Crypto World
Bitcoin crash fails to scare institutions, Coinbase strategist says
Bitcoin’s fall toward $60,000 has not caused a broad retreat among large investors, according to Coinbase Institutional strategy head John D’Agostino.
Summary
- Family offices and sovereign funds are buying Bitcoin at lower prices instead of reducing exposure.
- D’Agostino says major institutional holders do not appear dangerously leveraged or close to forced liquidation.
- Strategy added 1,550 Bitcoin while ETF exposure remained near $100 billion despite the market decline.
He said family offices, governments, and sovereign wealth funds continue treating lower prices as an entry point.
According to crypto.news market data, Bitcoin traded near $63,200 on June 9 after falling roughly 50% from its October 2025 record above $126,000. The sharp decline has weakened market sentiment, but D’Agostino said institutional demand has remained more stable than the price action suggests.
Coinbase sees institutional Bitcoin demand holding firm
“They loved it at $125,000, they liked it at $100,000, and they love it even more at $65,000,” D’Agostino said during a CNBC interview. He described the buyers as long-term allocators that completed extensive reviews before entering the asset class.
Such investors often build positions over longer periods instead of reacting to each daily move. D’Agostino said the latest decline has allowed some institutions to acquire Bitcoin at levels they had already considered attractive during the earlier rally.
In addition, D’Agostino pointed to about $100 billion held through spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds. He said retail interest linked to those products had declined by about 15%, even though Bitcoin had lost close to half its peak value.
Bernstein analysts also described the downturn as a quieter market cycle rather than a collapse in Bitcoin’s store-of-value case. As previously reported by crypto.news, spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $2.6 billion in net outflows during 2026, while corporate treasury purchases helped keep combined institutional demand positive.
Separately, as previously reported, spot Bitcoin ETFs had recorded 13 consecutive outflow days by June 5, the longest streak since their launch. Withdrawals were uneven across funds and did not amount to a full institutional exit. Bitcoin later recovered above $63,000, but remained more than 10% lower over seven days as of June 9.
Strategy purchase counters forced-selling concerns
Strategy added 1,550 Bitcoin for $101.3 million between June 1 and June 7, as previously reported. The company paid an average of $65,332 per coin and raised its total holdings to 845,256 Bitcoin.
The purchase followed Strategy’s sale of 32 Bitcoin in late May. The company also increased its dollar reserve to $1 billion. Its filing showed an average acquisition cost of $75,680 across its total Bitcoin position.
D’Agostino said he was unaware of any major institutional holder that was “horrifically overlevered” or nearing liquidation. He added that larger companies can often raise new capital to support their positions, although continued access to funding depends on market conditions.
The comments do not remove the risks facing Bitcoin. ETF outflows, weaker retail activity, and further price declines could still test institutional demand.
However, current purchases and retained ETF exposure show that large investors have not responded to the downturn with widespread selling.
A contract that pays one dollar if something happens and nothing if it does not is the simplest instrument in finance and the most legally contested. Here is how event contracts work, where the price comes from, who is allowed to list them, and why regulators still cannot agree whether they are derivatives or bets.
Summary
- An event contract is a binary derivative that settles at $1 if a stated outcome occurs and $0 if it does not, so its price between one cent and ninety-nine cents reads directly as the market’s implied probability.
- The buyer never owns an underlying asset: the contract references a real-world outcome, an election result, a rate decision, a match, a data release, and settles in cash against a named resolution source.
- Maximum loss is the purchase price, which makes the risk profile closer to a bought option than to a leveraged futures position, with no margin call and no liquidation.
- In the United States they trade on exchanges licensed by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission as designated contract markets, including Kalshi, Polymarket’s domestic venue, Crypto.com’s derivatives arm, ForecastEx, and Robinhood-affiliated Rothera.
- The unresolved question is categorical: federal derivatives law treats them as contracts, a dozen state gaming regulators treat them as wagers, and a bipartisan bill would ban the sports versions outright.
The instrument at the center of the fastest-growing market in American finance can be described in one sentence: a contract that pays one dollar if a stated thing happens and nothing if it does not. That simplicity is the reason event contracts spread from an academic curiosity to tens of billions of dollars in monthly volume, and it is also the reason they have generated more legal argument per dollar traded than any product in modern derivatives. A yes-or-no claim on a future outcome is, depending on which statute you read, a binary option, a futures contract, an information instrument, or a bet. This guide explains the mechanics from the ground up: what the contract is, where its price comes from and what that price means, how the venues are licensed, what the legal fight is actually about, and what a careful participant checks before putting money into one.
The instrument, precisely
Start with the payout structure, because every other property follows from it.
An event contract has two possible settlement values: $1 if the specified outcome occurs, $0 if it does not. Because the payoffs are fixed, the only variable is the price you pay to acquire the claim, which trades between one cent and ninety-nine cents. Buy a Yes contract at 60 cents and you risk 60 cents to make 40, an implied 40-cent profit on a 60-cent stake if you are right. Buy a No contract on the same market and the two prices sum to roughly a dollar, since one of the two must be true, and the small gap between them is the spread the venue and its market makers earn.
Three consequences of that structure matter more than any strategy discussion. First, maximum loss is the amount paid, always. There is no margin call, no liquidation price, no possibility of owing more than you staked, which distinguishes event contracts sharply from the perpetual futures that dominate crypto derivatives and gives them a risk profile closer to buying an option. Second, no underlying asset is ever owned or delivered. The contract references an outcome, and settlement is cash, which is why participants can hold a position on a Federal Reserve decision without touching a bond, or on an election without owning anything at all. Third, the outcome must be defined precisely enough to be adjudicated, which is why every serious contract specifies its resolution source in the rules, the official release, the certified result, the named data provider, and why a market can appear obviously settled in the world while remaining unresolved on the venue.
That third property is where most surprises live. The contract does not pay on what happened; it pays on what the named source says happened, according to the criteria written before trading began. Reading the resolution language is the single most valuable habit a new participant can build.
Where the price comes from
Event contract markets are order books, not bookmakers, and the distinction changes what the price means.
A sportsbook sets odds and takes the other side, earning a margin built into the line. An event contract exchange matches buyers with sellers, charging a fee, and takes no position: for every Yes contract someone holds, someone else holds the corresponding No. Price therefore emerges from participants disagreeing with each other at the margin, which is the mechanism that gives these markets their information reputation. When a contract on a Fed rate cut trades at 72 cents, it means the marginal dollar of capital in that market is willing to pay 72 cents for a claim worth a dollar if the cut happens, which is a probability estimate backed by money instead of opinion.
Liquidity comes from a mix of retail participants, professional market makers quoting both sides, and increasingly institutional flow. Deeper books produce tighter spreads and more reliable prices; thin books produce the opposite, which is why the same nominal price carries very different information content on a heavily traded macroeconomic market than on an obscure cultural one. Volume concentrates: political and macroeconomic contracts have accounted for a majority of trading on the largest regulated venue, and those are the markets where the price-as-probability reading is most defensible.
The reading is defensible, though, and not exact. Academic work on hundreds of thousands of settled contracts finds prediction market prices well calibrated overall while showing systematic distortions at the extremes, together with effects from fees, capital lock-up, and thin liquidity. Those distortions deserve their own treatment, and this publication covers them separately; for the purposes of this guide, the practical summary is that a price of 72 cents is a good estimate of a 72% chance and a bad substitute for one. That is what the price actually means.
Hedging, speculating, and the third use
Participants come to these markets for three distinct reasons, and the legal argument turns partly on which one dominates.
Hedging is the use that justifies the instrument in derivatives law. A farmer hedges weather, an importer hedges a tariff decision, a business exposed to a regulatory outcome buys the contract that pays if the unfavorable result lands. This is the classic economic purpose of any derivative: transferring a risk from a party who does not want it to one willing to price it, and event contracts extend it to categories no traditional futures market covers, since there has never been a way to hedge an election or a rate decision as directly.
Speculation is the use that dominates volume, as it does in every derivatives market ever created, and it is not a defect: speculators supply the liquidity that makes hedging possible. The distinguishing question, which the legal fight keeps returning to, is whether speculation in outcomes that participants have no economic exposure to is meaningfully different from wagering, and there is no settled answer.
The third use is the one the industry markets hardest: information. Prices aggregate dispersed knowledge into a continuously updated public number, and institutions increasingly consume that number as data, with exchange operators building distribution products around it. That informational role is what separates the strongest case for these markets from the gambling comparison, and it is why the sector’s largest investors have been buying data rights, not only trading fees.
