Stablecoin infrastructure provider Bastion says the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has granted it preliminary conditional approval for a U.S. trust bank charter. The development would place Bastion’s operations under federal oversight in addition to the state-level licenses it already holds, according to a company announcement issued Friday.

While the charter would strengthen Bastion’s regulatory standing, the proposal also clarifies what the entity would not be allowed to do: the chartered trust bank could not accept deposits or make loans. That limitation keeps the structure closer to a regulated custody and payments utility than a traditional commercial bank.

Key takeaways

• Bastion received preliminary conditional approval from the OCC for a U.S. trust bank charter, adding federal supervision to its existing state licensing.
• The charter would allow Bastion to operate as a federally regulated entity for stablecoin custody, wallet services, payments infrastructure, and white-label issuance.
• The approved trust bank would not be permitted to accept deposits or make loans, distinguishing it from conventional commercial banking.
• Bastion has been positioning for federal oversight since acquiring its New York trust charter in February 2025.

What Bastion’s conditional charter would change

The OCC approval is described by Bastion as “preliminary” and “conditional,” which typically means the process is not yet complete. Still, the company frames the move as a step toward more robust governance and regulatory rigor—an increasingly common theme in the stablecoin sector as regulators focus on how reserve-backed tokens are handled and controlled.

In its announcement, Bastion says the OCC’s role would overlay federal supervision on top of the state licenses it already holds. For customers and business partners, that matters because stablecoin services frequently sit at the intersection of asset custody, payment rails, and operational controls—areas where regulators often expect tighter, standardized oversight than state frameworks alone may provide.

At the same time, the entity described in the filing is not set up to function like a full-service bank. Bastion says the proposed trust bank could not accept deposits or extend loans. That delineation suggests the charter is meant to enhance the reliability of custody and issuance-related activities rather than broaden into retail or credit products.

A single regulated platform for stablecoin operations

Bastion plans to be licensed as Bastion Platforms National Trust Company. If the charter process reaches final approval, that federally regulated entity would support a range of stablecoin-focused services, including:

• Stablecoin custody and wallet solutions
• Payment infrastructure
• White-label stablecoin issuance

The “single entity” approach is particularly relevant for stablecoin ecosystems, where infrastructure providers often coordinate multiple functions—holding assets, managing keys, enabling transfers, and facilitating issuance. Moving more of that stack under one federally regulated umbrella can simplify compliance expectations for counterparties and reduce the number of operational handoffs involved in moving value.

Bastion’s CEO Nassim Eddequiouaq said stablecoins have shifted from emerging technology to “core financial infrastructure,” arguing that this requires “a different standard of trust, governance and regulatory rigor.”

How Bastion is preparing for federal oversight

Bastion says it has been working toward federal supervision since acquiring its New York trust charter in February 2025. That timing suggests the company’s current OCC step is part of a longer regulatory build rather than a sudden pivot.

The company’s prior funding also reflects investor interest in stablecoin rails infrastructure. In September 2025, Cointelegraph reported that Bastion raised $14.6 million in a funding round led by Coinbase Ventures, with participation from Sony, the investment subsidiary of South Korean phone maker Samsung, the crypto arm of Andreessen Horowitz, and crypto VC firm Hashed.

While that earlier round does not determine regulatory outcomes, it does indicate that market participants have been backing stablecoin infrastructure providers that aim to operate closer to regulated financial institutions—an approach that is increasingly attractive as stablecoin adoption grows and compliance requirements tighten.

Bank-charter momentum across crypto infrastructure

Bastion’s OCC progress comes amid a broader wave of interest from crypto companies seeking U.S. banking or trust-charter pathways for digital-asset services.

Cointelegraph has reported that Ripple received conditional approval for a similar charter. Separately, Cointelegraph notes that Circle and BitGo have received final approval for their respective national trust bank outcomes—highlighted in Circle’s coverage and in BitGo’s company release stating that it “became the first public federally chartered digital asset infrastructure company” (as referenced in the source material).

Cointelegraph also reported that several other crypto-related firms have applied for charter pathways, including Kraken parent Payward, Zerohash, and Block.

For investors and operators, this clustering of applications matters because it signals a common strategy: moving stablecoin and digital-asset services from loosely defined infrastructure into regulated frameworks that can support more mainstream financial integration. The critical difference between each case will likely be the boundaries of allowed activities—such as custody versus deposit-taking—along with how regulators assess governance, controls, and operational readiness.

