DoubleZero Foundation, a project building high-speed data infrastructure for blockchains like Solana, has rolled out a new platform to speed up how trading firms access crypto market data — a sign of growing demand for Wall Street-style systems in digital asset markets.

The project, called DoubleZero Edge, went live on Thursday. Its first offering is a real-time feed of raw data from the Solana blockchain, giving traders faster access to information that can influence prices.

Solana, a high-speed blockchain popular with traders, produces large amounts of real-time data as transactions are processed. DoubleZero plugs into that system by working with validators to distribute it more quickly to market players.

Unlike traditional finance, where exchanges rely on specialized networks to deliver data at high speed, crypto markets still largely depend on the public internet: a setup that can introduce delays and inconsistencies. DoubleZero is trying to change that by building a dedicated system designed specifically for onchain data.

According to the company, the new network can shave tens of milliseconds off data delivery times, with bigger gains during periods of heavy network activity. For high-frequency trading firms, even small speed improvements can translate into a competitive edge.

The platform works by sending data over a private fiber network using multicast, a method commonly used in traditional financial markets to simultaneously distribute data to multiple participants.

Beyond speed, DoubleZero is also pitching a new economic model. Validators on the Solana network can earn additional revenue by supplying data to the platform, while traders pay to subscribe to the feeds using USDC.

The launch comes as crypto trading firms increasingly seek more reliable, predictable infrastructure, particularly as competition intensifies and margins tighten. DoubleZero says its system could help level the playing field by reducing uncertainty in how quickly market data reaches participants.

“Traditional finance has spent decades building infrastructure where speed and deterministic performance are a real competitive advantage,” said Andrew McConnell, a co-founder of DoubleZero, in a press release shared with CoinDesk. “On-chain markets didn’t get that foundation, which left even sophisticated trading firms working on uneven ground. Deterministic infrastructure removes a risk market makers have to price in, which leads to tighter spreads and better execution.”

Read more: A former Solana exec is taking a page out of Wall Street playbook to make global crypto trades faster

Bitcoin’s core developers earlier this week proposed freezing 8 million coins to defend against quantum attackers.

But Cardano founder Charles Hoskinson believes it still can’t save coins belonging to the network’s pseudonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto, per a video posted to his YouTube channel late Wednesday.

Hoskinson said Bitcoin’s proposed defense against quantum computers is both technically mislabeled and structurally incapable of protecting the network’s oldest coins, including the roughly 1 million bitcoin attributed to Satoshi Nakamoto.

He argued that BIP-361, the proposal from developer Jameson Lopp and others to phase out quantum-vulnerable bitcoin addresses, is being presented as a soft fork but would functionally require a hard fork because it invalidates existing signature schemes that users are actively relying on.

“To actually do this, you need a hard fork,” Hoskinson said. The distinction matters because Bitcoin’s development culture has historically opposed hard forks, viewing them as violations of the network’s immutability. BIP-361 authors have described the proposal as a soft fork, a characterization Hoskinson called a lie.

A soft fork tightens the rules so old software still works but can’t use the new features. A hard fork changes the rules so fundamentally that old software stops working entirely and the network splits unless everyone upgrades.

BIP-361 suggests that users with frozen quantum-vulnerable funds could reclaim them by constructing a zero-knowledge proof tied to their BIP-39 seed phrase, a standard for generating wallet keys from a recoverable phrase.

Hoskinson argued this approach cannot rescue approximately 1.7 million bitcoin that predate BIP-39’s introduction in 2013, including the roughly 1 million coins associated with Satoshi’s early mining activity.

Those early coins were generated using a different key derivation method from the original Bitcoin wallet software, which relied on a local key pool rather than a deterministic seed.

There is no seed phrase to prove knowledge of, which means no zero-knowledge recovery scheme built on that assumption can return access to the holders.

“1.7 million coins can’t do that. It’s not possible. 1.1 million of which belong to Satoshi,” Hoskinson said.

If the proposal passes in its current form, those coins would remain permanently frozen regardless of whether their original owners ever attempt to migrate, because migration would require cryptographic proof they are unable to provide.

