Robinhood’s Q2 revenue grew 32% year-over-year, hitting a record $1.31 billion as growth across options, equities, and event contracts surged. Wall Street had predicted $1.26 billion in revenue for Robinhood during Q2.

Despite the impressive numbers, the platform’s crypto revenue fell substantially, declining 38% year-over-year to $100 million.

Robinhood’s Record Quarter

Robinhood has reported robust growth across its equities, events contracts, and options segments. According to the company’s earnings report, its net income grew 48% year-over-year to $573 million, while diluted earnings per share increased 48% to $0.62. The quarterly results also include $129 million in gains tied to the deconsolidation of the Robinhood Ventures Fund I. Chief Financial Officer Shiv Verma stated,

“We delivered record revenues and drove new highs across equity, option, and event contract volumes, as we continue to win market share.”

Robinhood’s record numbers were primarily driven by a surge in transaction-based revenue, which increased 44% year-over-year to $776 million. The platform generated $156 million from events contracts, a 10x increase from the previous year. Revenue from options jumped 29% to $342 million, and equities revenue jumped 95% to $129 million. Revenue from net interest rose 9% to $389 million. However, these gains were partly offset by lower short-term interest rates and securities lending activity. CEO Vlad Tenev stated,

“Whether it’s the Robinhood Chain, Robinhood Ventures, or Trump Accounts, our product velocity is focused on one goal: making everyone an owner.”

Meanwhile, Robinhood’s operating expenses rose 33% year-over-year to $734 million, largely due to investments in marketing and growth, restructuring charges linked with its June workforce reduction, and other expenses related to Trump Accounts and Rothera. Lastly, Adjusted EBITDA rose 35% to $741 million. Despite the strong numbers, HOOD is trading around $89.84, down over 3%.

Crypto Business Struggles

While Robinhood’s numbers are impressive, its crypto business struggled, declining 38% year-over-year to $100 million. The decline can be attributed to a broader downturn in the cryptocurrency market due to geopolitical and policy headwinds. However, the trading platform reported record trading activity, including an equity notional trading volume of $956 billion, 774 million options contracts, and 13.6 billion events contracts. Robinhood reported a crypto notional trading volume of $40 billion, with $18 billion through the Robinhood app and $22 billion through Bitstamp.

Analysts Bullish On Robinhood

Market analysts are bullish on Robinhood, with Bernstein raising its price target on HOOD from $130 to $160. Analysts expect the platform’s retail trading, prediction markets, and equities businesses will drive significant growth. They also expect new revenue from perpetual futures and Robinhood Chain. Bernstein analysts have applied a calendar-year earnings-per-share estimate of $4.56 for 2028, with revenue from prediction markets estimated to reach $1.7 billion by 2028.

Robinhood debuted in the prediction markets space in October 2024, offering presidential-election contracts. It launched a dedicated prediction markets hub in March 2025, and Rothera, a CFTC-licensed exchange and clearinghouse, in June. Rothera is independently managed via a joint venture with Susquehanna International Group.

Robinhood Chain

Robinhood recently launched Robinhood Chain, a layer-2 network built using Arbitrum’s tech stack. The total value locked (TVL) in Robinhood Chain is $325 million as of Tuesday. CEO Vlad Tenev stated Robinhood Chain has seen “great initial traction,” and decentralized exchanges have processed over $12 billion in trading volume. Tenev added that Robinhood Chain has already surpassed 150 million transactions and was the fastest to reach 100 million.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Ask most people how a crypto price gets set and they will describe spot trading: buyers and sellers meet on an exchange, and the last trade prints the price. But that has not been how it actually works for years as far as bitcoin, ether and the broader crypto markets are concerned.

Perpetual futures, also called perpetual swaps or “perps” for short, are leverage-friendly contracts that never expire, and they now account for roughly 93% of all crypto futures volume, with daily perp volume routinely running larger than the spot market underneath it.

A traditional futures contract has a settlement date, which is when it comes due and its price is forced to meet the spot price of the thing it tracks, also called the underlying. But a perpetual has no such date and can be held indefinitely (by paying a cost known as ‘funding rate,’ which varies daily).

