TLDR

• Kraken identified and contained two insider-related access incidents involving limited client data.
• The company confirmed that no systems were breached and no client funds were at risk.
• About 2,000 accounts were potentially viewed, representing only 0.02% of users.
• Kraken rejected extortion demands and is cooperating with law enforcement authorities.
• Galaxy Digital reported a separate cybersecurity incident with no impact on client data or funds.

Kraken confirmed an extortion attempt involving internal access claims, while it denied any system breach or fund risk. The company said it contained two insider-related incidents and limited data exposure. It also stated that affected accounts represented about 0.02% of its global user base.

Kraken Rejects Extortion Attempt and Secures Internal Systems

Kraken reported that attackers tried to extort the firm using alleged internal access videos. However, the company said its systems remained secure, and funds stayed protected.

The firm identified two separate incidents involving support staff access and limited client data visibility. It removed both individuals quickly and enforced tighter security controls after internal investigations.

Kraken said the first case emerged in February 2025 after it received a tip about a circulating video. The company then revoked access, identified the individual, and informed affected users.

Later, Kraken received another tip about a similar video linked to a different insider. It terminated access again and notified impacted users while strengthening safeguards.

Nick Percoco, chief security officer, stated, “Our systems were never breached; funds were never at risk.” He also added that the company will not negotiate with criminal groups.

Kraken said about 2,000 accounts were potentially viewed across both incidents. However, the firm emphasized that millions of users remained unaffected by the events.

Insider Access Cases Highlight Targeted Attack Attempts

Kraken reported that extortion demands followed shortly after it blocked the latest unauthorized access. The group threatened to release materials through media channels and social platforms.

The company confirmed it will not comply with any demands from the attackers. It also said it is working closely with law enforcement agencies and industry partners.

Kraken believes the case connects to wider insider recruitment efforts targeting crypto and technology firms. It stated that investigators have enough evidence to identify suspects.

The exchange added that it continues to improve internal monitoring and employee access controls. It also said it reviews processes to prevent similar incidents.

The firm stressed that no funds were lost and no core systems were compromised. It maintained that its infrastructure remained secure throughout both events.

Related Cybersecurity Event Reported by Galaxy Digital

Galaxy Digital also disclosed a separate cybersecurity incident involving unauthorized access. The company said the breach affected an isolated development workspace.

Galaxy Digital confirmed that no client funds or account data were exposed. It stated that the incident remained contained within internal systems.

The firm acted quickly to block access and investigate the situation. It also confirmed that operations continued without disruption.

Kraken said it continues to monitor threats and cooperate with authorities. Percoco stated, “We remain committed to combating insider recruitment threats globally.”

William Blair says Coinbase’s 26% pullback has largely “de‑risked” the stock, with weak trading now priced in as surging USDC adoption turns the exchange into a higher‑margin, cycle‑resistant bet on crypto’s share gains versus fiat.

Investment bank William Blair says Coinbase’s recent share price decline has effectively reset expectations, arguing that a roughly 26% drawdown from first‑quarter highs has “largely de‑risked” the stock by baking in soft spot and derivatives volumes. In a research note summarized by The Block and Investing.com, analysts write that “weak trading activity in early 2026 is now fully reflected in the valuation,” and that the firm continues to view Coinbase as “the best way to participate in crypto’s market‑share gains versus the fiat economy.”

The bank stresses that Coinbase is steadily evolving into a “full‑service trading platform,” pointing to the build‑out of derivatives, staking, DEX aggregation, 24/7 stock trading and prediction markets on top of its Base L2 infrastructure. That shift has already tilted the business mix: Coinbase’s Q3 2025 shareholder letter flagged subscription and services revenue — including stablecoin income — in a $710–$790 million quarterly range, while external estimates suggest trading fees now account for less than half of total revenue.

Where William Blair is most emphatic is on stablecoins. The note calls the continued growth of USD Coin “a core positive,” estimating that USDC’s share of the dollar stablecoin market has risen to roughly 27%, up from around 21% in 2024, as it steadily gains ground on Tether’s USDT. KuCoin and CEX.IO data show USDC supply has jumped about 220% since late 2023 to roughly $78–$81 billion, helping push total stablecoin capitalization to a record $315 billion in Q1 2026, with stablecoins now representing around 75% of all crypto trading volume.

