Crypto World
EU Parliament Approves ‘Chat Control,’ Exempts E2EE Until 2028
The European Parliament has voted to advance parts of the EU’s “chat control” regime, allowing tech companies to scan messages for child sexual abuse material until 2028. The measure—widely criticized by privacy and cryptography advocates—was set to expire in April, forcing lawmakers to decide whether to extend it.
While a majority backed the plan, the outcome was narrowly shaped by parliamentary procedure. According to HowTheyVote, 276 lawmakers supported the extension to stop it being rejected, while 314 voted against extending it. With the rejection threshold requiring 361 votes, the regulation moved forward after failing to secure enough opposition.
Key takeaways
- The Parliament’s vote revives the expired “Chat Control 1.0” framework, with scanning permitted until 2028.
- A carve-out was approved for communications where end-to-end encryption is used or will be used, excluding them from the rules in the relevant context.
- Because the regulation now goes to the EU Council, implementation ultimately depends on ministers from member states.
- Negotiations on a permanent “Chat Control 2.0” are set to resume in September, keeping encryption and scanning scope at the center of the fight.
What the Parliament approved—and what it tried to limit
EU lawmakers on Thursday largely voted against extending the “chat control” regulation, often described by critics as a form of mass surveillance. The mechanism allows certain forms of message scanning aimed at detecting child sexual abuse material. Supporters argue that the objective is essential for protecting children and disrupting the distribution of abusive content.
However, Parliament also approved an exemption aimed at preserving encryption. The decision excludes “communications to which end-to-end encryption is, has been or will be applied,” according to the exemption text referenced in the Parliament’s adopted materials (see TA-10-2026-0266_EN). For advocates of strong cryptography, this was framed as a meaningful limitation—though not an end to the broader scanning framework.
Pirate Party MEP Markéta Gregorová, whose party pushed for the amendment, called the result “a bittersweet victory.” In remarks cited by the Greens/EFA, she said the amendment secured “an absolute majority” in favor of protecting encryption, while “voluntary mass scanning unfortunately passed.”
Why the vote matters for messaging encryption and compliance
The controversy around “chat control” stems from how it interacts with encryption design. Encryption—especially end-to-end encryption—prevents service providers from reading message contents. Critics argue that forcing or incentivizing scanning undermines that core security principle, even when applied in narrowly defined circumstances.
Even with the end-to-end exemption, the Parliament’s action keeps the EU’s compliance direction moving toward detection mechanisms that may require changes to how platforms handle reporting, detection, and risk management. For developers and infrastructure teams, the immediate relevance is not only legal compliance but also how systems are architected to distinguish between encrypted traffic and other forms of communication, and how detection workflows are implemented without weakening privacy guarantees.
For users, the practical impact is uncertain: the measure advances to the Council, and the final shape will depend on how member states interpret and negotiate the text. Still, the policy direction—scanning permission extending through 2028—signals that the EU is not backing away from the core approach.
How “Chat Control 1.0” was extended after its April expiry
The Thursday vote is part of a process triggered by the expiry of the framework in April. As the rules lapsed, messaging services such as WhatsApp were allowed to adopt their own voluntary approaches to identify and respond to the sharing of abusive material, rather than being bound by an EU-wide framework.
Earlier in the week, on Tuesday, the Parliament voted using a rarely used urgent procedure to return to the question of whether to extend the legal basis. That followed a March decision where Parliament had rejected a temporary extension while a permanent “Chat Control 2.0” proposal was being discussed. In March, the European People’s Party—Parliament’s largest political group—had faced opposition over amendments that would have restricted the scope of scans. Yet in the urgent procedure vote on Tuesday, the group revived the extension push.
The internal political dynamics reflected the broader split in Parliament: while there was strong resistance to extending the scheme without changes, the voting threshold meant that the final outcome still leaned toward continuation of the framework.
Next phase: Council review and renewed “Chat Control 2.0” talks
After Thursday’s approval, the legislation with amendments will be sent back to the Council of the EU. The Council—comprised of member state ministers—must decide whether to approve or reject the text, which means the extension is not fully settled until negotiations complete.
Meanwhile, the fight is expected to continue. Earlier coverage noted that the political conflict over a permanent “Chat Control 2.0” is only beginning. As negotiations resume in September, lawmakers are reported to be divided over whether any scanning should be targeted or applied broadly.
For the crypto sector and privacy-focused communities, the critical uncertainty is how negotiators reconcile two competing goals: child safety and the preservation of message privacy at the protocol level. The end-to-end encryption exemption is a notable development, but the fact that voluntary mass scanning still cleared the procedural hurdle suggests that further rounds could again reshape the balance between compliance and cryptographic protections.
Readers should watch the Council’s stance and the September negotiations closely, because the final “Chat Control 2.0” design will determine whether encryption carve-outs remain meaningful in practice—or whether the scope of scanning expands again during final implementation.
Ethereum price has rebounded to nearly $1,800 after easing geopolitical tensions and an aggressive short squeeze across crypto derivatives restored appetite for risk assets, while traders now watch whether bulls can force a breakout above a key technical ceiling.
Summary
- Ethereum price has climbed back toward $1,800 as easing geopolitical tensions triggered a sharp short squeeze.
- Technical indicators favor bulls, with ETH reclaiming $1,750 and testing resistance near $1,800-$1,833.
- Analysts see scope for a move toward $1,900, though failure to hold $1,750 could revive bearish pressure.
The second-largest cryptocurrency has recovered sharply from this week’s low near $1,505, when U.S. strikes on Iranian targets triggered a broad sell-off across digital assets. Sentiment reversed over the past 24 hours after fears of further escalation subsided, prompting investors to rotate back into higher-risk assets
A wave of forced short liquidations accelerated the move, pushing ETH through several resistance levels and back toward the psychologically important $1,800 mark.
Asian markets added another catalyst. South Korea’s Kospi index jumped roughly 4% as artificial intelligence and semiconductor stocks rallied, encouraging a wider return to growth assets.
Ethereum participated in that rotation despite U.S. spot Ether ETFs recording a combined net outflow of about $52 million on Thursday, suggesting overseas spot demand and crypto-native buying more than offset weaker institutional flows in the United States.
Fresh regulatory developments also improved sentiment. CFTC leadership has urged the U.S. Senate to advance the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, a proposal that would establish a clearer regulatory framework for digital assets.
At the same time, Ethereum continues to dominate the tokenized real-world asset market with nearly half of global RWA value secured on its network, reinforcing the chain’s position as institutional tokenization activity expands.