A body of market-microstructure work has asked which venue “discovers” a bitcoin price first, meaning where new information enters the market before it shows up anywhere else. The answer has repeatedly come back pointing at derivatives.

A study in the Journal of Financial Markets by Carol Alexander and co-authors found that perpetual swaps on unregulated venues were the strongest instruments for bitcoin price discovery, with regulated futures and U.S. spot exchanges reacting to, rather than leading, those moves.

Other work has identified Binance’s perpetual market as the primary source of price formation across the fragmented crypto landscape.

The evidence is not conclusive, however, and some studies find spot still leads at certain frequencies or during stress. But the direction of the literature over the past few years has been toward the derivatives market as the place where the price is made.

“Historically, we have seen perps leading mostly during bear market price rallies,” Julio Moreno, head of research at CryptoQuant, told CoinDesk. “For example, Bitcoin perps demand growth (blue bars in the chart) led the price rallies of January 2026, and April-May 2026.”

“In these periods, spot demand was contracting, while perps demand expanded, thus the perpetual futures market was leading prices despite demand contracting on the spot market,” he said.

Which brings us back to the funding rate. Because a perpetual contract never settles, nothing forces its price back toward spot the way an expiry date does for a traditional future. Instead, every few hours, whichever side of the trade is crowded pays the other.

When the perp trades above spot, traders who are long (or betting on higher prices) pay those who are short (betting on lower prices), which nudges the contract back toward the underlying price.

The funding rate is both the tether that keeps the contract anchored and a live readout of sentiment, which is why some traders watch it as closely as price.

“We actually surveyed more than 100 of our traders,” Hong Yea, co-founder at onchain trading platform Grvt, told CoinDesk. “The traders who actually rely on us to hold real conviction positions want predictability there, not another data point to interpret.”

“If you’re holding a directional position for weeks, funding isn’t telling you something new about the market, it’s just eating into your PnL while you wait to be right. That’s the honest way our users describe it to us, not, ‘what is the market telling me,” Yea added.

The SpaceX use case

None of this requires a spot market to exist. And for about three weeks in May and June, one of the most-watched markets in the world was for a company that had never sold a public share was running on crypto rails.

Elon Musk-owned SpaceX priced its record $75 billion initial public offering at $135 a share and began trading on the Nasdaq on June 12. Well before that, traders on Binance, Coinbase, Hyperliquid and others were already buying and selling exposure to the company through pre-IPO perpetual futures, or contracts structured to track an implied valuation rather than a share price.

The first mover was Hyperliquid, the onchain derivatives exchange, where a synthetic SpaceX perpetual went live on May 18. Binance opened its own SpaceX market on May 21, Coinbase followed on June 4, and BitMEX, Bitget and OKX later added contracts of their own.

The striking part is how right they were at the one moment their accuracy could be tested. On the night before SpaceX listed, perpetuals on Hyperliquid and Binance were quoting the equivalent of roughly $170 a share, well above the $135 the underwriters had set.

The next day SPCX opened, ran to an intraday high above $176, and closed its first session at $161, up 19%. The stock printed almost exactly where the perps had it, and a market dominated by leverage-seeking retail traders had read first-day demand more accurately than the banks that spent months building the offering price.

That gap was also where the money was. The perpetual market was pricing SpaceX well above the $135 IPO price, so traders could buy the contract before listing and bet the two would meet. Every one of these contracts was built to automatically switch over to SpaceX’s real share price the moment the stock began trading, so any gap between the perp and the eventual opening price would close on its own. With the IPO already four times oversubscribed, the direction was rarely in doubt, and the pre-listing window was the only place to make the trade.

Then reality caught up with the market that had predicted it. SPCX has fallen more than 40% from its June peak, dropping from the $135 IPO price to about $115 as of publication.

The reason is one the perp could never have priced — supply. Only a sliver of SpaceX’s shares were sold at the IPO, and starting around August 6, roughly 900 million locked-up insider shares become eligible to sell.

