Bitcoin hovered around the low-$63,000s on Tuesday after briefly touching $64,660—its highest level in about two weeks—while US stock indexes slid in early trading. Equity weakness was led by semiconductor names, and the broader move again highlighted how tightly crypto traders are tracking traditional markets during risk-off sessions.

Despite the dip, BTC’s pullback remained orderly as US spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) continued to post net inflows for a second day, according to data compiled by Farside Investors. That inflow backdrop helped keep a clear downside break from fully materializing as traders debated whether recent price action was only a correction or the start of a more durable shift.

Key takeaways

• BTC pulled back from a $64,660 peak (highest since June 22) as the S&P 500 and Nasdaq 100 fell after the Wall Street open.
• Semiconductor stocks led the equity decline, including Micron Technologies, which was down more than 9% at the time of writing.
• US spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded net inflows for a second consecutive day, providing a floor for sentiment.
• Traders said BTC’s correlation to the Nasdaq has shifted quickly compared with the prior week, changing how BTC is being positioned intraday.
• John Bollinger reiterated that the market is at a “critical point,” pointing to a potential daily “W”-shaped reversal setup.

Bitcoin steadies near $63,000 as stocks slip

TradingView data showed BTC/USD cooling after rising to $64,660, the highest print since June 22. At the same time, market participants watched US equities weaken: the S&P 500 was down about 0.6% and the Nasdaq 100 down around 2.1% during the same window.

Semiconductor weakness intensified the risk mood. Micron Technologies led losses, falling over 9% after highly anticipated earnings late last month (coverage linked by Cointelegraph noted the market attention around those results). That kind of tape matters for crypto not because chip earnings “cause” Bitcoin directly, but because traders often use broader liquidity and index exposure as a proxy for overall risk appetite.

The equity story also carried an index mechanics angle. Tuesday marked the day SpaceX was set to be added to the Nasdaq-100, following its own period of volatility in late June, according to Cointelegraph’s earlier coverage linked in the original report. A faster-than-usual index inclusion—The Kobeissi Letter described SpaceX’s path as the fastest inclusion in the Nasdaq-100’s history in commentary posted to X—can increase near-term positioning and momentum across related exchange-traded products.

ETF inflows and a shifting Nasdaq correlation

While stocks retreated, BTC avoided a sharper breakdown in part because institutional-style demand continued to appear consistent. Fresh inflow data showed US spot Bitcoin ETFs logging a second day of net inflows, as tracked by Farside Investors (see the ETF flow dashboard referenced in the original coverage).

Beyond inflows, some traders focused on the relationship between BTC and the Nasdaq. Trader Daan Crypto Trades reported on X that BTC’s correlation to the Nasdaq had flipped to +0.72 from -0.87 over the span of days the previous week. The implication for day traders is straightforward: when correlation regimes change, strategies built around “hedging” versus “high-beta” equity-like behavior can stop working as expected.

“That’s the difference between trading like a complete hedge/inverse and trading like a high beta tech stock. Right now we’re back to the middle on the 4H timeframe.”

In other words, BTC wasn’t behaving as either a clean hedge or a strict substitute for tech risk—it was in-between, which often makes short-term price action more sensitive to index moves and ETF flow headlines.

Traders split on whether this is a deeper correction

Market commentary remained mixed. Some traders argued that lower-timeframe structure still pointed to additional downside before any larger trend improvement. Cointelegraph-linked coverage mentioned Exitpump as cautious on low time frames, describing an expectation for a “rounding topping structure” and more downside thereafter.

Others framed it as a matter of history repeating through a broader S&P correction. Trader Killa suggested that a “true $BTC bottom” could align with the next correction in the S&P 500, adding that it would be worth checking whether past cycles—citing 2015, 2018, and 2022—repeat in a comparable manner. This is not a prediction of exact dates, but it reflects a common approach: use major equity drawdowns as a timing reference for when liquidity tends to return to risk assets.

For readers, the practical takeaway is that the market signal is not unanimous. ETF inflows and index correlation shifts can stabilize BTC even if technical charts continue to warn of further chop or pullbacks. The next reliable clue would be whether BTC can hold key intraday levels while equities remain heavy, or whether an ETF-flow tailwind can overpower equity weakness for longer than a single session.

Bollinger points to a “W” reversal at a critical juncture

Alongside the trading-floor debate, long-running technical commentary also resurfaced. John Bollinger, the developer of Bollinger Bands, posted additional bullish nuance on X, again emphasizing that the market appears to be at a decision point.