That growth directly feeds Coinbase’s bottom line. Bloomberg Intelligence estimates the exchange generated about $1.35 billion in USDC‑related revenue in 2025 — roughly 19% of total income — through its share of reserve interest and fees, with analysts at FinanceFeeds and CCN projecting that figure could grow two‑ to seven‑fold if USDC‑based payments and B2B settlement rails continue to scale. Coinbase also holds a significant minority stake in USDC issuer Circle and splits global reserve income 50/50, a structure William Blair says creates “powerful economic alignment” as the stablecoin expands into merchant, payroll and card‑network integrations.

William Blair’s January note described Circle as “positioned to ride a wave of USDC commercialization,” highlighting Visa’s decision to formally settle some U.S. card flows in USDC, as well as new integrations with Intuit and other enterprise software providers. The latest update reiterates that view, arguing that as USDC becomes embedded in payment flows, on‑chain treasuries and tokenized real‑world assets, Coinbase’s USDC revenue stream should become “more recurring, higher‑margin and less cyclical than trading fees,” even under tougher U.S. stablecoin rules.

On the macro side, the bank assigns a low probability to a prolonged “crypto winter” and frames Coinbase’s setup as an “asymmetric upside” bet: if markets stay muted, stablecoin and subscription revenues still support the business, while any renewed bull phase in bitcoin and ether volumes would come on top of an already improving earnings base. In that sense, USDC’s rise from a roughly one‑fifth to more than a quarter share of the stablecoin market is not just a technical detail in on‑chain plumbing; for Coinbase and Circle, William Blair argues, it is the spine of a long‑term equity story.

The crypto industry’s chief effort in U.S. policy — the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act — has remained held up on a point about stablecoin yield that has little to do with the bill’s central aim to regulate U.S. crypto markets. It’s still a sticking point as bankers fired the latest volley to claim the industry’s reward programs are a danger to bank deposits.

In response to a recent White House economists report that the banks have little to fear from the rise of stablecoins, the American Bankers Association contends that the Council of Economic Advisers was analyzing the wrong scenario. Instead of looking at what would happen if Congress were to institute a ban on stablecoin yield now, it should have looked at what would happen if such returns from stablecoins were allowed.

“The CEA paper minimizes the core risk by starting from the wrong question,” according to ABA economists. “There is already ample evidence and analysis showing that a prohibition on yield for payment stablecoins is a prudent safeguard. Such a policy will allow stablecoins to mature as a payments innovation rather than as an economically risky substitute for insured bank deposits.”

This conflict over a topic already partially dealt with in last year’s Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act effectively derailed the Senate legislation for months. Though the Clarity Act’s lawmaker advocates have predicted it could get its necessary hearing in the Senate Banking Committee before the end of this month, that session hasn’t yet been scheduled.

Senators from both parties had been moved by the bankers’ arguments that their depositors (who fund their lending) would leave them in droves to chase stablecoin yield that outpaces what the banks offer in interest. So the lawmakers hashed out a compromise that would ban yield on stablecoin holdings that look like deposit accounts and only allow rewards programs for activity, akin to credit-card rewards. But the banks haven’t come out cheering it.

Senator Cynthia Lummis, the Wyoming Republican who chairs the Banking Committee’s digital assets subcommittee, posted Monday on social media site X, “America needs Clarity.” She’s kept a steady stream of posts going on the topic, saying over the weekend that it’s “now or never” for the bill.

The longer this debate stretches out, the more difficult it’ll be to get Clarity through the Senate process that can lead to a floor vote. While crypto insiders have been relatively vocal about the clash, bank representatives have been more reserved.

The bankers’ latest arguments suggest that the absence of intervention on stablecoin yield now would let stablecoin markets scale rapidly from $300 million to as much as $2 trillion.

“In a larger market, yield is not a minor product feature; it is the mechanism that would accelerate migration out of bank deposits,” they contend.

