A U.S. federal court has ordered the forfeiture of roughly $212,700 in stablecoins linked to wages earned by North Korean IT workers, giving the Justice Department a partial victory in its attempt to seize more than $7.74 million in digital assets tied to an alleged sanctions evasion network.

NK News reported on Sept. 7 that U.S. District Judge Rudolph Contreras ruled that funds seized from a crypto wallet beginning with “0x81c4” should be forfeited to the U.S. government. The Sept. 3 ruling granted part of the Justice Department’s request for default judgment while rejecting its attempt to immediately take control of other assets included in the case.

Prosecutors said the wallet received approximately 158,123 USDC from at least 10 addresses used to receive payments for North Korean IT workers and another 54,574 USDT from at least four worker payment addresses. The two dollar-pegged stablecoins had a combined face value of roughly $212,700.

The government argued that the funds were proceeds of a scheme in which North Korean workers obtained overseas IT jobs, concealed their identities and locations, and routed their earnings through cryptocurrency before money was ultimately sent toward North Korea.

U.S. court approves $212,700 North Korea crypto forfeiture

Contreras found that prosecutors had provided enough information to establish how the 0x81c4 wallet was connected to the alleged operation.

The court said the government’s allegations described a wire fraud and money laundering operation involving foreign entities that conducted transactions on behalf of sanctioned individuals in violation of the International Emergency Economic Powers Act.

For the purpose of the default judgment, the allegations were sufficient to establish that the seized funds constituted or were derived from proceeds traceable to those violations. Contreras therefore entered judgment in favor of the United States for the assets seized from the wallet.

The ruling covered only part of a substantially larger pool of assets targeted by federal prosecutors.

The Justice Department filed its civil forfeiture complaint in June 2025 seeking more than $7.74 million in cryptocurrency and other digital property allegedly generated and laundered through North Korean overseas IT employment schemes.

As crypto.news previously reported, the assets had initially been restrained in connection with an April 2023 indictment of Sim Hyon Sop, a representative of North Korea’s Foreign Trade Bank accused of working with IT workers to move crypto earnings back toward the country.

The complaint covered cryptocurrency, non-fungible tokens and Ethereum Name Service domains. Prosecutors said some of the funds had been frozen or seized while North Korean workers and their associates were attempting to launder the proceeds.

Contreras did not grant forfeiture of the remaining property. The judge found that the government had not adequately identified the other assets in its public forfeiture notice and denied that part of the request without prejudice, leaving prosecutors able to return with another request.

North Korean IT workers allegedly used stablecoins for salaries

The Justice Department has accused North Korea of deploying IT workers around the world to obtain employment at technology and blockchain companies, sometimes using fraudulent identification documents and other methods to hide their nationality and physical location.

Employers who were unaware of their identities then paid the workers for legitimate IT work, often using stablecoins such as USDC and USDT, according to the department.

Prosecutors said the workers used several methods to obscure where their crypto came from before sending funds toward North Korea. The alleged techniques included moving money in smaller amounts, using accounts opened under false identities, swapping tokens, moving assets between blockchains, buying NFTs and mixing employment proceeds with other funds.

U.S. authorities have continued targeting the people and infrastructure accused of supporting those operations. In March, the Treasury Department sanctioned a network that it said helped North Korean workers obtain overseas jobs using false personas and stolen identities before cryptocurrency was used to transfer or launder their earnings.

Investigators have separately traced the employment strategy into crypto development teams. An Ethereum Foundation-backed investigation disclosed in April identified 100 suspected DPRK operatives working within crypto companies, while the Ketman Project alerted 53 teams after examining developer identities and GitHub activity.

Security researcher and MetaMask developer Taylor Monahan said in a separate investigation that North Korean-linked developers had worked inside DeFi projects over several years, with the activity extending back to the early period of decentralized finance.

The risk has continued into 2026. Consensys temporarily halted product releases in July after discovering that a consultant linked to North Korea had gained access to its systems for roughly one month. The company’s investigation found no evidence that assets or data had been stolen or that malicious code had been introduced.

Sim Hyon Sop and Kim Sang Man remain tied to U.S. case

The forfeiture complaint identified Sim and Kim Sang Man as intermediaries who allegedly helped move earnings generated by overseas workers.

Sim served as a representative of North Korea’s Foreign Trade Bank, which has been sanctioned by the United States over its links to the country’s weapons programs. The Treasury Department placed Sim on its Specially Designated Nationals list in April 2023.

According to the Justice Department, North Korean IT workers sent funds to Sim after laundering their earnings. Prosecutors have accused him of participating in schemes involving workers who obtained employment at companies in the United States and elsewhere and of working with over-the-counter cryptocurrency traders to use illicit funds to acquire goods for North Korea.

Kim was sanctioned the following month along with Chinyong, also known as Jinyong IT Cooperation Company. U.S. authorities identify him as the chief executive of Chinyong, which is subordinate to North Korea’s Ministry of Defense and employs delegations of IT workers operating overseas.

Prosecutors said Kim served as an intermediary between those workers and the Foreign Trade Bank by transferring funds from workers to Sim. Chinyong delegations have operated in countries including Russia and Laos, according to the Justice Department.

U.S. authorities have previously linked Kim to crypto transactions involving overseas workers. An earlier investigation found that a suspected North Korean IT worker operating under the alias “Light Fury” transferred more than $300,000 from a public Ethereum Name Service address to Kim.

The Justice Department’s June 2025 complaint said the property targeted for forfeiture consisted of funds generated by North Korean IT workers, including people who had been unknowingly employed by U.S.-based companies, before proceeds were sent to Kim or Sim for the benefit of the North Korean government.

Shinhan Investment Securities has proposed allocating 2% of investment portfolios to digital assets as the traditional 60% stock and 40% bond strategy struggles to provide the diversification investors once expected.

According to Yonhap News Agency, Shinhan Investment Securities senior researcher Park Woo-yeol outlined the allocation during a press briefing at the Korea Exchange in Yeouido, Seoul, on Sept. 8, arguing that stocks and bonds have increasingly moved in the same direction.

The conventional 60/40 portfolio relies partly on bonds cushioning losses when equities decline. Park said that relationship has become less reliable, prompting the securities firm to look at assets with lower correlations to both markets.

Shinhan is now proposing that investors allocate 8% of their portfolios to alternative assets and another 2% to digital assets.

Shinhan proposes 2% digital asset allocation

The securities firm began recommending a 2% digital asset weighting this year after examining the risk-adjusted performance of portfolios that divided a 10% alternative allocation between gold and Bitcoin.

According to Park, the analysis produced relatively favorable results when gold and Bitcoin were divided at an 8-to-2 ratio. Under that model, Bitcoin would account for 2% of the overall portfolio.

The recommendation comes as South Korea works on rules that could give digital assets a larger role within its regulated financial system.

In July, crypto.news previously reported that the government had renewed plans for crypto ETFs, alongside legislation covering stablecoins, tokenized government bonds and other blockchain initiatives. Authorities are preparing the Digital Asset Basic Act and a framework for cross-border stablecoin transactions.

