Circle's Arc blockchain initiative could redefine institutional finance, fostering innovation and competition in the stablecoin market.

The post Circle raises $222 million from BlackRock and Wall Street giants for Arc blockchain appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Increased speculation of US military action highlights potential for heightened geopolitical instability and market volatility.

The post Trump rejects Iran’s proposal, raising military conflict concerns appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

BOJ's policy must balance corporate funding risks and economic stability, as global tensions and Japan's high debt limit monetary flexibility.

The post Japan panel urges BOJ to consider corporate funding risks in policy decisions appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Acton's AI-driven smart contracts could revolutionize automation but may also heighten security risks and liquidity fragmentation in the ecosystem.

The post TON Core launches Acton, a new tool for smart contract development appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Iran's demands could escalate geopolitical tensions, impacting global oil markets, inflation, and the strategic balance in the Middle East.

The post Iran demands US war reparations and sovereignty over Strait of Hormuz in peace talks appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

What does Bitcoin “Power Projection” mean to the U.S. Military? 

On April 21st and 22nd 2026, during a Senate Armed Services Committee, Admiral Samuel Paparo of U.S. Indo-Pacific Command made comments on Bitcoin’s utility in cybersecurity for the country’s military, calling it a “valuable computer science tool as power projection,” and disclosing that INCOPACOM is running a Bitcoin node in their experiments with the protocol.  

The comments by the INCOPACOM Commander came just days after the Islamic Republic of Iran demanded payment in Bitcoin for safe passage across the Strait of Hormuz. The mention of “power projection” echoed the work of a famous and controversial Bitcoiner, Jason Lowery, author of Softwar: A Novel Theory on Power Projection, MIT Fellow and Special Assistant to the Commander of INDOPACOM. 

In his work — which involved an MIT thesis and book expanding on his work — Lowery discussed the cybersecurity value of Bitcoin and its unique ability to deliver “power projection” in cyberspace, a landscape of national security and military operations that otherwise lacks traditional deterrence options. 

The book gained significant popularity and earned Lowery both fans and critics across the Bitcoin industry, but was later taken down from distribution by Lowery at the request of his superiors. An event that suggested to some that the book might have something important enough that the U.S. military wants to keep it quiet. 

But what is this unique value that Bitcoin brings to military matters, and what does “Power Projection” in this context actually mean? 

According to Department of Defense’s 2002 Dictionary of Military and Associated Terms, power projection is; “The ability of a nation to apply all or some of its elements of national power – political, economic, informational, or military – to rapidly and effectively deploy and sustain forces in and from multiple dispersed locations to respond to crises, to contribute to deterrence, and to enhance regional stability.” In other words, the ability of a nation to influence the behavior of other nations or political entities of interest, at a range beyond its national borders. Examples can range from diplomatic to economic influence, as well as military capabilities such as long-range missiles, drones or a powerful navy. 

The word deterrence is also doing a lot of work here. The DoD defines it as: “The prevention from action by fear of the consequences. Deterrence is a state of mind brought about by the existence of a credible threat of unacceptable counteraction.”

Lowery brings Bitcoin into the world of deterrence in the physical world by presenting a particularly interesting insight. That just as microchips are essentially wires moving electric power in “encoded logic” inside a computer’s motherboard, so can the globe’s electric grid be seen as a kind of “macrochip”, with giant wires moving large amounts of electricity from power sources across nations and throughout the world. These macrochips now also have logic gates in the form of Bitcoin mines — Lowery argues — they consume large quantities of energy, converting it into the scarce digital asset, which can be programmed via Bitcoin script. 

The Bitcoin macrochip could, in theory, bind cybersecurity matters to the physical world, since energy output is one of the most important and expensive resources a nation can muster. While governments can print paper money at will, summoning massive amounts of electricity to influence something like Bitcoin’s proof of work competition is orders of magnitude more difficult and is the basis of Bitcoin’s resilience.

Bitcoin’s Multisignature Deterrence

The most obvious and powerful demonstration of Bitcoin’s “embedded logic” security is the invention of multisignature Bitcoin wallets, which safeguard much of the Bitcoin wealth today. 

Multisignature wallets require multiple predefined private keys to sign valid transactions before Bitcoin can be transferred, making it possible to geographically decentralize the storage of Bitcoin private keys across space and jurisdictions. 

Multisig challenges hackers not just to hack one key pair, but multiple, across multiple locations under time constraints, since users have the advantage of legitimate access to those keys and can potentially move the bitcoin quickly in response to a threat. Hackers must gain access to enough keys while also fooling alarms and safeguards, avoiding getting caught. Multisig imposes high costs on attackers and, as such, might very well fit the definition of ‘deterrence’. It may even fit the definition of ‘power projection’ as Bitcoin funds can be kept secure and available to be sent when needed anywhere in the world, thanks to Bitcoin’s other networking-based censorship resistance qualities. 

This differs from traditional finance and its centralized databases since Banks can freeze and confiscate assets from their rightful owners when pressured politically, as seen in cases like that of Cyprus and their 40% bail in, or the United States’ confiscation of Russia’s foreign treasury reserves held in European custody.

But INDOPACOM did not explicitly talk about Bitcoin, the asset, in their comments; they seemed to think Bitcoin’s proof of work protocol could secure data and networks external to the Bitcoin asset. But the Bitcoin script, the logic internal to the Bitcoin blockchain, only governs BTC, its internal asset. 

For external networks to benefit from Bitcoin’s powerful proof of work macrochip, they would have to be anchored to Bitcoin somehow, and that’s where much of Lowery’s thesis starts to stall out. He does, however, develop this idea further by proposing the “Electro-Cyber Dome”.

Cyber Security Threats and the Electro-Cyber Dome

In Software 2.5, Lowery argues that “software system security vulnerabilities are derived from insufficient constraints on control signals” sent to networked machines. An example of this might be fake login attempts that cost a website more computer resources to authenticate than they cost attackers to send. Lowery adds that such vulnerabilities “can be exploited in such a way that it puts software into insecure or hazardous states.” Examples of such network security exploits include, but are not limited to:

• Email spam and comment spam — superfluous emails and comments that flood inboxes or forums.
• Sybil attacks — creation of large numbers of fake identities to manipulate systems.
• Bots and troll farms — automated or coordinated accounts used to amplify malicious activity.
• Weaponized misinformation/disinformation campaigns — flooding networks with false or manipulated information.
• Distributed Denial-of-Service (DDoS) attacks — flooding networks with superfluous control signals (service requests) to overwhelm bandwidth.
• Forged or replayed control signals — impersonating legitimate commands, orders, or data that put software into insecure/hazardous states.
• Systemic exploitation of administrative permissions/insider abuse — exploitation of trust-based hierarchies where high-privilege accounts can be compromised or misused.

Lowery suggests that other networks could defend themselves against all of these threats to some significant degree using proof of work (POW) protocols like Bitcoin’s.

In the Bitcoin white paper, Satoshi Nakamoto defined Bitcoin’s POW quite elegantly: “The proof-of-work involves scanning for a value that when hashed, such as with SHA-256, the hash begins with a number of zero bits. The average work required is exponential in the number of zero bits required and can be verified by executing a single hash.”

Nakamoto specifically references Adam Back’s “Hash Cash, A Denial of Service Counter-Measure”, which was designed to make email spam costly by requiring computers sending an email to produce a POW stamp of a difficulty defined by the recipient of the email. Recipient servers would need to keep a list of stamps already used, in order to prevent reuse of the same work by attackers, aka to prevent “double-spending” attacks. These stamps, however, were not transferable, a quality which some cypherpunks wanted in their pursuit of digital money. Hal Finney was one such engineer who furthered the field by inventing RPOW, or reusable proof of work.

RPOW essentially tokenized POW stamps via a centralized server that kept track and facilitated transfers. One of Nakamoto’s key innovations was decentralizing this server and its list of spent stamps, in the form of the blockchain, while also defining a global difficulty algorithm that all Bitcoin miners must satisfy, rather than relative difficulty targets chosen by each website at will. 

Lowery, in his concept of the Electro-Cyber Dome, is essentially talking about Hash Cash. He specifically says that servers can choose the difficulty target they see fit, and never proposes that the Dome would or should use Bitcoin’s SHA-256 protocol, though it is implied in his idea of the macrochip. What he does do is use Bitcoin as the principal example of such a cybersecurity network actually working at scale; “We know for sure that electro-cyber domes can function successfully as a security protocol because this is what Bitcoin uses to secure itself and its own bits of information against systemic exploitation.”

Lowery goes further than defense, pointing out that as such systems gain adoption, a concept of aggression becomes possible by large miners, he writes; “it should be noted that this wouldn’t be a strictly “defensive” power projection capability…People with access to proof-of-power can theoretically “smash” through these electro-cyber dome defenses if desired. Thus, proof-of-power protocols are not strictly “defense only” protocols as some have argued. A top threat to people using physical cost function protocols like Bitcoin is other people using the same protocol (hence why Nakamoto mentions the word “attack” 25 times in an 8-page whitepaper, each time referring to people running the same protocol).”

Criticisms of Lowery’s Softwar Thesis 

Lowery’s Softwar thesis can be fairly described as controversial within the Bitcoin community. It’s optimistic take that large portions of military conflict could instead be settled via hash rate wars in some future has been described by Shinobi at Bicoin Magazine as “delusional”. 

Broadly speaking, critics reject the idea that data or networks external to Bitcoin can be secured in any way with Bitcoin’s technology stack, be it its POW, its blockchain or its native asset. Jameson Lopp did a multi-part review of Lowery’s thesis and book, praising many aspects of the thesis but ultimately dismissing its conclusions, saying that: “Softwar falls short on acting as a blueprint for how we should build the future.”

The most obvious question to me is whether using SHA-256 proof of work to gatekeep access to networks outside of Bitcoin makes sense in the first place, or if it could even be considered using Bitcoin. If the Electro-Cyber Dome is not demanding a high enough POW difficulty to mine any Bitcoin, if it does not use Bitcoin’s target difficulty, its asset or its blockchain, then is it using Bitcoin? 

Furthermore, given that China has the bulk of the ASIC manufacturing industry for Bitcoin mining, would INDOPACOM — the U.S. military branch in charge of keeping the Indo Pacific in check — really want to secure its cyber networks with algorithms that China mass produces chips to brute force? That seems like an awkward decision to make at best, and is more likely to lead them to consider alternative POW algorithms. But at that point, they certainly would not be using Bitcoin and would lose the macrochip argument. It would instead be using classic Hash Cash, and maybe that’s the lesson in this story. Lowery’s affinity with Bitcoin might be more of a marketing strategy and a shout-out to an industry that inspired him, rather than the actual tool that INDOPACOM might end up using.  

The Happy Middle Ground

In the gap between theory, implementation, and criticisms of Software style ideas, there exist some projects that serve as young but curious examples of how Bitcoin can secure more than money. 

SimpleProof, an Open Time Stamps-based Bitcoin notary of sorts, has been using the blockchain to record hashes of data, demonstrating that a certain version existed at a certain time. This very narrow use of Bitcoin as a time-stamping server helped defend one side of the Guatemala elections a few years ago from accusations of fraud by the opposition, resulting in real political consequences for the country. 

Michael Saylor, on the other hand, led the creation of what some have called the Orange Checkmark protocol on top of Bitcoin. This tech stack, which can be found on Github, is a privacy preserving Bitcoin native decentralized digital identity system. It gained some interest from the Bitcoin community when it was announced a couple of years ago, but it does not appear to have gained any adoption. 

Finally and ironically enough, Jameson Lopp, perhaps Lowery’s most verbose critic with three dedicated articles on the topic, actually implemented a proof-of-work-based spam protection mechanism on his website for a submission form, which, according to Lopp, works well. So if even he can see the use of these old ideas, even if just based on Hash Cash, then perhaps we will one day see Bitcoin-like technologies used to secure the networks and data of the world. 

This post What does Bitcoin “Power Projection” mean to the U.S. Military?  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Juan Galt.

Bitcoin Magazine

ANTPOOL, Block Inc, F2Pool, Foundry, Spiderpool, MARA Foundation & DMND Join Stratum v2 Working Group

The Stratum v2 Working Group announces today that ANTPOOL, Block Inc, F2Pool, Foundry, Spiderpool, MARA Foundation, and DMND have joined the working group to advance the adoption of the Stratum v2 protocol. 

The working group was founded in 2022 by Braiins and Spiral to develop and maintain the Stratum v2 protocol as an open and vendor-neutral specification usable by the Bitcoin mining ecosystem. The protocol is an upgrade to the original Stratum mining protocol, bringing massive efficiency gains, privacy, security, and functionality that can be used to improve overall mining decentralization. 

The onboarding of the new members, all substantial players in the mining ecosystem, represents a big leap forward for the working group’s progress in ensuring proper functioning and compatibility across real-world mining operations at scale. It also shows a growing consensus in the mining ecosystem that Stratum v2 is the direction to take going into the future. 

“We’re proud to support the broader adoption of Stratum V2. Aligning around an open, interoperable standard enables the industry to collaborate more effectively and drive improvements in efficiency, security and decentralization,” said Andy Zhou, CEO of ANTPOOL. 

Stratum v2 supports mechanisms for more efficient management of large fleets of miners, is end-to-end encrypted, and allows individual miners to produce their own block templates with supporting pools (among other features). 

Kenway Wang, CTO of Spiderpool had this to say: “Decentralization is core to our mission. Stratum V2 supports this by enabling miner-constructed templates, while also improving efficiency, especially for miners in bandwidth-constrained environments.” 

About the Stratum V2 Working Group

The Stratum V2 Working Group is an open collaboration initiative dedicated to advancing the development, adoption, and interoperability of the Stratum V2 mining protocol. It maintains a public specification and provides a coordination layer between developers and industry stakeholders.

This post ANTPOOL, Block Inc, F2Pool, Foundry, Spiderpool, MARA Foundation & DMND Join Stratum v2 Working Group first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Shinobi.

Bitcoin Magazine

Why eBay Should Ignore GameStop and Use Bitcoin to Save $1.2 Billion in Transaction Costs

Ryan Cohen’s unsolicited $55.5 billion unsolicited bid to absorb eBay into GameStop has the corporate world doing a double-take. Cohen’s pitch sounds seductive on paper: he promises to slash $2 billion in bloated overhead and instantly rocket eBay’s diluted GAAP earnings per share from $4.26 to $7.79 in year one.

But behind the flashy presentation lies a massive hurdle: a highly speculative cash-and-stock structure that requires taking on $20 billion in new debt from TD Securities and drastically diluting GameStop’s own stock to buy a company four times its size. Analysts and investors are deeply skeptical, which is why eBay’s stock continues to trade well below Cohen’s $125 offer price.

eBay’s board doesn’t need a smaller, meme-backed retailer to step in and aggressively strip its budget to find efficiency. Instead, they can look at a real-world blueprint proving that true operational efficiency isn’t found by gutting marketing, it’s found by upgrading the payment layer.

By taking a page out of the broader digital asset ecosystem and looking at how legacy brand Steak ‘n Shake just revolutionized its business model, eBay can unlock a massive structural victory completely on its own terms.

