Aster has activated AOS-2, requiring projects to stake 1 million ASTER for four years before validators can approve a new perpetual market.

AOS-2 opens Aster perpetual listings to applicants

Aster said in an Aug. 11 X post that the standard replaces private listing talks with a public process built around token staking, validator votes, and on-chain records.

Under AOS-2, a project must first meet Aster’s eligibility conditions and stake 1 million ASTER before it can submit a perpetual market proposal. The tokens remain locked for four years, and the applicant cannot leave the program early once the lock begins.

Eligible proposals then move to an on-chain validator vote. Approval does not immediately activate trading because Aster’s risk-control team must first configure the contract and assign the market’s operating parameters.

Once that process is complete, Aster plans to list the perpetual contract on T+1, meaning the next day after the required market setup. The announcement does not state whether T+1 refers to a calendar day or a business day.

A rejected application does not lose its deposit. According to the AOS-2 rules, Aster will return the full 1 million ASTER stake if validators vote against the listing. The announcement does not say how long the voting period lasts, what share of validator support is needed, or when the returned tokens become available.

The four-year lock therefore applies to successful applicants rather than serving as a listing fee. Aster did not disclose whether the locked tokens earn staking rewards, carry governance rights beyond the listing vote, or become subject to penalties if a listed project later fails to meet platform rules.

Aster keeps control of leverage and market risk

Although validators decide whether a proposed market can proceed, Aster’s risk-control system retains authority over leverage and other contract settings. The platform said those rules will be public and each decision will be recorded on-chain.

Risk settings are central to a perpetual contract because traders can maintain leveraged long or short positions without an expiration date. The exchange must set parameters covering margin requirements, liquidation levels, and the amount of leverage available, although Aster’s announcement did not list the exact factors its team will use.

The model divides responsibility between validators and the platform. Token holders participating in validation decide whether an eligible market should receive approval, while Aster determines how the contract will operate once it reaches the listing stage.

AOS-2 follows AOS-1, which opened spot-token listings to projects meeting published conditions. The latest standard applies the same public-entry approach to perpetual contracts, a market where Aster said listings have traditionally depended on private negotiations between projects and exchanges.

Aster has already used direct partnerships to add perpetual markets. In April, crypto.news reported its GENIUS listing, which made the exchange the first decentralized venue to offer a GENIUS perpetual contract.

The April arrangement also included a $200,000 ASTER trading reward pool and followed Aster’s partnership with the Genius trading platform. Under AOS-2, eligible projects now have a stated route to apply without depending solely on a privately arranged partnership.

AOS-2 gives ASTER another staking function

Requiring 1 million ASTER for every application adds a new use for the platform’s native token. The size of the requirement also means the cost of applying will change with ASTER’s market price, even though the number of tokens remains fixed.

Aster has not stated whether applicants may delegate the stake, obtain the tokens through third parties or submit a joint application. Its Aug. 11 announcement also did not disclose whether multiple proposals from the same organization would each require a separate 1 million-token lock.

The requirement arrives after Aster connected ASTER more closely to platform revenue. On June 17, the protocol said it would use 99% of daily fees for open-market token purchases and remove an equal amount from its reserves.

As previously covered on crypto.news, Aster also planned to reduce total supply from 8 billion to 3 billion ASTER through reserve burns. Purchased tokens were assigned to its Loyalty Rewards program, where distribution goes to veASTER holders according to their lock-weighted participation.

Aster separately imposed a 50,000 USDT charge for permissionless spot listings, with the proceeds directed toward ASTER purchases and rewards for stakers. AOS-2 uses a different structure because the perpetual-market deposit is returned when validators reject a proposal and remains locked when the application succeeds.

The staking rule comes as decentralized perpetual exchanges take a larger share of derivatives activity. CoinGecko’s 2026 Crypto Perpetuals Report found that perp DEXs increased their share of open interest from 3.6% in early 2025 to 13.5% in early 2026, according to coverage published in May.

CoinGecko also reported that top perp DEX open interest rose from $1.19 billion at the start of 2024 to $14.99 billion by the end of January 2026. Centralized exchanges still controlled most activity, with Binance and OKX accounting for 33% and 15% of the market during the first four months of 2026.

U.S. users face separate derivatives rules

AOS-2 changes how markets reach Aster, but it does not, by itself, decide who may legally trade the resulting contracts. Access for U.S. residents depends on federal derivatives rules and the platform’s geographic restrictions.

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission regulates U.S. commodity futures, options, and swaps through registered entities, including designated contract markets and derivatives clearing organizations. The agency has also brought cases against offshore platforms accused of offering leveraged crypto derivatives to U.S. customers without registration.

In May 2026, the CFTC approved a Bitcoin perpetual futures contract for listing on a registered U.S. exchange and issued staff advisories covering continuous trading, clearing, and settlement, according to an updated CFTC regulation guide. The agency’s action concerned a regulated domestic product and did not provide general approval for U.S. customers to use offshore perpetual platforms.

