Pakistan Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority Chairman Bilal bin Saqib has called for continued discussion on digital assets under Islamic law. His statement followed a meeting with scholar Mufti Taqi Usmani on July 11. Saqib said both sides shared one aim: protecting Pakistanis from fraud, exploitation, and financial harm.

In his public statement, Saqib said blockchain, stablecoins, tokenized real-world assets, and other digital assets cover different technologies and uses. He said they require “careful technical assessment alongside rigorous Shariah examination” instead of one broad judgment. He also called for further engagement among scholars, regulators, and industry specialists.

Religious ruling rejects purchases made with crypto

The meeting followed an Islamic legal ruling issued by Darul Ifta at Jamia Darul Uloom Karachi. Mufti Usmani and five other scholars signed the ruling, dated June 10, 2026. It said purchases made with cryptocurrency, including USDT, were not permitted under their reading of Islamic law.

According to Dawn’s report, the scholars said current research did not establish crypto as recognised property or wealth. The ruling described it as “merely the recording of fictitious numbers in an account.” Saqib did not directly reject that finding. He instead asked for separate reviews of different digital asset categories.

Pakistan continues building a licensed crypto market

The exchange comes as Pakistan moves ahead with a regulated virtual asset sector. The Virtual Assets Act 2026 created PVARA as the body responsible for licensing and supervising virtual asset service providers. PVARA also opened a public consultation on rules covering exchanges, custodians, brokers, token issuers, and other providers.

On April 15, the State Bank of Pakistan allowed banks to open accounts for firms licensed by PVARA. The central bank circular requires banks to verify licences, perform due diligence, monitor accounts, and keep customer money separate from company funds. Banks cannot use their own capital or customer deposits to trade or hold virtual assets.

A previous report shows  that the policy ended an eight-year restriction on banking services for regulated crypto firms. The report said banks must still follow foreign exchange, anti-money laundering, and counterterrorism financing rules. Suspicious activity must be reported to Pakistan’s Financial Monitoring Unit.

Stablecoins and tokenization remain part of policy plans

Pakistan has also explored stablecoins and tokenized assets through agreements with international companies. In December 2025, the government signed a nonbinding agreement with Binance to study the tokenization of up to $2 billion in state assets. Crypto.news coverage linked the plan to government bonds, Treasury bills, and commodity reserves.

A separate January 2026 agreement involved studying the use of the USD1 stablecoin in cross-border payments. Crypto.news reported that the work would involve Pakistan’s finance ministry and central bank. These projects remain subject to regulation, technical review, and formal approval.

The dispute over crypto payments now adds a religious review to Pakistan’s regulatory process. PVARA has not announced any change to licensing rules after the meeting. Saqib’s statement leaves the discussion open while the regulator continues drafting operating standards. The ruling did not change state licensing rules, while licensed firms remained bound by the Virtual Assets Act and central bank controls.

Empery Digital’s shares jumped after the company disclosed it has been steadily trimming its Bitcoin treasury to support new funding needs. According to an 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, the NASDAQ-listed company sold nearly half of its Bitcoin holdings over the past two months and used the proceeds to back an AI data center project and reduce debt.

The news lands at a time when some investors appear increasingly skeptical of corporate “treasury” strategies that treat Bitcoin as a long-term balance-sheet asset without an obvious liquidity plan. Empery’s decision—and the market’s initial reaction—highlights how quickly corporate crypto strategies can shift when capital priorities change.

Key takeaways

• Empery Digital sold 1,400 Bitcoin at an average price of $62,200 per coin, raising about $87.1 million, per its SEC 8-K filing.
• The company said proceeds were used partly for its 25% stake in a Hunt Properties-affiliated venture targeting an industrial site conversion into an AI data center.
• Empery also allocated about $10 million of the proceeds to pay down outstanding debt.
• The sale reduced Empery’s Bitcoin holdings by about 48% to 1,514 BTC, according to the disclosure.
• Shareholders who had pressured Empery to change its Bitcoin strategy previously demanded leadership resignations tied to its treasury approach.

