Abraxas Capital has bought another 13,000 ETH worth $32.39 million in the spot market to hedge part of a 141,180 ETH short position on Hyperliquid valued at $353.27 million.

Lookonchain said on Sept. 8 that Abraxas Capital purchased the additional Ether while keeping its much larger short position open on the decentralized derivatives platform. The blockchain analytics account described the transaction as another spot purchase made specifically to hedge the short.

Sweden’s tax authority has ordered six crypto companies operating in Boden to pay nearly 540 million Swedish kronor (approx. $56 million) in additional taxes after finding that the firms used business structures to obtain tax benefits they were not entitled to.

Swedish public broadcaster SVT reported on Sept. 3 that the six companies accounted for most of the latest tax adjustments imposed on crypto businesses following a review by Skatteverket, the Swedish Tax Agency. The authority said some companies had structured their operations in ways that concealed crypto mining activity.

Patrik Lillqvist, head of intelligence at Skatteverket, said the arrangements were designed to secure tax advantages that would not have been available if the businesses had been classified as crypto miners.

“The companies that we have inspected often have a special arrangement to conceal that they are engaged in mining,” Lillqvist said, according to a translation of his remarks. “The purpose is to obtain tax advantages that the companies are not entitled to.”

The latest assessments form part of the agency’s review of the crypto industry between 2024 and 2026. Nine companies have received tax adjustments totaling more than half a billion Swedish kronor during that period, with six of them operating in Boden.

Sweden crypto tax review centers on mining operations

Boden, a city in northern Sweden, has attracted crypto miners for years because of its access to power and data center infrastructure. The region was already home to around 10 crypto mining companies by 2018, when operators were increasingly looking to Sweden as a location for mining facilities.

Tax treatment later became a source of tension between the industry and Swedish authorities. Sweden moved in 2023 to remove electricity tax relief previously available to data centers, a decision that affected Bitcoin miners operating energy-intensive facilities in the country.

The latest Skatteverket cases concern how companies described the nature of their businesses for tax purposes. According to the agency, some firms presented operations in a way that hid their role in creating new units of cryptocurrencies through mining.

SVT’s earlier investigation into Sweden’s crypto industry found in 2024 that companies had deprived the state of around 1 billion Swedish kronor in taxes, with most of the cases concentrated in Boden. The new assessments show that disputes involving the sector continued through 2026.

Lillqvist criticized companies that entered Swedish communities and used arrangements that the authority believes deprived the state of tax revenue.

“You come to a society and steal from it,” he said.

Several companies have challenged Skatteverket’s decisions in court. Sweden’s administrative court and administrative court of appeal have so far sided with the tax authority in the cases they have considered, according to SVT.

Bikupan Datacenter takes dispute to Sweden’s top administrative court

Bikupan Datacenter, which has operated in Boden and Robertsfors, is among the companies contesting the tax authority’s position.

The company has been granted corporate restructuring after becoming unable to pay its debts, while its tax dispute has reached Sweden’s Supreme Administrative Court. The case remains under consideration.

Bikupan is connected to HIVE Digital Technologies, whose Swedish operations have been caught in a longer-running disagreement over the tax treatment of its business. HIVE said in March that it was scaling down Bitcoin mining at its Boden facility as it challenged the way Swedish tax rules were being applied to the operation.

Johanna Törnblad, CEO of Bikupan Datacenter and HIVE’s Sweden country manager, rejected Skatteverket’s assessment of the company’s historical operations.

“When it comes to the historical operations of the Bikupa companies, we do not share the Swedish Tax Agency’s assessment,” Törnblad told SVT by email.

She said Bikupan’s restructuring application explains the company’s position that crypto mining itself was performed by external mining pools that were independent of the HIVE group.

Under the company’s account of its business model, the Bikupa entities sold computing capacity, or computing power, which could be used for workloads including artificial intelligence.

HIVE has been moving its Boden site toward AI computing

The distinction has become more relevant to HIVE’s plans for its Swedish infrastructure as the company moves resources toward high-performance computing and artificial intelligence.

Crypto.news previously reported in June that HIVE generated record fiscal 2026 revenue of $298 million while expanding its AI computing business. Its high-performance computing operation generated $19.5 million during the fiscal year, up 94% from $10 million a year earlier, while contracted annual recurring revenue from its BUZZ HPC unit reached $35 million.

HIVE reported 440 megawatts of global power capacity across Canada, Sweden and Paraguay at the end of the fiscal year. Its installed Bitcoin mining hashrate increased from 6.5 exahashes per second to 25.1 EH/s during the same period, although the company’s Bitcoin holdings fell to 150 BTC as of March 31.

Part of its AI expansion has involved repurposing infrastructure that was originally used for crypto mining. The company has been converting its Boden facility into a Tier 3 liquid-cooled high-performance computing data center designed to support 2,000 Nvidia GPUs.

