Zcash grants funding could soon face its biggest change since the program began. Co-founder Sean Bowe has published a draft proposal to switch off the automatic stream of newly created ZEC that flows to Zcash Community Grants (ZCG), arguing the program is already sitting on far more money than it can sensibly spend.

Under the draft, released late Monday, ZCG’s 8% share of newly minted ZEC would be redirected into the Network Sustainability Mechanism, a reserve meant to support future mining rewards. The committee would keep everything it already holds and keep awarding grants from that pot. Because the allocation is built into the protocol, ending it would require a change to Zcash’s network rules.

The Numbers Behind the Proposal

Bowe puts ZCG’s assets at roughly $125 million after outstanding commitments, using an illustrative ZEC price of $1,300. The committee’s dashboard showed about 91,453 ZEC and $8.8 million in cash, with $2.4 million already promised to grantees. Those figures are consistent with his estimate.

The flow of new money is the bigger issue. At the network’s target pace, ZCG receives about 144 ZEC a day, or about $68 million a year at that same price. By contrast, the Financial Privacy Foundation, which administers ZCG’s funds, reported just over $1.5 million in program expenses in the first quarter, about $6 million annualized. That is less than a tenth of the annual inflow.

Bowe also stress-tested the case. If ZEC dropped to $500 and spending rose to $10 million a year, he estimates the treasury would still last about five years. In a post announcing the draft, he said the program “was never designed to handle this amount of funding.”

Governance and Risk

The proposal is as much about governance as arithmetic. ZCG’s five-member committee is elected by a community advisory panel and chooses grants without a separate coinholder vote. Bowe’s draft argues that continuing to pile money into that custody and decision-making setup adds risk when reserves are already large.

He does not want to end all ecosystem funding. A second program receives 12% of newly created ZEC, and holders vote on its grants every quarter. Bowe wants that allocation left alone. The redirected 8% would stay in the sustainability reserve for the remainder of the grants stream’s existing term.

Timing Draws Attention

The proposal arrived as a ZCG-funded outreach effort drew criticism. The team behind it, ZECsy, demonstrated private payments at an adult-industry convention in Edison, New Jersey, over the weekend. It had requested $550,000 for work spanning adult-industry events and crypto conferences. Bowe’s draft does not mention the controversy, and its case rests on the treasury’s size and the continuing inflow rather than any single grant.

Whether the community embraces the change is an open question. The draft still has to move through Zcash’s improvement-proposal process, and it would need to win support before any network-rule change could take effect. For now, the debate over Zcash grants funding turns on one question: whether a program with a $125 million cushion still needs a guaranteed stream of new coins.

Explore more on this topic with Vexel Search.

Tokenized stock objections against the planned OKX-ICE trading venue rose to 26 this week, after IBM, Oracle, Intel and quantum-computing firm IonQ asked not to have their shares offered on the platform. The four names appeared in an updated public notice from the OKX-ICE joint venture dated Monday, Oct. 26, and were first flagged publicly by journalist Eleanor Terrett.

The latest additions follow an Oct. 23 disclosure that counted 22 objecting issuers. That earlier list included Microsoft, Alphabet, Qualcomm, Cisco, Broadcom, CoreWeave, Goldman Sachs and Wells Fargo. Taken together, the objectors span technology, banking, telecommunications and healthcare, so the pushback is not confined to one sector.

What the SEC’s opt-out rule allows

The objections stem from the SEC’s five-year Innovation Exemption, issued Sept. 17. It lets qualifying venues test round-the-clock, blockchain-based trading of certain stocks through permissioned automated market makers. Platforms must notify a company before offering shares that were tokenized by an unaffiliated third party, and the company then has 30 calendar days to object in writing. A timely objection keeps those shares off the venue under the exemption.

OKX-ICE, a partnership between crypto exchange OKX and NYSE owner Intercontinental Exchange, issued its first notice on Oct. 4. It outlined a design using Uniswap v4 liquidity pools on OKX’s X Layer blockchain, with the venture initially naming 63 prospective securities.