Cointelegraph’s earlier reporting linked in the original piece described Bollinger’s focus on a “W”-shaped reversal pattern developing on the daily timeframe, with the latest iteration potentially confirming a change in trend. Bollinger said last week that the newest setup could even cancel the existing downtrend—while acknowledging that in chart patterns, confirmation often requires follow-through.

On Monday, Bollinger added: “We are at a critical point,” and laid out the logic of how bullish and bearish formations tend to behave differently depending on the prevailing trend.

“In a bear market bullish setups break and in a bull market bearish setups break. So if this W pattern is successful I would see it as a confirmation of a change in trend.”

That framing matters because it highlights what investors should watch next: not just whether the “W” exists on a chart, but whether the market action after the supposed confirmation level actually holds, especially during equity-driven volatility.

As equities remain sensitive to corporate and index catalysts, and as crypto continues to react to ETF flow developments, the “critical point” Bollinger referenced may end up being less about one perfect pattern and more about whether buyers can defend the reversal attempt through the next round of risk fluctuations.

For the near term, traders should monitor two things closely: whether US spot Bitcoin ETF inflows persist as stocks trend lower, and whether BTC can sustain its reversal structure on daily and four-hour timeframes without another sharp correlation-driven selloff.

Kraken, the cryptocurrency exchange planning to go public in the U.S., is pursuing a full banking license in Europe, with a focus on Lithuania as the jurisdiction to secure it, according to a person familiar with the plans.

If the firm gets the license, Kraken would be the only crypto exchange to have such a designation. It will also tread the same regulatory path as fintech major Revolut, which holds a specialized European banking license issued in 2018 and regulated by the Bank of Lithuania. This allowed Revolut to offer full current accounts, consumer lending, and stock trading across the European Economic Area (EEA).

Kraken declined to comment on the plans. A spokesman for the Bank of Lithuania said the licensing process of financial market participants is confidential.

Other fintech firms holding a banking or specialized bank license in Lithuania include Mano Bank, PayRay, European Merchant Bank (EMBank), AB Fjord Bank, and Saldo Bank.

The move to gain full banking status in Europe is part of a broader effort by Payward, Kraken’s parent company, to obtain additional licenses globally.

“There is no major negative fundamental catalyst that we can see,” Dorman said. “These kinds of big movements are common after SPACs because the entire investor base turns over from fixed-income-oriented SPAC buyers to new, fundamentally driven long-term equity owners.”

SPAC merger tickers are often volatile in their early days of trading. These vehicles raise money first and seek an acquisition later, allowing a private company to reach the public market by merging with the shell. But once the deal closes, the investor base often turns over, with SPAC arbitrage investors and redemption-focused holders giving way to public-equity investors weighing the company’s fundamentals. That transition can create sharp price swings, particularly when the float is limited or the stock had traded up before the merger.

Crypto IPO hangover

Dorman added that poor performance of recent crypto-related stock listings have conditioned investors to be cautious.

“Given how horrible recent crypto IPOs have been — Coinbase (COIN), Bullish (BLSH), Gemini (GEMI), BitGo (BTGO) and Circle (CRCL) — it’s not that surprising,” Dorman said.

Since its February IPO, digital asset service provider and custodian BitGo tumbled 70%. Gemini, the crypto exchange founded by the Winklevoss brothers, is down 85% from its September debut. Bullish, CoinDesk’s owner, has fallen over 70% from its $90 debut price in August 2025, and sits below its $37 IPO price.

Stablecoin competition is increasingly giving way to specialization. Data from Dune’s Digital Asset Brief suggests Tether’s USDt (USDT) and Circle’s USDC are fulfilling different jobs across the crypto economy—less “winner-takes-all,” more complementary roles feeding payments on one side and DeFi and trading infrastructure on the other.

In the first half of 2026, Dune estimates the biggest stablecoin by activity settled about $95 billion in identified commerce payments. The same dataset points to roughly $14 billion for USDC in those commerce payments and puts USDT at about 92% of the $48 billion business-to-business (B2B) payment volume. On Tron, Dune also reports that approximately 93% of USDT’s supply sits in ordinary wallets rather than exchanges, reinforcing its use as a payment and remittance asset.