Ethereum has reclaimed key resistance, but $1,800 remains the decisive hurdle
The daily chart shows Ethereum reclaiming the 2/8 Murrey Math pivot near $1,750 after bouncing from the 0/8 support around $1,500. Price is now testing the upper edge of that range near $1,800, while the Chaikin Money Flow has climbed back into positive territory at 0.08, suggesting capital has started returning after weeks of sustained selling.
On the 4-hour chart, ETH has broken above the 78.6% Fibonacci retracement at approximately $1,773 and is trading just below resistance near $1,833. Momentum has strengthened as the MACD completes a fresh bullish crossover with expanding positive histogram bars, while the RSI has climbed above 62 without yet entering overbought territory. Together, those indicators leave room for another advance if buyers maintain control.
Derivatives positioning supports the technical picture. CoinGlass liquidation data shows one of the largest short liquidation clusters sitting between $1,790 and $1,810. A sustained move above that zone could trigger another round of forced buying, while the next concentration of leveraged positions appears closer to $1,850. As long as those liquidity pockets remain overhead, volatility is likely to stay elevated.
Commenting on the latest structure, analyst Ted Pillows wrote:
“ETH is holding above the $1,750 level, which is a good sign. Spot demand is picking up a bit, which could push Ethereum towards the $1,850–$1,900 zone in the coming weeks.”
Separately, fellow analyst Alex Marzell argued that Ethereum has bounced from the lower boundary of a long-term descending channel and believes “one clean breakout above the upper trendline could change everything.”
Failure to hold $1,750 would weaken the recovery setup
Despite the improving momentum, Ethereum has not yet confirmed a trend reversal. The $1,800-$1,833 region combines Fibonacci resistance with a dense liquidity pocket, making it the first major test for bulls.
Repeated rejection from that area would increase the likelihood of another move toward $1,725, while a break below $1,750 would expose the $1,620-$1,550 support region that launched the current recovery.
Macro risks also remain. Any renewed escalation in the Middle East, stronger-than-expected U.S. inflation data, or another wave of ETF outflows could reduce demand for risk assets and interrupt Ethereum’s recovery. Until buyers establish support above $1,800, the current advance remains a recovery rally rather than a confirmed long-term trend reversal.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
Metaplanet, a Japan-based investment firm best known for building a large Bitcoin reserve, says it is commissioning a joint study into Bitcoin-backed digital credit products in the country. The research ties together Metaplanet’s securities arm, Metaplanet Securities, stablecoin issuer JPYC, and tokenization infrastructure provider Progmatia, with the goal of testing whether Bitcoin can serve as collateral and credit enhancement for tokenized credit instruments.
In a filing shared by Metaplanet on Friday, the company outlined a concept in which BTC would be used alongside JPY Coin (JPYC)—a Japanese yen-pegged stablecoin—for settlement and payments. Security tokens would then be used to manage holder rights. Metaplanet emphasized that the work is exploratory, and that no product launch is planned as part of the study.
Key takeaways
- Metaplanet and partners are studying whether BTC can function as collateral and credit enhancement for blockchain-based corporate credit instruments in Japan.
- The proposed settlement flow uses BTC collateral plus JPYC for payments, while security tokens would represent and govern holder rights.
- The study focuses on design tradeoffs, proof-of-concept testing, and the feasibility of issuance, but Metaplanet said no issuance decisions have been made.
- The initiative aligns with Metaplanet’s “Project Nova,” which aims to expand the firm from a Bitcoin treasury model into Bitcoin-centered financial services.
- Tokenized real-world asset (RWA) data indicates growing investor interest in on-chain credit products, including asset-backed credit and tokenized corporate credit.
Bitcoin as collateral for tokenized corporate credit
At the core of Metaplanet’s joint study is a credit structure that blends traditional credit logic with on-chain settlement. According to Metaplanet, the research will evaluate whether Bitcoin can be used not only as collateral but also as a credit enhancement mechanism for digital corporate bonds and other credit instruments.
The company says the envisioned products would be designed for 24/7 accessibility, on-chain settlement, and daily interest accrual for holders. Rather than relying on conventional market hours and settlement cycles, the concept targets continuous operation on a blockchain ledger—an area that could matter to both issuers and investors if it translates into smoother servicing and potentially faster distribution.
Metaplanet also made clear that the study is intended to assess feasibility rather than to announce a new security offering. It highlighted that, while the research will explore product design and proof-of-concept options, nothing has yet been determined regarding future issuance.
JPYC and security tokens: how settlement and rights would work
One of the more specific parts of Metaplanet’s proposal is the role of JPYC and security tokens in the credit system. The study concept places JPYC at the center of settlement and payments, meaning the yen-pegged stablecoin would be used to handle value transfers associated with the credit instrument.
Separately, Metaplanet’s plan uses security tokens to manage holder rights. That design choice is important because credit instruments typically require clear rules around ownership, entitlements, and any rights attached to the underlying obligation. By mapping those rights onto a tokenized representation, the study aims to test whether a more automated rights-management layer can coexist with a collateral model anchored in Bitcoin.
Metaplanet’s filing also frames the project around “credit enhancement” and collateralization mechanics. That distinction matters: collateral alone can support repayment, but credit enhancement often targets investor risk by adding extra protection or structuring features. The study’s focus suggests Metaplanet is trying to answer a practical question for tokenized credit markets—how to translate Bitcoin’s volatility into a system that investors can underwrite.
Project Nova and a shift from treasury to financial services
Metaplanet’s study is not presented as a standalone research project. The company linked it to Project Nova, a broader initiative it announced earlier in 2026 to build a Bitcoin financial services ecosystem in Japan. Under that framing, Metaplanet portrays Bitcoin as “productive collateral on the balance sheet,” rather than a held asset with only treasury-oriented value.
The company says Project Nova is designed to deliver new yield products and capital market access to both retail and institutional investors in Japan, explicitly bridging conventional securities markets and digital asset markets. In that context, the joint study on Bitcoin-backed digital credit appears to be a logical next step: if Bitcoin can support structured credit products, it could become a foundation for generating returns rather than simply holding exposure.
Metaplanet has been actively reshaping its business infrastructure around that ambition. In June, it announced plans to acquire Siiibo Securities and rename it Metaplanet Securities. Earlier, in March, it established a new venture firm, Metaplanet Ventures, to support Bitcoin ecosystem development in Japan.
Why tokenized credit is gaining attention
Beyond Metaplanet’s internal strategy, the company’s push toward tokenized credit aligns with broader momentum in the tokenized real-world asset sector. RWA.xyz data referenced by Metaplanet shows the $33 billion tokenized RWA market, with asset-backed credit identified as the third-largest segment at $2.3 billion and tokenized corporate credit as the fifth-largest segment at $1.76 billion.