What the objections do and don’t mean

The scope of these tokenized stock objections is narrower than the headline count suggests. They do not amount to a general ban on tokenization, and they do not stop a company from issuing its own blockchain-based securities. Nor do they show that any affected shares have already traded. They simply remove a company’s stock from this particular venue’s third-party offering.

Why so many large issuers are opting out is not spelled out in the notices. Industry experts previously told CoinDesk the pattern may reflect a wait-and-see stance, with companies wanting more clarity on shareholder protections and the practical benefits of tokenized trading before taking part. Some industry groups are going further, urging regulators to replace the opt-out model with one requiring affirmative issuer consent.

A market that needs issuers to join

The larger test for OKX-ICE is whether it can assemble a credible roster. Round-the-clock trading is the main selling point of the exemption, but a venue is only as appealing as the companies on it. With 26 objections already logged against an initial list of 63 securities, the venture faces a thinner menu than it first outlined, though the sources do not say how many of the objectors fell within that original list.

The notice process is also ongoing, so the count could keep climbing. How OKX-ICE responds, and whether regulators revisit the opt-out mechanism, will shape how the first real test of the SEC’s tokenization framework unfolds.

Explore more on this topic with Vexel Search.

UK crypto regulation is shifting from a narrow focus on anti-money-laundering checks and marketing rules toward a fuller rulebook, and exchanges are already positioning themselves for it. In a recent CryptoUK interview, WhiteBIT founder Volodymyr Nosov argued that clarity from regulators is the missing ingredient for turning widespread awareness of digital assets into broader, safer adoption.

A big gap between awareness and ownership

The numbers Nosov leans on come from the Financial Conduct Authority’s 2025 Cryptoassets Consumer Research. By that account, 91% of UK adults are aware of cryptoassets, but only around 8% currently hold them. Nosov reads that gap as room for “responsible growth” once the framework matures.

One statistic he highlights points to why regulation matters commercially: 26% of non-users said they would be more likely to enter the market if cryptoassets were fully regulated. Nosov also notes the FCA’s finding that centralised exchanges remain the most common route into crypto for UK users, which puts platforms like his at the center of any regulatory shift.

What exchanges say users now want

Nosov describes a change in priorities. Early adopters valued access and simplicity. As the market matures, he says, users want a combination of accessibility, simplicity, security and trust, with trust increasingly resting on strong security and transparency. He points to growing attention to asset protection, liquidity, institutional-grade custody and intuitive products.

For retail customers, he sketches a good experience as one where users can fund an account in pounds, convert and trade easily, and see clear analytics. Education, transparent fees and practical risk information should sit inside the platform rather than behind a link, he says.

From AML box-ticking to market integrity

The more consequential argument concerns what a comprehensive regime changes for businesses. Nosov says the conversation moves beyond basic AML compliance toward market abuse monitoring, robust custody standards, conflict-of-interest management and capital adequacy. In his view, institutions such as hedge funds, asset managers and family offices want operational clarity, while retail users want clear disclosures, fair treatment and protection from predatory practices.

He also claims that exchanges which invested in compliance from the start now hold a significant advantage. That is a self-interested position, and worth reading as such: WhiteBIT recently launched a UK-specific arm, WhiteBIT UK, under the Section 21 regime, and Nosov sits on its board as a non-executive director. He describes the entity as a step toward a directly authorised route, offering local GBP banking through Faster Payments, UK-based customer support and products tailored to British users.

What to take from it

The interview is a conversation hosted by a trade association, so it reflects an industry view rather than an independent assessment. The published portion, which cuts off before Nosov’s answers on institutional demand, offers no detail on timelines, specific rules or how his firm’s authorisation will progress. Still, it captures a clear industry thesis: that UK crypto regulation, if it delivers predictable standards on custody, disclosure and market conduct, will reward firms that built compliance early and could draw in the cautious majority who have heard of crypto but have not yet bought any.

Whether that 26% of hesitant non-users actually converts is the real test, and the FCA’s research suggests it will depend as much on trust as on technology.

Explore more on this topic with Vexel Search.

[ad_1]

David Solomon, CEO of Goldman Sachs (L), Jamie Dimon, CEO of JP Morgan (C), and Ted Pick, CEO of Morgan Stanley.