The Proof of Concept: The Steak ‘n Shake Case Study

When the national burger chain Steak ‘n Shake activated Bitcoin Lightning Network payments across its locations, it wasn’t just a marketing gimmick. The real-world data completely flipped the script on corporate retail finance:

• 50% Fee Savings: Steak ‘n Shake’s leadership confirmed that processing payments over the decentralized Bitcoin Lightning protocol instantly cut their payment transaction costs right in half compared to legacy credit card networks.
• The Strategic Reserve: Instead of converting those savings back to fiat, they funneled the capital directly into a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve to fund employee bonuses, creating an organic, self-reinforcing financial flywheel.

The Opportunity Cost: What This Math Means for eBay

The Payments Blindspot

eBay is an e-commerce titan, facilitating massive scale across its global marketplace. In its fiscal year 2025 financial results, eBay reported steady momentum, yet it remains anchored to traditional payment rails. Because eBay runs its own internal payment infrastructure (eBay Managed Payments), it is stuck swallowing massive transaction fees from legacy credit card cartels, passing those costs onto sellers via a hefty ~13.25% take-rate.

While eBay guards its exact net processing fees, traditional credit card networks (Visa, Mastercard, Amex) charge large digital merchants an average global interchange and processing toll hovering between 2.5% and 3.5%.

Assuming a standard 3% merchant legacy swipe fee across eBay’s massive $80 billion volume, replicating Steak ‘n Shake’s proven 50% reduction in processing costs reveals a staggering annual opportunity cost currently paid to the banking cartel:

• $80B (Annual GMV) x 3% (Est. Legacy Swipe Fee) = $2.4B in Friction
• $2.4B x 50% (Lightning Efficiency) = $1.2B Annually

The Treasury Blindspot

While eBay has been letting its $2.92B in cash reserves sit in low-yield traditional treasury notes (generating a baseline productivity of just 12.23%), the opportunity cost of ignoring Bitcoin over the last three years has turned into a multi-billion dollar boardroom mistake.

If eBay’s board had allocated 100% of those reserves to Bitcoin instead of flat fiat cash, that treasury would have grown by a massive 1,406%. That represents a $5.02B unrealized gain that eBay completely left on the table.

Try the Bitcoin Treasury simulator.

Legacy Credit Card Rails vs. The Bitcoin Lightning Network

Instead of letting a leveraged buyout dictate its future, a native crypto payment layer permanently restructures eBay’s economics in favor of its 135 million active users [1.1].

3 Reasons Why the Payment Play Beats Cohen’s Takeover

1. It Protects Shareholders from Volatile Corporate Debt

GameStop’s proposal relies on stitching together an unconfirmed $20 billion financing letter and highly unpredictable meme-stock equity to cover the massive acquisition. Integrating a decentralized payment protocol, by comparison, costs eBay virtually nothing to implement. It expands profit margins organically without adding a single dollar of toxic corporate leverage to the balance sheet.

2. It Empowers the Lifeblood of eBay: The Sellers

Ryan Cohen intends to extract value by aggressively cutting $1.2 billion from eBay’s sales and marketing budget. Tech-forward payment integration takes the opposite approach: it extracts value from the banks. Passing a massive fee reduction back to power-sellers gives them an overwhelming incentive to list their best inventory exclusively on eBay rather than moving to independent storefronts or Amazon.

3. It Dominates the Collectibles Market Automatically

A massive pillar of GameStop’s buyout logic is using its 1,600 brick-and-mortar storefronts as physical hubs to authenticate trading cards and luxury items. However, the high-end collectibles market is already deeply intertwined with digital asset wealth. Seamlessly allowing global buyers to purchase a luxury watch or a rare comic book natively via Bitcoin unlocks a vast ecosystem of highly liquid global capital that a physical retail storefront simply cannot replicate.

The Ultimate Counter-Punch

GameStop is targeting eBay because it views the platform as a massive cash-generating engine that has grown technologically stagnant. Rather than allowing a smaller company to leverage itself to the hilt for a takeover, eBay’s board can render GameStop’s cost-cutting thesis totally obsolete.

By using the retail industry’s blueprint to fix its payment layer, cutting out banking monopolies, and returning $1.2 billion in annual savings to the marketplace, eBay can drive its own historic earnings boost, proving it doesn’t need a savior to dominate the future of digital commerce.

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

References

• [1.1] GameStop Investor Relations. (2026). GameStop Proposes to Acquire eBay at $125.00 Per Share. GameStop Investor Relations
• [1.2] ANI News. (2026). GameStop proposes to acquire ebay at USD 125 per share in cash and stock. ANI News
• [1.3] Bitcoin Magazine. (2026). Steak ‘n Shake Says Bitcoin Payments Cut Processing Costs by 50%, Save $6 Million Annually. Bitcoin Magazine
• [1.4] CoinoMedia via Binance Square. (2025). Steak ‘n Shake Saves Big with Bitcoin Payments. Binance Square
• [1.5] Reddit r/Bitcoin. (2026). Steak ‘n Shake Says Bitcoin Payments Cut Processing Costs by 50%, Save $6 Million Annually. Reddit
• [2.1] Kotaku. (2026). GameStop’s Absurd Bid To Buy eBay For $56 Billion Sounds Bad. Kotaku
• [2.2] Digital Transactions. (2026). How Steak ‘n Shake Slashed Costs With Crypto. Digital Transactions
• [2.3] MyBroadband. (2026). GameStop offers R930 billion for eBay. MyBroadband
• [2.4] Reddit r/Bitcoin. (2026). Starting March 1, Steak n Shake will give all hourly employees at its company-operated restaurants a Bitcoin bonus. Reddit
• [3.1] Bitcoin Magazine. (2026). Steak ‘n Shake Teases “Bitcoin Milkshake” For Bitcoin Conference 2026. Bitcoin Magazine
• [4.1] eBay Inc. Investor Relations. (2026). eBay Inc. Reports Fourth Quarter and Full Year 2025 Results. eBay Investor Relations
• [4.2] Value Added Resource. (2026). eBay Q4 2025 Earnings: GMV Growth & Depop Acquisition Surprise. Value Added Resource

This post Why eBay Should Ignore GameStop and Use Bitcoin to Save $1.2 Billion in Transaction Costs first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Nick Ward.

Bitcoin Magazine

Boltz Launches Non-Custodial USDC Swaps, Bridging Bitcoin Directly to Circle’s Regulated Dollar

Boltz, a leading non-custodial swap provider for Bitcoin, today announced the launch of USDC Swaps, enabling instant conversion between Bitcoin and USDC, the regulated stablecoin issued by Circle. Swaps are supported across all major Bitcoin layers, including the Lightning Network, and are live now at boltz.exchange.

“USDC Swaps mark a turning point for the Bitcoin ecosystem. For the first time, anyone can move between Bitcoin and the dollar most trusted by the regulated financial world without opening an account, completing KYC, or trusting a custodian in the process,” said the team in a press release shared with Bitcoin Magazine. 

A Non-Custodial Bridge

Exchanging Bitcoin for USDC is not new. What is new is doing it without giving up custody. Today, users who want to move between Bitcoin and a regulated dollar are typically funneled through centralized exchanges and brokerages that require account creation, identity verification, and full custody of user funds. A subset of services offer the same conversion without an account upfront, but because those services still take custody of user funds during the swap, they retain the ability to pause settlement and request identity documents if a transaction is flagged for review, with funds potentially getting confiscated in the meantime. The trade-off, in either case, has been the same: trust, surveillance, and friction in exchange for access.

Boltz removes that trade-off. USDC Swaps execute trustlessly, with no account, no sign-up, and no KYC at any stage. Funds remain under user control until the moment USDC arrives in the user’s wallet. This is the core innovation, and it is what separates Boltz from every other path between Bitcoin and Circle’s regulated Stablecoin.

Bridging Two Financial Worlds

For more than a decade, Bitcoin and the stablecoin economy have evolved on parallel tracks. Bitcoin built the open, permissionless side of the internet’s financial layer. Circle and USDC built the compliant, audited dollar that institutions require for operations. The two rarely connected directly.

USDC Swaps close that gap. With a single transaction, value can move between Bitcoin and a fully reserved, monthly-attested dollar that is already integrated into the products of Stripe, Coinbase, Visa, Mastercard, BlackRock, Robinhood, Revolut, Nubank, and a long list of banks, fintechs, and payment processors worldwide.

“The momentum is unmistakable,” wrote the Boltz team. USDC is the stablecoin that Stripe and Paradigm placed at the center of Tempo, their new payments-focused blockchain. It is the dollar on which Coinbase built its institutional infrastructure. It is the dollar that regulated card networks, asset managers, and global fintechs reach for when they need a digital dollar they can defend to a regulator. Boltz USDC swaps mean plugging Bitcoin directly into the rails that the regulated world is already standardizing on.

“Bitcoin and the regulated financial system have always been adjacent worlds, separated by intermediaries that demand custody and identity,” said Kilian Rausch, CEO of Boltz. “USDC Swaps remove that separation. A merchant accepting Bitcoin, a freelancer paid in sats, a treasury team managing operating capital, all of them can now reach the regulated dollar economy on their own terms, in seconds.”

Powered by the Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol

USDC Swaps are built on Circle’s Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP), the native infrastructure that allows USDC to move across blockchains without wrapping or third-party bridges. Every USDC delivered through a Boltz swap is genuine, Circle-issued USDC, the same USDC accepted by regulated payment partners around the world.

By building on CCTP, Boltz is able to serve users across every USDC-supported network, including Ethereum, Arbitrum, Base, Polygon, and others, from a single, focused liquidity provider.

Use Cases Across Consumer and Business

Boltz believes that USDC Swaps unlock a broad set of practical applications, including:

• Off-ramping Bitcoin into the banking system through regulated partners that already accept USDC, such as Stripe, Coinbase, and Bridge.
• Day-to-day operations for Bitcoin-native businesses, such as paying vendors, funding payroll, and settling recurring bills in regulated dollars without leaving non-custodial infrastructure.
• Merchant settlement for Bitcoin-accepting businesses that need to book revenue in compliant, accountant-friendly USDC.

All of the above are now unlocked without having to use crypto wallets outside of Bitcoin. Users send Bitcoin through Boltz and the recipient can receive USDC.

Bitcoin First, by Design

Boltz emphasized that the launch does not change the company’s Bitcoin-first orientation. All swaps remain non-custodial, all swaps settle atomically, and a “Bitcoin-Only Mode” continues to be available for users who prefer a stripped-down interface. USDC Swaps simply extend the reach of Bitcoin into a part of the financial system that, until now, has been difficult to access without trusted intermediaries.

USDC Swaps are available immediately to all users at boltz.exchange. Integration into various SDKs and the Boltz BTCPay Plugin is planned to follow in the coming weeks, according to the company.

This post Boltz Launches Non-Custodial USDC Swaps, Bridging Bitcoin Directly to Circle’s Regulated Dollar first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Juan Galt.

Bitcoin Magazine

Strategy Opens Door to Bold Bitcoin Sales Pivot Unlocking $2.2 Billion Tax Benefit

Strategy Inc. (formerly MicroStrategy, Nasdaq: MSTR), the world’s largest corporate Bitcoin holder and first Bitcoin Treasury Company, held its Q1 2026 earnings call on May 5. The results were dominated by massive non-cash GAAP losses from Bitcoin’s fair-value accounting amid a volatile quarter. Yet the real story, and the market’s focal point, was a clear strategic pivot: the company signaled it is now willing to sell portions of its Bitcoin holdings tactically. This marks a departure from the long-standing “never sell” narrative and positions BTC as an actively managed capital allocation asset rather than untouchable inventory.

The Numbers: GAAP Pain, Operational Resilience, Bitcoin Growth

Strategy reported an operating loss of $14.47 billion and a net loss of $12.54 billion ($38.25 per diluted common share), compared to smaller losses in Q1 2025. The primary driver was a $14.46 billion unrealized fair-value loss on its digital assets as Bitcoin prices declined during the quarter (roughly from ~$87,000 to ~$68,000 by late March). These are non-cash charges under current accounting rules.

The core software business showed modest growth, with total revenues of $124.3 million (up ~12% year-over-year) and gross profit of $83.4 million (67.1% margin). Cash and equivalents stood at $2.21 billion. More importantly for the Bitcoin Treasury thesis:

• Holdings: 818,334 BTC as of early May (3.9% of total supply), up 22% year-to-date in 2026.
• Acquisitions: 89,599 BTC purchased in Q1 alone (~$7.3 billion at ~$80,900 average) plus another 56,235 BTC in Q2-to-date.
• Key Metrics: 9.4% BTC Yield and ~63,410 BTC gain year-to-date (equating to ~$5 billion in dollar gains). Bitcoin per share rose 18% year-over-year to 213,371 sats.
• Capital Raised: ~$11.7 billion year-to-date (roughly half common equity, half preferred—primarily the flagship STRC “Stretch” digital credit product, which has scaled to $8.5 billion outstanding with strong liquidity and a 11.5% dividend yield). fool.com

The balance sheet remains fortress-like: modest net leverage (~9%), ample cash reserves, and a sophisticated digital credit engine via STRC that has attracted institutional and DeFi interest (including tokenized versions). Executives highlighted a proposed shareholder vote to shift STRC dividends from monthly to semi-monthly for better liquidity, with return-of-capital (ROC) tax treatment expected for the foreseeable future.

The Headline Shift: Tactical Bitcoin Sales as Financial Engineering

The call’s biggest takeaway, echoed in real-time X (Twitter) commentary, was the explicit openness to selling Bitcoin under the right conditions. Executive Chairman Michael Saylor stated the company “will probably sell some Bitcoin to fund a dividend just to inoculate the market, just to send the message that we did it.” President and CEO Phong Le added: “We will sell Bitcoin when it’s advantageous to the company… We’re not gonna sit back and just say, ‘We’ll never sell the Bitcoin.’ We wanna be net aggregators of Bitcoin, increasing our total Bitcoin, but more importantly, increasing our Bitcoin per share.” This isn’t a fire sale or abandonment of accumulation. Instead, as detailed in the earnings presentation slides and elaborated by executives, it’s optimized capital allocation:

• Tax Harvesting Opportunity: Strategy’s BTC stack has clear cost-basis tiers (from early low-basis holdings to recent higher-cost purchases). Slides illustrated that selling higher-cost-basis BTC (e.g., ~$80k–$100k+ tiers) at current levels could realize substantial capital losses—potentially turning ~$7.6 billion in unrealized losses into immediate tax benefits (estimated $2.2 billion in tax assets at a 29% rate). These losses can offset gains elsewhere, reduce CAMT (corporate alternative minimum tax) exposure, and create valuable tax shields. Because Bitcoin is treated as property by the IRS, wash-sale rules don’t apply, allowing strategic repurchases if desired. thestreet.com
• Redeployment for Accretion: Proceeds would fund high-BPS-accretive actions—buying back undervalued MSTR shares (especially below ~1.22x mNAV), retiring convertible debt, or supporting dividends—while maintaining or growing Bitcoin per share. A presentation slide modeled a $1 billion “sell BTC to buy MSTR” trade, showing strong positive delta to BTC yield and gains at sub-1.22x mNAV levels (e.g., +636 bps yield at 0.5x mNAV). This could crush shorts, reduce float/dilution risk, and boost mNAV. thestreet.com
• Dividend and Liability Management: Small, targeted sales could perpetually fund STRC preferred dividends (with STRC issuance potentially outpacing the BTC “breakeven” cost). This inoculates against FUD about forced sales or dilution while keeping the company a net BTC buyer overall.

