Crypto World
Has BTC bottomed at $60K?
Bitcoin has fallen to around $60,000, more than half off its all-time high, with the Fear and Greed Index in extreme fear and momentum near oversold. Is this the bottom before the next leg higher, or a pause on the way to $55,000 and lower? Here is what the charts, the 4-year cycle, and the analysts actually say.
Summary
- Bitcoin trades near $60,000 as of late June 2026, down roughly 18% on the month and about 52% below its all-time high near $126,000 set late last year.
- The bottom case rests on extreme fear, oversold momentum, support holding near $58,000, and structural demand from ETFs and corporate treasuries.
- The lower case rests on a broken technical structure below every major moving average, a late-cycle position historically tied to deep corrections, and a loss of $58,000 opening $55,000 and below.
- The single most important level is the 50-month exponential moving average near $65,600; reclaiming it on a monthly close would shift the picture, while failure keeps sellers in control.
- Analyst year-end targets span an enormous range, from the low-$40,000s in bearish models to $180,000 and beyond from prominent bulls, which tells you how unsettled the outcome is.
Bitcoin (BTC) is trading near $60,000 as of late June 2026, and the question dividing traders is simple to state and hard to answer: is this the bottom, or is there more pain to come? The price sits roughly 52% below the all-time high near $126,000 reached late last year, down about 18% over the past month, with the Crypto Fear and Greed Index mired in extreme fear at a reading around 18 and the relative strength index near 31, close to the oversold zone.
Bitcoin price is stuck below the 50-month exponential moving average near $65,600, a level that has historically separated Bitcoin bull markets from bear markets, and the immediate support that bulls are defending sits near $58,100, with $55,000 the next major shelf below that. This is the kind of moment that defines cycles.
Either extreme fear and oversold momentum mark a durable low from which Bitcoin recovers, as they often have before, or the late-cycle structure resolves lower in the classic post-halving correction that history warns about. Both outcomes have serious advocates and serious evidence, and the honest answer is that the setup is genuinely balanced rather than obvious in either direction.
This article works through the question from every angle a serious trader would weigh: where Bitcoin actually stands on the charts, the strongest version of the case that $60,000 is the bottom, the strongest version of the case that $55,000 or lower is next, the specific price levels that will confirm one path or the other, where Bitcoin sits in its 4-year halving cycle and whether that framework still applies, what the major analysts are forecasting and why their numbers diverge so wildly, and finally three concrete scenarios for the rest of 2026. The aim is not to tell you what Bitcoin will do, because nobody can, but to lay out what each outcome requires so that you can watch the right signals and form your own view.
The forecasts that follow are information, not advice, and the spread among them is itself the most honest summary of where Bitcoin stands: deeply uncertain, at a level that will look in hindsight like either a generational entry or a bull trap, with the evidence today pointing both ways.
Where Bitcoin stands right now
Start with the unvarnished technical picture, because it frames everything else. Bitcoin near $60,000 is in a confirmed downtrend on the higher timeframes. It trades below the 50-month exponential moving average near $65,600, the level many long-term traders treat as the dividing line between bull and bear regimes, and well below shorter-term averages such as the 20-month exponential moving average near $80,000, which shows how far price has fallen from its recent range. The monthly candle is down sharply, around 18%, and the broader drawdown from the $126,000 peak is about 52%, a decline consistent in scale with past Bitcoin bear phases.
Momentum is weak: the monthly relative strength index sits near 31, at the lower boundary that has historically marked important bottoms but which can also stay depressed while price grinds lower. Composite technical readouts across the major analytics platforms lean bearish, with the clear majority of tracked indicators flashing sell signals rather than buy signals.
Sentiment matches the price action. The Fear and Greed Index reads around 18, deep in extreme fear, the zone where past panic-driven selling has often exhausted itself and set up rebounds, though extreme fear can also persist through further declines when a real bear market is underway.
The key support structure is well defined, which is useful: immediate support sits near $58,100, and a decisive loss of that level would expose $55,000 and then lower shelves beneath it. On the upside, the first hurdle is reclaiming the 50-month average near $65,600 on a monthly closing basis, which would be the earliest technical sign that the worst is over. Until that happens, the structure favors sellers, and the burden of proof sits with the bulls.
None of this resolves the bottom question by itself, but it maps the terrain: oversold, fearful, below the key line, defending support, with a clear level overhead that needs to be reclaimed before any recovery can be called real.
The case that $60,000 is the bottom
The bottom thesis is not wishful thinking; it rests on a coherent set of signals. The first is sentiment as a contrarian indicator. The Fear and Greed Index at extreme-fear levels has, in Bitcoin history, frequently coincided with major lows, because by the time fear reaches these readings, the holders most inclined to sell in panic have largely done so, leaving a market with less downside fuel.
The 2nd is momentum. A monthly relative strength index near 31 is close to the oversold threshold that has historically preceded recoveries, and on the weekly timeframe some analysts note RSI approaching levels that have marked important bottoms in past cycles, suggesting the correction is closer to its end than its beginning. The 3rd is the price structure itself: Bitcoin is defending support near $58,100, and as long as that floor holds on a closing basis, the bottoming case remains technically intact.
The deeper support for the bottom thesis is structural demand that did not exist in earlier cycles. Spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds now hold very large quantities of Bitcoin, on the order of well over 1 million coins across the complex, and corporate treasuries continue to accumulate, with some holdings approaching levels that rival the largest known wallets. This persistent, price-insensitive buying provides a demand floor that earlier Bitcoin bear markets lacked, and bulls argue it changes the math of how low Bitcoin can realistically fall before institutional buyers step in.
Layer on the regulatory tailwind, with clearer United States rules advancing through the digital-commodity framework, and the bull case is that Bitcoin near $60,000 is being offered at a steep discount precisely when its structural demand base is the strongest it has ever been. In this reading, extreme fear plus oversold momentum plus a record institutional bid equals a bottom, and the people selling here are handing cheap coins to long-term accumulators. It is a serious argument backed by real flows, not merely hope.
