The $1.7 trillion asset manager Franklin Templeton is establishing a new dedicated active crypto investment management arm through acquisition of 250 Digital.

Franklin Templeton has established Franklin Crypto to offer institutional investors actively managed cryptocurrency strategies the asset manager said in a statement.

The San Mateo, California-based asset manager first announced the acquisition and the new crypto division in April as part of its increasing push into digital assets. It has not disclosed financial terms of the deal

The new division will combine the investment capabilities of the former 250 Digital team with Franklin Templeton’s global distribution. Franklin Templeton will also invest its own capital into these liquid strategies as part of the closing agreement.

The new unit absorbs the entire 250 Digital investment team, alongside all liquid cryptocurrency strategies they previously ran under CoinFund, according to the statement.

Crypto industry veterans Christopher Perkins and Seth Ginns will co-lead the new division. Perkins will serve as Head of Franklin Crypto and Chief Investment Officer respectively.

Read More: Franklin Templeton proposes new ETFs that turn corporate dividends into bitcoin

CFTC Chair Michael Selig has defended crypto perpetual futures while stressing they are not suitable for agricultural markets, as regulated crypto perps continue expanding across U.S. venues.

According to remarks delivered by Selig at the American Cotton Shippers Association Annual Convention on Tuesday, the CFTC recognizes that 24/7 trading and perpetual futures structures are not well suited to traditional agricultural markets that depend on physical delivery and operate during limited trading hours.

Drawing a contrast between the agency’s historic role overseeing products ranging from corn to livestock and its newer responsibilities involving digital assets, Selig said perpetual contracts tied to cryptocurrencies are not appropriate for every asset class, particularly in agriculture.

While emphasizing those differences, Selig’s comments come only weeks after the CFTC approved Bitcoin perpetual futures contracts for prediction market platform Kalshi and issued a no-action position allowing similar products on Coinbase. Following those developments, crypto exchange Kraken also launched perpetual futures trading for U.S. customers through its CFTC-regulated platform Bitnomial.

Crypto perpetuals remain under regulatory review

Alongside the emergence of regulated crypto perpetuals, the CFTC and the Securities and Exchange Commission recently opened a joint public consultation seeking feedback on how U.S. regulations classify swaps, security-based swaps, mixed swaps, and related derivatives products.

As reported by crypto.news, the agencies said financial markets and trading practices have evolved since the original implementation of Title VII of the Dodd-Frank Act, prompting a review of whether current definitions still align with modern products. Comments will remain open for 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.

According to the agencies, the request covers jurisdictional questions, swap exclusions, alternative compliance frameworks, mixed swaps, and newly developed financial products. The review also includes event contracts and prediction market products that increasingly sit at the intersection of commodities and securities regulation.

Addressing the initiative, Selig said the consultation could help resolve what he described as longstanding ambiguities within Dodd-Frank. SEC Chair Paul Atkins separately stated that additional regulatory clarity is overdue, including for event-based products.

A key issue emerging from the review involves crypto perpetual futures, which differ from traditional futures contracts because they have no expiration date. As crypto.news previously reported, Kalshi’s Bitcoin perpetual futures were permitted to remain listed under existing futures rules, subject to compliance with the Commodity Exchange Act and CFTC regulations.

If regulators eventually classify crypto perpetuals as swaps rather than futures, platforms offering the products could face different requirements covering execution, reporting, clearing, and regulatory oversight.

Traditional exchanges are taking notice

Growing interest in regulated crypto perpetuals has also attracted attention from established exchange operators.

According to additional reporting, CBOE has begun evaluating whether its Bitcoin and Ether futures products could be converted into perpetual contracts after crypto perpetuals generated more than $8.5 billion in trading volume on Kalshi within weeks of launch.

At the same time, Selig’s handling of prediction markets and crypto perpetual approvals continues to face legal scrutiny. Last week, CME Group filed a lawsuit against the CFTC in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, alleging that the agency’s approvals violated the Commodity Exchange Act.

Further uncertainty surrounds the agency itself. Despite calls from lawmakers to fill vacant seats, President Donald Trump has not appointed additional commissioners, leaving Selig as the CFTC’s sole commissioner and chair following Caroline Pham’s departure in December 2025.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Senate is expected to consider the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act in the coming weeks. According to lawmakers and industry participants, the legislation could redefine how regulatory responsibilities are divided between the CFTC and SEC for digital asset markets.

