High-performance blockchain designs have long wrestled with a structural trade-off: when execution is tied directly to consensus, the network’s throughput becomes limited by how fast validators can process transactions. As research and engineering teams push improvements in finality and block propagation, execution itself is increasingly viewed as the next bottleneck to redesign.

MultiversX, a Cointelegraph Decentralization Guardians (CTDG) ecosystem participant, is now testing an approach that aims to remove that bottleneck. Its Supernova upgrade decouples consensus from transaction execution, enabling validators to vote without waiting for execution to complete—shifting computation into an asynchronous pipeline. Supernova is live on testnet, and deployment planning targets a mainnet activation date later this year.

Key takeaways

• Supernova reorders the block workflow so proposers submit transaction blocks without executing first, while validators can vote immediately based on protocol validity.
• Execution output is confirmed in subsequent block headers, with execution lagging consensus by roughly one block (about 600 milliseconds).
• A “virtual mempool state” helps preserve validity by tracking pending nonces, expected balance consumption, and transactions already proposed but not yet executed.
• EIE (Execution-Result Inclusion Estimator) limits how many execution results a block can reference, based on what minimum-spec nodes can safely handle.
• Automatic backpressure reduces block capacity when execution falls too far behind, giving the system time to catch up.

Why execution-on-consensus became a scaling problem

In conventional synchronous blockchains, validators don’t just agree that a block is well-formed—they also must execute the transactions to verify state transitions before voting. That keeps the system deterministic and consensus-critical, but it also creates a shared bottleneck: the most computationally heavy transactions effectively slow the entire network.

Many networks have spent years optimizing around agreement speed and block dissemination. MultiversX’s framing is that these gains are not enough if execution remains on the critical path. The core question Supernova addresses is architectural: does execution have to stay inside the consensus loop, or can it be processed asynchronously while preserving safety and correctness?

Supernova’s asynchronous pipeline: voting first, executing after

Supernova, now live on testnet, introduces a changed block production sequence.

Previously, block production followed a more sequential pattern: a proposer selected transactions, executed them locally, and proposed a block containing those results. Validators then had to re-execute the same transactions to verify state transitions before voting, meaning execution sat directly inside the consensus-critical path.

With Supernova, that ordering changes. According to MultiversX’s description of Supernova’s decoupling, the proposer selects transactions and proposes the block without executing them first. Validators then verify that the proposal follows protocol rules and can vote right away. Execution continues asynchronously in the background, producing an output that is normally referenced and notarized in the next block header—so execution trails consensus by about one block, or roughly 600 milliseconds.

The practical consequence is that network responsiveness becomes less dependent on how quickly validators can execute every transaction before they can participate in consensus. Instead, consensus advances on protocol validity, while execution catches up in parallel.

Preserving validity when execution lags consensus

Decoupling execution from consensus creates an obvious safety and validity challenge: if execution is delayed, how does the network determine whether transactions included in a proposed block are likely to remain valid by the time their execution results are produced?

Supernova addresses this with a virtual mempool state. As described by MultiversX, the virtual mempool looks beyond the latest executed chain state and tracks forward-looking execution inputs such as pending nonces, expected balance consumption, and transactions already proposed but whose execution results have not yet passed consensus. That gives proposers a more accurate view of account activity so they can select transactions expected to execute successfully when their turn arrives.

To keep the system robust under varying validator performance, MultiversX also introduces two safeguards designed for operational stability:

• Execution-Result Inclusion Estimator (EIE): EIE limits how many execution results can be referenced in a block. The cap is tied to what minimum-spec nodes can process safely, reducing the risk that weaker nodes are overwhelmed by referencing too many pending results.
• Automatic backpressure: If execution falls too far behind, block capacity is reduced to allow the network to catch up—rather than letting lag accumulate indefinitely.

What Supernova changes for developers and users

For builders, the key message is that “in-shard finality” can arrive as soon as the proof is available. MultiversX states this typically happens within the same round at around 100–250 milliseconds, alongside more predictable execution conditions. This matters most for applications that rely on fast feedback loops—examples mentioned include high-frequency DeFi primitives and onchain order book systems, which can degrade when latency becomes a user-experience problem.

