Crypto World
Pi coin halving explained: the mining rate math
Pi Network borrowed crypto’s most powerful word and built a very different machine behind it.
Summary
- Pi’s mining-rate halvings are real, but they affect new emissions rather than the larger unlock flow already pressuring price.
- Around 6.5 million PI entering circulation daily makes unlocks more important than fresh mining emissions in 2026.
- The real supply debate is not only 100 billion PI, but how much eventually migrates, unlocks, and becomes sellable.
- Protocol upgrades and ecosystem growth may help demand, but utility must absorb recurring supply rather than one-time hype.
The full supply math runs from the 3.1415926 starting rate to the unlock schedule that now swamps it, and that math defines what the price can realistically do. Few words in crypto carry the weight of “halving.” Bitcoin built a 16-year religion around it: a clockwork cut to new supply, every four years, that has preceded every major bull market the asset has had.
So when Pi Network describes its own mining system in halving language, and when its team points to halvings as the reason a 100 billion token supply will not drown the price, the word does a lot of persuading on its own. That persuasion needs an audit. Pi does have halvings, real ones, with a history and a schedule of sorts. It also has a supply system in which those halvings are close to irrelevant for the question holders actually care about.
The tokens pressuring the price in 2026 were not mined yesterday at the current rate. They were mined years ago at far higher rates, and they are arriving on the market through a different door entirely. With PI trading near $0.12, down from a $2.99 peak in the first days of open trading, the gap between the scarcity story and the supply reality has become the most important piece of math in the ecosystem. What follows walks the math from the beginning: the original mining formula, the milestone halvings, the switch to monthly supply caps at mainnet, the unlock schedule that now dominates everything, and what would have to change for the halving narrative to start mattering.
The math in one paragraph
For readers who want the conclusion before the derivation: Pi’s halvings cut the rate of new mining, which in 2026 is a trickle, while the supply that moves the market comes from the migration and vesting of roughly 100 billion pre-allocated tokens, of which only about 9 billion circulate today. Around 6.5 million PI in newly unlocked tokens reach the market every day, a flow that dwarfs fresh mining emissions and adds tens of millions of dollars in potential sell pressure every month at current prices. Halving the mining rate slows the filling of a reservoir that is already 91% full of committed water behind the dam. Both the mechanics and the overhang are real; the overhang is bigger, for years to come, under every published version of the schedule.
Where the rate began: 3.1415926 per hour
Pi’s original mining design has a certain mathematical charm. When the network launched on March 14, 2019, Pi Day, every Pioneer mined at a systemwide base rate of 3.1415926 Pi per hour, the first digits of the constant the project is named for. The rule attached to that rate was simple and aggressive: each time the network of engaged Pioneers grew by a factor of ten, starting from 1,000 users, the base rate would halve. Growth came fast, so the halvings came fast.
Five halvings have occurred, triggered at the 1,000, 10,000, 100,000, 1 million, and 10 million engaged Pioneer milestones, each cutting the base rate in half. The next milestone on the original schedule sits at 100 million engaged Pioneers, and the December 2021 whitepaper noted the network was then above 30 million engaged users. The whitepaper also kept open a more drastic option: stopping mining altogether once the network reached a size the team never specified. Two things about this design separate it from the halving everyone knows.
Bitcoin halves on a fixed clock, every 210,000 blocks, roughly every four years, with a date the entire market can calculate years in advance. Pi halves on a growth milestone, which means the timing depends on user acquisition, the metric is “engaged Pioneers” as measured by the team, and nobody outside the company can verify how close the trigger is. A halving you cannot date is a halving the market cannot front-run, and front-running is most of what gives Bitcoin’s halving its price relevance. The second difference is direction of causality: Bitcoin’s halving rewards existing holders as adoption grows, while Pi’s milestone design was built to keep early mining generous enough to recruit, then throttle issuance as recruitment succeeded.
What each Pioneer actually mines
The base rate is only the floor of an individual’s mining speed, and the multiplier system matters for the supply math because it determines how unevenly the rewards have accrued. Every active Pioneer earns at least the systemwide base rate. On top of it stack bonuses: rewards for security circle connections, a referral team bonus for each invited member mining concurrently, node operation rewards for those running the desktop software, app usage rewards, and lockup bonuses that pay extra mining speed in exchange for voluntarily freezing balances for periods from two weeks to three years. A well-connected early Pioneer with a large referral tree, a node, and a long lockup could mine at many multiples of the base rate.
Today’s market carries the distributional consequence. The cheapest Pi ever created sits in the oldest and largest accounts, the ones with the deepest referral trees, and those balances have been migrating to mainnet and unlocking through 2025 and 2026. When the price chart shows persistent selling into every bounce, the mining formula’s history says who has the most room to sell profitably at any price above zero. It is the cohort the formula was designed to enrich first.
The metric nobody can audit
Before leaving the milestone system behind, one of its quietest problems needs daylight: nobody outside the company can measure the number that triggers the halving. Pi’s public figures come in layers that do not reconcile from outside. The project has claimed more than 60 million users at its peak messaging, recent coverage cites over 18 million KYC-verified accounts, and the halving trigger uses a third measure entirely, “engaged Pioneers,” defined by activity criteria the team applies internally. The December 2021 whitepaper placed that figure above 30 million.
Where engaged Pioneers stand in mid-2026, after a year of price collapse that has surely thinned daily check-ins, is not published on any dashboard a holder can refresh. The 100 million milestone could be two years away or could effectively never arrive if engagement has plateaued, and the difference between those worlds is invisible from the outside. Contrast the information environment around the halving everyone else means by the word. Any Bitcoin holder can compute the next halving to the block, watch the countdown on a dozen public sites, and verify the issuance change in the chain data the moment it happens.
The event’s power comes from this common knowledge: everyone knows that everyone knows, so positioning starts months ahead and the narrative compounds. Pi’s milestone halving offers the market nothing to coordinate around. It will be announced when the team says the threshold was crossed, verified by the team’s own definition, on data only the team holds. Whatever else that is, it is not an event a market can price in advance, which removes the one channel through which halvings have historically moved anything.
The pattern repeats across Pi’s supply system. The numbers that matter most, engaged users, migration completion, KYC attrition, and discretionary release timing, are exactly the numbers held privately. A project that wants its scarcity mechanics taken seriously could publish every one of them tomorrow. Choosing not to tells the market something, and the market has been pricing it all year.
The mainnet switch: from halvings to a supply budget
In December 2021, new whitepaper chapters quietly retired the pure milestone model and replaced it with something more corporate: a fixed maximum supply of 100 billion Pi, divided by allocation, with new mining drawn from a budgeted pool. The split honors the original 80/20 principle between community and core team. Of the 100 billion: 65 billion is reserved for mining rewards to past and future Pioneers, 10 billion for community organizations and ecosystem building, 5 billion for liquidity, and 20 billion for the core team. The team’s allocation unlocks proportionally to community migration, a design meant to prevent the company from cashing out ahead of its users.
