Bitcoin and Ether options with a combined notional value of about $10.43 billion expired on July 31, placing the $64,000 Bitcoin level at the center of the monthly settlement.

Greeks.live reported that 149,000 Bitcoin options worth $9.6 billion expired with a 0.28 put-call ratio and $64,000 max pain. Another 435,000 Ether options worth $830 million expired with a 0.63 ratio and $1,850 max pain.

Deribit’s monthly options settle at 08:00 UTC on the final Friday of each month. Shortly after settlement, Bitcoin traded near $63,824, while Ether changed hands around $1,891. Neither asset recorded an immediate break from its recent range.

Bitcoin options expiry settled near $64,000 max pain

The Bitcoin expiry represented about 30% of outstanding contracts, according to Greeks.live. Its low 0.28 put-call ratio showed that call open interest greatly exceeded put open interest going into settlement.

A separate PerpFinder snapshot, based on Deribit data at 07:51 UTC, recorded $7.39 billion in call open interest and $2.06 billion in puts. It placed total notional open interest at $9.45 billion, slightly below Greeks.live’s $9.6 billion estimate. The difference likely reflects changing Bitcoin prices and data captured at different times.

Max pain refers to the settlement price at which the largest value of options would expire without value for buyers. It does not guarantee that the spot market will move toward that level or remain there afterward.

Recent activity supports that caution. Research covering two earlier July expiries found that Bitcoin did not settle precisely at the stated max-pain levels and showed little lasting price movement after the contracts expired.

Call-heavy positioning did not confirm a bullish breakout

The low Bitcoin put-call ratio appears bullish at first because calls provide upside exposure. However, many calls were concentrated above the market price, particularly around the $70,000 and $72,000 strikes.

Contracts at those levels could not generate gains at expiry unless Bitcoin rose sharply above its weekly range. Bitcoin instead traded within a 24-hour range of roughly $63,787 to $65,305, keeping the largest upside positions out of the money.

Greeks.live said call gamma exposure was spread across several strikes, while put gamma exposure was more concentrated. Gamma measures how quickly an option’s price sensitivity changes when the underlying asset moves. Concentrated exposure can affect how dealers hedge, but it does not independently forecast market direction.

The firm also said “the conditions for a rally are not in place,” citing limited capital inflows and weak follow-through when U.S. equities rebounded. That is the firm’s market assessment rather than a confirmed future outcome.

Ether options showed stronger downside protection

Ether’s 0.63 put-call ratio showed more demand for puts relative to calls than the Bitcoin market recorded. Greeks.live placed Ether’s max-pain level at $1,850, below the market price shortly after settlement.

PerpFinder’s final pre-expiry snapshot recorded approximately $499.4 million in Ether call open interest and $311.5 million in puts. It calculated total open interest of $810.9 million and a 0.62 ratio, close to the figures provided by Greeks.live.

Ether traded near $1,891 after settlement, within a 24-hour range of about $1,884 to $1,934. The asset therefore remained above both the $1,850 max-pain estimate from Greeks.live and the $1,800 level cited by some earlier market reports.

As previously reported, Ether options carried a 1.26 put-call ratio during the July 10 expiry. The fall to about 0.63 indicates that positioning became less defensive by month-end, although Ether still carried more relative put exposure than Bitcoin.

ETF inflows and $65,000 resistance shape the next move

The expiry arrived as spot Bitcoin ETF demand showed signs of recovery. U.S. funds received $233.1 million on July 30, led by BlackRock’s IBIT with $183.4 million. However, flows had alternated between gains and withdrawals earlier in the week, supporting Greeks.live’s description of uneven capital demand.

Bitcoin also remained below the heavy trading area above $65,000 identified by Greeks.live. The asset briefly reached a 24-hour high above $65,300 but returned below $64,000, showing that buyers had not established the former rally zone as support.

crypto.news reported that the smaller July 10 expiry also produced cautious positioning and limited confidence in a sustained advance. Earlier July 3 coverage placed attention on weak ETF flows and demand for short-term downside protection.