What SpaceX showed in the extreme is what the research says is already true in ordinary crypto trading — the derivatives market is increasingly where price gets discovered. Spot follows.

Perps are excellent at pricing demand and blind to supply, which is worth remembering every time a bitcoin rally or a flush starts in the funding rate before it reaches spot.

China Business Journal warned on July 30 that fraudsters had impersonated the publication while demanding Bitcoin from companies threatened with negative news coverage.

According to the newspaper’s statement, the scammers contacted businesses through an address hosted by Proton Mail. They claimed that undercover investigations had uncovered damaging information about the targeted companies.

The senders allegedly threatened to publish the purported findings unless the companies transferred Bitcoin. The publication said it had not authorized the messages and considered the operation a suspected fraud scheme.

Scammers allegedly used negative coverage as leverage

The emails appeared to combine two established fraud methods: impersonating a recognized organization and threatening reputational damage to force payment.

China Business Journal said the perpetrators presented themselves as representatives of the newspaper. They then offered to suppress the alleged investigation in exchange for Bitcoin. The publication did not reproduce the full emails or identify the businesses contacted.

The allegation remains based on the newspaper’s account. No suspect has been named, and no law enforcement agency had publicly announced an arrest or criminal filing connected to the emails as of July 30.

Chinese authorities have previously prosecuted people who impersonated journalists or used negative coverage to demand money. In a 2025 case published by China’s news regulator, three people were convicted after using purported environmental reporting to extort 16 companies. 

China Business Journal says the emails were unauthorized

The newspaper said the messages did not come from its authorized reporting or business operations. It is collecting evidence and reserved the right to pursue civil and criminal action against those responsible.

The warning is intended to help companies distinguish genuine reporting inquiries from payment demands. A legitimate request for comment may contain difficult questions, but demands for cryptocurrency in exchange for suppressing publication are a clear warning sign.

China Business Journal was established in 1985. It operates under the supervision of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences and is organized by the academy’s Institute of Industrial Economics.

The scammers’ use of the publication’s identity could therefore make the emails appear credible to executives unfamiliar with its official contact procedures.

The newspaper did not disclose a Bitcoin wallet address, requested amount, transaction hash or payment deadline. It also did not say whether any targeted company transferred funds.

Without a wallet address, independent researchers cannot examine the blockchain for payments linked to the alleged scheme. The available information confirms the warning, but not whether the fraudsters successfully collected Bitcoin.

The use of Proton Mail does not establish who sent the emails. Proton allows users to report suspected phishing and abusive messages to its security team. Its guidance asks recipients to preserve and submit the original message when reporting suspicious activity.

The newspaper also did not announce whether it had contacted Proton or Chinese police. Any account suspension, identification request or criminal investigation would require further action by the relevant service provider and authorities.

Companies face a familiar impersonation tactic

China’s internet regulator has previously warned that criminals sometimes pose as legitimate news organizations, threaten to publish negative material and demand payment from companies or individuals. 

The latest case adds Bitcoin to that model. Cryptocurrency allows a recipient to request direct payment without using a conventional company bank account. However, the demand itself does not prove that the scammers received funds or successfully concealed their identities.

U.S. prosecutors charged a teenager over an alleged $8 million crypto ransom scheme tied to corporate intrusions and impersonation tactics.

Additionally, Coinbase refused a $20 million ransom demand after attackers claimed they possessed stolen customer information.

China Business Journal said it would continue gathering evidence. The next verified update could come from the newspaper, Proton, police authorities or a company that received one of the emails.

Adam Hollander has announced that he has stepped down as OpenSea’s chief marketing officer after serving in the role for roughly a year and a half, saying the decision was driven by personal priorities rather than the company’s business outlook.

In a post published on X, Hollander said this week would be his last at OpenSea after discussing the decision with co-founder and CEO Devin Finzer. He said he would not be moving to another company and instead plans to spend time focusing on his health, family and personal interests while remaining involved with the platform as a user and informal adviser.

“The last year and a half running marketing for OpenSea has been a wonderful adventure,” Hollander wrote, adding that the role had “taken everything I have to give.” He said the choice to leave was “far more of a personal decision… than a professional one.”

