Bitmine Immersion Technologies reported that it added nearly 10,000 Ether (ETH) over the past week, lifting its total ETH holdings to 5.79 million. The company disclosed the purchases in an update released Monday, with Ether now forming a substantial part of its overall treasury.

According to Bitmine, it holds 5.79 million ETH, representing about 4.8% of Ether’s total supply. Roughly 4.9 million ETH—about 85% of its position—is staked via the company’s validator operations, and Bitmine projected annualized staking rewards of around $299 million once all of its Ether is deployed across its staking infrastructure and partner validators. The company also said its total crypto assets, cash, and marketable securities total $11.8 billion as of July 26.

Key takeaways

• Bitmine Immersion Technologies increased its Ether holdings by nearly 10,000 ETH to 5.79 million.
• About 85% of Bitmine’s Ether position is staked through its validator operations.
• Bitmine projects annualized staking rewards of approximately $299 million once its full stake is deployed.
• The buys follow a week in which Ether outperformed Bitcoin, supporting a stronger ETH/BTC ratio.
• Bitmine’s accumulation approach appears to be diverging from Strategy, which has paused Bitcoin purchases in recent weeks.

Bitmine’s Ether treasury grows, with most coins staked

Bitmine’s latest disclosure centers on the continued expansion of its corporate Ether treasury. The company said it now holds 5.79 million ETH after purchasing nearly 10,000 ETH during the previous week.

Staking is a central part of that story. Bitmine stated that about 4.9 million ETH—around 85% of its holdings—are staked through its validator operations. In addition to describing its current staking footprint, the company gave an outlook for when its entire Ether balance will be placed across its staking infrastructure and partner validators. Bitmine projected annualized staking rewards of roughly $299 million once that process is complete.

From an investor perspective, the staking-heavy structure matters because it changes how treasury value may be expressed over time. Instead of relying solely on spot appreciation, Bitmine is explicitly tying a large portion of its ETH exposure to ongoing network rewards.

Why the timing looks strategic as ETH leads BTC

Bitmine’s purchases arrive during a period when Ether has been comparatively stronger against Bitcoin. According to CoinGecko data, ETH gained about 2.4% over the past seven days, while Bitcoin fell roughly 0.7% in the same timeframe.

In Monday’s announcement, Bitmine Chairman Tom Lee pointed to the rising ETH/BTC ratio as a signal. He characterized the ratio as being at a three-month high and said it indicated strengthening momentum for Ether.

Even if the immediate magnitude of daily price moves remains difficult to forecast, corporate buying decisions often reflect a broader view of relative positioning—particularly for firms seeking to build a dominant share of a given asset exposure. In this case, Bitmine’s continued accumulation coincides with a week where Ether has outpaced Bitcoin, reinforcing the narrative that its ETH thesis may be gaining traction across the market.

Bitmine vs. Strategy: accumulation strategies diverge

Bitmine has positioned itself as one of the most active corporate ETH treasuries. The company said it has built the world’s largest corporate Ether treasury and noted that it trails only Strategy among public companies by the value of its digital asset holdings.

However, the update also highlights a divergence from Strategy’s more recent approach. Bitmine’s accumulation strategy has recently differed from Strategy’s, which has paused Bitcoin purchases in recent weeks.

Earlier this month, Strategy announced it had raised $544.5 million through stock sales, repurchased $25 million of its STRC preferred shares, and increased its US dollar reserve to $3.75 billion, while maintaining holdings of 843,775 BTC.

That contrast matters because it underscores that “treasury strategy” is not uniform across the sector. While Bitmine appears to be leaning further into ETH accumulation and staking deployment, Strategy’s recent communications suggest a shift toward capital and reserve management around its BTC exposure. For observers, the key question is whether Strategy’s pause reflects timing, liquidity needs, or a longer-term recalibration of how it wants to allocate capital.

Total treasury size and staking deployment remain what to watch

Beyond the ETH purchase itself, Bitmine provided a snapshot of its broader balance sheet. The company said its crypto holdings, cash, and marketable securities total $11.8 billion as of July 26. This figure may help explain how firms sustain large, ongoing purchases without disrupting other liquidity priorities.

Looking ahead, two items are likely to draw attention. First, Bitmine’s projection of annualized staking rewards depends on full deployment of its Ether across its staking infrastructure and partner validators. Second, market participants will watch whether Bitmine continues adding ETH after this week’s purchases—especially given the near-term strength in ETH relative to Bitcoin and Bitmine’s interpretation of that movement via the ETH/BTC ratio.

For now, Bitmine’s disclosures reinforce that corporate Ether treasuries are increasingly paired with staking operations, turning holdings into a long-running revenue mechanism rather than a purely directional bet. The next signals to monitor are the pace of further ETH acquisitions and the timing of complete staking deployment relative to the company’s stated plan.

Strategy, the business intelligence firm best known for holding one of the largest corporate Bitcoin treasuries, continued reshaping its capital structure last week by combining common stock sales with buybacks of its preferred shares.

