Rootstock co-founder Sergio Lerner has called for Bitcoin bridges to adopt mandatory withdrawal delays after about 4,000 BTC left Liquid Network’s federation wallet through an unauthorized peg-out.

Sergio Lerner, chief scientist and co-founder of RootstockLabs, told crypto.news that immediate settlement can turn a single validation error into a loss before bridge operators have time to respond.

“Without a time-delay lock, a single validation bug and a total loss become the exact same event, because funds move the moment software says ‘yes,’” Lerner said.

His comments followed an incident in which actors created unbacked L-BTC and used SideSwap’s peg-out service to withdraw nearly 4,000 BTC from the Liquid Federation wallet. Liquid described the actors as purported white-hat hackers, while SideSwap said its service processed the request because the L-BTC appeared valid.

The actors later returned 3,400 BTC after Blockstream confirmed that affected bridge nodes had been patched. About 598 BTC remained outstanding, while Liquid resumed block production without restoring transactions or peg operations as of Sep. 10.

A time-delay lock could have created an intervention window

Lerner said a mandatory delay between the creation of the unbacked L-BTC and the release of real BTC could have reduced the damage.

Under such a system, software approval would start a waiting period rather than complete the withdrawal. Automated monitoring tools could compare the requested peg-out with the BTC backing L-BTC and flag any imbalance before settlement.

“If Liquid had possessed a time-delay lock — where funds cannot move for a specified period regardless of what the software or operators say — the bug would have resulted in a manageable incident rather than an immediate, full-scale catastrophe.”

According to Lerner, the delay would have given operators a multi-hour response window after the unbacked tokens were created. Monitoring systems running around the clock could have detected that the peg-out passed the first software checks despite lacking corresponding collateral.

Functionaries could then have paused the peg before the hardware signed the transaction or released BTC from the federation wallet, he added.

Liquid’s system did not report a stolen Peg-out Authorization Key. SideSwap said a customer sent 4,000 L-BTC to its peg-out service, which handled the request under its normal process because the tokens could not be distinguished from backed L-BTC. The federation paid 3,996 BTC to the supplied Bitcoin address about 23 minutes later.

Lerner’s proposal would place an additional control after the first validation stage. Even if software mistakenly approved a withdrawal, the delay would prevent the corresponding BTC from leaving immediately.

Rootstock enforces a 4,000-block Bitcoin withdrawal delay

Rootstock already uses a delay mechanism for BTC withdrawals through its two-way peg, although Bitcoin’s consensus rules do not enforce the waiting period.

The system relies on specialized hardware security modules called PowHSMs. Before signing a peg-out, the devices independently verify that 4,000 Rootstock blocks have passed, representing about 36 hours of cumulative proof-of-work.

Private keys remain inside the devices, according to Lerner, and functionaries cannot instruct the hardware to bypass the required period. Rootstock combines the HSM rules with merge-mining, through which Bitcoin miners contribute proof-of-work to the sidechain.

“Even a colluding majority of pegnatories cannot steal the funds, because the private keys never leave the PowHSMs, and the HSMs independently verify that 4,000 Rootstock blocks have elapsed before they will sign,” Lerner said.

Rootstock’s model assumes that a majority of the Bitcoin hash rate participating through merge-mining and the federation functionaries will not work together to halt the network. Lerner said compromised functionaries could interrupt peg operations, creating a liveness problem, but the HSM rules would prevent them from forcing an unauthorized early withdrawal.

When monitoring tools identify suspicious activity, functionaries can switch off their HSMs so that the pending peg-out receives no signature. Lerner described the pause as a way to protect the underlying BTC while operators examine the problem and decide how to proceed.

“A colluding majority can, at worst, halt the peg, but they cannot force an unauthorized withdrawal,” he said.

Distributed revocation controls could limit freezing powers

Stopping a pending withdrawal introduces another risk because the same power could be used to delay legitimate users. Lerner said no single company, operator, or administrator should control the revocation mechanism.

Instead, independent functionaries should share the authority through a multiparty structure, with hardware rules limiting what they can do. Under his proposed model, functionaries could pause processing but could not redirect the BTC to another address or confiscate it.