The case that $55,000 or lower is next
The bearish thesis is equally coherent and arguably has the cleaner technical structure behind it right now. The starting point is that Bitcoin trades below every major moving average that matters, from the 50-month exponential average near $65,600 on down, and price below falling long-term averages is the textbook definition of a downtrend, not a bottom. Extreme fear and oversold momentum, the bears note, are necessary but not sufficient for a low; in genuine bear markets, both conditions can persist for months while price keeps sliding, and a reading of extreme fear is just as consistent with the middle of a decline as with its end.
The support at $58,100 is the line in the sand, and a weekly close below it would, on this view, confirm further downside and bring $55,000 into focus, with little structural support between there and lower levels once that shelf breaks.
The macro and cyclical context reinforces the bearish read. Bitcoin is roughly 26 months past the April 2024 halving, which places it deep in the late-cycle phase that has historically followed the halving with a peak and then a substantial correction.
If the cycle top was the $126,000 high reached late last year, then a 52% drawdown is well within the range of past bear-market declines, and history would suggest the correction could run deeper and longer before a true bottom forms. Bears also point to the risk that the very institutional structures bulls celebrate could amplify a decline: leveraged corporate Bitcoin treasuries that bought at higher prices may face pressure to sell if their financing terms or share valuations deteriorate, and ETF flows that were a tailwind on the way up can reverse into outflows that remove the demand floor exactly when it is needed.
In this reading, $60,000 is not a bottom but a way station; the support break to $55,000 is the more probable next move, and the late-cycle clock argues for patience over bottom-fishing.
The levels that will settle it
Rather than guess, traders can watch a specific ladder of levels that will confirm which thesis is playing out, and this is where the abstract debate becomes concrete. On the downside, the first decisive level is $58,100. A clean weekly or monthly close below it would invalidate the immediate bottoming case and open the door to $55,000, which is the next significant shelf. Below $55,000, the structure thins out, and a loss there would suggest the broader bear phase has further to run, with traders then watching round-number psychological levels and prior-cycle reference points beneath. The bears need that $58,100 break to confirm their case; until it happens, the lower targets remain hypothetical.
On the upside, the levels are equally clear. The first and most important is the 50-month exponential moving average near $65,600. A monthly close back above it would be the earliest serious signal that the downtrend is ending, because reclaiming that bull-bear line has historically preceded recoveries. Above it, the next hurdles are the 200-day moving average near $65,200, which sits close by, and then the 20-month average near $80,000, a reclaim of which would signal a genuine trend change instead of a relief bounce. The bulls need that $65,600 monthly close to confirm their case; a rejection there would keep the structure bearish even if price bounces in the meantime.
The practical takeaway is that the bottom question will be answered not by sentiment or narrative but by which of these levels gives way first. Hold $58,100 and reclaim $65,600, and the bottom case strengthens decisively. Lose $58,100, and $55,000 becomes the conversation. Everything between is noise.
The 4-year cycle and where Bitcoin sits in it
No Bitcoin price discussion is complete without the halving cycle, and right now it cuts toward caution while raising a genuine question about whether the old framework still holds. Bitcoin’s supply issuance halves roughly every 4 years, and the April 2024 halving cut the block reward to 3.125 coins. Historically, the 12 to 18 months after a halving have produced the cycle’s price peak, followed by a deep correction into the next cycle’s accumulation phase. Bitcoin is now around 26 months past that halving, which places it firmly in the late-cycle window where, in past cycles, the top was already in, and a correction was underway or complete. If history rhymes, the $126,000 high late last year was the cycle peak, and the current drawdown is the correction phase, which historically has run deep before bottoming. That reading supports patience and the lower-price case.
But there is a serious counterargument that this cycle may not behave like the past ones, and it is the crux of the most important debate in Bitcoin right now. The arrival of spot ETFs, large corporate treasuries, and institutional adoption has injected a new kind of demand that did not exist in earlier cycles, and some analysts argue this could either smooth out the 4-year pattern, blunting both the euphoric tops and the brutal bottoms, or extend the cycle by adding sustained buying that delays the peak. If the cycle is being stretched or dampened by institutionalization, then late-cycle timing alone is a weaker guide than it used to be, and a drawdown to $60,000 could be a mid-cycle shakeout instead of the start of a multi-year bear market.
The honest position is that nobody yet knows whether the 4-year cycle still governs Bitcoin or whether institutionalization has changed the rules, and that uncertainty is precisely why the bottom question is so contested. The cycle clock says caution; the structural-demand argument says this time may differ. Both could be partly right.
What the analysts are forecasting
The dispersion among professional forecasts is wide enough to be its own data point, and it reflects exactly the unresolved debate this article describes. On the bullish side, Ripple chief executive Brad Garlinghouse has pointed to $180,000 for Bitcoin in 2026 on favorable market and regulatory conditions, and Bitwise chief investment officer Matt Hougan has reiterated a $200,000 target for the year, while acknowledging he did not expect the scale of selling that hit the market on the way down.
More structured institutional views are more measured but still constructive: the head of research at CoinShares has projected Bitcoin holding a $120,000 to $170,000 range across 2026 with stronger action in the 2nd half, and Carol Alexander has described a high-volatility band of $75,000 to $150,000 with a central tendency near $110,000.
Longer-term, Bitwise has floated $500,000 as Bitcoin approaches a share of gold’s market value, and various quantitative models, from stock-to-flow to power-law frameworks, sit anywhere from $100,000 to well above $250,000.
Against those stand the cautious and bearish models. Algorithmic forecasters such as CoinCodex read the 2026 setup as bearish on technical indicators, and model-based ranges from sources like CoinLore place 2026 anywhere from the low-$40,000s at the bottom to roughly $118,000 at the top, depending on conditions, with near-term projections clustering close to current levels. The sheer gap, from a low-$40,000s downside to a $200,000-plus upside within the same year, is not a sign that forecasters are careless; it reflects that Bitcoin’s 2026 path depends on variables that genuinely could break either way, chiefly ETF flows, macro liquidity and Federal Reserve policy, and whether the 4-year cycle reasserts itself.
