Hyperliquid’s $HYPE fell to around $58 earlier Wednesday as large staking withdrawals queued up, bringing a sizable supply overhang into the market over the next week. On-chain data compiled by Block Liquidity points to a coordinated set of unstaking and withdrawal requests involving multiple major crypto funds.

According to Block Liquidity’s flow tracking, Multicoin Capital controls a combined $138.78 million worth of staked HYPE, with about 83%—roughly $116 million—showing up as pending withdrawal. Separately, Selini Capital and Galaxy Digital have also queued withdrawals totaling $4.4 million and $29.4 million, respectively. Block Liquidity also flags a Multicoin-linked wallet depositing approximately 167,000 HYPE (about $11.2 million) to Coinbase, suggesting at least some tokens may be routed for potential sale or other handling.

Key takeaways

• Block Liquidity data shows Multicoin has about $116M in HYPE pending withdrawal, forming the bulk of the near-term unlock.
• Across the tracked queues, funds total roughly $150M in HYPE—large versus the token’s relatively thin spot market.
• HYPE spot liquidity has not matched the scale of withdrawals; Block Liquidity recorded $72.8M in HYPE spot volume over ~28 hours.
• Selini’s unstaking appears tied to the shutdown of a HIP-3 CASH perpetuals market, leaving open whether tokens are reallocated or sold.
• Multicoin managing partner Tushar Jain said the unlocked HYPE was not intended for selling, but where the July 28 liquidity ends up remains the key question.

Unstaking queues create a near-term supply overhang

The immediate pressure on HYPE came from the scale of withdrawals initiated by market participants. Pending unlocks are expected to be processed over roughly five to seven days, which effectively places a large amount of newly available HYPE into the liquid ecosystem on a compressed timeline.

While HYPE perpetuals volumes are substantially larger—reported around $400M daily for perps—the spot market is materially smaller. Block Liquidity recorded just $72.8M of HYPE spot volume across approximately 28 hours leading up to Wednesday morning, with 1,463 unique buyers and 982 sellers. Wintermute stood out as the largest net buyer at over $9M, while the biggest net seller reduced exposure by about $5.2M.

That imbalance—withdrawal queues that can approach $150M versus daily spot turnover that is far lower—helps explain why traders reacted quickly when the unlocks became visible. Even if not all tokens are sold, the market often prices in uncertainty around absorption capacity, especially when spot liquidity is thin relative to the potential supply.

Whether tokens get sold is unclear

The main variable for investors and traders is straightforward: do these withdrawals translate into market selling, or do they get redeployed elsewhere within Hyperliquid’s ecosystem?

For Selini Capital, the unstaking appears connected to the shutdown of HIP-3 CASH perpetuals markets run under the HIP-3 framework. The withdrawal activity is associated with Selini’s unstaking flow (see Selini-linked address on Hyperevmscan). The broader context points to DreamCash posting that relevant markets struggled to maintain liquidity, particularly as USDC became more entrenched in Hyperliquid’s trading environment.

Under HIP-3 deployments, a builder-deployed perpetual requires staking 500,000 HYPE as a slashable security bond. That bond is intended to be refunded when a market goes defunct, turning the unlock into something closer to a “release of collateral” than a direct liquidity event. That said, collateral can still be sold—potentially through OTC channels—depending on the fund’s strategy and risk posture.

As a result, the market’s near-term direction depends on what happens after the July 28 unlock and subsequent processing window. HYPE had dropped about 11% over the past week at the time of reporting, and even after recovering modestly from the day’s lows, it had not yet returned to earlier highs.

Multicoin’s role: potential redeployment rather than liquidation

While Selini’s unlock is tied to closing a specific HIP-3 market, Multicoin’s pending withdrawal could represent either liquidation or a reallocation into a new deployment. The distinction matters: redeployments into new perps can keep tokens within the ecosystem, while sales put downward pressure on both spot and potentially perp pricing if the sell pressure is large enough.

Multicoin was also recently involved in a Hyperliquid-linked venture bet. Last week, the firm led a $1.75 million seed round into Trasia, described as an Asia-focused, non-custodial trading platform aiming to launch perpetuals for Asian equities. Managing partner Tushar Jain said in an X post that Trasia is targeting “net new users” unfamiliar with Hyperliquid.