Within the 65 billion mining pool, issuance follows declining monthly supply limits, with the systemwide rate adjusted dynamically so that each month’s total new mining fits inside an exponentially decreasing budget. This was the moment Pi’s halving story changed character. The milestone halvings still exist on paper, with the 100 million Pioneer trigger still ahead, but the binding constraint on new supply became the monthly budget formula, which declines smoothly instead of in dramatic halves. There is no future Pi halving event that will cut flowing supply in half overnight the way Bitcoin’s does, because the system no longer works that way.
Out of the redesign also came the number that now towers over everything else: the difference between 100 billion allocated and roughly 9 billion circulating. As of early 2026, only about 9% of the eventual supply trades. The other 91% exists as a claim: unmined pool, unmigrated balances awaiting KYC, locked tokens serving out their bonus terms, and team and foundation allocations vesting on their schedules. Every one of those categories resolves, eventually, into circulating supply, while mining rate math governs only the first and smallest of them.
The unlock flow versus the mining trickle
Now the arithmetic gets concrete, because this is where the argument in the title gets settled. Through 2026, the dominant source of new circulating Pi has been unlocks: previously mined balances exiting their lockup terms, migrated balances clearing the pipeline, and scheduled releases tied to the allocation model. Tracking through the spring put the average at roughly 6.5 million PI entering circulation per day, which compounds to just under 200 million tokens a month. At a $0.12 price, that is over $20 million in potential monthly sell pressure; at the prices holders are hoping to return to, the dollar figure scales up with the dream.
The schedule reflects the same monthly pressure the market struggled with earlier in the year, and the struggle shows. The token broke below $0.13 support in early June on sustained selling volume, with technicians eyeing $0.10 next. Fresh mining must be placed beside that flow. The base rate has been halved five times from its 2019 starting point, and the monthly budget formula throttles it further across a user base where most participants mine at low multipliers.
Fresh emissions in 2026 are a small fraction of the unlock flow, and cutting them in half again at the 100 million Pioneer milestone would change the total monthly supply growth by a rounding error. That is the core asymmetry: halvings act on the flow of newly created tokens, while Pi’s price is set by the flow of previously created tokens reaching the market. Bitcoin never had this problem because Bitcoin had no pre-mined reservoir; every coin that exists was mined into the market at the prevailing rate, so cutting the rate cut the only supply source there was. Pi’s halving cuts the smaller of two pipes and leaves the larger one untouched.
A holder can check this logic against the chart. Bitcoin’s halvings preceded rallies because they measurably tightened the daily balance between new supply and steady demand. Pi’s five halvings have already happened, the monthly budget already declines, and the price fell more than 95% from its peak anyway, because none of that machinery touches the unlock schedule. The scarcity mechanics are real enough, just aimed at the wrong pipe.
The lockup machine and what it defers
Lockups need a closer look, because they are the one mechanism that actually removes supply from the market today, and they do it with a catch. A Pioneer who locks tokens for a longer term mines faster, which means the system pays users in future tokens to withhold present ones. In the short run this works exactly as designed: a meaningful share of migrated balances sits frozen, the daily sellable float shrinks, and the price gets a reprieve. In the long run, every lockup is a deferral, not a removal.
The locked tokens return to the float when their term expires, and they return accompanied by the bonus tokens the lockup earned, which means the mechanism converts present supply relief into amplified future supply. A three-year lockup opened in the post-mainnet enthusiasm of early 2025 matures in early 2028 carrying its rewards with it. None of this makes lockups bad design; deferral has real value, and a project buying time to build utility is making a defensible trade. But the supply math has to count both sides of it.
The unlock flow of 2026 is partly the echo of lockups chosen in 2022 and 2023, and the lockups being chosen today at depressed prices are writing the unlock schedule of 2028 and 2029. The reservoir does not drain through this mechanism. It sloshes. That is why the lockup system can reduce immediate sell pressure while still expanding the future supply problem.
The case that 100 billion never arrives
Inside the community circulates the strongest counterargument to everything above, and it deserves a fair hearing rather than dismissal. It runs as follows: the 100 billion figure is a ceiling, not a destination. The 65 billion mining pool pays out only for mining that actually happens, at rates that keep declining, across a user base whose growth has slowed. Tokens allocated to balances that never clear KYC may never migrate, and the team has tied portions of its own allocation to community migration that may never complete.
Run those leakages forward and several community analysts project a practical circulating supply stabilizing somewhere between 30 billion and 40 billion Pi, far short of the full hundred. If true, the effective dilution ahead is roughly a third of what the headline number implies. The projection is plausible, and the serious objections to it concern knowability, not direction. The variables that determine where supply stabilizes, including KYC completion rates, migration policy, the unspecified mining stop option, and the team’s release decisions, all sit inside the company’s discretion and outside public verification.
An asset whose terminal supply ranges from 30 billion to 100 billion depending on unpublished operational choices is an asset the market will discount for uncertainty, and the discount shows up as exactly the chart Pi has. Bitcoin’s supply schedule earns a premium not because 21 million is a small number but because no one can change it. Pi’s schedule carries a penalty not because 100 billion is large but because the real number is unknowable from outside. Scarcity that requires trusting an issuer is, in market terms, a different and weaker product than scarcity enforced by code.
There is a constructive version of this point. If the practical-supply argument is right, the cheapest credibility upgrade available to the core team is publication: audited migration statistics, a binding schedule for the team allocation, and a hard answer on the mining stop. The gap between 30 billion and 100 billion is worth more to the price, closed, than any halving. That is the kind of disclosure that would let the market price scarcity instead of guessing at it.
Why the team refuses to burn
Every few months the community’s favorite alternative resurfaces: burn the supply down. Petitions have circulated asking the team to destroy 10 billion or 20 billion tokens outright, importing the deflationary mechanics that other projects use to manufacture scarcity. The core team has rejected the idea explicitly, stating that supply discipline will come from halvings, the declining mining rate, and KYC gating instead. It has also argued that the large supply exists to keep the network accessible to a global user base instead of expensive for late arrivals.
The refusal is more defensible than frustrated holders allow, and less sufficient than the team implies. It is defensible because burning community-allocated tokens to lift the price for existing holders would invert the project’s stated purpose, and because burns at this scale would mostly reward the same early whales the mining formula already favored. It is insufficient because the stated alternatives do not address the overhang, as this piece has shown, and because “trust our discretion” is the exact posture the market is already discounting. Other ecosystems have shown a middle path that Pi has so far declined: mechanical, revenue-linked buyback or burn programs, transparent and rule-bound, that tie supply reduction to actual ecosystem usage instead of decree.
