Bitcoin BTC$76,350.59 has not reached its bottom yet, and a new all-time high is unlikely this year, said Michael Terpin, an early bitcoin investor and author of Bitcoin Supercycle: How the Crypto Calendar Can Make You Rich.

“Before a bull market for bitcoin can be called, the price needs to break back above $100,000 and no support anywhere near has manifested,” according to Terpin, who said the bottom will be seen at $57,000 sometime in October.

“Despite a double-digit gain thus far in April, we are very much still in a bitcoin fall.”

Terpin is often called ‘the crypto Godfather’ for his involvement in the industry around 2013, when the digital asset sector was still small and somewhat misunderstood by the mainstream. Among his many ventures, Terpin founded Transform Group, one of the first PR firms focused on blockchain companies, CoinAgenda, one of the first conferences in the space and BitAngels, a crypto angel investor group.

His bearish view for this cycle stands in contrast to the consensus among analysts that the February low around $60,000 marked the end of the bear market and the beginning of a new bull run. Most of these bullish analysts cited renewed inflows into U.S.-listed spot ETFs and the token’s resilience during the Iran conflict and the oil price spike as part of their outlook.

In an interview with CoinDesk, Terpin said that during Asian trading hours on Monday, “the psychological barrier of $80,000 was strongly rejected, with the high price of oil a factor.” He explained that this is typical at this stage of the bitcoin cycle, with lower highs being rejected until the final capitulation.

While Jason Fernandes, a market analyst and co-founder of AdLunam, agrees with Terpin that the bottom has not yet been seen, he disagrees with the timeline, adding that the market may not have fully capitulated yet. Capitulation is a phase in which long-term holders exit in large numbers, signaling a peak in selling pressure.

“Terpin makes a reasonable case for a later-cycle bottom, but I don’t believe bitcoin has fully capitulated yet,” Fernandes said. “Historically, durable bottoms tend to coincide with a clear exhaustion of both speculative leverage and macro uncertainty, and we’re definitely not there yet.”

Terpin insisted that the fundamentals point more toward a bottom that includes the historical average of the one-year period from each cycle’s bottom.

“That indicates somewhere around $57,000,” he said, predicting that it will happen sometime in October, about the same timeline from last year when BTC first dipped below $100,000, followed by the October 10 crash, when $19 billion in leveraged positions were wiped out in the largest single-day event on record.

Fernandes added that broader macro conditions could continue to weigh on risk assets, including bitcoin.

“Liquidity conditions remain tight, and risk assets broadly are still adjusting to a higher-for-longer rate environment,” he said. “Until we see a more decisive shift in monetary policy or a true washout event in crypto markets, downside volatility remains likely.”

‘Overly bearish’

The author and entrepreneur also said bitcoin will not see an all-time high (ATH) this year.

However, Mati Greenspan, a crypto market analyst and founder of Quantum Economics, disagrees.

“While I’m hesitant to ever disagree with the ‘Crypto Godfather,’ his take seems overly bearish to me,” Greenspan said. “We still have lots of room to run this year, given the level of institutional adoption and growing interest a new all-time-high (ATH) certainly seems plausible.”

AdLunam’s Fernandes also said market sentiment has not yet reached the levels typically associated with cycle bottoms.

“Sentiment hasn’t reached the kind of extreme pessimism that typically marks cycle lows,” he said. “To me, that says we may still need one more leg down – whether or not it aligns exactly with the $57,000 to $59,000 range – before a sustainable base is formed.”

Regarding Terpin’s $100,000 level, Fernandes said it serves more as a psychological signal than a strict technical threshold.

“A true bull market is defined by structural higher highs and strong capital inflows, not just a single price level,” he said. “That said, the psychological effects of hitting $100,000 could trigger exactly that behavior,” Fernandes added.

RedStone, a decentralized oracle provider based in Baar, Switzerland, has unveiled RedStone Settle, a new on-chain settlement layer designed to put tokenized real-world assets (RWAs) to work as collateral in DeFi lending protocols. The move targets a persistent structural hurdle: RWAs such as tokenized funds and bonds often carry redemption windows of 60 to 180 days, a timeline that has historically clashed with the near-instant liquidation mechanics that govern most DeFi lending markets. By introducing an on-chain auction mechanism that activates during liquidation events, RedStone aims to provide immediate liquidity while transferring the delayed redemption risk to liquidity providers who step in to buy positions.

