Bitget CEO Gracy Chen has put the chance of the U.S. government buying Bitcoin for its strategic reserve before President Donald Trump leaves office at close to zero.

Speaking in a recent interview, Bitget CEO Gracy Chen said the U.S. government is unlikely to begin buying Bitcoin for its strategic reserve within the next two years.

“From a policy perspective, it’s probably unlikely,” Chen said. “I just don’t see it coming right now.”

Chen said buying Bitcoin would require a more substantial policy decision than retaining assets already controlled by the government. Lawmakers and political parties would need to debate how any purchase program would work, particularly if public money or changes to federal accounting were involved.

Her assessment places the focus on the reserve’s funding rules rather than the administration’s public support for crypto. Trump created the reserve in March 2025, but the order did not provide money for regular purchases on exchanges.

Bitcoin reserve rules limit direct government purchases

President Trump signed the March 2025 executive order establishing the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and the U.S. Digital Asset Stockpile on March 6, 2025.

Under the order, the Treasury Department must maintain custodial accounts for Bitcoin that has been finally forfeited through criminal or civil proceedings or received through civil penalties. Federal agencies were also instructed to review their holdings and report eligible assets to the Treasury.

Bitcoin transferred into the reserve “shall not be sold,” according to the order, although existing laws allow exceptions for court orders, victim restitution, law enforcement operations and certain asset-forfeiture requirements.

The White House did not completely prohibit the government from obtaining more BTC. Instead, the order directed the Treasury and Commerce departments to develop acquisition strategies that are budget-neutral and impose no additional costs on taxpayers.

No funding mechanism or purchase schedule accompanied the directive. Any plan involving new federal spending would require congressional authorization, while alternatives such as revaluing U.S. gold certificates would face separate legal and political hurdles.

An August reserve policy explainer from crypto.news said gold revaluation has been discussed as one possible funding route. Federal Reserve gold certificates are recorded at a statutory price of $42.22 per ounce, far below the metal’s market value, but using the difference to finance Bitcoin purchases would require legislation.

The reserve removes supply without adding demand

Public estimates have commonly placed U.S. government holdings near 198,000 BTC, equal to about 1% of Bitcoin’s circulating supply. The estimate includes coins connected to major forfeiture cases, though the government has not released a complete public audit confirming how much BTC has been finally forfeited and is eligible for the reserve.

The distinction between seized and forfeited assets matters because the government does not necessarily own every coin held in a federal wallet. Seized assets may remain subject to court proceedings, restitution claims, or eventual return to victims, while finally forfeited assets can become federal property.

At Bitcoin’s recent price near $78,000, a 198,000 BTC position would be worth about $15.4 billion. Its main market effect comes from the order’s prohibition on sales rather than an expected stream of government purchases.

Before Trump established the reserve, the U.S. Marshals Service regularly auctioned Bitcoin obtained in criminal cases. The government sold about 195,000 BTC before the reserve order, according to White House estimates, and administration officials argued that earlier sales cost taxpayers billions of dollars in unrealized gains.

Removing a large federal position from potential sale reduces one known source of market supply. It does not provide the recurring demand that would come from Treasury purchases made at set intervals or price levels.

Bitcoin investors initially expected the reserve announcement to support active accumulation, but the order stopped short of creating such a program. The market’s response therefore depends more on whether the administration identifies a lawful, budget-neutral funding method or Congress passes separate legislation.

Treasury has previously ruled out active Bitcoin buying

Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent gave a similar account of the government’s plans in August 2025, when he said the reserve would grow through confiscated assets rather than direct purchases.

“We’re not going to be buying that [Bitcoin], but are going to use confiscated assets and continue to build that up,” Bessent told Fox Business, adding that the government would “stop selling” its holdings.

A June review of the reserve reported that Bessent valued the federal position at between $15 billion and $20 billion at the time. The report also noted that the executive order asked officials to examine budget-neutral acquisition methods without authorizing an open-market buying program.

Congress could replace the current arrangement with a statutory reserve. Senator Cynthia Lummis’s BITCOIN Act proposed purchasing 1 million BTC over five years, while the American Reserve Modernization Act, introduced in May 2026, proposed a 20-year holding period without retaining the same 1 million BTC target.