“Strengthening the resilience of payments in Europe has become a geopolitical necessity,” Markus Ferber, a leading member of the ECON committee said on Tuesday.

“In a world marked by geopolitical tensions, we can no longer accept that digital payments are largely dependent on the goodwill of a few foreign providers,” he added, echoing concerns expressed across the EU.

The new rules voted by the ECON Committee cleared the way for the ECB to introduce both online and offline versions of the currency by 2029. Crucially, the offline version will allow users to swap digital euros directly from phone to phone without an internet connection, guaranteeing cash-like privacy that prevents the ECB from seeing what citizens are buying.

The EU’s central bank digital euro approval comes just hours after U.S. Senate voted to place a four-year ban on a CBDC. The bill now heads to the House of Representatives. If they follow suit it then goes to President Donald Trump for his signature.

Commercial banks successfully lobbied for strict holding limits on how much a citizen can keep in a digital wallet to avoid a mass exodus of cash from traditional accounts during a crisis.

The ECB will now undertake a 12-month pilot phase using a beta version to test the infrastructure in real-world scenarios with select merchants and payment service providers.

In its first earnings report since its May IPO, Cerebras Systems (CBRS) is lower by 11% in after-hours trading after guiding to lower profit margins next quarter.

First-quarter revenue nearly doubled from the year-ago level to $193.4 million, and the company’s adjusted net loss of $2.5 million beat analyst forecasts of $36.75 million.

For the second quarter, the company guided to revenue of $194 million, but investors, for now, appear focused on core gross margin — the company expects 36%-38% in the second quarter versus 46.5% in the first.

Cerebras raised $6 billion in a May IPO priced at $185 per share. The stock soared as high as $385 shortly after going public, but has since retreated. It’s down another 11% in after-hours trading at $201.55.

Ethereum is running out of money, according to former insiders.

The warning has sparked one of the fiercest Ethereum governance debates in months: should the network fund developers by taxing staking rewards, or just rely on wealthy Ether holders to bankroll its ecosystem?

At the center of the debate is a controversial proposal from Kleros co-founder Clément Lesaege. He suggested redirecting up to 10% of validator rewards to ecosystem funding through a protocol-level mechanism called Validator Redirected Revenue.

Lesaege argued that this may be necessary to solve Ethereum’s “coordination failure” and reduce the underfunding of shared ecosystem work.

The idea was met with a wave of backlash, with critics warning of cartel-like incentives and a dangerous precedent for validator-led redistribution.

Validator Redirected Revenue proposal. Source: Eth Research

But just as the Ethereum community was sharpening its knives, a “credibly neutral” solution was forming: Ethlabs.

Unveiled Monday by five former Ethereum Foundation researchers, the shiny nonprofit Ethereum research and development lab is backed by the ecosystem’s biggest supporters, including BitMine, Sharplink and ConsenSys founder Joseph Lubin.

Related: Ethereum Foundation sacks 20% of workforce amid strategic restructuring

With large investors ready to dig into their pockets, the real question becomes less about whether Ethereum can fund itself and more about how it wants to be funded.

Ethereum’s ‘slow-burning funding crisis’

The latest ETH drama began on Friday when former Ethereum Foundation contributor Trenton Van Epps warned that Ethereum’s core development ecosystem could face a “slow-burning funding crisis” within three to nine months as older support programs dry up and Foundation spending falls.

He estimated that maintaining more than 10 client, research and coordination teams costs roughly $30 million a year, and that the Client Incentive Program and other support mechanisms were no longer enough to cover that bill.

Van Epps argued that Ethereum is entering an institutional “inheritance” phase in which the Foundation will move away from being the primary steward of protocol funding, and that new arrangements must replace the expiring programs he helped coordinate.

Having spent much of the year dealing with leadership turnover, public criticism over priorities, and a growing debate over core protocol funding, Van Epps’ warning touched a raw nerve.

But some Ethereum voices pushed back, arguing that the EF has “enough funds to run for at least 30 years, so there is zero funding crisis.” Bitmine’s Tom Lee also rejected the warning, saying there was “zero chance” of Ethereum running out of funds for protocol development.

Ethereum Foundation Treasury Policy. Source: Ethereum Foundation

The Ethereum Foundation’s own treasury policy already points to a multi-year operating buffer and a planned reduction in annual spending.

