Crypto World
Ether Bulls Eye $2.5K as Staking ETF Debuts; RWA Market Cap Grows
Ether has not reclaimed the $2,500 level since late January, and traders are awaiting catalysts to spark a fresh run. The latest signals from institutions point to a shift in appetite: some of the industry’s biggest players are reallocating from BTC-centric exposure toward Ethereum-focused ETFs. Harvard’s endowment disclosed an $87 million stake in BlackRock’s iShares Ethereum Trust during Q4 2025, while trimming holdings in the iShares Bitcoin Trust. Separately, the market for real-world assets tokenized on Ethereum surpassed $20 billion in aggregate value, reflecting a growing blend of traditional finance with blockchain rails. With the bear market bottom noted around $1,744 on February 6, analysts are watching for decisive momentum that could sustain a rebound.
Key takeaways
- Institutional sentiment is shifting toward Ether as elite funds reallocate capital from Bitcoin to Ether ETFs.
- BlackRock’s Staked Ethereum ETF features a 0.25% expense ratio and an 18% retention of staking rewards as service fees to intermediaries, balancing incentives in the staking flow.
- Real-world asset tokenization on Ethereum has surpassed $20 billion in aggregate value, with broad participation from BlackRock, JPMorgan Chase, Fidelity and Franklin Templeton.
- Harvard’s SEC filings show an $87 million addition to BlackRock’s iShares Ethereum Trust during Q4 2025, alongside a reduction in its iShares Bitcoin Trust.
- Dragonfly Capital’s $650 million funding round signals sustained appetite for tokenized stocks and private credit offerings on-chain, reinforcing the momentum toward RWAs and custody infrastructure.
Tickers mentioned: (omitted as per guidance to avoid introducing tickers not clearly provided in the source)
Sentiment: Neutral
Price impact: Positive. The combination of renewed institutional interest and expanding RWA activity on Ethereum could support a constructive price bias for ETH over the medium term.
Trading idea (Not Financial Advice): Hold. The emerging mix of ETF activity and RWA infrastructure suggests potential for a delay-driven rebound, pending clearer price confirmations.
Market context: The ETH narrative sits at the intersection of regulated access to staking, continued ETF experimentation, and a broadening roster of on-chain real-world asset use cases. While spot flows have been modest in the near term, the participation of major asset managers in ETH-focused vehicles points to growing demand for regulated exposure and secure custody solutions within the crypto ecosystem. The sector remains sensitive to overall risk appetite, macro cues, and regulatory developments that could influence institutional allocations to crypto assets.
Why it matters
The trajectory for Ether as a mainstream financial instrument hinges on the alignment between traditional finance’s risk controls and the evolving capabilities of on-chain infrastructure. The ongoing expansion of RWAs on Ethereum demonstrates that large-scale capital is looking beyond pure speculative bets toward assets that can be tokenized, securitized, and traded within regulated frameworks. A 0.25% expense ratio on a Staked Ethereum ETF, paired with an 18% retention of staking rewards as fees, signals an industry attempt to balance competitive pricing with sustainable staking incentives. The underlying staking ecosystem—where custodians like Coinbase play a key role in facilitating services—highlights a path for institutions to access ETH staking without shouldering daily operational risk directly.
Moreover, the $20+ billion RWA market on Ethereum reflects a concerted effort to bring real assets onto the blockchain, blending gold, Treasuries and bonds with programmable settlement and liquidity access. The involvement of BlackRock, JPMorgan Chase, Fidelity and Franklin Templeton underscores how the line between traditional custody and digital asset infrastructure is blurring. In parallel, venture funding from players like Dragonfly Capital reinforces confidence in the long-run viability of tokenized stocks and private credit offerings, suggesting a maturation phase for the sector that could underpin sustained demand for ETH as a settlement and collateral layer.
Price catalysts remain tied to the broader risk environment. While a near-term move to $2,500 is discussed in market chatter, the path will likely depend on regulatory clarity, ETF inflows, and the pace at which RWAs scale from pilot projects to widely adopted products. The bear market bottom observed in early February may prove to be a reference point if new catalysts emerge, but investors will want to see consistent demand signals, improved liquidity, and clear governance for staking yield structures before committing meaningful capital.
What to watch next
- Regulatory milestones for ETH-focused ETFs and any SEC updates on product approvals or adjustments.
- Upcoming quarterly ETF flow data to gauge whether institutional inflows into Ether-based products accelerate.
- New RWAs issuances and partnerships on Ethereum, including any large-scale tokenizations of traditional assets.
- Price action around the $2,000–$2,500 zone and whether macro risk sentiment supports a durable breakout for ETH.
Sources & verification
- Harvard’s 2025 Q4 Form 13F filings showing an $87 million stake in BlackRock’s iShares Ethereum Trust and adjustments to its iShares Bitcoin Trust.
- MarketBeat data detailing changes in notable iShares Ethereum Trust holdings.
- DefiLlama data on the RWAs aggregate on Ethereum exceeding $20 billion in value.
- Dragonfly Capital’s $650 million fundraise focused on tokenized RWAs and related on-chain infrastructure.
Institutional bets build as ETH ETFs mature and RWAs expand
Ether (CRYPTO: ETH) has begun to demonstrate a degree of resilience that could be the prelude to a broader regime shift in active institutional exposure. The most meaningful signal to date is the combination of major asset managers embracing Ethereum-based products and the rapid expansion of real-world asset tokenization that sits atop the Ethereum chain. The Harvard disclosures, which show an $87 million addition to BlackRock’s iShares Ethereum Trust in Q4 2025, and a concurrent trimming of iShares Bitcoin Trust holdings, exemplify a nuanced preference for ETH-driven exposure over BTC-focused routes. This bifurcation in appetite suggests institutions are seeking regulated, scalable access to staking and on-chain liquidity, rather than relying solely on the volatility of the broader crypto market.
BlackRock’s Staked Ethereum ETF adds another dimension to the narrative. With a 0.25% expense ratio and an 18% retention of staking rewards as service fees, the vehicle aims to strike a pragmatic balance between cost efficiency and the revenue necessary to compensate the intermediaries that enable staking. The arrangement underscores a broader trend in the industry: in order to scale, staking products must align the incentives of custodians, exchanges, and fund managers with the long-term interests of investors seeking yield-bearing crypto exposure. Coinbase’s involvement as a staking service intermediary is cited as a notable practical factor in ensuring smooth on-ramp and on-chain execution for such portfolios.
Beyond the ETF mechanics, the size and scope of RWAs on Ethereum point to a maturation of the ecosystem. The aggregate RWAs on Ethereum now surpass $20 billion, a milestone that includes tokenized gold and a growing slice of US Treasuries, bonds, and money market funds. The involvement of major financial institutions—BlackRock, JPMorgan Chase, Fidelity, and Franklin Templeton—signals a coordinated push to bring more traditional assets under a tokenized, on-chain framework. When measured alongside other blockchain ecosystems, Ethereum’s RWAs stand out as a bridge between regulated finance and decentralized technologies, reinforcing the case for ETH as a robust platform for both settlement and collateral.
The venture funding environment is also shifting in this space. Dragonfly Capital’s recent $650 million round, aimed at real-world assets and tokenized financial instruments, illustrates persistent appetite from crypto-focused investors to back asset-backed models that operate in concert with established market infrastructure. In practice, this means more pilot programs, more credible custodial arrangements, and more sophisticated deals that link asset origination with tokenized issuance and on-chain trading. The result could be a multi-year trajectory in which RWAs contribute to sustained demand for ETH, even as the broader crypto market experiences sideways or choppy price action.
From a price perspective, the catalysts discussed—ETF inflows, deeper RWA adoption, and regulatory clarity—could provide the conditions for a rebound toward the $2,500 level noted in market discussions. The bear cycle that bottomed near $1,744 on February 6 has left a price floor that investors are watching closely, with the possibility of a renewed risk-on environment driving ETH higher as institutional confidence grows. While no single event guarantees a sustained rally, the confluence of regulated access, staking economics, and tangible on-chain assets tied to ETH strengthens the case for a constructive, though cautious, upside path in the medium term. The landscape suggests that the next phase of ETH’s price narrative will be driven less by frothy retail speculation and more by disciplined, asset-backed finance and regulated market access. Harvard’s stake in BlackRock’s ETH Trust and the evolving real-world asset framework remain central reference points as this story develops. For additional context on RWAs’ market dynamics, see Tokenized RWAs climb despite market rout, and for coverage of Dragonfly Capital’s funding round, visit Dragonfly’s $650M fund. The price-angle discussion around a potential move to $2,500 is also explored in ETH chart patterns and rally scenarios as noted in market analysis. Investors should monitor price action, ETF flow data, and regulatory developments to gauge how these structural shifts translate into tangible market movements.
