In the wild, unpredictable world of cryptocurrency, chaos isn’t just a bug—it’s the main feature. One day you will be vibing and the very next; prices swing like pendulums on steroids, projects rug-pull overnight, and regulatory hammers fall with the subtlety of a sledgehammer. 

But nothing embodies this madness quite like Binance and its enigmatic founder, Changpeng Zhao (better known as CZ). Just when you thought the drama had peaked with accusations on Binance over its alleged role in the October 10 crash, the exchange dropped another bombshell, which seems to be an industry-friendly move but it is actually a camel’s nose. 

On January 30, Binance announced that it is converting the $1 billion Secure Asset Fund for Users (SAFU) from stablecoins into Bitcoin, right as BTC slumps to multi-month lows! Is this a savvy hedge against fiat volatility, or a cynical play to profit from the dip at users’ expense? 

SAFU Funds moving into Bitcoin: Why now?

As someone who’s watched this space evolve from Bitcoin’s early days to today’s prediction markets frenzy, I’ll say it straight: this move reeks of opportunism, and it’s emblematic of the deeper rot in centralized exchanges like Binance. 

If we look at it historically, the funds were first sitting majorly in BNB, partly in BUSD and Bitcoin. Later, the team decided to move it all to USDC in April 2024, following community criticism. Now, adjusting for the third time, the exchange is moving all of it (nearly $1 billion) into Bitcoin—just when the broader market crash appears—”opportunistically” as we reported intentionally. 

What’s SAFU though?

Launched in July 2018, this emergency fund was Binance’s way of assuring users that their assets were protected in case of hacks or operational failures. It is regularly funded by a slice of trading fees, now growing into a $1 billion buffer, mostly in stablecoins like USDC for stability. 

The idea was simple: “Funds are SAFU,” as CZ famously tweeted during a system outage, turning it into a meme that reassured millions. But here’s the kicker—despite its noble purpose, SAFU has been tapped only once, in a minor incident years ago, leaving questions about its real utility. 

Now, with Bitcoin trading at depressed levels, Binance announces a full conversion to BTC over 30 days, starting with an initial $100 million batch. They promise to rebalance if BTC’s value dips below $800 million, but let’s be real: this isn’t about protection; it’s about positioning Binance to ride the next bull wave while users foot the volatility risk.

Why now? Crypto markets are in turmoil, with Bitcoin down 40% from its all-time high. At this time, converting stable assets to BTC when it’s “down” screams bottom-fishing. Binance claims it’s for long-term resilience, but skeptics—and there are plenty—see it as a way to juice profits. 

After all, if BTC rebounds, that $1 billion becomes a windfall for the exchange, not directly for users. And if it tanks further? Well, SAFU’s there to cover losses, but the optics are terrible. 

This comes amid a chorus of X posts lambasting CZ and Binance for everything from market manipulation to enabling scams. One viral thread calls CZ “calculated” in scamming everyday people, while another ranks him atop a “crypto crime tier list.” It’s not just noise; it’s a symptom of eroding trust in the platform that handles more volume than anyone else. 

Crypto Crime Tier List

Number One: Keep Building @cz_binance pic.twitter.com/nlHPMi7y0g

— Foxy 🦊 (@Foxyyeth) January 27, 2026

The history of CZ: a wolf in sheep’s clothing?

CZ’s “hideous history,” as some call it, only amplifies the skepticism. Born in China and raised in Canada, Zhao built Binance from a Shanghai startup in 2017 into the world’s dominant exchange, amassing a fortune estimated to be around $80 billion. But, as any billionaire, his success came with shadows. 

In 2023, CZ pleaded guilty to violating U.S. anti-money laundering laws, admitting Binance allowed terrorists, drug traffickers, and ransomware gangs to launder billions. Prosecutors in the U.S. highlighted how the platform welcomed criminals, with one compliance officer reportedly joking about “washing drug money.” 

Zhao served four months in prison, though merely a slap on the wrist compared to Sam Bankman-Fried’s 25 years for FTX’s fraud. Then, in October 2025, President Trump pardoned him, citing no “identifiable victims” and framing it as Biden-era overreach. 

Critics called it “disgusting” pay-to-play, especially after reports of Binance’s $2 billion investment in Trump’s World Liberty Financial stablecoin, but well that’s a whole another story. 

Zhao’s post-pardon life? Back to influencing crypto from his Dubai base, a hub for the ultra-rich and, if not all, some shady figures. Dubai’s allure for CZ isn’t hard to see. No extradition treaty with the U.S. made him a flight risk during his trial and judges twice blocked his return there. 

The emirate’s lax regulations and crypto-friendly vibe attract everyone from Russian oligarchs evading sanctions to alleged fraudsters. CZ’s residence there fueled suspicions of criminal associations, though he denied any wrongdoing. 

Binance’s alleged role in Money Laundering

While CZ’s story speaks of his personal quests, Binance’s past speaks of volumes with the U.S. Treasury officials confirmed in the past that the exchange funneled money to Hamas, Al-Qaeda, and ISIS. 

A 2025 lawsuit by Oct. 7 Hamas attack victims accuses Binance of aiding over $1 billion in terrorist transactions, even after U.S. warnings. Zhao’s lawyers argue no “special relationship” with groups like Hamas, but the allegations stick: Binance prioritized growth over compliance, becoming a “conduit for illicit funds.” 

CZ Vs Crypto People 

Then there’s the drama reel. CZ’s feud with FTX‘s Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) was legendary back then. In November 2022, CZ tweeted about dumping $500 million in FTT tokens, triggering a bank run that collapsed FTX and wiped out $8 billion in user funds. He signed a non-binding acquisition letter, only to back out after “due diligence,” leaving SBF to face fraud charges. 

Fast-forward to Hyperliquid: As the decentralized exchange surged in 2025, eating Binance’s perps market share, CZ launched and promoted rival Aster, which was backed by his family office YZi Labs. Hyperliquid’s founder accused Binance of underreporting liquidations during crashes, while CZ touted Aster’s privacy features as superior. Competition? Sure. But whispers of sabotage linger, especially after reports Circle was buying Hyperliquid’s token before Aster’s push. 

The WazirX saga is another black mark. Binance announced acquiring the Indian exchange in 2019, but in 2022, CZ denied it ever happened, citing incomplete docs. When WazirX suffered a $234 million hack in 2024, Binance washed its hands, claiming no control—despite WazirX’s insistence on legal ties. Users lost big, and the feud escalated to litigation by 2025. This denial game eroded trust, painting Binance as evasive when convenient. 

Binance’s alleged role in October 10 crash

All these stories sound dramatic enough but nothing captures the current backlash like the October 10 crash. This “10/10 nightmare” wiped out over $19 billion in liquidation cascade. The embryonic point of this largest ever crash was said to be a technical glitch on Binance. 

Apparently, Binance is the largest crypto exchange with highest liquidity, and such occurrences on the platform will definitely shake the broader crypto market. 

OKX CEO Star Xu blamed it squarely on Binance’s “irresponsible” USDe APY campaign, which looped leverage without limits, turning a minor shock into systemic failure. Xu called it worse than FTX’s collapse, with cascading depegs and near-zero token prices. 

However, CZ dismissed it as FUD, attributing it to tariffs and leverage, not Binance errors. But users reported their sell orders executing while buy orders failing, fueling manipulation claims. Binance compensated $600 million, but critics say that’s peanuts compared to the damage. 

Recent callouts to CZ 

Given all these feuds, CZ was all over X (formerly Twitter) and crypto media in the past three weeks. A number of industry leaders called out that the crypto markets are not functioning the same as they were before the October 10 crash. Recent X posts amplify the vitriol, with one user calling CZ a “net negative” since 2021, while another accuses him of destroying crypto alongside Trump. 

Another article paints Binance as predatory, liquidating its own users weekly via volatility engineered with partners like Wintermute. And Justin Sun’s ex-girlfriend’s “Epstein files” tease more dirt on CZ’s circle. Even semantic searches reveal viral exposes on Binance scandals since 2024. 

While CZ has been around in the crypto space since a while now, he has been at the center of “a lot of” controversies. Not all crypto entrepreneurs are speaking against him currently but the wrath of users is largely visible within discussion on X. 

Final takeaway

The crypto landscape has long argued for decentralization over CZ’s centralized empire. Binance’s stark dominance creates a single point of failure, as the October 10 crash showed. 

At this point, CZ’s pardon and SAFU pivot feel like rewards for bad behavior, not redemption. Crypto needs transparency, not egos. If we let exchanges like Binance game the system, the chaos will only worsen. 

It’s time to decentralize or die trying.  

Also read: FTX Ghosts Return as Binance Faces Withdrawal Halt Amid Bitcoin Crash

While tokenized U.S. stocks are expanding rapidly, a closer examination over it reveals a significant irony: the tokens themselves trade on decentralized protocols, but the underlying settlement and custody processes remain profoundly centralized.

As noted by The Information with December 2025 data, nearly 94% market share of the tokenized stocks and exchange traded funds (ETFs) remains in the hands of Alpaca Securities, a California-based stock broker and dealer. Platforms like Ondo Finance, Kraken’s xStocks (via Backed Finance), and Dinari are all collectively using Alpaca as their go-to tokenized stock broker. 

From Alpaca’s perspective, the growth is a phenomenon, but the heavy reliance on one broker introduces notable vulnerabilities in a sector that champions decentralization. A disruption at Alpaca–whether from operational issues, cyberattacks, or heightened regulatory scrutiny–could affect a vast portion of tokenized equities.

This can be compared to past centralized failures in crypto, where single chokepoints amplified risks. A prime example is the 2022 Terra/Luna collapse, where the centralized design of the UST stablecoin peg led to a rapid death spiral and over $40 billion in market value destruction. Comparatively, the tokenized stocks market is currently a toddler but risk remains the same regardless of the market valuation. 

On top, regulatory bodies like the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) increasingly view tokenized assets as securities subject to existing rules, potentially targeting key infrastructure providers. One blue eye from them could shake the whole sector as it is already fragile due to its nature. The real-world settlements of tokenized stocks (trade execution, clearing, and share custody) depend on traditional systems. This hybrid model exposes the ecosystem to traditional finance (TradFi) frictions, including compliance hurdles and geographic restrictions. 

Alpaca’s dominance in tokenized stocks management

Initially known for its developer-friendly APIs, Alpaca has become the go-to provider for tokenized stock issuers. Early reports indicated that Alpaca held custody for nearly 75% of tokenized U.S. stocks in a market exceeding $1 billion. However, as the industry matured, Alpaca’s dominance rose and it currently sits on the top; apparently the only position. 

Latest data from RWA.xyz indicates that Ondo Global Markets’ $546 million in issuances, followed by xStocks with $209.5 million, further solidified Alpaca’s position. By early 2026, reports cited tokenized assets under management (AUM) climbing toward $670 million under Alpaca’s custody. 

The concentration stems from Alpaca’s willingness to engage where others hesitate, providing self-clearing custody and APIs tailored for tokenization via its Instant Tokenization Network. 

Explosive growth in tokenized stocks 

These digital tokens, backed by real shares in companies such as Tesla and Nvidia, promise 24/7 trading, fractional ownership, and global accessibility without traditional intermediaries. 

Tokenized stocks function by linking blockchain-based tokens to actual U.S. equities held in custody. These issuers purchase the underlying shares through a broker and mint corresponding tokens on blockchains such as Solana or Ethereum.

The sector has experienced explosive growth. By late January 2024, the valuation of total tokenized assets under custody (AUC) remained at $963.04 million, with over $2.11 billion in monthly transfer volume—as per RWA.xyz data. 

Popular tokens include EXOD, TSLA, SPY (S&P 500 ETF), QQQ, NVDA, and IVV—all having millions in on-chain value. This boom reflects broader interest in real-world assets (RWAs) as a bridge between TradFi and decentralized finance (DeFi). 

Looking ahead: Expansion and challenges

An optimistic point is that as the AUM in tokenized stocks reach new heights, Alpaca continues to invest aggressively in its role. In January 2026, the company secured $150 million in Series D funding at a $1.15 billion valuation, alongside a $40 million credit line. This capital is said to be used for global expansion, additional licenses, and enhanced tokenization infrastructure. 

Proponents view this phase as transitional, with Alpaca serving as essential bridge infrastructure until more diversified or fully on-chain solutions emerge. Critics, however, argue that true decentralization requires reducing such dependencies to avoid undermining the sector’s foundational promises. 

As tokenized equities grow from a niche experiment to a meaningful market segment, the tension between innovation and centralization persists. For now, Alpaca’s quiet dominance underscores a key reality: even in blockchain-powered finance, critical backend processes often remain firmly in centralized hands. 

Also read: Tokenized Securities Face Same Rules as Traditional Assets, Says SEC

In the world of cryptocurrency, viral trends often ignite massive market movements, and the recent example is set by the “Clawdbot” trend with a cluster of imitation tokens seeing explosive price surges. 

While the original Clawdbot project has no such official token, a number of fake tokens with similar logos have emerged, with one jumping 84.97% in 24 hours and another even surged by a whopping 669% spikes in the same time. 

These copycat assets, primarily on Solana and Base, have capitalized on the growing hype surrounding the original Clawdbot AI project. 

Search results on DexScreener show several “Clawdbot” tokens, showing established metrics while seeming like opportunistic investment. One of the leading tokens, paired as clawd/SOL under the clawdbot label, trades at $0.007366 with a market cap of $7.3 million. The total liquidity in this token’s pool merely reaches $368K, way below industry standard. 

The phenomenon underscores how meme coins can rapidly amplify buzz into financial frenzy, even as the authentic project focuses on innovative AI applications. It raises questions about market volatility and the risks of chasing unverified assets amid broader industry excitement.

The Clawdbot trend

The surge in these fake tokens stems from the escalating popularity of the genuine Clawdbot project, an open-source AI agent developed by Peter Steinberger. Launched as a personal tool for managing emails, calendars, iMessages, and home automation, Clawdbot has evolved into a collaborative human-AI platform with a lobster theme. 

Its recent updates include video understanding, cross-channel communication (e.g., WhatsApp to Discord), Zalo integration, and hooks for automation, drawing thousands of users and developers. 

All the discussions around Clawdbot have exploded on X, with users sharing experiences of automating their daily tasks which typical AI tools can not execute. The primary difference between traditional AI assistants (like ChatGPT and Claude) and Clawdbot is that older tools mostly give user instructions while the later one actually executes it. 

My clawdbot just asked me for an RTX 4090. Instead of buying it, I gave it a $2K trading wallet on Hyperliquid.

I said: If you want the GPU, earn it. It now trades crypto, stocks, and commodities 24/7.

It scans Twitter sentiment, tracks Trump posts, and decides trades on its… pic.twitter.com/5Yfa33UbnQ

— Legendary (@Legendaryy) January 24, 2026

Take away

Meme coins have a knack for latching onto cultural or tech trends, turning fleeting attention into speculative gold rushes, and Clawdbot’s fakes exemplify this. Investors often dive in hoping for quick wins, but greed and these often described pump-and-dump schemes can lead to steep losses. 

Historically, the crypto landscape has witnessed hundreds of meme coins skyrocketing on social trends just to be vanished within days as buzz cool-off. While the original Clawdbot innovates in AI agents, its unofficial tokens remind us that anything can rise up tremendously, even without utility, liquidity, and proper project credibility. 

Also read: Matcha Meta Flags SwapNet Bug as Over $16.8M is Drained

South Korea’s third-largest cryptocurrency exchange by trading volume Coinone, is reportedly exploring options to sell a portion of the controlling stake held by its Chairman and major shareholder, Cha Myung-hoon. 

As per local reports, Coinone is looking to cashout on major stakeholding with speculation about potential involvement from global players like Coinbase. The move comes amid broader consolidation pressures in South Korea’s tightly regulated crypto sector. 

According to reports from Seoul Economic Daily, Coinone has initiated a process to divest part or all of Cha Myung-hoon’s 53.44% ownership interest. This stake is split between Cha’s personal holdings (approximately 19.14%) and shares controlled through his affiliated entity, The One Group. Another significant shareholder, South Korean gaming company Com2uS, holds 38.42% of the company. 

Financial pressures prompt stake review

The news breaks against a backdrop of declining financial metrics. Industry sources indicate that Coinone’s book value fell to 75.2 billion Korean won (approximately $52.2 million USD) in the third quarter of 2026. This represents a notable drop of 22.64% from its previous valuation of 94.4 billion Korean won. 

While the crypto industry is currently navigating through a cool down period, the stake sell-off reflects challenges including intense domestic competition from market leaders Upbit and Bithumb. Additionally, ongoing regulatory compliance costs in a maturing crypto market also stays a hurdle. 

South Korea’s crypto exchanges have faced heightened scrutiny from regulators such as the Financial Services Commission (FSC) and the Korea Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU). Recent years have seen penalties imposed on several platforms for anti-money laundering (AML) and real-name account compliance issues. 

Read: $110B Crypto Exodus: Why Koreans Are Leaving Domestic Exchanges

Coinbase eyes strategic entry into the Korean market

The report from Seoul Economic Daily also noted that the U.S.-based Coinbase is planning discussions with Coinone during a visit to South Korea this week. Sources describe the talks as preliminary, potentially covering equity investment, strategic cooperation, or even a fuller acquisition scenario. 

Coinbase has not yet confirmed anything regarding the matter while Coinone representatives have characterized the outreach as early-stage exploratory discussions with overseas exchanges and domestic financial institutions. “Nothing has been decided,” they emphasized. 

Coinbase’s interest aligns with its broader Asia-Pacific expansion strategy, where gaining a foothold in regulated markets like South Korea could provide access to sophisticated retail and institutional users. 

Industry context: Consolidation and regulatory headwinds

South Korea remains one of the world’s most active crypto trading jurisdictions per capita, despite strict rules on leverage, foreign exchange controls, and virtual asset service provider (VASP) licensing. 

The potential transaction underscores ongoing consolidation trends in South Korea’s crypto landscape. With three major exchanges historically dominating within the country—including Upbit, Bithumb, Coinone—the sector has seen mergers, acquisitions, and strategic partnerships as platforms seek scale to meet rising compliance burdens and compete for liquidity.  

Also read: SEC Abandons Gemini Lawsuit: 100% Crypto Recovery Ends Legal Battle

The winter storm Fern has barreled across the United States, leaving a trail of destruction, including widespread power outages affecting the nation’s mammoth Bitcoin mining operations. The impact is so severe that it caused the Bitcoin network’s block production time to be delayed nearly 2 minutes. 

The total hashrate of Foundry USA, one of the largest Bitcoin miners, witnessed a sharp drop of nearly 60% on Friday as the natural calamity hit the firm’s facilities across the country. It plummeted from a peak of nearly 340 EH/s to as low as 242 EH/s, as noted by TheMinerMag. 

UPDATE: #Bitcoin hashrate on FoundryUSA is down by nearly 200 EH/s, or 60%, since Friday amid continued curtailment. Temporary block production slows down to 12 minutes 🫥🫥 https://t.co/e51LyWoxjs pic.twitter.com/uIrCD5JudD

— TheMinerMag (@TheMinerMag_) January 25, 2026

This represents about 23% of the global Bitcoin network’s mining power going offline, equivalent to roughly 200 EH/s of capacity. As a result, Bitcoin block production slowed to an average of 12 minutes per block, exceeding the network’s target of approximately 10 minutes and temporarily reducing transaction throughput. 

Curtailment among mining facilities

Foundry is based in the U.S., and it is heavily reliant on facilities in storm-hit regions like Texas. In the wake of the storm, the firm voluntarily reduced its operations to help stabilize the grid, a practice known as demand response. 

Luxor, another major Bitcoin miner in the U.S., recorded a similar decline with its hashrate dropping from 45 EH/s to roughly 26 EH/s over the same period. Combining this with that of Foundry USA, the two pools have seen more than 110 EH/s of computing power taken offline.

This reflects widespread curtailment among miners responding to extreme cold and elevated power demand. Other U.S.-based pools, including those of Marathon Digital Holdings (MARA), have also curtailed hashing power. 

Such reductions are typically part of collective efforts from the mining community, allowing them to sell electricity back to the grid or avoid operating during peak pricing periods. 

“For most operations, staying offline is the economically rational choice during peak stress periods,” Luxor noted in their latest article on X. “Miners can determine whether mining is currently economical by observing their fleet’s energy hashprice.”

Implications for Bitcoin Network Resilience

The event highlights Bitcoin mining’s dependence on regional energy infrastructure and the risks posed by geographic concentration. While Bitcoin’s decentralized design allows miners in unaffected regions, such as parts of Asia, Europe, or other U.S. areas, to compensate over time, such sudden large-scale offline capacity can create short-term security and efficiency concerns.

Although this is not the first time a cold winter has hit Bitcoin mining operations. Similar disruptions have occurred during previous winter events, including the 2021 and 2022 Texas freezes, when miners powered down to prevent broader grid failures. 

Despite the hashrate dip, Bitcoin price has shown resilience and it is holding relatively steady amid serious geopolitical implications. At the time of publishing, Bitcoin was hovering near $87,773—down 1% in the past 24 hours—while its trading volume jumped 188% to over $45 billion, as per CoinMarketCap data. 

The broader impact of Frenan storm

Since late last week, winter storm Fernan has swept from the southern plains through the Midwest and into the Northeast, stretching approximately 1,800 miles. The Weather Channel within the U.S. and other forecasters have described it as a historic event, with destructive ice toppling trees and power lines up to an inch thick in parts of the South. 

The storm has left more than one million households and businesses without electricity due to power outage, with some areas facing multi-day restoration efforts. States including Texas, Arkansas, Tennessee, Louisiana, and others have borne the heaviest burden. 

Also read: The Raid of the Century? Trump, Maduro, And The Rumored $60B BTC

For years, the meme “Institutions Are Coming” remained sensational across Crypto Twitter. It teased us with visions of Wall Street suits storming the blockchain barricades, briefcases bulging with billions ready to send Bitcoin to the moon. 

It was in January 2024, that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) finally cracked open the gates, approving the first batch of spot Bitcoin ETFs. It was hailed as a golden dawn! A momentous handshake between the wild west of crypto and the starched collars of Traditional Finance (TradFi). 

Fast-forward to today, and one can’t help but chuckle at the irony: what was supposed to be a flood of institutional conviction is feeling more like a fickle flirtation. They’re more like that charming guest at the party who arrives with fanfare, spikes the punch, and vanishes when things get rowdy. 

Trustworthy? Hardly. 

What seemed to be a billion-dollar injection in crypto, has upsetted the OG crypto doers. 

A quick glance over ETFs’ entry in crypto 

Let’s set the stage and recall the euphoria of that pivotal January 2024 approval. The U.S. SEC approved spot Bitcoin ETFs in January 2024 and Ether (ETH) made the entry later that year. This was considered a testament to crypto’s maturation. Both the leaders were followed by other larger altcoins: SOL, XRP, and the memecoin DOGE also joined the party. As of now, a total of eight cryptocurrencies have spot ETFs. 

As per SoSoValue data, the total funds sitting in spot Bitcoin ETFs amounted to $116.48 billion, representing nearly 6.5% of the total BTC supply. For Ethereum, it stands near $18.29 billion, having bagged 5% of the ETF supply. 

These ETFs no doubt bridged the gap between crypto and mainstream finance, luring in conservative capital with the allure of regulated wrappers. Yet, as we’ll see, this influx has been anything but a steady stream. It’s more of a capricious current that ebbs and flows with the whims of risk-averse portfolios. 

The befores and afters of crypto ETFs

To better clear the later part of the headline of this piece, let’s compare the delightful before-and-after snapshot of crypto’s market dynamics post-2024 ETF era. Before the approvals, crypto was a degen’s playground: volatile, innovative, and unapologetically decentralized. In this era, prices swung on fundamentals like adoption news, halvings, or Elon Musk’s midnight musings. 

With the entry of ETFs, the crypto market suddenly had to deal with diminishing marginal impact. The initial days after the Bitcoin ETF launch sparked a rally, with BTC price surged past its 2021 highs. But subsequent approvals? Yawn. Ethereum’s spot ETF debut barely moved the needle, and altcoin entries like SOL’s in October 2025 elicited more shrugs than fireworks. Why? Because each new ETF dilutes the novelty. 

The billion-dollar injections that once felt revolutionary now seem routine, their impact blunted by market saturation. It’s like adding more guests to an already crowded party where the excitement wanes and the jokes start to become lamer and lamer. 

A November 2025 report by 21Shares, one of the issuers of crypto ETFs, noted that the on-chain data held significant importance before. Metrics like realized value, unrealized profit/loss, transaction activity, and long-holder behavior reliably signaled cycles, overvaluation, and sentiment shifts because almost everything happened visibly on the blockchain. 

But as ETFs arrived, a large portion of Bitcoin ownership and trading moved off-chain into custodial wallets and derivatives markets, eventually breaking the direct link between onchain signals and price action. 

Crypto ETFs: A poisoned chalice

Here’s where the plot thickens, labeling crypto ETFs as a poisoned chalice. On an optimistic note, the regulated access to Bitcoin’s upside without the hacker headaches. Sip from it, though, and you might find the aftertaste bitter. 

Consider how ETF capital flees at the first whiff of crypto’s signature volatility. Crypto markets are no strangers to 50% drawdowns; degens (those lovable risk-embracing traders) ride them out, farming yields or HODLing through the storm. 

But TradFi investors? Not so much. These folks use ETFs for diversified portfolios, such as hedging against inflation, balancing stocks, or parking cash safely. A 10-20% dip? They’re out faster than a cat from a bathtub. We’ve seen this in action: during mid-2025 corrections, Bitcoin ETF outflows hit record highs (in billions) as TradFi rotated back to bonds or equities. 

Meanwhile, degen culture laughs it off, embracing the chaos for potential 10x gains. This risk aversion mismatch creates fragility; inflows legitimize crypto but also inject hot money that evaporates, leaving prices more prone to whiplash.

Moreover, the trading volumes tells a tale of superficial engagement. ETF volumes often pale compared to the actual on-chain or exchange trading of underlying cryptos. For Bitcoin, spot ETF daily volumes might hover in the hundreds of single digit billions, but global crypto exchanges churn through hundreds of billions. This discrepancy screams ‘minimal market participation but larger impact expectation.’

ETF capital isn’t diving deep, it’s skimming the surface, positioning for quick flips rather than long-term conviction. When volatility strikes (as it invariably does in crypto), this shallow capital bolts, exacerbating sell-offs. It’s a far cry from the steadfast institutional embrace we meme’d about. Instead, it highlights TradFi’s conservative core of seeking stability in an inherently unstable arena. 

My jab: If crypto is a rollercoaster, ETFs are the riders who scream and demand to get off mid-loop. 

It’s not just crypto, commodities witnessed the same

The post-ETF pernicious influences are not just limited to crypto, it has been historically found in that of commodity ETFs as well. It is evidenced by the post-approval data for major commodity ETFs like GLD for gold, SLV for silver, and USO for crude oil. 

