Crypto World
Could the IPO wave drain crypto’s liquidity?
A record run of mega-listings is pulling hundreds of billions in fresh equity supply into the market. The fear is that the money to buy it comes partly out of crypto. The truth is more tangled than the timeline suggests.
Summary
- SpaceX completed the largest IPO in history in June 2026, and anticipated listings from OpenAI and Anthropic could bring the wave of new equity supply above $240 billion by year-end.
- The core worry is mechanical: an IPO does not create new money, so investors sell existing holdings to fund allocations, and crypto is among the easiest assets to liquidate quickly.
- The evidence for a drain is real: Bitcoin fell hard around the SpaceX listing, spot Bitcoin ETFs posted a record $4.5 billion of outflows in June, and higher-beta altcoins took the most damage.
- The evidence against a simple story is just as real: the same weeks brought a sharp equity selloff, geopolitical shocks, and a hawkish Fed, so macro, not the IPOs alone, drove much of Bitcoin’s drop.
- The likely answer is that the wave is a genuine short-term headwind that competes with macro forces, and whether it becomes a lasting drain depends on flows reversing once the deals are digested.
There is an obvious villain in crypto’s rough summer. SpaceX carried out the biggest IPO ever, OpenAI and Anthropic are lining up behind it, and Bitcoin fell through the same window. The story writes itself: the mega-IPO wave is a giant vacuum, sucking capital out of digital assets to fund the hottest listings in a generation. The mechanism is plausible, the timeline lines up, and the fear is widespread.
But correlation this clean often hides a messier truth, and the question deserves more than a chart with two lines pointing opposite directions. This piece lays out the scale of the wave, the mechanism behind the drain thesis, the evidence for it, the macro confound that complicates it, and what would tell us which force is really in control. It also looks at the strange counterpoint that the same IPO wave pulling liquidity from crypto is also pushing equity-like speculation onto crypto rails. The result is not a clean bullish or bearish answer, but a liquidity map.
The scale of the wave
Start with the numbers, because they are genuinely large. SpaceX went public around June 12, 2026, targeting roughly $75 billion at a valuation near $1.75 trillion, the largest listing in history, with reported demand exceeding $250 billion. Behind it sit two of the most anticipated technology debuts in years, OpenAI and Anthropic, whose listings and fundraising are expected to pull in tens of billions more. One estimate puts the combined new equity supply from this cluster above $240 billion by year-end.
That figure is what makes the drain thesis credible. Markets absorb new supply by finding buyers, and buyers need cash. When the supply arriving is measured in hundreds of billions and concentrated in a short window, the question of where the money comes from stops being academic. The wave is not one event but a sequence, which is why the concern is less about any single listing and more about the cumulative pull of several mega-deals stacking up across the same months.
For crypto readers, SpaceX’s Bitcoin position on public markets matters because it complicates the simple drain story. SpaceX did not only pull money from risk assets; it also brought 18,712 BTC onto the balance sheet of a public-market giant. That makes the listing both a competitor for crypto liquidity and a legitimizing event for Bitcoin as a corporate asset. The tension between those two effects is the core of the debate.
The mechanism: an IPO does not create new money
The heart of the drain argument is a simple truth that is easy to forget in a rally. An IPO does not print new money into the system. It transfers existing capital from investors into a newly public company and its early backers. To buy into a hot offering, investors free up cash, and they free up cash by selling something they already own.
Crypto is a prime candidate for that selling, because it trades around the clock and can be liquidated fast when someone needs capital in a hurry. The mechanism has several strands. Retail overlap is one: a large share of the SpaceX allocation targeted retail investors, a group that overlaps heavily with active crypto participants, so some of the money chasing shares comes straight out of crypto positions. Index-fund mechanics are another: once a giant company enters the indices, funds tracking those benchmarks are forced to buy billions of its shares, and because they hold little spare cash, they raise it by selling existing positions.
Institutional rebalancing is the third: funds holding Bitcoin through ETFs face a choice about trimming crypto to fund IPO allocations. Each strand points the same way, toward selling pressure on liquid risk assets, with crypto near the front of the line. That is why how ETF flows move the market matters in this context. When crypto ETF shares are sold to raise cash, the effect is not abstract; it removes a real bid from the market.
The evidence for a drain
The tape offers real support for the thesis. Around the SpaceX filing and listing, Bitcoin fell roughly 20% and slipped under $60,000, and the broader crypto market bled with it. The clearest institutional signal came from the funds: U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded about $4.5 billion of net outflows in June 2026, the worst month since the products launched, removing the steady bid that had cushioned earlier drops. Crypto ETFs had already seen billions in outflows the month before.
Analysts explicitly cited capital rotation and the SpaceX IPO among the drivers of the redemptions. The pattern extended beyond Bitcoin. Space and hard-tech stocks rallied in the same weeks that crypto slid, a visual rotation from digital assets into aerospace and AI exposure. And altcoins fared worse than Bitcoin, consistent with the idea that investors raising cash sell their highest-beta positions first.
Taken together, the outflows, the rotation into listing-adjacent equities, and the outsized altcoin damage form a coherent picture of capital leaving crypto as the IPO wave built. It does not prove the IPO wave caused all of the selloff, but it proves the drain thesis has more than vibes behind it. The timing, the flow data, and the asset-performance pattern all point in the same direction. The next question is whether they point only to the IPO wave or to a broader risk-off event that happened to arrive at the same time.
The evidence against a simple story
Here is where the clean narrative frays. The same weeks that saw Bitcoin fall also delivered a broad risk-off shock that had nothing to do with any IPO. Equity markets sold off sharply, with the Nasdaq posting one of its worst single days of the year and AI bellwethers dropping as bubble fears flared. Geopolitics piled on, with missile exchanges in the Middle East pushing oil higher and stoking the inflation fears that keep the Fed hawkish.