Traders will next monitor whether positions roll into the August 28 monthly expiry. Deribit data showed about $3.15 billion already positioned for that date in Bitcoin options, while the September 25 expiry carried roughly $6.22 billion.

A sustained move above $65,000, stronger spot volume and several consecutive ETF inflow sessions would provide clearer evidence of improving demand. Without those conditions, the July settlement mainly removed a large block of expiring exposure while leaving Bitcoin’s wider trading range unresolved.

Tokyo-listed Quantum Solutions (2338) sold 1,000 ETH for $1.9 million and more than doubled its disposal ceiling to fund an AI data center business.

The move came as another crypto treasury firm, Hyperscale Data (GPUS), monetized about 100 BTC and opened a bitcoin-backed credit line for a Michigan AI data center..

Quantum sold the ETH on July 30 at $1,903 per token, generating $1.903 million after fees, according to a company filing. It expects to recognize a $100,970 loss against the position’s May 31 carrying value of $2,003.97 per ETH, the filing adds.

The sale price was 47% below the $3,595.02 average acquisition cost Quantum reported in June.

The firm sold 904 ETH for $1.61 million on June 16 at an average price of $1,777 per token. The two disposals raised about $3.51 million and reduced its holdings by 29% to 4,764.8 ETH from 6,668.8 ETH.

Quantum’s board raised the cumulative sale limit to 4,375 ETH from 1,875 ETH through Oct. 30, leaving it authorized to sell another 2,471 ETH. Using the full limit would mean disposing of nearly 66% of the holdings it reported in June.

Perpetual futures tied to tokenized stocks and commodities generated nearly as much trading volume as Bitcoin perpetuals on two of the largest venues for the products over the past week, according to Talos.

Combined seven-day volume across tracked real-world asset (RWA) perps reached $61.7 billion, equal to 99.2% of Bitcoin perpetual volume on Hyperliquid and Binance, where most trading activity is concentrated, Talos told Cointelegraph in an email summary citing a data snapshot taken on Thursday.

Tokenized equity contracts accounted for 57.8% of the total, followed by commodities at 28.2%.

The value of onchain RWAs has grown to about $36.8 billion, excluding stablecoins, according to RWA.xyz. Crypto exchanges have also expanded their offerings beyond cryptocurrencies, increasingly listing tokenized stocks and commodities alongside digital assets.

Related: Tokenized RWA market grows 420% since 2025 on regulatory clarity, access

Hyperliquid recorded $25.1 billion in RWA perpetual trading volume during the week of July 13 to July 19, exceeding the combined volume of all other perpetual categories on its platform.

Circle co-founder and CEO Jeremy Allaire said in a July 24 X post that growing RWA trading on Hyperliquid signals crypto markets moving “away from speculating on endogenous digital commodities.”

Growth continues into the new week

Early data for the current week suggests the trend is continuing. RWA perpetual trading volume has already reached $37.2 billion, exceeding Bitcoin perpetual volume by about 9%, according to Talos’ dashboard.

RWA perpetual futures volume as a percentage of Bitcoin perpetual futures volume on Hyperliquid and Binance. Source: Talos

Equity-linked contracts accounted for $22.8 billion of the total, followed by commodities at $9.1 billion and indexes at $4.2 billion. ETFs contributed about $338 million, while foreign exchange, pre-IPO and other RWA contracts made up the remainder.

Earlier in July, Pantera Capital said perpetual futures could become a dominant trading instrument beyond crypto, citing advantages such as 24/7 trading, the absence of contract expiries, simpler position management and continuous price discovery.

Hyperliquid’s growth has drawn attention from traditional finance. Intercontinental Exchange CEO Jeffrey Sprecher, whose company owns the New York Stock Exchange, recently urged regulators to create a “level playing field” for 24/7 onchain perpetual futures, arguing that existing market structures should not prevent the development of blockchain-based trading.

Despite the growth, RWA perpetuals remain a relatively small segment of the broader crypto derivatives market. Talos’ data shows aggregate futures trading volume of about $821.4 billion over the past seven days, with tracked RWA perpetuals accounting for roughly 7.5% of the total.