Jameson Lopp, the core developer who co-authored BIP-361, acknowledged in a post on X this week that he does not like the proposal and hopes it never needs to be adopted, describing it as “a rough idea for a contingency plan” rather than a finalized specification.

Lopp has argued that freezing dormant coins, which he estimates at 5.6 million bitcoin, would be preferable to allowing a future quantum attacker to recover and dump them on the market.

Hoskinson’s broader critique extends beyond the technical details. He argues that Bitcoin’s lack of formal on-chain governance leaves the network unable to resolve these tradeoffs through a structured process, forcing contentious upgrades to be negotiated through developer mailing lists and social pressure.

The U.K.’s Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) is proposing crypto rules that could quietly expand the definition of custody, potentially sweeping in platforms and software providers that don’t consider themselves custodians.

The FCA published its Cryptoasset Perimeter Guidance on Wednesday, which includes a few technical traps for firms handling clients’ crypto assets.

The rules draw a red line at the 24-hour mark for custody. Any firm or crypto platform or app holding client assets for longer than a day during trade settlement will likely fall under the regulated custodian classification, which triggers a requirement for a full safeguarding-license.

Validators and node operators also need to proceed with caution. The regulator warned those involved in those activities will lose their pure tech exemption the moment they provide “added value” features. That includes things like user dashboards, yields or reward-compounding tools. In those cases, they must seek full approval for arranging staking.

“Our new perimeter gives us the tools to strengthen protections for consumers and support fair, transparent and orderly markets as the sector matures,” the FCA stated in the paper.

Also noteworthy is that for the first time, the FC has addressed the “shadow custody” issue. The financial watchdog made it clear that if a crypto service provider allows it to theoretically override a client’s authority, it is officially a custodian even if it guarantees it will never exert that power.

“The fact that an arrangement involves smart contracts, public blockchains or some elements of decentralisation does not determine the perimeter position or place the arrangement outside of regulation,” the document noted.

For stablecoin issuers, the mandate is equally blunt as it considers issuance legal only if the issuer is established in the United Kingdom and manages the entire lifecycle. That includes everything from the initial offering to redemption and reserve maintenance.

The FCA requested views on these proposals until the consultation closes on June 3, 2026, it said in a separate statement Wednesday. The regulator intends to publish finalized rules in policy statements this summer, followed by the final perimeter guidance in September.

The roadmap forces all entities providing crypto services to transition from the current money-laundering registrations systems to a more strict approval regime under the U.K.’s Financial Services and Markets Act (FSMA).

Firms intending to continue in business under the new regulations face a five-month application window from Sept. 30 of this year to Feb. 28, 2027. Missing this deadline exposes them to potential fines and suspensions as well as permanent closures.

Only those who apply during the application period will benefit from the so-called “savings provisions” that allow them to keep operating while the regulator deliberates.

Bitcoin BTC$74,767.82 quickly pulled back in U.S. morning trade on Thursday, slipping 2% in a matter of minutes after once again failing to push through what’s becoming stiff resistance.

The largest cryptocurrency fell to around $73,500 during the U.S. morning session, now lower by more than 1% over the past 24 hours. The move came after the crypto was turned back yet again after rising past $75,000.

Alongside, the breathtaking stock market rally — which yesterday sent the Nasdaq and S&P 500 to record highs — took a pause. A bit more than an hour into the session, both of those indices were lower by about 0.1%.

Crypto-linked stocks also pulled back across the board. Coinbase (COIN), Strategy (MSTR), Robinhood (HOOD) and Circle (CRCL) were all down roughly 2%-3% in morning trading.

Meanwhile, crude oil prices rose about 2%, reclaiming the $90 level, as ongoing geopolitical tensions continued to underpin supply concerns.

The $75,000-$76,000 range is key for bitcoin, as that was the level it traded at prior to the Feb. 5 market crash that took BTC down to $60,000. A rise past that level might suggest a larger move that could bring prices back to around the $90,000 mark at which bitcoin started the year.

Software catching up to bitcoin

Bitcoin and software stocks were moving almost in lockstep prior to the Middle East conflict at the end of February, with a near 1:1 correlation. During this period, bitcoin has been outperforming IGV, the software ETF.