What Empery disclosed in its SEC filing

Empery Digital said it sold 1,400 BTC over the past two months. In the filing referenced by the company, the sales were executed at an average price of $62,200 per Bitcoin, resulting in gross proceeds of roughly $87.1 million.

The company linked that liquidity move to two key corporate priorities. First, it directed part of the funding toward an equity position: Empery said it used proceeds to maintain a 25% stake in a venture affiliated with Hunt Properties. That venture, according to the disclosure, is acquiring an industrial site intended to be converted into an AI data center.

Second, Empery indicated that it used proceeds to strengthen its balance sheet by paying off $10 million in outstanding debt. While the filing’s focus is primarily on the capital allocation, the combined effect is clear: the firm treated Bitcoin holdings as a source of funding rather than solely a long-duration investment.

Shares react as the Bitcoin treasury thesis faces scrutiny

Following the disclosure, Empery shares rose early in Friday’s trading. The article notes that the stock gained about 4.2% to $3.95 within the first 35 minutes and later narrowed to a $3.86 close, up roughly 1.58% for the day.

That initial upside suggests investors interpreted the sale as a pragmatic adjustment—one that may reduce the risk of capital being locked up in a treasury asset while the business pursues other needs. The timing also matters. The move comes amid broader pressure on corporate Bitcoin holders, where some investors have questioned whether “hold and never sell” approaches are realistic when companies must fund operations, pay debts, or finance new growth initiatives.

For Empery, the filing also shows how much of the Bitcoin position was affected. The company’s sales trimmed its holdings by about 48%, leaving it with 1,514 BTC. At current prices referenced in the report, that remaining position is described as worth about $97 million.

Pressure from a major shareholder preceded the sales

Empery’s Bitcoin reduction did not occur in a vacuum. Earlier reporting highlighted a shareholder dispute involving Tice P. Brown, who holds nearly 10% of the company. According to earlier coverage from Cointelegraph, Brown urged Empery to abandon its Bitcoin-buying strategy and called for changes in leadership, demanding the CEO and the board resign.

Cointelegraph’s prior account described Empery’s pivot to a Bitcoin-centric treasury plan that began around mid-2025, when Bitcoin was rallying toward its all-time high of $126,080 set in October. The latest disclosure indicates that—at least for now—the company is shifting away from adding to that position at the same pace, and instead monetizing part of it to fund other priorities.

Empery previously held a peak of 4,081 BTC before offloading some holdings in March and April. The Friday disclosure therefore appears to be part of a broader trend rather than a one-off sale.

The wider corporate Bitcoin pattern: Strategy’s earlier exit adds context

Empery’s actions echo a larger corporate debate about whether Bitcoin should be treated as an operational liquidity tool or as a purely long-term reserve. Earlier this month, Cointelegraph reported that Strategy—described as the largest corporate Bitcoin holder—sold 3,588 Bitcoin, worth about $216 million, after having taken the market-facing stance of “never sell your Bitcoin.” The company’s rationale, per the report, was tied to funding dividend payments for investors in its top perpetual preferred stock offering, Stretch (STRC).

That sale came as investors were already watching signals that Strategy’s dividend structure could be under stress. Cointelegraph referenced that STRC had broken below its $100 par value and was trading below $75 last month, raising concerns about the sustainability of the dividend model. In that context, Strategy’s willingness to sell some Bitcoin—despite its earlier messaging—illustrates how quickly capital management decisions can override long-held narratives when cash needs and investor obligations intensify.

In practical terms, Empery’s disclosure reinforces the same theme: when companies face debt payments or new investment opportunities, Bitcoin can function as a financial source rather than only a hedge against market cycles. The difference is that Empery’s stated end uses are directly tied to an AI data center initiative and debt reduction—two needs that investors often view as tangible business drivers rather than passive treasury management.