“To prevent single points of failure or centralized censorship, revocation controls should be distributed among independent, multi-party functionaries using hardware-enforced rules rather than centralized administrative keys.”

Such controls would still allow a group of functionaries to interrupt withdrawals if enough participants acted together. Lerner’s distinction rests on the scope of that authority: operators could temporarily withhold signatures while an anomaly is reviewed, but they could not create a valid transaction that transfers the collateral to themselves.

Time delays would also need to account for the value and purpose of each transaction. A 36-hour wait may be unsuitable for routine payments, while a bridge holding large amounts of BTC has a different risk profile.

Lerner said high-value settlement systems should treat time as a security control, similar to the delay mechanisms used by physical bank vaults. Withdrawal periods could vary by transaction size or require different cumulative proof-of-work thresholds according to the collateral at risk.

A shorter period could apply to smaller transfers, while a longer delay could give automated systems and human responders more time to inspect an unusually large request. Lerner did not prescribe one delay for every bridge, but cited Rootstock’s 4,000-block requirement as an effective period for infrastructure securing large BTC balances.

Native Bitcoin vaults could place safeguards in consensus

Rootstock’s current protection depends on its HSMs and federation rather than rules enforced by the Bitcoin network. Lerner said native Bitcoin vaults and revocation keys could move comparable controls into the base protocol.

One possible building block is BIP-443, a draft proposal for an opcode called OP_CHECKCONTRACTVERIFY, or OP_CCV. The proposal would let a Bitcoin output carry data and restrict how its funds may move through future transactions.

BIP-443 describes OP_CCV as a consensus change requiring a soft fork. Its listed uses include state-carrying Bitcoin outputs, sidechains, and two-step withdrawal structures that allow reactive security. The proposal remains in draft status, and its activation process has not been determined.

Lerner cited OP_CCV and BIP-443 as examples of how native vaults could give users or designated parties time to cancel a withdrawal after detecting stolen credentials, altered software, or another abnormal event.

Moving the mechanism into Bitcoin consensus would reduce reliance on bridge-specific HSM policies, according to Lerner. Miners, functionaries, or administrators would have to follow the spending conditions attached to the Bitcoin output rather than apply a discretionary pause after funds had already moved.

For large bridge withdrawals, Lerner said the delay should last long enough for automated alerts and human operators to identify the problem, stop processing, and examine the affected software before the BTC becomes permanently spendable by the recipient.

Japanese Bitcoin treasury company Metaplanet is facing renewed shareholder criticism after it continued expanding an executive share option pool that automatically grows as new shares are issued to support the company’s Bitcoin accumulation strategy. Multiple investors have raised dilution concerns and are urging the company to rescind the additional shares created under the plan.

Across Asia, the crypto sector also saw a mix of regulatory movement, enforcement actions, and corporate dealmaking—from Singapore granting Gemini a payment license to South Korea laying out a roadmap for tokenized securities and India moving forward with a tokenization test for grain warehouse receipts.

Key takeaways

• Metaplanet shareholders are objecting to dilution tied to a 20% fully diluted share executive option pool that expands when new shares are issued for Bitcoin buying.
• Singapore’s crypto funding performance strengthened sharply in 2026, with private market data cited as showing 25 rounds totaling $680 million.
• Gemini received a Singapore Major Payment Institution (MPI) license from MAS, removing the earlier “in-principle” approval step.
• South Korea’s Financial Services Commission introduced a three-phase plan for legally recognizing tokenized securities and eventually enabling stablecoin-linked onchain payments.
• US authorities moved to restrain over $52 million in crypto linked to alleged scam marketplace Xinbi Guarantee and related wallets; OFAC also designated Xinbi as a significant transnational criminal organization.

Metaplanet executive pool under scrutiny as dilution concerns escalate

Metaplanet’s executive stock pool has again become a flashpoint among shareholders, according to reporting linked by Cointelegraph. The plan in question is the company’s 10th Series executive option pool, structured to represent 20% of fully diluted shares and to expand automatically as Metaplanet issues additional shares to fund its Bitcoin (BTC) accumulation.