According to company disclosures, Strategy sold 5,429,160 shares of its Class A common stock through its at-the-market (ATM) program between July 20 and July 26, bringing in $544.5 million in net proceeds. In parallel, it repurchased 288,930 shares of its STRC preferred stock for $25 million, as detailed in a Form 8-K filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on Monday.

Key takeaways

• Strategy raised $544.5 million in net proceeds via its July 20–26 ATM common stock sales.
• In the same period, the company repurchased $25 million worth of its STRC preferred stock through buybacks.
• Despite the capital activity, Strategy reported no Bitcoin buys or sales for July 20–26, keeping holdings steady at 843,775 BTC.
• Strategy’s U.S. dollar reserve increased to $3.75 billion as of July 26, up from $3.225 billion the previous week.
• Recent remarks by Michael Saylor on X fueled speculation about Strategy’s preferred-stock strategy, though the filings show only what the company actually executed.

ATM stock sales and preferred buybacks

Strategy’s latest capital moves were carried out through both of the mechanisms it has relied on to fund its broader financial strategy. First, the company used its at-the-market offering program to sell additional shares. The reported sale volume—5,429,160 shares of Class A common stock—translated into $544.5 million in net proceeds over the July 20–July 26 window.

Separately, Strategy used preferred share repurchases to alter its balance-sheet composition. The company repurchased 288,930 shares of STRC preferred stock for $25 million, according to the Form 8-K filed Monday.

Market reaction followed the news as traders digested the mix of issuance and repurchases. Yahoo Finance data referenced by the original reporting indicated STRC preferred shares were up about 2.3% to $88.90 ahead of the Nasdaq open, while Strategy’s common shares were also higher in Monday’s premarket activity.

Why the cash reserve matters for Strategy’s structure

Following additional fundraising through its ATM program, Strategy increased its U.S. dollar reserve to $3.75 billion as of July 26. The company’s prior reserve level was $3.225 billion the week before, meaning the latest funding cycle added roughly half a billion dollars to the cash buffer over a short period.

Just as important for investors is that Strategy reported no Bitcoin purchases or sales during July 20–26. Its Bitcoin holdings remained unchanged at 843,775 BTC, acquired at an average purchase price of $75,476 per bitcoin, for $63.69 billion in aggregate. In other words, the week’s financing activity appears to have been directed toward liquidity and capital structure rather than changing the size of the treasury.

Strategy’s growing cash reserve reflects an operational need that goes beyond flexibility in market conditions. The reserve is intended to support dividend payments on its preferred stock and interest payments on its outstanding debt—requirements that make near-term liquidity particularly relevant for a company balancing treasury strategy with obligations across its capital stack.

Saylor’s posts reignite debate on Bitcoin and banks

These financial filings arrived in the wake of renewed debate sparked by Strategy executive chairman Michael Saylor on X. Earlier in the week, Saylor’s comments pushed the same discussion back to the forefront: whether Bitcoin’s long-term growth depends on integration with traditional financial institutions.

On Sunday, Saylor wrote that rejecting Bitcoin’s links to financial infrastructure would deny access to most potential users. The argument drew criticism from some Bitcoin supporters, who argue that greater reliance on banks runs counter to Bitcoin’s original goal as a peer-to-peer electronic cash system designed to minimize the need for financial intermediaries.

Supporters and critics both claim alignment with Bitcoin’s fundamentals, but they emphasize different layers of adoption. For those skeptical of bank involvement, the concern is that mainstream routing through established institutions could undermine the network’s decentralized promise. For those taking Saylor’s position, the focus is on distribution—how institutions can act as conduits for broader user access.

The renewed discussion also followed an earlier Saylor post in which he wrote, “We’re gonna need another color,” prompting speculation among market observers about possible adjustments to Strategy’s preferred stock approach. While the speculation highlighted investor attention to Strategy’s preferred instrument strategy, the week’s documented actions remain tied to the specific transactions reported in regulatory filings.

What to watch next

With Strategy maintaining a steady Bitcoin position during the July 20–26 window while simultaneously building cash reserves and adjusting preferred shares, the next signals to monitor are whether future filings show additional preferred share changes, further increases in the dollar reserve, or a shift back toward Bitcoin purchases. The balance between financing activity and treasury execution is likely to remain the key question for investors tracking how Strategy translates capital markets access into long-term Bitcoin exposure.

Crypto token discovery is becoming more fragmented as projects adopt multi-platform visibility strategies across DEX screeners, wallets, explorers, and trading terminals.

Crypto token discovery no longer happens on a single chart. As traders move between DEX screeners, wallets, explorers and execution terminals, token teams need a coordinated visibility strategy built around real market activity and platform-specific requirements.

A token launch can be technically successful and still remain almost invisible. Creating a pool and enabling trading puts an asset on-chain, but it does not guarantee that traders will encounter it while browsing the tools they already use.

That discovery layer is becoming increasingly fragmented. A trader might notice a pair on DEX Screener, research it through DEXTools or GeckoTerminal, encounter it in Phantom, verify activity on an explorer, and then execute through a terminal such as Axiom, Padre or GMGN. For token teams, visibility is therefore no longer a single-platform task.