Going forward, market watchers will likely focus on whether Empery pauses further Bitcoin trimming or continues to rebalance toward cash-generating projects. The next tell will be how much of its remaining 1,514 BTC stays untouched while the AI data center stake and other obligations progress—and whether shareholder pressure resurfaces if the company’s treasury strategy diverges further from what investors expected.

Shares in Empery Digital moved higher on Friday after the company disclosed that it has sold a large portion of its Bitcoin holdings to support an AI-focused expansion and reduce debt.

According to an 8-K filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Empery Digital sold 1,400 Bitcoin over roughly the past two months at an average price of $62,200 per coin, raising about $87.1 million. The disclosure helped trigger an early jump in the company’s stock, with shares rising about 4.2% to $3.95 within the first 35 minutes of trading before later trimming gains.

Key takeaways

• Empery Digital said it sold 1,400 BTC at an average $62,200 per coin, generating about $87.1 million.
• Management attributed the proceeds to funding a 25% stake in a venture tied to an AI data center project and to debt reduction.
• The sale reduced Empery’s Bitcoin holdings by 48% to 1,514 BTC, currently valued around $97 million based on prevailing market prices.
• The immediate market reaction suggests some investors are viewing treasury de-risking as a more credible use of Bitcoin than continual accumulation amid AI capital allocation.
• Earlier investor pressure from a near-10% shareholder had demanded the company stop buying Bitcoin and seek leadership changes.

What Empery Digital disclosed in its filing

In its SEC filing, Empery Digital detailed how it financed part of its operational and strategic plans through Bitcoin liquidation. The company said it sold the 1,400 BTC at an average price of $62,200, totaling approximately $87.1 million. The transaction, executed during the past two months, represents a meaningful shift for a business that previously leaned heavily on a Bitcoin treasury strategy.

The company also said it deployed a portion of the proceeds toward its AI data center ambitions. Specifically, Empery disclosed that some funding went to its 25% stake in a Hunt Properties-affiliated venture. That venture is acquiring an industrial site intended to be converted into an AI data center.

In addition to the AI-related investment, Empery said it used $10 million of the proceeds to repay outstanding debt, aligning the sale with a balance-sheet objective rather than only reinvestment into new assets.

Investor pressure and a changing Bitcoin treasury narrative

Friday’s share reaction comes against a backdrop of growing skepticism around corporate Bitcoin accumulation strategies. Empery’s Bitcoin sales followed months of pressure from Tice P. Brown, a shareholder who holds nearly 10% of the company. Brown publicly urged Empery to abandon its Bitcoin-buying strategy and even demanded the resignation of the CEO and the entire board.

Empery had shifted toward a Bitcoin-centric treasury posture in mid-2025, a period when Bitcoin was rallying toward its all-time high of $126,080 set in October. However, the new disclosure signals that the company’s approach may be evolving—from treating Bitcoin as a long-term, uninterrupted accumulation vehicle to using liquidity from Bitcoin sales for broader corporate priorities.

While Empery’s stock initially rose on the news—suggesting that investors may have preferred a sale framed around funding and debt reduction—shares subsequently eased. According to the report, the stock retraced to $3.86 and closed up 1.58% on the day.

Holdings trimmed nearly in half

Empery’s sale cut its Bitcoin exposure by a substantial amount. The company said the transaction reduced its holdings by 48% to 1,514 BTC. The filing also described the value of the remaining holdings as roughly $97 million at current market prices.

Empery previously held a company-high 4,081 Bitcoin before selling some holdings earlier in March and April. The latest liquidation therefore appears to continue a pattern of reducing exposure over multiple periods rather than a one-off exit.

For traders and investors, the key question is whether this marks the beginning of a more systematic treasury strategy—one that treats Bitcoin as an asset to rebalance capital between corporate needs and long-term holdings—rather than an all-or-nothing bet on perpetual accumulation.

