Cointelegraph is committed to providing independent, high-quality journalism across the crypto, blockchain, AI, and fintech industries.

All news, reviews, and analyses are produced with full journalistic independence and integrity. For more details on our standards and processes, please read our Editorial Policy.

By Rembrandt, founder of OLY

Charlie Munger had a rule that explains more of crypto than any whitepaper ever written: “Show me the incentive and I will show you the outcome.”

Now look at the incentives of every token you have ever held. Strip away the Discord, the roadmap, the word “community,” and the game underneath is simple: a pool of limited liquidity and a race to take it from each other.

There is exactly one way to get paid: market-sell before everyone else does. Buy early, dump at the right moment, onto the latecomers and the believers.

The traders dumped at the first sign of weakness. The mercenary farms dumped their emissions on your head.

The VCs unlocked and sold into your conviction. A handful of early insiders capture most of the money, everyone else funds it, and the whole arrangement wears the costume of a movement. That is not a market failure.

That is the design, working exactly as built: player versus player, dressed up as community. For four straight cycles the patient subsidized the impatient, and the industry called it normal. We all know what it was: extraction by design.

OLY exists because that game does not deserve another cycle.

Before OLY had a name, it had a list of every action a user can take in a token’s life: buy, hold, stake, provide liquidity, sell slowly, sell instantly. Each one was tested against a single question.

Does this action feed the people who stay, or feed on them? Then every action was priced to match. Nothing is banned, and nothing is free of consequence.

Munger’s rule, run in reverse: choose the outcome, then build the incentive that makes it the rational move.

The result runs like a machine with three parts. The fuel: tax revenue, paid by sellers. The engine: the vaults that generate long-term revenue for stakers.

The defense: a strategic liquidity buy wall that meets every crash. Start with the fuel, because nothing shows the design faster than the exits.

The fuel: exits, priced

OLY has three exits, priced by the damage they do.

A market-sell is the only act that truly pushes the price down. Every red candle you have ever stared at was someone choosing the fastest door.

OLY prices that door to match the damage: a dynamic tax that scales with the protocol’s market cap, highest while the protocol is young and stepping down automatically as it grows.

The exact brackets live in the whitepaper; the principle is what matters: the cost of the fast door falls as the protocol grows.

Taxes in the main pool are collected in ETH, using Uniswap V4 hooks. A limit order waits for a real buyer instead of eating the book, for a small flat fee.

An exit through single-sided liquidity is the unsung hero of the design. Instead of selling into the pool, you become the pool: your tokens sit as depth, earn trading fees while they wait, and convert to ETH as buyers arrive.

It is the one exit that cannot print a red candle, and it costs zero.

That price is not generosity. The protocol wants every leaver to choose the door that leaves the market standing.

What OLY prices is the damage: leave through the cheapest door and nobody feels it; slam the expensive one and you pay everyone still in the room.

Notice what the tax is in this design. Not a punishment. A price, and a revenue stream. Sellers are not the enemy; they are the fuel.

The engine: where the revenue goes

The largest share flows into a staked-ETH vault earning validator rewards through Lido.

The rest is split between a Uniswap liquidity vault that earns trading fees, direct staker payouts in ETH, a buy and burn that permanently shrinks supply, and the protocol’s newest layer: the Liquidity Defense, which gets its own section below. A percentage of the downside, captured and recycled into the system.

Follow that loop into a drawdown and you find the design’s strongest property: when the impatient rush to market sell, protocol revenue rises, and staker payouts rise along with it.

The moment every other system starves its people is the moment this one pays its stakers the most. Capitulation has a beneficiary: those with the highest conviction.

And what do the people who stay actually collect? The best of what DeFi has to offer: ETH from every taxed exit, stETH earning validator yield, trading fees from blue-chip liquidity positions, and, as the vault system grows, whatever the DAO adds next. One token, staked once, collecting a portfolio.

Most protocols pay stakers in freshly printed versions of themselves. OLY pays its stakers in everything else.