Prior to their launches in the mid-2000s, these commodities exhibited relatively lower volatility, hovering around 15-20% for gold, 25-30% for silver, and 30-35% for oil. This was primarily driven by fundamental supply, demand factors, and their actual trading volume in open markets. 

However, following ETF introductions, volatility rose noticeably to 20-25% for gold, 35-40% for silver, and 40-45% for oil, with studies indicating an 82.5% increase in futures basis volatility for gold alone. This pattern suggests that ETFs transform traditionally illiquid or institutionally dominated markets into more accessible arenas, amplifying price swings through rapid capital inflows and outflows that outpace underlying asset adjustments. 

While commodities had centuries of maturity; crypto’s barely a teenager. ETFs inject billions, yes! But at what cost? Nominal fees belie mammoth implications: increased fragility, diluted decentralization, and a shift from innovation to speculation. DeFi suffers as capital chases ETF ease over protocol yields. Arbitrage eats at efficiency, and volatility spikes deter true adoption. Why can’t they just learn crypto and start buying Bitcoin and Ethereum themselves rather than going after these damn ETFs (we know why but still)? 

Crypto ETFs important: but at this cost?

Although the cost is nominal, its implications and impacts are mammoth. The key aspect is that TradFi players, essentially ETF capital, love a good hedge. The availability of ETFs allow them to bet on crypto without the mess of actual wallets or private keys. 

Picture this: a fund manager shorts Bitcoin futures while going long on the ETF, arbitraging away discrepancies for tidy profits. Playful as it sounds, this creates artificial pressures. Inflows spike during bull runs, inflating prices, only for arbitrageurs to unwind positions en masse when sentiment sours. The result? Amplified volatility that doesn’t stem from crypto’s core utility but from TradFi’s tactical plays. 

I came across an interesting reddit comment while researching on the topic. It said, “Financial institutions play dirty in a regulated market. Why would you not think they will come to the tiny crypto market and wreck havoc?” 

Well okay, we are alleging big players without any solid proofs but they have now apparently become shenanigans to crypto degens. And the blame is not onto them as well because THIS IS HOW ACTUALLY IT ALL FUNCTIONS. 

Conclusion: Why ETF capital should not be taken accountable

So, why shouldn’t we take ETF capital accountable or, more precisely, why are inflows not trustworthy? At their core, ETF flows are noisy signals, reflecting tactical positioning rather than deep conviction. Inflows during dips might signal accumulation, but outflows don’t always presage doom; they could just be portfolio rebalancing. Blaming them for market woes ignores broader drivers: global events, regulatory shifts, or DeFi’s relentless innovation. 

We’ve seen Bitcoin shrug off massive ETF redemptions, buoyed by on-chain activity or NFT booms. The broader lesson? Crypto’s future isn’t in TradFi wrappers but in utility, real-world payments, decentralized apps, and NFTs that transcend speculation. Over-hyping ETFs risks missing the decentralized ethos that birthed this beast. What seemed a boon for liquidity ends up as a volatility vampire, sucking stability from the veins of once-staid markets.

In conclusion, treat ETF inflows like that flashy but flaky friend: Enjoy the party they bring, but don’t count on them sticking around when the music stops. Crypto thrives on its own 3D terms: degeneracy, decentralized, and delightfully unpredictable. 

Also read: The Raid of the Century? Trump, Maduro, And The Rumored $60B BTC

The sheer amount of degeneracy of crypto people often peaks to a level where emotions, morals, ethics, and standards do not seem to be a real thing. The idea of Polymarket, the trendsetting prediction market platform, is not as degen as the dramatic intro line but it surely is a topic we can elaborate onto for its positioning. 

While it’s not the first decentralized prediction market platform, Polymarket kicked-off a new catalyst in the finance landscape.  

The launch and take-off of Polymarket 

Polymarket was launched in 2020 by Shayne Coplan. While crypto traders were busy tracking and trading Bitcoin’s rise to new highs throughout 2020 and 2021, Polymarket was stepping up to become a product-market-fit. Fast forward to today, it has nearly 80k active users and over 1.2 million count in daily transactions. 

The dramatic surge in platform activity occurred vastly during the fourth quarter of 2025 and the start of 2026 with several viral events taking over the internet. Some of those events include the explosive betting on post-election political shifts, controversial geopolitical outcomes like the Israel-Gaza scuffle, the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro, and high-profile insider trading allegations that sparked global scrutiny. This frenzy not only drove record trading volumes but also thrust Polymarket back into regulatory crosshairs. This shift highlighted the platform’s role in turning sensitive real-world developments into high-stakes spectacles. 

Read Polymarket: Inside Shayne Coplan’s $8 Billion Prediction Empire, if you are not familiar with the topic. 

What sets Polymarket apart in the crowd is its unapologetic embrace of crypto’s debatable nature of borderless and often unregulated ethos. It allows users worldwide to wager on everything from election winners to military interventions without the oversight that plagues traditional betting platforms. 

This freedom fueled its post-2024 election boom, where it outperformed polls and became a media darling, only to face backlash as bets on wars, arrests, and even religious events raised eyebrows about exploitation and manipulation. As activity sustained into 2025 and beyond, the platform solidified its position, but at the cost of intensifying debates over its societal impact. 

Such attention led Polymarket to winding down its presence in the U.S. after the Commodity and Futures Commission (CFTC) and the Department of Justice (DoJ) accused it for running an illegal exchange. Though it is planning to make a comeback in the country after CFTC’s greenlight under the guidance of the new crypto-friendly government.  

A new “PumpFun” in town 

Despite not being available in its hometown to the U.S. users, Polymarket made a wave of trend, echoing that of PumpFun. In fact, PumpFun was at the same place where Polymarket is now. And if we look closely, both these platforms share the market dynamics. First one was used to speculate on any memecoin’s future outlook while the former one is focused on real-world events. Ultimately, the goal is to pocket a hefty amount of profits while predicting the potential favorable future outcome. 

If you are more of a crypto twitter person, you might have noticed that most KOLs—infamous for shape-shifting their personalities in accordance to trending narratives—are sharing content centered on Polymarket. Earlier, it was Hyperliquid and PumpFun throughout 2023 and early 2024. In its prime days, PumpFun was the talk of the town and it single handedly led Solana’s network activity to highest marks. 

However, Polymarket is launched on Polygon (formerly known as Matic) and due to its distinctive approach for fee structure, off-chain trade settlements, and UMA-based governance, majority of the activity does not reflect any growth on the blockchain. 

My momentary experience on Polymarket

For the sake of this opinion piece, I tried to get my hands on the platform and I found the onboarding process quite easy but it would surely confuse people who are new to crypto. I betted a couple of dollars on Elon Musk’s daily tweet count and Bitcoin’s 15 minutes price speculation (though I lost it all). 

Not to mention, Polymarket felt a little bit glitchy, but we know it is a standard for every other crypto website. While exploring all the events on the platform, I asked myself a question, do users really like this kind of trading? And a ‘degen voice’ inside my head answered “definitely I would do, and it’s not trading, it’s pure gambling.” 

There are also some events, which are not even gambling, it’s just pure degening: one of them is “Will Jesus Christ Return This Year?” If chances for this event collectively reaches even 50%, we should be worried about our sins. lol 

My key takeaway from a few hours of trading is that no matter what, if the thing makes them money, crypto people will rush to give it a try. And most of them will also be ready to lose a significant amount of their account just to experience the thrill and fuel their ‘FAFO’ motto. 

Polymarket core: Anonymity, outcomes, and profits

At the heart of Polymarket’s allure is its pseudo-anonymity. It’s a core feature of crypto that lets degens dive in without handing over their personal information. Sure, the platform officially geo-blocked certain countries and frowns on VPNs in the fine print, but let’s be real: a quick hop through a server in some permissive jurisdiction, and you’re in. 

This veil of anonymity isn’t just convenience; it’s rocket fuel for the wildest behavior, where whales can dump millions on sensitive outcomes without anyone knowing if it’s insider info or just a lucky hunch. Such bets on Polymarket have turned the whole thing into a shadowy playground where accountability is as rare as a rug pull that doesn’t happen. 

Then come the outcomes, resolved through this quirky UMA oracle system that’s supposed to be decentralized truth-seeking but often feels like a whale’s whim dictating reality. When the timeline for an event ends, disputes get voted on by UMA token holders, and history shows it’s ripe for controversy. Those are alleged for market flippings on technicalities, resolving geopolitical bets in ways that scream manipulation, and leaving losers raging about “scams” while winners cash out fat stacks. 

While not in all cases, it’s not clean arbitration; it’s crypto governance at its messiest, where profit motives twist the “truth” into whatever benefits the big holders. Often, disputes have arisen between users and the platform, when outcomes do not favor retail and their rage leads to nowhere. Why? Because it’s “decentralized” and decided through “governance.”  

Addressing insiders on Polymarket

Trading and insider-trading, both the words are increasingly used with the same meaning, especially in crypto; and even more especially on Polymarket. When insider trading is combined with geopolitical events, you get the big picture. 

The most recent example was set during the capture of Nicolás Maduro by the U.S. government. Hours before Trump officially announced the happening, a trader already put $30,000 on Maduro’s exit from Venezuela and they profited a healthy amount of $400,000 on this outcome. Just by reading the news, anyone can conclude that this trader must have the insider information, and since it was a state-backed operation, one must know how confidential it would have been. 

By far, Polymarket has made it only easy to chase fortune for those who always wanted to make big-fat-money and has connections to warmongers, military personnels, and leaders possessing power to have impact over, if not global, national spheres. 

These claims are not new and have already gained attention but no such actions have been taken, it’s an alien concept for even the government after all. Whales with suspiciously perfect track records, like the infamous “ricosuave666” boasting 100% wins on Israeli military ops and raking in over $150k, operate unchecked in this Wild West of wagering. 

Many such examples are there who are turning global tensions into personal profit machines for the connected few, leaving retail degens to foot the bill on manipulated markets. 

How developers are exploiting the platform?

In the world run by code only, no one can outsmart coders. 

If insiders were not enough, there are now developers who are exploiting the mechanics of Polymarket and amassing small but gradual profits. Since Polymarket is open-source and various tools and APIs available to directly connect with the platform’s backend, developers would not be shy to experiment with it.

A number of X posts note that programmers (call them coders or developers, all the same thing) are actively exploiting functionalities on Polymarket and profiting from either outcome. 

These code-crafters are deploying automated trading bots and scripts to extract value from the millions of dollars of trading volume. And it’s not even their smartness that is helping, but it’s their shenanigans like Claude, ChatGPT, and other AI tools. 

The philosophical POV 

At its core, Polymarket is not just a betting app, it’s an honest mirror held up in front of the true nature of crypto trading: one man’s loss is someone else’s profit. Exceptions aside, the whole of the crypto industry runs on the same principle.

The platform strips away the polite fiction that markets are about “information efficiency” and exposes the raw truth—most participants aren’t here for trading, they’re here to profit from chaos, tragedy, or someone else’s downfall. To add that, all while pretending it’s just “skin in the game.”

Zoom out, and Polymarket embodies the ultimate crypto nihilism: in a world where everything is probabilistic anyway, why not commodify reality itself? The degen does not ask if betting on geopolitical horror is ethical; he asks if the odds are mispriced, revealing how deeply we’ve internalized the idea that if something can be priced, it should be.

Speaking of philosophy, great grand philosophers like Aristotle and Nietzsche would recognize this instantly: we’re not rational truth-seekers aggregating wisdom; we’re dopamine-chasing primates who discovered a way to monetize schadenfreude and foresight porn. 

Final thoughts

The problem with the crypto industry is that we all want to make quick money but do not appreciate the technology. You will find thousands of traders who will say they hate crypto but still be buying useless coins the very next moment. It’s not developers and founders who are to blame for launching “get-rich-quick scheme” projects, but IT IS WHAT ACTUALLY PEOPLE WANT. 

Also read: Memecoins Are Financial Nihilism — And That’s the Point

In the annals of financial folly, few tales rival the rise and fall of the Bored Ape Yacht Club (BAYC). What began as a collection of 10,000 cartoonish ape images in April 2021, ballooned into a multi-billion-dollar empire, only to ultimately collapse under the weight of its own hype. 

While most projects in the crypto landscape follow the same direction, BAYC stands out because it involved not just crypto-degens but celebrities, tech-entrepreneurs, musicians, designers and several other high profile individuals.  

No doubt the invention of non-fungible tokens (NFTs) marked a shift in digital and intellectual properties rights, but most people have solely exploited it for their own benefits. Yuga Labs did not invent NFTs, but they mastered the art of turning digital nothingness into a status symbol. Let us examine the case study of this project and unfold the not-much-talked story behind it. 

How Yuga Labs created exclusivity from thin air 

Launched by Yuga Labs during 2021’s crypto bull run, BAYC’s apes were algorithmically generated variations of primates decked out in trendy accessories, such as hats, lasers, and gold chains. Each of these were minted on Ethereum and sold initially for 0.08 ETH, about $200. 

Their pitch was simple at the time: own an ape and join a virtual yet exclusive “yacht club” with perks like virtual parties, merchandise drops, and intellectual property rights to your ape’s image. But beneath the veneer, there was no such intrinsic value as these JPEGs were nothing more than any other NFTs on blockchain. In fact, some individual apes from the collection sold for millions, are now worth roughly $30,000–as of latest market data. 

By January 5, 2026, the floor price of these once-coveted NFTs has plummeted below 5 ETH—roughly $15,000—a staggering 98% drop from its mid-2022 peak when apes traded for over 120 ETH, or about $489,000 each at the time. 

This isn’t just a market correction, it’s a damning indictment of how Yuga Labs engineered perceived value from thin air while exploiting speculation, celebrity endorsements, and empty promises to fleece investors before the illusion shattered. 

The rise and trend of Bored Ape NFTs 

Within a month of its launch, the hype around the BAYC NFT collection kicked into overdrive through savvy marketing. The market vibe and FOMO (fear of missing out) fabricated by limiting supply to 10,000 apes, created artificial scarcity. Initially, only crypto people shared the madness for “weird Ape NFTs,” with their floor price—the lowest price at which an NFT is sold—surging nearly 10x from that at the time of minting. 

Soon after, the project got wider recognition from A-list celebrities. These included Justin Bieber, Madonna, Eminem, and Paris Hilton who jumped aboard, flaunting their apes on social media and inflating prices through association.  

Moreover, auctions at Sotheby’s and partnerships with brands like Adidas further legitimized the project, turning it into a cultural phenomenon. Media outlets breathlessly covered BAYC as the future of digital ownership, ignoring the fact that the “club” was merely a Discord server and unfulfilled metaverse dreams. 

A billion dollar NFT project that sold “Vibes Only”

At its peak in May 2022, BAYC’s market cap soared to the billions, with total trading volume hitting 15.6 million ETH. Besides the original collection, Yuga Labs later also revealed spin-offs like Mutant Ape Yacht Club and Bored Ape Kennel Club. This addition diluted the original collection while promising expanded utilities. 

In March 2022, Yuga raised $450 million in funding, valuing the company at $4 billion, and teased ambitious projects: a metaverse called Otherside, Hollywood deals, and later even launched a native token of the project, dubbed ApeCoin (APE), and its own blockchain ApeChain. 

Yet, the “value” within the project was only illusory as the project offered no dividends, revenue shares, or real-world utility beyond bragging rights. While the IP right was a thing, it largely remained unused, as most owners treated apes as speculative assets instead of creative tools. 

The Otherside metaverse? A glitchy demo that failed to materialize into anything substantive. High-profile ventures, like a Seth Green TV show, stalled due to legal hurdles over stolen apes. And at this point, Yuga’s expansions flooded the market and the exclusivity around the project eroded. 

Bored Apes in controversies 

Things got even worse for BAYC as controversies around the project undermined the brand’s facade. One of the issues was raised by Artist Ryder Ripps who accused Yuga of embedding racist and neo-Nazi symbolism. He claimed the BAYC logo resembled a Nazi Totenkopf emblem, ape traits evoking derogatory stereotypes, and founder pseudonyms tied to alt-right memes. 

In response, Yuga sued Ripps for trademark infringement over his satirical RR/BAYC collection, which repurposed apes to highlight these issues. The courts sided with Yuga, awarding $1.5 million in damages. This didn’t erase the stains; it amplified skepticism, revealing BAYC as a grift wrapped in memes, where insiders cashed out while holders clung to fading hype. 

Critics also argue that the project mirrored classic Ponzi dynamics: early adopters profited by hyping the project to lure in new buyers, with value derived solely from greater fools willing to pay more. Yuga’s founders, operating under pseudonyms like “Gargamel” and “Gordon Goner,” fueled the frenzy with viral social media posts and events, but the foundation was all sand. 

Where BAYC stands now?

At the time of publishing, the floor price for BAYC NFT collection is nearly 5 ETH, worth roughly $17,000—down 96% from its peak. Its average sale for the past 90 days has declined to 1,256—which is barely 1.2% of the collection of a total of 10,000 NFTs. 

The native token of the project, ApeCoin (APE) is down 99% from its peak of $39.40, currently trading at $0.22—as per CoinMarketCap data. It had a market capitalization of $5.5 billion, which has now shrunk to $170 million. 

Not to mention, the traction around Otherside metaverse and Apechain has no visible presence against other leaders. DeFiLlama data shows that ApeChain has $5.69 million in total value locked (TVL) with none of the applications within its ecosystem generating volume.  

Lessons learned: It’s all just hype and value extraction

The collapse of BAYC signals the death of hype-only projects in the crypto landscape, concluding on a fact that the industry needs to focus only on genuine innovation. It is important to emphasize that only utility and real value providing projects should be reaching mass, not any trend-driven that extract value. 

As one analyst noted, BAYC thrived on “hype-filled projects without underlying utility,” dooming it into the state of worthlessness. These apes weren’t really an art; they were a speculative vehicle disguised as a community token. 

The moral: value from “nothing” evaporates. Most of the crypto projects are mirage and conjure billions from digital dust only to become ruins. As the industry evolves, remember this as a warning against unchecked greed. 

Also read: Bitfinex Hacker Walks Free: $10B Crypto Heist Ends in Early Release

As 2025 came to an end, Ethereum shattered records for daily transactions while fees remained at rock-bottom levels. Coupled with a significant reversal in staking queues, where inflows now substantially outpace exits, the achievement signals renewed confidence in the network’s fundamentals. 

On December 29, Ethereum mainnet processed over 2.23 million transactions in a single day, according to data from block explorer Etherscan. This marks the highest daily transaction count in the history of the network, surpassing previous peaks and highlighting robust on-chain activity despite broader market volatility. 

A result of Pectra and Fusaka upgrades 

The surge is largely attributed to two major upgrades implemented in 2025: the Pectra upgrade in May and the Fusaka upgrade in early December. Pectra optimized validator efficiency and Layer-2 (L2) interactions, while Fusaka introduced PeerDAS (Peer Data Availability Sampling) and expanded block capacity by approximately 33%. 

These changes allowed the network to handle significantly more transactions per block without compromising decentralization or overwhelming validators.

Additionally, Fusaka’s enhancements to data “blobs,” which have dramatically improved scalability. Blobs are temporary storage for L2 rollup data that bundles transactions and provide data to Ethereum L1. Nodes on the network can now verify large data chunks by sampling rather than downloading everything. 

This combination of high activity and efficiency demonstrates Ethereum’s evolution into a more scalable settlement layer. This development is significant as much of the ecosystem’s volume migrates to L2 solutions like Arbitrum, Optimism, and Base. 

Ethereum staking queue crossover 

Another positive indicator is the dramatic flip in Ethereum’s staking queues. For the first time in six months, the validator entry queue has surpassed the exit queue, with approximately 740,000 ETH waiting to be staked compared to 350,000–370,000 ETH queued for exit. 

This reversal reflects growing long-term confidence among validators and investors. The process of staking involves locking ETH to secure the proof-of-stake network, and increased inflows reduce potential selling pressure while boosting network security. 

A part of this surge is driven by institutional activity, including large deposits from entities like BitMine, which has staked a total of $1.37 billion worth of ETH in recent months. The Pectra upgrade also played a role by improving staking flexibility and reducing activation times for new validators. 

Drastic decrease in ETH fees 

The timing of the new shift aligns with transaction fees on Ethereum mainnet reducing drastically this year. At the time of transaction numbers hitting a new high, the average fees have plummeted to around $0.17 per transaction. This number is at the lowest levels in recent years and a stark contrast to the 2022 peaks when fees exceeded $200 during congestion. 

The fee reduction stems directly as result of Pectra upgrade, which doubled blob capacity per block and lowering costs for L2s to settle data on the mainnet. The former upgrade Fusaka built on this by introducing efficient data verification and further optimizations. 

For context, simple transfers and complex smart contract interactions on Ethereum now cost fractions of a dollar. This affordability has fueled the transaction surge: lower fees drive more usage, which in turn validates the network’s scaling efforts. 

At the time of publishing, ETH was trading near $2,995 with a 24 hour trading volume of $17.35 billion as per CoinMarketCap. 

Also read: Vitalik Buterin Urges Stronger Decentralization to Curb Crypto Power

The Russian Ministry of Justice has unveiled draft amendments to the Criminal Code that would introduce severe penalties for unregistered cryptocurrency mining. The new rules include fines up to 1.5 million rubles (approximately $15,000) and imprisonment for up to five years in aggravated cases. 

These proposals, published on the federal portal for draft regulatory acts and reported by Interfax, mark a significant escalation in Russia’s regulation of the crypto mining sector. According to the publication, Article 171.6 “Illegal mining of digital currency and activities of a mining infrastructure operator” is being added to the Criminal Code of the Russian Federation.

Details of the proposed criminal penalties

The proposals follow announcements by Deputy Prime Minister Alexander Novak in early December 2025, targeting implementation in 2026. They build on earlier administrative fines introduced in 2025 for lesser violations.

The new Article 171.6 introduces basic offenses regarding unregistered mining causing significant damage while generating income over 3.5 million rubles (nearly $44k). It also includes fines up to 1.5 million rubles, compulsory labor up to 480 hours as well as forced labor up to two years. 

Moreover, aggravated cases, such as those involving organized groups or income exceeding 13.5 million rubles, could result in fines of 500,000 to 2.5 million rubles, forced labor up to five years, or imprisonment up to five years. 

Implications for Russia’s crypto sector

These measures aim to address ongoing issues like unauthorized electricity use straining national grids, particularly in Siberia, and unreported income. Even in some regions, such illegal mining practices have contributed to blackouts and financial losses for utilities. 

While encouraging formalization and tax revenue, critics warn stricter rules could drive underground operations abroad or deter investment. Russia, once poised to challenge the U.S. for global mining dominance, now balances economic benefits with energy security and regulatory control. Even some officials stated that crypto mining is essentially boosting the strength of the ruble. 

As the draft undergoes public review, the sector awaits potential passage, signaling Russia’s continued pivot toward a tightly controlled digital asset framework amid geopolitical pressures.

From gray area to regulated industry

Russia’s relationship with cryptocurrency mining has evolved dramatically over the past decade. Prior to 2024, mining operated in a legal gray zone. While not explicitly banned, it faced scrutiny due to energy consumption concerns and sanctions evasion risks. In 2022, the Central Bank proposed a full ban on mining and crypto activities but this was not enacted. 

By 2023, Russia had emerged as the world’s second-largest crypto miner, with an estimated capacity of 1 gigawatt and production of around 54,000 Bitcoin worth billions of dollars. The facilities for these productions are largely concentrated in energy-rich regions like Siberia and Irkutsk Oblast. 

A pivotal shift occurred in 2024 when President Vladimir Putin signed laws legalizing mining effective November 1, 2024. These laws defined mining as a legitimate activity, required registration for legal entities, individual entrepreneurs, and infrastructure operators with the Federal Tax Service (FTS), and mandated monthly reporting of mined assets. 

By mid-2025, over 1,000 entities had registered, but compliance remained low amid rapid sector growth and persistent illegal operations, often involving electricity theft.

Also read: Iranian Currency Collapse Shows Need for Bitcoin: Bitwise CEO

The year 2025 has been full of surprises in the volatile world of cryptocurrencies. While leading cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum rose to yearly highs, their gains vanished into thin air as the year came to an end. In the meantime, one overlooked contender has stolen the spotlight: Bitcoin Cash (BCH). 

With a year-to-date gain of nearly 35%, BCH has not only outperformed Bitcoin this year but also surged ahead of top altcoins. While only two of the top cryptocurrencies have posted positive gains YTD—BNB up 23% and TRX nearly 11%—gains in BCH price have upsetted harcore Bitcoin maxis and decentralized finance (DeFi) advocates altogether. 

Why? Let’s unfold. 

Bitcoin Cash (BCH) price analysis 

At the time of writing, BCH was trading at $599.5—up 11% in the December month alone. Its market capitalization of $11.97 billion positions the cryptocurrency at 11th spot, a noticeable place in the industry, worth roughly $3 trillion. However, its market share is negligible when compared to Bitcoin’s $1.76 trillion. 

However, BCH is down 86% from its all-time high of $4,355, marked eight years ago on December 20, 2017. Since then, the Bitcoin-sister has not attained any new highs, gaining merely to $1,398 in the 2021 bull run. But the chapter we have opened today is its YTD (year-to-date) gains in 2025, where it has clearly crushed Bitcoin and tens of other leading altcoins. 

Bitcoin Cash (BCH) Vs. Bitcoin: Price comparison for 2025

Entering 2025, both assets started on relatively even footing after shared movements in prior years. Bitcoin kicked off around $93,500, buoyed by institutional adoption and ETF inflows, while BCH hovered near $450. Early in the year, the two moved in tandem, reflecting broader market optimism, as shown in the TradingView chart below. 

However, divergence became stark from mid-year onward. Bitcoin peaked at new all-time highs but faced profit-taking and macroeconomic pressures, closing December 29 around $87,000—for a net loss of about 5.5%. In contrast, BCH climbed steadily, reaching $600 by 30th December, delivering a solid 35% return. This outperformance highlights a classic market rotation: as capital flowed out of overextended leaders like BTC, it sought “value pockets” in underappreciated forks like BCH. 

BCH vs. Top altcoins

BCH’s gains stand out even more when stacked against the top cryptocurrencies by market cap. This TradingView chart provides a clear visual summary of cryptocurrency performance throughout 2025, comparing BCH against several major altcoins on a year-to-date (YTD) basis. 

The overlaid percentage change lines reveal a striking divergence: while most prominent cryptocurrencies ended the year deep in negative territory, BCH stands out as one of the few with positive returns. Specifically, BCH shows a YTD gain of approximately +35.18%, placing it firmly in the green amid a late-year market correction that erased early gains for many assets. 

In contrast, high-profile coins like Cardano (ADA) at -58.87%, Solana (SOL) at -34.85%, Ethereum (ETH) at -11.36%, Dogecoin (DOGE) at -60.50%, and XRP at -9.48% all finished significantly lower, highlighting the broad-based weakness that characterized the second half of 2025.