The push for a clearer regulatory framework around digital assets in the United States remains one of the thorniest policy debates in Washington, with a fast-approaching deadline that could determine whether key crypto legislation advances in the near term. The US CLARITY Act, designed to bring regulatory clarity to exchanges, wallets and developers, faces a narrow window to secure traction. A crypto executive warned that if the bill does not move through committee by the end of April, the odds of its passage in 2026 look markedly worse. The clock is ticking as lawmakers weigh competing priorities and a crowded calendar in both chambers.
Key takeaways
- The CLARITY Act has a tight timetable: committee advancement by the end of April is framed as a prerequisite for any chance of floor action in 2026, according to industry observers.
- Senate leadership has signaled appetite to prioritize other measures, such as the SAVE Act, before considering crypto market structure legislation, complicating the CLARITY Act’s path.
- Stablecoin rewards stand out as a major hurdle, but observers warn they may not be the final obstacle; the bill could face concerns over DeFi, developer protections and the scope of regulatory authority.
- While some lawmakers have been optimistic about an April timeline, independent analysts have warned that a delayed vote could push enactment further into the decade, potentially into 2027 or beyond.
- Public commentary from political leaders underscores a broader need for compromise, with lawmakers and industry participants acknowledging concessions are likely on both sides.
Sentiment: Neutral
Market context: The regulatory spotlight on crypto remains intense as U.S. policymakers balance investor protection, financial stability and innovation incentives amid a shifting macro and regulatory backdrop.
Why it matters
The debate over the CLARITY Act crystallizes the broader tension between fostering innovation in the crypto sector and imposing safeguards that could stabilize a fragmented market. The central question for many stakeholders is whether a coherent, principles-based framework can be achieved without stifling experimentation, especially in areas like DeFi and wallet infrastructure where developers argue that current rules are vague or uneven in their application. Advocates say a well-defined set of rules would reduce uncertainty for exchanges, custodians and developers, potentially attracting more legitimate players into the U.S. crypto ecosystem. Opponents, however, warn that rushed legislation could impose overly broad or ambiguous standards that hamper innovation or push activities offshore.
The dialogue around stablecoins—sometimes framed as the bill’s linchpin—highlights the delicate balance lawmakers seek between consumer protection, financial-market stability and the speed at which new technologies evolve. Critics worry that focusing too narrowly on yield practices of stablecoins could miss larger questions about how stableassets interact with traditional banking rails and what protections should apply to on-chain protocols and developers. In the broader arc, the conversation signals a broader shift in how policymakers envisage regulatory authority across on-chain and off-chain activities, from scripting and DeFi governance to KYC/AML compliance for crypto service providers.
Within the policymaking process, internal dynamics also matter. For instance, a key Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee indicated that compromises will be necessary as both crypto advocates and banking interests push for favorable terms. The reality, many observers say, is that lawmakers will walk away with some concessions from both sides, rather than a pristine, perfect bill. This moderation could be the only viable path to a workable framework that gains bipartisan support while addressing substantive risk concerns. In parallel, commentary from industry leaders underscores a pragmatic approach: the CLARITY Act may not be the final word on regulatory design, with evolving oversight, enforcement priorities and technology-neutral standards likely to shape subsequent iterations.
On the legislative calendar, optimism about an April passage has given way to caution as Senate leadership weighs competing bills and priorities. Notable voices in the debate have warned that the timing is everything: a late ballot or postponed committees could push key decisions beyond midterms into a new political reality, complicating any immediate enactment. The urgency is partly tethered to the fact that other measures—such as voter verification initiatives under the SAVE Act—may receive precedence, effectively delaying crypto-specific legislation even if inputs from the crypto industry are deemed constructive.
Beyond the ideological divides, the policy conversation intersects with broader market dynamics. Investors and builders watch how regulators will interpret new authority in areas like stablecoins, on-chain governance and DeFi protocols. As discussions unfold, the industry continues to push for clarity about which actors would be regulated, what standards would apply, and how enforcement would be structured, all with an eye toward reducing the current patchwork of rules that many consider a drag on capital formation and innovation. The evolving dialogue suggests that even if a form of CLARITY bill emerges, its practical impact will depend on the specifics of the final text and the regulatory guardrails that accompany it.
One notable takeaway from industry commentators is that the debate over stablecoin yields may not be the definitive obstacle. While yield-related concerns dominate headlines, the bill’s proponents and opponents alike acknowledge that other contentious topics — including DeFi governance protections, developer liabilities, and the scope of regulatory authority — could surface once the immediate yield question is addressed. In short, passage hinges on a broader consensus about how a modern financial system can responsibly integrate programmable digital assets without creating systemic risk or stifling innovation.
A tweet from a prominent industry voice captured the urgency of the moment, underscoring the need for movement. The message, shared with the broader crypto community, signals that stall events could set the stage for a longer regulatory drag and a more uncertain roadmap for developers seeking clarity on permissible activities. The tweet and related discussions reflect a wider industry appetite for predictable rules, even as stakeholders acknowledge that any final framework will require careful calibration to satisfy both market participants and lawmakers.
On the political front, the rhetoric around crypto regulation remains varied. A senior Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee recently spoke about the need for compromise, noting that both crypto and banking lobbies will likely walk away with some dissatisfaction. The sentiment mirrors a broader pattern in which policymakers recognize that a workable framework will emerge only through negotiation, careful drafting and a willingness to adjust expectations on both sides of the aisle. The legibility of this compromise—how clearly it delineates responsibilities, protections and oversight—will greatly influence the sector’s trajectory in the coming years.
In parallel, some observers have floated more cautious timelines. While a handful of lawmakers previously suggested an April path, industry-facing research from investment banks has offered more conservative forecasts, predicting that market-structure legislation could slip into 2027 or even later, with enactment potentially delayed until 2029 if the political dynamics shift post-midterms. Such projections illustrate how the regulatory road map remains uncertain, even as the appetite for a formal, nationwide framework persists among many industry participants and policymakers alike.
Across the spectrum, the insistence on a credible regulatory approach—one that supports innovation while protecting investors—remains a central theme. The ongoing negotiations produce a mixed signal: steady calls for a clear regime juxtaposed with pragmatic caveats about timing, political capital and the potential need for additional adjustments beyond a single bill. That tension is likely to define the near-term landscape for the U.S. crypto industry, as stakeholders monitor committee votes, floor calendars and the evolving posture of the administration toward market structure proposals.
What to watch next
- Committee movement on the CLARITY Act by end-April and any statements detailing a concrete floor timeline in May.
- Interactions between crypto and banking lobbies shaping compromise terms ahead of any Senate action.
- Further discussions on stablecoins, DeFi protections and regulatory reach that could affect the final text.
- Public comments and lobbying activity around the SAVE Act and its scheduling relative to crypto legislation.
Sources & verification
- Alex Thorn, Galaxy Digital, comments on the April committee deadline and the 2026 passage odds, via X: https://x.com/intangiblecoins/status/2032853696824873429?s=20
- US Senate leadership and timing remarks on crypto market structure legislation and prioritization of the SAVE Act: https://cointelegraph.com/news/us-senate-thune-crypto-market-structure-april
- TD Cowen’s assessment that crypto market structure legislation may not pass until 2027 and could take effect in 2029: https://cointelegraph.com/news/us-crypto-market-structure-bill-delayed
- Public statements around stablecoin yields and regulatory hurdles, including comments from Senator Bernie Moreno: https://cointelegraph.com/news/crypto-us-clarity-act-coinbase-brian-armstrong-bernie-moreno
- President Donald Trump’s remarks criticizing banks for stalling the bill: https://cointelegraph.com/news/trump-takes-swipe-banks-over-stalled-crypto-bill
- Senator Angela Alsobrooks on the need for compromise in crypto-banking discussions: https://cointelegraph.com/news/crypto-banks-need-to-be-unhappy-crypto-bill-advance-senator
- Context and related analyses including industry perspectives on regulatory paths and market structure narratives: https://cointelegraph.com/editorial-policy
- Additional industry commentary from Sandeep Nailwal’s discussion post: https://x.com/sandeepnailwal/status/2032228011651842197?s=20
Regulatory clock tightens for the CLARITY Act and what it means for the market
The central dynamic in Washington is a race against time — and a race against competing agendas. The CLARITY Act is designed to provide a formal blueprint for how a wide range of crypto activities should be regulated, from centralized exchanges to wallets and on-chain developers. Yet the bill’s fate currently hinges on committee momentum and the willingness of lawmakers to balance the interests of a crypto industry that argues for clarity with the concerns of the traditional financial-oversight establishment that pushes for stronger guardrails.