South Korea has been gradually opening other parts of its financial system to digital assets as well. The Ministry of Economy and Finance disclosed plans in July to include digital assets under a new state asset management framework that would replace rules centered largely on conventional property.

Institutional participation has historically faced tighter restrictions. Financial institutions were barred from directly investing in cryptocurrencies under a policy dating back to 2017, while regulators have spent the past several years working through how crypto products can fit within existing securities and investment rules.

Trading hours are changing competition for Korean investors

Park said changes in global ETF trading could create another challenge for South Korea’s securities market.

Nasdaq is working toward extended trading that would eventually keep its market open for 23 hours on weekdays. Such a schedule would allow Asian investors to trade U.S. stocks and ETFs during South Korea’s regular market hours instead of waiting for the U.S. session.

Nasdaq’s plans have already moved through several regulatory and infrastructure steps. In August, the exchange agreed to acquire LeveL Markets, an alternative trading system that reaches more than 2,500 clients and trades more than 7,000 symbols daily.

The deal formed part of Nasdaq’s work around longer trading hours, tokenized securities and digital market infrastructure. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission approved Nasdaq rules for tokenized securities in March before approving longer trading hours in April.

Park expects the changes to intensify competition for investors once U.S. stocks and ETFs become accessible during Korean market hours.

At the same time, crypto trading platforms have been moving into products traditionally associated with securities markets.

“Stocks, bonds, commodities and ETFs that were traded through securities accounts can now be traded on crypto exchanges,” Park said. “Competition between traditional finance and digital finance platforms has begun.”

Crypto platforms have an additional difference in their operating hours because digital asset markets continue through weekends. Park pointed to the ability to react to geopolitical developments and other events that occur while conventional securities markets are closed.

Crypto exchanges are moving into stock trading

The boundary between the two types of trading platforms has already become less distinct as exchanges roll out tokenized stocks and equity-linked products.

Binance, for example, launched tokenized U.S. stocks in June through bStocks, allowing eligible users to convert supported equities into blockchain-based assets that can trade around the clock. Its initial group included tokenized versions of Nvidia, Tesla, Circle, Micron and Sandisk.

The products are backed 1:1 by underlying securities, according to Binance, and can be transferred to supported self-custody wallets or used in decentralized finance applications.

Kraken has taken a similar approach with xStocks. In July, the exchange began letting eligible users use tokenized stocks and ETFs as collateral for futures and margin positions on Kraken Pro, allowing traders to keep equity exposure while using the assets to support leveraged trades.

The model has continued expanding across international markets. Kraken parent Payward said in July that its xStocks platform had surpassed 500 tokenized assets and $37 billion in transaction volume, with plans to expand beyond U.S. securities into Hong Kong, the U.K., Europe and South Korea, subject to regulatory approvals.

South Korea is separately preparing its domestic capital markets for blockchain-based securities. Hanwha Investment & Securities has reportedly completed a tokenized securities platform supporting Avalanche and Hyperledger Besu ahead of legal changes scheduled for February 2027.

The Financial Services Commission plans to initially permit tokenization of certain funds, bonds, unlisted shares and fractional securities under the new framework.

Single-stock leveraged ETF trading has fallen sharply

While trading platforms are adding new products, Park said one source of recent market volatility has lost much of its influence.

Daily trading volume in single-stock leveraged ETFs averaged roughly 15 trillion won during June and July, according to the researcher. Recent turnover has fallen to between one-tenth and one-twentieth of those levels.

Park said the decline makes a return to the same level of volatility less likely for the time being.

He did not interpret the lower trading volume as evidence that existing investors had exited the market. Individual investors accounted for much of the net buying in those products, and Park said they appeared to be holding positions while waiting for prices to rebound instead of actively trading during the lower-volatility period.

For September, Park named the U.S. Dow Jones dividend index as his preferred ETF index.

Unlike South Korean dividend stocks, U.S. dividend stocks carry relatively high weightings in energy, healthcare and consumer staples, he said. Park argued that composition could offer an advantage in an environment of elevated geopolitical risk and market volatility.

Bitcoin has become one of the world’s largest pools of digital capital, yet only a small fraction participates in onchain financial activity.

Other crypto ecosystems built large economies around staking, lending and decentralized trading. Bitcoin, by comparison, still lacks a universally accepted home where holders can put BTC to work without taking on custody, bridge or foreign-chain risks.

That is the problem Bitcoin-native finance is trying to solve.

The term describes a financial system built around Bitcoin as the productive asset, with services such as staking, lending, borrowing and trading anchored to Bitcoin rather than requiring holders to move their wealth into another blockchain economy. Stacks is pursuing that model through a 2026 roadmap built around three connected stages: attract Bitcoin capital with self-custodial yield, scale the infrastructure needed to support greater activity, then expand the financial applications available to that capital.

The official roadmap is currently presented as a 2026 plan rather than a formal roadmap extending through 2030. Its direction, however, describes a longer-term effort to build lending, trading, programmable capital and other financial services around Bitcoin. The central question for the coming years is whether Stacks can turn that roadmap into the ecosystem where BTC holders move from passive ownership to active financial use.

Bitcoin Staking could become the entry point for idle BTC

Many Bitcoin projects have tried to make BTC productive, but each approach introduces different trade-offs.

Core already offers self-custodial Bitcoin staking using Bitcoin’s CheckLockTimeVerify timelocks, but rewards are paid in CORE. Babylon also keeps staked BTC native to Bitcoin, but its security model includes slashing, meaning delegated BTC can face penalties if protocol security conditions are violated.

Stacks is proposing a different combination. Under its Bitcoin Staking design, participants create a protocol bond by locking BTC on Bitcoin Layer 1 and pairing it with STX worth approximately 5% of the BTC position. The BTC remains under the participant’s keys, while the paired STX secures access to staking capacity. The current target yield is approximately 3% annualized and paid in Bitcoin.

The source of that yield is Proof of Transfer, or PoX, the consensus mechanism Stacks has operated since January 2021. Stacks miners commit BTC as they compete to produce blocks and receive STX rewards. The BTC committed by miners then flows to eligible participants. Stacks says the mechanism has distributed more than 4,200 BTC since launch.

That gives the planned product an economic structure different from staking systems funded entirely through new token issuance. The reward pool comes from BTC spent by miners as part of Stacks block production rather than from creating a new reward token or lending participants’ Bitcoin to borrowers.

The product is not yet established at scale. As of July 16, 2026, PoX-5 was operating on a private testnet with integration partners testing bonding, reward distribution and exits ahead of a public testnet and potential mainnet activation. Mainnet still depends on the Stacks governance process and successful testing.

That distinction matters. Bitcoin Staking could become the top of the Stacks capital funnel, but the thesis remains dependent on execution.

The roadmap moves from capital to infrastructure and finance

Attracting BTC is only the first step. A Bitcoin-native financial system also needs enough performance, liquidity and application depth to give holders reasons to keep using their capital after earning an initial yield.

The Stacks roadmap organizes that process into three phases. Bitcoin Staking anchors capital. Infrastructure improvements prepare the network for greater DeFi and automated activity. The final phase expands Bitcoin-native finance across lending, trading and programmable capital. The workstreams are progressing concurrently rather than waiting for each previous phase to finish.