According to investor posts referenced in the coverage, some shareholders are asking Metaplanet to cancel an additional 273 million shares created from changes tied to the pool. They are also requesting greater transparency around future decisions, arguing that the mechanism’s built-in growth can materially dilute existing holders.

In response to the backlash, Bitcoin Magazine CEO David Bailey defended the approach, characterizing the allocation of 20% of the cap table over a five-year period as not “crazy.” Still, the disagreement underscores the tension common to treasury-style Bitcoin strategies: while token issuance can fund BTC purchases, investors may view the share mechanics as insufficiently predictable or too aggressive relative to what they believe is warranted for long-term alignment.

Funding momentum in Southeast Asia tilts toward Singapore

In Southeast Asia, investment activity in crypto-related firms accelerated over the past year. A report cited by Cointelegraph states that funding doubled between 2025 and 2026, reaching 25 funding rounds and $680 million in 2026, based on private market data from Tracxn.

While the headline growth is notable, the data cited also suggests concentration risk: the number of rounds fell compared with the previous year (46 funding rounds reported for 2025), implying that more capital is flowing into fewer companies. Singapore, in the same coverage, is described as taking the lead as a regional crypto hub, with 2,285 of 3,957 blockchain companies in the region and 82.5% of all time blockchain equity funding tracked.

For investors and founders, the implication is straightforward: capital availability appears stronger, but competition for funding may be more intense as fewer deals capture larger sums. Builders looking for traction may need to sharpen their differentiation while fund managers may focus on a narrower set of “wins” as funding concentrates.

Singapore and other regulators: licensing upgrades, tokenization roadmaps, and enforcement actions

Singapore added regulatory clarity for crypto services when Gemini received a Major Payment Institution (MPI) license from the Monetary Authority of Singapore (MAS), completing a transition that had been underway since the exchange received in-principle approval nearly two years earlier. Cointelegraph’s coverage notes that MPI license holders can provide regulated payment services without the transaction-volume limits that apply to standard payment institutions.

Gemini has served Singapore customers since 2020, with the company describing Singapore as a strategic hub for both retail and institutional clients in its commentary as reported. The development matters because payment licensing often affects how quickly regulated exchanges and wallet providers can scale product features, especially where transaction processing and cross-border settlement capabilities are involved.

Meanwhile, South Korea’s Financial Services Commission introduced a three-phase roadmap to build infrastructure for tokenized securities issuance for assets such as stocks, bonds, and funds. Cointelegraph reports that starting February 4, 2027, tokenized securities will be legally recognized as digitized forms of securities following an update to the Act on Electronic Registration of Stocks and Bonds.

The plan is staged: the first phase covers legal recognition for certain tokenized products (including institutional money market funds, bonds, unlisted stocks, and fractional investment securities). Phase two would broaden recognition to all publicly offered securities, while phase three targets onchain payments linked to stablecoins. This sequencing is important for market participants because it indicates where compliance and infrastructure investment may land first—legal status tends to precede broader market rollout.

Related to payments economics, the South Korea National Assembly Budget Office estimates that won-denominated stablecoins could reduce merchant payment fees by between $275 million and $3.8 billion annually, as cited in the same coverage. Whether those savings materialize will likely depend on adoption and competitive dynamics among payment rails.

Enforcement also featured prominently. According to Cointelegraph, US authorities restrained more than $52 million in crypto linked to the alleged scam marketplace Xinbi Guarantee and its vendor network. The US Justice Department said its Scam Center Strike Force seized two wallets used by Xinbi to collect vendor payments containing about $12 million, and sought restraints against 47 additional wallets believed to be connected to money laundering across Xinbi’s network. Separately, OFAC designated Xinbi as a significant transnational criminal organization and sanctioned SafeW Technology (Singapore-based) and Anwen Technology (Cambodia-based) for allegedly providing technological and financial support to Xinbi.

Corporate and cross-border moves: payments, tokenization pilots, and treasury expansion

Several business developments highlighted how crypto is being tested and integrated into traditional finance workflows. Citi plans to offer Japanese companies near-instant international payments using blockchain-based infrastructure, including outside standard banking hours, according to Cointelegraph’s report.