Where they trade, and under whose license
In the United States, event contracts are federally regulated derivatives, and the venue matters as much as the contract.
Trading happens on designated contract markets, exchanges licensed by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission under the Commodity Exchange Act, which must clear their contracts through a registered clearinghouse. That is the license that lists them. Kalshi became the first purpose-built prediction market to hold that license in 2021. Polymarket, historically an offshore blockchain venue, acquired a licensed exchange to operate domestically. Crypto.com’s derivatives arm, Interactive Brokers’ ForecastEx, Gemini’s newly certified entity, and Rothera, the exchange affiliated with Robinhood and Susquehanna, all operate on the same regulatory footing. Outside the United States, blockchain-based venues settle in stablecoins with outcomes determined by decentralized oracle processes, a materially different resolution architecture that this publication covers separately.
The license is what separates an event contract from an offshore bet in legal terms, and it carries real consequences for participants: segregated customer funds, clearinghouse guarantees, exchange surveillance obligations, and a federal regulator with examination authority. It does not, however, settle the categorical question, which is the subject of the next section and of an unusual amount of current litigation.
The unsettled question: derivative or wager
Every element described so far is technically uncontroversial. What remains contested is what these instruments are, and the disagreement runs along the federal-state seam of American law.
Federal derivatives law treats event contracts as products a licensed exchange may list, subject to a special provision added by the Dodd-Frank Act that lets the CFTC prohibit contracts involving certain enumerated activities, including gaming and activity unlawful under state law, when they are contrary to the public interest. The Commission has used that authority against political contracts before, and it proposed a rulemaking this June to define the terms more clearly, a process this publication tracks in its coverage of contract listing procedures. That is how a market appears in days. Meanwhile a dozen-plus state gaming regulators argue that sports event contracts are wagers requiring state licenses regardless of federal registration, producing cease-and-desist orders and litigation across multiple jurisdictions. And in Congress, a bipartisan bill would ban CFTC-regulated exchanges from listing sports contracts outright, alongside separate legislation targeting contracts where a participant can influence or foreknow the outcome.
The honest framing for a reader is that the instrument’s mechanics are settled and its legal category is not. That uncertainty is not academic: it determines which contracts exist, which states residents can trade from, and whether the sports markets that generate the majority of retail volume survive the next Congress. Anyone participating should treat product availability as subject to change on a timescale of months.
The family tree
Event contracts are often described as a brand-new instrument, and understanding what they are related to clarifies both their appeal and the regulatory suspicion around them.
Their closest financial relative is the binary option, a derivative paying a fixed amount if a condition is met and nothing otherwise. That lineage carries baggage: offshore binary option platforms became one of the most prolific consumer fraud categories of the 2010s, marketed as simple trading and operating in many cases as unlicensed bucket shops with manipulated pricing, prompting bans on retail binary options in several jurisdictions and years of enforcement. The structural resemblance is real, and it is one reason regulators approach yes-or-no products with a caution that their simplicity does not obviously warrant. The material difference is venue: a contract listed on a licensed exchange, matched against other participants, cleared through a registered clearinghouse and surveilled under statutory core principles is a fundamentally different arrangement from an offshore platform quoting its own prices against its own customers. The instrument is similar; the market structure is not.
Their closest structural relative in traditional markets is the futures contract, which is why they sit under derivatives law at all. A futures contract obliges settlement against a reference price at a future date; an event contract settles against a reference outcome. Both transfer risk, both are standardized and exchange-traded, both clear centrally. The difference is that a futures contract’s underlying is usually something a participant can own, which supports the classic hedging story, while an event contract’s underlying is a fact about the world, which is why the hedging story requires more explanation and why the gaming comparison has traction.
And their closest relative outside finance is the parimutuel pool used in racing and lotteries, where all wagers form a pot and payouts derive from the distribution of bets. The distinction is important and often missed: parimutuel odds are determined entirely by how money is distributed among outcomes, so they measure sentiment among participants. Event contract prices are set by continuous two-sided trading against a fixed payout, which means arbitrage and informed capital can push the price toward an accurate estimate, and it is the reason these markets have a forecasting record that a betting pool does not. When the industry defends itself as information infrastructure, this is the distinction it is invoking, and it is a legitimate one.
The family tree explains the regulatory posture better than any argument about intent. Event contracts inherit the fraud history of binary options, the legal framework of futures, and the public perception of betting pools, and the sector’s entire legal project is to be treated as the second while shaking off the first and third.
What to check before trading one
Five things, in order of how often they cause avoidable losses.The resolution criteria. Read the rules, not the headline. The contract pays on what the named source reports under the stated criteria, and ambiguity in the wording is the raw material of every settlement dispute. That is how contracts finally settle, especially on blockchain-based markets with oracle processes.
The liquidity. Check the spread and the depth, not just the last price. A two-cent spread on a busy macroeconomic market is a different instrument from a fifteen-cent spread on a thin cultural one, and the wider the spread the more of your expected value the round trip consumes.
The fees. Venue fee structures differ, and on a contract priced in cents, fees are a large percentage of the potential return. Maker and taker treatment differs too, and the difference is measurable in the academic return data.
The capital lock-up. Money in a contract that settles in six months is money unavailable elsewhere for six months, with no interest. That opportunity cost is real and systematically ignored, and it is one reason long-dated contracts trade below their apparent fair probability.
The venue’s legal footing. Licensed domestic exchange, offshore book, or something in between changes your protections completely, and in a category under active legislative threat, it also changes the odds that your market still exists next quarter. This is the legal fight over the category.
One further practical note on position sizing, since the instrument’s simplicity invites a specific error. Because maximum loss equals the price paid, event contracts feel safer than leveraged products, and in one narrow sense they are: nothing can liquidate you. But the fixed-payout structure hides a different risk profile, which is that the loss rate is high by design. A strategy of buying contracts at 20 cents will, if the market is well calibrated, lose the entire stake four times out of five, and the profitable fifth outcome has to cover all of it. That distribution is psychologically punishing in a way a slowly bleeding leveraged position is not, and it is the reason experienced participants size these positions as a portfolio of small independent bets, never as conviction trades. The comparison worth holding is to buying options rather than to buying stock: defined risk, high probability of total loss on any single position, and profitability that depends entirely on the pricing being wrong in your favor often enough to pay for the losses. Anyone approaching event contracts with the mental model of a savings account with a yes-or-no switch has misunderstood the instrument in a way the interface will not correct for them.
Frequently asked questions
What is an event contract in simple terms?
A binary derivative that pays $1 if a specified real-world outcome occurs and $0 if it does not. It trades between one and ninety-nine cents, so a price of 65 cents implies the market sees roughly a 65% chance of the event. The buyer never owns any underlying asset, settlement is in cash, and the maximum loss is the price paid.
How is an event contract different from a bet with a bookmaker?
Structurally, in who takes the other side. A bookmaker sets odds and is your counterparty, earning a margin built into the line. An event contract exchange matches you with another participant and charges a fee, holding no position itself, so the price is set by traders disagreeing rather than by a house. In the United States, these venues are also federally licensed derivatives exchanges with clearinghouses and segregated customer funds.
Does the price really mean the probability?
Approximately, and with known distortions. Studies of hundreds of thousands of settled contracts find prices well calibrated overall, while showing systematic bias at the extremes, cheap contracts winning less often than their prices imply, plus effects from fees, thin liquidity, and the cost of capital locked until settlement. A price is a good estimate of probability and a poor substitute for one.
Can I lose more than I put in?
No. Because settlement values are fixed at $1 and $0, the maximum loss is the purchase price of the contract. There is no margin call and no liquidation mechanism, which makes the risk profile closer to buying an option than to trading leveraged futures, and it is one of the instrument’s genuine advantages for inexperienced participants.
Where can event contracts be traded legally in the US?
On CFTC-licensed designated contract markets that clear through registered clearinghouses. Kalshi holds the longest-standing prediction-market license, and other venues include Polymarket’s domestic exchange, Crypto.com’s derivatives arm, Interactive Brokers’ ForecastEx, a newly certified Gemini entity, and Rothera, the exchange affiliated with Robinhood and Susquehanna. Availability of specific contract types varies by venue and by state.
Why are sports event contracts controversial?
Because they sit exactly on the federal-state seam. Federal law permits licensed exchanges to list them subject to a public-interest review provision, while a dozen or more state gaming regulators argue they are wagers requiring state licensing, producing orders and litigation. A bipartisan bill in Congress would ban sports contracts on CFTC-regulated venues outright, and sports generates a large share of the category’s retail volume.
