TLDR:

• • Binance’s 51 TradFi perp pairs generated $60.3B of the exchange’s $585.3B total weekly perp volume.
  • Energy leads TradFi perp penetration in May, with Brent crude alone reaching 10.4% of global equivalent volume.
  • Equity perps show rapid adoption — CBRS hit 1.7% market share within four days of its Nasdaq listing
  • TradFi perp composition shifted from 96% metals in February to a diversified mix of energy, equities, and metals.

Binance’s traditional finance (TradFi) perpetual futures volume has grown from virtually nothing six months ago to over $60 billion weekly.

According to Binance Research data published recently, TradFi perps now account for 10.3% of the exchange’s total perpetual futures market.

The shift marks a notable development in how global traders are accessing traditional asset exposure through crypto infrastructure.

From Metals-Dominated to a Diversified TradFi Market

In February, precious metals made up roughly 96% of Binance’s TradFi perp volume. By May, that share had dropped to around 50%, with energy contracts accounting for 30% and equities at 21%.

The change came as the exchange expanded its product lineup across asset classes. Binance Research noted that CBRS, a Nvidia challenger listed on Nasdaq, launched on May 18 and quickly entered the mix.

As a result, the TradFi perp book now spans a broader range of global market exposure. Energy leads in penetration, with Brent crude alone reaching 10.4% of equivalent global spot and futures volume in May.

Silver peaked at 11.5% of global volume in March, while crypto-linked equities like Circle (CRCL) hit 9.2% of global volume in April. The average market share across all 51 TradFi pairs currently stands at 1.3%.

That average is still modest, but the trajectory across asset classes is upward. Traders are clearly using Binance’s TradFi perps as an alternative access point to global markets.

The diversification away from metals suggests growing confidence in the product structure across energy and equity instruments. It also points to an expanding user base looking beyond crypto-native products.

The pace of adoption across equities and ETFs has been uneven but shows clear pockets of traction. EWY, the South Korea ETF, saw daily volume spike to roughly 4% of global equivalent volume on two separate occasions. SNDK peaked at 2.0% with $500 million in daily volume, around 20 times its April average.

Early-Stage Equity Perps Show Pockets of Traction

MU, the memory chip maker, is still below 1% market share but is now generating $391 million per day, roughly 35 times its April average. CBRS reached 1.7% market share within just four days of its Nasdaq listing.

These figures come directly from Binance Research’s thread published on May 24. The speed of adoption for new equity listings is notably faster than what was seen with metals in early 2026.

This acceleration matters because it shows that Binance’s TradFi perp infrastructure is now responsive to new listings. When a new equity goes live, traders are finding the product and taking positions quickly.

That kind of latency compression between listing and adoption was not present in February. It reflects growing familiarity with the product among traders across global time zones.

Binance Research stated in its thread that TradFi perps have “crossed from experimental category to a structural source of global TradFi liquidity.” That transition is supported by the data across metals, energy, and equities.

The week ending May 24 saw 51 TradFi pairs generate $60.3 billion out of Binance’s total $585.3 billion in perp volume. That ratio, just over one in ten dollars, is likely to grow as more instruments are listed and traders build familiarity with the format.

TLDR:

• OpenAI and Anthropic make up over half of Big Tech’s $2 trillion future cloud backlog combined.
• Microsoft’s $13B OpenAI investment returned as cloud credits, then recorded as fresh revenue by Microsoft itself.
• Alphabet’s Q1 2026 record profit included $28.7B in unrealized paper gains tied to its Anthropic stake.
• Oracle has 54% of its entire $553 billion pipeline dependent on a single AI startup, OpenAI.

The AI revenue loop is drawing fresh scrutiny as analysts examine how major tech companies account for investments in AI startups.

Corporate filings reveal that OpenAI and Anthropic together account for more than half of the $2 trillion cloud backlog held by Microsoft, Oracle, Google, and Amazon.

Critics argue this structure relies on circular financial flows rather than organic market demand.

