The recent SpaceX IPO has made Elon Musk into the richest man alive, with a Forbes estimated net worth of $1.4 trillion.

It’s hard to comprehend.

For context, a billionaire who’s earning a conservative 4% on their portfolio can spend over $3 million every single month, more than $100,000 every single day, and never see their wealth decrease.

A trillionaire is the equivalent of a thousand billionaires.

If they’re earning 4% on their portfolio, they can spend $111 million every single day without ever decreasing their wealth.

Read more: ANALYSIS: Mapping Donald Trump’s growing crypto empire

Musk’s wealth is so massive that it makes the reality-warping fortunes of other crypto billionaires seem like a pittance.

Binance founder Changpeng Zhao is probably the richest person in crypto, with a mind-boggling net-worth of over $110 billion.

That’s less than 8% of Musk’s wealth.

Giancarlo Devasini leads what’s arguably the most important company in the industry, Tether, and it’s led to him having an estimated net worth of over $89 billion.

That’s less than 7% of Musk’s wealth.

Donald Trump, the president of the United States, who according to Forbes has seen his net worth increase by a stunning 282% since 2024, is worth a total of $6.5 billion.

This means that despite Trump’s unprecedented ability to increase his wealth during the presidency, his former “adviser” is worth 229 times more than he is.

Even among the ultra-wealthy who have found ways to personally increase their wealth thanks to proximity to state power, they’re worth a tiny fraction of what Musk is.

Indeed, Musk’s wealth is greater than Zhao’s, Devasini’s, Paolo Ardoino’s, Jean-Louis van der Velde’s, Peter Thiel’s, Stuart Hoegner’s, Chris Larsen’s, Justin Sun’s, Brian Armstrong’s, Howard Lutnick’s, and Donald Trump’s combined.

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.

Wall Street’s largest asset managers are increasingly competing to manage the assets backing stablecoins, a market that could swell into the trillions of dollars as digital dollars become a larger part of the financial system.

State Street Investment Management introduced the State Street Stablecoin Reserves Money Market Fund on Tuesday, a government money market fund designed specifically for stablecoin issuers operating under the framework established by the GENIUS Act.

The fund’s introduction comes as traditional financial (TradFi) firms race to position themselves as key providers of reserve management services for stablecoin issuers. Stablecoins, which are typically pegged to the U.S. dollar, are backed by reserves that often include Treasury bills, cash and money market funds. As issuance grows, so does the pool of assets generating management fees for fund providers.

The fund’s initial investors include State Street Bank and Trust Company and Anchorage Digital, the crypto-focused bank that holds a federal charter in the United States.

Stablecoins have become one of the most sought-after opportunities in digital assets for traditional finance firms. Major asset managers, custodians and banks have spent the past year rolling out products aimed at tokenized cash markets and reserve management infrastructure.

The upgrade is shaping up to be one of Ethereum’s most ambitious since the network’s transition to proof-of-stake in 2022. Jayanthi described Glamsterdam as “probably the largest fork we’ve had since the Merge,” adding that it will “change a lot of assumptions about Ethereum and set us up for much more scaling in the future.”

Among the headline features are enshrined Proposer-Builder Separation (ePBS), formally tracked as EIP-7732, and Block-level Access Lists (EIP-7928).

ePBS would bring into Ethereum’s core protocol a separation between the entities that build transaction blocks and those that propose them. Today, that process largely relies offchain, where there are additional trust assumptions and centralization concerns. By moving the mechanism onchain, developers hope to reduce opportunities for manipulation related to maximal extractable value, or MEV.

Another major proposal, Block-level Access Lists, would allow blocks to declare in advance which accounts and smart-contract data they intend to access. The change would enable Ethereum clients to preload information more efficiently, helping make block execution faster, more predictable and easier to optimize.

Beyond those headline proposals, Glamsterdam also includes a sweeping set of gas repricings that could significantly alter the economics of using Ethereum.

“This will majorly change the cost of actions on Ethereum. High-level compute gets cheaper and state gets more expensive.”

