The crypto leaderboard has been anything but sleepy in 2026, with venice token (VVV) up a staggering 1,541% year to date and several others already sitting on triple-digit gains. With less than three months left, Bitcoin.com News asked several leading AI models a tougher question: Which cryptocurrency still has the most firepower left before Dec. 31?

Ten AI Models Pick Crypto’s Year-End Contenders

Today’s leaderboard has already set a nasty pace. VVV leads the charge, while FUN, QNT, HYPE, NEAR, JST, PUMP, ORCA, and ZEC have all clocked triple-digit gains this year. Bitcoin.com News then put several AI models on the spot, asking each to name one potential year-end winner from the top ten and another from the wider crypto economy.

No hedging or laundry lists were allowed; each AI model had to quality-check its choices and explain why its picks could outrun the field by year-end. It turned into quite the AI panel. Grok, ChatGPT Astra, Claude Sonnet, Claude Opus, Pi, Qwen, Deepseek, Gemini, Venice, and Mistral all took a crack at the same question, with each model required to settle on just two names for the final stretch of 2026.

The prompt used for this particular test was:

“Research the current crypto economy using the latest verifiable data and make two aggressive theoretical calls for 2026. Pick ONE current top-10 crypto most likely to deliver the biggest percentage gain by Dec. 31, then ONE asset from the entire liquid, investable crypto economy. Consider YTD performance, valuation, adoption, momentum, catalysts and risks. QC both picks against competitors and replace either if evidence favors another. Answer in exactly 6 SHORT sentences, 3 per asset, and no more than 100 words total. State each asset, YTD performance and strongest catalyst. Be decisive. No hedging, runners-up, lengthy explanations or multiple picks.”

Grok expert-level answer:

Zcash is the top-10 crypto most likely to deliver the biggest percentage gain by December 31. ZEC is up 163% year to date near $1,350, still far below its $3,192 high. The strongest catalyst is Grayscale’s zcash ETF, already about $900 million, plus a privacy rotation that larger coins cannot match.

Orca is the liquid asset outside that set most likely to beat it. ORCA is up 140% year to date with a roughly $190 million cap and deep daily volume. The strongest catalyst is Solana’s Alpenglow finality upgrade funneling trading fees into the leading Solana DEX as ETF inflows continue.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 medium intelligence-level answer:

Top-10 pick: Hyperliquid (HYPE), targeting $140 by year-end. It trades near $93, about 5% shy of its $98 all-time high, up roughly 270% YTD from about $25. Its strongest catalyst is potential regulated U.S. access for its perpetuals market.

Full-market pick: Near Protocol, targeting $9 by year-end. It rallied from around $1.60 in August to above $5, roughly 230% YTD. Bitwise’s spot NEAR ETF cleared final approval on September 24, which is its strongest catalyst.

ChatGPT-6 Astra high intelligence-level answer

Pi AI’s answer:

Ethereum’s up 45% YTD and has the strongest catalyst: global ETF approvals expected by Q4, driving institutional inflows. No other top-10 crypto has this level of pending demand.

For a deeper play, I’m on solana—up 68% YTD, with Firedancer’s full rollout set to lock in speed and reliability, attracting high-frequency traders. It’s the only chain positioned to scale at this pace.

Qwen 3.7 Plus level answer:

Binance coin (BNB) is the top-10 crypto positioned for the largest percentage gain by December 2026. It maintains strong momentum as the strongest recent performer among major cryptocurrencies. Its strongest catalyst is a massive 164% year-to-date surge in BNB Chain DEX volumes.

Hyperliquid (HYPE) is the premier liquid, investable crypto asset for aggressive 2026 growth. It delivers a staggering 146% year-to-date return, vastly outperforming legacy assets. Its strongest catalyst is dominating onchain derivatives with over 44% of decentralized perpetual volume.

Deepseek Deepthink level answer:

Hyperliquid (HYPE) is up roughly 151% YTD and ranks in the top 10, making it the strongest major. Its CFTC push for regulated U.S. perpetuals access is the decisive catalyst. Buybacks funded by protocol fees make the rally structural, not speculative.

Zcash (ZEC) has gained over 170% YTD and entered the top 10 on privacy demand. Three spot ETF filings, including Winklevoss’s WINK, are the strongest catalyst. The unresolved Orchard counterfeiting risk is the key danger, but ETF flows should dominate into December.

Claude Opus 5.5 medium intelligence level answer

Venice AI answer:

Top-10 call: Solana (SOL), rank 7: -3.3% YTD at $120.

It shows the top 10’s best momentum, up 64% off its August lows.

Strongest catalyst: spot SOL ETF inflows plus the Alpenglow upgrade.

Economy-wide call: Chainlink (LINK), rank 15: +14% YTD at $14.

It is the only liquid major positive YTD, up 34% in three weeks.

Strongest catalyst: bank tokenization infrastructure—every institutional asset needs its oracles.

QC check: SOL beat ETH (-9% YTD), XRP (-19%), and DOGE (-20%) on momentum and beta; LINK beat SUI (-16% YTD, rank 32) on valuation, liquidity, and trend.

Mistral AI’s Vibe think-level answer

Hyperliquid and Solana Lead the Picks, but the Numbers Clash

Hyperliquid’s native asset HYPE drew six selections and Solana’s SOL collected five, making them the panel’s most popular bets for the final stretch of 2026. Their appeal rested on different arguments, with models favoring HYPE’s trading activity and fee-funded buybacks while backing Solana’s upcoming network upgrades and potential institutional demand. Zcash attracted three selections, giving a privacy coin a seat at a table otherwise crowded with trading platforms and blockchain infrastructure.

Still, the models agreed on certain names far more readily than they agreed on the numbers. Conflicting year-to-date returns and descriptions of exchange-traded fund (ETF) developments leave parts of their reasoning in need of independent verification, regardless of how confidently each answer was delivered. By Dec. 31, the market will have settled which picks earned their billing, but this experiment already offers a useful distinction between a persuasive forecast and a well-supported one.

Hero/Feature image source: Pi AI’s
answer.

#AI #ChatGPT #Claude #Grok #Crypto #CryptoPredictions #Hyperliquid #Solana #Bitcoin #CryptoNews

U.S. President Donald Trump has attached a startling $5,000 payout to the 2026 midterms. If Republicans keep the House and Senate on Nov. 3, Trump says every adult U.S. citizen should receive the money, a promise carrying a price tag of roughly $1.2 trillion.

Trump spent Saturday promoting a check that does not yet exist, days after his administration announced one that does. The first is a $5,000 “Trump Dividend” explicitly tied to Republicans retaining both chambers of Congress. The second is $90, backed by money already sitting in the Medicare Improvement Fund and headed to more than 20 million eligible beneficiaries.

One program costs nearly $2 billion and begins paying around Oct. 8. The other, meaning the $5,000 stimulus checks promised, would cost roughly $1.2 trillion and needs congressional approval. That’s quite a difference between the check in the mail and the check on the stump.

$5,000 if Republicans Win

Trump took the wraps off the larger proposal Sept. 9 at the Republican midterm convention in Dallas. If Republicans retained the House and Senate, he said, he would “issue a dividend to every adult citizen in the United States of America for $5,000.” He called it the “Trump Dividend” and compared the arrangement to a successful company paying shareholders. The condition was plain. “If the Republicans win, you win with us and you get $5,000,” Trump told the crowd, adding that the pledge alone “should win the midterms.”

On Oct. 3, Trump repeated the offer: “If Republicans win the House of Representatives and the Senate in the 2026 Midterm Elections, I’m going to give all adult citizens in the United States of America, $5,000!” That’s where things get a bit weird, a sitting president has tied a trillion-dollar nationwide cash proposal directly to his party winning an election.

And the arithmetic is a doozy. Roughly 245 million adult U.S. citizens multiplied by $5,000 comes to about $1.23 trillion. Using 250 million adults puts the tab near $1.25 trillion. Trump has occasionally said “every U.S. Citizen,” which would push the cost considerably higher if children were included. Not exactly pocket change.

The Trillion-Dollar Math Gets Sticky

Trump says tariffs and economic growth make the dividend possible. In Saturday’s remarks, he put its cost at “approximately $1 trillion” and pointed to what he described as $21 trillion in new investment coming into the United States over 15 months. But investment and government revenue aren’t the same pot of money.

Net tariff collections have been running below $200 billion annually, while 2026 gross tariff and excise receipts are around $210 billion. Erica York of the Tax Foundation said the dividend would consume roughly a decade of projected tariff revenue in one payment, with none of that money going toward federal debt, which crossed $40 trillion in August. Congress would also have to play ball. The president cannot simply order more than $1 trillion in new checks from existing accounts.

Sen. Bernie Moreno of Ohio said he plans to have legislation ready after the Nov. 3 election. Rep. Chip Roy of Texas, meanwhile, has questioned how Washington intends to pay for “well over $1 trillion.” Vice President JD Vance has argued that tariff revenue could cover the program and suggested wealthy Americans might be excluded. For now, the $5,000 check is a campaign proposal, not money sitting in a Treasury envelope.

An Election Condition Draws Fire

The explicit election condition has also put the larger proposal in the hot seat. Federal law makes it a crime to offer money to induce someone to vote in a particular way. California Gov. Gavin Newsom accused Trump of trying to “buy your vote with $5,000 in taxpayer-funded blood money,” while former prosecutors have said Trump’s wording could raise questions under the statute.

That does not establish that Trump committed a prosecutable offense. Legal experts reporting on the proposal have also expressed skepticism that such a case would go anywhere. Trump and Vance characterize the plan differently. They describe it as Americans receiving a share of the wealth produced by tariffs and economic gains if Republicans retain control. But prediction marketplaces like Polymarket and Kalshi show a Democrat sweep may come to fruition.

There is another wrinkle. Trump has floated big checks before. A proposed $5,000 “DOGE dividend” from government spending cuts in early 2025 never materialized. Neither did later talk of $2,000 tariff-dividend checks.

Bitcoin Has Seen the Stimulus Movie Before

For bitcoin holders, a trillion-dollar cash program raises an obvious question. What happens if even some of that money finds its way into crypto? The pandemic stimulus offers a useful reality check.

Washington distributed more than 476 million stimulus payments worth $814 billion across three rounds in 2020 and 2021. Coinbase data showed transactions for exactly $1,200, jumping from about 0.1% of activity to nearly 0.4% as the first checks landed. Yet subsequent academic research estimated that the first-round payments increased USD-bitcoin buying volume by 3.8% and bitcoin’s price by just 0.6%. Bitcoin buying attributed directly to the checks represented only 0.02% of all payment dollars.

The bigger action happened around the checks. The Federal Reserve pushed rates near zero, its balance sheet climbed from roughly $4 trillion before the pandemic to nearly $9 trillion by early 2022, and M2 expanded about 25% in 2020. Bitcoin climbed roughly 18-fold from its March 2020 low to its November 2021 peak. The checks played a part, but the broader flood of liquidity packed the bigger punch.

$5,000 Meets an $84,850 Bitcoin

Bitcoin is trading near $84,850 Saturday after Friday’s failed push above $87,000. Roughly $434 million in crypto positions were liquidated over 24 hours, with longs accounting for about $322 million, or 74%. That makes predictions about a hypothetical Trump Dividend sending bitcoin higher premature. The pandemic experience suggests the surrounding monetary and fiscal conditions matter far more than simply multiplying the number of checks by the number of potential crypto buyers.

For now, the contrast is plenty strange on its own. More than 20 million eligible Medicare beneficiaries have $90 payments scheduled from an existing federal fund. Trump is simultaneously promising $5,000 to adult citizens if Republicans win Congress, a proposition that would require lawmakers to find well over $1 trillion. One check is funded and headed for bank accounts. The other still has to survive an election, Congress and the arithmetic.

#Trump #TrumpDividend #StimulusChecks #USPolitics #Midterms2026 #Bitcoin #BTC #Crypto #USMarkets #Economy

Bitcoin ETFs returned to positive territory on Thursday with $102.67 million in net inflows, led by a powerful day for Blackrock’s IBIT.

Blackrock Inflow Offsets Fidelity Outflow

Bitcoin wasted little time finding buyers again.

A day after its nine-session inflow streak ended, U.S. bitcoin ETFs drew $102.67 million in fresh capital. Blackrock’s IBIT carried the recovery with a $195.57 million inflow, more than enough to absorb significant withdrawals elsewhere.

Grayscale’s Bitcoin Mini Trust added $14.59 million, while Morgan Stanley’s MSBT brought in $7.04 million.

Fidelity’s FBTC led the exits with $60.73 million. Grayscale’s GBTC lost $31.39 million, while Ark & 21Shares’ ARKB and Bitwise’s BITB shed $7.72 million and $6.89 million, respectively. Daily trading volume reached $1.97 billion, as net assets rose to $109.34 billion.

The category has now attracted $2.99 billion over the past 30 days, providing a strong institutional backdrop as bitcoin’s price climbed above $86K.

Blackrock Drives $103M Bitcoin ETF Rebound as BTC Price Tops $86K
The week flipped back to green for bitcoin ETFs, with a $103M inflow. Source: Sosovalue
Ether Weakness Stretches Into a Third Session

Ether ETFs remained under pressure, recording $55.37 million in net outflows for a third consecutive losing day.

Fidelity’s FETH shed $23.50 million, while Grayscale’s ETHE lost $20.39 million. Vaneck’s ETHV and Franklin’s EZET posted withdrawals of $6.90 million and $6.13 million, respectively.

Grayscale’s Ether Mini Trust supplied the only inflow at $1.55 million. Trading activity totaled $539.57 million, while net assets closed at $17.71 billion.

The prolonged selling marks a clear cooling in ether demand after the strong allocation streak that dominated the second half of September.

NEAR Extends Strong Debut as XRP and HYPE Gain

Bitwise’s NEAR ETF continued its impressive opening run, adding another winning day following its launch earlier this week. NRR attracted another $8.08 million, marking a third straight session of inflows. Net assets reached $55.57 million on $23.39 million in daily trading activity.

XRP ETFs added $4.07 million, meanwhile. Franklin’s XRPZ brought in $4.06 million, and Bitwise’s XRP fund attracted $3.18 million, while Canary’s XRPC lost $3.18 million. Net assets closed at about $1.69 billion.

Grayscale’s HYPE ETF also finished positive, with $4.96 million flowing into HYPG.

Zcash Retreat Gathers Pace

Zcash faced heavy pressure Thursday. Grayscale’s ZCSH recorded $28.26 million in outflows, pushing net assets down to $818.38 million. That leaves ZEC ETF assets almost $200 million below the $1 billion level reached on Sept. 24.

Solana ETFs lost $5.91 million. Bitwise’s BSOL shed $6.51 million, and Canary’s SOLC lost $4.78 million, with a $5.38 million inflow into Grayscale’s GSOL helping to soften the decline. Net assets closed at $1.91 billion

Thursday’s flows highlight a more selective phase for crypto investors. Bitcoin demand recovered quickly, the newer NEAR product continued to attract capital, and sustained redemptions in ether and zcash showed that institutional appetite is becoming increasingly asset-specific.

#Bitcoin #BTC #BlackRock #IBIT #BitcoinETF #CryptoETF #CryptoNews #InstitutionalInvestors #BitcoinPrice #ETFInflows

Veteran financial adviser Ric Edelman is making one of his most aggressive bitcoin allocation calls yet, arguing that investors should consider holding 10% to 40% of portfolios in BTC depending on risk tolerance. He also sees a path toward $500,000 bitcoin by 2030 if global adoption continues to deepen.

Ric Edelman Raises Bitcoin Allocation Call From 1% to 40%

Bitcoin is moving from satellite allocation to potential portfolio core, at least in Ric Edelman’s view.

Speaking at the Bitcoin Treasuries Conference in Manhattan on Sept. 28, the founder of Edelman Financial Engines said his recommended bitcoin allocation has risen dramatically from the 1% level he advocated several years ago.

“I argue for a 10% to 40% allocation,” Edelman said, outlining 10% for conservative investors, 25% for moderate portfolios, and 40% for aggressive ones.

The shift is significant because it reflects how far bitcoin’s place in mainstream portfolio construction has moved since the last crypto cycle.

Edelman Says the 60/40 Portfolio Is Broken

Edelman’s argument goes beyond bitcoin’s historical price returns.

“The 60-40 is broken,” he said, referring to the traditional portfolio split between stocks and bonds.

His reasoning centers on longevity. As people live longer, Edelman argues that investors need more exposure to growth-oriented assets for longer periods. That makes tiny crypto allocations less compelling in his view.

He said advisers may ignore a 1% position because the potential impact on client outcomes is too small to justify the education, volatility, and reputational risk. A 10% or larger allocation makes bitcoin harder to dismiss.

$500K Bitcoin Becomes Part of the Long-Term Case

Edelman also outlined a much more ambitious price framework.