On performance, Stacks core developers are targeting a 100-fold improvement in throughput through efforts including Clarity Wasm. The roadmap also calls for continued core improvements and optimization of the sBTC bridge. Stacks has separately set a goal of supporting up to 10,000 active AI agents as programmable financial activity grows.

The longer-term financial layer includes self-custodial Bitcoin lending, trading, perpetual markets and programmable BTC that software agents can use. The roadmap also explores allowing sBTC to pay transaction fees, which could reduce the need for users or automated agents to acquire a separate gas asset before interacting with applications.

For institutions and large Bitcoin holders, that combination matters because yield alone may not justify moving substantial capital into a new financial environment.

StackingDAO, Bitflow, Zest and Hermetica build the next layer

The wider Stacks ecosystem is already assembling several of the financial primitives needed to move BTC beyond a single staking product.

StackingDAO provides the liquid staking layer. It currently operates liquid Stacking products for STX and has outlined plans for a Bitcoin liquid staking token as Bitcoin Staking develops. A BTC liquid staking token, or BTC LST, would represent an underlying yield-producing Bitcoin position while remaining usable elsewhere in DeFi.

The role is comparable in structure to the function liquid staking tokens serve in Ethereum’s DeFi economy. Without a liquid representation, staked capital remains harder to use elsewhere. With one, the same economic position can potentially provide liquidity, serve as collateral or participate in additional financial strategies.

Bitflow supplies another necessary piece: markets where Bitcoin-linked assets can trade and find liquidity.

The protocol operates a decentralized exchange and aggregator on Stacks and has introduced HODLMM, a concentrated-liquidity engine designed for more capital-efficient markets. A future BTC LST would need liquid trading venues to maintain an effective market and provide holders with practical entry and exit routes.

Zest Protocol adds credit markets. Its existing Stacks market allows users to lend Bitcoin-linked assets and borrow against collateral, while its planned Bitcoin Collateral Vaults aim to let users borrow stablecoins against BTC without moving their Bitcoin off Layer 1. Zest says those vaults are scheduled to launch in 2026 and are designed around self-custodial Bitcoin collateral rather than a conventional wrapped-BTC structure.

Hermetica provides yield products and a Bitcoin-linked monetary layer through hBTC and USDh. The hBTC vault deploys BTC exposure into onchain strategies including lending, staking and basis strategies, with realized profits accounted for in Bitcoin terms. Hermetica describes the product as redeemable for native BTC, while its current documentation shows that withdrawals remain subject to protocol cooldowns and Bitcoin settlement times.

Its USDh product provides a Bitcoin-backed synthetic dollar that can serve as a stable asset within the same financial environment. Hermetica’s hBTC documentation describes a strategy that can use BTC-linked collateral in lending markets and deploy borrowed stablecoins into additional yield opportunities, connecting Bitcoin collateral, credit and stable liquidity within one system.

Together, these protocols illustrate what comes after Bitcoin Staking.

From Bitcoin yield to a Bitcoin-native financial economy

Ethereum and Solana showed how staking can become more than a standalone yield product. Once users begin earning on an asset, demand can develop for liquid staking, collateral markets, decentralized exchanges and structured strategies that make the staked capital more useful.

Stacks is attempting to build a similar progression around Bitcoin without simply copying another chain’s security and custody model.

Its strategy starts with a product designed to keep BTC on Bitcoin L1 while generating BTC-denominated rewards. The roadmap then connects that capital to faster infrastructure and an ecosystem spanning liquid staking, trading, credit and yield products.

Bitcoin-native finance will not be defined by one staking product. It will be defined by whether Bitcoin can function as productive capital across staking, lending, liquidity and programmable applications without forcing holders to abandon the properties that made them choose Bitcoin in the first place.

Stacks is building toward that outcome. Bitcoin Staking is intended to open the door. The ecosystem developing behind it will determine how far the capital travels once it enters.

FAQ

Ethereum price traded below $2,500 on Sept. 8 as weak short-term momentum and uncertainty over the Federal Reserve’s next move kept the asset inside a narrow range.

Ethereum price action today

According to data from crypto.news, Ethereum (ETH) price traded at approximately $2,475 at the time of writing, down 0.7% over the previous 24 hours. The asset recorded a daily high of $2,507.99 and a low of $2,463 on the daily chart.

The latest decline kept ETH below the $2,500 psychological level, which has repeatedly limited recovery attempts since the start of September. Buyers briefly pushed the price to $2,500 during the latest 4-hour session, but the move lost strength before reaching the upper end of its recent range.

Ethereum has largely traded between $2,450 and $2,550 since Sept. 3. Repeated moves through the middle of the range have failed to produce a sustained trend, leaving both breakout and breakdown attempts vulnerable to reversals.

Crypto trader Daan Crypto Trades described the movement as typical of an illiquid holiday weekend. He expected the return of regular market activity to help the market choose a direction after several days of uneven price action.

Fed uncertainty keeps Ethereum below $2,500

Stronger-than-expected U.S. employment data added pressure to Ethereum and other risk assets. The U.S. economy added 162,000 jobs in August, compared with expectations of about 53,000, while unemployment remained at 4.1%.

The report raised market expectations that the Federal Reserve could increase interest rates at its September meeting. Traders assigned roughly a 60% probability to a rate hike, according to market pricing cited by Reuters.

Higher interest rates can reduce demand for volatile assets because investors can earn greater returns from government bonds and other lower-risk instruments. The Fed is scheduled to announce its next policy decision on Sept. 16.

Rising oil prices have added another source of uncertainty for U.S. investors. Brent crude climbed to $98.66 per barrel on Sept. 8 as conflict in the Middle East raised concerns about energy supplies and inflation, Reuters reported.

Markets will now watch the U.S. Producer Price Index on Thursday and the Consumer Price Index on Friday. Stronger inflation readings could support expectations of tighter monetary policy, while softer figures may ease some of the pressure on Ethereum.

Ethereum indicators point to range-bound trading

The 4-hour Ethereum chart shows the price trading below the Bollinger Band midpoint at $2,484.76. The middle band is the first level buyers need to recover before challenging the upper band at $2,516.64.

A 4-hour close above $2,517 could improve the short-term setup and expose the $2,540–$2,550 resistance area. Ethereum has struggled to hold above that zone during recent recovery attempts, making it an important barrier for a larger breakout.

The lower Bollinger Band rests at $2,452.87 and provides the nearest technical support. A move toward the lower band would keep ETH within its existing range, but a decisive close below it could open a drop toward $2,400.

The Average Directional Index stands at 11.1 on the 4-hour chart. An ADX reading below 20 usually reflects a weak trend, consistent with the repeated reversals and limited follow-through visible since late August.

The daily chart remains more constructive. Ethereum is trading above the Supertrend support at $2,318.72, while the Awesome Oscillator remains positive at 256.05. However, the oscillator’s shrinking bars show that bullish momentum has weakened since the August rally.

Liquidation levels frame Ethereum’s next move

The three-day CoinGlass liquidation heatmap shows a dense liquidity cluster between approximately $2,445 and $2,460. The concentration places leveraged long positions near the lower boundary of Ethereum’s current range.

