Bitcoin’s drop from the $80k zone shows classic Fed‑week caution, with strong support near $75.5k, mixed on‑chain signals, and traders waiting on the FOMC decision.

Bitcoin (BTC) dropped below $76,000 after encountering strong resistance around the $80,000 level, a key psychological threshold that has consistently limited upward momentum since late April. Uncertainty surrounding the Strait of Hormuz reopening and tightening macroeconomic conditions continue to weigh on sentiment, keeping traders locked in a narrow range as the FOMC meeting approaches.

Michael van de Poppe, founder of MN Capital, emphasized that the current retracement is “typical behavior” ahead of major monetary policy announcements. He added, “I believe we are still in a phase of strong market conditions,” suggesting the consolidation phase may give way to renewed strength once macro clarity emerges.

On the downside, support is anchored at $75,500, a level that aligns with the 20-day EMA, 100-day EMA, and the lower boundary of an ascending channel. Glassnode’s UTXO Realized Price Distribution (URPD) data reveals direct resistance around $78,000, where investors hold 335,650 BTC, while approximately 298,560 BTC cluster at an average purchase price of $75,500, forming a critical support floor.

On-Chain signals show mixed picture

On-chain indicators paint a nuanced portrait of market dynamics. Glassnode data shows Bitcoin exhibiting “a coexistence of bullish momentum and cautious sentiment”. The spot Cumulative Volume Delta (CVD) surged nearly 200% over the past week, climbing from $18.3 million to $54.8 million, reflecting aggressive accumulation and strong conviction among market participants. However, spot trading volume declined 13.8%, dropping from $6.95 billion to $5.99 billion, signaling reduced overall activity despite the bullish CVD reading. Daily active addresses also fell by 1.6% during the same period, “indicating a reduction in market activity” and more subdued network participation.

Bitcoin is currently trading around $76,800, down approximately 1.9% over the past 24 hours. Ethereum (ETH) sits near $2,315, while the broader crypto market cap stands at $2.62 trillion, down roughly 2% from the prior day.

Key Takeaways

• Q1 2026 earnings release scheduled for May 7; Wall Street projects revenue between $42.5M and $42.8M, marking approximately 46% annual growth
• Shares have fallen roughly 18% in 2026 so far and plunged 66% since hitting December 2024 highs
• Wall Street maintains Strong Buy rating with consensus price target of $14.00, indicating potential gains near 75%
• Company announced acquisition of LivePerson, marking its most significant deal to date
• 2026 revenue outlook set at $225M to $260M; pathway to profitability continues to dominate investor discussions

As SoundHound AI approaches its first-quarter 2026 financial results on May 7, investors and analysts are paying close attention. The company’s shares have struggled this year, declining approximately 18%, prompting questions about whether its expansion narrative can withstand current headwinds.

SoundHound AI, Inc., SOUN

Wall Street forecasters anticipate first-quarter revenue ranging from $42.5 million to $42.8 million, representing year-over-year expansion of about 46%. This projection follows an impressive fourth quarter performance that saw the company generate $55.1 million in revenue, climbing 59% compared to the prior year.

Looking at the complete fiscal year, management has established revenue guidance between $225 million and $260 million. This represents significant growth from the record $168.9 million achieved in 2025, which had already nearly doubled the $84.7 million reported during 2024.

Yet the stock price tells a different story. SOUN shares have tumbled approximately 66% from the December 2024 high of $22.17, currently changing hands near $8.02.

Wall Street Maintains Optimistic Outlook

Despite recent weakness, analyst sentiment remains firmly positive. TipRanks data shows SOUN holds a Strong Buy consensus, derived from five Buy recommendations and a single Hold rating issued over the last three months. The mean price target stands at $14.00, implying potential appreciation of approximately 74.5% from present trading levels.

Following last week’s LivePerson acquisition announcement, D.A. Davidson’s Gil Luria maintained his Buy rating alongside a $14 price objective. He characterized the transaction as the company’s most substantial acquisition yet and suggested it holds promise for creating long-term shareholder value, while noting that execution and integration represent risks worth tracking.

Wedbush likewise preserved its Buy rating with a $12 target after reviewing the deal terms. The firm emphasized the data advantage—the merged entity would handle tens of billions of customer interactions each year, which Wedbush believes constitutes a significant competitive differentiator.