What are event contracts actually used for?
Three purposes. Hedging real exposure to outcomes no traditional futures market covers, such as a regulatory decision or an election result. Speculation, which supplies most volume and most liquidity. And information, since aggregated prices function as continuously updated public probability estimates, a product exchange operators are now packaging and distributing to institutional clients.
What is the most common mistake new participants make?
Trading the headline rather than the rules. Contracts resolve according to a named source and pre-written criteria, so a market can look obviously decided in the real world while resolving differently, or slowly, on the venue. Reading resolution language, checking spreads before sizing, and accounting for fees on cent-denominated contracts prevent most avoidable losses. This is educational information, not investment advice.
Disclaimer: This article is for information and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or legal advice. Event contracts carry risk of total loss of the amount invested, product availability varies by venue and jurisdiction, and the legal treatment of these instruments is subject to active litigation and pending legislation. Always do your own research. Information is accurate as of July 27, 2026.
A mobile spyware campaign known as SparkKitty has returned to attention after reports warned that infected iOS and Android apps can expose crypto wallet recovery phrases stored in phone galleries.
Summary
- SparkKitty steals gallery images, seeking wallet seed phrases, passwords and other sensitive information stored digitally.
- Malicious iOS and Android apps reached official stores, while sideloaded versions expanded the campaign further.
- Researchers advise offline seed storage, limited photo permissions and immediate wallet migration after suspected exposure.
The malware gains photo access, collects images and sends them to attacker-controlled servers.
However, this is not a newly discovered July 2026 threat. Kaspersky published a technical report on June 23, 2025, after finding SparkKitty in Apple’s App Store, Google Play and unofficial channels. A recent Cyberint article has renewed attention around the same malware family.
SparkKitty campaign dates back to 2024
Kaspersky linked SparkKitty to SparkCat, an earlier mobile stealer that used optical character recognition to search screenshots for wallet seed phrases. SparkKitty used related delivery methods, but many samples uploaded gallery images rather than selecting only files containing recovery words.
Researchers also found a related cluster that used OCR to choose particular images. The malware may therefore expose passwords, identity documents and QR codes. Kaspersky said it “believe[s]” the main goal involved crypto assets, while noting that some samples lacked direct proof.
The campaign had operated since at least February 2024 and mainly targeted Southeast Asia and China. As crypto.news reported in June 2025, it spread through fake crypto tools, modified social apps, gambling products and other applications.
In April 2026, Kaspersky reported a new SparkCat variant in two App Store apps and one Google Play app. That finding showed continued use of OCR-based gallery theft, but it did not confirm that SparkKitty itself had returned.
Malware uses photo permissions to steal data
On iOS, researchers found malicious code inside modified frameworks that imitated common development libraries, including AFNetworking and Alamofire. Other versions hid the payload in an obfuscated file named libswiftDarwin.dylib or placed it directly inside an application.
After launch, the malware contacted remote infrastructure and requested access to the photo gallery. Once a user approved the request, it monitored photos and uploaded files that it had not previously sent. It could also collect newly added images.
On Android, SparkKitty appeared in Java and Kotlin versions. Some samples operated as Xposed modules on rooted devices. They contacted command servers and transferred images with information about the infected device and application.
This approach differs from malware that records keystrokes or replaces copied wallet addresses. As crypto.news reported in June 2026, Microsoft tracked separate clipper malware that watched the clipboard, stole wallet credentials and supported backdoor commands.
Infected apps reached official stores
Kaspersky found an Android messaging app with crypto exchange functions on Google Play. The app, named SOEX, recorded more than 10,000 installations before Google removed it after receiving the researcher’s report.
The team also found an iOS crypto app called 币coin in Apple’s App Store. Kaspersky alerted Apple and updated its report on June 25, 2025, to say that Apple had removed the app. Researchers did not determine whether developers knowingly added the malware.
Other versions spread through fake websites, modified TikTok apps, gambling products and directly installed Android packages. Some iPhone campaigns abused enterprise provisioning tools, which let organisations distribute internal apps outside the public App Store.
The latest reporting does not establish that the named applications returned to official stores in July 2026. It also provides no confirmed victim count or total crypto losses. The original listings were removed, while sideloaded copies may still circulate.
Offline seed storage remains the main defence
A seed phrase usually contains 12 or 24 words that can restore every private key linked to a self-custody wallet. Anyone who obtains those words can recreate the wallet and transfer its assets. Changing an app password cannot secure an exposed recovery phrase.
Users should not keep seed phrases in screenshots, cloud albums, email drafts or notes apps. The crypto.news 2026 wallet guide recommends writing the phrase on paper or recording it on metal, then storing it offline securely.
Users should review photo permissions and remove access from apps that do not need it. They should avoid unofficial stores, modified apps and unknown download links. An official listing lowers some risks but does not remove the need to check the developer and requested permissions.
Anyone who believes SparkKitty exposed a seed phrase should create a new wallet on a clean device and move remaining assets immediately. The user should then remove the suspected app, update the device and rotate credentials stored in gallery images.
Current reports have renewed the warning around SparkKitty, but the public technical record traces the campaign to Kaspersky’s 2025 disclosure rather than a new July 2026 discovery.
Tom Lee, Fundstrat Global Advisors’ head of research, calls the market’s AI capex fear a bullish sign. He does not read it as a warning of an approaching top.
Steve Eisman, known for shorting the 2008 housing bubble, warned this week that markets could fall sharply. He said the risk comes if hyperscalers cut artificial intelligence (AI) spending. Lee, however, sees that outcome as unlikely soon.
Widespread Doubt Isn’t a Top Signal, Lee Argues
Lee flips the usual market logic. He argues that widespread skepticism about the AI trade shows the cycle still has room to run. Investors rarely question a story’s durability right before it peaks, in his view.
“The fact that many people are saying that is a sign that we’re not at a top because people are questioning the longevity of the cycle … I think that’s actually a bullish thing.”
Tom Lee, CNBC
That view directly counters Eisman’s capex warning, which centers on Nvidia’s exposure to hyperscaler spending. In contrast, Eisman put the risk in blunt terms on CNBC.
“I think the market will go straight down. At the end of the day, it all boils down to, in a sense, Nvidia.”
Steve Eisman, CNBC
The Fed Meets as the AI Trade Faces Its Test
Lee spoke a day before the Federal Reserve’s two-day July meeting begins. Traders currently price roughly a one-in-three chance of a hike, up from 16% a week earlier.
Lee expects the Fed to lean on quantitative tightening instead. He therefore sees a balance sheet shrink as a way to pressure growth without deliberately slowing the economy.
Lee also draws a historical parallel. He compared today’s AI durability doubts to the late 1990s, when investors repeatedly questioned Cisco and other internet stocks. That skepticism, historically, preceded further gains rather than a collapse.
The Fed’s rate decision this week will test Lee’s read. So will the next round of hyperscaler earnings, part of the broader AI spending arms race Wall Street is tracking. For now, Lee is betting that doubt, not conviction, keeps the AI trade alive.
The post Tom Lee Says the AI Capex Fear Is Actually the Bullish Tell appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Arthur Hayes bought 3,298 more Ether (ETH) worth $6.39 million hours before Ethereum’s spot price slid from $1,960 to $1,872.
The purchase extends a buying streak that began July 15. Hayes has now spent $13.87 million on 7,213 ETH at an average price of $1,923, leaving him roughly $368,000 underwater.
A Buying Streak Built in Pieces
Hayes assembled the position through a string of over-the-counter trades. Onchain trackers flagged transfers to Galaxy Digital, FalconX, and Cumberland since mid-July. Single purchases ranged from roughly 645 ETH to about 1,330 ETH.
The accumulation followed a reversal. Hayes closed his ETH position in late June at a loss of about $606,000. He then started rebuying on July 15, as Ether recovered above $1,750.
Hayes’ rebuilding lines up with a broader institutional case for Ether. Fundstrat’s Tom Lee has made a similar argument, saying institutions are moving past simply trading Ethereum toward building on it. His Ethereum bull case points to BlackRock’s tokenized fund and Robinhood’s ETH-based fee token.
Ether Slides With the Broader Market
Ether’s drop came as broader crypto markets pulled back Tuesday. The Federal Reserve’s two-day policy meeting concludes this week, and traders are watching for signals on interest rates.
Whether this marks a bottom or another early entry is unclear. That depends on whether Ether can reclaim the $1,900 level it lost in the selloff.