In a later Wednesday update on X, Jain also claimed that the HYPE being unstaked was not intended for selling. That statement directly addresses the question traders are asking: whether the visible withdrawal queue turns into a dumping event or becomes collateral movement toward a new deployment.

Investors will likely watch the July 28 unlock closely to see where the assets go next. If HYPE is redeployed into new HIP-3 markets or other ecosystem uses, the market may stabilize once immediate selling risk fades. If, however, the tokens are moved to venues in a way that suggests liquidation, the overhang could persist longer than the processing window itself.

Market watch: follow the flow after the unlock window

For now, HYPE’s near-term price action appears less about long-term demand and more about supply mechanics: how quickly pending withdrawals convert into spot selling versus redeployment. The decisive signal will be the post-unlock routing—whether tokens flow into new perpetual deployments or toward exchanges—particularly in the days surrounding the July 28 release.

South Korea’s Mirae Asset has completed its acquisition of cryptocurrency exchange Korbit. The financial group plans to increase its existing ownership stake from 92.06% to 97.15%.

The acquisition makes Mirae Asset the first financial group in South Korea to acquire a local cryptocurrency exchange.

Mirae Asset Acquires Korbit

Mirae Asset Financial Group is set to take control of South Korean cryptocurrency exchange Korbit through its affiliate, Mirae Asset Consulting. The latter completed the acquisition of the exchange, bringing its stake to 92.06%. Mirae Asset has also submitted a revised regulatory filing to increase its stake to 97.15%. The acquisition raises Mirae Asset’s cumulative investment in the exchange from 133.5 billion won to 141.4 billion won.

South Korea’s Fair Trade Commission approved the deal earlier this month, determining that the acquisition was unlikely to decrease market competitiveness. Korbit had only a 0.5% share of South Korea’s cryptocurrency market as of 2025.

A Global Investment Platform

The acquisition is part of Mirae Asset Financial Group’s mid- to long-term strategy. The group plans to leverage the exchange and develop a global investment platform that encompasses digital assets and traditional finance. Park Hyeon-joo, Mirae Asset Financial Group founder, stated that Korbit will relaunch as Digital X under the group’s Mirae Asset 3.0 vision.

“Digital X will serve as the most powerful engine for realizing Mirae Asset 3.0.”

Meanwhile, Korbit assured existing users that its services will remain unchanged, and user deposits and virtual assets will be held and managed separately. The exchange added that there will be no changes to how it is used or processed.

“Building on Mirae Asset’s stability and financial expertise, we will further strengthen user protection and service competitiveness and continue to grow as a trusted digital asset platform.”

According to CoinGecko, Korbit is South Korea’s fourth-largest cryptocurrency exchange by trading volume, recording around $4.3 million in the past 24 hours. In comparison, Upbit, the country’s largest cryptocurrency exchange, processed over $224 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.

Strategy has unveiled the Bitcoin Security Consortium, a new coalition of financial institutions and Bitcoin-focused companies aimed at strengthening the network’s resilience against the potential impact of future quantum computing breakthroughs. In a Thursday announcement, Strategy said the group plans to commit an aggregate $15 million over the next three years toward developer efforts focused on “quantum security” work for Bitcoin.

The initiative adds formal institutional backing to a debate that has been running through the Bitcoin ecosystem for years: how and when (or whether) quantum computers could force a shift in how the network secures transactions. While experts disagree on timelines, the consortium’s creation signals that large players are preparing for long-horizon security challenges rather than waiting for consensus to harden.

Key takeaways

• Strategy says the consortium will fund $15 million over three years to support developer work on Bitcoin’s quantum security.
• Founding members include major asset managers and crypto firms such as BlackRock, Coinbase, Fidelity Digital Assets, and Blockstream.
• Day-to-day coordination will be handled by Mike Schmidt, a volunteer executive director of Brink, a non-profit focused on Bitcoin open-source developers.
• Galaxy pledged up to $5 million in separate grants earlier this week and formed a quantum-advisory council for research on migration solutions.
• Bitcoin’s quantum risk timeline remains contested, with industry estimates ranging from decades away to only a few years.

