On 26 August, the US Commerce Department released July data on the Personal Consumption Expenditures (PCE) index. Core PCE rose 0.2% month-on-month and 3.3% year-on-year, in line with market expectations. Ellen Zentner, Chief Economic Strategist at Morgan Stanley Wealth Management, noted that the modest upside surprise in inflation was not significant enough to shift the balance of expectations ahead of the Federal Reserve’s September meeting.

Earlier, on 19 August, minutes from the Fed’s July meeting showed that policymakers remained open to further rate increases if inflationary pressures persisted, with three committee members having already voted in favour of a hike. Against this backdrop, Treasury yields remain close to multi-year highs, keeping rate expectations tilted towards the possibility of further tightening.

Technical Analysis of Dow Jones

The four-hour Dow Jones chart (WS30m on FXOpen) shows a short-term downtrend, with prices steadily declining from a local peak around 54,700 and establishing a descending trendline in the process.

On 25 August, the index moved beyond the trendline and subsequently formed the current market profile. The index is now trading between the Point of Control (POC) at 53,490 and the upper boundary of the profile at 53,700.

If the breakout develops into a sustained advance, the next significant level to watch is the red resistance area around 53,900.

Conversely, if the trend breakout proves to be false and the decline resumes, the price would first need to move through the POC at 53,490 and then break below the lower profile boundary at 53,320. Only after clearing this area would the path towards the green support level around 53,150 become more open.

The RSI + MAs indicator currently shows readings of 52, 55 and 51. The oscillator and both moving averages remain within the neutral zone, although the moving averages are still displaying a bullish signal.

Key Takeaways

The attempted break above the descending trendline is taking place within a dense market-profile area, providing no clear confirmation of a sustained move in either direction.

The index’s next move could depend on whether the current divide in expectations surrounding the Fed’s September decision persists or whether incoming economic data shifts the balance decisively in one direction.

Trade global index CFDs with zero commission and tight spreads (additional fees may apply). Open your FXOpen account now or learn more about trading index CFDs with FXOpen.

This article represents the opinion of the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand only. It is not to be construed as an offer, solicitation, or recommendation with respect to products and services provided by the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand, nor is it to be considered financial advice.

The native token of the synthetic dollar protocol Ethena (ENA) registered double-digit gains after the Ethena Foundation unveiled four ecosystem changes, including a proposal for revenue-funded token buybacks and a completed buyout of locked tokens held by some early investors.

The Ethena Foundation opened a vote on a fee-switch proposal under which 95% of the net revenue paid to it from Ethena’s core business lines would be used to purchase ENA once the circulating supply of USDe reaches the first proposed milestone of $7.5 billion, the foundation said in a Thursday blog post.

Tokenholders have until Sept. 2 to cast their votes. At press time, 65 votes representing about 14.4 million ENA in voting power had been cast, all in favor of the fee-switch proposal, according to Snapshot.

The ENA token rose 10.7% over the 24 hours and gained 27% during the past week to trade above $0.17 as of 8:11 am UTC on Friday, according to CoinGecko data.

The foundation also said it had bought locked ENA from certain major seed investors who sold some of their holdings during the past nine months. Separately, it agreed with lead investors to release the remaining unvested investor allocations on Oct. 5, replacing the existing monthly unlock schedule. Team tokens will remain subject to their original vesting schedules.

The change accelerates the remaining investor unlocks rather than canceling the tokens.

Ethena’s synthetic dollar, Ethena USDe (USDE), ranks as the sixth-largest stablecoin with a $4 billion market capitalization on DefiLlama.

In September 2025, M2 Capital, the investment arm of UAE-based M2 Holdings, invested $20 million in ENA to make it its latest strategic holding. The conglomerate previously invested in the Sui Foundation.

Magazine: Ethereum risks losing No. 2 spot as stablecoins gain ground

This article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and is intended for informational purposes only. It does not constitute investment advice or recommendations. All investments and trades carry risk; readers are encouraged to conduct independent research.

Gold has staged a remarkable comeback, surging almost 14% in August alone and reclaiming levels not seen since May, a stark reversal from late July, when prices had dipped below $4,000. The rally has been driven by a genuinely unusual combination of forces: the US Treasury’s surprise decision to double its long-dated bond buyback programme reignited fears over fiscal credibility and dollar debasement, while persistent Middle East tensions and steady Chinese buying have kept safe-haven demand firmly in place.

All eyes now turn to Fed Chair Kevin Warsh’s Jackson Hole speech, the week’s pivotal event. A hawkish tone or a fresh rise in real yields could trigger meaningful profit-taking after such a sharp run-up, while continued dollar weakness would likely keep gold’s momentum intact. Adding to the tension, this week’s data slate, including preliminary Q2 GDP, jobless claims, and Michigan’s inflation expectations, gives markets plenty of reasons to stay on edge.

With gold already up nearly 96% over the past year and testing territory unseen in months, the metal finds itself balancing two powerful forces: genuine structural demand against a market that may finally be due for a pause.