A Track Record of Bold Reversals
The Bitmex co-founder built his reputation on bold trades. He often exits a position just as fast as he enters it.
Hayes has talked up tokens like Hyperliquid’s HYPE, Zcash, and Worldcoin in the past. He then quietly closed those positions once sentiment turned.
Hayes and his Bitmex co-founders pleaded guilty in 2022 to Bank Secrecy Act violations tied to the exchange’s anti-money-laundering failures. President Trump pardoned all three in March 2025, wiping out the convictions.
The post Arthur Hayes Buys $6.39M More Ethereum, Then the ETH Market Starts to Tumble appeared first on BeInCrypto.
The KOSPI plunged 8.10% to 6,208.34 on Tuesday morning, deepening a global semiconductor rout.
SK Hynix sank 11.01%, and Samsung Electronics dropped 9.45%, a day before the memory giant reports quarterly earnings.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
Chip Selloff Spreads From Wall Street to Seoul
The Korea Exchange triggered a sell-side sidecar after the open, its 22nd this year. A similar mechanism tripped on the Kosdaq shortly afterward. The index was down 6.6% at press time.
Japan followed Seoul lower. Kioxia cratered 16.5%, Tokyo Electron dropped over 9%, and Advantest slid 8%.
SoftBank Group, an AI proxy through its Arm stake, fell nearly 5%. Overall, the Nikkei 225 lost 3.90%, while the Topix shed 2.49%.
The rout extends Monday’s weakness in US chip stocks, where the VanEck Semiconductor ETF lost over 2%, according to CNBC. AMD and Teradyne led declines, falling 5% and 4% respectively.
Investors remain skeptical about tech giants’ heavy AI spending. The selloff comes days after SK Hynix and Samsung announced $950 billion AI deals.
Earnings Gauntlet Meets Crypto Spillover
The timing raises the stakes. SK Hynix reports on Wednesday, July 29, its first earnings since a record Nasdaq debut. Microsoft, Meta, and a Fed rate decision land the same day. Apple and Amazon close Big Tech’s earnings week on Thursday.
The pressure has spilled into crypto markets. Bitcoin (BTC) traded near $63,199, down 2.9% over 24 hours. Meanwhile, US futures pointed to further weakness, with S&P 500, Nasdaq 100, and Dow futures down 0.1%, 0.42%, and 0.04%, respectively.
Whether Wednesday’s results from SK Hynix restore confidence or confirm the doubts driving the unwind may set the tone for the week.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights
The post KOSPI Crashes 8% as AI Chip Selloff Slams Asian Markets appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Binance says it has been running simulated phishing attacks on its own staff every month for the past four years, using the results to measure whether its security practices are improving. The exchange’s chief security officer, Jimmy Su, told Cointelegraph that the internal “red team” carries out the exercises and that employees who repeatedly fail may be sent for remediation training.
Meanwhile, the crypto sector also faces policy and compliance pressures across Asia: an Internet rights group in India challenged a government-backed order to remove repositories related to Jack Dorsey’s BitChat, while other developments—from stablecoin payment pilots in the Philippines to shifting retail behavior in South Korea—highlight how technology adoption and regulation are moving in parallel.
Key takeaways
- Binance conducts monthly internal phishing tests via its red team and uses the outcomes to trigger remediation training.
- India’s Internet Freedom Foundation says a recent order to GitHub to disable BitChat repositories is unconstitutional and threatens open-source and free speech.
- CoinShares-related social-engineering concerns remain in focus, with prior industry estimates suggesting a large share of crypto incidents are driven by manipulation rather than pure technical exploits.
- South Korea’s five largest crypto exchanges reported a sharp year-over-year drop in combined trading volume, despite growth in equities.
- Several countries are exploring real-world payment use cases for stablecoins and blockchain rails, even as governance scrutiny tightens.
Binance uses internal phishing drills to test security hygiene
According to Cointelegraph, Binance’s security approach includes ongoing, controlled attempts to trick employees with phishing-style tactics. Jimmy Su, Binance’s chief security officer, said the company runs these exercises “on a monthly basis” to determine whether day-to-day security hygiene is improving.
The tests are carried out by Binance’s internal ethical hacking unit—its “red team”—which is tasked with breaking into systems in order to identify vulnerabilities. Su said employees who fail the phishing simulations are not simply tracked; they are expected to undergo remediation training.
The broader relevance is that attackers often target human behavior rather than exploiting only software bugs. In February, AMLBot estimated that 65% of crypto security incidents in 2025 were driven by social engineering, underscoring why organizations have increasingly prioritized employee training alongside technical controls. (AMLBot estimate referenced by Cointelegraph: https://cointelegraph.com/news/amlbot-2025-crypto-incidents-social-engineering-phishing-impersonation)
India challenges GitHub takedown order over BitChat repositories
In India, the Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) condemned a government order directing GitHub to remove or disable repositories related to BitChat, describing the move as unconstitutional. The group warned that the decision could undermine free speech and the open-source ecosystem.
IFF’s statement, according to Cointelegraph, followed a cybercrime agency directive that ordered GitHub to disable access to three BitChat repositories within three hours. The agency’s rationale was that BitChat could be used to bypass internet shutdowns, evade lawful surveillance, and facilitate unlawful activities.
BitChat is described as a decentralized messaging app designed to route encrypted messages between nearby devices over Bluetooth, without relying on internet connectivity or centralized servers. Cointelegraph also noted that since BitChat’s July 2025 release, it has gained traction during periods of unrest and internet outages in countries including Madagascar, Nepal, Uganda, Jamaica, and Iran. (Cointelegraph links referenced by the original report: https://cointelegraph.com/news/jack-dorsey-launches-bluetooth-relayed-decentralized-messaging-app-bitchat, https://cointelegraph.com/news/48000-nepalis-install-jack-dorseys-bitcoin-amid-protests, https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitchat-second-ranked-app-jamaica-as-hurricane-strikes, https://cointelegraph.com/news/decentralized-messaging-adoption-global-unrest)
For developers and users, the dispute raises a familiar tension in crypto and open-source technology: platforms and code repositories can become collateral in broader concerns about communications infrastructure and governance. What remains to be seen is whether GitHub’s handling of the order, and any potential legal challenge in India, changes how decentralized tools are distributed—or whether similar requests spread to other repositories.
Retail crypto interest cools in South Korea while equities surge
Separately, South Korea’s crypto trading activity has deteriorated sharply even as its stock market climbed. Cointelegraph reports that the combined trading activity across five major won-based exchanges—Upbit, Bithumb, Coinone, Korbit, and Gopax—fell by 89% year over year.
The figure comes from Cointelegraph’s review of CoinGecko’s historical 24-hour volume readings. The comparison used seven-day averages in July 2025 versus July 2026. On a combined basis, average daily volume declined to $305 million from $2.82 billion over the comparable July 2025 period.
Cointelegraph also stated that the KOSPI benchmark more than doubled during the same stretch. While volume has dropped for crypto, the divergence suggests that some retail liquidity may be rotating toward stocks—or that risk appetite and participation in crypto are being influenced by factors beyond token prices alone, such as market structure or broader macro sentiment.
Traders and investors watching South Korea will likely want to focus on whether this pattern persists beyond July and whether exchange-level initiatives or regulatory developments affect participation. The next question is whether lower volumes reflect temporary sentiment shifts or a more durable change in retail allocation decisions.
Stablecoin rails and exchange restructures signal continued build-out
Beyond security and policy disputes, adoption-oriented developments continued. In the Philippines, the Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI) plans a stablecoin-based settlement rail for cross-border payments to freelancers, virtual assistants, and other workers receiving overseas income. Cointelegraph reports that the project is being developed with Meridian, with the intent to reduce processing cost and time while retaining safeguards associated with traditional banking transactions.
According to Cointelegraph’s reporting, stablecoins would be used as a settlement instrument before funds are converted to Philippine pesos and credited to recipients’ BPI accounts. (Cointelegraph referenced coverage from ABS-CBN and Philippine Daily Inquirer.)