Pi has no protocol revenue to commit yet, which is its own answer about sequencing: utility first, then mechanics. The chart records how long the market is willing to wait. This is why burns remain a tempting but incomplete answer. Without recurring demand or transparent supply policy, a burn would change the headline number faster than it changes the underlying confidence problem.
What the math permits the price to do
Put the pieces side by side and the supply half of Pi’s price equation reads roughly like this for the next several years. Close to 200 million new tokens a month arrive from unlocks and scheduled releases, a flow that no halving touches. Fresh mining adds a small increment on top, declining on its budgeted curve. Lockup maturities add lumpy surges with their bonus amplification.
Against all of that stands whatever organic demand exists: grassroots commerce, speculative accumulation near lows, ecosystem hopes pinned to the protocol upgrade ladder, and the smart contract functionality promised around version 26. None of this math forbids recovery; it prices it. For PI to hold any level, monthly demand must absorb the monthly flow at that level, which at $0.12 means finding over $20 million of genuine new buying every month just to stand still, and proportionally more at higher prices. That is the core of what the numbers actually permit the price to do.
Catalysts that create one-time demand spikes, an exchange listing, a Pi2Day announcement, or a protocol release, lift the price into a heavier supply schedule and then hand it back to the flow. Catalysts that create recurring demand, real applications with real token sinks and fee burn from actual usage, are the only kind the supply schedule cannot defeat. They are also the kind that takes years. This is the same lesson the divergence between corporate progress and token price has taught holders of much larger assets this year, played out with a supply overhang several times more aggressive.
The halving milestone at 100 million engaged Pioneers will arrive eventually, and when it does, the announcement will borrow Bitcoin’s vocabulary one more time. Holders who have followed the math to this point will know what to check before celebrating: not the new mining rate, but the month’s unlock total beside it. That comparison is what decides whether the event matters. Until the larger pipe slows, the smaller pipe is not the story.
A schedule is not a slogan
Pi Network did not lie about its halvings. Five of them happened, the rates fell, the monthly budget declines, and the team can point to every mechanism it promised. What the project borrowed, without earning, is the meaning the market attaches to the word: the Bitcoin-trained reflex that halving equals scarcity equals appreciation. That reflex was built on a system with no reservoir, no discretion, and no door between allocation and circulation except mining itself.
Pi has all three, and they, not the mining rate, write its supply story. One honest path remains for making the scarcity language true. Drain the uncertainty rather than the supply: publish the migration math, bind the discretionary releases, define the mining endgame, and let utility grow into the float that exists instead of promising that the float will stop growing. The day the practical supply becomes a number the market can verify is the day Pi’s halvings start to mean something.
Until then, the most important rate in the ecosystem is not 3.1415926 divided by thirty-two. It is 6.5 million per day.
As of June 11, 2026. Supply figures and unlock rates change monthly; verify current data before trading. This article is information, not investment advice.
SpaceX has gained fresh support from Wall Street as reports point to more than $70 billion in potential retail demand ahead of what could become one of the largest public offerings in U.S. market history.
Summary
- Oppenheimer initiated SpaceX coverage with an outperform rating and a $190 price target ahead of the IPO.
- Reports suggest the offering could attract more than $70 billion in retail investor orders.
- CryptoQuant data showed no clear evidence that Bitcoin selling was driven by investors shifting funds into SpaceX shares.
According to Oppenheimer, the brokerage has initiated coverage of SpaceX with an “outperform” rating and a $190 price target, implying substantial upside from the company’s expected IPO price of $135.
The firm’s coverage comes as investor interest continues building around the aerospace company’s planned stock market debut.
Framing its investment case around technology integration, Oppenheimer said SpaceX is positioned to combine space-based infrastructure with artificial intelligence-driven systems while using terrestrial computing capabilities to improve efficiency and expand services. The firm argued that such an approach could help lower operating costs while supporting future growth initiatives.
Excitement around the offering has intensified as investors await the company’s expected Friday, June 12, debut.
While optimism remains elevated, political scrutiny has also emerged. Senator Elizabeth Warren recently called on the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to delay the IPO, adding a regulatory dimension to discussions surrounding the listing.
Alongside its SpaceX coverage, Oppenheimer raised its outlook for Tesla stock, citing stronger electric vehicle demand amid elevated oil prices. The firm noted that Tesla’s long-term performance would still depend largely on execution in artificial intelligence and electric vehicle markets.
Wall Street forecasts point to gains after listing
Beyond Oppenheimer, additional firms have started publishing forecasts for the stock. New Street Research has initiated coverage with a $165 price target, representing roughly 22% upside from the proposed IPO price.
Those projections have emerged as institutional and retail investors compete for exposure to the Elon Musk-founded company. Reports citing people familiar with the matter indicate that retail demand alone could exceed $70 billion, highlighting the scale of investor interest before shares begin trading.
Allocation plans have also contributed to the enthusiasm. According to reports, at least 20% of the IPO shares could be reserved for retail investors, a relatively large portion for an offering of this size. The structure would give individual traders a larger role than is typically seen in major U.S. listings.
At the same time, reports suggest that less than 10% of the shares may be allocated to international investors, signaling a strategy primarily focused on domestic participation.
Crypto market watches for potential capital competition
Attention surrounding the IPO has extended beyond equity markets and into the digital asset sector.
As crypto.news reported earlier, some analysts have warned that the SpaceX listing could compete for investor capital at a time when cryptocurrencies are already facing pressure from ETF outflows and weak sentiment.
The discussion gained momentum after Bitcoin (BTC) fell roughly 16% during the same period that SpaceX began marketing its public offering. Bitcoin briefly dropped below $60,000 before recovering toward the $61,000 level, according to market data cited in reports.
Despite the timing overlap, available blockchain data has not established a direct connection between the two developments. According to CryptoQuant data reviewed in the report, exchanges did not record unusual withdrawals of USDC or Tether during the selloff.
Stablecoin flows remained within ranges observed since February, suggesting there was no clear evidence of investors moving large amounts of crypto liquidity to fund IPO purchases.
Even so, reports that retail investors could access the offering through platforms such as Robinhood, Fidelity, and Charles Schwab have kept the debate active as the market prepares for SpaceX’s highly anticipated debut.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
The US Department of Justice (DOJ) charged two men over AudiA6, a crypto laundering service tied to over $389 million. Ruslan Tkachuk and Alexander Ledenev were arrested Wednesday in Batumi, Georgia.
Each defendant faces one count of conspiracy to launder monetary instruments and one count of sting money laundering. The US Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania will seek their extradition.
AudiA6 Charged up to 5% for Crypto Laundering
US Attorney David Metcalf announced the charges Thursday. The DOJ statement describes Tkachuk, 37, and Ledenev, 25, as senior members of the AudiA6 organization.
