In a milestone decision for European cryptocurrency regulation, the European Banking Authority (EBA) has classified USDC as the European Union’s first significant e-money token under the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation framework.

What the EBA’s Significance Classification Means

According to the EBA, 45 e-money tokens have been notified under MiCA to date, but USDC is the very first to meet the criteria for “significant” designation. USDC is issued within the European Union by Circle Internet Financial Europe SAS.

Beginning November 12, USDC will transition to a dual-supervision model for significant e-money tokens under MiCA rules:

• European Banking Authority (EBA): Direct supervision covering essential structural areas including own funds requirements, reserve assets management, liquidity standards, as well as recovery and redemption planning.
• Autorité de Contrôle Prudentiel et de Resoluton (ACPR): France’s national regulator will retain responsibility for local governance, outsourcing, qualifying holdings, managing conflicts of interest, and executive fitness assessments.

Heightened Supervision vs Non-Compliance

Unlike previous regulatory guidance regarding non-compliant stablecoins, the EBA’s decision does not designate USDC as non-compliant or restricted. Instead, it subject USDC to enhanced, direct European oversight due to its substantial scale and systemic importance across digital asset markets.

Key Implications for UK and European Traders

For cryptocurrency exchanges, custodians, liquidity providers, and retail investors using USDC, this supervisory shift establishes a structured regulatory precedent under MiCA:

• Formalised supervisory coordination between national and EU-level regulators.
• More detailed operational requirements regarding reserve management, redemption protocols, and liquidity arrangements.
• Increased regulatory scrutiny for other stablecoin issuers approaching significant volume thresholds in European markets.

This development comes alongside wider European regulatory developments and ongoing implementation of cryptocurrency framework standards. Readers following institutional regulatory updates can also review our previous coverage on UK FCA crypto authorisation deadlines and UK banking access restrictions for additional context on evolving crypto compliance rules.

Alpenglow actually makes those transactions faster, giving apps a way to show users their money has arrived with stronger assurance that the payment will hold. Such a benefit is especially useful when a service needs to release funds or goods immediately after receiving payment.

An exchange could credit a deposit sooner, letting a customer trade with the funds. A shop accepting a stablecoin payment could confirm it without keeping the customer at the counter waiting for settlement.

How quickly that reaches a user’s screen also depends on the service handling the payment. Anza, the company behind Solana’s Agave software, told CoinDesk in a release that some computers receive finality information later than the validators voting directly.

The 150-millisecond figure remains a target under normal network conditions, rather than a guaranteed time for every payment.

Users can continue sending funds through their existing wallets. Transaction fees and the way applications run remain unchanged.

The speed comes from changing how validators, the computers checking transactions and agreeing on the network’s records, communicate.

Meanwhile, there is also a change readers may notice on network dashboards. Validator votes no longer appear as blockchain transactions, so services that counted them will report lower transaction totals.

President Donald Trump planned to put special focus on his administration’s efforts against overseas crypto-fueled criminal operations at a Wednesday event on cybercrime, according to a White House official.

Crypto-related scams have stolen tens of billions from U.S. citizens, and Trump was set to highlight how much his administration is targeting and disrupting the transnational organizations behind it. Multinational criminal cartels have set up elaborate scam centers designed to steal money through relationship scams, phishing campaigns, ransomware attacks and other fraudulent means, and the official said that the U.S. strategies to seize funds and shut down the operations will be discussed.

The administration says its law enforcement agencies have halted about $833 million in crypto connected to the overseas scams, and 503 fraudulent crypto websites have been seized under the watch of the Homeland Security Task Force. It’s also informed almost 9,000 U.S. citizens that they’re being victimized, the official said.

In November, the Department of the Treasury announced it had formed a multi-agency Scam Center Strike Force that pursued so-called “pig butchering” that was coordinated by widespread and well-funded organized-crime operations in places such as Burma, Cambodia, Laos and the Philippines.