He said Bitcoin could reach $500,000 by 2030, while arguing that a 2% allocation of global assets to BTC could imply a price around $1 million per coin. Bitcoin’s current all-time high price above $126,000 was set in Oct. 2025, while the asset has recently been hovering around the $83,000 level.

“This has been the best-performing asset class since inception,” he said, adding that he sees no obvious reason the long-term trend must end.

The projections remain highly speculative and depend on continued institutional adoption, capital inflows, and bitcoin maintaining its role as a scarce global asset. Edelman also said he is less focused on bitcoin’s traditional four-year cycle than many crypto traders.

Crypto Community Sees the Allocation Debate Shifting

The comments quickly drew attention on X.

Richard Byworth, managing partner at BYZ Partners, described Edelman as an “extremely credible allocator” and highlighted the significance of recommending 10% even for conservative portfolios.

Mike Alfred, private investor and founder of Alpine Fox LP, noted that Edelman discussed allocations closer to 1% to 10% when the two spoke in 2016 and 2017, writing that “the Overton window has shifted.”

Others were more bullish. Market analyst David Gokhshtein argued that $1 million bitcoin could arrive within the next few years, while “The Bitcoin Therapist” suggested that even a 1% allocation of global assets could support a $500,000 price.

Ultimately, the biggest story here is the size of Edelman’s shift. Bitcoin is no longer being discussed merely as a 1% hedge. For some established advisers, the debate is now whether it deserves a double-digit share of the portfolio.

#RicEdelman #Bitcoin #BTC #BitcoinPrice #Investing #Crypto #CryptoNews #Bitcoin2030 #Portfolio #DigitalAssets

Bitcoin’s price was changing hands at $84,899 on Sunday morning at 8 a.m. Eastern time, up 0.9% over 24 hours, as buyers worked their way back toward $85,000 following the retreat from $87,374. The daily technical picture remains firmly positive, with 14 moving averages flashing favorable readings, although lighter trading volume suggests the latest recovery still has something to prove before BTC can take another crack at its September high.

One-Hour Chart: Bitcoin Takes Another Crack at $85,000

The one-hour chart shows bitcoin’s price steadily clawing back ground following its Sept. 23 retreat into the low-$83,000s. After spending Sept. 24-25 trading between approximately $83,300 and $85,300, BTC has worked its way toward $84,870, putting the $85,000 threshold squarely in the spotlight.

BTC/USD 1-hour chart screenshot.
BTC/USD 1-hour chart via Bitstamp on Sept. 27, 2026.
However, the latest advance has unfolded on considerably lighter volume than the Sept. 21-23 trading activity. A sustained move above $85,000 would bring $85,300 and eventually $87,374 back into focus, while rejection at the overhead barrier could keep BTC confined to its recent trading range. Losing $84,000, followed by $83,300, would put the two-day recovery in a bind.

Four-Hour Chart: Recovery Gains Ground, but Resistance Awaits

The four-hour chart tells a similar story, although the broader picture reveals just how far bitcoin’s price range has traveled since its mid-September low of $74,913. Following the sharp advance into $87,374 between Sept. 18 and Sept. 22, BTC took it on the chin, retreating into the 83,000-84,000 neighborhood before gradually recovering toward $85,000.

BTC/USD 4-hour chart screenshot.
BTC/USD 4-hour chart via Bitstamp on Sept. 27, 2026.
That puts the immediate resistance line within striking distance, with $86,500 and $87,374 representing subsequent upside reference points. On the flip side, the 83,000-84,000 shelf remains an important defensive position. Should that support give way, $80,106 and eventually $74,913 return to the technical conversation.

Daily Chart: Bulls Hold Their Ground After September’s Rally

Bitcoin’s price on the daily chart continues to reflect a substantial recovery from its June low of $57,735, with July and August establishing a base before September’s advance carried prices to $87,374. The latest candles show BTC holding in the mid-$84,000s, comfortably above its summer trading range, although daily volume has cooled following the initial rally.

BTC/USD 24-hour chart screenshot.
BTC/USD 24-hour chart via Bitstamp on Sept. 27, 2026.
The $87,374 swing high remains the big hurdle, and a daily close above that figure would establish a fresh high relative to the visible September structure. Meanwhile, losing the mid-$84,000s could expose the previous launch area, with the $74,900-$80,000 range providing a deeper reference zone. For the time being, buyers remain above the principal daily moving averages.

Oscillators: Momentum and MACD Carry the Bullish Argument

The daily chart’s oscillator readings show nine neutral signals, two positive signals and zero negative signals. The relative strength index (RSI) registers 66, Stochastic stands at 77, the commodity channel index (CCI) reads 91, and the average directional index (ADX) sits at 44, all neutral.

The Awesome oscillator (AO) prints 4,693 today, while Stochastic RSI fast registers 66, Williams percent range stands at minus 20, bull bear power measures 3,937, and the Ultimate oscillator (UO) reads 63, also indifferent. Momentum, however, is cooking with gas at 8,491, accompanied by the moving average convergence divergence (MACD) level at 2,473, with both indicators delivering bullish readings.

Moving Averages: Fourteen Positive Signals Keep Bulls Sitting Pretty

The 24-hour timeframe’s moving averages (MAs) present a considerably stronger technical picture, registering 14 positive readings, one neutral, and zero bearish. Bitcoin’s price trades above every listed exponential moving average (EMA) and simple moving average (SMA), including the 10-period EMA at $83,328, 10-period SMA at $83,818, 20-period EMA at $81,433, and 20-period SMA at $80,449.

Further down the line, the 50-period EMA stands at $77,058, while the 200-period EMA and SMA register $74,142 and $71,076, respectively. The volume-weighted moving average (VWMA) at $80,290 and Hull moving average (HMA) at $84,516 also remain positive this weekend. Only the Ichimoku baseline at $81,144 is neutral, leaving the daily MA configuration firmly in positive territory.

Bull Verdict

Bitcoin’s price position above its major daily moving averages, coupled with positive momentum and MACD readings, supports the prevailing bullish technical structure. A convincing break above $85,000, followed by $85,945, would put the Sept. 22 high of $87,374 back on the radar.

Bear Verdict

The latest recovery has arrived on lighter volume, leaving buyers with unfinished business around $85,000. A rejection followed by a loss of $84,000 and $83,300 would weaken the short-term structure, potentially reopening the door to $80,106.

#Bitcoin #BTC #BitcoinPrice #Crypto #CryptoNews #CryptoMarket #BitcoinTrading #TechnicalAnalysis #BullMarket #BTCPrice

Trump-linked investment accounts spent the early summer unloading shares of Strategy (Nasdaq: MSTR), the world’s largest publicly traded corporate holder of bitcoin. Then, with the stock badly beaten down, the accounts turned around and bought it back. On July 24, they reported a Strategy purchase in the $1,001-to-15,000 range, according to ethics filings. Three days later came a much larger $50,001-to-100,000 purchase. Strategy closed those sessions at $91.67 and $98.65, respectively. By Sept. 22, it was worth $167.33, and on Wednesday, MSTR finished down at $162.20. Put another way, the first July buy was sitting on an 80% gain less than two months later.

The Accounts Sold, Then Changed Direction

The sequence appears in federal financial disclosures covering accounts in which President Donald Trump is named as the beneficiary. An Office of Government Ethics Periodic Transaction Report posted Sept. 22 runs 37 pages and contains 1,156 securities trades from July alone.

Buried among them are three Strategy (Nasdaq: MSTR) Class A transactions. The accounts sold Strategy shares worth between $1,001 and $15,000 on July 8, bought the same dollar range on July 24, and then made the larger $50,001-to-$100,000 purchase on July 27. Strategy is the business intelligence (BI) company that largely pivoted into a full-fledged bitcoin treasury firm in 2020.

OGE screenshot.
U.S. President Donald Trump’s Office of Government Ethics filing.
The selling had actually started earlier. A previous filing shows two Strategy sales on June 23 and June 24 totaling somewhere between $16,002 and $65,000. There were no Strategy purchases reported in June.

Then the stock got clobbered. Strategy, which had traded in the high $180s in May, sank as low as $81.81 shortly after those June sales. The accounts eventually flipped from sellers to buyers while MSTR was still hanging around its 2026 lows.

An 80% Move in Less Than Two Months

The numbers get pretty wild from there. Strategy closed at $91.67 on July 24, when the first repurchase was reported. By Sept. 22, shares closed at $167.33, leaving the stock roughly 80% higher about two months later. MSTR has lost a bit of steam since BTC drifted lower on Wednesday, and by Wall Street’s close, shares were down more than 2%.

The larger July 27 transaction has done pretty well too. The bitcoin treasury firm Strategy closed at $98.65 that day, putting the stock roughly 70% higher. There is an important limitation here. Federal disclosure forms report transaction values in ranges rather than exact dollar amounts, share counts, or execution prices. The filing also doesn’t reveal how many Strategy shares the accounts currently hold. A periodic transaction report records reportable trades over $1,000, not the entire portfolio.

And this wasn’t the accounts’ first dance with MSTR, either. A May disclosure covering January through March listed eight Strategy (MSTR) transactions, including a Feb. 12 purchase in the same $50,001-to-$100,000 range as the July 27 buy.

Bitcoin Put Strategy Back in the Driver’s Seat

There’s a fairly straightforward explanation for why Strategy shares were capable of moving so violently. In July, Strategy itself had temporarily stopped adding bitcoin. Its holdings remained at 843,775 BTC during the weeks of July 13-19 and July 20-26 while the company sold common shares through its at-the-market program and accumulated a U.S. dollar reserve exceeding $3 billion.

Meanwhile, MSTR had fallen from May’s high $180s toward the low $80s. That was the window in which Trump’s accounts finished selling and started buying again. Bitcoin subsequently recovered toward the mid-$80,000 range, and Strategy returned to accumulating the cryptocurrency. By Sept. 21, the company reported holding 846,000 BTC acquired for an aggregate cost of about $63.8 billion.

Strategy’s enormous bitcoin treasury makes its equity particularly sensitive to bitcoin’s moves. When the leading crypto asset picks up steam, MSTR can move a lot harder. That helps explain the 80% rebound without establishing that anyone involved knew the recovery was coming.

The Filing Doesn’t Say Trump Made the Trades

That distinction matters. The disclosure carries Trump’s name because he is the beneficiary of the accounts. It does not establish that the president personally chose the stocks, selected the dates or pressed a button to execute the trades.

The White House and Trump Organization have said the investment accounts are controlled by outside financial managers and that neither Trump nor his family directs what they buy or sell. Of course, Trump critics believe otherwise. Officials have also said some transactions follow model portfolios designed to track recognized indexes.

The July filing itself is enormous. Its 1,156 reported transactions have been estimated at a combined $79 million to $270 million. Strategy represents only a small piece of the Trump pie. July 20 sales of Microsoft and Amazon each landed in the range of $5 million to $25 million, while crypto-linked transactions included a Coinbase purchase and sales of MARA Holdings and the bitcoin miner and artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure provider Cleanspark.

Thousands of Trades Have Drawn Scrutiny

The sheer volume of activity has attracted political scrutiny. Sen. Elizabeth Warren, D-Mass., and Rep. Robert Garcia, D-Calif., pressed Trump in August over his financial disclosures, citing more than 14,000 reported stock trades worth as much as $1.06 billion in 2025 and another 3,555 worth as much as $500 million during the first quarter of 2026. They identified roughly 30 transactions, reported by the press, that they argued warranted examination, and asked for details about the outside investment managers.

Those are allegations and questions from Democratic lawmakers, not findings that Trump directed trades or violated the law. The White House’s position is that independent managers control the accounts without input from Trump or his family. That leaves the Strategy transactions in an interesting place. The documented sequence is striking enough on its own. What the disclosure cannot tell anyone is arguably the most interesting part: who actually made the call.

#Trump #Strategy #MSTR #Bitcoin #BTC #Crypto #BitcoinTreasury #CryptoNews #Investing #DigitalAssets

Bitcoin From 2011 and 2013 Suddenly Stirs

September has logged a slew of unique sleeping bitcoin wallets from ancient days, and Sept. 19 was no different. Before the 2011 wallet, a distinct group of four legacy Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash (P2PKH) wallets shifted 25 BTC each. All four transfers were confirmed at block height 967722.

All the wallets were either first created in February or March 2013. Bitcoin prices were all over the place during those two months, and the Cyprus banking crisis reached its absolute peak in March. On March 1, bitcoin traded for $32 per coin, and by the 31st of that same month in 2013, it was trading for $91.95. Market data shows that these four P2PKH addresses paid very little for the 100 BTC.

Then, ten blocks later, at block 967732, an even older wallet moved 100 BTC from an address born on Nov. 2, 2011. This was a single transaction, and the 100 BTC worth $8 million moved from a P2PKH address to a newer Pay-to-Witness-Public-Key-Hash (P2WPKH) wallet. The day these so-called sleepers were first acquired, bitcoin’s price was $3.24 per unit.

This means the owner’s cost for the 100 BTC was far lower than the $3,200 the 2013 address owner’s cache was, as it was around $324 for a 100 BTC that day. The 2011 wallet’s unrealized gains stand at 2,469,035% today, while the 2013 bitcoin logged an unrealized gain of 249,900%. The vintage 2011 wallet recorded a privacy score of 55 out of 100, according to blockchair.com stats.

The funds were swept, and the user leveraged the “send everything” option. The new P2WPKH wallet is not identified by any major explorer, including Arkham Intelligence. The address is brand new and not associated with any over-the-counter (OTC) dealer or centralized exchange (CEX). Now, while we don’t know much about the 2011 wallet owner from then on, the 2013 address owner is a different story altogether.

A 2013 Miner’s Trail Leads Straight to Bitgo

We can safely assume that the four transfers that sent 25 BTC into one consolidated wallet was a single entity. Blockchair gave the transfer a privacy score of around 60 out of 100, and that too was due to the fact that it was a sweep. Basically, an address sweep is the process of transferring all the funds from a paper or temporary wallet into another wallet in a single transaction. This particular sweep found its way to a single P2WPKH wallet that belongs to the custodian Bitgo.

Arkham’s explorer flags the wallet as a known Bitgo address, and this particular wallet has been known to accept batches of 100 BTC a few other times before this instance. Onchain heuristics indicate that this particular entity was a bitcoin miner, as the first time it sent Bitgo funds, it sent batches of 25 BTC that were initially block rewards from March 2013. This particular miner has been sending Bitgo batches like these since August 2025.

The patience of both of these bitcoin adopters is quite striking, and the fact that BTC is trading above $81,000 might also signal a market top or shift. The 2011 wallet owner’s transfer and anonymity can only leave us to speculate, but the 2013 miner’s Bitgo moves suggest calculated liquidation or custodial strategies. It is possible that the funds are simply being held by Bitgo and not sold, as the company is primarily a custodian. However, from that transfer out, there’s no way of knowing.

#Bitcoin #BTC #BitcoinWhale #SatoshiEra #HODL #Crypto #CryptoNews #OnChain #BitcoinWallet #WhaleAlert

Gold ETFs have recovered all 2026 outflows, while #Bitcoin ETFs have recovered about half. Short interest in IBIT remains near yearly highs vs. GLD below its historical average.

#Bitcoin #BTC #JPMorgan #BitcoinETF #IBIT #Gold #GoldETF #Crypto #CryptoNews #ETF

“This guidance gives firms the clarity they’ve asked for,” says FCA’s David Geale. 💬

Authorization applications open Sept. 30, 2026 with regime taking effect Oct. 25, 2027.

#Crypto #CryptoNews #UKCrypto #FCA #CryptoRules #Regulation #DigitalAssets #Bitcoin #Blockchain #CryptoPolicy

Senate Democrats are preparing a counteroffer to the Senate Republicans’ CLARITY Act draft text introduced on Sunday. Democrats have criticized the new ethics language as falling short of their expectations, and even some Republicans have expressed doubt about the CLARITY Act’s content and scope.

Senate Democrats to Introduce CLARITY Act Counteroffer

The future of the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, known as the CLARITY Act, remains uncertain as Democrats prepare to issue a counteroffer to a draft introduced by Senate Republicans on Sunday night.

The proposal comes after Senate Democrats, who are working on the bill, met with Minority Leader Chuck Schumer on Monday evening to decide what to do after receiving the CLARITY draft bill, which contains over 126 changes requested by Democrats. The draft includes new ethics language that encompasses a ban on crypto issuance for covered individuals and divestment of existing crypto investments.

Senator Mark Warner stressed that Democrats who have worked on the CLARITY Act in good faith will prepare this counteroffer. Warner publicly expressed his dissatisfaction with the current ethics rules, saying that for him, the ethics provision was not “near enough”

“It’s frustrating because we’ve had these same three issues outstanding for six, eight weeks, and why this couldn’t have been dealt with earlier? I’m really concerned,” he told Semafor.

Senator Raphael Warnock, who also believes the bill, as drafted by Republicans, did not deal with “opportunities for corruption,” told Politico that Senate Republicans would get the bill on Monday night, and that their answer would determine “if they’re serious about a viable path.”