And though leading stablecoin issuers would deposit reserves in banks, they’re likely to go to larger institutions and not community banks, according to the ABA’s thinking.

Read More: Clarity Act returns to U.S. Senate, bank earnings: Crypto Week Ahead

Key Takeaways

• For the first time ever, Meta is expected to eclipse Google in worldwide digital advertising revenue during 2026.
• Emarketer forecasts Meta’s net advertising revenue at $243.46B compared to Google’s $239.54B.
• Meta’s advertising expansion rate is anticipated to climb to 24.1% in 2026, rising from 22.1% in 2025.
• Advanced AI capabilities and fresh advertising formats including Reels, Threads advertisements, and WhatsApp commercial placements fuel expansion.
• The trio of Meta, Google, and Amazon is predicted to command 62.3% of worldwide digital advertising expenditure in 2026.

Meta Platforms is positioned to claim the title of the world’s dominant digital advertising enterprise in 2026, based on forecasts from market intelligence firm Emarketer. This milestone would mark the first occasion Meta has surpassed Google in this competitive arena.

Meta Platforms, Inc., META

Emarketer’s analysis indicates Meta’s worldwide net advertising revenue will hit $243.46 billion this year. Google’s projection stands at $239.54 billion. Both numbers exclude traffic acquisition and content-related expenses.

Meta’s advertising expansion velocity is anticipated to surge to 24.1% in 2026, compared to 22.1% in 2025. Meanwhile, Google’s growth trajectory is expected to remain relatively stagnant at approximately 11.9%.

Industry observers highlight that Meta’s aggressive growth at this magnitude is uncommon. Typically, platforms experience deceleration as they expand. Meta is bucking this trend.

Artificial intelligence plays a central role. Meta’s AI-powered recommendation algorithms increased Reels viewing duration in the United States by over 30% in the latest quarter versus the prior year period. Extended viewing translates directly to additional advertising opportunities.

Reels alone is projected to deliver $50 billion in revenue over the coming twelve months, the Wall Street Journal reports. Meta additionally disclosed that its video-generation technology achieved a $10 billion revenue run rate during Q4.

Advantage+ and Emerging Ad Formats Drive Momentum

Meta’s Advantage+ automated advertising platform has emerged as a critical catalyst. The solution streamlines campaign creation and enhances marketing ROI, attracting widespread advertiser adoption.

The social media giant has simultaneously broadened its advertising real estate through new placements on WhatsApp and Threads. This expansion positions Meta as a direct rival to platforms such as X. Instagram’s Reels format remains locked in competition with TikTok and YouTube Shorts for short-form video advertising dollars.

Emarketer analyst Max Willens credited Meta with demonstrating “incredible patience” — cultivating user engagement across Reels, Threads, and WhatsApp prior to activating monetization features. The approach is yielding substantial returns.

Meta’s infrastructure investment is projected to reach $135 billion this year as the company accelerates its AI capabilities.

Google Confronts Challenges Across Multiple Sectors

Google is navigating obstacles that extend beyond Meta’s ascension. The search giant’s portion of the US search advertising market is forecast to slip beneath 50% for the first time in more than ten years, declining to 48.5% in 2026.

Amazon has gradually eroded Google’s search supremacy as growing numbers of shoppers initiate product searches directly within the e-commerce marketplace.

Google’s varied business structure also constrains advertising revenue expansion. YouTube Premium diverts a significant user base away from ad-supported content, restricting monetization potential.

Smaller competitors experience heightened vulnerability from this transformation. Snap and Pinterest are viewed as particularly susceptible to advertising budget reductions, as marketer spending concentrates increasingly among dominant platforms.

Google and Meta both declined requests for comment.

Emarketer clarified that recent judicial decisions affecting Meta and YouTube were excluded from the analysis, as projections were finalized prior to those rulings.

Collectively, Meta, Google, and Amazon are forecast to control 62.3% of global digital advertising expenditure in 2026, advancing from 59.9% in 2025.

