XRP price has now rejected the descending trendline resistance at least three times since late March, and the most recent failure on April 6 to 7 arrived on rising volume, a signal analysts associate with bearish continuation rather than consolidation.

XRP (XRP) price is trading at $1.3184 on April 7, down 1.9% from the session’s high after failing to close above the descending trendline resistance near $1.35 on April 6. The rejection is visible on the 1H chart as a red arrow marking where price touched the diagonal trendline and reversed, the third such failure since late March with prior rejections marked at lower trendline contacts. The 1H Supertrend at $1.3247 is now sitting just above current price, providing an additional near-term ceiling that compounds the trendline rejection signal.

On the 1H chart, XRP is trading within a structure defined by a descending trendline that has produced at least three confirmed rejections since March 21, visible as orange circles at prior high points where price touched and reversed from the diagonal resistance. The red arrow marks the most recent rejection, the most significant because it followed a recovery from the $1.27 zone that briefly raised expectations of a breakout attempt.

The 1H MACD line sits at -0.0046, with the signal at -0.0059 and a histogram reading of 0.0013. Although the MACD line is fractionally above the signal, both lines remain in negative territory and the histogram reading of 0.0013 is too small to constitute a meaningful bullish cross. Per market data published April 7, the daily RSI stands at 38, described as “weak momentum, but not yet in oversold territory,” meaning there is no technical floor from that indicator alone. The same analysis noted that open interest is rising alongside falling price, a sign traders are adding short positions rather than accumulating, which tends to amplify downside moves if support gives way.

Key Levels: $1.28 Fibonacci and $1.15 Bear Target

The $1.30 to $1.31 zone is the immediate structural support. A closing break below it exposes $1.28, which has held since February and aligns with the 23.6% Fibonacci retracement of XRP’s prior rally. Below $1.28, holder support thins materially toward $1.15 as the next significant structural level. On the upside, a confirmed daily close above the descending trendline at $1.35 is the minimum requirement to shift the near-term bias, and would also need to clear the 50-day EMA at $1.38 to open a path toward $1.40 to $1.45. The CLARITY Act, with a late April Senate markup targeted, is a binary catalyst that could shift the structural picture if passed, but a failure extends the current setup lower.

Derivatives and ETF Flow Context

Spot XRP ETFs recorded $3.56 million in net outflows in the week ending April 6, per CoinMarketCap data, reflecting reduced demand at a point where fresh capital is needed to challenge trendline resistance. The combination of ETF outflows, rising futures open interest consistent with short positioning, and thinning order book depth on Binance leaves XRP exposed to larger moves once either level breaks.

If $1.30 holds on a daily close, the range between $1.28 and $1.35 remains the decision zone. A close below $1.28 targets $1.15 as the next significant support.

The latest crypto news US CLARITY Act Senate 2026 bitcoin regulation battle has reached a pivotal moment: the bill that would define US crypto law for a generation is deadlocked between four factions in the Senate Banking Committee, and Senator Bernie Moreno has warned plainly that missing the May window risks pushing comprehensive crypto legislation off the calendar until after the 2026 midterms — and potentially beyond.

The latest crypto news US CLARITY Act Senate 2026 bitcoin regulation standoff is less about what the bill says and increasingly about whether the political calendar will allow it to move at all. As crypto.news reported, the core stablecoin yield dispute — the fight that paralyzed the January markup and dominated the past three months — has a framework in place: the Tillis-Alsobrooks compromise from March 20 bans passive yield on stablecoin balances while permitting activity-based rewards tied to payments and platform use. Senators Lummis and Alsobrooks have described the deal as 99% resolved.

The obstacle now is not the bill’s content. It is the five-step process that remains: a Senate Banking Committee markup, a full Senate floor vote requiring 60 votes, reconciliation with the Agriculture Committee version, reconciliation with the House-passed version from July 2025, and a presidential signature. Senator Bernie Moreno stated explicitly: “If the bill does not reach the full Senate floor by May, digital asset legislation may not receive serious consideration again for years.”

