Connect with us

Crypto

CLARITY Act runs out of calendar as crypto regulation stalls

Published

on

the prediction market emergency that could redraw federal-state crypto boundaries

The House killed eight voting days, Polymarket odds crashed from 82% to 16%, and the ethics clause nobody can agree on may bury the most important crypto bill in a generation.

Summary

  • The Senate cloture vote on the CLARITY Act is set for September 15, but House Republican leaders canceled the weeks of September 21 and 28, leaving just four voting days before lawmakers leave Washington until after the November 3 midterm elections.
  • Polymarket odds for the bill becoming law in 2026 collapsed from 82% in February to roughly 16% in early September, while Galaxy Digital cut its own estimate to 10% on August 14.
  • The ethics clause banning the president, vice president, and members of Congress from issuing or sponsoring digital assets is the single provision most likely to kill bipartisan support, with Democrats calling the current language toothless and Republicans warning stronger restrictions would lose White House backing.
  • If cloture fails, crypto regulation defaults to a patchwork of agency rulemaking from the SEC, CFTC, OCC, and FASB that can be reversed by any future administration, with no realistic path to unified federal legislation before 2029.
  • The week of September 15 carries three overlapping catalysts: the August CPI print on September 11, the FOMC rate decision on September 16, and the SEC 24-hour trading roundtable on September 17.

The CLARITY Act was supposed to be the easy one. After the GENIUS Act cleared both chambers and became law in July 2025, the crypto industry expected the market structure companion bill to follow within months. Fourteen months later, the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act sits in a procedural limbo that would have been unimaginable when prediction markets gave it an 82% chance of passage in February.

Senate Majority Leader John Thune filed cloture on the motion to proceed just before the August 7 recess, setting up a procedural vote for Tuesday, September 15. That vote requires 60 senators to agree to even begin debating the bill. It is not a vote on the legislation itself. And between the filing and the return, the House went and blew a hole in the calendar that may have made the Senate vote irrelevant.

Advertisement

On September 3, House Republican leaders announced they were removing the weeks of September 21 and September 28 from the voting schedule. Eight days, gone. Representatives will return after Labor Day on September 14, work four days, and leave Washington on September 17. They will not come back until after the midterm elections on November 3. For a bill that still needs floor time in both chambers, that is not a scheduling inconvenience. It is a death sentence on the timeline.

The 60-vote math that does not work

The Senate cloture threshold has always been the CLARITY Act’s central obstacle. Republicans hold 53 seats, meaning Thune needs at least seven Democrats to cross over. In the Banking Committee markup, only two did. The gap between two and seven might look manageable on paper. In practice, it represents a chasm that five months of negotiation have failed to bridge.

Senator Elizabeth Warren has said she supports federal crypto legislation in principle but firmly opposes the current bill, arguing it fails to address corruption, consumer protection, and national security. Senators Chris Murphy, Chris Van Hollen, and Jeff Merkley have taken similar public positions. That is four confirmed Democratic no votes already eating into the margin.

The math gets worse when you consider what those seven crossover votes would require. Every Democrat who votes yes will face attack ads accusing them of supporting a bill that benefits President Trump’s crypto portfolio. In a midterm year, that is not abstract political risk. It is a concrete calculation that every campaign manager in a competitive district is making right now.

Advertisement

Republicans, meanwhile, are dealing with their own fragility. Galaxy Digital’s August analysis noted that the party expects to lose Senators Josh Hawley and Rand Paul on procedural grounds, bringing the effective Republican count closer to 51. If even one additional Republican defects, Thune would need nine Democratic votes instead of seven.

The ethics clause that broke the coalition

If the CLARITY Act fails, the cause of death will almost certainly be Section 13152.

The ethics provision, added to the July 22 draft, bans the president, vice president, and members of Congress from issuing or sponsoring digital assets while in office. Their spouses are covered too. The Department of Justice would enforce the restriction with fines of up to $250,000 per day. On its face, it reads like a reasonable safeguard. In practice, it has become the provision that three different constituencies can each find a reason to reject.

A poll showing 63% of Americans believe Trump crossed the line on crypto has given Democrats political cover to demand stronger language. Warren and her allies want the ban extended beyond January 20, 2029, the date it currently sunsets, which also happens to be the last day of Trump’s second term. They want state attorneys general to share enforcement authority with the DOJ, arguing that a presidential appointee cannot be trusted to investigate the president’s own financial interests. And they want existing holdings addressed more aggressively: the current text allows officials to place crypto in blind trusts, which critics say is insufficient when the assets in question are publicly traded tokens whose prices respond to presidential statements.

Advertisement

Republicans counter that the provision already goes further than any ethics restriction in existing securities law. Strengthening it further, they argue, would lose the White House’s support entirely. Trump urged Congress to pass the CLARITY Act in August, but that endorsement came with an implicit ceiling on how restrictive the ethics language could become.

The third constituency is the crypto industry itself. Companies like Coinbase, which earns roughly $1.35 billion annually from USDC rewards, care far more about the stablecoin yield provisions than the ethics debate. But the ethics fight has consumed so much oxygen that the yield question, which directly affects business models, has been pushed to the margins of the negotiation.

What the bill actually does and why it matters

The CLARITY Act would draw the first statutory line between the SEC and the CFTC on digital assets. Right now, the two agencies rely on a joint interpretation issued in spring 2026 that names 16 tokens, including XRP, SOL, and DOGE, as digital commodities. That guidance is better than nothing. It is also non-binding, revocable, and far narrower than what the industry needs.

Under the bill, tokens would fall into four categories: digital commodities, assets offered through investment contracts, permitted payment stablecoins, and securities such as tokenized stocks or bonds. The CFTC would take primary jurisdiction over digital commodities. The SEC would oversee digital securities and investment contract offerings. Both agencies would share authority over intermediaries, trading venues, and customer asset protections.

Advertisement

The framework also introduces registration requirements for exchanges, brokers, and dealers. Platforms would need to meet disclosure rules, anti-money-laundering controls, and customer segregation standards. For DeFi protocols, the bill proposes a classification system that is still hotly debated, with unresolved questions about whether autonomous smart contracts can be regulated as intermediaries.

The international stakes make this more than a domestic housekeeping exercise. The EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation has been operational since June 2024. The UAE’s Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority has licensed over 20 exchanges. Japan finalized its token classification rules in 2025. Singapore’s Payment Services Act covers stablecoins and digital payment tokens under a single license. Each of these frameworks gives local firms a rulebook to build against. American companies are still guessing which agency will knock on their door first.

The current US regulatory map is a patchwork stitched together from enforcement actions, no-action letters, and agency guidance documents. The CLARITY Act would replace that patchwork with legislation that survives changes in administration. That durability is the bill’s real value, and the reason its potential failure carries consequences far beyond 2026.

The prediction market collapse tells the story

Polymarket has become the unofficial scoreboard for the CLARITY Act’s chances, and the numbers are brutal.