CNBC | Getty Images | CNBC

Fueled by the global boom in artificial intelligence stocks, relaxed capital rules and greater lending to hedge funds, big Wall Street banks have already had a banner year for equities trading — even with one quarter left to go.

Advertisement

The five biggest investment banks have generated about $67 billion in equities revenue through Sept. 30, according to company filings. That is $7 billion more than what the group made during all of 2025, which itself was a record haul.

But it’s Wall Street’s Big Three that have captured the largest slice of what is shaping up to be the industry’s most lucrative arena: Goldman Sachs, JPMorgan Chase and Morgan Stanley have made a combined $52 billion in stock trading revenue so far this year, nearly 80% of the total.

“When it comes to the AI mega trade, the Big Three consider each other their main competitors, and that’s pretty much it,” Mike Mayo, Wells Fargo banking analyst, told CNBC. “They’ve been best positioned to take advantage of this market.”

Wall Street banks are experiencing an epic run of blockbuster profits as the total value of the stock market balloons and trading activity from institutional and retail investors rises across stocks, exchange-traded funds and derivatives. Helping drive this activity are the loans that the banks, through their prime brokerages, are extending to hedge funds so that they can amplify their bets.

Advertisement

Prime brokerage — the business of providing hedge funds with margin loans, securities lending and other trading services — has become a key battleground and source of growth. The Big Three’s prime brokers are central to the larger equities story because they serve the largest funds across markets and products.

Demand for leverage to make bets on AI hardware, hyperscalers and chip suppliers has reached new heights, bank executives said last week.

At Goldman Sachs, equities financing activities jumped 96% in the third quarter to a record $3.37 billion. JPMorgan and Morgan Stanley don’t break out that figure, but said they saw a similar dynamic.

“I like your ‘insatiable demand for capital’ point. That feels about right,” JPMorgan CFO Jeremy Barnum said on the bank’s third-quarter conference call, responding to analyst questions about financing demands.

Advertisement

“In this moment where AI is such an overwhelming theme … there is capital being tapped through all kinds of different mechanisms,” Barnum said.

That demand has helped transform equity desks at the Big Three from cyclical, transactional businesses into more durable, high-margin lending engines, Wall Street executives say.

The performance gap between Wall Street’s giants and rivals including Bank of America and Citigroup highlights a widening divide in capital markets.

“For clients, the value isn’t just a price on one trade, it’s coverage and continuity,” Rachid Alaoui, JPMorgan global head of equities, told CNBC in an interview. “You want a dealer that can give you the full suite across products, and you want that service to travel with you across regions. That matters in stressed markets and periods of volatility.”

Advertisement

Executing multibillion-dollar bets, like leveraged swaps on volatile AI stocks or sector ETFs, can require an enormous balance sheet. The biggest banks can absorb potential $100 million losses without threatening their quarters, according to trading executives. Smaller or more niche banks can’t underwrite single-trade risks of that magnitude, forcing them to decline the business or cede share.

U.S. prime brokers have also benefited from the retreat of European banks including Credit Suisse from the equities business, said Bloomberg Intelligence analyst Herman Chan.

“Prime is one of the ultimate scale businesses,” Chan said. “If you have a strong equities franchise, the hedge funds will want to transact with you because you have a bigger pool of trading opportunities with counterparties.”

Picks and shovels

While U.S. markets were swept up in software and cloud computing giants this year, trading executives say the fastest-growing frontier for equities was in Asia.

Advertisement

Institutional investors poured into South Korea and Taiwan, targeting the “picks and shovels” of the AI supply chain: the memory chipmakers and semiconductor manufacturers supporting data center construction, Alaoui said.

For the Big Three, with their footprints across Tokyo; Hong Kong; Seoul, South Korea; and Mumbai, India; the Asia trade was a goldmine. However, trading executives point out that transaction taxes and stamp duties are included in top-line revenue, artificially inflating Asia prime totals.

There is also no agreed-upon definition of what equities trading revenue should include, so some banks include business lines like clearing services that others exclude from their stock trading totals, making apples-to-apples comparisons difficult.

