OpenSea has added Solana NFT trading to OS2, giving users access to collections such as Mad Lads and Claynosaurz through its multichain marketplace.

OpenSea brings Solana NFT trading to OS2

OpenSea said in an Aug. 31 announcement that collectors can now browse, purchase, sell, and place bids on supported Solana NFTs through OS2. The launch includes Mad Lads, Claynosaurz, Collector Crypt, and Phygitals, among other collections built on the network.

Within the same interface, collectors can manage Solana NFTs without changing wallets or visiting a separate marketplace, according to the company. Creators using Solana can also list their work for OpenSea users who may already trade assets issued on other blockchains.

Solana token trading was already available through OS2 before the latest release. Adding NFT functions fills a gap in the platform’s support for the network, as users can now trade both fungible and non-fungible Solana assets through one account.

Released publicly in May 2025 after a testing period, OS2 initially offered token trading across 19 chains. The rebuilt platform also introduced cross-chain features, marketplace aggregation and support for tokens alongside the NFT products associated with OpenSea’s original business.

By Aug. 27, OpenSea said its market data covered more than 25 networks. Four days before the Solana NFT announcement, the company connected its market data to Perplexity Computer, allowing the AI service to answer questions about tokens, collectibles and onchain trading activity.

OpenSea co-founder and CEO Devin Finzer described the data used by AI agents as “open, live, and verifiable” when announcing the Perplexity integration. The service can identify heavily traded assets and collections by drawing from current OpenSea activity rather than relying only on token price feeds.

Solana support adds competition for NFT marketplaces

For Solana collectors, OpenSea’s release adds another place to trade collections that have largely depended on marketplaces with an established presence on the network. Magic Eden began as a Solana-focused platform before adding support for other ecosystems, while Tensor has built products around professional Solana NFT traders.

OpenSea’s entry creates more overlap among the marketplaces, though the company did not provide trading-volume targets, user projections or market-share estimates for its Solana product. Its announcement focused on access to collections and the ability to use existing wallets across supported networks.

The release also restores a service that OpenSea had tested several years earlier. In April 2022, the marketplace introduced Solana NFT support in beta, making Solana its first supported non-Ethereum Virtual Machine network. The new OS2 implementation brings Solana collections back into the platform more than four years after that initial test.

Competition now extends beyond individual NFT listings because the largest marketplaces have added networks, wallets, and token products to retain users. OpenSea has followed that model through OS2, combining its NFT marketplace with fungible-token trading and products that can pull liquidity from several chains.

Its July 2025 acquisition of Rally Wallet added a mobile-first wallet business focused on NFTs and tokens. OpenSea planned to place Rally’s technology within its product range, while Rally co-founder Chris Maddern joined the company as chief technology officer.

OS2 had launched two months before the Rally transaction with real-time liquidity aggregation and cross-chain functions. The wallet purchase gave OpenSea another route to develop mobile trading without separating token activity from NFT portfolio management.

OpenSea continues adding products beyond NFTs

While restoring Solana NFT trading, OpenSea has continued developing services outside its original collectibles market. In June, product executive Zack Brenner asked users about early access to perpetual futures and later indicated that Hyperliquid could supply the infrastructure.

The planned perpetual futures product would place OpenSea closer to crypto platforms that combine spot tokens, derivatives, and rewards. However, the company had not announced a release date or provided final product terms at the time of the report.

Product releases have moved ahead while OpenSea’s SEA token remains delayed. The company introduced SEA in February 2025 and initially expected to release it around March 30, 2026, with proposed uses including governance, reduced trading fees and staking linked to NFT collections.

In March, Finzer postponed the SEA launch and cited difficult market conditions. OpenSea did not provide a replacement date, while users who joined parts of its Waves rewards campaign received an option to recover certain platform fees by giving up associated Treasure Chest rewards.

The token was intended to support OpenSea’s plan for an application covering NFTs, fungible assets and other forms of crypto trading. Solana NFT support advances the product side of that plan without changing the unresolved schedule for SEA.

US regulatory questions remain relevant to OpenSea

For US users, access to Solana NFTs comes after the Securities and Exchange Commission ended an investigation into OpenSea without filing charges. The agency had issued a Wells notice in August 2024, indicating that its staff could recommend enforcement action based on the view that some NFTs traded through the marketplace might qualify as securities.