Discovery now happens at several layers

DEX screeners remain an important entry point because they organize large numbers of live pairs around activity, liquidity and attention. Yet screeners are only one part of the journey. Wallets have added token discovery surfaces, explorers highlight assets and activity, and trading terminals increasingly shape what active market participants see during fast-moving sessions.

The platforms do not all rank assets in the same way. DEX Screener’s official Trending documentation, for example, groups its signals into market activity, community engagement, and trust and credibility. It identifies factors such as volume, liquidity, transactions, unique makers, holders, page visitors, reactions and verified token information. The exact formula and thresholds are not public, and rankings remain competitive as market conditions change.

Phantom also gives users a dedicated way to explore trending tokens, while GeckoTerminal helps users identify pools gaining attention through on-chain activity and visits. These interfaces serve different moments in the research process, which means a campaign designed for one surface cannot simply be assumed to work on another.

Visibility signals are platform-specific

The common mistake is to treat trending as a switch. In reality, discovery systems observe a mix of conditions, and a token that is not ready can lose visibility as quickly as it gains it.

Before starting a campaign, teams should confirm the correct contract, chain, exchange and liquidity pool. Token information should be complete, and the selected pair should have enough liquidity and genuine market activity to remain usable. Community announcements should point traders to the same intended pair rather than dividing attention among several pools.

Timing also matters. A visibility push is easier to understand when it is connected to a real event such as a launch, product update, exchange expansion or active community campaign. Random activity without a clear reason for traders to investigate the token may produce impressions but little meaningful follow-through.

This distinction is important: visibility describes exposure on a discovery surface. It does not guarantee buyers, price appreciation or investment returns.

PandaBoost brings campaign workflows together

PandaBoost is a crypto visibility platform for token launchers, marketing teams and agencies. It provides platform-specific campaigns across DEX screeners, wallets, explorers and trading terminals rather than treating token discovery as a single generic placement.

Its current service lineup includes DEX Screener Trending, DEXTools Trending, GeckoTerminal Trending, Phantom Trending and Phantom Chat Trending, Solscan Trending, RugCheck Most Viewed, InsightX Trending, and Terminal Trending for Axiom, Padre and GMGN.

The value of this model is coordination. A team can choose the discovery surfaces that match its audience while keeping the campaign tied to one verified token and pair. That is more practical than assuming every trader begins research on the same website.

For teams focused specifically on DEX Screener, PandaBoost also publishes a detailed guide to DEX Screener Trending campaigns, including the platform’s disclosed ranking signals, campaign preparation, and live-position limitations.

New users can test one part of the workflow before placing a paid order: PandaBoost currently provides 20 free DEX Screener reactions for the correct token pair, with no card or wallet connection required. The test is designed to demonstrate reaction delivery; it is not a promise that a token will reach a particular trending position.

Try it first: Claim 20 free DEX Screener reactions for a token pair.

Visibility is not a substitute for market quality

No visibility service can repair a token that is not ready for public attention. Traders can still inspect liquidity, trading history, holder distribution, token information and security context. Sending more people to an incomplete profile or unstable market may expose weaknesses rather than build confidence.

A practical campaign therefore begins before the order itself. The team should verify the pool, update public information, check whether current metrics satisfy the selected platform’s requirements and choose a time when the community can support the announcement. During delivery, the same metrics need to be monitored because third-party rankings remain live.

Token teams should also separate campaign reporting from market performance. Useful visibility measurements can include placement range, duration, profile visits and engagement with the intended pair. Price action, trading decisions and conversion outcomes should be evaluated separately and without assuming causation.

A practical sequence for token teams

A coordinated visibility plan can follow five steps:

1. Verify the contract, chain, DEX and exact pool to be promoted.

2. Complete the token profile and review liquidity, volume and other eligibility conditions.

3. Identify where the target audience discovers and trades tokens.

4. Connect the campaign to a real launch event, update or community push.

5. Monitor visibility and market conditions separately throughout the campaign.

The broader shift is clear: token discovery has become multi-platform. DEX screeners still matter, but wallets, explorers and trading terminals now influence how traders move from first exposure to deeper research. Teams that plan around this fragmented journey can build more coherent campaigns while keeping expectations grounded in what visibility can — and cannot — deliver.

Strategy increased its U.S. dollar reserve by $525 million to $3.75 billion while keeping its Bitcoin holdings unchanged at 843,775 BTC. 

The company said the cash balance now provides 2.1 years of coverage for preferred stock dividends. The calculation reflects Strategy’s own reserve policy and does not guarantee payments under all market conditions.

The July 27 disclosure also showed that Strategy made no Bitcoin purchases between July 20 and July 26. Its Bitcoin reserve carries a purchase cost of $63.69 billion, including fees and expenses, at an average price of $75,476 per coin.