But that doesn’t change the overall momentum of the business, boosted by a stock rally that began in October 2022, weeks before OpenAI released ChatGPT.

Advertisement

“We’re still in a stock-based world,” Morgan Stanley CEO Ted Pick said on the firm’s earnings call. “Equities are still, all things being equal, the attractive asset class.”

While the CEOs of Goldman Sachs and Morgan Stanley have said the AI build-out is still in its early years, if AI turns out to be not as transformative as hoped, a downturn could impact those banks more than others, analysts said.

The boom has also drawn some concern over the possible risks posed by hedge funds.

The International Monetary Fund warned this month that growing leverage, crowded positions and correlated selling from hedge funds could create potential stability risks. The IMF estimated that global hedge fund assets had reached $13 trillion.

Advertisement

In August, JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon said industrywide leverage was “the highest it’s ever been,” though he stopped short of calling the risk big enough to pose a threat to the financial markets.

Wall Street executives and analysts pointed out that the industry wasn’t fazed by the meltdown of several hedge funds this summer. While the hedge fund run by former OpenAI researcher Leopold Aschenbrenner, Situational Awareness, garnered the most headlines, several smaller firms also experienced a forced unwinding.

Prime brokers have learned to leap on margin calls and quickly take down risk when markets move against clients, JPMorgan’s Alaoui said.

“In the summer, some investors had positions they were forced to unwind,” he told CNBC. “They deleveraged, risk came down, and the market moved on.”

Advertisement

‘Known unknowns’

Another factor driving the equities boom: Trump administration regulators have eased some leverage rules for the largest U.S. banks, giving them more room to expand balance sheet-heavy businesses including prime brokerage. The revised rules were finalized in 2025, and banks were allowed to adopt them as early as January.

By easing the stringent balance sheet caps that previously treated Treasurys and prime brokerage loans, which are collateralized, the same as riskier assets, regulators gave dealers greater flexibility to deploy balance sheet capital.

“Capital did go down, so you have to say the system is somewhat more levered because of the relaxation in regulations,” said Darrell Duffie, a finance professor at Stanford University and a leading expert on financial stability. “It’s not a good idea, but it hasn’t gotten dramatically out of whack.”

The larger size of the market and higher volatility can create more trading, derivatives activity and leverage, he said, but that’s not inherently alarming.

Advertisement

Wall Street executives also downplayed concerns over leverage, pointing out that they use collateral and frequent stress testing to get ahead of problems.

“Hedge fund leverage as a contributor of risk to the system is very much in the category of known unknowns,” JPMorgan’s Barnum said last week. “It doesn’t mean it’s riskless, but we kind of know what it is.”

— CNBC’s Leslie Picker and Ritika Shah contributed to this report.

[ad_2]

Source link

The list of approved Russia crypto exchangers has more than quadrupled in just over two weeks, and the country’s two largest banks are preparing to put Bitcoin and other coins in front of ordinary customers before the year ends. The Bank of Russia added Prosto LLC as the 17th firm on its register of crypto exchange providers on Thursday, up from four when the register opened on 6 October.

A regulated market takes shape

The rush follows a law “On Digital Currencies and Digital Rights,” which took effect on 1 September and pulls crypto trading inside Russia’s regulated financial system for the first time. A second register, for digital depositories that record who owns which coins, now holds eight names.

The two roles are distinct. Exchange providers can trade digital currencies for their own account outside organised venues. Depositories keep the ownership records and give clients access to the addresses where assets are held. Sberbank and VTB, both state-controlled, hold both statuses. VTB was listed in both registers on 6 October, while Sberbank joined the exchange register on 12 October after being among the first five depositories approved.

Retail launch dates and spending caps

VTB says it will open trading to a broad range of investors in November and December, through its VTB My Investments app and then directly through the bank’s exchange. Its broker has already settled its first stablecoin deals for corporate clients through accounts at its new depository. Sberbank is aiming for 1 December, using apps customers already have, though it says timing depends on the final regulations. It is reportedly already testing Bitcoin, Ether and USDT trades in its app.