OpenSea said in February 2025 that the SEC had closed the investigation. Finzer called the decision a victory for NFT creators and argued that treating NFTs as securities would misinterpret existing law.

No enforcement case followed the Wells notice, but the closure did not create a general exemption for every NFT or marketplace operating in the United States. The legal status of an individual digital collectible can still depend on how it is issued, marketed, and sold under US securities law.

In April 2025, crypto.news previously reported that OpenSea had asked the SEC to clarify that NFT marketplaces should not be treated as securities exchanges or brokers. The company’s legal team argued that platforms such as OpenSea do not execute transactions, hold customer assets, or act as intermediaries in the same way as traditional securities firms.

Bitcoin slipped lower in early Wednesday European trading, posting local lows near $76,400 before recovering to around $77,000, according to CoinGecko. The retreat came as broader risk assets weakened in Asia and as the US fixed-income backdrop remained fragile.

CryptoQuant data suggests the selloff wasn’t solely a momentum move—Bitcoin’s “apparent demand” indicator turned negative again following outflows from US spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs) reported the day prior.

Key takeaways

• Bitcoin sold off to roughly $76,400 before reclaiming the $77,000 area, but remains capped by a previously reported resistance cluster.
• According to CryptoQuant, Bitcoin’s apparent demand has flipped negative again after a short improvement during the August rally.
• US spot Bitcoin ETF flows showed $236 million in net outflows the previous day, aligning with the softer on-chain demand read.
• A sharp drop in USD/JPY to about 158.5 reignited speculation about another yen intervention, with no official confirmation at the time of writing.
• Asian equities fell broadly—South Korea’s KOSPI -4.0% and Japan’s Nikkei 225 -2.9%—with tech and chip names among the biggest drags.

CryptoQuant: apparent demand turns negative again

The latest leg down in BTC followed US spot Bitcoin ETF outflows of $236 million reported for the prior day. In parallel, CryptoQuant data indicates Bitcoin’s apparent demand measure has moved back into negative territory after a brief reprieve during the August rally.

The “apparent demand” concept is designed to infer whether market participants are actively absorbing newly created supply and previously dormant coins. It draws inspiration from commodity-market-style issuance versus inventory changes and attempts to capture the gap between newly mined issuance and changes in inactive supply.

In this framework, positive readings are generally interpreted as older coins waking up and the market absorbing both existing supply and new issuance—often viewed as a sign of active spot demand. Negative readings imply that coins are aging into dormancy faster than miners are creating new ones, which is typically treated as weaker spot demand conditions.

While BTC had regained the $77,000 level by the time of writing, it was still described as pinned under a nearby resistance cluster that Cointelegraph previously highlighted. The immediate question for traders is whether the bounce can break through that overhead supply or whether renewed negative demand readings will keep BTC confined.

Macro pressure: yields, USD/JPY, and possible yen intervention

Outside crypto, a broader risk-off mood was building. Earlier in the week, Cointelegraph reported on a global bond selloff that was weighing on markets; on Wednesday, the pressure appeared to ease slightly as the US 10-year yield briefly dipped below 4.8%.

However, FX markets added another layer of uncertainty. Commentators pointed to “inorganic” price movement in the USD/JPY pair around 13:00 UTC, interpreting it as a possible sign of another central bank action. USD/JPY fell to about 158.5, pulling away from the psychologically important 160 level that market participants widely expect the Bank of Japan (BOJ) to defend. At the time of writing, no official statement had confirmed whether intervention occurred.

This matters for crypto indirectly: rapid shifts in USD/JPY often reflect changing expectations for global liquidity and interest-rate differentials—conditions that can influence both risk appetite and the availability of capital for higher-beta assets like cryptocurrencies.

Asian equities slide, tech and chips lead the losses

Equities in Asia traded sharply lower, with multiple factors likely contributing, including rising oil prices and renewed profit-taking in parts of the AI complex. South Korea’s KOSPI led the decline, dropping 4.0% to close at 6,562.72. Among the largest detractors were chipmakers SK Hynix and Samsung Electronics, which fell about 4% and 4.7%, respectively.