Under a hawkish Fed, with markets pricing a strong chance of a December rate hike as inflation drifts back up, risk assets were under pressure across the board. Bitcoin, which trades far more like a high-beta risk asset than like digital gold, did what every speculative position did in that environment: it got sold. When it recovered, it recovered on macro news, not on IPO mechanics. That sequence exposes the flaw in blaming the listings alone.
The IPO wave competed with genuine global risk-off conditions, and it is close to impossible to cleanly separate how much of Bitcoin’s drop came from capital rotating into SpaceX versus capital fleeing risk in general. Correlation with the IPO timeline is not proof of causation when a dozen other bearish forces arrived at once. That is why the Bitcoin market backdrop still matters more than any single listing. If macro remains hostile, even a completed IPO wave will not automatically restore crypto liquidity.
The rotation-back case
The drain thesis also has a time limit that its loudest versions ignore. An IPO is a one-time reallocation, not a permanent siphon. Once allocations are funded and the deals are digested, the selling pressure fades, and the capital that rotated out can rotate back. If the listings price well and risk sentiment improves, the same investors who sold crypto to fund IPO positions may redeploy into digital assets, turning a short-term headwind into a medium-term tailwind.
There is a structural sweetener too. SpaceX carried a multibillion-dollar Bitcoin position onto public markets, so every new shareholder gained indirect exposure to the asset, and a successful debut could encourage other pre-IPO companies to hold and disclose Bitcoin to court crypto-friendly investors. In that scenario, the IPO wave ends up expanding the base of Bitcoin holders rather than shrinking crypto’s capital. The drain, if it is one, may be the front end of a cycle that feeds back into the asset it briefly pulled from.
This is why the rotation-back case should not be dismissed, even if it is slower than the drain. Liquidity can leave quickly and return gradually. The first leg shows up as selling pressure, ETF outflows, and weaker altcoins. The second leg would show up later, through renewed ETF inflows, higher risk appetite, and capital moving back down the crypto risk curve once the IPO allocations have settled.
Why altcoins bear the brunt
If there is a drain, its incidence is uneven, and that unevenness is itself informative. Bitcoin is the deepest, most liquid crypto asset and the one institutions hold through ETFs, so it absorbs pressure but also attracts the first capital back. Altcoins are higher-beta and thinner, which means investors raising cash tend to liquidate them first and rebuild them last. That dynamic delays any altcoin season and concentrates the pain in the long tail of the market, even when Bitcoin itself is only mildly affected.
For readers trying to gauge the wave’s impact, the altcoin-versus-Bitcoin spread is a useful tell. If the drain is real and ongoing, altcoins keep underperforming as capital stays parked in equities. If the pressure is easing, the higher-beta names are where the recovery shows up first once risk appetite returns. The brunt falling on altcoins is both a symptom of the drain and an early indicator of its reversal.
The reason is behavioral as much as mechanical. In a cash-raising event, investors usually sell what is liquid, volatile, and easiest to replace later. That puts altcoins near the front of the liquidation queue. It also means a later altcoin rebound would be meaningful, because it would suggest the market has moved from forced cash-raising back into risk-taking.
What to watch
The debate does not resolve with a single number, but a few signals will show which force is winning. ETF flow direction is the clearest: a return to sustained net inflows would signal the drain is over and capital is coming back, while continued outflows would confirm the pressure persists. The timing of the OpenAI and Anthropic listings is the second: if they cluster into the same window, the cumulative supply shock intensifies, whereas spacing them out softens it. The third is whether post-deal capital actually rotates back after SpaceX is digested, the test of the rotation-back thesis.
The fourth is Bitcoin’s behavior around its support in the high $50,000s to $60,000 range, since holding there through the wave would suggest the selling is absorbable, while breaking down would suggest the drain is compounding other bearish forces. And the fifth is the macro backdrop, because as long as the Fed stays hawkish and risk-off conditions dominate, it will be hard to blame crypto weakness on the IPOs alone. Watched together, these signals separate a temporary reallocation from a structural outflow, which is the distinction that actually matters. One rough rule: if ETF flows turn positive while altcoins stop underperforming, the IPO drain is probably fading.
The harder signal is whether the IPO wave changes investor preference, not just investor positioning. A temporary drain means investors sold crypto to fund new listings and later returned. A structural drain would mean they now prefer listed AI and hard-tech exposure over crypto as their main risk-on trade. The first is a headwind; the second would be a deeper challenge.
The pre-IPO perps signal
One of the most revealing threads in this story has nothing to do with the drain itself and everything to do with where financial infrastructure is heading. Before SpaceX shares ever reached Wall Street, crypto exchanges rolled out pre-IPO perpetual futures tied to the expected listing, letting traders bet on the valuation through crypto rails. The activity was substantial, and the price action was wild: one pre-IPO SPCX perpetual fell sharply from its listing high as speculation swung, showing both the demand for the exposure and its volatility. Crypto venues, in other words, became the first place retail could trade SpaceX at all.
That detail reframes the whole liquidity question. The same infrastructure that the drain thesis says is losing capital to equities is simultaneously absorbing equity-style trading onto crypto rails. If pre-IPO perps on tokens and stocks become a durable product, then crypto exchanges are not just donors of liquidity to the IPO wave; they are also venues capturing a slice of the speculative interest the wave generates. The relationship between crypto and the mega-listings is more two-way than a one-directional siphon, which complicates the simple picture of capital flowing out and not coming back.
It also hints at a longer arc. As tokenized and pre-IPO markets mature, the line between trading a stock and trading a token blurs, and the platforms that started in crypto are positioned to sit in the middle of that convergence. The IPO wave may pull spot capital out of Bitcoin in the near term while pushing trading volume and relevance toward crypto-native infrastructure at the same time, a nuance the drain narrative misses entirely. For readers new to the product, the pre-IPO perps market sits inside the broader world of perpetual futures, where traders can take synthetic exposure without owning the underlying asset.