Neither proposal has created an active federal purchase program. Congressional approval would also provide firmer legal protection than an executive order, which a future president can amend or revoke.

U.S. investors still face an uncertain reserve balance

For American investors, the reserve does not offer direct exposure comparable to shares in a spot Bitcoin exchange-traded fund. Its immediate relevance lies in federal supply management because the order limits when reserve coins can return to the market.

Public wallet trackers cannot determine the exact size of the reserve. Some services count Bitcoin held in government-linked addresses even when ownership, forfeiture status, or restitution obligations remain unresolved.

Federal custody activity can add to the uncertainty. In July, U.S.-linked wallets transferred nearly $297 million in seized Bitcoin and Ether to Coinbase Prime, including about 3,940 BTC valued at roughly $244 million at the time and 30,000 ETH worth about $53 million.

Coinbase Prime provides custody and trading services, so the transfers did not confirm a sale. Galaxy Research head Alex Thorn linked the Bitcoin to seizures involving Ryan Farace and the closed BTC-e exchange, while the Ether came from wallets tied to a separate federal case involving crypto storage and money laundering.

Billionaire investor Ray Dalio has renewed his support for holding gold and some Bitcoin as U.S. federal debt has crossed $40 trillion, and BTC has rallied toward $80,000.

Ray Dalio, writing in an X post, said the U.S. government’s financial position had reached an inflection point as its debt burden approached a level that may become difficult to manage without severe economic pain.

The Bridgewater Associates founder advised investors to spread their exposure across asset classes and countries with strong finances. He also recommended limiting exposure to debt assets such as bonds while holding more gold and a smaller allocation to Bitcoin.

“As general advice, I suggest diversifying well in asset classes and countries that have strong income statements and balance sheets and are not having great internal political and external geopolitical conflicts, underweighting debt assets like bonds, and overweighting gold and a bit of Bitcoin,” Dalio said.

His comments followed another major milestone for U.S. public finances. The federal government’s total outstanding debt reached $40.047 trillion on Aug. 18, up from $39.987 trillion one day earlier, according to the Treasury Department’s Debt to the Penny database.

Of the Aug. 18 total, approximately $32.27 trillion was debt held by the public, while about $7.78 trillion consisted of intragovernmental holdings. The government ended 2025 with $37.64 trillion in federal debt, meaning the total had increased by about $2.4 trillion in less than eight months.

Bitcoin and gold can reduce portfolio risk

Dalio said an allocation of roughly 10% to 15% to gold could lower a portfolio’s overall risk because the metal often behaves differently from stocks and debt securities during periods of financial stress.

Bitcoin received a more limited endorsement. Dalio described it as part of the group of assets investors could hold outside conventional debt markets, though his suggested positioning still placed more weight on gold.

His latest statement follows years of gradually changing views on the cryptocurrency. Dalio disclosed in 2021 that he owned some Bitcoin and later described it as an alternative, gold-like asset, while continuing to question whether governments and central banks would adopt it as reserve money.

In October 2025, crypto.news examined Dalio’s position that Bitcoin was unlikely to become a reserve currency. The report noted that he favored gold because of its long history, liquidity, and acceptance among central banks, even as he recognized Bitcoin as a possible hedge against monetary expansion and heavy government borrowing.

Dalio’s portfolio guidance is not a prediction that Bitcoin will rise whenever federal debt increases. His recommendation rests on diversification and reducing dependence on assets tied to highly indebted governments, rather than replacing an entire investment portfolio with BTC or gold.

For U.S. investors, both assets are available through regulated products as well as direct ownership. Spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds provide exposure through U.S. brokerage and retirement accounts, while gold can be held through exchange-traded products, mining shares, or physical bullion. Each route carries different fees, custody risks, and tax treatment.

U.S. debt concerns meet Bitcoin’s rally toward $80K

Bitcoin’s advance has placed Dalio’s comments alongside a sharp change in crypto market conditions. BTC fell to the $62,000–$63,000 area earlier this week before recovering through $70,000 and entering the upper $70,000 range.