In Singapore, Coinbase is also reported to be expanding its local presence, planning to grow headcount from 150 to about 200 staff members by the end of 2026 and prioritizing roles including engineers and institutional sales. Cointelegraph cited comments from Hassan Ahmed, Coinbase’s country director for Singapore, to the Business Times about the city-state’s role as a strategic hub for crypto innovation. (Cointelegraph referenced link: https://www.businesstimes.com.sg/singapore/coinbase-expand-singapore-operations-grow-headcount-200-despite-global-restructuring)
Elsewhere in Asia, HashKey Holdings said it has merged HashKey Exchange and HashKey Global into a single platform and application, with the goal of giving users a consistent app experience while compliance is managed through local regulatory frameworks. (Cointelegraph link referenced: https://cointelegraph.com/news/hong-kong-crypto-giant-hashkey-merges-its-exchanges-into-one)
Taken together, these stories point to a sector split between defensive maturity—like Binance’s ongoing internal phishing drills—and front-of-house expansion, such as stablecoin payment settlement testing and exchange platform consolidation. The common thread is governance: whether it’s security enforcement inside companies, repository access decisions by governments, or compliance-heavy product rollouts in banking systems, the “how” of crypto adoption is increasingly as important as the “what.”
For the weeks ahead, watch how India’s BitChat repository dispute develops and whether it affects other open-source or decentralized tools, while South Korean trading volume trends indicate whether retail activity is temporarily shifting or settling into a new baseline.
Dan Niles, founder of Niles Investment Management, says Apple’s (AAPL) slow start on artificial intelligence (AI) turned into an accidental advantage, even as he flags valuation risk ahead of its earnings report this week.
Apple’s stock recently reached new all-time highs, hitting a record closing price of $336.91 on July 27. This surge pushed Apple’s market capitalization to roughly $4.93 trillion, allowing it to reclaim the title of the world’s most valuable public company from Nvidia. The company reports fiscal third-quarter results on July 30.
Apple’s AI Delay Was Actually a Lucky Break
Speaking on CNBC’s Squawk on the Street, Niles said Apple avoided the AI spending spree that has hit rivals’ cash flow.
“Sometimes you get lucky for being incompetent,” Niles said, adding that Apple was “horrible” at getting AI onto iPhones.
That weakness now looks like an edge. Alphabet has raised its 2026 capital expenditure (capex) guidance to $195 billion to $205 billion for AI infrastructure. The spending pushed Alphabet’s free cash flow negative in the second quarter, the first such quarter since its 2004 initial public offering (IPO), the process by which a private company first sells shares to the public.
Apple takes a different path. It reportedly pays Google around $1 billion a year to license a custom Gemini model for Siri’s AI upgrade. That fee covers a fraction of what rivals spend building their own AI models from scratch.
Apple briefly passed Nvidia as the world’s most valuable company earlier this month. Its stock has kept climbing since, partly on the view that it can benefit from AI demand without carrying the balance-sheet risk.
The Valuation Catch
Niles was less comfortable with where the stock trades today. Apple’s price-to-earnings (P/E) ratio, a measure of stock price relative to earnings, sits in the high 30s. That’s well above the S&P 500’s roughly 22 times earnings.
He warned that could leave Apple exposed if Thursday’s numbers disappoint, particularly if rising semiconductor prices squeeze margins. Memory chip costs have surged this year, a trend already forcing price hikes across the phone market.
“You can’t put all the money in the world into this one stock because they’re just not spending on AI,” Niles said. “It doesn’t make sense at a certain valuation.”
Wall Street expects Apple to post revenue near $108.9 billion and earnings per share (EPS) of $1.89 for the quarter, up from $1.57 a year earlier. Thursday’s report also lands in the middle of a packed earnings week for Big Tech, with Meta and Amazon reporting the same week under similar AI spending scrutiny.
Niles said he plans to stay largely on the sidelines for those names too, citing his own concerns about capex tied to each.
The post Dan Niles Says Apple Was ‘Incompetent’ With AI, So Why Is The Stock at All-Time Highs? appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Binance ‘red teams’ its own staff every month to keep hackers out
Cryptocurrency exchange Binance has been running simulated phishing attacks against its own employees for the past four years and can fire staff who repeatedly fail the tests, according to Binance chief security officer Jimmy Su.
The fake attacks are conducted by Binance’s red team, an internal ethical hacking unit whose job is to break into systems to identify vulnerabilities.
“We do phishing attacks on our own employees on a monthly basis just so we understand if our security hygiene is improving,” Su told Cointelegraph. “The ones that have failed it, we will do remediation training.”
In February, AMLBot estimated that 65% of crypto security incidents in 2025 were driven by social engineering.
India’s BitChat GitHub takedown order ‘unconstitutional’
India’s Internet Freedom Foundation (IFF) has condemned a government order directing GitHub to remove repositories for Jack Dorsey’s decentralized messaging app BitChat, calling the move unconstitutional and warning it threatens free speech and open-source software.
The statement came a day after India’s cybercrime agency ordered GitHub to disable access to three BitChat repositories within three hours, saying the decentralized messaging app could be used to bypass internet shutdowns, evade lawful surveillance and facilitate unlawful activities.
BitChat is a decentralized messaging app that routes encrypted messages between nearby devices over Bluetooth without relying on internet connectivity or centralized servers.
Since its release in July 2025, the app has gained traction during periods of unrest and internet outages in countries including Madagascar, Nepal, Uganda, Jamaica and Iran.
More crypto news from India:
— India’s Central Board of Direct Taxes (CBDT) has issued guidance directing crypto exchanges to report all transactions on their platforms to the Income Tax department.
Balaji’s Network School turns to Kazakhstan amid Malaysian setback
Balaji Srinivasan’s utopian Network School looks set to move to Kazakhstan after Malaysian authorities revoked its business license over alleged premises-use violations.
A memorandum of understanding was signed between Kazakhstan’s Minister of Digital Development and Srinivasan to establish a campus in the country which has been positioning itself as an emerging technology hub, and has plans for Central Asia’s first “crypto city” in Alatau.
The Network School had been at the centre of a scandal involving hosting Israeli citizens given the Muslim majority country has no diplomatic relations with Israel. The US State Department called in the Malaysian envoy to ask for an explanation about the country’s apparent policy of deporting dual citizens with Israeli passports.
Source: The Times of Israel/Reuters
South Korea crypto volumes shrink as retail investors shift to stocks
South Korea’s five major crypto exchanges have seen their combined trading activity fall by 89% year over year, even as the country’s stock market surged.
The Korea Composite Stock Price Index (KOSPI) benchmark more than doubled over the period, while volumes across the country’s largest won-based crypto platforms fell off a cliff.
Cointelegraph reviewed CoinGecko’s historical 24-hour volume readings for Upbit, Bithumb, Coinone, Korbit and Gopax, comparing seven-day periods in July 2025 and July 2026.
On a combined basis, average daily volume fell about 89%, to $305 million from $2.82 billion in the comparable July 2025 period.
More crypto news from Korea:
— South Korean crypto exchange Korbit will reportedly rebrand as Digital X after becoming part of Mirae Asset Group.
— South Korea’s KB Kookmin Bank will launch a blockchain-based cross-border payment service for import and export businesses in August using JPMorgan’s Kinexys network.
— South Korean regulators have removed 29 unlicensed crypto exchange apps from the Google Play store. Affected apps include those from OKX, Bybit, MEXC, Kucoin, Gemini, Backpack, and BitMEX.
— North Korean authorities have reportedly arrested a group of former state cyber operators and IT specialists accused of hacking two state banks and laundering stolen funds through cryptocurrency.
Thailand SEC files complaint against Bitkub over alleged false disclosures
Thailand’s SEC filed a criminal complaint against Bitkub and two former directors over alleged false disclosures linked to a 2021 cyberattack involving $50 million in assets.
The complaint names former Bitkub directors Sakolkorn Sakavee and Thaweesap Rawan, who the SEC said were responsible for submitting company reports during the period under investigation.
The case comes as Bitkub’s parent company considers a potential public listing, putting renewed attention on transparency and governance at one of Thailand’s most prominent crypto businesses.
More crypto news from Thailand:
— Thailand’s Kbank has signed a memorandum of understanding with BPMG and HashKey Group to develop stablecoin-based cross-border remittance services.
— Thailand authorities have raided seven illegal Bitcoin mining operations after uncovering large scale electricity theft. More than 1900 crypto mining machines were seized.
One of two Bitcoin mining warehouses in Samut Sakhon alleged to be stealing power. Source: DSI Facebook page.
Philippine bank BPI plans stablecoin payments pilot
The Bank of the Philippine Islands (BPI) is planning to pilot a stablecoin-based settlement rail for cross-border payments to freelancers, virtual assistants and other workers receiving overseas income.
Developed with global digital clearinghouse Meridian, the system is intended to reduce the cost and processing time of inbound payments while retaining safeguards used in traditional banking transactions, according to ABS-CBN and the Philippine Daily Inquirer.
Stablecoins would be used as a settlement instrument before the funds are converted to Philippine pesos and credited to recipients’ BPI accounts.
