Source link

Oil prices jumped on Thursday. Brent crude topped $100 a barrel. The cause was one man. President Donald Trump said he is close to ordering a massive strike on Iran.

Reportedly, he told Axios he has not made a final call. But he says everything is ready. His decision could push oil even higher.

Trump’s Decision Could Push Oil Prices Higher

Trump said any new attack would be bigger than the last one. That earlier US campaign was called Operation Epic Fury. He said a decision is close, but not final.

“I am considering a massive attack. Bigger than ever before. I am close to making a decision. We are all set for it,” Axios reported.

The fight has grown over the past 12 days. The US wants to stop Iran from hitting ships in the Strait of Hormuz. About 20 million barrels of oil pass through that narrow route each day. That is close to a fifth of the world’s supply, the US Energy Information Administration (EIA) says.

The two sides had stopped fighting under a late-June truce. But tensions came back this month. US officials say no strike order has been given yet.

Iran-backed rebels in Yemen, the Houthis, have started hitting Saudi ships in the Red Sea. That puts a second oil route at risk, the Bab el-Mandeb strait. It handles millions of barrels a day too, EIA data show. Trump wrote on Truth Social that he would blame Iran for more attacks.

A bigger strike could block these oil ships and push prices up fast. The same thing happened on July 8. Bitcoin (BTC) fell below $62,000 and oil jumped when Trump ended an earlier deal with Iran.

For now, US crude sits near $93. Brent, the main global price, stays above $100. A full war would be very unpopular in the US.

Bitcoin Falls as Traders Play It Safe

Bitcoin fell about 2% in a day. It now trades near $64,755. It has barely moved over the past week.

The pioneer crypto has been stuck near $65,000 for weeks. However, crypto often falls when oil jumps on Middle East fears. Some traders had shrugged off Iran tensions earlier in July. Thursday’s threat changed that.

Trump set no deadline. So markets are left guessing. His next move will steer both oil and Bitcoin.

The post One Trump Decision Now Stands Between Oil and Its Next Surge As Brent Tops $100 appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Two of crypto’s biggest funds just unstaked about $291 million of Hyperliquid (HYPE) in days. The token fell below $60, and traders feared a wave of selling.

Unstaking frees locked tokens for sale. But Multicoin says it is not selling, and on-chain data backs that up.

Why HYPE Fell Below $60

Hyperliquid is one of crypto’s busiest trading platforms. HYPE is now a top-10 token. It was trading for $58. That is down about 2% on the day. It sits about 24% below its June record of $76.70.

Multicoin unstaked close to 2 million HYPE, worth about $120 million. On-chain monitoring by MLM reveals that Paradigm unstaked even more. That was 2.92 million HYPE, worth around $171 million. Paradigm has not commented.

Together, that is about $291 million. It equals roughly 85% of HYPE’s daily trading volume. That is huge for a thin market. Lookonchain first spotted the Multicoin transfers. Some coins went to Coinbase Prime, a custody service.

Multicoin Says the HYPE Unstaking is Not a Sale

Multicoin cofounder Tushar Jain pushed back fast. He said the fund unstaked HYPE, but not to sell it.

“Yesterday we unstaked a large slug of HYPE. We did not unstake to sell… Our funds are constantly tracked, forcing regular wallet rotations. Institutions need privacy to operate”

Big funds are watched on-chain all the time. So they rotate wallets to stay private. Jain made the same case in an earlier interview. His firm holds a bullish HYPE forecast for 2028.

Why is every move visible? Hyperliquid took no venture money. It gave HYPE away in a 2024 airdrop. So big holders bought on the open market. Every wallet they use is easy to track.

On-chain account Markets Alpha checked the wallets. Its analysis found four linked wallets. They moved the unstaked HYPE into custody, not onto the market to sell.

One group even sent about 1 million HYPE to Grayscale. That helped fill its new Hyperliquid ETF, HYPG. The fund began trading on Nasdaq in June.

Why Some Traders are not Worried

Not everyone sees a problem. Trader Elon Trades said HYPE usage barely changed. He pointed to its growing derivatives market share and steady revenue.

Still, more coins may soon hit the market. On Hyperliquid, unstaking takes about seven days, per its documentation. Most unlock near the end of July.