Advertisement

In February, when the Senate Banking Committee was making bipartisan progress on draft language, traders priced the bill’s passage at 82%. That number held through March and into April as committee negotiations continued behind closed doors. Then the ethics fight went public.

By mid-July, after Warren rejected the July 22 draft within hours of its release, odds had fallen to roughly 38%. The August recess without a vote pushed them below 20%. As of early September, Polymarket shows approximately 16% with over $7.2 million wagered on the contract. A single wallet placed an $818,000 bet against passage in late August, the largest individual position on the contract.

Galaxy Digital’s institutional research desk cut its own odds to 10% on August 14, the lowest estimate from any major financial firm. The reasoning was direct: unless the motion to proceed passes immediately upon the Senate’s return and the bill dominates the entire working session, there is not enough calendar to get it done. Galaxy noted that the window is not just narrow. It requires every remaining day to go perfectly, with zero procedural delays, zero extended amendment battles, and zero additional controversies.

The collapse from 82% to 10% is not the story of a bill that lacked support. It is the story of a bill that could not survive the collision between three constituencies whose demands were mutually exclusive: Democrats who wanted stronger ethics rules, Republicans who could not deliver them without losing the White House, and an industry that needed the yield provisions settled before either side would commit.

Advertisement

If cloture fails, regulation goes dark

The consequences of a failed cloture vote extend well beyond the CLARITY Act itself.

If the motion to proceed does not get 60 votes on September 15, the bill is effectively dead for this Congress. Midterm politics will dominate the floor from October onward, and no serious observer expects unified crypto legislation to return before the 119th Congress convenes in January 2029. Even then, the composition of the Senate and the political dynamics around crypto could look entirely different.

In the interim, regulation defaults to a collection of agency actions that lack the permanence of legislation. The SEC proposed Regulation Crypto Assets on August 19, a 402-page framework that creates two new exemptions from Securities Act registration for crypto offerings, plus a safe harbor letting tokens shed security status once networks are sufficiently decentralized. The CFTC is writing rules under its existing authority. The OCC is finalizing GENIUS Act stablecoin regulations with a November target. FASB has proposed accounting rules for stablecoins.

Advertisement

Each of these tracks provides some guidance. None of them provides the unified framework the industry has been asking for since 2018. And all of them can be reversed, amended, or reinterpreted by the next administration. A Republican SEC chair’s safe harbor becomes a Democratic SEC chair’s enforcement target. A CFTC classification that treats a token as a commodity today could face a challenge tomorrow. The entire structure rests on administrative discretion, not statutory authority.

For businesses trying to build in the United States, this patchwork creates a compliance environment that favors large, well-resourced firms over startups. Coinbase and Kraken have legal departments that can navigate overlapping agency guidance. A four-person DeFi team in Austin does not. The irony of the CLARITY Act’s potential failure is that the people who need regulatory clarity the most are the ones least equipped to survive without it.

The market impact of a failed vote is harder to predict than most analysts suggest. Bernstein projects a 10% to 25% correction in bitcoin if major legislation stalls, potentially testing the $55,000 to $60,000 range. But the GENIUS Act’s passage in 2025 showed that markets can rally on partial progress. If the SEC and CFTC accelerate their rulemaking tracks quickly enough, the practical effect on token prices could be muted even as the legal profession mourns the loss of statutory clarity. The deeper damage would show up over quarters, not days: fewer US-based token launches, more projects incorporating in Singapore or Dubai, and a slow drain of engineering talent toward jurisdictions where the rules are written down.

The week that decides everything

The week of September 15 is not just about crypto regulation. It is one of the most event-dense periods of the year for financial markets, and every item on the calendar interacts with the CLARITY Act vote.

Advertisement

On September 11, the Bureau of Labor Statistics releases the August CPI report. Markets currently price roughly a two-thirds probability of a 25 basis point rate increase at the following week’s FOMC meeting, driven by persistent inflation and energy price shocks. A hot CPI print would reinforce that expectation and put risk assets, including crypto, under pressure heading into the vote.

On September 15, the Senate reconvenes and the cloture vote is scheduled. The same day marks the start of the FOMC’s two-day meeting.

On September 16, the Federal Reserve announces its rate decision. If the Fed hikes, crypto markets will react. And if crypto markets are selling off on the morning of September 16, the political calculation for senators considering a yes vote on the CLARITY Act shifts. Nobody wants to be photographed supporting the crypto industry on a day when token prices are falling and retail holders are losing money.

On September 17, the SEC holds its roundtable on 24-hour equity trading, with BlackRock, Nasdaq, NYSE, Robinhood, Citadel, and Jane Street on the panel. That session explores whether traditional exchanges should adopt the continuous trading model that crypto markets pioneered. It is a symbolic marker: the SEC is already building the future of market structure through rulemaking, whether Congress acts or not.

Advertisement

The House leaves Washington on September 17. If the Senate has not passed the CLARITY Act by then, the bill needs to wait for the House to return. And the House is not returning until after the midterms.

The opposing case: why the bill could still survive

The bearish consensus deserves scrutiny. Polymarket odds and Galaxy estimates are not votes. They are probability assessments that can move fast in both directions, and there are genuine reasons the CLARITY Act could still clear cloture.

First, the bipartisan infrastructure exists. The House passed H.R. 3633 with votes from both parties in July 2025. The Senate Banking Committee advanced its version with two Democratic crossovers. The base of support is real, even if the ethics fight has temporarily obscured it.

Second, the stakes are high enough to force compromise. Every senator in that chamber understands what happens if the bill fails: two years of regulatory patchwork, potential enforcement whiplash after the midterms, and a signal to global competitors that the United States cannot legislate on digital assets. Singapore, the EU under MiCA, and the UAE under VARA are not waiting. Japan finalized its framework in 2025. The competitive pressure is not theoretical.

Advertisement

Third, the ethics clause has a natural compromise point. Extending the ban beyond 2029, adding state AG enforcement authority, and tightening blind trust requirements would address Democratic concerns without fundamentally altering the bill’s market structure provisions. The question is whether both sides have the political will to accept a deal that neither side loves, which is, historically, how most major financial legislation gets passed.

Fourth, Thune would not have filed cloture if he did not believe he could get close to 60. Senate leaders do not schedule votes they expect to lose by 15. The filing suggests private conversations have produced commitments that have not yet been made public.

The counterargument to all of this is the calendar. Even if cloture passes, the Senate needs time for amendments, debate, and a final vote. Then the bill goes to conference with the House, which is leaving town on September 17. A short-term continuing resolution or a lame-duck session after the midterms could theoretically provide a window, but those scenarios introduce their own complications. Lame-duck crypto votes are politically toxic, and a CR negotiation would consume whatever floor time remains.

