TLDR:

• BitGo’s Deputy CISO says businesses must prioritize custody decisions before selecting any digital asset tools or wallets.
• Hot and cold wallet choices should align with a company’s liquidity needs and intended digital asset usage profiles.
• Governance frameworks covering people, process, and technology must be in place before any transactions begin.
• Business model alignment, not trend-chasing, should drive every company’s digital asset architecture and strategy decisions.

Digital assets security remains a top priority as businesses accelerate their move into the digital asset economy. BitGo Deputy CISO Manny Khan has outlined a structured approach for companies entering this space.

Writing in Forbes, Khan argues that businesses often get the process backwards. Most organizations start with tools rather than building the right foundation.

His framework centers on custody, governance, and architecture decisions tailored to each business model.

Custody and Wallet Architecture Must Come Before Anything Else

Custody is the first decision any business should make before entering the digital asset space. Khan stresses that organizations must honestly assess whether they are ready to hold digital assets internally.

Handing this responsibility to an IT team without proper preparation can lead to irreversible losses. History has shown that preventable mistakes in this area carry serious consequences.

For businesses handling meaningful value, partnering with a regulated, institutional-grade provider may be more appropriate. This does not mean all companies should follow the same path.

Each organization must weigh its internal maturity against external options realistically. Security and control are not mutually exclusive, but achieving both requires the right fiduciary relationships.

Wallet architecture decisions should also be driven by purpose, not convention. Hot wallets suit speed and operational availability, while cold wallets prioritize long-term asset protection.

Neither option is universally superior to the other. The right choice depends entirely on liquidity needs and intended usage.

Multi-sig and MPC technologies also carry real operational consequences. They affect accountability, transparency, and resilience across the organization.

Companies should categorize digital assets by usage and liquidity profiles. Forcing all use cases into one mold typically increases risk rather than reducing it.

Governance Frameworks and Business Model Alignment Drive Long-Term Success

Governance must be established before a company begins transacting in digital assets. Khan’s framework covers people, process, and technology, with disciplined vigilance at the center.

Teams need a clear understanding of the stakes involved at every level. Processes must define approvals, controls, and accountability from the start.

As Khan noted via BitGo’s official post: “Most businesses are approaching it backwards, starting with tools instead of building the right foundation first.” Digital asset readiness requires compliance, security, finance, and operational controls working together.

Treating it as a simple infrastructure project misses the real challenge entirely. Silos between departments create misalignment and increase exposure.

Business model alignment is equally critical when developing a digital asset strategy. A trading firm has different liquidity needs than a corporate treasury function.

A fintech business requires secure API integration, while a B2B2B provider may need shared-control models. Architecture decisions should always work backward from the customer profile and operating model.

Not every company requires the same level of urgency in adopting digital assets. Businesses operating locally or within narrow geographic footprints may not need immediate action.

However, cross-border activity and settlement friction are pushing global companies in this direction. Leaders must approach this space with clear eyes, sound controls, and architectures that fit their specific business.

Key takeaways:

• Aggressive Bitcoin buying by Strategy helped to offset the recent leveraged long liquidations.
• Rising bond yields and a heavy US government debt burden are driving investors toward scarce assets.
• A potential deal between the US and Iran could quickly restore traders’ risk appetite.

Bitcoin (BTC) faced a rejection following a failed attempt to break above $82,000 on Thursday. A subsequent retest of the $76,000 level on Monday triggered $400 million in liquidations for bullish Bitcoin positions over a four-day period. While traders’ confidence took a hit from the 7% price decline, the prospects for recovering the $80,000 mark remain valid.

Bitcoin reserve accumulation by Strategy (MSTR US). Source: Strategy

US-listed Strategy (MSTR US) completed the acquisition of $2 billion in BTC over the past week alone. Spearheaded by Michael Saylor, the company continues to surprise investors by finding innovative ways to reduce the cost of capital and raise cash through equity issuance, whether via MSTR common stock or STRC preferred equity.

More importantly, Strategy proved the company can also capitalize on a weaker market by repurchasing $1.5 billion of its debt due in 2029. Retiring some of its senior convertible notes reduces potential future dilution for current MSTR holders. This move clears the runway for new share issuance and additional Bitcoin purchases.