The Ukrainian and Russian nationals also allegedly manage Dark2Web, the cybercrime forum where the service advertised.
A Dark2Web advertisement offered to conceal the source of any customer’s cryptocurrency traceable to criminal activity. The service charged fees of up to 5% of the amount laundered.
Blockchain analysis showed AudiA6 wallets received roughly 10,333 Bitcoin (BTC) since 2021. The deposits were worth about $389.7 million at the time of the transactions.
Only 393.39 BTC, worth roughly $19.2 million, arrived directly from darknet markets, major ransomware groups, and cybercrime services.
That is under 4% of all deposits. Additional funds arrived indirectly from illicit sources, suggesting customers layered coins before they ever touched the service.
International Operation Dismantles AudiA6 Infrastructure
The takedown followed parallel investigations by the Secret Service’s Cyber Investigative Section, IRS Criminal Investigation, Europol, and Eurojust. Partners in 10 more countries supported the action.
Authorities targeted servers and domains in the US, Iceland, Germany, and France. They blocked Telegram accounts, froze crypto assets, and seized digital devices.
The AudiA6 and Dark2Web sites now display seizure banners, mirroring earlier darknet marketplace takedowns.
The same playbook hit a crypto mixing service in November. German and Swiss authorities seized three servers and over 25 million euros, Eurojust reported.
The DOJ has meanwhile charged two Russian nationals over a $1 billion laundering operation and pursued a billion-dollar Venezuelan scheme.
Each defendant faces up to 20 years in prison if convicted, though the complaint’s allegations remain accusations.
The sting count covers funds that investigators represented as criminal proceeds, hinting at undercover contact with the service.
Extradition proceedings in Georgia will now determine how quickly the case reaches a Philadelphia courtroom.
The post AudiA6 Turned Crypto Laundering Into a 5% Service, Until the DOJ Caught Up appeared first on BeInCrypto.
- Short squeezes and $11 million liquidations fueled the rapid Audiera (BEAT) price spike.
- Weekly burns and $2.9 million revenue added strong narrative support.
- $7.50 support is key, break below risks move toward $6 or lower.
Audiera (BEAT) has become one of the most talked-about tokens in the digital asset market after recording an explosive move that pushed its price from below $1 levels earlier in the month to a recent high near $9.2053 on MEXC.
At its current trading range around $9.0708, the token is up more than 61% in a single day and has gained over 1,400% across the monthly timeframe.
The scale and speed of this move have placed BEAT among the strongest-performing crypto assets.
What is Audiera (BEAT)?
Audiera is a blockchain-based entertainment project built around music creation, rhythm gaming, and AI-powered content tools.
The ecosystem is designed to merge interactive gaming experiences with digital music production and on-chain ownership of assets such as NFTs.
The BEAT token acts as the central utility asset within this environment, and it is used for in-game transactions, creator rewards, subscription access, governance voting through staking mechanisms, and participation in platform-driven rewards.
The project also introduces AI agents designed to assist with music generation and user interaction inside the ecosystem.
Why has BEAT surged more than 1400% in a month?
The BEAT price has not been driven by a single factor.
Instead, it has developed through a combination of derivatives activity, market positioning, and ecosystem-related developments that aligned at the same time.
1. A major short squeeze in derivatives markets
One of the strongest drivers behind the price surge has been a large-scale short squeeze.
As BEAT’s price moved sharply higher, over $11 million in short positions were liquidated across derivatives exchanges.
These forced buybacks created additional upward pressure, accelerating the price movement.
During the same period, open interest rose by approximately 35.44% to around $303.5 million.
This indicates that leveraged positions were actively being built even as volatility increased, creating conditions for further liquidation cascades.
The combination of rising open interest and forced liquidations created a feedback loop where buying pressure was not entirely organic but heavily influenced by leveraged market structure.
2. BEAT token burn mechanism
Audiera is currently conducting a weekly token burn of 770,545 BEAT, funded by approximately $2.9 million in platform revenue.
$BEAT Revenue & Burn Update 🔥
Jun 1 – Jun 8, 2026
🔥 770,545 $BEAT burned
📈 772,045 $BEAT weekly revenue (2,866,231 USDT)Total burned: 12,353,034 $BEAT
Over 12.35M $BEAT permanently removed from circulation.1 $BEAT = 3.712 USDT (Jun 8, 2026)
Burn tx:… pic.twitter.com/ttaXnW5uui
— Audiera🟣🎵 (@Audiera_web3) June 8, 2026
This burn mechanism aims at reducing the circulating supply over time and is part of the broader narrative surrounding demand and deflationary pressure within the ecosystem.
Audiera (BEAT) price forecast
BEAT’s current structure shows a market that is still heavily influenced by leverage-driven flows and short-term momentum trading.
The key technical level for traders to watch is $7.50, which previously acted as resistance and has now become an important support zone.
As long as BEAT holds above $7.50, price action may continue consolidating within a wide range while volatility remains elevated.
Sustained stability above this level keeps the structure intact for potential continuation attempts toward the $9.40 region, where previous highs were established.
A breakout above the $9.40–$9.50 zone would place price discovery back into play, with extensions historically projected toward the $15 area based on prior momentum cycles.
However, seeing that the RSI is heavily oversold at 97.16, we could see a pullback as the market cools after the massive rally.
If the pullback happens and $7.50 is breached, we could see forced liquidations, which could accelerate a move toward the $6.00 region.
In a deeper correction scenario, particularly if open interest contracts sharply decline while price declines, extended downside projections have been observed toward the $3.70 area, reflecting a full unwind of the earlier leveraged move.
Key takeaways
- Rising supply and weak technical indicators could pressure PI toward key support at $0.1184.
- Around 16 million PI tokens are set to be unlocked on Thursday, with another 14.8 million becoming eligible for mainnet migration on Friday, potentially increasing selling pressure.
Pi Network (PI) traded lower on Thursday after suffering three consecutive days of losses earlier in the week. The token remains locked in a broader downtrend that has persisted since late April.
The recovery faces a significant near-term challenge as millions of new PI tokens are scheduled to enter circulation, potentially increasing selling pressure and limiting upside momentum.
Major token unlocks could increase supply pressure
According to PiScan data, approximately 16 million PI tokens are scheduled to be unlocked on Thursday.
A further 14.8 million PI tokens are expected to become eligible for mainnet migration on Friday, adding to concerns about rising circulating supply.
The newly unlocked tokens can potentially be transferred to centralized exchanges, increasing the likelihood of additional selling activity.
Historically, large token unlock events often create short-term downward pressure as investors gain access to previously restricted holdings.
Network activity also points to notable withdrawals among major wallets. PiScan data shows that three of the five largest transactions recorded over the past 24 hours involved the movement of approximately 255,000 PI tokens.