In Bastion’s case, the reported inability of the proposed trust bank to accept deposits or make loans sets a clear scope: the charter is aimed at custody, wallets, payment infrastructure, and issuance rather than traditional banking products.

What to watch next

The next milestone is whether Bastion’s OCC process moves from preliminary conditional approval to a final charter—and, if so, what specific operating conditions accompany approval. For the broader market, outcomes in similar U.S. trust bank applications will likely shape how quickly stablecoin infrastructure providers can consolidate services under federally supervised structures and how confidently regulated institutions can partner with them.

But its numbers show no sign of them arriving. Solana’s decentralized exchanges processed about $17 billion during Sept. 10-16, down 8% from the preceding week, while PumpSwap, the exchange tied to memecoin launchpad Pump.fun, recorded $2.9 billion, down 36% against Pons’ 37%.

Specific tokens may have pulled traders between the networks, but the chain-wide figures do not show a wholesale migration from Robinhood to Solana.

However, direct bridge flows show some money did move toward Solana. deBridge, a platform that enables token transfers between the two networks, processed $8.2 million from Robinhood to Solana during Sept. 10-16 and just over $6 million in the opposite direction, resulting in a net outflow of about $2 million.

The previous week was almost perfectly balanced, with $13.4 million leaving Robinhood and $13.3 million entering. Transfer counts then moved toward Robinhood, with about 5,000 Solana-to-Robinhood orders during the latest week against 3,800 going the other way, per data accessed by CoinDesk.

Strip out the wildest days and the same picture holds. Robinhood Chain averaged 11.5 million transactions and about $4 million in daily fees during the seven days ending Sept. 4, against 10.8 million transactions and $641,000 in fees in the seven days ending Sept. 16.

On August 5, Cencora (NYSE:COR) reported results for its fiscal third quarter, which closed on June 30, and the headline numbers looked clean. Revenue rose 5.1% to $84.8 billion, adjusted earnings per share climbed 12.0% to $4.48, and management raised its full-year adjusted EPS outlook to $17.75 to $17.95. The company also repurchased $1 billion of its own stock during the quarter. But the profit story has moving parts, and a few of them pull in opposite directions.

Profits Are Outrunning Sales

Start with the gap between profit growth and sales growth. Adjusted operating income rose 17.0% while revenue grew only 5.1%. Much of the help came from gross profit, which jumped 23.2% on an adjusted basis as both segments contributed and the OneOncology acquisition in February lifted margins in the US business. In plain terms, adjusted gross margin widened 61 basis points to 4.16%, so the company keeps more gross profit from every dollar it sells.

The strength was not confined to one corner, either. US Healthcare Solutions grew operating income 15.9% on higher pharmaceutical sales and the OneOncology deal, while specialty volume to health systems and physician groups lifted its revenue. International Healthcare Solutions did better still, with operating income up 20.8% on strength in European distribution and global specialty logistics. Management also put cash to work, completing in one quarter the $1 billion of buybacks it had expected to finish by the close of calendar 2026. The board declared a $0.60 quarterly dividend as well, payable August 31, to holders of record on August 14.

The Bill Behind the Growth

Growth is costing more than it first appears. Adjusted operating expenses jumped 26.8%, faster than adjusted gross profit, because OneOncology brought expenses along with its profits. Even so, adjusted operating income amounts to just 1.46% of revenue, a thin cushion on a business this large. Financing adds weight too. Cencora funded part of the purchase with new senior notes plus variable-rate term loans, and net interest expense rose $58.9 million from a year earlier.

The sales mix carries its own drag. GLP-1 drugs for diabetes and weight loss are adding to revenue, but they earn lower gross margins, so each dollar of that growth is worth less to profit. Meanwhile, an oncology customer Cencora lost in 2025, and lower sales to a large mail order customer both held back US revenue, as did lower manufacturer prices on some brand pharmaceuticals. Cencora is also exploring strategic alternatives for a group of other businesses, and its April divestiture of US Consulting Services trimmed consulting sales.

Funds Inch In, Shorts Stay Away

Hedge fund ownership edged up to 63 funds from 61 in the prior quarter, a small sign that more institutions want in. Short interest stands at 2.70% of the float. That is a low reading, so little money is organized against the company. At 15.55 times forward earnings, as of September 18, you pay roughly $15.55 for each dollar of profit expected over the next year. That change in fund count is a nudge, not a stampede.