The four factions each have veto power over different parts of the bill. Crypto firms, led publicly by Coinbase, want the flexibility to offer yield-bearing stablecoins and clear DeFi protections. Banks, led by the American Bankers Association, are opposed to any stablecoin economics that could pull deposits away from the insured banking system — Standard Chartered estimated an open-ended yield provision could redirect up to $500 billion in deposits. Democratic senators are pushing for ethics language barring government officials and their families from personally profiting from crypto — language directed explicitly at Trump family holdings. And structural critics within both parties want stronger anti-fraud and DeFi oversight provisions the current draft does not contain.

What Passes or Fails Means for Bitcoin

As crypto.news noted, the CLARITY Act’s outcome is a critical variable for the entire institutional crypto pipeline. If it passes, the SEC/CFTC jurisdictional line becomes federal law rather than a reversible guidance document — giving large asset managers a permanent legal rationale for Bitcoin commodity custody and product approval. If it stalls past May, regulatory guidance from the current administration could be reversed after the midterms, putting institutional capital currently on the sidelines back into waiting mode.

Peter Van Valkenburgh, executive director of Coin Center, framed the bill’s purpose precisely: the aim of passing the CLARITY Act is not to trust the current administration, but to “bind the next one.”

The Senate returns from Easter recess on April 13. The Banking Committee markup window is the second half of April. That window is the entire ballgame.

A bipartisan group of seven House members has formally pressed the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to account for its approach to insider trading in prediction markets and event contracts tied to geopolitical events. In a letter to CFTC Chair Michael Selig, the lawmakers argued that the agency wields clear authority under the Commodities Exchange Act to prevent evasion of the act’s underlying swap provisions, signaling support for Selig’s view that the CFTC has jurisdiction over prediction markets.

The letter also raises questions about how the CFTC polices contracts deemed “morally obscene,” including wagers on U.S. military actions in Iran and Venezuela. The lawmakers pointed to instances of suspicious trades related to the timing and outcomes of such actions, calling for swift and decisive oversight to prevent exploitation of these markets. They warned that allowing these contracts to persist could undermine confidence in a federal regulatory framework intended to ensure fair, transparent markets.

Key takeaways

• Lawmakers request a formal response from the CFTC by April 15 on six questions related to insider trading and the regulation of prediction markets.
• The seven-member letter reinforces the CFTC’s claimed jurisdiction over prediction markets by tying them to the agency’s swap provisions under the Commodities Exchange Act.
• Concerns over “morally obscene” event contracts—such as bets tied to U.S. military actions—highlight ongoing scrutiny of market content and potential misuse.
• Regulatory battles unfold at federal and state levels, including lawsuits by state gaming authorities against Kalshi and Polymarket, with questions of preemption and enforcement increasingly central.
• CFTC enforcement chief David Miller signaled a pragmatic stance on insider trading—prosecuting only cases involving tipping or misappropriated information, not pursuing every minor violation.

Regulatory scope and the arc of enforcement

The exchange between lawmakers and the CFTC underscores a broader debate about how federal commodities rules should apply to prediction markets and event contracts. The letter cites the Commodities Exchange Act as granting the CFTC the authority to apply rules designed to prevent evasion of swaps provisions, reinforcing the agency’s position that prediction markets fall within federal regulation rather than purely state purview. This stance sits against a backdrop of legal challenges to market operators ranging from Kalshi to Polymarket, with state authorities pursuing enforcement actions that argue unlicensed gambling or sports betting violations.

The legal landscape is drafting itself in real time as courts weigh the reach of federal preemption against state gaming statutes. For example, the Third Circuit recently affirmed a lower court ruling blocking New Jersey gaming authorities from pursuing enforcement actions against Kalshi, with two of three judges indicating Kalshi had a reasonable chance of success in arguing that federal commodities laws preempted state actions. The outcome of these jurisdictional questions could shape how prediction markets operate across multiple states and whether state regulators can curb activities they deem unlawful without clashing with federal authority.

Beyond court battles, industry players continue to navigate a patchwork of state laws and regulatory expectations. Kalshi and Polymarket have faced separate suits and inquiries as states seek to police unlicensed gambling while federal regulators frame certain event contracts as swaps. The evolving regulatory posture matters for investors and builders who rely on predictable rules for creating, listing, or trading contracts tied to real-world events.