But even in the Republican aisle, doubts remain about passing the CLARITY Act due to its complexity. “It’s more than 600 pages, with a new ethics provision in it, and other provisions that I need to look at, such as whether it would cause community banks to lose deposits,” Senator Susan Collins assessed.

A coalition of state attorneys general, led by New York AG Letitia James, torpedoed the CLARITY Act on Monday, declaring that the new draft would limit their authority to protect state crypto investors from fraud.

Senate Democrats’ rejection of the CLARITY Act’s so-called final draft tumbled its odds of being signed into law this year, with prediction market platforms like Polymarket estimating just an 18% chance of it passing at the time of writing.

The cloture vote on the CLARITY Act will happen on Tuesday evening, and it requires 60 Senators to vote for a final consideration of the proposed draft.

#CLARITYAct #Crypto #CryptoNews #USSenate #Democrats #Republicans #Bitcoin #CryptoBill #Regulation #DigitalAssets

Trader Willy Woo points out an anomaly in the HODLwave metric: “Whoever bought the bottom did it slowly. Possibly even a single whale…. That’s happened every time across 17.5 years of Hodl Wave data except now.”

#Bitcoin #BTC #BitcoinWhale #CryptoWhale #HODL #HODLWave #OnChain #CryptoMarket #BitcoinBottom #WhaleAlert

Bitcoin’s price is hanging around $77,300 on Saturday morning, after somehow squeezing a $3,215 intraday adventure into a 24-hour gain of just 0.2%. That tiny move does a pretty good job of hiding what has actually been a wild ride underneath, as bitcoin’s longer-term structure remains intact while the short-term picture has clearly cooled, leaving bitcoin’s price caught between support around $76,040-$76,400 and a stubborn patch of resistance beginning near $77,970.

1-Hour Bitcoin Price Chart

Bitcoin’s price on the 1-hour chart looks like a market that went through all that trouble just to end up back where it started. After sliding through a descending channel from an annotated $81,401 high around Sept. 5, bitcoin dropped as low as $76,040 around Sept. 11, suddenly came alive, and then got turned away after pushing into the upper $79,000s.

Since then, the fireworks have mostly disappeared. Price has settled into a cramped Saturday range around $77,000-$77,500, and those small candles suggest buyers and sellers are both waiting for somebody else to make the first move. It’s similar to a log poker game where no one is truly playing or showing their cards. For now, $76,040-$76,400 is the floor to watch if things get messy again.

4-Hour Bitcoin Price Chart

The 4-hour chart is where the recent loss of momentum becomes much harder to miss. Bitcoin’s price came roaring out of an annotated $62,470 mid-August low and traveled all the way to $82,281 around Sept. 4, but eventually that run ran out of gas. What followed was a string of lower highs and a much choppier market stretching from the low $80,000s toward the mid-$70,000s.

BTC/USD 4-hour chart via Bitstamp on Sept. 12, 2026.
Bitcoin most recently got knocked into the mid-$76,000s before fighting its way back toward $77,300, and volume actually picked up during the Sept. 11 bounce compared with the quieter trading beforehand. That gives bulls something to work with, but they still have some heavy lifting ahead. Getting through roughly $77,970-$78,800 would put bitcoin back above several short daily averages currently leaning bearish.

24-Hour Bitcoin Price Chart

The daily chart, funnily enough, looks considerably healthier than all that short-term commotion would have you believe. Bitcoin’s price journey begins at an annotated $57,735 swing low, works through a months-long recovery, and eventually reaches an annotated $82,833 high after the late-summer push into the low $80,000s.

BTC/USD 24-hour chart via Bitstamp on Sept. 12, 2026.
Since then, bitcoin has backed off, but it has not exactly fallen off the rails either, with the mid-$70,000s holding while price consolidates beneath the August and early-September highs. There is another interesting wrinkle hiding in the chart: volume was heavier during the recovery than it has been during the subsequent drift lower. If buyers can eventually crack $82,280-$82,830, those visible 4-hour and daily swing highs disappear from the road, and bulls could find themselves back in the driver’s seat.

Oscillator Noise

The daily chart’s oscillators are where things get a little funny because, for all the noise around bitcoin lately, most of them are basically sitting on the fence. The relative strength index is 55 and neutral today, while Stochastic sits at 15 and neutral as well. The commodity channel index at -112, average directional index (ADX) at 44, Awesome oscillator (AO) at 4,034, Stochastic RSI Fast at 8, Williams percent range at -80, and the ultimate oscillator (UO) at 40 are all neutral too.

In other words, there is a great deal of data here without much agreement on where bitcoin wants to go next. Momentum at 11 and bull bear power (BBP) at -1,171 lean positive and bullish, while the moving average convergence divergence level (MACD) at 1,814 takes the other side with a negative, bearish reading. Add everything together shows one bearish, eight neutral, and two bullish oscillator signals. For anyone hoping the oscillators would settle the argument, no such luck. Right now, the next move really is anyone’s guess.

Bitcoin’s Moving Averages

The moving averages (MAs) tell a more optimistic story, although there is a bit of fine print worth reading before breaking out the champagne. The 10-period exponential moving average (EMA) at $77,971 and the 10-period simple moving average (SMA) at $78,797 are both negative, while the 20-period SMA at $78,592 and the 20-period volume weighted moving average (VWMA) at $78,611 lean bearish as well. That is basically the short-term market waving a yellow flag.

On the flip side, the 20-period EMA at $77,031 is positive, and every listed 30-, 50-, 100-, and 200-period EMA and SMA is bullish as well. The Ichimoku baseline at $73,131 sits neutral, while the 9-period hull moving average (HMA) at $76,505 leans bullish. All told, the moving averages deliver ten bullish, four bearish, and one neutral signals. Put simply, bitcoin’s bigger trend is still standing while the short-term machinery works through a rough patch. Bulls are not out of the woods yet, and getting back through roughly $78,000-$78,800 looks like the hurdle that could finally move the needle.

Bull Verdict

The bulls still have a decent hand to play here. Bitcoin has absorbed a pretty hefty pullback without wrecking the bigger trend; the mid-$70,000s are still holding, and most of the longer-term moving averages remain firmly positive. If buyers can muscle through $78,800 and keep going, $82,280-$82,830 comes back into view pretty quickly. Clear that neighborhood, and the bulls could be right back in the driver’s seat.

Bear Verdict

The bears have plenty to work with in the meantime. Bitcoin has already been rejected from the upper $79,000s, short-term momentum has lost steam, and several of the averages sitting overhead are still leaning negative. If $76,040-$76,400 finally gives way, that comfortable-looking floor suddenly disappears. Until bitcoin gets back above $78,800, bears can make a pretty convincing case that this market is still not the bull’s domain.

#Bitcoin #BTC #BitcoinPrice #CryptoMarket #CryptoTrading #BTCUSD #BitcoinAnalysis #TechnicalAnalysis #CryptoBull #CryptoNews

Zcash surged past $1,200 to an intraday peak of $1,249, its highest level since Q4 2016, marking a weekly gain of over 45%.

Market Cap Reaches $20B as Derivatives Liquidations Spike

Zcash (ZEC) breached $1,200 Sunday, outperforming the rest of the cryptocurrency market after posting double-digit gains. Market data showed that the privacy coin surged to an intraday peak of $1,249, its highest level since late in the fourth quarter of 2016. Although an ensuing sell-off saw its price plunge below $1,200, it quickly reclaimed the mark, leaving the coin with a weekly gain of over 45%.

The latest surge lifted ZEC’s market capitalization to $20.44 billion, displacing HYPE as the ninth-largest digital asset by market cap. ZEC has now jumped 134%, making it one of the best-performing high-cap altcoins by far. Since sinking to $16.08 on July 4, 2024, the privacy coin has risen by a staggering 7,400%. However, despite this price growth, ZEC remains more than 62% below its Oct. 16, 2016, peak of $3,191.93.

On the derivatives front, Zcash’s price action in the last 24 hours saw slightly more than $24 million in leveraged positions liquidated — the third-most liquidations on a single asset behind ethereum and bitcoin. As expected with a rallying coin, wiped-out short bets accounted for the majority of liquidations at $17.5 million.

Echoing previous bull runs, ZEC’s explosive surge is being driven in part by high-profile endorsements across the crypto landscape, including bullish commentary from BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes and Bitwise CEO Hunter Horsley.

Still, the launch of Grayscale’s Zcash ETF (ZCSH) introduces a new dynamic for the privacy coin. Regulatory pressure had previously forced several centralized exchanges to delist ZEC, effectively choking off exposure for mainstream investors, particularly in the U.S. By providing a mainstream vehicle for speculative appetite, the ETF gives traders a direct path to ride the token’s momentum, a trend clearly reflected in recent fund inflows.

However, supporters of the privacy coin, which has completely eclipsed rival Monero (XMR), believe ZEC is also riding high on so-called privacy primitives. According to one independent analyst, Predictivemoney, the move is part of a larger structural trade: front-running the expansion of artificial general intelligence (AGI). While bitcoin possesses a rock-solid monetary policy, its transparent transaction graph makes it trivial for an AGI to de-anonymize wallet histories and user relationships at scale.

From this perspective, the breakout in Zcash and zero-knowledge protocols represents a structural shift in which capital pays a premium for bulletproof zero-knowledge encryption and advanced proof architectures.

This renewed momentum has spilled over into the network’s underlying metrics. The price surge triggered a massive rush of mining power, briefly driving the Zcash network solrate past 30 gigasols per second (GSol/s) for the first time. The rapid influx of competition left individual miner revenue roughly 3% lower than when ZEC was trading under $900, illustrating that new mining hardware and hash power are joining the network faster than block rewards can keep pace.

#Zcash #ZEC #PrivacyCoin #ZK #ZeroKnowledge #CryptoMarket #Altcoins #ZcashETF #CryptoMining #CryptoNews

The mid-top sneakers feature premium leather overlays, the signature Air Jordan Wings logo, and custom branding alongside other #Bitcoin inspired merch.

#Strategy #Bitcoin #BTC #Nike #AirJordan #BitcoinMerch #CryptoCulture #BitcoinCommunity #CryptoFashion #CryptoNews

As August comes to a close, the CLARITY Act is barreling toward a critical Sept. 15 Senate test with prediction marketplace odds flashing serious doubt that Congress can drag the sprawling U.S. crypto market structure bill across the finish line before 2026 ends.

Traders expect senators to show up and vote, but prediction market money says Congress probably will not finish the job.

Senate’s Sept. 15 Vote Starts the CLARITY Act Countdown

The Senate left Washington on Aug. 8 after Majority Leader John Thune filed a cloture motion, teeing up a Sept. 15 procedural vote. Cloture generally takes 60 votes and would let the Senate move toward debating and potentially passing the legislation.

Getting there solves only the first problem. According to American Banker reporting, Capital Alpha Partners’ Ian Katz slashed his enactment estimate from roughly 40% to 25%, possibly lower, warning that clearing cloture still would not guarantee passage. Galaxy Digital went further, cutting its estimate to 10% in August as Congress burned through precious calendar days.

Prediction Markets Bet Congress Votes but Cannot Seal the Deal

The cash piling into prediction markets tells essentially the same story. Kalshi’s Senate vote market has pulled in more than $1.25 million in volume, while its broader crypto market structure enactment contract has attracted more than $6.8 million.

Kalshi screenshot
Image source: Kalshi on Aug. 31, 2026.
Polymarket’s sharper bet on whether H.R. 3633 becomes law in 2026 has drawn roughly $11.5 million. The implied probability sits at a brutal 13%, a stunning collapse from the 82% odds traders were pricing in February.

Polymarket screenshot
Image source: Polymarket on Aug. 31, 2026.
Three Battles Threaten to Blow Up Congress’ Crypto Rulebook

This fight reaches well beyond another round of Washington theater. The CLARITY Act would create a federal framework for crypto markets, hand the Commodity Futures Trading Commission exclusive authority over spot digital commodity markets and leave the Securities and Exchange Commission overseeing certain securities offerings and exchange activity.

Three fights are now squeezing the coalition needed to find 60 Senate votes: ethics restrictions involving government officials and crypto, stablecoin rewards banks see as competition for deposits, and protections covering decentralized finance (defi) and non-custodial software developers.

Several Democrats who once appeared open to negotiations have attacked the latest text, while banking groups continue hammering stablecoin yield. Republicans, including Sens. Cynthia Lummis, Tim Scott, John Boozman, John Thune, and Thom Tillis remain among the legislation’s strongest backers.

SEC and CFTC Charge Ahead as Congress Burns Through the Clock

Regulators are not waiting around for lawmakers. SEC crypto rulemaking and CFTC work covering exchanges, leveraged trading, and decentralized finance (DeFi) could build major pieces of the regulatory framework without Congress, although future administrations can generally unwind agency rules more easily than federal statutes.

That makes Sept. 15 the pressure point. Even if senators clear the 60-vote procedural barrier, Congress faces a brutal calendar packed with government funding, defense legislation, and approaching midterm elections. Another failure could shove the broader market structure battle into a lame-duck session or 2027.

For crypto firms, banks, and investors, the signal now is not whether Washington keeps talking about CLARITY, but whether senators can scrape together enough votes on Sept. 15 to keep it breathing.

Lawrence Lepard, author of “The Big Print,” explained that even with CLARITY passing, demand for U.S. Treasuries used to back…

Clarity Act Won’t Save US Treasury Debt Market, Analyst Warns

Lawrence Lepard, author of “The Big Print,” explained that even with CLARITY passing, demand for U.S. Treasuries used to back…

Lawrence Lepard, author of “The Big Print,” explained that even with CLARITY passing, demand for U.S. Treasuries used to back…

#CLARITYAct #CryptoRegulation #USSenate #CFTC #SEC #CryptoPolicy #Kalshi #Polymarket #DigitalAssets #CryptoNews

Community banks are leading the opposition to the CLARITY Act, stressing that there is no middle ground on the stablecoin yield issue. Rebeca Romero Rainey, president and CEO of Independent Community Bankers of America, said that this so-called “loophole” had to be “closed entirely.”

Community Banks Draw Close Ranks On Stablecoin Yield

Passing the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act has become a difficult task, as issues believed to be solved rise again.

While both parties, the crypto industry and big banking, had reached a compromise on the language to confine stablecoin rewards to activity rather than ownership, this key pain point has been revived by community banks, which have already swayed at least two Republican senators, Josh Hawley and Jerry Moran, to oppose CLARITY in its current form.

Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA), a membership organization that groups roughly 5,000 community banks in the U.S., has recently updated its demands for changes to the CLARITY Act and highlighted how a wrong decision could affect the future of these institutions and the groups that receive credit through their intermediation.

In an interview with Banking Dive, Rebeca Romero Rainey, president and CEO of ICBA, declared that the discussion around these rewards should not revolve around compromise, as the future of the community banking sector might be at stake.

“There’s always the suggestion, well, how do we make both sides happy on this? For us, this loophole has to be closed entirely. There’s not a middle ground in terms of resolution,” Romero said.

She stressed that the main concern around CLARITY was deposit flight, estimating that $1.3 trillion could leave the banking system for stablecoins, prompting an $850 billion decline in local lending.

“There’s nothing to suggest that cryptocurrency would replace those deposits and redeploy them in local communities. That’s what has gotten the attention of a number of senators at this point,” Romero explained.

Finally, Romero criticized the “Effects of Stablecoin Yield Prohibition on Bank Lending” report issued by the Council of Economic Advisers of the White House, which downplays banks’ concerns about deposit flight.

“The rationale for some of this pushback doesn’t make sense because it doesn’t take into account a significant change in the environment if this legislation were passed,” she concluded.

The Senate has convened for a vote on the CLARITY Act on September 15, but it seems unlikely that at least 60 senators will agree to move the bill for further consideration, which would kill it for the foreseeable future.

Lawrence Lepard, author of “The Big Print,” explained that even with CLARITY passing, demand for U.S. Treasuries used to back…

Clarity Act Won’t Save US Treasury Debt Market, Analyst Warns

Lawrence Lepard, author of “The Big Print,” explained that even with CLARITY passing, demand for U.S. Treasuries used to back…

Lawrence Lepard, author of “The Big Print,” explained that even with CLARITY passing, demand for U.S. Treasuries used to back

#CLARITYAct #Stablecoin #StablecoinYield #CryptoRegulation #USBanking #CommunityBanks #Stablecoins #DeFi #Crypto #CryptoNews

Bitcoin briefly tapped $65,000 on Tuesday even as geopolitical tensions in the Middle East entered a critical phase following the expiration of the 60-day memorandum of understanding between the U.S. and Iran. However, before its sudden spike, bitcoin traded above $64,000, having reclaimed that threshold Monday afternoon.

Market data show it held above $64,200 until just two hours before midnight, when selling pressure nearly pulled the cryptocurrency below $64,000. A volatile period followed, which saw bitcoin fluctuate between $64,300 and $64,000 for almost 10 hours. Shortly after 9:30 a.m. EST, however, the cryptocurrency surged, adding approximately $1,000 in just one hour to reach $65,000.