Aster’s Aug. 11 announcement did not address U.S. availability, registration with the CFTC, or country-level access rules for markets approved through AOS-2. It also did not identify the assets that may qualify, publish an initial list of applicants, or disclose when the first validator vote will begin.

Aster said AOS-3 will follow AOS-2, but the exchange has not announced what the next standard will cover or when its rules will take effect.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has outlined a plan to take control of the Consolidated Audit Trail, replace its funding model, and prepare a transition that could run through late 2027.

The SEC said in an Aug. 10 letter from Chair Paul Atkins to CAT Operating Committee Chair Robert Walley that staff must prepare recommendations for changing how the market surveillance system is funded, governed, and operated.

Under the plan, the agency would examine whether CAT expenses could be covered through congressional appropriations or transaction fees collected under Section 31 of the Securities Exchange Act. Staff will also calculate what personnel, technology, and other internal resources the SEC would need to manage the system.

A separate rulemaking proposal could remove Rule 613 of the Regulation National Market System, the provision that led to CAT’s creation. Rescinding the rule would not eliminate the tracking system or end reporting by market firms.

Instead, Atkins asked staff to consider requiring stock exchanges, the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, and broker-dealers to send the same CAT data directly to the SEC or an agency-appointed operator. Existing infrastructure and technical reporting standards would remain in use, limiting disruption during the changeover.

SEC takeover would replace CAT’s current governance model

CAT records information about orders and trades across U.S. equity and options markets, giving regulators a single system for examining market activity. Rule 613, adopted in 2012, required national securities exchanges and FINRA to submit a plan for creating and maintaining the database.

Atkins said the current arrangement still has “persistent cost, governance, and funding issues,” even after the SEC reduced the system’s annual operating expenses and narrowed its data collection.

The agency achieved some of those reductions through targeted regulatory exemptions and amendments to the CAT NMS Plan, according to the letter. It also ended the requirement to report personally identifiable information to the system, reducing the amount of sensitive investor data entering the database.

Despite the changes, Atkins said the existing structure requires additional work because CAT remains managed under a joint national market system plan involving exchanges and FINRA. The proposed model would place responsibility more directly with the federal regulator that uses the data for market oversight.

“One theme emerges from the comment file: investors and market participants want the Commission to take more responsibility for managing and funding this project,” Atkins wrote.

His instruction does not transfer control immediately. SEC staff must first prepare recommendations, assess agency resources, and draft a proposal for the commission to consider. Any repeal of Rule 613 and replacement reporting requirements would need to pass through the federal rulemaking process before taking effect.

Hundreds of comments informed the CAT reform plan

The latest instructions follow an SEC concept release issued on April 16, which requested public feedback on CAT and other audit trails used to oversee U.S. securities markets.

According to Atkins, the commission received hundreds of responses, and staff reviewed them after the comment period closed. The feedback covered the system’s management, costs, data requirements, funding, and the role the SEC should play.

Among the options raised during that review was bringing CAT expenses into the SEC budget. Under such an arrangement, Congress would examine the spending through the appropriations process, while Section 31 transaction fees could provide another source of money.

Section 31 authorizes the SEC to collect fees on certain securities transactions. The agency adjusts those fees periodically based on the amount it must collect and the expected volume of covered transactions.

Atkins has asked staff to explore the option rather than adopt it, meaning the letter does not establish a replacement funding formula or determine how costs would be allocated among market participants. Congressional appropriations would also involve lawmakers because the SEC cannot approve its own federal budget.

The SEC expects several parts of the work to proceed at the same time. Since the agency must examine funding, prepare rules, and build its capacity to run CAT, Atkins said the handover would probably not finish before late 2027.

Market participants will have opportunities to comment as the process advances, according to the letter. Atkins said the agency intends to consult investors and firms both while developing the changes and after assuming responsibility, provided the commission approves the required rules.

CAT reform joins an SEC review of U.S. market rules

The CAT instructions form part of an active review of rules governing American securities trading, including provisions that could affect blockchain-based versions of U.S. stocks.

In June, the commission proposed rescinding Rules 611 and 610(e) of Regulation NMS. Rule 611 generally prevents a trading venue from executing a stock order at a worse price when another venue displays a better protected quote, while Rule 610(e) addresses locked and crossed quotations.

As crypto.news reported, Atkins said the proposal was intended to simplify equity market structure and reduce costs after two decades under Rule 611. The proposal entered the public comment process and did not change the rules immediately.

Galaxy Digital research head Alex Thorn said automated market makers may struggle to comply with Rule 611 because decentralized liquidity pools execute trades through bonding curves and cannot check every U.S. exchange before completing each swap. Thorn’s assessment concerned a possible obstacle for tokenized stocks and did not mean the SEC proposal had authorized their onchain trading.