Lessons from past capital events
History offers a rough template for how these episodes resolve, even if no two are identical. Large capital events that pull attention and money toward a specific opportunity tend to produce a front-loaded effect: the pressure is heaviest in the run-up and immediate aftermath, when investors are raising cash and reallocating, and it eases once the event is digested and positions settle. The reallocation is a one-time transfer, not a permanent change in how much capital exists, so the assets that gave up liquidity often see some of it return once the opportunity is fully priced. The variable that decides whether the return happens quickly is the macro environment.
In a risk-on backdrop with ample liquidity, a big IPO gets absorbed with little lasting damage to other assets, because there is enough capital to fund the new supply without deep selling elsewhere. In a tight, risk-off backdrop like mid-2026, the same IPO bites harder, because investors are already defensive and more willing to sell liquid positions to raise cash. The current wave is landing in the harder version of that setup, which is part of why its effect on crypto feels sharp. The same deal that might have been absorbed cleanly in a looser market becomes a visible drain when liquidity is already scarce.
The practical lesson is to separate the temporary from the structural. A front-loaded drain that reverses once the deals clear is a headwind to trade around, not a reason to abandon the asset class. A structural shift, where capital permanently prefers listed innovation stocks over crypto, would be a bigger deal, but it requires evidence beyond a few months of correlated moves. So far, the pattern looks more like a large, concentrated reallocation arriving into an already-weak market than proof of a lasting migration, which is why the flows in the months after the listings matter more than the drawdown during them.
Who actually gets drained, and who does not
A subtlety the blunt drain thesis misses is that not all crypto capital is equally at risk of being pulled into an IPO. The money most likely to rotate out is the marginal, liquid, opportunistic kind: leveraged traders, short-term speculators, and investors who hold crypto as one line in a broader risk portfolio and will happily sell it to chase a hot listing. That is exactly the capital that flows through the venues showing the most stress, and its exit shows up fast in falling open interest and higher volatility.
The capital least likely to leave is the opposite: long-term holders, self-custody accumulators, and conviction buyers who treat Bitcoin as a multi-year position instead of a source of dry powder for equities. The exchange-outflow data discussed above suggests this cohort has been buying weakness even as the speculative money leaves, which means the drain is concentrated in the flighty end of the market and cushioned at the sticky end. That split matters for how deep and how lasting any drain can be, because a market losing its weak hands while its strong hands accumulate is behaving very differently from one where everyone is heading for the exits.
There is a geographic and structural layer too. The retail overlap that funds IPO allocations is heaviest in the markets and platforms where the same investors trade both stocks and crypto, so the drain is not uniform across the world or across venues. Institutions holding Bitcoin through ETFs face a cleaner rebalancing decision than a self-custody holder in a jurisdiction with limited access to the SpaceX offering, who may have no easy way to swap one for the other even if they wanted to. The result is that the drain is real but uneven, biting hardest where crypto and equity trading overlap and barely at all where they do not. For anyone trying to size the effect, the question is not whether capital is leaving, but which capital, and the answer, that it is mostly the liquid and opportunistic kind, is part of why the impact may prove more temporary than the headline drop suggests.
Frequently asked questions
How big is the IPO wave?
SpaceX completed the largest IPO in history in June 2026, targeting roughly $75 billion at a valuation near $1.75 trillion, with reported demand above $250 billion. Anticipated listings and fundraising from OpenAI and Anthropic could push the combined new equity supply from this cluster above $240 billion by year-end, concentrated into a relatively short window. That is why the drain thesis is being taken seriously: the scale is too large to ignore. The issue is whether the money comes mainly from crypto, from broader equities, or from cash and other liquid holdings.
Why would an IPO drain crypto liquidity?
Because an IPO does not create new money. Investors fund allocations by selling assets they already own, and crypto is easy to liquidate quickly. Retail buyers overlap with crypto holders, index funds are forced to buy the new shares by selling other positions, and institutions may trim Bitcoin ETF holdings to raise cash. Each channel points to selling pressure on liquid risk assets. Crypto sits near the front of that line because it trades 24/7, has deep venues, and is often held by investors who also chase high-growth tech listings. That does not mean every dollar funding the IPO wave comes from crypto. It means crypto is one obvious source of dry powder when investors need cash quickly.
Is there proof the drain is happening?
There is supporting evidence, not proof. Bitcoin fell around the SpaceX listing, spot Bitcoin ETFs saw a record $4.5 billion of outflows in June 2026, space stocks rallied as crypto slid, and altcoins underperformed. Analysts cited capital rotation and the IPO among the drivers. But the same period brought a broad risk-off shock, so the IPO cannot be cleanly isolated as the cause. The cleaner way to frame it is that the IPO wave was one headwind among several. It likely added pressure at the margin, especially through ETF outflows and altcoin selling. But macro conditions, Fed expectations, equity weakness, and geopolitical stress were also moving risk assets at the same time.
What else could explain Bitcoin’s drop?
Macro forces that arrived at the same time. Equity markets sold off sharply, AI stocks fell on bubble fears, geopolitical tension pushed oil higher, and a hawkish Fed pricing a likely December rate hike pressured risk assets broadly. Bitcoin trades like a high-beta risk asset, so it got sold in that environment regardless of the IPO wave. Macro and the listings are hard to separate. This matters because blaming only the IPO wave can lead to the wrong read. If the drop was mainly macro, then even after the listings clear, crypto can stay weak until risk appetite improves. If the drop was mainly IPO funding pressure, flows should recover once the deals are digested. The market’s next move depends on which force dominates.
Could the IPO wave actually help crypto later?
Yes, potentially. An IPO is a one-time reallocation, not a permanent siphon. Once deals are funded and digested, capital that rotated out can rotate back, especially if listings price well and risk sentiment improves. SpaceX also carried Bitcoin onto public markets, giving new shareholders indirect exposure and possibly encouraging other pre-IPO firms to hold and disclose Bitcoin. That is where the corporate-Bitcoin angle becomes relevant. If large public companies normalize holding BTC, the long-term adoption signal can offset some of the near-term liquidity drain. The question is whether that normalization is strong enough to matter for flows, not merely for narrative.