How the Round-Trip Revenue Model Works

A pattern has emerged across several major investment deals in the AI sector. A tech giant provides billions to an AI startup, often in the form of cloud credits rather than direct cash. The startup then uses those credits to rent computing infrastructure from the same company that funded them.

BullTheoryio described the arrangement plainly: “A tech giant gives billions of dollars to an AI startup as an ‘investment’. But hidden in the contract is a strict rule forcing the startup to hand that exact same money straight back to the tech giant to rent their computer servers.”

Microsoft’s $13 billion investment in OpenAI followed this structure. The funds came as cloud credits, which OpenAI spent on Microsoft’s servers. Microsoft then recorded that usage as cloud revenue from a paying customer.

OpenAI’s cloud spending has grown to over $60 billion annually, more than double its reported revenue of $25 billion. The gap is covered by continued recycled investment flows rather than external customer income.

Paper Profits and Real Cash Gaps Tell Two Different Stories

Beyond cloud revenue, tech companies are recording large paper gains tied to startup valuations. Each new funding round at a higher valuation triggers a mark-up on the investor’s books, which gets counted as profit.

In Q1 2026, Alphabet posted $62.6 billion in profit. However, $28.7 billion of that figure came from a paper markup on its Anthropic stake.

Amazon reported $30.3 billion in profit the same quarter, with $16.8 billion attributed to an unrealized Anthropic valuation gain.

Meanwhile, Amazon’s free cash flow fell 95% to just $1.2 billion, as the company spent $44.2 billion building physical data centers. The contrast between reported profits and actual cash positions is stark.

The concentration risk is also notable. Microsoft has 49% of its $627 billion future backlog tied to OpenAI. Oracle has 54% of its $553 billion pipeline linked to the same company.

Analysts have drawn comparisons to the 2001 dot-com collapse, when Global Crossing and Qwest Communications swapped fiber-optic capacity to manufacture fake sales.

Qwest later erased $1.4 billion in revenue, and Global Crossing filed for bankruptcy. Unlike those cases, the current AI accounting structures remain fully legal under existing rules.

Bitcoin’s price action has traders recalibrating expectations after a key price zone came into focus this week. The market briefly violated a critical cushion around $75,000 to $76,000, prompting veteran analysts to reassess whether the sell-off marks the start of a larger correction or a temporary dip within a broader range.

Crypto market strategist Michaël van de Poppe flagged the move as meaningful, noting that corrections occurring on Fridays often flip back to bullish just as quickly. He also highlighted the existence of multiple CME Bitcoin futures gaps above current spot levels, with the widest gap sitting above $79,000, suggesting potential magnet points for price as the market seeks to fill those inefficiencies.

“If Bitcoin doesn’t grind back upwards to $76,600 or more, then there’s clearly no argument to assume that we are going to get into new highs and just remain within this range.”

The observation comes as the macro backdrop remains unsettled, with regulatory and policy uncertainty clouding the near-term trajectory. The Federal Reserve’s leadership and how future rate decisions unfold are shaping risk sentiment, even as Bitcoin’s bear market persists through a seventh month of drift.

The broader context includes a mix of trader sentiment and on-chain dynamics that are offering a counterpoint to the price action. A live market snapshot shows ongoing debate among market participants about whether the recent rally that extended roughly 90 days off the February low is sustainable or merely a consolidation before renewed downside pressure.

One notable data point gaining attention is the on-chain composition of Bitcoin holders. Recent analysis indicates that long-term holders now control roughly 71% of the circulating supply, a statistic that market observers say reduces the likelihood of a sharp drop below key support levels like $60,000. This crowd of investors has historically provided a stabilizing floor, even as spot price oscillates in the high-$60,000s to mid-$70,000s range.

On the technical side, Bitcoin remains below major moving-average benchmarks that many traders watch for trend changes. Data from TradingView shows BTC trading well under the 365-day and 200-day exponential moving averages, with a close below the 50-day EMA recorded on Friday. Taken together, price action still sits at the crossroads of a potential breakout versus further consolidation.