A consortium built around long-term quantum resilience

According to Strategy’s press release, the Bitcoin Security Consortium brings together financial institutions and Bitcoin companies with the shared goal of supporting work designed to protect the network against a potential quantum-security threat. Strategy’s stated focus is enabling developers to pursue approaches that would help Bitcoin adapt if quantum capabilities reach a threshold that undermines existing cryptographic assumptions.

The consortium’s plan is structured as a multi-year funding pool: $15 million in total commitments over the next three years. While the announcement does not detail specific deliverables or milestones, the emphasis on developer support indicates that the effort is intended to translate research and engineering into practical upgrades and implementation work over time.

Who’s involved, and how the work will be managed

The consortium names a broad set of founding participants. In addition to Strategy, the list includes Anchorage Digital, ARK Invest, BlackRock, Block, Blockstream, Coinbase, Fidelity Digital Assets, and Galaxy, among others.

Strategy also said the consortium’s daily operations will be coordinated by Mike Schmidt in a volunteer capacity. Schmidt is described as the executive director of Brink, a non-profit that supports Bitcoin open-source developers. The operational link to a developer-support organization matters because quantum security work is likely to require sustained engineering capacity—areas like cryptographic tooling, testing, and migration planning often take longer than headline news cycles.

Recent quantum-security funding momentum from Galaxy

In the same broader timeframe, Galaxy Digital separately announced support for quantum security-related development. Earlier coverage noted that Galaxy pledged up to $5 million in grants for developers working on Bitcoin’s quantum security and formed a council of quantum-advisory experts to study quantum-resistant migration options.

While the consortium and Galaxy’s grants are distinct efforts, together they reinforce a pattern: institutional capital is increasingly targeting the “preparation” phase—funding research and engineering before a crisis scenario forces rushed changes.

Disagreement on timelines, but shared urgency on preparedness

Bitcoin’s quantum risk debate is not purely academic. It influences how investors evaluate the durability of the network’s security model and how engineers prioritize long-term roadmap items.

Community concern is tempered by disagreements about when a meaningful quantum threat might arrive. Strategy’s announcement points to the ongoing debate rather than resolving it. In November 2025, Blockstream CEO Adam Back said Bitcoin faces no meaningful quantum threat for at least the next 20 to 40 years, according to earlier reporting from Cointelegraph in an article about the topic (“Bitcoin faces no meaningful quantum threat for at least the next 20 to 40 years,” Back said).

Other viewpoints compress that timeline dramatically. In April, investment manager Bernstein suggested Bitcoin has roughly three to five years to prepare for a post-quantum security upgrade, as discussed in Cointelegraph’s earlier coverage (Bernstein said Bitcoin has about three to five years to prepare).

This split matters because it shapes what “useful funding” looks like. In a decades-ahead scenario, the priority is gradual research and maintainable upgrades. In a short-window scenario, the emphasis shifts toward accelerating migration planning and ensuring that any transition path can be executed with high confidence.

Institutional backing signals confidence in core development capacity

Alongside the consortium announcement, Strategy’s partner ecosystem includes large traditional finance and crypto incumbents. BlackRock’s involvement, for example, is tied to its view that Bitcoin developers are doing critical work. As stated in the announcement, Robert Mitchnick, BlackRock’s global head of digital assets, said Bitcoin core developers do “incredibly important work” and that BlackRock is pleased to provide “significant additional funding” to support Bitcoin’s long-term security needs.

For investors and market participants, that message carries a specific implication: quantum security is being treated not as a speculative side project, but as a core infrastructure concern worthy of institutional budget lines. Even if the exact timing of quantum risk remains uncertain, multi-year funding structures are better aligned with how protocol security improvements actually get built—through testing, peer review, and coordinated development rather than emergency patching.

At the same time, it’s worth noting the consortium does not claim to settle the timeline question. Instead, it appears designed to fund the unknowns: research gaps, migration options, and implementation readiness that could become valuable under multiple scenarios.

Looking ahead, the key question is how the consortium and parallel grant efforts translate funding into concrete engineering outputs—such as migration research, candidate upgrade work, and developer tooling—while the broader community continues to debate quantum timelines. Observers should watch for updates that clarify priorities and measurable milestones over the consortium’s three-year window.

BitMEX’s utility token (BMEX) has suffered a dramatic collapse following the exchange’s announcement that it will wind down operations. Data from CoinGecko shows the token fell by nearly 90%, dropping to as low as $0.002 from about $0.06, and it was trading around $0.0063 at the time of writing.

