TLDR:

• TAO price surged over 24% on June 13, closing at $264 after opening near $212 in the session
• RSI bottomed in the low 30s, matching the same zone that marked the prior three swing lows on TAO
• Bittensor subnet activity had been accelerating quietly while the TAO price was trending lower
• The $280 to $320 zone is now the key resistance band TAO must reclaim to confirm the bullish trend

The TAO price recorded one of its largest single-day gains of 2025 on June 13, closing above $264 after opening near $212.

The move ended a seven-month downtrend that had pushed the asset from the $500 region into the low $200s. Multiple technical signals aligned ahead of the breakout.

Sentiment had turned deeply bearish in the weeks before the reversal candle printed.

Technical Signals Preceded the TAO Price Reversal

The TAO price had been compressing for months before Thursday’s session. Each rally attempt during the downtrend met fresh selling pressure near established resistance zones. Buyers were unable to hold any meaningful recovery, and many traders had written off the chart entirely.

However, momentum indicators were signaling a shift beneath the surface. The RSI had bottomed in the low 30s, the same region that marked the three prior swing lows on the chart.

Analyst account @2xnmore noted that oscillators were already curling higher before price confirmed the move.

The MACD histogram had also been compressing for several weeks heading into the reversal. That compression pointed to sellers losing steam rather than buyers gaining strength. It was a quiet warning sign that most traders overlooked during the grind lower.

Volume on the reversal candle removed any doubt about the session. It dwarfed anything seen across the prior two months of sideways action. That kind of participation on a single green candle separates genuine reversals from dead-cat bounces.

Bittensor Network Activity and the Road Ahead for TAO Price

While the TAO price was falling, Bittensor’s subnet activity was quietly accelerating. That divergence between price and network growth went largely unnoticed by retail participants. Institutional attention toward the network, however, had reportedly been building well before Thursday’s session.

The broader AI infrastructure narrative around Bittensor also remained intact throughout the drawdown. Discussions tied to co-founder Jacob Steeves and the network’s role in decentralized AI were still in early stages.

AI-related tokens have historically moved in cycles, with the first recovery candle rarely marking the full extent of a move.

The zone between $280 and $320 now becomes the critical area to monitor. That range previously acted as support before the breakdown and must be reclaimed on a closing basis. A sustained move through that band would add weight to the bullish case.

The 200-day moving average continues to serve as the long-term dividing line for TAO. Reclaiming major support after a multi-month downtrend is one of the stronger technical setups on any chart. Traders who were stopped out near the lows are now watching from the sidelines as price moves higher.

TLDR:

• Uniswap tokenized securities are now live on the web app, wallet, and API for eligible users.
• Over $9.1 billion has been swapped in real-world asset pools across 2.6 million transactions.
• Uniswap v4 hooks allow issuers to set KYC gates, allowlists, and dynamic fees at pool level.
• Builders using the Uniswap API need no extra configuration to expose tokenized assets to users. 

Uniswap tokenized securities are now accessible across the platform’s web app, wallet, and API. Users can trade tokenized versions of SpaceX, Apple, Tesla, and NVIDIA directly through Uniswap products.

Previously, these assets existed on the protocol but lacked integration into consumer-facing surfaces. That gap has now closed, opening regulated asset markets to a broader onchain audience.

Uniswap Opens Access to Real-World Asset Trading

The launch marks a notable expansion of Uniswap’s real-world asset coverage. To date, more than $9.1 billion has moved through real-world asset pools on the protocol.

Those transactions span over 2.6 million swaps across more than 140,000 wallets. As Uniswap noted on X, “The world’s value is moving onchain.”

Equity, fixed income, and yield-bearing instruments represent the bulk of global financial assets. These asset classes are gradually migrating to blockchain infrastructure as regulatory clarity improves.

Uniswap’s integration positions the protocol as an early access point for that transition. The timing aligns with growing institutional and retail interest in tokenized finance.

Eligible users can access tokenized securities through the Explore Page on the Uniswap Web App. The process mirrors any standard token swap on the platform.

Users connect a wallet, select the desired asset, and confirm the transaction. However, issuer-imposed KYC requirements, whitelists, and jurisdictional restrictions may apply.

Uniswap v4’s hook infrastructure also supports issuer-configured transfer restrictions and dynamic fee structures at the pool level. This gives issuers the ability to manage compliance without sacrificing liquidity access.

Geographic gates and allowlists can be embedded directly into pool logic. That level of configurability is central to supporting regulated asset markets onchain.

Protocol Infrastructure Powers Builders and Issuers

Builders can integrate tokenized stocks, bonds, and yield-bearing assets through the existing Uniswap API. No additional configuration is needed for developers to expose these assets to their users.