The company had already disclosed plans in November 2025 to retrofit the Boden site from a Tier I mining facility into a liquid-cooled Tier III+ high-performance computing center, while expanding GPU infrastructure in Canada.

HIVE’s dispute with Swedish authorities has continued while Bikupan deals with its tax liabilities and restructuring proceedings. The company maintains that its historical Swedish entities provided computing power while independent external mining pools carried out the actual crypto mining.

Skatteverket has maintained the opposite position in its assessments, treating the reviewed operations as mining activity and arguing that the structures used by the companies gave them tax advantages for which they did not qualify. Bikupan’s challenge to that assessment remains before the Supreme Administrative Court.

Bitmine Immersion Technologies, the largest publicly listed corporate holder of Ether, says it has added another large batch of ETH to its treasury. The purchase—announced in a Tuesday release—moves the company closer to its stated objective of acquiring 5% of Ethereum’s total supply.

According to Bitmine’s announcement, the firm bought 28,086 ETH last week. The amount was valued at roughly $69.5 million and brings Bitmine’s total holdings to 5.93 million ETH, accumulated at an average cost of $2,495 per ETH.

Key takeaways

• Bitmine purchased 28,086 ETH last week, bringing total holdings to 5.93 million ETH.
• The company says its treasury is near its target: it has completed 97% of the plan to reach 5% of total Ether supply.
• Bitmine reported $15.7 billion in total assets, including $593 million in marketable securities and 5.1 million staked ETH.
• Third-party figures cited in the report indicate Bitmine faces $5.1 billion in unrealized losses on its ETH exposure.

A steady accumulation strategy nears its stated 5% target

Bitmine’s latest buy is part of a longer accumulation program that began with the company’s goal of reaching a significant share of Ether supply over a limited timeframe. In the same Tuesday announcement, Bitmine stated that it has completed 97% of its effort to acquire 5% of the total Ether supply within 15 months.

Earlier coverage linked Bitmine’s progress to a persistent buying streak led by chairman Tom Lee. In the week preceding this announcement, Bitmine said it acquired 53,501 ETH, pushing its holdings to account for 4.9% of Ethereum’s 120.7 million circulating supply.

With the new purchase, Bitmine is effectively tightening the final gap toward the 5% benchmark. For investors, that matters because it suggests the firm is treating Ether not as a trading position but as a treasury allocation—one that will continue to draw attention to how corporate buyers balance accumulation against mark-to-market swings.

Staked Ether and treasury economics

Bitmine also highlighted the role of staking in its balance-sheet setup. The company reported $15.7 billion in total assets, including $593 million in marketable securities and exposure to other crypto holdings alongside its growing ETH inventory.

Crucially, Bitmine said it holds 5.1 million staked ETH, which it expects to produce $330 million in annualized staking revenue. The claim is tied to general expectations around staking yield and is referenced alongside broader coverage of Ethereum staking-linked themes, including an SEC filing and staking revenue discussions reported by Cointelegraph.

For market participants, the key question isn’t only whether Bitmine can keep buying ETH, but also how staking cash flows may partially offset unrealized losses during price drawdowns. Staking revenue can provide a different lens on performance compared with pure spot price exposure—especially when a company’s ETH position is large enough to dominate its treasury narrative.

Unrealized losses widen as Ether weakens

The company’s accumulation continues even as Ether has remained under pressure. The report cites Dropstab data indicating Bitmine is currently facing $5.1 billion in unrealized losses on its ETH holdings.

Ether’s market price has also moved lower versus early 2026 levels. CoinMarketCap data referenced in the article shows Ether was trading around $2,469 at 1:29 pm UTC on Tuesday, after being down 16% since the start of 2026. Against Bitmine’s average acquisition price of $2,495 per ETH, the latest buy is being added at levels close to (and slightly below) that cited average, underscoring how incremental purchases can still be made even when price remains soft.

That combination—continued buying at prevailing prices while showing very large unrealized drawdowns—can be difficult for equity holders to interpret because it creates a moving gap between cost basis and current valuation. The stock reaction can therefore depend as much on expectations for staking-related earnings and future accumulation pacing as on ETH’s spot trajectory.

Shares and equity market reaction

As Bitmine’s ETH treasury expands, its publicly traded stock also draws scrutiny. The article notes that Bitmine’s NYSE-listed shares (ticker: BMNR) were down more than 2% at Tuesday’s market open, implying the stock could extend its year-to-date decline into double digits.

Yahoo Finance tracking cited in the piece provides the market snapshot for investors watching whether the equity market is treating the ETH accumulation as a value-creating thesis or as a risk factor amid broader crypto volatility.

While the company’s latest purchase reinforces its commitment to its 5% goal, the equity market’s willingness to look past mark-to-market losses appears to be shaped by near-term price direction and by whether investors believe staking revenue assumptions and operational execution will ultimately translate into stronger shareholder outcomes.