The selloff started shortly before the shutdown became public. According to CoinGecko pricing, BMEX began sliding at around 7:00 am UTC—approximately an hour before BitMEX posted its shutdown notice on X, according to earlier coverage from Cointelegraph.

Key takeaways

• BMEX lost almost all of its value after BitMEX announced it would cease operations, with CoinGecko data indicating a move from ~$0.06 to near $0.002.
• The token’s drop began about an hour before the public shutdown message on X, suggesting markets were already repricing quickly ahead of confirmation.
• CryptoQuant CEO Ki Young Ju linked the decision to BitMEX’s reduced Bitcoin futures share, citing ~0.08% and about $84 million in daily BTC futures volume.
• Blockchain research firm 10x Research told Cointelegraph the exchange’s owners explored a possible $1 billion sale in 2025 before opting for an orderly wind-down.

What triggered BMEX’s sharp repricing

The immediate catalyst for BMEX’s decline was BitMEX’s decision to wind down. The token’s value had recently traded closer to $0.06, but it then experienced a sudden, sustained fall as the market absorbed the implications of an exchange shutting down.

CoinGecko’s timestamps place the start of the selloff around 7:00 am UTC, roughly an hour before BitMEX’s shutdown announcement on X. That timing matters for traders because it suggests the market had already begun anticipating severe downside—or at least a major operational change—before the message was made public.

BitMEX’s shrinking futures footprint

In explaining the broader context for BitMEX’s exit, CryptoQuant CEO Ki Young Ju pointed to the exchange’s declining position in Bitcoin derivatives. He said BitMEX’s share of the Bitcoin futures market had fallen to about 0.08%, alongside roughly $84 million in daily Bitcoin futures trading volume.

Ju also emphasized the exchange’s historical impact, saying on X that it helped shape the industry and that it was now “passing the torch” to newer platforms that grew out of the model BitMEX pioneered.

BitMEX cofounder Arthur Hayes later echoed the sentiment in a separate X post, writing that it had been “an amazing ride” and that the team had “done something special together.”

Details behind the wind-down: sale talks and operational reality

Beyond the headline closure, 10x Research shared additional context with Cointelegraph: BitMEX’s owners had explored a potential $1 billion sale in 2025 before selecting an orderly wind-down process.

The report suggests the shutdown wasn’t simply an abrupt break with operations, but the outcome of a longer decision cycle—one where finding an acquirer may have been considered, but ultimately did not materialize into a transaction.

This matters to investors in tokenized exchange ecosystems because “utilities” tied to a platform’s activity can lose their economic meaning when the underlying venue stops operating. When wind-down plans advance, holders often anticipate reduced buyback or incentive mechanics (if any existed), weaker demand for token usage, and—most importantly—a fading buyer base for any token that derives value from exchange activity.

A legacy built on perpetual swaps, now ending

BitMEX previously highlighted its industry role by marking its 11th anniversary in November 2025. The exchange credited its influence in creating the perpetual swap—a futures contract structure with no expiration date—that became a cornerstone for modern crypto derivatives trading.

That legacy contrasts sharply with BMEX’s post-announcement price action. The disconnect underscores a key point for market participants: reputational and historical contributions do not automatically translate into ongoing token value once market structure changes, derivatives competition intensifies, and operational costs rise.

Cointelegraph also reported that a restructuring advisor and CEO of investment firm Echo Base, Roshan Dharia, described the closure as part of wider “structural corrections” across digital asset markets. He linked the pressures to a combination of a more competitive environment, increasing regulatory and compliance costs, and reduced tolerance for operational inefficiency.

In other words, BitMEX’s ending appears less like an isolated event and more like an outcome of sector-wide tightening—where exchanges that cannot maintain scale or profitability face limited pathways forward.

Going forward, attention is likely to shift to what happens to BMEX holders as the wind-down proceeds—whether any remaining token incentives, liquidity provisions, or related mechanisms persist, and how quickly markets reprice any residual expectations. With the timeline and final operational steps not detailed in the available reporting here, traders and long-term observers should watch for further updates from BitMEX, plus signals from analytics and on-chain activity that indicate how derivatives volume migrates to competing venues.