Common stock sales fund the larger cash reserve

Strategy sold 5,429,160 shares of MSTR common stock through its at-the-market programme during the week. Those sales produced $544.5 million in net proceeds. The company sold no STRF, STRC, STRK or STRD preferred shares during the reporting period.

The Form 8-K said the $3.75 billion reserve includes expected proceeds from shares that had not settled by July 26. Strategy created the reserve to support preferred dividends and interest on outstanding debt. The company’s headline description of “2.1 years of dividend coverage” therefore represents a management calculation based on current obligations and the stated cash balance.

Strategy still had about $22.98 billion available under its MSTR stock offering programmes after the latest sales. That capacity gives the company another route to raise cash, although future issuance depends on market conditions and would increase the number of common shares outstanding.

Strategy buys back STRC but purchases no Bitcoin

Alongside the stock sales, Strategy repurchased 288,930 STRC preferred shares for $25 million. It retained $975 million of authority under its preferred-stock repurchase programme and another $1 billion under its MSTR common-stock repurchase programme.

The company did not buy back MSTR shares during the week. It also made no repurchases of STRF, STRK or STRD. The STRC transaction shows Strategy using part of its capital plan to support its preferred securities while it builds the dollar reserve used for distributions.

The unchanged Bitcoin balance extends the company’s pause in accumulation. As crypto.news reported on July 13, Strategy raised $466.7 million through MSTR sales during an earlier week while holding the same 843,775 BTC. Its reserve stood at $3 billion at that time. A later update placed the cash balance at $3.225 billion before the latest increase.

Bitcoin holdings remain below their June peak

Strategy’s current Bitcoin total remains 3,588 BTC below the 847,363 coins it held in late June. The company sold those coins for about $216 million between June 29 and July 5 after adopting a framework that allowed selected Bitcoin sales to fund dividends, interest and reserve needs.

As previously reported, the sales marked a change from Strategy’s long-running accumulation model. The company then stopped buying Bitcoin and directed fresh common-stock proceeds toward cash. The latest filing shows no new Bitcoin sale, leaving the reserve unchanged at 843,775 BTC through July 26.

The company still holds the largest disclosed corporate Bitcoin reserve. However, the July update centres on liquidity rather than further accumulation. Strategy’s latest action increased direct cash coverage while reducing the immediate need to sell Bitcoin or raise new funds solely to meet scheduled distributions.

Dividend coverage remains a company estimate

Strategy describes its reserve as money intended to support dividends on preferred stock and interest on debt. At $3.75 billion, the balance equals about 25 months under the company’s current coverage measure. The filing does not lock the cash into a separate legal account or remove the board’s role in approving dividends.

Recent related coverage also examined Strategy’s internal BTC Rating. The company said Bitcoin could fall 11.4% annually for 5.8 years while its model maintained 1.0x coverage of net debt and preferred stock. Strategy created the metric itself and that no independent credit agency assigns it.

JPMorgan previously said building two to three years of cash coverage could ease concerns that Strategy might need to sell Bitcoin to fund preferred dividends. The new 2.1-year figure enters that range, although refinancing costs, dividend-rate changes, share prices and Bitcoin market conditions can alter the calculation.

Strategy has not announced when it will resume Bitcoin purchases. Its July 27 filing instead records a larger cash reserve, a $25 million STRC repurchase and another week without buying or selling BTC. Future weekly disclosures will show whether the company keeps directing stock-sale proceeds toward liquidity or returns to Bitcoin accumulation.

For a year Robinhood was Kalshi’s largest distributor. Then it bought a CFTC-licensed exchange off the shelf, put Susquehanna behind the order book, and began routing its own flow to itself. The World Cup was the proving ground, the migration is under way, and the lesson is the one every platform eventually teaches its suppliers: the license was never the moat.

There is a sequence that plays out in every platform business, and the companies on the wrong end of it almost never see it coming, because the early years feel like partnership. A distributor takes a supplier’s product to its customers. The product succeeds. The distributor learns the economics, the operational requirements, and above all the size of the margin flowing past it to someone else. Then the distributor builds or buys the supplier’s function and keeps the margin. Amazon ran it on the merchants who taught it which products sold. Netflix ran it on the studios whose licensing bills it was paying. And this year Robinhood ran it on Kalshi, the prediction-market exchange it spent a year introducing to a hundred million retail accounts. The vehicle is Rothera, a CFTC-licensed derivatives exchange and clearinghouse that Robinhood and Susquehanna International Group acquired and rebranded, and the migration is already visible in the tape: the World Cup’s core markets routed to Rothera in June, the chief financial officer says most flow follows, and analysts report Robinhood customers now account for a shrinking share of Kalshi’s volume. This piece is the anatomy of that sequence, what it says about where value actually sits in prediction markets, and why the newest development, Robinhood reportedly negotiating to add a third party’s contracts alongside its own, is the most revealing detail of all.

What Rothera is, and what it cost to become one

The first fact worth internalizing is how ordinary the hard part turned out to be.