Japan’s Nikkei 225 slid 2.9% to 64,325.64, with technology heavyweights contributing to the weakness. SoftBank Group—which has been an investor in OpenAI—was among the names weighed by the broader risk-off tape. The Taiwan index also declined, with the TAIEX down roughly 1.7%.

Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph had already raised concerns about the US side of the AI trade, including signs that credit stress was building via rising credit spreads for hyperscalers. While Wednesday’s equity weakness wasn’t explicitly attributed to any single catalyst in the source, the connection to credit sensitivity is a key reason investors often watch these developments alongside crypto—because a broad deleveraging cycle tends to pressure leveraged positions across markets.

What to watch next: demand signals and the macro backdrop

Bitcoin’s near-term direction may hinge on whether apparent demand continues to recover from the negative reading highlighted by CryptoQuant, or whether the market slips back into a pattern of dormant-supply growth. At the same time, watch USD/JPY for clearer confirmation around intervention expectations and monitor whether US yields stabilize—both can quickly change risk sentiment across crypto and traditional markets.

Ondo Finance is urging US regulators to bring perpetual futures tied to individual stocks onshore, arguing that the products can already operate under the country’s existing security futures framework without new rules.

In three Aug. 24 comment letters to the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), Ondo argued that existing rules can accommodate perpetual stock futures while also accounting for modern margining practices and onchain market data.

Ondo said its Panama-based affiliate already offers stablecoin-settled perpetual futures on individual US-listed stocks outside the United States, with the platform recording $8 billion in cumulative trading volume as of Aug. 14, around six weeks after its launch.

Ondo ranks fourth among tokenized RWA managers by distributed value. Source: RWA.xyz

The company argued that scheduled funding payments can keep perpetual contracts aligned with the price of their underlying stocks, performing a similar function to expiration in traditional futures.

“Nothing in the statutory definition of a security futures product requires a fixed expiration date,” Ondo said in its product-classification letter.

Ondo also noted that many of the stocks underlying offshore perpetuals are principally traded on US exchanges. “Bringing that activity back to the U.S. should not be an open question; it’s something both agencies should actively pursue,” the company said.

Ondo is among the largest managers of tokenized real-world assets, ranking fourth with about $2.6 billion in distributed value as of Wednesday, according to RWA.xyz data.

Related: Ondo shifts from layer-1 blockchain plan to offchain execution network

US regulators look to modernize market rules

Ondo’s proposal comes as US regulators reconsider how existing market rules apply to onchain products, including perpetual futures and tokenized securities.

President Donald Trump said in August that CFTC Chair Michael Selig was working to bring Hyperliquid into the United States in a “fully compliant and legal fashion.” Hyperliquid is best known for its onchain perpetual futures market, though neither the CFTC nor Hyperliquid has publicly detailed how US access would work.

HYPE, the native token of Hyperliquid, jumped more than 20% following Trump’s comments and has gained nearly 49% over the past month to trade around $81 on Wednesday, according to CoinGecko data.

HYPE has gained nearly 49% over the past month. Source: CoinGecko

The SEC, which oversees securities markets, and the CFTC, which regulates US derivatives markets, have also stepped up coordination this year, signing a memorandum of understanding in March to harmonize oversight in areas where their jurisdictions overlap.

On Tuesday, the SEC proposed overhauling its decades-old transfer agent framework, citing growing demand for blockchain-native recordkeeping and tokenized securities in US markets as the agency reexamines rules built for older market infrastructure.

Magazine: BTC will hit $1M by 2030… but Arthur Hayes is buying ETH instead

Ondo Finance is asking US regulators to bring perpetual futures tied to individual stocks onshore, arguing that the products can already fit within the country’s existing “security futures” framework rather than requiring new rulemaking. In comment letters submitted on Aug. 24 to both the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), the company said that perpetual stock exposure can be structured to account for modern margining practices and the realities of onchain trading.

The proposal targets a persistent question for tokenized markets: whether crypto-linked perpetual instruments—without a traditional fixed expiration date—can still be treated as security futures products under current US definitions. Ondo’s filing also points to offshore activity as evidence that the market model is already functioning.