Even so, the joint study’s emphasis on proof-of-concept and product design underscores that tokenization alone does not guarantee credit market viability. The biggest unresolved issues—likely including investor protections, collateral management, settlement mechanics, and how risk is reflected in the structure—are precisely what the study says it will evaluate.
Metaplanet’s approach also echoes a recurring theme in institutional Bitcoin playbooks: using structured instruments to raise or allocate capital efficiently. Earlier coverage by Cointelegraph noted that Strategy—described in that reporting as the largest corporate Bitcoin holder—has relied on “digital credit” instruments such as STRC preferred stock to support its Bitcoin acquisition strategy. Metaplanet’s current proposal does not claim a direct match to that model, but it signals that Japanese corporate crypto players are exploring similar concepts adapted to local capital markets and on-chain settlement.
For investors, traders, and market builders, the key question is whether Bitcoin-backed digital credit can be made robust enough for real issuance—especially given Bitcoin’s price volatility and the complexity of credit enhancement. Metaplanet’s study results, and any subsequent decision on issuance, will be the next developments to watch, along with how JPYC settlement and security-token rights management perform in practice.
Key takeaways
- Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), and XRP extended their recovery as geopolitical concerns eased.
- Market sentiment improved after US President Donald Trump said Iran had reached out to discuss a potential agreement.
- Bitcoin has surpassed the key $64,000 resistance level, with a breakout potentially strengthening the short-term outlook.
Bitcoin (BTC) extended its recovery on Friday, climbing above the $64,000 level as improving investor sentiment supported a broader rebound across the cryptocurrency market.
The recovery comes after geopolitical concerns eased following comments from US President Donald Trump, who said Iran had contacted the United States to discuss a potential agreement.
The remarks fueled hopes of reduced tensions in the Middle East, encouraging investors to return to risk assets.
The positive sentiment also helped Ethereum (ETH) edge closer to $1,800, while XRP stabilized after finding support near key technical levels.
Improving risk appetite supports Bitcoin recovery
Cryptocurrency markets gained ground as fears surrounding the recent escalation in the Middle East began to subside.
Investor confidence improved after Trump indicated that Iran had initiated contact with the United States regarding possible negotiations, raising expectations that diplomatic efforts could help prevent further conflict.
The shift in market sentiment prompted renewed buying across digital assets, allowing Bitcoin to recover toward an important technical resistance zone.
Bitcoin price analysis: Bulls target higher resistance levels
Bitcoin was trading around $64,300 at the time of writing, placing it just below the significant $65,000 resistance area.
Although the recent rebound has strengthened short-term momentum, BTC remains below several key trend indicators, suggesting the broader market structure has yet to turn decisively bullish.
Bitcoin continues to trade beneath the 50-day Exponential Moving Average (EMA) at $65,399, the 100-day EMA ($68,991), and the 200-day EMA ($75,024)
These moving averages form a strong overhead resistance zone that bulls must overcome before confirming a broader trend reversal.
Technical indicators suggest buying momentum is slowly returning. The Relative Strength Index (RSI) has moved above the neutral 50 level, indicating strengthening bullish momentum after weeks of weakness.
Meanwhile, the Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) remains in positive territory, with the MACD line holding above zero and the histogram continuing to expand, signaling that upward momentum is gradually building.
While these indicators favor buyers in the short term, they have yet to invalidate the broader bearish structure.
The first major resistance for Bitcoin sits near the $64,686 horizontal level. A decisive daily close above this area would bring the 50-day EMA at $65,399 into focus.
If buyers clear that hurdle, attention could shift toward the 100-day EMA at $68,991, followed by the 200-day EMA at $75,024.
Beyond those levels, the next significant long-term resistance lies around $84,410.
On the downside, Bitcoin lacks a strong nearby technical support zone, making the market vulnerable to renewed selling pressure if the current recovery loses momentum.
In that scenario, traders will likely look to the $60,000 psychological level as the next major area where buying interest could emerge.
For now, improving geopolitical sentiment has provided Bitcoin with short-term support, but bulls will need to reclaim $64,000 and overcome the cluster of moving average resistance to strengthen the case for a sustained recovery.
TLDR
- Apollo Global Management has submitted a £5.7 billion ($7.7 billion) acquisition proposal for EasyJet, pricing shares at 715p each
- The proposal surpasses Castlelake’s competing 690p-per-share offer, setting up a competitive bidding scenario for the UK low-cost carrier
- EasyJet shares climbed 14.75% during London market hours, reaching 674.98p — the strongest level witnessed since February 2022
- Apollo faces an August 7 deadline to formalize its proposal under UK regulatory requirements; Castlelake must decide by August 3
- Both potential acquirers face limitations on complete ownership due to European Union regulations mandating majority European national ownership
EasyJet experienced a substantial stock rally on Friday following Apollo Global Management’s unexpected 715p-per-share acquisition proposal for the British low-cost airline, surpassing a competing proposition from Castlelake and initiating what market observers describe as an aggressive bidding contest.
The all-cash 715p proposition places EasyJet’s valuation at £5.7 billion ($7.7 billion) and delivers a 21.6% premium relative to EasyJet’s prior closing position of 588.20p. Stock performance reached 674.98p during London exchange activity — marking the highest point since late February 2022 — though still below both competing valuations.
Apollo’s proposition emerged mere days following EasyJet’s preliminary acceptance of Castlelake’s fifth and ultimate bid of 690p per share. EasyJet’s directors indicated they are “no longer minded” to endorse the Castlelake arrangement.
“A bidding war is on,” said Neil Wilson, investor strategist at Saxo UK.
EasyJet announced its board now stands ready to endorse Apollo’s proposition to shareholders, subject to finalizing outstanding transaction terms.
What’s Attracting Buyers
Airport landing rights, a contemporary Airbus fleet portfolio, and a rapidly expanding vacation packages division are regarded as primary attractions for both prospective buyers.
Susannah Streeter, chief investment strategist at Wealth Club, indicated the vacation business was probably a significant draw. Package vacation offerings deliver superior margins and more stable revenue streams compared to airline ticketing, she explained.
Morgan Stanley reported that Apollo intends to support EasyJet’s current strategic direction — expanding its aircraft fleet, increasing ancillary income streams, and developing the vacation packages unit. The financial institution contended EasyJet possesses stronger long-range expansion prospects under private control.
Apollo oversees assets exceeding $1 trillion and brings considerable aviation sector experience, having previously placed capital in Aeromexico, Sun Country Airlines and Atlas Air, while extending financing to Air France-KLM and Virgin Atlantic.
The Ownership Hurdle
A significant complexity confronting both prospective acquirers: European Union and UK regulations mandate that airlines conducting operations within the bloc maintain majority ownership and governance by European nationals.