When the credible range is this wide, the responsible conclusion is not to pick a number but to recognize that the outcome is unusually open, and to size risk accordingly. The analysts are not telling you where Bitcoin is going; collectively, they are telling you it is a genuine coin-flip at a decision point.
What would confirm a bottom, and what would break it
Pulling the threads together, a real bottom would announce itself through a recognizable cluster of signals instead of a single one. Technically, it would start with $58,100 holding on a closing basis, followed by a monthly close back above the 50-month average near $65,600, ideally on rising volume that shows real buying instead of a low-conviction bounce. Fundamentally, it would coincide with ETF flows turning consistently positive again after any period of outflows, since that institutional bid is the demand floor the bull case depends on, and it would likely be helped by a supportive macro shift, such as the Federal Reserve easing policy or broad liquidity improving, conditions under which risk assets like Bitcoin tend to recover. A stabilization or reversal in Bitcoin dominance and a lift in sentiment off extreme-fear lows would round out the confirmation. If those align, the case that $60,000 marked the low becomes strong.
The breakdown scenario is the mirror image. It would begin with a decisive loss of $58,100, opening $55,000 and then lower levels with little support beneath, and it would be reinforced by ETF flows turning to sustained outflows that remove the demand floor. The macro trigger would be tightening conditions, a stronger dollar, or a broad risk-off episode that pulls capital out of speculative assets.
The cyclical trigger would be confirmation that the 4-year pattern is intact and the late-cycle correction has further to run. And a specific structural risk worth watching is forced selling from leveraged Bitcoin treasury companies, whose need to sell into weakness could amplify a decline well beyond what spot demand alone would produce.
The practical discipline for anyone navigating this is to treat $58,100 as the hinge: above it, with $65,600 reclaimed, the bottom case has the upper hand; below it, the lower targets become the base case. Watching those levels and those flows beats guessing, because the market itself will signal which path it has chosen.
Three scenarios for Bitcoin into late 2026
Synthesizing the evidence into scenarios makes the range concrete without pretending to certainty.
In the bull scenario, $60,000 proves to be the cycle low or close to it. Support at $58,100 holds, extreme fear and oversold momentum mark the exhaustion of selling, ETF inflows resume, and a supportive macro turn lets Bitcoin reclaim the 50-month average near $65,600 and then push back toward and beyond $80,000 over the 2nd half of 2026, validating the more constructive analyst targets and putting 6-figure prices back in view into 2027. This scenario leans on the structural-demand argument and the possibility that institutionalization has changed the cycle, and it is the path the prominent bulls like Hougan and Garlinghouse are forecasting toward.
In the base scenario, Bitcoin chops in a wide, volatile range without a clean resolution for some time. It defends the low-$58,000s to $60,000 area more often than not but struggles to reclaim $65,600 decisively, spending the rest of 2026 oscillating between roughly the mid-$50,000s and the mid-$70,000s as bulls and bears fight over the cycle question, with the outcome unresolved into 2027. This middle path fits the high-volatility ranges that measured analysts like Carol Alexander and CoinShares describe, and it is arguably the most likely outcome given how balanced the evidence is.
In the bear scenario, the late-cycle correction reasserts itself. Bitcoin loses $58,100, slides to $55,000 and then lower, ETF flows reverse, treasury-company selling amplifies the move, and the 4-year cycle plays out classically with a deeper and longer bottoming process that drags into 2027 before a new accumulation phase begins, validating the bearish models that see the low-$40,000s as a real possibility. Which scenario unfolds depends on the levels and flows described above, and the only intellectually honest stance today is that all 3 are live.
Frequently Asked Questions
Has Bitcoin bottomed at $60,000?
It is truly unresolved. The bottom case rests on extreme fear, oversold momentum near a monthly RSI of 31, support holding near $58,100, and record structural demand from ETFs and corporate treasuries. The lower case rests on Bitcoin trading below every major moving average, a late-cycle position around 26 months past the April 2024 halving that historically precedes deeper corrections, and the risk that a loss of $58,100 opens $55,000 and below. The deciding signal is whether Bitcoin holds $58,100 and reclaims the 50-month average near $65,600 on a monthly close. Until then, neither side is confirmed, and the evidence points both ways.
What is the key level to watch for Bitcoin?
The 50-month exponential moving average near $65,600 is the single most important level, treated by many long-term traders as the line between bull and bear regimes; a monthly close above it would be the earliest serious sign the downtrend is ending. On the downside, $58,100 is the critical support, and a decisive close below it would expose $55,000 and lower. The 200-day moving average near $65,200 sits close to the 50-month average and reinforces that zone, while the 20-month average near $80,000 is the level a true trend change would need to reclaim. Watch $58,100 as the hinge and $65,600 as the confirmation.
Why is Bitcoin down so much from its high?
Bitcoin is about 52% below its all-time high near $126,000 reached late last year, having fallen roughly 18% in the past month alone. The decline reflects a combination of factors: a late-cycle position about 26 months past the April 2024 halving, the phase that has historically followed the halving peak with a correction; weakening momentum and sentiment, with the Fear and Greed Index in extreme fear; and macro pressures including liquidity conditions and uncertainty about Federal Reserve policy. Whether this is a normal cyclical correction or the start of a deeper bear market is exactly the question dividing analysts, and it depends heavily on whether ETF and institutional demand offsets the cyclical downdraft.
What are analysts predicting for Bitcoin in 2026?
The range is extremely wide, which reflects real uncertainty. Bullish forecasts include $180,000 from Ripple’s Brad Garlinghouse and $200,000 from Bitwise’s Matt Hougan, with longer-term calls like Bitwise’s $500,000 tied to Bitcoin taking share from gold. More measured institutional views include CoinShares at $120,000 to $170,000 for the year and Carol Alexander’s $75,000 to $150,000 band centering near $110,000. Cautious and bearish models run lower, with ranges extending into the low-$40,000s in weak scenarios. The gap from the low-$40,000s to above $200,000 within 1 year shows that the outcome depends on variables, chiefly ETF flows, macro liquidity, and the cycle, that truly could break either way.
Could Bitcoin fall to $55,000 or lower?