Corporate Bitcoin sales are not unique

Empery’s move comes as other corporate Bitcoin holders have also faced pressure to justify “treasury-first” frameworks. Earlier in the month, Even Strategy—described as the largest corporate Bitcoin holder—sold 3,588 Bitcoin worth $216 million and broke from its previous stance of not selling Bitcoin. In that case, the company said the sale was intended to cover dividend payments for investors linked to Stretch (STRC), which had fallen below its $100 par value to under $75 last month, raising concerns about dividend durability.

Cointelegraph previously noted the market reaction to Strategy’s approach as investor uncertainty grew around whether its dividend model could be maintained. That broader context helps explain why Empery’s disclosure may have been interpreted positively by some shareholders: using Bitcoin sales to meet financial obligations and fund other growth plans can look like a pragmatic response to cash-flow constraints, even if it runs counter to earlier accumulation messaging.

What to watch next is whether Empery’s remaining Bitcoin balance stabilizes or continues to decline as the AI project progresses and as debt obligations are addressed—especially given ongoing scrutiny from major shareholders who have already challenged the company’s Bitcoin-focused direction.

Morgan Stanley has increased its Bitcoin holdings by nearly 1,000 BTC over the past two weeks, lifting its tracked balance above 5,700 BTC, according to on-chain data.

According to blockchain intelligence platform Arkham, the investment bank continued adding Bitcoin through its spot Bitcoin investment product during the recent market pullback. Arkham’s latest portfolio data shows Morgan Stanley now holds 5,761 BTC worth roughly $369.9 million, making it one of the larger institutional Bitcoin holders tracked on the platform.

The latest increase follows a series of transfers recorded over the past two weeks instead of a single purchase. Arkham’s transaction history shows several large inflows from Coinbase Prime wallets, including transfers of 495.8 BTC, 171.9 BTC, 166.2 BTC, 154.8 BTC, 143.3 BTC, 126.1 BTC, 120.4 BTC, and another 34.4 BTC within the last 14 hours. The activity also includes minor operational transfers and a 1 BTC movement back to Coinbase Prime, leaving the firm’s net increase at roughly 1,000 BTC.

Latest purchases have come through multiple large transfers

Recent Arkham data indicates Morgan Stanley accumulated Bitcoin in stages rather than executing a single large transaction. Most of the recorded inflows originated from Coinbase Prime custody and deposit addresses, suggesting institutional settlement activity linked to its Bitcoin investment product.

At current market prices shown on Arkham, the firm’s Bitcoin holdings are valued at nearly $370 million. Arkham also classifies the entity as a fund, an exchange-traded product, and a Bitcoin whale, while linking the portfolio to 11 tracked wallet addresses.

The latest buying extends a pattern of adding exposure during price weakness. Although Arkham describes the activity as another instance of Morgan Stanley “buying the dip,” the platform does not disclose whether the transactions represent direct purchases, client subscriptions, or other operational inflows into the investment vehicle.

Crypto investment services have expanded for wealthy clients

The recent accumulation follows Morgan Stanley Wealth Management’s June announcement that it had expanded its digital asset offering through a referral arrangement with Galaxy Digital.

Under the program, eligible high-net-worth clients can lend cryptocurrencies including Bitcoin, Ether, and Solana to Galaxy Digital and receive shares in spot crypto investment products, including the Morgan Stanley Bitcoin Trust. According to the companies, the structure allows investors to move crypto exposure into regulated investment vehicles without first selling their digital assets.

Morgan Stanley and Galaxy Digital also said the arrangement can reduce in-kind crypto-to-exchange-traded product onboarding times by as much as 75%, making transfers into regulated investment products faster than conventional processes.

The expanded client offering and the latest on-chain accumulation come as institutional participation in spot Bitcoin investment products continues to grow. While Arkham’s wallet data tracks assets associated with Morgan Stanley’s Bitcoin product, the platform does not identify the underlying investors or distinguish between firm-owned holdings and assets managed on behalf of clients.