The move ended several weeks of sideways trading and pushed Bitcoin to its highest level since May. BTC was trading near $77,600 when checked, according to market data, leaving the $80,000 level as the next closely watched psychological barrier.

Forced buying from short sellers helped accelerate the initial breakout. When Bitcoin crossed $69,000, exchanges liquidated more than $1 billion in bearish positions within one hour, requiring some traders to purchase BTC to close leveraged bets.

Spot demand then added support. U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs attracted about $517 million on Aug. 19 and another $606 million on Aug. 20, according to SoSoValue data cited in recent market coverage. The two sessions generated more than $1.1 billion in combined net inflows.

As previously reported, Bitcoin gained about 18% in two days before clearing $76,000. The report identified $70,000 to $72,000 as an important support area, while resistance remained near $80,000 to $82,000.

ETF inflows offer a direct U.S. connection to the rally because the funds must obtain Bitcoin exposure as investors add capital. Short liquidations, by comparison, represent forced derivatives activity that may fade once leveraged bearish positions have been closed.

Treasury doubles long-dated debt buybacks

Alongside the $40 trillion debt milestone, the U.S. Treasury announced on Aug. 19 that it would increase the size of liquidity-support buybacks for longer-dated nominal government securities.

The maximum purchase size will rise from $2 billion to at least $4 billion per operation for securities in the 10-to-20-year and 20-to-30-year maturity sectors, according to the Treasury’s official announcement. The change takes effect on Sept. 9 and will remain in place through Nov. 4, when the department plans to provide further information during its next quarterly refunding.

Treasury said the increase would provide more liquidity in long-dated sectors where market participants had submitted a high volume of eligible offers. Buybacks allow the government to repurchase older, less-liquid bonds and may improve trading conditions in parts of the Treasury market.

The operations are not Federal Reserve asset purchases, money creation or direct support for cryptocurrency. Market participants nevertheless responded to the announcement as long-dated Treasury yields declined and demand for risk assets improved.

A recent market report linked Bitcoin’s initial 11.4% rise above $71,000 to the buyback announcement, renewed ETF inflows and short liquidations. The report said Treasury’s decision helped the liquidity backdrop but did not establish that bond buybacks alone caused the rally.

Dalio’s warning addressed the underlying debt burden rather than the mechanics of the buyback program. He said government finances should be repaired while economic conditions remain relatively strong because borrowing requirements tend to increase during a contraction.

Policies, political changes, and wars could either speed up or delay the point at which debt becomes unmanageable, according to Dalio. Waiting for an economic downturn would leave policymakers with fewer options because weaker tax revenue and additional government support programs typically increase funding needs.

Fed policy remains a risk for Bitcoin investors

While lower long-term yields have supported Bitcoin, Federal Reserve policy remains a separate source of risk for U.S. investors. The Fed kept its target rate at 3.5% to 3.75% in July but faced three dissenting votes from officials who preferred a quarter-point increase.

In its July policy statement, the Federal Open Market Committee said inflation remained above its 2% goal, partly because supply shocks had raised prices in sectors including energy. The committee also said it would “deliver price stability.”

Fed Chair Kevin Warsh and the committee face another policy decision on Sept. 15–16. Higher interest rates can raise the returns available on cash and government bonds, which may reduce demand for non-yielding assets such as gold and volatile assets such as Bitcoin.

The July vote showed that pressure for tighter policy already existed inside the Fed. Beth Hammack, Neel Kashkari, and Lorie Logan opposed the decision to hold rates steady and supported a 25-basis-point increase instead.

BitMine Chairman Tom Lee has identified BMNR as the US-listed stock most closely tied to Ethereum, citing an 80% correlation while predicting that ETH will outperform Bitcoin during the current cycle.

Fundstrat said in a Friday post on X that its study covered 17 companies with market values above $2 billion, giving stock investors a list of publicly traded businesses that have moved closely with Bitcoin or Ethereum.

BitMine Immersion Technologies led the Ethereum group with a correlation of 80%, while Coinbase ranked second at 74%. Among stocks linked to Bitcoin, Strategy recorded the highest reading at 78%, followed by Coinbase at 74%.