Insider trading enforcement: a measured approach

As lawmakers pressed for more aggressive oversight, CFTC enforcement chief David Miller weighed in on how insider trading in prediction markets would be pursued. Miller indicated that the agency would prosecute cases involving tipping or trading on misappropriated information but would not allocate resources to “trivial” instances that do not rise to a material manipulation of market integrity. The distinction—between serious, information-based misconduct and routine or minor mispricings—speaks to a broader enforcement philosophy that weighs market impact against prosecutorial effort.

For market participants, the comment signals that while insider trading remains a crucial concern, the CFTC’s approach may prioritize cases with clear, material harm to market fairness. This stance could influence how platforms design surveillance, disclosure, and antifraud controls to deter misuse without hampering legitimate price discovery and hedging activity.

What to watch next: implications for platforms and investors

The administration of prediction markets sits at the intersection of financial regulation, consumer protection, and national security considerations. The current letter and the broader regulatory dialogue suggest several trajectories to monitor:

• Regulatory clarity could emerge on whether prediction markets are categorically swaps under federal law or if alternative regulatory frameworks apply in specific contexts. The outcome will affect platform licensing, product design, and cross-state operations.
• State actions against prediction-market operators may continue to test the balance between state gaming authority and federal preemption, with potential implications for market access and compliance costs.
• Enforcement priorities could tilt toward high-impact, information-based misconduct, prompting platforms to strengthen anti-insider trading controls, surveillance analytics, and governance standards to deter misconduct.
• Investors and developers should watch how sensitive event contracts—especially those tied to geopolitical or military actions—are treated in terms of content guidelines, listing approvals, and risk disclosures.

The exchange between lawmakers and regulators arrives amid broader conversations about how to harmonize innovation in on-chain or off-chain prediction markets with robust oversight. As platforms adapt to the regulatory rhythm, participants should weigh the potential for policy shifts that could either broaden permissible activities under uniform federal standards or tighten restrictions at state levels. The next formal response from the CFTC by mid-April will be a telling signal of how aggressively the agency plans to police insider trading and whether it will pursue a more centralized, comprehensive framework for prediction-market regulation.

For readers following the evolution of prediction markets, the unfolding dynamic between federal regulators, state enforcers, and market operators like Kalshi and Polymarket will shape both the viability of these platforms and the risk landscape for traders who rely on event-based contracts to hedge or speculate. The coming weeks will reveal whether lawmakers’ questions translate into tangible regulatory clarity or simply intensify the ongoing debate over the proper scope of the CFTC’s powers in this evolving arena.

Readers should stay attentive to any formal CFTC responses, upcoming court decisions affecting jurisdiction, and platform-level governance changes that may arise as a result of increased scrutiny into insider trading and the content of event contracts.

TLDR

• SOL Strategies has acquired Darklake Labs for $1.2 million to expand its role in Solana’s ecosystem.
• The deal includes $200,000 in cash and $1 million in SOL Strategies common shares, with the stock portion subject to a four-month lockup.
• Darklake’s Zyga zero-knowledge proof system will enhance privacy features and reduce transaction vulnerabilities on the Solana blockchain.
• The acquisition brings in Darklake’s core team, including CEO Vitor Py Braga and COO Amber Hales, both of whom have extensive blockchain experience.
• SOL Strategies has been scaling its Solana holdings, with a treasury of 533,040 SOL valued at approximately $43.9 million.

SOL Strategies has confirmed the acquisition of Darklake Labs, a Solana-native zero-knowledge startup, for $1.2 million. The deal includes $200,000 in cash and $1 million in common stock, subject to a four-month lockup. This acquisition will bring privacy technology and new expertise to SOL Strategies as it increases its involvement in the Solana ecosystem.

SOL Strategies Strengthens Its Solana Presence Through Acquisition

In a strategic move, SOL Strategies has agreed to acquire Darklake Labs, a privacy-focused startup specializing in zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs). This acquisition is aimed at expanding SOL Strategies’ involvement in Solana’s blockchain development. Darklake’s expertise in ZKP technology will enhance the company’s offerings and provide a new layer of privacy-focused solutions.