What to watch

  • September 11 CPI print: A year-over-year number above 3.2% would harden rate hike expectations and put downward pressure on crypto heading into the cloture vote. Below 3.0% gives the Fed room to hold, which would be mildly positive for risk sentiment.
  • September 15 cloture vote count: The magic number is 60. Watch for the specific Democratic crossovers. If Senators Mark Warner and Kyrsten Sinema vote yes, it signals the moderate lane is still open. If they vote no, the bill is almost certainly dead.
  • House continuing resolution language: If the CR includes any provision extending legislative business past September 17, it reopens the calendar window for the CLARITY Act. If it does not, the House exit date is hard.
  • Polymarket contract movement in the 48 hours before the vote: Sharp upward movement would indicate insider confidence that a deal has been struck. Continued decline below 15% suggests the market sees no path.
  • Post-vote SEC and CFTC statements: If cloture fails, watch for accelerated agency rulemaking announcements. The speed at which regulators move to fill the vacuum will determine how the industry operates for the next two years.

What is the CLARITY Act and what does it do?

The CLARITY Act, formally the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (H.R. 3633), is a bill that would create the first statutory framework for regulating digital assets in the United States. It divides oversight between the SEC and the CFTC, classifies tokens into four categories, and sets registration requirements for exchanges and brokers. The House passed it in July 2025. The Senate has not voted on it yet.

Advertisement

What is a cloture vote and why does September 15 matter?

Cloture is a Senate procedure that requires 60 votes to end debate and move to a final vote on legislation. On September 15, the Senate will vote on whether to proceed to debate on the CLARITY Act. It is not a vote on the bill itself, but if cloture fails, the bill cannot reach the floor for a final vote. Given the compressed calendar, failing on September 15 likely means the bill is dead for 2026.

Why did the House cut eight voting days from September?

House Republican leaders removed the weeks of September 21 and 28 from the voting schedule on September 3, giving members more time to campaign ahead of the November midterms. After passing a stopgap spending bill, leadership determined there was less immediate need to keep representatives in Washington. The revised schedule leaves just four voting days before the House breaks until after the elections.

What is the ethics clause and why is it so controversial?

Section 13152 of the bill bans the president, vice president, and members of Congress from issuing or sponsoring digital assets while in office. The ban sunsets on January 20, 2029. Democrats argue the provision is too weak because the DOJ, led by a presidential appointee, is the sole enforcer, and the sunset conveniently aligns with the end of Trump’s term. Republicans say it already goes further than any existing securities law ethics restriction.

How much money has Trump made from crypto?

Trump’s 2025 financial disclosure reports more than $1 billion in crypto-related income. Roughly $635 million came from $TRUMP memecoin royalties through CIC Digital LLC. Another $515 million to $592 million came from World Liberty Financial token and equity sales. Public Citizen estimates Trump-linked crypto ventures left investors $4.7 billion underwater.

Advertisement

What are the Polymarket odds for the CLARITY Act passing?

As of early September 2026, Polymarket shows approximately 16% odds of the CLARITY Act becoming law in 2026, down from 82% in February. Over $7.2 million has been wagered on the contract. A single wallet bet $818,000 against passage in late August. Galaxy Digital’s institutional research desk separately cut its estimate to 10%.

What happens to crypto regulation if the CLARITY Act fails?

Regulation defaults to a patchwork of agency rulemaking. The SEC moves forward with Regulation Crypto Assets. The CFTC writes rules under existing authority. The OCC finalizes stablecoin rules by November. None of these actions carry the permanence of legislation, and all can be reversed or reinterpreted by future administrations. Unified federal crypto legislation would not return before 2029 at the earliest.

Should I make investment decisions based on the CLARITY Act vote?

Legislative outcomes are inherently unpredictable, and the interaction between the cloture vote, the FOMC decision, and the CPI data makes the week of September 15 unusually volatile. Past regulatory votes have produced sharp short-term price moves that reversed within days. This is educational analysis, not investment advice.

Disclaimer: This article was published on Sept. 7, 2026. The information provided is for educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, legal, or investment advice. Always conduct your own research before making any investment decisions.

Advertisement

Source link

Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto

Goldman Sachs brings $100 billion Treasury fund into crypto’s institutional plumbing

Published

on

Goldman Sachs brings $100 billion Treasury fund into crypto’s institutional plumbing

“There’s a convergence now that you’re seeing between traditional market participants and digital asset market participants as well,” Lynq CEO Jerald David said in an interview with CoinDesk TV.

For firms using Lynq, FTIXX gives them somewhere to put cash between trades rather than leaving it sitting around. They can earn yield on the money and pull it out when they need it again.

That was a product Lynq’s clients had been asking for, David said. The network works with firms including B2C2, Wintermute, Galaxy ·, FalconX, Crypto.com and Fireblocks, whose businesses can require moving large amounts of money between trades. They wanted another option for putting that cash to work in the meantime.

“We needed to demonstrate that there was client demand,” David said. “Our clients were looking for a treasury asset on the platform that may have had a different yield profile than the other instrument that’s on there right now.”

Advertisement

Getting FTIXX onto the network required some work. Lynq had to modify its technology, restrict access to U.S. clients and integrate with Mosaic, he said. Customers also need a relationship with tZERO Securities and must meet the required onboarding and eligibility checks.

Lynq itself runs on a private, permissioned Avalanche (AVAX) Layer 1 blockchain. Its network has more than 30 institutional digital-asset firms onboarded and more than $89 million in assets, according to the company.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto

Crypto’s Widening Net: From Fed Bets to Blackjack Tables, Digital Assets Keep Blurring Old Boundaries

Published

on

If there is one throughline in this week’s crop of crypto headlines, it is that the industry has stopped pretending it is only about buying and holding coins. Across a handful of stories making the rounds, digital assets are shown pushing into territory once reserved for central bankers, casino floors, brokerage accounts and pre-IPO investors alike — a reminder that “crypto news” increasingly means finance news, gambling news and macro news rolled into one.

Take the growing chatter around prediction markets and Federal Reserve policy. Traders have been flocking to on-chain betting platforms to price the odds of late-2026 rate decisions, effectively turning monetary policy into a tradable asset class alongside Bitcoin and Ethereum. That such markets exist at all is notable: a decade ago, speculating on FOMC outcomes required options contracts or futures desks.

Now it can happen peer-to-peer on a blockchain, with odds shifting in real time as economic data lands. The rise of these markets suggests crypto infrastructure is becoming a genuine alternative venue for hedging and speculating on the traditional economy, not just a parallel casino for digital tokens.

Speaking of casinos, the sector itself continues to evolve in ways that mirror shifts in consumer taste rather than technology alone. Reports on crypto gambling lobbies note that live-dealer blackjack tables are increasingly outnumbering roulette wheels—a seemingly small detail that says more about what crypto-native gamblers want.

Advertisement

Live blackjack offers a sense of skill and control that pure-chance games like roulette can’t match, and operators appear to be responding by stacking their lobbies accordingly. It’s a small but telling sign that crypto casinos are maturing into product-driven businesses competing on experience, not just novelty.