Supernova has also been producing 600-millisecond blocks on live testnet and devnet since Aug. 20. The network’s broader objective is to make onchain interactions feel more immediate, shifting the experience closer to responsive application infrastructure rather than delayed settlement.

On timeline, MultiversX indicates mainnet activation is expected for Sept. 10, 2026. While testnet performance does not always translate directly to mainnet behavior under full load, the architecture itself is designed to handle execution lag without forcing every validator to execute first during consensus.

Supernova within the CTDG and Cointelegraph ecosystem

The upgrade also lands within a broader infrastructure collaboration involving Cointelegraph Decentralization Guardians. Earlier coverage noted that Cointelegraph joined MultiversX as a validator through the CTDG program in March 2026, deepening the organization’s operational role beyond content and community work.

Cointelegraph’s CTDG Dev Hub is also described as a MultiversX official partner, connecting the protocol to a wider developer community. The input also references practical involvement such as the MultiversX Foundation delegating to a CTDG validator and the Dev Hub team building a dedicated validator dashboard on MultiversX.

From an industry perspective, this matters because protocol upgrades of this kind often require ecosystem alignment: performance improvements are only meaningful if infrastructure, tooling, and participating validators can adopt new execution and consensus mechanics reliably. Supernova’s focus on backpressure and minimum-spec safeguards suggests the design is attempting to make that transition smoother.

As Supernova moves from testnet toward the projected mainnet date, the most important things for users to watch are whether execution lag remains within expected bounds under real load, and how consistently EIE and backpressure prevent validators from falling behind without overly constraining throughput. The success criteria won’t only be faster finality—it will be whether execution remains dependable when consensus and execution operate on different clocks.

Well, of course Buffy resonated with Dolly. In many ways, she was the real-life equivalent of Buffy Summers. Creator Joss Whedon (a man whose relationship to feminism is notoriously complicated at best) conceived the character as an empowered antidote to the hot, scantily clad victim types of 1980s slasher flicks. He has said that he intended the original Buffy to be “one of these crappy, low-budget movies,” but one that “had a feminist agenda, had females in it who were people.” Instead of being saved by some heroic boyfriend, the busty, blonde cheerleader lead (played by Kristy Swanson in the film) “would have to get her own back.” Maybe Buffy looked like the stereotypical high school bimbo. But, especially in a TV series that paired the character’s battles against supernatural baddies with mundane teenage rites of passage, she also had intelligence, resourcefulness, depth, and, of course, a once-in-a-generation gift for slaying vampires. Being underestimated based on her beauty often put her at an advantage.

“CyberLeek,” the pseudonymous X user behind a series of recent GTA VI gameplay leaks, has shared the game’s “first true spoiler” today in the form of footage of one of its key protagonists.

That’s according to Forbes games journalist Paul Tassi, who warned his followers to mute specific words on X unless they want to risk seeing GTA VI spoilers.

So far the leaks have involved free-roam gameplay footage, but today’s are the first to cover GTA VI’s story elements.

GTA VI leaker says game is nowhere near ready

In a post to their site, CyberLeek reportedly claimed the GTA VI build in question is “actually recent,” and that “the game is not ready at all.”

CyberLeek also pleaded for followers to continue supporting their crypto token $CYBERLEEK.

The token shot up from a $40,000 market cap to over $2 million when they first shared gameplay footage on August 18. By August 23, its market cap hit $25 million.

Read more: GTA VI leak investigation video raises crypto scam suspicions

At time of writing, the market cap has fallen 70% from this all-time high, and almost 40% over the last 24 hours, to a low of $7.5 million. 

Rockstar Games admits GTA VI isn’t finished

GTA VI developer, Rockstar Games, finally addressed the leaks today in a statement. It admitted that the game isn’t finished, and that the team is “heartbroken” by the leaks. 

It said, “While it is unfortunate that the intended game experience may now be impacted by some spoilers, we hope that everyone will wait a bit longer to experience the game for themselves on November 19.”

CyberLeek’s actions also threaten to disrupt a major extended gameplay reveal taking place on Netflix this Thursday.