Since the conflict began at the end of February, bitcoin has gained more than 11%, while IGV has risen by roughly 2%, prompting a narrative that bitcoin was beginning to decouple from software equities.
However, over the past five days, IGV is catching up and is up by as much as 11%, while bitcoin has been flat. This suggests that rather than a clean decoupling, software may have simply been lagging bitcoin and is now catching up.
IGV is up 1% on Thursday, while bitcoin is down 1.5%.

Binance Alpha is launching a two-round Genius Foundation trading competition that will hand out roughly $200,000 in GENIUS tokens to 2,520 of the platform’s most aggressive buyers over the last two weeks of April.

Binance is rolling out a Genius Foundation trading competition on its Binance Alpha platform, dangling rewards equivalent to roughly $200,000 to drum up activity around GENIUS tokens. The exchange said its Web3 wallet will host the campaign in two rounds, ranked purely by participants’ total buying volume of GENIUS during the event windows.

The first round runs from April 16, 2026, at 21:00 to April 23, 2026, at 21:00, followed by a second round from April 23, 2026, at 21:00 until April 30, 2026, at 21:00, giving users two discrete weeks to accumulate eligible trading volume. According to Binance’s announcement, the top 2,520 users across the campaign will share a pool of 176,400 GENIUS tokens, with each qualifying trader receiving 70 GENIUS.

Binance framed the Genius Foundation competition as an Alpha‑branded promotion aimed at active Web3 wallet users, with the ranking metric focused on “total buying trading volume” of GENIUS rather than overall PnL or number of trades. That structure effectively rewards aggressive spot accumulation over the two rounds, favoring users willing to ramp up notional volumes in the token.

The exchange said the reward pool, sized at 176,400 GENIUS, is equivalent to about $200,000 at current reference prices, implying a per‑token valuation slightly above $1, though the exact dollar payout per user will fluctuate with the token’s market price. Each of the 2,520 eligible participants receives an equal 70 GENIUS allocation, avoiding a tiered or winner‑takes‑most structure and instead spreading the incentive across a broader group of traders.

Binance did not disclose detailed tokenomics for GENIUS in the brief announcement, but positioned the Genius Foundation campaign as part of its broader effort to route users into its Alpha and Web3 wallet ecosystem, where it has been layering on trading quests and airdrop‑style promotions for emerging tokens. Similar exchange‑run competitions in recent months have been used to bootstrap liquidity and price discovery for new assets, while giving existing users reasons to increase volumes on specific pairs.

In previous crypto.news coverage of exchange incentives and trading contests, reporters have highlighted how reward campaigns can temporarily inflate volume and open interest, sometimes concentrating risk among highly leveraged or promotional‑driven traders. For GENIUS, the coming two weeks on Binance Alpha will show whether a $200,000‑equivalent carrot is enough to convert short‑term farming into lasting liquidity around the token.

Key Highlights

• RKLB shares climbed almost 10%, regaining both the 50-day and 20-day moving averages following a ~27% decline from the 52-week peak
• The aerospace firm finalized its $155.3M Mynaric purchase, gaining laser optical communications technology and establishing its first European operations
• Rocket Lab introduced “Gauss,” an innovative electric satellite propulsion system with manufacturing capacity exceeding 200 units annually
• On April 14, Citigroup raised RKLB from Market Perform to Outperform; Cantor Fitzgerald maintains an $85 target price
• The space industry ETF (UFO) has gained over 30% year-to-date, partially driven by SpaceX IPO rumors

Rocket Lab has experienced a whirlwind week. The California-based aerospace company finalized a strategic acquisition, introduced an innovative propulsion system, and secured an analyst rating boost — all while shares surged nearly 10%.

Rocket Lab USA, Inc., RKLB

RKLB has soared more than 200% over the trailing twelve months and commands a market capitalization of approximately $40.7 billion. The shares had retreated about 27% from their 52-week peak but have recently recovered, reclaiming both the 50-day and 20-day simple moving averages. The stock continues to trade above its 200-day SMA.

Market observers are focused on the $78 threshold. A confirmed breakout above this level could indicate the beginning of another upward trend.

Mynaric Deal Finalized

On April 14, Rocket Lab finalized its Mynaric acquisition for a total price of $155.3 million — consisting of a modest cash payment plus approximately 2.28 million RKLB shares.