Although it lost momentum soon after breaching that mark, dropping to $64,744 at 2:35 p.m. EST, the price action left the cryptocurrency with a daily gain of 0.5% and pushed its weekly gains past 2%. At the time of writing, bitcoin’s market capitalization was nearing $1.3 trillion.

On the derivatives market, bitcoin’s latest gain was again particularly brutal for traders shorting the cryptocurrency. According to Coinglass data, bitcoin’s fluctuations in the previous 24 hours wiped out $56 million in leveraged short positions, compared with just $4 million in liquidated long bets. Overall, long bets still accounted for $108 million of total liquidations recorded across the cryptocurrency market.

Although bitcoin’s gradual climb seemingly kicked off after Strategy revealed that it had not sold bitcoin in the past week, some analysts warn that a concentration of sell orders around $65,000 suggests a breakout is not imminent.

Offering a contrarian perspective, Skybridge Capital founder Anthony Scaramucci argued that the data tells a different story from bearish headlines. While acknowledging that bitcoin is in a clear bear market, he noted that the current drawdown is far milder than those seen in previous cycles.

“This is a clear Bitcoin bear market, and yet we’ve only had a 55% drop, whereas in other bear markets you’ve gotten a 75-80% drop. That’s weirdly a good sign; it suggests many net buyers are already positioning for the next bull phase,” Scaramucci said in a post on X.

Supporting this view, blockchain analytics platform Glassnode noted that “strong hands” are actively buying bitcoin. According to the firm, market bottoms typically form as profit-taking slows and conviction buyers step in, drawing parallels to the market structure seen during 2022. Glassnode highlighted that the largest increase in bitcoin held by conviction buyers occurred when the asset dropped to $60,000 in January.

#Bitcoin #BTC #Crypto #BitcoinPrice #ShortSqueeze #CryptoMarket #BTCTrading #Liquidations #BitcoinBull #CryptoNews

A Coordinated Sweep Empties Hundreds of Wallets

The incident became public after roughly 594 BTC, valued near $38 million at the time, moved from about 500 single-signature bitcoin addresses on July 30. When the news first broke, Bitcoin.com News noted that the transfers occurred within approximately 25 minutes and appeared to target wallets with a shared technical weakness.

Later blockchain reviews expanded the possible scale of the theft. Researchers estimated that between 1,082 and 1,196 addresses may have been affected during a period of about 41 minutes. A custom dashboard called Coldcard Sweep Watch subsequently placed the total at 1,128.4717 BTC, worth about $71.1 million when bitcoin traded near $63,044.

Coldcard Sweep Watch dashboard screenshot.
Image source: Coldcard Sweep Watch dashboard. Screenshot taken at 8:30 a.m. Eastern time on August 1, 2026. Since this screenshot was taken, an hour later at 9:30 a.m., the estimate increased to 1,128.6633 BTC.
Most of the funds were consolidated into an address holding hundreds of bitcoin, where a large portion remained largely stationary. The affected addresses were linked by one important detail: Their recovery seeds had been created on Coldcard hardware wallets manufactured by Canadian company Coinkite.

A recovery seed is a list of words that controls access to a cryptocurrency wallet. Anyone who can reconstruct or obtain that seed can usually move the wallet’s funds without possessing the physical device.

Coldcard Finds a Broken Randomness System

Coinkite issued an urgent advisory warning that certain seeds generated on Coldcard devices could be weak. Mk3 devices running firmware version 4.0.1, released around March 2021, and later versions were among those facing the greatest risk.

Further analysis widened the concern to seeds created on some Mk4, Mk5, and Q devices before Coinkite released emergency firmware fixes. Tapsigner, Opendime, and Satscard products were reportedly not affected because they use different software.

The flaw involved the process used to generate random data. Secure wallets depend on high-quality randomness so that their recovery seeds cannot be guessed. On the most seriously affected Mk3 devices, researchers estimated that the seed may have contained only about 40 bits of effective randomness instead of the intended 128 bits.

That difference is critical. A properly generated 128-bit seed is considered practically impossible to guess through brute force. A 40-bit seed offers dramatically fewer possibilities, allowing an attacker with enough computing power to test potential seeds offline and compare the resulting addresses with the public Bitcoin blockchain.

Some newer devices may have provided approximately 72 bits of effective randomness because secure hardware added another layer of unpredictable data. That would make the seeds harder to reconstruct, though still much weaker than intended.

One Configuration Error Survived for 5 Years

The problem began with a build-time configuration mistake involving two software functions that performed similar jobs. One function used the device’s hardware-based true random number generator, while the other relied on a weaker software process inherited from MicroPython.

Coinkite intended to disable the MicroPython option. However, a software check looked only at whether a configuration label had been defined, rather than whether its value had been set to zero. As a result, the finished firmware could silently select the weaker function.

Because the two functions had matching formats, the software continued to compile and run without producing an obvious error. The mistake entered the code around a 2021 software migration and remained in publicly available firmware for more than five years.

Updating a device now does not strengthen a seed that was generated under the faulty software. Affected users must create a completely new seed using corrected firmware or another secure device, then move their funds to addresses controlled by that new seed.

X screenshot
Image source: X
Users who added at least 50 independent dice rolls while creating their seed may have supplied enough extra randomness to avoid the weakness. A strong BIP-39 passphrase could also have made reconstruction more difficult, while wallets requiring signatures from several independent devices may have prevented one compromised seed from moving funds alone.

Coinkite Points to AI, but Proof Remains Missing

Coinkite CEO Rodolfo Novak apologized publicly and said the company took full responsibility for the firmware failure. He said the team was working on fixed software, technical reports, and support for affected users.

Coinkite and Novak also advanced a striking theory about how the flaw was discovered. Because its firmware had been publicly available for years, the company said it believed someone may have used AI to examine older versions of the code and locate the weak randomness path.

“To every other developer: we believe this is a sober reality of the new AI paradigm. AI-assisted code review can now find latent bugs at a speed that is outpacing even the industry’s most seasoned experts,” Novak wrote in his apology post published on X. “If your firmware is open-source or has ever been public, assume it’s already being read by attackers and defenders alike.”

Today’s modern AI coding systems can process large software repositories and identify suspicious relationships between configuration settings, functions, and security assumptions. An attacker could ask such a system to look specifically for weak random number generators, fallback functions, or errors affecting cryptographic keys.

X screenshot
Some observers leveraged top AI models to find the Coldcard exploit on their own. Image source: X
Independent researchers later reported using AI models to locate or explain the issue after the underlying randomness problem was known. That demonstrated how accessible AI-assisted code analysis has become, but it did not establish that the original attacker used AI.

Coldcard Wallet blog post discussing AI screenshot.
Image source: Coldcard Wallet blog post discussing AI.
Coinkite acknowledged that its own review using a leading AI model failed to uncover the flaw before the theft. That result shows that AI systems do not automatically find every serious defect. Their performance can depend on the instructions they receive, the amount of code supplied and whether a human reviewer understands the warning signs.

Critics Say the Human Failure Came First

Some security specialists argue that focusing too heavily on artificial intelligence (AI) risks distracting from a basic engineering failure. Many believe the configuration mistake was a known type of software error, and conventional code reviews, testing procedures, or audits centered on seed generation could have detected it years earlier.

X screenshot.
Some observers do not believe AI is to blame and think the engineering team should have sniffed out the exploit on their own. Image source: X.
The opposing views are not necessarily incompatible. A human error created the vulnerability and allowed it to persist, while AI may have lowered the cost of finding, understanding, or exploiting it. Defenders must identify every dangerous weakness, while an attacker needs to locate only one.

The incident also challenges assumptions about open-source security. Public code allows independent experts to inspect software, but availability alone does not guarantee that someone will review the correct section, recognize a subtle defect, and report it before an attacker acts.

For Coldcard users, the immediate priority is determining when and how their seed was created. Anyone with an affected seed must verify instructions through official Coinkite channels, install corrected firmware, create a new seed, and move funds carefully while watching for phishing attempts and fake support messages.

The longer-term questions will center on how much bitcoin was taken, whether investigators can identify the attacker, and whether AI played any decisive role in finding the flaw. Hardware wallet companies will also face pressure to strengthen entropy testing, audit build configurations, and continuously examine old code with both human experts and adversarial AI tools.

#Bitcoin #BTC #Coldcard #Coinkite #AI #CyberSecurity #HardwareWallet #Blockchain #CryptoSecurity #CryptoNews

Bitcoin’s mandatory signaling window for the proposed BIP-110 soft fork opens in less than two weeks, and the story has changed more than the headline number suggests. Miner support remains modest at roughly 2.64%, but several weeks ago, signaling struggled to stay above 1%. Since then, it has climbed gradually as the deadline has come into view. The increase shows the proposal has gained some traction, yet not enough to indicate that the largest mining pools are preparing to switch.

At the time of writing at 8:40 a.m. Eastern time on July 27, the chain tip stood at block 959842. Roughly 1,790 blocks remain before block 961632, the point where nodes running BIP-110 software begin rejecting blocks that do not signal version bit 4. At Bitcoin’s average ten-minute pace, that height should arrive on or around Aug. 9, 2026.

BIP-110, formally called the Reduced Data Temporary Softfork, proposes limiting the size of certain data fields used in Bitcoin transactions. The rules primarily target Ordinals-style inscriptions, oversized OP_RETURN payloads, and similar data-heavy uses while leaving ordinary finance-centric bitcoin transfers, key-path Taproot spends, and standard Lightning channel operations unchanged.

If activated, the restrictions begin at block 965664 and expire automatically after 52,416 blocks, or roughly one year.

Support Is Growing, Just Not Fast Enough

The signaling charts have looked different over the past month than they do at first glance.

A few weeks ago, BIP-110 signaling barely registered, hovering below 1% during some periods. Since then, support has climbed into the 3% range. That’s a meaningful increase in percentage terms, but Bitcoin activations are driven by who is signaling, not simply how many blocks carry the bit.

Block signaling screenshot
A screenshot of signaling as of 8:40 a.m. Eastern time on July 27, 2026, via bip110.org/monitor.
Ocean continues to account for most of the signaling activity. The rest of the hashpower is built almost entirely by independent miners and smaller operators. The miners currently signaling for BIP-110 include Roughnecks, SoV, BIP110 Generic, Barefoot Mining, 234 Alberta, 888, Peer to Peer Money, Black Jade Advisors, Sazmining, Crestmont Fabrics, Datum Miner, SpammersGFY, Moonwalk, PyBLOCK-Datum, Just For Krypto, and JAMIN.

Meanwhile, Foundry, Antpool, ViaBTC, and F2pool, the four pools responsible for most of the network’s hashrate, have shown little movement. Until one of those operators changes course, gradual increases from smaller participants are unlikely to materially change the activation picture.

Coin Dance node count screenshot.
Coin Dance node count as of Monday, July 27, 2026, at 8:40 a.m. EDT.
The software ecosystem reflects the same divide. The only implementation enforcing the proposal is a Bitcoin Knots fork. Reachable nodes running that software stand at around 22% today, leaving enforcement concentrated among a relatively smaller share of the network compared to Bitcoin Core nodes.

Foundry Holds the Biggest Swing Vote

Among the major mining pools, Foundry has taken an interesting approach.

Around July 17, 2026, the company asked customers to vote on whether the pool should begin signaling for BIP-110. Rather than making the decision internally, Foundry tied the outcome directly to its clients’ hashrate, according to an email sent to pool participants.

“The voting window on Foundry USA Pool™ will be open through the signaling window close date, ahead of block 961,632,” Foundry USA pool wrote on its BIP-110 resource page.

Voting power is based on each customer’s average hashrate. Clients who do not respond are automatically counted as “No,” and Foundry’s default position remains to signal against the proposal. Only if “Yes” votes exceed 51% of participating weighted hashrate will the pool switch all of its blocks to signaling support.

That decision matters because Foundry represents between roughly 23% and 33% of Bitcoin’s global hashrate, depending on the measurement period. If a pool of that size flipped overnight, the signaling charts would change immediately.

As of today, there has been no indication that such a shift has occurred.

Foundry has also avoided endorsing either side publicly. Instead, its client resource page links to the BIP specification, the original bitcoin-dev discussion, criticism from Jameson Lopp, and commentary from Adam Back, Michael Saylor, Luke Dashjr, and others, allowing customers to evaluate the proposal themselves.

What Happens if the Window Opens Without Broad Support?

The mechanics become much more consequential once block 961632 arrives.

If current signaling levels persist, nodes enforcing BIP-110 will reject blocks mined by most of the network because they lack the required version bit. Those nodes will instead follow the relatively small number of signaling blocks.

Legacy nodes will behave differently. They will continue accepting both signaling and non-signaling blocks while following the chain with the greatest accumulated proof-of-work, as Bitcoin has always done. Several independent observers have built dedicated monitoring sites that track activation parameters, with some even simulating how the process could unfold under different scenarios.

BIP110 Situation Monitor screenshot.
The monitoring site BIP110 Situation Monitor also models a range of possible outcomes during the mandatory signaling window. Its simulation page lets users adjust variables, including the percentage of network hashrate expected to support BIP-110 in August. The simulation image above is with 25% hashrate dedicated to BIP-110, resulting in a chain split.
That creates the possibility of two competing chains, but not two equally viable ones. The chain recognized by Bitcoin Core and mined by the overwhelming majority of hashrate would continue producing blocks at its normal pace. A minority chain consisting only of signaling miners would advance much more slowly until reaching its next 2,016-block difficulty adjustment.

That potential outcome explains why much of the debate has shifted away from inscriptions and toward the activation process itself.

A Different Activation Strategy

BIP-110 follows a deployment path that differs from Bitcoin’s two most recent major soft forks.

The proposal launched on Dec. 1, 2025, using a modified BIP-9 process. It required 1,109 of 2,016 blocks, or 55%, signaling during a single difficulty period to lock in early. If that threshold was never reached, the proposal advances toward a forced lock-in at block 963,648 before activating one difficulty period later at block 965,664.

Between those milestones sits the mandatory signaling window.

From block 961,632 through 963,647, nodes enforcing BIP-110 reject every block that does not signal version bit 4, regardless of how much proof-of-work supports it. That approach differs from both Segwit and Taproot, where non-upgraded nodes continued accepting the strongest proof-of-work chain throughout activation.

The closest historical comparison is the 2017 BIP-148 user-activated soft fork (UASF), which also attempted to pressure miners through mandatory signaling requirements. That confrontation ultimately ended without a lasting chain split after sufficient hashrate shifted before the deadline. BIP-148’s UASF ultimately served more as leverage than actual activation.

Whether BIP-110 follows the same path depends largely on whether one or more major pools change position before Aug. 9.

Why Supporters Want the Change

BIP-110 was authored under the name Dathon Ohm. Earlier versions circulated under the BIP-444 designation before being accepted into the BIPs repository.

BIP-110 Supporters argue that inscriptions, BRC-20-style tokens, and increasingly large OP_RETURN payloads raise the cost of operating a full node, distort Bitcoin’s fee market, and shift network resources away from Bitcoin’s intended purpose as a payment and settlement system.

“Removing rules is a hardfork,” BIP-110 supporter and Bitcoin Knots developer Luke Dashjr explained on X in early July. “That includes scheduled rules like subsidy halvings, and yes, even BIP110. Rejecting BIP110 is a contentious hardfork attempt.”

Dashjr added:

“And unlike softforks, hardforks need consensus to succeed. There is no consensus on rejecting BIP110.”

Opponents generally agree that spam exists but disagree over whether BIP-110’s activation mechanism is the appropriate solution. “OP_RETURN blockspace usage hasn’t increased much since Bitcoin Core v30 was released. Oversized OP_RETURNs may be up slightly, but still they consume less than 0.1% of blockspace,” Alex Thorn, Galaxy Digital’s head of research, wrote on X.

Thorn continued:

“BIP-110 is an extremely disruptive & dangerous response given the tiny impact from these prunable [transactions].”

The Final Days Could Still Change Everything

The next two weeks will likely come down to three developments.

The first is whether one of the largest mining pools begins signaling support. The second is whether major exchanges publicly clarify which chain they would recognize if competing chains emerge after block 961,632. The third is what miners actually do once the mandatory window opens, because signaling percentages leading up to the deadline only tell part of the story.

The trend has been moving in BIP-110’s favor, climbing from below 1% to roughly 3% as the deadline approaches. Even so, the proposal remains far from demonstrating broad miner backing. Unless one of Bitcoin’s largest pools changes course in the days ahead, the mandatory signaling window appears set to open with support still concentrated among a relatively small portion of the network.

#Bitcoin #BTC #BIP110 #BitcoinMining #BitcoinCore #Crypto #Blockchain #Ordinals #SoftFork #CryptoNews

Musk made the prediction during an extended interview with Economist editor-in-chief Zanny Minton Beddoes, recorded at the Texas Gigafactory and published in late July 2026 as part of the outlet’s Insider series.

