Ken Griffin’s Citadel has reportedly stepped in to buy a large portion of the publicly traded stock portfolio of Situational Awareness, the hedge fund run by former OpenAI researcher Leopold Aschenbrenner. The deal comes after steep losses tied to last month’s broad selloff in AI-linked equities.

According to the Financial Times, Citadel purchased the discounted portfolio after Situational’s performance deteriorated in July’s AI stock rout. Earlier reporting from The Wall Street Journal indicated Situational fell about 67% during July, even as it was still up roughly 80% for the year at the time of a letter sent to investors.

Key takeaways

• Citadel reportedly bought much of Situational Awareness’s publicly traded equity portfolio after major July losses in AI-linked stocks.
• Reports cite liquidity pressure, including the need to handle lender margin calls, though Reuters could not confirm whether formal margin calls were issued before certain share sales.
• SEC filings show Situational held public stakes in AI-adjacent names such as Sandisk, CoreWeave-related exposure, and Bloom Energy as of March 31, alongside a sizable Bitcoin mining share portfolio.
• It remains unclear which exact holdings were included in the Citadel transaction and whether any of the miner positions were retained.

From AI selloff to portfolio sale

The reported acquisition follows a sharp equity drawdown that hit hedge funds concentrated in AI infrastructure and related trades. The Financial Times said Citadel bought the portfolio at a discount after Situational Awareness suffered heavy losses during July’s AI stock market rout.

The sequence of events described by major outlets suggests liquidity became the limiting factor. The Wall Street Journal reported that Situational needed cash to meet margin calls from its lenders. In that account, the fund agreed late Wednesday to sell $3.5 billion of Anthropic shares to a group led by Greenoaks and Sequoia Capital, but then withdrew from the deal after agreeing terms for a Citadel-led portfolio transaction.

Reuters separately reported that Citadel bought most of Situational’s stock holdings after the AI share rout and described details of the leveraged portfolio and share sales. Reuters also stated it could not determine whether formal margin calls had been issued before the Anthropic-related sale discussions. Reuters added that Situational retained about $10 billion in stocks and private investments, including exposure to Anthropic.

What July losses looked like in holdings

Several stocks connected to Situational Awareness’s portfolio reportedly dropped sharply during July. Yahoo Finance data cited in the coverage shows Sandisk down about 44% for the month even after closing Thursday up 26%. CoreWeave was down nearly 26% in July, while Bloom Energy fell around 32%, according to the same dataset.

While those monthly declines underline how concentrated positions can magnify market stress, they also illustrate why a portfolio sale at “discounted” terms can become attractive to a counterparty—particularly when pricing dislocations occur across an entire thematic trade rather than a single company-specific issue.

SEC filings point to AI infrastructure and Bitcoin mining exposure

Situational Awareness’s U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filing reportedly shows direct share positions in at least three companies—Sandisk, CoreWeave, and Bloom Energy—as of March 31. The SEC document is used to ground the public-equity portion of the story, including what was held before July’s drawdown.

The same filing also showed approximately $1.11 billion in shares of seven Bitcoin (BTC) mining companies, including Iren, Core Scientific, Riot Platforms, and CleanSpark. Cointelegraph previously reported that the strategy involved miner exposure that could benefit from demand for AI and high-performance computing by repurposing power supplies and data center sites.

In this round of reporting, however, the critical open question for investors is scope: it is not clear which specific stocks were included in the Citadel transaction, and it remains uncertain whether Situational retained any of its Bitcoin miner positions after the sale of the public stock portfolio.

Why the trade may signal shifting leverage risk

Across hedge fund industry coverage, the theme in situations like this is rarely the long-term thesis of an investor—it’s how leverage and collateral requirements interact with fast-moving equity markets. The reporting around margin calls and the need for cash suggests the fund’s ability to keep positions through volatility was constrained.

At the same time, the asymmetry between what is publicly visible and what is financially decisive remains. Reuters’ note that it could not confirm whether formal margin calls had been issued before certain transactions highlights the limits of what outsiders can verify in real time—especially when term sheets, lender discussions, and collateral mechanics are involved.