Mynaric specializes in laser optical communications terminals, a specialized yet increasingly vital component of satellite technology. This transaction provides Rocket Lab with its inaugural European footprint and enhances its capacity to support commercial constellation developers and defense agencies.

The purchase represents another milestone in Rocket Lab’s strategic evolution from a pure launch provider to a comprehensive space systems integrator. The organization has consistently targeted supply chain components that are difficult to procure at scale, then developing or acquiring the necessary capabilities internally.

Gauss Propulsion System Addresses Critical Supply Gap

The company’s second major reveal was Gauss, an innovative electric satellite propulsion system engineered for mass production. Electric propulsion has historically represented a supply chain constraint — dependable systems haven’t been accessible at volumes required by contemporary constellation operators.

Gauss aims to resolve this challenge. Rocket Lab has established a manufacturing facility with capacity to produce over 200 propulsion units annually. CEO Sir Peter Beck stated directly: “Proliferated constellations are now the norm, but the propulsion systems needed to maneuver these spacecraft in orbit have simply not been reliably available at any kind of scale.”

The propulsion unit incorporates a Hall Thruster, Power Processing Unit, and Propellant Management Assembly. It operates on xenon fuel, with krypton available as an option. The architecture delivers superior specific impulse compared to chemical propulsion, enabling spacecraft to carry reduced fuel loads while maintaining operational effectiveness during extended missions and station-keeping operations.

Engineering highlights include heaterless cathode technology enabling immediate activation, magnetic shielding to minimize degradation, and GaNFet-based power electronics. The platform is ITAR/EAR-free for low Earth orbit constellation deployments.

Regarding analyst coverage, Citigroup elevated RKLB to Outperform on April 14. Cantor Fitzgerald confirmed its Overweight stance with an $85 price objective following the iQPS multi-launch contract reveal. The consensus among 17 analysts stands at Moderate Buy, with an average price target of $79.85.

Rocket Lab recently concluded its at-the-market equity program, disposing of 6.73 million shares for gross revenue of roughly $474 million. Additionally, the company executed collared forward agreements involving 7.45 million shares, with anticipated proceeds between $474 million and $642 million.

In today’s newsletter, Marcin Kazmierczak from Redstone takes us through the evolution of tokenization as it moves from “concept to allocation.”

Then, in “Ask an Expert,” Kieran Mitha answers investor questions about tokenized investments.

– Sarah Morton

Where Tokenized Assets Are Today

Tokenization is moving from concept to allocation. What matters now is how these assets fit into portfolios and what they actually enable.

Your clients are already hearing and asking about tokenized assets, and that trend will only accelerate.

In the last 18 months, companies like BlackRock, Franklin Templeton, and Fidelity Investments have launched real products on the blockchain, including Treasury funds and private credit strategies. Investors are taking notice. The numbers are rising, the news is easy to track, and the basic idea is simple: bonds, private credit, and money market funds are now available on-chain, without traditional intermediaries, and settlement becomes orders of magnitude faster.

That summary is mostly accurate, but it does not tell the whole story.

The technology to create tokens has never been the main challenge. The real test comes later, with decisions on compliance, identity, transfer rules, sanctions, and lifecycle management. These are the areas where most projects slow down, and where the market is evolving now.

Last month, RedStone’s research team released the Tokenization & RWA Standards Report 2026, which examines how these systems are actually being built.

The compliance question is an architecture question

For issuers, the most important choice is not which blockchain to use, but where to place the compliance rules.

Compliance can be built right into the token and enforced by smart contracts with every transfer. It can also be managed outside the token using tools such as whitelisting. Another option is to enforce compliance at the network level, where the blockchain itself decides which transactions are allowed.

Each method fixes one issue but creates another.

Identity verification structures for tokenized assets, source: Tokenization Standards Report

Putting compliance rules inside the token gives you exact control, but it makes the system less flexible. For example, updating a sanctions list or rule might require upgrading the contract, turning a simple policy change into a technical task. Managing compliance outside the token makes things more flexible, but it means relying on middlemen and can expose assets if they leave their original environment. Enforcing rules at the network level makes token design easier, but it limits how easily the asset can move to other chains and systems.