“You want money for food, housing, transport, entertainment,” Musk said. “If that is so abundant, what do you need money for in that case?”

He predicted deflation rather than inflation, arguing output would outrun the money supply as robots and AI take over production. He also suggested governments could simply issue checks to citizens once goods become abundant enough.

A Prediction With a History

Musk has floated versions of this idea before. In past conversations with entrepreneur Peter Diamandis, he has described “universal high income” replacing basic income, work becoming optional, and money losing relevance as AI and humanoid robots outproduce human needs.

Musk has pointed to Iain M. Banks’ Culture novels as a model for what a positive AI future looks like. In those books, advanced machine intelligences called Minds handle production and logistics, citizens face no material want, and money is treated as a marker of poverty rather than a tool. SpaceX names its drone ships after vessels from the series.

Diamandis has pushed a similar abundance argument for years through the XPRIZE Foundation. He argues that exponential gains in energy, computing, robotics, and manufacturing will push the cost of many goods toward the cost of raw materials and electricity.

Other technologists share pieces of the same outlook. Mustafa Suleyman has discussed a universal basic provision built on abundant intelligence. Sam Altman has funded basic income experiments while building AI systems that could make large-scale transfers necessary. Ray Kurzweil’s singularity forecasts have long assumed a similar abundance follows accelerating computation.

Economists Question the Timeline

Not everyone accepts that AI will do such things and the 2036 date. Economists at the American Institute for Economic Research and writers at The Daily Economy argue that scarcity does not disappear when robots make physical goods cheap. It shifts. A house with a specific view, a seat at a top school, or the attention of in-demand people remains scarce, no matter how cheap manufactured goods become. Money, or something like it, still rations access to those things.

Critics have also raised governance questions. If a small number of companies own the robots and the energy infrastructure that powers them, distributing the resulting abundance does not happen automatically. Tesla’s own valuation, built partly on Optimus robot ambitions, still depends on investors who expect returns paid in the currency Musk says will soon matter less.

Economists Tyler Cowen and Noah Smith have pointed to comparative advantage as a limiting factor. Even in a world where AI outperforms humans at most tasks, people may still command wages where the scarce input is human presence, judgment, or accountability. Energy availability, land for data centers and robot factories, and the pace at which institutions can absorb labor displacement may end up as the real constraints, not the intelligence of the machines themselves.

Why It Matters

The prediction lands at a moment when governments, investors, and workers are already grappling with how fast AI and automation are moving through the economy. If Musk is right even partially, it points toward:

Falling prices for goods and services tied to automated production
Growing pressure on governments to fund large-scale income transfers
A shift in where scarcity and value concentrate, toward energy, land, and attention rather than manufactured goods
Musk has acknowledged the transition will be “bumpy” and could bring social strain as jobs disappear faster than new roles replace them. That acknowledgment sits closer to what past waves of automation have actually produced: uneven gains, real disruption, and institutions forced to adapt under pressure rather than a clean shift to abundance for everyone at once.

Money functions as a way to coordinate trade-offs under scarcity. Robots assembling houses or generating entertainment do not remove every scarce resource. Energy, land, political power, and genuine novelty stay limited. Whatever system allocates them will still need a pricing signal, whether or not it goes by the name money.

The next decade will test which constraints actually hold. Musk’s forecast raises real questions about what happens once machines can produce more than people need. Whether the answer arrives by 2036, and whether it removes money’s role rather than changing its form, remains an open bet.

#ElonMusk #AI #Robotics #ArtificialIntelligence #Future #Economy #Technology #HumanoidRobots #TechNews #Animalverse

Crenshaw has a track record of strong stock picks, AMZN +77.7%, AAPL +73.8%, and FAS +98.1% since 2022.

#DanCrenshaw #ETF #LeveragedETF #OilETF #USCongress #StockMarket #Investing #CongressTrading #FinancialMarkets

Saylor’s essay lists 100 numbered arguments against the proposal, which he says amounts to using Bitcoin’s consensus rules to discourage a disputed but currently valid category of transactions. He frames the piece as a critique of the proposal, not the developers behind it, and says he shares their underlying goals of affordable node operation and cheap payments.

BIP 110, titled the “Reduced Data Temporary Softfork,” reached Complete status on June 25, 2026, according to its Github listing. That status means the authors have finished their planned work and recommend adoption. It does not mean Bitcoin developers or node operators have agreed to activate it, and the BIPs repository itself states that publication does not establish community consensus.

What BIP 110 Would Change

The proposal would run for roughly one year and add seven new consensus restrictions. These include an 83-byte limit on OP_RETURN outputs, a 256-byte cap on many pushed payloads and witness items, a ban on spending undefined witness and Tapleaf versions, a prohibition on the Taproot annex, a 257-byte cap on Taproot control blocks, and a rejection of certain Tapscript opcodes and branches.

Existing unspent transaction outputs created before activation would be grandfathered under the current rules. Saylor stressed that protection does not fully remove risk, since some pre-signed transaction workflows could still span the activation window and face new constraints, potentially forcing some users to migrate funds ahead of time.

Threshold and Activation Concerns

Saylor focused heavily on how BIP 110 would activate. The proposal uses a 55% miner-signaling threshold, well below the 95% threshold set in the standard BIP 9 process. It also removes the conventional timeout and FAILED state that lets a stalled proposal quietly expire, and adds a mandatory-signaling period ahead of guaranteed lock-in.

Saylor argued that a lower threshold for a contested rule change raises the odds of a chain split, since miners represent only one group among holders, exchanges, wallets and custodians who decide which rules a network ultimately follows. He said mandatory signaling changes what nonparticipation means for node operators during the deployment window.

Fee Market and Security Questions

Saylor’s essay also raises questions about Bitcoin’s fee market. Saylor noted that transaction fees make up a growing share of miner revenue as the block subsidy continues to halve every 210,000 blocks. He said BIP 110 does not model how suppressing one category of transactions could affect total fee demand, miner incentives, or long-term network security.

He pointed to Bitcoin Core’s existing relay and mining policy tools as less disruptive alternatives, arguing that node operators and miners can already limit unwanted transaction types through configurable policy without changing consensus rules for the entire network. Saylor also noted the proposal cannot fully stop data embedding, since users could split or disguise data within permitted structures.

A Warning on Precedent

Saylor closed his essay by describing BIP 110 as a governance risk rather than a technical fix. He wrote that once transaction validity depends on judgments about acceptable use, future disputes over privacy tools, stablecoin settlement, or other applications could face similar restrictions down the line.

Saylor said he disagrees with using a consensus softfork to police disputed use cases, calling the proposal a “ Bitcoin Iatrogenic Proposal” that creates more risk than the problem it targets. He closed by urging Bitcoin to stay conservative at the base layer, arguing that means resisting changes to consensus rather than rewriting them.

The debate over BIP 110 remains active among Bitcoin community members, developers, miners and node operators.

Community Reaction Splits

Replies to Saylor’s post on X show a divided response typical of Bitcoin protocol debates. Among roughly 50 to 60 sampled recent replies out of about 339 total as of 3 p.m. EDT on Jul. 18, an estimated 60 to 70% pushed back against Saylor or dismissed the essay outright, with several users questioning whether he runs a node and others calling the length of the argument excessive.

Supporters of BIP 110 argue that the proposal responds directly to rising node costs and data storage use cases that fall outside plain payments. A smaller share of replies, roughly 20 to 30%, backed Saylor’s position on preserving neutrality and technical optionality. Several of the commentators questioned whether or not Saylor leveraged artificial intelligence (AI) to write his long essay, with a few calling it “slop.”

The remaining replies were mixed or low engagement, with some users granting that separating monetary from nonmonetary transactions is difficult, while others treated the exchange as a broader clash between corporate Bitcoin holders and node operators focused on decentralization. Saylor’s original post had drawn more than 1,500 likes and over 320 reposts as of Saturday, engagement that outpaced the more critical tone found in direct replies.

#Bitcoin #BTC #MichaelSaylor #BIP110 #BitcoinCore #SoftFork #BitcoinDevelopment #Decentralization #CryptoNews #Blockchain

#AnchorageDigital #TRON #TRX #TRC20 #CryptoCustody #InstitutionalCrypto #Staking #DigitalAssets #Blockchain #CryptoNews

Large financial entities are deploying capital at scale once regulatory infrastructure permits, per Chainalysis data. 📑

#Tokenization #RealWorldAssets #RWA #Blockchain #Chainalysis #DigitalAssets #InstitutionalAdoption #Crypto #DeFi #Finance

Traders have spent days watching exchange transfers from the wallet, treating each move as potential sell pressure.

#Bitcoin #BTC #Crypto #Cryptocurrency #Arkham #Germany #BitcoinNews #CryptoNews #OnChain #Blockchain

Brazil Terminates PCC-Linked Crypto Money Laundering Ring

The Brazilian Federal Police launched Operation Exchange on Friday, targeting a high-profile criminal organization linked to the Brazilian Specially Designated Global Terrorist (SDGT) Primeiro Comando da Capital (PCC), which used cryptocurrency and cash to launder illicit funds and transfer them from Florida to Brazil.

The operation, which involved 50 policemen, included the execution of 13 search-and-seizure warrants and 11 temporary arrest warrants at locations in the State of São Paulo.

Brazilian Federal Police Dismantle $2 Billion Crypto Money Laundering Ring Linked to the PCC Cartel

According to local media, the police reported that the organization used “a structured system to move funds through illicit cryptocurrency transfers and cash transportation.“

Authorities estimated that through this scheme, these criminals laundered nearly $2 billion by mixing transactions between users, large banking transactions, and cash. Nonetheless, no exchange has been identified as being involved in this scheme, as investigations are still ongoing.

On July 1, Victor Henrique de Oliveira Shimada and Stella Stefanie Nunes Henrique de Oliveira, two suspects of integrating this organization, were designated by the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) alongside three Brazilian companies and one Portuguese company due to their links to the PCC.

At that time, the U.S. Department of the Treasury declared that Shimada had been “a key link” for these operations. Shimada helped launder “more than $30 million in illicit proceeds generated in and around multiple cities in the United States, utilizing cryptocurrency to move funds back to Brazil on behalf of PCC,” the office alleged.

While Nunes Henrique de Oliveira was captured, Shimada is now a fugitive. Federal Police chief Andrei Rodrigues referred to a lack of coordination between the OFAC designation and Operation Exchange, revealing that the police had to execute these warrants before originally planned.

“Actually, if there hadn’t been this designation, maybe the outcome would be different, and we could have located this person. There was damage to our investigation,” he stated at a press conference.

The Trump Administration designated PCC and Comando Vermelho as SDGTs in May, as Secretary of State Marco Rubio declared that these two groups “command thousands of members and have orchestrated brutal attacks against Brazilian police officers, public officials, and civilians.”

#CryptoCrime #MoneyLaundering #Crypto #Blockchain #FinancialCrime #Brazil #OFAC #Security #CryptoNews #BreakingNews

The ruling overturns a 91-year precedent protecting federal regulators from removal, reshaping crypto oversight.

#SEC #CFTC #Trump #CryptoRegulation #Crypto #USSupremeCourt #Blockchain #Policy #DigitalAssets #CryptoNews

💸 With $40T U.S. debt and $1.4T annual interest, inflation is government’s easiest escape, per River data.

#Inflation #Gold #Bitcoin #Economy #USDebt #Macro #Investing #Markets #Finance #CryptoNews

📉 HYPE ETFs led altcoin inflows with $27.9M, while XRP added $10.7M and Solana $7.1M, as Galaxy Research flagged a record $6.35B in 30-day Bitcoin ETF outflows.

#BTC #ETF #BitcoinETF #Grayscale #GBTC #XRP #Solana #CryptoNews #Markets

President Donald Trump threatened to strike Iran again on Sunday unless Tehran reins in Hezbollah and other proxy forces in Lebanon, just four days after signing a ceasefire deal meant to end the 2026 Iran war.

Trump made the warning in a Truth Social post at 9:30 a.m. Eastern. “Iran must immediately stop their highly paid PROXIES in Lebanon from causing trouble. If they don’t, we’ll hit Iran very hard again, just like we did last week, only harder!!!” the post read, signed “President DONALD J. TRUMP.”

The post landed as the ceasefire he brokered showed new cracks. Trump and Iranian President Masoud Pezeshkian signed a 14-point memorandum of understanding on June 17 in Versailles, France, while Trump attended the G7 summit. Pakistan’s prime minister, who mediated the talks, signed as well. The deal calls for a 60-day window to negotiate a final agreement covering Iran’s nuclear program, sanctions relief and the broader regional conflict.

The first clause of the memorandum calls for the “immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon.” But Israel and Hezbollah never signed it.

Israeli forces struck Hezbollah targets across southern Lebanon overnight Thursday into Friday, with Lebanese officials reporting at least 18 civilians killed. It marked the deadliest single incident since the memorandum took effect. The Israel Defense Forces said the strikes responded to “repeated violations of the ceasefire.”

Iran responded by closing the Strait of Hormuz for the second time in a week, citing continued Israeli troop presence in Lebanon as a breach of the deal’s terms. The waterway carries roughly 20% of the world’s crude oil and liquefied natural gas. Brent crude traded near $78 a barrel Saturday, down from more than $100 during the height of the war but still sensitive to Hormuz disruptions.

Trump also posted Saturday that ships would cross the strait toll-free for 60 days “unless they are imposed by and for the United States of America,” should a final deal fall through.

Talks Resume in Switzerland

Technical-level negotiations between U.S. and Iranian delegations began this weekend at the Bürgenstock resort in Switzerland. Vice President JD Vance, U.S. special envoy Steve Witkoff and Trump son-in-law Jared Kushner represent Washington. Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi and Parliament Speaker Mohammad-Bagher Ghalibaf lead Tehran’s delegation. Pakistani and Qatari officials are mediating.

Organizers added an emergency session on the Lebanon fighting to the agenda, reflecting how directly the violence threatens the broader nuclear and sanctions talks the memorandum was designed to protect.

Why It Matters

The memorandum unlocked a $300 billion reconstruction fund for Iran and staged sanctions relief, but both remain tied to verified compliance. Continued fighting in Lebanon gives critics in Washington, including several Senate Republicans, an opening to argue the deal favors Tehran. It also tests how much control Trump has over Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, whose forces have continued operating in Lebanon despite the ceasefire’s language.

For now, the 60-day clock keeps running. Whether it produces a final agreement on Iran’s nuclear stockpile and missile program, or another collapse, depends largely on whether Lebanon stays quiet.

#Trump #Iran #Israel #Hezbollah #MiddleEast #Geopolitics #War #Oil #WorldNews #BreakingNews

📉 Daily #Bitcoin miner revenues sit at the 17th percentile of the last year, down 26% y/y.

Marathon bought 1,000 $BTC this week, even as “most miners are selling newly mined BTC to pay for operations amid the price slump.”

#BTC #Mining #BitcoinMining #Marathon #MARA #Crypto #CryptoNews #Investing #Bullish #HOLD

President Donald Trump declared a deal with Iran complete on Sunday, immediately authorizing the toll-free reopening of the Strait of Hormuz and the removal of the U.S. naval blockade.

Trump posted the announcement on Truth Social on June 14, 2026. The full statement read: “The Deal with the Islamic Republic of Iran is now complete. Congratulations to all! I hereby fully authorize the toll free opening of the Strait of Hormuz, and, simultaneously herewith, authorize the immediate removal of the United States Naval blockade. Ships of the World, start your engines. Let the oil flow!”

Markets Move Fast

Oil futures fell sharply within hours. West Texas Intermediate crude settled near $84.88 per barrel, down roughly 3.2% on the day. Brent crude slid approximately 3.4% to around $87.33 per barrel, reaching multi-month lows. Earlier in the crisis, Brent had traded above $100 per barrel as supply disruption fears gripped global energy markets.

Bitcoin responded positively. The cryptocurrency traded toward the $65,000 level amid a risk-on shift in broader market sentiment.

BTC had shown consistent sensitivity throughout the conflict, pulling back on escalations and recovering on progress toward peace. Prior de-escalation signals during this crisis had already produced daily gains of roughly 3%.

How the Crisis Began

The conflict escalated on February 28, 2026, when the U.S. and Israel launched coordinated strikes on Iranian military and nuclear sites under Operation Epic Fury. Iran retaliated with missile and drone attacks on Israel, U.S. regional bases, and Gulf state infrastructure, while closing or severely restricting the Strait of Hormuz. The strait handles an estimated 20 to 25% of global seaborne oil trade.

Iran deployed mines, speedboats, drones, and GNSS jamming to disrupt shipping. Dozens of vessels were damaged or abandoned. Insurance costs soared. Tanker traffic plummeted.

On April 13, 2026, the U.S. imposed a naval blockade on Iranian ports under CENTCOM, cutting off Iran’s oil export capacity and adding billions in estimated lost revenue. Multiple ceasefire attempts, including talks mediated by Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey, collapsed before today’s breakthrough.