Across market commentary, the mood is nuanced. Some analysts point to a possible bull-market restart given the persistence of a multi-week uptrend since the February low, while others caution that the market could enter months of range-bound trading if the price fails to reclaim critical levels.

In a separate view of market odds, the Polymarket platform currently assigns a roughly 51% probability to Bitcoin reaching $55,000 in 2026, with around a 31% chance of a drop to $45,000. While not a price forecast, the odds reflect divergent expectations among participants about how the macro cycle and on-chain dynamics will unfold over the coming years.

From an on-chain perspective, the narrative around long-term holders remains a focal point. The sector experience data suggest that a substantial majority of the supply is controlled by investors who have held positions through prior cycles, reinforcing a belief among supporters that a sustained break below major levels would require a material shift in fundamentals or external catalysts.

Key takeaways

• Bitcoin breached the nearby support zone around $75,000–$76,000, raising the stakes for a quick reclaim to maintain upside prospects.
• CME Bitcoin futures gaps linger above the spot market, with the largest gap around $79,000, potentially attracting price back to higher levels if those gaps begin to fill.
• On-chain data shows about 71% of circulating Bitcoin is held by long-term holders, implying a floor beneath $60,000 is less likely to give way easily.
• Technicals show BTC trading below the 365- and 200-day EMAs and closed under the 50-day EMA on the latest session, underscoring a cautious near-term stance.
• Traders’ mood remains mixed, with odds markets pointing to a range of outcomes and macro policy uncertainties weighing on momentum.

Market context and what’s next for BTC

The price action sits amid a backdrop of macro policy debate. The appointment of a new Federal Reserve chair, with potential shifts in interest-rate policy, injects an additional layer of uncertainty over the immediate path for risk assets, including Bitcoin. While some market observers expect rate adjustments to follow a cautious trajectory, others warn that policy missteps could trigger sharper risk-off moves across crypto and broader markets.

Against this backdrop, traders are watching for a definitive short-term signal. A reclaim of around $76,600 would be a meaningful bullish pivot, potentially opening the door to renewed tests of resistance near the $80,000 zone and beyond. Conversely, failure to regain that level could reinforce a period of consolidation, with price tethered to the upper bounds of the existing range.

In the near term, attention is also focused on the relationship between price and on-chain behavior. If long-term holders continue to accumulate or maintain a sizable share of the supply, the market could be more resilient to downside shocks, even if price action remains temperate. Conversely, any acceleration of selling from shorter-term traders or a shift in macro momentum could tilt the balance toward a deeper retrace.

Market watchers will also be mindful of the broader sentiment signals that have driven Bitcoin’s recent narrative, including the ongoing discussion around how Friday price action may precede a rebound or further weakness, and how the interaction between fundamental and technical indicators will shape the next leg higher or lower.

Looking ahead, the most salient watchpoints are the price must-hold levels and the reaction to any renewed momentum. If BTC can reestablish footing above the $76,600 threshold and begin filling the nearby CME gaps, the probability of testing higher highs could rise. If not, the market may gravitate toward a period of extended range-bound activity while macro cues remain unsettled and investors reassess risk exposure.

Readers should keep an eye on evolving policy signals, on-chain composition shifts, and key technical thresholds in the coming sessions, as these elements will collectively determine whether the current phase is a pause before another leg up or the onset of a more protracted consolidation.

TLDR:

• Bitcoin currently trades at 1.26x its 4YMA, placing it at the 33rd percentile of all historical valuations.
• Strategy’s 843,738 BTC stack is projected to reach $388B by 2030 under the median historical multiple of 1.87x.
• Even the floor case, with BTC at its 4YMA and no premium, values Strategy’s holdings at $207 billion.
• Strategy’s enterprise value sits at $77.7B today, while its median projected BTC stack is five times larger.

Strategy MSTR Bitcoin holdings are drawing renewed attention from market analysts as Bitcoin trades at historically low valuations relative to its four-year moving average (4YMA).

With 843,738 BTC on its balance sheet, Strategy sits at the center of a price projection model that points to a median stack value of $388 billion by 2030.