Binance, the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange, may be unable to serve customers in Europe if its regulatory license application in Greece is turned down, as Reuters reported on Tuesday.

Binance’s Markets in Crypto Assets (MiCA) license application, which has to be approved by a deadline at the end of this month, is going to be rejected by the Greek financial watchdog Hellenic Capital Market Commission (HCMC), according to the report, which cited two people familiar with the situation.

Binance said it has been pursuing a MiCA license over the past 18 months, including through a comprehensive application process with the HCMC in Greece.

“Our understanding is that the HCMC completed its review of the application and considered it compliant with MiCA requirements, and that the application was also reviewed at ESMA level,” a Binance spokesman told CoinDesk via email.

The spokesman also said that “HCMC informed ESMA that it was their view that the application was compliant and that they intended to progress the licence and move to authorise at an upcoming Board meeting.”

Cryptocurrency exchange Binance, whose application under the European Union’s Markets in Crypto Assets (MiCA) framework is under consideration, has generally deferred responding to a report that the company’s licensed activities in the region could be at risk.

In a Tuesday blog post, Binance said that Greece’s Hellenic Capital Market Commission (HCMC), one of the regulators responsible for overseeing MiCA, had completed its review of the crypto exchange’s application and “considered it compliant with MiCA requirements,” subject to review at the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA). The post came just a few hours after Reuters reported that EU regulators were preparing to reject Binance’s licensing bid, potentially cutting off the exchange’s ability to offer services to residents.

“Binance serves more users in Europe than any other crypto exchange, and any delay or distortion in our MiCA path has consequences beyond Binance,” said the company. “It risks weakening liquidity, reducing competition and user choice, and pushing activity, jobs, investment, and tax revenue outside the EU.”

Source: Binance

Under the MiCA framework, companies operating in the EU only have until the end of June to gain approval to offer services to residents. Should Binance’s application with HCMC be rejected, the exchange would likely be unable to legally operate in the EU starting on July 1.

Related: Robinhood cuts 10% of workforce as Tenev touts business strength

A Binance spokesperson told Cointelegraph that the company expected that ESMA “intended to progress the licence and move to authorise at an upcoming board meeting.” The company did not immediately respond to an additional request for clarification on the Reuters report, but added in the blog post it would update users by June 30, the deadline for the MiCA application.

The crypto exchange applied for its MiCA licensing in Greece under HCMC in January. Several regulators, including those in Germany and the Netherlands, have already approved licenses for crypto companies seeking to be compliant under MiCA with the deadline approaching in a matter of weeks.

Binance still under scrutiny by US authorities

In 2023, Binance reached an agreement with US authorities in which then-CEO Changpeng Zhao stepped down and pleaded guilty to one felony charge, and the company agreed to a $4.3 billion settlement with the US Treasury Department and Department of Justice and to follow a monitoring program. Amid the US-Israel war with Iran and reports that the exchange facilitated $1 billion to sanctioned entities, US lawmakers have been pressing for answers regarding Binance’s compliance.

Magazine: Bitcoin, the ‘canary in the coal mine,’ XRP transaction demand falls 91.5%: Market Moves

1. How Bitcoin perps are entering regulated US markets

For years, Bitcoin perpetual futures have ranked among the most important products in crypto trading. They account for a large share of global crypto derivatives activity and are widely used by traders seeking leverage, hedging tools and short-term exposure to market moves.

Despite their popularity, perpetual futures have mostly operated outside regulated US markets. Most trading has taken place on offshore platforms. This left many American traders and institutions with limited choices: Avoid true perps, use offshore venues where permitted or turn to imperfect regulated alternatives.

That could now change.

In late May 2026, the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) approved KalshiEX to list the BTCPERP contract, a perpetual futures contract that references the spot price of Bitcoin. The decision marks an important step for crypto derivatives. It could also change how retail and institutional traders gain leveraged exposure to Bitcoin.

While the contract is important on its own, its larger meaning lies in the signal it sends: One of crypto’s most widely used financial tools is moving into regulated US financial markets. 