PI technical outlook remains bearish
At the time of writing, PI is trading above $0.1250, but the broader technical picture remains weak.
The token continues to trade below key moving averages (50-day, 100-day, and 200-day) on the four-hour chart.
The clustering of these indicators above the current price suggests that sellers continue to control the broader trend.
Technical momentum signals offer little evidence of a strong recovery. The RSI is hovering near 43, indicating weak buying pressure and a lack of strong bullish momentum.
The Moving Average Convergence Divergence (MACD) and signal line remain slightly below zero, reflecting ongoing bearish conditions despite the recent rebound.
Together, these indicators suggest that any short-term rallies could face difficulty sustaining momentum.
If the rally resumes, PI would need to overcome the $0.1299 resistance to enable it to target the higher supply zones at $0.1360 (100-period EMA) and $0.1400.
However, if the bearish trend persists, the bulls will need to defend the core support levels at $0.1184 and $0.1000.
A break below $0.1184 could expose PI to further downside and potentially trigger a move toward the $0.1000 region.
While Pi Network has managed to stabilize after several days of losses, the combination of weak technical momentum and substantial upcoming token unlocks continues to favor the bears.
Unless demand strengthens enough to absorb the incoming supply, the current rebound risks becoming a temporary relief rally, with the recently established $0.1184 support level remaining the critical line to watch in the days ahead.
Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong disclosed three platform-scale figures on Thursday, giving the most detailed public accounting to date of how deeply stablecoins and agentic payments have embedded in the exchange's operations. Armstrong's post on X quoted an article by Alec Lovett, Coinbase's Head of… Read the full story at The Defiant
Crypto theft from criminal fraud and hacking would be the jurisdiction of a new U.S. cross-agency task force contemplated in a bipartisan bill introduced on Thursday, backed by well-placed lawmakers in the U.S. House of Representatives.
The Federal Cryptocurrency Theft Task Force would be led by the U.S. attorney general, according to bill text reviewed by CoinDesk, and it would involve the Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Department of Homeland Security and the Treasury Department, among others.
The legislation is sponsored by Representative Lance Gooden, a Republican on the House Judiciary Committee, and by a Democrat on House Financial Services Committee, Representative Josh Gottheimer.
“Crypto criminals are stealing billions from Americans, and Washington lacks a coordinated strategy to stop them,” Gooden, a Texas Republican, said in a statement to CoinDesk. “As digital assets shape the future of finance, this bill protects consumers, cracks down on thieves, and strengthens trust in the crypto ecosystem.”
The task force would become the main point of coordination for preventing and investigating the theft of cryptocurrency, which is a problem that plagues the young industry. From fraud and so-called pig butchering by complex criminal networks to state-backed attacks from hackers, digital assets have long been a target. Many of the sector’s most vocal political opponents often cite that undercurrent of criminal abuse as proof the sector is risky for consumers.
Despite $11 billion in thefts and scams last year, “victims have nowhere to turn,” Gottheimer, a New Jersey Democrat, argued. This change would provide “a single federal point of contact.”
This legislative effort suggests that the responses to theft cases have been inconsistent across the jurisdictions, including federal agencies and down through state and local law enforcement.
“By housing a coordinating task force at the Justice Department, this bill gives victims, investigators and local law enforcement the unified federal response they have been missing, all on a voluntary basis that respects local control,” said Dannis Porter, co-founder and CEO of the Satoshi Action Fund that advocates for digital assets policy, in a statement.
Before the arrival of the pro-crypto administration of President Donald Trump, the DOJ had maintained its own National Cryptocurrency Enforcement Team, but the agency quickly disbanded it during the new administration, with new leaders arguing it was regulating the industry through enforcement.
In 2021 — during the administration of President Joe Biden — the Joint Ransomware Task Force was established to coordinate across federal agencies in a similar fashion and in a related vein, because ransomware attacks are often associated with crypto payments.
And last year, the Treasury Department set up a Scam Center Strike Force to work with other law enforcement agencies to deal with overseas scams that seek to trick people into sending crypto. The group, led by the U.S. Attorney for the District of Columbia, says it seized more than $700 million in crypto from the scams, often backed by Chinese organized crime groups through intermediaries in Southeast Asia.
It’s not yet clear whether the new task force legislation will find an avenue for passage in the busy congressional session. Bills need to either find a track through a House committee or get attached to a must-move legislative package.
The Digital Chamber, a Washington group supporting crypto policy, said in a statement about this legislative effort that it’s “critical that law enforcement agencies have the tools, training and coordination necessary to investigate theft, trace illicit activity, support victims and pursue bad actors.”
Ethereum (ETH) price rebounded by almost 2% to near $1,650 after holding a key support level. Yet the recovery rests on a weak footing as whale behavior repeats a pattern that preceded the last leg down. The bounce follows a sharp drop from May highs.
The current rebound move looks slightly bullish on the surface. Below it, a whale setup that played out weeks ago appears to be forming again.
Ethereum Whales Are Repeating a Pre-Crash Pattern
Whale positioning is the first warning, and the danger is in the pattern, not the level. Ethereum whale supply, excluding exchanges, has ticked up since June 9, from about 124.75 million to 125.12 million ETH, a move that looks like steady accumulation.
Want more token insights like this? Sign up for Editor Harsh Notariya’s Daily Crypto Newsletter here.
It is not steady. The same choppy pick-up-and-drop played out between May 20 and May 28, when supply looked like it was climbing but was really churning.
What came next is the warning. Whales began cutting their stash on May 28 and kept selling through May 30. Price then broke down hard from May 31 with no rebound. The current June 9 to June 11 churn mirrors that exact setup.
A bounce built on this pattern lacks a strong base. The next flow metric shows whether longer-term holders are increasing risk.
Hodlers Walking Away Deepen the Pessimism
Longer-term holders are not stepping in either. ETH hodler net position change turned negative in early June, after months of steady accumulation. This cohort holds ETH for at least 155 days.
This compounds the whale signal.
Buying from the hodlers dominated from late February through May, as holders added supply. The flip means the same group began selling into the decline.
The two signals stack in a worrying way. Whales are showing the same fragile, churn-and-drop pattern that led the last breakdown, while hodlers are now actively selling.
That mix points to real pessimism, not a passing dip. With one cohort unstable and the other heading for the exit, a rebound has little support beneath it. Smart-money flows confirm the caution.
Smart Money Index Rolls Over as Price Bounces
The Smart Money Index deepens the divergence. The index tracks how informed ETH traders position near the close versus the open, with a falling line pointing to smart-money selling.
The reading rolled over sharply in June, when the biggest chunk of the price dip surfaced. The index now sits below its signal line. So while price bounced off the lows, the smart-money proxy kept falling.
Also, the ETH price correction since the highs of $2,424 to the near-term bottom of $1,503, resembles a pole of the bearish pole-and-flag pattern.