And the vault system is built to grow. The roadmap ahead includes an RWA vault on Robinhood Chain, pending DAO deployment, streaming tokenized stock yield to the same stakers, with more vaults to follow as Ethereum DeFi evolves.

Each new vault walks the same path: deployed, proven in production, then locked immutable. One stake, and your rewards reach beyond DeFi entirely.

The defense: liquidity that stands its ground

This is the part of the machine no tax can replicate. A tax makes the panicking seller pay, but it does not stop the fall; in a thin pool the crash happens anyway, just with a toll booth on the way down. So OLY defends with liquidity instead.

The protocol takes a share of every tax collection and stands it below the market price as concentrated ETH bids.

A crash cannot fall past those bids without selling into them, and every token they catch is permanently burned.

Sell-offs do not just pay the stakers; they arm the defense that meets the next sell-off. The more the price crashes, the more the protocol buys.

Commitment is priced too

The mint, opening August 28, prices patience directly: three pillars, best terms to the longest commitment.

Stakes run 88 days to 1,776, with share bonuses up to four times for the longest locks, and rewards landing on five rolling cycles of 8, 28, 90, 369, and 888 days.

The 888 was chosen because it is roughly one full crypto cycle.

Voting power comes from staking shares, not idle tokens. The steering wheel belongs to the people locked to the destination.

This is also how OLY answers the whale problem. In every token you have ever held, the largest holders were the largest threat: unstaked, unaccountable, one rumor away from nuking the chart. In OLY, size only works through staking.

Rewards flow to shares, voting power flows to shares, and shares come from locking, with real penalties for breaking the commitment.

A whale who wants whale economics must lock like everyone else, which means the largest positions in the system belong to the people least able to dump on you. The bigger the holder, the longer the alignment.

None of this makes OLY immune to markets. A reserve built on staked ETH falls when ETH falls.

Staking is a real commitment with real penalties for abandoning it. And a young protocol is a young protocol, whatever its architecture. What the design changes is not whether the storm comes. It changes who gets paid while it passes.

The thesis

Most tokens are extractive by design: they ensure value flows from the believers to the insiders. OLY is the reversal. Protection by design.

The impatient pay the patient. Conviction collects. Show me the incentive, and I will show you the outcome.

By the end of every cycle, the people who held are the people who matter. OLY is the incentive structure that finally agrees with them.

The mint opens August 28.

Website:oly.io   •   Whitepaper:oly.io/whitepaper   •   X:@olympusxreserve

This article is authored by a third party, and CoinJournal does not endorse or take responsibility for its content, accuracy, quality, advertisements, products, or materials. Readers should independently research and exercise due diligence before making decisions related to the mentioned company.

Grayscale’s filing for a proposed Worldcoin ETF has revealed that the 100 largest wallets control roughly 90% of the circulating WLD supply.

According to a recent SEC registration statement filed by Grayscale for its proposed Grayscale Worldcoin ETF, the largest 100 wallets held approximately 90% of all WLD in circulation as of the filing date. The disclosure appeared in the fund’s risk factors, where the asset manager outlined ownership concentration and governance risks tied to the token that would back the proposed exchange-traded fund.

The filing comes only days after Grayscale sought approval to list the product on Nasdaq under the ticker GWLD, offering investors direct exposure to Worldcoin through a traditional brokerage account instead of requiring them to purchase and store the token themselves. 

If approved, the trust would hold WLD directly, use the CoinDesk Worldcoin Benchmark Rate to determine its net asset value, and rely on BitGo Bank & Trust as custodian, while The Bank of New York Mellon would serve as administrator and transfer agent.

The ownership data disclosed by Grayscale differs from Worldcoin’s original vision for token distribution. 

Worldcoin’s whitepaper said most WLD tokens would eventually be claimed by individuals who verified themselves as unique humans through the project’s identity system. Grayscale instead warned that a relatively small group of early adopters currently controls a substantial share of the tokens already released.

The registration statement adds that it is “reasonably likely” that early holders own a significant portion of the circulating supply, making WLD more concentrated than its long-term distribution goals suggest.