In RedStone’s framing, Settle lets liquidity providers purchase positions during a liquidation, supplying on-chain liquidity to the lending protocol and accepting the underlying asset’s longer redemption horizon. If successful, the approach could convert a substantial swath of idle tokenized RWAs—RedStone cites “more than $30 billion” currently sitting on the sidelines in DeFi—into usable collateral, potentially enabling more efficient borrowing against yield-generating positions.

The broader context for this development mirrors the growing but uneven progress of RWAs in crypto markets. Current estimates of tokenized RWAs—excluding stablecoins—hover around the $30 billion mark, led by exposure to U.S. Treasuries and private credit, according to data from RWA.xyz. The figures align with industry observations that a sizable portion of tokenized assets remains underutilized within DeFi, constrained by liquidity frictions and settlement timelines rather than a simple lack of demand.

Key takeaways

• RedStone Settle introduces an on-chain auction mechanism triggered by liquidation events to bridge the liquidity gap for tokenized RWAs used as collateral in DeFi lending.
• The system envisions liquidity providers stepping in to buy positions, delivering immediate liquidity while bearing the risk of delayed redemption associated with the underlying RWAs.
• RedStone claims the approach could unlock more than $30 billion of tokenized RWAs currently idle in DeFi, aligning with broader market estimates for tokenized real-world assets not including stablecoins.
• Industry voices caution that tokenization alone does not guarantee liquidity; a Paris Blockchain Week panel highlighted the persistence of liquidity and settlement constraints, underscoring the need for robust mechanisms beyond mere tokenization.
• DeFi lending activity continues to rise, with institutional interest and RWAs as collateral contributing to a 72% year-over-year expansion through September, according to Binance Research via a TradingView report.

How RedStone Settle works and why it matters

At the core, RedStone Settle is a specialized settlement layer intended to unlock collateral potential for RWAs within DeFi lending protocols. When a loan or position is tested against risk parameters and approaches liquidation, an on-chain auction is triggered. Liquidity providers can participate by purchasing the position, thereby supplying immediate liquidity to the protocol. In exchange, these providers assume the delayed redemption risk tied to the underlying RWA asset. By internalizing this risk and aligning it with a structured on-chain auction, RedStone aims to minimize abrupt liquidations while preserving the utility of RWAs as collateral.

RedStone’s framework is designed to address the fundamental mismatch between the fast-moving cadence of DeFi risk management and the slower, real-world settlement cycles that characterize tokenized assets. If liquidity providers can efficiently bridge the gap during liquidations, borrowing against RWAs could become more practical for lenders and more attractive for borrowers seeking to leverage yield-generating positions. The emphasis on an on-chain auction mechanism also offers a transparent, auditable pathway for price discovery and settlement, which could help reduce counterparty risk during stressed market conditions.

Industry observers note that even with tokenized assets, the liquidity story is not uniformly compelling. The emergence of Settle comes as part of a broader debate about the liquidity implications of tokenization. A Paris Blockchain Week panel, which Cointelegraph covered, featured voices arguing that simply tokenizing illiquid assets does not automatically render them tradable or readily usable in financial markets. The panel underscored ongoing liquidity and settlement constraints that persist despite on-chain representations of real-world assets.

“I think there’s still this idea that tokenizing something illiquid will somehow magically make it a liquid asset, which is just not true,” said Oya Celiktemur of Ondo Finance during a Paris Blockchain Week panel hosted by Cointelegraph.

These observations help frame RedStone Settle as a targeted attempt to resolve a specific friction point—improving liquidity access during forced liquidations—rather than claiming tokenization alone will solve all liquidity challenges. The approach could complement existing collateral frameworks by creating a credible on-chain pathway for RWAs to participate in DeFi lending markets even when redemption cycles lag behind lenders’ risk-management timelines.