Lee said he expects Ethereum to beat Bitcoin during the present cycle because tokenization and AI applications could create demand for Ethereum’s network. In his view, the two uses matter more than the themes that supported ETH during earlier market cycles.

The post did not disclose the period used to calculate the correlations or explain whether Fundstrat measured daily, weekly, or monthly returns. Correlations also change as prices and market conditions change, meaning the figures describe the relationship found in Fundstrat’s dataset rather than a fixed link between each stock and the corresponding cryptocurrency.

BitMine stock gives investors an indirect route to Ethereum

BitMine’s position at the top of the list follows its decision to build the world’s largest corporate Ethereum treasury. As of Aug. 16, the company held 5,815,164 ETH, 210 Bitcoin, $78 million in cash and marketable securities, and investments in Beast Industries and Eightco Holdings.

Using an ETH price of $1,893, BitMine valued its combined crypto, cash, securities and other investments at $11.4 billion. The company said its Ethereum position represented 4.8% of the token’s stated 120.7 million supply, placing it 96% of the way toward its target of owning 5%.

During the week ending Aug. 16, BitMine purchased another 9,926 ETH. The company has bought Ether every week since adopting its Ethereum treasury strategy on June 30, 2025, according to its latest update.

An Aug. 10 treasury update previously covered by crypto.news showed BitMine holding approximately 5.81 million ETH after another 7,391-token purchase. At that time, the company had also repurchased three million BMNR shares under a $4 billion authorization.

BitMine added another 1.7 million shares to its repurchases during the following week, taking the total since July to more than 20.8 million. Lee said management considered the common shares undervalued, although that assessment represents the company’s view rather than an independent valuation.

BMNR closed at about $22.72 on Aug. 21, gaining roughly 5.3% during the session. Coinbase rose around 7.5%, while Strategy added about 5.9%, as Bitcoin and several large altcoins advanced during the same trading period.

Ethereum staking has become central to BitMine’s model

Of BitMine’s 5.82 million ETH, 5,067,309 tokens were staked as of Aug. 16. The amount represented about 87% of the company’s Ethereum holdings and was valued at $9.6 billion using the price cited in its announcement.

Based on a seven-day annualized yield of 2.61%, BitMine projected around $250 million in annual staking revenue from the position. The company said potential annual rewards could reach $287 million after its remaining ETH is staked through its MAVAN platform and external partners.

Staking gives BitMine a source of revenue that Strategy cannot generate from its Bitcoin holdings because Bitcoin does not use a proof-of-stake system. BitMine’s estimates, however, depend on Ethereum’s staking yield, ETH’s market price, validator performance and the amount of company-owned Ether placed into staking.

The company also joined the Russell 1000 large-cap index on June 26, giving US fund managers and benchmark-tracking products another route to obtain indirect Ethereum exposure. BMNR trades on the New York Stock Exchange, while its 9.5% Series A perpetual preferred stock trades under the ticker BMNP.

Compared with a spot Ethereum ETF, BMNR carries risks tied to its operating costs, capital decisions, share issuance, staking activity, and other investments. Its market value can also trade above or below the value of the ETH and other assets held on its balance sheet.

Tokenization supports Lee’s Ethereum thesis

Lee has described tokenization as one of the main reasons Ethereum could gain against Bitcoin. In BitMine’s Aug. 17 update, he said the ETH/BTC ratio had risen to 0.02994 and moved above a long-running downward trend.

Earlier ETH/BTC analysis showed the ratio testing resistance near 0.0286 in July after recovering from an early June low around 0.026. The ratio measures how much Bitcoin one Ether can buy, so a rising reading indicates that ETH is gaining value against BTC.

According to Lee, Ethereum’s relative gains during earlier cycles were supported by initial coin offerings in 2017 and 2018, NFTs in 2020 and 2021, and stablecoin adoption in 2025. He expects Wall Street tokenization and blockchain-based AI agents to support the next period of ETH outperformance.