Deal Framework

Iran’s Deputy Foreign Minister Kazem Gharibabadi confirmed the memorandum of understanding on state media. Pakistan’s Prime Minister Shehbaz Sharif, who served as a key mediator, said both parties agreed to the “immediate and permanent termination of military operations on all fronts, including in Lebanon.”

A formal signing ceremony is scheduled for Friday, June 19, 2026, in Switzerland. Reported deal elements include the full reopening of Hormuz without tolls, the lifting of the U.S. blockade, and Iranian commitments on nuclear non-weaponization. Demining operations and enriched uranium handling are also expected to be addressed in follow-on technical talks.

What It Means for Traders

Lower oil prices ease inflation pressure and reduce input costs across transportation and manufacturing, improving the macro backdrop for risk assets. For crypto, the deal removes a sustained source of geopolitical uncertainty that had weighed on sentiment since late February.

Bitcoin’s behavior throughout the conflict confirms its ongoing sensitivity to macro risk signals. With the blockade lifted and Hormuz reopening, traders are watching whether the $65,000 level holds as a base for further upside.

The June 19 signing and early implementation steps remain the next key catalysts. Any setback in compliance or renewed hostilities could reverse the gains quickly.

#Bitcoin #BTC #Trump #Iran #StraitOfHormuz #CryptoNews #BitcoinNews #CryptoMarket #Geopolitics #OilPrices #RiskOn #Blockchain #DigitalAssets #CryptoTrading #MarketUpdate #BreakingNews #MacroEconomics #Investing #FinancialMarkets #CryptoCommunity

Bloomberg Intelligence senior exchange-traded fund (ETF) analyst Eric Balchunas said on Thursday that Blackrock’s Ishares Bitcoin Premium Income ETF could be live on Nasdaq within a week after the firm filed a Form 8-A with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

“Blackrock filed an 8-A for the Bitcoin Premium Income ETF BITA,” Balchunas wrote on X. “That typically means launch in one week. So if I had to bet I’d say next Thursday BITA goes live. We’ll see tho.”

The 8-A is a securities registration form that exchanges require before a fund can list for public trading. Analysts closely track these filings because they typically precede launch by about five to seven trading days.

What the Fund Does

BITA is not a standard spot bitcoin ETF. It is a covered-call fund that holds bitcoin directly and shares of Blackrock‘s IBIT, then writes call options on roughly 25% to 35% of its notional net asset value each month.

The options premiums collected are used to support monthly distributions to shareholders, giving income-focused investors a way to earn yield from bitcoin exposure. The tradeoff is capped upside during strong bitcoin rallies, when written calls may limit gains.

Fee and Competitive Position

Blackrock set the sponsor fee at 0.65 percent, undercutting rivals including YBTC at roughly 0.95 percent and BTCI at approximately 0.99 percent. Grayscale’s Bitcoin Premium Income ETF, ticker BPI, carries a 0.66 percent fee and offers biweekly distributions.

BITA holds bitcoin in cold storage through Coinbase Custody and also holds IBIT shares to maintain exposure while writing options on the Nasdaq ISE exchange.

Timeline to Here

Blackrock formed the Delaware statutory trust behind BITA in September 2025 and filed the initial S-1 registration statement with the SEC on January 23, 2026.

Three subsequent amendments refined the strategy and seeding details, with the ticker BITA confirmed in a filing around late March. The fourth amendment came around June 10, 2026, which showcased the fee.

As of now, the fund is seeded and actively buying bitcoin and IBIT shares.

Racing the Competition

A Goldman Sachs bitcoin fund is reportedly targeting a launch around July 1. Balchunas’ estimate places BITA ahead of that window. Blackrock manages approximately $14 trillion in assets under management, a figure reached in late 2025, giving the firm significant distribution leverage as it enters the bitcoin income product space.

Who This Targets

BITA is designed to appeal to institutions, including pensions, endowments, and registered investment advisors, that want bitcoin allocation with a yield component. In flat or moderately volatile markets, covered-call strategies tend to outperform spot holdings because premiums add to returns. In sharp bitcoin rallies, BITA will likely lag IBIT.

Distributions are not guaranteed and depend on the premium income generated each month. Blackrock’s Delaware trust structure means BITA is not registered under the Investment Company Act.

#Bitcoin #BTC #BlackRock #BITA #IBIT #BitcoinETF #CoveredCallETF #CryptoETF #ETFNews #InstitutionalInvestors #DigitalAssets #CryptoNews #BitcoinAdoption #Nasdaq #CryptoMarket #AssetManagement #TradFi #CryptoInvesting #Bullish #CryptoUpdates

Bitcoin successfully reclaimed the $64,000 threshold, reversing a brutal multi-day rout that had previously dragged it below $60,000.

Bitcoin Reclaims $64,000 Amid Geopolitical Storm

Bitcoin staged a resilient comeback, shrugging off a volley of escalating military exchanges between Israel and Iran to aggressively reclaim the $64,000 threshold. The cryptocurrency’s swift rebound offers a stark contrast to a brutal multi-day rout just days prior, during which it slipped below $60,000 amid an aggressive sell-off that erased nearly 20% of its market value in under a week.

Market data reveal that before bulls triggered this rapid rally past $63,000, bitcoin briefly capitulated below $61,100 Sunday afternoon as geopolitical tensions in the Middle East reached a boiling point. However, between 4 p.m. and 8 p.m. EDT on June 7, the cryptocurrency kick-started a steep climb that momentarily saw it peak at just under $63,800.

From there, bitcoin consolidated above $63,000, save for a brief dip just below the $62,500 mark. By June 8, 8:14 a.m. EDT, renewed buying pressure triggered another leg up, propelling the cryptocurrency to an intraday high of $64,197. The cryptocurrency’s 2% overall gain helped it trim its weekly losses to 11% and lift its market capitalization to $1.27 trillion. The recovery of bitcoin and altcoins also helped push the crypto economy’s aggregate market capitalization to $2.26 trillion.

Although most traditional markets were closed when Iranian ballistic missiles slammed into northern Israel — a retaliatory strike for Israel’s operations in Lebanon — the overnight barrage sent an unmistakable signal of volatility ahead of Monday’s open. The attack injected a fresh wave of geopolitical risk into global markets, with traders bracing for a potentially disorderly start to the week as the conflict threatened to widen.

Energy markets reacted instantly. Fears of supply disruptions rippled through crude benchmarks, pushing Brent to just under $98 per barrel and lifting West Texas Intermediate (WTI) to $95 per barrel

The mounting geopolitical friction sent shockwaves through Asian equities, triggering one of the worst single-session routs in history for South Korea’s Kospi, while Japan’s Nikkei plummeted by nearly 4%. The panic subsided later in the global session following an apparent intervention by U.S. President Donald Trump, allowing European markets to absorb the shock and close with only negligible losses.

Bitcoin’s rapid turnaround, meanwhile, triggered a reversal of fortune across derivatives markets, punishing short sellers while throwing a lifeline to long traders. Derivatives data reveal a sharp polarization in liquidations: short positions accounted for 85%—roughly $240 million—of the $282.5 million in liquidations on the cryptocurrency alone. Across the broader cryptocurrency ecosystem, total liquidations reached $611 million, with wrong-footed short bets bearing the brunt of the pain at $463 million.

#Bitcoin #BTC #CryptoNews #ShortSqueeze #Liquidations #BitcoinRally #CryptoMarket #BTCBullish #DigitalAssets #BuyTheDip

A New York attorney intervened to stop what could have been the largest courtroom judgment in bitcoin in history, filing an amicus brief that persuaded a judge to freeze proceedings targeting nearly 40,000 dormant wallets collectively holding an estimated 3.8 million BTC.

The legal battle is unfolding alongside a wave of onchain activity from some of bitcoin’s oldest addresses. On June 6, 2026, Galaxy Research flagged a transaction involving 47.26 BTC, worth approximately $2.88 million, moving out of a wallet that had been untouched since June 17, 2011, a dormancy period of more than 15 years.

The address, 18sLgPeB9wQVrE8JoWqtKtnucbsx3Lw1m7, is listed as defendant address No. 37923 in a New York Supreme Court case styled ABC Company, XYZ Company, and Noah Doe v. John Does 1-39,069, Index No. 153119/2026. Alex Thorn, head of firmwide research at Galaxy, noted the movement on X, calling attention to the growing pattern of named addresses showing activity after years of silence.

“More 2011 coins that were claimed as ‘lost’ in the ‘noah doe’ NY state lost-and-found case are awakening and moving onchain,” Thorn wrote.

That June 6 transaction was not isolated. Another transfer tied to the case, 25 BTC from a Casascius coin redemption, was spent at block height 952534 and discovered by Galaxy Research. On June 2, a separate wallet dormant since March 2011 moved 35.55 BTC, becoming one of the first defendant addresses in the Noah Doe suit to register any onchain action after being named in court filings.

Each of these movements chips away at the central premise of the lawsuit: that these wallets were abandoned.

The Noah Doe Lawsuit

Filed March 11, 2026, and amended May 1, the case rests on a novel legal theory. A pseudonymous plaintiff identified in court documents as Noah Doe, a New York resident, claims he developed an algorithm that identified dormant bitcoin wallets exhibiting what he describes as a security vulnerability. He placed lists of wallet public addresses on USB drives and delivered them to the NYPD’s 17th Precinct in batches between December 2024 and April 2025.

He then directed a cyber expert to insert OP_RETURN messages into each wallet directing holders to a webpage, where they had 90 days to demonstrate their wallets were not abandoned. Of 42,001 wallets initially identified, 424 took onchain action and were removed. The remaining 39,069, valued at roughly $293 billion at current market prices, became the basis for a declaratory judgment claim that Noah Doe and two Wyoming LLCs own them outright under New York’s lost-and-found property statute.

The Amicus Intervention

On May 29, 2026, New York attorney Ian R. Cohen filed a Proposed Order to Show Cause along with a proposed amicus curiae brief, NYSCEF Doc. No. 33, before Hon. Kathy J. King in New York County Supreme Court. Cohen’s brief, submitted on behalf of no party but as an independent voice for adversarial analysis, mounts a systematic legal challenge across seven points.

His core argument: Article 7-B of the New York Personal Property Law, the lost-and-found statute the plaintiffs rely on, was written for tangible physical objects, not entries on a globally distributed blockchain. A person scanning a public ledger with an algorithm is not a “finder” under the statute. Bitcoin cannot be physically deposited with police. And dormancy, Cohen argues, is not abandonment.

“Abandonment requires intentional relinquishment of ownership and an external act manifesting that intent,” Cohen wrote. Cohen’s amicus further states:

“Mere inactivity, no matter how prolonged, is not abandonment.”

Cohen also flagged the proper legal framework. New York’s Abandoned Property Law, amended in 2022 to specifically address unclaimed virtual currency, routes dormant crypto assets to the State Comptroller for escheat, not to private parties or Wyoming LLCs.

He further challenged the suit’s due process foundation, arguing OP_RETURN messages and a global press release do not constitute constitutionally adequate notice, particularly for deceased holders, non-English speakers, and wallets using older address formats that may not receive such messages.

He also raised jurisdictional questions, noting that bitcoin has no cognizable legal situs in New York and that the vast majority of the 39,069 wallet holders are almost certainly not New York residents. Cohen’s brief also pointed to a judicial recusal that had already occurred in the case.

Acting Justice Emily Morales-Minerva recused herself on March 23, 2026, citing an ethical conflict with being directed to rule on a matter another justice in the same jurisdiction had already partially decided.

Court Acts on June 5

The court moved quickly. On June 5, 2026, Judge King issued a Decision and Order on Motion No. 001, characterized as an injunction and restraining order, and took action on Motion No. 004, Cohen’s amicus-related filing. The proceedings were stayed and any push toward a default judgment was halted pending further hearing.

NY Court Freezes Default Judgment After Lawyer Argues 39,069 BTC Wallets Aren’t Abandoned
Image source: Cohen’s X post about the court case.
The stay is significant because the defendant wallet addresses, served via OP_RETURN and press release, are unlikely to appear and contest the case. Without adversarial input, the plaintiffs’ theory risked proceeding unchecked toward an uncontested default. Cohen’s intervention changed that calculus.

“Not your keys, not your coins,” Cohen wrote in his brief, invoking the foundational bitcoin principle and applying it directly to the court’s consideration of the claim.

What This All Means

The case carries implications beyond the courtroom. If the Noah Doe theory prevailed, any party with blockchain analysis tools and a police station nearby could theoretically target long-dormant wallets anywhere on the bitcoin network. Cohen’s brief explicitly named that risk, warning the court that accepting the plaintiffs’ argument would threaten the property rights of every self-custody bitcoin holder in New York.

The wallet list in the case includes addresses linked in public reporting to the 2011 Mt. Gox hack, and others analyzed as potentially associated with Bitcoin’s genesis-era mining. The “1Feex” address, listed as John Doe No. 1, holds approximately 80,000 BTC and has been widely discussed in connection with the Mt Gox theft.

Cohen noted that a New York state-court ownership declaration over assets potentially subject to Japanese civil rehabilitation proceedings and U.S. federal forfeiture interest would risk serious legal conflict. The court’s stay means the case now heads toward a hearing with those questions on the table.

#Bitcoin #BTC #CryptoNews #BitcoinWallet #DormantBTC #NoahDoe #CryptoLaw #BTCNews #SelfCustody #MtGox

Banks Pool Resources Through The Clearing House

According to a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) report, JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup, Wells Fargo, and other major commercial banks are backing the effort through The Clearing House, a real-time payment network operator co-owned by those same institutions. The network will link traditional payment rails with blockchain infrastructure, allowing deposits to move on-chain with 24/7 settlement and programmable functionality.

The move comes as stablecoin issuers and crypto firms press further into the payments arena amid a more permissive regulatory climate under President Trump’s administration, the exclusive report by WSJ reporters Gina Heeb and Vicky Ge Huang notes.

How Tokenized Deposits Differ From Stablecoins

Tokenized deposits are actual commercial bank deposits recorded and transferred on distributed ledger technology. Key distinctions from stablecoins include:

Backed 1:1 by fiat reserves held directly at the issuing bank
Potential eligibility for FDIC deposit insurance up to statutory limits
Full AML and KYC compliance baked in
Programmable settlement running 24 hours a day, seven days a week
Stablecoins such as USDC and USDT, and many others, are issued by non-bank entities, backed by cash and Treasuries held in custody, and sit outside the regulated deposit perimeter. Tokenized deposits keep dollars inside the banking system while adding onchain functionality.

JPMorgan Already Has a Head Start

JPMorgan is not waiting for the broader consortium. The bank’s JPM Coin, also referred to as JPMD, launched on Coinbase’s Base network in late 2025 for institutional clients and has since expanded toward the Canton Network in 2026. JPMorgan positions the product as a direct bank deposit claim with on-chain programmability, calling it a superior option to stablecoins.

Citigroup has also moved forward with Citi Token Services, integrating tokenized liquidity with 24/7 USD clearing for cross-border instant payments.

A Parallel Network Targets Retail

A separate consortium called the Cari Network, involving regional banks including Huntington, First Horizon, KeyCorp, M&T, and Old National, is targeting a customer-facing tokenized deposit network launch in Q4 2026 following a Q3 pilot. That effort addresses the retail side of the market while the major-bank initiative focuses on wholesale and institutional use cases.

What It Means for Crypto

The industry largely anticipates tokenized deposits and stablecoins will coexist rather than one displacing the other, though some market participants regard the development as a direct competitive test. Tokenized deposits offer regulatory benefits for institutional and wholesale applications, while stablecoins continue to hold an advantage across decentralized finance ( defi), retail payments, and cross-chain composability.

For the broader crypto market, banks shifting substantial transaction volumes onto blockchain rails is expected to increase demand for settlement infrastructure, oracle networks, and interoperability solutions. With each passing day, growing institutional confidence in distributed ledger technology further solidifies its place within traditional finance (TradFi).

#JPMorgan #BankOfAmerica #Citigroup #WellsFargo #TokenizedDeposits #BlockchainBanking #DigitalAssets #Stablecoins #OnchainFinance #TradFiToDeFi

A bitcoin wallet, silent since March 27, 2011, moved 35.55 BTC worth approximately $2.54 million on June 2, 2026, not too long after being named as a defendant in a New York court case that claims nearly 3.8 million dormant bitcoins are legally abandoned property.

The Move Noah Doe Likely Did Not Expect

Galaxy Research flagged the transaction in real time. The address, 1LwWtSs7tMCwcRczQd5kVMv3xpWw6w4Sxe, received its first coins on March 27, 2011, when one bitcoin traded for roughly $0.87, weeks before BTC crossed $1 for the first time. The wallet sat untouched for 15.2 years before moving in block 952104.