A breakdown below $2,450 could trigger long liquidations and accelerate a move toward $2,400. CoinGlass data showed that about $29 million in Ethereum futures positions had already been liquidated over the previous 24 hours, while ETH open interest stood near $33.3 billion.

Liquidity is also concentrated above the market. The nearest upper clusters appear around $2,515–$2,520, followed by a larger band near $2,540–$2,550. A recovery through $2,500 could therefore trigger short liquidations and pull the price toward those levels.

The position of the clusters leaves ETH between two nearby liquidity targets. The $2,450 area represents the immediate downside risk, while $2,515 and $2,550 form the main upside objectives.

Analysts watch $2,400 for the bullish structure

Team Lambo Charts said Ethereum’s consolidation above $2,400 allows liquidity to build without damaging the broader bullish structure. The analyst identified $3,000 as the next major upside target if ETH begins another expansion phase.

A momentum-backed break above $3,000 could place $3,700 in view, according to the analyst. However, that longer-term scenario depends on Ethereum continuing to hold $2,400 and clearing the resistance that has formed near $2,550.

In the short term, the chart remains neutral while ETH trades between $2,450 and $2,517. A 4-hour close above the upper Bollinger Band would favor a move toward $2,550, while a loss below $2,450 would increase the risk of a liquidation-driven decline toward $2,400.

Visa has unveiled a new approach to funding businesses by linking its payment settlement records with blockchain-based lending. The payments company says the move is designed to let lenders use VisaNet settlement data together with onchain transaction information to assess borrowers and extend credit against payment obligations—effectively bringing onchain lending closer to everyday payment flows.

The announcement, made Tuesday, positions stablecoin-linked card programs and onchain credit as parts of a broader payments stack, where settlement data can serve as a source of “working capital” signals rather than relying solely on traditional banking-style documentation.

Key takeaways

• Visa will combine VisaNet settlement data with blockchain lending infrastructure to help finance payment obligations using both offchain settlement records and onchain activity.
• Credit Coop is highlighted as an early example, reporting over $2.5 billion in cumulative settlement volume since 2023 across participating facilities.
• Visa says its stablecoin-linked card network has grown to more than 160 programs, with payment volume up nearly 200% year over year.
• Stablecoin settlement volume has surpassed a $20 billion annualized run rate, according to Visa.
• The initiative suggests a strategic shift: onchain lending could expand from crypto-native collateral models into payment settlement ecosystems.

How Visa’s settlement-linked lending model works

Visa says the initiative will connect data produced through its settlement network with blockchain-based lending systems. In practice, lenders would be able to look at Visa settlement records alongside blockchain transaction data to evaluate borrowers and decide whether to finance their settlement obligations.

Visa’s framing is that settlement information already sits at the core of payment execution. By making that information usable within blockchain lending workflows, lenders can potentially shorten the bridge between a payment being authorized or processed and that activity being converted into credit.

The company did not describe a single universal lending mechanism, but the central idea is clear: settlement outcomes can act as a practical data layer for onchain underwriting, potentially reducing the friction that often exists when traditional credit decisions rely on separate documentation sources.

Early example: Credit Coop’s settlement financing

To illustrate the concept, Visa pointed to Credit Coop, a blockchain-based protocol that extends credit lines to businesses. Visa said Credit Coop has financed more than $2.5 billion in cumulative settlement volume since 2023 across participating facilities.

Visa added that the program involved more than 3,000 borrowing events and 9,000 repayments. While those figures are not a direct measure of the broader Visa ecosystem’s credit performance, they do offer a concrete indicator that settlement-linked credit has been operating at meaningful scale on-chain for some time.

For market participants, the relevance lies in what Visa is attempting: instead of limiting credit models to token-native borrowing against crypto assets, the system would connect lending eligibility to payment settlement signals—potentially broadening the addressable borrower base toward merchant and business use cases tied to card and stablecoin rails.

Visa’s wider stablecoin expansion sets the stage

This settlement-linked lending push arrives alongside Visa’s ongoing stablecoin strategy. During Visa’s fiscal third-quarter earnings call in July, management said the company was “investing in each layer of the stablecoin stack,” spanning blockchains, wallets, infrastructure, and applications. The company also described stablecoins as changing how money moves and creating opportunities to rethink payment infrastructure.

Visa’s stablecoin-related business growth is also reflected in card program and settlement figures. Visa stated that more than 160 stablecoin-linked card programs are now operating on its network. It also said payment volume is up nearly 200% year over year.

On settlement activity specifically, Visa said its stablecoin settlement volume has surpassed a $20 billion annualized run rate. The company also claimed this figure is more than 15 times year-ago levels—an indicator that stablecoin payments are moving from experimentation toward higher-volume operational activity within Visa’s rails.

For readers tracking the implications for onchain lending, the key point is that Visa appears to be treating stablecoin settlement as both a payment use case and a data foundation. The more settlement volume grows, the more underwriting inputs a lender could potentially access within the same payment-driven ecosystem.

Stablecoin volume continues to climb, but the underwriting link is the bet

Visa’s own analytics point to continued momentum in stablecoin transfers. According to Visa’s analytics dashboard, adjusted stablecoin transaction volume reached a record $1.79 trillion in June, and volume over the past 30 days stands at roughly $1.2 trillion.

These totals highlight demand for stablecoin settlement across the wider market. However, Visa’s new lending concept is effectively a bet on something more specific than usage volume: that payment settlement data can be integrated into lending infrastructure in a way that improves credit decisioning and liquidity access for businesses.

That distinction matters. Stablecoin transfer growth alone does not automatically translate into workable credit products. Visa’s initiative aims to bridge that gap by turning settlement records into potential underwriting inputs, then layering that into blockchain-based lending facilities.

Visa also pointed to its participation in the OpenStandard consortium, which plans to issue the OpenUSD stablecoin and includes more than 140 participating businesses. While that effort is separate from settlement-linked lending, it underscores that Visa is pursuing multiple routes to strengthen the stablecoin ecosystem around its payments network.

What to watch next

The next phase will likely be less about announcements and more about practical deployment: how widely the settlement-linked lending approach is adopted, which lending facilities integrate VisaNet settlement data, and whether lenders can scale underwriting using payment settlement signals without sacrificing risk controls. As stablecoin-linked card programs and settlement volume grow, the real test will be whether onchain lending becomes a standard financing layer for payment-driven businesses—not just a niche add-on.

Crypto exchange maker and taker fees compared across eight major platforms for spot and futures trading in 2026.

The trading fee is the one cost you pay on every single order, win or lose, so over a year of activity it quietly becomes one of the biggest line items a trader faces. Most exchanges split that fee into two rates: a maker fee when your order adds liquidity to the book and rests there, and a taker fee when your order removes liquidity by filling against what is already there. A resting limit order is usually the maker side, and a market order that lifts the offer is usually the taker side. The gap between the two, and how far each falls as you trade more, is what separates a cheap venue from an expensive one.