Magazine: The 100x obsession: Fundamentals grow in importance as crypto matures

Trading bitcoin BTC$64,171.64 these days feels much as it did seven months ago, at the start of the year.

The price of the largest cryptocurrency is stuck in a tight range, with volatility at six-month lows, and traders are struggling to identify a break to bet on. Not surprisingly, transaction volume has slumped and is on track for the lowest since November 2023.

Back in January, the bitcoin price had been stuck in a narrow band, $86,000-$90,000, since the second half of December. Trading volume had dropped to an average of $5.1 billion a day, and has fallen to $2.2 billion this month, according to research from K33.

What happened next is interesting. Volatility picked up in the following weeks, the price rose to nearly $98,000 by mid-January and then slid down to around $60,000 by early February. Trading volume rose.

And that’s precisely the point. Volatility is cyclical: long stretches of quiet price action often precede a sharp move in one direction or the other. Like a coiled spring, the tighter the market compresses, the more forcefully it can unwind.

Tokenized gold is getting a burst of investor attention this year, tracking a surge in physical bullion demand as gold prices have repeatedly set fresh highs. But a new report from RedStone suggests that—despite improving market conditions—only a small portion of tokenized gold is actually being used in decentralized finance.

RedStone data points to a widening gap between market interest in tokenized bullion and its deployment in DeFi lending. In the first quarter, tokenized gold spot trading volume reached $90.7 billion as gold futures climbed above $5,600 per troy ounce. Yet just $63 million worth of tokenized gold—via Tether Gold (XAUT) and PAX Gold (PAXG)—is currently posted as collateral on Aave v3 and Morpho, according to RedStone. That collateral usage represents roughly 1.5% of the tokens’ combined $4.2 billion market capitalization.

Key takeaways

• Tokenized gold saw high activity in spot markets, with $90.7 billion in Q1 trading volume.
• Despite that liquidity, DeFi adoption remains thin: only about $63 million in XAUT and PAXG is used on Aave v3 and Morpho.
• RedStone highlights a real stress test: Aave processed its largest cluster of XAUT liquidations on March 23 without disruption during a sharp gold sell-off.
• Gold has been under pressure from expectations of higher US interest rates, which can reduce demand for non-yielding assets.

A resilient collateral asset, but with limited deployment

RedStone’s report frames tokenized gold as “battle-tested” in DeFi collateral, even while showing that the broader adoption story is still early. The core issue is not whether tokenized bullion can hold up during market volatility—it can—but whether enough capital is being placed into decentralized lending markets to make tokenized gold a meaningful on-chain primitive.

To ground that claim, RedStone points to Aave’s performance during a major sell-off. On March 23, Aave processed its largest cluster of XAUT liquidations without disruption as gold prices moved sharply lower. RedStone presents this as evidence that tokenized bullion can function reliably as DeFi collateral when markets turn fast.

That liquidation episode landed after gold dropped around 10% over the prior week—its worst weekly performance in more than four decades. Earlier coverage linked the sell-off to what JPMorgan precious metals strategist Greg Shearer called an “extremely brutal flush,” reflecting heightened risk-off behavior and fast repricing in commodity markets.

Why DeFi use is lagging: the market is there, collateral is not

RedStone’s numbers point to a mismatch between trading interest and productive DeFi usage. Tokenized gold spot volume suggests there is plenty of demand to buy, sell, and exchange tokenized bullion exposure. But the amount actually locked or committed to decentralized lending stays relatively small—about $63 million across Aave v3 and Morpho.

That matters because lending protocols are where tokenized real-world assets can translate from “tradable exposure” into “composable financial infrastructure.” If only a tiny fraction of the token supply is being used as collateral, DeFi’s ability to scale tokenized assets—especially during periods of high volatility—remains constrained by capital deployment rather than technical viability.

RedStone also situates the findings within a broader RWA expansion. Gold is one component of a market that includes private credit and tokenized US Treasurys paired with equity-related structures. In June, Token Terminal reported the sector had topped $43 billion in value, underlining that tokenization momentum is visible beyond gold alone.