Take-Two, Rockstar’s parent company, has been requesting to file subpoenas against Microsoft, Discord, and X in an attempt to expose and stop the leaker.

One user who vaguely predicted the leaks claims Rockstar employees questioned them at their home. These claims were doubted after footage of the exchange was used to shill their crypto. 

Got a tip? Send us an email securely via Protos Leaks. For more informed news and investigations, follow us on X, Bluesky, and Google News, or subscribe to our YouTube channel.

Chainlink has introduced price feeds for four Coinbase tokenized stocks on Base, giving DeFi protocols the data needed to assess NVDAc, METAc, AAPLc, and GOOGLc as collateral.

Chainlink feeds support tokenized stock collateral

Chainlink said in an Aug. 26 X announcement that its Data Feeds allow DeFi protocols to integrate Coinbase Tokenized Stocks as collateral, extending their use beyond holding and secondary-market trading.

A new national survey has found that 53% of Americans oppose employers offering cryptocurrency in workplace retirement plans, while 77% consider such investments risky.

The National Institute on Retirement Security reported in its survey that 46% of respondents considered cryptocurrency in workplace retirement plans “very risky,” contributing to the 77% who expressed some level of concern.

Crypto retirement plans face resistance from US savers

Opposition to workplace crypto options extended beyond respondents who viewed digital assets as risky. According to the institute, 53% did not support employers offering cryptocurrency as an investment choice within their retirement plans.

Public concern about digital assets emerged alongside deeper anxiety over the condition of the US retirement system. The survey found that 80% of Americans believed the country faces a retirement crisis, compared with 67% in 2020. Another 61% said they were worried about achieving financial security during retirement.

Household costs and debt also affected how respondents viewed their ability to save. According to the report, 68% said preparing for retirement had become harder, while 77% said debt prevented them from putting aside enough money.

Researchers gathered the findings as part of a national survey conducted by Greenwald Research from Oct. 24 through Nov. 14, 2025. The poll included 1,203 US residents aged 25 and older, with the results weighted by age, gender and income to represent the country’s adult population.

The findings indicate that resistance to crypto inside retirement plans is not limited to people who reject digital assets altogether. A May Federal Reserve survey found that 10% of US adults used or held cryptocurrency in 2025, up from 7% in 2024. Roughly 7% held crypto as an investment, while fewer respondents used it for payments or transfers.

Retirement concerns grow as debt limits savings

Financial pressure formed a central part of the National Institute on Retirement Security’s findings. With more than three-quarters of respondents saying debt hurt their ability to save, the survey placed the crypto question within a retirement system already under strain.

According to the institute, concerns over retirement security have increased even as workplace plans remain one of the main savings tools available to US employees. Respondents cited affordability problems alongside uncertainty about whether their savings would support them after they stopped working.

The institute’s separate research on retirement preparedness has also found large gaps in workplace plan access and accumulated savings. Its February 2026 analysis, based on US Census Bureau data, said the median retirement savings balance across the American workforce was below $1,000 and that many employees lacked access to an employer-provided plan.

Social Security supplied about 52% of retirement income for older Americans, according to the same analysis, while approximately 17% of workers had access to a defined-benefit pension as of December 2022. Unlike a traditional pension that promises a defined payment, a 401(k) generally places investment decisions and market risk on the employee.

Crypto can expose a retirement account to sharper price changes than many traditional plan investments. The US Government Accountability Office has previously described digital assets as having unique volatility and said reliable methods for projecting their future returns remain limited, according to a congressional letter citing the agency’s research.

US regulators have removed barriers to crypto in 401(k)s

Federal policy has moved in the opposite direction from the caution expressed by many survey respondents. In May 2025, the Department of Labor withdrew its crypto guidance, which had instructed retirement-plan fiduciaries to exercise “extreme care” before adding cryptocurrency to investment menus.

The department said the earlier standard departed from its usual neutral approach to investment types. After the rescission, officials said fiduciaries should make decisions based on their duties under the Employee Retirement Income Security Act without the government either endorsing or discouraging cryptocurrency.

President Donald Trump added another policy directive on Aug. 7, 2025, by signing an executive order on alternative assets. The order covered digital-asset investment vehicles as well as private equity, private credit, real estate, and other assets that are not commonly found in defined-contribution plans.