What happens next? The funds could restake, hold, or sell. For now, the project’s fundamentals look solid. But the HYPE unstaking still hangs over the price. To recover, HYPE must climb back above $60.

The post Hyperliquid Slips Below $60 as Institutions Unstake $291M: Will Selling Follow? appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Strategy, formerly MicroStrategy, has overhauled the MSTR metrics it reports, and the new numbers make one thing clear. Much of its huge Bitcoin (BTC) pile is already promised to lenders and preferred investors, not regular shareholders.

The company says the change gives common shareholders a fairer picture. It shows how much Bitcoin is truly theirs after everyone else is paid first.

What the New Metrics Really Show

Strategy holds about 843,775 Bitcoin. That is the largest stash owned by any public company. On paper, its live dashboard values that Bitcoin at around $58 billion. But not all of it belongs to shareholders.

Lenders and preferred investors get paid first. They are owed about $22 billion. Take that out, and roughly $36 billion in Bitcoin is left for common shareholders. Strategy now calls this the net reserve.

The firm took on that debt to buy more Bitcoin. It laid out the approach in its Digital Credit framework this year. It also tested new numbers during an earlier metrics debate in June.

The Real Cost of the Debt

There is a catch. Servicing that debt and preferred stock costs about $1.8 billion a year. Strategy pays it in interest and dividends. It even keeps a cash reserve, set up in December, to cover those bills.

The new metrics also show the risk. A number called amplification, now about 1.53x, measures it. Put simply, shareholders gain more when Bitcoin rises. They also lose more when it falls. The stock proves the point. MSTR has dropped about 77% in a year, far more than Bitcoin’s 45% fall.

MicroStrategy also reworked its main value gauge, known as mNAV. It compares the share price to the Bitcoin left for shareholders, and it now sits at 1.00x. In plain terms, the old premium is gone.

The company admits its older numbers hid this. They left out the investors who get paid first. So Bitcoin bought with borrowed money may never reach common shareholders. Critics have questioned the mNAV model for months.

“Bitcoin Capital Markets require a new financial language,” said, Michael Saylor, the firm’s founder and executive chairman.

Bitcoin traded near $65,136 as of this writing, down about 1.4% on the day. When it falls, shareholders feel it first, which decides who absorbs the losses.

The plan itself has not changed. Strategy still buys Bitcoin, and it still owes its lenders first. But shareholders can now see how much Bitcoin is really theirs.

The post MicroStrategy Changes the MSTR-Bitcoin Link: What Do Shareholders Own? appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce warned on July 22 that moving crypto activity onchain does not erase its securities duties. She cautioned that vaults and lending strategies with active management can trigger registration requirements.

Her statement, titled “Headstands and Summervaults,” builds on an earlier warning that tokenized securities remain securities. Peirce extended that principle to a newer generation of onchain yield tools.

Vaults Risk Investment Company Rules

Vaults let users deposit crypto assets into smart contracts that route funds toward staking or lending. Peirce noted that they range from fully automated allocations to setups in which a manager actively selects strategies.

That spectrum ranges from purely programmatic vaults to those that depend entirely on a manager’s discretion, she wrote.

That distinction matters. A vault could become an investment contract when depositors expect profits mainly from a curator’s efforts. Similarly, that standard mirrors the crypto asset taxonomy the SEC-CFTC joint rule formalized earlier this year.

Some vaults may resemble mutual funds, too, as actively managed vault curator strategies are gaining traction in decentralized finance (DeFi). Active vault managers may trigger investment adviser obligations, a separate compliance layer beyond fund registration.

Lending Platforms Face SEC Note Test

Onchain lending strategies raise separate concerns for regulators. Depositors lend assets to borrowers through smart contracts. Meanwhile, platform operators often set interest rates, loan-to-value limits, and liquidation thresholds.

Those choices can make a loan resemble a security-style note, Peirce wrote, regardless of which asset backs it. Courts have applied a similar note test since the 1990 Reves v. Ernst & Young ruling, she noted.

Her office had flagged similar tensions before this statement. She previously disputed proposed wallet broker rules and limited a tokenized stock exemption she carved out in May. These asset deployment tools could still become mainstream portfolio management options if built carefully, Peirce added.