In Singapore, Circle agreed to acquire Tazapay for $400 million, with the company described as having more than 60 bank and fintech partners across 100 markets. The reported strategic logic is to deepen cross-border payments capability, an area where stablecoins and compliant rails often intersect.

In India, Arya.ag is testing a system to tokenize warehouse receipts representing ownership of stored grain on a dedicated Avalanche layer-1 blockchain, according to Cointelegraph. The coverage states Arya.ag is working with Finternet to connect grain deposits, warehouse receipts, collateral commitments, and loan status through the network. Devika Mittal of Ava Labs’ India team said each tokenized receipt would represent ownership of the stored commodity, while the companies did not disclose an expected launch date or the scale of the initial deployment.

Separately, the Indian Financial Intelligence Unit issued non-compliance notices to 15 offshore virtual digital-asset service providers for alleged AML failures and sought takedowns of relevant applications and URLs, accusing them of serving Indian customers without proper controls. And India’s Finance Ministry is expected—per Cointelegraph’s coverage—to appear before a parliamentary panel on September 16, with discussion focusing on taxation and regulation of virtual digital assets.

In Hong Kong, Circle’s USDC jersey sponsorship with Chelsea Football Club created complications, with the issue reportedly linked to the jurisdiction’s stricter approach to unlicensed crypto promotions and local merchant hesitation to sell the jersey. In another corporate treasury item, Hong Kong-listed gaming company Boyaa Interactive purchased an additional 115 Bitcoin, adding to its existing treasury holdings, as cited by Cointelegraph.

As these stories develop, the clearest watchpoints are shareholder governance in Bitcoin-treasury companies, the pace at which Singapore and South Korea turn licensing and tokenization roadmaps into real market products, and enforcement signals that may tighten how global payment providers and tokenized finance rails operate across borders.

Indian agricultural warehousing and lending provider Arya.ag is running tests for a tokenization system that would turn electronic warehouse receipts for stored grain into transferable on-chain tokens. The pilot is built on a dedicated Avalanche layer-1 network and is designed to connect digital records with the real-world lending workflow.

According to Arya.ag and its partners, the approach links grain deposits, warehouse receipts, collateral commitments, and loan status through Finternet’s infrastructure. Devika Mittal, Avalanche’s head of India at Ava Labs, told Cointelegraph that testing is underway and that each tokenized receipt would represent ownership of the stored commodity.

Key takeaways

• Arya.ag is testing tokenized warehouse receipts for grain storage on Avalanche’s dedicated layer-1, aiming to strengthen the link between physical collateral and on-chain lending records.
• Finternet will combine farmer, commodity, warehouse, and insurance data into a “composite token” intended to help banks evaluate collateral risk.
• The pilot focuses on improving shared transparency for lenders—such as whether grain is already pledged and what debt is outstanding—rather than immediately expanding the scale of Arya.ag’s existing loan book.
• Verification still depends on accurate confirmation of the underlying physical grain, keeping operational controls central to the model.
• The Finternet concept traces back to a 2024 BIS paper calling for unified ledgers for tokenized assets alongside legal and regulatory support.

Tokenizing grain collateral on Avalanche

Arya.ag’s system targets a long-standing bottleneck in commodity-backed lending: lenders need reliable, up-to-date information about what collateral exists, who owns it, and whether it has already been pledged elsewhere. Electronic warehouse receipts can help by enabling financing against stored commodities without requiring immediate sale after harvest. But translating those receipts into shared, verifiable digital records becomes the next hurdle.

In the testing described by Arya.ag and Ava Labs, tokenized warehouse receipts would act as digital representations of ownership in stored grain. Mittal said each receipt token would correspond to the commodity stored in the warehouse network. The intent is for the ledger to function as a shared reference point for lenders, borrowers, and related stakeholders.

Finternet’s role is to bridge more than ownership records. Sanmesh Kalyanpur, a director at Finternet Labs, said Arya.ag’s sampling and verification process collects information about stored grain and feeds it into the company’s portal. Finternet then aggregates multiple types of data—farmer, commodity, warehouse, and insurance—into what Kalyanpur described as a “composite token” that banks can use to assess collateral risk.