RWA.xyz data offered additional context for the tokenization argument. As of Aug. 21, the analytics platform tracked 2,267 real-world assets on Ethereum and $13.99 billion in RWA transfer volume over 30 days, an increase of 20.45%.

The same database placed the stablecoin market value on Ethereum at $157.11 billion, with 26.6 million holders and $1.55 trillion in 30-day transfer volume. Tokenized-asset platforms listed on the network included Ondo, Securitize, Circle, Tether, and Sky.

Wall Street involvement has also extended beyond companies holding ETH. BlackRock, JPMorgan, and several asset managers have developed or tested tokenized funds, collateral products, and settlement services that use Ethereum or networks compatible with its software.

US Ethereum ETFs show signs of institutional demand

US-listed exchange-traded funds have provided another measure of demand from investors who prefer regulated brokerage products. Spot Ethereum ETFs attracted $365 million in net inflows during July, while spot Bitcoin ETFs received $205 million.

The July result was Ethereum funds’ strongest month on record and the first time their monthly inflows exceeded Bitcoin ETF inflows by more than two to one, according to a recent ETF flow review. On July 23, Ethereum products received $72.64 million, compared with $68.99 million for Bitcoin funds.

Ethereum ETFs added another $53.75 million on Aug. 4, followed by $202 million over the next three trading days. During July, the ETH/BTC ratio rose by about 11%, moving from roughly 0.027 to 0.030.

AI applications form the second part of Lee’s forecast. Ethereum.org says blockchain-based agents can control wallets, execute transactions, interact with smart contracts and use stablecoins to pay for computing resources, data and application access.

Ethereum.org also describes the technology as experimental and warns users to exercise caution. Agent activity does not guarantee demand for ETH because applications can use other blockchains, layer-2 networks, or off-chain payment systems.

Lee has pointed to Robinhood Chain as one example of financial and blockchain services coming together. The Ethereum layer-2 network uses ETH for transaction fees and sends its final transaction records to Ethereum, while Robinhood reported 27.4 million funded customers at the end of the first quarter.

Within weeks of its July launch, the network had recorded almost $9 billion in cumulative decentralized-exchange volume, $431 million in locked assets and more than 250,000 daily active users, according to Robinhood Chain data. More than 80% of its early exchange volume came from memecoins, while temporary fee waivers reduced trading costs during the network’s first 90 days.

Galaxy Research has said the SEC’s proposed Reg Crypto framework could give hundreds of existing tokens a formal route out of investment contract status.

Galaxy Research, in an Aug. 21 analysis, said the proposal could replace years of uncertainty over when an investment contract tied to a token ends with a filing and a recorded date.

Alex Thorn, Galaxy’s head of firmwide research, said the first visible effect could be the resolution of securities-law questions surrounding tokens already in circulation, rather than a fresh wave of public token sales.

The SEC estimated that about 475 issuers would file transition reports under the investment contract safe harbor each year. By comparison, the agency expects approximately 130 annual offerings across the proposal’s two new fundraising exemptions.

According to Galaxy, the difference suggests that existing projects may have more immediate use for the exit process than new issuers have for the fundraising routes.

“Reg Crypto could provide meaningful regulatory clarity, but only Congress can make that clarity durable,” Thorn said.

Reg Crypto could give legacy tokens a formal exit

Under the proposal, the safe harbor would apply to a crypto asset that is not itself a security but was issued or sold as part of an investment contract. The framework would not cover tokenized stocks, bonds, or arrangements combining tokens with equity or another security.

An issuer could use the safe harbor after completing or permanently ending all essential managerial work promised to buyers. The issuer must also stop making new promises to perform such work and file a transition report with the SEC.

Once the requirements are met, the related investment contract would be treated as terminated under the Securities Act and the Securities Exchange Act. The token could continue to exist and trade without remaining tied to the original contract.

Galaxy described the framework as a workable legal model for a token’s lifecycle because the investment contract could begin when the asset is issued and end after the issuer’s promised work is finished. Unlike corporate stock, the token would not carry permanent securities treatment solely because it was once distributed through an investment contract.

