique features and potential for growth. In this article, we will explore the pros and cons of investing in Bitcoin versus altcoins to help you make an informed decision.

Cryptocurrencies have gained significant popularity in recent years, with more and more people looking to invest in this digital asset class. If you're new to the world of cryptocurrency and wondering how to buy cryptocurrencies, this guide will help you understand the process of purchasing cryptocurrencies.

Cryptocurrencies have become a popular investment option in recent years, with many people looking to buy and trade digital assets such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other altcoins. However, with the rise in popularity of cryptocurrencies, scams and fraudulent activities have also increased. It is essential to be cautious and take steps to avoid falling victim to scams while buying cryptocurrencies. In this article, we will discuss some tips on how to buy cryptocurrencies safely and avoid scams.

Cryptocurrencies have gained significant popularity in recent years, with many people looking to buy these digital assets as an investment or for various transactions. One common way to purchase cryptocurrencies is by using credit cards. In this guide, we will explore how to buy cryptocurrencies with credit cards and provide some tips to ensure a smooth and secure transaction.

Cryptocurrencies have gained tremendous popularity in recent years, with many investors looking to buy alternative coins, or altcoins, as part of their investment strategy. However, with so many different platforms available, it can be overwhelming to know where to start. In this blog post, we will discuss some of the best platforms to buy altcoins and provide a guide on how to buy cryptocurrencies.

How to Buy Bitcoin: A Step-by-Step Guide to Purchasing Cryptocurrency

Securing your digital wallet for Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies is essential to protect your assets from unauthorized access and potential loss. In the world of cryptocurrency, there is no centralized authority to help you recover your funds if they are lost or stolen. Therefore, it is crucial to understand how to backup and recover your crypto wallet to ensure that your assets are safe. In this blog post, we will explore the best practices for securing your digital wallet and the steps you can take to backup and recover your crypto assets.

Secure Digital Wallets for Bitcoin and Altcoins: Comparing Hardware vs Software Wallets for Crypto

In the world of cryptocurrency, the security of your digital wallet is paramount. With the increasing popularity of Bitcoin and altcoins, it has become more important than ever to ensure that your funds are safe from hackers and other cyber threats. One of the best ways to enhance the security of your crypto wallet is by using two-factor authentication (2FA).

Secure Digital Wallets for Bitcoin and Altcoins: Best Wallets for Storing Altcoins Safely

With the rise of cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and altcoins, the need for secure digital wallets to store, send, and receive these digital assets has become increasingly important. Cryptocurrency wallets are virtual wallets that allow users to store their digital currencies securely. They come in various forms, including desktop wallets, mobile wallets, hardware wallets, and paper wallets. In this blog post, we will explore some of the top secure Bitcoin wallets available in the market.

Zurich, Switzerland and Vancouver, Canada are two vibrant cities with distinct characteristics that make them stand out in their respective regions. While Zurich is known for its financial prowess and high quality of life, Vancouver is a bustling hub of business and innovation on the west coast of Canada. Let's take a closer look at how these two cities compare in terms of their business environments.

Located in the heart of Switzerland, Zurich is known for its stunning natural beauty, bustling city life, and thriving business environment. The city attracts businesses from all over the world, thanks to its robust infrastructure, highly skilled workforce, and favorable economic policies. For UK businesses looking to expand or set up operations in Zurich, there are a number of government business support programs available to help navigate the process.

Zurich and Tokyo are two major global financial hubs, each offering unique opportunities for investment strategies. In this blog post, we will explore some key considerations for investors looking to navigate the investment landscape in these two cities.

Zurich, Switzerland and Tokyo, Japan are two dynamic cities with thriving business scenes. Both cities are prominent global financial centers and are known for their innovation, economic stability, and high quality of life. In this blog post, we will explore the unique business environments in Zurich and Tokyo and compare the two cities in terms of business opportunities, infrastructure, and work culture.

Zurich, Switzerland and Sydney, Australia are two vibrant business hubs that offer unique experiences for entrepreneurs and professionals alike. From finance and banking to tech startups and creative industries, both cities have established themselves as key players in the global business landscape. Let's take a closer look at what makes Zurich and Sydney standout in the business world.