Going forward, readers should watch two things: whether Bitmine reaches its stated 5% of total Ether supply target on schedule, and how staking revenue expectations compare with realized performance as ETH prices fluctuate. The uncertainty remains straightforward—without clarity on future yield, pricing, and treasury valuation effects, the gap between long-term accumulation goals and short-term market sentiment will likely stay in focus.

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 price fell below $79,000 on Sept. 8 as weakening capital flows and nearby liquidation clusters increased the risk of a deeper pullback toward $76,000.

Bitcoin price falls below $79,000

According to data from crypto.news, Bitcoin (BTC) price traded at approximately $78,450 at the time of writing, down around 1% over the previous 24 hours. The decline followed another failed attempt to extend above $80,000, with sellers defending the broader $81,000–$82,000 resistance zone.

The 4-hour chart shows that BTC reached an intraday high near $78,995 before falling as low as $78,281. Price remained slightly above the Supertrend level at $78,204, making the indicator an immediate test for buyers.

Bitcoin’s Chaikin Money Flow reading fell to -0.10 on the same timeframe. A negative CMF indicates that more capital is leaving the asset than entering it, supporting the loss of short-term momentum.

The pullback also turned the former $79,500 support area into resistance, according to analyst Crypto with Haris B. The analyst said the $78,000 level was showing signs of weakness and identified $76,000 as the next local target if that floor fails.

Daily trend remains bullish above key moving averages

Despite the short-term decline, Bitcoin continued to trade above all four moving averages shown on the daily chart. The 20-day simple moving average stood at $78,440, placing BTC almost directly on its nearest dynamic support.

The 50-day SMA was near $69,995, while the 200-day SMA and 100-day SMA stood at approximately $69,902 and $66,622, respectively. The arrangement places the shorter average above the longer averages, a structure normally associated with a broader uptrend.

Bitcoin’s average directional index was 48.35. An ADX reading above 25 points to a strong underlying trend, although the indicator does not determine whether that trend will move upward or downward.

The daily chart also shows that BTC has consolidated between roughly $76,000 and $82,300 since its sharp August advance. A break from either side of that range may decide whether the rally continues or develops into a wider correction.

Dami-Defi described the current decline as a pullback within an uptrend because BTC remained above a rising 4-hour trendline. According to the analyst, a 4-hour close below that trendline would weaken the setup, while a break above $81,000–$82,000 could restart the advance.

Bitcoin liquidation map puts $78K in focus

CoinGlass’ three-day Bitcoin liquidation heatmap shows a bright concentration of leveraged positions close to $78,000. The price was approaching that liquidity band at the time captured by the chart, making it the most immediate downside area to watch.

A decline through the cluster could trigger forced closures of leveraged long positions and expose lower liquidity around $77,500. Beneath that zone, the supplied charts place the next important technical support near $76,000.

Larger liquidation concentrations sit above the market. The strongest visible band is around $80,500–$80,700, with additional liquidity between $81,000 and $82,000.

Price can move toward areas holding large numbers of leveraged positions, although a heatmap does not predict which cluster will be reached first. Bitcoin therefore remains caught between nearby long liquidations around $78,000 and a larger pool of short liquidations above $80,500.

A recovery above $79,500 would give buyers another opportunity to target the upper clusters. Failure to reclaim that level would keep pressure on the Supertrend and the $78,000 floor.

US jobs data raises pressure before the Fed meeting

The latest decline came as US investors reassessed the interest-rate outlook following stronger labor data. The US Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that nonfarm payrolls increased by 162,000 in August, compared with an average monthly gain of 31,000 over the previous 12 months.

The unemployment rate remained at 4.1%. A resilient labor market can give the Federal Reserve more room to keep borrowing costs elevated, a backdrop that can weigh on non-yielding assets such as Bitcoin.

Inflation also remained above the Fed’s 2% objective. The Bureau of Economic Analysis reported that the PCE price index rose 3.7% year over year in July. August PCE figures have not yet been released and are scheduled for Sept. 30.

Interest-rate traders were assigning an elevated probability to a rate increase at the September meeting, according to CME FedWatch. The Federal Reserve’s next policy meeting is scheduled for Sept. 15–16.

Bitcoin faces $76K risk if $78K breaks

Bitcoin’s immediate outlook depends on whether buyers can protect the $78,000–$78,200 area. Holding that zone would preserve the 4-hour Supertrend and leave room for a recovery toward $79,500, followed by $80,600 and $82,000.

A decisive 4-hour close below $78,000 would weaken the higher-low structure identified by Dami-Defi. Such a move could send BTC toward $77,000 and $76,000, where the recent range offers the next visible support.

The daily moving averages still support the broader bullish case, but negative CMF and resistance at $79,500 favor caution in the near term. A close above $82,300 would invalidate the current range and confirm a fresh breakout, while a loss of $76,000 would raise the risk of a wider retracement.

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.