Yes, it is a real possibility if support breaks. The bearish path runs through a decisive loss of $58,100, which would open $55,000 as the next major level, with thin support beneath it once that shelf gives way. The case is reinforced by Bitcoin trading below all major moving averages, the late-cycle timing that historically precedes deeper corrections, the risk of ETF flows reversing into outflows, and the specific danger of forced selling from leveraged corporate Bitcoin treasuries that bought higher. Bearish models see the low-$40,000s as possible in a weak 2026. Whether it happens hinges on the $58,100 support; as long as that holds on a closing basis, the lower targets remain hypothetical.
Is the 4-year cycle still valid for Bitcoin?
This is one of the most important open debates in Bitcoin right now. The traditional pattern, in which price peaks roughly a year or so after each halving and then corrects deeply, would place Bitcoin in a late-cycle correction now, around 26 months past the April 2024 halving, and argues for caution. But the arrival of spot ETFs, corporate treasuries, and broad institutional adoption has introduced sustained demand that did not exist in earlier cycles, which some analysts argue could smooth out the pattern, blunting both tops and bottoms, or stretch the cycle by delaying the peak. Nobody yet knows whether the cycle still governs Bitcoin or whether institutionalization has changed the rules, and that uncertainty is central to why the current bottom question is so contested.
This article is information, not financial or investment advice. Bitcoin price levels, indicator readings, and analyst forecasts reflect data available as of June 28, 2026, are point-in-time, and can change rapidly. Cryptocurrency is highly volatile, and you can lose money. Price predictions are inherently uncertain and the scenarios described are not guarantees. Do your own research and consult a qualified financial professional before making any investment decision.
Federal prosecutors are continuing to litigate the fallout from the collapse of FTX, as defense teams push back on what juries can hear and how certain market activities are regulated. In the Southern District of New York (SDNY), Michelle Bond—whose husband, former FTX executive Ryan Salame, is serving a 90-month sentence after pleading guilty in 2023—has asked the court to block references to that guilty plea in a campaign finance case.
At the same time, other SDNY-related crypto-adjacent legal fights are highlighting how prediction markets and event contracts can collide with insider-trading and commodity regulation arguments. Separate actions involving a former congressman’s Kalshi trades and a US soldier accused of making a large Polymarket bet underscore that courts may soon be forced to clarify both evidentiary rules and the legal classification of event contracts.
Key takeaways
- Michelle Bond’s legal team asked SDNY to exclude evidence tied to Ryan Salame’s guilty plea, arguing it has little relevance to Bond’s alleged intent or knowledge.
- In a separate CFTC case, former New York Rep. George Santos was ordered to pay $35,000 over trades on Kalshi’s event contracts, with the regulator citing misleading posts about his planned attendance at the 2026 State of the Union.
- A US soldier accused of earning more than $400,000 on Polymarket event contracts is seeking dismissal, challenging whether the Commodity Exchange Act can clearly apply to event contracts as “swaps.”
- Across these matters, the central pressure points are evidentiary fairness for defendants and regulatory clarity for prediction-market participants.
Bond seeks to bar Salame’s guilty plea in campaign finance fight
According to a Friday filing in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, Michelle Bond’s attorneys asked the court to preclude the government from introducing evidence about Ryan Salame’s guilty plea or any “related plea materials” in her campaign finance case.
Bond faces charges over alleged unlawful campaign funding tied to her unsuccessful 2022 congressional run in New York. The prosecution’s theory, as described in the filing, is that contributions supporting Bond’s campaign were partially funded through FTX arrangements facilitated by Salame.
Salame pleaded guilty in 2023 and is currently serving a 90-month sentence connected to conduct arising from FTX’s 2022 collapse. In Bond’s motion, her lawyers argued that Salame’s plea—where he admitted to making political contributions in Bond’s name funded by transfers from accounts associated with an FTX-linked entity—should not be treated as evidence against Bond herself.
“The Court should preclude the government from introducing or referring to Mr. Salame’s guilty plea or any related plea materials, because their minimal probative value is substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice to Ms. Bond,” the filing states.
Bond’s team further said that the plea materials do not meaningfully bear on Bond’s state of mind. They characterized the plea as an admission of Salame’s own guilt, not proof of Bond’s knowledge or participation in the charged conduct, quoting from the motion: “[…] Mr. Salame’s plea materials lack any probative value as to Ms. Bond’s guilt, knowledge, or intent. Mr. Salame’s plea is an admission of his own guilt, not evidence of Ms. Bond’s state of mind or participation in any charged offense.”
How personal litigation could become part of the argument
Bond’s motion also requested that the court allow information connected to her “contemporaneous divorce and custody proceedings.” Her lawyers appear to be positioning that personal context to rebut the government’s characterization of Bond as an “ordinary ‘individual’ donor,” despite her and Salame having divorced before the alleged criminal conduct.
While the filing’s request reflects a broader strategy often used in criminal litigation—attempting to shape how jurors interpret the campaign contributions and the parties’ relationship—the court’s decision will determine what personal-history evidence, if any, is ultimately presented.
CFTC penalizes George Santos for Kalshi event-contract trading
Separate from the FTX-linked litigation, the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has issued an order involving George Santos, a former member of the US House of Representatives who was expelled from Congress in 2023. The CFTC ordered Santos to pay $17,500 in a civil monetary penalty plus $17,570 in disgorgement from profits earned through prediction market trading on Kalshi.
According to the CFTC, the relevant trades were tied to event contracts betting on whether Santos would appear at the 2026 State of the Union in Washington, DC. The regulator said Santos posted on social media about his plans to attend or not attend the event, and that these posts contained “material misrepresentations and omissions.”
The CFTC added that after the posts, contract prices moved in a direction favorable to Santos’ positions, enabling him to earn over $17,500.
As part of the CFTC order, Santos is barred from trading on prediction market platforms for three years.
The case also sits in the shadow of Santos’ criminal proceedings. Earlier coverage notes Santos was sentenced to 87 months in prison in 2025 for wire fraud and aggravated identity theft, though he served only three months before his sentence was commuted by US President Donald Trump, as reflected in the article’s background.