Technical Analysis of XAU/USD

As the XAU/USD chart shows, gold has been trading within a well-respected ascending trendline since the 4,022 low in late July, having earlier broken decisively above the descending trendline that capped the May–July decline. Price recently touched a fresh high near 4,698, the 0 Fibonacci level, before pulling back and now testing the confluence of the ascending trendline and the 50-period EMA near 4,561.

Bullish Scenario

Should buyers defend this trendline-EMA confluence, the broader uptrend structure remains firmly intact. A renewed push higher would target a retest of the 4,698 high, with a confirmed break above that level opening the door toward the 4,760–4,800 resistance zone and fresh record territory beyond.

Bearish Scenario

Conversely, a decisive break below the ascending trendline and the 50-period EMA would signal that a deeper correction is underway, exposing the 0.382 Fibonacci retracement near 4,440 as the first real test, with a further slide risking a retest of the 0.5 level around 4,360.

With price sitting right at the intersection of a multi-week trendline and the 50-period EMA, gold’s next move looks set to determine whether this powerful August rally has more room to run or whether it’s due for a deeper pause.

Start trading commodity CFDs with tight spreads (additional fees may apply). Open your trading account now or learn more about trading commodity CFDs with FXOpen.

This article represents the opinion of the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand only. It is not to be construed as an offer, solicitation, or recommendation with respect to products and services provided by the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand, nor is it to be considered financial advice.

Visa and Dunamu—best known as the parent company of South Korea’s Upbit crypto exchange—have announced a strategic partnership aimed at exploring how stablecoins could be used for payments, cross-border remittances, and settlement services, alongside AI-enabled commerce.

In a Friday announcement, Dunamu said the two firms plan to combine Dunamu’s digital asset technology with Visa’s global payments infrastructure to study product and service opportunities across major markets. The partnership also points to using artificial intelligence for “agentic commerce,” where AI agents can search for products or services and complete purchases and payments on behalf of users.

Key takeaways

• Visa and Dunamu will test stablecoin-based use cases spanning payments, remittances, and settlement, leveraging Visa’s existing network.
• The partnership frames stablecoins, tokenization, and AI as an interlinked trend reshaping finance and commerce.
• Dunamu said it is evaluating multiple stablecoin options rather than tying the initiative to a single project.
• Open Standard’s dollar-backed OUSD is among the stablecoin proposals being considered, according to Dunamu.
• The parties also plan to explore AI “agentic commerce” scenarios that connect AI-driven purchasing with stablecoin payment rails.

Why Visa and Dunamu are focusing on stablecoins

Dunamu’s announcement places stablecoins alongside tokenization and AI as key forces expected to “change how finance and commerce operate.” The stated goal is to connect digital asset capabilities with traditional finance, which is where Visa’s payments reach could become a critical complement.

Stablecoin-centered initiatives have increasingly targeted real-world payment and settlement pain points—particularly the frictions involved in moving value across borders. By pairing Visa’s network with Dunamu’s digital asset expertise, the partnership suggests an attempt to move beyond pilots and toward workable integration models, though the companies did not specify timelines or deployment details in the announcement.

OUSD enters the conversation, but Dunamu keeps options open

As part of the exploration, Dunamu and Visa said they are considering business models involving Open Standard’s proposed Open USD (OUSD), a dollar-backed stablecoin introduced in June. Open Standard said that more than 140 companies have signed up to use OUSD, naming Visa, Mastercard, Stripe, Coinbase, and BlackRock among them.

Dunamu, however, indicated that OUSD is only one of several stablecoin projects it is evaluating. It also said the partnership has not prioritized a specific stablecoin for the work, signaling that the effort is currently oriented around feasibility and structure rather than committing to a single asset design.

This matters for market participants because stablecoin partnerships often hinge on compliance expectations, issuer and reserve arrangements, and interoperability—factors that can differ significantly between proposals. Dunamu’s stance implies that the partnership could remain flexible as regulatory and technical requirements evolve.

Upbit clarification underscores the partnership’s scope

The news comes against a backdrop of earlier discussion about OUSD and Upbit. In July, Upbit said it was not participating in the issuance of OUSD after Dunamu was named as one of the businesses involved in Open Standard’s initiative.

That clarification indicates that being connected to a stablecoin roadmap through partnerships or infrastructure evaluation does not necessarily translate into direct issuance involvement by Upbit itself. For users and investors watching stablecoin rollouts, the distinction highlights how roles can vary—issuers, service providers, trading venues, and network integrators can all be present in different capacities without assuming identical responsibilities.

Agentic commerce: AI agents plus stablecoin rails

Beyond payments and remittances, Visa and Dunamu said they will also explore “agentic commerce.” In practical terms, this refers to AI agents that can identify products or services and execute transactions—potentially including searching, selecting, and paying—on a user’s behalf.