If that pattern holds, the price chart shows how far ETH could move in the flag.
Ethereum Price Levels to Watch as Support Decides the Trend
ETH fell 38% from the May high before finding support at $1,503, then carved a V-shaped recovery into a rising channel. Ethereum price trades near $1,650, climbing back toward the channel.
The bullish case needs a clean break above $1,717, the level that caps the recovery range. Above it, the channel opens room back toward the $2,424 high lost in May.
The bearish case is heavier and tied to the flow data. A daily close below $1,600 would invalidate the bounce and expose the downside Fibonacci ladder at $1,365, then $1,256 and $1,147. These levels also align with Claude Fable 5 price prediction for ETH.
The Fibonacci retracement marks the proportional pullback from the prior swing. A full breakdown puts $992 in play, a level ETH has not traded below since the 2022 bear market. Precisely, June 2022.
The pattern carries a caveat. The V-recovery and channel are bullish shapes, but a repeating whale pattern, hodler exits, and a falling Smart Money Index argue the bounce is a relief bounce inside a downtrend, not a reversal.
The $1,600 level separates a channel-driven recovery toward $2,424 from a flow-driven breakdown toward $992.
The post Ethereum Whales Mask a 2022 Bear Market Warning appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Disclosure: This article does not represent investment advice. The content and materials featured on this page are for educational purposes only.
This guide reviews leading Canadian day trading platforms, focusing on commissions, execution quality, and investor protection.
Summary
- A 2026 review names SaintQuant the top automated trading platform for Canadian traders seeking AI-driven execution.
- SaintQuant leads a Canadian day-trading platform ranking with no-code automation, while IBKR and Moomoo serve active traders.
- Canadian traders in 2026 are weighing automated platforms like SaintQuant against active-trading options such as Interactive Brokers.
Choosing a day trading platform in Canada comes down to more than a feature checklist. Commissions eat into intraday margins. Slow execution on a fast-moving stock is the difference between a clean fill and a bad one. And regulatory standing determines whether capital is actually protected.
This guide covers the platforms worth considering in 2026, what each one is genuinely best at, and the factors that should drive a decision.
What to look for in a Canadian day trading platform
Day traders evaluate platforms differently from long-term investors. Here are the criteria that carry real weight:
- Regulation and investor protection. In Canada, look for platforms regulated by the Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization (CIRO) and backed by Canadian Investor Protection Fund (CIPF) coverage. CIPF protects eligible accounts up to $1 million if a member firm becomes insolvent.
- Execution quality. Order fill quality and execution speed directly affect profitability. Platforms with direct market access (DMA) generally provide faster, more reliable fills than those routing through third parties.
- Real-time data and Level 2 quotes. Intraday strategies depend on seeing the full order book. Some platforms charge separately for Level 2 data; others include it free.
- Commissions and total cost per trade. The headline rate is rarely the full story. Factor in ECN fees, currency conversion spreads on US equities, inactivity fees, and data subscription costs when calculating real cost per trade.
- Charting and order types. Serious day trading requires more than basic candlestick charts — look for broad indicator libraries, customizable layouts, and order types beyond market and limit.
The best day trading platforms in Canada for 2026
1. SaintQuant — Best for automated trading without the complexity
For Canadian traders who want systematic, algorithmic exposure to crypto, stock, and futures markets without the operational burden of managing a manual day trading setup, SaintQuant is the standout choice in 2026.
SaintQuant is a no-code AI automated trading platform that provides one-click quantitative strategies, ready to run from the moment a user signs up. There is no configuration, no coding, and no manual setup of any kind. The platform’s AI algorithms analyze market conditions and execute trades 24/7, with built-in risk management controls embedded in every strategy — designed to pursue consistent returns through disciplined quantitative models rather than high-volatility speculation.
Where every other platform on this list requires active involvement — reading charts, timing entries, managing positions — SaintQuant handles execution entirely on a user’s behalf.
New user offer: A $99 free starter trial credit to experience live strategy execution with no initial deposit, plus a $7 instant cash bonus upon registration with no conditions or hidden requirements.
2. Interactive Brokers (IBKR) — Best for experienced active traders
Interactive Brokers is the platform most professional and semi-professional day traders in Canada gravitate toward. Its Trader Workstation (TWS) offers over 100 order types, direct market access, institutional-grade charting, and coverage across Canadian and US exchanges.
Margin rates at IBKR are among the lowest available to retail traders — a meaningful advantage for active traders who use leverage regularly. Global market access across TSX, NYSE, NASDAQ, and international exchanges makes it the default choice for traders who want both breadth and depth.
The trade-off is a steep learning curve. TWS is not designed for beginners, and account setup is more involved than on consumer-facing platforms.
Best for: Experienced traders who prioritize execution quality, low margin rates, and global market access.
3. Moomoo — Best for active traders who want data without the cost
Moomoo has established a strong position in the Canadian active trading market by offering tools most platforms charge extra for — free Level 2 market data with full order book depth, advanced charting, stock screeners, and a comprehensive set of order types — all within a single interface.
For traders whose edge depends on reading order flow and reacting to market depth changes, free Level 2 access is a material advantage. The platform is app-first with a capable desktop version, well suited to traders who split time between mobile and desktop environments.
Best for: Active traders who want institutional data tools without institutional-tier fees.
4. Questrade — Best for options-focused traders
Questrade is one of the most established independent brokerages in Canada, with a solid options platform and competitive stock trading costs. For traders whose primary strategy involves equity options — spreads, covered calls, or directional plays — Questrade’s interface is among the better retail offerings in the Canadian market. For strategies that don’t rely heavily on Level 2 data, the absence of free depth tools is rarely a deciding factor.
Best for: Options traders and mid-volume equity traders who want a well-established Canadian brokerage.
5. TD Direct Investing (TD Active Trader) — Best for high-volume traders
TD’s Active Trader platform is designed for traders who execute at high frequency. Qualifying accounts receive discounted commissions based on trade volume, making it cost-effective for traders placing 150+ trades per month. The platform offers advanced charting, real-time data, and direct access to Canadian and US markets. Account minimums and the volume threshold for discounted commissions make it less accessible for lower-volume traders.
Best for: High-frequency traders who consistently execute at volumes that unlock the discounted commission tiers.
6. Wealthsimple — Best entry point for beginners
Wealthsimple isn’t a day trading platform in the traditional sense — it lacks Level 2 data, direct routing, and advanced order types. What it offers is the smoothest onboarding experience in the Canadian market, zero commissions on stocks and ETFs, fractional shares from $1, and the only direct crypto trading integration alongside equities at a major Canadian broker.
For traders just learning the mechanics, it removes infrastructure friction. It is not a platform to scale a serious intraday strategy on.
Best for: Beginners testing their first strategies before migrating to a more capable platform.