For readers tracking crypto-adjacent strategies, the story also underscores that “AI” and “crypto infrastructure” exposures are increasingly intertwined. Situational’s reported combination of AI-linked equity holdings and Bitcoin miner stock exposure reflects a broader market reality: demand for power, computing, and deployment of infrastructure can connect traditional equity investing, AI narratives, and crypto mining businesses.

Watch items after the reported deal

Investors should watch for further clarity on which holdings Citadel acquired, whether Situational retained any miner positions, and how the fund’s remaining $10 billion of reported stocks and private investments evolve after July’s volatility. Until additional filings or confirmations arrive, the practical takeaway remains straightforward: when leverage meets thematic drawdowns, portfolio exits can happen quickly—even for funds that may still look strong over a longer time horizon.

The state is seeking at least $36 billion in damages from the prediction market platform it calls an unlicensed gambling operation, and has filed for a temporary restraining order to halt its contracts immediately.

The lawsuit that prediction markets knew was coming

Two days after the Second Circuit denied Kalshi emergency relief on July 29, New York filed the most aggressive state action yet against the prediction market industry. The suit arrived with a coordinated announcement from AG James and Governor Hochul, counts spanning multiple bodies of state law, a $36 billion damages demand, and a motion for an immediate restraining order.

The $36 billion figure, reported by The Block based on the court filings, is roughly 1.6 times Kalshi’s reported valuation. It is the number every major outlet is leading with, and it signals that New York is treating this as a revenue-extraction case, not merely a cease-and-desist.

This piece examines the filing, the legal arguments on both sides, the federal regulator caught between them, and what the case means for an industry now fighting a war on two fronts: in courtrooms and in Congress.

What the complaint actually alleges

The core claim is straightforward: Kalshi is running an unlicensed gambling business in New York.

The AG’s office says the platform lets users place wagers on uncertain future events, from Super Bowl outcomes to reality TV winners to election results, without a Gaming Commission license and without paying state gaming taxes. New York treats these as bets, not derivatives, regardless of Kalshi’s CFTC registration.

The complaint goes further. It alleges Kalshi allows users aged 18 to 20 to place bets, violating New York’s 21-and-older minimum for mobile sports betting. It alleges the platform offered wagers on games involving New York college teams, a separate violation under state law.

The AG’s investigators placed test wagers from New York accounts as evidence: four “Yes” contracts on a UConn-Michigan basketball game at $1.14 in April 2026, and ten contracts on the winner of “Big Brother” in July 2026. Both transactions completed without obstruction.

The filing also introduces a count under the federal Interstate Wire Act, alleging Kalshi used wire communications to transmit bets across state lines. This is significant because it widens the legal exposure beyond state gambling statutes into federal criminal law, giving the state an argument that operates independently of the preemption question. Even if Kalshi’s CFTC registration were found to preempt state gambling law, the Wire Act is a federal statute, and the state is arguing that Kalshi violates it.

The complaint details the investigative methods in unusual specificity. Rather than relying on industry reports or third-party data, the OAG built its case from the inside. Investigators created accounts, placed real wagers, and documented each step. This matters for the TRO motion: the state can present firsthand evidence that illegal gambling is actively occurring in New York, not merely that it could occur.

“Prediction markets like Kalshi are gambling platforms, plain and simple,” James said in a statement accompanying the filing.

Governor Hochul framed the action around consumer protection, saying Kalshi “has chosen to ignore New York’s gaming laws, which exist to protect consumers, prevent problematic gambling, deliver funding for critical public services, and ensure that every company plays by the same rules.” The coordinated announcement from both the AG and the Governor signals that this is not a routine regulatory action. It is a political priority.

