Crypto World
Why 30% of Zcash supply is now in the shielded pool
Roughly 5 million ZEC out of 16.7 million circulating now sits in shielded addresses, up from 8 percent in early 2024.
Summary
- Zcash shielded supply has climbed to 30% from 8% in early 2024.
- Orchard now holds 4.2 million ZEC, absorbing most recent shielded growth.
- Shielded transaction adoption hit 59.3% as public ZEC activity stayed flat.
- ETF and institutional signals are adding pressure to Zcash’s privacy thesis.
The Orchard pool alone holds 4.2 million ZEC (25.4 percent of supply), having absorbed nearly all the recent growth. Public ZEC transaction counts have stayed flat at around 8,500 per day, while shielded transaction adoption hit an all-time high of 59.3 percent in February 2026. The market keeps reading this as a price story.
The honest read is the shielded supply metric is the most important signal in privacy crypto right now, and it correlates with genuine adoption in ways previous Zcash rallies did not. This is what the data actually shows, why the metric matters, and what it tells us about the post-CLARITY Act regulatory environment for privacy assets.
What “shielded supply” actually measures
The shielded supply of a privacy-focused blockchain is a deceptively simple metric that carries more analytical weight than most coverage acknowledges. To use it properly, you have to understand what it is, how it is measured, and why it differs from the surface-level signals most observers track.
Zcash is what cryptographers call a “privacy-optional” blockchain. The network supports two categories of addresses: transparent addresses, which behave like Bitcoin addresses and expose transaction details to public observation, and shielded addresses, which use zero-knowledge proofs (zk-SNARKs) to hide the sender, receiver, and amount of every transaction. A ZEC holder can choose which type of address to use, and can move funds between the two categories.
Shielded supply refers to the total amount of ZEC held in shielded addresses at any given moment. The metric is measured directly on chain. Anyone can verify it by running a Zcash node and counting the balances in shielded versus transparent addresses. The number cannot be faked because the cryptographic system requires actual proofs of valid balance transitions to enter or exit a shielded pool.
The reason this matters is moving ZEC into a shielded address requires direct interaction with the Zcash blockchain. You have to construct a valid shielded transaction, generate the zero-knowledge proof, broadcast it to the network, and wait for confirmation. This is not something exchanges do automatically. It requires the holder to make an active choice to move their funds into the private layer.
This is what makes shielded supply such a useful adoption signal. Speculators who buy ZEC on Coinbase or Binance and leave it on the exchange contribute nothing to shielded supply. The exchange holds the funds in transparent addresses. The price can rally substantially without shielded supply moving at all. When shielded supply does grow, it reflects actual holders making deliberate choices to use the network’s privacy features rather than just speculating on the token price.
The growth from 8 percent of supply in early 2024 to roughly 30 percent in May 2026 represents a structural shift in how Zcash is actually being used. Five million ZEC has been actively moved into shielded addresses by holders making individual decisions to prioritize privacy. The cumulative weight of those decisions is what the metric captures.
The three pools and why Orchard dominates
Zcash has not always had a single shielded pool. The network has launched three generations of privacy infrastructure, each more efficient and capable than the previous one. Understanding which pool the new supply is going into tells you more about what is actually happening.
Sprout launched in October 2016 as the original shielded pool. It used the BCTV14 zk-SNARK construction and required massive computational resources to generate proofs. Mobile transactions were impossible. The pool worked as a proof of concept but had severe usability limitations. As of late 2025, Sprout holds only 25,591 ZEC, or roughly 0.2 percent of supply. This is the residual of a pool most users have moved away from.
Sapling launched in October 2018 as the second-generation shielded pool. It introduced major performance improvements, reducing proof generation from tens of seconds to roughly one second and cutting memory requirements from gigabytes to megabytes. Sapling made shielded transactions practical on mobile devices and consumer hardware for the first time. As of late 2025, Sapling holds 635,812 ZEC, or roughly 3.9 percent of supply. This is meaningful but no longer where the growth is happening.
Orchard launched in May 2022 as part of Network Upgrade 5 (NU5). This is the pool that has absorbed nearly all the recent growth. Orchard uses the Halo 2 proving system, which eliminates the need for a trusted setup (a major historical concern for early zk-SNARK constructions). It supports Unified Addresses, which automatically route incoming funds to the most private available pool. It enables recursive proofs to improve scalability. As of late 2025, Orchard holds 4.2 million ZEC, or 25.4 percent of supply.
The numbers tell a clear story. The recent growth in shielded supply is overwhelmingly going into Orchard, not into the older pools. This is what you would expect if real users were responding to better infrastructure: they migrate to the newest pool because it offers the best privacy guarantees with the lowest friction. Speculative behavior would not produce this pattern. Speculators would not care which pool their ZEC sits in, because they are not using the privacy features. The fact growth is concentrated in Orchard specifically suggests users are making choices based on the actual quality of the privacy infrastructure.
Why the metric correlates with adoption, not speculation
The most important analytical observation about the current shielded supply growth is it diverges sharply from the pattern of previous Zcash rallies.
Past ZEC price rallies have typically shown the same pattern: price goes up first, shielded supply growth lags or stays flat, and the rally eventually fades without producing structural change in network usage. This pattern is consistent with speculative trading, where buyers acquire ZEC for price exposure and leave it on exchanges or in transparent addresses. The privacy features are not being used. The token is being treated as a financial asset rather than as privacy infrastructure.
The current 2025-2026 rally shows a different pattern. Shielded supply has grown alongside the price move, and in some cases preceded it. The metric was at 8 percent in early 2024, climbed to 18 percent by October 2025, hit 23 percent by November 2025, and crossed 30 percent by May 2026. This growth happened across both the rally and the consolidation periods. It is not a function of price action. It is happening because holders are actively choosing to use the privacy features.
Josh Swihart, CEO of Electric Coin Company (the firm behind Zcash development), framed the signal directly in late 2025: “Watch the Zcash shielded pool relative to ZEC price. Those who shield their ZEC don’t sell.” The implication is shielded ZEC is structurally different from transparent ZEC in terms of holder behavior. Once someone has gone to the trouble of moving their ZEC into a shielded address, they typically hold it for longer periods rather than trading it actively. The shielded pool functions, in effect, as a long-term holding mechanism that reduces effective circulating supply.
Victor, a developer in the Zcash ecosystem, captured the same pattern in plainer terms: “Normal crypto behavior: pump to exchange to dump. Zcash behavior: pump to shield to zodl. This isn’t speculation. It’s adoption of privacy tech.”
The “zodl” reference is to Zodl, a Zcash wallet that defaults to shielded transactions. This is the second piece of why the current adoption pattern is structurally different. Wallets like Zodl have made shielded transactions the default user experience rather than an advanced option users have to actively enable. Combined with Unified Addresses (UAs), which automatically route funds to the most private available pool, the user-facing friction of using shielded transactions has dropped substantially.
The result is shielded transaction adoption (a separate but related metric tracking the percentage of all Zcash transactions that use shielded addresses) hit an all-time high of 59.3 percent in February 2026. More than half of all Zcash transactions are now using the privacy features. This is not speculative behavior. It is real users running real transactions through the shielded pool.
The combination of these signals points to genuine adoption rather than pure speculation. The price action is one signal. The shielded supply is a more important one. The shielded transaction percentage is the most important of all, because it shows the privacy features are being actively used rather than just held.