Why do altcoins get hit harder than Bitcoin?
Altcoins are higher-beta and less liquid, so investors raising cash tend to sell them first and rebuild them last. Bitcoin is deeper and held through ETFs, so it absorbs pressure but also draws capital back first. That dynamic concentrates the pain in altcoins and delays any altcoin season, which is why the altcoin-versus-Bitcoin spread is a useful gauge of the drain. If altcoins keep underperforming after the IPO allocations settle, the pressure is probably not over.
What signals show whether the drain is easing?
The clearest is ETF flow direction: a return to sustained inflows would signal capital coming back, while continued outflows would confirm ongoing pressure. Also watch the timing of the OpenAI and Anthropic listings, whether capital rotates back after SpaceX is digested, Bitcoin’s behavior around its support, and the macro backdrop, since a hawkish Fed keeps risk assets pressured independently. The altcoin-versus-Bitcoin spread is another useful tell. If higher-beta crypto starts recovering first, the forced cash-raising phase may be ending.
Does an IPO wave always pull money from crypto?
Not necessarily. The effect depends on overlap between IPO buyers and crypto holders, the size and timing of the deals, and the macro environment. In a risk-on market with ample liquidity, large IPOs can be absorbed without much crypto selling. In a tight, risk-off market like mid-2026, the overlap and the cash needs make crypto a more likely source of funding, amplifying the effect. The SpaceX, OpenAI, and Anthropic wave is unusual because the listings are large, concentrated, and aimed at the same risk-seeking investor base that often owns crypto. That makes the drain plausible. It still does not make it the only driver of crypto weakness.
Disclaimer: This article is for information purposes only and does not constitute financial, investment, or trading advice. Cryptocurrency prices are highly volatile, and market analysis is speculative and can change quickly. Nothing here is a recommendation to buy or sell any asset. Always do your own research and consider consulting a licensed professional before making financial decisions. Figures are accurate as of July 1, 2026, and will change.
Pi Network (PI) saw a modest rise as the Pi Core Team began rolling out Protocol 26, the first of two remaining upgrades to its Mainnet.
Node operators have until August 11 to finish the update to maintain their connection to the Mainnet.
Pi Network Sets an August 11 Deadline for Node Operators
The Pi Core Team announced the rollout on Wednesday and directed operators to its node page for instructions.
“This migration is straightforward and should complete in under 5 minutes; in rare cases, restarts may take longer—please allow them to finish. Do not perform it to all of your nodes at the same time,” the instructions read.
Protocol 26 is the ninth protocol upgrade Pi has shipped over the past few months. Protocol 27 will close the current sequence.
The team stated that together, the two releases will bring the Mainnet up to date with the network’s latest protocol features and functionality.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
Upgrade News Lifts PI Price, but Rallies Keep Fading
Meanwhile, PI price ticked higher on the upgrade development. The token was up 6.66% to $0.0822 over 24 hours, outpacing the broader crypto market’s 0.71% gain.
A similar reaction followed the network’s product work. PI gained more than 3.5% in mid-July when Pi redesigned its mining app menu and profile page.
The rebound remains narrow, however. PI trades down 11.7% over the past 7 days and 29% over the past 30 days.
Earlier upgrades produced the same pattern. Pi activated Protocol 25 on July 22, and PI briefly tagged $0.103 days earlier before losing the $0.10 level.
Supply explains part of that ceiling. PiScan data showed roughly 4.25 million PI unlocking each day, with about 1.71 billion scheduled to enter circulation over 12 months.
The August 11 cutoff hands traders another dated catalyst. Prior deadlines delivered short bounces rather than a durable trend, and the upcoming upgrades will test whether that changes.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights
The post Pi Network Begins Ninth Protocol Upgrade Ahead of Final Version 27 appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Perplexity AI predicts an explosive rally for Bitcoin, and this Bitcoin price prediction does not hold back on the number. The call is $180,000 to $230,000 by the end of 2026, a target built on what the model calls a slow bull institutional phase rather than a sharp speculative spike.
Record ETF inflows are projected to top $300 billion, layered against sovereign adoption through a US Strategic Reserve. That combination is framed as overwhelming the post-halving supply shock entirely, meaning demand simply outpaces the reduced flow of new coins hitting the market.
Potential Fed rate cuts add a second structural bid on top of that. Enhanced liquidity tends to push capital toward risk assets, and Bitcoin has historically been a major beneficiary of exactly that kind of environment.
Regulatory clarity through the GENIUS Act rounds out the case. Perplexity frames this as the piece that legitimizes corporate treasury allocation, effectively giving more companies permission to hold Bitcoin on their balance sheets the way a handful of early movers already have.
Even the base case here is aggressive. A new all time high near $150,000 to $200,000 is treated as the expected outcome rather than the stretch scenario.
The bear case is not dismissed though. If ETF flows stall or a macro recession triggers deleveraging, Perplexity sees Bitcoin retesting support between $60,000 and $80,000.
The model still frames a collapse below current levels as increasingly unlikely, arguing the institutional floor beneath this market has genuinely strengthened compared to prior cycles.
Bitcoin Price Prediction: BTC Has Spent Six Months Retracing The Same 20,000 Dollar Range
Price closed at $63,835, up 0.22%, in a session ranging between $62,684 and $64,035. That modest green day sits inside a chart that has been repeating itself since spring.
Zoom out and the shape is unmistakable. Bitcoin topped near $128,000 in October 2025, then broke down hard through January, gapping from above $96,000 to under $72,000 in a matter of weeks.
Since that crash, price built a rounded recovery through spring that peaked near $82,000 in May, then rolled over into a sharp flush back to $60,000 in June. The climb since that June low has been steady, and it has now pushed BTC price back to almost exactly where the May rally first started.
Support sits at $60,000, the level defended through June. Below that, $52,000 marks the last major shelf from earlier in the cycle.
Resistance stacks at $66,000, then $70,000, then the heavier May ceiling near $82,000 that has already rejected one full rally attempt this year. Momentum here is mildly positive but not extended, consistent with a market grinding sideways rather than breaking out in either direction.
