The peace deal may stabilize global oil markets but unresolved issues could still impact regional stability and future US-Iran relations.

The post US and Iran sign peace deal amid ongoing 2026 war, reopen Strait of Hormuz appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The annulment request by Juntos por el Per could delay election result certification, increasing political uncertainty and market volatility.

The post Juntos por el Perú seeks annulment of 2,408 ballots citing 583 anomalies appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Paper Rex's strong performance boosts their championship prospects, influencing market confidence and altering competitive dynamics in esports.

The post Paper Rex secures top four spot in Masters London 2026 VALORANT playoffs appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Rising oil prices due to geopolitical tensions could reignite inflation fears, impacting global markets and potentially increasing regulatory scrutiny on crypto assets.

The post Oil tops $80 as US-Iran talk cancellation reignites supply fears appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Iran's new insurance fees for Hormuz passage could elevate global shipping costs, impact energy prices, and challenge maritime compliance.

The post Iran signals future insurance fees for ships crossing Strait of Hormuz appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Prediction Market Kalshi Eyes IPO as Revenue Hits $2 Billion 

Kalshi, the prediction markets platform that has become the dominant force in U.S. event contracts, is in informal talks with investment banks about a potential initial public offering, The Information reported Thursday, citing sources familiar with the company’s financials.

The disclosure caps a period of rapid transformation for the four-year-old company. Kalshi’s annualized revenue has crossed $2 billion — triple its November 2025 figure — after spikes in trading tied to the NBA playoffs and the FIFA World Cup drove volume to record levels. 

In May, the platform recorded $16.81 billion in monthly trading volume, up from $14.81 billion in April.

The IPO conversations remain at an early stage, and no listing is expected before late 2027 or 2028. As part of the discussions, Kalshi is asking prospective bank advisers to integrate with its platform, a move designed to give institutional clients of those banks direct trading access.

The news lands weeks after Kalshi closed a $1 billion Series F round led by Coatue at a $22 billion valuation — double the company’s valuation from January. The round drew participation from Sequoia Capital, Andreessen Horowitz, Paradigm, IVP, Morgan Stanley, and ARK Invest.

Kalshi’s monster numbers

Kalshi commands more than 90% of U.S. prediction market activity. Its annualized trading volume climbed from $52 billion to $178 billion over the past year, and institutional trading on the platform jumped 800% in the six months ended in early May. 

Those numbers have drawn attention from Wall Street firms looking for new venues to deploy capital.

The company was founded in 2020 by Tarek Mansour and Luana Lage, graduates of the MIT and Y Combinator programs, to build a regulated exchange where users can trade on the outcomes of real-world events — from Federal Reserve decisions and economic indicators to sports results and political races. 

For years, Kalshi waged a legal battle against the CFTC for the right to list political event contracts. It prevailed in late 2024 when a federal court ruled in the company’s favor, unlocking a market that now generates billions in annual trading volume.

Kalshi plans to deploy its latest capital toward institutional expansion, including block trading capabilities, new risk products for hedge funds, asset managers, and insurers, and upgrades to its core trading infrastructure.

IPO timing will depend in part on broader market conditions and the durability of Kalshi’s growth. The prediction market space has attracted a wave of competitors, including Polymarket, but Kalshi’s status as a CFTC-regulated exchange gives it advantages in institutional adoption that decentralized rivals cannot replicate.

Should Kalshi go public in 2027 or 2028 at a valuation near its last private round, it would rank among the largest U.S. fintech IPOs in recent years. 

This post Prediction Market Kalshi Eyes IPO as Revenue Hits $2 Billion  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Kevin Warsh Still Needs to Manage the Dollar, While Bitcoin Runs Automatically

Kevin Warsh chaired his first Federal Open Market Committee meeting this week and immediately showed his hawkish colors. Rates stayed steady, but the new Fed Chair made it clear he intends to prioritize price stability and reduce loose forward guidance. While Warsh is focused on managing the dollar’s ongoing challenges, his debut actually highlights something much deeper: the dollar still requires constant human intervention to avoid dilution and debasement.

Bitcoin, by contrast, has a hard-capped supply and predictable issuance that no chairman can change. Warsh’s first meeting as Fed Chair makes the advantage of Bitcoin’s fixed supply more obvious than ever.

The System Warsh Is Trying to Manage

Warsh inherited a central bank that must constantly adjust the money supply to balance inflation and employment.

This is not a temporary problem. Its built into how fiat currencies operate. The Federal Reserve can expand or contract the money supply at will, and history shows it tends to expand over time.

Since the U.S. left the gold standard in 1971, the dollar has lost roughly 88% of its purchasing power. A dollar from that era now buys what about twelve cents buys today.

U.S. M2 money supply has grown from hundreds of billions of dollars to more than $22 trillion. Every major expansion represents dilution for existing holders.

The Structural Problem Fiat Cannot Escape

Even a disciplined and hawkish chairman like Warsh must work inside a system where the money supply is discretionary. Policy decisions, political pressures, and economic shocks all influence how much new money enters circulation. This creates recurring cycles of inflation and erosion of purchasing power. Bitcoin removes this discretion entirely.

Bitcoin’s Fixed Supply Changes the Equation

Bitcoin has a hard cap of 21 million coins. New supply is issued on a transparent schedule that halves every 210,000 blocks, roughly every four years, until issuance approaches zero around 2140. No individual, committee, or government can increase that total.

This creates a level of monetary predictability that fiat systems cannot match. The rules are enforced by code and network consensus rather than policy statements. Once a block is sufficiently confirmed, the transaction history becomes practically immutable.

Why Warsh’s Approach Makes the Contrast Clearer

Warsh’s emphasis on price stability and reduced forward guidance is an attempt to bring more discipline to the current system. That effort itself reveals the core difference: the dollar needs active management to prevent excessive debasement. Bitcoin’s supply rules do not require ongoing intervention or trust in any central authority.

A hawkish Fed Chair trying to restrain inflation is not a threat to Bitcoin’s long-term case. It is evidence that the fiat system continues to need restraint. Bitcoin was designed so that restraint is built into the protocol from the start.

The Practical Difference

Warsh’s first FOMC meeting shows a serious attempt to manage the dollar responsibly. At the same time, it underscores why a money with truly fixed and unchangeable supply rules offers a fundamentally different foundation.

Bitcoin does not promise stable prices in the short term. It promises something narrower but more powerful: a monetary base that cannot be diluted by policy decisions. In a world where even committed central bankers must constantly fight against expansion, that fixed supply stands out as the clearest structural advantage.

For public companies and operators sitting on large cash reserves, this reality carries direct consequences. Cash sitting in bank accounts or short-term instruments continues to face gradual erosion through inflation, even under a more disciplined Fed Chair. Warsh’s emphasis on price stability is welcome, but it does not change the fundamental design of fiat — where the supply can still expand when policymakers decide it must.

Many CFOs are now quietly reevaluating what it means to hold hundreds of millions, or even billions, in a currency whose value is subject to ongoing management. Bitcoin’s fixed supply offers a fundamentally different option: an asset that cannot be diluted by policy decisions and whose scarcity is guaranteed by protocol rather than promise.

For operators thinking beyond the next few quarters, treating a portion of treasury reserves as a long-term store of value rather than pure liquidity is becoming a more serious strategic consideration.

Disclaimer: This content was prepared on behalf of Bitcoin For Corporations for informational purposes only. It reflects the author’s own analysis and opinion and should not be relied upon as investment advice. Nothing in this article constitutes an offer, invitation, or solicitation to purchase, sell, or subscribe for any security or financial product.

This post Kevin Warsh Still Needs to Manage the Dollar, While Bitcoin Runs Automatically first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Nick Ward.

Bitcoin Magazine

Franklin Templeton Files for Two ETFs That Reinvest Stock Dividends Into Bitcoin

Franklin Templeton has filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission to launch two exchange-traded funds that channel corporate dividend payments directly into bitcoin, the latest sign of Wall Street’s push to embed cryptocurrency into traditional investment structures.

The Thursday filing registers the Franklin US Equity Bitcoin DRIP Index ETF and the Franklin US Innovation Bitcoin DRIP Index ETF, with an effective date as early as Sept. 1, 2026. 

The “DRIP” name borrows from dividend reinvestment plans — a mechanism long used by investors to compound stock positions over time — and repurposes it to accumulate bitcoin rather than additional shares.

Both funds launch with a 95% allocation to U.S. large-cap equities and a 5% allocation to bitcoin. The first tracks the VettaFi US Large-Cap 500 Bitcoin DRIP Index, offering broad market exposure across approximately 498 securities with market caps ranging from $7.5 billion to $4.9 trillion, while the second tracks a VettaFi innovation-focused variant concentrated on growth companies.

Under the index methodology, dividends generated by the underlying stock portfolios flow into bitcoin-linked instruments — including spot bitcoin exchange-traded products, futures contracts, options, and in some cases a wholly-owned subsidiary in the Cayman Islands — rather than being redistributed to investors or reinvested in equities. 

The structure creates what one analysis described as “an automatic, low-maintenance 5% bitcoin feed funded entirely by equity dividends.”

Quarterly rebalancing rules would trim bitcoin allocations above 5% back to 4.5%, while a hard cap limits bitcoin exposure to 20% of the portfolio between rebalancing periods. No fees have been disclosed in the preliminary filing.

Bitcoin ETFs are getting popular

The proposal arrives amid a wave of crypto ETF innovation following the SEC’s publication of generic listing standards for crypto-linked funds in late 2025. 

Bitwise predicted more than 100 such ETFs could launch in 2026, and Bloomberg Intelligence counted well over 100 filings in the pipeline at the end of last year. Franklin Templeton’s dividend-into-bitcoin design is the latest variation on a theme that has produced covered-call income products and other structured wrappers competing for assets beyond plain spot exposure, where BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust dominates with tens of billions in net assets.

The filings extend a broader digital asset buildout at Franklin Templeton. 

In May, Franklin Templeton entered a partnership with Payward — the parent of crypto exchange Kraken — to tokenize traditional investment products and offer its BENJI tokenized money market fund on Kraken’s platform as a collateral management tool for institutional clients. Earlier this month, Franklin Templeton integrated BENJI into MoonPay Trade, enabling institutional users to swap between stablecoins like USDC and USDT and the tokenized fund through MoonPay’s on-chain infrastructure.

This year, Franklin Templeton also launched a dedicated Franklin Crypto division through its acquisition of CoinFund spinoff 250 Digital, and struck a separate agreement with Ondo Finance to offer tokenized versions of its ETFs for 24/7 trading from crypto wallets, targeting investors outside the United States. Taken together, the moves position the $1.5 trillion asset manager as one of the most active traditional finance firms in the digital asset space.

The new Franklin Templeton DRIP ETFs join a broader institutional push into bitcoin at a moment when the asset is under price pressure. BTC trades below $62,700 as of Friday morning, off more than 50% from its October 2025 peak near $126,000. 

Just this week, BlackRock launched the iShares Bitcoin Premium Income ETF (BITA), a new fund that holds exposure to Bitcoin through IBIT while selling covered-call options on 25–35% of its holdings to generate monthly income, targeting annual yields of 15%–25%. BlackRock ETF executive Jay Jacobs said the product is designed to attract traditional investors by turning Bitcoin’s volatility into a source of income, while offering a lower-volatility alternative to holding Bitcoin directly.

This post Franklin Templeton Files for Two ETFs That Reinvest Stock Dividends Into Bitcoin first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

BlackRock Executive Calls Bitcoin “Too Big to Ignore”, Discusses New Bitcoin Premium Income ETF

BlackRock, the world’s largest asset manager with more than $10 trillion under management, has launched a new Bitcoin exchange-traded product designed to generate monthly income for investors — a move the firm’s top ETF executive says is aimed at pulling in a wave of traditional investors who have kept their distance from the asset due to its volatility.

Jay Jacobs, BlackRock’s US Head of Equity ETFs, spoke to CoinTelegraph to discuss the launch of the iShares Bitcoin Premium Income ETF, ticker BITA, which began trading this week. The product represents a departure from conventional Bitcoin exposure by layering a covered-call strategy on top of the firm’s existing iShares Bitcoin Trust, known as IBIT.

“You can think about this as a hybrid strategy for investors,” Jacobs said. “You both have upside opportunity in Bitcoin, as well as the ability to generate income off of Bitcoin.”

BITA holds exposure to Bitcoin through IBIT and sells call options at the money on approximately 25 to 35% of the portfolio. The premium collected from the sale of those options is distributed to holders as income. 

Jacobs said the strategy targets an annual yield of between 15 and 25%, though the actual figure will depend on Bitcoin’s volatility at any given time — a direct application of the Black-Scholes options pricing model, where higher volatility produces higher premiums.

The trade-off is a cap on upside participation. 

If Bitcoin rises 10%in a year and the fund is selling roughly 30%of that upside through options, the fund’s price return would be approximately 7 percent. Add the 15% income component, and total return reaches around 22% — a figure that Jacobs noted would outperform spot Bitcoin in that specific scenario.

In a major Bitcoin rally, the math tilts the other way. If Bitcoin gains 100% in a year, BITA holders would see roughly 70%in price appreciation plus 15% in income, totaling approximately 85%. That underperforms a straight long position, but Jacobs framed that outcome as an accepted trade-off, not a flaw.

Turning bitcoin volatility into a feature

One of the central themes of Jacobs’ conversation was the idea that Bitcoin’s long-criticized volatility is precisely what makes a product like BITA viable. Options prices are a function of volatility, and Bitcoin’s high historical volatility means the premiums available from selling covered calls are substantial.

“You’re monetizing volatility by selling options that are primarily driven by that volatility,” Jacobs said. For investors who have seen Bitcoin’s price swings as a barrier to entry, the product offers a different frame: volatility as a source of income rather than a source of risk.

Jacobs outlined several distinct investor profiles for BITA. Income-oriented investors seeking yield across asset classes represent one group. Long-term Bitcoin holders in a bear or sideways market represent another — people who remain bullish on the asset but want cash flow in the interim. 

A third group, which Jacobs described as more institutional in character, is made up of portfolio managers who have historically required cash-flow-generating assets to justify an allocation.

“Assets that don’t have any cash flows associated with it had always been somewhat difficult, if not impossible, to put in those portfolios — Bitcoin, gold, silver — the cash flow is zero,” Jacobs said. BITA is designed to change that calculus for those investors.

IBIT is the foundation

Jacobs also addressed the broader trajectory of IBIT since its launch roughly two and a half years ago. He said approximately three quarters of IBIT buyers were purchasing an iShares product for the first time, indicating that Bitcoin ETFs have functioned as an on-ramp into the broader ETF ecosystem rather than just a new wrapper for existing investors.

Financial advisors on major bank platforms, who were restricted from accessing digital assets until those platforms opened up access to IBIT, represent a segment Jacobs called out as a source of growing momentum — one that is intersecting with generational wealth transfer as millennials enter higher earning years and accumulate investable assets.

This post BlackRock Executive Calls Bitcoin “Too Big to Ignore”, Discusses New Bitcoin Premium Income ETF first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

STRC Is Junk Credit in a Bitcoin Costume, and Retail Is Holding $8.8 Billion of It

There is now $15 billion sitting in three securities being marketed to bitcoin holders as the safer, smarter way to access bitcoin exposure: Strategy’s preferred stack, STRC, and SATA. The pitch is identical across all three. Tax-favored. 11.5% income. Backed by bitcoin. Money-market risk. 82.7% of the buyer base is retail. Every word of that pitch is wrong, and the security those buyers actually own is built to fail in exactly the bitcoin environment it claims to harness.

The Pitch Is a Story. The Capital Structure Is the Truth

STRC is an unsecured, subordinated, perpetual preferred equity. No maturity date. No lien on a single satoshi of Strategy’s bitcoin treasury. The dividend is discretionary, which means the board can cut it at any monthly meeting with no notice, no remedy, and no vote. S&P rates the issuer B-, four notches into junk territory. None of that information appears in the marketing.

Stack those features against the words in the pitch. “Backed by bitcoin” describes a security with no claim on a single coin. “Money-market-like” describes an instrument rated four notches below investment grade with no maturity and a discretionary coupon. “Safe income” describes a payment the board controls and the funding source for which is the security itself. Each phrase in the marketing is contradicted by the indenture.

That is not a money market fund. It is speculative-grade credit-like product dressed in safe-income marketing, and 82.7% of it sits on retail balance sheets. Of the $10.7 billion notional outstanding for STRC, roughly $8.8 billion belongs to retail bitcoin holders concentrated in a single junk credit. There is no polite phrase for that exposure. It is a bag, and retail is holding it.

The Funding Mechanism Eats Itself

The structural risk in STRC is not that the dividend is high. It is that the dividend cannot be funded out of the business. Strategy’s underlying software business produces roughly $477 million in annual revenue. Total preferred dividend obligations now exceed $1.2 billion, a ratio of 3.5 to 1. The gap is not closed by earnings. It is closed by issuing new STRC shares at or above par, or diluting common shareholders of MSTR, with the proceeds recycled to pay the existing holders.

That is a reflexive funding loop. It works when STRC trades above par and breaks the moment it doesn’t. Anything that pressures the price, a credit downgrade, a missed dividend, a bitcoin drawdown, a capital markets shutdown, removes the very mechanism the dividend depends on. There is no plan B in the indenture. There is no lien on bitcoin to seize. There is no operating cash flow to redirect. There is only the next share issuance, and the next, until either bitcoin compounds the company out of the problem or the structure jams.

Then there is the dividend ratchet. The coupon has moved monthly from 9% to 11.5%, embedding $268 million in permanent annual obligations into the structure. The rate has only ever moved in one direction. Each monthly increase makes the funding gap wider, the share issuance more dilutive, and the price floor harder to hold. The mechanism designed to keep STRC attractive to new buyers is the same mechanism that compounds the burden on the issuer and accelerates the run on the funding loop when stress arrives.

The Mythical Institutional Buyer and the Math That Buries Him

The standard defense of the Digital Credit category goes like this: surely informed institutional capital is on the other side. Insurance companies need yield. Pension funds need duration. Fixed-income desks need product. Digital Credit is the institutional bridge to bitcoin.

That defense collapses on its own logic. Any institution that allocates to an unsecured, subordinated, perpetual preferred layered on a bitcoin treasury must first underwrite the underlying asset. Any institution that does the work to underwrite bitcoin allocates directly to spot bitcoin, where the credit risk vanishes and the path-dependent fragility goes with it. The institutional buyer who is both informed and rational does not exist in this product. The buyer who does exist, at 82.7% concentration, is retail.

The path-dependency math finishes the argument. Across 5,000 simulated bitcoin paths at a 10% compounding rate, the credit model produces a 12.3% probability of formal default, a 21.9% probability of dividend deferral, and a 50.7% probability of at least one forced bitcoin sale by the issuer during the eight-year cycle. At a 15% compounding rate, STRC has a 44.6% probability of ending below $85 even on paths where bitcoin recovers to new highs.

A bitcoin holder’s terminal wealth depends only on where bitcoin ends. An STRC holder’s outcome depends on every drawdown in between, because the same mechanisms that pretend to protect the dividend in calm conditions become the mechanisms that consume the holder’s principal in stress. The product is most fragile in exactly the bitcoin scenarios the underlying asset absorbs without consequence.

Bitcoin Was Built to Kill This Exact Trade

Bitcoin’s entire reason for existing is the removal of counterparty risk, custody risk, and opacity from monetary holdings. STRC, Strategy’s preferred stack, and similar instruments reintroduce all three under a marketing layer the underlying instrument cannot support. The alternative does not require any of that machinery: bitcoin in self-custody alongside a U.S. Treasury income ladder produces the same cash profile, with more terminal wealth and no corporate issuer in between.

The market will eventually clear the difference between the security retail thinks it bought and the security it actually owns. Anyone reading the cap table and allocating anyway is willingly underwriting Saylor’s funding plan with capital that thinks it bought a money market fund.

This is a guest post by Glenn Cameron, Global Head of Onramp Institutional. Opinions expressed are entirely their own and do not necessarily reflect those of BTC Inc or Bitcoin Magazine.

This post STRC Is Junk Credit in a Bitcoin Costume, and Retail Is Holding $8.8 Billion of It first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Glenn Cameron.

STRC, Strategy's perpetual preferred stock, traded as low as $82.61 on June 18 before recovering to $88.59, putting the security nearly 17% below its $100 stated amount at the intraday low.

MSTR fell 3.4% to $112.53 during the same session, while Bitcoin traded near $62,730, down about 2.5%.

Strategy designed STRC to hover around $100 through monthly dividend-rate adjustments, currently set at 11.50% annualized, payable semi-monthly in cash.

At $88.59, that 11.5% coupon implies an effective yield of roughly 13.0%, and the disconnect between the stated rate and market demand shows how far confidence has slipped.

With approximately $10.5 billion of STRC notional outstanding, an 11.5% annual rate implies roughly $1.21 billion in STRC-only dividend costs.

If the market keeps pricing below par and Strategy responds by raising the rate to 14%, the cost would rise to about $1.47 billion annually, which is a dynamic that critics have been warning about for months.

What the criticism got right

The Ponzi-like characterization of STRC has circulated widely, with Peter Schiff calling it “the most obvious Ponzi” and arguing that new capital fund payments go to existing holders.

Strategy's filings describe STRC as perpetual preferred equity with disclosed risks and discretionary dividend mechanics. The company has no legal obligation to maintain STRC near $100, and its own prospectus warns that raising the dividend when STRC trades below par may fail to restore the price.

Tyler Wellener, CSO at Tyr Capital, commented on the structural problem in a note:

“The capital structure has become more complex over the last year, and the market is nervous about their ability to keep everyone happy and fulfill the obligations.”

He added that STRC is a confidence game in management, as it is not really backed or collateralized by Bitcoin. A 2.5% Bitcoin drawdown produced a 17% intraday swing in STRC because the instrument's stability depends on continuous confidence in Saylor's capital allocation.

Ryan Haczynski, head of protocol partnerships at GlobalStake, identifies a second accelerant. On-chain STRC derivatives and tokenized share products had been purchasing and tokenizing shares, while larger participants had built large short positions.

As STRC spent months trading close to par, investors treated it as a low-volatility carry and added leverage to enhance yield.

When the price slipped below key levels, margin calls triggered a cascade of liquidations, amplifying the move.

Haczynski also notes that Saylor recently acknowledged ChatGPT played a role in developing the STRC structure, a detail that compounded selling pressure as the clip circulated alongside the price decline.

Why selling Bitcoin does not fix this

Strategy disclosed that it sold 32 BTC between May 26 and May 31 for $2.5 million, with the proceeds expected to fund preferred stock distributions.

The company subsequently bought 1,550 BTC for $101.3 million, bringing total holdings to 845,256 BTC as of June 7 and raising its US dollar reserve to $1 billion.

The 32 BTC sale was financially negligible, roughly 482 times smaller than one year of STRC-only dividends at the current rate, but it cracked the narrative that Saylor would never sell.

Wellener addressed the BTC sale question:

“Selling BTC will weaken their balance sheet and spook the market as large BTC holders may look to sell their BTC to de-risk, and common equity holders may realize they're better off holding BTC directly or buying one of the ETFs.”

MSTR shareholders bought the stock to accumulate Bitcoin per share, while STRC holders bought it for yield. Selling Bitcoin to fund dividends appeases one constituency while alarming the other, and does nothing to address whether Strategy can generate yield without continuously refinancing through new capital.

Haczynski said that Strategy's likely next move involves some combination of a higher dividend rate, opportunistic buybacks of discounted STRC shares, or additional capital raises using MSTR or traditional debt.

Raising the dividend increases the annual burden and gives ammunition to critics who warn of a feedback loop. MSTR issuance preserves the Bitcoin stack but dilutes common shareholders and reduces BTC-per-share accretion, the core metric that MSTR buyers care about.

A buyback would be the strongest confidence signal, since repurchasing STRC at a steep discount and reissuing it closer to par could be accretive to MSTR shareholders, but it consumes cash that could otherwise fund dividends or buy Bitcoin.

Wellener shared what a credible fix requires:

“Strategy's ability to right the ship will come down to if they can convince the market they can increase BTC per share without relying on equity issuance or financial engineering.”

He added that moving beyond buy-and-hold to use derivatives for yield generation, as commodity firms have done for two decades, could provide a path to real yield that does not depend on capital-market access or Bitcoin price appreciation.

What the market prices next

If Strategy announces buybacks, raises its US dollar reserve, or outlines a credible derivatives-based yield strategy, STRC can recover toward the $95-$100 range.

Haczynski described the move as a liquidity unwind: the company held $1 billion in USD reserves as of June 7 against a quarterly STRC dividend obligation of roughly one-quarter of $1.21 billion.

A well-structured buyback at current prices would be accretive and would demonstrate that the $100 par target is more than a marketing claim.

If STRC holds below $90 and the market begins pricing a 14% effective yield as the new baseline, the feedback loop the critics described becomes self-reinforcing.

Dividend hikes increase the cash burden without restoring par, MSTR issuance to fund those hikes dilutes common holders, and Bitcoin sales to cover shortfalls undermine the accumulation thesis.

The instrument reprices as distressed Bitcoin credit, with different investor expectations, different buyer bases, and a much higher bar for confidence recovery.

The broader implication extends beyond Strategy, as Bitcoin-based yield products are being stress-tested at scale as credit instruments for the first time.

If STRC cannot hold par with an 11.5% dividend, a $10.4 billion notional base, and 845,256 Bitcoin on the balance sheet, the next generation of Bitcoin treasury products will face harder questions about collateral structures, yield sustainability, and what it means to offer yield backed by a non-yielding asset.

The post STRC’s plunge puts Saylor’s Bitcoin dividend machine under pressure appeared first on CryptoSlate.

DefiLlama shows Pump.fun generated $108.3 million in gross revenue during the first quarter and $69.2 million in the second quarter to date, marking a 36.1% decline from the prior quarter's pace.

The broader Pump stack, which includes PumpSwap and Terminal alongside Pump.fun, shows Q2-to-date gross protocol revenue of $179.3 million, 37.5% below the first quarter's $287.1 million, while earnings fell from $120.9 million to $79.1 million over the same period.

Pump.fun's scale ranks among the most profitable consumer applications ever built on Solana. Its cumulative revenue exceeds $1 billion, and the broader Pump stack has generated $1.18 billion since launch.

Its bonding-curve mechanism, which bootstraps initial liquidity for new token issuances and collects fees on trades, graduations, and Mayhem-mode activity, still processes hundreds of millions in DEX volume monthly.

The quarterly comparison shows a deceleration, with cumulative revenue and volume reflecting one of crypto's most productive consumer loops.

The revenue conversation on Solana has widened as Collector Crypt's quarterly numbers run in the opposite direction.

A different curve

Collector Crypt is a Solana protocol built around tokenized physical trading cards: users buy randomized digital packs tied to real, graded cards, trade tokenized cards on-chain, sell them back through the platform, or redeem the physical versions.

DefiLlama describes it as a protocol to sell RWA Pokémon cards on Solana, with revenue from gacha pack sales, marketplace fees, and royalties, net of gacha pack buybacks.

Collector Crypt opened over 215,000 tokenized TCG packs in a single week and crossed $50 million in cumulative revenue, with more than 30% of users redeeming physical cards.

DefiLlama shows Collector Crypt generated $12.3 million in the first quarter and $25.8 million in the second quarter to date, a 108.8% acceleration.

Its 7-day revenue of $5.1 million represents about 38% of its nearly $13.5 million 30-day total, a sharper recent concentration than Pump.fun's 22.8% ratio.

Collector Crypt's last 30 days also account for 88.3% of its approximately $123.5 million in cumulative DEX volume, compared with 1.4% for Pump.fun, which reflects a protocol whose measurable activity is recent and compressing upward rather than spread across years of cumulative issuance.

Collector Crypt's 2026 revenue of $38.1 million is about 21.5% of Pump.fun's $177.5 million, and 8.2% of the broader Pump stack's $466.5 million.

The data show that a protocol generates its strongest activity precisely as the larger platform decelerates.

CARDS as the market's attention proxy

CARDS, Collector Crypt's token, has moved in tandem with the protocol's revenue acceleration.
CoinGecko shows the token around $0.259, up 47% over seven days, with approximately $10.4 million in 24-hour trading volume, a market cap of around $66.83 million, and an all-time high of $0.38.

CARDS has become the liquid instrument traders use to express a view on Collector Crypt's acceleration, but token holders should not assume revenue capture from that price action.

DefiLlama currently lists Collector Crypt holders' revenue as zero and notes that tracking is disabled until the protocol's buyback hub wallet receives official confirmation.

The broader tokenized trading card market provides context for why Collector Crypt's activity curve looks the way it does.

The top seven tokenized trading-card platforms generated $230 million in gacha sales in May 2026, up sevenfold year over year, with Solana accounting for 64% of that volume.

That expansion points to a specific aspect of what Solana's consumer app economy can now monetize.

Pump.fun's model depends on a speculative issuance loop: new tokens launch, trade on bonding curves, graduate to open markets, and generate fees at each stage.

Collector Crypt's model depends on a consumer loop different from Pump.fun's, based on randomized pack openings tied to recognizable physical collectibles, on-chain secondary trading, and real-world redemption.

Both loops generate fees, volume, and token-market activity, but they draw on different user motivations and different definitions of what makes an on-chain asset worth holding.

Where the numbers go next

If Collector Crypt sustains its current revenue pace and the broader tokenized trading-card category continues to expand, the protocol becomes a durable fixture in Solana's app-revenue rankings.

CARDS continues to serve as the liquid proxy for that acceleration, gacha pack demand remains elevated, and the 30-day revenue gap between Collector Crypt and Pump.fun narrows further.

The sevenfold year-over-year figure for the broader TCG gacha category supports this trajectory if user demand holds.

If gacha demand fades, CARDS volume drops, or multiple jurisdictions apply loot-box frameworks to scrutinize randomized-pack mechanics, Collector Crypt's recent concentration of activity becomes a liability rather than proof of acceleration.

The protocol's cumulative revenue base of $58.4 million is thin relative to Pump.fun's $1 billion, which means a demand pullback would show up quickly in the weekly ratios that currently make Collector Crypt's trajectory legible.

Collector Crypt is building on the premise that users will pay for, trade, and return digital assets anchored to physical objects they recognize.

The second-quarter data show that this model and Pump.fun’s can both generate real fees on the same chain at the same time, and that Solana's consumer revenue base is wider than it was at the start of the year.

The post Pump Fun revenue slows as Collector Crypt’s $5.1M card-pack week reshapes Solana’s consumer loop appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin traded at $63,030 on June 18, down about 2% on the day, after whipsawing from an intraday high of $64,731 to a low of $62,263 while oil was falling and ships were moving through the Strait of Hormuz for the first time in weeks.

Today, June 19, it then continued to experience weak price performance, approaching $62,450 as of press time.

The US-Iran Islamabad Memorandum of Understanding, signed by President Donald Trump and sent to Congress on June 18, commits Iran to ensuring safe commercial passage through the Strait of Hormuz for 60 days, while the US fully ends its naval blockade on Iranian ports within 30 days.

Three Saudi-flagged supertankers carrying 6 million barrels of crude sailed through the Strait hours after Trump signed the deal, with vessels broadcasting their positions again after weeks of concealing voyages.

Brent touched its lowest level since before the war began on Feb. 28, settling near $79.85, while WTI settled at $76.60. The Strait handles roughly 20% of global oil supply, and for the first time since the conflict began, that supply lane was open.

Lower oil reduces the risk of another energy-driven inflation impulse, which in a standard macro sequence eases inflation expectations, puts downward pressure on yields, and makes risk assets with long duration more attractive to rate-sensitive positioning.

The Fed repriced what oil cannot fix

The FOMC held its target range at 3.50%-3.75% on June 18, but the dot plot was hawkish enough to overwhelm the oil signal.

Reports noted that 9 of 18 Fed policymakers now expect at least one rate hike this year, up from 0 in March, with 6 of those 9 projecting more than one 25-basis-point increase.

The Fed's median year-end PCE inflation forecast rose to 3.6% from 2.7% in March, and the statement said inflation is still elevated relative to its 2% goal and that the Committee “will deliver price stability.”

The FOMC cited supply shocks, including energy, which means the Fed is not yet treating the oil drop as a solved problem.

The US dollar index hit a one-year high of 100.80 after the Fed's statement, with Fed funds futures pricing a 68% chance of a rate hike by September.

Bitcoin's price action on June 18 saw the Hormuz deal remove one pressure point, while the Fed reintroduced a larger one, pushing BTC lower.

Lower oil today does not erase the inflation and rate-risk damage already embedded in the Fed's policy path. Policymakers marked inflation higher, nearly half see a hike coming, and the dollar is at a one-year high.

Cheaper energy helps at the margin while the Fed's own forecasts keep the rate-hike threat alive, with policymakers signaling hikes if inflation stays above target.

What the shipping data actually shows

Shipping and insurance officials stayed cautious after the deal, and Lloyd's Market Association warned that something approaching normal conditions could take months.

Mine-clearance operations in the Strait are incomplete, and the 60-day MOU timeline means the reopening is conditional.

That feeds directly into how Bitcoin trades the Hormuz channel from here. If the MOU holds and Brent keeps falling toward the mid-$70s, the disinflationary impulse becomes harder for the Fed to ignore.

Fed funds futures would reprice, the dollar would lose the rate-differential support that had pushed it to 100.80, and Bitcoin would have a more direct path toward recovery.

The war-risk premium that has weighed on risk assets since late February would genuinely deflate.

Where the rate path takes Bitcoin

If oil keeps falling and shipping normalization accelerates faster than Lloyd's and industry officials expect, the disinflationary signal will eventually feed into the Fed's inflation forecasts.

Hike odds recede, the dollar softens from its one-year high, and Bitcoin can reclaim the $65,000-$68,000 range as traders reprice the rate path rather than the war risk.

The Hormuz deal would have done what relief trades are supposed to do, it would just have taken longer than one session to show up in the macro variables the Fed watches.

If Fed hike odds keep climbing and the dollar extends its breakout above 100.80, Bitcoin faces pressure that oil relief cannot offset.

A clean break below $62,000 on persistent dollar strength and rising rate expectations would put the $60,000 area back in view, because the macro traders driving that move would be responding to the Fed's rate path.

June 18 confirmed the geopolitical news improved, oil fell, ships moved, and BTC still broke lower. The asset is pricing dollar strength, rate expectations, and whether cheaper oil shows up fast enough in inflation data to stop the Fed from validating the new hike dots.

Until that sequence completes, Bitcoin can receive good geopolitical news and still close the day lower.

The post Why Bitcoin fell below $63K after the oil shock finally eased appeared first on CryptoSlate.

The CFTC approved KalshiEX's BTCPERP contract on May 29, one day after Kalshi submitted it under Regulation 40.3.

The contract references spot Bitcoin, carries no expiry date, and perps generally allow leverage as high as 50-to-1, with automatic liquidation that can wipe out positions during sharp moves.

CME CEO Terry Duffy announced the company would sue the CFTC, arguing the regulator misclassified the product. As The Wall Street Journal reported, CME's complaint holds that Kalshi's perps should have been classified as swaps, which would have subjected them to stricter Dodd-Frank rules.

Kalshi has already recorded over $5 billion in perp volume since launch, with shares of CME, Cboe, and ICE falling on the approval, as investors read the CFTC's decision as a long-term competitive threat to incumbent exchanges.

That market reaction reveals why CME's objection rests as much on competitive logic as on consumer protection. Kalshi started as a platform where users trade event contracts, such as on Fed rate-cut odds or who will win the election.

Adding regulated Bitcoin perps pulls Kalshi toward the same retail derivatives screen that CME has spent decades building. The lawsuit is CME's attempt to use the courts to slow that expansion before it becomes structural.

Related Reading

Iran war bets turned Polymarket and Kalshi into the next fight over what people should be allowed to trade

Wall Street likes platforms that can monetize attention, but Washington tends to notice once that attention turns into incentives around the wrong topics.

Mar 15, 2026 · Andjela Radmilac

Wider pushback

The Futures Industry Association (FIA) and its Principal Traders Group told the CFTC that perpetual derivatives raise questions about trading and clearing risk, urging the agency to establish clearer definitions and a formal rulemaking process before approving more such products.

A bipartisan coalition of 41 attorneys general told the CFTC that sports-related event contracts should stay under state authority, arguing that platforms like Kalshi and Polymarket are operating as unregulated sportsbooks.

The CFTC's prediction market comment docket includes the American Gaming Association, state gaming boards in Arizona, Illinois, Maryland, and Michigan, the Indian Gaming Association, Major League Baseball, and the NBA.

The CFTC proposed new event-contract rules on June 10, with comments due July 27, and on June 12 sued New Mexico to block state gaming enforcement against CFTC-registered contract markets, citing similar conflicts in Arizona, Connecticut, Illinois, New York, Minnesota, Rhode Island, and Wisconsin.

CME's derivatives classification argument, the attorneys general's defense of state gaming authority, FIA's process objections, and the gaming industry's sportsbook framing each come from different institutional interests while targeting the same expansion.

Platforms are bundling tradable markets across categories that incumbents and regulators have kept separate for decades.

The convergence is already happening

Kalshi and Coinbase brought regulated crypto perps onshore, marking the first time such products were available to US investors through domestic regulated exchanges.

Polymarket's website advertises perps directly, with early-access invitations now live.

Hyperliquid, which built its user base on crypto perpetual futures, moved through HIP-4 to add outcome markets for off-chain events, including US inflation data and Federal Reserve decisions, allowing users to trade prediction-style contracts alongside crypto derivatives in one account.

Each platform followed the same underlying product logic independently, as perps generate continuous leverage-driven volume, event contracts generate media-driven attention spikes, and a platform hosting both captures both revenue streams.

Between May 17 and June 10, SpaceX pre-IPO perps generated approximately $3.2 billion in volume and $390 million in open interest across eight exchanges, with Binance accounting for $2.1 billion.

These are synthetic instruments with no direct claim on underlying shares, yet demand for tradable exposure to private-company valuations produced $3.2 billion in volume in under a month.

The list of assets that cannot become a perp underlying is getting shorter.

Two possible outcomes

If the CFTC's regulatory perimeter holds, with courts rejecting CME's swap-classification argument, federal preemption encompasses state gaming enforcement, and platforms continue to add cross-asset markets, the everything-exchange model accelerates.

Bitcoin becomes the gateway collateral and risk asset for a broader range of retail derivatives products. Kalshi's WSJ-reported $5 billion in early volume, sustained at that pace, would annualize to nearly $90 billion for onshore perps alone.

Prediction markets add derivatives depth, derivatives platforms add event-market engagement, and the boundary between a futures exchange, a sportsbook, and a crypto trading app collapses into a UX distinction.

If incumbents succeed in slowing expansion through an injunction, a remand forcing Kalshi's perps into swap classification, or a narrower event-contract framework from the CFTC, platforms will absorb higher compliance costs, more geofencing, and slower product cycles.

Offshore venues continue to dominate global perp volume, which reached $61.7 trillion in 2025, up 29% from the prior year, while US onshore-regulated perps stay below $154 billion in annual notional.

Users already trade BTC, inflation, elections, and sports outcomes. The platforms that absorb the current legal and regulatory friction will be the ones positioned to host all of it under whichever compliance framework survives.

CME's lawsuit confirmed that the fight is already underway, and that incumbents across futures, gaming, and state government have decided to contest it simultaneously.

The post CME lawsuit challenges whether Kalshi’s Bitcoin leverage push can become an everything-exchange appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Europe’s crypto rulebook is squeezing much of the industry before it has even fully taken effect, with Binance and Tether as the most visible examples of a wider scramble to remain within the bloc’s regulated market.

The pressure is building ahead of the July 1 deadline for firms to secure authorization under the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation, known as MiCA.

Alex Obchakevich of Obchakevich Research said only 194 of more than 3,000 crypto companies operating in Europe have obtained a license, leaving exchanges, brokers and wallet providers at risk of losing access to EU users once the transition period ends.

Obchakevich said 60% of European crypto users still rely on unlicensed platforms, while 7.6 million of the 18.5 million recent app downloads in the region were from firms without authorization.

That raises the prospect that the deadline could disrupt crypto access for millions of users before compliant alternatives have fully absorbed the market.

The squeeze also comes as the European Central Bank presses lawmakers to advance the legal framework for a digital euro.

That timing has turned MiCA into more than a licensing exercise, because the regulation is beginning to determine which companies can distribute digital assets across Europe, which stablecoins can circulate on regulated venues and how much room private crypto firms will have before a public digital-money alternative enters the market.

Binance’s MiCA European route narrows

Binance’s MiCA strategy had centered on Greece, where the exchange applied for a license earlier this year after establishing a local holding company in Athens.

An approval would have allowed the company to use the bloc’s passporting system to serve customers across all 27 EU member states from a single regulatory base.

However, that route now appears at risk.

Reuters reported that Greece’s Hellenic Capital Market Commission is preparing to reject Binance’s application, citing people familiar with the matter. If confirmed, the decision would leave Binance without a clear MiCA authorization just days before the July 1 deadline.

The reported setback has attracted wider attention because of claims that the decision may have extended beyond a standard regulatory review.

Gareth Jenkinson, head of multimedia at The Block, said he was told ECB President Christine Lagarde intervened after Greek regulators had effectively completed their assessment of Binance’s application. Neither the ECB nor Greek authorities have confirmed that account.

Even without official confirmation, the claim has added to industry debate over how much Europe’s crypto licensing process is being shaped by broader monetary and financial-stability priorities as MiCA takes full effect.

Despite the situation, Binance has maintained that its European strategy remains intact. Co-Chief Executive Richard Teng said the company remains committed to securing MiCA authorization and continuing operations under what he described as a “clear, fair, and harmonized” regulatory framework.

The firm is now exploring an alternative path through France, according to The Big Whale. The exchange already holds a digital asset service provider registration with France’s market regulator, allowing limited activities such as custody and spot trading. A full MiCA license there would restore its ability to operate across the bloc under the same passporting framework.

USDT retreats from EU licensed venues

On the other hand, Tether, the largest stablecoin issuer, faces a separate but related MiCA issue.

The EU framework requires issuers of fiat-backed stablecoins to register as electronic money institutions and comply with reserve, governance and disclosure rules.

Tether Chief Executive Paolo Ardoino has repeatedly criticized those requirements, especially rules governing how reserves must be held, and has said the company does not plan to seek approval in the EU for now.

That decision has already changed the market structure for European users.

Major exchanges, including Binance, Coinbase, Kraken, OKX, Bitstamp, and Crypto.com, have removed or restricted USDT for EU customers. Circle’s USDC, by contrast, has secured MiCA compliance, making it the only major dollar-backed stablecoin widely available across licensed EU platforms ahead of the deadline.

However, Tether has not abandoned Europe entirely.

The company invested in Dutch fintech Quantoz to support the launch of EURQ and USDQ, stablecoins designed to comply with European rules. Quantoz operates under the supervision of the Dutch central bank, and the tokens are structured as e-money products.

That move gives Tether a regulated foothold in Europe even as USDT, its core product, becomes harder to access through licensed venues.

The shift also strengthens a wider point for policymakers. Europe is not only asking stablecoin issuers to follow new rules. It is forcing the market to decide whether liquidity should remain concentrated in offshore dollar tokens or move toward regulated issuers operating inside the bloc.

The digital euro gives the dispute a larger frame

The pressure from Binance and Tether comes as the ECB continues to argue for a digital euro, a central bank-issued digital currency intended to complement cash and strengthen Europe’s payments sovereignty.

Lagarde has repeatedly urged lawmakers to accelerate the project, describing it as important to Europe’s monetary autonomy.

ECB Executive Board member Piero Cipollone recently told the European Parliament that the digital euro could support innovation, reduce fragmentation in payments and improve resilience in an uncertain global environment.

The ECB says a pilot could begin in 2027 if legislation is adopted in 2026. The Eurosystem could then be ready for a possible first issuance in 2029.

That timetable places Europe in a transitional period. The digital euro remains years away, but the private digital-money market is being reshaped now.

The ECB’s April 2026 Macroprudential Bulletin showed euro-denominated stablecoins had grown to about €450 million in January from €50 million two years earlier. Dollar-denominated stablecoins, by comparison, stood near $300 billion.

The gap explains why European officials are sensitive to stablecoin growth. A large share of crypto liquidity still runs through dollar-linked tokens issued outside the eurozone.

For the ECB, that raises questions about monetary control, financial stability and dependence on non-European payment rails.

Binance sits near the center of that system because large exchanges distribute stablecoins, set liquidity conditions and determine which assets European users can access. Tether sits at the other end as the dominant private dollar instrument used across crypto markets.

That combination makes the MiCA deadline a test of Europe’s preferred digital-money order before the digital euro is ready.

Europe’s crypto market enters a narrower phase

The July 1 deadline could leave European users with fewer global platforms, fewer stablecoin options and a clearer divide between regulated and unregulated crypto services.

For Binance, the immediate question is whether France can provide a viable path if Greece rejects its application. For Tether, the question is whether USDT can remain relevant to European users after disappearing from the region’s licensed venues.

For the ECB, the moment strengthens the case for a sovereign digital-money alternative.

The broader outcome may take years to measure. MiCA gives Europe a rulebook before the digital euro arrives. That rulebook is already deciding which private companies can operate at scale.

By the time the ECB is ready to issue a digital euro, Europe’s crypto sector may already be built around a smaller group of licensed exchanges, compliant stablecoin issuers and payment firms operating closer to the traditional financial system.

That would mark a major break from the offshore market structure that shaped crypto’s first decade and give Europe more control over the rails through which digital money moves.

The post Europe’s MiCA July deadline puts Binance access and USDT liquidity on the line appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Why Is XRP Price Down in 2026?

$XRP has had a difficult year. The token has fallen to around $1.12, sitting right on its 2026 year-to-date low and down roughly 40% year-to-date, putting the psychologically important $1 level uncomfortably close. After starting the year much higher, it has steadily drifted down to these lows.

Crucially, this weakness doesn't appear to be an XRP-specific problem. The slide fits a broader crypto drawdown rather than a Ripple-specific catalyst — Bitcoin is down around 30% year-to-date and Ethereum is down about 45%. In other words, XRP is moving with the market, not against it. As one analysis put it, the selling looks more like a risk-off rotation than a token-specific event.

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

How Far Has XRP Price Fallen, and Where Are the Lows?

XRP's descent through 2026 has been fairly orderly rather than a single dramatic crash. The decline began in January following a brief rally to $2.41. By early February, the price had fallen to around $1.11, then consolidated within a narrow $1.27–$1.67 range from mid-February to mid-May before resuming its slide.

That early-February low near $1.11–$1.12 is exactly where XRP trades today — the 2026 YTD low that buyers now have to defend, with little technical cushion between here and the round-number $1.00 mark.

Is XRP Coin at Risk of Falling Below $1.00?

With XRP now resting on its lows, the risk of a break toward $1.00 is very real — and it's mostly about momentum, not fundamentals. With the token sitting just above $1, even a modest additional decline puts the threshold in play, and a further slide in overall crypto sentiment could pull XRP through round-number support.

Recent momentum hasn't helped. XRP is down about 20% over the past month, with the one-month moves steeper than the YTD figures, suggesting recent acceleration of selling. Technically, the structure leans cautious: XRP's structure currently favors consolidation with a bearish bias unless bulls reclaim overhead resistance. A clean break of the current low would likely expose XRP to a retest of the $1.00 psychological level, with $0.95 as the next major demand area.

With Solana trading around $70 — a fraction of its cycle high above $260 — the question on many investors' minds is simple: is SOL a good buy at current prices, or is it a falling knife? The answer depends on weighing two things against each other: where the price sits relative to Solana's historical performance, and what the network is actually doing right now.

On the technical side, SOL on the monthly chart is the most oversold it has ever been in its history. On the fundamental side, Solana just set a new single-day record for tokenized stock trading. That combination — a beaten-down price alongside accelerating real-world usage — is exactly the kind of divergence worth examining closely before deciding whether current prices represent value or a trap.

How Does Solana's Current Price Compare to Its Historical Performance?

To judge whether $SOL is cheap, it helps to put today's ~$70 price in the context of where it has been:

• 2021 cycle peak: SOL ran from under $2 to roughly $260 at its first major top.
• 2022 bear market: It collapsed into the low single digits and teens during the broader crypto winter.
• 2024–2025 recovery: SOL rebuilt all the way back above $260 at this cycle's high.
• Now: It has retraced to around $70, testing a long-term support zone in the low $60s to $70 — a level that has acted as significant support in past cycles.

The pattern tells the story: SOL is a high-volatility asset that has historically delivered enormous gains from depressed levels and equally brutal drawdowns from its tops. At ~$70, it sits far closer to its accumulation zones than to its euphoric peaks — which is the first reason the current price draws value-hunters' attention.

Why Is Solana Dominating Tokenization?

Solana's grip on tokenized stocks comes down to its core technical strengths as a blockchain:

• Speed. Solana is one of the fastest chains in production, with high throughput and sub-second finality suited to rapid-fire equity trading.
• Low costs. Transaction fees often amount to a fraction of a cent, making high-frequency tokenized-stock trades economically viable where congested, high-fee chains can't compete.
• Deep liquidity and infrastructure. A mature ecosystem of DEXs, aggregators, and on-chain stockholders has formed around the network, creating a self-reinforcing liquidity advantage.

When the cost and speed of settling a trade approach zero, the friction that holds tokenization back on other chains largely disappears — which is why volume keeps concentrating on Solana.

Is Solana a Good Buy at Current Prices?

Here's how the two sides stack up. The bull case: SOL trades at historically oversold levels, sits on long-term support, and is winning one of crypto's fastest-growing categories outright. When price weakness and rising adoption diverge like this, the market is often pricing the asset on macro sentiment rather than what the network is doing.

The bear case: oversold can get more oversold, and a genuine turn requires a turn in broader risk appetite — likely tied to easing macro conditions and returning crypto liquidity. Until that happens, "cheap" assets can stay cheap or get cheaper.

A balanced read: at ~$70, SOL offers an arguably attractive risk-reward for investors with a long time horizon and tolerance for volatility, precisely because price is depressed while fundamentals strengthen. But it is not a low-risk bet, and nobody can reliably call the exact bottom. This is a setup that historically rewards patience and position sizing — not all-in timing.

The Bottom Line

Solana presents one of the more striking divergences in the current market: the most oversold monthly reading in its history paired with record-setting dominance of tokenized stock trading. Measured against its own historical performance, ~$70 places SOL deep in value territory rather than euphoria.

Whether that makes it a "good buy" depends on your time horizon and risk tolerance. For short-term traders, the lack of a confirmed reversal argues for caution. For long-term investors who believe in tokenization and Solana's role in it, the current setup — depressed price, record usage — is exactly the kind of moment that tends to look attractive in hindsight, even if the timing is never certain.

Why Is Solana Dominating Tokenization?

Solana's grip on tokenized stocks comes down to its core technical strengths as a blockchain:

• Speed. Solana is one of the fastest chains in production, with high throughput and sub-second finality suited to rapid-fire equity trading.
• Low costs. Transaction fees often amount to a fraction of a cent, making high-frequency tokenized-stock trades economically viable where congested, high-fee chains can't compete.
• Deep liquidity and infrastructure. A mature ecosystem of DEXs, aggregators, and on-chain stockholders has formed around the network, creating a self-reinforcing liquidity advantage.

When the cost and speed of settling a trade approach zero, the friction that holds tokenization back on other chains largely disappears — which is why volume keeps concentrating on Solana.

Is Solana a Good Buy at Current Prices?

Here's how the two sides stack up. The bull case: SOL trades at historically oversold levels, sits on long-term support, and is winning one of crypto's fastest-growing categories outright. When price weakness and rising adoption diverge like this, the market is often pricing the asset on macro sentiment rather than what the network is doing.

The bear case: oversold can get more oversold, and a genuine turn requires a turn in broader risk appetite — likely tied to easing macro conditions and returning crypto liquidity. Until that happens, "cheap" assets can stay cheap or get cheaper.

A balanced read: at ~$70, SOL offers an arguably attractive risk-reward for investors with a long time horizon and tolerance for volatility, precisely because price is depressed while fundamentals strengthen. But it is not a low-risk bet, and nobody can reliably call the exact bottom. This is a setup that historically rewards patience and position sizing — not all-in timing.

The Bottom Line

Solana presents one of the more striking divergences in the current market: the most oversold monthly reading in its history paired with record-setting dominance of tokenized stock trading. Measured against its own historical performance, ~$70 places SOL deep in value territory rather than euphoria.

Whether that makes it a "good buy" depends on your time horizon and risk tolerance. For short-term traders, the lack of a confirmed reversal argues for caution. For long-term investors who believe in tokenization and Solana's role in it, the current setup — depressed price, record usage — is exactly the kind of moment that tends to look attractive in hindsight, even if the timing is never certain.

Bitcoin Got the Wrong Crash

Crypto investors usually know exactly which crash they would rather see: oil, not Bitcoin.

When oil prices fall sharply, the market often reads it as good news for risk assets. Lower oil can reduce inflation pressure, improve the outlook for interest rate cuts, and support assets like Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, XRP, and other major cryptocurrencies. In theory, an oil crash after easing geopolitical tensions should have been a bullish signal for crypto.

But this time, the market did not follow the usual script.

Oil crashed after fresh US-Iran peace headlines and signs that energy supply fears were cooling. Yet instead of surging, Bitcoin fell below $63,000, Ethereum dropped under $1,700, and more than $180 million worth of crypto longs were reportedly liquidated in just 60 minutes.

So the question is no longer simply whether lower oil is good for crypto. The real question is: did Bitcoin just ignore a bullish macro signal, or is this selloff the storm before the sun?

Why an Oil Crash Should Have Helped Bitcoin

For Bitcoin bulls, falling oil usually sounds like a positive development.

Oil is one of the most important inflation drivers in the global economy. When energy prices rise, transportation, production, and consumer costs often rise with them. That can keep inflation sticky and make central banks less willing to cut interest rates.

But when oil falls, the opposite argument becomes stronger. Lower energy prices can ease inflation fears, increase expectations for future rate cuts, and improve liquidity conditions. In a normal market environment, that can support risk assets.

Bitcoin, in particular, tends to benefit when investors expect looser monetary policy. Lower rates reduce the appeal of cash and bonds, while making growth assets, tech stocks, and crypto more attractive. That is why many crypto traders would normally cheer an oil crash, especially if it comes after geopolitical tensions cool down.

This time, however, Bitcoin did not act like a risk asset enjoying better macro conditions. It acted like a market under pressure.

Crypto Crashed Instead

The latest crypto market performance shows a broad selloff across major coins. Bitcoin dropped more than 5% over 24 hours and slipped below the key $63,000 level. Ethereum also fell by more than 5%, trading under $1,700.

The weakness was not limited to BTC and ETH. Solana, XRP, BNB, Dogecoin, Cardano, and Chainlink were all in the red. Hyperliquid, which recently entered the top 10 cryptocurrencies by market cap, was hit even harder, falling by nearly 11%. Zcash also dropped sharply, losing more than 9% in 24 hours.

This broad weakness suggests that the selloff is not only about one coin or one isolated event. The crypto market is dealing with a larger risk-off move, and the oil crash was not enough to stop it.

The main reason may be leverage.

When prices start falling and too many traders are positioned long, liquidations can accelerate the move. A drop below important levels can force leveraged positions to close automatically, creating more selling pressure. That is how a normal pullback can quickly turn into a sharp market flush.

In this case, the reported liquidation wave shows that the market was not simply reacting to oil. It was also clearing out overleveraged traders.

Why Bitcoin Ignored the Bullish Oil Signal

There are several reasons why Bitcoin may have fallen even though oil crashed.

First, the market may already be too nervous. Even if lower oil helps the inflation outlook, traders may still be focused on short-term fear, weak technical momentum, and forced liquidations.

Second, an oil crash is not always bullish. A controlled decline in oil can be good for markets, but a sharp crash can also signal uncertainty, panic, or concerns about global demand. If traders see falling oil as a sign of economic weakness rather than relief, risk assets may not benefit immediately.

Third, crypto often moves faster than macro logic. The long-term argument may be bullish, but short-term price action can still be dominated by technical levels, leverage, and liquidity. Bitcoin can eventually benefit from lower inflation expectations, but that does not mean it has to pump instantly.

This is why the current setup feels like a reverse effect. Crypto traders got the crash they wanted in oil, but they also got the crash they feared in Bitcoin.

Is This the Storm Before the Sun?

The optimistic case is that this selloff could be a cleansing move.

If Bitcoin is dropping mainly because of liquidations, then the market may be removing excessive leverage before attempting a recovery. In that scenario, the oil crash could still become bullish later, especially if lower energy prices support rate-cut expectations and improve risk appetite.

This would make the current move the storm before the sun: painful in the short term, but potentially healthier for the next phase of the market.

For that to happen, Bitcoin needs to stabilize quickly. Reclaiming the $63,000 to $64,000 zone would be an important first step. If BTC can recover that area, traders may start to view the latest crash as a liquidity flush rather than the beginning of a deeper breakdown.

But if Bitcoin fails to reclaim those levels, the bearish pressure could continue. A prolonged move below $63,000 would keep sellers in control and could push traders to watch lower support zones.

Bitcoin Price Prediction: What Comes Next?

Bitcoin is now at an important short-term turning point.

If BTC rebounds above $63,000 and holds that level, the market could start pricing in the positive side of the oil crash: lower inflation pressure, easier monetary policy expectations, and better conditions for risk assets.

In that case, Bitcoin could recover toward the $64,000 to $66,000 range, especially if liquidations slow down and buyers return.

However, if BTC remains below $63,000, the market may continue to focus on fear rather than macro relief. In that bearish scenario, Bitcoin could face more downside pressure as traders reduce risk and wait for clearer support.

The key point is that the oil crash has not disappeared as a bullish factor. It may simply be delayed. Crypto is dealing with the immediate shock first, while the macro benefits may only matter once the liquidation wave ends.

Conclusion: Oil Fell, But Bitcoin Took the Hit

Bitcoin bulls wanted oil to crash, but not like this.

The fall in oil prices after US-Iran peace headlines should have supported crypto by easing inflation fears and improving the outlook for rate cuts. Instead, Bitcoin dropped below $63,000, Ethereum fell under $1,700, and the broader crypto market turned red.

That does not mean the bullish macro argument is dead. It means the crypto market is currently being driven by fear, leverage, and technical pressure more than by oil.

For now, Bitcoin got the wrong crash. But if the selloff clears excess leverage and lower oil strengthens the rate-cut narrative, this could still become the storm before the sun.

Oil has crashed roughly 38% from its war-driven peak, hitting a 3.5-month low near $74 per barrel. It now sits just about $7 away from $67 — the level it traded at before the US-Iran war even started. In other words, the entire conflict premium that inflated energy prices for months has almost completely drained out of the market.

That matters far beyond the energy sector. Cheap oil sits upstream of nearly everything in the economy, and the chain reaction it sets off runs straight into the macro conditions that drive $Bitcoin and the broader crypto market. Here's why this oil crash could be one of the more underrated tailwinds for crypto right now.

Why Did Oil Crash to a 3.5-Month Low?

The collapse traces back to one catalyst: de-escalation. With the US and Iran signing an interim peace agreement that reopens the Strait of Hormuz and clears the way for Iranian oil exports to return, the supply fears that drove crude toward triple digits during the war have evaporated.

Several forces are now compounding the downside:

• Supply is coming back. The deal allows Iran to resume exports, and more than 100 oil-laden ships previously stranded in the Gulf can begin moving again.
• A looming surplus. The International Energy Agency has warned of a potential global oil glut, projecting supply growth far outpacing demand into 2027.
• Fading risk premium. Crude has fallen nearly 40% from its conflict peak as the geopolitical fear that was priced in unwinds.

The result is gasoline slipping back below politically sensitive levels and energy costs broadly resetting toward where they sat before the war.

How Do Lower Oil Prices Affect Inflation?

This is the heart of why crypto investors should care. Oil is a foundational input cost across the entire economy, and when it falls, the effects ripple outward:

• Lower prices of goods. Energy feeds into manufacturing, transportation, and shipping. Cheaper crude lowers the cost of producing and moving almost everything, which filters through to consumer prices.
• Lower inflation. Falling fuel and energy costs are one of the most direct drags on headline inflation. As oil resets toward pre-war levels, that inflationary pressure eases.
• More chances of rate cuts. This is the key link. Central banks raise rates to fight inflation; when inflation cools, the case for holding rates high weakens, and the path toward rate cuts reopens.

That final point is the bridge from a barrel of oil to your crypto portfolio.

Why Are Rate Cuts Bullish for Bitcoin and Crypto?

Crypto is among the most rate-sensitive asset classes in the market. The logic runs through liquidity and risk appetite:

• Cheaper money flows into risk. When interest rates fall, holding cash and bonds becomes less attractive, pushing capital toward higher-risk, higher-reward assets like Bitcoin, Ethereum, and altcoins.
• Looser financial conditions. Rate cuts loosen overall liquidity in the system. Crypto has historically performed best when liquidity is expanding, not contracting.
• Lower opportunity cost. Bitcoin produces no yield, so when "safe" yields drop, the opportunity cost of holding BTC falls with them — making it relatively more appealing.

The recent crypto drawdown was driven in large part by the opposite of all this: a hot labor market, sticky inflation, and rate-cut hopes getting pushed further out. An oil-driven disinflation impulse flips that script.

What Does the Oil Crash Mean for the Crypto Market Outlook?

Put the pieces together and a clear macro tailwind emerges. The single biggest geopolitical overhang on markets is lifting, energy prices are resetting toward pre-war levels, inflation pressure is easing, and the door to rate cuts is creaking back open. For an asset class that thrives on liquidity and risk appetite, that's a constructive backdrop.

A few caveats keep it honest:

• The Fed hasn't pivoted yet. Policymakers held rates steady at their latest meeting and remain cautious. Lower oil improves the odds of cuts but doesn't guarantee their timing.
• Disinflation takes time to show up. Oil's drop needs to feed through into actual inflation data before the central bank acts on it.
• The peace deal is interim. The current US-Iran framework is a 60-day arrangement, not a permanent settlement, leaving room for renewed volatility.

Oil's Loss Could Be Crypto's Gain

The oil crash is more than an energy story — it's a macro signal. Lower oil means lower input costs, cooler inflation, and a clearer runway toward the rate cuts that have historically fueled crypto rallies. While nothing in markets is guaranteed, the chain of cause and effect points in a direction crypto holders have been waiting for: easing inflation, returning liquidity, and a macro environment that finally leans risk-on rather than risk-off.

After months of geopolitical fear weighing on Bitcoin and the broader market, a 38% oil crash toward pre-war levels is exactly the kind of quiet, fundamental tailwind that tends to matter more than the headlines suggest.

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

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

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

Why Is Binance EU Access at Risk?

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

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

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

What Is MiCA and Why Does It Matter?

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

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

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

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

What Could This Mean for Binance Users in Europe?

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

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

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

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

Could BNB Be Affected?

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

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

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

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

Why This Story Matters Beyond Binance

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

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

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

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

Binance EU Outlook: What Happens Next?

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

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

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

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

Final Thoughts

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

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

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

The disastrous day for Bitcoin firms' preferred equity offerings may have been due to unwinding of leveraged positions in STRC and SATA.

Amazon is pulling out of "Artificial," a film about Sam Altman's brief ouster from OpenAI, not long after investing $50 billion in the firm.

Researchers found malicious Wallpaper Engine downloads on Steam Workshop distributing infostealers, backdoors, and account-hijacking malware.

Isiah and Raymond Garcia held a Minnesota family at gunpoint for eight hours and forced the father to transfer over $8 million in crypto.

The asset manager's two proposed "Bitcoin DRIP" funds would hold U.S. stocks and reinvest dividends into Bitcoin, a novel ETF structure.

Evernorth CEO Ashish Birla links XRP's 2013 "coffee shop magic" to the asset's core financial mission ahead of the firm's Nasdaq debut.

Strategy’s bold financial experiment has become a primary source of anxiety for the cryptocurrency market.

Solana records strong daily and weekly spot trading volumes, outperforming major centralized exchanges like Coinbase and Kraken in such metric.

Stellar (XLM) rose as much as 30% on a weekly basis, briefly overtaking Zcash.

Ki Young Ju warns that a prolonged sideways grind is paralyzing fresh capital inflows as Bitcoin loses its original narratives.

TLDR

• BlackBerry shares declined after reaching a 52-week peak of $10.93, with the retreat viewed as profit-taking following overbought conditions
• First quarter fiscal 2027 results scheduled for pre-market release on June 25, with Wall Street forecasting $0.03 earnings per share on $137.7M revenue
• Previous quarter exceeded projections with $0.06 EPS compared to $0.04 estimate and $157.96M revenue, marking 10.1% annual growth
• Street consensus stands at Hold with $5.73 average target; CIBC upgraded to Outperform with $10.00 price objective
• Chief executive and senior vice president liquidated shares in early April at $3.56; insider transactions totaled 73,171 shares valued at approximately $260K over three months

Shares of BlackBerry (BB) began Thursday’s session at $8.84, declining approximately 3.6% as investors took profits following an aggressive advance that carried the stock to its 52-week peak of $10.93. The security has surged 133% since the beginning of the year.

BlackBerry Limited, BB

The decline doesn’t seem connected to unfavorable corporate developments. Market observers attribute the move to a classic technical pullback after an extended rally drove BB into overbought conditions.

Attention is shifting toward the upcoming quarterly report. BlackBerry plans to release first quarter fiscal 2027 financial results before Thursday’s opening bell on June 25. The earnings conference call is slated for 8:00 AM Eastern Time.

Analysts project earnings of $0.03 per share on sales of $137.65 million for the period. This represents a decline from the previous quarter’s impressive performance.

The company’s latest quarterly results, disclosed on April 9, significantly exceeded forecasts. BlackBerry delivered $0.06 per share versus the Street’s $0.04 projection and revenue totaling $157.96 million compared to anticipated $144.27 million — representing a 10.1% increase from the prior year period.

For the complete fiscal year 2027, executives have provided earnings guidance ranging from $0.15 to $0.19 per share. The first quarter outlook calls for $0.02 to $0.03 EPS.

Analyst Targets Show Wide Dispersion

The research community remains fragmented on BB. Canadian Imperial Bank of Commerce has emerged as the most bullish, elevating its price objective from $8.50 to $10.00 recently while assigning an Outperform rating.

This stance contrasts sharply with other coverage. Canaccord Genuity reduced its target from $4.60 to $4.40 in April while maintaining a Hold recommendation. Royal Bank of Canada kept a Sector Perform rating with a $4.50 objective. Weiss Ratings lowered BB marginally to Hold (C-) on June 4.

The Street consensus reflects a Hold rating with a mean price target of $5.73 — significantly beneath current trading levels.

Insider Transactions Show April Sales Activity

Chief Executive John Giamatteo divested 27,066 shares on April 2 at a price of $3.56 each, trimming his holdings by 2.92%. Senior Vice President Jennifer Armstrong-Owen sold 29,908 shares on April 4 at the identical price point, decreasing her stake by 23.96%.

Total insider dispositions during the trailing 90-day period reached 73,171 shares with an aggregate value near $260,000. Company insiders currently maintain just 0.51% ownership.

Among institutional investors, Creative Planning boosted its holdings by 87.5% during Q2, while multiple funds including Scientech Research and Man Group established fresh positions.

The equity’s 50-day moving average stands at $6.76 with its 200-day average at $4.77 — both substantially beneath the present price, highlighting the velocity of BB’s year-to-date appreciation.

BB trades at a price-to-earnings multiple of 110.50, exhibits a beta of 2.29, and maintains a debt-to-equity ratio of 0.26. The trailing 12-month low registered at $3.12.

The upcoming June 25 earnings announcement represents the next significant event, where management’s Q1 projection of $0.02–$0.03 EPS will face comparison against reported outcomes.

The post BlackBerry (BB) Stock Retreats From 52-Week Peak as Earnings Loom appeared first on Blockonomi.

Quick Summary

• Shopify’s share price has declined approximately 30% in 2026, hovering near $108, even as the company delivers 30%+ revenue expansion for the fourth consecutive quarter
• Traffic generated through AI channels on Shopify’s platform exploded 8x compared to the previous year, with ChatGPT and Copilot pathways producing nearly double the order volume of conventional channels
• Following the Spring 2026 Editions product rollout, Citizens maintained its Market Outperform designation with a $150 target price
• Weekly active merchants using Shopify’s AI-powered assistant Sidekick quadrupled year-over-year during the first quarter
• Thrive Capital deployed $100 million into Shopify, specifically highlighting artificial intelligence’s capacity to transform digital commerce

Shopify (SHOP) shares currently trade near $108, representing a decline of roughly 30% since the beginning of the year and approximately 35% from levels seen six months ago. However, beneath this price weakness lies a company posting some of its most impressive operational results in recent memory.

Shopify Inc., SHOP

The e-commerce platform has delivered revenue expansion exceeding 30% for four straight quarters. During Q1, the company’s gross merchandise volume (GMV) exceeded analyst projections by 2%, while earnings before interest and taxes (EBIT) surpassed consensus estimates by 14%. On a constant currency basis, GMV climbed 30% year-over-year.

This widening disconnect between share performance and operational strength has prompted certain Wall Street analysts to identify the current valuation as an attractive entry point.

Citizens reaffirmed its Market Outperform stance with a $150 price objective on June 18, immediately following Shopify’s Spring 2026 Editions announcement — the semi-annual product refresh event. This release featured upgrades to Catalog and Universal Commerce Protocol (UCP), both critical infrastructure components for autonomous shopping experiences.

The investment firm highlighted that Shopify’s development strategy centers on serving customers through any preferred interaction method — from conventional website browsing to AI agents executing purchases on behalf of users.

AI-Generated Traffic Delivers Measurable Business Impact

The company disclosed an 8x year-over-year explosion in artificially intelligent traffic during the most recent quarter. Shopify currently stands as the exclusive e-commerce platform enabling product discovery and purchasing through OpenAI’s ChatGPT, Microsoft Copilot, and Google Gemini interfaces.

These AI-powered channels demonstrate conversion rates approaching twice those of traditional traffic sources. This performance differential represents a meaningful business development rather than marketing rhetoric.

Sidekick, the company’s proprietary AI assistant built on merchant and corporate datasets, experienced a 4x expansion in weekly active merchant accounts year-over-year throughout Q1. This tool helps store owners optimize operations and accelerate business growth.

The underlying business dynamics are compelling: expanding AI traffic generates additional transaction intelligence, which enhances Sidekick’s capabilities, thereby attracting more merchants, subsequently producing more valuable data. This creates a self-reinforcing growth mechanism.

Wall Street Remains Cautiously Optimistic

Consensus opinion hasn’t completely aligned. Cantor Fitzgerald reduced its price objective to $115 while maintaining a Neutral rating, expressing concerns about margin sustainability. UBS similarly holds a Neutral position with a $130 target, identifying Shopify’s Retail POS division as a critical long-term performance driver.

Conversely, Piper Sandler preserved its Overweight recommendation with a $150 price target, emphasizing accelerating adoption of merchant tools. Citizens reinforced this perspective, stating Shopify “consistently delivers more value than it extracts in cost.”

Thrive Capital backed this investment thesis with a $100 million direct stake, specifically tied to the platform’s AI-enabled commerce trajectory.

Citizens acknowledged intensifying competitive pressures, particularly as advanced coding tools democratize merchant software development outside Shopify’s controlled environment.

A tangible risk exists: should OpenAI or Google elect to claim a more substantial portion of transaction value their AI systems facilitate, this could negatively impact Shopify’s merchant services revenue — which currently represents roughly three-quarters of total business income.

Currently, Shopify’s Spring 2026 Editions release strategically positions the platform to serve merchants across all touchpoints — brick-and-mortar, digital storefronts, and AI-mediated channels — leveraging its UCP framework and unified data architecture.

The post Shopify (SHOP) Stock Down 30% in 2025: Is This AI-Powered Dip a Buy Signal? appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR:

• Kaspersky identified dozens of malicious Wallpaper Engine packages with thousands of installs on Steam.
• Lumma and Vidar infostealers were deployed to harvest crypto wallet data and browser credentials.
• Malware was hidden inside password-protected archives or bundled directly within wallpaper downloads.
• The FBI previously investigated Steam-distributed malware across titles including PirateFi and Tokenova.

Wallpaper Engine malware is spreading through Steam Workshop, one of gaming’s most trusted content platforms.

Cybersecurity firm Kaspersky has identified dozens of infected wallpaper packages distributed via the popular live-wallpaper application.

The malicious files steal Steam credentials, hijack active sessions, and deploy infostealers targeting crypto wallet data.

Many packages carried thousands of downloads before discovery, with victims reported across China, Russia, Singapore, Germany, and several other countries.

How Attackers Weaponized a Trusted Platform

Kaspersky’s report, published Monday, revealed that threat actors exploited Steam Workshop to upload malicious Wallpaper Engine packages disguised as animated desktop wallpapers.

Most used anime-style female characters as cover images, lending them a credible, appealing appearance to gamers.

The platform’s trust factor gave the malware a reliable distribution channel with minimal friction for potential victims.

The application’s core feature became the attack vector. Wallpaper Engine allows executable programs to run directly on a Windows machine, which attackers leveraged to deploy malicious payloads under the appearance of legitimate content.

Kaspersky confirmed it had identified dozens of infected wallpaper packages available through Steam Workshop, with many reaching thousands or even tens of thousands of downloads.

Some wallpapers bundled malware directly within the download package. Others concealed payloads inside password-protected archives that unpacked silently after installation.

One documented 2025 case showed a wallpaper launching what appeared to be a functional desktop game while secretly installing the DarkKomet backdoor in the background.

Kaspersky researcher Maxim Starodubov addressed the core vulnerability enabling these attacks. “Trusted platforms can be abused to distribute malware: The attacks rely on users trusting content hosted within legitimate ecosystems,” Starodubov said.

“While many of the malware families involved are well-known, the delivery mechanism enables attackers to reach large numbers of potential victims through seemingly harmless content.”

Infostealers, Crypto Theft, and a Growing Steam Problem

Among the most dangerous payloads identified were Lumma and Vidar infostealers, distributed alongside the RenEngine loader.

These malware families are well-documented tools for harvesting browser credentials, saved passwords, and cryptocurrency wallet information. Kaspersky also noted the activity appeared to involve multiple threat actors rather than a single coordinated group.

Steam credential hijacking was another confirmed outcome. Attackers captured active session tokens, allowing them to access accounts without requiring a password.

Kaspersky explained that “the application-based wallpaper feature allows executable programs to run directly on a user’s Windows computer, allowing attackers to distribute malicious software under the guise of legitimate content.”

The findings follow a documented pattern of Steam-related malware incidents. In July 2025, cybersecurity firm Prodaft reported that the Steam Early Access title Chemia had been compromised to distribute Hijack Loader, Fickle Stealer, and Vidar Stealer.

Earlier, the FBI announced investigations into malware found across several Steam titles, including PirateFi, BlockBlasters, and Tokenova.

Kaspersky advised users to treat Workshop content as potential threat vectors regardless of download counts. High install numbers do not confirm safety, as malicious packages accumulated tens of thousands of downloads before removal.

The post Wallpaper Engine Malware Hijacks Steam Workshop to Steal Crypto Wallet Data appeared first on Blockonomi.

Key Takeaways

• Former SK Hynix CEO Seok-Hee Lee has been named executive vice president at Intel Foundry, focusing on advanced packaging operations.
• Lee’s responsibilities include system integration, advanced packaging leadership, back-end technology development, and manufacturing oversight under CEO Lip-Bu Tan.
• This strategic appointment targets packaging technology expansion, particularly EMIB-T and HBI solutions, rather than signaling a memory chip business revival.
• Shares of Intel have climbed over 500% in the last year, with advanced packaging positioned as crucial for attracting foundry customers.
• Recent reports suggest Intel and SK Hynix are discussing high-bandwidth memory integration, potentially validating Intel’s EMIB platform.

Shares of Intel (INTC) have skyrocketed more than 500% during the past year. Much of this impressive rally stems from investor optimism surrounding the company’s Foundry division, and Intel just reinforced that confidence with a significant leadership addition.

Intel Corporation, INTC

On Thursday, Intel revealed it has brought on board Seok-Hee Lee, who previously served as CEO of SK Hynix, appointing him as executive vice president within Intel Foundry. Lee will answer directly to CEO Lip-Bu Tan in this newly configured role.

The appointment centers on advanced packaging capabilities, system-level integration, back-end technology innovation, and related manufacturing operations. This represents a precision hire designed to address specific operational challenges.

Contrary to potential speculation, this move has nothing to do with memory chips. Intel systematically exited that market segment and finalized the sale of its remaining flash-memory operations to SK Hynix in 2020. Lee’s memory industry experience is complementary, not central to this appointment.

“Seok-Hee brings deep expertise in leading complex, high-scale technology and manufacturing organizations,” CEO Tan stated. He emphasized that Lee represents “the right leader to build and scale this critical part of the Intel Foundry business.”

Lee expressed optimism about the opportunity ahead. “Intel is uniquely positioned to lead in advanced packaging as demand for system-level integration accelerates across AI and high-performance computing,” he noted.

Notably, Lee isn’t unfamiliar with Intel’s culture. He previously spent a decade at the company as an engineer between 2000 and 2010 before transitioning to senior leadership positions in South Korea. His most recent role was CEO of SK On, a position he held for approximately two and a half years before departing at the end of May.

The Strategic Importance of Packaging for Intel’s Foundry Ambitions

Investors and analysts have maintained intense scrutiny on Intel Foundry’s performance. The division has accumulated substantial losses, and securing external clients represents the critical pathway toward profitability.

Advanced chip packaging has become the more accessible entry point for potential customers. It allows companies to collaborate with Intel without requiring full commitment to its cutting-edge process technologies. According to D.A. Davidson analyst Gil Luria, if Intel successfully scales its packaging capabilities with reliability, “it can become a customer acquisition channel for the broader foundry platform by giving Intel just a shot of momentum.”

The technology at the center of this strategy is EMIB—Intel’s embedded multi-die interconnect bridge platform. Intel has been marketing EMIB as a competitive alternative to TSMC’s CoWoS packaging solution. Scaling this technology to high-volume manufacturing now falls squarely within Lee’s purview.

Lee’s SK Hynix Background May Unlock Strategic Partnerships

Lee’s professional connections to SK Hynix could prove valuable beyond his technical expertise. Recent industry reports from ZDNet Korea indicate Intel is engaged in discussions with SK Hynix regarding the integration of high-bandwidth memory with logic chips.

Successfully executing such a partnership would provide substantial validation for Intel’s EMIB technology platform—and Lee’s established relationships within SK Hynix could facilitate these negotiations.

Within Intel’s updated organizational structure, Naga Chandrasekaran continues as EVP of Intel Foundry, concentrating on front-end technology development and the production ramp of the company’s 18A and 14A process nodes.

The post Intel (INTC) Stock Surges as Chip Giant Taps Former SK Hynix Chief for Critical Foundry Role appeared first on Blockonomi.

Quick Overview

• SpaceX launched its $135 IPO on June 12, securing $75 billion in the largest public offering ever recorded, with shares climbing approximately 49% to $201.80 by June 19.
• CNBC’s Jim Cramer labeled SpaceX a “meme stock,” expressing concern he’d “hate to see it walked to the size of Nvidia” via rapid overnight price movements lacking seller resistance.
• SPCX now exceeds all established Wall Street price targets; Oppenheimer leads at $190 while Morningstar estimates fair value at merely $63.
• Ross Gerber noted “no one wants to talk about Tesla anymore,” though merger discussions between Tesla and SpaceX continue to circulate without confirmation.
• Baron Capital increased its position to approximately $25 billion while Cathie Wood’s ARK invested roughly $530 million, demonstrating substantial institutional support.

When SpaceX set its IPO price at $135 per share on June 12, the company captured $75 billion — establishing a new benchmark as America’s largest initial public offering, eclipsing Saudi Aramco’s 2019 record by approximately threefold. Trading commenced at $150 and concluded near $160.95 on day one, representing roughly a 19% increase. The shares advanced to $192.50 by June 15, briefly hitting $212.19 during early June 16 trading. As of June 19, SPCX was changing hands around $201.80, marking a nearly 49% climb from the offering price.

Space Exploration Technologies Corp., SPCX

Retail demand proved extraordinary, with over $100 billion in purchase orders submitted before market launch. These individual investors secured approximately 30% of available shares — significantly exceeding the standard 5% to 10% allocation.

Then Jim Cramer weighed in.

The CNBC personality took to X, stating he would “hate to see a meme stock — what SpaceX has become — walked to the size of Nvidia over a series of overnight moves with no sellers.”

He expressed discomfort watching the stock jump ten points within hours, though he clarified his continued support for the underlying business. Nvidia commanded approximately $5 trillion in market capitalization at that moment, suggesting Cramer envisioned SPCX potentially doubling from current levels.

Not all observers share the meme stock characterization. Commentators at 24/7 Wall St. contended SpaceX diverges from traditional meme-stock patterns because the price movement reflects legitimate operations — orbital launches, Starlink satellite internet, and artificial intelligence initiatives — instead of social media-driven speculation.

Price Multiples Present Challenges for Bulls

SpaceX disclosed $18.67 billion in 2025 revenue alongside a $4.94 billion net loss. The IPO pricing implied roughly 94 times trailing twelve-month sales. Elon Musk has projected the enterprise could achieve $1 trillion in annual revenue by decade’s end.

Current trading levels now surpass every analyst price objective on record. Oppenheimer initiated coverage with the most optimistic target at $190 — a figure SPCX has already exceeded. Morningstar calculated intrinsic value at $63.

Despite stretched valuations, significant institutional capital continues flowing in. Baron Capital expanded its SpaceX holdings to approximately $25 billion following an additional $1 billion investment, according to founder Ron Baron’s CNBC interview. Cathie Wood’s ARK portfolios accumulated around $530 million in positions.

The Tesla Connection

Investor Ross Gerber introduced another dimension to the debate. In an X post, he observed: “No one wants to talk about Tesla anymore. Just SpaceX SpaceX.”

Gerber, who has characterized Tesla as “worthless” absent a SpaceX combination, previously indicated any transaction would likely resemble SpaceX acquiring Tesla rather than a partnership between peers.

Wedbush analyst Dan Ives estimated the probability of a Tesla-SpaceX combination at roughly 80% last month, pointing to overlapping capabilities in artificial intelligence, robotics, semiconductors, and power systems. However, such scenarios remain purely hypothetical at present.

Since the June 12 debut, Tesla (TSLA) has declined 0.44% from that session’s closing price. SPCX has gained nearly 49.5% during the identical timeframe.

SpaceX maintains 18,712 Bitcoin valued at approximately $1.3 billion as of Q1 disclosures, and reportedly negotiated to acquire Cursor developer Anysphere for $60 billion.

The post Cramer Sounds Alarm on SpaceX (SPCX) Stock Surge Past Analyst Targets appeared first on Blockonomi.

Ethereum may be heading toward a funding crisis that could begin to emerge within the next three to nine months, according to former Ethereum Foundation contributor Trent Van Epps.

In a recent article on X, Van Epps, who recently ended his five-year stint at EF, said the risk is not simply the result of a temporary funding gap but originates from deeper structural changes taking place across the ecosystem.

Funding Crunch

Van Epps spoke about EF’s long-standing philosophy of “Subtraction,” a strategy that aims to gradually reduce the Foundation’s influence and encourage the broader Ethereum community to take on a larger role in supporting the network.

While he said the approach has been successful in conveying that the EF does not want to remain Ethereum’s sole center of power, he believes it has been less effective at ensuring other institutions step in to fill the gaps left behind.

According to Van Epps, the Ethereum Foundation still occupies a unique position within the ecosystem due to factors such as its reputation, historical role in leading the protocol, connection to Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin, ownership of major communication channels and trademarks, as well as its long-standing support of core developers and researchers.

However, he added that one of the Foundation’s most important resources, its treasury, is becoming increasingly constrained.

The EF has spent much of its ETH holdings over the last decade helping bootstrap Ethereum’s growth and has already begun reducing spending to preserve remaining funds. He highlighted the Foundation’s treasury plan announced in June 2025, which outlined a gradual reduction in annual spending from 15% to a 5% endowment-style level by 2030.

Van Epps also pointed to the expiration of Ethereum’s Client Incentive Program (CIP) in April 2026. The four-year initiative provided funding to client teams through staking rewards, and no replacement program has been announced so far.

Shrinking Resources

Based on conversations across Ethereum’s core development community, he said these developments have created a real risk that funding pressures could start building over the coming months. He estimated that maintaining Ethereum’s current development capacity requires roughly $30 million per year to support client teams, researchers, and coordination efforts across the ecosystem.

Without stable funding, Van Epps warned that Ethereum could lose contributors who have accumulated years of critical expertise, which makes it harder to tackle major challenges such as scaling the network and preparing for future threats like quantum computing. According to the former contributor, the consequences of underinvestment may not be immediately visible but could become apparent within the next 12 to 18 months, when reversing the damage would be significantly more difficult and expensive.

Van Epps believes the Ethereum Foundation is unlikely to remain the network’s primary steward over the next decade, as he echoed recent comments from Vitalik Buterin that the organization was never intended to serve as Ethereum’s permanent caretaker. He called for new institutions and sustainable funding mechanisms capable of supporting Ethereum’s long-term development and maintaining the shared resources the ecosystem depends on.

The post Ethereum’s Biggest Risk May Be a Funding Crunch, Former EF Contributor Warns appeared first on CryptoPotato.

At the start of June, the two largest cryptocurrencies by market capitalization tumbled to their lowest levels in years. However, many analysts believe the cycle bottoms have not occurred yet.

The big question now appears to be whether Bitcoin (BTC) or Ethereum (ETH) will find its floor first, and here’s the take of one popular market observer.

Is ETH First in Line?