Castlelake’s framework addressed this requirement by allocating 51% ownership to EU nationals, encompassing aviation industry veterans Peter Bellew and Mark Breen.
Apollo acknowledged it would undertake the required measures to secure a European partnership but has yet to disclose additional specifics.
According to UK takeover regulations, Apollo must present a definitive proposal or withdraw by August 7. Castlelake faces an earlier deadline of August 3.
Apollo shares declined 1.1% during U.S. premarket trading following the disclosure.
In May, EasyJet disclosed that first-half losses expanded 27% to £377 million, with escalating fuel expenditures linked to the US-Iran conflict identified as a primary contributor. The carrier warned that the second half would likewise experience impacts.
Polymarket has applied for a US license to offer margin trading. The prediction market is seeking a futures commission merchant license.
If approved, the license would enable users to open positions by posting only a portion of the required capital.
What Polymarket Filed and Why It Matters
According to Bloomberg, Polymarket filed through its affiliate, Coming Home GBA LLC, to register as a Futures Commission Merchant (FCM). The application was submitted on July 3, as per the National Futures Association.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
Margin trading lets traders borrow to increase their position size without paying the full amount upfront. Institutional traders use it to improve capital efficiency, but it requires a broker that can hold funds and manage margin.
An FCM license would give Polymarket that role. As a Futures Commission Merchant, it would handle customer funds and margin in the same way as established futures intermediaries do.
That structure enables leveraged trading and provides institutions with the familiar brokerage and custody rails they expect. Even so, Polymarket still needs the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) to approve rulebook changes before it can list margined contracts.
Notably, rival Kalshi secured an FCM license earlier this year through its affiliate, Kinetic Markets LLC. The next move sits with the CFTC. Its decision will determine whether Polymarket can catch up to Kalshi’s lead in the coming months.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights
The post Polymarket Seeks to Offer Margin Trading to US Users appeared first on BeInCrypto.
The VI3NNA Congress has published the VI3NNA Declaration 2026, a position paper urging Europe to build its own digital asset infrastructure. Industry representatives, regulators and academic partners developed the document following the inaugural VI3NNA Congress, held in Vienna in May.
Representatives from digital assets, blockchain, artificial intelligence and regulation took part in the process, supported by an advisory board including Vienna University of Economics and Business (WU Vienna), Modul University, the University of Zurich, Bentley University and Boston Consulting Group. Partners included Bluecode, BitMEX, TaxBit and Black Manta Capital Partners.
“The financial system is being rewritten, and much of it is being built on infrastructure that is not European,” said Oliver Schmitt, managing director of VI3NNA Congress. “The issue is not that Europe lacks talent or capital, it’s that we are not making use of the assets we already have.”
Key Findings
The Declaration cites market data showing global stablecoins have surpassed USD 320 billion in market capitalization and processed USD 33 trillion in transaction volume over the past year, with the euro accounting for less than 1% of that volume. Tokenized real-world assets are projected to reach USD 16 trillion by 2030. Employment in Europe’s digital asset sector has fallen from about 100,000 to around 10,000 jobs in three years, and venture capital investment has dropped 70%.
The Declaration is built around four central conclusions:
Tokenization alone does not create liquidity – capital efficiency is achieved in the post-trade layer through mechanisms such as netting.
Europe’s regulatory framework is comprehensive but costly and fragmented; some firms allocate up to half their compliance workforce to anti-money-laundering obligations.
Claims about AI adoption in banking are often overstated, though measurable gains exist in anti-money-laundering use cases.
Europe remains internally fragmented despite 41 innovation hubs and 14 regulatory sandboxes across the EU.
“Where opinions differed, we did not attempt to smooth over those differences, we documented them,” said Jana Faschinger, project manager at VI3NNA Congress.
Twelve Measures Prioritized by Feasibility
The Declaration proposes 12 measures grouped by timeline. Short-term steps include a European onboarding portal for compliance and tax reporting and a clearer regulatory test for decentralized finance. Medium-term proposals cover a post-trade settlement sandbox and euro-denominated settlement assets as eligible collateral. Longer-term measures call for a Digital Asset Innovation Corridor and regulatory recognition agreements with the United States, the Gulf region and Singapore.
The Economic Opportunity
Citing the Draghi Report, the Letta Report and International Monetary Fund analyses, the authors estimate the measures could unlock EUR 300–800 billion in cumulative GDP by 2035, anchor up to EUR 450 billion of value on European infrastructure, and help rebuild more than 100,000 jobs lost in the sector.
Next Steps
The Declaration will be updated annually through working groups, a policy dialogue with EU consultations, an academic research function, and international outreach, with the next edition due at VI3NNA Congress 2027.
The full VI3NNA Declaration 2026
More Information available on the official website
The post VI3NNA Declaration 2026 Calls for European Digital Asset Infrastructure appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Robinhood Chain recorded between $560 million and $570 million in 24-hour DEX volume on July 8, 2026, seven days after its mainnet went live, overtaking Hyperliquid as the top decentralized exchange by that metric.
The displacement is not a minor statistical quirk: Hyperliquid had posted $492.7 billion in quarterly volume and a record ~$161 million in net revenue in Q1 2026, the highest single-quarter figure ever recorded by a DeFi protocol, making it the benchmark every new chain was being measured against.
What actually drove the surge forces an immediate qualification. The catalyst was not a blue-chip lending market, a novel perpetuals mechanism, or an institutional RWA product.
It was a memecoin called CASHCAT, a cat token that emerged organically on the new chain and alone accounted for roughly $98 million of the $560–$570 million total.
Discover: The Best Token Presales
A Cat Token Drives a Record-Breaking DEX Day
Robinhood Chain launched on July 1 as a permissionless Ethereum Layer-2 network built on the Arbitrum stack, integrating Uniswap for trading, Chainlink for price oracles, and Morpho for lending.
Because the chain is fully permissionless, anyone can deploy a token and spin up a trading pair, which is precisely how CASHCAT appeared, trading against WETH on Uniswap pairs with no corporate announcement behind it.
CASHCAT hit an all-time high above $0.17, with its market cap ballooning to somewhere between $100 million and $170 million in a single session.
The token’s price action generated approximately $98 million in 24-hour volume on its own, about 17% of Robinhood Chain’s entire daily DEX figure. Strip that out, and the chain’s number drops significantly, though the remainder still represents substantial activity for a seven-day-old network.
Daily active addresses on Robinhood Chain approached 200,000 on July 8, with more than 140,000 of those being first-time users. That onboarding rate signals genuine demand pull, not just existing DeFi participants rotating between chains. Whether those users stay once the memecoin cycle fades is the operative question.