2. What are Bitcoin perpetual futures?

A perpetual futures contract, often called a “perp,” is a type of derivative that lets traders take positions on Bitcoin’s price moves without holding the underlying asset.

Unlike traditional futures, perpetual futures have no set expiration date. Positions can stay open as long as traders maintain enough margin.

Standard futures contracts require traders to move into a new contract when the old one expires. Perpetual futures remove this step, making them more convenient and often more cost-effective for ongoing trading.

To keep perpetual contracts from moving too far away from Bitcoin’s spot price, platforms use a funding rate mechanism. Based on market conditions, traders in long or short positions make periodic payments to each other. This helps keep perp prices closer to the price of the underlying asset.

This simple design has helped perpetual futures become the preferred product for many crypto market participants.

3. How perpetual futures became crypto’s top trading product

Perpetual futures first became popular on offshore crypto exchanges. What started as a niche product grew into one of the most actively traded products in crypto.

The appeal is clear. These contracts provide leverage, letting traders manage larger positions with relatively modest capital. They allow traders to position for both rising and falling markets. They also avoid many of the practical challenges tied to traditional futures.

As the crypto sector grew, perpetuals became the go-to tool for speculators, hedge funds, market makers and arbitrage traders.

In many cases, perpetual futures trading volumes surpass spot market volumes for major cryptocurrencies. They also serve as a key venue for price discovery.

This growth has made perpetual futures one of the most important parts of crypto finance, even though their presence in regulated US markets has remained limited until recently.

Did you know? Unlike many financial products that began in traditional markets, perpetual futures first gained traction in crypto. The design solved a practical problem: Traders wanted futures-like exposure without constantly rolling contracts into new expiration dates.

4. Why the US stayed on the sidelines

For a long time, US regulators were cautious about crypto perpetual futures. That caution had a clear reason.

The hesitation was not about futures trading itself. Regulated futures markets have operated for many years. Instead, the concerns were tied to the features of several offshore crypto platforms.

Very high leverage, weak customer protections, limited transparency and risks of market manipulation made regulators reluctant to approve similar products in the US.

As a result, many US traders either used offshore platforms or relied on alternatives such as CME Bitcoin futures and, more recently, spot Bitcoin exchange traded funds (ETFs).

This created an unusual imbalance. One of crypto’s most popular products largely remained outside the reach of the world’s largest financial market. The recent approval of regulated Bitcoin perpetual futures may now help close that gap.

5. What exactly has the CFTC approved?

The CFTC recently approved KalshiEX’s Bitcoin perpetual futures contract, known as BTCPERP. The move gives the product a regulated path in the US.

Unlike many offshore alternatives, this contract operates under a US-regulated framework overseen by federal authorities.

The decision also gave the market more clarity on how perpetual futures can fit into existing futures rules. Rather than treating them as entirely new products, regulators found that they can work within current futures market rules if proper safeguards are in place.

The approval opens the door for regulated perpetual futures to trade alongside other established US derivatives products. This may be just as important as the contract approval itself.

Did you know? Many crypto enthusiasts assume Bitcoin’s spot market sets the price. In reality, large volumes of leveraged trading on futures and perpetual contracts often influence short-term price moves across the wider crypto market.

6. How regulated perpetuals differ from offshore versions

On the surface, regulated perpetual contracts and their offshore versions may look similar. Both offer leveraged exposure to Bitcoin without requiring traders to hold the actual asset.

But their market structures differ in important ways.

US-regulated products must follow strict compliance standards. Exchanges must use know-your-customer (KYC) and anti-money laundering (AML) checks. Trading is also monitored for signs of abuse, while risk management practices face regulatory review.

Margin rules are usually more conservative than those on offshore platforms.

Traders used to very high leverage may find regulated perpetuals more restrictive. Still, supporters argue that stronger protections can reduce systemic risks and improve market reliability.

Participants may accept lower leverage in exchange for better transparency and stronger regulatory oversight.