TRON (TRX) posted modest gains of +11%, but BCH’s nearly 35% placed it among the rare bright spots in the major league. The rise also helped BCH temporarily enter the top-10 crypto assets by market cap in early December with reaching the market cap of $12 billion. 

For more clarity, the table below shows yearly performance of top 10 cryptocurrencies, where many high-profile assets erased early gains due to year-end volatility. 

How BCH topped all in 2025: Reasons behind its surge

In this run, several factors converged to propel BCH’s unexpected rally, blending speculation with subtle fundamentals. Firstly, market rotation and speculation played a central role. After Bitcoin’s dominance pushed many assets to multi-year highs early in 2025, investors rotated profits into lagging coins. BCH, trading at a fraction of BTC’s price despite shared roots, became an attractive “value play.” 

Second, whale accumulation and liquidity flows fueled momentum following the BCH ETF filing by Grayscale in September 2025. This move influenced large holders to scoop up BCH during dips, with on-chain data showing increased activity and steadier hashrate. With this move, derivatives trading also added speculative fire for amplifying the asset’s short-term moves.

Third, marginal but meaningful upgrades bolstered confidence. The May 2025 Velma hard fork introduced enhancements like improved smart contract capabilities (VM Limits and BigInt), positioning BCH to better support DeFi and tokens. Rising on-chain usage—faster, cheaper transactions—drew practical adopters. However, the DeFi ecosystem on Bitcoin Cash remains next to nothing with a total value locked (TVL) of merely $8.49 million and hardly four active protocols.

Lastly, broader macro tailwinds, like anticipated rate cuts, indirectly supported risk assets. Yet BCH’s resilience stood out: it suffered smaller drawdowns than peers and recovered stronger. 

History of Bitcoin Cash (BCH)

While we have covered “everything price” of Bitcoin Cash, let’s not miss its fascinating backstory. BCH’s origin traces to one of the most contentious debates in crypto history. Launched in August 2017, as a hard fork of Bitcoin, BCH emerged from disagreements within the Bitcoin community over scalability. Bitcoin’s original design, with its 1MB block size limit, led to congestion, high fees, and slow transaction times during peak periods. 

At the time, proponents of larger blocks argued that Bitcoin should prioritize being “peer-to-peer electronic cash,” as described in Satoshi Nakamoto’s whitepaper. Meanwhile, developers from Bitcoin Core argued that Bitcoin should adopt solutions like Lightning Network. One group wanted Bitcoin to remain as an investment asset while others wanted it to become a peer-to-peer digital currency. 

This scuffle led to a fork, separating two chains: the original Bitcoin (BTC), which adopted solutions like Segregated Witness (SegWit) to improve efficiency without increasing block size, and Bitcoin Cash, which raised the block limit to 8MB (later expanded to 32MB). This allowed BCH to process significantly more transactions per second at much lower fees—often under $0.01—making it more practical for everyday payments. 

The resilience paradox: No hype, yet top performer

This is not a promotion of BCH—far from it. What’s fascinating is the irony. Bitcoin enjoys unwavering support from influential leaders like Michael Saylor, massive ETF inflows, and a narrative as institutional-grade “digital gold.” Its ecosystem boasts innovations like Ordinals, Runes, and BTCFi. Ethereum dominates DeFi and NFTs. Solana and others grab headlines with speed and memes. 

BCH? It lacks that traction. Divided community post-forks (including Bitcoin SV in 2018), limited developer hype, and perceptions as a “dinosaur coin” have kept it in the shadows. Its adoption for payments remains niche, while facing stiff competition from faster chains. 

Yet in 2025, this low-profile asset—with no celebrity endorsements or viral narratives—delivered the best returns among majors. It highlights crypto’s unpredictability: sometimes, simple utility and market dynamics trump hype. BCH’s outperformance reminds us that resilience can come from sticking to basics, even without the spotlight. 

Also read: Why Gold and Silver Won 2025, And Why Bitcoin Isn’t Done Yet

The crypto community is buzzing with allegations of insider manipulation surrounding the highly anticipated LIT token airdrop from Lighter, a zk-rollup perpetuals DEX. While the airdrop is days away, a number of X posts have fueled debate, accusing insiders of skewing Polymarket odds through coordinated betting. 

In a detailed thread posted on December 28, on-chain investigator Morsy alleged that Lighter insiders are using multiple linked wallets to manipulate Polymarket odds favoring LIT airdrop before year-end. While tracing transactions, Morsy identified wallets funded from Kraken that placed over $250K in “YES” bets on markets like “airdrop before December 31” and “December 29.” 

It seems @Lighter_xyz insiders are manipulating Polymarket odds using multiple wallets since they already have insider info about $LIT TGE :

i traced some top YES holder wallets of "Lighter airdrop before 31st dec" and found links to insiders also these multiple wallets are… pic.twitter.com/vVkQ3f8ARD

— Morsy (@morsyxbt) December 28, 2025

The investigator’s key findings include newly created wallets receiving funds from the same Kraken hot wallet and connections to addresses that deposited large sums to Lighter pre-public beta—suggesting insider access. He warned that such activity erodes trust in prediction markets, comparing it to past crypto scams. 

These findings have garnered significant attention from X users, with some debating whether the bets reflect genuine insider knowledge or sophisticated gambling. “You are betting with vibes against someone who literally has all the insiders info on paper/contracts,” Morsy noted. 

Similarly, popular analyst kkomysh also highlighted a Polymarket trader who deposited $315K to bet “YES” on an upcoming Lighter airdrop. This trader also had positions on high FDV outcomes and a smaller bet on December 29 as the exact date. 

Is this whole Lighter team doing insider trading, or just another BIG believer?

This trader deposited $315,000 on Polymarket and made YES bets on upcoming Lighter airdrop.

> Already in profit of $60,000+
> Bets on December 29 as the exact date of Airdrop
> He placed his bets… pic.twitter.com/uI57T44sfi

— kkomysh (@kkomysh) December 27, 2025

Though the trader is now down $43.7K, he is still holding positions on Lighter’s “FDV above $1 billion on launch day,” “FDV above $2 billion on launch day,” and “Airdrop by December 31.” 

Allegations over market manipulation

On December 28, analyst igorizuchaetcrypty directly accused the Lighter team of manipulating Polymarket through dozens of accounts, calling it “shady practices” for “pathetic $2M.” He criticized the project’s declining monthly revenue ($40M total, only $7M in December), lack of real users beyond farmers, and manual token distribution as signs of unprofessionalism. 

Lighter team is manipulating Polymarket.

Stay away from this project, because there’s a team behind it that’s involved in shady practices.

Let’s break it down.

Why does Lighter have no real future?

> Greedy and cunning team that will take all your money. Trust me, I’ve seen… pic.twitter.com/JPnN3yWzYq

— igorizuchaetcrypty (@igor_mikerin) December 28, 2025

“The Lighter team manipulates bets on Polymarket,” the analyst noted, adding, “They literally create dozens of accounts on Polymarket and place bets through them, doing it carefully to avoid suspicion.”

With his accusations, igorizuchaetcrypty advised users to stay away from the project, citing greed and comparisons to underperforming rivals like Hyperliquid. Though all these claims lack any solid source, the concern has raised debate over the team’s alleged role. 

Current market sentiment and broader implications

As December 29 unfolds, Polymarket volume exceeds $15 million across Lighter markets while odds around every potential outcome for the project have fluctuated sharply. Recently, bets favoring “no airdrop in 2025” have gained massive volume while facing timing risks. 

Earlier this month, Lighter transferred 250 million LIT tokens (25% supply) and enabled airdrop allocation forms, with team hints pointing to a year-end TGE. The pre-market trading for LIT token on platforms like Hyperliquid currently values the project at ~$3.5, implying a FDV potential of $3.5 billion. 

These allegations underscore prediction markets’ vulnerability to informed actors where insiders can profit while distorting crowd wisdom. While no official response from Lighter has addressed the claims, the drama highlights the high-stakes speculation around one of 2025’s most farmed airdrops. 

Also read: Hyperliquid Labs Unstakes $31.2M Worth of HYPE Tokens for Team

Hyperliquid Labs, the team behind leading decentralized perpetual futures exchange (perp DEX), is moving to unstake 1.2 million HYPE tokens—worth roughly $31.2 million—for team distribution. The token unlock underscores Labs’ commitment to transparency in an often opaque crypto landscape. 

The announcement was shared by Hyperliquid Labs’ Co-Founder Iliensinc via a Discord post on December 28, 2025. These tokens are slated for distribution to team members on January 6, 2026. The move follows protocol’s scheduled future token distributions, which will occur on the sixth day of every month. 

“1.2M tokens from Hyperliquid Labs will be unstaked today to be distributed to team members on Jan 6,” Iliensinc stated. “Moving forward, distributions, if any, will take place on the 6th of the month.”

As per Hypurrscan data, the unlock currently seems to be in the withdrawal queue, while over 240 million tokens still staked from the Hyperliquid Labs’ wallet. 

Earlier in December, validators approved the permanent burn of roughly 37 million HYPE tokens (worth about $1 billion at the time) from the Assistance Fund. This fund, which accumulates nearly all trading fees for automated token buybacks, saw its holdings formally excluded from circulating and total supply calculations. The burn reduced supply by over 13%, reinforcing Hyperliquid’s deflationary tokenomics and boosting community confidence.

Hyperliquid’s performance in 2025

Hyperliquid capped 2025 with impressive fundamentals, with its cumulative trading volume reaching $3.35 trillion, revenue topped $848 million, and the total value locked (TVL) stood at $4.15 billion, as per DeFillama data. Throughout the year, more than 600,000 new users joined the protocol, cementing its position as decentralized finance’s (DeFi’s) most profitable venue.

However, Hyperliquid is navigating through a dim phase since the past couple of months, with its revenue diminishing significantly in December. The quarterly revenue for the platform peaked at $302 million in Q3 2025 but dipped 7% to $281 million in Q4. 

Its weekly revenue recently hit a low of $9.16 million—the weakest since early May—amid broader market consolidation. While the daily perp volume remains robust at around $1.8 billion, the competition and incentive fatigue are taking a toll. 

Perp DEX narrative: End or a new beginning?

The perp DEX narrative, which exploded in 2025 with monthly volumes surpassing $1 trillion at peaks, remains a core DeFi trend but shows maturation. Hyperliquid once held 70-80% market share, but challengers like Lighter, Aster, and EdgeX have eroded dominance through innovations like zero-fee models, multi-chain support, and permissionless markets. 

While perp trading volumes grew dramatically year-over-year, recent data indicates stabilization, with farming-driven activity cooling as users demand sustainable economics over points chasing. Hyperliquid’s edge lies in real revenue accrual, with 99% of its total fees allocated for HYPE buybacks, a move creating a flywheel absent in many rivals. 

Read: DWF Labs Unveils $75M DeFi Fund to Invest in Perp DEXs, Money Markets

At the time of publishing, Aster was leading among all perpetual DEXs in 24-hour trading volume, sitting at $2.624 billion. Lighter with $2.514 billion followed in the second place, Hyperliquid with $1.847 billion at third, and EdgeX having $1.245 billion at the fourth position. 

However, Hyperliquid has the highest open interest (OI) among all, accounting for nearly 45% of total at $7.755 billion. Open interest is the total number of outstanding (unsettled) derivative contracts, such as futures or perpetual swaps, that have been opened but not yet closed, liquidated, or expired. 

What’s next for Hyperliquid?

Looking ahead, Hyperliquid’s roadmap focuses largely on ecosystem expansion. Some of its key initiatives include full HIP-3 implementation for permissionless perpetual market creation via staking, deeper HyperEVM integration for builder tools, and potential mobile apps or cross-chain enhancements. 

With portfolio margin already live and institutional custody integrations in progress, 2026 could see revenue rebound through new products like equities perps or universal collateral. 

Hyperliquid’s native token HYPE is currently trading near $26, up 3.66% in the past seven days, but down 56% from its September all-time high of $59, as per CoinMarketCap data. The latest downtrend in HYPE price reflects resilience amid unlocks and competition. As the team unlock proceeds predictably, Hyperliquid positions itself for sustained leadership in a competitive but still-vibrant perp DEX sector. 

Also read: Memecoins Are Financial Nihilism — And That’s the Point

The cryptocurrency market experienced its largest-ever options expiry today, with approximately $27 billion in Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) contracts settling on Deribit. Despite the huge scale of capital involved in the expiration, the calm market reaction underscores the subdued trading environment characteristic of the Christmas holiday period. 

The event, occurring on Boxing Day, involved $23.6 billion in BTC options and $3.8 billion in ETH options, clearing over 50% of the Deribit’s open interest. The settlement occurred orderly with minimal immediate price swings. Bitcoin traded steadily around $88,000–$89,000, while Ethereum hovered near $2,950–$2,980, as per CoinMarketCap data. 

At the time of publishing, BTC was trading at $88,500, while ETH was hovering around $2,960—both up nearly 1.5% in the past 24 hours. 

Record expiry and market stance 

Pre-expiry data revealed a bullish skew: BTC’s put/call ratio stood at about 0.35–0.38, with heavy call interest at $100,000+ strikes and max pain around $95,000–$96,000. For ETH, max pain was near $3,000–$3,100. 

Experts note that dealers pinned BTC in a tight $85,000–$90,000 range throughout December likely through Gamma hedging. This is a risk management strategy that involves adjusting the delta of an options position by buying or selling BTC to maintain a delta-neutral portfolio. The move likely suppressed volatility as market makers bought dips and sold rallies to remain delta-neutral.

The expiry removes this “gamma pinning,” freeing prices from artificial constraints and potentially enabling greater movement into 2026. Analysts expect volatility to pick up as hedging pressures fade and positions roll into January/March contracts. 

“A large Bitcoin options expiry rolls off, removing a chunk of short-term dealer gamma that’s been suppressing volatility and pulling price back toward high-interest strikes,” noted a trader on X, stating that if strong continuation meets bid support it will lead to accumulation while acceptance lower or weak bounce will expand distribution. 

Impact of low volatility and Christmas holidays

The thin holiday liquidity has muted any dramatic response so far, with trading volumes plummeting during the Christmas week as many institutional and retail participants away from desks. 

Historical patterns show December holidays often feature low volatility and range-bound action in crypto, exacerbated this year by tax-loss harvesting and year-end de-risking. Through implied volatility metrics, such as BTC’s around 40–45%, remained moderate, reflecting traders’ reluctance to bet on big moves amid reduced market depth. 

This low-volatility backdrop aligns with broader 2025 trends: despite institutional adoption via ETFs and derivatives growth, Q4 has been crypto’s weakest on record. During this quarter, BTC failed to sustain new highs above the $100K range and it shrinked below $90,000. Thin books during holidays amplify risk but also create opportunities for freer price discovery post-expiry, probably during the first few days of the new year.  

Outlook for 2026

As liquidity normalizes in early January, traders watch for a potential “Santa Rally” extension or renewed downside. Bullish call dominance, as per Deribit data, suggests upside bias if spot demand returns, but ongoing ETF outflows and risk-off sentiment could cap gains. 

“As we move into 2026, the cryptocurrency sector is entering a phase of strategic consolidation,” says Vikas Gupta, Country Manager at Bybit India. “The sharp volatility of late 2025 underscored the market’s sensitivity to global macroeconomic shifts. In the year ahead, regulatory clarity will be the primary catalyst, with initiatives such as the SEC’s proposed “innovation exemption” likely to influence how digital-asset firms operate and scale.” 

The event marks a structural milestone for maturing crypto derivatives markets. Yet, the holiday quietly reminds us that even record-breaking expiries can pass without fanfare in low-participation periods. 

“Changes in monetary policy across major economies will shape liquidity conditions and risk appetite. Although sentiment has improved from the extreme fear of November, traders remain cautious, with elevated futures open interest pointing to shorter, tactical positioning,” Gupta added, “Nevertheless, deeper institutional participation and clearer compliance frameworks support a constructive long-term outlook, making 2026 a year that rewards disciplined conviction.”

Market participants now shift focus to 2026 flows, where increased volatility may finally unlock the next major leg. With the massive December gamma hedging pressure lifted, Bitcoin can respond more freely to fundamental drivers like spot ETF demand and macro liquidity.

Also read: Ben Cowen Warns Ethereum Unlikely to Reach 2026 Highs

Solstice Finance’s USX, a Solana-native over-collateralized stablecoin launched in September 2025, experienced a significant depeg in secondary markets early this morning. The token briefly dropped as low as $0.80 before recovering to around $0.99 following emergency liquidity injections. 

As per DexTool data, USX stablecoin shrinked to as low as $0.7998 on 4:30 AM UTC and recovered back to $0.9977 by 5:30 AM UTC. Following the incident, the trading volume for the token surged by 440% to $15.5 million. 

The Solstice Finance team shared a post on X, stating that they were aware of the matter while confirming that custodied assets backing USX remain entirely unaffected. “We have requested an immediate and additional third-party attestation report that the team will post once available,” they said. 

We are aware of some major volatility in the secondary market for USX tonight.

The Solstice team can confirm the underlying NAV and the custodied assets backing USX on the Solstice side remain entirely unaffected and >100% collateralized. We have requested an immediate and…

— Solstice (@solsticefi) December 26, 2025

The depeg reportedly occurred due to liquidity exhaustion in decentralized exchanges (DEXs) such as Orca and Raydium, triggering sharp volatility in USX’s secondary market price. USX is currently the fifth largest stablecoin on Solana, comprising a market cap of nearly $310 million. 

“This is purely a secondary market liquidity issue that both the Solstice team and our market makers are addressing immediately,” the team emphasized, adding, “We will continue to inject liquidity into the secondary markets to ensure stability.”

Broader market impact

The incident highlights vulnerabilities in DEX liquidity for even over-collateralized stablecoins on high-throughput chains like Solana. While USX recovered swiftly, the event caused temporary ripples in Solana’s DeFi ecosystem, with some protocols experiencing brief imbalances. It underscores the importance of an accountable market-making approach which enhances peg resilience tools. 

Quick summary of the $USX situation

Started de-pegging at 1am UTC
Went down to $0.79 in the following hours
Caused by drained USX liquidity on Orca and Raydium
@solsticefi injected liquidity at 4:32am UTC (TX:… pic.twitter.com/zMn2AurV2p

— CryptoParsel (@derparsel) December 26, 2025

Given the scale of occurrence, no widespread liquidations or protocol exploits were reported, and Solana’s overall stablecoin market—exceeding $15 billion—remains resilient. Analysts note this could prompt increased regulatory scrutiny on DeFi liquidity management but also validates over-collateralized models’ fundamental stability. 

Such depegging events for stablecoins are not unprecedented. While minor fluctuations under 1% are common and often resolve quickly through arbitrage, major depegs—exceeding 10% or lasting days—can trigger broader market panic, forced liquidations in DeFi protocols, and contagion across crypto ecosystems. These events are more frequent in decentralized or algorithmic designs but can affect even fiat-collateralized stablecoins during external crises.  

Stablecoin depegging accidents 

Fiat-backed stablecoins like USDC and USDT have experienced temporary depegs from real-world risks. In March 2023, USDC dropped to as low as $0.87 after issuer Circle revealed $3.3 billion in reserves were trapped at the collapsed Silicon Valley Bank, sparking a brief run on redemptions. The peg recovered swiftly once U.S. regulators guaranteed all deposits. 

Similarly, USDT has depegged multiple times, including to $0.85 in October 2018 amid reserve concerns and briefly in 2022-2023 due to liquidity imbalances on platforms like Curve. 

The most devastating example remains the May 2022 collapse of Terra’s algorithmic stablecoin UST and its sister token LUNA. UST relied on arbitrage mechanisms and LUNA burning/minting to maintain its peg without full collateral, amplified by high yields on the Anchor protocol. At the time, a coordinated withdrawal and sell-off triggered a death spiral where UST fell below $1, forcing massive LUNA minting that diluted its value from over $100 to near zero. This cascade wiped out $45-60 billion in market cap and caused widespread crypto contagion. 

Also read: Trust Wallet Chrome Extension Hack Drains Over $6.7M from Users: ZachXBT

In the hyper-competitive blockchain landscape, very few projects created buzz with as much fanfare as Monad. Backed by a staggering $244 million in funding, including a $225 million round led by Paradigm at a $3 billion valuation, Monad promised revolutionary performance improvements over Ethereum while maintaining full EVM compatibility. 

The project was hailed as the “Solana killer” for the Ethereum ecosystem. Its parallel execution model aimed to deliver 10,000 transactions per second (TPS), sub-second block times, and low fees, all without compromising decentralization. But, since its mainnet is now live, did it deliver anything though? 

The Hype and the Launch 

The culmination arrived on November 24, 2025, when Monad’s public mainnet launched alongside its native MON token. The event was accompanied by a high-profile public sale on Coinbase’s revived token sales platform, raising approximately $188 million at $0.025 per token. It was followed by a substantial airdrop distributing 3.3 billion MON tokens to early community members and testnet participants. 

Yet, one month later, as the crypto market navigates the holiday season, Monad’s reality paints a starkly different picture. The MON token, which surged to an all-time high of $0.04876 shortly after launch, has plummeted over 60%, trading around $0.02 as of December 25. 

As per DeFillama data, its Total Value Locked (TVL) hovers around $235 million, a modest figure for a chain with such lofty ambitions but not up to the mark while compared to its pre-launch hype. The daily fees barely exceed $5,000, and its initially robust on-chain activity has shown signs of fading. Monad, it seems, is suffering a classic post-mainnet hangover: massive pre-launch hype met with minimal sustained traction. 

Where it all starts

Monad’s journey began in 2022, founded by veterans from high-frequency trading firm Jump Trading, which is currently under a massive legal scrutiny. The team re-engineered core components of the Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM) and introduced innovations like MonadBFT (a pipelined consensus mechanism), deferred execution, parallel transaction processing, and MonadDB (a custom state database). These allowed Monad to claim unprecedented performance on paper: 10,000 TPS, 0.4-second block times, and 0.8-second finality. 

The project’s testnet, launched in February 2025, lived up to much of the promise. It processed billions of transactions, peaked at over 5,000 TPS in real-world stress tests, and attracted hundreds of ecosystem projects. Alongside, developer activity ranked among the top in the industry, and partnerships with Circle, LayerZero, Wormhole, and Chainlink signaled readiness for prime time. 

The statistics helped the project with funding poured in, totaling over $240 million from blue-chip investors including Coinbase Ventures, Electric Capital, and Dragonfly. By mid-2025, Monad was one of the most anticipated launches, with pre-market trading on perpetual platforms valuing MON at premiums implying FDVs north of $5 billion. 

The launch strategy was meticulously planned for broad distribution. Coinbase hosted a public sale of 7.5 billion MON (7.5% of total supply) at $0.025, prioritizing smaller buyers with a “fill-from-bottom” allocation model. Simultaneously, an airdrop—which sparked chaos at the time—rewarded over 289,000 wallets, with 70% claimed by launch. Total initial circulating supply hit 10.8 billion tokens, aiming to avoid the concentrated dumps plaguing past launches. 

On November 24, at 9:00 AM ET, mainnet went live. Validators activated, dApps migrated from testnet, and MON began trading. Circle announced native USDC support from day one, bolstering stablecoin inflows.

Initial surge at the mainnet launch

No doubt, the first days were electric. MON quickly doubled from its $0.025 ICO price, peaking near $0.049 as retail FOMO kicked in. Trading volumes exploded, with centralized exchanges like Kraken listing from day one. On-chain metrics impressed: nearly 150,000 daily active users in the opening week, millions of transactions processed, and stablecoin market cap surging past $400 million at points. 

Monad:

> 3 years of building
> $225M raised at $3B
> VCs have a few years lock-up
> raised $187M more though ICO

It was the first ICO on Coinbase with US users eligible to participate, and the chart looks like this

Below ICO price ($0.025) and down 60% from ATH pic.twitter.com/aYBO7zT5lg

— jussy (@jussy_world) December 23, 2025

Notably, gaming and DeFi apps like Lumiterra (an MMORPG) drove viral activity, recording over 100,000 daily unique wallets and millions of daily transactions on Monad. Protocols such as Folks Finance, Kintsu (liquid staking), and emerging lenders like Neverland Money also rolled out incentives, creating a brief flywheel of activity. 

Artemis data highlighted strong early usage: 4.7 million transactions in the first weeks, with peaks rivaling established chains. Community sentiment on X was jubilant, with posts declaring Monad the “new king of EVM chains.” 

Early post-launch spikes showed 150,000+ active addresses and high transaction counts, but daily figures have normalized lower. TPS, while capable of bursts, averages far below the 10,000 headline in organic usage. 

Post-Airdrop Activity: The Fade Begins

Here, the time came where reality set in swiftly. As MON went live for trading, airdrop recipients and ICO buyers faced immediate sell pressure. Despite vesting for larger allocations, the unlocked portions flooded markets. It led profit-taking to rampant levels, exacerbated by spoofing incidents and order-book imbalances.

By early December, MON dipped below ICO price briefly, erasing gains. As of Christmas Eve 2025, it’s down nearly 55% from ATH, with market cap reflecting a painful correction.

While initial users explored free tokens, the post-airdrop engagement waned as sustained activity relied on incentives only. Many dApps, still bootstrapping liquidity, offered yields subsidized by ecosystem funds—but these proved temporary. 

TVL Tells the Tale

DeFiLlama tracks Monad’s TVL at approximately $235 million as of December-end, ranking it outside the top 20 chains. Early inflows reached $150 million in week one, but growth stalled. Stablecoin dominance (USDC and others) accounts for much of it, with actual protocol TVL being modest. 

Monad’s daily fees: a paltry $4,000-5,000, generating minimal revenue ($1,500-2,000). Compared to Hyperliquid’s millions or even Base’s hundreds of thousands as economic activity remains embryonic on the blockchain. Although its DEX volumes and perpetual open interest are present, no breakout apps are capturing liquidity like Hyperliquid did on its chain. 

Just Another EVM L1?

Monad’s core selling point—delivering high-performance, fully EVM-compatible Layer 1 blockchain, and sub-second block times—remains a double-edged sword. This seamless compatibility enables effortless porting of Ethereum dApps, tools, and liquidity, lowering adoption barriers in a developer ecosystem dominated by EVM standards. 

However, in a saturated market of EVM chains like Base, Arbitrum, Blast, and Scroll (all benefiting from Ethereum’s security and modular scaling), Monad struggles to stand out purely on technical benchmarks. Plus its competition against non-EVM speed leaders like Solana and Sui also raises the bar for this newcomer, which is largely looking like it’s here to extract value rather than adding any. 

Ultimately, on an optimistic side, Monad’s fate hinges on transcending speed claims with a breakout narrative or killer app, such as ultra-low-latency consumer experiences or AI/onchain innovations teased in recent blueprints. As of late December 2025, it risks fading into the crowded pack amid fierce competition and no-such traction. 