What is driving the structural shift
Three factors explain why shielded supply has grown from 8 percent to 30 percent over the past 18 to 24 months, and understanding them helps separate this growth from previous cycles.
The first is wallet user experience. Zcash historically had a difficult shielded transaction experience. Users had to manually configure their wallets, accept longer transaction times, and accept not all infrastructure (exchanges, payment processors, blockchain explorers) supported shielded addresses. Many users defaulted to transparent transactions simply because shielded transactions were operationally inconvenient.
This has changed substantially. Zodl and other modern Zcash wallets now default to shielded transactions. Unified Addresses (UAs), introduced with Orchard in May 2022, let users receive funds from any address type into a single Unified Address that automatically routes to the most private available pool. This removes most of the user-facing friction. A user holding ZEC in a modern wallet is, by default, using the privacy features rather than having to consciously opt in to them.
The second factor is regulatory environment shifts. The SEC completed a long review of Zcash in January 2026 with no enforcement action, removing a major regulatory overhang that had hung over the asset for years. Robinhood added ZEC to its platform during the same period, expanding retail access. Grayscale filed for a spot Zcash ETF, which if approved would be the first privacy coin ETF in the United States.
These regulatory developments do two things. They reduce the legal risk of holding ZEC, which encourages more long-term holding behavior (which often translates into shielded supply). And they signal privacy is becoming a regulated rather than prohibited category, which gives institutional and sophisticated retail holders more confidence to use the privacy features rather than avoiding them.
The third factor is the broader cultural shift around financial surveillance. Multicoin Capital’s Tushar Jain framed the institutional thesis directly: Bitcoin is censorship-resistant but transparent, which means tax authorities armed with blockchain explorers can see what holders own and where they spend it. Zcash’s shielded pool hides what cannot be seen. The framing has resonated with a category of holders who are not necessarily doing anything illegal but who do not want their financial activity exposed to potential surveillance, future regulatory changes, or hostile state actors.
The combination of better user experience, friendlier regulatory environment, and increased awareness of financial privacy as a category produces the structural growth in shielded supply. None of the three factors alone would produce a sustained shift. Together, they produce the pattern we are seeing.
The supply pressure dynamic that nobody discusses
A consequence of the shielded supply growth that does not get much attention is what it does to ZEC’s effective circulating supply.
ZEC has a fixed maximum supply of 21 million coins, following the same monetary structure as Bitcoin. Approximately 16.7 million ZEC is currently in circulation, with the rest scheduled to be released through future mining rewards (Zcash uses Proof of Work, though a planned upgrade to Proof of Stake through “Crosslink” is in development).
Of the 16.7 million circulating, roughly 5 million now sits in shielded addresses. ZEC in shielded addresses is, in practice, less liquid than ZEC in transparent addresses. The holder has paid the operational cost of moving funds into the shielded pool, which suggests longer-term holding intent. Exchanges generally do not support direct deposits to shielded addresses (Coinbase, for example, supports receiving from shielded addresses but does not support sending to them), which adds friction for any holder who wants to move funds out of shielded storage for trading.
The practical effect is the effective liquid circulating supply is closer to 11.7 million ZEC, not the 16.7 million on the headline numbers. As shielded supply grows, the effective liquid supply shrinks. This is structurally similar to how Bitcoin’s “long-term holder” supply (BTC that has not moved in over a year) functions as a deflationary pressure that reduces effective tradable float.
Under standard supply and demand mechanics, shrinking effective supply at constant demand produces upward price pressure. The 800 percent run in 2025 and the additional 30 to 70 percent weekly moves in May 2026 are consistent with this dynamic. The shielded supply growth is not just an adoption signal. It is a structural reduction in tradable ZEC that contributes mechanically to price appreciation when demand rises.
This is the technical reason why analysts who track the shielded supply metric have been more bullish on ZEC than analysts who focus only on price action. The supply absorption story has been visible in the on-chain data for over a year. The price has only recently caught up to what the supply dynamics were predicting.
What this means for ZEC’s investment thesis
The shielded supply analysis suggests a different investment thesis for ZEC than the “privacy coin speculation” framing most coverage applies.
Under the speculation framing, ZEC is one of several privacy coins (alongside Monero, Dash, and others) that experiences periodic rallies when crypto traders rotate into the privacy category. The rallies are typically driven by short-term narratives (a specific regulatory event, a major exchange listing, a high-profile endorsement) and tend to fade as the narrative loses momentum. Buy the rumor, sell the news. The price chart shows the cycles.
Under the adoption framing the shielded supply data supports, ZEC is being structurally repositioned as functional privacy infrastructure rather than just a financial asset. The shielded supply growth is the visible measurement of this transition. The wallet user experience improvements, the regulatory shifts, and the cultural concerns about financial surveillance are the underlying drivers. The price appreciation is a consequence of the supply dynamics the adoption produces.
The two framings produce different predictions for ZEC’s medium-term price action. The speculation framing predicts the current rally will eventually fade and ZEC will retrace toward its pre-rally levels, as has happened with previous privacy coin cycles. The adoption framing predicts shielded supply will keep growing toward 40 to 50 percent of circulating supply, the effective liquid supply will keep shrinking, and the price will reflect the structural supply dynamics over a multi-year horizon.
Neither framing is provably correct in advance. But the shielded supply metric is the cleanest empirical test of which framing is more accurate. If shielded supply keeps growing during periods of price weakness, the adoption framing is being validated. If shielded supply stagnates or reverses when the price retraces, the speculation framing is being validated.
The honest read of the current data is the adoption framing is winning. Shielded supply has grown through both rally and consolidation periods. The growth is concentrated in Orchard, the newest and most user-friendly pool. The wallet infrastructure improvements that drive the shift are real and ongoing. The regulatory environment is becoming friendlier rather than hostile. The cultural concerns about financial surveillance are intensifying rather than fading.
For ZEC holders, the practical implication is the shielded supply trajectory is the metric to watch more than the daily price action. If shielded supply keeps growing, the structural thesis stays intact. If it stalls, the thesis weakens. The price will follow.
The institutional and ETF signals
The institutional adoption layer reinforces what the on-chain data is showing.
Multicoin Capital’s disclosed ZEC position, accumulated since February 2026 and revealed at Consensus Miami, represents the most prominent institutional bet on the privacy thesis to date. Fund partner Tushar Jain’s framing has been widely circulated: Bitcoin is censorship-resistant but transparent, while Zcash provides actual privacy through the shielded pool. The position has been substantial enough to move market dynamics, with combined institutional disclosures triggering approximately $62 million in futures liquidations during the May 2026 rally.
Other institutional exposure has come from funds linked to Arthur Hayes (the BitMEX co-founder whose Maelstrom fund has been notably active in privacy positioning) and Cypherpunk Technologies, a Nasdaq-listed company that holds digital assets aligned with cryptographic privacy principles.
The institutional pattern matters because it represents a category of capital that traditionally does not chase short-term narratives. Multicoin’s accumulation since February predates the May rally by months. The fund was building the position when the market was still treating ZEC as a relatively boring privacy coin with limited near-term upside. This is the kind of patient institutional positioning that suggests genuine conviction in the underlying thesis rather than speculative rotation into a hot narrative.
The Grayscale spot Zcash ETF filing adds another structural layer. If approved (the SEC’s January 2026 no-action decision removed the major regulatory blocker), the ETF would be the first privacy coin ETF in the United States. This would create a regulated investment vehicle that pulls institutional capital into ZEC without requiring holders to engage with the privacy features themselves. The ETF would, ironically, raise demand for an asset whose value proposition rests on privacy features the ETF holders themselves would not be using.