The model relies entirely on Bitcoin’s own historical price behavior, requiring no extraordinary market conditions to reach that figure.

Bitcoin’s Historical Valuation Sets the Foundation

Bitcoin’s four-year moving average has never recorded a year-over-year negative reading across 3,964 measurable days.

Over that same period, Bitcoin’s price has traded above its 4YMA 93.3% of the time, with a median multiple of 1.87x.

Today, Bitcoin trades at 1.26x its 4YMA, placing it at the 33rd percentile of all historical valuations. That means, relative to its own smoothed average, Bitcoin is currently cheaper than it has been roughly two-thirds of the time.

Analyst Adam Livingston outlined the model on X, noting the math does not require Bitcoin to perform heroically. The projection instead applies a steadily decelerating growth rate to the 4YMA through 2030.

Starting from current levels, the assumed year-over-year CAGR drops by five percentage points annually, moving from 44.5% in 2026 down to 24.5% in 2030. Even under this conservative setup, the 4YMA reaches $245,542 by the end of 2030.

Applying the median historical multiple of 1.87x to that figure produces a projected BTC price of $459,578. This is not a bull-case scenario.

It reflects what Bitcoin has done statistically for most of its measurable history relative to its own trend line. The mean historical multiple of 2.32x would push the projected price higher still, but the median case alone produces a stack value of $388 billion for Strategy.

The floor case, which places BTC exactly at its 4YMA with no premium, still values Strategy’s holdings at $207 billion. That is more than three times the company’s current Bitcoin stack value of approximately $64 billion.

Strategy’s Market Position Relative to Its Bitcoin Stack

Strategy’s total enterprise value, covering all preferred shares, debt, and its software business, currently stands at $77.7 billion. Under the median projection, the Bitcoin stack alone would be worth five times that figure.

That gap between current enterprise value and forward Bitcoin stack value is what Livingston describes as the most asymmetric public-market trade available to retail investors today.

The model assumes Strategy purchases zero additional Bitcoin beyond its current 843,738 BTC. In reality, the company has continued acquiring Bitcoin consistently.

Strategy announced a new $21 billion at-the-market common stock offering earlier in 2025 and raised its BTC Yield target for the year to 25%.

Any further accumulation would only widen the gap between current market capitalization and projected stack value.

The median case projects a 6.1x increase from today’s stack value and a 6.9x return relative to Strategy’s current market capitalization.

Those figures rest entirely on Bitcoin continuing to behave as it has historically relative to its four-year moving average, with no assumptions about macro conditions, institutional adoption, or new capital inflows.

Kevin Warsh was sworn in as the chair of the United States Federal Reserve on Friday, launching a tenure that market participants are watching for signs of a policy tilt that could redefine the rate path for 2026. While a number of observers expect a traditional hawkish stance to persist, some prominent voices in the crypto and macro communities argue Warsh could pivot toward cuts as inflation cools and productivity advances via AI rhetoric take center stage.

Leading that line of thinking, Lawrence Lepard, a veteran Bitcoin investor and author, contends that Warsh’s leadership will eventually translate into rate reductions. In a post on X, Lepard noted that comments from other senior U.S. policymakers—specifically Kevin Hassett, former director of the White House National Economic Council, and Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent—support a shift toward lower rates in 2026. Lepard added that two data points highlighted in The Wall Street Journal are consistent with a narrative in which inflation proves more durable than initially assumed, yet ultimately transitory enough to justify rate cuts as productivity improves.

At Warsh’s swearing-in ceremony, President Donald Trump framed the debt challenge through a growth-centric lens, signaling an expansion of the monetary supply and a potentially looser regime on rates. His remarks fed a broader debate about whether the new Fed chair will resist executive-branch pressure to loosen policy, a topic that has also drawn scrutiny from lawmakers and market watchers.