In short, BTC transitions from a static “digital gold” reserve to a dynamic tool for optimizing taxes, liquidity, capital structure, and shareholder value, without increasing leverage. As one sharp X analysis put it: “BTC is no longer treated as untouchable inventory. It’s becoming an actively managed capital allocation asset optimized around Bitcoin per share, float control, taxes, and capital structure.”

Follow BFC on X.

Market Reaction

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

This post Strategy Opens Door to Bold Bitcoin Sales Pivot Unlocking $2.2 Billion Tax Benefit first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Nick Ward.

Tether’s second reserve asset is intelligence

Tether’s new QVAC project begins with an unusual phrase for a stablecoin company. The company describes “QVAC Psy” as a family of foundational models “rooted in the principles of Psychohistory.”

The reference to psychohistory belongs to Isaac Asimov’s Foundation universe, where Hari Seldon uses mathematics, statistics, and social dynamics to forecast the behavior of very large populations and shorten the dark age after the Galactic Empire’s collapse.

The Encyclopedia of Science Fiction describes Asimovian psychohistory as an “Imaginary Science,” while Seldon’s work is a plan that predicts future events and preserves knowledge through systemic breakdown.

Tether’s wording functions as a mission statement wrapped in science-fiction language.

The company built the largest stablecoin in crypto by turning reserves, liquidity, and distribution into a monetary infrastructure. QVAC applies the same instinct to intelligence.

Tether’s first reserve asset remains the dollar-like liability at the center of USDt. Its second reserve asset is becoming compute, models, datasets, and the ability to run AI outside centralized clouds.

From dollar reserves to intelligence reserves

Tether’s expansion into AI follows the mechanics of its core business. USDt converts demand for offshore dollars into a reserve stack dominated by short-duration sovereign instruments.

In its Q1 2026 attestation update, Tether reported $1.04 billion in net profit, an $8.23 billion reserve buffer, roughly $183 billion in token-related liabilities, and about $141 billion in direct and indirect exposure to U.S. Treasury bills. That reserve base gives

Tether recurring income, balance-sheet capacity, and room to fund long-duration infrastructure bets from operating strength.

CryptoSlate has already tracked how this reserve engine can turn stablecoin scale into strategic allocation. In January, Tether’s 8,888 BTC purchase showed how interest income and operating profits can translate into recurring Bitcoin demand. QVAC pushes the same logic into a different asset class.

Alongside Bitcoin, gold, startups, energy, mining, communications, and other infrastructure positions, Tether is allocating into intelligence itself. The move extends the company’s self-image from issuer of private dollar liquidity to builder of private digital infrastructure.

The “psychohistory” language fits that direction because Tether is framing AI as a civilizational layer rather than a software vertical. QVAC’s public materials describe an “Infinite Stable Intelligence Platform,” a local-first system for the “decentralized mind,” and an answer to centralized AI.

The QVAC vision page argues that routing every thought through centralized servers is too slow, fragile, and controlled, and then places QVAC as an edge-native foundation for the intelligence that users possess.

That framing mirrors Tether’s broader stablecoin pitch. Money should move without permission. Data should stay with the user. Intelligence should run where the user is.

The most serious claim, however, sits underneath the Asimov reference. Tether is saying that AI becomes more durable when it behaves like resilient infrastructure.

A cloud model can be more capable, yet it carries provider risk, pricing risk, policy risk, latency risk, and data-routing risk.

A local model gives up part of the frontier capability curve in exchange for ownership, privacy, and continuity.

The trade is familiar in crypto. Self-custody is less convenient than an exchange until the exchange fails. Local AI is less convenient than a hosted frontier model until the network drops, the API changes, the account closes, or the data cannot leave the device.

QVAC is an edge stack built around a different race

QVAC’s key distinction is architectural. OpenAI, Anthropic, Google DeepMind, and xAI compete across maximum general capability, coding, multimodality, long-context reasoning, agentic behavior, and enterprise cloud distribution.

QVAC aims at a different axis: deployability, privacy, latency, composability, and survival outside a single provider.

The QVAC welcome documentation defines the project as an open-source, cross-platform ecosystem for local-first, peer-to-peer AI applications across Linux, macOS, Windows, Android, and iOS. The same documentation says users can run LLMs, perform speech recognition and retrieval-augmented generation, and handle other AI tasks locally, or delegate inference to peers via built-in P2P capabilities.

That gives QVAC a different benchmark from the frontier labs. Frontier AI optimizes for the strongest general model available through a centralized service. QVAC optimizes for where inference happens, who controls the runtime, what data leaves the device, and whether an application can continue operating when centralized services become unavailable.

Tether’s April 2026 SDK launch describes a unified development kit that lets developers build, run, and fine-tune AI on any device, with applications designed to run unchanged across iOS, Android, Windows, macOS, and Linux.

It also says that the QVAC SDK uses a unified abstraction layer over local inference engines, including QVAC Fabric, a fork of llama.cpp, plus integrations with whisper.cpp, Parakeet, and Bergamot for speech and translation.

That is closer to an operating layer than a single model release. The open-source AI ecosystem already has powerful pieces: Llama, Qwen, Mistral, Gemma, DeepSeek, Hugging Face, llama.cpp, Ollama, vLLM, LM Studio, and a long tail of local inference projects.

QVAC’s bet is that developers need a coherent edge framework that joins model loading, inference, speech, OCR, translation, image generation, RAG, P2P model distribution, delegated inference, and local fine-tuning through one interface.

QVAC is positioning itself as a distribution layer for intelligence, assuming that good-enough local models will continue to improve.

QVAC Fabric is the technical center of that claim. Tether says Fabric supports fine-tuning across modern consumer hardware through Vulkan and Metal backends, including Android devices with Qualcomm Adreno or ARM Mali GPUs, Apple Silicon devices, and standard Windows or Linux setups with AMD, Intel, or NVIDIA hardware.

It also describes dynamic tiling for mobile GPU memory limits and a LoRA workflow with GPU acceleration and masked-loss instruction tuning.

If that workflow holds up in external developer use, the distinction from typical open-source model releases becomes material. The model weights are one layer. Local adaptation becomes the next layer.

MedPsy is QVAC’s first hard test

MedPsy gives QVAC its first concrete model-level proof point. The Hugging Face technical report, published May 7, presents QVAC MedPsy as a family of text-only medical and healthcare language models built for edge deployment at 1.7 billion and 4 billion parameters.

The claim is ambitious: smaller models, trained through a tightly controlled medical post-training pipeline, can outperform larger medical baselines while remaining practical for laptops, high-end mobile devices, and smartphone-class applications.

QVAC says MedPsy-1.7B scores 62.62 across seven closed-ended medical benchmarks, above Google’s MedGemma-1.5-4B-it at 51.20, despite being less than half its size.

It also says MedPsy-4B scores 70.54, slightly above MedGemma-27B-text-it at 69.95, while being nearly seven times smaller.

On HealthBench and HealthBench Hard, QVAC reports a wider gap, with MedPsy-4B scoring 74.00 and 58.00 versus MedGemma-27B-text-it at 65.00 and 42.67 under the CompassJudger evaluation shown in the report.

Those results, if independently reproduced, would support the core QVAC thesis: domain-specific, edge-scale models can challenge much larger systems in constrained, high-value categories.

The training recipe also shows how QVAC plans to compete. The report says MedPsy uses Qwen3 backbones and then applies multi-stage supervised fine-tuning and reinforcement learning to medical QA tasks.

It generated more than 30 million synthetic rows during experimentation, used a two-stage curriculum, and selected Baichuan-M3-235B as the single teacher model for long-form reasoning supervision. QVAC also states that the training corpus has not yet been released. That caveat is central.

The strongest public benchmark claims still come from QVAC itself, and the training data needed to fully interrogate contamination, coverage, prompt construction, and teacher influence remains unavailable.

The edge angle becomes sharper in quantization. QVAC says GGUF variants are published for llama.cpp and QVAC SDK, with Q4_K_M reducing file size by 69% while losing less than one average score point for both MedPsy sizes.

The report recommends Q4_K_M with imatrix calibration as the size-and-quality trade-off: 2.72 GB for the 4B model and 1.28 GB for the 1.7B model. The QVAC models FAQ also warns that MedPsy is text-only, English-only, unsuitable for emergencies, vulnerable to hallucination, and dependent on developers preserving privacy across the full application architecture. That gives the technical center its proper shape.

MedPsy is promising because medicine has strong reasons to prefer local inference. It remains unproven until external researchers reproduce the benchmark ladder and test it under real clinical workflow constraints.

The unresolved fight is convenience versus control

The local-versus-cloud AI debate is usually framed as a choice between privacy and performance. QVAC reframes it as convenience against control.

Cloud AI wins on ease. The user opens an app, sends a prompt, receives an answer, and avoids the operational burden of model weights, device memory, quantization, embeddings, or runtime compatibility.

The provider absorbs the complexity. That convenience is powerful, and it explains why centralized AI platforms have scaled so quickly. The user gets frontier capability with minimal setup.

QVAC asks developers and users to accept more responsibility in exchange for a different security model. The reward is local execution, offline operation, reduced data exposure, lower dependency on API access, and a path toward peer-to-peer inference and model distribution.

Tether’s SDK launch says QVAC-powered apps can keep working in low-connectivity environments and that “if the internet goes down, the AI keeps working.” Its 2025 QVAC announcement went further, describing AI agents running directly on local devices, peer-to-peer networking for device-to-device collaboration, and WDK integration that would allow AI agents to transact in Bitcoin and USDt.

That is the full Tether thesis: money, computation, and autonomous agents should share the same sovereign design pattern.

The decentralization claim isn't quite as straightforward as some would like. QVAC is meaningfully decentralized at the inference layer when a user can download a model, run it locally, and keep sensitive data on device.

It is more decentralized than a hosted API because the provider no longer sits inside every prompt.

It also adds peer-to-peer primitives through the Holepunch stack, including delegated inference and decentralized model distribution, according to Tether’s SDK materials. Those are substantive design choices.

Governance is a separate layer. QVAC is funded, named, coordinated, and promoted by Tether. The flagship apps, model family, SDK roadmap, and “Stable Intelligence” language all originate from a single corporate sponsor.

That structure coexists with the local-first value proposition. It narrows the decentralization claim to where the evidence is strongest.

QVAC decentralizes where inference can happen. The broader ecosystem still needs evidence of distributed control over default registries, release channels, safety conventions, model inclusion, and long-term governance.

Replication is the next threshold

QVAC’s credibility now sits on replication. If MedPsy’s results reproduce outside QVAC’s own evaluation harness, Tether will have a credible first example of its intelligence-reserve thesis: small, open, locally deployable models that can compete with larger cloud-oriented systems in a sensitive domain.

If independent testing narrows or reverses the benchmark gap, QVAC still has an infrastructure argument, while its model claim carries less weight. The broader fight then returns to the oldest trade in technology: convenience concentrates power, while control imposes work.

That is where the Asimov pitch becomes useful. Psychohistory in Foundation was concerned with large systems under stress. Tether’s version focuses on infrastructure under centralization. The language is grand, and the technical proof remains early, but the direction is coherent.

Tether is leveraging the cash flows of the world’s largest stablecoin to build an AI stack focused on local execution, peer networks, open tooling, and edge-scale models. It is extending the stablecoin premise from money to intelligence.

The question is no longer whether a stablecoin company can afford to build AI. Tether clearly can.

The question is whether QVAC can produce models and infrastructure strong enough to make users accept the friction of local control.

MedPsy is the first measurable threshold. Independent replication will determine whether QVAC’s psychohistory language remains a metaphor or begins to resemble the early operating logic of a serious edge-AI stack.

The post Tether launches decentralized local AI using Isaac Asimov’s Psychohistory straight out of Foundation appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Crypto projects with more than $3 billion in total value locked have migrated their cross-chain infrastructure to Chainlink’s Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol (CCIP) following a $292 million exploit at KelpDAO, which heightened scrutiny of bridge security across decentralized finance.

Chainlink confirmed the migration wave, saying four protocols, including KelpDAO, Solv Protocol, Re, and Tydro, had begun decommissioning legacy oracles and bridge systems in favor of CCIP.

The shift has also fed into LINK’s market performance. CryptoSlate data shows the token rose 15% to $10.52, its highest level since January, as traders responded to the acceleration in CCIP adoption.

Blockchain analytics firm Santiment said the rally came alongside a tightening in LINK’s available supply on exchanges. According to the firm, LINK's exchange reserves fell by 13.5 million LINK over five weeks, representing more than 10.5% of the exchange-held supply recorded in early April.

The price move reflects a broader reassessment of Chainlink’s role in crypto infrastructure. After years of being known primarily for price feeds and oracle services, the network is now becoming a direct beneficiary of DeFi’s search for safer cross-chain rails.

Why are DeFi protocols embracing Chainlink’s CCIP?

Cross-chain bridges allow tokens, NFTs, and data to move between otherwise separate blockchain networks. This means these platforms let users shift liquidity between ecosystems, such as moving assets from Ethereum to Solana, without relying on a centralized exchange.

That function has become essential as DeFi has spread across multiple blockchains. Lending markets, staking tokens, stablecoins, and tokenized assets increasingly depend on infrastructure that can move value between networks without fragmenting liquidity or locking users into a single chain.

However, bridges have also become one of crypto’s most frequently attacked pieces of infrastructure. This is because they often rely on complex verification systems and hold large pools of locked assets, making them attractive targets for hackers.

Chainalysis has described cross-chain bridges as one of the blockchain industry’s major security risks. As of 2022, more than $2 billion had been stolen across 13 bridge hacks, with North Korean-linked groups among the most active attackers.

That history has pushed DeFi protocols toward infrastructure that can offer more standardized security controls. Chainlink’s CCIP, which launched on mainnet in July 2023, has become one of the main beneficiaries of that shift.

CCIP uses Chainlink’s decentralized oracle networks, the same infrastructure behind the data feeds that secure large parts of DeFi. Chainlink says those networks now include more than 2,000 decentralized oracle networks in production, securing over $110 billion in value and powering more than 70% of DeFi.

Unlike many traditional bridges, which can depend on a narrow set of validators or verification pathways, CCIP is designed to transmit both data and token value across chains through Chainlink’s oracle infrastructure.

That gives protocols a way to move assets while reducing reliance on bespoke bridge designs.

For protocols managing hundreds of millions of dollars in assets, cross-chain infrastructure is now being evaluated less as back-end plumbing and more as a core part of risk management.

LayerZero attempts to contain the fallout

Meanwhile, the migration wave has put LayerZero, the cross-chain platform previously used by KelpDAO, under pressure to explain its role in the $292 million breach.

LayerZero issued an apology on May 9, about three weeks after the April 18 breach. The company acknowledged that its post-exploit communication had fallen short and conceded that its security model allowed a high-value application to operate with insufficient safeguards.

LayerZero had initially maintained that its infrastructure worked as designed and that responsibility sat with the application configuration.

However, its more recent comments struck a different tone, acknowledging that it should have exercised stronger oversight over how its decentralized verifier network was used.

The company said it “made a mistake” by allowing its Decentralized Verifier Networks (DVNs) to function as the sole verifier for high-value cross-chain transactions without adequate guardrails.