How the pilot ties receipts, commitments, and loan status

The announcement frames the system as an end-to-end linkage between deposits, collateral commitments, and lending outcomes. Arya.ag and Finternet say their network connects grain deposits, warehouse receipts, commitments made as collateral, and the evolving status of loans tied to those receipts.

That design matters because collateral risk is not only about existence—it’s also about exclusivity and exposure. A lender needs to know whether the grain behind a particular receipt is already pledged, and whether related debt is already outstanding. The companies said their system is intended to provide lenders with a shared record covering what is stored, who owns it, whether it is already pledged, and what debt remains.

However, the companies also stressed that the system’s effectiveness still depends on accurate verification of the physical commodities represented by the digital records. In practice, that means operational checks and sampling procedures remain crucial. Tokenization can improve the traceability of collateral and the speed of information sharing, but it cannot replace the underlying verification that proves the stored grain exists and matches the receipt’s claims.

Arya.ag reported that it stores about $2 billion in agricultural commodities across its warehouse network and supports roughly 120 billion Indian rupees (about $1.26 billion) in loans annually. Its lending arm, Arya Dhan, issues about $230 million in loans each year. The announcement clarifies that these figures describe Arya.ag’s existing business and do not represent assets or loans already brought on-chain.

Finternet’s deeper architecture and the regulatory question

The Finternet framework behind the pilot is not presented as a purely new idea. The concept traces back to a 2024 paper from the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), co-authored by Infosys co-founder Nandan Nilekani and then-BIS General Manager Agustín Carstens. The paper proposed interconnected unified ledgers for tokenized assets, while emphasizing that legal and regulatory frameworks would be required to support such systems.

According to BIS, the model is meant to enable tokenized assets to move through a connected system of records rather than isolated databases. The paper also underscored that technical alignment alone is insufficient; arrangements for legal recognition, operational responsibility, and oversight are central to adoption.

That focus on governance is particularly relevant for collateralized lending, where institutions require clarity on custody, ownership, enforcement, and dispute resolution. In a warehouse receipt context, the “source of truth” cannot be purely software if physical commodity verification is required.

Finternet’s background aligns with wider activity around tokenization on Avalanche. Earlier coverage by Cointelegraph reported that the value of tokenized real-world assets on Avalanche exceeded $1.3 billion at the end of 2025, driven by loans and tokenized money-market funds, illustrating that tokenization is already being used in parts of the on-chain finance stack.

Warehouse-backed lending momentum in India

India has been building momentum around warehouse-backed agricultural financing. The core mechanism—electronic warehouse receipts—allows farmers and businesses to borrow against stored commodities instead of selling immediately after harvest. That can help stabilize income and improve access to capital during seasonal price fluctuations.

The policy environment also matters. In 2024, the Indian government launched a 10 billion-rupee credit-guarantee program aimed at encouraging financing against electronic negotiable warehouse receipts, particularly among small and marginal farmers. This kind of program is designed to reduce risk for lenders, making warehouse receipt financing more accessible.

Arya.ag’s test can be seen as an effort to modernize how those electronic receipts are represented and shared when collateral moves into digital lending workflows. If tokenized receipts and composite collateral records function as intended, banks could gain a more synchronized view of pledged assets and associated exposure.

Still, the companies have not disclosed an expected launch date or the initial deployment’s scale—such as how much grain or lending it would cover—so investors and builders will likely need to monitor the pilot closely to understand performance, verification reliability, and how it integrates with existing lending operations.

For now, the most important question is whether the tokenized receipt model can deliver faster, more reliable collateral assessment without weakening controls over physical verification and pledge status; the next public updates from Arya.ag, Finternet, and Ava Labs will likely determine whether this remains a technical test or evolves into a productized pathway for warehouse-backed lending.

OKX has introduced pre-IPO derivatives tied to OpenAI and Anthropic alongside 100 tokenized stock markets for eligible European traders.

The Sep. 10 announcement from OKX said its new pre-IPO X-Perps allow eligible European customers to trade changes in the implied valuations of OpenAI and Anthropic before either company goes public.

Traders can open long or short positions at any time and apply leverage of up to 10x. However, the contracts do not represent shares in either private company or give their holders an economic claim against the referenced business.