The asymmetry is interesting. Institutional ETF holders would benefit from ZEC’s price appreciation driven by the shielded supply dynamics, without taking part in the privacy features that drive the shielded supply growth. The actual privacy users would keep being the dominant force in the shielded pool while ETF capital provides additional structural buying pressure.
If the Grayscale ETF is approved in 2026 or 2027, the combination of ETF inflows with the existing shielded supply dynamics could produce sustained upward pressure on ZEC’s price the current market is not fully pricing in.
The risks that could break the thesis
A fair analysis has to name the conditions under which the shielded supply adoption thesis could fail.
The first risk is regulatory reversal. The SEC’s January 2026 no-action decision on Zcash and the broader friendlier regulatory environment under the current administration are not permanent. A future change in political leadership or enforcement priorities could reverse the regulatory shift. Privacy coins have historically been singled out for restrictive treatment by some jurisdictions (Japan and South Korea have at various times restricted or banned exchange listings for privacy coins). If the US or major exchanges reversed their current posture, the institutional adoption would face headwinds.
The second risk is competitive technical disruption. Zcash’s shielded pool is the most mature production-grade zero-knowledge privacy system in crypto, but it is not the only one. Newer privacy projects, zero-knowledge Layer-2s on Ethereum, and emerging cryptographic approaches could potentially offer better privacy guarantees or better user experience. If a competitor emerges with materially better technology, the migration could happen in the other direction.
The third risk is the quantum computing threat. Zcash is working on post-quantum security upgrades, with quantum-recoverable wallets launching in mid-2026 and full post-quantum security targeted for mid-2027. If quantum computers advance faster than expected and break the current zk-SNARK cryptography before Zcash completes the post-quantum transition, the entire shielded pool could become retroactively transparent. This is a low-probability but high-consequence risk holders should be aware of.
The fourth risk is implementation bugs or attacks on the shielded pool itself. Zero-knowledge cryptography is mathematically sound but practically complex. Bugs in the implementation could theoretically let attackers forge shielded balances or break the privacy guarantees. The Zcash codebase has been audited extensively and has held up well over multiple network upgrades, but the risk is not zero. A serious technical exploit could undermine confidence in the shielded pool and reverse the adoption trend.
The fifth risk is broader crypto market correlation. Even if all the Zcash-specific drivers stay positive, a major bear market in crypto generally could pull ZEC down with the broader category. The shielded supply might keep growing during a bear market (the structural drivers are independent of price action), but the absolute price could still decline substantially if the broader market enters a sustained downturn.
None of these risks invalidate the structural adoption thesis. They are the conditions under which it could be weakened or reversed. The honest read is the shielded supply trajectory is the most reliable indicator of whether the adoption thesis is holding up over time. If shielded supply keeps growing through any of these risk scenarios, the thesis is more resilient than expected. If it stalls when the risks materialize, the thesis needs to be reassessed.
What to actually watch
For readers tracking Zcash beyond the daily price action, four specific metrics are worth watching over the coming year.
The first is shielded supply as a percentage of circulating supply. The current 30 percent level is a milestone, but the trajectory matters more than the absolute number. If the metric keeps climbing toward 40 percent in 2026, the adoption thesis is being validated. If it stalls around 30 percent, the thesis may be reaching saturation. If it reverses, the thesis is failing.
The second is shielded transaction percentage. This measures the share of all Zcash transactions that use shielded addresses, which is different from (but related to) shielded supply. The February 2026 reading of 59.3 percent is an all-time high. If shielded transactions stay above 50 percent of network activity, the privacy features are clearly being used. If they retreat back toward the historical 20 to 30 percent range, network usage is reverting to transparent patterns.
The third is the Grayscale ETF approval timeline. The SEC’s January 2026 no-action decision was the major regulatory blocker, but the ETF approval itself is a separate process. A timeline for approval would create a structural new demand source for ZEC. A continued delay or denial would limit the institutional channel.
The fourth is the NU7 network upgrade. The next major Zcash network upgrade, NU7, targets a 300 percent speed boost (cutting block times from 75 to 25 seconds) and doubled shielded transaction throughput. The flagship feature is Zcash Shielded Assets (ZSA), enabling user-issued tokens with full Zcash-grade privacy. If NU7 ships on schedule and ZSA delivers private DeFi capabilities, Zcash’s addressable use cases expand substantially. If the upgrade delays or ZSA fails to gain traction, the network’s growth ceiling is lower.
The bottom line
Zcash’s shielded supply hitting 30 percent of circulating supply is more significant than most coverage acknowledges. The metric is not just an adoption indicator. It is the structural foundation for a different way of thinking about what Zcash is and what its long-term trajectory looks like.
Under the standard framing, Zcash is a speculative privacy coin that goes through periodic rallies driven by short-term narratives. The rallies fade. The price returns to baseline. The cycle repeats. This framing has been broadly accurate for most of Zcash’s history, including the 2017-2018 cycle and earlier rallies that produced sharp price moves without structural network change.
Under the framing the current data supports, Zcash is being repositioned as functional privacy infrastructure. The shielded supply growth reflects holders actively using the privacy features rather than just speculating on the token. Wallet user experience improvements (Zodl defaulting to shielded, Unified Addresses auto-routing to the most private pool) have removed most of the historical friction. Regulatory developments (SEC no-action, Robinhood listing, Grayscale ETF filing) have legitimized the asset. Cultural concerns about financial surveillance have intensified. The combination of these factors produces structural adoption previous Zcash cycles never achieved.
The numerical signal is the cleanest test. Five million ZEC has been actively moved into shielded addresses through individual holder decisions. Sixty percent of network transactions now use shielded addresses. The Orchard pool, the newest and most user-friendly privacy implementation, holds the vast majority of recent growth. Public transaction counts have stayed flat at around 8,500 per day, while shielded activity has grown substantially. The actual usage is migrating to the private layer.
For the broader crypto market, what is happening with Zcash matters even beyond the asset itself. The shielded supply trajectory is the cleanest empirical test of whether privacy crypto can transition from speculative narrative to functional infrastructure. If Zcash’s adoption keeps going, other privacy assets (Monero, Dash, newer zero-knowledge protocols) will face structural pressure to compete on privacy quality. If Zcash’s adoption stalls, the broader privacy crypto thesis loses one of its most important data points.
For ZEC holders, the practical implication is the daily price action matters less than the shielded supply trajectory. The price is a consequence of the underlying supply dynamics and adoption signals. If the structural drivers stay intact, the price will eventually reflect them. If the structural drivers fail, no amount of speculative rallies will produce sustainable appreciation.
The 30 percent threshold is a milestone, not a destination. The question is whether the metric keeps climbing toward 40 percent and beyond, or whether it stalls at the current level. The data so far suggests the trajectory is still pointing upward. The wallet infrastructure keeps improving. The regulatory environment keeps clearing. The cultural concerns about financial surveillance keep intensifying.
That is the analysis the price chart cannot give you. The chart shows the consequences. The shielded supply shows the cause.
For anyone trying to understand whether Zcash’s current rally is different from previous ones, the shielded supply metric is the answer. It tells you whether the activity is real or speculative. It tells you whether the privacy features are being used or just held. It tells you whether the structural thesis is being validated by holder behavior or just hyped by narrative momentum.