SEC Invites Compliant Collaboration

Peirce did not mince words about attempts to dodge the rules.

“If you do headstands, backflips, and other gymnastics to read the law so that it does not apply to crypto assets and activities that are well within the scope of the federal securities laws, you will have a painful fall,” said Peirce.

She invited vault operators and lending platforms to contact the agency directly. The invitation comes ahead of her own planned departure from the SEC later this year. The commissioner asked whether existing rules block innovation. She wants SEC adjustments that do not weaken investor protection.

Whether vault designers accept that offer, rather than risk enforcement, may shape onchain yield products through the rest of 2026. Regulators and builders alike have a stake in getting that balance right.

The post SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce Warns Against Crypto Vaults and Lending appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Bitcoin (BTC) briefly surged over $66,800 this week, its strongest level in more than a month, before slipping back. Consecutive ETF inflows have pulled money back into the market after a prolonged period of outflows.

Still, every bounce revives the same question. Is this the low, or another bear-market rally that fades? 

Why the Bitcoin Rebound Looks Fragile

The ETF channel bled through May and June as investors pulled out. That trend has now reversed. Roughly $981.2 million in net inflows returned across 7 trading days from July 14, according to Santiment.

The last inflow streak of a similar length occurred ahead of Bitcoin’s October 2025 rally, though such streaks do not guarantee a repeat.

Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens

The rebound, however, reveals a growing divergence beneath the surface. While spot Bitcoin ETFs are once again absorbing supply, other market indicators point to more cautious positioning among professional traders.

ETF Buyers and Professional Desks Pull Apart

The Coinbase Premium Index has remained negative for more than 900 cumulative hours, the longest stretch in 2 years. 

A negative premium suggests relatively weaker demand, or stronger selling pressure, on Coinbase than on Binance, pointing to continued caution among professional market participants.

Analyst Darkfost tied that caution to sticky inflation, rising oil prices, and a less transparent Fed under its new chairman.

“This combination is what’s keeping institutional selling pressure going, as we’re still seeing today,” the analyst noted.

Together, these signals suggest ETF inflows are supporting prices, but the recovery has yet to gain confirmation from broader spot market demand, leaving the rally vulnerable if ETF inflows begin to fade.

Four-Year Cycle or Macro Asset

The divergence feeds a broader debate over what drives Bitcoin today. In a July 22 research note, Grayscale outlined 2 lenses for the bear market.

The four-year cycle view, tied to halving events, points to further downside and a possible bottom in September or October. Grayscale argued instead that Bitcoin has matured into a macro asset.

“The current bear market has also featured a major shift in Fed policy expectations and rising real interest rates. Naturally, if macro factors are in the driver’s seat, Bitcoin’s price could bottom when these macro factors turn around,” Zach Pandl, Grayscale Head of Research, said.

Meanwhile, Glassnode drew the line that settles the near-term argument.

“This is still a bear-market rally until the market proves otherwise, and the proof has an address,” the firm wrote.

Bitcoin trades below the Short-Term Holder Cost Basis near $69,000. A reclaim on steady inflows opens room toward $84,000. Rejection sends the price back toward the $63,000 demand shelf.

The next test is whether ETF buying persists and professional caution eases. Until Bitcoin reclaims $69,000, the burden of proof stays with the bulls.

Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights

The post Bitcoin Faces $69,000 Test as ETF Inflows Meet Professional Caution appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link

Source link

The debate over when Bitcoin’s bear market will end is largely split between two views. One camp still holds on to the traditional four-year cycle, while the other believes that the bottom may already be in.

Grayscale, for one, favors the latter.

Macro Over Market Cycles

The supporters of the four-year cycle theory see Bitcoin halving events as the main driver of price movements and expect the current downturn to follow the same pattern as previous bear markets. Historically, the crypto asset has reached its bottom around one year after a cyclical peak and roughly two and a half years after a halving event, with cumulative declines averaging about 80%.

Based on that framework, Bitcoin’s price could still fall further and reach a bottom in September or October. Grayscale, however, said it subscribes to an alternative view that BTC has matured as an asset and is now increasingly driven by broader macroeconomic forces, similar to other major asset classes.