Meanwhile, the boundary between crypto trading and traditional equities markets keeps eroding. New developments around Aave’s lending protocol reportedly let users borrow stablecoins against tokenized versions of tech stocks issued through Coinbase and built on the Base network.

If that model gains traction, it would mark a significant step in bringing real-world assets fully into DeFi’s collateral system — letting someone hold a tokenized slice of a Nasdaq darling and borrow against it the same way they might borrow against ETH or Bitcoin today. It’s the kind of integration that regulators, banks and crypto-native builders have all been circling for years, and its practical rollout matters more than the concept alone.

On the trading-platform side, perpetual futures exchanges continue to expand what counts as a “market.” One report describes a platform offering more than 120 perpetual contracts spanning everything from Bitcoin to pre-IPO robotics companies, letting traders apply leverage to assets that, in many cases, aren’t even publicly listed yet.

Advertisement

This kind of expansion into speculative, illiquid corners of the private market — wrapped in crypto’s leverage-friendly perpetual format — raises real questions about price discovery and risk, even as it satisfies demand from traders hungry for exposure beyond the usual crypto majors.

Finally, there’s the steady drumbeat of token listings that keeps the broader ecosystem churning. A gambling-focused token tied to the Dexsport platform recently landed on the MEXC exchange, a move that typically brings a token more liquidity and visibility, if not necessarily more fundamental value. Listings like these remain a bread-and-butter event in crypto markets — routine, but still closely watched by holders hoping for a price bump and a wider trading audience.

Individually, none of these developments is likely to reshape the industry overnight. But together they sketch a familiar pattern in crypto’s ongoing evolution: infrastructure built for speculative tokens is steadily being repurposed for macro bets, tokenized equities, private-company exposure and gambling products alike.

The technology is proving flexible enough to wrap around almost anything with a price — which is exactly why regulators, investors and casual observers alike keep struggling to say where “crypto” ends and the rest of finance begins.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto

Perplexity AI Predicts a Big Move for BTC in 2026 Even With Recent Dip

Published

on

Bitcoin price prediction: Microsoft Copilot AI predicts that if price momentum across the markets continues, BTC could hit $180K by 2027

Perplexity AI predicts that if a full-blown bull market returns in Q4, Bitcoin could reach $180,000 before January 1, 2027. The bullish range is estimated at $140,000 to $180,000, with a potential late-cycle surge that could push Bitcoin beyond $200,000.

Currently priced around $83,000, this would represent a gain of about 115% to reach $180,000. What’s noteworthy is that Bitcoin has already corrected significantly from its previous cycle high of about $126,200 on October 6, 2025, followed by a sharp decline during 2026.

Bitcoin has a history of producing substantial gains during strong market cycles. According to historical annual data, BTC gained approximately 154% in 2023 and 110% in 2024. If the current predictions hold true, we may see a similar increase on the horizon.

Bitcoin price prediction: Perplexity AI predicts that BTC could still rise to nearly $200K in 2026 even with it dropping -3% over the weekend
SOURCE: Perplexity AI Predicts Bitcoin Price

Perplexity AI Predicts Bitcoin to $180,000 if Bullish Catalysts Align: Does the Technical Analysis Back it Up?

Bitcoin recently broke out of a pattern of lower highs that had developed since May, reclaiming several key moving averages. According to Reuters’ technical analysis, $81,781 is considered important support, while $86,500 is a significant resistance level. Above that, the next technical targets are around $90,000 and $97,867.

Advertisement

CryptoQuant has noted a similar trend, calling $81,700 a key level because it aligns with Bitcoin’s 365-day moving average. Resistance levels above this are near $86,600 and $88,700.

Bitcoin’s first major test is surpassing the $85,000 level, followed by the $86,000 to $88,000 range. Bitcoin has pushed through this area, which matters because a sustained breakout would remove one of the largest technical obstacles between its current price and the $100,000 level.

The next major milestone is approximately $98,000. Beyond that, the market will be approaching the all-time high of $126,200, where it gets particularly interesting.

Advertisement

Once Bitcoin decisively breaks beyond $126,000, it will enter a phase of genuine price discovery. Historical resistance above that level is very limited. At that point, psychological targets such as $130,000, $140,000, and $150,000 could attract momentum traders and institutional investors.

Earn $50 and Enter $300K Prize Draw on EdgeX

Bitcoin Hyper Targets Early Mover Upside as Bitcoin Drops Dangerously Close to $80,000

A -2.5% daily drop is not too much to worry about for whales and those already heavily positioned at a much lower price. However, for those who bought over $80,000, things could be getting uncomfortable, which is why presale opportunities prove so popular.

Advertisement

Bitcoin Hyper ($HYPER) is positioning itself as the first Bitcoin Layer 2 with full SVM integration. It boasts smart contract execution built for speed that outpaces Solana itself, while settling back to Bitcoin’s base-layer security.

As of today, the presale has raised more than $33.1M at a current token price of just $0.0136864, with staking rewards live at launch at a huge 35% APY.

The pitch: solve Bitcoin’s slow transactions, high fees, and lack of programmability without abandoning what makes BTC trusted in the first place. A Decentralized Canonical Bridge handles BTC transfers natively.

Gain Access to New Bitcoin Layer 2 Early Here

Advertisement

Discover: The Best Token Presales

The post Perplexity AI Predicts a Big Move for BTC in 2026 Even With Recent Dip appeared first on Cryptonews.




Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto

XRP Price Slides 2.9% as $1.50 Reclaim Becomes Critical

Published

on

xrp logo

XRP lost its $1.50 price pivot today, sliding to $1.47 after a daily decline of about 3%. The break forces a binary question onto the chart: does the selling pressure showing up in spot-market volume resolve into a quick reclaim, or does it open the door to a deeper slide toward $1.40-$1.42?

The 200-day EMA is near $1.37, the level that would flip the medium-term structure from bullish to neutral. The token has been printing lower highs since a local peak near $1.63 on September 23, and a second attempt to clear $1.60 on September 25 failed as well. Since then, the decline has been slow and orderly: $1.55, then $1.52, then $1.50, and now $1.47.

Xrp (XRP)
24h7d30d1yAll time

There was no single dramatic session driving the move. Instead, the pattern reads as buyers simply not showing up, with every small bounce getting sold rather than extended. After the sharp rally in early September, that kind of cooling was overdue, but the open question is whether $1.50 was ever real support or just a round number the market is now testing.

Earn $50 and Enter $300K Prize Draw on EdgeX

Advertisement

ETF Accumulation Narrative or Technical Pullback?

The chart itself frames this as a cooling-off period following the rally that carried the XRP price up nearly 50% from its August low near $1.00. RSI sits at a neutral 54, with no overbought or oversold readings to lean on. Price levels, not oscillators, are setting the tone for this week.