OpenSea executive says confidence in company has grown

Although leaving the company, Hollander said his confidence in OpenSea had strengthened during his time there. He wrote that he believes in the company’s direction and has “enormous confidence” in both the products under development and the team building them.

He also made clear that his departure should not be interpreted as a move prompted by dissatisfaction with the business or by another employment opportunity.

“I’m not taking another job, and in fact, explicitly plan not to,” he said. “I’m going to take some time to focus on my health, family, hobbies, and of course I’ll be a regular OpenSea user.”

Hollander added that he intends to remain available to provide advice, product ideas, and feedback because he wants the marketplace to succeed.

Responding publicly on X, Finzer thanked Hollander for his contributions during the past 18 months.

“I’m glad to have fought alongside you,” Finzer wrote. He added that the company would continue communicating openly with its community while building new products.

Marketing team and upcoming OpenSea products remain in focus

Looking back on his tenure, Hollander said one of his proudest achievements was building a marketing team that he described as capable, entrepreneurial and deeply connected to artists, creators and collectors.

He said the group is well positioned to continue operating without him and expressed confidence that the responsibilities he handled as chief marketing officer are now in capable hands.

Attention also turned to the company’s product roadmap after Hollander suggested several upcoming releases carry work he contributed to before announcing his departure.

“There are so many exciting things being built at OpenSea right now,” he wrote. “Things I’ve always wanted to see from the platform.”

Without identifying those products individually, Hollander said he was proud that many would bear his “fingerprints” and that he looked forward to supporting the team from the sidelines after leaving.

His post concluded with thanks to colleagues, builders, collectors and traders who worked with him during his time at the company before signing off with, “For the last time as OpenSea’s CMO … sails up.”

OpenSea has expanded beyond NFTs during his tenure

Hollander joined OpenSea in early 2025, a period when the company had already begun expanding beyond its traditional NFT marketplace business.

One of the clearest examples came in June, when OpenSea signaled plans to introduce perpetual futures trading. At the time, Product Marketing Lead Zack Brenner invited users on X to request early access to perpetual contracts, pointing to a new trading product that would move the platform into on-chain derivatives.

When asked whether the feature would run on Hyperliquid’s infrastructure, Brenner replied “YES,” according to posts shared by Hyperliquid-focused accounts on X. OpenSea has not published a launch date, user terms or a full list of supported assets for the product.

The proposed integration would allow OpenSea to offer perpetual contracts using Hyperliquid’s infrastructure instead of building a derivatives exchange from scratch.

SEA token plans and trading strategy continue to develop

The perpetual futures initiative followed earlier changes to OpenSea’s product roadmap.

As previously reported by crypto.news, the company delayed the launch of its SEA token in March after citing market conditions. Finzer said at the time that the team wanted to ensure “every piece is in place” before proceeding with the rollout.

Earlier reporting also connected the token to OpenSea’s long-term “trade everything” strategy, which combines NFTs, token trading and perpetual futures within the same ecosystem.

CoinGecko’s marketplace rankings published in June placed OpenSea third among NFT marketplaces by monthly trading volume, giving it a 19.9% market share and approximately $66.52 million in monthly volume.

Outside the NFT business, Hyperliquid has also attracted institutional interest in recent months. Crypto.news previously reported that Grayscale updated its proposed Hyperliquid ETF filing with the ticker HYPG and a 0.29% management fee, joining existing Hyperliquid-related investment products from 21Shares and Bitwise.

MoonPay has introduced PayBox, a “payment vault” designed to let AI assistants such as ChatGPT and Claude execute crypto actions inside a conversation—while keeping users in control of their wallet permissions. The company positions the product as a safer way for AI to perform tasks like swapping tokens, bridging assets, and interacting with DeFi, using natural-language instructions from the user.

In practical terms, users connect a crypto wallet and payment methods to the AI assistant. The assistant then prepares transactions—such as token swaps, cross-chain transfers, or DeFi calls—based on what the user asks. MoonPay says approval can be handled via a passkey or through spending limits that allow the AI to carry out certain actions automatically within predefined boundaries.