Galaxy Research’s Alex Thorn noted on X at 7:30 a.m. ET on June 2, 2026, that the wallet had been attributed to “Noah Doe #38215” in the firm’s onchain tracking and was listed as “Salomon-dusted,” a reference to the dust transactions plaintiffs used to serve defendants in the case. Thorn’s X post was direct:

“These very old coins were served by ‘Noah Doe’ in the abandoned property case. Apparently, they were not, in fact, abandoned.”

What This Does to Noah Doe’s Legal Theory

The movement matters because the entire case rests on a legal claim that the targeted wallets qualify as abandoned property under New York’s Personal Property Law, Article 7-B. A plaintiff identified only as “Noah Doe” filed the case on March 11, 2026, at the New York County Supreme Court under Index No. 153119/2026, seeking legal title to 39,069 wallets holding roughly 3,799,629 BTC valued at approximately $293.5 billion.

To trigger a low-value procedural shortcut under Section 257(2) of the statute, Noah Doe’s unnamed expert valued each address at under $10. That figure, if accepted, allows title to vest in the finder just one year after the find, bypassing a prolonged police holding period.

Galaxy Research’s onchain analysis already dismantled that valuation. The 39,069 addresses hold an average of 97.25 BTC each, worth roughly $7.5 million. The median wallet holds 50 BTC. Thorn described the gap between the plaintiff’s $10 valuation and the actual $293.5 billion total as “nine orders of magnitude.”

A Holder Who May Have Been Watching

The June 2 wallet move adds a different dimension. The coins did not move randomly. They moved after Noah Doe served the address via onchain dust transactions carrying a link to court pleadings. The fact that the holder responded, moving 35.546709 BTC, signals active ownership and direct awareness of the lawsuit.

The court authorized onchain service through OP_RETURN messages, with 98 batch transactions confirmed across Bitcoin blocks 950446 to 950576. Each targeted address received 546 satoshis alongside a notice pointing to the case filing.

What a Default Judgment Would Actually Do

Even if Noah Doe wins a default judgment, no private keys transfer. What a New York court order produces is a legal document that could be used against any named coins appearing at a regulated custodian or exchange, potentially freezing assets and forcing holders to prove ownership publicly.

Thorn describes this theoretical judgment as “a cloud on title,” adding that the true value of the case lies in that leverage.

A technical default is expected by late June 2026, approximately 30 days after service. Thorn estimates the probability that the court grants the full title-vesting declaration on default as low to moderate.

The case now includes at least one named wallet whose holder has already shown they are neither absent nor unaware.

https://news.bitcoin.com/ny-lawsuit-served-a-2011-bitcoin-wallet-owner-moves-2-54m-to-prove-its-not-abandoned/

#Bitcoin #BTC #Crypto #Blockchain #DormantWallet #Onchain #GalaxyResearch #CryptoNews #BitcoinNews #WhaleAlert

Three investigations. Four suspects. Zero proof. Between October 2024 and April 2026, an HBO documentary, a New York Times investigation, and a feature-length film each named a different person as Satoshi Nakamoto and all three came up short.

The Hunt for Satoshi Nakamoto Heats up Again as 3 New Investigations Name Suspects

Over the years, prior to a hiatus, a string of self-proclaimed Satoshi Nakamotos and outside accusations have kept Bitcoin’s origin story permanently unsettled. From Craig Wright’s long-running legal campaign to a parade of cypherpunk candidates, the search has become a recurring fixture in crypto media, and interestingly, the trend is really picking up steam again.

Between October 2024 and April 2026, three high-profile investigations, including a HBO documentary, a New York Times deep dive, and a feature-length film, each pointed to a different person or pair of people as the pseudonymous creator of Bitcoin. None delivered a smoking gun, and none produced the cryptographic proof that would settle the question.

Peter Todd Steps Into the Spotlight

The onset of the new wave began on Oct. 8, 2024, when HBO released “Money Electric: The Bitcoin Mystery,” directed by Cullen Hoback. The film argued that Peter Todd, a Canadian Bitcoin Core developer, was Satoshi Nakamoto. Hoback built his case around Todd’s early cypherpunk activity, forum posts, his use of Canadian English, and what the director framed as suspicious technical overlap with Satoshi’s final known writings. The film documented that Todd was communicating with Hal Finney and Adam Back when he was just 15 years old.

Todd rejected the claim immediately and without hesitation. He called the idea “ludicrous” and compared the reasoning to “QAnon-style coincidence thinking.” The broader Bitcoin developer community sided with Todd, dismissing the film’s argument as circumstantial. Hoback’s case rested on a forum post where Todd appeared to write as Satoshi and then walk it back, but critics noted the evidence was too thin to support the conclusion. No cryptographic proof was offered. The roughly 1.1 million BTC long associated with Satoshi’s early mining activity remained unmoved.

John Carreyrou Turns His Eye to Adam Back

On April 8, 2026, the New York Times published an exhaustive investigation by John Carreyrou, the reporter known for his Theranos coverage. The piece, titled “My Quest to Solve Bitcoin’s Great Mystery,” was the product of roughly a year of research. Carreyrou applied linguistic filters across decades of cypherpunk mailing list archives, narrowing the candidate pool to one name: Adam Back, the British cryptographer and CEO of Blockstream.

The stylometric case was detailed. Carreyrou cited specific patterns, including Back’s alternation between “e-mail” and “email,” sentence-ending use of the word “also,” and the unhyphenated spelling of “double-spending.” He also pointed to a near-verbatim parallel between a Back post from 1996, “I’m better at coding than constructing convincing arguments,” and a Satoshi post from 2008, “I’m better with code than with words.” Back is the only person explicitly cited in the Bitcoin white paper, as the inventor of Hashcash, the proof-of-work system Bitcoin’s mining mechanism draws from directly.

Back denied it. He called the similarities unremarkable among cypherpunks and said the overlaps were the product of a shared intellectual culture, not shared identity. No cryptographic verification accompanied the Times report. Prediction market Polymarket, which opened a contract on April 9, 2026, asking whether Back would be confirmed as Satoshi by Dec. 31, 2026, placed the odds at 6%, with $14,598 in total volume.

Hal Finney and Len Sassaman: The Case for Two

Two weeks after the Times piece, on April 22, 2026, a separate documentary made a different argument entirely. “Finding Satoshi,” the result of a four-year investigation by author William D. Cohan and private investigator Tyler Maroney of Quest Research, argued that Satoshi was not one person but two.

The film proposed that Hal Finney, the software engineer who received the first bitcoin transaction from Satoshi on Jan. 12, 2009, handled the core code, while Len Sassaman, a cypherpunk privacy expert and PhD candidate at the Katholieke Universiteit Leuven, wrote the white paper and managed external communications. Both men are deceased. Finney died in 2014 after a years-long battle with ALS. Sassaman died by suicide on July 3, 2011, the same year Satoshi made his last known public communication.

The investigators pointed to a data analysis by scientist Alyssa Blackburn, whose work on Bitcoin’s early mining rhythms and online activity patterns matched both men. Finney’s widow, Fran, was shown in an archival interview appearing to pause when asked whether her husband helped build Bitcoin, a moment the filmmakers treated as meaningful. Sassaman’s widow, Meredith Patterson, told investigators she believed a secret collaboration between the two men was possible.

No Smoking Gun in Any of the Three

The documentary drew notable responses. Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong called it the “most thoughtful” examination of the Satoshi question and said he suspected the filmmakers had reached the right answer. Cryptographer Jon Callas, a PGP co-founder, told investigators the early Bitcoin team appeared to be a group effort and said one of the men could have been among the creators.

Still, no cryptographic evidence was produced. There is no signed message from Satoshi’s known keys confirming the identities. There is no movement of the coins. Adam Back, for his part, has argued that Sassaman’s timezone data does not line up with the timestamp patterns in Satoshi’s posts. Back in 2023, American software engineer Jameson Lopp argued that it couldn’t be Finney either because he was participating in running competitions during times Satoshi was active.

The three investigations, taken together, contradict each other in key respects. Each eliminates candidates that the others endorse.

The Coins Have Not Moved

Polymarket’s broader contract, asking whether any wallet identified as Satoshi’s on Arkham’s Intel Explorer would show an outflow or swap by Jan. 1, 2027, put the odds at 7%, with $3.1 million in total trading volume. The market reflects what the bitcoin community has largely concluded: the coins are not moving, and no reveal is coming.

The Mystery Holds

The Bitcoin community has largely settled into the view that identifying Satoshi does not change what Bitcoin is or how it works. The decentralized network functions the same regardless of who launched it. But the investigations keep coming, and the subject continues to draw serious journalists and filmmakers. Until someone signs a message with Satoshi’s known private keys or moves even a small amount of the roughly 1.1 million early-mined BTC, every theory remains a theory. Three separate efforts across 18 months pointed at four different people and reached three different conclusions. The question is no closer to being answered.

#SatoshiNakamoto #Bitcoin #BTC #PeterTodd #AdamBack #HalFinney #LenSassaman #Crypto #Blockchain #CryptoNews

With bitcoin down roughly 2.8% over the past seven days and the price touching a weekly low of $74,530 per coin, sleeping bitcoin wallets continue to awaken and relocate long-held funds. At block height 951160, 103.96 BTC valued at $7.8 million at current exchange rates moved for the first time in more than 12 years.

Vintage Bitcoin Wallets Continue to Reactivate

Earlier this week, Bitcoin.com News reported on five bitcoin wallets established in 2014 that transferred a combined 964.85 BTC, and since that report, another, albeit smaller, wave of dormant coins has continued to reappear from long-inactive addresses. Another 2014 wallet, created on Jan. 4 of that year, transferred 103.96 BTC on May 26 at block height 951160.

The transfer was detected by btcparser.com, and the 103.96 BTC, valued at $7.8 million using current exchange rates, originated from a legacy P2PKH (Pay-to-Public-Key-Hash) wallet. The wallet transferred the funds to another legacy P2PKH address, where the holdings were later divided into two separate transactions, with at least 53.96 BTC ultimately sent to the crypto exchange Coinbase.

This gives the transaction a stronger likelihood of being a sale rather than a simple consolidation move. The owner of these coins would have secured a substantial return, and if the funds were truly sold, the gain would amount to roughly 9,044.11%. On Jan. 4, 2014, a single BTC traded for $823 per coin, whereas today, or at least as of 4:40 p.m. ET, BTC is changing hands at $75,256 per coin.

Back in 2014, that cache of 103 BTC was worth just $85,559, only slightly higher than the price of a single BTC today. On Wednesday, two P2PKH wallets created in 2017 and 2016 transferred 46.85468400 BTC across two separate transactions, one carrying 24.99990000 BTC and the other moving 21.85478400 BTC. The first transfer, containing 21.85 BTC, originated from a wallet created on March 10, 2017, approximately 9 years, 2 months, and 17 days ago.

The stash eventually landed in a Bech32 (Pay-to-Witness-Public-Key-Hash) wallet that now holds 28.71 BTC valued at $2.16 million. The second transfer, consisting of 24.99 BTC, also moved to a Bech32 wallet, which is currently worth $1.88 million. That particular wallet was created on Aug. 12, 2016, when BTC traded near $587 per coin.

In the case of the March 2017 wallet, BTC exchanged hands at $1,201 per coin on the 10th of that month. Both owners are sitting on substantial realized or unrealized gains after holding the coins for so many years.

This pair of transfers, however, does not indicate that the coins were moved into the bidding process for sale, as the transactions more likely reflect consolidation activity. Blockchair assigned the 2016 transfer a moderate privacy score of 55 after detecting a sweep into another address type, while the 2017 sender received the same score of 55.

The 2014 sender that transferred 103.96 BTC, some of which eventually reached Coinbase, received a score of 45 due to sweeping behavior and multiple occurrences of the same address appearing in the transaction inputs. While bitcoin continues to hover 40% below its October 2025 all-time high above $126,000, long-dormant wallets appear increasingly willing to break years of silence and reposition old holdings.

While some of these transfers hint at potential profit-taking, others carry the fingerprints of routine wallet management rather than immediate liquidation. Either way, the steady reawakening of vintage bitcoin addresses continues to offer another reminder that a significant portion of the network’s oldest wealth still remains active beneath the surface, waiting for the right moment to move.

https://news.bitcoin.com/another-set-of-long-silent-bitcoin-wallets-move-millions-during-btc-decline/

#Bitcoin #BTC #Crypto #Whale #Coinbase #Blockchain #BTCNews #CryptoMarket #HODL #OnChain

Vitalik Buterin laid out a direct case on Sunday for why the Ethereum Foundation must become a leaner, more opinionated organization focused on the properties that set Ethereum apart.

Buterin Warns Ethereum Risks Mediocrity if It Chases Speed Over Decentralization

Writing on X, Ethereum co-founder Vitalik Buterin explained that the Ethereum Foundation (EF) is choosing longevity over breadth. The shift comes after a period he described as productive, with major efficiency gains in 2025, but one question kept surfacing in his feed: Why did the foundation’s actions not reflect the decentralization and privacy values he spoke about publicly?

Buterin acknowledged that tension clearly. Some people saw a foundation finally getting serious about execution and business development. He saw something different and stated that the critics who pushed hardest on idealism were the ones whose words carried the most weight with him.

To explain the choice the EF is making, Buterin reached for an analogy. He described Google as a company that started with strong, idealistic roots but slowly moved away from them as mainstream corporate pressure set in. He remarked that if he could have pressed a button in 2008 to make Google two standard deviations more principled, he would have pressed it immediately. His reasoning: one organization choosing to hold a different standard matters more when the rest of the industry is drifting in the other direction.

That same logic now applies to the Ethereum Foundation‘s positioning within the broader ecosystem.

Buterin was direct about what the EF is and is not. He stated that the foundation is one node with a defined purpose, not a center of gravity for the entire network. The EF holds approximately 0.16% of all ETH. By comparison, central foundations behind other blockchains typically hold between 10% and 50% of their native supply. The original mandate, building the chain software through the Serenity upgrade, was completed in 2022. The EF was never designed to be a permanent steward.

Going forward, the EF will concentrate on activities critical to Ethereum’s function as a censorship-resistant, private, and open system, and only those activities that would not happen without the foundation’s direct involvement. That means some respected contributors and technically aligned teams will move outside the EF structure. Buterin said that is necessary, not accidental. External teams need the ability to attract outside capital, and that is harder when they sit inside the foundation.

On the technical side, Buterin pointed to several specific goals. He called for provably bug-free Ethereum using AI-assisted formal verification, a target he wrote would have seemed impossible six months ago but is now within reach. He also cited available chain consensus, which he described as a property only Ethereum and Bitcoin share, combining fault tolerance under asynchrony with protection against attackers controlling up to 49% of nodes. A third priority is intermediary minimization, meaning users and protocols should be able to send transactions directly to the chain without routing through third parties.

Buterin was clear that these goals are not in conflict with scalability. He wrote on X that they are compatible with high transaction throughput, lower slot times, and well-designed layer two ( L2) networks built for specific applications.

He also addressed ETH directly. Buterin said the asset secures $250 billion in value and that nearly 90% of his net worth is held in ETH. The remainder, approximately $40 million, is in onchain fiat that he said has already been allocated to open-source biotech, software, and hardware projects. He noted that some aspects of supporting ETH as an asset fall outside the EF’s new scope, and called on other organizations, some of which hold more ETH than the foundation does, to take on that work.

Buterin closed the post by describing what the EF is becoming. A smaller ship. More opinionated. Built to last longer. He said the foundation’s new long-term structure should stabilize over the next few months.

Board member Aya Miyaguchi is leading the operational side of the transition. Buterin said his own influence on the board will continue to decrease, and that is the outcome he wants.

#Ethereum #ETH #Vitalik #EthereumFoundation #Crypto #Blockchain #Web3 #DeFi #ETHNews #Bitcoin

Bitcoin is trading in a volatile but technically fragile range on Saturday as bearish pressure from Friday evening’s whiplash continues to dominate higher time frames despite selective short-term recovery attempts. Traders are monitoring whether the leading crypto asset can stabilize above the critical $74,000 support zone after a sharp retreat from recent highs near $82,833.

Bitcoin Chart Outlook

Bitcoin is priced at $74,684 early May 23, marking a gain of roughly 3.4% over the previous 24 hours while maintaining a market cap near $1.496 trillion. Intraday trading remains highly active, with volume reaching approximately $32.53 billion and prices fluctuating between $74,344 and $77,433. Market observers note that the range between $74,300 and $74,500 continues to act as immediate support, while resistance remains concentrated between $76,000 and $77,000. The market structure this weekend suggests that buyers have not yet regained control despite oversold conditions near short-term lows.

The 1-hour chart highlights growing uncertainty around bitcoin’s next directional move as price action compresses near support. Technical analysis identifies two potential outcomes: a bearish continuation pattern or a short-term relief bounce. A break above the $74,800 to $75,000 range would improve near-term bullish momentum, while sustained movement above $75,500 could strengthen the case for a broader rebound toward $76,500.

Conversely, a breakdown below $74,100 would reinforce bearish continuation risks, particularly if bitcoin closes beneath the key $73,700 support level. Analysts describe the current setup as highly reactive to momentum shifts, requiring disciplined risk management because of elevated volatility across lower time frames.