CAT’s future could matter to firms offering tokenized securities because regulated trading venues and broker-dealers would still have federal reporting duties under the structure Atkins described. The proposed repeal of Rule 613 would change the legal and governance framework, but exchanges, FINRA, and broker-dealers would continue submitting transaction data through CAT’s existing specifications.

SEC rulemaking extends to crypto assets and broker-dealers

Digital-asset regulation is also moving through separate SEC projects. In July, crypto.news covered three proposals in the agency’s 2026 regulatory agenda involving crypto offerings, broker-dealers, and market structure.

One project considers exemptions and safe harbors for crypto asset offerings. Another examines how broker-dealer financial responsibility and recordkeeping requirements should apply to digital assets, including possible amendments to Rules 15c3-1, 15c3-3, 17a-3, and 17a-4.

The third project concerns crypto trading on national securities exchanges and alternative trading systems. Unlike the CAT plan, the projects focus on how digital assets could be issued, held, and traded within SEC-regulated markets.

Atkins also said in July that the SEC was prepared to use its existing authority if Congress did not complete the CLARITY Act. However, earlier reporting noted that agency rulemaking cannot independently grant the Commodity Futures Trading Commission nationwide authority over digital commodity spot markets.

The CAT plan does not depend on the CLARITY Act and deals with surveillance of securities orders and trades under the SEC’s existing market mandate. Any rule proposed by staff would still require commission consideration, publication for public comment, and another decision before becoming final.

According to Atkins, the SEC plans to issue regular public updates as staff develops the restructuring. The agency will also seek input from market participants during implementation and after any approved transfer of CAT governance.

Bitcoin slipped in early U.S. trading on Tuesday as investors rotated toward gold, pushing the precious metal to fresh multi-week highs. The move comes as analysts continue to watch whether BTC’s historically observed relationship with gold—often treated as a proxy for “digital gold”—is still holding during periods of heightened macro uncertainty.

Gold rose to $4,435 per ounce, its highest level since June 5, while BTC/USD fell back below $64,000 after failing to sustain a low-timeframe rebound. The broader backdrop included renewed geopolitical risk and firmer oil prices, both of which tend to influence safe-haven demand and risk appetite across asset classes.

Key takeaways

• Gold hit $4,435/oz (highest since June 5), while BTC slipped below $64,000 as “safe haven” interest intensified.
• Analysts point to a still-active positive correlation between Bitcoin and gold on a 90-day rolling basis.
• BTC price action remains capped near the $66,000 area, where a 50-month EMA sits around $65,827 on the daily chart.
• The next major catalyst for risk assets is the U.S. CPI report for July, with traders historically bracing for volatility into inflation releases.

Gold’s rally puts Bitcoin on the sidelines

According to TradingView data cited in the report, BTC/USD ended Monday down about 1.5%. The decline was tied to concerns over the U.S.–Iran conflict and a renewed standoff involving the reopening of the Strait of Hormuz oil route. In parallel, U.S. equities largely traded sideways while oil prices surged, with a fresh move upward noted alongside earlier coverage that described oil nearing a 5% gain on Hormuz-related disappointment.

Against that macro backdrop, gold demand strengthened further. The report highlights gold’s jump to $4,435 per ounce, and references earlier focus on Chinese buying for the metal, already a theme in August. When gold performs strongly during uncertain geopolitical conditions, it can draw incremental capital away from risk assets—at least in the short term—creating cross-asset tension for Bitcoin price.

Retail flows into gold ETFs spotlight the “safe haven” shift

A key detail in the story is where the buying is coming from. The report cites data from The Kobeissi Letter indicating that retail investors have been returning to gold exchange-traded products. Specifically, NYSE ARCA-traded SPDR Gold Shares (GLD) reportedly attracted daily retail inflows of $50 million on Aug. 5, the highest single-day figure since mid-March for the largest U.S. physical gold-backed ETF.

The same cited dataset places Aug. 5 total GLD inflows at $637 million, while U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs saw a combined inflow of $244.4 million that day. Kobeissi Letter framed the takeaway on X by noting that, through August, investors had added about $1.4 billion to GLD and that gold appetite appeared to have returned.

For Bitcoin investors, the implication is twofold. First, even if Bitcoin can trade like “digital gold,” the immediate flow of funds may still favor conventional safe havens when retail participation in gold ETFs re-accelerates. Second, because retail is often a late-cycle driver of positioning, the re-emergence of retail demand in gold can signal that investors are not yet fully rotating from protection into risk—or at least not doing so in a way that benefits BTC in the same session.

Correlation with gold remains, but BTC’s technical ceiling is unchanged

Even with gold stealing attention, the report argues that Bitcoin’s linkage to gold hasn’t disappeared. Using 90-day rolling metrics presented by on-chain analytics firm CryptoQuant, it states that Bitcoin’s correlation to gold remains positive on that timeframe. CryptoQuant CEO Ki Young Ju also commented on X that the Bitcoin–gold correlation is back to “digital-gold-era levels,” underscoring that the relationship has re-formed after periods when it weakened.