One of the largest addresses identified in public blockchain data belongs to the bridge connecting Ethereum and World Chain, meaning part of the concentrated holdings may represent assets deposited by multiple users rather than a single owner. Even so, Grayscale’s filing presents the overall concentration level as a material risk for prospective investors.

Filing outlines governance and decentralization risks

Beyond token ownership, the filing also describes several parts of the World Network that remain under centralized control.

According to Grayscale, governance of the network continues to be substantially guided by the World Foundation despite previous plans to decentralize decision-making over time. The filing states that WLD may eventually be used for governance, although the mechanisms required to support that transition remain new and untested at scale.

The disclosure contrasts with earlier statements from the project, which had promoted proof-of-personhood as a foundation for one-person-one-vote governance. Grayscale’s prospectus says governance has not yet reached that stage and continues to rely largely on the World Foundation.

The filing also identifies operational risks linked to the blockchain itself. World Chain currently depends on a centralized sequencer, while upgrade functions remain under the coordinated control of a limited group associated with the World Foundation, Tools for Humanity, and Optimism, the Ethereum layer-2 infrastructure supporting the network.

Grayscale further states that the Orb devices used to verify users are still manufactured and distributed mainly by or under the direction of Tools for Humanity. The filing also notes that the World Foundation continues to exercise significant influence over the protocol, the WLD treasury, and ecosystem grants.

ETF proposal arrives after recent ecosystem developments

The governance disclosures accompany Grayscale’s broader proposal to launch the first U.S. exchange-traded fund holding WLD directly.

Under the proposed structure, the trust would function as a passive investment vehicle without leverage or derivatives. Authorized participants would create and redeem shares in blocks of 10,000, known as baskets, either by delivering WLD directly or through cash transactions facilitated by liquidity providers. Grayscale has not yet disclosed the management fee, seed investment, or the number of WLD represented by each share, leaving those details for future amendments.

The SEC filing does not guarantee regulatory approval, and Nasdaq cannot list the product unless regulators approve the registration process.

The proposed ETF follows several developments that have increased attention on Worldcoin during recent months. In June, Robinhood added WLD to its trading platform, giving the token access to a larger retail audience. 

Despite the listing, WLD fell nearly 15% on the day as traders focused instead on allegations reported by third parties involving Sam Altman and entities connected to the Worldcoin ecosystem, alongside continuing criticism of the project’s biometric identity verification system and token distribution model.

Pons has unveiled its V2 upgrade plan, introducing an ETH-based bonding curve, Uniswap V4 integration, creator payouts in ETH, and support for tokenized real-world asset trading pairs as Robinhood Chain’s competition among token launchpads continues to intensify.

According to an announcement published by the Pons team, the update is scheduled for next week and will redesign how tokens launch, trade, and transition into decentralized liquidity pools on Robinhood Chain. The team said the contracts are still undergoing audits with two partners, meaning every feature remains subject to change until deployment.

Bitcoin (BTC) started the week in positive territory, reclaiming $65,000 and extending its gains on Tuesday, crossing $66,000 and reaching an intraday high of $66,923.

However, the flagship cryptocurrency failed to cross $67,000 as another escalation in hostilities between the US and Iran raised oil prices and dampened optimism.

Bitcoin Stumbles After Fresh Geopolitical Headwinds

Bitcoin (BTC) almost breached the $67,000 mark before sellers stepped in and drove prices lower. Price action is still being dictated by three key drivers: US-Iran tensions, the Federal Reserve meeting scheduled for July 28 and 29, and risk appetite. The immediate reason for BTC’s latest downturn is fresh tension between the US and Iran.

The ongoing geopolitical situation has adversely impacted global markets and investor sentiment. Oil prices briefly declined thanks to a fragile truce between the warring nations.

However, the latest round of escalatory actions has pushed prices higher again. US Crude rose nearly 3% to $84.70 per barrel as supply fears, amid the prospect of another closure of the crucial Strait of Hormuz, resurfaced. Rising oil and energy costs could push inflation higher. A report in Reuters also confirmed a damaged tanker near the Strait of Hormuz and warned of delays in Saudi crude shipments. Houthi forces have also issued threats to ships in the area.