Coinbase to expand Singapore office headcount by 25%: Report
Cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase plans to expand its presence in Singapore and grow its headcount from 150 to about 200 staff members by the end of 2026.
The cryptocurrency exchange is mainly looking to hire more engineers, customer service, relationship management staff and institutional sales representatives for its Singapore office, which opened at One Raffles Quay on Wednesday.
Hassan Ahmed, Coinbase’s country director for Singapore, told the Business Times the exchange plans to expand its operations in Singapore because the city state is increasingly becoming a strategic hub for cryptocurrency innovation.
More Singapore crypto news:
— The Singapore Police Force and the U.S. FBI signed a memorandum of understanding to strengthen joint operations on online scams including crypto related scams, cyber fraud, and money laundering cases.
— Singapore based payments firm Triple-A reportedly lost $11.8 million after its hot wallet was drained. The firm said it was investigating but no customer funds were affected.
— The Monetary Authority of Singapore has tightened monetary policy, which will lead to the Singapore dollar appreciating by about 1% per year.
Hong Kong crypto giant HashKey merges regional exchange into one
Hong Kong digital asset services business HashKey Holdings has merged its HashKey Exchange and HashKey Global exchanges into a single platform and application.
Core jurisdictional hubs including Hong Kong, Singapore, the Middle East (Dubai) and Bermuda have been merged under a single platform.
The idea is that all users download the same application wherever they are, while the platform manages compliance on the back end with local regulatory frameworks.
News in brief from China
— A Hunan man was penalized under the Anti-Telecom and Online Fraud Law for reselling virtual currency for profit and for lending out his relative’s payment accounts to others so they could receive and transfer funds.
—Authorities in Shenzen have closed down numerous social media accounts for hyping up cryptocurrencies.
Cointelegraph publishes long-form journalism, analysis and narrative reporting produced by Cointelegraph’s in-house editorial team with subject-matter expertise. All articles are edited and reviewed by Cointelegraph editors in line with our editorial standards. Content published in here does not constitute financial, legal or investment advice. Readers should conduct their own research and consult qualified professionals where appropriate. Cointelegraph maintains full editorial independence.
Tether holds 97,141 bitcoin, enough to rank second among corporate holders if it were listed anywhere. It is not. There is no share, so there is no multiple, no premium, no discount, and no market referee on the largest private Bitcoin position in existence, funded by a business that earns more per employee than any company on earth.
Summary
- Tether holds 97,141 BTC, worth roughly $6 billion at current prices, accumulated under a 2023 policy of allocating up to 15% of realized quarterly operating profits to Bitcoin, most recently an 8,888 BTC transfer on New Year’s Day.
- If Tether were public, ranking services place it second among corporate holders behind Strategy’s 672,497 BTC. It is private, so every metric built to value Bitcoin treasuries, mNAV above all, simply does not compute.
- The funding model inverts the treasury-company template: Strategy and its imitators raise capital to buy Bitcoin, while Tether buys with retained profits from a reserve business that reported over $10 billion in net income for 2025.
- Bitcoin is one leg of a diversified reserve: roughly 116 metric tons of gold worth more than $17 billion, around $135 billion in US Treasuries by the issuer’s account, against approximately $185 billion of USDT in circulation.
- The same diversification cuts both ways: S&P downgraded USDT to its lowest stablecoin rating in December, citing disclosure gaps and a rising share of high-risk assets, meaning the accumulation that makes Tether a Bitcoin power is what a rating agency counts against it.
Every large corporate Bitcoin position in the world has a price attached to it, and not the price of the coins. Strategy has an mNAV. So does every listed treasury company, tracked in real time across a hundred names by analytics platforms that publish thirty metrics apiece: enterprise value over Bitcoin net asset value, premium or discount, diluted variants, debt-adjusted variants, the entire apparatus a market builds when it needs to decide what a pile of Bitcoin inside a corporate wrapper is worth. That apparatus has one conspicuous blind spot, and it happens to contain the second-largest corporate stack on earth. Tether holds 97,141 BTC, roughly $6 billion at current prices, accumulated quarter after quarter since 2023 under a policy of committing up to 15% of realized operating profits to the asset. Ranking services note that if Tether were a public company it would sit second behind Strategy, and then they file it on a separate page for private companies, holdings listed, valuation column blank, because there is no share, no float, no enterprise value, and therefore no multiple to compute. The most-watched metric in corporate Bitcoin cannot be applied to one of corporate Bitcoin’s largest holders. This piece is about that gap: what Tether actually holds, how the accumulation is funded, why the absence of a market price is more consequential than it sounds, and what a rating agency sees when it looks at the same balance sheet.
The position, itemized
Start with the stack and the pattern, because the pattern is more informative than any single figure.
The current disclosed holding is 97,141 BTC. The most recent visible additions trace a consistent rhythm: an 8,888.8 BTC transfer to the treasury wallet on January 1, worth roughly $778 million at the time and described by the chief executive as the Q4 2025 profit allocation, taking holdings above 96,000, followed by a smaller addition in April that brought the total to its present level. The policy behind the rhythm dates to May 2023: up to 15% of realized quarterly operating profits committed to Bitcoin, executed as periodic purchases and consolidated near quarter-end, a mechanical program, not a discretionary trade.
Bitcoin is one leg of a three-legged reserve strategy, and the other two are larger. Gold: roughly 116 metric tons as of the third quarter of 2025, valued above $17 billion by early this year, a position that makes Tether one of the largest private gold holders in existence. US government debt: approximately $135 billion by the chief executive’s own framing, which he described as positioning the company as the seventeenth-largest holder of US debt, with later reporting citing exposure figures around $141 billion. Against those reserves sits roughly $185 billion of USDT in circulation, and around the whole structure, per its Q3 2025 attestation, approximately $184.5 billion in stablecoin reserves against $215 billion in total assets, with roughly $23 billion in retained earnings and about $30 billion in group equity.
The scale comparison worth holding onto: Strategy’s 672,497 BTC is nearly seven times Tether’s stack, built with more than $50 billion of raised capital at an average cost around $75,000 per coin, and it constitutes that company’s entire reason for existing. Tether’s 97,141 BTC is a side position, roughly 3% of its total assets, accumulated from spare profit by a company whose actual business is something else entirely. That difference in kind, not the difference in size, is what makes the valuation problem interesting.
The machine that funds it
The accumulation model is the inverse of the sector it is usually grouped with, and the inversion explains why Tether can keep buying when the treasury companies cannot.
The digital asset treasury template, which this publication has covered from Strategy’s flywheel through the newer entrants, runs on capital markets. A company issues equity or convertible debt, buys Bitcoin with the proceeds, and depends on trading above its net asset value so that each issuance is accretive rather than dilutive. When the premium compresses, as it has across the sector this year, the machine stalls: raising becomes value-destroying, purchases stop, and the equity story unwinds. It is a leveraged bet on both Bitcoin and continued market enthusiasm for the wrapper.
Tether buys with cash it already earned. The reserve business generates income by holding predominantly short-term US government debt against tokens the public holds without interest, which produced more than $10 billion in net profit for 2025 and, on the company’s own account, roughly $500 million a month from Treasury holdings alone at one point last year. Fifteen percent of realized profits into Bitcoin is an allocation decision made after the money is in the door. No premium is required, no issuance, no market permission. The purchases continue at $63,000 exactly as they continued at $100,000, because the input is profit, not sentiment, which is why Tether kept accumulating through a drawdown that stopped much of the treasury-company sector cold.
That funding structure also makes Tether the clearest single illustration of stablecoin economics that this publication’s stablechain coverage has traced from the other direction. The float pays for everything: the Bitcoin, the gold, the chain investments, the venture portfolio, and the free-transfer subsidies underwriting the purpose-built USDT networks. A business that earns on other people’s dollar balances converts monetary demand into a balance sheet, and the Bitcoin position is simply the most visible artifact of that conversion.
The metric that cannot be computed
Now the gap, which is the piece’s actual subject.
For public treasury companies, mNAV is the governing number. It divides enterprise value, market capitalization plus debt and preferred equity, by the market value of the Bitcoin held. Above 1.0 means the market pays a premium for the wrapper, its strategy, its access to capital, its operating business. Below 1.0 means the market discounts even the coins. Analytics platforms track it across more than a hundred companies with real-time variants for dilution and capital structure, and the ratio has become the sector’s price-to-earnings equivalent, the number that decides whether a treasury company can raise, whether it should buy back, and whether its strategy is working.