Ordinary buyers will face tight limits. Non-qualified investors can buy only the most liquid cryptocurrencies, up to 300,000 roubles (about $3,800) a year through any one intermediary, and only after passing a test. Qualified investors must also pass the test but can trade any coin without a cap.

Payments still restricted, cross-border use allowed

The opening has a clear boundary. Using crypto to pay for goods and services inside Russia remains banned. Importers and exporters, however, can use it for cross-border settlements without restrictions, through intermediaries or directly from any type of wallet. Sberbank launched such a service for foreign-trade companies on 1 September. Its first deputy chairman, Alexander Vedyakhin, said transfers take a couple of minutes, have no minimum payment and cost 0.3% on average. The product followed a central bank pilot that began under an experimental legal regime in September 2024.

Enforcement is the other side of the framework. Buying and selling crypto without a central bank-issued permit can bring a forced labour sentence of up to seven years, according to coverage of the new laws.

Beyond the big two

The growth in Russia crypto exchangers is not limited to the state giants. T-Technologies, parent of T-Bank, has registered its Atomyze unit as a depository and T-Invest Lab as an exchange provider. Several newly formed companies have also appeared on the register, and MTS Bank has said it plans basic crypto services in the fourth quarter.

The speed is partly procedural. Banks and other licensed institutions can join the registers through a simplified process that takes one working day. That helps explain how quickly the Russia crypto exchangers list has grown, and it suggests more names could follow as the retail launches approach.

What remains to be seen is how much demand the capped retail products will draw, and whether the final regulations arrive in time for Sberbank to meet its 1 December target.

Explore more on this topic with Vexel Search.

[ad_1]
Eligible EEA traders get cash-settled exposure, not shares or an IPO allocation, with a share-count adjustment designed to preserve position value…. Read the full story at The Defiant
[ad_2]

Source link

[ad_1]

[ad_2]

Source link

[ad_1]

Key takeaways

• Cardano trades near $0.201 on Monday, extending its decline after three consecutive losing weeks.
• Funding has turned negative at -0.0032%, reinforcing the bearish derivatives picture.
• ADA faces initial resistance at $0.213, while weak momentum leaves recovery attempts vulnerable.

Cardano fell below $0.202 on Monday as pressure persisted across its derivatives, spot, and technical indicators.

ADA traded around $0.201 following three consecutive weeks of losses, with its decline exceeding 20% since early October. The token remains beneath several major moving averages, suggesting buyers have yet to establish a sustained recovery.

Although momentum is approaching oversold territory, the broader setup continues to favor sellers. Any near-term rebound would face several resistance levels before materially improving the outlook.

Advertisement

Derivatives positioning tilts toward shorts

CoinGlass data shows Cardano’s long-to-short ratio at 0.92 on Monday, close to its lowest reading in more than a month.

A reading below one indicates that short positioning outweighs long positioning within the measured dataset. The figure points to a cautious market in which traders continue to favor downside exposure.

ADA’s funding rate also turned negative, reaching -0.0032%. Negative funding means short traders are paying longs to maintain their positions, consistent with stronger demand for bearish exposure.

Together, the metrics reinforce the weak price trend, although neither guarantees that losses will continue.

Advertisement

CryptoQuant’s summary indicators add to the cautious picture. The platform flags large whale orders and overheating conditions in Cardano’s futures market. Its spot and futures indicators also show sell-side dominance, suggesting selling pressure extends beyond leveraged positioning.

Large orders alone do not establish the direction of whale activity. However, alongside the reported selling imbalance and negative funding, the data offers limited evidence of a decisive shift toward stronger buying demand.

ADA remains below key moving averages

Cardano’s daily technical structure remains bearish, with its price below the 50-day, 100-day, and 200-day Exponential Moving Averages.

These averages sit between approximately $0.218 and $0.237, forming a series of overhead barriers.

Advertisement

The Relative Strength Index stands at 33, just above the conventional oversold threshold of 30. That reading reflects persistent weakness while leaving room for a short-lived corrective bounce.

The Moving Average Convergence Divergence indicator remains negative, with the MACD line below its signal line. Its subdued bearish profile provides little confirmation that momentum is turning in buyers’ favor.