The $1.2 million deal is divided between $200,000 in cash and $1 million in SOL Strategies common shares. The stock portion is subject to a four-month lockup period. This purchase positions SOL Strategies as a more active participant in Solana’s technological growth, especially in the growing privacy and security space. Darklake’s proprietary Zyga ZKP system is designed to improve transaction privacy on the Solana blockchain.

The Acquisition Brings Talented Individuals and Research Partnerships

The acquisition also includes Darklake’s core team, led by CEO Vitor Py Braga, a former infrastructure engineer at Meta and IBM. He will join SOL Strategies, bringing his deep technical expertise in blockchain infrastructure. Amber Hales, Darklake’s co-founder and COO, will also join the team, offering her valuable experience in compliance from previous roles at Coinbase and Coincover.

Darklake has developed strong academic partnerships in Brazil and is in the process of filing a patent for its ZKP technology. SOL Strategies will benefit from these collaborations, further strengthening its research capabilities. The company’s acquisition of Darklake is not just a hire; it reflects a deeper commitment to advancing Solana’s ecosystem with innovative solutions.

SOL Strategies Pushes Forward with Solana Growth and Institutional Access

As part of its ongoing strategy to expand its Solana holdings, SOL Strategies also reported a treasury balance of 533,040 SOL. This includes liquid staked SOL, worth around $43.9 million based on the April 1 price of SOL. In addition to the treasury, SOL Strategies has seen growth in its validator operations, managing 3.8 million SOL under delegation and 768,022 SOL in its liquid staking product, STKESOL.

The company has been expanding institutional access to its staking infrastructure. In March, Balance, a digital asset custodian, integrated SOL Strategies as a staking provider for its clients. ARK Invest’s Digital Asset Revolutions Fund also selected SOL Strategies as a Solana staking provider, further validating its role in Solana’s expanding ecosystem.

Solana DEX Stabble has urged its users to withdraw all liquidity after a former employee was outed as a North Korean operative.

The IT worker in question, who has also worked for Solana crypto fund Elemental, was named by crypto sleuth ZachXBT on Tuesday during a back and forth with Elemental founder “Moo.”

When the discussion turned to the issue of trust – something that Moo says they’ve been “obsessing over” for four years – Zach responded, “Stop virtue signaling you conveniently left out the fact that you had a DPRK IT worker on payroll at Elemental for years.”

The investigator then went on to reveal details of the alleged mole, naming him as Keisuke Watanabe, aka “kasky53,” and posting his GitHub aliases and email address.

Read more: The solution to crypto’s Lazarus problem could be simpler than expected

Stabble quickly quote tweeted Zach and urged its users, “To be safe – everyone please temporally [sic] withdraw your liquidity instantly! 

“Better safe than sorry. 

“This is the new team from Stabble, that aimed to repair the project.

“We will do new audits to be safe about our LPs. 

“Then we can continue. Safety first.”

It then admitted that it employed Watanabe a year ago.

DPRK plants have been on crypto payrolls ‘for years’

The warning comes as the industry grapples with fresh revelations from ZachXBT, who revealed this week that North Korean IT workers have been quietly embedded on crypto project payrolls for years.

Previous investigations have shown millions of dollars flowing to suspected DPRK-linked developers operating under fake identities, raising concerns about insider access and long-term infiltration risks.

Footage circulating on X appears to show suspected DPRK IT workers abruptly leaving a Zoom call after being prompted to criticize North Korean leader Kim Jong Un, further fueling speculation about covert operatives inside crypto teams.

The developments follow the recent Drift Protocol hack, one of the largest DeFi exploits of 2026, in which more than $200 million – and potentially up to $285 million – was drained.

Analysts and blockchain researchers have linked the attack to North Korean hacking groups, citing patterns consistent with past operations tied to the Lazarus Group.

Bitcoin price briefly touched $70,000 on April 7 within a well-formed ascending channel on the 4H chart, as spot ETF inflows logged $471 million on April 6, the strongest single-day institutional demand figure since late February.

Bitcoin (BTC) price is trading at $69,427 on April 7, having touched an intraday high of $70,036, the first test of the $70,000 level since March 26. The move came alongside $471 million in spot Bitcoin ETF inflows on April 6, the 6th-largest single-day figure of 2026 per SoSoValue data. The 4H chart shows an ascending channel in place since late March, with price printing consecutive higher lows from the $65,000 zone toward $70,000, but the round-number resistance has capped the advance through multiple sessions.