One Question Left Standing

The quarter leaves one tension unresolved: profit is growing far faster than sales, but the margin gain leans heavily on a single acquisition that also brought higher costs and more debt. The optimistic reading looks sturdier if those margins survive once the added expenses and interest bills settle into a steady pace. The skeptical one hardens if lower-margin GLP-1 volume keeps crowding the mix and the customer losses in the US business keep weighing on sales.

While we acknowledge the potential of COR as an investment, we believe certain AI stocks offer greater upside potential and carry less downside risk. If you’re looking for an extremely undervalued AI stock that also stands to benefit significantly from Trump-era tariffs and the onshoring trend, see our free report on the best short-term AI stock.

READ NEXT: 10 Best Future Stocks to Buy Under $10 and 12 Best Performing Semiconductor Stocks to Invest In.

Disclosure: None. Follow Insider Monkey on Google News.

XRP jumped roughly 7% over the weekend, pushing the token back above $1.41. Spot trading volume surged to about $1.36 billion in 24 hours, and total tracked turnover across markets climbed close to $4.9 billion. The rebound followed a broader crypto rally after Bitcoin broke through $80,000.

The gains stemmed largely from a short squeeze rather than fresh buying pressure. Traders holding bearish XRP positions lost roughly $8 million as prices reversed higher. Long positions absorbed far smaller losses, near $2.4 million, confirming the move mainly punished short sellers.

Futures Activity Still Outpaces Spot Trading

XRP futures volume reached about $5.7 billion, more than four times the spot figure. That gap leaves the rally exposed if leveraged positions unwind quickly. Futures activity had already hit a six-month high in August, a pattern that previously came before sharp price swings.

The rally also arrived without any major fundamental trigger. XRP had slipped toward the $1.23 to $1.30 range earlier in September. That decline followed a failed Senate cloture vote on the CLARITY Act, which fell one vote short of advancing. Saturday’s bounce therefore looks more like a technical relief move than a shift driven by new developments.

ETF Demand Offers Support, But Whale Deposits Raise Risk

US spot XRP ETFs have now drawn in more than $1.7 billion in inflows. That steady institutional demand gives the token a measure of underlying support. Still, roughly 1.6 billion XRP moved into Binance wallets over the past 30 days, a six-month high for such deposits.

Analysts have suggested the deposits could reflect repositioning rather than an imminent sell-off. Binance’s XRP reserves, however, sit near a 69-day high, and further gains could still trigger new selling pressure. Ripple’s broader business case keeps building regardless, with XRP and its RLUSD stablecoin now integrated into payment platforms including Stripe and Tempo.

A new derivatives venue adds another variable. The Moscow Exchange plans to launch XRP perpetual futures contracts on September 22. That expansion could bring additional leverage into the market just as XRP works to hold its ground above the $1 mark.

Whether XRP can sustain the current move depends on volume holding above $1 billion through the week. Continued ETF inflows and slowing Binance deposits would support a push toward $1.45 and $1.50. Without that, the rally risks becoming another short-lived bounce within XRP’s recent $1.23 to $1.50 trading range.

“The dead cat continues to bounce,” wrote investor Jason Calacanis as bitcoin returned to the $80,000 level on Friday.

“What is Bitcoin, 17 years later?”

Calacanis went on to argue that Bitcoin isn’t great for transactions or smart contracts, has an intimidating user experience, and no longer captures the public’s imagination.

“If it comes up at the dinner party,” said Calacanis, “it’s followed by a hearty ‘remember that!’”

“Folks expect bitcoin to be stable and that it’s no longer a way to get rich quick,” he continued. “It’s boring … Advocates went from pirates to suits in orange ties, awkwardly sharing cringe memes — just like the cool kids do!”

“If Bitcoin were going to reach mass adoption and an important use case, it does better than anyone else, it would have by now.”

‘Preserving wealth across generations’

“You’ve watched Bitcoin grow since 2011,” responded Michael Saylor. “It’s now a $1.6 trillion success and the world’s most valuable digital asset.”

“Digital Capital is the killer app,” Saylor continued. “Preserving wealth across generations is a bigger ambition than entertaining a dinner party.”

“The orange tie stays.”