RWA liquidity, market size, and adoption dynamics

RedStone’s projections sit within a landscape where tokenized RWAs are steadily growing in visibility and ambition, even as liquidity remains uneven. Data from RWA.xyz indicates a market worth north of $30 billion when stablecoins are excluded, with the largest segments concentrated in U.S. Treasury exposure and private credit. These assets reflect a broad appetite among traditional issuers and investors to tokenize real-world cash flows, while DeFi protocols seek durable, yield-generating collateral beyond crypto-native instruments.

Industry commentary during Paris Blockchain Week adds another dimension to the debate. Tokenization, while enabling on-chain representation of RWAs, does not automatically unlock tradability or deep liquidity across markets. Liquidity providers, market makers, and risk underwriters must still navigate custody, settlement, and regulatory considerations that govern real-world assets, even when they are tokenized. The discourse highlights why new settlement mechanisms—like Settle—are essential to translating tokenization into practical DeFi utility.

Meanwhile, DeFi lending remains buoyant, with research from Binance indicating continued growth driven in part by institutional interest in RWAs and stablecoins. The research shows a 72% year-over-year expansion in DeFi lending through September, underscoring the sector’s ongoing appetite for diversified collateral and onboarding of traditional finance players. This backdrop helps explain why RedStone is pursuing a settlement layer that could unlock additional liquidity channels for tokenized RWAs without waiting on gradual redemption schedules.

Beyond Settle, the broader ecosystem has seen related tokenization activity that signals growing experimentation with RWAs in crypto markets. For example, Flow Capital has publicly discussed plans to tokenize a $150 million private credit fund via DigiFT, illustrating how market participants are combining tokenization with institutional-grade asset classes to broaden DeFi’s collateral base. Such developments, while at different stages, collectively point to a trend toward more sophisticated ways of incorporating real-world yield into crypto lending and liquidity provision.

What changes for users, lenders, and builders

If RedStone Settle reaches meaningful adoption, several implications could emerge across the ecosystem. For lenders, the ability to collateralize tokenized RWAs more effectively could expand the universe of eligible collateral, potentially enabling larger borrowing capacity or more favorable terms for yield-oriented strategies. For liquidity providers, Settle offers a structured mechanism to deploy capital in exchange for exposure to the delayed redemption risk associated with RWAs, potentially creating new yield opportunities tied to safer liquidation outcomes.

For builders and DeFi protocols, Settle could offer a practical blueprint for integrating RWAs into lending markets without forcing a wholesale redesign of risk models. However, the approach also introduces new layers of risk—primarily around price discovery, settlement finality, custody, and regulatory compliance—that projects must model and monitor. The on-chain auction dynamic, while transparent, requires robust governance, clear settlement rules, and resilient oracle and data feeds to withstand market stress.

Regulatory and operational considerations will likely shape how quickly Settle scales. Tokenized RWAs sit at the intersection of traditional finance, asset custody, and crypto markets, where custody solutions, KYC/AML requirements, and cross-border settlement protocols often influence deployment timelines. As more institutions explore tokenized collateral, the market will be watching how on-chain settlement protocols align with existing compliance frameworks and risk management standards.

What readers should watch next

RedStone Settle represents a notable attempt to translate tokenized RWAs into practical, tradable collateral within DeFi. The coming months will reveal whether the on-chain auction mechanism can deliver the claimed liquidity lift without introducing new forms of risk or friction. Investors and developers should monitor how Settle interacts with existing lending protocols, the quality and diversity of RWAs brought into the frame, and the regulatory guidance that could shape custody, settlement, and disclosure requirements for tokenized assets used as collateral.

In the near term, the market will also weigh broader adoption signals for tokenized RWAs, including continued growth in DeFi lending, the volume and velocity of RWAs tokenized through various platforms, and the willingness of liquidity providers to engage with RWAs that carry longer redemption timelines. As industry research and independent coverage continue to dissect tokenization’s real liquidity impact, RedStone Settle adds a concrete mechanism to bridge the gap between on-chain execution and off-chain asset settlement—an issue that remains central to unlocking RWAs’ full potential in DeFi.

As the ecosystem tests Settle’s value proposition, market participants will closely observe the balance between immediate liquidity during liquidations and the risk transfer to providers. The outcome could influence future designs for DeFi primitives seeking to incorporate real-world yields, shaping the trajectory of RWAs in crypto markets in the months ahead.