Industry voices argue that clarity, even if imperfect, can catalyze investment and innovation by reducing the ambiguity that currently deters new entrants and strains compliance budgets. Proponents suggest that a well-structured framework could offer a predictable operating environment, enabling legitimate actors to navigate the regulatory landscape with greater confidence. Opponents, conversely, warn that hasty policy could overreach, potentially constraining experimentation or inadvertently stifling emerging technologies. In this context, every procedural milestone — committee votes, floor time, and regulatory clarifications — could meaningfully shift the market’s risk and liquidity dynamics.
The debate also intersects with broader macro factors affecting risk appetite in the crypto space. As policy discussions unfold, traders and investors monitor liquidity conditions, stance of regulators, and any shifts in capital flows tied to ETF and futures product developments. The regulatory frame could influence how institutional participants allocate capital to crypto strategies, how custodians structure risk controls, and how developers plan project roadmaps in a landscape that remains sensitive to political signals and regulatory expectations.
Ultimately, the CLARITY Act’s trajectory will be read through the lens of bipartisan compromise. If lawmakers arrive at a version that allocates clear responsibilities, certain consumer protections, and defined supervisory authority without crippling innovation, it could unlock a period of greater market engagement. If not, the sector may endure a continuation of policy ambiguity that encourages careful risk management but slows capital formation. The coming weeks will reveal whether the administration and Congress manage to align incentives, or whether the debate simply continues to propagate into future sessions and administration cycles.
The US CLARITY Act, aimed at bringing greater regulatory clarity to the crypto industry, may have little chance of passing this year if it doesn’t move forward within the next seven weeks, according to a crypto executive.
“If CLARITY doesn’t pass committee by the end of April, odds of passage in 2026 become extremely low,” Galaxy Digital head of firmwide research Alex Thorn said in an X post on Saturday.
“This needs to hit the Senate floor by early May… floor time is running out, and odds diminish every day that passes,” Thorn said. It comes after US Senate Majority Leader John Thune said he doesn’t expect the chamber to act on the digital asset market structure legislation before April, as it will prioritize the SAVE America Act, which would require voters to provide proof of US citizenship in person to register.
Stablecoin rewards debate may not be the last hurdle
Thorn said the main perceived holdup for the CLARITY Act is the debate over whether stablecoin rewards will disrupt the traditional banking system — which has split the banking and crypto industry — but warned that more issues could surface after that debate is settled.
“It’s very possible that rewards are not the ‘final’ hurdle but instead just the current hill the bill is dying on,” Thorn said, pointing to potential issues around DeFi, developer protections, and regulatory authority.
US Senator Angela Alsobrooks, a key Democrat on the Senate Banking Committee, recently said that crypto and banking lobbies will both have to accept compromises. “All of us will probably walk away just a little bit unhappy,” she said on Tuesday.
CLARITY Act may not pass until 2029, says investment bank
Some lawmakers had been optimistic about an April timeline. Crypto-friendly US Senator Bernie Moreno said on Feb. 19 that the CLARITY Act could make its way through Congress, “hopefully by April.”
Related: Balaji calls for more ‘crypto tools’ for refugees amid Middle East tensions
However, investment Bank TD Cowen warned in January that crypto market structure legislation may not pass until 2027, and might take effect in 2029, if Democratic lawmakers manage to stall the vote beyond the midterm elections and regain power in at least one chamber of Congress.
Earlier this month, US President Donald Trump criticized banks for stalling the Senate’s crypto market structure bill amid disagreements over stablecoin yield payments. “The US needs to get Market Structure done, ASAP,” Trump said on Mar. 4.
Magazine: Bitcoin’s ‘narrative vacuum,’ Ethereum now inevitable: Trade Secrets
Circle, the issuer behind the USDC stablecoin, has defied broader market pullbacks as its public stock climbs decisively in 2026. The rally comes as Bernstein analysts reiterated an Outperform rating with a $190 price target, arguing that stablecoins are maturing from a crypto-centric instrument to a fixture in payments infrastructure and on-chain settlement. The momentum reflects a broader trend: digital dollars are moving from trading desks into real-world finance, with corporate treasuries and insurers testing faster, cheaper cross-border flows. Data on USDC’s reach underscores the scale of this shift, with circulation approaching $79 billion, a signal that stablecoins are entrenched in both crypto markets and mainstream financial services. In the same ecosystem, institutions and fintechs are piloting models that could redefine how money moves across borders and asset classes.
The push into traditional finance is not theoretical. In a notable development, UK broker Aon is piloting stablecoin payments for insurance premiums, partnering with Paxos and Coinbase to explore whether cross-border premium settlements can be sped up and streamlined. The pilot aims to reduce settlement times and settlement costs, which historically involve multiple correspondent banks and complex currency conversions. If successful, insurers and their clients could experience faster premium collection, improved cash flow planning, and less administrative overhead when dealing with international policies and reinsurance transactions. The trial signals a broader real-world use case for stablecoins beyond speculative trading, aligning with industry narratives that digital dollars could underpin more efficient, automated financial workflows.
Meanwhile, Bitcoin’s resilience and the evolving approach of miners to treasury management are under the microscope. In contrast to several miners that trimmed holdings amid tightening margins, Canaan is expanding its BTC treasury. The company reported mining 86 BTC in February, lifting its total BTC reserves to 1,793. It also disclosed holding 3,952 Ether, adding to a growing crypto reserve that underscores a strategic shift toward balance sheet diversification. This accumulation stands out in an industry where several publicly traded miners have unwound portions of their Bitcoin holdings to weather post-halving economics and margin pressure. The contrast highlights how individual operators are interpreting risk, liquidity, and tax considerations in a market that remains volatile but increasingly institutionalized. Canaan’s expansion efforts extend beyond its core mining facilities; Texas operations are described as part of a broader buildout that positions the company within one of the country’s largest mining hubs.
In parallel, Wells Fargo has filed a US trademark application for “WFUSD,” a move that hints at deeper crypto ambitions among one of the country’s largest banks. The filing covers a spectrum of blockchain-enabled offerings, including crypto trading, payments, digital wallet services, and software for staking and custody, with a broader nod to distributed ledger technology-based financial services. While a trademark filing does not guarantee a product launch, it signals contemplation of crypto-related revenue streams and tokenized-dollar concepts within a large traditional banking framework. The transition—if it unfolds—would reflect ongoing discussions about how big banks can participate in digital assets while navigating regulatory, liquidity, and risk considerations that differ from their legacy businesses.
Key takeaways
- Circle’s market narrative is increasingly tied to the mainstream adoption of stablecoins, with Bernstein maintaining an Outperform rating and a $190 target as the stock outpaces broader indices in 2026.
- Real-world use cases for stablecoins are expanding, evidenced by Aon’s pilot with Paxos and Coinbase to streamline cross-border premium payments for insurance products.
- Canaan’s BTC treasury expansion contrasts with sector-wide selling by other miners, signaling a selective, long-term approach to balance-sheet resilience during a downturn.
- Wells Fargo’s WFUSD trademark filing points to potential crypto-related services that could broaden access to digital assets through a traditional banking channel.
- Industry dynamics suggest that digital dollars are moving from niche crypto applications toward mainstream finance, with on-chain settlement and cross-border payments at the core of the evolving value proposition.
Tickers mentioned: $BTC, $ETH, $USDC
Sentiment: Bullish
Price impact: Positive. The article notes a sharp rise in Circle’s stock and ongoing adoption of stablecoins that could sustain upside for the company’s balance sheet and revenue streams.
Trading idea (Not Financial Advice): Hold. The narrative suggests upside tied to stablecoin adoption and real-world use cases, though volatility in crypto assets and bank regulatory dynamics warrant a cautious approach.
Market context: The ongoing integration of stablecoins into payments infrastructure and on-chain settlements aligns with broader liquidity and digital-asset infrastructure trends, underscored by corporate pilots and major financial institutions exploring tokenized-dollar solutions.
Why it matters
The forward momentum around Circle and stablecoins matters because it ties a crypto-native instrument to scalable, traditional financial processes. USDC’s growing footprint signals that stablecoins can underpin faster, less costly cross-border payments, and potentially smoother on-chain settlements for institutions. If these dynamics persist, it could reshape treasury management practices for corporations and financial services firms, reducing reliance on conventional FX timing and bank-led liquidity cycles. The Bernstein thesis—anchored on broader stablecoin adoption across payments, infrastructure, and on-chain settlement—suggests a pathway for stablecoins to become a core component of the financial plumbing that underpins both crypto markets and the real economy.