On the 4H chart, Bitcoin is trading within a defined ascending channel built by two parallel diagonal trendlines. The lower boundary aligns with the Supertrend at $67,478 and has acted as dynamic support throughout the recovery. The upper boundary coincides with the $70,036 resistance annotated on the chart. The 4H MACD is in a confirmed bullish cross, with the MACD line at 415.63 trading above the signal at 410.64 and a positive histogram of 4.98, reflecting building momentum even as price hesitates at resistance.

Analyst Michael van de Poppe of MN Trading Capital wrote on X on April 4 that “the longer the range persists, the heavier the breakout becomes,” adding: “I expect a break above $71,000.” Technical analysis from Investtech published April 7 shows Bitcoin “has given a positive signal from the double bottom formation by a break up through the resistance at $68,120,” with a further rise to $69,769 or more signalled. That target has already been cleared, strengthening the short-term case.

Key Levels: $68,400 Support, $71,000 Bull Target, $67,478 Invalidation

The $68,400 level visible on the 4H chart is the immediate structural support below current price. A close below it exposes the Supertrend at $67,478, which is the invalidation level for the bullish thesis. Investtech identifies $66,300 as the next support below, representing a potential 4.5% decline from current levels in the bear case. On the upside, a confirmed 4H close above $70,036 resolves the current resistance and opens the path to the $71,000 level per van de Poppe’s analysis, with the ascending channel structure remaining intact as long as the Supertrend holds.

ETF Inflows Driving Independent Institutional Demand

Spot Bitcoin ETFs have drawn consistent inflows across recent sessions, with the $471 million on April 6 reflecting renewed institutional appetite at current price levels. According to Binance Research, Bitcoin’s correlation with its Global Easing Breadth Index “turned strongly negative after the launch of spot bitcoin ETFs,” suggesting ETF demand now operates more independently from broader macro conditions. The Iran ceasefire talks on April 6 and 7 provided a short-term macro catalyst, but ETF buyers were already positioned ahead of the move, reinforcing the institutional demand floor near current levels.

If $70,036 continues to hold as resistance, a retest of $68,400 and then the Supertrend at $67,478 becomes the more probable near-term path before any further breakout attempt. A clean 4H close above $70,036 with volume confirmation targets $71,000 as the next resistance.

Grayscale Research has called for the early rollout of quantum-resistant blockchain upgrades following a new warning from Google Quantum AI. The report suggests that quantum computing could undermine current cryptographic encryption methods sooner than previously anticipated. As a response, Grayscale highlights the XRP Ledger and Solana’s efforts in post-quantum cryptography as potential solutions to address these emerging security risks.

XRP Ledger’s Quantum-Resistant Efforts

The XRP Ledger (XRPL) has begun experimenting with quantum-resistant technologies to prepare for future threats posed by quantum computing. The ledger is currently testing ML-DSA signatures on its AlphaNet. Although these efforts are still in the early stages, Grayscale notes that they represent a critical step toward enhancing the security of blockchain systems in a post-quantum world.

Grayscale emphasizes the need for the blockchain community to accelerate the implementation of such solutions. The crypto industry faces challenges like engineering and consensus-building, which require significant collaboration across networks. Moreover, any quantum-resistant upgrade must address potential issues, including a reduction in transaction throughput, which could affect the network’s scalability.

While XRPL is not entirely ‘quantum-proof,’ the experiments on the AlphaNet represent meaningful progress in preparing for quantum threats. Grayscale advocates for further testing and the eventual deployment of these cryptographic updates to safeguard the blockchain from quantum attacks. The project is still evolving, but it is an important step forward in the industry’s readiness.

Solana’s Post-Quantum Cryptography Research

Solana is also taking proactive steps in response to the potential risks posed by quantum computing. The network has partnered with Project Eleven to experiment with quantum-resistant cryptographic signatures. These efforts aim to secure the blockchain from future quantum threats that could undermine the existing encryption methods.

However, Grayscale cautions that quantum-resistant upgrades on Solana have shown the potential to significantly reduce network speed. The tests indicate that the implementation of quantum-resistant signatures could lead to a 90% decrease in the network’s speed. While security is a top priority, the challenge remains to balance quantum resistance with maintaining the blockchain’s scalability.