The Cambridge Centre for Alternative Finance has estimated Ethereum’s annual electricity consumption at 7.87 gigawatt-hours. That equals a continuous power demand of about 0.90 megawatts. The study places Ethereum near the lower end of energy intensity among major proof-of-stake blockchains when researchers adjust electricity use for market value. Cambridge also estimated annual emissions of about 2.37 kilotonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent.

Ethereum used more electricity in absolute terms than most networks included in the comparison. Solana ranked highest at about 13.48 GWh each year, while Ethereum ranked second. However, Ethereum consumed about 33 kilowatt-hours for every $1 million of market value. That was the second-lowest rate measured, behind BNB Chain. Solana recorded about 283 kWh per $1 million, or roughly 8.5 times Ethereum’s rate. The networks in Cambridge’s top-tier PoS comparison used 38 GWh combined. NEAR, Tron and TON ranged from 3.6 to 5.1 GWh, while Cardano and BNB Chain stayed below 1 GWh.

Direct node tests shape the estimate

Cambridge built the estimate from direct power measurements rather than applying one assumed figure to every node. Researchers tested 20 combinations of Ethereum’s main execution and consensus software clients on two hardware setups. A lighter residential system drew a median of 18 watts. A workstation used for professional deployments drew about 152 watts. The study calculated a network-weighted average of roughly 105 watts per node.

The researchers identified 8,522 discoverable full nodes. Around 36% operated on residential hardware, while 64% ran in cloud or enterprise data centers. The United States hosted 31% of the nodes, followed by Germany at 16%, Finland at 8%, and France at 6%. Cambridge said those four countries together accounted for nearly 62% of the full-node network measured.

Grid mix now drives Ethereum’s emissions

Ethereum’s electricity sources now shape most of its remaining carbon footprint. Cambridge estimated that renewable energy supplied 39.4% of the network’s power and nuclear energy supplied 17%. Together, those sources accounted for 56.4%. Fossil fuels supplied the remaining 43.6%, with natural gas representing the largest single source at 27.7%. The final emissions estimate depended on the electricity grids serving each node location.

Alexander Neumüller, research lead at Cambridge’s digital assets energy program, said, “Under Proof-of-Stake, electricity is no longer the price of security.” Ethereum replaced proof-of-work mining with validators during the Merge on September 15, 2022. Cambridge estimated that continuous power demand fell from about 2.4 gigawatts before the transition to 0.90 megawatts afterward, a reduction of more than 99.9%.

Crypto.news coverage tracks the PoS shift

Related crypto.news coverage has described proof-of-stake as a lower-energy alternative because validators secure networks through staked assets instead of competitive mining. A January 2026 report also quoted Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse saying proof-of-stake systems use about 99.9% less energy than proof-of-work networks. The new Cambridge figures provide updated hardware and hosting data for Ethereum several years after its transition.

The report does not claim that Ethereum uses the least electricity among all proof-of-stake networks. Its annual total remains higher than most peers studied. Its stronger ranking appears only after researchers divide energy use by market value. Cambridge also avoided a per-transaction estimate because about 92% of Ethereum ecosystem transactions now settle on scaling networks, making a mainnet-only calculation incomplete. Cambridge said lighter stateless verification could lower hardware requirements, but wider node participation could offset those savings. The report treats future demand as uncertain rather than assuming efficiency gains will reduce total use.

Pakistan’s virtual-asset regulator is urging continued dialogue with Islamic scholars over how digital assets should be treated under Shariah principles—following a religious ruling that declared certain crypto-based purchases impermissible. Pakistan Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority (PVARA) chairman Bilal bin Saqib said his meeting with prominent scholar Mufti Taqi Usmani focused on blockchain technology, digital assets, stablecoins, and tokenized real-world assets (RWAs), along with the need to protect the public from fraud and financial harm.