Polymarket insider-trading allegations tested under “swap” debate
A more direct challenge to prediction-market regulation is underway in another SDNY matter. Gannon Ken Van Dyke, a US soldier accused of making more than $400,000 trading Polymarket event contracts, is attempting to dismiss the indictment.
As outlined in the background of the case, prosecutors allege that Van Dyke traded using nonpublic information connected to a military operation involving the removal of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January. The US Department of Justice alleges he used that alleged insider information to wager on whether Maduro would be removed from power, leading to criminal charges filed in April.
In a Friday SDNY filing, Van Dyke’s attorneys submitted a 51-page memorandum supporting a motion to dismiss. Among other arguments, they contend that the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) is ambiguous in how it treats event contracts as “swaps,” which is relevant to three of the charges.
Van Dyke’s lawyers argue that the ambiguity affects basic fairness: if the “swap” definition is not clear across Congress, agencies, and courts, ordinary citizens may lack “fair notice” that their prediction-market wagers fall under the CEA.
“If Congress, executive branch agencies, and courts all find the ‘swap’ definition ambiguous, how can ordinary citizens have fair notice that prediction market wagers are covered by the CEA?” the filing asks.
The defense also contrasts with the position taken by the CFTC under Chair Michael Selig, which has argued it has “exclusive jurisdiction” over prediction markets by treating event contracts as “swaps.” The dismissal motion suggests that—at least for some counts—those jurisdictional assumptions may not survive if the law is too unclear.
Why these cases matter beyond one courtroom
Taken together, the filings point to two urgent fault lines for the crypto-adjacent prediction market space: what evidence courts allow juries to consider when guilt and intent are contested, and whether the regulatory framework—especially the CEA’s treatment of event contracts—offers enough clarity for enforcement.
As courts weigh motions like Bond’s request to exclude plea materials and Van Dyke’s bid to dismiss based on legal ambiguity, traders, builders, and public officials using event-contract platforms may want to watch how judges define relevance, prejudice, and “fair notice.” The next procedural rulings could signal how far prosecutors can stretch existing statutes—and how tightly defendants can force regulators to justify their classification theories.
The first half of 2026 was the most active six months for crypto exploits on record.
This is according to a new report from Blockaid, which shows hackers stole $1.1 billion across 212 incidents.
Crypto Hacks Top $1.1B in H1 2026
The Blockaid report found that four major incidents involving KelpDAO, Drift, Resolv, and CoW Swap made up roughly $707 million of the total losses.
KelpDAO suffered the largest loss, after hackers stole $292 million worth of crypto by faking a cross-chain message that siphoned off the protocol’s Ethereum reserves. Drift Protocol, a perpetuals exchange built on the Solana chain, also suffered a similarly huge hit, as it was exploited for $285 million within 12 minutes.
Blockaid linked both cases to TraderTraitor, a state-sponsored North Korean subset of the larger Lazarus Group. Humanity Protocol’s $32 million loss was also connected to the same attacker cluster, bringing DPRK-linked losses to $609 million, which is about 55% of all funds stolen during the period.
The pace of attacks also increased through the year, with monthly incidents going from 18 in January to 57 in June. April proved to be the most painful month, as the KelpDAO and Drift Protocol hacks wiped out a combined $577 million to push total losses in that month to $635 million.
Privileged key misuse was the most costly attack type in the first half of 2026, with losses of approximately $790 million, or close to three-quarters of all funds stolen in the period, said Blockaid. Unbacked mint exploits came second in value, led by the $80 million Resolve breach. But the hacks at the code level caused the most casualties, accounting for nearly four out of five attacks by count.
Attack Vectors Change as New Threats Emerge
The report named AI agents as a new target after hackers in May used a prompt injection attack to fool Bankr’s AI agent into approving an unauthorized transaction for about $216,000.
Cross-chain bridges also took a major hit, with attackers breaching the verification systems of KelpDAO and Taiko through forged proofs and attestations accepted by the destination chains.
In addition, security teams faced newer attack methods in 2026, with Blockaid identifying four incidents involving EIP-7702 wallet delegation attacks, where a wallet can hand control to a smart contract. Legacy smart contracts also continue to be a common vulnerability, with data showing around five cases in May and June, including two involving Aztec Connect and one targeting Raydium’s AMM V3.
Recent incidents outside the report period showed the same pressure on crypto infrastructure. For instance, on July 23, AFX Trade, BSquaredNetwork, and Verus were hit in separate attacks on the same day that collectively caused more than $35 million in losses. Recall that Verus had already suffered another exploit about two months earlier, and Blockaid linked both incidents to the same bridge contract and bug class.
Recovery results varied depending on the type of attack. Per the report, code-related incidents sometimes allowed teams to freeze funds or negotiate returns, while attacks involving stolen keys usually ended with the money moving through mixers or cross-chain routes.
The post Crypto Hacks Drain $1.1B in First Half of 2026 Amid 212 Security Incidents appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Holders of Strategy’s (MSTR) high-yielding preferred stock STRC will not see a dividend increase in August.
Led by Executive Chairman Michael Saylor, Strategy is maintaining the current 12% dividend on the shares.
STRC investors may have been expecting as much as a 50-basis-point hike in the dividend as Strategy has customarily raised the payout anytime the stock traded sizably below its par value ($100) for the month.
As recently as July 1, Strategy had lifted the dividend 50 basis points following June’s plunge in STRC to as low as $71.
While that hike — along with Strategy’s sale of some bitcoin to fund dividends, and a bit of stabilization in the price of bitcoin — helped STRC bounce in July to the current $89.46, that level is still significantly below par.
CEO Phong Le yesterday said Strategy’s Corporate Objective is for STRC to trade at $99-$100 over time.
Nevertheless, the company is under no obligation to raise the dividend and chose not to do so this month.
A Friday filing in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) seeks to limit what prosecutors can use in the campaign-finance case involving Michelle Bond, the wife of former FTX Digital Markets co-CEO Ryan Salame.