In June 2025, the EF said it would maintain a 2.5-year operating expense buffer in cash and stablecoins, pledged to cap annual spending at 15% of total treasury assets and gradually reduce that spending rate toward a 5% baseline over five years.

Related: Ethereum can quantum-proof accounts for just 7 cents, says Ethereum’s Kohaku lead

On Tuesday, Ethereum founder Vitalik Buterin said the Foundation is decreasing its budget by roughly 40%, in line with that policy, as it transitions from spending around 15% of its funds annually before 2026 toward a long-term target of about 5% per year after 2030. It laid off 54 staff members.

The proposal everyone hates

So the Foundation may not run out of money, but it is tightening its belt and has a lot less cash to spend on research and development than in its glory days. Lesaege argued that Ethereum suffers from a coordination failure in which everyone benefits from shared infrastructure — but no one wants to foot the bill.

His proposal would require validators to signal how much of their staking rewards they are willing to redirect, a figure between 0% and 10%. If a majority of validators supported a non-zero rate, that redirect would become mandatory for all.

At current staking levels, he estimated that even a 5%-10% redirect could generate roughly 50,000 to 70,000 ETH per year for ecosystem work, or roughly $82.5 million to $115.5 million at current ETH prices today.

Incentive to fund Ethereum growth. Source: Eth Research

Critics quickly zeroed in on the mechanism’s power dynamics, warning that it could entrench large validators, blur the line between operators and governance actors, and give a stake-weighted majority new leverage over ecosystem funding decisions.

What staking providers say

A spokesperson for Figment told Cointelegraph the proposal would compress margins, which “tends to consolidate the validator set toward larger, more integrated operators” serving institutional clients, like Figment.

This would come at the “cost of some operator diversity and potentially fewer net new ETH stakers,” the spokesperson said.

Andrew Gibb, chief executive and co-founder of Twinstake institutional staking, told Cointelegraph that various investor segments would respond differently.

While long-term ETH holders may value the prospect of a better-funded ecosystem, shorter-term capital, such as retail participants, liquid multi-asset funds and reward-focused allocators may be less receptive.

He said the proposal would “narrow the addressable staking market at the margin,” with the most price-sensitive cohorts likely to “reduce or exit positions,” adding that he would expect some clients to reassess their staking allocations.

Related: Buterin fires back at Ethereum Foundation critics, recommits to neutrality

Senior research associate at Bitwise, Max Shannon, told Cointelegraph that Ethereum staking participation has so far shown limited sensitivity to lower rewards.

He said that the staking annual percentage rate (APR) has fallen from about 4.6% in June 2023 to around 2.7% now, while staked supply and the staking ratio roughly doubled. However, additional reward compression would make “slashing risk and exit-queue liquidity risk more material relative to the return.”

He added that a lower net consensus-layer yield could push validators to rely more heavily on maximal extractable value (MEV) to make up lost APR, which could potentially weigh on censorship resistance.

How large is the problem, really?

On paper the funding gap is not that large. Shannon noted that if the annual shortfall is around $30 million and annual staking rewards are about $1.9 billion, so the gap could be filled with just 1.6% of staking rewards.

That makes Lesaege’s proposal look modest, even though it remains politically radioactive. In economic terms, a single-digit haircut on staking rewards is manageable. In governance terms, many Ethereum participants see it as a line-crossing move that turns validators into a tax authority.

Shannon also argued that networks with hard-coded development funding are not necessarily better off just because they earmark rewards. In his view, protocol success is driven far more by token performance and contributor incentives than by any one developer funding mechanism.

A new funding model emerges

Tom Lee’s comment there was “zero chance” of an Ethereum funding crisis and that funds were “secured” foreshadowed the unveiling of the new non-profit EthLabs a few days later.

Rather than taxing rewards at the protocol level, Ethlabs enables large ETH-aligned institutions such as BitMine and Sharplink to fund development directly.

Ethlabs nonprofit R&D for Ethereum. Source: Ethlabs

It does not replace the Ethereum Foundation, but complements it. EthLabs signals that the smart contract platform’s next phase may involve a more distributed funding model, where the EF remains central to the protocol’s core, while other labs and treasury-heavy institutions fund adjacent work.