The $36 billion in damages and the TRO

New York is not seeking a slap on the wrist. The headline number is at least $36 billion in compensatory damages, pending a full accounting of Kalshi’s operations. The remedies demand:

• A permanent injunction barring Kalshi from operating unlicensed gambling in the state
• A temporary restraining order halting Kalshi’s event contracts in New York immediately
• A full accounting of every customer bet and loss processed through the platform
• Forfeiture and disgorgement of all gains the state deems illegal
• Restitution to affected consumers
• Penalties of three times Kalshi’s gains under Penal Law Section 80.10
• A fine of $100,000 per unauthorized sports wagering offer under the Racing Law

The TRO is the near-term threat. If granted, Kalshi would need to suspend operations in New York while the case proceeds, potentially for years. The triple-damages provision is the long-term one. At $36 billion, New York is claiming a figure that exceeds the platform’s reported valuation of $22 billion by more than 60%.

The per-offer fine structure adds another layer. The AG’s release notes that Kalshi users bet over $1 billion monthly in 2025, with 90% of that volume on sports. Each unauthorized sports offering carries a $100,000 fine under the Racing Law. At that volume, the per-offer penalties alone could produce a figure in the hundreds of millions.

The damages calculation itself reveals the state’s theory of the case. New York is not treating Kalshi as a minor regulatory violator that failed to file paperwork. It is treating Kalshi as a gambling operation that processed billions in unlicensed wagers over multiple years, and it wants the full economic benefit of that activity returned. The $36 billion figure presumably reflects the total volume of wagers placed by New York users, or a substantial fraction of it, multiplied by the treble-damages provision. The final number will depend on the full accounting the state is requesting, but the opening demand is meant to establish the scale of the alleged violation.

The TRO motion deserves separate attention because it operates on a different timeline from the main case. A TRO hearing can happen within days or weeks, while the underlying lawsuit could take years. If New York secures the restraining order, Kalshi faces an immediate operational decision: comply and lose the New York market, or challenge the order and risk contempt proceedings. Either outcome sets a precedent that other states can follow. Michigan and Nevada secured their own TROs through similar procedural mechanisms, and each one reduced Kalshi’s geographic footprint.

The $1 billion monthly number and why it matters

The AG’s release includes a figure that has received less attention than the $36 billion headline: Kalshi users bet over $1 billion every month on the platform in 2025, and 90% of that money went to sports betting.

This is the number that makes the bipartisan Senate proposal to ban CFTC-licensed platforms from offering sports event contracts existential. Sports are not a side product for Kalshi. They are the product. If sports contracts are removed, whether by state enforcement or federal legislation, the platform loses nine-tenths of its recorded consumer activity.

The figure also undercuts Kalshi’s framing of its offerings as sophisticated financial derivatives. A billion dollars a month on the Super Bowl, the NBA, and college basketball looks like a sportsbook by any name. New York is making exactly that argument, and the AG’s investigators have the receipts.

The concentration matters for investors and market participants as well. Kalshi’s $22 billion valuation implies a diversified event-contract platform serving a range of use cases: elections, weather, economics, entertainment. The AG’s data shows something closer to a sports gambling platform with a derivatives label. If the valuation was underwritten on the assumption of product diversity, the 90% sports concentration represents a disclosure risk independent of the legal outcome.

Kalshi’s federal preemption defense

Kalshi’s position rests on a single legal premise: that its 2020 registration with the CFTC as a designated contract market means its event contracts are regulated derivatives under the Commodity Exchange Act, subject to exclusive federal oversight.

The company calls the suit “political theater” and argues states cannot simply shut down a federally licensed exchange. The framing is deliberate. Kalshi wants this treated as a jurisdictional question, not a gambling question.

It is the strongest version of their argument, and it carries legal weight. The CFTC itself has backed the position, filing lawsuits against multiple states and claiming exclusive regulatory authority over prediction markets. On the same day New York filed its suit, the CFTC filed an emergency counter-motion in Manhattan federal court less than one hour before the state complaint dropped, attempting to reassert federal jurisdiction preemptively.

The federal regulator has now challenged state enforcement in at least nine states, including filing suit against Arizona, Connecticut, and Illinois in April 2026. The CFTC is not a passive bystander in this dispute. It is an active combatant on Kalshi’s side.

Ken Griffin’s Citadel has bought most of Situational Awareness’ AI stock portfolio at a discount, a move that represents another victory for the billionaire villain of the crypto industry.