This guide compares the maker and taker fees across eight major crypto exchanges, on both spot and futures, and looks at the first discount each one lets you reach, because the rate you can actually unlock matters more than a headline VIP tier you never will. Every figure was checked against exchange documentation, and where fees vary by product or region, we flag it.

Risk warning: Trading crypto, especially with leverage, carries a high risk of loss. Fees are only one part of the cost of trading. This article is informational and is not financial advice.

The fee comparison

The table is sorted by regular futures taker fee, cheapest first, since the taker rate is the number that hits most market orders. These are standard entry-tier rates before token discounts or VIP steps, checked against each venue’s fee schedule and cross-referenced with independent trackers like CoinGecko’s exchange rankings.

Two numbers can look identical and still cost you differently, because the discount path is where real money is saved or lost. A venue with a slightly higher regular taker but a discount you can actually reach can end up cheaper than one with a lower headline rate you will never qualify for.

What each exchange charges

MEXC is the cheapest on paper, with 0% maker and 0.050% taker on spot and 0% maker and 0.020% taker on futures as a standing policy rather than a promotion. There is no token to hold or threshold to clear for the base rate, and it pairs the pricing with a vast altcoin catalog, though liquidity thins on the smallest listings. If your only goal is the lowest published rate, MEXC leads.

Coinbase is a study in contrast: its perpetual futures are cheap at 0% maker and 0.030% taker, but Advanced Trade spot taker fees run as high as 0.60% at the lowest tier, so it is inexpensive for perps and pricey for casual spot buys. The premium buys regulatory standing and a polished, US-listed platform, and spot fees fall with monthly volume, but casual buyers pay the most of anyone here.

Binance sits at 0.10% spot and 0.020% maker with 0.050% taker on futures such as BTC USDT, and paying futures fees in BNB shaves off a further 10%. Its VIP ladder scales down further with volume or BNB holdings, so heavy traders push the effective rate well below the entry tier. Paired with the deepest liquidity in crypto, it is cheap where it counts for active traders.

OKX matches Binance on futures at 0.020% and 0.050%, with slightly lower spot maker fees at 0.080%, and layers on OKB-based discounts. Its VIP 1 is reachable at 50,000 USDT in assets on the futures side, one of the friendlier asset paths among the majors, which makes its effective rate competitive for a funded account.

Bybit charges 0.020% maker and 0.055% taker on futures, competitive on paper, but its first VIP discount needs $100,000 in assets, so most retail accounts stay on the regular rate. What offsets the distant discount is a fast matching engine and deep books on BTC USDT, so execution quality is part of the value even at the regular rate.

BloFin lists a regular futures rate of 0.020% maker and 0.060% taker on pairs such as BTC USDT, which is at the higher end of this group, but its discount path is the most reachable here. VIP 1 drops the taker to 0.0500% and is available with $50,000 in account assets, half of what the comparable Bybit tier requires, so a funded mid-size account actually reaches a cheaper rate rather than just seeing one advertised. You can compare its published schedule at this low-fee crypto exchange.

Bitget matches BloFin’s 0.020% and 0.060% regular futures rate, but its first VIP badge does not move the taker at all, which only falls at VIP 2, so the first upgrade many traders reach changes nothing on cost. In its favor, it lists more perpetual markets than almost any rival and adds BGB-token discounts, so the value is in the range it offers rather than the lowest single rate.

KuCoin also sits at 0.020% maker and 0.060% taker on futures, with spot around 0.10% and discounts through KCS-token holdings or 30-day volume. It supports up to 100x leverage across a broad perpetual catalog, so it is a capable mid-tier venue even if its fees are not the lowest here.

What it takes to reach your first discount

Most fee round-ups stop at the headline rate, but the tier you can actually reach is where real money is saved. Exchanges gate their first discount behind either a balance of assets held on the platform or a rolling 30-day trading volume, and those thresholds vary enormously. The table below shows the easiest path to a first meaningful discount on each venue, which is the part most comparisons leave out.

The pattern that matters is this: an asset-based path to a discount is rare, and where it exists the threshold decides everything. BloFin and OKX let a $50,000 balance unlock a lower futures rate, Bybit asks for double that, and Binance, KuCoin, and Coinbase mostly gate discounts behind trading volume you have to grind out. If you hold a funded account but do not trade millions a month, the asset-path venues are where your first discount is genuinely within reach rather than just advertised.

The standouts

Different traders optimize for different things, so the fee winner depends on the job:

• Lowest headline fees: MEXC, with 0% maker and 0.020% futures taker as a baseline, no token or threshold required.
• Best reachable discount for a funded account: BloFin, because a $50,000 balance unlocks a 0.050% futures taker where the comparable Bybit tier needs $100,000, so the discount is real rather than aspirational.
• Cheapest where it counts at scale: Binance, pairing a low 0.050% futures taker with the deepest liquidity, so your fills land near the mark as well as cheaply.

The lesson is that “lowest fee” and “lowest fee you will actually pay” are different questions, and the second one depends on your balance and volume.

Questions about trading fees

What is the difference between a maker and a taker fee? A maker order adds resting liquidity to the order book and is usually charged less or even rebated, while a taker order removes liquidity by filling immediately and is charged more. Binance Academy explains the maker-taker split in plain terms, and every rate in the table above is that split rather than a flat commission.

How do I actually pay the lower maker fee? Use resting limit orders instead of market orders where you can, since a limit order that does not fill immediately typically posts as a maker. Kraken’s help center has a clear walkthrough of how maker and taker fees are applied.

Do exchange-token discounts really help? They can, if you already hold or are willing to hold the token. BNB on Binance, OKB on OKX, and KCS on KuCoin all cut fees, but they add token exposure, so weigh the discount against holding an asset you might not otherwise want.

Are there fees beyond maker and taker? Yes. Funding on perpetual futures is a separate periodic charge between longs and shorts, and deposits, withdrawals, and network fees sit outside the trading fee entirely, so the maker-taker rate is not the whole cost of trading.

How to choose on fees

1. Match the rate to your order style. If you mostly post limit orders, weight the maker fee, and if you mostly take liquidity with market orders, weight the taker fee, since that is the one that hits you.
2. Look at the discount you can actually reach. A reachable first tier, like BloFin’s $50,000 path to a 0.050% taker, can beat a lower headline rate locked behind a threshold you will not hit.
3. Separate spot from futures. Some venues are cheap on one and expensive on the other, as Coinbase’s low perp fees and high spot fees show, so compare the product you actually trade.
4. Add up the whole cost. Factor funding, withdrawal, and network fees alongside maker-taker, and use a neutral reference like Investing.com’s crypto section to track the markets you trade while you compare venues.

The bottom line: MEXC wins on the lowest published fees, Binance is cheapest where liquidity matters most, and BloFin offers the most reachable discount for a funded mid-size account, so the right pick depends on your balance, your product, and how you send orders.

Nansen has integrated Outcome.xyz’s HIP-4 markets into its trading platform, becoming the first front end to support the venue as Hyperliquid opens its outcome-market infrastructure to outside builders.

According to a press release shared with crypto.news, the integration is live and initially gives Nansen users access to supported stock and crypto markets from Outcome.xyz alongside the platform’s existing onchain trading tools. Politics and sports markets are expected to be added as the offering develops.