Further reading and related coverage include Flow Capital’s tokenization plan for a private credit fund via DigiFT, as reported by Cointelegraph, and analyses of liquidity dynamics around tokenized assets presented at Paris Blockchain Week. For background on market sizing, RWA.xyz provides ongoing data on the scale and composition of tokenized RWAs beyond stablecoins.

Imagine a tireless analyst who works around the clock, cross-referencing a company’s onchain purchasing patterns with satellite imagery of its warehouses, correlating its job postings with its patent filings, and mapping its entire supply chain by watching the flow of smart contract payments. This analyst never sleeps, never loses focus and costs almost nothing to run.

That analyst is coming. It’s an AI agent, and your competition will have one.

The rush to build agentic commerce is well underway. The combination of decision-making AI with smart contracts on blockchains is genuinely powerful. Consumer-facing agents will go bargain hunting and close deals autonomously. Enterprise agents will forecast demand and execute procurement at scale through onchain contracts. The efficiency gains are enormous.

But this technology works in both directions. The same infrastructure that lets an enterprise agent negotiate better deals also broadcasts a remarkable amount of information about how that enterprise operates. Public blockchains have no native privacy. And “security by obscurity” — the hope that nobody will bother to piece together all those scattered data points — collapses completely when automated agents can spend their nights reverse-engineering a competitor’s operations, for pennies.

This is not new. It is about to get much, much faster.

Companies have always leaked intelligence. iFixit has built a business around tearing apart every major new electronics product within days of launch, exposing components, likely bill-of-materials costs, and manufacturing approaches for anyone to study. Satellite imagery firms already track everything from warehouse activity to crop yields to oil tanker movements, selling the insights to hedge funds and competitors alike. Specialized competitive intelligence firms have long mapped supply chains and reverse-engineered pricing strategies.

What’s different now is the synthesis. Each of these data streams, taken alone, tells a partial story. An agentic system can pull them all together — public filings, onchain transaction flows, satellite data, job postings, patent applications, shipping records — and deliver not just raw data about your competition but a coherent picture of their strategic road map, updated continuously.

The question this forces is not whether competitors will know more. They will. The question is: what should companies do about it?

Start by admitting what was never really secret

The first step is a clear-eyed audit, from first principles, of what needs to be confidential — because sensitive information is not always treated as such.

Take business strategy. Companies have to tell shareholders so they’ll buy the stock. They have to tell employees so they’ll pull in the same direction. They need to tell partners so they’ll invest alongside them. And once they’ve told all those audiences, they’ve effectively told the competition too. Strategy has not been a real secret for a long time.

The best companies already know this. Apple doesn’t hide that it’s building an ecosystem play. Amazon doesn’t disguise its obsession with logistics efficiency. They don’t win by surprise. They win by execution.

And even execution, at a high level, is more transparent than most people admit. Anyone can walk into a Walmart store and catalog every product on the shelves. Anyone can unscrew the back of any piece of electronics and identify every component. Any analyst can read the 10-K and map out the cost structure.

What’s genuinely left to protect

Strip away strategy, strip away the broad strokes of execution, and what remains is operational detail. Not what components are in a product, but what the company is paying for them. Not that a company has a supply chain, but the specific terms, conditions, volume commitments, and quality management processes that make one supply chain faster or cheaper than the next. The granular, day-to-day mechanics of how the machine actually runs.

This is the data that creates a durable competitive advantage. And in an era of agentic commerce, it’s precisely the data most at risk — because it’s flowing through the same blockchain infrastructure that agents use to transact.

The privacy imperative

If enterprise agents are executing procurement contracts, managing supplier relationships, and orchestrating logistics on public blockchains without privacy, those enterprises are broadcasting their operational playbook to every competitor running an analytical agent. The very system designed to drive efficiency becomes the system that strips away the competitive moat.

The answer isn’t to avoid blockchains — the efficiency and automation benefits are too significant. The answer is to demand privacy as foundational infrastructure, built in from the start, not bolted on as an afterthought.

And the rethinking won’t stop at blockchain transactions. Enterprises will need to examine every digital touchpoint — email metadata, web server configurations, government disclosures, DNS records — with fresh eyes, asking not “could someone find this?” but “what could an agent synthesize from this combined with everything else it knows?”