Key takeaways

• USDT is leading on real-world-style payments: Dune data shows about $95B in identified commerce payments in H1 2026 versus about $14B for USDC.
• USDC is more central to on-chain finance: USDC transfer volume on Base reached roughly $2.6T in June, with about $1.6T on Ethereum.
• Token distribution hints at use cases: On Tron, Dune estimates ~93% of USDT supply is held in non-exchange wallets, consistent with payments rather than trading.
• Regulatory momentum may change how stablecoins scale: The US GENIUS Act created a federal framework for payment stablecoins, while the CLARITY Act could reshape broader market structure affecting issuers and platforms.

USDT’s payment dominance and what the wallet data implies

Dune’s analysis is particularly telling because it doesn’t just measure token transfers—it focuses on “identified commerce payments.” That framing matters: it aims to map stablecoin flows that resemble merchant and transactional activity rather than purely speculative movement.

According to Dune’s Digital Asset Brief, USDT’s share in B2B commerce is especially large. With roughly 92% of the approximately $48 billion B2B payment volume going to the leading stablecoin, USDT appears positioned as the default settlement rail for corporate and cross-party transfers—at least in the portion of commerce activity Dune can identify.

On Tron, Dune’s “where the supply lives” view adds another layer. With about 93% of USDT supply held in ordinary wallets rather than exchange custody, the stablecoin’s on-chain footprint looks less like an instrument primarily circulating between trading venues and more like an asset staying in the hands of payers, merchants, and intermediaries that use it to settle obligations.

USDC’s DeFi and transfer velocity on Base and Ethereum

While USDT’s dataset emphasizes payments, USDC’s role looks more tied to crypto market plumbing—especially decentralized finance and exchange-like activity. Dune reports that USDC on Base processed roughly $2.6 trillion in transfer volume in June, the highest transfer volume of any token-chain pair. On Ethereum, USDC handled another approximately $1.6 trillion.

Velocity also points to broader usage intensity. Dune notes that USDC on Base recorded daily velocity of about 20 times its circulating supply in June. In practical terms, velocity rising far above one suggests frequent movement of the same supply across trading, lending, or routing activities—patterns often associated with on-chain markets rather than simple payment holding.

Put together, these metrics shift the conversation. Instead of asking which stablecoin “wins,” the more useful question may be where each stablecoin fits in the on-chain stack: USDT appearing to concentrate around payments and remittances, while USDC is more deeply embedded in transfer-heavy trading and DeFi ecosystems.

Why the USDT-versus-USDC narrative is losing clarity

Dune’s findings effectively argue that the traditional framing—USDT competing directly with USDC as the default stablecoin—does not capture how stablecoins actually behave across chains and use cases.

One way to see this is through concentration patterns. Dune reports USDT’s supply is split almost evenly between Tron and Ethereum, whereas USDC remains heavily concentrated on Ethereum despite expanding to newer blockchains. That distribution aligns with the performance profile the dataset shows: USDC’s most prominent volume and velocity signals appear tied to Ethereum and Base activity, while USDT’s stronger commerce-payments footprint aligns with Tron’s large role in everyday transfers.

Meanwhile, the stablecoin market remains dominated by both issuers’ assets. Dune tracked more than 200 stablecoin tokens across multiple blockchains and estimates USDT and USDC together account for roughly 83% of the sector’s approximately $315 billion market capitalization. In other words, even if the “competition” is shifting toward specialization, the center of gravity is still concentrated in these two tokens.

US policy moves: GENIUS passed, CLARITY could broaden the ruleset

These data-driven role distinctions are emerging alongside renewed US regulatory momentum. Earlier this year, the US stablecoin sector gained traction following the passage of the GENIUS Act. Signed into law in 2025, GENIUS created the first federal regulatory framework for payment stablecoins, with the stated goal of enabling banks and other companies to issue US dollar-pegged digital assets. (For background, Cointelegraph previously covered the legislation here: https://cointelegraph.com/news/treasury-genius-act-rule-illicit-finance.)

Lawmakers are now debating the CLARITY Act, which would establish a broader market structure for digital assets by clarifying when crypto assets fall under either the US Securities and Exchange Commission or the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission. While the bill does not target stablecoins directly, it could still influence the operating environment for stablecoin issuers, exchanges, and DeFi platforms through how regulators classify and supervise related activity.

CLARITY cleared the Senate Banking Committee in May and may be brought to a full Senate vote before the August recess, although the odds have been changing as lawmakers face time constraints. Cointelegraph reported that Galaxy trimmed its odds of passage to 50% before the break: https://cointelegraph.com/news/galaxy-cuts-2026-clarity-act-odds-50.