On the mining side, Canaan’s approach contrasts with industry-wide selling pressure by some peers. A strategy focused on expanding BTC reserves while maintaining a diversified crypto stash could provide insulation against short-term price swings and offer flexibility for future balance-sheet optimization. The Texas expansion also highlights how U.S. mining hubs are consolidating leadership in the space, potentially contributing to energy and regulatory considerations as the sector scales. The confluence of treasury discipline in mining, institutional pilots in insurance, and traditional banks exploring crypto-trading and custody suggests a period of convergence where crypto-native assets increasingly interact with mainstream financial services and corporate operations.
Wells Fargo’s WFUSD filing introduces a different dimension: the possible entry point for crypto-enabled payments or tokenized-dollar products under a high-profile banking franchise. While regulatory and operational hurdles remain, the signal from a major bank can catalyze investor and client interest in integrated crypto services, from custody to payments. The evolving narrative around Circle, stablecoins, miners’ treasury strategies, and traditional banks’ exploration of crypto services collectively points to a broader market reality: digital dollars are being woven into the fabric of everyday finance, with real implications for liquidity, settlement speed, and capital efficiency.
What to watch next
- Circle’s earnings trajectory and any updates to the USDC reserve composition or redemption dynamics, including commentary from Bernstein on the timing of a potential price target revision.
- Results or updates from Aon’s stablecoin pilot, including cost savings, settlement times, and cross-border policy implications for insurers.
- Further disclosures from Canaan on mining economics, treasury management, and any expansion milestones in Texas or other jurisdictions.
- Regulatory developments around stablecoins and tokenized dollars that could influence the pace of mainstream adoption and bank engagement in digital assets.
- Follow-on filings or product launches related to WFUSD or other crypto services from Wells Fargo that could affect corporate payments ecosystems.
Sources & verification
- Bernstein’s rating and price target for Circle stock (Outperform, $190 target).
- USDC circulation data approaching $79 billion (DeFiLlama).
- Aon’s pilot of stablecoin payments for insurance premiums with Paxos and Coinbase.
- Canaan’s February BTC mining output (86 BTC) and total holdings (1,793 BTC) plus 3,952 ETH.
- Wells Fargo’s WFUSD trademark filing with the USPTO.
Circle, miners, and banks move stablecoins toward mainstream finance
In a landscape where crypto markets can swing on macro headlines, Circle’s ascent reflects a deeper structural shift: stablecoins are being integrated into the fabric of traditional finance, with clear implications for liquidity, settlement speed, and cross-border payments. The firm’s equity story sits atop a broader ecosystem where real-world pilots, like Aon’s, demonstrate that digital dollars are not just a crypto industry curiosity but a scalable, enterprise-grade tool. For investors, the narrative emphasizes two focal points: a growing revenue model tied to stablecoin infrastructure and governance-driven clarity around reserves and redemption dynamics. For builders and users, the signal is practical—payments and settlement can be faster and cheaper, provided the regulatory and operational frameworks keep pace with innovation.
As the sector navigates these transitions, the balance between risk and opportunity will hinge on how quickly institutions adopt and scale these tools. The confluence of Circle’s market momentum, Canaan’s treasury strategy, and Wells Fargo’s potential for crypto-enabled services suggests that the next phase of crypto-market evolution will be measured not by rapid, speculative bets alone, but by the steady widening of stablecoins into everyday financial activity. If this trajectory endures, the market could see a new baseline for liquidity and settlement efficiency, anchored by the same digital dollars that have become a central talking point for policymakers, investors, and financial institutions alike.
The Basel III framework governing bank capital requirements is set for an update in 2026, with potential implications for the crypto ecosystem. The outcome could hinge on how the largest digital asset is treated in risk-weight calculations, and analysts warn that any shift could unlock liquidity that today remains constrained by capital rules. As US regulators weigh how to implement Basel rules domestically, industry participants say even modest improvements in crypto risk weights could tilt the economics in favor of traditional banks offering crypto services. The debate underscores a broader regulatory push to harmonize crypto with mainstream finance while preserving prudent risk controls.
Key takeaways
- The Basel III update planned for 2026 could change how crypto assets are risk-weighted, potentially easing bank capital requirements for holdings and services tied to digital assets.
- Under current Basel rules, Bitcoin carries a 1,250% risk weight, forcing banks to hold reserve assets at a 1:1 ratio to back BTC on their balance sheets, complicating participation.
- US regulators have signaled forthcoming implementation proposals, including a 90-day public comment window on how these rules will apply domestically, which market participants are watching closely.
- Industry players, including crypto treasury firms, have pressed for reform to introduce more accommodating risk weights for digital assets, arguing the current framework suppresses legitimate use cases.
- Compared with other asset classes, crypto faces a harsh capital treatment: investment-grade corporate bonds carry substantially lower weights, while gold and government debt often enjoy near-zero risk weights.
Tickers mentioned: $BTC
Sentiment: Neutral
Price impact: Positive. A lower risk weight could encourage banks to participate more fully in crypto markets, potentially boosting liquidity and product offerings.
Trading idea (Not Financial Advice): Hold. Regulatory clarity could unlock flows, but policy outcomes remain uncertain and depend on broader financial-regulatory alignment.
Market context: The Basel framework sits at the intersection of regulatory risk management and evolving institutional participation in crypto, with liquidity and risk appetite reframed as policy signals shift.
Why it matters
At the heart of the debate is a capital regime that, in its current form, treats Bitcoin as among the riskiest class of assets for banks. The Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) proposed the current capital requirements in 2021, placing cryptocurrencies into the highest risk category. The practical effect is a 1,250% risk weight for BTC, which translates into substantial capital reserves and limits on balance-sheet holdings. For banks, such a framework makes the business case for custody, trading, and lending around digital assets markedly more onerous than many other asset classes.
Observers point to a stark contrast with other instruments. Jeff Walton, chief risk officer at a bitcoin treasury firm, notes that investment-grade corporate bonds can carry risk weights as low as 75%, underscoring a mispricing of risk in the Basel framework. Gold, government bonds, and even physical cash frequently come with 0% risk weight, reflecting longstanding perceptions about their relative safety. This disparity feeds a perception that the crypto sector is systematically constrained, even as demand for crypto exposure grows among both institutions and retail participants. The current design creates what some describe as a choke point for blockchain-enabled finance, curtailing the ability of traditional banks to offer crypto-related services at scale.
Industry voices have repeatedly argued that a more nuanced treatment is needed—one that reflects the evolving risk profile of digital assets and the development of robust custody, settlement, and compliance infrastructure. In February, several crypto treasury executives publicly urged Basel rulemakers to reform the framework to implement more accommodating risk weights for digital assets. The push aligns with a broader call to integrate crypto into the financial system in a way that preserves risk controls without weaponizing capital as a barrier to innovation.
The conversation extends to the US, where the Fed recently signaled a proposal on how Basel rules would be implemented domestically, including a 90-day public comment window. If regulators signal even a modest improvement in BTC’s treatment, banks could gain a clearer pathway to adopting crypto strategies—from balance-sheet holdings to fully fledged services that bridge digital assets with traditional financing. The potential for such a shift has energized market participants who see policy clarity as a prerequisite for meaningful institutional engagement with the blockchain economy.
Critics of the current direction warn that Basel’s approach is a quiet but potent barrier. Chris Perkins, president of investment firm CoinFund, described the rules as a subtle mechanism that suppresses activity by making crypto-related banking expensive. He argues that while the policies stop short of outright de-banking, they effectively raise the cost of capital for crypto activities, thereby constraining market development. The broader takeaway is that regulatory architecture—when coupled with uncertain future direction—can exert a materially negative influence on liquidity and market depth even before policy changes take effect.
For now, the conversation remains active as regulators tilt toward a more actionable framework. The debate encompasses both the urgency of safeguarding financial stability and the opportunity to harness the blockchain economy within mainstream banking. The Basel discussions are inseparable from other regulatory and policy developments that collectively shape how, and how quickly, traditional financial institutions will engage with digital assets.
As a practical matter, observers are watching for concrete milestones: the timing of the Basel Committee’s 2026 update, any official US rulemaking actions implementing Basel in the domestic financial system, and what these signals portend for banks’ risk-management practices around digital assets. The results could influence not only price dynamics but the breadth of products available to consumers—ranging from custody services to regulated lending and tokenized asset offerings.