Welcome to “Ghost Chain” Town

One month in, whispers of “ghost chain” status emerge on X and forums. Low fees are essentially a good thing for blockchain but it leads the project revenue-starved for sustainability. Without viral organic growth, subsidized activity fades, leaving quiet blocks. Comparisons to past hyped L1s (Aptos, Sui post-launch dips) abound, Monad’s TVL-to-FDV ratio is unfavorable, with billions in implied valuation unsupported by fundamentals.

pic.twitter.com/bhz1LyDC0I

— Bold (@boldleonidas) December 15, 2025

Monad’s trajectory offers cautionary tales for the next wave of hyped L1s. It sets a perfect example that the projects on the verge of being “next Monad,” should heed these to avoid similar hangovers. Throwing VC money for marketing and growth might help initially but long-term goals only could be achieved if the project actually has something value providing. This is not just limited to Monad but other giants like Aptos, Sui, Movement as well. 

Key Takeaways

Monad’s story is still unfolding. Its tech is undeniably advanced, and early metrics showed promise. A month of data, however, reveals the chasm between hype and sustained adoption in crypto’s brutal arena. 

At ~$0.020, MON reflects disillusionment, but low valuations could attract patient capital if activity rebounds. Its ecosystem grants (38.5% allocation) and upcoming governance may catalyze growth, only if played well. For now, Monad embodies 2025’s L1 reality: building a blockbuster chain requires more than funding and tech—it demands unbreakable user loops in a saturated market. 

Also read: Aave’s Governance Meltdown: The Conflict on Brand, Fees, and Ownership

The share of stablecoins in decentralized, and in traditional finance to some extent, is growing rapidly. Noting this shift, a new empirical analysis reveals significant growth in real-world stablecoin payments on Ethereum, with business-to-business (B2B) transactions witnessing a spike of over 156% this year. 

Published on December 19, 2025, the report from analytics firm Artemis examines USDT and USDC transfers on Ethereum, which hosts about 52% of global stablecoin supply. Both these dominant stablecoins comprise 88% of the total market value of $302 billion, as per DeFillama data. 

Growth in stablecoin volume 

Over the period from August 2024 to August 2025, stablecoin payment volume and transaction counts more than doubled. Notably, B2B stablecoin volume surged 156%, accompanied by a 45% increase in average transaction size. These numbers highlight larger institutional settlements while person-to-business (P2B) payments grew even faster at 167%, signaling rising consumer adoption for everyday commerce. 

Despite this growth, the composition of transfers tells a nuanced story. Peer-to-peer (P2P) transactions dominate by count, making up 67% of direct wallet-to-wallet (EOA-to-EOA) transfers, but contribute only 24% of the volume. In contrast, business-related categories, like B2B, P2B, and internal business transfers, drove the majority of dollar value due to their substantially larger average sizes.

The report estimates that genuine payments account for up to 47% of total stablecoin volume on Ethereum, or 35% when excluding internal business moves. It includes only EOA-to-EOA transfers, excluding decentralized finance (DeFi) and smart contract interactions.

This data positions Ethereum as an increasingly reliable settlement layer for high-value flows rather than purely retail experimentation.

Larger players continue to dominate the market

Another notable key takeaway from the report is that the large market players (potentially institutions and DAOs) have continued to dominate the space. The top 1,000 sender wallets handle 84% of transfer volume. 

The analysis also notes patterns like reduced weekend activity and a spike in sub-$0.1 transactions, potentially indicative of bots or wash trading, which warrant caution in interpreting raw data. 

The methodology relies on Artemis’s wallet labeling to classify transfers into P2P, B2B, P2B/B2P, and internal business categories. It also acknowledges limitations such as potential misclassification in pseudonymous environments. 

The findings underscore a “quiet adoption” of stablecoins for institutional and commercial purposes on Ethereum. As James, Head of Ecosystem at the Ethereum Foundation, highlighted in recent commentary, these trends reflect Ethereum maturing into infrastructure for borderless, efficient payments—particularly where traditional systems fall short in speed and cost. 

Most stablecoin transactions on Ethereum are P2P at 67%

Most of the volume isn't (only 24%).
Over the last 12 months:

B2B volume grew 156%
Average transaction size rose 45%
P2B grew fastest at 167%

Institutions aren't sending more payments. They're sending bigger ones.… pic.twitter.com/Mz03DHzhuS

— James ⟠ | Snapcrackle.eth (@Snapcrackle) December 22, 2025

While P2P remains prominent in transaction numbers, the volume dominance of business flows suggests stablecoins are evolving into a tool for intermediaries and large firms, complementing DeFi and trading activities. 

This report arrives amid broader stablecoin expansion, with global supply exceeding $300 billion and monthly volumes in the trillions. For Ethereum, it reinforces the network’s role in bridging crypto with real-world finance, even as competitors like Tron capture significant shares in certain segments.

Also read: Why Gold and Silver Won 2025, And Why Bitcoin Isn’t Done Yet

The cryptocurrency community is currently buzzing with anticipation around the Lighter airdrop. The decentralized perpetuals exchange (DEX), built on Ethereum Layer 2 with zero-knowledge (ZK) rollup technology, is poised for its token generation event (TGE) by December end with a major community airdrop. 

As the TGE is just around the corner, analysts are speculating on the potential price and market valuation for Lighter. A recent X post by user, Vikingo.hl, noted that the LIT token was trading with $4.3 billion in valuation at ~$4.3 in pre-market price. 

Lighter trading above $4,3B in pre market which means over $85 per point.

1 Lighter point = 85$ $LIT = 4.3$ (pre-market)

Total $LIT supply: 1B
Airdrop: 250m (25% of TTS)
Total Lighter points: 12.5m

• 250/12.5 = 20 $LIT for every point
• 20 $LIT * 4.28 = $85.6 per 1… pic.twitter.com/0aZgDRUqRH

— Vikingo.hl (@VikingoDigital_) December 22, 2025

Other users also echoed similar sentiment around LIT token’s potential launch price and valuation. Most of the posts around this on X have also noted that the potential date for the airdrop is December 29. 

Just a few days prior, the Lighter team transferred 250 million tokens from the team wallet to a different address, fueling the airdrop speculation. According to the project’s tokenomics, the total supply for LIT token is 1 billion and the allocation for airdrop is 250 million tokens, representing 25% of the total supply. 

Vikingo’s post highlights that a total of 12.5 million points were rewarded to users, giving each point 20 tokens in equivalent, or $85 per point. However, the token’s pre-market price has declined to $3.9 at the time of publishing, as per market data from Hyperliquid. 

Lighter airdrop farming

Launched publicly in October 2025 after a private beta, Lighter has rapidly emerged as a fierce competitor to established players like Hyperliquid. With trading volumes surging, often reaching billions daily, and features like verifiable on-chain matching, the platform has attracted significant attention. 

Lighter’s growth has been propelled by its points program, a key mechanism for rewarding user participation and farming potential airdrop eligibility. The program spanned across two seasons. The first one covered the private beta from January to September 2025, onboarding around 100,000–110,000 users and second ran from October 1 to December 31, 2025, coinciding with the public mainnet launch. The next season added hundreds of thousands more users and focused on anti-Sybil measures to prevent wash trading.

Points were awarded on a weekly basis for trading activity, liquidity provision, competitions, and referrals, totaling roughly 12.5 million across both seasons. A recent dashboard update allows users to allocate their airdrop across up to four wallets, with a deadline of December 26, 2025, further signaling imminent distribution. 

As per DeFillama data, Lighter currently has a total value locked (TVL) of $1.4 billion. The past 30 days trading volume for the platform sits at $2.94 billion with its open interest (OI) sitting at $1.60 billion. 

Predictions around Lighter on Polymarket

Amid Lighter being the hot topic among crypto traders, prediction platform Polymarket has also become a hotspot for betting on Lighter’s timeline and valuation. Market data currently show over 86% odds for the airdrop and TGE before December 31, 2025. The trading volume for this bet has exceeded above $9 million. 

A separate market speculation on post-launch fully diluted valuation (FDV) also gained significant attention. The probabilities for >$1 billion stand high at 87%, while >$3 billion and >$4 billion have seen sharp increases following recent developments. This prediction has brought over $35.5 million in trading volume. 

Pre-market LIT token trading on Hyperliquid

In a notable move, Hyperliquid listed LIT-USDC perpetuals for pre-market trading on December 22, 2025. The listing announcement was quite unexpected as Lighter is considered a direct rival to Hyperliquid. 

By community request, Hyperliquid has listed LIT-USDC hyperps. You can now long or short the unlaunched Lighter token with up to 3x leverage. pic.twitter.com/f5ADrwFgrX

— Hyperliquid (@HyperliquidX) December 22, 2025

Within hours of listing, LIT token quickly climbed above $4 with its fully diluted valuation (FDV) reaching a new high of $4.3 billion. Conversely, its open interest and trading volume also reached millions, with leverage up to 3x enabling longs and shorts positions on token’s pre-market price. 

Also read: Hyperliquid Refutes Claims on $362M Shortfall and Insider Trading

In the world of decentralized finance (DeFi), protocols are meant to be governed by the community of token holders rather than centralized teams. Often, this approach raises tensions between entities and conflicts of interest simmer beneath the surface. A prime example for this is the recent blunders around Aave, where Aave Labs and the AAVE token holders’ community (Aave DAO) are sharing opposite views on the future of the protocol. 

What once started as questions on frontend swap fees, now escalated into a full-blown governance crisis, exposing deep rifts between the Aave DAO and Aave Labs. The matter has caught widespread attention from the crypto community as Aave is one of the largest DeFi protocols with over $33 billion in total value locked (TVL) and any developments around the platform have significant implications on the whole crypto ecosystem. 

Beginning of the Aave controversy 

The controversial spark ignited earlier this month when governance delegates discovered that Aave Labs had integrated CoWSwap—a decentralized exchange aggregator—into the Aave protocol frontend, replacing the previous ParaSwap integration. 

Aave Labs is partnering with @CoWSwap to provide an improved swap experience across https://t.co/uaJ3qsRWMw.

Swaps will now have better prices via CoW Swap's solver and protection against MEV attacks. pic.twitter.com/hlsVuWpLqO

— Aave (@aave) December 4, 2025

Earlier, swap-related referral fees and positive slippage surplus from ParaSwap flowed directly to the Aave DAO treasury, providing a voluntary but significant revenue stream for token holders. Estimates suggest this amounted to around $200,000 per week, potentially totaling over $10 million annually across supported chains.

However, on-chain analysis revealed that post the CoWSwap integration, these fees were redirected to a private wallet controlled by Aave Labs. Delegates like those from Orbit and the Aave Chan Initiative (ACI), led by Aave Chan Initiative Founder Marc Zeller, labeled this a “stealth privatization” of DAO-funded value. Critics argued that the DAO had indirectly subsidized the brand, development, and user acquisition that made the frontend monetizable, yet Aave Labs was capturing the upside unilaterally. 

The protocol, product, and community of Aave

Aave Labs defended the move by drawing a sharp line between the “protocol,” and the “product.” To note, Aave protocol refers to on-chain smart contracts governed by the DAO and the Product is their user-facing interface, which is funded and maintained independently by Aave Labs. 

For even broader clarity, Aave Labs is the developer entity that looks after developments and maintenance of Aave protocol. Aave’s Founder Stani Kulechov is currently the CEO of Aave Labs, which is owned by the parent company Avara. 

In forum responses, Aave Labs emphasized that frontend monetization had always been separate and voluntary, not an obligation to the DAO. They promised clearer distinctions in future communications and highlighted ongoing contributions, such as preparing for Aave V4 upgrades. 

Yet the community saw it differently. Zeller and others pointed out a “tacit relationship” where frontend revenues were expected to benefit the DAO, especially since much of the underlying development was funded by token holders through grants to contractors like Aave Labs. The controversy deepened with claims that CoWSwap solvers were bypassing Aave’s own flash loans in favor of competitors like Balancer, further eroding potential DAO income.

Who actually owns Aave?

As discussions heated up on the Aave governance forum, the debate shifted to a broader existential question: Who truly owns Aave? On December 16, 2025, Ernesto Boado—former Aave Labs CTO and Co-Founder of BGD Labs—posted a proposal titled “[ARFC] $AAVE Token Alignment Phase 1 – Ownership.”

The proposal called for transferring key brand assets, including the ‘aave.com’ domain, social media handles, GitHub repositories, trademarks, and naming rights, to a legally structured DAO-controlled vehicle. The goal was to prevent private monetization of collectively built value and include anti-capture mechanisms to protect the community.

After just five days of discussion on the matter, what followed was procedural chaos. On December 22, Aave Labs unilaterally escalated the proposal to a Snapshot vote, starting December 23, 2025, and set to conclude on December 26. The move once again raised anger among DAO members and they slammed Aave Labs for hurrying the vote during the holiday season.  

Boado publicly disavowed the move, stating it was submitted “in a rush, with my name on it, and without notifying me at all.” He argued it was not his intent and urged more time for deliberation. Prominent delegates echoed the sentiment, calling the timing “disgraceful” and accusing Labs of bypassing consensus to control the narrative. 

Aave Founder’s defence 

Stani Kulechov justified the escalation as compliant with governance rules, noting the community was “tired of this discussion” and ready for a decision. “The discussion has been going over the past 5 days already with various opinions and takes, a timeline set on the ARFC temp check,” he stated. 

Those who wonder, yes the vote is legitimate

– The discussion has been going over the past 5 days already with various of opinions and takes, a timeline set on the ARFC temp check (see more https://t.co/KovomHiB6H)
– The Snapshot is in compliance of the governance framework
-… https://t.co/nZoixZvbwl

— Stani.eth (@StaniKulechov) December 22, 2025

However, the backlash and market reactions were more brutal and swifter than Stani’s views. Within hours, AAVE token price plunged over 10% in a single day, from around $176 to $159, fueled by a major whale dumping 230,350 tokens worth $38 million at a significant loss. At the time, trading volume for AAVE spiked over 235%, and Polymarket odds on the proposal passing plummeted to around 25%, reflecting eroded confidence. 

DAO Vs. Developers: The DeFi paradox

This episode underscores unresolved tensions in DeFi governance: DAOs excel at on-chain protocol control but struggle with off-chain assets like brands and interfaces, whereas developer teams hold practical leverage. Aave’s case highlights the risk of “value extraction,” where founding teams monetize community-built reputation without proportional benefits flowing back to token holders.

A recent parallel also amplifies these similar concerns. Just days earlier, on December 15, stablecoin issuer Circle announced its acquisition of Interop Labs, the core development team and proprietary IP behind the Axelar network. The deal explicitly excluded the Axelar Foundation, network, and AXL token, leaving them under independent community governance. 

While Circle gained engineering talent to bolster its Cross-Chain Transfer Protocol (CCTP) and Arc blockchain, AXL holders received no direct upside—no buybacks, revenue share, or governance perks. The token crashed over 15% post-announcement, with community voices decrying it as a “token vs. equity” rug where vested insiders cashed out while retail holders bore the downside.

Also Read: Circle’s Axelar Deal Sparks AXL Crash and Token-Equity Backlash

In Axelar’s case, development shifted to contributor Common Prefix, but trust was damaged amid ongoing unlocks and adoption challenges. It serves as a stark reminder that in many crypto projects, token holders—who provide liquidity, governance, and decentralization—are often sidelined when teams or equity holders exit lucratively. 

Coming back to Aave, as the Snapshot vote unfolds amid holidays and low expected participation, the outcome could set precedents for DAO-team dynamics across DeFi. If the proposal fails, it may embolden centralized control; if it passes, it could force realignments but risk fragmenting development. Either way, the blunder has already cost AAVE holders dearly in market value, highlighting that decentralization’s promise remains fragile when incentives misalign.

Also Read: Why Gold and Silver Won 2025, And Why Bitcoin Isn’t Done Yet

The financial landscape of 2025 will be remembered by “crypto historians” as the year of the “Great Decoupling.” For over a decade, the “digital gold” narrative tethered Bitcoin (BTC) to the precious metals complex in the minds of macro strategists, suggesting that in times of monetary debasement and geopolitical fracture, both asset classes would rise in unison. But the reality of late 2025 has shattered this correlation, delivering a stark verdict on the hierarchy of safe havens.

As the year draws to a close, a distinct narrative has emerged: the “Debasement Trade” has been decisively won by precious metals, leaving digital assets in a precarious position of reassessment. Gold has surged approximately 68% year-to-date (YTD), shattering all-time highs and establishing a new valuation floor above $4,409 per ounce as of December 22, 2025.

This performance is not merely a function of lower rates or a weaker dollar—traditional drivers that have decoupled—but a reflection of a deeper structural anxiety regarding the creditworthiness of sovereign issuers and the weaponization of the global financial system.

Silver, often the volatile sibling to gold, has outperformed even the yellow metal, registering gains of roughly 130% and breaching the $60 per ounce mark. This surge is driven by a “perfect storm” of monetary spillover from gold and critical industrial shortages exacerbated by the burgeoning artificial intelligence (AI) and renewable energy sectors. The industrial imperative has collided with monetary demand, creating a squeeze on physical inventory that paper markets can no longer mask.

Conversely, Bitcoin—despite achieving an all-time high (ATH) of approximately $126,200 on October 7, 2025—has suffered a severe correction, sliding below $90,000 and almost ending the year with negative momentum relative to the metals complex.

This divergence challenges the “Digital Gold” thesis in the short term, highlighting Bitcoin’s continued correlation with risk assets rather than behaving as a true sovereign safe haven during periods of acute geopolitical stress. The October sell-off, triggered by tariff scares and leverage flushes, demonstrated that while Bitcoin is an unparalleled liquidity sponge, it has not yet achieved the “crisis alpha” status of physical bullion.

However, to declare crypto “dead” in the face of gold’s ascent would be a fundamental misreading of the structural shifts occurring in global finance. The establishment of a U.S. Strategic Bitcoin Reserve via Executive Order 14233 in March 2025  and the continued institutional accumulation by entities like MicroStrategy and state governments suggest that Bitcoin’s current slump is a cyclical volatility event rather than a terminal decline.

The divergence is better understood as a rotation within the “sound money” trade, where sovereigns and conservative capital favor the tangible certainty of gold, while risk-tolerant capital and forward-looking corporate treasuries continue to build positions in digital scarcity.

This report provides an exhaustive analysis of the drivers behind this divergence, the shifting strategies of corporate and sovereign treasuries, and a detailed forecast for 2026. It argues that while 2025 was the year of the “Tangible Safe Haven” (Gold/Silver), 2026 is poised to be a year of “Asset Coexistence,” where industrial imperatives for silver and the institutionalization of Bitcoin reshape portfolio allocations in a world increasingly skeptical of fiat currency.

Macroeconomic context of late 2025: Fiscal dominance and fractured geopolitics

To understand the divergent paths of Gold, Silver, and Bitcoin, one must first analyze the macroeconomic environment that characterized the latter half of 2025. The global economy did not merely face inflation or recession; it faced a unique convergence of “fiscal dominance,” geopolitical fragmentation, and the weaponization of trade policies that forced a re-evaluation of what constitutes a “risk-free” asset.

The return of fiscal dominance and the debasement trade

The primary driver for the surge in hard assets has been the market’s realization that fiscal deficits in major economies, particularly the United States, are becoming unmanageable without currency debasement. The “debasement trade”—investing in assets that hold value as fiat currency purchasing power erodes—became the dominant strategy of 2025.

Fiscal dominance occurs when monetary policy becomes subservient to fiscal policy; central banks are forced to keep interest rates low or expand their balance sheets to ensure the government can service its debt, regardless of inflation targets. In late 2025, this fear became acute. With U.S. debt levels continuing to climb and interest payments consuming a larger portion of the federal budget, the market began to price in a scenario where the Federal Reserve would be forced to monetize debt perpetually.

However, the market chose its vehicle for this trade carefully. Gold, with its millennia-long history and lack of counterparty risk, became the primary beneficiary. The fear of “sovereign debt issues” acting as a black swan event drove capital into physical bullion.

Unlike previous cycles where real yields (i.e. interest rates adjusted for inflation) dictated gold prices, 2025 saw a breakdown in this correlation. Gold rallied even as nominal rates remained elevated, signaling that investors were pricing in a long-term credit risk of the issuer (the U.S. Treasury) rather than just the opportunity cost of holding metal. This decoupling is historic; it suggests that Gold is no longer trading just as an inflation hedge, but as a hedge against the solvency of the fiat system itself.

Geopolitical fragmentation and the weaponization of finance

The freezing of Russian assets in 2022 initiated a trend that accelerated significantly in 2025: the move away from Western financial infrastructure by Global South nations. Central banks, fearing sanctions and the weaponization of the dollar, aggressively diversified into Gold. This was not merely investment; it was a matter of national security.

This environment heavily favored Gold and Silver, which can be kept physically in custody within national borders and traded bilaterally without passing through any clearinghouses. Bitcoin, despite its censorship-resistant properties at the protocol level, is still perceived by many sovereigns as volatile and susceptible to regulatory chokepoints in Western-dominated on-ramps and exchanges. The transparency of the blockchain, while a feature for auditability, acts as a bug for nations seeking to obscure their reserve accumulation from Western surveillance. Thus, in 2025, the “sovereign put” was exercised in Gold, not crypto.

The liquidity vs. crisis hedge distinction

A critical insight from the price action of 2025 is the stark distinction between a “liquidity hedge” and a “crisis hedge.”

• Crisis hedge (Gold): This asset performs best when the system itself is under threat, geopolitics fracture, and fear is the dominant sentiment. It is the asset of last resort when trust in institutions collapses.
• Liquidity hedge (Bitcoin): This asset performs best when money supply is expanding, risk appetite is high, and technology stocks are soaring. It is a “call option on the future,” thriving on liquidity injections.

In late 2025, as trade wars intensified (specifically new U.S.-China tariff threats) and geopolitical tensions rose in the Middle East and Eastern Europe, the market sought crisis insurance. This triggered a massive rotation out of Bitcoin (risk-on) and into Gold (risk-off). When the VIX (CBOE Volatility Index) spiked and tariff headlines hit the tape, algorithms dumped Bitcoin alongside the Nasdaq, while capital fled into the sanctuary of bullion. This behavior reinforces that, at this stage of its maturation, Bitcoin is still correlated with the liquidity cycle, whereas Gold is correlated with the fear cycle.

The inflation paradox

Inflation in 2025 presented a paradox. While headline inflation cooled slightly in some regions, “sticky” inflation persisted in services and wages. More importantly, inflation expectations became unanchored. The market began to believe that 3-4% inflation would be the new policy target, explicitly or implicitly, to erode the real value of sovereign debt.

In this environment, Gold shone as the proven historic hedge. Bitcoin, which has a theoretically inflation-resistant hard cap, failed to attract the same flows. This is partly due to the “high beta” nature of crypto; in a high-rate environment where cash yields 4-5%, the opportunity cost of holding a volatile asset like Bitcoin is higher than holding Gold, which is viewed as a currency substitute. The breakdown of the correlation between Bitcoin and inflation expectations in late 2025 was a key driver of its underperformance relative to the metals.

Comparative asset performance YTD 2025

Gold: The sovereign monarch and the new reserve standard

Gold’s performance in 2025 was nothing short of historic. Rising approximately 68% YTD, the metal did not just appreciate; it underwent a repricing that suggests a fundamental shift in its role within the global monetary system. It effectively re-monetized itself, asserting its role as the ultimate settlement asset in a multipolar world. 

Following are the factors behind gold’s meteoric rise in 2025;

Central bank accumulation: The new floor

The single most important driver of gold’s ascent has been the relentless, price-insensitive buying by central banks. The year 2025 marked the fourth consecutive year of massive accumulation, shattering records and fundamentally altering the supply-demand mechanics of the market. 

The China strategy: Covert vs. Overt

The People’s Bank of China (PBOC) has been the whale in the market. While official data shows consistent purchasing, investigative reports and analysis of import data suggest the true scale is far larger.

• Official data: PBOC’s gold reserves officially reached roughly 2,300 tonnes by late 2025, with consistent monthly additions.
• The “shadow” reserves: Credible analysis from institutions like Société Générale and industry insiders suggests China’s actual purchases may be higher than reported, potentially bringing their true reserves closer to 5,000 tonnes. By funneling Gold through sovereign wealth funds, state-owned banks, and the Shanghai Gold Exchange, China is able to accumulate massive quantities without immediately spiking the price or alerting the market to the full extent of its diversification.
• Strategic intent: This is not a trade; it is a strategy to de-dollarize. By holding gold, China reduces its vulnerability to U.S. sanctions and prepares the Yuan for a larger role in international trade settlement. The accumulation of Gold is the physical backing for a post-dollar trade bloc.

The Global South’s “Gold standard”

It is not just China. A bloc of nations including Poland, India, Turkey, Brazil, and Singapore have been aggressive buyers, as per Trading Economics data. 

• Poland: The National Bank of Poland (NBP) has explicitly stated its goal to increase Gold to 20% of its total reserves, buying aggressively throughout 2025 to safeguard national financial sovereignty against geopolitical instability in Europe.
• India: The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) moved significant quantities of Gold from storage in the UK back to domestic vaults, a trend of “repatriation” seen globally. This signals a distrust of foreign custody and a desire for physical possession.
• The “Central Bank Put“: This consistent buying creates a “floor” under the Gold price. Unlike retail investors who may sell during price dips or profit-take at highs, central banks buy for strategic duration. They are “strong hands” that effectively permanently remove supply from the market, tightening the float available for private investors.

Institutional re-rating and Western capital flows

For the first half of the decade, Western institutional investors largely ignored Gold, favoring the growth of equities and the yield of bonds. Late 2025 saw a dramatic reversal of this trend.

• ETF inflows: After years of outflows, Western exchange-traded funds, or ETFs, saw a resurgence of inflows in Q3 and Q4 2025. This was driven by portfolio managers realizing that a traditional 60/40 stock/bond portfolio was insufficient protection against a stagflationary or fiscal shock environment.
• The “Fear” allocation: Wealth managers and family offices began increasing Gold allocations from a tactical 0-2% to a structural 5-10%. The narrative shifted from “Gold is a dead rock” to “Gold is the only asset with no counterparty risk”.

The breakdown of correlations: A new paradigm

Historically, Gold moves inversely to the U.S. Dollar (DXY) and Real Yields. When rates rise, Gold (which yields nothing) typically falls.

In 2025, this correlation broke. Gold rose alongside a relatively strong dollar and high interest rates.

• Multidimensional polarization: J.P. Morgan describes this as “multidimensional polarization,” where Gold is trading on a new variable: the credit risk of the U.S. government.
• Implication: This suggests that the market believes the U.S. fiscal situation is so precarious that higher rates will actually cause a crisis (by exploding interest expense) rather than solving inflation. Gold is pricing in the eventual need for Yield Curve Control or a similar intervention, regardless of what the Fed says today.