Rothera was not built. It was purchased: MIAXdx, previously known as LedgerX, a derivatives exchange and clearinghouse that already held Commodity Futures Trading Commission registration, acquired in a majority stake by Robinhood alongside Susquehanna International Group and renamed. That single sentence contains the entire strategic insight of this story. The regulated status that Kalshi spent years and a federal lawsuit securing, the designated contract market license and the clearing infrastructure that constitute the legal right to list event contracts in the United States, was available for purchase from an existing holder. Licenses are assets. Assets have prices. And a company with Robinhood’s balance sheet can buy in one transaction what a startup treats as its defining achievement.

The complementary piece was liquidity, and Susquehanna supplied it. One of the world’s largest quantitative trading and market-making firms serves as Rothera’s day-one liquidity provider, with both Susquehanna and Robinhood holding advisory-board seats. New exchanges usually fail at exactly this point, because thin books produce bad fills, bad fills drive traders away, and the absence of traders keeps the books thin. Starting with a top-tier market maker committed to the venue removes the failure mode that kills most new exchanges before their first quarter closes.

So the assembled package is license plus clearing plus institutional liquidity plus, critically, a customer base that already exists inside an app those customers open every day. Rothera’s contracts are also expected to carry lower fees for Robinhood users than third-party alternatives, which is the natural consequence of removing an intermediary’s margin from the chain. Everything a prediction-market exchange needs, in other words, except the years.

The migration, contract by contract

The rollout has been methodical enough to read as a case study, and the sequencing shows a company managing risk, not making a statement.

The first step was the quiet one: Rothera self-certified a baseball outcome event contract in mid-May with an intended listing date on or after May 20, and Robinhood began routing select Major League Baseball and economic-data contracts through it in a late-May soft launch. Small markets, unglamorous categories, minimal customer visibility, exactly where a platform tests new plumbing.

The second step was the World Cup, and the choice of venue was not incidental. Rothera’s tournament contracts were self-certified on May 27, and when the competition opened on June 11 across the United States, Canada, and Mexico, Robinhood routed the core markets, individual match outcomes, tournament winner, spreads, and totals, through its own exchange. A hundred and four matches over a month, with the largest event-contract volumes of the year attached to them, is the most demanding load test available, and Robinhood ran it on the venue it owns.

The third step is the one still under way, and its shape is the most informative part. Robinhood did not cut Kalshi off. Player-specific contracts, parlay-style combinations, and complex tournament props continued to route to Kalshi, with the company saying routing decisions depend on liquidity and resolution clarity per contract type. That is the textbook profile of a migration, not a rupture: keep the partner supplying the long tail that is expensive to build while taking the high-volume core that generates the revenue. Chief Financial Officer Shiv Verma has said publicly that most prediction-market flow is expected to migrate to Rothera over time, which converts the split from an operational nuance into an announced trajectory.

The numbers that made it inevitable

Understanding why Robinhood did this requires only the scale of what it was routing elsewhere.

Robinhood has processed more than 16 billion event contracts this year, against more than 12 billion across all of 2025, growth that made prediction markets one of the company’s fastest-expanding segments. The revenue line tells the same story from the other end: event contracts produced $147 million in a single quarter, exceeding the company’s cryptocurrency transaction revenue in the same period, an internal flippening this publication covered in its earnings analysis. A business generating that much revenue while paying an external exchange for the venue function is, from the platform’s perspective, a margin leak with a countdown attached, and the countdown ends whenever acquiring a license becomes cheaper than continuing to rent one.

Kalshi’s exposure is the mirror image. The exchange grew explosively on the strength of exactly this distribution, with Robinhood’s hundred-million-account retail machine supplying a large tributary of the volume that took Kalshi to roughly $31.5 billion in a single month and a $22 billion valuation. Analysts now report that Robinhood customers represent a shrinking share of that volume, and Kalshi’s own chief executive named Robinhood as one of its largest competitors in June, roughly a year after naming it a partner. Kalshi’s response has been to build directly toward its own users, launching a professional-tier product and expanding into perpetual-style contracts, which is the correct strategic answer, and also an expensive one for a company that until recently had distribution handled.

The asymmetry underneath is worth stating plainly, because it generalizes past this pair. An exchange’s assets are its license, its clearing infrastructure, its liquidity, and its distribution. Three of those four can be bought. The fourth, a customer base that opens your application every day, is the one that takes a decade and a brand, and it is the one Robinhood already had.

The Crypto.com signal: a shelf, not a store

Then, two days ago, the strategy revealed a further layer, and it changes what the whole exercise means.

Reports place Robinhood in talks with Crypto.com to offer that company’s prediction-market contracts inside the Robinhood application, alongside contracts already sourced from Kalshi, Interactive Brokers’ ForecastEx, and Rothera. A company that had just built its own exchange negotiating to carry a competitor’s products looks contradictory only if the goal was to own an exchange. It is entirely coherent if the goal is to own the shelf. Robinhood’s stated position is that it intends to work with multiple exchanges to give customers a broad and resilient marketplace, and read against the Rothera migration, that sentence describes a specific architecture: the platform routes each contract type to whichever venue offers the best economics or the deepest book, including its own, and captures the customer relationship regardless of where any individual trade clears.