Discover: The Best Crypto to Diversify Your Portfolio
TVL Composition Is the More Durable Signal
The chain’s TVL crossed $100 million within its first week, and the primary driver was Morpho lending activity, not speculative token positions.
That distinction matters. Lending TVL reflects users deploying capital for yield under structured terms, which carries different retention characteristics than liquidity posted purely to support a memecoin trading pair. It does not confirm long-term DeFi adoption, but it is a structurally different signal than raw trading volume.
Trading volumes have already begun stabilizing below the July 8 peak, according to the primary source. That is expected behavior after a memecoin-driven spike – the question is what the floor looks like once CASHCAT volatility normalizes.
The lending TVL figure suggests at least some portion of the user base arrived with yield-seeking intent rather than pure speculation, which gives Robinhood Chain a non-trivial base to build from.
For context on the scale of what Robinhood Chain briefly displaced: Hyperliquid had accumulated $330.8 billion in combined spot and perpetual trading volume by July 2025 and entered the top 10 global derivatives exchanges by volume, a first for any DEX.
Robinhood’s own crypto trading arm had sat at $237.8 billion over the same period, meaning Hyperliquid had been outpacing Robinhood’s crypto business for months before the chain launched. The reversal, even if partly memecoin-driven, is not a trivial data point.
Don’t Miss Out on Our $1,000 USDT Airdrop on ByBit
The post New Memecoin CASHCAT Put Robinhood Chain Ahead of Hyperliquid in DEX Volume appeared first on Cryptonews.
Robinhood built a blockchain for tokenized stocks and institutional-grade real-world assets. In its first week, the chain did $570 million of volume against $21.68 million of liquidity, a 26-to-1 ratio that exists nowhere else in DeFi, and most of it was memecoin speculation. This is the launch-week autopsy: what the numbers actually show, what the chain was built for versus what it is being used for, and whether bought liquidity and degen volume can become a real economy.
Summary
- Robinhood Chain processed $570 million in launch week trading volume with just $21.68 million in liquidity as memecoin activity dominated early network usage.
- The blockchain launched for tokenized stocks and real world assets but early growth was driven largely by incentive backed DeFi deposits and speculative trading.
- The report says Robinhood’s long term success will depend on whether tokenized stocks become an active onchain market after launch incentives begin to fade.
Robinhood Chain launched its public mainnet on July 1 with the most institutional framing a blockchain has ever worn: an Arbitrum-based layer 2 built to institutional standards, 95 tokenized stocks trading around the clock, Chainlink as official oracle, BitGo custody, a zero-fee stock-token exchange built by the dYdX team, and a keynote in London titled The World is Flat. The pitch was unambiguous. This is the chain where real-world assets live, where NVDA becomes loan collateral, where the brokerage account and the DeFi protocol finally merge.
Then the first week’s data arrived, and it described a different chain entirely.
Launch-day volume hit $570 million against total value locked of just $21.68 million, a 26-to-1 turnover ratio that does not exist anywhere else in decentralized finance at comparable scale; mature venues run at or below 1-to-1. The volume was not tokenized Apple changing hands between institutions. By every on-chain accounting, it was overwhelmingly memecoin speculation, degens doing what degens do on any new chain with an airdrop-shaped incentive structure. A week in, TVL has climbed past $240 million, driven mostly by Morpho lending and Ethena farming against a 7% yield incentive, roughly 4 million transactions have produced about $57,000 in protocol revenue, and Robinhood’s own CEO has been openly, cheerfully inviting the crypto casino in to bootstrap the network built for Wall Street’s assets.
This piece is the autopsy of that opening week. It works through what the 26-to-1 ratio actually measures and why it stopped analysts cold, the gap between the chain’s stated purpose and its observed usage and why that gap is partly deliberate strategy, the anatomy of the incentive-bought TVL and what history says about whether mercenary capital converts, the genuinely novel pieces underneath the noise, and the specific numbers that will show, over the next quarter, whether Robinhood built an economy or rented a crowd.
What 26-to-1 actually measures
Start with the ratio, because it is the week’s headline statistic and it is widely misread in both directions. Volume-to-TVL compares how much trading a venue processes against how much capital sits in it providing liquidity. A ratio near 1-to-1, typical for mature exchanges, means the liquidity base turns over about once a day. Robinhood Chain’s launch day turned its entire liquidity base over twenty-six times.
The bearish reading treats the number as fake: volume without liquidity is churn, wash-adjacent hot-potato trading in tokens with no depth, exactly what memecoin launch frenzies produce, and it says nothing about durable demand. The bullish reading treats it as extraordinary demand outrunning supply: more people wanted to trade on this chain, immediately, than its nascent pools could properly serve, which is the opposite of the usual new-chain failure mode of incentivized liquidity sitting idle with no one to trade against.
The honest reading is narrower than both. High turnover on thin liquidity is characteristic of exactly one market condition: speculative launch trading, where participants are trading the newness itself, tokens minted hours earlier, positions held minutes, price impact on every fill because the pools are shallow. The ratio measures intensity, not quality, and its collapse over subsequent days, as TVL grew tenfold while volume normalized, is the pattern resolving toward ordinary proportions. What the launch-day number genuinely proved is distribution: Robinhood pointed 28 million customers and the entire crypto-native trading class at a new chain, and enough of them showed up in hour one to produce turnover no organic launch has matched.
Distribution was always the thesis behind corporate chains, the pattern this publication mapped when the land grab formed; week one was the thesis producing a data point.
Built for BlackRock, opened by degens
The gap between the chain’s marketing and its usage deserves direct examination, because it is the week’s real story and it is more strategic than embarrassing.
What Robinhood built is legible in the architecture. The chain is a permissionless Arbitrum Orbit layer 2 with the RWA stack bolted in from day one: 95 stock tokens with Chainlink price feeds and proof-of-reserve, a dedicated zero-fee stock DEX, Uniswap deploying a flagship AMM as core public liquidity, lending markets where equity tokens post as collateral, and wallet distribution across 120 countries. It is, structurally, the most complete attempt yet at the thing crypto has promised for years: equities as composable on-chain assets rather than walled tokens.
What the chain hosted in week one is equally legible: memecoin launches and rotation, farmed lending deposits, points-and-yield tourism. And the company’s response was the telling part: no distancing, no dismay. The CEO publicly courted the degen crowd, the 7% DeFi yield was aimed squarely at capital that follows incentives, and a perps venue pledged $11 million of its token to Robinhood users with doubled points for wallet trading. Robinhood, whose original business was built on making speculation frictionless for retail, understands with complete clarity what its crypto peers learned expensively: chains do not bootstrap on institutional assets, because institutions arrive last. They bootstrap on speculation, because speculators arrive first, generate the fees, stress-test the infrastructure, and produce the activity metrics that make the institutional sales deck credible. The memecoin casino is not a corruption of the RWA strategy. It is its funding round.