Indeed, despite years of criticism about Griffin’s traditional finance tactics, the crypto industry keeps giving him more assets.

From a copy of the US Constitution, payment for order flow, equity in a $40 billion crypto holding company, and a new distressed portfolio of cheap AI stocks, crypto traders are far too willing to further enrich the billionaire CEO.

Margin calls gutted former FTX Future Fund member Leopold Aschenbrenner’s AI hedge fund earlier this week, turning the 25-year-old into a forced seller liquidated under a stack of self-imposed leverage to Griffin’s standing bid.

Griffin, unlike most crypto investors, had plenty of cash amid Aschenbrenner’s distress.

The New York Times reported that Citadel won the overnight auction for Situational Awareness’ AI stocks at a “considerable reduction” to market value.

Crypto has watched this movie before.

Cheap share certificates alongside a cheap US Constitution

When the crypto industry’s people, tokens, or trophies land across the negotiating table from Griffin, more often than not, traders often accept his lowball offer. At the eleventh hour, a little cash is better than nothing at all.

Consider what happened in November 2021 when ConstitutionDAO raised over $40 million of ETH to bid on a physical print of the US Constitution. Over 17,000 donors chipped in at a median of $206 apiece.

Their crowdfunded bid carried a fatal flaw, as Protos noted. Its balance sat on-chain in public view, so rival bidders like Griffin knew precisely where their money to bid would run out.

The DAO also reserved millions for fees and costs that it couldn’t spend on bids.

Griffin won the document at $43.2 million. Sotheby’s irrevocable-bid mechanics trimmed roughly $4.2 million off his final bill. This spring, he bought the only other privately owned first print, cornering the market for the immensely valuable collectible, despite crypto’s attempt to decentralize it.

Thanks for the payment for order flow

Payment for order flow is a predictable profit generator for sophisticated market-makers and quantitative trading companies like Citadel.

Whenever a stock brokerage or similar platform offers commission-free or “$0 fee” trades, they often engage in payment for order flow on the backend.

Citadel Securities has accounted for over 40% of all US payment for order flow in some years, and it’s happy to accept order flow from crypto traders who inefficiently smash buy or sell with “market” orders.

Of course, retail crypto traders also buy stocks and options — the same folks who route even more payment for order flow through Citadel.

On crypto trades, for example, Robinhood discloses that market makers pay it $0.95 per $100 of orders routed. Its SEC filings identify B2C2, Wintermute, and Citadel Securities among the companies paying for order flow.

In today’s fast-paced economy, waiting 30, 60, or even 90 days for invoice payments can strain a company’s cash flow. For small and medium-sized businesses (SMBs), delayed payments often mean delayed growth, missed opportunities, and increased reliance on expensive loans.

Blockchain-powered invoice financing is emerging as a modern solution that transforms unpaid invoices into liquid capital while making the financing process faster, more transparent, and significantly more secure.

What Is Invoice Financing?

Invoice financing allows businesses to borrow money against outstanding invoices instead of waiting for customers to pay.

Here’s a simple example:

• A business issues a $50,000 invoice with 60-day payment terms.
• Instead of waiting two months, it receives up to 90% of the invoice value immediately from a financing provider.
• Once the customer pays the invoice, the remaining balance is released after deducting financing fees.

This gives businesses immediate working capital without selling equity or taking on traditional debt.

The Problems With Traditional Invoice Financing

While invoice financing isn’t new, the traditional system has several inefficiencies.

Slow Verification

Financial institutions spend significant time verifying:

• Invoice authenticity
• Customer creditworthiness
• Business ownership
• Payment history

This manual process often delays funding.

Fraud Risks

Invoice fraud remains one of the industry’s biggest concerns.

Examples include:

• Fake invoices
• Duplicate financing
• Altered payment records
• Identity fraud

Because records are stored across multiple databases, detecting fraud isn’t always easy.

High Costs

Banks and factoring companies charge fees to cover operational costs and credit risk.

Smaller businesses frequently pay higher financing rates simply because they lack extensive credit histories.

How Blockchain Changes Everything

Blockchain introduces a shared, immutable ledger where invoices can be securely recorded and verified.