7. What regulated perpetuals mean for retail traders

For individual investors, regulated Bitcoin perpetuals could offer easier access to leveraged crypto trading within the traditional financial system.

In the past, traders seeking perpetual futures had few options beyond offshore platforms. This often meant dealing with unclear regulations and higher counterparty risks.

A regulated option may offer several advantages:

• Clearer market rules
• Stronger customer protections
• Official oversight of trading platforms
• Better safeguards for client assets

Still, retail traders should not confuse regulation with guaranteed safety.

Perpetual futures remain high-leverage products that can lead to large losses quickly. Even under regulation, weak risk controls can result in fast liquidations.

While market infrastructure may become safer, the risks of trading do not disappear.

Did you know? Perpetual futures have no expiry date, so exchanges use funding payments between traders. These payments help keep perpetual prices close to spot prices without direct intervention from the exchange.

8. Why institutions may gain the most

Although retail interest often gets more attention, institutions could benefit the most.

Hedge funds, asset managers and proprietary trading firms have been cautious about offshore perpetual futures because of compliance concerns. Even when the trading opportunities looked attractive, internal policies often limited their involvement.

A regulated US market changes that. Institutions could now access:

• Leveraged exposure to Bitcoin
• Advanced hedging tools
• Market-neutral strategies
• Arbitrage opportunities across spot, ETF and futures markets

The launch of regulated perpetuals may bring more institutional capital into crypto derivatives. That, in turn, could improve liquidity and make markets more efficient.

9. How ETFs and perpetual futures are becoming more connected

The approval of spot Bitcoin ETFs marked an important step in wider crypto adoption. Regulated perpetual futures could be the next step.

Spot ETFs offer simple exposure to Bitcoin price moves. Perpetual futures, on the other hand, offer leveraged access and more advanced risk management tools.

Together, these products help create a fuller market structure that looks more like those seen in traditional asset classes.

Institutional traders often use a mix of spot and derivatives products. With regulated perpetuals now available, new strategies linking ETFs, spot Bitcoin and futures contracts are likely to develop.

This could improve overall liquidity and strengthen the connection between traditional finance and digital assets.

10. Crypto exchanges face a new competitive test

The approval has also created a new competitive test for trading platforms. KalshiEX secured the first approval for a regulated Bitcoin perpetual contract, but it is unlikely to be the last.

Coinbase has shown strong interest in crypto derivatives. It has expanded its capabilities through acquisitions, including Deribit, and through regulatory efforts involving its CFTC-regulated futures commission merchant.

Other exchanges could seek similar approvals if the CFTC continues to review perpetual products under this framework.

Crypto derivatives can be commercially attractive because they generate large trading volumes and create new fee opportunities. This gives platforms strong reasons to compete for the market.

As a result, regulated perpetual futures could become a key area of competition among crypto exchanges.

11. Could regulated perpetuals weaken offshore exchanges?

A central question is whether regulated perpetuals will draw liquidity away from offshore venues. The answer is not simple.

The outcome will likely depend on several factors:

• Available leverage levels
• Trading costs
• Market depth
• Institutional involvement
• Regulatory predictability

Offshore platforms still have deep liquidity and loyal user bases. Many traders remain comfortable with their current setups.

Still, if US-regulated venues can offer competitive fees and enough liquidity, some trading activity may slowly move onshore. Any such shift would likely happen over years rather than months, though the trend could become more important over time.

12. The risks regulators still worry about

Even after the approval, regulators remain cautious about perpetual futures. Their main concern is leverage.

Leverage increases both profits and losses. During sharp market swings, heavily leveraged positions can trigger chains of liquidations that make price moves worse.

Crypto markets have seen such episodes across several market cycles. While regulated perpetuals may include stronger protections, they cannot remove the core risks of leveraged trading.

Participants need to understand that regulation mainly addresses market structure risks, not the risks of the investment itself.

Binance says a key step in its EU Markets in Crypto Assets (MiCA) licensing process has moved forward, even as Reuters reported that regulators are preparing to reject the exchange’s bid—an outcome that could limit Binance’s ability to serve customers in the bloc.