It noted:

“We didn't police what our DVN was securing, which created a risk we simply didn't see. We own that.”

The admission goes to the heart of the dispute. LayerZero’s architecture gives application developers the flexibility to configure verification as they see fit. That customizability has long been part of the protocol’s appeal, particularly for teams seeking more control over their cross-chain security assumptions.

The KelpDAO exploit has exposed the weakness of that approach when teams operate with a too-narrow verification setup. If an application depends on a single verifier, a compromise in that layer can become a direct threat to user funds.

Meanwhile, LayerZero also disclosed a previously unreported incident from three years ago involving one of its multisig signers.

The company said the signer mistakenly used LayerZero hardware to conduct a personal trade. The signer was removed, wallets were rotated, and LayerZero later moved to a custom-built multisig framework.

The disclosure appeared intended to show that the protocol had addressed earlier internal security lapses. However, it also added another layer of scrutiny at a moment when clients were already reassessing their exposure.

LayerZero said the KelpDAO exploit affected only a single application, representing 0.14% of network applications and roughly 0.36% of total value on the protocol. It also said no other application was affected.

That defense leaves LayerZero with a narrow but difficult argument. The company is trying to show that the exploit was isolated while also admitting that the configuration should not have been allowed to secure so much value without stronger oversight.

Can LayerZero restore institutional confidence?

The central question now is whether LayerZero’s apology and technical explanation can slow the migration of protocols toward Chainlink.

Tom Wan, head of data at Entropy Advisors, questioned whether the damage to institutional confidence had already been done. He wrote

“Can an apology stop their clients from leaving to Chainlink, or is this just the beginning?”

LayerZero has tried to answer that concern with usage data. The company said more than $9 billion had moved through its infrastructure since the April attack, a figure meant to show that users and applications continue to rely on the protocol despite the KelpDAO incident.

Wan also noted that several major assets, including USDe, WBTC, and weETH, remain active on LayerZero.

That continued usage suggests the protocol has not suffered a full loss of confidence, even as several prominent projects shift parts of their cross-chain stack elsewhere.

LayerZero also retains defenders who argue that the protocol’s flexibility remains its core advantage.

In that view, customizability is not a flaw by itself. The risk arises when application teams fail to align their security configuration with the volume of capital flowing through their systems.

Lorenzo Romagnoli, co-founder of USDT0, said LayerZero’s model requires asset issuers to take security seriously from the start. USDT0, the largest asset on the LayerZero network, has moved $4 billion across chains without incident.

Romagnoli said:

“LayerZero is the golden standard for cross-chain interoperability because of its high level of customizability. Unfortunately, this means application owners need to invest serious resources to match the security standard that the capital moving through our rails demands.”

Romagnoli said USDT0 operates its own proprietary veto-powered DVN, with invariance checks tailored to its specific risk profile. He argued that the protocol remained unaffected because it treated security as part of the product, rather than a feature inherited automatically from the underlying rails.

That defense captures the wider debate now facing cross-chain infrastructure. Protocols want flexibility, but they also need defaults and guardrails strong enough to protect large pools of user capital. The KelpDAO exploit has made that trade-off harder to ignore.

For Chainlink, the migration wave strengthens CCIP’s position as a security-focused cross-chain standard, as DeFi teams reassess vendor risk.

For LayerZero, the challenge is to demonstrate that its customizable model can meet institutional expectations without exposing high-value applications to weak configurations.

The post Chainlink emerges as the unlikely $3B winner of KelpDAO exploit as DeFi projects dump LayerZero appeared first on CryptoSlate.

The rsETH crisis resulted in $200 million in bad debt on Aave's books, despite not a single line of its contracts misbehaving.

On Apr. 18, attackers that Chainalysis preliminarily linked to Lazarus compromised RPC infrastructure, forced a failover to poisoned nodes via DDoS, and injected false data into a 1-of-1 DVN configuration on KelpDAO's rsETH bridge.

The forged message released approximately 116,500 rsETH, and Aave's incident report confirmed that Ethereum accepted nonce 308 while the Unichain source endpoint never advanced past 307.

The attacker supplied the compromised rsETH to Aave and borrowed against it, resulting in bad debt and serving as a frame for the current state of DeFi's security.

Exploiters extracted over $635 million across 28 incidents in April, the worst monthly total in over a year. DefiLlama puts the cumulative historical cost of hacks at $16.5 billion, with $7.7 billion specifically targeting DeFi.

The high-profile exploits on Drift and the KelpDAO bridge resulted in DeFi losing nearly $11 bilion in total value locked last month.

That contraction occurred as stablecoin rails, tokenized treasuries, and regulated settlement layers gained institutional traction in the same capital markets.

How did DeFi end up here?

Mitchell Amador, CEO of Immunefi, told CryptoSlate that DeFi has historically rewarded growth, integrations, liquidity, and speed over security maturity.

A protocol that adds a new asset, bridge, oracle, adapter, or external dependency gains immediate utility. The risk that integration carries produces no visible price signal until an exploit materializes, because the absence of an incident is invisible while it holds.

That asymmetry kept audit cycles and isolation practices secondary to shipping velocity for years, until April concentrated the consequences into a single month.

Amador said the most overlooked practices were multisig hygiene and management, supply chain hardening, real-time monitoring, and emergency response procedures.

Too many teams treated multisig as a security solution in itself, when its actual strength depends on signer count, the independence of those signers, their operational setup, and the processes around transaction review.

A low-threshold multisig, weak signer security, or a poorly monitored bridge or oracle can become a systemic exposure because DeFi protocols are composable by default. In this landscape, risk travels through integrations as efficiently as liquidity does.

While that culture was forming inside DeFi, a different model was being built in parallel.

Solstice Finance CEO Ben Nadareski assessed:

“The gap in output per person tells you what happens when you strip away everything that isn't the core financial function. The teams that win this round will be the ones built on compliance and security from day one, ready to ship faster than a bank can call a meeting about it.”

DeFi built composable rails for over half a decade before Wall Street recognized them as the actual infrastructure layer of the next financial system.

The cost of that early market position was a security culture calibrated for speed over operational discipline.

Kasper Pawlowski, CTO of Euler Finance, names the governance dimension of the same failure in his post-incident analysis.

He said:

“DeFi treats risk assessment as a one-time onboarding decision, when in reality risk is dynamic.”

The 1-of-1 DVN configuration that enabled the KelpDAO exploit existed in production for years. Kelp says it was the default LayerZero shipped and reviewed across multiple integration meetings, while LayerZero says Kelp downgraded to it.

Whichever account is accurate, the configuration persisted unflagged through every integration with every downstream protocol. LayerZero has since banned the configuration on a protocol-wide basis, acknowledging that allowing its DVN to act as the sole verifier for high-value transactions was a mistake.

The more consequential point is that a critical bridge-security parameter was normalized across the entire dependency chain until a $292 million exploit surfaced it.

Pawlowski argued:

“The operational machinery DeFi has built — DAO governance, external risk service providers, and monthly review cycles — doesn't move at the speed the underlying risk surface does. In many cases, the people doing the reviewing aren't structurally independent of the assets they're reviewing.”

That structural conflict produced the specific governance failure Pawlowski dissected. Aave's 25,000 ETH treasury recovery proposal was authored by TokenLogic, a paid Aave service provider that publicly lists Kelp as a client and operates an Aave delegate platform.

For reference, TokenLogic is the same firm voting on its own proposals. On the same day Aave expanded rsETH to a 93% loan-to-value ratio in eMode, SparkLend deprecated the asset entirely, bundling the move with routine cleanup of underused positions.

Three months later, that routine pruning was the only separation between Spark's depositors and the bad debt Aave now carries.

One protocol's independent risk judgment outperformed another's full-stack risk advisory apparatus. DeFi's review machinery generated worse outcomes than a single asset manager doing portfolio hygiene.

What “here” means

Before the exploit, Aave was the largest DeFi protocol by total value locked, with over $26 billion in deposits.

Pawlowski noted:

“Aave was the gold standard. If Aave can carry $200 million-plus in bad debt from a bridge exploit on a different protocol, the market has to recalibrate what ‘safe' actually means in DeFi lending.”

The pooled lending model is only as strong as its weakest accepted collateral, and when that collateral breaks, the entire shared pool absorbs the damage. The exposure reaches every depositor in the broader market, extending well past the vault that held the position.

Pawlowski pointed out that the structural reality had been “muted by years of ‘battle-tested' and ‘blue-chip' marketing.”

Amador broadened the exposure map beyond the mechanics of KelpDAO. The attack surface in DeFi now covers governance, signers, privileged roles, integrations, bridges, oracles, custody arrangements, and every external system a protocol depends on.

The most dangerous operational assumption a team can hold is that audited smart contracts equal a safe protocol. Immunefi's own research shows that DeFi losses declined by as much as 80% over the last several years, because the sector hardened its code and attackers adapted.

Amador added that they now study the entire risk chain for the weakest points, and those points are now off-chain, governance-adjacent, or buried in dependency stacks that no single audit covers.

For institutions, April forced a specific reset. Amador described the checklist now: how admin keys are managed, who can pause markets, what dependencies exist, what the incident response process looks like, and how quickly a threat can be contained.

Pawlowski made the same point from the capital side, saying institutions will continue to enter on-chain credit because the demand for tokenized markets, transparent settlement, and programmable financial infrastructure is real.

However, the institutional investors will move toward isolated markets, permissioned or curated vaults, stricter asset onboarding, better insurance, continuous monitoring, and formalized emergency controls.

Aave Horizon, a permissioned market for tokenized securities and RWAs launched in August 2025, has grown to more than $440 million in deposits.

Morpho's vault ecosystem added ARCHITECT, the first FINMA-licensed investment manager to curate vaults at scale, and Flowdesk launched an institutional AUSD vault in March 2026, using tokenized equities as collateral.

EY-Parthenon and Coinbase's 2026 survey found 73% of institutional respondents plan to increase digital asset allocations this year, but 81% prefer registered vehicles. Capital is moving on-chain through curated, governed, and compliance-aware structures.

The regulated alternative is accelerating on the other side of that same preference.

The GENIUS Act created the first federal framework for US stablecoins, with mandatory 100% reserve backing, no rehypothecation, and custody standards that Nadareski said “read like something a compliance desk could approve.”

A Goldman Sachs survey found 35% of institutional investors named regulatory uncertainty their biggest blocker, and 71% said they would increase exposure once clarity arrived.

Nadareski said, “The floor is in place, the capital is waiting.” The CLARITY Act, which would define jurisdictional and custodian standards for digital assets, including tokenized securities, awaits consideration by the Senate Banking Committee as of May 14.

When that passes, Nadareski argued that “the last item on most institutional checklists gets checked off. The waiting ends.” DeFi is competing for institutional capital against a nearly complete regulatory framework.

How DeFi resurges

Pawlowski named the full list of DeFi recovery tools: governance combined with proper market isolation, automated and AI-assisted risk monitoring, selective timelocks on parameters that warrant them, circuit breakers, KYC when required by regulation, application-specific sequencing, and policy-aware block builders.

He added:

“What's been missing is the willingness to use them, because every one [of the tools] involves a tradeoff against the maximalist version of decentralization the industry has marketed itself on.”

Abandoning that marketing position is the starting point, but it's not easy.

Pawlowski noted that “the crypto industry has spent years pretending it can have everything”, such as full decentralization, censorship resistance, institutional-grade safety, and retail accessibility, without tradeoffs.

It was “that fantasy that produced the conditions for these exploits.” A regulated institutional credit facility on-chain is a different product from a permissionless retail lending market, and governing both under the same orthodoxy created the conditions that let aggressive rsETH listings clear governance while structural bridge-security parameters sat unflagged for years.

Pawlowski believes the structural fix requires ending “the conflicts that let aggressive listings get waved through low-turnout governance votes by service providers with commercial relationships on both sides of the trade.”

SparkLend's independent pruning, versus Aave's eMode expansion on the same day, is proof that different risk philosophies yield different outcomes.

DeFi needs to institutionalize that distinction, build governance structures around it, and make the tradeoffs explicit to every user and institution evaluating the protocol.

Amador's operational prescription attacks the same problem from the execution layer.

DeFi must professionalize security in the same way it professionalized liquidity incentives via continuous audits, live bug bounty programs, formal verification where appropriate, independent security councils, stronger multisig thresholds, hardware-backed key management, real-time monitoring, public incident response playbooks, and mandatory risk reviews for every major integration.

Circuit breakers and isolation mechanisms should be built so that losses from a compromised asset, adapter, or dependency stay bounded within the affected market.

The benchmark for evaluating protocols should expand to cover security posture alongside yield and total value locked: who audited it, what the active bounty size is, how admin keys are managed, what dependencies exist, what the emergency procedure covers, and how quickly a threat can be contained.

Users and institutions should be able to compare protocols on those dimensions the way they compare APR.

A reform is already underway, as KelpDAO has begun migrating rsETH to Chainlink CCIP, LayerZero has banned 1-of-1 verifier configurations protocol-wide, and Aave Proposal 477 authorized liquidation of attacker positions, with recovered assets routed to a Recovery Guardian multisig.

Phase II of that proposal covers burning excess rsETH on Arbitrum, restoring bridge backing, reopening withdrawals, and compensating affected users.

Arbitrum's Security Council separately froze 30,766 ETH tied to the attacker's downstream funds.
That recovery required emergency councils, DAO votes, multisigs, and court proceedings, comprising a crisis-management stack drawn from the institutional finance playbook, deployed within a system that describes itself as permissionless.

DeFi reaches for those tools when losses get large enough, and protocols can embed them in advance or reconstruct them while a crisis unfolds.

DeFi's case for composability

Nadareski identified the specific prize at stake for institutions choosing between DeFi and regulated alternatives.

Compliance officers want circuit breakers, time-locks, and custody standards that match their existing playbooks, and Wall Street has been building that wrapper for years.

Nadareski said:

“The banks that move fastest will be the ones that stop trying to build everything in-house. Spinning up on-chain settlement with legacy teams puts you at 2028 if everything goes right. The play that ships this year is pairing established distribution and customer relationships with teams who already have the rails built.”

Composability is DeFi's strongest argument for keeping the rails it built. A single protocol that executes a trade, manages collateral, routes liquidity, and automatically settles a transaction within seconds represents a capability that traditional finance can only replicate by rebuilding from the ground up.

Composability works as an institutional argument only if failures stay local. Once a bridge verifier, a governance vote, or a compromised oracle can transmit losses across shared liquidity pools at scale, composability operates as contagion infrastructure.

Amador noted:

“Trust the code is not enough when protocols depend on bridges, multisigs, governance processes, or external assets. The new standard has to be: assume every layer can fail, and design systems so one failure does not cascade into the entire market.”

Pawlowski framed the necessary changes as “growing up,” describing a sector that must accept and publish explicit tradeoffs, build genuinely independent governance structures, and make security a product feature that users and institutions can evaluate and compare.

DeFi built the composable infrastructure that tokenized markets are now adopting. Stablecoin rails, lending primitives, and liquidity mechanisms that originated inside permissionless DeFi are being packaged into products that Wall Street is shipping under regulatory cover.

If DeFi builds the operational maturity to match its technical architecture, composability remains the one capability beyond the reach of regulated wrappers. If DeFi fails to build that maturity, Wall Street captures the stablecoin and tokenization layer and, with it, the argument that open composable finance lacked the operational discipline serious capital requires.