Prices may also differ from valuations set during private funding rounds or from any price established through a future initial public offering. According to the company’s product disclaimer, an IPO could be delayed, canceled, or never take place.

OKX pre-IPO markets track private company valuations

Unlike a direct private-market investment, an X-Perp is a derivative through which traders speculate on the direction of a referenced company’s implied value. Opening the products with OpenAI and Anthropic gives European customers exposure to two closely followed private technology companies without placing their names on a shareholder register.

OKX said traders can enter and exit positions at any time, while each market will open with liquidity intended to support larger trades. Additional pre-IPO contracts will be introduced when the company considers them relevant.

Although the products extend access beyond conventional private markets, leverage raises the potential size of both profits and losses. OKX warned that customers trading X-Perps could lose part or all of their invested funds, particularly when leveraged positions move against them.

Erald Ghoos, CEO of OKX Europe, said pre-IPO markets have generally remained unavailable to most European traders through traditional brokerages and regulated platforms. He linked the launch to rising demand for the exchange’s perpetual products following the end of Europe’s MiCA transition period in July.

“X-Perps volume in Europe has grown fourfold since MiCA’s transition period ended in July, and these markets are built for those same traders,” Ghoos said.

According to Ghoos, the company intends to give European users enough liquidity to trade larger positions without requiring them to move to an unregulated venue. OKX did not provide a trading-volume figure or the initial implied valuations assigned to OpenAI and Anthropic in its announcement.

Tokenized stocks add 100 round-the-clock markets

Alongside the pre-IPO contracts, OKX has opened 100 tokenized stock and exchange-traded fund markets. The initial list includes products linked to SpaceX, Google, Nvidia, and Palantir, as well as the SPY and QQQ ETFs.

Customers can buy, sell, or convert the tokens and trade them continuously, including when the traditional markets for their referenced assets are closed. Supported order types include limit, market, stop, time-weighted average price, and Iceberg orders.

Stock tokens can also operate inside OKX’s dollar-cost averaging and Grid trading bots. For customers using multiple products, eligible tokenized positions may serve as collateral for X-Perps, allowing the same account balance to support stock-linked and crypto-linked derivatives.

On-chain transfers give the products another feature not normally available through a standard brokerage account. OKX said supported tokens can be deposited to the platform or withdrawn to external addresses, including self-custody wallets.

Round-the-clock access does not remove the pricing issues created when traditional exchanges are closed. OKX’s disclosure states that the tokens track the price of a referenced share, but holders do not directly own that share and receive no shareholder voting rights.

Company names used for the products do not indicate a partnership or endorsement, the disclosure added. Stock-token holders, therefore, gain price exposure through the instrument issued or supported by the platform rather than membership in the shareholder base of Google, Nvidia, Palantir, or another referenced company.

Ownership rights remain central to tokenized stocks

The distinction between price exposure and direct share ownership has become a central issue as trading platforms list more third-party stock tokens.

In September, crypto.news previously reported that AMC Entertainment objected to a Robinhood token linked to its shares. AMC CEO Adam Aron said his company had neither approved nor participated in the product, while Robinhood maintained that it stood behind its stock-token service.

Robinhood’s product documents described its tokens as debt securities issued by a Jersey entity rather than shares issued by the companies they follow. Buyers received economic exposure but no ownership, voting rights, or direct claim against AMC, creating a distinction similar to the one stated in OKX’s disclosure.

OpenAI raised a related concern in July 2025 after Robinhood distributed tokens offering exposure to the private company. OpenAI said at the time that it had not partnered with Robinhood, did not endorse the tokens, and had not approved a transfer of its equity.

For traders, the structure of each product determines whether a token represents an actual security, a contractual claim against an issuer, or a derivative that follows a reference price. Counterparty and insolvency risks can also differ from those attached to shares held through a conventional regulated broker.

OKX’s pre-IPO disclaimer states that its X-Perps provide no ownership or economic claim in the private company being referenced. Its tokenized stock disclosure separately says those instruments confer neither direct ownership nor shareholder rights.