Silver: The industrial titan and monetary phoenix

If Gold was the superstar of 2025, Silver was the hyper-growth phenomenon. Rising nearly 130% and breaching the psychological and technical barrier of $60/oz, Silver’s rally is underpinned by a structural supply deficit that appears nearly impossible to resolve in the near term. 

Silver is effectively firing on two engines: first, a monetary engine driven by Gold’s breakout, and second, an industrial engine driven by the green energy and AI revolutions. 

The industrial demand shock: AI, solar, and EVs

Silver is unique with its dual identity as a precious metal and a critical industrial input. In 2025, three pillars of industrial demand accelerated simultaneously, creating a demand shock that overwhelmed supply.

The photovoltaic (solar) juggernaut

Solar energy remains the dominant industrial driver.

• Technological shift: The shift to newer, more efficient solar cell technologies (like TOPCon and HJT) requires significantly more Silver paste per cell compared to previous generations. While manufacturers have attempted “thrifting,” which in this sense refers to using less Silver, they have hit technical limits where further reduction compromises efficiency.
• Volume growth: The sheer volume of new solar installations globally, particularly in China and Europe, continues to drive consumption. Solar demand alone now consumes a massive percentage of annual mine supply, and this is projected to nearly double by 2030.

The AI and data center surprise

A critical and under-discussed driver emerging in 2025 is the role of Silver in the artificial intelligence (AI) infrastructure build-out.

• Conductivity is King: AI data centers require massive amounts of power and generate immense heat. Silver is the most conductive metal on earth. It is increasingly essential in high-performance connectors, busbars, and thermal management systems within AI servers.
• Demand multiplier: Estimates suggest that AI-specific hardware consumes two to three times more Silver than traditional server hardware. As the “AI Arms Race” between corporations and nations intensifies, the demand for silver in this sector has become price-insensitive—and tech giants will pay whatever is necessary to secure the materials for their chips and centers.

Electric vehicle (EV) electrification

As the global automotive fleet electrifies, Silver consumption in circuitry, contacts, and battery management systems continues to rise. EV demand for silver rose by an estimated 20% in 2025, creating another persistent drain on physical stocks.

The structural deficit and supply inelasticity

The Silver Institute forecasts a fifth consecutive year of massive supply deficits in 2025, with deficits expected to persist through 2026.

• Inelastic supply: The most critical factor in the silver market is that ~80% of Silver is mined as a by-product of Lead, Zinc, Copper, and Gold. This means primary Silver supply cannot simply “respond” to higher prices. If the price of Zinc falls, a Zinc mine might close, reducing the Silver supply even if Silver prices are skyrocketing. This inelasticity makes supply shocks particularly acute.
• Mining challenges: Key producing nations like Mexico and Peru have faced regulatory headwinds, labor disputes, and declining ore grades. Russia, another major producer, remains sanctioned, complicating the flow of metal to Western markets.
• Inventory crisis: The deficit has been met by drawing down above-ground stockpiles. Inventories in London (LBMA) and Shanghai have plummeted to multi-year lows. There is a genuine physical tightness in the market; and the “buffer” that existed for years has already been eroded.

Sovereign entry: The Saudi pivot

A landmark development in 2025 was the entry of sovereign wealth funds into the Silver market, a domain previously reserved almost exclusively for gold.

• Saudi Arabia’s strategic move: The Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF) made strategic allocations to silver, utilizing ETFs like iShares Silver Trust (SLV) to gain exposure. This is a profound shift. It represents a diversification play away from oil and dollar assets, but also a strategic industrial hedge. Saudi Arabia’s “Vision 2030” relies heavily on massive solar energy projects; by buying Silver, they are hedging the future cost of their own infrastructure build-out.
• Russia and India: Both these nations have reportedly added physical Silver to their reserves, viewing it as an undervalued monetary asset relative to Gold and a way to diversify outside the NATO-sphere financial system.

Price forecasts: The path to triple digits?

Analysts have aggressively re-rated Silver forecasts based on these dynamics.

• Alan Hibbard (GoldSilver) has predicted a “triple-digit Silver” (>$100) in 2026 due to the exacerbation of the squeeze.
• Citigroup has set a base case of $62 and a bull case of $70 for 2026, citing the industrial rotation.
• J.P. Morgan forecasts an average of $56/oz in 2026, reflecting a sustained high plateau.
• The consensus is that $50 is the new floor, and the volatility skewed to the upside could see rapid spikes as short sellers in the paper market are forced to cover against a lack of physical metal.

Bitcoin: The maturation pain and policy pivot

Bitcoin’s trajectory in late 2025 has been a source of confusion and frustration for many digital asset investors. After hitting an ATH of ~$126,200 in early October, the asset crashed nearly 29% to slide below $90,000, ending the year with negative momentum. 

But why did “Digital Gold” fail to rally alongside physical Gold during the geopolitical stress of Q4 2025? The answer lies in its evolving identity and the friction of its transition from a speculative asset to a strategic reserve.

The “risk-on” identity crisis

The October 2025 sell-off was triggered by a $19 billion liquidation event following the new U.S.-China tariff threats. This event revealed a critical truth: despite the “store of value” narrative, institutional algorithms and macro traders still treat Bitcoin as a high-beta technology stock.

• Correlations: When macro fear spikes (e.g., trade wars, conflict), liquidity is pulled from risk assets (Bitcoin, Nasdaq) and moved to traditional safety (Gold, Treasuries). Bitcoin currently behaves as a “liquidity sponge”—expanding when money is cheap—rather than a “panic bunker.”
• The “versus” trade: In late 2025, portfolio managers explicitly rotated out of Bitcoin and into Gold. The Gold/Bitcoin ratio spiked, signaling a preference for tangible safety over digital promise during times of acute uncertainty.

Institutional flows: Stickiness amidst the drop

A divergence occurred within the Bitcoin market itself: Price dropped, but ETF holdings remained remarkably resilient.

• The ETF shield: Despite a 36% price correction from the top, total Bitcoin ETF assets under management (AUM) declined by less than 4% in Bitcoin terms. BlackRock’s IBIT actually increased its market share during the crash. This suggests that the new class of institutional holders (pension funds, advisers) are not panic selling. The selling pressure largely came from highly leveraged speculative traders in the futures market and crypto-native funds rotating capital.

• Slowing Demand: On-chain data indicates a contraction in demand growth in Q4 2025. The initial euphoria of the ETF launches has settled, and the market is digesting the supply overhang. The “easy money” phase of the cycle paused, requiring a new catalyst to drive the next leg up.

The Strategic Bitcoin Reserve: The sleeping giant

Perhaps the most significant, yet currently under-priced, development for Bitcoin’s future is Executive Order 14233, signed by the U.S. President Donald Trump in March 2025.

• The policy: The order officially establishes a “Strategic Bitcoin Reserve” and a “United States Digital Asset Stockpile.” It mandates that the U.S. government will not sell its seized Bitcoin holdings (currently over 200,000 BTC) and creates a framework to acquire more, with a long-term target of holding 5% of the total Bitcoin supply (approx. 1 million BTC).
• The lag effect: Why didn’t the price explode? The implementation involves a study period and legislative maneuvering (The BITCOIN Act). The market is skeptical of the timeline and execution. However, this represents a massive “put option” on the Bitcoin price long-term. If the U.S. government becomes a net buyer of 200,000+ BTC per year to build this reserve, the supply shock will be immense. The current slump is likely the final accumulation window before this policy begins to impact the order books in 2026.

The “four-year cycle” debate

Traditional Bitcoin analysis relies on the four-year halving cycle. However, 2025 broke the pattern by peaking early (October) and then corrected deeply.

• Broken cycle? Some analysts argue the cycle has accelerated or broken due to ETFs front-running the halving.
• Supercycle theory: Others, like Ark Invest and Bitwise, argue that we are entering a “supercycle” where volatility dampens, and price trends become more driven by structural flows than cyclical hype. They forecast that 2026 will see a resumption of the uptrend as the “Strategic Reserve” narrative moves from policy paper to actual purchasing.

The treasury shift: Will government and corporations move to treasuries?

Market watchers have asked: “Will the government and corporations move to Gold and Silver treasuries again?” The answer is a resounding “Yes.” However, the mechanisms differ between the metals and the digital realm. We are witnessing a bifurcation in treasury management strategies.

Sovereign wealth funds: The Gold/Silver pivot

We are witnessing a structural shift in how nations manage wealth, moving from “Return on Capital” to “Return of Capital.”

• The Saudi Public Investment Fund (PIF): As mentioned above, the PIF has aggressively moved into precious metals. Beyond the aforementioned Silver allocation, they have utilized ETFs like the SPDR J.P. Morgan Saudi Arabia Aggregate Bond ETF and engaged in direct commodity hedging. Their strategy is “Diversification Beyond Gold,” viewing Silver as a critical industrial input for their renewable energy ambitions. They are securing the molecules needed for their future economy, not just the money.
• Norway’s Government Pension Fund Global: Managing over $1.7 trillion, Norway maintains a massive equity portfolio but has shown increasing support for companies with Bitcoin treasuries. Notably, the fund voted in favor of Metaplanet’s Bitcoin treasury strategy. While the fund itself is not yet buying direct Bitcoin, their tacit approval of corporate Bitcoin adoption is a major signal that sovereign money is becoming comfortable with digital assets on corporate balance sheets.
• The Global South: The BRICS bloc and emerging markets (Poland, Brazil, Kazakhstan) are effectively moving to a “Gold Standard” for reserves, reducing reliance on U.S. Treasuries. This is a defensive move against the weaponization of the dollar.

Corporate treasuries: The MicroStrategy vs. Tether Model

While Bitcoin made hype earlier this year, two distinct models of corporate treasury management emerged from it, offering a blueprint for 2026.

The MicroStrategy Model (Leveraged Bitcoin Long)

The largest corporate holder of Bitcoin, MicroStrategy (now branded “Strategy”) holds over 671,000 BTC. However, late 2025 saw its stock underperform Bitcoin itself, down 45% YTD despite Bitcoin being flat/down slightly.

• The lesson: The market is questioning the sustainability of leveraged buying at all-time highs. While MicroStrategy remains the pioneer, the volatility of its stock relative to its holdings has deterred widespread imitation by conservative S&P 500 treasurers in the short term. Corporations are hesitant to adopt this high-volatility model until accounting standards and volatility dampen further. 

The Tether Model (The Hybrid Reserve)

A fascinating trend identified in the research is the behavior of Tether, the largest stablecoin issuer.

• The new whale: In Q3 2025 alone, Tether purchased 26 tonnes of Gold, surpassing the purchases of most central banks. With 116 tonnes of Gold reserves, Tether now holds more Gold than the central banks of South Korea, Australia, or Greece. 
• The blueprint: Tether is essentially operating as a “corporate central bank.” It is not trusting U.S. Treasuries to back its dollar-peg entirely; it is diversifying into Gold.
• Implication: This is the convergence of crypto and metals. Tether proves that the future isn’t “Crypto vs. Gold” but “Crypto backed by Gold.” If other stablecoins or large cash-rich tech firms follow this “Tether Model,” corporate Gold demand could rival sovereign demand in 2026. This is the model most likely to be adopted by other corporations: using Gold to stabilize a digital balance sheet.

Comparative analysis: “Versus” or coexistence?

Is crypto dead in front of Gold and Silver? The market enthusiasm, institutional plays, and data suggests no, but the role of crypto is evolving and facing a temporary cyclical headwind that gold is not. 

The “versus” trade matrix

Investors are increasingly using the Gold/Bitcoin Ratio as a regime filter.

• High Geopolitical Risk / Fiscal Fear: Buy Gold. (Late 2025 scenario).
• Monetary Expansion / Risk-On: Buy Bitcoin. (Projected 2026 scenario).
• Industrial Growth / Green Energy: Buy Silver.

The “versus” narrative is driven by short-term capital flows. In reality, both assets are betting against the same outcome: fiat debasement. Gold is the defensive play (preserve wealth); Bitcoin is the offensive play (multiply wealth).

Volatility and maturity

Bitcoin’s volatility is decreasing over the long term, but it remains 4x more volatile than Gold. For corporate treasurers, this volatility is a hurdle. Gold offers stability with lower returns; Bitcoin offers asymmetric upside with high drawdown risk.

• Insight: Sovereigns prefer Gold for stability and sovereignty. Risk-tolerant corporations and younger demographics prefer Bitcoin. The “death” of crypto is a media narrative born of price action; the reality is a cyclical correction after a massive run-up.

Institutional adoption vectors 2025

Forecast for 2026: The year of coexistence

As 2025 ends, the outlook for 2026 is shaped by the expectation of Federal Reserve rate cuts, continued industrial demand, and the activation of U.S. crypto policy. 

Gold forecast 2026: The path to $5,000

The consensus among major banks (Goldman Sachs, J.P. Morgan) and independent analysts are overwhelmingly bullish.

• Price target: $4,900 – $5,000 per ounce by year-end 2026.
• Primary drivers:
  • Relentless central bank buying: Projected to average 585 tonnes per quarter, creating a permanent deficit.
  • Fed rate cuts: Markets are pricing in two cuts in 2026, lowering the opportunity cost of holding metal.
  • Debt spiral fears: Continued U.S. deficits will keep the “debasement premium” high.

Silver forecast 2026: The breakout to $75-$100

Silver is expected to be the top performing asset of 2026, benefiting from the “Gold halo” effect and its own unique supply crunch.

• Price target: Base case $60-$70; Bull case $100+.
• Primary drivers:
  • The AI infrastructure boom: The upcoming year will see the realization of massive Silver demand for AI data centers, a demand source not present in previous cycles.
  • Supply cliff: The fifth year of deficit will deplete remaining efficient stockpiles in London and Shanghai.
  • Ratio compression: If Gold hits $5,000, the Gold/Silver ratio (currently high) will likely compress, acting as a slingshot for silver prices.

Bitcoin forecast 2026: The recovery and policy put

Despite the 2025 slump, 2026 is viewed as a recovery year, potentially breaking the “four-year cycle” curse through policy support.

• Price target: $150,000 (Standard Chartered/Bernstein revised targets) to new ATHs.
• Primary drivers:
  • U.S. policy implementation: The Strategic Bitcoin Reserve (Executive Order 14233) moving from paper to action. If the U.S. Treasury begins acquiring BTC, the psychological and physical impact on supply will be massive.
  • Halving aftershocks: Historical patterns suggest the true supply shock of the halving often manifests 12-18 months later (which aligns with 2026).
  • Institutional norm: The “Time-Weighted Average Price” (TWAP) buying by ETFs will resume as macro fears subside and risk appetite returns.

Bear case risks

• Gold/Silver: A sharp recession that crushes industrial demand could hurt silver. A resolution to geopolitical conflicts (peace in Ukraine/Gaza) could remove the “war premium” from gold.
• Bitcoin: Regulatory crackdowns in other jurisdictions or a failure of the U.S. Strategic Reserve to materialize could lead to further capitulation.

2026 forecast summary

Conclusion

The divergence of 2025 was not a failure of crypto, but a clarification of roles in a maturing asset class. In a world of fragmenting supply chains and weaponized finance, Gold has reclaimed its throne as the premier sovereign reserve asset—the “King” of the board. Silver has emerged as the essential strategic commodity for the future economy (AI/Energy)—the “Knight” with dual utility. 

Bitcoin is currently undergoing a maturation phase. It is transitioning from a speculative tech proxy to a recognized institutional asset. The “struggle” below $100k is likely a consolidation before the structural impacts of the U.S. Strategic Reserve policy take hold in 2026. It is not dead; it is dormant.

Will governments and corporations move to Gold and Silver treasuries? Yes. The trend is undeniable. The PIF, central banks, and even Tether have voted with their wallets.

So for the final time, is crypto dead? Essentially, no. It is seemingly taking a backseat during a period of “Safety First.” As the 2026 cycle turns toward liquidity expansion and the U.S. government formalizes its crypto stance, Bitcoin is poised to coexist alongside the metals.

While the winner of 2025 was Tangible, the winner of 2026 will likely be the Scarce—whether digital or physical. The astute investor will likely hold both, recognizing that they protect against different failures of the current system.

Disclaimer: The Crypto Times does not offer financial, investment, legal, or trading advice of any kind. All content on our website is intended to be neutral and fact-based. We do not endorse or recommend any specific cryptocurrencies, tokens, projects, financial products, or investment strategies. Readers should always do their own research, consult with licensed professionals, and evaluate risks independently. We do not accept legal liability for any financial losses incurred as a result of reliance on information published by us.

Ahead of the weekly opening in U.S. stock market, Bitcoin (BTC) swiftly surged past the $90,000 mark for the first time in the past two weeks, coinciding with the Federal Reserve’s scheduled overnight repurchase agreement (repo) operation injecting up to $6.8 billion into financial markets. 

At the time of publishing, Bitcoin was trading at $90,250, surging 2.20% in the past 24 hours, and a 24 hour trading volume of $29 billion, with a market cap of $1.8 trillion—as per CoinMarketCap data. 

Bitcoin had been consolidating in the high $88K earlier in the session, struggling below the psychological $90,000 barrier amid lingering macroeconomic uncertainty. The spike represented a notable push, driven by amplified moves in thin liquidity typical of the holiday season. 

Following Bitcoin, Ether (ETH) has also spiked nearly 3% to $3,060, showing significant strength among all other altcoins. Other leading altcoins—including BNB, SOL, DOGE, and ADA—have also shown noteworthy gains in the past few hours. 

Bitcoin reclaims $90K but risk still lingers

The latest move also revives hopes for a “Santa Rally,” with analysts noting strong support from institutional purchases and options positioning. However, resistance remains firm near recent highs, and a sustained break could target $92,000–$95,000 if momentum holds. 

Fueling the market optimism, various crypto analysts have shared their positive stance on Bitcoin’s potential upper side movements. Ted Pillows, a renewed crypto personality, analyzes that the bullish RSI divergence has emerged on Bitcoin’s three-day chart, where the Relative Strength Index (RSI) forms higher lows while prices dip toward the $89,000 level. This signals toward weakening downward momentum. “When this happened the last 2 times, Bitcoin formed a bottom,” trader Ted noted on X. 

$BTC 3D bullish divergence is now confirmed.

When this happened the last 2 times, Bitcoin formed a bottom. pic.twitter.com/z5X2HW0B2k

— Ted (@TedPillows) December 22, 2025

However, the downside risk still lingers as the crypto market is navigating through macro tension, with spot Bitcoin ETFs witnessing $497 million in outflow last week. Moreover, the whale momentum around Bitcoin has also slowed down, hinting towards cooling on-chain activities following dramatic volatility in Bitcoin and other leading cryptocurrencies in the past two months. 

Federal Reserve’s $6.8B liquidity injection

As per discussions on X, the U.S. Federal Reserve conducted an overnight repo operation on December 22 with a maximum offering of $6.801 billion, accepting bids to provide temporary cash to primary dealers against Treasury collateral. This technical measure addresses typical year-end strains where banks hoard reserves for regulatory and balance-sheet reasons, potentially spiking short-term rates. 

BULLISH: Fed will inject nearly $7 Billion in liquidity tomorrow. pic.twitter.com/Npq8vJ1Pzi

— Ash Crypto (@AshCrypto) December 21, 2025

It’s the latest in a series of operations totaling around $38 billion over the prior 10 days, separate from the ongoing $40 billion monthly Treasury bill purchases under the Reserve Management program initiated earlier in December. 

This marks the central bank’s first such repo since 2020, aimed at easing year-end funding pressures. Crypto enthusiasts quickly linked the price spike to the liquidity boost, amplifying bullish sentiment across social media and trading platforms. 

Unlike quantitative easing, these repos are short-term and targeted, expiring the next day. Still, markets—especially crypto traders—view any added liquidity as supportive for risk-on assets. While causation is hard to prove in volatile markets, the Fed’s proactive liquidity management has coincided with renewed Bitcoin strength. It highlights crypto’s sensitivity to central bank actions. 

Also read: From April 2026, India Can Track Crypto, Emails, & Social Media

The tensions within the Aave decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) have escalated dramatically after Aave Labs unilaterally advanced a controversial governance proposal to an on-chain Snapshot vote. 

Led by Aave Founder and CEO Stani Kulechov, the proposal seeks to transfer control of key Aave brand assets—including domains like aave.com, social media handles, trademarks, and naming rights—from Aave Labs to the DAO-controlled legal vehicle with anti-capture protections.

The recent DAO alignment proposal has been moved to Snapshot after extensive discussion. We realize the community is very interested in a path forward and is ready to make a decision.

Time for tokenholders to weigh in and vote.https://t.co/QwoPeglhmU

— Stani.eth (@StaniKulechov) December 22, 2025

The proposal, originally authored by former Aave CTO and BGD Labs Co-Founder Ernesto Boado, was posted with the initial “[ARFC] $AAVE token alignment. Phase 1 – Ownership” on the Aave governance forum on December 16.

After the proposal was moved for Snapshot votes, allegedly without his approval or broader community consensus, Ernesto explicitly denounced the move in a public statement on X. He argued that submitting the proposal to Snapshot without community approval represents a “breach of governance trust.” 

To be very clear:
– This is not, in ethos, my proposal. Aave Labs has (for whatever reason) unilaterally submitted my proposal to vote in a rush, with my name on it, and without notifying me at all. If asked, I would not have approved it.
– It was not my intention to submit the… https://t.co/JTWoMMNcQc

— Ernesto (@eboadom) December 22, 2025

“This is not, in ethos, my proposal. Aave Labs has (for whatever reason) unilaterally submitted my proposal to vote in a rush, with my name on it, and without notifying me at all,” Ernesto emphasized, “If asked, I would not have approved it.” He noted that the governance is supposed to be for open discussion and “trying to rush a vote is disgraceful.”

Border disputes between DAO and Aave Labs 

The controversy stems amid ongoing disputes over alignment between Aave Labs and the DAO. Recent accusations claim Aave Labs redirected frontend interface revenues—previously donated to the DAO—toward private monetization, estimated at over $10 million annually. This has fueled debates about whether brand assets, built largely through DAO-funded development and liquidity incentives, should remain under centralized control.

Now this vote has divided the community even further with critics, including prominent delegate Marc Zeller of the Aave Chan Initiative, labeled the latest push as “unprecedented interference” in DAO governance. Zeller’s view suggests that the voting window, which ends December 26, is for the holiday period and it is essentially timed to limit participation. 

Quoting Zeller, another Aave team member Nandy.eth, urges Aave Labs to return to discussions and directly answer why transferring brand assets to DAO ownership, with a license back to the entity Avara, would hinder operations. 

When questions are asked, avoiding them conscientiously and trying to sneak a vote when the majority of delegates are with their families for Christmas is clearly a bad move.
I gently ask Aave Labs to give more consideration to Aave DAO and its members. Come back to the table and… https://t.co/DykGtYIQi8

— nandy.eth Aave (@Nandy_ba) December 22, 2025

“When questions are asked, avoiding them conscientiously and trying to sneak a vote when the majority of delegates are with their families for Christmas is clearly a bad move,” Nandy stated. 

The backlash has also impacted market sentiment, with a major whale selling approximately 230,350 AAVE tokens worth roughly $38 million, incurring a $13.75 million loss while swapping into stETH and WBTC. This dump contributed to a sharp 10% price decline in AAVE token price, which is currently trading at $159, as per CoinMarketCap data. 

The core of the controversy

Currently, Aave’s trademarks, domains (e.g., aave.com), social handles, naming rights, and related intellectual property are controlled by Aave Labs, under the parent company Avara.

This newly published proposal claims that the DAO would own the assets outright. However, to allow Avara (and its entities like Aave Labs) to continue operating, developing, and maintaining official front-ends, apps, and services using the Aave brand, the DAO would grant a license back to Avara. This license would permit Avara to use the brand under defined terms, ensuring operational continuity while preventing unilateral control or potential misuse by the company.

Now critics argue that transferring ownership to the DAO (with a license back) is essential for transparency and to prevent “private monetization” of DAO-supported assets. While Avara representatives contend that such a transfer could hinder operations, raising questions about why a license back wouldn’t suffice for ongoing work. 

As voting commences on Snapshot, the outcome could set precedents for DAO-developer relationships across DeFi. With low passing odds based on community discussions eroded trust, Aave currently faces a pivotal moment in its governance evolution. 

Also read: HyperLiquid Denies Insider Trading as Ex-Staff Shorts HYPE

The world’s largest cryptocurrency Bitcoin (BTC) dipped to the $84,000 range on Thursday, reflecting ongoing volatility in the cryptocurrency market following a challenging end to 2025. Amidst this, traders have been closely monitoring unusual activity on Binance, the world’s largest crypto exchange, where a key metric known as Spot Delta—the difference between daily spot buying and selling volume—has remained negative every day since the October 10 market flush.

The metric, highlighted in a widely shared post by cryptocurrency trader MacroCGR on X, has fueled speculation about sustained selling pressure. Negative spot delta typically indicates more selling than buying in the spot market, which can contribute to downward price momentum. 

Binance spot delta is hilarious pic.twitter.com/Dq36G4d9Gq

— CRG (@MacroCRG) December 18, 2025

Quoting the post, CryptoGodJohn, another popular trader and analyst, pointed towards the significance of the metric. The analyst questioned whether major market maker Wintermute is offloading large amounts of Bitcoin through the platform, fueling speculations around the market makers’ suspected self-liquidation. 

This pattern emerged shortly after a dramatic flash crash on October 10, triggered by geopolitical tensions and the U.S. President Donald Trump’s announcement of steep tariffs on Chinese imports. At the time, that event led to a record $19 billion in liquidated leveraged positions across crypto markets, with Bitcoin plunging from highs near $126,000 to below $105,000 in hours. 

Crypto market struggling to stand still 

The broader crypto market has struggled to regain footing since the October 10 crash, with Bitcoin down roughly 30% from its all-time high and trading in a range-bound pattern for much of December. Analysts attribute part of the weakness to deleveraging, reduced retail enthusiasm, and correlation with traditional risk assets amid macroeconomic uncertainty. 

At the time of publishing, Bitcoin was trading near $88,130, up nearly 4% from its daily low, showing slight recovery from the recent downtrend, as per CoinMarketCap data. 

Despite the short-term pressures, some metrics offer a more optimistic long view. On-chain indicators show reduced outflows from smaller (also known as “shrimp”) wallets and Bitcoin forming higher lows in recent weeks, suggesting potential accumulation by long-term holders. Moreover, institutional interest remains evident through spot Bitcoin ETFs, which have seen decent inflows even during downturns. 

The situation underscores the crypto market’s sensitivity to exchange-specific dynamics and large-player activity, reminding investors of the risks in a highly leveraged and opaque ecosystem.