The post After the $16.5 billion in exploits, DeFi is now being forced toward the controls it once resisted appeared first on CryptoSlate.

The Morgan Stanley Bitcoin Trust completed its first month of trading without a single day of net outflows, providing an early test case for how a Wall Street bank’s brand, pricing, and distribution network can alter the competitive landscape of the digital-asset market.

The product, trading under the ticker MSBT, launched on April 8 and has since attracted about $193 million in net inflows, while managing over $240 million in assets.

Data from SoSoValue shows the fund's inaugural month included 17 days of positive inflows and five days of flat flows, with zero daily redemptions recorded.

That streak stands out amid a period of localized volatility for rival US spot Bitcoin funds. For context, the broader Bitcoin ETF category bled $422 million in combined outflows during the last two trading sessions, while MSBT successfully absorbed an additional $13 million in fresh capital.

This divergence gives Morgan Stanley a flow record that fund sponsors typically take quarters to build.

Currently, MSBT holds about 2,620 Bitcoin, ranking it 32nd among Bitcoin-holding crypto ETFs and exchanges, according to Bitcoin Treasuries data.

While it trails the largest spot funds in raw size, its resilience during market drawdowns indicates that institutional clients are treating the fund as a long-term allocation.

How Morgan Stanley's MSBT achieved a flawless first trading month

To understand why this capital is proving so sticky, market observers are looking directly at the issuer's pedigree, as Morgan Stanley’s primary advantage in a turbulent market is familiarity.

While crypto-native firms and dedicated asset managers pioneered the US spot Bitcoin ETF market, the bank offers investors a distinctly different entry point: a regulated financial institution with an established wealth-management and advisory base.

The bank leaned into this distinction at launch. Amy Oldenburg, Morgan Stanley’s head of digital asset strategy, noted that digital assets are increasingly intersecting with traditional markets. She emphasized the firm's focus on helping clients navigate this shift through financial structures they already trust.

This frames MSBT as part of Morgan Stanley’s broader client-service model rather than a standalone, speculative crypto venture.

However, brand familiarity and trust are only half the equation as the firm is also weaponizing its cost structure to capture market share.

The fund charges a 0.14% sponsor fee, which the bank positioned at launch as the lowest among all spot Bitcoin ETPs. It deliberately undercuts the Grayscale Bitcoin Mini Trust at 0.15%, Bitwise at 0.20%, and BlackRock’s industry-leading iShares Bitcoin Trust at 0.25%.

While the margin appears small in percentage terms, fees become a critical battleground as Bitcoin ETFs transition from novel launch products into standard portfolio allocation tools.

For fiduciaries, advisers, and institutions, a lower expense ratio heavily influences model-portfolio decisions when multiple products track the identical underlying asset and offer similar execution and custody standards.

This aggressive pricing strategy gives Morgan Stanley a highly effective pitch as its internal wealth-management channel expands access. The firm employs roughly 16,000 financial advisers overseeing $9.3 trillion in client assets.

Even a fractional allocation shift through this vast network could exponentially increase MSBT’s asset base over the coming quarters. Yet, this internal, advisor-led growth is just one pillar of a much wider, multi-front rollout.

Bitcoin ETFs register longest weekly inflow streak this year

Meanwhile, MSBT’s first month also benefited from a broader recovery in demand for US spot Bitcoin funds.

SoSoValue data show the US Bitcoin ETFs have drawn more than $3 billion across six straight weeks of net inflows through May 8, the longest run of weekly gains since last summer.

The streak suggests demand has steadied after Bitcoin’s uneven start to the year, even as daily flows remain sensitive to price swings and macroeconomic pressure.

Macroeconomic research platform Ecoinometrics noted that this steady improvement in ETF inflows suggests real, long-term capital is returning to the digital asset market, rather than a temporary rebound driven by short-term positioning or leverage.

For MSBT, the wider market recovery provides useful context. Morgan Stanley did not launch into a weak ETF market, but its lack of daily redemptions still sets it apart in a category where capital has continued to move unevenly across issuers.

The post Morgan Stanley’s MSBT ends first trading month with 0 outflows amid Bitcoin ETFs 6-week inflow streak appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Has Donald Trump been net positive for Bitcoin? It is an uncomfortable question for many Bitcoin supporters, including me.

My political criticisms of Trump are substantial and longstanding. They extend well beyond policy disagreements into questions about rhetoric, institutional conduct, and the broader political culture surrounding his presidency.

None of that disappears because Bitcoin performed well during parts of his administration or because parts of the industry now view him as an ally. Still, the question matters because Bitcoin increasingly sits inside state policy, capital markets, and geopolitical competition.

Once that happened, separating political preference from analytical judgment became harder. The reason the question deserves a serious answer is simple: no modern U.S. president has moved Bitcoin closer to formal government recognition than Trump.

That does not automatically make him “good for Bitcoin” in a complete sense. Price appreciation alone is insufficient. Campaign rhetoric is insufficient. Political branding is insufficient.

The real test is whether Bitcoin has become more institutionally durable, more legally defensible, and more difficult for future governments to marginalize.

On that narrower question, the evidence is stronger than many critics like me want to admit.

Trump’s Bitcoin legacy rests on whether political recognition became durable institutional protection.

So, to dig into it, Donald Trump has been positive for Bitcoin in one important and provable way: he moved it closer to the center of U.S. government policy than any prior president.

The clearest evidence comes from the federal record: an executive order endorsing lawful use of public blockchains, self-custody, mining, and validation, followed by a separate order creating a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and a U.S. Digital Asset Stockpile.

That shift changed Bitcoin's political ceiling. The U.S. government stopped treating it only as an asset to be policed, taxed, or liquidated, and began describing it as something the state could hold as a reserve asset.

For investors and institutions, that lowers the perceived risk of a federal ban or of hostile banking policy returning unchanged.

The broader record is less sweeping. Price action is mixed. Regulation has improved, while the law on Bitcoin itself remains incomplete.

Yet public trust remains weak. The blockchain has yet to show a simple adoption boom. Trump-linked crypto businesses have also created a separate reputation problem that Bitcoin supporters cannot dismiss by saying the protocol is apolitical.

The answer is therefore ledger-specific. Trump's Bitcoin record is strongest where government recognition, institutional access, and political permission are the test.

It is weaker where the test is price durability, public confidence, durable statute, or organic base-layer use.

Price and policy tell different stories

The price case depends on where the measurement begins. Bitcoin sat near $67,800 on Nov. 5, 2024, and about $80,700 on May 10, 2026.

From that election-day anchor, Bitcoin is up by roughly 20%. That supports the view that Trump's victory, policy signals, and the broader post-halving cycle coincided with a meaningful market repricing.

Other politically relevant anchors give a weaker read. Bitcoin was about $101,200 on Jan. 20, 2025, Trump's inauguration day.

It was around $90,600 on March 6, 2025, when the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve order was signed. Measured from those points, the market is lower.

CryptoSlate's Bitcoin page also places BTC just above $80,000 this weekend, roughly 37% below its Oct. 6, 2025, all-time high of $126,198.

The honest price verdict is mixed. Trump-era policy helped create a friendlier backdrop, and Bitcoin did reach a new high during that period.

Current price action still falls short of proving a durable Trump premium. It shows a rally that later gave back a large share of its gains, leaving the market positive from election day and negative from inauguration.

Policy gives Trump a stronger claim. Executive Order 14178 made support for lawful digital-asset use an explicit U.S. policy, including public blockchain networks, self-custody, mining, validating, and dollar-backed stablecoins.

Executive Order 14233 went further by establishing the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, giving Bitcoin distinct treatment from other digital assets in the federal stockpile.

That is a real status change. It turns Bitcoin from something the U.S. government mostly seized, sold, or argued about into something the government says it will retain as a reserve asset.

It also creates a political fact that future administrations would have to reverse openly if they wanted to return to a more hostile posture.

The limit is equally important. The reserve order capitalizes the reserve with forfeited government BTC and permits only budget-neutral acquisition strategies that impose no incremental taxpayer cost.

The reserve's immediate force is recognition, custody, and potential restraint from sell pressure. New sovereign demand would require acquisition records that are currently lacking.

Regulation follows the same pattern. The GENIUS Act was enacted as federal law and created a payment-stablecoin framework.

Related Reading

Trump signs GENIUS Act into law, activating America's first regulatory framework for stablecoins

In addition to sign the stablecoin framework into law, Trump vowed to approve the market structure bill next.

Jul 18, 2025 · Gino Matos

The SEC's SAB 122, the OCC's March 2025 clarification, and the Federal Reserve's withdrawal of prior crypto guidance all made the banking and custody environment less hostile.

Those are material changes. The central Bitcoin market-structure fight remains unfinished.

The CLARITY Act has passed the House and been referred to the Senate Banking Committee, but has not yet become public law.

In practical terms, Trump can claim a real shift in executive and agency posture, plus one major stablecoin statute. He cannot yet claim that Bitcoin's full federal market-structure problem has been solved by enacted law.

Public reputation did not follow the official endorsement

The weakest part of the pro-Trump case is public reputation. Gallup found in June 2025 that 14% of U.S. adults owned cryptocurrency, 60% had no interest in buying it, and 55% considered it very risky.

Pew's October 2024 baseline was similarly hostile: 63% of Americans had little or no confidence that crypto is reliable and safe, while 17% had ever invested, traded, or used it.

Those surveys are imperfect measures of Trump's second-term effect. Pew predates the term, and Gallup predates some later Trump-linked crypto controversies.

Even with that timing caveat, they show the starting terrain and first-year public response. Bitcoin and crypto have yet to become trusted mass-market institutions because the president embraced them.

The Federal Reserve's household survey adds another check. In 2024, 8% of adults used crypto for any purpose, while only 2% used it to buy something or make a payment.

That points to an asset still understood mainly as a speculative or investment product, rather than an everyday monetary tool.

This is where the reputation ledger cuts against the official-status ledger. A reserve order can change how fund managers, bank compliance teams, and public-market investors price political risk.

It has much less power over households shaped by exchange failures, scams, meme-coin cycles, and partisan suspicion. Official recognition can lower institutional fear while leaving popular distrust largely intact.

Trump's personal and family crypto ties complicate the reputation ledger further. Associated Press reporting on Trump-linked crypto business relationships and CryptoSlate's coverage of scrutiny around World Liberty Financial support a credible conflict-of-interest concern.

Related Reading

How exposed is Donald Trump in World Liberty Financial investigation into sanctioned crypto investments?

Watchdog claims spark federal scrutiny of Trump-affiliated WLFI sales.

Nov 20, 2025 · Liam 'Akiba' Wright

The sourced record supports reputation and ethics risk, plus allegation context. It falls short of proving criminal wrongdoing or showing that Bitcoin's protocol has been compromised.

For Bitcoin, that distinction is uncomfortable.

Still, public reputation is built through association as well as technical design. A president can strip Bitcoin of its official status while also making crypto look more self-serving to people who already distrust it.

Chain data leaves the adoption case unproven

On-chain evidence is the other major restraint on the net-positive claim. Blockchain.com data show daily confirmed transactions rising from 465,286 on Nov. 5, 2024, to 526,789 at the end of last week.

That is a positive endpoint comparison. Daily unique addresses fell from 548,496 to 498,493 over the same endpoints, and daily transaction fees fell from about $457,676 to about $232,729.

Those figures need careful handling. Unique addresses are a poor proxy for people, and daily endpoints can be distorted by batching, exchange flows, transaction composition, and non-monetary activity.

Still, they fail to support a clean claim that Trump's policy shift brought a wave of base-layer users into Bitcoin.

Independent on-chain analysis points in the same direction. Glassnode described a 2025 divergence between elevated BTC prices and quieter network activity, including low fee pressure and dominance by large entities.

Galaxy separately argued that fee pressure had faded after late-2024 Runes and Ordinals activity cooled.

A mempool.space check also showed a quiet point-in-time fee market, with 1 sat/vB recommended for half-hour, hour, economy, and minimum fee targets and 3 sat/vB for fastest confirmation.

That picture is mixed rather than bearish in every sense. Low fees make Bitcoin cheaper to use, and high prices can reflect institutional demand moving through ETFs, custodians, treasuries, and off-chain venues rather than base-layer transaction growth.

It does limit the adoption claim. Trump's Bitcoin effect looks stronger in official recognition and institutional channels than in everyday blockspace demand.

The sourced record supports a conditional answer. Trump has been positive for Bitcoin's ideological status and institutional access.

He turned public-blockchain support into executive policy, created a version of a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, backed a friendlier agency posture, and signed a major stablecoin law that helps crypto market infrastructure.

The rest of the ledger is weaker. Bitcoin's price is positive from election day and negative from inauguration and reserve-order anchors.

The reserve is real, but with no verified evidence here of an active government accumulation program. Market-structure law remains unfinished. Public trust is still low.

On-chain activity shows no simple grassroots boom. Trump-linked crypto conflicts create a credible reputation drag by association, even without proving criminality.

The most defensible answer is yes, in a limited sense. Trump has been net positive where government recognition, institutional access, and political permission are the main tests.

He has yet to be clearly net positive, where Bitcoin's broader legitimacy ultimately has to show up: public confidence, durable law, and organic network use.

The next developments that would change the judgment are concrete reserve accounting, any new record of BTC acquisitions, final market-structure legislation, changing public-opinion data, and sustained on-chain demand that cannot be explained primarily by speculation or institutional custody flows.

The post Has Trump’s presidency been a net positive for Bitcoin or created an unbreakable partisan divide? appeared first on CryptoSlate.

After weeks of outsized gains driven by the expansion of decentralized AI agents and Model Context Protocols (MCP), the market has entered a sharp correction phase. While major assets like $Bitcoin have shown resilience near the $80,000 mark, smaller, high-beta projects are experiencing double-digit drawdowns.

Analysis of the Top 3 Worst Performers

Based on current market data, the following three assets have faced the most significant selling pressure over the last week.

1. SKYAI (SKYAI): The -23.46% Correction

$SKYAI currently holds the title for the worst weekly performance. After hitting an all-time high of approximately $0.85 on May 6, the price plummeted to the $0.46 range.

• The Reason: This is a textbook "sell the news" event following its recent listing on major exchanges like Bitget. Additionally, the Relative Strength Index (RSI) reached an extreme overbought level of 85, signaling a technical exhaustion.
• Current Outlook: The token is currently testing psychological support at $0.45. A failure to hold this level could see a further slide toward the $0.35 liquidity zone.

2. Pi (PI): -2.37% Weekly Decline

While the loss is modest compared to the lead loser, $Pi has struggled to maintain its momentum above the $0.19 resistance zone.

• The Reason: The decline is largely attributed to a lack of concrete updates regarding the Open Mainnet transition. Speculative fatigue is setting in as the community awaits version 26 of the ecosystem upgrades.
• Technical Status: PI is currently hovering around $0.17, consolidating within a tight range. Traders are watching for a breakout above the 50-day EMA to confirm a reversal.

3. Sky (SKY): -2.36% Weekly Decline

The governance token for the rebranded MakerDAO ecosystem, $Sky, mirrors the slight bearish bias of the broader altcoin market.