That is a materially stronger position than vertical integration alone, and it maps onto the pattern our cluster coverage has been tracing from the other direction. The exchange operators bought their way toward the probability-data layer on the theory that owning the odds beats operating the casino. Robinhood is executing the third possibility neither of them centered: own the customer, and let the venues compete for the flow. In retail brokerage this is simply order routing, a business Robinhood understands intimately and has been litigated over before, and applying it to event contracts turns exchanges into interchangeable suppliers bidding for access to a distribution point they cannot replicate.

Which reframes the competitive question the whole sector is asking. The prediction-market war has been narrated as Kalshi versus Polymarket, regulated versus crypto-native, with a legislative overhang above both. The Rothera sequence suggests a different axis entirely: the venues are competing for volume that a small number of retail distributors control, and those distributors have every incentive to commoditize them. Kalshi’s $22 billion valuation prices continued category leadership. Robinhood’s build prices the possibility that leadership among venues is worth less than ownership of the front door.

The conflict nobody has priced yet

There is a structural problem inside this architecture that the competitive story tends to skip, and it is the one most likely to attract official attention: Robinhood now decides where its customers’ orders go, and it owns one of the destinations.

The company frames routing as an operational judgment based on liquidity and resolution clarity per contract type, which is a reasonable description of how any multi-venue router should work. It is also, precisely, a description of discretion exercised by a party with a financial interest in one outcome. When Robinhood routes a World Cup match contract to Rothera instead of Kalshi, the economics of that decision accrue to Robinhood twice, once as the distributor and once as part-owner of the venue and its clearing, and the customer has no visibility into the comparison that produced the choice. This is not a novel problem. It is the same structure that made payment for order flow the most litigated question in retail brokerage, produced a nine-figure settlement for this same company over disclosure of its routing economics, and remains a standing item on the regulatory agenda for equities and options. Applying the model to a newer product category does not make the question newer.

The mitigating facts are real and worth stating. Event contracts are not equities, best-execution obligations in derivatives markets work differently, and Rothera is a CFTC-regulated designated contract market with a clearinghouse, subject to that agency’s oversight instead of operating in a gray zone. Lower fees for Robinhood users, if they materialize as expected, are a genuine customer benefit that a vertically integrated venue can deliver and an arm’s-length partner cannot. A regulator examining the arrangement would find a licensed exchange, a licensed broker, disclosed common ownership, and a market maker with a public role, which is a considerably cleaner picture than the offshore venues occupying much of this category.

But the incentive asymmetry does not disappear because the entities are licensed, and the category’s regulatory environment makes scrutiny likelier and not less likely. Event contracts already face a bill that would ban sports markets outright, active litigation from a dozen state gaming regulators, and a congressional oversight probe into platform surveillance practices, all of which this publication’s cluster coverage has mapped. A retail platform routing customer orders to its own exchange, in a product category legislators are already inclined to treat as gambling, is a headline waiting for its hearing. The most valuable thing Robinhood could do about it is the thing platforms almost never do voluntarily: publish routing statistics per venue, per contract type, with the fee differential attached. Its absence will be noticed eventually, and the notice will come from somewhere less friendly than a competitor.

Cointelegraph is committed to providing independent, high-quality journalism across the crypto, blockchain, AI, and fintech industries.

All news, reviews, and analyses are produced with full journalistic independence and integrity. For more details on our standards and processes, please read our Editorial Policy.

Cloud mining platforms like LONG DeFi are promoting simplified crypto mining by removing hardware and technical barriers for everyday participants.

Still hesitant about mining due to the expensive equipment, specialized skills, and time commitment required? LONG DeFi completely breaks down all barriers – no need to build a personal mining farm, no need to master complex operations, and no geographical restrictions. Leveraging globally leading cloud computing infrastructure, it allows ordinary investors to participate in cryptocurrency mining with peace of mind and reap stable, ideal returns.

LONG DeFi is increasingly becoming a recognized and stable source of passive income, and a top choice for global investors. Its core advantages are as follows: User-friendly interface: The operation panel is intuitive and clear, all functions are readily apparent, and querying and managing assets is easy and convenient.

Significant profit potential: By optimizing mining strategies, we help users maximize their return on investment.

Safe, transparent and reliable: We adopt industry-leading security mechanisms to ensure asset security. Every transaction record is clear, verifiable and traceable.

How to start LONG DeFi Mining

Step 1: Register on the LONG DeFi Platform

Please visit the official LONG DeFi website and complete the simple account opening process:

Register Account: Fill in personal information to create an account.

Complete Verification: Pass identity verification to ensure account compliance and fund security.

Link Wallet: Connect a secure encrypted wallet for subsequent fund transfers and yield settlement.

Step 2: Choose a mining plan

Te platform offers flexible mining plans to suit different capital sizes and experience levels:

Beginner Plan: Suitable for beginners or users who wish to start with a small amount of capital.