Instead of relying solely on paperwork, participants share a trusted source of truth.

Key benefits include:

Immutable Records

Once an invoice is recorded on-chain, it cannot be secretly altered.

This creates confidence among:

• Lenders
• Suppliers
• Buyers
• Auditors

Instant Verification

Blockchain enables participants to verify invoice ownership almost immediately.

Smart contracts can automatically confirm:

• Invoice creation
• Payment terms
• Due dates
• Financing status

This dramatically reduces manual paperwork.

Reduced Fraud

Every invoice receives a unique blockchain record.

This helps prevent:

• Double financing
• Duplicate invoices
• Unauthorized modifications

The transparent audit trail makes suspicious activity easier to detect.

Faster Settlement

Smart contracts automate funding.

Once financing conditions are met, payments can be released automatically without multiple intermediaries.

Businesses receive working capital much faster.

The Role of Smart Contracts

Smart contracts are self-executing programs stored on blockchain networks.

Instead of requiring manual approval, they automatically execute financing agreements.

For example:

1. Supplier uploads invoice.
2. Invoice is verified.
3. Investor funds the invoice.
4. Customer pays invoice.
5. Smart contract distributes repayment automatically.

This reduces administrative overhead while minimizing human error.

Tokenizing Invoices

One of blockchain’s most exciting innovations is invoice tokenization.

An invoice can be represented as a digital asset on a blockchain.

This creates several new possibilities:

• Fractional ownership
• Secondary trading
• Global investor participation
• Increased liquidity

Instead of one lender financing an invoice, hundreds of investors could fund portions of it.

This opens invoice financing to decentralized capital markets.

DeFi Meets Invoice Financing

Decentralized Finance (DeFi) extends this concept even further.

Businesses may eventually:

• Tokenize invoices
• Use them as collateral
• Borrow stablecoins instantly
• Repay automatically when invoices settle

Rather than negotiating with a bank, financing could occur through decentralized liquidity pools operating around the clock.

This creates a more accessible financial ecosystem, particularly for underserved markets.

Benefits for Small Businesses

Blockchain-powered invoice financing offers several advantages.

Improved Cash Flow

Businesses gain immediate access to funds needed for:

• Payroll
• Inventory
• Marketing
• Expansion

Lower Costs

Automation reduces operational expenses, potentially lowering financing fees.

Greater Transparency

All financing activity is recorded on a shared ledger, reducing disputes between parties.

Expanded Access

Businesses with limited banking relationships may access financing through blockchain-based marketplaces rather than traditional lenders.

Benefits for Investors

Investors also benefit from blockchain-enabled invoice markets.

Potential advantages include:

• Transparent asset verification
• Automated repayments
• Diversified investment opportunities
• Global access to invoice portfolios

Tokenization may allow investors to purchase small portions of many invoices rather than concentrating risk in a single borrower.

Real-World Use Cases

Several industries stand to benefit significantly.

Manufacturing

Manufacturers often wait months for payment while continuing production.

Invoice financing bridges this gap.

Logistics

Shipping companies can unlock capital tied up in completed deliveries.

Healthcare

Hospitals and clinics frequently experience delayed insurance reimbursements.

Blockchain financing can improve liquidity.

International Trade

Cross-border invoice financing becomes more efficient through shared blockchain records that reduce paperwork and verification delays.

Challenges Ahead

Despite its promise, blockchain-powered invoice financing still faces obstacles.

Regulatory Compliance

Financial regulations differ across countries, requiring platforms to comply with local lending laws.

Digital Identity

Reliable identity verification remains essential to prevent fraud.

Enterprise Adoption

Many businesses continue using legacy accounting systems that require blockchain integration.

Legal Recognition

Some jurisdictions are still developing legal frameworks for tokenized financial assets.

The Future of Invoice Financing

As tokenization, digital identity, stablecoins, and smart contracts mature, invoice financing could become one of blockchain’s most impactful real-world financial applications.

Future platforms may combine:

• AI-powered credit scoring
• Blockchain verification
• Tokenized invoices
• Instant stablecoin settlement
• Global investor marketplaces

The result is a financing ecosystem that is faster, more transparent, and available to businesses regardless of geography.