\n\n

According to an October 2026 report by Stand with Crypto UK shared with crypto.news, 9,803 individuals submitted 10,092 complaints over a 90-day period between May and August after facing difficulties transferring money to crypto platforms.

\n\n

The complaints span all 650 UK parliamentary constituencies, highlighting how widespread the issue has become for retail crypto investors and traders.

\n\n

Which Banks Are Restricting Crypto?

\n\n

Lloyds Banking Group received the most complaints at 2,297, including those involving Halifax and Bank of Scotland customers, followed by Barclays with 1,569 and NatWest Group (including Royal Bank of Scotland) with 1,278. HSBC UK was the fourth bank to receive more than 1,000 complaints during the period.

\n\n

Other banks named in the report included Monzo, Santander UK, Nationwide, Revolut, Starling Bank, TSB and Chase UK, while Virgin Money and Co-operative Bank received the fewest complaints at 103 and 76 respectively.

\n\n

What Restrictions Are Actually in Place?

\n\n

The complaints covered a range of restrictions on crypto-related payments, from banks imposing daily and monthly transaction limits to providers blocking transfers to cryptocurrency platforms altogether.

\n\n

Barclays and HSBC UK allow customers to transfer up to £2,500 per transaction to cryptocurrency platforms, with a maximum limit of £10,000 over a 30-day period. NatWest allows no more than £1,000 per day and £5,000 over 30 days. Santander caps individual transactions at £1,000 with a monthly limit of £3,000. Monzo allows crypto-related transfers of up to £5,000 over 30 days, while Nationwide imposes a daily limit of £1,000.

\n\n

Six banking providers examined in the report, including Starling Bank, TSB, Chase UK, Metro Bank, Virgin Money and Co-operative Bank, were listed as imposing outright bans on crypto-related transfers.

\n\n

Lloyds and Revolut didn’t officially announce any restrictions, but customers of both providers still reported difficulties completing transfers.

\n\n

What Stand with Crypto UK Is Asking For

\n\n

Stand with Crypto has called on banks to replace blanket bans and rigid payment limits with controls based on individual customer and transaction risks, and urged banks to clearly explain when and why crypto-related transfers could be blocked or restricted.

\n\n

The organization also recommended that customers be given a proper way to challenge such decisions or request exemptions when transferring money to FCA-registered or authorized platforms.

\n\n

Why This Matters for UK Traders

\n\n

The dispute comes as the FCA has opened its crypto authorization process ahead of a new regulatory framework. The FCA opened applications for the new crypto regulatory framework on September 30, 2026, and firms have until February 28, 2027, to apply if they want to qualify for transitional arrangements.

\n\n

However, the new rules do not require retail banks to process payments to cryptocurrency exchanges, meaning customers could continue facing restrictions depending on their bank’s policies even after the new framework takes effect.

\n\n

If you bank with one of these providers, keep records of any blocked transactions and contact your bank’s customer service for clarity on their specific policies before attempting transfers to crypto platforms.

Key takeaways

• ADA futures open interest fell to $475.58 million from $549.14 million, reflecting reduced derivatives exposure.
• Positive funding shows a modest bullish tilt among perpetual traders, leaving longs vulnerable if prices fall further.
• ADA remains below key moving averages, with $0.1894 emerging as a potential downside target.

Cardano Stabilizes After Sharp Weekly Decline

Cardano held above $0.2200 on Monday as buyers attempted to steady the price following a roughly 12% decline last week.

ADA has lost more than 10% so far in October, while weakening derivatives activity and subdued large-wallet positioning suggest limited conviction behind a recovery.

The daily chart also remains under pressure after last week’s break below trendline support near $0.2321. With the token trading beneath its key moving averages, sellers retain the near-term advantage.

CoinGlass data shows that Cardano futures open interest declined to $465.87 million on Monday from $549.14 million last week.

That represents a reduction of approximately 14.5% in the notional value of outstanding contracts.