Traders and analysts remain divided on Warsh’s likely impact on the trajectory of interest rates. While some anticipate a path that maintains or even tightens policy in the near term, others point to a longer horizon in which inflation cools more quickly than markets expect, inviting rate relief. The tension is part of a broader debate about how much independence the central bank can preserve as political and fiscal considerations interact with monetary policy.

For crypto markets, the policy question matters because a shift toward rate cuts could boost risk-on assets, including Bitcoin and a broader array of tokens. The degree to which Warsh’s tenure will align with or diverge from the prior Fed regime remains a live question for traders who have grown used to a complex, data-driven approach to inflation and growth signals.

Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph noted the nuance in expectations surrounding Warsh’s swearing-in and the challenges of predicting the policy path under a new chair. The discussion has repeatedly underscored that the path of rates in 2026 will depend heavily on evolving inflation data, labor market dynamics, and the administration’s broader fiscal stance.

Key takeaways

• Markets remain split on the Fed’s 2026 trajectory: a subset expect rate cuts, while others anticipate higher-for-longer policy depending on inflation and growth signals.
• The CME FedWatch tool estimated that roughly 68% of traders priced in a 25-basis-point or larger rate move by December 2026, underscoring persistent uncertainty in the policy outlook.
• Warsh’s appointment has intensified questions about Fed independence versus executive influence, a dynamic that lawmakers have highlighted during confirmation debates.
• Crypto markets are watching policy signals closely, as a lower-rate regime could provide a marginal tailwind for risk assets, though the magnitude of any impact remains uncertain.

Policy direction under a new Fed chair: what changes—and what stays the same

The central question surrounding Warsh’s tenure is whether the new chair will push for a more expansionary stance in the face of fiscal stimulus and a shifting inflation narrative. Lepard’s interpretation, rooted in public signals from other senior policymakers, suggests room for a future pivot toward easier policy, even as near-term rate hikes remain a plausible response to inflation pressures. The contrast between a long-run objective of price stability and the short-run demands of political leadership creates a delicate balance for the Fed, and one that markets will parse as more data arrive.

Lawmakers have not been silent on the issue. In April, U.S. lawmakers scrutinized Warsh’s commitment to preserving Fed independence, raising concerns about the potential for political interference to compromise the central bank’s mandate. Senator Elizabeth Warren highlighted the possibility of conflicts of interest that could arise if the administration’s policies intersect with business interests in the crypto space. This tension matters because it shapes perceptions of credibility and the speed with which policy signals translate into market moves.

Against this backdrop, investors should monitor how Warsh weighs inflation progress against growth momentum. If inflation cools and growth remains solid, the case for gradual normalization or even a measured easing could gain traction. Conversely, any persistent price pressures could push the Fed toward a more restrictive path. The debate hinges on a delicate mix of data points, expectations, and political signals that will evolve over the coming quarters.

Crypto markets and the policy environment: a potential ripple effect

Bitcoin and other digital assets have historically shown sensitivity to U.S. monetary policy expectations. A potential shift toward rate cuts could lift risk-on appetite, supporting higher valuations for crypto assets in the medium term. However, the fundamental drivers for crypto—decentralization, innovation, and use cases—remain distinct from traditional macro cycles. Traders will evaluate policy signals in conjunction with crypto-specific developments, such as liquidity conditions, on-chain activity, and regulatory clarity.

The broader macro narrative remains a mosaic of competing forces: inflation dynamics, productivity improvements tied to technology adoption, fiscal policy signals, and geopolitical considerations. The Fed’s path under Warsh will interact with these forces, influencing not only asset prices but the funding environment for blockchain projects, venture funding, and the pace of institutional participation in crypto markets.

As Warsh settles into the chair, market participants should watch a few key indicators: the inflation trajectory relative to expectations, the pace of wage growth and job openings, and the evolving view of 2026 rate moves reflected in futures markets. Additionally, how the administration and Congress frame growth and debt management will influence market sentiment and the degree to which policy signals translate into real-world macro effects.

The policy narrative also touches on the broader question of central-bank independence in a highly politicized environment. While the Fed’s mandate remains price stability and economic resilience, the perception of independence—and how it is tested by political and fiscal pressures—will continue to shape investor confidence in the central bank’s ability to navigate a complex economic landscape.