In an X post on Monday, Ethereum co-founder Joe Lubin said there is still “an enormous amount of top tier talent” at the Ethereum Foundation that remain focused on “the cypherpunk core components” of the protocol. But he added that many other Ethereum R&D teams will now explore other dimensions.

Gibb said that the responsibility for funding ecosystem development sits with foundations and protocol treasuries. There are alternate mechanisms to explore, such as staking yield or priority fees, he added, “before making changes to validator economics at the protocol level.”

Whether Ethlabs proves sufficient remains to be seen. But its emergence has already shifted the debate from how Ethereum should tax itself to whether it needs to at all.

Market Moves: Why is Ethereum Foundation selling? BTC futures warning signs

Key Takeaways:

• CRWV declined 5.14% to close at $105.57 despite positive partnership news.

• The company secured official AI cloud partner status with BattleBots Pro League.

• Robot combat teams will gain access to CoreWeave’s advanced cloud infrastructure.

• An Innovation Award sponsored by CoreWeave will recognize creative engineering efforts.

• The stock remained near daily lows throughout trading after an early bounce dissipated.

Shares of CoreWeave (CRWV) experienced a 5.14% decline to $105.57 even after revealing a strategic AI cloud partnership with BattleBots. The stock hovered near daily lows following a brief mid-morning uptick that quickly evaporated. Persistent downward pressure dominated afternoon trading, keeping CRWV deep in the red.

CoreWeave, Inc. Class A Common Stock, CRWV

BattleBots Selects CoreWeave as Official AI Cloud Provider

CoreWeave has been designated as the exclusive AI cloud partner for BattleBots and its recently established Pro League. This collaboration links CoreWeave with robot designers, engineers, and technical professionals throughout the BattleBots ecosystem. Top-tier combat robotics teams will gain immediate access to the company’s sophisticated cloud computing capabilities.

Participating teams will leverage CoreWeave’s technology infrastructure while preparing robots for the 2027 Pro League competition. The platform will support various activities including design iteration, testing protocols, data evaluation, and performance optimization. This partnership positions CoreWeave’s solutions within a highly competitive arena centered on cutting-edge engineering and robotics innovation.

As part of the arrangement, CoreWeave will maintain Platinum Sponsorship status throughout the ongoing 2026 BattleBots Pro League season. The company’s branding will be prominently displayed across the BattleBots Arena in Las Vegas during scheduled combat competitions. A CoreWeave-branded arena clock will also mark critical moments throughout each match.

Partnership Introduces Innovation Recognition and Technical Resources

The collaboration features a CoreWeave-backed Innovation Award recognizing teams that showcase exceptional engineering creativity and technical prowess. Fan voting through BattleBots’ social media channels will precede the organizers’ final selection. The award aims to celebrate teams introducing novel designs, technological advancements, or superior performance capabilities.

Between combat rounds, BattleBots teams must rapidly assess damage, reconstruct machines, and modify tactics under tight time constraints. These teams depend on swift technical decision-making and dependable tools to enhance robot capabilities. CoreWeave intends to facilitate these processes by providing computing infrastructure optimized for intensive data processing and development requirements.

This alliance broadens CoreWeave’s marketing visibility among engineers and developers utilizing sophisticated computing platforms. It simultaneously provides the company exposure to BattleBots’ global audience of technology enthusiasts and robotics aficionados. Nevertheless, the news couldn’t prevent CRWV from posting a significant daily loss.

Company Emphasizes Track Record in Cloud Computing Excellence

CoreWeave delivers cloud infrastructure supporting the training, deployment, and operation of AI models throughout various development phases. The company has consistently posted impressive results in third-party computing performance evaluations covering both model training and inference capabilities. Its services target organizations requiring substantial computing clusters for sophisticated and resource-heavy operations.

CoreWeave has previously earned top placements in industry benchmarks evaluating cluster efficiency, inference velocity, and cost-effectiveness. The company received SemiAnalysis’s premier Platinum designation in two distinct ClusterMAX evaluations. Artificial Analysis similarly awarded high rankings to its infrastructure during independent assessments involving Moonshot AI coding and language processing models.

Despite these credentials, CRWV tumbled to $105.57 as investors showed minimal enthusiasm for the BattleBots partnership revelation. Shares stayed anchored near their intraday lows after the temporary morning recovery evaporated. The downturn demonstrated that the sponsorship announcement couldn’t counterbalance the prevailing bearish sentiment impacting the stock.