Nansen said the arrangement is part of its plan to let users research and trade different types of markets through the same interface. Eligible traders using qualifying Outcome.xyz markets through Nansen can participate in a $1 million rewards pool, subject to the campaign’s terms.

The rollout comes shortly after Hyperliquid opened HIP-4 deployments to outside venues, creating a permissionless route for builders to launch outcome markets using the network’s infrastructure.

Nansen brings Outcome.xyz HIP-4 markets into its trading platform

Nansen has historically focused on onchain analytics, wallet activity and market intelligence, but the company has been adding execution features to connect its research tools with trading.

Under the Outcome.xyz integration, traders can examine market activity and take positions without moving to a separate front end. Nansen said users can assess who is taking positions on particular outcomes and where conviction is concentrated before executing through Nansen Trading.

“Prediction markets are having a real moment for a reason. People enjoy forming a view and putting it to the test,” Nansen co-founder and CEO Alex Svanevik said.

Svanevik said Outcome.xyz gives traders exposure to outcomes involving stocks, crypto, politics and sports, while Nansen connects that activity with its intelligence tools.

“What we’ve done at Nansen is make that decision a better-informed one, while closing the loop between intelligence and execution,” he added. “Traders can look at who is taking positions on an outcome, which outcomes have the strongest conviction behind them, and trade on that information directly in Nansen.”

Outcome.xyz co-founder Ahmed said distribution is important for a new market category and described Nansen as a natural partner because traders already use it for onchain research.

“For a new market category, distribution matters as much as market design,” Ahmed said. “Outcome, like Hyperliquid, is focused on meeting traders where they already are.”

The integration arrives as Outcome.xyz has quickly taken a leading share of activity among third-party HIP-4 venues.

On Sept. 3, crypto.news previously reported that HIP-4 daily volume nearly tripled within three days of Hyperliquid opening the infrastructure to outside venues on Aug. 29. Daily outcome volume increased from an August average of $545,000 to $1.97 million on Aug. 31, according to research cited in the report.

Outcome accounted for approximately 85% of the reported HIP-4 volume at the time, while another third-party venue, Skew, generated roughly 1%. The early activity came as Outcome ran its $1 million rebate campaign, which paid eligible users approximately one cent for every dollar traded.

HIP-4 has opened outcome market deployment to outside builders

HIP-4 was designed to support contracts tied to outcomes with fixed settlement conditions instead of the continuously priced instruments used for conventional perpetual futures.

The framework supports fully collateralized contracts without leverage, funding payments or liquidations. Contracts settle according to predetermined outcomes, allowing the infrastructure to be used for event-driven markets covering areas such as economic data, crypto, equities, politics and sports where supported.

Hyperliquid began moving toward permissionless HIP-4 deployment earlier this year. In July, the protocol outlined plans for outside deployers to create outcome markets after staking 500,000 HYPE, initially through testnet before the framework progressed toward open deployment.

Deployers can be penalized through slashing if they incorrectly settle a market or fail to settle it within the required period. The framework relies on templates approved by Hyperliquid validators, which limits deployments to predefined types of markets and settlement structures.

The permissionless system began producing outside venues by late August. Hyperliquid received its first reported builder-deployed outcome DEX after OUT registered through the HIP-4 framework, with onchain transactions showing the exchange deployed under the name OUT.

Two outside venues had each posted the required 500,000 HYPE bond by early September, according to research cited by crypto.news. Seven validator-approved templates were available for deployers at the time.

Outcome.xyz is among the earliest builders operating through the framework. Nansen’s support now gives the venue another front end through which traders can access its markets instead of requiring users to interact only through Outcome.xyz itself.

Hyperliquid has expanded from perps into event-based markets

Hyperliquid introduced HIP-4 after building much of its trading activity around spot markets and perpetual futures.

The protocol’s first U.S. macro event market under HIP-4 used the May 2026 CPI reading as its settlement event. Traders could use USDC to take positions on the year-over-year inflation print, with settlement based on official U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

That market demonstrated how HIP-4 could handle events with a defined expiry and outcome instead of relying on the perpetual structure used for continuously traded assets. The contracts were fully collateralized, meaning traders did not face the liquidation mechanics associated with leveraged perpetual futures.

Hyperliquid subsequently allowed validators to settle markets tied to offchain events, with the network’s validator system handling deployment and final settlement against specified data sources.

The structure differs from HIP-3, Hyperliquid’s framework for permissionless perpetual markets. HIP-3 has been used to create contracts tracking crypto assets as well as equities, commodities, foreign exchange and other traditional-market instruments.

Activity in that segment has already moved heavily into non-crypto products. TradeXYZ, the dominant HIP-3 deployer, recorded $202 billion in trading volume during the second quarter, according to an external research report published in early September. Its equity perpetual volume climbed 377% quarter over quarter to $58.9 billion across 55 markets.

TradeXYZ’s estimated share of Hyperliquid HIP-3 trading rose from 84.5% to 95.1% during the quarter, while open interest reached $2.96 billion at the end of June. The research estimated quarterly revenue at $7.59 million.

HIP-4 now gives builders a separate framework for markets whose value depends on a defined event or result. Outcome.xyz plans to expand from its initial stock and crypto offering into categories including politics and sports, while Nansen said support for the venue’s HIP-4 markets is already live through Nansen Trading.

Zcash price traded near $1,150 on Sep. 8 after a sharp six-day rally carried ZEC from about $814 to a multi-year high of $1,249, with derivatives liquidations and a major technical breakout supporting the move.

Zcash price consolidates after reaching $1,249

According to data from crypto.news, Zcash (ZEC) price was trading at $1,150.62 at the time of the daily chart snapshot, up 0.92% during the session. ZEC opened at $1,140.26 and moved between an intraday low of $1,113.66 and a high of $1,174.03.

The token remains about 8% below the $1,249.28 peak recorded on Sep. 6. However, the pullback has not erased much of the rally that began near $813.95 on Sep. 3. Based on those levels, ZEC gained more than 53% at its peak and was still up about 41% by Sep. 8.

Price action on the 4-hour chart shows ZEC consolidating between approximately $1,110 and $1,170 after the initial correction from the high. Buyers have repeatedly entered near the lower end of that range, although attempts to move beyond $1,170 have faced selling pressure.

The rally followed a derivatives-driven short squeeze that liquidated more than $46 million in bearish positions within 24 hours, according to the supplied market data. Forced position closures added buying pressure as ZEC crossed $1,000 and accelerated toward $1,250.

Daily trading volume also rose above $1.2 billion during the advance, reflecting stronger market participation than Zcash had recorded before the breakout.

ZEC technical indicators remain bullish

The daily chart shows ZEC trading well above all four major moving averages. The 20-day simple moving average stands at $883.74, followed by the 50-day SMA at $650.98 and the 100-day SMA at $560.52.

The 200-day SMA is much lower at $458.79. ZEC is therefore trading roughly 151% above its long-term average, confirming the scale of the advance but also showing how far the price has moved from its broader trend line.