Under the order, the Labor Department was instructed to review its guidance on fiduciary duties and consider changes that could make alternative assets available to retirement savers. The Securities and Exchange Commission was also directed to consult with the department and examine regulatory changes for participants in employer-sponsored plans.

Five days later, the Labor Department rescinded a 2021 statement that had discouraged fiduciaries from considering private equity and certain other alternative investments. Officials said the statement had departed from a neutral, principles-based approach by treating one type of asset differently from others.

Removing the two pieces of guidance did not require employers to offer crypto. Plan sponsors and fiduciaries remained responsible for assessing each investment under ERISA, including whether its costs, risks, and structure were suitable for participants.

Labor Department proposal sets conditions for alternative assets

In March 2026, the Labor Department proposed a new rule explaining how fiduciaries could evaluate alternative assets for workplace retirement plans. The proposal included regulatory safe harbors intended to reduce litigation exposure for fiduciaries that follow specified review standards.

As crypto.news reported in March, the proposed framework covered more than 90 million retirement savers and required fiduciaries to examine performance, fees, liquidity, valuation, redemption terms, and participants’ ability to understand an investment.

Plan sponsors would not have to add cryptocurrency, private equity or private credit to their menus under the proposal. Employers choosing to include such products would need to document an objective review and show that the options met ERISA’s prudence requirements.

Department officials said the proposal would not provide unrestricted access to crypto or private funds. Instead, the rule would replace restrictions based on asset type with individual reviews by fiduciaries responsible for selecting and monitoring plan investments.

Political opposition followed the proposal. In June, three Democratic lawmakers—Sens. Bernie Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, and Rep. Bobby Scott asked the Labor Department to withdraw it.

In their letter, the lawmakers argued that cryptocurrency could expose workers to price volatility, fraud, and weaker safeguards than those available for public securities. They also questioned whether fiduciaries could assess certain digital assets using established methods for measuring value and expected returns.

“The application of securities laws to crypto assets is rapidly evolving,” the lawmakers wrote, adding that some protections available to investors in public securities “may not be available for crypto.”

Their request covered other alternative investments, including private equity and private credit, which the lawmakers said could carry high fees, limited liquidity and difficult valuation methods. The Labor Department’s proposal remained subject to the federal rulemaking process, under which the agency could revise, finalize or withdraw the framework after reviewing public comments.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has begun moving toward a major update to custody rules that govern how investment advisers and investment companies hold client assets, a change that could directly affect institutional crypto custody.

According to the SEC’s regulatory filings, the agency submitted “Amendments to the Custody Rules” to the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) on Aug. 25 as part of the federal review process. The proposal would then return to the SEC for internal consideration before potentially being released for public comment.

Key takeaways

• The SEC has sent proposed custody rule updates to OIRA for review under White House regulatory procedures.
• The changes target how investment advisers and investment companies hold client assets, including crypto, under the Investment Advisers Act and Investment Company Act.
• The stated goal is to reduce uncertainty for institutions trying to comply with existing federal securities rules while holding digital assets.
• The draft is not yet public, and OIRA and the White House Office of Management and Budget can request modifications before it returns to the SEC.

What the SEC is trying to change

The SEC’s regulatory agenda indicates that the custody proposal could amend existing rules or introduce new requirements under the Investment Advisers Act and the Investment Company Act. Those frameworks apply to firms managing client money and other assets, including assets that may be held in custody arrangements—an area where market participants have long sought clearer guidance for digital-asset holdings.

In its description of the effort, the SEC said the intended purpose is to clarify how companies can hold crypto for clients while remaining consistent with the agency’s securities-law custody framework. The SEC emphasized that the proposal is designed to address uncertainty, but it has not yet published the rule text for public scrutiny.

Once OIRA completes its review, the draft would come back to the SEC. From there, the commission would decide whether to circulate the proposal for public comment.

How the OIRA process could shape timing and scope

The custody rule effort is currently in a pre-publication stage. As reported by Bloomberg, the SEC sent the proposal to OIRA, which sits within the White House Office of Management and Budget, on Aug. 25. That step matters because it is not merely administrative: the White House can ask for changes before the proposal returns to the SEC.