S&P 500 index (left) vs. US 10-year Treasury yield (right). Source: TradingView

From a macroeconomic perspective, the odds of a sustainable bullish momentum for Bitcoin improved as traders demanded higher returns to hold government bonds. Yields on the 10-year Treasury jumped to 4.60%, hitting their highest level in 16 months. Investors are gradually realizing the heavy burden on the US Treasury, especially with $2 trillion in long-term debt maturing in 2026.

US dollar weakness and a potential deal with Iran

The US Federal Reserve will likely need to continue accumulating bonds and Treasurys, a move that potentially weakens the US dollar. Typically, investors seek shelter in scarce assets when they lose confidence in the central bank’s ability to navigate a crisis without devaluing the currency. Even if gold acts as the primary beneficiary, the incentive to hold fixed-income assets drops significantly.

Gold/USD (left) vs. Bitcoin/USD (right). Source: TradingView

Gold prices surged in January after the US captured Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro and President Trump’s global trade war escalated. However, gold retraced most of those gains over the next four months, while Bitcoin built strong bullish momentum, jumping to $76,500 from $65,000 in late February. These recent price moves hint at growing confidence in Bitcoin as a reliable hedge instrument.

Related: Analysts debate whether Bitcoin is in ‘sell in May’ bear market setup

Crude Brent oil prices jumped to $113 on Monday as negotiations to fully reopen the Strait of Hormuz backpedaled. Oil prices have surged more than 50% since the US and Israel attacked Iran in late February. President Trump’s administration also decided not to renew a waiver for Russian crude oil, further squeezing supply, according to Yahoo Finance.

A deal between the US and Iran, while not the baseline scenario, could trigger renewed risk appetite and catapult the Bitcoin price back above $80,000. Inflation has been pinned down by high energy prices, limiting the odds of expansionary monetary policies. Even so, the odds favor Bitcoin, as the US stock market is hovering near its all-time high while the cryptocurrency still sits 39% below its peak.

TLDR:

• Citi warns quantum computing could break Bitcoin encryption, with Q-Day set between 2030 and 2032.
• An estimated 6.7 to 7 million BTC in exposed wallets make Bitcoin a prime quantum attack target.
• Ethereum’s flexible governance positions it to adapt more readily against the quantum computing threat.
• Fireblocks CEO calls Bitcoin’s quantum risk a coordination issue and notes post-quantum tools exist.

Quantum computing poses a growing threat to the crypto sector, according to a new Citi research note. The report warns that Bitcoin faces far greater exposure than Ethereum.

That divide, analysts argue, comes down to governance rather than technology alone. Recent breakthroughs have pushed the estimated timeline for practical quantum attacks to as early as 2030.

With millions of Bitcoin already at risk, the industry is watching this closely. Analysts say the window for preparation is narrowing fast.

Bitcoin’s Structural Vulnerability to Quantum Attacks

Bitcoin transactions expose the sender’s public key to the network until they are confirmed. This creates a window where a quantum attacker could theoretically derive a private key.

From there, the attacker could redirect funds before the transaction is finalized. The exposure is brief but real, and it grows more dangerous as quantum computing hardware improves.

Google’s research suggests a 500,000-qubit machine could break Bitcoin’s encryption in minutes. No such machine currently exists, but the pace of progress is accelerating.

Google places its Q-Day estimate at 2032, while some researchers suggest 2030. Either way, the crypto industry has limited time to act.

The dormant wallet problem makes Bitcoin’s exposure more pressing. An estimated 6.7 to 7 million BTC sit in wallets with public keys already exposed. These wallets represent a concentrated and attractive target for any future quantum-capable actor.

Among those wallets, roughly 1 million Bitcoin believed to be mined by Satoshi Nakamoto remain untouched. These coins use early address formats that are particularly vulnerable to quantum attacks. At current prices, they carry an estimated value of around $82 billion.

Governance Gap Separates Bitcoin and Ethereum

Ethereum and other proof-of-stake networks are better positioned to adapt, Citi analysts said. Their more flexible governance allows for faster protocol changes when needed.