Conclusion

Blockchain-powered invoice financing reimagines one of business finance’s oldest challenges: waiting to get paid.

By combining immutable records, smart contracts, tokenization, and decentralized liquidity, blockchain has the potential to reduce fraud, accelerate funding, and broaden access to working capital.

For businesses, this means healthier cash flow and greater flexibility. For investors, it unlocks a new class of transparent, income-generating assets. As adoption grows, blockchain may transform invoice financing from a slow, paperwork-heavy process into a seamless digital marketplace that keeps capital moving as quickly as modern commerce demands.

REQUEST AN ARTICLE

Bernstein has maintained its Outperform rating on Robinhood Markets with a $160 price target, saying the company’s crypto business has expanded beyond trading into tokenization and market infrastructure.

Bernstein said in a note to clients that Robinhood’s latest crypto products, including Robinhood Chain, tokenized stocks, Bitstamp and Robinhood Earn, are creating new growth opportunities outside its traditional trading business while supporting its long-term investment case.

Robinhood shares closed at $89.84 on Wednesday, the level Bernstein used in calculating about 78% upside to its unchanged $160 target. The stock later fell 3.6% to close at $86.60 on Thursday, implying roughly 85% upside based on the firm’s target price.

Robinhood Chain and tokenized stocks expand crypto business

Among the products highlighted in the report, Bernstein pointed to Robinhood Chain as one of the company’s largest crypto initiatives since entering tokenization. According to the brokerage, the blockchain has processed more than $12 billion in decentralized exchange volume and completed over 150 million transactions since launch.

The report also said Robinhood Earn has accumulated more than $200 million in customer deposits. Meanwhile, tokenized U.S. stocks are now available through Robinhood Wallet in more than 120 countries, extending the company’s reach beyond its core brokerage platform.

Bernstein said the latest developments continue a strategy Robinhood has been building throughout the year. In June, the firm argued that prediction markets had become one of Robinhood’s fastest-growing businesses during the FIFA World Cup, projecting the segment could generate $586 million in revenue in 2026 compared with an estimated $150 million in 2025.

At the time, Bernstein estimated prediction markets could account for about 17% of Robinhood’s transaction-based revenue and around 10% of total company revenue next year, supported by higher customer activity during major sporting events.

Rothera continues to scale prediction markets

Attention in the latest report also turned to Rothera, Robinhood’s exchange, which Bernstein said has continued expanding since going live in June.

According to the analysts, Rothera has processed more than 3.5 billion contracts so far, including 2.1 billion during the second quarter alone. The exchange generated $17 million in second-quarter revenue and has become the third-largest prediction market exchange in the United States, Bernstein said.

The research note said Robinhood expects more prediction-market activity to migrate onto Rothera over time while continuing to distribute event contracts from third-party exchanges. Bernstein added that management also sees the exchange as a potential business-to-business platform for other Futures Commission Merchants in the future.

The brokerage has previously argued that controlling more of the trading stack allows consumer platforms to retain a larger share of transaction economics. In a June research report, Bernstein said companies across crypto, brokerages and sports betting are increasingly combining brokerage, exchange and clearing functions instead of depending on outside providers.

Robinhood’s ownership of Rothera was presented as one example of that trend, alongside similar moves by Coinbase and DraftKings to build or acquire more of their own trading infrastructure.

Bernstein sees infrastructure becoming a competitive advantage

Beyond trading volumes, Bernstein said Robinhood’s strategy increasingly resembles a financial infrastructure business rather than a brokerage focused only on crypto transactions.

The analysts grouped Robinhood Chain, Bitstamp, Robinhood Earn and tokenized stocks as complementary products that could diversify revenue over time. The report follows Bernstein’s earlier research on Coinbase, where the firm argued the exchange was also expanding beyond crypto trading through tokenized equities, prediction markets, blockchain infrastructure and artificial intelligence tools.