Bond’s attorneys argued that evidence tied to Salame’s 2023 guilty plea—while relevant to his own conduct—should not be admitted against her because it carries a risk of unfair prejudice and, in their view, offers little direct proof of Bond’s knowledge or intent. The motion also asks the court to factor in details from Bond’s contemporaneous divorce and custody proceedings.
Key takeaways
- Michelle Bond wants the court to exclude evidence and “related plea materials” tied to Ryan Salame’s guilty plea, arguing they are not probative of her state of mind.
- Bond’s campaign-finance charges stem from allegations that contributions to her 2022 congressional bid were influenced by FTX-linked activity facilitated by Salame.
- The SDNY motion also requests inclusion of information about Bond’s divorce and custody proceedings, contending she was not an “ordinary” donor.
- Separately, the CFTC ordered former congressman George Santos to pay $35,000 in total—$17,500 in penalty and $17,570 in disgorgement—over trades connected to Kalshi prediction market event contracts.
- A soldier accused of making more than $400,000 on Polymarket event contracts linked to a military operation asked the SDNY court to dismiss charges, citing ambiguity in how “swap” definitions apply to event contracts under the Commodity Exchange Act.
Bond asks SDNY to keep Salame’s guilty plea out of her case
Bond faces campaign finance charges tied to her unsuccessful 2022 congressional run in New York. According to the criminal allegations, contributions to her campaign were partly funded through FTX-related channels that were facilitated by her husband, Ryan Salame.
In the latest SDNY filing, Bond’s legal team asked the court to preclude prosecutors from introducing Salame’s guilty plea and related plea materials. The filing points to the core logic of the request: Bond is not being tried for Salame’s admissions, and the defense claims the government’s use of those materials would not meaningfully establish Bond’s guilt, knowledge, or intent.
Bond’s attorneys argued that Salame’s plea is an admission of his own conduct, not evidence about Bond’s mental state or participation in the charged offense. They said the materials’ probative value is substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice to Bond.
Prosecutors are expected to weigh heavily on the narrative connecting alleged campaign funding to the conduct of individuals tied to FTX’s collapse. Bond’s motion, however, signals an effort to narrow what jurors are allowed to consider—particularly evidence that may influence them emotionally or circumstantially rather than strictly proving the elements of the charges against her.
Why the defense is raising divorce and custody proceedings
Alongside the evidentiary dispute over Salame’s plea, Bond’s filing also requested that the court include information related to Bond’s divorce and custody proceedings that were underway around the same time as the alleged crime.
Bond’s lawyers’ position is that the circumstances of her family life affect how her campaign-related donor status should be viewed. The filing argues that Bond should not be treated as an ordinary individual donor solely because she is facing personal charges in connection with her political bid, even if she and Salame were not married at the time of the alleged conduct.
Whether and to what extent these family-law details will be admissible is likely to be a key procedural issue. It can shape the tone and framing of the case—especially if the government seeks to portray the campaign finances as closely connected to Salame’s network rather than to Bond’s independent circumstances.
George Santos ordered to pay over Kalshi predictions market trading
In a separate development involving prediction markets, the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) ordered former New York representative George Santos—who was expelled from Congress in 2023—to pay a total of $35,000. The figure breaks down into a $17,500 civil monetary penalty and $17,570 in disgorgement of profits.
The regulator said the action was tied to Santos trading on event contracts on Kalshi connected to whether he would attend the 2026 State of the Union address in Washington, DC. The CFTC stated that Santos made social media posts about his plans to attend or not attend the event and that those posts contained “material misrepresentations and omissions.”
According to the CFTC, after the posts, the contract prices moved in a way that became favorable to Santos’ positions and allowed him to make more than $17,500.
As part of the same order, Santos was barred from trading on prediction market platforms for three years. The order also comes against the backdrop of criminal proceedings: Santos was sentenced to 87 months in prison for wire fraud and aggravated identity theft in 2025, but served only three months before his sentence was commuted by U.S. President Donald Trump, as noted in earlier reporting.
Polymarket insider-trading allegations head toward dismissal arguments
Another SDNY filing, this time from the defense of Gannon Ken Van Dyke, challenges the legal foundation of allegations that he profited from Polymarket event contracts using nonpublic information.
The U.S. Justice Department says Van Dyke was involved in a military operation connected to the removal of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January, and prosecutors allege he later used insider information to bet whether Maduro would be removed from power—leading to criminal charges announced in April. The defense filing argues Van Dyke is facing accusations involving more than $400,000 in alleged profits from Polymarket event contracts.
Van Dyke’s attorneys filed a 51-page memo supporting a motion to dismiss the indictment based on multiple legal theories. One focus is the Commodity Exchange Act’s treatment of event contracts as “swaps,” which the defense characterizes as ambiguous.
While the CFTC under Chair Michael Selig has asserted that the agency has “exclusive jurisdiction” over prediction markets by treating event contracts as “swaps,” Van Dyke’s lawyers say the uncertainty itself is enough to dismiss at least some charges. In the filing, they argue that if lawmakers, executive agencies, and courts consider the “swap” definition ambiguous, then ordinary citizens cannot reasonably have fair notice that prediction market wagers fall under the CEA.
The case is expected to proceed on a timeline that could lead to trial in late 2026 or early 2027, based on a schedule submitted in June, and Van Dyke has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
The defense’s arguments also extend beyond Van Dyke’s personal exposure. The filing suggests the ruling could matter for lawmakers and government officials who have used prediction markets in connection with political events or public statements. Earlier coverage referenced by the filing indicates that Trump’s teleprompter operator reportedly placed more than $100,000 in bets on Kalshi event contracts tied to presidential speeches, underscoring how prediction markets can draw interest from political circles.
Across these cases, courts are being asked to decide what evidence is fair game, what definitions govern crypto-adjacent instruments, and how much clarity regulators must provide before individuals can be held criminally liable—issues that could determine how future crypto and prediction-market enforcement plays out.
Wife of former FTX executive seeks to preclude her husband’s guilty plea
In a Friday filing with the US District Court for the Southern District of New York (SDNY) over campaign finance charges, Michelle Bond’s legal team asked the court to consider precluding evidence related to former FTX Digital Markets co-CEO Ryan Salame, her husband who is currently serving a 90-month sentence after he pleaded guilty in 2023.