Stablecoin infrastructure provider Bastion says the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has granted it preliminary, conditional approval to establish a national trust bank charter. The move would bring Bastion’s existing state-licensed trust activities under federal supervision—an important development for a sector that is increasingly expected to operate like regulated financial plumbing rather than experimental software.

Under the structure described by Bastion, the proposed entity—licensed as Bastion Platforms National Trust Company—would not function like a traditional commercial bank. Instead, it would be limited to activities such as stablecoin custody and wallets, payment infrastructure, and white-label issuance, according to the company’s statement.

Key takeaways

• Bastion received preliminary conditional approval from the OCC for a national trust bank charter, adding federal oversight to its state trust licenses.
• The charter would be housed in a federally regulated entity, but it would not allow the institution to accept deposits or make loans.
• Bastion’s planned offering is centered on stablecoin custody, wallet services, payment infrastructure, and white-label issuance.
• The company has been working toward federal supervision after acquiring a New York trust charter in February 2025.

What the OCC’s conditional approval changes

According to a news release, the OCC’s approval is conditional and preliminary, meaning it is an early regulatory step rather than a final operational green light. Still, the practical significance is clear: the charter would extend federal supervision from the OCC over operations that Bastion already conducts under state licensing.

The OCC structure also clarifies the scope of what this “trust bank” model is meant to do. Bastion said the proposed institution would be unable to accept deposits or make loans—distinguishing it from conventional banks and keeping the focus on stablecoin-related services and related financial infrastructure.

A custody-first model built for stablecoin rails

Bastion’s charter plan is tightly tied to stablecoin infrastructure use cases. If approved, it would support stablecoin custody and wallet offerings, provide payment infrastructure, and enable white-label issuance through a single federally regulated entity.

Bastion frames the charter push as a response to the industry’s maturation. In the company’s statement, CEO Nassim Eddequiouaq said: “Stablecoins have moved from emerging technology into core financial infrastructure, and that requires a different standard of trust, governance and regulatory rigor.”

That perspective matters for market participants who increasingly treat stablecoins as settlement and payments infrastructure rather than niche tokens. For custodial and issuance providers, being under the OCC umbrella could also make compliance processes more standardized, potentially simplifying how clients assess regulatory posture—though the final contours will depend on how the bank charter terms are implemented and supervised.

Bastion’s path toward federal oversight

The conditional approval does not appear out of thin air. Bastion said it has been moving toward federal supervision since it acquired its New York trust charter in February 2025. By first establishing trust licensing at the state level and then seeking federal alignment, the company has followed a staged approach that mirrors how other regulated crypto infrastructure providers have sought to scale compliance readiness alongside product expansion.

Earlier reporting by Cointelegraph also placed Bastion on the radar as a steadily funded stablecoin infrastructure company. In September 2025, Cointelegraph reported that Bastion raised $14.6 million in a round led by Coinbase Ventures, with participation including Japanese tech giant Sony, the crypto-related investment arms of Samsung (through its investment subsidiary), Andreessen Horowitz, and Hashed.

While funding does not replace regulatory approval, it does help explain why companies like Bastion can pursue complex chartering processes. It also highlights how stablecoin infrastructure has become a priority for major investors, particularly those positioned to support regulated financial rails.

Broader trend: more crypto firms pursuing OCC trust charters

Bastion’s conditional approval arrives amid an ongoing wave of OCC charter activity involving crypto infrastructure firms. Cointelegraph has reported that Ripple received conditional approval for a similar charter, while Circle and BitGo have received final approval. Cointelegraph also noted applications from Kraken parent Payward, Zerohash, and Block (Jack Dorsey’s company), among others.

This matters because the trust bank charter pathway is one of the more concrete ways for stablecoin and digital-asset infrastructure providers to fit into existing U.S. banking oversight frameworks. However, the differences in approval status—conditional versus final—and in each applicant’s planned scope (such as whether deposits or loans are involved) may result in uneven timelines and uneven expectations across the industry.

For readers watching the sector, Bastion’s announcement underscores a practical reality: stablecoin infrastructure is increasingly being built around regulatory architecture, not just technology. The next key step will be whether the conditional approval progresses to full approval and how regulators define the operational boundaries of the chartered trust bank.

Investors, builders, and business partners should watch what happens after this preliminary stage: whether Bastion’s application clears final OCC requirements, how the bank charter’s scope is implemented for custody, wallets, payments, and issuance, and whether other applicants in the same pipeline receive similar milestones.