The same routing and liquidity infrastructure already in use for crypto assets now extends to securities. That continuity reduces friction for teams building on top of Uniswap.

Uniswap’s protocol has processed over $4.4 trillion in cumulative volume since launch. That liquidity depth makes it a practical backend for tokenized asset markets.

Onchain assets also trade outside traditional market hours, unlike their TradFi equivalents. That availability is a structural advantage as global adoption grows.

Assets settled onchain are composable across wallets, applications, and DeFi protocols. Any agent or interface with API access can tap into the same liquidity pools.

This composability supports the broader buildout of onchain financial infrastructure. It also reduces fragmentation across tokenized asset platforms.

UNI traded at $2.54 at the time of publication, up 0.43% in the prior 24 hours.

Source: Coingecko

Weekly gains stood at 4.84%, reflecting moderate market momentum around the announcement.

However, the two largest incidents were not simple smart-contract exploits of the type AI could engineer.

In one, a North Korea-linked group drained about $285 million from Drift Protocol after a six-month social-engineering campaign that won it admin access. For the other, the attacker exploited a single-verifier flaw that allowed roughly $292 million to be siphoned from Kelp DAO.

Another example hit on Tuesday, when Humanity Protocol, a decentralized human-identity service, lost over $30 million to a private-key compromise. CoinDesk found that a hacker gained access to three out of six private keys on one employee’s laptop,

Therein is the problem. While the most obvious smart-contract prompts may be exactly the ones Anthropic’s filters are designed to catch, the largest losses have not needed a contract bug.

The exploits, Ledger’s Guillemet noted, come from familiar weak points: social engineering, bad signing flows, exposed keys and human error.

A model like Fable does not need to hand over a finished exploit to change the economics of an attack. It can read public repositories, compare old versions of software, summarize audit reports and draft convincing messages that look for the small operational mistakes humans miss.

“These exploits remain rooted in social engineering and human error. “

A defender, in such an environment, has to secure every key path, every dependency, every signing flow and every privileged account. Because AI accelerates the scouting phase, the final signing step becomes more important. Private keys need to sit somewhere a compromised laptop cannot reach, and users need a trusted screen that shows what they are actually approving.

Strategy’s executive chairman Michael Saylor has defended the company’s first reported Bitcoin sale since 2022, arguing that the ability to sell BTC—at least when it’s required to back certain financial obligations—is a prerequisite for the firm to keep issuing “digital credit.”

The defense comes after Strategy disclosed the sale in a June 1 filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission: the company offloaded 32 BTC, a move that contrasted with Saylor’s widely repeated “never sell your Bitcoin” message. Speaking at BTC Prague, Saylor framed the decision as part of a broader credit thesis for Bitcoin-based financial products.

Key takeaways

• Strategy disclosed a June 1 SEC filing showing it sold 32 BTC for the first time since 2022.
• Saylor says Bitcoin must remain sellable so digital credit products can retain value and support dividend- and credit-linked obligations.
• He described Strategy’s STRC preferred stock as a “digital credit” instrument designed to route value from its Bitcoin balance sheet.
• Saylor claims digital credit could support yield-bearing crypto financial products and cited yields up to 8% for such structures.
• Apyx’s apxUSD stablecoin depegged amid BTC and STRC declines, illustrating how collateral volatility can test these systems.

Why Strategy chose to sell Bitcoin

In a June 1 SEC filing, Strategy disclosed its first reported Bitcoin sale since 2022, selling 32 BTC. The transaction stood in tension with Saylor’s long-running public stance that Bitcoin should not be sold.

In an interview with Cointelegraph at BTC Prague, Saylor argued that companies building Bitcoin-backed finance cannot treat BTC as untouchable capital. Instead, they need the flexibility to sell holdings when necessary to maintain the economic basis of credit instruments—particularly those tied to dividends and other payouts.

“If the company’s policy is that we won’t sell the Bitcoin, then the credit won’t have value and the equity won’t have value,”
he said, adding:
“The company is in the business of selling digital credit. The credit is backed by capital. Bitcoin is capital.”

“Digital credit” as a new use for the Bitcoin balance sheet

Saylor expanded on the concept by positioning Strategy’s financial products as components of a credit market built on Bitcoin holdings. In his explanation, instruments such as Strategy’s STRC preferred stock function as “digital credit,” leveraging the company’s Bitcoin treasury to meet credit obligations.