The 30 percent number says the answer is real, used, and validated. The trajectory says the story is not over yet.
This article is for informational purposes and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Cryptocurrency markets and on-chain metrics evolve quickly; the figures and milestones described reflect reporting available as of late May 2026. Always do your own research.
CryptoQuant CEO Ki Young Ju warns the Bitcoin bear market could extend into early 2027, based on on-chain PnL data.
Summary
- Ki Young Ju cited CryptoQuant’s PnL Index Signal, which shows investor profitability typically falls for 18 months after profit-taking cascades begin.
- The trend began in October 2025, placing a potential bear market bottom in early 2027 based on historical patterns.
- A true reversal requires unrealized profits to rise while realized profits fall simultaneously, a signal that has not yet appeared.
CryptoQuant CEO Ki Young Ju posted on X this week warning that Bitcoin’s current downturn mirrors the extended bear cycles of 2014, 2018, and 2022, and may not resolve until early 2027.
“Once profit-taking cascades, Bitcoin investors’ PnL typically falls for about 18 months,” Ju wrote. “Since the trend change started in October 2025, the bear market could last until early 2027. The trend only changes when unrealized profits rise and realized profits fall. We’re not there yet.”
What the PnL Index shows
Ju’s analysis is grounded in CryptoQuant’s PnL Index Signal, a 365-day moving average that tracks investor profitability cycles. The indicator peaked in late 2025 in a pattern closely matching the tops recorded before the prolonged bear phases of 2014, 2018, and 2022. Each of those periods saw steep sustained declines once the signal rolled over from its peak.
Bitcoin was trading near $73,000 at the time of the post, down roughly 30% from its 2025 highs, amid rising macroeconomic pressure from elevated US Treasury yields and broader risk-off sentiment across markets. As crypto.news reported, bearish social commentary on Bitcoin hit its highest level in 2026 earlier in April as spot demand weakened.
The reversal signal Ju describes requires a specific combination that has not yet materialised: unrealized profit margins must begin rising while realised profits fall simultaneously, indicating that selling pressure is exhausting itself and buyers are regaining control. Until that pattern appears, Ju views the bear case as intact.
Not all analysts share the extended timeline. VanEck CEO Jan van Eck told CNBC earlier this year that Bitcoin may be forming a cycle bottom, pointing to options market stabilisation and slowing long-term holder selling as early constructive signs. Coinbase noted in its April 2026 monthly report that price support may emerge between May and June, potentially setting up a stronger third quarter.
How Bitcoin recovers from this level
For a sustained recovery, Ju flagged two critical demand drivers: renewed inflows from spot Bitcoin ETFs and increased activity from over-the-counter institutional desks, both of which have slowed in recent months. ETF flows have remained positive but at a normalised pace relative to the surge seen in early 2025.
On-chain data from CryptoQuant shows that capital inflows into Bitcoin continue to rise, but market capitalisation has not responded proportionally. That divergence, where money enters the market but prices stagnate or decline, is the defining signature of a bear market in Ju’s framework.
Bitcoin’s current price is consolidating near the $73,000 level, with CoinGlass identifying $74,200 and $74,500 as key resistance zones where large sell orders are clustered. The Clarity Act’s potential passage remains one of the most cited institutional catalysts that analysts believe could shift sentiment, though Ju’s PnL model operates independently of policy timelines.
The United States has seized roughly $1 billion in Iranian crypto assets, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said Friday, adding that some of the wallet owners may not yet know the funds are gone.
“I believe that we have seized about a billion dollars of their crypto,” Bessent said while speaking at the Reagan National Economic Forum. “Just outright grabbed the wallets. Some of them may be typing in right now and not have realized that their wallet had been grabbed,” he added.
Bessent said the seizures are part of the US financial pressure campaign against Iran, known as Operation Economic Fury. Launched in March 2025, the operation has targeted Iranian assets across multiple fronts, seizing cryptocurrency, freezing bank accounts and working with European allies to confiscate properties.
Scott Bessent at the Reagan National Economic Forum. Source: YouTube
“I think between five and a half to six weeks of an incredibly successful military campaign and Operation Economic Fury, where we have really cut them off. They are at the end of their Tether now financially,” he said.
Related: Crypto markets shed $80B after fresh US strikes on Iran
Iran’s financial state is dire
The Treasury secretary said the regime had been siphoning $400 to $500 million a month and dividing the proceeds among roughly 80 leaders before the US intervened. He said inflation in Iran has likely surpassed 200%, food vouchers are being distributed, the internet has been shut down and 40 to 50% of Iranian troops are not getting paid.
Bessent also addressed ongoing negotiations with Iran, noting the complexity of dealing with a fractured leadership structure following US and Israeli strikes on senior regime figures.
The newly disclosed $1 billion figure is roughly double the $500 million in Iranian cryptocurrency assets the Treasury Department announced it had seized in late April, and much higher than the $344 million in seized crypto assets disclosed earlier in the month.
Related: Bitcoin bounces as Trump prepares to announce ‘negotiated’ Iran deal
Iran eyes Bitcoin-powered insurance scheme for Hormuz
As Cointelegraph reported, Iran is weighing a plan to monetize control of the Strait of Hormuz through a Bitcoin-based insurance model. A state document cited by Fars News Agency, an outlet closely affiliated with the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, outlined a platform called “Hormuz Safe,” which would sell digital marine insurance paid in Bitcoin and settled on the blockchain, potentially generating over $10 billion in revenue for the country.
In early April, a spokesperson for Iran’s Oil, Gas and Petrochemical Products Exporters’ Union said certain ships would be able to pass through the strait provided that they pay a tariff of $1 per barrel of oil in Bitcoin.
Magazine: Guide to the top and emerging global crypto hubs — Mid-2026
Binance named Genius Terminal its 65th HODLer Airdrop, giving 10 million GENIUS tokens to qualifying BNB holders.
Summary
- Binance will distribute 10 million GENIUS tokens to BNB holders who used Simple Earn or On-Chain Yields between May 11 and 13, 2026.
- Genius Terminal is a multichain trading platform backed by YZi Labs and advised by CZ, with a 1 billion token total supply.
- The HODLer Airdrop program is a recurring Binance mechanism that deepens BNB utility by rewarding long-term stakers retroactively.
Binance announced Genius Terminal as the 65th project on its HODLer Airdrop program, continuing its pattern of rewarding loyal BNB holders with tokens from projects ahead of their exchange listing.
The snapshot window for eligibility ran from May 11 to May 13, 2026. Only BNB subscribed to Binance’s Simple Earn or On-Chain Yields products during that three-day period qualifies, with allocations distributed proportionally based on each user’s BNB balance. Rewards were sent to eligible users’ Spot Accounts within five hours of the announcement.
What is Genius Terminal
Genius Terminal is a multichain trading platform that connects to perpetual decentralised exchanges, offering spot and perpetual trading with zero fees for select pairs. YZi Labs, formerly Binance Labs, made an eight-figure investment in the project in January 2026, and CZ joined as a strategic advisor. The announcement triggered a spike in platform trading volume from roughly $80 million per week to more than $2 billion in the following seven days.
The GENIUS token has a total supply of 1 billion and launched its token generation event in April 2026. The HODLer Airdrop distribution covers 10 million tokens, equal to 1% of maximum supply, adding new circulating tokens alongside the exchange listing.