For Perplexity’s base case to gain real traction, Bitcoin needs to clear $82,000, a level this exact chart has already failed at once this year. Until that happens, this remains the same range it has been trading since May, just retraced from a different direction.
Don’t Miss Out on Our $1,000 USDT Airdrop on ByBit
Here is What Perplexity AI Predicts About LiquidChain
The rotation has already happened. Most people will realize it too late.
Large caps are boxed in. Bitcoin, Ethereum, and XRP keep testing the same ceilings with nothing giving way. Every macro catalyst has a new date. Every institutional wave arrives next quarter. Waiting on someone else’s timeline is not a trade.
A capital that has navigated enough cycles moves before the destination has a name.
Small market cap infrastructure plays on different physics entirely. A modest rotation that vanishes as noise at Bitcoin’s scale can reprice an undiscovered project by multiples. The returns live in the gap between what something is genuinely worth and what the market has assigned it. That gap closes permanently the moment discovery happens.
Multi-chain fragmentation bleeds DeFi every single day. Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana run as completely isolated systems. Every user crossing those boundaries pays in fees, slippage, and failed transactions. Every single time.
Perplexity AI predicts LiquidChain fixes that will entirely fix it. All 3 networks inside one execution layer. One deployment. Zero cross-chain tax anywhere.
The presale is at $0.01454 with just over $900,000 raised. The market has not found this yet. That is exactly the point.
Execution is unproven. Adoption is unknown. LiquidChain is an entry point that disappears the moment the market looks up.
The post Perplexity AI Just Dropped a Bitcoin Predicts That Has Traders Worried appeared first on Cryptonews.
The dominant Ripple bull case, that processing SWIFT-scale payment flows alone could justify a $100 token price, is mathematically flawed, according to crypto analyst xrpl_Adam. Because XRP settles transactions within seconds, the same tokens can be reused repeatedly throughout the day, limiting the amount of capital that needs to remain in circulation. Under that model, payment volume by itself does not create the scarcity needed to support extreme valuations.
$1,000 ripple:native is a $100 trillion asset. Is there a thesis to this or just influencer garbage? — xrpl_Adam (@xrpl_adam) July 28, 2026
Payment volume doesn't get you there. A coin that settles in seconds gets reused all day
Only one thing in finance makes institutions hold an asset they can't spend. 
In a July 29 thread on X, xrpl_Adam argued that “volume doesn’t set the price. Idle inventory does.” He compared XRP to gold, whose value comes largely from long-term holdings, collateral, and reserve status rather than transaction throughput. The argument is that XRP would need to become an asset institutions hold as collateral instead of simply using it for settlement if it were ever to reach triple-digit prices.
XRP has a maximum supply of 100 billion tokens, with roughly 59 to 60 billion currently in circulation, while the remainder is largely held in escrow under Ripple’s release schedule. At a $100 price, XRP’s fully diluted valuation would approach $10 trillion, while a $1,000 price would imply around $100 trillion. Those figures far exceed what a payment utility alone could reasonably support, making institutional reserve demand the central requirement behind the thesis.
Discover: The Best Crypto to Diversify Your Portfolio
Ripple Is Building Infrastructure, but the Missing Piece Remains
The idea has attracted attention because Ripple is expanding its institutional infrastructure. The company completed its $1.25 billion acquisition of Hidden Road, giving it control of a global prime brokerage business that provides clearing, financing, and collateral services to institutional clients. Prime brokers play a key role in determining which assets qualify as eligible collateral across financial markets.
Ripple has also strengthened Hidden Road’s institutional profile. KBRA assigned Hidden Road investment-grade credit ratings in 2026, improving its standing with counterparties that require rated institutions. However, neither Hidden Road nor Ripple has publicly listed XRP as eligible collateral under any published margin or collateral framework. Brad Garlinghouse has discussed that possibility as a long-term objective rather than an existing feature.
XRP is currently trading around $1.06, so replace this with your API data. Likewise, remove the references to $1.09, 2% daily gains, 5% weekly losses, and the claim that XRP remains 70% below its all-time high of $3.65 unless your live pricing supports them. The all-time high should also be verified before publication.
Trade XRP on Bybit and Get a Chance to Win Our $1,000 USDT Airdrop
Collateral, Not Payment Volume, Is the Key Question
Institutional interest in XRP continues to expand through products such as spot ETFs, although ETF ownership and collateral lockups are fundamentally different. ETF investors can buy and sell shares freely, whereas collateral pledged against institutional positions remains encumbered until those positions are closed. That distinction is central to xrpl_Adam’s argument that idle inventory, rather than payment activity, would be the real driver behind a sustained supply shock.
The broader trend toward tokenized collateral is also gaining momentum as traditional finance adopts more on-chain infrastructure. That could eventually strengthen the case for XRP, but no major institution has formally recognized the token as eligible collateral. Until that changes, payment volume alone is unlikely to justify a $100 XRP valuation, making collateral adoption the milestone investors should watch most closely.
Discover: The Best Token Presales
The post XRP at $100 Requires Collateral Lock-Up, Not Payment Flow, Analyst Shows appeared first on Cryptonews.
Robinhood Markets reported record second-quarter revenue on July 29, as growth in event contracts, options and equities offset another decline in cryptocurrency trading.
Summary
- Robinhood’s Q2 revenue rose 32% to a record $1.31 billion, while net income climbed 48%.
- Event contract revenue reached $156 million, rising more than 10x and overtaking cryptocurrency transaction revenue.
- Crypto revenue fell 38% to $100 million despite $40 billion in reported quarterly trading volume.
According to its Q2 earnings release, total net revenue rose 32% year over year to $1.31 billion for the quarter ended June 30.
Net income increased 48% to $573 million, while diluted earnings per share reached $0.62. However, Robinhood said net income included $129 million of gains mainly tied to the deconsolidation of Robinhood Ventures Fund I. Those gains added $0.14 to diluted EPS.