Apply that to Tether and every input goes missing. There is no market capitalization, because there is no traded share. There is no enterprise value, because there is no market to compute it. There is no premium or discount, because nobody is bidding for a claim. The company has moved toward the edges of price discovery, a share buyback program was initiated last autumn and reporting has described interest from major investors in a private placement raising up to $20 billion, which would imply a valuation, but a negotiated private round is not a market price. It is one number agreed by a few parties under confidentiality, revealed selectively, and untested by anyone who might disagree.
The consequences are more than academic, and they run in both directions. Nobody can express a view: an investor who believes Tether’s Bitcoin is worth more than the market credits, or that the whole structure is worth less than claimed, has no instrument to trade. Nobody can be corrected: without a price, the company’s own attestations, disclosures, and framings are the primary information, and there is no continuously updated second opinion of the kind a share price provides. And nothing is disciplined: public treasury companies discovered this year that a compressing mNAV forces strategy changes, halted purchases, buybacks, defensive disclosure, because the market votes daily. Tether faces no such vote. The largest private Bitcoin position on earth is, in the most literal sense, unmarked, and the only external referees are the attestation firms and the rating agencies, which is where the story turns uncomfortable.
What the rating agency sees
S&P Global looked at the same balance sheet in December and reached a conclusion the accumulation narrative rarely mentions: it downgraded USDT to 5, the weakest grade on its five-point stablecoin stability scale, citing persistent gaps in disclosure and a rising share of high-risk assets in the reserves. The high-risk assets named include Bitcoin, gold, corporate bonds, and secured loans.
Sit with the symmetry, because it is the sharpest fact in this piece. Every headline celebrating Tether as a top-tier Bitcoin holder is describing, in the rating agency’s framework, the growth of the reserve component least suitable for backing a dollar-pegged liability. Both readings follow from the same asset. The company’s case, argued publicly by its chief executive against the downgrade, is that excess reserves and group equity absorb the volatility: roughly $7 billion in excess reserves and about $30 billion in group equity stand between a Bitcoin drawdown and the tokens, meaning the volatile assets are funded by capital rather than by the money backing USDT. That is a real argument and, on the disclosed figures, a substantially cushioned position.
The counter is equally real. The cushion is disclosed by the company and verified by attestation rather than by audit, a distinction this industry has debated for a decade; a Bitcoin drawdown of the severity Bitcoin has repeatedly produced would consume a large share of the stated excess in a single quarter; and the correlation problem is the one nobody models publicly, since the conditions that would trigger mass USDT redemption are precisely the conditions in which Bitcoin and gold would be falling and least convenient to sell. A reserve that is diversified in normal times can be concentrated in the only scenario that matters. That is not a prediction of failure. It is the reason a rating agency’s job exists, and the reason the missing market price matters: for a public company, a market would price that tail risk continuously and visibly. Here, one agency’s letter grade and the issuer’s rebuttal are the entire public debate.
What would make it pricable
Three developments would convert this position from an unmarked holding into a valued one, and each is at least plausible.
A completed private placement at scale, the reported raise of up to $20 billion with institutional participation, would produce a negotiated valuation for the whole enterprise. It would not be a market price, but it would be the first external number against which the Bitcoin, gold, and Treasury legs could be measured, and it would create shareholders with an interest in eventual liquidity.
Regulatory convergence is the second. The US stablecoin framework and its implementation, covered across this publication’s regulatory reporting, is steadily raising the disclosure floor for issuers serving American users, and Tether’s domestic-market vehicle brings part of the group inside that perimeter. Disclosure requirements are how private balance sheets become legible, and legibility is the precondition for valuation.
And a listing, the possibility every private financial company of this scale eventually faces, would resolve everything at once: a share price, an enterprise value, and finally an mNAV for the second-largest corporate Bitcoin holder in the world. There is no indication one is planned. But the buyback program, the private placement discussions, and the group-equity disclosures are the standard sequence of a company assembling the furniture a valuation event requires.
Until one of those lands, the situation stands as described: 97,141 bitcoin, roughly $6 billion, inside a company earning more than $10 billion a year, sitting on a spreadsheet somewhere with no multiple attached, in a sector that has built an entire analytical apparatus for exactly this question and cannot point it at the biggest private target in the field.
What to watch
The quarterly transfer. The 15% allocation makes each quarter’s profit-driven purchase a schedule, and the size of each transfer is a live read on the reserve business’s profitability, one of the few genuinely informative numbers a private issuer emits.
The next attestation. Excess reserves and group equity are the cushion the entire high-risk-asset debate turns on. Watch whether both grow with the Bitcoin position or lag it, since the ratio between them is the honest version of the risk question.
Any rating movement. S&P’s grade is the closest thing to an external referee. An upgrade on improved disclosure, or a further downgrade, moves the only public scorecard that exists.
The raise. Confirmation, size, and valuation of the reported private placement would supply the first external number for the enterprise, and with it the first opportunity to ask what the market thinks all that Bitcoin is worth inside this particular wrapper.
One final calibration, because Tether is not quite alone in this category and the comparison sharpens the point. Ranking services list at least one private entity with a larger claimed Bitcoin position, a technology company whose holdings, unlike Tether’s, cannot be verified on-chain at all, which produces a three-tier structure of corporate Bitcoin knowledge worth naming. Public companies disclose in filings and are priced continuously by markets. Tether discloses in attestations and is verifiable on-chain but priced by nobody. And a third tier claims holdings that are neither audited nor observable, existing purely as assertion. The industry’s data infrastructure, the trackers, the leaderboards, the dashboards with thirty metrics per company, handles the first tier well and quietly degrades across the other two, which means every statement about how much Bitcoin corporations own carries an error bar that grows as you move away from the listed names. That is worth remembering the next time a leaderboard is cited as though all its rows were equivalent evidence. Tether’s row is unusually good by the standards of private disclosure, on-chain verifiable, regularly attested, publicly discussed by its chief executive, and it still lacks the single thing that makes a corporate holding legible to markets: someone, somewhere, willing to state a price and be wrong about it in public.
Disclaimer: This article is for information and educational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Holdings, reserve figures, and profit numbers reflect company statements, attestations, and third-party reporting that cannot be independently verified against audited financials, and asset values change continuously. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy, sell, or hold any asset. Always do your own research. Information is accurate as of July 26, 2026.
Frequently Asked Questions
How much Bitcoin does Tether hold?
97,141 BTC, worth roughly $6 billion at current prices. The position was built under a policy adopted in May 2023 of allocating up to 15% of realized quarterly operating profits to Bitcoin, with recent additions including 8,888.8 BTC transferred on January 1 as the Q4 2025 allocation and a smaller purchase in April.
Where does that rank among corporate holders?
Second, if it counted. Ranking services note Tether would sit behind only Strategy’s 672,497 BTC if it were a public company, but list it separately because it is private. Strategy’s position is nearly seven times larger and constitutes that company’s entire business model, while Tether’s is roughly 3% of total assets.
How is Tether’s accumulation different from a treasury company’s?
Funding. Treasury companies raise equity or convertible debt to buy Bitcoin and depend on trading above net asset value for issuance to be accretive, so purchases stall when the premium compresses. Tether buys with retained profits from its reserve business, which reported more than $10 billion in net income for 2025, so its purchases continue regardless of market sentiment toward any wrapper.
What is mNAV and why can it not be applied to Tether?
mNAV divides a company’s enterprise value by the market value of its Bitcoin, showing whether investors pay a premium or discount for the wrapper. It requires a traded share price, which Tether does not have. With no market capitalization, no enterprise value, and no float, every input is missing, so the sector’s governing metric simply does not compute for one of its largest holders.
Why does the absence of a market price matter?
Because a price is a continuous external opinion. Without one, no investor can express a view on whether Tether is over- or undervalued, no daily second opinion checks the company’s own disclosures, and no market discipline forces strategy changes the way a compressing mNAV has forced them across the public treasury sector this year. Attestations and rating agencies are the only external referees.
What else is in Tether’s reserves?
Predominantly US government debt, around $135 billion by the company’s own account, described by its chief executive as making Tether the seventeenth-largest holder of US debt, plus roughly 116 metric tons of gold valued above $17 billion, against approximately $185 billion of USDT in circulation. Bitcoin is the smallest of the three headline legs.
Why did S&P downgrade USDT if the reserves are diversified?