As crypto.news reported, HODLer Airdrop listings have historically triggered sharp price moves in the airdropped token as recipients decide whether to hold or sell into the initial trading session. SAPIEN surged more than 100% in the 24 hours after being featured as the 57th HODLer Airdrop project.
For Binance, the program serves a dual purpose: it incentivises long-term BNB staking and provides visibility for projects building on BNB Smart Chain ahead of their listings. Genius Terminal’s selection follows the 64th HODLer Airdrop featuring Gensyn, a decentralised AI compute network, suggesting that AI-linked infrastructure projects have become a recurring theme in Binance’s curation decisions for the program.
The exchange has not disclosed whether a full spot listing for GENIUS will follow the HODLer distribution, though previous projects in the program have typically proceeded to spot trading within 24 hours of the airdrop announcement.
Payouts.com co-founders say the future of agent payments combines stablecoin rails with programmable control layers built for enterprise trust.
Summary
- Payouts.com CEO Leor Ceder says programmability, not wallets alone, will define which AI agents enterprises can trust by 2027.
- Co-founder Barak Hirchson lists five non-negotiable controls that make autonomous agent spending safe and auditable at scale.
- Stablecoins win in cross-border and machine-to-API micropayments; programmable infrastructure determines which rail gets used everywhere else.
Payouts.com co-founders Leor Ceder and Barak Hirchson say the next wave of AI agent commerce runs on stablecoin rails, and on the programmable control layer built on top of them. In their view, wallets are a necessary foundation, but the durable enterprise value sits in what governs them.
The position adds a critical dimension to the wallet-led narrative dominating agent payments today. Juniper Research forecasts cross-border B2B stablecoin payments will hit $5 trillion by 2035, up from $13.4 billion in 2026, with B2B taking 85% of total stablecoin transaction value.
Where stablecoins win and where smart rail selection matters
Hirchson, Payouts.com’s chief solutions officer, said rail selection is decided by the recipient: country, payment method, urgency, amount, and cost all factor in. Stablecoins win cleanly in two scenarios.
The first is cross-border versus SWIFT, where wire fees and FX spreads can eat 4 to 5% of a transaction. The second is machine-to-API micropayments, where the x402 standard already routes pay-per-call API invoices in stablecoin. Crypto.news reported that AI agents have settled $73 million across 176 million transactions on crypto rails, with USDC handling 98.6%.
“PIX clears in under ten seconds in Brazil for free, UPI handles hundreds of millions of transactions a day in India at near-zero cost,” Hirchson said. “The agents that scale are the ones that can pick the right rail per transaction, not the ones locked into a single rail based on what their limited wallet supports.”
The five non-negotiable agent controls
Hirchson laid out five controls he said are non-negotiable before companies let agents transact autonomously: scoped credentials, hard spend caps enforced at the protocol level, cryptographically signed mandates, idempotency at the payment layer, and a fail-closed posture.
“This is what programmable spending actually means. You define the envelope once, the infrastructure enforces it forever, and the agent operates freely inside it,” he said. “Is the industry building these fast enough? Not uniformly.”
Some wallets shipped recently include hard caps and signed mandates, he said. Others ship with an API key and a balance, which he called the worst-case configuration for a compromised key.
What the agent payment stack looks like by 2027
Ceder said the interesting question by May 2027 will not be which stablecoin wins. It will be programmability: how granularly enterprises can define what an agent is allowed to do, how reliably that policy is enforced, and how cleanly compliance can be proven after the fact.
“The wallet wars happening right now will look the way the browser wars look in retrospect: necessary, formative, and not where the durable value got captured,” Ceder said. The compliance layer must be built into the infrastructure rather than the agent, with every payment passing a cascade of principal, account and jurisdiction checks before any money moves.
Coinbase and Cloudflare have built the x402 protocol into a fast-growing settlement rail for agents, with the standard recently joining the Linux Foundation. AWS embedded x402 into Amazon Bedrock AgentCore Payments earlier this month, while Solana and Google launched Pay.sh as a parallel route.
For Payouts.com, the bet is that the control layer above those rails is where enterprise spend will land. The agent stays autonomous. The envelope around it does not move.
Senator Cynthia Lummis says the Clarity Act must pass this Congress or the next legislative window opens in 2030.
Summary
- Lummis posted on X that the next viable window for crypto market structure legislation is likely 2030 if Congress fails to act now.
- The Senate Banking Committee passed the Clarity Act 15 to 9 on May 14, but a full floor vote remains uncertain before midterms.
- Republicans risk losing House seats in November 2026, which could shelve comprehensive crypto regulation for years.
Senator Cynthia Lummis issued a stark warning on May 29, telling lawmakers the current Congress represents the final realistic window to pass comprehensive digital asset legislation before a four-year freeze sets in.
In a post on X, the Wyoming senator wrote: “The next window for digital asset legislation after this Congress is likely 2030. Until then, developers remain exposed with no legal protections, and law enforcement remains without the tools to hold bad actors accountable. The Clarity Act solves both.”
Why Lummis says 2030 is the fallback
The Senate Banking Committee advanced the Clarity Act with a 15 to 9 bipartisan vote on May 14, marking real progress after months of stalls over stablecoin yield disputes. A full Senate floor vote is a different calculation, with November 2026 midterm elections compressing the available calendar to weeks.
Lummis has argued the current moment is defined by a political alignment that rarely holds in Washington: the House passed the Clarity Act 294 to 134, the Senate Agriculture Committee has cleared its version, and the White House under Trump has publicly backed it as a national priority. A House flip after midterms, or a shift in Senate committee composition, could disassemble that alignment entirely and force the industry to start over under a new Congress with different priorities.
Political forecasts add weight to that concern. Several analysts expect Republicans to lose seats in November, which would push digital asset regulation down the Democratic agenda. Polymarket currently prices Clarity Act passage in 2026 at roughly 58%, a figure that reflects both the bill’s progress and the obstacles ahead.
SEC Chair Paul Atkins offered a counterpoint, telling Fox Business he has confidence Congress will pass the bill and that President Trump will sign it. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has also pressed for urgency, warning that regulatory ambiguity has already driven crypto development toward Abu Dhabi and Singapore.
What a delay actually costs
The Clarity Act would establish formal definitions for digital assets and divide oversight between the SEC and CFTC based on each asset’s classification. Without it, the SEC continues applying the Howey test case by case, with no binding rules or procedural protections for the sector.
As crypto.news reported, stablecoin yield provisions remain one of the most contested flashpoints, alongside ethics language barring government officials from personally benefiting from crypto holdings. Both issues must clear before the bill reaches Trump’s desk.
Lummis, who announced she will not seek a second Senate term, has framed the stakes in direct terms. Without the Clarity Act, she says American developers remain targets for prosecution simply for publishing code. The Senate Banking Committee’s approval was a milestone, but the floor vote, reconciliation with the House version, and the presidential signature all remain ahead. Lummis’s warning is that the calendar for all three is narrowing fast.
Former Celsius founder and former chief executive Alex Mashinsky has moved to vacate his 12-year prison sentence in a New York federal court, arguing that he received ineffective counsel and that the conviction rests on tainted evidence. The motion, filed in the Southern District of New York, follows Judge John Koeltl’s May 2025 ruling imposing a 144-month term for commodities fraud and securities fraud tied to the Celsius network’s downfall. Mashinsky filed the paperwork without new representation, after announcing on May 5 that he would proceed pro se.