Gold’s macro headwind could cut both ways

Even though the DeFi collateral test showed operational resilience, the report arrives during a period when gold itself has been under pressure. Since peaking in January, gold futures have fallen more than 26%. RedStone attributes the decline to expectations of higher US interest rates—an environment that tends to weigh on non-yielding assets like precious metals.

For tokenized gold, that matters for two reasons. First, falling prices can increase liquidation activity in lending protocols; the March 23 event shows that this process can occur without disruption. Second, if rates remain elevated, investor demand for bullion exposure may fluctuate, influencing both the spot trading volumes and the willingness of lenders/borrowers to engage with tokenized collateral strategies.

At the same time, RedStone’s reporting implies that DeFi adoption hasn’t accelerated in proportion to the broader “tokenized gold” trading narrative. If gold volatility persists, investors may demand more robust collateral mechanisms—but the current deployment levels suggest that the industry still has work to do to turn resilience into sustained utilization.

Centralized exchanges may be moving faster than on-chain lending

While RedStone’s focus is on DeFi collateral usage, the report’s broader framing highlights a contrast: centralized platforms are increasingly integrating tokenized assets as they try to bridge traditional finance and digital assets. According to a CoinGecko report referenced in the article, an emerging “crypto TradFi” market had grown to $6.6 billion as of June.

This difference in pace helps explain the adoption gap. Tokenized gold can be actively traded on centralized exchanges without necessarily being locked into on-chain lending. Until more liquidity and integrations flow directly into decentralized collateral ecosystems, tokenized real-world assets may remain more of a trading product than a primary DeFi building block.

As the tokenized RWA market expands—both on-chain and off-chain—readers should watch whether DeFi collateral usage of XAUT and PAXG rises meaningfully beyond current levels. The March 23 liquidation test suggests protocols can handle stress, but the next key question is whether capital continues to move from spot trading activity into sustained lending and other decentralized use cases.

South Korea has approved plans to establish a new 20 trillion won investment account within its sovereign wealth fund to finance artificial intelligence, data centers and other strategic industries while allowing domestic investments for the first time.

According to a South Korean government statement released Friday, the new account will be created under the Korea Investment Corporation (KIC), expanding the sovereign wealth fund’s mandate beyond overseas assets. The government said the account will begin with at least 20 trillion won in capital, funded through equity contributions from public institutions, including policy banks.

Unlike KIC’s existing portfolio, which primarily manages foreign assets, the new account will be permitted to invest inside South Korea. The government said the structure is intended to support industries considered strategically important while also generating long-term returns for future generations and strengthening national economic security, foreign exchange stability and financial markets.

The announcement also comes as South Korean equities remain under pressure. The Kospi index has fallen 34% during July, putting it on track for its worst monthly performance on record after investors sold shares of the country’s largest semiconductor companies over concerns surrounding the scale of AI-related capital spending.

South Korea expands KIC mandate to include domestic assets

Government officials said the investment account is designed to respond to rising international interest in South Korea’s technology sector, particularly projects linked to artificial intelligence infrastructure.

According to the government, a domestic anchor investor will help attract capital from foreign sovereign wealth funds and global asset managers seeking exposure to Korean technology investments. Although officials did not directly connect the initiative to the recent stock market decline, the announcement follows several government measures introduced in recent weeks to stabilize financial markets.

The government also stressed that the account’s investment decisions will remain independent despite its public policy objectives. It said the new vehicle will operate separately from KIC’s existing foreign exchange reserve portfolio, preserving the institution’s current investment framework.

To enable the new structure, the government plans to submit amendments to the Korea Investment Corporation Act to the National Assembly in August. Fund operations are expected to begin in 2027 once the legislative process is completed.

Korea Investment Corporation managed approximately $232 billion in assets at the end of 2025. The sovereign wealth fund oversees money entrusted by the government, the Bank of Korea and other public institutions as part of the country’s foreign reserve management program.

AI investment strategy builds on startup funding plans

The latest initiative adds another layer to South Korea’s technology investment strategy after the government recently stepped up efforts to attract overseas venture capital into domestic startups.