Bond faces campaign finance charges alleging that her unsuccessful 2022 congressional run in New York was partially funded by contributions from FTX facilitated by Salame. As part of the filings this week, Bond asked the court to exclude evidence of her husband’s guilty plea and “related plea materials,” in which the former executive admitted to making “political contributions in [his] name that were funded by transfers from the bank accounts” of an entity tied to FTX.
“The Court should preclude the government from introducing or referring to Mr. Salame’s guilty plea or any related plea materials, because their minimal probative value is substantially outweighed by the risk of unfair prejudice to Ms. Bond,” said the filing.
Bond’s lawyers added:
“[…] Mr. Salame’s plea materials lack any probative value as to Ms. Bond’s guilt, knowledge, or intent. Mr. Salame’s plea is an admission of his own guilt, not evidence of Ms. Bond’s state of mind or participation in any charged offense.”
The motion also requested the court include information related to Bond’s “contemporaneous divorce and custody proceedings,” arguing that though she and Salame were not married at the time of the alleged crime, the former FTX executive was not an “ordinary ‘individual’ donor” contributing to her campaign.
Related: US Senate unanimously adopts resolution opposing clemency for SBF
The criminal case is one of the latest involving individuals tied to the defunct crypto exchange following its 2022 collapse. Salame, former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried and former Alameda Research CEO Caroline Ellison were all sentenced to prison for their role in the misuse of customer funds and related charges.
Former congressman ordered to pay $35,000 over Kalshi bet
George Santos, a former New York House representative who was expelled from Congress in 2023, was ordered to pay a $17,500 civil monetary penalty and $17,570 in disgorgement from profits earned over bets placed on prediction markets platform Kalshi. The order from the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) stemmed from Santos trading on event contracts betting on his appearance at the 2026 State of the Union address in Washington, DC.
“While buying and selling positions in this market, Santos posted on social media about his plans to attend or not attend the SOTU,” said the CFTC. “In his social media posts, Santos made a series of material misrepresentations and omissions about whether he would attend the SOTU. After these posts, the SOTU contract prices moved in a direction that was favorable to Santos’ positions which allowed him to make over $17,500.”
February X post about his State of the Union attendance. Source: George Santos
Santos is barred from trading on prediction market platforms for three years as part of the order. He was also previously sentenced to 87 months in prison for wire fraud and aggravated identity theft in 2025, but served only three months before his sentence was commuted by US President Donald Trump.
US solider accused of making $400,000 Polymarket bet seeks to dismiss charges
Gannon Ken Van Dyke is a US soldier who faces charges for allegedly making more than $400,000 on Polymarket event contracts using nonpublic information tied to a military operation involving the removal of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro in January. He was involved in the operation removing Maduro, according to the US Justice Department, and allegedly used insider information to bet whether the Venezuelan president would be removed from power, leading to criminal charges in April.
In a Friday SDNY filing, Van Dyke’s legal team filed a 51-page memo in support of a motion to dismiss the indictment based on different legal theories, including that the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA) at the center of three of the charges was “ambiguous” in treating event contracts as “swaps.”
Although the CFTC under Chair Michael Selig has claimed that the agency has “exclusive jurisdiction” over prediction markets on the basis that event contracts are treated as “swaps,” Van Dyke’s lawyers said the lack of clarity was sufficient to dismiss some of the charges.
“If Congress, executive branch agencies, and courts all find the ‘swap’ definition ambiguous, how can ordinary citizens have fair notice that prediction market wagers are covered by the CEA?” said the filing. “They cannot.”
The case is expected to have significant implications for lawmakers and government officials using prediction markets. Trump’s teleprompter operator reportedly made more than $100,000 using Kalshi event contracts related to the president’s speeches.
Based on a schedule filed in June, Van Dyke is potentially looking at a trial beginning in late 2026 or early 2027. He has pleaded not guilty to all charges.
Magazine: Here’s why the CLARITY Act’s ethics deal may be so hard to reach
The attacker working through Coldcard-generated keys is now emptying wallets worth a few thousand dollars each.
Galaxy Research flagged a third wave of sweeps early Sunday, roughly 208 bitcoin drained from 1,912 addresses between Friday midday and Saturday morning UTC.
That is just over a tenth of a bitcoin per victim. The July 30 opening wave averaged close to a full coin, 1,083 bitcoin from 1,196 addresses in 41 minutes.
Observed losses across all three waves now total 1,367 bitcoin, nearly $89 million, from 4,585 addresses.
Wave three sends each victim’s coins to its own destination rather than the handful of shared collector addresses that made the first two easy to map, and parks them in pay-to-witness-script-hash outputs, a format that can carry multisignature or timelock conditions, instead of the plain single-key outputs used before.
It batched an average of six victims into each sweep where wave one took exactly one at a time, and it scanned only the default derivation path, the standard branch of the key tree a wallet checks first, instead of testing several branches per seed.
Perhaps due to the quickly re-escalating tension in the Middle East, the cryptocurrency market has posted fresh losses over the past few hours, with BTC dropping to $62,000 after failing to reclaim the $63,000 support during the day.
XRP was not spared, as it just slipped below $1.05. The asset was rejected at $1.20 during the mid-July rally after the favorable US inflation data for June, and eventually lost the coveted $1.10 support. Now, it fights for the last line of defense before the bulls would have to defend the $1.00 zone.
Popular analyst EGRAG CRYPTO outlined the significance of the $1.05 level, calling it the ‘battlefield’ region. Although he noted earlier today that the cross-border token had managed to maintain that level, he acknowledged the predominantly bearish structure of lower highs on the 4-hour chart.
The short-term path of recovery would be a successful defense of $1.05 before XRP can bounce above $1.083 and eventually reclaim the $1.10 level, which now acts as resistance.
EGRAG laid out an even more promising road ahead for the asset if it manages to continue its recovery, with the “major price target” set at $1.30.