The decline suggests reduced derivatives exposure, though it does not prove that retail traders alone are leaving the market. Falling ADA prices can reduce dollar-denominated open interest, while position closures and liquidations can also contribute.

The funding rate remained positive at 0.0032%, indicating that long positions were paying shorts in the tracked perpetual market.

That modest positive reading suggests some traders are still positioned for a rebound. However, funding alone does not demonstrate excessive leverage. 

A further price decline could nevertheless put vulnerable long positions under pressure and trigger additional forced selling.

Onchain figures suggest large holders have made only modest adjustments to their exposure.

According to Santiment data, wallets holding more than 100 million ADA accounted for 15.99% of circulating supply, slightly higher than 15.95% last week.

Meanwhile, the cohort holding between 10 million and 100 million ADA represented 38.11% of supply, down from 38.27%.

The opposing movements provide a mixed picture rather than a clear accumulation trend. They also do not, by themselves, establish whether tokens were sold, transferred between wallets or moved across holding categories.

Combined with lower futures exposure, the figures offer limited evidence of renewed buying conviction.

Cardano’s technical outlook remains bearish

ADA continues to trade beneath its 50-day Exponential Moving Average near $0.2290 and its 200-day EMA around $0.2395.

The loss of trendline support near $0.2321 adds to the weak structure, leaving several barriers above the current price.

Momentum indicators reinforce the bearish bias. The Moving Average Convergence Divergence indicator remains below zero with a negative histogram, while the Relative Strength Index hovers around 41.

The RSI reading suggests sellers retain the upper hand, although ADA has not reached the conventional oversold threshold of 30.

Without a recovery through nearby resistance, the latest stabilization remains a pause within the correction rather than confirmation of a trend reversal.

The psychological $0.20 level is an immediate downside reference if selling resumes. Below it, the August 30 low near $0.1894 represents the next structural support. 

A move toward that level would be about 14%–15% downside from the current price area.

On the upside, buyers first need to challenge the 50-day EMA at $0.2290. The former trendline support near $0.2321 then presents another obstacle, followed by the 200-day EMA at $0.2395.

A sustained recovery through those levels would help weaken the bearish setup. Until then, Cardano remains exposed to further losses as traders assess whether demand can strengthen around $0.2200.

Key takeaways

• NEAR fell 7% on Tuesday to around $4.70, extending Monday’s decline.
• Bitwise’s NEAR ETF attracted $5.42 million on Monday after three consecutive weeks of inflows.
• Resistance near $5.02 must be reclaimed to strengthen the recovery outlook.

NEAR retreats despite continued ETF buying

NEAR Protocol declined by over 7% on Tuesday, following a similar loss the previous day, as weakening short-term momentum outweighed continued demand through its exchange-traded fund.

The token traded around $4.70 at the time of this report, remaining below a closely grouped resistance area near $5.02.

Bitwise’s NEAR-focused ETF, NRR, recorded $5.42 million in net inflows on Monday, according to SoSoValue data. The buying followed three consecutive weeks of inflows totaling more than $80 million.

The positive flows indicate sustained demand through the fund, although they have not prevented the latest price correction. ETF activity represents one investment channel and does not determine the direction of the broader market.

NEAR’s Q3 2026 report, released Monday, highlighted growth in its multichain transaction infrastructure.

Cumulative volume through NEAR Intents exceeded $32 billion, approximately 45% above the previous quarter’s reported cumulative figure.

The protocol also reported that more than $8 million in fees had been directed toward token buybacks.

Meanwhile, total value locked in its privacy-focused Confidential Intents reached approximately $160 million, an increase of roughly 463%.

These figures point to expanding use of NEAR’s infrastructure. However, network growth and token buybacks do not guarantee an immediate recovery in NEAR’s market price.

Resistance around $5.02 caps recovery attempts

On the four-hour chart, NEAR remains below its 50-period Exponential Moving Average at $5.0179 and a descending resistance trendline near $5.0261.