XRP price slips 2.9% to $1.47 as bulls face a key test: reclaim $1.50 or risk a deeper pullback toward $1.37 and $1.30 if support fails.

Separately, market data has pointed to sustained spot XRP ETF inflows running into the hundreds of millions of dollars over recent weeks, a trend some trackers frame as ongoing institutional accumulation beneath the price action. That flow data is useful context, but it is not confirmed as the driver of Monday’s drop, as the pullback below $1.50 traces cleanly to failed resistance tests and fading bid support.

The medium-term structure remains intact for now. XRP sits above its 200-day EMA at $1.37, which is curling upward for the first time since spring. This is a sign the longer trend has not broken, even as the shorter-term chart bleeds lower. A descending trendline from the late-August spike to $1.70 was cleared in mid-September, and that breakout is what fueled the run to $1.67 in the first place.

A second descending trendline, drawn from the September 23 high, is now the line bulls need to clear in October; left alone, it points toward $1.20 by mid-November. The levels on both sides of the current price are well defined.

Advertisement

Trade XRP on Bybit and Get a Chance to Win Our $1,000 USDT Airdrop

Reclaim $1.50 or Risk $1.37: XRP Price Next Move

The first job for bulls is straightforward: close a daily candle back above $1.50. Do that, and Monday’s drop reads as a fakeout rather than a breakdown, with $1.55 as the next confirmation level and $1.60-$1.63 as the target that would put the September 23 high back in play.

Fail to reclaim $1.50 in the next day or two, and $1.40-$1.42 becomes the level to watch, with the 200-day EMA at $1.37 as the line that actually matters for the medium-term outlook. A close below it would shift Ripple’s native asset from a bullish structure to a neutral one, opening room toward $1.30 and, in a broader crypto market sell-off scenario, $1.20.

Advertisement

For this week, the range is $1.37 to $1.60, with $1.50 sitting as the pivot in between. On technical analysis grounds, the base case is a dip toward $1.40-$1.42 that gets bought, followed by another attempt at reclaiming $1.50. A pattern consistent with pullbacks inside an uptrend rather than the start of a new downtrend.

The $1.80-$2.00 zone remains the valid medium-term target as long as $1.37 holds; lose it, and that target moves out of reach for the immediate term.

Discover: The Best Token Presales

The post XRP Price Slides 2.9% as $1.50 Reclaim Becomes Critical appeared first on Cryptonews.

Advertisement




Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto

Crypto’s New Playground: Casinos, Fed Bets, and Tokenized Stocks Blur the Line Between Trading and Gambling

Published

on

The crypto industry has always had a talent for reinventing itself, but the latest wave of product launches suggests the industry is heading somewhere new: a place where trading, betting, and borrowing are becoming almost indistinguishable from one another. A cluster of recent developments — spanning live-dealer casino games, a new token listing tied to decentralized betting platforms, prediction markets built around Federal Reserve policy, sprawling perpetual futures exchanges, and DeFi protocols that let users borrow against tokenized shares of tech companies — paints a picture of an ecosystem racing to fuse speculation of every stripe into a single, crypto-native experience.

Take the world of crypto casinos, where live blackjack tables have reportedly begun to crowd out roulette wheels in lobby rankings. The dynamics driving that shift echo something familiar from traditional gambling: player preference for games that reward skill and pacing over pure chance. Blackjack lets players make decisions — when to hit, stand, split, or double down — giving a sense of agency that a spinning roulette wheel simply can’t replicate. In an industry built around instant, low-friction transactions using digital assets, that appeal seems to translate directly into engagement, with live-streamed dealers adding a layer of social, real-time theater that slot-style games lack.

That same appetite for interactive, decision-driven products is showing up elsewhere. Dexsport, a decentralized betting and casino platform, recently saw its native token, DESU, listed on the exchange MEXC — a milestone that matters less for the listing itself than for what it signals about the sector’s maturation. Token listings on major exchanges typically bring liquidity, visibility, and a degree of legitimacy that smaller platforms struggle to achieve on their own. For everyday users, a listing like this often translates into easier on-ramps, more trading pairs, and a stronger case that the underlying platform is being taken seriously by the broader market rather than treated as a niche experiment.

Meanwhile, speculation is moving well beyond games of chance and into the realm of macroeconomic policy. Prediction markets tracking the Federal Reserve’s interest rate decisions have become one of the more closely watched corners of crypto-adjacent finance heading into the back half of 2026. Traders on these platforms are effectively placing wagers on central bank behavior, turning monetary policy announcements into tradeable events. The appeal is straightforward: instead of relying solely on bond markets or futures tied to traditional finance, participants can now stake positions directly on whether the Fed will hold, cut, or raise rates, often with faster settlement and more granular contract structures than legacy markets offer. It’s a sign that prediction markets, once dismissed as a curiosity, are increasingly viewed as a legitimate barometer of trader sentiment on issues far removed from crypto prices themselves.

Advertisement

The appetite for exotic exposure is also evident in the perpetual futures space, where platforms like ApeX Omni have expanded their offerings well past the usual roster of Bitcoin and Ethereum contracts. With well over 120 perpetual markets now available, traders can reportedly take leveraged positions not just on major cryptocurrencies but on themes as far-flung as pre-IPO robotics companies. This kind of expansion reflects a broader trend of crypto exchanges positioning themselves as all-purpose speculation venues, offering leverage on virtually any asset class that generates enough trader interest — blurring the boundary between crypto trading and speculative bets on private, pre-public companies that would otherwise be inaccessible to retail investors.

Perhaps the clearest example of crypto finance colliding with traditional markets comes from Aave’s newest iteration. The protocol’s fourth version reportedly allows users to borrow USDC stablecoins against tokenized versions of Coinbase-linked tech stocks on the Base network. In practice, that means holders of tokenized equity exposure can unlock liquidity without selling their underlying positions — a mechanic long familiar to DeFi users who collateralize crypto assets, now extended to tokenized real-world securities. It’s a small but telling step toward a future where the wall between “crypto” and “traditional markets” continues to erode, with stocks, bonds, and other conventional assets increasingly represented on-chain and woven into the same lending and borrowing infrastructure that powers decentralized finance.

Taken together, these developments underscore a consistent theme: crypto platforms are no longer content to simply trade digital coins. They are building out entire ecosystems of speculation — casino games, prediction markets, leveraged derivatives, and collateralized lending — all designed to keep users engaged, liquid, and constantly exposed to new forms of risk and reward. Whether this convergence produces a more mature, diversified financial ecosystem or simply amplifies the volatility and risk-taking crypto is already known for remains an open question. What’s clear is that the industry’s appetite for expansion shows no signs of slowing down.

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto

When AI Met Crypto: A Season of Super-PACs, Prompt-Injection Heists and Vape-Pen Blockchains

Published

on

If there was a single theme running through the crypto world’s headlines this spring and summer, it was this: the industry that once promised to reinvent money has increasingly fused itself to the industry promising to reinvent everything else — artificial intelligence.