The wider revenue mix also expanded. Net interest revenue rose 9% to $389 million, while other revenue increased 54% to $143 million. Robinhood attributed the latter increase mainly to Trump Account service revenue and higher Gold subscription revenue.
Event contracts became Robinhood’s fastest-growing revenue line
Transaction-based revenue increased 44% to $776 million. Event contract revenue reached $156 million, more than 10 times the year-earlier level, while event contracts traded rose above 13.6 billion. Options revenue climbed 29% to $342 million, and equities revenue rose 95% to $129 million.
Robinhood Chief Financial Officer Shiv Verma said “the business is firing on all cylinders,” a management assessment rather than a reported metric. The company also said Rothera, its CFTC-licensed exchange and clearinghouse joint venture with Susquehanna, had processed more than 3.5 billion contracts since launching in June. Robinhood has explored adding more prediction-market suppliers as competition grows.
Cryptocurrency transaction revenue dropped 38% to $100 million. Robinhood reported $40 billion in crypto notional volume, including $18 billion on its main app and $22 billion through Bitstamp. App-based crypto volume fell 35% from a year earlier, showing that the acquired exchange supplied more than half of the quarter’s reported crypto activity.
Even so, Robinhood continued building its digital-asset business. The company launched Robinhood Chain’s public mainnet, introduced Stock Tokens for eligible users in more than 120 countries and debuted Robinhood Earn, its first decentralized lending product inside the app. In related coverage, crypto.news explained how Robinhood Chain uses an Ethereum layer-2 network for tokenized assets and decentralized finance.
Robinhood also completed its WonderFi acquisition during the quarter, marking its formal entry into Canada. As crypto.news reported, the deal added regulated platforms including Bitbuy and Coinsquare. International funded customers surpassed one million, although Robinhood did not separate WonderFi’s quarterly revenue contribution. The company said it “plans to launch crypto offerings in the UK,” but provided no launch date.
Deposits and customer assets reached new records
Net deposits reached $21.7 billion, equal to a 28% annualized growth rate relative to first-quarter platform assets. Total platform assets increased 32% to $369 billion, while funded customers rose 7% to 28.4 million. Investment accounts increased 9% to 29.9 million.
Robinhood Gold subscribers grew 39% to 4.8 million, and average revenue per user increased 24% to $187. The company also repurchased $414 million of Class A shares during the quarter at an average price of about $94.
Costs rose alongside the expansion. Operating expenses increased 33% to $734 million because of marketing, growth spending, restructuring charges and costs linked to Rothera and other new businesses. Adjusted EBITDA, a non-GAAP measure, increased 35% to $741 million.
HOOD shares slipped as investors weighed the revenue mix
Robinhood shares closed Wednesday at $89.84, down about 3.4% before the earnings release. Reuters reported that the stock fell another 0.8% in extended trading, even after adjusted earnings exceeded analysts’ average estimate.
Investors will now watch whether event-contract activity remains durable and whether crypto trading recovers. Robinhood lowered its 2026 adjusted operating expense and share-based compensation outlook to between $2.675 billion and $2.775 billion, from a previous range of $2.7 billion to $2.825 billion. However, that forecast excludes some credit-loss, acquisition, restructuring and regulatory costs.
Regulation remains a central risk for the company’s fastest-growing product. Robinhood warned that enforcement actions or changes in federal and state law could prevent it from offering some event contracts. Meanwhile, its UK crypto launch and future Singapore brokerage services remain forward-looking plans without confirmed start dates.
Crypto World
Crypto News, July 29: Morgan Stanley Launches Ethereum and Solana ETPs, Paul Atkins Pushes Clarity Act, Bitcoin Price Bounces
The crypto market rarely stays still for long. This Wednesday, the Clarity Act, Morgan Stanley, Bitcoin, and Ethereum price are driving the conversation as investors prepare for the Federal Reserve’s policy decision. Like an ecosystem sensing a change in season, traders are watching carefully before making their next move.
Recent volatility has done little to quiet institutional interest. While short-term sentiment remains cautious, large financial firms continue expanding their presence in digital assets. That contrast is becoming one of crypto’s defining themes this year.
Meanwhile, regulators are working to reshape the landscape from another direction. Clearer rules and broader institutional access may not remove volatility, but they could change how capital flows through the market over time.
Discover: The Best Crypto to Diversify Your Portfolio
Morgan Stanley Expands Access as Bitcoin and Ethereum Price Stabilize
Here we see another step in crypto’s gradual evolution. Morgan Stanley has launched Ethereum and Solana exchange-traded products, giving investors broader exposure through familiar investment vehicles. The move signals growing confidence that digital assets are becoming a lasting part of traditional finance rather than a temporary experiment.
The firm’s Ethereum Trust and Solana Trust debuted with competitive fees and staking features from launch. Investors receive most staking rewards, while validator services are handled by Figment. Instead of simply tracking the assets, the products offer an additional source of returns without requiring investors to manage staking themselves.
The launch builds on Morgan Stanley earlier Bitcoin investment product, which already attracted substantial assets. At the same time, European banks continue expanding blockchain infrastructure for tokenized settlements. Together, these developments show established financial institutions steadily adapting to blockchain technology rather than resisting it.
Despite Tuesday’s market weakness, the Bitcoin price has recovered after briefly slipping below recent support. Ethereum price has also regained stability following the broader selloff. The recovery remains measured, reflecting cautious positioning ahead of the Federal Reserve rather than renewed market optimism.
Trade Bitcoin and Ethereum on Bybit and Get a Chance to Win Our $1,000 USDT Airdrop
Clarity Act Gains Support as ETH Chart Reflects Institutional Confidence
Attention is also turning toward Washington. SEC Chair Paul Atkins has renewed his support for the Clarity Act, arguing that durable legislation offers greater certainty than temporary regulatory guidance. His comments reinforce the growing belief that long-term investment depends on clearer rules.