Issuers would drive the process by filing Form TR and certifying that they met the conditions. An earlier comparison of the frameworks noted that the SEC would retain the power to challenge a certification.

Projects would not need to have used either the Reg Crypto fundraising exemption to seek the safe harbor. Galaxy said the standalone route is therefore relevant to tokens issued years before the proposal, including assets whose legal position has remained unsettled through regulatory speeches, enforcement settlements and court cases.

The SEC estimates that preparing a standalone transition report would require an average of 30 burden hours, including work performed by outside professional service providers. Galaxy said the expected workload means most issuers would probably need legal or compliance support to complete the process.

Two exemptions would open token sales to US investors

Alongside the safe harbor, Reg Crypto proposes two exemptions from the registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933.

As crypto.news previously reported in its coverage of the $75 million exemption, the startup route would allow an issuer to distribute up to $5 million in covered investment contracts during a maximum four-year period. The one-time exemption would require public filings at the beginning and end of the period.

A second route, modeled on Regulation A, would contain two tiers. Tier 1 would permit an issuer to raise up to $20 million in 12 months, while Tier 2 would raise the ceiling to $75 million during the same period.

Offerings under the second route would require SEC qualification, financial statements, and continuing reports. Tier 2 issuers would also need audited financial statements and substantial organizational, management, and asset ties to the United States.

For unaccredited investors, the purchase limit would equal 10% of annual income or net worth, whichever figure is higher. Galaxy said the provision would give US retail buyers lawful access to qualifying token distributions while imposing a defined exposure limit.

Covered investment contracts sold through either exemption would not be restricted securities under the proposal. Unless the issuer added a separate contractual restriction, buyers could resell them immediately without a federal holding period.

Galaxy identified the lack of a resale lockup as a potentially important feature for projects that want tokens to circulate among users instead of remaining with venture investors. The research firm also noted that issuers would accept detailed disclosure and reporting duties in return for that flexibility.

Token disclosures would differ from stock filings

Rather than relying only on disclosure rules written for corporate shares, Reg Crypto would require information tied to how digital assets operate.

Issuers would need to disclose token supply, release schedules, minting and burning systems, governance arrangements, and smart contract permissions. Required information would also include source code, the structure of the project’s ecosystem, development promises, and progress toward completing them.

Galaxy said the list addresses information that token buyers use when assessing a project but that may not appear in a conventional equity filing. Token ownership does not necessarily give buyers the voting, dividend or liquidation rights attached to corporate stock, making supply controls and smart contract access more relevant to the investment decision.

Even with the new pathways, Thorn questioned how many projects would choose the fundraising exemptions. Rule 506 under Regulation D already permits uncapped offerings without an SEC qualification process or continuing public reports, although it does not offer the same public distribution route to non-accredited buyers.

Offshore structures could present another obstacle for larger offerings. According to Galaxy, token projects often use overseas foundations for governance, treasury management and tax planning, while the larger Reg Crypto exemption would require much of the issuer’s organization, management and assets to sit in the United States.

The startup exemption does not impose the same US incorporation condition. Galaxy said smaller domestic offerings could therefore use the $5 million route more readily, despite its lower ceiling.

SEC rules would leave part of the market unresolved

Reg Crypto would preempt state registration and qualification requirements for covered primary offerings and certain secondary transactions, provided that the issuer remained current with its obligations. The state antifraud authority would continue to apply.

The proposal does not establish rules for exchanges, brokers, dealers, or custodians. It also does not determine whether a token that leaves investment contract status becomes a commodity under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s supervision.

A separate analysis of Reg Crypto found that the safe harbor could therefore remove SEC treatment without assigning the token to another federal regulator. The CLARITY Act would address that question through legislation dividing oversight between the SEC and CFTC.

Galaxy warned that an agency rule could also be changed by a future commission. Federal legislation would carry more permanence and would override any conflicting SEC rule if Congress enacted it.

The Senate has scheduled a Sept. 15 procedural test for the CLARITY Act, according to recent Senate vote coverage. The cloture motion needs 60 votes and would only allow the chamber to begin considering the bill, not approve its final passage.