The new competitive landscape

The world is entering an era where the floor of competitive intelligence rises dramatically for everyone. Agents will make the kind of analysis that once required dedicated teams and significant budgets available to any company willing to deploy them.

The companies that will thrive aren’t the ones that try to hide everything — that’s a losing game. They’re the ones that will clearly distinguish between what can’t be secret (strategy, product design, market positioning) and what must be (operational mechanics, pricing terms, supplier relationships), and then invest seriously in the infrastructure to protect what matters.

Bitcoin’s (BTC) Coinbase Premium Index has turned negative at -0.008 for the first time in three weeks, signaling a sharp reduction in US spot market demand and aligning with BTC’s current price drop. The signal held across hourly readings through the next 48 hours, showing consistent selling pressure from US-based buyers. The shift comes as the net weekly average of BTC realized losses climbed to $829 million, suggesting reduced investor conviction. 

Bitcoin Coinbase Premium Index. Source: CryptoQuant

Crypto trader Ardi highlighted a break in both trendline support and the $77,300 liquidity zone. The trader linked the move to weakening spot demand, noting that the premium has posted consecutive red readings for the first time since BTC was near $67,000. 

Ardi said that price action during the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) meeting window could remain volatile, with rapid moves in either direction. Traders could place focus on the $74,500–$75,500 range as a key downside area tied to demand exhaustion.

Onchain data adds to this view. Crypto analyst Darkfost noted that the weekly realized losses reached $829 million on a seven-day average, compared to $566 million in realized profits. The net realized profit briefly turned positive on April 9, then reversed within two weeks. 

Bitcoin net realized profit/loss [USD] 7DMA. Source: CryptoQuant

The share of supply in profit stands at 64%, a level that has not historically supported sustained upside. This indicates weaker conviction among holders despite the recent rebound.

Related: Bitcoin price hits one-week low as $100 oil sparks fresh Asia crisis fears

Bitcoin sell volumes at Binance reach $828 million

Derivatives data shows strong sell-side activity on Binance. Crypto analyst Amr Taha noted that the 24-hour cumulative net taker volume dropped by $828 million on April 27, the lowest reading since late March.

BTC cumulative net taker volume on Binance. Source: CryptoQuant

Negative net taker volume indicates that the market’s sell orders exceed its buy orders. The Binance taker buy/sell ratio has also fallen to 0.89, a level last recorded on March 29.

That earlier reading aligned with a local pivot when Bitcoin tested $66,000, then recovered by 15% over the past 30 days.

The current readings place both metrics back near prior exhaustion zones. Taha described the setup as closer to a short-term capitulation than a larger trend breakdown.

Related: Can Bitcoin hit $250K this year? Traders say it may be time to ‘sell in May’

This article is produced in accordance with Cointelegraph’s Editorial Policy and is intended for informational purposes only. It does not constitute investment advice or recommendations. All investments and trades carry risk; readers are encouraged to conduct independent research.

TLDR:

• Banks integrating Ripple’s DLT are expected to grow XRP Ledger transaction volumes massively over time.
  
• Payment providers like Finastra and Volante are adding transaction volume through XRPL’s Cross-Currency RTGS functions.
  
• XRP cannot be mined and a portion is burned per transaction, meaning circulating supply will keep falling.
  
• XRP targets the $180 trillion international payments market, positioning it as a top bridging currency asset.

---

XRP is drawing renewed attention from the crypto community as Ripple’s distributed ledger technology gains traction among global banks.

Analysts and long-time observers point to a combination of rising network adoption, a shrinking token supply, and a massive addressable market.

Together, these factors are expected to push XRP toward higher and more stable valuations over time. The case being made is straightforward and grounded in market mechanics.

Banking Adoption and Payment Providers Fuel XRP Network Activity

As more banks integrate Ripple’s distributed ledger solution, transaction volumes across the network are expected to grow.

Each new institutional participant adds meaningful activity to the XRP Ledger. This growing participation directly increases the utility of XRP as a functional asset.

Payment service providers are also entering the picture. Companies like Finastra, Volante, and CGI are tapping into the XRPL’s Cross-Currency RTGS functions.