Valuation Metrics Under Scrutiny

The LivePerson transaction expands SoundHound’s existing technology suite, which encompasses solutions like Dynamic Drive-Thru, automotive Voice AI applications, and the Amelia 7 platform designed for creating customized AI agents.

Valuation metrics present a challenge for some market participants. SoundHound currently commands a price-to-sales multiple near 20, positioning it above most Magnificent Seven companies—with Nvidia being the notable exception. Using the midpoint of 2026 projections on a forward-looking basis, that multiple contracts to approximately 14.4.

Path to Profitability Remains Unclear

Continued losses represent a persistent concern among stakeholders. The company recorded an adjusted net loss of $53.8 million during 2025, showing improvement from the $69.1 million deficit in 2024. While progress is evident, profitability remains elusive.

Analysts are modeling a loss per share of $0.10 for Q1 2026, representing substantial improvement versus the $0.31 loss recorded in the year-ago quarter.

SoundHound concluded 2025 with $248 million in cash reserves and zero debt obligations, providing financial flexibility as it executes growth initiatives.

When earnings arrive on May 7, market participants will scrutinize revenue performance, potential revisions to annual guidance, and management’s timeline for integrating LivePerson into operations.

Key Takeaways

• Annual revenue for 2025 declined to $4.37B from $5.15B in the previous year
• Full-year net loss reached $1.3B for 2025
• Quarter-over-quarter home acquisitions surged 46%, signaling operational momentum
• Analysts maintain a Reduce rating with a consensus price target of $4.48
• Company aims for breakeven adjusted net income by late 2026

Opendoor has emerged as a focal point for investors tracking the residential real estate sector. The attention stems not from exceptional performance, but from its ongoing turnaround efforts amid challenging market conditions.

Opendoor Technologies Inc., OPEN

The company’s business model is straightforward. Opendoor acquires properties directly from homeowners, performs minor renovations, and resells them rapidly. Success requires access to cheap capital, predictable home valuations, and healthy transaction volumes. Currently, all three conditions remain elusive.

The 2025 fiscal year delivered $4.37 billion in revenue, representing a decline from the prior year’s $5.15 billion. Total homes sold reached 11,791, while acquisitions totaled just 8,241 properties. Year-end inventory stood at 2,867 homes valued at $925 million, a sharp contraction from 6,417 homes worth $2.16 billion twelve months earlier.

This represents a substantial downsizing. Leadership, however, positions this as strategic repositioning rather than distress.

CEO Kaz Nejatian has branded this transformation “Opendoor 2.0,” emphasizing improved profitability per transaction, accelerated inventory turnover, and enhanced consumer acquisition channels. The stated objective is achieving breakeven adjusted net income on a trailing twelve-month basis by year-end 2026.

Operational Momentum Building

Some encouraging indicators have surfaced. Home acquisitions climbed 46% versus the previous quarter. Weekly purchase agreements increased more than fourfold between late Q3 2025 and the most recent reporting period.

Contribution margins have shown consecutive monthly improvement since September. Management projects exiting Q1 2026 with the strongest contribution margin performance since Q2 2024.

Nonetheless, Opendoor recorded a $1.3 billion net loss for 2025 and a $195 million adjusted net loss. Fourth-quarter adjusted EBITDA registered at -$43 million. Q1 2026 guidance calls for adjusted EBITDA losses in the low-to-mid $30 million range — directionally positive but still unprofitable.

Market Conditions Remain Challenging

Broader economic factors continue presenting obstacles. Mortgage rates hover around 6%, and March pending home sales declined 1.1% year-over-year according to Reuters data. While not completely stagnant, market activity remains insufficient to support transaction-dependent platforms like Opendoor.

Reputational concerns also linger. In 2025, Opendoor settled a securities class action for $39 million related to allegations about its algorithmic pricing system. Though the company admitted no liability, the settlement underscores execution vulnerabilities inherent in automated valuation models.

Analyst sentiment remains cautious. Opendoor holds a Reduce consensus on MarketBeat, derived from 3 sell ratings, 3 hold ratings, and 1 buy rating across 7 tracked analysts. The mean 12-month price target of $4.48 trades below recent market levels.