Together, those levels form the first significant obstacle for buyers seeking to restore short-term momentum.

A sustained breakout above $5.0261 would strengthen the recovery case and bring the September 28 high at $5.5780 into focus. Beyond that, the $6.00 round-number level represents the next upside reference.

Until NEAR clears this resistance cluster, rebounds remain vulnerable to selling. The Relative Strength Index stands near 50 on the daily chart, indicating subdued momentum below its neutral midpoint.

The Moving Average Convergence Divergence indicator has also crossed marginally beneath its signal line, suggesting that upward pressure is fading.

These readings support a cautious near-term outlook, although they do not establish that the broader upward trend has reversed.

NEAR continues to trade above its 200-period EMA around $4.5513, leaving an important technical support level intact.

If the correction extends, the 200-period EMA near $4.55 provides the first significant support reference.

Below it, horizontal support at $4.4440 marks an area that limited losses on October 8. Holding this zone would support the interpretation of the decline as a correction within the broader uptrend.

A sustained break beneath both levels would weaken that structure and increase the risk of a deeper decline toward $3.9140, the September 19 high.

For now, NEAR’s outlook hinges on whether buyers can defend support and regain the resistance cluster around $5.02, even as ETF inflows and network activity remain constructive.

Smarter Web Lists Bitcoin-Backed Preferred Shares on LSE

The Smarter Web Company (SWC) listed its perpetual preferred shares on the London Stock Exchange, marking a significant development in how UK companies can now structure corporate Bitcoin investments.

The shares, trading under the ticker MORE, represent the UK’s first sterling-denominated perpetual preferred shares backed by a corporate Bitcoin treasury. The offer was priced at £90 per share with an annualized dividend rate of 12%, payable weekly.

This weekly dividend schedule sets MORE apart from traditional UK income stocks, most of which pay dividends quarterly or twice yearly. Smarter Web describes the weekly payout schedule as a first among London-listed public companies.

How the Shares Work

Perpetual preferred shares sit between bonds and common stock. They typically pay a set dividend and take priority for payment before ordinary shareholders, but they carry no maturity date and no promise of capital repayment. The shares carry a liquidation preference of £100 per share, which is the amount holders receive ahead of common shareholders if the company is wound up.

The 12% initial dividend rate translates into a running yield of approximately 13.33% for anyone who bought at the £90 issue price.

Funding Bitcoin Purchases

The listing comes after the company published results showing the offer raised £10.0 million gross, with net proceeds of around £8.3 million. The Bristol-based company, which trades under ticker SWC on the London Stock Exchange, adopted a formal Bitcoin treasury policy in 2025, making Bitcoin accumulation a central part of its corporate strategy.

As of September 30, Smarter Web held approximately 2,747 BTC. The structure ties the dividend-paying instrument directly to Bitcoin accumulation, creating a link between investor returns and corporate Bitcoin holdings.

What This Means for UK Investors

The listing opens a new income product for UK retail and institutional investors seeking exposure to Bitcoin through a regulated London-listed vehicle. Unlike buying Bitcoin directly, preferred shareholders receive weekly dividend payments and have claim priority if the company is wound up.

However, income depends entirely on Smarter Web’s ability to fund payouts. The company’s treasury is concentrated in Bitcoin, an asset known for sharp price swings, which creates both opportunity and risk for income consistency.

For investors tracking the shares, watch how MORE trades relative to the £90 issue price and £100 liquidation preference, and monitor updates to the company’s Bitcoin holdings as it deploys capital into the asset.

Main picture: Photo by Dylan Gillis on Unsplash

CME Group plans to start offering standard and micro bitcoin cash and uniswap futures, subject to regulatory review. For UK retail traders, this marks fresh access to regulated derivatives on two major altcoins.