The precedent is Base, which launched amid a memecoin frenzy widely mocked at the time and converted the initial degen wave into the largest corporate-chain economy in crypto. The counter-precedents are the dozens of incentive-launched L2s whose mercenary capital departed with the emissions, leaving ghost chains with impressive cumulative-volume screenshots. Which path Robinhood Chain walks is precisely what the next quarter’s data decides, and the fork between the paths runs through one question: whether anything on the chain gives the tourists a reason to become residents.
The stack underneath: what was actually shipped
Beneath the launch-week noise sits an architecture worth cataloguing precisely, because it is the part that persists after the tourists rotate, and several of its choices are quietly consequential.
The base decision is Arbitrum Orbit: Robinhood Chain is a permissionless Ethereum layer 2 using Arbitrum’s technology, settling to Ethereum for security, launched to mainnet after a February testnet that processed millions of transactions.
Permissionless matters here more than the marketing admits: any developer can deploy on the chain without Robinhood’s approval, which is why the memecoin economy could appear on day one uninvited, and it is also the property that separates this launch from the private-chain experiments banks have run for a decade.
Robinhood chose to build a public place it does not fully control, accepting the degen influx as the price of credibility with the DeFi protocols whose presence, Uniswap, Morpho, 1inch, Lighter, Arcus from the dYdX team, constitutes the actual product shelf.
The asset layer is the differentiator: 95 stock tokens at launch, NVDA, GOOG, AAPL among them, issued by Robinhood, priced and bridged by Chainlink’s oracle and cross-chain infrastructure with proof-of-reserve attestation, custodied through BitGo integration, and tradable through a zero-fee dedicated stock DEX alongside the general-purpose venues. The design collapses the historical trade-off of tokenized equities, offshore issuers with thin trust versus onshore institutions with no distribution, by putting a regulated, household-name broker behind the issuance and 28 million existing customers behind the demand, in 120 countries at launch. Every previous stock-token attempt failed on one of those two legs.
And the incentive layer is the bootstrap engine: the 7% DeFi yield on chain deposits, the Lighter perps integration with its $11 million token pledge and doubled points through the Robinhood Wallet, maker-fee cuts for US crypto traders, and the European expansion of commodity, ETF, and FX perpetuals at up to 10x leverage across 30 markets. Read together, the incentives are not scattered promotions; they are a funnel, each one converting a different existing Robinhood customer type, the yield-seeker, the perps trader, the stock investor, into an on-chain user whose activity accrues to rails the company owns. The launch week tested the funnel’s intake. The quarter tests its filter.
A detail inside the asset layer rewards a closer look, because it encodes the strategy’s regulatory sophistication. The stock tokens are not one product but a jurisdictional lattice: issuance entities, disclosure documents, and availability differ by region, with the European lineage descending from the SpaceX and OpenAI tokenized products Robinhood piloted there in 2025 as proof of concept. The pilots mattered twice over: they tested the legal wrapper under MiCA-era rules before betting the chain on it, and they taught the company which regulators would engage rather than object, knowledge that is itself a moat, since every competitor contemplating the same product must now either replicate two years of jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction groundwork or license someone else’s. The chain launch, seen through this lens, was the moment previously scattered regulatory assets were composed into a single architecture, which is why the company could ship 95 tokens to 120 countries on day one while better-resourced rivals ship white papers.
What the chain cannot yet answer
Honesty requires the list of open questions the architecture has not resolved, because several are structural rather than cosmetic.
The first is the sequencer and control question every corporate chain carries: Robinhood operates the chain’s infrastructure, and a permissionless network whose ordering, upgrades, and asset issuance all route through one regulated American company is decentralized in exactly one layer and centralized in the ones above it. The arrangement is standard for the corporate-chain era and immaterial to daily users, and it is the lever regulators will reach for first, which matters more here than on any predecessor because of what the chain hosts.
The second is the geofence paradox. The stock tokens ship to 120 countries and conspicuously not to the United States, where the line between a compliant synthetic and an unregistered security remains undrawn; Robinhood’s own home market gets the chain but not its flagship asset. A permissionless network carrying jurisdiction-gated assets is a truly novel compliance object, enforcement happens at the issuance and interface layers while the rails stay open, and whether that architecture satisfies regulators or provokes them is unresolved and, for the chain’s central product, existential.
The third is liquidity depth versus product promise. Around-the-clock equity trading and stock-collateral lending are only as good as their books, and week-one depth in the stock tokens was a rounding error against the memecoin flow. The products that justify the chain exist as listings; whether they exist as markets is precisely what the autopsy’s dashboard is built to detect.
The $240 million question: what bought TVL is worth
The TVL trajectory, $21.68 million at launch to past $240 million within the week, is the week’s second headline, and it needs the same forensic treatment as the first.
Decompose the growth and it is dominated by two flows: deposits into Morpho lending markets and Ethena-linked strategies, both farming the advertised 7% yield and whatever points programs shadow it. This is professional, rotational, incentive-seeking capital, the same capital that has toured every new chain’s launch incentives for three years, and its arrival proves exactly one thing: the incentives are competitive. Its departure, when yields normalize, is the base case, and every analysis of incentive programs across the L2 era finds the same shape: TVL tracks emissions up and tracks them down, with retention determined not by the size of the bribe but by what got built while the bribe ran.
What retention would require here is specific, and it is where the chain’s genuine novelty lives. If stock tokens actually acquire lending markets, a holder borrowing stablecoins against tokenized NVDA at scale, then Robinhood Chain hosts a product that exists nowhere else at brokerage distribution, and the capital servicing that market is not mercenary; it is doing business unavailable elsewhere. The early Morpho markets are the embryo of exactly that, and their composition, how much collateral is stock tokens versus recycled farm assets, is the single most informative series on the chain. The same test applies to the perps and the around-the-clock equity trading: weekend price discovery in tokenized stocks is a real product with real demand, and its volumes, separated from the memecoin churn, are the number that would vindicate the architecture.
There is also a stakeholder in the week’s data that costs Robinhood nothing and gained the most: Arbitrum. Ten percent of chain fees flow to the Arbitrum ecosystem, 8% directly to the ARB token holders’ treasury, and ARB rallied double digits on the confirmation, repricing Orbit’s sell-shovels business model on the strength of its biggest customer. Whatever Robinhood Chain becomes, the launch already validated the arms-dealer layer beneath it, and every future corporate chain negotiation starts from the precedent this deal set.