Alongside these considerations, investors should note the ongoing discourse about inflation as a “transitory” phenomenon, balanced against longer-term factors such as productivity and demographic trends. The balance of these forces will inform the ultimate stance Warsh adopts and how decisively the Fed communicates its future path to markets.

In the meantime, observers can look to official communications, minutes from meetings, and the evolving commentary from policymakers to gauge where rate expectations are headed. The next wave of data releases—starting with inflation reports, employment figures, and productivity metrics—will help clarify whether the 2026 trajectory tilts toward tighter policy, easier policy, or a more data-dependent stance that keeps traders in a state of cautious anticipation.

For readers tracking the crypto implications, the key takeaway is that any shift in the Fed’s stance—whether toward cuts or continued restraint—will likely influence risk tolerance in the near term. This environment could shape fundraising, liquidity, and price dynamics across digital assets as traders calibrate their positions to evolving macro signals. As always, the implicit takeaway is to balance macro expectations with the specific drivers of crypto adoption and innovation that continue to shape the sector’s long-run trajectory.

Specific references to Warsh’s ceremony and related debate can be found in contemporary coverage from Cointelegraph, including discussions on the odds of rate cuts and the political dynamics surrounding the appointment. For context on the broader public discourse, see the coverage of Warsh’s swearing-in and related policy debates as well as statements from lawmakers concerned with independence and potential conflicts of interest.

TLDR:

• U.S. banks are carrying $306 billion in unrealized losses tied to long-term bonds bought during low-rate years.
• Rising interest rates caused bond prices to collapse, leaving bank balance sheets significantly weaker than reported.
• Depositors are shifting cash to money markets and Treasuries, draining traditional banks of a key funding source.
• Commercial real estate stress is compounding bond losses, putting additional strain on already pressured bank portfolios.

U.S. banks are currently sitting on $306 billion in unrealized losses, raising fresh concerns about the stability of the country’s financial system.

The losses stem from a sharp rise in interest rates, which eroded the value of long-term bonds purchased during the near-zero rate era.

While the broader market appears calm, analysts and observers are watching balance sheet pressures build quietly across the banking sector.

Bond Portfolios Take the Hit as Rates Climb

During the low-rate years, banks moved heavily into long-term bonds to generate returns. However, when the Federal Reserve began raising rates aggressively, bond prices dropped in response. This left banks holding assets worth far less than their original purchase price.

Crypto analyst Lucky, posting on X, pointed out the core issue. He wrote that banks “loaded up on long-term bonds during the near-zero interest rate era,” and when rates surged, “bond prices collapsed” and “balance sheets got hit.” The pattern mirrors stress seen during the Silicon Valley Bank collapse in 2023.

Beyond bond losses, depositors have also been pulling funds toward higher-yielding alternatives. Money market funds and short-term Treasuries are drawing cash away from traditional bank accounts. This deposit migration adds another layer of pressure to already strained balance sheets.

Commercial Real Estate Adds to an Already Fragile Picture

Commercial real estate is emerging as a second fault line for U.S. banks. Property values in the sector have declined sharply since the pandemic, and loan delinquencies are ticking upward. Banks with heavy exposure to office and retail properties are now absorbing losses on multiple fronts.

Lucky also flagged that “commercial real estate stress is adding more pressure to bank balance sheets,” alongside the bond losses.

Together, these two forces are compressing bank margins and limiting their ability to absorb further shocks. The combination makes the overall system more vulnerable than headline figures suggest.

Confidence, however, remains the central variable. Modern banking depends on depositors and investors trusting that institutions remain solvent. As Lucky noted, “the entire system now relies heavily on confidence staying intact.”

That confidence, once shaken, can shift conditions rapidly. Consumer debt is also rising while household savings continue to shrink, narrowing the buffer that has historically cushioned financial stress.

The numbers, taken together, paint a more cautious picture than official narratives have conveyed.