They are also using the Neutral Liquidity Marketplace that the XRP Ledger provides. This adds another significant layer of transaction volume on top of banking activity.

A recent post from crypto commentator SMQKE on X laid out the case clearly. The post stated that “the transaction volumes of the network will grow massively” as banks and payment providers deepen their integration with Ripple’s infrastructure. More network activity directly translates to greater XRP utility.

Greater utility, in turn, supports a stronger case for price appreciation. This is not speculative reasoning. It follows a basic supply-and-demand framework that has held across multiple asset classes over time.

Decreasing Supply and a $180 Trillion Market Position XRP for Long-Term Value

XRP cannot be mined, which makes its supply dynamics fundamentally different from Bitcoin and similar assets. A small amount of XRP is permanently burned with every transaction processed on the ledger. Over time, this means the circulating supply will only continue to fall.

As the SMQKE post noted, “everything that exists in a limited amount and is actively used is becoming more expensive.”

This principle applies directly to XRP as network usage climbs. A shrinking supply base against rising demand creates natural upward pressure on price.

The addressable market adds further weight to this outlook. XRP is positioned to serve international funds transfers, a market with an annual volume of $180 trillion.

Even a fraction of that volume flowing through the XRP Ledger would represent enormous demand for the token.

On the question of price volatility, Ripple has addressed this directly. The company expects volatility to ease as demand becomes more constant.

A steady flow of transactions using XRP as a bridging currency is expected to support price stability over time.

A $300 million hole doesn’t usually come with a neat repair manual. This time, the group spearheading the Kelp DAO recovery effort is trying to write one.

DeFi United, a coalition of multiple blockchain projects and crypto ecosystem individuals, has laid out a detailed, step-by-step plan to restore the backing of rsETH after this month’s Kelp DAO hack sent shockwaves through DeFi lending markets, releasing more than 116,000 tokens that weren’t properly accounted for.

The proposal, circulated on Aave’s official X account, reads like a coordinated cleanup operation, one that leans heavily on Aave’s infrastructure to unwind the damage and get markets back on a stable footing.

The incident traces back to April 18, when an attacker exploited a vulnerability in rsETH’s bridge. By forging a message that appeared legitimate, the attacker tricked the Ethereum side of the system into releasing 116,500 rsETH, making the system believe the funds had moved when they hadn’t, allowing a large batch of rsETH to be created without backing.

Those tokens didn’t just sit idle. They were spread across multiple wallets and deployed across DeFi, with a significant portion used as collateral on Aave and other lending platforms.

That’s where the problem became systemic: protocols like Aave suddenly found themselves holding collateral that, at least temporarily, wasn’t fully backed.

According to the proposal, most of the exploited funds are still in play. Roughly 107,000 of the original 116,500 rsETH remain tied up in active positions across Aave and Compound.

That leaves two problems to solve at once: restoring the actual backing of rsETH itself, and unwinding the loans created using those extra tokens.

DeFi United’s proposal aims to tackle both sides of that equation simultaneously.

On the backing side, the group says it has already lined up enough ETH commitments to fully re-collateralize rsETH. The plan is to feed that ETH back into the system in stages, converting it to rsETH and depositing it back into the system so the token is once again fully backed.

At the same time, attention shifts to the lending markets where the damage is most visible.

Instead of letting things play out chaotically, the plan is to step in and carefully unwind the mess.

A big part of that involves dealing with the positions the attacker opened on Aave. These are essentially loans backed by rsETH that shouldn’t have existed in the first place. Rather than waiting for those loans to collapse on their own — which could cause more market disruption — the proposal suggests nudging the system so they can be closed out in a more controlled way.

In practice, temporarily adjusting how rsETH is valued inside the system will enable those bad positions to be liquidated or closed more smoothly. As those positions are unwound, the underlying assets (like ETH) can be recovered. The proposal estimates this could free up around 13,000 ETH from Aave alone.

Once that collateral is back in hand, it gets converted into ETH and used to cover the shortfall created by the exploit — essentially filling the hole left behind.

The process isn’t risk-free. It hinges on governance approvals across multiple chains, the successful deployment of committed funds and a smooth execution of the unwind.