Zurich, Switzerland, is a vibrant city known for its scenic beauty, rich history, and thriving business environment. One interesting aspect of Zurich's business landscape is the presence of Sudanese entrepreneurs who have made their mark in various industries in the city.

Zurich, Switzerland is known for its vibrant small business community, with entrepreneurs driving innovation and growth in various industries. However, starting or expanding a small business often requires financial support in the form of small business loans. These loans can provide the necessary capital for businesses to invest in equipment, hire employees, expand operations, or launch new products or services.

Zurich, Switzerland is a picturesque city known for its beautiful architecture, vibrant cultural scene, and high quality of life. On the other hand, Shanghai, China is a bustling metropolis that serves as a major financial and business hub in Asia. Let's explore how these two cities compare in terms of business opportunities and what makes them unique in their own ways.

Zurich, Switzerland and Quebec, Canada are two distinct regions with unique business environments. Let's delve into the differences and similarities when it comes to conducting business in these two locations.

Zurich, Switzerland and the Philippine Business Environment:

Cryptocurrency Wallets for Beginners: How to Choose a Safe Cryptocurrency Wallet

Cryptocurrency Wallets for Beginners: Understanding Private and Public Keys in Crypto Wallets

Cryptocurrency Wallets for Beginners: How to Set Up Your First Crypto Wallet

Cryptocurrency Wallets for Beginners: Top 5 Cryptocurrency Wallets to Consider

Cryptocurrencies have gained significant popularity in recent years, with more and more people looking to invest in this digital asset class. If you're new to the world of cryptocurrency and wondering how to buy cryptocurrencies, this guide will help you understand the process of purchasing cryptocurrencies.

Cryptocurrencies have become a popular investment option in recent years, with many people looking to buy and trade digital assets such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and other altcoins. However, with the rise in popularity of cryptocurrencies, scams and fraudulent activities have also increased. It is essential to be cautious and take steps to avoid falling victim to scams while buying cryptocurrencies. In this article, we will discuss some tips on how to buy cryptocurrencies safely and avoid scams.

Cryptocurrencies have gained significant popularity in recent years, with many people looking to buy these digital assets as an investment or for various transactions. One common way to purchase cryptocurrencies is by using credit cards. In this guide, we will explore how to buy cryptocurrencies with credit cards and provide some tips to ensure a smooth and secure transaction.

Cryptocurrencies have gained tremendous popularity in recent years, with many investors looking to buy alternative coins, or altcoins, as part of their investment strategy. However, with so many different platforms available, it can be overwhelming to know where to start. In this blog post, we will discuss some of the best platforms to buy altcoins and provide a guide on how to buy cryptocurrencies.

How to Buy Bitcoin: A Step-by-Step Guide to Purchasing Cryptocurrency

Cryptocurrencies have taken the financial world by storm, with Bitcoin and Ethereum leading the way as the most well-known digital assets. However, there are many hidden gem cryptocurrencies that have the potential to make significant gains in the future. In this article, we will explore some of the top cryptocurrencies to watch that are considered hidden gems in the crypto space.

Cryptocurrencies have become a hot topic in the financial world, offering investors a new avenue for potentially lucrative returns. With thousands of cryptocurrencies available in the market, it can be overwhelming to choose the right one for investment. In this article, we will explore some of the top cryptocurrencies to watch and provide tips on how to choose the right cryptocurrency for your investment portfolio.

Cryptocurrency trading has become increasingly popular in recent years, with many traders seeking to capitalize on the volatile nature of digital assets. Day trading, in particular, is a popular trading strategy where traders buy and sell cryptocurrencies within the same day to capitalize on short-term price fluctuations. If you are looking to try your hand at day trading in the cryptocurrency market, here are some of the top cryptocurrencies to watch:

Cryptocurrencies have taken the financial world by storm, with Bitcoin leading the way as the most well-known digital currency. However, there are many other cryptocurrencies worth watching and considering for long-term investment opportunities. Here are some of the top cryptocurrencies to keep an eye on: