Lawmakers introduce a bipartisan bill to protect crypto developers after Tornado Cash prosecutions sparked debate over coder liability.

The post Lawmakers introduce bill to shield crypto developers after Tornado Cash prosecutions appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Morgan Stanley's exploration into Bitcoin lending and yield services could accelerate mainstream crypto adoption and reshape financial services.

The post Morgan Stanley explores offering Bitcoin lending and yield services appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

PayPal is not in sale talks despite reports that Stripe is evaluating a potential acquisition amid leadership changes and financing hurdles.

The post PayPal not pursuing sale despite report of Stripe interest appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Wallet in Telegram launches BTC, ETH and USDT Vaults inside TON Wallet, offering onchain yield with up to 18% APY to Telegram users.

The post Wallet in Telegram rolls out BTC, ETH and USDT yield Vaults inside TON Wallet appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitfinex's update could democratize access to tokenized securities, potentially broadening market participation and enhancing portfolio management.

The post Bitfinex enhances account architecture to support native security tokens appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

The Core Issue: libsecp256k1, Bitcoin’s Cryptographic Heart

Common phrases heard among Bitcoiners include “don’t trust, verify” or “not your keys, not your coins”, sometimes even claiming that it’s “backed by math”. But what do these proverbs ultimately boil down to, and how exactly is this involved math put into practice? Most readers are surely aware that a fundamental ingredient in the design of Bitcoin is public-key cryptography and more specifically digital signatures, which are essential to prove ownership without needing a central entity. Probably less well-known is what piece of software is under the hood to make that elliptic curve math work and what efforts are involved to ensure that this happens in the most secure and performant way, with continuous improvements. Let’s dive into the exciting history and evolution of “libsecp256k1”, a library that started out as a small hobby project and over the years evolved into an essential part of consensus rules protecting a multi-trillion dollar asset.

The Genesis

For reasons we don’t know for sure, Satoshi picked an elliptic curve named “secp256k1” for creating and verifying digital signatures in Bitcoin. The initial version of the Bitcoin client was shipped using the widespread OpenSSL library for signing and verifying transactions. Relying on a third-party library sounds like a reasonable approach from a software engineering perspective (even more so if it is something as domain-specific and complex as elliptic-curve

cryptography), but this choice turned out to be problematic later due to inconsistencies in the signature parsing code. In the worst case, this could even lead to unintended chain splits. One lesson from that time period was that OpenSSL is not a suitable library for a consensus-critical system like Bitcoin. The issue was later fixed by BIP66, which ensured a strict encoding of ECDSA signatures. After that, the OpenSSL dependency was replaced with libsecp256k1 in Bitcoin Core v0.12, released in early 2016.¹

But taking a step back, the initial motivation behind starting the libsecp256k1 project was mostly curiosity about a potential speed-up. Sometime in the year 2012, Bitcoin Core developer Pieter Wuille a.k.a. “sipa” stumbled upon a bitcointalk thread by Hal Finney (known for being the recipient of the very first Bitcoin transaction in 2009 from Satoshi).

Under the subject “Speeding up signature verification”, the post discussed an optimization that would make use of a so-called “endomorphism” (more specifically using the so-called GLV-method, Gallant-Lambert-Vanstone), something that only certain elliptic curves allow, secp256k1 conveniently being one of them. Hal Finney himself implemented it using OpenSSL primitives, it was later even submitted as a PR to Bitcoin Core.² Even though it showed a solid

~20% speedup, it was never merged in the end due to concerns about increasing code complexity and missing assurance that the involved cryptography is sound.

Pieter Wuille went ahead and decided to start a new library from scratch, with the initial commit of the “secp256k1” repository dating back to March 5th 2013. After only one week the library was able to verify the full blockchain (block height ~225000 at that time), within another week the signing functionality was implemented. It took some more time and testing until the library was ready to be used in Bitcoin Core as a replacement for OpenSSL, first for signing in the

wallet (release v0.10, 2015), and finally for ECDSA signature verification in consensus (release v0.12, 2016). The efforts were absolutely worth it: according to the PR description in Core, using libsecp256k1 for signature verification was “anywhere between 2.5 and 5.5 times faster”. Ironically, this didn’t yet include the earlier mentioned endomorphism optimization, since it wasn’t turned on by default due to worries about patent violation. It was only activated in the year 2020, after the patent expired (enabled in release v0.20), leading to another solid speed-up of around 16%.

Over time, the project attracted several other contributors. This naturally involved people that were closely working with Pieter from the start at Blockstream, namely then-CTO Gregory Maxwell and researcher Andrew Poelstra. In 2015, Jonas Nick and a few years later Tim Ruffing joined, both employed by Blockstream as researchers and now holding the role of maintainers of libsecp256k1 for several years. As they are responsible for both specifying new cryptographic

protocols (including detailed security proofs) and putting them into practice by implementing and reviewing them, it is very appropriate to call them “full-stack cryptographers”, as Tim Ruffing likes to describe himself.

Occasionally even cryptographers from outside the Bitcoin space have contributed to

libsecp256k1. One notable example of that is Peter Dettman, known for being one of the maintainers of the C#/Java cryptography library BouncyCastle, who up to this day shows up every now and then with various performance improvement suggestions. One of his major contributions was implementing modular inversion using the “safegcd” algorithm in 2021 to safely improve , following a paper by Daniel J. Bernstein and Bo-Yin Yang.

Why Reinvent The Wheel?

The goal of libsecp256k1 is to provide the highest quality library for cryptographic operations on the secp256k1 curve, with the primary intent of being useful in the broader Bitcoin ecosystem–Bitcoin Core is simply the main client using it. The API of libsecp256k1 is designed to be robust and hard to misuse, in order to prevent users from performing insecure operations (e.g. by rolling their own cryptographic schemes) that could lead to a loss of funds in the worst case. By focussing only on one elliptic curve and by limiting its functionality to operations

relevant to Bitcoin (that is, primarily signing and verifying transactions), the code can be both faster and simpler to review, leading to a lower maintenance burden and higher overall quality in comparison to other implementations. libsecp256k1 is written in C and doesn’t have any dependency on other libraries, so it only uses internal code written specifically for the project. As such it is designed to also run on constrained devices like micro-controllers, which are commonly used in hardware wallets.

Measure Twice, Cut Once

From very early on, libsecp256k1 had a strong focus on quality assurance that was continuously improved and honed over the years. Now it has a testing code coverage of close to 100%, and new modules only have a chance of getting merged if that bar is still met. In addition to that, there is also a special form of assurance called “exhaustive testing”. The basic idea is to exercise the functionality of the library for the whole space of possible values on the curve. As this would be infeasible on the actual secp256k1 curve, consisting of ~2^256 points, a special, much smaller but very similar curve is used which has an order that is merely in the double or triple digit range, so it can easily be executed within a reasonable amount of time. Another important part of testing is assurance of constant-time behaviour, which is particularly relevant for signing, as we will see below.

Schnorr: A Whole New World

Shifting our focus from QA to new features, one of the major milestones within the last decade in libsecp256k1, and in the Bitcoin protocol in general, was the introduction of Schnorr signatures. Being an essential part of the Schnorr/Taproot soft-fork activated in late 2021, they offer many advantages over ECDSA signatures, including being provably secure under standard assumptions, more compact, and enabling a whole lot of other constructions on top like key and signature aggregation for more efficient multisignature schemes. Both the specification in BIP340 and implementation was  created by the current three maintainers of libsecp256k1, Pieter Wuille, Jonas Nick and Tim Ruffing.

libsecp256k1 Is Good For Your Node And The Network

It goes without saying that verifying digital signatures is one of the (if not the) most important and security-critical code paths of the Bitcoin consensus engine. No matter what complex script-paths and extra spending conditions might be included in some locking script, at the end there is likely at least one signature check involved in the transaction to ensure that it was actually created by the owner of the coins being spent. For such an essential operation, we want the code to be as robust, well-tested and performant as possible. Fast signature verification is also critical for both fast transaction and block propagation, and also to speed-up the Initial Block Download (IBD) for new participants in the network. We have already mentioned earlier the ~5x speedup when libsecp256k1 replaced OpenSSL for the first time about ten years ago. Over time, further performance improvements were implemented, and a recent investigation shows that libsecp256k1 is now about ~8x faster than OpenSSL for ECDSA signature verification using the most current version of each.³

Signing Can Be Dangerous, So Do It Right

So far we have focused on the verification functionality of libsecp256k1, being the most crucial for performance of node runners and miners. The other side of the coin (no pun intended!) is signing, i.e. the process of creating a digital signature for a transaction in order to spend funds. What makes this process delicate is the fact that secret key material is involved. If this material is in any way leaked, it could in the worst case lead to a catastrophic loss of funds, so special care has to be taken at the implementation level. libsecp256k1 tries to combat against so-called “side-channel attacks” by avoiding data-dependent branches, i.e. instances where different pieces of code are executed depending on what data is fed into it. This is a non-trivial task and takes some extra effort with regards to modern compilers, which are sometimes “too smart” in the sense that they try to optimize code while compiling it to software with resource saving branches where we explicitly don’t want that to happen. This is not just a theoretical concern, but has happened more than once, requiring patches to be shipped (e.g. releases 0.3.1 and 0.3.2). The important constant-time property is also tested using a tool called “valgrind” that was originally built for debugging memory issues. By using it to find any branching in code operating on secret data, we can detect if a potential side-channel risk exists.

Another way secret material could be leaked is by leaving it in memory unintentionally. Overwriting a memory region to make sure it is erased sounds trivial, but this has to be done in a way that prevents the compiler from getting in our way due to code optimization during compiling. Great care is taken to ensure that doesn’t occur.

Some Happy Accidents

More than once during the development of the library interesting things came up by surprise. In 2014, Pieter Wuille and Gregory Maxwell were already working on an extensive test suite for the library. One of the strategies to achieve a higher degree of assurance was verifying the behaviour of internal functions in the library against other implementations with special random inputs. This revealed a case where OpenSSL gave a wrong result when squaring a number, a serious security relevant bug filed as CVE-2014-3570 (“Bignum squaring may produce incorrect results.”).

In another instance a few years later, Pieter Wuille proposed a new method for computing a bound (or limit) on the number of iterations needed for the previously mentioned “safegcd” algorithm for computing modular inverses. This allowed shrinking that bound, leading to a faster computation. But it didn’t stop there. Mostly by accident, Gregory Maxwell discovered a different variant of Bernstein and Yang’s algorithm with even lower bounds, leading to another significant speedup both for signing and verification. 

It’s noteworthy to mention that correctness (so, safety) of the “safegcd” implementation has been formally verified using a special theorem proving software called “Rocq” (formerly named “Coq”) and the “Verifiable C” program logic.⁴ This impressive work was done by Russell O’Connor and Andrew Poelstra, who state that the entirety of libsecp256k1 could be verified in the same way.

Cryptography Is Still Evolving

We have now shown that libsecp256k1 is primarily used for creating and verifying digital signatures in Bitcoin transactions, taking great care to do so in the safest and most efficient way possible, but it doesn’t stop there. Whenever other proposals are put forward that involve cryptographic operations on the secp256k1 curve (ideally formalized in a BIP) and are seen as overall beneficial for the Bitcoin ecosystem, the chances are good that the necessary code is considered in-scope for the library. In such a case, given enough developer time for implementation and review, it has good odds at winding up in a release of libsecp256k1. This has notably happened before with the ElligatorSwift module, a piece that was essential for enabling encryption for nodes’ P2P communication [see BIP324; discussed in-depth on here], and most recently for MuSig2, a key aggregation scheme based on Schnorr signatures that allows creating n-on-n multi-signatures in a space-efficient and privacy-preserving way. There is also an ongoing effort to add a new module for Silent Payments, a proposal for a privacy-preserving static reusable address that doesn’t need interaction before payment between sender and receiver. And there is yet so much more to come: Batch Validation for Schnorr Signatures, DLEQ proofs, FROST, etc. Let’s see what the next 10 years of development in libsecp256k1 will bring!

Readers interested in libsecp256k1 are encouraged to take a look at and play around with secp256k1lab, a Python implementation of the secp256k1 curve that is intended for prototyping and experimentation.⁵

Don’t miss your chance to own The Core Issue — featuring articles written by many Core Developers explaining the projects they work on themselves!

This piece is the Letter from the Editor featured in the latest Print edition of Bitcoin Magazine, The Core Issue. We’re sharing it here as an early look at the ideas explored throughout the full issue.

[1] https://gnusha.org/pi/bitcoindev/55B79146.70309@gmail.com/ 

[2]  (#2061, https://github.com/bitcoin/bitcoin/pull/2061)

[3] https://delvingbitcoin.org/t/comparing-the-performance-of-ecdsa-signature-validation-in-openssl-vs-libsecp256k1-over-the-last-decade/2087?u=thestack

[4] [https://www.arxiv.org/abs/2507.17956] 

[5] https://github.com/secp256k1lab/secp256k1lab/

This post The Core Issue: libsecp256k1, Bitcoin’s Cryptographic Heart first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Sebastian Falbesoner.

Bitcoin Magazine

Citi to Integrate Bitcoin with Traditional Finance, Launch Custody Services

Citi is preparing to introduce infrastructure that integrates Bitcoin into traditional financial systems, a bank executive said Thursday. 

The initiative, introduced by Nisha Surendran, head of digital asset custody development at Citi, aims to provide institutional-grade custody, key management, and wallet services for clients holding the cryptocurrency.

Speaking at Strategy World, an industry event hosted by Bitcoin treasury firm Strategy, Surendran said the effort is part of Citi’s broader plan to “make Bitcoin bankable.” She outlined a three-pronged approach focused on custody, integration with existing reporting and tax systems, and simplifying client access to digital assets.

“Later this year, Citi will be launching our infrastructure that integrates Bitcoin into traditional finance,” Surendran said. “We’re starting with core custody and safekeeping capabilities, institutional-grade key management, and wallet infrastructure.”

The rollout will allow clients to manage Bitcoin positions alongside traditional assets. Citi manages roughly $30 trillion in client assets across securities and money market products. 

The bank plans to extend the same reporting channels, tax workflows, and compliance frameworks currently used for traditional assets to Bitcoin holdings.

Clients will not need to manage wallets, private keys, or one-time addresses, Surendran said, as Citi will handle those processes through its infrastructure. 

In December 2025, Citi analysts forecasted that bitcoin could reach $143,000 in 2026, with a bullish scenario above $189,000 and a bearish case near $78,500, citing increased adoption through ETFs and supportive U.S. regulation. 

At the time, bitcoin traded around $88,000, down 30% from its October peak. Bitcoin is now trading below $67,000. Bitcoin jumped a lot yesterday but has since been giving back some of its gains.

Morgan Stanley wants in on the bitcoin fun

Yesterday at Strategy World, Morgan Stanley also outlined plans to expand its digital asset offerings, including launching a native crypto custody and exchange platform. 

The bank will initially allow E-Trade clients to buy and sell spot cryptocurrencies through a partnership, while a fully integrated platform is expected over the next year. 

The planned custody solution would give clients legal control of their assets under Morgan Stanley’s oversight, though some may continue self-custody, especially for Bitcoin. 

The firm also said they are exploring crypto yield and lending products, leveraging its $8 trillion asset base to bring off-platform holdings onto its platform.

This post Citi to Integrate Bitcoin with Traditional Finance, Launch Custody Services first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Indiana Approves Bitcoin Investments in Public Retirement Plans

Indiana lawmakers have passed legislation allowing public retirement and savings plans to invest in bitcoin, crypto and crypto-linked exchange-traded funds (ETFs), with Governor Mike Braun expected to sign the bill, HB 1042, into law within the next 10 days. 

The move positions Indiana among a growing number of states considering digital assets in public investment portfolios.

Under the new law, Indiana’s public retirement boards, deferred compensation committees, and annuity savings programs are required, by July 1, 2027, to offer self-directed brokerage accounts that include at least one cryptocurrency investment option. 

These accounts will give plan participants the ability to select cryptocurrency investments in accordance with the boards’ established investment guidelines, track account valuations, and pay administrative fees associated with digital asset holdings.

The legislation defines cryptocurrency as a virtual currency that is not issued by a central authority, functions as a medium of exchange, and relies on encryption technology to regulate issuance, verify transfers, and prevent counterfeiting. 

Indiana joins other states that have authorized public funds to gain exposure to digital assets. 

This trend has accelerated following President Donald Trump’s directive to create a U.S. Bitcoin Strategic Reserve, encouraging states and public entities to consider bitcoin and digital assets as part of their long-term investment strategies.

Lawmakers say the new law will give public employees and retirees more ways to invest, including in cryptocurrencies, while keeping control over their choices. 

Self-directed accounts let participants manage crypto alongside stocks, bonds, and ETFs, with boards setting limits and guidelines to reduce risk. 

The legislation also clarifies that retirement boards and deferred compensation committees are responsible for overseeing crypto options, setting fees, and ensuring account values reflect market prices. 

It standardizes crypto offerings across state pensions, deferred compensation programs, and annuity accounts, giving Indiana participants consistent access to digital assets.

Bitcoin and crypto ATM ban amid fraud concerns

In a separate measure, the Indiana legislature voted to ban the operation of virtual currency kiosks, commonly known as bitcoin or crypto ATMs, across the state. The ban responds to law enforcement reports of rising fraud tied to crypto ATMs. 

In Evansville, residents lost approximately $400,000 in scams connected to these machines in 2025. Violations of the ban would fall under the enforcement authority of the state attorney general under deceptive consumer sales laws.

The prohibition aligns with broader concerns about crypto ATM fraud nationwide.

The FBI reported nearly 11,000 complaints related to crypto ATM scams in 2024, marking a 99% increase from the previous year, with losses totaling an estimated $240 million in the first half of 2025. 

This post Indiana Approves Bitcoin Investments in Public Retirement Plans first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoin ETFs Post Half a Billion in Inflows as BTC Rebounds Above $69,000

U.S. spot bitcoin exchange-traded funds recorded $506.5 million in net inflows on Feb. 25, the largest single-day total in three weeks, reversing a stretch of heavy redemptions that had fueled doubts about institutional demand.

The surge followed $257.7 million in inflows on Feb. 24, bringing the two-day total to more than $750 million. The rebound came after five consecutive weeks of outflows totaling about $3.8 billion. Year to date, net flows are now just under $2 billion in outflows.

BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT) led Tuesday’s gains with $297.4 million in inflows, accounting for nearly 60% of the daily total. Grayscale’s Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) posted $102.5 million in inflows, marking a rare positive session for the fund, which has seen about $25.9 billion in cumulative net outflows since converting to an ETF structure.

Bitwise Asset Management’s BITB added $39.4 million, while Fidelity Investments’s FBTC brought in $30.1 million. Invesco’s BTCO and VanEck’s HODL also recorded net buying. None of the 11 active spot bitcoin ETFs posted outflows on the day.

Bitcoin rose near $70,000 during the session, climbing more than 7% from its weekly low below $64,000. The move coincided with renewed ETF demand and strength in broader risk assets.

At the time of writing, Bitcoin is trading near $67,000. 

Bitcoin’s foundation looks strong

The inflows mark the highest daily total in three weeks and suggest institutional buyers have returned after stepping back through much of late January and February. If inflows persist through the end of the week, spot bitcoin ETFs could post their first weekly net gain in more than a month.

Despite persistent pessimism, BTC’s institutional infrastructure remains intact, unlike in 2022, when FTX, Celsius, and others collapsed. 

ETF outflows have largely stabilized, long-term holders’ buying capacity has grown, and major US banks continue building crypto products. With a shrinking tradable supply and solid market plumbing, analysts see current weakness as a temporary confidence crisis, with some projecting BTC could reach $150,000 this year.

BTC pulled back this morning, dropping to around $67,000 after approaching $70,000 yesterday.  The decline comes after a strong session for crypto-related stocks, which saw solid gains. 

The iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (NASDAQ: IBIT) fell $1.19, or 3.02%, to $38.04 today. IBIT is a financial product that tracks BTC’s price, giving investors exposure to BTC without directly owning it.

This post Bitcoin ETFs Post Half a Billion in Inflows as BTC Rebounds Above $69,000 first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

Bitcoin Magazine

Trump-Linked American Bitcoin (ABTC) Posts $59M Q4 Loss as Bitcoin Slump Hits Treasury Holdings

American Bitcoin Corp., the Trump family-linked mining company, reported a fourth-quarter net loss of $59 million as bitcoin prices fell, cutting the value of its digital asset holdings.

The Miami-based firm, which trades on the Nasdaq under the ticker ABTC, said revenue for the three months ended Dec. 31 totaled $78.3 million, up from $64.2 million a year earlier but slightly below analyst estimates of $79.6 million. For the full year, the company generated $185.2 million in revenue.

Bitcoin declined about 23% in the fourth quarter, pressuring companies that hold large reserves of the cryptocurrency on their balance sheets. Under updated rules from the Financial Accounting Standards Board, firms must mark digital asset holdings to market each reporting period. As a result, American Bitcoin recorded a $227 million non-cash loss tied to the revaluation of its bitcoin treasury.

The company ended the year with 5,401 bitcoin and has since increased that figure to more than 6,000 BTC, according to a statement from co-founder Eric Trump. American Bitcoin said roughly one-third of its holdings were acquired through mining operations, with the remaining two-thirds accumulated through open-market purchases and strategic transactions.

American Bitcoin is backed by the family of President Donald Trump and is 20% owned by Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. 

The firm went public in September, weeks before bitcoin reached a record high above $126,000. Shares have since fallen nearly 90% from a peak near $9 last year. The stock was up 2% in early trading Thursday at $1.06 but remains down about 22% over the past 12 months.

The company raised $150.5 million during the quarter through an at-the-market stock offering, capital it used to increase its bitcoin holdings. Management said the equity issuance boosted per-share bitcoin exposure by nearly 50%.

American Bitcoin posts 53% mining margin

American Bitcoin operates industrial-scale mining facilities and relies on infrastructure support from majority owner Hut 8. During the fourth quarter, the company said it mined bitcoin at a 53% gross margin, indicating production costs remained below prevailing spot prices despite the market downturn.

Chief Executive Mike Ho said 2025 marked the firm’s first year as a standalone public company and cited expansion of its mining platform and bitcoin reserves as key milestones. President Matthew Prusak described the company’s strategy as securing bitcoin through mining and accumulating additional reserves through treasury purchases.

The fourth-quarter loss of $59.45 million compares with a profit of $3.48 million in the same period a year earlier. The company also reported a profit in the previous quarter.

Industry peers have taken varied approaches to the downturn. Some large miners, including MARA Holdings and Riot Platforms, have explored converting portions of their operations to artificial intelligence infrastructure. 

Others have sold parts of their bitcoin reserves to strengthen liquidity.

Hut 8, which holds a majority stake in American Bitcoin, reported its own fourth-quarter results Wednesday. The company said it ended the year with an 8,500-megawatt development pipeline and secured a new $200 million revolving credit facility with Two Prime. 

It also expanded an existing credit facility with Coinbase to $200 million, bringing total available credit capacity to $400 million.

This post Trump-Linked American Bitcoin (ABTC) Posts $59M Q4 Loss as Bitcoin Slump Hits Treasury Holdings first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Micah Zimmerman.

On Feb. 25, t54 Labs announced that Ripple was a strategic investor in its $5 million seed round investment. t54 describes itself as the trust layer for the fast-rising agentic economy.

The latest artificial intelligence move is small in dollar terms, but larger in what it signals about where Ripple sees the next fight in blockchain infrastructure.

This is because Ripple is not backing a consumer chatbot or another token-branded AI product. It is backing the payment controls, identity checks, and risk infrastructure that could help determine whether autonomous software agents can transact in a way that businesses and regulated institutions are willing to use.

Related Reading

AI agents spend just $1.22 to shatter smart contract security exposing a terrifying economic reality

Automated exploit discovery is becoming cheaper than a coffee, forcing a total rethink of how digital assets are secured.

Dec 3, 2025 · Gino Matos

That matters because Ripple is making the bet after saying it has already deployed $550 million into the XRP Ledger (XRPL) ecosystem.

The new t54 investment suggests the company now wants to push XRPL deeper into what it sees as a coming market for machine-to-machine commerce, where software agents buy data, access computing resources, pay for services, and settle small obligations without human intervention.

The pitch is simple. If software agents become meaningful economic actors on the internet, payments will need to happen inside workflows, not after them.

And if those workflows touch regulated money, identity, and compliance become part of the transaction layer, not an afterthought.

That is the opening Ripple is trying to attack.

A payments thesis disguised as an AI story

Much of the market still talks about AI in crypto as a branding contest. Ripple’s move points in a different direction. The company appears to be treating AI as a payments-and-settlement problem.

t54 Labs is building around that premise. Its work focuses on identity, fraud and risk monitoring, and credit rails for autonomous agents. It is also tied to a live x402 implementation on XRPL.

x402 revives the HTTP 402 Payment Required status code to request and settle payments directly within web requests.

In practice, that means an agent can call an endpoint, receive a payment challenge, pay automatically, and continue its workflow, all without relying on subscriptions, invoices, API keys, or manual reconciliation.

Coinbase has promoted x402 as an open standard for machine-native payments, but the standard itself is only part of the story. The rails behind it matter.

For Ripple, the thesis is that a more agentic internet will require programmable, fast, and cheap payment systems.

However, those characteristics alone are not enough if the transactions are intended to serve businesses, financial firms, or other counterparties subject to compliance obligations.

That is where the company appears to see a gap.

The harder problem is not payment, but accountability

Sending value across a blockchain is no longer the hard part because most major networks can do that quickly enough for a large share of use cases.

In light of this, the harder question is whether a counterparty can understand who or what is on the other side of the transaction.

If an autonomous agent is paying for services, businesses will want to know who controls it, what permissions it has, whether it can be stopped, how its behavior is monitored, and who bears liability if something goes wrong.

Those concerns are operational requirements. They define the threshold regulated firms use to determine whether a system is ready for production.

t54’s roadmap is designed around those problems. Instead of assuming the agent economy can run on anonymous wallets and loose coordination, it starts from the premise that identity, verification, real-time risk controls, and credit assessment are required if autonomous software is going to scale into serious commerce.

That gives Ripple’s investment a clearer strategic logic. The company aims to position XRPL within AI as foundational infrastructure. It is working to build the trust layer that would enable XRPL to operate as a settlement venue for machine-driven activity.

Related Reading

How XRP and RLUSD are making Ripple the JPMorgan of the crypto industry

Ripple's closed-loop ecosystem modernizes financial services with near-instant settlement and liquidity management using RLUSD and XRP.

Nov 4, 2025 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

The distinction is important. Plenty of chains may support AI applications. Far fewer are trying to become the place where regulated machine commerce can clear and settle.

XRPL’s more recent direction fits that framing. Features such as Permissioned Domains and a Permissioned DEX point to a model in which regulated actors can operate in controlled environments, using allowlists, credentials, and restricted access while still interacting with public blockchain infrastructure.

If AI agents are expected to transact with institutions that must satisfy KYC and AML requirements, sanctions screening, and policy-based access rules, that permissioned path becomes relevant.

In that model, the central issue becomes the form of payment itself: agents must be paid in a format that compliance teams can approve.

RLUSD could matter more than transaction fees

If agentic commerce grows, stablecoins are likely to become the preferred working asset.

Constant machine-to-machine payments are difficult to manage when assets are volatile. Software agents buying data, compute, or access need something closer to digital cash than to a speculative instrument whose value can move materially in a short span.

That gives Ripple’s stablecoin, RLUSD, an important role in the thesis.

Ripple’s own data places RLUSD circulating supply at about $1.5386 billion, with $1.6109 billion in reserve funds.

The more revealing metric for XRPL is the stablecoin liquidity currently sitting on the ledger, rather than the headline supply.

Data from DeFiLlama puts the total stablecoin float on XRPL at about $415.09 million, with RLUSD accounting for roughly 83.10% of that float.

That gap is important. It suggests RLUSD may be spread across venues and networks, while the on-ledger settlement money stock inside XRPL remains much smaller.

For Ripple, the growth question centers on whether autonomous workflows choose to hold and move stable balances on XRPL itself, ultimately determining how RLUSD expands.

That is where the economics become more interesting.

XRPL’s base fee remains tiny, typically 10 drops, or 0.00001 XRP, and that fee is destroyed. Even a sharp rise in activity would probably leave the burn economically minor relative to the XRP supply.

The more material effect would be on liquidity. If machine commerce grows on XRPL, demand for stablecoin float, routing liquidity, and market-making balances could grow with it.

That is a more durable story than relying on transaction fees alone to change the economics of the network.

Ripple does not need to win AI agents outright

The competitive backdrop makes this clearer. Ripple is not entering a field where XRPL already dominates AI-agent activity.

Data from agentsevm shows Ethereum currently leads in deployed AI agents by network, with 27,903. Coinbase-backed Base is next at 20,623.

Those numbers reinforce where the center of gravity sits today, around deep liquidity, battle-tested smart contracts, and strong developer network effects.

Ripple’s bet appears to be something narrower, and potentially more practical. It does not need XRPL to become the primary home for every agent.

However, it needs XRPL to capture a meaningful share of the payment and settlement layer used by those agents.

That is where the scenario modeling becomes useful.

If x402 reaches 200 million transactions a year and XRPL captures 2% through integrations such as t54’s facilitator, that would amount to 4 million transactions a year, or about 11,000 a day. That would be visible, but not transformative.

Meanwhile, if x402 reaches 1 billion transactions a year and XRPL captures 5%, activity would rise to 50 million transactions a year, or about 137,000 a day.

At that level, the effect could become more important for ecosystem attention, builder incentives and on-ledger liquidity needs.

In a higher-end case, where x402 reaches 10 billion transactions a year and XRPL captures 5%, the ledger would handle 500 million transactions a year, or about 1.37 million a day.

That would represent a genuine step-change, not just in traffic, but in the need for robust compliance tools, stable settlement balances, and reliable developer infrastructure.

XRPL can generate meaningful impact with even a modest single-digit share of a large machine-payment market. Even limited penetration at scale would carry weight.

The post XRPL could capture billions in machine payments but only if AI agents choose RLUSD appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin bounced back toward $69,000 on Feb. 25 after an intraday flush that printed lows in the low-$60,000s across multiple venues, liquidating nearly $500 million in short positions.

The move keeps price inside the $60,000-$69,000 range that has defined February trading, according to Glassnode.

Yet, it doesn't resolve the structural weakness that has characterized the market since its 47% drawdown from all-time highs.

The bounce looks less like a macro breakout and more like a risk-on rebound combined with a flow and positioning reset after capitulation. Three mechanics explain the move.

Three drivers behind the rally

Cross-market risk appetite returned. Global equities rallied on Feb. 25, led by technology stocks ahead of Nvidia's earnings. Bitcoin traded in line with other high-beta assets as risk appetite improved.

Spot BTC ETF flows flipped positive. US spot Bitcoin ETFs printed net inflows of $257.7 million on Feb. 24, according to Farside Investors data. This marked a reversal from the prior day's $203.8 million outflow.

However, the movement doesn't erase the broader outflow trend. Glassnode flags ETF flows as negative year-to-date, but it also points to a plausible marginal buyer capable of powering a sharp bounce after a flush move.

Positioning and options hedging are normalized. Glassnode flags that perpetual futures funding rates normalized toward neutral, indicating leverage has reset.

Options markets spiked in short-dated volatility as Bitcoin approached $62,000, then compressed again as price reclaimed the mid-$60,000s.

This behavior suggests panic hedging unwound, a mechanical rebound fuel rather than new bull market demand.

What structural weakness still looks like

Glassnode's analysis is direct: Bitcoin is “stabilizing, not yet recovering.”

The market remains trapped between valuation anchors, with the main demand zone around $60,000-$69,000. Today's bounce doesn't change that picture.

The 47% drawdown from all-time highs is at historically mid-to-late bear-market depth. Approximately 9.2 million BTC held at a loss creates selling pressure on rallies as holders rotate out of underwater positions.

Glassnode's Accumulation Trend Score remains below 0.5, indicating limited conviction from large holders.

The 90-day Realized Profit/Loss Ratio below 1.0 indicates a loss regime and impaired liquidity conditions. Spot Cumulative Volume Delta remains sharply negative, showing active distribution and sell-side flow dominance.

ETF flows remain in a broader outflow phase despite Feb. 24's positive day.

The $60,000 floor and the $70,000 ceiling

Clear levels on both sides define Bitcoin's current range. The $69,000 area sits at the top of Glassnode's $60,000-$69,000 main demand zone.

Holding this level on a daily and weekly basis would help frame today's move as “reclaiming range highs” rather than a failed bounce.

The $65,000 level serves as a mid-range, and Glassnode notes the market snapped back as short-dated fear faded. The $62,000-$62,500 range is critical. Glassnode explicitly flags approximately $62,000 as a level that “could have opened a move toward the high 50s if broken.”

The Feb. 25 intraday flush tested this area and held, explaining the mechanical relief rally that followed.

The $60,000 level marks the bottom of the February range. Breaking it would shift expectations toward deeper contraction. Below that, approximately $55,000 represents the Realized Price, Glassnode's structural floor anchor.

Glassnode states explicitly that failure to reclaim levels above $70,000 keeps downside contraction risk elevated.

The $72,000 level marks the top end of Glassnode's $60,000-$72,000 corridor. Breaking through this range ceiling would be the first indication that the recent weakness is resolving.

The approximately $79,200 level represents the True Market Mean in Glassnode's valuation structure.

Reclaiming this would constitute a genuine regime signal. Above that, heavy overhead supply clusters sit at $82,000-$97,000 and $100,000-$117,000, where underwater holders can sell into relief rallies.

What would count as a genuine regime shift

Three concrete tells would indicate the market has moved from stabilization to recovery.

The first is sustained ETF inflows. Not just a single $257.7 million day but consecutive periods of net positive flows that reverse the year-to-date outflow trend.

The second is spot markets flipping from sell-dominant to bid absorption, with Glassnode's spot Cumulative Volume Delta stabilizing and trending positive.

The third is reclaiming higher valuation anchors, moving above $70,000, then $72,000, then ultimately the approximately $79,200 True Market Mean.

The bottom line

Bitcoin's jump back toward $69,000 reflects a risk-on rebound combined with a flow and positioning reset after a capitulation flush.

Global equities rallied, US spot Bitcoin ETFs printed a $257.7 million net inflow on Feb. 24, and Glassnode's on-chain data shows leverage has reset while options panic hedging faded.

However, the structural picture hasn't flipped. Glassnode still describes the market as stabilizing, not recovering.

Weak accumulation, negative spot flow bias, and fragile ETF demand persist. Bulls need to hold $65,000-$69,000 and reclaim levels above $70,000, then $72,000, before calling the recent weakness “fixed.”

The “don't lose it” floor remains $62,000, with $60,000 and approximately $55,000 Realized Price below that. Today's move is mechanical relief, not structural recovery.

The post Bitcoin surged toward $69,000 after a brutal flush, but Glassnode says one level decides if it fades appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Prediction markets promised something elegant: put money behind beliefs, and the price converges on reality. The wisdom of crowds, sharpened by skin in the game.

No pollsters, no pundits, just probabilities inching toward truth as traders stake capital on what they know.

However, the moment those markets matter (politically, financially, and socially), the best information stops being “alpha” and starts looking like material nonpublic information: unfair, corrosive, and in regulated venues, bannable.

Kalshi's newly disclosed insider cases mark a turning point. Prediction markets scale with market integrity. That integrity depends on surveillance, account freezes, penalties, audits, and a regulatory backstop.

The “exchange-ification” arrives

Kalshi's February 25 enforcement disclosure reads like a traditional exchange notice rather than a community moderation update. Two cases, both closed, both reported to the CFTC.

The details matter because they signal institutional maturity.

The first case is a California gubernatorial candidate who traded roughly $200 on his own race and posted about it. The penalty included a five-year ban and a financial penalty equal to 10 times the initial trade size.

In the second case, an insider with access to a YouTube creator's content pipeline traded approximately $4,000 on video release markets. The penalty was a two-year suspension and a fine of five times the initial trade size.

Both accounts were frozen during the investigation. Neither trader withdrew profits.

Kalshi donated the fines to a nonprofit focused on consumer derivatives education and explicitly analogized the disclosure to how CME and other established venues publish enforcement notices.

This is the product surface of a regulated exchange. Enforcement isn't crisis management, it's infrastructure.

Earlier in February, Kalshi announced an independent Surveillance Advisory Committee that will publish quarterly statistics on flagged trades, investigations opened and closed, and disciplinary proceedings.

The company partnered with Solidus Labs for surveillance and brought in the director of Wharton's Forensic Analytics Lab. A new Head of Enforcement joined the team.

These moves don't belong to a forecasting widget. They belong to an institution managing billions in notional exposure.

Truth versus fairness

The old story was simple. Prices aggregate dispersed information. Money disciplines nonsense.

Probabilities converge on reality because traders profit from being right.

The collision happens when people trust the price enough to use it as a hedge, a signal, or to speculate at scale. Insiders then become a structural threat.

If insiders win reliably, everyone else rationally doubts the price and backs away. Liquidity drops. The “truth” claim collapses from adverse selection. The market becomes a lemon market where only the privileged participate and the uninformed exit.

This isn't moral philosophy. It's market microstructure.

Empirical finance research shows insider trading days can coincide with wider spreads and weaker depth, a direct liquidity tax on uninformed participants.

The mechanism is probabilistic: when traders estimate a higher likelihood that someone on the other side of their trade knows more, they demand worse prices or don't trade at all. That kills the machine.

Prediction markets can still discover truth, but only if “truth” means publicly contestable truth, not private leaks. What would be allowed is public information, research, inference, speed, and better models. Anything the public could contest in principle.

Not allowed in a legitimacy-seeking venue are material nonpublic information gained through a privileged role, such as campaign staff, production access, government decision channels, or trading while able to influence the outcome.

Kalshi's two cases are teaching examples. A candidate trading on his own race and an editor trading on a content pipeline both illustrate the privileged-role problem.

These aren't edge cases. They're the central tension.

Scale forces the choice

The stakes now justify the overhead. MarketWatch reported nearly $1.5 billion traded on the Super Bowl winner alone, split across Robinhood, Kalshi, and Polymarket.

Volume has reached “serious market” territory in marquee events. Traditional venues notice. CME is reportedly exploring prediction markets through a partnership with FanDuel while seeking to avoid the most politically sensitive contracts.

Regulatory posture is shifting from ambiguity to formalization. In February, the CFTC withdrew its 2024 event contracts proposal and a 2025 staff advisory on sports event contracts, explicitly pointing to new rulemaking.

The CFTC filed an amicus brief asserting exclusive jurisdiction over event contracts and prediction markets, framing state-level actions as destabilizing.

Meanwhile, state pushback intensifies. Nevada sued to block Kalshi. Massachusetts granted an injunction in a related fight.

Once the product matters enough that regulators, states, and incumbents care, it inherits “real exchange” expectations. The focus has shifted to defining the integrity standards that will determine how prediction markets scale.

The Polymarket counterexample

Polymarket represents the opposite bet: that insiders accelerate the truth, while surveillance slows it. The platform's defenders argue that privileged information helps prices converge faster.

CBS's 60 Minutes quoted Polymarket's CEO calling it “the most accurate thing we have.” But accuracy and legitimacy diverge when the public believes the game is rigged.

Reports showed that a trader made roughly $400,000 on a well-timed Polymarket position ahead of a surprise geopolitical outcome involving Venezuela's Maduro, prompting insider accusations and lawmaker attention.

The Guardian highlighted “privileged” users allegedly profiting from war and strike-related markets, noting the platform's structure makes identity harder to pin down while also quoting the argument that insiders speed up truth.

A market can be fast and still fail the adoption test. Legitimacy is a constraint, not a vibe.

Polymarket's transparency, comprised of on-chain data enabling outsider monitoring, cuts both ways. It allows independent verification but also exposes patterns that invite scrutiny.

The trade-off is economic, not ideological

More insider tolerance sometimes produces faster convergence, but at the cost of lower trust and participation. More enforcement produces higher trust and participation, but sometimes at the cost of slower “truth.”

The industry is choosing enforcement because legitimacy is the growth lever.

Prediction markets want brokerage distribution, institutional hedging use cases, and regulator durability.

The Federal Reserve's own research ecosystem now evaluates Kalshi markets as high-frequency, continuously updated macro expectation measures, sometimes comparable to, or even better than, traditional benchmarks in specific forecasting setups.

The more these platforms function like macro instruments, the more they're judged like exchanges.

Who watches the watchers?

The legitimacy hinge is a transparent process.

An oversight stack exists, from strongest to weakest:

The same surveillance that prevents rigging can become arbitrary power. Transparency doesn't eliminate that risk, but it makes the exercise of power contestable.

Kalshi's commitment to quarterly public statistics and formal disciplinary processes matters because it creates accountability beyond the platform's discretion.

The forward view

Three plausible regimes could emerge over the next twelve to eighteen months.

In the first, the regulated exchange norm wins. The CFTC advances clearer event-contract rules, platforms publish enforcement statistics, and broker distribution expands.

Higher retail participation and steadier liquidity follow. Prices become more institutionally usable as risk benchmarks.

In the second, bifurcation occurs. Regulated products get stricter. “Anything goes” markets persist elsewhere, accessible via VPN or crypto rails.

“Truth” fragments, as mainstream sources cite regulated prices while power users chase offshore speed.

In the third, a gambling backlash constrains access. States keep winning injunctions or forcing geofenced compromises. Sports become the legal battleground. Volume migrates or concentrates.

Reach limits offset legitimacy gains.

The likeliest outcome is a hybrid. Regulated platforms anchor the institutional use case. Offshore markets persist for speed and breadth.

The industry bifurcates along the trust-versus-access axis.

The paradox that won't resolve

Prediction markets sold themselves as epistemology technology. Money as honesty enforcement. The market as oracle.

But oracles need priests, and priests need rules.

The moment prediction markets became big enough to matter, they became vulnerable to the same forces that regulate stock exchanges: the need to manage adverse selection, protect liquidity, and maintain public trust.

Integrity is an economic feature, embedded in the product itself.

Prediction markets won't die from being wrong. They'll die from feeling rigged. To sell truth at scale, they have to sell fairness first.

Kalshi's enforcement cases, a five-year ban here and a two-year suspension there, are the cost of that legitimacy. The truth machine is becoming a real exchange, and the surveillance is part of the product now.

The post 200 insider trading probes opened on Kalshi and one quiet change could remake prediction markets overnight appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin’s rebound toward $70,000 over the last 24 hours has revived a familiar debate in crypto markets: whether Wall Street firms operating within the spot exchange-traded fund (ETF) ecosystem have gained too much influence over price discovery.

The latest target is Jane Street, the quantitative trading firm that is both a major ETF intermediary and the subject of a fresh lawsuit tied to the 2022 collapse of Terraform Labs.

Related Reading

Wall Street titans quietly amass billions in Bitcoin ETFs and crypto stocks

Wells Fargo, Cantor Fitzgerald, and Jane Street lead the charge with billions in Bitcoin-focused ETFs and equities.

Aug 15, 2025 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

On social media platforms, traders linked Bitcoin’s recent rally to claims that an alleged pattern of sharp intraday selling around the US market open had suddenly faded after the lawsuit became public.

The theory spread quickly because it combines two ideas that already resonate: distrust of large trading firms and unease over how much of Bitcoin’s market now runs through traditional finance.

However, the evidence for a coordinated Bitcoin suppression program remains thin.

What the episode does show more clearly is that the structure of spot Bitcoin ETFs has made it harder for many investors to tell where genuine spot demand ends and where market-making, hedging, and arbitrage begin.

In that sense, the Jane Street controversy extends beyond a single firm. It centers on how Bitcoin’s new institutional infrastructure is shaping price discovery, determining whether markets are becoming more efficient or increasingly opaque.

Related Reading

Bitcoin on track for 5th straight monthly los as ETF outflows put $58,000 in sight

Wall Street now controls 55% of Bitcoin trading — and $58,000 is the level everyone should be watching.

Feb 24, 2026 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

How Jane Street's Bitcoin rumor began

The rumor took shape after Bitcoin rallied sharply over two sessions, prompting posters on X to argue that a so-called 10 A.M. sell program had disappeared.

Notably, Negentropic, the X account run by Glassnode co-founders Jan Happel and Yann Allemann, helped put the theory into circulation by claiming:

“Jane street Lawsuit gets made public, and miraculously the 10am BTC slam disappears.”

That claim gained traction because Jane Street is not an obscure market player. It is one of the largest trading firms in the world and a renowned player in the Bitcoin ETF market, serving as an authorized participant for IBIT.

In practice, this allows it to sit close to the mechanism that helps keep ETF share prices aligned with the value of the underlying holdings.

Meanwhile, the legal battles against the firm further stoked the raging fire.

The wind-down administrator for Terraform Labs filed a lawsuit in Manhattan, accusing Jane Street and others of using material nonpublic information tied to Terraform’s liquidity moves during the TerraUSD collapse in May 2022.

The complaint alleges that Terraform withdrew $150 million of TerraUSD liquidity from Curve’s 3pool and that a wallet linked to Jane Street withdrew about $85 million within minutes, before the move was publicly disclosed.

Jane Street has denied wrongdoing and described the case as a desperate attempt to shift blame for losses caused by Terraform’s own conduct.

That suit does not prove anything about present-day Bitcoin trading.

However, it helps explain why traders were quick to attach Jane Street’s name to an observable market pattern.

In crypto, trust is often fragile, and firms accused in one market episode tend to become suspects in the next one.

Related Reading

Wintermute researcher links wallet associated with UST depeg to Jane Street

Wintermute researcher Igor Igamberdiev said the transactions do not prove that Jane Street necessarily had malicious intent.

Feb 28, 2023 · Oluwapelumi Adejumo

Industry stakeholders counter rumors

Considering this, Bitcoin traders argued that the top crypto had been hit for months by mechanical selling around the US cash equity open, liquidating longs and creating air pockets in thin order books.

If that selling stopped when Jane Street came under new legal scrutiny, then perhaps the firm had been leaning on the market all along.

Moreover, the firm's early link to Sam Bankman-Fried, the disgraced founder of the bankrupt FTX, also helped paint it in a bad light. Bakman-Fried previously worked at the trading firm before founding the collapsed exchange.

That narrative is emotionally satisfying. It is also much easier to assert than to prove.

James Check, an on-chain analyst at Checkonchain, directly rejected the thesis, writing that Jane Street did not suppress Bitcoin and that long-term holders selling spot into the market had done far more to explain the price action.

CryptoQuant head of research Julio Moreno made a similar point, arguing that the theory ignored a more obvious driver, a collapse in Bitcoin spot demand since early October 2025.

He also added that the mechanics being ascribed to Jane Street were similar to the delta-neutral positioning many trading firms use.

That pushback matters because it goes to the central weakness in the rumor. Bitcoin had already entered 2026 under pressure from a broader macro repricing.

Data from SoSo Value shows that institutional investors had reduced their exposure to BTC ETFs over five straight weeks, and total spot Bitcoin ETF outflows reached roughly $4.5 billion.

At the same time, data from Glassnode showed that the repeated bout of market stress earlier this month had triggered a shift in BTC’s options market toward a more unstable setup.

According to the firm, a full-history gamma-exposure (GEX) map shows negative gamma expanding at and below the current price, while the positive-gamma “walls” above spot are thinning out.

In plain terms, this means that the options positioning that often acts like a shock absorber is fading, and more of the market is sitting in a zone where hedging flows can stop cushioning dips and start feeding them.

This dynamic is important because when price sits in a short-gamma pocket, dealers’ delta-hedging tends to chase the move rather than selling into weakness and buying into strength.

This result is a market that can move faster and farther on relatively small catalysts, with bigger intraday swings and a higher risk of cascading moves through key levels until BTC runs into the next thick “gamma wall” where hedging flips back into dampening mode.

In other words, traders were already operating in an environment primed to see intent everywhere. When liquidity is weak and leverage is high, almost any sharp move can look coordinated.

The ETF pipes are harder to read than they look

The more serious issue raised by the Jane Street debate is structural, not personal.

As Jeff Park, CIO at ProCap Financial, has argued, the real question is not whether one firm is uniquely “suppressing” Bitcoin, but whether the ETF market structure gives authorized participants a degree of discretion that the public cannot easily see.

That matters because investors still tend to read ETF disclosures as if they were clean directional signals. They are not. A Form 13F can show a large long ETF position, but SEC guidance is explicit that short positions are not included, and short options positions are not netted against longs.

Related Reading

Institutional investors reach $33.6B in Bitcoin ETF holdings during Q2

Data shows advisors now hold $17.4 billion in Bitcoin ETF positions, nearly doubling hedge fund managers' $9 billion exposure.

Aug 25, 2025 · Gino Matos

In practice, the market may see inventory without seeing the futures, options, or other hedges wrapped around it.

That opacity is reinforced by the way the trust is built. BlackRock’s report for IBIT states that the trust can process creations and redemptions through authorized participants and also transact with designated Bitcoin trading counterparties.

As of that filing, those counterparties included JSCT, LLC, an affiliate of Jane Street Capital, and Virtu Financial Singapore, an affiliate of Virtu Americas.

The filing also shows that the authorized participant roster had expanded to include institutions such as Jane Street, JPMorgan, Citadel Securities, Citigroup, Goldman Sachs, UBS, Macquarie, and others, broadening the number of firms with access to the ETF creation and redemption machinery.

Park’s point is that this structure can distort outsiders' interpretation of ETF flows.

Under the older cash model, creations required the fund to buy spot Bitcoin. But after the SEC approved in-kind creations and redemptions for crypto ETPs in July 2025, authorized participants gained greater flexibility in sourcing and delivering the underlying asset.

The SEC said the change would make the products less costly and more efficient. It also means, however, that an AP’s exposure can be managed through a wider set of instruments and counterparties, making it harder to know when ETF activity reflects outright spot demand and when it reflects inventory management, basis trading, or hedge construction.

None of that is proof of abuse, and Park’s argument does not depend on proving abuse by Jane Street or any other firm. The sharper point is that Bitcoin’s ETF era has introduced a black box between public positioning data and the underlying price-discovery process.

Related Reading

IBIT flips to in-kind creations: what it means for spreads, taxes and flows

Tighter spreads, tax advantages, and smoother arbitrage: that’s the payoff as IBIT adopts in-kind creations and redemptions.

Sep 30, 2025 · Andjela Radmilac

The beginning of the trade can look like ordinary market-making. The end can look like ordinary market-making.

What remains hard to observe is the middle: whether the hedge is in spot, futures, swaps, or some combination of all three, and whether the natural arbitrage mechanism is actually transmitting real spot demand into Bitcoin.

That is why the Jane Street rumor resonates. It is less an accusation against one participant than a sign of how little visibility the market has into the plumbing itself.

Why the US open feels like a sell zone

The 10 A.M. theory sounds compelling because the US open is a real volatility window even without deliberate manipulation.

That period concentrates on cross-asset repositioning, equity-related risk adjustments, and derivatives hedging.

In a market where ETF intermediaries can hedge inventory with futures or other instruments, futures can help pull spot prices around rather than simply follow them.

When order books are thin, those moves can look larger and more sinister than they are. Bloomberg reported earlier this month that Bitcoin market depth remained more than 35% below October levels, underscoring how fragile liquidity has become.

Meanwhile, Alex Kruger, a macro analyst, has opined that the available data does not support the claim of a systematic daily dump at 10 A.M.

He wrote that since Jan. 1, IBIT’s cumulative return in the 10:00 to 10:30 A.M. Eastern window was positive 0.9%, while the 10:00 to 10:15 A.M. window was down 1%.

In his view, that was noise and not evidence of a repeatable suppression program.

More importantly, he said, the performance pattern in both windows closely tracked the Nasdaq, suggesting broad risk-asset repricing rather than a Bitcoin-specific operation.

That interpretation fits the wider market backdrop better than the viral story does.

If Bitcoin is increasingly traded as a macro risk asset through an ETF wrapper, then it should not surprise anyone that stress at the US open, especially in a thin market, can create repeated weakness in the same intraday window.

Scarcity is clear on-chain. Price discovery is not

Bitcoin’s supply remains fixed by protocol. Nothing about the ETF market structure changes that. What has changed is the route through which a growing share of demand, and skepticism, now travels.

The Jane Street debate exposes the gap between those two realities. On-chain scarcity is transparent. The institutional system built on top of it is not.

Investors can see ETF shares outstanding and pieces of disclosed holdings, but they cannot see every hedge, every internal net exposure, or every cross-market position that may sit behind a market maker’s book.

That gap creates room for misunderstanding, but also for distrust.

It does not help that Jane Street has faced scrutiny in other markets.

In July 2025, India’s securities regulator issued an interim order in a case alleging index manipulation by Jane Street entities, and Reuters later reported that SEBI barred the firm from the Indian securities market while the matter proceeded. Jane Street denied wrongdoing there as well.

While the India case is separate from Bitcoin, it helps explain why crypto traders were ready to believe the worst when Jane Street’s name returned to the headlines.

Still, the available facts do not establish that Jane Street ran a deliberate Bitcoin suppression program.

They do establish something else. Bitcoin’s post-ETF market has become easier to access, more institutionally integrated, and harder for ordinary investors to interpret.

The post Notice Bitcoin selling off at market open? Jane Street is taking the blame, but the data points elsewhere appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Circle's fourth quarter earnings tell a story the company would prefer investors understand through the lens of growth: USDC circulation climbed 72% year-over-year to $75.3 billion, reserve income surged 69%, and adjusted EBITDA quintupled.

However, the income statement reveals a different architecture in which the issuer generates yield and immediately bargains most of it away to the platforms that control access to users.

The scoreboard is stark. Circle earned $733.4 million in reserve income during the quarter.

Distribution and transaction costs consumed $460.6 million of that, roughly 63 cents of every dollar earned from investing customer deposits.

Total revenue and reserve income reached $770.2 million, with distribution costs accounting for nearly 60% of all earnings flowing through the business.

Circle kept what remained after paying the gatekeepers.

This isn't a disclosure buried in footnotes. Circle elevates “Revenue Less Distribution Costs” as a core performance metric, publishing RLDC margins alongside earnings and net income every quarter.

The company is telling investors: the yield exists, but capturing it requires paying for shelf space. The stablecoin business is structured as a negotiation between issuers and the exchanges, wallets, and fintech rails that control where the balances actually sit.

The yield pie and who gets it

Stablecoins generate income through a straightforward mechanism.

Users deposit dollars or convert crypto into stablecoins. The issuer holds those funds in reserve, consisting primarily of short-term Treasuries and similar instruments, and earns the prevailing rate.

Circle reported a 3.8% reserve return rate in the fourth quarter, down 68 basis points year over year as the Federal Reserve's path evolved. Yet, even as rates declined, reserve income climbed because average USDC in circulation doubled from $38.1 billion to $76.2 billion.

Related Reading

Stablecoins were built to replace banks but on course to becoming one

Stronger regulations risk turning stablecoins from disruptive currency alternatives into centralized digital counterparts of traditional banking systems.

Dec 3, 2025 · Joel Valenzuela

Scale overpowered rates. That dynamic is central to understanding why distribution costs rose 52% year over year.

Circle attributed the increase explicitly to “increased distribution payments,” noting that the prior-year period included a previously disclosed $60 million one-time fee to a distribution partner.

Strip out that one-time payment, and the underlying growth in distribution economics accelerates further. As the pie grows, the toll grows faster.

Circle's net reserve margin, consisting of reserve income minus distribution and transaction costs as a percentage of reserve income, settled at 37% in the fourth quarter.

Put another way, Circle retained roughly $0.37 for every dollar of gross reserve yield, with the balance flowing to distribution partners.

This isn't a cost structure that scales down easily.

Distribution payments aren't technology spend or fixed overhead that dilutes with volume. They're negotiated economics tied to placement and flows, which means they're sticky and potentially increasing as gatekeepers gain leverage.

The distribution cartel as a market structure

The term “cartel” here is a metaphor, not an accusation. It's shorthand for a small set of gatekeepers who control user access and therefore extract a share of the economics proportional to their leverage.

Related Reading

Circle partners with Finastra to expand USDC’s role in cross border payments

Finastra connects its $5 trillion GPP platform to Circle for faster, compliant USDC cross-border settlements.

Aug 27, 2025 · Assad Jafri

Circle's own risk disclosures make this explicit. The company warns it may be “unable to maintain existing relationships with financial institutions and similar firms or enter into new relationships”. It flags the risk of being forced to accept “less favorable financial terms” with distribution partners.

It highlights “dependence on a few key distributors” as a structural constraint.

This language matters because it positions distribution not as a vendor relationship but as a power dynamic. Circle reports a metric called “USDC on Platform,” which tracks the share of total USDC held across partner platforms.

That figure reached $12.5 billion at year-end, up 459% year-over-year, with a daily weighted average of 17.8% of total circulation. The company is explicitly monitoring where balances concentrate, another signal that control over rails determines who captures yield.

The competitive battlefield isn't stablecoin technology or reserve management. It's access.

Exchanges, wallets, and payment platforms sit between issuers and users, and they monetize that position. Circle can engineer a better product, achieve regulatory clarity, or optimize reserve returns.

However, if a major distributor shifts incentives or threatens to promote a competitor, economics swing fast. The issuer's margin depends on the gatekeeper's terms.

What happens when rates fall

The current structure functions in a mid-3% rate environment, where reserve portfolios earn enough to support both issuer economics and distributor payouts while leaving room for margin expansion.

But rates are directional, and the Federal Reserve's trajectory matters. Treasury bill yields, the anchor for reserve portfolios, remain in the mid-3% range as of late February 2026. Yet, market expectations contemplate potential cuts over the coming quarters.

A falling-rate regime compresses issuer economics faster than distributor take if distribution costs are sticky.

In a potential scenario where rates decline 100 basis points, if distribution payments remain fixed or decline more slowly than reserve income, Circle's RLDC margin faces additional pressure.

If rates drop another 100 basis points and issuer economics can approach zero or turn negative under sticky distribution contracts, it forces renegotiation or consolidation.

This isn't speculation. Circle's guidance already reflects margin compression relative to the fourth quarter's 40% RLDC margin. The company is pricing in a world where distribution costs don't scale down proportionally to reserve income.

That dynamic intensifies the fight over the remaining spread and pushes the category toward more aggressive pay-to-play arrangements or structural redesigns.

Related Reading

CLARITY Act is turning into a proxy war over who pays Americans for holding “digital dollars”

Section 404 Not Found: the ‘who pays Americans’ page is still missing from the most watched crypto bill of the year.

Feb 16, 2026 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

The political economy of the float

Stablecoins present an unusual political economy.

Users supply the float, $75 billion in Circle's case, but don't directly receive yield in most implementations. Issuers earn the reserve income but negotiate away a majority share to distributors.

Distributors capture economics by controlling access but don't bear balance sheet risk.

This arrangement works as long as users value convenience and stability over yield, but it creates a legibility problem once stablecoins reach mainstream scale.

The GENIUS Act, referenced in Circle's disclosures as relevant to its regulatory environment, establishes a US framework for payment stablecoins. As regulation formalizes, the question of who deserves the yield becomes harder to avoid.

If stablecoins function as deposit substitutes, why shouldn't users receive interest? If they're payment rails, why do gatekeepers command such large economies? If they're reserve instruments, why isn't the issuer capturing a larger share of the spread?

These aren't rhetorical questions. They're the basis for future renegotiations among issuers and distributors, platforms and users, and the industry and regulators.

Circle's current margin structure reflects its bargaining power at a given moment. That power shifts with market share, regulatory posture, and alternative rails.

The real risk isn't a run

Circle's balance sheet can withstand redemption surges. Reserves are liquid, audited, and managed conservatively.

The operational risk the company flags isn't a classic bank run but a distributor switch, in which a major partner changes incentives, promotes a competitor, or builds its own stablecoin infrastructure.

This risk manifests differently from credit or liquidity risk. It's a market-structure risk tied to how stablecoins reach users.

If a top-tier exchange decides to favor a different stablecoin, flows shift rapidly. If a fintech platform integrates a competitor's rails, distribution economics reallocate.

The issuer's response options are limited: pay more to retain placement, accept margin compression, or build direct-to-user distribution. The result is a capital-intensive, time-consuming alternative.

Circle's “USDC on Platform” metric exists because the company needs to monitor this concentration.

Where balances sit determines leverage. The more USDC concentrates on specific platforms, the more those platforms can extract in negotiations.

The issuer's margin is a residual claim after distribution partners take their share.

The endgame question

Stablecoin competition looks like a bidding war for rails.

Market share gains don't come primarily from technical superiority or regulatory advantage, as they come from securing and maintaining distribution relationships.

That structure favors issuers with capital to pay for placement and distributors with large enough user bases to command economies of scale.

The consolidation pressure is straightforward.

Falling rates compress issuer margins. Distributors have less incentive to support multiple stablecoins when they can extract better terms from a concentrated relationship. Users gravitate toward default options embedded in the platforms they already use.

The category trends toward fewer issuers, more powerful distributors, and margin pressure on both sides as the yield pie shrinks.

Circle's fourth quarter demonstrates what this looks like at scale.

The company generated $733 million in reserve income and paid out $461 million to access users. The remaining $272 million, before operating expenses, is what the issuer kept.

That's the economic reality of stablecoins: they're not just digital dollars or an interest-rate trade.

They're a bargain between issuers and gatekeepers over who captures the spread, negotiated quarter by quarter as the size of the float and the level of rates determine how much yield exists to fight over.

The post Circle’s $461M payout shows who captures USDC yield — and it’s not Circle appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Following a period of intense market volatility that saw the global crypto market cap fluctuate, Cardano ($ADA) has emerged as one of the top performers among large-cap altcoins today. The price of ADA climbed from a daily low of roughly $0.27 to its current position near **$0.29**, representing an 8% gain. This move comes amid a broader recovery in the crypto sector, fueled by Bitcoin reclaiming key levels above $67,500.

Cardano Price Analysis: Testing the $0.29 Zone

As of February 26, 2026, Cardano is trading at approximately $0.293. The recent price jump has been supported by a notable increase in trading volume, suggesting that the move is not just a speculative spike but is backed by active participation. On-chain data indicates that "sharks" and "whales"—wallets holding between 100,000 and 100 million ADA—have been quietly accumulating throughout the recent drawdown, adding over 819 million ADA to their holdings.

Cardano Price Prediction: Breakout or Fakeout?

The most significant milestone for ADA in the immediate term is the $0.30 resistance level. This price point serves as both a technical and psychological barrier.

The Bullish Case: Targeting $0.32 and $0.35

If $Cardano can secure a daily close above $0.30 with sustained volume, it would signal a breakout from the current bearish structure. Traders are eyeing the following targets:

• $0.32: The first minor resistance and a previous consolidation zone.
• $0.35: A major supply wall that aligns with the 50-day Exponential Moving Average (EMA). A break above this could confirm a mid-term trend reversal.

The Bearish Case: Resistance and Rejection

Conversely, $0.30 has historically acted as a stiff ceiling. If the current rally lacks the momentum to pierce this level, we could witness a "fakeout." In this scenario, ADA might see a rejection, leading to a retracement toward:

• $0.28: Immediate support where the price recently consolidated.
• $0.26: A critical support floor that has defended against further declines over the past month.

Technical Indicators and Ecosystem Catalysts

Technical indicators provide a mixed but leaning-bullish outlook. The Relative Strength Index (RSI) has finally moved above the 50-midline, suggesting that buying pressure is neutralizing the previous bearish momentum. Additionally, the MACD is showing a bullish crossover on the daily timeframe.

Fundamental catalysts are also at play. The Cardano ecosystem is preparing for the launch of the Midnight privacy sidechain in March 2026 and the highly anticipated USDCx integration. Furthermore, the implementation of the Ouroboros Leios upgrade remains a key long-term driver for network throughput.

Cardano Future: A Critical Inflection Point

Cardano is currently at a crossroads. While the 8% jump has provided much-needed relief for holders, the battle for $0.30 will determine the asset's direction for the remainder of Q1. Investors should watch for a confirmed breakout above $0.30 to validate further gains, while remaining cautious of a potential rejection that could retest the $0.26 support.

What Needs to Happen for Crypto to Surge Again?

Crypto markets are filled with dramatic narratives. One day it’s institutional manipulation. The next day it’s geopolitical tension or a founder selling millions in tokens.

But crypto does not reach new highs because of headlines.

Major bull runs happen when structural conditions align. If investors want to understand whether a real surge is coming, they need to look beyond noise and focus on capital flows, liquidity, and macro signals.

Here are five signals that typically appear before the next crypto bull run begins.

1. Expanding Global Liquidity

Crypto is a liquidity-driven asset.

Historically, the strongest Bitcoin rallies have occurred when:

• The Federal Reserve pauses or cuts rates
• The US dollar weakens
• Bond yields roll over
• Global liquidity expands

When liquidity tightens, rallies fade. When liquidity expands, capital flows back into risk assets like Bitcoin and Ethereum.

What to watch:

• Fed policy shifts
• US Treasury liquidity trends
• DXY (US Dollar Index) weakness
• Falling real yields

Without liquidity expansion, sustained breakouts are unlikely.

2. Sustained Bitcoin ETF Inflows

Spot Bitcoin ETFs changed the structure of this cycle.

Unlike previous retail-driven rallies, this cycle depends heavily on institutional capital allocation. A true surge requires:

• Consecutive weeks of strong net ETF inflows
• Institutional buying on dips
• Supply absorption from long-term holders

When ETFs consistently absorb circulating supply, the probability of a supply squeeze increases. That is when price acceleration typically begins.

Short-term inflows create bounces. Sustained inflows create trends.

3. A Leverage Reset

Before every major bull phase, the market usually experiences pain.

Liquidation cascades, funding rate normalization, and open interest flushes often precede expansion. Overleveraged positions must be cleared before the next leg up.

Key signals:

• Declining open interest during corrections
• Neutral or slightly negative funding rates
• Reduced speculative positioning

A healthy market needs balance before it can trend sustainably higher.

4. Macro Stability and Risk-On Sentiment

Geopolitical headlines, inflation concerns, and economic uncertainty affect risk appetite.

When macro tensions cool and inflation pressures ease:

• Oil stabilizes
• Bond markets calm
• Equity markets regain strength
• Risk assets benefit

Crypto does not operate in isolation. A stable macro backdrop improves confidence and supports capital allocation into digital assets.

5. Technical Breakout Confirmation

Even with strong fundamentals, price must confirm.

Before new peaks, markets typically show:

• Weekly closes above key resistance levels
• Higher highs and higher lows on larger timeframes
• Expanding volume on breakouts
• Strengthening RSI momentum

Without structural breakout confirmation, rallies remain vulnerable to rejection.

Price action validates the narrative.

What Is Actually Needed for New All-Time Highs?

For crypto to surge again and push toward new highs, several elements must align:

1. Expanding global liquidity
2. Sustained institutional ETF demand
3. Reset leverage conditions
4. Macro stability
5. Technical breakout confirmation

Not one tweet.
Not one lawsuit.
Not one founder transaction.

Bull markets are built on capital rotation and structural demand.

Final Thoughts

Markets do not surge on emotion. They surge on flows.

Investors who focus on liquidity, institutional behavior, and macro conditions are better positioned than those reacting to social media headlines.

If these five signals begin aligning simultaneously, the probability of a sustained bullish phase increases significantly.

Until then, volatility and range-bound conditions remain part of the cycle.

The crypto market in early 2026 has been nothing short of a rollercoaster. After the euphoric highs of late 2025, where Bitcoin flirted with the $130,000 mark, a "diffuse cocktail of macro anxieties" has sent prices into a steep correction. As of late February 2026, $Bitcoin has retraced nearly 50% from its All-Time High (ATH), trading in the $63,000 to $70,000 range.

Is it a Good Time to Buy Crypto?

Historical cycles suggest that corrections of 50% to 70% are healthy "purges" that wipe out over-leveraged traders. With Bitcoin currently sitting at a 50% discount, the risk-to-reward ratio for March 2026 has shifted heavily in favor of the bulls.

As geopolitical tensions and tariff uncertainties stabilize, capital is expected to rotate back into "risk-on" assets. Investors who missed the 2025 rally now have a second chance to enter the market. If you are looking to build a portfolio, diversifying across these five projects offers a balance of stability, utility, and explosive recovery potential.

1. Ethereum (ETH) – The Infrastructure King

Despite the rise of "Ethereum killers," Ethereum remains the undisputed home of Decentralized Finance (DeFi) and Real-World Asset (RWA) tokenization. In 2026, the successful rollout of the "Prague" upgrade has further slashed Layer-2 costs, making the network more scalable than ever.

• Why Buy Now? ETH has followed Bitcoin’s slide, dropping from its 2025 high of $4,950 to under $2,000.
• The Catalyst: Major financial institutions like BlackRock and JPMorgan are increasingly using Ethereum for tokenized deposit pilots. At current prices, you are buying the "settlement layer of the internet" at a 60% discount.

2. Solana (SOL) – The Speed Demon

Solana has proven its resilience after the network reliability concerns of previous years. With the Firedancer upgrade now fully integrated in 2026, Solana can process over 1 million transactions per second.

• Status: While it reached $260 in the last bull run, SOL is currently trading significantly lower, creating a "gap" that savvy traders are eager to fill.
• Use Case: It has become the primary chain for consumer AI-crypto applications and high-frequency trading.

3. Chainlink (LINK) – The Oracle Essential

You cannot have a functional DeFi ecosystem without accurate data, and Chainlink owns 90% of that market. In 2026, its Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP) has become the standard for banks moving data between private and public blockchains.

• The Play: LINK often lags behind the initial BTC pump but rallies hard once the ecosystem matures. It is one of the most undervalued "blue-chip" utility tokens heading into March.

4. Sui (SUI) – The Emerging Contender

Sui has emerged as the breakout Layer-1 of the 2025-2026 cycle. Utilizing the Move programming language, it offers a level of security and parallel processing that older chains struggle to match.

• Growth Potential: Sui's Total Value Locked (TVL) has remained stable even during the February crash, suggesting a loyal and committed developer base. As the market recovers, SUI is positioned to be a top performer.

5. Fetch.ai (FET/ASI) – The AI Narrative

2026 is the year of "AI Agents." Fetch.ai, as part of the Artificial Superintelligence Alliance, is at the forefront of this movement. Their autonomous agents are now being used in logistics and decentralized energy grids.

• Why March 2026? The "AI plus Crypto" narrative is the strongest secular trend in the market. With FET down along with the broader market, it offers a high-beta play for those betting on the continued AI revolution.

Conclusion: Strategy for March 2026

Investing during a 50% Bitcoin drawdown requires a long-term mindset. While volatility may persist in the short term, the fundamental value of these projects remains unchanged. Consider using a regulated exchange to dollar-cost average into these positions throughout the month.

The cryptocurrency market has staged a significant comeback today, February 25, 2026, with Ethereum ($ETH) leading the charge among major altcoins. After a grueling period of volatility driven by tariff fears and geopolitical tensions, the Ethereum price surged by over 10% within 24 hours, reclaiming the psychological $2,000 mark.

This rebound comes as a breath of fresh air for investors who saw ETH slide toward the $1,740 support zone earlier this week. The global crypto market capitalization has followed suit, rising 3% to approximately $2.25 trillion.

Why is the Crypto Market Up Today?

Several macro and industry-specific catalysts have converged to trigger today’s "risk-on" sentiment:

1. Trump’s State of the Union Address: President Trump’s recent speech boosted market confidence by highlighting economic strength and a pro-innovation stance. Specifically, his administration's perceived support for digital assets has eased fears regarding restrictive trade policies.
2. Strategic Reserve Rumors: Sentiment was further bolstered by remarks from influential figures like Cathie Wood, suggesting that the U.S. government could eventually include $Bitcoin in a strategic reserve.
3. Institutional Accumulation: While retail traders were shaken out by recent liquidations, data shows that "whales" and long-term holders have been aggressively buying the dip, providing a solid floor for the recovery.
4. Regulatory Progress: The UK's FCA recently selected firms for its stablecoin sandbox, signaling that global regulators are moving toward structured integration rather than outright bans.

Ethereum Price Analysis: Key Levels to Watch

Technically, $Ethereum is sitting at a critical crossroads. The jump to $2,075 represents the largest one-day gain for the asset in months.

Support and Resistance Zones

According to current market data, the following levels are vital for the next move:

• Immediate Resistance: $2,100 – $2,300. This area acted as a "June War" support in 2025 and has now flipped into a major pivot point that bulls must conquer.
• Target Resistance: $2,800. The 20-week Exponential Moving Average (EMA) sits near this level. A daily close above this would signal a long-term trend reversal.
• Primary Support: $1,850. ETH successfully defended this zone during the recent flush.
• Critical Floor: $1,740. Analysts suggest that if this level holds, the "double bottom" scenario for 2026 remains intact.

Indicators and Momentum

The Relative Strength Index (RSI) is currently climbing away from the oversold territory (near 30), suggesting that the "leverage flush" is complete. However, for a sustained bull run, Ethereum needs to see consistent trading volume above its current $21 billion 24-hour average.

Ecosystem Growth: Staking and Upgrades

Beyond price action, the Ethereum Foundation (EF) has launched a solo staking initiative, deploying roughly 70,000 ETH to enhance network security. Total staked ETH has reached a record 37.1 million, effectively reducing the liquid supply available on exchanges.

Furthermore, anticipation is building for the "Glamsterdam" upgrade, Ethereum’s first major protocol improvement of 2026, which aims to further reduce gas fees and enhance Layer-2 throughput.

Is the Bottom In?

While today’s 10% pump is encouraging, Ethereum remains nearly 58% down from its all-time high of $4,955. The market is currently in a "show me" phase, where it must prove that this isn't just a "dead cat bounce" triggered by short-term news. Investors should keep a close eye on macro developments, especially upcoming earnings from tech giants like Nvidia, which often correlate with crypto market liquidity.

After weeks of grueling "Extreme Fear" and a steady decline toward the $60,000 mark, Bitcoin has reminded the market why it is the king of volatility. In a single 4-hour candle on February 25, 2026, $Bitcoin shot up by over 3%, breaking through multiple local resistance levels. This move has effectively invalidated the immediate bearish narrative that saw BTC pinned below $65,000 just hours ago.

What Caused the Bitcoin Pump?

The primary catalyst for today’s move appears to be a combination of macro-economic optimism and technical liquidations.

• The Trump Effect: President Donald Trump’s State of the Union address highlighted cooling inflation and record-low mortgage rates, which boosted risk appetite across the Nasdaq and S&P 500.
• The Short Squeeze: According to data from major exchanges, over $323 million in leveraged positions were liquidated in 24 hours. As short-sellers were forced to buy back their positions to cover losses, it created a feedback loop that accelerated the price upward.

Bitcoin Price Analysis: Breaking the $68,500 Ceiling

Looking at the 4-hour $BTC/USD chart from Bitstamp, we can observe several critical technical developments.

• V-Shape Recovery: The price bounced sharply off the $64,000 level, forming a local double-bottom structure.
• Resistance Flip: The previous resistance at $68,500 has been breached. For the bulls to maintain control, Bitcoin needs to close a 4-hour candle above this line to confirm it as new support.
• Stochastic RSI Overbought: The Stochastic RSI has reached the 100.00 mark. While this shows immense buying momentum, it also suggests that the rally may need a brief "cool-off" or consolidation period before attempting to break the major $72,000 resistance.

What is a Short Squeeze?

In the context of today's price action, a short squeeze occurs when an asset's price rises unexpectedly, forcing traders who bet on a price drop (short-sellers) to close their positions. To close a short, they must buy the asset, which adds even more upward pressure on the price. This often results in the vertical "spikes" seen on the chart today.

Market Sentiment and ETF Inflows

Institutional interest remains a backbone for this recovery. U.S. Spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded a net inflow of $257.7 million on Tuesday, marking the highest single-day inflow since early February. This suggests that while retail sentiment was in "Extreme Fear," institutional "smart money" was actively buying the dip.

Bitcoin Prediction: Can BTC Hit $72,000?

The next 24 hours are crucial. If Bitcoin can flip the $69,500 level into support, the path toward the $72,000 target becomes clear. However, traders should watch for the upcoming nuclear talks between the US and Iran, as geopolitical tensions often cause "flight to safety" moves that can temporarily pull liquidity out of crypto and into gold.

Nano Banana 2 brings Pro-level world knowledge at Flash speed, with impressive text handling and subject consistency. But ByteDance's Seedream 5 just showed up to the same fight.

American Bitcoin, co-founded by Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr., posted a $59.45 million net loss in Q4 2025 as crypto prices weakened.

Beast Industries has suspended an employee while it internally investigates allegations of insider trading, according to CEO Jeff Housenbold.

Railgun is now the most widely used mixing protocol, although Tornado Cash has had a modest recovery since sanctions were lifted last year.

Prediction market users are getting more bullish on near-term price moves for Bitcoin and Ethereum, but the crypto market is still fearful.

Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin has concluded his pre-announced selling plan.

XRP on-chain activity suggests that more traders are selling despite the ongoing price rebound as the asset's exchange reserve shows a notable increase over the last day.

Chairman of Strategy Michael Saylor reiterates his optimism about Bitcoin with a hint that he might need a "bigger orange bag." At the same time as MSTR becomes the most shorted stock, according to Goldman Sachs.

Binance has launched a major incentive campaign for Ripple USD (RLUSD) holders..

Crypto market is gradually leaving extreme fear following BTC and altcoin rebound.

TLDR

• Flare and Xaman introduced a one-click system that allows XRP holders to access DeFi directly from their existing wallets.
• The integration targets more than 2 billion XRP tokens that remain idle in wallets and outside decentralized finance.
• The new process removes the need for separate wallets, gas tokens, and complex bridging steps.
• FAssets create a wrapped version of XRP on Flare that interacts with smart contracts.
• Flare Smart Accounts allow users to authorize transactions using their current XRPL credentials.

Flare and Xaman introduced a new integration that targets more than 2 billion XRP tokens sitting idle in wallets. The companies estimate these tokens represent about 3.5% of the circulating supply and carry a value near $3 billion. The integration allows holders to access decentralized finance through a single in-wallet transaction.

Xaman Integrates Direct Vault Access on Flare

Xaman confirmed it reached an agreement with the Flare blockchain to simplify DeFi access for XRP holders. The company said users can now deposit XRP directly into a curated vault on Flare through one action. The update removes the need to download new wallets or manage gas tokens.

Many XRP holders previously avoided DeFi due to technical barriers and unfamiliar interfaces. The new system embeds the full workflow inside the existing Xaman wallet. Wietse Wind, founder of Xaman, said, “This integration lets our users explore new options directly from the wallet they already know, while keeping full control of their keys and decisions.”

The integration relies on three core components that operate in the background. FAssets create a trust-minimized representation of XRP on Flare for smart contract use. Flare Smart Accounts let users authorize transactions with existing XRPL credentials.

Xaman provides the front-end interface and guides users through the process. As a result, users avoid handling separate private keys across different chains. The process reduces operational steps to a single confirmation within the wallet.

Behind the scenes, the transaction carries structured instructions across systems. Flare’s Data Connector validates each request before execution. Smart Account controllers mint the wrapped asset and allocate it into vault strategies.

FAssets and Smart Accounts Power XRPFi Workflow

FAssets function as wrapped XRP that interacts with decentralized applications on Flare. The system creates FXRP, which users can deploy across lending and staking programs. Flare reported that minted FXRP supply has surpassed 100 million tokens.

More than 60 million FXRP tokens currently operate within staking programs and structured products. These figures show that some XRP holders already deploy assets into yield strategies. The new integration aims to expand that participation through simplified access.

Upshift manages the vault strategies while Clearstar curates capital deployment and risk controls. The companies structure strategies around lending markets and collateralized positions. They also use structured products to generate yield within defined parameters.

Flare compresses typical multi-step DeFi actions into one workflow through Smart Accounts. The system handles minting, allocation, and yield distribution automatically. Users only authorize the transaction through their existing credentials.

Recent market data showed XRP gained 6% earlier this week alongside a 212% rise in retail buying volume. Exchange-traded fund inflows have remained positive since their November launch. Flare and Xaman announced the integration as the FXRP minted supply crossed the 100 million mark.

The post Flare and Xaman Unlock One-Click DeFi for Idle XRP appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Circle shares surged nearly 50% within two sessions after the company reported fourth quarter earnings.
• Analysts said a short squeeze drove the rally rather than a change in the company’s fundamentals.
• Hedge funds had built large bearish positions before the earnings release, which led to rapid short covering.
• USDC circulation rose 72% year over year to $75.3 billion during the quarter.
• Circle reported a net loss of $70 million for 2024 compared with a net profit in the prior year.

Circle shares surged nearly 50% within two sessions after the company released fourth quarter earnings on Wednesday. The rally followed an 80% decline from record highs reached last year and reversed recent losses. Analysts said short covering, rather than improved fundamentals, powered most of the advance.

Circle Earnings Trigger Short Squeeze

Circle reported strong growth in USDC circulation during the fourth quarter. The company said USDC supply reached $75.3 billion, up 72% year over year. However, analysts linked the sharp share price jump to hedge fund positioning.

Markus Thielen, founder of 10x Research, said positioning drove the move. He stated, “The magnitude of the move was not driven purely by the headline numbers.” He added, “The real catalyst was positioning,” and described the rally as a “high-probability short squeeze rather than a fundamental re-rating.” He estimated hedge funds lost about $500 million in one day on short positions.

Hedge funds had built large bearish bets before the earnings release. As the stock climbed, short sellers rushed to cover positions. Consequently, buying pressure accelerated and pushed shares sharply higher.

The surge broke a prolonged downtrend that had erased most of last year’s gains. Shares had fallen about 80% from prior record levels before the earnings report. The rapid rebound followed heavy trading volumes across sessions.

USDC Growth Contrasts with Profitability Decline

Circle’s flagship stablecoin, USDC, expanded in circulation during the quarter. The company reported $75.3 billion in USDC supply, which outpaced Tether’s USDT growth rate. Harvey Li, founder of Tokenization Insight, highlighted the supply increase in a research note.

Revenue from reserve income rose 58% to $2.64 billion. Circle earns reserve income mainly from U.S. government debt backing USDC. However, distribution costs climbed 66% to $1.66 billion during the same period.

Despite higher circulation, Circle posted a net loss of $70 million for 2024. The company had reported a $156 million net profit in 2023. Li said, “Stablecoin may be scaling; stablecoin issuance is a tough business.”

Japanese investment bank Mizuho raised its price target on Circle to $90 from $77. The bank cited stronger fourth-quarter results and growth linked to prediction markets. However, it kept a neutral rating and warned that lower rates could pressure reserve income.

Analysts Dan Dolev and Alexander Jenkins said revenue and profit exceeded expectations. Management pointed to prediction and betting platforms, including Polymarket, as drivers of USDC growth. Executives also described USDC as a potential default currency for AI agents in digital marketplaces.

Mizuho projected an average USDC circulation of about 123 million in 2027. The bank modeled reserve income near $3.7 billion and EBITDA of $916 million for that year. It applied a 24x EBITDA multiple and set a $90 price target.

The post Circle Stock Jumps 50% as Short Squeeze Fuels Rally appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Telegram introduced in-app yield features for Bitcoin, Ether, and USDt through TON Wallet.
• Users can hold send, and earn crypto without leaving the Telegram chat interface.
• The vaults operate on DeFi infrastructure powered by Morpho TAC and Re7.
• Telegram allows users to keep full control of their funds through self-custody.
• USDt vaults offer dollar-denominated earning strategies with different risk levels.

Telegram has introduced yield features for major cryptocurrencies inside its messaging app. The update enables users to earn returns on Bitcoin, Ether, and USDt without leaving chats. The company integrated the tools into its self-custodial TON Wallet to simplify access to decentralized finance.

Telegram Integrates Bitcoin and Ether Vaults Inside TON Wallet

Telegram added vaults to TON Wallet, which operates within Wallet in Telegram. The vaults allow users to hold, send, and earn on Bitcoin and Ether directly in chats. The system processes transactions through a decentralized finance infrastructure while keeping a simple interface.

The platform relies on lending network Morpho, execution layer TAC, and strategy provider Re7. These tools run in the background, while users interact with a standard wallet layout. Wallet in Telegram plans to support direct deposits of native Bitcoin and Ether, which will appear in wrapped form inside the TON ecosystem.

The company said the vault strategies generate variable returns for Bitcoin and Ether holders. Users retain control of their assets through self-custody at all times.

A spokesperson stated, “We’re lowering the barrier to DeFi strategies by packaging advanced yield strategies in a product that is native to Telegram.”

USDt Vaults Expand Dollar-Denominated Earning Options on Telegram

Telegram also introduced USDt vaults that provide dollar-denominated earning strategies. The vaults offer different risk levels, and they operate within the same wallet interface. Users can access these features without using external wallets or network bridges.

Andrew Rogozov, CEO of The Open Platform and Wallet in Telegram, outlined the company’s objective. He said, “At Wallet in Telegram, our mission is to transform digital assets from complex concepts into practical tools for everyday life.”

He added that the platform aims to make onchain yield accessible inside a mainstream consumer app.

Wallet in Telegram stated that more than 150 million users have registered on the platform. The company said the goal is to simplify earning on crypto by removing technical steps. Earlier this month, the TON Foundation introduced TON Pay, which enables merchants and Mini App developers to accept cryptocurrency within Telegram.

Telegram reported $870 million in operating revenue for the first half of 2025. The company recorded a 65% increase from $525 million during the same period last year. It stated that about $300 million of that revenue came from exclusivity agreements tied to Toncoin.

The post Telegram Wallet Launches Crypto Yield for BTC, ETH, USDt appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Michael Saylor hinted at more Bitcoin purchases as the asset traded near $67000.
• Strategy currently holds 718722 BTC valued at about $48 billion.
• The company bought its Bitcoin at an average price of around $76000.
• Strategy faces an unrealized loss of about 12% on its holdings.
• Saylor said Bitcoin allows $1 billion to move globally with ease.

Bitcoin traded near $67,000 as Michael Saylor signaled continued accumulation through a new social media post. He shared an image showing himself carrying a large orange bag covered with Bitcoin logos. He added the caption, “Maybe I need a bigger one,” and implied further purchases.

Bitcoin Holdings and Accumulation Strategy

Saylor posted the image on X as Bitcoin attempted to stabilize around $67,000. He used the visual to reinforce the strategy’s ongoing acquisition plan. The caption suggested that the company may expand its holdings further.

Strategy currently holds 718,722 BTC worth about $48 billion at current prices. The company acquired its holdings at an average price of $76,000. Therefore, Strategy holds an unrealized loss of roughly 12% on its position.

Despite the paper loss, Strategy reports an mNAV ratio near 1. The company also lists an adjusted enterprise value multiple of 1.256. These figures reflect the firm’s market valuation relative to its Bitcoin reserves.

Saylor has maintained a consistent position on long-term holding periods. He has stated that investors should prepare to hold Bitcoin for seven to ten years. He continues to frame corrections as part of the asset’s normal cycle.

Strategy reports its Bitcoin transactions weekly when activity occurs. Market participants expect the next update in the coming days. The company has not disclosed any new purchases this week.

Strategy World 2026 and Market Performance

Strategy hosted Strategy World 2026 earlier this week. During the event, Saylor repeated his view that Bitcoin represents digital capital. He said, “Bitcoin’s value lies in its ability to move one billion dollars anywhere in the world.”

He contrasted Bitcoin transfers with traditional asset transfers. He said moving large sums in traditional systems involves greater complexity. He emphasized practical capital mobility rather than abstract narratives.

Saylor also addressed Bitcoin’s price volatility during the event. He stated that volatility limits large capital inflows. He argued that fluctuations, not structural flaws, remain the main challenge.

Meanwhile, Strategy’s stock MSTR trades at $132.8. The shares have fallen 12.6% year-to-date in 2026. The stock remains 75.8% below its all-time high of $542.

Goldman Sachs has identified MSTR as the most shorted stock in the market. The company continues to tie its equity performance closely to Bitcoin holdings. Strategy plans to release further updates on Bitcoin activity next week.

The post Strategy Eyes More Bitcoin as Saylor Teases Bigger Bag appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• Sam Bankman-Fried publicly endorsed the Clarity Act while serving a 25-year prison sentence.
• Republican and Democratic senators rejected his support for the crypto legislation.
• Senator Cynthia Lummis said her bill differs from the proposal Bankman-Fried backed in 2022.
• Senator Elizabeth Warren said his endorsement should raise concerns about the legislation.
• The Senate continues to debate crypto market structure and stablecoin oversight rules.

Former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried publicly backed the Clarity Act while serving a 25-year prison sentence. Lawmakers from both parties rejected his support and questioned his motives. His comments arrive as the Senate continues work on broader cryptocurrency legislation.

Clarity Act Draws Bipartisan Rejection

Bankman-Fried endorsed the Clarity Act in a post on X on Wednesday.

He wrote, “The CLARITY Act will be a huge milestone for crypto and a huge achievement for @realDonaldTrump.” He also claimed he supported similar reforms before his arrest.

He said he sought to remove crypto oversight from former SEC Chair Gary Gensler. He added that Gensler “helped Biden’s DOJ put me behind bars.” His remarks quickly triggered responses from lawmakers involved in drafting legislation.

Sen. Cynthia Lummis rejected his endorsement in a direct reply.

She wrote, “My legislation couldn’t be more different than the bill you tried to buy from Congress.” She added, “We do not need nor want your support.”

Lummis leads Republican efforts to advance digital asset legislation in the Senate. She said her framework would have imposed tougher penalties. She also stated that broader legislation could have extended his prison sentence.

Sen. Elizabeth Warren also criticized Bankman-Fried’s comments. She said his support “should set off alarm bells.” Warren added that any crypto bill must protect investors and taxpayers.

The Senate Banking Committee continues negotiations on market structure rules. Lawmakers aim to define oversight roles for the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. However, disagreements remain over stablecoin yield provisions.

Past Legislative Efforts and Political Context

In 2022, Bankman-Fried supported the Digital Commodities Consumer Protection Act, known as DCCPA. He urged lawmakers to pass the bill shortly before authorities arrested him. His arrest later stalled momentum for that proposal.

A federal court convicted Bankman-Fried on multiple fraud and conspiracy charges. Prosecutors said he misused billions in customer funds from FTX. The court sentenced him to 25 years in prison.

Bankman-Fried now appeals his conviction in federal court. At the same time, he posts frequently on X about policy and politics. Many posts express support for President Donald Trump.

A White House official told The Block that Trump has no plans to pardon him. Bankman-Fried’s recent posts appear to address current policy debates. His endorsement of the Clarity Act fits within that pattern.

The House passed its version of the Clarity Act over the summer. Senate lawmakers continue drafting related measures. They also debate how to address conflicts of interest tied to the Trump family’s crypto ventures.

The post Senate Pushes Back on Bankman-Fried’s Clarity Act Endorsement appeared first on Blockonomi.

The US midterm elections scheduled for Q4 2026 are increasingly being discussed as a potential macro catalyst for financial markets.

This includes crypto, amid expectations of changing liquidity conditions.

Asset Prices, Not Politics

According to a macro thesis by market participant ‘Egrag Crypto,’ early signals from betting markets point to relative Republican weakness, which could raise incentives for market-friendly economic conditions heading into the election window.

The framework outlines a three-phase timeline, which begins with a broader market correction in early 2026, during which criticism is expected to intensify toward Federal Reserve Chair Jerome Powell.

This is followed by mid-2026 pressure for a change in monetary stance, which could potentially result in liquidity easing as policymakers respond to economic and political constraints. Under this scenario, markets could enter a recovery phase in the second half of 2026, aligning with the election period.

The thesis argues that rising asset prices tend to improve public sentiment rapidly, supported by factors such as dividend income, potential tax relief for small businesses, and broader “feel-good” economic conditions. They further suggest that the Federal Reserve often becomes a focal point for blame during downturns, which, in turn, allows political narratives to shift as liquidity conditions improve.

As such, the view validates the idea that market structure and liquidity trends may play a leading role in shaping political outcomes, rather than political developments acting as the primary driver of markets.

“Structure first. Politics later. Markets always lead.”

2024 Flashback

In 2024, the cryptocurrency market saw significant price rallies following Donald Trump’s election victory. Bitcoin rose to record highs on investor optimism about a potentially more crypto-friendly regulatory environment and pro-crypto lawmakers in Congress.

However, by early 2026, much of the post-election upside had been eroded. Bitcoin, for one, retreated toward $60,000, and broader crypto sentiment cooled amid macro pressures and fading Trump-driven euphoria.

The post 2026 US Midterms Emerge as Potential Turning Point for Crypto Markets appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Bitrue said on February 26 that it recorded a 212% jump in XRP spot buying as institutional investors continued allocating capital through newly launched XRP exchange-traded funds (ETFs).

The exchange linked the spike to roughly $1.1 billion in cumulative ETF inflows, arguing that steady demand from funds and retail traders could tighten available supply in the months ahead.

Spot Buying Jumps as ETF Inflows Build

In a post on X, Bitrue said XRP buy orders on its platform outpaced sell orders by more than two to one.

“We recorded a 212% increase in XRP spot purchase volumes, outpacing the sell side by over 2x,” the exchange posted on X.

It attributed the imbalance to sustained institutional accumulation since the debut of XRP ETFs, which it claims have drawn $1.1 billion in net assets, even though data from SoSoValue showed there have been muted ETF flows in recent days.

However, the derivatives market tells a different story. According to CryptoQuant, XRP futures open interest has fallen across major platforms over the past 90 days, with Binance recording a decrease of 7.7 million XRP and Bybit showing a larger reduction of around 12 million tokens. Furthermore, the three-month moving average for XRP futures volume has dropped to its lowest level since November 2024, settling at approximately $87 billion.

Looking at XRP’s broader market structure, it was trading around $1.44 at the time of writing, up nearly 5% in the last 24 hours and about 2% during the week. Even so, the token is still down more than 23% over the past month and almost 38% across the past year, far below its July 2025 all-time high of $3.65.

Cooling Leverage Meets Steady Spot Demand

The divergence between spot accumulation and falling derivatives activity suggests a shift in market composition rather than uniform bullish momentum. Open interest now stands near $2.37 billion per CoinGlass figures, and the contraction in leveraged positions may reflect traders reducing risk after months of volatility.

From a price standpoint, XRP remains range-bound between $1.38 and $1.48 over the past 24 hours. One market watcher, CasiTrades, flagged resistance around $1.40 and $1.65, with support near $1.11 and $0.87. According to them, a sustained move above those resistance levels would likely require stronger follow-through from ETF inflows and broader market participation.

As such, considering the broader data, Bitrue’s reported spike in spot buying highlights firm exchange-level demand, but the wider data show a market that is rebalancing rather than accelerating.

Nonetheless, the crypto exchange is predicting that growing retail and corporate support could lead to a supply deficit that may push up the Ripple token’s performance enough to beat major rivals this year.

“With support increasing from retail and institutional levels, Bitrue is forecasting a potential supply squeeze, which will likely result in XRP outperforming key competitors over Q2 2026,” wrote Bitrue.

The post Institutional Pivot: Why XRP Spot Buying Is Skyrocketing While Futures Open Interest Slumps appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Cardano’s native token reached an all-time high of almost $3.10 in late 2021. Despite sporadic runs in the following years, it has not managed to break its record and is currently worth around $0.29, representing a staggering 90% decline from the historic peak.

The steep decline has left many investors frustrated, including popular content creator Jake Gagain, who described ADA as one of his worst investments since entering the crypto market.

Wasting “Such a Great Opportunity?’

Besides expressing regret over his investment, Gagain emphasized that Cardano still has a strong community and huge potential. He said he was disappointed to see the team waste “such a great opportunity” and asked his followers whether they still hold ADA.

His post on X sparked a heated debate, with many users sharing their experiences with the token. One person agreed with Gagain, arguing that Cardano’s community is among the most dedicated, “but the execution and speed have just been painful to watch for years now.”

The discontent was echoed by numerous others, some of whom pledged to step away from ADA and all altcoins for good and to shift their capital solely to Bitcoin (BTC) from now on.

Others differentiated from this thesis. X user Michael Lesser claimed that Gagain doesn’t understand the definition of a bear market, adding that his timing is bad.

“If you have an investment thesis and patience, ‘paper losses’ are just that. The growth in Cardano’s technology has been amazing, and the best is yet to come,” he said.

Many investors who remain optimistic said they would keep accumulating ADA, convinced that the token will set a new all-time high sooner or later. Some even flashed the “diamond hands” emoji to signal their determination not to sell under any circumstances.

Meanwhile, certain X users attacked Gagain for promoting meme coins, which performed much worse than ADA. In the summer of 2024, for instance, he claimed that NEIRO could be the next “billion-plus dollar project” on the Ethereum blockchain. It is important to note that the asset’s market cap briefly surged above $1 billion in late 2024, but since then, it has been in a sharp decline, and its current capitalization stands at less than $30 million.

What’s Next for ADA?

Cardano’s native token has been among the biggest beneficiaries of the recent market resurgence, with its price rallying by 9% on a weekly scale. The recent whale activity suggests a further jump might be on the way.

As CryptoPotato reported, large investors have scooped up almost 820 million coins over the past six months, thus increasing their total holdings to 25.36 billion tokens, or nearly 70% of ADA’s circulating supply.

Big purchases of this type leave fewer tokens on the open market, which could result in a surging price (should demand remain constant or rise). Whales’ buying also sends a strong signal that they believe in the asset’s long-term future, and that confidence could draw smaller players into the ecosystem.

Some analysts observed ADA’s recent comeback and envisioned further gains if key levels are reclaimed. X user Nehal argued that breaking and holding above $0.30 could lead to a pump to $0.32 and $0.34.

The post Popular Trader Calls Cardano (ADA) One of His Worst Investments: The Community Reacts appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Over the past 24 hours, the cryptocurrency market staged a solid rebound, with many leading digital assets showing renewed momentum and reclaiming some of their recent losses.

Polkadot (DOT) is among the top performers today (February 26), jumping by roughly 22%.

The Upcoming Halving and More

Polkadot’s native token, which was one of the major cryptocurrencies in 2021 when its price rocketed above $50, has been on a severe decline over the last several months, crashing to a local bottom of $1.15 at the start of February.

Over the past day, though, it posted a strong comeback, with its valuation reaching a monthly high of approximately $1.74. Its market capitalization soared past $2.6 billion, making it the 36th-largest cryptocurrency.

The broader market resurgence, marked by Bitcoin (BTC) nearing $70,000 and Ethereum (ETH) reclaiming the $2,000 psychological level, seems to be the most likely catalyst driving DOT’s price higher. However, some analysts claimed that other factors could have contributed to the upswing as well.

Lark Davis, who has almost 1.5 million followers on X, argued that Polkadot’s upcoming halving might be one such reason. He said the event, scheduled for March 14, will slash annual token issuance by 50%, claiming “the scarcity narrative is driving strong bullish sentiment.”

Another potential driver, as noted by Davis, is the growing anticipation surrounding prospective spot DOT ETFs, which prominent companies like Grayscale and 21Shares have expressed interest in launching.

These products (should they be approved by regulators) will allow investors to gain exposure to Polkadot’s native cryptocurrency through brokerage accounts without holding the token directly. This simplified access can attract more market participants, whereas increased demand could lead to upward price pressure on the asset.

The regulatory climate in the US has shifted toward a more favorable stance on crypto products, with multiple spot ETFs debuting over the past several months. This signals that a similar investment vehicle having DOT as the underlying token may also go live soon.

Davis did not stop there and offered a third possible reason for the asset’s recent revival. He suggested that DOT “broke above the daily 20 EMA and horizontal resistance at around $1.40+, while holding firm support at $1.23, a setup that could have triggered momentum buyers.”

The Next Targets

The resurgence has naturally sparked a fresh wave of enthusiasm among analysts and traders, some of whom believe DOT has more fuel left to chart further gains.

X user RACHEL CRYPTO predicted the price could rise to $1.80, while prior to that, Crypto GVR envisioned an ascent to $2-$3 in the long term.

At the same time, the asset’s Relative Strength Index (RSI) should serve as a warning. The technical analysis tool measures the speed and magnitude of recent price changes and can help identify potential price reversals. It ranges from 0 to 100, where ratios below 30 indicate that DOT is oversold and due for a potential pump, while readings above 70 are interpreted as bearish territory. Currently, the RSI stands at around 73.

The post Polkadot (DOT) Pumps by 22% Daily: What Drives the Rally and What’s Next? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

[PRESS RELEASE – Singapore, Singapore, February 26th, 2026]

Stablecoins have become a foundational layer for settlement, moving value across payments, remittances, and treasury operations worldwide. As these flows grow, the infrastructure behind dollar-denominated stablecoins matters as much as the assets themselves.

USDC and Circle Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP) will be launching on Morph, bringing payment stablecoins and standardized cross-chain settlement to infrastructure built for payments.

USDC on Morph

USDC will be issued on Morph by Circle’s regulated affiliates, establishing it as a settlement asset across the network.

Issuance provides a consistent foundation for dollar-denominated activity. USDC on Morph will be canonical, with uniform behavior across applications and clear provenance at the protocol level.

For developers building payment applications, this simplifies dollar settlement by eliminating the need to manage bridge risk or fragmented liquidity. For institutions operating treasury systems, merchant platforms, or cross-border payment rails, USDC will provide access to a transparent stablecoin supported by Circle’s established on- and off-ramp infrastructure.

“Morph has spent the last several months meaningfully investing in our network’s core offering. As we have engaged with global leaders in the payment space, it’s clear that they need a widely-used, dollar-denominated stablecoin to meet their needs. For us, working with Circle to bring USDC to Morph was a clear choice,” said Colin Goltra, CEO of Morph.

CCTP: Cross-Chain Infrastructure

CCTP will enable USDC to move between supported blockchains using a burn-and-mint process that preserves supply integrity.

When USDC is transferred to Morph via CCTP, it will be burned on the source chain and minted natively on Morph. The asset will remain fully backed and verifiable under the same reserve framework.

Applications will be able to use Standard Transfer or Fast Transfer depending on their security and latency requirements, while maintaining consistent settlement behavior across networks.

Use Cases Across Payments

USDC and CCTP will support a range of payment and financial applications that rely on dependable dollar settlement and cross-chain access.

• Crypto Cards and Neobanks

Card programs and digital issuing platforms will be able to settle balances in USDC while enabling users to fund accounts from supported blockchains via CCTP.

• Cross-Border Remittance

Money movement platforms will benefit from transparent, stablecoin-based settlement with near-instant cross-chain transfers across regions.

• Payment Gateways

Checkout providers will be able to accept payments from users across multiple chains while settling in USDC, simplifying reconciliation and reducing FX delays for merchants.

• DeFi and Trading

USDC will serve as collateral and a settlement asset across lending protocols and decentralized exchanges, with CCTP supporting liquidity movement between Morph and other supported blockchains, including connections to the Bitget ecosystem.

Building the Settlement Layer for Digital Dollars

To support teams bringing payment flows on-chain, Morph has launched the $150 million Payment Accelerator, providing funding, technical support, and access to payment partners and institutional onramps.

Together, USDC, standardized cross-chain settlement through CCTP, and direct ecosystem support position Morph as a settlement layer for real financial activity.

As stablecoins continue to underpin payments, treasury operations, and on-chain commerce, Morph is building the execution environment at institutional scale.

Money at the speed of life.

About Morph

Morph is an Ethereum-based, payments-first settlement layer and the native on-chain home of BGB, focused on building the foundation for global consumer finance on-chain. Morph supports real-world financial activity across payments, savings, identity, and rewards, enabling scalable, on-chain settlement for consumer and business use. Guided by the Morph Foundation, the network connects more than 120 million users through the Bitget and Bitget Wallet ecosystems.

The post USDC and CCTP Are Coming to Morph, Advancing Settlement for Payments appeared first on CryptoPotato.