However, correlation alone does not guarantee upside timing. The article points to a separate, more immediate factor: BTC’s technical resistance on lower timeframes. It notes that BTC/USD has been contained by a long-term trend reference point—the 50-month exponential moving average (EMA) at $65,827. Since the beginning of June, the pair has reportedly managed only three daily closes above the 50-month EMA, suggesting a persistent barrier that sellers and leveraged traders are watching.

Range behavior appears to be driving sentiment among short-term market participants. The report cites trader and analyst Michaël van de Poppe saying BTC remains “stuck in this range,” interpreting the recent dip as potentially a liquidity grab from leveraged longs. He also indicated that a bounce toward $64,500 could help prevent any continuation of the sell-off cascade, while a break above $65,800 could raise the odds of a move toward $73,000.

CPI in focus as Bitcoin trades into the next macro test

Wednesday’s U.S. Consumer Price Index (CPI) print for July is the next major volatility trigger highlighted in the report. The piece notes that crypto markets have historically tended to weaken into major U.S. inflation data releases, while also pointing to an earlier example: July’s softer inflation reading reportedly helped spark daily gains of more than 4% in Bitcoin when traders reacted to the change in expectations.

For traders, this sets up a familiar pattern. If CPI comes in hot, markets can reprice rate expectations, often weighing on high-duration assets like BTC. If CPI surprises softer, it can provide the kind of risk-on impulse that supports a breakout attempt—especially if BTC’s resistance zone near $65,800–$66,000 eventually gives way.

As gold remains elevated and retail ETF inflows appear to support the metal’s safe-haven bid, investors will likely keep a close eye on whether Bitcoin can convert its gold correlation into actual upside—particularly after the CPI print. The next question is straightforward: does BTC break and hold above the $65,800–$66,000 region, or does the macro shock steer flows further toward conventional havens like gold?

Nasdaq has agreed to acquire LeveL Markets, a major US alternative trading system (ATS), as the exchange operator moves deeper into tokenized and “always-on” trading infrastructure. The deal combines Nasdaq’s push for programmable market structures with LeveL’s institutional execution network, positioning the assets under Nasdaq’s Digital Liquidity Networks unit.

Under the terms announced Tuesday, LeveL Markets will keep operating as a FINRA-regulated ATS with its own management team after the acquisition. Financial details were not disclosed, and the transaction remains subject to regulatory approval.

Key takeaways

• Nasdaq will add LeveL Markets’ institutional execution network to its Digital Liquidity Networks initiative focused on tokenization and always-on trading.
• LeveL will remain FINRA-regulated as an ATS, preserving its regulatory status and management structure post-acquisition.
• The agreement follows Nasdaq’s earlier investment in LeveL (made in 2021) and builds on LeveL’s growth in multi-symbol execution.
• Nasdaq’s acquisition aligns with broader industry moves toward longer trading hours and tokenized equity settlement pilots.

Why Nasdaq wants LeveL Markets

Nasdaq says LeveL Markets handles “hundreds of millions” of shares daily and supports more than 2,500 buy- and sell-side clients. The venue operates across more than 7,000 symbols each day, and Nasdaq credits LeveL’s expansion to increased institutional usage—stating it serves more than 300 institutional buy-side firms and that average daily trading volume rose by 56% in 2025.

The acquisition matters for traders and liquidity providers because ATS infrastructure often determines how quickly and efficiently orders are routed and executed across market participants. By folding LeveL into a dedicated digital unit, Nasdaq is effectively tying execution capacity to its larger ambition: building market plumbing that can support tokenization, programmable settlement, and a more continuous trading experience.

LeveL stays an ATS—at least for now

Nasdaq emphasized that LeveL Markets will continue to operate as a FINRA-regulated ATS following the acquisition. It will also keep its own management team, suggesting Nasdaq wants to preserve operational continuity while integrating the network into its broader digital strategy.

Nasdaq will run the combined effort within its Digital Liquidity Networks unit, led by Roland Chai. Nasdaq also noted that Chai has been overseeing its digital assets strategy since earlier this year, placing tokenization and next-generation market design inside a single execution-focused organization.

While financial terms were not shared, the transaction’s stated dependency on regulatory approval is important. Because ATS operations and cross-market integration can raise oversight questions, the final structure will likely determine how quickly both companies can translate their combined capabilities into live tokenized or extended-hour execution use cases.

Nasdaq’s tokenized markets roadmap and the SEC’s moving target

Nasdaq’s interest in LeveL arrives alongside multiple regulatory and product efforts aimed at tokenized equities and longer trading sessions.

According to filings and updates cited by Nasdaq, the exchange first proposed a framework allowing tokenized securities to trade on its exchange in September 2025. A January 2026 SEC filing updating the proposal states that eligible stocks and exchange-traded products could be traded in tokenized form alongside traditional shares, with Depository Trust Company handling tokenization and blockchain-based settlement through a three-year pilot program. (These details are based on SEC documents referenced in the announcement.)