Key Highlights

• Altimeter Capital’s Brad Gerstner projects Anthropic’s ARR could surge to $80B–$100B by year-end 2026
• The company’s ARR currently exceeds $30B, a massive jump from $9B recorded at 2025’s close
• Claude’s average daily user count more than doubled between February and March 2026
• More than 1,000 enterprise clients now invest over $1M per year in Anthropic’s services
• ChatGPT experienced declines in web traffic and mobile usage during March as Claude and Gemini expanded their presence

Brad Gerstner, who founded Altimeter Capital, recently described Anthropic’s revenue trajectory as among the most explosive growth stories in technology sector history. During a weekend podcast appearance, he projected the AI company’s annual revenue run rate could climb to somewhere between $80 billion and $100 billion before 2026 concludes.

This projection represents approximately a threefold increase from Anthropic’s current position. The company’s ARR has now crossed the $30 billion threshold, surging from roughly $9 billion when 2025 ended. Just months earlier in 2026, that metric stood at approximately $15 billion.

Anthropic had initially set its sights on achieving an ARR ranging from $20 billion to $26 billion throughout the calendar year. The company has already exceeded those ambitious targets.

According to Gerstner, the organization has experienced a significant “rebound” during the last three months following a period where it received relatively little attention throughout 2025. He now characterizes the company as surpassing OpenAI, whose ARR currently sits in the $24 billion to $25 billion range.

Business Customers Driving Explosive Revenue

Anthropic now counts over 1,000 enterprise organizations that each commit more than $1 million annually to its platform. The company’s Claude AI models have gained widespread adoption for coding assistance, workflow automation, and API-driven applications.

The company introduced Claude CoWork in January 2026 and most recently unveiled an innovative AI model named Mythos. These product launches have maintained strong visibility for Anthropic throughout the tech industry.

To accommodate its rapid expansion, Anthropic has partnered with Google and Broadcom on developing 3.5 gigawatts of computing infrastructure. Gerstner emphasized that achieving the $100 billion ARR milestone will demand substantial infrastructure capital.

Market Share Shifts Favor Claude

Recent analysis from BNP Paribas reveals that Claude’s portion of chatbot website traffic nearly doubled, climbing from 3.6% in February to 6.6% by March. The platform’s average monthly daily active users jumped from 0.8% to 1.8% during the same timeframe.

Google’s Gemini platform similarly expanded, with its website visit share increasing from 26.2% to 28% in March.

While ChatGPT maintains its position as the leading chatbot platform, it experienced declines in both web traffic and mobile application usage throughout March, based on analysis from BNP researchers led by Nick Jones.

Amazon also featured prominently in the BNP analysis. Uber recently broadened its deployment of Amazon’s Gravitron4 and Trainium3 chip architectures. Amazon CEO Andy Jassy disclosed that AWS AI-related ARR has reached $15 billion, while chip-specific ARR stands at $20 billion.

Meta’s recently launched Muse Spark AI model triggered a significant spike in downloads for the Meta AI application. BNP analysts noted the launch demonstrates Meta’s advancing AI strategy.

Anthropic ranks among multiple privately-held technology companies potentially preparing for public offerings in 2026, with preliminary valuation estimates hovering around $300 billion.

Circle Internet (CRCL) CEO Jeremy Allaire offered his clearest public response yet to growing criticism over how the stablecoin issuer handles illicit funds, saying it does not freeze wallets unless there is a formal legal basis to do so.

Speaking on stage at a press conference in Seoul, Allaire positioned USDC, the second-largest dollar-pegged stablecoin, as a regulated financial product rather than a tool for real-time intervention.

“Circle has a very, very clear performance obligation under the law,” Allaire said. “Circle follows the rule of law, and we are able to undertake actions such as freezing a wallet at the direction of law enforcement or the courts.”

Allaire framed USDC as part of the traditional financial system, subject to legal process and oversight. Decisions to blacklist or freeze funds, he suggested, should not be made at the discretion of the company in the heat of an exploit, but instead follow requests from law enforcement or court orders. The approach reflects Circle’s broader strategy to align closely with regulators and institutions.