Momentum remains positive on the daily Moving Average Convergence Divergence indicator. The MACD line is at 140.71, above the signal line at 112.36, while the histogram remains positive at 28.35.

The positive configuration indicates that buyers still control the broader trend. However, the declining histogram bars following the price peak suggest that bullish momentum is beginning to cool. A continued decline in the histogram would raise the risk of a longer consolidation even if the broader uptrend remains intact.

On the 4-hour chart, the Supertrend indicator provides immediate support at $1,076.51. ZEC has remained above that level throughout the latest pullback, while the Bull Bear Power reading of 19.98 remains positive.

A close below the Supertrend would weaken the short-term structure and could expose the psychological $1,000 level. The former breakout zone near $875–$888 would become the deeper support area if selling accelerates.

Liquidation map points to resistance near $1,180

CoinGlass’s 24-hour ZEC liquidation heatmap shows the largest nearby concentration of leveraged positions around $1,178–$1,180. Another group of liquidation levels appears between $1,195 and $1,205.

Price often moves toward areas containing concentrated leveraged positions because forced liquidations can add volume once those levels are reached. A break above $1,180 could therefore trigger another push toward $1,200 and the recent high near $1,249.

Additional liquidity sits above $1,230, but ZEC would first need to overcome the selling pressure that emerged during its initial retreat from the peak.

On the downside, the heatmap shows concentrations near $1,110 and across the $1,080–$1,100 region. Losing $1,140 could pull the price toward those levels, with the 4-hour Supertrend at $1,076 providing the next technical test.

Traders should also watch leverage on both sides of the market. The earlier short squeeze helped drive the rally, but a heavily leveraged long market could produce the opposite effect if ZEC breaks below nearby support.

Zcash bulls target $1,500 after pennant breakout

Crypto analyst Team LAMBO Charts described ZEC’s longer-term formation as a bullish pennant and said the token had already surpassed the pattern’s initial $1,000 target.

The analyst identified $1,500 as the next upside objective while arguing that bulls remain in control as long as the breakout holds. From the Sep. 8 price near $1,150, reaching that target would require an advance of approximately 30%.

Before testing $1,500, ZEC must reclaim $1,200 and close above the Sep. 6 peak at $1,249. A sustained breakout beyond that high would leave limited recent price history to act as resistance, although profit-taking could increase as the token approaches the analyst’s target.

The bearish scenario begins with a 4-hour close below $1,076. Such a move would weaken the post-breakout structure and place $1,000 back in focus. A deeper correction toward the rising 20-day SMA near $884 would erase a larger portion of the rally but would still leave ZEC above its medium- and long-term moving averages.

For US traders, Federal Reserve expectations remain a possible source of volatility across speculative assets. Zcash has recently outperformed the broader crypto market, but shifts in rate expectations could still affect leverage and demand as traders assess the next US monetary-policy decision.

The CLARITY Act has moved closer to defeat ahead of its Sept. 15 Senate vote as lawmakers remain divided over presidential ethics rules and stablecoin rewards.

CLARITY Act ethics talks remain stalled

Semafor reported on Sept. 8 that Republican senators expect the crypto market structure bill to fail when the chamber returns, citing little progress on an ethics provision sought by Democrats.

The proposed restriction would address whether a sitting president and immediate family members could profit from crypto businesses while federal policy affecting the industry is being written. According to two Democratic aides cited by Semafor, negotiators have made little movement on the demand.

Sen. Mike Rounds, R-S.D., offered a brief assessment of the talks, saying the situation “does not look good right now.”

Sen. Thom Tillis, R-N.C., who has participated in bipartisan negotiations over the legislation, tied its survival directly to the White House’s willingness to compromise.

“If there’s no interest in the White House in trying to bridge the gap on the ethics language, it is going to fail,” Tillis said.

At the White House, an administration spokesperson told Semafor that Trump remained “unequivocal” in calling on Congress to pass the bill so the United States could compete with other countries in digital-asset development.

The spokesperson also said the administration had worked with Congress and accepted what it considered “the most comprehensive and wide-ranging ethics provision in history.” Democrats have disputed that description, arguing that the language does not sufficiently cover businesses controlled by a president’s relatives.

Questions about Trump’s crypto ties have followed the legislation through Congress. In August, crypto.news covered renewed ethics demands after Public Citizen called for the bill to require a sitting president and immediate family members to divest from crypto ventures.

Trump and members of his family have been linked to several digital-asset projects, including World Liberty Financial and the Official Trump meme coin. Public Citizen argued that federal crypto policy could not be separated from the president’s private financial interests, adding another source of pressure on senators seeking Democratic votes.

Sept. 15 vote requires bipartisan support

Senate Majority Leader John Thune filed cloture on the motion to proceed before lawmakers left Washington for their August recess. Under the scheduled Senate test, the motion will ripen at 2:15 p.m. ET on Sept. 15, one day after the chamber returns for regular business.

The vote will not decide final passage. Instead, senators will determine whether to open debate on the CLARITY Act, with supporters needing 60 votes to advance the measure.

Republicans hold 53 Senate seats, meaning they would need support from at least seven Democrats or independents even if every Republican backed the motion. Opposition within the Republican conference could raise the number of cross-party votes required.

Senators Josh Hawley of Missouri and Rand Paul of Kentucky have been identified as possible Republican opponents. Hawley has raised concerns about provisions governing stablecoin rewards, while community banks have warned that interest-like payments on stablecoins could draw deposits away from insured lenders.

Some Republican senators have sought additional protections for banks before agreeing to support the bill. Democrats, meanwhile, have pressed for state attorneys general to retain enforcement powers because they question whether federal agencies alone would enforce the framework effectively.

Earlier crypto.news coverage identified three unresolved provisions, presidential ethics restrictions, protections for decentralized finance developers, and the treatment of stablecoin rewards, as possible barriers to reaching 60 votes.

A successful cloture vote would allow senators to debate the legislation and offer amendments. Final passage would generally require a simple majority, but any Senate version that differs from the House-approved text would need further action before it could reach the president.

The House passed its version of the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act in July 2025 by a 294-134 vote, including support from 78 Democrats. Senate negotiations have since produced separate proposals addressing the roles of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

For U.S. investors and crypto businesses, the legislation would determine how federal agencies divide oversight of digital assets and trading platforms. The framework would also establish processes for deciding when a crypto asset falls under securities rules and when it qualifies as a digital commodity subject to CFTC authority.

Crypto groups increase pressure before the vote

As support remains uncertain, the Fairshake-linked Cedar Innovation Foundation has announced three national advertisements backing the CLARITY Act ahead of the Senate vote.

The campaign seeks to build public and political support during the final week before senators return. Fairshake and other crypto-aligned political groups have spent heavily in congressional races, giving the industry another way to pressure lawmakers if the bill fails.

Semafor reported that defeat could prompt crypto groups to direct additional funds toward competitive House and Senate races. Sen. Roger Marshall, R-Kan., questioned whether the measure carried much weight among voters in his state.

“There’s nothing I can do with the crypto bill,” Marshall said. “Haven’t heard a peep about it. Nobody back home is asking about it.”