Advanced Plan: For experienced users seeking higher returns.

Customized Plan: Tailor-made configurations for large investors.

For example:

Beginner: BTC [Intelligent Computing] $100 | Term: 2 days | Daily Profit: $4 | Total Profit: $100 + $8

DOGE [Digital Intelligent System]: $500 | Term: 5 days | Daily Profit: $6.25 | Total Profit: $500 + $31.25

BTC [Supercomputing System] $1000 | Term: 10 days | Daily Profit: $13.1 | Total Profit: $1000 + $131

DOGE [Computing Engine System] $5000 | Term: 25 days | Daily Profit: $72 | Total Profit: $5000 + $1800

BTC [Algorithm-Driven System] $10000 | Term: 30 days | Daily Profit: $158 | Total Profit: $10000 + $4830

Step 3: Deposit startup capital

Supports multiple payment methods and flexible deposits:

Cryptocurrency Transfers: Supports BTC, USDT, ETH, LTC, USDC, XRP, and BCH, among other mainstream cryptocurrencies.

Step 4: View and manage earnings

View mining earnings and operational status in real time on the platform panel. Users can withdraw their earnings at any time or reinvest them to further increase returns through compound interest.

Is LONG DeFi legal and compliant?

Yes, LONG DeFi operates in strict accordance with regulatory requirements in various regions, possessing complete compliance qualifications and a long-term stable service record.

Which cryptocurrencies does it support mining?

Currently supports mainstream digital assets such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Litecoin.

How long does it take to withdraw earnings?

Withdrawal requests are processed efficiently, typically arriving within 24 hours, ensuring funds’ liquidity.

Are there referral rewards?

Do I earn money by inviting friends to join?

Yes, the platform has a referral program; users can earn up to 5% by successfully inviting friends to register and use the platform.

Conclusion

LONG DeFi provides global investors with a reliable, low-barrier-to-entry path to participate in cryptocurrency mining and generate passive income. With its user-friendly product experience, robust yield potential, and commitment to compliance and sustainable operation, LONG DeFi is poised to continue leading the industry in 2026 and beyond.

Download the app now, register with one click, and easily start the passive income journey.

BitMine Immersion Technologies said its Ethereum holdings reached 5,787,414 ETH as of July 26 after the company bought another 9,946 tokens during the week. 

The position equals about 4.8% of Ethereum’s stated 120.7 million supply and leaves BitMine close to its target of owning 5% of all ETH. 

The company valued its broader portfolio at $11.8 billion using an ETH reference price of $1,948. The total includes 208 BTC, $268 million in cash and marketable securities, a $180 million stake in Beast Industries and a $61 million position in Eightco Holdings. The figures reflect BitMine’s own valuation method. 

BitMine moves closer to its 5% Ethereum target

BitMine calls its plan to acquire 5% of Ethereum’s supply the “Alchemy of 5%.” At the current reported supply, that target equals about 6.04 million ETH. The latest total places the company about 96% of the way there, leaving roughly 247,586 ETH to reach the goal if supply remains unchanged. 

Chairman Tom Lee said BitMine has bought ETH every week since it started the treasury strategy on June 30, 2025. As crypto.news previously reported, the company held nearly 5.78 million ETH in its prior weekly disclosure. The latest purchase raised that balance by another 9,946 ETH.

The strategy gives BitMine direct exposure to Ethereum’s market price. It also creates concentration risk because ETH makes up most of the reported portfolio. BitMine’s latest quarterly filing lists price volatility, liquidity limits, custody risks and possible unrealised losses among the risks tied to its digital assets.

Staked ETH supports a growing revenue stream

BitMine said it has staked 4,917,189 ETH through its Made in America Validator Network, known as MAVAN, and other partners. That amount represents about 85% of its total ETH holdings. The company valued the staked position at $9.6 billion using the same $1,948 reference price.

Lee said current staking operations could generate $254 million in annualised revenue based on a seven-day yield of 2.65%. He also projected annual rewards of $299 million if BitMine stakes its full ETH balance. These are management estimates rather than fixed returns. Ethereum rewards can change with network participation, validator performance and protocol conditions. 

Staking has become BitMine’s main operating revenue source. Its Form 10-Q showed $45.7 million in staking and validation revenue for the three months ended May 31. That represented about 98% of its $46.5 million quarterly revenue, as previously reported.

Share buybacks rise as ETH purchases continue

BitMine repurchased 6.1 million common shares during the latest week under its $4 billion buyback programme. The company said the purchase increased from 5.5 million shares in the prior week. It has repurchased 11.6 million shares since July 1.

Lee said management increased buybacks because it viewed the rising ETH-to-BTC ratio as a sign of stronger crypto conditions. The release stated that the ratio had reached a three-month high at “0.3000.” That statement reflects management’s market view and does not measure BitMine’s operating performance. 

The chairman also said ETH could test “$2,000 and $2,500” if a comparison with the S&P 500 after October 1987 continues to hold. That remains a price forecast. It does not form part of BitMine’s reported holdings and does not guarantee future ETH performance. 