Key takeaways

• PayBox aims to put consent first, offering per-transaction approval or limited autonomous execution based on user-set permissions.
• MoonPay says it protects wallet keys using multi-party computation and trusted execution environments to reduce direct access by both the AI assistant and MoonPay.
• PayBox supports multiple payment rails, including debit cards, bank accounts, Apple Pay, and PayPal, in addition to crypto wallets.
• The vault integrates with AI apps via an SDK, allowing developers to embed PayBox functionality into their own assistant experiences.
• x402 momentum continues, with public dashboards showing large recent transaction volumes across participating services.

PayBox: AI-driven crypto payments with user-controlled permissions

MoonPay’s central pitch with PayBox is control. The platform is built around the idea that an AI assistant should be able to request or construct crypto transactions from within a chat, but that the user retains authority over how those actions happen.

MoonPay says users can require approval for every transaction, or choose an approach where the AI is allowed to act automatically only within limits the user defines. Those limits can function as guardrails for autonomy—constraining what the assistant can do without additional confirmation.

To address key management and custody concerns, MoonPay states PayBox uses multi-party computation and trusted execution environments. The goal is to prevent either the AI assistant or MoonPay from independently accessing user funds. While the user initiates actions through the AI interface, the underlying design is intended to reduce the risk of unilateral fund movement.

From swaps to bridges: where PayBox fits in an AI workflow

PayBox is positioned for common “agent” behaviors in crypto—actions that are often difficult for users to execute safely or quickly. MoonPay says the system can support transaction types including:

• Token swaps initiated from chat prompts
• Cross-chain bridging and transfers across networks
• DeFi interactions constructed as transactions based on user intent

MoonPay also highlights that PayBox works with multiple blockchains and multiple payment methods. According to the company, users can combine crypto wallets with fiat-to-crypto and payment rails such as debit cards, bank accounts, Apple Pay, and PayPal.

For developers, MoonPay indicates the product can be integrated through a software development kit (SDK), suggesting a strategy beyond serving end-users directly and instead enabling other AI-driven apps to embed transaction authorization and execution flows.

PayBox’s parallel track: x402 and the push for AI-native payments

PayBox also supports x402, an open payment protocol originally developed by Coinbase. x402 is intended to enable AI agents to make internet-native payments, aligning with the broader trend of “agentic” applications that can transact without requiring users to manually navigate payment steps.

In April 2026, the x402 protocol was contributed to the Linux Foundation. The Linux Foundation said the protocol is now governed as an open, vendor-neutral industry standard, through the launch of the x402 Foundation. Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph also noted growing ecosystem activity around x402.

Why the x402 ecosystem growth matters

Coinbase has continued expanding the x402 toolset. In June, the crypto exchange launched features aimed at helping AI agents accept USDC payments, trade crypto, discover paid services through an AI marketplace, and process high-frequency micropayments more efficiently—capabilities designed to reduce friction for automated transactions.

Other industry participants have moved in the same direction. Amazon Web Services integrated x402 into its Bedrock AgentCore Payments service, while Fireblocks launched an x402-compatible payments framework for AI agents and joined the x402 Foundation. Together, these efforts point to a broader attempt to standardize how AI agents receive payment instructions and complete transactions.

Network activity is another indicator that adoption may be accelerating. According to Chainalysis, agentic payments on Coinbase’s Base network surpassed 100 million transactions within roughly nine months, as reported in a June 3 report. Chainalysis also noted early usage could have been influenced by speculative applications, underscoring that transaction volume alone doesn’t always map directly to stable commercial demand.

Still, the public x402scan dashboard shows more than 12.7 million transactions over the past 30 days across participating services, indicating that activity continues to build across the ecosystem.

What to watch next

As PayBox and x402-related infrastructure mature, the key question for users and builders is whether safety controls and key protection can scale smoothly alongside growing transaction throughput—so far, the trend suggests more AI payment workflows are moving from experiments into repeatable, permissioned execution. The next signal to monitor will be how widely these tools are adopted across real assistant experiences and whether transaction growth translates into robust, non-speculative usage.