The SEC published Reg Crypto in the Federal Register on Aug. 21 under docket S7-2026-27. Chairman Paul Atkins and Commissioners Hester Peirce and Mark Uyeda issued statements supporting the proposal, while the public comment period remains open until Oct. 20.

Bitcoin (BTC) consolidated above $77,000 after Friday’s Wall Street open as gold joined the crypto rally to hit 14-week highs.

Key points:

• Bitcoin and gold both hit their highest levels since May 15 against the US dollar.
• Analysis ties the strong performance firmly to US government debt policy.
• Polymarket odds of Bitcoin reaching $90,000 before 2027 reach 48%.

Analysis: Bitcoin and gold gains not “surprise”

Data from TradingView showed BTC/USD cooling after reaching its highest levels since May 15, still up nearly 6% on the day.

BTC/USD one-hour chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView

Gold echoed the move, reaching multi-month highs of $4,632 per ounce, up 2.2% on the day at the time of writing. On a monthly basis, BTC/USD and XAU/USD were up 13% and 16%, respectively.

BTC/USD vs. XAU/USD one-day chart. Source: Cointelegraph/TradingView

“What’s happening now in gold and crypto should not come as a surprise,” market commentary The Kobeissi Letter wrote in a response on X.

Kobeissi attributed the rapid gains in precious metals and crypto to a combination of inflation, deficit spending and US Treasury policy. Record government deficit spending and the Treasury Department’s pledge to at least double the size of certain debt buyback operations to $4 billion helped drive the rally in both asset classes, Kobeissi argued.

Discussing Bitcoin’s reaction to the current macro landscape, trading company QCP Capital noted that the financial stress signals went beyond the US, highlighting surging Japanese government bond yields after a rare joint currency intervention in the yen earlier this month.

“The most notable cross-asset signal this week has been the divergence after Treasury’s announcement. Treasuries initially rallied before giving back much of the move. BTC and gold did not retrace to the same extent,” it wrote in its latest Market Color analysis, adding:

“That does not establish a new liquidity or monetary regime, but it does highlight the sensitivity of alternative assets to changes in long-end rates and the dollar.”

Polymarket 2026 odds of $90,000 BTC near 50%

As BTC price upside passed 20% over two days, consensus over potential targets through year-end began to improve. 

Data from prediction service Polymarket put the odds of BTC/USD hitting $90,000 before 2027 at 48% at the time of writing, up sharply since the start of the week.

Odds of BTC/USD hitting $90,000 by Jan. 1, 2027 (screenshot). Source: Polymarket

Related: Strategy Bitcoin treasury hits breakeven point as BTC price passes $77K

Some market participants, however, remained skeptical. Trader and analyst Rekt Capital stressed that Bitcoin needed to reclaim its 50-week exponential moving average (EMA) at $77,232, a trend line it rejected in January.

“Break the Downtrend and Bitcoin will confirm entry into a new technical Macro Uptrend. Reject from here however and price will maintain its series of Lower Highs,” he told X followers. 

“History suggests there’s still time for price to continue its Downtrend.”

BTC/USD one-month chart. Source: Rekt Capital on X.com

US regulators have issued long trading and registration bans against two former FTX-linked executives as part of civil enforcement tied to the exchange’s collapse. In a separate SDNY matter, prosecutors are pushing back on a motion to dismiss in a case involving alleged insider betting on Polymarket.

Taken together, the rulings and filings underscore how US oversight is extending beyond criminal proceedings—using civil instruments to restrict market access and to continue pursuing novel questions around how prediction-market “event contracts” should be treated under federal commodities law.

Key takeaways

• The CFTC entered consent orders imposing five-year trading bans on Caroline Ellison and Zixiao “Gary” Wang, tied to their FTX roles.
• Those same orders also add registration bans—10 years for Ellison and eight years for Wang—separately from criminal outcomes.
• In SDNY, prosecutors opposed a motion to dismiss filed by a US soldier accused of more than $400,000 in alleged nonpublic-information trades on Polymarket.
• The government argued the defendant’s “ambiguous” Commodity Exchange Act theories raise issues that are not appropriate for a motion-to-dismiss stage.