As previously reported by crypto.news, President Lee Jae-myung met representatives from six Silicon Valley venture capital firms, including Sequoia Capital, Andreessen Horowitz, Khosla Ventures, Lightspeed Venture Partners, General Catalyst and New Enterprise Associates, encouraging them to increase investments in Korean startups.

The National Pension Service also signed separate memorandums of understanding with the six firms to establish long-term investment cooperation covering investment opportunities, market information sharing and stronger links between Korea’s startup ecosystem and international venture capital networks.

Asiae reported that the government is simultaneously preparing a proposed National Growth Fund valued at 200 trillion won to finance industries such as artificial intelligence and semiconductors. The publication said policymakers expect public funding, private investment and overseas capital to enter the domestic technology sector together if the initiatives proceed as planned.

While welcoming stronger international participation, Asiae also argued that South Korea will need policies that encourage successful startups to continue expanding domestically. The newspaper pointed to stock option rules, visa policies for foreign specialists, merger and acquisition activity, commercialization of university research and administrative procedures as areas that could influence long-term investment decisions.

Digital asset policies continue alongside technology funding

The sovereign investment plan has emerged alongside several technology-related policy initiatives that South Korean authorities have been advancing during recent months.

Earlier this week, a policy report published by Hashed Open Research and the Solana Policy Institute recommended introducing interim licensing guidance for stablecoins before lawmakers complete the country’s Digital Asset Basic Act. The report proposed a phased regulatory framework covering stablecoin issuance, payment services and foreign-issued tokens while comprehensive legislation remains under discussion.

The report also summarized views presented during a June policy symposium, including ongoing discussions over whether banks should retain majority ownership of stablecoin issuers while fintech companies manage operations. Those recommendations remain advisory and have not been adopted into law.

Separately, the Financial Services Commission has said it intends to consolidate ten pending digital asset proposals into a government-backed Digital Asset Basic Act covering stablecoin issuance, exchange conduct, disclosures, internal controls and operational resilience, although no implementation timetable has been announced.

Cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase reported its Q2 earnings, posting $1.2 billion in revenue and missing Wall Street estimates on sales and profits for a third straight time.

The exchange blamed low spot trading volumes and low volatility for missing earnings estimates. Coinbase lost $1.36 per share, significantly higher than Wall Street’s estimate of a loss between 17 cents and 44 cents, as transaction, subscription, and stablecoin revenue came in lower than expectations.

Coinbase Posts $1.2 Billion In Revenue

The mixed Q2 earnings come as weak trading activity dragged expected results lower despite cornering a record share of the cryptocurrency market. Coinbase reported $1.2 billion in net revenue for Q2, a 19% decline from the previous year.

The GAAP net loss of $359 million was significantly higher than market expectations of a $122 million loss. Coinbase’s subscription revenue, transaction revenue, services revenue, and adjusted EBITDA also fell short of expectations.

Transaction revenue was also lower at $599 million against the expected $636 million. Subscription services revenue clocked in at $555 million, narrowly missing the estimated $590 million.

Coinbase reported $292 million in stablecoin revenue, a $17 million decline from Q2 2025, and lower than StreetAccount’s estimate of $327.2 million. The company’s shares fell over 5% during after-hours trading following the earnings report.

Weak Spot Trading Activity Dampens Q2

Despite the lower numbers, Coinbase’s share of the cryptocurrency market jumped to an all-time high of 10.3%, substantially higher than the 9.1% reported in Q1. The increase in market share comes despite a struggling crypto market and weak trading activity.

Coinbase has attributed the lower-than-expected results to weak institutional and retail trading activity. Spot trading volume has dropped 25% quarter-over-quarter, while cryptocurrency prices have remained low thanks to geopolitical tensions and policy headwinds.

Brian Armstrong Bullish On Coinbase

Coinbase is positioning itself as an “Everything Exchange” as it expands its presence into derivatives, prediction markets, payments, and tokenized assets. CEO Brian Armstrong highlighted the exchange’s record market share, adding that it could operate in any market, stating,

“Coinbase is no longer a bet just on the price of bitcoin. All of financial services are getting updated by crypto, whether that’s trading or payments or lending.”

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.