X user Ted argued that the second-biggest cryptocurrency is more likely to bottom before the industry’s undisputed leader. He claimed that most of the downside liquidity has been taken out, projecting a plunge to $1,300-$1,400.

“But after that, upside liquidity will start to look more interesting,” he added.

Shortly after, Ted noted ETH’s drop below the critical $1,700 mark and warned that the asset could post a further 5-6% decline if it doesn’t reclaim this level.

There are plenty of other analysts who believe the worst for Ethereum is ahead. Ali Martinez said the asset is breaking down from its channel and is trading below the 200-hour SMA. That said, he expects a drop toward $1,580.

Niels also claimed that ETH hasn’t bottomed for this cycle, predicting a crash to as low as $1,200 sometime this year. At the same time, they see the current price level as a great buying opportunity.

How About BTC?

Earlier in June, the primary cryptocurrency plummeted to nearly $59,000 for the first time since late 2024. Ted, like many other industry participants, thinks this was not the bottom.

He spotted a massive liquidity cluster around $50,000-$60,000, describing it as the same zone with large BTC buy orders on exchanges. With that in mind, Ted said that the price will likely sink to $50K “with a possible wick.”

X users bee and Crypto Lens have also made bearish forecasts. The former opined that BTC is “on the verge of the final flush,” expecting a drop to $51,000-$52,000, while the latter envisioned a downturn to $43,000 by August this year.

However, it’s not all doom and gloom. Certain factors, such as the declining amount of BTC held on exchanges, suggest a rebound is also possible. As CryptoPotato reported, the figure recently dipped to a six-year low, meaning that investors have abandoned centralized platforms in favor of self-custody, thereby reducing immediate selling pressure.

Meanwhile, whales scooped up more than 30,000 BTC in a week: a strong signal that they are positioning for the next rally and something that could encourage retail investors to jump on the bandwagon, too.

The post Bitcoin (BTC) or Ethereum (ETH): Which Will Bottom First? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

It was another eventful and volatile week in the cryptocurrency markets (and beyond), which began with promising news on the war front in the Middle East that all concerned parties had agreed to a deal. However, it’s not that simple.

In the meantime, bitcoin’s price had struggled to break above $64,000 until Sunday evening, when Trump’s promise of a deal was announced to the world. The cryptocurrency reacted with an immediate surge that pushed it to $66,000 within hours and above $67,000 on Monday to mark a multi-week peak of its own.

However, the subsequent rejection was right around the corner. In the hours leading up to the Wednesday FOMC meeting, which was the first under the Federal Reserve’s new Chairman, BTC dropped below $65,000 and then jumped to $66,400. However, once the Fed confirmed that it won’t lower the rates, as essentially everyone anticipated, and then Kevin Warsh’s speech showed his hawkish tone, bitcoin slipped once again.

It kept sliding in the following days and dipped to a weekly low of $62,300 earlier today. This also came amid growing concerns that the memorandum of understanding between the US and Iran might not come to fruition. However, the two hotheads in the mix, Israel and Hezbollah, reportedly agreed to a ceasefire earlier today, due to begin at 14:00 BST on Friday.

BTC reacted with another uptick, going above $63,000 as of press time. It’s likely that the cryptocurrency will gain further traction if the actual permanent deal is signed, as it was promised, today, but the broader market remains fragile, especially with the uncertainty around Strategy and its controversial STRC shares. More on that, a bit later.

For now, BTC remains in the red weekly, and so are BNB, DOGE, XMR, CC, BCH, and ADA. In contrast, HYPE, XLM, WLD, UNI, and RAIN have marked double-digit gains.

Market Data

Market Cap: $2.26T | 24H Vol: $75B | BTC Dominance: 56.1%

BTC: $63,230 (-1.3%) | ETH: $1,700 (+0.85%) | XRP: $1.14 (-0.9%)

This Week’s Crypto Headlines You Can’t Miss

Strive CEO: Sharp STRC, SATA Drops Were Leverage Liquidations, Not Credit Failures. Despite making another $100 million bitcoin acquisition this week, Saylor’s Strategy attracted some controversy due to its STRC shares. The financial vehicle has fallen well below its intended price of $100, and a crash on Thursday increased the FUD even though Strive’s CEO defended the product and the issuer behind it.

Bitcoin Dips Below $64K Again: Here’s How Whales Reacted. With bitcoin’s price instability and consistent weakness, large whales, those holding at least 1,000 units, had increased their holdings to their highest levels in over three months. They control almost 36% of BTC’s available supply now.

Morgan Stanley Files Amendments, Clearing Path for Cheapest ETH, SOL ETFs. Months after launching its Bitcoin ETF, the banking behemoth filed amendments for its two ETH and SOL filings. If approved, the new financial vehicles will be the cheapest of the bunch and will include staking arrangements.

BlackRock Rolls Out Bitcoin Income ETF as Demand for Covered Calls Grows. Speaking of ETFs, the world’s largest asset manager launched its iShares Bitcoin Premium Income ETF (BITA) to expand its product lineup with a yield-focused vehicle.

Illinois Passed the Most Anti-Crypto Law in the US: Miles Jennings. On June 17, Illinois officials enacted the Digital Asset Privilege Tax Act, which was called “one of the most anti-crypto laws in the US” by Andreessen Horowitz’s Miles Jennings. It imposes a 0.2% tax on the exchange, transfer, and custody of cryptocurrencies, with no meaningful exemptions for routine self-custody moves.

Bitmine Adds $135M in ETH, Closing In on 5% of Ethereum Supply. The broader market’s weakness has not deterred Bitmine from reaching its goal of owning 5% of Ethereum’s total supply. In the latest acquisition spree, the company said it had acquired almost 77,000 ETH for $135 million, bringing its total to 5,620,754 tokens.

Charts

This week, we have a chart analysis of Ethereum, Ripple, Cardano, Binance Coin, and Hyperliquid – click here for the complete price analysis.

The post Bitcoin Slides as Warsh Stays Hawkish and Markets Await a Lasting US-Iran Agreement: Weekly Recap appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitcoin is still under heavy selling pressure after breaking below a significant rising channel that had been guiding the price action since February, and there seems to be little stopping the asset from dropping lower.

The latest rejection from a short-term resistance has accelerated downside momentum once again and is pushing BTC back toward the key demand zone around $60K. Meanwhile, on-chain data suggest that long-term holders are realizing losses, reflecting a notable shift in market dynamics.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: The Daily Chart

On the daily timeframe, Bitcoin has decisively broken below the large ascending channel that contained the price action for nearly four months. The breakdown occurred after BTC failed to reclaim the confluence of the 200-day moving average and the $80k zone and was rejected decisively to the downside.

The 100-day moving average located near the $72k area has now formed a key resistance zone. The market attempted to retest it following the initial breakdown, but sellers quickly regained control and triggered another leg lower before the market even reached the area, as the price failed to break back above the $67k short-term supply zone. The rejection confirms that bears remain in control of the broader trend for now.

The asset is currently trading around $63k and is hovering just above a major support area at $60k. This key demand zone marks the most important level on the chart, as it previously acted as a launchpad for the February recovery following the sharp capitulation move.

As long as BTC remains below the broken channel and beneath the moving averages, rallies are likely to be viewed as corrective. Moreover, should the $60k support region fail to hold, the next significant downside target appears to be the large demand area around $50k-$52k. Conversely, reclaiming the $72k resistance zone would be required to invalidate the current bearish outlook and potentially reopen the path toward the $80k region.

BTC/USDT 4-Hour Chart

The 4-hour timeframe provides a clearer view of the recent breakdown. Following the breakdown from the $72k-$74k block, BTC experienced an aggressive sell-off that drove the price into the $60k support zone. The subsequent rebound formed a short-term rising channel, which is often considered a bearish continuation pattern when it develops after a strong decline.

The price has recently broken below the lower boundary of the channel, confirming the bearish pattern and increasing the probability of another test of the $60k-$61k support area. The failed breakout attempt at $67k highlights the lack of bullish conviction. In addition, the RSI has rolled over from near-overbought conditions and is now trending lower near the oversold region, suggesting weakening short-term momentum.

If sellers maintain control, the immediate focus remains on the $60k support zone. A decisive breakdown could trigger another wave of liquidations and accelerate the move toward higher time-frame liquidity pockets beneath the recent lows.

On the upside, BTC would need to recover the $67k resistance region before any meaningful bullish scenario can be considered. Above that, the next major barrier remains the $72k zone, which aligns with the broken daily support and moving-average cluster.

On-Chain Analysis

The Long-Term Holder SOPR (Spent Output Profit Ratio) continues to trend sharply lower and is now below the critical 1.0 threshold. This metric measures whether long-term holders are spending coins at a profit or a loss. Values above 1 indicate profitable spending, while readings near or below 1 suggest holders are either realizing minimal profits or refusing to distribute their coins.

The persistent decline in the 30-day EMA of the Long-Term Holder SOPR reflects a substantial reduction in profit-taking activity among experienced market participants. Historically, such conditions often emerge during prolonged corrections, as investors become less willing to sell after a significant drawdown.

The metric has recently reached capitulation territory, and its continued deterioration confirms the weakening market environment visible on the price charts. If SOPR remains below 1, it would signal that long-term holders are consistently realizing losses, which is a condition that has historically coincided with late-stage correction phases and important market inflection points.

For now, the combination of bearish market structure, resistance rejection, and weakening long-term holder profitability suggests that Bitcoin remains vulnerable to further downside pressure unless buyers can reclaim the $72k region and re-establish control of the broader trend.

The post Where Could BTC Bottom After Breaking Below Key Ascending Channel? (Bitcoin Price Analysis) appeared first on CryptoPotato.

This Friday, we examine Ethereum, Ripple, Cardano, Binance Coin, and Hyperliquid in greater detail.

Ethereum (ETH)

This week, Ethereum is up 2%, but that is hardly relevant given that the price has failed to reclaim the $1,800 resistance. Sellers returned there to keep the price locked in under this key level.

With the uptrend halted, this cryptocurrency is forced to range between support at $1,500 and resistance at $1,800.

Looking ahead, because sellers appear to control price action, they’re likely to make another attempt to break the key support. If ETH shows weakness and loses $1,500, then new yearly lows will materialize with key targets at $1,400 and $1,100.

Ripple (XRP)

XRP closed the week in red with a modest 1% loss. While that is not much, the more concerning aspect is that the price was rejected at the $1.3 resistance, and since then it’s only been down.

If nothing changes, then this cryptocurrency is on a clear path to revisit the support at $1 where buyers showed up a few weeks ago. The question is if they will return there again or shy away.

Looking ahead, the XRP chart shows weakness with buyers absent. This has encouraged sellers to step up, and they are dominating right now. This could change once the price hits $1, but this is still uncertain now.

Cardano (ADA)

Cardano fell by 4% this week, and after losing support at $0.24, its market cap dropped significantly. This caused it to lose several places on the list of the biggest coins by market cap, where it now ranks 16th, behind the likes of Stellar and Monero.

The price found short-term relief at the $0.15 support, but this appears to have ended as of this post. Now, sellers are back, and they may soon test this key support again with the aim of breaking it and pushing ADA even lower.

Looking ahead, if bears are successful in the coming days, the price could quickly fall again to hit new lows around $0.10, where the next major support level is located. This would be quite unfortunate and prolong the existing downtrend that started in 2025.

Binance Coin (BNB)

After a long battle and consolidation, it appears BNB is finally falling below its support at $580. Because of this, it also closes the week 5% lower. If nothing changes and buyers don’t return, then $580 will turn into resistance, with lower lows likely.

The next key support is found at $500, and this level is likely to be tested if this bearish momentum persists. Since sellers appear to be dominating across the market, a reversal here appears unlikely.

Looking ahead, Binance Coin’s pause between $580 and $690 is about to end. This flat consolidation lasted for six months and a breakdown is a significant bearish signal. Expect new lows this year if bulls cannot regain control.

Hype (HYPE)

Surprisingly, HYPE closed the week 16% higher after a strong performance by buyers, briefly pushing it to $76. However, since then, the price entered a pullback which could see it return to the support at $63.

While the overall momentum remains bullish, the current price pattern may indicate a double top around $76. To confirm this, the price will need to make a lower low under $52 later on.

Looking ahead, buyers and sellers are actively competing to control the price. Right now, the ball is changing hands every few days. While buyers still appear to have the advantage, this remains fragile at the time of this post.

The post Crypto Price Analysis June 19: ETH, XRP, ADA, BNB, and HYPE appeared first on CryptoPotato.