While the companies are pursuing different strategies, Bernstein has consistently argued that digital asset platforms are competing to become broader financial marketplaces by adding infrastructure, custody, tokenization and regulated market products alongside traditional crypto services.

According to the analysts, ownership of exchange infrastructure may become increasingly valuable as companies seek to keep more execution and clearing revenue within their own platforms instead of relying on external providers.

Regulatory uncertainty remains part of the investment case

Despite maintaining its positive outlook, Bernstein outlined several risks that could affect Robinhood’s business.

The brokerage said changes affecting payment for order flow remain an important consideration because the model continues to contribute meaningfully to Robinhood’s brokerage operations.

Bernstein also noted that U.S. regulation surrounding digital assets continues to evolve. The analysts said the Securities and Exchange Commission has historically taken a strict approach toward crypto trading platforms, while uncertainty over whether certain digital assets should be classified as securities has yet to be fully resolved.

The report added that the digital asset industry remains in an early stage of development, meaning future regulatory decisions could influence the pace at which companies introduce new crypto products and expand tokenization services.

Even with those risks, Bernstein maintained that Robinhood’s expanding infrastructure business and growing portfolio of tokenized financial products continue to support its Outperform rating and unchanged $160 price target.

That didn’t happen, and probably catalyzed the closure of those bets during Friday’s 08:00 UTC expiry, which settled BTC and ether (ETH) options worth $10 billion. Notional open interest on the $70,000 call has fallen to $943 million, and on the $72,000 call to $888 million. While still significant, those levels are well below the $60,000 put.

Another interesting data point comes from seasonality. Since 2013, July has produced a median return of 8.61%. The price has risen by 8.9% this month, according to CoinDesk data. So far, so unexciting. But a positive July is usually followed by a negative August, producing a median return of -7.51%.

Median is useful here because it shows the typical outcome without being skewed by unusually large gains or losses that can distort the average. In markets like bitcoin, where a few extreme months can pull the mean up or down, the median often gives a cleaner read on what has happened most often.

That means the mood is bearish for BTC as we head into August. Stay alert!

Read more: For analysis of today’s activity in altcoins and derivatives, see Crypto Markets Today . For a comprehensive list of events this week, see CoinDesk’s “Crypto Week Ahead.”

New York has sued prediction market platform Kalshi, alleging it operates an illegal, unlicensed gambling business by offering event contracts on sports, elections and other outcomes.

The lawsuit seeks to stop Kalshi’s alleged illegal gambling operation in the state, require the company to forfeit illegal gains, pay restitution to users and pay civil penalties equal to three times those gains.

“No matter what they call themselves, prediction markets like Kalshi are gambling platforms, plain and simple,” Attorney General Letitia James said in Friday’s statement. “We are taking them to court to uphold our laws and protect New Yorkers.”

The lawsuit comes after the New York State Gaming Commission issued Kalshi a cease-and-desist order in October 2025, prompting the company to sue the regulator in federal court. 

A judge denied Kalshi’s request for a preliminary injunction in July, and an appeals court later rejected its bid to block enforcement while the appeal proceeds.

Kalshi did not immediately respond to Cointelegraph’s request for comment.

CFTC defends federal oversight of prediction markets

The lawsuit adds to an escalating jurisdictional dispute over whether event contracts offered by federally regulated prediction markets are subject to state gambling laws.

Just before New York filed its case, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) filed an emergency motion seeking to block New York’s enforcement efforts, arguing that the state’s actions interfere with the agency’s exclusive authority under the Commodity Exchange Act to regulate designated contract markets like Kalshi.

Related: CFTC issues second warning to prediction markets on cookie-cutter self-certifications

The CFTC has taken similar positions in disputes involving at least nine states, arguing that allowing states to prohibit event contracts listed by federally regulated exchanges would create conflicting state rules and undermine federal commodities regulation.

Prediction markets continue to gain mainstream traction

Prediction markets allow users to buy and sell contracts tied to the outcome of future events, with prices reflecting the market’s estimate of the probability that an event will occur.

Kalshi’s rival, Polymarket, has also faced regulatory scrutiny, with several countries restricting or investigating its operations over gambling and licensing concerns.