Going forward, investors and builders may want to track more than headline stablecoin market share. Dune’s results suggest that chain distribution, wallet versus exchange custody, and transfer velocity are increasingly important signals of real utility. The next question is how regulation—starting with GENIUS and potentially shaped by CLARITY—will affect which stablecoin roles can scale most easily across payments, lending, and trading.

Tether has taken a $20 million stake in Brazil’s Mercado Bitcoin as it pushes further into tokenized financial products and stablecoin-powered payments across Latin America. The investment is intended to back the company’s expansion into tokenized assets, lending and other blockchain-based services throughout the region.

Mercado Bitcoin, originally launched in 2013 as a crypto trading venue, has since broadened into regulated financial offerings. The platform says it now serves more than 4.5 million users and has issued over 2 billion Brazilian reais (about $370 million) in tokenized assets, while operating under nearly a dozen licenses in Brazil and Europe, including a payment institution authorization from Brazil’s central bank.

Key takeaways

• Tether’s $20 million investment targets Mercado Bitcoin’s expansion into tokenized assets, lending and stablecoin payments in Latin America.
• Mercado Bitcoin positions its business model as “onchain” financial infrastructure supported by multiple licenses, including Brazil’s payment institution framework.
• Tether says it is using profits from its stablecoin business (including USDT) to fund strategic investments in blockchain financial services.
• The deal builds on Mercado Bitcoin’s earlier tokenization deployments, including a $20 million private credit rollout on Bitcoin’s Rootstock sidechain.

Tether backs Mercado Bitcoin’s regulated onchain push

The partnership highlights how stablecoin issuers are increasingly funding regulated platforms rather than focusing solely on token supply. Tether Investments’ stated approach is to support companies building blockchain-based financial infrastructure, and Mercado Bitcoin is positioned as one of Latin America’s most developed “regulated onchain” ecosystems—according to Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino.

Ardoino said Mercado Bitcoin has established a comprehensive platform by combining licensing, tokenization capabilities, and integrated financial services. For investors and users, the practical takeaway is that the project is aiming to connect tokenization and payments to mainstream financial rails under oversight, rather than treating blockchain services as purely standalone experiments.

While the statement emphasizes regulatory breadth, the investment also implicitly addresses a core challenge facing tokenized finance: making tokenized products easier to deploy within existing legal and payment frameworks. Mercado Bitcoin’s cited license footprint—spanning Brazil and Europe, and including a Brazilian central bank payment institution license—suggests the company intends to keep expanding within compliance constraints as it adds more stablecoin and tokenized offerings.

Tokenization momentum: from private credit to wider asset services

Mercado Bitcoin’s broader tokenization strategy appears to be accelerating. In February, the platform announced it had deployed more than $20 million in tokenized private credit, describing this as part of its expanding real-world asset (RWA) activity. That deployment was carried out on Bitcoin’s sidechain Rootstock, according to earlier reporting from Cointelegraph: Mercado Bitcoin expands LatAm RWA push.

Against that backdrop, Tether’s new investment can be read as reinforcement of a direction already underway: scaling tokenization use cases beyond early pilots. The company’s most recent plan explicitly includes stablecoin payments and lending—two segments that typically require not only token issuance and custody capabilities, but also reliable payment processing and settlement infrastructure.

Still, the specific operational details of how the $20 million will be allocated within Mercado Bitcoin’s product stack weren’t provided in the information available here. Readers should watch for updates on whether the funding is earmarked for token issuance infrastructure, credit origination/servicing, or specific stablecoin settlement integrations.

Where Tether’s money is coming from

For Tether, the Mercado Bitcoin investment fits a broader pattern of deploying capital through its investment arm. The company issues USDT, which it describes as the largest stablecoin by circulation, with about $184 billion in circulation cited in the underlying material.

In its Q1 2026 results, Tether reported approximately $1.04 billion in net profit and said it is using those earnings for strategic investments. The underlying report also notes ongoing emphasis on reserves; the investment announcement ties directly to this broader capital deployment thesis via Tether’s finance strategy.

Beyond Mercado Bitcoin, Tether’s participation in other initiatives—such as a $134 million funding round for the Stablecoin Development Corporation—has also been framed as part of expanding the “stablecoin economy” and the infrastructure around it. In April, Tether backed that financing round, and later invested in remittance platform LemFi with the aim of supporting USDT settlement for cross-border payments across Africa and Asia.

