Key takeaways

• Ethereum continues its downtrend after breaking key support levels and testing a low of $1,505 last week.
• The broader crypto market remains under pressure following last week’s massive dump.

The cryptocurrency market starts the week on a weak footing, with Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), and Ripple (XRP) continuing to trade under heavy selling pressure following steep declines last week. 

Bitcoin lost more than 14%, Ethereum dropped over 15%, and XRP shed more than 13%, leaving technical indicators firmly tilted toward further downside risks. 

BitMine boosts Ethereum holdings with largest ETH purchase of 2026

Ethereum treasury company BitMine Immersion Technologies significantly expanded its holdings last week, purchasing 126,971 ETH as the second-largest cryptocurrency declined toward the $1,500 price region.

The acquisition marks BitMine’s largest weekly Ethereum purchase of 2026, underscoring the firm’s continued commitment to accumulating the digital asset despite recent market volatility.

Following the latest purchase, BitMine’s total Ethereum holdings have climbed to 5.54 million ETH. The company stated that it now controls approximately 4.59% of Ethereum’s circulating supply, moving closer to its long-standing objective of owning 5% of all ETH in circulation.

According to the firm, it remains on track to achieve that milestone before the end of the year, further strengthening its position as one of the largest corporate holders of Ethereum.

Ethereum slides below critical support areas

Ethereum is also extending its bearish trend, trading around $1,684 after breaking several key support levels below. The second-largest cryptocurrency remains firmly below its 50-day, 100-day, and 200-day EMAs, currently positioned near $2,058, $2,189, and $2,441, respectively.

The concentration of these moving averages above current price levels suggests that any recovery attempts could face strong selling pressure. Meanwhile, Ethereum’s daily RSI sits at 50, indicating a neutral market condition, while the MACD remains deeply negative, reinforcing the dominance of bearish momentum.

For bulls to regain control, Ethereum would need to overcome several resistance levels:

• Immediate resistance at $1,747.
• Psychological resistance at $2,000.
• 50-day EMA near $2,058.
• 100-day EMA around $2,189.
• 200-day EMA near $2,441.

On the downside, the next significant support level is located around $1,385, a zone where buyers could attempt to slow or reverse further declines if selling pressure intensifies.

THORChain has moved into the next phase of its recovery from the May 15 vault exploit. 

Validators are now reviewing version 3.19.0, which combines security patches with the ADR-028 loss-recovery plan.

The release also introduces a mechanism that can quarantine a compromised vault. THORChain said this would stop an affected vault from processing transactions while keeping its activity visible to the network.

Validators review THORChain v3.19.0

“The next major step in the recovery process is now underway,” THORChain said in its sixth incident update. Validators must vote to approve v3.19.0 before the network can begin the staged upgrade.

The release contains patches for the threshold signature system used to control THORChain vaults. It also implements ADR-028, the governance plan approved after the exploit. The protocol said the upgrade would move the network closer to restoring normal operations.

Version 3.19.0 includes a new Compromised Vault Mimir setting. Once enabled, the setting will isolate the drained vault from transaction processing without removing it from network monitoring.

Keyshare checks come before signing resumes

THORChain plans to validate the ADR-028 data migration after validators complete the upgrade. Every node must then verify the integrity of its keyshares through a temporary protocol called keyverify.

Keyshares allow validators to sign vault transactions together without one operator holding the full private key. The added check aims to confirm that the remaining shares are intact before signing restarts.

After those checks, validators will unhalt signing and start a churn. Churning replaces the active validator set and transfers assets into newly generated vaults. The network will wait for that process to finish before restoring other services.

Secured and Trade assets will return first. Liquidity-provider actions will follow, while trading will resume at the end of the 11-step process. Each stage depends on the previous checks completing successfully.

ADR-028 covers losses without new RUNE

As previously reported by crypto.news, THORChain validators approved ADR-028 in May. The plan uses protocol-owned liquidity to absorb losses before allocating any remaining shortfall across synthetic asset holders.

The framework does not mint or sell new RUNE. It also avoids direct dilution for existing holders. Future system income will help rebuild protocol-owned liquidity after the restart.

THORChain also activated a bounty window for the attacker and approved the full slashing of the linked node. The protocol said innocent nodes that shared the affected vault would remain protected.

Full restart still depends on validators

The May 15 exploit drained about $10.7 million from one of THORChain’s five vaults. THORChain’s report said a newly added node exploited a weakness in the GG20 threshold signature implementation. Four other vaults remained unaffected.

Automatic solvency checks detected the imbalance and halted signing within minutes. Node operators later paused trading, chain observation and churning while developers investigated the attack.