The firm noted that previous bear markets have coincided with periods of slowing economic growth and rising real interest rates, and added that this year’s downturn has unfolded alongside shifting expectations for US Federal Reserve policy and higher real interest rates.

Under this macro-driven framework, Grayscale said the asset’s price could find its bottom when those broader economic conditions begin to improve. The firm even added that if the Federal Reserve refrains from further rate hikes and economic growth remains resilient, BTC’s price may have already reached its low, making a further decline unnecessary despite expectations under the four-year cycle model.

Grayscale is not the only one arguing that the cryptocurrency could be approaching a turning point.

More Analysts Back Early Bottom Thesis

Crypto trader Killa also said Bitcoin’s market structure suggests the bottom may already be in, although he remains “50/50” because of the cycle’s timing. The trader explained that BTC has now “swept the dead cat base low” and completed the same five-wave corrective structure seen throughout previous bear markets. However, earlier bear markets took roughly 365 days to reach their final trough, whereas the current cycle would have bottomed in around 260 days.

Despite this, Killa said the “mistake is assuming” cycle lengths never change and believes Bitcoin is more likely to form higher lows than make significant new lows.

Earlier this week, crypto analyst Ali Martinez said the monthly chart is displaying the same combination of technical signals seen near the end of the 2015, 2019, and 2022 bear markets. While Martinez acknowledged that on-chain metrics such as MVRV and CVDD still leave room for a decline toward the $40,000-$50,000 range, he observed the current technical setup has historically identified a dominant accumulation zone with a favorable risk-to-reward profile for spot BTC buyers.

A similar argument was made by crypto analyst Doctor Profit, who warned that investors waiting for a traditional four-year cycle bottom in September or October could end up missing the market’s next move. While Bitcoin could still revisit the $54,000 area, the analyst said he does not expect a drop below $50,000 and believes gradual accumulation already offers an attractive risk-reward profile.

The post Has Bitcoin Already Bottomed? Grayscale Says Macro Signals Matter More appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Source link

Source link

No one can say exactly when quantum computers will break Bitcoin (BTC), but two experts warn the industry is treating a trillion-dollar risk far too casually. The right question is not the date, but the odds and the cost.

Stefano Gogioso and Daniela Herrmann made the case during the latest BeInCrypto Experts Council. Both call themselves optimists, yet both argue that preparation cannot wait for proof.

Q-Day Could Break a Trillion-Dollar Industry

Readers ask constantly when “Q-Day” will arrive. That is the day a quantum computer can break Bitcoin’s cryptography. Speaking on the BeInCrypto panel, Gogioso argued that fixating on a date misses the point.

“The question isn’t ‘will it be 2030?’ It’s what’s the probability of a tail event by 2030, and how much would we lose. Even at 2%, the impact on Bitcoin and crypto, if we’re not prepared, is essentially most of crypto going to zero. That’s trillions of dollars. And even 1% of that is more than enough to pay every cryptographer in the world to spend six months fixing it.”

Stefano Gogioso, a quantum computing lecturer at the University of Oxford and co-founder of Spooqy, said.

The logic is insurance, not prediction. You do not insure a house because you expect a fire. You insure it because the loss would be ruinous, and the premium is small. The same math turns a distant science story into a decision for today.

When Quantum Computers Could Break Bitcoin

The estimates for practical quantum computing keep shrinking. Herrmann has watched them fall in real time.

“In 2024, I was on stage and we said quantum computing will be here in 30 years. Then in 2025 it dropped to 15 to 20 years. Then in 2026, three to five to ten. And suddenly, in October, we hear two years, one year. The market moves faster, innovation moves faster, than it was communicated,” Daniela Herrmann, CEO and co-founder of Dynex, said.

Her advice was blunt. Stop naming a year, and prepare for the surprise instead. Gogioso explained why progress speeds up. The hardest step is the first one, not the last.

“The difference between no logical qubits and one logical qubit is an enormous gap. The difference between one and a million is a smaller gap. Once you get it to work, scaling up is actually quite easy.”

The research supports him. In May 2025, Google researcher Craig Gidney showed that breaking RSA-2048 might need fewer than 1 million qubits. That was down from his own 2019 estimate of about 20 million.