US regulators are considering a different model

The OKX products have been launched for eligible European traders, leaving American investors outside the stated rollout. In the United States, regulators have been considering how round-the-clock tokenized equity trading could operate under federal securities rules.

On Aug. 17, earlier coverage detailed work by the Securities and Exchange Commission on a limited exemption that could allow selected platforms to test tokenized securities. No final eligibility criteria or implementation date had been announced when that report was published, and existing federal securities requirements remained in force.

SEC staff has distinguished between tokens issued with the involvement of the company whose shares they represent and third-party instruments that merely track a security or provide a claim against another issuer. According to the agency’s position covered in that report, placing a stock on a blockchain does not remove it from U.S. securities law.

Ownership records, custody, disclosures, market surveillance, and investor claims during issuer insolvency remain among the matters U.S. regulators are assessing. Trading outside regular exchange hours also raises questions about price discovery and execution when the underlying cash market is closed.

A regulated model has already entered limited testing in the United States. In March, Nasdaq received SEC approval for eligible participants to trade certain securities in either conventional or tokenized form.

Nasdaq’s pilot covers eligible Russell 1000 stocks and major index-linked ETFs. Under the approved structure, the traditional and tokenized versions carry the same pricing and shareholder rights, unlike products that only follow a company’s market value.

For European customers, OKX has placed the new instruments in the same account as its crypto spot, X-Perps, trading bots, Earn, and Pay services. Users can apply the platform’s order types, automated strategies and margin balance across the supported products without maintaining a separate brokerage account.

Financial instruments and related investment services are offered through OKX Europe Markets Ltd., which the company said is authorized and regulated by the Malta Financial Services Authority under Malta’s Investment Services Act.

Truflation has forecast that annual U.S. headline inflation will remain at 3.4% in August as higher gasoline prices, tariffs and producer costs threaten to keep price pressure above the Federal Reserve’s target.

Truflation said in its August inflation report that the softer July CPI reading was driven mainly by falling energy prices rather than a clear easing of underlying costs. The company expects the reversal of that energy decline, along with tariffs and higher input prices, to shape Friday’s Bureau of Labor Statistics release.

The Cleveland Federal Reserve and market consensus also forecast an annual headline CPI of 3.4% and a core CPI of 2.4%. However, both expect headline prices to rise 0.4% from July, compared with Truflation’s 0.3% estimate. All three forecasts place monthly core inflation at 0.2%.

July headline CPI rose 0.1% month over month after falling 0.4% in June, while the annual rate eased from 3.5% to 3.4%. Core CPI increased 0.2% during the month and slowed from 2.6% to 2.5% year over year.

Energy has kept headline CPI above core inflation

Gasoline provided the clearest source of new pressure in Truflation’s August data, rising 3.4% from July and 27.6% from a year earlier. The report attributed the increase to high crude prices, tight fuel inventories, and limited spare capacity at refineries.

Retail gasoline remained above $4 per gallon and moved past $4.10 in early September, according to the report. Truflation said crude prices and supply risks in the Middle East could prevent consumers from receiving material relief unless oil prices fall or U.S. inventories recover.

“The principal reason headline inflation is running above core is the renewed pressure from energy,” Oliver Rust, head of data at Truflation, told crypto.news.

Food and non-alcoholic beverage prices added another 0.5% in August and rose 2.8% over the year. Restaurant prices led the monthly increase, with food away from home climbing 0.7% as operators passed on costs tied to ingredients, wages, utilities and property.

Grocery prices increased more slowly, although Truflation said tight beef supplies and high wholesale food costs limited the decline. Higher gasoline prices could also raise transportation and distribution expenses, adding another source of food-price pressure.

Apparel and communications provided some relief. Clothing prices fell 1% during August as retailers used back-to-school and end-of-summer discounts, while communications prices dropped 0.9% amid competition among mobile carriers and lower effective data costs.

Services costs have remained high despite lower core CPI

Although core inflation is forecast at 2.4%, U.S. service companies continued to report high operating costs. The ISM Services Prices Index increased from 70.3 to 72.6 in August, reaching its highest level since August 2022.