In his filing, Mashinsky contends that his defense was compromised by ineffective assistance of counsel and that the evidence underpinning his guilty pleas was tainted by a “fruit of the poisonous tree” scenario—a legal doctrine referring to evidence obtained through misconduct. He also noted that his counsel ceased communication with him at a critical juncture, forcing him to submit his reply directly to the court without new guidance.
Beyond the legal procedural questions, Mashinsky’s motion reiterates claims about the broader forces he believes influenced Celsius’s fate. He asserts that former FTX chief executive Sam Bankman-Fried intended to destroy Celsius and that the market manipulation surrounding Celsius’s CEL token on the FTX exchange was a central factor in the crisis. In support of his position, Mashinsky attached messages with Celsius’s former chief revenue officer, Roni Cohen-Pavon, alleging a “hostile takeover” attempt at the platform.
Celsis filed for bankruptcy in 2022 after a period of distress across the crypto sector, a year that saw a wave of exchange failures. In July 2023, U.S. authorities charged Mashinsky and Cohen-Pavon with fraud and market manipulation related to Celsius’s operations; both executives later pleaded guilty. The legal actions against them formed a broader narrative of accountability in a sector that had been rocked by collapses and restructuring.
In a separate piece of the Celsius saga, Cohen-Pavon was sentenced to time served after pleading guilty in September 2023. Prosecutors cited her “substantial assistance” to the government, including willingness to testify against Mashinsky, as a key factor in the sentence and in concluding the criminal case against the Celsius executives.
Key takeaways
- Alice Mashinsky seeks to vacate his 12-year sentence in SDNY, arguing ineffective assistance of counsel and tainted evidence as grounds for relief.
- The motion arrives in the wake of Mashinsky’s May 2025 sentencing and follows a 2022 Celsius bankruptcy and 2023 indictments of Celsius executives.
- Mashinsky alleges that Sam Bankman-Fried sought to destroy Celsius and points to internal communications suggesting a hostile takeover attempt at Celsius.
- Cohen-Pavon was sentenced to time served after pleading guilty; prosecutors highlighted substantial cooperation, with penalties including more than $1 million in fines and a $40,000 fine.
- Financial consequences for Mashinsky include a $48 million forfeiture from a criminal case and a separate $10 million FTC settlement tied to a multibillion-dollar Celsius judgment, most of which is suspended.
Legal tides around a fallen platform
The Celsius case sits at the intersection of criminal accountability and corporate collapse in a market still grappling with the aftershocks of the 2022 downturn. The move to vacate hinges on nuanced questions about representation and the admissibility of evidence, but it also underscores continuing scrutiny of how individuals and teams behind high-profile crypto platforms are held to legal standards. Mashinsky’s pro se stance adds a layer of procedural complexity, potentially prolonging a series of court filings that have already stretched across years.
From a regulatory perspective, the saga—spanning bankruptcy, indictments, guilty pleas, and settlements—illustrates the breadth of federal interest in the sector’s actors, not just the exchanges themselves. The case also intersects with the broader narrative of post-FTX accountability, where prosecutors have pursued multiple fronts to address alleged deception and market manipulation in the crypto economy.
The financial penalties connected to Celsius’s leadership also illustrate the penalties that can accompany wrongdoing in this space. Mashinsky’s $48 million forfeiture and the $10 million FTC settlement linked to Celsius’s broader judgment reflect the dimensions of civil and criminal consequences that can persist long after a platform’s immediate collapse. Cohen-Pavon’s time-served sentence, alongside more than $1 million in penalties, reinforces that executives may face significant costs even when criminal convictions are resolved.
What investors and crypto builders should watch next
For creditors, investors, and users connected to Celsius assets, the ongoing legal proceedings add a layer of uncertainty to an already unsettled chapter in the company’s history. The pending motion to vacate could, if granted, alter aspects of the sentencing posture and the potential financial exposure linked to the case. Even if the motion does not succeed, the process highlights the persistent risk of legal and reputational disruption surrounding failed platforms and their leadership.
Looking ahead, observers will be watching for a decision on Mashinsky’s vacatur bid, which could influence related sentencing or forfeiture orders. The proceedings also sit within a larger regulatory frame—where authorities are increasingly focused on executive accountability in the wake of major market disruptions. As the Celsius matter continues to unfold, market participants should monitor any formal court rulings, potential settlements, and how these developments might impact remaining creditors, unsecured claims, and the broader narrative around crypto lending platforms’ risk management and governance standards.
Readers should stay attentive to forthcoming court filings and rulings, as they will signal whether the motion to vacate moves forward or stalls. The case remains a key datapoint in understanding how the legal system handles complex criminal and civil actions tied to high-profile crypto platform failures—and what that means for the trajectory of crypto accountability in the years ahead.
Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong replied to JPMorgan chief Jamie Dimon’s broadside on the CLARITY Act with a hockey-themed meme that drew swift backing from across the crypto industry.
The viral exchange on Friday turned a regulatory fight over stablecoin rewards into a rallying moment for digital asset leaders pushing the bill to the Senate floor.
Crypto Industry Closes Ranks Behind CLARITY Act
Industry leaders pushed back fast after Dimon’s CLARITY Act broadside on Fox Business Friday. Mike Novogratz of Galaxy Digital argued elected lawmakers, not banks, should write financial laws.
Peter Van Valkenburgh of Coin Center pointed out that roughly $3 trillion was laundered through banks in 2025. He called Dimon’s anti-money-laundering framing nonsense.
“The second issue is not really related to rewards and interest on stablecoins. It’s also about AML, BSA, KYC. Because when you are in a bank system, it’s already been through all that. We do that. We have to [do it] for the federal government. So if they want to be moving money around… on any basis, you should have to question: ‘Can that be used illegitimately?’ Answer: Yes, unless they’re following the same rules,” Dimon had said in the interview.
Other crypto voices cited JPMorgan’s track record of regulatory fines and settlements totaling tens of billions.
The defense came with the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act before the full Senate. It cleared the Senate Banking Committee in a 15-9 vote on May 14.
The bill needs 60 votes on the Senate floor before returning to the House.
Armstrong’s Meme Becomes the Rally Cry
Armstrong’s poster cast Dimon as #2 for tradition and himself as #1 for economic freedom. The image went viral within minutes.
“Heated Rivalry” is also the title of a 2019 gay hockey romance novel adapted for television in late 2025.
The meme amplified the industry’s underlying argument. Bank opposition to stablecoin yield rewards looks like incumbent protectionism, not consumer protection.
Amid the escalating feud, Coinbase now compares to Charles Schwab’s late-1970s disruption of brokerage commissions. The comparison resonates with crypto traders who see Coinbase eroding traditional bank margins.
“Coinbase is to current finance/banking what Charles Schwab was to finance/trading in the late 70’s and 80’s. Schwab radically disrupted Wall Street then. Coinbase is radically disrupting Wall Street now. Schwab ultimately destroyed commissions and fees on transactions. Coinbase is destroying market hours, access, tech, and margins/interest,” remarked Andrew, co-founder of Arch Public.
Industry figures argue the existing framework already imposes Bank Secrecy Act rules on exchanges.
The pushback signals a coordinated response to months of bank lobbying. The Senate floor vote is expected in June.
The post Coinbase vs. JPMorgan Feud Escalates Over the CLARITY Act appeared first on BeInCrypto.