For advisors, this is not an abstract design choice. It directly affects how an asset behaves. It determines whether it can move across chains, integrate with blue-chip decentralized finance (DeFi) protocols, like Morpho or Aave, and serve as collateral in a lending strategy. Two tokenized funds with identical underlying assets can behave very differently depending on this single architectural decision.

Institutional capital is already moving on-chain

The transition from theory to practice is most evident in how tokenized assets are used in lending markets.

Deposits of tokenized real-world assets in DeFi lending protocols have surpassed $840 million. A large share of this activity follows a familiar structure: an investor posts a tokenized asset as collateral, borrows against it, and redeploys the borrowed capital, often back into the same asset. The mechanics are new, but the logic is not. It is a programmatic version of the same capital efficiency strategies long used in traditional finance, now executed without a prime broker — faster, cheaper, and with less friction.

How investors allocate these assets is increasingly reflecting broader market trends.

On one major protocol, tokenized Treasury exposure declined sharply, while tokenized gold allocations expanded severalfold over the same period, tracking changes in rate expectations with notable precision. It is the best showcase of how professional capital responds to macro signals through on-chain infrastructure.

For advisors, this reframes the role of tokenized assets. They are not simply wrappers around existing products. In the right structure, they become productive collateral, capable of generating additional yield and participating in broader strategies while remaining in the portfolio.

Credit risk is becoming explicit

As these assets move into lending and structured strategies, credit risk is evolving alongside specific DeFi strategies, such as looping. Emerging DeFi risk ratings frameworks like Credora introduce continuous, on-chain risk assessment, bringing a level of transparency that traditional markets rarely offer.

For advisors, that shifts the question from what the asset represents to how it behaves under stress, and what risks it entails. Simple-to-understand ratings on a familiar A+ to D scale facilitate the creation of a risk-adjusted portfolio, attracting more and more interested parties.

What remains unresolved

Some structural gaps remain. Corporate actions still rely heavily on off-chain processes, and illiquid assets such as private credit and real estate are not yet fully compatible with DeFi standards.

Until those pieces are solved, tokenization will continue to scale unevenly, with the most complex assets lagging behind the simplest ones. The bright side? Creators of tokenization frameworks are well aware of that limitation, and soon enough, we should see solutions addressing that gap.

Sanctions screening approaches in tokenized assets, source: Tokenization Standards Report

– Marcin Kazmierczak, co-founder, Redstone

Ask an Expert

Q:As tokenization moves from pilot programs into live financial infrastructure, what needs to happen for it to become a standard layer in global capital markets?

Tokenization becomes standard when it integrates into existing financial systems rather than competing with them. The priority is interoperability between blockchains, custodians, and traditional market infrastructure so assets can move seamlessly across platforms.

Regulatory clarity is equally critical. Institutions need confidence in ownership rights, settlement finality, and compliance frameworks before allocating significant capital. We are already seeing early traction, but scale will come when tokenized assets match or exceed the efficiency, liquidity, and reliability of traditional securities. At that point, tokenization will not be viewed as innovation. It will simply be the infrastructure underpinning modern markets.

Q:What are the most overlooked risks or misconceptions surrounding tokenized assets today?

One of the biggest misconceptions is that tokenization automatically creates liquidity. It does not. It simply makes assets easier to access. Take real estate as an example. You can tokenize a property and divide it into thousands of shares, but if there are no active buyers and sellers, those shares will still be difficult to trade.

Another challenge is how early the market still is. Different platforms are building their own ecosystems, which can lead to fragmented liquidity rather than one unified market.

The technology is moving quickly, but infrastructure, regulation, and investor participation are still catching up. That gap between what is possible and what is practical is where most of the risk exists today.

Q: For retail investors, does tokenization open the door to new types of investments, and could that be a catalyst for bringing younger generations into the market?

Tokenization is emerging as younger generations move into higher earning careers and take a more active role in managing their wealth. Having grown up through rapid technological change myself, this group naturally expects financial systems to evolve in the same way as everything else in their lives.