Bitcoin vs. the U.S. dollar on May 23, 2026, 1-hour timeframe.
BTC/USD 1-hour chart via Bitstamp on May 23, 2026.
On the 4-hour chart, bitcoin remains in a bearish consolidation phase after decisively breaking below the former $76,500 to $78,000 support region. Analysts point to large red candles accompanying the decline toward $74,100 as evidence of aggressive sell-side pressure rather than a gradual pullback. Although the market attempts to stabilize near recent lows, rebound candles lack sufficient strength to confirm a meaningful reversal.

The 4-hour structure continues to show lower highs and expanded downside volume, reinforcing bearish momentum while bitcoin trades below the major resistance zone between $76,500 and $77,500. Technical traders continue watching for a confirmed close above resistance levels before considering any sustained bullish continuation scenario.

Bitcoin vs. the U.S. dollar on May 23, 2026, 4-hour timeframe.
BTC/USD 4-hour chart via Bitstamp on May 23, 2026.
The daily chart reflects a broader corrective phase after bitcoin fails to sustain momentum near the $82,833 high. Market structure shifts into a pattern of lower highs and lower lows, signaling weakening buyer control after the prior rally. Analysts identify the $74,000 to $74,200 range as the most important near-term support zone, followed by additional downside targets near $73,700 and $72,000 if selling pressure intensifies.

Resistance remains concentrated between $75,500 and $77,500, an area viewed as critical for reversing the broader bearish correction. Despite the current weakness, analysts emphasize that the long-term trend has not fully deteriorated, though bitcoin would need to reclaim former support levels to invalidate the present bearish structure.

Bitcoin vs. the U.S. dollar on May 23, 2026, 1-day timeframe.
BTC/USD daily chart via Bitstamp on May 23, 2026.
Oscillator readings present a mixed technical outlook, contributing to the market’s overall neutral assessment. The relative strength index ( RSI) measures 38, while the Stochastic registers 11, both categorized as neutral this weekend. The commodity channel index (CCI), on the other hand, stands at negative 161, and the average directional index (ADX) measures 20, also reflecting neutral momentum conditions.

Additional indicators show weakness beneath the surface, with the Awesome oscillator posting negative 1,852 and the moving average convergence divergence ( MACD) level registering negative 305, producing a bearish signal. However, the momentum indicator generates a bullish signal at negative 4,610, suggesting oversold conditions could support selective short-term rebounds despite broader bearish pressure.

Moving averages (MAs) continue reinforcing bitcoin’s bearish bias across multiple time frames. The exponential moving average (EMA) (10) at 77,137 and the simple moving average (SMA) (10) at 77,453 both generate negative signals, while the EMA (20), SMA (20), EMA (30), SMA (30), EMA (50), and SMA (50) also remain in bearish territory as well.

The SMA (100) at 72,611 is one of the few indicators showing a positive signal, but the EMA (200) at 81,552 and the SMA (200) at 80,651 continue flashing negative sentiment signs. Overall, moving averages produce 13 bearish signals against one bullish signal, similar to yesterday evening’s reading, highlighting persistent downside pressure unless bitcoin reclaims the $76,500 to $77,500 resistance zone.

Bull Verdict:

Bitcoin bulls still have an opportunity to stabilize the market if BTC can defend the $74,000 to $74,200 support zone and reclaim resistance between $76,500 and $77,500 with strong volume. A confirmed breakout above those levels could shift momentum back toward the $78,000 to $79,000 range and weaken the current bearish correction narrative.

Bear Verdict:

Bitcoin remains technically vulnerable while trading below the former $76,500 to $77,500 support region, with moving averages and higher-time-frame charts continuing to favor sellers. A breakdown below $74,100, especially under $73,700, could accelerate downside pressure and expose BTC to deeper correction targets near $72,000 to $72,500.

https://animalverse.social/community/?activity_search=%23Bitcoin

#Bitcoin #BTC #Crypto #BTCPrice #CryptoNews #Trading #BearMarket #TechnicalAnalysis #BullRun #MarketCrash

The privacy coin Zcash jumped over 17% in six hours, hitting a new year-to-date high on May 20. The rally pushed its monthly gains past 90% and its market capitalization over the $11 billion threshold, eclipsing rival monero.

Key Takeaways
On May 20, privacy coin Zcash (ZEC) surged over 17% in six hours to cross an $11 billion market cap.
The ZEC rally triggered $28.25 million in liquidations and saw it eclipse rival token Monero.
To enter the top 10 crypto assets, ZEC must hit $1,000 to flip DOGE’s $16.25 billion valuation.
Zcash Hits New YTD High

Privacy coin Zcash (ZEC) surged to a new year-to-date high on May 20 amid a tepid cryptocurrency rally that also saw bitcoin briefly reclaim $78,000. Market data show ZEC jumped from $568 to an intraday peak of $686 in just over six hours, an increase of more than 17% over a 24-hour window.

Although it later retreated slightly, the privacy coin was still above $660 at the time of writing at 3:18 a.m. EST on May 21, leaving its daily gains well above 10%. ZEC’s latest surge lifted its weekly gains just above 25% and more than 90% since the beginning of the month. As a consequence, the privacy coin, which kicked off the month with an aggregate value of under $6 billion, saw its market cap surpass the $11 billion threshold.

In the meantime, ZEC’s latest parabolic rally saw $28.25 million in leveraged positions on the asset liquidated over 24 hours, the second highest this year. Coinglass data show liquidated short bets accounted for nearly $26.5 million, with the largest single liquidation of $2.68 million recorded.

Since early May, ZEC’s value has climbed steadily, fueled by high-profile endorsements from advocates who view it as the true embodiment of financial privacy—a trait critics argue bitcoin has lost. This renewed privacy narrative, coupled with an architecture widely considered superior to its rivals, helped ZEC eclipse Monero, which held a $7.3 billion market cap at the time of writing.

ZEC’s resurgence has even caught the attention of The Wall Street Journal, which recently dubbed the token a “more secret version of bitcoin.” Meanwhile, digital asset manager Grayscale contends that financial privacy will define the next crypto cycle, with ZEC leading the charge.

On social media, some supporters of the privacy coin, like David Hoffman, believe ZEC — currently ranked 13th — deserves a spot in the top 10 digital assets by market cap. However, for the privacy coin to achieve that, its price will have to surpass the $1,000 threshold to overtake DOGE, whose market cap stood at $16.25 billion. The last time ZEC traded above $1,000 was in the fourth quarter of 2016.

ZEC Spikes 17% to $686 as Ted Pillows Warns Zcash Rally Masks Short Squeeze
Alex Gladstein’s May 20 X post on Zcash
Meanwhile, some critics see risks associated with the privacy coin’s sudden surge. Ted Pillows argued that the jump was, in fact, a short squeeze disguised as organic demand.

“Zcash hasn’t suddenly solved adoption, liquidity, or regulatory headwinds overnight,” Pillows said in a post on X. “This looks far more like a coordinated squeeze than organic demand. Low float + thin liquidity + aggressive perp positioning = violent upside candles.”

#ZEC #Zcash #Crypto #PrivacyCoin #Bitcoin #Blockchain #Trading #Altcoins #Monero #DeFi

Bitcoin slid to $76,000 Monday morning, continuing a trend that began shortly after President Donald Trump hinted to reporters on May 15 that the U.S. and Israel may resume combat operations against Iran. Market data shows that bitcoin, which traded well above $78,000 just before Sunday evening, initially slipped below $77,000 just after 9 p.m. EST.

The top cryptocurrency remained largely under that threshold until 9:40 a.m., when a relief rally saw it not only reclaim $77,000 but surge well past $77,600. However, shortly afterward, a fresh wave of selling saw it completely reverse earlier gains and plummet to $76,000. The reversal caused bitcoin’s total market capitalization, which stood at just under $1.6 trillion on May 15, to decline to $1.53 trillion.

By shedding more than $1,000 of its value, bitcoin’s nearly 2% drop triggered the liquidation of approximately $223 million in long positions over a 24-hour window. In contrast, only $27 million in short bets was liquidated during the same period. Overall, the crypto economy saw $722 million in long positions liquidated versus nearly $94 million in shorts.

Reports of an imminent return to full‑scale combat persisted on May 16, extending the sense of volatility that dominated the weekend. One report even suggested operations could resume before the end of the week. The speculation gained traction as Pakistani officials offered no meaningful diplomatic updates and oil prices snapped back to levels last seen during active fighting, reinforcing the perception that de‑escalation efforts had stalled.

In Washington, there were indications that the Trump administration is actively reviewing military contingencies, while President Donald Trump’s social‑media posts signaled a growing impatience with Tehran. Adding to the unease, Iran appeared to harden its position in the Strait of Hormuz after unveiling what state‑aligned media outlets described as a bitcoin‑powered maritime insurance platform, Hormuz Safe.

The platform reportedly issues fast, cryptographically verifiable insurance policies for maritime cargo passing through the Persian Gulf, the Strait of Hormuz and surrounding waterways. While this would be consistent with Iran’s growing desire to gain recognition over the strait, there has been no official confirmation by Iran’s leadership. However, if true, the move would give hawks in Washington another reason to justify resuming the bombing campaign.

Meanwhile, bitcoin’s sell-off during geopolitical stress has again highlighted how the cryptocurrency is failing to catch its safe-haven bid. Part of the reason for this, according to Diego Martin, CEO of Yellow Capital, is that traders are treating it as part of the liquidity stack.

“When a geopolitical shock hits and you’re suddenly dealing with oil, yields and dollar pressure all at once, desks first look at collateral pressure, margin usage and where they can reduce exposure quickly,” Martin said.

According to the CEO, bitcoin is usually where that adjustment appears first because it has deep liquidity, trades 24/7, and sits within funding, collateral, and cross-venue strategies. However, the sell-off, Martin argues, is less about a change in bitcoin’s long-term viability and more about market mechanics.

On bitcoin’s next move, Martin suggests it may depend more on liquidity conditions than crypto-native news.

“The market already knows most of the major crypto narratives,” he said. “What it does not know is whether macro conditions will allow traders to keep risk on the book. If oil cools, yields ease and dollar liquidity improves, BTC can recover even without a major crypto-specific catalyst.”

Yet if the dollar stays strong, yields remain elevated, and leverage keeps getting cleaned out, positive crypto headlines may not be enough. In this scenario, “ bitcoin is trading more like part of the global liquidity cycle than a standalone crypto story,” Martin said.

#Bitcoin #BTC #Crypto #Liquidation #MiddleEast #War #Trading #Macro #Blockchain #MarketCrash

The surge in profit-taking comes as $ETH’s price declined 5.5% this week, with holders accumulating below $2K selling into the dip.

#ETH #Ethereum #Crypto #Altcoins #DeFi #Blockchain #Trading #Web3 #Santiment #Investing

#Bitcoin #BTC #KevinWarsh #Fed #Crypto #ClarityAct #FederalReserve #Web3 #Markets #USA

Bitcoin briefly dipped below $80,000 on May 12 as global markets reacted to President Donald Trump’s warning that the ceasefire between the U.S. and Iran was “on life support.” After testing the $82,000 mark Monday afternoon, the top cryptocurrency showed signs of weakness, plummeting to $80,900.

Although bitcoin quickly rebounded to trade above $81,000 in the early hours of Tuesday, it could not hold the level and slipped below the threshold again around 4 a.m. EDT. From that point, the cryptocurrency began a gradual decline that erased nearly all gains made in the preceding 48 hours. By 12:54 p.m. EDT, bitcoin had dipped to an intraday low of $79,820 before recovering quickly to $80,500.

Consequently, the 1.6% drop over 24 hours dragged the cryptocurrency’s market capitalization down to $1.61 trillion.

Speaking to reporters shortly after receiving Iran’s proposal, which he deemed “unacceptable,” President Trump repeated the argument that Tehran is stringing the U.S. along and seems uninterested in reaching an agreement. This latest impasse in negotiations is seen as strengthening hawks in Washington who favor a return to full combat operations.

However, a return to combat would ensure the Strait of Hormuz, where traffic has slowed to a trickle since the conflict began, remains closed. As warned by the Aramco CEO, this prospect means the oil market and prices will not stabilize until at least 2027. This warning places the Trump administration and the Republican Party in a bind, as higher oil prices for the remainder of the year will likely harm their chances in the November midterms.

Rising geopolitical tensions in the Middle East were not the only factor weighing on markets. The release of the U.S. April consumer price index (CPI) data, which showed inflation rising to 3.8% versus the projected 3.7%, dampened hopes of a rate cut. As expected, energy prices—particularly gasoline—were the main culprits. The producer price index (PPI) report, set for release on May 13, is the next major catalyst to watch, as it will signal whether these price pressures are continuing to build at the manufacturing level.

Meanwhile, bitcoin’s price action over 24 hours saw $57 million in long bets liquidated versus $7.5 million in shorts. Overall, the cryptocurrency market saw nearly $280 million in leveraged positions liquidated, with long bets accounting for approximately $232 million.

#Bitcoin #BTC #Inflation #Fed #Crypto #Markets #CPI #Trading #Macro #Finance

The bill would prohibit state governing authorities from accepting or requiring CBDC payments, and bars participation in any Federal Reserve CBDC test.

#CBDC #Crypto #Policy #US #Regulation #Finance #Blockchain #Freedom #Gov #Law

Gareth Soloway, chief market strategist and president of Verified Investing, told David Lin of The David Lin Report (TDLR) that bitcoin is forming a bear flag that could send prices down roughly 38% to $50,000, while the S&P 500 is flashing the same signals seen at the peak of the dot-com boom.

Soloway Tells David Lin Bitcoin Faces 38% Drop, Stays Short the S&P 500

In a recent video published on TDLR, Gareth Soloway drew a direct line between today’s stock market and conditions in 2000. The Nasdaq just pierced 25,000, he noted to host David Lin, the same way it pierced 5,000 before it topped out. He called the current environment a late-stage bull market, one where a handful of names carry the index while sectors like software are already down 20% year-to-date.

The IGF expanded tech software exchange-traded fund (ETF) illustrates the point, Soloway noted. Despite the index sitting at all-time highs, that ETF has shed roughly a fifth of its value in 2026, a divergence Soloway says traders should not ignore.

He remains short the S&P 500, though he is legging in gradually rather than committing all at once. His first downside target is former all-time high resistance, which now becomes technical support. A deeper flush could eventually bring the index back to the midpoint of its parallel channel from COVID lows.

On the economy, Soloway pushed his recession call out to 2027. He credited $700 billion in annual AI capital spending from companies like Meta, Amazon, Google, and Microsoft for keeping growth alive. Jerome Powell himself acknowledged at the most recent FOMC meeting that data center buildout has been a primary driver of the economy. When those companies pull back their spend, Soloway remarked, that is when the recession hits.

Inflation, he told Lin, is a two-part problem. The spike tied to oil prices above $100 a barrel will likely prove temporary, with political pressure ahead of the midterms pushing the president to bring prices down. But long-term inflation, already running around 2.7%, could settle in the 3 to 4% range given government spending running at roughly $1 trillion in new debt every quarter.

On gold, Soloway said he is trading it like a risk asset because that is what it has become. He is neutral on short-term swings and is watching $3,900 as first major support, with $3,500 coming into play only if the Nasdaq drops 20% or more. His long-term view remains bullish. He told Lin that five years from now, gold is much higher.

Bitcoin is where Soloway’s outlook has shifted most. He was bullish on his last TDLR appearance. Now he is neutral at best and bearish on a directional basis. The consolidation pattern between $80,000 and $85,000 is a bear flag, he stressed, similar to one that resolved lower earlier in the cycle. Unless bitcoin clears $85,000, his next downside target is $50,000, a drop of roughly 38%.

Soloway pointed to structural headwinds for crypto. The administration’s handling of coin launches, what he described as rug-pull-style activity, and damaged trust. The CLARITY Act moving through Congress offers little clear upside. And investors who might have parked capital in bitcoin are instead chasing semiconductors and artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure plays.

The 10-year Treasury yield hovering near 4.5% is the signal the bond market is not giving the all-clear, Soloway explained during the interview. The stock market, driven by retail inflows and index momentum, is ignoring it. That divergence is one more reason he is adding to short positions on the S&P and the Nasdaq.

Natural gas is the one trade he is willing to step up on. A breakout above $2.88 could draw capital that rotates out of oil. Data centers need power, nuclear is not ready, and natural gas is cheap relative to oil. That combination, Soloway told Lin, makes it the most attractive near-term position outside of cash and selective shorts.

Asked which falls first, bitcoin or stocks, Soloway detailed that stocks are more overdue for a drop, but if the Nasdaq keeps sliding, bitcoin investors will panic and the cryptocurrency will play catch-up fast.

https://animalverse.social/community/?activity_search=%23Bitcoin

#Bitcoin #BTC #Crypto #Trading #Bearish #Market #TA #Recession #SP500 #Risk