Only after that review cycle would the SEC determine whether to release the proposal for public comment—an important milestone for institutions because public comments can influence how custody obligations, compliance expectations, and operational constraints are ultimately written into regulation.

At present, the main practical takeaway for affected firms is that the proposal is moving, but the actionable details remain unavailable. Custody providers and asset managers will likely be watching for the published draft text and any adjustments that occur during OIRA’s review.

Why this fits the SEC’s broader digital-asset direction

Bloomberg linked the custody rule initiative to the SEC’s wider effort to support the Trump administration’s digital asset agenda, even as a separate piece of market-structure legislation remains stalled in Congress.

The article noted that the broader goal is occurring while the CLARITY market structure bill is still pending in the Senate. According to Cointelegraph’s earlier reporting, the bill is expected to face a cloture vote after lawmakers return from the August recess in September, suggesting continued legislative uncertainty around digital-asset rules at the federal level.

In that environment, rulemaking inside the SEC becomes particularly consequential for institutional participants. Custody is not just a compliance checkbox; it affects how funds and advisers structure client asset handling, choose custody models, and document safeguards—core concerns for asset managers considering or already providing crypto exposure.

From enforcement to rulemaking: institutional impact

Crypto market participants have closely tracked the SEC’s shift in posture under Paul Atkins, who became chair in 2025. Multiple reports in the crypto industry described a move away from what critics called “regulation through enforcement” toward formal rulemaking.

Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph has said Atkins pledged to end the SEC’s prior approach and to pursue policy development through established rulemaking channels. That shift is reflected in reported enforcement decisions as well: Cointelegraph previously reported that the SEC dismissed several cases against prominent crypto companies in 2025, including its lawsuit against Coinbase, as it sought to reshape how it regulates digital assets.

The SEC’s custody-rule proposal fits into that broader pattern. Even though the SEC has been less aggressive in some enforcement areas, institutions still need regulatory clarity for the mechanics of custody and client asset protection—areas where existing uncertainty can slow adoption or increase compliance risk.

For investors and intermediaries, a clearer custody framework could translate into better-defined standards for eligibility, controls, and operational practices. It may also reduce the reliance on case-by-case enforcement logic when deciding how to hold and safeguard client assets that include crypto.

What to watch next

Readers should watch for the custody proposal to be published after the OIRA/OMB review and for the SEC’s decision on whether to open a public comment period. The key uncertainty remains the draft’s contents—especially how it will address crypto custody within established custody rules under the Investment Advisers Act and Investment Company Act.

Cathie Wood’s flagship fund has spent more than a decade failing to beat her two most obvious benchmarks.

Her multi-billion dollar ARKK fund, which launched on October 31, 2014, has trailed the S&P 500’s total return, and BTC, since inception.

Even investors who might have tried to time their entries and exits out of Wood’s funds would have had a difficult time finding a slice of outperformance, as Ark Invest also underperformed most calendar years across that timespan.

It was easy for ARKK to outperform BTC during particularly bad years for the asset. For example, it crashed 73% in 2018 or -67% in 2022.

However, Wood’s pro-Tesla, pro-BTC, pro-AI, and pro-gene editing fund failed to beat its benchmarks over the long haul.

Cumulative returns over the full stretch, October 31, 2014 through yesterday’s close, are 318% for ARKK, 23,214% for BTC, and 367% for the S&P 500 with dividends reinvested.

Trailing the market despite a decade of work

Although it’s embarrassing for any fund manager to work full-time for a decade only to trail a passive, labor-free investment in the S&P 500, ARKK’s 49% shortfall actually fails to illustrate how bad the past five years has felt for investors in Wood’s ETF.

On February 16, 2021, ARKK peaked at $159.70 per share, a price it’s never reattained. Since that date, ARKK has lost 46% of its value whereas the S&P 500 has gained 65%.

From the start of 2022, ARKK has trailed the S&P by 80%. Since the start of 2023, 60%. Since 2024, 8%.

Over the past five years, ARKK’s has declined 28% while the S&P has rallied 72%.