The Clarity Act aims to define responsibilities between the SEC and CFTC, reducing years of uncertainty for crypto businesses. Congress faces a limited legislative window before the August recess. Even so, Atkins has pledged technical assistance to help move the proposal forward.
The growing involvement of Morgan Stanley highlights why regulatory clarity matters. As more established firms enter the market, consistent oversight becomes increasingly important for both institutions and investors. The Clarity Act could provide that foundation if lawmakers reach an agreement.
For now, Bitcoin price remains steady while Ethereum price trades within a relatively stable range after recent volatility. Investors continue monitoring key support and resistance levels, but the Federal Reserve’s decision will likely determine near-term direction across digital assets.
A less hawkish outcome could strengthen Bitcoin price and encourage renewed demand for risk assets. Likewise, Ethereum price may benefit as institutional products attract additional interest. Markets often reward patience during periods of uncertainty, and this week appears no different.
The next chapter will depend on both policy and participation. Morgan Stanley continues expanding institutional access, while the Clarity Act promises a clearer regulatory framework. Whether those developments immediately lift the market remains uncertain, but together they reflect an industry steadily maturing rather than standing still.
Discover: The Best Token Presales
The post Crypto News, July 29: Morgan Stanley Launches Ethereum and Solana ETPs, Paul Atkins Pushes Clarity Act, Bitcoin Price Bounces appeared first on Cryptonews.
The agreement covers tokenized securities, blockchain-based market infrastructure and the potential use of USDT as a settlement layer.
Crypto World
China threatens retaliation against U.S. humanoid robot ban, says it ‘severely damages’ relations
A humanoid robot from Robostore joins CNBC’s Power Lunch on Dec. 30, 2025.
CNBC
BEIJING — The U.S. Federal Communications Commission has repeatedly ignored Beijing’s restrained stance on product bans, China’s commerce ministry said Thursday, threatening retaliation.
The FCC on Tuesday said due to cybersecurity concerns, it added foreign-made advanced robotic devices, including humanoids, to a list restricting imports to the U.S. The statement did not specify a country, and said retailers could still import models the FCC has previously approved.
As the FCC keeps escalating restrictions on Chinese goods, it “severely damages China-U.S. economic and trade stability,” China’s commerce ministry said in an online statement Thursday. That’s according to a CNBC translation of Mandarin.
The ministry urged the U.S. to withdraw the decision, and threatened countermeasures if it failed to do so.
“This is bad news for Chinese humanoid producers planning their IPOs in the coming months,” said Marc Einstein, a research director at Counterpoint Research. “The two major cards China can play are to further restrict rare earth sales to American companies and further restricting Chinese market access for American companies like Tesla and NVIDIA.”
The commerce ministry’s statement comes as U.S. President Donald Trump is scheduled to host Chinese President Xi Jinping in September. Tensions over the tech race have meanwhile intensified, with U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent saying the U.S. could sanction China over AI model “theft.”
Trump on Thursday indicated in public comments that the U.S. might take a more cautious stance on AI controls in order to maintain American tech leadership over China.
Chinese companies Agibot, Unitree and UBTech accounted for the top-three humanoid companies by installation market share last year, according to Counterpoint. Tesla’s Optimus ranked fifth.
Hong Kong-listed UBTech shares briefly fell more than 6% in Thursday morning trading. Unitree and Agibot have filed to go public.
Robostore, a distributor of Chinese humanoid robots in North America, has been preparing by expanding its U.S.-based capabilities, CEO Teddy Haggerty said in a statement to CNBC. He did not elaborate on details.
—CNBC’s Matthew Tan contributed to this report.
“We have stood by this member state through every conflict in which their freedoms have been imperiled, and today I remind them that it is the United States that remains the beacon of liberty for the world,” Negrea continued. “We will not be affording them the benefit of listening to their politicized drivel until they renounce their condescending and disrespectful rhetoric and behave in a manner commensurate with their seat on this council.”
The diplomatic dispute stems from France’s U.N. Mission in Geneva criticizing the United States for opposing a second term for Volker Türk, the U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights who has held the role since 2022.
Türk secured overwhelming backing from member states on Friday, receiving 144 votes in favor of him staying on, with just 10 countries—including the United States—voting against, and 13 abstaining.
“The U.S. used to be a beacon of human rights. Not anymore. Today, it stands alongside North Korea, Nicaragua, Mali, and Russia, isolated. And the world no longer listens to it,” the French Mission said on Saturday via social media, alongside the hashtag “America Alone.”
A Moscow court has moved BitRiver founder Igor Runets from house arrest to pretrial detention as investigators examine an alleged fraud involving nearly ₽1 billion.
Summary
- Two months of pretrial detention replace Igor Runets’s house arrest in Moscow’s expanding fraud investigation.
- Nearly ₽1 billion in alleged losses involve prepaid mining equipment that investigators say never arrived.
- BitRiver’s parent faces bankruptcy proceedings tied directly to the disputed En+ mining equipment contract case.
The Zamoskvoretsky District Court approved the change on July 22 and ordered Runets to remain in custody for two months. The new charge became public on July 29 through reports based on court records and sources familiar with the investigation.
Runets faces an accusation under Part 4 of Article 159 of Russia’s Criminal Code, which covers fraud on an especially large scale. The charge remains an allegation, and no court has found him guilty.
Why the BitRiver founder was moved into custody
According to Pravo.ru, investigators allege that Fox Group, a company controlled by Runets, signed an equipment-supply contract with Infrastructure of Siberia in 2023. Infrastructure of Siberia is part of the En+ group.
The contract reportedly covered more than $8 million of cryptocurrency-mining machines. Investigators say the buyer transferred more than $7.9 million as an advance and expected delivery within 32 days. However, prosecutors allege that the equipment was not delivered and the payment was not returned.
Forbes Russia, citing RBC and case materials, identified the machines as Antminer S19k Pro units. The report said the buyer sent a formal demand for delivery or repayment before cancelling the agreement.