The companies will examine ways to combine AI with stablecoin-based payment and settlement infrastructure. While the announcement does not provide technical specifics, the direction is clear: stablecoins are being positioned not only as an alternative to traditional settlement mechanisms, but as part of an end-to-end stack that could enable automated purchasing workflows.

For developers and businesses, this raises questions about how AI decisioning, payment authorization, and compliance checks would be integrated. It also suggests that future implementations may focus on controlling risk (fraud and unauthorized spend) while maintaining the speed and global accessibility that stablecoin-based settlement can offer.

What to watch next

Visa and Dunamu’s partnership is an exploratory step, not a guarantee of an imminent stablecoin product launch. The next developments to track are whether the firms narrow down which stablecoin options they can realistically integrate, how they structure settlement and compliance workflows, and whether agentic commerce concepts move from planning into test implementations.

Crypto platforms lost $3.63 billion across 245 documented security incidents between January 2025 and July 2026, according to CoinGecko’s State of Crypto Security Report published on Aug. 27.

Losses were heavily concentrated. The ten largest attacks accounted for more than 72.5% of the total stolen value, while infrastructure and supply-chain compromises caused more than $1.8 billion in losses.

CoinGecko identified private-key compromise as the leading risk for centralized exchanges. Decentralized applications lost approximately $546 million through smart-contract exploits, while both platform categories also faced oracle manipulation and internal-mechanism failures.

The figures represent CoinGecko’s incident dataset. The published summary does not clearly state whether every recovered or frozen asset was deducted, so the $3.63 billion should be treated as its reported loss estimate rather than a final net-loss total.

Crypto security losses were concentrated in major attacks

The February 2025 Bybit breach was the largest incident included, accounting for approximately $1.44 billion. The attack involved compromised transaction-signing infrastructure rather than a defect in an exchange smart contract.

1/ Crypto platforms lost $3.63B to hacks since early 2025 🔓

• A total of 245 incidents occurred, with the top 10 attacks making up 72.5% of the total amount lost.
• Private key compromise is the top CEX risk while smart contract exploits drained $546M from dApps. pic.twitter.com/uqPdx1dzUZ

Advertisement

— CoinGecko (@coingecko) August 27, 2026

Other major incidents included the $292 million KelpDAO breach, the $285 million Drift Protocol attack and the $223 million Cetus exploit. Their different methods show why one security control cannot cover the industry’s complete attack surface.

Infrastructure attacks can target private keys, employee devices, front-end interfaces, software dependencies and bridge operators. These components often sit outside the smart contracts reviewed during conventional audits.

State-backed groups have also adopted longer and more complex operations. As previously reported, two North Korea-linked attacks drained approximately $577 million through social engineering and bridge infrastructure compromises rather than ordinary contract flaws.

Audits covered only a minority of exploited weaknesses

CoinGecko found that 147 of the 245 affected platforms, or about 60%, had completed an independent security audit before they were attacked. Those platforms accounted for 88.44% of recorded losses.

That finding does not establish that auditors approved the vulnerable component. CoinGecko said only approximately 11% of incidents involved flaws that fell within the scope of routine smart-contract audits.

Those in-scope failures still caused about $396 million in losses. Most other incidents involved external infrastructure, unaudited software updates, compromised credentials or governance mechanisms that the audit did not assess.

An audit is also a snapshot of a particular code version. Changes made after the review may introduce new vulnerabilities. Its effectiveness depends on the scope, methodology, auditor experience and whether developers resolved the findings.

In related coverage, Ripple’s security review identified 96 issues before affected code reached users, showing that audits can prevent losses when findings arrive before activation. They cannot replace continuous monitoring and operational security.

Onchain insurance capacity fell as attacks increased

Active coverage across leading onchain insurance protocols declined 20.2%, from $163.2 million to $130.2 million. Cumulative payouts remained near $33 million, according to CoinGecko.

Five of the nine protocols tracked had become inactive or moved into other business areas by August 2026. CoinGecko attributed the retreat partly to elevated risk, expensive premiums and difficulty attracting capital providers.

The $130.2 million coverage figure should not be compared directly with $3.63 billion as a formal coverage ratio. The first is a point-in-time measure, while the second covers cumulative incidents across 19 months.

Policies also contain narrow definitions. Some cover verified smart-contract failures but exclude phishing, private-key theft, employee mistakes, market volatility and losses involving unsupported chains.

Exchanges increasingly rely on self-funded reserves

Centralized exchanges have increasingly established investor-protection funds instead of purchasing full external insurance. These reserves can provide faster reimbursement after a breach.

However, a protection fund is not automatically equivalent to regulated insurance. Coverage depends on the exchange’s terms, reserve custody, asset composition and discretion over qualifying events.

Proof-of-reserves attestations address another issue by showing that an exchange controls assets corresponding to customer balances. They do not establish secure key management or prove that all liabilities have been disclosed.

The report’s next test will be whether platforms expand audits beyond smart contracts into operational systems, bridges and software dependencies. Insurance providers must also determine whether broader protection can be offered without making premiums unaffordable.