Validator approval of v3.19.0 would begin the final technical sequence, but it would not restore every service at once. THORChain will reopen signing, asset functions, liquidity actions and trading in stages after completing the vault, migration, keyshare and churn checks.

More than 200 crypto companies and organizations are pressing the U.S. Senate to pass the CLARITY Act, warning that delays could cost the industry a critical legislative window. A letter circulated Monday, and shared by the crypto lobby group Stand With Crypto, calls on Senate leadership to bring the bill to the floor without delay, arguing that momentum from a bipartisan Banking Committee vote should be built upon to advance durable market-structure legislation.

The CLARITY Act is designed to clarify how the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission would regulate digital assets. Yet it has stalled multiple times this year as lawmakers and advocacy groups have debated its provisions. The ongoing negotiations have centered on two high-stakes demands: a prohibition on platforms offering stablecoin yields, backed by banking groups, and protections for developers building decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols, championed by the crypto industry. The letter from industry groups underscores the stakes, saying that enactment would keep crypto jobs, investment and market activity in the United States and position the country as a global leader in digital asset innovation.

According to the letter, signed by Stand With Crypto, The Digital Chamber, the Blockchain Association, and the Crypto Council for Innovation, digital asset markets are increasingly global and central to modern financial infrastructure. The signatories argue that the question before Congress is whether the future of digital asset markets will be built within the United States under robust oversight and clear rules, or offshore under less transparency and accountability.

Key takeaways

• Industry coalitions are urging the Senate to bring the CLARITY Act to a floor vote, emphasizing the bipartisan momentum seen in the Banking Committee’s approval.
• The bill aims to harmonize how the SEC and CFTC regulate crypto assets, but negotiations remain unsettled on major reform provisions.
• Disagreements center on a potential ban on stablecoin yield platforms versus protections for DeFi developers, reflecting broader tensions between traditional financial regulators and the crypto sector.
• Timing is uncertain: the Senate has not scheduled floor time for the bill ahead of the November midterm elections, and analysts warn time is running out before a late-July recess.
• Industry observers note ethics and illicit-finance safeguards as critical sticking points that could determine whether lawmakers secure the necessary 60 votes to move forward.

Momentum, timing, and the legislative window

With the Senate yet to schedule floor time for the CLARITY Act, industry groups fear a narrow window ahead of the midterm season. The timing matters because passage would require swift action before lawmakers recess and return to a politically charged environment. Analysts have previously warned that the opportunity to pass meaningful crypto legislation could fade if the bill remains bottled up in committee or fails to reach the floor in a timely manner.

Galaxy Digital’s assessment of the bill’s chances has reflected the evolving political dynamics. In a note published recently, the firm reduced its odds of passage in 2026 to 60% from 75%, noting that the bill would need to clear the Senate before the August recess in late July. “After that, the window effectively closes,” the firm wrote, highlighting how timing could constrain any potential consensus on a comprehensive framework for the sector.

The CLARITY Act has already seen movement in the House-adjacent committees, with the Senate Agriculture and Banking panels advancing their own versions addressing commodities and securities laws. Critics and supporters alike agree that a key hurdle remains: aligning these committee-identified provisions into a single bill that can survive floor debate and garner the necessary bipartisan support. Without an agreed framework, the regulatory roadmap for U.S. crypto markets could remain murky for longer than industry participants can tolerate.

Policy clashes and what remains unresolved

The heart of the stalemate lies in concrete policy choices about how to oversee a rapidly evolving asset class. Banking groups have pressed for a ban on platforms that offer stablecoin yields, arguing that such practices could introduce unsupervised liquidity and risk to financial stability. By contrast, the crypto industry has pressed for measures that would protect developers and operators of non-custodial and DeFi platforms, seeking assurances that innovation won’t be stifled by overly prescriptive rules or punitive penalties for users and builders alike.

Beyond the bifurcated reform agenda, lawmakers are also wrestling with ethics and illicit-finance controls. Senator Cynthia Lummis has been at the forefront of advancing the bill but has signaled openness to amendments that would address potential ethics concerns and strengthen policing of illicit finance flows. Those issues, analysts say, could determine whether the measure can secure the broad support needed to cross the floor, especially in a Senate that has shown bipartisan nerves on digital-asset governance.

Observers note that the process remains a negotiation rather than a finished product. While the Senate Banking Committee’s vote demonstrated that consensus around the general approach exists, the precise balance of protections for users, developers, and market participants remains unsettled. The lack of a settled package means that the industry’s call for certainty — a predictable regulatory environment that could attract investment and job growth — must contend with the political reality of competing priorities as lawmakers prepare for the midterms.