• The Reason: Unlike the AI-driven volatility of its namesake (SKYAI), this asset's decline is linked to a decrease in USDS stablecoin minting activity over the past week.
• Market Context: At a price of $0.078, the token remains a core DeFi play, though it currently lacks the short-term catalysts needed to overcome the $0.085 resistance level.

Technical Factors: RSI Overextension and Whale Movements

The common thread among this week's losers—particularly the AI-themed tokens—is the extreme concentration of supply. Data from Etherscan and BNB Chain trackers suggest that a small number of "whale" wallets initiated the sell-off in SKYAI.

When an asset gains over 1,116% in a few months, liquidity becomes thin at the top. Even moderate sell orders can cause a "slippage" effect, driving the price down rapidly and triggering automated stop-loss orders from retail traders.

Michael Saylor is once again at the centre of the Bitcoin conversation after hinting that Strategy could be preparing for more BTC activity. His latest “back to work” style message caught the attention of crypto traders, especially as Bitcoin price continues to hold above the important $80,000 level.

The timing matters. Bitcoin is trading around $81,000, while the broader crypto market is showing signs of recovery. Ethereum is back above $2,300, XRP is outperforming several major coins, and Solana is also moving higher. In this environment, any signal from Strategy, the largest corporate Bitcoin holder, can quickly become a market catalyst.

Michael Saylor Bitcoin Signal: Why Traders Are Watching Strategy Again

Michael Saylor has built a strong reputation in the crypto market because of Strategy’s aggressive Bitcoin accumulation strategy. Over the past years, the company has turned into a corporate Bitcoin proxy, with investors often watching its moves as a signal of institutional conviction.

According to recent reports, Strategy holds around 818,334 BTC, making it the largest corporate Bitcoin holder in the market. The company also recently reported a major quarterly loss linked to Bitcoin’s earlier price decline, but it still remains deeply exposed to the long-term Bitcoin thesis.

This is why Saylor’s public signals matter. Whenever he posts or hints at renewed activity, traders often speculate that another Bitcoin purchase could follow. While a post alone does not confirm a new buy, the market tends to treat Saylor’s messages as important because they have often appeared around periods of Strategy Bitcoin accumulation.

Bitcoin Holds Above $80K as Market Sentiment Improves

Bitcoin price is currently holding around $81,272, according to the latest market data shown on TradingView. The coin is up slightly over the past 24 hours, while its market cap remains above $1.6 trillion.

This is important because the $80,000 zone has become a key psychological level for BTC. After the recent correction and recovery, traders are watching whether Bitcoin can hold this area as support. If BTC stays above $80K, the market could begin pricing in another move toward higher resistance levels.

The broader market also supports this narrative. Ethereum is trading around $2,348, Solana is near $94.5, XRP is around $1.47, and BNB is above $656. This shows that the recovery is not limited to Bitcoin only. However, BTC remains the main driver of crypto market direction.

Could More Strategy Bitcoin Buying Push BTC Higher?

If Strategy announces another Bitcoin purchase, it could strengthen bullish sentiment in the short term. Corporate buying does not guarantee a price rally, but it can create confidence among traders, especially during uncertain market phases.

There are three reasons why a new Strategy purchase would matter now.

First, it would show that Saylor and Strategy are still committed to the Bitcoin accumulation strategy despite recent volatility and financial pressure.

Second, it would reinforce the idea that institutional buyers are willing to buy BTC even above $80,000.

Third, it could bring fresh attention to Bitcoin at a time when the market is already trying to recover from recent weakness.

At the same time, traders should remain careful. Strategy’s Bitcoin exposure is already massive, and recent reports showed that the company faced a large quarterly loss due to Bitcoin’s earlier decline. That means every new purchase also increases the company’s dependence on BTC price performance.

Bitcoin Price Prediction: Can BTC Move Toward $85K Next?

From a market structure perspective, Bitcoin holding above $80K keeps the short-term outlook constructive. If buyers defend this level, BTC could attempt another move toward the $84,000 to $85,000 range. A clean breakout above that zone could open the door for a stronger move toward $88,000 and possibly $90,000.

However, if Bitcoin loses the $80K support again, the market could see renewed selling pressure. In that case, traders may watch the $78,000 to $76,000 area as the next important support zone.

For now, the key question is simple: can Bitcoin stay above $80,000 long enough for institutional and retail confidence to return? If Saylor’s hint turns into another confirmed Strategy purchase, BTC could receive the extra push it needs to continue its recovery.

What This Means for the Crypto Market

Michael Saylor’s latest hint comes at a sensitive moment for crypto. Bitcoin is recovering, altcoins are starting to move, and traders are looking for confirmation that the market has enough strength to continue higher.

A new Strategy Bitcoin buy would not only affect BTC sentiment. It could also support the broader crypto market by improving confidence in digital assets as a long-term investment class. Ethereum, Solana, XRP, and other major altcoins could benefit if Bitcoin continues to lead the market upward.

Still, the market remains volatile. Macro risks, regulatory uncertainty, and profit-taking can quickly change the trend. For now, Bitcoin holding above $80K is the level to watch, and Michael Saylor may have just given traders another reason to stay focused on the next move.

$BTC, $ETH, $XRP, $SOL, $BNB

Solana and Bitcoin Lead the May 2026 Bull Charge

Solana ($SOL) is currently on a critical recovery path toward the triple-digit mark. Meanwhile, the "king of crypto," Bitcoin ($BTC), has successfully converted the $80,000 resistance into a foundational support level, providing the necessary liquidity and sentiment boost for the broader altcoin market.

SOL Price Recovery: The Path to $100

As of May 10, 2026, the Solana price is trading near $93.43, showing significant resilience after a period of consolidation. Technical indicators on the daily chart reveal a compelling story for the bulls:

• Inverse Head-and-Shoulders: SOL has completed a bullish reversal pattern, suggesting that the recent "bottoming out" phase is over.
• Moving Average Crossover: The 20-day EMA is trending toward a "golden cross" with the 50-day EMA, a signal often followed by aggressive buying volume.
• Liquidity Influx: Onchain data shows that the USDC Treasury minted 250 million USDC on the Solana blockchain today, May 10, indicating massive institutional preparation for decentralized finance (DeFi) activity.

If SOL can clear the immediate resistance at $96.95, analysts predict a swift 14% move that would not only breach the $100 target but potentially extend toward $111.00 in the short term.

Bitcoin Price Holds the $80k Line: Institutional Dominance

Bitcoin's ascent above $80,000 earlier this month was not a mere "flash in the pan." Unlike previous cycles driven by retail speculation, the 2026 rally is anchored by sustained spot ETF inflows and corporate treasury adoption. Major financial institutions like Morgan Stanley and Goldman Sachs have fully integrated Bitcoin trading and custody services, creating a "floor" that was absent in earlier years.

The current stability of BTC above $80,000 is particularly impressive given the macroeconomic backdrop. Despite the transition in Federal Reserve leadership and persistent inflation concerns, the "Clarity Act" progress in the U.S. Senate has provided the regulatory certainty that institutional investors required.

"Bitcoin is no longer just a digital gold; it has become the anchor for a new era of digital credit," noted a lead analyst at Strategy Inc., which recently reported record first-quarter results for its Bitcoin-backed financial products.

As of May 10, 2026, XRP is trading around $1.4291, showing a recovery from the early-year lows. With the SEC lawsuit firmly in the rearview mirror since the 2025 settlement, the narrative has shifted from "will it survive?" to "how high can it scale?"

Is it a Good Time to Buy XRP?

Determining if it is a "good buy" depends on your horizon. Currently, XRP is consolidating just above the $1.40 psychological level. For long-term investors, the entry at these levels is attractive because the asset is backed by:

• Spot XRP ETFs: With over $1.53 billion in AUM across seven US ETFs, the "wall of money" has arrived.
• Legal Clarity: The removal of the SEC overhang allows US exchanges and banks to integrate XRP without fear.
• Institutional Adoption: Ripple’s partnerships with giants like Kyobo Life and Intesa Sanpaolo for on-chain settlement provide fundamental utility that few other tokens possess.

How High will XRP Reach in 2026?

The $2.00 mark isn't just a round number; it represents a full structural recovery and a gateway to the 2025 all-time highs of $3.66. To reach $2.00 from the current $1.42, XRP needs a 40% rally. Given the current daily volume and the steady ETF inflows (averaging $80M+ monthly), this target is technically within reach by Q3 or Q4 of 2026.

XRP Technical Analysis: Support and Resistance Areas

Looking at the 2-hour and daily charts provided, we can identify the specific "battlegrounds" for traders.

1. Immediate Support: The $1.35 Floor

The 2-hour chart highlights a primary support zone at $1.3521. This level has historically acted as a springboard for recent bounces. If XRP face a correction, bulls must defend this area to prevent a slide back to the $1.20 range.

• MA Cross: The 9-day and 21-day Moving Averages are currently hovering around $1.40 - $1.42, acting as dynamic support in the short term.

2. The $1.45 "Breakout" Resistance

$XRP is currently bumping its head against a yellow resistance line at $1.4500. As seen in the daily chart, a daily candle close above this level would signal a "cup-and-handle" breakout.

• RSI Check: The RSI (14) is sitting at 60.73. This indicates bullish momentum but leaves enough "overbought" room for a push higher toward the next major hurdle.

3. Critical Resistance: $1.60 and $1.85

• $1.60: This is the mid-range target. Passing this would likely trigger FOMO (Fear Of Missing Out) among retail traders.
• $1.85 - $1.88: This area aligns with the 200-day Moving Average. This is the ultimate "bull vs. bear" line. Reclaiming the 200-MA would practically guarantee a run to $2.00 and beyond.

XRP Price Levels in 2026

Ethereum Price Shows Early Comeback Signals

Ethereum price could be preparing for a stronger comeback as one important market signal starts to shift: Bitcoin dominance is losing momentum. After a 5-week uptrend, Bitcoin dominance has started to break down, while the daily MACD has flipped bearish.

This matters because when Bitcoin dominance weakens, capital often starts rotating into Ethereum and other altcoins. For $ETH, this could be an early bullish signal, especially after weeks of pressure and slow recovery attempts.

Bitcoin Dominance Breakdown Could Support Ethereum Price

The breakdown in $Bitcoin dominance suggests that traders may slowly be shifting attention away from $BTC and back into altcoins. Historically, when Bitcoin dominance loses strength, Ethereum is often one of the first major assets to benefit.

This does not confirm an immediate rally, but it does create a more supportive setup for ETH. If Bitcoin dominance continues to fall, Ethereum price could gain stronger momentum as liquidity starts moving into the broader altcoin market.

Ethereum Price Prediction: Is $3K Back in Sight?

The current Ethereum price prediction is turning more optimistic as market structure improves. A move toward $3K is possible if ETH holds key support levels, reclaims important resistance zones, and benefits from renewed altcoin demand.

For now, $3K is not guaranteed, but it is becoming a more realistic upside target. If ETH buyers return with stronger volume, $Ethereum price could attempt a bigger recovery in the coming sessions.

Altcoin Momentum Makes ETH One to Watch

This setup is also bullish for altcoins in general. A weaker Bitcoin dominance trend usually means traders are becoming more open to risk, which can support Ethereum, Solana, XRP, and other major altcoins.

Ethereum remains the key asset to watch because it often leads altcoin momentum. If ETH starts moving strongly, the broader altcoin market could follow.

Crypto companies are upgrading wallets to counter the coming quantum computing threat, but gaps remain.

Researchers say multiplayer games may reveal AI behavior that static tests miss.

Two men face money laundering and drug charges following the seizure of $4.2 million in Bitcoin from alleged darknet marketplace dealings.

U.K. police charged British sprinter CJ Ujah in an alleged crypto fraud scheme involving wallet seed phrase theft and impersonation calls.

Senators had hoped the issue, which has plagued crypto legislation for months, had been put to bed with a proposed compromise last week.

Bitcoin’s next major move may depend less on crypto sentiment and more on upcoming U.S. inflation data.

XRP fund inflows skyrocketed 12-fold as US and German investors front-run key crypto policy act approval by Senate.

The renowned author and financist believes the global economy crash is coming and crypto is not the best choice for safeguarding your assets.

Ripple's David Schwartz pitches names like Umbra to Helius's Mert Mumtaz, signaling an unexpected cross-chain alliance to solve blockchain's privacy deficit.

South Korea’s once-thriving cryptocurrency market is facing an existential crisis amid a perfect storm of plunging trading volumes.

Key Takeaways

• Delivery Hero shares climbed more than 7% following Prosus’s announcement of a 5% stake sale to Aspex Management
• The transaction is valued at €22 per share — representing approximately a 10% premium over Friday’s closing price and 22% above the 30-day volume-weighted average
• Prosus stands to generate around €335 million (approximately $395 million) in proceeds
• The divestment fulfills part of European Commission antitrust obligations linked to Prosus’s Just Eat Takeaway acquisition
• Post-transaction, Aspex will hold roughly 14% while Prosus retains approximately 17% — still exceeding the mandated regulatory limit

Shares of Delivery Hero (DHER) jumped over 7% on Monday following Prosus’s disclosure that it would divest a 5% ownership position in the Berlin-based food delivery platform to Hong Kong investment firm Aspex Management.

Delivery Hero SE, DHER.DE

The transaction values shares at €22 each. This pricing reflects approximately a 10% premium compared to Delivery Hero’s Friday market close, and marks a 22% premium relative to the company’s 30-day volume-weighted average price.

Prosus anticipates collecting gross proceeds totaling approximately €335 million, equivalent to roughly $395 million.

Aspex currently ranks as Delivery Hero’s second-largest institutional investor. The firm has been actively advocating for the company’s chief executive to pursue additional asset divestments or consider resignation.

Once finalized, this transaction will elevate Aspex’s ownership position to approximately 14% of Delivery Hero.

Meanwhile, Prosus’s stake will decline to roughly 17% — a figure that remains significantly above the regulatory ceiling it must achieve.

European Commission Mandates Behind Divestment Strategy

The stake sale stems directly from regulatory stipulations imposed by the European Commission. Last August, the EC granted approval for Prosus’s acquisition of Just Eat Takeaway, but attached a critical condition: Prosus must reduce its Delivery Hero ownership below 10% by late summer this year.

When the Just Eat Takeaway deal closed, Prosus controlled approximately 27% of Delivery Hero. The EU’s requirement to drop below 10% means substantial additional selling remains necessary.

This marks the second significant stake reduction in recent months.

Last month, Prosus divested a 4.5% position in Delivery Hero to Uber Technologies for €270 million. The current Aspex transaction carries a comparable per-share valuation.

Further Disposals Expected Before Deadline

Combined, the Uber and Aspex transactions have trimmed Prosus’s ownership from approximately 27% down to roughly 17%.

To satisfy the European Commission’s sub-10% mandate ahead of the late summer compliance deadline, Prosus must dispose of at least an additional 7% stake in Delivery Hero.

This indicates additional share sales are virtually certain, although Prosus has not publicly announced any subsequent transactions to date.

Aspex’s expanding stake — now approaching 14% — positions it as a dominant voice among Delivery Hero’s shareholder community.

The investment firm’s ongoing pressure on Delivery Hero’s chief executive regarding asset sales and leadership changes introduces additional complexity to the company’s strategic direction.

Prosus operates as an Amsterdam-listed technology investment company with an extensive portfolio spanning global technology enterprises.