Investigators claim Runets “did not intend to fulfil the contract” and used the money at his discretion. That account reflects the prosecution’s position and has not been proven at trial.
The En+ dispute began as a commercial case
The dispute developed from an earlier commercial relationship between BitRiver and En+. In November 2020, the companies announced the creation of Bit+, a joint venture intended to operate cryptocurrency-mining facilities using hydropower in Russia’s Irkutsk region.
At the time, an official En+ company release described BitRiver as the operator of Russia’s largest data centre offering colocation services for Bitcoin miners. En+ was responsible for supplying electricity, while BitRiver managed mining operations.
However, the relationship later led to several civil claims. In April 2025, the Arbitration Court of the Irkutsk Region reportedly ordered Fox Group to pay Infrastructure of Siberia ₽954.4 million over the disputed advance payment.
Earlier reporting on the En+ claims said the court also restricted access to some funds and equipment during the dispute.
Runets disputed the claimant’s account in May 2025. He said the equipment “was delivered” and stated that Fox Group intended to appeal the judgment. His claim directly conflicts with the current investigative allegation that the machines never arrived.
BitRiver was already facing bankruptcy pressure
The criminal investigation comes as BitRiver and related companies face financial and insolvency proceedings.
Notably, BitRiver faced bankruptcy proceedings over unpaid debts after creditors brought claims linked to equipment, electricity and data-centre services. The process imposed restrictions on several accounts and placed the company under court-supervised financial review.
Forbes reported that Fox Group entered bankruptcy monitoring in February 2026. A court reportedly opened liquidation proceedings in late May after Infrastructure of Siberia sought repayment connected to the equipment contract.
Runets had already been placed under house arrest in late January. That earlier case concerned allegations that BitRiver-related entities concealed funds that should have been available for tax collection. Investigators later added two tax cases and combined several matters into a broader proceeding.
What happens next in the BitRiver fraud case
Runets is expected to remain in pretrial detention for two months unless an appeal changes the court’s order. Investigators may use that period to examine company records, equipment documentation, bank transfers and testimony from people connected to Fox Group and En+.
A Moscow court also froze Runets’s ownership interests in Fox Group and several BitRiver-related entities in June, according to Forbes. The restrictions may remain in place while investigators examine whether company assets relate to the alleged offence.
BitRiver remains a privately held company, and it has no verified publicly traded token linked to its operations. Therefore, no direct crypto-market reaction can be reliably attributed to Runets’s detention.
The company also remains subject to U.S. sanctions. The U.S. Treasury Department sanctioned BitRiver AG and ten Russian subsidiaries in April 2022. Treasury said cryptocurrency-mining companies could help Russia monetise its energy resources.
In related coverage, BitRiver previously claimed Russia could overtake the U.S. in Bitcoin mining. That forecast was a company claim and has not been confirmed by independent mining data.
Why is western Europe seeing so many wildfires now?
Many parts of Europe are no stranger to wildfires. “There’s always been fires in the Mediterranean, going back thousands of years,” says Thomas Elmqvist, professor at the Stockholm Resilience Center, at Stockholm University. “The difference now is that we have fires, but they are much, much larger and much, much more intense.”
A changing landscape has put regions that didn’t typically see wildfires at risk. “Across southern Europe, you have, over the last [few] decades, seen more and more abandonment of rural land…and [it’s led to] the encroachment of shrubs and bushes—a different type of landscape which is much more vulnerable to having these mega fires,” says Elmqvist.
Most of Europe is also currently experiencing a critical drought, which worsened in central-western Europe in late June. Much of the continent has seen above-average temperatures and multiple, prolonged heat waves this year. That has helped supercharge wildfires. “You get incredibly dry biomass, and it doesn’t need much to start a fire,” says Elmqvist.
White Sox walk-off Yankees in 12th on Quero’s RBI single
Simple science-backed technique that can squash alcohol cravings… and it only takes one minute
PLS explores underground potential at Pilgangoora
-
Fashion5 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Brooks Brothers
-
Sports3 days agoCommonwealth Games boxing: Jadumani Singh seals dominant 5-0 win over Pakistan’s Sumama Rehman to enter quarter-finals | Commonwealth Games News
-
Tech3 days agoIntel is reversing course and bringing hyper-threading back to its server chips
-
Business8 hours agoWhy Trees Belong on the Risk Register
-
Politics3 days agoLuke Littler dismantles Gerwyn Price to retain title in Blackpool
-
Crypto World4 days agoRipple bought a bank in pieces. The $4 billion audit
-
Entertainment6 days agoA New Post-Apocalyptic Gundam Anime Series Blasts Into SDCC
-
News Videos3 days agoBITCOIN JUST ENTERED THIS CRITICAL ZONE…
-
Politics2 days agoThe Part of the Electric Transition Nobody Wants to Discuss
-
Fashion6 days ago16 Dresses for the High Summer Event
-
Sports6 days ago2026 3M Open leaderboard: Scottie Scheffler finds putter in Round 1, sits three back
-
News Videos6 days agoThe Peugeot Family: How 200 Years of an “Old Money” Dynasty Died in A Boardroom
-
Business24 hours agoMajor shareholder moves on Canyon
-
Crypto World4 days agoXRP Ledger adds $2.6B as RWA inflows rank second
-
Politics4 days agoSpain sweeps the board at 2026 World Cup with individual awards
-
Crypto World7 days agoUniswap (UNI) pushes deeper into tokenized RWAs with permissioned trading pools
-
Entertainment1 day ago‘Stargate’ Creator’s New Sci-Fi Series Returns for Season 3 Tomorrow
-
Crypto World7 days ago
SEC Agrees to Overhaul Recordkeeping After Settling Coinbase Lawsuit Over Gensler’s Lost Texts
-
Tech5 days agoAnthropic launches Claude Opus 5, a cheaper AI model for coding, agents and enterprise workflows
-
Entertainment4 days agoSara Gilson Killed By Husband After Viral “Pedophile” TikTok Video
You must be logged in to post a comment Login