Speculations around Wintermute liquidation

Market participants have linked the ongoing negative delta to Wintermute, a prominent trading firm and liquidity provider. On-chain data from Arkham Intelligence showed Wintermute-linked wallets transferring substantial BTC and Ethereum (ETH) volumes to exchanges, including Binance, in late November and early December—estimated at over $1.5 billion in Bitcoin alone. 

Some observers interpret this as “dumping,” while others suggest it reflects routine market-making activities, client order execution, or risk management amid turbulent conditions. 

Wintermute has previously described the period as a “digestion phase” for the market, emphasizing rotation into core assets like Bitcoin rather than broad sell-offs. CEO Evgeny Gaevoy had previously stated on October 11 that Wintermute is perfectly fine and they are running their business as usual. 

Sorry to disappoint you, but Wintermute is perfectly fine, business as usual

— wishful_cynic (@EvgenyGaevoy) October 11, 2025

However, whenever selling in crypto markets intensifies, analysts and most prominent names in the crypto do not forget to poke Wintemute around their rumored collapse in October crash. 

“At this point I am almost 100% convinced that Wintermute went under on 10/10/2025 and the cohort of CEXs have been trying to make them solvent again by liquidating retail traders through this forced selling,” noted a user in a recent post, pointing to recent volatility in the market. 

The Crypto Times reached out to the Wintermute team, but representatives for the firm did not immediately respond to requests for comment on the latest speculation. 

Also read: CLARITY Act to Enter Senate Markup in January, Says David Sacks

A federal judge has sentenced Magdaleno Mendoza, a senior promoter in the notorious IcomTech cryptocurrency Ponzi scheme, to 71 months (5 years and 11 months) in prison. The ruling marks another chapter in the downfall of one of the crypto industry’s most damaging frauds, which targeted vulnerable working-class communities with promises of guaranteed riches.

The U.S. District Judge Jennifer L. Rochon handed down the sentence on December 18, following Mendoza’s guilty plea to conspiracy to commit wire fraud and illegal reentry into the United States. 

Prosecutors described Mendoza, 56, as a key figure who closely collaborated with IcomTech Founder David Carmona, hosting lavish recruitment events at his Los Angeles-area restaurant and collecting substantial cash investments from victims. 

Mendoza’s sentence addressed his history of illegal U.S. reentries after multiple deportations. He was ordered to pay $789,218.94 in restitution and forfeit $1.5 million, including his California home purchased with scheme proceeds. Prosecutors also noted Mendoza promoted at least three additional Ponzi schemes post-IcomTech. 

IcomTech’s orchestrated ponzi scheme 

Operating from mid-2018 to late 2019, IcomTech masqueraded as a legitimate cryptocurrency mining and trading firm. During its runtime, promoters lured investors by promising daily profits, doubling of investments within six months, and access to an online portal displaying fictitious gains. 

The scheme predominantly targeted Spanish-speaking individuals with limited investment experience. In reality, no actual trading or mining occurred. New investor funds were used to pay returns to earlier participants, while promoters siphoned millions for personal luxury, including exotic cars and opulent expos. 

As withdrawal requests mounted in late 2018, victims faced delays, excuses, and fees. IcomTech introduced a worthless proprietary token called “Icoms” as a purported fix, only deepening losses. The scheme collapsed by the end of 2019, leaving thousands defrauded of millions. 

U.S. Attorney Jay Clayton emphasized Mendoza’s exploitation of trust: “By exploiting the promise of ‘crypto,’ he and his co-conspirators stole millions from working-class people, including New Yorkers.”

History of lawsuit against IcomTech 

The case builds on prior convictions, with IcomTech’s Founder David Carmona receiving 121 months (10 years and 1 month) in 2024, former CEO Marco Ruiz Ochoa receiving a five year sentence. Other promoters David Brend and Gustavo Rodriguez also faced lengthy terms. 

As reported by The Crypto Times previously, the initial charges against IcomTech operators were announced in May 2023, after the conviction of promoters in March 2024 and Ochoa’s sentencing in January 2024. This sentencing underscores federal authorities’ intensified crackdown on crypto frauds exploiting hype and underserved communities, serving as a stark reminder for investor caution.

Also read: Jump Trading Faces $4 Billion Suit Over Terraform Collapse

Acting Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) Caroline D. Pham announced today that the agency is officially withdrawing its 2018 guidance on the “actual delivery” of virtual currencies in leveraged retail commodity transactions. 

The move eliminates what the agency now considers outdated and overly restrictive interpretive rules that have long been criticized by the crypto industry. Pham described the old guidance as “outdated and overly complex,” stating it “penalizes the crypto industry and stifles innovation.” She emphasized that removing it aligns with the current administration’s 2025 priority of reducing regulatory burdens while maintaining investor protection and market integrity. 

Issued in 2018, the guidance interpreted the two-day “actual delivery” exception under the Commodity Exchange Act for leveraged or margined retail transactions in “virtual currencies.” Critics argued the strict requirements, such as full transfer of title and possession within 28 days, were nearly impossible to satisfy for most digital assets, effectively pushing U.S. retail traders toward unregulated offshore platforms. 

“This is exactly what the Administration has set out to do this year,” Pham said. “Eliminating outdated guidance shows that with decisive action, real progress can be made to protect Americans by promoting access to safe U.S. markets.”

What comes next for crypto regulations?

The withdrawal clears the path for the CFTC to implement recommendations from the President’s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets report issued earlier this year. The agency signaled it may issue updated guidance or frequently asked questions (FAQs) in the future and invited industry participants and the public to provide input through its ongoing “Crypto Sprint” initiative.

The decision is expected to provide greater regulatory clarity for tokenized commodities, stablecoins used in retail leveraged trading, and other digital asset products under CFTC jurisdiction. Market participants view the withdrawal as a step toward bringing more crypto trading activity back onshore and under federal oversight.

CFTC undergoes major shift in crypto oversight

This latest action underscores a broader transformation at the CFTC, with a flurry of pro-innovation moves in recent weeks aimed at integrating digital assets into mainstream U.S. financial markets.

The momentum began on December 5, when the CFTC approved spot cryptocurrency trading on regulated U.S. exchanges for the first time. Coordinated with the SEC and aligned with presidential directives, the approval incorporates tokenized collateral and updates rules on margin and settlement to support blockchain integration. 

On December 11, Acting Chairman Pham introduced the CEO Innovation Council, a new advisory body featuring top executives from major platforms, including Polymarket, Cboe Global Markets, CME Group, Bullish, Nasdaq, Bitnomial, Kalshi, Crypto.com, LSEG, Kraken, Intercontinental Exchange, and Gemini. The council will guide policy on emerging trends like tokenization, perpetual contracts, prediction markets, 24/7 trading, and blockchain infrastructure, building on the CFTC’s Crypto Sprint through 2026. 

Additionally, the CFTC launched a three-month pilot on December 9, allowing Bitcoin, Ether, and USDC as collateral for margin in U.S. derivatives trading by futures commission merchants, complete with weekly reporting and risk management protocols. The program also introduces guidance for tokenized real-world assets like the U.S. Treasury securities and offers a “no-action” position for compliant stablecoins. 

Collectively, these initiatives reflect the CFTC’s aggressive pivot under Pham’s leadership toward fostering U.S. leadership in digital finance, balancing oversight with innovation to reclaim market share from global competitors.

Also read: J.P. Morgan Arranges Landmark U.S. Commercial Paper Issuance on Solana

The Federal Reserve delivered its widely expected December rate cut on Wednesday, lowering the target range for the federal funds rate by 25 basis points to 3.50–3.75%. The move marks the third consecutive reduction in 2025 and brings the benchmark rate to its lowest level since early 2023.

In its official statement, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) noted that economic activity continues to expand at a “moderate” pace, but the labor market has cooled further, with the unemployment rate rising to 4.2%. Inflation remains “somewhat elevated” above the Fed’s 2% target.

JUST IN: The Federal Reserve has cut interest rates by 25 basis points. pic.twitter.com/6aEp7I3InA

— The Crypto Times (@CryptoTimes_io) December 10, 2025

For the first time in this easing cycle, the committee described risks to both employment and inflation as “roughly in balance,” a subtle shift that suggests policymakers may slow the pace of future cuts.

“The Committee seeks to achieve maximum employment and inflation at the rate of 2 percent over the longer run. Uncertainty about the economic outlook remains elevated. The Committee is attentive to the risks to both sides of its dual mandate and judges that downside risks to employment rose in recent months,” the statement reads. 

Market reaction to rate cuts 

The global markets reacted immediately to the Fed’s decision, and asset managers started rethinking their strategies by quickly buying and selling assets. The S&P 500 closed 0.8% higher, 10-year Treasury yields dipped to 4.12%, and Bitcoin surged more than 2% within minutes of the 2:00 p.m. ET announcement, briefly topping $93,000 before settling down, as per CoinMarketCap data.

Ethereum and other major altcoins posted gains of 3–6% in the hours that followed.

Crypto traders and analysts interpreted the dovish tilt as rocket fuel for risk assets. Popular crypto accounts celebrated the decision as validation that the Fed is once again providing liquidity that ultimately flows into speculative markets.

“FOMC cuts by 25 bps as expected,” noted Nick Rimiraos of The Wall Street Journal, adding that the “Fed will start ‘reserve management purchases’ this week, beginning at $40 billion per month in T-bills.”

FOMC cuts by 25 bps as expected

Three dissents: Goolsbee and Schmid opposed the cut. Miran wanted a 50 bps cut.

The SEP shows six officials of 19 didn’t favor a cut

The median dot is unchanged for 2026

The Fed will start “reserve management purchases” this week, beginning at… pic.twitter.com/r2O4KvHtJO

— Nick Timiraos (@NickTimiraos) December 10, 2025

Though not everyone was cheering for rate cuts. Several prominent voices in the community warned that the celebration may be short-lived as a 25 bps cut when unemployment is rising, and fiscal deficits are exploding, isn’t hawkish—”it’s just less bad.” 

By Thursday morning, Bitcoin had pared some gains and traded near $94,500 as investors digested Fed Chair Jerome Powell’s press conference remarks that “the economy remains in a good place” and that further cuts will be data-dependent.

The December cut concludes a year in which the Fed slashed rates by a cumulative 100 basis points. Whether crypto’s post-announcement pump marks the start of a new bull leg or simply a relief rally ahead of tighter financial conditions in 2026 remains the market’s biggest open question.

Also read: Singapore Tops 2025 Global Crypto Adoption Rankings: Bybit Report

In the middle of the Pacific Ocean, 500 kilometers east of the Philippines, lies a nation of 340 limestone islands with a population of just 18,000. Most people know Palau for its turquoise lagoons, WWII wrecks, and the world-famous Jellyfish Lake. But very few know that this tiny archipelago has quietly become one of the most powerful jurisdictions on earth for anyone who loves crypto.

Since its soft launch in January 2022 and full rollout in 2023, the Republic of Palau Digital Residency Program has issued more than 12,000 blockchain-native IDs, a physical card paired with an on-chain NFT to citizens of 151 countries. The holders list includes some of the most prominent names in crypto industry, including Vitalik Buterin, Tim Draper, three Binance co-founders (who used it for re-KYC after the 2023 U.S. settlement), and thousands of lesser-known traders, DeFi founders, and remote freelancers who simply wanted a government that “gets it.” 

So is Palau the new crypto heaven everyone is whispering about in Dubai Telegram groups and Lisbon co-living kitchens? The short answer is: for certain use-cases, yes — and it’s getting stronger every quarter. Let’s dive deep into it.

The ID that actually works where it matters

The Crypto Times met one of the representatives of this project and curiously had an extended conversation about its legality. Unlike most “crypto passports” that are little more than expensive JPEGs, Palau’s Digital Resident ID is a sovereign-issued, machine-readable government document. The front looks like a normal national ID. The back has a QR code that resolves to an NFT on the Root Name System (RNS), a BNB Chain sidechain purpose-built for identity. 

When you scan it, counterparties receive a zero-knowledge proof confirming:

• You passed Palau’s state-level KYC/AML (run by Crystal Intelligence and SumSub)
• Your record has not been revoked
• Optional selective disclosure (name, nationality, photo, residency expiry) 

In practice, this means exchanges like Binance, KuCoin, OKX, Bybit, Kraken, Coinbase International, and 30+ smaller exchanges accept it as Tier-1 KYC with no further questions in 2025. Additionally, neobanks such as Juno, Mercury, Airwallex, and Wise Business now list “Palau Digital ID” in their dropdowns alongside Singapore and Estonia.

One Dubai-based trader said that he onboarded to BlackRock’s BUIDL fund in eight minutes using only his Palau ID and MetaMask, something that used to take his Cayman SPC three weeks and $15,000 in legal fees. 

The tax story everyone wants to hear

While crypto exchanges allow users to complete their KYC with Palau ID, regardless of asking their original county, its tax code is brutally simple: 0% personal income tax on foreign-source income, 0% capital gains tax on crypto or any asset, and 0% corporate tax for the first three years if you incorporate a Palau LLC and keep books outside the country. 

For pure digital nomads who never set foot in Palau, that’s it. You route your income through a Palau LLC or simply declare yourself a Palau digital resident for KYC purposes and keep living in Bali, Portugal, or Dubai. 

But here is the most important insight; Palau is CRS participating and has a FATCA IGA with the United States. Your Palau bank (if you ever open one) will report to your tax home. The advantage is structural (clean KYC + entity options), not magical tax disappearance. Most users combine Palau residency with Portugal NHR, UAE zero-tax, or Puerto Rico Act 60 to create layered, fully compliant setups. 

The hidden superpower: 180-day Visa extensions

One of the most advantageous perks is that Palau Digital Resident ID grants you an extended stay visa. Usually, tourist visas are normally 30 days on arrival but if you show your ID at immigration (even the digital NFT on your phone), officers would routinely stamp you for an additional 90 + 90 days, essentially six months per entry, twice a year.

In 2025, Koror–the largest city in Palau—is suddenly witnessing arrivals full of DeFi founders who “touch down to reset the clock,” spend a week diving with mantas, and fly out again. A few have quietly bought beachfront houses using their Palau LLCs and PUSD, which is a Palau’s Ripple-backed stablecoin launched in Q3 2025 after years of development. 

The ecosystem that is quietly exploding

Palau didn’t just issue an ID and call it a day. The government, together with RNS and the Palau Chamber of Digital Commerce, has rolled out:

• PUSD – a 1:1 USD stablecoin issued by the Bank of Hawaii under Palau charter (already at $87 million circulating in November 2025). 
• On-chain company registry (register an LLC in 11 minutes for $500). 
• Digital banking licenses (four issued so far; the first neobank, Coral Bank, launches Q1 2026). 
• Virtual Palau phone numbers and physical mail scanning/forwarding
• 20–40% discounts on flights (United, Korean Air) and hotels via the Voyager Pass loyalty program tied to residency tiers. 

Who is actually moving the needle?

As of December 2025, 37% of total Palau’s Digital Resident ID holders are from the United States, 21% are from Southeast Asia, 18% are from the EU/UK, 9% are from the Middle East, and the rest are scattered across various other countries. 

As the fastest-growing cohort, Russian and Belarusian crypto entrepreneurs who lost access to European banking in 2022–23, now use Palau + UAE entities to stay liquid. 

The risks and the critics

As the saying goes, “Nothing is perfect,” similarly Palau Digital Resident ID’s acceptance is still in the emerging phase. To note, multinational giants like Goldman Sachs and traditional Swiss private banks won’t touch it yet. 

Moreover, the physical card takes three to six weeks to arrive after the application, though the NFT is issued instantly. And most importantly, if your home country decides to crack down on “flag theory” layering, Palau won’t save you. 

Verdict: Heaven, but with coordinates 

Palau is not the new Cayman Islands, nor is it trying to be. It is something more interesting: the first nation-state that natively speaks the language of on-chain identity and stablecoins, without the regulatory schizophrenia of bigger players. For crypto-native founders, traders who need Tier-1 exchange access, and remote workers who want a government ID that doesn’t treat Bitcoin like plutonium, Palau is currently the single most useful $248 you can spend. 

The archipelago may have only 18,000 physical residents, but its digital population is already larger than the real one and it is growing faster than any jurisdiction on earth. If your life is lived on crypto wallets, exchanges and Telegram trading channels, it might be time to add one more flag to your collection. 

Also read: Crypto Goes Mainstream in 2025, Says CoinSwitch Co-founder at IBW

The global stablecoin market has exploded in recent years, crossing $300 billion in total market capitalization by late 2025. USDT and USDC alone account for over 90% of the volume, facilitating everything from cross-border remittances to decentralized finance (DeFi) lending and 24/7 crypto trading. In emerging markets, stablecoins have become a de-facto digital dollar layer, offering dollar liquidity without the need for traditional banking rails.

Yet, in the world’s fifth-largest economy and its most vibrant digital payments market, the conversation is shifting: should India have its own rupee-backed stablecoin, or is the question itself a solution looking for a problem?

Stablecoin usage in India: Small but growing

Despite having one of the strictest crypto regulatory frameworks in the world, India has quietly become one of the top 10 countries by stablecoin transfer volume. Chainalysis’ APAC Crypto Adoption Report for 2025 notes that Indian users transferred over $45 billion in stablecoins in the last 12 months, largely USDT and USDC on chains like Tron, Ethereum, and Polygon.

The primary use cases remain familiar: crypto trading (especially on global perpetual futures platforms), cross-border payments for freelancers and exporters, and hedging against local currency volatility during election cycles or policy announcements. A small but growing segment within the country is also using stablecoins for yield farming and lending on DeFi protocols. However, when it comes to everyday payments, stablecoins are virtually invisible in India as that space belongs entirely to the country’s unique Unified Payments Interface (UPI). 

Efforts around INR-backed stablecoins

Over the recent few years, multiple teams have attempted to launch rupee-backed stablecoins. Early efforts such as Phi, Rupe, and INR Coin either shut down or pivoted after regulatory uncertainty. The Reserve Bank of India (RBI) has consistently maintained that private stablecoins pegged to INR fall under the definition of “currency” and therefore only the central bank can issue them. 

“There are currencies which are very much open, such as the US dollar which is easily tradable; there is no capital control. Then comes countries like India where there are capital controls,” Aishwary Gupta, Global Head of Payment & RWA for Polygon told The Crypto Times in an exclusive interview at India Blockchain Week (IBW) Conference 2025. “We don’t want a stablecoin wrong way because effectively you do not want to disrupt the market you want to work in and also it does not make sense since it’s a government decision and we can only embrace whatever the government has given us.” 

A couple of years back, the launch of the RBI’s wholesale and retail CBDC pilots (e-Rupee) in 2022–2023 was widely seen as a preemptive move to crowd out private INR stablecoins. And to note, despite millions of wallets being onboarded, actual transaction volume on the e-Rupee remains a tiny fraction of UPI. 

More recently, global players like Circle and Tether have explored partnerships with Indian banks and NBFCs to issue regulated INR-pegged tokens, but none have materialized publicly. The only visible effort that continues to make progress is Polygon’s tentatively named project ARC ( Asset Reserve Certificate). 

Polygon’s ARC Project 

Announced publicly on November 20, 2025, the Asset Reserve Certificate (ARC) is a fully collateralized, rupee-pegged stablecoin project, developed by Polygon Labs in partnership with Bengaluru-based fintech firm Anq. It will initially launch on Polygon’s proof-of-stake chain in Q1 2026, with future integration into the AggLayer for enhanced cross-chain liquidity and interoperability.  

“The difference on the ARC token is that it is effectively a deposit token and the difference between a deposit token and a stablecoin is first one do not work to increase the balances onchain,” Aishwary said, adding, “It basically becomes embed on the transaction layer and function as a means of transaction.”

The project aligns with India’s two-tier digital currency framework, complementing the Reserve Bank of India’s (RBI) Central Bank Digital Currency (CBDC) as a private-sector interaction layer for programmable payments. 

As in India, the settlement is done through banks, the idea behind ARC is to top the use case within cross-border payments. “So if you want to bring money from the U.S., such as USDC or any other stablecoin coming to India, it is swapped into ARC through deposit tokens and those deposit tokens equivalent are sitting in the bank already. So what you can do is you can just redeem your INR and it helps you in India because it pushes back a lot of USD which has started circulating in India. It also continues to help RBI dominate the market,” Aishwary emphasized. 

Its issuance is restricted to regulated entities only, such as RBI-approved banks, non-banking financial companies (NBFCs), and payment firms, which will handle minting and custody under strict oversight. licitly involves these licensed institutions to ensure compliance and operational integrity. 

Do we really need an INR stablecoin?

This is the question where the debate gets interesting. Proponents argue that an INR stablecoin would unlock 24/7 programmability, seamless cross-border settlements (especially with countries that have CBDC bridges), and deeper integration between traditional finance and DeFi. It could also reduce India’s reliance on dollar stablecoins and give the RBI better visibility into capital flows. 

On the other hand, critics counter that India has already solved digital payments better than almost any country on earth with UPI, which has processed nearly 20 billion transactions, worth Rs. 24.58 lac crores (approximately $273 billion) in November 2025 alone, with average transaction cost near zero and settlement in seconds. 

Given this traction, why build a parallel rail when the existing one is faster, cheaper, and universally adopted? Besides, users are very much familiar with USD-dominated stablecoins like USDT and USDC, so is INR-backed stablecoin really a need? 

Replying to the question, Polygon’s Payment Head said have we even given them the chance to use a deposit token like ARC? “The answer is no. So unless we give them that opportunity and let the market decide, I don’t think as an individual or Polygon, we can decide what the market wants,” he said. 

UPI vs Stablecoin: The clear winner is UPI (for now)

If we compare India’s UPI and stablecoins, UPI could be declared an apparent winner within the country’s financial ecosystem. For more context, let’s compare the two systems head-on:

• Speed: UPI is real-time while most stablecoins transfers settle in 5–60 seconds depending on chain congestion.
• Cost: UPI is virtually free for users; stablecoins carry network fees (though minimal on Polygon/Tron).
• Availability: UPI works 24/7 but requires both parties to have Indian bank accounts and phone numbers. Stablecoins work globally with just a wallet address.
• Programmability: Stablecoins win hands-down, escrow, streaming payments, automated yield, conditional transfers are trivial on-chain.
• Regulatory comfort: UPI is fully within RBI’s control; stablecoins (even INR-backed) introduce new risks around reserve management and systemic contagion.
• Adoption: 500+ million Indians use UPI monthly. Stablecoin wallets in India are likely under 15 million.

For retail payments, remittances under ₹50,000, and domestic commerce, UPI remains unbeatable. The only clear edge stablecoins have today is in crypto-native use cases and large-value cross-border flows where SWIFT is still slow and expensive.

Regulatory clarity needed to change the narrative

India does not need an INR stablecoin like a fish needs a bicycle, at least for everyday payments. UPI, supported by NPCI’s relentless innovation (UPI Lite, Credit on UPI, conversational payments, cross-border expansion), has already achieved what most countries can only dream of: near-universal, instant digital payments at near-zero cost.

That said, the story changes when we look beyond retail. For programmable money, salary streaming, DeFi integration, tokenized real-world assets, and seamless participation in global crypto markets, a compliant INR stablecoin could open entirely new frontiers.

Whether Polygon’s ARC or another player eventually succeeds will depend less on technology and more on regulatory clarity. If the RBI continues to view private stablecoins as competitors to the e-Rupee, the answer may remain “no” for years to come. But if policymakers see them as complementary rails that bring capital efficiency and innovation without sacrificing control, India could leapfrog into a new era of digital finance. 

“It has to become something which is effectively helping out India and the way money moves in the country while also respecting all the regulations and rules that have been built into the regulatory perspective by the Indian government,” Aishwary concluded, “Now I am not going to say we don’t care about rules. But I think the answer to the matter is what the market will decide.” 

The market is waiting. The infrastructure is ready. The only missing piece is policy.

Also read: Crypto Goes Mainstream in 2025, Says CoinSwitch Co-founder at IBW

The recent volatility in the world of cryptocurrency has brought the spotlight to various altcoins like Hyperliquid’s native token, HYPE. Over the past 24 hours, HYPE has plunged approximately 18%, trading at around $31.90 at the time of publishing. 

This sharp decline—down from a weekly high near $42—has wiped out nearly $3 billion in market capitalization, leaving the token’s total market cap hovering at $10.76 billion. The trading volume for the token spiked to $745 million in the last 24 hours, up 84% from the prior day, as per CoinMarketCap data. 

For traders, it’s a gut-wrenching reminder of crypto’s unforgiving nature: one moment you’re riding the wave of decentralized finance (DeFi) innovation, the next you’re watching red candles stack up. 

Broader market correction 

The drop aligns with a broader market correction, where risk assets are under siege. Bitcoin (BTC), the bellwether of the space, tumbled to a seven-month low of $81,386 late today. Ethereum (ETH), meanwhile, has shed nearly 10% in the same period, dipping to $2,650 amid fading momentum in layer-1 narratives. 

The total crypto market capitalization has contracted by 10.88% to $2.78 trillion, erasing $2.8 billion in value. Analysts point to macroeconomic headwinds—the uncertainty around Fed’s rate cuts in December and profit-taking after a lackluster post-halving rally—as the primary culprits. 

Yet, for HYPE specifically, the timing feels acutely personal. The token has now retraced 45% from its all-time high of $59.39 set in September, entering a zone that technical traders are calling the “final accumulation phase.” 

TradingView chart reveal HYPE breaking the key support levels at $35-$36 range and the next major support currently sits in the $30-$31 range. The relative strength index (RSI) dipping to oversold levels at 24—echoing bottoms in past cycles for high-growth altcoins. 

Normal pullback or bearish reversal?

This 18% drop is usually considered a classic correction move while HYPE remains up 380% from its May lows and still generates roughly $3–4 million in daily protocol revenue that flows almost entirely into buybacks and burns. Even during this sell-off, Hyperliquid’s trading volume stayed above $10 billion weekly, and open interest only contracted 8%—hardly the footprint of a dying platform. 

With Bitcoin stabilizing above $81k and the first major token unlock now most likely priced in, on-chain whales have either held or added positions below $33. As of now, this looks less like distribution and more like the final shakeout before the next leg higher. 

On the bearish perspective, the token’s market reveals something darker: a topping pattern disguised as a correction. HYPE has now erased its entire post-Robinhood listing pump, market share in perps has fallen from 72% to under 55% in six weeks, and daily active traders dropped 22% since the POPCAT bad-debt incident. 

The looming November 29 linear unlock will inject roughly $15–18 million of new sell pressure every single day for two years—more than double the current buyback firepower on most days. 

Hyperliquid’s gigantic rise 

Hyperliquid’s ascent earlier this year was nothing short of meteoric, positioning HYPE as a cornerstone of the perpetual DEX boom. Launched in late 2024 via one of crypto’s most lucrative airdrops—distributing 31% of supply to just 94,000 eligible users—the platform bootstrapped its way to dominance without venture capital fanfare. 