Despite these challenges, Grayscale views Solana’s initiative as another significant step toward ensuring the blockchain ecosystem’s resilience. The company emphasizes that the crypto industry must continue to experiment with and refine these solutions. Solana’s involvement in post-quantum cryptography is just one example of how blockchain networks are preparing for the future.

The Impact of Quantum Computing on Bitcoin

Grayscale’s report also highlights how quantum computing poses different risks to blockchains based on their structures. Bitcoin, for example, uses a UTXO (unspent transaction output) model, which Grayscale argues makes it less susceptible to quantum threats than blockchains with an account model, such as Ethereum. Bitcoin’s lack of native smart contracts further reduces its exposure to quantum computing vulnerabilities.

However, Grayscale points out that the primary concern with quantum computing is the potential loss of private keys. If a private key becomes inaccessible, it could lead to the loss or inaccessibility of coins. This situation could result in coins being burned, deliberately withheld, or simply left unused.

Bitcoin’s network also faces challenges in reaching consensus on protocol changes. Grayscale references last year’s debate over the inclusion of image data in blocks as an example of the hurdles the Bitcoin community must overcome when addressing security upgrades. The road ahead for quantum-resistant solutions will require significant collaboration and decision-making within the community.

Fresh on-chain data indicates Bitcoin may be carving out a new phase of supply dynamics, with long-term holders expanding their wallets and fewer coins circulating on exchanges. By early April 2026, the total amount held by accumulating cohorts surpassed 4.37 million BTC, reflecting a sustained shift of supply into HODL-oriented addresses even as the price hovered below previous all-time highs.

The pattern coincides with a notable uptick in network activity and a stubborn drawdown in active short-term participation, painting a nuanced picture for traders and investors alike as the market contends with shifting liquidity and potential price implications.

Key takeaways

• Accumulating cohorts now hold about 4.37 million BTC as of April 7, with long-term wallets continuing to absorb supply into Q2 2026.
• Retail-investor accumulation added roughly 857,000 BTC, while accumulating-pattern wallets expanded by about 1.29 million BTC—both contributing to the broader growth in long-term holdings.
• Exchange inflows have cooled markedly, averaging roughly 300,000 to 350,000 BTC—far below the 1.2–1.5 million BTC ranges seen during prior expansion phases in 2023–2024.
• The Bitcoin network activity index climbed to about 3,600, up from 3,320 on March 22, moving above its 365-day moving average for the first time since December 2024 and entering a bull-phase classification for the first time since April 2025.
• Active-address momentum slumped to -0.25 on April 6, the lowest reading since 2018, suggesting diminished short-term participation and a market dominated by long-term holders.

Long-term wallets expand holdings, reshaping liquidity

According to CryptoQuant data, the cohorts that accumulate BTC in regular, capped-out flows have continued to grow in the first quarter of 2026. The total BTC held by these accumulating cohorts reached 4.37 million BTC as of April 7, a substantial rise from the 2 million BTC level observed in early 2024. This acceleration points to a deliberate shift of BTC away from liquid markets into long-term storage or strategic accumulation pockets.

Breaking down the composition, retail-investor-linked accumulation addresses added about 857,000 BTC, while accumulating-pattern wallets—defined as entities that steadily add BTC at recurring intervals with minimal outflows—expanded by roughly 1.29 million BTC. Collectively, these movements illustrate a persistent absorption of supply by patient holders, even as the price lingered below the $70,000 mark through Q1 2026.

By contrast, inflows from centralized exchanges and highly active addresses have cooled. In 2023–2024, inflows during expansion phases often exceeded 1.2–1.5 million BTC. In the latest period, inflows have averaged around 300,000–350,000 BTC, signaling a meaningful shift in how coins move between on-chain activity and exchange wallets.

Network activity metrics corroborate the macro shift

The CryptoQuant Bitcoin network activity index rose to about 3,600, up from 3,320 on March 22, underscoring a broad rebound in on-chain usage signals. The index, which aggregates transaction counts and network throughput, pushed above its 365-day moving average—the first time since December 2024 that it crossed that threshold and the first appearance in a “bull-phase” classification since April 2025.