Prediction-market traders have also reduced their expectations for passage. Polymarket odds on the CLARITY Act becoming law in 2026 have fallen from earlier highs as the Sept. 15 vote approaches and the available congressional calendar narrows.

A prediction-market price represents traders’ positions rather than an official forecast, and it can change as negotiations continue or senators announce their votes. Recent readings have nevertheless placed passage well below an even chance.

House calendar leaves little time for final passage

Even if the Senate clears cloture, lawmakers will have limited time to debate amendments, pass the bill, and resolve any differences with the House version.

The Senate will have about 15 session days before election campaigning takes priority ahead of the November midterms. Leadership would need to manage debate while Congress also faces other deadlines competing for floor time.

House leaders have canceled sessions during the final two weeks of September and plan to begin the chamber’s midterm recess by Sept. 17. The schedule leaves little room for representatives to consider Senate changes during the same month.

If senators amend the legislation, the House would need to approve the revised text or the two chambers would have to reconcile their separate versions. The Constitution requires both chambers to pass identical language before a bill can be sent to the president.

Meanwhile, the SEC has continued work on crypto rules without waiting for Congress. In an Aug. 18 statement, SEC Chair Paul Atkins said legislation remained necessary to establish durable rules and prevent a future regulator from easily reversing the agency’s current approach.

The CFTC has also been examining how it can use its existing authority while lawmakers debate an expanded federal framework. Its current powers do not provide the complete spot-market oversight contemplated by the CLARITY Act, which would give the agency a larger role in supervising digital commodities and related intermediaries.

Robinhood has signed a multi-year deal to route selected event contracts through OG.com while taking equity stakes priced against $20 billion and $5 billion valuations for Crypto.com and OG.com, respectively.

Robinhood adds OG.com as an event-contract provider

Robinhood and OG.com announced the agreement on Sep. 8, confirming that the prediction market operator will provide exchange, clearing and infrastructure services for Robinhood’s event-contract business.

Under the multi-year arrangement, Robinhood will send part of its retail event-contract volume through OG.com’s derivatives exchange and clearinghouse. The platform operates under the oversight of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, giving Robinhood another federally regulated provider for its U.S. prediction markets business.

Selected football contracts will be among the first products routed through the new provider as the U.S. professional football season begins. OG.com said its contracts will appear gradually in the Robinhood app for eligible U.S. customers, with the phased rollout starting on Sep. 8.

Contracts covering economic indicators, elections, sports, and cultural events could follow, according to the company announcement. Each contract gives traders a yes-or-no position on a defined result and settles according to the outcome specified in its terms.

Robinhood already sources contracts from several providers rather than relying on a single exchange. The brokerage launched its prediction markets hub with Kalshi in March 2025 before adding ForecastEx and Rothera, its exchange venture with Susquehanna International Group.

As crypto.news reported in July, Robinhood had been discussing an agreement with Crypto.com that would add another supplier to its existing network. The completed deal turns the proposed distribution arrangement into an equity relationship involving both Crypto.com and OG.com.

Robinhood receives stakes at $20 billion valuation

Alongside the infrastructure partnership, Robinhood will take initial minority stakes in Crypto.com and OG.com. Neither company disclosed the size of the investments or the amount Robinhood will pay.

Pricing for the stakes will follow Citadel Securities’ recent investment terms, according to the joint announcement. Crypto.com was valued at $20 billion in that transaction, while OG.com received a standalone valuation of $5 billion after separating from Crypto.com.

OG.com now operates as an independent company with its own capital allocation and management focus. Crypto.com retains its main digital asset exchange business, while the separated platform concentrates on prediction markets, futures, perpetual contracts, and related derivatives.

Kris Marszalek, founder and CEO of Crypto.com and OG.com, described the agreement as the start of a longer relationship between the companies.

“We’re looking forward to making OG.com the most liquid venue globally for innovative derivative instruments, starting with prediction markets and quickly expanding into futures and perpetuals.”

Robinhood Vice President and General Manager of Futures and Prediction Markets JB Mackenzie said the equity component gives the brokerage a direct financial interest in the infrastructure supporting its contracts.

“Teaming up with Crypto.com and OG.com strengthens our position as a leader in the prediction markets space and gives us even more skin in the game,” Mackenzie said. He added that customer demand for contracts linked to public events has continued to grow.

Prediction markets become a larger Robinhood business

The agreement adds capacity to a product line that generated $156 million in revenue for Robinhood during the second quarter, according to Reuters. The figure was a quarterly record for the company’s event-contract business.

Robinhood is also preparing a dedicated election hub ahead of the November 2026 U.S. midterms. According to Reuters, the hub will carry contracts linked to state and federal races, with some products potentially routed through Crypto.com and OG.com.

A June Bernstein revenue forecast estimated that Robinhood’s prediction markets could generate $586 million in 2026, up from $150 million in 2025. The research firm based its estimate partly on trading during the FIFA World Cup, when daily prediction market volume reached as much as $4.8 billion.

Bernstein also estimated that the business could contribute about 17% of Robinhood’s transaction-based revenue and 10% of total company revenue during 2026. According to the firm, Rothera processed about 200 million contracts during its first 18 days, with World Cup and Major League Baseball markets producing nearly all of that activity.

Prediction markets are one part of Robinhood’s recent product expansion. The company has also entered underwriting, allowing Robinhood Securities to help bring companies to public markets rather than limiting its role to distributing IPO shares through the brokerage app.

On the crypto side, Robinhood Chain has drawn heavy decentralized trading activity since its July 1 public launch. A Sep. 3 network activity review found that the Ethereum layer-2 network processed about $945 million in DEX volume on Aug. 25 and more than $47 billion in cumulative volume within its first two months.

The same review found that memecoin trading supplied a large share of the activity. Pons alone produced $445 million of the chain’s $874.8 million in volume on Aug. 30, while Robinhood’s tokenized stock products remain unavailable to U.S. residents.

U.S. rules remain contested across states

Although OG.com operates a CFTC-regulated exchange and clearinghouse, prediction market providers continue to face disputes over whether sports contracts fall under federal derivatives law or state gambling rules.

The CFTC has maintained in court filings that registered derivatives exchanges fall under its exclusive jurisdiction. State officials have argued that contracts based on sporting events operate like betting products and should comply with local licensing, age, and consumer-protection requirements.

In July, attorneys general from 44 states challenged the CFTC, asking the regulator to withdraw and rewrite its proposed rules for sports-related event contracts. The coalition said the proposal reached beyond the agency’s authority and entered an area traditionally supervised by states.

Court decisions have produced different results across the country. Judges in Michigan and Washington temporarily restricted certain sports contracts, while a federal judge blocked Minnesota from enforcing its prediction market ban as litigation continued.

Availability on Robinhood will therefore depend on customer eligibility, individual contract terms, and state-level restrictions in addition to OG.com’s federal status. The rollout announcement did not provide a full list of states where the new contracts will be offered.

HOOD traded at $122.02 at 14:52 UTC on Sep. 8, down about 0.07% for the session after moving between $119.51 and $126.51. Crypto.com-linked Cronos gained about 5.3% to $0.0604 over the same daily period, with an intraday range of roughly $0.0565 to $0.0640.