Bottom Line

Opendoor has demonstrated tangible progress in inventory management and operational discipline. However, the company continues burning cash, remains vulnerable to interest rate fluctuations, and hasn’t validated its model during prolonged housing weakness. OPEN represents less of a traditional real estate investment and more of a leveraged bet on market normalization. The critical metric ahead is whether management delivers on its Q1 2026 EBITDA loss guidance — a test of execution that will determine credibility for the broader turnaround narrative.

Ondo Finance has teamed up with financial infrastructure giant Broadridge Financial Solutions to give holders of tokenized stocks and ETFs the ability to participate in on-chain proxy voting, according to a press release today, April 28.

The partnership enables holders of more than 250 Ondo tokenized stocks and ETFs to vote in shareholder events via a new platform built by Broadridge. Token holders will also gain access to prospectuses, regulatory filings, and other governance materials for the securities underlying their positions, according to the release.

Broadridge has integrated wallet authentication into its ProxyVote platform to allow investors to sign in and submit votes with a verifiable on-chain record, the release explains.

Ondo president Ian De Bode said on X today hat token holders will be able to “connect their wallet and vote on any relevant shareholder event, just like you would when holding stocks in a brokerage account,” adding that “the lines between offchain and onchain investing continue to blur, with Ondo leading the way.”

The integration marks another step in Ondo’s push to make on-chain equities functionally equivalent to their traditional counterparts.

The protocol launched tokenized U.S. stocks on Ethereum last September, and has since added integrations with MetaMask, Trust Wallet, Felix Protocol on Hyperliquid, and others, as The Defiant has previously reported.

Broadridge is itself a dominant force in tokenized real-world assets. Its Distributed Ledger Repo (DLR) platform accounts for 100% of tokenized RWA value on the Canton Network, per RWAxyz data.

Meanwhile, in December, tokenization platform Superstate launched direct on-chain stock issuance for Securities and Exchange Commission-registered public companies. As the The Defiant reported at the time, investors receive the newly issued on-chain shares in their own name, with the same voting rights as traditional stocks.

This article was written with the assistance of AI workflows. All our stories are curated, edited and fact-checked by a human.

• Settlement currency: Bitcoin, paid directly from user’s Bitbank exchange account
• Cashback rate: 0.5% in cryptocurrency on all card spending
• Card type: Credit card, not prepaid or debit
• Geographic scope: Japan, regulated under FSA licensing framework
• Exchange background: Bitbank FSA-licensed since 2017, operating since 2014

The recovery effort for rsETH, stalled by the April Kelp bridge incident that released 116,500 rsETH (roughly $293 million at the time) without a corresponding burn on Unichain, is moving into a formal technical phase. The DeFi United coalition, linked to Aave, published a plan to restore rsETH backing by converting committed ETH into rsETH in staged tranches and depositing the tokens into the bridge’s lockbox. This approach aims to resume normal bridge operations once the backing is fully restored. LayerZero and Kelp have also implemented additional security measures ahead of a full return to service, according to Aave.

Parallel to the backing restoration, DeFi United outlined steps to unwind attacker-linked positions across Aave and Compound to reclaim collateral and repair market distortions caused by the exploit. The coalition notes that seven addresses associated with the attacker still hold active rsETH-backed positions on Aave and Compound, representing about 107,000 rsETH of the original 116,500 rsETH released.

The broader context for rsETH recovery continues to unfold as the ecosystem coordinates funding, governance, and technical execution. Earlier coverage highlighted a broader pledge of ETH to restore rsETH backing, and the current plan builds on that momentum with a concrete, vote-dependent process.

The proposed sequence would temporarily adjust the rsETH oracle price to enable controlled liquidations, transfer recovered collateral to a DeFi United multisig, restore the oracle, redeem the rsETH for ETH, and use the resulting funds to clear deficits across affected markets. The recovery plan thus transitions from pledges and public commitments to a coordinated technical process that relies on governance approvals, temporary oracle changes, and execution across several DeFi protocols. While designed to restore rsETH backing, the plan remains contingent on DAO votes, finalized agreements, and the attacker not disrupting the liquidation steps.