What to watch next
- Publication of the Basel III update schedule in 2026 and the exact risk-weight calibration for crypto assets.
- US Federal Reserve rulemaking actions detailing how Basel provisions will be interpreted and enforced domestically, including the 90-day comment window.
- Industry responses from crypto treasuries and traditional banks, including any pilot programs or partnerships to offer crypto services under revised rules.
- Subsequent regulatory guidance on risk weights for digital assets and how they compare with other asset classes in the capital framework.
Sources & verification
- Basel Committee on Banking Supervision. Crypto assets proposed for highest risk category under the current Basel capital framework (coverage of 1,250% risk weight). https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-part-of-highest-risk-category-in-basel-s-new-bank-capital-plan
- Bitcoin treasury reform discussions and calls for Basel rule changes to accommodate digital assets. https://cointelegraph.com/news/btc-treasury-reform-1250-percent-risk-basel
- Basel capital rules and chokepoint critique related to crypto industry suppression, including commentary on the broader implications for market activity. https://cointelegraph.com/news/basel-bank-capital-rules-create-chokepoint-crypto
- US Fed regulatory proposals related to Basel rule implementation and the associated public comment window (industry analysis linked via policy discussions). https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-toxic-asset-basel-framework-federal-reserve-policy-institute
- Nic Puckrin on the potential for Basel rule adjustments to unlock BTC participation in the financial system. https://x.com/nicrypto/status/2032758888055861431
Basel III revisions and the path to broader crypto banking
Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) has long stood at the center of the Basel debate about how banks should treat digital assets. The current framework, which assigns BTC a 1,250% risk weight, creates a disproportionate capital burden relative to many traditional instruments. In contrast, assets such as investment-grade corporate bonds can fall as low as 75% risk-weighted, and gold or government instruments can be deemed almost risk-free in Basel’s schema. This imbalance fuels a perception that crypto remains a second-class citizen within mainstream finance, constrained not by technology but by capital rules that elevate the cost of provisioning and risk management for banks that choose to engage with digital assets.
The industry’s call for reform is anchored in a belief that prudential standards should reflect risk management advances, custody capabilities, and the growing liquidity and use cases that crypto markets demonstrate. While the Basel process is inherently technical and multi-jurisdictional, its outcome will ripple across banks, funds, and corporate treasuries that rely on regulated access to digital assets. The possibility that a modest improvement in BTC’s regulatory treatment could unlock significant liquidity—enabling banks to provide native crypto services—has generated interest from a cross-section of market participants, from treasury teams to policy researchers.
As the Basel discussions advance, market participants anticipate that any announcements in 2026 and beyond will need to be harmonized with other regulatory developments in the United States and abroad. The momentum toward clearer guidelines and more precise risk-weight calibrations could influence liquidity conditions, market depth, and the pace at which mainstream financial institutions integrate digital assets into their product suites. The interplay between risk discipline and innovation will shape how banks assess crypto financing, custody, and advisory services in the years ahead, with the potential to redefine the landscape for institutional crypto exposure.
Less than 1% of Australian crypto transactions were tied to illicit actors, even as the such entities in the country processed $50 billion in one year.
Illicit activity accounts for only a small fraction of Australia’s cryptocurrency ecosystem, even as digital asset adoption continues to expand.
According to the analysis by TRM Labs, less than 1% of the country’s total on-chain crypto activity between March 2025 and February 2026 was linked to illicit counterparties, which essentially highlights that the vast majority of transactions occur within legitimate financial and commercial use cases.
Australia’s Crypto Ecosystem
Over the same period, Australian crypto entities processed around $50 billion in total on-chain transaction volume, while the country recorded roughly $15 billion in incoming value to centralized exchanges and decentralized finance platforms.
Among 95 countries analyzed, TRM Labs said Australia holds the 20th position for total crypto value received, putting it in the top quartile globally.
Despite the growing role of digital assets in Australia’s financial system, the exposure to criminal activity remains minimal relative to the overall scale of transactions. Sanctions-related activity accounted for the largest share of illicit exposure and represents about 70% of the total illicit volume identified during the period.
Darknet markets ranked as the second-largest category, followed by investment fraud and illicit goods and services. Smaller amounts of illicit activity were linked to categories including banned substances, ransomware, scams, terrorist financing, and broader cybercrime. The findings reveal that while criminal actors have increasingly incorporated cryptocurrencies into existing financial crime typologies, such activity still represents a very small share of overall blockchain usage.
From Drug Markets to Broader Crimes
Historically, early crypto-related cases in Australia were often associated with drug markets, but the ecosystem has since diversified as adoption expanded and digital assets became integrated into more areas of financial activity. At the same time, authorities have ramped up regulatory and enforcement frameworks.
You may also like:
The country has required digital currency exchanges to register with the Australian Transaction Reports and Analysis Centre since 2018, subjecting them to anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing obligations such as customer due diligence, transaction monitoring, and suspicious matter reporting.
Meanwhile, Australia secured its first major crypto-related money laundering conviction in 2025 following Operation Taipan, which is a multi-year investigation led by Victoria Police into a Chinese-linked laundering syndicate that used digital asset infrastructure.
Binance Free $600 (CryptoPotato Exclusive): Use this link to register a new account and receive $600 exclusive welcome offer on Binance (full details).
LIMITED OFFER for CryptoPotato readers at Bybit: Use this link to register and open a $500 FREE position on any coin!
Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) edged higher across the week, bucking a cautious, risk-off mood that has dominated broader financial markets amid ongoing geopolitical tensions in the Middle East and regional frictions. By Saturday, BTC had advanced more than 7% over the past week, trading near $70,625, according to price tracking data. The contrast with the broader market was notable: the S&P 500 was down about 1.6% in the same period, underscoring a divergence between equities and the leading digital asset. The week’s rally comes as two distinct drivers align: a funding mechanism that could channel fresh demand into Bitcoin and a sustained wave of inflows into US spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs).
Key takeaways
- STRC.LIVE data indicate Strategy may have raised enough cash via at-the-market sales to buy more than 11,000 BTC this week, equating to roughly $776 million at current prices.
- US spot Bitcoin ETFs registered $767 million in net inflows over five consecutive trading days, underscoring ongoing institutional demand for BTC.
- BTC/USD rose约7% over the week to about $70,625 as the S&P 500 fell, highlighting a notable decoupling from traditional equities.
- Last week, STRC purchased 17,994 BTC, valued at roughly $1.28 billion at that time, with about 30% funded by STRC sale proceeds.
- Historical patterns show Bitcoin often strengthens during geopolitical stress, though near-term risks remain if chart patterns tip into bear-flag territory.
Tickers mentioned: $BTC
Sentiment: Bullish
Price impact: Positive
Trading idea (Not Financial Advice): Hold. The setup points to upside potential supported by robust ETF demand and STRC-driven buying, but technical caveats and external risk factors warrant caution.
Market context: The week’s strength in Bitcoin sits within a broader pattern of ETF-driven liquidity and institutional appetite, even as macro uncertainty and geopolitical headlines persist. Macro models have suggested a possible path toward higher levels, including targets around $100,000, though those projections depend on continued liquidity and risk sentiment shifts.
Why it matters
Bitcoin’s performance this week highlights how new forms of market liquidity can influence the bid for BTC even amid a risk-off environment. The STRC instrument, designed to raise investment cash for Bitcoin purchases, appears to have generated substantial buying power this week. If STRC proceeds materialize as estimated—more than 11,000 BTC could be purchased—the impact would be meaningful in terms of immediate demand, especially given the size of the BTC market already in play. As STRC notes, the instrument trades above its nominal value when demand drives new capital into BTC purchases, enabling fresh BTC-buying capital that can feed price momentum.
Concurrently, US spot BTC ETFs have been quietly pacing a multi-day inflow streak, with roughly $767 million pulled into the sector over five trading sessions. The persistence of ETF inflows signals that traditional market participants are increasingly comfortable rotating capital into BTC through regulated vehicles, even as geopolitical headlines swirl. The combination of on-market financing for BTC purchases and the ETF-driven bid presents a coherent narrative: BTC remains a port of liquidity for certain investors, even when risk assets elsewhere are under pressure.
From a chart perspective, the backdrop is mixed. While the weekly move above the $70,000 level reflects strength, a bear-flag interpretation on BTC’s recent rally warns of potential downside if buying momentum stalls. The pattern would typically play out if BTC fails to sustain the impulse and breaks below the lower boundary of the flag, with a measured objective that could pull prices back toward the lower end of the range. The immediate technical crossroads sit near the 50-day exponential moving average, close to $72,750, where traders will be eyeing whether price action can maintain an uptrend or roll over into a correction.