One comparative frame calibrates the launch against its true peers. Base, the reigning corporate-chain success, needed months to reach the TVL Robinhood Chain gathered in a week, and needed a memecoin summer nobody planned to find its first population; Tempo, Stripe’s entry, launched to a $5 billion private valuation with a fraction of the day-one activity; and the exchange chains of the prior cycle mostly never produced a week this loud at any point in their lives. On pure launch metrics, Robinhood’s is the strongest corporate-chain debut on record. The caveat is that launch metrics have never once predicted which chains matter, Base’s own opening weeks looked nothing like its eventual economy, and the survivorship graveyard is full of record-setting first weeks. The debut bought Robinhood the one thing debuts can buy, attention at zero marginal cost, and attention converts on the strength of what the next section prices.
The revenue reality, and who is actually paying
The $57,000 of week-one protocol revenue deserves more attention than its size suggests, because it prices the entire strategic argument. Against roughly 4 million transactions, it implies fees around a cent and a half each, deliberately subsidized throughput, and against the incentive spend, the 7% yield alone implies eight figures annually at current TVL, it makes the chain a straightforwardly negative-margin operation. That is not a criticism; it is the model. Robinhood’s brokerage was built the same way, zero commissions as customer acquisition with monetization layered behind, and the chain repeats the architecture: give away blockspace and trading, own the wallet, the issuance, the order flow, and eventually the financialization of assets that today sit inert in brokerage accounts. The 10% of fees flowing to Arbitrum makes the arithmetic even starker, Robinhood is running the subsidy and sharing the gross, and the fact that it agreed to those terms is itself information: the company is pricing the chain as distribution infrastructure whose payoff arrives elsewhere on the income statement, in custody, in spreads, in the international expansion the launch bundled, and in whatever a tokenized-stock franchise is worth if the geofence ever lifts.
For HOOD shareholders, who marked the stock up 8% on launch, the bet is therefore legible and long-dated: the market is not paying for $57,000 of weekly protocol revenue; it is paying for the option that a regulated broker with 28 million customers becomes the venue where equities’ on-chain era happens, ahead of the exchanges, ahead of the banks, and ahead of the incumbent settlement rails converging on the same destination from the other side. Options expire worthless more often than not. This one, uniquely among the corporate chains, has a product no competitor currently ships at any price, which is why the autopsy’s verdict on week one is neither the bulls’ triumph nor the bears’ farce, but a colder finding: the experiment is correctly designed, expensively funded, and entirely unresolved.
What the autopsy actually concludes
Strip the week to findings and there are four.
First, distribution is real and unprecedented: no chain launch has converted a corporate user base into on-chain activity this fast, and the 26-to-1 anomaly, whatever its quality, is a measure of reach no organic launch has produced. Second, the usage is currently almost entirely the wrong usage by the chain’s own mission statement, and the company is deliberately, rationally farming it as bootstrap fuel, with Base as the playbook and a graveyard of incentive chains as the warning. Third, the novel product, equities as live DeFi collateral at brokerage distribution, exists in embryo on the chain right now, is the only thing on it that competitors cannot copy with a bigger incentive budget, and is barely measurable yet beneath the speculative noise. Fourth, the protocol revenue, $57,000 against $570 million of volume, quantifies the bootstrap phase’s honest economics: the chain is currently a loss-leading customer-acquisition channel, as every corporate chain is at this stage, and its P&L matters less than whose customers it is acquiring.
The dashboard for the next quarter follows directly. Watch stock-token volumes and their share of total activity, the series that separates the mission from the noise. Watch Morpho collateral composition for equity tokens posted against real borrowing. Watch TVL through the first incentive step-down, the date bought capital reveals its intentions. Watch weekend and after-hours equity-token trading, the product’s unique selling point performing or not. And watch the regulatory perimeter, because the chain’s strangest feature, permissionless rails carrying geofenced assets that Robinhood’s own American customers cannot touch, is a standing invitation for exactly the scrutiny that the pending market-structure framework may or may not resolve in time.
The launch week, in the end, measured everything except the thing that matters. It proved Robinhood can summon a crowd, which was never in doubt, and it deferred the question of whether it can keep one, which is the entire bet. The 26-to-1 ratio will be forgotten in a month. The ratio to watch is slower and duller: real-world-asset activity as a share of everything else, week over week, the line on which a brokerage’s blockchain either becomes the first chain where Wall Street’s assets actually live, or joins the long list of well-funded venues that mistook a launch party for a population.
Three postscripts complete the record. The first is about the week’s strangest juxtaposition: on the same days the memecoins churned, the chain’s stock tokens quietly did something no US brokerage asset has done, traded through a weekend, and the Monday reconciliation between the tokens’ weekend drift and the cash open passed without incident, a small, unglamorous proof that the market-hours plumbing works. The second is about talent as a tell: the stock DEX was built by the team behind dYdX, Uniswap committed a flagship deployment, not a fork, and the protocols that arrived day one are DeFi’s first tier, not its mercenaries, which says the builders, at least, priced the distribution as real. The third is about time: Robinhood spent two years and several acquisitions assembling this launch, Bitstamp for exchange rails, WonderFi for licensing, the European tokenized-equity pilots as rehearsal, and companies that build that deliberately do not usually judge themselves on week one.
Neither should the autopsy. The body on the table is not the chain; it is the launch narrative, both the institutional one the keynote sold and the casino one the data showed, and the finding is that both died of the same cause: prematurity. What Robinhood Chain is will be decided by the dullest quarter of retention data in the company’s history, and for once in crypto, everyone, company included, has agreed in advance to be graded on it.
For readers building the tracking sheet, the sources are all public: the chain’s explorer and TVL dashboards for the composition series, the incentive program’s published terms for the step-down dates, the stock DEX’s volumes for the mission metric, and Robinhood’s quarterly filings for whatever the company chooses to disclose about the economics it is currently subsidizing in silence. The launch was loud. The verdict will be quiet, and it is already accumulating, block by block, in exactly those four places.
And a final calibration on the number that started it all: by the time this piece publishes, the 26-to-1 ratio has already normalized into the single digits as TVL caught up with volume, which is the healthiest possible fate for an anomaly, becoming ordinary. Launch statistics are weather. The climate is what the dashboard above measures, and it has a quarter to declare itself.
One housekeeping note for the record: the figures in this autopsy, launch-day volume, TVL trajectory, transaction counts, and revenue, are drawn from public dashboards and on-chain data as reported in the launch week, and the fastest-moving of them will be stale within days, which is the nature of autopsies performed on living subjects. The framework travels; the numbers should be refreshed at the reader’s end.