Industry voices and the potential impact on the market ecosystem

Supporters argue that a clear, U.S.-based regulatory framework would reduce uncertainty, entice capital to stay within American markets, and prevent a drift of digital-asset activity to offshore jurisdictions with less transparency and accountability. In the letter shared by Stand With Crypto, the signatories framed the CLARITY Act as a vehicle for “global leadership in digital asset innovation”—a claim that resonates with firms seeking to anchor their operations in a predictable, U.S.-regulated environment.

Yet the road ahead remains contested. The ongoing tug-of-war between groups favoring a stricter stance on stablecoins and those advocating for a rules-based approach that protects developers reflects a broader tension in the sector: balancing consumer protection and market integrity with the need to sustain a thriving ecosystem of innovation and entrepreneurship. The CLARITY Act, if enacted, would set a regulatory frame that could shape everything from product design and fundraising to exchange practices and the deployment of on-chain financial primitives.

For investors and builders, the key takeaway is that a clearer framework could alter risk premiums, funding dynamics, and competitive positioning across wallets, exchanges, and DeFi protocols. As politics and policy continue to unfold, market participants should monitor whether the bill’s sponsors can reconcile the ethics provisions, illicit-finance safeguards, and the two major industry asks into a cohesive package that can win broad support on the Senate floor.

Analysts also keep an eye on how state-level and global developments might influence U.S. policy timing. If the CLARITY Act stalls again, observers warn of a potential shift in investment incentives and project deployments toward jurisdictions with clearer or more favorable regulatory regimes. Conversely, a clear path to floor debate and a timely vote could catalyze a more robust domestic market, with clearer compliance requirements and a more predictable regulatory horizon for startups and incumbents alike.

The drafting process remains dynamic, and industry groups emphasize that any successful version would need to address both the governance needs of developers and the consumer protections that lawmakers want to see. As the debate moves toward potentially blending the different committee proposals, market participants should prepare for a period of heightened policy risk until a finalized framework emerges.

The article’s broader context is not just about a single bill; it’s about how the United States defines itself as a hub for digital-asset innovation. The outcome could influence where companies locate, how they recruit talent, and how they structure their product offerings in a landscape that is increasingly global, competitive, and technologically complex. While the exact details of the final language remain to be seen, the industry’s united plea underscores a shared belief that regulatory clarity is a prerequisite for sustained growth and responsible innovation in the crypto economy.

Readers should watch for a scheduling update on floor time as the summer break approaches, with the understanding that any movement could unfold quickly once leadership commits to a vote. The evolution of the ethics and illicit-finance components, in particular, will likely determine the bill’s fate in the Senate and whether the United States preserves its role as a stable, innovation-forward jurisdiction for digital assets.

The UK Financial Conduct Authority is proposing a calibrated path for authorized investment funds to hold limited exposure to crypto, opening the door for some UCITS and select non-UCITS funds to allocate up to 10% of their assets to crypto exchange-traded notes (ETNs). The move aims to close a regulatory gap between retail investors and funds while preserving protections and market integrity.

The proposal appears in the FCA’s quarterly consultation paper, part of a broader effort to align retail access to crypto with international practice. It follows the regulator’s August decision to lift the ban on retail trading of crypto ETNs, signaling a step toward a more consistent, market-conforming framework for crypto products offered to households and ordinary investors.

The FCA has framed the plan as a balance between “contemporary” investor demands and the need to protect consumers and keep markets functioning well. The 10% cap is described as a conservative restriction intended to enable fund managers to market crypto exposure to retail audiences without compromising risk controls or investor protection.

As background, the UK’s regulatory stance on crypto has intensified in recent months, with parallel workstreams on stablecoins, custody, and staking under active consideration by the Bank of England and FCA. The regulator notes that while some funds can gain exposure to crypto, it does not regard significant crypto holdings as appropriate for retail-focused vehicles given their speculative characteristics. Retail funds would need to demonstrate that crypto allocations are consistent with their disclosed investment objectives and risk profiles.

According to the FCA, unregulated and qualified investor schemes may invest in more speculative assets and would not face the 10% cap, but such funds cannot be marketed or sold to retail investors. The regulator also flags potential restrictions for funds primarily focused on holding long-term assets—such as property—if retail investors are the target, arguing crypto may not align with their objectives.

The consultation runs for five weeks, closing on July 13. In addition to the crypto-ETN proposal, the FCA is seeking feedback on whether to bar funds focused on long-term asset holdings from crypto exposure, and how to ensure consistency with fund-level risk disclosures and objectives.