Nasdaq also pointed to a March partnership effort involving Payward (which operates as Kraken), along with tokenization firm Backed, to develop infrastructure intended to link traditional equities markets with blockchain networks.

Beyond Nasdaq, other market operators are reportedly pursuing similar shifts. Cointelegraph earlier noted that Cboe and the London Stock Exchange are pursuing plans for longer trading hours, while the New York Stock Exchange is developing a separate platform for 24/7 trading and onchain settlement of tokenized securities. Those parallel initiatives suggest competition not only for liquidity but for the technical standards that govern how tokenized assets can be traded and settled.

In July, the SEC announced a September 17 roundtable focused on the shift toward 24-hour US equity trading. Cointelegraph’s coverage of the announcement referenced SEC chair Paul Atkins saying, “We are moving towards a new day – and night – in the US equity markets.” That backdrop reinforces why execution network capacity, not just tokenization software, has become a strategic priority for large venues.

Tokenized equities are growing—now execution networks are the bottleneck

Nasdaq framed the LeveL acquisition as part of its push toward programmable, “always-on” markets. It also tied the strategy to broader growth indicators for tokenized equities.

In the past year, Cointelegraph-referenced data from RWA.xyz suggests tokenized equities expanded more than sixfold. The report indicated distributed value rising to nearly $2.5 billion today from around $381 million in August 2025. While that figure is not a measure of how much of that trading occurs on any single venue, it underscores that the category is moving from concept to measurable capital allocation.

As tokenized equities attract more participants, the operational question becomes whether order routing, market-making participation, settlement mechanics, and compliance workflows can handle continuous or near-continuous trading at scale. That is the gap Nasdaq appears to be trying to close by pairing LeveL’s institutional execution network with its digital infrastructure capabilities.

For investors and market participants, the key issue to watch is not only whether tokenized products can be issued and settled, but whether liquidity can be sustained across trading hours—especially as “always-on” narratives meet the realities of regulation, counterparty risk, and operational readiness.

With the acquisition awaiting regulatory approval, the next milestones to track are the integration plan for LeveL Markets inside Nasdaq’s Digital Liquidity Networks unit and how Nasdaq’s tokenized trading proposal and pilots progress alongside broader SEC engagement on 24-hour equities. Those steps will determine how quickly tokenized markets move from growth in distributed value to reliably distributed liquidity.

Flowdesk has secured a full broker-dealer license in Dubai, allowing its local entity to provide regulated crypto services to qualified and institutional investors in and from the emirate.

Flowdesk completes Dubai’s licensing process

Flowdesk said Tuesday that the Virtual Assets Regulatory Authority had granted the full license to Flowdesk Omega FZE, its Dubai-based entity.

The authorization permits the company to conduct regulated broker-dealer activities for qualified and institutional investors located in Dubai or accessing its services from the emirate. Flowdesk did not say that the approval includes services for general retail customers.

Issued after the company received in-principle approval in June, the license completes VARA’s multi-stage application process. An in-principle approval allows an applicant to prepare its operations and meet outstanding requirements, but it does not provide the same authority as a full operating license.

Flowdesk described itself as a liquidity provider and virtual asset trading technology company serving token issuers and institutional market participants. Its services include trading infrastructure and liquidity management across centralized and decentralized crypto markets.

Guilhem Chaumont, co-founder and CEO of Flowdesk Group, said the company had invested in its governance, compliance systems, risk controls, and institutional trading infrastructure during the licensing process.

“This license allows us to bring that same rigor to how we serve institutional and qualified clients in the region,” Chaumont said.

According to VARA’s public licensing register, the regulator lists companies that hold full virtual asset licenses as well as applicants that have received in-principle approval. Entries identify the activities each company is permitted to conduct, preventing an approval for one service from being treated as permission to offer every type of crypto product.

Dubai license targets institutional crypto trading

Flowdesk’s authorization covers broker-dealer services, one of several activity categories regulated separately under Dubai’s virtual asset rules. VARA also oversees exchange, custody, lending, borrowing, transfer, settlement, investment, and management services through activity-specific requirements.

For institutional clients, a regulated broker-dealer can execute trades, arrange transactions, and source liquidity within the boundaries of its license. The exact services available to a client remain subject to VARA’s rulebooks, the company’s operating terms, and the investor classifications stated in the approval.

Dubai has placed particular controls around products offered to professional market participants. In March, crypto.news reported that VARA had introduced a crypto derivatives framework covering client suitability, leverage, margin, asset segregation, disclosures, and risk management.

Under that framework, VARA can intervene during market stress or suspected misconduct by suspending products, raising margin requirements, ordering liquidations, or requiring stronger controls. The derivatives provisions apply to licensed providers offering exchange services and do not automatically expand the permissions granted under Flowdesk’s broker-dealer authorization.