Rival Tether, the issuer of the world’s largest stablecoin, USDT, has a more proactive approach. The company has repeatedly frozen funds linked to hack and illicit activity within hours. In several cases cited by blockchain sleuth ZachXBT, including exploits affecting Ledger and Remitano, Tether blacklisted stolen funds while equivalent USDC remained untouched.

Allaire’s remarks come at a time of mounting scrutiny. Earlier this month, Drift Protocol suffered a suspected North Korea-linked exploit that resulted in losses of up to $280 million. Roughly $230 million in USDC was moved across chains over several hours. The incident has become a focal point for critics who argue that Circle is failing to act despite having the technical ability to do so.

Intervention carries risks, too

ZachXBT is among the most vocal. In a widely circulated thread on X, he said Circle’s inaction across more than a dozen cases since 2022 has contributed to over $420 million in illicit funds escaping. He pointed to multiple incidents where stolen USDC remained in identifiable wallets for hours or even days without being frozen, including exploits affecting Cetus, SwapNet, and Nomad.

Critics say the pattern highlights a deeper issue. USDC is centrally issued and contains controls that allow Circle to block addresses. Yet those powers are rarely used in real time. By deferring to legal processes that move far more slowly than blockchain transactions, they argue, Circle creates a gap that attackers can exploit.

Others in the industry argue that faster intervention carries its own risks. Omid Malekan, an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School, responded to calls for discretionary freezes by warning that allowing issuers to act beyond legal requirements would undermine the foundations of decentralized finance (DeFi).

Such powers could erode trust in DeFi systems by introducing centralized points of control, Malekan said.

“If Circle and other stablecoin issuers implement arbitrary freeze or seize functions beyond what the law requires, then not only is code not law, but also law is not law,” he wrote on X. “Instead what a single executive inside a single corporation decides is law.”

Foundry’s U.S.‑based, compliance‑first Zcash pool has already grown to roughly one‑third of network hashrate, giving institutional miners a regulated way into privacy coins while stoking fresh centralisation fears.

Foundry Digital, operator of the Foundry USA Bitcoin mining pool, has officially launched an institutional‑grade Zcash (ZEC) mining pool that has quickly grown to around 30% of the network’s hashrate, consolidating a significant share of new ZEC issuance under a single U.S.‑regulated operator. The Rochester, New York‑based firm, which Fortune notes already commands about 31% of global Bitcoin production, is positioning its new pool as the default home for institutional miners seeking exposure to privacy‑focused assets without abandoning compliance.finance.

In a Business Wire release, Foundry said the Zcash pool has seen “rapid and sustained hashrate growth reaching ~30% of the current Zcash network hashrate” since it was first announced on March 11, with “multiple institutional mining customers already onboarded and contributing hashrate.” The company stressed that the pool is “designed for professional mining organizations and public companies that require a U.S.-based, compliance-ready partner, including KYC verification in line with Foundry’s institutional standards,” mirroring the governance of its Bitcoin operation.

Foundry CEO Mike Colyer framed the move as both a bet on Zcash and a response to unmet institutional demand. “Zcash has matured into an institutional‑grade asset, but the mining infrastructure supporting it hasn’t kept pace,” he said, adding that the new pool is “purpose‑built for the operational and compliance requirements of institutional and public miners.”

A CoinMarketCap summary of the launch notes that the pool will offer know‑your‑customer and anti‑money‑laundering checks, transparent payout calculations, reporting tools and 24/7 technical support, with no minimum hashrate required to join.

Zcash, launched in 2016, relies on zero‑knowledge proofs (zk‑SNARKs) to enable shielded transactions that hide sender, receiver and amount while still allowing selective disclosure to auditors or regulators. Foundry and several commentators have argued that this “privacy with a view key” model is more compatible with institutional compliance than fully opaque systems like Monero, which lack native mechanisms for selective transparency.

At the same time, the arrival of a U.S. pool with roughly one‑third of Zcash’s hashrate raises familiar centralisation questions. Unfolded and other mining trackers have previously highlighted that Foundry USA already coordinates about 30% of Bitcoin’s global hashrate, and Mempool.space data shows the pool averaging more than 340 exahashes per second on Bitcoin alone. Adding a Zcash operation that quickly captures around one‑third of ZEC issuance further concentrates influence over block production in a single corporate group, albeit one that stresses its role in “contribut[ing] to the decentralization of Bitcoin’s hashrate” by anchoring North American capacity.