By mid-2025, Hyperliquid had processed over $1.14 trillion in cumulative trading volume, outpacing rivals like GMX and dYdX in market share, which peaked at over 70% of the perp DEX sector. Its own Layer-1 blockchain, HyperEVM, boasts near-instant settlements and up to 50x leverage, attracting a daily active user base exceeding 100k and total value locked (TVL) now sitting at $4.32 billion, as per DeFiLlama data. 

Traders elevates HYPE’s value proposition to its tight coupling to platform economics. An astonishing 97% of Hyperliquid’s fees—annualized at $1.2 billion—flow directly into HYPE buybacks and burns, creating a deflationary flywheel. In Q3 alone, the protocol generated $106 million in revenue, surpassing Ethereum and Solana combined in some metrics, with $25 million weekly repurchases removing tokens from circulation. 

Moreover, recent innovations around HIP-3 (permissionless perpetual markets via HYPE staking) and the launch of USDH stablecoin have deepened liquidity on the protocol, potentially routing 95–100% of yields back to HYPE holders. 

Also read: Monad Premarket Perps Drop 20% Ahead of Mainnet Launch

While Bitcoin price is falling to multi-month lows, crypto exchange Gemini’s Co-Founder Cameron Winklevoss declared the current Bitcoin plunge a “final opportunity” for investors. He is urging people to buy Bitcoin before its price surge renounces above $90,000 levels. 

The cryptocurrency, which peaked above $126,000 in October, has now erased all its gains for the year, shrinking to as low as $89,426 late Monday and hovering just above $90,000 early Tuesday. Winklevoss’s post on X struck a defiant tone against the prevailing bearish sentiment, positioning the dip as a classic entry point in Bitcoin’s volatile history. 

This is the last time you'll ever be able to buy bitcoin below $90k!

— Cameron Winklevoss (@cameron) November 18, 2025

“This is it—the last time you’ll be able to buy Bitcoin below $90k,” Winklevoss wrote, echoing the hype cycles that have defined crypto’s booms and busts. His message comes as the asset’s trading volume exceeds $100 billion, signaling heightened activity even as prices slide. For long-time advocates like the Winklevoss twins, who have championed Bitcoin since its early days, such pullbacks are not red flags but “fire sales” for the digitally savvy. 

At the time of publishing, Bitcoin is trading at $91,178 with a 24 hour trading volume of $121 billion—as per CoinMarketCap data. 

Why is Bitcoin price crashing? 

Bitcoin’s descent into negative territory this month (November 2025)—down nearly 30% from its October all-time high—has blindsided even optimistic traders, wiping out roughly $600 billion in market value over the past month. The slide accelerated over the weekend after the leading crypto asset failed to reclaim the critical $92,000 support level, flipping it into resistance and triggering a cascade of stop-loss orders. 

The 1-week chart shows that BTC is currently hovering around its major support level, trading closely above 100EMA, which has been constantly managed since late 2023. The RSI (Relative Strength Index) sits at 53, which suggests the market sentiment as moderately bullish. 

The cascade in Bitcoin price comes after the loosening market momentum following the flash crash on October 10, triggered by the U.S. President Donald Trump’s renewed trade war rhetoric against China, set the stage for this month’s rout, eroding investor confidence in risk assets. Fading expectations for aggressive Federal Reserve rate cuts have further soured the mood, with a persistent “risk-off” tone gripping global markets. 

Analysts point to macroeconomic drags—like delayed liquidity injections and heightened volatility—as key culprits, with Bitcoin now testing levels not seen since April. 

Industry voices split: Buy the dip or brace for more pain?

Winklevoss isn’t alone in seeing silver linings. A chorus of crypto influencers and executives echoed his bullish stance on X, framing the turmoil as a strategic accumulation phase. “The crypto market is clearly under heavy pressure, but this isn’t the end of a cycle,” said Lawrence Samantha, CEO of NOBI, to The CryptoTimes. “I believe it’s the kind of moment that usually creates new opportunities.” 

Strategy’s Michael Saylor, a perennial Bitcoin maximalist, has long advocated dollar-cost averaging through volatility, though he remained mum on specifics this week. Meanwhile, Ark Invest’s Cathie Wood, known for her long-term optimism, hinted at renewed inflows into spot Bitcoin ETFs as a stabilizing force, per recent filings.

“Short-term sentiment indeed can swing violently, but the industry’s foundations still haven’t changed with adoption keeps rising, infrastructure now stronger than ever, and innovation doesn’t stop just because prices pull back,” Samantha added. 

Though not all views are rosy. Some leaders urge caution, warning against “catching a falling knife.” Forbes contributor Billy Barton issued a stark “$1 trillion crypto crash warning,” citing Fed hawkishness as a potential accelerant for further declines. Economic Times experts predict Bitcoin could breach $90,000 by month’s end if volatility spikes, with altcoins like Ethereum and Solana facing steeper drops. 

Outlook: Bottom in sight or deeper waters ahead?

As Bitcoin dominance slips from 61% to 58.8%—potentially signaling a rotation to altcoins—the market teeters on a knife’s edge. Optimists like Winklevoss bet on a swift rebound, fueled by institutional demand and year-end rallies, while bears eye sub-$85,000 wicks as a real possibility. With U.S. liquidity injections on the horizon and Trump’s pro-crypto policies still in play, the dip could indeed prove fleeting. 

“Crashes like this shake out speculators more than builders. So my focus stays the same: who keeps building, improving products, and solving real problems while the market is ‘bleeding’? Those are the ones who usually lead the next leg up,” Samantha emphasized. 

For now, the crypto faithful are divided: a frenzy of “buy the dip” memes clashes with capitulation fears. In Bitcoin’s world, where fortunes flip overnight, one thing remains certain—volatility is the only constant. Investors, take note: the truck may be backing up, but timing the load is everything.

Also read: Mt. Gox Moves $936M in BTC as Repayment Deadline Extends to 2026

Since Ethereum pioneered the smart contract revolution, it has dominated as the premier Layer 1 (L1) platform, sparking a relentless wave of innovation in the blockchain ecosystem. This Ethereum-inspired frenzy has propelled countless teams to forge alternative L1 networks, each promising specialized use cases, from ultra-fast transactions to niche decentralized finance (DeFi) primitives or interoperability hubs. Yet, the proliferation shows no signs of abating, with new chains launching amid a saturated landscape. 

According to DeFiLlama, more than 470 functional blockchain networks now exist, but a mere 55 boast Total Value Locked (TVL) surpassing $100 million. The sheer number highlights a stark reality: in this crowded arena, the vast majority languish in obscurity, raising profound questions about sustainability and necessity for the title’s existential crisis. 

This shift presents a case study in the challenging landscape of alternative L1s. But does this data signal a thriving ecosystem or a cautionary tale of overfunding and underdelivery? Let’s dive into the existential crisis gripping alternative L1s. 

The uproaring crisis for Layer 1 blockchains

The thought of “L1 Crisis” came to spotlight as the cryptocurrency landscape buzzed with a contentious debate: Are alternative Layer 1 (L1) blockchains like Aptos, Berachain, and Sui viable in an ecosystem dominated by Ethereum and Solana, or are they doomed to fade into obscurity? 

The Aptos Conundrum 

This discussion around this topic began when X user 0xhantengri’s post went viral, noting a grim picture of Aptos. With a TVL of $753 million (now $539 million) and daily chain fees of just $3,290 (now $1,981 only) the blockchain’s financial metrics raise eyebrows. 

Despite raising $350 million three years ago, the thread suggests minimal real-world adoption, dubbing it a “wash trading hub” with few usable applications beyond niche projects like Aptos GCR.  

aptos

raised $350m three years ago

no one uses it except aptos gcr and a few of his cousins

it’s just a wash trading hub

can’t name a single app that people actually use

zero pic.twitter.com/cmA1AsMbbY

— hantengri (@0xhantengri) November 11, 2025

The user’s sarcasm—“can’t name a single app that people actually use”—strikes a chord with a growing sentiment that many alt L1s prioritize venture capital (VC) funding over sustainable growth.  

The broader scale

This scrutiny of Aptos mirrors a wider narrative about alternative L1s. It was echoed in Eldar’s X post a day later, referencing projects like Berachain and Aptos for stagnation, arguing that many new blockchains are more about securing VC funds than building robust ecosystems.  

So @berachain is dead @SonicLabs is dead@Aptos is dying @SuiNetwork seems like it is also dying @Plasma looks like it might be starting to dye @stable @monad are dead on arrival.

Can we stop with useless alt L1?

— Eldar (@eldarcap) November 11, 2025

However, recent data challenges this narrative. Berachain, for instance, saw its TVL surge 16% to $3.4 billion last week, driven by innovative DeFi integrations, according to Messari reports. Similarly, Sui and Aptos have recorded weekly decentralized exchange (DEX) volumes exceeding $1 billion each, hinting at latent potential. But all these traction seems to have risen on random rather than following any fundamentals or strong narratives. 

The counterargument is that these gains may be fleeting. Ethereum and Solana continue to dominate, with Ethereum’s robust developer ecosystem and Solana’s high-throughput capabilities setting a high bar. To note, alternative L1s often struggle to differentiate themselves after entering the scaling phase and when they could not leverage their existing audience, which were largely built on the basis of aggressive pre-launch marketing and airdrop hypes. 

The innovation paradox

Despite the criticism, some alt L1s are pushing boundaries. Sonic Labs, which raised $150 million for U.S. expansion, and Monad, supported by Avail Nexus on its testnet, represent efforts to innovate within niche markets. Sonic Labs aims to enhance cross-border scalability, while Monad’s focus on parallel transaction processing could challenge Solana’s speed crown. These developments suggest that while the L1 space is crowded, there’s room for specialization—provided these projects can translate funding into tangible user benefits.

Yet, the innovation paradox looms large. With over $350 million invested in Aptos alone, the return on investment (ROI) appears dismal when measured against daily revenues of $30,337 or app fees of $109,787. This gap fuels the debate: Are these funds fueling genuine technological advancement, or are they propping up speculative bubbles? 

Do we need more blockchains?

The core question remains: Do we need more L1 blockchains? The proliferation of new chains and each promising faster transactions, lower fees, or unique governance models, has led to a fragmented landscape. Ethereum’s Layer 2 solutions, like Optimistic Rollups and ZK-Rollups, are addressing scalability without necessitating new L1s, while Solana’s ecosystem continues to attract developers with its proven resilience. For alt L1s, the challenge is not just competition but relevance. If a blockchain cannot sustain a diverse and active user base, it risks becoming a footnote in crypto history.

On the flip side, the diversity of L1s fosters experimentation. Projects like Sui, Aptos, with its Move programming language, and Berachain, with its proof-of-liquidity consensus, introduce novel approaches that could inspire breakthroughs. If alt L1s can pivot toward these use cases, they might carve out a niche.

The path forward 

For alternative L1s to survive their existential crisis, a strategic shift is imperative. First, they must prioritize user adoption over VC-driven hype, focusing on applications that solve real problems—whether in DeFi, RWAs, or cross-chain interoperability. Hyperliquid is a prime example in this niche, which has bootstrapped its ecosystem since day one and has now grown into a fully fledged ecosystem with its own L1. 

Second, transparency in financial metrics and development roadmaps could rebuild trust, countering narratives of stagnation. And lastly, collaboration with established ecosystems, rather than competition, might offer a lifeline—think of Cosmos’ interoperable app model as a blueprint. 

As of now, Aptos and its peers stand at a crossroads. With hundreds of millions of dollars locked and nearly the same amount in the war chest, the potential is there—but so is the pressure to deliver. 

As of now, the crypto market is witnessing a drastic downtrend and the next few months will be crucial for all the newcomers into the L1 landscape. 

The raised question is: Will these L1s prove their worth, or will they join the graveyard of overhyped blockchains? In a space where innovation is king, the answer lies not in raising more funds, but in building something people actually use.

Also read: Crypto: The New Tool to Dodge Sanctions?

Lighter, a leading zero-knowledge (ZK) rollup-based perpetual futures decentralized exchange (DEX) on Ethereum Layer 2, has announced a strategic partnership with Chainlink, the industry-standard oracle network. 

This collaboration designates Chainlink as Lighter’s official oracle partner, integrating Chainlink Data Streams to power real-world asset (RWA) derivatives markets with high-fidelity pricing data, as noted in the announcement. 

We are excited to partner with Chainlink as our official oracle partner for real-world asset derivatives!https://t.co/xQFddbFfUB pic.twitter.com/nYaVtANZws

— Lighter (@Lighter_xyz) November 6, 2025

The integration will let Lighter access Chainlink’s real-time data feeds that provide pricing for commodities, equities, and foreign exchange (FX) markets. This data is critical for executing key protocol operations, including triggering liquidations, calculating margin consumption, and processing conditional and limit orders on Lighter. 

Lighter’s rise as a leading perp DEX

Launched as a ZK-rollup perpetual futures DEX, Lighter combines the security of Ethereum’s mainnet with the efficiency of Layer 2 scaling solutions. The official data from its explorer shows that Lighter has attracted over 430K users and processed more than 22 billion transactions so far. 

Lighter has integrated zero-knowledge proofs to ensure transactions are verified with high accuracy and transparency, appealing to both seasoned traders and decentralized finance (DeFi) novices. The platform’s approach has driven its total value locked (TVL) to surge 2000x in the past six months, currently sitting at $1.14 billion, as per DeFillama data. 

Market data further shows that Lighter has surpassed Hyperliquid in 24-hour perpetual trading volume, accumulating over $8.85 billion, positioning it at the first place among all decentralized perpetual trading platforms. Although the open interest is still highest on Hyperliquid. 

The growing landscape of Perp DEXs 

The perpetual DEX market is currently experiencing a transformative phase, with trading volumes soaring and challenging the dominance of centralized giants like Binance and Coinbase. 

According to a recent report from 21Shares, a leading asset management firm, the perp DEX market grew from merely reaching a billion in monthly trading volume to over $100 billion. Throughout 2025, Hyperliquid was the leader due to its early-established market positioning, which had around 80% of total market share. However, by October 2025, its dominance had been challenged by emerging competitors like Aster and Lighter. 

The shift toward decentralized derivatives trading is largely driven by increasing regulatory pressures on centralized exchanges and a demand for transparency and user control. Recent incidents like MEXC freezing user funds and its fallout—where the exchange witnessed huge withdrawals in funds—has further fueled the need for secure, decentralized platforms among crypto traders. 

Also read: Balancer Releases Preliminary Incident Report Of $117M Exploit

The decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem has been rocked by a significant security breach, with the protocol Balancer falling victim to a sophisticated exploit. 

According to blockchain analytics platform Lookonchain, approximately $70.6 million worth of assets were initially transferred from Balancer’s pools earlier today. The incident, flagged at around 7:48 AM UTC, has sent shockwaves through the crypto community, raising fresh concerns about the vulnerabilities plaguing DeFi platforms.  

The protocol @Balancer appears to have been exploited — about $70.6M in assets was transferred out, including:

6,587 $WETH($24.46 M)
6,851 $osETH($26.86 M)
4,260 $wstETH(~$19.27 M)https://t.co/oH4OuWSSbR pic.twitter.com/SUHwwGzI47

— Lookonchain (@lookonchain) November 3, 2025

Further reports revealed that the hacking amount exceeded to over $128 million across multiple blockchain networks, as noted by PeckShieldAlert. The stolen assets include a number of wrapped ETH derivatives and other tokens, including WETH, osETH, wstETH, sfrxETH, rETH, as well as stablecoins like USDC and sUSDe-as per wallet data from DeBank.

How the Exploit happened

The attackers exploited a vulnerability in Balancer v2’s “manageUserBalance” function, which was supposed to validate who can move funds while the smart contract is triggered. “Instead, it confused msg.sender with a user-supplied op.sender field,” notes Suhail Kakar, a popular developer in DeFi landscape.

Balancer V2 was launched on May 11, 2021, marking a significant upgrade to its Automated Market Maker (AMM) protocol after over a year of development. This version introduced a centralized Protocol Vault to manage assets across all liquidity pools, enhancing efficiency and scalability for DeFi applications. This iteration was using a single vault for every pools, even those on multiple chains, further broadening the scope of the attack.

Balancer team offers 20% bounty

Balancer protocol officially confirmed the exploit, noting that their engineering and security teams are investigating with attack on high priority.

We’re aware of a potential exploit impacting Balancer v2 pools.

Our engineering and security teams are investigating with high priority.

We’ll share verified updates and next steps as soon as we have more information.

— Balancer (@Balancer) November 3, 2025

Meanwhile the attacker wallet has received an onchain message from Balancer Security Team, asking the hacker to return funds in exchange for 20% bounty. “We are prepared to offer a one-time white-hat bounty equal to 20% of the recovered funds if the full amount deducting the white hat fee is returned immediately and to the address listed below. This offer will automatically expire 48 hours unless extended in writing,” the team said, “if you choose not to cooperate, we have engaged independent blockchain forensics specialists and are actively cooperating with multiple law-enforcement agencies and regulatory partners.”

Another DeFi protocol targeted by hackers

Balancer, a popular automated market maker (AMM) protocol, allows users to create and manage liquidity pools with customizable token weights. However, this flexibility appears to have been a double-edged sword, with the attacker exploiting a vulnerability—possibly related to rate manipulation in boosted pools, as noted in past incidents analyzed by security firm SlowMist. 

Data from a 2023 SlowMist report highlighted similar issues, where a near 1:1 exchange ratio between assets like USDC and bb-a-USDC was manipulated for profit. This latest breach suggests that despite prior warnings, such vulnerabilities persist, underscoring the urgent need for enhanced security protocols. 

At the time of publishing, Balancer had not released an official statement, leaving the crypto community guessing if it’s really an exploit or internal transfers of any kind. 

Over $3 billion in crypto stolen this year 

This incident adds to a troubling theft trend in 2025, with hackers stealing over $3 billion in crypto assets year-to-date, according to Forbes. Earlier hacks, such as the $91 million bitcoin (BTC) scam in August and the $2.5 million Moby exploit in January, highlight the escalating sophistication of attacks. 

The DeFi space now faces a critical juncture, with calls for real-time recovery systems and stricter security standards growing louder. Investors are urged to exercise caution, withdraw assets from affected pools, and monitor updates closely. 

Also read: Sei Token Slides Post-Robinhood Debut in Market Dip

The cryptocurrency market has witnessed nearly $470 million in liquidation as Bitcoin and other leading altcoins lose momentum ahead of Monday market opening in the U.S. The overall market capitalization has seen a 3.23% decrease, losing more than $100 billion in a swift downtrend. 

As per CoinMarketCap data, Bitcoin price fell 3% from daily high of $110,764 to $107,000 at the time of publishing. This pull-back led to massive volatility in altcoins market, with Ether (ETH) dropping nearly 5.8% to $3,680, XRP dropping 5% to $2.38, BNB seeing 5.70% drop to $1,029, and Solana (SOL) losing the most among all—6.5% to $174 as of 6:50 AM UTC. 

The drop in prices come as the crypto industry navigates through various key events such as impacts of recent rate cuts by Fed, questionable Bitcoin whale movements, and the controversy around MEXC, where several traders accused the exchange of freezing funds and hinted towards likely insolvency of the platform. However, MEXC affirmed their stance and shared a latest proof-of-reserve (PoR) on Sunday, confirming sufficient assets backing. 

24-hour liquidation reaches $470 million 

CoinGlass data shows that the 24 hour liquidation in crypto markets wiped out over $470 million, with ETH alone contributing nearly $112 million, followed by BTC, SOL, ASTER, and DOGE. Binance is in the leading position of liquidating traders among all other exchanges, cutting $140 million from all long/short combined, while Bybit clutched closely with $110 million. 

Hyperliquid is sitting among top platforms in market liquidations, contributing $101 million to the total. This shows the perpetual DEX’s increasing popularity among a growing userbase, echoing shrinking trust in centralized exchanges. 

Volatility ahead of Monday market opening

The weekly market opening on Monday in the U.S. usually brings volatility into cryptocurrencies, which most of the times witnesses downtrend. While most of the narratives have cooled down and investors are not anticipating any key events this week, the sell-off is likely due to short-term traders rethinking their strategies and exiting the market. 

The diminishing open interest (OI) in Bitcoin futures, as per Coinglass data, shows that traders are cutting their risks to the market and are on line to reposition themselves as new narrative hits the market. 

Adding to the fuel is an upcoming Fed speech on Tuesday, November 4, where Governor Lisa D. Cook will be speaking on the “The Outlook for the Economy and Monetary Policy” session. Moreover, the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC), scheduled to meet on November 6–7, would also be influential for crypto markets, stocks, as well as the global economy. 

Also Read: Aster Price Jumps 30% as CZ Confirms $2M Token Purchase

While Zcash (ZEC) is making waves of headlines for its continued growth, various traders are now betting against its price surge and opening leveraged short positions. 

Data from Coinalyze shows that ZEC currently has a long/short ratio of 1/1.92 as 34.28% traders are on the long side while 65.72% are on the short side. It has an open interest of $689 million across all perpetual markets.  

As noted by Lookonchain on X, a whale 0xC385 recently deposited approximately $3 million in USDC into Hyperliquid and initially placed a 2x leveraged short trade on 3,230 Zcash (ZEC) tokens. The latest data from Hypurrscan shows that the whale has increased the size of its trade to 4,614.85 ZEC, now amounting to nearly $2 million. 

Whale 0xC385 deposited 3M $USDC into #HyperLiquid in the past 3 hours and opened a 2x short on 3,230 $ZEC($1.41M).https://t.co/Ix6GA80hjx pic.twitter.com/QbfpdKaqRA

— Lookonchain (@lookonchain) November 1, 2025

The whale currently sits at a profit of $25,768 and has liquidation price at $581.43. It means that if ZEC price rises above $581.43, their short position will be liquidated with a loss of $3 million. 

The recent rise in ZEC price  

The trade comes against ZEC’s recent meteoric rise, which has seen the privacy-focused cryptocurrency surge nearly 200% in the last 30 days. At the time of publishing, ZEC is trading near $421 with a 24-hour trading volume of $1.36 billion—as per CoinMarketCap data. 

Zcash, known for its shielded transaction capabilities, has been a focal point of speculation ahead of its anticipated November 2025 halving, an event that halves mining rewards and historically drives scarcity-driven price increases. This has propelled ZEC’s market capitalization to $6.2 billion, surpassing rival Monero and cementing its status as the leading privacy coin. 

On a technical front, Zcash (ZEC) witnessed a remarkable surge in privacy adoption, with over 4.9 million ZEC now locked in shielded addresses—as per data from zkp.baby, a dashboard for Zcash blockchain data. The number marks a 15% increase for the month alone, now representing 30% of the total ZEC supply. 

This shift underscores growing user confidence in Zcash’s zk-SNARK technology, which enables fully private transactions without compromising compliance. By reducing the circulating liquid supply, this trend could exert upward pressure on ZEC’s market dynamics, potentially leading to tighter pricing and increased volatility. 

Simultaneously, it bolsters Zcash’s positioning as a regulatory-friendly privacy coin, distinguishing it in a landscape wary of anonymous assets. Besides, institutional interest—exemplified by Grayscale’s ZEC Trust holding $137 million in assets—further signals maturing demand from sophisticated investors seeking privacy-preserving exposure within compliant frameworks.

ZEC Trend on X 

Moreover, ZEC is in trend explosively on X, fueled by high-profile key opinion leaders (KOLs) like popular crypto influencer Ansem, Solana maxi Mert, BitMax founder Arthur Hayes, and others enthusiastically shilling the coin. 

The X buzz around ZEC has been relentless over the past few days, with KOLs driving the narrative. Ansem and Mert have touted ZEC’s privacy features and halving potential, while Arthur Hayes, the former BitMEX CEO, boldly predicted a $10,000 target, further amplifying the hype. 

Nothing stops this train.$ZEC to $10k pic.twitter.com/aNpOmm6ooN

— Arthur Hayes (@CryptoHayes) October 30, 2025

As the crypto community watches this high-stakes showdown unfold, ZEC’s price performance and the whale’s fate will likely dominate discussions on X in the days ahead. With the halving looming and sentiment running high, the market stands at a crossroads, poised for either a dramatic reversal or a continued ascent. 

Also read: MEXC Reaffirms Solvency Amid Rumors and User Complaints

21Shares, a leading crypto asset management firm, has filed an S-1 registration statement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to launch the exchange-traded fund (ETF) tracking Hyperliquid (HYPE) token. The proposed ETF aims to provide investors with exposure to Hyperliquid’s price performance and staking yields without requiring direct ownership of the HYPE token. 

The filing, accepted by the SEC on October 29, 2025, marks a pivotal step toward integrating Hyperliquid’s innovative DeFi ecosystem into regulated financial markets. While Hyperliquid is witnessing a notable growth as a leading perpetual DEX, 21Share’s filing has further fueled optimism for the platform’s market presence. 

The move aligns with a broader trend of growing institutional interest in crypto ETFs. Recent data from SoSoValue indicates that the U.S.-listed spot Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs recorded substantial inflows this month, exceeding $4.57 billion as of October 29.  

Fuelling Hyperliquid’s growth

As per the filing, 21Shares plans to utilize derivative instruments such as swap agreements and options, alongside potential spot HYPE exchange-traded products (ETPs), to achieve its investment objectives. This structure mirrors Hyperliquid’s on-chain market dynamics, including its perpetual futures and fee mechanisms, while adhering to SEC regulatory standards. 

Earlier this month, 21Shares filed a 2X Leveraged ETF for HYPE, suggesting the asset manager’s bullish stance on the cryptocurrency. 

Hyperliquid has emerged as a dominant player in the decentralized finance (DeFi) landscape in 2025, boasting trading volumes exceeding $3 trillion, as per Hyperliquid stats. Its fully on-chain perpetual exchange, built on a custom Layer 1 blockchain, offers zero gas fees and exceptional scalability, positioning it ahead of competitors like Aster and Lighter. 

Hyperliquid’s success is attributed to its optimized architecture, which addresses key DeFi challenges such as speed, cost, and transparency. This ETF filing could serve as a catalyst for institutional adoption, potentially unlocking significant capital inflows into Hyperliquid’s ecosystem. 

SEC’s upturn stance on crypto ETFs 

The SEC’s recent approval of generic listing standards for spot crypto ETFs has streamlined the approval process. With this update, the ETF review timeline shrinked from 240 days to a maximum of 75 days. This regulatory shift, coupled with the U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration’s push to mainstream crypto assets, has paved the way for products tracking assets like Solana and XRP, with Hyperliquid now joining the fray. 

Also read: Bitwise to Launch Solana ETF Featuring Staking Rewards

In a landmark move, Uniswap, the largest Ethereum-native decentralized exchange (DEX), has integrated Solana on its platform to enable traders swap SPL tokens (Solana-based tokens) natively alongside different EVM networks. 

This development brings Solana, Ethereum, Base, and other leading major blockchains under one roof, significantly enhancing cross-chain interoperability. 