Crucially, Saylor also tied this framework to Strategy’s capital strategy. For the company, these securities have become a key path to raise funding that can then be used to acquire additional Bitcoin. In other words, the sale—however limited—should be viewed less as abandoning a core Bitcoin conviction and more as enabling a loop intended to sustain issuance of Bitcoin-backed credit products.

Yield claims and the collateral test from apxUSD

Saylor described digital credit markets as an emerging “trillion-dollar opportunity” in finance, arguing they could enable yield-bearing digital money products. He also suggested that these structures may offer yields of up to 8%, which he said is multiple times higher than traditional savings accounts.

Part of his argument is that digital credit could change how participants think about credit and yield while drawing capital into the Bitcoin ecosystem. He pointed to projects operating within this model, including Saturn and Apyx, and emphasized that yield-bearing products built on top of digital credit can face real-world stress—sometimes quickly.

On June 4, Apyx Finance’s dividend-backed synthetic stablecoin apxUSD reportedly depegged, trading as low as $0.90. At the time, Bitcoin was trading below $63,000 and STRC shares had fallen below their $100 par value.

According to Apyx, the decline in STRC—apxUSD’s primary collateral asset—reduced the protocol’s reserve value. The company also pointed to falling Bitcoin prices, thinning liquidity, and derivative-driven market dynamics as contributing factors, citing a post on X from Apyx.

At the time of Cointelegraph’s reporting, apxUSD was trading around $0.96, still below its $1 peg, as tracked by CoinGecko.

What this exchange between “never sell” and sellability means

The core tension in the story is not merely reputational; it goes to how investors and counterparties should interpret Bitcoin as collateral. Saylor’s argument suggests that Bitcoin treasury companies must preserve the option to sell in order to keep credit instruments credible—particularly when those instruments depend on the value of collateral and the ability to cover obligations.

Meanwhile, the apxUSD episode underscores how sensitive these systems can be when collateral benchmarks move in tandem. When STRC falls below par and Bitcoin weakens, collateral values and liquidity conditions can deteriorate at the same time, putting pressure on mechanisms designed to maintain stablecoin pegs.

For readers watching the evolution of Bitcoin-based credit, the takeaway is practical: the “digital credit” thesis depends on collateral behavior and on whether protocols can manage volatility in a way that sustains promised yield and payout structures without breaking pegs.

With Strategy’s disclosed sale and apxUSD’s depeg both tied to a period of BTC and collateral weakness, the next question for the market is whether future issuances, liquidity provisions, and collateral management techniques will reduce the frequency and severity of these stress events—or whether such drawdowns will continue to be part of the risk profile of yield-bearing Bitcoin credit products.

TLDR:

• Bitcoin mining difficulty dropped 9.55%, marking the second-largest downward adjustment recorded in 2025.
• Network hashrate fell from near 1 ZH/s in May to roughly 861 EH/s around June 10 before partially recovering.
• The difficulty reset is expected to lift BTC output per active hashrate by over 9%, pushing hashprice above $30/PH/s.
• Power reallocation toward AI and HPC workloads is driving structural hashrate decline beyond short-term price pressure.

Bitcoin mining difficulty has dropped by approximately 9.55%, marking the second-largest decline recorded this year.

The adjustment follows a sustained slide in network hashrate after bitcoin’s price briefly plunged to around $60,000 in early June before recovering to near $64,000.

The reset lowers the computational work required to mine a block, offering direct relief to miners squeezed by thinning margins. Output per active hashrate is set to rise by more than 9% as a result.

Hashrate Collapse Triggers Steep Difficulty Adjustment

Bitcoin’s network hashrate had been holding near 1 zettahash per second (ZH/s) at the close of May. It then fell sharply to approximately 861 exahashes per second (EH/s) around June 10, before recovering moderately to about 894 EH/s in recent days.

That sustained decline over the two-week epoch triggered Bitcoin’s automatic recalibration mechanism. The resulting 9.55% drop is now confirmed as the second-largest downward difficulty adjustment of the year.

The adjustment directly reshapes mining economics across the network. A lower difficulty setting means each unit of active hashrate now produces more bitcoin per day than it did before.

That increase in output per hashrate is expected to push hashprice back above $30 per petahash per second. Hashprice had fallen below that level following the early June price crash, tightening margins across the industry.

The $30/PH/s threshold is a closely watched line for operators managing older or less efficient fleets. According to TheEnergyMag, the difficulty drop is expected to increase BTC output per active hashrate by over 9% and may also push mining hashprice back above $30 per PH/s.

Below that mark, sites running legacy hardware or carrying higher electricity costs move closer to gross breakeven before overhead and debt are factored in.

Texas-based miners likely played a role in the hashrate volatility as well. June marks the start of the state’s 4CP season under ERCOT, when large power consumers reduce load during four critical summer peak intervals to lower their transmission cost allocation for the following year.