For context, the UK’s approach sits within a broader policy environment that includes ongoing work on stablecoins, crypto custody frameworks, and staking rules. The Bank of England has signaled that it is reconsidering parts of its proposed stablecoin regime in light of industry feedback, and authorities are pursuing a cohesive set of rules across licensing, oversight, and consumer protections. The policy dialogue also intersects with international dynamics, including ongoing discussions around MiCA alignment and cross-border regulatory differences.

Key background links include the FCA’s consultation paper and related discussions on tokenized funds and crypto guidance, as the UK seeks to harmonize its framework with evolving global standards while preserving prudent oversight. The overarching aim is to modernize access to crypto products for retail investors without compromising market integrity or investor protection.

Related coverage indicates policymakers are weighing how to balance innovation with safeguards in a shifting crypto regulatory landscape.

Key takeaways

• The FCA proposes a 10% cap on crypto exposure for retail-focused UCITS funds and certain non-UCITS funds via crypto ETNs, aiming to preserve investor protection while enabling market access.
• Retail funds would need to ensure crypto holdings align with disclosed objectives and risk profiles; significant exposure to crypto remains constrained due to the asset’s speculative nature.
• Unregulated and qualified investor schemes may invest more aggressively in crypto or other speculative assets, but such products cannot be marketed to retail investors.
• The proposal contends with potential exclusions for funds focused on long-term assets (e.g., property) if crypto exposure would undermine their investment objectives.
• The consultation runs for five weeks, with a deadline of July 13, as part of a broader UK push to modernize crypto rules, including stablecoins, custody, and staking frameworks.

Scope, rationale, and safeguards for retail funds

At the core of the FCA’s proposal is a recognition that authorized funds, including UCITS and certain non-UCITS products aimed at retail investors, should be able to offer crypto exposure in a controlled manner. The 10% cap is described as a conservative threshold designed to balance two objectives: giving retail investors access to diversified crypto products and maintaining robust safeguards against volatile markets. The regulator emphasizes that this exposure must be consistent with each fund’s stated investment objectives and risk profile, ensuring that crypto allocations do not undermine the fund’s core mandate.

The FCA also differentiates between retail- and non-retail audiences. While retail-focused funds would be subject to the 10% limit, unregulated and qualified investor schemes could pursue more speculative holdings, albeit with the caveat that such funds may not be marketed to retail investors. This distinction aligns with common market practice where sophisticated investors can access higher-risk products under more stringent disclosure and risk management provisions.

Additionally, the FCA indicates that certain categories of funds—particularly those centered on long-term assets like real estate—may face restrictions on crypto holdings to preserve alignment with their investment objectives. The regulator’s framing suggests a careful calibration of product design and marketing materials to ensure consistency with risk disclosures and fund mandates.

Regulatory context and policy implications

The consultation occurs within a broader UK regulatory trajectory that seeks to clarify crypto product access while reinforcing protections. The FCA’s move to permit limited exposure to crypto ETNs comes after the August lifting of the retail ban on crypto ETNs, marking a shift toward greater compatibility with international markets and investor expectations. The proposal is part of ongoing policy work around stablecoins, crypto custody, and staking, areas where the Bank of England and FCA are coordinating oversight and licensing considerations.

Industry participants should note the evolving cross-border dimension. UK rules aim to harmonize with global standards and maintain domestic competitiveness in asset management and distribution. As the UK weighs these adjustments, practitioners should monitor how forthcoming guidance may intersect with broader regional regimes, including potential alignment or divergence from EU-level frameworks such as MiCA. The regulatory stance on product design, disclosures, and issuer obligations will influence both fund structuring and marketing strategies for crypto-linked funds.

In this context, the FCA’s consultation underscores a cautious approach to retail crypto access—encouraging innovation while preserving the integrity of markets and the protections afforded to everyday investors. Compliance programs, risk disclosures, and KYC/AML controls will be central to fund onboarding, product development, and ongoing supervision as the policy debate advances.

Industry impact and compliance considerations

For asset managers, this proposal would require careful alignment between a fund’s stated objectives and any crypto exposure, with robust due diligence and risk reporting to support marketing materials and investor disclosures. Funds considering crypto ETN allocations would need to evaluate suitability assessments, liquidity considerations, and custody arrangements to satisfy regulatory expectations and maintain sound governance practices.

Marketing materials and distribution strategies will be subject to scrutiny, particularly for retail products that advertise crypto exposures. Firms will need clear risk disclosures and consistent messaging about the 10% cap, the speculative character of cryptoassets, and how such holdings fit within a fund’s risk framework. The five-week consultation period provides an opportunity for industry participants to shape the specifics of the regime before any final rulemaking.