However, a decisive breakdown below $1.05 would essentially mean that XRP will head toward the notable liquidity zone at around $1.00, he warned.
Mikybull Crypto also believes XRP has the strength to stage a surprising comeback. The analyst claimed that the asset’s bullish reversal run is currently loading despite the negative outlook.
His long-term chart compares the current market structure with the one from two years ago when XRP was highly compressed at around $0.60. Once it broke out the upper boundary, though, it rocketed to a fresh all-time high within less than a year.
“Before the last run, I screamed for you to buy at a crazy discount. The opportunity is presenting again,” he said now.
History is not on XRP’s side at the moment, though, as August has been quite a painful month for the asset. As reported earlier today, the cross-border token was deep in the red in all four previous editions.
The post XRP Price Dips to ‘Battlefield’ Zone, but Analysts See Major Reversal Opportunity appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Pi Coin (PI) rose 8% on Saturday to $0.0870. The move pushed the token onto CoinGecko’s trending list, days before a hard deadline for Pi Network.
Nodes are the computers that check Pi transactions. The people who run them have until August 11 to install an update. Nodes that miss it get cut off.
Why Pi Coin Is Trending Again
CoinGecko ranked PI second on its trending board on Saturday. Most other coins on that list were falling. Pi Coin was one of the few going up.
The bigger picture is less kind. While PI has gained 7% over the past week, it is still down 25% over the past month. The token is worth about $957 million in total, making it the 67th largest coin.
Trading stayed thin. Pi Network market data shows roughly $8.6 million changed hands in 24 hours.
What the August 11 Deadline Means
Protocol v26 is the latest step in a long chain of updates that started at version 19. Pi says it makes smart contracts safer. It also improves how the network stores data and talks to other blockchains.
“Protocol 26 is a major milestone ahead of the final planned upgrade, Protocol 27. With 8 successful upgrades completed over the past few months, these final two upgrades will bring the network up to date with the latest protocol features, improvements, and functionality,” the team noted.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
Only node operators need to act. People who mine Pi on their phones do not. Pi lists every step on its node page.
Pi nodes agree on transactions in small trusted groups, a design borrowed from Stellar. The July 22 Protocol v25 rollout added the cryptography that privacy apps need.
Why Pi Coin Rallies Keep Fading
Traders have seen this before. PI jumped 24% ahead of the July 22 update. It handed the gain back once the day arrived. The Protocol 24 mainnet upgrade in June ended the same way.
Zoom out and it looks worse. PI hit a record low of $0.0710 on July 14. It now sits 79% below where it traded a year ago.
New supply is the main drag. PiScan data cited last month showed about 1.71 billion PI unlocking over the next year. That is a heavy load for a market trading under $10 million a day.
Protocol v27 is the last planned update. Whether August 11 shifts the PI price forecast outlook comes down to one thing. Buyers have to show up faster than the new coins do.
The post Pi Coin Defies Market Trend Before Key Deadline: Will the 10% Bounce Hold? appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Who are possible challengers to FIFA President Gianni Infantino?
Infantino was originally expected to easily retain his position at the helm of FIFA in March 2027.
Now, with public calls for review into his leadership, potential rivals may feel emboldened.
“FIFA is full of sharks, and there’s no question that many of them can smell blood. Infantino’s election in 2027, which seemed like a sure bet only a few days ago, is now an open question,” Boykoff says.
Challengers for his role must submit their candidacies by Nov. 18, and there has already been some speculation as to who might make a bid.
Sheikh Salman bin Ebrahim Al Khalifa, president of the Asian Football Confederation (AFC), was defeated by Infantino in 2016, the current administrator’s first term, but he could return a decade later as a frontrunner. He called Infantino’s investment proposal and his failure to consult AFC on it “totally unacceptable,” putting the two publicly at odds.
Will politicians EVER tackle the fly-tipping gangsters who have forced me off the land my family has farmed since 1893? asks EARL SPENCER
Cenovus Energy Inc. 2026 Q2 – Results – Earnings Call Presentation (TSX:CVE:CA) 2026-08-01
Nicole ‘Snooki’ Polizzi Has Hysterectomy Amid Cervical Cancer
-
Sports6 days agoCommonwealth Games boxing: Jadumani Singh seals dominant 5-0 win over Pakistan’s Sumama Rehman to enter quarter-finals | Commonwealth Games News
-
Business3 days agoWhy Trees Belong on the Risk Register
-
Fashion1 day agoWeekend Open Thread: Wit & Wisdom
-
Tech6 days agoIntel is reversing course and bringing hyper-threading back to its server chips
-
Politics1 day agoMeta enters AI-training agreement with far-right ‘propaganda rag’ Newsmax
-
Politics6 days agoLuke Littler dismantles Gerwyn Price to retain title in Blackpool
-
Crypto World8 hours agoMicroStrategy Post-Earnings CLARITY Act Push Could Add New Catalyst for Its Stock
-
Politics5 days agoThe Part of the Electric Transition Nobody Wants to Discuss
-
Entertainment4 days ago‘Stargate’ Creator’s New Sci-Fi Series Returns for Season 3 Tomorrow
-
News Videos6 days agoBITCOIN JUST ENTERED THIS CRITICAL ZONE…
-
Business4 days agoMajor shareholder moves on Canyon
-
Crypto World7 days agoXRP Ledger adds $2.6B as RWA inflows rank second
-
Politics6 days agoSpain sweeps the board at 2026 World Cup with individual awards
-
News Videos2 days agoBitcoin Enters the 3rd Stage of the Bear Market
-
Crypto World17 hours ago
XRP Ledger v3.3.0 brings five institutional features
-
Entertainment7 days agoSara Gilson Killed By Husband After Viral “Pedophile” TikTok Video
-
Crypto World4 days agoKraken Enables Retail Access to Jersey Mike’s IPO via Tokenized Shares
-
Tech5 days agoNew macOS Sequoia & Sonoma security updates for older Macs
-
News Videos4 days agoClaude: Build Financial Dashboards in Minutes (2026)
-
Politics2 days agoLuke Littler’s dominance sparks GOAT debate
You must be logged in to post a comment Login