Delivery Hero, based in Berlin, runs food delivery operations across numerous international markets.

The agreed €22 share price and resulting €335 million in proceeds for Prosus represent the core financial parameters of Monday’s announced deal.

The post Delivery Hero (DHER) Stock Surges 7% Following Prosus-Aspex Stake Deal appeared first on Blockonomi.

Key Takeaways

• Micron’s premarket session showed a 1.7% increase, building on a remarkable 75% surge over the previous month
• South Korean trading saw SK Hynix soar 12% while Samsung advanced 6.3% during Monday’s session
• Samsung’s labor unions are preparing for a potential 18-day work stoppage scheduled between May 21 and June 7 concerning compensation disputes
• Industry analysts suggest the strike could impact approximately 3% of worldwide memory chip manufacturing capacity
• Financial projections from JP Morgan indicate Samsung could lose more than 40 trillion won in annual operating earnings

Shares of Micron Technology climbed during Monday’s premarket session as market participants monitored an escalating labor conflict at Samsung Electronics that threatens to constrain worldwide memory chip availability.

Micron’s stock advanced 1.7% ahead of the market open. This gain continues an impressive rally that has propelled the semiconductor manufacturer’s shares upward by 75% over the past thirty days, elevating its total market capitalization beyond the $800 billion threshold.

Micron Technology, Inc., MU

Meanwhile, SK Hynix experienced substantial gains as well, posting a 12% increase during local South Korean market hours. Samsung’s own shares climbed 6.3%.

The trio of semiconductor manufacturers has benefited from robust appetite for memory components utilized in artificial intelligence hardware. This sustained demand has driven pricing power throughout the industry.

The pressing issue capturing market attention involves a scheduled work stoppage at Samsung. The electronics giant’s labor organizations are preparing for an 18-day strike action spanning May 21 through June 7 should ongoing discussions with corporate leadership fail to produce an agreement.

Samsung executives and union negotiators reconvened Monday under the supervision of the National Labor Relations Commission. As of Monday afternoon, the parties had not achieved a breakthrough.

These discussions represent post-mediation negotiations, which constitute the final formal procedural phase before strike action becomes probable. Any settlement reached during this stage holds equivalent legal authority to a comprehensive collective bargaining contract.

The central issue dividing the parties centers on Samsung’s compensation framework. Labor representatives are demanding Samsung eliminate its existing bonus limitation and allocate 15% of operating earnings toward a performance-based compensation fund. According to profit projections, certain semiconductor division employees could potentially receive approximately 600 million won under this arrangement.

Corporate leadership has presented an alternative special compensation offer but maintains its opposition to permanently eliminating the bonus ceiling, citing concerns about the long-term financial sustainability of such a structure.

Potential Strike Impact on Semiconductor Supply Chain

Should the work stoppage proceed as planned, the union coalition representing roughly 73,000 members anticipates participation from between 30,000 and 40,000 workers. This represents a significantly larger mobilization compared to the 2024 strike action, which drew only approximately 15% participation from a membership base of around 32,000.

Jefferies research suggests the strike could impact roughly 3% of worldwide memory semiconductor manufacturing output. JP Morgan’s analysis projects Samsung could experience an operating profit reduction exceeding 40 trillion won over the full year.

Any reduction in Samsung’s production capacity would presumably create opportunities for Micron and SK Hynix, which market comparable products to overlapping customer bases.

Robust Memory Semiconductor Market Conditions Continue

JP Morgan semiconductor analyst Mixo Das indicated in recent research commentary that the supply-demand imbalance for memory chips is projected to expand further through 2027. Corporate customers are already advancing their purchase orders forward in response to apprehension about future availability constraints.

Das projected that 2027 and 2028 could witness sustained expansion in both pricing and volume metrics across the sector.

South Korea’s Labor Minister Kim Young-hoon stated Monday that both negotiating parties had committed to continuing dialogue, characterizing this development as constructive progress while recognizing that reaching a final agreement would present considerable challenges.

The post Micron (MU) and SK Hynix Rally as Samsung Strike Looms Over Memory Chip Industry appeared first on Blockonomi.

Key Takeaways

• Shares of Nintendo tumbled 8.4% in Tokyo trading, hitting 7,020 yen—the lowest point since August 2024
• The Switch 2 console price increased up to 20% across major markets due to escalating memory chip costs fueled by AI industry demand
• The company projects 16.5 million Switch 2 sales for the current fiscal year, a decline from the 19.86 million units sold since launch
• Operating profit guidance of 370 billion yen fell significantly short of analyst expectations at 480 billion yen
• Industry experts suggest Nintendo’s forecast may be deliberately conservative, with Morningstar predicting 19 million unit sales

Nintendo shares suffered a significant decline Monday following the release of annual earnings results and forward guidance that disappointed the investment community.

Tokyo trading saw the stock drop 8.4% to close at 7,020 yen—marking the lowest valuation since August of last year. Year-to-date, the stock has declined 34% in 2026.

Nintendo Co., Ltd., 0R1E.L

Operating profit for the fiscal year concluding March 31 climbed approximately 28% to reach 360 billion yen, supported by net sales that nearly doubled. However, these figures fell short of market projections.

The company’s projections for fiscal 2027 sparked additional investor unease. Nintendo anticipates operating profit at 370 billion yen, considerably below the analyst consensus of 480 billion yen. Revenue is projected to decline 11.4% to 2.05 trillion yen.

Central to investor concerns is the Switch 2 console. The gaming giant expects to move 16.5 million units during the current fiscal period—a notable decrease from the 19.86 million units shipped since the June 2025 launch.

Rising Switch 2 Costs Dampen Sales Expectations

Last Friday, Nintendo revealed price adjustments for the Switch 2 across major territories including the United States, Japan, and Europe. American consumers face a $50 increase, while Japanese buyers will pay 10,000 yen more. These adjustments represent increases ranging from 7% to 20% depending on the market.

The driving force: escalating memory chip costs propelled by AI infrastructure investment. Rising component expenses are compressing hardware margins and are anticipated to weaken consumer appetite.

“The primary driver is obviously the price increase that Nintendo believes will result in reduced demand,” explained Serkan Toto, CEO of Kantan Games.

Software projections also raised red flags. Nintendo forecasts combined Switch and Switch 2 software sales of 165 million units for fiscal 2027—representing an approximately 11% year-over-year contraction. This outlook has sparked questions regarding the company’s confidence in its upcoming game releases.

Market participants are eagerly awaiting news of a “Nintendo Direct” presentation to showcase upcoming titles, especially those featuring beloved franchises like Mario and Zelda.

Market Experts Question Conservative Projections

Not all analysts share the pessimistic outlook. Nintendo has an established pattern of providing cautious forecasts, and several industry observers believe this situation follows that trend.

Kazunori Ito, director at Morningstar, characterized the guidance as “overly conservative.” He anticipates Switch 2 sales will hit 19 million units this fiscal year, surpassing Nintendo’s official projection. Ito also predicts software sales of 205 million units, substantially higher than the company’s 165 million estimate.

“We consider Nintendo’s stock as undervalued,” Ito stated, noting that the market is “underestimating the long-term profit potential from over 100 million Switch users transitioning to the new platform.”

Toto shared a similar perspective: “I believe that Nintendo is, as typical, underestimating because consumers will adjust to the new console price over time.”

On a positive note, Nintendo highlighted a robust third-party software catalog scheduled for upcoming months. Initial Switch 2 releases including “Mario Kart World” and “Pokémon Pokopia” have delivered strong results—the latter moved over 4 million copies within its first five weeks.

Toto suggested that a new Nintendo Direct event outlining the 2026 game lineup could arrive as early as next month.

The post Nintendo (NTDOY) Stock Plunges 8.4% on Switch 2 Pricing and Disappointing Forecast appeared first on Blockonomi.

Key Takeaways

• Over 80% of the S&P 500’s 2026 gains stem from AI-related stocks; without them, the index shows only 2% growth
• Jefferies analysts attribute the surge to genuine earnings expansion rather than overvalued multiples, labeling AI “the cheapest sector to own” on a PEG ratio basis
• Forward earnings projections for AI companies have climbed over 30% since mid-2025, with expected EPS growth of 38.5% annually through 2027
• Samsung Electronics achieved $1 trillion market capitalization, entering the elite group alongside Nvidia, TSMC, and Broadcom in AI infrastructure
• First quarter 2026 saw 86% of S&P 500 firms exceed earnings forecasts — the strongest performance since the pandemic — led by AI and commodity sectors

Artificial intelligence companies are shouldering the bulk of stock market gains throughout 2026. Research from Jefferies reveals these stocks contribute over 80% of the S&P 500’s year-to-date performance. Remove AI from the calculation, and the benchmark index registers merely 2% growth.

Such market concentration raises concerns among some market participants. However, Jefferies presents compelling evidence supporting the rally’s foundation.

The firm’s quantitative analysts examined the underlying factors propelling these gains. Their conclusion: legitimate earnings expansion, not valuation inflation, fuels the advance. This differentiation proves critical for investors assessing bubble risk.

The AI basket’s forward earnings projections for 2026 have surged more than 30% since the middle of last year. Projections show compound annual earnings expansion of 38.5% for AI-focused companies spanning 2026 through 2027. Meanwhile, non-AI sectors project growth of merely 11.9%.

Despite robust growth expectations, AI stocks trade around 25 times forward earnings. This multiple sits beneath the sector’s one standard deviation threshold. The price-to-earnings-growth metric stands at just 0.6 times.

“AI is the cheapest sector to own in the U.S.,” Jefferies strategists stated in their research report.

Performance Varies Across AI Subsectors

The AI sector shows considerable performance dispersion. AI server manufacturers, optical component suppliers, and memory producers have delivered superior returns this year. Cloud hyperscalers and chip architecture firms have underperformed.

From a valuation perspective, memory and compute infrastructure appear most compelling on a PEG basis. Semiconductor equipment makers and chip designers carry higher relative valuations.

First quarter 2026 earnings results provided additional insight. Approximately 86% of S&P 500 constituents surpassed earnings expectations — the highest rate since COVID-19, rising from 75% in the prior quarter. Revenue beats reached 82%.

The caveat: most positive surprises failed to trigger stock outperformance. Shares typically didn’t rally after beating estimates, except in AI and select other industries. Earnings misses faced severe punishment, suggesting elevated investor expectations broadly.

Jefferies analyzed roughly 330 earnings conference calls through the AlphaSense platform. Management commentary reflected 95% optimism. Analyst sentiment also strengthened, with 58% of calls exhibiting positive tone, compared to 48% during Q4 2025.

One recurring concern emerged from those discussions: the U.S.-Iran military conflict. Approximately 44% of companies referenced it as a headwind, citing supply chain complications and dampened consumer confidence.

Samsung Reaches $1 Trillion Milestone

The AI-driven rally extends beyond software developers and chip designers. Hardware manufacturers are experiencing substantial gains too. Samsung Electronics recently surpassed $1 trillion in market capitalization, entering this exclusive tier.

Samsung now stands alongside Nvidia, TSMC, and Broadcom — enterprises producing the processors, memory modules, and infrastructure supporting AI deployment. Samsung’s achievement stems from its high-bandwidth memory production, essential for AI computing systems.

The trillion-dollar club previously centered on consumer technology. Apple, Amazon, Microsoft, Alphabet, Meta, and Tesla reached this threshold through smartphones, cloud computing, e-commerce, and software platforms.

The current expansion wave emphasizes hardware infrastructure. Nvidia crossed $1 trillion in May 2023. TSMC followed throughout 2024. Broadcom joined later that year. Samsung now adds memory technology to this roster.

Berkshire Hathaway and Walmart have also achieved trillion-dollar valuations, alongside Eli Lilly driven by pharmaceutical demand and energy majors Saudi Aramco and PetroChina. Yet the most dynamic cluster currently centers on AI infrastructure.

Earnings revisions across the S&P 500 have increased 6% during the past three months. Excluding AI and commodity sectors, that figure contracts to merely 0.3%.

The post Jefferies Backs AI Stock Rally as Earnings Growth Fuels 80% of S&P 500 Gains appeared first on Blockonomi.

A low entry price can disappear in a single presale update, and that is exactly why the top crypto presale to join this month matters right now. DOGEBALL, Crypto All Stars, Pepe Unchained, Flockerz, Solaxy, and Bitcoin Hyper are all getting attention, but DOGEBALL is creating the strongest urgency because its Stage 2 price is still live at $0.0004, community demand has pushed the presale extension, and the next price jump is already in sight. Buyers who move early usually get the biggest upside, and this month that gap looks especially important.

This blog covers all 6 projects, but the spotlight is on DOGEBALL because it combines presale traction, real utility, and a closing low-price window. With 280K+ raised, 960+ participants, a 4bn token burn on May 11, 2026, and a timed presale model that can move faster if allocations sell out, DOGEBALL has the kind of setup that gets harder to ignore as momentum builds.

DOGEBALL Presale is live at $0.0004, but Stage 2 ends today at 21:00 UTC, so this top crypto presale to join this month could cost more very soon.

DOGEBALL Presale Extension And Stage 2 Deadline Make It The Top Crypto Presale To Join This Month

DOGEBALL is built on DOGECHAIN, a custom Ethereum Layer 2 that connects gaming and payments inside one ecosystem. Through DOGEPAY, users can send crypto while receivers get fiat directly into a bank account, with support for 30+ currencies, near-instant transfers, zero FX fees, and no middlemen such as banks, PayPal, or Wise. That gives DOGEBALL a practical use case that is easy to understand and easy to sell.

For buyers, the value goes further because $DOGEBALL is used for transaction fees across the ecosystem, staking rewards are available, and the gaming side includes a play-to-earn setup with up to a $1M prize pool and rewards up to $500K. When investors compare projects in the Top Crypto Presale To Join This Month category, DOGEBALL stands out because it links demand to payments, gaming, staking, and on-chain utility instead of relying on hype alone.

Stage 2 Ends Today At 21:00 UTC And The $0.0004 Entry Price Will Not Last

DOGEBALL is currently priced at $0.0004, while the expected launch price is $0.015. That means the increase per token is $0.0146. Using the standard formula, [(0.015 – 0.0004) ÷ 0.0004] x 100, the potential ROI comes to 3,650%. A $1,000 buy at today’s price secures 2,500,000 $DOGEBALL, and at $0.015 those tokens would be worth $37,500, creating a possible profit of $36,500 if the launch target is reached.

The pressure to act is even stronger because this presale was extended after strong community demand and rapid growth, making this a second chance at the lower price. Stage 2 ends today at 21:00 UTC, Stage 3 moves to $0.0005, and buyers using the bonus code can secure extra DOGEBALL before the price changes again. The longer someone waits, the fewer tokens they get for the same money and the smaller their upside becomes.

Crypto All Stars Uses MemeVault Staking To Attract Early Buyers

Crypto All Stars is gaining attention because it gives meme coin holders a reason to stay engaged through its MemeVault staking model. The project is built around the idea of staking supported meme coins to earn $STARS, which gives presale participants a clearer incentive than simply waiting for a listing and hoping for momentum. That makes it appealing to buyers who want utility during the presale itself.