While Saqib did not directly dispute the specific religious claim, he emphasized that different categories of digital assets should not be judged through a single framework. The comments land at a sensitive moment for Pakistan, where regulators are building a licensing regime for crypto, but religious views could meaningfully influence broader public acceptance.

Key takeaways

• PVARA chairman Bilal bin Saqib called for continued discussions with scholars after Mufti Taqi Usmani supported a ruling against crypto-funded purchases.
• Saqib argued that digital assets, stablecoins, and tokenized RWAs require separate technical and Shariah review rather than one blanket assessment.
• The religious controversy comes as Pakistan expands its regulated crypto sector after the Virtual Assets Act 2026 and new banking access rules.
• Pakistan’s regulator says public protection from fraud and exploitation remains central to its approach.

Religious ruling targets crypto-based purchases

According to Pakistani newspaper Dawn, Usmani and five other scholars signed an Islamic legal ruling issued by Jamia Darul Uloom Karachi. The reported decision said purchases made with crypto—including stablecoins such as USDT—are impermissible under the scholars’ interpretation of Islamic law.

Dawn reported that the ruling centers on the view that digital tokens do not qualify as recognized property or wealth. In other words, even when a token is used in a purchase transaction, the scholars argued that its status under Islamic legal reasoning does not meet the relevant criteria.

Saqib, in his remarks, did not directly challenge the ruling’s conclusions. Instead, he called for ongoing engagement among scholars, regulators, and industry participants, suggesting that distinctions across asset types—and their underlying functions—should be part of the evaluation process.

Why Saqib’s “different categories” stance matters

In a Saturday post on X, Saqib said his discussion covered blockchain technology and the spectrum of digital assets, including stablecoins and tokenized real-world assets. He also pointed to an operational concern: ensuring Pakistanis are protected from fraud, exploitation, and other forms of financial harm.

Crucially, Saqib argued that the “different categories of digital assets” warrant “careful technical assessment alongside rigorous Shariah examination, rather than being viewed through a single lens.” That framing implies two practical points for Pakistan’s regulatory trajectory.

First, it signals that Pakistan’s regulators may be preparing for a segmented approach in which religious review and compliance efforts consider how particular tokens are structured and used—rather than treating all virtual assets as identical. Second, it highlights a likely tension between market building and public acceptability: a licensing framework can formally enable regulated services, but religious objections—especially those targeting consumer-facing behaviors like purchases—could still shape adoption.

Those sensitivities are amplified by Pakistan’s demographics. The article notes that about 231.7 million people, or 96.35% of the population, identified as Muslim in Pakistan’s 2023 census, citing the National Census Report 2023. When religious rulings become salient for everyday commerce, regulatory progress can face additional hurdles beyond enforcement and licensing mechanics.

Pakistan’s regulatory shift: from restrictions to licensing

The religious discussion is unfolding as Pakistan continues its pivot from years of restrictions toward a formally regulated virtual-asset industry. In April, the State Bank of Pakistan allowed banks to open accounts for virtual asset service providers (VASPs) licensed by PVARA. The move ended an eight-year restriction on regulated institutions dealing with crypto, according to earlier coverage by Cointelegraph.

That banking update followed the passage of Pakistan’s Virtual Assets Act 2026 in March, establishing PVARA as the statutory body responsible for licensing and oversight of virtual asset activities, again per earlier reporting from Cointelegraph.

For investors and businesses, this regulatory expansion increases the importance of how digital assets are categorized—not just legally, but culturally and religiously. A stable regulatory environment can reduce operational risk for compliant firms, yet consumer comfort with using certain tokens may still depend on religious rulings and interpretations.

Saqib’s comments appear aimed at keeping that bridge intact: fostering dialogue that could reduce friction and clarify how scholars and regulators view the role of different blockchain-based instruments.