CFTC consent orders: Ellison and Wang face trading and registration bans

On Tuesday, the US District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) entered consent orders connected to a 2022 enforcement action brought by the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The orders involve former Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison and FTX co-founder Zixiao “Gary” Wang.

Under the CFTC’s terms, both individuals received a five-year trading ban related to their positions in the events surrounding FTX’s collapse. The Commission also required additional restrictions on each executive’s market-facing activities: Ellison was ordered to undergo a 10-year registration ban, while Wang received an eight-year registration ban.

According to CFTC enforcement director David Miller, the restrictions were imposed in recognition of what the CFTC characterized as Wang’s and Ellison’s “material assistance in the Commission’s FTX-related investigations.”

Importantly, the civil case handled through these consent orders is separate from criminal proceedings tied to allegations that customer funds were misused at FTX. Earlier criminal outcomes included a two-year prison sentence for Ellison and a “time served” outcome for Wang, as reported in coverage of the parallel matters.

Why these civil bans matter after criminal cases

Civil enforcement actions like these can still shape the post-FTX landscape even when criminal cases are winding down. Trading bans and registration bans directly affect whether a person can participate in regulated market activity, which can have longer operational consequences than criminal sentencing alone.

Here, the CFTC’s approach also highlights a key feature of how US financial regulators pursue accountability: consent orders can produce fast, court-approved restrictions without the need for a contested merits ruling in the civil case itself. While the underlying criminal cases address criminal liability, these orders focus on deterrence and on limiting future involvement in regulated trading and registration.

For market participants, the practical effect is clear: even as FTX’s executive-level criminal cases progressed on a separate track, the CFTC’s civil process kept moving to close off future access to trading and registration for key figures connected to the firm’s failure.

SDNY dispute over Polymarket insider-betting allegations

In another SDNY filing released this week, lawyers for the US government opposed a motion to dismiss from Gannon Ken Van Dyke, a US soldier accused of using nonpublic information to generate more than $400,000 through event contracts on the prediction market platform Polymarket.

Prosecutors say Van Dyke’s trading was connected to a military operation involving the removal of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January. The defense motion, filed on July 31, sought dismissal of charges by arguing that the Commodity Exchange Act—the legal framework at the center of three of the charges—was “ambiguous” in treating event contracts as “swaps” within the CFTC’s jurisdiction.

In the government’s Wednesday opposition filing, prosecutors contended that Van Dyke’s argument depended on hypothetical scenarios and broader questions about “ongoing litigation over state gaming laws,” which they said were unnecessary for the court to resolve at the motion-to-dismiss stage.

“Van Dyke’s motion asks the Court to make a factual determination not appropriate at the motion-to-dismiss stage,” SDNY Deputy US Attorney Sean Buckley argued in the filing. Buckley said the defendant’s approach relied on speculative assertions about facts drawn from the indictment and “incorrect conclusions” about the nature of the charge, particularly with respect to whether the alleged conduct involved “property.”

As of Friday, the court had not posted a decision on the motion to dismiss to the public docket.

How the case frames event contracts as commodities

The procedural fight in the Polymarket matter is significant because it turns on how the Commodity Exchange Act applies to event contracts—an issue that has been central to the government’s theory of the case. Van Dyke’s defense attempts to recast the charging statute as too uncertain, while prosecutors argue the legal and factual issues raised by the defense are premature.

For traders and platform users, the broader stakes are about what kinds of market instruments regulators view as sufficiently tied to commodities law enforcement. If the government’s theory prevails through the next stages, it could reinforce the idea that certain prediction-market structures may fall within the CFTC’s reach. If the defense meaningfully limits the statute’s application, courts may narrow how event contracts are categorized.

At this point, the key development is not a ruling on the merits, but the court’s next step after the opposition: whether it will deny dismissal, require further briefing, or allow the case to proceed with the government’s allegations intact.

Readers should watch for the SDNY decision on the motion to dismiss in the Polymarket matter and, separately, whether additional FTX-related civil enforcement actions follow the pattern set by the CFTC consent orders—especially as courts continue to translate civil theories into concrete trading and registration limits.