Beyond the immediate price action, macro narratives remain influential. Some analysts point to macro models that hint at a longer-term trajectory toward $100,000, suggesting that the current liquidity environment could act as a bridge toward more ambitious targets if conditions stay supportive. These projections, while not guarantees, reflect a broader consensus that BTC’s upside potential remains tethered to a balance of liquidity growth, risk appetite, and macro flows. The rhetoric around a higher target exists alongside the caveat that market dynamics can shift quickly in response to global risk events and policy developments.
Geopolitics also continues to color BTC’s behavior. Historical episodes illustrate that Bitcoin has sometimes rallied after initial declines during conflicts or crises, underscoring its potential as a non-sovereign store of value that can attract capital when headline risk spikes. Notable instances include the 2022 reaction to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine, where BTC delivered a substantial rally after an initial sell-off, and the 2020–early-2021 period during heightened U.S.–Iran tensions when BTC rose decisively despite volatility. These patterns are not guarantees, but they underscore a broader narrative in which Bitcoin can participate in risk-off and risk-on cycles depending on the sequence of liquidity, sentiment, and macro triggers.
Looking ahead, traders will be watching whether STRC’s weekly updates confirm continued BTC-buying flow and whether ETF inflows maintain their pace. The next developments in macro indicators and geopolitical headlines could either reinforce the current bid or introduce a new vector of volatility. The fact that Bitcoin has managed to hold ground amid tension underscores a growing maturity in the market where regulated products and structured financing schemes play an increasingly central role in price discovery, even as the asset class remains sensitive to external shocks.
In sum, Bitcoin’s recent trajectory demonstrates a confluence of financing-driven demand and institutional participation through ETFs, with indicators pointing to upside potential while technical and geopolitical risks keep a lid on exuberance. The market will likely react to fresh STRC data, the next tranche of ETF inflows, and any shifts in macro momentum or policy developments, all of which could alter the path toward or away from the higher targets that some macro models have floated.
For readers tracking the ongoing narrative, a few anchor points remain critical: the exact size and timing of STRC purchases, the persistence of ETF inflows, price action around key moving averages, and any new regulatory or macro announcements that could alter risk sentiment. As always, the interplay between regulated products, on-market financing, and macro risk will shape BTC’s near-term trajectory in ways that are hard to predict with precision but increasingly observable through the data that traders monitor daily.
What to watch next
- Next STRC weekly update (covering the current period) to confirm new BTC buys beyond the 11,000 BTC threshold.
- Continued US spot BTC ETF inflows over the coming five trading days and any new ETF launches or changes in structure.
- BTC price movement relative to the 50-day EMA near $72,750 and any break above or below that threshold.
- Macro signals or models suggesting renewed momentum toward higher targets, including the potential $100,000 milestone.
- Geopolitical developments that could reframe risk sentiment and liquidity dynamics in crypto markets.
Sources & verification
- STRC weekly data (March 9–13) via STRC.LIVE, which analyzed the potential BTC buying power from STRC financing.
- STRC ticker page and related STRC.LIVE data: https://strc.live/ticker/strc
- Cointelegraph: STRC may help Strategy hit 1m Bitcoin before BlackRock (markets coverage of STRC-driven buying)
- Cointelegraph: Bitcoin ETFs five-day inflow streak geopolitical tensions (US spot BTC ETF inflows)
- Cointelegraph: Bitcoin passing geopolitical stress test as BTC price spikes above $72K
- Cointelegraph: Bitcoin extremely precise macro signal 100k target back in play
Bitcoin momentum and the role of STRC-funded buys and ETF demand
Bitcoin (CRYPTO: BTC) has enjoyed a week of resilience that traders hope can extend into a sustained ascent. The immediate catalyst appears to be two parallel streams: STRC-driven buying capacity and recurring inflows into US spot BTC ETFs. The STRC instrument, which converts investor cash into BTC exposure, appears to have accumulated enough capital this week to purchase more than 11,000 BTC at prevailing levels, a move that could inject roughly $776 million into the market. If realized, it would mark a sizable step up in on-chain demand and likely support further price gains as the market absorbs fresh supply from this instrument. The STRC figure is grounded in data that show ongoing activity around the instrument, suggesting that the fund-raising mechanism remains a meaningful lever for BTC exposure.
Compounding this potential buying power, ETF liquidity has stayed robust. Over five trading days, US spot Bitcoin ETFs drew net inflows of about $767 million, a signal that institutional participants continue to allocate capital to a regulated exposure vehicle for BTC even in a time of geopolitical tension. This inflow pattern, combined with STRC’s disclosed activity, creates a backdrop in which BTC price action can diverge from wider risk-off moves in equities, at least in the short term. Investors should note that the ETF inflows come alongside other institutional narratives around crypto adoption, custody, and governance that have gained traction over the past year.
From a technical viewpoint, Bitcoin appears to be negotiating a critical crossroads. The price has moved toward the upper end of a near-term range, but a classic bear-flag pattern raises the possibility of a pullback if buyers fail to sustain the move. The upper boundary of that pattern coincides with the 50-day EMA near $72,750, a level that could attract fresh sell-side pressure if tested. In a scenario where the price breaks below the lower boundary of the flag, a downside target could emerge, underscoring the importance of risk controls for participants who are long the market. This is not a forecast but a reminder that price structures can flip quickly if momentum reverses.
Beyond the immediate price action, macro commentary has continued to surface suggesting a path toward higher levels. Some analysts point to macro signals that imagine BTC tracking toward $100,000 in the coming months, a target that hinges on sustained liquidity and favorable risk sentiment. While not a certainty, the notion underscores the evolving narrative around BTC as a potentially high-beta asset within a diversified risk framework. The current environment—comprising STRC’s funding-enabled demand and persistent ETF inflows—could be a catalyst for further upside if macro conditions cooperate and the market digests geopolitical headlines in a constructive light.
Historically, Bitcoin has shown resilience in the face of geopolitical stress. For example, during major conflicts such as Russia’s invasion of Ukraine in early 2022, BTC briefly sold off but soon recouped and posted a substantial rally, illustrating its potential to rebound after initial volatility. A similar dynamic occurred during the 2020–2021 period around the U.S.–Iran tension, when BTC advanced despite early disruptions. While past performance is not a guide to future results, these episodes help explain why BTC remains a focal point for traders looking to diversify risk and explore non-traditional liquidity channels during periods of uncertainty. The current blend of STRC-driven buying and ETF demand fits into this longer-running pattern, even as market participants weigh potential upside against the possibility of a near-term pullback.
As the week closes and traders assess the balance of on-chain buying, ETF activity, and macro indicators, the central question remains: will STRC’s funds translate into a sustained acceleration in BTC price, or will the market test the upper boundaries and pause to digest the influx? The answer will likely hinge on the convergence of liquidity flow, macro sentiment, and the evolving geopolitical backdrop—factors that have repeatedly shaped Bitcoin’s price path over the past several years.
Crypto losses fell to $49M in February, but attackers are shifting toward phishing and user manipulation, says Nominis.
A report by blockchain security firm Nominis shows that in February, total losses from crypto attacks fell by 87%, going from $385 million in January to $49.3 million last month.
However, while the drop in total value stolen suggests improved protocol security, Nominis claims that a closer examination of the month’s events shows that attackers are moving their focus away from exploiting code and toward manipulating the people who use it.
The Anatomy of February’s Crypto Attacks
According to the Nominis report, an attack on Step Finance, a Solana-based decentralized finance (DeFi) platform, caused more than 60% of February’s total losses.
In that case, attackers are said to have hacked devices belonging to the project’s executive team, which may have exposed private keys or allowed unauthorized transaction approvals. After that, they unstaked and moved 261,854 SOL worth up to $40 million from wallets that the project owned.
The damage was so severe that Step Finance was forced to shut down its core platform and affiliated projects, including SolanaFloor and Remora Markets.
The remaining losses came from a scattered mix of attacks, including $3 million lost by CrossCurve, a cross-chain protocol bridge, when an attacker exploited flawed validation logic in the contract responsible for processing incoming messages from the Axelar network.
Elsewhere, YieldBlox, a DeFi lending platform, lost about $10.2 million after a bad actor changed its collateral pricing logic so that it could borrow more than it was allowed to.