The next result aimed straight at crypto. In March 2026, Google Quantum AI worked with the Ethereum Foundation and Stanford. The team estimated that breaking Bitcoin’s elliptic-curve cryptography could take fewer than 500,000 physical qubits.

It studied secp256k1, the exact curve behind Bitcoin and Ethereum (ETH) signatures. That figure is roughly 20 times lower than the previous best estimate.

The reductions are steep across both targets.

One caveat keeps the picture honest. Gidney has said he does not expect another tenfold drop without new assumptions. Each reduction also shifts the burden onto harder engineering problems that remain unsolved.

Why 2% is Enough to Act On

Whether the machine lands in 2030 or 2035 matters less than the asymmetry. A small chance of total loss still justifies action. The cost of preparing is trivial next to the cost of being wrong.

Migration is also slow. Moving a financial system to new cryptography takes years. So the work has to begin well before any machine exists.

The clearest signal comes from the builders. Google has set an internal 2029 target to move its own products onto quantum-resistant encryption. When the leading quantum lab treats this as a this-decade problem, delay looks reckless.

How Quantum Computers Would Break Bitcoin

The popular image of Q-Day is a single dramatic morning. The reality the panel described is quieter and more dangerous. The damage lies in belief, not in the code.

The mechanism is now clear. When you spend Bitcoin, your public key is briefly exposed. A capable quantum computer could then derive your private key.

Google’s figures suggest the core computation could run in about nine minutes. Bitcoin’s average block time is roughly 10 minutes. That narrow window is the whole attack surface.

Gogioso stressed that the real weakness is psychological.

“It’s not a technical problem. It’s a PR problem. The moment one Satoshi-era coin moves off its wallet with ‘you’ve been quantum punked’ in the message, that’s it. It doesn’t matter that 75% of coins are protected, they’ll be worth nothing. Everybody panics and exits.”

Herrmann reached for a historical parallel, the tulip mania. Belief can stay near-universal until the instant it breaks.

“The moment one coin moves, it’s the end of the story. Imagine you’re an institutional asset manager. You wake up and your portfolio isn’t secure anymore. You have an obligation to get rid of it, if you still can. And if you can’t, you’re done.”

The March 2026 result was disclosed with care. Google published the resource estimates but hid the circuit designs behind a zero-knowledge proof. That choice signals a live risk, not a thought experiment.

Why No One Is Fixing It

If the threat is real and the fix is cheap, why has Bitcoin not moved? Gogioso pointed to governance, or the lack of it.

“Bitcoin has a completely different governance structure, in that it doesn’t have one. Some of those independent voices fall into quantum denialism. They don’t believe it’s a threat. There’s a conservative tendency. They don’t want to make changes they don’t have to. But this is a change you have to make.”

Ethereum offers a contrast. Vitalik Buterin has urged migration to quantum-resistant cryptography within about four years. He warned that elliptic-curve cryptography could be at risk around 2028.

His team published a formal roadmap in early 2026, following the Ethereum Foundation’s creation of a dedicated post-quantum research group.

The wider clock is also ticking. The US standards body NIST plans to deprecate the current elliptic-curve signature standard by 2030 and disallow it by 2035. Bitcoin has no equivalent body to coordinate such a change.

Gogioso’s warning about denial was sharp.

“It might be tomorrow. For all you know, it’s already happened.”

What Preparing Now Looks Like

None of this means Bitcoin is doomed. Both guests were firm optimists about the technology. Herrmann said solutions already exist in outline.

“There are already concrete ideas for transitioning from Bitcoin to a quantum-secure Bitcoin. Ways to move from the old coins to the new ones, with an offset between them. It’s never a linear consequence.”

The tools for a migration are on the table. What is missing is the will to start. For most large organizations, Herrmann noted, the threat is not yet part of strategic planning. A large institution cannot change course the day the danger appears.

The panel did not call for panic. It calls for treating a low-probability, high-impact event seriously, while the fix is cheap and the timeline is still generous. The one thing no one can promise is that the timeline will stay the same.

The post Q-Day: When Will Quantum Computers Actually Break Bitcoin? appeared first on BeInCrypto.

Source link