For Zcash, the trade‑off is stark: institutional capital and hashpower are flowing in through a U.S.‑regulated gateway that validates the project’s positioning as a compliant privacy coin, but at the cost of a more concentrated mining landscape. As regulators in the U.S., EU and Hong Kong tighten their grip on stablecoins, exchanges and tokenized assets — a trend explored in recent crypto.news coverage of HKDAP’s launch, MiCA implementation and the CLARITY Act — Zcash’s bet is that privacy with selective disclosure, plus a mining pool built for auditors rather than cypherpunks, is a price worth paying for long‑term relevance.

Bernstein said Monday that Bitcoin’s selloff has already priced in much of the market’s fear around quantum computing, arguing that the threat is real but still manageable rather than an immediate existential risk.

Bitcoin’s (BTC) near 50% drawdown from its $126,198 all-time high in October 2025 is proof that the market has “priced in” several risks tied to a quantum breakthrough, partly thanks to technological progress on zero-knowledge privacy and quantum-proof cryptography that “counterbalance” the AI and quantum acceleration, Bernstein said in a Monday note shared with Cointelegraph.

The note lands two weeks after Google researchers said future quantum computers could break the elliptic-curve cryptography used across many blockchains with fewer than 500,000 physical qubits in some architectures, reviving debate over how quickly Bitcoin needs a post-quantum upgrade path. This research suggested a quantum computer could crack a Bitcoin private key in nine minutes, in a theoretical scenario, which is less than Bitcoin’s 10-minute block production time.

However, Bernstein said Bitcoin core developers have “adequate time” to determine a post-quantum path. Last week, Bernstein predicted that Bitcoin has about three to five years to prepare for a post-quantum security upgrade, Cointelegraph reported on Wednesday.

Institutions will play constructive role in quantum-proofing Bitcoin

Bernstein said large institutional holders, including exchange-traded fund (ETF) issuers and corporate treasury buyers such as Strategy, are likely to play a constructive role in any eventual consensus on a post-quantum upgrade.

“We expect institutional partners with now billions at stake to play a constructive role in building consensus on the post-quantum path.”

The note also highlighted the recently introduced BIP-360 proposal and added that slower consensus from Bitcoin developers is seen as responsible behavior when it comes to a $1.5 trillion asset.

BIP-360 is a draft Bitcoin Improvement Proposal that proposes a Pay-to-Merkle-Root output type designed to reduce long-exposure quantum risk by removing Taproot’s key-path vulnerability, though it does not itself add post-quantum digital signatures.

Bernstein said BIP-360 could be implemented as a soft fork for exposed Bitcoin addresses, but added that this would still leave around 8% of the BTC supply in inactive addresses vulnerable to future quantum breakthroughs.

Related: Bitcoiners push for quantum-resistant BIP-360 upgrade as debate heats up

Quantum-proofing Bitcoin is a social issue, not technical

The real challenge of quantum-proofing Bitcoin lies in the societal adoption element of the new standards, not the technical development, according to Arthur Breitman, co-founder of Tezos blockchain.

“The coding work could be done this afternoon,” but Bitcoin holders would still need to migrate to this new standard, Breitman told Cointelegraph during an interview at EthCC 2026.

“If Bitcoin needed to migrate in the next month, they could do it from a technical perspective […] but they can’t get everyone to migrate their key in a month, Breitman said. “It’s going to take years for people to properly migrate their keys,” he added.

Asset manager Grayscale’s head of research, Zach Pandl, shared a similar view in a research report last Monday. He said Bitcoin’s quantum-proofing challenges are “more social than technical,” provided that its UTXO model does not have native smart contracts and that some address types are not quantum vulnerable.

However, he warned that the community needs to find consensus on how to quantum-proof wallets where the private key has been lost or is otherwise inaccessible.

Magazine: AI has dramatically accelerated the quantum threat to Bitcoin: AI Eye