Why This Matters for UK Traders

Futures offer an alternative to buying coins directly on crypto exchanges. Trading volume and open interest will indicate demand. For UK traders looking to gain exposure to Bitcoin Cash and Uniswap, CME futures could offer a way to trade these assets through a major regulated marketplace.

How to Access These Futures

CME futures are not traded on crypto exchanges. Instead, you access them through a futures broker — typically a licensed firm that clears through CME. This differs from spot crypto trading, where you buy and hold the actual asset. Futures let you go long (bet on a price rise) or short (bet on a fall), and you trade a contract rather than the coin itself.

UK traders should check whether their broker offers CME crypto futures. Many traditional brokers (stock and forex firms) that offer futures contracts now list crypto derivatives. Always confirm that your broker is FCA-regulated if you are a UK resident — this gives you access to the Financial Ombudsman and a clear regulatory framework if something goes wrong.

Standard vs. Micro Contracts

CME Group plans to start offering standard and micro bitcoin cash and uniswap futures. Standard contracts suit traders moving significant capital. Micro contracts allow smaller positions — useful if you want to test strategy or manage risk with less capital at risk.

Broader Market Context

This week is a busy week ahead across crypto markets, infrastructure, institutional adoption and regulation. The CME launch sits alongside other institutional developments in the crypto space.

For UK retail traders, the key takeaway is simple: regulated access to major altcoin derivatives just expanded. If you have been hesitant to trade Bitcoin Cash or Uniswap directly on crypto exchanges, CME futures offer an alternative pathway. As always, futures trading carries leverage risk — you can lose more than your initial margin — so understand the mechanics before you trade.

Main picture: Photo by Tötös Ádám on Unsplash

Every stablecoin yield product answers the same awkward question.Your USDC doesn’t appreciate. It’s engineered not to. So when a platform offers you 4%, 8%, or 20% on a dollar-pegged token, that money is coming from somewhere specific — and the “somewhere” is the only thing that matters.

Most comparison posts rank these by headline APY. That’s exactly backwards. A 12% yield funded by a sustainable market mechanism is a completely different product from a 12% yield funded by token emissions that run out in six months.

So this ranking does it the other way round. Six ways to earn yield on stablecoins, ordered by how durable the underlying source actually is.

The one thing to check before you deposit anywhere

Ask what the counterparty is doing with your money to generate the return. There are only a handful of honest answers:

• They’re lending it to someone who pays interest
• They’re putting it in Treasuries and sharing the coupon
• They’re running a trading strategy that generates returns
• They’re paying you out of token emissions or marketing budget

The first three are businesses. The fourth is a countdown. If a platform can’t tell you which one it is in a sentence, that’s your answer.

1. Funding-rate arbitrage — yield from a market mechanism

The source: perpetual futures contracts pay funding between long and short holders every few hours to keep the contract price tethered to spot. Crypto traders lean long most of the time, so shorts tend to collect. BitMEX’s Q3 2025 analysis found funding was positive for over 92% of the quarter — a persistent tilt, not a one-off.

A position that holds spot and shorts the perpetual collects that funding while the two legs cancel out directionally. The return isn’t coming from a token printer or a borrower who might default. It’s coming from leveraged traders paying to keep their positions open.

Typical return: varies with funding conditions and strategy. VectorTraders publishes target ranges from 7.8% to 43.3% annualised across its plans, depending on term and strategy mix.

The catch: funding can stay negative for extended periods, which inverts the payment direction. Execution runs on third-party exchanges, so venue risk is real. And running it yourself means managing two legs across venues continuously — which is why most people access it through a managed product rather than doing it directly. The full mechanism is explained here, worked example included.

Why it ranks first: the source is structural rather than promotional. Perpetual futures aren’t going anywhere — on-chain perp DEXs alone turned over $593 billion in 30 days as of September 2026 — and as long as traders use leverage, someone is paying funding.