Solana is now live on the Uniswap Web App 🦄

(Yes, you read that right) pic.twitter.com/XBurgVCgmS

— Uniswap Labs 🦄 (@Uniswap) October 16, 2025

The official integration was announced on X by Uniswap, warmly welcomed by various projects within the Solana ecosystem. Jupiter Exchange, a leading DEX aggregator platform, noted that this integration enables millions of SPL tokens to be traded on Uniswap while accessing deep liquidity markets and best trade rates. 

One interface, two stacks.

Uniswap + Jupiter Ultra API are bringing Solana swaps to the Uniswap Web App.

Surf through millions of SPL tokens and route across deep liquidity markets with the best optimized trade. https://t.co/SCoIafiD2Z pic.twitter.com/bzYu5L0lzy

— Jupiter (🐱, 🐐) (@JupiterExchange) October 16, 2025

Solana’s inclusion into the vast DeFi ecosystem 

Solana currently has nearly $11 billion in total value locked (TVL) across its ecosystem, as per DeFiLlama data. Its inclusion into Uniswap marks a pivotal milestone for the blockchain landscape. This development addresses the fragmentation that has long plagued users, who previously had to manage different wallets and navigate multiple interfaces to access tokens across various blockchains. 

As mentioned in the official blog, users can seamlessly trade Solana tokens alongside Ethereum and other networks, simplifying the DeFi experience. This integration not only expands Solana’s reach but also strengthens its position as a competitive player in the DeFi space, potentially attracting new users and increasing liquidity. 

Uniswap’s growing dominance 

Uniswap’s decision to integrate Solana underscores its growing dominance in the DeFi sector. By expanding beyond Ethereum to include non-EVM chains like Solana, Uniswap is positioning itself as the go-to platform for cross-chain DeFi activities. This move is expected to bolster Uniswap’s user base and trading volume, reinforcing its role as a leader in DeFi trading. 

Future updates, including bridging and cross-chain swaps, are anticipated to further enhance Uniswap’s capabilities, making it a comprehensive solution for DeFi enthusiasts worldwide. 

Also read: a16z Crypto Invests $50 Million in Solana Staking Protocol Jito

The supply of Tether (USDT) stablecoin is growing, with it now sitting at 181 billion in circulation. The recent mintings added over 4.5 billion in USDT supply to meet rising demand from institutions and on-chain trading, showing that stablecoins remain a key part of crypto markets.

As per DeFiLlama data, USDT supply currently amounts to total $181.406 billion, suggesting the total supply as 181.4 billion as each token is backed by $1 in collateral. It dominates the stablecoin sector with nearly 60% shares, followed by Circle’s USDC with 24.6% and a supply of 75.7 billion tokens. 

Surge in stablecoin supply in 2025 

The stablecoin market has experienced a remarkable surge in supply throughout 2025. It was largely driven by growing institutional adoption, favorable regulatory developments, and increasing demand for stable digital assets. By mid-2025, the total stablecoin supply surpassed $300 billion and it is projected to increase to $ 400 billion by year-end at this pace of growth. 

This surge, highlighted by a record $15.6 trillion in transfer volumes during Q3 2025, underscores stablecoins’ role as a cornerstone of the digital economy, particularly in DeFi and cross-border payments. 

Ethereum’s dominance in hosting 69% of new issuances, coupled with centralized stablecoins like USDT and USDC accounting for 90% of the market, reflects the sector’s robust expansion, potentially catalyzing broader cryptocurrency market growth as adoption reaches a mainstream tipping point. 

Stablecoins are increasingly bridging traditional finance and decentralized networks. It also enables cross-border stablecoin transfers, reducing settlement times from days to hours and lowering fees from about 2% to 0.3%. By combining regulatory compliance with automated DeFi processes, it shows how stablecoins can be used beyond basic trading.

Also Read: Mastercard, Chainlink Use CCIP to Bring Payments Onchain

Venezuelan opposition leader and Bitcoin advocate Maria Corina Machado has been announced as the winner of the 2025 Nobel Peace Prize. 

Machado, a vociferous and longstanding advocate for decentralized finance and digital assets, is widely regarded as the initial prospective “Bitcoin Nobel” laureate. She has vigorously promoted the cryptocurrency as an essential “lifeline” for citizens ensnared under systemic financial repression.

The Norwegian Nobel Committee awarded Machado for her “zealous efforts to promote democratic rights in Venezuela.” But for the tens of millions globally that employ crypto to cushion themselves from hyperinflation and debilitating capital controls, the prize shines a light on her utopian economic vision that bets on decentralized money instead of bribeable state-issued fiat.

Machado took over her X handle to announce the appreciation, citing that her recognition is similar to that of struggles of all Venezuelans, who aim “to conquer Freedom.”

This recognition of the struggle of all Venezuelans is a boost to conclude our task: to conquer Freedom.

We are on the threshold of victory and today, more than ever, we count on President Trump, the people of the United States, the peoples of Latin America, and the democratic…

— María Corina Machado (@MariaCorinaYA) October 10, 2025

“We are on the threshold of victory and today, more than ever, we count on President Trump, the people of the United States, the peoples of Latin America, and the democratic nations of the world as our principal allies to achieve Freedom and democracy,” Machado said, adding, “I dedicate this prize to the suffering people of Venezuela and to President Trump for his decisive support of our cause!”

Bitcoin as the New Tool of Resistance

Machado’s campaign is based firmly on the economic disaster in Venezuela, where the bolívar has essentially been debased through hyperinflation that at one point reached 1.7 million percent. She has consistently pointed out that this economic meltdown was the inevitable result of untrammeled money printing and theft by the state.

Against this backdrop, Bitcoin was the sole dependable option. It has made it possible for Venezuelan households to keep value out of the failing national currency, to receive life-saving remittances without state confiscation, and to maintain some degree of financial independence. 

Proposal for a National Bitcoin Reserve

Carrying her advocacy well beyond mere survival, Machado last week made the bold economic proposal that a democratic future Venezuela should include Bitcoin in its national reserves.

This dramatic action, she argues, would restore wealth plundered by the dictatorship and guarantee future budgetary prudence. By adopting Bitcoin’s fundamental philosophy of open, incorruptible public record, the country could mark a fresh start from the financial repression that caused it to fail.

The victory has caused waves in the decentralized finance (DeFi) community, with key players celebrating the win as a signal that decentralized money is fundamentally linked to human rights and the struggle for democracy. 

Also Read: Banks Join Forces to Launch G7-Backed Digital Stablecoins

The Ethereum Foundation (EF) and the Keyring Network are collaborating to establish a legal defense fund to support the creators of Tornado Cash, Roman Storm and Alexey Pertsev, who are criminally charged with developing privacy-protecting software. 

The initiative is launched by Keyring’s “Developer Legal Defense Fund” and is designed to safeguard open-source developers from criminal liability merely for producing code that sustains digital privacy. As per the official portal, the fund aims to offer structural and financial assistance to developers that are at risk legally because of their efforts in building privacy tools.

The fund works through zkVerified vaults on Avalanche and Ethereum, and users have the option to deposit USDC and earn yield and have the protocol fees earned over two months go toward the legal defense fund. Members need to go through a brief private verification process via Keyring Connect in order to access the vaults. 

To date, as of October 10, 2025, the program has raised $22,109.52 in funds, all of which will be used for the defense of Storm and Pertsev, as well as for the general Tornado Cash legal defense work. 

Tornado Cash developers’ convictions

Roman Storm was just convicted by a Manhattan federal jury on charges of conspiracy to run an unlicensed money transmitting business, with a top sentence of five years. The jury was not able to agree, however, on two other counts — conspiracy to commit money laundering and conspiracy to violate U.S. sanctions. Prosecutors claim Tornado Cash enabled laundering of more than $1 billion, including money related to North Korean hacker teams. Storm’s defense asserts that Tornado Cash is independent and that he never had control over its usage.

Alexey Pertsev was previously convicted in May 2024 in the Netherlands and sentenced to 64 months in prison on related charges. He has since been released from pretrial imprisonment and is appealing the conviction. In early February, the Ethereum Foundation contributed $1.25 million towards Pertsev’s defense, stressing that “privacy is normal, and writing code is not a crime.” The EF also offered to match up to $500,000 in community contributions to fund Storm’s appeal after his conviction.

The Ethereum Foundation’s participation in this new legal defense fund is a more institutionalized form of developer advocacy. It moves beyond monetary contributions by integrating legal defense into a decentralized finance system — essentially turning advocacy into a sustaining ecosystem for the defense of developer rights.

Roman Storm is preparing his appeal and Pertsev is pressing on with his fight in court. The decisions in these cases have the potential to define the future of privacy tools and developer liability throughout the blockchain space. The Ethereum Foundation and Keyring’s initiative represents a turning point in the effort to maintain the principle that coding for privacy is not a crime. 

Also Read: Grayscale Stakes $150M in ETH Ahead of its Staking ETF Approval

Amid growing crypto activity, the Central Bank of Russia (CBR) announced that it will permit specific commercial banks to engage in crypto-related business. This indicates a shift in Russia’s policy towards digital assets, showing greater tolerance of blockchain finance, but with tight regulatory supervision.

According to a local crypto media outlet Bits, the CBR said that permission to provide crypto services will be provided only to a limited list of banks with defined criteria. Such banks must prove their ability to handle the operational, legal, and financial risks of digital assets. 

The central bank also assured that operations related to crypto should continue to remain secondary to the main business operations of banks, in an effort to avoid undue exposure of risk to the overall financial system. 

Controlled Access in Crypto Space

According to comments from central bank officials, this move looks to balance opening doors to innovation while ensuring macroeconomic stability. The activities allowed will most probably be limited to services like dealing in digital financial assets, crypto-linked investment products for sophisticated investors, or facilitating regulated custody and settlement. However, the bank does not aim to legalize unregulated retail access to cryptocurrencies nor enable speculative dealing in banks.

The CBR is in talks with other financial institutions to create a regulatory framework that comprises risk controls, capital adequacy requirements, and reporting requirements. The framework should be developed within the next few months and could entail a pilot project with a few major institutions, like Sberbank or VTB, which have started modest experimentation with blockchain technologies.

Crypto in Russia

The policy change follows amid growing crypto activity in Russia. As per earlier reports, Russian users accounted for tens of billions of dollars worth of crypto-based transactions every year. The central bank and government previously were opposed to any level of cryptocurrency adoption but are now seeking to find how to make digital assets a part of the financial system in an organized and nationally advantageous way.

Over the last few months, Russia has been adopting a crypto-friendly approach. The CBR has suggested a test run for certain investors to let them trade cryptocurrencies for three years as a test, in March 2025. 

Though crypto continues to be prohibited as a means of payment in Russia, this recent step indicates that regulators are considering blockchain and digital assets more viable. It primarily facilitates means of financial innovation and diversification of investment amid foreign trade in the face of Western sanctions. Yet the central bank maintains that risks to investors, depositors, and financial markets must be entirely addressed before the extension of wider usage is on the table.

Also Read: Citi Ventures Invests in BVNK Stablecoin Platform

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong has fiercely criticized a leaked Senate Democrats’ proposal targeting decentralized finance (DeFi), calling it a “bad proposal” that could derail U.S. leadership in the crypto sector. 

The new proposal imposes strict regulations, including a Treasury-managed restricted list for high-risk DeFi protocols and Know Your Customer (KYC) requirements for non-custodial wallets. In a latest post on X, Armstrong warned that these new measures will risk stifling innovation and driving development overseas. 

We absolutely won’t accept this

It’s a bad proposal, plain and simple, that would set innovation back, and prevent the US from becoming the crypto capital of the world.

But legislating is a process, and we’re committed to engaging and helping Congress get it right. We will keep… https://t.co/SmHsBgFRoE

— Brian Armstrong (@brian_armstrong) October 10, 2025

Widespread Criticism from the Crypto Community

Besides Armstrong, the proposal has sparked a widespread backlash from industry leaders, including Blockchain Association CEO Summer Mersinger, who argue it effectively bans DeFi and wallet development in the U.S. 

“The disappointing proposal outlined by Senate Democrats would effectively ban decentralized finance, wallet development, and other applications in the United States – an outcome that’s neither workable nor consistent with American innovation,” said Blockchain Association CEO Summer Mersinger, adding, “The language as written is impossible to comply with and would drive responsible development overseas. We urge our policymakers to stay at the table, continue to engage each other across the aisle, and ensure this critical piece of legislation supports – rather than hinders – our nation’s leadership in financial technology.”

Armstrong, quoting Mersinger’s statement, emphasized that the U.S. risks losing its tradition of technological leadership if the legislation passes in its current form. Despite the setback, he expressed commitment to engaging with Congress to refine the bill and protect economic freedom. 

The controversy has stalled bipartisan crypto market structure talks, with critics like Uniswap founder Hayden Adams echoing concerns that the Democratic counterproposal could “kill DeFi” in the U.S. 

The republican senate banking market structure draft is the best bill we’ve seen on defi / dev protection

Just read the leaked dem counter and it would kill defi in the US

There needs to be a HUGE shift from dem senators to fix this and make progress on market structure https://t.co/1Ilj2AJk4S

— Hayden Adams 🦄 (@haydenzadams) October 9, 2025

The timing coincides with heightened political tensions, as some speculate the move may be a strategic jab at the Trump administration amid its recent successes, including ending the Gaza war. 

As the crypto community rallies against the proposal, the outcome of these negotiations could shape the future of DeFi globally. At this time, industry titans are vowing to fight for a regulatory framework that fosters innovation rather than suppression. 

Also read: Bitcoin Cycle Poised to Extend Beyond 2026: Mike Alfred

A mysterious crypto whale has sent buzz across the crypto market with shorting a staggering $420 million worth of BTC on Hyperliquid. The timing for the short trade aligns with BTC witnessing a huge selling pressure as it recently hit a new all-time high of $126,198 on October 6, 2025. 

As noted by Arkham, a blockchain data platform, the whale executed the trade with a $80 million USDC in margin and using a 6X leverage to size up the trade. The whale also transferred $50 million to Binance, potentially following a similar activity or hedging the trade. 

THIS GUY JUST SHORTED $420M OF BITCOIN ON HYPERLIQUID

He deposited $80M of USDC and leveraged it over 5x to short BTC. He also sent $50M to Binance, where he is likely doing the same activity.

This whale is betting on a massive DUMP. pic.twitter.com/te1wrnzIAv

— Arkham (@arkham) October 9, 2025

Lookonchain, another onchain data tracking platform, noted that the same whale sold 3,000 BTC for $363.87 million two days ago. Now this mammoth short position suggests that whale is expecting a huge downside in BTC price over coming days. 

After selling 3,000 $BTC($363.87M) 2 days ago, the #BitcoinOG just deposited 80M $USDC into #Hyperliquid to open a 6x short on 3,477 $BTC($419M), with a liquidation price of $140,660.

He also deposited 50M $USDC into #Binance.https://t.co/GY2k5pRwcehttps://t.co/SYkEUe1Z5d pic.twitter.com/fBmMHXpOYo

— Lookonchain (@lookonchain) October 9, 2025

BTC price slumps below $120K

Following the public revealing of the trade, Bitcoin price took a hit and fell below $120K, losing daily high $123,614, as per CoinMarketCap data. It is currently trading at $120,300 with a 24 hours trading volume of $71.26 billion. 

Data from Hypurrscan, an onchain data and trade explorer for Hyperliquid, shows that the whale is currently $660K in profit and their liquidation price sits at $140,660 per BTC. 

The crypto community is abuzz, with reactions ranging from awe to skepticism, as some question whether the whale might be balancing positions across multiple accounts. Crypto traders are currently closely monitoring the market’s response. While some users are predicting a lesson for the whale if the bet fails, others, such as suggest that the strategy might be more complex than it appears. 

The trade underscores the growing influence of large players in crypto markets and could prompt closer scrutiny from regulators. As of now, the market holds its breath, awaiting Bitcoin’s next move in this high-leverage showdown.

Also read: Kerrisdale Shorts BitMine Stock, Says Its Crypto Strategy is Outdated

Sorare, an NFT-based fantasy sports platform, has announced a blockchain migration to Solana, calling the move “It’s not a replacement, it’s an upgrade.”

According to the official thread posted on X, Sorare’s switch to Solana is designed to accelerate its vision of an “open and on-chain sports platform where speed, liquidity, and utility are at the core of a new digital sports economy.”

✨ We are moving to @solana 🚀

Our goal is to accelerate our vision of an open & on-chain sports platform for Sorare, where speed, liquidity and utility are at a core of a new digital sports economy.

It’s not a replacement, it’s an upgrade

A thread 🧵 pic.twitter.com/VVhRik7gU5

— Sorare (@Sorare) October 8, 2025

The migration begins in early October, with ETH balances shifting from StarkEx to Base, Coinbase’s Layer-2 network. By the end of October, all existing Sorare cards will be reissued as Solana NFTs, maintaining their original scarcity tiers, XP, metadata, and serial numbers.

Sorare will also introduce multi-chain payments, supporting ETH, SOL, and stablecoins for in-game purchases and player rewards. Users will soon be able to manage assets directly through Phantom Wallet and trade their cards across external NFT marketplaces such as Magic Eden.

Sorare also hinted at a utility token, which would reward users for gameplay and trading activity, unlocking new utilities across its ecosystem. Sorare is not the first project to migrate to Solana as projects like Helium and DeGods have also taken similar approach for better performance and cost-efficiency.

Also Read: Solana-based Jupiter Exchange Launches Desktop Wallet for Users

Shayne Coplan, founder of Polymarket, has reportedly become the world’s youngest self-made billionaire at 27-year-old. This comes following a $2 billion investment from the Intercontinental Exchange (ICE), the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE). Reportedly, the deal values Polymarket at nearly $8 billion. 

A few years ago, Coplan was selling his belongings in a cramped Lower East Side apartment to cover rent. Today, the founder of Polymarket has joined the Bloomberg Billionaires Index as the world’s youngest self-made billionaire, as claimed by a latest Bloomberg report. 

Coplan’s path to this milestone has been anything but smooth. After dropping out of New York University, he became disillusioned with speculative crypto projects and turned his focus to economist Robin Hanson’s ideas on prediction markets. “This is too good of an idea to just exist in whitepapers,” he once wrote. Working from his bathroom during the pandemic, Coplan launched Polymarket in mid-2020 as a venue for crowd-driven forecasting.

Features of the Platform 

Polymarket lets users trade outcomes of real-world events using stablecoins, aggregating crowd sentiment into on-chain price signals. It was founded in 2020 but its activity surged through 2024 amid U.S. election speculation.

Polymarket’s backers include Founders Fund, Blockchain Capital, and Ethereum’s Vitalik Buterin, alongside 1789 Capital, where Donald Trump Jr. serves as adviser. ICE’s CEO Jeffrey Sprecher, whose wife Kelly Loeffler heads the U.S. Small Business Administration, has long advocated closer alignment between digital markets and regulated finance.

The platform’s “move-fast, ask-later” approach soon drew regulatory fire. In 2022, Polymarket paid a $1.4 million penalty to settle with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) over unregistered trading and blocked U.S. users from access. Following the 2024 presidential election on which users wagered more than $3 billion, FBI agents raided Coplan’s apartment, suspecting ongoing U.S. activity. Both the Justice Department and the CFTC later dropped their investigations in July 2025.

That same month, Polymarket acquired QCEX, a CFTC-licensed exchange and clearinghouse, for $112 million, enabling it to legally resume operations in the U.S. ICE’s investment marks a dramatic turnaround, not only restoring Coplan’s reputation but also legitimizing decentralized prediction markets within the traditional financial system.

With the deal, Coplan’s paper wealth exceeds $1 billion, a remarkable rise from coding in his bathroom to reshaping how information and capital intersect online.

Also Read: Polymarket Reveals $205M in Unannounced Funding Rounds

Amid heightened attention to Bitcoin in finance markets, Binance CEO Richard Teng ignited a buzz by labeling Bitcoin the “digital gold of our era.” Teng’s remarks reinforce its status as a modern store of value. 

Shared on X, the post reflects Teng’s view that Bitcoin, like gold, offers a decentralized, inflation-resistant asset amid economic uncertainty, a narrative gaining traction as institutional adoption grows. 

#Bitcoin is the digital gold of our era.

— Richard Teng (@_RichardTeng) October 8, 2025

Agreeing with Binance CEO, the founder of Strategy—the largest Bitcoin holder company—Michael Saylor also supported this point of view, citing “Yes” in reply to Teng’s X post. 

Bitcoin replacing Gold as store of value asset

Historically, gold has been a safe-haven asset for centuries, its value tied to scarcity and cultural significance. Bitcoin, introduced in 2009 by Satoshi Nakamoto, mirrors this with a capped supply of 21 million coins, appealing to investors during financial turmoil like the 2020 pandemic crash, when Bitcoin surged from $10,000 to over $60,000. Teng’s claim echoes this evolution, positioning Bitcoin as a digital evolution of gold.

At the time of publishing, Bitcoin was trading at approximately $123,186, down 2.39% from its recent all-time high of $126,198–marked on October 5, 2025. Gold, meanwhile, hovered around $4,042 per ounce, a 1.56% surge in the past 24 hours. The Bitcoin-to-gold ratio stands at about 30:1, suggesting Bitcoin’s outperformance, though volatility remains a key difference. 

Michael Saylor of MicroStrategy has long called Bitcoin “digital energy” and a hedge against fiat devaluation, while Cathie Wood of ARK Invest predicts its value could hit $1.5 million by as soon as 2027. These claims underscore a growing consensus, though critics argue Bitcoin’s energy-intensive mining and regulatory risks set it apart from gold’s stability.

Also read: Bitcoin Miner IREN Share Price Jumps Post AI Deal

SmartPay, a stablecoin payment company with over $1 billion yearly traction volume, has been acquired by Rezolve AI, a platform merging AI, commerce, and payments. This strategic acquisition marks a significant push for the world’s most advanced digital asset payment platforms.

The announcement was made on October 7 with a press release which discusses that the acquisition provides Rezolve with the base to integrate digital assets, including stablecoins like USDT, into mainstream retail payments, leveraging Smartpay’s proven infrastructure, which has already processed over $19 million commercial transactions. 

Building a Fee-Free Blockchain Network

This deal is crucial to Rezolve’s initiative with Tether, the issuer of the USDT stablecoin. By combining Smartpay’s payment rails with Rezolve’s proprietary “Brain Checkout” technology, the company aims to build a blockchain-based payment network that eliminates traditional merchant fees.

“Smartpay gives Rezolve a proven, transaction-tested foundation to scale our digital asset payment initiative globally,” said Daniel M. Wagner, CEO of Rezolve AI. “By combining Smartpay’s live payment rails with Rezolve’s Brain Checkout technology, we can deliver merchants a fast, simple, and fee-free way to accept digital assets, bridging the gap between blockchain and everyday commerce.”

The new infrastructure will allow consumers to pay instantly using a variety of digital assets, including USDT, Bitcoin (BTC), and Ethereum (ETH), while merchants receive instant settlement in fiat currency.

Global expansion of the company

Smartpay’s existing network is already active in key high-growth markets, including Brazil, Argentina, Colombia, and Angola, where it handles millions of stablecoin transactions annually. This instantly extends Rezolve’s reach across major emerging markets and provides a tested model for scaling digital asset payments across North America, Asia, and Europe.

The acquisition is expected to accelerate Rezolve’s roadmap toward Agentic Commerce, where AI agents conduct transactions autonomously. With Smartpay’s digital asset payment capabilities, Rezolve is ready to build the first platform where these AI agents can not only discover and compare products but also negotiate and complete transactions instantly using digital assets.

Also Read: Pineapple Financial Kicks-off $100M Asset Treasury, Buys $8.9M in INJ

Grayscale Investments, a leading crypto asset management company, has reportedly staked approximately $150 million worth of Ethereum (ETH). This follows key deadlines for several altcoin Exchange-Traded Product (ETP) applications looming before the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

Noted by the analysis firm Lookonchain, the move could help Grayscale to potentially generate yield on a substantial portion of its Ether holdings, if the SEC approves its staking-based ETFs for Ether and Solana. 

Grayscale(ETHE and ETH ETF) staked 32,000 $ETH($150.56M) today.https://t.co/OcQGQe8US6 pic.twitter.com/lQLIWl8yQX

— Lookonchain (@lookonchain) October 7, 2025

Grayscale’s decision comes amid scrutiny from the SEC concerning ETPs based on digital assets other than Bitcoin. Market participants are closely watching the outcomes of various altcoin ETP deadlines, including those for Ether products scheduled in the coming weeks. The regulatory body’s disposition toward products that incorporate staking, which involves locking up assets to earn yield on a proof-of-stake network like Ethereum, remains a central and complex issue.

Grayscale has previously made regulatory history, and this initiative is seen as a show of confidence in the long-term viability and regulatory acceptance of ETPs that incorporate staking features. By staking a large chunk of its Ether, Grayscale is preparing to capitalize on the yield generation capabilities of the Ethereum network.

Current Market Situation

As of now, the market is focused on how the SEC will classify staked vs. non-staked Ether and whether it will allow ETP issuers to pass staking rewards on to investors. This is a feature that could significantly enhance the appeal of these investment vehicles compared to non-yielding trusts or ETPs.

The $150 million staking in ETH shows a commitment by Grayscale and emphasizes the high stakes involved in the current round of SEC reviews, which could pave the way for a new generation of regulated, yield-bearing crypto investment products in the U.S. market.

Also Read: Ethereum Treasuries & Spot ETFs Hold Over 10% of Total ETH Supply

Meanwhile, a fintech company dedicated to life insurance contracts that are denominated in Bitcoin (BTC), has closed a substantial funding round for $82 million. The funding round has attracted various prominent investors, including Apollo, Northwestern Mutual, Pantera Capital, Stillmark, Bain Capital and Haun Ventures. 

As per the Bloomberg article, the fundraise came after just six months of Meanwhile’s series A funding round of $40 million in April. The company’s initial funding in 2023 was led by OpenAI CEO Sam Altman. 

Regulated in Bermuda, Meanwhile claims to be the first life insurer to offer products entirely denominated in crypto. The firm launched its services in 2023 and it invests policyholders’ premiums by lending Bitcoin to large, regulated financial institutions. 

Zac Townsend, co-founder CEO of Meanwhile, notes the firm is now one of the largest Bitcoin lenders in the world. “We are not running a hedge fund or trading desk or worried about the price of Bitcoin day-to day or week-to-week or month-to-month,” Townsend said in an interview. “We engage on this side of the business in institutional B2B, private credit.” 

The unique approach of Meanwhile’s life insurance products provide tax advantages for Bitcoin holders. It enables policyholders to borrow up to 90% of their policy’s Bitcoin value in a tax-free manner after two years of signing. The borrowed Bitcoin will adopt a new cost basis, allowing the policyholders to sell the Bitcoin without triggering capital gains taxes, reads the bloomberg report. 

Also Read: US Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Funding Can Start Anytime: Lummis