Source: Aave

Ethereum backers join the recovery effort

The technical plan follows earlier moves to secure funding and governance support for rsETH restoration. On Monday, Consensys and Ethereum co-founder Joe Lubin joined DeFi United with a commitment of up to 30,000 ETH to back the recovery, while Sharplink, a publicly traded Ethereum treasury company, joined in an advisory role to help structure the plan.

As part of the broader push, Aave Labs had asked the Arbitrum DAO to release 30,765 ETH that had been frozen by the Arbitrum Security Council following the exploit and redirect those funds to DeFi United. The goal is to accelerate the restoration of rsETH backing and stabilize affected markets.

Earlier coverage noted that crypto protocols pledged about 43,000 ETH to the rsETH relief effort, underscoring the ecosystem-wide appetite to address the aftermath of the breach.

As of the latest update, DeFi United’s website shows roughly $302.26 million in total raised or committed toward the rsETH recovery, equivalent to about 132,706.903 ETH. Some commitments remain subject to DAO votes and final execution, reflecting the governance-intensive nature of the plan.

DeFi United secured over $300 million in commitments. Source: DeFi United

The initiative sits at the intersection of cross-chain security, governance, and rapid liquidity management. By moving toward a structured, multi-step restoration rather than relying solely on pledges, the effort aims to reduce the risk of a prolonged imbalance between rsETH and its backing assets while preserving user trust in the affected protocols.

What this means for users and markets

For rsETH holders and the broader DeFi ecosystem, the plan represents a carefully staged attempt to restore collateral behind a pegged asset that saw a rapid distribution of backings during the breach. If successful, the process could set a precedent for how multi-chain bridges and restaking ecosystems manage post-incident recoveries without triggering abrupt slippage or cascading liquidations. The reliance on governance votes underscores the ongoing tension between rapid response and community consent in DeFi crisis management.

Investors and traders will want to watch the timeline for governance approvals, the pace of ETH-to-rsETH conversions, and the execution across Aave, Compound, and the implicated bridge components. The involvement of high-profile supporters—Consensys, Joe Lubin, and Sharplink—adds credibility to the plan, but the execution still hinges on attacker behavior and the stability of oracle adjustments during liquidations.

Next milestones to monitor

Key milestones include finalization of the governance process to authorize the tranche-based ETH-to-rsETH conversions, the operational deployment of the restored backing into the lockbox, and the restoration of oracle feeds to normal levels after backing is re-established. The plan also requires the attacker’s positions to be reliably unwound without triggering further market impairment, an outcome that hinges on coordinated liquidations and cross-protocol cooperation.

Additionally, continued updates on the Arbitrum DAO’s actions and any further commitments from ecosystem participants will shape the speed and reliability of the restoration. The evolving liquidity landscape as new funds are deployed and balances are reset will inform how quickly rsETH markets can regain normal functioning and reduce systemic risk across the DeFi stack involved in the recovery.

Readers should stay attentive to governance votes and official statements from DeFi United, Aave, and partner protocols as the plan progresses. The rsETH restoration is a multi-faceted effort that requires precise coordination across several entities, and the outcome will influence how similar crisis-response playbooks are interpreted in future cross-chain incidents.

Paul Sztorc is not trying to move Satoshi Nakamoto’s bitcoin.

That is the narrow fact getting lost in the backlash around eCash, a proposed Bitcoin fork scheduled for August at block height 964,000. The new chain would copy Bitcoin’s history up to that point, giving BTC holders an equivalent balance on the forked network. Hold 4.19 BTC, get 4.19 eCash.

This would follow the standard fork playbook. Bitcoin Cash did it in 2017, and Bitcoin SV followed later. Both copied Bitcoin’s ledger, changed the rules and in the hopes that the market will care.

eCash is different because of what it plans to do with Satoshi’s copied coins.

The roughly 1.1 million BTC attributed to Bitcoin’s pseudonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto sits in dormant addresses often linked to the Patoshi pattern, an early mining fingerprint widely believed to trace back to Satoshi though never conclusively proven.

On a normal one-to-one fork, those addresses would receive roughly 1.1 million eCash. Sztorc’s plan would allocate 600,000 eCash to those addresses and redirect the remaining 500,000 eCash to investors who fund the project before launch.

Sztorc, CEO of LayerTwo Labs, pushed back on the theft framing in a Monday X post.