That mindset is driving a greater willingness to explore asset classes beyond traditional stocks and bonds. Tokenization can open access to areas like private markets and real estate, while offering a more digital and flexible investment experience.

It is not just about new opportunities, it is about alignment. As the financial industry modernizes, it begins to reflect the speed, transparency, and accessibility younger investors are used to. That shift is likely to play a meaningful role in attracting a new generation into investing.

– Kieran Mitha, marketing coordinator

Keep Reading

• Chiliz price rose more than 13% to above $0.0433.
• Korea’s Naver Pay has onboarded nearly 1 million users to the Chiliz Chain.
• Top European teams with fan tokens have advanced in the UEFA Champions League.

Chiliz (CHZ) rose more than 13% as investor momentum strengthened.

The token’s price moved higher following a new milestone in Asia’s crypto adoption, while renewed excitement around European football also supported gains, pushing CHZ to its highest level this month.

Chiliz Chain gets Korean boost

Chiliz is looking to gain traction in South Korea following a new integration with Naver Pay, the country’s dominant payment gateway.

On Thursday, Chiliz announced that Naver is bringing its 33 million daily active users on-chain via Chiliz Chain, a move aimed at supercharging growth in the SportFi ecosystem.

CHZ’s price action intensified amid UCL semifinal drama.

The token surged by more than 13% intraday, peaking above $0.0433 and emerging as one of the top performers on the day. Gains aligned with a spike in trading volume, which had exploded 262% to over $175 million, as of writing, to signal robust investor enthusiasm.

This rally coincides with Chiliz’s announcement on X that a Fan Token-backed team is assured a UCL final spot.

Notably, Arsenal, Atletico Madrid, and Paris Saint-Germain (PSG) have all advanced to the semifinals, amplifying hype for their Chiliz-powered Fan Tokens.

𝟏𝟎𝟎% 𝐋𝐎𝐂𝐊𝐄𝐃 𝐈𝐍. 🔒

A Fan Token team is guaranteed a spot in the final.$AFC $ATM $PSG ⚡️ $CHZ pic.twitter.com/58DbhdHXzH

— Chiliz – The Sports Blockchain (@Chiliz) April 15, 2026

Advertisement

Fan Tokens, which let supporters vote on club decisions and earn rewards, saw heightened trading as fans rallied behind their teams.

Chiliz price outlook

Analysts remain bullish on CHZ ahead of the 2026 World Cup in the United States, Canada, and Mexico, projecting a potential rally as the showpiece event draws closer.

In the short-term, CHZ could climb to $0.06 if Korean onboarding sustains and UCL finals deliver fan token spikes.

However, primary resistance sits at $0.045 and $0.05. On the downside, immediate support is likely at $0.038.

Macro and geopolitical factors could catalyze broader market corrections, which means Chiliz’s price may swing alongside top coins.

In the United States, victims of the $4 billion crypto Ponzi scam OneCoin are finally receiving compensation. 

On April 13, the US Department of Justice said that $40 million in assets are available to anyone who purchased OneCoin between 2014 and 2019 and experienced a net loss.

This program marks a milestone for OneCoin victims, most of whom had no recourse to get back what they lost, until now. Victims in the UK attempted a class action suit in 2024, but it fell apart when litigation funding was terminated.

Few crypto schemes were as prominent as OneCoin, in terms of scale and the international intrigue that followed. Founders and associates have been imprisoned or killed, while the ringleader is still on the lam.

The Wild West of early crypto was often defined by schemes and eccentric characters, the effects of which, in the case of OneCoin, are still felt today. 

OneCoin’s founding and legal troubles

In 2014, cryptocurrency was still a niche internet phenomenon. The Bitcoin white paper was only six years old, and general knowledge of cryptocurrencies and blockchain tech was limited. Still, interest in the new asset class was rising among retail investors.

From August to December 2014, Ruja Ignatova and Karl Sebastian Greenwood founded OneCoin. Initial promotions began in Europe, and soon entities popped up in Bulgaria, Dubai and Belize. 

OneCoin’s structure was convoluted. Investors needed to buy packages of tokens that would allow them to “mine” OneCoin. There were several different price entry points for packages, with almost no upper limit. The most expensive, according to CoinMarketCap, was 225,000 euros.