Treasury model combines staking, equities and cash

Beyond Ethereum and Bitcoin, BitMine holds stakes in Beast Industries and Eightco. The company describes these positions as “moonshots.” Their stated values can change with financing terms, market prices and company developments. The update also showed cash and marketable securities falling to $268 million from $385 million in the previous weekly disclosure.

BitMine joined the Russell 1000 index on June 26 and launched Series A preferred stock under the BMNP ticker. The company said its common shares recorded average daily dollar volume of $597 million over five sessions through July 24. It ranked the stock 171st among U.S.-listed companies using Fundstrat and Statista data.

As crypto.news previously reported, BitMine’s growing treasury could reduce the amount of ETH available for trading because most holdings are staked. The same structure leaves the company closely tied to ETH prices and staking economics. Its SEC filing warns that staking yields, regulatory changes and access to capital could affect results.

The company remains below its stated 5% target, but the gap has narrowed to less than 250,000 ETH at the reported supply level. Future weekly disclosures will show whether BitMine keeps buying ETH while continuing its share repurchase programme.

The Hyperliquid Policy Center and Multicoin Capital have filed a joint comment supporting the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s proposed prediction-market framework.

The groups said written federal standards would help operators design event contracts and reduce policy swings between administrations. 

The filing arrived on July 27, the proposal’s comment deadline. The rule would explain how the CFTC reviews contracts tied to gaming, war, terrorism, assassination and conduct that violates federal or state law. 

Joint filing supports the CFTC proposal

The CFTC proposed amendments to Regulation 40.11 in June after an earlier consultation. Its three-step test would ask whether a product is an event contract, whether it involves a listed activity and whether trading would conflict with the public interest.

The plan does not ban every contract connected to those subjects. The CFTC would review products case by case during a process lasting up to 90 days. Chairman Michael Selig called it a “durable, transparent framework,” although the Commission may change the text before adopting a final rule.

Hyperliquid Policy Center and Multicoin said “clear rules beat guesswork.” They argued that standards written into regulations would offer more certainty than policies based mainly on staff interpretation. Their filing presents an industry position and does not resolve current legal disputes. 

Groups seek one federal regulator

The joint comment argues that the CFTC should remain the single federal regulator for exchange-traded prediction contracts. It distinguished those products from bookmaker wagers. Exchange participants trade with one another at market prices, while the venue matches orders and charges fees.

Several states have challenged prediction-market operators under gambling laws. Platforms and the CFTC argue that the Commodity Exchange Act gives federal authorities exclusive control over contracts listed on registered derivatives exchanges. Courts have not produced one final nationwide answer.

As crypto.news previously reported, North Carolina approved access for CFTC-regulated prediction markets in July, while disputes continued elsewhere. Separate coverage described lawsuits involving Kentucky, Kalshi and Polymarket. Those cases test whether federal derivatives rules override state gaming requirements.

Filing seeks settlement-based tests and public reasons

The comment recommends that the CFTC decide whether a contract “involves” a restricted activity by examining the event that controls settlement. A passing link to war or gaming would not automatically trigger review. The payout condition would determine whether the contract enters a listed category.

The CFTC proposal follows a similar reading. It focuses on the underlying settlement event rather than treating trading itself as gaming. The agency also gives examples separating a contract on an unlawful act from one that settles on a lawful court decision.

The groups asked the Commission to publish more examples for difficult cases. They also want it to explain every completed review, including approvals. The proposal requires reasoning when the CFTC blocks a product, but approval decisions could guide later filings.

That request comes as the regulator demands more product-specific detail. On July 24, the CFTC issued its second 2026 warning against broad, template-style self-certifications. It said venues must provide contract terms, settlement methods, data sources and compliance analysis for each proposed variation.

Hyperliquid’s markets shape its policy interest

Hyperliquid introduced HIP-4 outcome contracts on mainnet in May. The fully collateralised products settle at zero or one and do not use leverage or liquidations. Validators approve and settle canonical markets using defined information sources within Hyperliquid’s network.

As crypto.news reported, Hyperliquid’s first offchain market covered the U.S. consumer price index. The platform later expanded its outcome-market system as part of a move beyond perpetual futures. The Policy Center has also asked regulators to account for non-custodial blockchain markets.

The group said Hyperliquid’s products support its case for technology-neutral rules. However, the onchain venue does not currently operate as a CFTC-registered U.S. exchange. A final event-contract rule would not alone create a legal route for decentralized platforms or U.S. users.

The filing also cited fast market growth. Hyperliquid Policy Center said major venues passed $50 billion in June volume. A crypto.news analysis placed combined June volume for Polymarket and Kalshi at $44.8 billion, showing that totals vary by platform and product coverage.

The CFTC will review the comments before deciding whether to revise or adopt the proposal. The process may clarify how registered venues list event contracts, while questions about decentralized access, state authority and registration remain open. National regulators, courts and lawmakers may still shape which firms can serve U.S. customers and which contracts may legally reach them in practice.