What to watch next: dialogue outcomes and compliance implications

The immediate uncertainty is whether religious authorities will revisit their position if technical distinctions between token types—such as the difference between “stablecoins” and other digital assets, or the way tokenized RWAs function in transactions—are examined more thoroughly. Saqib’s stance suggests he expects those distinctions to matter.

Meanwhile, market participants should watch how PVARA structures licensing guidance and consumer protection efforts as Pakistan builds out its regulated sector. The regulator’s stated emphasis on preventing fraud and financial harm suggests compliance priorities may expand alongside licensing—potentially influencing what kinds of services become viable in practice.

For now, the key signal is that Pakistan’s crypto roadmap is not only a legal and banking story—it is also an interpretive question about how digital assets fit within Islamic legal reasoning. The next developments will likely hinge on whether continuing scholar-regulator engagement produces clearer, category-specific frameworks that both regulators and the public can follow.

Tom Lee has reaffirmed that Ethereum will play the central role as traditional finance and cryptocurrency converge into a single market.

According to a post published by Bitmine chairman Tom Lee on X, he believes the line separating traditional financial markets and digital assets will eventually disappear, with Ethereum positioned at the center of that transition.

In the last week of June, XRP printed its weakest price since late 2024, briefly touching $1.01 before stabilizing in the $1.05 to $1.13 range where it has traded through early July. The token is down more than 25% for the year and roughly 65% below the $3.65 cycle high it set in July 2025. On the same June days that the chart broke down, tokenized real-world assets on the XRP Ledger crossed $3.5 billion, more than triple the level at which they started the year, spot XRP exchange-traded funds extended a net inflow streak that would reach eight consecutive weeks, and Ripple stood weeks away from full European authorization under MiCA.

That is the whole story in one paragraph, and it is genuinely strange. By any operational measure, the 12 months behind Ripple are the most productive in the company’s history: a settled SEC case, launched ETFs, a $1.25 billion prime brokerage acquisition, membership in the clearing infrastructure of American equities, a stablecoin with $18 billion in quarterly transfer volume, and regulatory licenses stacking up on three continents.

By the only measure most holders care about, the same 12 months are the worst since the 2022 bear market. The gap between what Ripple built and what XRP is worth has never been wider, and how that gap closes, upward through the price or downward through the narrative, is now the central question hanging over the fourth largest ecosystem in crypto.

This feature lays out both sides honestly: the case that the infrastructure eventually drags the token up, and the case that the token and the company have simply decoupled, with the price telling the truer story.

The year Ripple built: an inventory

It helps to see the accumulation in one place, because no single item explains the disconnect. The pattern does.

Legal closure came first. The SEC’s enforcement case against Ripple, filed in December 2020, formally concluded in 2025 with a financial settlement, ending the overhang that had defined the token’s American existence for half a decade and building on the 2023 court finding that programmatic exchange sales of XRP were not securities transactions.

Then distribution. Spot XRP ETFs launched in November 2025 across 5 providers and have accumulated roughly $1.49 billion in cumulative net inflows since. May 2026 was the strongest month of the year with $118 million, including a record $60.5 million week.

The streak ran 8 consecutive weeks into July, as crypto.news reported, before showing its first daily pauses, and assets under management sit near $1.05 billion, about 1.5% of the token’s market capitalization, led by Bitwise at $331 million, Canary at $265 million, and Franklin at $262 million.

Then market plumbing. Ripple closed its acquisition of prime broker Hidden Road in October 2025 and rebranded it Ripple Prime. On March 2, 2026, Ripple Prime joined the participant directory of the National Securities Clearing Corporation, placing an XRP-linked institution inside the DTCC complex that clears the bulk of American equity trading and safeguards roughly $100 trillion in assets. DTCC has since named Ripple Prime to the working group of more than 50 firms shaping its tokenization service for Russell 1000 stocks, ETFs, and Treasuries, scheduled for October 2026.