Platform comparison at a glance
| Platform | Best For | Level 2 Data | Commissions | Automated Trading |
| SaintQuant | Automated/passive | Built-in | N/A | ✅ Full automation |
| Interactive Brokers | Experienced traders | Yes (fee-based) | Very low | Partial (API) |
| Moomoo | Active / data tools | Free | Competitive | No |
| Questrade | Options traders | Available | Low | No |
| TD Active Trader | High-volume traders | Yes | Volume-tiered | No |
| Wealthsimple | Beginners | No | $0 | No |
Canada-specific considerations
No PDT Rule. The US Pattern Day Trader rule — requiring a $25,000 minimum balance to place more than three intraday trades in five days — does not apply to Canadian traders using Canadian brokerages. This is a meaningful structural advantage for traders with smaller accounts.
Currency conversion costs. Most Canadian day traders actively trade US equities. The FX conversion spread on USD/CAD transactions can be a hidden cost that erodes edge, particularly on platforms without a USD account option. IBKR and Questrade both offer mechanisms to mitigate this cost.
Tax treatment. The CRA generally treats day trading profits as business income rather than capital gains — taxed at full marginal rate. This doesn’t change platform choice, but it’s worth factoring into net return expectations.
Final verdict
For most Canadian traders in 2026, the decision comes down to one key question: trade actively, let capital work systematically in the markets without managing personally?
If it’s the latter, SaintQuant is the clear answer — one-click automated strategies, built-in risk management, and a $99 free trial to evaluate it without depositing money first.
For those who want to trade actively, Interactive Brokers leads on execution and margin rates for experienced traders, while Moomoo delivers the best combination of free data tools and accessible onboarding for active traders who don’t need the full depth of IBKR.
The platform is a tool. Choose the one that matches how to actually want to engage with the markets.
Try SaintQuant Free: New users receive a $99 free starter trial credit and a $7 instant cash bonus upon registration — no deposit required.
Disclosure: This content is provided by a third party. Neither crypto.news nor the author of this article endorses any product mentioned on this page. Users should conduct their own research before taking any action related to the company.
Federal prosecutors have charged two alleged operators of a cryptocurrency laundering service that processed more than $389 million in transactions and received over 10,000 Bitcoin since launching in 2021.
Summary
- U.S. prosecutors charged two alleged AudiA6 operators after tracing more than $389 million in cryptocurrency transactions through the laundering service.
- Authorities said the network received over 10,000 Bitcoin since 2021, including funds linked to darknet markets, ransomware groups and cybercrime services.
- An international operation led to arrests in Georgia, server seizures across multiple countries, and the freezing of cryptocurrency assets.
According to the U.S. Attorney’s Office for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, Ukrainian national Ruslan Igorevich Tkachuk, 37, and Russian national Alexander Vladimirovich Ledenev, 25, were arrested in Batumi, Georgia, on Wednesday and are awaiting extradition to the United States.
The criminal complaint accuses the pair of serving as senior members of AudiA6, a cryptocurrency laundering network that prosecutors say helped customers conceal the origins of digital assets linked to criminal activity. Prosecutors also allege that both men managed the Dark2Web cybercrime forum, where AudiA6 promoted its services to users seeking to move illicit funds through cryptocurrency.
Court documents cited by the U.S. Attorney’s Office state that an advertisement posted on Dark2Web offered to disguise the source of traceable cryptocurrency in exchange for fees of up to 5% of the amount being laundered.
Blockchain analysis conducted during the investigation found that approximately 10,333 Bitcoin had been deposited into wallets controlled by AudiA6 since 2021, according to prosecutors.
Authorities said about 393.39 BTC came directly from known darknet marketplaces, ransomware groups, cybercrime services and other identified illicit sources, while the remaining deposits were traced indirectly to criminal activity.
International operation targets laundering infrastructure
Details released by prosecutors show the arrests formed part of a coordinated operation involving the U.S. Secret Service, Internal Revenue Service Criminal Investigation, Europol and Eurojust, alongside law enforcement agencies from Australia, Canada, France, Georgia, Germany, Iceland, Japan, Poland, Switzerland and the United Kingdom.
Investigators carried out searches at three properties and targeted servers and domains located across the United States, Iceland, Germany and France. Authorities also blocked Telegram accounts allegedly used by the network, froze cryptocurrency assets and seized electronic devices linked to the investigation.
At the same time, law enforcement agencies replaced both the clear web and dark web infrastructure connected to AudiA6 and the Dark2Web forum with seizure notices.
For Tkachuk and Ledenev, prosecutors have filed one count of conspiracy to launder monetary instruments and one count of sting money laundering. The charges remain allegations, and both defendants are presumed innocent unless proven guilty in court.
The case adds to a series of enforcement actions targeting cryptocurrency laundering services and darknet-linked funds. In May, the U.S. Department of Justice charged German citizen Owe Martin Andresen over an alleged laundering scheme tied to Dream Market, a darknet marketplace that ceased operations in 2019.
According to the DOJ, Andresen allegedly moved funds from dormant Dream Market administrator wallets before converting part of the proceeds into gold bars.
Prosecutors in that case said more than $2 million was laundered between August 2023 and April 2025, while searches uncovered approximately $1.7 million in gold bars and information linked to crypto wallets and bank accounts holding another $1.2 million in suspected proceeds.
In today’s newsletter, Joshua de Vos, from CoinDesk Research, analyzes May’s crypto outflows to explain what current market signals mean.
Then, in “Ask an Expert,” Bryan Courchesne from DAiM addresses how investors can navigate the current market environment.
Crypto ETFs: May Breakdown and What’s Next
May ended two consecutive months of net inflows, with global crypto ETP flows swinging back to heavy redemptions. According to TrackInsight data, global digital-asset investment products recorded $2.39 billion in net outflows, against $1.79 billion of net inflows in April, as total assets under management fell to $141.1 billion from $158.7 billion a month earlier. U.S.-listed vehicles accounted for almost the entire redemption, while flows outside the U.S., which had already cooled in April, turned modestly negative.
The CoinDesk 20 Index (CD20), which captures a diversified cross-section of the top 20 digital assets, fell 1.11% in May after gaining 5.45% in April. The more concentrated CoinDesk 5 Index (CD5) declined 3.73% and bitcoin itself fell 3.56%, a sharp reversal from April, when bitcoin (up 11.87%) and the CD5 (up 9.91%) led a broad rally. The return hierarchy also inverted: large caps led in April, whereas in May the broad index outperformed, indicating that large-cap assets bore the brunt of the decline while diversified exposure offered relative shelter.
According to data from TrackInsight, outflows were concentrated in bitcoin — and ether-linked instruments globally, while parts of the altcoin market, led by XRP, Hyperliquid and Solana, drew net inflows, a divergence that widened over the month.