Meanwhile, Bitcoin’s active addresses momentum slipped to -0.25 on April 6—the lowest level since 2018. The metric tracks the rate of change in active addresses, with negative readings indicating waning user participation. CryptoQuant notes that the low activity levels echo a period in 2024 that preceded a roughly 35% price correction, suggesting the market may be experiencing a period of consolidation or a longer-term rebalancing rather than immediate selling pressure.

Analysts have interpreted the data as signaling a market increasingly driven by long-term holders rather than short-term participants or “tourists.” Gaah, a CryptoQuant analyst cited in the data notes that the pattern reflects a sector where long-term accumulation dominates network activity, potentially reducing near-term sell pressure even as on-chain usage fluctuates.

Implications for investors: what changes, and what remains uncertain

The divergence between rising long-term holdings and cooling exchange inflows presents a nuanced risk-reward picture. If the trend toward accumulating wallets persists, liquidity available for rapid selling could tighten, potentially supporting a floor for BTC during periods of price hesitation. Historically, large pockets of long-term holding have coincided with periods of price resilience during broader market uncertainty.

However, the current combination of rising on-chain activity and thinning short-term participation warrants a careful read of price dynamics. While the data suggest that the market is gradually shifting away from high-frequency turnover, the actual price trajectory will still depend on macro factors, sentiment, and the pace of new adoption or regulatory developments. The latest readings imply a potential for renewed price stability or gradual upside, contingent on continued supply absorption and sustained on-chain engagement.

For market watchers, the next few quarters will be telling. Will long-term wallets continue the inflow that’s reshaping the liquid BTC supply, and will the lower frequency of exchange inflows translate into firmer price support? How new regulatory or macro developments influence retail participation and exchange flows remains an open question, even as the on-chain metrics point toward a more durable, holder-led regime.

Looking ahead, readers should monitor whether accumulation momentum maintains its pace into Q2 and beyond, and whether the network activity index can sustain its newly regained footing above the 365-day average. If the long-term holder community continues to swell while on-chain usage remains constructive, Bitcoin could see a gradual decoupling from the most frenetic short-term trading cycles—an outcome that would carry meaningful implications for both traders and long-term investors.

Binance founder Changpeng Zhao (CZ) says Sam Bankman-Fried asked him for “a couple of billion dollars nonchalantly, as if he were asking for a bologna sandwich” during the phone call that preceded Binance’s attempt to acquire FTX in November 2022, and that he never had any intention of going through with it.

“I didn’t have any interest in owning FTX. I also wasn’t that interested in helping SBF,” Zhao writes in his memoir Freedom of Money, released Tuesday. “But we may have to step in to protect the users and the industry.” He signed the non-binding Letter of Intent, he says, purely as a formality: “I was explicit that we were not making any commitment. Our team would simply assess the numbers and then decide.”

On the collapse itself, Zhao is clear about where it unraveled. When Alameda CEO Caroline Ellison publicly offered to buy Binance’s FTT holdings at $22 each — an attempt to stabilize the market — Zhao says she made “a fatal mistake.”

“She had just revealed her floor price,” he writes. Professional traders immediately shorted FTT through that level. The token fell to $15, then $10, then $5. Within 72 hours, $6 billion had exited FTX.

Zhao also discloses the existence of “Exchange Collaboration,” a Signal group set up by FTX’s Zane Tackett during the Terra/LUNA collapse earlier that year, which included Zhao, Bankman-Fried, Brian Armstrong of Coinbase, Jesse Powell of Kraken and others. The group later attracted scrutiny from DOJ and SEC investigators. “They were keen to find any possible hint of collusion or market manipulation between the exchanges,” Zhao writes. “Of course there was no such thing in this case.”

By Nov. 9, Binance had walked away from the deal. Binance’s own FTT holdings — worth $580 million at their peak — had become “basically worthless,” Zhao writes, echoing the company’s $1.6 billion LUNA wipeout six months earlier.

The aftermath brought a bank run on Binance, with $7 billion withdrawn in a single day on Dec. 14. Zhao says he spent that evening at dinner with friends. “I was not worried,” he writes. “All user funds were in our reserves.” Within a month, he says, users had deposited it all back — and more.