“We do not take any of Satoshi’s BTC,” he wrote. “BTC balances are untouched by eCash. To move BTC, you always need BTC software and the BTC private key. We lack both.”

But Satoshi’s untouched holdings function as Bitcoin’s foundational guarantee, the proof that even the network’s creator never moved his coins because the rules apply to everyone equally. Selling claims on a forked-chain version of those holdings to fund a new project is the part that reads as theft, even when no theft is technically occurring.

That turns the dispute into a property-rights fight, even if the property exists only on a new chain.

“Bitcoin was created to preserve and protect inviolable property rights for everybody on earth,” Beau Turner, CEO of mining firm Abundant Mines, said in an email to CoinDesk. “Any proposal that seeks to evolve or improve it by violating the property rights of the creator of that network is such a serious ethical misstep that it’s hard to believe it would even be considered.”

The timing makes the fight sharper. Bitcoiners have already spent recent weeks arguing over proposals to freeze or restrict old quantum-vulnerable coins, including addresses believed to belong to Satoshi. Those debates put dormant balances, immutability and social intervention back at the center of Bitcoin culture.

That is why the eCash fight is landing in a market already primed to treat any intervention around Satoshi-linked coins as radioactive. Vijay Selvam, author of Principles of Bitcoin, argued that even proposals framed as protective measures risk damaging Bitcoin’s core monetary promise if they create a precedent for treating dormant coins differently.

“Freezing Satoshi’s coins under any circumstances sets a precedent that irreparably damages Bitcoin’s monetary properties,” Selvam wrote on X. “With such a precedent, how can Bitcoiners ever feel confident that their money is safe into the distant future without feeling the need to constantly monitor the news to see if miners are going to rug them?”

Selvam compared the issue to gold’s durability, arguing that bitcoin should offer similar confidence across generations. “If you set a rug-pull precedent for Bitcoin, you’d forever kill its claim to being durable and immutable digital gold,” he wrote. “You’d destroy confidence in its timeless integrity.”

Why propose eCash?

Sztorc has previously spent years pushing Drivechains, a proposal that would let developers add sidechains to Bitcoin through proposals BIP300 and BIP301. The Bitcoin Core community has not agreed to adopted it, and the eCash fork now functions as both an exit plan and pressure tactic.

He has said he would call it off if Bitcoin activates those proposals before August. There is no sign that will happen.

This is why people care even if eCash never becomes economically relevant. Bitcoin forks mostly fail in market terms, but they still test Bitcoin’s social assumptions.

Bitcoin Cash and Bitcoin SV copied the ledger and kept trading, but neither came close to displacing BTC. eCash may end the same way. The difference is that its launch forces a cleaner question than block size ever did: can a fork claim Bitcoin’s moral inheritance while rewriting the most famous untouched balance on the copied chain?

The movement in Meta Platforms shares is being driven by two competing narratives. On one hand, advertising revenue is benefiting from AI-based tools: the Advantage+ platform continues to support strong advertiser demand, and the analyst consensus for Q1 2026 revenue stands at around $55.5 billion—near the upper end of the company’s guidance range of $53.5–56.5 billion. On the other hand, investors remain cautious about planned capital expenditure of $115–135 billion for 2026, which is weighing on free cash flow. The company’s earnings release is scheduled for 29 April after the market close.

Technical Overview

On the 4-hour chart, price action from late January to the end of March showed clear signs of a downtrend, with the stock falling roughly 30% from $744 to $521. The rebound from this low was sharp and symmetrical, forming a clear V-shaped recovery. The return of buyers was accompanied by a notable spike in vertical volume on 8 April, after which the price moved firmly into the market profile range of $610–683.

Within this zone, momentum has slowed. The Point of Control (POC) is concentrated around $668–673. The price is currently trading between this high-volume area and the upper boundary of the profile at $683, where trading activity has been most concentrated over the period. Above current levels, the next key resistance is at $692 — the April high. Support at $594 aligns with a gap formed during the strong upward move on elevated volume. The RSI with moving averages shows readings of 62, 63, and 60. The oscillator sits between two upward-sloping moving averages, indicating that bullish momentum persists, although price action is clearly slowing near the upper edge of the volume range.