Promoters, meanwhile, could earn commissions by bringing new investors into the program. This allowed the project to expand rapidly.

While marketed as a cryptocurrency, it was not decentralized. The coin itself was hosted on the centralized servers of OneCoin Ltd. The coins were not available for public trading and owners could only trade nominal amounts in a closed system. 

The project seemed fairly suspect from the outset, but fear of missing out, as well as the massive audiences drawn by Ignatova at seemingly above-board conferences, were enough to convince many.

Throughout 2015, the project grew across the globe in Europe, Asia, Africa and Latin America. Repeating the familiar MLM playbook, promoters emphasized urgency, and the immediacy of an impending explosion in value and crypto adoption. 

Regulators began to catch on by late 2015. Bulgaria’s Financial Supervision Commission issued a warning about OneCoin, after which the company ceased all operations in the country. 

By 2016, several other national financial regulators also had OneCoin on their lists. By year’s end, Norway, Bulgaria, Finland, Sweden and Latvia were all investigating the project. The Hungarian central bank called it a pyramid scheme.

In December, Italian authorities defined OneCoin as an illegal pyramid scheme and demanded it cease activities in the country. China began investigating the project and even arrested some investors. 

Regulation efforts ramped up again in 2017. Germany, Thailand, Belize and Vietnam all issued cease-and-desist orders or declared OneCoin illegal. In India, undercover police arrested 18 organizers of a OneCoin event that attempted to bring in new investors. Indian authorities went so far as to charge Ignatova herself in July.

By the year’s end, things had reached a breaking point. Investors were concerned about delays in a supposed exchange that would allow them to cash out their coins. This was supposedly going to be addressed at an October meeting of OneCoin organizers in Lisbon, Portugal. 

But Ignatova didn’t show. According to a BBC investigation, she boarded a Ryanair flight from Sofia to Athens, Greece on Oct. 25, 2017. No one has seen her since. 

Arrests, murders and Crypto Queen on the run

In early 2018, investigators moved in on the project. At the request of prosecutors in Germany, Bulgarian police raided the OneCoin offices in Sofia. The raid, which according to the Sofia Globe also included German police and Europol, seized servers and material evidence. 

In July, co-founder Greenwood was arrested on charges of money laundering and fraud in Thailand, where he would await extradition back to the United States.

Ignatova’s own lawyer, Mark S. Scott, was convicted of conspiracy to commit money laundering and conspiracy to commit bank fraud due to his connections and activities at OneCoin. He would be disbarred a few years later. 

OneCoin stayed in the headlines for the next couple of years as developments continued to unfold. In July 2020, two project promoters, Oscar Brito Ibarra and Ignacio Ibarra, were kidnapped and murdered in Mexico. Local media reported that local cartels, which were increasingly becoming interested in cryptocurrencies, could have been involved. 

In 2020, entertainment media in Hollywood reported that Kate Winslet would star in a movie about OneCoin. To date, it hasn’t started production. 

While Greenwood’s case proceeded in the United States, the Federal Bureau of Investigation put Ignatova on its Ten Most Wanted fugitives list in June 2023. 

In September, Greenwood was sentenced to 20 years in prison and ordered to pay $300 million in damages. He pleaded guilty to charges of fraud and money laundering. His sentence was a marked reduction from the initial 60 years sought by the prosecution. 

In 2024, the DoJ arrested and charged William Morro for bank fraud in connection with OneCoin. Morro moved some $35 million in OneCoin funds between banks in China and Hong Kong, and $6 million between Hong Kong and the US. Morro surrendered himself to authorities and pleaded guilty to one count of conspiracy to commit bank fraud.

In the latest news, the DoJ announced on Monday that $40 million in assets are available to compensate investors who bought OneCoin between 2014 and 2019 and recorded a net loss. 

By the time everything was said and done, some 3.5 million people had lost money to the crypto scheme. Authorities estimate that organizers ultimately made away with $4 billion in user funds. 

Ignatova remains at large and on the Ten Most Wanted list. The FBI is offering a $5 million reward for info leading to her arrest and/or conviction. 

Magazine: Bitcoin will not hit $1M by 2030, says veteran trader Peter Brandt