Key takeaways

• Ondo argues that perpetual stock futures do not need a fixed expiration date to fall under the statutory definition of a security futures product.
• According to Ondo’s filings, its stablecoin-settled perpetuals for individual US-listed stocks have already logged $8 billion in cumulative trading volume as of Aug. 14.
• Ondo says scheduled funding payments can keep perpetual contract pricing aligned with the underlying stock, serving a role comparable to expiration in traditional futures.
• The SEC and CFTC have been increasing coordination and revisiting older market rules that may not fit blockchain-native recordkeeping and tokenized securities.

Ondo’s argument: existing security futures rules can cover perpetuals

Ondo’s Aug. 24 comments were directed to the SEC and CFTC, with the company maintaining that regulators already have the tools to oversee perpetual futures tied to individual stocks within current security futures guidance. The letters argue that, with the right risk controls and market structure, the absence of a fixed expiration date should not disqualify the product from being classified as a security futures instrument.

Central to Ondo’s position is the idea that regulatory definitions for security futures do not inherently require a fixed maturity. “Nothing in the statutory definition of a security futures product requires a fixed expiration date,” Ondo wrote in its product-classification letter submitted to the SEC. The company’s filings also emphasize how margining and settlement mechanics can be adapted to modern trading environments.

Ondo further contends that funding mechanics can mimic the economic function that expiration provides in conventional futures. Instead of a contract rolling off on a specific date, scheduled funding payments are used to keep the perpetual contract’s price tied to the underlying stock—an approach commonly used in perpetual derivatives markets.

The company also highlights the operational reality that the underlying stocks for many offshore perpetual offerings are “principally traded on US exchanges.” In its view, US regulators should not treat domestic market participation as a barrier to bringing these products to regulated venues. “Bringing that activity back to the U.S. should not be an open question,” Ondo said, urging both agencies to pursue that shift.

Offshore track record is part of the compliance case

In its filings, Ondo pointed to live trading activity from a Panama-based affiliate that offers stablecoin-settled perpetual futures tied to individual US-listed stocks outside the US. Ondo said the platform recorded $8 billion in cumulative trading volume as of Aug. 14—about six weeks after the launch.

While offshore activity is not a substitute for US authorization, Ondo appears to use it as an evidentiary support for its claim that the product design can run at scale and with margining and pricing mechanisms that investors rely on. The company also provided information on its standing in tokenized real-world assets (RWA), noting that it ranks fourth among tokenized RWA managers by distributed value. According to RWA.xyz data cited in the filing, Ondo had about $2.6 billion in distributed value as of Wednesday.

Why the definition of “security futures” matters now

Ondo’s filing lands at a time when US regulators are increasingly re-examining how old market frameworks apply to onchain derivatives and tokenized securities. The SEC and CFTC have also increased public coordination on overlapping areas of oversight, including a memorandum of understanding signed in March to harmonize aspects of jurisdiction where responsibilities intersect.

On the securities side, the SEC has moved to modernize mechanisms related to tokenized markets. The agency recently proposed overhauling its transfer agent framework, citing growing demand for blockchain-native recordkeeping and tokenized securities in US markets—an acknowledgment that parts of the current infrastructure were built for traditional forms of ownership and recordkeeping.

Meanwhile, the derivatives conversation is actively evolving. In August, President Donald Trump said that CFTC Chair Michael Selig was working to bring Hyperliquid into the United States in a “fully compliant and legal fashion.” Hyperliquid is known for onchain perpetual futures, although details about how US access would be handled have not been publicly specified by the CFTC or Hyperliquid.

For Ondo, this regulatory backdrop makes its core request—bringing perpetual stock futures under a recognized oversight umbrella—more than a niche classification debate. If regulators accept Ondo’s interpretation that perpetuals can meet the statutory requirements for security futures, it could open a clearer path for other tokenized derivatives strategies to seek regulated access in the US.

What to watch next: regulatory posture and product design constraints

Ondo’s letters argue that no fundamental rewrite is required—only the application of existing security futures definitions to modern perpetual structures, including funding-based alignment to underlying assets and updated margining workflows. Still, the question for the market is whether the SEC and CFTC agree with that interpretation, and—if they do—what implementation details they will require.

Investors and builders should watch for whether regulators respond with guidance or enforcement signals that clarify classification boundaries for perpetual instruments tied to individual securities, and whether US venues will replicate or supersede offshore trading models like Ondo’s stablecoin-settled setup.