The chain will publish its own verdict, block by block, whichever way it goes; few experiments in finance grade themselves this publicly, and fewer still have agreed to.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute investment advice. Digital asset markets are volatile and you can lose your entire investment. Figures are current as of July 9, 2026, and may change. Always do your own research.
Elon Musk once again captured investor attention with a blunt claim on X. He said SpaceX “will be worth more than the rest of Earth” if the company accomplishes its long-term goals.
Here is what Musk means, how the market values SpaceX today, and why the vision matters.
What Musk’s Bold SpaceX Claim Actually Means
Market cap is the total value of a company’s outstanding shares, calculated by multiplying its share price by the number of shares outstanding. Musk is not describing SpaceX’s value today, but a far larger future potential tied to a space-based economy.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens.
His reasoning traces back to a January 2026 post. There, Musk argued that space industries “will vastly exceed the value of all of Earth.” Furthermore, he pointed to solar energy as the core driver of that exponential growth.
The math behind his vision is striking. Humanity could eventually harness roughly 100,000x more solar energy than it uses today. Moreover, that would consume less than one millionth of the Sun’s total energy output across the solar system.
For context, the global economy generates around $100 trillion in annual GDP. The IMF projects 2026 output closer to $109 to $110 trillion. Musk believes orbital manufacturing, asteroid mining, and Mars colonies could shatter those earthly limits entirely.
“SpaceX will be the world’s first $10 Trillion company. Calling it,” analyst Nic Cruz Patane said on X
SPCX Fell 32% From Its ATH: What’s Next
The current market reflects strong belief, but also caution. SpaceX shares trade near $153, with a market cap close to $2 trillion, according to TradingView data. However, the stock has corrected roughly 32% from its June all-time high of $225.
Musk’s message carries both philosophical and strategic weight for markets. SpaceX’s ultimate goal is to make humanity a multiplanetary species. As a result, vehicles like Starship are critical to building a self-sustaining presence beyond Earth.
The vision also fuels speculation about deeper Tesla integration. JPMorgan recently described a potential merger between SpaceX and Tesla as “strategically coherent.” Moreover, the bank cited strong synergies across artificial intelligence, robotics, energy, and transportation.
However, that path faces real obstacles. JPMorgan also flagged significant regulatory hurdles, particularly in China. Consequently, any merger would require navigating complex approvals across multiple jurisdictions before unifying leadership and accelerating innovation.
Short-term technical signals remain mixed but are being closely watched. The stock recently tested key support near $145 to $150 after its steep post-IPO correction. Traders are eyeing a possible recovery if that support level continues to hold firmly.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights.
Beyond daily price action, investors keep betting on Musk’s ambition. SpaceX debuted with the largest IPO in history in June. Still, questions remain about execution timelines, costs, and the technical risks associated with his interplanetary economic vision.
The ultimate test lies ahead. Time and operational milestones will determine whether SpaceX can transcend not only its competitors, but the very economic boundaries of Earth itself, as Musk boldly predicts for the coming decades.
The post Elon Musk Bets SpaceX Will Outvalue Earth, SPCX Says Not Yet appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Prediction market Polymarket applied for a license to offer U.S. users margin trading, enabling them to place bets with less upfront capital, Bloomberg reported Thursday.
Polymarket’s U.S. affiliate, Coming Home GBA LLC, filed for a futures commission merchant license with the National Futures Association, Bloomberg said, citing a company representative. Polymarket will also require authorization from the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) for changes to its rulebook that would allow trading without fully collateralized positions.
Prediction market platforms like Polymarket and Kalshi offer yes-or-no wagers on the outcomes of events, such as weather, sports and elections. Margin trading lets investors open positions with less upfront capital, a practice common in traditional markets. Kalshi received clearance to offer margin trading in March.
Polymarket’s application comes as prediction markets continue to grow. Volumes hit $51 billion last year and are on pace to reach about $240 billion in 2026. Wall Street broker Bernstein recently said it expects volume to rise to $1 trillion by 2030 as the sector evolves from niche wagering into wide-based “information markets” spanning sports, crypto, politics and the economy.
Nearly 50% of S’pore employees fear job loss as AI & cost-cutting concerns grow
Gym owner on One Nation shortlist for Secret Harbour
Ethereum price climbs toward $1,800 as short squeeze and risk-on rally gather pace
-
Fashion7 days agoWeekend Open Thread: High Hopes
-
NewsBeat5 days agoTaylor Swift and Travis Kelce wedding staffer hilariously struggles to keep her cool while checking in megastars
-
Crypto World7 days agoStandard Chartered Secures MiCA License as ESMA Adds 37 New Crypto Firms
-
Fashion4 days agoOpen Thread: What Great Books Have You Read Recently?
-
Politics7 days agoThe House | “Reframing the debate from a binary discussion of winners and losers”: Yuan Yang reviews ‘We Are Not Machines’
-
Fashion24 hours agoLoro Piana Fall 2026 Enters Houston’s Art Scene
-
News Videos3 days agoWhats Hidden Inside This Cash Register? #treasure #reselling #money
-
Tech3 days agoAnthropic’s new “J-lens” reveals a silent workspace inside Claude that mirrors a leading theory of consciousness
-
Crypto World7 days agoESMA Expands Crypto Register by 37 Firms Following MiCA Transition Period
-
Business4 days agoAXT Shares Jump Nearly 14% as Semiconductor Materials Maker Rebounds on AI-Linked Indium Phosphide Demand
-
Sports3 days agoJoshua Pacio ‘more complete’ ahead of ONE rematch vs Malachiev
-
Crypto World5 days agoSouth Africa proposes crypto tax guidance under existing rules
-
Crypto World4 days ago
SK hynix (000660.KS) Stock Dips as $28B Nasdaq ADR Offering Drives AI Memory Expansion
-
News Videos4 days agoBest Time to Enter Small Caps Right Now? Another Bull Run? | Financially Free
-
Tech5 days agoLenovo laptops are now shipping with YMTC SSDs, a sign of Chinese NAND entering the mainstream
-
Sports3 days ago
We have punished the disrespect
-
News Videos4 days agoAvoid entering in FOMO #bitcoin #cryptocurrency #trading #scalping
-
Crypto World4 days ago$1,000 Credit Alert! BlockDAG X Exchange Pre-Registration Now Officially Open, Polkadot Dips & Zcash Rebounds
-
Tech2 days agoAnthropic brings Claude Cowork to mobile and web as usage data shows most users aren’t coding
-
Tech6 days agoNeuralink Threads Its Way Straight Through the Brain’s Armor
You must be logged in to post a comment Login