Clarity Act Progress And Sustained ETF Inflows Behind Bitcoin Push Above $65,000

Bitcoin (BTC) pushed higher on Tuesday after the Trump Administration reached an agreement on comprehensive federal ethics rules. The rules could also apply to President Donald Trump’s crypto interests, an issue raised repeatedly by Senate Democrats. However, it remains unclear how the restrictions will be imposed. Democratic senators have pushed for tighter restrictions on political crypto dealings, with Senator Elizabeth Warren stating that a bill that does not address the president’s links to the crypto industry would be worthless.

Reports of the agreement also pushed crypto-linked stocks higher, with Coinbase and Circle shares surging nearly 10%.

Meanwhile, spot Bitcoin ETFs extended their inflow streak for a sixth day, recording $203.2 million in inflows on Tuesday, according to Coinglass data. Total inflows over the past six days currently stand at $930.2 million. Additionally, over $223 million was liquidated in 24 hours, of which $181 million were short positions.

Bitcoin Price Action

Bitcoin (BTC) briefly pushed above the upper Bollinger band when it crossed $66,000, indicating substantial buying pressure. However, with sellers dominating around $67,000, the flagship cryptocurrency has lost ground over the past two sessions.

BTC reached an intraday high of $66,923 on Tuesday but failed to cross the resistance at $67,000. As a result, it declined to $66,086 and has extended its decline during the ongoing session, and currently trades around the $65,700 mark.

Disclaimer: This article is provided for informational purposes only. It is not offered or intended to be used as legal, tax, investment, financial, or other advice.

Kakao Group has partnered with stablecoin issuer Circle to explore payment infrastructure for won-backed stablecoins as South Korea prepares a broader regulatory framework for crypto assets. 

On Thursday, the companies announced that Kakao, Kakao Pay and Kakao Bank had signed a strategic memorandum of understanding (MOU) with Circle Internet Group. Under the agreement, the companies will explore ways to connect Circle’s blockchain and global payment infrastructure with Kakao’s consumer platforms and financial services.

The agreement highlights how major South Korean consumer and financial platforms are positioning themselves ahead of expected stablecoin legislation, even before the regulatory framework is finalized. 

Under the MOU, the companies plan to examine stablecoin payments, cross-border remittances, merchant settlement and connections between existing financial systems and blockchain networks. 

The companies will also consider support for tokenized financial services, but they did not disclose any products or launch timelines.

Cointelegraph reached out to Circle and Kakao Group but did not receive a response before publication. 

South Korea’s stablecoin framework 

South Korea has been working toward legislation governing won-backed stablecoins as policymakers seek to encourage digital payment innovation while addressing risks related to reserves, redemption and issuer oversight. 

The government has been preparing a bill that would establish requirements covering stablecoin issuance, collateral management and internal controls. Lawmakers have also introduced competing proposals as support has grown for won-pegged tokens aimed at reducing reliance on the US dollar. 

However, the regulatory process has stalled over disagreements about which institutions should be permitted to issue won-based stablecoins. 

The Bank of Korea, the country’s central bank, argued that banks should retain a majority stake in stablecoin issuers, while the Financial Services Commission warned that eligibility limits could restrict competition and innovation. 

In its economic growth strategy announced on July 14, the government listed advancing the Digital Asset Basic Act among its priorities for the second half of 2026. 

Related: South Korean regulator misses stablecoin bill deadline: What’s next?

Meanwhile, companies and financial institutions have begun testing the technology in South Korea. In April, internet bank Kbank partnered with Ripple to test blockchain-based remittances. 

In May, KB Financial Group completed a pilot covering stablecoin issuance, offline merchant payments and cross-border remittances through the Kaia blockchain. The group said it was preparing to introduce stablecoin services once the regulations take effect. 

Magazine: Why Australia’s $17B crypto opportunity depends on regulation