Other crypto companies have also sought access to Dubai’s institutional market. In May, Kraken’s parent company, Payward, received preliminary VARA approval for broker-dealer, investment, and management services.

Kraken said its planned UAE offering would include dirham funding, over-the-counter trading, margin products, and Kraken Prime access, although the May approval still required the company to complete VARA’s remaining conditions before a full rollout.

Bitpanda obtained a Dubai broker-dealer license in March 2025, giving the company permission to offer its digital asset platform to investors in the UAE. Earlier approvals for Crypto.com, Binance, and BitOasis also covered selected activities rather than providing unrestricted permission across every virtual asset service.

Flowdesk adds Dubai approval after MiCA authorization

The Dubai license follows a separate authorization for Flowdesk Europe under the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation.

France’s Autorité des Marchés Financiers granted Flowdesk Europe Crypto-Asset Service Provider authorization in June. Effective from June 30, the approval allows the French entity to provide regulated crypto services across eligible EU markets through MiCA’s passporting system.

Flowdesk Europe operates under registration number A2026-022, according to the company’s announcement. The authorization was built on its previous status as a digital asset service provider registered with the French regulator.

MiCA created common requirements for crypto service providers across the EU, replacing a system in which national registrations did not always permit cross-border operations. Authorized companies must comply with rules covering governance, capital, client asset protection, disclosures, and complaint handling, depending on the services they offer.

Flowdesk’s Dubai and European permissions apply to separate legal entities and regulatory systems. Flowdesk Europe’s MiCA authorization does not grant operating rights in Dubai, while Flowdesk Omega’s VARA license does not provide access to EU customers under MiCA.

The company has received financial backing from investors, including Coinbase Ventures. Funds managed by BlackRock also provided debt financing as part of a funding package that Flowdesk announced alongside an extension from HV Capital.

U.S. broker-dealer rules follow a separate system

For U.S. readers, Flowdesk’s VARA approval does not authorize the company to operate as an American securities broker-dealer or offer regulated brokerage services to U.S. customers.

Broker-dealers conducting securities business in the United States generally register with the Securities and Exchange Commission and become members of the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority, subject to the activities covered by their registration.

Wintermute followed that route on Aug. 6 when its U.S. affiliate registered with the SEC and FINRA. As crypto.news previously reported, Wintermute USA may trade equities and equity options, act as an authorized participant for exchange-traded products, and self-clear digital asset securities transactions.

Wintermute’s registration is limited to proprietary trading, meaning the entity trades for its own account instead of providing brokerage services to retail or institutional customers. Flowdesk’s Dubai permission has a different scope because VARA specifically authorized services for qualified and institutional investors in and from Dubai.

The SEC has also placed digital asset broker-dealer requirements on its 2026 regulatory agenda. In July, the agency listed possible amendments involving net capital, customer protection, recordkeeping, and financial responsibility requirements as they apply to crypto assets.

The three proposed rulemaking projects also cover crypto offerings and the trading of digital assets through national securities exchanges and alternative trading systems. The SEC had not adopted those proposals as final rules when it added them to the agenda.

Spritehood has sold 42,956 paid NFTs on Robinhood Chain in about 53 minutes, generating nearly $1.28 million for Pudgy Penguins co-founder Cole Villemain.

Spritehood NFT sale reached $1.28 million

The Defiant reported that Villemain launched Spritehood on Aug. 11 after previously being removed from the founding team of Pudgy Penguins, with the paid portion of the sale selling out in less than one hour.

On-chain analyst 0xlaplaced calculated that the mint generated about $1.2829 million, or approximately 684.28 ETH, based on the price of Ether during the sale. The final total came in well above an earlier estimate of roughly $755,000 that circulated before the mint had finished.

According to the analyst’s transaction review, buyers minted 37,430 NFTs for $17 each, producing $636,310 in proceeds. A second group of 5,526 NFTs sold for $117 each, adding another $646,542.

Combined, the two paid tiers generated $1,282,852 from 42,956 tokens. The deploying address had already distributed 1,488 NFTs at no charge through 20 zero-price transactions before the public sale, taking the full reported supply to 44,444 items.

Although the available figures show how many tokens moved at each price, the supplied report did not identify what determined whether a buyer paid $17 or $117. It also did not provide details about any benefits, future access, or other features attached to the collection.

Unverified code limits review of Spritehood’s mint

Spritehood’s contract appears with an “unverified” label on Robinhood Chain’s Blockscout explorer, according to The Defiant. An unverified contract can still operate and record transactions on-chain, but its human-readable source code has not been matched publicly with the deployed bytecode through the explorer.

Without that verification, buyers cannot use Blockscout to inspect the complete source code governing Spritehood’s pricing and distribution process. The label does not establish that the contract is malicious or faulty, though it reduces the information available for independent review through the explorer.

The reported mint figures instead come from an analysis of completed blockchain transactions. Since every paid tier can be calculated separately, the on-chain totals explain why the final proceeds exceeded the figure shared while the sale was still underway.