Ethereum also has a demonstrated history of regular protocol upgrades. That agility gives it a structural advantage against the quantum computing threat.

Bitcoin’s conservative, consensus-driven model is widely seen as central to its credibility. That same model, however, makes rapid protocol changes slow and contested.

Moving to quantum-resistant cryptography would likely require a hard fork, a notoriously difficult process. Broad network consensus would need to be achieved before any changes take effect.

Fireblocks CEO Michael Shaulov addressed this at the Financial Times Digital Asset Summit, arguing that the threat “is not actually a threat as people make it out to be.”

He described Bitcoin’s quantum challenge as “mostly a coordination issue” for the community rather than a technical one.

Shaulov further noted that “the entire internet industry needs to basically leapfrog and start using post-quantum encryption,” adding that “generally speaking, we have the available algorithm.” His remarks suggest that preparation, not the threat itself, remains the real challenge.

Citi’s analysts pointed to BIP-360 and BIP-361 as proposed Bitcoin upgrades worth monitoring. Ethereum, meanwhile, is not entirely immune to quantum threats either.

A quantum-enabled attacker could theoretically acquire enough private keys to control 33% of staked assets. This could allow disruption of block finality or broader network operations.

Bitwise will devote 10% of its HYPE ETF management fee to buying HYPE on its balance sheet.

Bitwise Asset Management announced that it will devote 10% of the management fee from its Bitwise Hyperliquid ETF (NYSE: BHYP) to holding HYPE on its balance sheet. The firm said the move mirrors Hyperliquid’s own tokenomics, which routes roughly 99% of protocol revenue through its Assistance Fund to repurchase HYPE.

“Hyperliquid’s token is explicitly designed so that rising trading activity on the Hyperliquid platform directly benefits token holders,” said Matt Hougan, Chief Investment Officer of Bitwise. “This has translated into historically strong returns. We think it’s one of the most exciting assets in crypto.”

HYPE ETF structure and the buyback signal

BHYP launched on NYSE on May 15 with a 0.34% sponsor fee, waived for the first month on the fund’s first $500 million in assets. It is the only US-listed Hyperliquid product to stake HYPE through the issuer’s own infrastructure rather than a third party. As crypto.news reported, HYPE rebounded toward $46 following the launch and has recovered roughly 65% since the start of 2026.

The 10% fee commitment adds a second capital channel into HYPE beyond staking. Bitwise stakes the fund’s holdings through Bitwise Onchain Solutions, with rewards flowing back into the fund after a 15% fee. Adding balance sheet purchases from management fees means institutional capital flows into HYPE through two parallel mechanisms.

Competing with BHYP is 21Shares’ THYP product, which launched on Nasdaq earlier in the week and drew approximately $1.2 million in inflows on its first day. Together, the two HYPE ETFs have accumulated more than $5.6 million in total net inflows.

Why the fee model matters for HYPE

Hyperliquid saw $2.9 trillion in trading volume in 2025, up more than 400% year on year, and currently commands roughly 60% of all on-chain derivatives open interest globally. HYPE’s market cap stands above $11 billion, making it the tenth-largest crypto asset by market capitalisation.

As crypto.news documented in its April filing update, Bloomberg ETF analyst Eric Balchunas flagged the addition of the BHYP ticker and fee details as signs the fund was approaching launch.

The fee-to-buyback pledge aligns Bitwise’s incentives directly with Hyperliquid’s community-first model. Every dollar of management fee generates a fraction of HYPE that sits permanently on Bitwise’s balance sheet, creating a demand mechanism that scales with fund AUM alongside ETF inflow growth.

Bitcoin (BTC) lost its hold on the $80,000 level over the weekend, and data suggest that the cryptocurrency needs to trade above the $74,000-$75,000 range, as it has repeatedly served as key support over the last two years. 

Crypto analyst Ardi said the next retest of the $74,000-$75,000 range could become the most important support test of the current bear market.

The analyst pointed to the role that the price range played during the last two years. In 2024, Bitcoin struggled to break above the range during a seven-month-long consolidation. In Q1 2025, the same area held as support before BTC rallied toward its cycle highs at $126,000.