In a Tuesday blog update, Binance stated that Greece’s Hellenic Capital Market Commission (HCMC)—a MiCA regulator involved in reviewing the company’s application—has completed its assessment and “considered it compliant with MiCA requirements,” while noting that the matter still requires review by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA).

Key takeaways

• Binance claims HCMC has completed its MiCA application review and found its submission compliant, subject to ESMA oversight.
• Reuters reported EU regulators may reject Binance’s licensing request, potentially preventing the exchange from offering services to EU residents.
• MiCA authorization timing remains critical: EU firms must obtain approval by the end of June to continue serving residents lawfully.
• Binance says delays could affect liquidity, competition, and user choice, and may shift activity outside the EU.

Binance points to progress with HCMC review

Binance’s response comes shortly after Reuters reported that EU regulators were preparing to reject the exchange’s licensing bid. Binance’s blog post did not directly address the Reuters claim in detail, but it framed the latest stage of the process as constructive.

According to the company, HCMC has finished reviewing its application and concluded that it meets MiCA requirements, with remaining steps moving to ESMA. Binance characterized any disruption in the timeline as having consequences beyond its own operations, arguing that it could reduce liquidity and competition while narrowing user choice.

Binance also said it plans to update users by June 30, aligning with the MiCA application deadline referenced in its communication.

What MiCA timing means for Binance in the EU

Under the MiCA framework, crypto businesses that want to operate legally for EU residents need to secure authorization by the end of June. The reporting in the source indicates that if Binance’s application—submitted to and reviewed through HCMC—were ultimately rejected, it would likely be unable to legally continue offering services in the European Union starting July 1.

The practical significance for users and market participants is straightforward: authorization or lack of it can determine whether an exchange can provide services to EU-based customers without regulatory risk. That makes the ESMA review stage pivotal, particularly given the approaching end-of-June cut-off.

Binance previously applied for MiCA licensing in Greece under HCMC in January, and the source notes that other regulators—such as those in Germany and the Netherlands—have already approved some MiCA-compliant licenses, underscoring how time-sensitive the current stage is for remaining applicants.

Why the HCMC-to-ESMA handoff is a flashpoint

MiCA oversight is split across national authorities and EU-level review. In this case, Binance highlights that the Greek regulator has completed its portion and assessed compliance, while Reuters suggests EU-level decisions could still go the other way.

That gap—between a national regulator’s compliance assessment and the eventual outcome after ESMA review—matters to investors, traders, and counterparties because it affects expectations around service continuity, custody arrangements, and liquidity flows. Market participants often plan around regulatory certainty, and a process that appears to be “moving” on one layer but is rumored to be heading toward rejection at another can raise uncertainty about near-term access to a major venue.

Binance’s blog message reflects that concern, arguing that any delays or distortion in its MiCA path could have broader consequences for the EU crypto market, including liquidity and competitive dynamics.

Binance faces additional compliance scrutiny in the US

While the immediate focus is MiCA authorization in Europe, the exchange’s regulatory posture is also shaped by its ongoing history with US authorities. In 2023, Binance reached an agreement with US regulators in which then-CEO Changpeng Zhao stepped down and pleaded guilty to a felony charge. The company also agreed to a $4.3 billion settlement with the US Treasury Department and Department of Justice and to operate under a monitoring program.

More recently, US lawmakers have pressed for answers regarding Binance’s compliance amid war-related geopolitical developments and reporting that the exchange facilitated $1 billion to sanctioned entities. The source indicates that this issue has continued to draw attention from US lawmakers.

For market participants, this parallel regulatory track is relevant because it can influence reputational risk assessments and compliance expectations globally, even when the immediate decision is specific to EU authorization.

With ESMA review and the end-of-June MiCA deadline approaching, the key question for users and the broader market is whether Binance’s authorization path ultimately aligns with Binance’s claim of HCMC compliance—or whether Reuters’ report of a possible rejection proves accurate; the June 30 update and the timing of ESMA’s next steps will be the most important signals to watch.