Tether also outlined plans to work with the Government of Georgia to launch a stablecoin pegged to the Georgian lari under the country’s digital asset framework. Separately, Tether has said it invests in sectors including artificial intelligence, energy, biotechnology and digital media through its investment arm.

Signals for stablecoin adoption and regulated finance in LatAm

The Mercado Bitcoin deal matters because it sits at the intersection of three trends: tokenization of real-world assets, stablecoin payments, and regulatory-driven rollout. Stablecoins can reduce settlement friction, while tokenized credit and other RWAs aim to bring traditional financial products onto blockchain rails. Mercado Bitcoin’s licensing and reported track record are positioned as the bridge between those worlds.

For users in Brazil and across Latin America, the most meaningful question is whether stablecoin payments and lending will become integrated into Mercado Bitcoin’s regulated financial stack in a way that supports scale—especially for remittances, merchant payments, and other high-frequency use cases. For builders and institutional participants, the investment suggests continued demand for compliant infrastructure that can connect tokenized assets to payment systems.

There’s also an important context point: Tether leadership has previously addressed speculation about going public. Paolo Ardoino said the company has no plans to go public, according to a social post linked in the underlying material.

That clarification doesn’t change the Mercado Bitcoin story directly, but it underscores that the investment strategy is being presented as an ongoing part of Tether’s operating approach rather than a short-term funding maneuver tied to corporate restructuring.

Next, the market will likely look for concrete milestones from Mercado Bitcoin: how quickly stablecoin payments and lending roll out under its licensing framework, and whether additional tokenized credit or other RWAs expand beyond the earlier Rootstock-based deployment. The $20 million investment is a clear signal of intent, but execution details will determine how much of Latin America’s tokenized-finance promise turns into sustained, usable products.

The world’s biggest stablecoins are increasingly becoming chain-specific financial products, with Tether’s USDt (USDT) and Circle’s USDC (USDC) serving distinct roles across the crypto ecosystem rather than competing head-on.

Dune’s Digital Asset Brief found that USDT overwhelmingly dominates onchain payments. During the first half of 2026, the biggest stablecoin settled about $95 billion in identified commerce payments, compared with $14 billion for second-biggest USDC. It also accounted for roughly 92% of the $48 billion in business-to-business payment volume. On Tron, USDT’s largest network, around 93% of the token’s supply is held in ordinary wallets rather than on exchanges, underscoring its role as a payment and remittance asset.

USDC, meanwhile, has established itself as the dominant stablecoin in decentralized finance. USDC on Base processed roughly $2.6 trillion in transfer volume in June, the highest of any token-chain pair, while on Ethereum, that stablecoin handled another $1.6 trillion. 

USDC on Base recorded daily velocity of about 20 times its circulating supply in June, reflecting its extensive use in trading and DeFi. Source: Dune

The findings suggest the traditional USDT-versus-USDC narrative is becoming less useful. Instead, each stablecoin is carving out its own niche, with USDT dominating payments and USDC underpinning much of crypto’s trading and DeFi activity.

USDT’s supply is split almost evenly between Tron and Ethereum, while USDC remains heavily concentrated on Ethereum despite expanding to newer blockchains. Source: Dune

The findings come as the two digital assets continue to dominate the stablecoin market. Together, they account for roughly 83% of the sector’s approximately $315 billion market capitalization, according to Dune, which tracked more than 200 stablecoin tokens across multiple blockchains.

Related: UN agency moves Stellar blockchain payment initiative beyond pilot stage

US lawmakers reshape stablecoin rules

The stablecoin sector has gained momentum in the United States following the passage of the GENIUS Act. Signed into law in 2025, GENIUS established the first federal regulatory framework for payment stablecoins, paving the way for banks and other companies to issue US dollar-pegged digital assets.

Lawmakers are now debating the CLARITY Act, which would establish a broader market structure for digital assets by defining when crypto assets fall under the jurisdiction of the US Securities and Exchange Commission or the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission. While the bill does not regulate stablecoins directly, it would shape the broader regulatory environment in which stablecoin issuers, exchanges and DeFi platforms operate.

CLARITY cleared the Senate Banking Committee in May and could receive a full Senate vote before the August recess, although Galaxy recently trimmed its odds of passage before the break to 50% as lawmakers run short on time.

Magazine: Kraken’s $600M stablecoin firm, Huione scandal deepens: Asia Express