BTC/USD, one-day chart analysis by Ardi. Source: X

Bitcoin is now approaching this level after its 5.78% weekly correction to $77,900. Ardi said the zone carries added weight because several major price pivots formed at $74,000-$75,000 across multiple time frames.

Crypto trader Alex Wacy focused on the $70,000 level. Wacy said holding that area could support a move back toward $85,000-$90,000. Losing it could open the door to a larger decline toward the $50,000-$60,000 range.

Related: BTC price ‘bull trap’ at $76.5K? Five things to know in Bitcoin this week

Bitcoin market signal weakens again

Bitcoin researcher Axel Adler Jr. said the Bitcoin bull-bear structure index turned bearish again after BTC failed to stay above $82,000 earlier this month.

It tracks six indicators linked to exchange-traded fund (ETF) demand, trader activity, exchange flows, and short-term price momentum. A positive reading indicates buyers are in control, while a negative reading points to growing seller pressure.

Bitcoin bull-bear structure index. Source: CryptoQuant

The bullish signal lasted less than three trading days. On May 6, the index briefly turned positive as Bitcoin climbed near $82,000. By May 17, the reading had dropped to -23.49, indicating that sellers quickly regained control.

Meanwhile, CryptoQuant data showed more Bitcoin moving onto exchanges from investors who bought BTC six to 12 months ago. The average buying price was around $110,851, meaning many are now sitting on large unrealized losses after the latest drop.

The share of older coins moving to exchanges also surged to 10.54%, far above its usual level below 1%, with market analyst Easy On Chain stating, 

“Historically, this reflects investors locking in major losses and exiting the market, creating severe spot-market selling pressure.”

Related: Saylor’s Strategy scoops $2B Bitcoin, holdings reach 843,738 BTC

Citi warned Monday that Bitcoin faces an outsized quantum computing threat, with up to 6.9 million BTC already vulnerable.

Citi analyst Alex Saunders warned in a May 18 digital asset research note that accelerating quantum computing advances are shortening the timeline for risks to Bitcoin and broader internet infrastructure.

The bank said Bitcoin is particularly exposed because its conservative governance structure makes protocol upgrades slow and difficult to coordinate.

The Citi Institute has been tracking quantum risk to financial systems throughout 2026, estimating that a quantum-enabled attack on a major US bank could put $2 to $3.3 trillion of GDP at risk, as reported by The Quantum Insider in February.

“While large-scale quantum attacks remain a medium-term concern, the pace of progress has shortened the horizon and warrants closer attention from investors,” Saunders wrote in the note.

Bitcoin’s governance is its quantum weakness

Citi identified vulnerabilities tied to public keys already exposed on-chain. Older Bitcoin addresses using pay-to-public-key outputs left public keys permanently visible, including wallets believed to belong to Bitcoin’s pseudonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto. The bank estimates 6.5 to 6.9 million BTC hold already-exposed keys, worth roughly $450 billion at current prices.

The report flagged a “harvest now, decrypt later” risk, where attackers collect encrypted data today for future quantum-enabled decryption. Proof-of-stake networks such as Ethereum may be better positioned to respond because they upgrade protocols more frequently, Citi said.

However, the bank warned they present a larger attack surface. The crypto.news Bitcoin price page shows Bitcoin currently trading at around $76,900.

How far away is the actual threat?

The bank said it remains constructive on crypto’s long-term ability to adapt through post-quantum cryptography. Proposed Bitcoin upgrades including BIP-360 and BIP-361 are in development but require broad consensus among miners and node operators, a process that historically takes years.

Broader Bitcoin ecosystem context matters here: as crypto.news reported in its Q1 2026 mining sector coverage, the Bitcoin network is navigating simultaneously rising energy costs, the AI pivot among miners, and now growing institutional scrutiny of its long-term cryptographic resilience.

JPMorgan has separately noted that miners pivoting to AI face high capital needs and potential shareholder dilution, underlining that the broader Bitcoin infrastructure is undergoing structural stress from multiple directions at once.