Rust said businesses were paying more for labor, logistics, energy, and other operating needs, but the increases did not pass directly into consumer prices. Productivity has offset part of the wage pressure by allowing companies to produce more with each hour of work.

“While compensation may be growing around 3.5%–4.0%, productivity growth of approximately 2.0%–2.5% means that the increase in labor costs per unit of output can be closer to 1%–2%,” Rust said.

Technology and artificial intelligence have improved output per worker in some industries, he added, reducing the inflation effect of higher wages. Truflation therefore expects services inflation to remain persistent rather than accelerate sharply.

Housing produced a mixed reading. Truflation’s measure rose 0.15% in August but remained 2.32% lower than a year earlier. Rental inflation increased as the supply of newly built apartments started to slow, while high mortgage rates continued to limit home purchases and transactions.

Owned housing prices remained under pressure from weak affordability, elevated listings, and price cuts. Rental concessions stayed common, especially in Sun Belt markets, although the report said slower construction could allow asking rents to rise faster than effective rents.

Tariffs have raised the risk of higher goods inflation

Costs entering the production chain were running well above consumer goods inflation. Goods producer prices rose 6.5% year over year in July, while core goods PPI, which excludes food and energy, increased 4.9%.

Nonfuel import prices advanced 0.4% during July and 4.5% from a year earlier, their strongest annual increase since 2022. Imported capital goods rose 0.9% for the month, goods from China added 0.8%, and prices for imported vehicles and parts increased 0.2%.

Manufacturers also faced high raw-material costs. The ISM Manufacturing Prices Index stood at 71.1 in August, extending a run of rising prices to 23 consecutive months. Truflation linked the pressure to steel, aluminum, petroleum products, imported goods, and tariffs.

The average statutory tariff rate reached about 11% in August and is scheduled to rise to 11.8% by year-end, according to the report. Truflation said importers could delay the effect on consumers by accepting lower margins, selling inventory purchased before the tariff increases, changing suppliers, or negotiating lower prices.

As older inventories are replaced, Rust expects more of the higher landed costs to enter retail prices. Truflation’s analysis found that the effective tariff rate had its strongest correlation with core goods inflation when tariffs led prices by about four months.

U.S. tariff policy has already affected digital-asset markets. A Sep. 4 report on trade policy noted that an earlier tariff announcement covering 60 trading partners had sent Bitcoin below $65,000 as Treasury yields rose and leveraged long positions absorbed most crypto liquidations.

Truflation data have led BLS CPI by 41 days

To construct its U.S. inflation measure, Truflation collects more than 15 million price observations from over 40 data partners. The company maps the observations into BLS spending categories and then applies the weights used in the official CPI.

The resulting index serves as the input for Truflation’s BLS forecasting model. According to Rust, the company’s data have led movements in official CPI by approximately 41 days, or about six weeks.

Since 2011, Truflation’s measure and the BLS CPI have recorded a correlation of 0.955. Moving Truflation’s data forward by 41 days raises the correlation to 0.962, although Rust said the exact lead varies by inflation environment and spending category.

Since the company began publishing BLS CPI forecasts, its estimates have recorded an average absolute deviation of 0.09 percentage points from the eventual government releases, Rust said.

The August reading will also influence expectations for the Federal Reserve’s Sept. 15–16 meeting. A recent Bitcoin market report found that BTC had fallen below $78,000 as hotter producer inflation and rising expectations of a September rate increase reduced demand for risk assets.

August headline producer inflation reached 5.4%, slightly above the 5.3% forecast, while core PPI increased to 4.6%, its highest level since June. CME FedWatch data cited in the report placed the probability of a quarter-point September rate increase at about 60%.

Truflation expects headline inflation to remain around 3.3%–3.4% during the quarter, with monthly readings ranging from roughly 0.2% to 0.4%. By year-end, the company projects a possible decline into the 2.8%–3.2% range if energy prices ease, housing disinflation continues, and businesses pass higher goods costs to consumers gradually.

Federal Reserve Governor Christopher Waller said before the payroll report that the next inflation release would carry considerable weight in his September decision. The BLS is scheduled to publish August CPI data on Sept. 11, five days before the Federal Open Market Committee announces its interest-rate decision.