No information in the supplied report indicates that Robinhood organized, promoted or endorsed the Spritehood launch. Robinhood describes its network as a permissionless Ethereum Layer 2, meaning independent developers can deploy applications and tokens without each project representing an official Robinhood product.

Robinhood Chain has attracted speculative assets

Spritehood arrived about six weeks after Robinhood opened its Layer 2 network to the public. As crypto.news reported in July, Robinhood Chain launched as an Arbitrum-based Ethereum scaling network designed for tokenized stocks and decentralized finance applications.

The mainnet debuted with integrations involving infrastructure providers, including Alchemy, BitGo, and Chainlink. Robinhood also introduced Stock Tokens for eligible users outside the United States, while decentralized exchanges and lending applications supplied on-chain trading functions.

Despite its stated focus on financial assets, permissionless deployment has allowed unrelated tokens and speculative projects to enter the network. A July network review found that memecoin trading had become a major source of early activity, even though Robinhood built the chain around tokenized equities and real-world assets.

The network’s early activity also produced a gap between trading volume and available liquidity. Another July analysis found $570 million in launch-week trading volume against $21.68 million in liquidity, with incentive-backed decentralized finance deposits and speculative tokens driving much of the activity.

More recent figures cited by Bitmine Chairman Tom Lee placed Robinhood Chain’s cumulative decentralized exchange volume near $9 billion. Lee said the chain could expose Robinhood’s 27 million customers to Ethereum-based services, although the figure represented the company’s funded customer base rather than confirmed users of the blockchain.

ETH functions as Robinhood Chain’s native gas token, while network transactions settle through Ethereum. Buyers therefore need ETH to pay transaction fees when directly using applications deployed on the chain, including NFT contracts such as Spritehood.

Pudgy Penguins history follows Villemain’s new mint

Villemain, also known online as ColeThereum, helped create Pudgy Penguins with three other founders in 2021. The original collection contained 8,888 penguin profile-picture NFTs and sold out shortly after launch.

An earlier Pudgy Penguins history published by crypto.news said the initial mint priced the NFTs at about $90 each and generated more than $800,000. The collection later became one of the most recognized projects from the NFT market’s 2021 expansion.

Pudgy Penguins holders voted Villemain out of the founding team in January 2022. The removal followed community allegations that he had misused project funds and failed to deliver on parts of the project’s roadmap.

The claims remained allegations, and the supplied report said Villemain was not prosecuted over them. Entrepreneur Luca Netz later acquired control of the Pudgy Penguins brand in April 2022 for 750 ETH, taking over its leadership after the original team’s removal.

Under its new ownership, the project expanded beyond blockchain collectibles into physical toys, licensing deals, and the PENGU token. Pudgy Penguins has also continued to register periods of high secondary-market activity, including a 247% weekly sales increase to $9.3 million in July 2025.

What the Spritehood sale means for US buyers

Robinhood is a U.S.-listed brokerage, but use of its public blockchain does not mean an NFT carries Robinhood’s approval or the protections attached to a brokerage account. The company’s official disclosures describe Robinhood Chain as a permissionless and separate blockchain from its regulated financial services.

For U.S. buyers, the tax treatment of NFT purchases also differs from buying assets inside a standard brokerage account. The Internal Revenue Service treats digital assets as property, and its guidance requires taxpayers to report taxable gains or losses when cryptocurrency is sold, exchanged or used to acquire property, including an NFT.

Paying for a Spritehood NFT with ETH may therefore create a taxable disposal for a U.S. buyer if the Ether changed in value between acquisition and use. Any later sale of the NFT may produce another reportable gain or loss based on the difference between its cost basis and sale proceeds.

Federal securities treatment depends on the economic facts surrounding an offering rather than the NFT label alone. In 2023, the Securities and Exchange Commission charged Impact Theory over an NFT offering that raised about $30 million, while Stoner Cats 2 agreed to settle charges tied to an $8 million NFT sale.

Neither the supplied report nor the cited on-chain review said a U.S. regulator had examined Spritehood or alleged that its NFTs were securities. The report also did not identify any passive-income rights, revenue-sharing terms, or promises of returns attached to the collection.

Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee has identified inflation above the Federal Reserve’s 2% target as the main U.S. economic problem while officials debate whether to raise rates from 3.50%–3.75%.

Why Goolsbee sees inflation as the main challenge

Wired released Goolsbee’s interview on Aug. 11 after recording the discussion on June 22, with the Chicago Fed president arguing that fast-rising prices remain more damaging than current labor-market conditions.

“The biggest problem facing our economy right now is not the collapse of industry and the collapse of jobs; it’s that the prices have been rising too fast,” Goolsbee said. “We got an inflation problem and people hate inflation.”

While assessing employment, Goolsbee pointed to the unemployment rate, hiring and layoffs as the three main indicators shaping his view. He described the labor market as “stable, without being good,” indicating that conditions have weakened without showing the type of collapse that would make employment the central bank’s most urgent concern.