The result, according to a string of reports and commentary tracked by researcher-journalist Molly White and blogger David Gerard, is a landscape where political money, security failures and marketing absurdity are all converging in ways that ought to worry anyone paying attention.

Start with the money in politics. In a recent interview, White — who has spent years cataloguing where crypto industry cash flows in Washington — turned her attention to a new wrinkle: artificial intelligence companies adopting the same political playbook that crypto firms pioneered.

According to the discussion, OpenAI and Anthropic are now effectively running competing pro-AI super-PACs, pouring money into races much the way crypto-aligned PACs like Fairshake have done in recent election cycles. White reportedly highlighted a botched intervention in New York’s 12th congressional district as an example of the sums involved and the risk of these efforts backfiring.

Advertisement

The parallel is not incidental. Crypto’s political spending playbook — deploy industry money to shape friendly regulation and punish critics — was built over several election cycles and proved remarkably effective at getting crypto-friendly candidates elected and skeptics sidelined.

Watchers like White argue that AI companies, facing their own looming questions about regulation, safety and liability, are now borrowing that same toolkit almost wholesale. Whether AI’s political spending proves as consequential as crypto’s remains to be seen, but the early signs suggest deep-pocketed AI labs are not content to leave the lobbying playing field to blockchain interests alone.

Money and politics aside, the more immediate crypto news has been considerably more chaotic on the technical side. A case in point: an unofficial crypto wallet built on top of Elon Musk’s Grok AI was reportedly compromised through a combination of an NFT and a prompt injection attack — a technique in which malicious instructions are hidden inside content an AI model processes, tricking it into taking unauthorized actions.

The episode is being cited by critics as a vivid illustration of what happens when experimental AI agents are given direct access to cryptocurrency funds without adequate safeguards. As one commentator put it, the incident underscores a blunt truth: the push toward “agentic commerce,” in which AI systems autonomously manage transactions and wallets on a user’s behalf, currently looks a lot like an open invitation to fraud.

Advertisement

That warning fits a broader pattern. Crypto’s history is littered with hacks and exploits that followed hard on the heels of new technical hype cycles — DeFi protocols, bridges, NFT marketplaces — and the addition of AI agents with wallet access appears to be simply the latest frontier for attackers to probe.

Security researchers have long cautioned that combining large language models, which can be manipulated through carefully crafted inputs, with systems that move real money is a combination that demands far more rigorous testing than the industry has so far shown appetite for.

Then there is the sheer commercial strangeness of the AI-crypto convergence. Among the products making the rounds is “Gudtrip,” described in coverage as an AI agent vape pen built with blockchain technology — a mash-up that manages to combine three separate hype cycles (AI, crypto, and vaping) into a single device.

It’s the kind of product that invites eye-rolls even from people steeped in the industry, and it has become something of a symbol for critics who argue that “blockchain” and “AI agent” are increasingly being slapped onto unrelated consumer goods simply because the buzzwords still move product.

Advertisement

Labor practices are also getting the AI-crypto treatment. Reports have surfaced of AI companies experimenting with paying staff in AI-linked tokens rather than conventional money — an arrangement that echoes crypto’s long history of compensating workers and contractors in volatile, illiquid tokens instead of cash. Critics have been quick to note the obvious problem: a token’s value depends entirely on continued enthusiasm for the company issuing it, leaving employees exposed to exactly the kind of speculative risk that traditional salaries are designed to avoid. The practice, if it spreads, would import one of crypto’s more employee-unfriendly habits directly into the AI industry’s compensation structures.

Not everyone covering this convergence is doing so with a straight face. A satirical piece making the rounds — structured as a twist on the old “two cows” economics joke — skewered the fintech, AI, blockchain and crypto sectors in one go, imagining a “crypto” cow story where two digital cows produce “milk tokens” tradeable for millions but drinkable only by avatars in the metaverse, and a “hedge fund” version featuring robotic cows that befriend real cows just to steal their milk.

Silly as the format is, the satire lands because it captures something real: a sense among observers that these overlapping industries have become adept at generating elaborate financial and technical narratives that produce headlines and valuations long before they produce anything resembling durable value.

Taken together, these threads — political spending mirroring crypto’s playbook, an AI wallet hacked via prompt injection, blockchain-branded vape pens, token-based salaries, and no shortage of pointed satire — paint a picture of an industry moment defined less by a single breakthrough than by rapid, sometimes reckless, cross-pollination.

Advertisement

Crypto spent the better part of a decade building the infrastructure, the political machinery and the marketing instincts for turning speculative technology into cultural and financial weight. Now AI companies appear to be absorbing many of the same instincts, for better or worse, at a pace that leaves regulators, security researchers and workers alike scrambling to keep up.

Editor’s note: Much of the reporting referenced above originates from commentary and short-form blog coverage rather than in-depth investigative reporting, and some details — such as the specific financial scale of AI super-PAC spending or the full technical mechanics of the Grok wallet exploit — were not independently verifiable from the available material. Readers should treat figures and claims here as preliminary pending fuller reporting.


 


 

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto

Nearly half the stocks in the S&P 500 are at cross purposes with the rest of the market

Published

on

Nearly half the stocks in the S&P 500 are at cross purposes with the rest of the market

U.S. oil drilling site.

David McNew | Getty Images

Nearly half of the stocks in the S&P 500 are moving against the index with a negative beta, an unusual divergence that is becoming increasingly difficult to ignore.

About 45% of S&P 500 stocks have a negative three-month beta, according to a recent note from Goldman Sachs. The data closely aligns with CNBC’s finding that nearly 40% of S&P 500 stocks had a negative three-month beta versus the index, while 17% have a negative one-year beta, based on weekly returns.

Advertisement

Beta measures how a stock moves relative to the rest of the market. A negative beta means an individual stock’s returns moved in the opposite direction of the S&P 500 over the measured period.

The surge in stocks with a negative beta dovetails with other unusual market signals. The S&P rallied 1.5% last Monday. The same day 30 stocks touched a 52-week low while just 7 scored a new high. The last time the S&P 500 gained at least 1% while sitting within 1% of a new 52-week high and new lows outnumbered new highs was in December 1999, right before the very top of the dot-com boom, according to Jason Goepfert, founder of SentimenTrader.

The two indicators show that market indexes can remain at or close to records despite wide divergences among individual stocks.

Widening divide

The yawning gap largely reflects how concentrated the S&P 500 has become, according to Adam Turnquist, chief technical strategist at LPL Financial.

Advertisement

Mega-cap technology companies carry an outsized weight in the benchmark, meaning a strong performance from a small number of stocks can drive the index even when many others are moving the other way.

“It only takes a few of those mega caps names to work, and a lot of the smaller weighted stocks don’t need to work,” Turnquist told CNBC, pointing to unusually low correlations among S&P 500 stocks.