That mechanism pushes bitcoin miners to curtail operations during potential peak windows, temporarily removing significant hashrate from the network regardless of real-time power prices.

AI and HPC Redeployment Pulls Capacity from Bitcoin Mining

Not all of the hashrate decline was tied to price pressure or seasonal curtailment. Several publicly listed miners have been actively unplugging rigs and redirecting power capacity toward high-performance computing and AI data center workloads.

That structural shift removes bitcoin hashrate even when the underlying power infrastructure remains fully operational and under contract.

The pivot toward HPC and AI reflects a deliberate strategy by major mining companies to diversify revenue. As TheEnergyMag reported, beyond the shutdown of older mining rigs due to profitability pressure, another key driver of the hashrate decline is the reallocation of power capacity toward high-performance computing and AI data centers.

Long-term computing contracts with enterprise clients offer more stable cash flow compared to bitcoin’s variable hashprice environment.

Power capacity that once drove network hashrate is now being allocated to contracted AI workloads under a different business model entirely.

Several public miners have been unplugging mining rigs or slowing mining growth as they retrofit sites for contracted AI and HPC use, a strategy that can remove bitcoin hashrate even when the underlying power capacity remains in use. That transition is reshaping how mining infrastructure is deployed across North America.

The partial hashrate recovery seen in recent days points to some of the June decline being temporary. Curtailments tied to Texas’s 4CP window and short-term economic responses likely account for a portion of the drop rather than permanent fleet shutdowns.

Even so, the continued migration of mining infrastructure toward AI use cases adds lasting downward pressure on network hashrate heading into the second half of the year.

The 9.55% difficulty drop offers a meaningful reset for operators who held through the June pressure, with improved margins now expected in the current epoch.

TLDR:

• XRP ETF inflows reached $10.68M in the latest week, marking five consecutive weeks of positive flows.
• Bitcoin and Ethereum ETF products recorded negative flows during the same five-week period.
• XRP price sits near $1.15, with analysts watching the $0.70–$0.90 range as a potential support floor.
• EMAs at $1.45 and $1.78 must be reclaimed before any macro trend reversal can be confirmed for XRP.

XRP ETF inflows have remained positive for five straight weeks, even as the broader crypto market faces ongoing pressure.

According to Coingecko data, XRP trades at $1.15 as of this writing, up 1.38% in the past 24 hours and 3.61% over the past seven days. Trading volume reached $1.115 billion within the same 24-hour window.

Source: Coingecko

Meanwhile, Bitcoin and Ethereum ETF products continue to record negative flows, making XRP’s institutional resilience a notable contrast in the current market cycle.

Institutional Demand Stays Firm Despite Market Volatility

XRP ETF inflows totaled $10.68 million in the most recent weekly period, according to SosoValue data. That capital entered across three separate trading sessions during the week. The consistency of those inflows sets XRP apart from other major digital assets at this time.

Bitcoin and Ethereum have both struggled to attract fresh ETF capital over the same period. Negative flows in those products reflect broader investor hesitation tied to prolonged market uncertainty. XRP, however, has maintained a different trajectory on the institutional side.

Five consecutive weeks of positive ETF flows suggest that institutional participants are not reacting to short-term price weakness.

They appear to be maintaining their positions regardless of the current price environment. That kind of behavior typically reflects longer-term positioning rather than reactive trading.

The separation between price performance and ETF flow data is worth noting here. XRP’s spot price remains under pressure, yet institutional demand through ETF channels continues without interruption.

That divergence adds a layer of context to how different market participants are reading the current conditions.

Price Structure Points to a Potential Cycle Bottom Zone

XRP spent nearly two years capped below the $0.70 to $0.80 resistance range before breaking out in Q4 2024. That breakout pushed price toward the July 2025 high before momentum reversed. The asset has since pulled back from its January 2026 peak to current levels near $1.04 to $1.15.

Analyst X Finance Bull noted that the current price range represents a defined “area of interest” on the chart. That zone is being watched as a potential cycle bottom between now and Q4 2026. The old resistance band between $0.70 and $0.90 may now act as a support floor.

X Finance Bull stated: “The ceiling that capped XRP for years becomes the floor that holds it.” However, the analyst was clear that no bottom confirmation exists yet. The EMAs at $1.45 and $1.78 still need to be reclaimed before any macro reversal can be established.

Until those levels are recovered, the price structure remains in a phase that tests holder conviction. The underlying fundamentals have not changed according to the analysis. Price behavior of this kind often precedes the next directional move in longer market cycles.