From a broader compliance and licensing perspective, the proposal reinforces the UK’s intent to build a robust, transparent market structure for crypto products. Banks, custodians, and fintechs involved in crypto product issuance, safekeeping, or distribution should prepare for potential changes in product approval processes, cross-border marketing permissions, and supervisory expectations around suitability, disclosure, and operational risk.

The regulatory clock is moving in a direction that could influence how funds are structured, marketed, and regulated as crypto markets mature. Institutions should continue to monitor the FCA’s consultation outcomes, potential the introduction of accompanying guidance, and any cross-cutting policy adjustments that could affect licensing, stablecoins, and crypto custody regimes.

Closing perspective: As UK authorities balance investor access with rigorous safeguards, the five-week consultation will reveal how far the market can extend retail participation in crypto through regulated funds. The outcome will shape product design, risk management, and compliance playbooks for asset managers and their institutional counterparts in the months ahead.

Key Highlights

• U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs registered $1.72 billion in net redemptions during the week concluding June 5
• This marks the fourth consecutive week of outflows, representing over a month of sustained billion-dollar withdrawals
• BlackRock’s IBIT dominated the exodus with $1.34 billion in redemptions, with Fidelity and Grayscale following behind
• Market observer Ted Pillows anticipates a potential decline to $50,000 before an eventual surge past $100,000
• Bitcoin price recovered toward $64,000 following President Trump’s announcement of an Israel-Iran ceasefire agreement

U.S. spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds have extended their redemption pattern into a fourth consecutive week, recording $1.72 billion in net withdrawals for the period ending June 5, based on figures from SoSoValue.

This withdrawal pattern began during the week concluding May 15. Every subsequent week has witnessed more than $1 billion departing these investment vehicles.

The most intense selling pressure materialized during June’s opening three trading sessions. Funds experienced losses of $483.8 million, $519.1 million, and $396.6 million across those consecutive days. Thursday provided a momentary respite with $3.2 million in inflows before Friday delivered another $325.7 million in withdrawals.

BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF (IBIT) dominated the redemption activity, representing $1.34 billion of the week’s aggregate outflows. Fidelity’s Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund (FBTC) experienced $201.9 million in withdrawals, while Grayscale’s Bitcoin Trust ETF (GBTC) recorded $144.3 million in exits.

Matthew Pinnock, Chief Operating Officer at Altura DeFi, characterized the selling wave as a “macro-driven repricing of risk” unrelated to Bitcoin-specific fundamentals. He explained that IBIT experiences the highest outflows due to its substantial size and liquidity profile, noting that institutional investors gravitate toward the most liquid instruments when reducing risk exposure.

“The timing of these redemptions aligns closely with stronger-than-expected US employment data, rising Treasury yields, and a sharp reduction in rate cut expectations,” Pinnock stated. He emphasized that Bitcoin’s recent price weakness stems from shifting rate expectations and evolving institutional risk appetite.

Ethereum ETFs Mirror Withdrawal Trend

Spot Ethereum ETFs exhibited comparable patterns, documenting $173.05 million in redemptions for the week ending June 5, continuing their own four-week outflow sequence. Ether ETFs have collectively shed approximately $885.6 million throughout this four-week period.

However, not every cryptocurrency ETF product experienced redemptions. HYPE ETFs attracted $16.65 million during the week. XRP ETFs recorded modest inflows of $2.62 million. Solana ETFs registered $6.52 million in outflows.

Cryptocurrency analyst Ted (@TedPillows) observed on X that Bitcoin has formed two lower highs in this market cycle, contrasted with three in the preceding cycle. He cautioned that a third lower high might emerge in Q3, potentially followed by a correction to $50,000. His projection then anticipates a rally exceeding $100,000 following that trough.

Bitcoin Price Rallies Approaching $64K

On June 8, Bitcoin advanced back toward $64,000 after President Trump announced via Truth Social that Israel and Iran were pursuing an “immediate ceasefire.” BTC touched $63,715, representing a 3.25% daily gain.

The cryptocurrency had declined earlier following Iran’s retaliatory military strikes targeting Israeli military installations, which came after Israeli operations against Hezbollah-affiliated sites in Beirut. Iranian authorities subsequently announced their joint military command had suspended offensive operations.

Trump clarified that a blockade would persist until a comprehensive agreement is finalized, though he indicated diplomatic negotiations were already progressing.

Bitcoin traded at $63,715 according to the most recent available information, rebounding from geopolitical-induced declines earlier in the trading session.