The same dynamic explains why the broader index can look relatively calm even when individual stocks are making large moves, said Bradley Krom, director of investing strategy at WisdomTree.

“Beta is a function of correlation and volatility,” Krom said. When stocks experience large moves at different times and for different reasons, those moves can largely offset one another at the index level.

Advertisement

In July this year, Alliance Bernstein, using one-year trailing returns, found an unprecedented share of U.S. stocks displaying negative beta as AI winners powered market gains.

Semiconductor makers, hardware companies and other AI infrastructure beneficiaries have benefited from enormous capital spending, while companies outside the AI trade have struggled to keep up.

“But a narrow market can also distort the signal investors receive from index returns. When a handful of companies dominate performance, many financially sound businesses may lag or even decline, simply because they aren’t tied directly to the most powerful market narrative,” wrote Kurt Feuerman, chief investment officer of Select U.S. Equity Portfolios at AllianceBernstein.

Negative energy

Energy stocks with negative beta are being driven by different forces.

Advertisement

“Another part of the other story is energy. That’s been pronounced this year: higher oil prices, higher energy stocks and then the rest of the market trades lower,” said Turnquist, seeing energy as an important part of the negative-beta story, alongside more defensive sectors.

Earlier this month, Evercore ISI used a six-month measure to call out 115 S&P 500 stocks with negative beta, a list skewed toward energy, utilities and consumer staples. The investment bank called the energy sector a “synthetic S&P 500 put option” because of the way it has reacted to geopolitical pressure.

If market leadership broadens out, Turnquist believes the number of negative-beta stocks could decline. But he expects dispersion to remain elevated as investors become remain selective toward beneficiaries of AI spending and seek returns there.

Krom at WisdomTree expects the recent extreme readings to eventually revert to the mean. Similar spikes appeared around the 1999-2000 dot-com bubble, he said, when market concentration and large moves in a narrow group of stocks also triggered unusual divergences.

Advertisement

Turnquist pushed back on comparing today with the dot-com era, leading tech companies now are more mature businesses with established revenue and products. Krom is on the same page. He said the individual pieces driving returns don’t have the same historical relationship they’ve had in the past.

“It is not the same market environment now versus 2000,” Krom said. The negative betas seen today boil “down to the amount of market concentration.”



Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto

Crypto’s Quiet Mainstreaming: From Wall Street Trading Desks to Weeknight Spending Habits

Published

on

Cryptocurrency no longer lives only in trading app screenshots and speculative headlines. A cluster of recent coverage suggests digital assets have settled into three very different corners of everyday life at once: the boardrooms of family offices moving nine-figure sums, the phones of ordinary Britons paying for a night out, and a growing ecosystem of explainer sites trying to make sense of it all for newcomers. Taken together, they paint a picture of an asset class that has stopped trying to prove itself and started simply getting used.

At the top end of the market, the mechanics of moving serious money in crypto increasingly mirror what has long happened on Wall Street. Selling a large position on the open market is a blunt instrument — dump a $20 million order into a standard exchange and the price can slide five to ten percent against you before the trade even completes, as algorithms and bots react to the visible order book.

High-net-worth investors and family offices have borrowed a page from traditional equities to avoid that problem, leaning on block trades negotiated privately between two parties and reported only after execution, dark pools where institutional orders are matched away from public view, and OTC desks that lock in a price before a trade ever touches the open market.

None of these tools are new in spirit — block trading dates back to the 1960s, and banks such as Credit Suisse pioneered dark-pool venues in the mid-2000s — but their extension into crypto shows how thoroughly digital assets have been absorbed into the plumbing of institutional finance, complete with all its discretion and negotiated pricing.

Further down the market, the story is less about avoiding slippage and more about convenience. A growing share of everyday spenders now treat crypto the way they treat a contactless card — something to tap and forget.

Much of that shift traces back to apps like Revolut, which began as a travel card and has since folded budgeting tools, instant transfers and built-in crypto purchases into a single interface. For users already comfortable buying fractions of Bitcoin or Ethereum on their phone, spending a small slice of a holding online no longer feels like a leap. Recent Pew Research figures cited in industry coverage suggest roughly one in five adults have used cryptocurrency in some form, evidence of just how far the technology has travelled from niche forums into ordinary financial habits. Faster networks and pound- or dollar-pegged stablecoins have also softened the volatility fears that once made spending crypto feel reckless.

That spending habit has, in turn, fed into digital entertainment, where a wave of offshore-licensed sites — often based in Malta, Curaçao or Gibraltar — have built their appeal specifically around crypto and app-based payments such as Revolut, alongside larger game libraries and bigger sign-up bonuses.

These platforms sit outside the UK’s domestic licensing system, which is precisely the draw for some users, including those who have self-excluded through Gamstop. The logic mirrors a broader pattern researchers have tracked in crypto adoption more generally: users start on a single centralised platform for convenience, then gradually spread activity across multiple services and self-custodied wallets as they grow more comfortable, seeking flexibility rather than a single gatekeeper. It’s worth being clear-eyed about what this means in practice — these offshore sites operate under lighter regulatory oversight than UK-licensed operators, and readers weighing them should treat player-protection tools and responsible-gambling warnings as essential reading, not fine print to skip.

Feeding all of this is a parallel boom in explainer content trying to translate crypto’s jargon — DeFi, staking, tokenomics, smart contracts — into plain English. Sites such as RobTheCoins.com have positioned themselves as educational hubs rather than exchanges or wallets, publishing guides on blockchain business models, crypto tax tools and the overlap between gaming and crypto economies.

That distinction matters, because the line between “content that explains crypto” and “a product that handles your money” is not always obvious to a casual reader, and confusing the two is exactly the kind of mistake that has burned newcomers before.

None of this amounts to a single dramatic headline. There is no exchange collapse or regulatory crackdown driving this particular news cycle. Instead, what emerges is a quieter, arguably more consequential trend: crypto is being absorbed into the ordinary architecture of modern finance and leisure, from the trading desks of the ultra-wealthy down to a tap-to-pay night out.

Whether that mainstreaming is entirely healthy is a separate question. Institutional tools like dark pools and OTC desks still lack the transparency of public markets, offshore gambling platforms carry real consumer-protection gaps, and no amount of friendly explainer content changes the fact that crypto remains a volatile, largely unregulated asset in most jurisdictions.

Readers tempted by any part of this ecosystem — whether it’s a block-trading conversation or a crypto-funded casino account — would do well to verify claims independently, check who is actually regulated, and remember that accessibility is not the same thing as same thing as safety.

Continue Reading

Crypto

Convicted cybercriminal arrested in connection with ShinyHunters group

Published

on

Convicted cybercriminal arrested in connection with ShinyHunters group

A 24-year-old convicted cybercriminal was arrested in the Netherlands on September 16 on suspicion of aiding crypto hacking collective ShinyHunters.