Kalshi began expanding into blockchain-based infrastructure in December 2025, launching tokenized prediction markets on Solana and later adding support for multiple blockchain networks.

The broader prediction market sector has also grown alongside major sporting events.

According to analytics firm Chainalysis, blockchain-based prediction markets processed about $20 billion in trading tied to the 2026 FIFA World Cup, with more than 400,000 wallets participating.

Magazine: The 100x obsession: Fundamentals grow in importance as crypto matures

The crypto market is closing out July on the back foot, with bitcoin BTC$63,893.92 falling 1.31% since midnight UTC to $63,870 and ether (ETH) dropping 1.40% to $1,890 after struggling to regain the $2,000 level it touched earlier this month.

The performance is diverging from equities, with South Korea’s Kospi surging by more than 15%. Nasdaq 100 and S&P 500 index futures are also in the green.

The conflict in the Middle East and hawkish comments from the Federal Reserve committee have dented crypto’s recovery hopes this week. The CoinDesk 20 Index has dropped 2.34% since midnight Monday, though with a gain of 8.7% since June, it’s still positive for the first month in three and by the most in a year.

Derivatives positioning

• Taker long-short futures volume ratio: As the market wilts, the taker long-short futures market volume ratio continues to lean bearish, suggesting a downside bias. A taker is a market participant who executes an order immediately against an existing order in the book.
• XRP futures open interest rises: XRP’s futures open interest (OI) rose further, extending the three-week upswing to 2.27 billion tokens, the most since late June. The token’s price has declined to $1.07 from $1.13 during the period. A combination of a drop in price alongside a rise in OI is said to confirm the downtrend, a sign traders are shorting the market in anticipation of a deeper price drop.
• BTC in stasis: BTC’s OI remains static at around 750K, as it has all month. That’s a sign traders are unwilling to deploy capital in leveraged products despite signs of stability in the market. It’s no surprise that BTC’s early month bounce from under $58K has stalled in the $62K to $65K range. It’s the same story for ether and Solana.
• UNI’s OI growth: Uniswap’s UNI token is the OI growth leader for the third straight day, rising to 75.80 million UNI, a level last seen Feb. 14. This is a clear sign of investors willing to take on risk in tokens backed by positive newsflow. Recently, BlackRock decided to debut its tokenized Treasury fund on Uniswap.
• Negative cumulative volume delta: Most major tokens, including UNI, have negative 24-hour OI-adjusted cumulative volume delta, a feature consistently observed during sharp downtrends over the past year. A negative CVD means traders are shorting more at market orders than passive limit orders. In other words, bears are being more aggressive.
• Bitcoin implied volatility: Bitcoin’s BVIV, the 30-day implied volatility index, fell to 37%, the lowest since May. These levels have served as floors in recent years, bringing about a bounce in the so-called fear index. Since ETFs debuted in 2024, the BTC price correlation with the BVIV has been negative, meaning any bounce in the BVIV could be accompanied by a fresh decline in the spot price.
• Options open interest: On Deribit, bitcoin and ether options worth $10 billion expired early today. Now the distribution of open interest in remaining expiries that extend all the way to June 2027 shows a $60,000 put as the most popular bet. A put represents a bearish bet on the market.

Token talk

• Uniswap (UNI) was Friday’s standout performing altcoin, rising by 9.30% over 24 hours to $4.41 as it sustains momentum from its Robinhood layer-2 integration announced earlier this month.
• Ethena (ENA) extended its recovery, rising 1.23% since midnight UTC and 4.31% over 24 hours to $0.082, with the token now up significantly from its July lows. Keep in mind it’s still more than 90% below its all-time high.
• Lighter (LIT) fell a further 2.28% as the correction from its July peak deepened, with the token now 20% below the highs it set earlier this month after its 200% rally between May and early July.
• Zcash (ZEC) gave back 2.15% to $459 after a strong run earlier in the week, with the privacy coin sector losing ground on Friday.
• ADA$0.1702 added 0.94% since midnight and 4.09% over 24 hours, quietly extending a recovery that has seen it claw back after June’s 45% plunge.