Start small and see how it behaves. VectorTraders’ entry plan opens at $100 on a seven-day term, which is about the cheapest way to watch funding capture work in practice. See the current plans →

2. Tokenized Treasuries — yield from government debt

The source: your stablecoins buy short-dated US Treasury bills through a tokenized fund, and you receive the coupon.

Typical return: tracks short-term Treasury rates, minus a management fee. Whatever T-bills are paying, roughly.

The catch: returns are capped at the risk-free rate, and they fall when rates fall. Many of these products are also restricted to accredited or institutional investors, and redemption can take a business day or more.

Why it ranks second: it’s the most boring source on this list, and that’s the compliment. You know exactly where the money comes from.

3. DeFi lending — yield from borrowers

The source: protocols like Aave and Morpho let you supply stablecoins to a pool that borrowers draw from, paying interest. Rates float with utilisation.

Typical return: low single digits in quiet markets, spiking when leverage demand runs hot. Highly variable.

The catch: smart contract risk is the obvious one. The subtler one is that rates collapse exactly when you most want them — in calm markets, nobody’s borrowing. You’re also exposed to the protocol’s liquidation machinery working correctly during a crash, which is the moment it’s under the most stress.

4. Exchange rewards programmes — yield from a revenue share

The source: exchanges pay rewards on stablecoin balances, typically funded by sharing the interest the issuer earns on its reserves.

Typical return: low single digits. Coinbase’s USDC rewards have run around 3.5%.

The catch: this is the category regulators have been circling. The GENIUS Act, signed in July 2025, bars stablecoin issuers from paying yield on reserves directly. The CLARITY Act would have extended restrictions to platforms, but it failed a Senate procedural vote 49–50 in September 2026, so the platform-level ban never became law. A proposed OCC rule on affiliate arrangements remains unresolved.

Translation: this yield source exists at the pleasure of a rulemaking process that is still moving. Fine for parking cash. Not something to build around.

5. Yield-bearing stablecoins — yield baked into the token

The source: the token itself accrues value, usually from Treasuries or a delta-neutral strategy run by the issuer.

Typical return: varies enormously by product, because “yield-bearing stablecoin” describes a mechanism, not a risk level.

The catch: you’re taking the issuer’s strategy risk and their peg risk simultaneously, and the two are correlated — if the strategy breaks, the peg is what breaks. Read what’s actually backing it. Some are Treasury wrappers. Others are leveraged positions with a dollar sign on the front.

6. Liquidity provision and yield farming — yield from emissions

The source: you supply stablecoins to a liquidity pool and earn trading fees plus, usually, token rewards.

Typical return: the advertised numbers are the highest on this list, and the realised numbers frequently are not.

The catch: headline APYs on stablecoin farms are typically dominated by token emissions rather than fees. Emissions decay, the token price usually falls as rewards are sold, and the quoted APY assumes neither happens. Add impermanent loss on non-pegged pairs and smart contract risk on top.

Why it ranks last: not because it never works — it sometimes works very well — but because the source is a marketing budget with a timer on it.

Side by side

How to actually choose

If you want the yield to still be there in two years, weight durability over headline rate. Tokenized Treasuries and funding-rate strategies both have sources that exist independently of anyone’s marketing budget.

If you’re parking cash for a few weeks, exchange rewards are frictionless and the regulatory question won’t resolve in your holding period. Just don’t plan around it.

If you want the highest sustainable rate, funding-rate arbitrage has historically offered more than Treasuries because it’s compensating you for real operational work — running two legs across venues, managing exchange exposure, handling the periods when funding inverts. That’s a genuine return source, not a free lunch, and it comes with genuine risk.

If you’re drawn to a 20%+ farm APY, work out what percentage is fees and what percentage is token emissions before you deposit. The answer is usually uncomfortable.

One rule covers all of it: if you can’t explain where the money comes from, you’re not earning yield. You’re providing it.

Want the funding-rate route without running it yourself? Plans start at $100 with a seven-day term. Explore VectorTraders →

FAQ