S&P cut USDT to 5, the weakest grade on its stablecoin scale, in December, citing persistent disclosure gaps and a rising share of high-risk assets including Bitcoin, gold, corporate bonds, and secured loans. The agency’s framework treats volatile assets backing a dollar-pegged liability as a risk, so the same accumulation celebrated as treasury strength counts against the stability rating. Tether’s response points to roughly $7 billion in excess reserves and about $30 billion in group equity as the buffer.
Could Tether ever be valued publicly?
Possibly, through three routes: the reported private placement of up to $20 billion, which would produce a negotiated enterprise valuation; regulatory convergence raising disclosure requirements as US stablecoin rules are implemented; or an eventual listing, which would supply a share price and, finally, an mNAV. None is confirmed, though a share buyback program and private-placement discussions are the customary preliminaries. This is educational analysis, not investment advice.
Ethereum price rallied 5% to $1,966 on July 27 as surging spot demand, short liquidations, and tighter available supply pushed ETH toward the key $2,000 barrier.
Summary
- Ethereum price gained 5% to $1,966, while 24-hour spot trading volume jumped 118.53% to $9.21 billion.
- The daily chart places $1,981.50 and $2,000 as the next major resistance zones.
- 4-hour RSI reached 73.36, showing strong momentum but raising the risk of a short-term pullback.
- Liquidation data shows large leverage clusters near $1,980–$2,000, with downside liquidity around $1,930.
- Analysts see $2,350–$2,500 as possible targets if ETH establishes support above $2,000.
Ethereum price rally targets $2,000
According to data from crypto.news, Ethereum (ETH) price climbed to around $1,966 after trading near $1,870 during the previous session, extending a recovery that began from its June low near $1,512. The latest move brought ETH within 2% of the psychological $2,000 level.
Spot trading volume increased 118.53% over 24 hours to $9.21 billion, according to the supplied market data. Rising volume alongside price suggests buyers supported the advance rather than the move occurring during thin trading conditions.
The daily chart shows ETH reaching an intraday high of $1,981.24 before easing toward $1,964. That high closely matches the 100% Fibonacci retracement level at $1,981.50, making the $1,981–$2,000 area the first major test for the recovery.
Ethereum has already reclaimed the 78.6% Fibonacci level at $1,880.97. Below that price, the next retracement levels sit at $1,802.05, $1,746.62, and $1,691.19.
The daily Supertrend has also switched to bullish support at approximately $1,772.31. ETH would need to fall below that level before the broader recovery structure faces a more serious invalidation risk.
Spot demand and supply pressure support ETH
Ethereum’s rally coincided with a sharp increase in market activity and a reported rise in its staking rate to a record 34%. Staked tokens cannot immediately enter the spot market, reducing the liquid supply available to buyers during periods of stronger demand.
Higher Layer 2 throughput and decentralized finance activity have also increased smart contract execution. Under Ethereum Improvement Proposal 1559, part of each transaction’s base fee is burned, removing ETH from circulation when network usage rises.
These supply conditions do not guarantee further gains, but they can magnify price movements when demand accelerates. A smaller pool of liquid ETH means buyers may need to bid at progressively higher prices to complete large spot purchases.
US spot Ethereum exchange-traded funds provide another source of demand. The supplied market context indicates that the products recovered from volatile outflows earlier in July and began recording more consistent net inflows.
For US investors, sustained ETF inflows would offer evidence that regulated demand is strengthening alongside activity in native crypto markets. However, the upcoming Federal Reserve interest-rate decision remains a key risk because a hawkish policy signal could reduce demand for high-beta assets such as ETH.
Technical indicators warn of short-term overheating
Ethereum’s 4-hour chart shows the price moving inside an ascending parallel channel that has guided the recovery since early July. ETH recently rebounded from the channel’s lower boundary near $1,850 and returned to the $1,965 region.
The Aroon Up indicator stands at 92.86%, compared with Aroon Down at 14.29%. That wide gap indicates that recent highs are arriving more frequently than recent lows, supporting the bullish short-term structure.
Momentum is becoming stretched, however. 4-hour relative strength index reached 73.36, above the conventional overbought threshold of 70 and well above its moving average at 55.41. This reading does not require an immediate reversal, but it raises the chance of consolidation or profit-taking near $2,000.
The daily moving average convergence divergence indicator remains constructive. Its MACD line sits at 46.51, above the 40.75 signal line, while the positive histogram reads 5.76. Those values show that upward momentum remains active despite ETH approaching resistance.
A daily close above $1,981.50 would clear the full Fibonacci recovery level shown on the chart. Bulls would then need to reclaim $2,000 as support before targeting the upper portion of the 4-hour channel near $2,050–$2,100.
Ethereum liquidations could accelerate the breakout
CoinGlass’s three-day liquidation heatmap shows concentrated leverage immediately above the current price. The strongest nearby clusters appear around $1,980–$2,000, with additional liquidity extending toward $2,040.
A move into those levels could force leveraged short positions to close through market purchases. That process may create another short squeeze and help ETH move through resistance, particularly if spot volume remains elevated.
The heatmap also maps downside liquidity around $1,945–$1,930, followed by larger concentrations near $1,900–$1,880. A rejection from $2,000 could attract price toward those areas as leveraged long positions unwind.
The largest lower cluster appears around $1,835–$1,850. That zone aligns with the 4-hour channel floor and gives bulls a major defensive area if ETH loses $1,880. A break below it would expose $1,802, followed by the daily Supertrend near $1,772.
Analysts map $2,350 to $2,500 ETH targets
According to market commentator Michaël van de Poppe, Ethereum may consolidate before beginning another upward leg.
“Matter of time until it runs towards $2,500 (which is the other side of the range).”
Analyst Ted Pillows also pointed to rising spot demand but placed the immediate condition at $2,000.
“If Ethereum manages to break and reclaim $2,000 here, it could rally to May highs.”
Pillows’ chart places intermediate resistance near $2,191 and a larger supply zone around $2,350–$2,400. These targets remain conditional on ETH closing above $2,000 and holding that level during a retest.
Failure to reclaim $2,000 would favor short-term consolidation toward $1,930 or $1,881. The bullish structure remains intact above the ascending channel floor, while a decisive loss of $1,850 would weaken the current recovery thesis.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
What is an event contract? The yes/no trade explained
General Hospital 2-Week Spoilers July 27-Aug 7: Tracy Left Reeling & Ethan on the Run!
Mike Tyson, Floyd Mayweather and Manny Pacquiao could all be set to appear on the same card
-
Fashion3 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Brooks Brothers
-
Crypto World7 days agoGrayscale Files For Worldcoin ETF, WLD Registers Sharp Rise
-
NewsBeat6 days agoHow a former Blue Peter presenter stunned America’s Got Talent judges
-
Tech1 day agoIntel is reversing course and bringing hyper-threading back to its server chips
-
Tech7 days agoTurtle Beach Command Series KB7 review: a nifty screen-equipped gaming keyboard
-
Business6 days agoNew Jersey voter registration controversy explained: How 6,600 noncitizens got on the rolls, and what happens next
-
Entertainment6 days agoJohnny Depp’s R-Rated Gothic Cult Classic Gets New Release Ahead of Sydney Sweeney Remake
-
Crypto World5 days agoEthics, other provisions in crypto Clarity Act to be further discussed
-
Politics16 hours agoLuke Littler dismantles Gerwyn Price to retain title in Blackpool
-
NewsBeat7 days agoShanghai science forum photos show China’s AI and robotics advances in rivalry with US
-
Sports4 days ago2026 3M Open leaderboard: Scottie Scheffler finds putter in Round 1, sits three back
-
Sports1 day agoCommonwealth Games boxing: Jadumani Singh seals dominant 5-0 win over Pakistan’s Sumama Rehman to enter quarter-finals | Commonwealth Games News
-
Fashion4 days ago16 Dresses for the High Summer Event
-
News Videos4 days agoThe Peugeot Family: How 200 Years of an “Old Money” Dynasty Died in A Boardroom
-
Politics2 days agoSpain sweeps the board at 2026 World Cup with individual awards
-
Entertainment4 days agoA New Post-Apocalyptic Gundam Anime Series Blasts Into SDCC
-
News Videos1 day agoBITCOIN JUST ENTERED THIS CRITICAL ZONE…
-
Crypto World2 days agoXRP Ledger adds $2.6B as RWA inflows rank second
-
NewsBeat7 days agoNADINE DORRIES: I have witnessed first-hand what happens to new Prime Ministers when they enter No 10… and this is why Andy Burnham will be out by May
-
Crypto World5 days agoUniswap (UNI) pushes deeper into tokenized RWAs with permissioned trading pools
You must be logged in to post a comment Login