Summary

The chart structure reflects a transition from a deep correction to a recovery phase that has now encountered a dense volume barrier. Price behaviour within the $668–683 range will largely depend on the upcoming earnings release and whether the company can meet analysts’ expectations amid rising capital expenditure.

Buy and sell stocks of the world’s biggest publicly-listed companies with CFDs on FXOpen’s trading platform. Open your FXOpen account now or learn more about trading share CFDs with FXOpen.

This article represents the opinion of the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand only. It is not to be construed as an offer, solicitation, or recommendation with respect to products and services provided by the Companies operating under the FXOpen brand, nor is it to be considered financial advice.

Developers behind a new wallet product say they have found a way to tackle quantum computing risks using a smart contract layer that runs alongside Bitcoin without requiring any change to the network itself.

Postquant Labs unveiled Quip Network’s post-quantum bitcoin BTC$75,723.58 wallet Tuesday, the company told CoinDesk in an email. The product runs on Arch Network, a system that lets developers build smart contracts anchored directly to Bitcoin rather than on a separate chain or through wrapped tokens.

Quip uses that infrastructure to add a post-quantum signature scheme called WOTS+, short for Winternitz One-Time Signature, on top of Bitcoin’s existing security. WOTS+ is a tested cryptographic technique that does not rely on the elliptic curve math a quantum computer could break.

By using a “Layer 2” — shorthand for a separate network built on top of Bitcoin that processes transactions and settles back to the main chain—developers can add features without changing Bitcoin’s base layer.

“The Bitcoin community has delayed a fix for years, despite Satoshi himself discussing the quantum problem,” Postquant Labs CEO Colton Dillion said in a statement to CoinDesk. “Developers say any protocol upgrade could take 5 to 10 years, but with Quip’s approach, we provide similar protection immediately.”

Bitcoin’s quantum readiness

The launch arrives in the middle of an active fight over how Bitcoin should respond to quantum risk.

Prominent developer Jameson Lopp and five others proposed BIP-361 two weeks ago, which would phase out quantum-vulnerable addresses on a fixed five-year timeline and freeze coins that fail to migrate, including the roughly 1.1 million bitcoin attributed to pseudonymous creator Satoshi Nakamoto.

Paul Sztorc’s controversial eCash hard fork would copy Bitcoin’s chain and ship seven sidechains including a quantum-resistant one, funded partly by reassigning Satoshi-pattern coins on the new ledger to investors.

Both proposals have drawn pushback from the community.

Quip’s pitch is that neither approach is necessary. The setup requires no soft fork, no consensus change, no community vote. A soft fork is a Bitcoin upgrade that tightens existing rules so older software still works, but it still needs broad miner and node support to activate. Bitcoin’s last major soft fork was Taproot in 2021. The next one, if it happens, could take years.

Technical trade-offs

The three approaches actually disagree on something specific. Lopp’s argument is that Layer 2 protection like Quip’s is insufficient because Bitcoin mainnet public keys still leak the moment a user broadcasts a transaction, giving a future quantum attacker a target.

There are a few caveats, however. The wallet app launches next week rather than today. A third-party audit is underway but not complete. Quip’s quantum-resistant accounts already exist on Ethereum and Solana, but the Bitcoin deployment is new and Arch Network is still relatively early infrastructure.

Postquant Labs CTO Dr. Richard Carback, a long-time collaborator with eCash inventor Dr. David Chaum who now advises the project, said the approach narrows the window for a quantum attack to as little as two blocks, roughly 20 minutes.

(David Chaum’s eCash is the original digital cash protocol from 1983, the academic foundation for ‘blind’ signatures and privacy-preserving electronic money. It predates Bitcoin by 25 years and has nothing to do with Bitcoin or the eCash proposal by Sztorc.)

Sztorc’s argument is that incremental patches are exactly why Bitcoin needs a clean fork with quantum resistance built in from the start. The Layer 2 approach, which now includes Quip and Blockstream’s hash-based signature work on the Liquid Network, argues both other positions overreact to a threat that better infrastructure can handle without changing Bitcoin itself.

Which approach wins depends partly on how fast quantum computers actually arrive. The Bitcoin holders most worried about quantum risk have historically been the same group most resistant to wrapped or smart-contract-anchored products.