You may also like:
There were also several address poisoning scams targeting individuals, with their losses ranging from about $100,000 to nearly $600,000. Others were drained after unknowingly signing malicious token approval transactions. This is a method in which a fake prompt tricks people into giving criminals permission to take money from their wallets.
A Broader Pattern is Emerging
Apart from the direct attacks, there were also several notable findings made in February by investigators and law enforcement. For instance, SlowMist published a technical breakdown of a phishing campaign that specifically targeted administrators of crypto projects.
In that campaign, attackers made fake versions of real token vesting tools to trick operators into giving them access to contracts.
Meanwhile, authorities in South Korea are investigating a case in which a seed phrase was accidentally exposed in a publicly shared photograph, which allowed attackers to reconstruct the wallet and steal nearly $5 million worth of crypto.
As far as enforcement was concerned, the U.S. Department of Justice reported that it had seized more than $61 million in cryptocurrency connected to a pig butchering investment fraud scheme. The investigators were able to trace the money through blockchain analysis and obtain a legal forfeiture of the funds.
Based on the February incidents, the loss of funds is not primarily through exploiting unknown vulnerabilities in the underlying code. The Nominis study found that most losses now come from compromised user accounts, misleading transactional requests, and users copying the wrong wallet address. According to the firm, the most vulnerable aspects of the cryptocurrency ecosystem are not the blockchains themselves, but rather, they are the human behaviors and operational practices that surround them.
Binance Free $600 (CryptoPotato Exclusive): Use this link to register a new account and receive $600 exclusive welcome offer on Binance (full details).
LIMITED OFFER for CryptoPotato readers at Bybit: Use this link to register and open a $500 FREE position on any coin!
Former UK prime minister Boris Johnson sparked a fresh volley of criticism around Bitcoin by labeling it a Ponzi scheme in a Daily Mail op-ed. He recounts a personal anecdote: a friend who handed over 500 pounds, or about $661, to a promoter who promised to “double his money” via BTC, only to be drawn into a years-long cycle of fees and delays. Over three and a half years, the friend’s losses mounted to roughly 20,000 pounds, around $26,474, leaving him unable to recover his capital and facing financial hardship. The column amplifies a broader distrust of crypto assets, contrasting them with more traditional forms of collecting and trading. Johnson also suggests that collectible Pokémon cards — with a decades-long fan base and a fungible market — are more tradable than Bitcoin. He writes that Pikachu and its peers have sustained appeal across generations, which, in his view, makes them more reliably tradable than the volatile, permissionless network he critiques.
Key takeaways
- A prominent UK political figure frames Bitcoin as a Ponzi scheme, anchoring the debate in a real-world investment loss narrative.
- Proponents of Bitcoin push back by outlining fundamental network properties, including the absence of a central issuer and a lack of guaranteed returns.
- Public commentary highlights a tension between decades-long collectibles markets and the newer, complex dynamics of decentralized digital assets.
- The exchange of views references specific milestones, such as Bitcoin’s mining progress and ongoing discourse about the asset’s role in financial systems.
Tickers mentioned: $BTC
Sentiment: Neutral
Market context: The exchange underscores a continuing public debate about crypto’s legitimacy while markets navigate macro risk sentiment and evolving regulatory discussions that influence investor perception.
Why it matters
The exchange illustrates how public figures, policymakers, and crypto advocates frame Bitcoin in moral, economic, and regulatory terms. When high-profile voices compare a highly decentralized asset to traditional, widely traded collectibles, the narrative risk is a false equivalence: tangible collectibles have long-established markets and price psychology shaped by collectors, whereas decentralized networks derive value from utility, scarce supply, and network effects. This distinction matters for both retail investors and institutions attempting to evaluate risk, duration, and custody considerations in crypto exposure.
From a market-structure perspective, the episode reinforces the central tension around Bitcoin’s identity: is it a currency in the conventional sense, a store of value, or a speculative asset tethered to sentiment and narratives? The backlash from Bitcoiners highlights a sharper claim — that Bitcoin’s coded rules, lack of an issuer, and open-market dynamics constitute a fundamental departure from traditional Ponzi-like constructs where returns depend on new participants. That debate touches regulatory narratives, risk assessment, and how financial products built on BTC are described to investors, including BTC-backed instruments and on-chain monetization strategies.
The discussion also arrives as the crypto industry continues to point to milestones such as the network’s ongoing issuance and scaling achievements. Debates about value, legitimacy, and investor protection persist even as the blockchain network nears notable supply milestones and the ecosystem expands with new products and narrative catalysts. The back-and-forth underscores how societal perception, media framing, and official policy interact to shape the appetite for crypto exposure, particularly among traditionally risk-averse audiences.
“Bitcoin is not a Ponzi scheme. A Ponzi requires a central operator promising returns and paying early investors with funds from later ones,” said Michael Saylor, a leading voice in corporate Bitcoin strategy. “Bitcoin has no issuer, no promoter, and no guaranteed return, just an open, decentralized monetary network driven by code and market demand.”
Another industry perspective came from Pierre Rochard, who leads a BTC-backed financial product issuer. He argued that the United Kingdom’s financial framework effectively finances itself through debt, a view that casts the Johnson-backed critique as part of a broader dispute over how fiat and crypto should interact within public policy. The back-and-forth reflects broader disagreements about how value is created, transmitted, and safeguarded in a modern financial system that increasingly sits at the intersection of traditional banking and decentralized networks.
As the discussion unfolded online, supporters referenced Bitcoin’s continued development milestones, including the network’s ability to reach new levels of on-chain activity and security. They also cited examples from recent coverage about Bitcoin’s role in mainstream discourse, such as the ongoing interest in how digital assets are described to the public and regulated by authorities. The exchange of ideas demonstrates that the crypto space remains a live laboratory for questions about trust, safeguards, and the potential for new financial instruments to emerge around BTC.
Viewed in this light, Johnson’s critique serves as a catalyst for a wider conversation about what Bitcoin is and what it is not — a debate that will likely persist as policymakers, investors, and developers navigate the evolving landscape of digital money and decentralized finance.
What to watch next
- Response from policymakers and financial regulators in the UK and abroad regarding crypto classification and consumer protections.
- Continued commentary from crypto executives and thought leaders about Bitcoin’s role in value storage, payments, and macro hedging.
- Monitoring milestones like Bitcoin’s network expansion and on-chain activity, including references to the network’s historical supply milestones.
- Public and media discussions comparing traditional assets and collectibles with decentralized digital assets to gauge shifts in narrative and investor sentiment.
Sources & verification
- Johnson, Boris. Daily Mail op-ed on Bitcoin and Ponzi narratives: https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-15643681/BORIS-JOHNSON-bitcoin-ponzi-scheme.html
- Bitcoin’s fundamental properties explained: https://cointelegraph.com/learn/articles/what-is-bitcoin-a-beginners-guide-to-the-worlds-first-cryptocurrency
- Bitcoin price reference and market context: https://cointelegraph.com/bitcoin-price
- Bitcoin’s 20 millionth coin milestone coverage: https://cointelegraph.com/news/bitcoin-mined-20-million-executives-speculate-1-million-left
- Logan Paul’s Pokémon card record article: https://cointelegraph.com/news/logan-paul-sells-pokemon-card-record-16-million
Bitcoin’s battle of narratives: Johnson vs. the proponents
Crypto World
XRP Price Prediction Points to $8.6 Rally as Ripple Expands Stablecoin Stack, but Pepeto’s Listing Math Could Erase These Returns Before XRP Even Moves
Ripple just expanded its stablecoin payment infrastructure for banks and fintech companies across the globe, and the XRP price prediction is getting louder. Historical data shows XRP trading in a descending channel from its $3.6 peak, and analysts project a potential rally to $8.6 by Q4 2026 if the pattern breaks.
That sounds impressive until you compare it to listing math. An XRP move from $1.39 to $8.6 delivers roughly a 6x. The presale entry about to list delivers multiples that make 6x look like a savings account. This article covers the XRP outlook and the presale where the listing erases this price forever.
Ripple expanded its stablecoin based payment platform to help banks and fintech companies move money faster reducing foreign reserve requirements according to Coinedition. The upgrade adds stablecoin collection, custody, conversion, and payout across Ripple’s global network.
Separately, historical data reveals XRP’s descending channel from the $3.6 July peak could resolve in a rally to $8.6 between September and December 2026. The XRP forecast benefits from expanding infrastructure, but the listing math at presale pricing makes even a 6x XRP rally look modest.