The United States has seized roughly $1 billion in Iranian cryptocurrency assets, Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent announced at the Reagan National Economic Forum. He characterized the action as a direct disruption of illicit financial activity, describing it as an outright grab of wallets that some owners may not yet realize have been emptied. The disclosure situates the seizures within a multiyear effort to constrain Iran’s access to international financial networks and to press its leadership economically.
Bessent said the seizures are part of a broader pressure campaign against Iran, known as Operation Economic Fury. Launched in March 2025, the operation combines cryptocurrency takedowns, banking account freezes, and coordinated asset confiscation with European partners. He framed the effort as a sustained, comprehensive push designed to “cut them off” financially, noting that the trajectory over the past five-and-a-half to six weeks has been remarkably effective. “Between five and a half to six weeks of an incredibly successful military campaign and Operation Economic Fury, where we have really cut them off. They are at the end of their Tether now financially,” he stated.
Key takeaways
- The United States reports roughly $1 billion in Iranian crypto assets seized through Operation Economic Fury, including wallet-level takedowns.
- The newly disclosed figure is about twice the $500 million previously announced in late April and well above the $344 million disclosed earlier in the month.
- Officials describe Iran’s financial situation as dire, with high inflation, internal funding pressures, and disruptions to state services and military payrolls.
- The seizures illustrate intensified cross-border enforcement and international cooperation, with implications for crypto compliance, sanctions screening, and banking access for sanctioned states.
- Policy conversations around crypto-enabled shipping and revenue mechanisms—such as Bitcoin-based incentives for Hormuz transit—signal broader state-influenced use cases for digital assets, pending regulatory scrutiny.
Asset seizures: scale, method, and regulatory context
According to officials, the $1 billion in Iranian crypto assets seized under Operation Economic Fury represents a significant escalation in exploiting blockchain-traceable funds linked to sanctioned activity. The strategy appears to rely on identifying wallets associated with state-backed or proxy actors, then applying enforcement measures that repurpose or redirect the assets through compliant channels. The approach also reflects the United States’ broader sanctions toolkit, which increasingly treats certain digital assets as subject to traditional financial and export-control regimes.
The Treasury’s disclosures underscore a shift in how authorities frame enforcement risk for crypto-asset holders connected to sanctioned regimes. By publicly detailing wallet-level seizures and the scale of the assets involved, policymakers and regulated institutions gain a clearer baseline for due diligence, screening, and ongoing monitoring. For exchanges, custodians, and banks with crypto-related business lines, the development raises questions about the diligence required to identify sanctioned wallets, the treatment of seized or frozen crypto, and the timing of any redress or remediation for affected customers.
The previously reported figures provide context for the current disclosure. Officials had announced roughly $500 million in Iranian crypto assets seized in late April and about $344 million in crypto assets seized earlier in the month. The latest figure, therefore, suggests a substantial acceleration in enforcement activity within a relatively short window. These milestones have implications for cross-border regulatory coordination, including parallel actions by allied regulators and law enforcement partners in Europe and beyond. For market observers, the trend highlights the growing intersection of sanctions policy with digital-asset compliance requirements and the need for rigorous KYC/AML controls across custody and exchange ecosystems.
Iran’s economic strain and the geopolitical backdrop
Secretary Bessent painted a picture of severe economic strain within Iran, describing a regime that has allegedly siphoned hundreds of millions of dollars monthly and allocated proceeds among a broad leadership cadre. He suggested inflation could exceed 200 percent, with social subsidies being deployed to mitigate cost-of-living pressures and widespread internet restrictions affecting communications. Reports cited by officials indicate that a substantial portion of Iranian troops have faced delayed or disrupted pay, further complicating the regime’s capacity to project authority and sustain external influence flows.
The statements also reflect the strategic complexity of negotiating with a fractured leadership structure following recent strikes against senior regime figures. While Bessent did not hinge policy outcomes on these internal dynamics alone, the comments underscore how enforcement actions intersect with diplomatic channels, sanctions policy, and potential leverage in any future negotiations surrounding Tehran’s regional posture and long-term security considerations.
These disclosures come at a moment when the U.S. and its allies continue to calibrate sanctions pressure against Iran, balancing the aims of disrupting illicit financial networks with broader regional stability goals. The clearly articulated message is that crypto assets are not beyond the reach of conventional sanctions enforcement, and that dynamic, rapid actions can be employed to disrupt stated objectives even when actors pivot to digital instruments. For compliance teams and risk managers at financial institutions, the implications are twofold: a heightened emphasis on tracing cross-border crypto flows and an expanded mandate to screen counterparties against sanctioned-entity lists in near real time.
Policy implications and regulatory coordination
Beyond the immediate asset seizures, observers are examining the regulatory and policy ramifications for the crypto industry. The operation demonstrates a continued hard line on sanction enforcement, potentially accelerating the development of best practices around sanctions screening, wallet clustering analysis, and the cross-jurisdictional sharing of intelligence related to illicit fund flows. Firms engaged in custody, exchange, or payment processing face heightened expectations to implement robust monitoring, rapid response protocols, and transparent reporting mechanisms when dealing with funds that may be implicated by sanctions regimes.
In parallel, the focus on state-led crypto strategies—such as potential monetization schemes tied to strategic chokepoints—highlights the need for clear regulatory guardrails around crypto-based insurance, settlement, and revenue-sharing models used by states. As reported by Cointelegraph, Iran has been weighing a Bitcoin-based insurance framework to monetize shipping through the Strait of Hormuz, a project that could generate substantial revenue if implemented at scale and supported by compliant, auditable mechanisms. The proposed platform, termed “Hormuz Safe,” would sell digital marine insurance payable in Bitcoin and settled on the blockchain, potentially enabling more than $10 billion in revenue for the country, subject to regulatory approval and international compliance constraints. A separate report cited that some ships could pass Hormuz in exchange for a Bitcoin-denominated tariff of about $1 per barrel of oil. The development underscores the convergence of sovereign financing strategies and digital asset infrastructure, inviting scrutiny from licensing authorities and international financial regulators alike.
For regulated entities, the evolving environment implies a need for heightened vigilance around sanctioned counterparties, as well as clearer guidance from regulators on the permissibility and treatment of crypto assets tied to state operations. The cross-border dimension—where U.S. actions, European cooperation, and potentially other jurisdictions intersect—will likely shape licensing decisions, oversight practices, and the rigor of AML/KYC programs across the global crypto ecosystem. In this context, ongoing updates from U.S. agencies and international partners will be critical reference points for risk managers, legal counsel, and compliance leaders assessing exposure to sanctioned activities or users with ties to Iran or other restricted regimes.
Closing perspective
The scale of the recent seizures, coupled with Iran’s stated economic and strategic pressures, signals a pronounced trend: cryptocurrency is increasingly entangled with state-level sanctions enforcement and foreign policy aims. As authorities pursue more aggressive asset recovery and cross-border cooperation, firms across the crypto value chain must strengthen their compliance programs, enhance real-time monitoring, and prepare for evolving guidance on sanctioned assets and state-backed financial activities. The coming months will likely reveal further operational details and regulatory responses that define how digital assets interface with traditional sovereignty and enforcement mechanisms.
For further context, authorities and industry observers continue to monitor related developments, including prior disclosures and coverage of Iran-related crypto actions. In particular, Cointelegraph has reported on related seizures and policy discussions, illustrating the ongoing convergence of sanctions policy, crypto regulation, and geopolitical risk management.
The cryptocurrency market has steadied somewhat over the past 24 hours, following a painful correction that pushed Bitcoin and most large-cap altcoins lower during the week.