The Chicago Fed president did not provide guidance on whether he would support an increase at the Federal Open Market Committee’s Sept. 15–16 meeting. Goolsbee does not vote on monetary policy this year, although his comments add to the public debate among regional Fed presidents and members of the Board of Governors.

Inflation has remained above the central bank’s 2% goal despite periods of slower monthly price growth. The June consumer price index fell 0.4% from May, while annual inflation eased to 3.5% from 4.2%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Core CPI, which removes food and energy, was unchanged for the month and increased 2.6% from a year earlier.

Fed rate hike support has divided policymakers

At its July 28–29 meeting, the Federal Reserve maintained rates within a target range of 3.50%–3.75% by a 9–3 vote. Beth Hammack, Neel Kashkari, and Lorie Logan dissented because they preferred a 25-basis-point increase.

Minneapolis Fed President Kashkari has since argued that the central bank should begin raising rates as elevated inflation and the U.S.-Iran conflict complicate the policy outlook. The closure of the Strait of Hormuz has restricted a route that normally carries about one-fifth of global oil and gas supplies, according to Reuters.

Kashkari said uncertainty around the conflict made it difficult for the Fed to promise rate cuts or provide firm guidance. During an earlier CBS interview, he said policymakers “might have to go the other direction” if the war and resulting energy shock kept inflation elevated.

The Minneapolis Fed president also warned that there was no assurance that shipping through Hormuz would return to normal quickly. Higher oil costs can reach American households through gasoline prices, while businesses may face increased transport and production expenses.

St. Louis Fed President Alberto Musalem has also backed tighter policy, arguing that an early and gradual response would be less disruptive than waiting until inflation becomes more firmly established. San Francisco Fed President Mary Daly supported the July decision to leave rates unchanged, saying the central bank needed more evidence to determine whether the energy-driven increase would prove temporary or persistent.

Meanwhile, Goolsbee’s comments place him closer to the Fed’s inflation-focused camp without confirming how he would approach the next policy decision. His description of employment as stable separates current conditions from a severe labor downturn, even though the latest payroll figures showed a notable loss of momentum.

Weak jobs data has reduced September hike expectations

The U.S. economy lost 23,000 nonfarm payroll positions in July, while the unemployment rate remained near 4.1%, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. May and June payroll estimates were also reduced by a combined 103,000 jobs, while average hourly earnings increased 3.2% from a year earlier.

As crypto.news reported in its July payroll coverage, Bitcoin initially gained almost 2% and traded near $65,200 after the report reduced expectations of an immediate rate increase. Prediction-market traders raised the probability that the Fed would leave rates unchanged in September to 66%, up from about 50% one day earlier.

Expectations have continued to vary across contracts. The supplied prediction-market data placed the probability of no September change at 59%, while a separate contract gave a rate increase before the end of 2026 the same probability. Since the contracts cover different time periods, the figures do not represent conflicting outcomes for the same FOMC meeting.

Iggy Ioppe, chief investment officer at Theo, previously told crypto.news that one weak employment report would not necessarily overcome the inflation concerns created by energy prices and shipping disruptions.

“A softer jobs number does not automatically close that gap,” Ioppe said. “Risk assets, including Bitcoin, retain the medium-term support that comes from continued inaction, but the same geopolitical energy risk that is keeping the Fed cautious also continues to limit upside.”

For U.S. crypto investors, the rate decision can affect Treasury yields, the dollar and demand for assets that do not pay interest. Higher rates raise the returns available from lower-risk government debt, while tighter financial conditions can reduce the amount of capital investors allocate to Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

July CPI has become the next test for Bitcoin

The Bureau of Labor Statistics is scheduled to release July CPI at 8:30 a.m. ET on Aug. 12. Economists surveyed by Reuters expect headline inflation to slow from 3.5% to 3.4% annually, with core inflation easing from 2.6% to 2.5%.

A recent CPI preview reported that expectations for a September rate increase had fallen to 44% from 67% one week earlier after the weak payroll numbers. The U.S. 10-year Treasury yield was trading near 4.66%, while Bitcoin had briefly moved above $65,000 before failing to establish the level as support.

Selling returned on Aug. 11 as crude oil rose and negotiations over Hormuz lost momentum. Bitcoin dropped about 2% to $63,780 before attempting an intraday recovery, while Ether and XRP also came under pressure. U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $144.6 million in net withdrawals on Aug. 10, ending five consecutive sessions of inflows, according to SoSoValue data cited in Bitcoin’s latest decline.

Iranian official Mohsen Rezaei said the Strait of Hormuz would remain closed unless the United States met Tehran’s conditions, which included ending the war and unfreezing Iranian assets held abroad. His statement followed comments from Pakistan’s defense minister that Washington and Tehran were close to an arrangement despite fresh attacks on maritime traffic.