Its main strength is simplicity. The staking-focused pitch is easy to follow and easy to market, especially for users already active in meme coin communities. Still, compared with DOGEBALL, it does not currently offer the same mix of payment utility, gaming rewards, and urgent stage-based pricing that can push faster buying decisions.

Pepe Unchained Builds Around Layer 2 Speed And Ecosystem Growth

Pepe Unchained continues to draw interest by combining meme branding with a Layer 2 angle focused on lower fees and faster transactions. That gives the project a stronger story than a standard meme token because it adds a technical direction that can support future ecosystem growth rather than relying only on short-term speculation.

For presale buyers, that Layer 2 identity is the key attraction. It gives the token a broader narrative and may help it stand out in a crowded market. Even so, DOGEBALL currently looks more time-sensitive because its lower entry price is tied to a same-day Stage 2 deadline, giving buyers a more immediate reason to act.

Flockerz Pushes Vote-To-Earn Rewards And Community Participation

Flockerz has built its pitch around Vote-To-Earn, giving holders a reason to participate in governance while earning during the presale phase. That can be attractive for buyers who want more than passive holding and prefer projects where community action plays a visible role in the token story.

This approach works well for engagement, but the investment case remains more community-led than utility-led. DOGEBALL currently has the stronger conversion setup because its token is tied to payments, gaming, staking, and a real presale price event happening today, which makes the buying decision feel more urgent and more measurable.

Solaxy Targets Solana Scaling Demand With A Strong Infrastructure Narrative

Solaxy is getting noticed because it is pitching itself around Solana scaling, a theme that often attracts buyers looking for infrastructure-based upside. Projects connected to lower fees and better network performance can gain attention quickly when the market is looking for technical narratives instead of pure meme momentum.

That gives Solaxy a solid angle, especially for buyers who like ecosystem plays. Still, DOGEBALL has the sharper near-term opportunity because the current $0.0004 price is about to move, supply pressure is tightening through token burns, and the project is pairing urgency with clear use cases instead of relying mainly on infrastructure positioning.

Bitcoin Hyper Taps Into Bitcoin Utility Expansion And Fast Transaction Appeal

Bitcoin Hyper stands out because it is trying to build on one of crypto’s biggest narratives, expanding what Bitcoin can do through faster and broader functionality. That immediately gives it visibility because Bitcoin-linked projects often attract attention from both speculators and long-term believers when the story is strong enough.

The theme is powerful, but timing matters just as much as narrative. DOGEBALL currently has the more aggressive entry setup because buyers can still get in before the next stage price increase, and that kind of deadline can matter far more in a presale than a broad long-term concept without an immediate pricing event.

DOGEBALL Presale Momentum, Token Burn, And Price Deadline Put It Ahead Of The Pack

All 6 projects above have reasons to be watched, but DOGEBALL has the clearest mix of urgency and measurable upside. The Top Crypto Presale To Join This Month fits DOGEBALL especially well because the project already has 280K+ raised, 960+ participants, a 4bn token burn scheduled for May 11, 2026, and a timed presale structure where unsold stage tokens are burned.

The DOGEBALL presale is still open at $0.0004, but only until Stage 2 ends today at 21:00 UTC. That means buyers who move now can secure more tokens, improve their upside to the expected $0.015 launch level, and position themselves before higher pricing cuts into potential gains. For investors comparing all 6 names, DOGEBALL looks like the one that feels most expensive to miss.

Find Out More Information Here

Website: https://dogeballtoken.com/

X: https://x.com/dogeballtoken

Telegram Chat: https://t.me/dogeballtoken

FAQs For Top Crypto Presale To Join This Month

Which Presale Coin Is Best For DOGEBALL Buyers?

DOGEBALL looks strong because it combines gaming, payments, staking, and a live low-price entry. DOGEBALL also has a Stage 2 deadline today, which gives buyers a stronger reason to act now.

How To Find Legit Crypto Presales?

Look for audits, utility, token demand, roadmap clarity, and visible traction. DOGEBALL connects all 5, with a 100% audit score, 280K+ raised, 960+ participants, and clear payment and gaming use cases.

Which Coin Will Reach $1?

No presale can promise $1, but buyers usually watch utility, traction, and entry price. DOGEBALL stands out because its current price is low, its use case is broad, and its presale momentum is already visible.

The post 6 Top Crypto Presales To Join This Month Before Stage Prices Rise And Early Entry Closes appeared first on Blockonomi.

After a relatively quiet weekend, bitcoin went through a highly volatile evening session on Sunday and Monday morning, before it was stopped at $82,400 after Trump’s comments on Iran’s latest proposal.

Many altcoins tried to break out yesterday, including XRP and ADA, but the overall bearish sentiment prevailed.

BTC Stopped at Over $82K

Last week was quite positive for the primary cryptocurrency. It began with a price surge to $80,800 on Monday, a level not seen in three months, before a sudden but brief crash drove it south by over two grand. However, BTC quickly rebounded and reclaimed the $80,000 level and even rocketed to $82,800 on Wednesday to mark a new local peak.

After gaining $8,000 in a week, though, bitcoin was due for a correction, which took place on Thursday and especially on Friday when it dipped to $79,100. Nevertheless, the bulls persevered and initiated a minor leg up that helped BTC reclaim the $80,000 level on Saturday.

The following 36 hours were calmer, but more volatility ensued on Sunday evening and Monday morning. BTC first jumped to $81,500, before it dived to $80,250, and then rocketed to $82,500. However, then dumped back down below $81,000 after US President Donald Trump rejected Iran’s latest proposal, calling it “totally unacceptable.”

BTC’s market cap remains around $1.620 trillion on CG, while its dominance over the alts is still above 58%.

Alts Stopped

XRP became the top performer yesterday evening at one point, gaining over 5% and exceeding $1.50 for the first time in over three weeks. As analysts were predicting a major breakout, though, the familiar rejection came, and the asset lost its momentum, dropping back down to $1.45. ADA faced a similar price trajectory and now sits at essentially the same level as yesterday.

ETH, BNB, SOL, TRX, and DOGE are also in the green on a daily scale, but are all lower than their respective peaks from yesterday evening. SUI has rocketed the most now, gaining 12% daily, while ZEC has plunged by over 6%. HYPE and UNI are also in the red.

The total crypto market cap is down to $2.780 trillion on CG after it topped $2.830 trillion yesterday evening.

The post BTC, XRP, ADA Stopped by Trump’s Latest Response to Iran Proposal: Market Watch appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Ripple’s cross-border token went on an impressive run Sunday evening, outperforming all other larger-cap alts and bitcoin.

However, it faced the same fate as it did during its previous several breakout attempts as the bears stepped up. Nevertheless, analysts remain optimistic about its future price performance despite the most recent rejection.

XRP Tried and Failed (Again)

The asset had fallen to $1.38 in the hours leading up to the major breakout attempt, before it jumped to $1.42 and then to over $1.50. This substantial increase came amid many analysts predicting such a move from XRP, given its prolonged consolidation.

However, its momentum quickly faded, nowhere near the targets set by those analysts of up to $1.80. The most likely reason for this failed attempt was the developments on the US-Iran front, which have continuously impacted the entire crypto market.

Iran had sent another peace proposal to the US, which the latter’s President, Donald Trump, deemed “totally unacceptable.” XRP’s price rejection came shortly after Trump’s response went viral, and it was mimicked by many other digital assets. BTC, for example, had risen to $82,300 before it dropped almost immediately to under $81,000.

However, XRP’s situation is rather different as its more macro momentum is mostly downhill. It closed six consecutive months in the red, five of which were by double-digit losses, before it finally broke that streak in April with a minor increase. In addition, all of its breakout attempts in 2026 have been halted, and have marked lower highs since then.

Analysts Still Positive

Despite facing yet another rejection in its tracks, many analysts still believe XRP is on the right path to a more profound breakout. CW noted that the upward momentum in the futures market is “being maintained,” while the downward pressure is “small.” As such, they predicted that “the rise will resume” over time.

Although $XRP has fallen after a rise, the upward momentum in the futures market is being maintained.

Downward pressure during the decline is small.

Over time, the rise will resume. pic.twitter.com/AwJBofQTMj

— CW (@CW8900) May 11, 2026

CRYPTOWZRD said XRP had closed “a bit bullish” but expects validation in the next 12-24 hours. XRP has to hold above $1.445, which is currently being tested, to offer more upside potential.

ERGAG CRYPTO, who focuses mostly on the long-term charts, also noted that the asset’s bull structure is still intact as it remains above the 2-Month 21 EMA. They explained that the actual bull confirmation would come only after XRP reclaims $2.40-$3.36, which would open the door for their massive prediction of up to $13.

The post Why Was Ripple (XRP) Rejected at $1.50 Again? appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Crypto analyst Michaël van de Poppe posted on X on May 11 that altcoins are beginning to break out to the upside, running one to three weeks behind Bitcoin’s move.

If that lag holds, Van de Poppe says altcoins could deliver gains of 100-300%, depending on momentum and available liquidity.

Altcoins Are Starting to Move

Van de Poppe has been one of the more closely followed voices in crypto through this cycle, and his reasoning is fairly straightforward: Bitcoin moves first, altcoins tend to follow with a delay, and when they do move, the percentage gains are usually far larger.

“If Bitcoin went up 40% from the lows, altcoins can do 100-300% depending on the momentum and the amount of liquidity in the books. We’re in that stage,” he wrote.

That framing got some support from trader Mark Chadwick, who posted that altcoins are “flashing the strongest signals we’ve seen in years.” He pointed to a breakout of a major falling wedge pattern and described last week’s candles as the biggest breakout moves in a long time.

“This is exactly how major alt runs begin,” he wrote, adding that the setup looks even stronger when you factor in the broader backdrop: expanding liquidity, the Russell 2000 hitting all-time highs, and the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 edging closer to passage.

That last point matters because the Senate Banking Committee is scheduled to meet on May 14 to consider the crypto market structure bill, putting it back on the calendar after previous postponements.

The White House is also pushing Congress for faster action, and if institutional money starts flowing into crypto under a clearer regulatory framework, Chadwick argued, “this market could move on an entirely different scale.”

Van de Poppe also updated everyone about his own altcoin portfolio. He has put in a total of $160,000 in the portfolio, which is currently worth about $78,000, down by about 50% from the time he bought in but still up from an earlier drop of 75%.

He plans to add another $40,000 in four monthly tranches through September 1, then stop. The reason for that is that he believes the market has likely bottomed and wants to focus on compounding returns rather than putting in more fresh capital.

The Broader Market Is Starting to Cooperate

Van de Poppe’s comments have coincided with a broader improvement in crypto markets.

While Bitcoin was trading at around $81,000 at the time of writing, having been relatively quiet in the last 24 hours and gaining just 0.1%, per CoinGecko, the altcoin picture was more interesting, with several mid-cap tokens posting large gains during the weekend.

As CryptoPotato reported, ONDO and JUP rose more than 20% in a single day, with NEAR, ARB, and ICP also moving higher.

On the other hand, Ethereum is holding near $2,300, even though it dropped about 2.4% in the last 24 hours, while XRP was trading at around $1.45 after earlier rising to a three-week high of $1.50. Meanwhile, their top 10 counterpart, Solana, climbed 11% on the week to around $95.

The post Analyst Predicts Massive Altcoin Rally After Bitcoin Run appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Well-known and award-winning international centralized crypto exchange Toobit has announced that it managed to achieve an AAA security rating from CER.live

This is the industry’s premier cybersecurity ranking and certification platform. The milestone makes Toobit one of the top 10 most secure crypto exchanges globally (according to the certifiers). The move follows rigorous audits of its infrastructure and protocols installed to enhance user protection.

What the Data Shows

CER.live data shows that Toobit was able to score a perfect 100/1000 in Server Security, User Security, Penetration Testing, and Bug Bounty management.

Combined with ISO 27001 certification and funds insurance, these metrics confirm a resilient, robust security environment for international traders.

It’s important to understand that the CER.live methodology is globally recognized as one of the most comprehensive in the entire digital asset industry.

The Evaluation Process

The ranking process tends to evaluate more than 18 indicators across server security, user security, penetration testing, as well as bug bounty programs. In order to receive an AAA rating, which is the highest possible tier, the exchange has to pass rigorous technical scans. It also has to demonstrate operational transparency through recurring external audits as well as bug bounty programs.

This security milestone follows Toobit’s recent Proof of Reserves (PoR) report, independently verified by Hacken. The Hacken audit confirmed that Toobit maintains a collateral ratio of over 100% across all in-scope digital assets, including BTC, ETH, USDT, and USDC.

The need for such standards is further underscored by the current landscape of the crypto industry. The value of hacked or stolen money in the ecosystem increased by 31% year-over-year in early 2026. Moreover, threats driven by the advance of AI such as automated smart contract probing, as well as deepfake phishing, have become some of the fastest-growing cyber risks for trading platforms.

In a world where illicit actors are becoming more targeted, third-party verification from reputable auditors is absolutely essential for establishing platform integrity.

The post Toobit Achieves AAA Security Rating from CER.live, Ranking Among Top 10 Global Exchanges appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Crypto markets have gained marginally over the weekend, hitting a weekly high on Monday morning trading in Asia. But this week’s inflation reports could put a dampener on things.

Meanwhile, US stock market futures fell on Monday as Iran War peace talks stalled and President Trump said he does not like Iran’s response to the peace proposal. At the same time, oil prices spiked by around 4% back to $100 a barrel.

Iran has also rejected dismantling its nuclear facilities in its response to the US peace proposal, as the stalemate continues. This week’s focus will also center on Trump’s visit to China and his expected summit with Chinese leader Xi Jinping.

Economic Events May 11 to 15

April’s consumer price CPI inflation data will be released on Tuesday. The report will assess the impact of higher energy costs and the chances of the Federal Reserve cutting interest rates in the coming months.

The PPI inflation report follows on Wednesday, offering more insight into inflationary pressures, which are expected to have increased due to the war in the Middle East.

Other data this week includes April’s existing home sales figures and retail sales data for April on Thursday, which will give signs of whether consumers are confident enough to spend despite higher energy prices. Weekly jobless claims are also due Thursday, and industrial production data on Friday.

Key Events This Week:

1. April Existing Home Sales data – Monday

2. April CPI Inflation data – Tuesday

3. April PPI Inflation data – Wednesday

4. OPEC Monthly Report – Wednesday

5. April Retail Sales data – Thursday

6. April Industrial Production data – Friday

More crucial…

— The Kobeissi Letter (@KobeissiLetter) May 10, 2026

“For incoming Fed Chair Kevin Warsh, these [jobs] numbers are likely to kill off any prospect of a near-term rate cut,” said Nick Rees, head of macro research at Monex, according to the WSJ.

“A resilient labor market raises the risk that rising energy costs will translate into a broader-based increase in price growth,” he added.

Crypto Market Outlook

Crypto markets gained almost 1% over the past 24 hours to reach $2.8 trillion on Monday, their highest level since late January.

Bitcoin was leading the charge, topping $82,300 in late Sunday trading before falling back to the $81,000 level on Monday morning. The asset has gained steadily, adding 11% over the past month.

Ether prices reached $2,380 but found resistance there, falling back slightly during Asian trading. The altcoins were largely mixed with slightly better gains from XRP, Solana, Cardano, and Sui, which surged almost 20% following a prediction market push.

The post 4 Things That Could Move Crypto Markets This Week appeared first on CryptoPotato.