The former trendline break near $0.213 represents Cardano’s immediate resistance. Above that, buyers would face the 100-day EMA at $0.218 and the 50-day EMA at $0.224. Further resistance sits around $0.236, reinforced by the nearby 200-day EMA at $0.237.

A sustained move through that cluster would bring $0.245 into focus, while $0.299 remains a more distant barrier.

Advertisement

On the downside, $0.200 is the nearest psychological reference as ADA trades just above it.

For buyers, reclaiming $0.213 would be an initial improvement. A more convincing recovery would require ADA to overcome its moving averages alongside stronger momentum and easing selling pressure.

---

Share this article

---

Categories

---

Tags

Advertisement

[ad_2]

Source link

[ad_1]

A crossover token launch between prominent crypto trader Kimchi and memecoin platform Pump Fun has descended into chaos after users were left wondering whether or not Kimchi had been hacked.

Pump Fun and Kimchi, real name Clayton Kim, have been working together to promote Pump Fun’s “Pill Your Friends” campaign.

The platform’s co-founder Alon Cohen described Kim as “the first ever example of a trader becoming a celebrity,” while Pump Fun tried enticing users to become “the next Kimchi” by using their platform. 

Advertisement

Read more: Pump Fun and Kraken delete Hunter Biden $LAPTOP promotion

Kimchi’s X account shared rugpull

Things turned sour yesterday when Kimchi’s X account shared a new token in the form of a QR code. 

The Project Kimchi token reached a market cap of $14 million before plummeting to roughly $600,000 within minutes. It currently sits at just $183,000.

During this time, Cohen had reshared — and quickly unshared — the post. Kimchi’s X account then began deleting Pump Fun-related posts and removed the platform from his bio. 

Advertisement

Read more: Pump Fun paid $700K to callers shilling mostly tiny tokens

Prior to this, there were already various Kimchi-themed tokens. The fiasco led many users to suspect that Kimchi was hacked.

Some suspect Kimchi is behind it

Some users believe the post may have been intentional, and that the token’s disastrous launch was, at best, a bad case of mismanagement.

Crypto trader Fabiano highlighted that Cohen didn’t share any hack warnings after unsharing the post. 

He also suggested that Cohen resharing the post would have involved minute-by-minute planning, and that Kimchi’s deletion of his Pump Fun posts doesn’t make sense if the two had a partnership deal.  

Advertisement

Kimchi’s alleged $40M TRUMP trade debunked

In its promotion, Pump Fun also reiterated an unverified claim that Kimchi had made over $40 million trading TRUMP.

However, crypto analyst Bubblemaps reports that his publicly verifiable profits are closer to $6 million.

There is a possibility of an unrevealed addresses, but Bubblemaps notes “he likely would have revealed it by now.”

Advertisement

Kimchi rarely posts online, but when he does, it’s often in the form of lavish displays of wealth. 

Kimchi’s YouTube channel only displays one vlog at the time of writing. It was posted two days ago and features a Pump Fun promo in a private jet.

Got a tip? Send us an email securely via Protos Leaks. For more informed news and investigations, follow us on X, Bluesky, and Google News, or subscribe to our YouTube channel.

Advertisement

[ad_2]

Source link

[ad_1]

The High Court of England and Wales has granted permission for applicants to appeal a legal ruling concerning property rights over seized Bitcoin, according to reporting by Pluang.

The legal permission allows applicants to challenge this ruling while individual ownership claims remain to be settled separately.

According to analysis by law firm Simons Muirhead Burton, proving that money taken in a fraud was used to buy digital assets does not automatically mean victims can recover them.

Legal Context for Crypto Investors

The ruling highlights how digital assets operate without physical borders, yet legal claims to them remain tied to specific national legal systems. The court found that Chinese law governs the existence and content of the proprietary rights asserted by the applicants.

Advertisement

As legal proceedings continue, the court has not yet decided whether investors own the assets in question. This case illustrates the importance of understanding jurisdiction and legal protections when participating in digital asset markets.

For ongoing context on regulatory developments in the UK market, see our analysis on the FCA Authorisation Gateway.

[ad_2]

Source link