XRP Price Prediction Targets $8.6, but This Presale Listing Makes Those Returns Look Ordinary
Pepeto: The Listing Erases This Entry Forever and the Clock Is Running Out
The timing on this presale is closing faster than most people realize. While the XRP forecast debates $8.6 by December, Pepeto sits at a fraction of a cent with a listing approaching that will erase this entry permanently. The moment trading begins, this price ceases to exist and the open market decides what an exchange token backed by real infrastructure is actually worth.
That’s how every exchange token listing in crypto history has worked. The presale price is the entry. The listing is the repricing. The gap between those numbers is where wealth gets created, and Pepeto’s gap shrinks with every round that fills.
The cofounder who built Pepe to $7 billion is building the exchange underneath. PepetoSwap handles cross chain swaps with zero fees, a bridge moves assets between networks that normally can’t communicate, and risk scoring checks every token’s safety before you buy. These tools generate the volume that makes exchange tokens valuable after listing, and the Binance listing approaches with every stage that closes.
Staking at 199% APY compounds positions for the wallets already inside, and the listing itself transforms presale entries into open market positions at whatever price the volume demands. Right now, two types of people are reading this. The ones who’ll get into Pepeto before the listing erases this entry, and the ones who’ll look back at this article and wish they’d acted when the math was still in their favor.
XRP Price Prediction: $1.39 in Descending Channel With $8.6 Target if Pattern Breaks
XRP trades near $1.39 according to CoinMarketCap within a descending channel from the $3.6 July 2025 peak, down 23.8% year to date. Historical data suggests a potential rally to $8.6 between September and December 2026 if the channel resolves bullishly.
Seven spot XRP ETFs hold $1.06 billion in total assets, and institutional access continues expanding. But even the most bullish XRP forecast delivers a 6x from here, respectable for a large cap but not the kind of return that changes financial trajectories.
BNB: $656 Exchange Token King but Ground Floor Entry Disappeared Years Ago
BNB trades near $656, proving exchange tokens outperform every cycle. Binance’s ecosystem keeps expanding with over $130 billion in BlackRock crypto products flowing through according to Fintechweekly.
But the ground floor that created BNB millionaires vanished at $0.15. The next BNB sits at presale pricing right now.
XRP Price Prediction Requires Months of Waiting, but This Listing Changes Everything Now
Here’s what regret looks like in crypto: reading about an opportunity, understanding the math, and choosing to wait while others act. XRP’s channel could take months to resolve. The Pepeto listing won’t wait that long.
The cofounder who built $7 billion in demand is building again, the community keeps growing, and the moment trading goes live this price disappears permanently. Visit the Pepeto official website and act while the entry that the listing erases is still available.
Click To Visit Pepeto Website To Enter The Presale
FAQs
What is the XRP forecast for Q4 2026?
The xrp price prediction targets $8.6 by Q4 2026 based on historical channel data, a 6x from current levels, while presale listings like Pepeto offer listing math that operates on a different scale.
How does Ripple’s stablecoin expansion affect the XRP forecast?
Ripple’s stablecoin expansion supports institutional adoption and the bullish XRP forecast, but returns remain limited by XRP’s large cap structure.
Where can I find presale entries with better returns than XRP?
Pepeto offers exchange infrastructure at presale pricing with listing math that dwarfs large cap returns. Visit the Pepeto official website before the listing erases this entry.
Disclaimer: This is a Press Release provided by a third party who is responsible for the content. Please conduct your own research before taking any action based on the content.
TLDR:
- Over 240,000 ETH worth approximately $480M has been accumulated by whales since early March 2025.
- BlackRock’s ETHB ETF on Nasdaq lets institutions earn yield by staking 70–95% of their ETH holdings.
- Rising Ethereum active addresses during a price decline mirror historical accumulation patterns seen since 2022.
- Shrinking ETH exchange supply combined with whale buying could trigger a supply squeeze in the coming weeks.
ETH whale accumulation has reached unprecedented levels as BlackRock’s iShares Staked Ethereum Trust ETF begins trading on Nasdaq.
Over 240,000 ETH, worth approximately $480 million, has been stacked since early March. The price of ETH remains range-bound between $1,900 and $2,150.
Network activity data also points to growing bullish momentum. Active addresses on the Ethereum network have risen sharply.
This signals that accumulation is actively driving on-chain engagement amid the current price stagnation.
Whales and Institutions Drive ETH Demand
Crypto analyst CryptosRus flagged the trend on social media, noting that whales are stacking ETH at a remarkable rate.
The accumulation of over 240,000 ETH since early March has drawn broad market attention. Despite this sustained buying pressure, the ETH price has not yet broken out of its current range.
BlackRock’s iShares Staked Ethereum Trust ETF now trades under the ticker ETHB on Nasdaq. This product has introduced a fresh layer of institutional demand into the ETH market.
The ETF allows institutions to gain direct exposure to ETH while staking between 70% and 95% of holdings for yield. It gives institutional participants both price exposure and a passive income stream at once.
In the early days of trading, approximately $2.2 million flowed into the ETF. While that figure remains modest, the product’s structure could attract larger capital allocations over time.
The yield component makes this product more attractive than a standard spot ETF. Institutional participation in new instruments like this typically accelerates after an initial quiet period.
Shrinking exchange supply is another factor that warrants close attention. As more ETH moves off exchanges into staking or cold storage, available selling pressure decreases.
Combined with ongoing whale activity, this dynamic could produce a supply squeeze if demand continues to build at its current pace.
On-Chain Data Supports the Accumulation Thesis
Crypto analyst CW8900 noted that active Ethereum addresses have risen sharply despite the recent price decline. This trend of rising network activity during a price dip has been consistently observed near Ethereum market bottoms since 2022. The data indicates that participants are using the low-price window to accumulate ETH.
Moreover, the analyst pointed out that activity increased most sharply immediately after the latest price decline. This timing closely mirrors behavior seen during prior Ethereum accumulation phases.
Source: Cryptoquant
It adds weight to the view that experienced market participants are actively positioning at current price levels.
The divergence between price action and network activity is a well-tracked indicator in on-chain analysis. When prices decline while active addresses rise, it often reflects growing engagement from new or returning market participants. This behavior has historically preceded broader market recoveries across past Ethereum market cycles.
That said, price confirmation has not yet arrived. ETH continues to trade within the established range, and no breakout has materialized.
Market participants are closely watching whether this accumulation trend will eventually translate into a sustained price move higher.
Political Pivot: Kazakhstan votes on unicameral shift and vice president post
Onyeka Urges Coventry to Bounce Back After Southampton Defeat
This Printed Zipper Repair Requires No Unsewing
-
Tech4 days agoA 1,300-Pound NASA Spacecraft To Re-Enter Earth’s Atmosphere
-
News Videos6 days ago10th Algebra | Financial Planning | Question Bank Solution | Board Exam 2026
-
Crypto World24 hours agoHYPE Token Enters Net Deflation as HyperCore Buybacks Outpace Staking Rewards
-
Business4 days agoExxonMobil seeks to move corporate registration from New Jersey to Texas
-
Crypto World6 days agoParadigm, a16z, Winklevoss Capital, Balaji Srinivasan among investors in ZODL
-
Fashion1 day agoWeekend Open Thread: Addict Lip Glow
-
Tech4 days agoChatGPT will now generate interactive visuals to help you with math and science concepts
-
Sports13 hours ago
Why Duke and Michigan Are Dead Even Entering Selection Sunday
-
Sports7 days agoBraveheart Lakshya downs Lai in epic battle to enter All England Open final | Other Sports News
-
NewsBeat3 days agoResidents reaction as Shildon murder probe enters second day
-
Business6 days agoSearch for Nancy Guthrie Enters 37th Day as FBI Probes Wi-Fi Jammer Theory
-
Business4 days agoSearch Enters Sixth Week With New Leads in Tucson Abduction Case
-
NewsBeat5 days agoPagazzi Lighting enters administration as 70 jobs lost and 11 stores close across Scotland
-
Tech6 days agoDespite challenges, Ireland sixth in EU for board gender diversity
-
Business15 hours agoUS Airports Launch Donation Drives for Unpaid TSA Workers as Partial Government Shutdown Enters Fifth Week
-
NewsBeat4 days agoI Entered The Manosphere. Nothing Could Prepare Me For What I Found.
-
Crypto World10 hours ago
Coinbase and Bybit in Investment Talks: Could Bybit Finally Enter the US Crypto Market?
-
Business5 days agoSearch Enters 39th Day with FBI Tip Line Developments and No Major Breakthroughs
-
Sports6 days agoSkateboarding World Championships: Britain’s Sky Brown wins park gold
-
Business16 hours agoCountry star Brantley Gilbert enters growing non-alcoholic beer market