Largest ETF Gainers, Globally (by May Net Flows)
- NEOS Bitcoin High Income ETF (BTCI): +$141.8 million; $1.24 billion AUM
- Bitwise Solana Staking ETF (BSOL): +$79.3 million; $672.2 million AUM
- Morgan Stanley Bitcoin Trust (MSBT): +$73.9 million; $260.1 million AUM
- Bitwise Hyperliquid ETF (BHYP): +$62.0 million; $71.1 million AUM
- iShares Staked Ethereum Trust ETF (ETHB): +$56.1 million; $584.3 million AUM
- 21Shares Hyperliquid ETF (THYP): +$49.7 million; $61.6 million AUM
- NEOS Boosted Bitcoin High Income ETF (XBCI): +$42.8 million; $71.8 million AUM
- Franklin XRP ETF (XRPZ): +$38.7 ,million; $273.8 million AUM
- iShares Bitcoin ETP (IB1T): +$33.1 million; $1.06 billion AUM
U.S.-listed products continued to dominate the global crypto ETF market in May. Despite net outflows of $2.37 billion, American-domiciled ETFs closed the month with $119.2 billion in AUM, retaining roughly 84.5% of the $141.1 billion global market, broadly in line with April’s 85.1%.
May’s headline outflow ended two months of inflows and was overwhelmingly a U.S., large-cap reversal. The gainers list, by contrast, was dominated by income, staking and newly launched products. With the CoinDesk 20 down just 1.11% against a 3.73% fall in the large-cap CD5, diversified and altcoin exposures showed a relative resilience that the flow data corroborated. That resilience has since been overwhelmed: by early June, Bitcoin had fallen to around $62,000, and the major indices were down a further 15% or more, leaving no sign that May’s outflows marked a bottom and pointing to intensifying pressure into June.
Read more: May’s global ETP recap and May’s U.S.-focused ETF recap.
– Joshua de Vos, research team lead, CoinDesk
Ask an Expert
Q: Bitcoin’s RSI recently dropped into the low 40s. Why is that significant?
Bitcoin’s Relative Strength Index (RSI) has fallen into the low 40s on key timeframes, which is a relatively rare occurrence. Similar readings were seen in February 2020 and during the March 2020 COVID crash. In both cases, those oversold conditions preceded powerful recoveries and substantial long-term gains. While no indicator guarantees future performance, historically these periods have often represented attractive accumulation opportunities for long-term investors.
Q: Does this signal present an opportunity today?
Potentially, yes. For investors who remain focused on bitcoin and have a long-term time horizon, periods of market pessimism have historically offered some of the best entry points. The challenge is that buying often feels hardest when sentiment is negative, which is exactly why many investors miss these opportunities.
Q: What advice would you give investors who struggle to evaluate crypto projects?
If you cannot confidently assess factors such as real-world usage, security, tokenomics, decentralization and adoption metrics, simplifying your approach may be the best option. Bitcoin remains the most established digital asset, with the strongest network effects, the clearest store-of-value thesis, institutional support through ETFs and a proven ability to survive multiple market cycles.
Q: How can investors separate credible advice from noise?
A: Look for analysts and advisors with verifiable experience, a track record of being right more often than not, and a history of evidence-based commentary. Be skeptical of anonymous influencers, paid promoters and personalities whose primary business model appears to be generating engagement. In many cases, the difference between successful investing and costly mistakes comes down to ignoring the attention machine.
Q: What’s the key takeaway from today’s market environment?
This RSI setup could prove to be another important moment in bitcoin’s history. While no outcome is guaranteed, bitcoin has repeatedly rewarded patience, discipline and long-term conviction. Investors focused on fundamentals may view current conditions as an opportunity, while those still waiting for unrealistic altcoin narratives to play out risk missing another bitcoin-led recovery.
– Bryan Courchesne, founder, DAiM
Keep Reading
- Japan’s three largest banks, MUFG, SMBC and Mizuho, plan to jointly issue a stablecoin by March 2027.
- The stablecoin market cap hit a new all-time high of $320 billion while the total market cap of tokenized real-world assets reached $28.9 billion: read the latest research.
Looking for more? Receive the latest crypto news from coindesk.com and market updates from coindesk.com/institutions.
Forget ‘Deadpool,’ Ryan Reynolds’ Best Sci-Fi Movie Is Waiting To Be Rediscovered
What is the Common Travel Area? Why the Ireland-UK border arrangement isn’t a ‘loophole’ for migrants
Bitcoin’s Shaking Everyone Out
-
Fashion6 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Evereve – Corporette.com
-
Crypto World6 days agoJensen Huang Approves Samsung, SK Hynix, and Micron for NVIDIA (NVDA) HBM4 Memory Supply
-
Entertainment5 days agoThe Best Mystery Series of All Time Is Surging on Streaming 30 Years After It Ended
-
Crypto World3 days agoAnatomy of the June crypto crash: Fed, Iran, Saylor
-
NewsBeat4 days agoAlexander Zverev wins the French Open to finally earn a 1st Grand Slam title
-
Tech6 days agoSuspicious Polyfill login prompts pop up on Toshiba, Muji websites
-
Crypto World5 days agoSenator Cynthia Lummis Calls CLARITY Act the Most Consequential Financial Legislation of This Generation
-
Tech4 days agoMicrosoft unveils seven homegrown AI models in new bid for ‘long term self-sufficiency’
-
Tech6 days agoMicrosoft launches MXC, an OS-level sandbox for AI agents, with OpenAI and Nvidia already on board
-
Business6 days ago(VIDEO) Justin Bieber Delivers Surprise Happy Birthday Serenade to Diners at Los Angeles Mexican Restaurant
-
Business5 days agoThe Pain Points Taking a Fragile Tech Rally Down a Notch
-
Business3 days agoHigh Stakes for Wembanyama as New York Pushes for 3-0 Lead
-
Crypto World3 days agoEli Lilly (LLY) Stock Surges 4% Following Breakthrough Sleep Apnea Trial Results
-
Tech6 days agoVon der Leyen’s AI envoy pick draws conflict-of-interest fire
-
Tech6 days agoMeta steals a tactic from Tesla and builds data centers in tents
-
Crypto World6 days ago
LBank Surpasses 25 Million Users Worldwide as AFA Partnership Continues to Drive Global Growth
-
Tech5 days agoHackers now exploit SolarWinds Serv-U flaw to crash servers
-
NewsBeat4 days agoAlexander Zverev conquers demons and outlasts Flavio Cobolli to win French Open for first major title
-
Crypto World4 days agoTrump’s AI Ownership Plan Could Benefit Anthropic at OpenAI’s Expense
-
Sports2 days agoBangladesh beat Australia after 20 years in ODIs, register only their second win over six-time world champions | Cricket News
You must be logged in to post a comment Login