Still, the plan reflects a more coordinated response than DeFi has often managed previously. If executed as intended, the end goal is straightforward: “rsETH backing is fully restored, and all affected markets are stabilized,” as the proposal says.

Read more: Industry leaders are pouring hundreds of millions into a rescue plan for Aave users after massive crypto hack

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) sued Wisconsin on April 28, 2026, to reassert its exclusive jurisdiction over prediction markets. The action challenges state-level regulatory interference in a sector increasingly built on blockchain technology and crypto assets. The lawsuit underscores ongoing federal-state jurisdictional disputes over decentralized and tokenized derivatives platforms.

The CFTC’s enforcement action signals the regulator’s intent to maintain control over derivatives-adjacent products in the crypto space, potentially affecting platforms that tokenize prediction market shares or operate on decentralized protocols.

The CFTC said that its lawsuit is in response to Wisconsin filing civil suits against multiple CFTC-regulated prediction market companies — Kalshi, Polymarket, Crypto.com, Robinhood, and Coinbase — alleging violations of state law.

Sources: CFTC

This article was generated automatically by The Defiant’s AI news system from publicly available sources.

TLDR:

• LayerZero Labs is donating 5,000 ETH and depositing another 5,000 ETH into Aave to strengthen market liquidity.
  
• The $292M Kelp DAO exploit involved an RPC-poisoning attack that forged cross-chain messages via LayerZero’s DVN.
  
• DeFi United has raised over $300M in ETH and stablecoins, with major contributors including Consensys and Arbitrum DAO.
  
• Total value locked across DeFi fell from $95B to $80B following the Kelp DAO hack, reflecting broad market disruption.

---

LayerZero Labs has committed over 10,000 ETH to the DeFi United recovery initiative, led by Aave, following the $292 million Kelp DAO exploit.

The crypto infrastructure provider will donate 5,000 ETH directly and deposit another 5,000 ETH into Aave markets.

This contribution, valued at roughly $23 million, places LayerZero among the largest participants in the industry-wide effort to restore rsETH backing after the April 18 attack.

LayerZero’s Contribution to DeFi United

LayerZero’s pledge comes approximately five days after the company first announced its intent to join a recovery effort.

The firm will also work to deepen liquidity for GHO, the native stablecoin on Aave. This move signals a broader commitment beyond a simple financial donation.

LayerZero confirmed the details in an official post on X, stating it is “donating 5,000 ETH to DeFi United, depositing an additional 5,000 ETH to strengthen Aave markets liquidity, and strategically deepening GHO liquidity.”

LayerZero also confirmed plans to continue working with Aave and other DeFi participants. The focus will be on how Omnichain Fungible Tokens (OFTs) should be designed and configured for use in lending markets. This collaboration could shape future standards across the ecosystem.

The exploit on April 18 involved a sophisticated RPC-poisoning attack on LayerZero’s Decentralized Verifier Network.

Attackers forged a cross-chain message, releasing unbacked rsETH from Kelp’s LayerZero-powered bridge adapter on Ethereum. Around 107,000 rsETH then entered lending positions on Aave, creating substantial bad debt.

Industry Response and Recovery Progress

DeFi United has now raised over $300 million in ETH and stablecoins from dozens of protocols and individuals. Arbitrum DAO has a pending vote to release 30,765 ETH toward the effort.

Consensys and Joseph Lubin together are contributing 30,000 ETH, matched by a low-interest loan from Mantle.

Aave DAO also has a pending proposal to approve a 25,000 ETH contribution. This adds to Aave founder Stani Kulechov’s personal pledge of 5,000 ETH. Kelp DAO contributed 2,000 ETH, while Circle is buying AAVE tokens to support the protocol’s stability.

There remains a dispute over responsibility for the attack. LayerZero states it “recommended multi-DVN redundancy” to protect against single points of failure. Kelp, however, says it “used the default configuration” provided, which relied on a 1-of-1 DVN setup with only LayerZero Labs as the verifier.

Meanwhile, the total value locked across DeFi has dropped to $80 billion, down from roughly $95 billion just before the hack.

Aave has released a detailed technical recovery plan, and the broader effort to restore rsETH backing continues to move forward.