However, Stellar (XLM) continues to be the clear outlier from the top alts, posting yet another massive daily surge while the broader market remains under pressure.
BTC Price Calms Above $73K
Bitcoin’s most recent weekly correction took the asset south when it slipped below $73,000 amid renewed pressure across crypto markets. The primary cryptocurrency has recovered since then and gained some ground, now trading at $73,400.
Its intraday moves have not been without volatility, however. The price ranged between $72,200 and $74,200 before finally settling down at the current levels as the weekend starts.
Bitcoin’s market capitalization remains above $1.47 billion, while its dominance over altcoins is more or less unchanged, suggesting they failed to capitalize on BTC’s weakness. The latter could have been induced by weakening ETF flows, which have posted record outflows in the past few days.
For now, the $73,000 zone has become the key area to watch. A decisive loss of that level could trigger another leg lower, potentially to $70,000, while a move above $74K may ease some of the short-term pressure.
Stellar (XLM) Continues to Lead the Altcoin Market
The altcoin market shows a mixed picture today, with most large-cap assets posting relatively modest moves over the past 24 hours rather than sharp recoveries.
Ethereum (ETH) is trading close to $2,000, while SOL, XRP, and several other majors are showing only limited changes. BNB has fared the best from the top alts, rising by more than 5% on the day.
XRP is also slightly in the green, while ETH and SOL remain almost flat compared to their levels from 24 hours.
Stellar (XLM), however, is in a completely different category. The altcoin has exploded by roughly 25% over the past day and is trading near $0.20, making it one of the strongest performers among mid-cap cryptocurrencies.
The move comes shortly after DTCC announced that its tokenization service will connect with the Stellar public blockchain. The move is expected to support tokenized DTC-custodied assets, including stocks, ETFs, treasuries, and corporate bonds, with availability targeted for the first half of 2027.
Other notable performers for the day include LAB, up 37.5%; Algorand’s ALGO, up 9.5%; and XDC Network (XDC), up 9%.
The post Bitcoin Calms at $73,000, Stellar Explodes by 25% Daily: Weekend Watch appeared first on CryptoPotato.
MicroStrategy, the largest corporate Bitcoin (BTC) holder, withdrew 411.5 BTC from Coinbase Prime hours after depositing it. The reversal cooled fears that Michael Saylor’s firm was preparing its first BTC sale in years.
Meanwhile, Tom Lee’s BitMine Immersion Technologies bought 25,000 Ethereum (ETH) for $50.6 million on the same day. The purchase extended one of the largest corporate ETH accumulation programs in markets.
MicroStrategy Reverses Brief Coinbase Prime Deposit
On-chain trackers flagged the initial deposit as MicroStrategy’s first direct exchange move in nearly two years.
The transfer was split into two batches near 205 BTC each, with smaller wallet transactions also active.
Saylor signaled this week that Strategy could sell some BTC before year-end, citing dividend and capital needs. The remark had shifted prediction-market pricing even before the Coinbase Prime move.
The deposit pushed Polymarket odds on Strategy selling any Bitcoin in 2026 above 90%. Those odds eased after the withdrawal but stayed elevated.
“Did Michael Saylor’s Strategy cancel its BTC sale? Strategy withdrew 411.5 BTC ($30.2M) back from Coinbase Prime 5 hours ago,” Lookonchain posed.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
BTC trades near $73,532, with the broader Bitcoin treasury stocks split showing limited contagion.
Strategy still holds 843,738 BTC, valued above $62 billion. The firm has bought no Bitcoin since May 18. That pause is the longest in its weekly accumulation as corporate Bitcoin treasury demand softens.
BitMine Doubles Down on Ethereum Amid Price Weakness
BitMine bought the dip below $2,100, lifting its aggressive ETH accumulation to roughly 5.39 million ETH. That sum represents about 4.47% of supply, near Tom Lee’s 5% target for the year.
“Tom Lee’s Bitmine bought another 25,000 ETH ($50.56M) 6 hours ago,” Lookonchain noted.
The firm stakes more than 4.7 million ETH through its Made in America Validator network. The position generates an annualized yield of about $276 million. Ether trades near $2,011 after a 10% monthly decline.
Lee frames the weakness as a buying window, pointing to tokenization growth and AI demand for compute.
Backers including ARK Invest and Founders Fund maintain exposure. BMNR trades below net asset value despite unrealized BitMine ETH losses.
However, even as Tom Lee’s Bitmine buys the Ethereum dip, old wallets are dumping, with one selling $112 million worth of ETH in the last week.
“Ethereum OG is dumping ETH! Over the past week, an Ethereum OG sold 55,000 ETH ($112.25M) and 9,442 wstETH ($24M) at an average price of $2,041 per ETH,” the on-chain analytics account highlighted.
The post MicroStrategy Corrects Bitcoin Sell-Off Fears With $30 Million Withdrawal appeared first on BeInCrypto.
US commander meets with Cuban military officials
Walmart and 5 More Consumer Stocks to Buy After a Solid Retail Earnings Season
13 Years Later, the Biggest Zombie Blockbuster in History Is Crushing Paramount+
-
Business6 days agoNYT Strands Answers May 24 2026 Revealed for Puzzle No. 812 Theme Summer Essentials
-
NewsBeat3 days agoIsrael says it has killed new Hamas military leader in Gaza City airstrikes
-
Politics5 days agoBridgerton Season 5: Cast, Release Date And Everything We Know So Far
-
Business3 days agoSelena Gomez Reportedly Upset Over Benny Blanco’s Comments on Her ‘Terrible’ Diet
-
Crypto World7 days agoRobinhood crypto COO Tanya Denisova exits
-
Crypto World4 days agoMicron Crosses $1 Trillion Market Cap as AI Demand Reshapes Memory Sector
-
Tech5 days agoMicrosoft’s quiet Claude Code retreat and the real cost of enterprise AI
-
Business5 days agoBTS Sells Out Four Las Vegas Shows at Allegiant Stadium for ARIRANG World Tour
-
Tech4 days agoChina assigns ID codes to 28,000+ humanoid robots
-
News Videos3 days agoXRP *JUST* SUCCEEDED!!!! CLARITY ACT EXPOSED!!! (SHE EXPOSED IT)
-
Tech3 days ago
The Samsung pay deal is the moment Korean unions changed register
-
Tech1 day agoWaymo dominates autonomous vehicle registrations as Tesla trails behind
-
Tech5 days agoWestone Audio and Etymotic Acquired by Fidelity Collective in Major IEM Market Move
-
Tech3 days agoMillions of AI agents imperiled by critical vulnerability in open source package
-
Crypto World5 days ago
Brian Armstrong Outlines Crypto Vision for the Future Financial System
-
Entertainment4 days ago‘Breaking Bad’ Star’s Easy-to-Binge 6-Part Crime Series Spin-Off Is Finally Heading to Free Streaming
-
Crypto World3 days ago
SpaceX’s $2 Trillion IPO: Why Tech Giants Nvidia (NVDA), Apple (AAPL), and Microsoft (MSFT) May Face Pressure
-
Crypto World5 days agoNvidia (NVDA) CEO Calls on Super Micro to Strengthen Export Controls Amid Smuggling Probe
-
Tech3 days agoNASA taps Blue Origin to deliver lunar rovers for Moon Base initiative
-
NewsBeat5 days agoHottest May day ever as London hits 34.8C in 2C leap from previous records
You must be logged in to post a comment Login