Krebsonsecurity reports that Pepijn van der Stap was detained by Dutch authorities for questioning in relation to ShinyHunters. 

Police claim he’ll appear in the Rotterdam District Court on September 29, while local news reports the United States is also involved in his case.

Over three years ago, van der Stap carried out multiple acts of data theft and extortion under the moniker “Umbreon.”

Advertisement

Read more: Crypto hacking group ShinyHunters says it stole data of 5,000 FBI agents

Van der Stap was eventually arrested, convicted, and handed a four-year suspended sentence. He was released in December 2025.  

While carrying out his criminal activities, he worked at cybersecurity startup Hadrian and volunteered at the nonprofit Dutch Institute for Vulnerability Disclosure.

Advertisement

He’s currently the offensive security lead at Neo Security, and described himself to Krebsonsecurity as a reformed convict. 

ShinyHunters attacked FBI days after van der Stap’s arrest

Just six days after van der Stap’s arrest, ShinyHunters claimed responsibility for hacking and stealing the data of 5,000 FBI agents. 

This attack also manipulated the FBI’s job page to display a picture of the Pokémon Umbreon.

Krebsonsecurity reports that the attack represented a shift in ShinyHunters’ usual attacks while the group is under the leadership of a teenager based in Amman, Jordan, who goes by the nickname “Rey.”

Advertisement

Rey reportedly merged the group with fellow hacking groups Scattered Spider and LAPSUS$ to become ScatteredLapsussHunters.

Read more: Crypto hackers target Hinge and Match Group in data leak

Sources close to the ShinyHunters investigation told the publication that Rey had “ongoing beef” with van der Stap, and that Umbreon’s inclusion was possibly an attempt by Rey to shift blame towards van der Stap.

ShinyHunters has also been linked to the hacking of the Netherlands telecommunications provider Odido last February. 

Advertisement

Personal data, including bank account and passport numbers, of six million Odido customers were leaked.

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.




Source link

Continue Reading

Crypto

Strategy buys 1,665 BTC and repurchases $152M STRC

Published

on

what it means for BTC

Strategy has acquired another 1,665 BTC for approximately $142.7 million while spending $151.7 million to repurchase STRC preferred shares during the week ended Sept. 27.

Summary

  • Strategy bought 1,665 BTC for $142.7 million, lifting total Bitcoin holdings to 847,666 coins overall.
  • Strategy repurchased 1,534,530 STRC shares for $151.7 million during the September 21 to 27 period.
  • MSTR sales generated $246.2 million net proceeds, with no preferred shares issued during the week.
  • Strategy held $5.02 billion in USD Reserve and $1.00 billion in deployable USD Cash overall.
  • Bitcoin holdings cost $63.95 billion in aggregate, averaging $75,437 per coin including fees and expenses.

Strategy disclosed the transactions in a Sept. 28 Form 8-K, showing that the company paid an average of $85,681 per BTC, including fees and expenses, between Sept. 21 and Sept. 27. The purchase lifted its Bitcoin holdings to 847,666 BTC.

During the same period, Strategy sold 1,469,165 MSTR shares through its at-the-market program, generating $246.2 million in net proceeds. Of that amount, $142.7 million funded the Bitcoin purchases and $103.5 million went toward STRC repurchases.

The company issued no STRF, STRC, STRK or STRD preferred shares through its ATM programs during the week.

Advertisement

Strategy Bitcoin holdings reach 847,666 BTC

Following the latest purchase, Strategy held 847,666 BTC acquired for an aggregate $63.95 billion. Its average acquisition cost stood at $75,437 per BTC, including fees and expenses.

The latest addition follows Strategy’s 950 BTC purchase after a two-week buying pause reported for the previous week. The company spent $75.7 million on that acquisition at an average price of $79,670 per BTC, increasing holdings at the time to 846,000 BTC.

Strategy’s new $85,681 average purchase price for the Sept. 21-27 period was above Bitcoin’s latest market price. CoinGecko shows BTC trading near $83,401 at the latest reading, around 2.7% below Strategy’s average price for the latest purchase.

At that market price, Strategy’s 847,666 BTC position would be worth roughly $70.7 billion. The calculation uses a live market price and therefore differs from the company’s recorded acquisition cost.

Advertisement

STRC repurchases reach another $151.7 million

Alongside the Bitcoin acquisition, Strategy repurchased 1,534,530 shares of its Variable Rate Series A Perpetual Stretch Preferred Stock, or STRC, for approximately $151.7 million.

The latest transaction continues a repurchase program that Strategy began earlier in 2026. After the latest week, $723.5 million of authorization remained under its digital credit securities repurchase program, according to the filing.

Strategy’s previous $174 million STRC repurchase came during the Sept. 14-20 period, when the company spent more on preferred-stock repurchases than on its $75.7 million Bitcoin purchase.

Earlier in September, Strategy doubled its digital credit securities repurchase authorization to $2 billion after spending $176.3 million on STRC during a week when it bought no Bitcoin.

Advertisement

Strategy said in July that it intends to repurchase STRC while the preferred stock trades below its $100 stated amount, subject to market conditions, liquidity and other capital priorities.

MSTR sales funded both transactions

Strategy financed the latest Bitcoin purchase and part of the STRC repurchase through MSTR common-stock sales.

The company raised $246.2 million in net proceeds by selling 1,469,165 MSTR shares between Sept. 21 and Sept. 27. The filing assigns $142.7 million of those proceeds to Bitcoin purchases and $103.5 million to STRC buybacks.

A further $48.1 million of the STRC repurchase came from Strategy’s USD Cash balance. Over the same period, the company used $22.1 million from its separate USD Reserve to pay preferred-stock dividends.

Advertisement

Strategy reported $18.84 billion of additional MSTR issuance capacity under its ATM program as of Sept. 27. No preferred shares were sold during the latest reporting period.

The latest funding structure differs from the previous week, when Strategy made no ATM stock sales and used existing cash to fund its Bitcoin purchase and STRC repurchases.

Strategy keeps $6.02 billion in dollar assets

Strategy ended Sept. 27 with a $5.02 billion USD Reserve and $1.00 billion in USD Cash, giving the company a combined $6.02 billion across the two balances.

The company defines the USD Reserve as capital designated to support preferred-stock dividends and interest payments on outstanding debt. USD Cash is maintained separately for Bitcoin purchases, reserve additions, capital management and other treasury uses.

Advertisement

The cash framework has changed materially since July, when Strategy built a $3.75 billion reserve while Bitcoin buying remained paused.

Strategy’s board expanded its STRC repurchase program during September while continuing to manage Bitcoin purchases, common-stock issuance and preferred-stock obligations through separate pools of capital.

As of Sept. 27, the company still had $723.5 million available under its digital credit securities repurchase authorization and $1 billion available under its separate MSTR common-stock repurchase program.



Source link

Advertisement

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2025